Laserfiche WebLink
Ms. Dennis referred to the visual exhibits, which seem to show a utility pole in the <br />landscaping. She thought the utilities were to be underground. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift said that pole will not be there. The other utility poles are on East Bay <br />Regional Park District property and there are no plans to underground that portion. It <br />depends on whether PG&E thinks they will be needed. <br /> <br /> Ms. Ayala asked staff to make certain Council is aware if any action is necessary <br />to remove these lines. She asked if this plan is review by the PUC. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift said this plan was not going before the Public Utilities Commission. <br />He believed the poles on the Park District were for power and telephone. The <br />subdivision will have underground utilities and those will be carried to where the private <br />driveway ends, which is quite a ways from Foothill Road. If it is possible to come from <br />that location, pop up onto a pole above ground there, it will eliminate a portion of those <br />above ground lines. PG&E is has never been averse to doing that because that will be <br />some overhead lines it no longer needs to maintain. If it costs PG&E more money, it <br />may object. <br /> <br /> Ms. Ayala if there is anything Council can do to initiate that. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift said Council could ask the applicant to investigate the possibility of <br />feeding those lines from the subdivision itself. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico had questions regarding the geological and seismic report. He felt there <br />were serious concerns raised regarding the Calaveras Fault, which runs right above or <br />through this property. He asked for clarification of terms that refer to surface fault <br />rupture displacement at the site being one foot for the MPE and 6.2 feet for the MCE. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift explained that MCE was "maximum creditable earthquake" and MPE <br />was "maximum probable earthquake". The maximum creditable earthquake for the <br />Calaveras Fault is 7.1 or 7.0. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico said if there were a 7.1 earthquake and there is a 6.2 foot rupture <br />displacement, does that mean fault zone will widen by six feet? <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift said the earth moves laterally; there is no widening of the fault zone. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico referred to the high groundwater level above the fault and asked if that <br />impacted the stability of the slope. A 1998 report from TerraSearch indicated that <br />because of the proximity of the fault there would be unusually high ground response. <br />What does that mean? <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift there are many issues involved here. Basically, the reports are <br />indicating that houses have to be designed to compensate for that kind of an event. <br />Because the location of the fault is so well identified, the setback requirement has been <br /> <br /> 30 09/20/99 <br />Pleasanton City Council <br />Minutes <br /> <br /> <br />