April 09, 2004

Back to the Table of Contents Page

Back to the Weekly Home Page

Classifieds

Publication Date: Friday, April 09, 2004

Airport expansion triggers inter-city feud

Critics of plans to expand the Livermore Airport and nearly double flight operations there won a postponement of public hearings on the project this week while, at the same time, Pleasanton Mayor Tom Pico warned that his city might take legal action to block the plan from proceeding.

At issue is a new Airport Master Plan that has been making its way through Livermore's municipal approval process for several years but was revealed publicly only recently. It would: ¥ Increase the annual number of flights out of the municipally owned airport from 257,500 in 2001 to 370,000 in 2020; and, during the same period, ¥ Increase jet flights from 2,220 to 18,500; ¥ Increase the number of planes based at the airport from 594 to 898, with the number of jets growing from 2 to 30; and, ¥ Increase flight training exercises and the number of charter flights using the airport.

Calling the plan unacceptable and in separate actions, both the Pleasanton City Council and a newly formed Livermore Airport Citizens Group (LACG) want the proposal pulled back and revised downward.

"In order to maintain the good relationships that exist between our two cities and to avoid future litigation, Livermore officials need to address our concerns," Pico said at the City Council meeting Tuesday.

"I don't think the people of Livermore realize just how serious we are about the impacts that the proposed expansion would have on Pleasanton," he added. "Our concerns to this point appear to have been dismissed out of hand."

With the unanimous support of the council, Pico said he would send "a strongly-worded" letter "expressing our grave concerns and extreme frustration that none of our recommendations and concerns (with regard to the airport plan) have been implemented."

Meanwhile, at the Livermore City Council's meeting facility a few miles east on Pacific Avenue, Livermore Planning Commission Chairwoman Martha Claassen decided to postpone the first of two scheduled public hearings on the master plan proposal. That ruling came after a crowd estimated at 150 filled the 126-seat council chamber, with nearly 200 more lining the sidewalks outside, unable to participate in the hearing.

Claassen rescheduled the hearing to 7:30 p.m. May 4, in a larger facility that she's looking for now. The delay also will affect the second hearing, which was scheduled for May 4, along with a final hearing planned by the Livermore City Council on June 7.

Claassen said that the date for submitting oral and written comments, scheduled to expire yesterday, April 8, also would be extended, although some officials said they were not sure that date, set by rules governing the master plan process, could be changed. Members of LACG and Pleasanton City Attorney Michael Roush said they planned to file their formal comments by that date.

Airport supporters at the Livermore meeting said the sudden burst of opposition had caught many by surprise in what they thought had been a steady and methodical review of the airport's outdated 1975 master plan.

"Over the past 29 years, the Municipal Airport has been operating under the parameters established in the 1975-1995 Airport Master Plan," stated Livermore's Associate Planner Jennifer Craven in her staff report to the city's Planning Commission. "Over nearly three decades, the development needs identified in the 1975 plan have been fulfilled and, more recently, exceeded."

She added that because the city-owned airport is self-funded, most of its capital improvement projects have been funded by grants from the Federal Aviation Agency, which encourages airports to maintain 20-year master planning documents that are updated to reflect changes in the aviation industry.

"As a result, the forecasted operational and facility parameters for the airport through 2020 were included in the (proposed) General Plan Environmental Impact Report analysis."

Opposition to the proposed plan started growing when it was made public last month. Concerned residents formed their organization, posted information on a Web site, launched an Internet chat room, and started collecting signatures on petitions to stop the expansion. Even during the 30-minute time period while Planning Commission Chairwoman Claassen was negotiating a new hearing date, LACG members were collecting signatures on a new letter to Mayor Marshall Kamena asking that the council reject the new master plan.

"They want to rezone 393 acres of agriculture and open space to accommodate runways and airport-related businesses," said LACG activist Karen McMullen. "This is a regional issue, and Dublin and Pleasanton should be very involved."

The letter dated April 2, which McMullen and her group will take to Kamena, states:

"Please do not pass the Livermore Airport Master Plan, as it is not what I or the residents of Livermore want: a small recreational airport, and not a larger airport with more jets and more commercial usage. Slow the growth!"

But Kevin Ryan of Pleasanton, a member of the Flying Particles flying club at the Livermore Airport, said that many in the Pacific Avenue crowd were airport supporters - recreational pilots, like himself, or in businesses that support the airport or use it for business trips.

As for the opposition, he said: "The emotions are high but the facts are low."

Patrick Humbert, an aircraft mechanic, said that concerns identified by expansion opponents actually would be lessened if the field were enlarged.

"The No. 1 reason to extend these runways is for safety and to reduce the circling around the pilots have to do because we're short of runway capacity," he said. "Another reason is because the airport helps to create more jobs in the region and stimulates the local economy."

In Pleasanton, 12 residents spoke about the airport expansion proposal, some in favor and some against.

"This country was built on aviation, and the Livermore Airport is very important out there," said Jane Berthet of Autumn Court. "We have big corporations in Pleasanton because we have a safe airport here. But we won't have any more if we don't allow the airport to be expanded."

"Ever since 9-11, there's been a fear of general aviation," she added. "I've even heard parents warn their children that there could be terrorists flying up there. There's a whole lot of ignorance and people need to learn more about aviation and the true value of having an airport."

But June Geiselman of Glen Isle Drive said that argument is not against the airport as it is today, but over plans for major growth.

"It's not like the sky is falling," she said. "I'm not against people who fly airplanes; I'm not even again jets. And sure, I knew the airport was there when I bought my home, but I was also assured it wouldn't be expanded."

"I've heard they want to expand the airport to serve a growing number of pilots from the Central Valley," she added. "Let them build their own airport. I don't want ours to become one like Oakland's or San Francisco's."

Kelli Wong said she lives under the direct flight path of the Livermore Airport on Ballantyne Drive.

"Fairlands (Elementary School), like Mohr, is also in the flight path, and many parents are concerned about safety, pollution and the impact on the value of our homes," she explained. "We're organizing the school PTAs to support this opposition effort."

Brian Arkin, a member of the Pleasanton Planning Commission, said he has called Livermore Airport Manager Leander Hauri, the airport tower and others to complain about stunt pilots who fly wingtip-to-wingtip on weekends over his house.

"All it would take is a sudden gust of wind and they'd come crashing down," Arkin complained. "The airport manager told me he knows who these pilots are and has talked to them. But they're still doing it. They don't care."

Other speakers said they have had a similar lack of response when complaining to the airport.

"I've complained a dozen times in 10 years with very little response," Shirley Lauer of Martin Avenue told the council. "I leave my name and phone number, but I'm never called back. It's like Pleasanton doesn't exist."

Commenting on the simmering feud with Livermore, Teri Smith of Rockingham Drive urged everyone to work together for a satisfactory solution.

"We moved here because we like the neighborhood feel not just of Pleasanton, but also of Dublin and Livermore," she said. "Our three cities have so much to offer and support. I applaud Livermore parents who are coming up with so many great, innovative ways of solving their school crisis. Let's make the same collective effort to solve this one."

E-mail a friend a link to this story.