{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2018-03-26", "page": 1, "text": "APPROVED MINUTES\nREGULAR MEETING OF THE\nCITY OF ALAMEDA PLANNING BOARD\nMONDAY, MARCH 26, 2018\n1. CONVENE\nPresident Mitchell convened the meeting at 7:00pm\n2. FLAG SALUTE\nBoard Member Koster led the flag salute.\n3. ROLL CALL\nPresent: President Mitchell, Board Members Burton, Cavanaugh, Curtis, K\u00f6ster,\nSullivan, Teague.\n4. AGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSION\nStaff Member Tai asked to move item 7-A to the end of the regular agenda.\n5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS\n*None*\n6. CONSENT CALENDAR\n*None*\n7. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n7-B 2018-5358\nRecommendation to Adopt a Resolution Recommending that the City\nCouncil Approve the Development Agreement for Rebuilding the Existing\nSupportive Housing at Alameda Point (RESHAP) Project\nStaff Member Giles gave a presentation. The staff report and attachments can be found\nat:  https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3378566&GUID=6EE67A30-\n4231-4FE1-99F9-56F1523C57ED&FullText=1\nBoard Member Curtis asked what circumstances would take the project beyond the ten\nyear horizon.\nStaff Member Giles said the complicated financing required for these projects and the\ndependence on a market rate developer for backbone infrastructure could take time.\nBoard Member Curtis suggested that language in the development agreement regarding\nmortgagees (vs. trustees), and lawsuits and developer obligations be reviewed.\nBoard Member Teague asked how safe the Phase I residents will be while the later phases\nare awaiting completion and under construction.\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 1 of 8\nMarch 26, 2018", "path": "PlanningBoard/2018-03-26.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2018-03-26", "page": 2, "text": "Staff Member Giles said the areas that would present a hazard would be fenced off.\nBoard Member K\u00f6ster asked how many total residents are expected to be served at the\nsite. He asked how the Trump Tax Plan would affect the funding availability.\nStaff Member Giles suggested there were over 500 residents of APC. She said there are\ncurrently funding sources for this type of project.\nBoard Member Sullivan asked if there are funding sources already locked in for this\nproject.\nStaff Member Giles said they are looking at sources for funding, but that the project is still\nlikely years away.\nBoard Member Cavanaugh asked if the demolition would be done in phases or all at once.\nStaff Member Giles said they would try and do it in phases in order to not disturb existing\nusers until new buildings come on line.\nDoug Biggs, Alameda Point Collaborative, said the Collaborating Partners serve almost\n500 residents, including over 300 children. He said they need the ten year horizon to make\nsure they will have flexibility to acquire adequate funding sources.\nBoard Member Teague made a motion to approve the recommendation with the\ncriteria that the City Attorney review the mortgagee/trustee issue, the liability issue\nbrought up by Board Member Curtis, and the potential addition of a mediation\nclause. Board Member Sullivan seconded the motion. The motion passed 7-0.\n7-C 2018-5359\nRecommendation for the Planning Board to Review and Endorse the\nEconomic Development Strategic Plan (EDSP)\nStaff Member Fonstein introduced the item. The staff report and attachments can be found\nat: https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3378567&GUID=01848478-\n04B9-4A74-8C5F-50723F3FBD34&FullText=1\nSujata Srivastava, Strategic Economics, gave a presentation on the EDSP.\nJohn Knox White, Chair of the Task Force, said this document is a values guided\ndocument. He said they acknowledged that dealing with our housing and transportation is\ncritical for our economic development success.\nBrock Grunt said the document does a good job of representing the city's views and vision\nfor the future.\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 2 of 8\nMarch 26, 2018", "path": "PlanningBoard/2018-03-26.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2018-03-26", "page": 3, "text": "Debi Ryan, CASA, said the plan seems more holistic than previous plans.\nBoard Member Curtis said the report is well integrated. He asked if the ten year time frame\nis realistic for the blue tech/maritime elements given that many of the waterfront\ndevelopments are already finalizing their plans.\nStaff Member Fonstein said the time frames are estimates and that certain items could\nmove ahead more quickly where appropriate.\nBoard Member Burton asked what the procedure would be for incorporating Planning\nBoard feedback to the plan before it goes to City Council.\nStaff Member Fonstien said they would incorporate the board's comments when they go\nforward to the City Council.\nPresident Mitchell asked why teacher housing and affordability were not specifically called\nout in the plan, given the struggles the school district is having retaining quality teachers.\nMs. Srivastava said they did discuss housing opportunities for teachers but that they plan\nlooked more holistically at the housing issue. She said they are trying to achieve\naffordability for a range of incomes in Alameda.\nPresident Mitchell said that the plan discusses workforce housing, but asked why it does\nnot address rent stabilization.\nMs. Srivastava said the task force felt that the City was still working out its position on the\nissue and wanted to let that issue work itself out.\nMr. Grunt said the consensus was that it was more of a political issue to be addressed by\nthe voters instead of this task force.\nBoard Member Sullivan said there is a disconnect between the discussion of marine goals\nand actions.\nPresident Mitchell opened the public hearing.\nCatherine Pauling, Alameda Renters Coalition, said the rent issue is much more than a\npolitical issue. She said renters provide the labor for the economy and the lack of\naffordable housing is a problem for businesses. She said the City needs to do a better job\nof collecting information on rental housing.\nRasheed Shabazz asked if any of the discussions focused on living wages, disadvantaged\nbusinesses (women and minority owned), and if there are specific equity indicators\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 3 of 8\nMarch 26, 2018", "path": "PlanningBoard/2018-03-26.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2018-03-26", "page": 4, "text": "developed. He said there was a plan in the 2000s for building student housing at Alameda\nCollege. He suggested bringing back the summer jobs program.\nLorre Zuppan said the plan is really about strategy now instead of just tactics. She said\nshe endorses the plan and thinks the plan can improve with time.\nPresident Mitchell closed the public hearing.\nBoard Member Curtis said the document is well integrated, apolitical, and deals with\nsolutions.\nBoard Member Teague said the language in the plan may discourage certain types of\ntechnology companies from coming to Alameda. He said he would like to see the\ntransportation barriers outlined clearly. He said, similarly, that defining the barriers as they\nrelate to housing and economic development would improve the plan.\nBoard Member Burton said the document should be a communication tool to identify what\nthey City's strategies are. He said it would help to have some definitions in the document\n(i.e.- blue tech, green tech.) He said the north Park St. plan should be highlighted in the\ndocument. He said he looks forward to the City Council adopting the plan.\nBoard Member Sullivan said the support services are lumped together as if they were\nequally weighted against the business buckets. She said there is nothing that anchors the\ndiscussion, a jump off point. She said there is nothing in the document about growing\nexisting businesses.\nBoard Member Cavanaugh said the board's comments need to be incorporated into the\ndocument and brought back before sending it to the City Council.\nBoard Member K\u00f6ster said we should look at homeless shelter opportunities throughout\nthe city. He said a higher end resort opportunity should also be pursued given Alameda's\nattributes.\nPresident Mitchell said he liked the idea of focusing on disadvantaged businesses. He\nsaid he would like to see something addressing the rent issue. He said he would like to\nsee the plan come back to the Planning Board.\nBoard Member Burton said he thinks the task force should get to have the final say on\nincorporating feedback into the plan.\nBoard Member Curtis cautioned the board from trying to make the document perfect\ninstead of implementing the strategies in the document.\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 4 of 8\nMarch 26, 2018", "path": "PlanningBoard/2018-03-26.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2018-03-26", "page": 5, "text": "Board Member Burton suggested that the document could come back on the consent\ncalendar.\nBoard Member Burton made a motion to direct staff to incorporate the board's\ncomments and bring the item back on the consent calendar. Board Member K\u00f6ster\nseconded the motion. The motion passed 7-0.\n7-D 2018-5360\nPLN17-0538 - 1825 Park Street - Applicant: Ganesha LLC. A Planning\nBoard Design Review study session to consider a four-story, 96-room\nHoliday Inn Express hotel at the southwest corner of Park Street and\nClement Avenue. The project is located within the NP-G North Park Street\nGateway zoning district. No final action or decision will be taken.\nStaff Member Barrera gave a presentation The staff report and attachments can be found\nat: https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3378568&GUID=2D43FBA8-\n4C-4A01-96AD-1D43D23181AO&FullText=1\nBoard Member Sullivan asked if, given the large chunk of Park St. that the project would\ntake up, there would be any public serving businesses on the ground floor.\nStaff Member Barrera said there would not be any kind of retail, but that the lobby and\ngreat room area facilities would be accessible to the public.\nBoard Member K\u00f6ster asked if there was anything prohibiting a parking structure as part\nof a podium or wrapped structure.\nStaff Member Tai said that there is nothing prohibiting it, but that it is not part of the\nproposal.\nPresident Mitchell asked what the signage requirements are.\nStaff Member Barrera said that they would have to come back with the signage permit\napplication and meet the appropriate guidelines.\nBoard Member Cavanaugh asked if bringing the parapet height down was considered.\nStaff Member Barrera said there is some wiggle room, but that the design is within the\nheight limit allowed for the site.\nPresident Mitchell opened the public hearing.\nVita McConnell said she supports the project because of the business it brings to Alameda.\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 5 of 8\nMarch 26, 2018", "path": "PlanningBoard/2018-03-26.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2018-03-26", "page": 6, "text": "Christopher Buckley, Alameda Architectural Preservation Society, said the gateway site is\nimportant. He suggested some material and design element changes that would improve\nthe Streamline Moderne design.\nGreg Beren, adjacent property owner, said he has concerns about a four story building\nlooming over his yard. He said he has parking concerns. He said the hotel will exacerbate\ntraffic issues getting on and off the island.\nPresident Mitchell closed the public hearing.\nBoard Member Teague said he was underwhelmed by the architecture and the different\ncolors. He said the access to the parking off of Clement will be a problem because traffic\nbacks up on Clement. He said he would like to see how other hotels' shuttles are\nperforming at reducing the parking load. He said he would look at reducing the compact\nparking spaces first.\nBoard Member K\u00f6ster said he welcomes more hotels in Alameda. He said as guests arrive\nto the rear of the hotel in the parking area the entrance to the hotel needs to be stronger.\nHe suggested more appropriate Streamline Moderne elements. He said the parapet\nseems oversized. He suggested doing more to serve the public on the ground floor.\nBoard Member Cavanaugh said that reducing the parking for a hotel with a shuttle seems\ndoable.\nBoard Member Curtis said there is no place for any overflow parking.\nBoard Member Sullivan said parking is her big issue. She said the location does not lend\nitself to anything but getting around by car. She said there are too many colors and she\ndoes not like the brown.\nPresident Mitchell said there are a lot of improvements that need to be made to the design.\nHe said he is a little cautious after seeing the Hawthorne Suites hotel not turn out as well\nas the original design seemed. He said that if he is going to give a parking variance it\nwould be for a different type of use like residential.\nBoard Member Burton said the entrance on Clement is the right location, but we have to\nget the flow right. He said the parking study, comparison with the other hotels in Alameda,\nand a detailed market study of who the customers will be are going to be required to make\nan educated decision on the parking waiver. He said there has not been any progress with\nthe design since he last saw the project over two years ago. He echoed Board Member\nKosters comments about improving the ground floor treatments. He said the horizontal\nelements must be strengthened to accomplish the Streamline Moderne look. He said\nhorizontal muntins on the windows would be good. He said there is no reason to have\nplanters protruding into the public right of way. He said the back of the building needs to\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 6 of 8\nMarch 26, 2018", "path": "PlanningBoard/2018-03-26.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2018-03-26", "page": 7, "text": "have a consistent level of design. He said there is no reason for an illuminated signage on\nthe rear of the building facing the residential. He said the south elevation needs some\ntreatment other than a huge blank wall.\nPresident Mitchell, due to the late hour, moved items 9-A and 12 up in order to take public\ncomment.\n*9-A 2018-5362*\nZoning Administrator and Design Review Recent Actions and Decisions\nJeff Speckels said the size of the addition at 1123 Versailles dwarfs the size of his home\nand he has concerns about the design. He said increasing the property by over 100%\nwould violate the design guidelines.\nRobert Tokini said turning a two bedroom one bath into a five bedroom three bath home\nwould drastically change the neighborhood.\nStaff Member Tai said that the neighbors can file an appeal or a board member may call\nthe item for review. He said the addition meets all of the objective standards in the zoning\ncode. He said they have conditioned the approval with various privacy considerations for\nthe neighbors.\nBoard Member Sullivan asked to call the Versailles item for review.\n*12 Oral Communications*\nRasheed Shabazz said he is working on a book about race and housing history in\nAlameda. He said he would be giving a talk April 24th on Measure A at the Alameda\nLibrary. He invited the board to attend.\n7-A 2018-5357\nPlanning Division Online Tools Presentation\nStaff Member Tai gave a presentation. The staff report and can be found at:\nhttps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3378309&GUID=CF154438-\nEE02-4C00-90A3-7ADDC9171B50&FullText=1\nBoard Member Curtis asks what happens if a neighbor finds unpermitted work being done.\nStaff Member Tai said that if there is no permit on file they would refer them to code\nenforcement.\nBoard Member K\u00f6ster asked if staff was accepting electronic submittals of plans.\nStaff Member Tai said they are accepting both now and working through the kinks.\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 7 of 8\nMarch 26, 2018", "path": "PlanningBoard/2018-03-26.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2018-03-26", "page": 8, "text": "Board Member Teague pointed out that the personal information of permit applicants\nbeing posted on the website for all to see is a privacy issue.\nStaff Member Tai said he will consult the City Attorney's office about the requirements and\nconcerns.\n8. MINUTES\n8-A 2018-5361\nDraft Meeting Minutes - February 12, 2018\nBoard Member Sullivan asked that the paragraph starting with \"Nancy Hird \" be clarified.\nBoard Member Teague clarified his comments under 7-B.\nBoard Member Sullivan made a motion to approve the minutes as amended. Board\nMember Curtis seconded the motion. The motion passed 7-0.\n9. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS\n9-B 2018-5363\nFuture Public Meetings and Upcoming Community Development\nDepartment Projects\nThe schedule can be found at:\nhttps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3378571&GUID=C93A1C83\n88DF-4103-97C7-268BE47F292D\n10. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS\n*None*\n11. BOARD COMMUNICATIONS\nBoard Member Teague said he wanted to thank staff for all the hard work they do in\nanswering all of his questions.\n12. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS\n*Moved*\n13. ADJOURNMENT\nPresident Mitchell adjourned the meeting at 10:25pm.\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 8 of 8\nMarch 26, 2018", "path": "PlanningBoard/2018-03-26.pdf"}