Res96 12834 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

3.10.14 Potential Effect: The Project could represent a hazard to aerial navigation if not properly designed. Care must be taken to ensure that visual hazards (i.e. distracting lights, glare and smoke), electronic interference with radio communications or navigational aids, or other potential hazards (e.g. ponds for migratory birds) do not occur. Findings: The GID hereby makes finding (1). Facts in Support of Findings: (a) 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.") (b) 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.) (c) The FAA Finding concluded that the Project did not need to be obstruction-marked or lighted. -32- GIDEIRFD.DOC 7/23,'96 5:44 PM