TO: HONORABLE MAYOR FROM: Chris Burton
AND CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: See Below DATE: October 18, 2024
Approved
Date:
10/21/24
COUNCIL DISTRICT: Citywide
SUPPLEMENTAL
SUBJECT: GPT24-001- City-Initiated General Plan Text Amendment to Update Text and Maps in the Envision San José 2040 General Plan and the Diridon Station Area Plan to Align With the Recently Adopted San José Mineta International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
REASON FOR SUPPLEMENTAL
The purpose of this supplemental memorandum is to provide City Council with City staffs’ response to a 30-day response letter from the County of Santa Clara Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) staff about the notification of the City’s intent to overrule the ALUC’s inconsistency determination of GPT24-001. The letter was received on October 1, 2024, after the Planning Commission hearing on September 25, 2024, so it was not included in the original staff report.
BACKGROUND
On August 28, 2024, file number GPT24-001 for a modified Airport Influence Area (AIA) and associated text changes was heard by the ALUC. At the hearing, the ALUC voted to find GPT24-001 inconsistent with the San José Mineta International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP). An overrule notification letter, which indicates that the City plans to overrule the ALUC’s inconsistency determination with a two-thirds majority vote by City Council, was sent to the County ALUC planners and to Caltrans Aeronautics on September 6, 2024. The overrule notification was sent more than the required 45 days before the City Council hearing. Both agencies have 30 days to respond to the overrule nofication. On October 1, 2024, Caltrans Aeronautics sent a response letter to the overrule notification to the project manager of GPT24-001. On October 3, 2024, the County ALUC planners sent a response letter to the overrule notification to the City Clerk’s office.
COUNCIL AGENDA: 10/22/24
FILE: 24-2112
ITEM: 10.2
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
October 22, 2024
Subject: GPT24-001 - City-Initiated General Plan Text Amendment to Update Text and Maps in the Envision San José 2040 General Plan and the Diridon Station Area Plan to Align with the Recently Adopted San José Mineta International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
ANALYSIS
(1) The response letter from Caltrans Aeronautics
Caltrans Aeronautics responded that it supports the City’s decision to conduct a partial overrule of the County of Santa Clara ALUC’s adopted noise contours and the resultant AIA identified in the March 27, 2024, ALUCP for San José Mineta International Airport based on the finding that the ALUC did not utilize an FAA-approved Airport Master Plan as the basis for the ALUCP update in accordance with Public Utilities Code (PUC) Section 21675. The City agrees.
(2) The response letter from ALUC
The ALUC alleges that (1) the adoption of an AIA is within the sole purview of the ALUC and the City has no authority to adopt a different AIA, and (2) for purposes of referrals the ALUC expects the City to make all required referrals within the ALUC adopted SJC- AIA. The City disagrees for the reasons set forth below.
Government Code section 65302.3, subsection (a) requires the City to incorporate the ALUCP into the City’s general plan. However, Government Code section 65302.3 (c) provides: “If the legislative body does not concur with any provision of the plan required under Section 21675 of the Public Utilities Code, it may satisfy the provisions of this section by adopting findings pursuant to Section 21676 of the Public Utilities Code.”
The AIA is a required provision of the ALUCP under PUC section 21675(a). Indeed, the AIA is derivative of the compatibility factors considered in the planning endeavor, as recognized in the Caltrans’ Handbook (e.g., pages 2-4) and Business and Professions Code section 11010(b)(13)(A): The AIA “is the area in which current or future airport- related noise, overflight, safety, or airspace protection factors may significantly affect land uses or necessitate restrictions on those uses as determined by an airport land use commission.” As a result, the City cannot address and rectify the ALUC’s use of erroneous noise contours in the ALUCP – a mistake well documented by Caltrans and the City – without implicating the AIA. When the City does not concur with a provision of the ALUCP, such as the AIA, the City is authorized by 65302.3(c) to utilize the overrule process in section 21676 of the Public Utilities Code.
The ALUC’s assertion that the City must continue to make all required referrals within the ALUC adopted SJC AIA even if the City processes an overrule is also not supported by the PUC. Under PUC section 21676.5(b), once an override has been processed, local agency actions “shall not be subject to further commission review, unless the commission and the local agency agree” to such continued review. See also pages 5-18 in Caltrans’ Handbook: Subsequent Reviews—If a local agency adopts or amends a
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
October 22, 2024
Subject: GPT24-001 - City-Initiated General Plan Text Amendment to Update Text and Maps in the Envision San José 2040 General Plan and the Diridon Station Area Plan to Align with the Recently Adopted San José Mineta International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
local plan for the airport area by overruling the ALUC, then subsequent ALUC review of individual development projects related to that overruling become voluntary (PUC Section 21676.5(b)).
In addition, Public Utilities Code section 21674 recognizes ALUCs have the power and duty to adopt ALUCPs pursuant to section 21675 but subject to the limitations of section 21676, which is where the local agency overrule pathway is provided. If the California Legislature had intended for local agencies to utilize a process other than the overrule pathway when expressing their disagreement with the AIA boundaries, then it would have provided one. The interpretation of the law in the ALUCs letter would negate and render meaningless the intent and utility of the State Aeronautics Act’s overrule provisions by requiring local agencies to continue to bring matters back to the ALUC anytime the dispute is regarding the geographic coverage of the ALUCP and despite the local agency’s prior processing of an override at the plan level.
COORDINATION
This memo was coordinated with the City Attorney’s Office.
/s/
Chris Burton, Director
Planning, Building and Code Enforcement
For questions, please contact Ruth Cueto, Principal Planner, Planning, Building and Code Enforcement Department, at [email protected] or (408) 535-7886.