{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2014-06-23", "page": 1, "text": "APPROVED MEETING MINUTES\nREGULAR MEETING OF THE\nCITY OF ALAMEDA PLANNING BOARD\nMONDAY, JUNE 23, 2014\n1. CONVENE:\n7:02 p.m.\n2. FLAG SALUTE:\nBoard Member Zuppan\n3. ROLL CALL:\nPresident Burton, Vice President Henneberry, Board members\nAlvarez-Morroni, and Zuppan. Absent: Knox White, K\u00f6ster,\nand Tang.\n4. AGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSION: None\n5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Speakers:\n6. CONSENT CALENDAR: None\n7. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS:\n7.A. Hold a Public Hearing and Recommend that the City Council Approve the\nJean Sweeney Park Master Plan and Mitigated Negative Declaration\nMs. Amy Wooldridge, Director of Alameda Recreation and Park Department provided a\npresentation on the Jean Sweeney Open Space Park Master Plan.\nBoard member Zuppan asked about the maintenance costs and would that include capitol\nreplacement costs.\nWooldridge stated it would not cover replacement cost.\nOpen public comment period.\nMr. Jim Sweeney, commented on being elated this project is moving forward so quickly.\nHe reported on the community process and thanked Mr. K\u00f6ster for his time and talent. He\nexpressed positive feelings from the informal vetting process. He asked for approval of the\nplan.\nMs. Dorothy Freeman, reported on the process of the design, and encouraged the\napproval of the plan. She stated Jean would be proud of this design.\nMr. Joseph Woodard, stated that the Board has the power to approve this plan and park\nand join the hundreds of people who have already endorsed and approved this plan.\nMr. Bill Delaney, Chair of the Recreation Commission, reported the Commission has been\nApproved Regular Meeting Minutes\nPage 1 of 9\nJune 23, 2014", "path": "PlanningBoard/2014-06-23.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2014-06-23", "page": 2, "text": "working on this park plan for two years. The Commission have been involved in all of the\ncommunity input processes. He stated the design can provide something for everyone in\nthe community from active use, to passive use.\nMr. Damian Mason, Alameda Backyard Growers, spoke on adding more details to the plan\nand design. One of those ideas was to reuse the cattails, but then to clean the\ncontamination of oil on the site. He provided sketches of the community garden plots, tool\nstorage, and composting.\nMs. Ester Burlingame, lives next to the park and is supportive of the design plan. She\nquestioned the 24' of path and the need for it being that wide. She is concerned the path\nmay become a road in the future.\nMr. Mike O'Hara, Tim Lewis Communities, reported being in support of the park and the\nplan. The company will contribute $2 million to the project. He wanted to clarify the\ncompany's role in the park is strictly funding.\nMs. Amanda Soskin, resident stated she is hopeful this plan and park is approved. She is\nconcerned with parking at the park, and not on the streets. She reiterated Ms.\nWooldridge's comments on safety and maintenance.\nMr. Doug deHaan, spoke in favor of moving the plan forward and approve it. He wanted\nto recognize the champions of the committee who have worked tirelessly. He\ncommended Ms. Wooldridge for her role.\nClosed public comment.\nBoard Member Alvarez-Morroni thanked the public and Mr. Sweeney and stated this to be\na wonderful tribute to his wife. She asked Ms. Wooldridge about the lighting of the park.\nMs. Wooldridge reported there are two aspects for lighting, the cross Alameda trail will be\nlit and the pathway will have ground lighting. There is a Park Monitor program in place\nthat will help. The large path will be for patrol vehicle use.\nBoard member Zuppan stated being excited to see this back, and remembers Jean\nSweeney being before this Board. She hopes there will be some kind of tribute to her.\nMs. Wooldridge reported there will be educational markers throughout the park.\nBoard member Zuppan is pleased but encouraged the City to fully look at the long term\ncosts for maintenance costs. She thanked all who volunteered.\nVice President Henneberry is pleased to see the BMX path gone from the plan. He\nsupports approval.\nPresident Burton supports the great connections to the adjacent neighborhoods on the\nApproved Regular Meeting Minutes\nPage 2 of 9\nJune 23, 2014", "path": "PlanningBoard/2014-06-23.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2014-06-23", "page": 3, "text": "streets on the south side, but on Chapin there is no connection.\nMs. Wooldridge stated there is a parking lot owed by Housing Authority who didn't want\naccess to the park.\nPresident Burton likes the plan, and is excited about the outdoor classroom. He thanked\neveryone involved, along with board member K\u00f6ster who donated his time.\nBoard member Zuppan motioned to approve the Master Park Plan.\nBoard member Alvarez-Morroni seconded.\nMotioned carried, 4-0\n7.B. Public Workshop to Discuss a Draft Master Plan and Development Plan\n(PLN14-0059) for the Rehabilitation, Reuse, and Redevelopment of the Former Del Monte\nWarehouse Site Located at 1501 Buena Vista Avenue\nMr. Andrew Thomas, City Planner, provided a presentation and update on the history of\nthe development plan, including the transportation and parking plans.\nMr. Mike O'Hara, Tim Lewis Communities, presented the Board with more details, and\ncommended staff for working with them. He introduced the rest of his team.\nMr. William Dunkerson, BAR, architects, made a presentation on the materials.\nBoard member Zuppan asked about the report comparing the Master Plan to the current\nDevelopment Plan.\nMr. Thomas stated the draft Master Plan is older than the staff report. There are three\ndocuments for this project. He stated the Development Agreement is the final agreement\nbetween the City and developer.\nBoard member Alvarez-Morroni asked about Universal Design and how does Measure A\neffect this plan.\nMr. Thomas referred to state law, single family homes, and zoning. In 2012 the city\ndesignated 1% of land to be multi-family and this is one of those sites.\nMr. Dunkerson stated Universal Design is an overall design on the property, There is\na\nmodel for aging in place in the ground floor units.\nPresident Burton asked about the live/work design being adaptable.\nMr. Dunkerson stated the first floor is an accessible route throughout the property. The\nlive/work units have stairs, but there is a possibility for making them accessible.\nBoard member Alvarez-Morroni questioned why the building looks so different and asked\nApproved Regular Meeting Minutes\nPage 3 of 9\nJune 23, 2014", "path": "PlanningBoard/2014-06-23.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2014-06-23", "page": 4, "text": "staff to talk about the Secretary of Interior Standards.\nMr. Thomas explained the design and asked the public to view the building as to what is\nhistoric and what is an addition. This site design has the addition much more stated as\nnew. This usually happens at the design review approval process.\nVice President Henneberry asked if Windriver has been approached for parking.\nMr, Thomas stated there have been discussions with Windriver and they are ongoing.\nPresident Burton asked about the retail space uses and parking ratios for retail, and how\nwas the number decided. He asked about the unbundling of spaces.\nMr. Thomas stated the need will probably be 45 spaces for retail, but there are further\ndiscussions to overall parking. Adjustments can be made. He stated there are 326\nspaces within the footprint.\nMr. O'Hara clarified the 2:1 ratios were as the site sits currently.\nPresident Burton asked about the site using Density Bonus and Multi-Family Overlay and\nhow does that affect affordable unit count, being 414 total.\nMr. Thomas stated the site is zoned at 30 units per acre. He walked through the\ncalculations of arriving at the affordable number. There will be 55 affordable units.\nPresident Burton asked about the development of pads B and C.\nMr. O'Hara stated there are some agencies they are working with to partner for the\naffordable units.\nVice President Henneberry motioned to limit speakers to three minutes.\nBoard member Alvarez-Morroni seconded.\nMotioned carried, 4-0\nOpen to public comment.\nMr. Tom Mills, resident ask if his house at the corner of Bay and Eagle has been rezoned.\nHe is against a rezoning and opposed to moving trucks with commerce. He was denied\nyears ago to add a unit under his home because of no parking.\nMr. Nick Cabral, resident, stateed he remembers being before the board many years ago\nand he is completely for this project. Its time to move forward.\nMr. Rion Cassidy, resident, stated he has received no official notification on the project.\nHe has read about it in the newspaper, or been informed by neighbors. He would like\nresidents to be involved in parking discussions. He asked if the units will be leased or\nApproved Regular Meeting Minutes\nPage 4 of 9\nJune 23, 2014", "path": "PlanningBoard/2014-06-23.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2014-06-23", "page": 5, "text": "purchased.\nMs. Dana'l Lamb, resident, agrees with the parking concerns, but is happy to see the\ndevelopment. She questioned why a low height parking structure can't be built close by.\nShe expressed concerns with the demographics.\nMs. Kim Baranek, resident, stated being concerned with the asbestos and carcinogens\nairborne during construction as she has respiratory issues. She expressed concerns with\ntraffic impacting the entire island.\nMr. Serge Wilson, resident, commented on this project impacting the entire island, his\nchildren will be impacted with long term decisions. His impression is a lot of the decisions\nare being handled in the shadows. Parking and other standards are in place for a reason,\nand traffic and parking mitigations aren't based on a good study. He asked them to slow\nthe project down a little and plan a bit more.\nMs. Debra Arbuckle, resident, provided a petition with 200 signatures opposing the parking\nplans. She commented on the affordable housing being planned in the corner of the\nproject. Adding extra traffic and parking not only with this project, but with the Encinal\nTerminal project also. A shuttle bus on Buena Vista isn't a good idea.\nMr. Mark Little, resident, agrees this is a remarkable structure. He encouraged more\nplanning for walking mobilityand stated the Windriver shuttle is already full during commute\ntimes. He wants plans completed before the development.\nMs. Alison Greene, PLAN! Alameda, stated she is disappointed with time limit, and\ndispelled the myth that the project won't bring more cars and traffic to the area. The\ntransportation plan needs to look at safety, egress and emergency access.\nMs. Heather Little, resident, stated she bought her home nine years ago and still excited\nabout development of the project. She wants to see a clear plan for transportation before\nbuild out. She thanked the board for hearing public comments before making a decision.\nMr. Sam Greason, Orinda, CA, spoke on being involved in some of the northern waterfront\nredevelopment area and he commended staff on development in the area stating that the\narea from Boatworks to ShipWays is a blighted waterfront, and now there will be an\nopportunity for waterfront living.\nMr. Brock deLappe, resident, asked about the requirements for alternative modes of\ntransportation and asked about light rail. He asked about a emergency plan if the estuary\ntubes become disabled.\nMr. Thomas stated light rail should be removed from the General Plans. Light rail cannot\ncross over the Pacific Rail in Oakland. That means a bridge over or tunnel under and that\nisn't feasible on the Oakland side. He stated the estuary emergency plans have been in\nthe works for years.\nApproved Regular Meeting Minutes\nPage 5 of 9\nJune 23, 2014", "path": "PlanningBoard/2014-06-23.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2014-06-23", "page": 6, "text": "Mr. Bill Smith, resident, reported being excited for the project. He is concerned about the\ntraffic issues, and really wants this project to succeed. There isn't enough transit options\nnow and this shouldn't be ignored.\nMr. Lester Cabral, resident, he commented on the transportation issues and that there isn't\nanything now. The bus line went away years ago. The people who live in the area don't\nwant to be inconvenienced by parking and traffic issues.\nMs. Denise Cicuto, resident, commented there were people double parked on Benton\nduring the weekends for Litltejohn Park. She rents and could leave if traffic gets worse,\nbut doesn't want to. There are no buses now to the ferry terminal. The transportation\nsolutions seem to be around commuters only, but there needs to be transportation.\nMr. Frank Thorsberg, resident, stated he cannot build parking on his property and is more\ndependent on street parking, which is impacted during the weekend. There needs to be\nmore planning needed for parking, and transit issues can be dealt with as they arise.\nMr. Robert Byrne, resident, agrees with everyone on both sides. He stated all the same\narguments have been heard before. He stated the trucks are not staying on the truck\nroute, and the problems have gotten worse. He is in favor of the project and hopes issues\nwith the truck route can be in place for enforcement and directing the trucks.\nMr. Ken Gourdine, resident, stated being excited about the project and transportation plan.\nHe thinks there could be more car sharing ideas and the water taxi plan is great. He likes\nthe neighborhood retail focus. He commented on the double rows of trees along Buena\nVista and suggested benches for walkers.\nMs. Jill Ingram, resident, stated she would like to see the project move forward but wants it\ndone right. She asked if less housing units was possible, and can the look be more\nhistoric. She asked when the traffic study was completed in 2009 did it include a school\ndays and times. Complained that the view from her windows will be impacted by the\nbuilding.\nMr. Doug deHaan, resident, spoke on the traffic issues and many ideas had come off the\ntable. The water taxi has failed in the past. Bus ridership has decreased over the past\nyears. He reported parking will fill up no matter how much there is. He is worried about sea\nlevel rise on the island. He asked them to look closely at the overlay and affordable unit\ndetails.\nMr. Jay Ingram, resident, asked that more thought be put into the design and building and\nperhaps look at the entire Northern Waterfront. The design is sub-par compared with\nPark Street developments. He compared 1,000 units at Northern Waterfront with 1,400 at\nAlameda Point. Littlejohn Park is tired and old. Parking should be looked at more\nclosely.\nApproved Regular Meeting Minutes\nPage 6 of 9\nJune 23, 2014", "path": "PlanningBoard/2014-06-23.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2014-06-23", "page": 7, "text": "Mr. Nate Martin, resident, stated being a believer in eco friendly cars, and seeing the\ntransit plan but there is a hole from east bay to south bay. Employee shuttles cannot be\ncounted on, and a ferry to Redwood City would be a great alternative to being in a car.\nCar Share is fantastic, but three spots isn't realistic. Water taxis should run late and often.\nThere is no transit within the island. He asked for solar on building along with other eco\nfriendly options.\nMs. Karen Bey, resident, spoke on being excited about the project and the vision for the\nNorthern Waterfront. Stating it will be the beginning of the waterfront redevelopment. She\nis excited about the transit plan stating the ferries have reached capacity. She hopes\nthis moves forward.\nMs. Carol Gottstein, resident, stated she is not excited about the project. She thinks there\nshould be more attention to the details. She asked about the design of each parking spot\nstating more handicap parking should be added.\nMr. Jim Smallman, resident, stated the simple answer would be to slice the fourth floor off.\nHe commented on the concentration of the development makes transit solutions a must\nand when will those be implemented. The rezoning makes it possible to hold on to\nMeasure A on the rest of the island.\nMs. Kay Penstone, resident, stated the historic value of the Victorian homes on the island.\nThis project should be nice and attractive.\nMr. Adam Gillitt, resident, stated he is excited about the vision but disappointed on the\nnotification for the meeting. He stated the photos of the traffic patterns and parking in the\narea aren't realistic. There needs to be more attention to detail made. Transit should be\nin place before building. He is concerned about the extension of Clement and how long\nwill it take to remediate the Pennzoil site. There needs to be more active space even\nthough Jean Sweeney will be passive. What if all the projections are wrong and gridlock\nis a real problem.\nClosed to public comment.\nBoard member Alvarez-Morroni thanked the speakers stating their comments are being\ntaken to heart. She understands the concerns of transit and parking, but there are\nfunding issues and challenges with what to do first.\nBoard member Zuppan asked staff the timing of the transportation and planning by the\ntime it reaches the 175th unit.\nMr. Thomas reported on the basics for funding transit needs. Other agencies are not\nwilling to fund transit needs for us, and the City of Alameda doesn't have the funding\neither. That is why we are planning for development that requires annual fees for transit\nper unit. He explained the day-one service concept. Waterfront transportation has been\nlooked at for the past 12 years. He stated AC Transit won't commit until all units are built.\nApproved Regular Meeting Minutes\nPage 7 of 9\nJune 23, 2014", "path": "PlanningBoard/2014-06-23.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2014-06-23", "page": 8, "text": "Board member Zuppan commented on parking in the neighborhood, but would appreciate\nweb links to the studies. She is excited to see a master transportation plan, but would like\nto see the ability for all residents to use the services. She agreed there are huge gaps in\nconnecting the east bay to south bay.\nMr. Thomas stated ideally a walk to Clement will allow one to catch a bus over to BART,\nand back, with this service being available frequently. Clement needs to be built with this\nproject.\nBoard member Zuppan stated that for the residents to pay for all the transit costs isn't fair.\nShe likes the idea of increasing the car share option. She asked about sidewalk widths,\nand suggested they are increased to 7', and likes the benches along Clement. She wants\nbike parking to be looked at, and interior open space needs more thought. She\ncommented on sea level rise with the subterranean parking, and would like to see the\nbarrier. Handicap spaces cannot all be compact, and shared parking should be detailed.\nStorm water runoff is being exempt and she wants to know why, are they looking at\ncapturing runoff, is there an offset from the old building for the silver certification.\nRequested for glass on building have detail to protect birds. Make it look like it belongs' is\na valid comment. She thanked everyone for the comments, hard work, and support.\nBoard member Zuppan motioned to continue meeting past 11:00 p.m.\nVice President Henneberry seconded.\nMotioned carried, 3-1 (Alvarez-Morron opposed)\nVice President Henneberry asked for clarification on the parking sticker program.\nMr. Thomas explained if there is a gap in the cost to administer the program, the\nneighborhood would have to pay for it. The majority of the public comment has been\nnegative and the idea was dropped.\nVice President Henneberry stated he has lived here many years and this building has been\nempty a long time and he hopes this project will move forward. There are some details\nthat need to be hammered out, but this project can work.\nPresident Burton commented on the car share idea and would like the number increased,\nbut wants an analysis. Electric charging stations are a good idea. He wants to see a good\neven distribution of the affordable units, and see those specified on the drawings. He\ncommented on the entrance roads being 12', and would like those narrowed. On the\nmaster plan there is a phasing approval for permitting, typo. He agreed the need for\nhandicap parking, but seeing the plans larger could work. He like the paseos, but there\nare no east and west courts. He needs to see the commercial frontage details and\nlandscaping details for the property between Windriver and Clement.\nMr. Thomas stated waterfront side landscaping will be paid for by the project, along with\nthe street work.\nApproved Regular Meeting Minutes\nPage 8 of 9\nJune 23, 2014", "path": "PlanningBoard/2014-06-23.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2014-06-23", "page": 9, "text": "President Burton wants to see more studies on the new building side with 3-D views, and\nhow it is modeled with the older side. There is a need to see the documentation on the\ntransportation / parking details and plans, along with getting those documents out to the\ncommunity. Thanks to staff and the developer, along with the public it is valuable to hear\ncomments.\nMr. Thomas stated they will regroup, and the next public meeting will be sent out to the\n300' of the project (normally) and then the community people can help with getting the\nword out further.\n8. MINUTES: None\n9. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS:\n9.A. Future Agendas - Mr. Thomas reported on upcoming agenda items.\n9.B. Staff Communications - Zoning Administrator and Design Review Recent\nActions and Decisions. Mr. Thomas reported there have been thousands of people at the\ncounter.\n9.C. Phase Zero of the Town Center and Waterfront Precise Plan - Mr. Thomas\nstated there has been a one page handout from Ms. Nanette Mocanu.\n10. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None\n11. BOARD COMMUNICATIONS:\nVice President Henneberry stated that he did not appreciate the Planning Board being\ncompared to Nazi's by a speaker.\n11.A. Report from Alameda Point Town Center Ad-Hoc Sub-Committee - The\nplan is going to City Council on July 1, 2014.\n12. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None:\n13. ADJOURNMENT: President Burton adjourned at 11:10 p.m.\nApproved Regular Meeting Minutes\nPage 9 of 9\nJune 23, 2014", "path": "PlanningBoard/2014-06-23.pdf"}