PC 10/07/99 - Laserfiche WebLink

property. He expressed concern with the dust blowing from the Bemal property over the City of Pleasanton. He inquired whether the wells have been evaluated due to plutonium migrating through ground water. He noted that additional data should be provided from the samples and requested additional follow-up on DSRSD. He commented that flood control issues should be examined and inquired whether any of the Commissions have examined Zone 7 flood control issues. Carl Pretzel, 3633 Glacier Court North, questioned statements made by the experts relating to the Soviet Union breaking a treaty, effects of the whey from the Cheese Factory, and effects of radiation on smokers. He stated that the Commission is not receiving the whole picture on this property. He commented on the effects of plutonium in the human body and the definition of contamination. He noted that plutonium levels have been detected in this area above normal and that the big question is whether plutonium levels are safe or not. He noted that the Bemal property will house children who will be playing in the dirt and that children need their environment protected. He initiated discussion relating to "allowable safety standards" and inquired whether the community should accept moderate levels of plutonium. He noted that the Commission should consider all of the effects of nuclear material prior to making a determination of the acceptable level of contamination. Mr. Pretzel expressed concern with the changes in the scope of the project and the public process. He noted the importance of seeking the public's opinion on this project. He expressed concern with issues relating to location of schools, sewer capacity, sound buffers, and design of project. He stated that the Commission should not be concerned with Alameda County taking away jurisdiction of how the Bemal property should be developed. In conclusion, he noted that the Commission should carefully examine the risk of the measurable amounts of plutonium on this property, that the EIR should be examined relating to the sewer system, the buffer should be retained until watershed problems are resolved, and that this property could be developed better than what is proposed by the City of San Francisco to date. Matt Morrison, 5581-A Sonoma Drive, expressed concern with the immediate health impacts of the property and with the EIR not containing ample information relating to radionuclide contamination on the Bernal property. He commented on the dates for the deposits of sledge at the property and noted the variations in the information. He noted that the Commission should examine whether new information is being provided. He commented on the August 5, 1999 letter received from Marilyn Underwood following the testing plan, and referenced the letter's statement that the tight timeline for developing a workplan and conducting the scoping sample may not provide for adequate review by interested parties and community involvement in the process. Further, that the City of San Francisco should consider the balance between timeliness and credibility before proceeding. He commented on the practices at the radioactive laundry and noted the importance of the INS being contacted to determine the contaminants that were contained in the laundry from 1976 to 1981. He stated that there is significant new information that should be included in the EIR. Mr. Morrison noted that he is satisfied with the testing that has been conducted, based on his conversations with the State of California, and that additional testing will be required for the Bemal property. He noted that there should be an amendment to the EIR to establish the next steps for developers and to gain formal responses to issues raised. He commented on testing at the laundry and on the timeline for testing of dry samples. He noted that spikes in testing are not attributable to dry or wet testing, as referenced by Mr. Anspaugh. He reiterated that new information has been determined which should be included in an amendment to the EIR to allow for a formal method of response. He noted that he concurs with the validity of the experts' statements that Planning Commission Minutes October 7, 1999 Page 6