{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2019-09-05", "page": 1, "text": "APPROVED MINUTES\nREGULAR MEETING OF THE\nCITY OF ALAMEDA HISTORICAL ADVISORY BOARD\nTHURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 2019\n1. CONVENE\nChair Saxby called meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.\nChair Saxby noted that Board Member Sanchez would be absent due to his need to recuse\nhimself for both items.\n2. ROLL CALL\nPresent: Chair Saxby, Board Members Jones, Lau, and Wit.\nAbsent: Board Member Sanchez.\n3. MINUTES\n3-A 2019-7222\nDraft Meeting Minutes - August 1, 2019\nChair Saxby noted an error in name under item 1.\nBoard Member Jones made a motion to approve the minutes as corrected. Board\nMember Wit seconded the motion. The motion passed 4-0.\n4. AGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSION\n*None*\n5. ORAL COMMUNICATION\nBetsy Mathieson requested that the HAB begin a process to designate Jackson Park as\nan historical monument. She said the need has arisen due to a proposal for a playground\nbeing added to the park. She gave a brief history of the park and neighborhood.\nDenise Nowicki described the park characteristics that she feels make it worthy of\npreserving the Victorian nature of the park. She asked that the HAB begin the process of\ndesignating the park an historical monument.\nChair Saxby asked what the process would be for nominating the park for historic\nmonument status.\nAllen Tai, City Planner, thanked the speakers for their engagement. He said the topic is\nnot agendized for tonight's meeting and would need to be placed on an agenda before\nbeing discussed by this board. He said the neighborhood could accelerate the process by\nfiling an application.\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 1 of 7\nSeptember 5, 2019", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2019-09-05.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2019-09-05", "page": 2, "text": "Chair Saxby asked if the Fa\u00e7ade Grant Program or something similar would be available\nto assist in preservation efforts.\nStaff Member Tai said the Fa\u00e7ade Grant Program was established to assist with private\nprojects and is not sure if this type of project would be eligible. He said he is not aware of\nany mechanism for waive application fees for historic projects in Alameda and the issue\nwould need to be discussed at a public hearing.\nChair Saxby said the proposal has a lot of merit and the park has a lot of historic integrity.\nStaff Member Tai reminded the Board that they should refrain from discussing the topic,\nwhich is not agendized.\n6. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS\nStaff Member Tai said they received a flyer promoting Oktoberfest, and a letter from\nAlameda Architectural Preservation Society regarding the next agenda item.\n7. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS\n7-A 2019-7225\nPLN19-0385 - Alameda Marina Certificate of Approval - 1815 Clement Avenue, Alameda\nMarina - Applicant: Pacific Shops, Inc. Public hearing to consider the Rehabilitation Plan\nfor existing contributing buildings #15, 16, 17, 19, and 27 and non-contributing building\n#18 in the Alameda Marina Historic District at the Alameda Marina site, and consideration\nof Certificate of Approval for the demolition of non-contributing building #14, and potential\ndemolition/reconstruction of contributing building 21 and non-contributing buildings #5, 13,\n25, and 26 to facilitate shoreline rehabilitation under the approved Alameda Marina Master\nPlan. The environmental effects of the proposed project were considered and disclosed in\nthe Alameda Marina Master Plan EIR (State Clearinghouse #2016102064). No further\nenvironmental review is required under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)\nStaff Member Tai gave a brief presentation. The staff report and attachments can be found\nat: ttps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4119985&GUID=F8918104-\n6E4-4DDE-925D-F149832E6914&FullText=\nClay Fry, project architect, gave a presentation about the plans for adaptive reuse of the\nhistoric buildings on the site.\nChair Saxby asked if the proposed layout for the gatehouse matches the original footprint.\nMr. Fry said he attempted to replicate the original box, though cannot be 100% sure\nwithout undertaking demolition.\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 2 of 7\nSeptember 5, 2019", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2019-09-05.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2019-09-05", "page": 3, "text": "Chair Saxby said the grade change around building 19 changes the building's relationship\nto the site. He asked if part of the surrounding area, perhaps the south side and a little\naround the corners, could be kept at the existing elevation.\nMr. Fry said they studied putting the building \"in a hole.' He said there was not enough\nspace to do that. He said preserving the grade at the south fa\u00e7ade is theoretically possible,\nbut all the surrounding parking and sidewalk would be elevated. He said that if he were to\ntry and preserve the grade at one side, it would be at the north side which did not\npreviously have an entrance. He said it was perhaps also possible on the west side of the\nbuilding where there is more sidewalk to work with.\nChair Saxby said that it would be great to be able to keep the south and west sides as\nthey were. He questioned the addition of a water table feature added to buildings 15, 17\nand 18 since that would be ahistorical. He asked what the intention is for the roof monitors.\nMr. Fry said any damaged glazing would be replaced with glass.\nChair Saxby said the guard shack photograph shows that the building had louvered vents.\nHe said in the past he has put glass on the backside of the monitors in order to condition\nthe interior space. He asked if that could be considered.\nMr. Fry said he could consider doing that type of treatment.\nChair Saxby asked if any of the old growth heavy timbers used in these buildings would\nbe salvaged and reused.\nMr. Fry said the demolition plans for phase I include plans to salvage materials from those\nbuildings and some would be used by the landscape architect. He said they have not\nconsidered using old materials in any of the new construction. He noted that surgical\ndemolition is extremely expensive and they have plans to do some of that.\nChair Saxby asked if relocation of buildings has been discussed with any moving\ncompanies.\nMr. Fry said the large buildings won't move and the small ones are being kept.\nBoard Member Wit asked what Building 19's intended use would be.\nMr. Fry said that under the Master Plan, it is intended to be used for maritime commercial\nuse.\nBoard Member Jones suggested having an additional color to help Building 19 stand out\nmore.\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 3 of 7\nSeptember 5, 2019", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2019-09-05.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2019-09-05", "page": 4, "text": "Mr. Fry said that the color palette matches the historic nature of the site and creates a\ncohesive theme for all of the historic buildings. He said he originally liked the orange, but\nhas been converted.\nBoard Member Jones asked why Mr. Fry preferred the taller alternative for the gatehouse\ntower.\nMr. Fry said it helps pull the banding and other elements from the adjacent buildings into\nthe gate house. He said it also frames the new street better and draws more attention to\nthe importance of the entry.\nBoard Member Lau asked if anything from Building 14 could be salvaged or pieces re-\nused.\nMr. Fry said the building is not structurally stable and the wharf cannot safely support the\nbuilding. He said the cost of moving and replacing the building is economically infeasible.\nBoard Member Wit asked how many parking spaces would be provided for buildings 25\nand 26.\nMr. Fry said there are over 300 spaces dedicated to maritime uses throughout the site,\nand no residential parking is permitted in those spaces.\nChair Saxby opened the public hearing.\nKarl Robrock expressed concern that the vision of a maritime building would not happen\nbecause the timing of leases being terminated and demolition do not match up and provide\na place for maritime industries to be able to move into. He said those businesses are\nimportant mom and pop shops that need a realistic plan.\nChris Nicholas, commodore of Island Yacht Club, said that the yacht club is a cultural\nresource worthy of preservation under the Board's mandate. He said he hopes their home\ncan somehow be preserved for the community.\nChair Saxby asked what the plan is for existing maritime businesses and if there is a plan\nfor preserving the social aspect of the marina community.\nSean Murphy, Alameda Marina, said the Master Plan focused the plan for the maritime\ncore on these buildings and put it in the first phase in order to address the needs for\nmaritime commercial space. He said they have an active marina and the yacht club\nactivities are an important part of their plan going forward.\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 4 of 7\nSeptember 5, 2019", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2019-09-05.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2019-09-05", "page": 5, "text": "Chair Saxby said the mitigation measures are his focus. He said he appreciates the effort\nto preserve buildings 15, 17 and 18. He said the proposal for Building 16 is entirely\nappropriate. He said he would like to see a study of keeping the grade at one or more\nsides of Building 19. He wondered if the sliding doors should only be used where the\noriginal entrances are and that the new entrances on the north and east elevations should\nbe something different. He said he is okay with the raw metal color. He asked what is\nproposed for all the large roof vents on Building 19.\nMr. Fry said the plan is that the vents would stay.\nChair Saxby said removing the doors on Building 27 is a difficult issue. He suggested that\nanything that could be left that indicates the former presence of a door would be a good\nthing. He said he strongly favors the one story gatehouse. He said the historic buildings\ndo a good job of framing the entrance and that the tower would take something away from\nthe view of Building 19. He said he would like to see the roof monitor restored and water\ntable removed on buildings 15, 17 and 18.\nBoard Members all expressed support for the one story gateway approach.\nChair Saxby said that any efforts that can be made to preserve buildings 5, 13, 25 and 26\nwould go a long way towards preserving important parts of the marina's history. He said\nwe should hold onto the possibility of moving buildings for wharf and seawall work and\nthen moving them back into place.\nBoard Member Jones expressed a desire to reuse materials in a larger fashion than just\nmaking benches out of them.\nStaff Member Tai asked if the Board would be amenable to having the study of the grading\non the south and west sides of Building 19 be brought back to staff for decision and shared\nwith the Board as an off agenda report. He said a similar approach could be taken for\nreviewing the applicant's salvage plans.\nChair Saxby said that he would like to add a similar procedure for reporting back on the\npossibility of moving and replacing the buildings along the waterfront.\nStaff Member Tai summarized the Board's positions based on the discussion: Building 16\nrehab improvements are satisfactory; Building 19 would study the west and south\nelevations and not have sliding doors on the north and east elevations.\nChair Saxby said he supported the idea of not using the sliding doors on the north and\neast sides in order to differentiate from the original entrances.\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 5 of 7\nSeptember 5, 2019", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2019-09-05.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2019-09-05", "page": 6, "text": "Board Member Jones felt the sliding doors were different enough in scale and materials\nthat it did not appear to be trying to replicate the historic look.\nBoard Members Lau and Wit said they were okay with the sliding doors.\nStaff Member Tai continued to summarize the Board position. Sliding doors would be okay\non all sides of Building 19. The removed doors on Building 27 should leave some evidence\nof their previous existence, if feasible. The one story gatehouse option would be preferred.\nBuilding 15, 17 and 18 would remove the water table and restore the monitor windows.\nThere would be a report back to the Board on the findings regarding moving and relocation\nof buildings, and reporting back on the disposition and demolition of materials.\nChair Saxby made a motion to approve the draft resolution with all of the conditions\nsummarized by Staff Member Tai. Board Member Wit seconded the motion. The\nmotion passed 4-0.\n7-B 2019-7226\nPLN19-0270 - Informational Presentation on Alameda Marina Phase 1 - 1815 Clement\nAvenue, Alameda Marina - Applicant: Pacific Shops, Inc. The Historical Advisory Board\nwill hear a presentation on Phase 1 of the Alameda Marina Master Plan project, called\nWrap A or The Launch. The Board may provide comments on the project design but no\naction will be taken. This item is informational only and no environmental review is required\nunder the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)\nStaff Member Tai introduced the item. The staff report and attachments can be found\nat:\n https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4120016&GUID=9F983014-\n886B-4B8D-BDOE-52F3F36D2323&FullText=1\nMr. Fry gave a brief presentation on the design for the first multifamily building at Alameda\nMarina.\nChair Saxby asked for more information about the phasing of the project.\nMr. Murphy said that this 351 unit building, combined with the maritime commercial core\nwould be phase I. He said phase Il is on the eastern edge of the site. He said the historic\nrehab would be happening simultaneously with the apartment construction. He said the\nseawall in front of each phase would be done at the same time, which would allow\nupgrading utilities for the marina.\n8. BOARD COMMUNICATIONS\n*None*\n9. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 6 of 7\nSeptember 5, 2019", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2019-09-05.pdf"}
{"body": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard", "date": "2019-09-05", "page": 7, "text": "Staff Member Tai noted that the fa\u00e7ade grant program was reopening. He said the focus\nthis round is on restoring historic building facades. He gave an update on the exploratory\nwork at the Lincoln Market site.\n10. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS\n*None*\n11. ADJOURNMENT\nChair Saxby adjourned the meeting at 8:54 p.m.\nApproved Meeting Minutes\nPage 7 of 7\nSeptember 5, 2019", "path": "HistoricalAdvisoryBoard/2019-09-05.pdf"}