pages: PlanningBoard/2007-05-29.pdf, 6
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
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 |