CCMIN041586 - Laserfiche WebLink

273 presented in Staff Report 86:146, be adopted. The roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Councilmembers Butler, Mohr, Wood, and Mayor Brandes NOES: None ABSENT: Councilmember Mercer Recommendation Regarding the Allocation of Funds to Purchase Relocatable Child Care Facilities to be used for School Age Child Care Mayor Brandes declared this item removed from the agenda at the request of staff. Matters for the Information of the Council Parcel Map Improvement Plans and Subdivision Agreement for Parcel Map 3863~ Hacienda, ~hase II Mr. Okamura presented his report (IR 86:26) dated April 15, 1986, regard- ing this matter. No action was required or taken by Council on the item. Minutes from Staff Traffic Committee Meetings of March 28~ 1986 and April 2~ 1986 Mr. Okamura presented his report (IR 86:27} dated April 15, 1986, regard- ing this matter. No action was required or taken by Council on the item. Update on Status of PG&E Transmission Lines Mr. Swift presented his report (IR 86:29) dated April 15, 1986, regarding this matter. Mayor Brandes stated that Council is concerned about this issue, and would like to schedule a public hearing to allow PG&E and citizens input relative to the matter. He stated that Council should also respond to the PUC regarding this issue. Ms. Suzanne Kallo, representing PG&E, stated PG&E has addressed a letter to the Mayor and City Manager stating they would agree to appear before the Council at a public hearing in May. She advised the Environmental Assessment will be available in late June or early July, and that copies will be placed t City Hall, the Library, and the PG&E office. She stated the Environmental Impact Report will be conducted once the proposal is filed. She invited City Council and staff to walk the proposed line later this week. She stated that CPC hearings will be conducted within the community. Mayor Brandes suggested using a jeep or helicopter to view the proposed routes. Mr. Lou Holvick, representing PG&E, stated they did not intend to walk the entire route, only the initial part visible from the City. Mr. Ted Fairfield, representing the Kottinger Ranch, stated the proposed towers and lines are a serious threat to this project and an economic liabili- ty. He stated he is concerned about disenfranchisement; he does not know how to deal with the problem as it is a PUC decision. He stated he is disap- pointed PG&E decided not to follow the original plan shown in the General Plan of 1970, which was a periferal route around the City into the vineyards area that would not affect housing or open space. He asked if Council could demand that the original be reconsidered. Mr. Fairfield stated if PG&E would not consider the original route, then more undergrounding should be required and 4-15-86 - 12