Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout040-020-135 (2)Meeting Date The Board er.:.ourages members of the audience to provide input on items list on our agenda. To facilitate this participation., please complete this form: T Name V I Vic SYet (Please Print) Address 3.c), Q �I d� rl � SIC° . _ C ►' 11 Cy �` ! � S q 2 b Agenda Item No. or Subject:y' �5 (-�LVCu�- C' o NSc cic.u�a coins �'�� �� In e 2-,,Q00 acv-e/ En v t (rn vi - r PLEASE HAND THIS TO THE CLERK OF THE BOARD AS SOON AS IT IS COMPL' CLERK SITS TO THE LEFT OF THE BOARD. �1 6 ED. 'THI2r C S �'7 L A N D O F N A T U R A L W FA LTH AND B E A U T Y � PLANNING -DEPARTMENT ti 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397 y-3`- , •,.y" ': ;a; ;= '.. TELEPHONE: (916) 538-7601 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION AGENDA ' December 9- 1992 TIME: 9:00 a.m. PLACE: Board of Supervisor's Room County Administration 25 County Center Drive � Oroville, CA 95965 L ✓ Pledge of Allegiance II. Roll Call Approval of Minutes of October 14, 1992 and November 1� 1992. �IV. Consent Agenda V. Business 1. Discussion - Revision of Butte County Airport Land Use Commission Bylaws. 2. Discussion - Public notification of referrals from other agencies and procedure for approval of minutes. 3. Status Report - Oroville Municipal Airport Environs Plan text revision. 4. Status Report - Chico Municipal Airport Environs and Noise Compatibility Program. 5. Business from the floor - (Presentations will be limited to three minutes. The Airport Land Use Commission is prohibited by State Law from taking Action on any item presented if it is not listed on the agenda VI. Correspondence VII. Referrals to Staff and Formation of Committees VIII. Announcements 1. Next meeting is scheduled for January,13, 1993. BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION . MINUTES - December 9, 1992 The meeting of the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) was called to order at 9:03 a.m. on December 9, 1992, in the Board of Supervisors' Room, County Administration Center, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California. I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE H. ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Commissioners Koch, Lambert, Stevens and Chairperson Rossas Commissioners Franklin, Crotts and Gerst Also Present: David Hironimus, Jackie O'Brien and Sherry Elgan, ALUC Staff ************************************** III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES November 18, 1992 Corrections to minutes of November 18, 1992 were handed to the secretary. Commissioner Koch said in the Cliff Johnson's discussion, Mr. Coats should be changed to " Doctor Coats". He said on page 7, of above, the Planning process should read " The Planning Department Code Enforcement process; page 8, the first line should read " the Commission should not talk with staff." Page 9 no corrections, but should be noted under "Correspondence" to agendize this particular item. On a motion made by Commissioner Koch and seconded by Commissioner Lambert, to approve November 18, 1992 minutes with corrections, by the following vote: AYES: Chairperson Rossas, Commissioners Koch, Lambert and Stevens NOES: No one ABSENT: Commissioners. Franklin, Gerst and Crotts ABSTAIN: None ****************************** 1 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES. - December 9, 1992 OCTOBER 14, 1992 Commissioner Lambert noted she had a few changes on pages. 5 • & 6 and had given them to the secretary.- On a motion made by Commissioner Koch, . seconded by Commissioner Lambert, and unanimously carried to approve the minutes of. October 14, 1992, as corrected, by the - following vote: ! { AYES: Chairperson Rossas,. Commissioners Koch, Lambert, and Stevens NOES: None , ABSENT: Commissioners Franklin, Gerst and Crotts ABSTAIN: None Commissioner Gerst arrived at this time. IV. CONSENT AGENDA None V. BUSINESS 1. Discussion - Revision of Butte County Airport Land Use Commission Bylaws: Chairperson Rossas noted Article III, Section 4, 2nd `paragraph should read "It shall be the duty of the Vice Chairperson to assist the Chairperson On the next page article V, Section 2, the word reconvenes is spelled incorrectly and should be ""reconvene". Section 3, second line, should be "to the press" and the next line should be "Chairperson" instead of " Chairperson". The last line should be "meeting" not meetings. Commissioner Lambert noted in Article III, Section '1 noted officers shall consist of a Chairperson, fust Vice Chairperson, and a second: -Vice - Chairperson. Section 2 doesn't deal with the second Vice Chairperson. 2 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT , LAND USE COMIVIISSION. MINUTES - December 9, 1992 - Commissioner Koch suggested deleting the second Vice ,Chairperson and- adding a statement that says "In absence of the Chair and the first Vice Chair, the . Chair Pro tem will be appointed from the members in attendances _ at that meeting only". On Section 1 , delete "and second Vice Chairperson", and -the word "first Vice Chairperson", " officers' will consist of a Chairperson. and a Vice, Chairperson!' , Include " in the absence of the Chairperson and the Vice Chairperson, a Chair Pio Tem will be appointed or elected from those in attendance. Staff suggested it come after the duties in Section. 4.. Commissioner Koch suggested a redraft on January 13, 1993. He asked why the By - Laws referred to a Treasurer? Staff has been handling what little money ALUC ' has. Commissioner Koch. suggested on Article VI, Amendments - to try to get -proposed amendments to the Commission in advance, too structured. Staff noted changes or amendments to the. By -Laws would have to be on an agenda. Staff said under the Brown Act it would have .to have to be on the- agenda in order to repeal or amend them. Possibly Just adding the phrase " By a vote ,of a majority of the members of said Commission after written notification". ' Commissioner. Koch . had a question on the word "said",.does this mean the entire commission or the quorum? Chairperson Rossas suggested the word "said" be eliminated. Commissioner Koch questioned as to whether the By -Laws should be held, to a higher standard? Should it be the majority of the entire group instead of. 3 or 4 who happened to be at the 'meeting. Chairperson Rossas said it would appear to. be left as a majority of the members of the Commission. He said that would -.be 4 members.. Commissioner Lambert agreed. Chairperson Rossas rioted the State laws that supersede these, and in cases of vacancies business can be transacted with three. This should come under the same State law. 3 i 0 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - December 9, 1992 - Staff mentioned the majority of members could be three, and needed a way to differentiate people appointed and* sitting holding a position versus the number of slots available, which would always have to have four. Staff said if a couple of seats were vacant, then it would be a situation that it read three might be appropriate. Commissioner Koch suggested just putting " by a vote of at least four members of the Commission". Commissioner Stevens said on Article 7,. second paragraph, County of Butte should be capitalized. Commissioner Koch noted the last two paragraphs on Article 7, does not belong there, and should be put at the end of the document, they are not rules. Commissioner Lambert asked if alternates could be elected to serve as Chairperson and Vice Chairperson? Commissioner Koch suggested alternates having a right to sit and vote, in place of the absent member. Chairperson Rossas said an alternate has to be on the Commission for a year. Staff noted several different situations where the alternate sat on a permanent basis, and alternates who only showed up occasionally. Staff suggested we leave the alternate an out and may step down from the duties of the officer if they so wish. Commissioner Koch said there was confusion as to who does what. Even if we are only advisory it still makes sense for everyone to know their responsibilities. Chairperson Rossas said the chair and the Pro. tem have to be elected. Staff noted the Officer status goes with the individual not with the seat. Staff said if they have a permanent alternate, then they can be elected if they wish. Commissioner Lambert asked if the alternates could be elected to serve as chairperson, vice person? Commissioner Koch said duly appointed officers may vote on behalf of the members who are absent, or who they represent. He said alternates should be under a separate Section. 2 U BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - December 9, 1992 - Commissioner Gerst asked if the alternate could only serve for one member? Staff noted under the Public Utilities Code, each member shall appoint one proxy to represent him in Commission affairs and shall vote all matters when the member is not in attendance. The Proxy shall be designated and sign a written statement which will be kept on file. The vacancy proxy shall be filled promptly by the appointment of a new Proxy, so it goes with each individual Commissioner. Commissioner Gerst wanted to know what would keep a member from appointing an alternate and another member from appointing the same alternate. Chairperson Rossas said it would be terrible if the alternate was the chairperson's alternate, then there would be no continuity whatsoever. Actually that person should be provincial and representing the Agency that made the appointment. Commissioner Koch noted there could be two opposing points of view. Staff noted the legislation talks about each Commissioner appointing an individual as his proxy. That would water down your pool of alternates. If several members - were absent and the one alternate were sitting in one of those spots, you would need another alternate to get a quorum. Staff said he would prepare a draft of the Bylaws for the next Agenda and the Commission could either adopt them or fine tune them for the next month. 2 Discussions - Public notification of referrals from other agencies and procedure for approval of minutes. Staff noted that the ALUC acts in an advisory capacity for other agencies. When we have a project being reviewed in the safety area of the airport, does ALUC want to notify the applicant, or does ALUC want to publish and make a public hearing out of it. There is no direction in State Law as to requirements for public meetings. It might be nice to have the proponent here to speak -and answer questions. On the other hand at other advisory groups like this, the proponent is not generally present, such as the Water Quality Control Board. The other matter is the procedure of the correction of the minutes. A Chairperson Rossas asked what the distance is that the Planning Department uses for notification? 5 0 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE CONMESSION MINUTES - December 9, 1992 - Staff said Planning Commission notices property within 300 feet of the project or 10 owners as required by State law. Chairperson Rossas said there could be a variety of things happening when there are just a few people within 300 feet. Or if there were hundreds of people. Staff said if there were this many, we would have to start collecting fees. Commissioner Koch said the applicant should be notified. Everyone else does not need to be notified. Commissioner Lambert agreed the applicant should be notified. She said if there was opposition, the applicant would be aware and could show up. Commissioner Koch noted that their opposition would be more appropriately directed to the body that they were sending their advisory to. The door would not be shut on their opportunity. It would be looked at in a very narrow focus whether it would fit in an Environs Plan and they would not make the final decision. Chairperson Rossas asked if the statement would be that the proponent would be advised. Commissioner Koch said his recommendation would be for ALUC to give it's comments based on what they have. Commissioner Lambert asked how the other gentlemen in opposition to previous projects became aware of the hearings? Commissioner Koch noted that the gentlemen came to the meetings because he saw the agendas published by the news media. Chairperson Rossas stated no problems in notifying the proponents, just the opponents. The Bylaws state they are advising. Commissioner Koch said if they aren't the body taking the final action, there is no need for notices, and the press will publish the agendas. Commissioner Stevens asked if we notify the applicant? Staff noted that they do, one just slipped thru as in Mr. Simms case. R BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - December 9, 1992 - Chairperson Rossas said they could just notify the referring agency, and leave it to them as to the responsibility of notifying the proponent. Staff suggested we notify the referring agency when the meeting is going to be, and sending a copy to the project proponent, notifying the agency and sending a copy to the proponent. Chairperson Rossas said it was the consensus of the Commission to notify the referring agency with a copy to be sent to the project proponent. 2. Discussion - Procedure for approval of minutes Commissioner Koch and Lambert felt most comfortable going over the minutes in the meeting. Chairperson Rossas stated there was consensus the minutes be corrected at the next meeting. 3. Status Report - Oroville Municipal Airport Environs Plan text revision. Staff said there was nothing new to report. Chairperson Rossas said they are still debating the 25 persons/acre versus the number of square feet of coverage for particular uses. The Planning Department seems to say that it's much easier to administer the Code as does the Enforcement Department. is very difficult to police standard 25 people per acre. This is the standard way of doing it. Staff said he had prepared a spread sheet using some of the occupancy load factors form the Uniform Building Code, and translated it into the 25 people per acre format. Chairperson Rossas said this should be done at Staff .level, the hearings have just been finished and it will be coming before the Planning Commission. In the area of the Oroville Airport they have come out with a new zone. It has wording exactly how they want it handled. They realize there are to be 25 people per acre. How it will - be worded and policed is the problem. The Oroville Airport has just received a $3.8 million grant this year from the FAA on the runway project. He said the airport will receive an additional amount to finish the runway. They will also plane off the area for the new T hanger, between runways on the road side and will begin to move all the facilities over to the new area. It can't be done with Federal funds, but the ground preparation can 7 0 0 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE CONEMSSION MINUTES - December 9, 1992 - be. Now the bad part is, the wetlands are involved. They still have to do some more on the Meadowfoam. Even tho they are sure there are none there, they still have to go and look around. The Wetlands problem is not in the runway per se, but in other related areas. So they had a meeting' with the Army Corp of Engineering and the appropriate environmental groups, and all the other people involved. In this project the Army Corp of Engineers is the lead agency, and they have come up with ideas of creating wetlands in lieu of wetlands. Presumably this will get worked out around June or July of this year. We are in hopes. we can come out with a contract to move dirt this summer at least. The group that met consisted of 6 agencies. They are in the stage where they have completed their original statements, and all their basic thoughts. 4. Status Report - Chico Municipal Airport Environs and Noise Compatibility Program Commissioner Koch noted the final report would be finished in January 1993, and believes this is still the case. The first report is completed and is ready to be mailed. This is an interim document, and would like to know the ALUC process to develop the final Environs plan. Does this body have to approve or accept it. Staff stated at the present time ALUC was using the Airport Environs Plan that was done by the City in a similar manner as this, as the Airport Land Use Plan. They will continue using that until they can adopt something else or modify it accordingly. Timing might be a factor, but if ALUC finds in the preliminary plans there are significant health and safety concerns, they may want to adopt all or parts of that new plan on an interim basis. All indications are that the impacts are less than those expected in the original plan. After the final plan is adopted by the City, the ALUC would hold a Public Hearing to adopt the City plan as an Airport Land Use plan. Commissioner Koch asked if in terms of the interim plan, would a copy be sent over for information. Assuming a duplicate copy would not be sent out to everybody. Staff confirmed a copy would be not be sent over at this point. Commissioner Koch noted a copy would be looked at again at the final stage. 5. Business from the floor - Vincent F. Phelan of 3010 North Avenue, Chico, had a question for consideration by ALUC for avigation considerations related to the 3,000 acres west of the Chico Municipal Airport, between Sycamore and Rock Creeks, and on West 99, and east to Hicks Lane. Staff noted this lies within the CSA 87. He said the County is working on a specific plan for that area. Staff has talked to the consultant who is working with the Planning Department. The project is still progressing, but is not into the Public Hearing status 1 t BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - December 9, 1992 - yet. The environmental documents are a part of it, and as soon as a draft is available, staff will look at it from the standpoint .of the, _airport... , Chairperson Rossas asked if Mr. Papadakis had anything to say. Mr. Papadakis said he did not. Commissioner Lambert asked if that area was in the Chico Airport plan. Commissioner Koch said the contour might touch" on the edge.. Commissioner Lambert asked if Chico had avigation easements. Commissioner Koch noted they were mainly on .the south end of the runway area, and some on the southwest portion. A few small ones on the north or top end. Staff noted pursuant to the Public Utilities Code and the Government Code , the General Plan and therefore the Specific Plan have to be consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan. The consultant is aware of this and is touching bases with everybody. Commissioner Koch said Steve Honeycutt touched bases with him regarding air quality. Staff noted his rough sketches showed there shouldn't be a problem. VI. Correspondence None VII. Referrals to Staff and Formation of Committees None VIII. Announcements The next meeting is scheduled for January 13, 1993. IX. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:05 A.M. Signed: CWaa ROSSAS, Chairperson E BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - December. 9, 1992 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION /she b: \wp5.1 \aluc\dec92 min. BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION AGENDA November 18, 1992 v.vw::.::•:::.:::4 :::::w:;: }:::': •: {:::::. �::::::.:�:::::>:.� ::{{:•}:^:%.}: v:., vv: �: vx :•.:':. �::::::::::: •i:.�:::::::� .::•:.:................................ .. :{4%vi.:iiii:•i:{•}•::::...:.•: ...................:..... ... ... ------------------------ TIME: 9:00 a.m. PLACE: Board of Supervisor's Room County Administration 25 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 I. Pledge of Allegiance II. Roll Call III. Approval of Minutes of September 16, 1992 and October 14, 1992. IV. Business 1. Consideration of Revocation or Modification of Airport Permit: Cliff Johnson, Hog Ranch Airport south of Chico, identified as AP 040-020-135 (now AP 040-020-153, 154, 155 and 156) Continued open from October 14, 1992. 2. Discussion - Revision of Butte County Airport Land Use Commission Bylaws. 3. Discussion - Public notification of referrals from other agencies and procedure for approval of minutes. 4. Status Report - Oroville Municipal Airport Environs Plan text revision. 5. Status Report - Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan and Airport Noise Compatibility Program. 6. Business from the floor - (Presentations will be limited to three minutes. The Airport Land Use Commission is prohibited by State Law from taking Action on any item presented if it is not listed on the agenda.) V. Correspondence VI. Referrals to Staff and Formation of Committees VII. Announcements 1. Next meeting is scheduled for December 9, 1992. Count .. utte �- -. T.'i LAND Or NATURAL W EAITH AND BFE- :4U, PLANNING DEPARTMENT 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397 TELEPHONE: (916) 538-7601 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION AGENDA November 18, 1992 v.vw::.::•:::.:::4 :::::w:;: }:::': •: {:::::. �::::::.:�:::::>:.� ::{{:•}:^:%.}: v:., vv: �: vx :•.:':. �::::::::::: •i:.�:::::::� .::•:.:................................ .. :{4%vi.:iiii:•i:{•}•::::...:.•: ...................:..... ... ... ------------------------ TIME: 9:00 a.m. PLACE: Board of Supervisor's Room County Administration 25 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 I. Pledge of Allegiance II. Roll Call III. Approval of Minutes of September 16, 1992 and October 14, 1992. IV. Business 1. Consideration of Revocation or Modification of Airport Permit: Cliff Johnson, Hog Ranch Airport south of Chico, identified as AP 040-020-135 (now AP 040-020-153, 154, 155 and 156) Continued open from October 14, 1992. 2. Discussion - Revision of Butte County Airport Land Use Commission Bylaws. 3. Discussion - Public notification of referrals from other agencies and procedure for approval of minutes. 4. Status Report - Oroville Municipal Airport Environs Plan text revision. 5. Status Report - Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan and Airport Noise Compatibility Program. 6. Business from the floor - (Presentations will be limited to three minutes. The Airport Land Use Commission is prohibited by State Law from taking Action on any item presented if it is not listed on the agenda.) V. Correspondence VI. Referrals to Staff and Formation of Committees VII. Announcements 1. Next meeting is scheduled for December 9, 1992. E grll _.. �uit6 �ii ..... L A N D 0 F NATURAL WEALTH AND B E A U T Y PLANNING DEPARTMENT 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397 TELEPHONE: (916) 538-7601 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION AGENDA November 18, 19,92 . ....... . ....................... ...... ............ TIME: 9:00 a.m. PLACE: Board of Supervisor's Room County Administration 25 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 I. Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call Approval of Minutes of September 16, 1992 and October 14, 1992. IV. Business 1. Consideration of Revocation or Modification of Airport Permit: Cliff Johnson, Hog Ranch Airport south of Chico, identified as AP 040-020-135 (now AP 040-020-153, 154, 155 and 156) Continued open from October 14, 1992. 2. Discussion - Revision of Butte County Airport Land Use Commission Bylaws. 3. Discussion - Public notification of referrals from other agencies and procedure for approval of minutes. 4. Status Report - Oroville Municipal Airport Environs Plan text revision. 5. Status Report - Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan and Airport Noise Compatibility Program. 6. Business from _the floor (Presentations will be limited to three minutes. The Airport Land Use Commission is prohibited by State Law from taking Action on any item presented if it is not listed on the agenda.) V. Correspondence VI. Referrals to Staff and Formation of Committees VII. Announcements 1. Next meeting is scheduled for December 9, 1992. BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES November 18, 1992 The meeting of the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) was called to order at 9:01 a.m. on November 18, 1992, in the Board of Supervisors' Room, County Administration_ Center, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California. I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE H. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Koch, Gerst, Lambert, Crotts, Stevens and Chairman Rossas Absent: Commissioner Franklin Also Present: David Hironimus and Jackie O'Brien, ALUC Staff; Neil McCabe, County Counsel; Jim Michaels and Krista Engle, Division of Aeronautics; and Nick Ellena, Chico Enterprise Record. Chairman Rossas said Mary Ann Imbiorski, City of Oroville Planning has been appointed as his alternate. Commissioner Lambert introduced John Papadakis who will be joining the Commission as her alternate. Commissioner Franklin arrived at this time.. M. APPROVAL OF MINUTES r October 14, 1992 Corrections to minutes of October 14, 1992 were handed to the ,secretary. Commissioner Lambert said the discussion of special use airports as relating to Johnsen's Airport needed to be added to page 3. Specifically, conversion to a special use airport would not be able to 'meet length and safety area requirements at this- time, without acquiring adjacent property. • BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - November 18, 1992 - September 16, 1992 On a motion made by Commissioner Lambert, seconded by Commissioner Gerst, and unanimously carried to approve the minutes of September 16, 1992 as corrected. *************** IV. BUSINESS 1. Consideration of Revocation or Modification of Airport Permit: Cliff Johnsen, Hog Ranch Airport south of Chico, identified as AP# 040-020-135 (now AP 040- 020-153 154, 155 and 156). Continued open from October 14, 1992. Commissioner Gerst said he has a possible conflict of interest with this item and stepped down from the Commission. Staff received additional information regarding the airport from the State. Staff said this includes a copy of the airport permit from the Division of Aeronautics, letter from the Division of Aeronautics to Cliff Johnsen regarding the use of the airport, and an unsigned lease agreement for the airport allowing the use of the airport by other people. He said Jim Michaels and Kristin Engle, Division of Aeronautics are present for any questions that the Commission or public might have. The hearing was opened to the public. David Kennedy, Attorney representing Mr. and Mrs. Coats, said he spoke with Neil McCabe, County Counsel, in regards to a County agency that zones an area and then having that zone respected by the Division of Aeronautics. He said there is uncertainty whether or not the State has the right to control the zoning or the impact of the zoning of a particular airstrip operation. He asked whether or not Mr. Johnsen's facility comes within the 1989 definition of a private use facility or whether or not he was grandfathered in? He said he understood Mr. Johnsen initially brought the issue of a private owned public use airport before ALUC in 1984, subsequently he processed an application for a private use airport through CalTrans, Division of Aeronautics. He said at the time the property was zoned A-2 (General); which allowed a personal use airport without a Use Permit. He said no permit was needed from the County of Butte for the operation of this airstrip., In late 1985, a permit was issued by the Dept. of Transportation for a private use airport. He said he does not know what the definition of a private use airport was in 1985. In 1987 the property was rezoned from A-2 to A- 20. The A-20 zoning did not allow for the use of a private use airport. He said a permitted use under a ' prior scheme of zoning becomes a non -conforming use. On 2 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES November 18, 1992 - March 14, 1989, postdating the personal use airport definition, Mr. Johnsen sold property to Dr. Brown. He said Dr. Brown uses the airport for commuting purposes. He said there has been an increase in the non -conforming use. He said the concern of ALUC is code enforcement and the appropriate zoning regulations in that area. He said there is no permit necessary for a conforming use or a continuing use of a non -conforming use. He said Mr. Johnsen's personal use of his airstrip is a non -conforming use, as long as Mr. Johnsen is using it in conformity with the law. He said Mr. Johnsen's use is non- conforming with the land use regulations and is beyond the jurisdiction of ALUC. He said ALUC needs to look at the purpose and nature of the non -conforming use law. He said the original permit was granted for a grass runway, and now exists a 2,000 ft. paved runway with more than one person having access. He said Butte County has zoning ordinances that provide no .non -conforming use land may be expanded in any way, either on the same or on adjoining parcel. He asked if one can subdivide a parcel of land with a non -conforming use and thereby create multiple non -conforming uses? He said he doesn't think it is appropriate. He asked if Mr. Brown would be able to take off and land on his own property or does he have to use adjacent property or adjoining property? He said if he does, then it is not within the definition of a personal use airport. He asked if the runway is on Dr. Brown's property? He said part of the runway might touch his property. He said if Dr. Brown is found to have a valid runway or personal use airport on his property, then what does it say about Mr. Johnsen's airstrip? Staff said the property line between the two parcels runs due north south. He said with the descriptions that staff has, the runway does cross both parcels. He said the 50 ft. setback from the centerline of the runway for clear zone space may touch the third parcel. He said the airport was approved prior to this parcel map being approved. William Coats asked staff to point out the taxiway to Dr. Brown's house from the airstrip. Staff said the aerial photos show a taxiway coming across some point just south of the mid point of the runway. He said he has no indications there have ever been a formal easement granted across a portion of Mr. Johnsen's property. He said there is a 60 ft. ingress/egress easement to be reserved in deeds and offered to dedication to the County of Butte elsewhere on the property. Mr. Coats said the property between Dr. Brown's parcel and Mr. Johnsen's property belongs to Mr. Scott. He asked if the taxiway touches Mr. Scott's property? Staff said yes. 3 • 0 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - November 18, 1992 - Connie Andrusaitis, owner of 20 acres on Oro -Chico Hwy. located directly under the flight pattern of this airport, registered her opposition to the expanded use of that .air facility. Cliff Johnsen said Connie Andrusaitis is the daughter of the Coat's and is not like she is unrelated or disinterested party that also happens to object to the airport. He said Mr. Kennedy pointed out numerous things that pertain to things that happened after 1988 when the zone changed. He said this use did not become non -conforming until 1988. He said there was no expansion after that zone change. He said the parcel that the runway is on, prior to the division in 1987, has never had a single owner except back in 1950 when Frank Brazell owned the property. He said when he applied for the permit, the property was mutually owned by three people. He said when the property was divided, the other two people who had a right to the runway under the original permit, assigned that right to transfer to.parcel 3 if it was ever sold to a third, party. He said in 1987, that property was bought the Browns. He said prior to any zone change there was two classifications that the County had for an airport- private or commercial. He said there was no definition for private. He said his airport did not fall under the commercial definitions, therefore the airport was private. He said his airport is hardly used. He said only 4 different airplanes have ever landed there in the last 7 years. He said his permit says he's entitled to an occasional guest. He said he could increase the traffic 100 times and still be within regulations and the rules. He said the four airplanes that have landed, one was an emergency landing, one was a relative, one was an unauthorized one, which was reported to FAA. He said the airport is marked with a big R, which means that the airport is restricted. He said there is a lot of traffic over the runway that has - nothing to do with him. He said the proponents of this hearing want the Commission to believe there is all kinds of traffic and ' is causing tremendous amount of trouble. He said this is not so. He said 'the County sent their Code Enforcement Officer out there and had a couple of hearings on the airport and was not notified. He said 'the best code enforcement officer the County has is him. He said the runway is precious to him and the last thing he wants is to lose it. He said he does this out of courteousness. He said there is nothing under the flight path of the runway except for almond trees. He said at the last ALUC meeting,. -Mr. Coats referred to the airport and him as "gentlemen with their toys", he said his airplane is not a toy, it is mode of transportation. He said he -bought that property specifically because it was zoned A-2 and because private airports were permitted in that zone. He said the reason private airstrips were a permitted use in A-2 zone is because there isn't anything you could do with an airplane . that would affect the amount of nuts ttiat can be produced on his tree. The airport is surrounded on both sides by trees. He said there is nothing that could devalue Mr. Coats property and it's ability to produce nuts on those trees. He said Mr. Coats said at the last meeting, the only reason he wants our airport permit provoked is so Mr. Coats can subdivide his property someday, and he thinks the airport will devalue it. He said he -spoke with James Deehan, a realtor that lives near the Ranchaero Airport, and asked him if there is any difference in the value of the houses directly under the flight 4 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - November 18, 1992 path of Ranchaero Airport. He read a letter that stated there is no significant variation in the price of those houses directly in the flight path and from those several blocks away. He said the only complaint out there has been from Mr. Coats. He said Gail Brown went to all the neighbors in the area and asked for . their opinions. He submitted letters from the neighbors to the Commission. Most had no objection, but did object to dust from the orchards, noise from crow guns and diesel pumps used by Mr. Coats. He read several letters from neighbors. He said over half of the residents on Estates Drive was not aware the airport existed. He said the other half was aware, but said the traffic from the runway has never been a bother. Delbert Simpsen, Attorney representing Mr. Johnsen, said the agenda says consideration of revocation or modification of airport permit. He asked who's permit is this in regards to? He said the County does not have a permit to revoke. Neil McCabe, Assistant County Counsel, said there is no actual County permit. ALUC and the Board of Supervisors reviewed the matter of an airport and indicated at the time that it would be acceptable. He said the State has the actual permit. He said there was been some talk about a Use Permit for a non -conforming use, but there never has been such a Use Permit. He said there may be a question whether or not there should be such a Use Permit applied for and granted. Mr. Simpsen said if there is something to do with a non -conforming use, it should go before the Planning Commission and not ALUC. He said there really isn't anything here for ALUC to do since there is no authority under the State law to deal with private airports. Commissioner Lambert read from the Staff Findings of June 10, 1985 when it came before ALUC. From there it went to the Board of Supervisors and the Board approved an airport permit. She said she doesn't know what kind of permit it was, but it was in referenced to a permit. Staff said the A-2 zone permitted airports. The Division of Aeronautics required local review before they would issue a permit. He said ALUC initiated the local review then forwarded their recommendation to the Board of Supervisors who found the airport in conformity with the A-2 zoning and the General Plan. He said that anytime that the Board wishes, they could make findings that the use does not conform to the General Plan any longer and at that point it would trigger revocation procedures through the Division of Aeronautics. Mr. Simpsen said the regulations indicate that CalTrans wants some action from ALUC under the statutes, ALUC has no jurisdiction over private airports. He said there was nothing for ALUC to do in regards to this airport back in 1985. He said ALUC's only review dealt with public airports, therefore that particular requirement that CalTrans had, 5 • BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - November 18, 1992 - • only applied for any action that was required that ALUC had authority over, which was public airports, not for private airports. Mr. McCabe said the County's position is that ALUC could review the matter and make a recommendation to the State to look into it. He said ALUC could do that within the purview of a fact finding proceeding. Mr. Johnsen said the reason it came before ALUC and the Board is because the State assumed most counties required a Use Permit for private runways. The States permit process required local approval first. He went to the State and told them the airport was already a permitted use. The State said they needed a statement signed by the Board of Supervisors or ALUC stating the airport is a permitted use. He said since the airport began, there has never been any expansion to the use or traffic. He said the only thing that has changed is the definitions and rules of various governments. He said under the new State definitions, his existing conforming use now falls under the State's new definition of a special use airport, which under the new rules is anything more than one individual user. The State was in a position to reissue a license for a special use airport. When this letter went to the County, they saw that the airport was being considered a special use airport, the County said the special use will give them unlimited expansion rights. He asked the State to put a restriction on the license that made it conform to what the letter stated. Bill Riesen agreed. Now the limited number of users of the runway is 6 and is willing to accept the permit with that restriction. Commissioner Koch and staff discussed the different zonings of the property. Commissioner Koch asked has if the use has expanded since 1988? He said if the rights were transferred with the property, there isn't a problem. He said that he agreed with Mr. Simpsen, the duties of ALUC relate to public airports only. Mr. Kennedy said Mr. Johnsen has finally admitted to 6 different airport users. He said He submitted a deed from Mr. Johnsen to Michael Brown that shows they purchased the property in March 14, 1989. He said in March 1989 they purchased and signed an agricultural statement in May 1989, and started construction of their home in 1989 and 1990. He said prior to this time, the Browns did not own property. He said the zoning was A-20 and for the Browns to have an airstrip would be a non-conformance use and it should be abated. He said Mr. and Mrs. Coats have no objections to Mr. Johnsen using the property for his personal use. The Coats object to a Cameron Park type situation. He said at the last meeting, Mr. Johnsen said the ad that ran in the newspaper was in error and submitted a letter from the publisher stating so. He now admits that all 6 properties have deeded access to the runway. He said the recommendation of ALUC to appropriate agencies that the airport can be considered a non -conforming use, that any expansion would be in violation of the Non -Conforming Use Law and it should be abated. He said Mr. Johnsen stated that he would be the best enforcement officer out there, when his intention is to sell his property. He said the statement that Mr. Johnsen made about their son-in-law wanting to land at the airport C BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - November 18, 1992 - E was incorrect, the Coat's son-in-law is not a pilot and does not own an airplane. He said the Coats are interested in keeping the Cameron Park type out of this area and keeping the airport from expanding any further. Cliff Johnsen said his house was for sale for a short period of time. He withdrew the ad because he is no longer in danger of losing his house. He said all the houses out there do not have access to the runway. He said Mr. Brown actually owns property underneath the runway. He said transferring a right to something doesn't make it a non- conforming use. He said he has no intention of expanding the airport. Commissioner Stevens asked if the letter from the Department of Transportation dated August 19, 1987 is superseded by another letter?. Mr. Michaels answered no. The hearing was closed. Staff said if ALUC finds they have an airport that is now . defined as a special use airport, it would require airport land use plans. He said the changes in 1989 could affect the status of the airport and what ALUC has to do with the airport. He said we need to define the scope of this airport. Commissioner Franklin said the users are defined by the letter from the Department of Transportation. He said it is out of ALUC's jurisdiction. He said if the airport exceeds the six allowed, then it would be a code violation. He said the issue today, is who has the authority. Commissioner Koch agreed that it was a land use issue and it should go through the Planning Department Code. Enforcement Process. He said he believes the Commission should take no action and let the Planning office take care of _the land use issue. On a motion made by Commissioner Franklin, seconded by Commissioner Koch, and unanimously carried that no further action was necessary. ************** 2. Discussion - Revision of Butte County Airport Land Use Commission Bylaws. This item was deferred to . the December 9, 1992 ALUC meeting. Staff was asked to redistribute the Bylaws at the next meeting. rh BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES. - November 18, 1992 - 3. Discussion - Public notification of referrals from other agencies and procedure for approval of minutes. Commissioner Koch said if there is a problem with the minutes, the Commission should not talk with Staff. Commissioner Lambert said she agreed, the approval of the minutes should be done at the meeting, the corrections being heard by everyone, and approved at that meeting. Staff said the minutes do not have to be approved at the next meeting if there is a problem. The minutes can always be tabled to the next meeting. This item was deferred to the December 9, 1992 ALUC meeting. 4. Status Report - Oroville Municipal . Airport Environs Plan text revision. Chairman Rossas stated the hearings on the Oroville General Plan started November 17, 1992. The property at the end of the runway has all been purchased and is being prepared to go to bid as far as funding. Staff reviewed the General Plan text revision and is available at the Planning Division for review. He said most of the overflight area over the north end of the runway is being set up for a business park designation. He ' said the number of people allowed in the overflight area was discussed with Laura Jones. He said the need for this will be included in the zoning ordinance. He said the General Plan designations and the policies that are contained within the draft look good in terms of the protecting the overflight areas. 5. Status Report - Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan and Airport Noise Compatibility Program, Commissioner Koch was advised by the consultant that the Noise Exposure Map Report is being printed and will be issued within the next couple of weeks. The Final Map will be finished in January 1993. 8 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - November 18, 1992 - 6. BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR None. ************** V. CORRESPONDENCE Staff submitted a letter from the Department of Transportation concerning availability of funding for various privately owned public use airport facilities. He said one thing ALUC will be able to do under certain conditions, is purchase clear zone areas. Staff said he will review and look at the long range affect on ALUC and the individual airports. Commissioner Koch said this needs to be on the next agenda for discussion. ************** Commissioner Stevens thanked the Commission for their patience with her recent absences from the meetings. VI. REFERRALS TO STAFF AND FORMATION OF COMMITTEES Staff said on the January 8, 1992 ALUC meeting, two, different committees were formed. Both included Commissioner Walter, which is no longer with the Commission. Chairman Rossas said the airport land use noise compatibility was in regards to the Oroville Airport and the committee consisted of those Commissioners from Oroville. Staff said it may be appropriate to reform the committee after the City of Oroville has their General Plan adopted. Chairman Rossas said the Committee for the Changes in the Bylaws has become a committee of all members. Staff said ALUC is proposed to be a partof the reorganization of the Butte County Association of Governments and they will be redoing the Bylaws when they are combined. Chairman Rossas said the Bylaws are suitable at the present time. E BUTTE -COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMIVIISSION MINUTES - November 18, 1992 VII. ANNOUNCEMENTS The next meeting is scheduled for December 9, 1992. VIII. 'ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:45 a.m. Signed:; ROSSAS, Chairman BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION /jlo c:\wp50\aluc\nov-92.min. E . 40 ki BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION AGENDA October 14, 1992 ... . ...... x ................ . .. . ..... . ...... .... X; — -------------------- TIME: 9:00 a.m. PLACE: Board of Supervisor's Room County Administration 25 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 I. Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call III. Approval of Minutes of July 8 and September 16, 1992 IV. Business 1. Consideration of -Revocation or Modification of Airport Permit: Cliff Johnson, Hog Ranch Airport south of Chico, identified as AP 040-020-135 (now AP 040-020-153,,154, 155 and 156) 2. Review - City of Chico referral of a Rezone for Drake Homes from N -C (Neighborhood Commercial) to PD/R2 (Planned Development Medium Density Residential) for property located south of and adjacent to the southerly boundary of the Chico Municipal Airport Property and the Airport Protection Zone, identified as AP 048-430=006 and 008: 3. Status Report - Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan and Airport Noise Compatibility Program. 4. Ae Business from the floor - (Presentations will be limited to three minutes. The Airport Land Use Commission is prohibited by State Law from taking Action on any item presented if it is not listed on the agenda.) V. Correspondence Vi. Referrals to Staff and Formation of Committees Announcements 1. Next meeting is scheduled for November 18, 1992. (The third Wednesday. Nov. 11, 1992, the regularly scheduled meeting date, is the Veterans's Day holiday.) BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - October 14, 1992 The meeting of the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) was called to order at 9:04 a.m. on October 14, 1992, in the Board of Supervisors' Room, County Administration Center, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California. I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Gerst, Lambert, Crotts, Koch and Chairman Rossas Absent: Commissioners Franklin and Stevens Also Present: David Hironimus, Senior Planner Jackie O'Brien, Secretary Neil McCabe, County Counsel III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF July 8, 1992 Commissioner Franklin arrived at this time. On a motion made by Commissioner Lambert, seconded by Commissioner Crotts, to approve the minutes of July 8, 1992 by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Franklin, Lambert, Crotts, Koch and Chairman Rossas NOES: No one. ABSENT: Commissioner Stevens ABSTAIN: Commissioner Gerst Corrections to minutes of. September 16, 1992 were handed to the secretary. ############### 1 1' BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - October 14, 1992 - IV. BUSINESS 1. Consideration of Revocation or Modification of Airport Permit: Cliff Johnsen, Hog Ranch Airport south of Chico, identified as AP# 040-020-135 (now AP 040- 020-153, 154, 155 and 156). Staff said in 1985, Cliff Johnsen's Airport was approved as a private use airport. He said there is evidence that indicates the airport may have grown beyond a private use, airport and now may be a special use airport. He said County Counsel is present to break down the possibilities the Commission has to look at. Neil McCabe, County Counsel said it was mentioned on the agenda of the possibility of revocation. However, he said no local permits exist for this airport. He said there was local review, but the permit was granted by the State. He said there could be a question that would arise whether or not the State permit should be recommended for revocation, or whether or not the ' use at this time is a zoning violation, if it has expanded beyond what it was legally established to be previously. He said it might be necessary for Mr. Johnsen to get'a Use Permit to expand a non -conforming use through the Planning Department. He said he might also need to seek an amended permit from the State. Either way it will come before ALUC for reyew. Staff said a Commissioner of ALUC has concerns and evidence that perhaps this airport is not being used as a private use airport. Staff said ALUC would be a recommending body to either the Board of Supervisors, Code Enforcement Officers, or the State. Commissioner Koch said the Staff Report states the Board of Supervisors granted an Airport Permit after ALUC's review and then the- California Department of Transportation issued a permit for a private use airport. Mr. McCabe said in staffs memo dated October 8, 1992, there was mention of a permit and the Board of Supervisor's minutes referenced a permit. He read the Board of Supervisor's motion, which stated "Review the plans for this airport and that under the Butte County General Plan, this is an approved use".. He said it was reviewed for conformity with the General Plan. Staff said the original application for the airport was on a single parcel. Since then there has been a land division that created four parcels and the airport is located on two of those parcels. Staff indicated that coversion to a special use airport at this time may not be able to meet the dimensional requirements bf the Division of Aeronautics without requiring additional properties. The hearing was opened to the public. 2 CJ BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - October 14, 1992 - • William Coats, adjoining property owner to the airport, read the definitions of a special use airport and private use airport from the Division of Aeronautics. It states: Private use airport is defined an airport limited to the non commercial use of an individual owner or family and an occasional invited guest. A special use airport is defined as an airport not opened to the general public, has access to which is controlled by the owner in support of commercial activity, public service operations and/or personal use. He said the end of the runway is approximately 40 feet from his property line and should be at least 200 feet away. He said the Airport Land Use Commission minutes of June 10, 1985 stated that an airport permit to allow a privately owned, private use airport was granted to Cliff Johnsen subject to several conditions. He said ALUC warned Mr. Johnsen about problems with not getting avigation easements. He said he was not notified there was an airport going in. He said he believes there are other property owners with landing rights that do not use the airport. He said he regularly sees Mr. Johnsen and Dr. Brown's airplanes leaving. He asked with future growth, will the new property owners have access to the airport? He said it is a mild nuisance at the present level of activity and that his . property value has been badly damaged. He said his concern is what happens in the future from a danger and an economic damage standpoint. He said he sees no compelling necessity for an airport for two gentlemen and their toys. Cliff Johnsen, owner of Hog Ranch Airport, said the definitions that Dr. Coats read are the new definitions of airports and they do not have any bearing on the definitions that were in effect when he was issued his permit. He said staffs memo stated that he contacted the State and asked for an upgrade on his permit. He stated this was incorrect. He said the State contacted every airport owner in the State because of recent revisions in California Airport Regulations redefining various categories of airports. He said the State is trying to get shed of private airports. The State sent him a survey and asked him to review the new categories to see where his airport fitted in. He said he asked for the lowest classification for whatever airport they had under their new definitions. He said he was not trying to change anything, he was cooperating with what the State had asked for. He said in regards to the 200 ft. displaced threshold, this was not a requirement when his permit was granted. He said the threshold is displaced approximately 300 feet from Dr. Coats property and is placed 600 ft. on the north end. In regards to future use, he said the State is the only licensing agency that has a permit on his runway, and the State is the only licensing agency that can regulate future use. He said it is clearly defined in the private permit from the State what the private use is. He said the advertisement that ran in "Home Seekers" was misprinted. He submitted a letter from the publisher of the magazine apologizing for the errors. He said it should have stated that only his house has access to the 2,000 ft. runway. He said if further clarification is needed, he would ask for a coptiruance so his legal representation could be present. 3 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - October 14, 1992 - Commissioner Koch asked if the advertisement was published wrong, will the property owners of the subdivision have access to the runway? Mr. Johnsen said the advertisement makes it looks like he is going to be future subdividing and giving out runway rights. Commissioner Koch asked who has access to the runway now and if it will change in the future? Mr. Johnsen said him and Mr. Brown use the Airport. He said he has never changed the perimeters of the permit and does not int6nd to change anything in the future. He said he has no intentions of future subdividing. Staff asked if the two houses that currently have access to the airport is the original parcel the airport permit was issued for? Mr. Johnsen stated yes. Dr. Coats said he had a telephone conversation with Mr. Johnsen, approximately 18 months ago, and Mr. Johnsen stated that he had sold landing rights to five different people, Brown, Wickham, and Scott. He said there was mention of two others names, but he didn't record it at the time of the conversation. The hearing was closed to the public. Commissioner Koch said when regulations change, and the use changes, the new use needs to comply with new regulations, no matter what regulations were in effect when the permit was issued. He said he needed more information on the definitions that are in effect, and what applies to this particular permit. Commissioner Lambert said Dr. Coats came b6fore ALUC before with his concerns. She asked if Code Enforcement Officers were still involved? Staff said on August 21, 1990, the Board of Supervisor's originally heard from Dr. Coats regarding this airstrip. He said the complaint was referred to the Planning Director. On February 22, 1992, the Board of Supervisor's asked Code Enforcement Officers to continue monitoring the airport. With recent discussion with Code Enforcement Officers, no additional activity of the airport was. reported. Commissioner Lambert said this is a fact finding situation. She said this has been ongoing and there has been a continual question of the status of the airport. She said this issue needs to be resolved. 4 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - October 14, 1992 - Commissioner Franklin said there is no evidence that would require the need to continue the hearing. He said Dr. Coats stated there are only two airplanes using the airport and both are owners of the airport property. He said, as he sees it, it does not violate the definition of a private use airport. Commissioner Lambert said it may be in violation- of land use. She said it needs to be resolved in whoever's jurisdiction it belongs. She asked if five people have been sold landing rights, will it still come- under the original approval of a permit for a private use with one owner? Commissioner Crotts said she doesn't know what definitions apply or what the Division of Aeronautic's has classified the airport. Commissioner Gerst agreed. He said the Airport Land Use Commission should request that it be researched, so a determination can be made as to the status of the airport. It was a consensus of the Commission to continue this item to the November 18, 1992 meeting, with additional information coming from staff, and so legal representation for Mr. Johnsen can be present. Chairman Rossas said all parties involved should be notified. Staff will ask Jim Michaels, Division of Aeronautics; CalTrans, to attend next month's meeting. Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 2. Review - Staff said this item was discussed at the July 8, 1992 ALUC meeting. (There was no quorum present to take action). He said it is now an official application and ALUC must make a finding of conformity. The hearing was opened to the public. Barbara Hennigan, Chico, said in 1948, the Board of Supervisors was asked to protect the property around Chico Airport. She said - at the time, the reaction was that Chico Airport was way out in the country with grazing land. She said Cliff Johnsen's Airport is a good example that nothing stays the same. She stated the City of Chico requires 5 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - October 14, 1992 - avigation easements and proponents of airport activities think it's time for the County to do something to protect the airport. She asked the .Commission what would be the best procedure for airport proponents to tackle this issue on the County, level? She said the Division of Aeronautics has stated there should be no schools within two miles of an airport. She said this states a legal basis for drawing a protection line around an airport. She said a two mile circle around Chico airport takes up about 17 square miles or 1 percent of the land in Butte County. And that if avigation easements were required by the County as well as the City of Chico in that 1 percent of the land, the people who like airplanes would be delighted to buy and move into that 1 percent, and the people who do not particularly like airplanes can buy in the other 99 percent of the County. She said this particular proposal is an encroachment of people into that two mile circle. She said those home owners and the airport need to be properly informed. Chairman Rossas said part of Ms. Hennigan's statement should of came under Business From The Floor. The hearing was closed to the public. Staff said the County does have an Airport Land Use Plan around Chico Airport that extends out a couple of miles. He said this project would allow uses that would place people near the airport, but the property owner has the right to apply for change. Commissioner Koch referred back to ALUC minutes of July 8, 1992. He said on behalf of the City of Chico, Chico's City Council has considered this matter and the council was not in favor of the proposal at that time. He said there has been no action. Commissioner Lambert said it does not conform to the current policies of Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan and does not know what the new proposed plan will be. Commissioner Koch said it is likely the noise contours will be pulled back and this area will be located outside those contours, but the overflights and the flight patterns will still exist. He said this is more of a safety issue than a no issue. Chairman Rossas said at the July 8th meetingi the. Commission was not in favor of the proposal. He said with the Japanese Flight Scligol flying overhead several times a day, safety becomes a major factor. Commissioner Lambert said one of the statements that was made at the July meeting, was that any findings would be subject to what was in effect at the time of the application. She said it does not conform to the existing Chico Airport Plan. Z i BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - October ' 14, 1992 - Commissioner Koch asked if Tony Simms from Drake Homes was notified of this hearing? He said Mr. Simms was present at the July 8th ALUC meeting and asked ALUC to take action. Now the application comes before ALUC, he is not present to speak to the Commission. He said all applicants should be notified. Staff said this is a referral from Chico Planning Department to ALUC for recommendations. He said this is not a public hearing and there are times that the applicant is notified, but in this case, Mr. Simms was not notified. On a motion made by Commissioner Lambert, seconded by Commissioner Franklin, and unanimously carried to find that the proposed rezone site is in an area that is known to be subject to overflights of both arriving and departing aircraft and related noise and safety hazards and find that the project to rezone AP# 048-430-006 and 008 to PD/RD2 does not conform to the Policies of the Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan and forwards this finding to the City of Chico. 3. Status Report - Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan and Airport Noise Compatibility Progam. Commissioner Koch said the initial noise compatibility map will be completed in approximately one month. The report is still be reviewing by staff and the consultant is currently responding to comments. He said the development stage of the program is 60 to 70 percent complete and should be completed in approximately two to three months. He said at that time a public hearing will be held. 4. BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR Barbara Hennigan asked the Commission how airport proponents in a community might bring pressure to create more legal protection for airports? She said all airports are having the same problem with encroachment and the problem will only get worse. Staff said the State Law sets up this Commission as a requirement. One of the requirements this Commission has to work within, is to prepare an Airport Land Use Plan for each airport within the County. Under the Government Code, the first step is the County and City General Plan's must be compatible with the Airport Land Use Plan. The second step is implementing those General Plans and the Cities and Counties usually control that through zoning. He said in most cases, the zoning around our airports, either ieflects the plan or existing development. He said we need the support mainly at the implementation level of when the application is received. 7 i BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - October 14, 1992 - Ms. Hennigan said we need better communication with support groups who will attend various Board of Supervisor's, Commission and City Council meetings. - Chairman Rossas said the County needs a support group which will handle the airports. He said support groups influence those Board's decision. Commissioner Franklin said there needs to be a committee to pass out a bond act, to acquire land around the airport to use it as low density purposes. He said he believes in the future, Chico Airport will lose power of their airport and Oroville will gain power, because Oroville's land is protected. Staff said the City of Chico has purchased the land within their clear zones and approach zones. Chairman Rossas said Oroville Airport has moved their thresholds south from the Highway and are in the process of purchasing all the property to the State Forebay. V. CORRESPONDENCE Staff handed out an example of a court case stating the . requirements for an override of ALUC. ************** Commissioner Gerst said there is a committee that is looking over fees of different activities and services of the County. He said there are no fees for the Airport Land Use Commission. He asked why there are no fees . for hearings like Drake Homes? Staff said since ALUC strictly makes a finding based on the County's existing plan, years ago ALUC decided there was no reason to set up a fee structure. Staff said if the Commission wishes to hold public hearings, 4 foe structure could be set up. Chairman Rossas said it is proposed that in the near future ALUC will become a part of the Butte County Association of Governments. And at that time, a fee structure will probably be set up. ***********i*** EN BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - October 14, 1992. - VI. REFERRALS TO STAFF AND FORMATION OF COMMITTEES Commissioner Franklin asked if notification of applicants and public hearings could be on next month's agenda for discussion. Commissioner Gerst said may be the property owners within 300 feet of the proposal, should also be notified. Commissioner Koch asked if a discussion on the process of approval of minutes can be on next month's agenda. Staff said a discussion of Bylaw changes will also be on next month's agenda. VII. ANNOUNCEMENTS The next meeting is scheduled for the third Wednesday, November 18, 1992. (The 2nd Wednesday, November 11th, is Veteran's Day.) VIII. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:25 a.m. Signed: (fA>fES ROSSAS, Chairman COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION /jlo c:\wp50\aluc\min.oct 9 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION DRAFF MINUTES - October 14, 1992 . The meeting of the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) was called to order at 9:04 a.m. on October 14, 1992, in- the Board of Supervisors' Room, County Administration Center, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California. I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II. ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Commissioners Gerst, Lambert, Crotts, Koch and Chairman Rossas Commissioners Franklin and Stevens Also Present: David -Hironimus, Senior Planner Jackie O'Brien, Secretary Neil McCabe, County Counsel III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF July 8, 1992 Commissioner Franklin arrived at this time.. On a motion made by Commissioner Lambert, seconded 'by Commissioner Crotts, to approve the minutes of July 8, 1992 by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Franklin, Lambert, Crotts, Koch and Chairman Rossas NOES: No one. ABSENT: Commissioner Stevens ABSTAIN: Commissioner Gerst Corrections to minutes of September 16, 1992 were handed to the secretary. 11 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - October 14, 1992 IV. BUSINESS 1. Consideration of Revocation or Modification of Aitport Permit: Cliff Johnson, Hog Ranch Airport south of Chico identified as AP# 040-020-135 (now AP 040- 020-153, 154. 155 and 156). Staff said in 1985, Cliff Johnson's Airport was, approved as a private use airport. He said there is evidence that indicates the airport may have grown beyond a private use airport and now may be a special use airport. He said County Counsel is present to break down the possibilities the Commission has to look at.. Neil McCabe, County Counsel said it was mentioned on the agenda of the possibility of revocation. However, he said no local permits exist for this airport. He said there was local review, but the permit was granted by the State. He said there could be a question that would arise whether or not the State permit should be recommended for revocation, or whether or not the use at this time is a zoning violation, if it has expanded beyond what it was legally established to be previously. He said it might be necessary for 'Mr. Johnson to get a Use Permit to expand a non -conforming use through the Planning Department. He said he might also need to seek an amended permit from the State. Either way it will come before. ALUC. for review. Staff said a Commissioner of ALUC has concerns and evidence that perhaps this airport is not being used as a private use airport. Staff said ALUC would be a recommending body to either the Board of Supervisors, Code Enforcement Officers, or the State. Commissioner Koch said the Staff Report states the Board of Supervisors granted an Airport Permit after ALUC's review and then the California Department of Transportation issued a permit for a private use airport. Mr. McCabe said in staffs memo dated October 8, 1992, there was mention of a permit and the Board of Supervisor's minutes referenced a permit. He read the Board of Supervisor's motion, which stated "Review the plans for this airport and that under the Butte County General Plan, this is an approved use He said it was reviewed for conformity with the General Plan. Staff said the original application for the airport was on a single parcel. Since then there has been a land division that created four parcels and the airport is located on two of those parcels. The hearing was opened to the public. William Coats, adjoining property owner to the airport, read the definitions of a special use airport and private use airport from the Division of Aeronautics. It states: Private BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - October 14, 1992 - use airport is defined an airport limited to the non commercial use of an individual owner or family and an occasional invited guest. A special use airport is defined as an airport not opened to the general public, has access to which is controlled by the owner in support of commercial activity, public service operations and/or personal use. He said the end of the runway is approximately 40 feet from his property line and should be at least 200 feet away. He said the Airport Land Use Commission minutes of June 10, 1985 stated that an airport permit to allow a privately owned, private use airport was granted to Cliff Johnson subject to several conditions. He said ALUC warned Mr. Johnson about problems with not getting avigation easements. He said he was not notified there was an airport going in. He said he believes there are other property owners with landing rights that do not use the airport. He. said he regularly sees Mr. Johnson and Dr. Brown's airplanes leaving. He asked with future growth, will the new property owners have access to the airport? He said it is a mild nuisance at the present level of activity and that his property value has been badly damaged. He said his concern is what happens in the future from a danger and an economic damage standpoint. He said he sees no compelling necessity for an airport for two gentlemen and their toys. Cliff Johnson, owner of Hog Ranch Airport, said the definitions that Mr. Coats read are the new definitions of airports and they do not have any bearing on the definitions that were in effect when he was issued his permit. He said staffs memo stated that he contacted the State and asked for an upgrade on his permit. He stated this was incorrect: He said the State contacted every airport owner in the State because of recent revisions in California Airport Regulations redefining various categories of airports. He said the State is trying to get shed of private airports. The State sent him a survey and asked him to review the new categories to see where his airport fitted in. He said he asked for the lowest classification for whatever airport they had under their new definitions. He said he was not trying to change anything, he was cooperating with what the State had asked for. He said in regards to the 200 ft. displaced threshold, this was not a requirement when his permit was granted. He said the threshold is displaced approximately 300 feet from Mr. Coats property and is placed 600 ft. on the north end. In regards to future use, he said the State is the only licensing agency that has a permit on his runway, and the State is the only licensing agency that can regulate future use. He said it is clearly defined in the private permit from the State what the private use is. He said the advertisement that ran in "Home Seekers" was misprinted. He submitted a letter from the publisher of the magazine apologizing for the errors. He said it should have stated that only his house has access to the 2,000 ft. runway. He said if further clarification is needed, he would ask for a continuance so his legal representation could be present. Commissioner Koch asked if the advertisement was published wrong, will the property owners of the subdivision have access to the runway? 3 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - October 14, 1992 - Mr. Johnson said the advertisement makes it looks like he is going to be future subdividing and giving out runway rights. Commissioner Koch asked who has access to the runway now and if it will change in the future? Mr. Johnson said him and Mr. Brown use the airport. He said he has never changed the perimeters of the permit and does not intend to change anything in the future. He said he has no intentions of future subdividing. Staff asked if the two houses -that currently have access to the airport is the original parcel the airport permif . was issued for? Mr. Johnson stated yes. Mr. Coats said he had a telephone conversation with Mr. Johnson, approximately 18 months ago, and Mr. Johnson stated that he had sold landing rights to five different people, Brown, Wickham, and Scott. He said there was mention of two others names, but he didn't record it at the time of the conversation. The hearing was closed to the public. Commissioner Koch said when regulations change, and the use changes, the new use needs to comply with new regulations, 'no matter what regulations were in effect when the permit was issued. He said he needed more information on the definitions that are in effect, and what applies to this particular permit. Commissioner Lambert said Mr. Coats came before ALUC before with his concerns. She asked if Code Enforcement Officers were still involved? Staff said on August 21, 1990, the Board of Supervisor's originally heard from Mr. Coats regarding this airstrip. He said ' the complaint was referred to the Planning Director. On February 22, 1992, the Board of Supervisor's asked Code Enforcement Officers to continue monitoring the airport. With recent discussion with Code Enforcement Officers, no additional activity of the airport was reported. Commissioner Lambert said this is a fact finding situation. She said this .has been ongoing and there has been a continual question of the status of the airport. She said this issue needs to be resolved. Commissioner Franklin said there is no evidence that would require the need to continue the hearing. He said Mr. Coats stated there are only two airplanes using the airport and 4 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - October 14, 1992 - both are owners of the airport property. He said, as he sees it, it does not violate the definition of a private use airport. Commissioner Lambert said it may be in violation of land use. She said it needs to be resolved in whoever's jurisdiction it belongs. She asked if five people have been sold landing rights, will it still come under the original approval of a permit for a private use with one owner? Commissioner Crotts said she doesn't know what definitions apply or what the Division of Aeronautic's has classified the airport. Commissioner Gerst agreed. He said the Airport Land Use Commission should request that it be researched, so a determination' can be made as to the status of, the airport. It was a consensus of the Commission to continue this item to the November 18, 1992 meeting, with additional information coming from staff, and so legal representation for Mr. Johnson can be present. Chairman Rossas said all parties involved should be notified. Staff will ask Jim Michaels, Division of Aeronautics; CalTrans, to attend next month's meeting. 2. Review - City of Chico referral of a Rezone for Drake Homes from N -C (Neighborhood - Commercial) to PD/R2 (Planned Development Medium Density Residential) for property located south of and adjacent to the southerly boundary of the Chico Municipal Airport Property and the . Airport Protection Zone, identified as AP# 048-430-006 and 008. Staff said this item was discussed at the July 8, 1992 ALUC meeting. (There was no quorum present to take action). He said it is now. an official application and ALUC must make a finding of conformity. The hearing was opened to the public. Barbara Hennigan, Chico, said in 1948, the Board of Supervisors was asked to protect the property around Chico Airport. She said at the time, the reaction was that Chico Airport was way out in the country with grazing land. 'She said Cliff Johnson's Airport is a good example that nothing stays the same. She stated the City of Chico requires avigation easements and proponents of airportactivities think it's time for the County to do something to protect the airport. She asked the Commission what would be the best M BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - October 14, 1992 - procedure for airport proponents to tackle this issue on the County level? She said the Division of Aeronautics has stated there should be no schools within two miles of an airport. She said this states a legal basis for drawing a protection line around an airport. She said a two mile circle around Chico airport takes up about 17 square miles or 1 percent of the land in Butte County. And that if avigation easements were required by the County as well as the City of Chico in that 1 percent of the land, the people who like airplanes would be delighted to buy and move into that 1 percent, and the people who do not particularly like airplanes can buy in the other 99 percent of the County. She said this particular proposal is an encroachment of people into that two mile circle. She said those home owners and the airport need to be properly informed. Chairman Rossas said part of Ms. Hennigan's statement should of came under Business From The Floor. The hearing was closed to the public. Staff said the County does have an Airport Land Use Plan around Chico Airport that extends out a couple of miles. He said this project would allow uses that would place people near the airport, but the property owner has the right to apply for change. Commissioner Koch referred back to ALUC minutes of July 8, 1992. He said on behalf of the City of Chico, Chico's City Council has considered this matter and the council was not in favor of the proposal at that time. He said there has been no action. Commissioner Lambert said it does not conform to the current policies of Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan and does not know what the new proposed plan will be. Commissioner Koch said it is likely the noise contours will be pulled back and this area will be located outside those contours, but the overflights and the flight patterns will still exist. He said this is more of a safety issue than a noise issue. Chairman Rossas said at the July 8th meeting, the Commission was.not in favor of the proposal. He said with the Japanese Flight School flying overhead several times a day, safety becomes a major factor. Commissioner Lambert said one of the statements that was made at the July meeting, was that any findings would be subject to what was in effect at the time of the application. She said it does not. conform to the existing Chico Airport Plan. Commissioner Koch asked if Tony Simms from Drake Homes was notified of this hearing? He said Mr. Simms was present at the July 8th ALUC meeting and asked 6 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - October 14, 1992 - ALUC to take action. Now the application comes before ALUC, he is not present to speak to the Commission. He said all applicants should be notified. Staff said this is a referral from Chico Planning - Department to ALUC for recommendations. He said this is not a public hearing and there are times that the - applicant is notified, but in this case, Mr. Simms was not notified. On a motion made by Commissioner Lambert, seconded by Commissioner Franklin, and unanimously carried to find that the proposed rezone site is in an area that is known to be subject to overflights of both arriving and departing aircraft and related noise and safety hazards and find that the project to rezone AP# 048-430-006 and 008 to PD/RD2 does not conform to the Policies of the Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan and forwards this finding to the City of Chico. 3. Status Report - Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan and Airport Noise Compatibility Program. Commissioner Koch said the initial noise compatibility map will be completed in approximately one month. The report is still be reviewing by staff and the consultant is currently responding to comments. He said the development stage of the program is 60 to 70 percent complete and should be completed in approximately two to three months. He said at that time a public hearing will be held. x x x x x x x x x x x x x 4. BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR Barbara Hennigan asked the Commission how airport proponents in a community might bring pressure to create more legal protection for airports? She said all airports are having the same problem with encroachment and the problem will only get worse. Staff said the State Law sets up this Commission as a requirement. One of the requirements this Commission has to work within, is to prepare an Airport Land Use Plan for each airport within the County. Under the Government Code, the first step is the County and City General Plan's must be compatible with the Airport Land Use Plan. The second step is implementing those General Plans and the Cities and Counties usually control that through zoning. He said in most cases, the zoning around our airports, either reflects the plan or existing development. He said we need the support mainly at the implementation level of when the application is received. 7 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - October 14, 1992 - Ms. Hennigan said we need better communication with support groups who will attend various Board of Supervisor's, Commission and City Council meetings. Chairman Rossas said the County needs a support group ,which will handle the airports. He said support groups influence those Board's decision. Commissioner Franklin said there needs to be a committee to pass out a bond act, to acquire land around the airport to use it as low density purposes. He said he believes in the future, Chico Airport will lose power of their airport and Oroville will gain power, because Oroville's land is protected. Staff said the City of Chico has purchased the land within their clear zones and approach zones. Chairman Rossas said Oroville Airport has moved their thresholds south from the Highway and are in the process of purchasing all the property to the State Forebay. V. CORRESPONDENCE Staff handed out an example of a court case stating the requirements for an override of ALUC. Commissioner Gerst said there is a committee that is looking over fees of different activities and services of the County. He said there are no fees for the Airport Land Use Commission. He asked why there are no fees for hearings like Drake Homes? Staff said since ALUC strictly makes a finding based on the County's existing plan, years ago ALUC decided there was no reason to set up a fee structure. Staff said if the Commission wishes to hold public hearings, a fee structure could be set up. Chairman Rossas said it is proposed that in the near future ALUC will become a part of the Butte ' County Association of Governments. And at that time, a fee structure will probably be set up. 1 8 0 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - October 14, 1992 - VI. REFERRALS TO STAFF AND FORMATION OF COMMITTEES Commissioner Franklin asked if notification of applicants and public hearings could be on next month's agenda for discussion. Commissioner Gerst said may be the property 'owners within 300 feet of the proposal, should also be notified. Commissioner Koch asked if a discussion on the process of approval of minutes can be on next month's agenda. Staff said a discussion of ByLaw changes will also be on next month's agenda. VII. ANNOUNCEMENTS The next meeting is scheduled for the third Wednesday, November 18, 1992. (The 2nd Wednesday, November 11th, is Veteran's Day.) VIII. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:25 a.m. Signed: JAMES ROSSAS, Chairman BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION /jlo c:\wp50\aluc\min.oct 9 To: From: Subject: Date: Inter -Departmental Memorandum Airport Land Use Commission David Hironimus, Planning Department City of Chico Referral of Rezone from N -C to PD/R2, AP 48-430-006 and 008 October 7, 1992 This.Proposed Rezone is for the Area Reviewed by three members of the Airport Land Use Commission for Drake Homes, Foothill Park Unit 8, at their July 8, 1992 meeting (no quorum present). Attached for reference is the package of information from that..meeting. Since the previous meeting the City of Chico has accepted a Draft Airport Noise Compatibility Program: Aircraft Noise Exposure Map Report. The Report has not yet been adopted. Maps contained in the report indicates that the subject property is located within a noise sensitive area between the 55 dB and 60 dB contours for both existing and all future projections. Policies within the existing Land Use Plan for the subject area indicate that residential uses should be prohibited. Policies in the existing plan for, areas with similar noise characteristics as those discussed above indicate noise control measures should be required in all new residential construction. It should be noted that the existing land use policy was based not only on noise exposure, but also on safety. The project site is located on the extended runway centerline and in a direct line of sight from the airport. Accident statistics contained in the Airport Land Use Planning Handbook prepared by the California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics indicates that 22% of accidents take place within 1 mile of the airport involved. The site is approximately 1 mile from the end of the runway. While the noise exposure maps indicate that there may be cause to revise the land use policies in the area, there has been no change in the safety aspects of the site. Until the land use policies are formally changed, the existing policies prohibiting residential uses are still in effect and must be considered. RECOMMENDATION: Find that the proposed rezone site is in an area that is known to be subject to overflights of both arriving and departing aircraft and related noise and safety hazards and find that the project to rezone AP 48-430-006 and 008 to PD/R2 does not conform to the Policies of the Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan and forward this finding to the City of Chico. Inter -Departmental Memorandum To: Airport Land Use Commission From: David Hironimus, Planning Department Subject: Cliff Johnson, Hog Ranch Airport Permit, AP 40-020-153, 154, 155 and 156 Date: October 8, 1992 This hearing is for the purpose of considering the revocation or modification of the permit for Hog Ranch Airport, owned and operated by Cliff Johnson. HISTORY: In 1984, Cliff Johnson applied for a Use Permit for a Privately owned, public use airport on property that was zoned A-2 at that time. When the state Division of Aeronautics pointed out that the proposed airport could not meet the dimensional criteria for a public airport Mr. Johnson withdrew his Use Permit application and began processing an application with the state for a private use airport. At that time the A-2 zone allowed personal use airports without a Use Permit. The Division of Aeronautics, however, required local review of all new airports. After application by Mr. Johnson, the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission reviewed the proposed private airport and recommended the Board of Supervisors grant an Airport Permit. The Board subsequently granted a permit for a Privately owned. Private Use airport and in late 1985 the California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics issued a permit for a private airport. In January of 1991, Mr. Johnson contacted the Division of Aeronautics and requested reclassification of his airport from a personal -use status to special -use airport. The Butte County Planning Department asked the Division not to reclassify the airport since the zoning was now A-20 (Agricultural, 20 acre parcels) and did not allow special -use airports. However, since the private -use airport was a pre-existing legally established non -conforming use, Mr. Johnson could apply for an expansion of the non -conforming use pursuant to the requirements of Butte County code section 24-37. To date no application has been received by the planning Department. Over the years there have been several complaints and allegations that the airport was no longer being used as a private -use airport, but as a public or special -use airport. Proof that the airport was being used by people other than Mr. Johnson and his 'occasional invited guests" has been elusive. However, Mr. Johnson recently placed an advertisement (attached) which clearly indicates that the use of the airport has in fact changed. As such, it appears that Mr. Johnson is in violation of his existing airport permit as granted by the state as well as the county A-20 zone. Mr. Johnson's remedy to. this situation would be to apply for a Use Permit to allow the expansion or change of character of his non -conforming use to a special -use facility. However, without acquiring additional land, it does not appear that he can meet the dimensional requirements of the state. He would need to have each threshold at least 240 ft. from the property line with a smooth unobstructed surface between the threshold and the property line. There would also have to be an additional 300A of object -free area which could be located on neighboring ,properties and protected by an easement or other agreement. Assuming the neighbors refuse to sell their property or easements (and remove trees, including producing orchard) this would reduce the existing 2000 ft. runway (using displaced thresholds not allowed on special -use airports) to 920 ft., clearly inadequate for - - _-..._safe--operations: - Extending the 300 ft. obstruction free arca onto ncia- voices F?vFi%, y iii only one direction would result in a useable runway length of only 1220 ft. RECOMMENDATION: Forward a recommendation to the Butte County Board of Supervisors to set a public hearing to consider the revocation or modification of the Airport Permit for Cliff Johnson and recommend that the Board revoke said permit. enol. cc: Cliff Johnson Jim Michael, Div of Aeronautics 36 This facility covers 70 acres and is shared by only 5 very lucky families. Each house has its own dock and boat house. Each has access to the 2.000 ft surfaced- runway and a taxiway to their house. The above house is being offered for sale for the first time. All 20 acres stay green on a -year round basis. Currently 15 horses graze and require no feeding, other than what they eat in the irrigated pastures. FREE water right! 76,000 gallons per hour. The entire project is fenced with security gates and surrounded by orchards. It is beautifully secluded, yet only 4 miles from city limits. 800 feet from Butte Creek with a large wildlife area that is outstanding for riding horses. Fish and game property adjacent. You can commute to the Bay Area in 50 minutes via your plane that is parked right at the house. If this all sounds too good to be true... . it is! This home is being offered for below replacement cost. Just wait until you see it. Say ........ I saw it in HomeSeekers" Vol. 92 No. 9 Pa d a THE MAIN HOUSE - Tudor home with allthe old world cra`-.s-nanshio. 3.200 so ft. bedrooms. = baths. fame_ room. a read gourme{ kitchen with Wolf commercial double rar9e. solid walnut cabinets and Conan countertops. a fireplaces. concrete snake roof and 5 car garage. There is an ac7:uonal 300 so ft sun room facing East. GARAGEIGUEST HOUSEMANGER. 5 car garage -2 oversized doors. Lots of built-in storage cabinets. 800 so ft guest house. fireplace, gas heat, air conditioner, evaporative cooler, inside stairs to garage. 11 x 26 ft deck over end garage with outside stags. 42 x 30 ft airplane hanger. currently has 2 planes. a ski boat. etc. State of California Department of Transportation Division of Aeronautics This. Certifies that HOG RANCH AIRPORT Owned by CLIFFORD N. JOHNSEN Operated by CLIFFORD N, JOHNSEN Located at L AT I TODE : 39 ° 4120" N, LONGITUDE: 121 ° 46' 58" W. MARYBILL RANCH ROAD, CHICO, CALIFORNIA Has received Permit No. BUT -10 Operation of an airport is hereby authorized under this permit pursuant to the laws of the State of California and the rules and regulations of the Department of Transportation subject to any nditions imposed by the Department. APRIL 13, 1987 1 DATA JACK D. KEM RLY VHIEF, Division of Aeronautics • STATE CF CALIFORNIA—BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATI&D HOUSING AGENCY GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DIVISION OF AERONAUTICS 1130 K STREET - 4TH FLOOR i 4 MAIL: P.O. BOX 942874 SACRAMENTO, CA 94274-0001 (916) 322-3090 TDD (916) 323-7665 August 19, 1987 Mr..Clifford N. Johnsen Route 3, Box 508 Chico, CA 95928 Dear Mr. Johnsen: In response to your recent inquiry concerning use of your airport, this should clarify our interpretation of a "private use airport". As indicated on the state Airport Permit for the Hog Ranch Airport, condition Number 2 states: "Airport is restricted to owner and occasional invited guests utilizing aircraft with adequate performance characteristics." Additionally, the Butte County Board of Supervisors and the Airport Land Use Commission approved the airport as a privately -owned, private use facility. Also, the FAA's no -objection airspace determination is subject to the airport being operated for private use only. Your question as to whether there could be as many as six regular users of the airport and still retain its private -use status depends upon the degree of ownership the users have. -The �- Department interprets an "owner" as someone holding fee simple title or a long term lease (20 years) on the airport property. Therefore, it is possible for several persons to hold an undivided interest in the runway. either in fee or long term lease, and be considered an "owner". However, if the number of "owners" becomes excessive -for the particular airport in question, the Department could, in the interest of public safety, determine that the airport no longer qualifies as "private -use". Depending on the number of operations generated by as many as six owners of the Hog Ranch Airport and their guests, it appears as though private -use status could be retained. .'Clifford N. Johns Page 2 ..August 1.9. 1987 yx We hope this clarifies our position and answers your. ques.tion.s concerning private -use airports. If we can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, JACK D. KEMMERLY. Chief Division of Aeronautics W. R. Riesen Aviation Consultant .gid -r 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 s LEASE AGREEMENT STILLWATER AIRPORT THIS LEASE, made between CLIFFORD JOHNSEN, and his assignees, hereinafter referred to as Lessor, and CLIFFORD JOHNSEN, hereinafter referred to as Lessee, provides as follows: RECITALS 1. Lessor is the owner of the premises described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and desires to lease a portion of said premises to Lessee. 2. Lessee desires to lease the premises for the purpose of maintaining an airplane runway. 3. The parties desire !o enter into a lease agreement defining their rights, duties and liabilities relating to the premises. In consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, the parties agree as follows: SECTION ONE SUBJECT AND PURPOSE Lessor leases the real property located in the County of Butte, State'of California, and more particularly described as that certain runway, being mostly 100 feet in width and 2,070 feet in length, located 323 feet east from the northwest corner of Parcel 2, being a part of the entire LEASE AGREEMENT 9 10 11 IN 00 N 12 �z�Clm W W W ¢ Q Z N a 13 j a 14 3 E 0 y 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 s LEASE AGREEMENT STILLWATER AIRPORT THIS LEASE, made between CLIFFORD JOHNSEN, and his assignees, hereinafter referred to as Lessor, and CLIFFORD JOHNSEN, hereinafter referred to as Lessee, provides as follows: RECITALS 1. Lessor is the owner of the premises described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and desires to lease a portion of said premises to Lessee. 2. Lessee desires to lease the premises for the purpose of maintaining an airplane runway. 3. The parties desire !o enter into a lease agreement defining their rights, duties and liabilities relating to the premises. In consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, the parties agree as follows: SECTION ONE SUBJECT AND PURPOSE Lessor leases the real property located in the County of Butte, State'of California, and more particularly described as that certain runway, being mostly 100 feet in width and 2,070 feet in length, located 323 feet east from the northwest corner of Parcel 2, being a part of the entire LEASE AGREEMENT 1 property described on.Exhibit "A" attached. 2 SECTION TWO 3 TERM AND RENT 4 Lessor leases the above premises for a term of 5 qg �commencing Joe -e- !�.7 �-F�_, and 6 terminating on ;;,., P.7 or sooner, as 7 provided herein; at the annual rental of One Dollar ($1.00), -6 payable. on the 8th day of January of each year, during the 9 term of this lease. All rental payments shall be made to 10 Lessor at such locations as may.be,specified by Lessor, or 11 their successors in interest. N N Z U1 N12 SECTION THREE a LU M 2 m13 ALTERATIONS, ADDITIONS, AND IMPROVEMENTS >y d LU O J A. All alterations, additions and improvements on or 3014 Q " o w15 in the runway at the commencement of the term, or that may U U 16 be erected or installed during the term, shall become part 17 of the demised premises and the sole property of Lessor, 18 except that all moveable fixtures installed by Lessee shall 19 be and remain the property of Lessee. 20 B. Lessee may, at their own.expense, make any 21 alterations, additions or improvements in and to said runway 22 as long as prior written approval of the Lessor is obtained. 23 SECTION FOUR 24 REPAIRS 25 Lessee shall, at all times during this lease, and at 26 their own cost and expense, -repair, replace and maintain, -2- LEASE AGREEMENT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 9 10 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 • 0 0 in a good, safe and substantial condition, all improvements, additions and alterations on the runway, and shall use all reasonable precaution to prevent waste, damage or injury to the demised premises. SECTION FIVE TAXES Lessor shall be responsible for all real property taxes levied on the .property.- Lessee shall be responsible for additional taxes levied against the runway or improvements on the runway (to be prorated by the number of subleases). SECTION SIX UTILITIES All applications and connections for necessary utility services on the demised premises shall be made in the name of the Lessee only, and Lessee shall be solely liable for such utility charges as they become due. SECTION SEVEN USE Lessor is leasing The premises to Lessee for the specific purpose of an airplane runway. Any other use by Lessee shall require written approval of Lessor. SECTION EIGHT INSURANCE During. the term of the lease, Lessee shall obtain and maintain, at their expense, the following types and amounts of insurance: -3- LEASE AGREEMENT 11 m c) 12 Z w W Q a Z N m 13 > L a 0 14 `U d 15 ` U u U 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 • 0 0 in a good, safe and substantial condition, all improvements, additions and alterations on the runway, and shall use all reasonable precaution to prevent waste, damage or injury to the demised premises. SECTION FIVE TAXES Lessor shall be responsible for all real property taxes levied on the .property.- Lessee shall be responsible for additional taxes levied against the runway or improvements on the runway (to be prorated by the number of subleases). SECTION SIX UTILITIES All applications and connections for necessary utility services on the demised premises shall be made in the name of the Lessee only, and Lessee shall be solely liable for such utility charges as they become due. SECTION SEVEN USE Lessor is leasing The premises to Lessee for the specific purpose of an airplane runway. Any other use by Lessee shall require written approval of Lessor. SECTION EIGHT INSURANCE During. the term of the lease, Lessee shall obtain and maintain, at their expense, the following types and amounts of insurance: -3- LEASE AGREEMENT 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 • 0 (a) Fire Insurance: Lessee shall be responsible for fire insurance on Lessee's personal property. (b) Personal Injury and Property Damage Insurance: Lessee shall maintain general liability, personal injury and property damage insurance for the runway in an amount of not less than $1,000,000 and/or furnish an indemnity agreement satisfactory to Lessor, as per SECTION NINE. This amount - may be increased ten percent (10%) per year by the request of Lessor and one of the owners of Parcels 2 or 3, as described herein (two of three). (c) All aircraft operating on.the premises shall have a $1,000,000 liability and personal injury and property damage policy in effect at all times, with first Lessee (JOHNSEN), the owners of Parcels 2 and 3, and Lessor named as additional insureds. The required amount may be increased by Lessor, or the owners of Parcels 2 and 3, on a yearly basis but in an amount not to exceed ten percent (10%) per year. SECTION NINE INDEMNITY Lessee shall indemnify Lessor against all expenses, liabilities and claims of every kind, including reasonable attorney's fees, by or on behalf of any person or entity arising out of either (1) a failure by Lessee to perform any of the terms or conditions of this lease; (2) any injury or damage happening on or about the demised premises caused by -4- LEASE AGREEMENT 1 11 2 Z 3 co U1_ 4 5 W 6 � m13 7 LL1N 8 9 10 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 • 0 (a) Fire Insurance: Lessee shall be responsible for fire insurance on Lessee's personal property. (b) Personal Injury and Property Damage Insurance: Lessee shall maintain general liability, personal injury and property damage insurance for the runway in an amount of not less than $1,000,000 and/or furnish an indemnity agreement satisfactory to Lessor, as per SECTION NINE. This amount - may be increased ten percent (10%) per year by the request of Lessor and one of the owners of Parcels 2 or 3, as described herein (two of three). (c) All aircraft operating on.the premises shall have a $1,000,000 liability and personal injury and property damage policy in effect at all times, with first Lessee (JOHNSEN), the owners of Parcels 2 and 3, and Lessor named as additional insureds. The required amount may be increased by Lessor, or the owners of Parcels 2 and 3, on a yearly basis but in an amount not to exceed ten percent (10%) per year. SECTION NINE INDEMNITY Lessee shall indemnify Lessor against all expenses, liabilities and claims of every kind, including reasonable attorney's fees, by or on behalf of any person or entity arising out of either (1) a failure by Lessee to perform any of the terms or conditions of this lease; (2) any injury or damage happening on or about the demised premises caused by -4- LEASE AGREEMENT 11 �Z o Z co U1_ 12 >M W � R � m13 LL1N tD -1 ci 3 Q�Q Z 14 o QN orf Ua p W ` 15 U u U 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 • 0 (a) Fire Insurance: Lessee shall be responsible for fire insurance on Lessee's personal property. (b) Personal Injury and Property Damage Insurance: Lessee shall maintain general liability, personal injury and property damage insurance for the runway in an amount of not less than $1,000,000 and/or furnish an indemnity agreement satisfactory to Lessor, as per SECTION NINE. This amount - may be increased ten percent (10%) per year by the request of Lessor and one of the owners of Parcels 2 or 3, as described herein (two of three). (c) All aircraft operating on.the premises shall have a $1,000,000 liability and personal injury and property damage policy in effect at all times, with first Lessee (JOHNSEN), the owners of Parcels 2 and 3, and Lessor named as additional insureds. The required amount may be increased by Lessor, or the owners of Parcels 2 and 3, on a yearly basis but in an amount not to exceed ten percent (10%) per year. SECTION NINE INDEMNITY Lessee shall indemnify Lessor against all expenses, liabilities and claims of every kind, including reasonable attorney's fees, by or on behalf of any person or entity arising out of either (1) a failure by Lessee to perform any of the terms or conditions of this lease; (2) any injury or damage happening on or about the demised premises caused by -4- LEASE AGREEMENT 1 2 3 E 5 6 7 10 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 or related to Lessee, or his friends, invitees, or his invitees' guests; (3) failure by Lessee to comply with any law of any governmental authority; or (4) any mechanic's lien or security interest filed against the demised premises or equipment, materials, or alterations of buildings or improvements thereon due to the conduct of Lessee. In the event of a default of'this lease, or in the event any dispute concerning this lease arises between the parties, the prevailing party in any legal action shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees and costs. SECTION TEN TTL'171 T7T m nn � nL+* nv Each of the following events shall constitute a default or breach of this lease by Lessee: (1) If Lessee shall fail to pay Lessor any rent or additional rent when the rent shall become due and shall not make the payment within thirty (30) days after notice thereof by Lessor to Lessee. (2) Allowing or inviting any aircraft to operate on the runway without first presenting Lessor, and the owners of Parcels 2 and 3, as described herein; a copy of a prepaid annual insurance policy for the plane. Such policy shall list, as additional insureds, Lessor and the owners of Parcels 2 and 3. The terms of such policy are described in SECTION EIGHT. -5- LEASE AGREEMENT 11 N 12 Z wQ W Q Z m 13 > LU 6 Ce S 14 V Cd J 3. Q N U 6 Q� p =15 U T 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 or related to Lessee, or his friends, invitees, or his invitees' guests; (3) failure by Lessee to comply with any law of any governmental authority; or (4) any mechanic's lien or security interest filed against the demised premises or equipment, materials, or alterations of buildings or improvements thereon due to the conduct of Lessee. In the event of a default of'this lease, or in the event any dispute concerning this lease arises between the parties, the prevailing party in any legal action shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees and costs. SECTION TEN TTL'171 T7T m nn � nL+* nv Each of the following events shall constitute a default or breach of this lease by Lessee: (1) If Lessee shall fail to pay Lessor any rent or additional rent when the rent shall become due and shall not make the payment within thirty (30) days after notice thereof by Lessor to Lessee. (2) Allowing or inviting any aircraft to operate on the runway without first presenting Lessor, and the owners of Parcels 2 and 3, as described herein; a copy of a prepaid annual insurance policy for the plane. Such policy shall list, as additional insureds, Lessor and the owners of Parcels 2 and 3. The terms of such policy are described in SECTION EIGHT. -5- LEASE AGREEMENT 1 SECTION ELEVEN 2 EASEMENTS, AGREEMENTS, OR ENCUMBRANCES 3 The parties shall be bound by all existing easements, 4 agreements and encumbrances of record relating to the 5 demised premises, and Lessor shall not be liable to Lessee 6 for any damages resulting from any action taken by a holder 7 of ­an interest pursuant to the rights of that holder 18 thereunder. 9 SECTION TWELVE 10 QUIET ENJOYMENT 11 Lessor warrants that Lessee shall be granted peaceable co Z F. and quiet enjoyment of the demised premises free from any W � Lu cc Z > N m13 eviction or interference by Lessor if Lessee pays the rent 3 m 3 < and other charges provided herein, and otherwise fully and " V " u 014 `15 punctually performs the terms and conditions imposed on U U 16 Lessee. 17 SECTION THIRTEEN 18 LIABILITY OF LESSOR 19 Lessee, and/or sublessee, shall be in exclusive control 20 and possession of the demised premises, and Lessor, or the 21 first Lessee (CLIFFORD JOHNSEN), shall not be liable for any 22 injury or damages to any property or to any person on or 23 about the demised premises, nor for any injury or damage to 24 any property of Lessee. 25 *** 26 *** LEASE AGREEMENT 1 SECTION FOURTEEN 2 REPRESENTATIONS BY LESSOR 3 At the commencement of the term, Lessee shall accept 4 the property and improvements, and any equipment, in their 5 existing condition and state of repair, and Lessee agrees 6 that no representations, statements, or warranties, express 7 or implied, have been made by or on behalf of Lessor in respect 8 thereto, except as contained in the provisions of this Lease,-- ease,=and andLessor shall, in no event, be liable for any latent defects. 10 SECTION FIFTEEN 11 LIMITATIONS OF OPERATION AND REGULATIONS FOR USE ZU1 Owner: Owner: CLIFFORD JOHNSEN, 200 Stillwater Drive, Chico, z 13 California, 95928 LH c 3Z14 Hog Ranch Airport is a private use airport and, as stated " _15 on the conditions of the permit, is for use by owners and U - 16 their occasional guests. 17 An owner is a holder of a long term lease on the strip. 18 Only persons, and their immediate family, holding a 19 valid and current lease, signed either by CLIFFORD JOHNSEN 20 or the holder of the Master Lease, are allowed to use the 21 strip. All pilots must have a current private license and 22 at least 100 hours pilot in command time. 23 Persons holding a valid lease signed either by CLIFFORD 24 JOHNSEN or the holder of the Master Lease may have occasional 25 guests fly in but only if both owners and guests abide by 26 the same rules as the Lessees, which are as follows: -7- LEASE AGREEMENT 1 2 3 4 5' 6 7 8 9 10 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 9 Before any plane lands or takes off of the strip, its owners must: 1. Every pilot should familiarize himself with the airport, its limitations and obstructions. This should be done from the ground, i.e. pilots should.drive their cars on their first visit. 2. Have on file with the Lessor, and the owners of Parcels 2 and 3 (as described on that certain Parcel Map filed on March 30, 1987, in Book 107.of Maps, at page'14, in the office of the Recorder of the County of Butte, State of California), a copy of a prepaid annual insurance policy for each plane that is going to operate at the Hog Ranch Airport. Such policy shall be in an amount not less than $1,000,000 in liability and personal injury coverage, and such policy shall name, as additional insureds, the Lessor and the owners of Parcels 2 and 3, as described above. The amount of such policy may be increased by ten percent (10%) per year at the request of the Lessor, and either owner of Parcels 2 or 3 (two of three) . 3. Guest pilots must have a current FAA private license and at least 250 hours of pilot in command time. 4. Be properly instructed by the host or Lessee about the following: *Traffic patterns: #16 -left hand;.#34-right hand (see map attached. *Obstructions -(trees and PG&E wires; that the marker wires -8- LEASE AGREEMENT 11 N N 12 UZ m Lu Q z m 13 i 14 —� �+ G of U p i a 15 U - ` V 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 9 Before any plane lands or takes off of the strip, its owners must: 1. Every pilot should familiarize himself with the airport, its limitations and obstructions. This should be done from the ground, i.e. pilots should.drive their cars on their first visit. 2. Have on file with the Lessor, and the owners of Parcels 2 and 3 (as described on that certain Parcel Map filed on March 30, 1987, in Book 107.of Maps, at page'14, in the office of the Recorder of the County of Butte, State of California), a copy of a prepaid annual insurance policy for each plane that is going to operate at the Hog Ranch Airport. Such policy shall be in an amount not less than $1,000,000 in liability and personal injury coverage, and such policy shall name, as additional insureds, the Lessor and the owners of Parcels 2 and 3, as described above. The amount of such policy may be increased by ten percent (10%) per year at the request of the Lessor, and either owner of Parcels 2 or 3 (two of three) . 3. Guest pilots must have a current FAA private license and at least 250 hours of pilot in command time. 4. Be properly instructed by the host or Lessee about the following: *Traffic patterns: #16 -left hand;.#34-right hand (see map attached. *Obstructions -(trees and PG&E wires; that the marker wires -8- LEASE AGREEMENT • 1 at the north end are 10 feet.south of and five feet lower" 2 than the PG&E wires). Power lines are obscured by trees 3 while landing on 16 or taking off on 34. A steep descent 4 over the trees, while coming in to 16, will put you in the 5 power lines! 6 *Length and width of runway: 1900 feet long with 7 obstructions at both ends. Surfaced portion is 25 feet 8 wide. 9 *That there are fences on both sides of the runway; space 10 between fences is 100 feet. 11 *The fact that the runway is also a road shared by horses, Z N12 people and cars. Pilots should always fly down the runway LuN z 13 at 700 feet MSL to check for traffic and warn others of O X14pending landing. (Horse people know that a plane that n U U" p a `15 flies by at 700 feet MSL will be landing soon.) U 16 *To avoid the Little League fields; to avoid the house off 17 the south end of the runway, .and houses in general; to 18 avoid the golf course. 19 *Because of the trees and wires obstructing both ends, the 20 effective length of the runway is about 1400.feet. 21 Aircraft owners should know that they can easily take off 22 and clear a 75 foot obstacle in 1900 feet. 23 *Hog Ranch Airport is a day VFR airport only. 24 *Fly by's are to be 500 feet AGL minimum (700 feet MSL); 25 *Take offs are generally to the north; landings are to the 26 south. -9- LEASE AGREEMENT . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 10 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 *Visitors are to take the taxiway midway on field and park near their host's house. *The airstrip is for owners and guests, not for all the pilots who want to fly in to tournaments held at Sky Lake. Unfortunately, due to the conditions of the permit, those .such pilots have to go to Municipal or Ranchero Airports. For those persons.who live at Sky Lake.and have chosen not to buy an airport right, please advise your flying friends that they should use the other airports in town, and not buzz the lake when they come or go. Overuse and abuse may be cause for revocation of the airport permits by governmental authorities. SECTION SIXTEEN WAIVERS The failure of Lessor to insist on a strict performance of any of the terms and conditions hereof shall be deemed a waiver of the rights or remedies that Lessor may have regarding that specific instance only, and shall not be deemed a waiver of any subsequent breach or default in any terms and conditions. NOTICE r All notices to be given with respect to -this lease shall be in writing. Each notice shall be sent by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, -and return receipt requested, to the party'to be notified at the address set forth herein, or at such other address as either party may from time to --10- LEASE AGREEMENT 11 y12 ZtnN r G� m yy v w W Q z ; m 13 ] u] y R O m ? 14 < C a U a Q�p`15 U = J. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 *Visitors are to take the taxiway midway on field and park near their host's house. *The airstrip is for owners and guests, not for all the pilots who want to fly in to tournaments held at Sky Lake. Unfortunately, due to the conditions of the permit, those .such pilots have to go to Municipal or Ranchero Airports. For those persons.who live at Sky Lake.and have chosen not to buy an airport right, please advise your flying friends that they should use the other airports in town, and not buzz the lake when they come or go. Overuse and abuse may be cause for revocation of the airport permits by governmental authorities. SECTION SIXTEEN WAIVERS The failure of Lessor to insist on a strict performance of any of the terms and conditions hereof shall be deemed a waiver of the rights or remedies that Lessor may have regarding that specific instance only, and shall not be deemed a waiver of any subsequent breach or default in any terms and conditions. NOTICE r All notices to be given with respect to -this lease shall be in writing. Each notice shall be sent by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, -and return receipt requested, to the party'to be notified at the address set forth herein, or at such other address as either party may from time to --10- LEASE AGREEMENT 1 time designate in writing. 2 Every notice shall be deemed to have been given at the 3 time it shall be deposited in the United States mails in the 4 manner prescribed herein. Nothing contained herein shall be 5 construed to preclude personal service of any notice in the 6 manner prescribed for personal service of a summons or other 7 legal process. 8 SECTION EIGHTEEN 9 ARBITRATION 10 In any situation where there is a'dispute concerning 11 this lease, the settlement of such dispute or question shall x al u U be by arbitration, in accordance with the current rules of u Z > ^12 m13 the Butte County Superior Court for the.State of California, N z p � u Z14 and judgment on the award rendered may be entered in any 3 v U" 0 E W15 court having jurisdiction thereof. U 16 SECTION NINETEEN 17 ASSIGNMENT 18' It is anticipated that both Lessor -and Lessee may sell 19 or assign their interests in this lease. 20 SECTION TWENTY 21 SURRENDER OF POSSESSION 22 Lessee shall, on the last day of the term, or on earlier 23 termination and'forfeiture of the lease, peaceably and quietly 24 surrender and deliver the demised premises to Lessor, free 25 of subtenancies, including all buildings, if any, additions, 26 and improvements constructed or placed thereon by Lessee, -11- LEASE AGREEMENT e::cept moveable fixtures, all in good condition and repair. SECTION TWENTY-ONE TOTAL AGREEMENT, APPLICABLE TO SUCCESSORS i This lease contains the entire agreement between the parties and cannot be changed or terminated except by a written instrument subsequently executed by the parties hereto. This lease, and the terms and conditions hereof, apply to and are binding upon the heirs, legal representatives, suc- cessors, and assigns of both parties. SECTION TWENTY-TWO TIME OF THE ESSENCE Time is of the essence in all provisionsof this lease. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this lease at Chico, California., this day of , Address: (LESSOR) I Address: (LESSEE) I CLIFFORD JOHNSEN LESSOR -12- LEASE AGREEMENT LESSEE .. 1 EXHIBIT "A" STILLWATER AIRPORT RUNWAY DESCRIPTION All that portion of the real property described on that certain parcel map filed in the office of the Recorder, County of Butte, State of California in book 107 of Maps at page 14, under the names of Clifford N. Johnsen and Kenneth and Marjorie Houser. Recorders ser. # 87-11395. Beginning at a point lying on the southern property line of parcel 3,. being 115 feet east of the south West corner of parcel 3, thence West a distance of 100.feet along said south property line to a point, thence north on a line ending at a point lying on the northern property line of parcel 2 and being 323 feet east of the north West corner of parcel 2, thence east along said north property line a distance of 100 feet to a point being the north east property corner of parcel 2, thence south along the eastern property line of parcel 2 a distance of 389 feet to a point, thence south 89 24' 27" east a distance of 35 feet to a point, thence south to the point of the beginning. .e q- -'f -Y 3 g E�14 T F B ,At 2 I Pv[ 1A 1.\ 1,11.1 J �1 I P V 6 • I i s II 1 1 4-1 F- AO , _ LAKE 1 n r .60' ROA" 1 Lakt_��S.C..r,?.0 •I.L t oh..-•p2__�rQ0. RetTricTcd q�ra: Resrncte,l (oma rCo1.,...e., vse Gf .III/T Jo A.'Sfh An./ �+n . Sin /i. A&-'- . I.estJ q.-/ Q.JS91\erf only. �1 .Ts A4. J QT eat rr e••.l of I, AM DOGE a aoA7 PovS a 07 N E CSA /,,At p( ,73— 411 COP"PIo-% ar4'q nord, of .vA7ec/1ne C --,d Lit sr 01 Nord. Oa AT kooX )f re$ Aired 75 Q$9 6y . dW.%erS of -t I,pT Pruper-L'I Tv Lam,, ' T f . T� � r ' 10 WL O F( 1 ' ll (�r.IeSJ' P44 �+ ��hJvieS HOG RANCH AIRPORT LEASE ADENDUM SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT The holder of this lease, and all subleases agree to subordinate this lease and all sub—leases to any loans that may be secured by parcels 2 or 3' as described herein, PROVIDED: 1. That loan is made by a.licenced lending institution. 2. That the loan to value ratio does not exceed 80% of appraised value. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,'the parties have executed this lease at Chico, California, This day of Address: (lessor) Clifford Johnsen Lessor Clifford Johnsen Lessee • �n �n n � 01C..YUC E CAME= 2194 OROVILLE CRICO-H`NY DURHAM, CA. 95938-5716 AP � �a�.-e X20 �►-� � '�° �.e 1�7 � -� �16TP0 oyo--obo-m�q_oo") Al r �ANtD t'}i2vv�F� FAWIM /CPr..,c 4 `�.c�,4r/ H:.. C ti � �a . C/t i►�- �/i-or� e -z � G✓e h��e 1,7 u 7'lCe-/ Al � � C re �v�2 rv, C/�e �o y' G}2 i� G1iz L✓ -e �� �vecj T G?c .sT�W 44v eves OrCx a P � � Smarr x e,-� ti-•G.�.e �. ru �•�� z'4 i. a � . ex n �_ 1.e _o - ✓ c.�-o w e12 -e a -- - — — � i I To whom it may concern: c -ALO/ e. ,a, Uf., I live at- -tes Brive in Chico. I aware of the private airstrip on the other side of the .Creek. In the last Z - years or so., none of the operations related to that air strip have ever been bothersome tows. name a To whom it may concern: I live at m2d Estates Drive in Chico. I am aware of the private airstrip on the other side of the Creek. In the last 6 years or so, none of the operations related to that air strip have ever been bothersome to us. name To whom it may concern: I live at A P2A-c Env T Er'tatas nr- v- in ch iI am aware of the private airstrip on the other side of the Creek. In the last 6 years or so, none of the operations related to that air strip have ever been bothersome to us. name To whom it may concern: I live at G1 al► Estates Drive in Chico. I am aware of the private airstrip on the other side of the Creek. In the last 6 years or so, none of the operations related to that air strip have ever been bothersome to us. - name f • To whom it may concern: W] I live at rive in Chico. I am aware of the private airstrip on the other side of the Creek. In the last 6 years or so, none of the operations related to that air strip have ever been bothersome to us: name To whom it may concern: 'l I live at Estates Drive in Chico. I am aware, of the pri a e airstrip on the other side of the Creek. In the las 6 yea o so, non of the operations related to that air st ave ever been bothersome to us.. n e To whom it may concern: • I live at C Estates Drive in Chico. I am aware of the private airstrip on the other side of the Creek. In the last 6 years or so, none of the operations related to that air strip have ever been bothersome to us. To whom it may concern: I live at Estates Drive in Chico. I a< notM' aware of the private airstrip on the other side of the Creek. In the last 6.years or so, none of the operations related to that air strip have ever been bothersome to us. name To whom it may concern: I live at -91/6 Estates Drive in Chico. I am not aware of the private airstrip on the other side of the Creek. In the last 6 years or so, none of the operations related to that air strip have ever been bothersome to us. To whom it may concern: I live at �440 At-ates Drive in Chico. I am not aware of the private airstrip on the other side of the Creek In the last 6 years or so, none of the operations related to that air strip have ever been bothersome to us. na e To whom it may concern: I live at 3 Estates Drive in Chico. I am not aware of the private airstrip on the other side of the Creek. In the last 6 years or so, none of the operations related to that air strip have ever been bothersome to us.' To whom it may concern: I live • 0 ata�41 Pw—�&tates Drive in Chico. I am not aware of the private airstrip on the other side of the Creek. In the last 6 years.or so, none of the operations related to that air -strip have ever been bothersome to us. To whom it may concern: I live at f� rA i Estates Drive in Chico. I am not aware of theprivate airstrip on the other side of the Creek. In the last 6 years or so, none of the operations related to that air strip have ever been bothersome to us. name To whom it may concern:. I live at qc/_Estates Drive in Chico: I am not aware of the private airstrip on the other side of the Creek. In the last 6.years or so, none of the operations related to that air strip have ever been bothersome to us. name To whom it may concern: I live atA Estates Drive in.Chico. I am not aware of the private airstrip on the other side of the Creek: In the last 6 years or so, none of the operations related to that air strip have ever been bothersome to us. name To whom it may concern: I live at �Q Estates Drive in Chico. I am not aware of the private airstrip on the other side of the Creek. In the last 6 years or so, none of the operations related to that air strip have ever been bothersome to us. Inter -Departmental Memorandum To: Airport Land Use Commission From: David Hironimus, Planning Department Subject: - -C Ity-of-Chico Referral of Rezone from N -C to PD/R2, AP 48-430-006 and GOo Date: October 7, 1992 This Proposed Rezone is for the Area Reviewed by three members of the Airport Land Use Commission for Drake Homes, Foothill Park Unit 8, at their July 8, 1992 meeting (no quorum present). Attached for reference is the package of information from that meeting. Since the previous meeting the City of Chico has . accepted a Draft Airport Noise Compatibility Program: Aircraft Noise Exposure Map Report. The Report has not yet been adopted. Maps contained in the report indicates that the subject property is located within a noise sensitive area between the 55 dB and 60 dB contours for both existing and all future projections. Policies within the existing Land Use Plan for the subject area indicate. -.-that residential uses should be prohibited. Policies in the existing plan for areas with similar noise characteristics as those discussed above indicate noise control measures should be required in all new residential construction. It should be noted that the existing land use policy was based not only on noise exposure, but also on safety. The project site is located on the extended runway centerline and in a direct line of sight from the airport. Accident statistics contained in the Airport Land Use Planning Handbook prepared by the California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics indicates that 22% of accidents take place within 1 mile of the airport involved. The. site is. approximately 1 mile from the end. of the runway. While the noise exposure maps indicate that there may be cause to revise the land use policies in the area, there has been no change in the safety aspects of the site. Until the land use policies are formally changed, the existing policies prohibiting residential uses are still in effect and must be considered. RECOMMENDATION: Find that the proposed rezone site is in an area that is known to be subject to overflights of both arriving and departing aircraft and related noise and safety hazards and find that the project to rezone AP 48-430-006 and 008 to PD/R2 does not conform to the Policies of the Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan and forward this finding to the City of Chico. r City Of Chico REPORT TO: City. Staff DATE: September 29, 1992 FROM: Planning Staff FILE: A-Zon- 3 (441) SUBJECT: Rezone No. 441 & Foothill Park Unit -8 Subdivision (Drake Homes) - Eaton Rd. and East Lassen Ave. GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Drake Homes, P.O. Box 1448, Chico, CA 95927 OWNER: Same REQUESTED ACTION: Rezone PURPOSE: To rezone to PD/R-2 Planned Development Medium Density Residential, and change provisions of 19.40.050 for minimum lot size and lot width (see attached) to create 71 lots for development with duplexes (or attached single family dwellings). LOCATION: North of East Lassen Ave., west and south of Eaton Road EXISTING ZONING: N -C Neighborhood Commercial, limited by the Northeast Chico Spec fic Plan to office development with other uses permitted by use permit. ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: 048-430-006 and 008 SIZE: 19.5 acres EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant Land SURROUNDING LAND USE: N Airport Clear Zone/Single Family Residential - Zoned R-2 S Church/Multiple Family Residential - Zoned N -C E Single Family Residential - Zoned R-2 W Office Development - Zoned N -C GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Neighborhood Commercial - limited by the Northeast Chico Specific Plan to office development ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Focused EIR ADDENDUM TO APPLICATION FOR REZONING AP #'S 4843-06 & 08 FROM NC TO P.D. R-2 The requested zoning to P.D. R-2 is requested in order to change provisions of chapter 19.40 of the Land Use Regulations of the City of Chico as follows: 19.40.050 minimum lot size A. The minimum interim lot width at the setback line to be changed from 45 feet to 35 feet. B. The minimum interior lot area to be changed from 4000 square feet to 3500 square feet. C. The minimum corner lot width at the setback line from 50 feet to 45 feet. All other provisions of chapter 19.4cof the Land Use Regulations of the City of Chico are to be complied with in full. ` SITE.. E o 0 SYg`M01 Cq fE,K t EATON ROAD • �G 9 i y�C cCp; yo9�'�e.; yqo • . . � tik 9,y Lc!� 9y 9 LUPIN 9 P 99 L� AV E. W > > Q l a a 1 Vl Z N a Q H W cr. t z 2 ¢ o O O u U 2 EAST AvE. ' LOCATION MAP i NO Sca.LE � L 'J T u PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED HOMES ul _Pfi:fil PGRKING PS►RK1lG 7TALL 15T&LL TYPICAL OFFSITE PARKING AND DRIVEWAY CONFIGURATION LAYOUT SCALE I" = 40' 1i 3NOZ HY313 lHodufY / �\ 1 / � � 3nN3n� N7SSvl 9 / �i R, iq :� a ■° a • n II I ° W � W / i H 3NOZ HY313 lHodufY / �\ 1 / � � 3nN3n� N7SSvl 9 S cN trfYr xLiYd .7-71f{1oad i Sp�3Hy�\ / R, iq :� a ■° a � � 1� e! INA ;, S cN trfYr xLiYd .7-71f{1oad i Sp�3Hy�\ / j d �. .. -TL ♦ ' f • . � _.._ ,� rt%tet ynr� 4 ^h 4N1SYA11410 M�,A _ J� .. �h Y: � � +.4'?[� - � � 5��<yf �' .}A .+� :G'YF�+" "Zw-'`�� �+iS.�y�.�.''iisa4-�`.ta;.� Lw �S�,J� �'*T.�� , Ci:a ta of Chico :REPORT Li ::t �tf y✓#*�{LL C.�?ir wL ' .cry ��# S . � 7 ,yy44e 3 - • i ' ; sZ �; . �Yj 1.: q'5�5,ti� .�e: to t...`}y,�t 0.�. {" y.�gT�i•' fit, TO: City Staff DATE: September 29, W ti h � 'TL i •�� Y FROM: Planning Staff FILE:, A-Zori- 3 (441) SUBJECT: Rezone No. 441 & Foothill Park Unit -8 Subdivision (Drake Homes) - Eaton Rd. and East Lassen Ave: GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Drake Homes, P.O. Box 1448, Chico, CA 95927 OWNER: Same REQUESTED ACTION: Rezone PURPOSE: To rezone to PD/R-2 Planned Development Medium Density Residential, and change provisions of 19.40.050 for minimum lot size and lot width (see attached) to create 71 lots for development with duplexes (or attached single family dwellings). LOCATION: North of East Lassen Ave., west and south of Eaton Road EXISTING ZONING: N -C Neighborhood Commercial, limited by the Northeast Chico Specific Plan to office development with other uses permitted by use permit. ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: 048-430-006 and 008 SIZE: 19.5 acres EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant Land SURROUNDING LAND USE: N Airport Clear Zone/Single Family Residential - Zoned R-2 S-Church/Multiple Family Residential - Zoned N -C E Single Family Residential - Zoned R-2 W Office Development - Zoned N -C GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Neighborhood Commercial - limited by the Northeast Chico Specific Plan to office development. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Focused EIR The requested zoning to P.D. R-2 is requested in order to change provisions of chapter 19.40 of the Land Use Regulations of the City of Chico as follows: 19.40.050 minimum lot size A. The minimum interim lot width at the setback- line to be changed from .45 feet to 35 feet. B. The minimum interior lot area io be changed from 4000 square feet to 3500 square feet. C. The minimum corner lot width at the setback line from 50 feet to 45 feet. All other provisions of chapter 19.40of the Land Use Regulations of the City of Chico are to be complied with in full. • • uh {w� k.a ��r.rw .%< vi LOCATION MAP No SC: LE T , PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY ATTAI-HEDHOMES I �1 ^Pfi:1.Li± PDRKNG Pb,R(J/dG 7TAL— �T4ll. TYPICAL. OFFSITE PARKING AND DRIVEWAY CONFIGURATION LAYOUT SCALE I"= 4d i \ \ FOOTHILL ?f,RK UNIT NU 5 LASSEN AVENUE` \ / DIS --------_--_ � \ ' 1 c ' / d _ Y IV arhn` S IN ■ � o GLACIER TL— ^� _ / �I r - _ -_E= L^ - . PEAK LANE 7' —1 •oc• F/ f .A _ ..E .:Ej :j ` w ood Al 21 r � I ��(\ S � \ �✓E ppp 'r a N .oa J IDIi :V: w \��--- • � , pyo .,.--• � ____-- w Nit ' � 'O \ '] 10 i f d ROAD D V o a I Io,_ --. -- - - I o- n f( pit� � Rno i iL > liiii{� 4 .g i` s a IE i• • tt� +� S O ^ E ■ ■t fL s • Escec ° E 'IST R AIRnRT CLEAR ZONE Q.4 Z9 IP R •s r E BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION AGENDA III. Approval of Minutes of July 8, 1992 IV. Business 1. Welcome new member(s) of Commission. 2. Airport Facilities and'Land Use Manual - Accept for review. 3. Report - Paradise General Plan Update. 1 4. Status Report - Oroville Municipal Airport Environs Plan text revision 5. Status Report - Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan and Airport Noise Compatibility Program. 6. Business from the floor - (Presentations will be limited to three minutes. The Airport Land Use Commission is prohibited by State Law from taking Action on any item presented if it is not listed on the agenda.) V. Correspondence VI. Referrals to Staff and Formation of Committees VII. Announcements 1. Next meeting is scheduled for October 14, 1992. j f '°�+e;`r�` ���•u•::-3Ws';"gin September 3, 1992 Ms. Lauren Handley 882 Bruce Lane Chico, CA • RE: Meeting with All County Airport Managers Dear Lauren: It has come to the Butte County Airport Land Use Commissions attention that you are now the manager of Ranchaero Airport. We have tried reaching your airport through phone calls but the number has been disconnected and we know of no other number to reach the airport. The Airport Land Use Commissions staff is scheduling an Airport Managers Meeting on September 16, 1992 at 8:45 a.m. located at the Board of Supervisor's Room, Administration Center, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA. If you have a conflicting schedule, please contact me as soon as possible. I can be reached between 8am-5pm at 538-7784. Sincerely, W Jackie O'Brien ALUC Secretary /jlo L A N D O F N AT U RA L W EA L T H A N D BEAUTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397 TELEPHONE: (916) 538-7601 RE: Meeting with All County Airport Managers Dear Lauren: It has come to the Butte County Airport Land Use Commissions attention that you are now the manager of Ranchaero Airport. We have tried reaching your airport through phone calls but the number has been disconnected and we know of no other number to reach the airport. The Airport Land Use Commissions staff is scheduling an Airport Managers Meeting on September 16, 1992 at 8:45 a.m. located at the Board of Supervisor's Room, Administration Center, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA. If you have a conflicting schedule, please contact me as soon as possible. I can be reached between 8am-5pm at 538-7784. Sincerely, W Jackie O'Brien ALUC Secretary /jlo INTER -DEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM TO: Airport Land Use Commissioners and Alternates FROM: Jackie O'Brien, ALUC Secretary SUBJECT: Changes to ALUC By -Laws DATE: October 2, 1992 Enclosed please find ALUC's By -Laws. Please review, we will be discussing possible changes at next weeks meeting. Sorry they are late! Sincerely, Jackie /jlo Regular Agenda $5-494 ilffJbh se? - permit to allow a privately -owned, private -use (1976) airport consisting of a 1600 foot grass runway on property located on the .south side of Marybill Ranch Road, approximately 3/4 mile east of the Midway, identified as AP 40-02-135, south of Chico. Motion: FOUND THAT THE AIRPORT DOES MEET THE ZONING IN THE GENERAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS AND APPROVED. THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PRIVATE AIRPORT IN THIS LOCATION. S M Vote: 1 2 3 4 5 S M Vote: 1 Y 2 Y 3 AB 4 N -5 Y -(Motion-carried) 85-495 State Department of Fish and.Game Deer Herd Study in Butte County. Motion: ESTABLISHED FEE OF $6.00 FOR SALE OF THE DOCUMENT TO THE PUBLIC. M S Vote: 1 Y 2 Y 3 AB 4 Y 5 Y (Motion carried) 85-496 Community Development Block Grant- audit - proposals. have been solicited for the conduct of the. county's Community Development Block Grant audit of programs for the 'period July 1, 1982 through June 30, 1985. Motion: ACCEPTED THE PROPOSAL OF MATSON AND ISOM ACCOUNTANCY CORPORATION TO PERFORM THE WORK AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED $6,850. M S Vote: 1 Y 2 Y 3 AB 4 Y' 5 Y (Motion carried) Recess: The Board recessed at 2:27 p.m. as a Board of Supervisors to sit as the Air Pollution Control District Board'of- Directors. Reconvene: The Board reconvened at 2:29 p.m. as a Board of Supervisors. Page 76 c July 16, 1985 .y10/12/2992 10:38 916-347-5780 Vickie Leppik Area Representative October 12, 1992 Mr. Cliff Johnsen 200 Stillwater Drive Chico, CA 95928 Dear Mr. Johnsen, VICKIE - HOMESEEKERS PAGE 02 yt N Published by Century Publishing Company Real Estate Publics ions Since 1971 Coeur d'Alene Idaho Thank you for calling to my attention the error in your advertising copy in the September 11th issue of Home Seekers., Zt has been noted that all future advertising 'of this property will be corrected to state; l 2nd paragraph I "Each house has it's o. -n dock and boat house. This home has access to' a 2,000 ft. surfaced runway and a taxiway to its own hanger." I, I apologize for the confusion caused by the previous advertisement. If I can be of any further assistance, please don't hesitate to let me know. Sincerely, ( ickie Lepp Area Representative (91.6) 347-5780 =----------------------.-------- _------------------------------------ ---- -=------- 10/12/1992 10:38 916-347-5780 VICKIE - HOMESEEKERS Val. 99 No. 9 NV fty......"I "w It In Nomefte ma NORTH VALLEY, CALIFORNIA PAGE 03 a .. .. PrInted by CENTURY PUSLISHINQ COMPANY P,O, Box 730 ® Copyright HomsSsskers Mag"ns. 1002 Coeur d'Alene, ID 83814 INDEX OF ADVERTISERS BaywoodCompany ......... ................ ..................................................................:.....:....................... „ 34. as Better Homea Realty 22.23 BennettRealty ...........................................:......................................:.......................................... ........................................................................ ...... . ... Birkes Realty.......................................................:...........................................................................................................................:...........:...............................................................7 BirkesRealty • Ed Armitage............................................................................................................................................:.............................................................................................e Can ills Ru..................................:......................................................................................................:.......................................ad for'ty......................................................................... Cantarbury Investments, Inc.........................:........:.::..:.................::.........:..............................................................................................................:.................:................................91) Century21. First Place..........................................................................................:....................................................................................................................................................27 Century 21, Harry Jamsa Co................ ............................ ............:........,.,.,, 40 Century 21, Jeffries Lydon..............................................................................................:..:.....................:.....................:............................................................................................3a Century 21. Plonow Realty, Inc..t..........................:::..............:................................ ..................... ....11 Century 21, Results Realty ............. ................................................................................................ -............................................. ,.......................................................................... ,.4I) Century 21 r Rodgws It Associates(CHICO)...........................................................................................................................................................................................................20, 21 Century 21, Rodgws Really (OROVILLE)............................................................................................:.....................................................:..................................................................19 Coldwai Banker, Dufour Realty..............................:....................................................:.....:....:...:..........:.........................................................:.....................:...................................2.4 Co:.T l Banker. Pendwoea Real Estate .............................:...:..............::..............................................................::.........:.........:.........................................................................30, 31 Ccdwat9aAM Ponderole - Forrest Lindgren.......................................:...............:.................................................................................................................................:.......:.........31 COidwell Banker. Ponderosa - Joe CaldwellBanker, Penderow - Steve Wlniems..............................................................................................::.::.::....:............:.................:.....................................::.............................as Connections Real Estate Company............................................................................................................................................................:................................................................97 Contractors Real Estate Exchange • Oliff Johnsen.....................................................................................::................................................................................................................39 CorningRealty ......................................................................................................................:....................................................................................................................................49 E,N. color Realty ................................... ................:......:.......:..:...................:.....................................................:...................::.............................................:.............................42, as Eden Roc Realty, Inc ........................ ...,..,,.,.,.,,.,,.,..,...,,,,,..............,.......,........,:........,:.......,,.,.,.,,...,...,.....,.......,,,.........,,.,.a ERAGinter rl Brown, Meadowood Estates (ORLAND) . .........................................:.......:.:......................................................................................................................... ....... 0 .,SERA Ginter A Brown (ORLAND).. ................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... .............4a ERANetwork Rol Eatola (CHICO MALL)................................................................::..................................................................................................................................................tag ERANetwork Real Estate (PARADISE) .................... ..............:.................................................................................................................................. ..,,......,,.,.....68 GilsonRul E$tste - Better Horriss A awdom...................................... .:,,.,,.,,.,:,,................................,:,.....,,:.....,..,.....,,,,....,,,,.,,,:.......,.,.........,............:.e4 Gould Properties. ................................ ....:,,,.....,.,.,,,...,.,,.,,,...,,,.,....,...............................,,,....,.:,..............,...........,....39 GreanOergProperties...................................................................................................:................................ ...7 HeartReally......................................................................::...:.....................:.......................................................:....................................................................................................49 ZP-U•Sen of Chico....................................................................................................::.::...:..:...::..........:...............................................................:.:.............".,,.,....,..,.,I..............,,,Be Ingram A Shelton Realtors............... ..........,,.,.,,,,:,.....,.,,,,,,,,,,,,.,:,,,,.,..............................,...,,........,.,,,......,24, 26 Ingrama Shelton Realtors - Lon Allison................... .,.....,.................................................,.........,:,,....,,,,:::,.:,,,......,,,,..,,,.,,...,,,...,,..........,..................,,...2a Ingram d Shelton Realtors - Scott Dlllinghom..........................................................................:...................................................................................................................................29 McKenz4.8ramiage, Inc, ..................:.:::...........................................................................................37 Maclay Rally • Sandra Penny ..................................................................................:. .:............................................................................................................................................50 MountainValley Real Estate........................................................................................................................:..:............................................................................................................39 North Star Real Estate ............................................. ... e2 —�Nonharn Callremla Propemas - NCP.........................:.:................:..........................................................................:...........................:.......................................................................41 ThePRUDENTIAL - Alpine Real Estate...................................................................... .................... :..................................................... ............... .... ... .... .................................. ", 91 RainbowRealty, . . .... ......... ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 04 Real Estate Services REALTYWORLD; Country Estates.....:........................................................................................:...........:......:.......................................................................................................1e-17 REALTYWORLD, Country Estate$ - Maris Outman ....................................... ,.,......:,.,,,..,,,,.,,,,..,....,..,..,.,.,.....,.........,..,.,..........,,.,........,....,,.,,.....,,......,......,,r......,..,...,.,...........,.,.,......14 REALTYWORLD, Dope Realty.......................:.............................................•,,..................................,.........,.....,.,,.,,,.,,..,,.,......,,,.,...,,,,...,,,,,.,,.....,...........,.,.......................:,........,12, 13 RF/MAX of Chico - Mark Chrl$Co................................... .,..,.........,:.,.,,.,.,,.,,,,.,,.,,.,..:,,........,.................,.,,.............,..........,..,:,,,......,,,,....,.,,,..,.,,,.,..,,........,..,..,,..,.,..40 RE/MAX of Chlto - Chanes Kolemen...................................................................................................................:...............................................•........................,.......,.,..,.,,,,...,....,..47 RE/MAX of Chico - 9nan McLean........................................................................:...................................................................................:..................................................................47 6e1tiesRol Estate,,,,;,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,;,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, a Sun Country Realty -The REAL ESTATE Shoppe...................................................................:.:.:..................................................:.............................................................................49 TehamaReel Estate.................................................................................:.......:...............:........:...............................................................:.......................:......:...:.......................2e, 20 Town S Country Properties (OROftl,E).................................................. .,:................................, Town8 Country Properties (RED BLUFF) .......................... .............................................................................................................................................a2 Unlimited Real Estate. (CANYONVILLE, OREGON) ............................................. ............................................................................. ............1 ................... st WasthiilPropertisa . Robin Fox............................:............:.............:.......................................................:.....................................................................1s COW All real estate advertising In thla magazine Is subject to the Federal Fair Housing Act of 1009, which makes it Illegal to advertise 'any preference, limitation or discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin, or an Intention to make any such preference, limitation or dlscrlminatlon.' This magazine will not knowingly acoept any advertising for real estate which IS In YWatlon of tris law. Naltner advertisers nor Homeseekers are responsible for any errors In the ad copy. The publisher reserves the right to refuse Tny Qdvertielpe which it p deems unsuitable for ublicetlon. The Index Is compliments of the publisher and therefore no liability Is assumed for errors or omsale of idv33 Ah A N OCTOBER 10, 1992 DEAR MR. HIRONIMUS, I AM RESIGNING MY POSITION AS AN ALTERNATE COMMISSIONER ON THE AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION EFFECTIVE TODAY. THE DEMANDS OF MY PROFESSIONAL WORK AND A NEW AND TIME CONSUMING PERSONAL ACTIVITY HAVE ELIMINATED MY FREE TIME. I CERTAINLY HAVE ENJOYED MY PARTICIPATION ON THE COMMISSION AS THE TOPICS DEALT WITH WERE INTERESTING AND AT TIMES CHALLENGING. I HOPE TO BE ABLE TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS AGAIN BUT IT WILL HAVE'.TO BE'AFTER I RETIRE. SINCERELY YOURS, w�tir A101 STEPHEN D. SCHWARTZ, MD CHIEF e F• o. o o e 00 o e C�UNty JOHN S. BLACKLOCK CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER ADMINISTRATIVE COUNTY OF BUT'T'E 25 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965.3380 Telephone: (916) 538-7631 Fax: (916) 538-7120 October 8, 1992 Dr. Stephen'Schwartz Airport Land Use Planning Commission 1985 Hooker Oak Avenue Chico, CA 95926 Dear Dr. Schwartz: Re:' Statement of Economic Interests Type of Statement: Leaving Office Date Due: November 8, 1992 OFFICE Planning Department OCT 9 1992 Orovilie, California MEMBERS OF THE BOARD: HASKEL A. McINTURF JANE DOLAN MARY ANNE HOUX ED McLAUGHLIN LEN FULTON The Political Reform Act of 1974 requires that officials and employees who are designated in the agency's conflict of interest code must file a Statement of Economic Interests Form 730. Our records indicate that you left your position with the Airport Land Use Planning Commission. As an official or employee whose position is designated in the agency's conflict of interest code, you are required to file a leaving office statement of economic interests no later than 30 days after the date you left office. Enclosed you will find Statement of Economic Interest Form 730. Also enclosed is a copy of your disclosure category from the, agency's conflict of interest code which specifies the type of interests you must report. Please complete the enclosed Form 730 and return it to this office. 7371. If you have any questions, please contact my office at 538- Sincerely, t Carol Roach Assistant Clerk of the Board CR/pr Enc. . cc: '.Airport Land Use Planning Commission, Barbra Duncan BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION AGENDA September 16, 1992 v: ••r+: •. •:'.rn vy ::::::w.vrr .. .:: v.v: v::::::••x•{ii{.::::::::.}}}}}}}:?{;ti:{^: ff ... r%{: nti }4.{ " :\.v..tini:{r{{{••:: i•: ii'!.{{.}:?{{{?:,..{{{{{v t{ v..x...\\.v.. \..L .:.::................{-0Cvi��r.:.:.:.......n....v...... rv.n ....... ...... ..{.::.:. {.'3..}:{.:ti::: {.:{Fx•:: •v::?::{{xr: r.::5} TIME: 9:00 a.m. PLACE: Board of Supervisor's Room County Administration 25 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 I. Pledge of Allegiance II. Roll Call III. Approval of Minutes of July 8, 1992 IV. Business 1. Welcome new member(s) of Commission. 2. Airport Facilities and Land Use Manual - Accept for review. 3. Report - Paradise General Plan Update. 4. Status Report - Oroville Municipal Airport Environs Plan text revision S. Status Report - Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan and Airport Noise Compatibility Program. 6. Business from the floor (Presentations will be limited to three minutes. The Airport' Land Use Commission is prohibited by State Law from taking Action on any item presented if it is not listed on the agenda.) V. Correspondence VI. Referrals to Staff and Formation of Committees VII. Announcements 1. Next meeting is scheduled for October 14, 1992. _r counAf leatte �S;��i%I�•Sa. ; fir. 1 U'. LAND � — _� - OF NATURAL W EA LTH AND BEAU PLANNING DEPARTMENT 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397 TELEPHONE: (916) 538-7601 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION AGENDA September 16, 1992 v: ••r+: •. •:'.rn vy ::::::w.vrr .. .:: v.v: v::::::••x•{ii{.::::::::.}}}}}}}:?{;ti:{^: ff ... r%{: nti }4.{ " :\.v..tini:{r{{{••:: i•: ii'!.{{.}:?{{{?:,..{{{{{v t{ v..x...\\.v.. \..L .:.::................{-0Cvi��r.:.:.:.......n....v...... rv.n ....... ...... ..{.::.:. {.'3..}:{.:ti::: {.:{Fx•:: •v::?::{{xr: r.::5} TIME: 9:00 a.m. PLACE: Board of Supervisor's Room County Administration 25 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 I. Pledge of Allegiance II. Roll Call III. Approval of Minutes of July 8, 1992 IV. Business 1. Welcome new member(s) of Commission. 2. Airport Facilities and Land Use Manual - Accept for review. 3. Report - Paradise General Plan Update. 4. Status Report - Oroville Municipal Airport Environs Plan text revision S. Status Report - Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan and Airport Noise Compatibility Program. 6. Business from the floor (Presentations will be limited to three minutes. The Airport' Land Use Commission is prohibited by State Law from taking Action on any item presented if it is not listed on the agenda.) V. Correspondence VI. Referrals to Staff and Formation of Committees VII. Announcements 1. Next meeting is scheduled for October 14, 1992. BUTTE COUN'T'Y AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION DRAFT MINUTES - September 16, 1992 The meeting of the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) was called to order at 9:04 a.m. on September 16,-1992, in the Board of Supervisors' Room, County Administration . Center, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California. I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - .II... ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners - Franklin, Gerst, _ Lambert, Crotts, Stephens, Koch and.. Chairman Rossas- _ Absent: - No: one Also Present: David Hironimus, -Senior Planner, -Jackie O'Brien, Secretary Mike Crump, City. of Oroville The following item was taken out of order. IV. BUSINESS 1. Welcome new member(s) of Commission Staff welcomed Commissioner Fred Gerst and Bob Koch to the commission. Fred Gerst was appointed by the Board of Supervisors and Tom Lando was appointed by the Airport Managers. Staff received a letter from Tom Lando appointed Bob Koch as his representative. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF July 8, 1992 June 10, 1992 minutes will be mailed .to the Commission. Any changes of the June and July 8, 1992 minutes will be given. to the clerk. Minutes will. be approved at the October 14 meeting. 1 ME BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - September 16, 1992 - IV. BUSINESS 2. Airport Facilities and Land Use Manual - Accept for Review. Staff received -a note from Mike- McClintock, .consultant that prepared the manual saying that the report should be considered semi-final: If the . Commission has any comments or corrections it should -be. forwarded - to staff. The following items were._ discussed- as being needed to be revised: 1. Update of new members on the Airport_ Land Use Commission. 2. Manager of Ranchaero Airport. 3. Oroville Hospital Heliport. - 4. Gridley Hospital Heliport. 5. Location map of the Landing Area of Sea Plane Base of Lake Oroville and omission of island. # # # # # # # # # # # # 3. Report - Paradise General Plan Update. Staff said the Town of Paradise is currently updating their General Plan. The plan does touch into the overflight areas of the Paradise Skypark. Staff said the document is available for review. Staff said he didn't see any problems with seeing the constraints of the airport. He said the public comment period is still open. 4. Status Report - Oroville Municipal Airport Environs Plan text revision. Staff said Airport Land Use Plan for Oroville Airport needs work on text. Staff said the text is adequate and changes are up to the Commission. He said ALUC needs to work with the airport and with the newly adopted Master Plan. Staff stated that Commissioner -Stevens, Rossas and ' Walter are on the Committee to review that text revision. Chairman Rossas said there is -no one else on the Commission from the Oroville area, and it might be appropriate when he appoints' an Alternate, they could serve as Commissioner Walter's replacement. Staff said we need to get this moving and to either make changes. or let them know we are happy the way it is. 2 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT. LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - September 16, 1992 - Mike Crump, City of Oroville, said Oroville has completed the. Master Plan and the city is also updating their General Plan. He said the committee looked at the Airport and land use plans and is back to the consultant to do administrative revisions. Staff said. from staffs viewpoint, he would like to see .getting away from- the number of - people per.' acre criteria 'and go to a type of use criteria. There *was a'brief discussion. Mr: Crump said 'FAA is given Oroville verbal- notification of receiving a $3.5 million grant . to extend runway 119 to the.:south. He said . the. -city is - involved in- doing a wetlands delineation and working with the Corps of Engineers in trying to get the plans approved. If this can be_ approved irr a timely manner `they .are- looking at starting construction- next spring. He said the following year the State promises another approximate $3 million to do more tax weight tie down area and future T hanger areas in - the central partof the airport. He said the City is in possession of 2 or _ 3 parcels to the south of the airport. He said the City Council approved the grant. for FAA to reimburse the City 90 percent. There was a brief discussion of time limits the City is having to work under for the grant money. This item will be forwarded to the November meeting for an update. s s s s s s s s s s s s s s S. Status Report - Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan and Airport Noise Compatibility Program. Copies of the draft noise compatibility program was .handed out to the .Commission. Commissioner Koch said there was a public, staff and consultant meeting on September 3, 1992. He said this is the first -phase of. a two page report. He said the Environs Study is the. ultimate goal. He said the consultant is now working on phase two. He said they expect this report to be done within the next 3 months. And at that time a formal public hearing will be held. He said -there were some changes . in the noise compatibility report. Commissioner Crotts said most of the comments came from "Save Our Skies" (S.O.S.). Staff said there is no official adoption of the new plan. s s s s s s s s s s s s s s 3 • BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - September 16, 1992 - 6. Business from the floor. . None - i - . V.. CORRESPONDENCE None. VI. REFERRALS TO STAFF AND FORMATION OF COMMITTEES Commissioner Koch . asked what Committees are in effect at this time. Staff said there is a committee for revision of the ByLaws. Chairman Rossas asked if a committee is still needed. Staff will mail copies of ByLaws to the Commission and if any changes should be made to let staff know. There was a brief discussion on the changing of the ByLaws. Staff stated there is a committee consisting of Commissioners Crotts and Rossas for the Oroville Airport Land Use text revision: VII. ANNOUNCEMENTS Staff reported the Manager of Ranchaero Airport is closing down their operation and Mack Hill has leased the property to someone else and they will be continuing the operation. Staff asked those Commissioners who do not have alternates to appoint someone as soon as possible for back up reasons. The next. -meeting is scheduled for October 14, 1992. _ - VIII. ADJOURNNEENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:12 a.m. . Signed: JIM ROSSAS, Chairman BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION 4 i -.... utt Count : k e y LAND OF NATURAL WEALTH AND BEAUTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT t 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397 TELEPHONE: (916) 538-7601, is t BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION AGENDA July 8, 1992 {•l:•}:?ti•:vxk\ .v..v:... i.\ ::... }}: \.J]CJC .v.S.:W..i :fi. \..v..t '4ti.v. i..i.k 'ti inv.�Y:. > ':.:. iv {iti.v.Jv:.b .SJ..v}.iii.i}:%+f.•Y/.??\ti}}}}:vEv:i+Y}/Y}}Yhi}Yinh^H.?vW.t�.v\.:r},f.3S}};p}Y.{.'fA3ri:3h+ti}}}Y/1NbYYIYY:Yb::iv}Y.: is i.3nCNw.i TIME: 9:00 a.m. PLACE: Board of Supervisor's Room County Administration 25 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 I. Pledge of Allegiance II. Roll Call III. Approval of Minutes of May 13, 1992 IV. Business 1. Resolutions of appreciation for Commissioners Davis and Walter 2.. Review - Drake Homes, Potential for residential development on property now zoned N -C (Neighborhood Commercial) located in Foothill Park, Unit 8, adjacent to the southerly end of the Chico Municipal Airport Runway Protection Zone. 3. Review - Dept of Transportation, Potential school site, CUSD, within 2 miles of Chico Municipal Airport. 4. Status Report - Oroville Municipal Airport Environs Plan text revision 5. Status Report - Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan. 6. Business from the floor - (Presentations will be limited to three minutes. The Airport Land Use Commission is prohibited by State Law from taking Action on any item presented if it is not listed on the agenda.) V. Correspondence VI. Referrals to Staff and Formation of Committees VII. Announcements 1. Next meeting is scheduled for August 12, 1992. (David Hironimus, Staff, will be absent) BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT. LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - July 8, 1992 The meeting of the Airport Land .Use Commission (ALUC) was called to order at 9:06 a.m. on July 8, 1992, in the Board of Supervisors' Room, County Administration Center, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California. I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE H. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Schwartz, Crotts and ' Chairman Rossas Absent: Commissioners Stevens and Franklin Also Present: David Hironimus, Senior Planner Bob Koch, City; of. Chico Nick . Ellena, Chico Enterprise Alternate Commissioner Gerst Commissioner Lambert Jackie O'Brien, Secretary There was no quorum present. 'Staff stated that Commissioner Walter,, appointed by. the Board of Supervisors has resigned. Commissioner Davis represented airport managers has retired and resigned from the .commission. Staff said that the Board of Supervisor's has not' appointed anyone to these positions yet. -Staff said that he has contacted the airport "managers asking . for someone to be appointed to this position. . It was a consensus• of the Commission to proceed with the meeting for informational purposes only. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF June, 10, 1992 The minutes can not be approved at this time. IV. BUSINESS f Resolutions of appreciation for Commissioners Davis and Walter's. There was a consensus of the Commission to have the Resolutions ready for the next ' meeting. - r AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - July 8, 1992 Review - Drake Homes. Potential for residential development on property now zoned N -C (Neighborhood Commercial) located in Foothill Park, Unit 8, adjacent to the southerly end of the Chico Municipal Airport Runway Protection Zone. Staff said there has been no official application filed at this time. Drake Homes wanted to get input from ALUC as to what the concerns would be. Staff said Drake Homes is looking at changing the use from N -C and are considering to go residential uses. Staff said since there is no official application, no official action can be taken by ALUC at this time. He said the property is located immediately adjacent to the end of the Clear zone. He said the existing 65 dB CNEL contour comes right up to this area. He said the existing airport environs talks about allowing residential uses under these conditions but the new Environs Plan that the City is working on might not allow for this. Staff said there is a safety concern for noise. The hearing was opened to the public. Tony Simms, representative for Drake Homes, said that there is not enough affordable homes in Chico and this project would make for affordable housing of 140 single family dwellings. He said Chico is updating a new Environs Plan and that the new CNEL lines are being pulled way back and that the noise concerns are getting better with technology, insulation, notice to property owners are given that people know what they are buying when they buy a home in the general area of the airport and are aware of the noise issues. He said Drake Homes has built 100's of homes in the airport environs area. He said after environmental review, he hopes to apply with a tentative subdivision map by the end of 1992. He asked the Commission for direction. He said that Drake Homes is working with the Army Corps of Engineering for additional lands in Foothill Park to be set aside for permanent reserve. Mike Kelly, president of Butte County Taxpayers Association, asked that the Commission look favorably toward this project. He said that Drake Homes are producing affordable homes that Butte County needs so much. He said the buyers are now aware of the close proximity of the airport and can adjust to this. He said tax money that this project would make would help Butte County. Vince Phelan, 3010 North Avenue Chico, stated that Drake Homes does build good quality homes but does not look favorably toward this project. He is opposed of the commercial airline flight training facilities at Chico Municipal airport. Bob Koch, Assisting City Manager of City of Chico he said from the City of Chico standpoint would recommend that any decisions would be deferred because the new CNEL contours have not yet been established and could have a significant impact on rather or not it is appropriate to put residential housing in this particular area. He said the City does receive frequent noise complaints on low flying aircraft that comes from the area north of East Avenue, the area that is in question as well as other places in the 2 AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - July 8, 1992 city. He said the City Council will not take official action on this proposal until after the environs plan is adopted. The hearing was closed to the public. Commissioner Crotts said she would feel uncomfortable making any kind of encouragement at this time until the airport environs plan is updated and because of noise complaints that come in daily from this specific area. Commissioner Schwartz said he is concerned with safety. He said the issue of noise is controllable. He said it is an unfortunate place to want to put a lot of houses because it is at the end of the main runway. Staff said that the City of Chico has commercial zoning in this location which -does not allow for large concentrations of people where in a residential zone it does. Commissioner Schwartz asked about the different noise complaints that the city managers office takes? He asked if there is a log kept of the different. complaints? Mr. Koch said that they come from different areas. He said no log is kept at this time, but would be a good idea to have one started and will see that it is done. It was a consensus of the Commission to wait until the Airport Environs Plan is adopted and more information becomes available. 3. Review - Dept. of Transportation. potential school site. CUSD..within 2 miles of Chico Municipal Airport. Staff said located directly under one of the flight paths from .the McClintock study and near another flight path. Staff said noise does not appear to be .a factor and the existing plan permits Quasi - Public Quasi uses through the Use Permit process. He said without having the new Environs Plan and policies in place it; is, difficult 'to make a finding. Since we are dealing with a school, safety would, be the biggest concern of the Commission. Commissioner Schwartz said safety should be our major concern. He said it is tough when you need a new school with a good, area. Staff said he spoke with, -Jim Michael of Division of Aeronautics and their concerns is that of an alternate site. ' 3. • 1 AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - July 8, 1992 Chairman Rossas said he visited this site and agrees on the safety factor. He said most airplane accidents happen next to airports, and having a school next to an airport would not be a good area- for a school. He said `the sound environment changes the educational system. He said if there is a flight school with a lot of touch and go would ruin teaching because of the noise. He said it is not ,the ideal place to have a school. He said he spoke with a family in that area and they agreed that this is not a good site for a school. Commissioner Crotts said she agrees with Chairman Rossas. She said an alternate location should be found. The hearing was opened to the public. Vince Phelan, said the flight patterns shown on the McClintock Study map are not followed. Commissioner Crotts said she had a problem with the letter from the Division of Aeronautics that is dated after this meeting, July 10, 1992. Staff told Mr. Michaels he would forward a letter with staff recommendations with impressions from the commission. Commissioner Schwartz said staff should inform the site selection committee and let them know that there is a negative action" being taken on this site. Staff said he would notify the Chico Unified School District. 4. Status Revort - Oroville Municival Airport Environs Plan text revision. Chairman Rossas the runway extension is on target. He said the wetlands report is being worked on. He said over half the property has been purchased. He said the zoning is being changed. He said the annexation has not taken place yet. He said they are currently replacing underground fuel tanks. 5. Status Report - Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan. Mr. Koch said Chico's consultant is completing phase I of the project which includes developing the exposure maps, gathering and validating data, land use info and in a draft report will be before Chico Airport Commission on July 23rd meeting. He said once this F11 AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - July 8, 1992 is completed, the consultant will be working on the CNEL contour lines. He said this will hopefully be completed by fall 1992. 6. Business from the floor. Alternate Commissioner Gerst said he has noticed activity happening on 18th Street, Thermalito. Chairman Rossas said this project has come before this commission. Staff said just a corner of the project touched within the 1 mile radius of the clear zone. V. CORRESPONDENCE The first administrative draft of the Airport Land Use Commission policy procedure manuals were handed out to those commissioners and alternates present. Staff asked the Commission to review and comment to the consultant to be included in the final draft. Commissioner Schwartz said the commission should write and compliment the consultant on the excellent work done on the manual. VI. REFERRALS TO STAFF AND FORMATION OF COMMITTEES There was none. VII. ANNOUNCEMENTS 1. The next meeting is scheduled for August 12, 1992. (David Hironimus, Staff' -will not .be present). f It was the., consensus of the Commission to cancel the August 12, 1992 meeting and if something of great importance comes up to notify the Commission. Staff indicated that he will be out of the office for the entire month of August. The next meeting is scheduled for September 9, 1992. VIII. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:15 a.m. H- AIRPORT LAND USE 'COMMISSION MINUTES - July 8, 1992 Signed: 41 VJ41./ 4R0SSAS, Chairman BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 92-01 AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION COUNTY OF BUTTE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION FOR CARL WALTER WHEREAS, Carl Walter, has served the Airport Land Use Commission during the past four years; and WHEREAS, Carl Walter, has exhibited on all occasions the highest impartiality and expertise in the execution of his duties; and WHEREAS, Carl Walter, has enabled the Commission to more effectively perform its duties; and WHEREAS, he is a man of rare intelligence, integrity, wisdom and moral fiber, and his contribution during his term of office with the Commission has been substantial and of great value to Butte County; and, WHEREAS, he has exhibited great knowledge and concern for the orderly development of this County, and has worked diligently toward it's protection. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission takes recognition of and expresses its appreciation for the services of Carl Walter to the County of Butte and the Commissioners, staff members and associates extend sincere appreciation and commend Carl Walter for his service on the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission. FURTHER, that this Resolution be included in the minutes of the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission and that a copy of said Resolution be delivered to Carl Walter, as a testimonial of the sentiments of the Airport Land Use Commission of Butte County. MOVED by Commissioner Schwartz seconded by Commissioner Crotts this Resolution was passed on this 8th day of July, 1992. Nkd Lambert —quiz Rossas Dr. Stephen' Schwartz RESOLUTION NO. 92-02 AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION COUNTY OF BUTTE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION FOR FRED DAMS WHEREAS, Fred Davis, has served the Airport Land Use Commission during the past eight years; and WHEREAS, Fred Davis, has .exhibited on all occasions the highest impartiality and expertise in the execution of his duties, and WHEREAS, Fred Davis, has enabled the Commission to more effectively perform its duties; and WHEREAS, he is a man of rare intelligence, integrity, wisdom and moral fiber, and his contribution during his term of office with the Commission has been substantial and of great value to Butte County; and WHEREAS, he has exhibited great knowledge and concern for the orderly development of this County, and has worked diligently toward it's protection. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission takes recognition of and expresses its appreciation for the services of Fred Davis to the County of Butte and the Commissioners, staff members and associates extend sincere appreciation and commend Fred Davis for his service on the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission. FURTHER, that this Resolution be included in the minutes of the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission and that a copy of said Resolution be delivered to Fred Davis, as a testimonial of the sentiments of the Airport Land Use Commission of Butte County. MOVED by Commissioner Schwartz , seconded by Commissioner Crotts this Resolution was passed on this 8th day of July, 1992. ;Ncncq Lambert jJvn Rossas 1' hL` �G 1� i-� GLA -T Dr. Stephen Schwartz Inter -Departmental Memorandum To: Airport Land Use Commission From: David Hironimus, Planning Department Subject: Drake Homes, Foothill Park Unit 8 Date: July 1, 1992 Drake Homes has asked the Airport Land Use Commission to review the possibility of changing the planned use of Foothill Park Unit 8 from commercial offices to residential. The subject property is located within the.incorporated city limits of Chico. The current zoning is N -C (Neighborhood Commercial) which requires a use permit for residential uses. The current Chico Municipal Airport Environs -Plan designates the area as being in a Compatible Land Use Zone (CLUZ) IIp. Excerpts from the plan describing CLUZ IIp are attached. The text in the plan states that the primary constraints to development are proximity to the 65 dB CNEL boundary and proximity to the flight corridors. While preliminary indications are that the noise contours will contract (upon adoption of a revised Airport Environs Plan now under development) due to both reduced commercial jet traffic and generally quieter newer aircraft, unforseen increases in air carrier or business jet traffic could impact the area in the future. Additionally, development permitted now, based on 20 -year projections, will still be in place 30, 40 or 50 years from now. - As chico grows toward the middle of the 21st century, demand for air transportation of people and goods will almost certainly increase. Since the property in question is adjacent to the end of the southerly Runway Protection Zone, almost all flights either approach or depart over the site. this situation is not likely to change due to the design of the airport and prevailing weather conditions. While no official application has been made, The applicant would like direction from the commission regarding his request. RECOMMENDATION: Find that under the existing Plan residential uses in the area are strongly discouraged. but note that the City of Chico is now working on a new plan which may result in policies that are considerably different than those in effect today. Any findings made as a result of a formal application will be subject to the policies in effect at that time. LAS ZZS-!'V AVENUE DIABLO AVENUE Diainage Easement FRL r Po N 4L 0 • LAS ZZS-!'V AVENUE DIABLO AVENUE Diainage Easement FRL 0 Estt A4 E. C E J� O N 1 MILES • • kir t cc O. O I. `x C Ed. E 'Q9j� a� BOjs •. 0 Estt A4 E. C E J� O N 1 MILES • • kir LEGEND MME :ar.. � fflm-Lllza au w A. 7 0 Ay- • la 1000 0 1000 2000 SOURCE R. DIXON SPEAS ASSOCIATES♦ SCALE IN FUT ApproveC: Designed Drawn DRAWING NO. I. By pr"lc REA JRH AIRPORT ENVIRONS PLAN LAND USE COMPATIBILITYMAP tic- 13 (A. DIXON /PEAS ASSOCIATES. INC. Checked 'Dai! . CHICO. MUNICIPAL AIRPORT' No. Revision BY Appr Date Date JEP JULY 1978 P. I. CNEL 65 OR HIGHER IN OR OUT OF CORRIDOR: Residential land'use prohibited.after 1985 by California Administrative Code Title 4, Subchapter 6, Article 2:: Other .land uses -subject to guidel inesjo-r appropriate criteria as recommended by -State of,Cali:fornia-Department of Health. :. Acceptabi 1-i ty .of -commercial office_ development determined primari ly ' by degree of noise insulation. Transient lodging development.will.require indoor level of CNEL 45 under CAC Title 25 (Noise'Insulation Standards)- II. CNEL 60-65 IN CORRIDOR: Residences -other than detached single family units (3 feet or more from property line, 6 feet,or more between buildings ) require indoor CNEL 45 under California Administrative Code Title 25, Chapter 1, Subchapter. 1, Article 4 (Noise Insulation Standards). Transient lodging required to achieve CNEL 45 (indoor) under CAC Title 25._ New single family residences require indoor CNEL 45 by Butte County/ Chico City Ordinance.* Ordinance should follow CAC Title 25. No mobile home•park development by Butte County/Chico City Ordinance.* Disclosure of aircraft noise environment, via deed attachment and voluntary } action of real estate board.* Publish map of record in recorders office to be addressed in Title Search. IIP. CNEL 60-65 IN CORRIDOR: PROTECTED AREA-. Same criteria as Category I for.those areas immediately bounding the. CNEL 65 -i sol i ne. *Recommended actions EXHIBIT 8 COMPATIBLE LAND USE ZONE (CLUZ) CRITERIA`S . I. CNEL 65 OR HIGHER IN OR OUT OF CORRIDOR: Residential land'use prohibited.after 1985 by California Administrative Code Title 4, Subchapter 6, Article 2:: Other .land uses -subject to guidel inesjo-r appropriate criteria as recommended by -State of,Cali:fornia-Department of Health. :. Acceptabi 1-i ty .of -commercial office_ development determined primari ly ' by degree of noise insulation. Transient lodging development.will.require indoor level of CNEL 45 under CAC Title 25 (Noise'Insulation Standards)- II. CNEL 60-65 IN CORRIDOR: Residences -other than detached single family units (3 feet or more from property line, 6 feet,or more between buildings ) require indoor CNEL 45 under California Administrative Code Title 25, Chapter 1, Subchapter. 1, Article 4 (Noise Insulation Standards). Transient lodging required to achieve CNEL 45 (indoor) under CAC Title 25._ New single family residences require indoor CNEL 45 by Butte County/ Chico City Ordinance.* Ordinance should follow CAC Title 25. No mobile home•park development by Butte County/Chico City Ordinance.* Disclosure of aircraft noise environment, via deed attachment and voluntary } action of real estate board.* Publish map of record in recorders office to be addressed in Title Search. IIP. CNEL 60-65 IN CORRIDOR: PROTECTED AREA-. Same criteria as Category I for.those areas immediately bounding the. CNEL 65 -i sol i ne. *Recommended actions (5) Other proposed land uses should be subject to acceptable noise exposure level guidelines as recommended by the California State Department of Health (Exhibit 4-3). 8.3.2 CLUZ Area IIP 'The next .level of restriction. is applied to areas which would normally -qualify for residential land use if the - noise exposure, 1 evel s constituted the only constraint to development. There are two additional considera- tions which have been applied in defining this special category. First, the land in this category abuts the existing airport south property -.boundary. This factor, taken together with the location -.of the CNEL 65 .contour as a second consideration, indicates a potential for more serious future land use conflicts than might normally!be associated with the CLUZ II area. The CNEL 65 contour boundary, projected for future flight operations, extends to the limits of the airport property to the south. Any unforeseen increase in air carrier or business jet traffic at CIC beyond the forecast levels could cause this legal restriction on resi- dential.land use to extend onto these adjacent parcels. If this situation were to occur, it would create a clear.mandate for future acquis-ition of any affected residential properties. There are two large parcels having boundaries common with the south airport property line which are affected by the CLUZ IIP category. Each of these parcels was.subdivided for planning purposes when the county staff created the Interim Zone boundaries. The easternmost of these two parcels is transected by the two branches of Sycamore Creek. These two creek beds form easily identifiable natural geographic divisions on the property. It was decided to use these to further refine the CLUZ planning area in order to avoid a blanket restrictive categorization of the entire parcel. This has the dual benefit ofmaintaining practical divisions of the parcel for planning and reserving a portion of the property -for land 8-11 2 use which would prove more beneficial to the property owner. It is recommended that the CLUZ IIP boundary be extended to the east to follow the north branch of Sycamore Creek and continue along the Interim Zone boundary and the south limit of the two parcels.in _ question,. as7 illustrated in CIC -13. This allows -for maximum pro- tection of both the CNEL 65 noise exposure area and the flight corridor concept. Recognizing that most of the Interim Zone property between the two creek beds falls outside the flight corridor,: there is.an argument to be made -for pulling the-CL"UZ.IIP boundary-back.to.the south branch of Sycamore Creek. This would -constitute a "least re- strictive" option for ultimate zoning of this parcel.. The final decision between this and the recommended "most restrictive" option. should be made locally and should reflect local community attitudes and priorities. The second, or westernmost, of the two parcels affected by the CLUZ IIP category was also subdivided by the county staff in defining the Interim Zone boundaries. In this case, it is believed that there is a clear requirement to use the parcel boundary and the.Interim Zone boundary to define the remainder of the CLUZ IIP area. Again, this reserves approximately half the total- parcel for land uses more bene- ficial to the.property owner.. The particular characteristics of the Interim Zone boundary, i.e.--, the series of ninety degree turns in the perimeter, result in an intrusion of some small segments of uncon- strained property into the noise.exposure and flight corridor on this second of two parcels. These small intrusions currently carry an S -R . zoning designation, allowing single family residential'' development with .a minimum lot -size of 8,125 -square -feet. Any residential land use would be unacceptable in these small segments of the parcel lying within the flight corridor.. If the existing SR zoning is to be retained for* 8-12 remainder of the parcel, it will be necessary to incorporate a more restrictive zoning on these small segments to protect these areas. The other (easternmost) parcel has the Interim Zone overlap extending outside the -flight corridor.. This presents the opportunity for a separate zoning category in the segment outside the Interim Zone area,. _ ..consistent with the.Interim Zone boundaries. Recommendations: ----(1)-..The. parcel segments,.within the Interim Zone boundary, designated as CLUZ IIP areas should carry.an A -X (Agricultural) zone.classification- consistent with the size of. parcel. (2) Residential units (one single family) allowed under this classification should be restricted to contiguous property outside the CLUZ IIP area. (3) Use permits for any uses involving concentrations of people (parks, golf courses, churches, other public or quasi -public uses) should not be granted. 8.3.3 CLUZ.Area II .All areas falling under the CLUZ II category lie within the Interim Zone -boundaries. The only residential land use specifically excluded under this category is mobile home park development. This 'is designed -to elim- inate concentrations.of residential uni-ts with potentially unacceptable outdoor -to -indoor noise reduction characteristics. Other residential .units are subject to controls over building construction methods and procedures as specified in -existing state law and recommended County Ordinance. 8-13 Eatte Count LAND &F' NATUR.AL WEALTH AND BEAUTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397 TELEPHONE: (916) 538-7601 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMNUSSION AGENDA May 13, 1992. •....•••.......•.........•..ti; •: •:.: •., .•••,yk\\css;ST:ti::k nauL:xavtiiti::;u::Y:":c"E:ttaa'acaa56A:y>Vsx:,;r:xa'ooa]OssF}W>:,.c::x;:is]6})'000bssss`aFM:sJu•:"".w.Rn.]s.�a•"w:w::LuiC.;"1.;3.cSslCU'.'%.G"H.':{w>G:G:'t{dcs:+st4:�...::".sS"1!3.y.4"l..".+a.•:;:.'•::::::::.'.: F:::::::::2::::::: TIME: 9:00 am. PLACE: Board of Supervisor's Room County Administration 25 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 I. Pledge of Allegiance - II. Roll Call III. Approval of Minutes of April 8, 1992 IV. Business / 1. Election of Officers, 1992-1993 2. Status Report - Oroville Municipal Airport Environs Plan text revision 3. Status Report - Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan. 4. Business from the floor - (Presentations will be limited to three minutes. The Airport Land Use Commission is prohibited by State Law from taking Action on any item presented if it is not listed on the agenda.) V. Correspondence VI. Referrals to Staff and Formation of Committees VII. Announcements 1. Next meeting is scheduled for June 10, 1992. (David Hironimus; Staff, will be absent) BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION DRAFT MINUTES - May 13, 1992 The meeting of the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) was called to order at 9:04 a.m. on May 13, 1992, in the Board of Supervisors' Room,, County Administration Center, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California. I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Walter, Schwartz, Rossas, Davis; Short, and Chairman Franklin Absent: Commissioner Stevens Also Present: David Hironimus, Senior Planner 'Alternate Commissioner Gerst Barbra Duncan, Secretary III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF April 89 1992 It was moved by Commissioner Rossas, seconded by Commissioner Schwartz, and carried to approve the Minutes of April 8, 1992 by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Walter, Schwartz, Rossas, Davis, and Chairman Franklin NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Stevens ABSTAINED: Commissioner Short IV. BUSINESS Election of Officers. 1992-1993 It was moved by Commissioner Davis, seconded by Commissioner Walter, and carried to .approve Commissioner Rossas as the Chairman for the 1992-1993 fiscal year by the following vote: 1 AIRPORT LAND USE COMN41SSTON MINUTES May r13, 1992 AYES: Commissioners Walter, Schwartz, Davis, Short, and Chairman Franklin NOES: None ABSTAINED: Commissioner Rossas ABSENT:. Commissioner Stevens It was moved by Commissioner Rossas; seconded by Commissioner Davis, and unanimously carried to approve Commissioner Crotts as 2nd Vice -Chairman for the 1992-1993 fiscal year. It was moved by Commissioner Davis, seconded by Commissioner Rossas, and unanimously carried to approve Commissioner Schwartz as 2nd Vice -Chairman for the 1992-1993 fiscal year. Status Report - Oroville Municipal Airport Environs Plan text revision Commissioner Rossas stated the revision is waiting for the go ahead from the FAA who is waiting to see what is decided by Congress. Status Report - Chico Municival_ Ai ort Environs Plan. Staff stated the Consultant had brought by two new maps and was close to completion of the project. Commissioner Davis gave the Commission a report on the status , of the plan and said new schools must now have approval to build if they are within two miles of an established airport. Business from the floor. Staff stated the Consultant has begun work on an airport inventory. Commissioner Davis stated he has requested the Consultant develop a manual that will be available to the Commissioners. 2 AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - May 13, 1992 V. CORRESPONDENCE There was none. VI. REFERRALS TO STAFF AND FORMATION OF COMMITTEES There was none. VII. ANNOUNCEMENTS 1. Commissioner Walter announced he was resigning from the Commission to move to Washington. The Commission expressed its appreciation for Commissioner Walter's years of service. 2. It was the :consensus of `the Commission' to schedule the next ALUC meeting for July 8, 1992. 3. Commissioner Davis announced he would be leaving the Commission effective June 30, 1992. The Commissioners stated how Commissioner Davis and his help and knowledge regarding airports would be greatly missed. VIII. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, -the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 a.m. Signed: JO FRA Chairman B TTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION /Ibd 3 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION AGENDA April 8, 4992 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -- -- - ------------------ TIME: 9:00 a.m. PLACE: Board of Supervisor's Room County, Administration 25 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 I. Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call III. Approval of Minutes of February 12 and March 11, 1992 IV. Business 1. Public Hearing Oroville Municipal Airport Environs Plan Map revision. Item on which, the Environm ental.Documents have already been Certified. Adoption of a: new map recognizing the new runway thresholds and status as adopted by the. City of Oroville Municipal Airport Master 'Plan. (Continued open from March 11, 1992) 2. Status Report - Oroville Mulficipal Airport E&irons Plan text revision 3. Status Report - Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan. 4. Business from the floor - (Presentations will. be limited to three minutes. The Airport Land Use Commission is prohibited by,State Law from taking Action on any item presented if it is not listed on the agenda.) V. Correspondence VI. Referrals to Staff and Formation of Committees VII. Announcements 1. Next meeting is scheduled for May 13, 1992. • N BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - April 8, 1992 The meeting .of the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC), was called to order at 9:04 a.m. on April 8, 1992, in .the Board of Supervisors' Room, County Administration Center, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California. I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE H. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Crotts, Walter, _ Schwartz, Rossas, Stevens, and Chairman' Franklin Absent: Commissioner Davis Also Present: David 'Hironimus, Senior Planner Alternate Commissioner Gerst Mike Leanna, City of - Oroville Barbra Duncan, Secretary Commissioner Stevens was absent at this time. } III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 12, 1992 AND -MARCH 11, 1992 It was moved by Commissioner Walter,, seconded by Commissioner Schwartz, and carried to approve the Minutes of February .12, 1992 by the following vote: AYES: A Commissioners Crotts, Walter, Schwartz, Rossas, and Chairman Franklin NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Davis and Stevens, ABSTAINED: -None it was moved by Commissioner Crotts, seconded by. Commissioner Schwartz, and carried to approve the Minutes of March 11, 1992 by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Crotts,Walter, Schwartz, Rossas, and Chairman Franklin NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Davis and Stevens x 1 Butte County Airport Land Use Commission Minutes - April 8, 1992 Commissioner Stevens was present at this time. IV. BUSINESS Public Hearing, - Oroville Municipal Airport Environs Plan Map revision. - Staff stated this item. was continued from the. March 11, 1992 ALUC meeting to receive further information from the City regarding . FAA's judgment as to the appropriateness of the 5,000, 7,000; or 10,000 foot radius. for the overflight area. The hearing was opened to the public. Mike Leanna, City of Oroville Community Services: Director, stated the 7,000 foot radius would be suitable with existing land uses, in the area. Mr. Leana said the City is in the ' process of updating their General Plan Land Use Element. The City is considering the 7,000 foot radius north of the runway as "Office and Business Park" where there would be less population and no residential uses. The hearing was closed to the public. ` It was' moved by Commissioner Rossas, seconded by Commissioner Walter,, and unanimously carried to adopt Staff recommendations as follows: A. Find. that. the adoption of this revised map .is consistent with the purpose of Section 21670 through' 21679 of the, State of California Public 'Utilities Code and with the purpose and policies, contained within the text of the Oroville Municipal Airport -Environs Land Use Plan; and B. Note that the requirements of. the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) have been completed' and considered in making this decision, and note the Negative Declaration by the Oroville City Council, filed October' 18, 1990; and C. Adopt the revised map of the overflight area, safety areas and noise contours, showing a'7,000 ft. radius measures from the end of the primary surface of Runway 19. ********** Butte, County Airport Land Use Commission Minutes - April 8, 1992 Status Report - Oroville Municipal AirportEnvirons. Plan text revision. Commissioner Walter stated the Sub -Committee met twice and has prepared a draft text revision which they will .present to the Commission at a later date after further consideration and discussion. Chairman Franklin stated this item would be placed on a later ALUC Agenda. There was a brief'. discussion regarding the 25 persons per acre issue. Commissioner Walter requested Staff to research what other City's and County's standards are regarding floor space and ground coverage and report it to the Sub - Committee before the next ALUC meeting. Status Report - Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan. Commissioner � Crotts stated she spoke to Commission Davis and was told there has been no change to the Plan since the last ALUC meeting. There was a brief discussion on conducting an inventory of all airport strips in the County. .Business from the floor. There was none. V. CORRESPONDENCE There was none. VI. REFERRALS TO STAFF .AND FORMATION OF COMMITTEES There was none. .VII. ANNOUNCEMENTS The next ALUC meeting is scheduled for May 13, 1992. 3 Butte County Airport Land Use Commission Minutes - April 8, 1992 VIII. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting_ was adjourned at 9:31 a.m. Sign O NKLIN, Chairman BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION /bd BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - March 11, 1992 The meeting of the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) was called to order at 9:03 a.m. on March 11, 1992, in the Board of Supervisors' Room, County Administration Center, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California. < I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE H. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Crotts, Walter, Schwartz, Davis, Stevens, and Rossas Absent: Chairman Franklin Also. Present: Nina Lambert, ALUC Commissioner David Hironimus, Senior Planner Alternate Commissioner Gerst Barbra Duncan, Secretary III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JANUARY 8, 1992 It was moved by Commissioner Schwartz, seconded by Commissioner Stevens,, and unanimously carried to approve of the Minutes of January 8, 1992. It was the consensus of the Commission to table approval of the Minutes of February 12, 1992 to the April 8, 1992 ALUC -meeting. ********** IV. BUSINESS Public Hearing - Oroville Municipal Airport Environs Plan Map revision. Staff stated the City .of Oroville has .adopted a new Master Plan for the Oroville Airport. Staff discussed the major changes contained in the Plan. The hearing was opened to the public. Robert Wilson, 2604 Oro Dam Blvd. West, stated he was in favor of the Plan but was concerned the overlay of different zones on his property would lower his property values. The hearing was closed to the public. Commissioner Davis asked Staff what the regulations are in the Protection Zone in Safety Area "I"? 1 Butte County Airport Land Use Commission Minutes March 11, 1992 Staff discussed the various regulations and height restrictions. Commissioner Davis asked Staff if the County has adopted an Air Approach Zone that matches the Oroville Nunicipal Airport Environs Plan Map revision? Staff answered no. There was a brief discussion on the Oroville Municipal Airport overflight boundaries. Chairman Rossas suggested the Commission do more research regarding FAA requirements before they, make' a decision on this issue. It was moved by Commissioner Schwartz, seconded by Commissioner Walter and unanimously carried to table this discussion to. the April, 8, 1992 ALUC _ meeting. ********** Status Report = Oroville Municipal Airport Environs Plan text revision. Staff stated that although there has been no discussion with the Sub -Committee since the last ALUC meeting, the text revisions will depend upon the boundaries that are adopted by the Oroville Municipal Airport Environs Plan Map. Chairman Rossas appointed Commissioner Walter as the Chairman of the Sub - Committee. Commissioner Walter stated he has studied the information available on the Plan text and in the maps and found several conflicts regarding zoning that the Commission should consider. He stated the map and text of the City and County Plans should be in compliance with the Airport Land Use Plan. Mike Leana, Community Development Director, City of Oroville, stated the City's General Plan Committee has been studying the airport area. He. stated the City is aware of the conflicts and is working to correct them. Staff stated the Government Code requires the City and ..County General Plans to be in conformance with the Airport Land Use Plan. RgWrt Commissioner Crotts - Airport Land Use Planning Workshop, held _in San Diego. G Butte County Airport Land Use Commission Minutes March 11, 1992 Commissioner Crotts gave a presentation to the Commission on the Workshop and the items discussed. Status Report - Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan-, Commissioner Davis stated the Consultant is in the process of developing noise contours. He said one hearing has been held in which comments were received on the traffic projection. He said in order to get the noise contours, a traffic projection study needed to be done first. He said the Land Use Compatibility Plan could then 'be completed. Business from the -floor. Fred Gera, Alternate Commissioner, stated he has checked on the Williams Airport on Afton Road. He said they are interested in talking to ALUC Stafff regarding coming under the jurisdiction of the Airport Land Use Commission. Chairman Rossas directed Staff to follow this up. V. CORRESPONDENCE There was none. VI. REFERRALS TO STAFF AND FORMATION OF COMMITTEES There was none. VII. ANNOUNCEMENTS The next ALUC meeting is. scheduled for April 8, 1992. VIII. ADJOURNMENT There : being no rther business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:03 a.m. Signed: J HN FItAKKLIN, Chairman /BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND' USE COMMISSION. /bd 3 I BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION DRAFT MINUTES - March 11, 1992 The meeting of the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) was called to order at 9:03 a.m. on March 11, 1992, in the Board of Supervisors' Room, County Administration Center, .25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California. I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE H. ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Commissioners Crotts, Walter, Schwartz, Davis, Stevens, and Rossas Chairman Franklin Also Present: Nina Lambert, ALUC Commissioner David Hironimus,. Senior Planner Alternate Commissioner Gerst Barbra Duncan, Secretary III. - APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JANUARY 8, 1992 It was moved by Commissioner Schwartz, seconded by Commissioner Stevens, and unanimously carried to approve of the Minutes of January 8, 1992. It was the consensus of the Commission to table approval of the Minutes of February 12, 1992 to the April 8, 1992 ALUC meeting. ********** IV. BUSINESS Public Hearing - Oroville Municipal Airport Environs Plan Map revision. Staff stated the City of Oroville has adopted a new Master Plan for the Oroville Airport. Staff discussed the major changes contained in the Plan. The hearing was opened to the public. Robert Wilson, 2604 Oro Dam Blvd. West, stated ,fie was in favor of the Plan but was concerned the overlay of different zones on his property would lower his property values. The hearing was closed to the public. Commissioner Davis asked Staff what the regulations are in the Protection Zone in Safety Area "I"? 1 Butte County Airport Land Use Commission Minutes March 11, 1992 Staff discussed the various regulations and height restrictions. Commissioner Davis asked Staff if the County has adopted an Air Approach Zone that matches the Oroville Municipal Airport Environs Plan Map revision? Staff answered no. There was a brief discussion on the Oroville Municipal Airport overflight boundaries. Chairman Rossas suggested the Commission do more research regarding FAA requirements before they make a decision on this issue. It was moved by Commissioner Schwartz, seconded by Commissioner Walter and unanimously carried to table this discussion to the April 8, 1992 ALUC meeting. ********** J Status Report - Oroville Municipal Airport Environs Plan text revision. Staff stated that although there has been no discussion with the Sub -Committee since the last ALUC meeting, the text revisions will depend upon the boundaries that are adopted by the Oroville Municipal Airport Environs Plan Map. Chairman Rossas appointed Commissioner Walter as the Chairman of the Sub - Committee. Commissioner Walter stated he has studied the information available on the Plan text and in the maps and found several conflicts regarding zoning that the Commission should consider. He stated the map and text of the City and County Plans should be in compliance with the Airport Land Use Plan. Mike Leana, Community Development Director, City of Oroville, stated the City's General Plan Committee has :been studying the airport area. He stated the City is aware of the conflicts and is working to correct them. Staff stated the Government Code requires the City and County General Plans to be in conformance with the Airport Land Use Plan. Report - Commissioner Crotts - Airport Land Use Planning Workshop held in San Diego. 2 ' t s , t Butte County Airport Land .. Use Commission Minutes . ". • March 11, 1992 y Commissioner Crotts gave a presentation to the Commission on the Workshop and the items- discussed.. Status Report - Chico Municipal Airport. Environs Plan. Commissioner Davis stated the Consultant is `in the process of developing . noise contours. He said one hearing has been held in which comments were received on the traffic projection. He said in order to get the .noise contours, a traffic projection study needed to be done first. He' .said the Land Use -Compatibility Plan could then. be completed. 6 Business from the floor. ' l r Fred Gerst, Alternate Commissioner, stated. he has checked on the Williams Airport on Afton Road. He said they are interested in talking to ALUC Staff regarding coming under the jurisdiction of the Airport Land Use Commission. Chairman Rossas directed Staff 'to follow this up: V. CORRESPONDENCE r There was none. < VI. REFERRALS TO STAFF AND FORMATION 'OF, COMMITTEES' There `was . none. VII. ANNOUNCEMENTS The next ALUC meeting is scheduled for April 8, 1992. VIII. • ADJOURNMENT TWbeinno rfurtheusiness, the meeting was adjourned, at 10:03 a. in. Signed ; J HN WX14KLIN, Chairman UTTE COUNTY ' AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION 3 i yy�••... ligil,u un L A N D O F NATU RAL WEALTH A N D BEAUTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT y 'y 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397 yM Jt;'':' TELEPHONE: (916) 538-7601 BUTTE COUN'T'Y AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION AGENDA February 12, 1992 TIME: 9:00 a.m. PLACE: Board of Supervisor's Room County Administration 25 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 I. Pledge of Allegiance II. Roll Call III. Approval of Minutes of January 8, 1992 IV. Consent Agenda V. Business 1. Status Report - Oroville Municipal Airport Environs Plan. 2. Status Report - Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan. 3. Status Report - Review of ALUC Bylaws. 4. Business from the floor - (Presentations will be limited to three minutes. The Airport Land Use Commission is prohibited by State Law from taking Action on any item presented if it is not listed on the agenda.) VI. Correspondence VII. Referrals to Staff and Formation of Committees . VIII. Announcements 1. Next meeting is scheduled for March 11, 1992. BUTTE , COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION �DRAFf�MINUTES, - February 12, 1992 The meeting of the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) was called to order at 9:03 a.m. on February 12, 1992, in the Board of Supervisors' Room, County Administration Center, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California. I. PLEDGE • OF ALLEGIANCE II. ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Also Present: Commissioners Crotts, Walter, (Alternate) Schwartz, and Rossas Commissioners Stevens, Davis and Franklin Chairman Nina Lambert, ALUC Commissioner David Hironimus, Senior Planner Alternate Commissioner Gerst Jackie O'Brien, Secretary Correction of Minutes of January 8, 1992. The Commission had the following corrections: page 2, 1st sentence change "Commissioner" to "Commission"; page 4, delete the 2nd "Schwartz" on the NOES vote; page 5, 6th paragraph change "Alternate Commissioner Davis" to "Alternate Commissioner Schwartz". It was moved by Commissioner Walter, seconded by Commissioner Schwartz and unanimously carried to table approval of the* minutes of January 8, 1992 to March 11, 1992. IV. CONSENT AGENDA Staff submitted comments that was sent to the City of Chico regarding Rezone #432 and Rezone #435. Copies were included in the Commission packets. Staff stated copies will be provided to the commission for information only and- when the environmental documents for the projects become available, they will come before this Commission for findings. , Staff stated that the Consent Agenda will be eliminated from the agenda unless there is an item that needs to be discussed. t 1 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - February 12, 1992 V. BUSINESS 1. Status Report - Oroville. Municipal Airport Environs Plan. A brief report was made by the Subcommittee. Commissioner Walter asked the Commission for comments on what the Committee should recommend for the boundaries of the area of influence. Commissioner Rossas said that the City of Oroville would agree to having the overflight area at either 7,000 or 10,000 ft. He stated that the City of Oroville is pretty well protected. There was a brief discussion on the different runways. Staff said the area within 5,000 ft. of, the end of the existing threshold is City property for the approach zone. He said that pieces of the overflight area are County property. Commissioner Walter said that the overflight area extends out to 7,000 ft. in the current city proposal. Staff said extending the overflight area out to 10,000 ft. with the existing development would cause endless concerns with property owners wanting to build to match existing development. Staff said he agrees with keeping the overflight area at 7,000 ft. Staff said next month we will be adopting a new Airport Master Plan Map which shows the full 10,000 ft. overflight area. He said that map will need to be modified. He said he will prepare a map showing the different overflight areas. Commissioner Rossas stated that Commissioner Stevens was unable to attend the subcommittee meeting and that this report was a majority report. { 2. Status Report - Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan. A message was given to Staff from Commissioner Davis stating that the City of Chico is proceeding with the contract for the program which ALUC has requested in connection with the inventory of airports in Butte County. s s s s s s s s s s s s s a s FA :BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - February 12, 1992 3. Status Report - Review of ALUC Bylaws. Staff stated that the subcommittee has been unable to schedule a meeting to discuss the Bylaws. He said the Planning Commission is holding a workshop with County Counsel on February 13, at 10:30 a.m. regarding the Brown Act. Staff said he will contact the subcommittee with the date of the meeting. 4. Business from the floor - (Presentations will be limited to three minutes. The Airport Land Use Commission is prohibited by State Law from taking Action on any item presented if it is not listen on the agenda.) None. VI. CORRESPONDENCE Staff said CalTrans sent a draft report on California Aviation System plan and is available for review. VII: REFERRALS TO STAFF AND FORMATION OF COMMITTEES None. VIII. ANNOUNCEMENTS 1. Next meeting is scheduled . for March 11, 1992. .i There being no further business, the meeting was adjourne&at 10:23 a.m. Signed: JOHN. FRANKLIN, Chairman BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION /jlo 3 r BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMNIISSION CORRECTED MINUTES - January 8, 1992 The meeting of the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) was called to order at 9:03 a.m. on January 8, 1992, in the Board of Supervisors' Room, County Administration Center, 25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California. I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE H. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Schwartz (Alternate), Rossas, Davis, Walter, Crotts and Chairman Franklin Absent: Commissioner Stevens Also Present: David Hironimus, Senior Planner Alternate Commissioner Gerst Jackie O'Brien, Secretary M. Approval of Minutes Commissioner Stevens arrived at this time. December 11, 1991 The Commission had the following corrections: page 2, 2nd para. delete "and"; page 3, 6th para., 2nd sentence to read "He said the proposed map's 2 mile radius is 10,000 ft. from the primary surface." Next sentence delete "from";page 4, 1st para., 3rd sentence delete "what",page 4, 4th para. delete "contract"; page 6, 3rd para. change "has" to "have",page 6, 7th para. add to end of sentence "concerning allowable densities under the approach zone and overflight zones." Next paragraph change "chance" to "change"; page 7, 4th para. should read "Commissioner Lambert asked with the Board of Supervisor's decision, what kind of density is created?"; page 7, last para. change "ALUC" to "Chico Airport Commission"; page 8, 2nd para., 13th sentence delete "any of the"; 15 sentence after "can" add not"; page 10, 1st para. after "the" add "city";page 10, 8th para. should read "Commissioner Crotts asked of staff does the City of Oroville think they have all the comments for ALUC and have no need to come back to ALUC for further comments?" Page 11, 4th para., last sentence change "if to "whether"; page 12, 5th para., change "the" to "there will be a". 1 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMIVIISSION MINUTES - January 8, 1992 December 18, 1991 The Commission had the following corrections: Page 3, 6th para. after "that" add "if"; 3rd sentence delete "6500"and add "65";page 4, 6th para. after "that" add "will";last para. change "right" to "write"; page 5, 7th para. change "use" to "used"; page 6, 4th para. change "MPSB" to "NTSB" and after "final turn" add "which most frequently"; page 7, 1st para. change "use" to "interest"; page 7, 2nd paragraph change "starr" to "staff' and delete "in";4th para. change "of'to "have"; page 7, 5th para., 3rd sentence from the end delete "has" to "have", page 8, 4th para. delete "the following"; page 11, last para. change "if to it It was moved by Commissioner Davis, seconded by Commissioner Schwartz and unanimously carried to approve the minutes of December 11, 1991 and December 18, 1991 as corrected. The approved corrected minutes will be sent out with next months packet. ******************** IV. BUSINESS 1. Status Report - Requirement for Avigatgion Easements with Subdivision Maps and Building Permits. Staff said the Board of Supervisors referred this item back to Staff. Staff has discussed possible changes with Land Development who is currently working on amendments to our Subdivision Ordinance. He said he has spoken with the Building Dept. and they want to take a closer look to see what kind of an effect it will have on building regulations. He said the County's environmental review process is dealing with all development under the entire overflight areas of all the airports. Avigation easements are required. ************** 2. Status Report - Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan. Commissioner' Davis reported that on January 9, 1992 at 7:00 p.m. in Chico's City Council Chambers the first report on the New Chico Airport Environs Plan will -be held. He said the City of Chico will be going to the Chico Airport Commission on January 30, 2 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - January 8, 1992 1992 and asking them to fund an Air Quality Element to the Environs Plan so that we will have safety, land use, noise and air quality in the plan. 3. Initiate adovtion of Oroville Municival Airport Master Plan and addenda as the Oroville Municipal Airport Environs Plan. Staff said the item is to initiate the project to adopt to new Oroville Airport Master Plan as a substantial portion of the Airport Land Use Plan. He said will take some addenda in the form of surrounding land use compatibility policies. He said it may be appropriate to have a committee formed' to work on formulating those policies in conjunction with this project. Commissioner Davis asked to see all documents that were used in adopting the Airport Land Use Plan and the documents that ALUC will be adopting. Staff said the documents would be forwarded to Commissioners. It was moved by Commissioner Davis, seconded by Commissioner Rossas and unanimously carried • to initiate the process that is necessary for ALUC to adopt the Oroville Municipal Airport Master Plan and addendum_ which will be titled "The Airport Environs Plan Commissioner Rossas reported to the Commission that the City of Oroville went into another step of condemnation of Phil Rauch's property. 4. Status Report - Rezoning of approach zone north of Ranchaero Airport. Staff reported that the Butte County Planning Commission held a meeting on December 12, 1991 and denied the rezone north of Ranchaero Airport. He said that the Planning Commission's action was reported to the Board of Supervisors at the meeting* of January 7, 1992 and that the Board of Supervisors accepted the report and took no further action. *************** 3 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES - January 8, 1992 5. Discussion - Review of ALUC By -Laws, Airport Land Use Commission responsibilities and authority. Commissioner Walter said that several Commissioners have spoke to him regarding the way meetings have been canceled. He proposed to add to Article V, Section 4 to read: "Meetings may be canceled or rescheduled by the Chair with the concurrence or majority of the Commissioners, who may be polled by telephone for this process. Chairman Franklin said staff has contacted the Chair and if there was nothing of great importance, the meeting would be canceled. He said the Commission members should contact Staff if they have an item that should be added. Staff said that when a meeting is canceled, certain agencies are notified and it is posted just as an agenda would be. It was moved by Commissioner Walter, seconded by Commissioner Davis to add Section 4 to Article V of the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission's By -Laws to read: Meetings may be canceled or rescheduled by the Chair with the concurrence of a majority of the commissioners, who may be polled by telephone for this purpose, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Walter NOES: Commissioners Schwartz, Rossas, Davis, Crotts, and Chairman Franklin ABSENT: No one ABSTAINED: No one The motion failed. Commissioner Davis said the words "as required" in Article V, Section 1 of the By -Laws needs to be clarified. He suggested that a subcommittee should be formed to review the By -Laws. It was moved by Commissioner Davis, seconded by Alternate Commissioner Schwartz, and unanimously carried for Commissioners Rossas, Walter and Staff for a committee to review the Airport Land Use Commission's By -Laws. d. 4 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES January 8, 1992 *************** 6. Initiate a letter to the Butte County Association of Governments supporting preparation of an airport inventory including existing Land Use and Zoning_ Staff said BCAG is requesting a letter from ALUC stating that BCAG has ALUC's support for this project. It was moved by Commissioner Davis, seconded by Commissioner Walter, and unanimously carried to ask the Chair to prepare a supporting letter to the Butte County Association of Governments regarding the preparation of an airport inventory. *************** 7. Business from the floor - (Presentations will be limited to three minutes. The Airport Land. Use Commission is prohibited by State Law from taking Action on any item presented if it is not listen on the agenda.) None. *************** V. CORRESPONDENCE None. ******************* VI. REFERRALS TO STAFF AND FORMATION OF COMMITTEES Staff said a committee should be formed for the Airport Land Use and Noise Compatibility Policies for properties surrounding the different airports. It was moved by Commissioner Davis, seconded by Alternate Commissioner Schwartz and unanimously carried to elect Commissioners Rossas, Walter and Stevens to serve on a committee. Commissioner Walter asked staff to prepare a map for each commissioner of the area surrounding the Oroville Airport (similar to Plate 1 on page 5 of the Master Plan) 16 5 BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMNIISSION MINUTES - January 8, 1992 showing the current zoning and overlay with, the boundaries of the new approach zone and the area of influence that were approved at the last ALUC meeting. ******************* VII. ANNOUNCEMENTS 1. Next meeting is scheduled for February 12, 1992. 2. Miscellaneous announcements. None. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:20 a.m. Signed: /j 10 COMIVIISSION 0 Rutte Count LAND OF NATURAL WEALTH AND BEAUTY PLANNING. DEPARTMENT 7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397 TELEPHONE: (916) 538-7601 r BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION AGENDA January 8, 1992 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -------- --------- ... -114.... TIME: 9:00 am. PLACE: Board of Supervisor's Room. County Administration 25 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 I. Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call III. Approval of Minutes of December 11, 1991 and December 18, 1991 IV. Business 1. Status Report - Requirement for Avigation Easements with Subdivision Maps and Building Permits. 2. Status Report - Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan. 3. Initiate adoption of0roville Municipal Airport Master Plan and addenda as the Oroville Municipal Airport Environs Plan. 4. Status Report - Rezoning of approach zone north of Ranchaero Airport. 5. Discussion - Review of ALUC Bylaws, Airport Land Use Commission responsibilities and authority., 6. Initiate a letter to the Butte County Association of Governments supporting the preparation of an airport inventory including existing Land Use and Zoning. 7. Business from the floor (Presentations will be limited to three minutes. The Airport Land Use Commission is prohibited by State Law from taking Action on any item presented if it is not fisted on the agenda.) V. Correspondence tl'A� s BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION CONT. AGENDA - January 8, 1992 VI. Referrals to Staff and Formation of Committees VII. Announcements 1. Next meeting is scheduled for February 12, 1992. 2. Misc. announcements.