SAY NO TO LIVERMORE, CA (LVK) AIRPORT EXPANSION and REDUCE THE NOISE
Help us reduce airplane noise and increase safety in our communities by joining us against the Airport and Livermore City Expansion plan!
Keep the airport small and lower the noise.
PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO THE LIST (Bottom of Page)
Your involvement made a difference - Kaiser 737 Jetport defeated. Thank you!
Next Up: July 10th Livermore Airport Development Policy - Most PUBLIC COMMENTS IGNORED
July 10th 7 pm - Livermore City Council Meeting -- Staff to present for Approval
(please email your comment ASAP - see emails addresses below)
Signup on our website for more info coming: https://www.livermoreairportnoise.org/
July 2023 Livermore Airport Development Policy Changes - Still NOT listening to the citizens
Amended Policy, some progress – Still Ignores Many Critical Public Comments --
Key issues with Actions for council's consideration in the latest draft:
Noise controls not “aggressively” implemented in the policy. These are easy to implement, and will lower noise. For example, the Airport Development Policy should add:
All tenants and their leases,etc will attend a semi-annual training on noise mitigation including flight paths, procedures etc (when safe)
All tenants will in writing acknowledge the voluntary curfew and suggested flight paths and mitigation procedures (when safe)
All tenants will be required to sign a "good neighbor pledge" to the above. (there may be no legal recourse if they "break" the pledge -- but it sends a clear signal that noise is taken very seriously by Livermore and be part of our community).
If a tenant violates the voluntary night curfew more than X times, they will have additional training. 3rd time around a meeting with the airport manager/director etc. 5th time the Mayor.
All tenants must have a 20” x 34” sign clearly visible in each building/hanger with the noise mitigation recommendations by the Airport Management (i.e. curfew hours, best practices, recommend flight paths (when safe))
Tenants (and all planes) that violate the voluntary curfew will be published monthly in the livermore airport monthly newsletter.
Council Member Barrientos – you asked – what can be done about noise? – putting the above would be a good step in the right direction.
MOU process keeps public completely in the dark with little recourse afterwards.:
After MOU with City leaders, all focus is on passing and getting the “deal done”, with NO incentive to impartially assess the deal. Full transparency required at onsite of approaching the city.
Document secrecy: Language should be inserted:
- Other than financial documents, all documents and communications will be available to the public. Otherwise we will have another “Kaiser situation” where all documents were deemed “NDA” – no transparency.
Public comment – the public has no vehicle to provide input that can result in any action (other than at the council meeting).
The airport commission is not an unbiased, fair commission that has EVER revised any policy, or direction from non aviation public comment in the past 25 years.
There needs to be another vehicle for public comment that is unbiased and not directed by the aviation industry and takes into account the 300,000 impacted citizens.
Council Member Branning requested that allowing “small air cargo” in section 1.2 be taken out of the document. Staff instead took out all instances of air cargo – including in section 2.9 – where large air cargo was previously a reason to reject an application! Now, large air cargo is no longer a reason for rejection?
Q: Why did airport management now have that large air cargo is not a valid reason for rejection? Council member did not ask for this.
Removes the requirement for “existing” demand requirement
in the same section 1.2 – applicants no longer have to show “existing” demand, just demand – which could be future demand created by the actual project i.e. build an FBO facility so that it will attract cargo traffic? This is also inconsistent with the 2010 resolution that states “existing demand”
“Discourage applications not consistent with the 2010 resolution” - Council member Branning (?) requested this language – this is strong language
Instead the new version is: “Encourage development consistent with the ….2010 resolution”
Why did staff change this to “encourage”? This has a very different meaning...and impact.
Deleted in section 7.5 where applicant was asked to:
"Please provide a detailed description as to how the proposed
development/redevelopment meets the following objectives [2010 resolution and more]
This is a very big change – why isn’t the applicant providing this anymore?
5. Lead Poisoning of our Children is ignored in the Policy
Why? How much are our children worth to the City of Livermore?
Send your comments to: LivermoreCityCouncil@LivermoreCA.gov, firstname.lastname@example.org , email@example.com , firstname.lastname@example.org , email@example.com , firstname.lastname@example.org , email@example.com , firstname.lastname@example.org , email@example.com , arhescher@LivermoreCA.gov
Signup on our website for more info coming: https://www.livermoreairportnoise.org/
Take Action Today!
Please Subscribe to stay informed and get updates.
(Your email info will not be given out)
SAY NO TO LIVERMORE AIRPORT EXPANSION
Make a Difference Today
Livermore Airport Citizen's Group (LACG) is an organization comprised of concerned Tri-Valley residents. The group is dedicated to helping residents in Dublin, Livermore and Pleasanton have a voice in the decision making process for Livermore airport expansion plans.
LACG's objectives are two fold
1) Stop expansion of Livermore airport which includes addition of new Fixed Base Operators (FBOs)/Large Jet Operations
2) Alleviate noise and flight path concerns of residents by working on a community outreach program with local small plane pilots.
WHY ARE WE OPPOSING EXPANSION?
FIXED BASE OPERATORS (FBO) AND LARGE JET APPROVAL COME WITH NO LIMITS
As LVK is a public use airport the number of flights, time of flight etc cannot be restricted. Preventing a new FBO is the only way to stop further expansion. Once approved the carrier gets to decide if they want to follow guidelines voluntarily or change their mind at a later date.
Other carriers may also follow once the FBO is built and there is nothing that can be done to stop this once approval goes through. Currently even though B737s are allowed at the airport, no B737s or other large jets call LVK their home due to lack of hangars, maintenance facilities etc. The approval aims to change just that. Once facilities are built, Livermore may become an attractive option compared to OAK or SJC.
There are plenty of studies showing ill effect of noise on people, especially our children. The 737s have tested at 89 DBs which is higher than city, state and CEQA limits. 89 DBs is considered as harmful to humans. As there are no restrictions on number of flights that could be imposed we could be subjected to this throughout the day and weekend. The California noise control act sets noise above 80 DBs as considered harmful to humans. Click here for a study showing effects of noise pollution.
PROPERTY VALUES WILL SUFFER IF LIVERMORE AIRPORT BECOMES A HIGH TRAFFIC AIRPORT
Several studies have shown negative correlation between property values and growth of an airport. On average property values decreased 5-9% and sometimes by larger amounts. While the charter company is able to save and increase their profits the taxpayer will suffer by losing value on her/his home, a major investment for many. The airport commission being a public interest organization is planning without input of residents who will be most impacted by this change
FOLLOWING FLIGHT PATH AND NOISE MANAGEMENT
It is very clear that the airport's approach towards resident's concern of noise management is "live with it". Even though flight paths clearly showing neighborhoods to be avoided has been established years ago it is rarely followed or enforced. Noise abatement measures, noise studies, proactively working with residents to make our towns more pleasant is virtually non existent. The airport meeting minutes speak for themselves. We have requested help but there has been zero outreach from the airport to mitigate current issues.
If Livermore airport is unable to manage noise for a small number of planes and keep the neighborhoods pleasant, how can we trust them to manage larger jets which can have a worse impact on quality of life?
In 2020 Livermore airport had several safety issues and near misses (all available in meeting minutes). Near misses are not a lagging but a leading indicator. History of non adherence to previously established flight paths and B737 seems like a bad combination in case of any emergency over our schools and homes
A PUBLIC SERVICE DIVISION WORKING AGAINST PUBLIC?
The airport commission is a public interest organization, yet behaves like a privately run business. The impacted people are not being involved and decisions are made without their knowledge. The residents of Tri-Valley already expressed their views firmly more than a decade ago - "No further jet expansion" and yet here we are years later. The sad truth is that many of us would have never found out about this had it not been for excellent reporting by The Independent, KPIX (CBS) San Francisco, KRON4 and East Bay Times.
VOLUNTEER TO HELP DISTRIBUTE INFORMATION IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD
We have to spread the word to a lot of people within a limited amount of time. Volunteer to help spread the word within your neighborhood or a block or even your street
Click here if you would like to volunteer. Thank you for your consideration