Laserfiche WebLink
d. Completely subjective and far too late in the process — and inform only — no comments or input from <br /> the public allowed! <br /> e. <br /> b. <br /> C. <br /> d. Also, the policy requires it only for"a project that would noticeably increase <br /> e. aircraft activity, vehicle traffic, noise to surrounding neighbors" — who <br /> f. decides? How? Based on what? Not specified. <br /> g. "Noticeably" is vague and subjective. <br /> h. The incentive for airport and applicant is to deem a <br /> i. project does not noticeably increase noise, whereupon this policy <br /> f says <br /> k. there's no notification requirement. <br /> M. <br /> n. <br /> b. <br /> C. <br /> d. The June revision section 2.4 says the applicant submits a Public Engagement Plan <br /> e. to the City of Livermore. It does not <br /> f. specify what criteria the City will use to accept or reject the plan. What is acceptable public <br /> engagement? What is required? <br /> g. Not specified. <br /> h. <br /> d. <br /> e. <br /> f. Public should be notified and COMMENT at every stage of the process (Interest, <br /> g. MOU, Concept Plan, etc) and able to provide feedback <br /> h. at that time. <br /> i. Otherwise by the time it gets to the Airport Commission or Council the whole <br /> j. deal is already done. <br /> k. <br /> I. <br /> M. <br /> d. <br /> e. <br /> f. Information Secrecy: <br /> g. All information must be provided publicly without NDA/confidential at all stages ( except for any <br /> financial information ). We saw this with the Kaiser deal where all documents were not made <br /> public or"missing". <br /> h. <br /> 3 <br />