body,date,page,text,path
PlanningBoard,2006-08-14,1,"Minutes of the Regular Planning Board Meeting
Monday, August 14, 2006
1.
CONVENE:
7:07 p.m.
2.
FLAG SALUTE:
Member Ezzy Ashcraft
3.
ROLL CALL:
President Lynch, Vice-President Cook, Ezzy Ashcraft, Kohlstrand,
Lynch, Mariani and McNamara.
Board member Cunningham was absent.
Also present were Planning and Building Director Cathy Woodbury, Assistant City Attorney Donna
Mooney, and Planner III Douglas Garrison.
4.
MINUTES:
Minutes for the meeting of July 24, 2006
Member Kohlstrand requested that under Item 9-A (Catellus) the minutes reflect a discussion
regarding the retail development block framed by public streets with crosswalks. She noted that Dan
Marcus, the developer, had indicated he was willing to incorporate that into the design.
Vice President Cook advised that the last full paragraph on page 13 should include the following
language: "" requiring a shopping center in Subarea 3. In fact, Subarea 3 could include 370,000
square feet of R&D instead of retail, which seemed inconsistent with many of the speakers'
perceptions and desires.""
Member Mariani noted that page 18, paragraph 5 read, ""Member Mariani noted that she did not want
to see a lot of RVs and parking areas,"" but that she was not the Member to make that statement.
M/S Ezzy Ashcraft/Kohlstrand to approve the minutes for the meeting of July 24, 2006, as amended.
AYES - 6 (Cunningham absent); NOES - 0; ABSTAIN - 0
5.
AGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSION:
None.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 1
August 14, 2006",PlanningBoard/2006-08-14.pdf
PlanningBoard,2006-08-14,2,"6.
ORAL COMMUNICATION:
President Lynch noted that a speaker slip had been received from Karen Butter regarding Item 10-A,
and inquired when it should be heard. Ms. Woodbury advised that it may be heard earlier in the
agenda if so desired.
President Lynch noted that he would not object to doing that one time, but did not want to set a
precedent that would leave the public without a sense of certainty of when a particular item would be
heard. He wished to retain the historical precedent of Oral Communications being reserved for items
not on the agenda.
Member Kohlstrand would like the discussion of Measure A to be held during Item 10-A, and to
allow the public to make comments at that time.
Ms. Mooney noted that with respect to Board Communications, the Rules and Procedures of the City
Planning Board permitted any Board member to speak on any matter, and ""limited action may be
taken by the Board, such as asking staff for further information, there would typically not be
deliberation or action taken by the Board, and that public comments on an agenda item typically
immediately precede something to be discussed and acted upon. If the comments were kept to Oral
Communications, and Board members spoke during Board Communications, that would be consistent
with the Agenda's intent.
President Lynch suggested that both speakers be taken during Oral Communications, and Board
comments would be heard during Board Communications.
Ms. Diane Lichtenstein hoped there would be time for public discussion regarding Measure A.
Ms. Karen Butter, League of Women Voters, urged the Board to move forward and hold a public
forum on a possible exemption of Measure A for Alameda Point. She believed this was a critical issue
for Alameda citizens to discuss and understand the implications of that possibility.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 2
August 14, 2006",PlanningBoard/2006-08-14.pdf
PlanningBoard,2006-08-14,3,"7.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
7-A.
Use Permit UP06-0010 - N. Saidian & L. Zekster - 1310 Central Avenue (DV). The
applicant requests a Use Permit pursuant to Section 30-20.2 of the Alameda Municipal Code
to extend the hours of operation for the Alameda Gasoline - Valero Station, an existing legal
nonconforming service station facility. The current hours of operation are 9:00 am-6:00 pm
Monday through Friday, 9:00 am-4:00 pm on Saturday, and closed on Sunday. The auto
repair hours would be eliminated on Saturday. The Alameda Gasoline-Valero Station is
located in the R-4 (Neighborhood Residential) Zoning District. (Applicant requests
continuance.)
M/S Cook/Ezzy Ashcraft to continue this item.
AYES - 6 (Cunningham absent); NOES - 0; ABSTAIN - 0
Planning Board Minutes
Page 3
August 14, 2006",PlanningBoard/2006-08-14.pdf
PlanningBoard,2006-08-14,4,"8.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS:
8-A.
PD06-0001 and DR06-0054 - Habitat for Humanity - 626 Buena Vista Ave. (DG). The
applicant requests approval of Planned Development and Major Design Review applications
allowing the construction of eight new dwelling units consisting of four two-story duets on a lot
previously used as a carwash. The project site is zoned R4-PD Neighborhood Residential
District-Planned Development Zoning District. (Continued from the meeting of July 24,
2006).
President Lynch congratulated Mr. Garrison on his impending promotion to Supervising Planner.
Mr. Garrison presented this staff report, and recommended approval of this item.
Ms. Doreen Soto, Development Services, presented the rest of the staff report, and displayed a
PowerPoint presentation describing the scope and layout of the project.
The public hearing was opened.
Ms. Virginia Jhang noted that she lived near the proposed site, and thanked the City for holding the
neighborhood meetings. She noted that there were not many neighbors in attendance because many of
them did not receive notice, and also because they supported affordable housing on this vacant site.
She noted that it was difficult to afford home ownership, and that this project was a great help. She
expressed concern about density, traffic safety and accountability. She noted that the developers did
not propose to have a homeowners association with CC&Rs to maintain the project. She noted that
the project met the Measure A criteria, but was still too dense for its location and lot size.
In response to an inquiry by President Lynch whether her own development had CC&Rs, Ms. Jhang
confirmed that it did, and that it was very helpful to her and her neighbors. She noted that it was an
entry-level community, and that there was a playground in the common area for the children. She
described some of the surrounding businesses, and believed the area was already too dense. She
would like to see more open space and visitor parking on [Paramus].
The public hearing was closed for Board discussion.
Member McNamara noted that she was very familiar with this area, and noted that Ms. Jhang's points
about traffic congestion were valid, and she hoped they could be addressed and corrected. She
supported this project and believed it was a good use of the current lot, while helping Alameda meet
the affordable housing requirements. She believed it would be an asset to the neighborhood, and
would be a good opportunity for increased home ownership.
Member Mariani expressed concern that when all the Catellus units are rented out, the street will be
become more congested and that perhaps traffic calming measures would be needed. She supported
this project.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 4
August 14, 2006",PlanningBoard/2006-08-14.pdf
PlanningBoard,2006-08-14,5,"Vice President Cook recognized the traffic problems, and believed that Public Works would be able
to find a way to mitigate them. She supported this project, and believed that it would be an asset to
the community. She had been a previous volunteer for Habitat for Humanity, and supported the pride
of ownership it created. She was not concerned about adding CC&Rs to this site.
Member Kohlstrand supported this project, and was reluctant to put additional burdens on this parcel,
particularly for parking. She noted that this project already met Code in that regard. She would like to
see The staff report noted that the City would like continuous sidewalks for trash traffic removal and
she also felt they should be there for pedestrians to use. She added that the lots were so small that she
believed it would be difficult to get all the landscaping in.
Member Ezzy Ashcraft supported this project, but did not find the designs to be attractive. She did
not believe they blended well with the rest of the community. She did not see any mention of green
building elements in this report, and hoped that it would be included.
President Lynch inquired whether the Board wished to add Member Kohlstrand's request about
continuous sidewalks and landscaping to the conditions. Mr. Garrison noted that would be agreeable.
M/S Kohlstrand/Cook and unanimous to add continuous sidewalks and landscaping to the conditions
of approval.
AYES - 6 (Cunningham absent); NOES - 0; ABSTAIN - 0
In response to an inquiry by Member Ezzy Ashcraft regarding the explanation of the cost delta for the
project, Mr. Craig Meltzner, contract project manager for Alameda Development Corporation, noted
that the City funds were actually writing down the total development cost of the project. The actual
production cost of the units would be in excess of $400,000 each, and that the City funds would write
down the costs to make them affordable to the targeted groups. The very low income units will sell
below $200,000; the low income units will sell at $225,000, and the moderate income units will sell at
$300,000. The total development costs would reflect the market conditions, before the application of
the City funds.
Ms. Soto noted that Habitat would bring their donations, volunteers and equity into the project to
fund the other portion of the project.
Mr. Jim Bergdahl, housing development director for Habitat for Humanity, East Bay, noted that the
community can help by donating building materials to the project. With respect to green building
elements, they had been using sustainable features in recent projects, including PV panels for all eight
panels units and advanced framing techniques. He noted that durability was part of sustainability, and
they did not use cheap materials.
In response to an inquiry by Member Kohlstrand regarding maintenance, Mr. Bergdahl replied that
Planning Board Minutes
Page 5
August 14, 2006",PlanningBoard/2006-08-14.pdf
PlanningBoard,2006-08-14,6,"these were privately owned homes, and that the mortgage documents had requirements to require
appearances to be maintained.
With respect to the exterior design, Mr. Kirk Peterson, Peterson & Associates Architects, noted that
they looked at many designs, and wished they could have had more parking. He noted that this block
did not have the typical charm of Alameda, and noted that he tried to follow the 19th century models
for their simplicity. HardiPlank siding, corner details, double-hung windows and leaves were used to
follow that design palette.
Member Ezzy Ashcraft respected the historical aspect of the buildings and wanted to see the project
noted that the City moved forward as well.
Member Mariani liked the simplicity of the design when surrounded by the commercial clutter.
Member Kohlstrand believed the existing courtyard developments in Alameda were more attractive,
but she accepted the fact that 16 off-street parking spaces must be provided. She believed the design
should be accepted as presented.
Member Ezzy Ashcraft noted that it would be preferable not to look at the development from the street
and see rows of parked cars have a row of cars parked on the street if possible.
President Lynch was confident in the designers' capabilities, and believed that they addressed as many
design features as possible before adding the City's requirements.
M/S Mariani/Kohlstrand and unanimous to adopt Planning Board Resolution No. PB-06-31 to
approve a Planned Development and Major Design Review applications allowing the construction of eight
new dwelling units consisting of four two-story duets on a lot previously used as a carwash, with the
additional modifications as noted by the Board.
AYES - 6 (Cunningham absent); NOES - 0; ABSTAIN - 0
Planning Board Minutes
Page 6
August 14, 2006",PlanningBoard/2006-08-14.pdf
PlanningBoard,2006-08-14,7,"8-B.
Appointment of Planning Board member to the Climate Protection Task Force.
M/S Mariani/Kohlstrand and unanimous to nominate Board member Andrew Cunningham to the
Climate Protection Task Force.
AYES - 6 (Cunningham absent); NOES - 0; ABSTAIN - 0
9.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATION:
President Lynch noted that a letter was received from Housing Opportunities Makes Economic
Sense, signed by Helen Sause, regarding Measure A.
Member Mariani noted that the reference to City Council taking action on Measure A on the 1991
ballot was to define Measure A.
10.
BOARD COMMUNICATION:
a.
Oral Status Report regarding potential future Planning Board Measure A Forum
(Board member Cunningham).
Member Kohlstrand recalled that the Board had asked for this item to come to the Planning Board to
review the history of Measure A, and for members of the public to give their perspective on it. She
requested a report from the Planning and Building Director regarding that progress.
Vice President Cook agreed with Member Kohlstrand's comments, and believed that this issue should
be addressed sooner rather than later. She noted that historic preservation and open space planning
were important issues, and that a civil community discussion would be needed.
Member Mariani believed there was a full forum on Measure A with the Planning Board and City
Council in the 1990s. While it was important for discussion to take place, she did not believe the
Planning Board should take a political view on an item to be considered for the ballot. She would feel
more comfortable if a separate group or person would drive that discussion.
President Lynch noted that Measure A was the purview of City Council and the public, not the
Planning Board. He agreed that it was important for the public to be aware of the genesis of Measure
A. Part of that discussion included how Measure A was consistent with existing design guidelines as
projects come before the Planning Board. He would like to define the appropriate forum for this
discussion.
Vice President Cook perceived the City Council's role as political, and the Planning Board's role as
analytical.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 7
August 14, 2006",PlanningBoard/2006-08-14.pdf
PlanningBoard,2006-08-14,8,"Ms. Woodbury generally agreed with Vice President Cook's description of the Planning Board's role,
and that the Board must abide by the regulations set forth in the law.
Member Ezzy Ashcraft believed the Board would serve the City better by acting proactively, and
noted that the deadline for the November ballot had passed. She would like to see a proposed ballot
measure to understand the issue more completely."" ""We have not even seen a ballot measure on this
issue."" She would like to hear from some outside authorities regarding this issue for more
perspective, and cited attractive developments in other cities. She would like to hear more substantive
comments than a series of anecdotal events. She believed an outside facilitator would be a valuable
addition to the process.
Member Kohlstrand suggested forming a task force comprised of people with a range of perspectives,
as well as City representatives and the EDC.
Vice President Cook believed a less structured forum would be ideal for the problem-solving needed
in this issue. She noted that the EDC had interesting perspectives. She would be interested in working
with a highly skilled facilitator who could focus the discussion on the fundamental, underlying issues.
Member Mariani suggested consulting with the Mayor and City Council on the Board's role in this
matter. She supported an outside forum.
Member McNamara supported using an outside forum to clarify the issues, and acknowledged the
emotional component of Measure A in the community. She believed the forum should be televised.
President Lynch noted that he and Ms. Woodbury would develop a plan of action and report back to
the Planning Board.
b.
Oral Status Report regarding the Northern Waterfront Plan (Vice-President Cook).
Vice President Cook noted that no further meetings had been held.
c.
Oral Status Report regarding the Oakland/Chinatown Advisory Committee (Board
Member Mariani).
Member Mariani noted that no further meetings had been held, and that the next meeting would be
held on Tuesday, August 22, at the Asian Health Center.
d.
Oral Status Report regarding the Transportation subcommittee (Board Member
Kohlstrand).
Member Kohlstrand noted that no further meetings had been held.
12.
STAFF COMMUNICATION
None.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 8
August 14, 2006",PlanningBoard/2006-08-14.pdf
PlanningBoard,2006-08-14,9,"13.
ADJOURNMENT:
8:55 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Cathy Woodbury
-
Cathy Woodbury, Secretary
City Planning Board
These minutes were approved at the August 28, 2006, Planning Board meeting. This meeting was
audio and video taped.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 9
August 14, 2006",PlanningBoard/2006-08-14.pdf