{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2019-07-22", "page": 1, "text": "APPROVED MINUTES\nREGULAR MEETING OF THE\nCITY OF ALAMEDA PLANNING BOARD\nMONDAY, JULY 22, 2019\n1. CONVENE\nPresident Curtis convened the meeting at 7:00 p.m.\n2. FLAG SALUTE\nBoard Member Ruiz led the flag salute.\n3. ROLL CALL\nPresent: Board Members Curtis, Cavanaugh, Hom, Rothenberg, Ruiz, Teague.\nAbsent: Board Member Saheba.\n4. AGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSION\nPresident Curtis moved a portion of STAFF COMMUNICATIONS to the beginning of the\nmeeting. He introduced the new City Attorney, Yibin Shen.\nCity Attorney Shen introduced himself and thanked the members of the board for their\nservice to the City.\n5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS\n*None*\n6. CONSENT CALENDAR\n*None*\n7. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n7-A 2019-7106\nPLN17-0538 - Final Architectural Design - 1825 Park Street - Applicant: Paul Patel for\nGanesha, LLC - Public hearing to consider the final architectural design for a four-story,\n96-room hotel. The property is located within the NP-G, North Park Street Gateway zoning\ndistrict with a MF, Multi-Family Residential overlay. Approval of the final architectural\ndesign for the hotel is not subject to CEQA under McCorkle Eastside Neighborhood Group\nV. City of St. Helena (2018) 31 Cal.App.5th 80, which found that design review for by right\nprojects is a ministerial decision under Public Resources Code section 21080\nLinda Barrera, Planner II, gave a presentation. The staff report and attachments can be\nfound at:\nhttps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4063218&GUID=0C8F98BF-\nBFB2-4ECC-96AC-E2AFEB4D8A81&FullText=1\nApproved Planning Board Minutes\nPage 1 of 11\nJuly 22, 2019", "path": "PlanningBoard/2019-07-22.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2019-07-22", "page": 2, "text": "Board Member Hom said the Council discussion asked for a redesign to a classical style\nbuilding. He asked why the applicant stayed with this design.\nStaff Member Barrera said there were lots of conflicting comments at the Council meeting.\nShe said they are trying to shift away from the Streamline Moderne style to a more modern\nlooking building which is consistent with the Gateway District.\nBoard Member Teague asked if the Planning Board is constrained by what is in the City\nCouncil resolution.\nCelena Chen, Assistant City Attorney, said the Council gave some examples but no exact\ndirection. She said the Board needs to consider the direction, but has some leeway in the\nfinal design of the hotel.\nPaul Patel, applicant, thanked the Planning Board and city staff for all of their help through\nthe long process. He said he hopes we are in the final phase of approval and can move\nforward with the project. He told his personal history coming to this country and city and\nthe work he has done to reach this point. He said the process can be frustrating but the\ncommunity support has not let him quit.\nPresident Curtis opened the public hearing.\nJanet Magleby, Executive Director of DABA, said the business district strongly supports\nthe project. She said the hotel will support the major street fairs and compliment downtown\namenities.\nSharan Cao spoke in support of the project.\nNorris Bethke said it can be hard to find accommodations nearby for visitors and\nexpressed support for the project.\nRalph Ednalino said he has travelled a lot and this is a good location that will bring lots of\nbusiness to the area.\nChun Yan Zhang said she has seen hotels drive local economies and bring jobs. She said\nAlameda feels like home to her, but is missing amenities that this hotel will bring to serve\nher business needs.\nRich Krinks, commercial real estate broker, said it is time to get shovels in the ground. He\nsaid the design has no restaurant or bar, because they want to benefit the other\nbusinesses on Park Street. He asked the Board to approve the hotel tonight.\nSunil Lama said he supports the project.\nApproved Planning Board Minutes\nPage 2 of 11\nJuly 22, 2019", "path": "PlanningBoard/2019-07-22.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2019-07-22", "page": 3, "text": "Christopher Buckley, AAPS, referenced several points in their letter to the board. He said\nthey are comfortable with the Streamline Moderne vocabulary of the design. He said the\nwindows should be made symmetrical. He said the granite bulkheads should be\nsubstantial slabs and not small tiles. He said the fin should be restored to the previous\nheight.\nHolden Lim said a hotel like this will reactivate the downtown area. He expressed support\nfor the project.\nLan Shaw said crossing the bridge from Oakland does not present an attractive welcome\nto Alameda. She said the hotel will change the landscape and attract business. She\nexpressed support for the applicant and identified with his personal story.\nLars Hanson said he supports the project.\nGreg Barron said the hotel does not conform to the North Park Street Plan. He said it\nneeds retail and more parking. He said he spoke with the developer about ways to mitigate\nimpacts on the neighbors that the Board should consider as conditions. He suggested a\n20 foot wall on the property line and lowering the light standards to prevent light intrusion.\nHe said he has worked in good faith with the City in the past and hopes to be able to on\nthis issue.\nAnita Ng said the project would be a big improvement to the gateway of Alameda.\nHarold Lueders said it would be nice for his family to have a good place to stay when they\nvisit.\nBikash Suintu expressed support for the project.\nCarlos Quan supported the project and its design.\nOlga Maribel Cantu said she thinks the hotel will be very nice and benefit Park Street.\nEzequiel Galbado expressed support for the project.\nDolores Jeanpierre urged support of the project.\nSwapan Munshi expressed support for the project, saying it will bring tax revenue and\nbenefit downtown.\nEric Relos said the project will be a good addition to the island.\nMiyoko Ohashi supported the project. She said it is hard for her visiting family to find good\nplaces to stay.\nApproved Planning Board Minutes\nPage 3 of 11\nJuly 22, 2019", "path": "PlanningBoard/2019-07-22.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2019-07-22", "page": 4, "text": "Ana Reynoso said it is a lot of work to get folks to invest in your city. She expressed\nsupport for the project.\nMichelle Yuan said the location is very good for a hotel.\nShawn Flynn supported the project and thanked the applicant for spending so much effort\nto develop in Alameda.\nHaley Welsch said she supports the design.\nSanjiv Patel applauded the applicant for his persistence over the years. He said the hotel\nwill bring tourists to the city.\nTarun Gaur said he supports the project and has confidence in the applicant.\nSandy Glendinning said she lives behind the hotel location. She said her kitchen window\nview currently shows the Mormon Temple and will be lost with this project. She said\nparking has become much more difficult in recent years.\nCarlos Rosales expressed support for the project and its design.\nCamille Hammand said Alameda does not have good options for hotels and that the\nproject would be a good addition.\nJohn Ball said he supports the project.\nAnn Sekhon said people need a place to stay when they visit Alameda. She asked the\nBoard to approve the project tonight.\nBob Sekhon said the hotel will be a great addition and help small businesses.\nVincent Ma said he supports the project and believes in the applicant.\nMark Skolnick said having a hotel in the downtown area will benefit the whole city.\nMadlen Saddik said the Chamber of Commerce supports the project.\nAlicia Shu expressed support for the project. She said the mural would be good for\nattracting people to the city.\nKyle Conner said that every time the process gets delayed it costs a lot of money for the\ndeveloper.\nApproved Planning Board Minutes\nPage 4 of 11\nJuly 22, 2019", "path": "PlanningBoard/2019-07-22.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2019-07-22", "page": 5, "text": "President Curtis closed the public hearing.\nBoard Member Teague said the design has improved and he supports the project with\nsome conditions that staff can deal with without coming back to the Board. He agreed with\nMr. Buckley, saying the granite base should be larger and more solid. He agreed that the\nfin should be restored to the original height with the sign. He asked staff to resolve the\nquestion about the tree plan. He said the project will benefit the city. He asked that the\nride share information be provided upon check in.\nBoard Member Hom said he thinks the delay was the right choice because the project\ndesign has improved substantially. He said he supports the project and agrees with the\ncomment about the tile being more substantial. He said the fin strikes him as somewhat\ngeneric and could be improved, consistent with the Streamline Moderne approach.\nBoard Member Rothenberg agreed with the other members' comments. She suggested\nthat the motion address AAPS comments 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 9, and 11 be considered in the final\ndesign in a practical manner that not impede but rather improve the construction.\nBoard Member Ruiz concurred with the previous comments. She said the fin should be\nmore of a marquee part of the project. She said the pilasters should have three\ndimensionality and the back elevation should have some vertical articulation that can be\naddressed at the staff level. She said the circulation in the parking lot may need to be one\nway to prevent vehicle conflicts with the ride share queue.\nBoard Member Cavanaugh agreed with other board members about the design. He said\nhe liked the design a lot and thinks it should be approved.\nPresident Curtis said there is a point of diminishing returns with trying to improve the\ndesign with minor changes such as the fin height, which translate to expensive delays and\nchanges for the developer. He said he supports the project and asked Board Member\nTeague to make the motion.\nBoard Member Teague moved approval of the project with the following changes:\nride share information be provided to guests upon check in and be included with\nin-room materials; add the condition that large slabs of granite, or granite simulated\nmaterial, establish a solid base; restore the fin to the previous height and let staff\nand the applicant decide whether or not to restore the \"H\" to the fin; staff will review\nthe street trees in response to the AAPS letter. He said that if the applicant decides\nthat having symmetrical window configuration is doable, that staff can approve that\nchange without returning to the Planning Board. Board Member Rothenberg\nseconded the motion.\nAllen Tai, Planning Services Manager, summarized the motion on the floor.\nApproved Planning Board Minutes\nPage 5 of 11\nJuly 22, 2019", "path": "PlanningBoard/2019-07-22.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2019-07-22", "page": 6, "text": "The motion passed 6-0.\nPresident Curtis declared a five minute recess.\n7-B 2019-7107\nFinal architectural elevations, landscape plan, and lighting plan for a five-story hotel with\n172 guest rooms, a freestanding restaurant and coffee shop in the Harbor Bay Business\nPark adjacent to the Harbor Bay Ferry Terminal. The property is located within the C-M-\nPD, Commercial Manufacturing - Planned Development zoning district\nHenry Dong, Planner III, gave a presentation. The staff report and attachments can be\nfound at:\nttps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4063298&GUID=CE421D4D\n709E-43B5-9AB4-9490EF5A0330&FullText=1\nBoard Member Hom asked for clarification about the changes in the footprint and the\nsetback from the water.\nStaff Member Dong said the required setback is 35 feet. He said the restaurant is set back\n35 feet, but the hotel was set back an additional five feet to accommodate patios being\nprovided to guest rooms. He said the building had been widened an additional 25 feet to\naccommodate desired design changes.\nBoard Member Ruiz asked what the change in footprint would do to the overall square\nfootage of the project.\nStaff Member Dong said the overall project has stayed approximately the same size.\nBoard Member Teague asked if the footprint has changed since the May 28 meeting.\nAndrew Thomas, Planning, Building and Transportation Department Director, said the\nfootprint has not changed since May 28. He explained that the staff report clarified that\ninformation in response to the appeal of the May 28 decision.\nBoard Member Hom disclosed that he met with the applicant before the meeting. He asked\nif the landscape barrier for the headlights needs to be further clarified before approval.\nStaff Member Thomas explained the options discussed with the neighborhood about what\ntype of barrier would be provided. He said they left the condition open to multiple options,\nbut that the Board could express a preference if it desired.\nBoard Member Cavanaugh asked why the landscape barrier on the northern edge would\nnot be a mound similar to the treatment in front of the Bay Trail.\nApproved Planning Board Minutes\nPage 6 of 11\nJuly 22, 2019", "path": "PlanningBoard/2019-07-22.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2019-07-22", "page": 7, "text": "Staff Member Thomas said that there was not as much space on the northern edge,\nadding that the area had to also accommodate the storm water treatment needs of the\nproject.\nPresident Curtis said that a wire fence may not turn out well and that the wall option may\nbe more desirable.\nBoard Member Teague asked if the landscape wall would have gaps for wildlife to traverse\nthe area.\nStaff Member Thomas said that the condition is written to include holes at the bottom\nspecifically to allow wildlife to move across the space.\nBoard Member Cavanaugh asked if building a landscape barrier for the neighbors was\nraised as an issue when the adjacent property to the south was developed.\nStaff Member Thomas said that issue was not raised in connection with the McGuire and\nHester project. He added that the difference was that it was an office building, so there\nwas not the same concern with light intrusion from vehicles at all hours in the way that the\nhotel would have.\nBoard Member Teague received clarification from Staff Attorney Chen that the footprint,\nheight, use, and parking plan are all approved already, so the only items being focused\non are specific design and landscaping aspects called out in the previous meeting.\nPresident Curtis opened the public hearing.\nEd Sing said the residents have agreed on the landscaping and lighting plan. He said the\ncolor option renderings were promised and not provided. He said you can't tell from the\nimagery provided how the different color option would look and asked that the promised\nrenderings be provided to the community. He said the public expects that the project\ninformation be, complete, accurate, and consistent with a transparent rationale. He said\nthe drawings and landscaping features do not match the landscaping plan. He said the\nitems should not be approved as conditions, but should be in the plans that the public can\nlook at now and in the future. He said the Board approved a 35 foot setback, not a 40 foot\nsetback. He said the 25 foot increase in footprint between the December and May\napprovals was not explained during the May meeting. He said the conference room space\nhas been significantly reduced. He added that the coffee shop and restaurant should not\nbe up for approval because the dimensions, designs, and colors have not been discussed\nwith the community.\nBrian Tremper said the trees in the plan will be bent and blown over and leafless. He said\nthe appeal was made because information is conflicting and the community does not know\nApproved Planning Board Minutes\nPage 7 of 11\nJuly 22, 2019", "path": "PlanningBoard/2019-07-22.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2019-07-22", "page": 8, "text": "what is happening. He asked that the approval be postponed until after the appeal and\nuntil the plans accurately reflect what is expected.\nMadlen Saddik said this will be a great hotel which Alameda needs. She said the Chamber\nof Commerce supports the project.\nPat Lamborn said she supports what Brian and Ed have said. She asked the Board not to\napprove the project until the plans reflect the changes. She said the changes regarding\nthe landscape screening are very important. She said the community does not like the\nsolid grey structure. She said the project is over-parked. She said the plants do not reflect\nthe community input. She asked for a delay.\nDave Ross thanked the Board for all the work they do. He said there is no such thing as\nperfect. He said waiting costs money. He said the neighbors signed disclosures when they\npurchased their homes that say they lived next to a business park. He asked the Board to\napprove the project.\nRobert Leach, applicant, said he respects the residents who oppose the project. He said\nthis will be the nicest hotel in Alameda. He said they have not asked for variances and\nhave complied with every requirement there is and have tried to listen and accommodate\nas many changes as possible. He said they have a qualified landscape planner and a\nunion labor agreement in place for construction and operations. He said the neighbors\nliked the blue color, but that they believe the tone on tone design will keep the hotel from\nbecoming dated.\nPresident Curtis closed the public hearing.\nPresident Curtis said the project complies with the zoning requirements, BCDC, and every\nregulatory issue there is. He said they can only focus on the design and landscaping.\nBoard Member Teague asked if there is a problem with the Board taking action tonight\nwhile the appeal is pending.\nStaff Attorney Chen said the appeal does not affect the Board's action tonight.\nBoard Member Teague said he is in favor of the project. He said he slightly favors the non-\nblue color option, and would not oppose the brick if that is what the neighbors want. He\nsaid the floorplan is up to the developer to decide and not part of the Board's decision\nmaking process. He asked that the condition reflect that evergreen plants be used when\npart of a light barrier.\nBoard Member Rothenberg said she supports the project. She asked that the drawings be\nupdated and conform to the design changes reflected in the staff report. She said the\napplicant needs to verify that the changes are reflected in the final drawings. She\nApproved Planning Board Minutes\nPage 8 of 11\nJuly 22, 2019", "path": "PlanningBoard/2019-07-22.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2019-07-22", "page": 9, "text": "suggested that we stipulate that there be an environmentally appropriate landscape\nscreen, subject to mockup and field approval. She said concrete walls and cheap fences\ncan be ugly.\nBoard Member Hom said he prefers the blue color, but does not have a strong preference.\nHe said he favors a masonry wall instead of a mesh fence given the concern over lighting.\nHe suggested potentially matching the fa\u00e7ade of the hotel and the masonry wall.\nBoard Member Cavanaugh said the landscape wall is an opportunity to do something a\nlittle different and artistic. He said he is otherwise okay with the project moving forward.\nBoard Member Ruiz said she generally agrees with the other board members. She said\ncondition #5 should have stronger language about ongoing maintenance. She said there\nare other options for the barrier wall, such as living wall trays. She said the color is a\ntossup and recommends a field mockup for staff to review. She said providing operable\nwindows would be desirable if possible. She said she is otherwise in favor of the project.\nPresident Curtis said he is in favor of the project. He said as long as it complies with the\nordinance requirements and statutory agencies, it should move forward.\nStaff Member Tai summarized the Board's comments: condition that evergreen\nplants be used where barriers are desired, cite the sheets of the landscape plans,\nadd language that the applicant is responsible for timely maintenance and prompt\nreplacement of plants that do not survive, have the applicant work with the Planning\nDirector and the community to come up with a design for the barrier wall as part of\nthe building permit review process.\nPresident Curtis asked to ensure that the bank along the lagoon be fully landscaped.\nBoard Member Teague asked if they need to specify blue versus grey in the approval.\nStaff Member Thomas said the plans show grey and if the Board would like to change it\nto blue it should say so specifically.\nBoard Member Hom asked if swatches could be painted in the field and a decision could\nbe made at that point.\nPresident Curtis asked the applicant if he had a preference.\nThe applicant said his partners preferred the grey, which reflected the majority of the\ncomments from the neighbors.\nApproved Planning Board Minutes\nPage 9 of 11\nJuly 22, 2019", "path": "PlanningBoard/2019-07-22.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2019-07-22", "page": 10, "text": "Board Member Rothenberg made a motion to approve the staff recommendation\nwith the modifications outlined by Staff Member Tai. Board Member Teague\nseconded the motion. The motion passed 6-0.\n8. MINUTES\n8-A 2019-7092\nDraft Meeting Minutes - June 10, 2019\nBoard Member Teague asked staff to remind the board members not in attendance to\nwatch the meeting video before the next meeting.\n8-B 2019-7093\nDraft Meeting Minutes - June 24, 2019\nBoard Member Teague moved approval. President Curtis seconded the motion. The\nmotion passed 4-0-2 (Hom and Ruiz abstained.)\n9. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS\n9-A 2019-7090\nPlanning, Building and Transportation Department Recent Actions and Decisions\nThe staff report can be found at:\nhttps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4058404&GUID=847949DF-\n480-49D2-B2C9-0977BC8B9BE8&Options=&Search=&FullText=1\nStaff Member Tai noted some changes to the attachment since the agenda was posted.\nPresident Curtis asked that posting the plans when the notice goes out be made a priority.\n9-B 2019-7091\nOral Report - Future Public Meetings and Upcoming Planning, Building and Transportation\nDepartment Projects\nStaff Member Tai said the board is off in August and said the Site A Phase II Tentative\nMap would be coming to the board, along with an Alameda Marina item, and possibly a\nnew building at Harbor Bay Parkway. He said the second meeting in September may have\nan Alameda Landing Item and a Housing Authority item for the North Housing site.\nPresident Curtis asked when the boatyard RFQ would be coming back.\nStaff Member Thomas said that item does not come back to the Planning Board, but will\ngo to the City Council. He said the above ground improvements would be worked out once\nan operator is on board.\n10. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS\n*None*\nApproved Planning Board Minutes\nPage 10 of 11\nJuly 22, 2019", "path": "PlanningBoard/2019-07-22.pdf"}
{"body": "PlanningBoard", "date": "2019-07-22", "page": 11, "text": "11. BOARD COMMUNICATIONS\n*None*\n12. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS\n*None*\n13. ADJOURNMENT\nPresident Curtis adjourned the meeting at 9:37 p.m.\nApproved Planning Board Minutes\nPage 11 of 11\nJuly 22, 2019", "path": "PlanningBoard/2019-07-22.pdf"}