Laserfiche WebLink
• • <br /> CITY OF SAN LEANDRO <br /> CITY COUNCIL AIRPORT COMMITTEE <br /> JOINT MEETING WITH PORT OF OAKLAND AVIATION COMMITTEE <br /> May 1, 2006 <br /> 12:30 p.m. — 1:30 p.m. <br /> Port of Oakland <br /> 530 Water Street <br /> Oakland, California <br /> Port Board Room <br /> HIGHLIGHTS <br /> Committee Members: Vice Mayor Badger, Councilmember Grant, and Councilmember Santos <br /> City staff present: Assistant City Manager Steve Hollister and Community Relations <br /> Representative Kathy Ornelas <br /> Port of Oakland Members: Commissioners Anthony Batarse and Darlene Ayers - Johnson; <br /> Director of Aviation Steve Grossman, plus numerous Port staff <br /> Public present: None <br /> The meeting was called to order at 12:45 p.m. by Port Committee Chair Batarse <br /> (Written comments from Port staff on the following agenda items are attached.) <br /> 1. What is the Port of Oakland's position on the construction of a noise barrier for the <br /> Airport's South Field? <br /> Port Aviation Planner Kristi McKenney reviewed the study that was done as part of the <br /> Airport Master Plan process regarding a possible sound barrier. According to the results of <br /> the study, the sound barrier would be most effective if built directly behind the homes on the <br /> west side of Neptune Drive, and then would only benefit those homes on Neptune Drive. <br /> However, at a community meeting in San Leandro, the homeowners of Neptune Drive <br /> clearly stated that they did not want a barrier wall built on their property. Residents preferred <br /> the Port investigate a barrier on Port property. According to the study, a wall built on Port <br /> property would only provide a benefit to the Neptune Drive homes — the barrier would not <br /> reduce noise for any other areas of San Leandro. Additionally, a barrier would have no <br /> impact on reducing low frequency noise (rumbling noise), which is a common complaint of <br /> the Neptune Drive residents. These facts, along with the cost of the wall (millions) and <br /> environmental permitting obstacles, lead the Port to believe that a sound barrier wall is not <br /> practical and would not likely be a successful project. The Port believes a more practical <br /> solution and one that would provide the most benefit to residents is continued sound <br /> insulation of hones. <br /> • <br />