Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-09-05 Architectural Review Board Summary Minutes City of Palo Alto Page 1 Call to Order/Roll Call Present: Chair Peter Baltay, Vice Chair Osma Thompson, Board Members Alexander Lew and David Hirsch. Absent: None. Chair Baltay: Good morning, everybody. I apologize for the delay. Could we have a roll call, please? [Roll Call] Oral Communications Chair Baltay: First item on our agenda is oral communications. If there’s any members of the public who would like to address us…? I don’t see anybody. Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions Chair Baltay: Next item is agenda changes, additions and deletions. Do we have anything, Jodie? No? City Official Reports 1. Recognition of Alicia Spotwood and her Years of Service to the Board. Introduction of Vinhloc “Vinh” Nguyen and Overview of Support Responsibilities. Chair Baltay: Office reports. Alicia Spotwood, what can we say? Jodie Gerhardt, Current Planning Manager: Yes. Alicia is not able to make it this morning. She’s on to her next job duties, but I really did want to thank her for her 19 years of service to the ARB. I hadn’t realized it was that long until I was talking to her. She said she started on her very first day. We now have Vinh, who is starting on his very first day, handling the ARB. Any questions that you have, probably best to email the both of us, and then, Vinh will be sending out the packets to you, and things like that. Chair Baltay: Thank you, we look forward to working with you, Vinh. Vihn Nguyen: Likewise. Chair Baltay: Those are big shoes to fill. 2. Transmittal of 1) the ARB Meeting Schedule and Attendance Record, and 2) Tentative Future Agenda items. Chair Baltay: Meeting schedule, Jodie. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD MINUTES: September 5, 2019 City Hall/City Council Chambers 250 Hamilton Avenue 8:30 AM City of Palo Alto Page 2 Ms. Gerhardt: Yes. We do have changes to the schedule. We thought we were going to have one item on the 19th. That project has been delayed. There are some parking things that we were working out, but there also seems to be some FEMA flood zone issues, that they might be going over the valuation and need to do additional work. They are figuring that out. So, we are not going to have a meeting at the middle of September. That meeting will be cancelled. Chair Baltay: Wonderful. Okay. Action Items 2. PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI-JUDICIAL. 180 El Camino Real [19PLN-00129] Request for Architectural Review to Allow for Modifications of the Exterior Storefronts and Market Plaza Area for "Sigona's Market", "Schaub's Meat, Fish, and Poultry", "Cocola Bakery", Along with Changes to the Service Entrance Façade at Building E within the Stanford Shopping Center. Environmental Assessment: Categorically Exempt from the Provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Guideline Section 15301 (Existing Facilities). Zoning District: CC (Community Commercial). Chair Baltay: We move on to our first action item. It’s a public hearing about 180 El Camino Real, a request for architectural review to allow for modifications to the exterior storefronts and M market plaza area for Sigona’s Market, Schaub’s Meet, Fish and Poultry, Cocola Bakery, along with changes to the service entrance façade at Building E within the Stanford Shopping Center. Before we start, do we have any disclosures? Alex? Board Member Lew: I visited the site yesterday. Chair Baltay: Osma? Vice Chair Thompson: I’ve been to the site. Chair Baltay: David? Board Member Hirsch: I visited the site yesterday. Chair Baltay: Okay. Likewise, I also visited the site and have nothing else to add. Okay. Do we have a staff report on this? Samuel Gutierrez, Associate Planner: Hello, good morning, Board. My name is Samuel Gutierrez, Associate Planner, and also known as the Stanford Shopping Center planner, presenting yet another Stanford Shopping Center project to you. We’ll start with the title page here. You’ll see a map here, and this is the area of the shopping center that’s being worked on. It involves three existing tenants, Schaub’s, Cocola’s and Sigona's. Also, there is a common entrance that you may recall that’s between The Melt and the Pacific Catch that leads to the internal corridors and back-of-house areas for the other tenants in Building E. That’s also included here, along with what we call the market area plaza upgrades. The project is to renovate existing facades of the market plaza tenants, the plaza site plan improvements, and façade improvements to the shopping center common area that I just mentioned. There’s going to be new, modern façade designs, new planters and tree rail grates, new signage, and new exterior light fixtures. With this project, there is no changes to existing uses, tenants, floor area, coverage, parking and circulation when it comes to vehicle parking and circulation and how that’s impacting, being impacted by this project. Here again is just an overview of the shopping center. There is a highlighted triangle superimposed on the area where this project is located at. It is the main entry to the shopping center if you’re coming off of Sand Hill. That will lead you to the kind of core of the shopping center. This is a photo of the existing conditions. As you can see, there are a number of mature trees there in the plaza area, but peeking behind, you can see the Sigona’s storefront with the green awning, kind of arrangement with the tan awnings where fruit and vegetable stands are located. And then you’ll see the Schaub’s to the right of that, and that has the barrel configured awning with a metal trim piece. It’s difficult to see, but on the far left you’ll see these tan arches City of Palo Alto Page 3 on the building on the left, and that’s were Cocola Bakery is located. To start the façade improvements, here’s a better shot of Cocola’s. You can see the arches there, and you can see the proposed façade for Cocola Bakery. They’re going to utilize precast façade profile, so it will change from the arch shape to rectangular, which actually mimics what Pacific Catch is currently constructing, again, from a few months ago. It’s more rectangular, angular, rather than these smooth, curved arches that they’re going from. There will be these upper trellis planks that is internally illuminated. There is a new canopy. Instead of the existing canopy, which is metal and glass, this one will have metal and wood, kind of tying in that upper wood façade design. The existing plaster is going to be painted a combination of gray and beige. You can see that there. There will be new wall-mounted sconces at each of these new rectangular, kind of precast concrete forms. You can see that at each point of that rendering there. Here we see the Sigona’s façade in the existing condition. It’s mostly a blank wall of the façade tenant space. Really, the draw is the fruit stands and vegetable stands at the bottom, beneath the awning. The awning is going to get upgraded, as well. It’s going to this metal and wood look with, again, an upper trellis wooden design, and it’s utilizing tan and beige colors for the upper and lower facades. The storefront trims are going to be in dark gray, and there are also new light fixtures on this façade. Here you will see the Schaub’s, which is mimicking the other kind of tannish-gray combination, except that it has this unique graphic print, which is on the sample board before you. It gives it a unique look, but also maintains its character and differentiates it from the other tenants, that it is a different tenant. Again, it’s this gray and beige kind of color combination throughout, using rectangular forms, cleaner awnings, going away from the existing canvas awning to a metal and wooden awning. There will be new exterior light sconces on the Schaub’s as well. And then, the recessed entry, because Schaub’s does have sort of a recessed entry at the bottom, there’s going to be new limestone, kind of porcelain tile flooring in there to kind of change over from the market plaza of concrete floor to, now you’re entering into the Schaub’s tenant space. It’s kind of a transition. Here, we can see the façade improvements for that common back-of-house area, which is between The Melt and Pacific Catch. On the left you can see the existing condition. Again, it’s the old arch, and it’s being changed to this rectangular form, again, matching Pacific Catch and the greater market area with more rectangular forms. It is in this kind of neutral pattern, you know, beige and light grays and earth tones. It looks more modernized, but it also still looks like it’s not a tenant space. It appears like it is an employee space, or some other access not for the public. In reviewing the project, staff considered the bicycle parking for the area. With all these upgrades, it’s going to become more of a draw for this area. With Pacific Catch under construction, and then, these three tenant spaces being renovated, we felt that there should be more bicycle parking located in this area. On the Pacific Catch side of the market space, which is further up the drive aisle from this space, there are a number of bike racks that are going to be replaced there. They are taken out currently because of construction, but they will be replaced. That left side, if you’re looking at this market plaza from Sand Hill, is covered with short-term bicycle parking, but the right side didn’t have any. We conditioned that three short-term bike racks be located here in this location as you enter from Sand Hill at Plum Lane. It’s currently in front of the Sprinkle’s location, so that would help increase the bicycle parking for the shopping center overall, and for the capacity of bicycle parking in this location of the shopping center. Here’s a site plan overview. You can see the mature trees there, and there is some new tree grates proposed. These are similar to those that were proposed for Pacific Catch. They are the heel proof, so you could easily walk over them, no matter what kind of shoes you are wearing. Or, if you have a stroller, or if you have some kind of walker or wheelchair, which expands the pedestrian walkable surface area. That is an improvement to the plaza overall. Also included here is location of planter boxes, new planter boxes in front of Schaub’s and Sigona's. In front of the Schaub’s, you’ll see these little green dots at each pillar of the façade. That’s a small planter. Where the Sigona's wraps around into the interior corridor of the subcommittee, there are these larger planter boxes there, which currently don’t exist. Again, this is an existing photo. You can see the tree wells don’t have any kind of grates at all, so it does limit a bit of the walkable, comfortable surface. The tree grates would be a significant improvement to this area. Just an overview of the landscaping. The project proposes to retain all of the trees. None of the trees will be removed. They will remain. Again, the new planter boxes around Schaub’s and Sigona's. However, a landscape plan with the actual plant selection was not provided for the ARB to review. The size of the planters would limit the total number of plants, so, again, the planter boxes in front of Schaub’s are small and probably for a singular plant. Maybe some type of grass or something -- it’s shown on Sheet A-102 – while other planters, they are larger and provide some opportunity for some variation. Staff recommends that the Board discuss the landscape options for this location. It is still limited. It’s not very involved City of Palo Alto Page 4 landscaping, so we would appreciate your feedback on that. Here is the signage, just some of the tenant spaces again; the renderings. Currently, there are three signs for Sigona's, four for Schaub’s, and two for Cocola. Each tenant space has a blade sign and a main façade sign, and then, a secondary façade sign. One thing that was noted was the Schaub’s main façade, which faces the Sand Hill entry before it angles into the market plaza, there was a sign proposed to be directly above an existing bench, which is adjacent to the Sprinkle’s tenant space. That sign would not meet the master tenant façade guidelines for the shopping center, so that was conditioned to be removed because it would be a secondary sign on a primary wall. There is a similar sign on the other wall to the left of this rendering, and that is where secondary signs would go, so that would remain. Key considerations for the ARB would be the applicability to policy documents of the Master Tenant Façade and Sign Program; architectural design, theme, cohesiveness and quality of materials; and comments and feedback for the landscaping. Staff recommends that the ARB recommend approval to the proposed project to the Director of Planning and Development Services based on the findings and subject to the conditions of approval, with a requirement for the landscaping selection to be reviewed and approved by the ARB subcommittee. That concludes staff’s presentation. Chair Baltay: Thank you, Sam. Next, the applicant, do you have a presentation for us? You’ll have 10 minutes to speak. Jason Smith, Land Shark Development Services: Good morning, Board members. Chair Baltay: If you could state and spell your name for the record. You’ll have 10 minutes. Mr. Smith: Jason Smith [spells name], with Land Shark Development Services. Matt Woods, GHA Design: Matt Woods with GHA Design [spells name]. Chair Baltay: Thank you. Mr. Woods: Sam actually picked up on 90 percent of our design. We speak a little bit as to the “why.” This is an exterior design project for us, specially looking at vertical surfaces and horizontal surfaces in this market area. The intention, as you know, if you’ve walked it, it’s not grubby, but it’s getting a little unsafe in some areas. I’ve personally actually watched people trip in the landscape zone where the trees or sitting, so that’s kind of driving a little bit of this. This wasn’t initially part of the project. It was really an elevation project at first, and we kind of brought this part back. Our push and our goal, I think, is really to get the hardscape going prior to, actually completed prior to shopping season, which is in November, and get all that taken care of, and then, come back later and rework all the facades for the tenants after the shopping season. Again, the hardscape in this area, we’d do all new paving areas – go to that one sheet; the next one – this kind of shows the boundaries of all the paving areas. Start from Pacific Catch. They move around… Is there a pointer, or something? Or no? You can’t do that? Right in front of Pacific Catch, there is one little tiny spot where we’re adjusting the curb. That’s to meet our 10-foot radius in front of the seating zone that’s already out there. Everything else holds its line. We hold the lease lines; we hold the exterior façade lines. We’re pulling back in the full depth of Sigona's, and we move over outside a shop. There’s a tiny tiled area in there which actually breaches their lease line, so we’re going to do concrete hardscape up to their lease line. From there, in, is really there’s, but we’re going to finish that off for them with that concrete-looking porcelain tile that you saw in the package. All new tree grates, something you can walk across. Right now, you can’t navigate easily in a wheelchair or a stroller, and of course, with the furniture and stuff, it shuffles around a little bit here and there. We’re trying to tidy all that stuff up and just make it very navigable and much cleaner. Let’s go to the exterior stuff. We can talk real quick. The facades here, they’re all existing tenants, they are existing storefronts, so we’re not adjusting the storefronts. We’re just going through and cleaning everything, repainting, resurfacing. All the stucco is going to be resurfaces, patched, repaired and repainted. And then, we’ve applied some sort of a trellis element in front of a few of them, [inaudible] façade. Rearranged their signage so they have better visuals. The signs that you saw are all internally illuminated, but it’s halo, so it’s not shining back out to the parking lot or back towards the street. There are a couple tiny letters that say, like, “meat” and “fish” and that. Those are push-through acrylics, and they do shine, but they don’t blast light the same way. We’re trying City of Palo Alto Page 5 to keep everything low-key retail and pretty sharp looking. The Schaub’s version, that actually is going to have a skin treatment on there, which is a painterly, so more like silkscreen on site. That’s going to give it a little bit of rusticated look to it. That will fit in with the trees and everything that are there and keep it a little bit more natural and softer. As you wrap the corner to the concourse, there is an existing mural. We’re staying completely out of that, and I think our upper left elevation kind of shows the boundaries of how that tenant jobs around there. We’re trying to keep that really clean, as well. Keeping on that particular tenant, that corner, it is an existing corner that wraps on a bit of a roll. They have a tile treatment that comes down from the lower two feet of the façade and rolls into the walking way. It’s kind of decaying right now, so that is being removed, and that’s where those planters are going. It’s kind of replacing that, puts the space back in there for us. I think that’s relatively it. Chair Baltay: Okay, thank you very much. Do we have any questions of either the applicant or staff? David, do you? Board Member Hirsch: Just starting where you ended up, the planters that you’re planning for the return. There’s a certain base height to the building before the beginning of the window line. Are you matching that window line with the planters, and is it sufficient to provide depth for planters? Mr. Woods: It’s a sufficient planter. There’s actually a landscape architect that is in retainer with the center, and they’ll be looking at all the actual planters. Board Member Hirsch: Okay, good. It’s one step out from your responsibility, then. Mr. Woods: My responsibility, right. Board Member Hirsch: Okay. You know… Board Member Lew: David, there are cut… The planters are on the materials sheet. Eight hundred. And the heights are listed, like 24 and 30 inches. Board Member Hirsch: Which does match up. Mr. Woods: Yeah, it matches up. Board Member Hirsch: Okay. Mr. Smith: And the specific plants themselves are being reviewed and proposed by the onsite landscape architect for the shopping center. Board Member Hirsch: Okay, fine. Actually, we’ll see a landscape plan a little later on? Is that what’s going to happen with this? Mr. Gutierrez: Yes. We recommended approval of the project with a subcommittee requirement for the landscaping to come back. Board Member Hirsch: Okay, because I noticed that there’s a dead tree and a dying tree, so there’s really some landscape issues, I think, that yet need to be addressed. Also, the paving is divided between concrete paving and octangle paving, so we really haven’t seen that in this drawing to date, right? It’s yet to come for us to review completely? Chair Baltay: I think that’s right, David. They’ve said that the landscape package isn’t complete yet. Are there any other questions? Alex, if you could? City of Palo Alto Page 6 Board Member Lew: I have a question about bollards. Mr. Woods: Could I speak to the landscape for a second? Chair Baltay: Sure. Mr. Woods: Yes, existing right now, the hardscape, it’s two different materials, and they actually settle different, and that’s what’s been causing a bit of our problems. The new hardscape going in is the same space, same locations, but it’s all concrete. It’s all the same materials. We don’t have to have [inaudible] from materials and things adjusting and shuffling over time. The tree grates will fill the same spots, and hopefully, just kind of, you know, clean and even surfaces all around. Board Member Hirsch: Okay. Board Member Lew: I have a question about bollards. I think there are some existing illuminated bollards on site. Mr. Woods: Correct. Board Member Lew: And I think the plans are showing some new bollards, and maybe more of them. And then, they’re not being shown on any… I don’t think we have a cut sheet, and nothing showing up on the photometrics, so I’m assuming that they’re not illuminated. I was wondering if you had a thought about what’s happening there. Because I think you do need something because it’s a curbless condition. Mr. Woods: There are bollards. We’ll make sure they’re illuminated. Board Member Lew: Yeah, so, and then… I think maybe I would suggest, maybe for the Board, is that that come back to subcommittee for review. Mr. Smith: To adjust the photometric to identify those? Board Member Lew: Yeah, and then, I don’t think we have a cut sheet for them, and I think the existing conditions that I see now are, there may, like, four or five illuminated ones, and there may be one or two metal poles. Maybe we just review all of that to make sure that it’s all coordinated, and it looks good. Chair Baltay: Thanks, Alex. Osma, your question? Vice Chair Thompson: I had a question on the patterning, the graphic. In our elevations, we’re showing a bigger scale than what’s here on the material board, and I just wanted to clarify, at what scale is this graphic going to have in it? Is our elevations more accurate, or is this accurate? Mr. Woods: The elevations are more accurate. That’s really, kind of a sample. Even for our own use. This would be mocked up on site so we kind of adjust the scale and make sure it’s right. It’s artist driven, so what you see here is the direction we’ll go, and we’ll kind of work from there in a mock-up form. Vice Chair Thompson: I see. Okay. Thank you. I’m sorry, I had one more. The extra entrance next to the Pacific Catch, next to The Melt, which…? I haven’t seen an elevation of it outlining which materials and which wood and which paint is going on there. Do we have that? Mr. Woods: A-601. Vice Chair Thompson: Ah, thank you. Chair Baltay: Okay, any further questions? Then I’ll note that I don’t have any speaker cards here for members of the public. Is there anyone here who wishes to address the Board on this issue? Okay, then City of Palo Alto Page 7 I’ll bring the issue back to the Board. You gentlemen can sit or stand as you like. Who wants to start us off? David? Board Member Hirsch: Okay. In general, very nice presentation, with one comment about that. Labels. When you have three different stores like this in different drawings, it would be very nice if you had labeled each one so we could relate them one to the next. It’s very hard to read the drawings without proper labels. I mean, I think, just to go over a list of items that you’ve done, you’ve worked on here. Starting with the landscaping, filling in the tree grates, I noticed that there’s uplighting under the trees at present, and also some electrical boxes within the tree pits, and you have a very nice pattern of a rectangular box- like element that’s flat to the paving, which is a big help to pedestrian movement there. But it doesn’t really indicate what’s going to happen with those particular utilities within the tree grate. Are they cut out of the present existing…? Or, you know, are they cut out of the new grates that’s going to be applied? Mr. Woods: Yes. Board Member Hirsch: It will be adjusted accordingly to whatever is in there? And is the lighting then going to stay in those locations? Mr. Woods: Presently, some of them are damaged. They will be replaced with new and energy efficient. Board Member Hirsch: Everything that you see, the utilities that are in the tree grate are going to remain? Mr. Woods: Yes. Board Member Hirsch: Okay. Well, it’s actually, in the daylight, it’s not such an attractive thing, with the wires going up the trees. Mr. Woods: Right. Board Member Hirsch: I don’t know. There might be some further consideration when you work on your landscaping, is how you electrify the tree lights, you know? And organize them for the trees, and how you see it during the day as well as, as beautiful as it might be at night. Mr. Woods: Right. Board Member Hirsch: That’s just a caution that hopefully could come back during our committee meeting. One of my biggest concerns is the pedestrian movement through this area. We’ve talked about it at Pacific Catch when we were reviewing that project. It’s still a consideration because it’s a sort of dense collection of trees, seating arrangements. There’s kind of a limited area between the trees where you could possibly walk. If you walk in front of Pacific Catch, it’s a wider area. And then, with Sigona's… Well, at night, if they pull it in, it’s going to be much more space, but during the day, they’ve taken up a lot of the plaza area. So, hopefully, in a future plan, you could sort of… Maybe the whole shopping center could work on this thought about how movement is through that area, to keep it open. It could certainly be improved by reducing the number of seats since you already provide passage over the tree grate area, and it isn’t a trip hazard anymore. Then, consider the flow of traffic through. Also consider how people will get to their car from there, because instead of having to jog one way or another, look at the crosswalk relationship there as well. I think that becomes very significant at that intersection. It’s quite a nice place to come to the mall, you know? As one of the entries, I really always enjoyed it because of the variety of commercial at that particular location. Having it becoming a market area is nice, and it’s going to be even improved, I think, with Pacific Catch and the attraction of that retailer. But, therefore, all the more important to consider how the traffic moves through the area, the pedestrian traffic. I like the lighting improvements. I think the fact that you’re putting lighting at the end of the canopies and it’s going to light further out into the plazas are a really great improvement. I had a question before about how the lighting fixtures are, the ones that are there in the plaza, the high ones, they’re going to remain? City of Palo Alto Page 8 Mr. Woods: They’re going to remain. Board Member Hirsch: Those exact ones will remain. I guess that’s acceptable, you know? Mr. Woods: They’ll be cleaned up and refurbished, yeah. Board Member Hirsch: Okay. Moving on to… I am concerned that, you know, if you looked at your section, some of the light fixtures, although I really like the idea of low light fixture sconces on the buildings, these are going to be eight, nine feet high? Eight or nine feet above…? They’re fairly low if you consider people moving, tall people moving by, and maintenance of those. I’m just, without wanting to see them removed somehow, I’d like some assurance for your own sake that somebody tall won’t come along and damage those, you know, that area. It’s a consideration, you know? But it’s nice to have them low. I mean, I really like that. I notice that there’s air conditionings on Sigona's doorframes there, so it won’t look as clean as what you’ve drawn, or how will you deal with the air…? There’s an air door machinery that they have installed there. What will happen with that? Mr. Smith: The air curtains are being proposed to be inside the building, so they will no longer be on the exterior of the building. Board Member Hirsch: Excellent. That will help clean up that façade tremendously. I noticed, I think there’s kind of an error in one of your section drawings here. Well, I can’t see it right now. It’s sort of looking one way and not looking the other way. You can go back and take a look. It just seems like it shows the wood patterning coming down lower than the section would show it. But, whatever. The patterning is clear enough if you go back and rethink it as a reviewer, where it is with the patterning of the wood above. Which I think is excellently done, by the way, and such an improvement to the whole corner. Mr. Woods: Thank you. Board Member Hirsch: I mean, I think all the colors are kind of muted, the way you described them. I like the effect of that. I think it’s a very big improvement. I had some other thoughts. Hold on a second, here. Well, on the Cocola Bakery, it would have been so much nicer to see a demo drawing in some way, to see how you progressed from the rounded front of everything to the flatter look, which we aren’t getting in a large enough scale to really understand it. But looking a little more detailed, I think it comes across. In the sample panel you have that as… What is CONO-1 stand for, then? The thicker stone? Mr. Woods: That’s concrete, yes. Board Member Hirsch: That’s a concrete panel that’s going to go all the way up the…? Mr. Woods: That’s following the column line. Board Member Hirsch: Following the column line… Mr. Woods: Like a portal [crosstalk] Board Member Hirsch: … but rectangular now, now rounded. Mr. Woods: Right. Board Member Hirsch: All of that façade is being stripped off and replaced with the rectangular. Mr. Woods: The inset façade is where the arch is, and that gets [crosstalk]. Board Member Hirsch: Yeah. A single inset in the middle of it. City of Palo Alto Page 9 Mr. Woods: Yeah. Board Member Hirsch: And that’s where the light fixtures are. The inset. Mr. Woods: Oh, you’re on… I’m sorry, you’re on Cocola? Board Member Hirsch: Yeah. Well, I see them on the drawing, on A-400. Mr. Woods: Yeah, it’s a perimeter that goes around, follows the column lines. Board Member Hirsch: Yeah. Mr. Woods: It’s like a portal. Board Member Hirsch: It keeps the same kind of look but makes it a rectangular. Mr. Woods: Right. Exactly. Board Member Hirsch: I think that’s quite successful. Let’s see. I have a few more thoughts here. You know, in terms of the planters, I think there was a comment made they’re awfully small, and they’re really only going to take a single plant in each one. The ones in front of Schaub’s, they certainly look kind of fussy to me when you have more, a larger, planters around Sigona's. That seems to work rather. Of course, Sigona's is now going to lose a little of their area for, in the front, which at present is melon season there, so… But it’s a nice return with the planters, I think, in front, and I don’t know how those things get adjusted in the shopping center, but I agree that it’s a better way to do it, have it turn the corner there and give a little more elegance to an area that gets a bit sloppy with all of the fruit vending stuff out there. In that respect, it sort of makes me think that the areas that are pulled out are not part of the design effort really by themselves. Sort of the stuff that all that fruit and stuff is sitting on is not a design issue, I guess. And whatever Sigona's tends to want to put out there, they will be allowed to do so. We can’t get too fussy, I supposed, about how a commercial tenant uses their space like that. Ms. Gerhardt: Board Member Hirsch, if I may. David. Just related, you were asking about pedestrian trafficways, and now you’re talking about the sort of outside market area. I think some of the discussion we had with Pacific Catch was that we wanted sort of an eight-foot walkway free and clear of obstructions. It would be good for the Board to discuss – maybe we should be doing the same thing here – just where that area might be. Is it just in front of Sigona's? Because we already have a walkway in front of Pacific Catch, so if we just have the two walkways, maybe that would be good enough. But if we could talk about that. And then, you were saying something about a dead tree, so, I didn’t know where that was located. Is that just in the plaza area, or…? Board Member Hirsch: No, it was… I noted it. Yeah, it’s closer to Schaub’s. Well, I think, you know, there has to be some coordination between the shopping center and façade design. I know they are two distinct things, so, I’m sure the shopping center has been doing some excellent work. Mr. Smith: We’ll have the arborist look at the tree out there on site and confirm if it’s dead or if it needs… Board Member Hirsch: Yes. Now, as to the walkways, it really can’t be kind of in front of the two retail storefronts that easily because of the way Sigona's places its exterior uses into that plaza. There would too much of a jog, really, at that point, in order to make that work effectively. I think the shopping center could come to us, and I think distances, as mentioned, is a good basis on which to analyze that. Mr. Smith: And we are going to maintain an eight-foot clear space from the edge of any of the farmers market that gets pushed out, to light standards and the actual trees themselves. There will be an eight- foot clear maintained. City of Palo Alto Page 10 Board Member Hirsch: Eight foot clear through the trees, or…? Mr. Smith: No, the trees are existing, but from the edge of the display area to any obstructions, we’re going to maintain an eight-foot clear. And then, the main path of travel along the corridor where Pacific Catch is, they’re maintaining a clear path there as well. Board Member Hirsch: What I saw, however, is that when you put the furniture out there, that there is no eight-foot clear area. Mr. Smith: Correct, through the furniture areas. But around the perimeter, the edges up against the markets itself, are going to keep an eight-foot clear. Board Member Hirsch: Yes, but you know when you travel that, you have to take quite a jog to get around there, to really get in front of Schaub’s and… It’s just not comfortable. I think if you really blow that up at a larger scale and really think about how people are moving, you’ll question it and perhaps reduce the amount of seating in the plaza to make it work. Mr. Woods: We can provide a drawing of that as well, with red lines to kind of show where the flow is. Board Member Hirsch: Yes. Mr. Woods: Right now, with those landscape pockets around the trees, they’ve fallen enough that you can’t have chairs and tables overlap that. Board Member Hirsch: Yes. Mr. Woods: All the furniture is actually pushed into the hard surfaces, which is not ideal. Once this new stuff is all set up, it will make it a lot more flexible, for sure. Board Member Hirsch: Okay. Mr. Woods: We’ll provide a drawing that shows the flow, the intended flow. Board Member Hirsch: Okay. You know, another thing about it is the drainage and the watering for those trees. How is that done? I mean, this is a landscape issue, but I don’t want it left to the very, very end here, because if the trees are not living or, you know, your arborists tell you you need something for that. Mr. Gutierrez: There is a full-time maintenance crew at the shopping center that maintains the trees, as well as all the planters in the shopping center. Board Member Hirsch: Well, of course, the planting looks fabulous all the time over there. I’m expecting that you will take a look at this one and it will look as good at some point. That’s all the comments I have. Thank you very much. I just want to say thank you for the presentation, with a caution that we love labels, and to make some of the text bigger so we can actually read it. I know that we can probably blow it up ourselves on our computers, but sometimes an emphasis on… For example, all of the samples here, when they’re three different facades, should be clearly delineated so we can make that comparison, the comparisons. Chair Baltay: Thank you, David. Alex? Board Member Lew: Thank you for your presentation. I think the design is very handsome. I think you’ve worked really hard to sort of differentiate each storefront, but also fit it in with the new Pacific Catch. I think that’s actually very successful, so I can recommend approval. And then, in addition to the staff conditions of approval, I think I would add that we look at the bollard, especially if it’s illuminated. I do support the condition of approval to review the landscaping. I do support the staff’s recommended addition City of Palo Alto Page 11 of bike racks near Schaub’s. I think that’s all that I have. And I think that’s all that I have, so, that’s where I am. Chair Baltay: Wonderful. Thank you, Alex. Osma? Vice Chair Thompson: Hi, there. Thank you for your presentation. I will get right into it. The detailing of the wood slats gives me a little cause for concern. The material that you’ve presented here is a laminate that has, like, the edges are showing black, and the detail that you’ve drawn doesn’t really show exactly which side the black edges are, if it’s up-down or left-right. Kind of makes me wonder, regardless, why wouldn’t you go with the real wood that you could see from all sides? I mean, really, what’s important is from the pedestrian eye, that you’re seeing it from underneath, and then, also, all the sides. And I don’t know how that laminate is going to get that effect for you. For the wood, I feel like for the HPL, which is the light-colored wood that’s underneath the awnings, that one can be detailed with the awning that you’ve selected, so that the black edges are not so visible. But everywhere else that you have a trellis, I think that detail is actually really crucial. Because what you have right now in that area of the shopping center that’s really nice is you have a lot of relief. You’ve got the arches that are providing this depth, and then you have these gigantic awnings that are super cozy, you know, they have this breath of space and relief. And the design that we’re looking at today takes away a lot of that. There’s a lot of flat planes, and I see that you’re attempting to get… The things that are giving you the relief are the wood trellis and your concrete at the Cocola’s, you know, your concrete pilasters. But if those things aren’t detailed right, you’re going to just get a really super-flat façade that might lose a lot of the complexity and detail and coziness that’s currently there, despite the sort of grubbiness. That’s really crucial, and I think you want that also for that area. I feel like if we do go to subcommittee, that’s really important. I think that material for the wood trellis and, you know, if you’re changing it to real, I understand there’s maintenance issues with that, but there’s also an aesthetic issue with the wood that you have right now. I’m not really sold on that material right now. Also, with the patterning of Schaub’s, I really like the design concept for that. I do agree that maybe that scale is too small. I’m not sure if what you have right now is the right scale. It might be too large. I think you’re right; the mock-up will definitely make that real. But I do, what I think is important about that is that granularity that kind of gives it that sort of human scale that makes it really nice to interact with on the ground. So, I appreciate the design intent for that. Those were kind of my two main items. Oh, and I’m not sure how the rest of the Board feels about this. I’m a little concerned about Schaub’s just being really quite dark. I don’t know if there’s enough contrast to make it seem lighter. I’m a little worried that the color scheme is too dark for the area. I’ll just put that out there. I don’t know if it’s a deal- breaker for me, but it does give me worry. Even right now, looking at the elevations, the signage is really muddy. It’s a little hard to see. There’s no saying that that wouldn’t also happen in real life, when you actually build this, you know, if you’re using a dark lettering on something that’s kind of black. I wonder if there needs to be a bit more contrast with the Schaub palette. Okay. I’ll leave it there. Oh, sorry, one more thing. The contrast of wood color. In the Cocola Bakery, you have the lighter-color wood, which I think makes sense for that palette. I notice that in the Sigona's palette, you’re using that wood, and the dark wood. You’re using dark wood on the wall, and then, the light wood underneath. They touch. There’s kind of that place where the Sigona's sign comes down. I don’t know that that’s the best use of that. I don’t know. It might be worth rethinking. But that might change if you change the wood slat design. Anyway, that’s all. Thank you. Chair Baltay: Okay, thank you, Osma. I confess, my first thought about this whole project was, “Gee, this plaza really does look a little bit run down.” I hand it to you guys for taking the initiative to improve it. It never really crossed my mind before. I’ve been through it a hundred times and it’s a wonderful space. But sitting there, the tree grates are a hazard, the buildings do look tired, so it’s great that you’re wanting to do something. I’d like to call my colleagues’ attention to the fact that, it seems to me that the bicycle racks are a great idea, and we really ought to have more than just three additional bike storages. Is that what you’re proposing, Sam, is that they add three spaces on the right-hand side? Mr. Gutierrez: Yes, it’s just three on the right-hand side. City of Palo Alto Page 12 Chair Baltay: It seems to me that this is a time where we might get a substantially bigger amount of bike storage, if possible. Board Member Lew: Three racks mean six spaces. Mr. Gutierrez: Correct. Chair Baltay: Six spaces? Mr. Gutierrez: Yes. Chair Baltay: Okay. That’s better. Mr. Gutierrez: A bike is on each side of each rack. Chair Baltay: Okay. And Pacific Catch, how many will be on that side, in front of their restaurant? Mr. Gutierrez: I believe there’s at least six, maybe nine. There’s a detail of it in the plan. One moment. Board Member Lew: It’s on the plans. Chair Baltay: I think I saw two racks of six on the plans, to the left of Pacific Catch as you’re facing it. Mr. Gutierrez: There’s 10. Chair Baltay: Ten there, okay. Mr. Gutierrez: On Sheet A-601. That would be capacity for 20 bikes. Chair Baltay: That makes me feel better then. Okay. I misread that thing. It seems to me that the bicycle parking is important. This is a really critical entrance, so I’d like to see us address that. My other thought looking at this, I generally agree with what everybody said, but coming back to David’s concerns about the pedestrian circulation, is that I think the planters in front of Schaub’s, at the corner there, maybe they’re a nice design idea, but I think they impede on the circulation. And probably they’re also just really making it more difficult for the market to operate. They always seem to have carts of melons and things like that there. It seems to me we’d be better without any planters whatsoever there. And perhaps in front of Schaub’s, too, where they just have very small, sort of fussy-looking planters. The plaza is full of trees as it is, and it’s such a bustling area. I’d like to hear my colleagues… Perhaps we don’t need those planters at all. Those are my two thoughts. I do agree with Osma’s comments about the use of the wood laminate. It’s probably not the right material because it is very one-dimensional. She made some very clever points about the relief and why that plaza has such a character to it. I think it would be wise to reconsider that. Counter to Osma’s comment about the dark frame, I rather like it, actually, Osma. I found that most of the colors in this proposal seem a little bit muted and sort of flat and restrained, and that dark frame with the interesting graphic pattern in front of it, I think is going to be dramatic. And a little bit of drama, I think, is a good thing here. It is dark, but I’m sort of enjoying the way it looks, at least in the renderings. Do my colleagues have any additional comments, responding to each other, or anything else? Board Member Lew: I did want to follow up on the wood slats, the faux wood slats. I would point to a project at Stanford. There’s the Mayfield housing on California Avenue, there’s two multifamily buildings there. And right at the entrance, there is a wood laminate slat entry system there. I think you’re right. The end grain is the giveaway, and that’s the weakness of the material. In this case, I think they’re using fairly small elements, and they’re high up, so I’m not quite as worried about it as if it were really right at the entry, like an entry door. I think the other issue that’s come up before, though, here in downtown, is a lot of times the building department won’t allow the wood, like, real wood, because it’s combustible. There are code issues with use of wood. And I think the Board has brought up many times before, that natural City of Palo Alto Page 13 wood is really high-maintenance, like, too high-maintenance, I would argue, for a commercial application. I don’t necessarily support changing the material, but I do understand the concern about the detailing with that. I think it does help that, in this location, that they are high up and they’re not at high level. And I think, Peter, you comment about the planters, I think I can go either way. I think I would just argue on the planting palette, that I think it’s going to be tricky. They’re in shade. I think it might be tricky to do a native planting palette there, in planters. And I think, like, former board member Furth had been pushing for native planting at Pacific Catch, and I didn’t necessarily agree with that. I think we should just try to get wildlife-friendly planting. I think you can pick, you can pick plants carefully. I think in this location it’s going to be harder, trickier than at Pacific Catch, just because you’re trying to do dry shade as… There are much fewer plants option than if it were in the sun. Anyway, I can recommend approval today. I’m happy, if you guys want more details, to come back. I think I’m fine with that. Chair Baltay: David, any other ideas? Board Member Hirsch: Yes. I noticed when Sigona's turns the corner there, that there’s this area at the top of the window that’s recessed, and it’s in sort of a light panel, and it ends before the glass ending there. Sort of ends with a curve up to it. I notice you’re bringing all of the slats down over that area, so you’re going to be covering it, and it is doing to be painted a darker, or whatever, treated a little differently. But what exactly is happening at the window line there? It really ought to continue all the way across. Will you be carrying the fascia piece that’s set back all the way across that window? Mr. Woods: It’s an existing window. It actually rolls that corner. Board Member Hirsch: Oh, no, I’m not talking about the corner itself. I’m talking about the other end of that, the left-hand end. [Applicant looking through documents] Mr. Gutierrez: Sheet 901? Mr. Woods: Yeah, it’s a different stucco tone. Board Member Hirsch: Piece of sheet metal. Right, exactly. Some piece of, sheet metal piece that goes… It just doesn’t go continuously to the… If you look at your rendering on A-901, it doesn’t go above the man who is walking with the bags, above his head. It just doesn’t go all the way over to that wall. It ends with, sort of in front of a piece of glass that comes up. Mr. Woods: That might be a modeling flaw in our rendering. I’ll check into that, though, for sure. Board Member Hirsch: Yeah. Okay. But I appreciate the fact that you’re bringing that trellis, the… What do you call it? The wood frame pieces all the way down. And I really want to compliment you on not letting the top of the building just be yet another wasted piece of whatever, visually, and that you carry that all the way through. Because that scale is kind of critical to the way in which you treat the facades. I want to represent that, although I agree with Osma about some of the color treatment of it could be lightened up a bit, you know, that on the other hand, I think the overall palette is pretty good. And the fact that you’ve considered those parapet areas up high a part of the design here. And it sets that corner so that it makes a nice transition, in particular on A-901, where you’re now looking at the historic façade treatment further up, and make a neutral, you keep that neutral on the way to getting to that piece of work that’s on the wall, which is so much fun for the entry there. I just wanted to bring that particular detail to your mind because carrying the wood slats down is a good idea, but what if the piece you’re covering doesn’t extend all the way? Take a look at that, please. Again, just my concern, really, somehow ended up in the way in which the plaza flows, more than the facades, which I think are well done. Chair Baltay: I’d like to bring us to two issues I think we want to be sure and address. The circulation you’re talking about, David. If we all look at rendering A-901, that’s the corner of Sigona's, I think we should ask City of Palo Alto Page 14 ourselves whether those planters really are appropriate at all at that location. It seems to me that they’re impeding the circulation of the pathway past it, and they also block the storefront for the merchant. I’d like to hear everybody’s opinion on that. Alex already addressed it. And I’d also like to hear what the applicant thinks. Are those planters something you put in because you think they’re necessary, or because you really want them there? Why don’t we do the Board first. Osma, what do you think about them? Ms. Gerhardt: If we can also take a look at the site plan, which is A-102, because we do have, in front of Sigona's, there is sort of a… I don’t know if it’s a rectangle or triangle shape, but there is a lease area for the outdoor market. The use of that area extends beyond the façade. Maybe the applicant can better explain that. Chair Baltay: Jodie, you’re saying on A-102, the shaded blue area is the lease area in front of Sigona's? Ms. Gerhardt: No. The blue area is just the canopy. There’s a line further than that. Chair Baltay: Oh, I see. That’s the… Okay. And our concern is that the lease area restricts the traffic too much? I’ve heard you several times bring that up. Ms. Gerhardt: I don’t know that it’s too much, but it definitely does restrict traffic. What I’m thinking is outside of that… I mean, there’s sort of an outdoor market that goes with Sigona's, so I’m thinking that the eight feet would be around the outdoor market. Mr. Smith: That is correct, an eight-foot clearance would be maintained around that market area, once they put out their goods and their carts. Chair Baltay: Yeah, I think some of the confusion is that they frequently seem to exceed their lease area, and it’s all quaint and beautiful, European vegetable market, but it does get into the way of walking past it. Ms. Gerhardt: Potentially, that’s something that we can, you know, the hardscape is being redone, so maybe there can be some markers put into that hardscape about, to delineate that space. Maybe it’s just small corner markers, or something of that nature. Chair Baltay: It seems like a reasonable idea. Okay, so, we’re discussing the issues of the circulation going through and around that corner and such. Osma, what did you think? Vice Chair Thompson: I actually like the planters where they are. Sorry to disagree. I think, again, this is a cozy, it’s a cozy spot, and the change in the facades is going to make it less cozy. That’s just the reality of it. Adding more green and… I think it’s worthwhile. I think it will enhance the area. I don’t think it will take away. Chair Baltay: Okay. Did you want to add something on that, David? Board Member Hirsch: Yeah, no, I think the planters are useful because they create a little separation between the base, which is really rather boring, and the window display, which is always fascinating there with that store. I think it’s a softening of the corner, and I think in a way, it kind of leads to, when you’re looking down here, because there’s no other planters in the middle here, leads to coming to an area of nature around the corner. And I think it just softens the corner at the base. It’s an interesting window return with that curve happening at that point. And I’m happy to see that the chamfered wall is removed, and I think you need something in its place, so I’m okay with the planters. It gets kind of tight with Cocola’s across the way, at that point, and there’s no drawing that shows what Cocola’s, when they put their furniture out there. Once again, if their furniture is way out, it’s going to create a tighter junction. I think maybe the shopping center should consider how to hold them back a little bit with their seating in order to make that a comfortable corner for pedestrians. But just to reflect on that, I do like the planters. I think they serve a useful purpose at that corner. City of Palo Alto Page 15 Chair Baltay: I had offered the applicant a chance to address the same question, though it seems that the planters are going to stay. Any thoughts additional to that, or are we…? Mr. Woods: Just a quick history. I mean, we weren’t doing the hardscape at first, and that chamfer that came down was, again, decaying. When you remove it, it was bare underneath there, so we were going to put in a built-in planter. And then, it became a bit of an issue, tying that into some of the older structure, and we went with just, you know, loose planters. Chair Baltay: Okay, thank you. Mr. Woods: We like the idea, the same way. The wall came down, it broke down the mass a little bit and added a bit more green. Mr. Smith: And as far as the seating is concerned along the bakery there, I think currently they have a couple four-tops out there, which really kind of restricts the amount of space that comes out form that wall. And they would still maintain that area, but we would keep an eight-foot clear, and we can identify that in the drawing set. If that’s what we’re looking for. Chair Baltay: Okay, thank you. Is the Board in consensus of perhaps requesting some sort of paving pattern or some other detailing to reflect the leasehold area for the market, for Sigona's, as Jodie mentioned might be a good idea? And does the applicant, again, is that something you can support? Mr. Woods: I would think since it’s all new concrete, we could pour in a potential lease line, like a constraint for them. That shouldn’t be an issue. An impressed line. Not a trip hazard. Mr. Smith: Provide some markers. Mr. Woods: Yeah. Chair Baltay: And to the Board, though, is that something should be done? I mean, this is a legal definition. Sometimes maybe the overreach by Sigona's adds to the coziness, right? Vice Chair Thompson: I would be in support of that if it was done artfully. I’m a little nervous about just saying throw anything out there. But the floor pattern paving is a great opportunity for something really awesome, and right now, there is something really interesting down there, you know, with how the trees are kind of framed. I’m actually all for enhancing the floor pattern paving if it serves dual purposes. That would be good. Board Member Lew: The plans say that the existing paving is to remain, so I think we have a discrepancy here. Board Member Hirsch: You know, I just, I mean, the question I think is really, can the shopping center enforce the line in some way? I think it’s an area that is for everybody’s use. It’s a public area, and as such, it really shouldn’t have specific markers in it like that because it changes the impact of the whole thing. In the evening, when they take those things down, late-night shopping would still continue. I’m not quite sure about the timing of when they bring their fruit and vegetables in, in the market there, but unless it’s designated to them and they maintain something out there all the time, I think it should be something that the shopping center enforces. This is the line, you know? My feeling is I wouldn’t want to see a separate marker. Chair Baltay: Thank you, David. I wonder if we could get some clarification as to the extent of the pavement replacement from the applicant. There’s some confusion up here, at least. Mr. Woods: Page 103, A-103? City of Palo Alto Page 16 Chair Baltay: Yes. That light red [inaudible] area with the heavy red dash line around it. Is that…? Mr. Woods: The red dash line is the extreme limits, yes. Chair Baltay: Everything within that red dashed area is new pavement. Mr. Woods: Yes, correct. Chair Baltay: Okay. I think that’s what we’ve been assuming, so it’s good to have that out there. Vice Chair Thompson: And is the new pavement the square pattern that we’re looking at? Mr. Woods: That is the score line pattern that you see, yes. Vice Chair Thompson: Okay. What we’re discussing is potentially changing that score pattern, or the design down here? Mr. Woods: I think for a particular tenant – and I’ll just speak; I’m not a landlord, but I’ve been in the retail environment for quite a bit – is if you do something special, like, too special, and that tenant becomes something different, then you end up with something maybe unintended for a fashion tenant, or somebody down the road. Do you know what I’m saying? I think we can discreetly put some markers in there that, like, define an area. There’s a collaboration with the tenant. They’ll know when they’re breaching that line, or not. Chair Baltay: What I’ve heard is David was not in favor of a permanent marker; Osma, only so if it was done artfully. Alex, did you have…? Board Member Lew: I don’t have a preference. Chair Baltay: And I don’t have a preference. To me, that’s an individual owner’s decision as to how they want to enforce it. I think it’s a good idea, Jodie, but it is permanent. This is concrete. Mr. Woods: If I could add just a little bit. I mean, the amount of product this tenant brings out there, that’s your texture, that’s your defining line. That really reads very different, right? I think that helps. We’ll be basically doing an alternate material and covering it. Chair Baltay: Staff is hopeful that clearer delineation will result in better enforcement. Mr. Woods: Yes. Chair Baltay: Which is her goal. Mr. Woods: I agree. Mr. Woods: And it is justifiably an issue. It’s a cozy plaza, but there’s a lot of people walking through it. That’s what all our hesitation and hemming and hawing is about. But what I’ve heard from the Board is that we really need to see the details of the landscaping come back, perhaps on consent calendar. Let’s address the other issue Osma brought up, which was – and David, as well – some of the detailing of the buildings, the wood slats and the trellises and stuff. Is that something the applicant would feel comfortable putting together more details and reconsidering the wood slats, and coming back on a consent or subcommittee? Mr. Woods: Absolutely, yes. If I could say, the horizontal slats, that’s exactly the reasons, for being combustible. That simple detailing between, that dark line goes away over height, but it’s how you treat City of Palo Alto Page 17 that exterior edge that makes it look like it still has a real thickness, like real wood. The façade work, we’ll look at that again for you and define it a little clearer. We agree with you for there. It has to look authentic. Chair Baltay: We have tremendous regard for your capacity, but would like to see some evidence that that’s going to look correct. I think that’s fair to say. Nobody is saying it should be natural wood, perhaps. MOTION Chair Baltay: Okay, with those two, are we ready for a motion, then? Who wants to give it a stab? Ms. Gerhardt: I can summarize, if need be. Chair Baltay: Why don’t you do that, Jodie, please. Ms. Gerhardt: Okay. What I was hearing is that we’d like to see, on the eight-foot clear for pedestrians, that there would be a walkway in front of Pacific Catch, and that there would also be a walkway in front of Sigona's and Schaub’s, sort of going that way. There would be two different eight-foot clear pathways. Potentially, some corner markers, so that we know how far out the Sigona's Market should be, but we’ll kind of test out… Chair Baltay: Extremely discreet. Ms. Gerhardt: Yes. Yes. I’m thinking the surveyor, little dots, really. And then, we had some conversation about the wood slats. We’d like some additional details about how those end pieces are going to look, you know, if there’s maybe a different material. We’ll look into that detail. Bike racks. It sounds like we have sufficient bike racks, but we don’t have the details for those. I think the shopping center has a standard, so that will be a quick fix. The landscaping, we need all that goes with the landscaping plan. The bollard details, we need those, and potentially any photometrics that come with that. Yeah, related to the landscape plan, we understand that, given it’s a shaded area, maybe it’s not going to be fully native, but we’ll do wildlife-friendly planting. The darker trim, it sounds like there wasn’t consensus on that, so maybe we’ll leave the darker trim for Schaub’s alone. There was a question about the sconces being nine feet, that maybe that was too low, so I don’t know if we want to include some further review about the scones. And, Board Member Hirsch had conversations about the uplighting in the tree grates, that kind of area. I don’t know if we need to look at that further. That was it. Chair Baltay: Who wants to make a motion? Let’s get this done. Board Member Lew: I will make a motion that we approve the project, with… Let’s see, we’ve got Jodie’s six… You listed nine potential items, so I would… I think my motion is to include the first six. Ms. Gerhardt: So, circulation… Board Member Lew: Circulation… Ms. Gerhardt: …markers… Board Member Lew: … the corner marker, review… Ms. Gerhardt: Wood slats. Board Member Lew: I’d say consider the wood slat detailing. And you say that it’s the, it’s a faux wood slat detailing, right? Bike rack cut sheet; submit the landscape plan, bollards, cut sheets, and photometric. With regard to item 7, the dark color, which is number 12, I would suggest that the Board, if the Board has concerns about that, that the subcommittee could review it on site, like, the pattern of the stenciling, but also the color of number 12. You could review that on site if you want. The sconce height seems normal City of Palo Alto Page 18 to me. I think that’s fairly typical. And then, the uplight, the existing tree up-lights, I think that there is, there isn’t a cut sheet in the packet, but I think the applicant is saying that those are being refurbished, and we can just put that in as noted. That those are just existing fixtures that are going to be reworked. I think the motion is just for the first six items. Chair Baltay: Okay, so moved. Anyone want to second that? Vice Chair Thompson: I have a question. Is paint 12 also part of the review in subcommittee? Board Member Lew: I haven’t included it. I’m throwing it out to you. Because that’s your… It depends on how you want to do it. Chair Baltay: Let’s get the motion seconded, and then we can make amendments. Board Member Lew: You can amend it. Chair Baltay: I will second that motion. Does anyone want to make an amendment. Why don’t you try? Vice Chair Thompson: Okay. Could I make an amendment, that we review paint 12, and… Sorry, this is a quick question of the applicant. The coloring is paint 12 over paint 2, correct? Maybe just a bit more detailing on Schaub’s. Board Member Lew: I’ll accept the amendment. Chair Baltay: Okay, that’s fine with me as well, so, we’re going to add a seventh item, which is regarding having the portal frame color and the patterning come back to the subcommittee as well. Board Member Hirsch: I would like to add to the amendment the uplighting in the planters because it’s more than just uplighting. There are electrical boxes. They’re quite large and interrupt… Chair Baltay: Let’s be specific, though, David. What are we asking them to do in that amendment? Board Member Hirsch: Well, exactly Jodie’s, one of Jodie’s lists. I’d like to keep it in. Chair Baltay: What are asking them to do regarding the uplighting? Board Member Hirsch: I’m sorry? Chair Baltay: What are asking them to do regarding the uplighting that’s existing? Board Member Hirsch: Show exactly how it interrupts or will interrupt all of the elements that are part of the planting box. Board Member Lew: I will accept that. Chair Baltay: You will accept that? Board Member Lew: To me, it’s a coordination issue. I looked at the utilities yesterday. I saw them, and I thought about… I mean, I considered that in the tree grates and stuff. And I think that’s just part of being an architect and working with a contractor. I don’t really know that the Board can… I don’t really know what the Board can do about that. Just saying that it is a concern that we have. Chair Baltay: Okay, so, uplighting in the trees will also come back to the subcommittee, with further detail of how that’s going to be executed. City of Palo Alto Page 19 Ms. Gerhardt: Is that you seconding? Chair Baltay: I agree with that, as well. Ms. Gerhardt: Okay. Chair Baltay: Let’s put that on the… Ms. Gerhardt: Okay, so, two friendly amendments. Chair Baltay: Two friendly amendments. With that, are we ready to vote? All those in favor? Opposed. Okay, the motion carries 4-0. MOTION PASSES 4-0. Chair Baltay: Thank you very much. Mr. Woods: Thank you very much. Ms. Gerhardt: I’m confirming this is approved with subcommittee, correct? Chair Baltay: To the subcommittee, yes, of course. Ms. Gerhardt: Thank you. Chair Baltay: Okay, why don’t we get done? Study Session – None Approval of Minutes 4. Draft Architectural Review Board Meeting Minutes for August 1, 2019. Chair Baltay: I wanted to hear from Alex, but first we have minutes from August 1st. Do we have any comments? Otherwise, anyone willing to make a motion for us? Board Member Lew: I will move that we approve the minutes for August 1st. Board Member Hirsch: Second that. Chair Baltay: Moved and seconded. All those in favor? Opposed. Motion carries 4-0. MOTION PASSES 4-0. Subcommittee Items Chair Baltay: We don’t have any subcommittee items today. Board Member Questions, Comments or Announcements 5. North of Ventura Coordinated Area Plan (NVCAP) Chair Baltay: Next item is a report from Board Member Lew regarding the North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan. I’m hoping you have something to bring to us today about that, Alex. Board Member Lew: Yes. On August 19th, the City Council reviewed the additional services proposal from staff, and it passed on a 4-3 vote, so it was pretty close. Additional services were for the historic component City of Palo Alto Page 20 of the project, both adding to the scope, right? Council agreed to add the historic review as one of the goals of the project, and the funding for that. Also, there was additional services for the creek, to try to enhance the concrete channel, and making it something more wildlife and naturalistic. That was on the 19th. That same week, there was the committee meeting here at City Hall. That was not well attended by the committee, and that was the first meeting we’ve had since May. But the meetings are going to resume, and I think the next one is on the 21st, I think. Let me see. The 19th. Here, hold on a second, let me get the meeting. I have the meeting date here somewhere. And then, also, on August 19th, the Council did interview ARB candidates, and they will be voting on that next Monday. Chair Baltay: Regarding the Ventura plan, I’m just curious if we have any more content that you can report back to us, on what the group has been doing. I hear you saying there’s nothing. Board Member Lew: The group has not met since May. It’s been on hold. Board Member Hirsch: I have something to add to that. The major issue that really has come up is that Fry’s, as being a potentially historic structure, or historic story about Palo Alto. There’s more of a push at this point to maintain the building, and that’s a really ambiguous issue now, whether you maintain the building or maintain the cultural idea of it in some symbolic way. Everybody has been stating that a plaque is just not symbolic, and that something more significant has to be presented somehow in this whole project in order for that cultural history to be maintained on the site. That’s a big open question because, of course, there are those who are promoting keeping the whole Fry’s building, which is most of the site. And, in fact, that raises big issues with a development concept here because, of course, Fry’s building would preclude usefulness as a real housing site. That conflict is going to go on for quite a long time, so now, they’ve sort of proposed that we’re talking about a 10- or 20-year period of time, between now and when anything could happen to that site, which is quite a big issue because it’s one of the last two really remaining major sites in the whole city that could afford significant housing. That just seems to be the major issue of the project at this point. I mean, I think that, as it affects us in some way, it has to do with how historical buildings or buildings that represent some historical-cultural factor for Palo Alto, how they affect the future of Palo Alto, since we are under pressure to provide housing here. What do we do? Do we respond to that issue ourselves in some way? Chair Baltay: Okay, I think that’s noted to Alex, that that’s an issue. Right? Board Member Lew: Yes. There is an issue about the founder of the cannery. And then, I think the other thing is that the Chinese owner of that died, and then, and the cannery continued afterwards for many years, and it expanded after that. And the building was built over time. It was not just built, you know, it’s not just one big building. It’s a conglomeration of many buildings added over time. And then, I think the other issue is that the NVCAP is a long-term zoning change. It’s not a short-term document. And the boundary of the site is much larger than the Fry’s site, so there are still other possibilities that can happen in the area to add housing. Anyway, it’s going to be… But I think David is right. It’s going to come down to, like, no growth, people using historic, the historic issue as a wedge topic, and I think there are going to be advocates for housing that are going to push for more housing. And that’s the Palo Alto process. And the meeting, I did… Well, the best model is, that I think people are happy with is, is the SOFA project on the Old Palo Alto medical clinic, and I think generally, people are happy with that project. The next meeting tentatively is set for September 24th, here at City Hall, in the lobby conference room. Chair Baltay: Okay, thank you. I look forward to hearing further feedback on that issue. Anything else? Okay, with that, we are adjourned. Thank you very much, everybody. Adjournment