Pleasanton Weekly

Opinion - April 16, 2010

Letter: Airport noise vs. housing

Dear Editor,

If the Pleasanton City Council is truly concerned about aircraft noise in the northeast portion of Pleasanton ("Jet noise still a concern for Pleasanton," April 2), why did they approve the building of senior housing in Staples Ranch? At meetings to review Staples Ranch development, I personally advised the council against building additional residential closer to the airport than existing (due to the potential noise issues) as well as the representative of Continuing Care Communities (the developer), who assured me they have similar developments near airports with no noise issues.

By approving the senior housing development, the council has denied there are noise issues in that area of Pleasanton. Any noise issues from the senior housing development will be the burden of the Pleasanton mayor and City Council, not the airport. The most recent noise complaint statistics (February 2010) are a total of 38 complaints from Pleasanton, 17 from Livermore, with 47.3 percent coming from two households in Pleasanton (statistics courtesy Livermore airport). This percentage being from two households is typical month to month.

Regarding Southwest Airlines (or any airline) rerouting its incoming flights (to Oakland) over Ruby and Vintage Hills, airlines do not choose their routing, this is determined by FAA air traffic control.

Rezoning the Livermore airport property for aviation and aviation-related uses (previous zoning was educational and institutional) does not open the door for unlimited development, it means that any development proposal must be aviation-related. All proposals must go through the normal review and approval processes. Previously any development proposal of any type would have to have been reviewed by the planning commission.

The sky is not falling (or becoming dark with airplanes in this case) as a result of the rezoning, despite the propaganda and misinformation that has been rampant in the last several years.

Kevin Ryan

Comments

Posted by a local, a resident of another community
on Apr 16, 2010 at 9:02 am

Kevin Ryan is misinformed.

When the aviation mall is built the owner can put any kind of aviation
business in there including air taxis (jets 30 seats or less) and
jet charters (30 seats or less)such as Net Jets and other jet companies, and jet engine repair. All this and more without going before the planning commission or the city council. It is not
required.

The single engine pilot is not the aviation market this aviation mall
is targeting. They will be forced out as the Livermore Airport is turned into a jetport (jets 30 seats or less). Kevin Ryan can
find this out by talking to the single engine pilots at the Santa
Monica airport. They say, they have been forced out.

A local pilot, Brett Wayne, stood before the Livermore City Council and said. "I will stand here holding Wendy Weathers' hand, and
ask you not to turn the Livermore Airport into a Jetport". This
is public record. He knows single engine pilots will be forced out.

The Livermore City Council has never used the word serenity, either
in written form or spoken and neither has the Livermore City Staff.





Posted by Repleasnacrat, a resident of Stoneridge
on Apr 16, 2010 at 10:08 am

Livermore should move the airport to all the land available in North Livermore, Just north of 580 and N.Livermore Rd. There is a ton of land to build a brand new airport. This would free up the current( and extremely valuable)location for light business and mixed housing that will be easily accessible to BART and 580/Isabel. Builders already have plans to develop North Livermore into a giant town unto itself(e.g. Mountain House). I have lived 3 or 4 miles from the airport for 12 years. Sometimes it is annoying, but mostly OK. The worst noise comes from the smallest , hobby planes trying to fly into a head wind. 95% of the new jets that fly in or out are undetectable or barely noticeable! But, worse is the amount of pollution we all injest from the jets! I would hate to see any major carrier using it as a stop for the bay area. Maybe Urban Habitat could prepare a lawsuit to move the airport! Yeah, low income subsidized housing for aircraft! I hear that stimulus money-printin machine firing on all three cylinders!


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: *

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields