Los Gatos Weekly-Times

New proponents push current site for substation over alternates

Fearing more confusion, council won't pick a site

Decision now goes to PUC

By Jeff Kearns

Councilmembers decided April 6 not to make a recommendation to the Public Utilities Commission as to which site would be best for the Vasona substation, citing the massive amount of information they would need to sift through before selecting one site from several options. The council sent an advisory letter to the PUC after the meeting.

At last week's hearing, the original cast of characters who have been the most vocal in their opposition to the substation, and who forced PG&E to come up with a list of alternate sites for the project, is now sharing the stage with another group of neighbors: those who live around the alternate sites. Residents addressed the council at last week's meeting on what stand, if any, the town should take in the matter.

PG&E's current application, however, is only for the site at Lark Avenue and Winchester Boulevard. If the appplication is denied by the PUC, the utility may be forced to build the substation on an alternate site. No new transmission lines are planned in town unless an alternate site is chosen.

The council did ask the PUC to require that PG&E hire a facilitator to work with the town and neighborhoods before a final decision is made; that PG&E prepare an emergency response plan for the substation; and that single-pole transmission towers replace the older crossbar towers.

The letter also asks that the PUC address problems with the process of gathering input from municipalities. Councilmembers agreed that preparing a recommendation has been a confusing task because they have been unsure of how to go about doing so.

Councilmember Jan Hutchins said that the council had heard at different times that it had no input in the decision, that there might be a possibility of having some say and later that their opinion would be "seriously taken into account."

Moises Chavez, a regulatory analyst at the PUC, says that the weight given to input from local agencies varies on a case-by-case basis, depending on the types of comments made, what's being proposed and whether new information is being presented.

In this case, because of the controversy the plan has generated, Chavez says the commissioners will likely take a very close look at all the information before making a decision. The current process, he added, is also new and untested, thanks to recent changes in the law.

An evidentiary hearing Monday, presided over by a PUC administrative law judge, marked the deadline for public comment on the issue. The judge now has 90 days to prepare a recommendation to the commission, followed by a 30-day public comment period on his decision. After that, the five commissioners will take up the matter and approve or deny PG&E's application to build the substation, or prepare an alternative decision based on the original proposal. The commission, which meets bimonthly in San Francisco, has no set deadlines.

The PUC held its own hearing March 23 in Los Gatos to get feedback from residents on the matter. (Transcripts of that meeting are available in the town clerk's office.)

While those lined up against the current site called for more analysis and a better decision-making process, some neighbors from areas around the alternate sites said the existing site was good enough.

"We should complete the plan that's the least destructive," said Roland Carrier, who lives near Lark Avenue and Highway 17. "We shouldn't displace people or add power lines to back yards, add new corridors, add additional costs. It's fine just the way it is."

Elvia Hashimoto and Audrey Van Belleghem, who live near one of the alternate sites on the north side of Highway 85, gathered 342 signatures on a petition to use the present site over any of the alternates.

Many of those who spoke out against the current site pointed out that it was located in a removed, undeveloped area more than 20 years ago, but is now inappropriate because residential neighborhoods and offices have moved into the area since it was first approved.

Ann Burns said that she and a group of her neighbors, who live near the Vasona site, are pushing a site on Winchester Boulevard between Highway 85 and the freeway's southbound exit ramp.

But the site has problems. PG&E identified the nine-acre site in a report as feasible but not recommended because of safety concerns, and Caltrans is unwilling to sell the land. Building new transmission lines could mean displacing 10 townhouses on Hooke Lane.

PG&E is sticking with its original site, wary of the extra costs and delays that would be involved in getting another one approved and built.

Burns and other opponents have accused the utility of putting profits first, citing a recent interview with CEO Gordon Smith and instances of legal action filed against the company. Some alleged PG&E was providing misinformation and called the process a ploy to put the town at odds with itself.

"The company doesn't operate that way," said spokesperson Scott Blakey, who added that some opponents had relied on scare tactics and appear to have made an effort not to inform people in other neighborhoods.

Blakey says that the time is approaching when electrical demand will surpass capacity, which could be as early as the next heat wave. "We need the substation. The longer you delay it, the more risk you run," he said.

[ Back to Contents Page | Los Gatos Weekly-Times Home Page | Archives ]