From: Trish Spencer
To: Jennifer Ott
Cc: Abby Thorne-Lyman; Allen Tai; Alesia Strauch; Steven Buckley; Annie Cox; Yibin Shen; City Clerk Subject: Re: Agenda item 5-H
Date: Tuesday, March 19, 2024 1:13:39 PM
Hi Jen,
Thank you for this additional information. However, I'm trying to figure out the pic Staff attached to show storage of equipment between the subject hangars historically. The attached picture does not show the space between the subject hangars and is from a different perspective. Also, it shows people, planes, and vehicles, that are mobile. Does staff have pics from between the hangars on Monarch that show storage blocking the views? Is it staff's position that a permanent 9 foot high fence made of barrels as proposed in the lease is in compliance with the historic protections of the former NAS? What about the least tern protections against structures greater than 4 ft.? Is it staff's position that use of the side yard as permanent storage of equipment of any height (over 4 ft high) blocking the views from Monarch is in compliance with the historic protections of the former NAS?
Has staff checked with the potential tenant (Gold Bar) to confirm the anticipated height of storage in the side yard?
Thank you.
Trish
Trish Herrera Spencer
Councilmember
From: Jennifer Ott <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2024 2:09:35 AM
To: CityCouncil-List <[email protected]>
Cc: Abby Thorne-Lyman <[email protected]>; Allen Tai <[email protected]>; Alesia Strauch <[email protected]>; Steven Buckley <[email protected]>; Annie Cox <[email protected]>
Subject: Protected views at Alameda Point
Mayor and City Council:
In response to questions from Councilmembers, City staff wanted to provide additional information regarding questions about protected views at the Alameda Point:
1. The character-defining features of the base include the spatial organization and arrangement of buildings, which create strong vistas and view corridors both internal to the site and offsite to the surrounding water and skyline. This is documented in the National Register of Historic Places nomination for the Naval Air Station Alameda Historic District National Register Nomination (linked here).
2. The view corridors extend between the seaplane hangars along W. Tower Avenue and the landplane hangars along Monarch Street. Some of these are terminal views of access roads, such as along Lexington and Saratoga Streets.
Others are perpendicular to the frontage road, between buildings but not along a distant axis.
3. The preservation of these view corridors is achieved by preventing new buildings from being constructed within the view corridors themselves. In the Seaplane Lagoon area, this is accomplished through building setbacks established in the Waterfront Town Center Precise Plan. The intent is to preserve visual access to the sides of the hangers, as well, since the large doors are a character defining feature that should remain visible and functional. See page 134 of the Plan (linked here
) for an illustration of how infill
development could occur.
4. There are no building setbacks established in zoning for the landplane hangars along Monarch St except where adjacent to public park / open space or on corner lots – AMC 30-
4.24, Alameda Point zoning district. (The regulation of street side yards is more applicable to corner lots found in the interior of the district, not along the hanger row.)
5. Therefore, the general use of the spaces between the seaplane and landside hangars is governed by the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, which state: "A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships." Historically, the Navy utilized the spaces around the hangars for miscellaneous equipment, storage and other ancillary uses, as evidenced by historical photographs (see provided example below).
6. Projects that require a building permit are subject to design review; projects that physically affect the historic contributor buildings require HAB review; outdoor activity that is not strictly ancillary to a primary use requires a use permit.
In addition, the Biological Opinion will also be considered and restrictions on landscaping, light poles and structures vary depending on the location. Staff consults with the City’s biological consultant that assisted the City in negotiating the Biological Opinion and supports the City in complying with it.
In summary, while the view corridors themselves are protected from new construction of buildings, the spaces between the buildings can be utilized in ways that are compatible with the historic use of the area. The ancillary use of the spaces between hangars that we see today represent minimal alterations to the distinctive spatial relationships that contribute to the historic character of the district, and generally do not constitute a use that requires further review.
Allen Tai, AICP | Director
City of Alameda
Planning, Building & Transportation Dept.
510.747.6888
alamedaca.gov/PBT
From: Trish Spencer
To: City Clerk
Subject: Fwd: Gold Bar Spirits, 2505 Monarch (formerly Hangar One) Date: Wednesday, March 13, 2024 1:27:01 PM
From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2024 1:06:23 PM
To: Lara Weisiger <[email protected]>
Subject: Fwd: Gold Bar Spirits, 2505 Monarch (formerly Hangar One) From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 11, 2024 4:14:22 PM
To: Shelby S <[email protected]>; Jennifer Ott <[email protected]>; Yibin Shen <[email protected]>
Subject: Gold Bar Spirits, 2505 Monarch (formerly Hangar One) Dear Ms. Sheehan, City Manager Jennifer Ott and City Attorney Yibin Shen, After receiving Ms. Sheehan's email of March 6 (below), I visited the site (2505 Monarch) and adjacent property (Natel).
I've attached the pics I took (day and night), which are similar to Ms. Sheehan's in that there is little foliage and an almost completely unobstructed view of San Francisco skyline from the subject site (formerly Hangar One).
Staff - Can you please share when your pic of what the view adjacent to the formerly Hangar One supposedly currently looks like was taken? Also, is it possible to have current pics taken (day and night) from the front of the view (yours might have been at an angle behind the box/container that's to the left) added to the agenda item? I also want to commend Natel for clearing their side yard and restoring the views (see my attached pics). I believe those views (i.e., between the buildings) are historic and protected and have been protected historically by City staff. I appreciate Staff's efforts over the years and recently to encourage Natel to keep their sideyard neat and not blocking the views, including not adding slats to the chainlink fence or otherwise obstructing the views.
Sincerely,
Trish Herrera Spencer
Councilmember
From: Shelby S <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 6, 2024 7:21:58 PM
To: Trish Spencer <[email protected]>; Jennifer Ott <[email protected]> Subject: [EXTERNAL] fun with photoshop: Hangar 22 exterior
image.png
#1. 2022 unretouched #2. last night's presentation --
Shelby
510-435-9263
From: Trish Spencer
To: City Clerk
Subject: Fwd: Whiskey/Hangar One
Date: Wednesday, March 13, 2024 1:27:31 PM
From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2024 1:06:01 PM
To: Lara Weisiger <[email protected]>
Subject: Fwd: Whiskey/Hangar One
From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 11, 2024 4:29:57 PM
To: Jennifer Ott <[email protected]>; Yibin Shen <[email protected]> Subject: Whiskey/Hangar One
Hi Jen,
These are my additional questions that we discussed earlier today.
1. The property on the side of the building has painted parking spaces for approximately 30 vehicles, including disabled spaces. I believe there's actually space for approximately 90 vehicles if the painted spaces were extended. Please see pics attached. I believe that's how it was used when Hangar One was there, entering through the side gate to the back of the building. It was my understanding that now no parking will be on the side of the building and that employees and visitors will park in the shared, non-exclusive parking on Monarch.
However, it sounds like you think the marked spaces may remain. Can you please confirm what exclusive parking will remain and where employees and the public will park and enter the premises?
The shared parking in front of the building on Monarch currently and historically supports at least Faction, Pacific Fine Foods and Building 43 Winery and others when needed. I don't think Hangar One historically used the Monarch shared parking because their entry was on the side/back and they had significant parking (room for 90?) in the side yard.
How will there be sufficient parking for the existing businesses if this new business removes their exclusive parking and converts it for equipment?
2. What type/size of equipment are they planning to have in the current exclusive use parking lot? I'm particularly interested in how it will obstruct the skyline views from Monarch, as well as block the exclusive use parking on the side of the building.
3. I also want to confirm that it's the City’s position that the views between the buildings (i.e., Natel and formerly Hangar One) are not protected and can be completely blocked. I believe that this is a significant change from what City staff has historically allowed. Please confirm that these buildings are in the historic area and provide the historic district designation documents and all documents that speak to whether these buildings are in the historic district and protections of the views.
Thank you.
Trish
Trish Herrera Spencer
Councilmember