CCMIN022001 - Laserfiche WebLink

emergency response plans of DSRSD, Pleasanton, Livermore and Dublin when there is an earthquake. The City's current emergency response plan was drafted in 1995 and still has old phone numbers that are now obsolete. Sondra Bierre, 980 Reisling Drive, stated that the staff report recognizes there is an energy crisis, but she felt that part of that crisis was caused by growth. When the Enron application came before the Planning Commission, she expressed her concerns and saluted the Planning Commission for its decision on that application and its action to work on developing an energy study. She urged Council not to defer action. Some on Council believe in regional planning, but she did not support that. She referred to the growth in Dublin and her concerns about increased power issues. With the new computer companies coming in, there will be even more draws on energy. She did not think the City of Pleasanton could control what happens in other cities. She wanted Pleasanton to control its own energy, possibly through municipal power generation or other reasonable alternatives. Palo Alto has its own power generation. Pleasanton is an expensive city to live in and she didn't want the cost of living to go up more. Most power plants use natural gas and it is more and more expensive. She encouraged Council to support the Planning Commission. She wanted renewable power supplies including photovoltaic, etc. and other forward looking ways with not much impact on the city. She asked for support of a local energy policy now. Brian Arkin, 3740 Newton Way, referred to the Plaiming Commission meeting of November 8, 2000 when the Enron application was on the agenda. It was a very crowded meeting. Most people complained about air quality, water, etc., but there is also a major noise problem associated with the operation of a power plant like this, which he described. At the same time, there was a PG&E proposal for a plant across the street. He did not want to see any more applications like them without a plan for the City. He believed the Enron application was design review only and the City Council would never have seen the application. He supported the comments of Matt Sullivan and felt the City needed a plan so that when these applications come forward, there will be some direction. He wanted Council to give this a high priority and to authorize staff time and hire a consultant. Council needs to authorize staff to work on this. Jennifer Hosterman, 2922 Chardonnay Drive, spoke to the sustainability issue and referred to comments of other speakers. She agreed that unless one has worked with it, it can seem very elusive. The General Plan refers to it a few times, but just because the General Plan includes the word a few times, it doesn't mean this is a sustainable document. The California courts have long described the General Plan as "a constitution for all future development with the city." The document speaks very well to the development of a community with caveats and time constraints to review that development, but it does not speak to the sustainability of a community. She felt this was a basic concept. One could take any topic, such as water, waste management, garbage, or air quality and be able to see we will not use more resources and we don't put out more waste than the earth is capable of absorbing. Do we put together a commission to look at environmental issues? She agreed staff does work long hours on many issues. There is one sustainable issue in the General Plan, the fiscal and economic element. It is about a Pleasanton City Council 18 02/20/01 Minutes