Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-19-2014 ph4 ppp LUCE updateLUCE Update Consider Intent to Overrule the Airport Land Use Commission City Council August 19, 2014 1 Recommendation & Process Outcomes 1.Review ALUC Inconsistency Determination 2.Consider Draft Resolution of Intent to Overrule 3.Direct Staff to Forward Draft Overrule Findings to the ALUC and to the Caltrans Division of Aeronautics pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21676(b) This will allow the 45-day noticing period to commence before an actual decision to overrule can be made. 2  34 Task Force meetings  8 Planning Commission hearings  11 City Council hearings  Mobile workshops and surveys LUCE Policies and Programs reflect the goals and desires of community 3 LUCE Update Process Airport Land Use Compatibility Report  Nick Johnson, Johnson Aviation Ensures that airport-area LUCE policies comply with the State Aeronautics Act and are consistent with guidelines contained the Caltrans Airport Land Use Planning Handbook. Recommended Safety Zones Airport Overlay Zone (LUCE) Figure 13. Airport Overlay Zone Existing ALUP Safety Zones Recommended Safety Zones ALUP Safety Zones Safety Zone Comparison Special Focus Areas Environmental Review  Draft EIR released June 13, 2014  Close of Public Comment Period July 28, 2014  No substantial evidence of potentially significant impacts related to noise, safety or airport operations 12 ALUC Referral  Referral to ALUC  Hearing held July 16, 2014  LUCE determined to be inconsistent with ALUP 13 Overrule CA Public Utilities Code 2/3 vote 45-day notice Required Findings Noise Safety Overflight Airspace Protection Draft Findings  ALUP is outdated and inconsistent with state law Draft LUCE is consistent with state law, CALUPH, AMP and FAA-approved ALP and TAF Draft LUCE ensures orderly airport expansion Draft LUCE includes adequate measures to protect public safety and noise exposure (implementing AOZ) Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP)  Outdated  Inconsistent with state law  Inconsistent with the Airport Master Plan and FAA- approved Terminal Area Forecast  Policies unnecessarily restrict land use  No verifiable nor substantiated basis for expanded noise and safety zones Orderly Airport Expansion  Airspace Protection AOZ ensures no penetration of airspace protection surfaces and prohibits activities that could pose a hazard to flight operations  Overflight notification AOZ requires overflight notifications and disclosures, and ensures substantial open space for emergency landings 17 Safety & Airspace Protection  Caltrans Handbook-Recommended Safety Zones  Review local “Adjustment Factors”  FAA Part 77 surfaces for Airspace Protection  Runway Protection Zones  Open Space  Uses and Densities restricted based on risk Safety & Airspace Protection  Handbook Safety Zone “Adjustment Factors” Airport Area Topography Boundaries Based on Geographic Features Instrument Approach Procedures Other Special Flight Procedures or Limitations Runway Use by Special-Purpose Aircraft Small Aircraft Using Long Runways Runways Used Predominantly in One Direction Displaced Landing Threshold Noise & Overflight  60 dB maximum for new sensitive uses 60 dB noise contour map based on AMP forecast, which significantly exceeds FAA-approved TAF 45 dB required for interior areas SLO Airport is not an existing or proposed “noise problem” airport Overflight identifies these areas and provides real estate disclosure Conclusion ALUP is flawed, unnecessarily restricts land use LUCE is consistent with state laws and guidelines and provides adequate protection for noise, safety, airspace protection and overflight protection State law anticipates this situation and provides for overrule based on findings  Required findings can and should be made Recommendations 1.Review ALUC Inconsistency Determination 2.Consider Draft Resolution of Intent to Overrule 3.Direct Staff to Forward Draft Overrule Findings to the ALUC and to the Caltrans Division of Aeronautics pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21676(b) This will allow the 45-day noticing period to commence before an actual decision to overrule can be made. AMP EIR Noise Contours [add ALUP noise contour comparison]