JT75C - 200 E. 1ST AMERICAN WAY - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City of Santa Ana February 17,2005 Page 3 the Santa Ana General Plan's Airport Environs Element (and associated components such as the Noise Element); and the likelihood of single event noise disturbance to future residents. Also, concurrent with these commission deliberations, JW A had communicated its general concerns with encroachment by incompatible development, to the ALUC. Since the Commission has no record of receiving the CEQA documentation for this project, we may have had further comments or reasons to find the project either consistent or inconsistent had that document been provided. In fact, during our proceedings various Commissioners cited JW A AELUP policies in light of the ALUC's planning role. Referring to Section 2.1.3 (page 13), a Member quoted "that the Commission may utilize criteria for protecting aircraft traffic patterns at individual airports" and "which may differ from those contained in Part 77" and "should evidence of health, welfare or air safety surface sufficient to justify such an action," noting the height and proximity of the residential project to the operating airspace. Referring to the page again, he noted the ALUC's responsibility to simultaneously protect the airports and the people, voicing his view that the motion leans more to protecting people. Another Member referred to AELUP Section 3.2.8 (page 25), regarding the height restriction zone wherein a project that by reason of height or location would cause a diminution in the utility of an airport is unacceptable to the ALUC. He opined that the project as proposed could probably result in reduction of the minimums and movement of the JW A threshold, and should be found inconsistent. The Chairman observed: that it is a sensitive area for navaids and that the FAA considers various factors by modeling projects on their computer, but after construction the FAA flight tests all of their navaids. Should they discover a problem, the solution is to reduce the utility of the airport, and an ALUC mandate is to prevent that. He recalled a large building further off the centerline which had that affect to increase minimums and another building that rendered the VOR inoperative. He noted that despite his concerns with the traffic pattern in this sensitive area, the number the Commission used was not arbitrary and capricious but was the existing building height there today, reiterating that the flight tracks show the site experiences a significant amount of overflight with the resulting noise and that if built, hopefully the occupants will like aviation and airplanes. We have noted the lack of reference to avigation easement dedication as a mitigation measure and a lawful means for protecting both the Airport proprietor and the City of Santa Ana regarding aircraft noise and related effects upon future residents. Similarly, the proposed findings on the topic of safety do not include the safety of people in aircraft utilizing the Airport, especially important since general aviation aircraft may arrive/depart the Airport from/to a multitude of directions. Furthermore, we have also noted that numerous references to the FAA's formal determination do not mention the notations therein that the project is critical to flight safety and that proximity to the airport may subject the future occupants to attendant noise. Lastly, there was such an apparent unwillingness of the City staff to consider any of the 75C-188