Title
Public Hearing to consider a Planning Board recommendation to approve a Master Plan and Density Bonus application for the Encinal Terminals property at 1521 Buena Vista Avenue. Applicant: North Waterfront Cove, LLC. An addendum to a previously certified Focused Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the project has been prepared, in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act
Body
Date: July 23, 2018
Re: Public Hearing to consider a Planning Board recommendation to approve a Master Plan and Density Bonus application for the Encinal Terminals property at 1521 Buena Vista Avenue. Applicant: North Waterfront Cove, LLC. An addendum to a previously certified Focused Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the project has been prepared, in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act.
BACKGROUND
The Encinal Terminals property is comprised of 16.73 acres of land and 9.17 acres of submerged land owned by North Waterfront Cove, LLC (“the applicant”), and 6.4 acres of Public Trust Lands owned by the City in trust for the State of California (“the tidelands property”). The property is located within the Northern Waterfront Priority Development Area, and the site is designated as a mixed use, multifamily housing opportunity site in the City of Alameda General Plan Housing Element and Alameda Municipal Code (AMC). The entire site is zoned mixed use (MX) to support residential mixed use development. The applicant’s portion of the property also includes a Multifamily Housing Combining District (MF overlay) designation, which was applied in 2012 by the City Council to meet the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). The MF overlay was not applied to the tidelands portion of the site because tidelands property may not be used for residential purposes under State law.
On December 19, 2017, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 15337 certifying the Final Focused Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the development of the initial proposed project. Although the City Council certified the EIR, the City Council did not approve a proposed property exchange agreement for the redevelopment of the Encinal Terminals property. The exchange agreement would have reconfigured the locations of the tidelands property and the applicant’s property to facilitate development of the site. As a result, the applicant revised its plans so that it no longer needs a tidelands exchange with the City.
The applicant’s revised Master Plan (Exhibit 1) is designed to meet the adopted standards of the City of Alameda General Plan and AMC and minimize any further delays to the applicant’s ability to develop housing on its property. The following discussion provides an overview and evaluation of the revised Master Plan, which can also be found at:
<https://alamedaca.gov/sites/default/files/document-files/department-files/Planning/encinal_terminals_master_plan_7-11-18_opt.pdf>
DISCUSSION
Mixed Use Development: The Alameda General Plan and M-X Zoning designation require a mix of uses on the property including residential, commercial, and public open space. The General Plan states:
“The intent of the site specific development policies for the Encinal Terminal Site is to facilitate redevelopment of the site with new land uses that will take advantage of the unique site configuration and waterfront location, increase opportunities for public access and enjoyment of the waterfront and eliminate the existing uses which contribute a large volume of truck traffic in the vicinity. The Mixed Use designation will allow for the development of a wide range of land uses to capitalize on the site’s unique location adjacent to the Alaska Basin, Oakland/Alameda Estuary, Fortman Marina, and Del Monte Warehouse site. Anticipated land uses in this district include a range of housing types, including senior housing, commercial, office, and public parks and open space. Public waterfront access around the perimeter of the site is envisioned, as well as a new marina on the Alaska Basin.”
The revised Master Plan establishes four (4) mixed use sub-districts to guide the future development of the property:
• The “Gateway District” and “Estuary District” include approximately nine acres planned for 589 housing units and ground floor retail and commercial use;
• The “Tidelands District” includes 6.4 acres of public tidelands property planned for maritime commercial, recreational, and visitor serving use; and
• The “Waterfront District” includes three to five acres of wharf and land planned for public open space, and approximately 9.7 acres of privately owned submerged land planned for a 160-slip commercial marina, and public water shuttle landing and kayak launch. In addition, approximately 2.7 acres of the applicant’s land is planned for the Clement Avenue extension.
Residential Development: The General Plan Housing Element identifies the property as a housing opportunity site for multifamily housing. AMC 30-4.23 (MF Multi-family Residential Combining District), which covers 15.48 acres of the applicant’s property, permits up to 30 units per acre of multifamily housing by right. The Master Plan “Gateway” and “Estuary” Districts:
• Provide for 589 multifamily housing units in a variety of sizes and price points. It is anticipated that the units will be a mix of rental and ownership units.
• Provide for 79 deed-restricted affordable housing units, including 25 units for very low-income households, 20 units for low-income households, and 34 units for middle-income or “moderate”-income households. Moderate-income households are defined as households with an income that is between 80% and 120% of Alameda County area wide median income. In 2018, a moderate income family of four earns an annual household income of between approximately $89,600 and $124,800.
• Provide for 51 market rate “affordable by design” units of 900 square feet or less and 102 small “affordable by design” units of 900 to 1,200 square feet in size.
• Require all new residential construction to comply with LEED Silver or equivalent standards.
• Require all new residential buildings to comply with the City of Alameda’s 2017 Universal Design Ordinance.
• Require ground floor retail and commercial uses in the residential buildings.
Alameda’s inclusionary housing requirements for residential projects (AMC 30-16) requires at least 15% of the total units to be inclusionary units restricted for occupancy by very low-, low-, or moderate-income households. Under AMC 30-16.4(c), 4% of the total units must be deed restricted for occupancy by very low-income households, 4% of the total units must be deed restricted for occupancy by low-income households and 7% of the total units must be deed restricted for occupancy by moderate-income households.
State Density Bonus Law and AMC 30-17 (Density Bonus Ordinance) impose a mandatory density program that requires the City to permit the construction of additional residential units and, if requested by the applicant, provide reduced parking standards, regulatory incentives/concessions, and waivers to developers who agree to build a certain percentage of affordable housing that meets the statutory criteria. (Gov. Code, § 65915(b) (1), AMC 30-17.) State law defines a density bonus as a “density increase over the otherwise maximum allowable gross residential density as of the date of application… or, if elected by the applicant, a lesser percentage of density increase, including, but not limited to, no increase in density.” (Gov. Code, § 65915(f).)
The proposed residential density and number of housing units is consistent with State and local law. The Encinal Terminals site includes 15.48 acres of land that is zoned MX (Mixed Use) with an MF (Multi-family Residential Combining District) which permits a residential density of 30 units per acre, and 1.25 acres of land that is zoned MX, which allows 21.78 units/acre. The applicant proposes to deed restrict 5%, or 25 of the units, for very low-income households and therefore, qualifies for a 20% density bonus. With the density bonus, the applicant is proposing 589 residential units. Based on the City’s calculations, 589 units falls within the limit that the applicant is entitled to and is consistent with state density bonus law. The applicant’s density bonus application is attached as Exhibit 1.a.
Government Code section 65915 prohibits the Planning Board or City Council from reducing the number of units in a development that has qualified for a density bonus:
“In no case may a city… apply any development standard that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development meeting the criteria of subdivision (b) at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted by this section. An applicant may submit to a city… a proposal for the waiver or reduction of development standards that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development meeting the criteria of subdivision (b) at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted under this section, and may request a meeting with the city…. If a court finds that the refusal to grant a waiver or reduction of development standards is in violation of this section, the court shall award the plaintiff reasonable attorney’s fees and costs of suit.”
Furthermore, Government Code section 65589.5 (the Housing Accountability Act) requires the City to approve applications for residential mixed-use development that are consistent with its objective development standards without reducing the proposed density, unless the City makes specific findings related to “specific, adverse impacts” to public health and safety. Because the Encinal Terminals project is consistent with all objective development standards, the Housing Accountability Act prohibits the Planning Board and City Council from reducing the number of units, unless the reduction in units is necessary to mitigate:
“a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete."
In this case, there are no specific, adverse impacts to public health or safety because (1) no such standards, policies, or conditions existed on the date the application was deemed complete, and (2) there is no evidence of public health or safety impacts associated with the project. Community concerns about project impacts on automobile delay (traffic), public parking availability, maritime commercial space or dry boat storage are not impacts on public health and safety standards.
The proposed project will not result in a public safety impact as the result of increased congestion caused by the new automobile trips added to the local and regional transportation network. An analysis of Fire and Police response times in Alameda over the last six years found that although the City of Alameda has added additional housing units each year since 2012, there is no evidence of a correlation between housing production and emergency response times in Alameda. Between 2012 and 2016, the average response times for Priority 1 calls by the Police Department have varied annually by less than 60 seconds and averaged around 2 minute and 30 seconds. Priority 2 calls varied annually by about 48 seconds and averaged around six minutes and 30 seconds. The response times vary by year (i.e., some later years are lower than earlier years), but the response times do not increase sequentially. Therefore, there is no evidence that the variation in response times is correlated to housing production or worsening traffic congestion.
During the same period (2012 to 2016), Fire Department response times also varied year by year, but with no correlation to housing production. The Fire Department maintains a response time target for all fire calls. The Department achieved its target 89.5% of the time in 2012, 87.1% in 2013, 91.8% in 2014, 87% of the time in 2015, and 89.9% of the time in 2016. Emergency Medical Service calls showed a similar variability with no correlation to housing projection. The Alameda Fire Department achieved its emergency response goal 65.7% of the time in 2012, 67.6% in 2013 and 2014, 69.4% in 2015, and 66.9% in 2016. Finally, a comparison of 2016 Fire Department response times to 2017 Fire Department response times shows that average response times decreased from 2016 to 2017, even though traffic got worse and the number of responses went up between 2016 and 2017.
An analysis of “time of day” response times for the Fire Department in 2017, finds that average response times do vary by time of day, but that there is not a clear correlation between longer response times and commute hour traffic. For the analysis, four periods were considered: morning commute period, evening commute period, mid-day between commute periods, and the evening period from 7 pm to 7 am. The shortest average response times (4 minutes and 36 seconds) occurred during the evening commute hours between 5 pm and 7 pm. Response times during the non-commute period during middle of the day (10 am to 5 pm) and during the nighttime hours (7:00 pm to 7:00 am) were longer than during the evening commute hours. During the morning commute hours (7 am to 9 am) the average response time was only 6 seconds longer than during the evening hours (7 pm to 7 am), and the evening commute hour response time was faster than the mid-day period and the nighttime period. Only 36 seconds separates the shortest response time period and the longest response time period.
In conclusion, there does not seem to be any evidence of a correlation between housing production in Alameda and slower emergency response times in Alameda. Alameda’s emergency response time are faster than the three other cities that were considered: Berkeley, San Francisco, and San Jose. The survey also found that when cities wish to reduce response times they increase the budget for Fire or Police departments. In Alameda, every new housing unit pays Development Impact Fees to fund additional public safety facilities necessary to accommodate anticipated growth and additional calls for service in Alameda.
Residential Building Height Limit Waivers: Pursuant to Government Code section 65915 and AMC 30-17 (Density Bonus Ordinance), the applicant has requested a height waiver to allow residential buildings to exceed the Multifamily Zoning 45-foot height limit to accommodate the proposed 589 housing units.
The applicant’s density bonus application demonstrates that only 508 units could be constructed within the 45-foot height limit, and the height limit physically precludes construction of the proposed project with the density bonus units. Therefore it can be concluded that a waiver of the City’s height limits must be granted to comply with State Law governing density bonus waiver requirements and allow the development of the requested 589 units.
Consistent with AMC requirements and the Master Plan, the specific design and height of all future buildings on the site must be reviewed and approved by the Planning Board. Given that it is not clear at this time how many, or which, buildings will need to exceed the 45-foot height limit and to what extent the buildings will need to exceed the height limit to accommodate 589 units, the Master Plan includes a height waiver that states:
• The maximum height for any residential building within the Gateway and Estuary Districts shall be determined by the Planning Board at the time the Design Review application is submitted for Planning Board review.
• Design Review applications for any residential buildings that exceed 45 feet in height shall be accompanied by a massing study for the Gateway and Estuary Districts that demonstrates that the proposed height is needed to accommodate the 589 units and all of the amenities, parking and mix of commercial and open space uses as described and illustrated in the Master Plan.
• The Planning Board shall not deny a building height above 45 feet unless the Planning Board is able to make one or both of the following findings: 1) Based upon a review of the Design Review plans and the massing study, the 45-foot height limit does not physically preclude construction of the 589 units and all of the amenities, parking and mix of commercial and open space uses as illustrated and described in the Master Plan, or 2) the waiver of the 45-foot height limit would have a specific, adverse impact, as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, upon health, safety, or physical environment, and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact. The 45-foot height limit shall not be used by City to prevent construction of the proposed project on the property.
Maritime Commercial Development: The Master Plan’s “Tideland District” represents a significant opportunity for the City to expand its maritime commercial business sectors consistent with the City Council’s economic development objectives. With its strategic location directly in between the Fortman Marina and the Alaska Basin and future Alaska Basin Marina, the Tideland District has the potential to become a major maritime commercial center with space for marina land side facilities, boat and paddle boat sales and rentals, maritime and “blue tech” leased space, restaurants and other visitor serving commercial services.
The Encinal Master Plan is designed to maximize maritime commercial opportunities on the City’s 6.4 acres of tidelands property. Referred to as the “Tidelands District” in the Master Plan, the Tidelands District is envisioned as a maritime commercial center with access to the planned 160-slip marina in the Alaska Basin to the west and the existing 400-slip Fortman Marina to the east. The Tidelands District permits marina support and boatyard facilities, dry boat storage, kayak, paddle board, windsurfing and sailing sales, rentals and lessons, restaurants, hotels and activities that support water and maritime related job and business opportunities consistent with City economic development policy objectives and Public Trust land use restrictions.
The Master Plan requires that the residential development support the future development of the Tidelands District by providing and constructing public roadway access and infrastructure improvements (sewer, water, storm drain, power, etc.) for City’s tidelands property. The Tidelands District already shares a long eastern property line with the adjacent Fortman Marina tidelands property, and the Master Plan provides access easements across the applicant’s land to the Alaska Basin to ensure access from the Tidelands property to the nearby Alaska Basin and future Alaska Basin marina for maritime uses on the Tidelands property.
Although the Master Plan provides infrastructure, access improvements, a wide range of Public Trust-compliant uses, and setback standards to ensure a 50-foot “buffer” between residential buildings and future maritime commercial buildings and uses to minimize future land use conflicts in this mixed use development, the Master Plan does not propose specific building locations or specific site plans for the Tidelands district.
The Master Plan allows the applicant and the City to work together to decide appropriate future uses and development plans for the Tidelands District. The 6.4 acres of tidelands property that makes up the Tidelands District is currently leased to the applicant until 2029. Therefore, should the applicant wish to make a major financial investment within the Tidelands District, Design Review approval from the Planning Board, as well as a Tidelands Lease extension from the City Council, will be needed. Through these processes the City of Alameda will be able to ensure that the future use of these lands supports the mixed use vision for the site and citywide maritime commercial needs and objectives.
The Tidelands District is described on pages 43 and 44 of the Master Plan.
Public Waterfront Open Space: The Master Plan Waterfront District provides for the construction of not less than three acres of publically accessible waterfront open space, a 160-slip marina, and a public water shuttle dock. The amount of open space provided may increase beyond three acres depending on the amount of existing concrete wharf that the applicant will be able to feasibly rehabilitate and repurpose for public open space use. (All of the existing deteriorated wood wharf will be removed.)
The Master Plan ensures that the public will have access to:
• At least three (3) acres of public open space along the waterfront edge of the project site. Public access shall be ensured though public access easements. The final configuration and design of the waterfront open space shall be subject to future review and approval by the City of Alameda Planning Board, the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission and a variety of other regional agencies.
• A public promenade around the perimeter of the waterfront open space at the water’s edge. The pubic promenade at the shoreline edge of the wharf shall include a railing, a minimum 10-foot wide pedestrian promenade with benches, lighting, and trash receptacles, a two-foot buffer to separate the promenade from a 12-foot wide separated bicycle path, and a three-foot buffer between the bicycle path and any adjacent roadway for vehicles or adjacent property line. The public promenade and bicycle path shall extend along the entire perimeter of the site from Wind River campus to Fortman Marina entrance.
• A water shuttle and kayak launch facility placed either in the Alaska Basin or on the north side of the site in the Oakland Estuary with shuttle bus access and turn-around, passenger unloading, and bicycle parking, and a kayak drop off zone all in close proximity to the shuttle landing/public kayak launch.
• An adaptive sea level rise protection plan designed to protect at minimum three acres of public open space.
• A construction phasing plan that ensures that each residential district constructs its fair share of the public waterfront park to ensure completion of the public waterfront open space prior to completion of the housing units.
• A Municipal Services District to pay for the maintenance of the public open space.
The Waterfront District and open space plans are described in more detail on pages 21-23 and 41 of the Master Plan.
Primary Entry Roadway Alignment: The Master Plan provides a primary vehicular entry to the property on the western edge of the wharf along the Alaska Basin and the waterfront promenade and bicycle path.
Staff recommends that the primary entrance be moved to the existing intersection at Entrance Road and Clement Avenue, approximately 320 feet east of the applicant’s proposed location. Staff’s recommended location is consistent with General Plan policy (E-T 11), which states:
Require that the master plan include inviting, well-designed public entrances from Clement Street. Primary vehicular access into the site should occur at a four-way intersection at Clement/Entrance, if feasible.
Staff is recommending this revision to the Master Plan for the following reasons:
• It would improve the quality of the open space experience and the public’s enjoyment of the waterfront promenade to move the roadway from the waterfront to the center of the property.
• It would be safer for bicyclists on the Cross Alameda Trail. The General Plan- recommended alignment eliminates one new automobile crossing of the trail (proposed by applicant at the wharf) and one existing un-signalized automobile crossing (at the Fortman Marina entrance) and replaces them with a signalized crossing at Entrance and Clement, which would provide automobile access to both the Encinal property and the Fortman Marina property.
• It would create a view corridor from Entrance Road/Clement intersection all the way through the site to the Estuary and Coast Guard Island as recommended by the General Plan.
• It would provide automobile access to the Tidelands District equidistant between the Alaska Basin and Fortman Marina. Under the applicant’s alignment, future maritime and marina uses will be required to cross the major entry road on the wharf to access the water in the Alaska basin.
To relocate the road to the Entrance Road/Clement intersection, as specified in the General Plan and recommended by staff, the City Council would have to approve dedication of approximately 0.7 acres of the tideland property for public road use. The applicant would need to dedicate 1.4 acres of land for the public road. The applicant cannot place the road in the location recommended by the General Plan and as described above, unless the City Council approves the required dedication. Therefore, staff is recommending that the Planning Board recommend that the City Council approve the Master Plan with amendments that would specify and require:
• Placing the primary entrance at a new four-way signalized intersection at Clement and Entrance and extension of Entrance Road
• Extending Entrance Road straight through the site to the northern waterfront edge of the site, where a “turnaround” shall be provided to serve the water transit landing. The straight alignment shall also serve as a public utilities corridor to serve all of the Master Plan Districts, including the Tidelands District.
• Dedicating approximately 1.4 acres of private land in the Gateway and Estuary Districts by the applicant and dedicating approximately 0.7 acres of public land in the Tideland District by the City to enable development of a public roadway through the middle of the site.
The Master Plan already requires establishment of a Municipal Services District on the property to fund the maintenance of the streets, roads, and infrastructure.
Staff’s recommended amendment to the Master Plan would delete the existing “Streets” description on page 24 of the Master Plan in its entirety, and replace it with the following language:
Streets: To provide an inviting, well-designed public entrance from Clement Street., the primary vehicular access into the site shall occur at a four-way intersection at Clement/Entrance and provide access to the Gateway, Tidelands, and Estuary Districts. The final alignment and design of the public right-of-way design shall be determined by the Planning Board during the review of Subdivision Map and Development Plans for development, but the right-of-way shall be no less than 62 feet in width and extend in a straight alignment across the Gateway, Tidelands, and Estuary Districts to the northern edge of the property. The Entrance Road extension shall include driveway access to the adjacent Fortman Marina. Permanent public access and utility easements shall be provided within the right-of-way from the Clement Avenue intersection across the Gateway District, Tidelands District, and Estuary District to the northern waterfront edge of the Encinal Terminals site.
Financial Implications for Alameda: The Master Plan has the following financial implications for the City of Alameda:
General Fund Revenues and Costs: An independent analysis of the proposed project estimates that the increase in property taxes and property transfer taxes received as a result of the project will increase significantly due to redevelopment of the property. The new residents and businesses will require an increase in Police and Fire services, but those increased costs are more than off-set by the larger increase in revenue generated by the project. Pursuant to the requirements of the MX Zoning district, the applicant has provided a market analysis to demonstrate that the amount of land proposed for each use can be realistically supported by market conditions. (Exhibit 1.a).
Investment in City-owned Tidelands and Annual Tidelands Lease Revenue to the City: With the staff-recommended amendments, the Master Plan would require significant investment in infrastructure and roadway access to support future use of the Tidelands Property. Without these amendments, the future use of the Tidelands by maritime commercial uses would be extremely limited.
Under the current tidelands lease, the City receives approximately $11,000 annually. Adoption of the Master Plan would not alter the amount of these payments for the next 10 years. Upon expiration of the lease in 2029, and completion of the staff-recommended infrastructure improvements to support the Tidelands property, the City’s Tidelands property will be well positioned to attract a “blue tech” or traditional maritime commercial use in 2029. At that time, the City Council will also be in position to consider a new lease for the adjacent Fortman Marina and may consider combining the Tidelands under a new lease with a marina and boatyard operator or other qualified investor/operator.
Clement Avenue Extension. The Clement Avenue extension from Sherman to Entrance and Cross Alameda Trail facilities are estimated to cost approximately $6 million. The costs for this major public investment would be shared by the developers of the Del Monte project and Encinal Terminals project at no cost to the City.
Transportation Improvements. In addition to annual Transportation Demand Management fees and improvements to Clement Avenue, the Project will provide approximately $996,000 (2018 dollars) in impact fees for citywide transportation improvements.
Transit Funds: The project will fund additional public transportation services through the TMA on an annual basis. Per the Master Plan, each townhome will pay $500, each apartment and/or condominium will pay $400, and each commercial space will pay $0.75 per square foot annually. Assuming 100 townhomes and 489 apartments and/or condominiums, and 50,000 square feet of commercial space, the project will generate approximately $282,500 annually for transportation services. With required CPI increases (cost of living index), the value of the contribution will increase each year starting in 2018.
Parks and Open Space. In addition to the three acres of public open space to be constructed on the property, the project will provide over $5.9 million (2018 dollars) in impact fees for park facilities.
Public Safety and General Public Facilities. In addition to the General Fund revenues generated by property and transfer taxes described above, the project will provide over $1.59 million (2018 dollars) in impact fees for public safety and general public facilities.
Alameda Unified School District. Assuming an average unit size of 1,500 square feet, the project will provide over $3.34 million (2018 dollars) in impact fees to the Alameda Unified School District, consistent with the District’s adopted impact fee ordinance.
Conclusion: The proposed Master Plan, as amended per staff’s recommendation, is l designed to comply with all objective standards of General Plan and Zoning code. Redevelopment of the Encinal Terminals property is a key part of the overall revitalization of the Northern Waterfront. It will provide much needed housing, facilitate public access to the waterfront, and create an opportunity to continue to grow the City’s blue economy. In addition, the financial benefits of the project are comprehensive, ranging from off-site transit and traffic improvements to investment in the City-owned tideland property. Based on these factors, staff is recommending that the Planning Board recommend that the City Council approve the Master Plan as amended.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
On December 19, 2017, the City of Alameda certified the Encinal Terminals Final Focused Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the development of the initial proposed project in compliance with CEQA. An addendum has been prepared (Exhibit 2), which finds that the reconfiguration of the 589 units on the site and the maintenance of the existing Tidelands property within its existing location would not cause any new or more significant environmental impact than those that were disclosed in the certified EIR for this Master Plan.
To reduce the significant unavoidable transportation impacts associated with the project and disclosed in the EIR, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program adopted by the City Council in December 2017 requires that the applicant: 1) submit a comprehensive traffic management and reduction strategy for Planning Board review and approval, 2) signalize the intersections at Clement and Entrance and Entrance and Buena Vista, and 3) build the Clement Avenue extension for Sherman to Entrance, if Del Monte has not already begun the work.
RECOMMENDATION
Hold a public hearing and adopt the draft resolution (Exhibit 3) recommending that the City Council approve the Encinal Terminals Master Plan and Density Bonus Application as amended.
Exhibits:
1. Encinal Terminals Master Plan
a. Density Bonus Application and Market Study
2. Environmental Impact Report Addendum
3. Draft Resolution