HomeMy WebLinkAboutACCOUNTING SHEETACCOUNTING SHEET
Shutt Moen Associates (Comprehensive Land Use Plans for the four public use airports in Butte
County)
Caltrans Grant ` $81,000.00
City of Chico 5,000.00
BEGINNING BALANCE: TOTAL $86,000.00
7/20/00 Contract Amendment 5,000.00 (See addition page 2)
TOTAL $91,000.00 Amended Contract Total
1/20/01 Contract Amendment 5,000.00
TOTAL $96,000.00 Amended Contract Total
DATE OF
INVOICE
AMOUNT*OF
INVOICE
BALANCE TO
BE PAID
DATE OF CLAIM
AUDITOR
Beginning Balance $86,000.00
2/28/99
10/31/98 $1,676.05 $84;323.95
12/3/98
12/31/98 $1,841.35 $82,482.60
1/22/99
1/31/99
$6,432.80
$76,049.80
2/18/99'
��,�
2/28/99
$ 885.80
$75,164.00
3/17/99
o ae�4
Y
� Ole
3/31/99
$3,182.00
$71,982.00
4/15/99
4/30/99
$3,328.00
$68,654.00
5/20/99
5/31/99
$2,338.00
$66,316.00
6/17/99
7/31/99
$4,197.80
$62,118.20
8/20/99
8/31/99
$8,716.84
$53,401.36
9/13/99
wdr� 9/30/99
$3,744.28.
$49,657.08
11/8/99
\0
10/31/99
$2,371.16
$47,285.92
12/2/99
11/30/99
$2,381.92
i
$44,904.00.
1/4/00
12/31/99
$5,474.24.
$39,429.76.
1/20/00
1/31/00
$7,831.36.
$31,598.40
2/18/00
2/29/00
$12,177.76
$19,420.64
3/14/00
• �i
3rd S
4-0�a
5/31/00
•
$7,469.96
$1,986.36
$11,950.68
9 9(4
5/31/00
7/11/00 $2,928.92. $ 7,035.40 7/11/00
7/2000 Contract Amendment + 5,000.00 .
Amended Balance to be Paid $12,035.40
����h�
�b
7/31/00
$1,986.20
$10,049.20 1/23/01 '
8/31/00
$5,428:95
$4,620.25 1/23/01
10/31/00
$1,944.17
$2' 676.08 1/23/01
11/30/00
$1,632.72
$1,043.36 1/23/01
rte, m a�
�o D 12/31/00
1/2001
1/31/01
0\
�V 2/28/01
1g .
$1,043.36
0 1/23/01
Contract Amendment +-53000.00
Amended Balance to be Paid $5,000.00
$1,000.00 $4,000.00 2/22/01
$1,500.03 $2,499.97 2/27/01
4/30/01 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 5/14/01
(.03)
Note: Auditor will pay adjusted amount (including 3 -cent difference).
FINAL PAYMENT ON CONTRACT
K:\Planning\ALUC\CLUP\2000\Contract\CLAIMS.SMA
V�
a
1
FILE No.432 01/22 '01 PM 04:30 ID:SHUTT u MOEN
FAX:5269721 PAGE 1
SHUTT MOEN -
A§-.S0CIAJ US FAX MEMO
4
` Date: January 22, 2001
I� Number of Pages: 3
,4�- (including this page)
Servroes to the
Aviation lndWry:
• Planning
• Engineering
• Management
707 AVIATION BLVD.
SANTA ROSA, CA 95403
TEL: (707)526.5010
FAX: (70)526-472'I
To: Ms. Cheryl Spoor
Butte County Department of Development Services
Fax Number: 530/538-7785
From: Ken Brody
Subject: Status of Invoice Payments
The Original: u Will nut follow l J Will follow
Message:
Thank you for your phone call. We had been receiving the county's payments in
a timely manner, so 1 had riot paid attention to the lack of payments on recent
invoices.
The attached printout lists the invoicc.and payment dates and amounts since the
outset of the project. It appears that a Portion of the 3/31/00 invoice and all of
amounts due on the invoices beginning 7/31/00 have not been paid. The total
amount currently due is $14,435.40. ,
Your prompt attention to this matter will be greatly appreciated. If you have any
questions regarding the attached records, please contact our office manager, Patti
Wright', at 707/526-5010.
`ry C4unty of Butte
�
1m
7,469.96
. _ _ _ __
•fotfll
0.00
Lw u81sr
>>c
$4J21i�.E1iII..
�il�id
1,841.35 /
IV 10/3111998
1,676.05
0.00
1,616.05
6,432.80
PAY 1/21/1999
0,00
6,417..x6
0101)
Invoice 10827 ToMis:1.676,05
x88.60
0.00
1,676.05
0'00
IV 12/31/1998
041.35
0.00
1,84135
3,182,00
PAY 215/191)9
3,328.00
3, 3211,0(1 /
0.00
luvoico 10915'CntelR:1,8.11.73
1%
O�OU
1.841.13
2.338-00
1V 1/31/199')
5.159.41
1,273,39
�
6,432.80
4.197.80
PAY 3/18/1999
11.00
..
0.00
Invoice 10935 Totnlx:
5,159.41
1,27.1.39
6,432.80
0,00
IV 2/28/1999
885,x0 (/
0.00
885.80
3,144.28
'PAY 3/30/1999
2,371,16
2,371.16 I
0.00
Invoice 11004 l'otsls:
885.RA
0.00
8(S5,A0
2.391,92
0.00
2,381.92
0.00
5,474.24
IV 3/31/1990
3,182.001/
0.00
3,182.00
PAY 4130!1099
7,831.36
0.00
7,+131.36
lnvuice 11042 Towb:
;, ► 02.00;
0.00
1.1 A2.00
12.177.76
IV 4!1A/1999
3,101.43
()46 D55
3,328.00
PAY 6/8/1499
lnvoicc II I io,Toleis:
3581.45 T
146.55
9,328.00
Iv 5!1!/1099
2,338.00•,/
0.00
2,338.00
PAY 7/611999
h,vuicc 11140TOIals:2,338.00
0.00
:,338.00
IV 7/31/1999
4,197.80 ✓
0.00
4,197.80
PAY 9/7/}999
lnvoico 11231 Tolak:
4.197,N0
�0•QA
4.197,0%%
'
IV 813111999
8,536.96-I?9.86
8,716.84
PAY 9/27/1990
Invoice 11271 •1'01810:
� 0,886.96
139.88
0,116.84
IV 960/1999
3,144.28 ✓
0.00.
3,744.2R
PAY 1102/1999
Invo un 11331 Tolnl++:
?',7,14.2
U.c)0
3 744,26
/
IV 10131/1999
05.46
j165,70)2.37l..16
PAY 12/21/1999-
Ir,voiG) 11300 z'otals:
2,205.46
10.70
2,371.16
1V 1030/1999
2.361.02 1/
0.00
2,381.92
PAY 1174/2000
'
Invoice 1 1411 Tolnls:
2,381.92
0.00
2,381.92
IV 12/31/1999
5.474.14 ✓
0.00
3,474.24
PAY 2/712000
- --
Inv6,;c 11474 Totals:
5.474.2-1
0.00
5,474.24
IV 1/312000
1,831.?6✓
0.111)
7,x11,36
PAY 316%2(100
-
_
A,voica I I116
7,831-�.-�?0
0.00
7,831.1~
1 @��
IV 2129/2000
9R1,71f!
2195.98
12,117.76
PAY 329/2000
Invoice 11532ToIniv:'
9-R1.7R
2.lyS,vB
!3,1)7.76
IV 1/11/2000
(,,890.40
S7H.56
7,469.9E
PAY 5/16120(10
Iv 4/112000
348.12
r2.05I .ts6 M
- 2,4o0.A0
Invoice 11173 lblal;;:?.
!2 8 S2
-4.1" -
4,SE9.90
1-�
1V 41%02000
;,855.26
131.10
1,9R6.36..
-PAY 6172/00%1
'_
'
Invoicu I t616 1-vttik:
1,835.26
1.3.1.-I0C
1,'136.?(i
(
}V 6i30/200t1
2 A0n.22
122.?(i�
2,928.92 ,
PAY 712312000
PFivmtnus
1m
7,469.96
,676,115
).616.05
0.00
1.676.05
0.00
1,841.35
1,841.35 /
0.00
1.841.35
0.00
`
6,432.80
6,4:12.80. ✓
0,00
6,417..x6
0101)
885.80
x88.60
0.00
885.80
0'00
3,192.00
3,182.00 i
0.00
3,182,00
0.00
3,328.00
3, 3211,0(1 /
0.00
3,920.00
0.00
2,138.00
2.338-00
0.00
2,338.00
0.00
4.197.80
4.197.80 /
11.00
4,197.80
0.00
0,716.84
8.716.84 /
00
B,71 b.Ra
0,00
3,744.2x
3,144.28 /
0.00
3,144.28
0.00
2,371,16
2,371.16 I
0.00
2.771.10
0,00
1,381.92
2.391,92
0.00
2,381.92
0.00
5,474.24
1,474.24
0.00
5,474.24
0.(K)
7.831,36
7,831.36
0.00
7,+131.36
/
12,177.76
12,177.76
0.00
12.177.76
0.00
7.469.96
7,469.96
- �0 GCA OL
-
2.aou'(}A 1(1ex- v0µ0
14-00nQ
1,469.91%
IT
4,306.36.
1,986.36
2,400.00
1 vxh.3G
2,46[}.�1
.3,328.92 Y
`
7at;0'0(1-•
0
TMeI >3alaaco ,
!!A �1i iiBLG Reiml+.1!uD.� I2us
i luvoice 11718 Touds. 2,906.22 122,7u 2,921+.92 2,428.42
1V 7/31/2000 1,799.11 ISTU9 1,986.20 4.396-20
Involve 11766 Totals; 1.799.1 I 187.09t 86.20 ,i O.tKf 4,396.20
s,
IV 813112000 5.428.95 0,00 5;428:45 9,815.15
Invoice 11809 Trials:5 428.95 00 0.00 9,515.15
r
IV 1U131l2A00 1,920.79 123.38 1944.17 11,759:12
Invoice t 1923 11000Totals: 1,820.79 1,924. f? 0.00 1l?5932
._
IV 11/30/'2000 1,332.11 3110.61 1,632.72 13,392.04
lnvoi,:e 11969 Tr1"is:' 1,332.1 1 3110.61 .632.72 ., b.00 1z..192.04
JV 12131/2000 832.69 210.68 4ma 14,335.40
invoicc 12112/3 1'uwts:' B32.G8 210.68 0.00 149;s.30
,2`'
Prk?ieG 9840 Totals: 85.751.50 7,649.50 93,400,00. 78.964,60 ✓ 14,435.40
4 � r—�
ACCOUNTING SHEET
Shutt Moen Associates (Comprehensive Land Use Plans for the four public use airports in Butte
County)
Caltrans Grant $81,000.00
City of Chico 5,000.00
BEGINNING BALANCE: TOTAL, $86,000.00
7/2000 Contract Amendment 5.000.00 (See addition page 2)
TOTAL $91,000.00 Amended Contract Total
r
DATE OF AMOUNT OF BALANCE TO DATE OF CLAIM
INVOICE INVOICE BE PAID AUDITOR
Beginning Balance $86,000.00
10/31/98 •$1,676.05 $84,323.95 ' 12/3/98
12/31/98 $1,841.35 $82,482.60 1/22/99
1/31/99 $6,432.80 $76,049.80 2/18/99
2/28/99 $ 885.80 $75,164.00 3/17/99
3/31/99 $3,182.00 $71,982.00 4/15/99
4/30/99 $3,328.00 $68,654.00 5/20/99
5/31/99 .$2,338.00 $66,316.00. 6/17/99
7/31/99
$4,197.80
$62,118.20.
8/20/99
1/31/00
$7,831.36
$31,598.40
2/18/00
8/31/99
$8,716.84
$53,401.36,
9/13/99
5/1/00
$7,469.96
$11,950.68
9/30/99
$3,744.28
$49,657.08
11/8/99
10/31/99
$2,371.16
$47,285.92
12/2/99 -
11/30/99
$2,381.92
$44,904.00
1/4/00
12/31/99
$5,474.24
$39,429.76
1/20/00
1/31/00
$7,831.36
$31,598.40
2/18/00
2/29/00
$12,177.76
$19,420.64
3/14/00
5/1/00
$7,469.96
$11,950.68
0
t
5/31/00
$1,986.36
$ 9,964.32
5/31/00
7/11/00
$2,928.92
$ 7,035.40
7/11/00,
7/2000
Contract Amendment.
+ 5,000.00
•
Amended Balance to be Paid
$12,035.40
1/23/01
$1,986.20
$10,049.20
1/22/01
1/23/01"
$5,428.95
$4,620.25
1/22/01
1/23/01
$1,944.17
$2,676.08
1/22/01
1/23/01
$1,632.72
$1,043.36
1/22/01 "
1/23/01
$1,043.36
0
1/22/01
K\Planning\ALUC\CLUP\2000\Contmct\CLAIMS.SMA
0
t
FILE No.435 01/23.'01 PM 12:09 ID:SHUTT & MOEN FAX:5269721 PAGE 1.
SHUTT • ASSOCIATES
A eROJM28I0101- COMPATIO" Fm S.D. 6iNO "" 2
7 Aviation Blvd. Santa Rosa, CA 95403 (707)!526-'51010
of
Invoice Number: 11573
March 31. 200.0 1I
Invoice
To: County of Butte
Development Services Director
.7 County Center Drive
Oroville• CA 95963
Anention:,Thomas A. Parilo u
6
Project. 9840 Butte County Airport Land Use Plan
Manager Ken Brody
Professional Services for the Period: 3/12000 to 3/31/2000
Billing Group: PLN Invoice: 11573
March 31, 2000
Tasks Accomplished: Contract Amount: $86.000.00
o Submitted plan pollcles for staff review. Percent Complete: 86.10%
o Hearing completion of admin draft plan. Fee Earned: $74.049:32
y
Prior Fee Billings: 66,579.36
Current Fee Total: $7.469.96
Phask
1. Project [nititiation '
Bullet
$18,380.00
Invoked to Date
$18,380.00
Comcleted
100%
2. Plan Preparation
$45,412.00
$45,412.00
100%
3. Review and Adoption
$18,856.00
7,542.20
40%
Administration
3'352•Q0
2.7
$-72 15.12
Totals
$86,000.00
$74,049.32
86.100/0
Poet -It` Fax Note 7671
Date. 0 ` pa.1 b,
7b
From
GO./oepL ..�r4 Cw 10 kSe.v.
Co. Sad
Phona #
Phona 0 ZOO 5Z 4a— Smvo
Faxa S't+o(S_36-1/85
Faxu
+vcLrs�vs5 wl8�'?r�y 1
FILE No.435 01/23 '01 PM 12:09 ID:SHUTT & MOEN
Billing Group: ADD
Additional Books
FAX:5269721 PAGE 2
Invoice: 11573
March 31. 2000
Contract Amount: $2.400.00
Percent Complete: 100.00%
Fee Earned: $2.400.00
Prior Fee Billings: 0.00
Current Fee Total: $2.400:00:
Project 'Totals:
*'' * Total Project Invoice Amount 59.869.96
FILE No.435 0123 '01 PM 12:09 ID:SHUTT & MOEN, FAX:5269721 PAGE 3
VENDOR 4857 _ DATE 05/10/00, _NO. .1505 -499285
'.. P. O. OR
CLAIM INVOICE OR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT BUDGET UNIT ACCOUNT FUND
X1107 11573 LAND USE PLANS 7469.96 480001 R536 0010
TOTAL
ECF;, iD
PAY 1 Z
7469.96
mail 007151
County of Aattc
Lmq DIM
gQr, ��ry
$!il111a:El1Q.
IV 10/~1/1998
1,676.05 +:'
0.00
PAY 1/21/1999
1.616.05
1,676.05
0.00
lnvoicc 10827 Totals:1.676,05
1,676.05
0.00
1V 12/31/1998
1,941.35
0.00
PAY 2!5/1949
1,6.11.35 ✓
O.OV
, Lfvoico f091S'tncsla:1,841.33
.��
0.00
6,432.80
6,432.80
IV 1/31/1999
5.159 �t!
1,2j3.39.:
- PAY ]/11/!999-
6.432.tr0
0.00
Invuica 10935 Totak
5,159.41
1,273.39
IV 2/28/1999
111"A043
0.00
PAY .36(VI999
885.80
0.00
Invoice 11004 Touts.
885.90
0.00
IV 3AIII999
3,182.00'.
0.00
PAY 4110.099
3,182.00
0.00 .
lnvuicc 11042 Tanis:3,
t82,00..
0.00
/ (V :41. 0/109
3,181. 3.
_
146.55.,'`
- PAY 6/8/1999
3,329.00
0.00
Invoice I I1 t0'Totela:
?,181.45
146.55
IV 5!3111999
2,338.00
0.00
PAY 7.'6!1999
2,338.00
0.00
Ir,vuicc 11 140'Colalts:2,338.00
0.00
I V . 7/31/1999
4,191.80 `/
0.00
PAY 9/1/1997
4 197.80.
0.00
Invoico 11231 Totals:
4.197.80
0.60
IV 8131/1999
11,536.96
159.88
PAY 987/1999 '
T
0,00
lovrtict 11271 1'01313:
� A316 9G
159.88
IV y>70/1999
3,744.29
0.00
PAY 1 112211 99 9
0,371.16
lnvoiva 11331 TOMIA:?:7.14.28
2,371.16 !�
0.00
Cv 1P131i1999
2,203.46
165,70 -
PAY 121311199y'
2,381,92 !C
1,381.92
111,00
Ifivniu 11300 Totals:
2,205.46
165.70
IV I1130!1999
2.3111.92
0.00
PAY 120000
3,474.24
0.(w
lnvoico 11413 Tatola:
2,3111_92
0.00
IV 12/31/1999
5.474.24 ;-}
0.00
PAY 21`7.12000
7;131.36
tl.tw
Invtnce 11474 Totals:
5.474.2.1
0.00
IV 1/31/2000
x,831,?6.
00)
PAY 3/612(100
12.177.76
n -0a -
lllvoicu 11516 TNAIa:
7,831 R,
O.M
IV 2/29/-21x;13
0.9XI.7S
2,195.99.
PAY 3,1912000
--
Invoice .U532ToInk
9991.18
2.lyS.vB
:IV 3/111,2000
6,990.40
57'1.5!
PAN' 3116 2000
1,986.-24
21400.00
IV t/3 t 2000;
343 12
_
2.OS 1 da
Invoke 1 15?3 Toler;,:
7.'138 :2
'? n31 A•t
Iv 4110/2000
;,955.2!,
1:11.10
PAY 6/22r:00b
InVLul'C t 1616 Truk
1,835.21+
131.10
IV Gi?02000
2.1101,:2
122•1(1
PAY 7/.5!2000
/lLoet23
Y//' 2 2_/
TOW
�blettwome
ents
-1,67c.OS
1.616.05
1,676.05
0.00
1,676.05
1,676.05
0.00
1,84133.
1,841.35
•
1,6.11.35 ✓
O.OV
1,841.11
1,841,35
0.00
6,432.80
6,432.80
4,332.80. �
tl,cl0
6,4� 32.80
6.432.tr0
0.00
885.80
_
885.80
•
e8S.60 E'
0.00
885.90
885.80
0.00
3,182.00.
3,162.00
3,182.00 /r
0.00
1,182.00 -
3,182.00
0.00 .
3,328.00
.3,328.00
3,328,00
OJAI
3,328.00
3,329.00
0.00
2,338.00
2,338.00
2,3. .00 ✓
0.00
x,338.00
2,338.00
0.00
11,197.80
4.107.80
4.197.80 V
0,00
4.197A,
4 197.80.
0.00
8,716.84
4,716.84
8,716.84 ►G
00-
9,116.94
8,71 n.Ra
0,00
3,744.29
3,144.28 t,-'
3,744.2'•
0.00
.1.744.29
3,144.231
0.00
2.371.16
0,371.16
2,371.16 !�
0.00
2,371.16
2.371.10
0,00
2,381.92
2,381,92 !C
1,381.92
111,00
2,181.92
2,38192
0.00
5,414.24
3,474.24
5,474.24
0.00
5,474.24
3,474.24
0.(w
_ 7.X.11.36
7.811.36
7,831.16 . ✓
0.00
1,8? I .?tl
7;131.36
tl.tw
t 2,177.76
✓
12,177.70
I'_,177.7n
0.00 -
12.177.1G
12.177.76
n -0a -
7.464.96
7.469.96
7,469.94
0.00
�Q , Aid -
2,3015.00
2 �
"'2.400.n(i OU--
9,869.96
7 4453.9(3
1
1.986.36
✓
4,3k6 36
1,986.-24
21400.00
2,4011.00
2.928 92
5,328.92 {
ze
` Toiid 13aiaaeo
Dam Baimh.1180, am
luvoico 11718 Touds. 2,l1Uti.22 132.T0 2,92A,y2 2,948.92 Z 4o0.ppf ps , '
IV 1/3)12(100 1,799.11 187.09 �f� 1,986.211. 41AG.20
Involve 11706 Totals: 1.799.1.1 187.0° . ' , BG.20 0•(M' 4,380.20
1V 95112000 5.428.95 0,00tS;4IB,95'
' 9,815.15
hrvoicc 11809 TOMIs: 5,429.95 0.00 5,428.95_ 0.00 - 9.815.15
LN
IV 10131/2000 1,920.7923.38 1,947 1? 11.759.32Invoice 11 3.38 924 Totals: . 1,820.79 12 1,944.17 0.00 !l?5932
IV 11130/20M 1,332.11 100.61 162.72 1: 13,392.04
Invoice 11969 Tiital&: 1,132.1 I —� 300.61 :632.74 - - – 0.00 13,192.04
IV 12l311200 832.68 210,69 k 1,041,3 � 14,435.40
lnVoiee 12i12b TOWS: 932.68 ,210.62 00 14.435.40
Pmiwt 9840 Totals: BS.731.509,50 93,400.00 - 78,964,60 i 14,435.40 '
. R
.
CIO
Q.y1,1;0`l�-✓lt;, 1^8�1�1Q,i7'Li� l� �, `� , � �/
- - 1•�c� /4, �3 S- 4�v
3-17
� �
i'Ylo ken dy204�
FROM. Thomas A. Parilo, 11ire&tor
DATE:: January 23, 20
L Consent .
a. Item No. 3.08
The Board approved Budget Transfer B-163 fora budget augmentation of $78,000 to fund
activities related to the County's long range planning efforts (implementation of the 2000
Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, quality of life survey to support the Growth Scenarios
Analysis Study, and additional funds to finalize the 2000 CLUP)..
b. Item No. 3.30
The Board approved an amendment to an agreement with Shutt Moen Associates for the.
preparation of a Comprehensive Land Use Plan for the four public use airports in'Butte
County. The amendment extends the term of the agreement to June 30, 2001, and increases
the maximum amount payable by $5,000 to provide for additional work.needed to. finalize
the Plan.
C. Item No. 3.36
The Board accepted for information a report of the Airport Land Use Commission's
responses to the Board of Supervisors' comments submitted December 1% 2000, on the
Draft 2000 Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan and Addendum. This report also provides
information on the future process that includes a requirement to refer all discretionary
projects to ALUC for compatibility review until the county adopts revisions to the General.
Plan and zoning or adopts overrides.
II. Regular Agenda
a. Item No. 4.02
Update on legislative and budget activities. The Chief Administrative Officer will present
to the Board on February 13, 2001, on a new results based management system program.
This program will build on the Board's goals of Operational, Fiscal and Customer Service.
MEMORANDUM
DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
DIRECTOR'S OFFICE
TO: Keen Brody, Shutt Moen Associates.
FROM: _
Brian A. Larsen, Principal Analyst
SUBJECT: CONTRACT AMENDMENT
DATE: � July 6, 2000)
It is clear at this time that theadoption of the Butte County Comprehensive Land Use Plans will not
occur as originally planned for. This delay will require a contract amendment extending the term of
the contract. We do not anticipate the need for further funding for your firm to comply with your
contractual obligations to see the project through to plan_adoption. However, we are increasing the.
maximum amount payable under the contract by $5;000.00 for contingency purposes.
Enclosed are three copies of the amendment. Please sign all three and return to me at your earliest .
convenience. If you need any additional information please call me at (530)'538-7464.'
JACONTRACTXSHUTT MOEN AMNDI.menio.wpd,
AMENDMENT # 1 TO THE AGREEMENT (X11078) BETWEEN
THE COUNTY OF BUTTE AND SHUTT MOEN ASSOCIATES
REGARDING PREPARATION OF COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLANS FOR THE
FOUR PUBLIC USE AIRPORTS IN BUTTE COUNTY
Reference is made to that certain Agreement, dated September 22, 1998 regarding preparation of
comprehensive land use plans for the four public use airports in Butte County.
Section three entitled "PAYMENT TO, 'CONSULTANT" of the aforesaid Agreement is hereby amended,
changing the maximum amount payable to $91,000.00.
Section four entitled "TERM" of the aforesaid Agreement is hereby amended so as to have an ending date
of December 31, 2000.
The remainder of the terms of the aforesaid Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the authorized representatives of the. parties hereto have executed
this Agreement.
COUNTY APPROVED AS TO FISCAL
AND BUDGETARY CONTROL
s,
ACCOUNTING SHEET "
Shutt Moen Associates (Comprehensive Land Use Plans for the four public use airports in Butte County)
Caltrans Grant $81,000.00
City of Chico 5,000.00
BEGINNING BALANCE: TOTAL $86,000.00
DATE OF
INVOICE .
AMOUNT OF
INVOICE
BALANCE TO
BE PAID
DATE OF CLAIM
AUDITOR
10/31/98
•$1,676.05
$84,323.95
12/3/98
12/31/98
$1,841.35
$82,482.60
1/22/99
1/3.1./99
.$6,432.80
$76,049.80
2/18/99
2/28/99
$ 885.80 _
$75,164.00
3/17/99
3/31/99
$3,182.00
$71,982.00
4/15/99
4/30/99
$3,328.00
$68,654.00
5/20/99
5/31/99
$2,338.00
$66,316.00
6/17/99
7/3.1/99
$4,197.80
$62,118.20
8/20/99
8/31/99
$8,716.84
$53,401.36
9/13/99
9/30/99 $3,744.28 $49,657.08 11/8/99
10/31/99 . $2,371.16 $47,285.92 12/2/99.
11/30/99 $2,381.92 . $44,904.00 1/4/00
12/31/99 .$5,474.24 . , $39,429.76 1/20/00
1/31/00 $7,831.36 $31,598.40 2/18/00
2/29/00 $12,177.76 $19,420.64 3/14/00
5/1/00 $7,469.96 $11,950.68 5/1/00
5%31/00 $1,986.36 $ 9,964.32 5/31/00
7/11/00 $2,928.92 $ 7,035.40 7/11/00
K. \P LA NNIN G\A L UC\C LU P\2000\CONTRA CIBC LA I M S. S MA
September 1, 1998
Ms. Christa-Maria Engle
Department of Transportation
Aeronautics Program M.S. #40
P.O. Box 942874
Sacramento, CA 942740001
s
�3aate C.
LAND' OF NATURAL WEALTH AND BEAUTY
AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE • OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397
TELEPHONE: (530) 538-7601
FAX: (530) 538-7785
Subject: Refinement of Butte County Comprehensive Airports Land Use Plan Work
Program
Dear Ms. Engle:
As described in the August 24, 1998 Department of Development Services correspondence to
Shutt Moen Associates, which was forwarded to you, the Airport Land Use Commission has
selected their firm as the consultant for the referenced project. The letter also requested that the
work program prepared by SMA be refined to delete those items which were determined as "non
granteligible" by your agency, such as the preparation of Airport Diagrams for the two privately
owned airports.
Although the Airport Land Use Commission is supportive of including the expanded noise study
for the Chico Municipal Airport within the work program, this task was not identified in the RFP
that was distributed and is. therefore viewed as a supplemental or optional task. Since the grant
amount the ALUC has been allocated is not sufficient to cover the cost of the expanded study
(estimated between $5,000 and $6,000), we have requested that SMA not include this item within
the work program at this time. The ALUC is pursuing discussions with the City of Chico Airport
Commission and/or the Butte County Association of Governments to assist with funding for the
CLUP update process. If either of those agencies responds favorably, the work program could
be amended to include the noise analysis. However, it is not known whether either of those
agencies will be able to .contribute at this time.
During our recent telephone conversations it appeared that Aeronautics Program staff considered
the expanded noise analysis to be an important component of the CLUP update process. Since
the refined work program must be approved by Caltrans before the grant agreement can be
executed, we are requesting correspondence from your agency specifying whether a work
program which does not include the expanded noise analysis will be acceptable. Your agency's
response will help expedite refinement of the work program and the ultimate execution of the
.grant agreement.
Ms. Christa Engle
September 1, 1998
Page 2
As always, your assistance and prompt attention to this request is greatly appreciated. Please
call me at (530) 533-1131 if you have any questions or need additional information in order to
provide a response.
Sincerely,
Laura Webster
Butte County ALUC Staff —
a
gust 24',"-1998
Do.- D,3: D/ -,.9.2-
L A N D '
D.L
•
LAND' OF NATURAL WEALTH -AND BEAUTY
. AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE • OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397
TELEPHONE: (530) 538-7601
FAX: (530) 538-7785
Mr. Kenneth Brody
Shutt Moen Associates
707 Aviation Boulevard
Santa Rosa, CA 95403
SUBJECT: Consultant Selection for the Butte County Comprehensive Airports Land Use
Plan
Dear Mr. Brody:
The County of Butte Department of Development Services is pleased to announce the selection
of your firm as the consultant to prepare the Comprehensive Airports Land Use Plan for all four
public use airports in the County. At this time we are requesting that.you prepare a refined
work program and budget to accompany the forthcoming contract.
The contract amount recommended for approval by 'the Airport Land Use Commission at it's
August 19, 1998 meeting, is $81,000.00. Although the cost estimate that was presented in your.
July 15, 1998 proposal was $82,824.00, it has been determined by Caltrans Aeronautics
Program staff (see attached July 24, 1998 correspondence from Christa-Maria Engle), that the
preparation -of Airport Diagrams for the two privately -owned airports is not a grant eligible
activity. Therefore, we are requesting that you eliminate that item and its associated cost
during your refinement of the work program for the project. However, preparation of the
Airspace Plans for those facilities should remain within the work program since that activity is
considered a grant eligible item. Other minor scope modifications or clarifications
recommended in Ms. Engle's letter should also be incorporated into the refined work program.
Although the ALUC is supportive of including the expanded noise analysis for the Chico
Municipal Airport and the utilization of Brown Buntin Associates for the task, funding for that
item has not yet been acquired. Therefore, we would like to proceed with refinement of the
basic work program and execution of the contract without incorporating that item. If funding
becomes available in the near future, an amendment to the contract will be prepared to
incorporate that work effort.
In order to place approval of the contract and work program on the Board's. September 22,
1998 agenda, the refined work program should be submitted to the Department of Development
Services as soon as possible, but not later than Friday, September,4, 1998. Since the work
program must be approved by the California Department of Transportation, Aeronautics
Program before the grant agreement can be executed, we are hoping to coordinate Caltrans
staffs review of the work program concurrently with the Board's approval.
Mr. Kennedy Brody
Page 2
Again congratulations on your firm's selection. Please call Paula Leasure (530) 538-7601 or
Laura Webster (530) 533-1131 if you have any questions at this time. ry
Sincerely,
Thomas A. Parilo,
Director of Development Services
cc: Christa-Maria Engle, Caltrans Aeronautics Program
Paula Leasure, Department of Development Services
Laura Webster, ALUC Staff
. r
' .k
0
r
rr
JUL-228-199': 09: 1s •CALTFi iMS 1 iERp�laU i IGS • 91r 227 9093, P. 011'03
STATE OF CALIFORNIA -BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY PETE WILSON, GOVernOr
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
AERONAUTICS PROGRAM M.S. #40 :
1120 N STREET - ROOM 3300 A'
P.O. BOX 942874
SACRAMENTO, CA 94274-0001
(916) 654-4959
FAX (916) 653-9531
July 24, 199$
Ms. Paula Leasure
Principal Planner
Butte County Airport Land Use Commission
7 County Center Drive
Oroville, CA -95965
Dear Ms. Leasure:
Comments on the Shutt Moen Associates proposal for the Butte County Airport
Comprehensive Land Use Plan
The Aeronautics Program, California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), has
reviewed the Shutt Moen proposal for the Butte County's airport comprehensive land use plan
(CLUP) development. Overall, the proposal is solid, however we do have a few specific
comments for your consideration.
In the Request For Proposal (RFP), Item 1.2 was outlined to reassess the ALUC Airport
Area of Influence. If it was implied within this proposal, then this comment can be set aside;
otherwise, we would want to make sure that the item is covered within the work scope.
Issues Identification
While we agree with the proposal that issue'identiflcation involves discussion with all
available sources, we do not feel that any one entity should be emphasized. The narrative did
not specifically mention including the ALUC. Each ALUC member should have the
opportunity to provide input into the process.
Development of Airport Layout Diagrams and Airspace Plans
It should -be noted that the Aeronautics Program cannot pay for the preparation of the
Airport Layout Plans (ALPs) for the two privately owned airports. This was correctly alluded to
in the"proposal. It will be the airport owner's responsibility to ensure that an adequate ALP is
prepared for planning purposes. We have already sent information to assist the owners with that
task. The ALPs will be mandatory in order for us to reimburse the costs of CLUP development
for those airports. The law is clear that the CLUP must be based upon either a long-range
master plan or an ALP. Also, it should be noted that the ten -percent match in cash or "in-kind"
JUL-^8-199:: 09:16 • CALTRAHS AEROHAUT[CS • 916 32r'r 9G9P. 02/03
Ms. Paula Leasure
July 24, 1998
Page 2
monies for the project must ilsn.he. a etnta-aligihlP PxrPncP We reimhnrSA the AT.T TC. ar. ninety
percent (and with a ten percent holdback until project completion) of both matching costs and
consultant costs up to the maximum allowed by the state's share (i.e., ninety percent of the total
project cost). We will comment on some of the specific budget items in that regard later in our
comments.
Airspace and Instrument Approach Procedure Analyses (and Sidebar)
Any benefits to the CLUP process which would include a Terminal Procedures. (TERPS)
analyses should be carefully thought-out. It pay be a consideration for the larger airports if the
master plans indicate that a TERPS analysis would provide vital data for future planning.
Noise Analyses (Sidebar)
The analysis of noise abatement procedures as it relates to airport operations is not within
the purview of the ALUC. These are not reimbursable items for this project.
Policy Development
We agree with the sidebar comment that noise and safety concerns and the associated
criteria should be separately addressed.
Implementation Measures
In the first statement, the consultant is probably not entirely outlining the ALUC's role. It
should be noted that one of the ALUC's primary responsibilities is to make a determination of
compatibility for the projects referred and for those required by law for review. Therefore, the
implementation section, as it relates to the CLUP should be thoroughly addressed in the CLUP
development process. However, the two activities listed in the sidebar: the update of the pilots'
guide insert and the update to the FAR Part 150 study are not reimbursable items with these
funds. The ALUC should consider additional items that will directly enhance the ALUCs
ability to function more effectively.
Administrative Draft Plan
The administrative draft plan should also be reviewed by the ALUC, and/or its
subcommittee and Caltrans.
Review and Adoption - Environmental Documentation .
This document should also be reviewed by the ALUC and/or its subcommittee and
Caltrans.
•
•
JUL-228-1998 '� �- 16 �:ALTF.At l'� HERCiI dHUT I CS 916327 ?G_1P. 03;'0.;
Ms. Paula Leasure
July 24, 1998
Page 3 .
Public Review Process and Adopted Plan
It was our understanding that the listing of specific changes recommended by the
commission and other reviewing bodies was to be a working document and would not be
included in the final plan. If it is included as an addendum or otherwise, what will be its
purpose? I
Proposed Task Budgets
Many of the supplemental tasks are not eligible for the state's reimbursement, some of
which have already been addressed. However, there are two tasks identified which would be
worth considering and would be eligible for the state funds: "refine Implementation Measures
Ianguage" and the "additional meetings," if needed.
Note that the consultant and the ALUC will be refining the scope of the work based upon
the comments of the reviewers and any scoping discussions that might take place. That
document will become the final scoping document of record, which we will want to review at its
completion. The rest of the budget, from our perspective, looks acceptable.. Keep in mind that
the State's allocation is $81,000.00 (i.e., the 90%portion of a $90,000.00 project). Thus, the
ALUC will need a $90,000.00 project in order to receive the full allocation from Caltrans. As
indicated previously, the additional $9,000.00 cost in the project must also be state -eligible
tasks. Beyond that number, the City of Chico or the County can choose to pay for some of the
other non state -eligible supplemental tasks if so desired.
This concludes the Aeronautics Program's comments on the Shutt Moen proposal.
Although only the one firm applied, we feel that they are competent and will provide the ALUC
with unbiased fact-finding and produce a solid product.
It is hoped that these comments will be of assistance to the reviewing committee. Please
advise us of the final results from the committee review and the ALUC's intention regarding the
consultant.
Should you have any questions regarding these comments or the grant agreement process,
please contact me at: (916) 654-5553.
Sincerely,
CH STA-16LAdUA ENGLE
Aviation Planner
y
��B COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION +
• 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA 95965 • (530) 538-7601 FAX (530) 538-7785 •
AGENDA ITEM - E. 4.
TO: Honorable Chair and Airport Land Use Commission
FROM: Laura Webster, ALUC Staff
DATE: August 4, 1998
Consultant Selec• 1 for Butte County • 1
Use 1
FOR: Airport Land Use Commission Meeting of August 19, 1998
SUMMARY:
Staff and the Airport Land • Use Commission Subcommittee consisting of Chairman
Hennigan, Commissioner Gerst and Commissioner Rosene recommend that the firm of
Shutt Moen Associates .(SMA) be selected to prepare the Butte County Comprehensive
Airports Land Use Plan.
ANALYSIS: _
On June 12, 1998 staff distributed,a Request for Proposals (RFP) to prepare the Butte
County Comprehensive Airports Plan. The RFP was distributed to fve,qualified firms
based upon an approved list provided by the California Department of Transportation,
Aeronautics Program.
The deadline for proposal submittal was July 15, 1998. Staff received a proposal from only
one of the five firms that were solicited - Shutt Moen Associates. According to information
from m Caltrans Aeronautics Program staff, the ALUC may chose to select a consultant even
if only one proposal is submitted, if it finds that the firrih is qualified to complete the work
and the contents of the proposal are adequate.
Staff prepared the attached matrix to assist the Subcommittee and Commissioners with
their review of the proposal. The far left column identifies the task number and work effort
requested within the RFP. Columns two through four are used to indicate whether the item
was addressed in the proposal or shown as an optional task. Column five identifies the
page number within the proposal that the task item is addressed and any other pertinent
comments.
• Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission •
As indicated within the matrix, all of the tasks listed in the RFP have been addressed to
acceptable levels within the proposal. In addition, the consultant has noted a number of
"supplemental tasks" or enhanced work efforts which the ALUC may wish to consider.
Correspondence from Christa Engle of the Caltrans Aeronautics Program (see attached
letter dated 7-24-98) also provides that agency's comments regarding the adequacy of the
proposal, the qualifications of the consultant, and which proposed and supplemental tasks
may be eligible for grant funding.
According to Ms. Engle's letter and subsequent telephone conversations, almost all of.the
basic program tasks proposed by the consultant are considered "grant eligible" activities,
except for the preparation of Airport Diagrams for the two privately owned airports. The
cost estimate associated with preparation of the Airport Diagrams ,for those facilities is
approximately $2,376. The consultant's proposal also included the preparation of Airspace
Plans for both of the privately owned airports. According.to SMA discussions with Caltrans
staff, that portion of the work effort (another $2,376) will -still be needed and is considered
an "eligible" activity.
Other discussions with Aeronautics Program staff indicate that the owner, of the Ranchaero
Airport has recently submitted an updated Airport Layout Plan (ALP) which is currently
being reviewed by their agency. Therefore, the preparation of an Airport Diagram will not
be necessary for that facility. However, preparation of an updated Airport Layout Plan
(Diagram and narrative) is still needed for the Paradise Skypark Airport. The status of this
airport's permit is also in question until an adequate Airport Layout Plan is submitted. In
recent conversations and correspondence, Caltrans staff has repeatedly cautioned that
because the facility• is privately owned, public funds should not be utilized for ALP
preparation.
The two supplemental tasks noted by Caltrans staff as "grant eligible" work efforts include:
• Refinement of Implementation Measure Language $2,000 - $4.,000
Staff Comment: As part of the basic proposal, Shutt Moen Associates will provide
samples of the typical contents of an Airport Combining Zone District, Avigation
Easement, and Advisory Notice within the implementation section of the Plan. The
supplemental work effort listed above would involve working primarily with local
agencies to develop actual ordinances and documents in a form that was ready for their
adoption. Although considered a "grant eligible" item, it may be more appropriate for
local agencies to consider funding this item independently.
• Additional Meetings by Shutt Moen Associates $ 800 - $1,000 per mtg.
Staff Comment: Shutt Moen Associates has already proposed to attend up to 11
meetings as part of the CLOP update and adoption process. These meetings include
public workshops, status and input meetings with the ALUC, consultations with local
agencies, and adoption hearings. The number of meetings proposed by SMA appears
to be adequate for a project of this type, however, it is difficult to predict at this time how
many meetings will actually be necessary. -
• Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission •
During staffs 8-3-98 meeting with the ALUC Subcommittee, it was suggested that Shutt
Moen Associates be contacted regarding the amount of funding that was provided for the
noise analysis. The purpose of this inquiry was to ensure that the amount shown in the
proposal would be adequate to evaluate the noise contours prepared within the City of
Chico's FAR Part 150 study and conduct additional modeling to factor in any noise
sources not considered within that document.
When contacted by staff, representatives from SMA indicated that their original proposal
did not factor in additional noise modeling for the Chico Municipal Airport. If such a work
effort is desired by the Commission, SMA would recommend that Brown-Buntin Associates
(BBA) be retained as a subconsultant to conduct the analysis. The estimate given by BBA
for the expanded analysis was approximately $5,000. This estimate assumes that raw
data used to calculate the contours generated for the FAR Part 150 study will be available
from the City of Chico and that minimal data collection will be necessary on the part of
BBA. Representatives from Shutt Moen Associates have also indicated that their work
scope would need to be expanded slightly to factor in coordination with the subconsultant
if this task is incorporated into the work program.
Staff contacted Caltrans Aeronautics Program staff to discuss whether this item would be
considered an eligible activity under the CAAP grant. Christa Engle commented that the
task would not only be considered an eligible activity, but is highly recommended based
on the controversy that has existed over the noise contours within the FAR Part 150 study.
She also suggested that the ALUC may wish to consider adding this task in place of the
ineligible task of preparing Airport Diagrams for the privately owned airports.
Other supplemental tasks within the original proposal that the Subcommittee felt were
beyond the scope of the ALUC's responsibility, but could be valuable work efforts for
individual cities and/or airport land owners to consider funding include:
• Updates to Pilot Guide Inserts $500 per airport + printing
• TERPS Analysis of Six Existing Instrument $8,000
Approaches (Task applies to Chico and Oroville)
• Review of Existing Noise Abatement Procedures $2,000 to $5,000
(Relates to Airport Operations)
The total fixed fee amount for the basic work program items proposed by the consultant
is $82,824. If the task of preparing Airport Diagrams for the two privately owned airports
is removed, the cost estimate is reduced to approximately $80,450. Total funds approved
from the California Aid to Airports Program (CARP) consist of $81,000. In order to ensure
maximum utilization of the grant funds which have been allocated, the Commission may
wish to replace ineligible tasks with other supplemental items as recommended by Caltrans
Aeronautics Program staff. If the expanded noise analysis is selected in place of the
Airport Diagrams for the privately owned airports, and no other scope modifications are
desired, the total fixed fee amount for the consultant's portion of the project would be
$86,000, leaving a cash funding shortfall of $5,000.
*Butte County *Airport Land Use Commission •
3
Options to address this shortfall include:.
• Reducing other aspects of the consultant's scope of work to.a level that.matches the
total grant amount available.
Likely modifications would include reducing the total number of meetings that SMA will
be attending/conducting. However, such an action may make it necessary for staff to
conduct some project related meetings in place of the consultant.
• Request that all municipal and private airport owners contribute funds to facilitate the
completion of the CLUP update.
After the consultant is selected and the final budget amount available for consultant
services is determined, Shutt Moen Associates will prepare a more refined work program
that will accompany the contract. The Commission should be'aware that the refined work
program must also be reviewed and approved by Caltrans before the grant agreement can
be executed.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
A. Recommend that the Board of Supervisors approve the selection of Shutt Moen
Associates as the consultant for preparation of the Butte County Comprehensive
Airports Land Use Plan for a contract amount equal to the full amount of the CAAP
grant allocation ($81,000) and a total project amount of $90,000 (including a 10% staff
"in kind services" match). _
B. Provide direction to staff regarding any preferred scope modifications.
Option 2
A. Recommend that the Board of Supervisors approve the selection of Shutt Moen
Associates as the consultant for preparation of the Butte County Comprehensive
Airports Land Use Plan and solicit additional funds from the City of Chico to facilitate
completion the expanded noise analysis ($5,000).
Note - This option assumes that the ineligible activity of preparing Airport Diagrams for
the privately owned airports will be removed from the work program.
Under this scenario the Board would be asked to approve a contract amount of $81,000
for Shutt Moen Associates and a total project amount of $90,000 (including a staff "in
kind services" match equal to 10% of the total project). The- City of Chico would be
asked to fund the portion of the expanded noise analysis ($5,000) that will not .be
covered by the grant amount available from the state.
• Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission •
4
• i - � ,,'. r' ' ,, •fes• �, t 1 t,` �.. '� n � `�r - � '
Y
1.1 Data Collection.
X
+
See page 2.
1.2 Reassess ALUC Airport Areas of Influence. ,
' X
According to staff's 7-31-98 discussions
with representatives from . (SMA)
reassessmentof the Airport Areas of
t
Influence will result as part of the noise .
and safety analysis, not as an initial or
Y
individual task.
1.3 j Summarize/Map GP & Zoning Info for
X i
X
See pages 3 and 15. According to Butte
Each Airport Area of Influence.
Updating ..
County GIS staff, adequate zoning and
'
County GIS
land. use information 'are `` already
Info
available. SMA will not need to update
`
the County's data files.
1.4 Compile Data and Map Existing Land Uses
X
,,'
See page 3. This task will be completed
in Each Airport Area of Influence.
using .' information .. from local
{
.
'jurisdictions and air, photos. No
windshield surveys are proposed.
1.5 Air Photos: '
r
, See page'2 for'standard photos. Digital
X
-
ortho photos are shown as an optional
item for $30,000+.
2.1 Review Existin Documents.
g
X t<
`
k ;
;See page 2.,
2.2 = Conduct Research to Define Issues..
X
See pages 2 and 3. =77,
2.3 Develop Categorization of Compatible
X -
�r
�•
Seepage 6.
Uses/Designations. Identify,Conflicts.
2.4 Prepare Interim report to Document
„ X ,.
n .
According to 'staffs discussions with
Existing Conditions and Issues. ,
representatives from SMA, a number of
"status report" meetings are proposed.
A variety of "interim" maps and analysis
a :
j
will "also be presented'as appropriate in
"
the process rather than a specific report.
3.1 Define Technical Parameters for Each
'
X .
-
.`
See page 4. < •, ,..
Airport.
.ye
3.2 Define Imaginary Airspace Surfaces Per
X ''
;'
•t:
See pages 4 and 5'
FAR Part 77.-
r
,:
3.3- Examine : All Existing; and Proposed'
X
,.
X
See pages 4 and' 15. TERPs analysis
Instrument Approach Procedures. Prepare
Instrument
6; .
TERP.
would be an additional' $8,000. The
TERP Surfaces if necessary.
_ . - •
Approach
Analysis
City's of Oroville and Chico may wish to
_
r
consider funding the optional analysis.
3.4 Evaluate Land, -,Use ;Implications for
X
See pages 6'and 7.,
Imaginary. Surfaces.
v
t=
4.1 Update'Airport Aircraft Activity Info and
X
t
e
Seepage 5.
Forecasts (20 Year Horizon).
,
t:
.....:: .M..........
.. .. . ........ .............
1. " * i ............... : X.....%.Xi
" ..
..................... . . . .. .
...X.........
. ..... ..........
....... ..X..: ..........-X..-X..-X..-X. -.............................. .. x..
.......
......
........... ..........
.....
......
......
.........
.....
..... ......
- ---------- - --.......... ..............
.......
:X
........... . ...
................... . ...... ...... .........
. ............ .... . ....
..... .....
..
.............................
.................
.......................
..... ...............
...............
............. ........ X
.. . .. X.:
4.2 Define Airport Safety Zones *and
X
See page 6.
Appropriate Land Uses.
5.1 Prepare Existing akid' Projected; Noise
X
See page 5.
Contours.
5.2 Assess . Extent to which Noise Affects,
X
See page 6..
Nearby Land Use.
an
5.3 Identify Appropriate CNEL; CNEL vs. -
2
See page 6..
Land Use Matrix; Areas Requiring Noise'
Insulation; Single Event Noise Events.
6.1 Review, 1993 Airport Land Use Plainning
•X
Shutt Moen Associates prepared the
Handbook.
Handbook.
6.2 Gather �and Present Noise Complaint
Mp
X
See page 6.
Information
r 4
6.3 Evaluate the Need f6r Specific Policies to
See page 6. A supplemental noise
Ensure Compatibility Based on Complaints.
X
•
related analysis to - review the
effectiveness. of current' operational
policies, noise abatement procedures,
and'outline possible improvements is
shown as an optional task on pages 5 and
•
15 for an additional cost of $2,000 to
•
$5,000.-. The City's of Oroville and
Chico may wish to consider funding the
optional tasks.
7.1 Develop Goals, Objectives and Policies
X,
See page 7.
(Comparability and Procedural)•
7.2 Compare Existing and Proposed CLUP
X
r
r
See page 9.'
Policies.
'J"
7.3 Reference Airport Layout Plans.
See. pages 4 -and 15. Preparation of
X
updated Airport Layout Plans and
Airspace Plans to FAA Standards for
Paradise and Ranchaero are shown as an
optional task for $2,000. The proposal
covers 'necessary modifications for the
ALP's -to be used as the basis for the
CLUP.'
7.4 Discuss Recommended Land Use Patterns
X
See page 8.
and Planning Issues
8.1 -Identify Butte County ALUC's Role and-
X
See page 8.
Authority.
8.2 Prepare Consistency Evaluation Between
See pages 8 and 9.
14
Existing City and County GP's/Zohing and
X
Proposed CLUP. Policies.
2
I
8:3 Provide Sample Implementation Tools. '
' X. •`
See pages 7, 8 and 9.
9.1 Compile Results of Tasks 1-8 into the
X -
-
See pages 8 and 9.
CLUP._-
,
9.2 : Provide Draft Table of Contents or Outline
X
See page 8.
for the CLUP.
9.3 Submit 5 Copies of Admin. Draft CLUP.
. X'
''
See pages 8 and 9.
9.4 Submit 75 Copies of "Public Circulation
X
_
Seepage 10.
' Draft CLUP."
3. ,
9.5 Prepare and Maintain a Plan Addendum
. i,. X 4
{
Seepage 10. .•,' ': . '
During the Public Review Process.. t
-
.
<.. , ,
, ,,
• ,
9.6- Incorporate all Modifications Directed by
'See page W. The consultant proposes to
the Commission to Produce the Final Plan
X,
present the Draft Plan and Addendum to
(75 Copies). t. ` ' ,; °`
'ALUC for adoption prior to producing
"
t
a -
final copies of the Plan. • Staffs 7-31-98
"
discussions with representatives from
`
SMA confirmed that modifications
•
directed by . ALUC, through the
Addendum will be -incorporated as
appropriate within the final document,:
rather than just attaching the Addendum
to the Draft Plan. This is how the Draft
• -
,•.
RFP originally described the process..
'
However, it was subsequently modified
'
-
by Caltrans staff. This aspect of the
work program may need to be modified
to satisfy Caltrans.
10.1 Prepare Initial S.tudy.(5 Copies)
X
See page 9. ' • _
10.2 Determination of Appropriate CEQA
-
-
See pages 9 and 10. The proposal and
Documentation. f
X `"
cost estimate anticipates the preparation
4
; '
of a Negative Declaration. Staff will
" '
_
•
officially determine the type of CEQA
documentation that should be prepared
'
later in the process. However, at this
point a Negative Declaration is expected
t
to be adequaie'
10.3 Public Review for Environmental
X
i
See page 12. ALUC staff will be
. Documentation.
responsible for notices and distribution
of environmental documentation. �.
11.1 Coordinationwith ALUC, ALUC staff and
X
This item is addressed throughout_ the
Caltrans Representatives.
r'
-
proposal. '
11.2 Project Initiation Workshop.
X
7.
See pages 2 and 3. `
',i
JUL-28-1993 09:15 �CALTRANS AERONAUTICS • 916 327 9093. 'P.01.'03
STATE OF CALIFORNIA—BUSINESS, TRANSPORTAifON AND HOUSING AGENCY PETE WILSON, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ...• •
AERONAUTICS PROGRAM M.S. 040 :-
1120 N STREET - ROOM 3300 4
P.O. BOX 942874
SACRAMENTO, CA 94274-0001
(916) 654-4959
,FAX (916) 653-9531
July 24, 1998
Ms. Paula Leasure
Principal Planner
Butte County Airport Land Use Commission
7 County Center Drive
Oroville, CA 95965
Dear Ms. Leasure:
Comments on the Shutt Moen Associates proposal for the butte County Airport
Comprehensive Land Use Plan
The Aeronautics Program, California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), has _
reviewed the Shutt Moen proposal for the Butte County's airport comprehensive land use plan
(CLUP) development. Overall, the proposal is solid, however we do have a few specific
comments for your consideration.
In the Request For Proposal (RFP), Item 1.2 was outlined to reassess the ALUC Airport
Area of Influence. If it was implied within this proposal, then this comment can be set aside;
otherwise, we would want to make sure that the item is covered within the work scope.
Issues Identification
While we agree with the proposal that issue identification involves discussion with all
available sources, we do not feel that any one entity should be emphasized. The narrative did
not specifically mention including the ALUC. Each ALUC member should have the
opportunity to provide input into the process.
Development of Airport Layout Diagrams and Airspace Plans
It should be noted that the Aeronautics Program cannot pay for the preparation of the
Airport Layout Plans (ALPs) for the two privately owned airports. This was correctly alluded to
in the proposal. It will be the airport owner's responsibility to ensure that an adequate ALP is
prepared for planning purposes. We have already sent information to assist the owners with that
task. The ALPS will be mandatory in order for us to reimburse the costs of CLUP development
for those airports. The law is clear that the CLUP must be based upon either a long-range
master plan or an ALP. Also, it should be noted that the ten -percent match in cash or "in-kind"
w
JUL-23-1995 09:15
Ms. Paula Leasure
July 24, 1998
Page 2
OLTRANS AERONAUTICS • 915 327 9093 P.02/03'
monies for the project must alsn he a state-PI1gihIP expense. We rp.imhiircP the AN K, at ninety
percent (and with a ten percent holdback until project completion) of both matching costs and
consultant costs up to the maximum allowed by the state's share (i.e., ninety percent of the total
project cost). We will comment on some of the specific budget items in that regard later in our
comments.
Airspace and Instrument Approach Procedure Analyses (and Sidebar)
. Any benefits to the CLU? process which would include a Terminal Procedures (TERPS)
analyses should be carefullv thought-out. It pay be a consideration for the larger airports if the
master plans indicate that a TERPS analysis would provide vital data for future planning.
Noise Analyses (Sidebar)
The analysis of noise abatement procedures as it relates to airport operations is not within
the purview of the ALUC. These are not reimbursable items for this project.
Policy Development
We agree with the sidebar comment that noise and safety concerns and the'associated _
criteria should be separately addressed.
Implementation Measures
In the first statement, the consultant is probably not entirely outlining the ALUC's role. It
should be noted that one of the ALUC's primary responsibilities is to make a determination of
compatibility for the projects referred and for those required by law for review. Therefore, the
implementation section, as it relates to the CLUP should be thoroughly addressed in the CLUP
development process. However, the two activities listed in the sidebar: the update of the pilots'
guide insert and the update to the FAR Part 150 study are not reimbursable items with these
funds. The ALUC should consider additional items that will directly enhance the ALUCs
ability to function more effectively.
Administrative Draft Plan
The administrative draft plan should also be reviewed by the ALUC, and/or its
subcommittee and Caltrans.
Review and Adoption - Environmental Documentation
This document should also be reviewed by the ALUC and/or its subcommittee and
Caltrans.
JUL-29-1992 09:16
Ms. Paula Leasure
July 24, 1998
Page 3
•CALTRANS AEP,i INAUT [ CS
Public Review Process and Adopted Plan
• 916 327 9093 P.03/03
It was our understanding that the listing of specific changes recommended by the .
commission and other reviewing bodies was to be a working document and would not be
included in the final plan. If it is included as an addendum or otherwise, what will be its
purpose?
Proposed Task Budgets
Many of the supplemental tasks are not eligible for the state's reimbursement, some of
which have already been addressed. However, there are two tasks identified which would be
worth considering and would be eligible for the state funds: "refine Implementation Measures
Ianguage" and the "additional meetings," if needed.
Note that the consultant and the ALUC will be refining the scope of the work. -based upon
the comments of the reviewers and any scoping discussions that might take place. That
document will become the final scoping document of record, which we will want to review at its
completion. The rest of the budget, from our perspective, looks acceptable. Keep in mind that
the State's allocation is $81,000.00 (i.e., the 90% portion of a $90,000.00 project). Thus, the —
ALUC will need a $90;000:00 project in order to receive the full allocation from Caltrans. As
indicated previously, the additional $9,000.00 cost in the project must also be state -eligible
tasks. Beyond that number, the City of Chico or the County can choose to pay for some of the
other non state -eligible supplemental tasks if so desired.
This concludes the Aeronautics Program's comments on the Shutt Moen proposal.
Although only the one firm applied, we feel that they are competent and will provide the ALUC
with unbiased fact-finding and produce a solid product.
It is hoped that these comments will be of assistance to the reviewing committee. Please
advise us of the final results from the committee review and the ALUC's intention regarding the
consultant.
Should you have any questions regarding these comments or the grant agreement process,
please contact me at: (916) 654-5553.
Sincerely,
CH STA- LAR.I.A ENGLE
Aviation Planner
STATE OF CALIFORNIA—BUSINESS, TRANSPORT& AND HOUSING AGENCY PETE WILSON, Govemor
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
AERONAUTICS PROGRAM. M.S. #40
1120 N STREET - ROOM 3300 0
P.O. BOX 942874 Rfning D1V1310n
SACRAMENTO, CA 94274-0001
(916) 654-4959
JUL 2 51998
FAX (916) 653-9531
OWN,, calffomLq
July 24,199 8
Ms. Paula Leasure
Principal Planner
Butte County Airport Land Use Commission ,
7 LCounty Center Drive
Oroville, CA 95965
Dear Ms. Leasure:
Comments on the Shutt Moen Associates proposal or the Butte County Airport
Comprehensive Land Use Plan '
The Aeronautics Program,, California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), has
reviewed the Shutt Moen proposal for the Butte County's *airport comprehensive land use plan
(CLUP) development. Overall, the proposal is solid, however we do have a few specific
comments for your consideration.
In the Request Fof Proposal (RFP), Item, 1.2 was outlined'to reassess the ALUC Airport
Area of Influence. If it was implied within this proposal, then this comment can be set aside;
otherwise, we would want to make sure that the item is covered within the work scope.
Issues Identification '
While we agree with the proposal that issue identification involves discussion with all
available sources, we do not feel that anyone entity should be emphasized. The narrative did
not specifically mention including the,ALUC. Each ALUC member should have the
opportunity to provide input into `the. process.
Development of Airport Layout Diagrams. and Airspace Plans
It should be noted that the Aeronautics Program cannot pay for the preparation of the
Airport Layout Plans (ALPS) for the two privately owned airports. This was correctly alluded to
in the proposal. It will be the airport owner's responsibility to ensure that an adequate ALP is
prepared for. planning purposes. We have already sent information to assist the owners with that
task. The ALPS will be mandatory in order for •us to reimburse the costs of CLUP development
for those airports. The law is clear that the CLUP must be based upon either a long-range
master plan or an ALP. Also, it should be noted that the ten -percent match in cash or "in-kind"
Ms. Paula Leasure
July 24, 1998
Page 2
monies for the project must also be a state -eligible expense. We.reimburse the ALUC at ninety
percent (and with a ten percent holdback until project completion) of both matching costs and
consultant costs up to the maximum allowed by the state's share (i.e., ninety percent of the total
project cost). We will comment on some of the specific budget items in that regard later in our
comments.
Airspace and Instrument Approach Procedure Analyses (and Sidebar)
Any benefits to the CLUP process which would include a Terminal Procedures (TERPS)
analyses should be carefully thought-out. It may be a consideration for the larger airports if the
master plans indicate that a TERPS analysis would provide vital data for future planning.
Noise Analyses (Sidebar)
The analysis of noise abatement procedures as it relates to airport operations is not within
the purview of the ALUC. These are not reimbursable items for this project.
Policy Development
We agree with the sidebar comment that noise and safety concerns and the associated
criteria should be separately addressed.
Implementation Measures
In the first statement, the consultant is probably not entirely outlining the ALUC's role. It
should be noted that one of the ALUC's primary responsibilities is to make a determination of
compatibility for the projects referred and for those required by law for review. Therefore, the
implementation section;: as it relates to the CLUP should be thoroughly addressed in the CLUP
development process. However, the two activities listed in the sidebar: the update of the pilots'
guide insert and the update to the FAR Part 150 study are not reimbursable items with these
funds. The ALUC should consider additional items that will directly enhance the ALUCs
ability to function more effectively.
Administrative Draft Plan
The administrative draft plan should also be reviewed by the ALUC, and/or its
subcommittee and Caltrans.
Review and Adoption - Environmental Documentation
This document should also be reviewed by the ALUC and/or its subcommittee and
Caltrans.
Ms. Paula Leasure
July 24, 1998
Page 3
•
Public Review Process and Adopted Plan
•
It was our understanding that the listing of specific changes recommended by the
commission and other reviewing bodies was to be a working document and would not be
included in the final plan. If it is included as an addendum or otherwise,, what will be its
purpose?
Proposed Task Budgets
Many of the supplemental tasks are not eligible.for the state's reimbursement, some of
which have already been addressed. However, there are two tasks identified which would be
worth considering and would be eligible for the, state funds: "refine Implementation Measures
language" and the "additional meetings," if needed.
Note that the consultant and the ALUC will be refining the scope of the work based upon
the comments of the reviewers and any scoping discussions that might take place. That
document will become the final scoping document of record, which we will want to review at its
completion. The rest of the budget, from our perspective, looks acceptable. Keep in mind that
the State's allocation is $81,000.00 (i.e., the 90.% portion of a $90,000.00 project). Thus, the .
ALUC will need a $90,000.00 project in order to receive the full allocation from Caltrans. As
indicated previously, the additional $9,000.00 cost in the project must also be state -eligible
tasks. Beyond that number, the City of Chico or the County can choose to pay for some of the
other non state -eligible supplemental tasks if so desired.
This concludes the Aeronautics Program's comments on the Shutt Moen proposal.
Although only the one firm applied, we feel that they are competent and will provide the ALUC
with unbiased fact-finding and produce a solid product.
It is hoped that these comments, will be of assistance to the reviewing committee. Please
advise, us of the final results from the committee review and the ALUC's intention regarding the
consultant.
Should you have any questions regarding these comments or the grant agreement process,
please contact me at: (916) 654-5553.
Sincerely,
CH STA- ARIA ENGLE
Aviation Planner
e`er
+B=lE OO �RPOE T' ]Ian CJS WO SSION +
• 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA 95965 • (530) 538-7601 FAX (530) 538.7785 •
t
MEMORANDUM
TO: Christa Maria Engle
FROM: Paula Atterberry, Office Assistant III
DATE: July 20, 1998
SUBJECT: Proposal submitted for CLUP
Paula Leasure has asked` me to advise ..you that only one proposal was received for the
preparation of,the Comprehensive Land Use.Plan.. It is enclosed for your review.
If you have any questions, Paula Leasure can be reached Monday through* Friday 8:00 a.m. to
5:00 p.m., or by calling (530)538-7601.
r
• Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission •
SHUTT MOEN ASSOCIATES
n
*�HUTf MOEN
ASSOC I A T.E S
Services to the
Aviation Industry:
• Planning
• Engineering
• Management
707 AVIATION BLVD.
SANTA ROSA, CA 95403
TEL: (707)526-5010
July 15, 1998
Mr. Thomas A. Parilo, DDS Director
Butte County Airport Land Use Commission
7 County Center Lane
Oroville, California 95965
SUBJECT: ALUC Proposal
Dear Mr. Parilo:
We are most pleased to respond to Butte County's June 12, 1998 request for a proposal
from our firm to update the comprehensive airport land use plans for Butte County's four
public -use airports. As detailed in the accompanying material, Shutt Moen Associates is
exceptionally well qualified to provide the highly specialized consulting services the County
requires. In support of this conclusion, we would like to highlight several of the key points
that distinguish our proposal:
> Our professional practice is focused exclusively on airports. Our entire staff and all of
our corporate resources are dedicated full-time to the planning and improvement of
airports.
> Shutt Moen Associates has more experience with airport land use planning in California
than any other firm in the nation. 'We have prepared countywide airport land use com-
patibility plans for airport land use commissions in 14 of the state's counties. Together
with land use analyses conducted as part of airport master plans and special projects,
we have completed compatibility plans for more than 80 airports in the state. Our firm
also had the privilege of preparing the 1993 Caltrans Airport Land Use Planning Hand-
book and continues to maintain a close working relationship with Caltrans Aeronautics
Program staff..
> Butte County will obtain the benefit of both our corporate and individual experience in
airport land use planning. Messrs.. Brody and Dietz the key staff who will be as-
signed to both manage and accomplish this project — have more than 35 years of com-
bined professional experience in airport planning and have been directly involved in all
of our firm's previous airport land use planning projects.
> In order to provide Butte County with the additional specialized expertise which this
project warrants, we have augmented our in-house project team with two subconsul-
tant firms: Mike Bobbitt & Associates and QED Airport and Aviation Consultants.
These firms will provide GIS integration and airspace analysis, respectively. We have
an established working relationship with these firms developed while working on sev-
eral recent land use compatibility plans.
SHUTT MOEN
ASSOCIATES
Mr. Thomas A. Parilo
July 15, 1998
Page 2
> We are familiar with all four airports and their environs. During the course of other
airport projects in northern California, our staff has visited each of the four airports.
Within the past two weeks, we flew to each airport to update our information on facili-
ties and nearby land uses. We are also regular participants in the quarterly meetings of
the Northern California Airport Managers Working Group. This gives us insight into
the concerns of those who operate the airports in the area.
> Our proposal focuses on providing a highly cost-effective product for the County.
Toward this end, we offer a list of supplemental tasks which can be added to our basic
proposal at the County's option. Most of these tasks are Grant -eligible. By including
some or all of these tasks, the County. can maximize its use of the Grant funds which
the Caltrans Aeronautics Program has allocated for the project.
We trust that the attached proposal clearly communicates our sincere interest and consid-
erable enthusiasm for Butte County's project. As you requested, we have enclosed a copy
of a recent report similar to the one we propose for Butte County. This document, the
Merced County Land Use Compatibility Plan, was just released as a public -review draft.
Please let us know if we can provide you with any additional information regarding our
qualifications, experience, and project approach.
Respectfully submitted,
Michael A. Shutt, P.E.
Principal
Kenneth A. Brody
Project Manager
0, PZ
David P. Dietz, AICP
Director of Planning Projects
Attachment
:ca
HAwPDOCS\PROPOSAL\BUTTEL- I. W PD
MEN ASSOCIATES
L' J
Airport Land Use Plan
Proposal
PROJECT OVERVIEW
Airport land use compatibility planning is important for a variety of
reasons. The fact that it is a state -mandated process is probably the
least significant. More significant is that preparation of compatibility
plans is important — and often vital — to protection of the valuable
community assets which airports represent. Additionally, as stated in
the preamble to the state airport land use planning statutes, it is the
objective of airport land use compatibility planning to "minimize the
public's exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within the ar-
eas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not al-
ready devoted to incompatible uses."
Our approach to airport land use compatibility planning in general
and for Butte County in particular — is to accommodate the needs
both of airport protection and of sensible community development. In
this regard, a major challenge of the Butte County Airport Land Use
Plan project will be to establish a uniform countywide approach to
compatibility planning, while also recognizing the distinct differences
among the four airports and the settings in which they are located.
On the following pages, we outline our proposed project methodology
and also identifyseveral supplemental tasks which could beneficially
be accomplished in conjunction with the basic scope of work.
As noted above and further discussed
in the fees portion of this proposal, we PROJECT METHODOLOGY
can take either a basic or a more ex-
panded approach to this project. The
project methodology described here We propose to organize formulation of the plan into three primary
generally reflects the basic approach phases of work. The major components of each phase and some of
with marginal notes indicating where
an expanded effort could be beneficial. the key issues to be addressed are outlined in the following discussion.
���I�III •
SHUTT MOEN ASSOCIATES 1
As a part of our basic proposal, we will
obtain recent aerial photographs of
each airport. As a supplemental task,
we can obtain aerial photographs in a
digital orthophoto format that could be
added to Butte County's GIS database.
Phase 1 — Project Initiation
The focus of the Phase 1 work effort will be on identification of issues,
together with gathering and presentation of information essential to
preparation of the plan. Specific elements of this phase include:
> Data Compilation — The first step in the planning process is to
gather and review a wide variety of data regarding the four airports
and the surrounding land uses. Among the documents and other
data sources to be examined are:
• The airport land use plans previously adopted by the ALUC;
• Adopted master plans and layout plans for Chico and Oroville
Municipal airports;
► Any materials available from the ongoing Chico Municipal Air-
port master plan update;
► Any available drawings or documents pertaining to the two pri-
vately owned, public -use airports in the county: Paradise Sky -
park and Ranchaero airports;
► Airport master records (FAA Form 5010) for each airport;
► The FAR Part 150 Plan for Chico Municipal Airport;
► Any available noise complaint data;
► Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Caltrans, and local air-
craft activity data for each airport, both current and forecast;
► Pilots' guide data regarding each airport;
► Local general plans, specific plans, and zoning ordinances;
Noise and other compatibility analyses contained in EIRs and
negative declarations for projects near the airports;
► Current aerial photography of each airport and its environs (we.
will obtain new photographs as necessary);
► Other information on existing land uses.
In conjunction with this task, we will meet with airport personnel,
planning staffs of the county and affected jurisdictions, and other
people who may be sources of useful information.
> Issues Identification — In any airport land use planning process
there are certain issues which, because of their immediacy, conse-
quences, controversy, or other factors, are. critical to the plan's suc-
cessful formulation. Early identification of significant issues affect-
ing each of the airports will be important. Toward this end, we
will make a project initiation presentation to the ALUC, both to
describe the project work scope and to obtain members' thoughts
on the issues to be addressed (see below for further details). Also,
I�III
SHUTT MOEN ASSOCIATES 2
k
I
i
twill=
we will seek input from Butte County officials and staff, officials
and staff of nearby communities, airport tenants ;and pilots, and
the community at large around each of the airports. Because of
the history of controversy over compatibility with its municipal air-
port, particular emphasis will be given to meeting with officials and
staff of the City of Chico. Public involvement will be encouraged
through workshops as described below.
> Mapping — As background both to preparation of the plan and its
subsequent implementation, several types of maps and drawings
will need to be prepared. These and other maps prepared during
this project will be prepared in an Arclnfo format in UTM Zone 10
NAD 83 using feet as units.
► Airport Environs Base Maps — We intend to utilize the map-
ping available from Butte County's geographic information sys-
tem as base maps. We assume that these will be made avail-
able at no cost.
► Topographic Maps — Digital topographic maps will be ob-
tained for use in airspace. analyses.
Asasupplement toour basic proposal, ► Land Use Plans — Using the Butte County GIS database and
we could map the general plan and printed map sources, we will map existing and planned land
zoning designations for all parcels uses at a level of specificity necessary for ALUC decision -mak -
within the ALUC referral area that are
not already input into the Butte Ing'
County GIS database.
Project Initiation Workshop — As part of the project initiation, ,
Shutt Moen Associates (SMA) will conduct a workshop with the
Butte County Airport Land Use Commission. During this initial
workshop, we will:
Present background information regarding the project and its
purpose.
Review the work program, products, and project schedule.
► Review general land use compatibility planning concepts as de-
scribed in the 1993 Caltrans Airport Land Use Planning Hand-
book and the subsequent evolution of these concepts.
► Report on- the schedules for the Chico Municipal Airport master
plan and the update of the Caltrans Airport Land Use Planning
Handbook.
► Seek the views of the airport land use commission and public
on specific issues to be addressed.
SHUTT MOEN ASSOCIATES
3
�1 1
Phase 2 — Plan Preparation
The preponderance of the project work effort will take place during
Phase 2. Tasks will include assessment of the airports' impacts, devel-
opment of compatibility and procedural policies, and preparation of
the plan document. Throughout this period, we will work closely with
county staff. We also will seek the input of the staff and the airport
land use commission. regarding the major choices to be made in for-
mulation of the plan and its.policies.
Specific tasks to be accomplished during Phase 2 will include:
structions near airports can reduce safety and.affect existing or pro-
posed instrument.approach procedures. It is up to local govern-
ment to protect the airspace around airports. Criteria established
in accordance with Federal Aviation Regulations Part'77 provide
the basic, but not the only, method of determining appropriate
height limits. Sometimes more important is the U.S. Standard for
Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). Depending upon the de-
sign of the specific procedures, TERPS may be more or less restric-
tive than FAR Part 77.
Chico and Oroville Municipal Airports together have six existing in-
strument approaches between them. It is technically possible that
GPS -based instrument approaches could be developed, for Para-
dise Skypark and Ranchaero airports. However, due to the air-
ports' short runways, the instrument approaches would have high
minimums. Because these two airports are privately owned, it is
��lull
SHUTT MOEN ASSOCIATES
�'
> Development of Airport Layout Diagrams and Airspace Plans
As an alternative to the basic proposal,
we could prepare airport layout plans
Preparation of an ALUC compatibility plan requires a clear under -
and airspace plans for the two private
standing of the existing and future facilities at the airports included
airports to fully meet FAA standards. ..
'
in the plan. Information on the airspace requirements of each air -
However. we have some concerns
about the appropriateness of expend-
port must also.be documented. This information is typically ob-
ingpublicfunds onpreparation ofplans
tained from the airport layout plans and airspace plans for the air -
for privately owned airports that are
ports. Airport layout plans and airspace plans are available for
more detailed than necessary to full
the ALue'smission.
Chico and Oroville Municipal Airports. However, Paradise Sky -
park and Ranchaero Airports do not currently have airport layout
plans and airspace plans. We will develop basic airport layout dia-
grams and simplified airspace plans that reflect the existing and fu-
ture airfield configurations planned by the airports' owners. These
plans will beat a level of detail sufficient to meet the needs of the
ALUC.
> Airspace and Instrument Approach Procedure Analyses — Ob-
structions near airports can reduce safety and.affect existing or pro-
posed instrument.approach procedures. It is up to local govern-
ment to protect the airspace around airports. Criteria established
in accordance with Federal Aviation Regulations Part'77 provide
the basic, but not the only, method of determining appropriate
height limits. Sometimes more important is the U.S. Standard for
Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). Depending upon the de-
sign of the specific procedures, TERPS may be more or less restric-
tive than FAR Part 77.
Chico and Oroville Municipal Airports together have six existing in-
strument approaches between them. It is technically possible that
GPS -based instrument approaches could be developed, for Para-
dise Skypark and Ranchaero airports. However, due to the air-
ports' short runways, the instrument approaches would have high
minimums. Because these two airports are privately owned, it is
��lull
SHUTT MOEN ASSOCIATES
1
Our analysis of airspace issues could be
supplemented with an analysis ofsome
or all of the TERPS surfaces for the
existing instrument approaches to
Chico and Oroville Municipal Airports.
We have not made a TERPS analysis
part of our basic proposal, because we
feel that the cost of the analysis may
outweigh the value, given the speck
circumstances in Butte County. Pre-
paring TERPS sur faces for the airspace
around Chico Municipal Airport is more
likely to be ofvolue due to proximity to
development, terrain. and lower ap-
proach minimums.
As a supplemental noise -related analy-
sis, we could review the effectiveness
of current operational policies and
noise abatement procedures and out-
line possible improvements at each air-
port.
`"#`R�RP�QRT,i ID USE;PLAN PROPOSAL
unlikely that the FAA will develop the approaches. Given the cost,
it is unlikely that the private airports will independently fund devel-
opment of GPS approaches. However, we will need to discuss fu-
ture development plans with the two airport owners, before a final
conclusion can be made.
' We will evaluate the airspace requirements of the four airports
based upon their current FAR Part 77 airspace plans. We will seek
to define a consistent set of height limit criteria — criteria which
will assure essential protection for the airports' airspace, yet allow
tall structures where no adverse effects would result. These criteria
will be designed to make implementation of height restrictions as
simple as possible for the cities and county.
> Activity Forecasts — To provide a high degree of compatibility,
the airport land use plan must take a long-range, but realistic, look
at what the future character and volume of activity will be at each
airport. This information will be used in the analysis of noise and
safety issues at each airport. Existing aviation activity forecasts for
the four airports vary significantly in their currency. Therefore, we
will review the forecasts for each airport and update them as nec-
essary. A time horizon of at least 20 years will be used. New fore-
casts from the Chico Municipal Airport master plan update may
not be available, as the update will have just started in July 1998.
Data from Caltrans Aeronautics Program aircraft operations counts
and from other sources will be utilized in establishing the current
baseline activity levels.
> Noise and Overflight Analyses — In this task, we will draw upon
various data sources and the FAA's Integrated Noise Model (INM)
version 5:1 to delineate the current and potential future noise and
overflight impacts created by aircraft operations at the four airports.
Specifically:
We will review aircraft operational distribution data (runway
utilization, time of day, etc.) and flight track location informa-
tion used to develop existing noise contours. Where data are
outdated or nonexistent, we will assemble new operational
data as necessary for input to noise model calculations.
For those airports for which new activity estimates or forecasts
are developed, we will, prepare new noise impact contours.
SHUTT MOEN ASSOCIATES 5
We will, obtain all available documentation of noise complaints
associated with the four airports. To supplement available doc-
umentation, airport managers, owners, agency staff, and others
knowledgeable about noise complaint history will be inter-
viewed. We will graphically portray all noise -sensitive areas
identified.
► With input from the ALUC, select the noise contours to be
used for airport compatibility purposes, and define the overall
noise influence/overflight area. Areas within which structures
may require special noise insulation will be indicated.
> Safety Analyses — The general aviation aircraft accident database
included in the 1993 Caltrans Airport Land Use Planning Handbook
is the best source of accident location data currently available.
This data, developed. by the Institute of Transportation Studies
(ITS) at the University of California -Berkeley and Shutt Moen Asso-
ciates, has served to document that significant aviation -related risks
exist in locations beyond the runway protection zones. ITS re-
cently completed a major expansion of this database; the number
of data points was more than doubled. This data may be available
soon enough to be utilized in the Butte County ALUC plan update.
We will utilize the 1993 accident database together with historical
accident data, current flight track and operational procedures infor-
mation, and projected future activity levels at the four Butte Coun-
ty airports to assess the risks to surrounding land uses. The ex-
panded aircraft accident database will be used in this assessment if
the data is available.
> Land Use Compatibility Analyses — This task will comprehen-
sively assess the relationships between airport activity impacts and .
surrounding land use development and identify existing and po-
tential future compatibility conflicts. It also will serve as a starting
point for the development of policies to minimize or avoid such
conflicts. Careful attention will be given to the policy implications
of existing incompatible uses versus potential future incompatible
development. The vastly different character of the land uses
around the four airports will also be important planning considera-
tions. Issues such as nonconforming uses and the acceptability of
infill development will specifically be addressed. The preceding
impact analyses and the land use data compiled in Phase 1 will
provide theinformation basis for this task.
��I�III
SHUTT MOEN ASSOCIATES 6
One of the tradeoffs to be considered
with regard to the format of the com-
patibility policies is whether to use
separate or combined criteria tables
and maps. As noted in the Caltrans
Handbook, the relationships between
noise and safety concerns and the
associated criteria are more clear if
noise and safety are separately ad-
dressed, but the combined approach is
usually more flexible and easier to im-
plement.
Another facet of this topic which could
be explored as an additional task is
identification of actions which the air-
port owners could take to reduce the
impacts of aircraft activity. Although
the ALUC has no authority over airport
operations, the airport land use plan
can and should take into account noise
mitigation and other impact reduction
Policies adopted by airport manage-
ment.
• An update of pilots' guide inserts is
a basic work element which could
be done as part of this task.
• A more extensive effort would be to
expand upon the operational poli-
cies review by informally reviewing
and updating other recommenda-
tionscontained in the Chico Munic-
ipal Airport FAR Part ISO Plan.
> Policy Development — Essential to a good airport land use plan is
a set of concise, clearly written policies. Airport land use planning
policies fall into two basic groups: compatibility policies and pro-
cedural policies.
► The compatibility policies will define what types of land uses
are or are not compatible with airport noise, safety, airspace
protection, and overflight concerns. These policies will be de-
veloped based upon conclusions reached.in the above impact
and land use analyses. Where the policy rationale is not
readily evident from the policy language itself, supporting doc-
umentation will be included in the report appendices.
To the extent practical, the compatibility policies will be appli-
cable to all of the airports equally. The distinctions between
the airports will be defined primarily by means of the individual
compatibility maps. However, where essential, policies which
pertain only to one of the airports will be developed. Policies
for commission review of airport and heliport master plans in
accordance with Section 21676(c) of the State Aeronautics Act
will be included as well.
The procedural policies will set forth the process by which the
county staff and the airport land use commission conduct re-
views of land use plans and proposed development near each
airport. The policies will identify the types of land use devel-
opment projects which should be subject to compatibility re-
view. The types of information which a project proponent will
be required to submit to the ALUC also will be listed. Lack of
fully defined procedural policies is one of the major shortcom-
ings of many existing compatibility plans.
> Implementation Measures — Airport land use commissions do
not have the authority to implement the compatibility plans they
adopt, only to review the land use proposals of other bodies. Most
of the implementation responsibilities fall to local land use jurisdic-
tions. By state law, local jurisdictions are required to make their
land use plans consistent with the commission's plan or to overrule
the commission. To facilitate attaining this consistency objective,
we will identify the changes or additions which would need to be
made to Butte County and individual city land use plans and zon-
ing regulations to bring them into consistency with proposed air-
port land use plan policies. Specific components to this task will
include:
hI
SHUTT MOEN ASSOCIATES
7
Identification of specific conflicts between the adopted plans
and ordinances of local jurisdictions and the proposed airport
land use plan policies.
Outlining of essential contents for an airport combining zone
ordinance which local jurisdictions can adopt. Draft language
for deed notice and buyer awareness measures will be provid-
ed. Typical avigation easement wording also will be included.
> Submit Draft Compatibility Plan Format — At the second meet-
ing with the ALUC, we will present the proposed format of the
Comprehensive Airport Land Use Plan. We will also use this meet-
ing to report on the status of the study.
> Submit Draft Compatibility Maps and Criteria _ The third meet-
ing with the'ALUC will be used to present draft compatibility maps
and compatibility criteria for the four airports. Following ALUC
review, these draft maps and criteria will be forwarded to staff of
the three cities (county staff will have, of course, already received a
copy) to serve as the basis for subsequent discussions. We will also
update the Commission on the status of the project.
> Coordination with Local jurisdictions — Early coordination with
each of the local jurisdictions affected by the plan will facilitate a
better understanding of the plan and help to assure implementa-
tion of the plan's compatibility policies. We will meet individually
with the staffs of each local jurisdiction to .discuss this consistency
review. Feedback from this review process will be utilized to re-
fine the compatibility plan recommendations where appropriate.
> Administrative Draft Plan — The concluding task in the plan
preparation phase of work will be completion of an administrative
draft report for internal review and comment by Butte County staff.
This document will contain the following:
► An introductory chapter describing the statutory authority of
ALUCs, the history of the Butte County ALUC, the function of
the airport land use plan, and the relationship to airport master
plans and community general plans.
A countywide policies chapter defining the compatibility and
procedural policies applicable to development around all four
airports.
SHLM MOEN ASSOCIATES
A chapter containing special policies and individual maps for
each airport.
A chapter summarizing background data regarding the layout
and activity levels at each airport and the characteristics of ex-
isting and planned land uses around them.
An implementation chapter that begins by documenting signifi-
cant inconsistencies between the proposed ALUC plan and
adopted local plans and ordinances. The balance of the chap-
ter will identify strategies and methods for local governments to
implement the proposed ALUC plan: Sample documents relat-
ing to this topic will be. included in the appendices.
A set of appendices containing a copy of current airport land
use planning laws, a comparison of major policy differences be-
tween the previous and proposed airport land use plans, copies
of sample implementation documents (e.g., an airport combin-
ing zone ordinance), a glossary, and other supporting materials
as appropriate.
We will provide,county staff with five copies of the administrative,
draft plan.
Phase 3 —Review and Adoption
The final phase of the project involves the review of the draft plan
and, after necessary revisions are made, its ultimate adoption by the
Butte County ALUC. Appropriate environmental documentation also
will be prepared and circulated for review during this phase. We wish
to emphasize that, while the formalized review steps all occur during
this phase, the importance of obtaining a wide range of input during
the preceding two phases cannot be underestimated. If we meet our
goal of adequately addressing significant concerns early in the planning
-process, the formal review process will be greatly simplified. Specific
steps in the review and adoption process will include:
3
> Environmental Documentation — We will prepare an Initial
It is anticipated that preparation of an
environmental'impact report will not : 3 Study of Environmental Impacts in accordance with California En -
be required for this project. However. 4 vironmental Quality Act (CEQA),. and Butte County guidelines. The
if circumstances should arae which ' document will be formatted so as to facilitate preparation of a neg-
dictate EIR preparation. we can pro-
vide the necessary services. alive declaration. We will submit five copies of the initial study for
staff review.
��III
SHUTT MOEN ASSOCIATES
9
II
We have budgeted for a total of 11
public meetings/hearings. Based upon
our current knowledge, we have allo-
cated those meetings as described in
our proposal. However. we know from
over two decades of experience with
AU/Cs that circumstances may change
during the course of plan development.
There fore, we would be quite willing to
modify the format or purpose of the
meetings to better meet the evolving
needs of the project.
We anticipate that the only environmental concerns which would
need to be addressed to any significant degree are those involving
noise, safety, and land use. However, if the ALUC plan would sig-
nificantly reduce the number of allowable housing units in a com-.
munity, there is the potential that the effects of locating additional
housing in other parts of the community would need to be ad-
dressed.
It should be noted that it is the view of some county counsels and.
other attorneys that airport land use commission adoption of an
airport land use plan is not a "project" within the meaning of
CEQA. This determination is largely based upon the fact that
ALUCs do not have any direct power to implement their plans.
We believe that this CEQA compliance approach warrants consid-
eration by Butte County staff. Nevertheless, for the purposes of
,this proposal, the cost of preparing an initial study is included in
our budget.
> Draft Plan for Public Review — Following county staff review, we
will make necessary revisions to the administrative draft plan and
environmental initial study. A draft airport land use plan report
will then be preparedforpublic review. We will print 75 copies
and also provide the county with a reproducible master.
> Public Review Process — We will make two public presentations
of the draft plan to the ALUC and public. If there is anticipated to
be considerable discussion of the draft plan, it may be appropriate
to use a workshop format for the first meeting. Beyond or as con-
tinuations of these public meetings/hearings, we also will attend up
to three additional meetings with the ALUC and/or county staff in
order to help facilitate the adoption process. During this review
process, we will maintain a listing of specific changes as recom-
mended by the commission and other reviewing bodies. This ad-
dendum, combined with the draft plan will constitute the plan
proposed for ALUC adoption.
> Adopted Plan — After the plan is adopted, we will combine the
addendum and the draft document into a final plan and print 75
copies. We also will provide the county with a master copy, in-
cluding graphics, both in reproducible format and on computer
diskettes. (Text files will be provided in WordPerfect 6.1 for Win-
dows.) Any presentation graphics prepared during the course of
the project will be given to the county for future use.
��\� II SHUTT MOEN ASSOCIATES
10
SCHEDULE, STAFFING, AND FEES
Schedule
Shutt Moen Associates will assign a high priority to all phases of the
Butte County Airport Land Use Plan work effort. All of the key staff
who will be assigned to this project are available to begin work on it
immediately.
The chart on page 14 depicts our proposed work schedule. This
schedule calls for completion of an administrative draft plan during the
seventh month.
Elapsed time for the review and adoption phase will be dependent to
a significant extent upon such factors as:
► Administrative draft review time;
► Scheduling of public presentations and follow-up meetings if .
necessary,
► Mandatory CEQA and county public noticing time require-
ments;
► The degree of controversy which the project generates; and
► The extent to which revisions to the plan become necessary.
We nevertheless expect that the entire project can be completed with-
in 12 months.
Staffing
Consultant Team
As is standard on all major Shutt Moen Associates projects, we will
employ a team approach to staffing for the Butte County Airport Land
Use Plan project. The key individuals on this team will be:
Resumes for each of these individuals;
> Kenneth A. Brody, Senior Planner — Mr. Brody will be the proj-
are included in the Qualifications and _§ ect manager and will have the overall responsibility for preparation
E- erience section of this proposal. of the plan. Mr. Brody served in a similarcapacity during prepara-
tion of the 1993 Airport Land Use Planning Handbook for the
SHUTT MOEN ASSOCIATES
I
Caltrans Aeronautics Program and on the majority of the firm's air-
port land use planning projects.
> David P. Dietz, A.I.C.P., Director of Planning Projects — Mr.
Dietz will have major involvement in the public participation com-
ponents of the project. , He will also have key roles in policy formu-
lation and CEQA matters.
> Michael A. Shutt, P.E., Principal — As one of the firm's two prin-
cipals, Mr. Shutt will contribute to major policy decisions affecting
the plan and will have overall administrative responsibilities regard-
ing the project contract.
Supporting Shutt Moen Associates will be two subconsultants:
> Mike Bobbitt & Associates — Mike H. Bobbitt and staff provide
GIS and GPS project design, implementation, and management
services. Mr. Bobbitt also provides training in ArcView and Trimble
Navigation Mapping products. Mike Bobbitt & Associates will al-
low us to direcdy utilize the GIS data that the county has devel-
oped. Using Arclnfo for both analysis and preparation of ALUC
mapping, Mike Bobbitt & Associates will ensure that products of
this study can be readily integrated into the County's geographic
information system.
> QED Airport and Aviation Consultants - Headed by Ronald F.
Price, this firm specializes in airport airspace analyses and design of
instrument approach procedures, particularly ones utilizing GPS.
QED will have principal responsibility for any TERPS analyses pre-
pared as a part of this proposal.
Butte County Staff
Responsibilities of Butte County staff will include the following:
► Providing copies of all necessary data from its geographical in-
formation system.
► Facilitating contacts with other agencies.
► Reviewing materials prepared during this project.
► Preparing all public notices.
► Circulation of documents associated with environmental re-
view.
► Arranging for rooms for public meetings.
Wdi
SHUTT MOEN ASSOCIATES 12
Fees
Because project cost is one of the factors by which this proposal is to
be evaluated, the work scope outlined ori the preceding pages is sepa-
rated into two categories: the basic project and supplemental tasks.
Our proposed fee structure is divided into two levels as well.
> Basic Project — The basic project includes all of the tasks outlined
in the county's request for proposals and further described in the
body of the preceding text. The work effort will serve the basic lo-
cal airport land use planning needs and fully satisfy Caltrans Aero-
nautics Program requirements.
Our proposed fee for the basic project is Eighty -Two Thousand
Eight Hundred Twenty -Four dollars ($82,824.00). A listing of pro-
ject costs by task is presented on page 15.
> Supplemental Tasks — These tasks, as outlined in the sidebars of
the preceding pages, are closely related to the basic airport land
use planning work scope and would provide valuable additional
information and products for the county's use. This expanded
work effort is intended to enable the county to leverage its 10%
matching share of the Caltrans grant so as to fully utilize available
grant funds.
We will need to discuss with you which, of the supplemental tasks
are desired and the level of detail which would be associated with
each. Preliminary cost estimates for the supplemental tasks are in-
cluded in' the listing on page 15.
VIIIIt
SHUTT MOEN ASSOCIATES
13
Project Schedule
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Month
-� SHUTT MOEN ASSOCIATES
14
0
SUPPLEMENTAL TASKS
(estimated costs) '
• Obtain digital ortho-
At least
photos of airport envi-
$30,000 '`:
rons
$2,000 to
• Map general plan and
Need to '
zoning designations at
define v
parcel level for inclu-
para-
sion in GIS where they
meters
do not already exist
• Prepare airport layout
$2,000
plans and airspace
Depends
plans to FAA stan-
upon
dards for two private
scope
airports.
`#
• Update Pilots' Guide
$500.1 1
inserts
+pruning
• Refine Implementation
$2,000
Measures language
to s.
$4,000
• Additional meetings by
$800 to
Shutt Moen Associates
$1.000
• TERPS analysis of six
$8,000
existing instrument
approaches.
► Review existing noise
$2,000 to
abatement procedures
$5,000
• Update Pilots' Guide
$SOO
inserts (per airport)
+printing
• Update recommenda-
$S,000
tions in Chico FAR Part
ISO Plan
► Prepare EIR
Depends
upon
scope
PROPOSED TASK BUDGETS
> Phase 1: Project Initiation
► Data Compilation
► Issues Identification
► Mapping
► Project Initiation Workshop
Phase 1 Total:
> Phase 2: Plan Preparation
► Develop Airport Diagrams and
Airspace Plans
► Airspace and Instrument Approach
Procedure Analyses
• Activity Forecasts
• Noise and Overflight Analyses
• Safety Analyses
► Land Use Compatibility Analyses
► Policy Development
Implementation Measures
► Draft Compatibility Plan Format
► Draft Compatibility Maps and Criteria
► Coordination with Local Jurisdictions
► Administrative Draft Plan
Phase 2 Total:
),-Phase 3: Review and Adoption
► Environmental Documentation
► Draft Plan for Public Review
► Public Review Process
► Adopted Plan
Phase 3 Total:
> General Administration and
Coordination Services
► Work Scope & Contract Preparation
► Project Administration
General Services Total:
GRAND TOTAL (Fixed Fee Amount):
$ 5,528
3,848
6,752
3,432
$ 19,560
$ 4,752
1,512
1,336 .. .
3,560
2,192
3,592
2,944
4,192
1,140
4,912
6,384
9,052
$ 40,816
$ 2,368
4,180
6,856
5,692
$ 19,096
$ 2,368
984
$ 3,352
$ 82,824
�I1P/ II
�- SHUTT MOEN ASSOCIATES
15
win
40 " �
,
"WMES
Qualifications
and Experience
OUR FIRM
Shutt Moen Associates is a multi -discipline, full-service, professional
consulting firm specializing in the planning and engineering of general
aviation and small hub air carrier airports. Founded in 1976, Shutt
Moen Associates offers a wide range of consulting services to airport
owners, operators, and tenants. Our services include the following:
Airport. Planning
► Land Use Compatibility Plans
► Airport Master Plans
Environmental Assessments
► Site Selection Studies
► Airport System Studies
> Airport Engineering
► Runways and Taxiways
► Aircraft Parking Aprons
► Aircraft Storage Hangars.
► Terminal Area Facilities
► Airfield Lighting and Naviga-
tional Aids
Financial Plans
Airport Commercial/
Industrial Parks
► Community Information
Programs
► . Airport Fueling Systems
► Access Roads, Parking Lots
► Fencing and Gates
► Utilities and Infrastructure
► Construction Planning and
Coordination
> Airport Management and Operations
► Grants Administration Property Management/
Rates and Charges Analyses Lease Reviews
► Regulatory Compliance Emergency Response Plans
► Safety/Operational Audits ' Marketing and Promotion
Shutt Moen Associates is located adjacent to the Sonoma County Air-
port in Santa Rosa, California. Our office location at a busy FAR Part
139 commercial air service/general aviation airport gives us an excellent
perspective on the day-to-day operation of such facilities.
J,mII
SHUT I MOEN ASSOCIATES
OUR STAFF
> ATeam Approach to Projects — We utilize a team approach to all
of our, major projects. This teamwork involves more than just plan-
ners working with other planners and engineers with other engi-
neers. Our engineers contribute their practical experience in proj-
ect construction to the facility layout and cost analysis elements of
our airport planning projects. And our planners, bring their insight
regarding project objectives and long-range development plans to
the engineering design of airport improvements. Rarely a day
passes without planners and engineers brainstorming with each
other about their respective projects.
3
> Staff Stability — Shutt Moen Associates has an exceptional level of
staff tenure and stability. All of our project managers have been
with the firm a minimum of eight years and four of our key profes-
sional staff have been with the firm for 20 years. We believe you
will find that this record of staff tenure and commitment is unsur-
passed in the industry. Our clients benefit greatly from this continu-
ity and the historical knowledge of past projects which it represents.
�I�lll
lI SHUTT MOEN ASSOCIATES
Shutt Moen Associates staff is comprised of 18 full-time professionals,
technicians, and support staff. As a group, this staff brings a unique
combination of capabilities to our airport projects:
Individual resumes for each of our
>- Wide Range of Disciplines — In addition to airport planning and
senior project staff are presented on
civil engineering, members• of the Shutt Moen Associates staff have
the following pages.
education and experience in a wide range of fields, including:
AirportManagement
► Airline Operations
► Flight- Instruction
► Financial Analysis
► Environmental Analysis
► Land Use Planning
► Architecture
► Graphics Design .
► Computer Applications
> ATeam Approach to Projects — We utilize a team approach to all
of our, major projects. This teamwork involves more than just plan-
ners working with other planners and engineers with other engi-
neers. Our engineers contribute their practical experience in proj-
ect construction to the facility layout and cost analysis elements of
our airport planning projects. And our planners, bring their insight
regarding project objectives and long-range development plans to
the engineering design of airport improvements. Rarely a day
passes without planners and engineers brainstorming with each
other about their respective projects.
3
> Staff Stability — Shutt Moen Associates has an exceptional level of
staff tenure and stability. All of our project managers have been
with the firm a minimum of eight years and four of our key profes-
sional staff have been with the firm for 20 years. We believe you
will find that this record of staff tenure and commitment is unsur-
passed in the industry. Our clients benefit greatly from this continu-
ity and the historical knowledge of past projects which it represents.
�I�lll
lI SHUTT MOEN ASSOCIATES
EDUCATION
B.S. in Civil Engineering —
University of Illinois
Graduate work, Transportation
Studies — University of
California, Berkeley
AFFILIATIONS
Licensed Civil Engineer — States
of California and Washington
National Society of Professional
Engineers, Member
American Society of Civil Engi-
neers, Member
Aircraft Owners and pilots Asso-
ciation, Member
Licensed Instrument Pilot
SHUTT MOEN ASSOCIATES
MICHAEL A. SHUTT, P.E.
Principal
As a principal, Mr. Shutt has primary responsibility for directing the
firm's engineering efforts, especially with regard to grant planning, coor-
dination with clients and the Federal Aviation Administration, budget
monitoring, and overall project scoping and phasing. He also provides
quality control review of all the firm's projects before they are delivered
for bidding.
A major recent accomplishment for Mr. Shutt was his role in the con-
struction of the $10 million Byron Airport located in Contra Costa
County. As program manager he was responsible for all aspects of the
project— planning, environmental, Corps of Engineers permitting, de-
sign, construction, and grant management: He has had similar respon-.
sibilities at four other new California airports Petaluma Municipal (a
$4.8 million. project), Mammoth/June Lakes ($5.0 million), Calaveras
County ($3.0 -million); -and �Chemehuevi ($1.5 million). Mr. Shuttcoor-
dinated all FAA and State grant applications for. these airport sponsors.
Subsequent to the completion of the Petaluma and Calaveras airports,
he directed the design work and acted as the sponsors' representative in
obtaining State loan financing for construction of hangar facilities.
Mr. Shutt was the principal -in -charge of improvement and expansion
projects at Livermore Municipal Airport totaling $10 million. These
included a new parallel runway and taxiway, undergrounding of PG&E
distribution lines, and a 13 -building hangar complex, the. Jargest single
hangar development undertaken in California. Subsequently, he has
managed twelve additional hangar projects providing covered space for
three hundred aircraft
In addition to his engineering duties, Mr. Shutt provides policy direction
for the firm's airport planning projects, furnishing specialized expertise
in the fields of airfield layouts, off -airport land use, project implementa-
tion, and noise analyses. He has lectured on these subjects at universi-
ties in California and Oregon and has served as an expert witness on
behalf of various airports.
EDUCATION
Bachelor of Architecture —
Univasity of California, Berkeley
Master of Urban Planning —
University of Washington
AFFILLA77ONS
• American Planning Association,
S
Member
�J/I— SHUTT MOEN ASSOCIATES
KENNETH A. Mom -
Senior Planner
As•a senior planner,.Mr. Brody has had project management responsi-
bility for a majority of Shutt Moen Associates' airport master planning,
land use planning, and environmental projects. On many projects, he
is the firm's principal contact with the client. His strong analytical, de-
sign, and writing skills — gained from his background in architecture
-and urban planning and his lengthy airport planning experience —
have been instrumental to the firm's outstanding record of plan adop-
tion and implementation.
In the field of airport/land use compatibility planning, Mr. Brody is
among California's leading experts. He has made presentations to
statewide airport land use commission conferences sponsored by the
California Aeronautics Program. He has prepared compatibility plans
for airports in more than a dozen California counties and also has done
compatibility-planning:for airports in Nevada, Oregon, and Washington.
Mr. Brody was the project manager for the update of Caltrans' state-
wide airport land use commission handbook and training program.
Other major projects that Mr. Brody has managed include:
Tuolumne County Airport Land Use Plan
► Merced County Airport Land Use Plan
► Siskiyou County Airport Land Use Plan
► Ramona Airport Master Plan
► Columbia Airport Master Plan
► Sonoma County Airport Master Plan and Environmental Report
► Nevada County Airport Master Plan
► New East Contra Costa County (Byron) Airport Master Plan and
Environmental Impact Report
► Buchanan Field Airport Master Plan
► New Calaveras County Airport Master Plan
► Fresno County Airport Land Use Policy Plan
► Imperial County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
► Portland -Hillsboro and Portland -Troutdale Airport Master Plans
Another facet of aviation planning in which Mr. Brody has greatly ex-
panded Shutt Moen Associates' capabilities is in helicopter facility plan-
ning. In addition to preparing the plans for these facilities, he has rep-
resented the firm at many public hearings on frequently controversial
proposals for heliports at hospitals.
EDUCA77ON
B.A. in Public Service,/Political
Science — University of Califor-
nia, Davis
Masters in City and Regional
Planning — Harvard University
Post graduate courses in plant
taxonomy, endangered species,
and wetland delineation.
APPILIATTONS
• American Planning Association,
Past President, Nevada Chapter
• American Institute of Certified
Planners
• California Native Plant Society
Licensed Instrument Pilot
/' SHUTT MOEN ASSOCIATES
DAVID P.. DIE-rz, A.1.C.P.
Director of Planning Projects
As Director of Planning Projects, Mr. Dietz has responsibility for coordi-
nating the allocation of staff resources among the firm's planning proj-
ects. He also acts as a project manager on a wide range of aviation
planning projects. He served in this latter role during the preparation of
the first Airport Master Plan for Henderson Executive Airport — a gen-
eral aviation facility recently acquired by Clark County to serve as a
reliever to McCarran International Airport in Las Vegas. Additionally,
Mr. Dietz directed the preparation of a systems study and airport master
plans for the eight airports operated by Humboldt County. He also
played major roles in airport site selection studies in Lake and Madera
Counties.
Mr. Dietz's expertise on airport land use compatibility planning has
been utilized in the preparation of Comprehensive Land Use Plans for
more than30 airports. Half of these plans have been formatted for
inclusion in geographic information systems. His related experience in
compatibility planning includes the preparation of FAR Part 150 Noise
Compatibility Programs for Redding Municipal Airport and Hayward Air
Terminal.
Mr. Dietz brings substantial and varied planning expertise to his duties
at Shutt Moen Associates. During his recent term as Environmental
Planning Manager at San Francisco International Airport, he was re-
sponsible for ensuring that the $2.4 billion terminal expansion program
complied with all applicable environmental regulations. Wetland and
endangered species issues were prominent concerns. He also devel-
oped and implemented a mitigation monitoring program to verify that
the 100+ project mitigation measures were implemented. He is Shutt
Moen Associates' authority on CEQA and NEPA. He has lectured on
environmental and land use compatibility topics at the collegiate level.
For seven of ,his twenty years as a professional planner, Mr. Dietz
worked as a county planner in California and Nevada. His responsibili-
ties included: current and advanced planning, subdivision review,
grants administration, and capital improvement program development
Additionally, he acted as a county lobbyist before the Nevada State
Legislature.
1 �
Resume
Michael H. Bobbitt Phone: (707)996-1719
149 EI Ritero Dr. Fax: (707)996-1744
Sonoma, CA 95476 mikebobbitt@compuserve.com
Mike Bobbitt & Associates Sept. 1996 -Present
GIS/GPS Consultant Sonoma, CA
Providing training in ArcView and Trimble Navigation Mapping products on-site. at client facilities or as Adult
Education Classes at local learning institutions. Providing GIS and GPS project design, implementation and
management services.
Sonoma Ecology Center Sept.. 1994 - Present
GIS/GPS Project Director Sonoma, CA
Responsible for compiling available data, and the development of new GIS information, covering Sonoma Valley.
The project goal is,to make GIS information accessible to government, business and the public for education, better
decision making and more efficient operations. —
Utilizing Trimble Navigation GPS equipment and software to perform GPS field data acquisition and processing for
integration into GIS applications. Certified Trainer for Trimble Navigation Pathfinder Products. Experienced with
Workstation Arc/info and ArcView. Specialize in data conversions from different applications, and across operating
platforms, into Arc/Info. Provide a full spectrum of GIS services from data input, digitizing, editing, database design
and geocoding, to custom map outputs.
Combustion Catalysts, Inc. April 1993 - December 1994
President Sonoma, CA .-
First US distributor of a fuel additive developed in. Canada:. Sales and marketing of the organoiron compound to
diesel and heavy fuel oil users.
JEBCO Seismic, Inc. February 1984 - March 1993
Vice President Operations and GIS Projects Houston, Tx
Developed, managed and sold to the oil exploration industry, non-exclusive GIS database projects for Venezuela and
Colombia. Negotiated agreements for source data, supervised digitizing and data capture operations, distribution to
purchasers as per their specifications, data licensing agreements and development of marketing materials. .
Operations Manager .
Responsible for accounting, contracts, personnel, production and office computer systems for a privately held
international seismic company. JEBCO acquired, processed and marketed non-exclusive marine seismic surveys in
the Gulf of Mexico, the North Sea and other international locations.
Peninsula Bank of Commerce
Assistant Vice President, Lending
Commercial and retail loans for a recently established community bank.
Bank of the West
Management Training Program
Education:
University of Santa Clara
BSc. Economics
Sept. 1982 - Jan. 1984
Millbrae, CA
July 1980 -Aug. 1982
San Jose, CA
Santa Clara, CA
1' r
Work Summary
Sonoma Ecology Center
Lotline Digitizing Project
The County of Sonoma has not had the funding or foresight to fully implement a GIS for the county. The Sonoma
Ecology Center recognized the need and benefits to the local community of having lotline and parcel information
available in a GIS. Through the use of interns and volunteers it has completed the digitizing of the Sonoma County
Planning Department 1:12,000 scale lotline maps for the Sonoma Valley. Using GPS gathered by driving and
mapping curb locations this information is being groundtruthed so the various map sheets can be joinedinto one
continuous coverage. The next phase will be to tag all of the parcel polygons with Assessor Parcel Numbers.
California Department of Parks and Recreation — Silverado District
Trail Mapping in Annade/ State Park
This project involved designing a data dictionary for GPS mapping of authorized and un -authorized trails along
with attributes describing the condition of the trails. Training was given to Park staff and volunteers on how to use
Trimble Navigation GeoExplorers and Pro-XLs to do the field data collection.'I was also responsible for managing
the data after it was collected, differentially correcting, editing and exporting the GPS data into Arc/Info and
ArcView. Using ArcView I produced a number of maps which have been used for mitigating the conflicts between
the hikers, bikers and horseriders in the Park, designing control burns, aiding State Parks in creating a
Management Plan for the Park and assisting State Parks to obtain grant monies for trail reconstruction and
enhancement.
Debris Mapping in Benicia Recreational Area
The primary purpose of this project was to remove wooden and urban debris which had accumulated on sensitive
wetland habitat for endangered species. Using GPS I mapped the spatial extent and location of these debris areas.
Since no digital data existed on the Park I also collected location information for other physical features in the Park.
The GPS data was used to georeference a color. aerial photograph of the property which could then be used as a
background coverage in ArcView. The collected. data and .resulting maps were used to obtain the Army Corps of
Engineers and the Bay Conservation and Development Corp. permits for the removal of the debris. The GIS
information was used by the California Conservation Corps to estimate the cost of removal and plan the removal so
as not to damage any rare plants found in the vicinity.
Mapping Redwood Trees in the Lawndale area of Annadel State Park
A previous project to poison and eradicate non-native Eucalyptus trees, which were competing for habitat with native
Redwood trees, had limited success. The purpose of this project was to inventory the number and current health
status of the remaining Eucalyptus with their location in relation to remaining Redwoods. The results of this inventory
were used to plan and estimate the cost of another round of Eucalyptus eradication. The significance of this project
was the ability to successfully use GPS in a very difficult field situation. The project area was located down the side of
a very steep slope with heavy canopy cover.
Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District
Conservation Easement Baseline Documentation
DeLoach Property
Andersen/Treadwell Property
Lorenzini Property
McCrea Property
Sonoma Developmental Center Property
When the Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District purchases a Conservation
Easement on a property the property owner agrees to certain uses and restrictions of the land and to maintain the
property in a certain state. The condition of the property at the time the Conservation Easement is established
needs to be documented so changes in the condition of the property can be monitored over time. Using GPS I
map the physical features on the property. GPS is also used to record the location and direction photos are taken
on the property. Using this location information, monitors will be able to return to the exact same location in the
future. The GPS data allows me to use ArcView and Arc/Info to georeference and compile together other maps of
information on the property such as land surveys, soil data, topography, aerial photographs, surrounding parcel
ownership and zoning. Hard copy maps of all this information are'put into the Baseline Document. This
information is also digitally stored in the'GIS where it can be used to plan future acquisitions and more readily
query and produced maps showing the current properties under the control of the District.
Shutt Moen Associates
GIS Consulting Services
Shutt Moen Associates is an airport planning, engineering and management consulting firm. In the past they have
used CAD for their mapping needs. As more of their clients are providing' GIS data for them to work with they
needed a source for helping them handle this information. I have assisted in providing GIS mapping and analysis
on a number of their Airport Land Use Planning Projects.
Sonoma Valley Citizens Advisory Commission
Urban Growth Boundary Study
The Sonoma Valley Citizens Advisory Commission reports directly to the County Supervisor for the Sonoma
Valley. The Commission was given the task of examining the trend in the conversion of agricultural lands to
residential and urban use and whether or not to recommend Urban Growth Boundaries as a means to control this
conversion. By preparing a series of maps demonstrating the current relationship between urban areas,
agricultural land uses, water districts and sanitation district spheres of influence I was able to assist the
Commission to quickly reach the conclusion current ordinances with some minor modification would suffice.
Trust For Wildland Communities
GPS and GIS Mapping of the Boggs Lake Nature Preserve
Working in conjunction with a Botanist I have used GPS to map the physical features and important plant
communities at the Boggs Lake Nature Preserve. This former Nature Conservancy property is a vernal pool which
contains a number of rare plants. The GIS database and maps will.form the basis for the development of a
management plan for this unique habitat.
Oak Hill Farm
GPS and GIS Mapping of a Small Scale, Farming Operation
Oak Hill Farm produces a variety of plants and crops for local cut flower, ornamental flower decorating' and
vegetable markets. Having recently taken over management of the property the current owner needed an
inventory of how much land was planted with what crops, in order to determine the income levels being generated
and be able to make future planting decisions. GPS was used to map out and inventory the mix of perennials,
annuals, vegetables and orchard. The components of the irrigation system were also mapped and inventoried for
future planning. This information was imported into ArcView for analysis and creation of hard copy map outputs.
Skaggs Island Foundation .
GIS and GPS Training
As an instructor with the Skaggs Island Foundation I teach an eight week combined ArcView GIS and Trimble Pro-
XR GPS class to former shipyard workers at the recently closed Mare Island Naval Shipyard.
Sonoma State University
GeoExplorer GPS training
As part of the Extended Education Curriculum offered at Sonoma State I teach the Trimble Certified Class on the
use of the GeoExplorer GPS receiver and Pathfinder Office software.
San Francisco State University
GeoExplorer GPS training
As an instructor with the San Francisco State University College of Extended Learning and their Multidisciplinary
GIS Center I teach the three day Trimble Certified Class on the use of the GeoExplorer GPS receiver and
Pathfinder Office software.
California Academy of Sciences
ArcView training
I am the instructor for the three day Introduction to ArcView class as part of the California Academy of Sciences
Adult Education Program.
RELATED PROJECT
EXPERIENCE
State of Iowa. Iowa Navigational
Aid and Aviation Weather Network
System Plan (benefWcost assess-
ment of terminal navigational aids.
visual landing aids. and communka-
tion requirements: development of
GPS approach procedures)
State of Maine: GPS Analysis for
the Maine Aviation System Plan
(assessment of GPS approach po-
tential and establishment of state-
wide priorities as input to FAA)
► Aspen -Pitkin County Airport, Colo-
rado: GPS Analysis (evaluation of
potential GPS procedures for airport
situated in mountainous terrain to
permit enhanced airport utilization
during periods of poor weather)
Juneau International Airport, Alas-
ka: GPS Analysis (review of non -
precision and precision GPS/DGPS
procedures)
�� SHUTT MOEN ASSOCIATES
QED AIRPORT & AVIATION CONSULTANTS
QED is an airport and aviation consulting firm whose qualifications are
concentrated in its principal, Robert F. Price. Mr. Price developed his
experience in this technical area through his role as project manager for
numerous airport planning and aviation system studies during the past
25 years, both while employed by other firms and_since founding QED
in 1994. Project assignments have included a broad range of issues at
airports of varying size and complexity. Many of these assignments
have emphasized the relatively smaller general aviation facilities whose
development needs and.typically limited financial resources place a
particular sensitivity on the planning effort. In each project, QED seeks
to identify unique and innovative solutions to meet the needs of the
client. -
An area of specialization within QED is the preparation of terminal nav-
igational aid/global positioning system.(GPS) analyses based on the U.S.
Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). QED staff has
assisted nine states in preparing terminal NAVAID/CPS system plans.
Each of these plans is in varying stages of implementation, attesting to
the quality of the planning effort. Further, QED has conducted numer-
ous ground-based navigational ai&and GPS approach analyses for spe-
cific airports and runway ends as part of master plans or special investi-
gations. The majority of these assignments has involved airports located
in mountainous terrain.
Additionally, QED staff.has been invited to address aviation groups on
the topics of terminal navigational aids/GPS and aviation weather, and
continually corresponds with state aviation agencies on these items of
concern.
> Ronald F. Price, Principal — Mr. Price is active in professional avia-
tion organizations. He serves as president and member of the
board of directors of the Airport Consultants Council (ACC), an or-
ganization representing 200 member firms. Previously, he served as
chairman of the 4,000 -member American Society of Civil Engineers
Air Transport Division. Mr. Price also is an assistant professor at
Southern Illinois University at Carbondale where he teaches under-
graduate courses in airport planning.
Shutt Moen Associates has more
experience whh airport land use
planning In Californla than any
other firm In the nation. The map
on the following page shows the loco-
-Vons of these projects.
d
// SHUTT MOEN ASSOCIATES
RELATED PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Over the past 20 years, Shutt Moen Associates has completed more
than 1,000 assignments for some 200 airport clients throughout Califor-
nia and Nevada and elsewhere in the western U.S. As these numbers
suggest, this work includes an extensive amount of repeat assignments_
from satisfied. clients.
Of particular relevance to the upcoming work for Butte County is our
experience in airport land use planning. Our firm has prepared airport
land use compatibility plans for over 80 airports in California (including
work done as Hodges & Shutt). This work includes countywide com-
patibility plans for airport land use commissions in 14 of the state's
counties. Additionally, as part of airport master plans and special proj-
ects, we have conducted land use compatibility studies for airports in
13 other California counties. The airports addressed in these plans have
ranged from small, low -activity, general aviation airports to major, com-
mercial airline facilities.
Our firm also had the privilege of preparing the 1993 Caltrans Airport
Land Use Planning Handbook and participating in the preparation of the
1983 Handbook.: The. California State Aeronautics Act now requires
that anyairport land use commission that formulates, adopts, or amends
an airport land use plan "shall be guided by information" contained in
the Handbook.
Many of the airport land use planning concepts we have developed in
these projects will be directly applicable to the airport land use compat-
ibility plans for the four public -use airports in Butte County.
ME�^5
rj M She.,,•. f
Shutt Moen Associates has more
experience whh airport land use
planning In Californla than any
other firm In the nation. The map
on the following page shows the loco-
-Vons of these projects.
d
// SHUTT MOEN ASSOCIATES
RELATED PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Over the past 20 years, Shutt Moen Associates has completed more
than 1,000 assignments for some 200 airport clients throughout Califor-
nia and Nevada and elsewhere in the western U.S. As these numbers
suggest, this work includes an extensive amount of repeat assignments_
from satisfied. clients.
Of particular relevance to the upcoming work for Butte County is our
experience in airport land use planning. Our firm has prepared airport
land use compatibility plans for over 80 airports in California (including
work done as Hodges & Shutt). This work includes countywide com-
patibility plans for airport land use commissions in 14 of the state's
counties. Additionally, as part of airport master plans and special proj-
ects, we have conducted land use compatibility studies for airports in
13 other California counties. The airports addressed in these plans have
ranged from small, low -activity, general aviation airports to major, com-
mercial airline facilities.
Our firm also had the privilege of preparing the 1993 Caltrans Airport
Land Use Planning Handbook and participating in the preparation of the
1983 Handbook.: The. California State Aeronautics Act now requires
that anyairport land use commission that formulates, adopts, or amends
an airport land use plan "shall be guided by information" contained in
the Handbook.
Many of the airport land use planning concepts we have developed in
these projects will be directly applicable to the airport land use compat-
ibility plans for the four public -use airports in Butte County.
Airport Land Use Planning Projects
Land Use Compatibility
Plans For Individual Airports
Alameda
Calaveras
Glenn
Los Angeles
Mono
Nevada
San Bernardino
San Diego
Santa Cruz
Shasta
Stanislaus
Tulare
OLI
ON
0 Countywide Airport
Land Use Plans
Contra Costa
Fresno
Humboldt
Imperial
Kern
Kings
Lake
Madera
Merced
Mendocino
Napa
Solano
Sonoma
Siskiyou
Tuolumne
DII SHUTT MOEN ASSOCIATES
PROFESSIONAL REFERENCES
Shutt Moen Associates believes that the most reliable indicator of our
firm's capabilities and commitment to quality is the measure of project
satisfaction consistently experienced by our clients. Accordingly, our
firm has placed a high priority on developing a professional reputation
as a firm willing and able to do what is necessary to exceed our clients'
expectations.
Listed below are the names of'6 professional references for our firm.
All of these are people with whom we have worked on airport land use
planning issues. We heartily encourage Butte County to verify, through
extensive reference contact, our firm's past and present performance,
integrity, and commitment to client satisfaction.
Mark Bautista
Airports Director
Tuolumne County, California
(209). 533-5685
Brian J. Parker
Senior Planner
Solano County, California
(707) 421-6765
Robert Sawyer
Director of Planning
City of Ukiah, California
(707) 463-6219
Jeffrey L. Shaw
Director of Community DevL
City of Redlands, California
(909) 798-7555
1hiNA1111
Q/� SHUTT MOEN ASSOCIATES
Columbia Airport Master Plan (199 7)
Tuolumne County Airport Land
Land Use Plan (on-going)
Travis Aero Club Land Use
Compatibility Plan (199 7)
Ukiah Municipal Airport Master Plan
and Land Use Compatibility Plan
(1996)
Redlands Municipal Airport Land
Use Compatibility Plan (1992)
July 8, 1996
Mike McClintock
P&D Aviation
1000 Broadway Suite 390 .
Oakland,. CA 94607
Dear Mike,
cLel ID
260.0 3 ; of o'
ffiatte Countil
PLANNING DIVISION
DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397
TELEPHONE: (916)'538-7601
FAX: (916) 538.7785
Enclosed is a copy of the letter from Dick Tiller of the CDF Air Attack Base that you
requested to assist you in your review of the Bidwell Ranch Specific Plan EIR, also a copy
of the Franklin Field CLUP.
Please accept our appreciation for meeting with ALUC staff on -June 27, 1996. 1 believe
we made progress in our goal of completing a Comprehensive Land Use Plan for the Chico
Municipal Airport. As we discussed, the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission has
selected the format used by SACOG in the enclosed Franklin Field Comprehensive Land
Use Plan. This format is relatively easy to understand, and does not include the technical
aspects of how a CLUP is prepared, or any background about airport planning as
discussed in the CalTrans Handbook.
The ALUC has shown interest in a user friendly document, that with the use of maps and
text clearly identifies the planning area boundaries, the safety zones, the noise contours,
and the permitted uses allowed in these zones. Please understand the importance of
utilizing this format.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 7 County Center Drive,
Oroville, or by calling 916-538-7601.
Sincerely,
01
� r�:'
Paula Leasure
Principal Planner
cc: Steve L.
k _ REQUEST FOR RECENT SCALE AERIAL PHOTOS
OF
CPO MUNICIPAL, OROVILLE MUNICIAL,
RANCHAERO, & PARADISE AIRPORTS
PARADISE AIRPORT: I ph'd John Franklin on 11/25/98 to request recent aerial photos - He ph'd back & left a
voice mail with two numbers he could be reached at: 345-5461 & 521-9030. I tried
both - no answer.
I ph'd him on 12/1/98. He said that Richard B. Davis Company took aerial on 11/2/97
he has one set of pictures and if we wanted to call them to request them we could call
them at 707-487-6200. He also said he is planning on moving the runway, in the spring.
Needed from Paradise Airport:
1 Aerial Photos
TOWN OF PARADISE: I ph'd on 11/25/98,1 LMTC on recorder, they were out for the holiday. Craig Baker ph'd
12/1/98 and said that, their General Plan was sent out for printing and should be back
in a week to 10 days, and he would get us a copy of it at that time. He has all the other
documents we need and will send them to us. I ph'd again on 12/11/98, LMTC on
recorder for Craig to call me back regarding the documents he was going to send.
Needed from Town of Paradise:
1. General Plan
2. Land Use Diagrams
3. Zoning Ordinance
4. Zoning Maps
5. Recent aerial photos of Paradise Skypark Airport
CITY OF CHICO: I ph'd Bob Koch on 11/25/98 about the items I had requested from the City of Chico and
Chico Municipal Airport. He was not in the office. I ph'd again on 12/1/98, he was out of
the office today also. I ph'd 12/2/98. He said that he has the General Plan, Zoning
Ordinance, but no maps, and the Airport Layout Plans for. CMA. He said that he
would find the information on CMA aerial photos and let me know.
Needed from City of Chico:
1.
General Plan
Received 12/3/98
2.
Land Use Diagrams
Received 12/8/98
3.
Zoning Ordinance
Received 12/3/98
4.
Zoning Maps
Received 12/8/98
5.
Recent aerial photos of Chico Municipal Airport
CITY OF OROVILLE: I ph'd Lisa Purvis -Wilson on 11/25/98 to request aerial photos of Oroville Municipal. She
will get them together and get them to us by mail. She wasn't sure how`recent they
would be. Lisa ph'd back and said the aerials that the City have are prior to the 1,000
ft. runway extension, and that they are not current, but asked if we still wanted them.
RANCHAERO AIRPORT: I ph'd Gary Griggs onl 1/25/98 to request aerial photos of Ranchaero Airport. He said he
didn't have any, and wasn't sure who to get in touch with to do them. I told him he
might want to call Laura Webster to find out exactly what type of photos were
necessary.
JW ULAWLUONOTESUNFORMAT.SMA
City of Chico = Chico Municipal Layout Plan 11/98 Received
DATA' COLLECTION FOR BUTTE COUNTY CI UP UPDATE
' GENERAL PLANS (TEXT)
City of Chico Received
�❑
Town of Paradise
56
City of Oroville Received
Butte County Received
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DIAGRAMS ,
City of Chico
❑
Town of Paradise
City of Oroville Received
Butte County 4
SPECIFIC PLANS
J21
North Chico Specific Plan (CSA 87)
ZONING ORDINANCES '
!SI .
City of Chico Received
44 ❑
Town of Paradise
1
City of Oroville Received
Butte County Received
ZONING MAPS
r—t_
City of Chico Received
❑
Town of Paradise -
1
City of Oroville Received
1_ ❑
Butte County
COMPREHENSIVE
AIRPORT LAND USE PLANS
19
1978 Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan (CMAEP) Received
0
October 21, 1998 Amend_ ments to the CMAEP (Summarized in 11-22-98 Letter and Attachments to Tom Parilo; Butte
County DDS) Received
®
1985 Paradise Skypark : Received
1987 Ranchaero Airport Received
1985 Oroville Airport Received
AIRPORT MASTER PLANS
1990 Oroville Airport Master Plan Received
NOISE STUDIES
1
February 1995 FAR Part 150 Airport Noise Compatibiltiy Program and Airport Environs Plan Received
Appendix C from FAR Part 150 Study (Field Noise Monitoring Results October 17-19, 1991) Received
91
CDF Logs for FAR Part 150 Noise Monitoring Dates Received
S
Paradise Airport Noise Exposure Contours (August 30, 1996- Prepared by BBA) Received
®
Ranchaero Airport Noise Exposure Contours (August 30, 1996 - Prepared by BBA) Received
AIR PHOTOS
j ❑
Chico Municipal Airport
i ❑
Paradise Skypark
Q_=
Oroville Municipal Airport
❑
Ranchaero Airport
GIS FILES_ .
r O
GIS files covering each Airport'Area of Influence and lands slightly beyond those boundaries. Data layers should
include: parcel ines; streets/roads; significant natural features such as rivers, creeks, and channels;, City and County
Zoning, General Plan and Specific Plan•designations.
Y
OTHER MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS
a
Airport Facilities and Land Use Manual (July 1992 - Prepared by P & D Aviation) Received
September 23, 1998 Correspondence from Commissioner Rosene to Reinard Brandley, Chico Airport Master Plan
Consultant Received
City of Chico = Chico Municipal Layout Plan 11/98 Received
RPORT LAI. USE CO
r .
County Canter 0(9ys, OroviAa, CA 959M 33&7607 FAX.(916) t8-7785 w
• .. _
4::
:•'(04 N.0 no
ub 4� U.G. Subcommittee Meeting to Revi6w CLUP Proposal
Ptttec" :, . Qtlt:t®view is a matrix staff has developed.W assist with the Subcommittee's
...
nevi ti' ^i 4t � UP proposal submitted by''Sh�att Moen Associates. and comments
sub''O� -Inns Aeronautics Program stall. -Of particular. concern aro'an� comments
;-ftarding .the proposed work• program including any "supplemental" or
013#4041%". We will also be looking for consensus among the group. regarding 'the '.
,;dq -..'.Consultant's qualifications and' related work experience: .
^ ....
1#n: E1r9rnittee meeting has been scheduled,for;
Date -Monday, August 3, 1998
Time - 8:O0 a.m.
JtiLocation Cornucopia (515 Montgomery Street Orovitle)
...The: r the meeting will be to provide an' opportunity. for Subcomrfiittee .members
io : d{i , '.`proposal with staff and formulate.:specifie recommendations regarding:
con ttt I ion and/or work program refinement.
1opfi;ii suiili:be able to attend this very important. meeting.
If youtt.:gUestions at this time, please call me at 533-'9131.
:':Lauri=-•�T.`':.
�<
•Butte County a A#port land Use Commission •
,:
I
CALTRAI%r* AERONAUTICS
kSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY
My N, .1998:
'AfrObrt Land Use Commission
"ve
7
oko "on the Shutt Moen Assoc iatespropvsajjojr. the Butte Co A"
Comprehensive Land Use Plan'
�.�Qutics Program. California De, pw'tn,ent'0f Transpormtion (Cidtratis has
n'Moeri propoisal for the Butte County' s'%airportxomprehensjv *e Wid'us'e . pIaa
9 It Overall, the proposal is s9lid' }i6weve we do have ak few specific
r
consideration.'
bist For Proposal, (RFP), It6m 1.2 was outlined to reassess the A>•_.L1C Airport
M.tp: If it was implied within this proposal; then -this commentItan.be sot -aside;
'Pold want to make sure that the item 'is•covered within'th6 work.--scop-,Z..
"N.
`4
�.4vee with the Proposal that issue idontjflcation involves discuissioniwith -all'
ft.er'-we do not feel -that any one entity -should be eniphasized,' Thi natititive:did.
WY - "-fition including the ALUC. Each ALUC member should have the
*&Vide input into the process.
i grams anAirspace P-A-1rPort Layout Dia d ?lani
Plbii:T , i6ted that the Aironautics. Pro. the preparati, f the
i t_Vldiis (ALPs) for the two privately' -owne d airports. This was correctly 'alluded to.
W., 0mi;bi1ity to*e'
willbetheairporto ner's-resjp.tisure that an adequate ALP is
ling purposes. We.h4ve iready slant to assist the wnars with that
i',will be mandatory in or6r for us to: rt-4ubtirte the costs of CLUP dev elopment
:The law is clear that the --CL1UP'%Mu2't-:b&based upon either a. -long-range
t ALP. Also, it should be ftoted:that.the-'ten-perccnt match in cash or "in-kind"
J1 -;'C+' "• t .l ': CALAERnMAUTIC3 ;n
TR NS 916 � - , .09 P . ��i.�
::.
. °r„•
.2
;14
IN i'`! •' .
' .'T}9b W1 c; (�A,�@fP.t must 11sn ho. A Ot2iA.P.lie.411P.: P.fC11�r1Cp .�1%P Pe!11TfhIIPCa' 1}1P. aT.1 Jit” :1r Ilftlelsr•
`-:,por *Vk ten percent holdback until projacf cQrripla[ion) of both matching costs and :
'..:..
't
<' coti 1.;ti to the aximum.a lowed by the•state's share (i.e,, Helyercerit:of.the tocai'
m 1 (' ni
praj c t;Eti >.will comment on some of the specific budget. items in that tagerd' later ii, our '
>'
:::..
t Approach Procedure r4nelyses (end Sidebar)
''. 'to the CLUP rocess which would i" lud�e a Terminal Procedures (TERPS)
" P e urinal
.
' rtaj 9e"s."tie:.car� fully thought-out. It pay. be consideration for the larger airports if the
`;utast rimie that a TE.RPS analysis would provide viud data for future pl
-
;
.
Nodi A (Sidebar}
r
-z 4_:6f noise abatement procedures' a� it ialat8$ to' airport operations is notwithin
's
tire p tlia'.A.LUC. These are not reimbursable items for this project..
.
;Alit
'• n ! i-.iw
f Vit the sidebar comment that ttoise.and`sa ty
fe concc�ms
.' -.... and the as sooiated '
;cilte d's azcparately addressed,
. i >
• . ' • '
_ .:
.Measures ,
} tatement, the consultant is probably not. entirely outlining the Ai>UC's role. It
>shQu ';Fit+ t at one of the ALUC's primary iesporisibiljt cs is to make a determiriation of
projects d for those
P J an required by law for review.' Th6refoTeyche
{:
.
litipl+eit soon; as it relates to the CL UP shoi>)d. be thoroughly addressed in the CLUP
iidve l tu0s. However' the two activities listed in,the sidebtir: the update• of the pilots'
•.
F
$.3,-
'tfie. update t reimbursable
p to the FAR Pan 1 S� study laro. re ursable itsnis with Mega. '
W
.fluid `r J: should consider additional items drat will.-di,ectly enhe the ALUCs
anc.
biliitgh i6ore effectively.
Plan
,.
"a'tzative draft plan should also be reviewed by its
'
the:ALUC, and/or
`i itb 3t "Caltrans.
ReviN:-<;i iop�tion Environmental Documentatfo.,ee
r.. "',•�`"1•}►uiiag�l should also: b� . • � •
reviewed by tho. ALUC and/or its subcgrninittee and
.�.i:
` = CHLTRANS AEf• OMAl iT ( C= 32
IVIS w';�'
,..Pub
..Pu .. ` „'cltiFrucess and Adopted Plan
;.,.
` : �izderstanding that the IiSdng of specific changes recommended by the
d° er reviewing bodies was to be a workitig ''
ll��': �' g document and woald not be .'.
'.incicri�l.plan. If it is included as an addendum or otherwise what wlll be its
Pram `
,. > Sufgets
supplemental tasks are not eligible' for the.staWs reimbursement; some of .
whY i dy been addressed. However, there are two tasks identified which would be
-w pd would be a s: eligible for the stat fund "l refine Implementation Measutes .Y
slap g '" iet`additional meetings,' ifneeded:
ot`ti:tli-.consultant and the AI:UC will be refining the scope of the work b
: aced .upon
tl�o t '.pftbe reviewers and any scoping discussions that r: gilt take place. �Ti at,
;doci iencuz - :fitim ecothe final scoping document of record, which we will want-td. feview at its'
:
=:`r 04 G, rest of the budget, from our perspective, looks acceptable. Keep in iniad that
`zhe S C : tion is $81,000.00 (i.e., the 90% portion' of a $90,000.00 project):.Thu8,;the' . '
ALL ti � X90,000.00 project in order to receive the full allocation from Calttans: As
'il�i'pusl , the additional $9 000.00 cost in
:.::• _.,. '. Y , the project must also be'state-eligible
h'tasl�r :1, at: number the Cit of Chico or:tlie: Coon
Y ty can choose to pay for Borne of the
odic t t rli ible supplemental tasks. if so desired.
'H#gdes the Aeronautics Program's comments'on the Shutt Moe o
n'pr posal::
}A; „s'arie 1 :'• firm applied, we feel that they are competept and will provide'the _
�.Witlomtl .fact-f nding and produce a solid product. :
.tliiYthese comments will be of assistance to the reviewing corhrrtlttee, .please
advitifutal results from the committee review and the ALUC's intention regarding .th
e
` ltQ t lxave any questions regarding these cowments or the grant a reeirtent process,
V as �cW. at: (916) 654-5553.
Sincerely,
.;:
CH STA- A ENGLE A
;:Avlation Tlanner
facsimile
TRANSMITTAL
to: Paula Leasure, Butte County DDS
fax 538-7785
re: ALUC Minute Request from Shutt Moen ,Associates
date: January 7, 1999
pages: 1, including this cover. sheet.
In preparation for the upcoming CLUP kick-off meeting with the ALUC on 1-20-99, Ken Brody of
Shutt Moen Associates asked that we provide copies of the ALUC's minutes for the last two years
to hips as soon as possible so that he can familiarize himself with the types of issues the ALUC has
been discussing. In Paula Atteberry's absence, I was not sure who to direct this request to.
The copies should be sent to: Shutt Moen Associates
Attn: Ken Brody
707 Aviation Boulevard
Santa Rosa, CA 95403
Ken also has some overheads that he will be presenting at the kick-off meeting, therefore, he asked
that I confirm that a screen and overhead projector will be available.
Please give me a call if County staff will have any difficulties providing the requested items so that
I can inform Ken as early as possible. Thank youl
UVISIOn
®roville, Californi9
From the desk of...
Laura Webster
Senior Planner
PaofEo Munldpal Consultants
1465 Were street
OroWfta, CA 95985
(530) 533-1131
Fax (530) 533-7099
Honorable Chair and Commissioners:
It has come to the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission's attention that the City of Chico
has recently entered into a new lease agreement (five year lease, plus a five year option) with
Chico Aerial Applicators (CAA).
CAA's flight operations have a number of unique characteristics which may warrant specific
noise, safety, and land use consideration during development of the updated CLUP for the Chico
Municipal Airport. For example, these aircraft are typically. not equipped with radios, so their
approach to the runway and the tower must occur at extremely low altitudes. They also use flight
tracks which are not commonly utilized by other general aviation aircraft and may cavy hazardous
materials. Future development plans, such "as the west side development at the airport and
buildout of the North Chico Specific Plan, may also impact the current flight tracks utilized by
CAA.
The ALUC is requesting input from your Commission regarding the level of protection that is
desired to accommodate Chico Aerial Applicators' long term operations. For example, if it is
anticipated that CAA will continue to use its current flight tracks, policies may need to be
developed which would prohibit residential development and other sensitive land uses within
areas subject to CAA's low altitude approaches. • This type of input will help guide the ALUC and
its consultant as we embark upon the CLUP update process. The ALUC considers the
participation of your commission to.be an essential component of the project
Sincerely,
Robert Hennigan, Chairman
Butte County Airport Land Use Commission
cc: Chico Aerial Applicators
Shutt Moen Associates
:..._ utte .Count
LAND OF NATURAL WEALTH AND BEAUT
AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION .
7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397
-
TELEPHONE: (530) 538-7601
FAX: (530) 538-7785
October 26, 1998
City of Chico Airport Commission
P.O. Box 3420
Chico, CA 95927'
-
Subject: Protection of Chico Aerial Applicators' Operations
Honorable Chair and Commissioners:
It has come to the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission's attention that the City of Chico
has recently entered into a new lease agreement (five year lease, plus a five year option) with
Chico Aerial Applicators (CAA).
CAA's flight operations have a number of unique characteristics which may warrant specific
noise, safety, and land use consideration during development of the updated CLUP for the Chico
Municipal Airport. For example, these aircraft are typically. not equipped with radios, so their
approach to the runway and the tower must occur at extremely low altitudes. They also use flight
tracks which are not commonly utilized by other general aviation aircraft and may cavy hazardous
materials. Future development plans, such "as the west side development at the airport and
buildout of the North Chico Specific Plan, may also impact the current flight tracks utilized by
CAA.
The ALUC is requesting input from your Commission regarding the level of protection that is
desired to accommodate Chico Aerial Applicators' long term operations. For example, if it is
anticipated that CAA will continue to use its current flight tracks, policies may need to be
developed which would prohibit residential development and other sensitive land uses within
areas subject to CAA's low altitude approaches. • This type of input will help guide the ALUC and
its consultant as we embark upon the CLUP update process. The ALUC considers the
participation of your commission to.be an essential component of the project
Sincerely,
Robert Hennigan, Chairman
Butte County Airport Land Use Commission
cc: Chico Aerial Applicators
Shutt Moen Associates