|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
A redevelopment project aimed at replacing the Livermore Town Center shopping plaza with townhomes drew a group of concerned residents to the Livermore Planning Commission meeting this week.
Under discussion was the scope of the environmental impact report for the Pacific and Livermore Townhomes project proposed by San Jose-based Swenson Development and Construction.
Located at the corner of Pacific Avenue and South Livermore Avenue, this project would involve demolition of the shopping center’s two existing commercial buildings, associated landscaping and parking lot.
The following construction, including an adjacent vacant lot along South Livermore Avenue, would create 15 residential buildings for a total of 115 two- and three-story townhomes and associated amenities. The amenities would include a pool area, pool equipment, clubhouse buildings, guest parking and an interior park.
The approximately 6.5-acre site would also feature about 26,050 square feet of open space and 55,200 square feet of landscaping. Associated public improvements would include the undergrounding of utility lines, new landscaped meandering sidewalk, curb and gutters along South Livermore Avenue, Pacific Avenue and Dolores Street.
The project EIR will analyze the potential impacts of the project on the surrounding area and recommend mitigation measures to address any impacts that are considered significant, said Jennifer Ackerman, associate planner for the city of Livermore.
All nine public commenters at the March 18 Planning Commission meeting expressed concerns about the project. Among their worries were potential noise, dust, pests, hazardous material, blockage of views and sunlight, insufficient parking as well as a loss of privacy and commercial space.
Their responses, along with written comments received by the city by April 3, will be included in the public comment section of the EIR. Those pertaining to elements of the EIR will be responded to in the document, while those regarding project merit will not garner a response in the EIR.
“My neighbors and myself, we will bear the brunt of all the noise, dust and fumes from the construction as well as when you dig up the land all the rodents, roaches and whatever critters have been living there for the past 30 or 40 years,” said Livermore resident Michael Tootle, whose backyard abuts the future project site.
On March 3, the city published a “Notice of Preparation of a Draft EIR” for the project in part as a way to solicit comments and suggestions regarding the preparation of the EIR.
According to the notice, the potentially significant environmental topics that will be analyzed in more detail in the EIR include air quality, hazards, hazardous materials, biological resources, land use planning, cultural resources, noise, energy, transportation and greenhouse gas emissions.
Top concerns for Tootle’s neighbor Lon Overacker were possible chemicals on the project site, rodents, asbestos in the buildings and noise levels.
Loss of the shopping center, which hosts businesses including Patisserie By Simone, a bingo hall called Bingo4CHEF and The Oak Door, was another concern for residents.
Jeffrey Kaskey, former member of Livermore’s Downtown Steering Committee and former City Council candidate, said nearby residents want retail in the center.
But because of waivers through the builder’s remedy, the project is not required to meet some zoning standards like height and commercial space requirements, Ackerman said. The builder’s remedy allows zoning and general plan waivers if a city is out of compliance with their housing element. At the time of project application, the city’s Housing Element was briefly non-compliant with state law because it had not been approved.
“I would ask the city to consider incentives that would make it attractive to trade a small amount of the housing for a market space,” Kaskey said.
He also suggested that the EIR take into account the additional emissions and traffic created since Nob Hill Foods left the site.
Later in the meeting, Commissioner Jacob Anderson requested the EIR include a study of the potential economic impacts of removing the center. Staff plan to discuss the suggestion with a city consultant. Many years ago, an economic study found the site wasn’t viable for commercial use due to market changes, staff added.
If the economic impact cannot be incorporated into the EIR, Anderson suggested the EIR include a study of the “vehicle miles traveled” for people traveling farther for access to stores.
Anderson also expressed concern about food accessibility in the area.
“Already it is a food desert,” Anderson said. “But now we are losing small convenience stores, a restaurant and all of that, so that even creates an even bigger challenge, and also especially with the several low-income nearby.”
The possibility of a small footprint market could be included in the EIR as a project alternative, staff said.
In response to a letter received from the public, Anderson also suggested that the EIR look at energy consumption, amid the possibility of new buildings blocking some sunlight to solar systems on nearby houses.
Vice Chair Tracy Kronzak expressed concern about the presence of asbestos in older buildings, but added that handling the chemical and other hazardous materials is regulated.
As for the scope of the EIR, Kronzak suggested researching whether the new buildings could create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.
Written comments regarding topics in the EIR are due to the city by 5 p.m., April 3.
The developer and city staff plan to also host an open-house style preview meeting of the project for residents May 14.
After the draft EIR is complete, the planning commission is expected to hear the project entitlements and certify the EIR in the late summer. Then Livermore City Council is expected to vote on the project late summer or early fall.
