Resolution 13215CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO. 13 215
APPROVING THE APPEAL OF JOHN NG FOR BAYVIEW INVESTMENT GROUP, INC. AND
OVERTURNING THE PLANNING BOARD'S DENIAL OF MAJOR DESIGN REVIEW, DR -99-
109, FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A WIENERSCHNITZEL RESTAURANT AND A
SECONDARY COMMERCIAL BUILDING, DENYING USE PERMIT, UP- 99 -45, FOR
UNENCLOSED DINING AND A DRIVE - THROUGH WINDOW, AND DENYING VARIANCE,
V- 00 -04, TO PERMIT ONE DRIVEWAY IN EXCESS OF TWENTY FEET IN WIDTH, AT 1700
WEBSTER STREET
WHEREAS, applications were made on November 17, 1999, by John Ng requesting a Major
Design Review for the construction of a Wienerschnitzel fast food restaurant and Use Permits to
allow the use of a drive- through window and outdoor dining at 1700 Webster Street; and
WHEREAS, an application was made on December 23, 1999, by John Ng requesting a
Variance to permit two driveways to be 24 -feet wide, where 20 -feet is the maximum pettiiitted
driveway width at 1700 Webster Street; and
WHEREAS, the applications were accepted as complete on February 10, 2000; and
WHEREAS, on February 28, 2000 the Planning Board, in response to a request from the
applicant, removed the item from the agenda in order to allow the applicant to revise the proposed
plans and directed staff to renotice and ageticlize the item for Planning Board consideration when
review and aualysi.s of the revised plans are completed; and
WHEREAS, the amended applications, which included a secondary commercial building,
were accepted as complete on March 9, 2000; and
WHEREAS, the subject property is designated Community Commercial on the General Plan
Diagram; and
WHEREAS, the subject property is located in a C -M (Commercial Manufacturing) Zoning
District; and
WHEREAS, the drive - through window and the outdoor dining require a Use Permit in the
C -M Zoning District, pursuant to AMC, Subsection 30- 4.10(c)(9), unenclosed uses; and
WHEREAS, the subject parcel is located within the boundaries of the Business and
Waterfront Improvement Project (BWIP) Area; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board held a public hearing on this application on March 27, 2000
and has considered all available testimony and information, reviewed the administrative record and
all pertinent maps, drawings, and documents; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board denied Major Design Review, DR -99 -109, Use Permit, UP-
99-45, and Variance, V- 00 -04, based on the findings in the Planning Board Resolution PB- 00 -26;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board found that the proposal is Categorically Exempt from the
California Environmental Quality Act, pursuant to Section 15303 of the Guidelines, Class 3 (c) -
New construction of small structures; and
WHEREAS, an appeal was filed on April 5, 2000 by John Ng for Bayview Investment
Group, Inc. to the City Council for the denial of Major Design Review, DR -99 -109, Use Permit, UP-
99-45, and Variance, V- 00 -04; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on this appeal on May 16, 2000, and has
considered all available testimony and information, reviewed the administrative record and all
pertinent maps, drawings, and documents; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that there is merit to the bases of the appeal with respect
to the appellant's bases of appeal; and
WHEREAS, the City Council made the following' findings in regards to the proposed
restaurant use:
The Planning Board has been advised that, subject to meeting City standards and
requirements, the proposed restaurant use would conform to the adopted Community
Improvement Plan (CIP) for the Business and Waterfront Improvement Project
(BWIP) and General Plan policies incorporated by reference within the CIP.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Alameda is able to make the following findings
with respect to the appellant's bases of appeal, relative to Major Design Review, DR -99 -109, for the
construction of a Wienerschnitzel restaurant and a secondary commercial building:
1. The project will not have significant adverse effects on persons or property in the
vicinity;
Project Design
This finding can be made. The amended design of the project is consistent with the General Plan,
is less automobile oriented, and the removal of the second driveway on Webster Street and inclusion
of an outdoor dining area would have a beneficial effect on the pedestrian use of Webster Street.
Drive - Through Window
This finding can be made. The proposed drive- through window would not be a detriment to the
adjacent residential uses because it would be located away from residential uses and the property
would be surrounded by a sound wall of at least 6 -feet in height. In addition an automatic volume
control module would be installed to reduce the noise impact from the external public address
system.
2. The project will be compatible and harmonious with the design and use of surrounding
properties;
Project Design
This finding can be made. The project proposal to expand the building frontage along Webster
Street and bring the building up to the corner of the Webster/Pacific intersection is compatible and
harmonious with the in -line commercial development of Webster Street.
Drive- Through Window
This finding can be made. The location of the drive - through window, would be harmonious with
the pedestrian use of Webster Street and the adjacent residential uses because its location would not
compete with the uses of either the adjacent residential properties nor compete with the retail uses
along Webster Street.
3. The addition will be consistent with the City's Design Review Guidelines;
Project Design
This finding can be made because of the following reasons:
a. The site layout is consistent with the in -line historical commercial development of Webster;
and
b. The proposed off - street parking area is located behind the buildings and is not visible from
the Webster Street frontage, making this design consistent with the historical development
of Webster Street and the policies contained in the General Plan; and
Drive- Through Window
This finding can be made. The drive- through window would not accentuate automobile uses nor
compete with the historic pedestrian use of Webster Street. Therefore, the proposal would not result
in adverse effects on persons or property in the vicinity and would be compatible and harmonious
with the design and use of surrounding properties and would be compatible with the City's Design
Review guidelines.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Alameda is able to make the following findings
with respect to the appellant's bases of appeal, relative to Use Permit, UP- 99 -45, for the installation
of the drive- through window and the outdoor dining:
The location of the proposed use is compatible with other land uses in the general
neighborhood area.
Drive- Through Window
This finding can be made. The location of the drive- through window operation would, not be in close
proximity to the adjacent residences and would include the installation of an automatic volume
control module to reduce noise impacts upon adjacent properties.
Outdoor Dining
This finding can be made. Outdoor dining areas are consistent and compatible with the pedestrian
and retail uses along Webster Street. The outdoor dining is located away from the residential uses.
2. The proposed use is compatible and will be served by adequate transportation and
service facilities.
Drive - Through Window
This finding can be made. With the conditions of approval, the drive- through window will not create
impacts with pedestrian uses of the Webster Street right -of -way nor would it create additional
vehicular impacts along the Webster Street frontage and the two adjacent residential uses.
Outdoor Dining
This finding can be made. Outdoor dining is consistent with the restaurant which is a permitted use
in this district. The outdoor dining would have a positive effect upon pedestrian use of the Webster
Street right -of -way and have no adverse effects upon the existing transportation and service facilities.
3. The proposed use, if it complies with all conditions upon which approval is made
contingent, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity,
Drive - Through Window
This finding can be made. The location of the drive - through window operation would not be in close
proximity to the adjacent residences. Therefore, this use would not create a detriment to these
residences through exposure of noise, vehicular emissions, and the use of the public address system
of the drive- through window. The public address system would also include the installation of an
automatic volume control module to reduce noise impacts upon adjacent properties.
Outdoor Dining
This finding can be made. Outdoor dining areas are consistent and compatible with the pedestrian
and retail uses of Webster. The outdoor dining is located away from the residential uses. Therefore,
it would not affect these residential uses.
4. The proposed use relates favorably to the General Plan.
Drive - Through Window
This finding can be made. The drive - through window is compatible with the development of
pedestrian uses along Webster Street. This is consistent with General Plan Policy number 3.3.g
which calls for this area to be developed with retail uses which maintain pedestrian character and
visual interest because the drive- through operation would not conflict with this policy. This is also
consistent with General Plan Policy number 4.4.a, which requires that automobile circulation
improvements do not impact the pedestrian uses because the drive- through operation would be
located away from pedestrian uses.
Outdoor Dining
This finding can be made. Outdoor dining is compatible with restaurant uses and would support
pedestrian uses within this retail district and favorably relates to the General Plan.
WHEREAS, the City Council makes the following findings in respect to the appellant's
bases of appeal to approve Variance, V- 00 -04, to permit the single driveway on the Pacific Avenue
right -of -way to be 22 -feet wide, where 20 -feet is the maximum permitted driveway width, pursuant
with Subsection 30 -21.1 of the Alameda Municipal Code:
There are extraordinary circumstances applying to the property relating to the physical
constraints of the parcel, such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings.
This finding can be made. Because of the limited width of the lot frontage on Pacific Avenue
frontages, the requirement to locate parking in the rear of the buildings with a single point of
ingress /egress and the need to achieve a continued building facade along Webster Street, a wider
driveway width is required to facilitate access to the required parking.
2. Because of extraordinary circumstances, the literal enforcement of the Zoning
Ordinance standards would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship such
as to deprive the applicants of a substantial property right possessed by other owners
of the property in the same district.
This finding can be made. The extraordinary circumstances include the requirements to develop the
site to be consistent with the historic development of Webster Street. This requires that buildings
be located up to the right -of -way with parking in the rear. This requirement is made even more
difficult because historic development produced conditions which did not address current parking
and circulation standards. Therefore, the unnecessary hardship would create conditions which
prevent the property owner from developing a site to City parking standards because historic
development is generally inconsistent with current development standards.
3. The granting of the Variance, under the circumstances of the particular case, will not
be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to persons or property in the vicinity.
This finding can be made. The granting of a two -foot wider driveway on the Pacific Avenue
frontage in context to the entire project would not be a detriment to the pedestrian use of Webster
Street and would not degrade the historic character of Webster Street.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Alameda hereby determines that the proposal
is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, pursuant to Section 15303
of the Guidelines, Class 3 (c) - New construction of small structures.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council approves the appeal and
overturns the Planning Board's denial of Major Design Review, DR -99 -109, for the construction of
a Wienerschnitzel restaurant and a secondary commercial building, Use Pennit, UP- 99 -45, for the
installation of the drive- through window and the outdoor dining, and Variance, V- 00 -04, to permit
the single driveway on the Pacific Avenue right-of-way to be 22 -feet wide, where 20 -feet is the
maximum permitted driveway width, subject to the following conditions:
The property shall be maintained in substantial compliance with the plans prepared for the
Bayview Investment Group, "Wienerschnitzel "titled, prepared by Keystone Architecture
Interior Planning, last dated March 8, 2000, and consisting of two (2) sheet marked Exhibit
"A" and on file in the office of the City of Alameda Planning Department, with the following
exceptions:
a. A detailed plan of the drive- through window and all external support elements (i.e.,
menu board, order board and public address system shall be provided, subject to the
satisfaction of the Planning Director. The public address system shall incorporate an
Automatic Volume Control Module as defined in the May 12, 2000 correspondence
from Downing Sound & Communications, Inc., contained in the Addendum to the
Regular Agenda Item #5 -A.
b. Because the current plan is deficient by two parking spaces, prior to submittal of the
final plans for Planning Department review and Building Permit approval, the
applicant shall comply with one of the following:
1. Apply for and receive Planning Board approval for a parking Variance, to
allow thirteen parking spaces, where fifteen parking spaces are required; or
2. Apply for and receive Planning Board approval for the payment of parking-
in -lieu fees in order to address the reduction in the parking requirement for
two parking spaces; or
3. Reduce the floor area of the buildings by 400 square feet to conform with
parking standards for thirteen off - street parking spaces; or
4. Reconfigure the off - street parking to provide at least fifteen off - street parking
spaces.
c. The final plans, submitted for the Building Permit shall include the following
elements to be approved to the satisfaction of the Planning Director:
1. A color board shall be submitted for the structures.
2. Tile (instead of brick) shall be used along the lower course of the buildings'
facade. This tile course shall extend along the entire frontage of the buildings
and any barriers (including the barrier for the outdoor dining area) on the
Webster Street frontage and the Pacific Avenue frontage.
3. Landscape /irrigation and lighting plans shall be submitted. Parking lot
landscaping shall include trees at a ratio of one tree for every four parking
spaces.
4. An eight -foot high sound -wall at the property line, between both adjacent
residential properties.
5. Awnings shall be installed as part of the final design along the facade of both
street frontages.
A convex mirror and warning light system for the exit driveway onto Webster
Street.
d. The facade at the driveway exit on Webster Street shall be minimized and/or adjusted
to maximize auto /pedestrian visibility at this exit to the satisfaction of the Planning
Director and the City Engineer.
LIMITATIONS OF USE
2. All alternative outdoor uses other than outdoor dining within the proposed patio area shall
be subject to approval of the Planning Director.
3. The hours of operation for all uses on this site shall be limited to the hours from 7:00 a.m.
to 1:00 a.m., seven days a week and shall be subject to review by the City Council within six
months from the beginning of the business operation.
4. Sign permit approval by the Planning Department is required for all proposed signage.
5. All windows especially windows fronting Webster Street and Pacific Avenue remain
unobstructed by any signage not approved by the City Sign Permit process. Banners, flags,
and grand opening signs shall be prohibited unless approved by the City.
6. A cooking exhaust odor reduction scrubber shall be installed to the satisfaction of the
Planning Director and the County Health Department. This scrubbing system shall be in use
for all cooking exhaust from the restaurant during all hours, of operation.
TRANSPORTATION FEE
7. The property owner shall contribute an amount specified by the City Engineer, not to exceed
an annual fee of $0.013 per square foot of building area or $50 per employee, whichever is
greater, as a pro -rata share of BART Shuttle service provided by AC Transit.
8. Prior to the issuance of the Building Permit for the site, the applicant shall be required to
provide a pro rata payment of traffic mitigation fees to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
The Central Permits Office shall accept the payment and advise the Planning Department
once the payment has been received.
BICYCLE FACILITIES
9. The property owner /applicant shall provide a bicycle rack for at least four employees.
Bicycle facilities shall be installed in locations convenient to the building access points and
acceptable to the City Engineer.
TRUCK ROUTES
10. All truck deliveries to the proposed facility must remain on the established truck routes and
shall, not occur earlier than 7:00 a.m. nor later than 10:00 p.m.. _;
URBAN RUNOFF
11. The project must conform with the City's Urban Runoff Program. The final development
plan must incorporate long term storm water pollution prevention controls to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer.
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
12. A geotechnical report, by a registered geotechnical engineer shall be reflected in the final
development plans. The report's findings and recommendations shall be to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer.
13. Improvement plans must sow all proposed utilities, including pipe sizes, slopes, elevations,
etc. to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
WASTE MANAGEMENT
14. The property owner /applicant shall incorporate all applicable standard conditions for Waste
Management and Recycling Functions into the final design subject to approval of the City
Engineer. This shall also include procedures for the disposal of contaminated soil and
petroleum tanks found on the site.
STREET FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS
15. The final improvement plan shall include details on the reconstruction and replacement of
all frontage improvements (i.e., curb, gutter, and sidewalk), pursuant to City standards and
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. This shall include but not be limited to the removal
of the utility pole in the Pacific Avenue right -of -way and undergrounding the respective
service to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
VESTING
16. Approval of the Use Pen lit UP- 99 -45, and Variance, V -00 -04 is valid for a period of one
year, until May 16, 2001, and the use shall not be considered vested unless prior to this date:
the applicant has begun to operate the restaurant; or the building permit is issued and work
substantially begun; or a request for an extension has been filed with the Planning
Department prior to the expiration of the Use Permit.
17. Design approval is valid for six months after the date of this approval. Final Design Review
approval shall be obtained prior to November 16,2000, unless the applicant applies for and
is granted a six (6) month extension by Design Review Staff prior to said expiration. Only
one (1) extension may be granted.
HOLD HARMLESS
18. The applicant agrees to indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City, its officers, agents and
employees, from any and all liability or claims that may be brought against the City arising
out of its approval of this permit, or arising out of the operation of the business, save and
except that caused by the City's active negligence.
REVOCATION
19. This Use Permit may be modified or revoked by the City Council or Planning Board, should
they determine that the proposed uses or conditions under which it is being operated or
maintained is detrimental to the public health, welfare or materially injurious to property or
improvements in the vicinity or if the property is operated or maintained so as to constitute
a public nuisance.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF CONDITIONS
20. The permittee shall acknowledge in writing all of the conditions of approval and must accept
this permit subject to those conditions and with full awareness of the provisions of Chapter
30 of the Alameda Municipal Code in order for this Use Permit to be exercised.
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 regular meeting assembled on
the 16th day of May , 2000, by the following vote to wit:
AYES: Councilmembers Daysog, DeWitt, Johnson, Kerr and
Mayor Appezzato - 5.
NOES: None.
AB SENT: None.
ABSTENTIONS: None.
IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of said City
this 17th day of May , 2000.
e Felsch, City Clerk
City of Alameda