Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 8.2 Western Dublin GPA/ SP/EIRSUBJECT: AGENDA STATEMENT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: MARCH 16, 1992 Western Dublin GPA/SP/EIR: Summary of DSRSD and Zone 7 Comments; List of EIR Responses Received to Date; Staff Recommendations for Various Aspects of the Project. PREPARED BY: Brenda A. Gillarde, Project Coordinator ATTACHMENTS: 1. Minutes from the February 24 City Council meeting RECOMMENDATION: I-r 1. Continue public hearing on the GPA/SP from March 2, 1992 2. Hear Staff presentation 3. Take additional public comment 4. Close public hearing on GPA/SP 5. Begin deliberation on the EIR, GPA, SP in that order 6. Continue meeting to March 30, 1992 FINANCIAL STATEMENT: None DESCRIPTION: I. BACKGROUND At the last meeting on March 2, the Planning Commission closed the public hearing on the Western Dublin EIR. The public hearing on the General Plan Amendment (GPA) and Specific Plan (SP) was continued to March 16, 1992. This staff report addresses three items: a) com ments made by Zone 7 and Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD) at the February 24, 1992 Council meeting (see Attachment 1 for a copy of the minutes); b) comments received from agencies/persons on the draft EIR as of March 9, 1992; and c) options for Planning Consideration on various aspects of the project. Item A is included to ensure that the information presented by DSRSD and Zone 7 at the Council meeting is available to the Commission for their deliberations on the Western Dublin project. Item B includes a brief summary of the major concerns expressed by the commenting agency or person. Staff and the Consultant are preparing formal responses which will be included in the March 30 staff report. Item C presents various issues with the Western Dublin project and options for possible modifications to the EIR, Specific Plan or General Plan Amendment. The issues raised are based on concerns heard during the public hearings to date. Where appropriate, Staff has made recommendations for a preferred option. ITEM NO. 13.2 COPIES TO: Applicant Owner Address File PAGE.-�- G 1-- The Commission cannot make decisions on these issues/options until the adequacy of the EIR has been discussed and it has been recommended that the EIR be certified with any changes deemed appropriate by the Commission. However, the issues are outlined in this staff report to assist the Commission in their discussion of whether the EIR has adequately covered the issues and impacts associated with the proposed project or whether additional information is required. II. DISCUSSION A. SUMMARY OF ZONE 7 AND DSRSD COMMENTS Mr. Robert Beebe, General Manager of DSRSD, described how the California water system works. There are two major projects: the Central Valley Project and the State Water Project on the Feather River. DSRSD purchases its water from Zone 7, which in turns obtains water from three sources: 1) the State Water Project; 2) local runoff from Del Valle watershed; and 3) natural recharge of the groundwater basin. Approximately 1,200 acre feet of water per year will be required to service the proposed Western Dublin project. Mr. Beebe felt that the recycling component being considered for this project would reduce the amount of water needed to serve this project by one third. DSRSD is working with Zone 7 to ensure future water supplies. However, the District is also beginning to investigate other sources of water beyond that provided by Zone 7. Water costs in western Dublin may be higher than in other parts of the Valley. There are several ways to deal with this issue without affecting current users such as an assessment district or developer "up front" funding. Tom McCormick, President of the Board of Directors of DSRSD, stated their clear intention to provide water to the City of Dublin. He reiterated the District's current search for new sources of water and expansion of the Valley's recycling plan. Mr. Sandy Figuers, Chairman of the Zone 7 Board, explained they are the water wholesalers for the entire eastern portion of Alameda County. and currently supply 40,000 acres feet of water per year to their customers. Last year the State supplied them with only 10% of their allotment. It appears this year the State will supply 20% of their allotment, possibly increasing to 30% if March provides sufficient rain. The Zone expects to request voluntary reductions of about 15-20%, which is a decrease from last year's 20-25% reduction. Presently the Zone serves 50,000 dwelling units or 130,000 people; their current maximum supply capability is approximately 70,000 dwelling units. Based on recent discussions of consumption rates, demand will exceed their ability to supply within the next 10 years. Water connections are on a first come, first serve basis. However, Zone 7 has a legal charter requiring them to provide water. The Zone takes their commitment Page 2 of 11 PAGE A OF seriously and will be exploring all possible methods for ensuring sufficient water supplies for the future. B. EIR COMMENTS As of March 9, the City has received eleven letters commenting on the Draft EIR for the Western Dublin project. The name of the agency/person and a sum mary of the major concerns is provided below. As mentioned above, responses to these comments will be provided in the Commission's March 30th staff report. 1. Department of Transportation - District 4 Requests further analysis of impacts on I-580; use of the current 1990 Traffic Volume Manual; ADT for two additional intersections; and inclusion of ramp metering as a mitigation. 2. Department of Fish and Game States the EIR does not adequately describe impacts or specific mitigation measures for vegetation and habitat loss; recommend substantial effort be made to reduce impacts; strongly oppose the project in its present configuration. 3. California Integrated Waste Management Board Requests additional discussion of final disposal sites for waste generated during and after construction; the impact on existing disposal site capacities; and inclusion of additional public information measures for recycling. 4. City of San Ramon Requests additional study of visual impacts to San Ramon; integration with San Ramon trail system; air quality impacts on San Ramon; impacts on Tri-Valley housing; impacts on San Ramon's hillside development ordinance; and further analysis of impacts on I-680 and Alcosta/San Ramon Boulevard. 5. City of Pleasanton Requests discussion of fair share improvements of Foothill/Dublin Canyon Road; storm water flow; and regional impacts including housing, transportation, open space, and parks. 6. East Bay Regional Parks District Supports open space and trail mitigations; prefers one lane gravel road for emergency vehicle access over ridge, if necessary; will not accept lands with repaired landslides or within a Geologic Hazard Abatement District (GHAD); and suggests connections with other local trails. 7. Dublin San Ramon Services District Requests inclusion of additional information on expansion of district boundaries; district servicing policy; documentation of district dedications; visual impacts of district facilities; servicing capabilities; projected wastewater demand; reservoir operations; and revision of growth inducing and cumulative impacts. 8. Preserve Area Ri elands Committee Requests additional information on water supply; groundwater availability; costs for new water; liability for graded areas; Williamson Act Contract cancellations; and establishment of more specific standards. Page 3 of 11 PAGE 3 OF /7 9. Parson Rourke & Walker Requests a "how and when" explanation for recommended plans and programs; revisions to the visual section; additional information on the Schaefer Ranch interchange; and modification to the energy resources discussion. 10. Eden Development Group Requests revision to visual mitigations for Oak Ridge; clarification of design review process; revision to property tax discussion; and deletion of the process and construction schedule. 11. Anne Durrer States opposition to project and Brittany Drive extension. C. PROJECT ISSUES. OPTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The following issues were raised by the public during the public hearings or are discussed in the Draft EIR. Issues were selected that require a decision by the Planning Commission or otherwise merit special attention. Options are presented for the Commission's consideration and where appropriate, a staff recom mendation (SR) has been noted. Population Staff has noted that the potential population figure for western Dublin needs to be amended to reflect a vacancy factor of 5% and 2.0 instead of 2.5 persons per household for multifamily units. This would amend the population figure on page 1- 12 from 9,655 to 8,383 persons. Land Use Jssue: SR: GPA language. Chapter 3 of the EIR lists the proposed amendments to current general plan policy language that would be required to accommodate the Western Dublin project. Staff concurs with the proposed language changes. Unless the Western Dublin project is drastically reduced, these policy changes are necessary to ensure consistency between the Specific Plan and the City's General Plan. Staff recommends the proposed policy changes remain in the EIR as presently worded unless the Planning Commission desires to substantially alter the project concept. Traffic and Circulation Issue: Brittany Drive Extension. This possible road connection has created considerable concern among local residents. The EIR states that the existing Brittany Drive can physically handle the additional traffic although speeds and conflicts with pedestrians could increase. Options: The EIR lists five alternatives that would eliminate this potential impact: Page 4 of 11 PAGE 171 CIF /7 SR: Issue: No Proiect. No development would be permitted on the Cronin/Milestone property and it would remain in open space. Rural Residential. Two homes would be permitted on the property with access from Martin Canyon. Wells and septic tanks would be used instead of urban services. Reduced Development. Sixteen homes would be built in the less constrained portions of the site. Access would be via Brittany Drive extension; however traffic impacts on Brittany Drive would be reduced to 10% of the applicants' current plan. Cluster Development. Seventy-four units would be permitted with access from the Hansen Hills Ranch subdivision. This would eliminate the need for the Brittany Drive extension. Optional Site. The development would be moved to another site, thereby eliminating traffic impacts on Brittany Drive. Staff believes the concerns expressed by residents regarding potential speeding and pedestrian safety are valid. The City wishes to avoid creating potentially unsafe driving or walking situations in Dublin. The applicants proposed an alternative to the Brittany Drive extension which involved constructing a full public street over Skyline Ridge and connecting to the Eden Development project. The street would follow the alignment for the proposed southerly emergency vehicle access road. Staff is not supportive of such a public road because of additional grading in a visually sensitive area and disruption of the regional trail corridor planned along Skyline Ridge. Staff recommends selection of the Cluster Development alternative which would reduce the number of units on the Milestone property from 125 to 74 or fewer dwellings. Reduction to below 75 units eliminates the need for two public access roads. Under this alternative, access would be through the Hansen Hills Ranch subdivision, thereby eliminating the Brittany Drive extension. However, this alternative would require an Emergency Vehicle Access (EVA) which is discussed in the following paragraph. An EVA for the Milestone oroieet. Unless 25 or fewer units were built on the Milestone property, an EVA is necessary, per the requirements of the Dougherty Regional Fire Authority. Options: The EIR provides two options for an EVA which would cross Skyline Ridge (refer to Figure 1-9 in the EIR): The North Alienment would begin in Martin Canyon and wind up the north slope of Martin Canyon. Slope would exceed 20 percent in some areas with tight curves which would make access difficult for heavy vehicles. Page 5 of 11 PAGE 5 OF l r% The South Alignment would follow the south side of Cronin ridge. Maximum gradient would be 15 percent with no curves of restricted turning radius. However, this alignment would be more visible than the North Alignment. This could be reduced if the road width is kept to a minimum and gravel is embedded into the pavement surface. SR; Staff recommends the South Alignment as it provides a safer route for emergency vehicles. Visual There are several unavoidable adverse visual effects of the proposed project. They cannot be mitigated to a level of less -than -significant unless the project were substantially reduced in size and scope per the options listed below. Issue: Construction of Hollis Canyon Boulevard. The lower portion of Eden Canyon would be filed, to accommodate a four lane arterial. There is no other feasible route for this road and even with intense planting, it will be decades before the visual quality of the canyon would begin to return. (EIR page 5-14); Options: Rural Residential Alternative (200 units) No Project/Optional Site Alternatives Issue: Mass grading for the Eden Canyon Country Club proiect. Approximately 35 to 37 million cubic yards of dirt will be moved over a two year period. This is equivalent to a hole one square mile by 37 feet deep. The upper sections of seven ridges would be removed or substantially altered; in some cases elevations would be lowered 100 feet or more. Fill would be placed in 6 canyons, exceeding depths of 100 feet in certain areas. The result will be a wide level floor over an area that is currently distinguished by incised canyons. (EIR page 5-17) Options: Rural Residential Alternative (200 units) No Project/Optional Site Alternatives issue: Mass Eradinff for the Milestone project. Cronin Ridge would be substantially graded and the earth placed in upper Martin Canyon, completely obliterating this section of the canyon. (EIR page 5-19) Options: Rural Residential Alternative (2 units) Reduced Development Alternative (16 units) No Project/Optional Site Alternatives Issue: Visual Effects of Mass Grading on the Morris Residence,. Fill banks in excess of 100 feet high for the proposed Hollis Canyon Boulevard would extend within 200 feet of the Morris residence. This substantial alteration would permanently change the landscape for the surrounding ranchland. (EIR page 5-22) Page 6 of 11 PAGE . OF .a Options: Rural Residential Alternative (200 units) Reduced Development Alternative (1,300 units) No Project/Optional Site Alternatives SR: Issue: The alternatives mentioned above are environmentally preferable to the proposed project. Because the building envelope would be substantially reduced, the amount of grading required and resultant visual impacts would be reduced to a level of less -than -significant. Alteration of the project to this level would require a complete redesign of the development concept. The resultant concept would likely be quite different from the proposed project. If the project is to proceed according to the concept presently proposed by the applicants, the City Council will have to make Findings of Overriding Consideration for the above identified impacts. At this juncture the Commission needs to determine if the project should be modified to reduce the above impacts. Visual Effect of Development on Cronin Ridge. As presently proposed, a portion of the Milestone project would project above the 740' elevation, which historically, has been the upper limit of development in Dublin. These homes would be visible from central Dublin and the Dublin hills. Options: In order to mitigate this impact to less -than -significant level, approximately 30 to 40 lots would need to be relocated or deleted from the plan (EIR page 5-11). SR: Staff recommends that the total number of units on the Milestone property be reduced to 74 or less, per the discussion in the traffic section. In addition to resolving traffic concerns with the Brittany Drive extension, this reduction also rectifies the visual impact identified above. Limiting development to the 740' elevation would be in keeping with historic development patterns in Dublin. It would also maintain the upper portions of the hills as scenic resources for the entire Dublin community. Issue: Off -Site Gradine. A 2.3 acre area along the western edge of the Donlan Canyon property is included in the grading concept for the Eden Canyon project. The area proposed for grading is part of the Donlan Canyon project's permanent open space. Options: The EIR recommends two options (EIR page 5-28): - Obtaining a grading easement; or - Revising the grading plan. SR: Staff recommends revising the Eden grading plan to avoid the open space area. This would be in keeping with the project conditions established for the Donlan Canyon project. Page 7 of 11 PAGE OF 17 Vegetation Due to the amount of landform alteration on the entire site, substantial stands of native vegetation will be removed. This will result in unavoidable significant adverse impacts in several locations. These impacts cannot be mitigated to a less - than -significant level unless the project was substantially redesigned, as indicated by the options listed below. Jssue: Upper Elderberry Canyon. About 3,600 lineal feet of this canyon would be filled for the proposed golf course. Significant stands of coast live oak woodland would be lost. The canyon's role as a viable wildlife corridor would be substantially degraded. Also destroyed will be the relatively scarce oak -bay riparian woodland. Options: Rural Residential Alternative (200 units) Reduced Density Alternative (1,300 units) Cluster Development Alternative (3,260 units) No Project/Optional Site Alternatives Issue: Upper Hollis Canyon. About 4,800 lineal feet of this canyon would also be filled for the golf course. Large stands of coast live oak woodland would be destroyed. Also lost would be the relatively scarce willow riparian woodland in central and lower Hollis Canyon. Options: Rural Residential Alternative (200 units) No Project/Optional Site Alternatives Issue: Wildflower Canyon., About 2,000 lineal feet of this canyon would be filled for residential development and a school/park site. A large contiguous stand of coast live oak woodland would be removed. Options: Rural Residential Alternative (200 units) Cluster Development Alternative (3,260 units) No Project/Optional Site Alternatives Issue: Eden Canyon. Willow riparian woodland would be removed to construct the entry road into the project. Options: Rural Residential Alternative (200 units) No Project/Optional Site Alternatives Issue: Songbird Canyon. Willow riparian would be removed to accommodate residential development and a school. Options: Rural Residential Alternative (200 units) No Project/Optional Site Alternatives Issue: Oak Ridge, Phillips Ridge, Shell Ridge, Powerline Canyon. The limit of development intrudes into areas with significant stands of oak woodland on these ridges. In the case of Oak Ridge, 6 acres of tress would be removed. Page 8 of 11 PAGE._ OF L2. Options: The EIR recommends that the site plan be adjusted so that tree removal is minimized in these areas (EIR page 6-10). Specifically, on Oak Ridge the EIR recommends that most of the 6 acre area remain as open space (EIR page 5-13). For Powerline Canyon, the EIR recommends relocating the reservoir (EIR page 6-10). Issue: Cronin Ridge. Proposed grading would remove a substantial portion of the oak woodland on this ridge. Options: Rural Residential Alternative (2 units) Reduced Development Alternative (16 units) Cluster Development Alternative (74 units) No Project/Optional Site Alternatives Issue: Martin Creek. About 1,500 lineal feet of riparian corridor along this creek would be destroyed by the filling of this area. Options: Rural Residential Alternative (2 units) No Project/Optional Site Alternatives SR: Eden/Schaefer Property The rural residential, no project and optional site options would reduce vegetation impacts to a less -than -significant level. However, it is recognized that project objectives might not be met with these alternatives. Under the Cluster Development Alternative, there would be smaller single family lots and more multifamily units than presently proposed. The golf course and commercial center would remain. Upper Elderberry Canyon and Wildflower Canyon would be preserved as open space. Elderberry Canyon is considered one of the most valuable habitat areas on the site. This alternative would still result in unavoidable impacts including vegetation removal and mass grading. The higher densities and fewer large lot homes could result in a negative fiscal impact on the City. However, with a carefully balanced mix of units, a neutral fiscal impact could be possible. Given the desire to develop the property in the im mediate future, the Cluster Alternative might not be a viable option. However, if the property were to be "land banked" for future use, and market conditions shifted toward smaller, more dense living communities, the Cluster Alternative might become a more viable development option. Other ways to reduce vegetative impacts include closely following the mitigations outlined on pages 5-13, 6-10, 6-11, 6-12, and 6-13. These measures call for modifications to the site plan to avoid or minimize tree removal, minimize grading, establish stream corridor buffers and reconstruct stream channels. Implementation of these measures may result in a reduction of residential lots in some areas. Page 9 of 11 CAGE .r_ ®OF y/ Milestone Property Implementation of the Cluster Development option would substantially reduce the amount of tree loss on the Milestone property. This option retains the single family development concept proposed by the applicants; however it would reduce the number of units to 74. Fewer units could also be considered under this option. In addition to reducing loss of oak woodland, this option reduces visual impacts and traffic problems associated with the Brittany Drive extension. Public Services Issue: SR: Air Quality Issue: Provision of water and sewer service. This has been a major topic of discussion. The presentations by DSRSD and Zone 7 indicate that future supplies are not guaranteed but they are aggressively seeking resolution to anticipated supply and capacity shortages. Language should be added to page 7-4, mitigation measure 7.1-5 that a "will serve" letter from DSRSD shall be submitted to the City prior to the issuance of grading permits or final map approval. Ozone Precursors.. The project would produce a small increment to regional levels of ozone precursors. Because of the existing regulatory requirement to produce a five percent per year reduction in air pollution, this impact is considered an unavoidable significant adverse impact. Options: The No Project Alternative is the only way to mitigate this impact to a level of less -than -significant. SR: Jssue: SR: The mitigation measures on page 12-13 should be closely followed. Language will be added to the mitigation stating that State regulations will be followed pertaining to golf carts on public streets. Dust Control.. Considerable concern has been expressed about the effects of dust on adjacent residents and the larger Dublin community. The EIR recommends a number of measures including watering exposed dirt, revegetation, daily cleanup of construction vehicles travelling on streets and limitation of on -site vehicle speed. (EIR page 12-13, 14) To address concerns for dust exposure to adjacent residents and the larger Dublin community, Staff recommends adding language to page 12-14 of the EIR stating that the Public Works department will handle all dust complaints. The Public Works Director may require the services of an air quality consultant to advise the City on the severity of the dust problem and additional ways to mitigate impacts on residents, including temporarily halting project construction. Page 10 of 11 PAGE ! D (j= , 7 Open Space Issue: Open Space Management. A recurring question has been management of the site's open space. Chapter 7 of the Specific Plan lists several options for ownership/management/maintenance. The most logical entity to assume management would be East Bay Regional Parks District, given their expertise in this area. The City has been working with the District throughout this project and will continue to do so. SR: Add language to page 7-17 of the Specific Plan which stipulates that resolution of the open space management issue must be completed prior to the issuance of site specific development plans and/or grading plans. Issue;, SR: Dedication of Open Space. Language should be added to the Western Dublin Draft General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan to clarify restrictions in open space uses. Amend page 22 of the Draft GPA, Implementing Policy J to read: "Except where steep slopes occur in designated areas of clustered development or ancillary facilities, require areas of steep slopes to be dedicated as permanent open space." Amend page 7-17 of the Draft SP, Action Program 7.9A, first bullet, to read: "Land Dedication. Land designated as a Resource Protection Area shall be restricted to permanent open space by documents which shall emphasize that this land may not be considered for development in the future:I III. CONCLUSION At the March 16 hearing, additional public comment on the Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment should be taken. The Planning Commission should then close the public hearing on the Western Dublin project. The Planning Commission can begin formal deliberation of the project, beginning with the EIR. The Commission needs to carefully consider the identified project impacts, particularly those that are unavoidable and will require the Council to make findings of overriding consideration. The purpose of this review is to determine whether the EIR has adequately addressed the issues or whether additional information is needed before the Commission can make a determination on the EIR's adequacy. This discussion should be continued to March 30 to provide an opportunity to review the EIR response to comments. Once the Commission determines the EIR is adequate, discussion of the Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment can commence. The Commission will need to weigh the various impacts and mitigations, select preferred options where applicable and make other recommendations for changes or modifications, as deemed appropriate. [wdmarl6] Page 11 of 11 and the Finance Department. The Certificate was awarded for the City's Annual Finance Report for Fiscal Year 1989-90. Mr. Molina stated that an award like this cannot be received without a hardworking staff. He introduced 2 of the 3 members of his staff. REPORT ON AVAILABLE WATER SUPPLY BY DSRSD AND ZONE 7 (1000-10) Planning Director Tong advised that the City is presently undertaking 2 significant General Plan Amendment studies, and during the Planning Commission public hearing on the Western Dublin GPA study, the issue of water availability to serve the study areas was raised. Mr. Tong advised that Staff had arranged for Dublin San Ramon Services District and Zone 7 Alameda County Floodr Control & Water Conservation District to make a presentation in order to provide the most accurate information possible to date. Bob Beebe, General Manager of DSRSD gave a report on how the California water system works. Three-quarters of the State's water runoff occurs in the northern part of the state and yet three-quarters of the demand is in the southern part of the state. The Federal Central Valley project delivers about 5 million acre feet of water per year to about 3 million acres of farmland between Red Bluff and Bakersfield. About 1 million acre feet is supplied to urban users through water retailers such as the Contra Costa Water District in Concord. A second major northern California system is the State Water Project on the Feather River northeast of Oroville. This project can supply 3 million acre feet in a normal year and it is from this source that the Valley's water is imported. Zone 7 has the distinction of being the first of 30 state water contractors to pump water out of the California Aqueduct. Zone 7 has 2 treatment plants which filter and disinfect the water. They also receive local runoff from Del Valle and this water is then delivered to DSRSD for sale in Dublin. For 25 years, DSRSD's mission has been limited to retail service and water; i.e., making connections to new homes and businesses, reading meters, billing customers. With the uncertainty of the summer of 1989 supply, the DSRSD directed their Staff to begin looking for water to make the current supply more reliable and to meet the demands of new customers. Mr. Beebe stated as the City plans growth, the District is determined to provide water and wastewater services. As a state water contractor, Zone 7 is probably in a better position to seek new water. Further, 2 separate water systems are not really needed in the Valley. Zone 7 is now considering policies that could meet the need for new supplies of water. The District will continue to put out feelers to find where there may be water available, but they will not make commitments so long as Zone 7 makes progress toward finding new sources of water. Mr. Beebe stated with regard to water service to West Dublin, water service to the planned 3,260 homes will require about 1,200 acre feet of water per year. They sold 3,950 acre feet of water to the City of ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ e ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ CM - VOL 11 - 68 Regular Meeting February 24, 1992 PAGE OF / Dublin in 1990 and 3,570 acre feet last year when they were urging conservation. Recycling of treated wastewater from the District's plant will make a big difference between the amount of water required in West Dublin and what would be needed to serve a like number of homes in the central part of town. They feel they can easily serve West Dublin with 1/3 less water than it would take here because of recycling. West Dublin will actually use more recycled water than they will produce, so this is a fine opportunity for good water management here in Dublin. The recycled water would receive the same filtration and disinfection treatment given drinking water and the water will be safe for body contact. DSRSD is working with Zone 7 to set conditions for recycling major portions of treated effluent, as it becomes cost effective to do so in comparison with new water supplies. Best Management Practices throughout the District are being implemented to reduce the impact of expanding service. Mr. Beebe explained that they suspect that California water costs in the 90's may resemble gasoline prices in the 70's. Since last summer, they have raised their water rates about 30%. They feel that the District will remain financially healthy, provided they can continue to see as much water as they did last summer. Water costs in western Dublin may be higher than in the Valley. Developers may advance those funds and then add them to the cost of a house; or another possibility would be an assessment district that would pay the marginal cost of bringing new water to the Valley. No matter how it's done, it will not affect the cost of water to current residents, nor the reliability of supply. Tom McCormick, President of the Board of Directors of DSRSD stated they clearly understand their responsibility to the City to provide water to the City's planned needs. With or without the cooperation of Zone 7, they intend to pursue and meet the need. They want Zone 7 to assume the rightful role of wholesaler, and they wish to continue in their role as a retailer. They are now looking for sources of water and are actively planning and trying to widen the scope of the recycling plan for the Valley that will add to that source. They regularly discuss how to meet the planned needs and may have to create their own source. Board Member Georgean Vonheeder stated she echoed Tom's comments regarding their commitment to providing services. The District's Mission Statement is very clear, and their Board is highly committed to being utility providers and understands that the planned growth that goes on is the responsibility of the City that it serves. As the City develops to the west and to the east, it will be their responsibility to provide services to, those areas. Mr. Sandy Figuers, Chairman of the Zone 7 Board commended the DSRSD Board for staying out of land planning and being in water service. He explained that they are the water wholesalers for the entire Livermore Valley area, covering the entire eastern portion of Alameda County. They currently supply about 40,000 acre feet of water per year to their customers. Last year, the State supplied them with only 10% of their normal allotment. They discovered that they did not have the ■ a ■ ■ ■ • ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ CM - VOL 11 - 69 Regular Meeting February 24, 1992 PAGE /2 OF 27, capacity to supply the entire Valley from the groundwater basin. Parts of Livermore were supplied strictly through the canal system. This situation has been remedied, both through the addition of piping infrastructure and the addition of new wells to allow peak capacity pumping during the summer. It appears that this year, the State will be giving them 20% of their current requested supply. This could increase to 30% or greater if we have March rains. They have currently added approximately 3,000 to 4,000 acre feet of extra storage in Del Valle Reservoir, and are currently running 100% of that runoff water through the water supply system, saving the State supplies until later in the year. Mr. Figuers stated they expect water supplies to be similar to last year, and will probably be requesting voluntary reductions of about 15-20%. Last year, they requested 20-25%. A current copy of water supply projections was passed out. They currently serve about 50,000 dwelling units, or 130,000 people. Their current system maximum supply capability is approximately 70,000 dwelling units. Based on current discussions of numbers, the demands will exceed their ability to supply water within the next 10 years. As we get closer to the ultimate limits of their system, they also lose flexibility. Mr. Figuers indicated he felt the cheap water era is coming to an end. The problems are both technical and political. Zone 7 must know how many people they will be required to serve. The next problem is where do they get new water. The whole State is having to deal with these problems. Storage will probably require a reservoir in the upper Del Valle area, and also a treatment plant, double the capacity of current systems. A preliminary cost analysis is in the $200-$400 million range. This would necessitate an increased connection fee of between $4,000-$8,000 per new house, from the current fee of approximately $850. This new type system will require 10 to 12 years lead time, so if they are to start building new infrastructure and getting new water, it needs to begin within the next year or two. Mr. Figuers discussed the political question of whether water should be used to control growth. Both sides of the question have good and bad points. They have members on their Board who represent both sides. Their attorneys have advised them that there is no legal problem or restriction preventing them from supplying water outside the Alameda County boundaries. Cm. Jeffery questioned how he characterized Zone 7, as a provider or a planner. Her constituency has asked her this. Mr. Figuers stated they are legally required by their charter to provide water, and he could not give a pat answer to this question. A historical summary was given of how Zone 7 came into being in the late 50's. He felt the voters should have a say regarding major increases in infrastructure as they will be paying for it. It's an unclear issue as far as where the official request comes from for them to double their water system size. ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ s ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ CM - VOL 11 - 70 Regular Meeting February 24, 1992 1 Cm. Burton requested comments on whether he felt the Board members were elected on the basis of their strategy on planning, or their strategy and knowledge of water. Mr. Figuers replied that the Board members seem to have every spectrum represented and the answer would have to be yes and yes. Cm. Moffatt asked if Zone 7's decisions could be overturned by the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Figuers advised that even though they are an elected Board, they are not completely independent. Their decisions are reviewed by the Board of Supervisors. They do have the ultimate authority, but he was unaware that the Board of Supervisors had ever overturned one of their decisions. Cm. Jeffery felt it would be helpful to note that most of the cities look to Zone 7 as a provider, not a planner. Mr. Figuers agreed, but he questioned how the planners come up with their numbers. Cm. Jeffery advised that this is not their problem, but the City's. Planning Commissioner Lee North questioned with regard to the projected increase of about 51,000 dwelling units, how soon Zone 7 would know how they're going to provide water. The City will be making plans in the next year or so for the next 20 years. Mr. Figuers stated he could not guarantee that there will be water for that many people. Potential recycled water sources have been discussed. The way things are in the water business today, you can have a project brought on line and constructed, and still not get the water. Right now, they have approximately 20,000 slots left in their system. Basically, the first projects that come through will have a much better change of getting those slots. In summary, Mr. Figuers stated that he understood that it's difficult for a planner to plan things for the future when they can't give a firm answer, but Zone 7 will do the best they can. TRI-VALLEY WASTEWATER AUTHORITY (TWA) EXPORT SYSTEM ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT REVIEW (1030-70) Public Works Director Thompson advised that in 1986, the sewer providers in the Valley formed a JPA, Tri-Valley Wastewater Authority (TWA), to plan and construct additional facilities to serve the future needs of the member agencies. These agencies include DSRSD, the Cities of Livermore and Pleasanton, and Alameda County. A solution for increasing the capacity of the export line to San Francisco Bay was proposed in the past, but that solution ran into some political and environmental problems. New solutions have been explored, and an ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ o ■ ■ e ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ CM - VOL 11 - 71 Regular Meeting February 24, 1992 PAGE /5- OF .. 7 updated environmental document has been prepared for release to the public. Mr. Thompson introduced Bob Whitley, General Manager, who explained that the new Environmental Report covers 3 physical alternatives: 1) The preferred alternative is to export future untreated wastewater north along the Southern Pacific right-of-way to the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District's system. 2) The second alternative would pump treated wastewater west over the Dublin Grade to the edge of the Bay, where it would connect to the existing East Bay Discharger's Authority (EBDA) and then to EBDA's existing outfall into San Francisco Bay. 3) The third alternative is the same as Alternative 2 except that it would have its own outfall to San Francisco Bay. A fourth alternative is the "no project" alternative. Mr. Whitley advised that no decision has been made to go with any one of the alternatives. TWA is, however, working very closely and confidently with representatives of Central Contra Costa Sanitary District to outline a possible business relationship between the 2 agencies. Their intention is that the EIR be certified as being complete and it can then be used for the decision making process. Mr. Whitley discussed the capacity allocation and how the limitations within the TWA project might be handled. The arrangement with Central San is that they have offered that up to 40 million gallons a day of peak wastewater flow can be conveyed through their system. It has been projected in the EIR that at the ultimate build -out of prospective general plans for all of the cities in the County's area, that over 200 million gallons a day would be generated. A question of how a capacity of 40 MGD would be split between member agencies would have to be determined by the member agencies of TWA, DSRSD serving Dublin. TWA adopted a resolution at their meeting last week which addressed how capacity would be distributed among the member agencies. As long as the figure is less than 26.1 MGD of capacity as identified in the EIR, the problem is relatively simple. If it adds up to more than 26.1, they will attempt to work out discrepancies at a staff level. If they are unable to work it out, it would then be referred to the Board of Directors. The resolution outlines four triggering events as to when the member agencies must take some actions. The first is that if there would be an overflow event in the member agency's jurisdiction, there would be an overflow event within the District's jurisdiction. This being the case, the District would have to build additional facilities. The second would be if there is an overflow event in another jurisdiction, but that the District was at 75% of its existing dry weather flow capacity. In that case, both agencies would have to build additional facilities. The third would be that the District would be at 75% of its capacity and TWA's total capacity would be at 50%. The fourth would be that the District would be at 75% of its capacity and the peak flow through TWA's system exceeds 30 MGD. The 75% criteria comes from what is required by the Regional Water Quality Control Board for the planning and expansion of wastewater facilities for treatment and eventual disposal into the receiving waters. ■ ■ ■ s • • ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ • ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ • ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ • ■ ■ ■ ■ CM - VOL 11 - 72 Regular Meeting February 24, 1992 PAGE OF II_ Mr. Whitley discussed a final point of decision making related to financing. First of all they must plan for phased construction to match the needs of the communities. They will defer debt until it's absolutely necessary. They don't wish to go into debt until such time as a project is approved and ready to go. Mr. Whitley stated TWA recognizes the primacy of the City and County as far as the General Plan process. Their objective is to serve the needs of the member agencies and to serve the needs of the General Plans. Dublin's anticipated capacity needs for the east and west Dublin planning areas need to be transmitted through correspondence with DSRSD. In a couple of months, they will be going through a formal capacity allocation process. Mr. Whitley stated that even though TWA's program does have limitations as to peak hydraulic flows to leave the Valley, it is workable. It will require planning for future facilities which are typically not included in the land use planning process. Items such as wetwater storage reservoirs, recycling, and flow reduction measures need to be incorporated in the future land use plans. Cm. Jeffery asked for a clarification about whether or not storage facilities would be underground. Mr. Whitley stated they would be predominantly underground. The design criteria would be left up to the member agency for other types of basins and storage reservoirs which would be upstream and in local jurisdictions. An underground facility does add costs. Mr. Figuers asked him to discuss the anticipated costs of the system. Mr. Whitley advised that the preferred alternative with Central San and for the end Valley facilities of TWA alone is about $43 million. This excludes all future costs from Central San and local costs for conveyance and storage, recycling, whatever is necessary to reduce peak flows. A total cost is not known at this time. On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unanimous vote, the Council authorized the Mayor to send a letter expressing City Council support of the development of expanded sewer capacity to Dublin's planning areas. ADDITION OF ITEM TO AGENDA (410-40) On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Jeffery, and by unanimous vote, the Council added an item to the New Business section of the agenda related to Parcel Map 6097. ■ ■ ■ a ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ s a ■ ■ e ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ CM - VOL 11 - 73 Regular Meeting February 24, 1992 or Z,