CCMIN090396 - Laserfiche WebLink

Carl Groch, of Jordan, Woodman & Dobson, 3664 Grand Avenue, Oakland, architect for the project, described the site planning and the design of the building. A goal was to have the least impact on the street and to have full use of all four sides of the building. There is an 80 ft. set back from Stoneridge Drive. He then described the heights of the building and purposes of various building features. Ms. Dennis asked about the lighting plan on the Stoneridge Drive side of the building. Mr. Groch indicated the landscape architect, who was not present, would have to respond to her questions. Ms. Mohr asked where public art would be placed and what would it be. Mr. Groch indicated his firm would cooperate with the Civic Art Commission and it would be appropriate to place a piece of art in the entry plaza, but he would work with staff and the Commission to find the right place. Michael O'Hara, Ehrlich, Rominger & Associates, 4800 E1 Camino Real, Los Altos, architect for the interior design, described the layout of the interior. The polymer production area is a very small function and the chemical storage area will be built in accordance with all Codes. Any waste would be hauled offsite and would never reach any drain. He then described the assembly operation, which takes less than 30% of the total building. The remainder of the building consists of offices and employee support areas. Kathy Hopkins, 6106 Allbrook Circle, Pleasanton, spoke in opposition to the project. She did not want light manufacturing on this property. She indicated she has worked at various companies in Silicon Valley. She felt there were inconsistencies in the staff report. In the event Council approved the project, despite her objections, she requested various mitigations. She wanted Council to adhere to the currently approved PUD and not change the permitted use. She also did not want the maximum building height changed. She also objected to the FAR for the current project. She wanted it to stay at 42,300 square feet. This building is too large for the site. She asked Council not to allow Thoratec to expand the building in the future. She referred to an increase in the parking lot and requested a three to four foot berm with grass and concrete pillars on the parking lot at Stoneridge Drive where it connects to the existing parking lot. She wanted signage at each end of the berm that states trucks are not allowed to use this route to Stoneridge Drive. She wanted sewer testing for a minimum of five years after occupancy and she wanted public notification of the Council review. She wanted a significant penalty if Thoratec violates the no voluntary release condition, such as revocation of the use permit. She also wanted the applicant to provide City inspectors with adequate information so the City can verify that the applicant is using the services of certified toxic disposal firms. The City should condition this applicant to participate in the City' s TSM program and require a specified number of employees the must use the TSM program. Thoratec cannot permanently lease parking on adjacent araeas and parking will be a problem. 09/03/96 -14-