Downtown Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Strategy Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC)

Meeting 8 Meeting Notes November 14, 2006

6:37 p.m. – CALL TO ORDER

Attendance

CAC Members Present: Alcantar, Brannan, Chi, Collier, Cuellas, Finberg, Free, Helmbrecht, Hopkinson, Houston, Kaplan, Markham, Mobley-Maundu, Raposo, Stensgard, Talley, Tannam, Trujillo, Ward

CAC Members Absent: Flynn, Kleebauer, Sidari, Sykes, Storer Staff: Hanson Hom, Community Development Director, Kathleen Livermore, Senior Planner and TOD Project Manager Other: Michael Smiley, BMS Design Group, Tim Hurley, BMS Design Group, Jim Daisa, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Item 1: Welcome

Anna Brannan, CAC Chair, opened the meeting and asked that both CAC members and members of the public sign in.

Mayor Elect Tony Santos welcomed the Committee members and noted he recognized quite a few folks. He extended his personal appreciation for the work of the CAC. Mayor Elect Santos stated that the downtown is the heart of the community and this plan is vitally important for San Leandro and the future. This plan can help provide the essential critical mass and be a catalyst for development in the downtown. Mayor Elect Santos stressed the importance of evaluating noise impacts of any proposed development in the study area as he had heard from many residents in noise impacted areas during his campaign. He also stressed the importance of providing parks and open space in the downtown. Mayor Elect Santos noted that people will have to learn how to get out of their cars to make a successful pedestrian friendly oriented downtown. He again expressed his appreciation for the commitment of time.

Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) November 14, 2006 Meeting 8 Notes Page 2 of 7

Anna Brannan asked for roll call to be taken, which established that a quorum was present for the meeting. She then gave an overview of the evening’s agenda. Chair Brannan announced that public comments would be heard at the end of the meeting to allow commenters to speak on all of the items discussed.

Item 2: CAC Business

Brannan asked for comments on the September 12 meeting notes. CAC member Raposo moved approval of the meeting notes and CAC member Free seconded the motion. The meeting notes were approved with abstentions from members not present at the September 12 meeting.

Michael Smiley, BMS Design Group introduced the consultant team members present, including Tim Hurley and Jim Daisa.

Item 3: East Bay Greenway – Urban Ecology

Phil Olmstead, Project Coordinator with Urban Ecology for the East Bay Greenway gave a brief presentation on the East Bay Greenway. The East Bay Greenway is a project that will coordinate with BART to improve BART right-of-way beneath the elevated tracks in the cities of Oakland, San Leandro and Hayward. This will be in conjunction with the 2009 BART retrofit of elevated structures from Central Oakland to Fremont. The bike and pedestrian way will be similar in nature to the Ohlone Greenway in El Cerrito, Albany and Berkeley. The East Bay Greenway will try to replicate that success and model. Urban Ecology took this idea to BART and explained that San Leandro, Oakland and Hayward were thinking about this idea as well. Urban Ecology has raised enough money to prepare the conceptual plan for the bike and pedestrian path along the BART corridor. Olmstead thanked the CAC for the opportunity to present this information and invited everyone to be a part of the process. He will inform us of upcoming meetings in various communities as they occur.

CAC member Hopkinson asked how long the project would take to complete. Olmstead responded that the initial planning process to develop a concept plan and 35 percent design documents will be done by the summer of 2007. BART plans to begin the retrofit in early 2009 and the project is anticipated to take 2-4 years to complete. CAC member Cuellas asked what the City role was in the process. Olmstead explained that the San Leandro Bike Plan shows this as a planned corridor. Urban Ecology and BART would coordinate efforts in the future, particularly as it relates to construction and traffic. CAC member Trujillo asked where the improvements would be. Olmstead explained they would start at 18th Avenue in Oakland and continue to South Hayward just south of the South Hayward Station. At that point, the elevated structure returns to an at-grade condition. CAC member Houston asked about the railroad tracks that are no longer in use. Olmstead explained that the tracks have not been officially abandoned and this project focuses on the BART right-of-way not Union Pacific. Union Pacific is not ready to sell that track. In some areas the right of way is wide and other areas it is narrow. This issue will be addressed as part of the conceptual plan. Community Development Director

G:\CAC\Mtg8 Minutes.doc 11/14/06 Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) November 14, 2006 Meeting 8 Notes Page 3 of 7

Hom confirmed that the track still is in use. Olmstead said that ensuring safety of the linear park users will be a concern. Vice-Chair Chi asked if there was a commitment of construction funds for the project. Olmstead replied that they have commitment for the planning process and they will be fundraising for the second phase – implementation. Money for the retrofit will not be available as that is bond money. Having a detailed conceptual plan will help with the fundraising effort as the end product will be known. Olmstead’s final comment was the East Bay Greenway will add open space, provide a safe place to walk and bike and increase access to BART stations.

Item 4: Presentation of Draft Strategy Plan Concepts

Michael Smiley began the presentation with an overview of the evening’s content. In order to ensure that all critical elements of the future Draft Strategy document have been reviewed and approved by the CAC, this presentation would begin that process with a discussion of broad, basic conceptual principles, including Land Use, Building Height and Circulation framework elements. If these could be reviewed and approved during this CAC meeting, the following meetings could be devoted to some of the details that will support and reinforce the framework elements. Therefore, Smiley asked the CAC to provide feedback on the evening’s presentation, with regard to the general appropriateness of the concepts (such as the kind of land uses proposed), as well as such specifics as whether land uses were located appropriately.

Following Smiley’s remarks, Tim Hurley elaborated on the schedule for the next several months. Of most importance is the sequence of upcoming CAC meetings, with the 10th and final meeting scheduled to review and approve a preliminary Draft Strategy document. Once the contents of this draft are approved by the CAC, the consultants will be able to prepare a series of final drafts for review by the public and the City Council, with final approval by the Council anticipated for July 2007. As part of the discussion of the schedule, Hurley reviewed the process of the project to date, including the sources of input that have influenced its direction. These sources have included the CAC through a series of seven prior meetings, two community meetings, and the technical team of the consultants, TAC and city staff, culminating in the material that would be presented during the meeting.

Deviating somewhat from the published agenda due to schedule conflicts, Jim Daisa presented the preliminary parking strategies. This presentation included a brief review of the strategies that were elaborated in the November 7 Working Paper, and the accompanying map depicting proposed locations of public parking structures in the study area. Several photographs were shown that indicate how parking structures can be integrated into the architecture of a downtown without disrupting scale or ground floor uses.

Vice-Chair Chi expressed concerns about maximizing on-street parking, particularly on E. 14th Street, at the expense of providing an improved pedestrian experience. She felt that wider sidewalks on E. 14th Street should be provided now. Maintaining or increasing on-street parking on the side streets would be okay. Daisa noted that he wasn’t really talking about E. 14th Street in his examples. Vice-Chair Chi reminded the group not to forget the pedestrians. Daisa agreed and stated that if we need to eliminate some on-street parking to improve the pedestrian

G:\CAC\Mtg8 Minutes.doc 11/14/06 Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) November 14, 2006 Meeting 8 Notes Page 4 of 7

experience, that is a good trade-off. In places other than E. 14th Street, the emphasis would be to maximize and preserve parking. It may be possible to reduce the traffic lanes.

CAC member Hopkinson asked about the pricing for parking and wondered if higher priced parking could be implemented slowly. She noted it would be a shock to get 12 minutes instead of 30 minutes for $0.25. Daisa agreed that is has to be gradual. Control can be done with meters or with manned garages. You can have more control with manned garages.

Smiley asked if we are on the right track with these ideas? Vice-Chair Chi expressed concern about the combination of diagonal parking next to a bike lane. CAC member Markham talked about the medians provided on Shattuck Avenue in Berkeley. Daisa explained that on Hays and Clark, the bicycle lanes would be adjacent to parallel parking spaces not the diagonal parking. Vice-Chair Chi noted that there already is diagonal parking on Juana with a bike route. A discussion of the safety of diagonal parking with bike routes continued with CAC members Mobley and Hopkinson. Daisa summarized that angled parking can maximize parking but increase accidents and this is a trade-off. The group concluded that this matter needed additional study.

After the discussion of the parking strategy components, Hurley began the presentation of the Land Use Plan components. Since these were covered in detail in the Working Paper, the presentation focused on the overall strategy of land use types and locations, with the use of example photographs to indicate the character of buildings and environments that would be likely to develop within these land use areas. Part of the Land Use plan includes Special Policy (SP) Areas, where complexities of context and existing conditions suggest a flexible approach to future development. Twelve SP areas were identified in the Working Paper, but for the sake of time, only four were elaborated on during the presentation, with descriptions of possible development scenarios and use of the previously seen development prototypes and photo images to indicate the type and scale of possible development.

Related to Land Use is building height. Each proposed land use category has an associated maximum (and in some cases, minimum) height requirement. A Height Map was presented to indicate these heights, and to indicate where the new requirements differ from existing zoning code.

CAC member Helmbrecht asked if SP2 or SP3 would be the downtown civic plaza site. Hurley responded that the civic plaza site could happen at either of those locations and one could happen in the near term. Smiley noted there are alternative sites as well. CAC member Helmbrecht said he had trouble envisioning this. Hurley said it could be developed over time. CAC member Tannam wondered what is the minimum size to function as civic space. Smiley responded the ideal is a full city block, but it could be less. In Sonoma, it is 4 city blocks. In Healdsburg, it is a very small city block. CAC member Talley voiced concern about St. Leanders and asked if staff has talked to them. Livermore responded that St. Leanders representatives attended the first Community Meeting and they are aware that these are ideas, not concrete plans. Smiley explained that the site would not be indicated as open space on the land use plan and St. Leanders could choose to modify their property or not. Hom concurred that we recognize this is a private school and these are just ideas to consider.

G:\CAC\Mtg8 Minutes.doc 11/14/06 Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) November 14, 2006 Meeting 8 Notes Page 5 of 7

Chair Brannan wanted to be sure that the West Joaquin improvements are in the plan. Hom responded that the site plan does show the planned West Joaquin Improvements. Vice-Chair Chi thought the requirement for property owners to provide wider sidewalks was good. She suggested that the City use the right-of-way now to improve the pedestrian corridor and not wait for developers. She felt West Joaquin could have pedestrian improvements now. Hom asked for clarification: was Chi recommending elimination of parking on E. 14th Street to increase sidewalks? Chi responded, yes, reduce the travel right-of-way and parking to improve the pedestrian corridor. CAC member Mobley suggested there be short- and long-term goals for transit connections. She suggested working with BART to provide better BART and downtown signage and connections. Hom concurred this would be a downtown branding technique. Mobley suggested this tie-in with existing work to show continuity and we should not wait another 10 or 20 years. CAC member Hopkinson suggested that the gateway area between St. Leanders and the BART parking lot be opened up more. She also liked the idea of this happening sooner rather than later.

Smiley asked for any comments on the mixed use districts, density and heights proposed. CAC member Raposo responded that this is the way to go, and the heights are fine. He said we should look at the people who ride BART and live close to BART. In any major city, most of the apartments are within 2 blocks of major subways. The more units closer to BART the better. At first he felt that Creekside Plaza looked too tall, but now he is used to it. He noted the importance of a concentration of people near BART that will also shop downtown. Mobley brought up the lessons of Fruitvale BART, how it impacted the merchants in the downtown area and that we need to think about the correct placement of mixed use. Raposo agreed that it should be mainly residential next to BART with minor retail, e.g. dry cleaning, bakery. CAC member Helmbrecht wondered why we wouldn’t require retail. Hom responded that the market study showed you don’t have to have so much retail. Smiley continued that you can overbuild retail, for example, in Petaluma. The retail market is only so deep and you want to save that for downtown. Hom agreed that E. 14th is the stronger retail location. Mobley reminded the group of the findings of the developer symposium and said if we start the work now, developers will come. She suggested we continue with the work we have already started, prepare the land and hopefully encourage new residents to come to San Leandro. Hopkinson said we should also encourage the people that already live here.

Item 5: Public Comment

Chair Brannan opened the public hearing, noting that although the presentation had not been completed, we wanted to keep to the time commitment for the public comment.

Harold Perez said he has lived here for many years and is very concerned about 1,000 more units on E. 14th Street. He mentioned global warming, that more people equals warming, and says he can’t see how you can add more people. He said you would have to double deck the trains to get through San Leandro, that right now you have to stand on BART because everyone has to go through San Leandro to get where they are going.

G:\CAC\Mtg8 Minutes.doc 11/14/06 Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) November 14, 2006 Meeting 8 Notes Page 6 of 7

Pauline Angus expressed concern about the safety of the open space between the BART Station and the train tracks, noting two children that were killed by a train in the recent past. She felt it is appropriate to have a high rise on the vacant parcel west of the BART station and agreed with the previous speaker about having to stand up on BART in San Leandro. She concluded that her main concern was with safety.

Harjeet Ghuman wanted to know what was going on at the Albertson’s location. Livermore explained that a moratorium was in place for the opportunity sites until the conclusion of the Downtown TOD Strategy.

John Sherwood asked if E. 14th Street is a State Highway. Hom answered, yes, E. 14th Street is a State Highway. Hom also noted there are several CAC members who are employed by Caltrans, although tey are not representing Caltrans per se.

John Titus wanted to know how the opportunity sites where chosen. Livermore gave a brief answer and offered her business card for follow-up. Hom noted there is no eminent domain proposed. Smiley offered that the Downtown TOD Strategy is a means to help private property owners propose improvements themselves.

Harjeet Ghuman stated he thought San Leandro had lots of good things going on and said this is good work.

Item 6: Continuation of Presentation

A series of framework elements, including maps and example photographs, was presented next. Each element was introduced by a set of associated goals that the framework element is intended to address. This discussion included Open Space, Major Vehicular Circulation, Pedestrian Connections, Bicycle Circulation and the Street Modifications that would be required to achieve these framework elements.

The presentation was concluded with a brief review of several street sections that were in preliminary stages of development. These sections were intended to convey the character of the physical environment that will develop with implementation of the land use plan and framework components. Up to this point in the project, all diagrams had been map-based, so this was the first opportunity for the CAC to understand the implications of the Strategy on the public environment of the street. These sections would become the basis for the design guidelines that would be developed as part of the overall Strategy document. The streets presented as section diagrams and example photographs included a typical retail condition of E. 14th Street, a typical Pedestrian Connector street (such as W. Juana that connects downtown and the BART station area), an Arterial street such as Davis west of the study area, and a reconfiguration of San Leandro Boulevard near the BART station.

CAC member Houston asked if West Joaquin is underway. Hom said the effort is in the planning stage. Houston suggested that it would be ideal for the new street at West Joaquin to line up with the pedestrian crosswalk. Hurley explained that if it lined up with no changes on the BART side, it would be in the middle of the buses. Smiley explained that the TOD Strategy

G:\CAC\Mtg8 Minutes.doc 11/14/06 Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) November 14, 2006 Meeting 8 Notes Page 7 of 7 will include information about these pedestrian and circulation improvements. Houston suggested that sidewalks be wide enough for people to walk side by side. Raposo suggested the use of tree grates. Talley asked who would pay for maintenance. Hom answered that improvement districts are one funding mechanism. Vice-Chair Chi thought there would be a lot of interest from the public on the architecture and the urban form and the concepts (e.g. MXD) are rather overwhelming. Smiley agreed and explained that we will be going into greater detail at a subsequent meeting. There was some discussion about the pros and cons of form based codes. Petaluma has concerns about their form based code. Hopkinson asked if flexibility will be built into the Strategy, as some development may not happen for 20 years. Hom responded affirmatively.

CAC member Tally moved to adjourn the meeting. The motion was seconded by CAC member Stensgard.

The meeting was adjourned at approximately 9:30 p.m.

Meeting notes recorded and prepared by Kathleen Livermore and Tim Hurley

G:\CAC\Mtg8 Minutes.doc 11/14/06