CCMIN032100 - Laserfiche WebLink

building is 48 feet high and 720 feet from the road. There is a clear view of the ridge, trees and the lake. The proposal will remove a view of the ridge, provide four story buildings (55 feet tall) and 200 foot setbacks. The staff report compared the plan to the AT&T building on Rosewood Drive and that building has a 525 foot setback. It is fine there but not in this location. She did not think four story buildings are consistent with this area. She said the existing buildings on the Kaiser property are hidden by 80 foot trees. The plan is vague as to the ramoval of some of those trees. She believed most of them will have to be removed according to the current plan. Staff recommends public access be given to the entire site only if there are multiple tenant users. She did not want another trail to be taken a~vay and there is no park. She indicated the current plan allows construction of an accessory building around the lake and she strongly objected to that. When Kaiser responded to the Housing Commission request for affbrdable housing, it drew plans that put the housing at the lake or directly on Sunol Boulevard. No one really believes this property is good for affordable housing although everyone agrees there is a need for it. Finally, she referred to traffic concerns. At this end of town there are only two ways to go anywhere; go to 1-680 or go through the downtown area. This plan will only add to an already bad traffic situation. Kaiser is not adding any money to pay for intersections, since they are paid for already by other developers. This property is at the gateway to the city in a beautiful residential area. The Planning Commission had numerous problems with the plans and she felt the buildings were too big, setbacks were too small, there would be too much noise and traffic. She asked Council to deny this plan. Pat Brick, 421 Arlington Court, indicated traffic was his main concern with the proposal. He said there will be six lanes on Sunol Boulevard that funnel down to four lanes by Raleys and then to two lanes on First Street. He did not believe this will work. He complained of the backup at the traffic light at Sycamore and that will be worse ira light is installed at Arlington Court. Residents had an opportunity to vote to purchase the Bernal Avenue property. One reason to support that was to preserve open space at a gateway to the city. He felt the real gateway was Sunol Boulevard and he did not want high rise buildings on Sunol Boulevard. He thought Kaiser had been a good neighbor and the existing building is not overly large and there is a lot of open space. The new project does not fit in this location. He wanted to preserve the quality of life in this area. William Olsom 301 Diamond Court, believed that the campus style developmere was appropriate for this site. However, he did not want a building near the lake, buildings should be restricted to three stories and the buildings should be set back from Sunol Boulevard by 400 feet. He wanted the square footage limited to 800,000 or less. His main concern was traffic. There are 3500 round trips per day for this project. Kaiser has assumed that 90% of the traffic will come from the South Bay and use Sunol Boulevard from 1-680 to enter the site. He considered the worst case scenario of people commuting to the South Bay from Pleasanton and east of Pleasanton. He felt the worst case would be that the majority of people would come to this facility from Pleasanton and east of Pleasanton and that would put a lot more traffic onto surface streets. He referred to the time period when Stanley Boulevard collapsed near Shadow Cliff and said traffic on Sunol Boulevard was half what it had been. He believed the solution to traffic on Pleasanton City Council 8 03/21/00 Minutes