body,date,page,text,path
CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities,2012-04-23,1,"UNAPPROVED
COMMISSION ON DISABILITY ISSUES
MEETING MINUTES OF
April 23, 2012
1.
ROLL CALL
The meeting was called to order at 6:37 P.M.
Present: Chair Lord-Hausman, Vice-Chair Harp, Commissioners Deutsch, Kirola, Tam,
and Warren.
Absent: Commissioners Krongold, Moore, Fort
2.
MINUTES
2-A.
The minutes were approved with changes.
3.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS/NON-AGENDA (PUBLIC COMMENT)
4.
NEW BUSINESS
4-A.
Universal Design - Housing Element (Andrew Thomas, Planning Services Manager)
Andrew Thomas stated that the Planning Department is working on updating the Housing
Element including zoning requirements, housing development, and construction by
making sure land is available for such construction. With respect to Universal Design
(UD), Mr. Thomas stated the UD is not included in the first phase of the update the
Housing Element. These changes would modify the current Municipal Code.
Chair Lord-Hausman asked about the timeline to which Mr. Thomas replied that the
initial draft will go to Council in late June.
Mr. Thomas stated that having a Universal Design ordinance is not State mandated to be
adapted by 2014. There are no obligations for inclusion of this language in the update of
the Housing Element. Mr. Thomas encouraged the CDI to begin working on proposed
language and to collaborate with the PB.
Commissioner Tam thanked Mr. Thomas for his presentation and inclusion of the CDI in
the process.
4-B.
CDI Restructuring - (Alex Nguyen, Deputy City Manger)
Deputy City Manager, Alex Nguyen, discussed re-structuring the various Boards and
Commissions. There are questions about the CDI doing actual Commission work; and
suggested consideration of having 4-designated seats of the CDI on Planning Board, Park
& Recreation, Transportation, and SSHRB, which would be phased in.
1",CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities/2012-04-23.pdf
CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities,2012-04-23,2,"Commissioner Kirola spoke about her personal experiences and the fact that the CDI has
a significant role in the community.
Chair Lord-Hausman stated that the CDI has provided feedback to Public Works,
developers regarding some infrastructure improvements, as well as the Development
Department. As a collective voice, the CDI has a stronger voice.
Vice-Chair Harp stated the CDI has interacted with other departments and Boards on
various issues.
Chair Lord-Hausman stated that clarification should be made regarding the duties of the
CDI.
Commissioner Tam stated that the CDI represents many levels of disability. The CDI
tries to remedy problems before they become an issue. The CDI is the voice of the
""silent"" issues.
Chair Lord-Hausman stated the CDI and Secretary Akil provides a link to the
community.
Mr. Nguyen stated that the Council will require an Annual Action Plan starting 2013.
Vice Chair Harp stated the CDI has had an Action Plan over the years.
Commissioner Tam stated that there is a perception that the CDI is an activity-based
commission.
Secretary Akil stated that there would always be an Accessibility website link.
Commissioner Warren asked about the possibility of having both seats on other city
commissions and a smaller Commission to which Mr. Nguyen stated it is not out of the
realm of possibility but would have to be further evaluated.
Secretary Akil stated the CDI under a dual option would have to be careful about not over
stepping its role and following the Bylaws set forth by the City.
4-C.
Report Out - Wilma Chan's State Budget Meeting - (Vice Chair Harp)
Vice-Chair Harp stated it was organized by Wilma Chan and it was a well attended event.
There are many threatened State cuts under the proposed budget that would affect the
disability and care services arenas.
2",CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities/2012-04-23.pdf
CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities,2012-04-23,3,"5.
OLD BUSINESS
5-A.
Goals and Objectives 2012 (Chair Lord-Hausman)
Chair Lord-Hausman made a Universal Design presentation to the Mastick Senior
Center Board to encourage collaboration between the two. A Mastick member
volunteered to be the liaison and work with CDI, reporting back to Mastick's
Board.
Chair Lord-Hausman will contact Alameda Theatre regarding audio hearing.
Jack Kapon / Housing Development Project: Chair Lord-Hausman contacted
Debbie Potter regarding being a catalyst with APD for sensitivity training
regarding incidents with persons with disabilities.
Monthly Recognition: Commissioner Warren has done some research and will
provide more info.
Chair Lord-Hausman also stated that the monthly recognition events could be
posted to the City website
Universal Design - The Work Group: Chair Lord-Hausman, Vice-chair Harp,
Commissioner Deustche volunteered.
5-B.
City Council Meeting Report (Commissioner Fort):
None.
5-C.
Planning Board Meeting Report (Chair Lord-Hausman):
Chair Lord-Hausman stated that the Housing Element meeting will be May 29th and both
she and Vice-Chair Harp will attend.
6.
STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
None.
7.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
7-A.
Park Street/Alameda Avenue ADA compliance curb cuts have been completed after three
years of advocacy by the CDI.
7-B. Meet your Public Officials sponsored by League of Women Voters - May 3rd at the Elks
Lodge and no fee is charged to CDI members.
3",CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities/2012-04-23.pdf
CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities,2012-04-23,4,"8.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 8:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lucretia Akil
Board Secretary
4",CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities/2012-04-23.pdf
PlanningBoard,2012-04-23,1,"APPROVED MEETING MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING OF THE
CITY OF ALAMEDA PLANNING BOARD
MONDAY, APRIL 23, 2012
7:00 p.m.
City Hall Council Chambers
2263 Santa Clara Avenue, Third Floor
(Corner of Santa Clara Avenue and Oak Street)
ALAMEDA, CA
Doors will open at 6:45 p.m.
1.
CONVENE:
7:07 p.m.
2.
FLAG SALUTE:
Board member Köster
3.
ROLL CALL:
Present: President Zuppan, Vice-President Burton, Board
members Ezzy Ashcraft, Knox White, and Köster. Board
member Henneberry (arrived at 7:20 pm)
4.
MINUTES
Minutes from the Regular meeting of March 12, 2012
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft motions to approve March 12, 2012 minutes as amended
Board member Knox White seconds motion. Motion carries 5-0, no abstentions
5. AGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSION
NONE
6. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
6.A. Future Agendas
Andrew Thomas, Planning Services Manager, reviewed future agendas.
Board member Knox White stated that several park projects have made significant
changes that didn't have any of the bicycle and other infrastructure that private projects
are required to have. Asked if the Zoning Administrator is forwarding projects to Public
Works to confirm projects meet all required City codes.
Approved Meeting Minutes
Page 1 of 8
April 23, 2012",PlanningBoard/2012-04-23.pdf
PlanningBoard,2012-04-23,2,"Mr. Thomas responded that staff has been in contact with Public Works regarding this
particular project. Stated that all projects whether reviewed by the Zoning Administrator
or Planning Board are supposed to have a full review by every department. Clarified
that the only distinction between the Planning Board and the Zoning Administrator is the
Zoning Administrator reviews items that are deemed small and non-controversial. Staff
will have Public Works review the plan and the bicycle provisions. This will be a design
review and use permit
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft stated that there have been projects where there weren't
as many bicycle parking facilities as the bike community wanted until the project was
reviewed a second time. Asked if Gail Payne, Bicycle Transportation Specialist, has
seen the plan
Board member Knox White asked if the HAB is notified when staff approves a demolition
so HAB has an opportunity to call projects for review if there is a concern; asked what
the distinctions between staff level HAB decisions and Board level decisions. Asked if
there it is possible to send these design review approvals to HAB for review prior to the
project date of April 26
Mr. Thomas stated that the HAB is not currently informed; staff should report to the
Historical Advisory Board; affirmed that there is time to forward design review to HAB for
review. Unless packaged with design review application, these should be reported to the
HAB.
Oral Communication
Karen Bey, requested that a few items be added to the agenda: the Economic
Development Commission (EDC) is scheduled to review the Developers Retail Strategy
on May 17, which is an important part of the Planning Board process in terms of
approving and designing. Stated that there was no site map attached to the large lot
Master Map on the Master Use Permit and it is difficult to know how the area will be
used, i.e. retail. If retail is included would like to see how the project fits in with the Retail
Strategy. Requested that the Large Format Retail Ordinance Section 30-21.36 be
amended to include how the City determines a large format and that design guidelines
be included. Requested that community have more time for input and perhaps host a
work session prior to the Planning Board review of Phase 2, the fifth street portion of the
projects; feels that the Target design was rushed and would like to see preliminary
designs in the future .
President Zuppan responded that the Sunshine Ordinance allows for over a week of
review for packets and projects.
Approved Meeting Minutes
Page 2 of 8
April 23, 2012",PlanningBoard/2012-04-23.pdf
PlanningBoard,2012-04-23,3,"Board member Ezzy Ashcraft stated that members of the community are welcome to
email, call, or stop by to speak with staff to provide input and comment on projects.
6.B. Alameda Landing - Status Report on Target Store Building Design Improvements
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft inquired about the location of the additional doors and
what the doors were for. She inquired if more brick can be added to the front building
panel next to the pharmacy as well as additional brick on the west side; inquired if
additional green screens can be added to the west side.
Board member Köster inquired about skylights and stated if brick is added to the west
elevation it should be added to the north side so the west and north side match.
Tom Dulik, Target Design Architect, explained placement of doors and windows, clarified
which doors are employee access only, and pointed out the single customer entrance;
affirmed the possibility of adding more brick to the building.
Public Comments:
Karen Bey, requested that more windows be added to the design. It is a large building
and having more windows would lighten and brighten the building up. She inquired if the
parking lot layout was already approved, stated that if the Board cuts the parking lot into
smaller lots with trees, it will look more appealing, and not seem so large.
Board Comments:
Board member Knox White stated that pedestrians walk in such a way that they will be
walking through a field of cars trying to back up despite the pedestrian pathways. The
only way to fix a ""sidewalk to nowhere"" is to make it go somewhere; public art in a place
where nobody needs to walk is not an actual fix. This particular issue highlights the need
that all access to the buildings needs to be prioritized at the beginning of the process,
prior to the approval of parking, guaranteeing that all connections to the front door are
usable.
Vice President Burton stated he hoped to see more extensive changes to the design.
The public art piece at the terminus is better than employee doors; likes the trellises
which have been pulled away from the building and help break down the scale of the
building. Suggested that that the base element at the four foot level be reviewed, it cuts
through middle of doors and windows, perhaps the eight foot level would work better.
Design needs to be integrated more tightly, stated that the windows and doors don't
have any relationship to the overall a massing elements of the building. The edge of the
building could be softened by adding more green screens. He requested to see actual
Approved Meeting Minutes
Page 3 of 8
April 23, 2012",PlanningBoard/2012-04-23.pdf
PlanningBoard,2012-04-23,4,"building materials; want to see how the poured form concreted looks next to the painted
textured concrete, an actual brick that will be used and actual paint chips, instead of
copies of paint chips.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft concurred with the request to see building samples, She
stated that this Target design is the only Target out of several in the area that has
pedestrian pathways through the parking fields; giving pedestrians and cyclist more
options to safely get to the entrance of the building.
Board member Henneberry thanked staff and developer for their work and look forward
to seeing the changes
Board member Knox White stated that if the Board wants to see building materials
before going forward with then the board needs to call the design for review tonight as
opposed to allowing the plans to move forward and finding out that there are concerns
later.
President Zuppan stated that there was concern that the building materials were not
provided at the initial approval and that she thought the building materials would be
presented with the status report. Want to make sure that the direction is in accordance
with what the Board anticipated.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft, concurs with President Zuppan and stated that it looks like
the color has changed.
Mr. Dulik gave the Board drawings with the actual colors that will be used. Stated that
the color palette has not changed; agrees to provide physical samples of the building
material, and states that Target is interested in working with Board, Staff, and Catellus
on tying in the poured-form concrete.
Mr. Thomas responded that the building is a very large tilt-up concrete, and brick
building, and unless the Board is suggesting that the building materials change to wood,
the materials will not affect the approval of the foundation permit; will provide the Board
with building material samples at the next meeting. Status report continued to next
meeting.
6.C. April 9, 2012 Resolution Denying Alcohol Sales at 1716 Webster Street (76 station).
Mr. Thomas gave brief presentation and presented the revised resolution. Applicant has
filed an appeal. The City Council will receive the revised resolution along with the appeal
hearing request; which will mostl likely be scheduled for the June 5 City Council meeting.
Approved Meeting Minutes
Page 4 of 8
April 23, 2012",PlanningBoard/2012-04-23.pdf
PlanningBoard,2012-04-23,5,"Board member Ezzy Aschraft, stated that the Board received an email from a 7-eleven
representative clarifying that the owner of the 7-eleven and the applicant were in
discussion regarding the convenience store at the 76 Station, but were not in contract.
7-eleven has no plans to close the store on Buena Vista.
President Zuppan requested that staff invite a representative from the Police Department
to the Appeal Hearing to speak about the impact additional alcohol sales would have in
that area.
7.ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None
8.CONSENT CALENDAR
None
9. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
9.A. College of Alameda-555 Ralph Appezzato Parkway-A Public Hearing to Consider a
Use Permit for a Flea Market located on the campus of the College of Alameda weekly
on Saturdays between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
Planning Services Manager Andrew Thomas gave a brief presentation.
Board member Henneberry stated that this it is not without precedence that venues of
this nature are at that end of town. It is a good use and seems to be a good fit. He states
his support of the Use Permit.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft asked how the Flea Market benefits the Community
College, if the City collects sales tax revenue, if the Use Permit allowed for the sale of
alcohol, and bathroom facilities are portable. She suggested that the Use Permit specify
that it does not include the sale of alcohol.
Vice President Burton stated that the single use plastic bag ban only affects retailers of a
certain size and wouldn't apply to vendors of this scale, He supports the restrictions on
amplified noise, trash pick up, and a six month review of the permit. He inquired if any
reports, good or bad, had been filed. Concurs with Board member conditions that resale
license for vendors and prohibition of alcohol sales be included in the motion.
Lori Taylor, Community Development Director, stated that the City is collecting sales tax
revenue; regular flea market vendors have to pay sales tax an exception to the rule is the
Approved Meeting Minutes
Page 5 of 8
April 23, 2012",PlanningBoard/2012-04-23.pdf
PlanningBoard,2012-04-23,6,"once a year vendor. An incidental benefit is that many people who attend these events
will dine in Alameda and it puts the City on the map
Mr. Thomas stated that the college is being paid for the use of their property. Antiques by
the Bay had a condition of approval on the resale license for each vendor. The permit
does not entitle anyone to sell alcohol, and a clause can be added to the permit.
Attendees have access to the college's permanent bathrooms. With the exception of the
one neighbors email, no additional reports have been received. Originally the permit
proposed an early start time in addition to a Saturday and Sunday use. Staff requested
that the flea market operators move their event to Saturday only due to the traffic caused
by Antiques by the Bay, and requested a later start time to accommodate for residential
neighbors.
Board member Knox White asked for clarification on condition number 10 requiring a
traffic contingency plan in the event of an emergency Tube closure. He asked if a second
traffic study is required prior to the six month review.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft stated that the Abrams Plan indicates that the College will
coordinate with WABA and Caltrans to develop a traffic control plan in the event of street
or Tube closure.
Mr. Thomas clarified that at the six month review if the City finds that the Flea Market
operators have not provided an adequate contingency plan then the City can request
that certain actions stated in the staff report occur. The operators and Public Works are
still working with the College to come up with a final traffic circulation plan for people
trying to enter/exit the college during the event.
Board member Köster asked why the operators are using Parking lot A, which is closer
to the residential area, than combining the use of parking lots B, C, and D; if there is
space to park bicycles that are towing wagons; does the Abram's Report include traffic
studies for the Target Store; and if the report does not include Target traffic study will
one be done later and how do these conflict with each other.
Flea Market Operator responded that Parking lot A is one large asphalt space, with no
puddles, it is also the lot with the best and safest access the other three lots only have
one entrance/exit. Parking lots B, C, and D are separate lots with irregular surfaces that
are muddy when it rains. Parking lot D is also used by parents who have children
playing baseball or soccer, traffic and noise would be endless during the event it it was
hosted in Parking Lot B, C, and D. Parking lot A is very quiet. Responded that they can
accommodate bicycles with trailers/wagons, and thus far very few people traveling by
bicycle have attended the event.
Approved Meeting Minutes
Page 6 of 8
April 23, 2012",PlanningBoard/2012-04-23.pdf
PlanningBoard,2012-04-23,7,"Mr. Thomas responded that the traffic studies do not incorporate the opening of Target.
Staff will continue to monitor the traffic.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft motions to approve the Use Permit to allow a Flea Market
locating on the College of Alameda Campus with the amendments as discussed.
Vice President Burton seconds the motion; motion carries 6-0. No abstentions
9.B. Review and Comment on Staff's Responses to the Regional Sustainable
Communities Strategy - Jobs Housing Connection Scenario.
Planning Services Manager Andrew Thomas gave brief presentation
Board member Knox White stated that the City needs to state the goal of the letter and
be more specific with what is being asked of the regional agencies. He disagrees with
the letter's statement that the proposal will further increase Alameda's job-housing
imbalance, the ratio of jobs to housing will get better by about 20%. Stated that there
should be discussion on how the City is asking the region to prioritize the transportation
projects. List seems to throw all the transportation projects the City wants is into a letter
to the region. Stated he would like to see the City encourage MTC to put together an
effective Climate Policy Initiative, which is what the SB 375 asks the City to do and their
analysis shows that what they are proposing doesn't really get them closer to their goal.
Wants City to encouraging MTC and the County to identifying best practices for reduce
green house gas reduction, so they can work with cities to make sure we are all working
towards that goal. Stated he would like to see the City argue for geographic equity in
regional funding.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft, commended staff on a very good letter. Concerned about
job creation and believes if more employment opportunities in addition to more housing
then the City can help reduce the commute and therefore reduce the carbon foot print.
Stated if there are unfunded mandates then there needs to be some sort of hold-
harmless protection. Concurs with Board member Knox White to choose a few
achievable goals to work towards
Board member Henneberry commended staff for their hard work.
President Zuppan stated she does not see credible evidence that the broad assumptions
made by ABAG and MTC actually work. She would like to see better proof that this is
not just incremental impact that would otherwise occur from the same type of growth
governed in a different way. She would like to see MTC and ABAG provide factual
information to support the requests that are being made.
Approved Meeting Minutes
Page 7 of 8
April 23, 2012",PlanningBoard/2012-04-23.pdf
PlanningBoard,2012-04-23,8,"10. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
None
11. BOARD COMMUNICATIONS
Board member Knox White stated that the Target status report was confusing and not
clear on Board's purpose with this item. It seemed like a public hearing on the design.
Not clear on how to give direction to staff on a status report when the direction is coming
from one person not the entire body.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft stated that in the future design review should not be
approved until it has met all the Board's standard. Suggested that staff review the
pedestrian past at the shopping district on Bay Street in Emeryville, which may give
guidance on pedestrian pathway protection.
President Zuppan stated that the piecemeal approach is sometimes too isolated and the
Board needs to have all the context in order to make decisions. Requests that
guidelines for status report be drafted so the Board better understands of what the
expectations are.
Vice President Burton concurs that bringing items to the Board earlier is the best solution
so the Board has a chance to review and change as necessary. Developers and
designers would want issues identified as early as possible to help keep projects on
track.
Board member Köster asked if the Board will review the final site plan that was approved
with conditions
Mr. Thomas affirmed that the Board will be presented with a final site plan review. Will
take Board comments to staff for review to come up with the best approach to receive
final approval but keep the project on task.
12. ADJOURNMENT:
9:33 p.m.
Approved Meeting Minutes
Page 8 of 8
April 23, 2012",PlanningBoard/2012-04-23.pdf