The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutItem 4.13 Tri-Valley Wastewater Authority EIR (2) CITY OF DUBLIN AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: March 9, 1992 SUBJECT: Response to Tri-Valley Wastewater Authority (TWA) Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (DSEIR) for the Long-Range Wastewater Management Plan for the Livermore-Amador Valley. REPORT PREPARED BY: David K. Choy, Associate Planner VC/ EXHIBITS ATTACHED: 1) Draft letter to TWA with comments on the DSEIR. 2 ) A copy of the DSEIR is available in the Planning Director' s office and will be available at the City Council meeting. RECOMMENDATION: 1�f 1) Send comments to TWA regarding DSEIR FINANCIAL STATEMENT: None at this time. Future developers and sewer users will ultimately pay for the development and maintenance of the system. DESCRIPTION: At its regular meeting of February 24, 1992, the City Council expressed their support of the expansion of wastewater services in the Livermore-Amador Valley, as described within the DSEIR as the "preferred" project alternative, Alternative North 3 . This project proposes the location of an export pump station, emergency storage basin and an export pipeline within the City of Dublin to facilitate exporting future untreated wastewater north along the Southern Pacific right-of-way to the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District' s system. Staff has reviewed the DSEIR and has prepared a response to TWA regarding the population and employment projections used in the DSEIR and the project' s direct physical impacts on the City of Dublin. Comments regarding the projections reflect the up-to-date progress made on the Eastern Dublin and Western Dublin General Plan Amendment Studies . Comments regarding the physical impacts focus on the adequacy of impact identification and proposed mitigation regarding Alternative North 3 . The two additional alternatives discussed in the DSEIR propose facilities and pipeline routes outside the City of Dublin, resulting in negligible direct physical impacts to Dublin. Since the time that the background studies for the DSEIR were prepared, the City has made significant progress on the Eastern Dublin and Western Dublin General Plan Amendment studies . The population and employment projections in the DSEIR are somewhat overstated. The discussion of impacts related to the overstated projects may also be overstated and should be reviewed. The discussion is more than adequate to address the updated projections . Staff has identified several areas where more specific mitigation should be added. These areas include: automatic notification in the event of upset; temporary interruption of on-site vehicular access; roadway disruption associated with pipeline road crossings; and provisions to require securing appropriate Planning Department and Construction Permits prior to construction. The DSEIR with responses to comments will become the Final SEIR and will serve as the sole environmental document for the proposed project. The project could be implemented upon approval and certification of the Final SEIR by TWA. Staff recommends sending the formal comments to TWA regarding the DSEIR for the Long-Range Wastewater Management Plan for the Livermore- Amador Valley. ITEM NO. ♦ COPIES TO: General/Agenda File twaagnda _ Project Planner Senior Planner CITY LE RK FILE � 0 DRAFT March 10, 1992 Chairperson and Directors Tri-Valley Wastewater Authority C/O Mr. Robert Whitley, General Manager 36 Quail Court Walnut Creek, CA 94596 SUBJECT: Comments Regarding Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (DSEIR) for the Long-Range Wastewater Management Plan for the Livermore-Amador Valley Dear Chairperson and Directors : The City of Dublin appreciates the opportunity to provide comments regarding the DSEIR for the Long-Range Wastewater Management Plan for the Livermore-Amador Valley. The City has comments on the population and employment projections used in the DSEIR and on the project ' s direct physical impacts . Comments regarding the projections reflect the up-to-date progress made on the Eastern Dublin and Western Dublin General Plan Amendment studies . Comments regarding the physical impacts focus on impacts resulting from the "preferred" project alternative, Alternative North 3, which would include the location of an export pump station, emergency storage basin and an export pipeline within the City of Dublin. The two additional alternatives discussed in the DSEIR, Alternative West 2 and Alternative West 3, propose facilities and pipeline routes outside of the City of Dublin, resulting in negligible direct impacts to Dublin. No comments are provided on these two alternatives . Comments regarding the population and employment projections are as follows : The DSEIR states that the wastewater flow estimates and the new facilities are based on population and employment projections for the year 2010 (pg. 3-4 ) . The City Staff has provided in this letter projections for the year 2010 and for ultimate build-out for the Dublin area, which is not anticipated until beyond the year 2020 . Since the time that the background studies in the Appendices of the DSEIR were prepared, the City of Dublin has made significant progress on the Eastern Dublin and Western Dublin General Plan Amendment Studies . The projections in the DSEIR, both in the tables and in the text, are out of date and need to be updated. Attached to this letter are several tables from the DSEIR with annotations to reflect the updated population and employment projections for the Dublin area. In summary, the updated population and employment projections for the Dublin area are as follows : Existing General Plan Scenario for year 2010 from existing Dublin General Plan and State Department of Finance SF Units MF Units Total Units Population Employment Dublin 5,311 3,045 8,356 26,251 8,400 Eastern Dublin -- -- -- -- -- Western Dublin -- -- -- -- -- Prospective General Plan Scenario for year 2010 from Dublin General Plan Amendment Studies SF Units MF Units Total Units Population Employment Dublin 5,311 3,045 8,356 26,251 8,400 Eastern Dublin 4,269 8,275 12,544 28,701 39,554 Western Dublin 1,757 1,420 3,177 8,039 127 24,077 62,991 48,081 Ultimate General Plan Scenario from Dublin General Plan Amendment Studies for beyond year 2020 SF Units MF Units Total Units Population Employment Dublin 5,311 3,045 8,356 26,251 8,400 Eastern Dublin 5,816 12,659 18,475 41,745 42,944 Western Dublin 1,920 11340 3,260 8,240 127 30,091 76,226 51,471 Historical Population Growth for 10 year period from 1980 and 1990 censuses Average Annual 1980 1990 Growth. Rate Dublin 13,496 23,229 973 5 .58% Projected Population Growth for 15 year period from existing Dublin General Plan and Dublin General Plan Amendment Studies Average Annual 1990 2005 Growth Rate Dublin 23,229 49, 342 1741 5 . 15% Since the projections in the DSEIR for the selected design period of the year 2010 are somewhat overstated, the discussion of the impacts related to the projections within the DSEIR may also be overstated and should be reviewed. The discussion of impacts is more than adequate to address the updated projects . - 2 - The City of Dublin Sphere of Influence boundaries shown in Figure 3-1 of DSEIR should be corrected to reflect the Alameda County LAFCO action of November 8, 1990 . Attached to this letter is Figure 3-1 with annotations to show the correct boundaries . As part of the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment Study, the City of Dublin is planning future land uses in the Doolan Canyon area. The City anticipates requesting that Dublin' s Sphere of Influence be adjusted to include the Doolan Canyon area. Comments regarding the project proposed within Alternative North 3 are as follows : Impact Concern 6-2 The City of Dublin should be included within the automatic notification system to allow for local emergency response measures . In the event of upset, mitigation of resultant odor impacts is not discussed. 6-3 Same as 6-2 . 6-4 Same as 6-2 . 6-5 Same as 6-2 . 10-2 Construction of the West Valley Interceptor pipeline will disrupt existing shopping centers in Dublin. The DSEIR states that no mitigation is required. The City of Dublin has identified the following impacts which will require mitigation: A. Construction of the West Valley Interceptor should allow continuous vehicular and pedestrian access to existing shopping centers to the fullest extent possible. If access is interrupted, it should be coordinated with the affected property owners and business owners to minimize conflicts . Disruption should not occur during peak business hours . B. If vehicular access is disrupted, safe and direct pedestrian access shall be provided from adjacent parking areas to the affected businesses . C. Any disruption or modification to parking lots ( i .e. paving or striping) shall be repaired and/or replaced in conformance with approved plans . D. If properties are not under the same property ownership, an Agreement or Joint Access Easement may be needed to assure the joint use of properties . - 3 - Impact Concern 10-3 Same as 10-2 . 10-4 (a) Does the time estimate of two days for the pipeline road crossing of Dublin Boulevard take into account that this roadway is constructed over approximately fifteen ( 15) inches of concrete spanning twenty-five (25) feet? Does this change the amount of time traffic is disrupted on Dublin Boulevard? All road closures and construction activity related to the pipeline road crossings should be coordinated with the City of Dublin Public Works Department. Construction activity shall be limited to weekdays between 9 : 00 a.m. and 3 : 30 p.m. All weekend construction activity must be approved in advance, in writing, by the Public Works Director. Affected Public Transportation Agencies (BART Express, Wheels, etc. ) should be notified of road closures which may disrupt of impact their schedules or routes . 10-5 The proposed export pump station #1 and storage basin to be located on the former Camp Parks property will require appropriate Planning Department and Construction Permits from the City of Dublin prior to construction. 11-1 Same as 10-5 . Mitigation Measure 11(c) should be modified to include the review of architectural and landscape plans by the City of Dublin prior to project approval . 13-2 Same as 10-4 (a) . 15-6 Same as 10-2 and 10-4 (a) . Once again, the City of Dublin appreciates the opportunity to comment on the DSEIR for the Long-Range Wastewater Management Plan for the Livermore-Amador Valley. If you have any questions, please feel free to call David K. Choy, Associate Planner, or me at (510) 833-6610 . Sincerely, Peter W. Snyder Mayor LT/DKC: fh Attachments - 4 - cc: City Council Members Planning Commission Members R. Ambrose, City Manager L. Tong, Planning Director L. Thompson, Public Works Director D. Choy, Associate Planner Robert Beebe, General Manager, DSRSD - 5 - a AN)o7'A7t_D ro��M 1-: 3-2 LAND USE POTEN XISTING GENERA L PLAN SCENARIO BY ANALYSIS AREA TWA SERVICE AREA' Analysis Area SF Units MF Units Total Units Population 2 Employment3 Alamo-Blackhawk -- -- -- -- -- Danville -- -- -- -- -- San Ramon 7,673 2,568 10,241 27,029• 1,483 Tassajara & Dougherty Valleys 4,584 -- 4,584 13,202 233 Dublin X311 -447— 3045 � MG - ZVSf 202 - SAOa 14, 6— East Dublin -- -- — -2-,500,- X00- — fA''J9, West Dublin -- -- -- -' -- Pleasanton 19,042 10,168 29,210 74,364 80,675 Pleasanton Ridge 259 -- 259 745 -- Livermore4 23,760 6,427 30,187 80,763 92,769 North Livermore 2,248 6 2,254 6,487 17,780 TOTAL 62,043 25,802 87,845 228,219 258,573 'Excludes Danville, Alamo-Blackhawk and Northern San Ramon. ZAssumes a 4% vacancy rate, 3 persons per single-family unit and 2 persons per multifamily unit. 3Assumes a 5% vacancy rate and the following employment densities (employees per square feet of building space): Retail-510; Office- 260; Service-490; Industrial-590; Motel-1,060; R&D-360; Restaurant-175; Warehouse-1,300. 4Includes Springtown. Sources: General Plans of Tri-Valley Cities; TJKM; Economic and Planning Systems. ATTACHMENT L_._1 l..__.1 I_._._1 �eK �(EA2 ZOIO BLE 3-3 E POTENTIA ROSPECTIVE GENERAL PLANS SCENARIO' BY ANALYSIS AREA TWA SERVICE AREA2 Analysis Area SF Units MF Units Total Units Population 3 Employment4 Alamo-Blackhawk -- -- -' -- -- Danville -- -- -- -- -- San Ramon 7,673 2,568 10,241 27,029 1,483 Tassajara & Dougherty Valleys 8,585 11,985 20,570 47,736 4,000 Dublin 5,311 ;4 3,a4S � g,356 $" 26251 gH;829- $,400t4& East Dublin �,26�1 +500" ?5441 2-$,701 33 & 3%5t-4 46,49-2- West Dublin I ( z�-,843- =-1�27o+,689 �*- 43 - Pleasanton 4 19,042 p3ti10,168 Z�q 4629,210 -10.15 74,364 80,675 Pleasanton Ridge 2,020 -- 2,020 5,817 Livermore s 23,760 6,427 30,187 80,763 92,769 North Livermore 14,030 3,972 18,002 . 48,032 17,800 TOTAL 86,930 51,353 138,283 348,949 255,493 1 Includes existing General Plans plus amendments for major planning areas where the planning P rocess has been initiated. ZExcludes Danville, Alamo-Blackhawk and Northern San Ramon. 3Assumes a 4% vacancy rate, 3 persons per single-family unit and 2 persons per multifamily unit. 4 Assumes a 5% vacancy rate and the following employment densities (employees per square feet of building space): Retail-510; Office- 260; Service-490; Industrial-590; Motel-1,060; R&D-3fi0; Restaurant-175; Warehouse-1,300. SIncludes Springtown. Sources: General Plans of Tri-Valley Cities; TJKM; Economic and Planning Systems. AI'ACHME T TABLE 3-3 LAND USE POTENTIALS FOR THE PROSPECTIVE GENERAL PLANS SCENARIO' BY ANALYSIS AREA A ERVICE AREA" j,Tt Mate CsI�J � P sc�N49c o �R $EYo�rr Y � 2020 Analysis Area SF Units MF Units Total Units Population3 Employment4 Alamo-Blackhawk -- Danville San Ramon 7,673 2,568 10,241 27,029 1,483 Tassajara & Dougherty Valleys 8,585 11,985 20,570 47,736 4,000 Dublin 5,3t t -4-,47-7-~ 3D45 4,+3,3- Qj3S6-g-, E}- 2651 X8$29- 2,4-oo 4+,,346- East Dublin 4,-SOO- 12,659�04, 00' 41,Z3S3-3-,� -4.2,94446,,1-92- x,443- H�59-- 12'1 28- West Dublin 1,9ZO 3- 1,3�� 6AA- 3��-60 -$I , Pleasanton 19,042 10,168 29,210 6,3 83 7 4,3 64 80,675 Pleasanton Ridge 2,020 -- 2,020 5,817 -- Livermore5 23,760 6,427 30,187 80,763 92,769 North Livermore 14,030 3,972 18,002 . 48,032 17,800 TOTAL 86,930 51,353 138,283 348,949' 255,493 areas where the planning process has been initiated. 'Includes existing General Plans plus amendments for major planning P g P "Excludes Danville, Alamo-Blackhawk and Northern San Ramon. 3Assumes a 4% vacancy rate, 3 persons per single-family unit and 2 persons per multifamily unit. 4Assumes a 5% vacancy rate and the following employment densities (employees per square feet of building space): Retail-510; Office- 260; Service-490; Industrial-590; Motel-1,000; R&D-300; Restaurant-175; Warehouse-1,300. S Includes Springtown. Sources: General Plans of Tri-Valley Cities; TJKM; Economic and Planning Systems. . i on the Tri-Valle Area 16. Growth and*Effects Y •• r TABLE 16-1 r HISTORICAL POPULATION GROWTH BY JURISDICTION L Average Annual 1980 1990 Growth Rate Percent Percent Area Number of Total Number of Total Number Percent Dublin 13f4q(o 13 2 14 173 H, 2$ Livermore 49,612 41 59,900 33 1,029 1.90 i Pleasanton 35,319. 29 59,200 33 2,388 5.30 San Ramon 20,245 17 35,700 20 1,546 5.84 TWA Study Area Total 120,475 100 180,300 100 5,98-:1 4.11 Bay Area Region Total 5,179,789 5,950,950 77,116 1.40 TWA Study Area As 2 33 3.03 7.76 C Percent of Bay Area L Source: Association of Bay Area Governments, Economic and Planning Systems, Inc. TABLE 16-2 PROJECTED POPULATION GROWTH BY JURISDICTION Average Annual 1990 2005 Growth Rate Percent Percent Area Number of Total Number of Total Number Percent 4 17 -b-IT Dublin 2 32'29 - 598- 14 4Sr'C6, 17 l 2-Livermore 59,900 33 , 31 2,340 3.35 Pleasanton 59,200 33 80,500 30 2,130 3.12 San Ramon 35,700 20 55,600 21 1,990 4.53 TWA Study Area Total 180,300 100 265,600 100 8,530 3.95 Bay Area Region Total 5,950,950 6,832,850 88,190 1.39 TWA Study Area As 3.03 3.89 9.67 Percent of Bay Area Source: Association of Bay Area Governments, Economic and Planning Systems, Inc. 90179 16-4 r AOL I 16V W 3- r fT�+ pV11J 5 �� NK,UEfJCf- 34UNDAM-S, Nov 51 tct q r .., ti ■� a ■ ■♦♦■ SOUTH SAN RAYON ■. ♦♦♦♦ 10 ♦~ TASSAJARA/ 1 DOUGHERTY VALLEY 1 SOUTH N RA �`'. w�:_::x<_5:::::::r :. :`:y?_'f �� .-. . ♦ :. . ..R NORTH LIVE WE T DUB - ■. S " .LIN vALLAT ..... �i/iii ■ ................. ................ ............. .............. :LIVER so PLEASANTON ^\� ,♦ ,.,_..._.. iF ■.oi::...(;::: .... LIT .r r' p. i t. .. w rrarorr \� 1 PLEASANTON \ ATTACHMEMI