My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN111792
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1992
>
CCMIN111792
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:55:02 AM
Creation date
10/28/1999 11:32:20 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
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
183 <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr stated that she had raised the issue of reviewing the <br />' sign ordinance, but we are at the point of making a decision to <br /> create this new Economic Development Committee. It would seem <br /> impossible that the new Committee could review it and have an <br /> answer back to Council at the next meeting. The two issues (appeal <br /> and reconsideration of the sign ordinance) would have to be <br /> reviewed separately. <br /> <br /> 8. MATTERS INITIATED BY COUNCILMEMBERS <br /> <br /> Item 8a <br /> Review of the Proposed Livermore Municipal Airport Protection Area <br /> currently under consideration by the Alameda County Airport Land <br /> Use Commission (SR92:467) <br /> <br /> Mayor Mercer explained that this Protection Area was a major <br /> change that the City of Livermore had proposed. It was scheduled <br /> for a Committee meeting of ABAG (Association of Bay Area <br /> Governments) and then from that Committee, to the Airport Land Use <br /> Commission. He had drafted a letter to ABAG and the item had been <br /> continued to January 1993. Tonight, the Airport Land Use <br /> Commission meeting is being held and this issue was going to be <br /> continued to January as well. Mayor Mercer asked Mr. Roush if this <br /> type of action would require an EIR. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush stated that the staff report discussed what matters <br /> had been discussed in the draft negative declaration and the fact <br /> that the City of Dublin and Kaiser Sand and Gravel had already <br /> submitted letters to the Land Use Commission indicating that an EIR <br /> should be prepared for the project. Council could agree with the <br /> City of Dublin and Kaiser Sand and Gravel and request that EIR be <br /> prepared. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr commented the City is in the process of a new General <br /> Plan review for which a citizens committee will most likely be <br /> formed within a couple of months. She believed that if this issue <br /> would result in a modification to the Stoneridge Drive Specific <br /> Plan, then this issue should be part of the General Plan review. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver suggested making minor changes to Mayor Mercer's <br /> draft letter. The changes would try to stay away from making a <br /> determination of what might result from an EIR. Basically, it <br /> would ask for more information. <br /> <br /> Mayor Mercer stated that this Protection Area, if adopted, <br /> will have significant impacts on the City of Pleasanton, City of <br /> Dublin and Alameda County, but none of these entities have been <br /> involved in the process. He felt that the cities affected should <br /> be more involved in the process and need to be presented with more <br /> information. He said that the local pilots were very responsive to <br /> the noise and safety factors of North Pleasanton and Pleasanton <br /> <br /> 11/17/92 9 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.