My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
01
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2009
>
072109
>
01
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 2:25:01 PM
Creation date
7/14/2009 2:24:58 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
7/21/2009
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
01
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
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).
View images
View plain text
applicant did not account for current uses of land and instead used a general sense of topography <br /> to choose the most economical route on which to install these pathways. Mr. Dolan expounded on <br /> that, stating that the applicant used primarily aerial photographs, rather than ground surveys, and <br /> has already received a lot of feedback from local communities on what actually lies in that path. <br /> Councilmember McGovern questioned and confirmed that the applicant has the ability to exercise <br /> eminent domain and run the project wherever it chooses. Mr. Dolan noted that while the applicant <br /> does have that right as a public agency, it is not the preferred method of action and they have <br /> expressed a willingness to explore preferable locations. <br /> Councilmember McGovern acknowledged Mr. Haggerty's involvement but questioned whether or <br /> not any members of the public were informed. Mr. Dolan noted that there was one Sunol resident in <br /> attendance at the public meeting attended by staff. <br /> Councilmember McGovern acknowledged the project's benefits for the applicant and asked about <br /> the benefits for those communities it passes through. Mr. Dolan said that the only benefit for host <br /> cities to realize from this exists to the extent that the public, in general, gets a better energy <br /> transmission system. Mr. Fialho explained that the transmission lines are specifically for the use of <br /> the JPA to deliver power to and from the areas identified; with the exception of those municipal <br /> utilities, there is no benefit to any agency that hosts the transmission lines. <br /> Councilmember McGovern questioned why the applicant has explicitly chosen not to upgrade or <br /> utilize any of their existing facilities. Mr. Dolan could not answer specifically but said that he <br /> believes they have proposed entirely new facilities in order to maximize capacity. <br /> Councilmember McGovern asked that the impacts of new line and infrastructure versus the use of <br /> existing equipment be studied. <br /> Mayor Hosterman opened the item to public comment. <br /> Mary Roberts said she asked Mr. Dolan to share the County's letter with the Council because it is <br /> an excellent scoping document that addresses those elements of the proposal which stand in direct <br /> opposition to local area plans that have provided for these preservation corridors. She stressed that <br /> homeowners and business owners in the Vineyard Corridor sought the area for its ambience, an <br /> ambience that does not include ugly overhead lines. Ms. Roberts reiterated all concerns outlined in <br /> the letter and asked who the final authority on the matter will be. <br /> Mayor Hosterman closed the public comment. <br /> Mr. Dolan explained that the project proponent, the JPA, will ultimately decide the project's <br /> outcome. <br /> Councilmember Sullivan confirmed that the Public Utilities Commission does not have jurisdiction <br /> here and likened this situation to a developer being allowed to decide whether or not it would be <br /> allowed to build a bunch of homes. <br /> Mr. Fialho said that, as a public agency he would imagine the JPA must conform to all meeting <br /> requirements but that as a utility, it is also given broader discretion with respect to utility land use <br /> planning that cities and counties are not afforded. He said that staff's approach is to target the <br /> community's concerns via writing, await a response and if a suitable response is not forthcoming, <br /> the City can form a coalition with Livermore and the county in opposition to the project. <br /> City Council Minutes Page 8 of 11 June 2, 2009 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.