On October 6, 2004, the city of Tucson Planning Commission concluded that the proposed changes to the Davis-Monthan Airport Environs Zone were not ready for mayor and council approval. By a vote of 13-0, the commission recommended that the city delay approval of these changes until closer to the Dec. 31, 2005, deadline, which had been set by the state. The commission recognized that the airbase has very important economic impacts to the community, but found that, from a land use planning perspective, there were simply too many unanswered questions. During the public hearing process, it became apparent that the issues of noise, safety, health, impacts on property values and quality of life had not been adequately addressed. The commission understood that the A-10 is slated for retirement within a few years. This relatively quiet, two-engine aircraft will be replaced by a much louder series of jets. In addition, the number of flights, both during the day and at night, is projected to increase substantially. This left the commission with many unanswered questions. How noisy will the new aircraft actually be? Why had no realistic noise studies been conducted? What effect would the noise/safety zone expansion have on property values? Would the property owners within the new overlay zone be compensated by the city or state if the extension of the zone caused a decline in their property values? Would any financial assistance be provided to those property owners who might now need to soundproof their homes? How will the transition to newer aircraft affect the safety of those living in the expanded overlay zone? With neighborhoods encroaching on three sides of the base, how wise is it for the city to encourage more intense land development in the one remaining open area located to the southeast of D-M? Can the city work with the state and D-M to move the runway toward the less-populated southeast and away from the more densely populated urban core of the city? Are alternative flight pathways available? A large, vocal group of citizens attended the public hearings held by this commission. I felt these citizens needed to have their concerns discussed, and the two public hearings before the Planning Commission were inadequate to address an issue of this magnitude. This commission has been charged with ensuring that responsible development occurs within the city of Tucson, and therefore decided to take advantage of the extra time afforded by the Dec. 31, 2005, deadline. I hoped to use this time to gain more information, broaden public input, ensure community consensus and recommended that the mayor and council delay action until such time as our questions and the community's concerns would be better addressed. Unfortunately, the Planning Commission's recommendations to extend interim regulations to Dec. 31, 2005, to investigate further other mitigation, to take no action on the current amendment and to provide more public notice and information were not followed.