{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2018-05-14", "page": 1, "text": "APPROVED MINUTES\nREGULAR MEETING OF THE\nCITY OF ALAMEDA PLANNING BOARD\nMONDAY, MAY 14, 2018\n1. CONVENE\nPresident Mitchell convened the meeting at 7:01pm\n2. FLAG SALUTE\nBoard Member Curtis led the flag salute.\n3. ROLL CALL\nPresent: President Mitchell, Board Members Burton, Cavanaugh, Curtis, Sullivan,\nTeague.\nAbsent: None\n4. AGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSION\n*None*\n5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS\n*None*\n6. CONSENT CALENDAR\n6-A 2018-5560\nPLN16-0314 - Design Review - Seaplane Lagoon Ferry Terminal.\nApplicant: City of Alameda. Public Hearing to consider Design Review\napproval pursuant to AMC Section 30-37 for new ferry terminal\nimprovements located at the Seaplane Lagoon in the NAS Alameda historic\ndistrict. The environmental effects of the proposed project were considered\nand disclosed in the Seaplane Lagoon Addendum to the Alameda Point\nEnvironmental Impact Report. No further environmental review is required\nunder the California Environmental Quality Act\nBoard Member Teague asked to pull item 6-A from the consent calendar.\n*proceeded after item 6-B*\nBoard Member Teague said he pulled the item because of the Historical Advisory Board\ncomments and his own design questions regarding the lighting and additional information\nshared with the board.\nStaff Member Tai gave a report on the item. The staff report and attachments can be found\nat: https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3494068&GUID=55BFBC80-\nCCBF-4B86-9EOE-7DEDA8F16413&FullText=1\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 1 of 9\nMay 14, 2018\nPlanning Board Meeting", "path": "PlanningBoard/2018-05-14.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2018-05-14", "page": 2, "text": "Board Member Curtis asked if the glass wall met the code requirements.\nStaff Member Tai said the code requirement is for 42 inches and the glass wall is designed\nto 60 inches.\nBoard Member Curtis said that raising the wall would be an unnecessary cost increase\nand suggested the board override that suggestion by the HAB.\nBoard Member Teague asked if the removal of the handrail for aesthetic reasons would\ncreate an accessibility issue.\nKent Royal, project architect, said this is a fixed pier and not a ramp and therefore does\nnot require a handrail. He said five feet is the highest they can cantilever the glass without\nadditional support.\nBoard Member Teague said he wanted to specifically exclude the sign lighting from the\nmotion. He said he was fine with a five foot wall and the other design suggestions.\nBoard Member Burton said he would be okay with or without the caulking, and thinks the\nhand/lean rail should remain.\nPresident Mitchell said he was okay with out without the caulking. He said he prefers the\ndesign without the railing.\nBoard Member Teague made a motion to approve the supplemental memorandum\nwith exclusions for the handrail and caulking, retaining the five foot height, and\nexcluding the uplighting for the sign. Board Member Curtis seconded the motion.\nThe motion passed 6-0.\n6-B 2018-5561\nApprove a Resolution Finding that the Harbor Bay Entities have\nDemonstrated Good Faith Compliance with the Terms and Conditions of\nDevelopment Agreement, DA-89-1, through April 4, 2018, Based on the\nFindings Contained in the Draft Resolution. This Compliance Review is not\na project under CEQA\nBoard Member Teague made a motion to approve the item. Board Member Burton\nseconded the motion. The motion passed 6-0.\n7. REGULAR\nAGENDA\nITEMS\n7-A 2018-5564\nPLN17-0484 - 1123 Versailles Avenue Call for Review - Applicant: Shirley\nXie. A public hearing to consider Design Review to construct a one-story\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 2 of 9\nMay 14, 2018\nPlanning Board Meeting", "path": "PlanningBoard/2018-05-14.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2018-05-14", "page": 3, "text": "addition at the rear of an existing split-level single family home. The\naddition will add approximately 562 square feet to an existing 974-square\nfoot residence. The property is listed on the City of Alameda's Historic\nBuilding Study List with a \"B\" designation. The project is located within the\nR-1 (One-Family Residence) Zoning District\nPresident Mitchell said he lives close to this property and would be recusing himself for\nthe item.\nStaff Member Sablan gave a presentation. The staff report and attachments can be found\nat: https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3494069&GUID=53D9146F\nCCEE-4F5E-AOD7-F3AE1F765CB1&FullText=1\nThe staff report was briefly interrupted by an earthquake.\nBoard Member Sullivan thanked the applicant for the changes to the plan which she said\nfit in beautifully with the neighborhood.\nBoard Member Burton asked that a condition be added to make the window trim match\nthe existing house.\nBoard Member Teague said the existing windows have mismatched trim and staff should\ndecide which trim should be matched. He commended the applicant for going above and\nbeyond in accommodating the neighbors' concerns in the plan. He said he believed that\nthe motion would need to be amended to deal with the Secretary of the Interior\ncompatibility issue.\nBoard Member Teague moved approval of the motion with modification to finding\nnumber four to include the finding of compatibility of the addition. Board Member\nCurtis seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-0. (Mitchell recused)\n7-B 2018-5565\n1100-1250 Marina Village Parkway Public Hearing to Review and\nComment on the Shipways Residential Project Draft Environmental Impact\nReport and Project Design - Applicant: The Cavallari Group, Inc. A public\nhearing to review and comment on the adequacy the Draft Environmental\nImpact Report (EIR) and project design for the Shipways Residential\nProject application. The Shipways Residential Project Draft EIR (State\nClearinghouse No. 2017042021) evaluates the potential environmental\nimpacts associated with the approval and construction of the proposed\nproject, and this public hearing is being conducted pursuant to the\nCalifornia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 3 of 9\nMay 14, 2018\nPlanning Board Meeting", "path": "PlanningBoard/2018-05-14.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2018-05-14", "page": 4, "text": "at: https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3494070&GUID=D97338CE-\nEF4-45A2-BOC4-9307E2E5CAOB&FullText=1\nStaff Member Thomas explained the draft EIR process and how the comment period and\napproval process works.\nNathan Herrera, project architect, gave a presentation on the current iteration of the\nproposal.\nBoard Member Teague pointed out that the project is requesting a 35% density bonus. He\nasked if the project were changed from rental to for sale would that affect the EIR.\nStaff Member Thomas said there would be no difference.\nPresident Mitchell opened the public hearing.\nSteve Meckfessel said he has been involved in the project since 1982, owns Marina\nVillage Yacht Harbor, and lives in Alameda. He said he supports the end result of the\nproject but does not want the marina to be forgotten. He said his birthers are very affected\nby noise and dust generated by construction. He said they would need to provide new\nrestrooms and showers for the tenants of Gate 11, retain parking, and provide equitable\nbenefits to the community. He said the plan needs to address the traffic the project would\ngenerate.\nRobert Nelson said he is a liveaboard resident at Gate 11 near Shipway 1. He said the\nmany kayakers are drawn to the craneways and shipways from the waterfront side. He\nsaid he submitted five pages of written comments. He said the dEIR does not mention the\ntenants and residents of Marina Village who would receive the biggest impacts. He said\nthere is nothing in the dEIR to discuss hydrographics. He said a water taxi would not be\nable to function if the breakwaters that the two craneways provide are removed. He said\nthe alternative to retain craneways one and four is important. He said they should be\npreserved for historical and hydrographic reasons.\nPresident Mitchell closed the public hearing.\nBoard Member Teague said the visual effect of having the four craneways be the same\nlength is important for the site to have if possible. He said that on page 311 the TMA\nshould look at providing transit to the ferry terminal. He said it is unfortunate that we cannot\nconsider the cumulative effects of construction pollution. He corrected a typo in 4.G.3. He\nsaid the capacity of Encinal High School was not included and should be. He said the\ntraffic study should note whether it was conducted before or after Oakland changed the\ntraffic signals on the other side of the Park St. bridge. He said impacts on the High St. and\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 4 of 9\nMay 14, 2018\nPlanning Board Meeting", "path": "PlanningBoard/2018-05-14.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2018-05-14", "page": 5, "text": "Bay Farm bridges are not properly studied. He said some outbound buses are left off of\none of the diagrams. He said AC Transit does not go to the Main St. ferry. He said that if\nthere were alternatives studied, they should be listed.\nBoard Member Burton agreed that the impacts on Marina tenants and residents need to\nbe properly studied.\nBoard Member Curtis asked where the land for new schools would come from. He said\nthe emergency services report needs to focus on peak hour response times, suggesting\nmiddle of the night calls bring the average response time down.\nStaff Member Thomas said that state law takes away their ability to ask for more regarding\nschools when there is an impact fee collected by the district. He said AUSD has a surplus\nof available land.\nBoard Member Sullivan asked if AUSD is planning to build any new schools.\nPresident Mitchell said some schools are overenrolled but the district as a whole is under\nenrolled.\nBoard Member Cavanaugh said he is very concerned with getting cars on and off the\nisland. He said he likes the idea for the water taxi. He echoed members Teague and Curtis'\nremarks.\nBoard Member Sullivan said she wants to make sure there is sufficient parking. She said\nshe is concerned about the construction impact on boats.\nPresident Mitchell asked for more explanation on the shift towards vehicle miles traveled\nin the analysis.\nStaff Member Thomas explained that the state has changed the standards for EIRs from\nLevel of Service to Vehicle Miles Traveled. He said they are trying to also look at travel\ntimes using the MTC model.\nBoard Member Burton said the project is tremendously improved from a year ago. He said\nthe podium design allows the buildings to be broken up but has the potential to feel like\none big wall to pedestrians. He said he would need more detail on some of the materials\nchoices to make sure the feel would be acceptable. He suggested several changes and\nfurther details that could be provided to convince the board that they are on the right track.\nBoard Member Teague reiterated his comment that the piers should all go out the same\nlength to give the same feeling as the historic feel of the site.\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 5 of 9\nMay 14, 2018\nPlanning Board Meeting", "path": "PlanningBoard/2018-05-14.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2018-05-14", "page": 6, "text": "Board Member Cavanaugh said he likes the design of the project.\nBoard Member Sullivan said that the benefits of separating the buildings is lost because\nthe building is so elevated. She asked how the building was able to exceed the height\nlimit.\nStaff Member Thomas said that it was a function of the density bonus application, the\nboard's desire to break up the buildings, and need to fit in the number of units.\nBoard Member Sullivan said perhaps they should go back to one building and shorten the\noverall height in that case, saying you can't do this to the community. She said the vistas\nbelong to all the residents. She said the cement wood paneling often looks cheap. She\nsaid it should have the maximum allowed parking.\nPresident Mitchell said the entrance could be an interesting design component and is\ncurrently a missed opportunity. He said he is concerned about the amount of lawn space\nin the plan and the required water use. He said he would like to see more active space\nand less passive space for this somewhat isolated site. He said he is concerned about the\nwood paneling as well, saying it could be done well or work out poorly.\n8. MINUTES\n8-A 2018-5552\nDraft Meeting Minutes - April 9th, 2018\nBoard Member Teague offered a correction attributing a comment regarding the Open\nGovernment Commission on page 3 to President Mitchell instead of himself.\nBoard Member Sullivan made a motion to approve the minutes with the proposed\nchanges. Board Member Teague seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-0-1\n(Burton abstained).\n8-B 2018-5553\nDraft Meeting Minutes - April 23rd, 2018\nBoard Member Sullivan suggested a correction to her comments on item 9-B.\nBoard Member Sullivan made a motion to approve the minutes with the proposed\nchange. Board Member Burton seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-0-1\n(Cavanaugh abstained).\n9. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS\n9-A 2018-5558\nZoning Administrator and Design Review Recent Actions and Decisions\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 6 of 9\nMay 14, 2018\nPlanning Board Meeting", "path": "PlanningBoard/2018-05-14.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2018-05-14", "page": 7, "text": "Staff Member Thomas gave a brief report. The staff report and plans can be found at:\n https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3494065&GUID=A8F3EC17-\n7C11-454F-91FF-D7F5548B6FF5&FullText=1\n9-B 2018-5559\nFuture Public Meetings and Upcoming Community Development\nDepartment Projects\nThe\nreport\ncan\nbe\nfound\nat:\nhttps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3494066&GUID=B928C671\n4927-491D-9B78-1BD6589CD175\n10. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS\n*None*\n11. BOARD COMMUNICATIONS\n11-A 2018-5566\nReview of Planning Board Rules and Procedures\nStaff Member Thomas introduced the item. The current rules can be found at:\nttps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3494071&GUID=FD08EC70-\n121E-4C4E-8E6D-122026DB665D\nPresident Mitchell said the Open Government Commission had recommendations on\nmeeting procedures and rules for City Council. He said that his first couple years on the\nboard had meetings that frequently ran late. He suggested reviewing the policy of holding\nboard elections on the first meeting that new members attend.\nPresident Mitchell opened the public hearing.\nIrene Dieter, chair of the Open Government Commission, suggested that the Planning\nBoard consider using the same process that the City Council is using for updating its rules\nand procedures. She suggested the board consider adopting Rosenberg's Rules of Order\nwith some supplemental rules.\nPresident Mitchell closed the public hearing.\nBoard Member Curtis said that this is the first time he has seen this Rules and Procedures\ndocument and that it is very helpful. He said it should be required reading for new\nmembers.\nPresident Mitchell suggested considering an automatic trigger for reducing public\ncomment to two minutes if a certain number of speakers are reached on an item.\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 7 of 9\nMay 14, 2018\nPlanning Board Meeting", "path": "PlanningBoard/2018-05-14.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2018-05-14", "page": 8, "text": "Board Member Burton said he would support a reasonable trigger for reducing the time\nlimit for speakers.\nBoard Member Teague said he is uncomfortable making any changes tonight. He said he\nwould not like to use a subcommittee to evaluate changes, but rather have options on the\nagenda and have a discussion with the entire board.\nBoard Member Sullivan said she is concerned with the idea of reducing speaking time to\nless than three minutes. She said we owe it to the residents to allow them to speak on hot\ntopics for the community.\nBoard Member Curtis suggested setting aside some time for reviewing possible changes.\nHe said we should be very cautious in reducing the public's ability to participate in the\npublic meeting.\nStaff Member Thomas said the future agendas item is there to allow the board to have\nsome control over the agendas. He also said the board can consider enforcing time limits\nfor staff and applicant presentations.\nBoard Member Teague suggested some of the unofficial processes the board uses for\nstructuring their meetings be codified in the rules and procedures document.\nPresident Mitchell said that they can consider changes at a future meeting. He said\nadopting Rosenberg's Rules would change how the board handles motions, requiring a\nmotion and a second before any discussion takes place.\nBoard Member Cavanaugh said he likes having the staff report for the public's benefit\nbecause not everyone has read the staff report.\n12. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS\nBoard Member Sullivan asked for an update on a mixed use project on Webster St. that\nthe board approved over a year ago.\nStaff Member Thomas said the developer sold the entitlements to another developer. He\nsaid the new owner of the entitlements has not submitted plans or pulled building permits.\nBoard Member Sullivan said the commercial property at High St. and Fernside is\nbecoming blighted and needs to be addressed.\nPresident Mitchell asked for an update on the new stop lights across the Park St. bridge\nin Oakland.\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 8 of 9\nMay 14, 2018\nPlanning Board Meeting", "path": "PlanningBoard/2018-05-14.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2018-05-14", "page": 9, "text": "Staff Member Thomas said he is not sure. He said he can get someone from Public Works\nto update the board.\n13. ADJOURNMENT\nPresident Mitchell adjourned the meeting at 9:18pm.\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 9 of 9\nMay 14, 2018\nPlanning Board Meeting", "path": "PlanningBoard/2018-05-14.pdf"}