CCMIN021693 - Laserfiche WebLink

85 ~, MEETING OPEN TO THE PUBLIC Jim Fields, 4083 Walnut Drive, requested that Council direct the City Attorney'$ office to join the lawsuit filed by a local property owner against the expansion of the Livemore Airport. He expressed his concern to City staff as well as to the newspapers. Mr. Fields stated that many residents were concerned with noise and safety issues. He was aware that the deadline for filing this law suit was 5:00 p.m. tonight. He understood that Mayor Tarver wanted to negotiate with Livemore but he preferred a negotiated settlement that addresses Pleasanton's concerns. Mayor Tarver stated that Council met in closed session before the deadline for filing a lawsuit and considered this matter very carefully. The majority of Council felt that the best way to protect Pleasanton's neighborhoods would be to negotiate with the City of Livemore. The lawsuit to "open up" the Livemore Airport Protection Area was based on the fact that environmental damage would be done. Council wants to protect the Airport and have the aircraft go north, not over the Pleasanton Meadows. It also wants to reach an agreement that Livemore will not expand the Airport. The City of Livemore has agreed to cooperate with the City of Pleasanton to do so. Sharrell Michellotti, 7873 0live Court, spoke in regards to the Main Street Reconstruction Project. She shared her concerns and objection with the elimination of the bulb-outs, expanded handicapped ramps, and design of benches and the coloring of the materials. She asked if Council had fully considered the impacts on the design in view of the expanded handicapped ramps. She asked that the public or Planning Commission be a part of the final decision making process. Ms. Acosta indicated that this matter was first on the February 23rd Special Meeting agenda. Mayor Tarver stated that the public will be allowed to comment at the meeting. He did not believe that there would be enough time to reconsider the design of the bulb-outs. Mayor Tarver stated that Council will be making the final decision. Ms. Michellotti added that she was assured at the last City and County of San Francisco meeting that input had been received from the School Board members regarding the second school site. The newspapers did not reflect this. She asked when this matter will be addressed again. Mr. Swift explained that the School District adopted a Master Plan one year ago which has three elementary schools and one additional middle school and the two existing high schools. The locations were identified. This plan was based on the District's mid-range demographic study which concerned three different 02/16/93 3