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

Home Browse Search

Mr. Jack W. Golden September 16,2004 Page 17 of20 The ALUC's role in Heliports is discussed on page 17 of the AEE. It is unnecessary to repeat the same concepts on every page of the AEE. While this concept is already evident in the AEE, and the omission of ALUC from this policy does not create an "inconsistency, " the City will include ALUC in Policy 3.4 if ALUC determines it is required to achieve "consistency" . XVI. STAFF REPORT dated AU2ust 19,2004 Since the ALUC staff report contains additional issues that were not in your letter and it omits your issues,13 I can only presume these are yet another set of corrections to the AEE. A. 65 dB (Ai CNEL AND ABOVE NOISE CONTOUR First, as to the dB(A) CNEL, we received an e-mail from Mr. Brady dated May 12,2004 which forwarded an e-mail from Mr. Leyerle dated May 7,2004. In this e-mail Mr. Leyerle states that CNEL includes the (A) and is thought to be redundant, and I quote "[a]dding the 'A' is thought to be redundant, something like ordering a beverage at Starbucks and asking for a 'Decaf, Grande, non-fat latte, coffee. ,,, Just as it is not illegal to order the coffee that way, it is not illegal for the City to choose to include the (A). Moreover, please note that, in a conversation with Mr. Trevino, Mr. Vince Mestre, the ALUC's noise consultant, informed that dB(A) CNEL was the technically proper reference. Since many of the people who would be helped by the General Plan are not noise experts, the (A) is simply more information to assist the "general public" in understanding the AEE. Since, at most, the (A) is a mere redundancy and not a different noise standard, I am at a loss to understand how this would make the AEE inconsistent with the AELUP. That being said, if this is one of those major sticking points for the ALUC, the City would consider amending the AEE to remove this notation. B. Avigation Easement First, the language now proposed to be deleted by the ALUC staff was added at its request. Either version14 is consistent with the AELUP. The AELUP does not require avigation easements. See Section 3.2.10. This section entitled "Avigation Easements" states that the ALUC will consider an easement if the City so requests. "However, nothing in this section shall be deemed to confer upon the Commission the legal jurisdiction or authority to require, compel or mandate the dedication of an avigation easement as a condition of consistency; and the lack of an avigation easement shall not constitute the basis for a determination by the Commission that a project is inconsistent with the AELUP." As such, the requirement of the City to include avigation easements in this section as a \J Although., as stated above, I do not believe any of the .above needs to be included for the City's AEE to be consistent with the AELUP. . 14 Either the May 13,2004 AEE or the redlined version of the AEE submitted at the July 19,2004 ALUC special meeting. 75C-212