[0:06] >> good evening. I'd like to call tonight's
[0:08] meeting of the san mateo planning commission to order.
[0:18] [pledge of allegiance].
[0:38] >> can we have rollcall, please.
[0:42] >> commissioner romaro.
[0:44] >> present.
[0:45] >> commissioner ellen mallory?
[0:48] >> present.
[0:49] >> chair, diane whitaker.
[0:52] >> here.
[0:55] >> thank you.
[0:56] on the consent calendar for this evening we
[0:57] have two sets of minutes. The first one is the march
[1:02] 12th 2019 planning commission meeting, and then the
[1:05] second one is the march 26th 2019 planning commission
[1:10] meeting which that one we will be holding over to our
[1:16] next meeting on april 23rd but do I have any additions
[1:21] or corrections to the march 12th minutes? Nope? Okay.
[1:28] could I have a motion, please?
[1:30] >> I motion that we approve the minutes of
[1:34] the march planning commission meeting.
[1:36] >> a second?
[1:37] >> second.
[1:38] >> thank you. All those in favor say aye.
[1:44] >> aye.
[1:45] >> minutes are approved three zero.
[1:50] the next item is the public comment period,
[1:53] and this is the opportunity for anyone in the audience
[1:57] to address the commission on an item not on tonight's
[2:01] agenda. Do we have any speaker slips for the public
[2:05] comment period? The general? Nope. Okay.
[2:18] is there anyone in the audience who would
[2:20] like to address the commission on an item not on
[2:24] tonight's agenda? Seeing none we'll close the public
[2:28] comment period and move on to our study session tonight.
[2:34] this is a study session. There will be no
[2:37] vote, but we will be taking input and start with staff
[2:40] presentation.
[2:42] >> yes thank you, chair.
[2:47] so as you mentioned this meeting does serve
[2:50] dual purposes for this project tonight. This is the for
[2:56] the underground flow equalization system that is part of
[3:01] the clean water program that the council has adopted.
[3:04] so first of all tonight, the staff will be
[3:09] making a presentation regarding both the project and the
[3:13] draft eir that's now out for review. Following that
[3:21] presentation we will first take questions and comments
[3:26] on the project itself. And then following that we will
[3:34] take a look at the draft eir intake, and take comments
[3:39] from both the commission and the public on the draft
[3:43] eir.
[3:44] again, there is no decisionmaking tonight.
[3:46] this will come back to the planning commission and the
[3:49] council at a later time with a site plan review, special
[3:58] use permit and a site plan review application.
[4:02] the deadline for eir comments if you do not
[4:07] make comments on this tonight, you have until may 7th to
[4:14] provide written comments, and we'll take them by e-mail,
[4:18] and we also have in the lobby on the table at the entry
[4:23] there are some cards made up especially for taking
[4:27] comments on the draft eir. So we invite you to
[4:31] participate in that. And at this time I will turn this
[4:36] over to derrick for the presentation.
[4:42] >> thank you, richard.
[4:44] once again, my name is derrick and I'm the
[4:47] engineering manager with public works helping to assist
[4:51] with the clean water program. My presentation tonight, I
[4:56] will be presenting as well as tom williams our senior
[5:01] engineer, but this is our agenda. I'm going to be giving
[5:05] an overview of the clean water program, and tom will
[5:08] provide some updates specifically about the project,
[5:11] which is the underground flow equalization system and
[5:16] talk about the sequel process overview and discuss all
[5:20] the resource areas addressed in the draft environmental
[5:23] impact report and, as richard indicated, go through the
[5:27] planning commission to answer any questions related to
[5:30] the project of the presentation and lastly, receive
[5:33] formal comments on this document.
[5:40] so this is the why slide. Why are we here
[5:44] today, and why is the clean water program even here?
[5:48] whenever there is weather flows the sewer system gets
[5:54] inundated, and the capacity gets overwhelmed and the
[5:59] sewer overflows occur.
[6:01] on the image to the left there all those
[6:04] blue dots are either historical sso locations, active
[6:09] sso locations or model sso locations, and as a result of
[6:14] overflows they spew out of manholes. And this is
[6:18] essentially raw sewage, and it spills out on to the
[6:22] streets, into the gutters and into the creeks and
[6:25] affects our beaches.
[6:28] essentially, our san francisco bay and along
[6:31] every step of that sewer overflow all those components
[6:36] get contaminated. It's gotten to the point where we've
[6:40] had to close our beaches and also has gotten to the
[6:43] point where the regional quality control board has
[6:47] issued permits mandating the elimination and prevention
[6:54] of sanitary sewer overflows in our collection system and
[6:58] waste water treatment facility.
[7:02] because of both of those regulatory drivers
[7:05] the clean water program was established to replace the
[7:09] agent infrastructure and built a wet weather sewer
[7:15] system capacity to prevent these sewer overflows to meet
[7:20] current and future regulatory requirements and to align
[7:23] with the city of san mateo. And in 2016 the city council
[7:30] adopted and certified the environmental impact report,
[7:34] and at that same time the city council selected the in
[7:38] system storage approach which really culminates where we
[7:43] are today and the suggestion of the treatment system
[7:48] strategy and this component.
[7:50] the clean water program, it has multiple
[7:53] projects within it. This is a map of all the pipeline
[7:56] projects, and the dots indicate all the pump station
[7:59] improvements, and in the upper right where that yellow
[8:03] blotch is is the waste water treatment plant.
[8:09] multifaceted approach for this clean water
[8:13] program is to construct an underground equal flow
[8:18] project, and why is the underground project needed? It
[8:25] will minimize the cease and desist order to prevent
[8:29] sewer overflows and provide system capacity and
[8:33] performance and improve safety and reliability of the
[8:37] system and relieves discharge of sewage in the bay. And
[8:43] because of this selected program approach we don't have
[8:46] to build a treatment plant much larger than what it is
[8:49] currently being designed for. The fact that we are
[8:52] holding capacity upstream in the system with this
[8:56] project allows the size of the treatment plan to be much
[8:59] smaller.
[9:00] the imagery to the left here is at the
[9:04] intersection of saratoga and delaware and happens almost
[9:08] annually and has been mitigated through our field and
[9:12] maintenance crews helping to prevent that and through
[9:15] some flow management with our system right now and along
[9:20] with improvements in our sewage system that we're
[9:23] undertaking.
[9:24] now, the impact report also identified 55
[9:30] sites for this facility, for this underground flow
[9:35] equalization facility, and these next slides take you
[9:41] through the history of how it was selected to be where
[9:44] it is today. 55 sites were in the impact report and from
[9:49] there it got shortlisted from 55 down to 12 down to six
[9:56] down to two to one and the green boxes on the right were
[10:00] the areas where we started reaching out to the public
[10:03] after we did the environmental along with the technical
[10:07] criteria selection and shortlisted it down to six and
[10:10] from six all the way to one there were 31 meetings with
[10:16] various stakeholders including the city council, various
[10:20] commissions, various community meetings and neighborhood
[10:24] associations some of which are here today. And I
[10:27] recognize people from all these meetings that are
[10:30] actually here in the audience today.
[10:33] august of 2016 is when we revealed the first
[10:39] six or at that time five locations, and then in january
[10:44] of 2017 it got shortlisted to the corp yard and event
[10:49] center. And at that point we did another alternatives
[10:52] analysis that looked at the economic, technical
[10:57] consideration and did a matrix to help provide
[11:03] information to the city council to make their decision
[11:05] on selecting the event center.
[11:08] and tom williams here is now going to talk
[11:11] about the project.
[11:14] >> good evening. Tom williams senior
[11:18] engineer with the public works clean water program.
[11:20] >> excuse me, can we have the microphone
[11:22] turned on, please.
[11:26] >> okay. Thank you. Tom williams senior
[11:29] engineer with the public works clean water program.
[11:35] so, this structure it's in the corner of the
[11:40] event center and it's underground. It's about five
[11:43] million gallons, 150 to about 200 feet. The way it
[11:50] operates is mostly it sits dormant and in dry weather
[11:55] other than for maintenance purposes it would just sit
[11:59] dormant.
[12:01] in a rain event when the sewer has become
[12:05] overwhelmed the water begins to divert into the storage
[12:10] system, and that's part of a complex operation. It's not
[12:14] just the only thing that manages the overflows, but it's
[12:17] a key element. So the flow flows into the system, and it
[12:23] stays there about 24 hours, and then pumps pump it back
[12:28] into the system when the treatment can handle the flow,
[12:32] and it flows by gravity into the treatment plant. It has
[12:36] continuous odor control, and it also cleans itself
[12:43] automatically. When the flow subsides it has an
[12:46] automatic flush system that flushes it, and then it will
[12:49] get an inspection, and if it needs any additional
[12:53] cleaning then it will be done at that time.
[12:56] and then it goes back to normal, and it goes
[12:59] back to being dormant. It's mostly going to handle with
[13:04] wet weather flow that's combines storm water and sewage,
[13:09] but sometimes it may hold sewage when it's being used
[13:13] for maintenance purposes. We may need to hold some flow
[13:17] pump stations worked on or pumps diverted from a force
[13:23] main.
[13:24] when it's finished, all you'll really see on
[13:26] the surface is like the picture on the upper left.
[13:31] there will be an airtight hatch, an access hatch to the
[13:37] controls and pumps, and it will be flush with the
[13:40] surface of the ground, and there will be an electrical
[13:44] building, 600 square feet that will have a cnu block
[13:49] surface similar to the lower right picture and other
[13:54] than that, there will be a couple of events maybe and
[13:57] that's all you'll see.
[14:00] and then to go with that, there will be some
[14:04] pot construction. There will be two 36 diversion pumps
[14:10] built in saratoga and delaware, and they will be a part
[14:14] of diversion system that diverts flow to this.
[14:19] >> thank you, tom. I'd actually like to go
[14:21] back a few slides to the layout real quick just to
[14:26] provide some context for this. The underground structure
[14:30] is on the east corner just as tom indicated, and there
[14:34] is the underground structure, the diversion sewer pump
[14:38] lines and force mains and the continuous odor structure
[14:44] and the pipelines -- excuse me -- pipelines run along
[14:49] delaware as well as saratoga and feed into the
[14:54] underground structure.
[14:56] to the north across saratoga there is a
[14:59] sound wall and a channel that separates saratoga from
[15:04] the fiesta gardens neighborhood, and to the south
[15:08] there's the bay meadows mark and the bay meadows
[15:12] neighborhood and to the south there's the train tracks
[15:15] and to the southwest there's nova school as well.
[15:26] so the other component we are here for
[15:30] tonight is the draft environmental impact report, and
[15:33] the contents are summarized here. We have the executive
[15:37] summary, the summary of the impacts and mitigation
[15:40] measures and introduction which includes the background
[15:43] objectives for the project and the description
[15:47] components, such as the underground structure, the
[15:50] pipes, electrical building, etcetera, and of course,
[15:53] maintenance construction aspects of this project.
[15:58] there is a significant section on the
[16:00] environmental resource areas addressed and of course,
[16:03] alternatives as well. In terms of the environmental
[16:06] resource addressed in the environmental impact report
[16:11] this is all of them here. Out of all these, these can
[16:20] all be avoided through mitigation measures all with the
[16:24] exception of noise and vibration during construction.
[16:33] these next few slides are going to really
[16:36] highlight some of the comments and concerns that we've
[16:39] heard through the public since introducing this project
[16:42] in 2016, and also through the comments that we've
[16:46] received during the common period so far. One of the
[16:51] main concerns is odor control, as tom indicated. We will
[16:55] have air tight vaults, which is shown again there in the
[16:59] top left.
[17:00] the carbon odor scrubbers, which is the
[17:03] image to the top right and this is all underground and
[17:07] all going to be in the vault. Under the surface is what
[17:10] the two images on the bottom will really show.
[17:15] these will be covered after we construct the
[17:19] facility. You will essentially see what the current use
[17:23] is now, which is parking for the event center, and you
[17:29] will see the air tight vaults as well, but under the
[17:32] parking surface is the flushing curbs, the self-cleaning
[17:38] tipping buckets and part of the self cleaning mechanisms
[17:41] is to help mitigate odors. Once the facility is used the
[17:46] buckets tip, clean the facility, and reduce any odors
[17:51] that may linger there.
[17:53] in terms of the material being used it is
[17:56] highly efficient technology used throughout the
[18:00] industry, and these are carbon odor scrubbers, and they
[18:08] absorb large massive odors. And three grams of this
[18:12] stuff has a surface of a football field, and any odorous
[18:16] components stick to it and going back one slide, you can
[18:21] see that odor scrubber, that big tank there on the upper
[18:25] right, and instead of just three grams we're filling
[18:28] that whole thing up. It's going to be a lot of football
[18:32] fields that are going to be extracting that odor.
[18:35] in terms of construction, we understand that
[18:38] construction noise is an issue. These are images to help
[18:43] demonstrate what to expect during construction. In the
[18:47] bottom left there after excavating, walls will be up
[18:52] there and most of the excavation and construction for
[18:56] concrete pouring and rebar instillation, etcetera, will
[19:00] be drawn in that hole so the shoring walls and the fact
[19:04] that it's down in there will be a noise mitigation
[19:07] measure all in itself as opposed to constructing much
[19:11] taller sound walls. The elevation at which this
[19:16] construction will be occurring once it's excavated will
[19:19] help to mitigate some of that noise.
[19:22] the image to the top left shows almost a
[19:25] finished structure, and the image to the top right is
[19:28] sort of the finished product of this project. And this
[19:32] project is up in the seattle area and to the south here,
[19:37] hopefully I can show it here, where I'm highlighting now
[19:44] this is actually a daycare or preschool center and all
[19:48] these residential homes. So this has been built in
[19:52] similar types of scenarios to what we're trying to build
[19:57] here in san mateo.
[20:00] this image here is of a local bay area
[20:03] construction. This is in pacifica, and they are
[20:08] constructing a flow equalization system as well. And
[20:11] they have been in construction as you can see in the
[20:14] back there.
[20:16] there is a noise barrier along with a
[20:18] residential home, and so this is being built under their
[20:23] community center parking lot. After it's done they are
[20:28] going to re pave it, and it's going to be used all over
[20:31] again as a parking lot.
[20:36] another concern that has echoed through all
[20:41] the meetings that we've had is traffic impacts, and we
[20:44] are aware of them. We will be implementing a management
[20:50] plan and just to provide some background there are
[20:53] vehicle types that we're considering here, heavy trucks
[20:56] or other construction trucks, worker vehicles and in
[21:00] terms of construction it's going to be similar to
[21:04] construction in bay meadows and also at the hillsdale
[21:08] mall. And the management plan will be implemented, and
[21:11] some of the key components that have been listed out in
[21:15] the report to help mitigate to avoid peak traffic hours
[21:21] and coordinate with emergency responders.
[21:32] this image was also in the environmental
[21:34] impact report. The blue or light blue colored lines are
[21:40] the current city truck access routes, and these are the
[21:44] major arterials and major collectors within the city
[21:49] designated for construction traffic and truck routes.
[21:52] and the orange lines are the proposed access truck
[21:56] routes from the project site to those truck routes so
[22:00] primarily traveling to and from saratoga to either
[22:04] delaware or towards the freeway on the south.
[22:12] and in terms of geology the design team
[22:18] completed geotechnical investigations, and we're
[22:22] currently monitoring the area to establish base
[22:26] groundwater levels. And the intent is to mitigate
[22:31] measures to prevent settlement, and we have a plan to
[22:34] provide monitoring to make sure measures are taken and
[22:39] design criteria for the project itself.
[22:44] this slide is to illustrate the ceqa process
[22:48] and the permit process and also to identify the public
[22:54] input opportunities. In october of this past year we had
[23:00] a scoping period, which is shown there on the far left
[23:04] box. After that scoping period we received comments and
[23:08] prepared the draft environmental impact report and we
[23:11] released the report. And we are here tonight to receive
[23:16] more commentary, comments on the report, so that we can
[23:20] implement any measures into the report.
[23:31] in late summer after all the comments have
[23:33] been implemented and the eir has been revised we plan on
[23:38] releasing it. We will come back to the planning
[23:42] commission to get a recommendation or to request a
[23:44] recommendation on the eir certification and permit, and
[23:49] after that in october we plan on going to city council
[23:52] for the same two actions.
[23:56] these blue asterisks are for public input,
[24:04] and it started back in the scoping input and we're here
[24:08] tonight and there will be planning and city council
[24:12] opportunities again.
[24:15] so to echo what richard said in the
[24:20] beginning we're going to first take any questions
[24:22] related specifically to the project or presentation
[24:25] through and from the planning commission, and then
[24:28] secondarily or mainly the main goal for tonight is to
[24:32] obtain comments on the draft environmental impact
[24:35] report. And those could be submitted through verbal
[24:39] comments tonight. We have comment cards in the lobby as
[24:42] well as up front here where you could rip off a portion
[24:46] of the comment card and insert it into the drop box out
[24:51] front or you could share it with ryan up here. There's
[24:54] also the opportunity to e-mail or mail the comments in.
[25:02] thank you.
[25:06] >> thank you.
[25:08] does the commission have any questions of
[25:10] the staff presentation? No? No. Okay.
[25:30] I'm just going to start, and if it doesn't
[25:32] flow I'm really sorry.
[25:35] I was reading in the packet about potential
[25:39] contamination in the soil that will be brought up during
[25:43] excavation, and I wondered what type of contamination we
[25:48] were talking about?
[25:57] >> so again, I would just emphasize tonight
[26:00] we're taking comments, we'll respond to those in the
[26:02] finals. If there's a quick answer we'll give it.
[26:06] otherwise, we'll respond to those comments in the final.
[26:12] >> so I can go through and ask them one
[26:14] right after the other?
[26:16] >> sure and the consultant of the eir is
[26:22] here tonight, and we'll be preparing the final documents
[26:28] and questions raised tonight.
[26:31] >> I wonder what the agricultural district
[26:37] meant, if that particular area of land was considered
[26:40] agricultural because of the event center or what used to
[26:44] be there?
[26:45] >> the event center partial is zoned as
[26:48] agricultural mainly due to its history of being a
[26:53] racetrack.
[26:55] >> I wanted clarification of when the
[26:57] project would be starting. There were several parts of
[27:01] the packet that said 2019, and there were several parts
[27:05] in the packet that said 2020. So I just wanted to know
[27:09] what the plan was on that, and I wanted to know a
[27:15] definition of dewatering. I assume that relates to when
[27:21] you start digging down below sea level that there's
[27:27] leeching of water and how that -- am I correct in that
[27:30] assumption and then it's how it's pumped out?
[27:35] >> yes. Essentially dewatering is when we
[27:39] get below the groundwater table during excavation. This
[27:44] facility will go down as deep as 50 feet, and we will be
[27:48] running into groundwater levels and part of it to secure
[27:52] the site as to dewater it so we can construct the
[27:56] facility.
[27:57] >> where does it go?
[27:59] >> it will get pumped and essentially taken
[28:02] for treatment elsewhere.
[28:04] >> okay. So pumped out through our regular
[28:07] sewer system now?
[28:09] >> no, it would be through dewatering pumps
[28:12] specifically.
[28:14] >> into tanker trucks and then driven away?
[28:18] >> yes.
[28:19] >> okay. Is there a potential that any
[28:23] residents will need to be relocated?
[28:30] >> not to my knowledge.
[28:36] >> if you could explain to me what a
[28:39] piezometer is?
[28:43] >> it measures ground pressures.
[28:45] >> ground pressure?
[28:46] >> yes.
[28:47] >> okay.
[28:53] so it said in the packet that the daytime
[28:56] hours that construction was allowed was between 7:00 and
[29:02] 7:00. Are there multiple shifts that go on during that
[29:05] time period or is there an eight-hour shift that happens
[29:09] some time during that time period?
[29:14] >> we haven't gotten to that level of detail
[29:17] for the construction contract yet, but we'll take that
[29:20] comment into consideration.
[29:22] >> so my question is, will there be
[29:24] construction activity from 7:00 a.m. To 7:00 p.m.?
[29:28] that's my question, ongoing? Have we ever used a hotline
[29:35] in the past on any projects here in the city?
[29:39] >> the hotline has been established since
[29:41] 2015.
[29:43] >> so I'd like to know just the history of
[29:45] that, how many calls we get in a given month.
[29:49] >> oh, it fluctuates depending on the
[29:52] topics. For example, when we had to raise rates for
[30:00] sewers we got a lot of calls.
[30:03] >> okay.
[30:05] >> but when there's not much activity we
[30:07] don't get many calls.
[30:09] >> is it posted on our website?
[30:12] >> yes it's on the screen too. On the right.
[30:16] >> so that's the hotline to the call the
[30:19] clean water program?
[30:20] >> yes.
[30:21] >> okay. How do you notice when construction
[30:32] is going to incur on the weekend or does it just happen?
[30:39] >> any type of variance outside of monday
[30:43] through friday workdays would have to get approved, and
[30:47] then notifications would go out accordingly.
[30:50] >> how does that happen?
[30:52] >> through mailers, typically.
[30:56] >> does it go through e-mail or is it a hard
[30:58] copy?
[30:59] >> typically, for some of the projects in
[31:02] the collection system that we're doing right now we send
[31:04] out mailers and then follow up with door hangers.
[31:09] >> okay. Will the grade separation at 25th
[31:14] avenue be done before this project starts?
[31:18] >> I'm not familiar with the timeline of
[31:20] that project.
[31:22] >> my concern is, are we going to have a
[31:24] traffic impact from the grade separation at that exact
[31:29] point that we have traffic issues affecting delaware at
[31:33] 25th with this project?
[31:43] there was a table under the traffic section
[31:47] that detailed 2005 conditions and then potential
[31:54] conditions from this project. I wondered if there were
[31:59] any other data points for later than 2005 because
[32:03] between 2005 and now things have really changed, and I
[32:09] wasn't confident in that data. It was table 16-4.
[32:22] on the native american requirements there
[32:29] was only a letter in the packet from a state department
[32:36] that just gave how things needed to work. It wasn't a
[32:41] response from an ohlone representative, and I just
[32:45] wondered if anyone from the ohlone people had responded
[32:51] personally to what was going on along the construction
[32:55] site? My concern with that would be that since it does
[33:01] have a close proximity to a creek bed that there could
[33:06] possibly be artifacts that we're going to dig up
[33:10] underground.
[33:17] those are my only comments or questions
[33:20] right now.
[33:21] >> alright. Thank you.
[33:23] >> thank you.
[33:27] >> I have a couple of questions. I
[33:29] understand that your construction time is from 7:00
[33:32] a.m. To 7:00 p.m.. How would that affect the flow of
[33:35] traffic from the neighborhood -- the traffic plant from
[33:43] the neighborhood residents and also for the school? Have
[33:47] you had conversations with the school and residents
[33:50] about when would be the best time to have construction
[33:53] vehicles on that street? I understand that saratoga is
[33:56] going to be the main point for the construction
[33:58] vehicles, and saratoga is the main street to go into the
[34:02] school and the residents.
[34:05] and also, if the goal was to have mailers or
[34:10] have door hangers on weekend construction, how would
[34:14] that affect the use of the neighborhood park where some
[34:19] of the events, sports events, are held on the weekend as
[34:23] well? Those are my two questions.
[34:29] >> thank you. Okay. I will open up the
[34:34] public comment period on this project, and I see we have
[34:41] speaker slips. How many?
[34:45] >> 12.
[34:46] >> 12, okay. We're going to be using the
[34:50] timer tonight so each speaker will have three minutes,
[34:55] and the secretary will call your name.
[35:03] >> bay meadows neighborhood alliance, kelly
[35:07] moran and jonathan shafferman.
[35:14] >> before we begin, we put in a request for
[35:16] a group presentation and the slip says that allows us
[35:19] fifteen minutes and we have planned for more than three
[35:23] minutes as our neighborhood presentation.
[35:25] >> okay we'll set the timer for 15, and I
[35:28] hope we won't take up all that time.
[35:31] >> jonathan is actually going to start, but
[35:33] I want to introduce the bay meadows neighborhood
[35:41] alliance. We're 750 for homes, and we've got between
[35:47] 1,000 and 2,000 residents in the neighborhood alliance.
[35:52] we did not have time to take a position
[35:55] given the short notice, but we'll be submitting written
[36:00] comments but we won't be indicating specific positions
[36:03] on almost anything that we say tonight. We do request
[36:06] additional time to review the design because the first
[36:09] time we saw it was friday night. Jonathan is going to
[36:14] start off with our main comments, and then I'll follow
[36:18] up.
[36:19] >> commissioners, I'm jonathan and I reside
[36:22] at 490 east 28th avenue, and I am speaking on behalf of
[36:29] the bay meadows neighborhood alliance and also as a
[36:32] member of the landsdowne homeowners association.
[36:38] our bay meadows neighborhood alliance has
[36:41] been actively engaged for two years. Given the
[36:46] extraordinary project cost many of us actually disagreed
[36:50] with the city's conclusion that the five million gallon
[36:53] sewer tank sized for flood overflows was a better
[36:58] multigenerational solution than full conveyance which we
[37:02] discussed in several community meetings, addressing the
[37:07] antiquated storm sewer network from the top of the
[37:10] watershed and not at the bottom down in the flatlands of
[37:14] the city. We also expressed concern that placement in
[37:17] either bay meadows park or fiesta gardens park would
[37:21] affect park users in either area.
[37:24] additionally, we remain unsettled with the
[37:27] additional financial burden that our neighborhood will
[37:31] shoulder from property assessments to service the bond
[37:35] debt for the project. Many of our homes are within 50 to
[37:39] several hundred feet from the project site visible from
[37:42] some of the diagrams. Today my home is visible from
[37:47] diagrams that were presented today.
[37:49] and our concern is that the draft eir does
[37:53] not adequately address impacts during the construction
[37:57] and post construction project phases especially the
[38:00] structural risk to our homes. Our primary concern is
[38:04] soil stability in the areas surrounding both trunk line
[38:08] and sewer tank excavations especially given the amount
[38:12] of dewatering that will be necessary.
[38:15] the draft eir indicates that groundwater
[38:19] elevation is shallow here. It has yet to be determined
[38:22] as was expressed earlier, but it has in the report
[38:29] expected to be somewhere between six and no more than 15
[38:32] feet below the surface along most of the site.
[38:37] now this is a site where the sewer tank
[38:43] structure will be 50 feet below the surface, and what
[38:48] wasn't mentioned earlier is that in order to support
[38:52] that heavy a structure an additional 25 feet of
[38:57] excavation will need to go down to install the piles
[39:00] that will hold up the sewer tank. That's 75 feet below
[39:05] surface.
[39:06] we in the neighborhood are aware of the
[39:09] severe unexpected settling, and I believe it was in
[39:11] excess of three foot unexpected settling that occurred
[39:16] at the concar rite aid store during excavation and
[39:18] dewatering for the adjacent projects at 40o and 450
[39:21] concar. And want adequate assurance that our homes,
[39:25] streets and the bay meadows park will not survey similar
[39:29] fate.
[39:30] we believe no open trench codes will be done
[39:35] and that pipeline installation discussed in section 4.2
[39:40] of the project geotechnical report should be mandatory.
[39:46] furthermore, we ask that the project contract stipulate
[39:50] that no settlement damage will be made to adjacent
[39:55] structures especially pipeline trenching and sewer tank
[40:00] excavation activities, and that the contractor take full
[40:05] equivocal responsibility for any settlement damage that
[40:09] occurs to private property or city facilities.
[40:13] we're concerned with construction noise. In
[40:15] fact, the eir concludes that significant and unavoidable
[40:20] impact will occur during the twenty-five month
[40:23] construction phase of the project.
[40:25] table 5.5 indicates that pile driving will
[40:31] result in a noise level at 50 feet, and this exceeds the
[40:37] threshold outline in a section of san mateo manciple
[40:45] code and furthermore, 7.2 of the geotechnical report
[40:50] suggest that quote, drilled in place piles may be
[40:53] considered if noise and vibration of pile driving is not
[41:00] acceptable without defining acceptable to whom. We
[41:03] assert herein equivocally that noise and vibration from
[41:09] pile driving will be unacceptable from hour homes within
[41:14] the construction area and pre drilling as opposed to
[41:18] standard pile driving will be necessary to mitigate
[41:22] noise impact to punch through the coarse, sandy layers
[41:26] of soil that show up in your soil locks.
[41:31] sandy soil is where piledrivers get stuck
[41:37] trying to punch through stiff soil layers. Measure 12.3
[41:42] inquired to incorporate project construction to help
[41:46] reduce the effects of off-site vibration, and these are
[41:51] vibration reducing methods that can quantifiably
[41:57] demonstrate noise impacts, but we cannot find any
[42:03] definition of vibration issues describing how they may
[42:08] be mitigated. Mitigation 12.3.a. Only calls for site
[42:14] specific mitigation measures for the project to be
[42:17] implemented as necessary. We do not want to repeat the
[42:41] experience.
[42:45] >> thank you.
[42:47] to follow up just in a bigger picture we're
[42:49] used to construction. There's construction going on all
[42:53] around bay meadows. This project is proposing different
[42:57] techniques tremendously troubling to our neighborhood.
[43:02] the city has never allowed a private developer to do
[43:07] pile driver, the one that goes pound, pound, pound. We
[43:13] hear that in san francisco. We have never let anyone
[43:17] violate that ordinance.
[43:21] second, the proposal to put in sheet piles
[43:24] instead of the standard water system that is being used
[43:29] by every other development. So every other development
[43:32] is doing drilled in place piles and lagging and tie
[43:36] backs. This is the only proposal that has tried to do
[43:40] that is cal train.
[43:41] there were residents running into the street
[43:46] in the middle of the night when cal train did that and
[43:49] that was 2,000 feet from homes, and this is less than
[43:53] one hundred feet from the nearest home and third is the
[43:57] depth and this is why we're concerned about the
[43:59] dewatering and we understand there are other methods
[44:03] that's would be drawing down a lot less water, a
[44:07] pinpoint watering system and we suggest that the city
[44:13] review these other techniques and we were shocked when
[44:17] we opened the eir and found those disturbing precedents
[44:21] in this project. Nothing had ever been said about that.
[44:26] we know that having construction near our homes is going
[44:29] to be a pain, but we don't want damage in our homes.
[44:35] the other precedent here is about vibration.
[44:38] the eir, you all get to set the significant standard and
[44:44] that is no damage to buildings. So the right significant
[44:48] standard should be ability to use ones' home and work in
[44:52] ones' office nearby. So that's a lower vibration level.
[44:57] the vibration that is being proposed almost
[45:00] reaches but doesn't quite reach at the nearest house as
[45:04] they predict the level that would cause damage to
[45:07] buildings. It far exceeds the level that would prevent
[45:11] normal use of ones' home. It would be like having a mini
[45:15] earthquake going on. All the dishes would rattle in your
[45:19] home.
[45:20] for example, everything would rattle in your
[45:22] office if you are working at home. That does not create
[45:25] a condition that would be acceptable in my view for the
[45:28] city and not a precedent we would want to set for
[45:31] allowing private developers to do the same thing. I urge
[45:33] you to define it as such. That sort of precedent could
[45:38] not be accepted by the rest of the city.
[45:41] we're also interested in preserving the use
[45:44] of the parks. The eir admits that there's construction
[45:50] next to both of the other city parks in the area so this
[45:52] would be at the same time, construction next to the
[45:54] city's largest park in this area. Here we'd be looking
[45:59] for hours of construction to end to allow for that after
[46:02] school soccer time and quiet time on weekends.
[46:05] the staff informed you on the city
[46:08] construction hours. Unless you establish requirements to
[46:11] provide that kind of notification and self permitting
[46:15] weekend system, that would not be by default a city
[46:19] requirement.
[46:21] there were e-mail notices sent and it kept
[46:23] the construction to weekdays to allow us to use our
[46:28] residences and gave us advanced notice so we could plan
[46:32] our lives around that and not use the park space next to
[46:36] them.
[46:37] also, I think there's a very strong city
[46:39] interest in preventing damage to homes and to prevent
[46:43] unreasonable noise as precedents, and I think you all
[46:48] really need to enforce that of staff. I don't think the
[46:51] staff really want to do these things, but the
[46:54] information in front of us and our experience which
[46:57] should highlight the event center has been a really
[47:00] great neighbor but they've been trying to handle how
[47:04] they work out late night parties, and they've had a
[47:07] private person running the sound system and the
[47:11] vibration causes the exact same vibration I'm talking
[47:16] about; dishes rattling during a concert, our whole homes
[47:21] were rattling at night so every half an hour you'd wake
[47:24] up, shake, shake, shake for five minutes. That's the
[47:28] kind of stuff. It's just simply not acceptable for
[47:32] members of our community and to have that go on for six
[47:36] months, it's devastating to members of our community and
[47:41] we do as a neighborhood -- it is our pattern to try to
[47:45] work with people, and we are are interested in working
[47:48] on this to find an acceptable solution.
[47:51] I'm pretty confident if the city proposed
[47:54] techniques and monitoring programs and did some work to
[47:58] make sure that the park is useable on the weekends and
[48:01] so forth, that our neighborhood would not oppose the
[48:05] project, but I'm not 100% sure on that since we haven't
[48:09] taken a position.
[48:10] thank you for listening to our neighborhoods
[48:13] concerns, and we're hoping by laying this more detailed
[48:17] testimony in front of you that will make it easier for
[48:20] both you and the other residents who have shared their
[48:23] concerns to share their concerns with you. Thank you.
[48:28] >> thank you. Now we're going to go to the
[48:30] three minute clock and call the individual speakers,
[48:33] please.
[48:35] >> jean holbrook followed by joshua
[48:39] wallstorm.
[48:46] >> thank you, commissioners, for giving us
[48:50] this opportunity. I am a member of the amelia members
[48:56] association. I have sewage tank fatigue. I was at all of
[49:06] those meetings, and I appreciate that the neighborhood
[49:08] association and my neighbors are willing to persist on
[49:12] this because we care very much about the quality of life
[49:15] in our neighborhood.
[49:17] both jonathan and kelly laid out the
[49:19] details, but I just want to say as a member of the
[49:22] community I'm concerned about continued use of the park
[49:25] through the construction. It's not just used on weekends
[49:28] by any means. We have soccer over there every day during
[49:32] the soccer season and there are many families, children,
[49:36] parents, dogs, that use that park on a regular basis
[49:40] since that is our backyard.
[49:42] I also am concerned about the noise and the
[49:45] vibration. I thought I heard staff say we can mitigate
[49:48] everything but noise and vibration which of course I
[49:52] hope I misunderstood.
[49:54] also I want to make sure that the
[49:55] construction methods that are used do make it possible
[49:59] for us to sleep and enjoy our homes. Bay meadows is a
[50:04] wonderful community, and that's why we're all here
[50:07] tonight. We want to preserve that. Thank you.
[50:09] >> thank you.
[50:11] >> hi. My name is joshua wallstorm, and I'm
[50:18] a resident of bay meadows and also a member of the
[50:21] landsdowne homeowners association, and I lived in bay
[50:26] meadows, one of the first people to move in and of
[50:31] course, I'm no stranger to construction and living with
[50:34] construction noise but I just want to reiterate kelly
[50:37] and johnathen's comments. I think they did a good job
[50:43] expressing my concerns about the construction techniques
[50:45] that are being used and whether they are appropriate and
[50:48] safe and avoid damage to our homes and the surrounding
[50:52] homes outside of bay meadows as well.
[50:56] one comment that I'd like to state
[50:58] specifically about about the noise mitigation, there was
[51:01] a claim that due to the fact that most of the
[51:03] construction is going to happen deep inside the tank
[51:06] that's being constructed, that noise mitigation is not
[51:11] as much of a concern, but there is that six month period
[51:14] where they are going to be constructing and pile driving
[51:18] and I would really urge the commission to require and
[51:21] the city in fact to require that they erect a tall noise
[51:26] barrier. Thank you.
[51:27] >> thank you.
[51:29] >> eranzi followed by ann mclaughlin.
[51:37] >> good evening. Thank you for giving me the
[51:41] opportunity to address my concern and rest for
[51:47] assurance. I'm an owner of a house on 20th avenue and
[51:55] I'm actually a member of the bright side hoa. The
[51:59] environmental study that I saw has a lot of shortcoming
[52:07] and I'm here to -- actually, I was here to try to get
[52:12] some answers which I guess I'm not going to get this
[52:16] evening.
[52:17] my many concerns is actually about the noise
[52:21] and the vibrations. So, we had the experience with the
[52:29] cal train issues and we made the noise and well it
[52:36] stopped but it was really, really bad. It was in the
[52:41] middle of the night, two a.m. And I don't know how they
[52:45] got to it and on the weekends it was really bad.
[52:50] and my main concern is that the vibration
[53:00] will weaken the foundations. In the event of an
[53:04] earthquake and because of the foundations that got
[53:08] weakened, if there's a damage to their houses, my house,
[53:13] neighborhood houses, will we be compensated? Will the
[53:21] city compensate us? Will the construction? That's a big
[53:30] concern that I have. An earthquake can actually hit us
[53:36] and I understand if it's a 10.0 it's not going to stand
[53:40] usually, but maybe if it's weakened and it's a 4.0 it
[53:45] may cause some issues.
[53:47] and also since I work from home, most of the
[53:51] days of the week I'd like to limit the noise and
[53:55] definitely I'd like the noise just to be between nine
[53:58] and five just like every other work and definitely not
[54:05] on the weekends and nights.
[54:08] and also, I wanted to ask if anybody thinks
[54:14] about the contingency in case we have an overrun on the
[54:19] budget for this construction because in my experience
[54:24] everything runs over budget, actually.
[54:28] well, thank you for listening to me. Thank
[54:30] you.
[54:31] >> thank you.
[54:33] >> ann mclaughlin followed by vanessa
[54:39] seawell.
[54:41] >> hi. My name is ann mclaughlin and martin
[54:44] and I are residents at bay meadows and members of the
[54:48] bright side homeowners association. And we agree that
[54:51] the environmental impact report has serious shortcomings
[54:55] and also support the neighborhoods' requests that the
[54:58] site change it's approach, and do not involve violation
[55:07] of the city's noise ordinance. And we believe that
[55:11] mitigation and several areas of the eir are both
[55:15] imprecise and lacking include but are not limited to
[55:20] noise abatement.
[55:21] I was one of the residents who ran out in
[55:24] the middle of the night in my pj's. The noise was
[55:27] unacceptable and frightening.
[55:30] the cal train project was more limited in
[55:32] scope and duration than this proposed project. Only
[55:36] after residents' complaints to cal train was it switched
[55:41] to alternative methods and the impact of this projects
[55:45] construction on local schools and parks and it is
[55:50] unacceptable. A hotline is not mitigation, and the
[55:53] proposed temporary barriers appear inadequate. I request
[56:06] that any city official who has not experienced this type
[56:10] of noise and vibration to sample it personally before
[56:13] making a decision on this proposal. It is frightening.
[56:18] second issue, dewatering impact 7-3, this
[56:21] issue is also concerning without more information. The
[56:24] risk of dewatering is called out in the report, and I
[56:29] would also reference the millennial reflux. San mateo
[56:34] says dewatering. This is from the san francisco
[56:37] chronicle from an october 2016 article. This article
[56:41] reports on the resulting litigation and potential
[56:44] liability and the whole thing sounds like a mess.
[56:47] as a homeowner I'm concerned about property
[56:50] damage. As a san mateo taxpayer I'm concerned and
[56:55] worried about the city leaving tax papers on the hook
[56:59] for significant financial liability. We would like to
[57:04] request a precise plan that fully addressed this risk
[57:09] and adopts all reasonable measures to mitigate these
[57:13] potential impacts.
[57:16] traffic, this report estimates a significant
[57:20] number of truck trips per day with estimates as high as
[57:25] 206 and the mitigation proposal of quote preparing a
[57:29] traffic management plan is not mitigation. It proposes
[57:33] no specific actions to address this significant
[57:36] disruption. The proposed scheduling of this work
[57:40] concurrently of the closure of the cal train station
[57:43] promises to make a bad situation even worse. This eir
[57:48] reinforces the poor site selection and planning for a
[57:53] project in the middle of schools, parks and housing
[57:56] areas, and I would urge this commission to reevaluate
[58:00] this plan.
[58:01] thank you very much.
[58:02] >> thank you.
[58:04] >> vanessa seawell.
[58:23] >> hi, my name is vanessa seawell. I have
[58:24] twin babies and a three year old. My biggest concern as
[58:28] a mother is the noise vibration, the construction
[58:31] process. My home is on saratoga drive, and I'm the
[58:35] nearest home at bay meadows to this construction project
[58:40] less than three hundred feet away.
[58:42] the rite aid is about five hundred feet away
[58:46] from recent construction that caused their structural
[58:49] damage. So that is a large concern, and we've touched on
[58:53] that. My biggest concern is the noise and pile driving.
[59:00] I had my daughter, my first daughter and
[59:03] next door the house was demolished and reconstructed
[59:08] over the course of the next year. I was severely
[59:12] affected by vibration, by sound that was constant over
[59:16] that year, so much so that I was hospitalized for mental
[59:22] health. This is not just something that can physically
[59:25] affect hearing loss but mentally affect you.
[59:28] I have three children that sleep in that
[59:31] home everyday, and they take two naps a day. We're at
[59:34] home with our kids, we're into the neighborhood walking
[59:38] to the park every single day, and that's a large issue
[59:41] if we're looking at something like over one hundred
[59:44] decibels. That is a hundred times louder than the
[59:48] eighty-five decibel mark that can cause hearing loss.
[59:51] it's ridiculous and that cannot be acceptable.
[59:55] further information or concern that I have
[59:57] is with the dewatering process and I know that there are
[1:00:01] better best practices to mitigate those issues that
[1:00:05] could cause foundation and structural damage to our
[1:00:09] homes and those need to be addressed. There's also -- I
[1:00:12] don't believe the water would be trucked out of the area
[1:00:14] if we're looking in excess of millions of gallons of
[1:00:18] water during this construction period. We need to look
[1:00:20] at recycling or recharging that water in the best
[1:00:24] possible way, again, to limit problems with our
[1:00:25] foundation.
[1:00:27] I'm also concerned about vehicle traffic.
[1:00:30] that is a large amount of noise specially because we
[1:00:33] live on saratoga and several of my neighbors do as well.
[1:00:36] we couldn't have four a.m., five a.m., six a.m. Trucks,
[1:00:41] diesel, huge vehicles driving down our street waking us
[1:00:47] up every morning for over six months. I have one year
[1:00:52] old twins, newborns, I understand losing sleep but the
[1:00:56] facts of these large vehicles roaring up and down the
[1:01:00] street every day is not acceptable. So I do think we
[1:01:03] need to have parameters of times of day in place for
[1:01:07] construction and traffic. Thank you.
[1:01:09] >> thank you.
[1:01:43] >> just a couple of things to add. One is
[1:01:51] around the traffic mitigation that hasn't been mentioned
[1:01:52] around the construction of the new sewer pipelines along
[1:01:53] saratoga drive. Given the extra traffic that is flowing
[1:02:00] on saratoga due to the parking of the facebook and
[1:02:11] google employees. I think you are going to see extra
[1:02:14] traffic impacts and as the event center continues to
[1:02:19] have more and more events you are seeing more and more
[1:02:22] cars in the morning between six and seven a.m. Going to
[1:02:25] set up. I think any taking away of lanes is going to
[1:02:32] cause major issues and you are going to have to mitigate
[1:02:36] through the event center and that could lead to other
[1:02:39] impacts.
[1:04:15] >> those need to be thought of an
[1:04:18] alternative method. There are many
[1:04:21] considerations and I won't go over them
[1:04:25] now. The vibrations of our homes
[1:04:30] foundations and our values
[1:04:40] again, I just ask that you hear us and
[1:04:44] I want to reiterate there are more
[1:04:52] appropriate and safer methods. That's
[1:04:54] what's being proposed and I also want to
[1:04:56] remind this is a brand new high density
[1:05:00] neighborhood. This is not an industrial
[1:05:02] commercial zone. Thank you.
[1:05:03] >> thank you.
[1:05:06] >> ray lynn.
[1:05:13] public speaker: hi, I'm a resident of
[1:05:16] bay meadows and also a member of the
[1:05:20] homeowners association. I share the same
[1:05:24] concerns with my neighbors. In addition
[1:05:25] I
[1:05:26] have two questions and I wonder if the
[1:05:28] council can help with. My first question
[1:05:30] is regarding the environmental impact on
[1:05:35] the natural lives in the parks of the
[1:05:39] birds. During spring there is a lot of
[1:05:42] birds migrating into this area. I wonder
[1:05:44] if the team has evaluated the potential
[1:05:47] environmental impact on these natural
[1:05:49] lives.
[1:05:50] second question is regarding the
[1:05:51] selection of the exact location. So
[1:05:56] there are other spots in the san mateo
[1:05:59] area. The proposed area is adjacent to
[1:06:00] the park and also very close to the
[1:06:02] residential area. So I just wonder if
[1:06:03] the
[1:06:06] team has evaluated other spots in the
[1:06:07] san
[1:06:15] mateo area. One wish that I wish for
[1:06:18] council to help is that we didn't get
[1:06:24] this environmental impact report until
[1:06:26] very late lasts week. So that makes it
[1:06:30] very challenging to have a thorough
[1:06:33] review and provide comment during this
[1:06:35] short period. We would appreciate more
[1:06:36] time for review in order to have more
[1:06:39] constructive and meaning full feedback
[1:06:40] to
[1:06:41] the council in the future. So that's why
[1:06:45] I'm especially preview of today's
[1:06:47] opportunity that we can be here to share
[1:06:49] our thoughts with this council. I hope
[1:06:52] the council can keep the spirit and
[1:06:53] we'll
[1:06:54] have a very open and transparent
[1:06:58] democratic process throughout this
[1:06:59] project. Thank you very much.
[1:07:02] >> thank you.
[1:07:10] >>clerk: jennifer mcadam.
[1:07:12] public speaker: hi, there, I would like
[1:07:15] to thank the commission for the
[1:07:17] opportunity to speak. I'm a member of
[1:07:18] the
[1:07:21] homeowners associations and I live along
[1:07:25] 13th avenue. I share some of these
[1:07:27] comments regarding the short
[1:07:28] accommodations regarding the
[1:07:32] environmental impact report, and agree
[1:07:37] with my neighbors. I work from home and
[1:07:40] I'm very sensitive to noise and I run a
[1:07:46] lot of meetings. I'm mostly concerned
[1:07:47] about the foundation and the vibration
[1:07:51] issues that it could have on my home.
[1:07:53] therefore I request that the city will
[1:07:57] change the construction approach and may
[1:07:59] not involve the violation of the cities
[1:08:03] ordinance. In addition I would like the
[1:08:05] commission to add a wall barrier during
[1:08:08] the noise construction and consider
[1:08:10] limiting the construction hours so we
[1:08:11] may
[1:08:13] have some peaceful days where we are
[1:08:14] living. Thank you.
[1:08:17] >> thank you.
[1:08:23] >>clerk: wendy?
[1:08:25] public speaker: I'm wendy, I have a home
[1:08:30] in the meadows. I would like to support
[1:08:32] all the concerns that bay meadows
[1:08:36] alliance has brought up. I think our
[1:08:39] homes is like, it's our sanctuary, it's
[1:08:41] where we go home and relax and all of
[1:08:46] that stuff. The parks in our
[1:08:47] neighborhood
[1:08:48] are really important to us. So the use
[1:08:49] of
[1:08:53] that should be somewhat of a priority.
[1:08:55] the noise and vibration, I also work
[1:08:56] from
[1:08:57] home. I would like you all to empathize
[1:09:02] with homeowners there. Living there has
[1:09:06] been great. We love our neighborhood,
[1:09:07] but
[1:09:08] if this is going to go on for 6 months
[1:09:09] at
[1:09:12] a time, it's really going to impact
[1:09:15] everyone there. My husband would like to
[1:09:23] add.
[1:09:26] >> I live with her. A couple things I
[1:09:30] will add. I don't know if you read the
[1:09:34] recent new york times. There was a
[1:09:39] couple that bought a couple brown stones
[1:09:43] and they have been driving into the
[1:09:45] foundation for months and it's driving
[1:09:47] every mad and the local didn't realize
[1:09:52] that was happening. So there are a lot
[1:09:53] of
[1:09:56] unintended consequences to these kinds
[1:09:57] of
[1:09:59] decisions that people have to live with.
[1:10:01] unfortunately those that made the
[1:10:03] decisions don't have to live with it.
[1:10:05] the people around it do. Many of us are
[1:10:09] always involved in planning large
[1:10:10] projects. The plan that we have in place
[1:10:12] is the most optimistic view. There is
[1:10:16] never a plan that actually happens the
[1:10:19] way it is planned. Everything always,
[1:10:24] something always goes wrong. The fact
[1:10:26] that we are this most optimistic view is
[1:10:31] already quite horrifying if you live in
[1:10:33] the neighborhood should give everyone
[1:10:35] pause. It can get worse and it likely
[1:10:38] will get worse, but if we already feel
[1:10:41] this way of what the optimal view looks
[1:10:45] like, that scares me. So I echo
[1:10:49] everything that everyone here has been
[1:10:50] saying. I look forward to having a
[1:10:51] better
[1:10:53] dialogue of where this goes after this.
[1:10:55] thanks.
[1:10:57] >> thank you.
[1:11:02] >>clerk: claire?
[1:11:05] public speaker: good evening,
[1:11:07] commissioners and staff. My name is
[1:11:09] claire and president of the homeowners
[1:11:15] association's and I thank you for your
[1:11:18] time today and thank you for your hard
[1:11:22] work to listen to us. I really
[1:11:23] appreciate
[1:11:26] it. I have a couple of concerns and
[1:11:30] first is vibrating and it's impacting
[1:11:31] the
[1:11:32] homes in our neighborhood. We've all
[1:11:33] seen
[1:11:36] issues with structure integrity can
[1:11:38] actually cause things like windows and
[1:11:43] wall cracks and even foundation at
[1:11:45] issues. These are expensive problems. My
[1:11:47] questions are what is the staff as plan,
[1:11:50] mitigation plan for these issues which
[1:12:03] are expensive to repair, and do we have
[1:12:04] a
[1:12:05] fund set aside to pay for potential
[1:12:06] damages for private property and homes.
[1:12:07] we've all heard about the leaning power
[1:12:08] of san francisco caused by transbay
[1:12:16] construction. We don't want to be known
[1:12:18] as the leaning homes in san mateo. That
[1:12:19] is not ideal for all of us. So my
[1:12:20] question is, have you considered
[1:12:21] alternative construction methods? The
[1:12:22] current proposed message is the
[1:12:28] polydriven method. How did we reach this
[1:12:31] conclusion? Is it the cheapest method,
[1:12:35] have you thought about it damaging other
[1:12:37] homes. Why is there no report in the
[1:12:38] eir.
[1:12:40] is there a way that we can actually do
[1:12:41] an
[1:12:45] analysis and an alternative construction
[1:12:47] method. I also want to echo a point that
[1:12:49] a neighbor brought up earlier which is
[1:12:53] impact to wildlife. In san mateo, we
[1:13:00] have wildlife birds that pass through
[1:13:01] the
[1:13:02] parks. Have we thought about the
[1:13:03] wildlife that pass through the parks. I
[1:13:05] thank you for your time and effort on
[1:13:07] this project. I hope we can work
[1:13:08] together
[1:13:10] to get to a good conclusion for
[1:13:11] everyone.
[1:13:13] >> thank you.
[1:13:16] >> sally chang followed by lauren lee.
[1:13:25] public speaker: hi, I'm sally chang.
[1:13:28] thank you for letting us speak tonight.
[1:13:34] I'm a property owner and I live near the
[1:13:39] proposed construction and also part of
[1:13:40] the lands down association.
[1:13:43] we just moved into this neighborhood
[1:13:44] last
[1:13:46] year and we specifically moved out of
[1:13:47] san
[1:13:48] francisco where there is a lot of
[1:13:50] construction because we wanted to live
[1:13:51] in
[1:13:52] a place where we could raise children
[1:13:53] and
[1:13:55] we could have like a quiet neighborhood,
[1:13:59] a beautiful park to live next to, and to
[1:14:06] just have a peaceful home to go home to.
[1:14:13] we are planning on starting our family
[1:14:16] this coming year, and the fact that this
[1:14:19] construction has really loud methods of
[1:14:21] construction for 6 months really
[1:14:33] terrifies me. As a mother going
[1:14:36] through this, it's a really scare
[1:14:37] process
[1:14:40] at some point having construction
[1:14:41] between
[1:14:42] the hours of 7:00 a.m. And 7:00 p.m.
[1:14:43] that
[1:14:46] makes it even more terrifying. I agree
[1:14:50] with a lot that has been said so far by
[1:14:53] the members of the community, and I
[1:14:55] strongly urge the city and commission to
[1:14:58] really think of alternative methods of
[1:15:00] construction because it just really
[1:15:05] affects the livelihoods of many people
[1:15:06] --
[1:15:08] who are here to speak today and it
[1:15:11] affects lives of people who are working,
[1:15:16] people who have families, children,
[1:15:18] animals, everyone in our community.
[1:15:20] thank you.
[1:15:21] >>clerk: lauren lee, followed by simon
[1:15:27] yun.
[1:15:28] public speaker: good evening. Thank you
[1:15:32] so much to the commission for the
[1:15:34] opportunity for all the of us to speak
[1:15:38] here.
[1:15:39] I'm lauren lee, and I live at 2868
[1:15:45] saratoga drive. From east 28th in
[1:15:49] saratoga. Just close to my neighbor with
[1:15:51] vanessa. She was here with three kids. I
[1:15:53] have four kids and three of them being
[1:15:56] boys. We moved from pleasanton. We were
[1:15:59] the first building to go up and we were
[1:16:03] there before anything came to bay
[1:16:06] meadows. And bay meadows park is our
[1:16:11] backyard. We left pleasanton and bay
[1:16:14] meadows is our backyard and we need it
[1:16:20] desperately especially with the boys. I
[1:16:21] want to agree with all of my neighbors
[1:16:26] and community members here that are
[1:16:27] present that you take a closer look at
[1:16:30] some of the plans and consider just the
[1:16:34] impact that it has in our neighborhood.
[1:16:38] thank you.
[1:16:39] >> thank you.
[1:16:42] >>clerk: simon yun followed by eric
[1:16:43] park.
[1:16:45] public speaker: good evening, I want to
[1:16:46] say thank you to the commission for what
[1:16:48] you are doing and the time you are
[1:16:49] taking
[1:16:51] to look into it. We really appreciate
[1:16:52] it.
[1:16:53] my name is simon yun, a homeowner in
[1:16:54] the
[1:17:05] land down hoa, also part of bay meadows.
[1:17:08] I thank you for listening to our
[1:17:09] concerns
[1:17:10] and I want to speak to again the noise
[1:17:14] and the vibration. When I think of the
[1:17:17] substance of our concerns have been
[1:17:19] addressed already. I just want to paint
[1:17:20] a
[1:17:21] picture of what this looks like.
[1:17:27] my bedroom faces bay meadows park so
[1:17:31] there is going to be nothing between us
[1:17:34] and the construction going on. The issue
[1:17:37] with noise and particularly concerning
[1:17:38] are going to be imagine that maybe you
[1:17:40] work at home and you are trying to work
[1:17:43] during the day but there is power
[1:17:44] driving
[1:17:48] going on. It's not going to affect only
[1:17:53] the conferences that you have going on
[1:17:56] and you have to get work done and it may
[1:18:00] not be easy to get work done because
[1:18:01] it's
[1:18:04] harder to focus and maybe you lose sleep
[1:18:09] and you get woken up in the morning
[1:18:14] because of this. I think this is
[1:18:16] something we should avoid if we can. The
[1:18:19] other thing is I have two young children
[1:18:21] anther in school now fortunately and
[1:18:22] they
[1:18:24] are pretty good at sleeping, but I think
[1:18:26] any parent knows the difference between
[1:18:27] a
[1:18:29] well rested child and a child on sleep
[1:18:33] debt in terms of their ability to focus
[1:18:36] and learn. I'm concerned about the
[1:18:37] impact
[1:18:38] that losing sleep is having on them
[1:18:43] especially after the power driving
[1:18:44] situation. The other thing is vibration,
[1:18:49] and I think as residents of the bay area
[1:18:56] we are cognizant of risks we have with
[1:18:59] earthquakes, but I don't think when we
[1:19:02] are buying property we as much think
[1:19:04] about human caused risks to our
[1:19:07] properties, structural risks to our
[1:19:09] properties caused by construction
[1:19:10] especially when there may be
[1:19:11] alternatives
[1:19:12] that are safer for our structures. I ask
[1:19:15] that you please consider that. Thanks
[1:19:17] for your time.
[1:19:19] >> thank you. Eric park followed by tom
[1:19:26] t.
[1:19:27] public speaker: as everyone else has
[1:19:29] said, thank you, commissioners, for
[1:19:30] taking the time to listen to our
[1:19:33] comments. I'm also with bay meadows
[1:19:37] homeowners association. I agree with the
[1:19:39] points made by the previous speakers. 2
[1:19:42] points that I would like to reiterate, I
[1:19:44] would like to say that bay meadows in
[1:19:47] particular is a neighborhood of young
[1:19:49] families. I have a six-year-old and
[1:19:51] almost all houses near mine have houses
[1:19:54] with families and near the schools. And
[1:20:00] we have many people that work from home
[1:20:02] and this is one of the demographics that
[1:20:06] will be impacted by work. I have
[1:20:07] concerns
[1:20:10] about noise, pollution and noise on
[1:20:12] families. I would like you to consider
[1:20:16] the request made by all the speakers
[1:20:18] today. Thank you.
[1:20:21] >> tom t followed by dana stuart.
[1:20:26] public speaker: hello, my name is tom
[1:20:30] chi. I have been part of bay meadows
[1:20:33] since 2015. Thank you, commission, for
[1:20:42] allowing us to participate. I will keep
[1:20:47] it short. I absolutely continue to echo
[1:20:51] a lot of points that have been made and
[1:20:52] I
[1:20:57] can underscore what this allows us to do
[1:21:01] except to engage in participation. A
[1:21:04] couple of additional points. When we go
[1:21:07] through all the construction, it's
[1:21:11] absolutely understandable and expected,
[1:21:13] right? People didn't move into a new
[1:21:16] development expecting that you get peace
[1:21:20] and quiet immediately. However, what I
[1:21:22] do always noticed is that regardless of
[1:21:26] the methods, while construction is
[1:21:28] happening, the folks that are in it, the
[1:21:31] workers, they have got gear protecting
[1:21:38] eyes, ears, mouths, nose. When a mere
[1:21:44] 25-100 feet, however many feet away, we
[1:21:48] are as residents experiencing much of
[1:21:49] the
[1:21:51] similar impacts without any of that
[1:21:54] protection. So that is just another
[1:21:56] perspective on what we talk about in
[1:22:00] terms fof noise concerns and vibration
[1:22:09] concerns. It matters a lot when we have
[1:22:13] an expectation when we can have some
[1:22:16] level of normalcy. But there is too much
[1:22:19] x factor in the air, you know, perhaps
[1:22:20] on
[1:22:23] that day, not all the time and you want
[1:22:25] to go back inside, but there is a lot of
[1:22:31] impact there. Lastly, I would like to
[1:22:34] just call in the question as we move
[1:22:39] forward, let's, I would really love to
[1:22:40] be
[1:22:43] able to review information that helps us
[1:22:49] validate decisions made progressively
[1:22:50] with regard to the cost and what the
[1:22:53] solution is such that as conditions
[1:22:55] change, we allow ourselves the
[1:22:57] flexibility. So what I would definitely
[1:22:59] appreciate is that a ton of hard work
[1:23:00] has
[1:23:04] already gone into this over a long
[1:23:05] period
[1:23:08] of time. But every week, month that
[1:23:12] passes and we have these large scale
[1:23:17] projects, that it allows for flexibility
[1:23:21] to approach solutions and what solutions
[1:23:23] are best or matter most. Thanks.
[1:23:37] >>clerk: dana stuart.
[1:23:38] public speaker: thank you, commissioner
[1:23:40] for allowing me to speak tonight. My
[1:23:42] name is dana story. The ceo of the san
[1:23:46] mateo county event center. I would like
[1:23:48] to thank the city staff that I have
[1:23:52] directly worked through with this
[1:23:53] process. And I would like us to note the
[1:23:56] designation of the agricultural
[1:23:58] designation of the land. The san mateo
[1:24:09] exposition and fair has dealt with san
[1:24:11] mateo for the last 70 years. We are not
[1:24:16] the oldest host facility, but the oldest
[1:24:18] neighbors in the area. We also and I
[1:24:21] think it's an important designation
[1:24:22] under
[1:24:23] the department of california food and
[1:24:24] ag,
[1:24:25] we are among the network of california
[1:24:29] fairs and we are also the designated
[1:24:31] office of emergency management resource
[1:24:33] for the entire county and in the event
[1:24:34] of
[1:24:36] a natural disaster. We are self
[1:24:40] supporting 501c3. All of the receive
[1:24:42] that we operate on the land comes from
[1:24:47] activities on the property. We are too
[1:24:50] concerned about noise constraints. We
[1:24:52] host everything from holiday parties
[1:24:53] which you have heard from the neighbors
[1:24:56] that can be somewhat disruptive
[1:25:00] unfortunately to academic testings to
[1:25:04] sony, high profile corporate events. We
[1:25:06] also strive to be a really good
[1:25:07] neighbor.
[1:25:09] so specifically in relative to the event
[1:25:14] that ms. Moran mentioned, one with the
[1:25:16] issue of vibrations, that was a $200,000
[1:25:24] per event of the event center. Because
[1:25:26] they weren't able to comply with the
[1:25:30] request for the reverberation made, this
[1:25:34] is a san mateo corporation that put on
[1:25:39] this event, they were asked not to come
[1:25:41] back and that's because of our alliance
[1:25:43] with the neighborhood. We are important
[1:25:46] as a self supporting organization that
[1:25:49] noise doesn't override our ability to
[1:25:53] sustain that self sustainability and we
[1:25:55] don't drive away our clients and we look
[1:25:59] forward to working with city staff so
[1:26:01] that doesn't happen. So such as
[1:26:04] construction time, noise, process, our
[1:26:06] buildings are old and not angered. We
[1:26:07] are
[1:26:10] working through an eir with county
[1:26:13] council to achieve our best outcomes. We
[1:26:15] look forward to continuing to work with
[1:26:16] the community and the neighbors and the
[1:26:19] city and hosting the project and looking
[1:26:22] for developing as many positive outcomes
[1:26:24] as we can along the way knowing that I'm
[1:26:28] also a citizen of the city of san mateo
[1:26:30] to work together to get to outcomes to
[1:26:46] develop and minimize the noise in san
[1:26:56] mateo.
[1:26:57] public speaker: thank you, jonathan, I'm
[1:26:59] speaking on behalf of myself and my
[1:27:01] family on this add on comment. I want to
[1:27:06] discuss pedestrian, public safety and
[1:27:08] pedestrian and bicycle safety
[1:27:11] specifically. Both on saratoga during
[1:27:20] the construction period, but also the
[1:27:22] city have a safer walking route for the
[1:27:27] safe bus commuters and to the centers
[1:27:31] from the parking lot during the
[1:27:35] construction. Saratoga is going to be
[1:27:36] less welcoming at best and quite
[1:27:41] dangerous at worse. Both pedestrians and
[1:27:46] bicyclist during the construction
[1:27:47] period.
[1:27:48] a suggestion that the city study and
[1:27:50] potentially coordinate with the event
[1:27:52] center and the county to provide a
[1:27:56] pedestrian gate from bay meadows park to
[1:28:00] the event center parking lot and that
[1:28:02] suggestion would be at an appropriate
[1:28:08] location where pedestrian safety and
[1:28:10] bicycle safety can be taken into account
[1:28:12] perhaps closer to nuevo school. Thank
[1:28:13] you.
[1:28:28] >>clerk: lily wu.
[1:28:29] public speaker: hi, my name is lily wu.
[1:28:34] >> please speak closer to the mic.
[1:28:38] >> I would like to thank you for giving
[1:28:41] us the opportunity to let you know how
[1:28:42] we
[1:28:45] feel. I live near with my children. I
[1:28:48] represent my family and the community.
[1:28:59] my concern mainly is the foundation or
[1:29:02] the process and method of their trying
[1:29:03] to
[1:29:06] build the sewage tank. The reason for
[1:29:08] that is already, I understand there is
[1:29:09] already the way it is proposed right now
[1:29:12] it could have some very possible
[1:29:13] damages,
[1:29:17] and I'm thinking, you know, in san
[1:29:19] francisco, we have the problem with the
[1:29:23] leaning building and then later on with
[1:29:26] the bus terminal area. We are very
[1:29:29] concerned about problems with
[1:29:30] foundations
[1:29:31] because the foundation is most important
[1:29:32] to a building. And that is expensive in
[1:29:42] the area and even to live in the area,
[1:29:44] and if there is a problem affecting the
[1:29:47] residents, I think is a lot of stress
[1:29:49] because in our bay meadows neighborhood,
[1:29:51] I think a lot of people are very
[1:29:53] hardworking and a lot of money is going
[1:29:55] into the residents but they work hard
[1:29:56] for
[1:29:58] that, and if something happens, how will
[1:30:00] they be able to handle the damages and
[1:30:05] the recuperate. Which could be coming
[1:30:13] back to the city. So I would recommend
[1:30:17] instead of going forward, with
[1:30:25] the problems, take the preventative
[1:30:27] method. If there is a problem, then
[1:30:30] later it might be worse. If you are not
[1:30:41] able to prevent the damages, maybe look
[1:30:44] at it in a different way. And for the
[1:30:47] people that are also of working class,
[1:30:52] and to do well, if there is a lot of
[1:30:54] noise, that is going to affect the
[1:30:57] performance. I think my main concern is
[1:31:06] that I don't think this is an ideal area
[1:31:11] to have a sewage tank. I don't know if
[1:31:13] it's too late to consider, or as was
[1:31:18] suggested earlier, there is a location
[1:31:19] in
[1:31:22] the park that can serve the area better.
[1:31:25] I really worry about it for everyone in
[1:31:27] that area. Thank you.
[1:31:36] public speaker: thank you for the
[1:31:38] opportunity to speak as an individual.
[1:31:40] I'm here representing myself and my
[1:31:42] husband markle yot who was too sick to
[1:31:43] be
[1:31:46] here tonight. We are members of the land
[1:31:51] homeowners associations association. I
[1:31:53] want to mention there are numerous
[1:31:54] errors
[1:31:59] in the eir and I will send those
[1:32:00] comments
[1:32:03] to you. And I want to mention that
[1:32:05] delaware is set to open when it would
[1:32:08] start and 25th would close and traffic
[1:32:10] would be very difficult and the same for
[1:32:13] pedestrian and bicycle situation through
[1:32:15] the construction area. Finally, I would
[1:32:16] like to point you to design comments I
[1:32:20] have sent via e-mail. I will not take
[1:32:24] time to repeat those here but I'm
[1:32:25] assuming
[1:32:31] you will get that. And I would like to
[1:32:33] thank you for being here. It's also an
[1:32:37] opportunity to get things on course when
[1:32:39] they seem off course in the community.
[1:32:41] you have that opportunity tonight. Thank
[1:32:43] you.
[1:32:50] public speaker: hello, my name is mike
[1:32:53] brat. I live on 10th street which is 150
[1:32:56] feet from where this tank is proposed to
[1:32:58] go in. What is I find amazing is that I
[1:33:03] was up here when bay meadows phase 1
[1:33:04] came
[1:33:09] in and I said, look, one of the big
[1:33:11] things is the sewage capacity. It barely
[1:33:13] meets what we have. You need to increase
[1:33:17] it. No no no. When phase two came in, we
[1:33:28] said, it a big problem. And you said, no
[1:33:30] no no, we are going to have more coming
[1:33:34] in, are you goes to increase capacity?
[1:33:36] no no, we are going to build a storage
[1:33:40] tank. Well for 25 years with all of
[1:33:41] these
[1:33:42] developments we have been going over the
[1:33:44] same stuff over and over again, sewer,
[1:33:52] noise, vibration. Honestly, the
[1:33:53] neighborhood is done. You have
[1:33:56] surrounded us with development that is
[1:33:58] just inundating our lives with nothing
[1:34:01] that is redeeming. I take it back. I
[1:34:04] like bay meadows, both phase 1 and phase
[1:34:07] 2, they beat the expectation that I had
[1:34:10] for them. I enjoy walking through them
[1:34:13] and I enjoy it every single day every
[1:34:16] weekend. I apologize for my comment.
[1:34:19] however, the noise and all of the
[1:34:21] construction impacts of those two
[1:34:24] developments, and everything that's gone
[1:34:26] on around us has taken our quality of
[1:34:28] life and made it very stressful. My wife
[1:34:33] is a two time cancer survivor. Her
[1:34:34] cancer
[1:34:36] came on about a year after saratoga was
[1:34:41] done. I sustained $5,000 worth of
[1:34:42] personal damage to the outside of my
[1:34:45] house because of the fungal infection
[1:34:49] that came from the air born stuff that
[1:34:52] they tore off from saratoga. I asked for
[1:34:56] it to be paid for, no, no, no, I
[1:34:57] couldn't
[1:35:03] prove it. I had proof, but it didn't
[1:35:07] matter. But I'm here watching this and
[1:35:09] hearing all the concerns which I 100%
[1:35:12] appreciate all of the research that they
[1:35:14] have done. I hope it doesn't fall on
[1:35:18] deaf ears having lived through all this,
[1:35:21] having been told everything is going to
[1:35:22] be fine and then you find out it's not
[1:35:26] fine. But it's already in process and
[1:35:36] the impacts are horrendous. Listen to
[1:35:38] their comments because they are going to
[1:35:43] be impacted like when theirs was
[1:35:54] developed. Thank you.
[1:35:55] >> I have no more speaker slips.
[1:35:58] >> okay, is there anyone else in the
[1:36:03] audience that would like to come forward
[1:36:04] and make some comments to the planning
[1:36:07] commission? You can fill out the yellow
[1:36:10] slip afterwards if need be.
[1:36:17] >> james yang.
[1:36:18] public speaker: thank you for the
[1:36:20] opportunity to speak. My name is james
[1:36:22] yang. I'm a resident of bay meadows, my
[1:36:25] wife and I are and a member of the
[1:36:26] meadow
[1:36:29] walks and the bay meadows alliance and
[1:36:34] the meadow walk homeowners associations.
[1:36:38] I don't want to reiterate too much of
[1:36:39] what my neighbors have been saying. I
[1:36:41] have absolutely agreed with most of the
[1:36:44] comments here tonight, and most of the
[1:36:47] bay meadows residents have come to
[1:36:51] understand that the sewage tank is a
[1:36:53] result or I guess it's a solution for
[1:37:00] waters that's overflow that's coming
[1:37:01] from
[1:37:02] pipes that are damaged up and through
[1:37:03] the
[1:37:05] hills and it's a result of rain and not
[1:37:07] really a result of increased population.
[1:37:11] we've come to understand that this is
[1:37:16] necessary. The residents are a group of
[1:37:31] public minding and decent citizens. I
[1:37:34] would add that if we allow for potential
[1:37:41] property damage or additional noise,
[1:37:42] it's
[1:37:44] really adding injury to insult. It's
[1:37:47] adding an additional layer of things for
[1:37:50] residents who have already come to
[1:37:52] understand the need for something like
[1:37:54] this and come to accept it and actually
[1:37:56] be open to it. So I just wanted to add
[1:38:00] that. Thank you.
[1:38:02] >> thank you.
[1:38:13] >> anyone else? Okay, we'll close the
[1:38:16] public comment period. So continue or
[1:38:18] take a short break? Okay. Are you okay?
[1:38:26] okay.
[1:38:27] so were there any questions or issues
[1:38:28] that the public brought up that we can
[1:38:31] provide additional information tonight?
[1:38:49] >> I would like to introduce heather,
[1:38:50] she
[1:38:54] prepared the environmental impact
[1:38:55] report.
[1:38:56] >> I would like to address the public
[1:38:59] comments. The public comments will be
[1:39:02] considered and considered against the
[1:39:04] evaluation that was conducted for the
[1:39:05] eir
[1:39:06] and formal responses will be made in a
[1:39:10] final document and again, as derek
[1:39:13] indicated, we are expecting that to be
[1:39:17] sometime in the fall. But I did want to
[1:39:19] address a few things that the
[1:39:21] commissioners brought up. I believe the
[1:39:22] agricultural question that you had was
[1:39:25] addressed, but if you have additional
[1:39:26] questions, we can go over that. There
[1:39:27] was
[1:39:29] some concern about the contamination or
[1:39:30] a
[1:39:32] question about the contamination and
[1:39:33] there is a phase 1 site assessment in
[1:39:34] the
[1:39:37] report. I don't want to quote from it
[1:39:39] because I don't have it in front of me,
[1:39:41] but I would start there and review that,
[1:39:46] and we can of course come back with full
[1:39:50] quick summary on the contamination that
[1:39:55] was determined not necessarily, there
[1:39:57] were not soil samples that I understand,
[1:40:00] but again, I don't want to quote from
[1:40:01] the
[1:40:04] report.
[1:40:06] >> excuse me, is it in this report?
[1:40:10] >> yes, the first part of the report
[1:40:11] that
[1:40:14] summarizes the phase 1 assessment and
[1:40:18] there were errors on the phase 1 on the
[1:40:21] thumb drive.
[1:40:22] >> I don't have a thumb drive.
[1:40:23] >> I'm sorry, I thought a thumb drive of
[1:40:27] the reports was provided to the
[1:40:31] commissioners? Either way, we can get
[1:40:34] the report. It's on the website also.
[1:40:39] the full eir and the attachments are on
[1:40:43] the website for this attachment.
[1:40:45] >> you gave it a name where the
[1:40:47] contamination was?
[1:40:48] >> a phase 1 site assessment.
[1:40:52] >> phase one, thank you. So derek
[1:41:07] provided a quick explanation of the
[1:41:10] dewatering. If you have any questions on
[1:41:12] that, I'm happy to provide an
[1:41:15] explanation. He also responded to your
[1:41:28] question of what a pedo meter is.
[1:41:37] and a question about dewatering and a
[1:41:40] question about dewatering to our
[1:41:44] waterways. That method has not been
[1:41:47] determined. It can also be removed via
[1:41:50] truck. The method by dewatering has not
[1:41:54] been determined. Regardless of the
[1:41:57] method, the contractor will be required
[1:41:59] to follow state requirements from the
[1:42:03] regional quality control board and the
[1:42:06] city of san mateo. The city has
[1:42:10] requirements on disposing water as well
[1:42:11] through their municipal code.
[1:42:14] I believe derek responded to the
[1:42:15] hotline,
[1:42:17] we have received comments about the eir
[1:42:20] via the hotline, the prime use of the
[1:42:23] hotline again was during the 2018 rates
[1:42:31] which I was not involved with and I
[1:42:32] don't
[1:42:34] want to necessarily get into that
[1:42:36] discussion.
[1:42:37] the hours of construction were
[1:42:38] addressed,
[1:42:41] the municipal code does have
[1:42:42] construction
[1:42:48] limitations, construction hour
[1:42:49] limitations and currently the
[1:42:51] construction is planned to be within
[1:42:52] those limited hours. I can't tell you
[1:42:55] specifically if they are going to arrive
[1:42:57] at 7:00 a.m. And leave at 7:00 p.m.. But
[1:43:01] I'm currently, the construction is
[1:43:03] planned to occur within those time
[1:43:04] limits
[1:43:07] established by the cities municipal
[1:43:08] code.
[1:43:16] and there was a question about
[1:43:22] consultation with native-american
[1:43:23] heritage commission. We did follow the
[1:43:26] requirements established by assembly
[1:43:27] bill
[1:43:33] 52 and there is a state consultation
[1:43:34] with
[1:43:36] tribes and letters and phone calls were
[1:43:38] made and there were no tribes in the
[1:43:39] area
[1:43:42] that requested consultation. We did
[1:43:43] receive one letter from the heritage
[1:43:46] commission on the draft eir and that
[1:43:47] will
[1:43:48] be addressed through the mechanism of
[1:43:49] the
[1:43:52] final eir. That I think addresses the
[1:43:54] bulk of the questions that you had.
[1:44:05] >> I don't know if tonight is the night
[1:44:07] to answer, but there is a question about
[1:44:09] the table in the eir and talk about a
[1:44:12] traffic study.
[1:44:13] >> I'm sorry, you are right. That is a
[1:44:14] question that I will have to research a
[1:44:17] little bit further. I know that when the
[1:44:19] eir was prepared, we did not have recent
[1:44:23] date accounts on the roadways in the
[1:44:25] area. So we used the materials that were
[1:44:27] available. So I will have to go back and
[1:44:29] take a look at that at that table to see
[1:44:33] if we have updated counts and could
[1:44:37] possibly update that analysis.
[1:44:38] >> could I just ask of staff when the
[1:44:44] station park green development went in,
[1:44:45] I
[1:44:48] assumed there was traffic data for that
[1:44:53] area, right?
[1:44:54] >> yes, but as you recall when station
[1:44:56] park green went through the development
[1:44:58] review process, it was during the
[1:45:02] recession. So the traffic counts were
[1:45:05] low.
[1:45:06] >> what year was it?
[1:45:07] >> it was probably around (2) 011-2012.
[1:45:13] those were more current. It just jumped
[1:45:16] out to me that it was 14 years old. And
[1:45:20] in response to comments, we can update
[1:45:22] the traffic counts in terms of what is
[1:45:25] actually occurring on the ground. So
[1:45:26] most
[1:45:45] of the conversation tonight has been
[1:45:49] about the draft environmental impact
[1:45:52] report. The eir document, but we as a
[1:45:54] planning commission can talk about the
[1:45:56] design. I'm wondering if you have given
[1:46:01] any thought to that or have comments or
[1:46:04] questions?
[1:46:05] >> I have a question for staff. In your
[1:46:07] report you indicated there is a project
[1:46:10] being done at the pacifica community
[1:46:13] center. What methods are they using to
[1:46:16] construct their project. Also on the
[1:46:17] page
[1:46:18] that you showed us, there was also a
[1:46:24] sound barrier constructed as well. What
[1:46:28] sound levels were shared with those
[1:46:35] residents?
[1:46:36] >> I don't have the construction. I only
[1:46:38] have the photos that I shared and that's
[1:46:42] the detail that I know.
[1:46:44] >> any other comment?
[1:46:45] >> I can make a comment on the design. I
[1:46:48] guess I should go back. It's very
[1:46:55] difficult, we got the information on
[1:46:57] thursday. I know some of the residents
[1:47:00] commented that they got it on friday.
[1:47:03] it's not a long time to look at large
[1:47:07] amounts of data. I feel very fortunate
[1:47:09] that I was around on the public works
[1:47:11] commission when this whole project was
[1:47:14] being discussed and being developed and
[1:47:15] we saw a lot of stuff from the seattle
[1:47:19] trip that you all went on and got
[1:47:25] information, real life information from
[1:47:26] cities that were going through it. So,
[1:47:30] this is an awful lot to take in over 4-5
[1:47:37] days. So, I think it would have been
[1:47:40] helpful to have a presentation on this,
[1:47:43] just presentation only to the planning
[1:47:45] commission to sort of give some
[1:47:48] background that would make it a lot
[1:47:53] easier for us to analyze what's in the
[1:47:56] eir based on the thought process that
[1:47:57] was
[1:47:58] gone through to develop the program
[1:48:00] because it was a very detailed process,
[1:48:05] and it's very beneficial to have that
[1:48:18] process. I looked through the plans of
[1:48:22] the building and the bay meadows is a
[1:48:28] very appealing community, and it would
[1:48:29] be
[1:48:32] great if the building can look like the
[1:48:34] houses in the area rather than the brick
[1:48:38] so it blends more with the surrounding.
[1:48:40] but that would be my only comment on the
[1:48:45] structures because I admit, I wasn't
[1:48:50] aware we were discussing the actual
[1:48:53] aesthetic of the building. So I did take
[1:48:56] a quick look, but it's only a quick
[1:48:57] look.
[1:49:08] >> so I have a few questions that relate
[1:49:11] to other aspects of the project beside
[1:49:15] the environmental document. There is
[1:49:17] fencing proposed along saratoga and the
[1:49:21] adjoining property line with the bay
[1:49:24] meadows park. The documents we have say
[1:49:31] -- is it an 8 or 6-foot. An 8-foot fence
[1:49:41] and concrete wall. I think we can
[1:49:44] provide direction as to which we would
[1:49:47] prefer. Whether we prefer a metal, or
[1:49:56] even wood.
[1:49:57] >> through the chair if I can make a
[1:49:59] comment. Right now the city and the
[1:50:03] county and also the events that are in
[1:50:07] negotiations on the screening material
[1:50:08] whether it's going to be a cme wall or a
[1:50:12] fence. That will most likely be part of
[1:50:15] the easement negotiation that's being
[1:50:20] taken now.
[1:50:21] >> so, the planning commission can still
[1:50:32] provide their preference and I don't
[1:50:33] know
[1:50:34] what will come of that at the moment.
[1:50:36] >> okay, any preference?
[1:50:50] >> not metal.
[1:50:52] >> my comments is that what we have on
[1:50:54] the other side of saratoga, and that
[1:51:00] until the landscaping has reached a
[1:51:03] certain maturity, it's going to feel
[1:51:04] like
[1:51:05] you are driving down the freeway with
[1:51:06] two
[1:51:07] sound walls. That was my comment there.
[1:51:11] also this site plan had a location of
[1:51:12] the
[1:51:17] air exhaust. It was labeled as 16 inches
[1:51:20] diameter and 10 feet tall and it's
[1:51:27] located fairly adjacent to the sidewalk,
[1:51:31] the public sidewalk. Is there any
[1:51:35] latitude as to where that air exhaust
[1:51:38] people can be located? Perhaps further
[1:51:41] away from the public right-of-way?
[1:51:43] >> we'll have to work with the engineer
[1:51:45] of design and determine if that is
[1:51:50] feasible.
[1:51:51] >> and is there only one of those air
[1:51:57] exhaust?
[1:51:58] >> from my recollection of the plans and
[1:52:00] I don't have it in front of me right
[1:52:01] now,
[1:52:02] I believe there should only be one.
[1:52:03] >> okay. And then it was indicated that
[1:52:16] there would be many at grade hatches. Do
[1:52:19] we have how many of those. I know you
[1:52:22] showed them in your presentation.
[1:52:24] >> not at the moment. We are currently
[1:52:34] passed 60% design and optimizing the
[1:52:37] location of those vaults.
[1:52:41] >> one of the public comment letters
[1:52:52] posed the question about if there was a
[1:52:55] spare the air, would construction
[1:52:56] proceed
[1:52:59] as normal or would construction recede
[1:53:00] at
[1:53:13] that time?
[1:53:14] >> I don't have a response for that, but
[1:53:16] we can take that into consideration.
[1:53:19] >> okay, and the staff report talked
[1:53:22] about as many as 200 vehicle trips per
[1:53:27] day during the construction period. How
[1:53:31] do we get a number that high and what
[1:53:33] would the majority of them be the reason
[1:53:38] for?
[1:53:39] >> I would have to call in heather for
[1:53:42] this. She has the number. There is a
[1:53:45] separation of truck trips associated
[1:53:46] with
[1:53:48] the underground structure and truck
[1:53:49] trips
[1:53:51] associated with the pipeline
[1:53:52] construction
[1:53:53] that total the numbers that you stated.
[1:53:56] >> right, the estimators for the
[1:54:04] project and designers, we did our best
[1:54:06] assessment of the type of construction,
[1:54:09] the duration of construction, and the
[1:54:10] types of equipment that would be
[1:54:11] required
[1:54:16] to not only build the holding structure
[1:54:19] and the associated facilities but also
[1:54:21] the pipeline. So the peak daily, we
[1:54:24] don't have an average for each of the
[1:54:27] different elements, but rather we
[1:54:28] analyzed what is going to be the worse
[1:54:35] case scenario on any given day but this
[1:54:38] is maximum that would occur on any given
[1:54:41] day. We estimated a total of 100 truck
[1:54:44] trips and that would mean haul trucks,
[1:54:50] bringing or removing, bringing equipment
[1:54:53] and supplies or removing excavated soil.
[1:54:57] for the holding structure and we are
[1:54:59] expecting approximately 30 workers on
[1:55:01] site. So we estimated a total of 60
[1:55:04] truck trips for those 30 workers. A
[1:55:05] truck
[1:55:08] trip is one trip in and one trip out. 30
[1:55:13] workers would generate 30 work trips,
[1:55:14] one
[1:55:16] in and one out.
[1:55:18] the pipeline construction we are
[1:55:19] expecting a peak of 30 heavy truck trips
[1:55:22] per day, and 8 workers on a daily basis
[1:55:26] for a total of 16 truck trips per day
[1:55:27] for
[1:55:32] a combined total of 206 truck trips or
[1:55:36] 206 trips on a peak day.
[1:55:39] so, just to point out, a point of
[1:55:45] clarification, howe, the environmental
[1:55:46] document assessed a truck trip as a 1.5
[1:55:50] passenger car equivalent. So for folks
[1:55:52] who are reviewing the eir, they are
[1:55:53] going
[1:55:54] to see a peak number of combined trips
[1:55:55] at
[1:56:00] 271, but that is because the truck trips
[1:56:02] that are holding the structure are
[1:56:05] estimated at 150 passenger car
[1:56:09] equivalence and a 45 passenger care
[1:56:18] equivalence.
[1:56:19] >> okay, based on what you told us, the
[1:56:21] pipe line project is it going to run
[1:56:28] concurrent with the the construction of
[1:56:30] the tank?
[1:56:32] >> that is going to be a shorter line.
[1:56:33] we
[1:56:36] are estimating about 13 months for the
[1:56:39] construction of the pipeline, but there
[1:56:43] will be concurrent construction.
[1:56:44] >> okay.
[1:56:45] >> for a total construction duration of
[1:56:50] 25 months, expected construction
[1:56:51] duration
[1:56:52] of 25 months for the entire project,
[1:56:54] pipeline and holding structure.
[1:57:02] >> and then there was a comment tonight
[1:57:05] by the public and I don't think it's
[1:57:07] going to involve you, heather, you can
[1:57:12] sit down. I remember reading it in the
[1:57:17] online comments about looking at
[1:57:23] installing a new pedestrian gate
[1:57:26] between the bay meadows park and the
[1:57:27] parking lot at the center that take the
[1:57:33] shuttles to their jobs in the area. If
[1:57:42] we do nothing, a possible safety issue.
[1:57:47] >> that component for having an access
[1:57:49] gate between the gate center and bay
[1:57:52] meadows is not considered as part of
[1:57:53] this
[1:57:56] project, but dana is here to talk about
[1:58:01] discussions with the recreation and
[1:58:02] parks
[1:58:07] department.
[1:58:10] >> sheila and I have discussed and with
[1:58:13] the issues with the center and the city.
[1:58:15] one would be to create an access gate
[1:58:16] for
[1:58:18] those folks that are currently using the
[1:58:20] soccer feeds as a relief measure for the
[1:58:29] congestion on 28 and we are developing a
[1:58:32] process to do that so that's in
[1:58:36] conversation.
[1:58:37] relative to the commuters, the google
[1:58:38] and
[1:58:39] facebook commuters that we host, that
[1:58:43] traffic is automobile traffic coming
[1:58:48] through the saratoga entrance. City
[1:58:49] staff and I have worked through the
[1:58:51] processes in which that won't be
[1:58:54] interrupted based on times when buses
[1:58:59] arrive and leave. It has to do with
[1:59:01] commuter traffic making sure that if
[1:59:02] there is a way that we can alleviate and
[1:59:08] enhance safety for not only kids playing
[1:59:21] in the park. The access is open to
[1:59:24] delaware. It would be open for the park.
[1:59:26] the access would be twofold and one
[1:59:27] fore
[1:59:30] soccer and for bay meadows residents or
[1:59:34] any san mateo residents that are going
[1:59:36] through the parking lot. Does that help
[1:59:39] clarify that?
[1:59:40] >> it's under negotiation?
[1:59:41] >> right, we are working on that
[1:59:45] separately. And then not a part of this
[1:59:49] project. Thank you.
[2:00:14] >> derek, in the work that you did with
[2:00:20] seattle, did they ever address the
[2:00:23] vibration and the noise issues? Were you
[2:00:27] there to see it?
[2:00:32] >> not to my recollection. The noise
[2:00:39] issues in seattle, they were completed
[2:00:40] or
[2:00:42] not active construction sites.
[2:00:46] >> I would be really interested to know
[2:00:49] from them what their experience was on
[2:00:51] this because theirs is a similar
[2:00:55] situation with structures right there on
[2:00:56] top of what it is they were building. So
[2:00:58] I would be interested to know if the
[2:01:02] structures were there when it was built
[2:01:05] or if the structures came after it was
[2:01:07] built. What the impact on those
[2:01:10] structures was during their construction
[2:01:13] because that's great information to get
[2:01:16] from them, also from pacifica as well
[2:01:18] since they have a neighborhood right
[2:01:20] behind theirs. What sort of things were
[2:01:25] they encountering during their
[2:01:30] construction. I also would like to know
[2:01:34] who is responsible, and who holds the
[2:01:51] bill at the end. People commented that
[2:01:54] the contractors shouldn't do the decibel
[2:01:56] level, but if it is the contractors
[2:01:57] doing
[2:02:00] the work, who is responsible for it and
[2:02:02] the damage and how would the city handle
[2:02:05] it. I would like to know what the
[2:02:06] thought
[2:02:09] process is behind it. People mentioned
[2:02:13] other construction methods. Are there
[2:02:18] other construction methods, I don't know
[2:02:20] about building something like that and I
[2:02:22] know you probably looked at all the
[2:02:25] different options.
[2:02:26] >> I'm not too sure what other
[2:02:28] construction methods the public comment
[2:02:32] shared tonight other than methods of the
[2:02:36] pipe. I'm not too sure about what other
[2:02:40] alternatives.
[2:02:41] >> have you investigated all of that in
[2:02:45] your planning?
[2:02:46] >> the design team has evaluated several
[2:02:50] options for construction.
[2:02:51] >> so they chose this method that's been
[2:02:54] considered in the eir?
[2:03:01] >> I would have to rely on heather for
[2:03:12] that.
[2:03:13] >> I'm sorry, can you repeat the
[2:03:14] question?
[2:03:15] >> my question is are there other
[2:03:16] options
[2:03:18] for putting supports down into the
[2:03:19] ground
[2:03:21] to support the tank. I'm not a
[2:03:24] construction person so I'm not going to
[2:03:26] say it right, but are there other
[2:03:27] methods
[2:03:30] other than driving piles or is that the
[2:03:32] only method that's available to us? I
[2:03:35] just want to understand how far along we
[2:03:37] are in the process if it's already been
[2:03:39] decided because that's the best option,
[2:03:40] I
[2:03:42] would like to know that. And if there
[2:03:43] are
[2:03:46] other options why weren't they selected?
[2:03:49] >> so, I'm not the best person to answer
[2:03:53] that either. I'm not a geotechnical
[2:03:56] expert, I'm not a structural engineer,
[2:03:59] I'm not an engineer. That would be a
[2:04:02] better question for our structural folks
[2:04:04] who are not here tonight.
[2:04:08] >> I would be interested the know.
[2:04:13] >> the eir did not evaluate other
[2:04:19] construction methods. So we don't have a
[2:04:21] construction evaluation. Based on the
[2:04:25] geotechnical analysis and I'm venturing
[2:04:28] into an area that I'm not an expert on,
[2:04:30] this was the method to build a
[2:04:33] structurally sound structure. So I would
[2:04:35] say we can take that back to our team to
[2:04:38] see what other terms fof method of
[2:04:44] foundation have been explored and
[2:04:45] provide
[2:04:46] and answer for you.
[2:04:48] >> I was just curious. I know a lot of
[2:04:53] work has been done. It doesn't involve a
[2:04:57] long answer. I'm just curious as to
[2:04:58] other
[2:05:03] options. Thank you.
[2:05:13] >> I have a question for heather. You
[2:05:17] were discussing other site location
[2:05:20] options? What are they?
[2:05:23] >> that was covered in the earlier
[2:05:29] sites. There were 55 sites.
[2:05:31] >> other sites. Okay, I interpreted
[2:05:33] there were other site locations on the
[2:05:38] event center parking area.
[2:05:39] >> not within the center parking area.
[2:05:42] this location through discussions with
[2:05:43] the event center was the only feasible
[2:05:45] location that they were willing to work
[2:05:47] with the city on.
[2:05:50] >> okay.
[2:05:56] >> anything more? So let me ask a
[2:05:58] question of city staff. I will start
[2:06:01] there. So trying to understand what the
[2:06:04] public talked about with respect to the
[2:06:08] caltrain construction at 25th, that's
[2:06:18] under the jurisdiction of caltrain which
[2:06:22] is a regional entity, and what we are
[2:06:25] talking about tonight, the underground
[2:06:30] flow equalization storage is entirely a
[2:06:36] city, a municipal project with the
[2:06:38] exception of the easement that we are
[2:06:39] asking for from the county for its
[2:06:43] location. So we have what I'm getting
[2:06:50] at is the midnight 2:00 a.m.
[2:06:51] construction
[2:06:52] that went on with caltrain, and that we
[2:06:57] have more control with this project
[2:06:58] because it's a city project in terms of
[2:07:01] the hours of construction.
[2:07:02] >> this project would be coming to the
[2:07:05] city for a special use permit and a site
[2:07:08] plan and architectural review and there
[2:07:10] will be conditions of approval
[2:07:11] associated
[2:07:12] with those. So the construction hours
[2:07:14] will be addressed in the conditions of
[2:07:19] approval.
[2:07:20] >> okay. Then one other question, by
[2:07:34] calculations, the electrical building is
[2:07:36] 37 feet long by 16 feet wide and a
[2:07:37] little
[2:07:41] over 13 feet tall. Does that sound about
[2:07:46] right? Okay. And then the underground
[2:07:50] storage area is a little over 200 feet
[2:07:51] by
[2:07:54] a little less than 150 feet in planned
[2:08:04] mention and it was mentioned earlier
[2:08:05] that
[2:08:09] the depth of the storage was probably 50
[2:08:12] feet but that we would have to excavate
[2:08:16] 25 feet below that in order to install
[2:08:21] the structure?
[2:08:22] >> the depth of the structure is
[2:08:23] anywhere
[2:08:26] from 32-50 feet. The bottom of it slopes
[2:08:29] to facilitate the cleaning mechanism. In
[2:08:33] terms of over excavation, I don't have
[2:08:34] that information with me right now.
[2:08:42] >> okay.
[2:08:43] so we are onto comments? You are
[2:08:48] finished. Comments? You are good. Well
[2:08:53] my input would be that based on the
[2:09:05] quantity of input we got from the public
[2:09:07] and pretty much a consistent message
[2:09:08] that
[2:09:15] the project needs to go back and look at
[2:09:22] an alternate method of construction and
[2:09:27] avoid the pile of driving and the sheet
[2:09:31] pile construction that were delineated
[2:09:32] in
[2:09:34] the environmental document. I think, I
[2:09:36] agree with the residents. That's
[2:09:45] unacceptable impacts to those homes, and
[2:09:48] especially given the duration of this
[2:09:51] project. That's it. Just to remind
[2:10:03] everyone, you have until may 7 to submit
[2:10:07] further comments and questions. We had
[2:10:11] an e-mail address I think on the screen
[2:10:12] at the end of the presentation. And
[2:10:20] those concerns are to my understanding
[2:10:22] will be addressed in the final
[2:10:25] environmental impact report document
[2:10:27] before it comes back to planning
[2:10:29] commission and then onto city council.
[2:10:32] so, thank you, everyone. If you could
[2:11:07] take your conversation to the lobby. We
[2:11:09] have to wrap up our meeting tonight.
[2:11:13] thank you. So, a couple things. Romero
[2:11:23] never got this document. It was passed
[2:11:26] out at our last planning commission
[2:11:28] meeting and he was absent. And then also
[2:11:30] there was mention of a thumb drive with
[2:11:34] some additional studies, we didn't get
[2:11:38] that and I wasn't aware that that was
[2:11:44] available.
[2:11:45] >> I wasn't aware that a thumb drive was
[2:11:47] available.
[2:11:48] >> sometimes in the past we have gotten
[2:11:49] a
[2:11:50] cd at the back of the draft
[2:11:51] environmental
[2:11:54] impact report that we can look at.
[2:11:58] >> I think another reason that we
[2:12:01] included the link in the staff report is
[2:12:03] that those technical studies are
[2:12:05] available on the website. I realize that
[2:12:07] is not a substitute for having a hard
[2:12:11] copy. It's a little late now.
[2:12:19] [ laughter ]
[2:12:26] we apologize. You are correct, they were
[2:12:30] handed out at the last planning
[2:12:33] commission meeting. We can follow up on
[2:12:36] the thumb drive, but again, that's the
[2:12:38] reason we also included the link on the
[2:12:40] staff report to the web page which has
[2:12:46] the document.
[2:12:52] >> okay.
[2:12:53] >> from a planning point, we could have
[2:12:56] handled it better.
[2:12:57] >> I'm looking at page 3 of the staff
[2:13:01] report where it lists attachment 8, the
[2:13:07] geotechnical report. I had heard
[2:13:09] references to that but I didn't know how
[2:13:11] to get it.
[2:13:12] >> if you go to the website listed in
[2:13:13] the
[2:13:15] staff report. It's got all of those
[2:13:19] technical opinions.
[2:13:20] >> can I add a statement of
[2:13:27] clarification. The report is in the
[2:13:30] attachments to the copies you received.
[2:13:33] the phase 1 site assessment in
[2:13:34] attachment
[2:13:37] e is a 400 plus page document. So we
[2:13:38] just
[2:13:42] took the summary section of that
[2:13:47] report and the remainder of that report
[2:13:49] is available in full on the website. If
[2:13:52] there is a request for that report to be
[2:13:55] sent to you directly, please let me
[2:13:56] know.
[2:13:58] >> I think at this point since we closed
[2:14:01] the public hearing, if there are
[2:14:02] procedural questions about how can we
[2:14:03] get
[2:14:05] the documents, we can answer them if
[2:14:07] there are questions about the documents
[2:14:09] themselves, I think that would be better
[2:14:13] handled in a public setting since we
[2:14:15] closed the public hearing.
[2:14:18] >> yeah. Okay.
[2:14:23] >> okay. There are no off the record
[2:14:26] questions at a public hearing.
[2:14:31] but really, we have closed the public
[2:14:35] hearing on this item. If there is more
[2:14:37] information, we can forward it to the
[2:14:39] planning commission. If there is
[2:14:41] anything more, we have a may 6 deadline.
[2:14:52] for making comments. I think since we
[2:14:56] closed the public hearing, we should
[2:14:57] move
[2:15:00] onto other business.
[2:15:02] >> reports and announcements.
[2:15:06] >> okay, let's see, on april 15th, the
[2:15:11] city council will be holding a public
[2:15:13] hearing on the modifications to the
[2:15:14] water
[2:15:16] quality control plant that the
[2:15:17] commission
[2:15:19] heard earlier in march.
[2:15:25] if you happen to be at the extravaganza
[2:15:31] on saturday april 20th, we'll have a
[2:15:32] book
[2:15:34] on the efforts that the city has entered
[2:15:37] into with the county to provide
[2:15:39] affordable housing issues. It's mainly
[2:15:41] informational as well as a general plan
[2:15:45] information booth. We'll be there that
[2:15:48] day.
[2:15:49] at your next meeting april 23rd, there
[2:15:51] will be a study session on the
[2:15:55] mid-peninsula proposal and the new
[2:15:58] downtown parking garage and the former
[2:16:02] redevelopment sites downtown.
[2:16:03] additionally we will have the return of
[2:16:08] the kerry school modification. I can't
[2:16:10] recall which commissioners were on the
[2:16:11] commission when we heard it in study
[2:16:16] session.
[2:16:17] saturday, april 27th, again the city has
[2:16:18] entered into an agreement with home for
[2:16:20] all through the county of san mateo to
[2:16:23] provide a forum for a housing
[2:16:24] discussions
[2:16:27] outside of a specific general plan
[2:16:29] discussion, outside of the discussion on
[2:16:33] a specific development project. Home for
[2:16:37] all will be facilitating discussions at
[2:16:39] this meeting which will be from 930-1130
[2:16:43] at san mateo high school in the
[2:16:46] cafeteria. The hope is that not only in
[2:16:55] attendance will be people that are
[2:16:59] normally involved in housing issues, but
[2:17:01] people that are not normally involved in
[2:17:03] civic affairs. That is the reason we are
[2:17:06] going to the eggs extravaganza and city
[2:17:13] staff will be setting up and phil's
[2:17:21] coffee shop downtown. The commission is
[2:17:23] welcome for all to come saturday but in
[2:17:29] the guise of being observers rather than
[2:17:34] participants. In the may 14 and 28, we
[2:17:37] do have planned planning commission
[2:17:39] meetings. We have items on those
[2:17:40] agendas.
[2:17:43] so, those would include a review of the
[2:17:49] bay meadows annual development
[2:17:50] agreement,
[2:17:51] as well as a return of the windy hill
[2:17:59] project on the program and construction.
[2:18:01] that's what we have in may for the
[2:18:05] planning commission. That concludes
[2:18:10] staff announcements.
[2:18:11] >> did you want to give an update on the
[2:18:15] 432 virginia avenue?
[2:18:22] >> yes, we have responded. Now, if you
[2:18:28] can recollect, did you get cc'ed on the
[2:18:37] staff response, there is a building
[2:18:38] permit, the results of the building
[2:18:42] permit indicate and we've had an
[2:18:44] inspection on the property and the work
[2:18:46] is within the scope. We have sent a
[2:18:48] letter to the property owner and
[2:18:51] indicated that it is a permit issue for
[2:18:55] the single family dwelling and in the
[2:18:56] code that include the single family
[2:18:59] dwelling and the definition of dwelling
[2:19:01] and I will provide a copy of that letter
[2:19:04] to you shortly after adjournment.
[2:19:07] >> okay. Any announcements?
[2:19:09] we are adjourned.
[2:19:09] >> okay. Any announcements?