Laserfiche WebLink
18 acre site. He felt the structures are more appropriate in the <br />Meyer or Hacienda centers. <br />Chairman Wilson addressed the 18 acre site and Mr. Lee reviewed <br />the recommendation of the residential review committee. <br />Dick Hunt, 7266 Foothill Road,said he can't see this property <br />from his residence but he is a neighbor. He doesn't felt a glass <br />edifice belongs in the neighborhood. <br />Al Holling, 632 Romero Court, was against a structure of two <br />stories in height. Commissioner Michelotti asked if the speaker <br />would support a two story building. Mr. Holling also expressed <br />concerns with traffic generation. <br />Carolyn Hunt, 7266 Foothill Road, spoke against this project <br />because of traffic. <br />Chili Barlow, 6723 Alisal Street, spoke to the drainage <br />indicating that when Carriage Gardens was put in, a 6' pipe was <br />also installed for drainage and it is half-filled with silt. <br />The public hearing was closed. <br />Mr. Bras rebutted the comments of the speaker. They are prepared <br />to address the drainage problem and are prepared to install two <br />6' box culverts. The zoning allows the use. A two-story <br />solution would probably make the project economically infeasible. <br />Rosepoint didn't like the development of Carriage Gardens and <br />that has turned out to be a very nice development. <br />Commissioner Innes then discussed the economics of the site with <br />the applicant. <br />Chairman Wilson asked staff if the reflective glass were removed <br />whether or not staff would be satisfied with the project. Mr. <br />Lee responded that in and of itself, this change would not alter <br />staff's opinion. <br />Commissioner Innes expressed concerns with traffic especially <br />Sunol and Foothill Road being used as an alternative to I-680. <br />The reflective glass didn't present a particular concern to him. <br />He felt there would be visible impacts, however, and he would <br />like to see the size of the structure reduced to 40-45,000 sq. <br />ft. and suggested the staff and the applicant work closely <br />together to determine the appropriate footage that would be both <br />economical and in the City's best interest. <br />Chairman Wilson felt the applicant should be given some direction <br />from the Planning Commission as to what they do not want in the <br />area. <br />Commissioner Hoyt stated the structure would overwhelm the site <br />because of itslthighe.character ofethetareal should be changed to <br />better blend w <br />- 4 - <br />