Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1984/04/25 Tape #246: Side 2 0-1042 MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers Wednesday, April 25, 1984 Public Services Building ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chairman O'Neill, Commissioners Cannon, Green, Johnson, and Shipe COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Commissioners Guiles and Pressutti (both with prior notification) STAFF PRESENT: Director of Planning Krempl, Assistant Planner Bazzel, Assistant City Attorney Gill, Secretary Ruth Smith PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Chairman O'Neill and was followed by a moment of silent prayer. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MSUC IShipe/Johnson) to approve the minutes of 3/14/04. ORAL COMMUNICATION None. 1. PUBLIC HE~RING: CONSIDERATION OF AN EXTENSION OF THE TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP, HUDSON VALLEY ESTATES NO. l, CHULA VISTA TRACT 77-10, SUE HUDSON Director of Plan~ing Krempl explained ~hat the item was a request to extend a tentative subdivision map for 3 years, the original map having been approved in 1981. Fifteen lots are involved, seven of which are pan-handled and the project is located on the extension of Las Flores Drive north of "D" Street. He added that a proposed street improvement assessment district including other property and involving complicated drainage issues, had been rejected by Council and staff directed to return with alternatives providing costs that would be less of a financial burden to the property owners. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing ~as opened. Margie Fuentez, ll Cresta way, C.V., asked if "D" Street would be involved, and if the extension affects the assessement of her property. She said she is not in opposition to the subdivision of Mrs. Hudson's land but expressed concern over the amount of the proposed assessment. Planning Commission - 2 - April 25, 1984 Planning Director Krempl assured her that the extension did not commit her to the street improvements or authorize any assessment on her property. Mrs. Joe Trevisani, 149 "D" Street, C.V., also expressed concern over the proposed assessment particularly to the retired living on Social Security. She also questioned the location of the proposed access to the Hudson property. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. MSUC {Johnson/Cannon) to approve a 3-year extension of the tentative map for Hudson Valley Estates No. l, CV Tract 77-10, the map to then expire on 4/17/87. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: A PUBLIC HEARING TO TAKE PUBLIC TESTIMONY ON THE ADEQUACY OF THE DRAFT EIR 84-4 FOR THE PROPOSED OTAY SMALL ELECTRIC GENERATING PLANT - OTAY LANDFILL CENTRAL PLANTS, INC. ~sistant Planner Bazzel stated the purpose of the public hearing was to receive testimony on the adequacy of the Draft EIR, then the Commission would close the hearing, the Consultant would incorporate the testimony into the Final EIR and return it to the Planning Commission for certification. He said the EIR is for a project that consists of grading and preparation of a 0.87 acre site at the northeast corner of the Otay Landfill site and the construction of a 9,040 square foot structure housing two generator engines (utimately four) and three compressors plus a system of wells to extract methane gas which will be compressed and turned into electricity. This electricity will go the BKK site on the landfill site and to Otay Valley Road through the existing power lines. A conditional use permit will be required and considered by the Planning Commission and the City Council. He then introduced the consultant, Betsy Wiseman. Betsy Wiseman, New Horizons, 1850 Fifth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101, the consultant preparing the EIR, said the environmental issues considered included (1) geology and soils, {2) visual aesthetics, {3) air quality, (4) noise, (5) utilities, (6) health, {7) transportation and (8) risk of upset. She explained that (1) a site-specific .geologic reconnaisance study by a registered engineering geologist revealed the possibility of low-to-moderate seismic groundshaking but nothing differing from any other location in Chula Vista thus resulting in no signficant impact and two mitigation measures proposed, (a) moving portions of the proposed structure to the western portion of the pad and (b) review by a soils engineer of the stability of the north and south cut slopes and the foundation characteristics; {2) visibility of the proposed plant by the neighboring residents is minimal because of the intervening knolls and could be further diminished by painting the structure in earth tones; (3) in 1982, the 3-hour hydrocarbon standard, as recorded by the CV monitoring station, was exceeded 183 days, however, the facility will collect and burn these gases decreasing existing levels of reactive organic acids and hydrocarbons; because the levels of oxides, nitrogen and carbon monoxide will be slightly increased by the burning process, APCD requires an Plannin~ Commission - 3 - April 25, 1904 Air Quality Analysis to demonstrate no dedregation of air at the property boundaries before any construction can be authorized; conformance to the APCD standards will mitigate all potential air quality impacts; (4) the greatest noise impact would be the four generators' engines, however, that would be limited to 65 dbA at the northerly property line (100 feet away) and to 36 dbA at the nearest residential unit; (5) heavier gauge wires and new power lines would be needed for an approximate 1/2 mile extension of the lines from the project to the existing power lines; no water or sewer lines would be involved; (6) trace amounts of "toxic air pollutants" (for which there are no regulatory standards presently in effect) are presently being emitted over the expanse of the landfil.1; these trace components are combustible and an estimated 70 percent of them would be combusted in the project; (7) this would involve only internal vehicular traffic; (~) there is a continuous monitoring system to detect changes in the methane/oxygen ratio with automatic shut-down features and vibrator switches to shut down equipment in case of seismic activity. Commissioner Green asked the location of the wells and was told that most were shown in Figure 14 and the methane is collected by suction and drawn into the system. Commissoner Green then asked if it would not be hard to have a net reduction if there were emissions from the facility itself. Ms. Wiseman commented that there would be a reduction of the reactive hydrocarbons because of the burning but at the same time the burning process created other gases which are not now covered by regulatory standards but which the APCD is studying. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing ~¢as opened. Tudor Williams, 6055 E. Washington, Commerce, CA 90040, identified himself as a member of the Pacific Lighting and Energy Systems, the parent company of Central Plants. He said he was here to answer any questions from staff or the public and emphasized that the plant would endeavor to capture 80-90 percent of the methane gas presently being emitted. Henry Kohler, 1547-222 Sonora Drive, C.V.--representing the California's Homeowners' Council--stated that on April lO, 1984, the City Council passed a resolution outlawing any SANDER-type waste-to-energy type plant within the City limits of Chula Vista or its sphere of influence. He asked how the subject plant can therefore be considered. In the name of the Homeowers' Council, he urged the Planning Commission to accept the Council resolution and vote against the proposed methane gas electric generating plant. The Chairman reminded Mr. Kohler that the Commission was only receiving testimony on the adequacy of the draft EIR at this hearing. Larry McKenna, 1347 Mt. View Lane, C.V. 92011, representing Citizens' Action Network, commended the New Horizon's consultants for the thorough job done in addressing the environmental issues presented by the project, adding that it Plannin~ Commission - 4 - April 25, 1984 was a pleasure to see a draft EIR factually addressing the issues. He then read comments on the Draft EIR which he presented to the Clerk along with the referenced documents to be made part of the record. Mr. McKenna's concerns included the operation of "ostensibly a prototype facility" in proximity to residences and a Class I dump site, necessitating close scrutiny to ensure public health and safety. Mr. McKenna stated the need for (1) enforceable standards and further data by either the State (under the ~B 1807 research program) or by privately-funded studies to prevent risks created by landfill gases containing toxic contaminants; (2) air and soil studies to determine magnitude and range of migrating toxic gases; (3) inventory of toxic/hazardous materials previously deposited in the dump site to determine types of gas that might be collected in the system; (4) details of location and depth of test wells and sampling methods; (5) substantiation of the claim that 70 percent of the toxic gases would be consumed; (6) an analysis of possible project alternatives including other locations and the reasoning behind present site choice; (7) a more detailed treatment to be required of the "collection and flaring" method of gas reduction. Mr. McKenna referred to a table depicting the effects of certain toxic contaminants listed on pages 80-83 of the House of Representatives' 98th Congress, first session, document #98-93. He also referred to tWD~,,,articles contained therein; namely, "What Monitor Wells Can and Cannot (pages 75-77) and "Pollution's 'Invisible' Victims: Why Environmental Regulations Cannot Wait for Scientific Certainty," (pages 200-214). Mr. McKenna then requested that a copy of Citizens Action Network's correspondence, dated 9/14/83, be made a matter of public record for the environmental impact report. One final question asked by Mr. McKenna was the reason for installation of heavier gauge power lines, what gauge, and if the lines were installed solely for this project or was there consideration of another project being sited in the area. Commissioner Green pointed out that it might be appropriate to have specific monitoring of the nature of the exhaust gas emissions and emissions from other parts of the system considered for input in the EIR. Tudor Williams replied to some of the statements and questions raised by Mr. McKenna saying (1) the plant is not a prototype, the technolog~v and hardware have been available for a long time and used principally in natural gas application; Southern California Gas Company, a subsidiary, has been operating on methane gase for about 50 years with +lO0,O00 horsepower; all gas is brought in from Texas and similar equipment is used to bring it to the borders; the technology is well proven and safety and monitoring procedures are well established; the Disneyland Hotel and the Hotel del Coronado use a central plant type facility and the Hotel del Coronado has recently put in a new co-generation system which has the same type of equipment to be used on the landfill; the difference in the landfill is that the nature of the gas has a lower BTU content but the methane is the same as the methane in natural gas; Mr. Williams added that in San Francisco, the air quality people are Planning Commission - 5 - April 25, 1984 recommending this type of technology as the preferred pollution control basic technology for sites like the one under consideration; in Los Angeles power generation systems have been recommended for the lO sites found to be responsible for 80-90 percent of the community's pollutants. Caryn Mears, 1581 Point Delgada Court, C.V. 92011, asked if other plants have drilling on site or do they transport methane gas in by trucks. Mr. Williams replied that the methane is being generated by anerobic digestion of the material on the site, collected on the site and none is trucked in. Ms. Mears expressed concern about the earthquake fault and the well-drilling combination plus the rising of the air pollution up the hill because of the ampitheatre effect of the terrain. No one else ~ishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Chairman O'Neill announced that the consideration of the final EIR would be set for a future Planning Commission meeting when the proposed conditional use permit would be submitted. In reply to a question by Commissioner Johnson, Planning Director Krempl said no definite date had been set for the submission of the final EIR but all who had received prior notice and all who had spoken tonight would be notified. DIRECTOR'S REPORT: Planning Director Krempl reported that: - A tentative schedule for the May workshop would cover the land use development procedure study. Copies of the study would be mailed to the Commissioners as soon as it was printed. ~so, the Commission would be brought up-to-date on the status of the sphere of influence study including the tentative findings resulting from a recent workshop held by the affected agencies, special districts, and surrounding municipalities and communities. An outline of the GPAs pending in late June, August and September will be reviewed. - EastLake's SPA plan is about to be filed, with a tentative schedule for the EIR in August and the likelihood of a special meeting in August to consider EastLake as a separate matter. CObIMISSION COMMENTS: Commissioner Green said he would represent the Planning Commission at tonight's Beautification Awards Banquet. ADJOURI~qENT AT 8:00 p.m. to the Regular Business Meeting of May 9, 1984 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Cha~ers. Ruth M. Smith, Secretary WPC 0948P