Title
DRAFT MINUTES-APRIL 25, 2016
Body
DRAFT MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING OF THE
CITY OF ALAMEDA PLANNING BOARD
MONDAY, APRIL 25, 2016
1. CONVENE
Board Member Köster called meeting to order at 7:01pm.
2. FLAG SALUTE
Board Member Sullivan led the flag salute.
3. ROLL CALL
Present: Board Members Burton, Köster, Mitchell, Sullivan, Zuppan. Board Member Henneberry arrived at 7:03pm, during item 5. Absent: President Knox White.
4. AGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSION
*None*
5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
*None*
6. CONSENT CALENDAR
6-A 2016-2803
PLN16-0161 - Road B in Harbor Bay Business Park - Applicant: Penumbra, Inc. Public hearing to consider a recommendation to the City Council to: a) rename Road B in the Harbor Bay Business Park to “Penumbra Place” pursuant to the 1998 Council-adopted policy on Corporate Address Designations, and b) integrate the Corporate Address Designation provisions into the 2007 Policy for Naming City Property, Facilities, and Streets. The street renaming and consolidation of street naming policies are not actions subject to environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act per Section 15061(b).
Board Member Henneberry asked who pays for the signs when there is a corporate street name change.
Staff Member Tai said the business is responsible for the costs.
Board Member Henneberry moved approval of the item. Board Member Zuppan seconded the motion. The motion passed 6-0.
The final resolution can be found beginning on page 92 at: <https://alamedaca.gov/sites/default/files/document-files/department-files/Planning/2016_planning_board_resos_5-2-16.pdf>
7. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
7-A 2016-2821
Appeal of PLN16-0039 - 3244 Sterling Avenue - Applicants: Catrina and Jarred Fobian - Appellants: Anne and Ted Rogers. An appeal of Design Review approval to allow a second-story addition of 954 square feet to an existing one-story residence. The resultant overall height of the residence will be twenty-four feet (24’), where the maximum height limit in the R-1 zoning district is thirty feet (30’). Pursuant to AMC 30-5.7 (k) and (l), the addition will continue an existing legal nonconforming three-foot and three-inch (3’-3”) setback in order to achieve a uniform design and compatibility with the existing structure. The project is located within a R-1 (One-Family Residential) zoning district.
Staff Member Barrera gave the staff presentation. The staff report, including attachments and draft resolution, can be found at: <https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=2690479&GUID=DC501A96-0502-4115-B89F-B8DA694E2F86&FullText=1>
Board Member Mitchell asked how the recent modifications to the (k) & (l) language affect this project.
Staff Member Thomas said they are still working off of the previously existing language.
Board Member Henneberry asked if consideration was given to the fact that this is an historic district of one and one and a half story homes.
Staff Member Thomas said they did consider that, and that staff believes additions can be made in these types of neighborhoods. He said that when City Council suggested a downzoning a neighborhood to single story in a similar situation, the reaction from residents was almost uniformly negative.
Board Member Sullivan asked if they looked at the house next door, which is also a two story.
Staff Member Barrera said they did look at that unit and changes to the design were made to better mimic the original two story home on the block and not copy some of the flaws they saw in the house next door.
Board Member Köster opened the public hearing.
Anne Rogers, appellant, said the shading caused by the addition would cause the loss of hours of morning sun for half the year. She said the second story stepback on the original two story home should be a guide to the board’s decision.
Ted Rogers, appellant, asked the board to strike a balance between needs of homeowners and the costs born by neighboring residents. He said that adding a setback of four feet to the second story right side setback would make a huge difference. He said changing to a two foot setback with a hipped roof could alleviate many of the issues as well.
Catrina Fobian, applicant, asked the board to uphold staff’s recommendation. She said they have worked with staff for six months and made many modifications to the design already.
Elaine Lee, project architect, said that based on some of the questions that came up, if two story buildings were not wanted on a street with small homes, then the zoning needs to change, however, that by right, two stories are permitted. She said they reduced the size of the addition after working with staff. She said they have taken great care with the design and it is in keeping with the character of the other homes on Sterling.
Brian Fox, neighbor, said he liked the small houses and small lots on Sterling. He said the addition does not match the neighborhood and is like “parking a bus in a compact space.”
Claire Bonde, neighbor, said she understands the desire for more space, but this over 2000 square foot design is not fitting with the neighborhood of small homes.
Bernard Lim, neighbor, said the size of the design would not fit the character of the neighborhood.
Joe Mariscal, neighbor, gave some history of the street. He said he now supports their plan after being against it previously.
Christopher Buckley, AAPS, said they oppose this large 2nd story addition due to the street full of single story homes on small lots. He said this would set a bad precedent for the street. He said there are design options that could allow a 2nd story that fits the design guidelines.
Elliot Gorelick, neighbor, said the owners have a right to a 2nd story, but they have to meet the other design guidelines.
Laura Lake, neighbor, said the two 2nd story additions put in before Planning Board guidelines existed are not attractive. She said it should take its cue from the one original two story home where the 2nd story is much smaller than the ground floor.
Board Member Köster closed the public hearing.
Board Member Burton said he was torn. He said the Craftsman design of the project was very good. He said the footprint of the addition is very almost a full footprint. He said the addition is not quite subordinate to the first story. He suggested a 20-25% reduction in size would be more proportionate.
Board Member Zuppan said the design was very nice and that they have a right to build up. She said she would like to see the western wall to be stepped back a little bit more.
Board Member Henneberry said there needs to be a balance between preserving the character of this neighborhood and the homeowner’s right to expand. He said he agrees with AAPS, this time, and thinks the design needs to be reworked.
Board Member Mitchell agreed that the design was well done, but was stuck on the shading impacts were significant.
Board Member Sullivan said the one wall that goes straight up is her main issue with the project and would like to see more sculpting on that side.
Board Member Köster said the biggest issues were the shading issues and making the 2nd story subordinate to the 1st story. He gave some architectural suggestions on how to reshape some of the lines to provide more sunlight to the neighboring house.
Staff Member Thomas said he was hearing that the Board wanted to send the applicant back to redesign the project. He said it sounded like they were most concerned with the shading and pushing the side and front elevations back to make it more subordinate to the first floor and in character with the neighborhood.
Board Member Burton made a motion to remand the item back for further study. Board Member Mitchell seconded the motion. The motion passed 6-0.
8. MINUTES
8-A 2016-2823
Draft Meeting Minutes - November 23, 2015
Board Member Sullivan made a motion to approve the minutes. Board Member Henneberry seconded the motion. The motion passed 6-0
8-B 2016-2824
Draft Meeting Minutes - January 25, 2016
Board Member Sullivan made a motion to approve the minutes. Board Member Burton seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-0-1 (Zuppan abstained).
8-C 2016-2825
Draft Meeting Minutes - February 8, 2016
Board Member Burton made a motion to approve the minutes. Board Member Henneberry seconded the motion. The motion passed 6-0.
9. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
9-A 2016-2827
Zoning Administrator and Design Review Recent Actions and Decisions
Staff Member Thomas reviewed the recent approvals.
9-B 2016-2828
Future Public Meetings and Upcoming Community Development Department Projects
Staff Member Thomas gave an update on items to expect in upcoming meetings including Alameda Point, Universal Design, M-X zoning, and other items.
10. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
10-A 2016-2819
Report to the Commission on Disability Issues on Universal Design
*None*
11. BOARD COMMUNICATIONS
11-A 2016-2822
Report from the Boatworks - Ad-Hoc Sub-Committee
*None*
Board Member Zuppan shared a Wall Street Journal article on “The Future of Cities.” She said there were some interesting ideas to examine.
12. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
*None*
13. ADJOURNMENT
Board Member Köster adjourned the meeting at 8:57pm.