Laserfiche WebLink
Dolan said the measurement is not linear, but increases are perceptible at increments of 3 <br />decibels. If the question is whether it is worth the effort to reduce noise levels from 61 to 60 <br />decibels here, one could make the argument that the change would be imperceptible. <br />Mr. Fialho referred to the table of noise levels contained within the General Plan, said 60 <br />decibels is the threshold, 70 is comparable to a gas powered lawnmower at 30 meters, 80 -90 <br />decibels is like a large truck passing within 15 meters, and 100 decibels is like a pile driver. <br />Councilmember McGovern referred to the Specific Plan amendments as they pertain to flood <br />control where it comments on the deferral of certificates of occupation until implementation of <br />Livermore Flood Protection Improvements. She said it continues in stating that if Livermore has <br />not succeeded in executing this, the cost sharing agreement requires that Alameda County <br />Surplus Property Authority will construct the planned Livermore Flood Protection Improvements. <br />Mr. Bocian said Livermore's plans are not clear at this time, but they are continuing to work on <br />the project. Councilmember McGovern questioned and confirmed with Mr. Bocian that the issue <br />would be resolved when CLC breaks ground. <br />Mayor Hosterman opened the public hearing. <br />Pat Cushman, representing the County of Alameda acknowledged the efforts of the community <br />in bringing these issues to light and those of staff in bringing the proponents and opponents of <br />the project together. He said tonight's discussion has been reasonable and fair, although he <br />noted the development agreement calls for the opening of Stoneridge Drive when Jack London <br />Boulevard opens and has nothing to do with the Regional Policy Agreement. He said the region <br />wanted Stoneridge Drive built, the quid pro quo for that was the priority setting of SR -84, and <br />both parties are concerned the other side will renege. He said he wants there to be no political <br />misunderstanding regarding this issue in the future. This project deserves certainty and that is <br />what the development agreement does. Aside from that, he voiced appreciation for the City's <br />positive approach to the project and complimented neighbors. <br />Ralph Kanz, Alameda Creek Alliance Conservation Director, said the Alliance is in full support of <br />the project at this point. He said it has been a long and difficult process, but the result is a fair <br />agreement that balances the needs of all parties. He complimented everyone involved in the <br />final negotiations, particularly Troy Bourne and Matt Morrison. <br />Mary Tantillo said this has been a long process and she looks forward to having CLC as place <br />to retire. <br />Brenda Harris thanked the Council for working so closely with the developer and other interests. <br />She said she is very happy to see the project move forward and hoped it would do so quickly <br />enough for her parents to take advantage of. <br />John Harris said his grandparents intend to move into Stoneridge Creek, and he is excited to <br />see this move forward and them to stay so close. <br />Ted Tinges said he and his wife have lived in Pleasanton for nearly 15 years and they look <br />forward to living in the Stoneridge Creek development. He said he has heard it may not be <br />finished for 2 -3 years, at which point he will be 80 years old and perhaps not around to move in. <br />He implored the Council and community to vote in approval of the project. <br />Marge Johnson thanked everyone for the time and energy spent in reaching agreement on the <br />project. As co -chair of the self- appointed Stoneridge Task Force, she said she would be remiss <br />in not acknowledging the efforts of Barbara Hemphill. <br />Special City Council Minutes <br />Page 7 of 9 August 24, 2010 <br />