pages: PlanningBoard/2005-05-09.pdf, 9
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2005-05-09 | 9 | include public art in the project. She noted that it would not contain advertisements. Ms. McNamara supported public art in this project. In response to Ms. McNamara's request, Mr. Stanton described the shear wall and entrances in detail. He stated the garage was mechanically ventilated, because of the lack of adequate opening to the outdoors prevented natural ventilation. He noted that the mechanical ventilation would activate only when the carbon monoxide sensors detected a buildup; this would be safe and energy efficient. Mr. Lynch believed the extra costs should be borne by the project. At his request, Mr. Stanton described the different colors and materials of the façade, and how it would relate to long-term maintenance of light colors at the base, moving up the structure. He noted that the sample board represented the original color choices. He preferred a honed finish, which discouraged some forms of graffiti and abuse. He believed a darker, warmer red at the base of the building would be appropriate, and would like further Board feedback. In response to an inquiry by Mr. Lynch, Ms. Ott confirmed that the garage would not be costed out until after the final design approval. In response to an inquiry by Vice President Cook whether cars would be visible from the outside, Mr. Stanton replied that the cars should not be visible from the street. He noted that the lighting would be visible, but anticipated that the lighting fixtures would be as inconspicuous as possible. He added that he would create the view angles from across the street, but did not believe they would be visible. Vice President Cook believed the time had come to have a parking garage in Alameda, and added that the parking availability had become more limited. She was not happy that an appropriate solution could not be worked out with Long's She noted that with planning, nothing was ever perfect and believed that it was time to move forward. She believed the architect had been responsive to the severe constraints of the site. She agreed with Mr. Buckley's comments, although she did not believe they were all feasible. She liked the idea of arching the area in the tower to match the other arches, as well as having a darker shade at the base to create grounding. She appreciated what the architect did with the doors closest to City Hall. She believed the poster size insets were too small, but did not believe they should be storefront-sized; the poster casing should be framed, perhaps similar to the treatment around the doors. She appreciated the architect's responsiveness on the stair tower. Mr. Stanton agreed with Vice President Cook's assessment that the posters did indeed look "dinky," and would be happy to bring an alternative back to the Board. Mr. Piziali agreed that the posters should not be larger, but that they should be framed. President Cunningham noted that there was an additional speaker due to the reverse order of the items. Planning Board Minutes Page 9 May 9, 2005 | PlanningBoard/2005-05-09.pdf |