CCMIN120401 - Laserfiche WebLink

Russ Swerdon, 6558 Hanover Court, indicated he lived directly across from the main entrance of the project. He has no financial interest in Applied Biosystems and is not an employee of the company. He has been involved in meetings on this project for a year and a half. Many residents who attended meetings in 2000 were led to believe that the 48 foot height limit represented the maximum height of the buildings. The prior Kaiser building was about 48 feet from base to top of parapet with no screening visible from the neighborhood. As a result of the increased mass of the proposed buildings, the maximum building height was reduced from a proposed 55 feet to 48 feet. If you look at the plans drafted by Kaiser, they were ambiguous and used three different terms (maximum height, height, overall building height). The design guidelines state the maximum height of any three-story building on the site is 48 feet. That is what led most people to believe that what they would see is a 48 foot tall project. Granted, there was some mention of screening enclosures for mechanical apparatus in other sections, but those said screening enclosures were not included in overall building height. No one envisioned that what we would see would be a massive new structure that is 15-17 feet above the roof level. The concern of the neighbors is not two and a half feet. There is an increase in height from 48 to 65 feet. That is 17 feet and a 35% increase in height. The term maximum building or overall building height to suggest any height not including everything attached to the structure and roof should not have been done on this project. On other projects where viewsheds were an issue, different terms were used to make clear that a total building height was contemplated. That should have been done on this project. It was clear from the outset that viewsheds were an issue to the neighbors. After considering many aspects, including the fact that many projects in the south Pleasanton area had parks included, which were later taken out of the final as-built project, he wanted to make certain that does not happen here. No compelling details have been provided as to why a perimeter, publicly accessible, trail would not work on this project. He felt most items mentioned in the staff report are easily addressable. He requested that the Planning Commission recommendations, especially Condition 39 requiring a perimeter trail, be approved by Council. He quoted from a May 2001 staff report that recommended the public be given access to the trails. There being no further speakers, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Sage addressed concerns about the building height. He referred to the design guidelines which do not include the mechanical screening in the calculation of the building height. They have tried to reduce the impact of the buildings on the residents by placing two story buildings nearest to Sunol and orienting the buildings so the most reduced mass would face the neighborhood. The higher buildings are all on the back side of the campus. They have reduced the total height by reducing the mechanical screening as much as possible by reducing the height of the mechanisms being shielded. The air handlers are 29 inches lower than standard equipment. He indicated the two and half foot height increase is truly due to operational requirements for the buildings for long term use of the buildings. He indicated Applied Biosystems has been very impressed with the community and the way the company has been received. He recognized there are differing views from some neighbors. He was grateful for the support shown at this meeting, but they still look forward to a good community relationship with those who do not support the project. He said the company is here to stay and will be a part of the community. Pleasanton City Council 11 12/04/01 Minutes