11 ATTACHMENTS 6-9 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Jarvis referred to ESA's extensive Response to Comments document which contains analysis on air quality which takes into account cumulative development and that assumes there will be continuing development. Commissioner Pace inquired how the models are created and how exceptions are generated in order to account for exceptions and monitoring for air quality based upon growth. Mr. Jarvis responded that all situations were accounted for and taken into consideration when developing the analysis. Some projects in the General Plan are not far enough along in the development process to be accounted for and he spoke about two projects taking place in the neighboring City of Dublin. Commissioner Pace asked and confirmed that the analysis relied upon are part of the General Plan for the City of Dublin and the City of Pleasanton and the model uses those as the primary input for the assessment conducted. Chair Allen referred to the next item referenced in the correspondence as to health risk and the response that because other projects are beyond 1,000 feet from the project site, they are outside the impact area addressed; the author has discretion as to whether they want to go beyond this level for analysis. Mr. Jarvis confirmed that City staff and ESA have both reviewed and determined there is no reason to go beyond the threshold. Exceptions might be used for industrial facilities or something that produces unusual impacts and the analysis conducted determined they were far from any thresholds. Commissioner Pace inquired why 1 ,000 feet is used. Mr. Jarvis confirmed this is the regulatory standard recommended by BAAQMD. Chair Allen referenced the second question as it relates to the cumulative impact which was already answered. She then referenced the third question and the data source for the pass-by assumptions related to trips generated by traffic and impact of the project. Mr. Jarvis responded this is the first time the question has been raised and they can provide more details at the City Council level. He spoke about pass-by trips, weekend versus weekday traffic and believes there is sufficient information and analysis in the record to support the EIR's conclusions. Commissioner Ritter inquired about the new analysis and confirmed with Mr. Jarvis that he did not see any genuine EIR issues and that the comments were more or less a way to slow the process of the project moving forward. Chair Allen referenced the correspondence received by Matt Sullivan and inquired about the comments and questions brought up in his letter. Mr. Jarvis stated this letter indicates the writer is not amenable with the responses that have been provided within the document. Excerpt: Planning Commission Minutes, December 11, 2019 Page 4 of 6