PC 051408 - Laserfiche WebLink

Chair Blank noted that rather than the term "inadequate," he preferred to say "where the Commission believes more development would be worthwhile having." Section 3.1., Aesthetics and Visual Quality Commissioner Narum inquired where on Figure 3.1-7 the automall freeway sign was located. After a short discussion among the Commissioners, Commissioner Narum was able to locate it on the corner. Chair Blank noted that there has often been controversy about visuals and that he found the visuals in this document great. He noted that the existing and the proposed have the same exact lens and proportion such that there can be no controversy about which kind of lens was used. He compliment the author who came up with this idea and highly recommended that staff encourage developers who are asked to do visuals to use this methodology as it takes all questions out. Section 3.2., Air Quality Chair Blank stated that this section talked about exposure from the Livermore Airport. He indicated that he knows the concentrations of carbon monoxide or hydrocarbons would be addressed but that not a lot of people know that leaded fuel is used in general aviation aircraft. He stated that he would like to make sure that the recommendations for health assessment not be limited to diesel particulates but also address all the health hazards, including lead, that might be potentially involved, especially since the document states that the flying altitude is 800 feet but the FAA says it is 600 feet. Section 3.3, Biological Resources There were no comments. Section 3.4, Hazards and Hazardous Materials Referring to page 3.4-5, Other Health and Safety Considerations in the Project Area, Chair Blank stated that he believes about 80 percent of complaints about the Livermore Airport come from houses in Pleasanton. He expressed concern that the reflected impact this prof ect could have on the Livermore Airport has not been looked at. He noted that while the project talks about the Airport Protection Area, it does not talk about the Airport Influence Area. He observed that the noise complaints were coming from the farther side of the Staples Ranch site. He stated that the prof ect is not being proactive enough in the mitigation for the surrounding area. Chair Blank noted that pa.~e 3.4-10, Noise, talks about the 65 dBA noise contour and the part of the project is in the noise contour. He further noted that on page 3.4-19, reference is made to the airplane flight altitude as 800 feet above ground level rather than 1,800 feet earlier mentioned. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, May 14, 2008 Page 11 of 14