Res96 12834 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

considered testimony by other experienced pilots who stated that the Project would not constitute a hazard to aviation. (f) The Airport Study was reviewed by Arthur Negrette from the Flight Safety Institute on behalf of the Project applicant. Mr. Negrette, who is a pilot, was formerly a flight instructor at San Carlos Airport and is an accredited airport executive with a great deal of experience in airport planning. Mr. Negrette testified that the Airport Study is "one of the most comprehensive and detailed safety studies that we've seen of a general aviation airport and of safety issues associated with a general aviation airport .... [T]he scope, the detail, the methodology, their references to applicable statutes and regulations and techniques is very accurate and quite professional." (Reporter's Transcript of Proceedings, Redwood City Planning Commission, June 19, 1996, p. 363.) (g) The FAA is responsible for administering Part 77 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR Part 77). The FAA's objective is to "ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of navigable airspace by the aircraft." (FAA, Advisory Circular 70/7460-21, "Proposed Construction or Alteration of Objects that May Affect the Navigable Airspace," p. 2.) Pursuant to Subpart B of FAR Part 77, the Project was required to submit FAA Form 7460-1, "Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration," to the manager of the regional FAA Air Traffic Division. The FAA then conducted an aeronautical study of the Project's potential effects, including the "extent of [any] adverse physical or electromagnetic interference effect upon the navigable airspace or air navigation facilities." (FAA Order 7400.2C, "Procedures for Handling Airspace Matters.") (h) On June 17, 1996, prior to the last two Planning Commission hearings on the Project, the FAA issued its determination. The FAA stated as follows: "The airspace evaluation concludes the proposal would not have a substantial adverse effect on the safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace by the aircraft and would not be a hazard to air navigation." (FAA, Airspace and Procedures, AWP- 530, "Acknowledgment of Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration," 96- AWP-1042-OE ("FAA Finding"), p. 3.) (i) In a letter to the City dated February 26, 1996, the President of the San Carlos Airport Pilots' Association states as follows: "Pilots from our organization and Airport Staff have consistently stated that the height of this building creates a public safety hazard. The developer and his representatives have claimed that no hazard exists .... It would seem that the final and most appropriate arbiters of these conflicting claims would be the Federal Aviation Administration who have established the 7460-1 form for just this purpose." (Emphasis added.) The FAA process has determined that the Project would not create a hazard to aviation. -13- OIDEIRFD.DOC 7/23065:44 PM