{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2016-11-14", "page": 1, "text": "APPROVED MINUTES\nREGULAR MEETING OF THE\nCITY OF ALAMEDA PLANNING BOARD\nMONDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2016\n1. CONVENE\nPresident K\u00f6ster convened the meeting at 7:01pm\n2. FLAG SALUTE\nBoard Member Curtis led the flag salute.\n3. ROLL CALL\nPresent: President K\u00f6ster, Board Members Burton, Curtis, Knox White, Mitchell,\nSullivan, Zuppan.\n4. AGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSION\nBoard Member Zuppan made a motion to move a portion of staff communications to the\nbeginning of the regular agenda in order to hear public comment. Board Member\nMitchell seconded the motion. The motion passed 7-0.\n5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS\nLinda Asbury introduced herself as the new Executive Director of the West Alameda\nBusiness Association.\n6. CONSENT CALENDAR\n6-A 2016-3578\nPLN14-0517 - 712 Lincoln Avenue - Applicant: Simon Kwan for Kevin\nLam. A public hearing to consider design revisions to the building cornice\nto address a condition of approval from the July 25, 2016 Planning Board\nMeeting. A report to the Planning Board from staff regarding the\nrehabilitation and relocation plan for the Southern Pacific Railroad waiting\nroom structure on the site. This project has determined to be exempt from\nthe California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA\nGuidelines Section 15332 - Infill Development Projects.\nBoard Member Knox White made a motion to approve the item. Board Member Zuppan\nseconded the motion. The motion passed 7-0.\n**9-A 2016-3573**\nZoning Administrator and Design Review Recent Actions and Decisions\nStaff Member Thomas introduced the item. He said they approved a design review for a\ngarage on St. Charles. He said the board could decide to call it for review (applicant\npays) or uphold the staff decision and the neighbors could appeal (appellant pays).\nApproved Minutes\nPage 1 of 9\nPlanning Board Meeting\nNovember 14, 2016", "path": "PlanningBoard/2016-11-14.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2016-11-14", "page": 2, "text": "Board Member Curtis asked how much the call for review would cost.\nStaff Member Thomas said staff and materials cost would typically be around $1,000.\nPresident K\u00f6ster opened the public hearing.\nDee Keltner said she is very concerned that the expansion will endanger the three large\noak trees surrounding the structure.\nThomas D., applicant, said they have been trying to be very accommodating of neighbor\nconcerns with the design and construction plan. He said they have invested in an\narborist to properly prune the trees and hopes the board continues to approve their\nproject.\nScott Dawson said the concern is the proximity of the construction to the oak trees. He\nsaid the arborist report does not say what distance from the building would be\nappropriate because the building will be too close.\nAntonia Nicosia said the large accessory structures along the property line cause\ndrainage and flooding issues. She asked that the plan be reviewed and no plan be\napproved that compromises live oak trees.\nPresident K\u00f6ster closed the public hearing.\nStaff Member Thomas said there were a number of conditions of approval regarding the\ntrees. He said an arborist would be consulted throughout the construction process.\nPresident K\u00f6ster asked what the distances were between the trees and the proposed\nstructure.\nStaff Member Thomas said the distances were 4 feet, just over 4 feet, and 4 feet.\nBoard Member Mitchell asked if the foundation would be pier to post or continuous\nfoundation.\nStaff Member Sablan said they would be required to use piers and floating timbers.\nBoard Member Burton asked how the garage door would work with the \"grade beam\"\nrequirements. He asked whether the parking surface would be replaced and, if so,\nwhether it would be impervious or not.\nApproved Minutes\nPage 2 of 9\nPlanning Board Meeting\nNovember 14, 2016", "path": "PlanningBoard/2016-11-14.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2016-11-14", "page": 3, "text": "The applicant said they have hired a landscape architect, Jennifer Bowles, and that they\nexpect the parking surface to be permeable.\nBoard Member Sullivan asked how the four foot requirement was chosen.\nStaff Member Thomas said that it was a staff decision based on site conditions and other\nfactors. He said they also made the problem more difficult by pushing the new garage\nfive feet off the property line.\nBoard Member Zuppan asked about the drainage concerns raised by the neighbors.\nStaff Member Sablan said the conditions required that the drainage be directed away\nfrom the property line and that it would be reviewed at the plan check phase.\nBoard Member Curtis said he would not like to call the project for review.\nBoard Member Burton said he has been in that backyard and that the trees are\ncharacter defining trees for the neighborhood. He said it requires more detailed study to\ndemonstrate that the project can proceed without killing those trees. He said he would\ncall the project for review and described what he would look for in the plan.\n7. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n7-A 2016-3579\nSafety and Noise Element Update - Public Hearing and Recommendation\nfor Adoption by City Council. This project is categorically exempt from the\nCalifornia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA\nGuidelines Section 15061(b)(3), as the project does not have the potential\nto have a significant effect on the environment.\nStaff Member Thomas introduced the item. The staff report and attachments can be\nfound at:\nhttps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=2875503&GUID=5171E347-\n2872-44DE-87C5-OFOCD6E522AO&FullText=1\nThere were no public speakers.\nBoard Member Knox White made a motion to approve the item. Board Member Zuppan\nseconded the motion. The motion passed 7-0. The resolution can be found at:\n  https://alamedaca.gov/sites/default/files/document-files/department-\nfiles/Planning/2016_planningboard_resos_july-december.pdf\n7-B 2016-3582\nApproved Minutes\nPage 3 of 9\nPlanning Board Meeting\nNovember 14, 2016", "path": "PlanningBoard/2016-11-14.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2016-11-14", "page": 4, "text": "Exception to construct a new approximately 14,300-square-foot three-\nstory mixed-use building located on the southwesterly corner of Webster\nStreet and Pacific Avenue. The new building contains approximately\n5,000-square-feet of ground floor retail with an approximately 9,300\nsquare-foot senior boarding house within the second and third stories.\nThe site is located within the C-C Community Commercial Zoning District.\nStaff Member Thomas introduced the item. The staff report and attachments can be\nfound at:\nhttps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=2875505&GUID=0E5AB5AA-\n5339-406F-894D-8104621C3F63&FullText=1\nStaff Member Dong gave a presentation on the project plans.\nPresident K\u00f6ster asked why this use was not included in the CC zoning district.\nStaff Member Thomas said the zoning was created in 1999 specifically for the business\ndistricts. He said hotels and dwelling units were allowed but is not sure why boarding\nhouses were left out.\nBoard Member Curtis asked if the leased parking would be restricted at any time.\nStaff Member Dong said they would be exclusively for the lessee.\nBoard Member Zuppan asked why the parking agreement was only for 14 years when\nthe building would be there indefinitely.\nStaff Member Dong said the condition was based on how a previous project was\nhandled.\nBoard Member Sullivan asked if we knew how many employees would be on site at any\ngiven time.\nStaff Member Dong said they anticipated three employees.\nSam Koka, applicant, explained the background for the project and asked the board to\napprove the project.\nBoard Member Mitchell asked how the applicant arrived at the unit sizes for the project.\nMr. Koka said they based it off of other similar projects.\nApproved Minutes\nPage 4 of 9\nPlanning Board Meeting\nNovember 14, 2016", "path": "PlanningBoard/2016-11-14.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2016-11-14", "page": 5, "text": "President K\u00f6ster asked the applicant to explain why this type of project is needed.\nMr. Koka said this place would be more affordable than the high end assisted living\nfacilities, including to people like him.\nPresident K\u00f6ster opened the public hearing.\nBill DeMar spoke in favor of the project. He said he looks forward to the pedestrian\nnature of the project and that it would help catalyze activity on Webster St.\nRony Nathan said he would like to live in a place like this because driving is very\nstressful. He said he wants to be in the middle of the action instead of a remote spot like\nBay Farm or Cardinal Point.\nPresident K\u00f6ster closed the public hearing.\nPresident K\u00f6ster asked if this project would count towards the Housing Element.\nStaff Member Thomas said they are not dwelling units and would not count towards the\nhousing allocations.\nBoard Member Sullivan said her problem is with the lack of parking.\nBoard Member Zuppan said she is happy to see the proposal and hopes it succeeds.\nShe said she does have concerns about the parking situation. She said the space needs\nto be flexible and needs to have adequate parking in case the use changes. She said\nthe parking arrangement should be required as long as the use exists. She said the\nbuilding fits in the neighborhood, but that it looks flat. She said she would like to see\nmore depth with the windows and maybe different colors. She suggested adding some\nopen air community space on the ground floor. She said she agrees with Board Member\nSullivan that this type of use would need more than one accessible parking space.\nBoard Member Curtis said he wanted to make sure the parking lease agreement would\nsurvive any changes with the hotel business.\nBoard Member Knox White said this was an exciting project for this location. He said he\nwould be looking for every unit to have a transit pass. He said the shared parking\nagreement is a good solution to the parking issue. He said there should be an annual\nreporting requirement for the transportation requirements placed on the project.\nApproved Minutes\nPage 5 of 9\nPlanning Board Meeting\nNovember 14, 2016", "path": "PlanningBoard/2016-11-14.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2016-11-14", "page": 6, "text": "Board Member Mitchell said Alameda needs this type of housing and this a good\nlocation for it. He said Webster street needs this type of project more than it needs\nparking spots. He said he hopes the project is successful.\nBoard Member Burton said this project is very much needed in this section of Webster\nstreet. He said he is not worried about the parking at all. He said the shared parking\nshould be flexible and allow a lease within a certain distance, not specifically with\nHawthorn Suites. He said he would provide a list of building plan concerns that might be\nan issue with the building code. He said the architectural composition was fine, but he\nwould like to see a little more detail. He said he would like to see a color and materials\nboard before approving the design.\nPresident K\u00f6ster said these are the types of projects we like to see in our downtown\ndistricts. He said that a parking problem along this section of Webster would be a good\nthing. He said this location has a walkscore of 88. He said he agrees that the design\ncould use a little more articulation.\nBoard Member Zuppan made a motion to continue the item, at staff's request, to\nDecember 12, 2016. Board Member Curtis seconded the motion. The motion passed 7-\n0.\n7-C 2016-3583\nAlameda Marina Draft Master Plan Environmental Impact Report Scoping\nSession\nBoard Member Burton said his firm is working on this project and he recused himself\nfrom the discussion.\nStaff Member Thomas introduced the item. The staff report and attachments can be\nfound at:\nhttps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=2875506&GUID=A6AD81E5-\n748F-4871-BC53-D5EAFA19A3B2\nSean Murphy, Bay West Development, gave a presentation on their plans for the site.\nPresident K\u00f6ster opened the public hearing.\nPeter Brand said he is participating in an advisory committee for the project. He said the\ndeveloper is proposing to eliminate two thirds of the commercial and dry storage space.\nHe said they are proposing to drastically reduce the dry boat storage and non-maritime\ncommercial. He said most people are not aware of the 1845 approved units in\nAlameda's pipeline or the thousands of units coming to Brooklyn Basin. He said lessees\non the site are not going to confront their landlord and come speak to them.\nApproved Minutes\nPage 6 of 9\nPlanning Board Meeting\nNovember 14, 2016", "path": "PlanningBoard/2016-11-14.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2016-11-14", "page": 7, "text": "Steve Cooper said he is a neighbor and long term sailor who feels threatened by this\nproject. He said he is scared of the traffic.\nDorothy Freeman said there are few plans to deal with traffic generated by all the\napproved housing developments. She said she is concerned that all of Alameda's\ncommercial areas are being used up for housing and that we should support the\nbusinesses we already have.\nBob Naber gave a presentation on the current maritime ecosystem that exists at\nAlameda Marina. He said getting the maritime and boatyard activities approved\nsomewhere else is very difficult.\nLaura Thomas, Renewed Hope, said they do support the project and applaud the\nattempts to address our housing crisis. She said the rise in rents has created an exodus\nof long time residents.\nHelen Sause, Alameda Home Team, said this is an exciting mixed use project. She said\nthis is an opportunity to interface with projects on the other side of the estuary.\nKaren Bey said she supports this project. She said she is excited by all the housing\nopportunities for residents of different incomes. She said these types of developments\nwill help pay for water transit infrastructure.\nJohn Platt said the project is very interesting. He said Svendsen's boatyard is one of the\nfew boatyards left in the area. He said the boatyard is critical to a viable maritime\necosystem in the Bay Area.\nWoody Minor gave a presentation on the maritime and architectural history of the site.\nHe said the character defining spaces are the interior spaces and they are ignored in the\nconsultant's report. He said the report is inadequate and lacks context.\nPresident K\u00f6ster closed the public hearing and announced a five minute recess.\nBoard Member Zuppan said that we needed an assessment of the historical analysis.\nStaff Member Thomas said they respect greatly Mr. Minor's comments and will follow up\nwith the consultant.\nBoard Member Sullivan said that the EIR should study the effect on the entire Bay\nArea's boating community.\nApproved Minutes\nPage 7 of 9\nPlanning Board Meeting\nNovember 14, 2016", "path": "PlanningBoard/2016-11-14.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2016-11-14", "page": 8, "text": "Staff Member Thomas discussed the tradeoffs between using housing to pay for needed\nimprovements that will preserve the maritime infrastructure and preserving enough\nspace to allow the maritime functions to thrive.\nBoard Member Curtis asked if other revenue sources have been pursued to fund the\nneeded improvements besides relying on housing to pay for everything.\nStaff Member Thomas said they have explored that possibility somewhat and that there\njust is not a lot of money for this type of work.\nBoard Member Sullivan asked if money was set aside every year for these anticipated\ninfrastructure improvements.\nStaff Member Thomas said that for city owned land, like streets, yes, but not on private\nland.\nBoard Member Sullivan said it is a lot of houses to add and a lot of businesses and uses\nwill be displaced. She said she is concerned about the mix of rental and for sale units.\nShe said the city is already 55% renters and that is an issue.\nBoard Member Knox White suggested studying what the housing's impacts would be on\naffordability. He said the no build alternative really needs to study what would happen to\nthe infrastructure under that scenario. He said we need to study travel time impacts for\ntransit. He said the community might be interested in a lower housing alternative.\nBoard Member Zuppan said the EIR should study the changes in the types of use of the\ncommercial spaces. She asked if we were ready for the impact of work that would\ndisturb the water and what to do with what we find there. She said we need to consider\nwhat the impact of of Brooklyn Basin would be on traffic for this project. She said we\nneed to study what the economic consequences are to restructuring the commercial\nareas of the site and their downstream effects.\nPresident K\u00f6ster said this is an ambitious plan. He said the site is very large and could\nlend itself to more efficient use of space. He said we need a better inventory of the\nbuildings and the environmental impacts of removing these buildings. He said we need\nto study the water transit impacts and how the project works with the rest of the Northern\nWaterfront. He said we need the workforce housing.\nBoard Member Knox White made a motion to continue the meeting to 11:05pm. Board\nMember Zuppan seconded the motion. The motion passed 6-0.\nApproved Minutes\nPage 8 of 9\nPlanning Board Meeting\nNovember 14, 2016", "path": "PlanningBoard/2016-11-14.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2016-11-14", "page": 9, "text": "Department Projects\n*None*\n10. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS\n*None*\n11. BOARD COMMUNICATIONS\nBoard Member Zuppan gave an update on the Economic Development Strategic Plan.\n11-A 2016-3581\nSubcommittee with Commission on Disability Issues regarding Universal\nDesign Ordinance\n*None*\n12. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS\n*None*\n13. ADJOURNMENT\nPresident K\u00f6ster adjourned the meeting at 11:03pm.\nApproved Minutes\nPage 9 of 9\nPlanning Board Meeting\nNovember 14, 2016", "path": "PlanningBoard/2016-11-14.pdf"}