My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 110800
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2000
>
PC 110800
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/10/2017 3:14:47 PM
Creation date
8/1/2001 5:50:58 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
11/8/2000
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 110800
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
there is a program called Community Energy Authority with State legislation that provides <br />funding to allow communities to take control of energy management. <br /> <br />Chairperson Sullivan stated that he would like to see Pleasanton take control of its energy <br />destiny and work with PG&E to see how to address the energy short-fall over the next two years <br />and develop a longer term plan and strategies. <br /> <br />Commissioner Roberts noted that the kinds of alternatives that Chairperson Sullivan is <br />diseussiag are usually presented in the EIR. She questioned why an EIR has not been done. She <br />stated that the alternatives should include the placement of the power plant. She questioned the <br />deadline, and asked if the deadline is absolutely necessary. She cited an article in the Wall Street <br />Journal regarding the dissolution oflSO Board and she questioned how this would affect Enron's <br />potential subsidy. <br /> <br />The following issues and questions were raised by Commissioner Roberts: <br /> Is it possible to reduce the size of the stacks if the project is consmaeted a little later, <br /> thereby allowing additional time to manufacture the shorter stacks7 <br />- Concern about the use of Highway 84 as the traffic route for truck traffic, especially <br /> lrucks carrying ha~Rrdons materials. <br /> Concern about the water usage. The potential use of R/O water needs to be analyzed. <br /> Need more noise studies, with studies in Vintage Hills and areas higher in the hills. <br /> The issue regarding landscaping needs to be reviewed. (She noted that apparently Kiewit <br /> doesn't want potential heritage trees planted on its property.) <br /> The gas line and potential impacts and users need to be analyzed. <br /> Concern about the cumulative impacts of another facility across the street and one in <br /> Livermore, and this should be discussed (possibly in an EIR). <br /> How might the facility alleviate the need for the transmission line? An analysis needs to <br /> be done as to the current and future needs. <br /> <br />In response to a question from Commissioner Roberts, Mr. Pavan confirmed that the public <br />review of the negative declaration would extend to when the Council reviews the application or <br />through the EIR period, if an EIR is prepared. <br /> <br />Commissioner Roberts encouraged residents to talk with the Enron representatives if they would <br />like them to speak to their community groups. <br /> <br />Commissioner Kameny commented on recent articles in the newspaper regarding private power <br />plants. <br /> <br />The following issues and questions were raised by Commissioner Kameny: <br /> Will the energy generated in this plant be used strictly in the Valley or in Pleasanton? <br /> The noise in the area he lives in is very loud, especially the noise fi~om the gravel <br /> quarries. The questions regarding noise need to be answered. <br /> Concerned about air quality. He noted that the emissions reduction credits make business <br /> sense, but not health sense. <br /> <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 8, 2000 Page 9 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.