{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2016-06-22", "page": 1, "text": "APPROVED MINUTES\nSPECIAL MEETING OF THE\nCITY OF ALAMEDA PLANNING BOARD\nWEDNESDAY, JUNE 22, 2016\n1. CONVENE\nPresident Knox White called the meeting to order at 7:01pm\n2. FLAG SALUTE\nBoard Member Zuppan led the flag salute.\n3. ROLL CALL\nPresent: President Knox White, Board Members Henneberry, K\u00f6ster, Sullivan, Zuppan.\nBoard Member Mitchell arrived at 7:05pm. Absent: Board Member Burton.\n4. AGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSION\nPresident Knox White moved Staff Communications to the beginning of the meeting.\n5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS\nGretchen Lipow asked why there appeared to be no Community Facilities District in the\nEncinal Terminals plan to pay for public safety.\n6. CONSENT CALENDAR\n*None*\n***9. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS\n9-A 2016-3038\nAppointment of a Planning Board member to sit on Ad Hoc Committee for\nPreparation of the Economic Development Strategic Plan\nStaff Member Fonstein introduced the item and gave an update on the formation of the\nnew committee.\nBoard Member Zuppan volunteered and was appointed to the Ad Hoc Committee.\n7. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n7-A 2016-3033\nPLN16-0165 - Westmont of Harbor Bay Assisted Living. Applicant: Chris\nGarwood for Pacific Union Land Investors LLC. Public hearing to consider\na\nrevision to the previously approved Final Development Plan PLN15-0092\n(Esplanade site) to allow construction of an approximately 105,500-square-\nfoot, two-story senior assisted living facility on the remainder of the\nundeveloped portion of the property at 2900 Harbor Bay Parkway. The site\nis located within a CM-PD Commercial Manufacturing Planned\nDevelopment Zoning District in the Harbor Bay Business Park. Pursuant to\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nJune 22, 2016\nPage 1 of 9", "path": "PlanningBoard/2016-06-22.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2016-06-22", "page": 2, "text": "CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, there have been no significant changes\nin circumstances that require revisions to the previously certified\nEnvironmental Impact Report. The proposed project is not likely to cause\nsubstantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure\nendangered, rare, or threatened fish or wildlife or their habitat.\nStaff Member Thomas introduced the item. The staff report and attachments can be found\nat:\nhttps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=2751057&GUID=767B8261-\n-279-47BB-AOC3-8B37255A44FD&FullText=1\nMs. Bishop, biologist with Monk & Associates, gave a report on her wildlife survey.\nChris Garwood, project applicant, spoke about why they think the site is a good spot for\nseniors.\nMichael O'Rourke, project applicant, explained how the operation would work and the\ngrowing need for this type of facility.\nBoard Member Zuppan asked if a one day wildlife survey was adequate.\nMs. Bishop explained the process she used to survey the site from a distance prior to a\nthorough examination of the site.\nBoard Member Sullivan asked if May 6th was the right time to look for nesting birds.\nMs. Bishop said it was and that nesting season begins in February.\nBoard Member Mitchell asked for more information on the level of care for the residents\nand demands on emergency services.\nThe applicant explained that they are an assisted living facility, but do not provide more\nacute levels of care such as feeding tubes, open wounds, etc. He said EMS is called\nperiodically but not often.\nBoard Member Henneberry asked if the zoning and licensing requirements are the same\nas for Cardinal Point.\nStaff Member Thomas said they were, but Cardinal Point was in a manufacturing area and\nthis area allows more uses in the commercial area.\nBoard Member K\u00f6ster confirmed that the units do not have kitchens.\nPresident Knox White opened the public hearing.\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nJune 22, 2016\nPage 2 of 9", "path": "PlanningBoard/2016-06-22.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2016-06-22", "page": 3, "text": "Audrey Lord-Hausman expressed support for the project and said there is a dire need for\nthis type of project.\nPatricia Reilly said she supports the project. She said we do not have a lot of assisted\nliving facilities and she hopes not to leave the island when she has to move into an\nassisted living facility.\nCarol Gottstein said the site is very far from available hospitals. She said she does not\nfeel this type of facility meets the zoning for the site.\nRon Kamangar said the location is directly under the flight path for the airport and not\nsuitable for this type of facility. He said burrowing owls use the site but the construction\nnext door was the reason she did not find anything.\nPatricia Gannon said the building is too big. She said the location is not appropriate for\nassisted living.\nGeorge Humphries said he is opposed to the project as envisioned. He said he is\nconcerned with view corridors and wildlife habitat.\nTim Neilson said he is concerned about the ferry. He said the ferry needs the land adjacent\nto the ferry parking lot to continue to thrive. He suggested a downsized facility with parking\nfor the ferry as a compromise.\nBob Osterman said Alameda has an abundance of open space and parkland. He said he\nsupports the project and that it would generate tax revenue for the city.\nReyla Graber said, that in 2008, 1200 people signed a petition to keep the area as open\nspace. She showed a video on the jack rabbits that live on the site.\nArt Lenhardt said he supports the development. He said Alameda needs this type of\nfacility. He said he hopes that as a senior he is at least as important as a jack rabbit.\nHonora Murphy, Juelle Ann Beyer, Jon Burkhard, Rosemary Reilly, Luann Dewitt, and\nDiane Lichtenstein submitted video comments expressing support for the project.\nLaura Ramirez Gonzalez said she does not support this project at this location. She said\nthe wildlife has decreased greatly as the area has been developed. She said the cost of\nthis project would be very high.\nCathy Leong said there are many animals that use the site that you won't see in one day.\nShe said that whatever is built needs to be small enough to preserve habitat and allow\npeople to enjoy the area.\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nJune 22, 2016\nPage 3 of 9", "path": "PlanningBoard/2016-06-22.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2016-06-22", "page": 4, "text": "Steven Gortler said the project is too large. He said this is a luxury retirement facility not\na medical facility. He said it does not meet the zoning and the City would open itself to a\nlawsuit if it approved the project.\nPat Lamborn said the applicant does not have a good reputation. She said this operator\nshould not be approved.\nDaniel Reidy, Harbor Bay Business Park Association, said the design of the project is\nattractive and workable. He said the project would add variety to the business park.\nBrock Grunt said he is in favor of the project. He said the city has a need for this type of\nfacility. He said this is the type of place kids would want to come visit their grandparents.\nHe said he loves nature but the rabbits are incredibly adaptable.\nLarry William said he supports the project and would want to live there, soon. He said he\nhas had difficulty finding a quality facility in the area that has space.\nBruce Myers read a letter from WETA that supports the project.\nTom Krysiak said he opposes the project because of the size, loss of views and wildlife\nconcerns.\nJoe Van Winkle said the EIR is out of date. He said the building is too big for the site.\nRobert Dowd said he supports the project.\nPeter Brand suggested establishing a habitat mitigation program for the developer to\ncontribute too. He suggested the Doolittle landfill site as an ideal location for spending\nmitigation dollars.\nKari Thompson, Chamber of Commerce, said the project is transit friendly and has lower\nimpacts than alternative uses. She said this land was created for development purposes\nand not open space.\nGeoffrey Burnaford said people value wildlife more than humans. He said he supports the\nproject.\nIrene Dieter said everyone supports assisted living. She asked if the developer considered\na smaller footprint and adding a story. She asked if they could include an affordability\nrequirement.\nDorothy Freeman said the facility is the right idea in the wrong location. She said the\nlocation is too isolated and would not offer a variety of services for residents and their\nfamilies.\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nJune 22, 2016\nPage 4 of 9", "path": "PlanningBoard/2016-06-22.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2016-06-22", "page": 5, "text": "Kevin Hester said the site was zoned for development, not open space. He says the\nproposal eliminates much of the asphalt in the previous plans and will be aesthetically\npleasing.\nPresident Knox White closed the public hearing.\nPresident Knox White asked how the airport noise is addressed.\nStaff Member Thomas said the project was reviewed and approved by the airport land use\ncommission.\nPresident Knox White asked when the property was planned. He asked what discretion\nthey have over the plan.\nStaff Member Thomas said the development plans date back to 1979. He said they\nupdated the areas of the EIR that have changed. He said the City has discretion to deny\nthe use and keep the office use for the site.\nBoard Member Henneberry asked what would have to happen to make the site remain\nopen space.\nStaff Member Thomas said the City would have to buy the property or use eminent domain\nto purchase the land for public use. He said you would have to also pay for programming\nand maintaining the park.\nStaff Attorney Brown said the City also has a vested contractual relationship and the owner\nhas a right to develop the property.\nBoard Member Zuppan said she met with the developer as well as community members\non both sides of the issue. She said she supports assisted living but has concerns about\nthis site. She said she is concerned with site coverage, lack of use flexibility from limited\nparking, job types and tax base, and view corridors. She said the class of job is completely\ndifferent from this use compared to office use. She said she would like a view corridor in\nthe middle if the project goes forward. She said the project could be smaller. She says a\nsmaller footprint would allow landscaped space to be converted to parking if the use\nchanged in the future. She said she is not ready to approve the project tonight.\nBoard Member Henneberry said he supports Board Member Zuppan's comments. He said\nhe liked the comment to increase the height to reduce the footprint. He said some of the\nissues could be addressed through design review. He said he is in favor of the use and\nthinks it could work at the site.\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nJune 22, 2016\nPage 5 of 9", "path": "PlanningBoard/2016-06-22.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2016-06-22", "page": 6, "text": "Board Member Mitchell said he met twice with the developer. He said we need assisted\nliving in this community. He said he is concerned with the scale and scope compared to\nthe previously approved use. He said he is torn. He said he would like to send it back,\nreduce the footprint, and increase the view corridors.\nBoard Member K\u00f6ster said he is concerned with the loss of the view corridors. He said the\nuse is good and the parking and traffic impacts are less with this project. He suggested a\nmore compact design and maybe to increase the height.\nBoard Member Sullivan said she supports assisted living in Alameda. She said the scale\nof this building is too large. She said she is concerned with safety and that she thinks the\nlocation is not appropriate for this facility. She said she is concerned with the quality of\njobs the project would bring in.\nPresident Knox White said he would like to see the shuttle and WETA bike parking\ncontributions spelled out in anything that is approved. He said we need all types of jobs.\nHe said there is still a large amount of land available for commercial development in the\nHarbor Bay Business Park. He said this is a good transitional use from the office park to\nthe residential neighborhoods.\nBoard Member Henneberry made a motion to approve the resolution allowing the assisted\nliving use for the site and to continue working with staff on the footprint and size of the\nfacility. Board Member K\u00f6ster seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-1 (Sullivan).\nThe resolution can be found at: https://alamedaca.gov/sites/default/files/document-\nfiles/department-files/Planning/2016 planning board resos june-july 2016 reduced.pd\nPresident Knox White announced a five minute recess.\nBoard Member Henneberry made a motion to continue the meeting past 11pm in order to\nhear Item 7-C and continue item 7-B to a future meeting. Board Member Mitchell\nseconded the motion. The motion passed 6-0.\n7-B 2016-3034\nPublic Hearing to Introduce an Ordinance Amending Chapter 30 of the\nAlameda Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance) to Remove Barriers and Add\nIncentives for Second Units. The proposed amendments regarding Second\nUnits are Statutorily Exempt pursuant to Section 15282(h), for the adoption\nof ordinances implementing AB 1866 - Second Unit Law (Government\nCode Section 65852.2).\nCONTINUED\n7-C 2016-3035\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nJune 22, 2016\nPage 6 of 9", "path": "PlanningBoard/2016-06-22.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2016-06-22", "page": 7, "text": "Planning Board Study Session: Encinal Terminals Master Plan Sub Area\nLand Uses and Building Heights.\nStaff Member Thomas introduced the item. The staff report and attachments can be found\nat https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=2751059&GUID=C9C81E47-\nEBA-477A-9C1E-B9699781F621&FullText=1\nMike O'Hara, Tim Lewis Communities, gave a presentation on the site and their thoughts\non trading off between building heights and the amount of open space.\nBoard Member Zuppan asked if the increased open space would require additional units\nto pay for those benefits.\nStaff Member Thomas said that they should not make that assumption and just provide\ninput on how they would like the site organized and what their thoughts are on the height\nquestion.\nPresident Knox White opened the public hearing.\nDorothy Freeman said less open space is better than a 250 foot skyscraper. She said it\nwould set a precedent that all future developers would try and follow. She said there is\nabundant open space near the site.\nAlison Greene said that you can't separate the land swap considerations from the height\ndiscussions. She said she does not want to lose sight of the benefits earned from the Del\nMonte process.\nKaren Bey said we should use Alameda Point as a model for the Northern Waterfront. She\nsaid she is okay with the heights. She said it is important to make sure we get benefits\nfrom the site. She said she would like restaurants to be a permitted use, not a conditional\none.\nWesley Bexton said they have seen a dramatic reduction in their views from the Lennar\ndevelopment. He said effects on landscapes and wind should be considered.\nBrian McGuire said the site is remote and having some tall buildings out toward the edge\nof the site makes sense. He said high story units can earn a premium and pay for public\namenities. He said there is too much emphasis on space for cars along Alaska Basin and\nthey should be moved to the other side of the buildings.\nAnita Longoria said she wants to keep the buildings shorter.\nPresident Knox White closed the public hearing.\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nJune 22, 2016\nPage 7 of 9", "path": "PlanningBoard/2016-06-22.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2016-06-22", "page": 8, "text": "Board Member Sullivan said a 25 story building is too big and out of context. She said she\nwould prefer to see smaller buildings.\nBoard Member K\u00f6ster said he was intrigued by the idea of the taller building with more\nopen space. He said he agrees with the idea of increasing heights as they go toward the\nwater. He said he would like to see Entrance Rd extended and a view corridor preserved.\nHe said the 250 foot height limit is probably too tall for Alameda.\nBoard Member Zuppan said she has a problem with the idea of a 250 foot building trying\nto fit into the neighborhood. She said she would like to see the heights lower on the\nFortmann Marina side to prevent shadow impacts on the boats. She said she was\nconcerned that the road layout would create hard wind corridors. She said she is\nsupportive of having the taller buildings out towards the end as long as they are set back\nfar enough. She said she would lean towards lower buildings with less open space.\nBoard Member Mitchell said he did not think a 250 foot building is in character for Alameda.\nHe said he could support stepping the heights up as they go out on the project. He said\nputting the large road between the buildings and the boardwalk would be a lost\nopportunity.\nBoard Member Henneberry said the 250 foot tower is probably a non-starter. He said he\nwas otherwise in favor of shrinking the building footprints to get more open space.\nPresident Knox White said he would like to see some bike infrastructure in the plan the\nnext time the project comes forward. He said he does not see a 250 foot building getting\napproved. He said he is concerned with connecting the project with the neighborhood. He\nsaid there are too many roads on the site and would not like to see townhomes because\nthey conflict with the City's transportation and universal design goals.\n8. MINUTES\n8-A 2016-3036\nDraft Meeting Minutes - March 28, 2016\nBoard Member Zuppan made a motion to approve the minutes. Board Member Sullivan\nseconded the motion. The motion passed 5-0 (Henneberry recused, not in attendance).\n9. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS\n*Moved to beginning of meeting*\n10. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS\n*None*\n11. BOARD COMMUNICATIONS\n*None*\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nJune 22, 2016\nPage 8 of 9", "path": "PlanningBoard/2016-06-22.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2016-06-22", "page": 9, "text": "12. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS\n*None*\n13. ADJOURNMENT\nPresident Knox White adjourned the meeting at 11:34pm.\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nJune 22, 2016\nPage 9 of 9", "path": "PlanningBoard/2016-06-22.pdf"}