Title
Draft Meeting Minutes - September 5, 2019
Body
DRAFT MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING OF THE
CITY OF ALAMEDA HISTORICAL ADVISORY BOARD
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 2019
1. CONVENE
Chair Saxby called meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Chair Saxby noted that Board Member Sanchez would be absent due to his need to recuse himself for both items.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: Chair Saxby, Board Members Jones, Lau, and Wit.
Absent: Board Member Sanchez.
3. MINUTES
3-A 2019-7222
Draft Meeting Minutes - August 1, 2019
Chair Saxby noted an error in name under item 1.
Board Member Jones made a motion to approve the minutes as corrected. Board Member Wit seconded the motion. The motion passed 4-0.
4. AGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSION
*None*
5. ORAL COMMUNICATION
Betsy Mathieson requested that the HAB begin a process to designate Jackson Park as an historical monument. She said the need has arisen due to a proposal for a playground being added to the park. She gave a brief history of the park and neighborhood.
Denise Nowicki described the park characteristics that she feels make it worthy of preserving the Victorian nature of the park. She asked that the HAB begin the process of designating the park an historical monument.
Chair Saxby asked what the process would be for nominating the park for historic monument status.
Allen Tai, City Planner, thanked the speakers for their engagement. He said the topic is not agendized for tonight’s meeting and would need to be placed on an agenda before being discussed by this board. He said the neighborhood could accelerate the process by filing an application.
Chair Saxby asked if the Façade Grant Program or something similar would be available to assist in preservation efforts.
Staff Member Tai said the Façade Grant Program was established to assist with private projects and is not sure if this type of project would be eligible. He said he is not aware of any mechanism for waive application fees for historic projects in Alameda and the issue would need to be discussed at a public hearing.
Chair Saxby said the proposal has a lot of merit and the park has a lot of historic integrity.
Staff Member Tai reminded the Board that they should refrain from discussing the topic, which is not agendized.
6. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
Staff Member Tai said they received a flyer promoting Oktoberfest, and a letter from Alameda Architectural Preservation Society regarding the next agenda item.
7. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS
7-A 2019-7225
PLN19-0385 - Alameda Marina Certificate of Approval - 1815 Clement Avenue, Alameda Marina - Applicant: Pacific Shops, Inc. Public hearing to consider the Rehabilitation Plan for existing contributing buildings #15, 16, 17, 19, and 27 and non-contributing building #18 in the Alameda Marina Historic District at the Alameda Marina site, and consideration of Certificate of Approval for the demolition of non-contributing building #14, and potential demolition/reconstruction of contributing building 21 and non-contributing buildings #5, 13, 25, and 26 to facilitate shoreline rehabilitation under the approved Alameda Marina Master Plan. The environmental effects of the proposed project were considered and disclosed in the Alameda Marina Master Plan EIR (State Clearinghouse #2016102064). No further environmental review is required under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Staff Member Tai gave a brief presentation. The staff report and attachments can be found at: <https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4119985&GUID=F8918104-B6E4-4DDE-925D-F149832E6914&FullText=1>
Clay Fry, project architect, gave a presentation about the plans for adaptive reuse of the historic buildings on the site.
Chair Saxby asked if the proposed layout for the gatehouse matches the original footprint.
Mr. Fry said he attempted to replicate the original box, though cannot be 100% sure without undertaking demolition.
Chair Saxby said the grade change around building 19 changes the building’s relationship to the site. He asked if part of the surrounding area, perhaps the south side and a little around the corners, could be kept at the existing elevation.
Mr. Fry said they studied putting the building “in a hole.” He said there was not enough space to do that. He said preserving the grade at the south façade is theoretically possible, but all the surrounding parking and sidewalk would be elevated. He said that if he were to try and preserve the grade at one side, it would be at the north side which did not previously have an entrance. He said it was perhaps also possible on the west side of the building where there is more sidewalk to work with.
Chair Saxby said that it would be great to be able to keep the south and west sides as they were. He questioned the addition of a water table feature added to buildings 15, 17 and 18 since that would be ahistorical. He asked what the intention is for the roof monitors.
Mr. Fry said any damaged glazing would be replaced with glass.
Chair Saxby said the guard shack photograph shows that the building had louvered vents. He said in the past he has put glass on the backside of the monitors in order to condition the interior space. He asked if that could be considered.
Mr. Fry said he could consider doing that type of treatment.
Chair Saxby asked if any of the old growth heavy timbers used in these buildings would be salvaged and reused.
Mr. Fry said the demolition plans for phase I include plans to salvage materials from those buildings and some would be used by the landscape architect. He said they have not considered using old materials in any of the new construction. He noted that surgical demolition is extremely expensive and they have plans to do some of that.
Chair Saxby asked if relocation of buildings has been discussed with any moving companies.
Mr. Fry said the large buildings won’t move and the small ones are being kept.
Board Member Wit asked what Building 19’s intended use would be.
Mr. Fry said that under the Master Plan, it is intended to be used for maritime commercial use.
Board Member Jones suggested having an additional color to help Building 19 stand out more.
Mr. Fry said that the color palette matches the historic nature of the site and creates a cohesive theme for all of the historic buildings. He said he originally liked the orange, but has been converted.
Board Member Jones asked why Mr. Fry preferred the taller alternative for the gatehouse tower.
Mr. Fry said it helps pull the banding and other elements from the adjacent buildings into the gate house. He said it also frames the new street better and draws more attention to the importance of the entry.
Board Member Lau asked if anything from Building 14 could be salvaged or pieces re-used.
Mr. Fry said the building is not structurally stable and the wharf cannot safely support the building. He said the cost of moving and replacing the building is economically infeasible.
Board Member Wit asked how many parking spaces would be provided for buildings 25 and 26.
Mr. Fry said there are over 300 spaces dedicated to maritime uses throughout the site, and no residential parking is permitted in those spaces.
Chair Saxby opened the public hearing.
Karl Robrock expressed concern that the vision of a maritime building would not happen because the timing of leases being terminated and demolition do not match up and provide a place for maritime industries to be able to move into. He said those businesses are important mom and pop shops that need a realistic plan.
Chris Nicholas, commodore of Island Yacht Club, said that the yacht club is a cultural resource worthy of preservation under the Board’s mandate. He said he hopes their home can somehow be preserved for the community.
Chair Saxby asked what the plan is for existing maritime businesses and if there is a plan for preserving the social aspect of the marina community.
Sean Murphy, Alameda Marina, said the Master Plan focused the plan for the maritime core on these buildings and put it in the first phase in order to address the needs for maritime commercial space. He said they have an active marina and the yacht club activities are an important part of their plan going forward.
Chair Saxby said the mitigation measures are his focus. He said he appreciates the effort to preserve buildings 15, 17 and 18. He said the proposal for Building 16 is entirely appropriate. He said he would like to see a study of keeping the grade at one or more sides of Building 19. He wondered if the sliding doors should only be used where the original entrances are and that the new entrances on the north and east elevations should be something different. He said he is okay with the raw metal color. He asked what is proposed for all the large roof vents on Building 19.
Mr. Fry said the plan is that the vents would stay.
Chair Saxby said removing the doors on Building 27 is a difficult issue. He suggested that anything that could be left that indicates the former presence of a door would be a good thing. He said he strongly favors the one story gatehouse. He said the historic buildings do a good job of framing the entrance and that the tower would take something away from the view of Building 19. He said he would like to see the roof monitor restored and water table removed on buildings 15, 17 and 18.
Board Members all expressed support for the one story gateway approach.
Chair Saxby said that any efforts that can be made to preserve buildings 5, 13, 25 and 26 would go a long way towards preserving important parts of the marina’s history. He said we should hold onto the possibility of moving buildings for wharf and seawall work and then moving them back into place.
Board Member Jones expressed a desire to reuse materials in a larger fashion than just making benches out of them.
Staff Member Tai asked if the Board would be amenable to having the study of the grading on the south and west sides of Building 19 be brought back to staff for decision and shared with the Board as an off agenda report. He said a similar approach could be taken for reviewing the applicant’s salvage plans.
Chair Saxby said that he would like to add a similar procedure for reporting back on the possibility of moving and replacing the buildings along the waterfront.
Staff Member Tai summarized the Board’s positions based on the discussion: Building 16 rehab improvements are satisfactory; Building 19 would study the west and south elevations and not have sliding doors on the north and east elevations.
Chair Saxby said he supported the idea of not using the sliding doors on the north and east sides in order to differentiate from the original entrances.
Board Member Jones felt the sliding doors were different enough in scale and materials that it did not appear to be trying to replicate the historic look.
Board Members Lau and Wit said they were okay with the sliding doors.
Staff Member Tai continued to summarize the Board position. Sliding doors would be okay on all sides of Building 19. The removed doors on Building 27 should leave some evidence of their previous existence, if feasible. The one story gatehouse option would be preferred. Building 15, 17 and 18 would remove the water table and restore the monitor windows. There would be a report back to the Board on the findings regarding moving and relocation of buildings, and reporting back on the disposition and demolition of materials.
Chair Saxby made a motion to approve the draft resolution with all of the conditions summarized by Staff Member Tai. Board Member Wit seconded the motion. The motion passed 4-0.
7-B 2019-7226
PLN19-0270 - Informational Presentation on Alameda Marina Phase 1 - 1815 Clement Avenue, Alameda Marina - Applicant: Pacific Shops, Inc. The Historical Advisory Board will hear a presentation on Phase 1 of the Alameda Marina Master Plan project, called Wrap A or The Launch. The Board may provide comments on the project design but no action will be taken. This item is informational only and no environmental review is required under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Staff Member Tai introduced the item. The staff report and attachments can be found at: <https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4120016&GUID=9F983014-886B-4B8D-BD0E-52F3F36D2323&FullText=1>
Mr. Fry gave a brief presentation on the design for the first multifamily building at Alameda Marina.
Chair Saxby asked for more information about the phasing of the project.
Mr. Murphy said that this 351 unit building, combined with the maritime commercial core would be phase I. He said phase II is on the eastern edge of the site. He said the historic rehab would be happening simultaneously with the apartment construction. He said the seawall in front of each phase would be done at the same time, which would allow upgrading utilities for the marina.
8. BOARD COMMUNICATIONS
*None*
9. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
Staff Member Tai noted that the façade grant program was reopening. He said the focus this round is on restoring historic building facades. He gave an update on the exploratory work at the Lincoln Market site.
10. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
*None*
11. ADJOURNMENT
Chair Saxby adjourned the meeting at 8:54 p.m.