pages: PlanningBoard/2020-01-27.pdf, 3
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2020-01-27 | 3 | CJ Jiang said the outdoor dog runs concern the neighbors, including their hours of operations. They said the property values would take a hit. They asked that the dog runs be moved indoors or enclosed, at minimum not share a fence with neighbors, eliminate the rooftop runs, and prohibit public events on the rooftop and asked for the application to be denied until those issues can be addressed. President Curtis closed the public hearing. Mr. Lipp, answering Board Member Hom's questions, said the rooftop will not be an event space but members of the public may be brought there on tours. Board Member Teague said the building design is a done deal and the Board is only discussing the use permit. He said he would support adding the one-to-one ratio into the use permit and removing the three dog limit. He said he would want continued noise complaints to trigger the three dog limit. He said adding some material to the fence that absorbs some of the sound would be a reasonable condition. Board Member Hom said he is open to some flexibility in the number of dogs. He said the fence detail should be subject to further review by the Planning Director and that the use permit should be subject to review if staff determines there are enough noise complaints. Board Member Saheba expressed surprise that an acoustical report was not provided for the neighbors to evaluate and to determine the barrier treatments. He supported the one- to-one requirement. He said he would consider adjusting the maximum number of dogs at ground level but not on the roof because of sound projection. President Curtis said the use permit should be left at three dogs maximum. Board Member Teague made a motion to approve the staff recommendation with the following changes: allowing up to four dogs on the outside run and three dogs on the rooftop run; and bring back a staff report on any noise complaints of the residents after a year of operation. Board Member Hom seconded the motion. Staff Member Tai said the typical standard for use permit complaints, included in this use permit, is three verified violations will trigger a public hearing for possible revocation. The motion passed 5-0. 7-B 2020-7658 PLN20-0017 - Block 11 Landscape Plan - Alameda Point Site A - Applicant: Alameda Point Partners. Public Hearing to consider the proposed landscape plan for Block 11 at Alameda Point Site A. The landscape plan follows final Planning Board approval of Design Review for the Block 11 building architecture on December 9, 2019. Approval of the landscape plan for the Block 11 is not subject to CEQA under McCorkle Eastside Approved Planning Board Minutes Page 3 of 6 January 27, 2019 | PlanningBoard/2020-01-27.pdf |