My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
21 SUPPLEMENTAL
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2023
>
060623
>
21 SUPPLEMENTAL
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/6/2023 1:00:06 PM
Creation date
6/6/2023 12:59:24 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
6/6/2023
DESTRUCT DATE
20Y
Document Relationships
21
(Message)
Path:
\CITY CLERK\AGENDA PACKETS\2023\060623
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
71
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
LIVE ®RE <br /> t. ‘L I F O R N I A COMMENT COMPILATION AND RESPONSE <br /> Commenter#2 <br /> C94 Section# 1.2 <br /> Page# 1 <br /> Comment: Environmental: any further expansion of the airport will have severe, destructive, <br /> environmental impacts on the surrounding neighborhoods, significantly increasing noise and air <br /> pollution, negatively affecting the health of residents ...this policy does not adequately address the <br /> increased environmental and health damage which will be caused by expansion and extension of services <br /> at the airport <br /> R94 Comment noted.No specific alternative language or deletions provided. <br /> C95 Section# 1.2 <br /> Page# 1 <br /> Comment: further expansion of the airport will negatively impact the relationship between the airport and <br /> the surrounding communities since expansion will result increased pollution and noise,both of which are <br /> continuing issues objected to by the surrounding communities. <br /> R95 Comment noted.No specific alternative language or deletions provided. <br /> C96 Section# 1.2 <br /> Page# 1 <br /> Comment: Economic issues are not properly addressed...while the airport will undoubtedly benefit <br /> financially from airport expansion, local homeowners will definitely not, as noise and pollution will <br /> decease property values <br /> R96 Comment noted.No specific alternative language or deletions provided. <br /> C97 Appendix B-1 <br /> Page# 1 <br /> Comment: the resolution states in#4 that the city does not intend to extend the existing runways this <br /> offers no real assurance and does not even offer assurance that public input will be solicited,with enough <br /> notice to be effective,if such plans come up in future <br /> R97 Comment noted.No specific alternative language or deletions provided. <br /> As such,a change was not deemed necessary. <br /> C98 Appendix B-1 <br /> Page# 1 <br /> Comment: #5 states the city will aggressively foster the reduction of airport noise...this section is <br /> disingenuous at best, since any noise complaints submitted are met with the standard reference to FAA <br /> regulations,which prevent cities or local jurisdictions from enacting any regulation of which aircraft that <br /> can use the airport if the facility is adequate...that is why the noise reduction efforts are all voluntary, <br /> and why the city will not be aggressively reducing airport noise...expansion of the airport and aircraft <br /> services will increase noise and pollution and the only way the city can aggressively work to reduce such <br /> is by not increasing traffic through the airport <br /> R98 Comment noted.No specific alternative language or deletions provided. <br /> C99 Comment: In support of airport expansion,the ever increasing demand for increased hangar space and <br /> services is often cited; the inclusion in the document that expansion shall not be solicited and will only <br /> be approved if the demand already exists, also specious...as far as i can see, the policy plan does not <br /> specify when public notice shall be given of proposals and when/if public comments will be solicited <br /> regarding such proposals.This should be included in the proposal in a clear way and be required before <br /> any advancing of any proposal that will increase airport traffic, and the city needs to be more upfront <br /> regarding its lack of power over the real results of expansion,and of how only by not encouraging more <br /> airport traffic can the city help protect residents from the health,economic,social and functional goals <br /> R99 Comment noted.No specific alternative language or deletions provided. <br /> Commenter#25 <br /> C100 Section# 1 <br /> Page# 1 <br /> Comment: Keeping a"compatible relationship" with the community should include reducing the noise <br /> problem. I do not see "noise" discussed.Just because people may have given up complaining about the <br /> noise,it does not mean that the problems are solved. <br /> R100 See R5 <br /> Comment noted.No specific alternative language or deletions provided. <br /> Comment Compilation and Response 20 <br /> City of Livermore, Livermore Municipal Airport(06/05/2023) <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.