pages: PlanningBoard/2017-07-24.pdf, 4
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2017-07-24 | 4 | Alan Teague said the restroom, fix it station, and water fountain being located together is critical to cyclists. He said conveying the slope of the site along the side of the building could be a nod to its history. President Mitchell closed the public hearing. Board Member Köster said he is having trouble figuring out how the project fits Alameda. He said it would be nice if some of the elements of the project reflected the site's past. He said he would like to see two structures with pedestrian access through the middle of the site. He said he would like to see the landscape connect to the water more and reflect some of the historic use of the site. He suggested butterfly or shed roofs that could mimic the old ramps. He suggested using the rooftop as an amenity for the project. He said he preferred the architecture in option C. Board Member Knox White said the ramps are the defining feature of the site and does not reflect the history of the site. He said he likes the size of the units being smaller and more affordable by design. He said we could lose 100 parking spaces at $50,000/ space to fund amenities and reduce cost. He said we should start setting the standard of where we want to go in the next fifty years. He said he is excited to see the project move forward. Board Member Curtis said the site is very difficult and the layout and circulation of the design are very good. Board Member Sullivan said she likes how the building façade is visually broken up. But she said at street level, you will not be able to see the water because of the 544 foot long wall of building. She said she has concerns over some of the composite materials looking plastic. Board Member Burton said he would like to see something in the architecture that speaks to the site and not be indistinguishable from thousands of other projects. He asked if the buildings and courtyards could be manipulated to match the rhythm of the the existing ramps and crane ways. He asked to see the building step down and break up the massing more. He agreed that option C was the best of the available choices. Board Member Zuppan said she would like to see more information about the sea level rise planning and perhaps do more than the minimum to protect the park from sea level rise. She said the park should step down to the water somehow. She said she feels 544 feet would be too long of a building. She said she would like to see the building step down to the water and break up the massing. She said the plan needs to connect better to the site history, something experiential. Board Member Curtis said all the suggestions lead to a potential increase in cost which we need to be sensitive to. Approved Minutes Page 4 of 9 July 24. 2017 | PlanningBoard/2017-07-24.pdf |