body,date,page,text,path
PlanningBoard,2017-07-17,1,"APPROVED MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE
CITY OF ALAMEDA PLANNING BOARD
MONDAY, JULY 17, 2017
1. CONVENE
President Koster convened the meeting at 7:02pm
2. FLAG SALUTE
Board Member Sullivan led the flag salute.
3. ROLL CALL
Present: President Köster, Board Members Curtis, Mitchell, Sullivan. Absent: Board
Member Burton.
4. AGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSION
President Köster said the board elections may be moved to the end of the meeting,
pending Board Member Burton's arrival.
5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
*None*
6. CONSENT CALENDAR
*None*
7. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
7-A 2017-4568
Encinal Terminals Environmental Impact Report, Draft Master Plan,
General Plan Amendment and Development Agreement. Applicant: North
Waterfront Cove, LLC. Public Hearing to consider the Master Plan, Density
Bonus application, General Plan Amendment, and Development
Agreement for the redevelopment of the Encinal Terminals property located
at 1521 Buena Vista Avenue. (APN 72-0382-001, -002, and 72-0383-
03) The properties are zoned MX (Mixed Use) and MF (Multifamily
Residential). A Focused Supplemental Environmental Impact Report has
been prepared for the project pursuant to California Environmental Quality
Act
Staff Member Thomas gave a presentation on the staff recommendation. The staff report
and attachments can be found at:
ittps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3099766&GUID=7C55F667-
E01A-4538-A431-6F2D68F32FBB&FullText=1
Approved Minutes
July 17, 2017
Page 1 of 10
Planning Board Meeting",PlanningBoard/2017-07-17.pdf
PlanningBoard,2017-07-17,2,"Board Member Sullivan asked if BCDC would still require the perimeter to be open space
if no Tidelands swap were executed.
Staff Member Thomas said we would be likely to get a 15-20 foot shoreline path, but not
7 acres with 100 feet of open space around the water.
Board Member Sullivan asked who would be responsible for dredging a new marina at the
site.
Staff Member Thomas said that would be an issue to be dealt with when the marina lease
is set up. He said the site does not presently have much need for dredging.
Board Member Zuppan asked for clarification on which documents governs various open
space and public access requirements if there is a conflict.
Staff Member Thomas said they tried to minimize overlap of issues and eliminate conflicts
between documents.
Board Member Zuppan asked if the money that might have been available for a water
shuttle has been allocated for acquiring the Pennzoil property, and if so, what the thinking
was for that.
Staff Member Thomas explained the transit funding sources and plans the project will
provide. He said the General Plan identifies the Pennzoil parcel as the priority in order to
complete Clement Ave and move the truck route.
Board Member Curtis asked how we can approve a development agreement without the
phasing set.
Staff Member Thomas said there is no financial risk to the City. He said they cannot start
building until they get a phasing plan approved. He said there is a detailed phasing plan,
but they preserved flexibility in case the state requires a different phasing plan.
Board Member Knox White asked what the benefit is of going above the 60 foot height
limit in the General Plan.
Staff Member Thomas said they did not want every building to look the same. He said you
could get 589 units within the 60 foot height limit, but every building would be 5-6 story
squares and not step down toward the water.
Board Member Knox White asked about a section in the plan that seems to allow the
developer to go higher than the limit if they have more or less commercial space. He did
not understand why they would need to go higher if they put in less commercial.
Approved Minutes
July 17, 2017
Page 2 of 10
Planning Board Meeting",PlanningBoard/2017-07-17.pdf
PlanningBoard,2017-07-17,3,"Staff Member Thomas said that they might have situations that all parties want to approve
a building that does not exactly meet the master plan and wanted to be able to have the
planning board approve that without requiring a master plan amendment.
Mike O'Hara, Tim Lewis Communities, gave a presentation on the master plan.
Board Member Knox White asked if the road along the promenade that connects with
Clement would allow private vehicles to pass through.
Mr. O'Hara said they plan to limit through access to emergency vehicles only.
Board Member Sullivan asked where marina users would park.
Mr. O'Hara said there would be a loading zone and parking would be in the structures of
the buildings.
President Köster asked what S the current condition of the piers.
Mr. O'Hara said there is a timber portion of the wharf that would be removed and the rest
of the piles will be rehabilitated for mixed use.
Board Member Mitchell asked if the quantity of electric vehicle parking at each location is
defined.
Mr. O'Hara said that those details would be left for the design review phase.
Board Member Zuppan asked if ""purple pipe"" for water recapture is included in the plan.
Mr. O'Hara said there are a number of ways to achieve different LEED certifications and
they are supportive but did not prescribe what elements would be included.
Board Member Zuppan asked how they could evaluate the tradeoff of a tall building with
more open space if the design review does not happen until the last phase.
Mr. O'Hara said that each design review application would be accompanied by a report
on how all the other phases are progressing and how they are falling within the unit ranges.
President Köster asked if the traffic light would still be required at Entrance Rd. and Buena
Vista.
Mr. O'Hara said that once the truck route on Clement is complete, the Buena Vista and
Entrance Road intersection would not require a traffic signal.
Approved Minutes
July 17, 2017
Page 3 of 10
Planning Board Meeting",PlanningBoard/2017-07-17.pdf
PlanningBoard,2017-07-17,4,"President Köster asked if there would be a vehicular drop off area for the water taxi.
Mr. O'Hara said they would need to look at that as the detailed plans progress.
President Köster opened the public hearing.
Cristin Sullivan expressed concern about safety for residents during construction. She
expressed concern over being able to support all the retail development. She said she
supports adding housing in Alameda to address affordability.
Dorothy Freeman read a news quote cautioning against setting the precedent of allowing
very tall buildings. She said tall buildings belong in Oakland. She said the residential mix
was too high and wanted more commercial space and fewer units.
Rachele Trigueros, Bay Area Council, said they endorse the project because of the
housing crisis. She said the state is not building the number of units required to keep up
with job growth.
Kari Thompson, Chamber of Commerce, urged the board to support the project.
Michael McDonough, Chamber of Commerce, said this project will lead to the
beautification of the northern waterfront. He said he was excited to see the project happen.
Beth Kenny, Chair of the Commission on Disability Issues, expressed concern about the
visitability and universal design requirements are not consistent with the ordinance the
board recently recommended. She asked the board to not approve the universal design
section of the plan.
Christopher Buckley asked that the 60 foot height limit be maintained. He said a 160 foot
height limit would open a Pandora's Box in Alameda. He asked for clarification on how
many areas might be allowed to have tall buildings.
Ken Levins said he did not see any facilities for liveaboards. He said the tall building could
take away his view of Oakland. He said Clement is not a well-designed truck route. He
said he did not see any spaces for vehicles with trailers that might use the marina.
Meredith Levins said there are no red curbs on her street which is supposed to be a fire
lane which makes it impossible for emergency vehicles to pass and for them to exit their
driveway. She asked that the city put in accountability in the plan for things like parking
and enforcement.
Eric Embry said adding 589 units on top of Del Monte might be more than the
neighborhood can handle. He said Clement does not make sense as a truck route. He
Approved Minutes
July 17, 2017
Page 4 of 10
Planning Board Meeting",PlanningBoard/2017-07-17.pdf
PlanningBoard,2017-07-17,5,"said Marina Shores did not help with the housing crisis. He suggested waiting to see how
Del Monte goes before moving forward with this plan.
John Platt said Del Monte fits Alameda but a 14 story building does not fit. He said the
traffic on Sherman is already bad before any units are built. He said the quality of life on
the island is going down.
Lisa said they purchased a home in Alameda because of the small town feel. She said it
takes 30 minutes to get off and on the island. She said there will be too many people and
not enough parking. She asked why the truck route would be on a waterfront street. She
said there is no solution to traffic, school overcrowding, hospitals, and animal shelters.
Bill Smith said he is excited about the project. He said there will be growing pains, but not
having housing is real misery, not just inconvenience. He said he likes the 14 story
building.
Laura Thomas, Renewed Hope, thanked the board for their hard work. She said they
support the project. She said they would like to see a higher percentage of affordable units
in such a large project.
Teresa Ruiz said they are excited to see these underutilized sites move forward. She said
we can solve transportation problems with incentives but cannot solve the housing
problem without building more housing. She encouraged higher bedroom count units to
support families that need housing.
Karen Bey said there is a lot to like about the project, including the 14 story tower. She
said it is an appropriate place to build. She wanted to make sure the ferry is very important
to make sure is funded.
Alan Pryor said trucks and traffic have been a big part of our history. He said we need
places for people to live that are affordable.
Angela Hockabout, Alameda Home Team, said we need every unit to help address the
housing shortage. She said the discomfort from traffic and tall buildings is nothing
compared to the suffering of folks without stable housing. She said opposing new housing
for aesthetic reason is oppressive. She urged approval of the project.
President Köster closed the public hearing.
Board Member Knox White asked who approves the density bonus.
Staff Member Thomas said the density bonus is embedded in the master plan.
Approved Minutes
July 17, 2017
Page 5 of 10
Planning Board Meeting",PlanningBoard/2017-07-17.pdf
PlanningBoard,2017-07-17,6,"Board Member Knox White said the application is not included and asked if they can
discuss the merits of the project without the density bonus application.
Staff Member Thomas said the requirement is to show that the 491 unit base project is
feasible for the density bonus, but they are not asking for any waivers like some projects
have.
Board Member Knox White asked for clarification about the project's universal design
requirements.
Staff Member Thomas said that 80% of the project would be visitable. The 20% that are
townhomes would not meet that standard. He said the draft ordinance on universal design
requires 100% visitability, but allows for developers to apply for waivers for townhomes.
Board Member Sullivan asked what data we have to show the impacts of TDM on the
""substantial and unavoidable"" traffic impacts.
Staff Member Thomas said we can't build a new bridge and we can't say no to new
housing. He said we have to be more efficient with our transportation space. He said we
are working on increasing transit services.
Board Member Mitchell said that 589 units, when compared with the size of the city, is a
modest amount. He said he likes the revitalized Park St., even though it is hard to park
there. He said he likes the flexibility in the plan, the access to the water, additional
affordable housing, down payment assistance, and public art funds. He said he
appreciates the mixed use of the site and is okay with the building heights in the plan. He
said he would like to move forward tonight.
Board Member Curtis said we might consider that 589 units is too many for the site. He
said he is against the 90 foot height level. He said the parking is inadequate. He said he
cannot vote for the project.
Board Member Sullivan said she is opposed to the project as designed. She said the
project is jam packed with units. She said she is disappointed in the universal design
elements of the plan. She said she does not support the 90 foot tower. She said traffic and
parking are issues and we should not build this many units.
Board Member Zuppan said she thinks we are striking a good balance because people on
both sides are unhappy with parts of the project. She said we should make sure there is
access for vehicles with boat trailers. She said we should limit the number of compact
parking spaces on the site. She said she liked the suggestion of making sure we have
more two and three bedroom units. She said we should make sure that pets are allowed
in these buildings. She said she would like the potential height waiver to only apply to the
Approved Minutes
July 17, 2017
Page 6 of 10
Planning Board Meeting",PlanningBoard/2017-07-17.pdf
PlanningBoard,2017-07-17,7,"one corner of the site. She said we need to require energy and water conservation in the
project. She said rentals and affordable units are the most likely ones to require universal
design elements and some of these items should be required up front. She said the
reduced cost transit passes should be available to more residents. She said she would
like the landscaping to be part of design review. She said she agreed with the speakers
who said Clement is a bad place for a truck route. She said the line 19 is at double the
expected ridership and still parking problems, which means there is something wrong with
our transportation models. She said we should have flexibility for residents to leave their
cars someplace safe so they can use transit. She suggested making the parking stalls tall
enough to allow stacked parking. She suggested tying the ferry dock to something more
concrete to make sure that transportation infrastructure is built earlier in the project.
Board Member Knox White said he is not inclined to approve a 14 story building at this
time. He said the exception to the height limit should only apply to sub-area F, increases
the planned commercial square feet, and is architecturally exceptional. He said the design
review exception needs to have some benefit to the community beyond just a nice tower.
He said we should include construction updates and schedules be released every six
months. He said we should require liveaboard facilities to be addressed in design review.
He said he agreed with Board Member Zuppan about the universal design review issues.
He said he would like to see the language of the draft universal design ordinance included
in the agreement. He said he would like to have the density bonus application included
when the plan goes to council. He said there are dozens of empty parking spaces around
Littlejohn Park every night. He said we can build to support cars or build to support bikes
and transit.
President Köster said we are in housing crisis mode and these units are badly needed.
He said he likes that the units in this development would be smaller and inherently more
affordable. He said he would like to see the project meet the universal design elements.
Staff Member Thomas said a potential recommendation would be to approve the master
plan with the following additional recommendations to council and staff: eliminate 4b and
expand the height limit exception to only apply to site F if the design is exceptional and
there is an increase in the amount of commercial; six month construction plans noticed to
the public; the density bonus application be included with the proposal that goes to the
city council; the master plan include design review for boat trailer access, liveaboard
facilities, limits on compact spaces, landscaping for open space and private will come to
design review; include a distribution of larger bedroom units; provisions to allow pets; meet
the standards of the draft universal design ordinance and allow waiver applications during
design review if necessary; allow households to purchase more transit passes if needed;
encourage council to examine the phasing requirements for the water shuttle as well as
drop off access for the water shuttle.
Approved Minutes
July 17, 2017
Page 7 of 10
Planning Board Meeting",PlanningBoard/2017-07-17.pdf
PlanningBoard,2017-07-17,8,"Staff Member Thomas addressed the two members who stated their opposition to the
plan. He said the city legally cannot say there are too many units. He said if there are other
items that they had issue with in the plan that they could try and address with amendments
they could raise them now.
Board Member Curtis said staff is saying that the state says if you can stuff that many
units on the site there is nothing you can do. He said there are other mitigating concerns
that he owes the public. He said the parking is an issue and accommodating the weekend
visitors will be a problem. He said the Pasta Pelican is going broke because of their parking
problems. He said the design can be improved and there is not enough parking, and that
is the basis for his vote.
Board Member Zuppan made a motion to extend the meeting to 11:15pm. Board Member
Mitchell seconded the motion. The motion passed 6-0.
Board Member Knox White asked if they would be able to hear other items given that they
did not make a motion at 10:30pm.
Staff Attorney Penick said they would not be able to hear additional items tonight.
Board Member Zuppan asked how hard it would be to come back after the first phase to
add parking.
Staff Member Thomas said they could amend the plan, or they could include a condition
that allows changes at the design review phase is certain conditions are met.
Board Member Zuppan said she would like to include that flexibility in the plan.
Board Member Mitchell and President Köster said they would be supportive of the
amendment.
Board Member Knox White said if we want to define what the problem is to trigger such a
clause, he could be supportive. He described a parking occupancy study that could give
the board or the developer to amend the parking levels of future phases.
Board Member Knox White made a motion to approve the staff recommendation
with the changes listed (above, in italics, underlined) by Staff Member Thomas plus
the parking occupancy study that could trigger a review of parking requirements.
Board Member Mitchell seconded the motion. The motion passed 4-2 (Curtis,
Sullivan).
<skip to item 8. Minutes>
Approved Minutes
July 17, 2017
Page 8 of 10
Planning Board Meeting",PlanningBoard/2017-07-17.pdf
PlanningBoard,2017-07-17,9,"7-B
Board Elections
Board Member Knox White nominated Board Mitchell to serve as President. Board
Member Curtis seconded the motion. The motion passed 7-0.
Board Member Curtis nominated Board Member Sullivan to be Vice President. Board
Member Zuppan seconded the motion. The motion passed 7-0.
7-C 2017-4572
Zoning Amendment - Affordable Housing. Applicant: City of Alameda. The
Planning Board will hold a Public Hearing to consider zoning amendments
related to Affordable Housing. The project is categorically exempt from
further review under the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 In-Fill Development Projects. Staff is
requesting this item be continued to July 24, 2017
*continued*
8. MINUTES
2017-4564
Draft Meeting Minutes - May 8, 2017
Board Member Sullivan made a motion to approve the minutes. Board Member Mitchell
seconded the motion. The motion passed 7-0.
2017-4565
Draft Meeting Minutes - May 22, 2017
Board Member Zuppan made a motion to approve the minutes. Board Member Curtis
seconded the motion.
Board Member Curtis asked to add (on page 4 of 9) ""Curtis said he would vote for the
revised plan as long as staff forwarded his recommendation for informational purposes
that a bond could be put up to secure the development of phase 3."" He said the information
was not included in the presentation to City Council.
Board Member Zuppan moved to amend the motion to include the amendment. Board
Member Curtis seconded the amendment. The motion passed 6-0-1 (Sullivan abstained).
Board Member Zuppan made a motion to extend the meeting to 11:30pm. Board Member
Curtis seconded the motion. The motion passed 7-0.
<return to item 7-B>
9. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
9-A 2017-4566
Approved Minutes
July 17, 2017
Page 9 of 10
Planning Board Meeting",PlanningBoard/2017-07-17.pdf
PlanningBoard,2017-07-17,10,"Zoning Administrator and Design Review Recent Actions and Decisions
Staff Member Thomas gave a report (unintelligible).
10. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
*None*
11. BOARD COMMUNICATIONS
11-A 2017-4567
Subcommittee for Alameda Marina
*None*
Board Member Knox White thanked President Köster for his service as President and said
a potential goodbye to the board and staff.
Board Member Zuppan said it was a pleasure to serve on the board.
All board members thanked the outgoing board members.
12. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
*None*
13. ADJOURNMENT
President Köster adjourned the meeting at 11:17pm.
Approved Minutes
July 17, , 2017
Page 10 of 10
Planning Board Meeting",PlanningBoard/2017-07-17.pdf
RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee,2017-07-17,1,"Approved Minutes
July 17, 2017
Minutes of the Special Meeting of the
Rent Review Advisory Committee
Monday, July 17, 2017
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
The meeting was called to order at 6:39 p.m.
Present were:
Chair Cambra and Vice Chair Sullivan-Sariñana; Members
Friedman, Griffiths, and Murray
Committee Staff:
Jennifer Kauffman
City Attorney Staff: John Le
2. AGENDA CHANGES
a. Staff noted that a revised agenda was published today and is available in the back
of the room or online.
3. STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS
a. Staff for the record stated there are no cases reviewed at tonight's meeting.
4. PUBLIC COMMENT, NON-AGENDA, NO.1
a. None.
5. CONSENT CALENDAR
a. None.
6. UNFINSHED BUSINESS
a. No unfinished business.
7. NEW BUSINESS
7-A. Overview of Rent Program Administrative Procedures
Review of RRAC meeting procedures
Schedule possible Brown Act/Sunshine Ordinance Training
Staff explained the administrative procedures for the Ordinance, noting the
information is also available at public informational workshops. The discussion
included the following topics:
Communication between staff and parties
Invalid notices and reimbursements on violations
Qualifications for the individual meeting the Ordinance's definition of ""Landlord""
Reasonable accommodation process
Page 1 of 3",RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2017-07-17.pdf
RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee,2017-07-17,2,"Approved Minutes
July 17, 2017
Public record requests
Referrals to regional legal and social services
Mediation options
Committee members discussed factors under consideration for rent increase reviews
including the role of supportive documentation. The discussion addressed the
information provided to parties prior to Committee meetings, types of supportive
documentation relevant to rent increases, parties' inclusion or exclusion of
supportive documents. Committee members requested staff share with each
member a copy of the template letters provided to parties prior to the RRAC
meeting.
Members discussed the Committee's role and procedures during the mediation and
recommendation phase. City attorney staff identified section 6-58.85.A, noting that
members are not advocates for either the Landlord or the Tenant. Members requested
that staff provide guidance on City Council's intent with the role of mediation and
dialogue during the RRAC process. Member Friedman stated he will follow-up with
City attorney staff at a later time if he is interested in pursuing this topic.
Member Sullivan-Sariñana introduced topic regarding the appropriate time allotment
per case. Members discussed the procedures and noted that changes will be made
through an amendment to the RRAC Rules and Procedures.
Chair Cambra made logistical recommendations on the following topics:
Seating arrangement
Time management
Name badges
Member's roles
Room acoustics
Member's ability to discuss Committee procedures in the future
Members request staff agendize the opportunity for a Committee
members to debrief on the RRAC process at each meeting.
Motion and second for the meeting to extend 10 minutes beyond 9:30pm (Griffiths
and Sullivan-Sariñana). Approved by unanimous consent.
Chair Cambra and Member Sullivan-Sariñana discussed updating the RRAC chair
announcements. Cambra and Sullivan-Sariñana agreed to prepare the language
together to share at the upcoming RRAC meetings.
Page 2 of 3",RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2017-07-17.pdf
RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee,2017-07-17,3,"Approved Minutes
July 17, 2017
City attorney staff informed Committee members that a Sunshine Ordinance video
training is available to the public online at the City's website. Staff confirmed that the
information will be sent to Committee members and each members is welcome to
contact the City attorney's office with questions once they view the video.
8. PUBLIC COMMENT, NON-AGENDA, NO. 2.
a. No public comment.
9. MATTERS INITIATED
a. Chair Cambra requested the Committee agendize a discussion on the low volume
of reviews requested by tenants for increases equal to or less than 5%. Members
and staff discussed the scope and purview of the Committee. Cambra withdrew
the request and noted he will introduce the topic at a later date.
10.ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was unanimously adjourned at 9:43 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Committee Secretary
Jennifer Kauffman
Approved by the Rent Review Advisory Committee on November 6, 2017.
Page 3 of 3",RentReviewAdvisoryCommittee/2017-07-17.pdf