Resolution 15488CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO. 15488
DENYING APPEALS FILED BY BRIAN TREMPER AND LABORERS
INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICA, LOCAL UNION 304
AND APPROVING A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND DESIGN
REVIEW TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OFA 172-ROOM HOTEL
AND RESTAURANT ON THE HARBOR BAY BUSINESS PARK
SHORELINE AT 2900 HARBOR BAY PARKWAY (PLN18-0381)
WHEREAS, Robert Leach for Harbor Bay Hospitality, LLC submitted an application
requesting Design Review and Development Plan Amendment for the construction of a
new 172-room five-story hotel and restaurant located on approximately 5.5 acres within the
Harbor Bay Business Park, as case number PLN18-0381 ("project"); and
WHEREAS, the subject property is designated Business Park on the General Plan
Diagram; and
WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the C-M-PD, Commercial
Manufacturing -Planned Development District; and
WHEREAS, the Planned Development for the Harbor Bay Business Park was
approved by PD-81-2, and subsequently amended by PDA-85-4, PDA05-0003, PLN07-
061, and PLN15-0092; and
WHEREAS, Condition #2 of Resolution No. 1203 which approved the Business Park
requires that for each development proposal within the Business Park a Final Development
Plan be reviewed by Community Development Department staff for compliance with the
standards and conditions of the Business Park Final Development Plan and then be
brought before the Planning Board; and
WHEREAS, on October 8, 2018, the Planning Board held a study session on the
project and provided comments on the proposed design and development plan
amendment; and
WHEREAS, the application was agendized for the Planning Board hearing of
December 10, 2018, and public notices were duly distributed; and
WHEREAS, on December 10, 2018, the Planning Board independently reviewed,
considered, and determined based on substantial evidence in light of the whole record that
no further review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is required
for the proposed project because the proposed modifications to the approved development
result in no new significant or substantially more severe environmental effects than were
previously identified in the existing environmental documents; and
WHEREAS, on December 10, 2018, the Planning Board approved the Design
Review and Development Plan Amendment for PLN 18-0381, subject to findings and
conditions of approval; and
WHEREAS, on December 18, 2018, appellant Brian Tremper filed a timely appeal
of the Planning Board's decision to approve the project; and
WHEREAS, on December 19, 2018, appellant Laborers International Union of North
America, Local Union 304 filed a timely appeal of the Planning Board's decision to approve
the project; and
WHEREAS, after giving due notice to the appellants, the applicant, all interested
parties, and the public, the appeals came before the City Council in a duly noticed public
hearing on February 5, 2019; and
WHEREAS, the appellants, the applicant, supporters of the application, those
opposed to the application and interested neutral parties were given the opportunity to
participate in the public hearing by submittal of oral and/or written comments; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a de novo public hearing on February 5, 2019, on
the final development plan and design review application at which time the Council
considered the entirety of the record, including all submitted materials and public
comments regarding the application; and
WHEREAS, the public hearing on the appeals was closed by the City Council on
February 5, 2019; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the appeals, the public testimony, and all
pertinent maps and reports and evidence in the record as a whole, and made the following
findings concerning the project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council makes the following
findings regarding the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA):
A. The City Council independently finds and determines that this Resolution complies
with CEQA, as no further environmental review is required for the proposed
amendment to the Development Plan pursuant to Public Resources Code section
21166 and section 15162 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines
because there have been no changes to the project or the circumstances in which it
is undertaken that would result in a new significant or substantially more severe
environmental effect than was identified in the previously certified Environmental
Impact Report for Harbor Bay Isle and related Addendum (Previous CEQA
Documents).
B. The project site has no value as habitatfor endangered, rare or threatened species.
The Previous CEQA Documents analyzed the impacts of Harbor Bay development
on wildlife and migratory birds. The biological survey for the proposed hotel
concludes that the proposal does not substantially change the determination of the
previously certified EIR. The area of the proposed development is currently a
vacant 5.5 acre site. The vacant site has no habitat value for any endangered, rare,
or threatened wildlife species. A survey for burrowing owls and sensitive species
was conducted by Monk & Associates Environmental Consultants at the project site
on September 10, 2018, and no evidence of the presence of these species were
observed on or within a zone of influence of the site.
C. Approval of the proposed project modifications would not result in any substantial
changes in the environmental determination in the Previous CEQA Documents in
regards to traffic, noise, and air navigation. The previously certified Harbor Bay Isle
EIR analyzed the impacts of the Harbor Bay development on traffic, noise, and air
navigation. The traffic analysis, noise analysis, and Airport Land Use Commission
analysis conclude that the proposed hotel facility will not substantially change the
determinations of the previously certified EIR. A traffic and parking analysis
conducted by Abrams and Associates on November 14, 2018 shows that the new
hotel, restaurant, and ferry parking proposal does not result in any significant traffic
or parking impacts to the surrounding area. The project also received an approval
letter from the Alameda County Airport Land Use Commission on September 27,
2018 in regard to compliance with the safety, noise, and height development
requirement of the adjacent Oakland Airport. The Noise analysis conducted by
Saxelby Acoustics on September 5, 2018 determined that the project can meet city,
state, and county requirements in regard to noise levels through the implementation
of standard CNEL building requirements. The proposed project modifications will not
result in any significant traffic, noise, air quality or water quality impacts because the
proposed hotel use is consistent with the uses analyzed by the Harbor Bay Isle
Environmental Impact Report.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council, having independently heard,
considered and weighed all the evidence in the record presented on behalf of all parties
and being fully informed of the application, the Planning Board's decision, and the appeals,
hereby finds and determines that the appellants have not shown that the Planning Board's
decision was not supported by substantial evidence in the record. This decision is based,
in part, on the February 5, 2019 City Council staff report and the October 8, 2018 and
December 10, 2018 Planning Commission staff reports, each of which is hereby
incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein, on the reports and testimony provided
at the hearing, and on the City's General Plan, Zoning Code, and other planning
regulations as set forth below; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the appeals are hereby denied, and the Planning
Board's decision to approve the Design Review and Development Plan Amendment for the
construction of a new 172-room five-story hotel and restaurant located on approximately
5.5 acres within the Harbor Bay Business Park, is affirmed, subject to the findings for
approval and conditions of approval adopted by the Planning Board, each of which is
hereby incorporated by reference and separately and independently adopted by this
Council in full as though set forth herein; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that in support of the City Council's decision to deny
the appeals and approve the project, the City Council affirms and adopts as its own
independents findings and determinations: (1) the October 8, 2018 Planning Board staff
report for the project, (2) the December 10, 2018 Planning Board staff report approving the
project (including without limitation the discussion, findings and conclusions, each of which
is hereby separately and independently adopted by this Council in full); and (3) the
February 5, 2019 City Council staff report (including without limitation the discussion,
findings and conclusions, each of which is hereby separately and independently adopted
by this Council in full); and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the record before this Council relating to this project
application and the appeals includes, without limitation, the following:
1. The application, including all accompanying maps and papers;
2. All plans submitted by the applicant and its representatives;
3. The Petitions for Appeal and all accompanying statements and materials;
4. All final staff reports, final decision letters, and other final documentation and
information produced by or on behalf of the City, including without limitation
all related/supporting final materials, and all final notices relating to the
application and attendant hearings;
5. All oral and written evidence received by the Planning Board and City
Council during the public hearings on the application and appeals; and all
written evidence received by relevant City staff before and during the public
hearings on the application and appeals; and
6. All matters of common knowledge and all official enactments and acts of the
City, such as (a) the General Plan; (b) the Alameda Municipal Code; (c) all
applicable State and federal laws, rules and regulations; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the custodians and locations of the documents
or other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City Council's
decision is based are located at the Office of the City Clerk located at 2263 Santa Clara
Avenue, Room 380, Alameda, CA 94501; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, if litigation is filed challenging this decision, or any
subsequent implementing actions, then the time period to begin actual construction of
authorized construction-related activities stated in Condition of Approval #24 of Planning
Board Resolution No. PB-18-23 is automatically extended for the duration of the litigation.
The applicant shall defend (with counsel reasonably acceptable to the City), indemnify, and
hold harmless the City of Alameda, the Alameda Planning Board and their respective
agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding (including legal costs
and attorney's fees) against the City of Alameda, Alameda Planning Board and their
respective agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul, an approval by
the City of Alameda, the Planning, Building and Transportation Department, Alameda
Planning Board or City Council relating to this project. The City shall notify the applicant of
any claim, action or proceeding and the City shall cooperate in such defense. The City
may elect, in its sole discretion, to participate in the defense of said claim, action or
proceeding; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the recitals contained in this Resolution are true and
correct and are an integral part of the City Council's decision.
*****
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in a regular meeting
assembled on the 51h day of February 2019, by the following vote to wit:
A YES: Council members Knox White, Oddie, Vella and Mayor Ezzy
Ashcraft -4.
NOES: Councilmember Daysog -1.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTENTIONS: None.
IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of
said City this 61h day of February 2019.
Approved as to Form:
Michael H. Roush, Interim City Attorney
City of Alameda
Lara Weisiger, Ci
City of Alameda