09/05/1979 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

"- e Hearings Officer. His report proposes a process similar to that required by the Clean Air Act Amendments for implementation of air quality standards. First, he feels agreement must be reached on the goals or standards for airport noise. Second, an objective and responsive procedure is needed for identifying the few facilities with potentially serious noise problems for the development of noise abatement plans. Third, a coordinated planning process that includes representatives of all affected parties, agencies, and jurisdictions is absolutely essential. The purpose is to bring together in one place both the affected parties and representatives of each agency with the authority to implement and approve options for airport noise abatement. Included would be representatives of the public, citizens affected, local officials, FAA, private pilot associations, etc. From that, an abatement plan could be developed and presented for review, with public hearings held and a final approval granted by the Environmental Quality Commission. This approach would facilitate the unified development of an abatement plan and public support generated by this process could be extremely valuable in the develop- ment of revenue for implementing the proposed strategy. Ms. Miller wondered about the definition of "noise-sensitive" property, and Mr. Smith answered that it is considered to be areas where sleep is necessary. Ms. Miller wondered what would encourage implementation of any plan developed. Mr. Smith answered that the advisory body would develop a plan, then the EQC would hold hearings to adopt the plan. There would be a provision for fines included for any violations e which occurred. Mr. Smith added that all of the area around the airport is not under complete control and it would be best, in the future, for encroachment provisions if there is residential development. City Attorney Stan Long said that, from a legal standpoint, saying "you were there first" is not a valid defense. Someone moving into the airport area and being disturbed by the noise could sue the City. Therefore, the coordination of all jurisdictions involved is extremely important. Other cities have spent many dollars fighting legal actions or relocating airports. This proposed plan would strengthen the City's position. Mr. Shelby, Director of Aviation, said it is a very complex issue because of the regulations that need to be dealt with. There is a concern with the subjective approach giving almost total authority to the DEQ. He feels that the City's proposal is much better than the DEQ staff proposal which vests control within one agency. Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to approve and adopt the report of August 9, 1979, as written by Mr. Smith. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Hamel would hope that noise pollution by other forms of transportation industries would also be considered at some time. -e 1-/85 9/5/79--3