PC 051309 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner Blank referred to Policy 21 on page 5-42 regarding working with the City of Livermore regarding air navigational hazards. He stated that the City of Livermore has no jurisdiction in determining air navigational hazards and that it is strictly the purview of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). He noted that there was a famous building by Montgomery Airport in San Diego that was torn down because it went against the FAA, which had pressured the City to withdraw its building permit. He suggested the language be revised to add “FAA” to the “City of Livermore.” Ms. Stern stated that she believed this Policy was a hold-over from the 1996 General Plan and would be corrected as necessary for accuracy. Commissioner Blank referred to Chapter 11, Noise, Policy 8, Program 8.2, on page 11-27, regarding working specifically with the City of Livermore to address noise impacts at the Livermore Municipal Airport. He suggested that language be added to encourage the City work with BART or other noise generators as well. He noted that the airport is called out but not other agencies such as roadways, railways, or rapid transit. Ms. Stern stated that other entities could be added. Commissioner Olson stated that he had no comments. Commissioner Narum stated that she agrees with the letter from Cox, Castle and Nicholson regarding retaining the current General Plan zoning for East Pleasanton in the new General Plan until the Specific Plan for East Pleasanton is completed. Commissioner Narum voiced reservations regarding the housing cap, although she realized that the City is at a point where it just needs to approve the General Plan. She added that the General Plan could always be modified in the future. She noted that it is likely the City will face some significant modifications in the future around the housing cap and that she wanted to move on. She indicated that she liked Ms. Dennis’ idea of adding a program that, should the housing cap be thrown out, some kind of process be put in place for the public to provide input regarding how to remedy it. Commissioner Blank stated that rather than making it a formal program in the document which could significantly modify the document, the Commission could, as part of its motion, recommend that the Council develop a contingency plan for events that might affect the General Plan, e.g., revocation of the housing cap. Commissioner Narum stated that everyone recognizes there would be some modifications in the near term and as an interested resident, she would want to know that a process is in place for community input, as some of those modifications may be potentially significant. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, May 13, 2009 Page 5 of 13