Title
Draft Meeting Minutes - October 6, 2016
Body
DRAFT MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING OF THE
CITY OF ALAMEDA HISTORICAL ADVISORY BOARD
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 6, 2016
1. CONVENE
Chair Vella called meeting to order at 7:00pm.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: Chair Vella, Vice Chair Piziali, Board Members Chan, Jones, Saxby.
3. MINUTES
3-A 2016-3439
Draft Meeting Minutes - September 1, 2016
Chair Vella corrected the names for which Board Members convened and adjourned the meeting.
Vice Chair Piziali asked staff to update the board on the two items of unfinished business former Chair Owens spoke to in the previous meeting.
Staff Member Tai said they can address that during Staff Communications.
Board Member Saxby made a motion to approve the minutes as amended by Chair Vella. Vice Chair Piziali seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-0.
4. AGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSION
Staff Member Tai said they are recommending continuance of item 7-B.
5. ORAL COMMUNICATION
*None*
6. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
*None*
7. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
7-A 2016-3438
Public Hearing to Consider a Request for a Certificate of Approval for Alameda Point Building 8 at 2350 Saratoga Street - PLN16-0468 - Alameda Redevelopers, LLC. The applicant is requesting a Certificate of Approval to restore and modify the General Storehouse Historic Building on Alameda Point.
Staff Member Tai introduced the item. The staff report and attachments can be found at: <https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=2848108&GUID=1206B758-6C4B-4890-BC20-F3719DEC947B&FullText=1>
Kent Royal and Erick Mikiten, project architects, gave a presentation on the history of and plans for the building.
Chair Vella opened the public hearing.
Richard Rutter said this building was always the jewel of the base when it came to adaptive reuse. He said he supports the project.
Chair Vella closed the public hearing.
Vice Chair Piziali said he was happy to see Mr. Rutter supporting the project.
Board Member Saxby said the design appears to be on the right track. He said he is concerned about the addition on the roof and its height. He asked why the height was 21 feet.
Mr. Royal explained the factors that led to the proposed height of the roof addition.
Board Member Saxby said he would like to see the height reduced in order to not draw attention away from the tower elements. He said he was very concerned about all the ancillary items that would litter the roof deck.
The applicant expanded on their reasons and benefits of having the roof deck and adding a railing on the awning.
Chair Vella asked if they considered glass for the railing to create a lighter effect. She said she liked the creative way they planned to change how the windows opened. She asked that the doors be integrated more with the white band across the bottom for consistency. She asked what the occupancy of the roof structure would be.
Mr. Royal said it would be considered common area for the residents of the building.
Chair Vella said she would like to keep the height down closer to the height of the towers so that it blended in more with the overall profile of the building. She said she would like to see the green roof treatment expanded.
Board Member Jones confirmed that the glass wind wall would not be very visible when looking at the building. She said the banding is integral to the historic nature of the building and would like to prevent the awning from being cluttered with patio items.
Vice Chair Piziali said that he was less concerned with the balcony use restrictions because it was adaptive reuse and people would be living there and it will look different in any case.
Staff Member Tai explained that this is not the first time that new openings have been added to historic buildings at the Point.
Staff Member Tai summarized the board feedback: concerns about the height of the roof building; potentially adding more green roof; continuing the color band at the bottom of the new doors. He said the board could recommend to the Planning Board to consider lowering the height of the roof building.
Board Member Saxby said he was also concerned with adding doors instead of casement windows out to the awning due to the use of the awning as a deck that would occur.
Vice Chair Piziali said he would not be in favor of restricting the use of the awning.
Chair Vella said that allowing an HOA type body to govern what could and could not be left on the decks would be satisfactory.
Staff Member Tai said that staff tries to encourage activating the public facing areas of projects like this.
Vice Chair Piziali made a motion to approve the staff recommendation with the condition that the horizontal color band be maintained at the bottom of the doors, railings on the canopy be minimized, and a recommendation that the roof pavilion visibility be reduced as much as possible. Board Member Saxby seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-0.
7-B 2016-3440
PLN16-0314 - Certificate of Approval - Seaplane Lagoon. Applicant: City of Alameda. Public Hearing to consider a certificate of approval for a new ferry terminal and landside improvements located at the Seaplane Lagoon in the NAS Alameda historic district. The environmental effects of the proposed project were considered in the Seaplane Lagoon Addendum to the Alameda Point Environmental Impact Report. No further environmental review is required. Staff is requesting a continuance to the meeting of November 3, 2016.
*Continued*
8. BOARD COMMUNICATIONS
*None*
9. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
Staff Member Tai spoke about a small train station building that will be replaced with a two story mixed use building at 712 Lincoln Avenue. He said the property owner has volunteered to restore and move the structure to Jean Sweeney Park.
Regarding unfinished business noted by former Chair Owens, Staff Member Tai explained that the preservation ordinance update was placed on hold due to changing City priorities and unprecedented permit volume. The preservation ordinance update was originally intended to make the ordinance better, more user friendly, and to accommodate wish list items and best practices from other cities. The current ordinance has been working fine as a tool to prevent demolition and unauthorized alterations of historic resources, so there is not an urgent need to work on ordinance updates.
10. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
*None*
11. ADJOURNMENT
Board Member Jones made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Board Member Saxby seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-0. The meeting wa