PC 06/28/99 - Laserfiche WebLink

was known two years ago, the EIR would contain an analysis of the site. He expressed concern with certifying the EIR and approving the project prior to an analysis being performed on the property. He expressed concern with energy issues and the possibility of PG&E having difficulty constructing the infrastructure for electrical distribution for the Tri-Valley areas. He stated that PG&E has postponed their presentation relating to energy and that energy issues have not been adequately addressed in the EIR. Commissioner Sullivan expressed concern with issues relating to setbacks at the Arroyo and noted that issues relating to the disclosing of information about the An'royo are out of the City's control. He stated that energy, nuclear contamination, and traffic issues need to be addressed before there is approval of the EIR. Commissioner Roberts noted her concurrence with Commission Sullivan's statements and noted that if she would have considerable concern with leaving the pre-annexation agreement as is. She noted that the modeling for the traffic impact is the best modeling at this time. She expressed appreciation to Mr. Morrison for bringing forward pertinent information relating to the site. She noted that she viewed new information as findings and that the property will not be annexed until analysis is performed on the property. She noted that performing another EIR is time consuming and that additional information may not be provided. She further stated that problems are incurred by other agencies not providing sufficient information and that the project should be conditioned to allow for input from other agencies. Chairperson Kumaran noted that Exhibit A lists seven reasons why he is not comfortable certifying the EIR as complete and adequate. These reasons include impacts on the regional transportation system and its effect on the Bernal Avenue exit, including cut-through traffic and 1-680 not moving at the projected speed due to excessive traffic. He noted that the TVTC fees are inadequate for mitigation. Further, that the project will contribute to excessive regional emissions on air quality. He stated that he could not identify economic, social and other considerations to accept the statement of overriding considerations. He expressed concern with the noise levels affecting the residents along 1-680 even after mitigation, and suggested that the noise mitigation efforts do significantly contribute adversely to the visual resources in the project. He expressed concern with the removal of heritage trees, the radionuclides issue, and Zone 7 issues. He noted that he would not be in favor of performing a nuclides study at the PUD stage and stated that the analysis should be conducted at the present time to ensure that the residents of Pleasanton are not harmed in anyway by this project. Further, he stated that Zone 7 setback issues should be addressed at the present time. He concluded by stating that he would not be in favor of certifying the EIR due to the reasons listed. Commissioner Maas asked for clarification as to the process if the EIR is not certified. Discussion ensued relating to certifying the EIR findings and how overriding considerations fit into project. Commissioner Maas expressed concern with Zone 7 water issues, radionuclide issues, flood issues for current residents, fire protection for residents; however, she noted that these issues have been addressed in the EIR. She noted that the memorandum received by the Commission from Zone 7 addressed water issues adequately and stafl's explanation of issues is adequate and mitigation measures will be performed at a future date. She noted the importance of including mitigation efforts in this project. Commissioner Kameny expressed concern with transportation and circulation issues that are addressed in the EIR, especially levels of service at the 1-680 on-ramps and off-ramps, and traffic being based on PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Page 5 June 28, 1999