Loading...
Resolution 14139CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO. 14139 UPHOLDING THE PLANNING BOARD DECISION TO APPROVE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT PDA05 -0001, MAJOR DESIGN REVIEW DR05 -0010 AND USE PERMITS UP06 -0003 AND UP06 -0013 ALLOWING E THE DEMOLITION OF AN EXISTING BANK BUILDING AND o d REDEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY WITH A TWENTY -FOUR HOUR o IL Ili E GAS STATION LOCATED AT 2234 OTIS DRIVE - WHEREAS, applications were made on February 9, 2005, March 3, 2006, 2 N and August 16, 2006, by the applicant requesting approval of Planned • Development Amendment PDA05 -0001, Use Permits UP06 -0003 and UP06 -0013 a a and Major Design Review DR06 -0010; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board found the Initial Study complete and correct, and after holding a public hearing on this application on April 23, 2007, and examining pertinent maps, drawings, documents and testimony, found on the basis of the whole record before it that there was no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment; and adopted Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration 1505 -0001; (together, the "MND ") pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA "); and WHEREAS, the Board evaluated the design of the Original Project and then requested that the applicant make specific changes to the project design and then voted to continue the hearing to allow the applicant time to submit revised plans; and WHEREAS, on May 1, 2007, the City Council called for review of the Planning Board decision to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration; and WHEREAS, on June 5, 2007, the City Council voted to uphold the Planning Board decision to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration; and WHEREAS, on June 18, 2007, the project applicant submitted to the City revised designs for the project that reflected the changes requested by the Planning Board on April 23, 2007; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board held a public hearing on July 9, 2007, and examined pertinent maps, drawings, documents and testimony, determined that the revised design would not cause new significant impacts, would be compatible with neighboring properties, and then approved PDA05 -0001, DR05 -0010, UP06- 0003 and UP06 -0013; and WHEREAS, on July 19, 2007, Ann Marie Walsh, of 911 Chestnut Street, submitted an appeal of the July 9, 2007 Planning Board decision to approve the project; and WHEREAS, the Council held a public hearing on August 7, 2007, and examined pertinent maps, drawings, documents and testimony; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Alameda hereby makes the following Findings of Fact Regarding the Environmental Impacts of the Project: Finding 1: The current proposal does not represent a change in the project as evaluated in the MND such that new significant or substantially more severe environmental impacts have been identified that were not previously considered in the MND. Evidence: The six fuel dispensers (twelve fueling stations) in the revised project proposal represents a substantial decrease from the nine fuel dispensers (eighteen fueling stations) that were included in the project as originally proposed and as analyzed in the MND. Because the project trip generation numbers calculated in the MND are based on the number of fueling stations, the traffic impacts of the revised project proposal will likewise be substantially decreased from those of the project as originally proposed and as analyzed in the MND. As air quality impacts are based primarily on traffic calculations, the air quality impacts of the revised proposal will also be Tess than those of the original project. All other aspects of the revised project proposal (including traffic flow patterns, visual appearance and noise) will remain either substantially the same or less than those analyzed in the MND. The mitigation measures suggested in the MND therefore would appropriately mitigate the environmental impacts of the project as now proposed. Finding 2: No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the project is to be undertaken that would require revisions of the MND due to the involvement of new or substantially more severe significant environmental impacts that were not evaluated in the MND. Evidence: There is no evidence that any such environmental changes have occurred. Finding 3: No new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the MND was adopted, either: (a) Shows that the project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the MND, or that any of the significant effects identified in the MND will be substantially more severe than indicated in the MND; or (b) Requires a reassessment of the mitigation measures. Evidence: All information that has been submitted to or developed by the City since approval of the MND could readily have been known before the MND was adopted. Furthermore, no such information implicates either (a) or (b) above; and WHEREAS, pursuant to AMC Section 30 -4.13, the City Council of the City of Alameda hereby makes the following Findings of Fact Regarding Planned Development Amendment PDA05 -0001: Finding 4: The proposed development is a more effective use of the site than is possible under the regulations for the C -2 Zoning District and the project will not have an adverse effect on adjacent land uses. Evidence: Based on evidence contained in the MND, the project file, the April 23, 2007 and June 25, 2007 Planning Board Reports, the June 5, 2007 City Council report, other City records, site visits and consultation with other City departments, this finding can be made. The project encroaches into the rear setback and the proposed trellis along the sidewalk to be located on the southerly property boundary will exceed the maximum barrier height as established in the AMC. However, this design provides more effective pedestrian and vehicle access to and within the site; groups the building frontages along Otis Street in a more visually pleasing manner; and adds interest to the proposed pedestrian pathway along the southern boundary of the site. The monument sign, with decorative structural elements would exceed the maximum area allowed in the AMC. However, this design better incorporates the important design elements of the shopping center than if the decorative structural elements were removed in order for the sign area to comply with the AMC. The project will not adversely affect adjacent land uses. Finding 5: The project relates favorably with the General Plan. Evidence: The property is designated as Community Commercial on the General Plan Diagram and Central Business District (C -2) on the Zoning Map. General Plan policies support the continued operation of commercial activities in this district. The proposed commercial use is consistent with uses permitted, subject to Use Permit approval, in the C -2 Zoning District. Finding 6: The project complies with the Subdivision Map Act. Evidence: The project entails the redevelopment of an existing legal lot and does not include the creation of new lots or modifications of existing lots. Finding 7: The project complies with applicable health and safety standards. Evidence: Based on evidence contained in the Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration, the project file, the April 23, 2007 and June 25, 2007 Planning Board Reports, the June 5, 2007 City Council report, other City records, site visits and previous consultation with other City departments, this finding can be made. The project includes demolition of an existing building and construction of a new gas station. Demolition, construction and operational activities are subject to regulatory requirements that ensure compliance with health and safety standards. Additionally a MND was prepared for this project that includes mitigation measures that will ensure that the project will not adversely affect water or air quality. The Planning Board adopted this MND on April 23, 2007 and the City Council upheld this decision on June 5, 2007; and WHEREAS, pursuant to AMC Section 30 -21.3, the City Council finds as follows regarding the Use Permits UP06 -003 and UP06 -0013: Finding 8: The location of the proposed use is compatible with other land uses in the general neighborhood area. Evidence: Based on evidence contained in the Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration, the project file, the April 23, 2007 and June 25, 2007 Planning Board Reports, the June 5, 2007 City Council report, other City records, site visits and previous consultation with other City departments, this finding can be made. Properties to the east and west of the project site along Otis Drive have been developed as commercial businesses, and the Alameda Towne Centre Shopping Center lies to the south of the project. The project is bordered to the north by Otis Drive; on the far side of the street there is a tidal lagoon, with residences beyond. Given the commercial nature of its setting, the project represents an infill replacement of an existing business establishment (i.e., the development formerly occupied by U.S. Bank). Furthermore, until recently, a fueling facility existed on the corner of Otis Drive and Park Street, and there was another gas station in the past on the site now occupied by the OfficeMax store. The MND evaluated a wide range of potential impacts. Feasible mitigation has been identified that will reduce potentially significant impacts to a Tess than significant level. Additionally, the proposed project has been reduced in size, further reducing potential impacts previously determined to be less than significant. The potential effects of reducing the project size and redesigning the site plan have been evaluated. These changes will not cause an increase in significance of previously evaluated impacts and no new significant impacts have been identified. Finding 9: The proposed use will be served by adequate transportation and service facilities. Evidence: Based on evidence contained in the Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration, the project file, the April 23, 2007 and June 25, 2007 Planning Board Reports, the June 5, 2007 City Council report, other City records, site visits and previous consultation with other City departments, this finding can be made. The project is a gas station, located in an existing urbanized location. Most patrons will drive to the gas station. Traffic impacts have been evaluated and determined to be less than significant with the implementation of proposed mitigation measures. City engineering staff have determined that adequate sanitary sewer, stormwater, and electrical system capacity exists to meet the requirements of this project. Finding 10: The proposed use, if it complies with all conditions upon which approval is made contingent, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. Evidence: Based on evidence contained in the Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration, the project file, the April 23, 2007 and June 25, 2007 Planning Board Reports, the June 5, 2007 City Council report, other City records, site visits and previous consultation with other City departments, this finding can be made. An Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project. Feasible mitigation measures have been proposed that will reduce all potentially significant impacts to less than significant level. For example, the project has been designed to include decorative elements of the Alameda Towne Centre Shopping Center so that it will enhance the existing visual character of the site. The project lighting has been designed to include recessed lights beneath the gasoline canopy, lower wattage accent wall fixtures on the kiosk building, and freestanding lot lights; the applicant has submitted a photometric analysis which indicates that (with the exception of the Otis Drive driveway due to safety considerations) the proposed lighting at the property lines will not exceed 2 to 3 foot - candles of illumination. In addition, the project incorporates an east -west pedestrian pathway along its southern border which will provide a safe and convenient way for pedestrians to travel between retail establishments located along the internal east -west drive aisle of the shopping center. Finally, the project will be required to limit fuel deliveries to non -peak hours, thus reducing the potential for traffic conflicts with fuel trucks serving the project site; and WHEREAS, pursuant to AMC Section 30 -37, the Council finds as follows regarding this Major Design Review approval: Finding 11: The project will be compatible with the site and neighboring buildings and surroundings and promotes harmonious transitions in scale and character between different designated land uses. Evidence: Pursuant to AMC Section 30- 37.5(c) the City may rely on project consistency with the principles and standards contained in the City Design Review Manual (DRM) to make this finding. Based on evidence contained in the Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration, the project file, the April 23, 2007 and June 25, 2007 Planning Board Reports, the June 5, 2007 City Council report, other City records, site visits and previous consultation with other City departments, this finding can be made. The project has been evaluated and determined to be consistent with the principles and standards of the DRM, specifically those principles and standards described on pages 13 -15 of the April 23, 2007 Planning Board report. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Alameda hereby denies the appeal and upholds the Planning Board approval of Planned Development Amendment PDA05 -0001, Use Permits UP06 -0003 and UP06 -0013 and Major Design Review DR06 -0010, subject to the following conditions: CONDITIONS Mitigation Measures 1. Mitigation Measure No. 1 Air Quality: Construction activities must comply with the "Basic Control Measures" and "Enhanced Control Measures" for dust emissions as outlined in the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines. These requirements are listed as follows: Basic Control Measures • Water all active construction areas at least twice daily. • Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose debris or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard. • Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non- toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites. • Sweep daily (with water sweepers) all paved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites. • Sweep streets daily (with water sweepers) if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets. Enhanced Control Measures • Hydroseed or apply non -toxic soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for ten days or more). • Enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply non -toxic soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.). • Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph. • Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways. • Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. 2. Mitigation Measure No. 2 Archeological Resources: If archeological materials or artifacts are identified, work on the project shall cease until a resource protection plan conforming to CEQA Section 15064.5 is prepared by a qualified archaeologist and /or paleontologist and approved by the City of Alameda. Project work may be resumed in compliance with said plan. If human remains are encountered, the County Coroner shall be contacted immediately and the applicable provisions of state law shall be carried out. 3. Mitigation Measure No. 3: The improvement plans shall include an erosion and sediment control plan subject to approval of the City Engineer to effectively prevent the entry of soil, dirt, debris and other pollutants to stormwater runoff and the storm drain system. Plan sheets prepared for the construction phase shall indicate the notes for the installation and upkeep of the erosion control mechanisms. Details and specifications shall be provided for the perimeter protection(s), any silt fencing and fiber rolls used, the storm drain inlet protections, the stabilized construction entrance(s) and exits and vehicle tire wash area(s), the vehicle and equipment servicing area(s) and the materials handling and storage area(s). These specifications should meet the same level of erosion and sediment control effectiveness identified for erosion and sediment control practices established in the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board's Erosion and Sediment Control Field Manual and the California Stormwater Quality Association's Stormwater Best Management Practice Handbook — Construction (www.cabmphandbooks.com). 4. Mitigation Measure No. 4 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: The project developer's civil engineer shall prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) adhering to the City of Alameda and Regional Water Quality Control Board standards to assure long -term adherence to surface water quality standards. The SWPPP shall incorporate the most recent Best Management Practices for preventing petroleum impacts to stormwater, including, but not limited to, oil /water separators, containment sumps, spill clean -up kits, safety signage, emergency response procedures, periodic maintenance, and labeling storm drain inlets. The applicant shall be responsible for monitoring water quality and maintenance of facilities. A written record of monitoring and maintenance activities shall be maintained by the fueling center operator, who shall provide these records to City staff upon request. 5. Mitigation Measure No. 5 Park Street Two -Way- Left - Turn -Lane: The project shall contribute a proportional share toward the installation of a two - way -left- turn -lane on Park Street if this improvement is constructed as part of the Alameda Towne Center shopping center expansion. Should the proposed Alameda Towne Center project not be approved, the proposed Safeway Fuel Center project will be responsible for installation of the two - way -left- turn -lane. 6. Mitigation Measure No. 6 Otis Drive / Trader Joe's Driveway Intersection Improvements: The Applicant shall contribute a proportional share toward the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Otis Drive and Trader Joe's driveway, based on data contained in the project traffic study, prepared by Omni Means. The Public Works Director shall determine the final pro -rata share. The applicant shall make said payment to the City, at the time of Building Permit issuance, unless a later date is approved by the Public Works Director. The City shall implement this improvement as soon as practical but no later than ten years from the date of Building Permit application submittal. 7 Mitigation Measure No. 7 Otis Drive Driveway Improvement: The applicant shall limit the Otis Drive driveway to right -in /right -out when a traffic signal is installed at the Trader Joe's driveway. This improvement shall be accomplished with a raised curb or median subject to the approval of the Alameda Public Works Department. 8. Mitigation Measure No. 8 Annual Monitoring: At the applicant's expense, the City shall conduct the traffic monitoring for the traffic associated with Safeway Gas Station on a yearly basis for a period of five years to ensure the operation is consistent with projected condition for traffic delay, vehicle queuing, and overall safety per the Dec 2006, Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration. Traffic monitoring shall be stamped and signed by a licensed Civil or Traffic Engineer. The monitoring scope shall be approved by the Public Works Director. At the minimum it will include, collision analysis including comparison of collision data before and after the development at all driveways to the gas station and at the Trader Joes /Otis Drive intersection, peak hour counts at the affected intersections including the project driveway, evaluation of traffic queues, circulation at the Gas Station driveway, and Trader Joes Driveway on Otis Drive, and at southerly driveways on the internal parking area street. If in any year, the 95th percentile queues extend beyond the gas station driveway on Otis Drive or the total number of collisions increases at the driveways to the gas station and at the Trader Joes /Otis intersection, the following will be implemented as a stepped approach: First Step: Safeway gas station driveway operation will be converted to right -in and right -out operation only with raised curb or median on Otis Drive. Second Step: If in the following years traffic evaluation indicates that the 95th percentile queues are continuing to extend on to Otis Drive beyond the gas station driveway or the total number of collisions increase persists, then the Safeway Gas station driveway will be converted to an exit only driveway. Planning and Building Department 9. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit the following materials for approval by the Planning and Building Director: a. Final building elevations with color and materials boards. b. Window details including material and manufacturer cut sheets. c. Final design, materials, alignment and cross - sections for the sidewalk located on the southerly property boundary and the trellis to be located adjacent to said sidewalk. 10. Prior to occupancy, the applicant shall request a final inspection by Planning staff. Final occupancy shall not be granted until Planning and Building staff determine that buildings, landscaping and other improvements have been constructed in substantial conformance with approved Design Review plans. 11. This Planned Development Amendment, Use Permit and Major Design Review approval is valid for one year. Construction must commence under valid permits prior to July 9, 2008 unless the applicant applies for and is granted a one (1) year extension prior to expiration. 12. The applicant shall include a final landscaping plan that includes recommended plants and techniques from the publication Bay Friendly Landscape Guidelines available at http: / /www.stopwaste.orq, with the submittal of Building Permit applications. If landscape maintenance is to be shared with neighboring property owners, a maintenance plan shall be submitted, detailing the responsibilities of individual parties. Landscaping within the public right of way shall be subject to approval by the Public Works Director, otherwise all landscaping shall be subject to approval of the Planning and Building Director. 13. Starting with its initial opening for business of the fuel station, in addition to the gasoline product(s) which Safeway otherwise offers for sale at the fuel station, Safeway shall offer for sale in one or more of its fuel pumps at this site a biodiesel product selected by Safeway, with the understanding and agreement that Safeway may, at its sole option, modify, or cease to offer for sale, such biodiesel product at this site at anytime thereafter, Safeway shall notify the Planning and Building Director in writing within 30 days after modifying or eliminating the sale of a biodiesal product. 14. The applicant shall limit fuel deliveries to non -peak hours, as defined in the traffic study for this project. No fuel deliveries shall be permitted on weekdays between 7:00 to 9:00 am and 4:00 to 6:00 pm and on weekends between 11:30 am and 1:30 pm. The applicant shall be responsible for monitoring compliance with this condition and maintaining records of compliance. These records shall be made available to the City upon request. 15. The City of Alameda requires as a condition of this approval that the applicant, or its successors in interest, defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Alameda or its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City or its agents, officers, and employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul, an approval of the City concerning the subject property. The City of Alameda shall notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and the City shall cooperate in the defense. If the City fails to notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding, or the City fails to cooperate in the defense, the applicant shall not thereafter be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City. Public Works The developer shall incorporate the following into its plans, to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director and in accordance with City standards: 16. The applicant shall obtain all required encroachment permits related to any aspect of the project that encroaches on public rights of ways or utility easements to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director prior to issuance of Building Permits. 17. The applicant shall provide evidence of all required access easements with the adjacent shopping center prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 18. The sidewalk shall be designed and constructed integral and consistent with connecting pedestrian sidewalks in the Alameda Towne Centre to provide a reasonably direct pathway for pedestrians and shall meet ADA requirements. Along the southerly side of the project, the sidewalk shall be raised with ADA compliant pedestrian access ramps installed at both ends to create two driveways into the gas station. 19. All driveways required for fuel truck access shall be designed to ensure that the trucks do not encroach into the opposing lanes on Otis Drive and the Alameda Towne Centre internal circulation streets to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director (prior to the approval of the final improvement plans). However, trucks exiting the site may briefly encroach into the two -way left turn lane at the center of Otis Drive, if necessary to ensure a safe turn. 20. A minimum of one bicycle rack shall be provided at a suitable location and as per City standards. 21. The trash enclosure area shall be covered with a solid roof and designed to prevent water runoff onto the area and runoff from the area. The enclosure shall be designed to contain litter and trash, and prevent their dispersion by the wind. The trash area shall be designed to prevent pollutants from being discharged to the storm drain system and the floor drain from the trash enclosure area shall be connected to the sanitary sewer. The enclosure shall accommodate a front -end loader trash bin (H = 6'X9', W = 4'X5', H = 5') a recycling bin, and an organics bin. 22. Final Improvement plans shall show grades, direction of surface runoff and other applicable drainage information to meet City standards. The pad around the fueling pumps shall be Portland Cement Concrete and be graded so that there is no surface runoff onto the pad. Runoff other than from the fuel slab area shall be directed to the perimeter landscaped areas along Otis Drive and allowed to enter the landscape area for treatment. Drainage plans shall be approved by the Public Works Director prior to issuance of Building Permits. 23. Roof drains from the canopy shall be connected to the site's underground storm system and not allowed to run over the paved areas. Roof drainage shall be directed to the landscape areas for flow- through treatment. 24. Citywide Development Fees shall be paid prior to issuance of Building Permits. Alameda Police Department 25. The applicant shall implement appropriate security measures, substantially similar to the measures recommended by the COPPS unit of the Alameda Police Department, in written communications dated February 25, 2005 and March 13, 2007. The applicant may implement alternative security measures, if approved by COPPS. I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda during the Regular Meeting of the City Council on the 7th day of August 2007, by the following vote to wit: AYES: Councilmembers Matarrese, Tam and Mayor Johnson - 3. NOES: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Gilmore - 1. ABSTENTIONS: Councilmember deHaan - 1. IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of said City this 8th day of August, 2007. Lara Weisiger, City City of Alameda