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

Home Browse Search

Ms. Kylee Otto, Deputy City Attorney August 6, 2004 Page 2 It appears from my review of the proposed General Plan amendments that the empha~is of the City's efforts has been to assure that its general plan element is consistent with state aI?-d federal law, as City staff interprets it, while giving less attention to the fact that state law requires the City's General Plan to be consistent with the AELUP for JW A. (PUBLIC UTILITIES COI;>E ~21676). ' If the City disagrees with the contents of the AELUP, it should have so stated during the consultation and public comment period when the AELUP was amended in 2002. Since it did not do so, the AELUP as adopted stands, and the City, to be consistent, must amend its General Plan to conform to the AELUP as it exists today. See, GOVT. CODE ~65302.3. The portion of the AELUP with which the City seems to have the most concern (the public health, safety and welfare standard) has been a part of the AELUP since 1983, ifnot longer. The Negative Declaration for General Plan Amendment 2004-03 in the Project Description section on page I states that the "City of Santa Ana Airport Environs Element of the General Plan .. . establishes a long-range policy guide to safeguard the general welfare of inhabitants within the vicinity of the John Wayne Airport." It further states "[t]he purpose of the Airport Environs Element is to ensure that people in facilities are not concentrated in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents and to ensure that no structures or activities adversely affect navigable airspace. The Airport Environs Element establishes land use/noise compatibility criteria, height restrictions and procedures to ensure that proposed development projects are in compliance with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport." Yet the draft Airport Environs Element of the General Plan Amendment submitted does not use language as strong as the negative declaration and seems to dance around the AELUP's land use compatibility policies in such a manner that the proposed Element could potentially be used to circumvent those important policies. Elimination of direct conflicts between the City's General Plan Amendment and the AELUP for JW A is not enough to guarantee that future land use development will adhere to the compatibility criteria set forth in the AELUP. An implementation process must also be defined either directly in the general plan, or by reference to a separately adopted ordinance, regulation or other policy document. There are three key facets to the process of ensuring compliance with airport land use compatibility criteria: (i) Delineation of Compatibility Criteria. Airport land use compatibility criteria must be defined either in a policy document adopted by the City, or through adoption of or reference to the ALUC's compatibility plan itself. Clear delineation of intended land uses is key. (ii) Identification of Mechanisms for Compliance. The mechanisms by which applicable compatibility criteria will be tied to an individual development and continue to be enforced must be identified. Conditional use permits or development agreements are two possibilities. 75C-191