Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 8.1 DEIR TriVlyElectricPowCITY CLERK FILE # 1020-10 AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: January 16, 2001 SUBJECT: Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the Proposed Tri- Valley 2002 Electric Power Capacity Increase Project. Report Prepared by Carol R. Cirelli, Senior Planner (74~C--/ ATTACHMENTS: California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC's) Environmentally Superior Project and Other Project Alternatives , PG&E's Preferred Project City's Notice of Preparation (NOP) Comment Letter RECOMMENDATION: Direct Staff to: 1) review the DEIR; 2) work with the City Attorney' s office; and 3) provide comments to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) on the DEIR. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: None DESCRIPTION: On December 26, 2000, the CPUC released for public review the DEIR for the proposed Tri-Valley 2002 Electric Power Capacity Increase Project. The DEIR public comment period will end on February 19, 2001. As a result of staff s preliminary review of the DEIR, staff recommends that the City go on record as strongly opposing the CPUC's chosen "enviromnentally superior project" because it would !mpact the adopted land use plan and zoning for the Dublin Ranch project within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area, and would create potential health and safety; noise; and aesthetic impacts within this planning area. Staff s preliminary assessment shows that this project does not present the most significant environmental benefit and is not the most feasible compared to the other project altematives analyzed in the DEIR. PG&E also strongly opposes the environmentally superior project mainly for the following reasons: 1 ) undergrounding 9.2 miles of 230kV transmission lines vs. 2.7 miles would delay PG&E's need to provide COPIES TO: In-House Distribution ITEM NO. ~ g:\PG&E\CC staff report re NOA of DEIR power by June of 2002 due to the time it will take to engineer, manufacture and procure the lines to get the project built; 2) the proposed eastDublin substation would be too far south in the distribution link to fully relieve San Ramon of its demand for electrical power; and 3) implementation of the proposed project (environmentally superior project) would involve greater costs, thus putting unnecessary burdens on ratepayers. Informational Meetings/Public Participation Hearings The CPUC will conduct three informational. meetings and three public participation hearings on the proposed Tri-Valley 2002 Electric Power Capacity Increase Project. These meetings will be held as follows: Information Meetings (informational only) January 23,2001 January 24, 2001 January 25, 2001 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. - City of Pleasanton - Vintage Hills School - Multi-Purpose Room- 1125 Concord Street 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. - City of Dublin - Dublin Elementary School - Multi-Purpose Room - 7051 Dublin Blvd. 6:30 to 8:30 p .m. - City of Livermore - City of Livermore Council Chambers - 3575 Pacific Avenue Public Participation Hearings (CPUC will receive oral and written comments on the DEIR and PG&E's Application) February 8, 2001 February 13, 2001 February 15, 2001 7:00 p.m. - City of Livermore - City Council Chambers - 3575 Pacific Avenue 6:30 p.m. - City of Pleasanton- Vintage Hills School - Multi- Purpose Room- 1125 Concord Street 7:00 p.m, - City of Dublin - Dublin Elementary School - Multi- Purpose Room - 7051 Dublin Blvd. CPUC's Environmentally Superior Project The CPUC's preferred project involves installing new and/or modifying existing transmission lines and substations within the Pleasanton, Noah Livermore, Dublin and San Ramon areas as follows (also see Attachment 1 ): Pleasanton underground 230kV transmission line from a proposed Switching Station Site 2 (south of the Del Valle Water Treatment Plant) to the existing Vineyard Substation (with proposed modifications) on Stanley Blvd. North'Livermore · New substation at Livermore Avenue with underground 23 0kV transmission line extending east/west along May School Road. 2 Dublin/San Ramon · New above ground 230 kV transmission line extending from the existing Vineyard substation north primarily through the existing gravel preserve; then underground along a portion ofi-580 extending west, connecting to a new 5-acre substation in East Dublin. Tesla Connection/Phase 2 · New Switching Station Site 2 south of the Del Valle Water Treatment Plant and adjacent to the Tesla- Newark Transmission Line Corridor. As stated above,'the CPUC's environmentally superior alternative involves the construction of a new 230 kV substation on a 5-acre parcel west of Fallon Road, east of Tassajara Road, and between the future extension of Dublin Boulevard and the existing 1-580 Freeway within the Dublin Ranch project area. The Dublin substation would be an un-staffed and fenced, remote-controlled facility. The substation will be fenced to enclose four, 21-foot by 36- foot metal-clad switchgear buildings. The substation will ultimately consist of four 230/21 kV transformers with a total capacity of approximately 180 Megawatt. Impacts to the City of Dublin The environmentally superior project is not PG&E's preferred alternative that the City supported through PG&E's application for Certificate of Public Convenience and Proponent' s Environmental Assessment process. The environmentally superior project impacts the adopted land use plan and adopted stage 1 Planned Development (PD) zoning for the Dublin Ranch project located within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area° The proposed substation would be located within the Dublin Ranch General Commercial/Campus Office designated land. This Dublin Ranch project area (Area C) already received a Stage 1 PD zoning approval. The proposed location of the substation would greatly impact the development potential of this site. The project would also negatively impact land values and the aesthetics of the surrounding commercial; office; residential; and open space areas that have already been master-planned by the Dublin Ranch land owners. The project would result in visual impacts to Fallon Road and the 1-580 Freeway, which are designated as Scenic Corridors by the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and the Eastern Dublin Scenic Corridor Policies and Standards. PG&E's preferred project includes a substation in Contra Costa County near the Alameda/Contra Costa County border where the substation can be easily screened with existing hillsides and where land use intensities are not as high as the General Commercial/Campus Office land uses in Dublin Ranch (see Attachment 2). The environmentally superior alternative would involve locating a 5-acre substation within an area that has very high land values due to its relatively flat terrain and its close proximity to the 1-580 Freeway and other existing retail and commercial development in Eastern Dublin. Other potential impacts to the City of Dublin include: · health/safety impacts to existing/future Eastern Dublin residents due to electromagnetic fields · noise impacts to existing/future Eastern Dublin residents · feasibility of project; i.e., economic; environmental; social; and technological factors On May 19, 2000, the City submitted a comment letter on the Notice of Preparation for the Tri-Valley 2002 Electric Power Capacity Increase Project DEIR (see Attachment 3). The letter outlines the impacts Alternative 2 (which is now the environmentally superior project) would have on the Eastern Dublin area. Although the City has already gone on record as opposing the altemative that the DEIR now recommends as the environmentally superior project, it is crucial to go on record again during the DEIR review period. The representatives of the Dublin Ranch property owner, Jennifer Lin, have also submitted letters to the CPUC outlining the impacts Altemative 2 would have on the Dublin Ranch properties. CONCLUSION: Staff, in consultation with the City Attorney' s office, will be reviewing the DEIR and preparing a comment letter that does not support the CPUC's environmentally superior project, but supports PG&E's preferred alternative as it presents the most significant environmental benefit and is most feasible compared to the CPUC's environmentally superior proj ecto RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council: 1 ) review the DEIR; 2) work with the City Attorney' s office; and 3) provide comments to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) on the DEIR. g:\PG&E\CC Staff Report re NOA of DEiR 4 I I i 1 1 l I l l I I' I i I J~ SI&L2 :, Figure ES-2 Environmentally Superior Project Aspen Dx-~ft EIR, Dec~nber 20~0 Executive Stunmary " ...... ' ~ t~ ":"" Corridor. . .~-~" '-~ ': . " Alternative/? ~,: .~ Legend '~'~; ~:"'~ ':~ :~-:: , ~ ,~ EnVironmentally Superior Compon6nts 0 1~ 1 Mile ...... ~,~ ~ '/,'.~;:'~ 'L" ~ Underground ~ ,~ ,~ %~ ,, , :.~: :,~ :7 ~ ~;~ '~', J Substation or Switching Station ~.,~ = , ..., ~ .~ = ~~ - (Dimensions are Approximate) ~ ;. ~ ,-::: ~ Proposed and Alternatives Routes (Overhead) ' -- -- -- Proposed and Alternatives Routes (Underground) ..................... Proposed Route (Phase 2) .................. Existing Transmission Line I Substation or Switching Station (Dimensions are Approximate) ~ Transition Structure Tfi-V~ey 2~1 Cspaci~ b~e ~oj~t Preferred Alternative _. ",~ i~!· ~ :~: Northern Plan ~i~ ~!~!~P~- Construct a new double circuit 230kV power line from the '.~ r ~ existing PG&E C~ntra Costa/Newarkline. The neW. powe~ line . \ ,\ ...' .~- would originate 3.4 miles north Of Va~co .Road/Higr~waY 580 and ust west of Vasco Boad near the BFI andfill~entranceL '~ ~' ' '~' ~ The new line would ~un' 6.8 miles west, Within PG&E's easement, No~ A~a substation in Dublin. A one mile line would be constructed where :o ~.:/ ~' ~' ~, the PG&E easement crosses Noah Livermore Avenue. running ~C~~ ) ,/; .:~ .., .. '.. (. /~-" .-. · ..... - .,, _"':;" . .:,~..;~. . ..... ,. . ....... _--~--~ .: ~o~wi.~ -~ ;~:.::~ .'....:.:,..::?'-_ - -.~ . :..:: ~ - ..-= -~ ......;-.,-, ~-.: . / , ..._:. ~ u~lon of the N0~hern and Southern ' ~ .' "'.~:_:7-:~'-~ ;.-~: '.,~-'::::'::.:~.~.." I ;'' ~ ' ~' ~ ~" ~.J~F,sL~:s~c.w,,o:/pbns, phase 2 may be added to meet the mgion's ' I' ~ "~' ' :~7 ~ -- . ' .. '-. ~ ~.. '-' ;~::' ......: ..... ' '! ' / ~ ~: ~ '} ~ · :-,- future demands ' ' ' · :=- ~'~ '-.-'~-~..-~':'-':-%~' '~ ~, ~ r~' "-:;, :.' ;' ? ""~ .: I . ' - . .- -, ... .::' Constru~ and conne~ 2.7 miles of 230kV line and 2.8 miles of ,- .... Phaa 2 ~e~ad 2~ kV ungroUnded 230kV conduit to PG&E's existing Vineyard ~ Pro~d Subs~fions Substation in Pleasanton. The 230kV line would connect to the ~7 + Milepo~ M~ffier existing PG&E Contra Costa/Newark power line south of - ~isffng Transmission Lines Highway 84, less than a mile east of the GE Vallecitos Nuclear i Exi~ng su~ons Center entrance; While the route traverses mountainous terrain noah towards Pleasanton, near the ci~ limits the overhead lines o. ~.. , ,. = ~. flAY-19-2000 FRI 04:15 P~ KPC PC'LEVEL 3 PROJEOT FAX NO. 9253983050 MAY-19 00 14:45 FROM:DUBLIN CITY MGR OPFC 925~833-fi651 TO:9~5'J983050 P. 02/06 CITY OF DUBLIN P.O. 80x ~340, Dublin, Oalifornfa e-.j45~8 May 19, 2000 O;ty O~ces,' 1 O0 Gtvlc Pla~, Dublin, Ca~if0fr'~a 94568 MS, Beth Sh/pley c/o Aspen Environmental Group 235 Montgomery Street, Suite 800 San Francisco, CA 94104 SUBJECT: Comments on PG&E Tri-Valley Upgrade project NOP Dear Ms. ShipIcy: Tile City oF Dublin appreciates the opportunity to comment on the Notice of Preparation dated A ~l 21, 2000 for the proposed PG&E Tfi-Valley Upgrade project. The comments of the .City of Dub~i~ .are as follows: The northern component of any of the alternative plans will. pro~iide two substations d~at will supply North Livermore and the City or Dublin w~th sufficient energy to accommodate planned growth. The Vineyard Substation in the City of Pleasanton does not supply that ci~ with sufficient electrical capacity. The substation has .99.4 megawatts ofoapacit and a load of 204. I megawatts. This issue is Pleasamends problem not D,blin's. The City of Dt%lin will not bear the burden of providing energy to the Vineyard Substation via the Alternative 2 rou.t¢ along Fallen Road. This burden should be borne by the City of Plea.~anton. This must be accomplished by either th~ Prei~rred Alternative or another route through the City of Pleasanton. Tl~e Dublin Cit~' Council is on record (see a~tached resolution) as being in favor of the Preferred Alternative which supplies th~ Vineyard Substation in Pleasanton from the south through Kottin er Ranch, I spoke in favor of the Pret~rted Alternative and in opposition to Alternative 2 along FalYoen Road at the seopir~g meeting on May 8, 2000. As present~ in the Proponent's Envirotunental Assessment (PEA), the project would rtu~ an above ground 230 kV line along Fallen Road through Dublin to I480 and th sou to the Vineyard Substation. Fallen Road has been designed and is currently under aonstruetion. The median of Fallen Road is not designed to accommodate an above ground 230kV facility. Over 13,000 homes have been approved as part of the Eastern Dublin Sp~ci fie Plan. Failon Road runs through the middle of thi~ phmned community, Hundreds or homes authorized by approved Tentative Maps wSll soon be located alon the route of A Itemalive 2 inunediately ad'aeent to the facility and would be negatively im acted. ~y the time you receive this letmr over 20 ~a~ilies will be Hving in homes immediately to t~2 west ofFallan Road. An elemm~tary school is planned that would lie within 400 I~.et oFthe rome of Alternative 2 along t:'alton Road, ' .4. Alternative 2 as described in the PEA would have sl ni~cant negative environmental impacts on deveh.~pments under construction that were approve~by the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan in 1994. The impacts include visual impacts to Fallen Road and Interstate 580 which are designated as Scenic Corridors by the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan and the Eagtern Dublin Scenic Corridor Policies and Standards. Exposure to potentially l~a7.ardoUS Electric and Magnetic Field (EMF) Clti:cts of hund~-eds o/residents along Fallen Road should be addressed. Land Use and Planning would be aH~eted because of the impacts to approved pittas and fimillties. The only reasonable alternative to placing a 230kV facility down Fallen Road pursuant to Alternative 2 is ~he Preferred Alternative. AdmlnlSIrtlliOn (925)833-6650 · CIty COuncil (92$)833-6605 - F';nah~;~ (g25)8;33-8640 - Building Insl~eclion (S125)833-8620 Cooo En~orcornent (925)833-6620 , Englneedn9 (925)833-6630 · Pirks & Community 8errices (925)833-8645 E~;onomi~ OevBlapment (925)833-6650 , P~lic~ (925)Ba3-e670 , PublicWo~e (925 833-6630 3 Commu61ty' Development (925) 833-6610 , Flrt PrtvenBon Bute~tl (92~} 833-~~ . ...: ,. ..t LEVEL Ffi× N0, 9253983050 IlF~Y-19-2000 FRI 04:15 3 PROJEOT 03/06 PIRY-19 00 14:45 FROM:DUBLIN CITY MGR QFFC 9e5-833-6651 TO:!~a53983050 PAGE:03 Alternative 2 would have a tmnenaously neS-ntive irapact on the lm~operty values o3 ~i|i lands adjacent ~o ihc f.-qcili~y in Aitcmati ve 2 ~d upon ~he health of ~hose, livh~g nemrby. lVhny ~eveloprncnts alon~ Fallon .Kosd w{lI have b:en 5uiIt by the time any facili my envisioned by Aimmative 2 i,s buih along Fa)]on Road, The City of DubtLn is in favor of tl~e Ptderted Alternative a~ shown in the PEA and is opposed to Alternative 2. If you have any questions please contact me at (925) 833-6610. Sincerely yours, Mayor ' f.'plan/letter~/pg&¢ lctt~rl RESOLUTION NO. 184 - 99 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN SUPPORTING THE PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY TRI-VALLEY UPGRADE PROJECT WHEREAS, the electrical demand in the Tri-Valley region is nearing the area's electrical system's capacity and is expected to exceed it by mid-2002; and WHEREAS, to keep the electrical system at its traditionally high reliability level and avoid blackouts at peak hours, PG&E must upgrade the Tri-Valley region's electrical system and infrastructure; and WHEREAS, to upgrade the system, PG&E plans to build two new substations and construct new power lines capable of delivering more electrical power to the Tri-Valley region; and WHEREAS, in working with the communities to develop plans for the upgraded system, PG&E has balanced environmental, engineering and economic factors; and WHEREAS, PG&E has met with the City' s representatives in recent months to discuss and develop alternatives for supplying the electrical energy needs for the developments envisioned and approved by the local jurisdictions; and WHEREAS, PG&E's preferred alternative for the Tri-Valley Upgrade Project is shown on the attached map (Exhibit 1A) and iS comprised of: 1) a northern component consisting ofl~4no, 5-acre 230/21 kV substations and approximately seven miles of 230 kV transmission line extending east-west from the existing Contra-Costa-Newark transmission line along the existing PG&E right-of-way to the new Dublin substation, located outside Dublin's current city limits and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, but within the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment area; 2) a southern component consisting of approximately six miles of new 230 kV transmission line, 2.7 miles of which will be located underground within Pleasanton city streets, connecting the existing Vineyard substation and the Contra Costa-Newark transmission line; and 3) a second phase, if electric demand increases, consisting of a new 230 kV transmission line along PG&E'S existing northern right-of-way connecting the existing Contra Costa line to the Tesla substation. WHEREAS, PG&E has been communicating directly with the public in order to build an understanding of the need for the up~ade and to gain input and insight into specific concerns raised throughout the community; and WHEREAS, PG&E intends to file an application with the California Public Utilkies Commission (CPUC), on or about November 22, 1999, for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN) authorizing construction of the above described project, together with the Proponent's Environmental Assessment (PEA); and WHEREAS, at that time, PG&E will provide notice to, among others, all public agencies having an interest in the project and make available the application and the PEA for review; and WHEREAS, the CPUC will likely issue a drat~ Environmental Impact Report (EIR) analyzing the projeet's potential environmental effects for formal public review and comment in late 2000; and WHEREAS, this resolution is in advance of that review and is intended to illustrate a high level of interest in the project. .NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Dublin City Council: Understands that the electrical system in the Tri~Valley region is nearing its capacity and supports the necessity to address this problem by mid-2002; and Pending further review and understanding that PG&E's preferred alternative may undergo further refinements, supports the Tri-Valley Upgrade Project as reflected on the attached map labeled Exhibit 1A; and Recognizes that the City will have a formal opportunity to cornmere on the proposed project as part of the CPUC's CPCN process and reserves its fight to cornmere "further on the proposed project and the EIR; and .Directs staff to submit to PG&E for inclusion in the PEA to be filed with the CPUC, a written statemere of the City' s position on the proposed project as reflected by this resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 5tn day of October, 1999. AYES: NOES: Councilmembers Howard, McCormick, Zika, Vice Mayor Lockhart and Mayor Houston None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ATTEST: . . - C K2 /G/10- 57 9 9 /re so-pg &e. doc Mayor g: ~PG&E~CC Reso suppt;rtT'ng prq~ct .]., ': .. ":' :~ Phase 2 .., ................. :, . .......... , '.. ..', ..~.' .~...)' . . ~ · :..... ~ ~ ~ ;.:;:'("" · ~... .' , . ~ ~ : - . .. . ,....:~...' , - .: · . .,,,',. . .: . . .... .; ...,.:.;..'. :.' :.,.~:, ':,. . · .. . · .. '...:..:..T.' '..., ~ :..;".. . ..:".'.. '.~..: ... ..,~,~m Ar~a'."~'"~"..:~ '.-:: >~., ~ ~.~ '. ..., , . . ~ % ~... ,~.,~:..'~-': .:~ .. . - ~~ issio. L e ~= .-;.' '. ~~ '~ ' ' ~, ', ' . :~ ~':~. Substation In pleasanton. The 230kV line would connect o th ' ' ~. ~ ' · - ~- ': ,. '.. ungrounded 230kV Conduit to pG&E's existing Vineyard · , ~ ~ '. '. ~- existing PG&E Contra Cos~alNewark power line south of ' ' VALL~C~OS ,~ Highway 84, less than a mile east of the GE Vallecitos Nuclear ' <." ~ ~ . Center entrance- While the route traverses mountainous terrain , .. ~ ~ ' ~ · nodh towards pleasanton, near the ci~ limits the overhead lines ' ~l < ' , - ' plans, Phase 2 may be added to meet the region's future demands.