Public Meetings - Alameda, California

The Planning Board of Alameda met on December 13, 2021, at 7:00 PM via Zoom to consider several items including amendments to the Bayport/Alameda Landing Master Plan, implementation of Senate Bill 9 (SB9) zoning changes, and adoption of objective design review standards. The meeting included significant public testimony and board deliberation, with votes on all three major agenda items. Consent Calendar - The board unanimously approved the 2022 Planning Board Regular Meeting Schedule (Item 6-A). Public Comments & Testimony - Item 7C (Bayport/Alameda Landing): Betsy Mappison, Jay Garfinkel, Shella Liva (a resident of the new Pulté development), and Zach Bowling spoke. Liva expressed strong support for converting the commercial space to residential, citing safety concerns. Mappison and Bowling favored mixed-use or commercial to activate the waterfront. Parks Director Amy Woolridge suggested the space could serve as a community amenity (e.g., library/recreation center). - Item 7A (SB9): Multiple speakers, including Zach Bowling, Jay Garfinkel, Christopher Buckley (Alameda Architectural Preservation Society), Betsy Mappison, Margaret Hall, and Hank Renettez, commented. Most urged the board to stick closely to state law, avoid unrelated zoning changes, and consider an urgency ordinance. Buckley highlighted the need to preserve the word “alteration” in the ordinance. - Item 7B (Objective Design Standards): Zach Bowling and Christopher Buckley spoke. Buckley supported the standards but requested clarifications on applicability and recommended refinements to window alignment and materials. Discussion Items - Item 7C – Bayport/Alameda Landing Master Plan Amendment: Staff recommended maintaining the 5,000 sq ft commercial requirement. Bill Sadler (Pulté Homes) proposed converting the lot to residential (3 single-family or 5 townhomes, deed-restricted at moderate income). The board debated the value of commercial vs. housing. Board members Ruiz, Curtis, and Rothenberg expressed support for residential, while Teague, Hom, and Cisneros favored retaining commercial/community use. President Saheba emphasized the need for flexibility. The board ultimately voted on a motion by Teague, seconded by Cisneros, to amend the condition of approval to extend the deadline for design review (to February 28, 2022, or issuance of the 200th building permit) while keeping the 330th permit deadline for building permits. The motion passed unanimously. The board did not recommend changing the master plan. - Item 7A – SB9 Text Amendments: Staff presented draft amendments to R1 zoning to comply with SB9, allowing up to four units per lot with ministerial review. Key discussion points included unit size limits (staff proposed 1,200 sq ft; board debated 1,600 sq ft), the inclusion of “alteration” language, treatment of accessory dwelling units (ADUs) on split lots, and whether to permit efficiency units. Board members Teague, Hom, Ruiz, and Curtis offered amendments. After extensive debate, a motion by Teague (seconded by Curtis) passed 6-1 (Curtis dissenting) to recommend to the City Council an ordinance that: (1) uses the state’s “any form of rent or price control” language; (2) retains the word “alteration” in demolition/alteration provisions; (3) sets maximum unit size at 1,600 sq ft; (4) allows ADUs as per existing ordinance, potentially exceeding four units; (5) requires residential-only use on split lots; (6) removes all changes to permitted/conditional uses and definitions unrelated to SB9; and (7) clarifies that split lots must have vehicular access. The board also directed staff to return with the full definition section for efficiency units at a later date. - Item 7B – Objective Design Review Standards: Staff presented objective standards for SB9 projects, drawn from existing design guidelines. Board members Rothenberg, Ruiz, Teague, and Hom raised questions about applicability, garage door width, plate height, and flexibility. A motion by Curtis (seconded by Saheba) passed 6-1 (Ruiz dissenting) to adopt the standards with the removal of the third bullet on applicability, clarifying that the standards apply only to SB9 projects. Staff will continue refining the standards based on public and board comments. Key Outcomes - Item 7C: Unanimous vote to amend the condition of approval for the Alameda Landing Waterfront project, giving Pulté Homes until February 28, 2022, or the 200th building permit to submit design review for the commercial space, while maintaining the 330th permit deadline. The board did not recommend changing the master plan. - Item 7A: 6-1 vote to recommend SB9 ordinance to City Council with multiple amendments. Staff will present the revised ordinance to council on January 4, 2022. - Item 7B: 6-1 vote to adopt Objective Design Review Standards for One- and Two-Family Dwellings, with the third bullet on applicability removed. The standards take effect January 1, 2022. - Minutes: The board postponed approval of draft minutes from September 27, October 11, and October 25, 2021, to the next meeting. - Staff Communications: Director Andrew Thomas noted that the City Council approved the General Plan update. The board will continue housing element discussions in January 2022.

The Alameda Planning Board met on October 26, 2021, to consider recommending the General Plan 2040 to the City Council and to hold a workshop on the draft Housing Element update. The meeting included public comments, board discussion, and a unanimous vote on the General Plan, with several amendments adopted. No action was taken on the Housing Element, but the board provided extensive feedback for staff to incorporate. Consent Calendar - No items were on the consent calendar. Public Comments & Testimony - General Plan 2040: Zach Bowling expressed full support for the plan and disagreed with preservation society requests to change density language. William Smith suggested increasing floor area ratios in R1 and R2 districts to further fair housing. Christopher Buckley (Alameda Architectural Preservation Society) requested removal of the final clause in LU 15B and correction of typos, and proposed expanding tree preservation to non-invasive trees. Betsy Matheson expressed concern that the spotlight listing housing growth areas was premature and should be removed. - Housing Element Workshop: Zach Bowling commented that ADU projections might be high and stressed the need for upzoning residential areas, especially in high-opportunity neighborhoods. Betsy Matheson urged focusing new housing in shopping centers rather than historic neighborhoods. William Smith emphasized that the fair housing assessment must be completed before finalizing the site inventory and policies, and called for robust public participation. Dolores Kelleher questioned the lack of progress on negotiating with the Navy to remove the Alameda Point housing cap. Christopher Buckley voiced major concerns about upzoning R2-R6 zones, recommending a more gradual approach and greater reliance on shopping centers and vacant lots. Josh Geyer expressed strong support for housing as a human right and urged spreading housing throughout the city, including the Gold Coast and East End, to address historical discrimination. Discussion Items - General Plan 2040 Recommendation: Planning Director Andrew Thomas presented the final draft, noting it was the product of a three-year community process with over 1,700 comments and 25 organizations. Key changes from the prior draft included maintaining existing floor area ratios and deferring housing density conversations to the upcoming Housing Element update. Board members praised the document and proposed amendments. After discussion, the board agreed to: - Revise the spotlight on Article 26 (page 49) to remove confrontational language, keeping only factual statements about state law and the city’s obligations. - Change the spotlight on page 50 from "these" to "some" housing growth opportunity areas to indicate the list is not exhaustive. - In the tree preservation policy, replace "native" with "non-invasive" to protect desirable non-native trees. - In LU 15B, change "constructed" to "allowed" and use "optimizing" instead of "maximizing" to clarify the policy intent. - In ME 21 (ferry terminal parking), strike "such as rebates or need-based parking passes" to avoid implying that fee hikes are needed for equitable access. - Retain the theme "character" as broadened in the document, after board members expressed concern that the word could be used exclusively but decided the expanded definition addresses that. - Housing Element Workshop: Andrew Thomas presented the draft Housing Element, which must accommodate 5,353 units (Regional Housing Needs Allocation) by 2031. Key strategies included: 1,400 units from already approved projects; 1,282 units at Alameda Point (dependent on entitlements and Navy cap removal); 589 units at Encinal Terminals; 1,000 units from rezoning shopping centers; 500 units from upzoning residential districts (R1-R6); 480 accessory dwelling units; and 200 units on Park and Webster Streets. The presentation emphasized the new state requirement to affirmatively further fair housing (AFFH), requiring a historical analysis of segregation and a commitment to spread housing across all neighborhoods. Board members discussed the Navy cap (called for aggressive action but noted difficulty), the relationship to SB 9 and SB 10, the feasibility of ADU counts, the need for a backup plan if Encinal or Alameda Point projects fall through, and the importance of realistic capacity and clear presentation to the public. No vote was taken; this was a workshop for input. Key Outcomes - General Plan 2040: The board voted unanimously (5-0) to recommend the General Plan 2040 to the City Council with the adopted amendments. The resolution will be forwarded to the City Council for consideration at its November 16, 2021 meeting. - Housing Element Update: No formal action was taken. The board provided extensive comments for staff to incorporate into future drafts. Staff will produce updated versions, and the next public workshop will be with the City Council on November 16, 2021. The goal is to submit a draft to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) by spring 2022 for certification.

The Alameda Planning Board held a public hearing on October 11, 2021, to consider a conditional use permit (PLN21-0037) for Astra Space, Inc. for rocket research, development, light industrial manufacturing, indoor rocket engine testing, and associated outdoor storage and fencing at Alameda Point. After staff and applicant presentations and board discussion, the board approved the permit with conditions focused on noise mitigation and compliance, and also approved the minutes of the September 13, 2021 meeting. Consent Calendar - None. Public Comments & Testimony - No members of the public addressed the board during the public hearing for item 7-A or during the general oral communications period. Discussion Items - Staff presented the conditional use permit, explaining that the city-owned land is zoned for employment uses in the Enterprise District. The use permit sets rules for rocket testing, including noise limitations. Staff recommended conditions: no rocket engine testing between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m., a maximum of 120 minutes of testing per 24-hour period, installation of a permanent noise monitor funded by the applicant and owned by the city, and provision of past test dates/times upon request. Staff noted that the noise study showed rocket tests did not increase ambient noise levels at Main Street and that future expansion would require additional permits from state, federal, and regional agencies. - Matt Ganzer, from Astra Space, presented the company's operations, emphasizing safety, community engagement, and the growing small satellite launch market. He described current testing in Building 372 and future plans for a new facility at 1900 Skyhawk Street. - Board members asked about noise monitoring methods, potential future engine noise, helium gas handling, and the scope of activities covered. Staff clarified that the noise conditions anticipate future testing and that any expansion beyond the approved uses would trigger new permit reviews. - The board expressed general support for the project while emphasizing the importance of noise compliance and ongoing monitoring. Key Outcomes - The Planning Board unanimously (4-0) approved Resolution of Approval for Conditional Use Permit PLN21-0037 for Astra Space, Inc., subject to the staff-recommended conditions, including the noise limitations and monitoring requirements. - The board also unanimously approved the minutes of the September 13, 2021 Planning Board meeting.

The Alameda Planning Board met on Monday, September 27, 2021, starting at 7:00 PM via Zoom. President Saheba presided. Board members present: Cisneros, Curtis, Hom, Rothenberg, Ruiz; Teague was excused. The board considered four regular agenda items: amendments to off-street parking regulations (eliminating minimums, adding EV requirements), a policy for naming city property and streets, the draft Climate Adaptation and Hazard Mitigation Plan, and staff recommendations for a two-year commercial streets work program (Park Street, Webster Street, parklets, Alameda Avenue closure, parking enforcement). The board also approved minutes from three prior meetings. Consent Calendar - There were no consent calendar items. Public Comments & Testimony - Item 7A – Parking Ordinance: Denise Trapnier (Bike Walk Alameda president) expressed strong support for the staff recommendations, aligning with neighboring cities. Debbie Ryan (CASA) also strongly supported the ordinance, emphasizing equitable EV charging and greenhouse gas reduction benefits. - Item 7B – Naming Policy: Drew Gera Abrams (Calhoun Street resident) spoke in favor of a robust process for street renaming, noting a small number of streets (2-4) are likely candidates. - Item 7C – Climate Adaptation Plan: No public speakers. - Item 7D – Commercial Streets Program: Kathy Weber (Downtown Alameda Business Association executive director) urged continuation of the program as a lifeline for businesses. Ron Mooney (resident and business owner) supported the program, noted no recent complaints on Alameda Avenue, and emphasized the need for parking enforcement and a 20 mph speed limit. Discussion Items - 7A – Amending Alameda Municipal Code for Off-Street Parking (Section 30-2, 30-7): Brian McGuire presented staff's proposal to eliminate minimum parking requirements (except for disabled and EV) and set maximums, based on City climate and transportation goals. Key changes: maximum parking ratios (e.g., 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit), EV ready requirements (25% level 2 for multifamily, 10% installed for commercial), simplified bike parking, and maintaining disabled parking minimums based on the maximum allowed. Board members asked about disabled parking calculation, EV charger stringency vs. state code, parking stackers, and applicability to existing uses. After public comment, the board passed a unanimous motion (with amendments) to recommend the ordinance to City Council. - 7B – City Council Policy for Naming City Property, Facilities and Streets: Alan Tai presented the updated policy with a new four-step public process, expanded criteria (diversity, inclusiveness), removal of pre-approved names list, and a new process for renaming existing facilities/streets requiring a petition (500 Alameda residents or 50%+1 property owners). Board members commented on thresholds, weight for affected residents (suggesting a veto by 2/3 of residents), renter inclusion, and cost transparency. No vote; comments to be forwarded to City Council. - 7C – Draft Climate Adaptation and Hazard Mitigation Plan: Danielle Neiler presented the plan addressing natural hazards (earthquakes, sea level rise, flooding). Key points: 70% of soft-story buildings retrofitted, 63 remaining vulnerable (1,000 units); planning for 3.5 feet sea level rise by 2070; FEMA eligibility. Board questions covered regional collaboration, supply chain resilience, private wells, feasibility of improving FEMA CRS rating (currently 8), and mandatory vs. incentivized seismic retrofits. No action; comments to inform final plan. - 7D – Commercial Streets Two-Year Work Program: Rochelle Wheeler presented five program elements: restriping Park/Webster streets (retaining two lanes with turn pockets), parklet program (32 permits issued; proposed higher safety/aesthetic standards, concrete barriers, annual fees), return to pre-COVID parking enforcement (restoring 2-hour limits, resuming meter enforcement), maintaining Alameda Avenue closure until repaving (expected 2024), and letting the temporary use permit for private parking lots expire (November 1, 2021) with option for individual permits. Board discussed potential collisions, parking equity, survey demographics, and parklet fees. Comments to go to City Council. Key Outcomes - Item 7A – Adoption of Recommendation to City Council on Parking Ordinance: Motion by Board Member Hom, seconded by Curtis, passed unanimously (5-0, with Teague absent). Amendments included: clarify that exceeding parking maximum is an administrative use permit (zoning administrator level); clarify encroachment and stacking language; confirm that new requirements apply only to new or expanded parking facilities (not existing untouched lots); clarify that floor area excludes unenclosed balconies/garages; exempt ADUs from all parking and bicycle parking requirements; delegate parking lot lighting design review to administrative staff. - Item 7B – No action taken. Comments on naming policy to be forwarded to City Council. - Item 7C – No action taken. Comments on climate plan to be forwarded. - Item 7D – No action taken. Comments on commercial streets program to be forwarded. - Minutes Approval: Board approved draft minutes for June 28, 2021 (vote: 4-0-1, Hom abstained because absent), for July 12, 2021 (vote: 4-0-1, Ruiz abstained because absent), and for July 26, 2021 (vote: 5-0-0). Minor typographical corrections noted. - Staff Communications: Upcoming meetings noted: October 11 (housing element workshop), October 25 (general plan draft). Board subcommittee meeting on housing element scheduled for Thursday, September 30.

The Alameda Planning Board convened on September 13, 2021, at 7:00 PM via Zoom to consider several major items, including the certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Alameda General Plan 2040, approval of the General Plan itself, and a review of the Draft Vision Zero Action Plan. The meeting also included oral communications from the public on non-agenda topics and on specific agenda items. After extensive discussion, the board voted unanimously to recommend certification of the Final EIR and deferred the final approval of the General Plan to a future meeting to allow for a consolidated draft. The board also reviewed and commented on the Vision Zero plan. Public Comments & Testimony - Non-Agenda Oral Communications: A speaker (Lisa Ross) raised concerns about the difficulty of finding the Zoom link in the agenda, requesting it be made more visible. A second speaker (Christopher Buckley) noted that public correspondence records were unavailable online earlier that day. Staff acknowledged the issue but noted that the Legistar system does not allow colored hyperlinks. Board members offered suggestions to improve accessibility. - General Plan 2040 and Harbor Bay Club: Numerous residents spoke in favor of preserving the Harbor Bay Club as a recreational facility, opposing its designation as community mixed-use or housing. Key points included: - Speakers emphasized the club's role as a community amenity, providing swimming, tennis, camps, and after-school programs, especially during the pandemic. - Several speakers (e.g., Chris Arya, Jeff Peterson) argued that the original developer’s agreement and reclamation district bond required the site to be recreational, and that changing the designation would breach promises to residents. - One speaker (Neil Dandavati) expressed openness to mixed-use development but stressed the need for community engagement and assurance that a recreational club would remain. - A speaker (Bill Pai, board president of the Harbor Bay Isle primary board) supported deferring the zoning decision to the housing element process but stated the community strongly opposes high-density residential on the site. - One speaker (Zach Bowling) advocated for keeping the Measure A historical references in the plan and deferring the Harbor Bay Club decision to the housing element. - Vision Zero Action Plan: No public speakers signed up for this item. Discussion Items 1. General Plan 2040 and Final EIR (Items 7A1 and 7A2) - Staff Presentation: Planning Director Andrew Thomas presented the two resolutions: one recommending certification of the Final EIR and adoption of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), and the second recommending approval of the Alameda General Plan 2040. He highlighted the three-year community process, noting that 1,500–2,000 individuals participated. He identified three key outstanding issues: (a) references to Measure A and the Fair Housing Act in the introduction, (b) the land use classification for the Harbor Bay Club, and (c) the relationship between land use classifications and the upcoming housing element. Staff proposed maintaining the current commercial recreation designation for the Harbor Bay Club and deferring the housing discussion to the housing element update. Staff also circulated Exhibit C with additional amendments. - Board Discussion on EIR: Board members had no questions on the EIR. The board voted unanimously to recommend certification of the Final EIR and adoption of the MMRP (motion by Board Member Teague, second by Rothenberg). - Board Discussion on General Plan: - Board members debated the inclusion of Measure A language. Some (Curtis, Teague) argued it was historically inaccurate and should be removed, while others (Cisneros) felt it was a factual statement. The board also discussed the term "character" in the plan's themes, with Cisneros suggesting replacing it with "balance" to avoid exclusionary connotations. - Regarding the Harbor Bay Club, several board members (Hom, Cisneros, Rothenberg) supported staff's recommendation to keep the current commercial recreation designation and address the issue during the housing element process. Board Member Curtis provided historical context on the club's origins and the reclamation district bond, arguing that the site should remain recreational. Board Member Teague listed numerous specific amendments to the plan text, including changes to bike boulevard language, parking maximums, and equity-focused terminology. - The board decided to defer the final vote on the General Plan and requested staff to produce a consolidated draft incorporating all amendments discussed, to be brought back for a final review at a future meeting. The motion passed unanimously. 2. Vision Zero Action Plan (Item 7C) - Staff Presentation: Senior Transportation Coordinator Lisa Foster presented the draft Vision Zero Action Plan, a five-year plan aiming to eliminate traffic deaths and severe injuries by 2040. She highlighted the data-driven approach, including a 10-year crash analysis showing that 73% of injury crashes occur on 20% of streets (high injury corridors). The plan includes 50 actions, such as prioritizing investments on high injury corridors, creating traffic engineering checklists, and focusing enforcement on dangerous behaviors. The plan will go to the Transportation Commission in October and to City Council for adoption in December. - Board Discussion: Board members praised the plan's thoroughness and actionability. Suggestions included: - Adding a Caltrans representative to the task force (Rothenberg). - Including before-and-after studies to measure the effectiveness of safety improvements (Hom). - Clarifying the prioritization of actions within the plan (Cisneros). - Considering the impact of freeway traffic on Alameda's streets (Rothenberg). - The board also noted that Fifth Street, despite not being on the high injury corridor map, had recent crashes and community concern, and staff is evaluating responses. Key Outcomes - Final EIR: The board voted unanimously to recommend that the City Council certify the Final Environmental Impact Report and adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. - General Plan 2040: The board voted unanimously to defer the final recommendation and requested staff to bring back a consolidated draft (incorporating all amendments discussed) for one more review before sending to the City Council. - Vision Zero Action Plan: No formal action was taken; the board provided comments and feedback for staff to consider before the plan goes to the Transportation Commission and City Council. - Naming Policy (Item 7B): This item was deferred to a future meeting due to time constraints. - Minutes (Items 8A and 8B): The board decided to continue review of the draft minutes to a future meeting to allow for public comment as advised by the City Attorney. - Staff Communications (Items 9A and 9B): These were also deferred to the next meeting. - Future Meetings: Staff announced upcoming items including a workshop on the housing element update, revisions to parking ordinance amendments, and climate action plan updates. Note: The meeting adjourned after oral communications at approximately 11:00 PM.

The Alameda Planning Board convened on July 26, 2021, at 7:00 PM via Zoom. The board addressed a consent calendar, a temporary use permit for a parking lot, a design review for a medical respite facility, and other administrative items. Key actions included approval of the temporary use permit with conditions and approval of the design review with a 4-3 vote. Consent Calendar - 6-A (1310 Harbor Bay Parkway): Approved final development plan amendment to reduce front yard setback from 50 to 49 feet for a two-story R&D office building. Unanimous consent. Public Comments & Testimony Item 6-B (1435 Webster Street Temporary Use Permit): - Residents (Melissa Malam, Marie Malam, Stacey Marino, Constance Garcia) expressed strong opposition, citing excessive noise, parking issues, and disruption to quality of life. They requested no amplified music after October or denial of the permit. - Supporters (Tina Blaine, Zach Bowling, Janet Koike, Stacey Lewis) highlighted community benefits, economic support for local businesses, and the need for outdoor arts programming during COVID. The applicant (Linda Asbury, West Alameda Business Association) stated no profit is made, that sound mitigation measures have been implemented, and that ticketed events cover artist fees. Item 7-A (1245 McKay Avenue Design Review): - Public testimony was restricted to design issues. Speakers (Zach Bowling, Ronlin Harris) praised the design as beautiful and appropriate. Others (Carmen Reed, John Healy, Mike Van Dyne, Harvey Rosal, Liz Cox) criticized the lack of historic reference, questioned the lack of public notice, and raised concerns about the building's height, materials, and sustainability. Discussion Items 6-B – 1435 Webster Street Temporary Use Permit: - Staff recommended a limited use permit through December 31, 2021, with conditions including amplified sound restrictions and compliance with noise ordinances. Board members discussed noise levels, attendee capacity (220 vs. 350), and the number of amplified events per weekend. The applicant confirmed contracts were signed before the use permit process. - Key Amendments: Board member Cisneros moved to approve with modifications: noise monitoring at property line to comply with city ordinance (50-60 dB), reduce maximum attendees to 220, limit amplified events to two per weekend (with a September exception for three events), and correct event date lists. Motion passed 6-1 (Curtis opposed). 7-A – 1245 McKay Avenue Design Review: - Staff and applicant presented plans for a two-story, 29,810-square-foot medical respite facility with contemporary design. Board members raised concerns about the east (McKay) elevation's lack of activation, sustainability features (all-electric, solar shading, roof material), and materials (EIFS texture, roof type). Some members favored approving with conditions delegated to staff, while others wanted further board review. - After debate, board member Cisneros moved to approve with conditions: smooth EIFS texture, refined McKay elevation, a sustainability plan, improved roofing material (preference for standing seam), and a suggestion for on-site public art referencing site history. Motion passed 4-3 (Ruiz, Sahaba, Rothenberg opposed; Curtis, Hom, Cisneros, Teague in favor). 7-B & 7-C (General Plan Update and Vision Zero Plan): - Continued to September 13, 2021, due to time constraints. 7-D – Board Elections: - Board member Sahaba elected President; board member Ruiz elected Vice President. 8-A – Minutes of June 14, 2021: - Approved as amended (5-0-2 abstentions). Key Outcomes - 6-B Approved (6-1) with conditions on noise, capacity (220), amplified event frequency, and corrected event dates. - 7-A Approved (4-3) with conditions to refine design, improve sustainability, and select materials. - General Plan Update and Vision Zero Action Plan continued to September 13, 2021. - New board leadership elected: President Sahaba, Vice President Ruiz. - Meeting adjourned at approximately 11:00 PM.

The Alameda Planning Board held a regular meeting on July 13, 2021 to discuss three major items: a conditional use permit for outdoor space at a bar, a study session for a parking lot event venue, and a study session on the General Plan update. The board approved the first item with conditions and continued discussion on the others. Consent Calendar - No items on the consent calendar. Public Comments & Testimony (Public comments are included under each discussion item below.) Discussion Item 7A: 1215 Park Street – Conditional Use Permit for Outdoor Patio and Yard - Proposal: Clubhouse Bar requested a conditional use permit to serve customers on its rear patio and lawn. Staff recommended approval with conditions addressing noise impacts on nearby residences (adjacent property line within 15 feet). - Public Comments: Multiple neighbors opposed the permit, citing frequent loud noise, profanity, sexual harassment, and a drunk-driving incident linked to the bar. They submitted video evidence. Supporters (including the owner Joe Milosevic and long-time patrons) described a well-run business that has taken steps to mitigate issues (signs, monitoring, upgraded cameras). Over 350 local signatures were gathered in support. - Board Discussion: Board members debated hours of operation for the lawn area (11 a.m. to 6 p.m. on weekends approved via amendment, versus an earlier 3 p.m. cutoff) and added conditions: a good neighbor policy, prohibition of amplified sound including live performances, downward-directed lighting, cameras no higher than the fence line, and a mandatory six-month review. - Key Outcomes: The board voted 5-0 to approve the conditional use permit with the final conditions. The decision is final unless appealed within 10 days. Discussion Item 7B: 1435 Webster Street – Study Session for Use Permit for Outdoor Commercial Entertainment Space - Proposal: The Webster Street Business Association and West Alameda Arts Foundation sought a permit to continue a summer concert series in a parking lot (the Healing Garden) through year-end. Due to a noticing error (wrong address published), this item was heard as a study session only; no action was taken. - Public Comments: Many speakers supported the events, calling them a community asset that revitalized Webster Street, supported local businesses, and provided a safe gathering space. Neighbors raised concerns about noise and parking loss. - Board Discussion: Board members broadly supported the concept but asked staff to clarify event schedule discrepancies, review fire safety for proposed draperies, and address maximum occupancy. The item will be re-noticed and return for formal action on July 26, 2021. Discussion Item 7C: General Plan Update – Study Session on Proposed Amendments - Proposal: Staff presented a list of amendments to the March 2021 draft General Plan, including changes to land use classifications and residential densities. A key issue was whether to defer detailed density decisions to the Housing Element process. - Public Comments: Speakers addressed density concerns (e.g., Harbor Bay Club site re-designated as community mixed-use), historic preservation, and the need for better community outreach. - Board Discussion: The board generally agreed to remove specific density ranges from the land use element to avoid predetermining Housing Element outcomes, and to use floor area ratios instead. Other topics included cautioning against mandates for existing building electrification, refining historic preservation levels, and standardizing the name of the Alameda Wildlife Reserve. No formal action was taken; discussion will continue on July 26. Key Outcomes - 7A: Approved (5-0) with conditions and a review in six months. - 7B: No action; formal decision scheduled for July 26, 2021. - 7C: No action; further refinement of amendments to be presented at the next meeting. - Minutes: Approved (4-0-1) with a correction. - Staff Communications: The City Council filed an appeal of the RHNA allocation on July 9, seeking a 50% reduction to 2,650 units. Staff will continue work on the Housing Element.

The Alameda Planning Board held a regular meeting on July 12, 2021, via Zoom. The board considered a use permit for an outdoor patio at Club House Bar (7A), held a study session on a use permit for outdoor events on Webster Street (7B, re-noticed due to an address error), and conducted a public hearing on the General Plan Update (7C). The board also approved minutes from May 24, 2021, and received staff updates on the RHNA appeal and upcoming projects. Consent Calendar - None. Public Comments & Testimony - Item 7A – Club House Bar Outdoor Patio: Multiple neighbors expressed strong opposition, citing noise, sexual harassment, and inappropriate behavior from patrons in the backyard. They provided video evidence and described negative impacts on their quality of life. Supporters, including customers and local business advocates, praised the owner's efforts to improve the bar and urged approval with conditions. The owner stated they had installed signs, surveillance, and reduced access to the grassy area to mitigate issues. - Item 7B – Webster Street Outdoor Events (Study Session): Residents and business owners overwhelmingly supported the Healing Garden and summer concert series, describing it as a community asset that revitalized the West End, supported local artists, and provided safe outdoor gatherings. Some acknowledged noise and parking concerns but praised the organizers' mitigation efforts. No opposition was voiced during the meeting. - Item 7C – General Plan Update: Public comments addressed a range of issues: the Harbor Bay Club's proposed land use change (community mixed use), concerns about density and lot sizes, preservation of the Alameda Wildlife Reserve name, and the importance of maintaining recreational amenities. The Alameda Architectural Preservation Society recommended deferring density decisions to the housing element process. Discussion Items - Item 7A – Club House Bar: Staff recommended approval with conditions (e.g., limited hours, noise mitigation). The board discussed hours of operation for the lawn area (11am-6pm vs. 11am-3pm). Board members emphasized the need for a good neighbor policy, clarified lighting and camera placement, and added a six-month review requirement. After an amendment to keep the 6pm closing time passed 4-1, the motion for approval (including additional conditions) passed 5-0. - Item 7B – Webster Street Events: As a study session, no action was taken. Board members expressed general support but raised questions about event frequency, sound mitigation, and communication with neighbors. Staff will re-notice and bring the item back for formal action on July 26, 2021. - Item 7C – General Plan Update: The board discussed proposed amendments, particularly regarding residential densities and land use classifications. There was agreement to avoid predetermining densities in the land use element and instead address them in the upcoming housing element process. Board members offered specific suggestions on policies related to electrification of buildings (favoring incentives over mandates), historic preservation, and the definition of character. Staff will prepare revised amendments for the next meeting. Key Outcomes - Item 7A: Approved (5-0) the use permit for Club House Bar's outdoor rear patio and yard with conditions: hours of operation for lawn area 11am-6pm (or dusk if earlier); development of a good neighbor policy; clarification of amplified sound prohibition to include live performances; lighting directed below neighboring window lines; surveillance cameras not mounted above fence line; and a mandatory review in six months. Appeal deadline: 10 days. - Item 7B: Study session concluded; the item will be re-noticed to the correct address and return for action on July 26, 2021. - Item 7C: No action taken. Staff will incorporate board feedback and present updated amendments at the July 26, 2021 meeting. The board aims to finalize the general plan in September 2021 to allow focus on the housing element. - Minutes: Approved (4-0-1, President Teague abstaining) with a correction to replace "carb" with "CARP" (California Air Resources Board). - Staff Communications: The City Council voted 3-2 to appeal the RHNA allocation, requesting a 50% reduction (to 2,650 units). The appeal was filed July 9, 2021; response expected by November 2021. Staff will continue working on both scenario plans.

The Alameda Planning Board met virtually on Monday, June 28, 2021 at 7:00 PM. The board considered a call for review of a variance for a single-family home on a narrow lot, a design review for a commercial building on Webster Street, and held a workshop on proposed amendments to off-street parking regulations. The meeting also included approval of minutes and board communications. Agenda Changes - Item 7-A (Board Elections) was moved to the July 26, 2021 meeting, pending the outcome of the City Council’s nomination of a mayor. Public Comments & Testimony - Non-agenda items: None. - Item 7-B (910 Centennial Avenue): Roberta (neighbor) opposed the variance, citing concerns about fire safety (one-foot setback), loss of sunlight, mold issues, and the scale of the proposed 2,100+ sq. ft. home. She noted the fire chief had assured her a water wall could protect adjacent property. Zach Bowling spoke in support, stating the lot is zoned for housing and the constraints make development difficult. Philip Vagoni (property owner) explained the home is for his sister and family, and that he has owned the property for 100 years. - Item 7-C (1929 Webster Street): Zach Bowling expressed strong support, citing the benefits of a neighborhood tavern near the Cross Alameda Trail and transit. Karan Patel (owner of the adjacent Roadway Inn) raised concerns about noise from the tavern operating until 2 a.m. and parking overflow onto his property. He stated he had not been contacted by the applicant. - Item 7-D (Parking Amendments Workshop): Denise Trapigny (BikeWalk Alameda) and Drew Dara-Evans supported the elimination of parking minimums, citing climate goals, housing affordability, and mode shift. Zach Bowling also offered technical comments on EV charging standards. Discussion Items - 7-B – 910 Centennial Avenue: The board reviewed staff’s recommendation to uphold the Zoning Administrator’s approval of a variance and design review for a new two-story, 1,907 sq. ft. home on a 22-foot-wide lot. The variance would allow side setbacks of 3 feet (east) and 1 foot (west) instead of the required 5 feet, and a front yard setback of 14.5 feet instead of 20 feet. Staff found the lot’s narrowness an extraordinary circumstance and that the design was compatible with the neighborhood. Board members discussed fire safety, the removal of an avocado tree on the property line, and the potential to increase the garage setback from 1 foot to 2 feet. President Teague proposed a condition to require a minimum 2-foot setback for the garage wall. The motion passed 6-0. - 7-C – 1929 Webster Street: The board considered a design review for a 6,210 sq. ft. restaurant and tavern building with a rooftop deck, intended to replace a vacant lot at the intersection of Webster Street and Atlantic Avenue. The project had already received a use permit and parking variance in 2020. The applicant presented updated designs emphasizing warm materials, a cantilevered canopy, and integration with the Cross Alameda Trail. Board members praised the architecture but criticized the proposed fence as inadequate. A condition was added requiring the developer to explore incorporating public art into the fence. The motion passed unanimously (6-0). - 7-D – Parking Amendments Workshop: Staff presented draft amendments to Alameda Municipal Code Section 30-7, proposing to replace parking minimums with maximums, require EV charging infrastructure, establish transportation demand management (TDM) for large projects, and update bike parking standards. The amendments aim to implement the Climate Action and Resiliency Plan and Transportation Choices Plan. Board members offered diverse perspectives: some stressed the need to avoid unintended consequences (e.g., parking spillover into neighborhoods), others supported eliminating both minimums and maximums to let the market decide. Concerns were raised about equitable access for low-income residents, older adults, and people with disabilities. The discussion was for feedback only; no action was taken. Key Outcomes - 7-B – 910 Centennial Avenue: Motion to uphold the Zoning Administrator’s decision with an added condition to increase the garage wall setback from 1 foot to 2 feet. Approved 6-0 (Board Member Saheba absent). - 7-C – 1929 Webster Street: Motion to approve the design review subject to conditions in the revised resolution, including a recommendation to work with the Arts Commission on the fence. Approved 6-0. - 7-D – Parking Amendments: No action taken; workshop only. Staff will incorporate board feedback before returning with a final proposal for recommendation to City Council. - Minutes: Draft minutes from May 10, 2021 were approved with amendments suggested by Board Members Ruiz, Hom, and Teague. - Board Communications: The board discussed the upcoming City Council hearing on the housing element resolution. President Teague expressed disappointment that the planning board’s recommended resolution had been presented in strikeout format and that the staff report did not fully capture the board’s reasoning. Director Thomas clarified that the staff report included both the planning board’s version and staff’s own recommendation. The board agreed the matter would be debated by the City Council.