body,date,page,text,path
PlanningBoard,2007-05-29,1,"Minutes of the Special Planning Board Meeting
Monday, May 29, 2007
1.
CONVENE:
7:08 p.m.
2.
FLAG SALUTE:
Board member Mariani
3.
ROLL CALL:
Acting President Cook, Cunningham, Ezzy Ashcraft,
Kohlstrand, Mariani and McNamara.
President Lynch was absent from roll call.
Also present were Planning Services Manager Andrew Thomas, Assistant City Attorney
Donna Mooney, Planner III Doug Vu.
4.
MINUTES:
a.
Minutes for the Special meeting of April 18, 2007.
Board member Kohlstrand noted that on page 8, paragraph 2, the discussion about
regarding traffic levels at Island Drive and Doolittle, read, "" which often backed up at
Lincoln School so that traffic could not pass through the intersection."" She would like it
to state that ""the traffic at Island Drive and Doolittle backs up as a result of people trying
to get off of Harbor Bay going to Lincoln School and the high school, but it did not back
up at Lincoln at that point.""
Board member Kohlstrand noted that page 9, paragraph 2, should be changed to read,
""Member Ezzy Ashcraft Member Kohlstrand-understoo that the private high school is not
such a viable option, and inquired whether it was still in the running.""
Member Ezzy Ashcraft moved approval of the minutes as amended.
Board member Cunningham seconded the motion, with the following voice vote - 6.
Absent: 1 (Lynch). The motion passed.
b.
Minutes for the meeting of May 14, 2007.
Board member Kohlstrand moved approval of the minutes as presented.
Board member McNamara seconded the motion, with the following voice vote - 6.
Absent: 1 (Lynch). The motion passed.
5.
AGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSION:
None.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 1
May 29, 2007",PlanningBoard/2007-05-29.pdf
PlanningBoard,2007-05-29,2,"6.
STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
a.
Future Agendas
Mr. Thomas provided an update on future agenda items.
b.
Zoning Administrator Report
Mr. Thomas provided an update on Zoning Administrator actions.
7.
ORAL COMMUNICATION:
None.
8.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
None.
9.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS:
Planning Board Minutes
Page 2
May 29, 2007",PlanningBoard/2007-05-29.pdf
PlanningBoard,2007-05-29,3,"9-A.
DP07-0002 & DR07-0044 Development Plan and Design Review - Applicant:
Catellus Development Corporation - Alameda Landing Mixed Use
Development Project. The applicant requests Development Plan approval for a
Site-Wide Master Landscape Development Plan and a Waterfront Promenade
Plan, and Development Plan and Design Review approval for the Clif Bar & Co.
Headquarters commercial project, parking shed, off-street parking, landscaping,
and associated improvements on an approximately 8.69 acre site. The site is
located along the northern end of the former FISC Site (Tract 7884) within the M-
X Mixed Use Planned Development Zoning District. (AT/DV)
Mr. Thomas summarized the staff report. Staff recommended approval of the items being
considered: the Site-Wide Master Landscape Development Plan Amendment, the
Waterfront Promenade Plan, and the Development Plan and Design Review. He thanked
David Tierman of Catellus for bringing an excellent team of designers and consultants to
this project.
Acting President Cook disclosed that she had met with Mr. Tierman and several other
consultants on-site the previous week in order to walk around with the plans.
Member Ezzy Ashcraft disclosed that she visited the site, and noted that she was very
pleased to see this area of the waterfront that she had never seen before.
Board member Kohlstrand disclosed that she visited the site, and found the on-site
examination of the plans to be very helpful.
The public hearing was opened.
Mr. David Tierman, Vice President, Catellus Development Group, introduced the
development team.
Mr. Mike Engelhart, Development Project Management Team, Catellus Development
Group, noted that their focus in attaining a sustainable design was adaptive reuse of the
existing facility.
Mr. Bruce Lymburn, Wendel Rosen Black & Dean, project manager, detailed the history
and corporate culture of Clif Bar. He noted that Clif Bar demonstrated a commitment to
sustainability in their brands, business, people, the community and the planet, as well as
ethical business practices.
Mr. Rene Behan, SWA, provided an overview of the Landscape Master Plan and
displayed a detailed PowerPoint presentation of the Master Plan.
Ms. Martina Goodman, SMWM Architects, described and displayed the adaptive reuse of
parking behind the Clif Bar building.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 3
May 29, 2007",PlanningBoard/2007-05-29.pdf
PlanningBoard,2007-05-29,4,"Ms. Kathy Berg, project architect, Zimmer, Gunsul, Frasca Architects, described and
displayed the design and site plan for the Clif Bar headquarters facility. She detailed how
the project would support Clif Bar's commitment to both the financial and community
bottom lines.
Acting President Cook called for a five-minute recess.
Mr. Bruce Reeves, 2527 Santa Clara Avenue, noted that he supported the arrival of Clif
Bar to Alameda, and that it would be a benefit to the community.
Mr. Gail Wetzork, 3452 Capella Lane, spoke in support of this project, and noted that he
had been involved with it since its inception. He supported the use of as much existing
property and material as possible, and looked forward to seeing the Northern Waterfront
open up.
Ms. Melody Marr, 1416 Park Avenue, noted that the President of the Alameda Chamber
of Commerce could not attend, and noted that the officers and directors supported this
project. She complimented Catellus for all the work and community outreach they had
performed, and added that they performed their due diligence and used the suggestions
they had received. The Chamber was very pleased with what they had seen over the past
year, and supported parking sheds.
Mr. Dick Lyons, 18 Shannon Circle, spoke in support of this project as a resident and as a
past president of the Alameda Chamber of Commerce.
The public hearing was closed for Board discussion.
Acting President Cook suggested addressing the landscape plan first.
Board member Mariani noted that she was very pleased with the plan.
Board member Cunningham believed this was the most exciting project he had seen
during this tenure on the Planning Board, and complimented the excellent work
performed by the team. He inquired whether vehicle access would be available down to
the waterfront for people carrying kayaks and similar watercraft down to the waterfront.
Mr. Behan believed there would be access to the waterfront, and that a gateway entry
would be necessary to gain access to the floating dock. The structural studies would
determine whether vehicle access would be possible.
In response to an inquiry by Board member Cunningham whether any consideration had
been given to the screening of the recreation zone at the turning basin area, Mr. Behan
replied that was the most picturesque piece of the waterfront and noted that it was a
balancing act. He noted that there were not many opportunities to screen it because it was
fully open to the waterfront.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 4
May 29, 2007",PlanningBoard/2007-05-29.pdf
PlanningBoard,2007-05-29,5,"In response to an inquiry by Board member Cunningham regarding other amenities, Mr.
Engelhart replied that the Master Plan contained a requirement that public access to
restrooms be available in the facilities. He noted that an office building was also planned,
with the possibility of a restaurant in the last office building. He described the overall
vision of the office building, which would anchor the project and capture the views to the
waterfront.
Mr. Thomas noted that the Master Plan limited this project to 400,000 square feet of
office.
Mr. Behan noted that the Clif Bar building will highlight sustainable features, identifying
design elements through graphics that talk about how the bioswales filter water and treat
storm drain runoff. They have been working in conjunction with Alameda Power &
Telecom regarding the project design in order to maximize the impact of renewable
energy sources, produced on-site as well as produced by AP&T. They have discussed
putting a kiosk on the waterfront to exhibit different sources of energy coming to the
project both on-site and from the renewable energy sources from AP&T. He noted that
the entire project was designed to be a discovery center, both in the buildings and the site
development for sustainable development.
Board member McNamara inquired about the children's water garden identified on the
village green. Mr. Engelhart noted that it was intended to be an interactive water piece,
possibly with environmental graphics, that would also be fun for children to play with on
a warm day. He noted that it would be specifically scaled for children.
Board member McNamara expressed concern about filtering requirements for chlorine,
which could become very involved and possibly cost-prohibitive. She suggested a
different kind of educational water element.
Mr. Behan noted that the new health standards require that the pieces be treated not as a
fountain, but as a pool, and brought up to pool standards.
In response to an inquiry by Board member McNamara, Mr. Thomas noted that the
comparison of the green space to a soccer field was to illustrate its comparative size. He
added that it was not designed to be a formal recreational soccer field. He noted that it
would be an informal space for gathering, kite flying, and events, and that the western
end of the promenade would have more programmed facilities and spaces.
Board member Kohlstrand believed this project was like a dream come true for the City
of Alameda, and she believed that overall, Catellus has put considerable effort into this
project. She wished to discuss the street lighting on the waterfront, which was to have
several different fixtures with higher standards to attain better coverage. She requested a
discussion of the pedestrian-level scale standard as well, and inquired whether a lower
fixture could be added.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 5
May 29, 2007",PlanningBoard/2007-05-29.pdf
PlanningBoard,2007-05-29,6,"Mr. Engelhart noted that a single-pole/multiheaded fixture was shown as being
approximately 35 feet high, which came with multiple heads that could be oriented in a
number of different ways. He noted that a lower level light could easily be used, and he
noted that the elevation was extremely flat, and they intended to get an emphasis at the
end of the tree rows so that there was a hierarchy to the lights themselves.
In response to an inquiry by Board member Kohlstrand regarding public art, Mr. Thomas
noted that would be addressed at another time. He noted that the development agreement
establishes that the project actually has two public art requirements, $150,000 each. He
noted that the Public Art Commission reviewed those proposals, and the first piece would
be included as part of the first phase of the development. He noted that staff could brief
the Planning Board as the pieces came forward.
Board member Kohlstrand noted that in San Francisco, the public art was well-integrated
into the facilities and the public infrastructure.
Board member Kohlstrand wished to ensure that if the landscape plan was adopted, that
the Planning Board did not preclude the discussions about better development of the
street system, particularly in the retail area as well as the warehouse area. She noted that
they had discussed a strong sense of a public space going between the warehouses,
parking sheds and the actual buildings and would like a little more conventional treatment
of the retail area.
With respect to the public feel, Mr. Thomas noted that the east-west public access was a
unique situation, as well as all the parking surrounding the sheds. Staff concluded that the
team's design was a unique place in Alameda and elsewhere.
Board member Kohlstrand believed the idea of 90-degree parking made the most sense.
Member Ezzy Ashcraft noted that she loved the project and complimented Catellus and
Clif Bar for their hard work and inspiration. She was pleased to read that Clif Bar was
helping businesses adopt green practices, as well as StopWaste.org. She was concerned
about the project's contribution to Bay-friendly landscaping, Mr. Behan replied that it
was a balance between creating a landscape that was functional and sustainable. He
added that it was not a suburban lawn that used a lot of resources. The soil and polymer
palette would help retain the soil and prevent runoff; the landscaping was also designed
to be drought-tolerant. The plant palette on the Master Plan was native and drought-
tolerant. He described the irrigation system, and noted that the infrastructure would
accept the reclaimed water system. He noted that products would be used that would have
minimum impact on the Bay.
In response to an inquiry by Board member Ezzy Ashcraft regarding the Field of Dreams
playground, Mr. Thomas replied that it would return to the Board with the design review
of the final phase of the Promenade.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 6
May 29, 2007",PlanningBoard/2007-05-29.pdf
PlanningBoard,2007-05-29,7,"Board member Ezzy Ashcraft suggested that because the Field of Dreams would be a
very positive addition to the City's children, that any playground also be universally
accessible to accommodate differing physical abilities.
Acting President Cook noted that she was excited to see this project, which met the
caliber of what she hoped to see in a waterfront development, and commended the
developers. She noted that this site was being changed to become an environmentally
sensitive project. She expressed some discomfort with the bioswale/cottonwood tree
usage, as opposed to a more urban treatment.
Mr. Behan believed that the site's uniqueness was a strength, and brought up Crissy Field
as an urban park. He noted that the circulation brought people out to the water, and that
the wind rows and agricultural landscape was appropriate for the area. He noted that the
site was restricted with respect to how much retail would be allowed. He believed the
landscape responded to the existing structures.
Acting President Cook noted that how the landscape connected back to the residential
arm of this project was of interest to her, and would like to see more of a visual
connection straight through to the waterfront, as detailed on Drawing L1. She noted that
the City had control over the water retention basin, and was concerned that the wind rows
may impact that in the future.
Mr. Behan noted that that the greenway did not necessarily have to be a wind row,
although they would like the linear orientation to connect to the waterfront. The property
line was not orthogonal to the waterfront, but there was a clear and strong pedestrian
connection at that point, which attempted to connect to the waterfront. As that is
developed, they intended to further the clear and direct connection as much as possible.
Acting President Cook suggested using interpretive signage to help people make their
way onto the site, and to make it clear that they have a right to be there. She would like to
discuss that issue with City Council going forward.
Board member Cunningham believed that BCDC would be strong advocates for that
program.
Mr. Engelhart noted that they submitted that plan to BCDC and applied their comments
to this plan. They also planned to make a connection of the Bay Trail along the
waterfront, and that the bike path would be signaled and striped.
Mr. Thomas noted that Condition 3 of the Clif Bar resolution stated that all signs would
be reviewed and approved by the City, which was a standard condition. In this case, the
signage would be very important so that people understood that this was a public area. He
noted that easements will be in place, and the public parking will be shared, and the
signage will be appropriate and will emphasize that.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 7
May 29, 2007",PlanningBoard/2007-05-29.pdf
PlanningBoard,2007-05-29,8,"Acting President Cook wanted to ensure that the interpretive signage would not only
describe the site but also the company, while being respectful of the private nature of the
company. She also believed the interactive fountains would be very welcoming and
exciting, and loved that addition.
She echoed Board member Cunningham's concern about wind screening by the baseball
field so that it would be comfortable.
Acting President Cook believed there should be public restrooms separate from those in
the building. Mr. Thomas replied that staff would return on June 25 with the first piece of
details for the promenade, and that would be a good opportunity to discuss bathroom
facilities.
Mr. Behan noted that this was an extraordinary project for BCDC, and that they were
very favorable toward it.
Board member Mariani noted that she had some concern about the simplicity of this
design being loaded down with interpretative signage and educational features; she did
not want it to be overplanned. She acknowledged the baseball field would be windy, and
did not want people to be overwhelmed to the point of not being able to discover what
was intended to be a simple project.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft recalled some national parks in Hawaii that had self-guided
tours with signs that educated but did not mar the natural beauty of the site. She believed
that the signs would be educational and creative in that manner.
Mr. Thomas noted that an overall sign program was required of the project in the Master
Plan, and he recommended that the Planning Board include a condition that the required
sign program include the plans for interpretive signage and wayfinding, as well as a
requirement that it be brought back to the Planning Board prior to occupancy of the Clif
Bar project.
Board member Kohlstrand moved to adopt Planning Board Resolution No. 07-17 to
approve the Landscape Master Plan Amendment as proposed, with the condition that the
retail landscape plan may vary from the Master Landscape Plan.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, with the following voice vote - 6.
Absent: 1 (Lynch). The motion passed.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft noted that she felt favorably about the entire concept, and
noted that when she visited the site, she felt the view was very accessible. She expressed
concern about the guardrail for the promenade, and did not want children to climb on the
railings. She noted that her husband had taken photos of the guardrail at the Embarcadero
in San Francisco, which had vertical rather than horizontal rungs; the design work at the
top was attractive but was not something a child could get a foot into. She noted that the
view should be maximized with an eye towards safety. She inquired whether there would
Planning Board Minutes
Page 8
May 29, 2007",PlanningBoard/2007-05-29.pdf
PlanningBoard,2007-05-29,9,"be intervals of ladders to climb if someone got to the wrong side of the railing, or fell in.
She noted that there were flotation devices at the Embarcadero.
Mr. Behan did not have information on the life safety issue, and noted that there were two
options for the guardrail. He noted that it was not uncommon to see the horizontal rail,
and that a nonclimbable mesh could also be used. They would like to stay away from the
Victorian-era rails, which became ornamental and would be out of character and
nontransparent.
Mr. Thomas suggested that those elements be brought back with the Phase I design
review for the promenade.
In response to an inquiry by Board member Kohlstrand, Mr. Behan described and
displayed the access to the floating docks.
A discussion of the floating dock ensued.
Board member Mariani noted that she was extremely pleased with the plan, and she
looked forward to seeing more details at the next hearing.
Acting President Cook noted that she was very happy with the simplicity of the plan, and
would like the applicant to keep the notion of guest docks on mind so people could sail to
a destination to access restaurants.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft moved to adopt Planning Board Resolution No. 07-18 to
approve the Waterfront Promenade Development Plan.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft seconded the motion, with the following voice vote - 6.
Absent: 1 (Lynch). The motion passed.
Regarding the Clif Bar design review proposal, Board member Mariani did not like the
parking sign because it did not blend with the aesthetics of the restored warehouse. She
inquired whether the Clif Bar doors would be red in the final design.
Ms. Goodman noted that the area was vast, and a great deal of signage would be required
to direct people into the parking garage. They believed that the large sign would be the
easiest way to accomplish that, and she added that the orange door may end up being
white in the final design.
Board member Cunningham noted that he liked the supergraphics associated with the
garage, and may support making them bigger. He suggested the wording on the sign just
say ""Parking"" rather than ""Parking Garage."" He inquired whether there was any
consideration of harvesting gray water from the very large roof. Ms. Goodman noted that
they had not explored that option, but that solar panels would be explored.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 9
May 29, 2007",PlanningBoard/2007-05-29.pdf
PlanningBoard,2007-05-29,10,"Mr. Engelhart noted that they would not want to harvest more water than they could use,
but they would find the amount of water to balance the system.
Board member Cunningham liked the idea of the beacons coming through the doors. He
requested more information on activating the waterfront with respect to the light wells,
and would like to see a way to blur the line of the north façade of the building relative to
the waterfront promenade.
Ms. Berg noted that there would be openings in the front that would bring people directly
into the building, and that will provide the indoor/outdoor connection. They were looking
at a way to incorporate planters and seating areas up towards the face of the building, so
that Clif Bar can spill out, and the public came come up towards the edge of the building
and sit there. She noted that one of the gardens moved out towards the edge, and that it
will also be used for stretching and aerobics, as well as some gathering near the wellness
facility. She noted that the spine at the water's edge was the circulation path and there
will be seating areas near the edge of the glass.
In response to an inquiry by Board member McNamara, Ms. Berg confirmed that the
water tower would be approximately 27 feet tall, and it would be about 25-27 feet above
grade.
Board member McNamara understood the functionality of the water tower, and inquired
whether there was any way to design it with additional screening. Ms. Berg believed the
water tower was within the character of the maritime environment. She added that there
were different options for materials and shaping that would enable it to fit in very well,
and that it would serve as an iconic element.
Mr. Engelhart noted that they would probably bring a precast concrete system into the
site.
Board member Cunningham noted that because of concrete's fluid nature, it could be used
in a very creative manner.
Board member McNamara inquired where the accessible ramp was designed to go. Ms.
Berg replied that there was a 2% slope from the center of the Clif Bar building, within the
building, and that the inside of the building must be flattened to accommodate furniture
systems. She noted that one of the ramps would be used to address the grade transition
between the north-south elevations and the entries on the east and west.
Regarding the red doors, Board member Kohlstrand believed it was important for people
coming through the parking garage and the central spine know where the main entrance
to Clif Bar was. She did not believe people should have to walk around trying to find the
main entrance.
Board member Kohlstrand expressed concern about the wind turbines on the roof.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 10
May 29, 2007",PlanningBoard/2007-05-29.pdf
PlanningBoard,2007-05-29,11,"Acting President Cook did not believe the wind turbine issue should be decided at this
time because it was a major issue.
Mr. Thomas understood that Clif Bar and Catellus were still working out the details on
the wind turbine system, and noted that the Planning Board could condition this item so
the turbines come back for approval with more details and information.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft noted that she liked the graphics on the parking shed, as
well as the red door. She inquired whether there would be bike racks in the parking
garage; Ms. Goodman confirmed that there would be bike racks, and that they had not
been drawn in yet. Board member Ezzy Ashcraft wanted to ensure that energy would
come from clean resources.
Ms. Berg noted that they had extensive conversations about telling the stories of how
various projects, such as the wind turbines, contribute to green power. She noted that this
could be done through interpretive signage, or simply through the observation of the
feature itself.
Acting President Cook wanted to ensure there would be sufficient parking not only for
the employees, but also for any members of the public who would visit the site. Mr.
Thomas confirmed there would be sufficient parking, and added that they had made an
effort to put in much more parking than Clif Bar needed, even when it expanded.
Acting President Cook wanted to ensure the parking in the shed was well-lit, and that it
would feel safe. Ms. Goodman replied that they intended to light it well, as well as install
CCTV cameras. She noted that the parking garage will be open 24 hours a day.
Mr. Engelhart noted that using the shared parking concept, the restaurants would use the
parking as well during non-office hours. Acting President Cook emphasized that security
would be a priority in the garage.
In response to an inquiry by Acting President Cook, Mr. Engelhart noted that the Master
Plan included a provision that there will always be a waterfront restaurant use on-site,
although the restaurant use was not controlled by the development; it was a tenant
request.
Mr. Thomas noted that the design review for the waterfront plaza, the design review and
development plan for the waterfront retail, as well as the configuration of the design.
In response to an inquiry by Acting President Cook regarding the difference in language
between the staff report and the resolution, Ms. Mooney noted that the Planning Board
should focus on the language in the resolution and the findings. She added that there
were some findings listed in the staff report that did not appear in the resolution, and that
the Board did not have to address.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 11
May 29, 2007",PlanningBoard/2007-05-29.pdf
PlanningBoard,2007-05-29,12,"Board member Mariani moved to adopt Planning Board Resolution No. PB-07-16 to
approve the Waterfront Promenade Development Plan.
1.
Finding 8 (comprehensive coordinated information and directional
signage) should be modified to read, ""The development will provide a
comprehensive, controlled and coordinated system of informational and
directional graphic signage throughout the development"" because a sign
program is required of this project, and will be subject to review and
approval by the Planning Board.
2.
Condition 7 on page 4 of the resolution should be modified to read, ""Prior
to certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall submit a comprehensive
sign program for the Alameda Landing project for Planning Board
review. Assigned programs shall provide a comprehensive and
coordinated and controlled system of informational and directional
graphic signage throughout the development; include descriptions of
wayfinding, public access, graphic signage and tenant signage for the
project."" The following language shall be stricken from the Condition:
""The City shall review and approve all building, parking lot and internal
circulation signage for the project.""
3.
Prior to issuance of building permits for the wind turbines, the design
review should return to the Planning Board for review and approval (new
Condition 12).
Board member Cunningham seconded the motion, with the following voice vote - 6.
Absent: 1 (Lynch). The motion passed.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 12
May 29, 2007",PlanningBoard/2007-05-29.pdf
PlanningBoard,2007-05-29,13,"9-B. Design Review DR06-0104 - Applicant: Community Improvement
Commission and Alameda Entertainment Associates, 1416 Oak Street and
2305 Central Avenue. Consideration of a landscaping, signage and exterior
lighting plan for the cineplex and parking garage and a queuing plan for the
Alameda Theater Complex. The review of the landscaping, signage and exterior
lighting plans by the Planning Board are requirements of Design Reviews DR05-
0041 and DR05-0028. The site is located within a C-C-T, Community
Commercial - Theater Combining Zoning District. (CE/JO)
Ms. Jennifer Ott, Redevelopment Manager, Development Services Department,
summarized the staff report for this project.
The public hearing was opened.
Mr. Christopher Buckley, 1017 San Antonio Avenue, submitted a letter to the Planning
Board encouraging the continuance of the sycamores along Central Avenue within the
Park Street Business District. He believed they would enhance the streetscape, and gave
the street a distinct identity. He did not believe having different street trees for different
projects would be beneficial to the continuity of the streetscape. He noted that the
arborist's report stated that the infrastructure impacts for sycamores were low with
respect to damage. He did not believe the impact of sycamores on signage would not be
an issue because they had relatively transparent canopies, reached higher, and would
provide clearance for storefront signage. He believed the choice of a chanticleer pear
would be good for Oak Street. He recommended 4X4 foot cutouts, and that tree guards
should be used for the streetscape planning to protect the trees from vandals. He would
like to see sidewalk treatments along the frontage of the theatre, and believed the historic
frontage of the theatre should be unobstructed.
Mr. Kyle Conner, applicant, noted that his studies indicated that the sycamores stopped at
the high school, and that there were no particular trees that stood out at Park Street. He
was concerned about the size of sycamores, and that it would be difficult to control the
growth of those trees. They had proposed the pear trees because they were more vertical.
He believed they would be a more appropriate tree for Central Avenue.
Mr. Buckley displayed a photograph of sycamores on a narrow sidewalk, and noted that
they could be adapted for narrow sidewalks.
The public hearing was closed for Board discussion.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft moved to extend the meeting to 11:20 p.m.
Board member Kohlstrand seconded the motion, with the following voice vote - 6.
Absent: 1 (Lynch). The motion passed.
Board member Ezzy Ashcraft favored the staff choice of chanticleer pear, and believed
they would add variety, color and would define the project well. She believed that Oak
Planning Board Minutes
Page 13
May 29, 2007",PlanningBoard/2007-05-29.pdf
PlanningBoard,2007-05-29,14,"Street sorely needed some trees, and she was happy to see these trees being added. She
inquired about the tree grates and tree guards.
Ms. Ott noted that the tree grates were kept to 3x3 feet on the 10-foot sidewalk, and was
concerned about narrowing that space further so that sidewalk seating and potential
queuing outside for a blockbuster movie may be accommodated. She believed the
omission of tree guards was an oversight, and noted that they would be included.
Member Ezzy Ashcraft echoed a concern raised by a landscape architect friend that the
trees on Park Street would be tied down and bound, which may reduce their strength and
growth. Ms. Ott noted that staff would be amenable to investigating that issue.
Member Ezzy Ashcraft supported staggering the showtimes to mitigate queuing, and
inquired about the intermission length to support exit of the audience. Mr. Conner replied
that referred to the time period between movies, rather than intermission in the middle of
the movie.
Member Ezzy Ashcraft inquired about queuing for blockbuster customers inside the
theatre during inclement weather, and asked whether the Art Deco railing would be of
sufficient height to accommodate those customers. Ms. Ott noted that the railing was
subject to the California Historic Building Code, and would not be altered as such; it was
approved as part of the building permit.
Mr. Conner noted that would concern him as well, and that he could use ropes and
stanchions to keep people away from the historic railing.
In response to an inquiry by Board member Kohlstrand whether reversing the queuing
line and purchase line might provide better flow and less crowding, Mr. Conner replied
that may create more traffic with people crossing the ticket holders line to purchase the
tickets, and then return to the ticket holders line. Board member Kohlstrand noted that it
may keep the crowd in front of their facility. Mr. Conner noted that their policies were
geared to not have ticket holder lines that queue for very long, as opposed to what is
found at Jack London Square.
Board member Kohlstrand expressed concern about some of the standards for the
Downtown Vision Plan not being applied to this project. She had further concerns about
trees having too wide of a canopy over a commercial area without a setback for the
building. Mr. Conner agreed with that concern.
Mr. Thomas acknowledged that the Tree Master Plan needed to be updated. He noted that
the Planning staff who were landscape architects felt this was an appropriate
recommendation.
Acting President Cook suggested having the Tree Master Plan updated. Mr. Thomas
noted that the City Council had put that on their ""to do"" list as a result of some issues that
occurred at South Shore.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 14
May 29, 2007",PlanningBoard/2007-05-29.pdf
PlanningBoard,2007-05-29,15,"Board member McNamara expressed her ongoing concern about the line queuing issues
about accommodation for blockbuster movies, and inquired how overnight queuing could
be monitored and prevented.
Board member McNamara noted that the diagram showed a queue going down the
adjacent alleyway, which she felt was a dark and inhospitable environment for their
customers. Mr. Conner noted that the alley was not his first choice, and he would support
not using the alleyway at all.
Board member McNamara would not support using the area in front of the taqueria
because they were not a tenant of the applicant's building, and she did not feel it would
be fair to the taqueria's owners and customers.
Board member Cunningham noted Mr. Buckley's comments about the framework and
continuation of a theme with respect to the street trees. He believed that there was a
precedent in not continuing the sycamores down the street, and added that it was
important to have the understanding of a framework of design that continued through the
street. He inquired about the driver of the spacing of the trees, and suggested adding one
more tree to get the feeling of a green line that he would like to maintain.
Mr. Conner noted that the driver for the tree space was the utilities, and added that there
was a culvert at the west end that they were trying to work around. He noted that there
was a very large grease interceptor from the restaurant, as well as a number of utilities
vaults that must be avoided by the trees and their roots.
Acting President Cook believed the lighting design was much more Art Deco and
supported the architectural details very well. She noted that she was swayed by Mr.
Buckley's letter until she drove down Central Avenue. She was concerned that the
amount of pruning that would make the sycamores work would detract from the natural
form of that tree. She believed the canopy could be more defined, and suggested adding
more trees or choose a similar tree to fill in the tree scheme.
Mr. Conner noted that the pear tree did have a canopy, which would spread to 20 to 25
feet. He noted that they were easier to control than a sycamore. He did not oppose fitting
in another tree, and would be amenable to studying that possibility.
Board member McNamara suggested that because the signage and exterior lighting plans
were not an issue, that the landscaping and queuing issues be revisited.
Acting President Cook suggested adding a condition stating that queuing in the alley be
not recommended, and that the queuing be switched if the lines got too long; also, the
addition of one more tree should be studied.
Board member Cunningham moved to adopt Planning Board Resolution Nos. 07-19 and
07-20 to approve a landscaping, signage and exterior lighting plan for the cineplex and
Planning Board Minutes
Page 15
May 29, 2007",PlanningBoard/2007-05-29.pdf
PlanningBoard,2007-05-29,16,"parking garage and a queuing plan for the Alameda Theater Complex. The review of the
landscaping, signage and exterior lighting plans by the Planning Board are requirements
of Design Reviews DR05-0041 and DR05-0028. The following modifications will be
added:
1.
Queuing in the alley will not be recommended as part of the queuing plan;
if the lines become too long, the queuing direction will be reversed;
2.
The addition of one more tree will be studied by staff.
Acting President Cook seconded the motion, with the following voice vote - 5. Absent: 2
(Lynch, Mariani). The motion passed.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 16
May 29, 2007",PlanningBoard/2007-05-29.pdf
PlanningBoard,2007-05-29,17,"10.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None.
11.
BOARD COMMUNICATIONS:
a.
Oral Status Report regarding the Oakland/Chinatown Advisory Committee
(Board Member Mariani).
Board member Mariani was not in attendance to present this report.
b.
Oral Status Report regarding the Transportation subcommittee (Board
Member Kohlstrand).
Board member Kohlstrand advised there was nothing new to report.
c.
Oral Status Report regarding the Alameda Climate Protection Task Force
(Board Member Cunningham).
Board member Cunningham noted that the previous meeting had been cancelled, and the
next meeting would be held in mid-June.
12.
ADJOURNMENT:
11:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Andrew Thomas, Secretary
City Planning Board
These minutes were approved at the June 25, 2007, Planning Board meeting. This
meeting was audio and video taped.
Planning Board Minutes
Page 17
May 29, 2007",PlanningBoard/2007-05-29.pdf