CCMIN081986 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Lou Holveck, representing PG&E, stated that representatives of PG&E are present to provide Council and the Pleasanton community with a briefing and update on the Vineyard 230kv Transmission Line project, leading up to the selection of the route proposed. Mr. John McCullough, San Francisco Land Department of PG&E, made a slide presentation showing the various proposed routes for the transmission lines and their impact on the different areas involved. He advised the proposed Vineyard Avenue substation is necessary in order to bring power to Pleasanton because of the increased growth of the City in recent years. He reviewed the --- environmental features examined, land use, engineering considerations, and cost figures. He elaborated the balloon tests taken at locations where the poles would be in order to examine the visual impact. He stated that after all the studies, and after consideration of input from property owners and concerned citizens, that PG&E proposes placing the transmission line route in the eastern hills (Route 3) with appropriate undergrounding near the Vineyard Avenue substation. He stated the process will be documented and filed with the PUC, and that an environmental document will also be filed. The PUC will determine whether or not an Environmental Impact Report will be required. He advised the PUC will be holding work sessions, and later a public hearing. Council discussion ensued regarding the San Ramon Substation, disruption OD to streets, time frame, and cost of undergrounding. Mr. McCullough advised (D') that the San Ramon Substation could not be enlarged, there would be disruption TH to streets but that it would be phased, construction time is expected to take |m~ two years including the substation, and the cost of the undergrounding is [I3 $1,200 per foot as compared to $150 per foot for overhead. He stated that maintenance of undergrounding is very slight, and not significant for overhead ~ lines. Mr. Doug Safreno, 1627 Vineyard Avenue, stated he has never been contacted by PG&E regarding this matter. He stated it looks like the route will be going right over his house. He advised there is already one power line along Vineyard Avenue and he felt the addition of another line would be very disrup- tive to his residence. He stated he does not want another power line but if · -- one is installed it should be undergrounded. Mr. McCullough advised that PG&E would not place any lines over houses. Mr. Philip Wente, 5565 Tesla Road, Livermore, representing Wente Winery, stated that he and his family are very concerned about the PG&E route selec- tion. He stated that Council can influence where the route will go and that their support and recommendation is extremely important. He advised that he has a problem with the consultants hired by PG&E to do the studies; no one contacted him with regard to future conflicts. Mr. Wente stated that he was again impressed by the beauty of the hill area as shown in the slides just presented; he felt this area should be preserved from adverse visual impact of any PG&E towers and transmission lines. He advised that Route 3 would seriously impact the proposed winery project that Wente plans for this area; to have towers in this area would torpedo the project. He stated the problem impacts the entire Valley, not just Pleasanton, and the quality of life will be affected. He stated his preference for routing is Route 1 with under- grounding from the Kottinger and Lund developments. He stated his number one priority would be to have the entire route cancelled and moved to the north and come in from San Ramon. From his standpoint aesthetics is the key word. He strongly recommended Council support Route 1 with further undergrounding to get the project out of the residential areas. - 5 8-19-86