{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-01-06", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF HISTORICAL ADVISORY BOARD\nREGULAR MEETING OF THURSDAY, JANUARY 6, 2005\nCOUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL\n2263 SANTA CLARA AVENUE - 7:00 PM\nVice Chair McPherson called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. Secretary Altschuler called\nthe roll.\nMEMBERS PRESENT:\nBoard Members McPherson, Anderson, Lynch, & Tilos\nMEMBERS ABSENT:\nBoard member Miller arrived at 7:20 p.m.\nSTAFF PRESENT:\nSecretary Altschuler, Elizabeth Johnson, Development Services\nDepartment, Recording Secretary Debbie Gremminger.\nAGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSIONS:\nStaff is requesting Item #2 be continued to a future meeting.\nApproval of minutes and Election of Officers will move to the end of the Agenda when full\nBoard is present.\nMINUTES:\nMoved to the end of the Agenda. (see Agenda Changes and Discussions).\nELECTION OF OFFICERS:\nMoved to the end of the Agenda (see Agenda Changes and Discussions).\nWRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: (Discussion only)\nNone.\nACTION ITEMS: (Discussion/Action)\n1.\nAdoption of 2005 Historical Advisory Board Calendar.\nM/S to adopt the 2005 Historical Advisory Board Calendar. Anderson/Lynch 4-0-1..\nAyes: 4;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n1 (Miller); Motion carries.\nACTION ITEMS: (Discussion/Action)\n2.\nCertificate of Approval CA04-0013- Helena Liang - 1104 Oak Street. The applicant\nrequests a Certificate of Approval for an unauthorized demolition of a one-story residential\nstructure built prior to 1942. A two-story residence in the same style was approved by Design\nMinutes of January 6, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n1", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-01-06.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-01-06", "page": 2, "text": "Review (DR04-0003). The site is located within the R-5, General Residence District. (continued\nfrom 9-9-04) Applicant & staff request a continuance to future meeting.\nM/S (Anderson/Tilos) to continue this item to a future meeting. 4-0-1.\nAyes:\n4;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n1\n(Miller); Motion carries.\nBoardmember Miller arrived.\n3.\nAlameda Point Update. Presentation of the ongoing planning process for Alameda Point.\nElizabeth Johnson, Development Services Department, summarized the information provided in\nthe staff report. Ms. Johnson indicated that there had been two community workshops and that\nthere will be three more. Staff will give the Board regular up-dates of the planning process after\neach Community Workshop. The next workshop will be held on March 3, 2005 which will be\nhosted by the Planning Board. Staff would also like the Board to consider co-hosting one of the\nremaining Community Workshops with the Alameda Point Advisory Committee.\nMelissa Gaudreau and Chris VerPlanck from Page and Turnbull gave a presentation giving a\nbrief history of the site, and outlined the Historcal District at NAS. Mr. Plank stated that the\nbuildings and structures within Alameda Point reflect three distinct periods of development: Pre-\nwar, War and Post-war. Most of the Pre-war buildings were constructed during 1940-1941 of\nreinforced concrete in a styling typical of commercial and industrial design from the 1930's.\nThis style is known as \"Moderne\".\nA comprehensive inventory of pre-1946 buildings and structures was done in 1992 by S.B.\nWoodbridge, which focused on determining whether any buildings at Alameda Point qualified\nfor listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The report concluded that while\nno individual building qualified for listing in the NRHP, an area in the Civic Core sub-area\nappeared to qualify for listing as a historic district. The identified area includes 87 buildings and\nstructures that contribute to the area's historic significance, 35 non-contributing major buildings\nand many temporary or minor buildings, which do not contribute to the Historical District.\nVice-Chair McPherson opened the floor for public comment.\nBirgitt Evans, AAPS, stated that AAPS is very interested in the 86 buildings. She encourages\nthe Board to become involved in the planning process. She is also concerned why the Tower\nBldg was not included in the 86 buildings.\nRichard Rutter, 2329 Santa Clara Ave., informed the Board that he once lived on the base and is\nalso surprised that the Tower Bldg. is not included. He felt that Bldg. 400 was also worth taking\nanother look at. He wants the Board to be cautious when approving buildings for demolition.\nVice-Chair McPherson closed public comment.\nElizabeth Johnson stated that at the time that the inventory was done, there was an addition to the\nControl Tower that has since been removed.\nMinutes of January 6, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n2", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-01-06.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-01-06", "page": 3, "text": "Ms. Altschuler asked the Board if they would be interested in hosting a community workshop?\nThere will be more opportunities in the future for the Board to give their comments. This will\nbe a standing agenda item, so staff can give the Board updates and also allow the public to have\naccess to the Board if they have any questions. The next community workshop is scheduled for\nMarch 3, 2005. Staff will reschedule the Regular March meeting so the Board may attend the\nworkshop.\nStaff will provide the Board with a copy of the Historical Architectural Resources Inventory for\nNAS, and the Guide to Preserving the Character of the Naval Air Station Alameda Historic\nDistrict.\nMINUTES\nMinutes of the Special Meeting of October 28, 2004. (continued from 12-02-04).\nM/S (Tilos/Anderson) to approve minutes as corrected; 3-0-2.\nAyes: 3;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n2\n(Lynch, Miller);\nMotion carries.\nMinutes of the Regular Meeting of December 2, 2004.\nM/S (Tilos/Miller) to approve minutes as corrected; 3-0-2.\nAyes: 3;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbstain: 2 (Anderson,Lynch); Motion carries\nELECTION OF OFFICERS:\nM/S (Lynch/Anderson) to nominate Vice-Chair McPherson as Chair. 5-0-0.\nAyes: 5; Noes: 0; Absent: 0.; Motion carries.\nM/S (Lynch/Miller) to nominate Boardmember Anderson as Vice-Chair. 5-0-0.\nAyes:\n5;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n0.;\nMotion carries.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS:\nRosemary McNally asked why Item 2, 1104 Oak was continued. She also thanked the Board and\nStaff for all of their hard work on this item. Ms. Altschuler advised that staff was continuing to\nwork with property owner to resolve issues.\nBoardmember Tilos will be on vacation until March 17, 2005.\nSTAFF COMMUNICATION:\nMs. Altschuler informed the Board that the Planning & Building Director has resigned. Staff is\nnot certain when that position will be filled but will update the Board as needed. Ms. Altschuler\nMinutes of January 6, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n3", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-01-06.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-01-06", "page": 4, "text": "also stated that she would be training another member of staff to take over her position as\nSecretary.\nADJOURNMENT:\nMeeting adjourned at 9:20 p.m.\nRespectfully Submitted by:\nJudith Altschuler, Secretary\nHistorical Advisory Board\nG:\\PLANNING\\HAB\\AGENMIN\\Agemin.04\\12-2-04 MIN.doc\nMinutes of January 6, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n4", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-01-06.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-02-03", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF HISTORICAL ADVISORY BOARD\nREGULAR MEETING OF THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 2005\nCOUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL\n2263 SANTA CLARA AVENUE - 7:00 PM\nVice Chair McPherson called the meeting to order at 7:08 pm. Secretary Altschuler called\nthe roll.\nMEMBERS PRESENT:\nChair McPherson, Boardmembers Miller & Lynch.\nMEMBERS ABSENT:\nVice-Chair Anderson, Boardmember Tilos.\nSTAFF PRESENT:\nSecretary Altschuler, Leslie Little Development Services\nDirector, Recording Secretary Debbie Gremminger.\nAGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSIONS:\nRemove Item 1 from agenda per the City Attorney's office. (see below.)\nMINUTES:\nM/S (Miller, Lynch) to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of January 6, 2005 with\ncorrections. 3-0-2.\nAyes: 3;\nNoes: 0; Absent: 2. (Anderson, Tilos.) Motion carries.\nWRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: (Discussion only)\nNone.\nACTION ITEMS:\n(Discussion/Action)\n1.\nCertificate of Approval CA04-0013- Helena Liang - 1104 Oak Street. The applicant\nrequests a Certificate of Approval for an unauthorized demolition of a one-story residential\nstructure built prior to 1942. A two-story residence in the same style was approved by Design\nReview (DR04-0003). The site is located within the R-5, General Residence District. (continued\nfrom 9-9-04)\nMs. Altschuler advised the Board that the City Attorney's office contacted the State Historic\nPreservation Office for guidance regarding the listing of the property and procedure of\nprocessing the Certificate of Approval. We were advised that it was inappropriate for the\nHistorical Advisory Board to list the site on the Historical Building Study List, or consider a\nCertificate of Approval for demolition because the building was already demolished and no\nlonger meets any of the criteria for being considered as a historic resource. Thus, rather than\nbeing a historical preservation issue for Historical Advisory Board consideration, the scope of\nwork permitted under the issued building permit is in question. Staff requests that the Board\nremove this item from the agenda.\nMinutes of February 3, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n1", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-02-03.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-02-03", "page": 2, "text": "M/S (Miller, Lynch) to remove this item from the agenda. 3-0-2.\nAyes: 3; Noes: 0; Absent: 2. (Anderson, Tilos.) Motion carries.\n2.\nStudy Session for a proposal to rehabilitate the Alameda Theatre and construct a new 7\nscreen Cineplex and 350 space parking structure on the Video Maniac site. This site is located\nat 2305 Central Avenue within the CC - CCPD, Community Commercial and Special Planned\nDevelopment Districts.\nLeslie Little, Development Services Director, informed the Board that Staff would like direction\nfrom the Board regarding the proposed rehabilitation and construction of the 2 story multiplex\nand the 352 space parking structure. She expects the project should be ready for a Planning\nBoard public hearing in mid March.\nMichael Stanton, consultant, gave a presentation which included a brief history of the theater\nand showed the Board what is proposed. He informed the Board that the lobby and auditorium\nof the Alameda Theater will be restored to look as it did in 1939 when it opened for the first\ntime. The second floor of the lobby, will also be restored. The balcony area is not included in\nthis first phase. The marquee will be restored as well.\nIn designing the new Cineplex, it is noted that, according to the guidelines from the Secretary of\nInterior, new construction should be clearly differentiated from the existing historic building.\nThere will be retail on the street level corner of Central Ave. and Oak Street. There are four\ntheaters proposed on the second level and three theaters proposed for the ground floor.\nThe proposed 352-parking garage will not only serve the Theater, but all of Park St. It is\ndesigned so that it can be easily expanded in the future.\nChair McPherson opened the floor for public comment.\nRichard Rutter, AAPS, felt that the design should emphasize a vertical articulation, not\nhorizontal. The materials used should be high quality such as pressed brick or terra cotta. The\nparking garage should not look like a parking garage. AAPS felt that the previous parking\ngarage proposal prepared for the Long's Drug Store site was headed in a better direction.\nAlthough windows are probably not possible on the upper floors of the new theater at the\nOak/Central corner, it should not be treated as a blank wall. Some suggestions include surface\narticulation (such as on the existing Alameda Theater), and false windows. The design should\nnot be too modernistic. He also showed the Board pictures of other projects including the\nLivermore Theater which might be good prototypes for the new Alameda Theater annex. He\nfeels that the corner of Central and Oak St. should be set back from the corner as the Twin\nTowers Church across the street is.\nBirgitt Evans, AAPS stated that the corners should be rounded to mimic the original structure.\nChair McPherson closed the floor for public comment and opened the floor for Board\ncommunication.\nMinutes of February 3, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n2", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-02-03.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-02-03", "page": 3, "text": "Leslie Little stated that the DDA would be ready for hearing sometime in March. The City\nCouncil has taken action to allow staff to purchase the Video Maniac's parcel.\nMs. Altschuler informed the Board a request for Certificate of Approval for the structural\nalterations relating to the seismic strenghthening of the front fa\u00e7ade, the new openings between\nthe theatre and the new Cineplex, and the new opening for the concession stand. Ms. Altschuler\nalso noted that the community would also have chance to speak at the Planning Board hearings.\nThe Board thanked Leslie Little and her team for a nice presentation and they all look forward\nfor this project to begin.\nREPORTS:\n3.\nReview and consider possible modifications of Section 30-15 of the Alameda Municipal\nCode regulating Work Live Studios.\nMs. Altschuler informed the Board that the City Council directed staff to agenize a review of the\nWork/Live Ordinance by the Planning Board, the Historical Advisory Board and the Economic\nDevelopment Commission. The Council asks the Historical Advisory Board to review the\nOrdinance in general, with specific focus on whether the ordinance protects historic buildings,\nand whether the Ordinance should be changed to expand the geographic limitations on work/live\nstudios to include other portions of the City such as the Park Street or Webster Street\nCommercial Districts, more of the Northern Waterfront area, or Alameda Point.\nChair McPherson opened the floor for public comment.\nDick Rutter, AAPS, feels that the Ordinance should state that the kitchens should not be located\nnear the work area. He feels that this Ordinance is a good tool in preserving Historical\nBuildings, and that it should be extended to include the former Navy Base. He also stated that\nMeasure A is an issue that the community should be educated on.\nChair McPherson closed the floor for public comment and opened Board discussion.\nBoardmember Miller feels that the Work/Live Ordinance is not a threat to Measure A, and has\nno problem expanding this to Alameda Point.\nChair McPherson stated that Board needs to ask themselves if there is anything that the\nWork/Live Ordinance could do to threaten Historic Preservation. She does not feel that the\nBoard should recommend that the area be expanded to any commercial buildings on Park St. or\nWebster St. Chair McPherson also feels that the current ordinance may have too many\nlimitations on developers. She would like to see this item on a future agenda so that Staff can\noutline all of the current limitations for the Board.\nMs. Altschuler agreed that Staff can create a list or a table listing all of the limitations such as\nzoning, density, parking and specific uses. Staff will try to have this ready for the April meeting.\nMinutes of February 3, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n3", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-02-03.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-02-03", "page": 4, "text": "Board member Lynch asked staff to find out how much the Work/Live permit would cost, how\nthe permit would be enforced and would the occupant be advised of any limitations.\nMs. Altschuler informed the Board that the Work/Live permit fee has not yet been determined.\nThere would be an individual use permit required for each project, as well as a business license\nfor each use. A deed restriction would also be required. If an applicant is in violation of the\nconditions of their use permit, it can be revoked by the Planning Board.\nM/S to continue this item to a future meeting for further discussion. (Miller/Lynch) 3-0-2.\nAyes: 3;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n2.\nMotion carries.\n4.\nConsideration and possible recommendation to the City Council to revise the definition\nof demolition in the Historic Preservation Ordinance.\nMs. Altschuler began by informing the Board that it has become more difficult for Staff to\ndetermine whether a project meets the Historic Preservation Ordinance's definition of demolition\nwhich states that demolition occurs when 30% of the value of the building is removed. This\ndefinition has been challenging to administer because the meaning of \"value of the building\" can\nhave many interpretations, thus there is no clear indication when a proposal includes a\ndemolition and when it does not. For example, if the value of the building is based upon\nassessed value, two identical buildings could have a different assessed value (depending upon\nwhen it was last sold or whether it has Proposition 13 protection), and a larger portion of a\nbuilding with a higher assessment could be removed before a demolition would occur. If value\nwas dependent upon the cost of the work or materials, then more of a well-maintained, well-\nconstructed property could be removed than a deteriorated one before the removal would meet\nthe definition of demolition.\nStaff has reviewed the definition of demolition for a number of jurisdictions. Most have\nlanguage similar to that for the City of Davis which states:\n\"Demolition\" means for the purpose of this article, any act or failure to act that destroys,\nremoves, or relocates, in whole or in part a historical resource such that its historic character and\nsignificance is materially altered.\nThis approach depends upon the discretion of staff rather than a qualitative method to determine\nwhen demolition has taken plan. The current Alameda definition is a better attempt at providing\na more objective determination. However, even this definition is not sufficiently clear to allow\nboth staff and the property owner to know when a structure is proposed to be demolished\naccording to the Code. The Cities of San Jose and Los Gatos take a very objective approach. In\nSan Jose, demolition is defined as\" the removal of more than fifty percent of the exterior walls\nof a building.' In Los Gatos the definition is the \"removal of more than twenty-five (25) percent\nof a wall(s) facing a public street(s) or fifty (50) percent of all exterior walls.\"\nMinutes of February 3, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n4", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-02-03.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-02-03", "page": 5, "text": "Staff has prepared two Alternatives for the Board to consider. Ms. Altschuler informed the\nBoard that this would require a recommendation to City Council to change to the Historic\nPreservation Ordinance\nAllen Tai, Planner II, presented two different examples of projects for the Board to review and\ndetermine which they feel should be considered a demolition under the current definition.\nChair McPherson wished to remind the community that this Board is not saying no to all\ndemolitions, but would like applications to come before the Board so they can have the chance to\nlook at it prior to demolition.\nChair McPherson opened the floor to public comment.\nBirgitt Evans, AAPS, stated that she feels that as a result of 1025 Fair Oaks and 1104 Oak St; the\n30% (of the value) rule is not fair to anyone involved. 30% of a home worth $800,000.00 is\n$240,000.00 which could be a huge demolition. She is in favor of Alternative #1.\nRosemary McNally stated that she is leaning more towards more that 5% of the front of the\nbuilding. She also stated that it should be determined on a case-by-case basis.\nFrancie Farinet. AAPS, is in favor of Alternative #2. She is not sure what the solution should\nbe.\nChuck Miller stated that it is obvious that there needs to be clear guidelines. He feels that the\nfront should be separate percentage from the rest of the house. In most houses the front fa\u00e7ade is\nonly around 20% of the house. He also feels that the roof is very important architecturally and\nshould be taken seriously.\nChair McPherson closed public comment and opened Board discussion.\nBoard member Miller asked which alternative would be best for staff.\nMs. Altschuler stated that the purpose of either alternative is to have a better discussion with the\napplicant regarding if a demolition permit is necessary.\nChair McPherson stated she is leaning towards Alternative #1 but would like staff to add\nverbiage to include roof removal as part of the definition.\nM/S (Miller/Lynch) to continue this item to a future meeting for further discussion. 3-0-2.\nAyes: 3;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n2.\nMotion carries.\nMinutes of February 3, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n5", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-02-03.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-02-03", "page": 6, "text": "ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:\nBoardmember Lynch informed the Board that she received an e-mail from Elizabeth Johnson\nregarding the Alameda Point Community Workshop that will be held on March 3, 2005, which is\nthe same time as the Regular HAB meeting. Ms. Altschuler informed the Board that this\nmeeting will be hosted by the Planning Board and that Staff will look for an available night to\nhold a Special HAB meeting.\nChair McPherson stated that she spoke to Bill Norton, Interim City Manager, regarding specific\ninterests that the Historical Advisory Board might have. She would also like to staff to agenize\npermit fee'e relating to Historic Preservation for a future meeting.\nSTAFF COMMUNICATION:\nMs. Altschuler informed the Board that her last official meeting as their Secretary would be\nApril 7, 2005. She also stated that we are currently in the process of interviewing for the Planner\nIII position and hopes that it will be filled prior to her leaving. Ms. Altschuler will be devoting\nmost of her remaining time to working on the Development Code revisions and completing the\nGuide to Residential Design. Ms. Altschuler also thanked AAPS for helping with the graphics\nfor the Guide. She stated that Allen Tai would most likely be the \"Interim\" Secretary to this\nBoard until the Supervising Planner position is filled.\nADJOURNMENT:\nM/S (Lynch/Miller) to adjourn the meeting at 10:48 pm.\nRespectfully Submitted by:\nJudith Altschuler, Secretary\nHistorical Advisory Board\nG:\\PLANNING\\HAB\\AGENMIN\\Agemin.05/2-3-05 MIN.doc\nMinutes of February 3, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n6", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-02-03.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-03-10", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF HISTORICAL ADVISORY BOARD\nSPECIAL MEETING OF THURSDAY, MARCH 10, 2005\nCOUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL\n2263 SANTA CLARA AVENUE - 7:00 PM\nVice Chair Anderson called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. Secretary Altschuler called\nthe roll.\nMEMBERS PRESENT:\nVice-Chair Anderson, Boardmembers Miller & Lynch.\nMEMBERS ABSENT:\nChair McPherson, Boardmember Tilos.\nSTAFF PRESENT:\nSecretary Altschuler, Allen Tai, Planner III,\nRecording Secretary Debbie Gremminger.\nMINUTES:\nM/S (Lynch, Miller) to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of February 3, 2005 with\ncorrections. 3-0-2.\nAyes: 3; Noes: 0; Absent: 2; Motion carries.\nAGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSIONS:\nNone.\nWRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: (Discussion only)\nNone.\nACTION ITEMS: (Discussion/Action\n1.\nCA05-0003 320 Pacific Avenue - The applicants request a Certificate of Approval to\nremoval a Coast Live Oak tree. The tree has a 24\" diameter and large low-angled trunks that\nextend across the property line. The application also includes a request to partially demolish an\nexisting 622 square-foot, pre-1942 building as part of a new proposal to construct a single-family\nresidence on the property. The site is located at 320 Pacific Avenue, within an R-4,\nNeighborhood Residential Zoning District.\nAllen Tai, Planner III, was present and briefly reviewed the staff report as presented. He\ninformed the Board that the property owner is requesting a Certificate of Approval for two items.\nThe first is to allow the removal of a Coast Live Oak tree that is located along the western edge\nof the property. The second request involves the partial demolition of the existing single-family\ndwelling.\nMinutes of March 10, 2005\nSpecial Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n1", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-03-10.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-03-10", "page": 2, "text": "Mr. Tai stated that the applicants are proposing to raise the existing structure in order to integrate\na new single-family dwelling into the existing structure. The construction will involve removal\nof the existing front fa\u00e7ade of the building as well as the front portion of the roof. This matter is\nbrought before this Board because it involves partial demolition of a structure built prior to 1942.\nStaff feels that there is no evidence that the structure exhibits any architectural or historical merit\nand that the proposed project will be more consistent with the adjacent homes than the existing\nbuilding. Therefore, Staff recommends that the Board approve the Certificate of Approval as\nstated in the draft Resolution.\nVice Chair Anderson opened the floor for public comment.\nIvan Chiu, Architect, stated that the tree should be removed because one trunk is leaning over the\nfence toward the adjacent property while another is leaning toward the existing structure. At the\nrecommendation of the arborist, the applicant wishes to remove the existing Oak in order to\neliminate the possibility of the tree causing damage to the neighboring property. Mr. Wong also\ninformed the Board that the proposed design intends to keep the Craftsman style appearance and\nto preserve salvageable portions of the existing building by incorporating the structure into the\nrear of the new building.\nVice Chair Anderson closed public comment and opened Board discussion.\nBoardmember Lynch stated that she visited the property and feels that the tree does look sick.\nShe also feels that the existing structure should not be considered a historic resource. She also\nfeels that this structure should not be referred to as a \"craftsman\" style because there are no\n\"craftsman\" style elements on the existing or proposed structure.\nVice Chair Anderson asked if the old house is structurally sound enough to support the proposed\nnew house.\nMr. Chiu stated that the detail of the design has not yet been looked into. He does not anticipate\nany problems.\nMr. Tai stated that lifting and moving the house is considered necessary to comply with setback\nstandards. If the house were completely demolished then several variances would be required.\nMr. Miller asked if the neighbors were ok with this project.\nMr. Tai stated that there were no comments as of yet.\nVice-Chair Anderson stated that one of the conditions of the Resolution states that the applicant\nmust replace the removed tree with two new trees. She is concerned that the lot cannot support\ntwo 15 gallon Oak trees. Would it be possible for the Board to require the applicant plant one\nOak tree and another type of tree?\nMinutes of March 10, 2005\nSpecial Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n2", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-03-10.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-03-10", "page": 3, "text": "Mr. Tai explained to the Board that the reason for replacing one Oak tree with two Oak trees is\nthat most likely only one will survive.\nMs. Altschuler added that the requirement of two Oak trees was a decision of this Board many\nyears ago. Not every tree will survive. This just ensures that each tree that is removed will be\nreplaced.\nM/S (Lynch, Miller) to approve the Certificate of Approval, for the removal of one Coast Live\nOak Tree as stated in the draft Resolution. 3-0-2.\nAyes:\n3;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n2;\nMotion carries.\nM/S (Lynch, Miller) to approve the Certificate of Approval, for the partial demolition of an\nexisting 622 sq. ft. residence at 320 Pacific as stated in the draft Resolution. 3-0-2.\nAyes: 3; Noes: 0; Absent: 2; Motion carries.\nREPORTS:\nNone.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS:\nBoardmember Lynch attended the Special Planning Board workshop on March 3rd regarding\nAlameda Point and she is concerned that the Flight Tower is not included in the Historic District\nand would like staff to agendize this for a future meeting.\nSTAFF COMMUNICATION:\nNone.\nADJOURNMENT:\nM/S (Lynch/Miller) to adjourn the meeting at 7:53 pm.\nRespectfully Submitted by:\nJustice\nJudith Altschuler, Secretary\nHistorical Advisory Board\nG:\\PLANNINGHHAB\\AGENMIN\\Agemin.05/2-3-05 MIN.doc\nMinutes of March 10, 2005\nSpecial Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n3", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-03-10.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-04-07", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF HISTORICAL ADVISORY BOARD\nREGULAR MEETING OF THURSDAY, APRIL 7, 2005\nCOUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL\n2263 SANTA CLARA AVENUE - 7:00 PM\nVice Chair Anderson called the meeting to order at 7:10 pm. Secretary Altschuler\ncalled the roll.\nMEMBERS PRESENT: Boardmembers Lynch, Miller & Tilos.\nMEMBERS ABSENT:\nChair McPherson, Vice-Chair Anderson.\nSTAFF PRESENT:\nSecretary Altschuler, Recording Secretary Debbie\nGremminger.\nMINUTES:\nM/S (Lynch, Miller) to continue the minutes of the Special meeting of March 10, 2005 due to\nlack of quorum. 3-0-2.\nAyes: 3;\nNoes: 0; Absent: 2; Motion carries.\nAGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSIONS:\nStaff requested that Item 4 be heard 1st prior to items 1, 7 2, & 3.\nM/S (Lynch, Miller) to hear Item 4 first. 3-0-2.\nAyes:\n3;\nNoes: 0; Absent: 2; Motion carries.\nWRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: (Discussion only)\nSecretary Altschuler informed the Board of the Historical Preservation Conference in\nRiverside.\nACTIONITEMS (Discussion/Action)\n4. Transportation Master Plan Policies - Review and comment on the draft TMP policies,\nand recommend a set of final draft policies to the City Council for approval.\nBarry Bergman, Public Works Department, stated that in 2004, the City Council approved\nthe development of a citywide Transportation Master Plan\nMinutes of April 7, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n1", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-04-07.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-04-07", "page": 2, "text": "The TMP will consist of six individual plans: 1) multimodal circulation, 2) motor vehicle, 3)\ntransit, 4) bicycle, 5) pedestrian, and 6) transportation system management/ transportation\ndemand management.\nA subcommittee was established to oversee the development of circulation policies for the\nTMP These polices were to address all transportation modes on a general level, while\npolicies for the mode-specific plans (e.g. the bicycle plan and transit plan) will include more\ndetail.\nStaff would like the Board to review the Draft Policies and give comments, and recommend a\nset of final draft policies to the City Council for approval.\nThe Draft Policies were not included in the packet. Staff will forward a copy of this\ndocument to the Board and they can submit their comments via e-mail.\n1. Adoption of Resolution Commending Judith Altschuler, Secretary for the Historical\nAdvisory Board, for her Contributions to the City of Alameda.\nDebbie Gremminger, Recording Secretary, read the Resolution and presented it to Ms.\nAltschuler.\nBoard member Tilos opened the floor to public comment.\nScott Brady, former president of HAB, would like to thank Judith for all of her time and\neffort she has put in over the time of his tenure on the Board. Mr. Brady feels they got a lot\nof things accomplished in terms of advancing preservation here in Alameda. And Judith did\na lot of the behind the scenes work. We have very good amendments to our Preservation\nOrdinance largely due to her efforts.\nRosemary McNally, would like to encourage the Board to pass this resolution.\nBoard member Tilos closed the floor to public comment and opcned Board discussion.\nBoard member Tilos would also like to thank Judith for her work on this Board. She has\nbeen very helpful.\nM/S (Miller/Lynch) to approve the Resolution as presented. 3-0-2.\nAyes: 3;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent: 2; Motion carries.\nMs. Altschuler thanked the Board and the members of the community.\nMinutes of April 7, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n2", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-04-07.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-04-07", "page": 3, "text": "2. Review of the Landscaping Plan for planting two Coast Live Oak trees (Quercus\nagrifolia) on the vacant property at 301 Spruce Street. The submittal of a Landscaping Plan\n(as part of new development proposals on the site) was required as a Condition of Approval\nby the Historical Advisory Board under Resolution HAB 01-08, which approved the removal\nof one Coast Live Oak tree in 2001, The site is located within an R-4 Neighborhood\nResidential District.\nMs. Altschuler gave a brief history of the project. In 1988, the previous owner damaged an\nOak tree through extensive trimming. The owners were required to preserve the tree despite\nit being severely pruned. In 2001 the tree showed signs of deteriorating health, and the\nBoard approved a new owner's request to remove the damaged tree in order to allow a\nproposed residential development, with the condition that two new oak trees be planted on\nthe property. The Board also required the submittal of a landscaping plan for review and\napproval by the Board when new construction is proposed on the site. The Board's approval\nwas subsequently appealed to the City Council, where the Board's decision was upheld upon\nthe Council's finding that there was no merit to the appeal.\nThe applicants have secured the services of a Landscape Architect as required by the Board\nin 2001 to prepare a landscaping plan and recommendations for the location of the two new\ntrees. The applicants have also secured services of a certified arborist who has provided\nrecommendations for protecting the existing trees during construction.\nBoard member Tilos opened the floor for public comment.\nPatrick Lynch, 305 Spruce St., spoke in opposition of this project. He has several issues with\nthis application. He stated that the Board should be aware that the conditions contained in\nCA-01-08 have not been complied with and his requests to the City for enforcement have\nbeen ignored. In 2002 a grading permit was issued for the development project at the site\nwithout requiring replacement trees. He is concerned with the recent changes to Alameda's\nHistorical Preservation Ordinance that allows Oak Trees with a trunk diameters less than 10\"\nto be removed without a Certificate of Approval. The proposed replacement trees will not\nlikely have trunk diameters of this size for 10 to 20 years, and could be removed at the end of\nthe period required for the landscape maintenance agreement. He therefore requests that the\nreplacement trees have a diameter greater that 10\" at 4,5 ft. above the ground. He also\ndisagrees with staff's decision that this project is categorically exempt from the CEQA\nguidelines. The tree removal together with the proposed single-family home project may\ncumulatively cause additional and substantial adverse change in the condition of the\nremaining oak trees.\nMs. Altschuler addressed Mr. Lynch's concerns as followed:\nMinutes of April 7, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n3", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-04-07.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-04-07", "page": 4, "text": "1. Mr. Lynch's concern with the issuance of the grading permit does not fall under the\nprevue of the Historical Advisory Board.\n2. To resolve Mr. Lynch's concern regarding the size of the trunk diameters of the\nreplacement trees, the Board can extend the landscaping maintenance agreement to five years\nand require the replacement tree to be larger than 10\" diameter.\n3. His issue with staff's decision that this project is exempt from CEQA guidelines do not\nfall under the prevue of this Board and should be addressed during the design review process.\n4. According to city records, the Certificate of Approval CA01-08 was valid on the day the\ntree was removed. The Board approved the request with the condition that two new oak trees\nbe planted on the property. The Board also required the submittal of a landscaping plan for\nreview and approval when new construction is proposed. The current owners have submitted\na proposal to construct a single-family residence on the site. A landscaping plan for the\nplanning of two new Oak trees has been prepared in conformance with Resolution HAB-01-\n08. The plans for the new construction are currently under review by Design Review staff.\nConditions of approval for the Design Review will require protection of the existing trees per\nthe arborist and landscape architect's recommendations, as well as the recordation of a\nLandscape Maintenance Agreement to ensure maintenance of the oak trees on the property.\nStaff understands that Mr. Lynch has enjoyed living next to a vacant lot, but the owner is\nentitled to develop his lot.\nMs. Altschuler advised the Board that the decision before this Board tonight is to approve the\nlocation of the replacement trees as stated in the Landscaping Maintenance plan.\nBoard member Tilos opened the floor to Board discussion.\nBoard member Miller is in favor of extending the Landscaping Plan to 5 years. He is also in\nfavor of requiring the replacement trees to be bigger than a 10\" diameter.\nThe Certified Arborist, Chris Bowen was present. He suggested that the replacement trees be\n24\" box, which would be close to 8 ft tall when planted. He feels this would improve the\nproperty value.\nM/S to approve the Landscaping Maintenance Plan with the following revisions: (1) Change\nthe replacement trees from two 10-gallon trees to two 24\" box trees. (2) Extend the\nLandscape Maintenance Agreement from 3 to 5 years.\nREPORTS\n3. Consideration and comments on design of proposed 352 space parking structure to be\nconstructed as part of the rehabilitation of the Alameda Theatre and construction of a new\nCineplex. The parking structure would be built at 1416 Oak Street within the CC,\nCommunity Commercial District. (continued from 2-3-05mtg.)\nMinutes of April 7, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n4", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-04-07.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-04-07", "page": 5, "text": "Jennifer Ott, DSD, informed the Board that this project consists of three parts: the\nrehabilitation of the Alameda Theatre; the construction of a seven screen, two story Cineplex\nwith retail at the ground floor; and the construction of a 352 space, 60+ foot high parking\nstructure. Tonight staff would like the Board to provide comments on the parking structure\nand Cineplex.\nCINEPLEX:\nThe Henry Architects Inc, design team gave a presentation on the proposed Cineplex and\nproposed parking structure. The presentation included various pictures of the proposed\nCineplex from different views of Central Ave. to address the concern that the Cineplex\nwould block the view of the Twin Towers Church. Mr. Henry concluded that in order to see\nboth towers of the church, over half of the upper levels of the new Cineplex would need to be\neliminated.\nAnother concern Mr. Henry spoke of is the 20 ft. overhang element on Central Ave and Oak\nSt. Mr. Henry stated that in order to provide a viable Cineplex it is critical to have the\nproposed overhang. Without this overhang auditorium #7 would suffer greatly, losing 28\nseats and reducing the screen size significantly. This will have a severe impact on the quality\nof the presentation and reduce the ability to compete effectively with Jack London Square.\nIn addition to the severe economic impacts, deletion of the overhang. would be detrimental to\nthe architecture. The overhang provides a clear separation of stories and materials thus\nreducing uninterrupted wall would create.\nThe last concern Mr. Henry addressed was the corner element. Mr. Henry stated that this\ndesign included a great deal of surface articulation to eliminate the box like effect. Vertical\nrecesses continuing the line of the columns from the ground level have been added to the\nupper sections at the auditoriums along with the horizontal elements to reduce the tallness of\nthe building. They have also rounded the corner \"tower\" on Oak St. and Central Ave. to\nmatch the curved corners of the historic theater and the Starbuck building on Park St. This\nwill also reduce the box like effect shown in previous plans and adds more set back to the\ncorner for better visibility of the church.\nLastly Mr. Henry briefly went over the three different ideas for the color of the proposed\nCineplex.\nBoardmember Lynch stated she was not in favor of the proposed sign on the new Cineplex.\nMr. Henry responded by stating he had no problems eliminating the proposed sign.\nBoardmember Tilos opened the floor to public comment.\nMinutes of April 7, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n5", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-04-07.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-04-07", "page": 6, "text": "Ann Rutter stated she likes the new proposed design. She would like to see the Oak St.\nelevation. She feels this project has been forced on the community. She would like to see\nmore handicap parking spaces closer to the elevators for easier wheelchair access.\nDavid Baker, 939 Taylor Ave., feels that the new proposal is not compatible with the\nhistorical qualities of Alameda. He stated that the art deco is missing.\nRichard Knight, 1372 Versailles Ave., feels that the primary goal of this project is for the\nHistoric Alameda Theatre to be back in operation. He is concerned with what would happen\nif this Cineplex went out of business in the future.\nJohn Sargent, 3105 El Paseo, stated he was concerned when he saw the proposed design in\nthe Alameda Sun. He feels that the parking lot should be located on the corner of Oak St.\nand Santa Clara Ave. The parking garage should include more art deco style and not look so\nmuch like a parking garage. He stated that housing should be included on the upper two\nstories of the parking garage.\nScott Brady, AAPS, feels that in general the design is good. He feels that the vertical\nelements should be stressed more. The proposed design has impressions of columns, but\ndoes not read very strong. This is a very good start.\nKevin Frederick, 1287 Caroline St., stated that the proposed design still feels to \"boxie\"\nlooking. He stated that he feels that Oak St. is too narrow to support such a huge Theatre and\nParking Garage. He does not currently go to movie theaters. He would prefer to rent a\nmovie or download from computer. These days modern technology may prevent huge Multi-\nplex Theatres to be successful.\nDoreen Soto, DSD, responded to some of the comments made tonight as follows:\n1. Currently Long's Drugs is not willing to participate in this project. The City has to move\nforward with this project.\n2. The City has hired the best economist to work on this project. He has determined that\nbased on the population and demographics, this project will succeed. The parking\nstructure will attract more business to Park St.\n3. The proposed Cineplex is not an addition to the Historic Theatre. She feels the new\nCineplex will compliment the Historic Theatre.\nBoard member Lynch requested that the Board hold a special meeting to submit comments\non the proposed Cineplex, as she would like more time to review the items submitted tonight.\nThe Board agreed and instructed Staff to schedule a Special meeting to hear comments on the\nCineplex only. Staff will forward a copy of the PowerPoint presentation to the Board. The\nBoard will only submit comments on the Parking Structure tonight.\nMinutes of April 7, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n6", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-04-07.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-04-07", "page": 7, "text": "PARKING STRUCTURE:\nMr. Michael Stanton, architect, gave a brief summary of what was presented to the Planning\nBoard on March 28, 2005. Mr. Stanton informed the HAB of the comments they received\nfrom the Planning Board. The Planning Board preferred the lighter color brick, simplify the\nlines (on top) of Cineplex behind Longs, more lighting on the disabled bike access of parking\ngarage, stair tower should either be all open or have the same openings as the parking garage,\neliminate the on-street parking on Oak St. to extend the sidewalk and add street trees.\nBoard member Tilos opened the floor to Public comment.\nDon Cunningham, Twin Towers Church, is in favor of the lighting and the color. He stated\nthat Twin Towers was built long before automobiles were in use. Not in favor of losing the\non-street parking on Oak St. He is concerned with the travel pattern.\nChuck Millar, 2829 San Jose Ave., stated that for safety reasons the on-street parking should\nbe eliminated. All construction should fit in to the surrounding area. He would like to know\nwhat the HAB's role in this project is?\nIn response to Mr. Millar question, Ms. Altschuler stated, there are three items that require\napproval from the HAB. First, Certificate of Approval for the structural alterations relating\nto the seismic strengthening of the front fa\u00e7ade, second, the new openings between the\ntheatre and the new Cineplex, and third, the new opening for the concession stand.\nThe Planning Board will give final design approval for the Cineplex and Parking Garage.\nStaff is just asking for comments from the HAB.\nKevin Frederick, 1287 Caroline St., is not in favor of the exterior design He feels it is out of\nplace with surrounding buildings.\nDon Sargent, is not in favor of fa\u00e7ade. He feels the open banks can be treated architecturally.\nHe feels that it might be necessary to take away the on-street parking on the opposite side of\nthe street as well.\nRichard Knight is not in favor of design. He feels there are no historical elements. Is not\ncompatible with surrounding area.\nAnn Rutter commended Michael Stanton for his work on this project. She would like to see\nfree parking on Sundays. She is in favor of the lighting design, but would like to see more\nart deco.\nMinutes of April 7, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n7", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-04-07.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-04-07", "page": 8, "text": "Scott Brady, AAPS, feels the Oak St. fa\u00e7ade looks to jumbled. The lower level does not tie\nin with the upper levels. Stair tower should have more glazing. Arches should be increased.\nHe is in favor of the buff colored brick. More attention should be placed on the blank wall\nfacing Long's\nRob Ratto, PSBA, is in favor of project. He likes the idea of a mural on the blank wall facing\nLong's He likes the new proposed design for the Cineplex. The loss of on-street parking\nspaces will make it more pedestrian friendly. There will be metered parking spaces in the\nparking garage. Five-hour time limit Monday - Saturday, 9 am - 5 pm, free on Sundays. He\nstated that this project has limited funds. There will have to be some compromises. It is hard\nto hide the fact that this is a parking garage.\nM/S (Miller, Lynch) to extend the meeting to 10:30 pm. 3-0-2.\nAyes: 3; Noes: 0; Absent: 2: Motion carries.\nBoardmember Tilos closed floor for public comment and opened Board discussion.\nBoardmember Miller is in favor of the poster boxes because he feels that there will be a\nmaintenance issue with the planting of vines. He is in favor of the glazing on the tower, and\nis not in favor of the canopy.\nBoardmember Lynch does not feel this design is compatible but understands this project\nneeds to move forward. She is in favor of the buff color and prefers the posters to the vines.\nShe likes the idea of free parking on Sundays and is in favor of the mural.\nBoardmember Tilos stated that the columns above the main entrance do not blend together.\nHe is in favor of the design for the Cineplex.\nM/S (Lynch, Miller) to continue only the Cineplex portion of this item for comments to a\nSpecial Meeting. (date to be announced.) 3-0-2.\nAyes: 3; Noes: 0; Absent: 2: Motion carries.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS:\nBoardmember Lynch stated that representatives from Alameda Point will be meeting with\nAAPS on April 19, 2005 to address the Historic Preservation concerns. Boardmember Lynch\nwould like to be a representative for the Historical Advisory Board if a committee is formed.\nStaff took note of this request.\nMinutes of April 7, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n8", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-04-07.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-04-07", "page": 9, "text": "STAFF COMMUNICATION:\nMs. Altschuler introduced Doug Garrison, Planner III. There will also be another new\nplanner starting on Monday, April 11, 2005.\nADJOURNMENT:\nM/S (Miller, Lynch) to adjourn meeting at 10:38 pm.\nRespectfully Submitted by:\nJerry Cormack,\nInterim Planning & Building Director\nG:PLANNINGHHAB\\AGENMIN\\Agemin.05\\4-7-05 MINUTES_HAB.doc\nMinutes of April 7, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n9", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-04-07.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-06-02", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF HISTORICAL ADVISORY BOARD\nREGULAR MEETING OF THURSDAY, JUNE 2, 2005\nCOUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL\n2263 SANTA CLARA AVENUE - 7:00 PM\nChair McPherson called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. Secretary Eliason called the roll.\nMEMBERS PRESENT:\nChair McPherson; Vice-Chair Anderson; Boardmembers Lynch\nand Miller\nMEMBERS ABSENT:\nBoardmember Tilos (arrived at 7:30 p.m.)\nSTAFF PRESENT:\nSecretary Eliason, Acting Recording Secretary Rosemary Valeska\nMINUTES:\nConsensus by Chair and Boardmembers to continue minutes of the Special Meeting of March 10,\n2005 to the next meeting in order to allow more time for review.\nConsensus by Chair and Boardmembers to continue minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 7,\n2005 due to the lack of a quorum present for these minutes.\nAGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSIONS:\nNone\nWRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: (Discussion only)\nNone\nELECTION OF OFFICERS:\nM/S (Lynch/Miller) to elect Vice-Chair Anderson as Chair. 4-0-1.\nAyes: 4;\nNoes: 0;\nAbsent:\n1;\nMotion carries.\nM/S (McPherson/Anderson) to elect Boardmember Miller as Vice-Chair. 4-0-1.\nAyes: 4;\nNoes: 0;\nAbsent:\n1;\nMotion carries.\nACTION ITEMS (Discussion/Action)\n1. Consideration of Independent Consultant's Findings and Issuance of Certificate of Approval\nCA-05-0012 - City of Alameda (DSD) - Alameda Theatre- 2317 Central Avenue.\nJennifer Ott of Development Services gave an overview of this item and introduced Naomi\nMiroglio of Architectural Resources Group (ARG), who gave a PowerPoint presentation\nregarding the Historic Alameda Theatre Rehabilitation.\nMinutes of June 2, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n1", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-06-02.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-06-02", "page": 2, "text": "*\nSign language interpreters will be available on request. Please contact the\nPlanning & Building Department, at 510.747.6850 or 510.522.7538 (TDD\nnumber) at least 72 hours before the meeting to request an interpreter.\n*\nAccessible seating for persons with disabilities (including those using wheelchairs)\nis available.\nMinutes of the meeting are available in enlarged print.\nAudiotapes of the meeting are available upon request.\nPlease contact the Planning & Building Department at 510.747.6850 or\n510.522.7538 (TDD number) at least 48 hours before the meeting to request\nagenda materials in an alternative format, or any other reasonable\naccommodation that may be necessary to participate in and enjoy the benefits of\nthe meeting.\nG:\\PLANNING\\HAB\\AGENMIN\\Agemin.05\\09-01-05 draft Agenda. HAB.doc", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-06-02.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-06-02", "page": 3, "text": "Chair McPherson opened the floor to public comment.\nRichard W. Rutter commended Bruce Anderson's Section 106 Findings Report. He explained\nthat there was a process called \"jacketing\" that could be used to make the window columns\nappear smaller. He stated that he would like to see more detail on the proposed automatic movie\nticket dispensing machines - wants to be sure that they don't look like BART ticket machines.\nHe also noted that there are companies back East that specialize in salvaging vitolight from old\nbuildings.\nAni Dimusheva stated concern that the Historic Theatre Rehabilitation portion of the project\ncould bear the burden of a budget shortfall.\nChristopher Buckley stated that he was speaking for himself and not on behalf of the Alameda\nArchitectural Preservation Society. He recommended the HAB approve the Certificate of\nApproval with the conditions that the details of the storefront, ticket booth and concession stand\nare brought back for further review and that the HAB should request material and color samples.\nBirgitt Evans criticized the design of the cinema multiplex. She commended Bruce Anderson's\nSection 106 Findings report and agreed with the finding recommending redesign of the ticket\nbooth for the Historic Theatre. Secretary Eliason noted that the ticket booth would be redesigned.\nChair McPherson closed public comments and opened the floor to Boardmember comments.\nVice-Chair Anderson stated that even though the HAB could not turn its back on the Theatre's\nhistoric status, we need to move forward on retrofitting for seismic safety. Automatic ticket\nbooths are the wave of the future but these will need to be redesigned. The concession stand is\nOK to be in the center of the lobby but should have architectural features with Art Deco\nelements.\nChair McPherson stated her concurrence with Vice-Chair Anderson.\nVice Chair Anderson summarized the need for the HAB to see: 1) material samples, 2) storefront\ndetails, 3) material colors, and 4) further detail regarding the ticket booths.\nBoardmember Miller asked about the suggestion regarding column jacketing. Ms. Miroglio\nstated that would follow up with her engineer regarding this item.\nJudith Altschuler, who was in attendance in the audience, addressed the Board, stating that the\nHAB's purview was for the exterior only - not the interior design. Exterior elements could come\nback to the HAB and that could be part of the overall design approval. HAB's advice to staff\nwould be taken into consideration regarding the structural changes and exterior design, only.\nChair McPherson stated that she wanted the details of the ticket machine and the window and\ndoor system to come back to the HAB. The HAB wants to see a finished sample of the\nVitrolight.\nMinutes of June 2, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n2", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-06-02.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-06-02", "page": 4, "text": "Secretary Eliason noted that staff would craft into the conditions of the Resolution: 1) final\ndesign of ticket machines and 2) return with storefront window details, including finished\nsamples and materials.\nM/S (Tilos, Miller) to approve per the staff recommendation with conditions as noted. 5-0-0.\nAyes: 5;\nNoes: 0;\nAbsent:\n0;\nMotion carries.\n2. Review and Comment on Independent Consultant's Findings regarding Proposed Cineplex -\nCity of Alameda (DSD) - 2305 Central Avenue.\nSecretary Eliason stated that the HAB's purview was to provide comments for the Planning\nBoard's Final Design approval.\nMs. Ott addressed the Board and noted that the City does not agree with the consultant's findings\nregarding aluminum door and window systems.\nChair McPherson opened the floor to public comment.\nRichard W. Rutter noted that the consultant was only referring to the aluminum color. Alcoves\nfor the recessed entry doors should be required. Consistency of column treatments would unify\nthe building fa\u00e7ade.\nAni Dimusheva stated that the proposed new buildings \"bully\" the surrounding historic buildings\nand were examples of \"disposable architecture.\"\nKevin Frederick stated that the original vision of the multiplex has been blown out of proportion.\nThis is not what Alamedans expect. The Planning Board was pressured by the developer.\nChristopher Buckley stated that he was representing the Alameda Architectural Preservation\nSociety. He gave an overview of AAPS comments to the Planning Board regarding Section 106\nand read from Item 2, page 9 of the consultant's report. Mr. Buckley stated that he endorsed the\nconsultant's recommendations. The Chair granted Mr. Buckley additional public speaker time in\norder for him to show samples of other architecture on the projector. One of the examples shown\nwas a theater in Livermore designed by Rob Henry, the architect for the cineplex.\nChair McPherson closed public comments and opened the floor to Boardmember comments to\nrecommend to the Planning Board regarding exterior design elements of the cineplex.\nBoardmember Miller stated that he agreed with Mr. Buckley's comments. He doesn't think\nwe're there yet. Asked how much room there was for change.\nBoardmember Lynch stated that people at Twin Towers were concerned about looking at a blank\nwall. In fact some church members have discussed taking slides of their own historic art glass\nchurch windows and projecting the images onto the blank surface of the Oak Street fa\u00e7ade.\nMinutes of June 2, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n3", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-06-02.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-06-02", "page": 5, "text": "Vice-Chair Anderson stated that there was too much of a difference between the Historic Theatre\nand the proposed cineplex and parking structure - not compatible with historic standards. A\nstronger connection is needed - cited the Livermore example.\nSecretary Eliason stated that the Planning Boards May 9 preliminary design approval was to\nprovide consistency for the Section 106 findings study.\nBoardmember Tilos stated that the vertical elements needed work.\nChair McPherson suggested making a recommendation requiring clear anodized aluminum.\nVice-Chair Anderson would like to ask the architect to design an alternate fa\u00e7ade.\nChair McPherson stated that the Oak Street fa\u00e7ade needs to be looked at.\nBoardmember Miller stated that it would be a good idea to \"Send it back to the drawing board. \"\nChair McPherson stated that she did not think it was awful but it could be reworked.\nBoardmember Lynch stated that we began with the preliminary massing design that was a\nbuilding with a refrigerator box at the corner and now we are presented with a building with a\ngrain silo on the corner. It is still not compatible. She recommended telling Rob Henry to take a\nlook at his design for Livermore.\nChair McPherson stated that greater design detail on the fa\u00e7ade was needed and the vertical\nelements needed to be more consistent.\nBoardmember Lynch stated that true Art Deco moldings and details could be introduced and\ncited the example of the apartment building on the corner of Shattuck and Haste in Berkeley.\nChair McPherson summarized as follows: 1) more attention to the Oak Street fa\u00e7ade; 2) use\nelements like Livermore; 3) use clear anodized aluminum framing; 4) more attention to vertical\nelements; 5) more Art Deco details; 6) the architect needs to revisit the Livermore project\nelements for an alternative design.\nMs. Ott noted that the Livermore project had been brought up at a previous Planning Board\nmeeting. Mr. Henry had cited the Alameda projects' site constraints compared to Livermore.\nChair McPherson noted that Art Deco elements could complete with the Historic Theatre and be\nat odds with the Federal standards.\nVice-Chair Anderson stated that you don't have to repeat the Alameda Theatre but more\nelements are needed on the fa\u00e7ade so it won't read as a blank wall.\nBoardmember Miller stated that the design competes with and overwhelms the Historic Theatre.\nMinutes of June 2, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n4", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-06-02.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-06-02", "page": 6, "text": "Boardmember Tilos stated concern with the horizontality of lobby windows.\nSecretary Eliason noted that the Planning Board wants the mezzanine \"punch out.\"\nVice-Chair Anderson stated that the architect should revisit the design and incorporate elements\nfrom the Livermore theatre.\nSecretary Eliason stated that the Board had provided quite a bit of direction.\n3. Review and Comment on the Independent Consultant's Findings regarding Proposed Civic\nCenter Parking Garage - City of Alameda (DSD) - 1416 Oak Street.\nSecretary Eliason stated that the HAB's purview was to provide comments for the Planning\nBoard's Final Design approval.\nMs. Ott gave an overview to the Board.\nChair McPherson opened the floor to public comment.\nKevin Frederick stated that he was concerned about potential traffic and circulation problems\nalong Oak Street and stated that the garage would have been better sited on the Elks property. He\nalso stated that the garage drawing did not look proportional.\nRichard W. Rutter stated that he supposed that the reason there were no architect's comments in\nthe Section 106 Findings report was due to the garage being a design/build project. He agrees\nwith the recommendations regarding lighting and signage in the 106 Report, but with a caveat\nthat there should be an emphasis on the lights being easily accessible for effective maintenance.\nHe also agrees with the recommendation for a graphics consultant.\nChristopher Buckley stated that he was representing the Alameda Architectural Preservation\nSociety. He stated that he had made a recommendation to the Planning Board to \"dress things up\na\nbit.\" The design looks massive - maybe moldings would help. It is obvious that there are\nbudget concerns with this project.\nAni Dimusheva stated concerns with traffic issues - ingress and egress on Oak Street. Asked if\nthe drawing proportions were correct - the height to width ratio did not look right.\nChair McPherson closed public comments and opened the floor to Boardmember comments to\nthe Planning Board regarding exterior design elements of the parking garage.\nChair McPherson stated that there needs to be a focus on signage and lighting.\nVice-Chair Anderson explained the concept of \"design/build.\"\nMinutes of June 2, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n5", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-06-02.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-06-02", "page": 7, "text": "Ms. Ott noted that if the fa\u00e7ade did change, the project would be required to go back to the\nPlanning Board.\nChair McPherson stated that more needs to be done on the street level - They can do better than\nfour movie posters. Secretary Eliason noted that the Planning Board did require additional\nframing around the posters.\nChair McPherson asked about landscaping. Secretary Eliason stated that there would be street\ntrees along Oak St. Ms. Ott noted that landscape design would be required as part of the\ndesign/build and that sidewalks would be widened.\nChair McPherson stated that the detailing on the fa\u00e7ade needs revisiting - too vanilla, not\nconsistent with the architecture in the area. The whole thing needs revisiting with special\nemphasis on the public walkway.\nBoardmember Tilos asked how HAB's previous comments would be incorporated. Ms. Ott\nstated that at this meeting, HAB was being requested to comment only as it related to the Section\n106 Findings.\nSecretary Eliason stated that a recommendation could be made for a signage and lighting\nprogram to go back to the Planning Board for approval and this condition could be added to the\ncineplex recommendations, also.\nREPORTS: None.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS:\nBoardmember Miller asked about the status of the code enforcement action against the house\ndemolition at 616 Pacific Avenue. Secretary Eliason took this opportunity to introduce Emily\nPudell, a new member of the Planning Staff. Ms. Pudell stated that she is preparing the agenda\nreport for this item. The property owner is appealing the five-year stay imposed by Code\nEnforcement. The owner states that he intends to re-use architectural elements from the original\nstructure.\nChair McPherson directed that discussion of 616 Pacific Avenue be agendized for the next HAB\nmeeting.\nVice-Chair Anderson thanked Chair McPherson for her service to the HAB.\nSTAFF COMMUNICATIONS:\nADJOURNMENT:\nM/S (Lynch/Miller) to adjourn the meeting at 9:20 p.m.\nMinutes of June 2, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n6", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-06-02.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-06-02", "page": 8, "text": "Respectfully submitted by:\nCynthia Eliason, Secretary\nHistorical Advisory Board\nG:\\PLANNINGUHAB\\AGENMIN\\Agemin.05\\06-02-05 minutes.do\nMinutes of June 2, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n7", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-06-02.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-08-04", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF HISTORICAL ADVISORY BOARD\nREGULAR MEETING OF THURSDAY, AUGUST 4, 2005\nCOUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL\n2263 SANTA CLARA AVENUE - 7:00 PM\nChair Anderson called the meeting to order at 7:01 pm. Secretary. Eliason called the\nroll.\nMEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Anderson, Vice-Chair Miller, Board Member Lynch.\nMEMBERS ABSENT:\nBoard Member Tilos.\nSTAFF PRESENT:\nSecretary Eliason, Andrew Thomas, Supervising Planner,\nAllen Tai, Planner III, Emily Pudell, Planner II, Jennifer Ott,\nDSD, Recording Secretary Debbie Gremminger.\nMINUTES:\nM/S (Lynch, Miller) to approve the minutes of the Special meeting of March 10, 2005. 3-0-1.\nAyes: 3;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n1;\nMotion carries.\nM/S (Lynch/Miller) to continue the minutes of the Regular Meeting of June 2, 2005. 3-0-1.\nAyes:\n3;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n1;\nMotion carries.\nM/S (Lynch, Miller) to continue the minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 7, 2005 due to\nlack of quorum. 3-0-1.\nAyes: 3;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n1;\nMotion carries.\nAGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSIONS:\nNone.\nWRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: (Discussion only)\nNone.\nMinutes of August 4, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n1", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-08-04.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-08-04", "page": 2, "text": "ACTION ITEMS:\n(Discussion/Action)\n1.\nCA05-0008, 1305-1311 Park Street, Applicant: Italo Calpestri for Anita Ng. The\napplicants request a Certificate of Approval for demolition of previous additions, including an\nun-reinforced masonry addition, at the rear of an existing one and two story commercial\nbuilding. The demolition is part of a proposal to replace the previous additions with a new two-\nstory rear addition. The proposed demolition exceeds 30% of the value of the structure\nand requires a Certificate of Approval pursuant to AMC Subsection 13-21.7. The building is\nlisted as a Contributing Structure in the Park Street C-C, Community Commercial Zoning\nDistrict. (AT) (continued from 7-7-05 mtg.)\nAllen Tai, Planner III, briefly reviewed staff report as presented. At the request of the Board at\nthe last meeting staff conducted further research regarding the addition. Staff found no evidence\nthat the addition located at the rear of 1311 Park St. was associated with any significant events in\nAlameda History. The appearance of the addition does not contribute to the character of the\nstreetscape nor does it possess unique visual characteristics to be considered an important part of\nthe Park Street Historic District.\nStaff recommends approval of the Certificate of Approval to demolish two additions, including\nan un-reinforced brick addition at the rear of the property as stated in draft Resolution.\nThere are no speaker slips submitted for this item. Chair Anderson opened Board\ncommunications.\nIn response to Chair Anderson's question if there would be any changes to the Park St. fa\u00e7ade,\nMr. Tai answered no. In response to Chair Anderson's question if the tenants and storefronts\nwill remain as is, Mr. Tai answered in the affirmative.\nBoard Member Lynch complimented staff for the additional information provided in the staff\nreport. In response to Board Member Lynch's question if the parking spaces in the rear remain,\nMr. Tai answered in the affirmative.\nIn response to Board Member Lynch's question of what is proposed at the rear of the property,\nMr. Tai responded that a commercial space is proposed on the ground floor, with two residential\nunits on the upper floor.\nM/S (Lynch, Miller) to approve the Certificate of Approval to remove two rear additions,\nincluding a reinforced masonry addition and a single story addition at the rear of the property\nwith conditions stated in draft Resolution. 3-0-1.\nAyes:\n3;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent: 1;\nMotion carries.\nMinutes of August 4, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n2", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-08-04.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-08-04", "page": 3, "text": "2.\nCA05-0010, 1815 Sherman Street, Applicant: Jules Garabaldi. The applicant is\nrequesting a Certificate of Approval to alter more than thirty percent (30%) of the historic\nstructure, located at the above address, for the purposes of remodeling the existing single-family\ndwelling. The site is located at 1815 Sherman Street, within an R-2, Two Family Residence\nZoning District. (EP) (re-hearing from 7-7-05 mtg.)\nMs. Pudell, Planner II, briefly reviewed the staff report as presented. On July 7, 2005 the HAB\ndenied this application, in part, because they did not like the design of the new construction. Per\nthe City Attorney Office, the Historical Advisory Board does not have purview over the design\nof new construction; however, the Board may provide their comments to staff to consider during\nthe Design Review approval process.\nMs. Pudell informed the Board that the original plans have been revised to maintain the first\nfifteen feet of the building. Although this structure does have some local significance, it does not\nwarrant its inclusion on the State Historic Research Inventory. Staff recommends approval of the\nCertificate of Approval for the partial demolition of a single family residence located at 1815\nSherman St. with conditions as stated in the draft Resolution.\nChair Anderson opened the Pubic Hearing.\nJeff Hamon, contractor, informed the Board that the design has been revised according to the\ncomments made at the July hearing.\nChristopher Buckley - AAPS, spoke in favor of the revised design. He stated that AAPS would\nlike to submit comments during the design review process.\nThere were no speakers opposing this project. Chair Anderson opened the floor to Board\ndiscussion.\nBoard Member Lynch stated that it is important for this Board to see what is being proposed in\norder to make an informative decision whether the historical character of the building will be\naltered, and the new development will be harmonious with existing buildings and neighborhoods.\nBoard Member Miller stated that he understands that design issues are not the purview of this\nBoard, but feels without the knowledge of what is being proposed, he would most likely deny\nany application for demolition.\nMs. Pudell stated that currently staff is working with the City Attorney's office on possible\nrevisions of the Historical Preservation Ordinance, which will be on a future agenda.\nThe Board may provide any comments on the proposed design to staff for consideration in the\nDesign Review approval process.\nMinutes of August 4, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n3", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-08-04.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-08-04", "page": 4, "text": "Board Member Lynch responded by stating that she would prefer to submit her comments during\na public hearing so it can be part of the public record.\nChair Anderson stated she visited the site and is concerned that the structure will be altered more\nthat thirty percent.\nMs. Pudell stated that there would be very little change to the overall appearance of the existing\ndwelling. The demolition and addition will occur at the rear of building. The front fa\u00e7ade will\nnot be changed, and the visibility of the additions would be minimal.\nM/S (Miller, Lynch) to approve the Certificate of Approval for the partial demolition of an\nexisting single family dwelling at 1815 Sherman St with conditions as stated in draft Resolution.\n3-0-1.\nAyes: 3; Noes: 0; Absent: 1; Motion carries.\n3.\nCA05-0015, 862 Cedar Street, Applicant: Donald & Nancy Olney. The applicant is\nrequesting a Certificate of Approval for the removal of a Coast Live Oak Tree (Quercus\nAgrifolia) deemed to be an imminent hazard by a Certified Arborist. The site is located at 862\nCedar St. within the R-4, Neighborhood Residential Zoning District.\nMs. Pudell briefly reviewed staff report as presented. Staff has confirmed that the tree has\nalready been removed. A Certified Arborist report was submitted and determined that the subject\ntree was in close proximity to human activities and items of value and should be considered an\nimminent hazard. Staff recommends that although the tree has already been removed, the Board\nshould still require the standard conditions of approval as stated in draft Resolution.\nChair Anderson read a letter submitted to the Board from Mr. Lou Baca, neighbor, in opposition\nof removing the tree.\nThere are no speaker slips submitted for this item. Chair Anderson opened the floor to Board\ndiscussion.\nBoard Member Lynch visited the site, and learned that the tree had fallen down prior to this\nhearing. She would like the Board to be advised of when and where the replacement trees have\nbeen planted. She would also like information on what happens to the money once it is donated\nin lui of planting replacement trees. Staff noted the request.\nM/S (Lynch, Miller) to approve the Certificate of Approval to remove one Oak Tree at 862\nCedar St. with the conditions as stated in the draft Resolution. 3-0-1.\nAyes:\n3;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n1;\nMotion carries.\nMinutes of August 4, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n4", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-08-04.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-08-04", "page": 5, "text": "4.\nCA05-0016, 1501 Buena Vista Avenue, Applicant: Encinal Real Estate. Certificate of\nApproval for structural alterations to be made as part of the rehabilitation of the Del Monte\nBuilding. Review and comment on findings regarding the consistency of the proposed alterations\nwith the Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Restoration). The Del Monte\nBuilding is located at 1501 Buena Vista Avenue within the M-2 General Industrial District. (AT)\nAndrew Thomas, Supervising Planner, briefly reviewed staff report as presented. The applicant\nand building owner, Mr. Peter Wang, is requesting a Certificate of Approval for repairs and\nalterations to the building to facilitate adaptive reuse of the structure. The building is currently\nbeing used as a warehouse and trucking facility. Mr. Wang is proposing to modify the building to\naccommodate a variety of retail, commercial and office uses, consistent with the existing zoning\nregulations for the site and consistent with the proposed Northern Waterfront General Plan\nAmendment for the area.\nIn June 2002, the HAB reviewed Mr. Wang's preliminary proposal for the renovation of the Del\nMonte building located at 1501 Buena Vista. At that time the HAB was very positive about the\nproject and encouraged Mr. Wang to move forward. The current proposal differs from the 2002\nproposal in that the work/live component has been eliminated from the project, a large exterior\naddition for a restaurant has been eliminated from the proposal, and a proposal to open up the\nroof for an interior \"open air\" passageway through the building has been eliminated.\nGiven the extremely large size of the building and the high commercial vacancy rates currently\nin the Bay Area, Mr. Wang is anticipating that the building will transition from\nwarehouse/trucking to retail/commercial/office in stages over a period of several years. The pace\nat which the transition occurs will be determined by the demand for space within the building\nand Mr. Wang's ability to attract tenants.\nTo facilitate the rehabilitation, repair, and preservation of the City Monument and enable the\napplicant to make changes necessary to attract new tenants, the applicant is requesting a\nCertificate of Approval for alterations to the building to accommodate the desired new uses.\nStaff believes that the proposed changes to the Del Monte building are consistent with the\nSecretary of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation of a historic property and that the proposed\nchanges will facilitate the long term preservation and maintenance of this unique and important\nAlameda property.\nStaff recommends that the Historical Advisory Board approve the Certificate of Approval with\nconditions as stated in draft Resolution.\nChair Anderson opened the floor to public comments.\nChristopher Buckley, AAPS, spoke in favor of the project moving forward. He submitted his\ncomments to the Board in writing at the hearing. Staff noted his comments.\nMinutes of August 4, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n5", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-08-04.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-08-04", "page": 6, "text": "Lil Arnerich, Elizabeth Krause, Birgitt Evans and Dick Rutter spoke in favor of project. The\nmain concern was the removal of the canopies.\nThere were no public speakers opposing project.\nChair Anderson closed the public hearing and opened Board comments.\nIn response to the concerns of the public and the Board Members with removing the canopies,\nPeter Wang, owner, stated that the canopies were not part of original building. He feels that the\nremoval of the canopies will not alter the historical character of the building.\nIn response to Board Member Lynch's question regarding timeline of this project, Mr. Wang\nstated he intends to start as soon as they receive approval from this Board. The entire project\nshould be completed by 2008.\nBoard Member Lynch stated that she is in favor of this project moving forward. She feels that\ndue to the historical significance of this building, this Board should be advised of the progress of\nthis project periodically.\nChair Anderson stated that it is their duty as a Board to preserve the Historical integrity of all\nlisted resources. She stated that the removal of the canopies, opening in every bay, and leveling\nthe loading platform will change the historical character of this building. Not in favor of\napproving a \"blanket\" Certificate of Approval She would like this project to come back before\nthis Board for all exterior changes.\nBoard Member Miller feels that the three foot gap between the canopies will disappear when you\nlook at the entire building. Feels for safety reasons the leveling of the loading dock makes sense.\nHe would also like periodic updates on this project.\nMr. Thomas explained to the Board the \"blanket\" Certificate of Approval makes it easier for the\napplicant to get financing for this project. This building is a Historical Monument so any\nchanges made would have to comply with the Secretary of Interior's standards. If Staff has any\nquestions regarding any changes proposed in the future they will come before this Board for\nguidance.\nM/S (Lynch, Miller) to approve the Certificate of Approval with the additional condition that\nstaff returns for a periodic review so the Board may be advised of the progress of renovations\nand be able to provide their comments on such things as replacement window materials,\nstorefront colors and materials, lighting, signage & landscaping. 2-1-1.\nAyes:\n2;\nNoes:\n1;\nAbsent:\n1.\nApplication denied.\nMinutes of August 4, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n6", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-08-04.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-08-04", "page": 7, "text": "(Following the meeting, Staff reviewed the HAB by-laws in the City Charter Sec. 28-6.-B which\nstates: Three (3) members shall constitute a quorum and a decision of the Board shall be\ndetermined by a majority vote of those members present at the meeting.) Staff informed the\nBoard that the Certificate of Approval CA05-0016, for 1501 Buena Vista is approved by a\nmajority vote.\n5. Consideration of penalties for unauthorized demolition at 616 Pacific Avenue.\nEmily Pudell briefly reviewed staff report as presented. Ms. Pudell stated that an application for\nMajor Design Review was approved in 2004. The description of work that was provided on\napplication stated that the scope of work would affect a significant portion of the existing\nstructure; however demolition of the structure was not specifically called out in the project\ndescription. The applicant felt that he had obtained all necessary permits to \"dismantle\" the\nhouse. Staff feels that there was a miscommunication with the applicant. Although this building\nwas listed on the Historical Building Study List with an (H) designation, which means that it\nmay have Historical importance because of it's age or location or similarity to other buildings\ndone by important architects or builders, staff was unable to find any historical significance to\nwarrant the inclusion of 616 Pacific Ave. on the list.\nStaff has received several letters from the neighbors opposing the 5-year stay in development.\nStaff is recommending waiving the 5-year stay in development with conditions stated in draft\nResolution.\nChair Anderson opened the Public Hearing.\nBirgitt Evans, Kevin Frederick, Nancy Hird, spoke in opposition of waiving the 5-year stay in\ndevelopment.\nBill Smith spoke on penalties of unauthorized demolition occurring in the City of Alameda.\nPaul Rezucha, spoke in favor of waiving the 5-year development stay.\nThere were no more speakers. Chair Anderson opened the floor to Board discussion.\nMs. Pudell informed the Board that staff is currently undergoing revisions to the Historical\nOrdinance, most importantly the Interim Review section and penalties section. They intend to\nbring this to the Historical Advisory Board for public hearing very soon.\nIn response to Chair Anderson's question regarding the process of modifying a structure on the\nHistorical Building Study List, Ms. Eliason responded that Staff would evaluate the application\nwith the Building Official to determine if it meets the criteria for a Certificate of Approval for\ndemolition. Currently the definition of a demolition is set at 30% of the value. If so, it would\nneed to have HAB approval as well as Design Review.\nMinutes of August 4, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n7", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-08-04.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-08-04", "page": 8, "text": "Chair Anderson feels that the Board should have been notified in the beginning of this process.\nThis is something that the Board seriously needs to look at with staff and reiterate the Boards'\npurpose. She spoke in favor of the five-year stay, would like the owner to submit a landscaping\nplan as stated in the notice sent to him from Code Enforcement. Although she concurs with the\nneighbors regarding the blight of a vacant lot for five years, she does not approve of waiving the\n5 year stay in development.\nBoard Member Miller stated he has difficulty with the term \"dismantled\" He stated the\ndemolished house does not resemble the new house at all. He was on the Board when they\nworked on 5 year stay, and feels if not enforced in this case, then it will send the wrong message\nto the public. Board Member Lynch concurred with Board Member Miller's statement.\nMinutes of August 4, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n8", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-08-04.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-08-04", "page": 9, "text": "In response to Board Member Lynch's question regarding why the landscaping plan has not been\nsubmitted, Ms. Pudell stated that once staff receives direction from this Board, they will know\nhow to proceed.\nM/S (Miller, Lynch) to waive the five year stay in development for the unauthorized demolition\nat 616 Pacific Ave. as stated in the draft Resolution. 0-3-1.\nAyes:\n0;\nNoes:\n3;\nAbsent:\n1.\nApplication is denied.\nREPORTS:\n6.\nReview and comment on the final design of the storefront as part of the rehabilitation of\nthe historic Alameda Theatre including review of a color and materials board. The historic\nAlameda Theatre is located at 2315 to 2323 Central Avenue within the C-C-T (Community\nCommercial Theater Combining) District.\nJennifer Ott, Development Services Department, reviewed staff report as presented. She\ninformed the Board that the plans for rehabilitation have been submitted for permits to the\nPlanning & Building Department on August 3, 2004. There has been inspections done on the\nmarquee and it is in very good shape. In response to the HAB June 2, 2005 conditions of\napproval, the City's architect for the rehabilitation of the Alameda Theatre, Architectural\nResources Group (ARG), has provided a detailed submittal of the proposed storefront designs for\nthe Historic Theatre for the Board to review. Sample materials and color boards were also\nprovided to the Board for review.\nMs. Ott began the presentation by responding to a number of issues raised at the June 2, 2005\nmeeting. In response to the HAB's concern regarding why spandrel glass was used in lieu of\nVitrolite, Ms. Ott stated that there is a very limited supply of this historic material available.\nIn response to the HAB's concern regarding the visibility of the new structural supports in the\nreplaced storefronts of the Theatre, the design team has opted to add visual interest to void these\nareas by furring out the walls in from of the piers and introducing movie poster cases in these\nlocations.\nIn response to the public's concern regarding the idea of \"column jacketing\" to help reduce the\nsize of the columns, Ms. Ott stated the design team explored this idea with the project engineer\nand found that column jacketing is not applicable for this project. Staff would like the Board to\nreview the sample boards and provide comments on the proposed storefront design for the\nrehabilitation of the Alameda Theatre. There is no action required at this time.\nChair Anderson opened the public hearing.\nChris Buckley spoke in favor of the material and colors shown tonight.\nBirgitt Evans would like the interior structural support to be either painted or stuccoed.\nMinutes of August 4, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n9", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-08-04.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-08-04", "page": 10, "text": "Dick Rutter, AAPS, brought a picture of a 1943 storefront in San Rafael. He pointed out the\ndetail on the floor and the ceiling and the use of Vitrolite.\nThere were no more speaker slips. Chair Anderson opened the floor to Board discussion.\nChair Anderson would like to have more information on the restoration of the ceiling. Ms. Ott\nstated she was not sure of the extent of the restoration of the ceiling.\nBoard Member Lynch spoke in favor of the materials and colors shown tonight. She would like\nthe storefront doors to be recessed.\nBoard Member Miller had no comment.\nWRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:\nAAPS has submitted a written request to add Naval Air Station Resources to the Historical\nBuilding Study List. The letter lists several resources which merit consideration for their\nhistorical significance and associations before they are affected by the proposed redevelopment\nthe Alameda Point or by any other project. The purpose for listing these resources is to give the\nHAB and the public an opportunity for future consideration of preservation before the buildings\nare proposed for demolition or alteration. In addition, they further request that the City begin\nproceedings to add these resources to the City Monument designation of NAS Historic District.\nBirgitt Evans, AAPS, reviewed the letter that was provided to the Board in their packet which\nincluded a picture and brief description of each resource\nM/S (Miller/Lynch) to agenize this item for a future meeting.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS:\nBoard Member Lynch would like the Board to consider placing two train station sidewalk\nmarkers on the Historical Sign list. She would also like the Board to consider recommending the\nnomination of 2320 Lincoln Ave. be considered a Historic Monument.\nStaff is aware of the request and has begun research. This will be on a future agenda.\nSTAFF COMMUNICATION:\nNone.\nADJOURNMENT:\nMeeting was adjourned at 10:30 pm\nMinutes of August 4, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n10", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-08-04.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-08-04", "page": 11, "text": "Respectfully Submitted by:\nCynthia Eliason,\nSecretary, Historical Advisory Board\nG:\\PLANNINGIHAB\\AGENMIN\\Agemin.05\\8-4-05 HAB minutes.doc\nMinutes of August 4, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n11", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-08-04.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-09-01", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF HISTORICAL ADVISORY BOARD\nREGULAR MEETING OF THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 1, 2005\nCOUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL\n2263 SANTA CLARA AVENUE - 7:00 PM\nVice-Chair Miller called the meeting to order at 7:02 pm. Secretary Eliason called the\nroll.\nMEMBERS PRESENT: Vice-Chair Miller, Board Members Lynch & Tilos.\nMEMBERS ABSENT:\nChair Anderson.\nSTAFF PRESENT:\nSecretary Eliason, Emily Pudell, Planner II, Dennis Brighton,\nPlanner II, Recording Secretary, Debbie Gremminger.\nMINUTES:\nMinutes of the Regular Meeting of June 2, 2005. (continued from the 8-4-05 mtg.)\nM/S (Lynch, Tilos) to approve the minutes of the Regular meeting of June 2, 2005. 3-0-1.\nAyes: 3;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n1;\nMotion carries.\nMinutes of the Regular Meeting of July 7, 2005. (continued from the 8-4-05 mtg.)\nM/S (Lynch, Tilos) to approve the minutes of the Regular meeting of July 7, 2005. 3-0-1.\nAyes:\n3;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n1;\nMotion carries.\nMinutes of the Regular Meeting of August 4, 2005.\nA quorum to consider these minutes was not present. They will be considered at the next\nmeeting.\nAGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSIONS:\nNone.\nMinutes of September 1, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n1", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-09-01.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-09-01", "page": 2, "text": "ACTION ITEMS:\n(Discussion/Action)\n1.\nAppointment of a Historical Advisory Board member to the Transportation\nSubcommittee.\n--\nM/S (Lynch, Tilos) to continue this item until there is a full board. 3-0-1.\nAyes: 3;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n1;\nMotion carries.\n2.\nCertificate of Approval CA05-0024 - Applicant: Mark Haskett - 1715 Encinal Avenue.\n(DB). The applicant is requesting a Certificate of Approval for demolition of more than thirty\npercent (30%) of a residential structure built prior to 1942, located at the above address, for the\npurposes of remodeling the existing single-family dwelling. The site is located within an R-4,\nNeighborhood Residential Zoning District.\nMr. Brighton presented staff report. He informed the Board that this structure is not listed on the\nHistorical Building Study List, but was built prior to 1942, so a Certificate of Approval for\ndemolition is required. The building consisted of several different architectural styles and had\nbeen severely altered over the years. None of the alterations appear to have improved the\narchitectural characteristics of the structure.\nMr. Brighton also stated that on February 23, 2005, the applicant had received Major Design\nReview approval. This application received extensive coordination with members of AAPS\nthroughout the review process including a public meeting with the architect, neighbors, members\nof AAPS, and City Staff. Plans were submitted to the Planning and Building Department that\nincorporated the requested design alterations from the January 11, 2005 public meeting.\nMr. Brighton concluded by stating that the structure did not represent the work of a master or\npossesses high artistic values. There are no events or persons of historical interest associated\nwith the property. Therefore, staff recommends the Board approve the Certificate of Approval\nwith conditions stated in draft Resolution.\nIn response to a question from Board Member Tilos, Ms. Eliason stated that since this is a pre-\n1942 structure, that is not on the study list, the Board can either approve the Certificate of\nApproval, so the applicant can move forward with project, or they can deny the Certificate of\nApproval, and applicant will have to pay a fine and the investigative fees for doing work without\nproper permits.\nVice-Chair Miller opened the public hearing.\nJoanne Gibson, Ellen Gomez, Ruth Tillman and Rosemary McNally spoke against this\nCertificate of Approval.\nMinutes of September 1, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n2", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-09-01.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-09-01", "page": 3, "text": "Bill Smith spoke about the demolition process and the fact that the public is unaware of the\npenalties stated in the Ordinance.\nPeter McDonald spoke on behalf on applicant. He informed the Board that the applicant was\nunaware of the requirement for a Certificate of Approval. He informed the Board of the steps the\nHasketts went through to obtain the permit.\nDave Teeters, architect, spoke in favor of approving the Certificate of Approval. He reviewed\nthe pictures of 1715 Encinal Ave, which were provided to the Board in their packet.\nThere were no more speaker slips. Vice-Chair Miller closed the public hearing and opened the\nfloor to board discussion.\nBoard Member Lynch stated that the entire process should be amended. She would like to deny\nthis Certificate of Approval so it will get up to City Council level. She also stated her concerns\nwith the staff report regarding maintaining the historical integrity of the building.\nBoard Member Tilos is in favor of approving the Certificate of Approval. Currently, there are\ntoo many requirements involved with getting an approval.\nVice-Chair Miller stated that the applicant should have had the proper permits prior to\ndemolishing the structure.\nM/S (Lynch, Tilos) to approve Certificate of Approval CA05-0024, for the partial demolition of\nan existing residence at 1715 Encinal Avenue as stated in draft Resolution. 1-2-1.\nAyes:\n1;\nNoes:\n2;\nAbsent:\n1;\nMotion is denied.\n3. CA05-0018, 812 Paru Street, Applicant: John Miller/Kathleen Egan (EP). The applicants\nrequest a Certificate of Approval to remove a Coast Live Oak tree (Quercus Agrifolia) located at\nthe rear of the property. The tree is greater than 24\" in diameter and is only 5' from the main\nbuilding. Per an Arborist, the tree is in poor health and has structural flaws. The site is located\nat 812 Paru Street, within an R-1, One Family Residence Zoning District.\nMs. Pudell presented staff report. The applicant is requesting removal of an Oak Tree to\neliminate the potential damage the tree may cause to the site and neighboring properties. An\narborist report was submitted which states the tree should be removed at the earliest possible date\ndue to its close proximity to the property owners home, its failing health, and structural flaws.\nStaff recommends that the Board approve the Certificate of Approval with conditions as stated in\ndraft Resolution.\nThere were no speaker slips for this item. Vice-Chair Miller opened the floor for Board\ndiscussion.\nMinutes of September 1, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n3", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-09-01.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-09-01", "page": 4, "text": "Board Member Lynch feels that tree is in poor health and should be removed.\nM/S (Lynch, Tilos) to approve the Certificate of Approval CA05-0018, for the removal of one\nCoast Live Oak tree at 812 Paru Street with conditions stated in draft Resolution. 3-0-1.\nAyes:\n3;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n1;\nMotion carries.\n4.\nCA05-0020, 1415 Union Street, Applicant: Julie Cowell (EP). The applicant requests a\nCertificate of Approval for the removal of a Coast Live Oak tree (Quercus Agrifolia) that was\nlocated along the left side of the driveway. The tree was promoting hazardous conditions due to\nits proximity to the leaves of the building. The site is located at 1415 Union Street, within an\nR-5, General Residential Zoning District.\nMs. Pudell presented staff report. The tree was removed in July 2005 because it posed a health\nand safety hazard to the apartment building located on the property. A six foot tall portion of the\nstump still remains. Typically staff would require two replacement trees be planted, but a\nlandscape plan was submitted by the applicant indicating that there does not appear to be a\nsuitable location for the replacement trees. Staff is requesting that the applicant pay fees equal to\nthe cost of the two replacement trees to be collected by the Recreation and Parks Department.\nThere were no speaker slips submitted for this item. Vice-Chair Miller opened the floor to Board\ndiscussion.\nVice-Chair Miller is in favor of approval, but would like staff to notify the Board when the fees\nare collected.\nBoard Member Tilos feels there should be a penalty for removing an oak tree without proper\napproval.\nMs. Eliason informed the Board that Staff is currently working on revisions to the Historical\nPreservation Ordinance and can include a section on penalties for removing Oak trees without a\npermit. As it is now, the only way to impose penalties would be if the application came in as a\ncode enforcement complaint, then investigative fees would apply.\nM/S (Tilos, Lynch) to approve Certificate of Approval CA05-0020 for the removal of one Coast\nLive Oak Tree at 1415 Union Street with conditions as stated in draft Resolution. 3-0-1.\nAyes:\n3;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n1.\nMotion carries.\nMinutes of September 1, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n4", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-09-01.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-09-01", "page": 5, "text": "5.\nCA05-0021, 1705 Eagle Avenue, Applicant: Gregory & Anna Sanford (EP). The\napplicant requests a Certificate of Approval for the removal of a Coast Live Oak tree (Quercus\nAgrifolia) that was located on the property. The tree was promoting hazardous conditions due to\nits proximity to utility wires and the roof of the building at 1705 Eagle Avenue. The site is\nlocated at 1705 Eagle Avenue, within an R-2, Two Family Residence Zoning District.\nMs. Pudell presented staff report. A large Coast Live Oak tree that was located between the\nproperty line and the back of the sidewalk in front of 1707 Eagle Avenue was removed in late\nJuly 2005. According to the applicant, the tree posed a hazard to the house and the utility lines.\nIt is unclear whether the applicant knew the tree was located on City property. Given that this\ntree was not removed from the applicant's property, staff is recommending that fees, equal to the\ncost of two replacement trees be collected from the Recreation and Parks Department. Staff\nrecommends approval of CA05-0021, with conditions as stated in draft Resolution.\nVice-Chair Miller opened the public hearing.\nJohn Miller, 812 Paru St., stated that the current Ordinance should be rewritten. There should be\npenalties imposed when an Oak tree is removed without a permit.\nGreg Sanford, applicant, informed the Board that he did have permission from the adjacent\nproperty owner. He was not aware that Oak trees were protected.\nVice-Chair Miller closed the public hearing.\nM/S (Lynch, Tilos) to approve the Certificate of Approval CA05-0021, for the removal of one\nCoast Live Oak tree at 1707 Eagle Ave with conditions as stated in draft Resolution. 3-0-1.\nAyes:\n3;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n1;\nMotion carries.\n6.\nCA05-0022 and CA05-0023, 818 and 1706 Lincoln Avenue, Applicant: City of\nAlameda (EP). Review proposal to designate two signs as historical signs. The signs,\ncompleted in 1891, were cast into the concrete to mark the locations of the train station waiting\nrooms. These sites are located in the sidewalk in front of 818 and 1706 Lincoln Avenue within\nthe R-4 and C-1 (Neighborhood Residential and Neighborhood Business) Districts.\nMs. Pudell reviewed staff report. This item is being brought to the Board at the request of Board\nMember Lynch at the July 7, 2005 meeting. Staff is asking the Board to review the Historical\nSign checklist and evaluate each sign for inclusion on the Historic Sign List.\nThe Board evaluated each sign and found that both signs at 818 & 1706 Lincoln Avenue were\neligible for placement on the List.\nMinutes of September 1, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n5", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-09-01.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-09-01", "page": 6, "text": "M/S (Lynch, Tilos) to approve Certificate of Approval CA05-0022, for the designation of two\nHistoric Train Station Waiting Room signs at 818 and 1706 Lincoln Avenue as stated in draft\nresolution. 3-0-1.\nAyes: 3; Noes: 0; Absent: 1; Motion carries.\nREPORTS:\n7.\nReplacement of Historic Entrance Lights at the Posey Tube.\nMs. Pudell presented staff report. Staff is asking that the Board review the photographs and\nspecifications, and give their comments. Staff will forward the comments to the Public Works\nDepartment.\nVice-Chair Miller opened the public hearing.\nRichard Rutter & Chris Buckley spoke in favor of restoring the lights to look like the original\nfixtures.\nVice-Chair Miller closed the public hearing and opened the floor to Board discussion.\nThe Board submitted the following comments to staff:\n1. Caltrans should restore the lights to the original style.\n2.\nCaltrans should investigate recasting as an economic option. One suggested company\nwas the \"Spring Company\".\n3. Caltrans should consider to piggyback with other communities such as San Leandro and\nOakland on replacement lighting.\n4. The new lights should be adequate to meet lighting needs.\n5. The cobra heads should be removed.\n6. HAB requested to see the final design.\nMs. Eliason stated that this is a Caltrans project, but staff will request them to return the final\ndesign to the HAB for final approval.\nStaff noted the Board's comments and will forward them to the Public Works Department.\nWRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: (Discussion only)\nMs. Eliason noted an Off-Agenda report and Resolution approving handicapped ramp addition to\n351 Corpus Christi Road, Alameda Point.\nMinutes of September 1, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n6", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-09-01.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-09-01", "page": 7, "text": "STAFF COMMUNICATION:\nMs. Eliason informed the Board that the City Council will hear the appeal of 616 Pacific on\nSeptember 6, 2005.\nMs. Eliason informed the Board that all pre-1942 plans submitted to the Planning & Building\nDepartment will be stamped in big red letters that says:\nNOTE:\nBUILDINGS CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO 1942 SHALL NOT HAVE MORE THAT 30% OF\nTHE VALUE OF THE BUILDINGS REMOVED OR DEMOLISHED WITHOUT FIRST\nOBTAINING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL FROM THE CITY OF ALAMEDA'S\nHISTORICAL ADVISORY BOARD.\nStaff feels that this should help control any future unauthorized demolitions.\nMs. Pudell informed the Board that staff has not received an application for 500 Central Ave.\nShe has been in contact with the applicant and hopes to have something for the October meeting.\nADJOURNMENT:\nM/S (Lynch, Tilos) to adjourn meeting at 8:58 p.m.\nRespectfully Submitted by:\nCynthia Eliason,\nSecretary, Historical Advisory Board\nG:\\PLANNING\\HAB\\AGENMIN\\Agemin.05\\8-4-05 HAB minutes.doc\nMinutes of September 1, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n7", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-09-01.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-10-06", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF HISTORICAL ADVISORY BOARD\nREGULAR MEETING OF THURSDAY, OCTOBER 6, 2005\nCOUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL\n2263 SANTA CLARA AVENUE - 7:00 PM\nChair Anderson called the meeting to order at 7:02 pm. Secretary Eliason called the roll.\nMEMBERS PRESENT:\nChair Anderson, Vice-Chair Miller, Board Members Lynch &\nTilos.\nMEMBERS ABSENT:\nNone.\nSTAFF PRESENT: Secretary Eliason, Andrew Thomas, Supervising Planner, Emily\nPudell, Planner II, Elizabeth Johnson, DSD, Debbie Gremminger, Recording Secretary.\nMINUTES:\nM/S (Lynch, Miller) to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of August 4, 2005. 3-0-1.\nAyes: 3;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbstain:\n1 (Tilos);\nMotion carries.\nM/S (Tilos,Lynch) to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of September 1, 2005.\n3-0-1.\nAyes: 3;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n1 (Anderson);\nMotion carries.\nAGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSIONS:\nNone.\nACTION ITEMS\n1.\nAppointment of a Historical Advisory Board member to the Transportation\nSubcommittee. (Continued from the 9-1-05 mtg.)\nThis item will be continued to the November 3, 2005 meeting when a full Board is present.\n2.\nCA05-0027 - Certificate of Approval - 2255 Clinton Avenue -Applicant: Dan Thebeau\n-\nThe applicant is requesting a Certificate of Approval to alter more than thirty percent (30%) of\nthe historic structure, located at the above address, for the purposes of converting the existing tri-\nplex to a single-family dwelling. The site is located at 2255 Clinton Ave. within the R-4,\nNeighborhood Residential Zoning District.\nEmily Pudell presented staff report. She informed the Board that the applicant received Design\nReview approval on August 17, 2005 and building permits have been issued. During the\nMinutes of October 6, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n1", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-10-06.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-10-06", "page": 2, "text": "construction process, dry-rot was discovered in the front bay window. The siding and trim\nboards were removed and set aside. Because the repair of the bay window was not specifically\nidentified in the Design Review application or building permits, and because the project was\napproaching the 30% threshold for demolition, staff informed the applicant he must stop-work\nand apply for a Certificate of Approval. The applicant has also identified that the front staircase\nwould also be repaired \"in-kind\".\nStaff recommends the Board approve the Certificate of Approval CA05-0027, for the partial\ndemolition of an existing dwelling at 2255 Clinton Ave with conditions as stated in draft\nResolution.\nChair Anderson opened the public hearing.\nNorman Sanchez, architect, spoke on behalf of the applicant. He informed the Board that the\ngoal is to convert the existing triplex to a single-family residence while preserving the\narchitecture character of the house.\nThere were no more speaker slips. Chair Anderson closed the Public hearing and opened the\nfloor to Board discussion.\nBoard Member Lynch is in favor of approving the project, but has concerns with the replacement\nof front stairs.\nChair Anderson is also in favor of approving the project, with the added condition that the posts\nand handrails be replaced with materials that are reminiscent of the building's original\narchitecture.\nIn response to Board Member Tilos question if the Housing Authority has any objections to\nchanging a triplex to a single family dwelling, Ms. Eliason stated that the Housing Authority\ndoes not have jurisdiction over non-public housing properties and that the triplex was not legal.\nM/S (Tilos, Lynch) to approve Certificate of Approval CA05-0027 for the partial demolition of\nan existing dwelling at 2255 Clinton Avenue with conditions as stated in the draft Resolution,\nwith the added condition that the front staircase, including the handrails, balusters, and newel\nposts, shall be replaced with materials that are reminiscent of the building's original architecture\nand shall be similar in appearance to those found on the landing portion of the front staircase.\nThe design of the staircase shall be approved by Planning Division staff. 4-0-0.\nAyes:\n4;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n0.\nMotion carries.\nREPORTS:\n3.\nUpdate on the NAS Alameda Historic District - Presentation and Discussion of the\nPreliminary Development Concept Process for Alameda Point.\nMinutes of October 6, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n2", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-10-06.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-10-06", "page": 3, "text": "Elizabeth Johnson, Development Services, presented staff report. She informed the Board of the\ntwo public processes currently underway that involve historic properties at Alameda Point. First\nis the development of the City's Preliminary Development Concept (PDC), which informs the\npublic of potential trade-offs between historic preservation and viable redevelopment of the\nformer Naval Air Station. The second process is the re-initiation of consultation under Section\n106 of the National Historic Preservation Act between the Navy, the Advisory Council for\nHistoric Preservation, and the State Historic Preservation Officer. There have been a total of six\ncommunity meetings to gain input from residents of Alameda. Historic preservation was\nidentified as a critical issue for discussion at each meeting.\nOne of the major items the Navy is responsible for under the MOA is the nomination of the NAS\nHistoric District to the National Register. The Navy is currently contracting a qualified\nconsultant to complete this task. The Navy anticipates that preparing the nomination and\nsubmitting it through the Secretary of the Interior's process will take up to two years. The HAB\nwill then have a chance to review the Navy's nomination. After reviewing the information and\nstudies conducted by the Navy, and National Register's nomination, the Board may consider\nwhether any additional structures that have not been determined to be eligible for the National\nRegister, are eligible for listing on the City of Alameda Historic Building Study List or Historic\nMonument List.\nChair Anderson opened the public hearing.\nElizabeth Krase, AAPS, expressed her concern with waiting two years. She stated that AAPS has\nalready met and discussed this issue with the Navy and they have no objections to the City listing\nany structures on the Study List prior to their National Register nomination.\nBirgitt Evans, AAPS, is also not in favor of waiting to list the structures. She would like to\nreiterate that AAPS has already done research on these buildings and can assist staff on further\nresearch if necessary. She would like to see this item on a future agenda as an action item.\nThere was no more speaker slips submitted. Chair Anderson closed the public hearing and\nopened the floor to Board discussion.\nBoard Member Lynch would prefer not to wait for the Navy. She stated that AAPS has already\ndone extensive research on the buildings and would like to proceed with listing the properties\nthey recommended in their letter submitted to the Board.\nMs. Johnson informed the Board that the reason that Staff is recommending waiting for the\nNavy's nomination is because the Navy is already funding the cost for the consultant. Mr.\nThomas added that there is no need to rush to list any buildings, because there will not be any\ndemolition until the CEQA process is completed.\nMinutes of October 6, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n3", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-10-06.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-10-06", "page": 4, "text": "Ms. Eliason stated that currently there aren't any individual buildings located at Alameda Point\nlisted on our study list. Alameda Point is designated as a Historic District with contributing\nstructures.\nVice-Chair Miller approves of Staff's recommendations.\nBoard Member Tilos stated that since the City does not own the property yet, it would be a waste\nof time to list any structures.\nChair Anderson recommended that the Board accept the staff recommendations, but with the\nrevision that we not wait to add the structures the Board feels are eligible for listing on the City's\nHistorical Building Study List. She would like to enlist the services of AAPS to help staff with\nthe research needed.\nMs. Eliason stated that Staff can provide Board updates as they move forward, but due to current\nwork loads in the Planning and Building Department, staff cannot commit to a date certain.\nM/S (Lynch, Anderson) to accept staff's first two recommendations and amend the third by\nproceeding with listing eligible buildings to the City Historical Building Study List. (3-1-0).\nAyes:\n3;\nNoes:\n1 (Miller);\nAbsent:\n0;\nMotion carries.\n4.\nWorkshop on possible changes to the Historical Preservation Ordinance.\nMs. Eliason presented staff report. In 2002, the Historical Advisory Board held several\nworkshops and public hearings regarding revisions to the Historical Preservation Ordinance,\nwhich primarily focused on the Interim Review Section of the Ordinance. The HAB\nrecommended that any building built prior to 1942 must first obtain a Certificate of Approval\nfrom the HAB prior to demolishing more than 30% of the structure. The City Council adopted\nthe recommended revisions made by the HAB in 2003.\nSince that time, implementation of the Ordinance has resulted in identifying a few areas of\nconcern, particularly relating to penalties and enforcement sections. Staff would like direction\nfrom the Board on several sections of the Ordinance.\nFirst area of concern is the definition of demolition. Currently the Ordinance reads: \"Demolition\nshall mean the removal within a five (5) year period of more than thirty (30%) percent of the\nvalue of any designated structure or building, as determined by the Building Official.\" The\nproblem with this definition is that valuation has nothing to do with saving the character-defining\nelements of a structure.\nIn most recent cases, once a building permit has been issued and demolition begins, the\ncontractor has run into wood rot or other damage that must be removed. It is the natural\ninclination to simply remove that wood without consideration of the historical implications.\nA\nMinutes of October 6, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n4", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-10-06.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-10-06", "page": 5, "text": "demolition that was first assessed at less than 30% of value may unintentionally grow into a\nlarger demolition without knowledge that additional approvals are required.\nThere are also areas of concern in the Penalties section of the Ordinance. In the recent months\nthere have been several unauthorized demolitions that have come before this Board. Currently\nthe Ordinance only provides one remedy for each type of unauthorized demolitions. For\nexample, pre-1942 unauthorized demolitions are only a violation of the Alameda Municipal\nCode, which would result in the issuance of an administrative citation or fine. This inflexibility\nregarding penalties provides no administrative relief nor does it allow for extenuating\ncircumstances regarding individual situations. In some cases, the penalty may be too harsh and\nin other cases it may not be enough.\nOther areas of concern are the section on Historic signs and the penalty, or lack there of, for\nunauthorized removal of protected Oak trees.\nStaff is requesting the Board review the options provided by in the staff report and submit their\ncomments and recommendations. Staff will then create a revised ordinance and seek HAB\nrecommendations to the City Council for approval around the first of the year.\nChair Anderson opened the public hearing.\nBirgitt Evans, AAPS, spoke in favor of revising the Ordinance. She stated the current Ordinance\nlimits the Board's ability to impose conditions of approval on Certificates of Approval. Also the\npenalties are too limited. She agrees with Board Member Miller statement at the previous\nhearing regarding 616 Pacific Ave. \"Why do we have a moratorium, if it is not imposed.\" She\nagrees with AAPS's recommendations regarding different penalty options\nNancy Hird, AAPS, is concerned with the 5 year stay of building permits. What would happen if\nthe property changes ownership within those five years?\nDick Rutter, AAPS, stated his concerns that once dry rot is discovered, the initial scope of work\ncan change. Staff should provide better documentation to contractors and home owners\nregarding what should be done on pre-1942 houses that are on the border line of demolishing\nmore that 30%. The current definition of 30% of value does not work.\nMs. Eliason informed the Board that all pre-1942 submittals are now being stamped in big red\nletters informing the applicant of the Certificate of Approval process and the 30% demolition\nrule.\nThere were no more speaker slips. Chair Anderson closed the public hearing and opened the\nfloor to Board discussion\nBoard Member Lynch agrees that there should be more options for imposing penalties.\nMinutes of October 6, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n5", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-10-06.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-10-06", "page": 6, "text": "Chair Anderson recommended that the HAB be informed of all permits issued on pre-1942\nbuildings, not just the demolitions. Too many applications are coming before this Board \"after-\nthe-fact\". She stated that there is a disconnect between the design review process and the\nCertificate of Approval process.\nVice-Chair Miller stated that previously they were informed by the City Attorney's office that\ndesign was not the purview of the HAB.\nBoard Member Lynch stated that in the AMC it states that they are able to look at proposed\ndesign of new buildings as well as historic ones, to determine whether the proposed new design\nis compatible with the surrounding areas. She would also like to see a better definition of\ndemolition.\nIn response to Board Member Tilos question regarding who determines if demolition is\nexceeding 30%, Ms. Eliason responded that the Building Official makes the determination.\nChair Anderson would like to be informed of all application submittals, prior to any permits\nissued on pre-1942 structures, so that the HAB may look at the scope of work, such as window\nreplacements. The HAB needs to be in the loop early on. She would like staff to provide the\nBoard a list on a regular basis of all project submittals.\nStaff has noted the Boards recommendations.\nWRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: (Discussion only)\nStaff has provided the Board with a copy of Resolution HAB-05-27. Staff also provided a copy\nof an Off-Agenda report from the City Manager regarding a Community Needs Survey for their\ninformation.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS:\nBoard Member Lynch would like certain districts of Alameda designated as Historic Districts\nbeginning with LeonardaVille, followed by Park Ave.Station, Bay Station, and Burbank-Portola\nStation Staff noted her request.\nBoard Member Miller asked Staff what would have happened to the approved Design Review\npermit if the City Council denied the appeal of 616 Pacific Ave. Ms. Eliason stated that the\napplicant would of had to submit a landscape plan to the Planning & Building Director. After\nthe five year stay was over, a new Design Review application would need to be submitted.\nSTAFF COMMUNICATION:\nThe Mayor has not nominated anyone to fill the vacant seat on this Board.\nMinutes of October 6, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n6", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-10-06.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-10-06", "page": 7, "text": "ADJOURNMENT:\nM/S (Lynch, Tilos) to adjourn meeting at 8:35 pm.\nRespectfully Submitted by:\nCynthia Eliason,\nSecretary, Historical Advisory Board\n::\\PLANNING\\HAB\\AGENMIN\\Agemin.05\\8-4-05 HAB minutes.doc\nMinutes of October 6, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n7", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-10-06.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-11-03", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF HISTORICAL ADVISORY BOARD\nREGULAR MEETING OF THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2005\nCOUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL\n2263 SANTA CLARA AVENUE - 7:00 PM\nChair Anderson called the meeting to order at 7:02 pm. Secretary Eliason called the roll.\nMEMBERS PRESENT:\nChair Anderson, Vice-Chair Miller, Board Members Iverson\n& Lynch.\nMEMBERS ABSENT:\nBoard Member Tilos.\nSTAFF PRESENT:\nSecretary Eliason, Emily Pudell, Planner II, Debbie\nGremminger, Recording Secretary.\nChair Anderson welcomed new Board Member Janet Iverson to the Historical Advisory\nBoard.\nMINUTES:\nM/S (Lynch, Miller) to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of October 6, 2005 with\ncorrections. 3-0-1-1.\nAyes: 3;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbstain:\n1 (Iverson): Absent: 1 (Tilos);\nMotion carries.\nAGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSIONS:\nNone.\nACTION ITEMS\n1.\nAppointment of a Historical Advisory Board member to the Transportation\nSubcommittee. (Continued from the 10-6-05 mtg.)\nAt this time, the Board has declined the invitation to serve on the Transportation Subcommittee.\nMs. Eliason will inform the Board of any upcoming information that would be of interest to this\nBoard.\nMinutes of November 3, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n1", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-11-03.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-11-03", "page": 2, "text": "2.\nCertificate of Approval, 500 Central Avenue, Applicant: Tony Wong. The applicant is\nrequesting a Certificate of Approval for the unauthorized removal of more than thirty percent\n(30%) of the value of the historic structure, located at the above address. According to AMC\nSection 13-21, removal of more than 30% of the value of the structure, is defined as demolition.\nWithout prior approval of a Certificate of Approval, the property is subject to a five year stay in\nthe issuance of any building or construction-related permit. The site is located at 500 Central\nAve. within the R-5, General Residential Zoning District. (Applicant is requesting this item be\ncontinued to the December 1, 2005 mtg).\nMs. Eliason informed the Board that the applicant has requested a continuance to the December\n1, 2005 meeting. Mr. Wong is currently working with Staff to develop a compliance plan to\nresolve the outstanding historic preservation issues that are associated with this site.\nBoard Member Lynch fears the structure will continue to deteriorate if left untouched for another\nmonth.\nMs. Eliason advised the Board that staff is currently working with the applicant to stabilize the\nbuilding to prevent any further deterioration\nM/S (Miller, Anderson) to continue this item to the December 1, 2005 meeting. 4-0-1.\nAyes:\n4;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n1; (Tilos).\nMotion carries.\nREPORTS:\n3.\nHistorical Advisory Board's consideration of whether to recommend to the City Council\nthat it designate the structure at 2320 Lincoln Avenue as a Historical Monument. (EP).\nEmily Pudell presented the staff report. This item is before the Board at the request of Board\nMember Lynch. In 2003 a historical evaluation of 2320 & 2322 Lincoln Avenue was performed\nby the Architectural Resources Group (ARG). The report concluded that neither building\nmaintains all aspects of integrity as set forth by the National Register of Historic Places.\nIn addition, this property has also been evaluated in the New Alameda Free Library Project\nProperty Acquisition for Parking EIR, and researched by members of Alameda Architectural\nPreservation Society (AAPS). Based on the information provided, the building at 2320 Lincoln\nAvenue has been determined to be the oldest commercial structure in Alameda that is still intact,\nand was believed to be part of Alameda's former Chinatown district.\nBecause the structure is listed on the Historical Building Study list, it is subject to demolition\ncontrol protection under the Historical Preservation Ordinance. Staff has recently met with the\nproperty owners and they have indicated that they do not support the recommendation\nto\nMinutes of November 3, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n2", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-11-03.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-11-03", "page": 3, "text": "designate their property a Monument due to a lack of financial incentive and delays in the public\nhearing process for the proposed structural alterations they have planned.\nBased on the conclusion of the ARG report, the existing demolition controls, and the owner's\nopposition, Staff cannot support the recommendation to designate the property at 2320 Lincoln\nAvenue a Historical Monument.\nChair Anderson opened the Public Hearing.\nJeffrey Ow, spoke in favor of the recommendation and has done further research on the property\nwhich he included in a letter submitted to the Board.\nKevin Frederick, AAPS, spoke in favor of the recommendation.\nBoard Member Lynch read an article by Woody Minor, which indicates that the structure located\nat 2320 Lincoln Avenue, formally known as the \"Encinal Saloon\", was erected in the late 1860's\nand is oldest and most intact surviving commercial building.\nIn response to Chair Anderson inquiry about whether the proposed project plans would come\nbefore this Board for approval, Ms Eliason stated that a Certificate of Approval from this Board\nwill be required for the proposed demolition of more than 30% of the structure. The application\nis tentatively scheduled for the January 5, 2006 meeting.\nIn response to Vice-Chair Miller's inquiry regarding the level of protection for a monument, Ms\nEliason stated that the HAB has purview over any structural modifications for all designated\nmonuments. There are also stricter penalties for any unauthorized demolition.\nIn response to Vice-Chair Miller's question regarding whether the owner's consent is needed\nrecommendation, Ms. Eliason answered in the affirmative.\nBoard Member Iverson advised the Board that she would like more time to consider this. She\nasked that the Board continue this item to a future meeting.\nM/S (Iverson, Miller) to continue this item until the January meeting for further consideration.\n4-0-1.\nAyes:\n4;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n1;\nMotion carries.\nWRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:\nInvitation to the Webster Renaissance Completion Celebration to be held on Friday, November\n4th at Hawthorne Suites on Webster Street.\nMinutes of November 3, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n3", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-11-03.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2005-11-03", "page": 4, "text": "ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:\nBoard Member Lynch would like to place Andy Pagano name on the City's street naming list.\nStaff noted her request.\nSTAFF COMMUNICATION:\nMs. Eliason informed the Board that comments and review for the Section 106 report for the new\ndesign of the Cineplex and Parking Garage is scheduled for the December 1, 2005 agenda.\nADJOURNMENT:\nM/S (Miller, Lynch) to adjourn meeting at 7:36 pm.\nRespectfully Submitted by:\nCynthia Eliason,\nSecretary, Historical Advisory Board\nG:\\PLANNING\\HAB\\AGENMIN\\Agemin.05\\11-03-05 min\nMinutes of November 3, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n4", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2005-11-03.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-01-05", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF HISTORICAL ADVISORY BOARD\nREGULAR MEETING OF THURSDAY, JANUARY 5, 2006\nCOUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL\n2263 SANTA CLARA AVENUE - 7:00 PM\nChair Anderson called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. Secretary Eliason called the roll.\nMEMBERS PRESENT:\nChair Anderson, Vice-Chair Miller, Board Members Iverson,\nLynch & Tilos.\nMEMBERS ABSENT:\nNone.\nSTAFF PRESENT:\nSecretary Eliason, Emily Pudell, Planner II, Jennifer Ott,\nDevelopment Services Department, Debbie Gremminger,\nRecording Secretary.\nMINUTES:\nA motion and a second was made to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of December 1,\n2005 with corrections. 5-0-0.\nAyes:\n5;\nNoes: 0;\nAbsent:\n0.\nMotion carries.\nAGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSIONS:\nNone.\nACTION ITEMS:\n1.\nHistorical Advisory Board's consideration of whether to recommend to the City Council\nthat it designate the structure at 2320 Lincoln Avenue as a Historical Monument. (EP).\n(Continued from the 11-03-05 meeting).\nEmily Pudell presented staff report. This item was before this Board on November 3, 2005 at the\nrequest of Board member Lynch. In November, the Board continued the discussion to allow\nmore time for Board member Iverson to become familiar with the history of this building. Staff\ndoes not support the recommendation to nominate 2320 Lincoln Avenue a historic monument.\nChair Anderson opened the public hearing.\nKevin Frederick, 1287 Caroline Street, spoke in favor of recommendation.\nThere were no more speaker slips submitted. Chair Anderson closed the public hearing, and\nopened the floor to Board discussion.\nMinutes of January 5, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 1", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-01-05.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-01-05", "page": 2, "text": "Board member Lynch requested that this item be tabled to a future meeting to allow time for the\nproperty owner to complete the proposed renovations to the building.\nM/S (Iverson, Lynch) to table this item until the proposed work has been completed. 2-3-0.\nAyes:\n2 (Iverson, Lynch); Noes: 3 (Anderson, Miller, Tilos); Absent: 0; Motion\nfailed.\nM/S (Miller, Anderson) to accept Staff's recommendation not to recommend the designation of\n2320 Lincoln Avenue as a historic monument. 3-2-0.\nAyes: 3 (Anderson, Miller, Tilos); Noes: 2 (Iverson, Lynch); Absent: 0; Motion\ncarries.\n2.\nCA05-0035 - 2320 Lincoln Avenue - Applicant: Li-Sheng Fu for Jim Hom. Applicants\nrequest a Certificate of Approval to alter more than thirty percent of the value of a historically\ndesignated commercial structure. The proposed work includes a new foundation and restoration\nof the existing siding and windows, where possible, and reconfiguration of the interior spaces for\nthe purposes of establishing a new commercial use. The site is located at 2320 Lincoln Avenue\nwithin an C-C-T Community Commercial Theater Zoning District. (EP)\nEmily Pudell presented the staff report. On July 15, 2005, an application for Minor Design\nReview was received by the Planning and Building Department to restore the building at to\ncommercial/office use. The plans propose to restore the interior and exterior of the building,\nincluding a new foundation, interior staircase, and restoration of the building's existing siding\nand windows. A Certificate of Approval is required from this Board because the interior and\nexterior modifications to the building exceed the 30% threshold for demolition. Staff is\nrecommending that the Board approve the Certificate of Approval for removal of more than 30%\nof the value of the structure with the conditions stated in draft Resolution.\nThere were no speaker slips submitted. Chair Anderson closed the public hearing and opened\nthe floor to Board discussion.\nThe Board had several questions regarding the plans. Ms. Pudell stated that she has not begun\nthe Design Review because she needed a decision from this Board regarding the demolition. The\nexterior of the building will remain as is.\nIn response to Board member Lynch's questions regarding the front door, Ms. Pudell informed\nthe Board that she has not seen any historical pictures of the original door; however, the\napplicant will be required to provide a door schedule as part of the design review requirements.\nM/S to (Miller, Anderson) to approve the Certificate of Approval, CA05-0035, to alter more than\n30% with conditions as stated in draft resolution. 5-0-0.\nMinutes of January 5, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 2", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-01-05.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-01-05", "page": 3, "text": "Ayes:\n5;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n0;\nMotion carries.\n3.\nCA05-0033 - 2708 Lincoln Avenue - Applicant: Minxi Liu for Alvin and Lai Wong.\nApplicants request a Certificate of Approval to alter more than thirty percent of the value of a\nhistorically designated single family residence. The proposed work includes the addition of\napproximately 1,100 square feet first story and new second story, removal of 2/3 of the exterior\nrear and side walls, and removal of the roof. The site is located at 2708 Lincoln Avenue within\nan R-1, One Family Residence Zoning District. (EP)\nEmily Pudell presented staff report. She informed the Board that this project has already received\ndesign review approval by the Planning Board on August 8, 2005, with the condition that prior to\napproval of the final plans for the building permit; the property owner shall apply for and obtain\napproval for a demolition permit from the Historical Advisory Board.\nAccording to available resources, the small, cottage-style dwelling was constructed in 1906. The\nbuilding, however, is not listed on the Historic Building Study List. The approved plans indicate\nthat the modifications would not only change the architectural style of the building, but would\nadd approximately 1,100 square feet to the existing building and change the location of the front\nentry and staircase. The approved Design Review indicates that similar siding and window\nmaterials will be utilized for the new additions and remodel. Staff is recommending the Board\napprove the Certificate of Approval, with conditions as stated in draft Resolution.\nChair Anderson opened the public hearing.\nLili Rollins, 1607 Pearl St., spoke in favor of this project.\nMinxi Liu, architect, was present and available for any questions the Board may have.\nThere were no more speaker slips. Chair Anderson closed the public hearing.\nVice-chair Miller commented on the fact that after this project is complete, there won't be any of\nthe original house remaining.\nChair Anderson spoke in favor of the proposed project, however requested that wood windows\nbe required as a condition of approval.\nMs. Eliason stated that the design review has already been approved by the Planning Board, so\nthe conditions of Design Review approval cannot be changed.\nM/S (Tilos, Miller) to approve to approve Certificate of Approval to alter more that thirty percent\nof the value of the structure located at 2708 Lincoln Avenue with conditions stated in the draft\nresolution. 5-0-0.\nAyes: 5;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n0;\nMotion carries.\nMinutes of January 5, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 3", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-01-05.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-01-05", "page": 4, "text": "REPORTS:\n4.\nReview and Comment on Section 106 Findings Regarding Revised Designs for the 350-\nSpace Parking Garage and Cineplex at the corner of Oak Street and Central Avenue within the\nC-C T (Community Commercial Theater) Zoning District. (JO). (Continued from 12-01-05\nmeeting).\nJennifer Ott, Development Services presented the staff report. She informed the Board that the\nCity has retained a new architect, Komorous-Towey Architects (KTA) to develop revised\ndesigns for both the Cineplex and parking garage based on direction from the City Council on\nAugust 16, 2005. Revisions to the fa\u00e7ades include reduction of scale and bulk, greater evocation\nof Art Deco style, additional vertical articulation, greater design consistency and symmetry, as\nwell as greater articulation of blank surfaces.\nThe City Council accepted and authorized Section 106 review of the revised designs on\nNovember 1, 2005. Mr. Bruce Anderson, the City's Section 106 consultant, has reviewed the\nrevised designs for compliance with the Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and\nRestoration and has prepared a supplemental report to his initial Section 106 Report, considered\nby this Board on June 2, 2006. Staff requests that the Board review and comment on the revised\ndesign and supplemental Section 106 report. Staff will forward the Board's comments along\nwith the draft minutes from this meeting to the City Council to consider before taking a final\napproval action on the revised design.\nChair Anderson opened the Public hearing.\nSusan Denault, 1416 Willow St., spoke in opposition to the new design. She stated that it is still\ntoo big for the proposed location. The proposed design does not fit into the neighborhood.\nNina Rosen, 1045 Island Dr., spoke in opposition of the size of the building.\nMonica Penya, 1361 Regent St., stated the report does not address the size and scale of this\nproject and does not think it will be compatible with the surrounding buildings. She believes\nthere is a better alternative.\nNancy Hird, 1519 East Shore Drive., spoke on behalf of AAPS and commended the new\narchitect on the revised design; however, the project is way too large for the area. She would\nlike the City to further pursue the Longs parking lot site.\nAni Dimishiva, 2911 Calhoun St., is not in favor of revised design. It still has the box- - like mass\nfeeling of the Cineplex, which has been a major concern of the community. The question is\nwhether the massive box fits in it location. It must be compatible with surrounding buildings.\nThe report does not address if the proposed construction protects the environment. There should\nbe no further action taken until there is a three dimension model of project provided.\nMinutes of January 5, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 4", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-01-05.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-01-05", "page": 5, "text": "Valerie Ruma, 1610 Willow St., spoke in opposition of the project. She would like an\nEnvironmental Impact Report done. She read into the record a statement by Woody Minor\nopposing the bulk and massing of the proposed project.\nRayla Graber spoke in opposition of the size of the project. The present plan is an improvement\nto the original design but it is still too large.\nScott Brady, 1812 Encinal Ave., spoke on behalf of AAPS and briefly reviewed a November 1,\n2005 letter from AAPS to the City Council, which was distributed to this Board in their meeting\npacket. He stated that his main concerns are with the size of the project, and that it is not\ncompatible with the surrounding area. The north wall of the parking structure has not been\naddressed adequately. He would like to see a physical model done and be required as part of the\napproval process. This would allow for a better understanding of the size and scope of the\nproject with regards to the surrounding area.\nChris Buckley, 1017 San Antonio Ave., spoke on behalf of AAPS and further reviewed the\nabove mentioned letter. He stated that AAPS feels that although the new design is an\nimprovement, they still have concerns with the 20-inch projection of the Cineplex. He stated\nthat the projection is adding too much bulk and is not sure why it is necessary. He also stated\nthat the upward angle of the bay windows of the second floor lobby should be increased, and a\nmore vertical mullion pattern be used for the mezzanine windows.\nDick Rutter, 2205 Clinton Ave., agreed with Chris Buckley that the 20-inch projection should be\neliminated. He reviewed the drawing that was attached to the letter submitted by AAPS. He\nstated that a more substantial material should be used for the tile on base of the storefronts.\nAAPS would like to review materials and color samples when they become available.\nLeslie Fishback, 1334 Burbank St., spoke in opposition of the project. She does not feel that the\nhistoric theatre is being restored. She is also concerned with the size of the Cineplex and feels\nthe parking garage has too few spaces.\nSusan Batailia, 1351 Burbank St., stated that the size and scope are too large. The majority of\ncitizens agree that the historic theatre should be preserved. The Twin Towers church will not be\nvisible if this is built. There will be more traffic problems. The alternative has been brought to\nthe City, by contracting with existing parking lots. She is not as concerned with the color as\nmuch as the size.\nRuss Button, 2711 San Jose Ave., is opposed the size and scale of the project. He stated that\ntraffic would be increased on Park Street. The rents will go up and the \"mom and pop\"\nbusinesses such as Ole's, La Pinata, and Tuckers Ice Cream would disappear. This will change\nAlameda in a major way. He stated that this Board's job is too keep Alameda the way it is.\nRosemary McNally, 2145 San Antonio Ave., also opposed the size of the project. She would\nalso like to see a model. She urged the Board to inform the City Council that the size of the\nCineplex and parking garage will ruin the historic character of Park Street.\nMinutes of January 5, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 5", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-01-05.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-01-05", "page": 6, "text": "Irene Deeter stated her main concern is the location of the parking garage. The Elk's site would\nbe a much better location and it would allow for the height and bulk of the Cineplex to be scaled\ndown. The people of Alameda want a fully restored historic Theatre. She would like an\nagreement from the developer that he will completely restore the Historic Theatre.\nCharles Kasdorf stated that the proposed structure is too large. He would also like to see the\nhistoric Theatre completely restored.\nPaula Rainy, 556 Palace Ct., agreed that the size and scope of the project will have a detrimental\neffect on the neighborhood and the quality of life in Alameda. She would also like to see a\nmodel.\nKristianne Koenen, 1360 Pearl Street, spoke in opposition of project. The thing that attracted her\nto Alameda was its uniqueness. She wants Alameda to hold the unique charm that draws people\nto it. She agreed that the garage is misplaced. She has joined the group Citizens for a Mega-\nPlex Free Alameda (CFMFA), who have worked hard to come up with an alternative plan. They\nhave come up with ideas that would allow this area of Alameda to be a Civic Center.\nKevin Frederick, 1287 Caroline St., spoke against the project as proposed. He would like to have\nmore of a setback on the corner of Oak St. and Central Ave. He agrees that a model should be\ndone. He stated the Elks Lodge would be a better location for the parking garage, and added\nthat this suggestion has been ignored by City staff. The people should have a say, and have taken\na lot of abuse. He would like an Environmental Impact Report done.\nRob Ratto, Park Street Business Association (PSBA), would like to address a comment made by\none of the previous speakers who indicated that the project would raise rents on Park Street and\nrun out \"mom and pop\" businesses. He would like to say for the record that the owners of Oles',\nTuckers, and La Pinata support this project as do most of the businesses on Park St.\nRobert Wood stated that his primary objections to this project have been scale. He agrees that\nthis project is on a site that is too small. He would like to blame Longs for not making their site\navailable. He stated that if this project goes ahead, it will establish precedence for the rest of the\nblock. There is no Master Plan for the Civic Center in this City. He has asked the Planning\nBoard to direct Staff to prepare a Master Plan for the Civic Center and its surrounding blocks. He\nagrees there should be a model done which should include the new Library and the Elks Club.\nLinda Kibler, 1625 San Antonio Ave., moved to Alameda because of the historic quaintness.\nShe is fearful where this project will take our town in 20 years from now. It is too large and out\nof place for the downtown area.\nDavid Kirwin, 1416 Seminary Ave., would first like to thank Staff and Board members for all of\ntheir work on this project. He stated that this has been difficult because of the division that is\nbeing created between the business owners and the community. He stated that Oak Street is too\nMinutes of January 5, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 6", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-01-05.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-01-05", "page": 7, "text": "narrow for the entrance to the parking garage and it would be very unsafe. This Board should\npreserve the historic quality of Alameda.\nThere were no more speaker slips. Chair Anderson closed the public hearing and opened the\nfloor to Board discussion.\nBoard member Lynch stated how difficult this is. She feels the Board is being pressured to push\nthis project through. A year ago this Board was shown a design that looked like a \"refrigerator\nbox\" that was too big. The new design has improved, but it is still too big. She was not aware\nthat there could have been an alternative location for the parking garage. She stated that she\nwould like a three dimensional model made so she would have a better idea of the size and scale\nof the new Cineplex and parking garage.\nBoard member Tilos agreed that the parking garage should be built on an alternate site and thinks\nthe Council should further consider the Elk's parking lot as a possible site. He agrees with Board\nMember Lynch that the Cineplex is too large for its current location.\nVice Chair Miller stated that he has always said that this project is too large, as well as his fellow\nBoard members. He stated that the City Council has ignored the community. He agreed that\nthere should be a model to better visualize the size and scale of the project. He stated that AAPS\nhas good suggestions. The colors for the garage should have less contrast.\nBoard member Iverson acknowledged the amount of work put into the presentations. She stated\nthat the size and scale is incompatible to the area. She is interested to learn more about the\ndifferent parking locations. She stated that the comments submitted by AAPS are good. The\nmechanical enclosure at top of the building is too high. The 70-ft. wall should be more detailed.\nThis would be a good opportunity for public art. She would also like to see a model of the Civic\nCenter. The detailing at the street level of the Cineplex is not keeping with the style of the\nparking garage.\nChair Anderson would like to reiterate what the people are saying. When she first learned that\nTheatre was going to be restored she was excited. She feels they have been made hostage by the\nproposed Cineplex and Parking Garage. She does not think that Alameda can support eight\nscreens. The revised size and scale is an improvement to previous design but does not think that\nit is proportioned to the site. It is too massive. This project would be a mistake. She feels that we\ndo need the parking structure in the downtown area to keep the businesses viable. She is opposed\nto the Cineplex and the parking garage as it is designed but is in favor of the restoration of the\nhistoric Alameda Theatre.\nStaff thanked the Board for their comments.\nWRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:\nMinutes of January 5, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 7", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-01-05.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-01-05", "page": 8, "text": "AAPS submitted a letter regarding their request to list several buildings located at Alameda Point\non the Historical Building Study List. Ms. Eliason stated that the ARRA has directed Staff to\npresent them with language that will be added to the preferred development concept.\nBoard member Lynch asked staff if there the City is still planning to create a committee\nregarding the future plans for Alameda Point.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS:\nAni Dimusheva, 2911 Calhoun St., thanked the Board for their comments on Item 4.\nIrene Dieter, thanked the Board for their comments on Item 4. She also informed the Board of\nthe 2002 Park Street Streetscape Plan, which indicated there should be no traffic on Oak Street.\nMs. Eliason stated that this document was the basis for the grants that the City has received for\nthe Park Street Streetscape. Staff will provide the Board with a copy.\nChris Buckley, AAPS, would like to clarify what the ARRA Board requested. He stated that\nthey were concerns that the plans were not set in stone before all of the historic buildings be\nidentified. They asked staff to put together a schedule of how the various steps of dealing with\nhistoric buildings would occur. Staff was supposed to return to ARRA with the schedule in\nFebruary 2006.\nBoard member Lynch would like information on 500 Central Ave. Ms. Eliason stated that the\napplicants were required to weatherize the building and will be ready for public hearing in\nFebruary.\nSTAFF COMMUNICATION:\nStaff would like to remind the Board of the open house for the new Planning & Building\ndirector, hosted by the Planning & Building Department on Monday, January 9th\nADJOURNMENT:\nThis meeting was adjourned at 9:32 p.m.\nRespectfully Submitted by:\nCynthia Eliason,\nSecretary, Historical Advisory Board\nG:\\PLANNING|HAB\\AGENMIN\\Agenmin.06/01-05-06 min.doc\nMinutes of January 5, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 8", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-01-05.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-01-05", "page": 9, "text": "Minutes of January 5, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 9", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-01-05.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-03-02", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF HISTORICAL ADVISORY BOARD\nREGULAR MEETING OF THURSDAY, MARCH 2, 2006\nCOUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL\n2263 SANTA CLARA AVENUE - 7:00 PM\nActing Chair Tilos called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. Secretary Eliason called the roll.\nMEMBERS PRESENT:\nBoard Members Iverson, Lynch & Tilos.\nMEMBERS ABSENT:\nChair Anderson, Vice-Chair Miller.\nSTAFF PRESENT:\nSecretary Eliason, Cathy Woodbury, Planning & Building\nDirector, George Carder, Supervising Building Inspector,\nEmily Pudell, Planner II, Stefanie Hom, Planning Intern,\nDebbie Gremminger, Recording Secretary.\nMINUTES:\nM/S (Iverson, Lynch) to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of January 5, 2006 with\ncorrections. 3-0-2.\nAyes: 3;\nNoes: 0;\nAbsent:\n2;\nMotion carries.\nAGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSIONS:\nThe Secretary of the Historical Advisory Board requests that Report #4, 500 Central Avenue be\nconsidered first.\nM/S to consider Report #4, 500 Central prior to Action Items. 3-0-2.\nAyes:\n3;\nNoes: 0;\nAbsent:\n2;\nMotion carries.\nREPORTS:\n4.\nPreliminary Restoration Review; Applicant: Duane P. Jensen for Tony Wong - 500\nCentral Avenue. The applicants are seeking comments regarding the design for the proposed\nrestoration of 500 Central Avenue.\nEmily Pudell reviewed staff report as presented. Staff is requesting comments on the\npreliminary plans submitted for the restoration of 500 Central Ave. Staff will then work to\nensure that the Board's comments are incorporated into the plans for final major design review.\nNo action will be taken tonight.\nActing Chair Tilos opened the public hearing.\nMinutes of March 2, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 1", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-03-02.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-03-02", "page": 2, "text": "Chris Buckley, AAPS submitted a letter to the Board with AAPS comments. Mr. Buckley\nreviewed the comments stated in the letter and said that he is looking forward to the restoration\nof the building. His main concern is with the front elevation on the proposed design. AAPS\nwould like the storefronts and front elevation to be retained as it was originally. They would also\nlike the wood shingles retained on the front elevation. He would like the restoration to include\nthe reconstruction of the sloped window hood over the east side entry to match the hood shown\nin the 1979 photo. He would like staff to be aware of the inconsistency in plans. The proposed\nplans do not show original stairway and existing historic storefronts. The plans should note what\nis existing and what is proposed.\nDick Rutter, AAPS, stated the building should be restored to look as it did in the 1979 photo.\nThe shingles are important because that was the way buildings were modernized in 1908.\nColleen Leong, 478 Central Ave., reviewed an article dated October 22, 1993 about the 5th Street\nstation and gave a brief history of the building. As a neighbor she has been concerned about\npreserving certain elements for her tenants. Mr. Wong began construction on this property in\n2004 when he purchased the property. He began demolition without receiving the proper\npermits. As result of this demolition, the rear cottage has since collapsed. She has made several\ncomplaints with the City, but feels that they have done very little to stop Mr. Wong from\ncontinuing this illegal construction and demolition. She also has concerns with amount of debris\nleft from the collapsed rear cottage.\nThere were no more speaker slips. Acting Chair Tilos closed the public hearing and opened the\nfloor to Board discussion.\nApplicant, Duane Jensen of City Shapers and Architect Richard Vaterlaus, AIA were present\nrepresenting the owner, Mr. Wong. Mr. Jensen informed the Board that his team is seeking\nguidance from this Board and the community for the best possible restoration plan. He stated\nthat the proposed plan is preliminary. He informed the Board that he is seeing the photos for the\nfirst time today.\nBoard member Lynch confirmed the importance of the restoration of this building. She would\nlike the storefronts to remain as original. She also has concerns with the proposed windows.\nBoard member Iverson confirmed that now that they have this information the drawings will be\namended to match the front and side fa\u00e7ades.\nIn response to Board member Lynch's question regarding whether this application will come\nbefore this Board again, Ms. Eliason stated that this will not come before this Board again. It\nwill go through the design review process with the Board's comments and will be approved at\nstaff level.\nMinutes of March 2, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 2", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-03-02.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-03-02", "page": 3, "text": "Board member Lynch does not feel that they have had enough time to review the plans. She\nwould like to see this item before this Board one more time, so they may comment on the final\nplans.\nMs. Pudell stated that staff will be proceeding with design review process with the\nrecommendations given by this Board tonight. The Board is welcome to submit further\ncomments during the 10-day public notice period during the Design Review process.\nMs. Eliason stated that if applicant agrees, this item can be brought back before this Board. The\nBrown Act prohibits any private conversations with the applicant and the Board members.\nCathy Woodbury, Planning & Building Director, expressed staff's concern with delaying this\nproject any further. She informed the Board that staff does understand the importance of\nrestoring the building to match the original and will take the comments of this Board very\nseriously when reviewing the final Design Review plans.\nMr. Jensen stated that he would like to see this project move forward. He does not want to leave\nthe building exposed to the weather any longer.\nBoard Lynch stated that she would like to continue this item, until there is a full Board present.\nM/S (Lynch, Iverson) to continue this item to April 6, 2006 meeting for review of revised plans\nthat incorporate the Board's comments made tonight. (Lynch, Iverson) 3-0-2\nAyes:\n3;\nNoes: 0;\nAbsent:\n2;\nMotion carries.\nACTION ITEMS:\n1.\nCertificate of Approval, CA06-0006, Applicant: Buttrick Wong for Donald Ousterhout,\n1511 Gibbons Drive. The applicant is requesting a Certificate of Approval for demolition of\nmore than thirty percent (30%) of a residential structure built prior to 1942, located at the above\naddress, for the purposes of remodeling the existing single-family dwelling. The site is located\nwithin an R-1, One-Family Residence Zoning District.\nStefani Hom reviewed the staff report as presented. Staff has determined that demolishing 30%\nof the structure is a necessary step of the overall renovation and would not affect the basic\narchitectural integrity of the structure. Staff has determined that bringing this structure to current\nbuilding standards will improve its usefulness and overall value. Staff recommends the Board\napprove the Certificate of Approval with conditions as stated in draft Resolution.\nActing Chair Tilos welcomed Cathy Woodbury, our new Planning & Building Director and\nStefanie Hom our planning intern, and opened the public hearing.\nDon Ousterhout, owner, spoke in favor of the project.\nMinutes of March 2, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 3", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-03-02.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-03-02", "page": 4, "text": "Mr. Wong, architect, also spoke in favor of this project.\nThere were no more speaker slips. Acting Chair Tilos closed the public hearing and opened the\nfloor for Board discussion.\nBoard member Lynch confirmed that the front fa\u00e7ade would not be changed.\nM/S (Iverson, Lynch) to approve Certificate of Approval, CA06-0006, with conditions as stated\nin draft Resolution. 3-0-2.\nAyes:\n3;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n2.\nMotion carries.\n2.\nCertificate of Approval; CA06-0001; Applicant: Scott Brady for Douglas and Maria\nLove - 2253 San Antonio Avenue. The applicants request a Certificate of Approval to alter\nmore than thirty percent (30%) of the value of a historically designated structure, located at the\nabove address, for the purposes of remodeling a single-family dwelling. The site is located at\n2253 San Antonio Avenue, within the R-5, General Residential Zoning District.\nStefanie Hom reviewed the staff report as presented. Staff has determined that the proposed\naddition and modifications, which were approved as part of Major Design Review DR05-0120,\nwill not affect the historic significance of the existing structure. All proposed construction will\nbe limited to the rear and interior of the building with the existing exterior features of the front\nfa\u00e7ade to remain unaltered. The proposed addition will use materials that will match the existing\narchitectural details. Staff recommends approval of Certificate of Approval with conditions as\nstated in draft Resolutions.\nActing Chair Tilos opened the public hearing.\nMr. Dileo, AAPS, spoke in favor of the Certificate of Approval.\nScott Brady, architect, spoke in favor of approval.\nThere was no more speaker slips. Acting Chair Tilos closed the public hearing and opened the\nfloor for Board discussion.\nBoard member Lynch commended staff on a very thorough staff report and packet.\nThe Board had no further questions on this application.\nM/S (Lynch, Iverson) to approve Certificate of Approval, CA06-0001, with conditions as stated in\nthe draft Resolution. 3-0-2.\nAyes:\n3; Noes: 0; Absent: 2. Motion carries.\nMinutes of March 2, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 4", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-03-02.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-03-02", "page": 5, "text": "3.\nCertificate of Approval, CA06-0002; Applicant: Frank Do for Alice Young - 1813 St.\nCharles Street. The applicants request a Certificate of Approval to alter more than thirty percent\n(30%) of the value of a historically designated residential duplex, located at the above address\nfor the purposes of legalization of remodeling work. The site is located at 1813 St. Charles\nStreet within an R-2, Two-Family Residence Zoning District.\nEmily Pudell presented the staff report. She informed the Board that this structure is not listed\non the Historical Building Study List; however, it is before this Board because it was built prior\nto\n1942. Staff found that the proposed \"Colonial Revival Cottage\" design of the remodeled\nhome would be more characteristic of and compatible with the other homes in the neighborhood.\nStaff is recommending approval of Certificate of Approval, CA06-0002, with conditions as\nstated in draft Resolution.\nActing Chair Tilos opened the public hearing.\nChris Buckley stated that the plans are inconsistent, which has been an ongoing problem. He\nfeels that this building has craftsman elements, not colonial revival as the staff report states.\nThere were no more speaker slips. Acting Chair Tilos closed the public hearing.\nBoard member Iverson does not feel that the bay window or the columns have any historic style.\nIn response to Board member Lynch's question regarding the handrails, Ms. Pudell stated that\nthe Major Design Review process has not been completed. A letter of incompleteness which\naddressed the issues which have been brought up tonight has been mailed to the applicant.\nBoard member Lynch feels that the proposed design is an improvement. She would also like to\nmake sure that the Oak tree will be protected as a condition of approval.\nActing Chair Tilos approves of the proposed design.\nMs. Eliason stated that the Board's comments will be considered in the design review process.\nM/S (Lynch, Iverson) to approve Certificate of Approval, CA06-0002 with conditions as stated\nin draft Resolution. 3-0-2.\nAyes:\n3;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n2.\nMotion carries.\n5.\nReview and Comment on Proposed Revisions to the Historical Preservation Ordinance.\nStaff is requesting this item be continued to the April 6, 2006 meeting to allow staff time for\nfurther research.\nM/S (Iverson, Lynch) to continue this item to the April meeting. 3-0-2.\nMinutes of March 2, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 5", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-03-02.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-03-02", "page": 6, "text": "Ayes:\n3;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n2.\nMotion carries.\nWRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: (Discussion only)\nStaff has provided the Board with a resolution for a garage demolition approved by the Secretary\nfor 1831 Nason St.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS:\nBoard member Lynch invited the Board members and staff to the Alameda Museum lecture\nseries.\nBoard member Lynch requests further information regarding their comments given on the Posey\nTube entry lights.\nSTAFF COMMUNICATION:\nStaff gave the Board information on upcoming workshops and conferences.\nADJOURNMENT:\nThis meeting was adjourned at 8:32 p.m.\nRespectfully Submitted by:\nCirllis Eleaser\nCynthia Eliason, Secretary\nHistorical Advisory Board\n:\\PLANNING\\HAB\\AGENMIN\\Agenmin.06\\approved minutes03-02-06approved min.doc\nMinutes of March 2, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 6", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-03-02.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-04-06", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF HISTORICAL ADVISORY BOARD\nREGULAR MEETING OF THURSDAY, APRIL 6, 2006\nCOUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL\n2263 SANTA CLARA AVENUE - 7:00 PM\nChair Anderson called the meeting to order at 7:03 pm. Secretary Eliason called the roll.\nMEMBERS PRESENT:\nChair Anderson, Vice-Chair Miller, Board Members Iverson\nand Tilos.\nMEMBERS ABSENT:\nBoard member Lynch.\nSTAFF PRESENT:\nSecretary Eliason, Cathy Woodbury, Planning & Building\nDirector, Emily Pudell, Planner II, Debbie Gremminger,\nRecording Secretary.\nMINUTES:\nM/S to continue the March 2, 2006 minutes to the May 4, 2006 meeting due to a lack of a\nquorum. 4-0-1.\nAyes: 4; Noes: 0; Absent: 1; Motion carries.\nACTION ITEMS:\nNone.\nREPORTS:\n1.\nPreliminary Restoration Review - Applicant: Dwane P. Jensen for Tony Wong - 500\nCentral Avenue. The applicants are seeking comments regarding the design for the proposed\nrestoration of 500 Central Avenue. (Item continued from 3-02-06 meeting).\nThis item was continued from the March 2, 2006 meeting per the Board's request. The applicant\nhas incorporated the Board's comments received at the March 2, 2006 meeting and has\nsubmitted a revised set of drawings for review. Staff is seeking comments from this Board to\nassist in the Design Review approval.\nChair Anderson opened the pubic hearing.\nChris Buckley, Alameda Architectural Preservation Society (AAPS), submitted their comments\nin a letter which was distributed to the Board.\nMinutes of April 6, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 1", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-04-06.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-04-06", "page": 2, "text": "There were no more speaker slips. Chair Anderson closed the public hearing and opened the\nfloor to Board discussion.\nBoard member Tilos is in favor of the new design.\nChair Anderson is in favor of staff's conditions of approval noted in the staff report.\nAdditionally, she would like an investigation of the rear addition, and would like staff to require\nthe applicant to apply for a lot line adjustment. She does not agree that the windscreen on the\nside elevation is original as AAPS has suggested; therefore it should not be a condition of\napproval.\nVice-Chair Miller would like to incorporate AAPS recommendations with the comments made\nby the Board tonight, with the exception of the windscreen.\nBoard member Iverson agreed that the windscreen was not original and is not necessary.\n2.\nReview and Comment on Proposed Revisions to the Historical Preservation Ordinance.\n(Continued from the March 2, 2006 meeting).\nStaff has made several revisions to various sections of the Historical Preservation Ordinance.\nStaff would like the Board to review the proposed revisions, and submit comments. Staff will\nthen incorporate the comments made by the Board and from the public and bring this item back\nfor final review and recommendation to the City Council.\nDefinition of Demolition:\nStaff proposes that the definition of demolition be easier for property owners and staff to\ncalculate and should be equal to all properties.\nThe Board did not have any comments regarding this section.\nProtected Trees:\nMs. Eliason stated that staff is proposing stricter penalties for the unauthorized demolitions of\nprotected trees.\nChair Anderson stated that a landscape plan should only be required when replacement trees are\nlocated on the property. She would also like the ordinance to be clear that the applicant is\nresponsible for the payment of the arborist.\nMs. Woodbury stated that staff will revise the language to read that when only one tree is being\nreplaced, the applicant may submit a site plan in lieu of the landscape plan.\nIn response to Vice-Chair Miller question regarding the fine for unauthorized removal of a\nprotected tree, Ms. Eliason responded staff is proposing that the fine be equal to twice the\nMinutes of April 6, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 2", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-04-06.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-04-06", "page": 3, "text": "appraised value of the original tree which will be determined by the Planning and Building\nDirector.\nThe Board had no further comments.\nHistoric Signs:\nMs. Eliason reviewed the proposed revisions to the Historic Signs and designation process.\nThe Board did not have any comments regarding this section.\nNew Application Process:\nMs. Eliason reviewed the proposed revisions to New Application Process. To prevent further\nunauthorized demolitions, the requirements for Certificate of Approvals should be very clear.\nChair Anderson stated that section (a) should be revised. A structural report can only be\nprepared by a structural engineer, not an architect. Staff concurred and will make the revision.\nThe Board had no further comments.\nPenalties:\nMs Eliason reviewed the proposed revisions to the Penalties section. She informed the Board\nthat the revisions to this section are important due to the recent problem of several unauthorized\ndemolition of listed buildings and buildings built prior to 1942. The present ordinance only\nprovides one remedy for each situation. For properties listed on the Historic Building Study List,\nunauthorized demolition is subject to a five (5) year stay in the issuance of any building permit\nor construction-related permit for any new construction at the site previously occupied by the\nhistoric resource. For pre-1942 unauthorized demolitions, the applicable penalty reads: \"Any\nviolation of this section or failure to comply with a condition of approval of any certificate of\napproval or permit issued pursuant to this section constitutes a violation of the Alameda\nMunicipal Code.\" This inflexibility regarding penalties provides no administrative relief nor\ndoes it allow for extenuating circumstances regarding individual situations.\nStaff has proposed new language that provides additional flexibility for handling demolitions of\nHistorical Monuments, structures on the Historical Building Study List and Pre-1942 dwellings,\nas well as Protected Trees. The proposed revision strengthens the overall penalty from $250.00\nto $500.00 under the Alameda Municipal Code. It retains the potential of an up to 5-year\nmoratorium on development also allows for the requirement to reconstruct, as determined\nappropriate by the Historical Advisory Board. The Pre-1942 provisions have been clarified to\nfirst determine if the property should have been on the Historical Building Study List.\nMinutes of April 6, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 3", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-04-06.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-04-06", "page": 4, "text": "Vice-Chair Miller would like the penalties to be very clear that it is not ok to demolish historical\nstructures. He would like Alameda to set the standard for strict penalties. He would like staff to\nconsult with the City Attorney's office regarding charging as a misdemeanor offense.\nChair Anderson would like to see guidelines within the Ordinance stating who is responsible for\noverseeing that the property is maintained in the event of the five year moratorium.\nBoard member Iverson inquired if the monetary penalties could be assessed periodically though\nnon-compliance, possibly on a quarterly basis. Board member Iverson also would like to see an\nadditional penalty imposed if the property is sold within a certain amount of time after the illegal\ndemolition.\nThe Board had no further comments.\nAppeals and Call for Review:\nStaff has proposed the standard language used for all Boards regarding Appeals and Call for\nReview.\nThe Board did not have any comments regarding this section.\nChair Anderson opened the public hearing.\nRosemary McNally, 2145 San Antonio, would like to see very strict penalties for unauthorized\ndemolitions.\nDick Rutter, 2205 Clinton Avenue, stated that the entire structure should be considered in the\ndemolition process, not only the front fa\u00e7ade. He stated that the fine should start at $10,000.\nDenise Brady, president of AAPS, stated the current ordinance does not give enough penalty\noptions. She also feels the $500.00 penalty is too low. She would like to see the contractors who\nare doing the unauthorized demolitions be penalized as well as the homeowners.\nChris Buckley, AAPS, reviewed the comments submitted in a letter from AAPS. He would like\nmore time to consider all of the different options and scenarios which might occur. He would\nlike the HAB to have more authority over the proposed design and construction plans. On tree\nprovisions, with regards to trees, the International arborist formula is appropriate.\nChuck Millar, 2829 San Jose, read the letter to the Board from Birgitt Evans. He stated that the\nfine should be based on the degree of the offense and be high enough to prevent any further\nunauthorized demolitions\nScott Brady, former president of the HAB, spoke on the background of the revisions that were\nadopted in 2002. He stated that the Board was rushed to make a recommendation, as staff\nwanted to take both the Zoning Ordinance revisions made by the Planning Board and the\nMinutes of April 6, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 4", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-04-06.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-04-06", "page": 5, "text": "revisions to the Historical Preservation Ordinance to the Council at the same time. He supports\nthe recommendations made by AAPS. There should be various scales of penalties. He concurs\nwith Denise Brady's comment to penalize the contractor. Item 3 under new application process,\nissuance should lie with the general contractor's role, not the architect.\nElizbeth Krase, 2520 Chester St, would like to see stricter penalties. She stated that a $500.00\nfine will not be very effective.\nThere were no more speaker slips. Chair Anderson closed the public hearing. The floor was\nopened again for additional Board comments.\nChair Anderson would like this item to be continued to allow further discussion and to give the\nBoard more time to review. She would also like staff to provide the entire ordinance rather than\njust the revised pieces.\nChair Anderson requested that a review of the Historical Building Study List be on a future\nagenda.\nM/S to continue this item to a future meeting for further discussion. 4-0-1.\nAyes: 4;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n1;\nMotion carries.\n3.\nDiscussion and recommendation to City Council regarding support for National Historic\nPreservation Month.\nMs. Woodbury informed the Board that each year the National Trust for Historic Preservation\npromotes preservation efforts across the country by designating May as National Preservation\nMonth. Thousands of communities showcase their unique historic buildings and landscapes and\nhonor their local heritage through a variety of activities that increase the public's awareness and\nappreciation of protecting the nation's rich history.\nNational Preservation Month provides an excellent opportunity to celebrate historic preservation\nin Alameda. Staff has provided several activities suggested by The National Trust to celebrate\nNational Preservation Month.\nStaff recommends that the Historical Advisory Board recommend that the City Council proclaim\nMay 2006 as National Preservation Month at the May 2, 2006 City Council meeting.\nChair Anderson has agreed to attend the City Council meeting to accept the proclamation.\nChair Anderson opened the public hearing.\nChris Buckley, AAPS, would like to thank Ms Woodbury for her efforts in getting the Council to\nissue this proclamation. He also stated that the Alameda Architectural Preservation Society\n(AAPS) currently sponsors several of the different activities suggested in the staff memo. On\nMinutes of April 6, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 5", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-04-06.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-04-06", "page": 6, "text": "June 4, 2006 AAPS will be giving out preservation awards. He stated the more publicity the\nbetter.\nM/S to recommend to the City Council to proclaim May 2006 as National Preservation month.\n4-0-1.\nAyes: 4;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n1;\nMotion carries.\nWRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: (Discussion only)\nCorrespondence addressed to Rick Jones, PM Realty Group, from Leslie Little, Development\nServices Director, clarifying the process regarding proposed exterior alterations to buildings\nwithin the Naval Air Station Alameda Historic District at Alameda Point.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS:\nNone.\nSTAFF COMMUNICATION:\nNone.\nThe meeting was adjourned at 8:47 p.m.\nRespectfully Submitted by:\nCynthia Eliason,\nSupervising Planner.\nG:\\PLANNING|HAB\\AGENMIN)Agenmin.06/04-06-06/04-06-06 DRAFT min 1.doc\nMinutes of April 6, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 6", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-04-06.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-05-04", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF HISTORICAL ADVISORY BOARD\nREGULAR MEETING OF THURSDAY, MAY 4, 2006\nCOUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL\n2263 SANTA CLARA AVENUE - 7:00 PM\nChair Anderson called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. Recording Secretary Gremminger\ncalled the roll.\nMEMBERS PRESENT:\nChair Anderson, Vice-Chair Miller, Board Members Iverson\nand Lynch.\nMEMBERS ABSENT:\nBoard member Tilos.\nSTAFF PRESENT:\nCathy Woodbury, Planning & Building Director, Emily\nPudell, Planner II, Miriam Delegrange, Development\nServices (DSD), Debbie Gremminger, Recording Secretary.\nMINUTES:\nM/S to approve the April 6, 2006 minutes as presented. 4-0-1.\nAyes:\n4;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n1;\nMotion carries.\nACTION ITEMS:\n1.\nCertificate of Approval - CA06-0007 - Applicant: The New Zealander - 1400 Webster\nStreet. The applicants request approval to relocate the historically designated Croll's sign by\nlifting it approximately 12-inches. The sign is being raised to accommodate the addition of the\ntenant's business signage. The site is located at 1400 Webster Street within a C-C, Community\ncommercial Zoning District.\nEmily Pudell summarized the staff report. Ms. Pudell informed the Board that he applicant has\ninformed staff that he is not proposing to restore the existing sign as it states on the application\nfor the Certificate of Approval. He has discovered that doing so could possibly damage the\nhistoric sign and would be too expensive. Staff is recommending approval of the Certificate of\nApproval.\nChair Anderson opened the public hearing.\nSherri Steig, WABA spoke in favor of the Certificate of Approval.\nNolan Steig spoke in favor of the Certificate of Approval.\nThere were no more speaker slips. Chair Anderson closed the public hearing and opened the\nMinutes of May 4, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 1", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-05-04.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-05-04", "page": 2, "text": "floor to Board discussion.\nIn response to Board Member Lynch's inquiry regarding if a historic sign survey has ever been\ndone, Ms. Pudell stated no.\nMs. Pudell stated that the proposal to raise the existing Croll's 12-inches from its current position\nso that the new tenant signage can meet the current height requirements.\nM/S (Miller, Lynch) to approve Certificate of Approval, CA06-0007, for the alteration of a\nhistorically designated sign at 1400 Webster Street. 4-0-1.\nAyes:\n4;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n1.\nMotion carries.\n2.\nCertificate of Approval - CA06-0008 - Applicant: Dan Adams for Dale and Kay\nEmerson - 1150 Bay Street. The applicant requests a Certificate of Approval to alter more than\nthirty percent (30%) of the value of a historically designated residential building located at the\nabove address for the purpose of remodeling a 1970's addition. The site is located at 1150 Bay\nStreet within an R-1, One-Family Residence Zoning District. (EP) Item 2\nMs. Pudell summarized staff report. Staff is recommending approval of Certificate of Approval,\nCA06-0008, with conditions as stated in the draft resolution.\nThere were no speaker slips. Chair Anderson opened the floor for board discussion.\nThe Board is in favor of approving the Certificate of Approval with the following revised\nconditions:\n1. Revise the proposed roofline above the dwelling's main entrance to a style that is more\ncompatible with the building's architectural style, subject to review and approval by\nplanning staff as part of the Major Design Review process.\n2.\nRevise the plans for the second-story rear deck to include supporting posts, columns, or\ndecorative brackets to establish a more substantial feeling to its appearance, subject to\nreview and approval by Planning staff as part of the Major Design Review process.\n3. Revise your plans to use a more appropriate material and design for the front landing,\nincluding the guardrail, handrail, and balustrade, subject to review and approval by\nplanning staff as part of the Major Design Review process.\nM/S (Lynch, Anderson) to approve Certificate of Approval, CA06-0008, with the revised\nconditions. 4-0-1.\nAyes: 4; Noes: 0; Absent: 1. Motion carries.\nMinutes of May 4, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 2", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-05-04.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-05-04", "page": 3, "text": "3.\nCertificate of Approval - CA06-0009 - Applicant: Mohamed Elhashash - 1530 & 153 2\nNinth Street. The applicant requests a Certificate of Approval to alter more than thirty percent\n(30%) of the value of three historically designated single-family homes, located at the above\naddresses for the purposes of remodeling and restoring the buildings. The site is located at 1530\nand 1532 Ninth Street within an R-4, Neighborhood Residential Zoning District. (EP)\nMs. Pudell summarized staff report. Staff is recommending approval of Certificate of Approval\nCA06-0009, with conditions as stated in draft resolution.\nChair Anderson opened the public hearing\nLi-Shung Fu, Architect, spoke in favor of the Certificate of Approval.\nDick Rutter, 2205 Clinton Ave., stated that the golden mean has not been properly applied. He is\nnot in favor of approving the Certificate of Approval.\nBirgitt Evans, AAPS, concurs with Dick Rutter. She is not in favor of approving the Certificate\nof Approval.\nKevin Frederick, 1287 Caroline St., is not in favor of approving the Certificate of Approval.\nThere were no more speaker slips. Chair Anderson opened the floor to board discussion.\nBoard Member Lynch stated that there should be more detail around the windows to match other\nVictorian cottages built around the same time. She would like the new siding to match the\nexisting. She is not in favor of approving this application.\nVice-Chair Miller stated that if this was a restoration, then they should restore it back to original.\nHe stated that raising the house would drastically change the appearance of the building. He is\nnot in favor of approving this application.\nBoard Member Iverson is not in favor of approving the application.\nChair Anderson would like all windows replacements to be wood. She agrees with the Board\nand is not in favor of approving this project.\nMs. Woodbury requested the Board re-open the public hearing to allow Miriam Delegrange,\nDSD, to speak.\nM/S to re-open the public hearing. 4-0-1.\nAyes: 4;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n1.\nMotion carries.\nMinutes of May 4, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 3", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-05-04.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-05-04", "page": 4, "text": "Ms. Delegrange, project manager, informed the Board that this project will be providing much\nneeded affordable housing. She also stated that the reason for raising the house is to provide\nADA access. The reason why they are proposing vinyl windows on the sides of the house is so\nthey can be energy efficient, however she does not have a problem with changing them all to\nwood.\nChair Anderson closed the public hearing.\nM/S to approve the Certificate of Approval, CA06-0009, to alter more than thirty percent (30 %)\nof the value of three historically designated single-family homes at 1530, 1532 and 1532 1/2 9th\nStreet. 0-4-1.\nAyes: 0; Noes: 4; Absent: 1.\nMotion denied.\nREPORTS:\nNone.\nWRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: (Discussion only)\nNone.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS:\nBoard Member Lynch would like to invite the Board to the Alameda Legacy Home Tour. Also,\ndocents are needed.\nSTAFF COMMUNICATION:\nMs. Woodbury informed the Board that staff would like to schedule a study session to review the\nDesign Guidelines.\nOn May 2, 2006 the City Council proclaimed May 2006 as National Preservation Month.\nStaff has hired a consultant to assist with the revisions to the Historical Preservation Ordinance.\nADJOURNMENT:\nThe meeting was adjourned at 8:47 p.m.\nRespectfully Submitted by:\nCathy Woodbury\nPlanning & Building Director\nG:\\PLANNING|HAB\\AGENMIN\\Agenmin.06/04-06-06/04-06-06 DRAFT min 1.doc\nMinutes of May 4, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 4", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-05-04.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-07-06", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF HISTORICAL ADVISORY BOARD\nREGULAR MEETING OF THURSDAY, JULY 6, 2006\nCOUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL\n2263 SANTA CLARA AVENUE - 7:00 PM\nChair Anderson called the meeting to order at 7:02 pm. Recording Secretary Gremminger\ncalled the roll.\nMEMBERS PRESENT:\nChair Anderson, Vice-Chair Miller, Board Members Irons\nand Iverson\nMEMBERS ABSENT:\nBoard member Lynch\nSTAFF PRESENT:\nAndrew Thomas, Planning Services Manager, Doug Vu,\nPlanner III, Debbie Gremminger, Recording Secretary.\nMINUTES:\nM/S (Miller, Iverson) to approve the May 4, 2006 minutes as presented. 4-0-1.\nAyes:\n4;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n1;\nMotion carries.\nELECTION OF OFFICERS:\nThis item will be continued to the next meeting a full board is present.\nACTION ITEMS:\n1.\nCertificate of Approval - CA06-0011 - 2629 Central Ave. Applicant: Hwan Kim. The\napplicant requests a Certificate of Approval for the removal of two coast live oak trees (Quercus\nagrifolia) that are located along the right side of the property. The trees are causing a potentially\nhazardous condition due to their proximity to the eave of the house. The site is located at 2629\nCentral Avenue, within an R-4, Neighborhood Residential Zoning District.\nAndrew Thomas, Planning Services Manager, introduced Doug Vu, Planner III, who was\nrecently hired to the Planning & Building Department.\nStaff member Doug Vu briefly summarized the staff report. Mr. Vu stated that both the\napplicant and Elite Tree Service, Inc. are concerned about the location of the trees and their\npotential to cause damage to the foundation of the two homes located at 2629 and 2633 Central\nAve. AMC Section 13-21.7(c) requires that any protected oak tree that is removed shall be\nreplaced with a minimum of two oak trees of ten gallon size or larger. Since there is a lack of\nsufficient space on the applicant's property to replace these trees, the Planning & Building\nDirector recommends that a $375.00 fee, equal to the cost of three fifteen gallon trees, be\nMinutes of July 6, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 1", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-07-06.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-07-06", "page": 2, "text": "collected on behalf of the Recreation & Parks Department for the purchase and planting of these\ntrees in a City park. Staff recommends approval of CA06-0011, with conditions as stated in draft\nresolution.\nThere were no speaker slips. Chair Anderson closed the public hearing and opened the floor to\nBoard discussion.\nVice-Chair Miller stated that he agrees with the staff recommendation.\nIn response to Vice-Chair Miller's question regarding why an arborist report was not submitted\nwith this application, Mr. Vu stated that according to the Ordinance, a report from a certified\narborist is required only if the health of the tree is in question.\nChair Anderson stated that the Board should discuss this section of the Ordinance when the\nrevisions to the Ordinance are reviewed by the Board in the near future.\nBoard Member Irons stated that he agrees with staff recommendation.\nBoard Member Iverson stated that she appreciates that this is being brought before the Board\nprior to removing the trees.\nM/S (Iverson, Miller) to approve Certificate of Approval, CA06-0011, at 2629 Central Avenue\nwith conditions as stated in draft resolution. 4-0-1.\nAyes:\n4;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n1;\nMotion carries.\n2.\nProposed Addition to the Official Naming List for City Facilities and Streets. Request by\nthe City Council to add the name \"Willie Stargell\" to the City's Official Naming List for\nFacilities and Streets.\nStaff member Doug Vu summarized the staff report and informed the Board that the the City\nCouncil has inquired about the possibility of renaming a west-end street to honor Willie Stargell\npursuant to requests from the Encinal High School Alumni Association. The Street Naming\nPolicy currently states that the Historical Advisory Board must approve additions or deletions to\nthe List based on written documentation of the historic importance of the name in Alameda\nhistory. As a prominent sports figure in Alameda's history, Staff has determined that Willie\nStargell is eligible to be added to the List.\nM/S (Iverson, Miller) to approve the addition of Willie Stargel to the Official Naming List for\nCity Facilities and Streets as stated in draft Resolution. 4-0-1.\nAyes:\n4;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n1;\nMotion carries.\nMinutes of July 6, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 2", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-07-06.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-07-06", "page": 3, "text": "REPORTS:\nNone.\nWRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: (Discussion only)\nThe following Written Communications were distributed to the Board. No action was taken.\nLetter dated June 29, 2006 from Dian Coler-Dark, President, Alameda Museum, to the Mayor\nand Council Members regarding the Carnegie Library Building.\nUpdated Historical Advisory Board Member phone number list.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS:\nNone.\nSTAFF COMMUNICATION:\nNone.\nADJOURNMENT:\nThe meeting was adjourned at 7:45 p.m.\nRespectfully Submitted by:\nCiplin Eleaser\nCynthia Eliason, Secretary\nHistorical Advisory Board\nS:\\PLANNING\\HAB\\AGENMIN\\Agenmin.06\\approved minutes07-06-06 approved min.doc\nMinutes of July 6, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 3", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-07-06.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-07-07", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF HISTORICAL ADVISORY BOARD\nREGULAR MEETING OF THURSDAY, JULY 7, 2005\nCOUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL\n2263 SANTA CLARA AVENUE - 7:00 PM\nVice Chair Anderson called the meeting to order at 7:07 pm. Vice-Chair Miller called\nthe roll.\nMEMBERS PRESENT: Vice-Chair Miller, Boardmembers Lynch & Tilos.\nMEMBERS ABSENT:\nChair Anderson.\nSTAFF PRESENT:\nActing Planning & Building Director Greg McFann, Allen\nTai, Planner III, Emily Pudell, Planner II, Recording\nSecretary Debbie Gremminger.\nMINUTES:\nM/S (Lynch, Tilos) to continue the minutes of the Special meeting of March 10, 2005 due to\nlack of quorum. 3-0-1,\nAyes:\n3;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\nl;\nMotion carries.\nM/S (Tilos/Lynch) to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of April 7, 2005 with\ncorrections. 3-0-1.\nAyes: 3;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n1;\nMotion carries.\nM/S (Lynch/Tilos) to continue the minutes of the Regular Meeting of June 2, 2005 due to\nlack of quorum.\nAyes: 3;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n1;\nMotion carries.\nAGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSIONS:\nNone.\nWRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: (Discussion only)\nBoardmember Lynch has provided additional information regarding the constructions dates\nand historicial significance of the projects to be heard tonight for the Board's review.\nMinutes of July 7, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n1", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-07-07.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-07-07", "page": 2, "text": "ACTION ITEMS: (Discussion/Action)\n1.\nCA05-0008, 1305-1311 Park Street, Applicant: Italo Calpestri for Anita Ng. The\napplicants request a Certificate of Approval for demolition of previous additions, including an\nun-reinforced masonry addition, at the rear of an existing one and two story commercial\nbuilding. The demolition is part of a proposal to replace the previous additions with a new two-\nstory rear addition. The proposed demolition exceeds 30% of the value of the structure\nand requires a Certificate of Approval pursuant to AMC Subsection 13-21.7. The building is\nlisted as a Contributing Structure in the Park Street C-C, Community Commercial Zoning\nDistrict.\nAllen Tai, Planner III, briefly reviewed staff report as presented. Mr. Tai stated that the\nproposed demolition is part of a project to build a new two-story addition that will replace the\ntwo existing additions at the rear of the property. No changes are proposed to the fa\u00e7ade or sides\nof the main building; the historical fabric will not be disturbed.\nIn order for these additions to be considered historical resources, they must possess and retain\nenough of their historic character or appearance to be recognizable as historical resources. There\nis no evidence that these structures exhibit any architectural or historical merit. Furthermore,\nthese additions are incompatible with the design of the existing main building. Staff recommends\nthat the Board approve the Certificate of Approval as stated in draft Resolution.\nVice-Chair Miller opened the floor to public comment.\nChris Buckley, 1017 San Antonio stated that a state historic resources inventory form was done\nfor this property. The property as a whole including the addition is part of the Park Street\nNational Register District. The reference period extends from the late 1800's to 1900. The brick\naddition does have historical significance. He stated that staff has been applying the National\nRegister Criteria to all of the properties before the Board tonight. This criteria should only be\nused if it is designated as a monument. He feels this property does fall under criteria B, from the\nHistorical Building Study List which states \"A resource which, due to its scale, massing,\nmaterials, style, and other features, is similar to a nearby \"N\" or \"S\" resource and serves as\nBackground support for it.\"\nItalo Calpestri, architect, stated the proposal is to build a new two-story addition that will replace\nthe two existing additions at the rear of the property. The front fa\u00e7ade will not be affected.\nParking that currently exists in the rear will also remain as it is. Mr. Calpestri informed the\nBoard that a Building Inspection Report has been submitted which concluded the existing\nadditions are structurally inadequate under current seismic safety standards and require\nsignificant alterations in order to render the structures safe. Mr. Calpestri thanked staff Planner\nAllen Tai for his work on this project.\nMinutes of July 7, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n2", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-07-07.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-07-07", "page": 3, "text": "Boardmember Lynch would like clarification on the Environmental Determination in staff report.\nAllen Tai stated that staff determined this project qualifies for a Categorical Exemption because\nthe portion of the building to be demolished is an accessory structure and is not historically\nsignificant therefore, this project qualifies for a Catorgial Exemption from CEQA Guidelines per\nSection 15301 (1)(3).\nBoardmember Lynch asked Mr Calpestri if any thought was given to saving the structure?\nMr. Calpestri responded by stating that the existing rear building was constructed with\nunreinforced masonry and does not blend with the front of the building. He also stated the the\ncurrent space is unsuitable for tenant use and would not be financially viable to keep.\nVice-Chair Miller closed public comments and opened Board discussion.\nBoardmember Lynch would like staff to revise the draft resolution so it is clear that it refers only\nto the two rear accessory buildings and not the front fa\u00e7ade. Staff noted the revision.\nBoardmember Tilos feels the accessory structures are as historically significant as the main\nbuilding and does meet the criteria to be a historic resource.\nMotion (Lynch) to approve Certicate of Approval CA05-0008, as stated in draft resolution with\nthe correction that staff revise the language so it is clear that this applies only the accessory\nbuildings in the rear of the building.\nMotion failed due to lack of a second.\nM/S (Tilos, Lynch) to continue this item until such time there is a full Board. 3-0-1,\nAyes:\n3;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n1;\nMotion carries.\n2.\nCA05-0011, 1013 Fair Oaks Avenue, Applicant: Derwin Cheung/David Deng. The\napplicants request a Certificate of Approval to remove a Coast Live Oak tree (Quercus Agrifolia)\nlocated along the western edge of the property. The tree has a 24\" diameter and is only 30\" from\nthe main building's brick foundation. Per an Arborist, the tree is interfering with the proposed\nfoundation reconstruction and would become unstable as part of that process. The site is located\nat 1013 Fair Oaks Avenue, within an R-1, One Family Residence Zoning District.\nEmily Pudell, Planner II briefly reviewed staff report as presented. Per the arborist report\nsubmitted by the applicant, removal of this tree, located on the western side of the property, will\nstabilize their property and eliminate the potential of the tree causing damage to the neighboring\nproperty. Staff recommends approval Certificate of Approval CA05-0011 with conditions as\nstated in draft Resolution.\nMinutes of July 7, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n3", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-07-07.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-07-07", "page": 4, "text": "Vice-Chair Miller stated there where no speaker slips submitted, and opened the floor for Board\ndiscussion.\nBoardmember Lynch informed the Board she visited the property. The tree appears to be in bad\nshape and is in favor of removing the tree for health and safety reasons.\nVice-Chair Miller is also in favor of removing the tree.\nStaff informed the Board that the Recreation & Park Department has been accepting fees in lui of\nreplacement trees. They have not found locations for the replacement trees as of yet. Staff will\nnotify the Board when and where a replacement tree has been planted.\nM/S (Tilos, Lynch) to approve Certificate of Approval CA05-0011, to remove a Coast Live Oak\ntree (Quercus Agrifolia) located along the western edge of the property at 1013 Fair Oaks as\nstated in in draft Resolution. 3-0-1.\nAyes:\n3;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n1;\nMotion carries.\n3.\nCA04-0006, 826 Lincoln Avenue, Applicant: Cindy Li. The applicant is requesting a\nCertificate of Approval to demolish the existing single-family dwelling, located at the above\naddress, for the purposes of clearing a dilapidated structure from the site and constructing a new\nresidential duplex. The site is located at 826 Lincoln Avenue, within an R-4, Neighborhood\nResidential Zoning District.\nEmily Pudell, Planner II, briefly reviewed staff report as presented. Applicant wishes to\ncompletely demolish a single-family dwelling. This building is not listed on the Historical\nBuilding Study List but was built prior to 1942. The condition of the existing building is poor\naccording to a building inspection report letter prepared in 2004. Permit records indicate the\nbuilding has been significantly altered over time.\nStaff feels the existing building is not historically significant and does not meet the criteria to be\nconsidered a historical resource. Staff recommends approval of CA04-0006.\nVice-Chair Miller opened the floor for Public comment.\nIvan Chiu, designer with Bill Wong Engineers, who spoke on behalf of the applicant informed\nthe Board that they are ready to proceed with proposed project upon approval. Applicants plan\nto construct a new duplex on this site.\nBoardmember Lynch asked Mr. Chiu if there are parking spaces provided in rear of proposed\nsiteplan. Mr. Chiu answered in the affirmative.\nChristopher Buckley, 1017 San Antonio Ave., agrees with staff that this property does not have\nhistorical significance but feels staff is applying the wrong criteria to this property as well. Staff\nMinutes of July 7, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n4", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-07-07.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-07-07", "page": 5, "text": "should not be applying the National Register Criteria. In the Ordinance, the National Register\nCriteria is sited in the definition, Sec 13-21-2, as part of the definition as Historical Monument.\nIt is not referenced in the definition of a Historical Building. Study List. Currently there is no\nspecific criteria in the Ordinance stating what is or what isn't eligible for the Study List. He\nfeels this should be addressed in a future meeting. However, he feels the building does not meet\nthe criteria of the study list. He also stated that he feels that the design quality of the replacement\nstructure should be of the same quality of what it is replacing. He is in favor of the proposed\ndesign, with minor changes.\nStaff noted his changes, and informed Mr. Buckley that he may submit his comments during the\ndesign review process.\nVice-Chair Miller opened the floor to Board discussion.\nBoardmember Lynch stated this building does not have any historic value, but would like staff to\nwork closely with the applicant on the design of the proposed project.\nM/S (Lynch, Tilos) to approve Certificate of Approval,CA04-000 to approve the demolition of\nan existing residence at 826 Lincoln Ave. as stated in draft Resolution. 3-0-1.\nAyes: 3;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n1;\nMotion carries.\n4.\nCA05-0010, 1815 Sherman Street, Applicant: Jules Garabaldi. The applicant is\nrequesting a Certificate of Approval to alter more than thirty percent (30%) of the historic\nstructure, located at the above address, for the purposes of remodeling the existing single-family\ndwelling. The site is located at 1815 Sherman Street, within an R-2, Two Family Residence\nZoning District.\nEmily Purdell reviewed staff report as presented. She would like the Board to omit paragraph 2\nof Section III due to a staff error. The demolition plan that was submitted shows retention of the\nmajority of the dwelling's exterior walls; including all of the first-floor front elevations and the\nmajority of the first-floor side and rear elevations. The proposal does not include any changes to\nthe existing porch area. Staff used the same criteria as prior application, and concluded that\nalthough there is some local history associated with this property, it is not significant enough to\nconsider this building a historic resource.\nStaff feels the proposed additions and remodel of this single family home are restricted to the\nrear elevations and maintains the character of the existing structure, therefore staff recommends\napproval of the Certifiate of Approval as stated in the draft Resolution.\nVice-Chair Miller opened the floor for public comment.\nJules Garibaldi, owner, informed the Board that he grew up in this house, would like to expand\nthe upper level bedrooms and feels the best way to do this is to dismantle and reconstruct. There\nMinutes of July 7, 2005\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\n5", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-07-07.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-08-03", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF HISTORICAL ADVISORY BOARD\nREGULAR MEETING OF THURSDAY, AUGUST 3, 2006\nCOUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL\n2263 SANTA CLARA AVENUE - 7:00 PM\nChair Anderson called the meeting to order at 7:03 pm. Secretary Eliason called the roll.\nMEMBERS PRESENT:\nChair Anderson, Vice-Chair Miller, Board Members Lynch,\nIrons and Iverson.\nMEMBERS ABSENT:\nNone.\nSTAFF PRESENT:\nCynthia Eliason, Secretary, Doug Garrison, Planner III, Doug\nVu, Planner III, Miriam Delegrange, Development Services,\nDebbie Gremminger, Recording Secretary.\nMINUTES:\nMinutes of the Regular Meeting of March 2, 2006.\nM/S and unanimous to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of March 2, 2006 as\npresented. 5-0-0.\nAyes:\n5;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n0.\nMotion carries.\nMinutes of the Regular Meeting of July 6, 2006.\nM/S and unanimous to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of March 2, 2006 as\npresented. 5-0-0.\nAyes: 5;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n0.\nMotion carries.\nAGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSIONS:\nNone.\nELECTION OF OFFICERS: (Item continued from the July 6, 2006 Meeting).\nBoard Member Lynch nominated and the Board voted unanimously to re-elect Nancy Anderson\nas Chair and Randall Miller as Vice-Chair.\nMinutes of August 3, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 1", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-08-03.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-08-03", "page": 2, "text": "ACTION ITEMS:\n1.\nCertificate of Approval - CA06-00012 - 1530 & 1532 Ninth Street. Applicant: Mohamed\nElhashash. The applicant is requesting a new Certificate of Approval to alter more than thirty\npercent (30%) of the value of three historically designated single-family homes. The site is\nlocated at 1530 and 1532 Ninth Street within an R-4, Neighborhood Residential Zoning District.\nCynthia Eliason, Supervising Planner, presented staff report. On May 4, 2006, the Historical\nAdvisory Board acted to deny a Certificate of Approval CA06-0009. The applicant has since\nbeen working with Staff and representatives of the Alameda Architectural Preservation Society\n(AAPS) to revise plans to address design concerns raised at the May HAB meeting. Staff is\nrecommending the Board approve the Certificate of Approval CA06-0012, with conditions as\nstated in the draft Resolution.\nChair Anderson opened the public hearing.\nMiriam Delagrange, Project Manager, Development Services, spoke in favor of the revised\ndesign.\nDick Rutter, AAPS, reviewed a letter submitted by AAPS and is in favor of approving the\nCertificate of Approval.\nLi-Sheng Fu, architect, spoke in favor of revised design. He informed the Board that he is\nwilling to incorporate AAPS's suggestions into the plans. He informed the Board that the plans\nfor the rear building have not changed and that all the exterior doors will match the existing\ndoors.\nChris Buckley, AAPS, spoke in favor of approving the Certificate of Approval with the\nconditions stated in letter submitted by AAPS.\nKevin Frederick, 1287 Caroline St. spoke in opposition of the revised design.\nThere were no further speaker slips, Chair Anderson closed the public hearing and opened the\nfloor to Board discussion.\nBoard Member Lynch thanked the applicant for his attempt to incorporate the Board's\nsuggestions into the revised plan. She feels that the revised plans do not include enough of the\noriginal design details. She would like to see the details match a photograph of a similar house\nbuilt around the same time which is located down the street.\nBoard Member Irons is in favor of approving the revised plans. He asked for clarification from\nBoard Member Lynch as to what details she is referring to. He stated that it was his\nunderstanding that design details does not fall under this Board's purview.\nMinutes of August 3, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 2", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-08-03.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-08-03", "page": 3, "text": "Ms. Eliason stated that the Board should only be considering the partial demolition of the\nexisting structure, not the proposed design. Board Member Lynch disagreed with staff and read\nfrom the Municipal Code that the HAB is charged with the responsibility \"to encourage new\nbuilding and developments that will be harmonious with existing buildings and neighborhoods\"\nBoard Member Lynch added that the Board can't encourage harmonious designs if it doesn't see\nthose designs.\nVice-Chair Miller is not in favor of approving the Certificate of Approval. He feels this project\nwould create parking issues in the neighborhood.\nBoard Member Iverson also thanked the architect for revising the plans. She would like to see\nthe front detail match an existing house which is located down the street.\nM/S (Irons, Miller) to approve Certificate of Approval CA06-0012, to alter more than thirty\npercent of the value of three historically designated single-family homes located at 1530 & 1532\n1/2 Ninth Street. 1-4-0.\nAyes: 1 (Irons); Noes: 4; Absent: 0; Motion failed. Item deemed denied.\nM/S (Lynch, Iverson) and unanimous to continue this item to a future meeting to allow the\napplicant to incorporate the Board's comments into the plans. 5-0-0.\nAyes: 5;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n0.\nMotion carries.\nSecretary Eliason stated that staff will inform the Board if the applicant chooses to revise the\nplans.\n2.\na.\nCertificate of Approval - CA06-0017 - 2020 Oak Street. Applicant: Richard\nHornberger. Applicant requests a Certificate of Approval to move an existing, pre-1909 dwelling\nfrom its existing site to the corner of Oak Street and Blanding Avenue. Both sites are within the\nM-2, General Industrial Zoning District. and;\nb.\nCertificate of Approval - CA06-0018 - 2319 Clement Avenue. Applicant:\nRichard Hornberger Applicant requests a Certificate of Approval to permit the demolition of a\nvacant pre-1909 industrial building. The site is located within the M-2, General Industrial\n(Manufacturing) Zoning District.\nCynthia Eliason, Supervising Planner presented the staff report. The Board will be considering\ntwo separate Certificates of Approval. The applicant is requesting a Certificate of Approval to\nmove an existing residence from a site at 2020 Oak Street to the corner of Oak Street and\nBlanding Ave. Further, the applicant requests a Certificate of Approval to permit the demolition\nof the industrial building located at 2319 Clement Ave. These requests are part of a project to\nexpand the Perforce Software facility located at 2320 Blanding Ave. Staff is recommending\napproval of CA06-0017 and CA06-0018 with the conditions as stated in the draft resolutions.\nMinutes of August 3, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 3", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-08-03.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-08-03", "page": 4, "text": "Chair Anderson opened the Public hearing.\nKen Carvallo and Christopher Buckley, AAPS, spoke in favor of approving both Certificates of\nApprovals.\nThere were no further speaker slips. Chair Anderson closed the public hearing and opened the\nfloor to Board discussion.\nThe Board had no concerns with either proposal.\nM/S (Iverson, Lynch) and unanimous to approve CA06-0017, to move an existing, pre-1909\ndwelling from its existing site to the corner of Oak Street and Blanding Ave. and CA06-0018, to\npermit the demolition of a vacant pre-1909 industrial building located at 2319 Clement Ave. with\nconditions as stated in draft resolutions. 5-0-0.\nAyes:\n5;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent: 0;\nMotion carries.\n3.\nCertificate of Approval - CA06-0015 - Applicant: Phong T. & Lieu Dinh - 1343\nFernside Blvd. The applicants request a Certificate of Approval to alter more than thirty percent\nof the value of a pre-1942 single family residence. The proposed work includes the addition of\napproximately 1,450 square feet first story and new second story for an attached garage and\nliving space, removal/replacement of the exterior siding, windows, interior walls and roof. The\nsite is located at 1343 Fernside Blvd. within an R-1, One Family Residence Zoning District.\nCynthia Eliason, Supervising Planner, presented the staff report. In 2006, the applicant received\nseveral permit approvals for repair and replacement work to the structure, which cumulatively\nhave resulted in exceeding the thirty percent (30%) removal provisions within a five (5) year\nperiod. In addition, the applicant is requesting further demolition to the roof system as well as a\nnew addition to the structure to add a two-car garage and additional second-story living area.\nStaff is recommending that the Board 1) include 1343 Fernside Blvd. on the Historical Building\nStudy List as an \"H\" designation, 2) deny the portion of the Certificate of Approval for\ndemolition associated with the proposed addition of a two-car garage and living area and 3)\napprove the portion of the Certificate of Approval associated with window and siding\nreplacements and new roof with conditions as stated in draft resolution.\nMs. Eliason informed the Board that all comments made by the Board will be forwarded to the\nPlanning Board.\nChair Anderson commended staff on their report and opened the Public Hearing.\nAndy Anderson, 1348 Fernside, spoke in favor of the project and read a letter from Sylvia\nHudson, Heather and Erin Lambert, who were also in favor of moving this project forward.\nMinutes of August 3, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 4", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-08-03.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-08-03", "page": 5, "text": "Richard Rutter, AAPS, spoke in favor of staff's recommendation to deny the Certificate of\nApproval for the addition.\nGary Longoria, 3292 Briggs, opposes the proposed addition. He stated that it will block his\nwindows in living room dining room and bedroom. He is also concerned with the dead oak tree\non the rear of the property.\nTom Pavao, 1337 Fernside, spoke in favor of staff's recommendation to deny the addition.\nChris Buckley, AAPS, commended staff on their report. He reviewed comments submitted by\nAAPS and would like them incorporated into the draft Resolution.\nBetsy Matheson, 1185 Park Ave., is not in favor of proposed addition. She would like to see this\nproperty included on the Historic Building Study List.\nPhong Dinh, applicant/owner, informed the Board that prior to purchasing the property, he was\ntold by Staff that the addition would be approved. Once construction began, he discovered\nadditional damage done by a previous fire. He noted that he has tried to comply with all of\nstaff's requests.\nKevin Frederick, 1287 Caroline St., commended staff on their report. He is not in favor of the\nproposed addition.\nThere were no further speaker slips. Chair Anderson closed the public hearing and opened the\nfloor to Board discussion.\nBoard Member Irons commended staff on their report. He noted that as a contractor,\nhe\nunderstands the cost of restoring this building would be very high.\nBoard Member Iverson also commended staff on their report. She would like the building\nrestored to the way it looked in the 1979 photo.\nVice-Chair Miller spoke in favor of staff's recommendations. He would also like to see the\nhouse restored to the way it looked in the 1979 photo.\nBoard Member Lynch spoke in favor of including the property on the Historic Building Study\nlist. She would like a 1979 photo be provided to all property owners of listed houses. She noted\nthat she is not in favor of the proposed addition. She pointed out that the staff report mentioned\nthe shutters as a signature detail of the Craftsman style. However those particular shutters are\nnot original, nor are shutters a Craftsman style hallmark.\nChair Anderson noted the unique detailing that is replicate of that craftsman style cottage. She is\nin favor of including to the Historic Building Study List as an H designation. She would like to\nsee the property restored to the way it was in 1979. She stated the dormer windows on the front\nfa\u00e7ade should not be changed as they are a very important characteristic of this style of house.\nMinutes of August 3, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 5", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-08-03.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-08-03", "page": 6, "text": "In response to Board Member Irons inquiry regarding whether the proposed addition is within\nthe purview of this Board, Ms. Eliason stated that the demolition of the side walls for the\nproposed addition is under the purview of this Board because the applicant has exceeded 30 %\nover a period of five years.\nBoard Member Irons noted that if this Board requires the applicant to restore this back to the way\nit looked in 1979, then the applicant may again apply for an addition, without coming before this\nBoard. That would be very costly to the property owner, and he is within his rights to build an\naddition on his property.\nAfter separately reviewing each condition, the Board approved staffs recommendation for\nconditions one and three. The Board would like conditions two, four, five and six be revised to\nincorporate AAPS's comments.\nM/S (Lynch, Iverson) and unanimous to include 1343 Fernside Blvd. to the Historic Building\nStudy List as an H designation. 5-0-0.\nAyes: 5;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n0;\nMotion carries.\nM/S (Irons, Miller) to approve the portion of the Certificate of Approval CA06-0015, associated\nwith window and siding replacements with revised conditions submitted by AAPS. 5-0-0.\nAyes: 5; Noes: 0; Absent: 0; Motion carries.\nM/S (Miller, Lynch) and unanimous to deny the partial demolition associated with the proposed\naddition of an existing dwelling at 1343 Fernside. 5-0-0.\nAyes:\n5;\nNoes:\n0;\nAbsent:\n0;\nMotion carries.\nBoard member Lynch stated that she would like staff to give updates on this project as it moves\nforward.\nChair Anderson called a 10 minute recess.\nChair Anderson reconvened the meeting.\n4.\nCertificate of Approval CA06-0014 - Applicant: Sebastian Martinez for Raul Reyes\nTapia, 1534 Buena Vista Avenue. The applicant is requesting a Certificate of Approval for\ndemolition of the remainder of a residential structure built prior to 1942, located at the above\naddress, for the purposes of constructing a new single-family dwelling. The site is located within\nan R-4, Neighborhood Residential Zoning District.\nDoug Vu, Planner III, presented the staff report. He informed the Board that the applicants are\nrequesting a Certificate of Approval to allow demolition of the remaining thirty-five (35) percent\nMinutes of August 3, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 6", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-08-03.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-08-03", "page": 7, "text": "of a residential structure at 1534 Buena Vista Avenue that was destroyed by two fires. The\nbuilding was constructed in 1909, but is not listed on the Historical Building Study List.\nMr. Vu stated that the proposed project is brought before the Board because it involves partial\ndemolition of a structure built prior to 1942. Given the amount of damage already sustained to\nthe building, the applicants are proposing to remove the remaining garage and three storage\nrooms on the ground floor in order to construct a new single-family dwelling. Staff will continue\nto work with the applicants to ensure the new residence is consistent with the intended design\napproach and compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Staff is recommending approval\nof Certificate of Approval, CA06-0014, to allow the demolition of the remainder of the structure\nat 1534 Buena Vista Ave., with conditions as stated in draft Resolution.\nIn response to Board Member Lynch's inquiry regarding the proposed new single-family\ndwelling, Mr. Vu stated that staff will consider any comments made by this Board tonight during\nthe Design Review process.\nChair Anderson opened the public hearing.\nKevin Frederick, 1287 Caroline St., requested that the owner try to salvage any of the historic\nmaterials during the demolition.\nSebastian Martinez, architect, stated that he will make every effort to match original house.\nThere were no further speaker slips. Chair Anderson closed the public hearing and opened the\nfloor to Board discussion.\nThe Board thanked the applicant for reviewing the plans for the new single-family dwelling.\nM/S (Irons, Lynch) and unanimous to approve Certificate of Approval, CA06-0014, for the\ndemolition of the remainder of an existing dwelling at 1534 Buena Vista Ave. 5-0-0.\nAyes:\n5; Noes: 0; Absent: 0; Motion carries.\n5.\nCertificate of Approval - CA06-0022 - Applicant: Fargo Farnesi Inc. - 2427 Clement\nAve. The applicant requests a Certificate of Approval to demolish more than thirty percent\n(30%) of a commercial structure, portions of which were constructed prior to 1942, located at the\nabove address for the purpose of expanding the existing business. The site is located at 2427\nClement Ave. within an M-2, General Industrial (Manufacturing) District.\nDoug Garrison, Planner III, presented the staff report. Due to the scope of existing structural\nproblems, it may be necessary to completely demolish and then rebuild the entire building. The\nreconstructed building would incorporate the important design elements and building materials\nof the original structure. The front fa\u00e7ade of the building contains the architectural details that\nare of most interest stylistically and as an historic resource. These details will be preserved or\nrebuilt with similar materials.\nMinutes of August 3, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 7", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-08-03.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2006-08-03", "page": 8, "text": "Mr. Garrison stated that staff along with the applicant, held a neighborhood meeting and\nredesigned the original proposal to meet the concerns of the neighbors.\nStaff is recommending approval of Certificate of Approval CA06-0022, for the demolition of a\ncommercial structure, located at 2427 Clement Ave.\nChair Anderson opened the public hearing.\nDick Rutter, AAPS, is not in favor of this project because of the 100 ft height limit. He would\nlike to see the community try to lower the height limit.\nShawn Smith, architect for the owner, spoke in favor of project.\nIn response to Chair Anderson inquiry regarding the use of the new structure, Mr. Smith stated\nthat currently this property houses a commercial wood cabinet shop.\nKevin Frederick, 1287 Caroline St., is also concerned with the height limit.\nThere were no further speaker slips. Chair Anderson closed the public hearing and opened the\nfloor to Board discussion.\nChair Anderson is in favor of approving this project, with the exception of the height and the\nclapboard siding.\nM/S and unanimous to continue the meeting past 10:00 p.m. 5-0-0.\nBoard Member Iverson spoke in favor of rebuilding the front fa\u00e7ade to match original storefront.\nShe also noted that the proposed height will be too large for the surrounding area.\nBoard Member Irons spoke in favor of staff's recommendation to grant the Certificate of\nApproval for the demolition.\nIn response to Board Member Iron's inquiry regarding whether the height limit and proposed\ndesign of the new building falls under this Board's purview, Ms. Eliason stated that this Board\nshould only be considering the demolition of the existing structure. Ms. Eliason stated that staff\nwould consider their comments during the Design Review process.\nBoard Member Lynch does not think the front fa\u00e7ade should remain. She would like Condition 3\nbe removed from the draft Resolution. She also stated that the proposed project is too big for\nthe surrounding area.\nM/S (Lynch, Miller) to approve Certificate of Approval CA06-0022, for the demolition of a\ncommercial structure, subject with conditions one and two only, and delete condition three from\ndraft Resolution. 4-1-0.\nMinutes of August 3, 2006\nRegular Historical Advisory Board Meeting\nPage 8", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2006-08-03.pdf"}