{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2013-01-15", "page": 1, "text": "APPROVED MEETING MINUTES\nREGULAR MEETING OF THE\nCITY OF ALAMEDA PLANNING BOARD\nMONDAY, JANUARY 15, 2013\n1. CONVENE:\n7:04 p.m.\n2. FLAG SALUTE:\nBoard Member Henneberry\n3. ROLL CALL:\nPresident Zuppan, Vice-President Burton, Board members\nKnox White, Henneberry and K\u00f6ster.\n4. AGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSION:\nItem 7.A moved to after 7.C.\nBoard member Knox White\nBoard member Burton seconded the motion\nMotion carried, 5-0, no abstentions\n5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:\nNone\n6. CONSENT CALENDAR:\n6.A. Annual Review of the City of Alameda Food Truck Program and Recommend\nAdoption of Revised Program Guidelines. The Planning Board will review and make a\ndecision on a staff recommendation to revise the program guidelines.\nPresident Zuppan pulled item from consent.\nEric Fonstein, Development Manager, gave a brief update on the guidelines.\nBoard member Henneberry questioned the experience relating to brick and mortar\nestablishments at SouthShore Center.\nPresident Zuppan asked if permits of use could be adjusted, and would that cost anything.\nAndrew Thomas briefly described the process.\nPresident Zuppan opened for public comment.\nMr. Young Han Yi, owner of Pearls Burgers reported the food truck events have negatively\nimpacted his business. He asked for a review of other food establishments. His loss has\nbeen up a major hit on Saturdays. He asked for them to look at each food truck running\non a generator and waste oil disposal. He has health and safety concerns, and are those\nfood trucks required the County food handling certification. He stated concerns that\nparking in the area is over crowded.\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 1 of 8\nJanuary 15, 2013", "path": "PlanningBoard/2013-01-15.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2013-01-15", "page": 2, "text": "Vice President Burton asked what the percentage of loss on a Saturday.\nMr. Yi stated as much as 33%. They opened in August 2010, and had food truck been in\nthe marketing plan for the Center he would have looked at that further.\nBoard member Henneberry asked if he knew the impact on the other local eateries at\nSouth Shore.\nMr. Yi stated he didn't know the numbers.\nMr. Robb Ratto, Executive Director, Park Street Business Association (PSBA), stated that\nthe PSBA Board of Directors voted not to allow the food trucks in the Park Street retail\narea. PSBA Members feel that the permit fees for food trucks should be in line with the\nfees for brick and mortar eateries, but they are not.\nPresident Zuppan closed the public comment.\nVice President Burton stated his support of the proposed changes. At a future date, he\nwould like to revisit the ordinance. He has concerns about limitations on the location of\nfood trucks and would like to see a study on the impact the trucks have on brick and\nmortar establishments and whether new areas could be added with no adverse impact\ncurrent vendors.\nBoard Member K\u00f6ster agreed with Vice President Burton.\nBoard Member Knox White would like to talk more about the generators, and is in support\nof bringing the ordinance back for further discussion.\nPresident Zuppan stated she is supportive of the changes to the guidelines.\nBoard member Knox White motioned to approve.\nBoard member Henneberry seconded the motion.\nMotion carried, 5-0; no abstentions\n7. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS:\n7.B. Use Permit and Design Review - PLN12-0230 - 1928 High Street - European Auto\nRepair. Use Permit and Design Review approval to add a smog test facility to the existing\nbusiness. Exterior changes consist of removing one window facing Fernside Blvd and\nreplacing it with a garage door. The service bay is not deep enough to completely enclose\nthe automobiles being serviced; therefore a portion of the cars will remain outside the\nbuilding. Pursuant to Alameda Municipal Code (AMC) $30-4.8 (c)(6), a Use Permit is\nrequired for uses not conducted within an enclosed building.\nPlanning Services Manager, Andrew Thomas presented an overview of the Use Permit.\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 2 of 8\nJanuary 15, 2013", "path": "PlanningBoard/2013-01-15.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2013-01-15", "page": 3, "text": "Board member K\u00f6ster asked if there will be a design review tonight. He also questioned\nthe curb cut going directly into the garage and smog only versus a smog station.\nMr. Thomas replied that the design can come back to the Board at a later date. Yes there\nis a curb cut directly to garage, and the applicant can speak on the smog servicing\nquestion.\nOwner/Applicant Albert Boehler, stated the state laws have changed as of January 2013\nand the reason he submitted his application is that there are no longer a test only facilities.\nThere is a star certification required by the state, and he is confident his shop can meet\nthat standard.\nBoard member Henneberry asked whether the vehicles being serviced would be half way\nout of the bay what would the noise ramifications be, and if noise is part of the state\ncertification.\nMr. Thomas reported they have looked at other facilities, and the noise readings have met\nthe ordinance levels, and noise is not part of the state certification.\nPresident Zuppan opened public comment.\nMr. Boehler wanted to clarify that cars built in the year 2000 or newer would have a simpler\ntest then older models. New cars don't need the car to be running for a long period of\ntime to test.\nTerry Walker, resident, stated that the dynamometer makes a loud noise, the wheels roll\nfast and the engine revs up also making loud noise. He expressed concern on signage,\nand the number of cars on Fernside Boulevard.\nDaryl Dorn, stated that he lives next door to the service station and is concerned about the\nnoise and pollution. He is concerned about the impact to the elderly community across\nthe street, along with the High Street business corner.\nJon Spangler, stated that he doesn't live close to the area in question but has been a\nlongtime customer of Engine Works in a similar neighborhood. He suggested a one-year\nreview for the use permit and he supports the application.\nPresident Zuppan closed public comment period.\nBoard member Henneberry asked the noise pollution issues.\nMr. Thomas stated that the use permit could be reviewed and compliance with noise\nstandards a condition of the permit.\nBoard member Henneberry asked if the owner operates on Saturdays.\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 3 of 8\nJanuary 15, 2013", "path": "PlanningBoard/2013-01-15.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2013-01-15", "page": 4, "text": "Mr. Boehler stated they do not typically operate on Saturdays.\nMr. Thomas stated that the Board could limit the use to Monday through Friday.\nPresident Zuppan inquired as to the testing and which car is being checked for noise\nordinance when a complaint comes in.\nMr. Thomas stated it is the machine and not specific to which car is being tested at the\ntime of complaint. He isn't sure if the car or the machine is louder.\nBoard member Knox White asked if the car is hanging out of the bay, how is the tailpipe\nbeing filtered.\nMr. Boehler replied that the testing is the probe inside the exhaust pipe and adding a\nventilation system at the test location would cause a negative reading.\nBoard member Knox White stated the rolling up door would not be improving this site. This\nis a commercial property and would like to review this in six months. There is a design\nreview attached but he doesn't feel this is enough to approve the design right now.\nPresident Zuppan asked for more staff input on discussion with applicant.\nBoard member K\u00f6ster stated that when the site comes back for Design Review approval\nthere will need to be substantial improvements.\nMr. Thomas summarized the Board's options on this item.\nVice President Burton motioned to approve the Use Permit resolution but not the Design\nReview with edits to the findings and additions of landscape, parking and a signage plan in\nthe design review permit and a six-month review.\nBoard member Knox White seconded Approved 5-0.\n7.C. Historic Preservation Workshop. The Planning Board will hold a public workshop to\ndiscuss the ongoing effort to revise and amend the Historic Preservation Ordinance. No\nfinal actions will be taken by the Planning Board on this item.\nPlanning Services Manager, Andrew Thomas provided the Board an update on the\nordinance.\nPresident Zuppan opened public comment period.\nRobb Ratto, Executive Director of PSBA, stated he would like the ordinance to include a\ncommercial building component. He stated all business districts agree.\nChristopher Buckley, AAPS, added some more information regarding the historic\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 4 of 8\nJanuary 15, 2013", "path": "PlanningBoard/2013-01-15.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2013-01-15", "page": 5, "text": "ordinance and how it relates to the historic study list.\nPresident Zuppan closed the public comment period.\nVice President Burton commented on pages 5 and 6, regarding definitions.\nMr. Thomas reported that definitions were an ongoing item for review.\nBoard member K\u00f6ster asked if the historic trigger year of a building will change in the\nfuture.\nMr. Thomas stated it could change to anything older than 50 years, but possibly getting rid\nof the language and define the design review system.\nBoard member K\u00f6ster asked about the Commercial component mentioned by Mr. Ratto.\nMr. Thomas reported the process currently, and that the process can change eliminating\nthe duplication with other Boards.\nBoard member Henneberry commended staff on the direction they are moving.\nBoard member Knox White commented that the Purpose of the ordinance should be\nclearer and how will the ordinance do what it is saying. He talked about the word,\n\"enhance\" and its definition, but asked if the Purpose could be taken to Council before\nmoving forward with the ordinance. He suggested a joint meeting with HAB soon.\nPresident Zuppan agreed with member Knox White regarding the Purpose. She stated the\nscope should be more in line with the Purpose. It would be valuable to have a secondary\nprocess. She wanted to emphasize the commercial component for residents in the\nbusiness districts, and specifically Alameda Point.\n7.A. Draft Zoning Ordinance Amendments, Design Review Manual Amendments, related\nGeneral Plan Amendment Final EIR for the North Park Street Planning Area and\nAssociated Zoning Ordinance and General Plan Amendments. The Planning Board will\nreview and make a decision on a staff recommendation to certify the Final EIR, approve\nthe revised zoning, approve amendments to the Design Review Manual, and approve an\nassociated General Plan Amendment for an area located between Oak Street, the\nOakland Estuary, Tilden Way, and Lincoln Avenue. Moved to end of meeting.\nBoard member K\u00f6ster recused himself from the meeting.\nPlanning Services Manager, Andrew Thomas provided a presentation on the item.\nBoard member Henneberry asked for clarification on the height limits. He asked what the\nheight is of a specific building on Clement. He asked staff to brief him on the yellow\nhouse incident on Buena Vista. He further asked for clarification on the retail matrix.\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 5 of 8\nJanuary 15, 2013", "path": "PlanningBoard/2013-01-15.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2013-01-15", "page": 6, "text": "Mr. Thomas provided the brief clarification, along with explaining the alcohol definitions.\nBoard member Knox White further asked about the grocery and alcohol definition.\nBoard member Henneberry stated to make the definition consistent for alcohol.\nPresident Zuppan opened the meeting for public comment, and stated there are 11\nspeakers.\nVice President Burton motioned to limit speakers time from 5 minutes to 3 minutes.\nBoard member Henneberry seconded the motion.\nMotion carried, 4-0-1.\nDavid Baker, resident, stated his main concern was with the height limit going from three to\nfive-stories and in the past 12 years there has only been one request. Why review this\ndebate again. There is a wonderful view because power lines are underground.\nPresident Zuppan clarified the current height limit is 100', and ten stories.\nPatsy Paul, stated her concerns are with the proposed new height limit, along with parking\nlots and parking garages. She stated further concerns with proposed mixed-use zones.\nShe asked for more green building.\nRobb Ratto, PSBA, stated that he supports the staff recommendations and thanked the\nsubcommittee. He proposed looking at further options per specific buildings. He provided a\nreview of the yellow house property and process.\nChristopher Buckley, Alameda Architectural Preservation Society (AAPS), stated he would\nlike to see this go to City Council as soon as possible. He approves of the changes and\nthanked staff, the subcommittee and the Board for the work done. He commented on the\nheight limit and is concerned with the scale proposed. He commented on office space and\nmixed use zones.\nCorinne Lambden, expressed concerns about the height limit being too high. The gateway\nshouldn't swallow the street. She commented that the yellow house had a reuse / recycle\ncondition attached that didn't happen and the owner wasn't held accountable.\nHelen Sause, Housing Opportunities Make Economic Sense (HOMES), absent but\nprovided written comments.\nJon Spangler, resident, provided a briefing on his involvement with development projects.\nHe supports AAPS comments. He feels this project isn't ripe yet. He expressed concerns\nwith creating non-friendly walk and bike tunnel effected areas when buildings are too tall,\nand each new development needs open space areas. The 40' limit should be maximum,\nasked there be more consideration before approving this item.\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 6 of 8\nJanuary 15, 2013", "path": "PlanningBoard/2013-01-15.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2013-01-15", "page": 7, "text": "President Zuppan called for motion to extend the meeting.\nBoard member Knox White motioned to go until midnight.\nVice President Burton seconded the motion.\nMotion carried, 4-0-1; Koster recused\nLaura DiDonato, resident, provided written comments and asked for this item to reconsider\nthe property that is the former Island High School on Eagle Avenue. The Alameda Unified\nSchool District (AUSD) Board is meeting to talk about this specific property.\nMelanie Wartenberg, resident, previously provided written comment along with 60\nsignatures from neighbors. She asked that more green space and open space be\nconsidered to balance the neighborhood. She mentioned that she is a member of Project\nLeaf.\nKaren Bey, resident, expressed thanks to the Board and staff. She suggested the purpose\nstatement to include \"promote historic tourism', and to also include it in the vision\nstatement.\nShe asked the Board to consider the West End's Neptune Beach District. She asked if\nthere were funds for park streetscape on this project.\nPresident Zuppan closed the public comment period.\nMr. Thomas reported there are no funds for public streetscape, or park space. There is no\nscenario where the city purchases the property on Eagle Avenue. The only comment he\nhas heard is the Housing Authority might have the funds to purchase the site. He reiterated\nthat it is AUSD's property.\nBoard Member Henneberry mentioned the railroad property along Tilden Way and\nquestioned whether the City can acquire it as imminent domain.\nMr. Thomas stated that imminent domain properties still have to be purchased.\nBoard member Knox White had one comment regarding parking stating that reciprocal\nparking should be a default.\nPresident Zuppan asked for clarification on reciprocal parking.\nBoard Member Henneberry suggested that a change on the retail language to be uniform\nand be incorporated city-wide.\nVice President Burton pointed out a typo, and asked about clarification on industrial\nlighting, and asked for clarification of electrical language. He expressed thanks to staff and\nmembers, also to the community members for helping with the process. He stated that\nwithout the higher buildings there would be no mixed-use development.\nPresident Zuppan expressed appreciation to all members of the community for staying\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 7 of 8\nJanuary 15, 2013", "path": "PlanningBoard/2013-01-15.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2013-01-15", "page": 8, "text": "involved with the long process. She stated support of the changes from other Board\nmembers.\nBoard member Knox White motioned to approve with requested changes.\nBoard member Henneberry seconded the motion.\nMotion carried, 4-0-1; Koster recused.\n8. MINUTES\nMinutes from the Regular meeting of September 10, 2012 - No quorum\nMinutes from the Regular meeting of December 10, 2012 (Pending)\n9. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS\n9.A. Future Agendas\n10. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None\n11. BOARD COMMUNICATIONS - None\n12. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None\n13. ADJOURNMENT- - 11:32 p.m.\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 8 of 8\nJanuary 15, 2013", "path": "PlanningBoard/2013-01-15.pdf"}