Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Folsom Pipeline Appeal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission upholds mitigated negative declaration for Folsom Street homes after pipeline safety debate
Summary
Planning staff's PMND for two single-family homes and a proposed Folsom Street connection in Bernal Heights was upheld following extended public testimony on slope stability and a PG&E transmission pipeline; the commission required PG&E sign-off and a vibration-monitoring plan before permits.
The Planning Commission on June 15 voted to uphold the Planning Department's preliminary mitigated negative declaration (PMND) for a proposal to construct two single-family residences and associated street and stair improvements on a paper section of Folsom Street at the base of Bernal Heights.
The proposal drew sustained public concern because PG&E transmission pipeline #109 runs beneath the project site and the surrounding hills are steep. Neighbors and a pipeline expert retained by appellants argued the PMND understates geotechnical and pipeline risks and called for a full environmental impact report to analyze potential catastrophic outcomes and slope stability.
Planning staff and project counsel said the PMND analyzes construction vibration and site hazards and includes firm mitigation: a construction vibration monitoring plan, limits on material storage and construction activities within 20 feet of the transmission line, and a requirement that PG&E review and approve the site-specific vibration plan before building permits are issued. Staff noted there were no pending applications for other adjacent vacant lots and therefore no reasonably foreseeable cumulative development to require an EIR.
An independent pipeline-safety expert submitted a letter asserting the PMND's mitigation is insufficient and recommending replacement or additional integrity work on the pipeline segment; appellants urged the commission to require a site-specific pipeline integrity analysis and deeper geotechnical study before permitting. Planning staff countered that PG&E is the technical authority on pipeline safety and that the proposed monitoring and PG&E sign-off are appropriate mitigation measures under CEQA.
After deliberation the commission found the PMND adequate and adopted the mitigation measures, including PG&E review and a vibration-monitoring plan to be approved prior to permit issuance. Commissioners and staff emphasized that scheduling, trenching and excavation work would require coordination with PG&E and Public Works.
Quotes: "Given the uncertainties of actual pipe integrity, strong consideration should be given to replacing the segment of pipeline," an independent expert wrote; Planning staff responded that PG&E has specific site controls and will sign off on the monitoring plan.
The Commission's decision does not preclude further project-level oversight by PG&E or Public Works, and permit-level conditions must be met before construction can proceed.
