HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-21-2014 ph2 Forbes with attachmentKremke, Kate
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
PH2 10/21/14
Mejia, Anthony
Monday, October 20, 2014 10:50 AM
Kremke, Kate
FW: SLO Airport ALUC override -- Please do NOT override
KSBP letter Oct 2014 to city council.docx
Anthony J. Mejia, MMC I City Clerk
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
tel 1 805.781.7102
@ >ML+LY t w✓
OCT 2 0 2014
CITY CLERK
AGENDA
CORRESPONDENCE
Date 'o - ' - I *Item# L' 24 °�
- - - -- Original Message---- -
From: Bert Forbes [mailto:bforbes488 @gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 10:27 AM
To: Ashbaugh, John; Carpenter, Dan; Christianson, Carlyn; Codron, Michael; Dietrick, Christine; Lichtig, Katie; Marx, Jan;
Smith, Kathy; Mejia, Anthony
Subject: SLO Airport ALUC override -- Please do NOT override
Dear City Council and staff,
I strongly oppose overriding the Airport Land Use Commission. This short term action will have long term negative
impact on the airport and thereby on the City of SLO. Please see attached copy of my letter to the Tribune in response to
their editorial on Sunday.
Thanks,
Bert Forbes
1
Viewpoint
I believe that the SLO Tribune editorial on Sunday October 19 overlooked several important and
pertinent points on the San Luis Obispo Airport: Noise, economic impact and relentless forces for
closure.
The Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) mission includes `To provide for the orderly
development of the areas surrounding public use airports within the county so that
new developments are not likely ultimately to cause restrictions to be placed on
flight operations to or from the airport."
Having housing in the flight paths of airplanes produces many complaints from the population
living there, and ultimately lead to much ill will and discussions about closing the airport or
severely restricting operations. Since the airport is a vital part of the SLO economy of the San
Luis area, any restrictions would be bad for the community. From the 2005 Airport Master Plan,
Appendix D, Table 61 Summary of Economic Benefits FY2003: 1142M revenue; $38.3M
earnings; and 1541 employment." The numbers will likely be higher today.
For a current example Santa Monica has two conflicting measures on the November ballot
concerning the long term viability of that airport. Santa Monica allowed housing right up to the
border of the airport and has had nothing but strife from residents against the noise and
perceived hazards (many of which have been shown to be untrue). Developers want to turn the
airport area into housing.
Just because the airport was already there when one buys a house under the flight path doesn't
stop homeowners from complaining, even if they have signed a waiver. San Luis Obispo Airport
has numerous complaints from neighbors already. How much more time and County effort will be
spent if the City of SLO allows more housing?
The ALUC is oft maligned, but do many hours of volunteer hard work protecting the airport. There
are too many examples of cities that have ignored their ALUC and regretted it later. Once you
have used space around an airport, it can never be recovered. I strongly urge the City Council to
not override the ALUC.
Bert Forbes
140 Twin Ridge Dr.
San Luis Obispo, CA
805.544.5689