Alameda Planning Board Meeting - October 23, 2023
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Alameda Planning Board Meeting - October 23, 2023
The Alameda Planning Board met on Monday, October 23, 2023, at 7:00 PM in City Hall Council Chambers. The meeting included a consent calendar, one regular design review item, staff and board communications, and a tribute to the late Board Member Ron Curtis. All votes were unanimous.
Consent Calendar
- The Board approved the annual reviews for three development agreements: Alameda Point Site A (Applicant: Alameda Point Partners, LLC), Boatworks (Applicant: Boatworks, LLC), and Del Monte (Applicants: TL Partners I, LP and Alta Buena Vista Owner, LLC). Each consideration of an annual report was noted as not a project under CEQA. The motion passed unanimously (5-0).
Public Comments & Testimony
- Shelby Shannon spoke during non-agenda public comment regarding an O Club parking lot issue, alleging that staff statements about permitting were inaccurate and that the city does not enforce laws on city-owned properties. She also addressed the consent calendar, arguing that the Site A project exceeds residential unit limits established in the 2014 Alameda Point EIR. She requested the Board review the EIR and remove offending provisions. Staff responded that approvals went through proper channels with CEQA review.
- During the second non-agenda public comment period, Shannon thanked staff for information about the O Club parking lot, requested a permit number, and reiterated concerns about Alameda Point development compliance with the EIR and Plan Bay Area requirements.
Discussion Items
- 5-A: 1251 Park Street Design Review (PLN23-0121) — Staff presented a proposal for a new 3,316 square foot, two-story mixed-use building with a 1,400 square foot ground-floor commercial space and two residential units. The existing building, constructed in 1922 and heavily altered in 1941, has been vacant since 2020. The Historical Advisory Board issued a certificate of approval on October 5, 2023, finding the existing building not historically significant. The design review is discretionary, reviewed against the Citywide Design Review Manual. Staff included conditions from the Historical Advisory Board, including transom windows, tile bulkhead, fabric awning, fiberglass windows, and smooth siding. No public speakers testified on this item.
- Board members discussed the project, with comments on material cohesion, top-heavy proportions, residential entry identity, canopy design, and maximizing glazing in living spaces. Suggestions included using a single material or heavier base, creating a distinct residential entrance, and reorienting interior layouts to allow larger windows.
Key Outcomes
- The consent calendar was approved unanimously (5-0).
- The design review for 1251 Park Street was approved unanimously (5-0) with three conditions: (1) revise the design to show more cohesive exterior materials, (2) enhance the residential entrance to give it its own identity, and (3) maximize glazing for living areas where feasible.
- Staff communications noted recent zoning administrator hearings, design review approvals, and tree removal permits, with future meetings scheduled in early November and early December.
- Board communications included a tribute to Board Member Ron Curtis, who passed away about a week prior. The Board observed a moment of silence. The meeting adjourned at 8:00 PM.
Meeting Transcript
Meeting of October 23rd, 2023, and is now seven o'clock exactly. So let's start with the Pledge of Allegiance, and board member Areza will lead us in the pledge. I pledge allegiance of America under remote hands. One nature under God. Indivisible liberty and justice call. Okay. Thank you. So staff, um, the roll call, please. Yes, good evening. Um board member Ruiz. Here. Board Member Saheba present. Board Member Cisneros here. Board member Ariza. Here. And President Hamm. Here. We have a quorum. Yeah, we have a quorum, and I will talk a little bit more about it, but you know, for those who don't know, unfortunately, uh board member Ron Curtis passed away about a week ago. So we'll take the end of this meeting to probably say a few words and adjourn the meeting uh with a moment of silence in his honor. So yeah, very sad news. So next item, any agenda changes. Or no, okay, moving on. Um next is a non-agenda public comments. This is an opportunity for anyone to speak for three minutes regarding uh any item that is not on tonight's agenda. Do we have any speakers? Uh yes, we have one uh online uh speaker, uh Shelby Shannon. Okay, all right. Hi there, thank you. Um I have a few things I want to talk about tonight. Um the first thing is that at the last meeting uh Alan Ty was directed to follow up with me about the O Club parking lot issue, and I did receive an email from him today a little bit before five, where he says that uh it's a the the parcel is owned by the school district and that they don't need to have a permit from the planning department, which I know is not true because they just did some permits for the Singleton Avenue projects, and um it's also a parking lot, and I've recently discovered that that the use is supposed to be a corporation yard, and it's right across the street from residential district. So um the other thing that he said was that the set the fence was under six feet, which it's not, and so I I'm having a little trouble with the veracity of Mr. Ty's statements, and he also said that there's nothing they can do, which I also know is not true. So um this is an inappropriate place for an inappropriate project, and there have there must be a way that the public can weigh in on it. And I I highly doubt that this isn't a project that shouldn't be permitted. If so, I'd like to see the regulations about that. And then uh I just wanted to remind you guys about the sunshine ordinance. Uh there is there are provisions in the sunshine ordinance that say that you that you may respond to the public during the public comment period. So um I would like a little bit more public involvement in the public process, especially questions like mine, which I don't know if you can answer tonight, but um uh we need to have the ability to oppose this project. And uh so uh I I just think that there might that I need to be followed up with because it can't be legal, which actually goes toward the theme that is most of my complaints about is that the city does not enforce the law when it comes to city projects or city beneficial benefiting projects, and so uh I really don't want to have to keep coming back. You know, I want the city to follow the law. They're not enforcing the historic preservation code. I live in one of the big whites, um, they won't enforce code violations, they won't you can't even get a code enforcement inspection out here most of the time. I finally got one after asking for five years, and when they find violations of the historic preservation code, for example, at the Veterans Memorial Building, they will not enforce the law against city-owned properties, and I think that's wrong. There's a prosecution unit that's supposed to be independent of the city attorney and and prosecute anyone who violates the law, and the city should not be exempt from its own law, and that this project that I just talked about absolutely is out of compliance with all the code. So I don't believe that that Alan Ty knows nothing about it, and I want something to be done, please. Okay, thank you for your comments. I believe um these were similar comments from the last meeting, or there might be something new. And I understand staff did speak with the speaker regarding her concerns. So I'll leave it to staff, but I want to just comment also that whereas board members we can ask clarifying questions and just basic questions unless the items agendized on the agenda per the Brown Act requirements.
openpublica.com