PC 051408 - Laserfiche WebLink

Section 3.5, H.. dry_olo~y and Water Quality There were no comments. Section 3.6, Land Use and Agricultural Resources Chair Blank noted that the document did not address a California bill has just been introduced and has been either approved by the California Senate or coming before the Senate for signature regarding statewide airport land use policies. He stated that he did not know what its current status is and requested that it be looked into to ensure that it does not contain anything that might be a cause of issue for this project. Section 3.7, Noise Chair Blank pointed out that on page 3.7-8, it stated that the Airport Noise Study was done on a Tuesday, which is not necessarily representative in 2006 of operations at the airport today. He noted that there has been a substantial growth in larger aircraft at the airport since 2006 and recommended that further noise studies be done, particularly on Saturday or Sunday as Livermore Airport is a heavy training airport. Commissioner Narum stated that page 1.5 of the Summary refers to limiting noise levels from the automall carwash stations to 60 dBA at the senior continuing care community facility. She requested that the statement be defined more clearly, e.g., if the 60 dBA is at the property edge. Commissioner Narum noted that it might not be appropriate to discuss page 3.1 of the Summary on noise at this point; however, it talks about implementing Best Management Practices to reduce construction noise. She stated that it would seem that construction should start on the eastern side to mitigate the western side so that construction vehicles access the property from the east end. Chair Blank agreed and added that with proper mitigation for the noise that the airport generates that would impact the project, the potential complaints that come from the project could be mitigated back toward the airport with the proper types of disclosures. He requested that this issue be looked into. Commissioner Narum stated that page 4.1 of the Summary talks about using noise attenuating pavements to new portions of Stoneridge Drive. She indicated that she would like to seethe impact of the pavement on the Automall Parkway, particularly in vicinity of the community park. Section 3.8, Population, Employment, and Housing There were no comments. Section 3.9, Transportation Commissioner Narum noted that the statement "Narrow lanes to reduce pedestrian clearance to 20 seconds" on page F-46 on the Summary needs to be clarified. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, May 14, 2008 Page 12 of 14