Cal Water Well at 800 Carlisle Way

Cal Water superintendent presented the applicant case: the well is critical infrastructure, 16 wells drilled company-wide in a decade, and mitigation commitments offered.

Raised concerns about vibration thresholds and risk of localized ground subsidence.

Voiced concerns about pollution from drilling and the diesel generator.

Questioned Cal Water's business model and noted the parcel is zoned for housing.

Spoke in opposition to the project.

Raised concerns about the proposed sound mitigation barrier.

Presented concerns about sound wall height and proximity to power lines.

Raised concerns about diesel generator pollution and the condition of the shared wood fence.

Voiced opposition to the project.

Presented concerns about the well location and an unexplored project alternative.

Raised concerns about noise and vibration from drilling.

39-year neighbor presented concerns about tree removal and noise mitigation plans.

Raised concerns about long-term diesel generator use and noise.

Voiced concerns with items in the draft Environmental Impact Report.

Supported conducting a property survey and filing an insurance bond.

Asked that emergency action plan details — contacts and responsibilities — be made available to residents.

38-year resident next to the site asked the commission to save trees 439 and 434, called the EIR incomplete and inaccurate, said the noise analysis ignores water aeration noise, and asked that no permit issue until all mitigations are locked in.

Adjacent resident questioned the adequacy of the EIR, said the alternatives analysis is a conclusion rather than an analysis, and noted the vibration analysis rests on a structure on the project site rather than the nearest residence.

Speaking for neighbor Tina Baumgartner, urged enforceable, transparent mitigation, verifiable monitoring with clear thresholds and corrective actions, and criticized hotel vouchers for only two homes as inadequate.

Asked about protocols preventing release of infectious pathogens, suggested discharging water to the East Channel instead, and said noise and air quality mitigation is insufficient; urged choosing Alternative 2.