Title
Draft Meeting Minutes-May 7, 2015
Body
DRAFT MEETING MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING OF THE
CITY OF ALAMEDA HISTORICAL ADVISORY BOARD
THURSDAY, MAY 7, 2015
1. CONVENE: 7:02 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL: Present: Chair Owens, Vice Chair Rauk and Board Member Piziali. Absent: Board Members Chan and Vella were absent.
3. MINUTES:
3-A 2015-1651
Draft Meeting Minutes-December 5, 2013
Vice Chair Rauk motioned to approve the minutes with edits. Board Member Piziali seconded the motion. The motion carried, 3-0.
3-B 2015-1653
Draft Meeting Minutes-February 5, 2015
Vice Chair Rauk motioned to approve the minutes. Board Member Piziali seconded the motion. The motion carried, 3-0.
4. AGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSIONS: None
5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None
6. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
Mr. Christopher Buckley, President of the Alameda Architectural Preservation Society (AAPS), wrote a letter to the Board expressing support for a proposed height limit for new buildings constructed at Alameda Point.
7. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS:
7-A. 2015-1649
Public Hearing to Consider Amending the Guide to Preserving the Character of the Naval Air Station Alameda Historic District to Include Exterior Paint Guidelines for Existing Buildings in the NAS Alameda Historic District. The Environmental Impact Report Prepared for the Alameda Point Project, Certified on February 4, 2014, Satisfies Environmental Review for this Action Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Mr. Eric Fonstein, Economic Development Manager, gave a presentation. He introduced consultants Mr. Pierluigi Serraino and Mr. Lorenzo Apicella to give a presentation on the selection of a paint palette. During the presentation, Mr. Serraino passed out samples of the paint color schemes proposed for the hangar buildings. He explained how each color would be used for certain parts of the buildings.
Chair Owens asked how his team included the public in the color selection process. Mr. Fonstein replied that there were several focus group meetings with the current business tenants in the historic district. Mr. Serraino added that the feedback from the public outreach led to the selection of colors that respected the history of the buildings while providing opportunities to highlight their unique features.
Chair Owens asked if these color guidelines would also be used in the residential subarea known as the Big Whites. Mr. Fonstein said that the colors would not be brought over to residential areas because those residential buildings are unique and were historically painted white. The color palette and guidelines are for the shop and hangar areas, because those subareas are very similar in nature.
Vice Chair Rauk asked staff if existing tenants were given paint samples. Mr. Fonstein replied in the affirmative, and explained that two focus groups looked at the paint colors and gave the team comments. Vice Chair Rauk said she noticed the new signage at Alameda Point. Mr. Apicella replied, saying that the proposed color schemes on the signs are meant to attract attention, and the colors on the buildings are likewise meant to attract attention to them. The colors are meant to induce effortless orientation for those at former naval air station. Mr. Serraino said that his team plans on using three base colors being used at Alameda Point.
Vice Chair Rauk asked Mr. Serraino if his team was leaning towards clear or opaque colors for the buildings. Mr. Serraino said that he is working with the tenants on determining their preferences. Chair Owens asked Mr. Tai if tenants would have to confirm their paint colors with staff. Mr. Tai said that there is no permit needed to paint a building, but there would probably be a conversation between the tenants and staff about what paint product substitutes would be considered appropriate if they differed from the paint palette.
Mr. Serraino explained that the colors were chosen because of the surrounding marine environment. He said that it is reasonable to talk to Sherman Williams about making the cost of paint affordable.
Board Member Piziali asked Mr. Serraino about his conversation with the tenants. Mr. Fonstein explained that the tenants were shown the color palettes, and staff asked for their input.
Chair Owens said that he did not think that any of the reds presented to him were muted, especially those presented with a sheen.
Vice Chair Rauk said that different lighting makes a huge difference in the appearance of certain colors. She applauded the team’s approach to the issue.
Chair Owens said that he was disappointed that the gray shown was not more bluish. He also expressed concern about the cost of the paints. Mr. Serraino said that his team would look into the different shades of colors.
Board Member Piziali asked staff if any tenant was ready to start painting their buildings. Mr. Fonstein replied that the Bladium and a new tenant, Wrightspeed, have expressed interest in starting to paint their facilities.
Mr. Tai added that paint substitutes were taken into account when determining the appropriate paint products. Therefore, the proposed guidelines incorporate standard RGB color combinations that would be used to find suitable substitutes in the event the Sherman Williams colors are no longer available. He explained that the significant deviations from the prescribed color palette could be brought back to the Board for consideration on a case-by-case basis if it was deemed necessary.
Vice Chair Rauk motioned to approve the draft Resolution. Board Member Piziali seconded the motion. The motion carried, 3-0.
7-B. 2015-1652
Public Workshop on the initial development for Site A Development Plan.
Vice Chair Rauk indicated that she had to leave the meeting by 8:30 P.M.
Mr. Andrew Thomas, City Planner, introduced Mr. William Duncanson, of BAR Architects. Mr. Duncanson gave the presentation.
Chair Owens asked staff if the boundaries for Site A had changed. Mr. Thomas replied in the negative. Chair Owens said he was pleased to see the district boundaries expressed on the graphics.
Mr. Thomas explained that staff would be taking the final presentation to the Planning Board on May 11th for a vote, and to the City Council in June. He explained some of the changes that had been made to the plans since the Board’s last meeting.
Board Member Piziali said that the Alameda Architectural Preservation Society supports the proposal.
Chair Owens said he would have concerns with a 65’ tall parking structure that is supposed to be taller than one of the hangar buildings. He said that it should be shorter than the adjacent building. Mr. Thomas said that the Board needs to issue a Certificate of Approval and the Planning Board needs to approve Design Review for all buildings to be constructed. He explained that full build-out of Alameda Point will take up to 15 to 20 years.
There were no public speakers.
Board Comments:
Board Member Piziali said that he is pleased with the progress made on the project and would like to see the development move forward.
7-C. 2015-1654
Board Elections. Continued due to lack of full Board attendance.
8. BOARD COMMUNICATIONS: None
9. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS:
Mr. Tai informed the Board that staff will be approving a Certificate of Approval on May 12 to remove an oak tree that has already fallen at 3215 Liberty Avenue.
10. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None
11. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 8:10 p.m.