{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2016-01-11", "page": 1, "text": "APPROVED MINUTES\nREGULAR MEETING OF THE\nCITY OF ALAMEDA PLANNING BOARD\nMONDAY, JANUARY 11, 2016\n1. CONVENE\nBoard Member K\u00f6ster called meeting to order at 7:01pm.\n2. FLAG SALUTE\nBoard Member Sullivan led the flag salute.\n3. ROLL CALL\nPresent: Board Members Burton, Henneberry, K\u00f6ster, Mitchell, Sullivan. Board Member\nZuppan arrived at 7:38pm, during item 7-B. Absent: President Knox White,\n4. AGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSION\nStaff Member Thomas requested to move item 9-C to the before of the regular agenda.\n5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS\n*None*\n6. CONSENT CALENDAR\n*None*\n9-C 2016-2443\n2100 Clement Update - Bicycle Pedestrian Path\nStaff Member Thomas introduced the item. He said the school district is not interested in\nhaving the developer of 2100 Clement build a biking and walking path on the utilities\neasement of the AUSD site at this time.\n7. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n8. 7-A 2016-2433\nPLN15-0440 - 1716 Webster Street - Applicant: United Brothers Enterprise,\nInc. The applicant requests an amendment to a use permit to allow sale of\nbeer and wine at an existing 24-hour gas station and convenience store.\nThe property is located within the C-C, Community Commercial zone within\nthe Webster Street Business District. The project is categorically exempt\nfrom the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA\nGuidelines Section 15270 - Projects Which Are Disapproved.\n1\nApproved Minutes\nJanuary 11, 2016\nPlanning Board Meeting", "path": "PlanningBoard/2016-01-11.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2016-01-11", "page": 2, "text": "Staff Member Tai introduced the item. The staff report and attachments can be found at:\nittps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=2540600&GUID=E046864C-\n3C13-4B01-B50E-BF39BA8C490A&FullText=1\nBoard Member Sullivan asked the property owner how the Alameda Landing Safeway has\naffected his business.\nThe business owner, De Liu, explained that the Safeway gas station has had a large\nimpact on his sales. He also said that many of his customers ask why he does not sell\nalcohol. He said he just wants the same chance to survive as the neighboring convenience\nstores and the gas stations on Park St.\nBoard Member K\u00f6ster opened the public hearing.\nDe Liu said he covered most things in response to Board Member questions. He added\nthat he wants what is fair for gas stations on Park St. to be fair for him and that it is an\ninconvenience for his customers.\nBoard Member K\u00f6ster closed the public hearing.\nBoard Member Henneberry said he remembered when the item came before the board\nthree years ago. He said the issue then was about approving alcohol sales at a gas\nstations. He said he does not see a reason to change it.\nBoard Member Mitchell said he agreed with Board Member Henneberry, that nothing has\nchanged to warrant approving the use permit now.\nBoard Member Burton said he also remembered when the item came up previously and\nthe large turnout of the public to speak on it, including many concerns from the neighbors.\nHe said he agrees with the staff report saying nothing has changed since the previous\ndecision that indicates they should change the decision.\nBoard Member Sullivan said she is concerned with the competition small businesses face\nfrom the big box retailers.\nBoard Member K\u00f6ster said that the staff report and most of the letters received were still\nin opposition to this and that the applicant could appeal to the City Council if he did not\nagree with the Board's decision tonight.\nBoard Member Henneberry made a motion to approve the staff recommendation to deny\nthe use permit application. Board Member Mitchell seconded the motion. The motion\npassed 4-1. (Board Member Sullivan opposed)\n2\nApproved Minutes\nJanuary 11, 2016\nPlanning Board Meeting", "path": "PlanningBoard/2016-01-11.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2016-01-11", "page": 3, "text": "7-B 2016-2424\nPLN15-0468 - 523 South Shore Center - Bank of Marin Workshop -\nApplicant: Lev Weisbach on behalf of Jamestown L.P. A request for a study\nsession to consider the design for a new building to be constructed for the\nBank of Marin at the South Shore Center access road, with associated\npedestrian improvements. This project is covered under the Environmental\nImpact Report for the expansion of the Alameda Towne Centre, certified by\nthe City on August 11, 2008.\nStaff Member Diamond introduced the item. Lev Weisbach, project architect, gave a\npresentation on the proposed project. The staff report and attachment can be found at:\ntps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=2540601&GUID=DF710704\nIDEC-4CDE-92BA-9B44BEFE88AD\nBoard Member Mitchell asked for clarification of the parapet heights on the different design\noptions and adjoining building.\nMr. Weisbach explained the varying heights and the structural concerns of connecting to\nthe wrapped cornice of the TJ Maxx building.\nBoard Member Sullivan asked for clarification about the parapet heights and slope options.\nMr. Weisbach explained the context of the different heights and how the slope fit into the\nneighborhood.\nBoard Member K\u00f6ster asked whether the roof cantilevers over the front elevation.\nMr. Weisbach explained that it does not and that it would require an additional set of\nbeams that would interrupt the voluminous space on the interior that the applicant wished\nto preserve.\n*There were no public speakers*\nBoard Member Sullivan said she liked version C. She said she liked the wood siding, the\ngrey color and how the ATM fit more smoothly.\nBoard Member Burton said he was very happy with the sidewalk connection to Shoreline\nbeing included in the project. He said he liked scheme A, including the green color. He\nsaid he would like to see the ATM with the lower parapet AND pushed back in order to\n3\nApproved Minutes\nJanuary 11, 2016\nPlanning Board Meeting", "path": "PlanningBoard/2016-01-11.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2016-01-11", "page": 4, "text": "combining the cantilever on option B with the green color of option A.\nBoard Member Mitchell said he was not sure if the glass design would fit with the rest of\nthe center. He said he liked option C, and that he preferred the lower roofline over the\nATM.\nBoard Member Zuppan said none of the options fit with the rest of the shopping center.\nShe said option C comes closest to fitting in. She said she is glad to see the sidewalk\ncoming in.\nBoard Member K\u00f6ster said he liked the modern design. He said he preferred the form of\nthe sloping parapets on option B. He said he supported the lower roofline and recessing\nthe ATM back. He said he is fine with either color scheme and prefers the twelve foot\nwindows.\nNo action was taken.\n7-C 2016-2435\nPlanning Board Workshop on Alameda Point Site A Design Review for\nBlock 8 Affordable Housing\nStaff Member Thomas introduced the item. The staff report and plans can be found at:\n  https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=2540602&GUID=B63C693F-\nF704-4886-884D-3682E661641C&FullText=1\nNeil Saxby from Eden Housing gave a presentation about the developer's plans for the\nsite.\nJessica Music, architect from KGTY, gave a presentation on the project's design.\nBoard Member Sullivan asked why the senior building had the Juliet balconies, but the\nfamily building did not.\nMs. Music explained that they wanted to activate the courtyards, but that Appezzato\nParkway needed some activation. She also said that some of Eden's concerns dictated\nthose choices.\nBoard Member Burton asked about the color changes in the metal paneling of the senior\nbuilding. He asked for clarification on materials choices in several areas of the buildings.\n4\nApproved Minutes\nJanuary 11, 2016\nPlanning Board Meeting", "path": "PlanningBoard/2016-01-11.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2016-01-11", "page": 5, "text": "Ms. Music explained the details and philosophy behind the materials choices.\nBoard Member Mitchell asked about the lack of entrances on the ground floor corner unit\nof the senior building. He also pointed out the concern of birds congregating on the long\nhorizontal surfaces.\nMs. Music explained the community room nature of the ground floor space and\nacknowledged the need to account for bird behavior when making their detail choices.\nBoard Member K\u00f6ster asked about public access to the open spaces.\nStaff Member Thomas said there would be public access easements through the mid-\nblock parklet and that there would be no gates.\nBoard Member K\u00f6ster asked whether the ground floor windows would be transparent or\nopaque and about the prevalence of white and grey in the senior building. He noted studies\nregarding the effects of colors on seniors' emotional states.\nMs. Music said the glass would be clear and that this was a \"first pass\" at the colors.\nBoard Member Sullivan asked if there would be sufficient parking for the project. The\napplicant explained their experience with parking needs for affordable projects and how it\ninformed the amount of parking they are choosing to build.\nBoard Member Zuppan asked about the selective use and placement of the awnings.\nMs. Music said the choices were made to emphasize changes in the window patterns and\nmaterials choices. She said they were decorative.\n*There were no public speakers*\nBoard Member Mitchell said he liked the family building. He said he was worried that the\nsenior building design might be too busy.\nBoard Member Zuppan said she liked the parklets and inclusion of the community\ngardens. She said there was too much variation along the Appezzato frontage and maybe\nthere should be more repetition. She said the white corner of the senior building was too\nlarge of a mass and it breaks up the rhythm. She said she felt there were too many layers.\nShe said she liked the idea of bringing more color to the senior building.\nBoard Member K\u00f6ster said he appreciated the efforts to transition the scale of the buildings\nand the juxtaposition of the horizontality and verticality in the design and how that relates\n5\nApproved Minutes\nJanuary 11, 2016\nPlanning Board Meeting", "path": "PlanningBoard/2016-01-11.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2016-01-11", "page": 6, "text": "to the other buildings at Site A. He said he wondered about the entry to the senior building\nand whether extending the canopy out would be necessary for seniors.\nBoard Member Burton said the overall project and site gestures are on a good footing. He\nsaid he liked the ground floor active community spaces facing Appezzato. He said the side\nstreet elevations were very flat and needed more articulation around the corners.\nBoard Member Sullivan said she liked the gardens, parklet and the family building. She\nsaid she wants to see a drop off area right up close to the entrance of the senior building.\nNo action was taken.\n7-D 2016-2437\nPlanning Board Workshop on Alameda Point Site A Design Review for\nWaterfront Park\nStaff Member Thomas introduced the item. The staff report and attachments are available\nat:\nhttps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=2540603&GUID=EDFBA20A-\n2CD1-4023-8EF1-8FCC6203C2A1&FullText=\nJoe Ernst of Alameda Point Partners gave the background on the project. The project\narchitect then gave the presentation on the park's design and programming.\nBoard Member Zuppan asked about water access for small boats and whether that was\nin this phase. The architect said that it would hopefully be included with Building 113 which\nis just outside of this area.\nBoard Member Sullivan asked whether a railing was being considered for the waterfront.\nThe architect said they have studied the issue and are considering different options.\nBoard Member Burton asked about the permeability of the promenade.\nThe architect explained the strategy for the surface and intentions to reuse much of the\nconcrete surface.\nBoard Member K\u00f6ster asked about the potential to add steps down to the water.\nThe architect explained that they might be able to do that around the corner where the\nriprap is, but in this section the fragility of the bulkhead and distance down to the water\nprevented that.\nBoard Member K\u00f6ster opened the public hearing.\n6\nApproved Minutes\nJanuary 11, 2016\nPlanning Board Meeting", "path": "PlanningBoard/2016-01-11.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2016-01-11", "page": 7, "text": "Doug Perry stressed the need to establish access to the water for maritime uses such as\nsmall boats.\nJohn Hansen said the access to the water drew him to Alameda 20 years ago. He is\nconcerned that we are focusing on water access meaning a promenade and not actual\naccess to the water for recreational boating activity.\nRichard Jepsen said residents deserve access to use the water not just look at it. He said\nthe Community Sailing Center needs a better space.\nTom Charron said that Alameda's boatyards have been disappearing and we need to\nprioritize our working waterfront to serve the thousands of boats around the island.\nDan Leininger encouraged the board to focus on helping get people in boats, not just\nwatching boats.\nYvonne Wiegman had a letter read by Kame Richards stating her experience with\nAlameda Community Sailing Center and her desire to keep the docks and boat ramps.\nRyan Schofield said it seems like we are making it harder for average citizens to get on\nthe water instead of just walking around it.\nKame Richards, President of the Alameda Community Sailing Center, explained the value\nof the Seaplane Lagoon. He showed what Newport beach has done for community sailing.\nHe explained the difficulty of the proposed sailing center location due to prevailing wind\ndirection and that they would prefer to launch along the northern wall, further to the west.\nTravis Lund, executive director of the Treasure Island Sailing Center, said that getting kids\nfrom different socioeconomic backgrounds on the water, it does great things. He said it\nmakes good citizens.\nNancy Hird encouraged the board to accelerate the process of getting the water access\nfor the sailing center so we can take advantage now rather than wait years and years.\nJohn Platt said that the plans are not utilizing the water.\nSteve Sorensen echoed the other speakers' comments. He said there are reducing levels\nof access for people to put small craft in the water. He wishes we could develop something\nlike the Tideway center at the Seaplane lagoon.\nDavid Lyman said the board will be remembered favorably for providing genuine access\nto the water.\n7\nApproved Minutes\nJanuary 11, 2016\nPlanning Board Meeting", "path": "PlanningBoard/2016-01-11.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2016-01-11", "page": 8, "text": "Peter Wolfe said the location of the small boat dock on the downwind end of the lagoon\nwas problematic. He said the beach in the plans for later phases looked contrived.\nHelen Sause said we should preserve the opportunity to be next to the water.\nBoard Member K\u00f6ster closed the public hearing.\nBoard Member K\u00f6ster pointed out that the historic ramps are just outside of the phase that\nthey are considering tonight. He said that that there are limited spots in the Bay Area for\npublic docking of larger boats to encourage people to come visit sites like this.\nJoe Ernst said they are committed to developing boat access at the site and they are still\nworking on how best to accomplish that.\nBoard Member Sullivan said she does not understand why we are not prioritizing the\naccess to get on the water for the sailing center.\nBoard Member Mitchell said the design is special. He said he has experience with his\nchildren being water adjacent without railings and it works out okay. He said he likes\nbringing the historical aspects to the taxiway.\nBoard Member Burton said there was a good balance between open spaces and making\nit human scale. He said other waterfront areas manage to succeed without railings and he\nwould go to the mat to prevent a railing.\nBoard Member Zuppan said we need to account for the impact of dogs, discouraging\nskateboarding and thinking about potential fishing uses in later phases. She said she\nthinks the plans have come a long way. She said has been worried about potential ongoing\nmaintenance costs and that the design hopefully minimizes them.\nBoard Member K\u00f6ster said the entire Site A plans are really coming together. He said he\nhoped a floating dock could be a part of phase 0 to get the ball rolling.\nNo action was taken.\n9. MINUTES\n*None*\n10. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS\n9-A 2016-2441\nZoning Administrator and Design Review Recent Actions and Decisions\n8\nApproved Minutes\nJanuary 11, 2016\nPlanning Board Meeting", "path": "PlanningBoard/2016-01-11.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2016-01-11", "page": 9, "text": "Staff Member Thomas said no items were approved since the last meeting.\n9-B 2016-2442\nFuture Public Meetings and Upcoming Community Development\nDepartment Projects\nStaff Member Thomas said Block 10 would be coming before the board at the next\nmeeting.\n9-C 2016-2443\n2100 Clement Update - Bicycle Pedestrian Path\n***moved to beginning of the meeting***\n11. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS\n*None*\n12. BOARD COMMUNICATIONS\n11-A 2016-2439\nReport from the Alameda Point Site A - Ad-Hoc Sub-Committee\n*None*\n11-B 2016-2440\nReport from the Boatworks - Ad-Hoc Sub-Committee\n*None*\n13. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS\n*None*\n14. ADJOURNMENT\nBoard Member K\u00f6ster adjourned the meeting at 10:53pm.\n9\nApproved Minutes\nJanuary 11, 2016\nPlanning Board Meeting", "path": "PlanningBoard/2016-01-11.pdf"}