The URL can be used to link to this page

2008-09-16 5-C SubmittalsCity Countii Meeting Public Nearing --September 16, ~QOg Magyar Design Review ~- DRD?-i~D56 item Nv. 5-C ~-~'. Submitted by the A ppellant at the 09-~ 6-08 Council m eet~ng Re: Agenda Item #5-C Appeal Requirements - The AMC states that a Notice of Appeal must be filed no later than ten (10) days following the decision of the Planning Board. - The AMC states that "in filing an appeal, tf~e applicant shall s eci icall p f y state the reasons or justification for an appeal." - The AAPS filed the reasons fortheirappeal thirtyane da s afterth P Y e fanning Boards approval and twenty one days after the due date far filing the appeal. ~ The Guide should be used as a tool by the Plannin De artment. Th g p e AMC states that the Design Review Staff may determine compliance with Development re ufations b g y determining the consistency of the project with the principle and standards of the deli n r g ev~ew manual. The word "Shat!" is defined in the AMC as mandatory and not directo .Thew " ry ord May indicates that stafif is permitted to use the Guide in makin determinations g but is not a requirement. - The City Council should consider rejecting jurisdiction over the a eal. pp U`,~,~ of ~,~a -~ ~~ PETITION FOR APPEAL PLANNING ~ BUILDING This petition is hereby filed as an appeal of the decision ofthe: .~~ ~ ~~ Planning and Building DirectorlPlanning BoardlHistoricalRdvisory BaardlAppeals Board} REC~~V~D .~ JUL 0, 2008 hich PERMIT CENTER ALAMEDA, CA 94501 _..... - - - - ~ J - .. ,..,.. ,._..... ..,_, for application ~DeniedlGrantedlEstablished Conditions? Y~ ~ ~ fir- v -~ i~ number ~~ ~ ~ Application Type} ~ Application Number} at ~J~ ~ ~: ~I ~ ~ V (street Address} on ~ ~~ a Specify D to of Action} The basis of the appeal is: r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ rYi L ~r:.~ is ~ ~If more space is needed, please attach additional sheets.} I~1~Yj~ P~~~ d~~h11~=~?~~~ ~ Appellant: ~'Q~s~,~v~-~ So ~, t ~ ._.....____._.~~~hone: x"23 ~~~1 l -- ~Appellant Names}) Address: Gl o (~102~ 51~~v,F,/1 ~5 ~/c~ t1,~:7 ; /D l7 5~,~ Appellant Address} `' J ~~~-~~~~ g~'S"~1 I hereb a ree to a the Cit f AI ``~ y g p y y o ameda all incurred costs far staff time and ma#erials associated with review and processing of the subject appeal even if the appeal is withdrawn or nat approved. I understand that ane or more deposits will be required to cover the cost noted herein at such time as required by the Planning and Building Director to ensure there are adequate funds to cover anticipated time and materials costs related to the appeal. I express) ack ledg a agree to pay a written invoice for additional funds within 14 days of date of invoice. _ Signed: ~Appellai~t 5ignature~s For Office Use Only Received By: Receipt No.: Date Received Stamp G:IPLANNlNGIFORMSIAPPEALg1.WPD 30-25.2 Final Decisions. Page 1 of 1 CHAPTER XXX DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS 30-25 APPEALS OR CALLS FOR REVIEW. 30-25.2 Final Decisions. a. Final Decision of the Zoning Administrator. Any decision of the Zonin Administrator the date of the decision, unless an ersvn a rieved g shall be final on Y P 9g or by any officer, agency, or department of the City affected by any decisive of the Zoning Administrator, files a Notice of A eai wi Department no later than ten 10 da s followin th ~ ~ PP th the Planning ~ ~ Y g e dec~sEon or a Crty counciimember fifes a call for review wi#h the Planning Department no later than ten ~10~ days followin the decision. are appealed or called for review shall not becom g Dec~slons that e effective until the appeal or call for review is resolved by the appropriate City body. b. Fina! Decision of the Planning Board or Nis#orica! Advisory Board. An decision of h or Historical Advisory Board shall be final an the d Y t e Planning Board ate of the dec~s~on, unless any person aggneved or by any officer, agency, or department of the City affected by any decision of the Plannin Bo H~stoncal Advisory Board, files a Notice of A eai with the 9 ardor da s followin the de ' ' ~ . PP Planning Department no Eater than ten ~10~ Y g cision or a City councilmember files a call-for review with the Plannin De artment no later than ten ~10~ days following the decision. Decisions that area e g P not become effectnre until the a eai pp algid or called for review shalt pp or call for review is resolved by the appropriate City body. c. Final Decision of the Gify Counci! A decision by the City Council re ardin an a eai or review shall become final on the date of the deci ~ ~ 9 g PP tali for sion subject to ~udiciai review pursuant to Califomia Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.5. Any petition for~udicial review is sub'ect to ' ' Califomia Code of Civil Procedure Section 1 D t the provisions of 94 6 after the date of the City Council's decision. d. Fnd of Appeal or Cal! for Review Period When the end of an a eai or call for rev#e a weekend or a statutory holida the riod sh PP w period falls on Na.1794 N y' ~ all continue until the first working day thereafter. Ord. .5., Ord. No. 1836 N.S., Ord. Nv. 2025 N,S., Ord. No. 2625 N.S. § 1; Ord. No. 2733 N.S. Ord. No. 2920 N.S. § 32~ ~ ~ ~~ revious ~ ne http:/lwww,ci.a~ameda.ca.uslcode/ DATA/'ITTLE30/30 25 APPEAL ~. ~ S_OR CALLS FDR REQ... 8/6/2008 30-25.4 Initiafion of Appeals and Calls for Review. Page 1 of 1 CHAPTER XXX DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS 30.-25 APPEALS OR CALLS FOR REVIEW 3D-25.4 Inifia~ivn of Appeals and Calls for Review. a. Appeals o~Ac#ions of the Planning Director. An appeal to the Plannin Planning Director decision shall be filed in w ' ' g Board concerning actions of a ni~ng with the Planning Department and shall be accompanied by the required fees. In filing an appeal, the appellant shall s ecifi or ~ustEficat~on for an appeal, P taffy state the reasons b. Appeals of Ac#ians of the honing Adminisfra#ar. Ana eal #o the Pl of the Zoning Administrator shalt be fil • • ~ PP anning Board concerning act~ans ed en venting with the Planning Department and shat! be accompanied by the required fees. In filing an appeal, the appellant shall s ecifi or ~ust~fication for an appeal. P tally state the reasons c. Appeals of Actions of the Planning Board or Historical Adviso Board. A concerning actions of the Plannin Board ar His#a ' rY n appeal to the City Council with the Plannin D g rlcal Advisory Board decision shall be filed in writin g apartment and shat! be accompanied by the required fees, fn fiiin an 9 applicant shall spec~ficalfy state the reasons or justification for an a g appeal, the d. Calls forReview A call far review shat PPeal. I be filed with the Planning Department by the Plannin Board the City Council, or a member of either body by statin the reasons ar 'u g shall be required for a calf for review. 9 ! st~ficat~on for the review. No fee {ord. No. 2733 N.S. § 2; Drd. No. 2g2D N.S. § 34} prev~aus ~ next,» ht~p:/Iw~w.ci.alameda.ca.uslcode/ DATA/TITLE30/30 ZS APPEALS~~R CALLS_FaR REQ.,. SIl b12~~ .~ S 30-2 DEFINITIGNS. Page 1 of S CHAPTER XXX DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS 30-1 ZONING PLAN. 30-2 DEFINITIONS. a. Vvords used in the present tense include the future, wards in the singular number include the plural, and words in the plural number include the singular; the word "building" includes the word "structure", and the word "shall" is mandatory and not directory. Cify Councilshall mean the Ci#y Council of the City of Alameda, and Planning Board shall mean the Planning Board of the City of Alameda. Cityshallmean the incorporated area of the City of Alameda. Zoning Aa~rninistrafor shall mean the Planning Director, or such person as helshe may, with the prior approval of the Planning Board, designate, who shall administer and interpret the provisions of the zoning regulations and perform other duties as prescribed herein. Other terms not specifically mentioned hereabove shall have the meanings ascribed to them by the Charter and this Code. b. As used in this chapter: Accessory building shall mean a detached subordinate building, any part of which is within a required minimum yard of the subject Zoning District, and the use of which is incidental to that of the main building on the same lot, or tv the use of the land. For properties within a Residential zone, or with a Residential use, the use of such accessory buildings is restricted to garages, carports, storage sheds, and similar buildings which are found by the Building Gfficial to conform to the "U" futility} occupancy classification. Accessory use shall mean a use of a building which is incidental or subordinate to the principal use or building located upon the same lot. Agencyshall mean an office or commercial establishment in which goods, material or equipment are received for servicing, treatment or processing elsewhere. Alley shall mean a public or permanent private way or lane less than forty X40'} feet in width which affords a secondary means of access to abutting property. Anchor-out shall mean and refer tohouseboats orlive-aboard boats moored or anchored oflshvre and not in an authorized commercial marina. Note: Anchor-outs, other than transient boats, are not permitted.} Antenna, Satellite Dish shall mean adish-shaped device designed to receive television signals transmitted from orbiting satellites, as well as all supporting equipment necessary to install or mount the antenna. Balcony shall mean a platform enclosed by a railing or balustrade projecting from the exterior wall of a building, accessible only from the interior of the building. Banks, savings and loan services shall mean financial institutions that provide retail banking services to individuals and businesses. These institutions include banks, savings and loans, credit unions, security brokers and real property lending institutions. It does not include check cashing or payday advance uses. Bar shall mean a place where alcoholic beverages are sold in unpackaged form for consumption on the premises, does not include food prepared in a kitchen located on the premises and does not admit persons under the age of twenty-one X21 }. This classification includes businesses with Alcoholic Beverage Control ABC} licenses 40, 42, 48, 49, or 61. Bay window shall mean an architectural projection built out from a wall, with windows and without any, orvery limited, solid wall area on the Iongestwall ofthe projection itself. Bed and breakfast facility shall mean a building or portion thereof or group of buildings containing rooms used, designed or intended to be used, let or hired out for occupancy by transient guests for compensation or profit, and subject to all regulations listed below: 1. A use permit shall be obtained where required. 2. Parking shall be provided in accordance with Section 30-7 of the zoning regulations. 3. Signs shall be permitted in accordance with Section 30-6 of the zoning regulations. 4. Design review shall be required for interior and exterior modifications of the structures and grounds. 5. Any structure proposed for a bed and breakfast facility shall be listed in the City's historical building list as an "N"designated structure. 6.Open space shall be provided as required by the zoning district in which the bed and breakfast facility is located. http:llwww.ci.aameda.ca,uslcodel_DATAITITLE30130_I_ZONING_PLAN_l30_2_DEFINITIG... 8/19/2005 30-37.5 Requirements. Page ~ of 1 CHAPTER XXX DEVELOPMENT REGULATIQNS 30-31 DESIGN REVIEW REGULATIQNS. 3Q-37.5 Requirements. a. Projects must be compatible with their site, any adjacent or neighboring buildings or surroundings and promote harmonious transitions in scale and character in areas between different designated land uses. b. Projects which do not meet the requirements of paragraph a. shall be presumed detrimental to either existing property values or the growth of property values in the vicinity of the project. c. The Design Review Staff may determine compliance with paragraph a. by determining the consistency of the project with the principles and standards of the design review manual. ~Qrd. No. ~ 801 N.S.} previous ~ next » http:llwww.ci.aiameda.ca.uslcodel DATAITITLE3013o_37~DESIGN_REVIEW REGULATION... SIl SIZODS 34-38.5 Design Review Manual; Preparation by Design Review Staff. Page 1 of 1 CHAPTER XX~ DEVELQPMENT REGULATIQNS 3Q-38 SPECIAL PR4VISIQNS. 30-38.5 design Review Manuai; Preparation by Design Review Staff. It shall be the duty of the Design Review Staff to prepare a Design Review Manuai that will rovide guidance to applicants seeking to comp! with subsection 30-37.5a of p y this article. The Manual may separate residential, commercial and industrial uses by sections or constitute a separate Manual for each of the uses. Graphic 'illustrations may be used as examples of good ar bad design and such examples need not be limited to improvements within the City. The Manual may be revised as experience dictates and examples of approved projects considered successful by the staff should be included therein. Copies of the Manual shall be made available to the public in the Piannin Director's office. The City Council may review the manual at such times as it deem 9 s appropriate and approve or disapprove any part thereof. ~Qrd. No.1~'15 N.S.; Qrd. No. 1983 N.S. « revious ~ next » http:/lwww.ci.alameda.ca.uslcadel DATAIT~TLE30130_38_SPECIAL PR~~S~4NS 13U 3S 5... _ _ ~. ~ 81i 8/ZOOS Property Description - Waterfront property on Fernside Blvd between Monte V' ista and Fa~rv~ew - Propertyis built in 194, not on Historical Buildin Stud [.i g y st - barge two story house plus a partially above rade ara g g ge/basement - Structure incorporates Craftsman style elements - Permitted improvement in 2oDO to allow handica acres p s at the rear of the house - Adding 15 inches to the height of the house from 2S' 9" tv ' 30 - Neighborhood is eclectic - Handicap accessible - Renovations preserve and improve the architectural st le of y the dwelling - Project requires no variances and is in com fiance with tl~ P e Alameda Mun~c~paf Code - Neighborhood Support ' S , ~I1• .~I- ~~ I rl;t, r, ; i ~~~r~'IlI~ ~!~ III ~ :.r, ~ f ,. #i (y ~IffI I I I s + I 1+f 11 ;: ,~ I i~ 1 ~.#I II l.. } I I ^~ ..: .i '~~~ 'r:, f~~ 1 a: 1 ;~ ~ IiII,. ,3 1.~ ~. ~I~I I ,~. ~' I rl 1 ~ ~ ~ I jr~~ „ I I I 'f. I till .~1: r ~~ r $ ~ 'I. t' ~~~ ~; ~ r~ 5 . _ ' i' 7 ~ L~ -_-- 1 ~ ~- i ii~~~ { __ - f 17 '7~I~ .~~~ I I1 I I I ~I ~ ~ I i I r .~ . r~ ~~ , ,' •at ' ~.'•I ti~.••I •4 ';' ' 1~ '~ 5 .. •i. ~; ~ ,; .;;- ~I , ~ 4i ~l, ~ ~~ ~ .~ .i, • 1 .. , ~Y le '1' ~~~' ~.~'~ . ~ f~• ~~, 1~1'..• ~ , ~ ~ , I•. , I 1 ~ . •r lil '1~~..~ti+r~r ,,. ... ~ , ~ ~ .. . ~ ~ .. ~ ,`F ~r ~r ~~~T[ 5~. ~ ~n~' - ' ~ L 1, , ' ~~., Y:l ~ ~ i . ~.\+ ~ 1• ~ t • 1, ~ 4i'fr ~~ •~ ~' ^! ' ~~ ` I ~ ' ~ • A I I 1 ~ , . .... ~:~I` ~;~ r . ; ~,, ,,~ , -~ ;~ ir:r' », ' • . 1 ~ ~ Y,; , .,. _ ~ ._ . a'~I. I '~ ~~'- ' , ~' I I i ~ _.~ I -- -- j I! : i ~ I i $ ' f ~I I [ ~- . ~~ t .1..,.rC ~. i ._ __,.__~ , ..__._ _~w.. I ;I ; .a.--~- - ~ . I .~-:__ I r o~ --- l 1 i Summary of AAPS issues Issue 1. Incomplete Plans The plans will be modified in accordance with Resolution adopted bythe Planning Board. These minor modifications will bedone priorto the issuance of a building permit. Issue 2. Project does not conform to Guide to Residentia!Design 1. The project conforms with the Alameda Municipal Code and the Guide to Residential Design, 2. The Guide reference on Page 21, refers to adding a story to a bungalow structure. The project is not adding a story and it is not a bungalow style structure. The project does not involve lifting a Craftsman house by 2'-3'. The final Planning Board Resolution allows the applicant to raise the house 15". 3. The Golden Mean applies only to Victorian and Colonial Revival residences, 4. The structure is not a one and a half story house, but a large two story house. The second story has three bedroom, a full bath, three walk-in closets, and a seven foot hallway. 5. The project would not create a massive structure. The project is not creating an additional story. 6, The project will not block the view of adjacent properties or create unnecessary levels of shading. 7. The lifting of the house by l5"will be barely perceptible to the homes across the street and the adjacent properties. It will not cause the house to loom over the other homes in the neighborhood. The neighbors across the street will be favorably impacted by the proposed project as the completed project will be more visually appealing and will eliminate the need for the applicant to park their cars on the street. 8. The design of the proposed project is not substantially different from the current design of the house, 9. The adjacent neighbors all are of the opinion that the project is an improvement over the existing structure. 10. The AAPS references the second bullet on page 18 of the Guide. This section pertains to adding a second storyto a single story buildingand is not relevant to our project. 11. The new front basement addition will not have an intrusive effect of the streetscape and is far less intrusive than a house located three doors to the right. Staff has measured the front setback for the project as 29 feet. The AMC standard is 20 feet. 12. The purpose of the front porch is to create additional outside space for the handicapped. The Planning Board thought the addition of the porch across the front was an improvement over the existing front of the house. This supports the Craftsman philosophy of a building's relationship to the outdoors. 13. Neither the Applicant nor the Planning Board thought the excavation of the basement was a good option. 14, The Applicant has already agreed to lower the ceiling height to 9' 6" of the basement to avoid the necessity for a variance. This measurement takes into consideration the addition space needed above the ceilingforthestructural support beams. 15. The roofof the subject propertywill Iookthe same as it does nowfromthe street, 16. The Planning Board and the Applicant prefer the look of the new double wide garage doors and the elimination ofthe cutout driveway. This doublewide doorwill notvisuallydominate the neighborhood. Within 400 feet of the property there are five dwellings that are faced with a large two car garage. The driveway cut off of the street is remaining untouched. It gracefully widens several feet off of the road, 17. The Design review process is "tv balance a project sponsor's development objectives and~or creative desires with the community's desire to preserve and enhance its architectural quality and historic identity," The development objectives and creative desires of this project yield a more aesthetically pleasing structure and are compatible and harmonious with the surrounding properties. 18, The AMC states that the intent of the City Council in enacting Chapter XXX Development Regulations is "to promote and protect the health, safety and general welfare of the City by conserving the value of property by encouraging construction of buildings which are compatible and harmonious with the decision and use of surrounding properties, and to discourage the construction of buildings which have a deleterious effect upon, impair the occupancy of, or jeopardize the value of, such properties. At the same time it is the intent that the review and control procedures herein accommodate and stimulate a broad range of individual and creative design, so that the monotony and mediocrity of construction will be avoided and owners of property are not deprived of thefuil, efficient and lawful use thereof." Further, the purpose of the regulations are stated in Section 30-35.3, "Land values and construction aesthetics are dependent upon one another if sound land use development is to be successfully promoted. The purpose of this article is to recognize such interdependence, and thereby assist in the development ofarchitectural standardsand guidelinesforallstructures, buildings, and improvements to real property in the City." The applicant has walked the neighborhoods of Alameda, researched Craftsman architectural characteristics, and reviewed the alternatives designs and uses of our property. The proposed project meets the objectives and intent of the City Council in promulgating Chapter XXX of the AMC and represents a reasonable balance between our development objectives and the community's desire to preserve its architectural quality and historic identity. Issue 3: The Planning Board did not make clear what the front of the modified structure would look like. The Planning Board was clear that the only restriction that they were putting on the project was that the height of the structure was not to exceed the AMC maximum of 34 feet. They instructed the Applicant that the height of the individual floors was entirely up to them, F d w ~, N V g 'a ~ y 01 @ S IA L it m ' v o '~ ~ +~ m a H m ~ a ~ a ~ W 0 k • y 4 ~ ~ ~` ~ ~ ~' fi ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ u ~ '~ ~ ~ 4 ~ a ~ ~ b b •. o ~ ~ a ~o w '~ ~ s b o~ a m H ~ ~ a '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 y M 4 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ k ~ ~ t~ ~ b ~ ~' ~i ~` . ~ a H kd ~ ~ M m ,,~ R ~ ~0 ~~C r b ri ~~, -0 m ,4 ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ yy k ~ ~.~ a~ ~ ~ ~ a c, a ti • ~m ~ i~ Q ti'1 V ~ • yr" ~ L 0 ~} H a m ~, ~ ~, ~ a o ~ ~ ~m +r ~ ~ ~ ~ .v ~' w~ • •• k ~ ~ ~ ~ H ~ a a ,~.~ ~ ~ a rM'" M m ~ o m a c i. ~ ~+ ~ ~• ~ ~a y y ~ ~ ~ fl W +' ~~ ~~v 0 V .~ O r~ C U W 0 ,:, ae ~ m ~, a, ~ k H q +~ ~ ~ .~ ~ V chi U ~ y 3 Q M 0' w 8 .. E n 4 a' O 4V V d ~ ~ H ~ ++ b b~ 5t ~ ~, 0 ~ ~ 0 W •C ~, o .. y ry -ry ~ rh` V ~ V fi u ~ ~ ~~ 3~ gy 0 ~ ' p . ~ k ~~ k ~ N qi i ~ ~ ~ti ~ G ~ ~ ~ d ti W ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ 0 Q, a A O 4~ W ~ ~" ~ ti k ~ ~ b C ~a ~ ''~ ~ k m U ~ p4 ,y a m b ~ 4 ~ ~ ~~ .~ 4r ' ~ ~C „i I k m M ~~~ b ~i to ~• fi ~ ~ ~ ~ y ~ w ~ " a ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ • ~ •~ ~ ~ H ~ ~ ~ $ * M N ~ ~ ~ ~ro ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ •~ ~ i~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ a W M a a m .3~ L 0 a ;~ 0 U w 0 m .~ a 0 Process Problem: Clase relationship between AAPS and certain em ployees of the Planning Department Suggestion; All communications and meetings between the P fanning Department and the AAPS should be open. The applicant should be invited to artici ate in p p the commun~cat~ons, and a written record should be kept of those communications. Problem: Disposition and negativity of certain Plannin D g epartmentStaff Suggestion; Staff has a fiduciary responsibilit to the citi~ Y ens of Alameda and should provide positive and knowledgeable assistance to applicants who are oin g g through the Design Review process. Staff should not misrepresent the process. Staff should not use their pasit~on to promote their own agenda, ignoring the balance between our development ob'ectives a 1 nd the communities desire to preserve its architectural quality and historical identity. Problem: lack of detailed criteria forthe determination of th e 30% demolition calculation used to determine if an applicant has to apply for a Certificate of Approval from the Historical Advisory Board. Suggestion: The Planning Department needs a Poli which cy clearly details the calculations relative to the Solo demolition criteria for going before the HAB, Problem: The Staff acts as though the Guide supersedesthe AI ameda Municipal Code. Suggestion: The Staff should be instructed to use the Guide a s a toot and not interpret it as Code. Prablem: lack of informing the applicant when erkinent cv ' P mmunlcat~on had been received by Planning Department Suggestion; Planning Department Staffshould immediate! • • • y inform applicants ~f information relative tv~ their project is received by the Department from outside a p rues. Problem: lack of continuity between City agencies, The Plann' Ong Department fs supporting the AAPS and not the Planning Board. Suggestion: The Planning Department, as a De artment of t P he C~tyofAlameda, should support the Resolution of the Planning Board. Conclusions - The City Council should consider rejecting jurisdiction overthe appeal. - The neighbors support the project - The Planning Board approved the project - The project requires no variances - The project is in compliance with the Alameda Municipal Code - The Planning Board Resolution should be upheld by the City Council Petition in support of the Planning Board's approval of the Mayor Desi n Review ' t g loran addition and remodel of the existing structure and the construction of a detached waterfront ' dwelling at 3321 Fernside Boulevard -~ DR07-Q056 Dear Honorable Mayor Johnson, Vice-Mayor Tam, Counciimembers deHaan Gilm ore, and Matarrese, 1Ne have reviewed the proposed plans fvr an addition and remodel of the exi ' sung structure at 3327 Fernside Boulevard. We have also reviewed the proposed plans to construct a d dweflin etached waterfront g• 1Ne are in strong support of the approval of the proposed pra'ect at 3327 Fernsi ~ de Boulevard, we believe that the project will fit in with the eclectic context of the nei hborh g ood, and !s compatible with the properties in the immediate vicinity, and will enhance ro ert values in ' ' ' p p y the v~c~n~ty of the .protect. Further, we believe that the project improves the original architectural chars cter of the structure. Finally, we urge the City Council to uphold the Planning Board Resolution of June 23, 2008 and allow Donna Talbot and James Rauk to move forward with their project. Thank you fvr your consideration, Name Address ~~~ ~~.• 4. 1/L~.LL~- „ - 6. 7. 10. r 11:~,~~~ ~ ` ~' 12. 1~ 13. ~~~ L~ ~~ ~ S~G~f ~-P~hs~d.e ,alvc~ . ~~ ~ ~c~'st~~l~cf C~C~(/L~ c~ ~ l ( fI c~~Slf~ c ~%~J/~ 3 a~t r F ~, ~.~ r rr,/ : ~ 3a7y ~~`R~`~`~ yv~ 335 ~v~%~e p~~ 33 7 ~ {~~~~I~'~,~~~ 3321 ~~~r.s~~ Blued ~ ~ 4 ri ~~ s; ~~ e, ~ CuaQ Page Z Petition in support afthe Planning Board's approval of the Major Design Review for an addition and remodel of the existing structure and the construction of a detached waterfront dwelling at 3327 Fernside Boulevard - DRQ7-4D56 Dear Honorable Mayor Johnson, Vice-Mayor Tam, Councilmembers deHaan, Gilmore, and Matarrese We have reviewed the proposed plans for an addition and remodel ofthe existing structure at 3327 Fernside Boulevard. We have also reviewed the proposed plans to construct a detached waterfront dwelling. We are in strong support of the approval of the proposed project at 3327 Fernside Boulevard. We believe that the project will fit in with the eclectic context of the neighborhood, and is com atible with . ~ P the properties in the Immediate vicinity, and will enhance property values in the vicini of the ro'ect. tY P J Further, we believe that the project improves the original architectural character of the structure. Finally, we urge the City Council to uphold the Planning Board Resolution vfJune 23, 2DD8 and allow Donna Talbot and James Rauk to move forward with their project. Thank you for your consideration, Name Address 14. 1~~1(/1, A~n.clerscY~ s~ d~am-~v~~~„~ 2~Sa ~5. ifs ~'~R~7 ,~zas ~~,~ I/,s7y q,E 9~t5o~ ie. J=ar h ~411gc~ ~1`~y ,~ ~~ ,. ~, 17. ~0~'~, ~~ 3~0 Nc.L V~ Cu R-~4. 1s. ~e one o~2. ~Zcri 2f ~ 332 ~,rn Si du gl,,~. 1s. 'C~~nas ~y~CC4~„~ 3aa-~ Q,~ru V~S~ A ~~ ~C~o~ zo. SA~~ URd ~/EJ- 3 z~$'~; r v+b~ ~ C ~!S`u~ zl~iou.wc ~,,~~ 32z8 ~ l~ibE-cam Q-~c. G4So! zz ~IVb~_~~ ~({~hl~Nl~Y~ ~J~2~~120~9SfDE 13LV~. za. ~z-~- ~e,~n-hr's b 3~9' ~-~t751 t7~ /~LV1J `~YSa~ Kathie C. Boothby 3321 Fernside Boulevard Alameda, Ca 94501 (510) 701-8173 September ~ 2, 2DD8 Honorable Mayor Beverly Johnson Honorable Mice-Mayor LenaTam Councilmember Doug deHaan Councilmember Marie Gilmore Councilmember Frank Matarrese i am writing in strong support of the Planning Board's approval of the proposed project at 3327 Fernside Boulevard. Donna Talbof and Jim Rauk have reviewed with me the renovation plans for their existing house and the proposed plans for their new waterfront house. I think that the completed project will fit in well with the other houses in the neighborhood and wilt increase the value of the adjacent properties amine included}. have lived at 3321 Fernside Boulevard my entire life (55 years) and am excited to see the positive changes that this project will bring to the neighborhood. Sincerely, Kathie Boothby Monday, January 28, 2008 PLANNING DIVZSIDN, CITY DF ALAMEDA CITY HALL ~~~~ Santa Clara Avenue, Rm,190 Alameda, CA 94501 RE: A ends item 9-B on Janua 2$ 2a0$: v07-OOQ~ ariances and. /~JJ . ~ } DRQ / -Q056 {1Vla~or Design Rev~ew~ -~ Donna Talbot and James Rauk -- 3327 Fern ' side Blvd. Dear Planning Board Commissioners and Staff: Please accept this letter as an indication of our strop su ort for antin a r vari g PP gr g pp oval of the antes and mayor design review requested by our neighbors, Donna Talbot and James Rauk. Donna and Jim live two doors to the northwest of me, m wife and alm _ Y ast three year old son. we moved here to Alameda in 2004 in search of a safe town with eat sc a true gr hoofs and community of neighbors who are engaged and care about one another fallowin in the foatste s of m d arents fath ~ g P Y ~ P er, uncle and his family, all of whom also grew u in Alameda. P Donna and Jim generously sat down with us and walked throu in detail ' gh their application and plans. ~Ve think they've arrived at a wonderful fan that bal p antes nicely issues of aesthetics, usability of their home and lot and cansiderati ' on of their neighbors. r believe the renovation and new construction the are ro osin will Y P P g enhance neighborhood values, demonstrating the commitment of eo le to make 1 P p ong term investments in Alameda while respecting the character of the surroun ' ' ding neighborhood. while we absolutely appreciate alI the efforts b this bad to rated the . Y Y p character and value of our neighborhood with their review and olicies we were disc ' • P ~ • ppainted wrth, and respectfully disagree with, the conclusion reached b staff gyn. recommend~n ' Y g denial of the requested variances and design review. we ask that both staff and the board rec ' ons~der this position based on the following facts: 1 ~ The majority of variances requested relate to the drivewa and r y ear structure. In bath cases it is our impression upon further discussion with the a ' ppl~cants that they have figured out a means to avoid the need for mast or all of th ese variances, which we leave up to the applicants to explain in detail. ~) The one remaining variance relates to hei t and involves . gh ~ an extremely small portion of the house, lust one tiny section of the eak of the roof that exc ' Consi P eels 30 dertng that items ~Iike chimney's and other ro'ections of small scat P J e are allowed to exceed 30', it is hard to understand how this small sec ' ' ton of roof is detrimental to any of the surrounding neighbors ar broader comm it ail unity. Further, ows the applicants to leave untouched the on final itch and desi roof g p gn of the an outcome that seems quite desirable. 3} The objection to approving the major desi n review on ound g gr s that the . improvements are out of character with the historic nature and character of the structure seems unfounded. This home already has three full com fete floors is clean of a ~ ~ ' a.nd lar a and d p Y g om~nant scale. The desire of the applicants to make the ground l subterranean floor only three feet taller is somethin that sh be g ould and can supported, ~ncreas~ng values, tax base and usability of the roe for de p p rty codes to come. Because of the existing scale and subterranean nature of the o . gr and level, the three feet wtil hardly be noticeable and will not affect the already dominant character of the home. Likewise, the additions to the rear of the lot are consistent in scale and mass with alI the properties along this side of Fernside, man of which hav Y e two or more complete homes on each Iot. To deny this application is to den their r' en' ~ Y zght to boy the same improvements that other neighbors have on their ro ert • p p Y~ and discourages the land of smart and respectful renovation and dev elopment that this neighborhood will increasingly need as its homes a e. g In conclusion, we firmly urge the staff to reconsider their osition of th p , and to grant approval e variances and design approval requested by our goad nei hbors Donna and J' g ~ xm. Thank you for your consideration, ,~~~, ~~ ~ . i .y-} -~ " K ~ Ali •~ ~=K+'L"i•. -J ~ _y ~ _ _. !~~r~_ - .~ ~~ L!~ +~ Shelly Hamalian Seth Hamalian 3 3 ~ 3 Fernside Blvd., Alameda, CA 945 ~ 1 shamalian~a hotmail.com { .. -. ,, ., _~ ~;, .. '~ .,./tip ~l. !/'~~GI~ C~±~,(;~;"fl,; ~_. ~.... ,•,U1~U i:f~~ V:. ~r ~rtiC~ r~,r ~J~~r~S~'.~±f~G~~U~~~, ~;~~,~, ~~--~~; ~~~~~~}-~~ ~ ~~ ~ r ', ~~ R-- ~ ~~ ' ~., -~ I ~f {~ O~~ CJ. ti, f~'~,v~11 '[/:~~ L• TG'l~'rUL i / r ~ - ~, V 0~~~~'I,~.i.Q~~L L,~ t?/~G C'~ f/i ! _r ~~ ~'~/ ~ j ~ r ~, r o~ t ~~ e~~ ~s~~r t,L~, i'.a ~.~. ~ rY~~~f~ J `-~ r ~ ~ • ~ : ~. ~• ~~ G ~~ G~'r~ Q1/~5~~008 x.9;04 FAg 51p 5~3 111 PAT PLO'~AN f~p~x Ja~u~ry ~5, ZQOS ~'ianning Baard Planning ~i~~qn, ~i#y ~~ A~~rn~d~ ~i~ Haii ~~ ~#~ ~I~ ~4v~. ~a~rr~1g~ ~amed~, ~ ~45a1 M~mber~ of Plennir~ Bard: E 1iv~ right n~x~ der ~~ ~ann~ "~a~bat and dim F~auk at ~3~~~ end 3~~1 Fern~ide~ arrd hive ant ver~i #~au~ with m ~ aver heir p far impra~ring th~Er property at 3~~~ Femsid~ ~vd. ~ Kok f~~ ~ #~ ~-pr~ven~~ ~~ t~i~ prq~rty ~n~ age vu~ whit #~ waWd 1'd~e to da ~ far es ~miaravemen~ ~a. . ~ie~~e consider that these iflnprm~ts wild a~~y enh~nt~ t~ ~hbarhaad ar~d in l~~Y vet in add'rt~n to mating #~tter use of ~i~ props . ,. Pat Plonnm~an 3329 and 3331 Femside Blvd. Alameda, CA 94509 City Council Meeting Public Hearing -September 16, 2405 Major Design Review - DR07-0056 index to Pictures Clockwise from Top left I, Page One-3327 Fernside Blvd A. Backyard B. North Side Yard C, View of Rear Neighbor D, Frant View II. Page Two E. Comparable property along Fernside F, Rear View of North Neighbor G. North View from Front yard of 3327 Fernside H, Comparable property along Fernside III. Page Three --Comparable property along Fernside r ___.:....._, ~~f i_'' ~'. . . ~; -_. ~..; ~~ I: r~_; ~,.~.. . ~-..:~. ~..,..__ ~_....~ ; i'`::_ :_ ~~ ;= : ;._ E: . i. s : •.:-' 4 .". _. i •. I "- ~..:. •. ~'. '. : - I..:. .. ~_____' f,:;: ~~ 'S r 11 .... ......~.•.. ......~.~.. .. .... .•. .9] ........ .... ..... ....~~...... .i ~.:~.. ..fin. :.. '.:~. '~ .i.. i.l:..'....~:'.:._..~: _~. .. ...:. m.n....i.~5~:r:.......... ~...nt . 91~ 512008 Lara ~ f Weise er _ Fwd: ~Publ~icHearin ~:09~. ~ 6.2~08~ Re: DROl-~456~ ~.........° ........................... ~ ..... .. ~~~ ~ ~~ ~ .... w~:uMxauny~....w..., w,km:c..;,~... ,wv..,~..oy„y„r,,.n~...J~mr:c+rwM:,~.~,~. ~ rw-r~r,+ ^w^N^~reartt~ .. ... ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~.,r!e". ,..~,,,~.e,,..,,~.;~~;rcym,,.~,,.,.~,,,,,,~,~~wtow,,,~.,,,,.,.;.,,~~,-..,.,.M.,,,,,,,M.,.kr .. ~~~v,.,,,vM,.,~,~...,.Mv~,...,....~.~~.,~»~....w,u~..w,....w„~a9.e..~... From: Beverly Johnson To: Sara Weisiger Date: 911512aa81z;a5 PM Subject: Fwd: Public Hearing a9.16.2aa8 Re; DRa7-aa56 Attachments: GWAVA_2#TFxT.htm; 3#AAPSappeal.pdf; 4#appealamc.pdf; GWAVADAT.TXT €~rtFi {~f0 spar spar »> 9J8J2a08 6;12 PM »>~par }Dear Ms. Highsmith,~par spar spar `par We are the owners of 3327 Fernside Blvd. We have a renovation project that~par was approved by the Planning Board on June 23, 2aas. The decision of the~par Planning Board was appealed by the Alameda Architectural Preservation~par Society ("AAPS"} on July 3, zags. We are requesting that you and the City~par Council consider whether the City should accept jurisdiction over this~par appeal. We were originally going to discuss this issue with you at the City~par Council meeting on August 19, zoos, however, the Planning Department called~par us at 3:45 pm on August 19 and informed us that an error had been made and~par the proper notices had not been posted by the Planning Department. spar `par spar spar The Alameda Municipal Code ~"AMC"} states, that a Notice of Appeal must be~par filed no later than ten (1a} days following the decision of the Planning~par Board. Further, the AMC states that "in filing an appeal, the applicant~par shall specifically state the reasons or justification for an appeal," We~par have attached a copy of the relevant sections of the AMC and a copy of the~par appeal that was filed by the AAPS. The AAPS states that the basis for the~par appeal is that the project is not consistent with the City of Alameda Design~par Review Manual (Guide to Residential Design}, However, they da not~par specifically state what section of the 98 page "Guide to Residential Design"spar the project does not meet. I da not believe that the applicant has met the~par requirements for filing an appeal, because they did not specifically state~par the reasons or justification for an appeal in their July 3rd filing.~par Instead, the AAPS filed a "place holder" until they had time to put tagether~par the basis for their appeal. It is my understanding from reading the Mema~par from the City Manager that the supplement to the appeal was filed are July~par 24th, thirtyLone days after the Planning Board's approval and twentyLone`par days after the due date far filing the specific reasons for the appeal. spar spar spar spar We also believe that the fact that the AAPS represents that the project is~par not consistent with the Guide is not sufficient to grant an appeal. ~ur~par understanding is that the Guide, is just that a Guide, and that when the~par Guide was being developed, concerned parties were provided assurances by the~par Planning Department and the City that it would not carry more weight than a~par Guide. The Guide should be used as a too! by the Planning Department and~par not interpreted as Code. The AMC states that Design Review Staff may`par determine compliance with Development regulations by determining the~par consistency of the project with the principle and standards of the design par review manual. The word "Shall" is defined in the AMC as mandatory and not~par directory. The word "May" indicates that Staff is permitted to use the~par Guide in making determinations but is the use of the Guide is not a~par requirement of the AMC. spar spar spar spar The project as approved by the Planning Board requires no variances and is~par in compliance with the AMC. The Planning Board and the neighbors have~par indicated by their approval and support that the project is compatible with~par the neighborhood and would increase the existing property values in the~par vicinity of the project. The only Alameda residents who have spoken out as~par not supporting our project are all members of the AAP5. None of these AAPS~par members live in the immediate vicinity of the project.~par spar `par spar Vlle would like to meet with you this week to discuss whether the City Council~par should accept jurisdiction aver this matter, Please let us knave what time~par and day would be convenient far yau.~par spar spar spar Thank you in advance for you time and assistance. spar spar spar spar spar spar spar spar Donna Lee Talbot & James E. Rauk~par spar spar spar 3327 Fernside Blvd.~par spar Alameda, CA 945a1L1711~par spar spar spar 51a~846~6698 (cell}spar spar 51aLZ17~Z361 (fax} spar spar spar 1par } Re: Agenda Item #5-C 09-1 G-D8 U`,~.~ OP ALgtij~O 'y PETITION FOR APPEAL PLAN(~NG 8 BUILDING This petition is hereby filed as an appeal of the decision of the: . ~ ~ ~ d ,~ Planning and Building DirectvrlPlanning BoardlHistoricalAdvlsory BoardlAppeals Board} RECE~~~D .~ JUL 0. ~ Z008 hich PERMIT CENTER ALAMEDA, C.4 94501 .~-~~~= ~, „ ,... ,..,,,., fvr a Ilcation pp ~DeniedlGrantedlEstabiished Conditions} ~/ number ~ ~ Application Type} ~ Application Number at ~J~ ~ ~; ~'1 ~ ~ V Street Address} on ~ Z~ l~ Specify D to of Action) The basis of the appeal is: ,. ~ ~ ~. ~ r ~~ / r .. ~' u~~,~ IS ~. 1~ i ~If more space is needed, please attach additional sheets. ~~~ ~~` ~~h~17=.~Tv-R~ ~ Appellant: ~ , v -~ S % ~ 23 ~~ ~ ~Appefiant Names}} Address: ~ ~Il~ ~(~~-~ ; ~~ Appellant Address) ~' 1~-~~r,~~ ~~~~r I hereb a ree to a the Cit of Alameda all in `~ Y g P Y Y curred costs for staff time and materials associated with review and processing of the subject appeal even if the appeal is withdrawn or not approved. I understand that one or more deposits will be required to cover the cast noted herein at such time as required by the Planning and Building Director to ensure there are adequate funds to cover anticipated time and materials costs related to the appeal. 1 expressl ack ledg a agree to pay a written invoice for additional funds within ~~ days of date of invaice. Signed: ~Appella~t Signatures (For Office Use Only} Received By: Receipt No.: Date Received Stamp G:IPLANNINGIFORMSWPPEALO~ .WPD ~~~--~~-08 ~1:18R F~+~1 .~~-~~,~ l~'I~t~i ~rv~l~l~ln~. P~~~~t'. I ~)J l ~WA~T~R,K~C~ ~E1lE~~~J~ENT RE~t.IJ..~TI~N~ ~~-~~,APPEAL~,~R ~~LL Fi~J~ RE~,~EW. r "_ n~ ~ ~ ~~-~~.~ Fin~f ~~~i~i~ns. a. F~r~al D~rlisiarJ ~f tf~e Z~r~ing ~drraini~lr~fer Ar~y d~~i~ian ~f the ~~rring Adrnir~r~trat~r shall he final err the date ~f the dec~~r~n, unless any R~r~~n aggrfav~d ~r by any ~~eer, ag~n~ or d~ artr~ent a pity a'~t~d by any d~~l~ien of the ~anirt Adminis#~~t~r fries s Y1 R f the ~eRartrnent ~~ l~t~r than ten ~~ da f ~ ~ N~ti~e of Ap~~l with tt~~ Planning ~ } y~ ~Jl~vr~ing the d~i~ien or ~ ~itY ~oun~iimember filar ~ wall fir review with tl~~ Planning Q~p~rhn~nt n~ l~t~rt than t~i~ {10j days l'~il~~ving the d~~isien, ~e~i~ien art aRp+~~i~d or ~Jlad far revirrr~- ~halJ tint be~m~ ~fl~etiv~ until tl~e ~ that apR~~l ~r call fir r~viaw i~ r~~alv~d by the apprepri~te pity h~dy. b. Final a~~ision ~f the PlanniJ7~ ~oar~ er F~is#~t~l ~I d>rr'~r ~~ar~. An deeisi~n ~f the t~ ~r Hiat~ncal Advi~~ry heard ahail be final ~n the date ~~ the d ' ' Y f~nn'ng ~~ar~ any ~tf~r, agency, ~r de artmarlt ~f the ~i ecrsi~r~, ur~lesa any persen a~~rreved ~r ay P ty affi~eted by any decis~rr ~f the Plarinir~~ Beard ~r Histnncal Advi~Qry guard, tiles a N~tiCa ~f Appeal wt#h the F~nniri~ ~~partment nQ l~t~r than days fQJlewJng the deeisi~r~ ~r ~ pity ~un~lmemh~r fibs arall ~r review t~ri ~~~~ r+~ later than #~n ~~ 0~ days f~ll~win #5~ d+~~i~ien. - ~ with the ~'lani~ing ~~partment g ~~~i~,~ns that ~r~ appled er called fer revieuu ~haii net ~~~~ e~e~tiv~ until the aRpe~l er ~lJ fir reviavv i~ i~~lved ~y the appr~ riate fit bid . c. Final ~~~r'~ian ~~ f1~~ ~r'ty~ t~~-~iJ' A deci~i~n b the fit ~eun ' ~ y y view ~h~IJ beeeme final an #h~ d~t~ of ~ ~ Y , ~I regarding ~n ~ppJ ~r call fir ~~xie the d~~~en ~u~j~t to ~udi~ial reviar~ pursuant t~ ~afif~rnJ~ ~f ~iviJ ~rae~dure ~ecti~n ~ ~g4.5. AnY Mien ~~r judJCral n~vr~w rs ~u~'~et to the rovisi ~~I~arnra ~~de of civil Rraeedur~ ~~tian 10,E aft~i' the date ~ ~ p Qns et d. Fnd of Appeal er ~a1i fnr F~evr~~r pried. ~f the ~~y ~~unerl's da~i~ian. 1~Vh~n the end ~f an app~~i ar call fir revlaw period falls on a weekend er ~ ~ctatutary holiday, the p~ri~d shill ~nbnue until the fir~# warl~Jn da thereafte JVa. ~1~4 N,;~.' ord. Nv, ~~~~ l~l,~_; ord. No. ~~~5 N.~,; ord. Ne~ ~~~5 N 9 ~ r. ~~rd. ord. N~, ~g~~ N.~, ~ ~2~ ,~, ~ ~, Ord, NQ. ~~~~ ~1.~. ~ ~; .~. ~~ ,pr~viaus ~ ~~~ct ~~ .~~~~r~l'~'I'!'LF~QI~U ~~ ~, _~.~l~H,l~ ~, ~ ~ ~ ~~ L ~ F ~~ ~~E~.., ~I1~l~Of~~ ~e -~~-~8 ~1:1~P ~+~~ Ins#iati~n ~f App~al~ and ~al~~ i~~r ~~vl~w. y, s , r ~~~~~ 1 t~~ ~ ~MAP`~E,R ,~ I~EVEL~I~I,I~ENT RE~UL~TI~NS ~~-~5 APR~~~~ ~R~~. F~l~ F~EVI ~....~. ~_ .... . '4... `~~... ~~~~5.4 Inifr~t~~n ~f Ap~~~ia and ~~~~~ fir ~evi~w, a. Appeals a~A~fian~ ~f the I~la~nin~ ~ire~t~r'. ~~ appeal to the pla~nin Board ~~r~cern' l~larrr,ir~~ Uirectcr de~i~iQn shall be laced in wri#in with the P ~ ~~g a~tic~~ ~f ~ ac~mparr~ed h the re uir~ed fear, ~ ~ la~ning I~~partment aid shall ~~ Y q l~1 filrng a~ appeal, the appellan# shall speci~~lly state the reaso~~ ~r ~usti~ieati~t~ far an appeal, ~, Appeals a~ ~4olians o~ the Z~nin~ ~dmir~i~hatcr. A~ appeal #~ the Planni~ Boar ~f the ~aa~r-~ ~dminis#ra#ar shell be ~l$d ire writin with the ~l ~ d ~~r~oem~ng aot~ans ampanied by the uir~d fees. In Dili g arrn~~~ Bepa~trr~ent and shall he ~ ng en appeal, tl~e appellant shall sp~~~fically state the rea~~r~s cr jug#i#i~ti~n fir ari appeal. c. Ap~aa1~ of ~~tiarr~ ~f the ~1ar~r~-n~ B~ar~ ~~' Hi~tor~al Advisory ~~ar~d Ar} a eat ' cx~n~e~ni~g actia~s ~f the planning Bard ~~ Hi~t~rical Adviso .. ~~ #~ the ~~ty ~~u~oil wi#h tl~e Planni~~ De artme~t ar~d sh ry ~~~d dec~~~~n fall ~~ l'rled in writlr~~ p all ba empar~ied b~+ the r~~uited fees. In f~lin~ an appeal, tl~e appli~nt shall ~p~cifcalfy state the r~asar~s ~t ~u~t~tlan fir an a e~i, d, ~all~ far 1~~view, A call i~~ review shall fie filed wi ~~ th the F~ienrnr~g C~per#rrrent by the I~lannin~ Baard~ the pity ~~uncil, ~~ a member of either ~dy ~y ~~-g the rea~n~ or 'u~#t~ shall be ~~~uired far a fl fOr revi~r. ord. ~~, ~7~3 N l ~etien f~t• the rerrr~w, ~u fey ~ ,S. § ~, Ord, N~. ~~~Q lV,~. ~ ~~~ ~~ revi ~ next ~~ http:Il~vww.ei.a[arri~;da.e~,.usf~~del ~~~'~'~IT`1''I"f 3 , , ._ .~E~~/:3~ ~~ ~~~ ~1~L~ ~Y~ ~~1~L~ i~~~R ~~p-~~--08 01:18P R+~~ ~~-~ ~~F,F~NlTI~N~, ~~~e 1 ~t' ~HAI~T~R,~(~ D~V~L~I~MENT BE~ULATI~NB ~0-1, ~~NIN~ ALAN. 3~-~ aE~iNiT1~N~, a. Vllords used in the present tense include the future, w~-d~ Ir- the SIrl~ular nurnbet include the plural, and w4rda in the plural rrur~b~r irr~l~tde the singular; the ward "bu~ld~rr~" lnclude~ the word ustn~cture", and the word shall" is mandatory and not directory, ~fty CcUr~erJ shall mean the City ~auncil of the pity of Alameda, and Planr~in~ ~~~ sh~11 mein the Pl~r~rrin~ Beard cf tha City of Alameda. pity shall mean the incorporated area ~f the Cf~ cf Alameda. ~er~in~ ~~rn~r~i~frata~ shall mean the Planning Director, or such person as helshe may, with the prior approval cf the I~lanning hoard, designate, who shell administer and Enterpret the prcvisicns of the z~r~ir~~ regulations and perform other duties ~$ prescribed herein, Other t$rrrrs r~et specif Ily trrentiened hereab~ve ~l`rall have the meanings ascri to thcrrti by tha Charter and this Cede. b. As used in thI$ chapter: Accessary ~uiEdin~ shall mean a defached suhardin~e building, any pert ~f which is within a required minimum yard of the subject ~enir~~ District, and the use of which is inciderl#al #~ that cf the rrraln building ~n the sarr~ let, cr t~ tl~e use ~f the iand~ FQr prcpertles within a I~esidentlal zone, ~r with a Residerrtiel use, the use cf such artery buildir~~s is res#ricted to garages, carports, stprage sheds, end sirniiar buildings wl~icl~ are i~und ~y the ~uildir~~ ~I`i~cial to canfarm to the u~" ~~#~lity~ ~ceupancy classnc~etfer~. Accessary u$c shall nnean a use e~ ~ buifdin~ which is irtciderrtai or' subordinate #a the principal u of building located upon the same int. Agency shall mean an af'I~ice ar commercial ~tabllshment in whleh goods, material er eguipmer~t are received far servicing, treatment cr prssi-~g elsewhere, Alley shall mean a public of permanent private way ^r lane less then forty ~4~'~ feet in width whiff atfards a Secondary means of ac$s tc abut#ing property. Ancl2er~trt shall mean and refer ~ h~useb~ts er five~ai~and boats mired cr entered ~fl~hore end nek ir'~ ar1 authari~ed commercial marina. ~1~o#e: Anther-~tt$, ether than transient btu, ~~ net permitted.} An#enna, ~~#eJJifd ~i~~i shall mean adish-shaped device desi~n~ tc receive tclevisi~r~ signals trar~srnitted from ~rt~tlr~~ satellites, as welt as all supp#rtir~~ e~ulpment necessary to irt~#all ~r rrrount the antenna. ~alcany shah! mean ~ plati~rm encl by ~ railing r3r balus~ade prc~eetirr~ from the exteri~f wail ~f a building, accessible ~niy ~m the intedar ~f the building. ~ar~k~, .~a~rin~~ and loan services sh;~ll mean fir~aneial institutions that pr~vld+~ Mail banking ~rviaes to individuals and businesses, These institutions include finks, savings and loans, credit unions, sec~~~ bakers and real property ler~din~ institutions. it does net include c~h~k cashing ~r payday advance uses. ser Sl~~ll mean ~ glace where alc~halie beuera~es are sold in r~rrp$cka~ed farm for nsumPt~n on the prerrlise~, dies rat Include ~d p~pared in a kitohen located on the prerrrises and does net edrr~It persons under the a of twenty~ne ~~~}. This olassifrcatian incl~rdes busir~ess~ with ~A#o~helic Beverage Cont-~l ~ABCy licenses ~48, 4~, 49, ~~, er ~~. ~a~- window shall meerr an arohrtectural prcjccticrr built opt from a well, with windows end without arl , ~r very f united, salyd wall area ~n the longest well ~f the pr~j~tiQn itself, y ~d errd breakfast i~r~lr,~r shall rne~n a building ~r plan thereof ar group ~f buildings o~ntaini roams used, des~gr~cd or rntended to be ul, let ar hr~d out ter coca a transient ~ p ~ by guests far oompensataan Qr prof#, ar~d subject ~ all regulati~rr$ listed ~Icw; ~, A use permit shall be obtained wl~cre required. ~. ~arlcir~~ shat! be provided in accardant~ ~rlth Beeti4n ~~-T of the ~~rring reguletiens, ~. signs shell be permitted in arrrlce wi#h ~eotien ~ of the ~onir~$ ~gulatiens. ~. design review shall be required ~r interior and exterior rnodificaticns of the structures and r~lrrrds. ~, Any structure pr~pased ~r a bed and area~tfa~t facility shell be listed an the C' s hi ~ g ll~t ~~ ~~n "~' de~jg~l~t~ ~tr~JC~1re, i`T ~t~~Gal ~ulldi~~ ~. ~Rer~ space shall ae provided as requited by the Bening district in which the bed and ~s l~t~d, breakfast facllr#y ht~~:Ilww~w.~~i.~latr~~~tn.c~~~.ir.~cod~I T~1~T ~ , _ rl.~~~l~~ ~ ~~NI~iC~ ~i~AN Z~(l~ ~e~-0~-~8 ~1:1~R ~.~4 3~~~7,~ I~c~~~~ren~cr~~.~- t~~~c ~ of ~ CHAPTER ~C7C~C ~E1~EL~l~MENT RE~UI~Tl~N~ ~~-~~ aE~l~l~ RE~I,L.lI11 RE~ul~~rl~~~. ~~-~7.5 R~~~I~~m~~nt~. a. ~'ra~ccts must be compatible with their sits, ~r~y ~dj~a~r~t er r~ei~h~arir~~ ~uitdin~s er surreundings and pram~t~ h~rrr~ar~iau~ t~~~~itiar~~ ire ~a~le ~~~ al~~r~~ta~ i~ ~~~~~ h~tw~~n different desi~nate~ land ~~~~, ~. ~rajc~ts r~h~uh d~ r~~t meet the ~~~uir~m~~ts ~t p~r~~raQh a. shall be presumed detrimental tc eith~~ existtrr~ property values ~~ the grewth of property v~lt~~~ ~~ the vicinity ~f tl~~ project. c. The [design Review staff may determine camplianc~ with p~r~~r~ph ~, ~y datermir~ir~g the cansistet~cy cf the prefect with the principles and ~t~nd~rd~ of tha d~si~~ review manual. ~~rd. Nc. ~ $~~ N.~.~ ~~, r~evicu5 ~ nex# ~~ ~~ttp;ll~~wt4r.~i.it~~~n~~4~~~,c;~r.u~fc~,~~c;l ~l~A`~111'I'!'1'I ,~~~1~~~ ~~ 1~~` ' ' ~~p-0~-0~ ~1:1~R P+~5 3~-~~.~ ~e~t~~ k~vi~w 1'~an~~~.~; ~r~~~ra~i~n ~y L~~si~ri ~~v~~w ~t~f~. ~a~~ 1 ~f` 1 ~. CHApTEF~ X aEllEL~~~IEN`~ RE~U_~,~N~ 3D-3~ ~l~E~~At_.~,~.~ull~~~, ,~ n5w.~ i~~ ~~}~~,~ ~+~~i~n ~~~~~w ~I~nu~l; pr~~~r~ti~n ~y D~~i~r~ R~vi~w t~ff~ It sha[l b~ the duty ~f tf~~ p~~i~n Review staff to pr~p~r~ ~ ~~~ign review M~r~u~l that uvill provide guidance k~ ~pplir~rtt~ ~~~kin~ to amply with sub~~~~ ~4~37,~a Qf this ar#i~l~, Thy Manual may separate resldentFal, ~~~mer~i~l end industrial uses ~y ~ti~~s ar cDnst~tut~ ~ ~~p~~a~te Manual fir ea~#~ ~f the uses. graphic illuskr~tie~~ rn~y be used as examp[~~ ~fi load er bad d~~i~~ and such examples n~~d r1~t ~~ limited t~ impravem~n#~ wi#hirt the pity. 7h~ M~~u~l may be avid as experien~~ di~t~te~ ~~d examples of approved pr~je~t~ ~onsider~d s~~C~~sful by the ~t~ff ~h~~rld he ~r~cluded therei fl, ~~pies of the Manual ~tt~ll b~ m~d~ ~v~il~hle too the public in the Rlan~ing airecta~s afFFCe. ~'he pity ~aurr~il r~~y review the manual ~t ~u~h times as it ~eem~ ~p~~~priate and ap~~~ye cr disapprove any p~rktl~ere~f. ~~rd. Na. ~~~~ N,~,; ord. hl~. ~~~~ hl.~,y ~~ previous ~ ~.~,~~. ~~ fi[[p:/lvvwr~~,~~i.~ilarr~uci~i,ca,~~Ic~ode/_~11't~Af~'ITL!~;~k1130 3~ ~P'~ _ ~~~AL~~t~~~II~IC~N~~ 1~0 3S_~... ~1 ~ ~l?~~~~ ,n ,. ..:e:..... [n:~ .~,.n•: [.....::s:x..,.. _n..a...»,.re.. r.:'~:.......,..~...~ ............::re...,,.....~.,....................,.t... e,...:::r :.::a: :..... ~..... X911512448 Lara weisiger - Fwd.•~•3313 Ferns•ide Blvd~~Se~•~tem~ber~•16 .. r`~r~ [~~ ~•~~•~•~•••••• }~`~••••`••~•••••••••••••• ~ •• •• •• ~~ ~cou c•i•I•~m tin ee ,~.~~.~....~ Page 1 '... ~~.,»»...•,,..~..,,„wy,,~r.yi,;r, .. .. ..?~~+?k}~YY Y .. ... .,y....;.....~,:::!:!q•r?v~,.w'sKVtl'-r.:^`rM:•Y.-0C :YW^N.Y+-0Y^t+^•w'w,.. .. W+,r.kw^.~^m•^f-, ,w+µ.,^~WY0.KW~.~. •nY^;f ...'M:i......::"1r.f f:N+:M?'wuMw.ww~..•w. vf~.wi "!»^!!M!!u!•i?NM.~.~kkM^rN^w.y.yy.y..nv MlM:hr,xrnu..... K^;f'?`??GYM?y4.~....~,}y!m•n..,...~,.~t+^w;yn?;W;v....t. }.n .,..AV;;m;;wr:}.. u........._,ti S From: Beverly Johnson To, Lara Vlleisiger Date: 9/15/20x$ I2:04 PM Subject: Fwd: 3373 Fernside Blvd, September 16 council meeting »> Kevis Brownson <~cevis alam~danet.n~t> 9/15~200812:1~ AM »> Honorable Mayor, Vice Mayor, and Council Members; Please consider supporting the Planning Staffs recommendation ors this house remodel. I feel this is a good compromise that will allow the homeowners to meet their needs while still preserving goad design. The recommendation keeps the roofline intact, which is very important to the architectural integrity of the house. Thank you very much, Kevis Brownson 1554 Everett Street 510-522-4966