PC 10/26/83 - Laserfiche WebLink

MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION 10/26/83 Page 18 Mr. Kenzel explained the formula used in their report. Commissioner Wilson asked about the comment concerning the provision that no intersection be allowed to deteriorate to LOS D. He indicated he recalls reading that ongoing traffic studies that they were to indicate when the intersections became LOS E planning and everything would halt. He was confused that some reports say D and others E and he would liike to know which it is under any circumstances. Mr. Kenzel stated that the condition reads that you cannot exceed D, or cannot reach LOS E, so LOS D would be the lowest level or worse condition that would be achieved. Jim Musbach, Gruen + Gruen, addressed the Commission. He stated that their study presented a very exaggerated impact of the areas under study. The purpose of their analysis is to assess the impacts of the project which they did. The environmental review process establishes a means of monitoring development in the Tri-Valley on an ongoing basis. Stan Saylor, Bissell and Karn, addressed wastewater. If Hacienda Business Park were to be approved and allowed to connect to the sewerage system, it could result in an overload to the system, but the EIR, both Volume I and II point out that approval of the PUD would not permit Hacienda Business Park to discharge anything to the sewerage system. He explained that sewer permits are issued with building permits by the City, DSRSD and LAVWMA. They have no authority to overcommit their capaiity without running the risk of a building ban. Further the DSRSD is the holder of both federal and state permits. The Regional Water Quality Control Board continually monitors this situation when any treatment plant approaches 75% of capacity. He then addressed water supply relative to the general plan amendment. He says there will be no land use change. Quantification of water was made in the EIR, Volume II which also references the prior EIR and forecasts of Camp Dresser and McKee. He indicated City staff and Zone 7 forecasts are covered in detail in both volumes. He read a paragraph of Zone 7's staff report of March 30, 1983 explaining the various scenarios under which deficits might occur. John Innes, General Plan Chairman, stated that the Transportation Subcommittee of the General Plan Review studied acceptable levels of traffic for six months with regard to the various projects within the City. He requested that the level of service be defined as shown on the Trans ortation Subcommittee Roadwa s Task Force Document to be inclu a in con itions o approval or the Hacienda Business Park. This report was previously distributed to the Planning Commission and dated 10/13/83 calling for a specific range within the LOS (Item 3 (a through e). Commissioner Wilson asked if the Committee is satisfied with Condition No. 2 of the PUD. Mr. Innes said he was not sure if this is consistent with the Meyer and Reynolds and Brown as well as other developments. He urged that the General Plan Committee recommendation be implemented into project approval at this time. -18-