HomeMy WebLinkAboutALUC MINUTES, AGENDAS AND PACKETS JANUARY 1998 THROUGH JULY 1998ALUC MINUTES, AGENDAS AND PACKETS
JANUARY 1998 THROUGH JULY 1998
J
AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION PACKET
I
JULY 159 1998
0
BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE (COMMISSION
•
Location:
■ Department of Development Services ■ 7 County Center Drive, Oroville CA 95965 ■ (530) 538-7601 FAX (530) 538-7785 ■
REGULAR MEETING OF THE COMMISSION
Butte County Administration Building, Supervisors' Chambers
25 County Center Drive, Oroville California
Date/Time: July 15, 1998 9:00 a.m.
AGENDA
ALL ITEMS ARE OPEN FOR PUBLIC COMMENT
A. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
B. ROLL CALL
C. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: June 17, 1998
D. ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA (Committee members or staff may request additions, deletions, or changes
in the Agenda order)
F BUSINESS ITEMS:
4-
Items with Public Hearings
11
Subdivision - Drake) on APN 048-043-012, 014 and 015: Vesting Tentative Subdivision
Map to divide 18 acres into 89 single family lots. A General Plan Amendment from Offices
to Low Density Residential and a Rezone from RP (Residential -Professional) to R-1 (Single
Family Residential) is necessary to accommodate the proposal. The project site, is located
on the south side of Eaton Road, between Eaton Road and East Lassen Avenue.. The project
area is bisected by Ceres Avenue. Staff recommends that the Commission find the project
inconsistent with the Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan.
2. Adoption of a Policy Establishing an Official Address for the Airport Land Use
Commission: This item was placed on the agenda by Chairman Hennigan.
Items Without Public Hearings
3. Reconsideration of Deficiency Findings Adoptedv try of Chico when ado tp ing
the 1994 General Plan: This item was placed on the agenda by Commissioner Rosene.
4. • 1 • • • rrTrittee to - • • • • 11 • for oreparatiO-T Of 1
Comprehensive , 1 1
■ Butte County ■ Airport Land Use Commission ■
• F. MONTHLY STATUS REPORT
G. PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ALREADY ON THE AGENDA
(Presentations will be limited to five minutes. The Airport Land Use Commission is prohibited by State Law from
taking action on any item presented if it is not listed on the agenda.)
H. ADJOURNMENT
■ Butte County ■ Airport Land Use Commission ■
�y disabled person needing special accommodation to participate in the Commission proceeding is requested to contact Paula
asure at (530 538-7601) prior to the meeting and arrangements will be made to accommodate you.
Any person may address the Commission during the "Business From the Floor" segment of the Agenda.
'Copies of the Agenda documents relative to an Agenda item may be obtained from the Clerk of the Commission at cost of $.08
per page.
RULES APPLYING TO PUBLIC COMMENTS
1. Members of the public wishing to address the Commission upon any subject within the jurisdiction of Butte AL UC
may so upon receiving recognition from the Chairman at the appropriate time.
2. Comment on items not on the agenda should be made at the time indicated for "Public Comment' on the agenda.
The Commission may not act on any matter so raised and will have to put off action until a meeting at which the
matter can be put on the agenda.
3. Comment on specific agenda items may be made during the discussion of that agenda item, upon recognition
by the Chair.
4. After receiving recognition, please stand and state your name and address before making your presentation, so
that the Clerk may take down this information.
5. All documents to be presented to the Commission shall be given to the Clerk of the Commission (original and
seven copies) prior to Call of Order of meeting. Such documents shall be distributed to the Commission and
made available for public inspection.
This Agenda was mailed to those requesting notice and posted 72 hours in advance of the meeting at the
• following locations:
Butte County Administration Building, front entrance, and glass case.
LA N N I N G W L U MM E ET I N G SU U LY 15-917-15-98.A G D
0 Butte County ■ Airport Land Use Commission ■
0
• BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
MINUTES
June 17, 1998
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11�
12
13
14
15-
16
17
rWV
�a
'20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
A. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
B. ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Commissioners Lambert, Gerst, Rosene, and Hatley
and Alternate Koch and Chairman Hennigan
ABSENT: Jim Causey
ALSO PRESENT: Thomas A. Parilo, Director Development Services
Laura Webster, ALUC staff
Diana Shuey, Secretary
Brian Baldridge (Alternate)
Chet Ward (Alternate)
Nick Ellena, Chico Enterprise Record
C. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: May 20, 1998
The Commission had the following corrections: On Page 2, lines 12 and 13, delete the
words: The motion was seconded by Commissioner Gerst." On Page 2, lines 15 and 16,
delete the words: "but there was no second" and replace with: "but he declined the
nomination and seconded the nomihation of Commissioner Lambert."
It was moved by Alternate Koch, seconded by Commissioner Lambert,. and carried
unanimously for approval of the minutes of May 20, 1998, as corrected.
D. ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA
Brian Baldridge asked to speak on a proposed subdivision on East Avenue which was not
reviewed by ALUC.
Chairman Hennigan suggested that the Public Comment period would be the appropriate
time for Mr. Baldridge to present his comments on the matter.
E. RESOLUTIONS OF APPRECIATION: Resolutions of appreciation have
been prepared for John Franklin, Allen Campbell, Ron Bulber, and John
Papadakis for their efforts as Commissioners or Alternate Commissioners of
the Airport Land Use Commission. Staff is requesting the Commission adopt
the proposed Resolutions.
Commissioner Lambert noted that John Papadakis will continue to serve as her alternate
on ALUC.
■ Butte County ■ Airport Land Use Commission ■
61 It was moved by Alternate Koch, seconded by Commissioner Rosene, and carried
2 unanimously for adoption of the Resolutions of Appreciation for John Franklin, Allen
3 Campbell and Ron Bulber.
4
5 F. BUSINESS ITEMS:
6
7 Items with Public Hearings
8
9 1. Ree uest for Consistency Findings ALUC File No. A98-07 - (Butte
10 County General Plan Amendment and Rezone GPA#98-04 - Faria) on
11 APN 048-040-028: General Plan Amendment from High Density and Low
12 Density Residential to Commercial and a Rezone from R4 (High Density
13 Residential) and SR (Suburban Residential) to C-2 (General Commercial), .
14 located on the east side of Cohasset Road, approximately 650 feet north of
15 East Avenue. Staff recommends that the Commission find the project
16 consistent with the Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plana
17
18 Ms. Webster summarized the staff report, noting that the applicant has since modified the
19 proposal from C-2 to C-1, which will lessen the density. She noted that the proposal would
20 eliminate the potential for residential development of the property.
21
JW It was moved by Commissioner Lambert, seconded ' by Alternate Koch, and carried
3 unanimously .to make the findings *and adopt the conditions listed in Exhibit A of the
24 Agenda Report dated June 2, 1998.
25
26 Items without Public Hearings
27
28 2. west for information from the Federal Aviation Administration
29 The FAA is seeking new ideas regarding how to better
30 influence land use decisions around airports in order to encourage
31 and help State and local governments achieve and maintain land use
32 compatibility. Staff is requesting comments from the Commission to
33 forward to the FAA by June 22, 1998.
34
35 Commissioner Gerst suggested that when FAA guidelines are not followed, that the further
36 funding not be provided to the entity not following the guidelines.
37
38 Alternate Koch said there is a, process in place to address violations of the guidelines.
39
40 Commissioner Gerst suggested that the FAA be alerted to the need for the guidelines
41 being followed.
42
�3
4
■ Butte County ■ Airport Land Use Commission ■
1
F
61 Commissioner Rosene suggested that the FAA provide an information bank on an Internet
2 website to make technical information available to local agencies to use in their own
3 planning.
4
5 Commissioner Hennigan said there is a problem with the existing procedure on compliance
6 with FAA guidelines since it is negative. Compliance is assumed unless it can be proved
7 that there is not compliance. He thought it would be better to have an affirmative program
8 wherein compliance must be demonstrated or certified. He noted that denial of airport
9 funding can effectively "kill" an airport. On the other hand, with the principle of cross
10 compliance, not just airport funding is withheld, but rather all federal funding is withheld if
11 there is not compliance, which protects the airport from being singled out for loss of
12 funding.
13
14 Commissioner Gerst agreed with the Chairman's comments.
15
16 Commissioner Lambert recommended that there be more public disclosure, in order to
17 reduce complaints about airports. She suggested having maps available showing flight
18 tracks and working with real estate companies to make buyers aware of airports.
19�
20 Commissioner Hennigan summarized the suggestions as being the need to strengthen
21 public disclosure and the accessibility to information.
2
3 Commissioner Rosene said mapping of flight tracks for Realtors is a good idea.
24
25 Commissioner Hennigan noted that only the areas of most dense flights can be indicated:
26
27 Mr. Parilo said that underlying zoning must be disclosed prior to a sale of property. He said
28 the new CLUP's could have overlay zoning that can be translated into zoning. The CLUP's
29 would have to be implemented through compatible zoning. He said the FAA could
30 encourage adoption of overlay zones.
31
32 Mr. Baldridge suggested that the FAA make available an informative video or CD ROM
33 describing what the FAA wants and needs regarding land use.
34
35 There was consensus that Chairman Hennigan would work with staff to compose a letter
36 to the FAA expressing the ideas discussed above.
37_
38 ********
39
.40 3. Discussion of Standard Oaeratina Procedures. In order to establish
41 orderly project processing and communication with project applicants, and
42 other governmental. agencies, standard procedures need to be developed.
044
3 This item was placed on the agenda at the request of Chairman Hennigan.
■ Butte County ■ Airport Land Use Commission ■
2
1 Chairman Hennigan said he would like to have a simple handbook of information on ALUC
2 procedures available. He would like people to be aware of ALUC procedures and not have
3 project proponents be surprised and delayed by ALUC review. He suggested having a
4 three ring binder which would include such information as how to get an item on the ALUC
5 agenda. He would like to have a correspondence log with only the most important items
6 being copied for the Commissioners in their packets. He would like to have a description
7 of the CLUP's and a description of the annual update process for CLUP's. He would like
8 a description of how to make findings of consistency or inconsistency.
9
10 Commissioner Lambert suggested that developers should be notified early in the review
11 process if their project will need ALUC review.
12
13 Commissioner Lambert said that there should be information on what is necessary to make
14 adequate legal findings.
15
16 Commissioner Hennigan said there should be a way to communicate with an applicant in
17 the early stages of the application in order to be helpful and informative without making a
18 commitment. He visualized compiling ideas into a draft document that could evolve over
19 some time before being adopted.
�0
1 Mr. Parilo said the CLUP's will address some of the items being mentioned. He noted it
22 is important that the types of projects which require. ALUC review for each airport be
23 identified. He said review requirements for each airport are different because some
24 airports have updated consistent documents. Mr. Parilo noted staff time is limited and
25 ALUC consider whether Ms. Webster's time is better spent working on the CLUP process
26 or standard operating procedures. She has currently worked twice as many hours as
27 originally projected on the mandatory functions. He recommended that Ms. Webster not
28 devote time to details that might be generated by the CLUP process.
29
30 Chairman recommended that staff and' commissioners keep notebooks on ideas for
31 standard operating procedures and deal with compiling the procedures at a later date.
32
33 Mr. Parilo noted that a log is being kept of all ALUC correspondence, which can become
34 part of the monthly status report.
35
36
37
38 (From Supplementary Agenda)
39
40 4. Butte County Specific Plan Amendment #97-01 (Kammerer) and Butte County
6 General Plan Amendment 97-02 on APN 047-250-141: This proposal is an
amendment to the North Chico Specific Plan changing the land use designation on
43 approximately 187 acres located on the west side of Hicks Land, approximately 1 mile
■ Butte County ■ Airport Land Use Commission ■
3
•
1 south of Keefer Road, in the north Chico Area. This item was found inconsistent by the
2 Airport Land Use Commission on November 11, 1997. This proposal has been
3 modified and has not been referred back to ALUC for consistency findings. This item
4 is on this agenda for discussion. (Hennigan)
5
6 Mr. Parilo went over the recent history of this project.
7
8 Alternate Koch said the Chico Airport Commission was opposed to any residential
9 development on the property. That recommendation has not changed and will be reiterated
10 at the Board of Supervisors hearing.
11
12 Commissioner Hennigan was in favor of the Board of Supervisors postponing any decision
13 on the project until such time as the best alternative for the property can be created. He
14 noted there has been talk of relocating Hicks Lane and of creating a series of flood meadows
15 to retain and convey floodwaters. He thought there could be a solution of having industrial
16 uses and at the same time solving flooding problems. He said that ALUC had thought
17 industrial uses would be appropriate for the property but the outdated CLUP precluded such
18 uses. He recommended the Board of Supervisors hold off on any action until a well thought
19 "win-win" solution can be achieved.
0
Commissioner Rosene said the project has been through so many changes that ALUC
22 should review the project again at some point. The land could be used in such a way as to
23 enhance the airport.
24
25 Alternate Koch said the City of Chico manager's position is that nothing should happen until
26 the CLUP is complete.
27
28 Commissioner Gerst was in favor of waiting until the CLUP is complete. He mentioned that
29 air tankers fly low over the property at 200 feet.
30
31 Chairman Hennigan said the air tankers fly over the property for practice runs and to jettison
32 their loads and Aero Union engineers experiment with drops from new tanks.
33
34 Mr. Parilo noted the North Chico Specific Plan has assigned certain densities to properties
35 which might apply pressure for approval on the Board of Supervisors.
36
37 Alternate Koch asked if George Kammerer had received notice of today's meeting.
38
39 Mr. Parilo said that Mr. Kammerer was supposed to have been notified of today's meeting.
40
41 Chairman Hennigan recommended that the Board of Supervisors review the requirements
0 needed to over -rule ALUC findings and remind them of the need for a super majority vote.
43
■ Butte County ■ Airport Land Use Commission ■
4
•
I The Board should also refer to Exhibit A of the North Chico Specific Plan which is the scatter
2 map used for accidents which indicates accidents over this piece of property.
3
4 It was moved by Commissioner Gerst, seconded by Commissioner Rosene to send a letter
5 to the Board of Supervisors from Mr. Parilo, requesting the Board not take any action until
6 the CLUP and the Master Plan for the airport are updated. Also, ALUC,would like an
7 opportunity to review and comment before a final decision is made by the Board if they
8 decide to take action on the project, and that they review the requirements for them to
9 overrule the ALUC's findings.
10
11
12
13 G. MONTHLY STATUS REPORT
14 —
15 Ms. Webster said the CAO has been designated as the person to sign the agreement with
16 Caltrans for the Caltrans Grant for CLUP preparation. (#1) She said Caltrans comments on -
17 the RFP and airport layout plans were received. The RFP was updated and returned to
18 Caltrans. The RFP has been distributed to a list of consultants whose responses are due
1919 by July 15.
4i1 Alternate Koch asked if the Commissioners can have copies of the RFP.
22
23 Mr. Parilo said copies of the RFP can be provided to the Commissioners.
24
25 Ms. Webster said Caltrans comments on the deficiencies in the Paradise and Ranchaero
26 airport layout plans. She said Gary Griggs is working on the new plan for Ranchaero airport.
27 (#2)
28
29 Mr. Parilo recommended attendance at the Visalia workshop.
30
31 Brian Baldridge offered air transportation to anyone wishing to attend the Visalia workshop.
32 (#3)
33
34 At this time Chet Ward was introduced as Commissioner Gerst's new alternate.
35
36 Mr. Parilo reported on the status of signage for the North Chico Specific Plan. He said the.
37 money for the signs will come from the ALUC/Planning Division budget although
38 reimbursement may be possible from developers. He said no funds have yet been
39 generated by the NCSP and yet lots are being developed and there are no signs up as yet.
40
1 Commissioner Rosene requested that the signs be placed in highly visible locations. (#4)
■ Butte County ■ Airport Land Use Commission ■
5
•
1 Mr. Parilo-said Craig Sanders will participate in the Chico Master Plan Technical Advisory
2 Committee from the Planning Division.
3
4 Commissioner Rosene recommended that Ms. Webster -should attend the Master Plan
5 Committee meetings as part of her paid time.
6
7 Mr. Parilo said he would explore the possibility of Ms. Webster attending the Master Plan
8 meetings and would discuss the issue with her employers.
9
10 Alternate Koch said the Master Plan Committee would meet 4 or 5 times for 2 to 3 hours.
11 (#8)
12
13 H. CORRESPONDENCE
14 —
15 I. PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ALREADY ON THE AGENDA
16
17 Mr. Baldridge said he attended a City of Chico Planning Commission this past Monday (June
18 15, 1998) and was surprised to see a tentative subdivision on the agenda for approval which
19 - is near the approach zone of the airport and was not sent to ALUC for review.
1020
21 Commissioner Hennigan asked staff to investigate the proposed subdivision and report back
22 to ALUC at the next meeting.
23
24 Mr. Baldridge said urgency may be an issue. He said it appeared the project would be
25 approved subject to review by ALUC regardless of ALUC's comments on the project. It was
26 said that without an MOU, ALUC's comments are irrelevant.
27
28 ********
29
30 Alternate Koch asked that the Commissioners be supplied with an updated roster of the new
31 ALUC members and alternates.
32
33 J. ADJOURNMENT
34
35
36
37
38 Chairman Bob Hennigan
39
40 Minutes by Diana Shuey _
911 K:\PLANNING\HLUCWINUTES\NLUC98UUNE98.WPD
■ Butte County ■ Airport Land Use Commission ■
6
- + BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT ]LAND USE COMMISSION +
• Department of Development Services • 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA 95965 • (916) 538-7601 FAX (916) 538-7785 •
AGENDA ITEM - E.1.
TO: Honorable Chair and Airport Land Use Commission
FROM: Laura Webster, ALUC Staff
DATE: June 29, 1998
ITEM: Request for Consistency Findings ALUC File No. A98-08 - (City of Chico
Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map, General Plan Amendment and Rezone for
Stonecreek Subdivision - Drake) on APN 048-043-012. 014 and 015: Vesting
Tentative Subdivision Map to divide 18 acres into 89 single family lots. A general
plan amendment from Offices to Low Density Residential and a rezone from RP
(Residential -Professional) to R-1 (Single Family Residential) is necessary to
accommodate the proposal. The project site, is located on the south side of Eaton
Road; between Eaton Road and East Lassen Avenue.
FOR: Airport Land Use Commission Meeting of July 15, 1998
SUMMARY: The City of Chico is presently processing the above mentioned project. A copy of
the Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map and a request for comments was submitted to the Butte
County Planning. Division. The documents were forwarded by the Butte County Planning Division
to ALUC for review and comment. Staff recommends the Commission find the project inconsistent
with the Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan.
ANALYSIS: This City of Chico project involves an 18 acre site formerly known as Foothill Park
Unit #8. According to the Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map that was submitted, the applicant
is proposing to divide the 18 acre site into 89 single family lots with an average lot area of 6,990
square feet (4.94 gross units/acre). The project site is currently zoned RP and has a General
Plan land use designation of Offices. A rezone from RP (Residential -Professional) to R-1 (Single
Family Residential) and a general plan amendment from Offices to Low Density Residential is
necessary to accommodate the proposal. The project site, is located on the south side of Eaton
Road, between Eaton Road and East Lassen Avenue. The project area is bisected by Ceres
Avenue.
The project description was forwarded from the Butte County Planning Division to Airport Land
Use Commission staff on May 28, 1998 for comment as part of the routine Request for Comments,
-- and the Commission must respond within 60 days. Staffs review consisted of land use
compatibility and noise sensitivity. Based upon this data staff informed the City of Chico
• Community Development Department that the project was tentatively found to be inconsistent with
• Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission •
• the adopted Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan and would receive a formal ALUC
recommendation at its July 15, 1998 meeting.
Land Use Compatibility
Staff reviewed the request pursuant to the currently adopted Chico Municipal Airport Environs
Plan (CMAEP). A determination was made that the project site is located within the Chico
Municipal Airport Study Area (CIC -6) and both the Horizontal and 50:1 Approach Surfaces for
that facility (CIC -5). The site is located approximately 5,500 feet southeast of the south end of
the main runway (31 Q. At a horizontal distance of 5,500 feet from the end of the runway, the
approach surface would be between 250 and 300 feet above the project site.
The north end of the property is immediately adjacent to the Chico Municipal Airport Clear. Zone.
The site is also located within: the Flight Pattern for Heavy Aircraft Departure and VFR Arrival
(CIC -2); the Flight Corridor for the Chico Municipal Airport (CIC -4); Compatible Land Use Zone
(CLUZ) Category IIP and the Interim Zone Boundary (CIC -13). _
Recommendations within the CMAEP for properties located within the Interim Zone Boundary
which are designated as CLUZ IIP are as follows:
1) An A -X (Agricultural) zone classification is recommended consistent with the size of the
parcel.
2) Residential units (one single family) allowed under this classification should be restricted
to contiguous property outside the CLUZ IIP area. Note - The 18 acre parcel under review
is entirely within the CLUZ IIP area.
3) Use permits for any uses involving concentrations of people (parks, golf courses,
churches, other public or quasi -public uses) should not be granted.
Although not part of the analysis for consistency with the CMAEP, it should be noted that the
Chico Municipal Airport Master Plan (CMAMP) is in the process of being updated. This update
may identify runway extensions and/or other improvements designed to accommodate heavier
aircraft. These activities, while considered beneficial in terms of airport operations and
capabilities, are likely to result in additional noise and safety concerns.
Noise Sensitivity
The project site is located between the projected 60 and 65 dB CNEL contour as depicted in
Drawing CIC -3 within the CMAEP. Exhibit 4-4 of the CMAEP indicates that noise insulation
features should be required in the design of all residential development occurring within those
exposure levels. However, as noted within the previous section, there are a number of safety
issues above and beyond noise that apply to this property which make it unsuitable for residential
development. The above data also does not address single event noise levels over the project
• Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission •
E
• site. Given the low altitude (250-300 feet) that individual aircraft will overfly this site, single event
noise levels are likely to exceed the CNEL standard.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission
find that the City of Chico Stonecreek Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map, General Plan
Amendment and Rezone A98-08 (Drake) on APN 048-043-012, 014, and 015 is inconsistent with
the Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan subject to the findings in attached Exhibit "A".
Attached: A: Findings
B: Location Map
• Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission •
3
+BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE CO.MMISSION +
• Department of Development Services • 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA 95965 • (916) 538-7601 FAX (916) 538-7765 •
EXHIBIT A
BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION CONSISTENCY FINDINGS FOR:
A98-08 (City of Chico Stonecreek Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map. General Plan
Amendment and Rezone - Drake) on APN 048-043-012.014 and 015
The following findings have been prepared at the direction of the ALUC and are for the
consideration of the City of Chico (local agency) when making a decision on the project. If the
local agency does not accept the findings of the ALUC, it may override the ALUC decision with
a 2/3 vote of the governing body provided it makes specific findings that the proposed action is
consistent with the State Aeronautics Act as stated in Section 21670. Overriding findings
cannot be adopted merely as matters of opinion, but instead must be supported by
substantial evidence.
Section 1: ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS
A. The ALUC did not receive any environmental documentation for the project and cannot
offer any conclusions as to the adequacy of the environmental review process relating to
airport related impacts.
Section 2: PROJECT CONSISTENCY FINDINGS
A. The ALUC finds the project is inconsistent with the Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan
(CMAEP) and is incompatible with the viable, responsible operation of the Chico Municipal
Airport as indicated below.
1. The project is located within the CMAEP Compatible Land Use Zone IIP and Interim
Zone Boundary which recommends that an A -X (Agricultural) zone classification be
applied consistent with the size of the parcel; and, that residential units (one single
family) allowed under this classification be restricted to contiguous property outside
the CLUZ IIP area.
2. The project site is in an area that is known to be subject to overflights of both
arriving and departing aircraft.
3. The site is in a known area of increased noise and safety hazards because of its
location within the 50:1 Approach Surface and Flight Corridor for the Chico
Municipal Airport.
4. The project site is located within the projected 60-05 dB CNEL noise contour which
is incompatible with the CMAEP unless noise attenuation features are incorporated
into the building design of permitted structures.
• Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission •
4
• 5. Single event noise levels will exceed acceptable standards due to aircraft
approaching/departing over this site at an elevation of approximately 250 to 300
feet.
•
• Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission •
5
6,roiect Lnca
+B=IE COUN1 Y AAIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION +
• Department of Development Services • 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA 95965 • (530) 538-7601 FAX (530) 538-7785 •
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: I Airport Land Use Commission
FROM: ALUC Staff
DATE: July 7, 1998
SUBJECT: Official Address
It appears that various agencies are still sending information intended for the Airport Land Use
Commission to the Butte County Department of Development Services, Planning Division. The
incoming mail is distributed to the Principal Planner in charge of current planning and may or may
not be forwarded to ALUC.
In order to eliminate this problem, staff recommends adopting a policy designating an official
address for the Airport Land Use Commission and directing staff to provide the official address
to various agencies, and inform them that items sent to an address other than the official address
will be considered as not having been received.
' Staff proposes the official address be as follows:
Butte County Airport Land Use Commission
7 County Center Drive
Oroville, California 95965
Recommendation: Adopt the official address as proposed by staff and direct staff to provide
notice to various agencies who normally contact ALUC.
K 1P LAN N I N G W L U C\M E ET I N G SU U LY 15 -MD D R E SS I. RPT
• Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission •
i
+B=]E COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION +
• Department of Development Services • 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA 95965 • (530) 538-7601 FAX (530) 538-7785 •
MEMORANDUM
TO: Airport Land Use Commission
FROM: ALUC Staff
DATE: July 7, 1998
SUBJECT: Overide of ALUC Inconsistency Findings for the 1994 City of Chico General
Plan
This item was placed on the agenda at the request of Commissioner Rosene. Commissioner
Rosene will present his concerns to the Commission at the meeting.
Staff researched the issue by conducting a thorough review of minutes of the ALUC meetings.
However, there were no minutes for the closed sessions held by the Commission. Based on
available information staff determined that the Commission was advised by Legal Counsel that
the statute of limitations had run out on ALUC's ability to sue the City of Chico for preparation of
inadequate findings. The Commission was advised that if the City of Chico failed to request
ALUC's review of projects requiring'a General Plan Amendment, Rezone, or Specific Plan, or
failed to prepare adequate overriding findings on a project, then the ALUC could then take legal
action. The Commission was also advised that preparation of the updated CLUPs is critical and
would require additional action by the City.
K:\P LAN N I N G\A L U C\M E ET I N G SU U LY 15.9\C H I F I N D. R PT
• Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission • ,
•
+BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION +
• Department of Development Services • 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA 95965 • (530) 538-7601 FAX (530) 538-7785 e
MEMORANDUM
TO: Airport Land Use Commission
FROM: ALUC Staff
DATE: July 7, 1998
SUBJECT: Sub -Committee Selection
Last year the Commission appointed a three-member Sub -Committee to review proposals for
preparation of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Commissioners appointed to this -Committee
were Chairman Hennigan, Commissioner Campbell, and Commissioner Franklin. Since these
appointments were made, there has been a change in the composition of the Commission leaving
two vacancies.
Staff requests the Commission select two current Commissioners to serve on the Sub -Committee
with Chairman, Hennigan.
K:\PLANNINGW LUC\MEETINGSUULY15-9\SUBCMTE.RPT
• Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission •
I- +13UTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION +
• Department of Development Services • 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA 95965 • (916) 538-7601 FAX (916) 538-7785 •
t MEMORANDUM
TO: Honorable Chair and Airport Land Use Commission
FROM: ALUC Staff
SUBJECT: Monthly Status Report
DATE: For the Meeting of July 15, 1998
1. Board of Supervisors June 23, 1998 Action on Stephens General Plan Amendment - The
Board continued consideration of the amendment request to an unspecified open date. They
also directed that a Development Agreement be developed to embody conditions -that would
govern future tentative map application. The Development Agreement is subject to a public
hearing by the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors.
2. Findings of Staff Research Regarding 35 Unit Subdivision in Chico on Floral Avenue - ALUC
staff is unable to determine whether a request for consistency findings was submitted by the
City of Chico. At the time the project was circulated by the City, ALUC did not maintain a log
of incoming correspondence. However, all projects received by ALUC that require a
legislative action are referred to Laura Webster for review. If a legislative act is not involved,
staff prepares a letter to the City requesting standard conditions be imposed. Steve Lucas
spoke with Bob Summerville about the subdivision of Floral Avenue, and was advised that the
City is unable to tell if the project was submitted specifically to ALUC or to the Planning
Division. If submitted to the Planning Division, it would not necessarily be referred to ALUC.
3. Status of the RFP for CLUP Preparation - The RFP for the CLUP was distributed to
prospective consultants on June 12, 1998. Proposals are due by 4:00 p.m. on Wednesday,.
July 15, 1998. It appears that two, or possibly three firms will submit proposals.
4. Airport Land Use Workshop (Visalia - June 25, 1998) - Staff would like to extend a sincere
thank you to the Northern California Pilot's Association for providing air transportation to the
Airport Land Use Workshop in Visalia. The event was attended by Commissioner Gerst,
Alternate Baldridge, Alternate Ward, and Laura Webster. Presentations were given by
experienced land use planners from San Mateo County, the City of Ceres, Shutt Moen &
Associates, and specialists from the Caltrans Aeronautics Program. Topics discussed
included:
• An overview of the 1993 Airport Land Use Planning Handbook.
• State requirements and review processes for siting schools near airports.
• Use of FAA Airport Hazard Form 7460-1.
• Aircraft noise descriptions, measurement standards, management and mitigation.
• Formulation of a Comprehensive Land Use Plan (San Mateo County - In Progress)
• Conforming a City General Plan with a Comprehensive Land Use Plan (Approach
taken by the City of Ceres)
• Overview of the authority and legal basis for Airport Land Use Commissions and their
activities.
• Butte County *Airport Land Use Commission •
jk�
Copies of the. workshop agenda and handout materials collected by staff have been provided
to the full Commission. The agenda contains the name and phone number for each member
of the workshop panel. Other pertinent information includes a website address where you can
access almost all state codes: www.leginfo.ca.gov.. A phone number was also given for Dan
Burkland, President of the National Business Aviation Association (760) 749-6303.
5. Status on Ranchaero Airport - An agreement has been reached and signed by both parties.
However, there is a question whether the Division of Aeronautics and the FAA would accept
the agreement, as is. If an agreement is accepted by their agencies, then the license can
return to an unrestricted status. Staff will report on any future status in the August monthly
report.
6. ALUC Membership - as requested by the Commission on June 17, 1998 an updated roster
of members is attached to this review.
7. Resolutions of Appreciation - Copies of the Resolution of Appreciation are attached to this
report.
8. Request for Proposals for the Comprehensive Lanni use Plan Attached to this report is a
copy of the RFP distributed to consultants.
9. Letter to FAA. At the June 17, 1998 meeting the Commission directed staff to prepare a letter
to the FAA summarizing the Commissions comments regarding the Compatible Land Use
Planning Initiative. Staff prepared this letter for the Chairman's signature and it is attached
to this report.
10. Preparation of Draft County Ordinance - ALUC Staff is in the process of making revisions to
the County Ordinance as it applies to airports in Butte County. During a detailed review of the
current ordinance, staff determined that there were several questions that needed to be
answered. County Counsels office contacted staff on Thursday, July 2, 1998, regarding this
ordinance. The draft ordinance may be ready for the Commission to review at the August
meeting.
11. ALUC Project Review Authority ALUC review of certain types of actions is --or appears to be --
still required even after a local agency has made its general plan, and any specific plans
consistent with the commission's compatibility plan or overridden the commission.
Review of individual development projects becomes optional once the general plans and
specific plans have been made consistent with the compatibility plan. This review is optional
because it requires an agreement between the jurisdiction and the Commission which states
ALUC has review authority. ALUC retains review authority over any project which requires a
general plan, specific plan, or zoning ordinance amendment.
In Butte County there are four public use airports subject to ALUC review of projects within the
airport area.
The Chico Municipal I Aires lies with the jurisdiction of the City of Chico. However ALUC .
retains authority over lands within the City of Chico and Butte County. The City of Chico
prepared and adopted findings to override the ALUC findings of inconsistency of the City of
Chico General Plan. Therefore, in the Chico incorporated area, projects subject to ALUC
review are projects which require a legislative act. These are general plan amendments,
• Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission •
2
• specific plans, and rezones. The unincorporated area west and northwest of the airport is
subject to the North Chico Specific Plan. The Commission prepared findings of inconsistency
for the NCSP. The Butte County Board of Supervisors prepared and adopted findings to
override the ALUC findings of inconsistency. Again, the only projects subject to ALUC review
are legislative acts, which are general plan amendments, specific plans, and rezones. The
remaining unincorporated area within the Chico Overflight area must submit all development
projects to the ALUC for consistency findings.
The Commission tried to establish a MOU with the City of Chico and the Butte County Board
of Supervisors which would subject projects within the incorporated area and North Chico
Specific Plan Area to ALUC for review; however, the MOU was rejected by the City of Chico
and therefore not submitted to the Board of Supervisors.
Recently, ALUC staff has received courtesy requests for project review from the City of Chico.
In this instance, ALUC staff prepares a courtesy response advising the City of Chico of the
projects compatibility or incompatibility with the Land Use Plan and recommends conditions
for approval. These courtesy reviews do not require overriding findings if the Council does
not agree with staff and approves the project without the recommended conditions.
The Ranchaero Aires is also multi jurisdictional having lands within the City of Chico and
Butte County. Discretionary development projects in the unincorporated portion of the
overflight area are subject to ALUC review. Projects within the City of Chico are subject to
ALUC review in the same manner as the Chico Airport.
All discretionary development projects within the overflight area of the Oroville and Paradise
Airport must be submitted to ALUC for consistency findings.
12. Correspondence - Attached to this report is a copy of the ALUC Correspondence Log
instituted June 8, 1998 at the request of Chairman Hennigan. Some of the more important
correspondence not related to the above items is attached for your information.
13. ALUC Staff Time Accounting - Pay periods 11, 12 and 13 (5/16/98 through 6/26/98). Total
hours dedicated to work on ALUC issues by individual staff members.
Tom Parilo 16
Paula Leasure 16
Laura Webster Total Hours Remaining on Contract at the beginning of this
Reporting Period: 50.50 hours
Total Hours Worked: 56.50 hours
(Note - PMC will not bill for hours worked over the initial contract
amount)
Additional Hours Absorbed by PMC for 6-25-96 Airport Land Use
Workshop:' 8.00 hours
Paula Atterberry 58.5
• Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission •
3
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
. FORMULATION OF COMPREHENSIVE AIRPORTS LAND USE PLAN
Butte County Airport Land Use Commission .
L INTRODUCTION
The Butte County Airport Land Use Commission requests proposals from qualified
consultants to prepare an update to the Comprehensive Airports Land Use Plan (CLUP).
The Plan is to consider the necessary land use objectives to protect the four public -use
airports within the County. The Plan will be presented to the Butte County Airport Land Use
Commission (ALUC) for adoption. After adoption, it will be used by local agencies for the
purpose of considering modifications to their respective General Plans. It will also be used
by the Airport Land Use Commission in reviewing local agency plans, general plan
amendments, rezonings and specific project proposals for consistency determinations
involving land use actions in the vicinity of the four airports.
II. BACKGROUND
The Department of Development Services (DDS), together with a contract staff member from
the firm of Pacific Municipal Consultants (PMC), provides staffing services to the Butte
County Airport Land Use Commission. ALUC staff and Caltrans representatives will oversee
the preparation of the Draft CLUP.
The airport system consists of the following airports: Chico Municipal Airport (CIC), Oroville
�y Municipal Airport (OVE), Ranchaero Airport (023) and Paradise Skypark Airport (Q88).
These airports are owned and operated by municipalities (CIC, OVE) and as private
enterprises (023, Q88). The Chico Municipal Airport is currently in the process of updating
its Airport Master Plan. The Oroville Municipal Airport updated its Airport Master Plan in
1990. Updating.of the existing Airport Layout Plans for both the Ranchaero and Paradise
Skypark Airports is necessary before they can be utilized as the basis for the CLUP for those
facilities.
The four airports all have existing ALUC Comprehensive Land Use Plans (CLUP). The age
of these documents ranges between 11 and 20 years: `
Existing CLUP Adoption Date .
Chico Municipal Airport . 1978
Oroville Municipal Airport 1985
Paradise Skypark Airport 1985
Ranchaero Airport 1987
An update of the CLUPs for all airports is warranted due to several factors:
• The age of the existing plans.
• The need for consistency between the CIC's updated Airport Master Plan and the
_ CLUP.
• A desire to apply current concepts and strategies for achieving noise and safety
.• compatibility.
Funding for the project is largely based on a grant allocation through the California
is Department of Transportation, Aeronautics Program and the California Transportation
Commission. The desired timeframe for project completion is one year from the date of
contract execution.
III. . PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The intent of the project is to prepare a complete update of the existing airport land use plans
for each public -use airport within the County of Butte and compile the information into a
single Comprehensive Airports Land Use Plan. The update is to be based on the 1993
Airport Land Use Planning Handbook issued by the California Department of Transportation,
Aeronautics Program. The project will include all maps, text, documentation, public and
environmental review necessary to allow adoption and use of the Plan by the Butte County
ALUC.
IV. SCOPE OF WORK
The proposed Scope of Work defines the project in detail. The consultant's approach,
methodology, and proposed phasing should be clearly defined and explained. Assumptions
regarding staff and consultant roles and responsibilities should also be noted.
1.0 Compile Base Data and Conduct Initial Mapping
1.1 Gather existing information relative to each airport, including but not limited
to: Existing Airport Master Plans, Airport Layout Plans, current individual
Airport Land Use Plans, the Chico Municipal Airport FAR Part 150 Study,
other background reports, mapped information available at the Department
of Development Services, and any other pertinent information for each airport
in the County.
1.2 Reassess the ALUC Airport Area of Influence for each public use airport in
the county based upon new forecasts, the 1993 Airport Land Use Planning
Handbook's recommended criteria and any new data gathered for the
airport's CLUPs.
An "Administrative Draft" version of the Airport Area of Influence maps shall
be submitted to ALUC staff, Caltrans and the Commission for review and
comment prior to finalization of "Public Circulation Drafts". Hearings and
consultations with involved agencies shall. be conducted pursuant to Public
Utilities Code Section 21675 (c).
Maps shall be prepared in a georeferenced data set (preferred projection is
in UTM Zone 10, in feet) compatible with existing Butte County Department
of Development Services Geographic Information Systems (Arc Info coverage
exchange file or shape file).
1.3 Compile local agency general plan, specific plan designations, and zoning
ordinance districts for the area of each ALUC Airport Area of Influence. -
Summarize and map this information for each Airport Area of Influence.
1.4 Compile and map local agency data on existing land uses within each Airport
Area of Influence. `
2
1.5 Utilize existing aerial photographs of each Airport Area of Influence, if
• considered suitable and available at a scale compatible with the base maps
described in Task 1.2. If existing aerial photographs are not suitable, new
ones shall be prepared as part of the project. It is likely that new aerial
photographs will be necessary for OVE, 023 and Q88.
•
CJ
2.0 Analyze Existing Conditions and Identify Primary Compatibility Issues
2.1 Review documents compiled in task 1.1.
2.2 Consult with airport personnel, Caltrans, the ALUC, the 1993 Airport Land
Use Planning Handbook and staff of local jurisdictions to help verify existing
conditions and define primary compatibility issues associated with each
particular airport.
2.3 Analyze planning designations, zoning categories, and existing land uses
within the Airport Areas of Influence, and develop a categorization of
compatible uses or designations. Identify areas of potential conflict with
planned airport operations.
2.4 Prepare a summary report or other appropriate interim document to facilitate
local agency staff, ALUC staff and Caltrans review and comment on
information developed in the analysis of existing conditions and identification
of primary issues.
3.0 Define Structural Height Limit (Imaginary Airspace) Surfaces
3.1. Define technical parameters for each airport in the system, i.e. airport role,
runway category, type of approach, and traffic patterns.
3.2 Define Approach, Transitional, Horizontal, and Conical imaginary airspace
surfaces reflecting criteria in Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77,
"Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace" for each airport.
3.3 Examine all existing and proposed instrument approach procedures to
determine whether FAR Part 77 surfaces are consistently controlling. Part
77 may not always be sufficiently restrictive. Non -precision Terminal
Instrument Procedures (TERPs) may,- in fact, be required to establish
adequate height restrictions. If that is determined to be the case, appropriate
TERPs surfaces will be prepared.
3.4 Evaluate land use implications for imaginary surfaces for each Airport Area
of Influence.
4.0 Define Airport Safety Zones for each Airport
4.1 If Airport Layout Plan updates have not been completed for (023 and Q88),
work with Airport Owners and/or Managers to update airport aircraft activity
3
information and forecasts, as necessary, for use in both the noise and safety
• analysis. A time horizon of at least 20 years shall be utilized for all airports.
4.2 Define airport safety zones for each airport. These zones shall be displayed
on a base map with current property lines, and shown in relationship to
defined boundaries on the Airport Layout Plan of each airport. A matrix
displaying inappropriate land uses within the various safety zones shall also
be included.
5.0 Define Noise Implications and Impacts on Existing and Proposed Land Uses
5.1 Existing and projected no contours shall be prepared for each airport
utilizing the most. current data generated through updates to the Airport
Master Plan for CIC and Airport Layout Plan updates for 023 and Q88, or task
4.1.
Noise contours set forth in the Airport Master Plan for the Oroville Municipal
Airport and recent noise studies prepared for the Ranchaero and Paradise
Skypark Airports should be. used if they are useful data for CLUP purposes.
5.2 The extent to which airport noise affects nearby land use, compatibility shall
be assessed based upon the noise contours.
5.3 The Plan shall identify an appropriate threshold Community Noise Equivalent
._ Level (CNEL) on which to base future land use decisions; present a matrix
of CNEL values versus land uses in which the level of compatibility will be
indicated; identify areas within each Airport Area of Influence where
structures may require special noise insulation; and, provide an analysis and
suggested methods to address overflight impacts including single event noise
events.
6.0 Define Overflight Compatibility Issues
6.1 Review overflight compatibility concerns in` the 1993 Airport Land Use
Planning Handbook.
6.2 Consult with Airport Owners/Managers and local agency staff(s) to obtain
information regarding complaints about operations at each airport. Complaint
information should be presented by geographic location and land use
category (residential, office, commercial, etc.).
6.3 Based on the complaint experiences associated with each airport, evaluate
the need for the development of specific policies to assure airport land use
compatibility
7.0 Policy Development
7.1 Develop goals, objectives, and policies to help guide development around the
county's airports. It is likely that this component of the Plan will consist of
-4
�7-
countywide goals, objectives and policies that apply uniformly to all airports,
as well as more refined language which applies on an individual basis to each
Airport Area of Influence. The policy section should distinguish between
"Compatibility Policies" and "Procedural Policies."
Examples of Compatibility Policies include those that:
Serve as the basis for future project reviews and compatibility
determinations relative to airport noise, safety, airspace protection
and overflight concerns.
Examples of Procedural Policies include those that:
Set forth the process by which ALUC and its staff will carry out their
mandated review of local actions.
• Specify the type of information about a project or action that the
ALUC needs to perform an adequate review.
Indicate the timing of ALUC review relative to other local actions on
a project.
• Present ALUC action choices (findings of consistency or
inconsistency).
• Express ALUC's reservation of the right to decide whether a
proposed local action meets the compatibility criteria set forth in the
CLUP.
The formulation of goals, objectives and policies shall be in accordance with
the requirements of State ALUC enabling legislation (§ 21670, et seq. of the
Public Utilities Code) and with the 1993 Airport Land Use Planning Handbook
issued by the California Department of Transportation, Aeronautics Program.
The formulation of goals, objectives and policies shall be rationally based on
concerns about potential land use activity near the airports which could
adversely affect current and planned operations. The goals, objectives and
policies shall be in a format that facilitates ease of implementation by
individual local agencies.
7.2 Provide a comparison of existing and proposed CLUP policies. This
comparison will be used to demonstrate the policy similarities and differences
between the existing and proposed CLUP. The comparison may also be
incorporated within the CLUP or as a technical appendix, to the final
document, if determined appropriate based upon input from the selected
consultant.
7.3 The proposed CLUP shall reference the Airport Layout Plans (CIC, Q88 and
023) and Airport Master Plan (OVE) on which the CLUP is based. Defined
zones for Structural Height Limit and Public Safety policies shall make
specific reference to defined reference lines on the Airport Layout Plans and
Master Plan.
7.4 Discuss recommended land use patterns and any other relevant planning
issues.
5
8.0 Prepare an Implementation Section for the Comprehensive Airports Land Use Plan
8.1 Identify the Butte County ALUC's role and authority through the following
components:
8.1.1 An overview of jurisdictional factors, e.g. location and nature of
project, which affect or determine the scope of ALUC review.
8.1.2 Criteria, e.g. CNEL, type of use, density and height to be used by the
ALUC in evaluating future land use proposals.
8.1.3 Mitigation measures, e.g. insulation, easements, and their
applicability to specific types of land use proposals.
8.2. Prepare a consistency evaluation which identifies specific conflicts between
currently adopted plans and ordinances of local jurisdictions and the
proposed airport land use plan policies. Specify changes or additions that
— would need to be made to County and individual city land use plans and
zoning regulations to bring them into consistency with proposed airport land
use plan policies.
8.3 Provide sample implementation tools for local agency consideration and/or
use. Specific examples will be incorporated as appendices to the CLOP.
These tools may include but not be limited to:
8.3.1 Airport Combining Zone District - A sample ordinance for an "Airport
Combining Zone District" that incorporates the proposed Plan goals
and policies and could be easily added to existing local agency
zoning.
List of Information Required from Applicants of Development Proiects
- The proposed ordinance shall include a list which specifies in detail
the information related to proposed CLUP policies that will be
required from any applicant for projects which are subject to ALUC
review.
8.3.2 Ordinance Requiring Dedication of Noise and Avigation Easements -
A sample ordinance that would automatically require the dedication
of.aircraft access and noise generation rights to the appropriate City
or County for a subdivision. This sample should include the
geographically defined area that the ordinance would apply to for
each of the four airports.
8.3.3 Noise and Avigation Easement Wording - Evaluate and recommend
sample wording for a grant deed instrument that would convey aircraft
access and noise generation rights to the City or County.
8.3.4 Advisory Document - An advisory document to be used to notify
prospective property buyers or tenants near the airport that they may
be subject to overflight impacts associated with fixed wing or rotary
• r aircraft.
6
•
0
9.0 Preparation of Comprehensive Airports Land Use Plan
9.1 Results of Tasks 1 through 8 will be compiled into a professional document
that represents the Butte County ALUC Comprehensive Airports Land Use
Plan.
9.2 A draft Table of Contents or other similar outline listing the major components
and anticipated organization of the Comprehensive Airports Land Use Plan
shall be submitted to ALUC staff and Caltrans for their review and comment
within three months of project initiation.
9.3 Five (5) copies of the proposed plan shall be submitted initially in
"Administrative Draft" form for the review and comment of ALUC staff and
Caltrans.
9.4 Following receipt of comments, the consultant shall prepare and submit
seventy-five (75) bound copies of a "Public Circulation" Draft Comprehensive
Airports Land Use Plan, including any appendices, and one (1) unbound
document for additional reproduction.
9.5 During the public review and finalization process for the Draft CLUP and
associated environmental documentation, the consultant shall develop and
maintain a "Plan Addendum." The Addendum, which will function as an
internal tracking tool for modifications to the Draft CLUP, shall consist of a
matrix format divided into multiple columns which list: specific plan changes
suggested through written input from the public andother reviewing bodies
or agencies; Commission or staff initiated changes; and, a column which
documents the final direction of the ALUC relative to each item.
9.6 Prior to formal adoption of the CLUP, the changes directed by the
Commission through the Plan Addendum shall be incorporated into the draft
document to develop the Final Plan.
10.0 CEQA Documentation and Processing
10.1 Prepare an Initial Study to determine,—the significance of potential
environmental impacts associated with implementation of the recommended
Comprehensive Airports Land Use Plan. This document shall be prepared
in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and State and
County CEQA Guidelines. A minimum of five (5) copies of the Initial Study
shall be submitted to the Development Services Department, Planning
Division for internal staff review.
10.2 Following Department of Development Services, Planning Division review of
the Initial Study, the Planning Division will determine and recommend the
appropriate level of environmental compliance necessary for the project.
10.3 All environmental documentation shall be made available for public review
and comment in accordance with the timeframes required by the California
Environmental Quality Act. Official notification of the public review period and
proposed environmental documentation will be distributed to the State
7
Clearinghouse, Department of Transportation Aeronautics Program and other
appropriate agencies and/or interested parties as part of the public review
process.
1-1:0 Review and Adoption Process
11.1 The ALUC, ALUC staff and a Caltrans Aeronautics Program Representative,
will provide input throughout the project and comment on all administrative
draft documents.
11.2 A Project Initiation Workshop will be conducted at a regular meeting of the
Butte County ALUC to introduce the consultant, and discuss the following:
• Project background and purpose
• Work program and anticipated products
• Proposed project timelines
_ • Overview of the process
This forum may also be used to solicit initial comments from the public
regarding the key points of the project or proposed process.
11.3 During the development of Airport Area of Influence boundaries, consultation
with affecfed'lortjunsdictrons"shall '6tdU' as required by Section 21675(c)
of the Public Utilities Code. This activity will require one consultant
presentation before the Butte County ALUC and additional presentations; as
necessary, before the City Council of each affected jurisdiction and the Board
of Supervisors.
11.4 During the development of the Comprehensive Airports Land Use Plan, one
(1) Community Workshop shall be conducted with the ALUC to provide the
Commission and the public with a status report on project activities, present
key results of the land use, noise and safety analyses, describe preliminary
compatibility criteria, and discuss anticipated policy concepts.
Commission and community feedback gener-ated during this workshop shall
be considered during development of the Administrative and Public
Circulation drafts of the CLUP.
11.5 During the public review period for the Public Circulation Draft CLUP and
associated environmental documentation, one (1) Public Workshop will be
conducted at a regularly scheduled ALUC meeting to present the Draft Plan
and solicit comments from the public and other local jurisdictions. The Plan
Addendum documenting suggested document modifications will be
developed and expanded dudng-this phase for use in subsequent hearings.
11.6 Following the close of the public review period for the Public Circulation Draft
CLUP and associated environmental documentation, the Draft Plan and Plan
_ Addendum, will be presented to the ALUC for formal consideration and
preliminary acceptance. Formal Commission direction regarding all items
within the Plan Addendum will be solicited at this time.
•
11.7 Following formal direction and preliminary acceptance by the ALUC, the Draft
CLUP will be modified as appropriate to produce the Final Plan. The Final
Plan and associated environmental documentation will then be presented to
the ALUC for adoption.
12.0 General Coordination
12.1 The consultant will work and consult with the ALUC, ALUC staff, Caltrans
Aeronautics Program staff and act as a liaison with other local, state, and
federal agencies as necessary during the project. The consultant will also be
responsible for conducting public presentations and preparing workshop
materials/exhibits.
13.0 ALUC Staff Responsibilities
13.1 ALUC staff will coordinate the technical -review of the project, be responsible
for issuance of all public notices, arrange rooms for publicly noticed
meetings, and record meetings.
ALUC staff will also provide information and documents to the consultant as
necessary to facilitate project activities, respond in a timely fashion to
administrative draft materials, and provide contact information and
introductions to local agency staff.
14.0 Summary of Major Products
14.1 Draft Table of Contents for Comprehensive Airports Land Use Plan
(5 copies, plus 1 unbound)
14.2 Administrative Draft - Airport Area of Influence Maps
(5 copies, plus 1 unbound)
14.3 Summary Report - Existing Conditions Analysis/Preliminary Issues
(10 copies, plus 1 unbound)
14.4 Administrative Draft CLUP (5 copies, plus 1 unbound)
14.5 Administrative Draft Initial Study (5 copies, plus 1 unbound)
14.6 Public Circulation Draft CLUP and Appendices
(75 bound copies, 1 reproducible copy, 1 computer diskette version)
14.7 Public Circulation Draft - CEQA Documentation
(75 copies, 1 reproducible copy, 1 computer diskette version)
14.8 Plan Addendum —
(75 copies, 1 reproducible copy, 1 computer diskette version)
EN
• 14.9 Final CLUP and Appendices
(75 bound copies, 1 reproducible copy, 1 complete set of computer diskettes.
The computer disk version should be sufficiently documented so as to allow
use and modification by staff as the Plan is updated and amended over time)
All documents, other than graphics, shall be prepared in Word Perfect 6.1 for
Windows.
V. PROPOSAL CONTENTS
A. Project Understanding and Approach - This section should consist of a brief
overview of the consultant's interpretation of the project, its overall objectives and the
firm's general approach to completing the assignment. This portion of the proposal
may also be used to demonstrate the firm's familiarity with the four public -use
airports in Butte County and any primary compatibility issues they are already aware
of.
B. Work Program - This section should present a succinct description of the work
activities or tasks to be performed including proposed methodologies and techniques.
Tasks should be organized into logical phases. Assumptions regarding staff and
consultant responsibilities should be noted and work products described in detail.
C. Project Schedule and Costs - All proposals must contain a proposed schedule of
activities and costs presented by task. The schedule should also indicate the
anticipated timing of major project deliverables, status reports to the ALUC,
workshops and hearings. Cost estimates should include meeting attendance and
anticipated document production/reproduction costs.
D. Project Management - Provide a brief description of the proposed management
structure and study team organization including the qualifications and relevant
experience of key personnel who will be working on the project.
E. Qualifications - Present a concise statement of the firm's specific qualifications to
conduct this project, including a list of similar projects completed by the consultant.
All personnel and sub -contractors must be designated along with statements of their
qualifications and experience. Substitution of designated individuals will not be
allowed without prior consent of ALUC staff and Caltrans.
F. References Provide a minimum of three (3) relevant client references for projects
completed within the past three (3) years. Please include agency name, contact
person, title, phone number, and a brief description of the types of services
performed and/or products delivered.
G. Example of Previous Similar Work Product - Respondents are encouraged to provide
one (1) copy of a previous work product produced by their firm or which was
produced by the proposed manager of the project which is similar in scope to this
project. The work product will be returned following selection of a consultant.
,rye
10
.r
•
VI. CONSULTANT SELECTION AND WORK INITIATION
All proposals submitted in response to this request will be evaluated by ALUC staff and
Caltrans. Recommendations for final selection will be made based on (1) the overall quality
of the proposal, (2) thoroughness of the work program, (3) demonstrated competence to
complete all aspects of the project, (4) previous work performance, and (5) the bid amount.
The ALUC expects `to enter into a contract with the consultant in July or August 1998. We
anticipate that the chosen consultant will initiate project activities following execution of the
contract.
VII. PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL
To be considered, five (5) copies of the proposal must be received by the Butte County
Airport Land Use Commission no later than 4:00 p.m. on Wednesday, July 15, 1998.
Proposals shall be submitted to:
Tom Parilo, DDS Director
Butte County Airport Land Use Commission
7 County Center Drive
Oroville, CA 95965
VIII. FURTHER INFORMATION
Questions regarding the RFP or selection process should be directed to Laura Webster (530)
533-1131 or Paula Leasure (530) 538-7601. .
GIS questions only should be referred to Dave Hironimus at (530) 538-7601.
11
t
Al
Airport Land Use Workshop
Visalia, California
June 25, 1998
Schedule:
09:00 AM - Welcome, Doug Silviera, ALUC Tulare County
09:05 AM - Workshop Overview, Jay White, California Pilots Association*
Larry Thelen, Esq. * *
09:15 AM - Ken Brody, Shutt Moen Airport Planners. (707) 526-5010. Subject: Caltrans' Airport
Land Use Planning Handbook. Followed by Q&A
09:45 AM - Christa Engle, Caltrans Aeronautics Program, Transportation Planner, (916)
654-5553. Subjects: School siting near airports, FAA Airport Hazards Form 7460-1,
CLUP consistency, Followed by Q&A
10:15 Break
10:30 AM _ Dick Dyer, Caltrans Aeronautics Program, Environmental Officer, (916) 654-5507.
Subject: Aircraft noise, descriptions, measurement standards, management, mitigation. Followed
by Q&A
11:00 AM - Dave Carbone, Senior Planner and ALUC Staff, Planner San Mateo County. (650)
363-4417. Subject: Formulation of a Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Followed by Q&A
12:00 Lunch
11:00 PM - Charlie Woods, Senior Planner, City of Ceres. (209) 538-5774. Subject: Conforming
a city general plan with a Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Followed by Q&A
1:30 PM - Panel Discussion, all panelists - questions from audience, answers, comments
3:00 PM - Adjourn
* The Workshop Facilitator is Jay White, volunteer president and legal counsel for the California
Pilots Association (CPA). CPA is a California nonprofit public -benefit 501(c)(3) corporation
whose main mission is to assist public entities in the preservation of California's public airports.
Additional information about CPA can be obtained by calling 1-800-244-1949 (California only),
(650) 594-9300, FAX (650) 366-1915 or E-mail: jaMhite@pacbell.net.
** Larry Thelen is the experienced Caltrans Attorney who advises Aeronautics program
personnel on airport legal matters. His telephone number is (916) 654-2630.
Note.: Telephone numbers of panelists are provided for those who wish to retain this sheet for
future reference.
V-�]
CITY OF CERES
GENERAL PLAN
POLICY DOCUMENT.
Adopted
February 24, 1997
=�r
LAND USE AND COMMUNITY DESIGN, Chapter 1
The northeastern part of the Planning Area is close to the Modesto City -
AIRPORT AREA County Airport, located north of the river in Modesto. It is the oldest
DEVELOPMENT publicly owned airfield in the U.S., with its original dirt runway bunt in
1928. The airport serves the general aviation and commercial service needs
of Stanislaus County. The airport has two runways for general aviation and
commercial uses. The longer 5,911 -foot runway serves the commercial uses,
while the 3,459 -foot runway is used for general aviation purposes.
In 1978, the Stanislaus County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC)
adopted an Airport Land Use Plan for the Modesto City -County Airport.
Under various provisions of state law, cities and counties are required to
either bring their general plans and zoning and any specific plan into
compliance with the adopted County Airport Land Use Commission
(ALUC) plan for territory around designated airports.or make specified
findings. The purpose of the airport land use plan and the consistency
requirement is to eliminate or minimize development around airports that
would be subject to significant levels of aircraft noise or would pose'a safety
hazard to aircraft or occupants of the development in the event oT-a crash.
For the purposes of this General Plan, the City developed. air
.port
area safety zones and standards based ori the guidelines in the 1993
California Division of Aeronautics Airport Planning Handbook, in
consultation with the Modesto City -County Airport Manager and,the
California Division of Aeronautics. The City relied on the more current
guidelines rather than using the standards in the 1978 ALUC Plan, since the
most current guidelines represent more recent scientific andplaniiirig
analysis of risks around airports, and to plan for and anticipate fufure
changes in this area if or when ALUC updates its 1978 plan. z '"
See also the `Aircraft Crash Hazards °section in Chapter 7, Health, and Safety.
GOAL. I.H:
To regulate future development near the airport to provide for protection of
public health and safety.
POLICIES
1.H.1. The City shall emphasize compatibility of land uses for both'urban
development and for airport facilities to ensure the availability of
local air transportation services and a quality living environment.
1.H.2. The City shall allow new development within Airport Safety Zones
(Figure 14) according to the standards in Table 1-2. At the
discretion of the Ceres Director of Planning and Community
Development, an applicant for a permit or other entitlement may be
required to submit survey information sufficient to document the
location of a property or development site in -relation to the various
Airport Safety Zones.
1-25 Ceres General Plan Policy Document
--a
TABLE 1-2
RESIDENTIAIJNONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
MODESTO CITY -COUNTY AIRPORT SAFETY ZONES
Nonresidentiai'..
Gross Floor
Percentage
Residential
Density/Intensity'
Area"/
Open
Flammable/
Airport Safety Zones
Densities
(max. pop/
Population
Space
Special Care
Hazardous
No.
(See Figure 14)
(max. du/ ss ac)
gross ac)
(gfatpop)
(ave. */Jac)
Uses'
MaterialO
I
Runway Protection Zone (RPZ)
None
10
1,090
100
Prohibited
Prohibited
2
Inner Safety Zone (ISZ)
0.1 (or 1 du/10 ac)
40
270
50
Prohibited
Prohibited
3
Inner Turning Zone (ITZ)
2.0 (or I du/0.5 ac)'
100
108
20
Prohibited
Prohibited
4
Outer Safety Zone (OSZ)
0.4 (or I du/2.5 ac)'
100
108
159
Prohibited
Prohibited
5
Sideline Safety Zone (SSZ)
0-5 (or I du/0.5 ac)
60.
180
30
Prohibited
Prohibited
6
Traffic Pattern Zone (TPZ)
6"
150
70
10
Conditional
Permitted
6A
Traffic Pattern Zone (TPZ)
6"
150
70
1Prohibitedro
Prohibited
Prohibited
a
ral occupancy only — determined by Uniform Building Code standards; maybe -higher in a single location on the same property or properties if combined into
Structural
a single development provided maximum not exceeded on a per acre basis.
b
Example of gross floor area using maximum population per acre assuming 25% site coverage.
c
Includes public and private schools, colleges, hospitals, nursing homes, and other similar uses
d
Perm itted if in small quantities or if stored in underground tanks.,
e
'
Portion of ITZ for Runway 1OR-28L designated LDR and zoned R4 may be developed to R-1 densities, balance of area south and/or west of River Road not in the City
of Ceres may be developed at a maximum density of 4.0 du/gross acre.
f
Densities may be transferred from OSZ to portions of same or adjacent property in TPZ; density on portions of property receiving transferred units may exceed
density limit of VLDR but may not exceed 6 du/gross acre.
g
30% required within the 500 -foot wide strip along center line extended in OSZ.
h
Some portions (Very Low Density Residential 5.0 du/gross acre), generally closer to ITZ and OSZ, may have residential densities lower than maximum permitted in
TPZ.
--a
-7 17
L4 tip
4,1
1 L
4 —
fto
J.7
�
J. LL
_ Jl Tie
T
WZ
0
X M LN
COUNTY
J
YODESTO CITY
S,
J.
f
COUNTY - CNEL 75cg*-,.
CERES
TY AIRPORT -'=-. --
7-1,
CITY of MODESTO
WODESTO CITY—COUNTY AIRPORT
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
PROGRAM EIR
SCALE
LEGEND
twit logo
twit MR. CdB 1 750
Airport Property somadoty
Political setedethi
1- or 2- re.fly
villiple NOY
Odra
#Capitol
Avditoltum
Airport
FIGURE 7-2
'UTURE AIRPORT NOISE CONTOUM
2005/06
P&D A vieffon
afttl_ 40
A" Tft.%gaw
COMTY*'
f
COUNTY - CNEL 75cg*-,.
CERES
TY AIRPORT -'=-. --
7-1,
CITY of MODESTO
WODESTO CITY—COUNTY AIRPORT
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
PROGRAM EIR
SCALE
LEGEND
twit logo
twit MR. CdB 1 750
Airport Property somadoty
Political setedethi
1- or 2- re.fly
villiple NOY
Odra
#Capitol
Avditoltum
Airport
FIGURE 7-2
'UTURE AIRPORT NOISE CONTOUM
2005/06
P&D A vieffon
afttl_ 40
A" Tft.%gaw
AIRPORT N011SE
AND THE STATE
NOISE STANDARDS
(CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS, TITLE 21, SECTION 5000 - 5090)
LEGISLATIVE DIRECTIVES AND GUIDELINES
i
1. DEPARTMENT SHALL ADOPT NOISE STANDARDS
(A) APPLICABLE TO AIRCRAFT AND AIRCRAFT ENGINES
(B) AIRPORTS OPERATING UNDER VALID PERMIT
(C) NOT PROHIBITED BY FEDERAL LAW
(D) BASED UPON ACCEPTABLE LEVEL TO REASONABLE PERSON
2.. STATEWIDE UNIFORMITY NOT REQUIRED
3. MAXIMIZE LOCAL CONTROL AND ENFORCEMENT
4. CONSIDER ECONOMIC AND TECHNOLOGIC FEASIBILITY OF COMPLIANCE
5. COUNTY WHERE AIRPORT LOCATED SHALL ENFORCE THE NOISE STANDARDS
•s
AIRPORT NOISE
•
STANDARDS'
1. Legislature directs Department to adopt Noise Standards - 1969.
2. Department adopts Noise Standards in 1970.
3. Legislature delays implementation of Noise Standards until 12/1/1972.
4. A noise description method (CNEL) was developed in Noise Standards.
5. Noise Standards designed to be used for land use planning as ,well as
regulatory.
6. Noise Standards include requirement for noise monitoring to validate
location of Noise Impact Boundary.
7. Single
Event Noise Equivalent
Level (SENEL)
requirements were included
that
were later shown to be
preempted by
Federal law .(ATA v Crotti).
8. Regulatory criterion sufficiently restrictive that a variance process was
included in consideration of feasibility of compliance.
9. County enforcement provided in accord with legislative directive.
SOME KEY FACTORS IN
HUMAN RESPONSE TO AIRCRAFT NOISE
EVENT NOISE LEVEL
DURATION OF EVENT
NUMBER OF EVENTS PER DAY
TIME OF DAY
BACKGROUND NOISE LEVEL
HISTORY OF PRIOR EXPOSURE
SEASON OF YEAR
KEYFCTRS.SID
M9/99 rdyer
ORGANIZED ACTIVITIES
ECONOMIC ASPECTS
SOCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
FEAR OF CRASH
SUSPECTED MALFEASANCE
LITIGATION
NEW AIRPORT PROPRIETOR
W
cn
O
z
O
cn
V
W
Li
Li
W
z
O
a
. o
•
I
NOISE
COMPARING THE FLYOVER NOISE
;RECORDINGS OF TWO AIRCRAFT
AIRPLANE A
TIME
AIRPLANE B
BROADBAND AND PURE TONE NOISES
SOUND
PRESSURE
LEVEL
(d B)
SOUND
PRESSURE
LEVEL
(d B)
FREQUENCY (CPS) (Hz)
FREQUENCY (CPS) (Hz)
0
u
C
0
a -50
Z
of
. u
0
-60
-70
i
10 100 1,000 10,000
Frequency, cycles per second (or Hertz)
AN APPROXIMATION OF THE FREQUENCY RESPONSE OF THE HUMAN EAR
4
EQUAL PERCEIVED NOISE SPECTRUM
110
SOUND 100
PRESSURE
LEVEL
DECIBELS 90
(dB)
PIANO
KEYBOARD
31.5 63 125 250 500 1000 2000.4000 8000
FREQUENCY
CYCLES PER SECOND (CPS)OR HERTZ (Hz)
261.6
(MIDDLE C)
m
v
J
W
W
J
W
Q
� —ll
N
N'
W
Q
d
O
z —2
O
N
W
Q —3
J
cr
W
—4
A
—50 20 56 100 200 500 1000 2000 5000 10,000 20,000
FREQUENCY, Hz
GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATION OF THE A, B, C, AND D WEIGHTINGS
THE SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL SCALE
SOUND PRESSURE
SOUND
SOUND
SOUND
(DYNES/SQ CENTIMETER)
PRESSURE
PRESSURE
PRESSURE
LEVEL
LEVEL
(MICROBAR)
(LB/SQ INCH)
(BELS)
(DECIBELS)
200
0.0029
1?
120
20
0.00029
10
100
2
0.000029
8
80
0.2
0.0000029
6
60
0.02
0.00000029
4
40
0.002
0.000000029
2
20
0.0002
0.0000000029
0
0
SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL = 10 LOG10 (P/PpEF)2
ADDING SOUND LEVELS
EXAMPLES OF ADDING TWO SOUNDS HAVING THE LEVELS SHOWN
100 dB + 100 dB 103.010 dB
100 dB + 95 dB = 101.193 dB
100 dB + 90 dB = 100.414 dB
100 dB + 80 dB = 100.043 dB
100 dB + 70 dB = 100.004 dB.
Conclusion: Large sound levels are so dominant that
lesser sound levels become insignificant when
sound levels differ by 10 dB or more.
TWO COMMONLY USED ACOUSTICAL GENERALITIES
1. EACH DOUBLING OF DISTANCE TO AN AIRCRAFT REDUCES THE
MEASURED NOISE LEVEL BY APPROXIMATELY 6 DECIBELS.
2. IN GENERAL, A REDUCTION OF 10 DECIBELS (dB) REDUCES
NOISINESS TO HALF ITS ORIGINAL LEVEL.
100 dB
C� 100 Ft
i
86.0 dB
@ 500 Ft
80.0 dB
@ 1000 F
76.5 dB
t @ 1600 Ft
74.0 dB
@ 2000 Ft
72.0 dB
@ 2500 Ft
X70.6 dB
V 3000 Ft
NOISE REDUCTION THROUGH SPHERICAL DISPERSION
For An Aircraft Noise, Level Of 100 Decibels
Measured 100 Feet From The Aircraft
Note: Bolls Air And Ground Adsorption WIII Further Reduce Noise
Levels Beyond Tice Effects Of Spherical Dispersion
69.1 d8
@ 3600 Ft
68.0 d8
@ 4000 Ft
NOISE REDUCTION DUE TO SPHERICAL DISPERSION
10(
9(
71
60 '
0 1. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
DISTANCE BETWEEN SOURCE AND RECEIVER (1000 FEET)
PERCEIVED NOISE LEVEt. CONTOURS - ONE ENGINE RUNUPS.
CIVIL AND MILITARY JET AIRCRAFT WITH TUR80FANI ENGINES.
SINGLE EVENT NOISE EXPOSURE. LEVEL (SENEL) CONCEPT
TIME
O
HOURLY NOISE LEVEL (HNL) CONCEPT
0 60
TIME
COMMUNITY NOISE EQUIVALENT LEVEL (CNEL)
Definition: The CNEL, in decibels, represents the average noise level during a 24
hour day, adjusted to an equivalent level to account for the lower
tolerance of people to noise during evening and night time. periods.
Or, by equation
CNEL = 10 log (1/24) Izantilog (HNLD/10) + 3T.antilog (HNLE/10) + 101:antilog (HNL/10)�
Where Z means summation, and
HNLD
are the
hourly
noise levels for the
period
0700-1900
hours
HNLE
are .the
hourly
noise levels for the
period
1900-2200
hours
HNLN
are the
hourly
noise levels for the
period
2200-0700
hours.
AIRPORT NOISE DESCRIPTION METHODS
CNEL = SENEL + 10 Log (ND + 3NE + 10NN) -- 49.4
LpN
= SEL +
10 Log (ND
+ NE +
10NN) — 49.4
NEF
= EPNL +
10 Log (ND
+ NE +
16.67NN) -- .88
CNR = PNL + 10 Log (ND + NE + 16.67NN) - 13
Where N = Number of Operations Per Time Period
Day (D): 0700 - 1900 Hours
Evening (E): 1900 - 2200 Hours
Night (N): 2200 - 0700 Hours
CONTOUR OF EQUAL NOISE LEVEL
DURING TYPICAL JET TAKEOFF
ALTITUDE
(1000 FT)
'3
HORIZONTAL
DISTANCE
FROM -
FLIGHT PATH
(1000 FT)
0
w
25
RISTANCE FROM START OF
TAKEOFF 'ROLL (1000 FT)
Residential
Commercial
Residential
Industrial
Airport Property
The Noise Impact Area is the Sum of All
the Cross -Hatched Areas, in Square Statute
Mlles. Noise Impact Boundary Applicable
to Homes of Normal Construction
Agricultural
Industrial
Resident. I Agricultural
Noise Impact Boundary
Applicable to
Acoustically Modified
Homes
-Acoustically Treated
Residential
CONCEPTUAL SKETCH OF NOISE IMPACT BOUNDARIES AND NOISE
IMPACT AREA
-- BASIS FOR ADJUSTING. CRITERIA TO FIT SITUATION
-- GIVES CONSIDERATION TO LOCAL CONDITIONS
-- USES QUALITATIVE DESCRIPTIONS IDENTIFIED BY EPA & OTHERS
USEFUL FOR:
QUIET RURAL AREAS
NOISE SENSITIVE AREAS
AIRPORTS HAVING FEW FLIGHT OPERATIONS
QUALITATIVE CNEL
DESCRIPTIONS DECIBELS OUTDOOR LOCATIONS
• — 90 —
LOS ANGELES —3rd Floor Apartment Next to
Freeway
so—
CITY NOISE LOS ANGELES — Downtown with Some Con -
(DOWNTOWN MAJOR struction Activity
METROPOLIS) HARLEM — 2nd Floor Apartment
HIGH DENSITY —Downtown San Francisco
Residential
VERY NOISY —70— MEDIUM -HIGH San Francisco Residential
—T OENStTY — Near Downtown
•
NOISY URBAN
URBAN _60— LOW DENSITY
—Los Angeles - San Fernando
Valley Residential
SUBURBAN
SMALL TOWN Z LOW DENSITY —Berkeley Hills
AND . 50 —.
QUSUBURBAN
SAN DIEGO —Wooded Residential
CALIFORNIA Tomato Field on Farm
—40—
COMPARATIVE
40—COMPARATIVE CNEL VALUES AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS
Slide 4
Adjustments to the
Measured Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL)
to Obtain Normalized CNEL
I
Amount or correction I
Type of
I i
to be Added'to Measuredl
1 Correction
1
I Description I
CNEL in dB I
(" Seasonal
( Summer (or year-round operation). (
1
0 I
I Correction
I Winter only (or windows always closed).
I Correction
I Quiet suburban or rural community (remote I
I
i for Outdoor
I from large cities and from industrial I
I
I Residual
I activity and trucking) .. I
+10 I
I Noise Level
i
I
I Normal suburban community (not i
I
I located near industrial activity). I
+5 I
I
I
I Urban residential community (not i
I
I
I immediately adjacent to heavily traveled I
I
I
I roads and industrial areas). I
.0 i
I
I Noisy urban residential community (near (
I
I
I relatively busy roads or industrial
I
I areas). I
-5
Very noisy urban residential community I
-10 I
I Correction
I No prior experience with the intruding I
I,
I for Previous
I noise. i
+5 I
I Exposure and
I Community
( Community has had some previous exposure I
I
I Attitudes
I to intruding noise but little effort is I
I
i
I being made to control the noise. This I
i
I
I correction may also be applied in a sit- I
I
I
I uation where the community.has not been I
I
I
I exposed to noise previously,. but the
I I
people are aware that bona fide efforts
are being made to control the noise i
0 '
I I
I i
Community has had considerable previous i
I
I
exposure to the intruding noise and the I
I
I (
noise maker's relations with the i
I
. community are good.
-
I I
Community aware that operation causing I
I
I
C noise is very necessary and it will not I
I
I I
continue indefinitely. This correction
I
can be applied for an operation of limitedl
I
I 1
duration and under emergency circumstances)
-10- I
Pure Tone I
No pure tone or impulsive character.
I' or Impulse I
Pure tone or impulsive character present. I
+5 I
Slide 3
APPENDIX B
• AERONAUTICS LAW
STATE AERONAUTICS ACT
PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE
(CHAPTER 4, ARTICLE 3.5)
AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
Creation; Membership; Selection
21670. (a) The Legislature hereby finds and declares that:
(1) It is in the public interest to provide for the orderly development of each public use
airport in this state and the area surrounding these airports so as to promote the overall goals
and objectives of the California airport noise standards adopted pursuant to Section 21669 and
to prevent the creation of new noise and safety problems.
(2) It is the purpose of this article to protect public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring
the orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the
public's- exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports'to
the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses.
(b) In order to achieve the purposes of this article, every county in which there is located
an airport which is served by a scheduled airline shall establish an airport land use
commission. Every county, in which there is located an airport which is not.served by a
scheduled airline, but is operated for the benefit of the general public, shall establish an airport
land use commission, except that the board of supervisors of the county may, after consultation
with the appropriate airport operators and affected local entities and after a public hearing,
adopt a resolution finding that there are no noise, public safety, or land use issues affecting any
airport in the county which require the creation of a commission and declaring the county
exempt from that requirement. The board shall, in this event, transmit a copy of the resolution to
the Director of Transportation. For purposes of this section, 'commission" means an airport land
use commission. Each commission shall consist of seven members to be selected as follows:
(1) Two representing the cities in the county, appointed by a city selection committee
comprised of the mayors of all the cities within that count y, except that if there are any cities
contiguous or adjacent to the qualifying airport, at least one representative shall be appointed
therefrom. If there are no cities within a county, the number of representatives provided for by
paragraphs (2) and (3) shall each be increased by one.
(2) Two representing the county, appointed by the board of supervisors.
(3) Two having expertise in aviation, appointed by a selection committee comprised of the
managers of all of the public airports within that county.
N.�
(D) Adopt processes for the amendment of general and specific plans to be consistent with
• the comprehensive airport land use plans.
(E) Designate the agency that shall be responsible for the preparation, adoption, and
amendment of each comprehensive airport land use plan.
(3) The Division of Aeronautics of the department shall review the processes adopted
pursuant to paragraph (2), and shall approve the processes if the division determines that the
processes are consistent with the procedure required by this article and will do all of the
following:
(A) Result in the preparation, adoption, and implementation of plans within a reasonable
amount of time.
(B) Rely on the height, use, noise, safety, and density criteria that are compatible with
airport operations, as established by this article, and referred to as the Airport Land Use
Planning Handbook, published by the division, and any applicable federal aviation regulations,
including, but not limited to, Part 77 (commencing with Section 77.1) of Title 14 of the Code of
Federal Regulations.
(C) Provide adequate opportunities for notice to, review of, and comment by the general
public, landowners, interested groups, and other public agencies.
(4) If the county does not comply with the requirements of paragraph (3) within 120 days,
then the plan and amendments shall not be considered adopted pursuant to this article and a
commission shall be established within 90 days of the determination of non compliance by the
division and a plan shall be adopted pursuant to this article within 90 days of the establishment
of the commission.
(d) A commission need not be formed in a county that has contracted for the preparation of
• comprehensive land use plans with the Division of Aeronautics under the California Aid to
Airports Program (Title 21 (commencing with Section 4050) of the California Code of
Regulations), Project Ker -VAR 90-1, and that submits all of the following information to the
Division of Aeronautics for review and comment that the county and the cities affected by the
airports within the county, as defined by the plans:
(1) Agree to adopt and implement the comprehensive airport plans that have been
developed under contract.
(2) Incorporated the height, use, noise, safety, and density criteria that are compatible with
airport operations as established by this article, and referred to as the Airport Land Use
Planning Handbook, published by the division, and any applicable federal aviation regulations,
including, but not limited to, Part 77 (commencing with Section 77.1) of Title 14 of the Code of
Federal Regulations as part of the general and specific plans for the county and for each
affected city.
(3) If the county does not comply with this subdivision on or before May 1, 1995, then a
commission shall be established in accordance with this article.
(e) (1) A commission need not be formed in a county if all of the following condition are met:
(A) The county has only one public use airport that is owned by a city.
(B) (i) The county and the affected city adopt the elements in paragraph 2 of subdivision (d),
as part of their general and specific plans for the county and the, affected city.
(ii) The general and specific plans shall be submitted, upon adoption, to the Division of
Aeronautics. If the county and the .affected city do not submit the elements specified in
paragraph (2) of subdivision (d), on or before May 1, 1996, then a commission shall be
• established in accordance with this article.
AN
damages to property or personal injury resulting or county's decision to proceed with the action,
• regulation or permit.
(g) A commission may adopt rules and regulations which exempt any ministerial permit for
single-family dwellings from the requirements of subdivision (b) if it makes the findings required
pursuant to subdivision (c) for the proposed rules and regulations, except that the rules and
regulations may not exempt either of the following:
(1) More than two single-family dwellings by the same applicant within a subdivision prior
to June 30, 1993.
(2) Single-family dwellings in a subdivision where 25 percent or more of the parcels are
undeveloped.
(h) Until June 30, 19.93, no action pursuant to Section 21679 to postpone the effective
date of a zoning change, a zoning variance, the issuance of a permit, or the adoption of a
regulation by a local agency, directly affecting the use of land within one mile of the boundary of
a public airport, shall be commenced in the County of Mendocino. .
(1) This section shall become inoperative on June 30, 1993, and is repealed on that date.
•
SEC. 2. In enacting Section 21670.3 of the Public Utilities Code pursuant to Section 1 of
this bill, the Legislature finds and declares that:
(a) The Legislature has not extended the deadlines in Sections 21671.5 and 21675.1 of
the Public Utilities Code for the Willits Municipal Airport.
(b) This act shall have no effect on the pending litigation brought by the City of Willits
regarding the lack of a comprehensive land use plan for the Willits Municipal Airport.
(c) The Legislature does not intend to further extend the deadlines in Sections 21671.5
and 21675.1 of the Public Utilities Code for the County of Mendocino.
SEC. 3. The Legislature finds and declares that a special law is necessary and that a
general law cannot be made applicable within the meaning of Section 16 of Article IV of the
California Constitution because of the unique circumstances of the commission in the County of
Mendocino. The facts constituting the special circumstances are:
There are unique problems involved for the commission in preparing the comprehensive
land use plans with sufficient resources and broad public involvement, taking into consideration
such factors as the county's natural resources and lands of high scenic values.
Airport Owned by a City, District, or County; Appointment of Certain Members by
Cities and Counties
21671. In any county where there is an airport operated for the general public which is
owned by a city or district in another county or by another county, one of the representatives
provided by paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of Section 21670 shall be appointed by the city
selection committee of mayors of the cities of the county in which the owner of that airport is
located, and one of the representatives provided by paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) of Section
21670 shall be appointed by the board of supervisors of the county in which the owner of that
airport is located. —
M
Initiation of Proceedings for Creation by Owner of Airport
• 21673. In an county not having a commission or a body designated to carry out the
Y tY 9
responsibilities of a commission, any owner of a public airport may initiate proceedings for the
creation of a commission by presenting a request to the board of supervisors that a commission
be created and showing the need therefor to the satisfaction of the board of supervisors.
Powers and Duties
21674. The commission has the following powers and duties, subject to the limitations
upon its jurisdiction set forth in Section 21676:
(a) To assist local agencies in ensuring. compatible land uses in the vicinity of all new
airports and in the vicinity of existing airports to the extent that the land in the vicinity of those
airports is not already devoted to incompatible uses.
(b) To coordinate planning at the state, regional, and local levels so as to provide for the
orderly development of air transportation, while at the same time protecting the public health,
safety, and welfare.
(c) To prepare and adopt an airport land use plan pursuant to Section 21675. (d) To
review the plans, regulations, and other actions of local agencies and airport operators
pursuant to Section 21676.
(e) The powers of the commission shall in no way be construed to give the commission
jurisdiction over the operation of any airport.
• (f) In order to carry out its responsibilities, the commission may adopt rules and
regulations consistent with this article.
Staff Training and Development
21674.5 (a) The Department of Transportation shall develop and implement a program or
programs to assist in the training and development of the staff of airport land use commissions,
after consulting with airport land use commissions, cities, counties, and other appropriate public
entities.
(b) The training and development program or programs are intended to assist the staff of
airport land use commissions in addressing high priority needs, and may include, but need not
be limited to, the following:
(1) The establishment of a process for the development and adoption of comprehensive
land use plans. ;
(2) The development of criteria for determining airport land use planning boundaries.
(3) The identification of essential elements which should be included in the
comprehensive plans.
(4) Appropriate criteria and procedures for reviewing proposed developments and
determining whether proposed developments are compatible with the airport use.
(5) Any other organizational, operational, procedural, or technical responsibilities and
functions which the department determines to be appropriate to provide to commission staff and
for which it determines there is a need for staff training and development.
B-7
comprehensive land use plan shall be reviewed as often as necessary in order to accomplish
its purposes, but shall not be amended more than once in any calendar year.
•(b) The commission may include, within its plan formulated pursuant to subdivision (a), the
area within the jurisdiction of the commission surrounding any federal military airport for all of
the purposes specified in subdivision (a). This subdivision does not give the commission any
jurisdiction or authority over the territory or operations of any military airport.
(c) The planning boundaries shall be established by the commission after hearing and
consultation with the involved agencies.
(d) The commission shall submit to the Division of Aeronautics of the department one copy
of the plan and each amendment to the plan.
(e) If a comprehensive land use plan does not include the matters required to be included
pursuant to this article, the Division of Aeronautics of the department shall notify the commission
responsible for the plan.
Date of adoption; review of actions; approval or disapproval '
21675.1. (a) By June 30, 1991, each commission shall adopt the comprehensive land use
plan required pursuant to Section 21675, except that any county which has undertaken by
contract or otherwise completed land use plans for at least one-half of all public use airports in
the county, shall adopt that plan on or before June 30, 1992.
(b) Until a commission adopts a comprehensive land use plan, a city or -county shall first
submit all actions, regulations, and permits within the vicinity of a public airport to the
commission for review and approval. Before the commission approves or disapproves any
actions, regulations, or permits, the commission shall give public notice in the same manner as
the city or county is required to give for those actions, regulations, or permits. As used in this
• section, 'vicinity' means land which will be included or reasonably could be included within the
plan. If the commission has not designated a study area for the plan, then 'vicinity' means land
within two miles of the boundary of a public airport.
(c) The commission may approve an action, regulation, or permit if it finds, based on
substantial evidence in the record, all of the following:
(1) The commission is making substantial progress toward the completion of the plan.
(2) There is a reasonable probability that the action, regulation, or permit will be consistent
with the plan being prepared by the commission.
(3) There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the future
adopted plan if the action, regulation, or permit is ultimately inconsistent with the plan.
(d) If the commission disapproves an action, regulation, or permit, the commission shall
notify the city or county. The city or county may overrule the commission, by a two-thirds vote of
its governing body, if it makes specific findings that the proposed action, regulation, or permit is
consistent with the purposes of this article, as stated in Section 21670.
(e) If a city or county overrules the commission pursuant to subdivision (d), that action shall
not relieve the city or coynty from further compliance with this article after the commission
adopts the plan.
(f) If a city or county overrules the commission pursuant to subdivision (d) with respect to a
publicly owned airport that the city or county does not operate, the operator of the airport shall
be immune from liability for damages to property or personal injury from the city's or county's
decision to proceed with the action, regulation, or permit.
(g) A commission may adopt rules and regulations which exempt any ministerial permit for
single-family dwellings from the requirements of subdivision (b) if it makes the findings required
•
ME
airport land use commission pursuant to Section 21675, the local agency shall first refer the
• proposed action to the commission. If the commission determines that the proposed action is
inconsistent with the commission's plan, the referring agency shall be notified.
The local agency may, after a public hearing, overrule the commission by a two thirds vote
of its governing body if it makes specific findings that the proposed action is consistent with the
purposes of this article stated in Section 21670.
(c) Each public agency owning any airport within the boundaries of an airport land use
commission plan shall, prior to modification of its airport master plan, refer such proposed
change to the airport land use. commission. If the commission determines that the proposed
action is inconsistent with the commission's plan, the referring agency shall be notified. The
public agency may, after a public hearing, overrule the commission by a two-thirds vote of its
governing body if it makes specific findings that the proposed action is consistent with the
purposes of this article stated in Section 21670.
(d) Each commission determination pursuant to subdivision (b) or (c) shall be made within
60 days from the date of referral of the proposed action. If a commission fails to make the
determination within that period, the proposed action shall be deemed consistent with the
commission's plan. --
Review of Local Plans
21676.5. (a) If the commission finds that a local agency has not revised its general plan or
specific plan or overruled the commission by a two-thirds vote of its governing body after
making specific findings that the proposed action is consistent with the purposes of this article
as stated in Section 21670, the commission may require that the local agency submit all
subsequent actions, regulations, and permits to the commission for review until its general plan
or specific plan is revised or the specific findings are made. If, in the determination of the
commission, an action, regulation, or permit of the local agency is inconsistent with the
commission plan, the local agency shall be notified and that local agency shall hold a hearing
to reconsider its plan. The local agency may overrule the commission after the hearing by a
two-thirds vote of its governing body if it makes specific findings that the proposed action is
consistent with the purposes of this article as stated in Section 21670.
(b) Whenever the local agency has revised its general plan or specific plan or has
overruled the. commission pursuant to subdivision (a), the proposed action of the local agency
shall not be subject to further commission review, unless the commission and the local agency
agree that individual projects shall be reviewed by the commission.
Marin County Override Provisions
21677. Notwithstanding Section 21676, any public agency in the County of Marin may
overrule the Marin County Airport Land Use Commission by a majority vote of its governing
body.
Airport Owner's Imununity
21678. With respect to a publicly owned airport that a public agency does not -operate, if the
public agency pursuant to Section 21676 or 21676.5 overrides a commission's action or
• recommendation, the operator of the airport shall be immune from liability for damages to
B-11
(b) If a commission has been prevented from adopting the comprehensive land use plan by
June 30, 1991, or if the adopted plan could not become effective, because of a lawsuit involving
the adoption of the plan, the June 30, 1991, date in subdivision (a) shall be extended by the
period of time during which the lawsuit was pending in a court of competent jurisdiction.
(c) Any action pursuant to Section 21679 commenced prior to January 1, 1990, in a
county in which the commission or other designated body has not adopted an airport land use
plan, but is.making. substantial progress toward the completion of the plan, which has not
proceeded to final judgment, shall be held in abeyance until June 30, 1991. If the commission
or other designated body adopts an airport land use plan on or before June 30, 1991, the action
shall be dismissed. If the commission or other designated body does not adopt an airport land
use plan on or before June 30, 1991, the plaintiff or plaintiffs may proceed with the action.
(d) An action to postpone the effective date of a zoning change, a zoning variance, the
issuance of a permit, or the adoption of a regulation by a local agency, directly affecting the use
of land within one mile of the boundary of a public airport for which an airport land use plan has
not been adopted by June 30, 1991, shall be commenced within 30 days of June 30, 1991, or
within 30 days of the decision by the local agency, or within the appropriate time periods set by
Section 21167 of the Public Resources Code, whichever date is later.
(Revised 11/15/94)
•
•
B-13
w .,
0. -
California Public Resources Code
§ 21096. Airport -related safety hazards and noise problems; projects with.
in airport comprehensive land use plan boundaries or within
two nautical miles of airport; preparation of environmental
impact' reports
(a) if a lead agency prepares an environmental impact report for a project
situated within airport comprehensive land use plan boundaries, or, if a
comprehensive land use plan has not been adopted, for a , project within two
nautical miles of a public airport or public use airport, the AIrport Land Use
Planting Handbook published by the Division of Aeronautics of the Department
of Transportation, In compliance with Section 21674.5 of the Public Utilities
Code and other documents, shall be utilized as technical resources to assist in
the preparation of the environmental impact report as the report relates to
airport -related -safety hazards and noise problems.
(b) A lead agency sball not adopt a negative declaration for a' project
described in subdivision . (a) unless the lead agency considers whether the
project will result in a safety hazard or noise problem, for persons using the
airport or for persons residing or working in the project area.
(Added by Stats.1994, c. 438 (S.B.1453), § 1.)
California
Government Code
165302.3. General and applicable specific plans; consistency with airport land use plans; . amend-
ment; nonconcurrence findings
(a) The general plan, and any applicable specific plan prepared pursuant to Article 8 (commencing with
Section 66460), shall be consistent with the plan adopted or amended pursuant to Section 21675 of the
Public Utilities Code.
(b) The general plan, and any applfcable specific plan, shall be amended, as necessary, within 180 days
of any amendment to the plan- required under Section 21676 of the Public Utilities Code.
(c) If the legislative body. does not'concur with any provision of the plan required under Section 21675
of the Public Utilities Code, it may sa �' rthe provisions of this section by adopting findings pursuant to
Section 21676 of the Public Utilities. Code.
•
'PROJECT CONSISTENCY
CONSISTENT
WITH
CLUPt y
• �:r
LOCAL AGENCY ACTION I OUTCOME
I
PLAN ADOPTED s
PLANLOCAL ADOPTION _ OY
APPROVED PROCESS LOCAL AGENCY
I,�, RESI181YT PLAN
O AGENCY AIEIlD P ( TO ALUC
(wt►�N leo oAYs
I2166766((C) Gov. COOS h
/ 65302.3 0
II PLAN ADOPT@.
S NO ALUC REVIEW
or
OVERRIDE
INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS.
Put1<x
I NEARNc FINOINGsv
Ib MTN
CONTINUED ALUC'
REVIEW OF ALL
II ACT10115-/ 21676.M -
PLAN ADOPTED
By
LOCAL AGENCY
I LOCAL "ACTION TO I
AMEND PIAN OR PLAN ADOPTED;
jnND CONSISTENT NTH NO ALUC REVIEW OF
I PURPM OF STATUTE INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS
-4.`� UNTIL CLOP ADOPTED
/ 21675.1(e)
Y PUBLIC NTH
216751 d HEARNG Ll CONTIAIED ALUC
. I REVIEW OF
ways ALL ACTIONS
/ 21675.1(c)
tl6TERIAt PLAN ADOPTED
S PLAN LOCAL AD0PTWN BY
APPROVED I PROCESS I LOCAL AGENCY
PIEERAL/SPECiIt LOCAL AGENCY
N AYENOIE►IT CONSIDERS ALUC
OrERRIDE/TI DNCS
NOT REQUIRED.
PROJECT FOR APPROVAL-
S CONSISTENT
AGRMENT FOR NTH I
ALUC REVIEW OF CLUPt S
INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS ACTION. PROJECT
/ 21676.5(D) y0
No ALUC LOCAL APPROVAL APPROVED
REVIEW OF PROJECT PROCESS BY LOCAL AGENCY
PROJECT
CONSISTENT
NTH PUBLIC: OVERRIDE
-
CLUPt AGENCY HEAT INGitlW TH I
NOTIFIED
hp ACTION, PROJECT
IMOT APPROVED
I .STATE LAW IS NOT FUMY
CLEAR ON THIS POINT -SEE TEXT, I
TYPE
ACTION
h
I
h
GENERALN
crop
�
AOOPTEDt
APPROVAL OR
sPEcvTG PLAN
ADGPnoN
OTHER ACTIONS.
OR
CLOP li
I
AME DIEHT
REGULATIONS.
OR pERIe75
•
'PROJECT CONSISTENCY
CONSISTENT
WITH
CLUPt y
• �:r
LOCAL AGENCY ACTION I OUTCOME
I
PLAN ADOPTED s
PLANLOCAL ADOPTION _ OY
APPROVED PROCESS LOCAL AGENCY
I,�, RESI181YT PLAN
O AGENCY AIEIlD P ( TO ALUC
(wt►�N leo oAYs
I2166766((C) Gov. COOS h
/ 65302.3 0
II PLAN ADOPT@.
S NO ALUC REVIEW
or
OVERRIDE
INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS.
Put1<x
I NEARNc FINOINGsv
Ib MTN
CONTINUED ALUC'
REVIEW OF ALL
II ACT10115-/ 21676.M -
PLAN ADOPTED
By
LOCAL AGENCY
I LOCAL "ACTION TO I
AMEND PIAN OR PLAN ADOPTED;
jnND CONSISTENT NTH NO ALUC REVIEW OF
I PURPM OF STATUTE INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS
-4.`� UNTIL CLOP ADOPTED
/ 21675.1(e)
Y PUBLIC NTH
216751 d HEARNG Ll CONTIAIED ALUC
. I REVIEW OF
ways ALL ACTIONS
/ 21675.1(c)
tl6TERIAt PLAN ADOPTED
S PLAN LOCAL AD0PTWN BY
APPROVED I PROCESS I LOCAL AGENCY
PIEERAL/SPECiIt LOCAL AGENCY
N AYENOIE►IT CONSIDERS ALUC
OrERRIDE/TI DNCS
NOT REQUIRED.
PROJECT FOR APPROVAL-
S CONSISTENT
AGRMENT FOR NTH I
ALUC REVIEW OF CLUPt S
INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS ACTION. PROJECT
/ 21676.5(D) y0
No ALUC LOCAL APPROVAL APPROVED
REVIEW OF PROJECT PROCESS BY LOCAL AGENCY
PROJECT
CONSISTENT
NTH PUBLIC: OVERRIDE
-
CLUPt AGENCY HEAT INGitlW TH I
NOTIFIED
hp ACTION, PROJECT
IMOT APPROVED
I .STATE LAW IS NOT FUMY
CLEAR ON THIS POINT -SEE TEXT, I
h
I
•
NO
y
I;
�
APPROVAL OR
OTHER ACTIONS.
CLOP li
I
REGULATIONS.
OR pERIe75
ADOPTEDT
=r.E
GENERAL/SPECIFIC
.
PLAN PREVIOUSLY
,
FOUND CONSISTDATT
..
T
I
(.
GENERALPAEMOUSLCIFLC
PLAN PR Y
•,
-
ADOPTED
II
BY OV4 m"T
Sourca: Hodges & Shutt
(December 1883)
•
'PROJECT CONSISTENCY
CONSISTENT
WITH
CLUPt y
• �:r
LOCAL AGENCY ACTION I OUTCOME
I
PLAN ADOPTED s
PLANLOCAL ADOPTION _ OY
APPROVED PROCESS LOCAL AGENCY
I,�, RESI181YT PLAN
O AGENCY AIEIlD P ( TO ALUC
(wt►�N leo oAYs
I2166766((C) Gov. COOS h
/ 65302.3 0
II PLAN ADOPT@.
S NO ALUC REVIEW
or
OVERRIDE
INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS.
Put1<x
I NEARNc FINOINGsv
Ib MTN
CONTINUED ALUC'
REVIEW OF ALL
II ACT10115-/ 21676.M -
PLAN ADOPTED
By
LOCAL AGENCY
I LOCAL "ACTION TO I
AMEND PIAN OR PLAN ADOPTED;
jnND CONSISTENT NTH NO ALUC REVIEW OF
I PURPM OF STATUTE INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS
-4.`� UNTIL CLOP ADOPTED
/ 21675.1(e)
Y PUBLIC NTH
216751 d HEARNG Ll CONTIAIED ALUC
. I REVIEW OF
ways ALL ACTIONS
/ 21675.1(c)
tl6TERIAt PLAN ADOPTED
S PLAN LOCAL AD0PTWN BY
APPROVED I PROCESS I LOCAL AGENCY
PIEERAL/SPECiIt LOCAL AGENCY
N AYENOIE►IT CONSIDERS ALUC
OrERRIDE/TI DNCS
NOT REQUIRED.
PROJECT FOR APPROVAL-
S CONSISTENT
AGRMENT FOR NTH I
ALUC REVIEW OF CLUPt S
INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS ACTION. PROJECT
/ 21676.5(D) y0
No ALUC LOCAL APPROVAL APPROVED
REVIEW OF PROJECT PROCESS BY LOCAL AGENCY
PROJECT
CONSISTENT
NTH PUBLIC: OVERRIDE
-
CLUPt AGENCY HEAT INGitlW TH I
NOTIFIED
hp ACTION, PROJECT
IMOT APPROVED
I .STATE LAW IS NOT FUMY
CLEAR ON THIS POINT -SEE TEXT, I
BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
Gammissioner Alternate Agency that Term Expires
First Monday in May
Nina Lambert John Papadakis Member At Large 2002
1643 River Road 1462 Creek Haven PI.
Chico, CA 95928 Chico, CA 95926
Home: 342-3780
Work:
Fred Gerst
1860 Laurel St.
Gridley, CA 95948
Home: 846-2913
Work:
Jim Causey
3801 Hildale Ave.
Oroville, Ca 95966
Home: 532-9206
Lando
�. Box 3420
Chico, CA 95927
Home:
Work: 895-4805
Art Hatley
1176 20th St.
Oroville, CA 95965
Home: 533-9234
Work:
Robert N. Hennigan
5130 Anita Road
Chico, CA 95926
Home: 893-8492
Work: 891-1862
Norm Rosene
049 Village Lane
Fico, CA 95926
2-4300
Dr. Chester Ward
4 Lemmon Hill Court
Oroville, CA 95966-3708
Home: 532-0105
Terry Hodges
865 Long Bar Road
Oroville, CA 95965
533-0698
Bob Koch
P.O. Box 3420
Chico, CA 95927
Home:
Work: 895-4805
Board of Supervisors
Airport Managers
Airport Managers
VACANT City Selection Committee
Harald Hermes
1.4790 Eagle Ridge Dr.
Forest Ranch, CA 95942
Home:
Work:
Brian Baldridge
11088 Midway
Chico, CA 95928
Wk: 345-0779
City Selection Committee
Board of Supervisors
1999
2001
2000
1999
2000
—May 6, 2002
STAFF
Paula Leasure
Principal Planner
4 Parilo
Director of Development Services
Laura Webster
Pacific Municipal Consultants
Diana Shuey Brown
Secretary
Paula Atterberry
Clerical
Butte County Planning Division '
7 County Center Drive
Oroville, CA 95965
538-7601
*day through Friday
0 a.m. to 4:00 p:m.
K:\PLANNING\ALUC\FORMS\MEMBERS.COM
Revised: June 22, 1998
• RESOLUTION 98-01
AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
COUNTY OF BUTTE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
RESOL UTION OF COMMENDATION FOR RON B ULBER
WHEREAS, Ron Bulber, has served as Public Member Alternate to the Airport Land Use
Commission during the past 2 years; and
WHEREAS, Ron Bulber, has exhibited impartiality and expertise in the execution of his
duties; and
WHEREAS, Ron Bulber, has enabled the Commission to effectively perform its duties; and
WHEREAS, he is a man of intelligence, integrity, and wisdom and his contribution during
his term of office with the Commission has been of great value to Butte County, and
WHEREAS, he has exhibited knowledge and concern for the orderly development of this
County, and has worked diligently toward it's protection.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Airport Land Use Commission takes
. recognition of and expresses its appreciation for the services of Ron Bulber to the County of Butte
and the Commissioners. Staff members and associates extend sincere appreciation and commend
Ron Bulber for his service on the Airport Land Use Commission.
•
FURTHER, that this Resolution be included in the minutes of the Airport Land Use
Commission and that a copy of said Resolution be delivered to Ron Bulber, as a testimonial of the
sentiments of the Airport Land Use Commission of Butte�County.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Airport Land Use Commission of the C,aunty of Butte, on
the 17th day of June, 1998, by the following .vote: �� /f ,/ _
Robert Hennigan
Iim Causey
Art Hatley
Norm Rosene
ina Lambert Fred ers
Bob Koch
RESOLUTION 98-03
AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
COUNTY OF BUTTE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION FOR JOHN FRANKLIN
WHEREAS, John Franklin, has served as the Public Member Commissioner during the past
10 years and Chairman during the past year to the Airport Land Use Commission; and
WHEREAS, John Franklin, has exhibited impartiality and expertise in the execution of his
duties; and
WHEREAS, John Franklin, has enabled the Commission to effectively perform its. duties;
and
'WHEREAS, he is a man of intelligence, integrity, and wisdom and his contribution during
his term of office with the Commission has been of great value to Butte County, and
WHEREAS, he has exhibited knowledge and concernfor the orderly development of this
County, and has worked diligently toward it's protection.
• NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Airport Land Use Commission takes
recognition of and expresses its appreciation for the services of John Franklin to the County of Butte
and the Commissioners. Staff members and associates extend sincere appreciation and commend
John Franklin for his service on the Airport Land Use Commission.
FURTHER, that this Resolution be included in the minutes of the Airport Land Use
Commission and that a copy of said Resolution be delivered to John Franklin, as a testimonial of
the sentiments of the Airport Land Use Commission of Butte County.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Airport Land
the 17th day of June, 1998, by the following vote:
Robert Hennigan
dJim:Causey
N na Lambert
•
of Butte, on
Norm Rosene
Fred ' erst
r
Bob Koch
• RESOLUTION 98-04
AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
COUNTY OF BUTTE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION FOR ALLEN CAMPBELL
WHEREAS, Allen Campbell, has served as the Cities Commissioner to the Airport Land Use
Commission during the past 3 years; and
WHEREAS, Allen Campbell, has exhibited impartiality and expertise in the execution of his
duties; and
WHEREAS, Allen Campbell, has enabled the Commission to effectively perform its duties;
and
WHEREAS, he is a man of intelligence, integrity, and wisdom and his contribution during
his term of office with the Commission has been of great value to Butte County, and
WHEREAS, he has exhibited knowledge and concern for the orderly development of this
County, and has worked diligently toward it's protection.
• NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Airport Land Use Commission'takes .
recognition of and expresses its appreciation for the services of Allen Campbell to the County of
Butte and the Commissioners. Staff members and associates extend sincere appreciation and
commend Allen Campbell for his service on the Airport Land Use Commission.
FURTHER, that this Resolution be included in the minutes of the Airport Land Use
Commission and that a copy of said Resolution be delivered to Allen Campbell, as a testimonial of
the sentiments of the Airport Land Use Commission of Butte County.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Airport Land
the 17th day of June, 1998, by the following vote:
the County of Butte, on
Robert Hennigan Art atl
Jim Causey No ene
700
Nina Lambert Fre er
� V
Bob Koch
+BUTT E OOH AIRPORT ][ate USE COMMISSION Cl!f
• Department of Development Services • 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA 95965 • (916) 538-7601 FAX (916) 538-7785
June 22, 1998
Federal Aviation Administration,
Office of the Chief Counsel
Attn: Rule Docket (AGC -200)
Docket No. 29231 ,..
800 Independence Avenue
SW. Washington, DC 20591
Subject: Butte County Airport Land Use Commission Comments in Response to Docket No. .
29231 - Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Parts 91 and 150 Compatible
Land Use Planning Initiative
On behalf of the Butte County ALUC, we appreciate the opportunity to provide comments and
suggestions to the FAA that might serve to promote compatible land use planning by state and
• local authorities and discourage development of noncompatible land uses around airports.
The primary emphasis of our Commission's comments focus on the value of expanded public
education/awareness programs, increased access to public information (technical studies,
sample documents and reports) and enhanced disclosure mechanisms. Specific suggestions.
presented by individual Commission members and the public during.our regular meeting on
June 17, 1998, are summarized below:
1) Develop a' resource library which could be accessed through the Internet that would
include aircraft noise signatures for various types of planes that could be overlayed onto
the airport area of influence for individual airports to identify preliminary noise contours.
The "online" resource library could also include sample CLUPs from various jurisdictions,
Airport Layout Plans and a variety of other technical reports and Advisory Circulars.
2) Modify current regulations to create a more affirmative process. in terms of local agency
demonstrations of compliance with Comprehensive Airport Land Use Plans.
Currently there is an assumption at the state and federal level that local governments
comply with airport land use protection requirements. Instances of non-compliance only
appear to come to the attention of state and federal agencies if a formal complaint is filed
by either another agency or members of the public: This process should be modified so
• that the burden of demonstrating compliance is placed upon the local agency.
• Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission •
3) Develop policies which would more effectively encourage local agencies to ensure that
• their actions comply with airport protection plans and, at the same time, discourage
actions which deliberately eliminate an airport's eligibility for state and federal funding
through a system of "cross compliance".
C7
In some instances, actions are taken which deliberately make an airport ineligible for
funding of future improvements to accelerate the demise of the facility. A more effective
incentive for maintaining both compliance with airport protection policies and eligibility for
funding of airport improvements would be a policy requiring "cross compliance. " This
would mean that if an agency deliberately lost its eligibility for airport improvement funding
based on non-compliance, they would also lose their eligibility for all other types of state
and federal funding.
4) Create financial incentives for local agencies to develop and maintain education and
disclosure programs targeted toward local Real Estate Boards and Title Companies. The
purpose of the education component would be to increase the awareness of real estate
agents, brokers and title company employees regarding airport operations, flight paths,
safety zones and land use compatibility issues. Current forms of disclosure, such as
advisory notices, could also be enhanced by making Flight Track Maps available to real
estate offices and title. companies. This would ensure that prospective buyers'were not
only made aware that property they are considering purchasing is located within an
Airport Area of Influence, but would also illustrate the location of property in relationship
to existing flight patterns.
5) Encourage and/or require local agencies to adopt and apply Airport Overlay Zones to
properties within an Airport Area of Influence to enhance disclosure. and implement
airport protection policies.
6) Produce and distribute FAA videos and/or CD ROMs geared toward real estate
professionals, local agency staffs and decision makers, which provide FAA recommended
approaches to achieving and maintaining adequate airport protection and land use
compatibility.
Again, the Butte County ALUC appreciates the opportunity to provide input to the FAA on this
very important topic. Any questions regarding these comments should be directed to myself at
(530) 893-8492 or Laura Webster (530) 533-1131.
Sincerely,
Robert HennIigan, Ch ran
Butte County Airport Land Use Commission
• Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission •
2
1-1
0
ALUC CORRESPONDENCE
INCOMING AND OUTGOING
Date
Addressed To
From
Subject
Received/
Sent
6-8-98
Paula Leasure &
Caltrans - Christa Engle
Comments on the draft CLUP RFP & Airport Layout Plans for
Bob Hennigan
Chico, Ranchaero & Paradise
6-9-98
Paula Leasure
Laura Webster
Updated CLUP & RFP
6-9-98
Paula Leasure
Laura Webster
Draft Evaluation on Kammerer
6-10-98
Gary Griggs, John
Laura Webster
Distribution of Caltrans ALP comments
Franklin & Bob
Koch
6-10-98
Paula Leasure
Laura Webster
Copies of Caltrans ALP comments distribution
6-11-98
Laura Webster
Caltrans-Christa Engle
Comments and authorization to distributed CLUP RFP
6-12-98
Christa Engle
Laura Webster
Submittal of Revised CLUP & RFP to Christa Engle
6-12-98
Consultants:
Thomas A. Parilo
Request for Proposal - Formulation of CLUP
Walt Gillfillan,
Don Cortright,
Freddie
'
Comperchio, Jim
Harrris, & Dave
Dietz.
6-15-98
Michael. Farmer,
Paula Leasure
Acceptance of Allocation of Additional Funds and Board
with Caltrans
Resolution No. 98-91 executed June 9, 1998
6-16-98
Paula Leasrue
City of Chico
Memo from Bob Summerville, regarding Bostrom tentative
Subdivision, 2646 Floral Avenue, Chico
6-17-98
ALUC
Caltrans Aeronautics
Adopted 1998 Aeronautics Program
Program
6-22-98
Tom Parilo
Laura Webster
Follow up items from June 17, 1998 meeting - FAA letter from
Laura Webster & Bob Hennigan & extra copy of CLUP RFP
6-22-98
Paula (copy) of
Laura Webster
Follow up items from June 17, 1998 meeting - FAA letter from
above document
Laura Webster & Bob Hennigan &extra copy of CLUP RFP
6-22-98
E-mailed to FAA
Laura Webster
ALUC comments to FAA
6-22-98
Board of
Thomas Parilo
Butte County Specific Plan Amend. on file No. 97-01
Supervisors
(Kammerer) & General Plan Amend. file No. 97-02 (APN 047-
250-141)
6-25-98
ALUC
Laura Webster
Laura's notes and handouts from the Airport Land Use
Workshop held in Visalia, CA
7-7-98
Bob Hennigan
City of Chico - Bob Koch
Chico Municipal Airport FAR Part 150 Noise Compatibility
Program
STATE OF CALIFORNIA—BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY PETE WILSON,
Govemo
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
AERONAUTICS PROGRAM M.S. #40
•1120 N STREET - ROOM 3300
P.O. BOX 942874
SACRAMENTO, CA 94274-0001
(916) 654-4959
FAX (916) 653-9531
June 12, 1998
TO: AIRPORT CONTACTS
On June 2, 1998, the California Transportation Commission (CTC) adopted the
1998 Aeronautics Program, i.e., the CTC approved a list of aviation projects for funding in the
next three fiscal years. These projects are similar to those in the 1998 Proposed Program for
Aeronautics (PPA) that we sent to you on March 17, 1998. Specific projects are shown on the
enclosed list. Also enclosed is an explanation of the adopted Program and how it might impact
your airport.
Please review the enclosed 1998 Aeronautics Program to see if it includes any projects for
• your airport. If your airport has a project in fiscal year (Fy) 98/99, you will receive additional
instructions from us in a few days.
If you have any questions or comments, please call Mike Farmer at (916) 654-5174.
Sincerely,
dINPECKWITI, Program Manager
Aeronautics Program
Enclosures
c: Regional Transportation Planning Agencies
Airport Land Use Commissions
Herman Bliss, FAA
lon
�p J 1993
•
California Department of Transportation
1998 Aeronautics Program
Aviation Funding for FYs 98/99 - 00/01
PPA and CIP. The 1998 Aeronautics Program and the Proposed Program for Aeronautics
(PPA) are based upon the Capital. Improvement Program (CIP) that the California Transportation. :
Commission (CTC) adopted in January 1998. The CIP identifies airport capital needs for the
next ten years. The CIP was jointly prepared by the Department, airport managers, and regional
transportation planning agencies.
The Department selected projects from the CIP in accordance with the Project Evaluation Matrix
and available funds. These selected projects became the three-year PPA (FY. 98/99 dirough
FY 00/01). The PPA also includes those.prcjects from the .1996'Aeronautics Program that were
scheduled for FY 98/99. !
Availability of funds corresponds to the. 1998 Fund Estimate from last summer with adjustments
for final accounting reports and projects that the CTC added for the Rio Vista Municipal Aport..fi,
(FY 97/98) and Lee Vining Airport (FY 99/00). We distributed the CIP and the ,PPA to. all
interested parties earlier this year.' If you have any questions about either the, CIP or theProject_I ,t
Evaluation Matrix, please contact Bob Moore at 916/654-3775.
Project List. Please review the enclosed 1998 Aeronautics Program to see if it includes any
projects for your airport. If your airport has a project in fiscal year (FY) 98/99, you will receive
additional instructions from us in a few days. If your airport has a project on the "deleted" list,
funding is no longer available for that project.
Changes. Several changes were made to the PPA in response to inquiries from you. Two
projects were added in the final Program: (1) a segmented circle for Montgomery. Field, and
(2) an overlay of the runway at the Lee Vining Airport. The other change was that the CTC did
not withdraw the taxiway and lighting projects at Lee Vining Airport as'the Department had
recommended in the PPA. Instead, the CTC allowed Mono County to substitute the overlay
project. This change did not affect other projects because AIP Matching savings from FY 97/98
funded the new Lee Vining Airport project.
Programmed Cost. The."programmed cost" of each project represents only the state's share of
the project's cost. The local match is about 11% of the -programmed cost. The CTC has chosen
to continue with the 90/10 matching ratio for the duration of the 1998 Aeronautics Program. Me-
CTC
eCTC will consider adjusting the ratio when it adopts the 2000 Aeronautics Program. By law, the
CTC can raise the matching ratio to as high as 50/50.
P1oo!��..,,.�
Rl' l 17 15S03
0(o"caiiloilua
AIP Matching. Please note that the 1998 Aeronautics Program does not specify which projects •
are eligible for state matching of federal Airport Improvement Program (AIP) grants. However,
the 1998 Program does indicate how many dollars will be set aside each year for state matching
of AIP grants. We consider and approve your applications for State matching on a project -by -
project basis, as the Federal Aviation Administration awards the AIP grants. However, AIP
projects must have been included in the CIP in order to receive state matching. Whenever you ;
receive and accept an AIP grant, please contact us immediately so that you do not jeopardize our
ability to provide you with matching funds. We cannot -Write a matching agreement for any
project that has already started construction. Several airports have lost a considerable amount
of matching by not applying to us in a timely manner.
Waiting List,. Also enclosed is a waiting list of highly ranked projects that were not ;
programmed. We anticipate that some additional funds will become available so that at least a: ;
few of these projects might be amended into the 1998 Aeronautics Program. ,.
If you have any questions or comments about these projects or the Department's aviation gr'
programs, please call.Mike Farmer at 916/654-5174. (E-mail: riifamier@trmx3.dot:c6.g6v.
This address expires on July 31, 1998. Caltrans is converting to a new a=mail system ind all
current addresses will be changed. As soon as Aeronautics is assigned new addresses, we will
inform all of you.) You can also visit our web site at www.dot.ca.gov/hq/planning/aeronaut/.
•
1998 Aeronautics Program
• FY 1998-99 Projects
($ in thousands)
N= S oR nsor
Previously Programmed Projects:
Alpine County
County of Alpine
Blue Canyon
County of Placer
Boonville
Anderson Valley CSD
Bryant Field
County of Mono
Chiriaco Summit
County of Riverside
Compton
Co. of Los Angeles
Corona Municipal
City of Corona
Eureka Municipal
City of Eureka
Fort Bidwell
County of Modoc
Gen. Fox
Co. of Los Angeles
Hayfork
County of Trinity
Herlong
County of Lassen'
Lonnie Pool
County of Trinity
Lonnie Pool
County of Trinity
Mendota
City of Mendota
Poso
County of Kern
Ravendale
County of Lassen
hingletown
County of Shasta
hoshone
County of Inyo
Sierraville
County of Sierra
Sutter County
County of Sutter
New Projects for FY 1998-99:
Brackett Field
Co. of Los Angeles
Cameron Air Park
Cameron Park AD
Cameron Air Park
Cameron Park AD
Firebaugh
City of Firebaugh
Nut Tree
County of Solano
Watsonville Muni..
City of Watsonville
Current Programmed
Project Description Cost
Construct turnarounds = RW 16/34
$44
$44
Install segmented circle
13
13
Airport Layout Plan
55
55
Construct turnaround - RW 16
22
:22,
Construct turnaround - RW 24
22
22 `
Overlay south RW, reconstruct shoulders..500
500
Slurry seal RW, TW, taxilane
109
109
Construct turnaround - RW 16
22
22
Segmented circle
16
16 •
—Slung seal RW 6/24 and. parallel TW
`182
382.''
'
Slurry seal RW, TW, and apron "
98
98
Airport Layout Plan for all County airports
66
66
Safety area obstruction `femoval
11
11
Crack seal and slurry seal RW & apron
74
74
Overlay RW
98
98
Construct turnarounds RW 16/34
44
44
Construct turnaround RW 17
22
22
Aitport Layout Plan :
58
58
Construct turnarounds RW 15/33
44
44
Overlay RW & construct turnaround RW 3
164
164
Overlay RW
89
89
SUBTOTAL, 98/99 in 1996 Program
$1,953.
•Pts
Overlay south TW
$175
$179
195
Construct RW turnaround areas
501,
51,.-
222
Slung seal RW
30
31
.192..,
Storm drain improvements; RW safety area -; ...
295
301
204
L .
Crack fill/seal RW and repair RW lights.. • ,,
.40
4.1 -.,205
,
Pavement maintenance; slurry seal RW '
.
. 50
51 ...
195
SUBTOTAL, New Projects
$654
Previously. Programmed Projects
1,953
AIP Matching
1,400
TOTAL 98/99 Program
$4,007
1998 Aeronautics Program
FY 1999-2000 Projects "
($ in thousands)
Airport Sponsor Project Description
No projects carried over from 1996 Aeronautics Program into FY 99/00
New Projects for FY 1999-2000:
I
Current Programmed
Cost
Pts
•
Brackett Field
Co. of Los Angeles
Slurry seal RW 8U26R, north TW & north ramp
$400
$418
195 .
Compton
Co. of Los Angeles
Slurry seal. south RW, TW & south ramps,
350
366
200
Fresno -Chandler
City of Fresno ..
Overlay RW 121J30R_ . _
150
157
181
Healdsburg Muni.
City of Healdsburg
Slurry seal RW and TW, phase 1
• 150
157
188
Lee Vining
County of Mono
Overlay runway :;a"
260
272
..170 .
Montgomery Field
County of San Diego
Segmented Circle _
20
21
195
Thermal -
County of Riverside
Slurry seal RW 17/35 and TW "F":,... ,-,
1,00
104
192
Westover Field
County of Amador
Slurry seal RW and TW
;'77
80
188
SUBTOTAL, New..
_
Projects
$1,575
= AIP Matching =
-
1,400
TOTAL 99/00 Program
$2,975
FY 2000-2001 Projects
•
($ in thousands)
Current
Programmed
Airport
Sponsor
Project Descri to ion
Cost
QQ9
Projects Carried Over from FY 98/99 in 1996 Aeronautics Program:
Willows -Glenn
County of Glenn
Overlay RW 16/34, reconstruct runup at so. end
., $382
SUBTOTAL, Previously Programmed Projects
New Projects for FY
2000-2001:
Brown Field
- City of San Diego
Slurry seal and paint all RWs and TWs
$500
French Valley
County of Riverside
Slurry seal TWs ."
"40
Georgetown
County of EI Dorado
Construct runup area for RW 16
36
Salinas Municipal
City of Salinas
Repair joints on apron and TWs C/E/F
260
SUBTOTAL, New Projects
AIP Matching
TOTAL 00/01 Program
TOTAL 3 -Year 1998 Program
$399
$399
Pts
$500 190 "
43 181
38 186
278 185
$859
1,400
$2,658
$9,640
•
•
1998 Aeronautics Program
Projects Deleted from the 1994 and 1996 Aeronautics Programs
($ in thousands)
Projects Deleted from the 1994 Aeronautics Program at Request of Department
(Sponsor Did Not Comply with Timely -Use -of -Funds Policy):
Hemet -Ryan (95/96) Riverside Co. ALUC Update CLUP
$32
$32
SUBTOTAL
Current.
Programmed
Airport
S o�nsor
Project Descri tp ion
Cost
Q
Projects Deleted from
the 1996 Aeronautics Program Due to Funding from Other Sources,
or at Sponsors
Request: y
Adin (96/97)
County of Modoc
Install segmented circle .
.415
$15
Alturas (97/98)
County of Modoc
Slurry seal RW 13/31 and TW stubs,
51
51
Columbia (96/97)
County of Tuolumne
Overlay runway •
;.55
55 ;
Corona Muni. (96/97)
City of Corona
Construct"apron
340
340--
40->Haigh
HaighField (96/97)
County of Glenn
Fencing
129
129:
Kneeland (98/99)
County of Humboldt
Construct turnarounds RW 15/33
44`; :•.:..
Lampson (97/98)
- Countyof Lake
Seal coat RW and TW.,..
67
Mammoth Lakes (96/97)
Town of Mammoth Lakes
Seal coat RW and:TW.;. -
:121
121
Ruth (98/99)
County of Trinity
Construct turnaround . RW 13
22
22
Ruth (98/99)
County of Trinity
Airport Layout Plan
82
82
San Carlos (96/97)
Co. of San Mateo
Slurry seal RW
22
22
Tehachapi (96/97)
City of Tehachapi
Widen RW
125
125
Tehachapi (96/97)
City of Tehachapi
Seal coat RW
62
62
Wasco (97/98)
County of Kern
Remove obstruction approach end RW 30
16
16
Willits Municipal (97/98)
City of Willits
Construct turnaround RW 34
42
42
Willits Municipal (96/97)
City of Willits
Lengthen RW
13
13
*Allows -Glenn (96/97)
County of Glenn
Drainage, remove obstruction so. of RW 34
451
451
SUBTOTAL
$1,657
Projects Deleted from the 1994 Aeronautics Program at Request of Department
(Sponsor Did Not Comply with Timely -Use -of -Funds Policy):
Hemet -Ryan (95/96) Riverside Co. ALUC Update CLUP
$32
$32
SUBTOTAL
$32
TOTAL Deletio
$1,689
1998 Aeronautics Program
Waiting List
($ in thousands)
•
Current
Programmed
A!! R4�
Sop nsor
Project Description
Cost
Qs
Projects that Could
Be Amended into the Program if Other Projects Withdraw:
Pts
Colusa County
County of Colusa
Repair/replace RW, TW & apron pavement
$499
$500
183
Willows -Glenn
County of Glenn
Crack seal RWs and TW
18
19
188
Pine Mtn Lake
County of Tuolumne
Overlay parallel TW
97
104
181
Yuba County
County of Yuba
Overlay crosswind TW
313
334
181
Yuba County'
County of Yuba
Seal RW 5/23
126
135
181
Brackett Field
Co. of Los Angeles
Overlay transient aircraft apron
155
.165
180
Brackett Field
Co. of Los Angeles
Slurry seal south apron and hangar area
175
187
180
Watsonville Muni.
"City of Watsonville
Seal coat apron
50
53
-180
Brackett Field
Co. of Los Angeles
Slurry seal southeast parking ramp
167
178
180 -
Buchanan Field
Co. of Contra Costa
Reconst. TWs btwn east ramp T hangars
100
107
180
Camarillo `
County of Ventura
Reconstruct ramp at Building 339
-294 294
314
180
COPIES OF THIS AGENDA
AVAILABLE FROM:
City- Manager's Office
41.1 Main Street'
Chico, California
Telephone: (916) 895-4803
AGENDA
PREPARED: June 22. 1998
POSTED: June 25. 1998
PRIOR TO: 5:00 o.m.
CITY OF CHICO AIRPORT COMMISSION
Chico Municipal Center - Conference Room No. 1 - 421 Main Street
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING -- TUESDAY, JUNE 30, 1998 -- 3:30 P.M.
Items Not Appearing on Posted Agenda. This agenda was posted on the Council Chamber Building Bulletin Board
at least 72 hours in advance of this meeting. In order for the Commission to take action on an item not appearing on the
• posted agenda, other than merely acknowledging receipt of correspondence or other information, the Commission must make
one of the following determinations:
(1) Determine by a majority vote that an emergency exists as defined in Government Code Section 54956.5.
(2) Determine by a two-thirds vote of the members present, or by a unanimous vote if less than two-thirds of the
Commission is present, that there is a need to take immediate action and that the need for action came to the attention of the
City subsequent to the agenda being posted.
(3) Determine that the item appeared on a posted agenda for a meeting occurring not more than 5 calendar days
prior to this meeting, and the item was continued to this meeting.
1. ROLL CALL.
2. CONSENT AGENDA: All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine
and will be enacted by one motion. Resolutions and Minute Orders will be read by title only. There
will be no separate discussion of these items unless members of the Commission or persons in the
audience request specific items to be removed from the Consent Agenda to the Regular Agenda for
separate discussion prior to the time the Commission votes on the motion to adopt the Consent
Agenda. If any items are removed from the Consent Agenda, the items will be considered at the
beginning of the Regular Agenda.
2.1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - 6/9/98.
0 3
The Commission has been provided with copies of minutes for its -meeting held on 6/9/98..
HEARINGS. None P18nning1)IV181911
Page 1 of 3
JUN 2 5 O
0ro>,►111G, C.Mornla
r
c:
•
4. REGULAR AGENDA.
4.1. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA.
4.2. DISCUSSION OF AIRPORT MANAGER POSITION AND JOB DESCRIPTION.
At its 6/9/98 meeting, the Commission requested a workshop -type discussion of the Airport
Manager position. The Commission has been provided with Airport Manager job descriptions
from various airports, together with a summary comparison chart.
4.3. REPORT ON LAND USE ISSUES IN THE VICINITY OF THE AIRPORT.
Risk Manager Koch will review for the Commission items relevant to CMA which were discussed
at the ALUG meeting of 6/17/98, the outcome of the 6/23/98 meeting of the Board of Supervisors
with regard to the proposed development of the Stephens 'property (Kammerer), and any other
matters relating to land use surrounding the Airport.
4.4. REVIEW OF 1998-99 ANNUAL BUDGET.
Staff will review the 1998-99 Annual Budget, focusing on the sections relating to the Airport.
Commissioners previously received a copy of the Budget and were requested to bring it to this
meeting.
4.5. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES REPORT.
Management Analyst Forbes will report to the Commission regarding economic development
activities at the Airport, including preliminary expansion plans of Transfer Flow.
4.6. UPDATE ON AVIATION FACILITY PROJECTS.
Risk Manager Koch will review the status of aviation facility projects currently under way or
about to begin.
4.7. UPDATE ON AIRPORT MASTER PLAN PROJECT.
Risk Manager Koch will update the Commission on the status of the Technical Advisory
Committee for the Airport Master Plan Project.
4.8. REPORT ON FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION (FAA) PUBLICATION "ESTIMATING
THE REGIONAL ECONOMIC SIGNIFICANCE OF AIRPORTS".
As recommended at the 6/9/98 meeting, staff has obtained copies of the FAA publication and
reviewed the document. Risk Manager Koch will report to the Commission on the feasibility of
preparing an estimate for CMA.
4.9. ITEMS ADDED AFTER POSTING OF THE AGENDA.
0
Page 2 of 3
r
5. BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR: A member of the general public may address the Airport
Commission on any matter not appearing on the agenda which is of interest to such person and which
is within the jurisdiction of the Commission. Where a member of the general public seeks to address
the Commission under Business From The Floor, the Commission may ask questions of such person,
but may not discuss the matter unless and until the matter is included on a posted agenda at a
subsequent meeting, or make one of the determinations listed on the first page of this agenda in
the unnumbered section entitled "Items Not Appearing on Posted Agenda".
6. REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS: None.
7. ADJOURNMENT: The next meeting will be the Commission's regular meeting on Tuesday, July
'28, 1998, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chamber. -
Distribution:
Commission - 5*
News Media - 11
CM/RM/AA-Airport - 3*
City Clerk and Council - 8
City Attorney - 1*
ACA - 1
• DPW/ADPW-E/ADPW-O&M - 3*
CDD/PI.Dir.%CDA - 3*.
MA -ED
AS -ACM*
Chief of Police - 1
Finance Director - 1
Fire Chief/Station #3 - 2
Public Review Binder - 1*
Post
File
Extra - 6
A/C Industrial, Nick Buck
Aero Union Corp., Vic Alvistur
Allan, Ella
Aviation Committee, Chamber of Commerce
Baldridge, Brian
Beachfront Deli, Pam Wilson
Butte County Admin., John Blacklock
Butte County Dev. Svcs, Tom Parilo
Butte County Supervisor Dolan
Butte County Supervisor Houx
CDF Air Attack Base
Chico Chamber of Commerce, CEO
FAA Control Tower, Martin Clark
Fleetwood Motor Homes
Fortress -Independence, Karl Hall
Hennigan, Bob & Barbara
Herfi Aircraft, Retta Herfi
League of Wmn Voters, Catherine Monceau
Merit Medi -Trans, Inc., Stan Gungl
Paradise Town Manager, Chuck Rough
Schooler Flying Co.; Harold Schooler
Team Chico, Bob Linscheid
Page 3 of 3
CITYorCHICC►
UaC.ie�z
16
OFFICE OF THE
CITY MANAGER
411 Main Street
P.O. Box 3420
Chico. CA 95927
(530) 895-4800
FAX (530) 895-4825
ATSS 459-4800
G-GA-2-10/Chrono
Bob Hennigan, Chair
Butte County Airport Land Use Commission
7 County Center Drive
Oroville, CA 95965
RE: Chico Municipal Airport FAR Part 150 Noise Compatibility Program.
Dear Mr. Hennigan:
Planning Deparament
J U L 0117 1998
Orovilie, California
July 2, 1998
The purpose of this letter is to formalize the comments I made at the last meeting of the Airport
Land Use Commission (ALUC) regarding the confusion on -the part of the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) as to whether or not the City's FAR Part 150 program was approved or
adopted by ALUC.
In the FAA's Record of Approval of this program, it was noted that ALUC had adopted the land
use plan in the FAR Part 150 program as the official airport land use plan for the Chico
Municipal Airport. Because it was recognized that this is not correct, since ALUC did not take
such action, ALUC requested the City to look into this matter to determine how the FAA arrived
at this conclusion.
As I indicated at the last meeting, City staff has reviewed all correspondence with the FAA
regarding the FAR Part 150 program, all of the draft reports prepared by the consultant, and
questioned the consultant to determine if he made any such representation to the FAA.
At no time, either in writing or orally, did the City or its consultant represent to the FAA that
ALUC had approved the program. It is unknown how the FAA came to the conclusion it did.
If members of ALUC have additional questions regarding this matter, I will attempt to respond to
them at the next ALUC meeting.
_. S' c rely,
Robert E. Koch
Risk Manager
c: Ci' Manager
er
�
&9 Made From Recycled paper
'"BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
■ Department of Development Services ■ 7 County Center Drive, Oroville CA 95965 ■ (530) 538-7601 FAX (530) 538-7785 ■
REGULAR MEETING OF THE COMMISSION
Location: Butte County Administration Building, Supervisors' Chambers
25 County Center Drive, Oroville California
Date/Time: June 17, 1998 -9:00 a.m.
AGENDA
ALL ITEMS ARE OPEN FOR PUBLIC COMMENT
A. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
B.' ROLL CALL
C. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: May 20, 1998
D. ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA (Committee members or staff may request additions, deletions, or changes
in the Agenda order)
.. RESOLUTIONS OF APPRECIATION:. Resolutions of appreciation have been prepared for
John Franklin, Allen Campbell, Ron Bulbe_ r, and John. Papakakis for their efforts as
Commissioners or Alternate Commissioners of the Airport Land Use Commission. Staff is
requesting the Commission adopt the proposed Resolutions.
F. BUSINESS ITEMS:
Items with Public Hearings
1. Request for Consistency Findings ALUC File No A9"7 - (Butte County General Plan
Amendment and Rezone GPA#98-04 - Farial on APN 048-040-028: General Plan
Amendment from High Density and Low Density Residential to Commercial and a Rezone
from R4 (High Density Residential) and SR (Suburban Residential) to C-2 (General
Commercial), located on the east side of Cohasset Road, approximately 650 feet north of
East Avenue. Staff recommends that the Commission find the project consistent with the
Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan.
Items. without Public Hearings
2. Request for information from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The
0- FAA is seeking new ideas regarding how to better influence land use decisions around
airports in order to encourage and help State and local governments achieve and
■ Butte County a Airport Land Use Commission ■
maintain land use compatibility. Staff is requesting comments from the Commission
to forward to the FAA by June 22, 1998.
3. Discussion of Standard Operating Procedures. In order to establish orderly project
processing and communication with project. applicants, and other governmental
agencies, standard procedures need to be developed. This item was placed on the
agenda at the request of Chairman Hennigan:.
.i
G. MONTHLY STATUS REPORT
H. CORRESPONDENCE
I. PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ALREADY ON THE AGENDA
(Presentations will be limited to five minutes. The Airport Land Use Commission is prohibited by. State Law from taking.
action 'on any item presented if it is not listed on the agenda.)
J. ADJOURNMENT
Any disabled person needing special accommodation to participate in the Commission proceeding is requested to contact Paula
Aft.6asure at (916) 538-7601 prior to the meeting and arrangements will be made to accommodate you.
W,Any person may address the Commission during the "Business From the Floor" segment of the Agenda. .
*Copies of the Agenda documents relative to and Agenda item may be obtained from the Cleric of the Commission at cost of $.08
per page.
RULES APPLYING TO PUBLIC COMMENTS
1. Members of the public wishing to address the Commission upon any subject within the jurisdiction of Butte ALUC may
do so upon receiving recognition from the Chairman at the appropriate time.
2. Comment on items not on the agenda should be made at the time indicated for "Public Comment" on the agenda. The
Commission may not act on any matter so raised and will have to put off action until a meeting at which the matter can
be put on the agenda.
3. Comment on specific agenda items may be made during the discussion of that agenda item, upon recognition by the
Chair.
4. After receiving recognition, please stand and state your name and address before making your presentation, so that the
Clerk may take down this information.
5. All documents to be presented to the Commission shall be given to the Cleric of the Commission (original and seven
copies) prior to Call of Order of meeting. Such documents shall be distributed to the Commission and made available
for public inspection.
This Agenda was mailed to those requesting notice and pasted 72 hours in advance of the meeting at the
following locations:
Butte County Administration Building, front entrance and glass case.
■ Butte County ■ Airport Land Use Commission ■
BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION MINUTES
May 20, 1998
A.' Pledge of Allegiance
C. Roll Call
Present: Commissioners Rosene, Hennigan, Gerst and Hatley; Alternates
Hodges and Koch and Chairman Franklin
Also Present: Thomas A. Parilo, Director of Development Services
Laura Webster, ALUC Staff.
Diana Shuey, Secretary
Nick Ellena, Chico Enterprise. Record
B. Introduction of New Commissioners (selected by Board of Supervisors and City
r Selection Committee)
Commissioners Rosene and Hatley were introduced by Chairman Franklin.
.D. Approval of Minutes of March 18, 1998.
The Commission had the following correction: On Page 5, line 8, the word "Master" was misspelled.
It was moved by Alternate Koch, seconded by, Commissioner Hennigan, and carried unanimously for
• approval of the minutes of March 18, 1998 as corrected.
H. Acceptance of the Agenda
There was a consensus to select the. Public Member prior to nomination and election of Chairman and
Vice -Chairman.
F. Nomination and Election of Public Member
Commissioner Gerst nominated Nina Lambert to be Public Member. The nomination was seconded
by Commissioner Rosene.
Alternate Koch nominated John Franklin to be Public Member. There was no second.
In.response to a question regarding the necessity to second a nomination, Mr. Parilo said the Bylaws
do not address that issue, but normally a second would be required especially with more than one
nomination.
The vote was unanimous for Nina Lambert to be the Public Member at Large.
E. Nomination and Election of Chairman and Vice -Chairman
Chairman Franklin conducted the selection of the new Chairman and abstained.from voting. Newly,
appointed Commissioner Lambert participated in the voting.
Butte County Airport Land Use Commission minutes - May 20,- 1998 - Page 1
• It was noted that the Vice -Chairman normally becomes the Chairman but in this case, former Vice -
Chairman Allen Campbell is no longer an ALUC member.
Commissioner Gerst nominated Commissioner Hennigan to be Chairman. The motion was seconded
by Commissioner Rosene.
The vote was unanimous for Commissioner Hennigan to be Chairman. Commissioner Hennigan took
John Franklin's place as Chairman.
Alternate Koch rioted that the Vice -Chairman is required. by the Bylaws to have served on ALUC for
one year. He nominated Commissioner Lambert to be Vice -Chairman.
Commissioner Lambert nominated Commissioner Gerst to be Vice -Chairman, but he declined the
nomination and.seconded the nomination of Commissioner Lambert.
The vote was unanimous for Commissioner Lambert to be Vice -Chairman.
G. Introduction of Laura Webster, Pacific Municipal Consultants
Mr. Parilo introduced the new ALUC staff person, Laura Webster.
A description of the arrangement, which has been worked out with Pacific Municipal Consultants for
• the period from April 1 to June 30, 1998, was distributed.
Mr. Parilo summarized the arrangement with Pacific Municipal Consultants. He said the contract will
provide the immediate services to support the mandated responsibilities. There is a primary emphasis
on coordinating the update of the CLUP's for all four airports. Ms. Webster has established contact
with the Division of Aeronautics staff of Caltrans to secure additional grant funds and in coordinating
the RFP process, which must be completed prior to soliciting proposals from consultants. Mr. Parilo
said that after this first three months period, a contract will be negotiated for the following year, which
will coincide with the County's budget year. Mr. Parilo asked that any direct contacts regarding
administrative issues be directed to Paula Leasure, or in her absence, Mr. Parilo. He recommended
that Ms. Webster's time be directed toward supporting the mandated responsibilities rather than
administrative issues. Ms. Webster will advise staff when reviewing projects, or changes to a General
or Specific Plan, or areas around the airports where, the General plan is not in conformity with the
current CLUP. Ms. Webster will attend all meetings and coordinate update of the CLUP's.
Ms. Webster introduced herself and described her background.
There was a discussion on the level of experience available in Airport Land Use Planning by Pacific
Municipal Consultants.
Mr. Parilo noted that any planner who has worked with public agencies has had involvement with
airport planning, since every community has at least one public use airport, so there is a general
familiarity with Airport Land Use Planning.
Butte County Airport Land Use Commission minutes - May 20, 1998 -Page 2
• Alternate Koch said that ALUC has expressed a desire to have staff which has extensive or specialized
experience in Airport Land Use Planning -- not just generalized experience. He said ALUC has
discussed specialized training for staff: He asked if money has been set aside for training and who
would be taking the training if any -- Ms. Webster or Ms. Leasure?
Mr. Parilo said specialized training would be funded separately as part of the annual budget that has
been prepared.
Chairman Hennigan noted there are courses offered by the University of California and Caltrans that
would be relevant and should be included in the budget and included in Ms. Webster's schedule.
Mr. Parilo said under the first contract the essential components of the mandate should be emphasized,
but under a long term relationship, specialized training should be a component.
L. Closed Session
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision of Section 54956.9.
One potential case.
Mr. Parilo said according to County. Counsel the two parties involved in the litigation have come to
•. an agreement and are in the process of signing the agreement, so County Counsel has asked that the
Closed Session be postponed to the following meeting in case the two parties do not reach an
agreement.
Chairman Hennigan said that in addition to the litigation, there is the issue of the County Code. He
asked if that issue could be discussed in Open Session.
Mr. Parilo agreed issues relating to the County Code could be discussed in Open Session, but would
have to be placed on the Agenda. He noted that ALUC has previously given staff direction to work
with County Counsel on amending the County Code so the provisions of the current code would apply
to all the public use airports. At the next meeting, draft language could be provided to amend the code
and an ordinance change could be requested of the Board of Supervisors.
Commissioner Hennigan said the language is unclear in the code -- using "airports" in the plural but
only referring to one airport --Chico Municipal Airport. Also the code does not cite specifically the
standards contained in the Federal and State codes, which should be incorporated into the language
of the code, either by reference or explicitly. Also, there should be an enforcement mechanism.
Mr. Parilo said at the next meeting draft language can be provided addressing those concerns. He
noted that Neil McCabe of County Counsel's office, has been working with both attorneys in the
litigation, and the situation appears very hopeful for resolution.
• I. Business Items
Butte County Airport Land Use Commission minutes - May 20, 1998 - Page 3
ITEMS WITH PUBLIC HEARINGS
None
rr .•
SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA
y
Appointment to the Chico Municipal Airport Master Plan Technical Advi ory
Committee (TALI_ The Chico Airport Commission has requested the Butte County
Airport Land Use Commission consider appointing a representative to serve on the
Chico Municipal Airport Master Plan Technical Advisory Committee. The appointee
should have a technical or practical background in aviation and airport related matters.
Alternate Koch said the Chico Airport Commission has invited a representative from ALUC to a
participate iri work on the Chico Municipal Airport. Master Plan Technical Advisory Committee as a
voting member. The County Planning staff was also invited to send someone as an ex -officio member.
Commissioner Lambert nominated Chairman Hennigan .to be the representative. The nomination was
seconded by Commissioner Gerst. The selection was approved by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Lambert, Gerst, Rosene, and Hatley and Alternate Hodges and Chairman
Heninigan
NOES:. 0
+ • ABSTAIN: Alternate Koch
ABSENT: 0
Commissioner Rosene suggested that Ms. Webster beincludedin the TAC as the Planning staff
person.
Mr. Parilo said he would confer with Tom Lando and Alternate Koch as to whether they would prefer
someone purely from the Planning Department. He, agreed it would be good to have Ms. Webster
involved with the TAC, but budget resources would have to be allocated.
Commissioner Gerst asked if meetings on the Master Plan for the Chico Municipal Airport are open
to the public.
Alternate Koch said that is correct.
ITEMS WITHOUT PUBLIC HEARINGS
,1. Review a proposed. Bylaws, Version No. 9: Review of proposed Bylaws for
operation of the Airport Land Use Comrriissiori' The proposed Bylaws have been
amended to reflect staffmg.
Mr. Parilo said draft No.9 of the Bylaws is ready for review.
ti Butte County Airport Land Use Commission minutes - May 20, 1998 --Page 4 `
• Commissioner Gerst referred to Page 4, line 44, regarding "unexcused absences" and how to handle
a vacant seat.
There was a discussion of the paragraph, `but no agreement was reached on modifying the paragraph
and it was left unchanged.
Alternate Koch recommended that the word "proxy"wherever it appears' be replaced by the word
"alternate" for the sake of consistency.
It was moved by Alternate Koch, seconded by Commissioner Hatley,`and carried unanimously to
replace the word "proxy" to "alternate."
Alternate"Koch said that on Page 6, line 30; the wording is unclear regarding Special Meetings. He
said the wording. in the second sentence about "the chair may call a special meeting" should be deleted
since the second sentence is about a meeting being called by -the Commissioners.
It was moved by Alternate Koch, seconded, by Commissioner Gerst, and carried unanimously to use
the following wording: "A special meeting may be called upon a majorityvote'of the Commissioners
at a regularly scheduled meeting."
Commissioner Gerst said the first paragraph on Page 5 is confusing and contradictory.
1VIr. Parilo- said that Section 1.3.1 of the Bylaws covers the members representing the cities of the
• County and does notidentify an'elected official as that member.
It was moved by Commissioner Gerst, seconded by Alternate Koch for deletion of lines one through
three at, the top of Page 5 since membership is covered by the Public Utilities Code.
Chairman Hennigan noted that the membership of ALUC includes applicable sections of the State
Code.by reference on Page 3. He read aloud from PUC 21670 that "public officers whether elected
or appointed may be appointed and serve as members of the Commission during their terms of public
office."
There was, consensus that the' Bylaws should not attempt to reinterpret the PUC section.
The motion for deletion of lines 1-3 at the top of Page 5 was unanimously carried.
Alternate Koch suggested.that on Page 7, "Acceptance of the Agenda" be included in the""Order of
Business.".
There was consensus to include "Acceptance of the Agenda" after "Approval of Minutes."
Chairman Hennigan noted that the Bylaws can be amended by the Commission at any time, if there
are any items which Commissioners wish to include at a later date.
• Commissioner Lambert suggested'including wording at this time about amending the Bylaws..
Butte County Airport Land Use Commission minutes -.May 20, 1998 - Page 5
Mr. Parilo recommended including the paragraph on amendment of the Bylaws from the current
Bylaws which could be handled without requiring circulation for minor changes. He said the .
Bylaws could be circulated if the Commission so desires.
Alternate Koch summarized the wording from draft No.7 of the Bylaws regarding amendment of the
Bylaws and requiring circulation.
It was moved by Alternate Koch, seconded by Commissioner Lambert, and carried unanimously, to
amend Draft No.9 of the Bylaws to incorporate ARTICLE VI of the current Bylaws, which says:
"These Bylaws may be amended, revised or repealed at any regular meeting of the Butte County.
ALUC by a vote of 4 of the members of said Commission."
Chairman Hennnigan noted that any change to the Bylaws would be placed on the Agenda and receive
public notice as required by the Brown Act.
It was moved by Alternate Koch and seconded by Commissioner Hatley to adopt the Bylaws as
presently amended.
Mr. Parilo asked -if the signature of.the Vice -Chair would be necessary on the Bylaws.
Alternate Koch amended his motion on approval of the Bylaws to eliminate the signature of the Vice -
Chair on Page 10. The amendment of the motion was seconded by Commissioner Hatley.
• There was consensus that references to code sections (which are shaded) should be retained in the
Bylaws; but the editorial notes (which are also shaded) should be deleted.
The Bylaws as presently amended were adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Gerst, Rosene, and Hatley; Alternates Koch and Hodges and Chairman
Hennigan.
NOES: 0
ABSTAIN: Commissioner Lambert
ABSENT:O
J. Public Comment on items not on the agenda.
Commissioner Lambert congratulated Commissioner Rosene on. his appointment and thanked the
Commission for their years of cooperation.- She presented Commissioner Gerst with a token of
appreciation for his dedication to the Commission.
K. ALUC Monthly Status Report
(Item #3)
Butte County Airport Land Use Commission minutes - May 20, 1998 - Page 6 .
• Ms. Webster said that she would notify the Chico Airport Commission of Chairman Hennigan's
appointment to the City of Chico's Airport Master Plan Technical Advisory Committee.
(Item #5)
Mr. Parilo said no budget resources for preparation of the CLUP's were included in the budget which
was submitted since the funding source for the CLUP's is not secured. Once the grant is secured a
budget adjustment can be made. Since the State will pay in various "draws" after work is complete
the actual budget resources will be less than the total amount of the grant.
Chairman Hennigan asked for clarification on the requirement for a secure budget source since
preparation of the CLUP's is mandated by the State.
Mr. Parilo explained that it is a matter of form over substance. He noted that if a consultant is selected
who will exceed the cost of the grant, the Board will have to approve the additional appropriation. He
noted the grant resources are much greater than originally expected, but the true costs are unknown
at this time. Once the true costs are known the Board can be asked for additional budget resources.
(Item #6)
Ms. Webster said in her conversations with Christa Engle she was told the California Transportation
Commission did approve the second request for grant allocation for preparation of the CLUP's which
would be $40,000 added to the original $41,000. As soon as written notification of the grant is
received, it will be forwarded to ALUC. She said staff resources will be acceptable for the 10%
matching funds.
• John Franklin, owner of the Paradise Airport, said he discussed the Airport Layout Plans with Christa
� uP Y
Engle and learned.that Caltrans does not like the Paradise or Ranchaero Airport Layout Plans. Mr.
Franklin was concerned that unacceptable layout plans for Paradise and Ranchaero airports could delay
the entire CLUP process for all four airports. He was concerned about lack of funds for doing the
layout plans for Paradise and Ranchaero airports and dealing with the frustration of working with the
Caltrans staff in preparing new Airport Layout Plans.
(Item #7)
Ms. Webster said she talked with Ms. Engle about the status of the layout plans and the concerns for
the Paradise and Ranchaero layout plans. The Airport Layout. Plan for Chico is not a concern since
a Master Plan is being created. Updating the layout plans for Paradise and Ranchaero could be
included in the RFP for CLUP preparation so the costs could be determined. ALUC could address the
issue of whether the Airport Layout Plans could be funded with the grant funds.
Chairman Hennigan felt the grant funds could be used to revise the Airport Layout Plans since there.
is a public interest in the airports. He noted that the Paradise airport is the only one for the town and
is available when the valley is foggy. He encouraged using the funds to revise the layout plans even
though the airports are privately owned.
Ms. Webster said an updated RFP was submitted to Caltrans and according to telephone discussions
with Ms. Engle, the Aeronautics Program should have very few comments on the updated version once
• received. Ms. Engle's comments on the layout plans could be included as a task within the RFP.
Butte. County Airport Land Use Commission minutes - May 20, 1998 - Page 7
Alternate Koch asked how significant the modifications to the layout plans -would be.
Ms. Webster said there were extensive suggestions from the .Caltrans in-house consultant on how the
layout plans should be improved. Ms. Engle intends to review the suggestions to determine what
would be an absolute necessity versus a good idea of the consultant. Once correspondence from
Caltrans is received, we will have a better.idea regarding the extent of the modifications.
Alternate Koch asked if the Paradise layout plan would need FAA. approval.
Mr. Franklin did not think it would need FAA approval. He expressed concern in dealing with the
Caltrans bureaucratic process.
Ms. Webster said she has expressed to Caltfans the urgency of moving forward with the CLUP process
and noted that a letter from Caltrans identifying the specific issues of concern will be very helpful..
Mr. Parilo asked the Chairman to assist staff by taking an active role in working with Caltrans.
There was more discussion of the selection of a consultant and Caltrans involvement in that process.
• - Commissioner Rosene asked about the status of development in CSA 87 and signage about the airport.
Mr. Parilo said signage is required for development in CSA 87, and is to be installed upon recordation
of the final maps. Previously lots have been sold, which did not have the benefit of signage.
Mr. Rosene said that at the previous Chico Aviation Commission meeting, members of the public
living near Keefer Road objected to airplane noise. Although they signed avigation easements they
are ready to form a group to combat the airport. If the signs could be installed at least new people
would be aware of the airport.
Chairman Hennigan said ALUC discussed the signs previously. He asked what progress was made
on getting the signs put up.
Mr. Parilo said apparently the size of the signs created a difficulty in terms of costs. It was thought
that all the signs could be ordered when the first sign is to be installed, which will be triggered by the
first map ready to record.
Chairman Hennigan said the public education portion of CSA 87 'should be implemented. The
mitigations are actually supposed to be completed. He asked Mr. Parilo to report back on the status
of signage at the next meeting.
Mr. Parilo said he would check on the County's ability to front the cost of the signs.
Butte County Airport Land Use Commission minutes - May 20, 1998 - Page 8
Butte County Airport Land Use"Commission minutes - May 20, 1998 - Page 9
RESOLUTION 98-01
AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
COUNTY OF BUTTE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
RESOL UTION OF COMMENDATION FOR RON B ULBER .
WHEREAS, Ron Bulber, has served as Public Member Alternate to the Airport Land Use
Commission during the past 2 years; and
WHEREAS, Ron Bulber, has exhibited impartiality and expertise in the execution' of his
duties; and
WHEREAS, Ron Bulber, has enabled the Commission to effectively.perform its duties; and
WHEREAS, he is a man of intelligence, integrity, and wisdom and his contribution during
his term of office with the Commission has been ofgreat value to Butte County, and
WHEREAS, he has exhibited knowledge and concern for the orderly development of this
County, and has worked diligently toward it's protection.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Airport Land Use. Commission takes
recognition of and expresses its appreciation for the services of Ron Bulber to the County of Butte
and the Commissioners. Staff members and associates extend sincere appreciation and commend
Ron Bulber for his service on the Airport Land Use Commission.
FURTHER, that this Resolution be included in the 'minutes of the Airport Land Use
Commission and that a copy of said Resolution be delivered to Ron Bulber, as a testimonial of the
sentiments of the Airport Land Use Commission of Butte County.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Airport Land Use Commission'of the County of Butte, on
the 17th day of June, 1998, by the following vote:
Robert Hennigan Art Hatley
Jim Causey Norm Rosene
Nina Lambert Fred Gerst
`� Bob Koch
RESOLUTION 98-02
AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
COUNTY OF BUTTE, STATE OF CALIFORNM
RESOL UTION OF COMMENDATION FOR JOHN.PAPADAKIS
WHEREAS, John Papadakis, has served as Alternate Commissioner to the Airport Land Use
Commission during the past S years; and
WHEREAS, John Papadakis, has exhibited impartiality and expertise in the execution of
his duties; and
WHEREAS, John Papadakis, has enabled the Commission to effectively perform its duties; "
and
WHEREAS, he is a man of intelligence, integrity, and wisdom and his contribution during
his term of off ce with the Commission has been of great value to Butte County, and.
WHEREAS, he has exhibited knowledge and concern for the orderly development of this
County, and has worked diligently toward it's protection.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that'the Airport Land Use Commission takes
recognition of and expresses its appreciation for the services of John Papadakis to the County of
Butte and the Commissioners. Staff members and associates extend sincere appreciation and
commend John Papadakis for his service on the Airport Land Use Commission.
FURTHER, that this Resolution be included in the ,minutes of the Airport Land Use
Commission and that a copy of said Resolution be delivered to John Papadakis, as a testimonial of
the sentiments of the Airport Land Use Commission of Butte County.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Airport Land Use Commission of the County of Butte, on
the 17th day of June, 1998, by the following vote:
Robert Hennigan Art Hatley.
Jim Causey Norm Rosene
Nina Lambert Fred Gerst
Bob Koch
i
RESOLUTION 98=03
AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
COUNTY OF BUTTE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION FOR JOHN FRANKLIN
WHEREAS, John Franklin, has served as the Public Member Commissioner during the past
10 years and Chairman during the past year to the Airport Land Use Commission;, and
WHEREAS, John Franklin, has exhibited impartiality and expertise in the'execution of his
duties; and
WHEREAS, John Franklin, has enabled the Commission to effectively perform its duties;
and
WHEREAS, he is a man of intelligence, integrity, and wisdom and his contribution during
his term'of office with the Commission has been of great value 'to Butte County, and
WHEREAS, he has exhibited knowledge and concern for the orderly.development of this'
County, 'and has worked diligently toward it's protection.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Airport Land Use Commission takes
recognition ofand expresses its appreciation for the services of John Franklin to the'County of Butte .
. and the Commissioners. Staff members and associates extend sincere appreciation and commend
John Franklin for his service on the Airport Land. Use Commission.
FURTHER, that this Resolution be included in the minutes of the Airport Land Use
Commission and that a copy of said Resolution be delivered to John Franklin, as a testimonial of
the sentiments of the Airport Land Use Commission of Butte,County.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Airport Land Use Commission of the County of Butte, on
the 17th day of June, 1998, by the following vote:
Robert Hennigan Art Hatley
Jim Causey Norm Rosene
Nina Lambert Fred Gerst
Bob Koch
RESOLUTION 98-04
AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION ,
COUNTY OF BUTTE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION FOR ALLEN CAMPBELL
WHEREAS, Allen Campbell, has served as the Cities Commissioner to the Airport Land Use
Commission during the past 3 years; and'
WHEREAS, Allen Campbell, has exhibited impartiality and expertise in the execution of his
duties; and
WHEREAS,' Allen Campbell, has enabled the. Commission to effectively perform its duties.-
and
uties;and
WHEREAS, he is a man of intelligence, integrity, and wisdom and his contribution during
his term of office with the Commission has been ofgreat value to Butte County, and
WHEREAS, he has exhibited knowledge and concern for the orderly development of this
County, and has worked diligently toward it's protection.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Airport Land Use Commission takes
recognition of and expresses its appreciation for the services of Allen Campbell to the County of
Butte and the Commissioners. Staff members and associates extend sincere appreciation and
commend Allen Campbell for his service on the Airport Land Use Commission.
FURTHER, that this. Resolution be included in the minutes of the Airport Land Use
Commission and that a copy of said Resolution be delivered to Allen Campbell, as a testimonial of
the sentiments of the, Airport Land Use Commission of Butte County.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Airport Land Use Commission of the County of Butte, on
the 17th day of June, 1998, by the following vote:
Robert Hennigan Art Hatley
Jim Causey Norm Rosene
Nina Lambert
•
Bob Koch
Fred Gerst
i
+BlCTTT E COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION +
• Department of Development Services • 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA 95965 • (916) 538-7601 FAX (916) 538-7785
AGENDA ITEM - F.1.
TO: Honorable Chair and Airport Land Use Commission
FROM:' Laura Webster, ALUC Staff
DATE: June 2, 1998
ITEM: ALUC File No. A98-07 (Butte County General Plan Amendment and Rezone
GPA #98-04 - Faria) on APN 048-040-028: A request for consistency findings for
a General Plan Amendment from High and Low Density Residential to Commercial
and a Rezone from R4 (High Density Residential) and SR (Suburban Residential)
to C-2 (General Commercial), located on the east side of Cohasset Road; 650 feet
north of East Avenue.
FOR: Airport Land Use Commission Meeting of June 17, 1998
SUMMARY: The County of Butte is presently processing the above mentioned project and has
submitted a comment sheet and map to ALUC for review and comment. Staff recommends the
Commission find the project consistent with the Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan.
ANALYSIS: This Butte County project involves a 2.059 acre site. The applicant is requesting'
a General Plan Amendment from High and Low Density Residential to Commercial. If the
General Plan Amendment is approved, the property will also be subsequently -rezoned from R4
(High Density Residential) and SR (Suburban Residential) to C-2 (General Commercial).
According to materials submitted by the project applicant, the purpose of the project is to facilitate
the expansion of Courtesy Motors, although a number of commercial uses could theoretically be
permitted if the General Plan Amendment and Rezone are approved. The tentative site plan
identifies a proposed 10,080 square foot single story structure located within the front half of the
lot which would accommodate a vehicle showroom, offices and an automobile service area. The
remainder of the site would be developed with landscaped vehicle display areas adjacent to
Cohasset Road, and other outdoor vehicle parking and storage areas.
The project description was referred to Airport'Land Use Commission staff on May 8, 1998 for
comment as part of the routine Request for Comments, and the Commission must respond within
60 days. Staffs review consisted of land use compatibility and noise sensitivity. Based upon this
data staff informed the Butte County Planning Division that the project was tentatively found to
be consistent with the adopted Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan and would receive a formal
ALUC recommendation at its June 17, 1998 meeting.
�j
• Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission •
Land Use Compatibility
Staff reviewed the request pursuant to the currently adopted Chico` Municipal AirportEnvirons
Plan (CMAEP). A determination was _made that the project site is.located within the Chico
Municipal Airport Study Area (CIC -6) and the Horizontal Surface for that facility: However, the
site is located outside of all Compatible Land Use Zone (CLUZ) categories and areas depicted
on Figure CIC -13. The project site is also located outside of all defined safety areas (clear zone,
approach zone and overflight area) and both heavy and light aircraft traffic patterns depicted in
Figure CIC -2.
Noise Sensitivity
The project site is located outside of both the existing and projected 55 CNEL contours identified
in Figures CIC -2 and CIC -3 within the, CMAEP. "Although not an adopted document by the Butte,
County ALUC, the project is also located outside ,the existing and projected (2010) 55 .CNEL
contours identified within the 1995 FAR Part 150 Airport Noise Compatibility Program for the
Chico Municipal Airport. However, it should be noted that the above documents do,not address
single event noise levels overthe site.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission
find that the proposed. Butte County General Plan Amendment and Rezone A98-07 (Butte County
Planning Division GPA#98-04 - Faria) on APN 048-040-028 is consistent with the Chico
Municipal Airport Environs Plan subject to the following findings and recommended conditions in
attached Exhibit "A".
If the ALUC would like to take additional action on this project it would be limited to a
recommendation to the Butte County Planning Commission, that although the project is consistent
with the currently adopted Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan, the ALUC does have additional
concerns. This recommendation would only be advisory and would not require any overriding
findings to dismiss. T
Attached: A: Findings
B: Location Map a
• Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission •
2
r S.
+BUTTE COUNTY -AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION +
• Department of Development Services 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA 95965 • (916) 538-7601 FAX (916) 538-7785 •
EXHIBIT A
BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION CONSISTENCY FINDINGS FOR:
A98-07 (Butte County General Plan Amendment and Rezone GPA #98-04 - Faria�
on APN 048-040-028
The'following findings have been prepared at the direction of the ALUC and ' are for ,the
consideration of the County of ,Butte when making a,decision on the project.
r
Section 1: ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS
A. No environmental documentation was submitted -at the time of review. However, .it is not
foreseen that there will be any significant impacts at this time.
Section 2: PROJECT CONSISTENCY FINDINGS
A. The ALUC finds the project consistent with the Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan and
that the project is compatible with the viable, responsible operation of the Chico Municipal
Airport subject to the following recommended conditions.
Section 3: RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS
A. The property owner shall sign an avigation easement granting the right of continued use
of the Chico Municipal Airport in the airspace above the subject parcel and acknowledging
any and all existing or potential airport operational impacts.
B. The use of strobe lights or spot lights for advertising and/or other purposes should be
prohibited.
C. All project lighting should be directed within the project site and shielded to prevent
adverse impacts on adjacent properties and aircraft flight activities.
r t
D. 'Tethered balloons or other advertising materials which extend into the airspace above the
property should be limited to a maximum of 35 feet in height.measured from ground level.
Reviewed and Approved by:
Robert Hennigan,
Chairman Butte County Airport Land Use Commission
• Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission •
3
+10DUTTE, COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION.
• Department of Development Services • 7 County Center Drive Oroville CA 95965• (530) 538-7601 FAX (530) 538-7785 •
AGENDA ITEM F-2
MEMORANDUM
TO: Airport Land Use Commission r ,
FROM: ALUC Staff
DATE: June 9, 1998 'S
SUBJECT: Request for Information
Attached is a copy of the request for information frons .the'FAA regarding how to better. .,
influence landuse decisions around airports. Please -review this'request and be prepared to
provide input to staff at the June 17th ALUC meeting. +If time allows, please put.your
comments in writing. The deadline for submitting comments is June;22, 1998.
w
• Butte County a Airport Land Use Commission •
bTATE OF'CALJFORNIA-BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY PETE WILSON, Governor"
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
AERONAUTICS PROGRAM M.S. #40 -
1120 N STREET -ROOM 3300 ,
P.O. BOX 942874
SACRAMENTO, CA 94274-0001
(916) 654-4959
FAX (916) 653-9531
June 2, 1998
To: All Noise Control Officers - r
and Airport Land Use Commission Members
Subject:- Transmittal. of Notice Regarding, Compatible Land Use Planning Initiative
I For your information; attached is a copy of the notice published in the Federal Register of
May 21, 1998 in which the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) asks for comments on
• actions the FAA may take to better influence land use decisions around airports for. the purpose
of improving compatibility between airports ah-& communities., Please review the notice and,
forward any comments you believe appropriate.
Please note, any comments must-be received by June 22;1998.
Best regards,
Richard G. Dyer
Airport Environmental Specialist
Planning Division
Enclosure JUN 0 3 1998
• - Gal(fornla
�ravill®,
,.
27876 Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 98/Thursday. May 21, 1998/Proposed Rules
(a) corpo to an ice detection systemtn p) A person affected y this ' ective / telephone, (202) 267-3496: facsimile,
acco dance ith th nstructVn/(S
may tain co es of th docum is referr d (202) 267-5594: email,
Ml ubish' : -2 ice B leo. to rein up reques to Mits ishi He alan.trickey@faa.dot.gov.
2 Revion B, aced No emb6,In ustrles erica, c., 153 Dallas
nd T Instru entatio nc. DNo. P Away, ite 685 B-77, alias, Te ;or SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
MU2 005, d ed Septber 2/ ay exa ine the docum is at th AA, Background
to 2: Rosem nt icedobe Centra egion, flice of a Regio(p n num r(P/N) 71 HL1 Cou 1. Roo 1558, 6 E. 12th trees, Aircraft noise Is a serious problem for
A -app ved eq valent p numbed may Ka s City, issourl 1106-
0
106. communities around airports. Federal,
be subs tuted for he Rose ount P ued In ansas Miss rl, on. ay state and local governments have spent
0871C 1 called ut In Mi ubishi -2B SB 1 , 1998. several billion dollars for the acquisition
No. 7, Revis' n B, dat d Nove ker 7. Michae allagh of land, soundproofing, changes in
19 and Te Instru ntatlon airport operations and airspace, and
D cument o. MU2- 05, dat Septerr ber Man a r, Sm Airplane (rector te, Al aR P P p
1997. i Cert' cation S rvlce. processing of complaints. The airline
(b) In rporate pneu c de-ice [ oc. 98 3517 Fi 5-20 8; 8:4 ami industry has expended billions more to
monit ing syst in acc dance C the B LINO CODE 4910-1 acquire quieter aircraft that reduce noise
instr tions in estInst mentation, Inc. exposure levels. Although this
Doc men( N MU2-5 1. Rev. .', dated collective effort has resulted in
M 21. 199 , and M subishi -2 SB No. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION significant progress, additional
2 2, dated my 2, 1 7. % measures are needed to maintain
(c) Inc porate a rim -in- tion alecting Federal Aviation Administration current gains and prevent the
system d an a omatic a opilot / development of new noncompatible
disco ect syst in acc dance w h the 14 CFR Parts 91 and 150 land uses around airports.
instr ctlons i est Inst mentati n, Inc. rP
Dc mens N . MU2-1 1, Rev. , dated une (Docket No. 29231 The FAA has been actively engaged in
1 . 1997, T t Instru entation nc. measures to solve the problem of aircraft
ocumen o. MU 4001, R . C. dat d June Compatible Land Use Planning noise since the 1960's. Specifically, the
30, 1997 and Mi bishi M -2 SB .231. Initiative FAA has issued regulations phasing out
dated J y 2, 199 . noisier airplanes. The noisiest Stage 1
(d) corpora an engi a igniti unit AGENCY: Federal Aviation airplanes were phased out of
rept cement 1 accord ce with Administration (FAA), DOT. commercial operations in the United
I ructions ' Mitsu shi MU B SB N . ACTION: Request for comments. States b 1988. The current phaseout
_0 4/74-00 , dated tober 9. 991. Y P
(e) Inc porate a auto-ig tion (re- ght) SUMMARY• The FAA is seeking new ideas will eliminate large Stage 2 airplanes
• system accord ce wit a ins ctions-in regarding how t
from operations in the contiguous
Mitsu shi MU- SB No. 26B, R Ion B. he agency can better
date ctober , 1997. influence land use decisions around United States by the year airport
The
( Fabricat a placa with t follows/ airports. Noise contours around airports FAA provides grants to airport operators
w dh ass and 1 stall thi placard ithin tilt measures suce purchase of land
will continue to shrink with the willing to undertake noise abatement
/ th
lot's cle view: elimination of noisier Stage 2 airplanes �-�-
Prior t the firs ight of a day, negative by the year 2000. The FAA now seeks and soundproofing of residences.
torque using S) the and a opeUer/ to develop a process that will better Based on several. studies, the FAA
Feat
Valve eck mu be pe rf rmed influence long-term land use planning expects noise contours at most airports
acco dance w h the N mal Ch cklist and zoning around airports. This notice to continue to shrink for several years
Pr edures. into the 21st century due to the
Para aph (E) o this AD an be solicits suggestions about methods the elimination of noisier aircraft. After the
accompt hed by t e owner operato holding FAA can use to encourage and help completion of the Stage 2 phaseout by
at least private .lot cert' tate State and local governments achieve the year 2000, the FAA anticipates that
autho zed b s ction 43 of the ederal and maintain land use compatibility
Y these contours could begin to expand
Avi on Reg ations ( CFR 4 .7), an ust around airports. again at some airports primarily due to
be ntered i o the ai raft rec rds sho Ing DATES: Comments must be received on increases to operations. It is essential for
c ptianc with thf AD in cord a with or before June 22, 1998.
ection 4 .9 of the ederal viation local jurisdictions to plan ahead to
Regulati ns (14 C R 43.9) ADDRESSES: Comments should be maintain the land use compatibility
(h) S cial fill t pe s may issued n mailed In triplicate to: Federal Aviation already achieved near airports and to
actor ante wi sectio s 21.19 and 21. 9 Administration, Office of the Chief control land uses to prevent new noise -
of t Federa Avlatio Regul ons (14 FR Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket (AGC- sensitive development within an agreed
21 97 and 1.199) t operas the airy ne to 200), Docket No. 29231, 800 upon protection zone.
ovation here t requir ents of Is AD Independence Avenue, SW., The U.S. Constitution, gives
can be a omplis ed. Washington, DC 20591. Comments may individual States the authority over land
(I) aherna ' e meth of co Hance r also be sent electronicallyto the Rules
adjust ent of a comp ance ti a that use, though such authority is often
pr es an uivalen level of fety m be Docket by using the following Internet delegated to local governments. Some
ap 0 e b the M ger, Sm 1 Airpl a address: 9-nprm-cmts@faa.dot.gov. airports are operated by the state or
D ectorat . 1201 W nut, su a 900, nsas Comments must be marked Docket No. municipal governments that have the
City. Mi ours 64 6. The r quest s 1 be 29231. Comments may be examined in power to achieve appropriate land use
forwar d throw an app opriate AA the Rules Docket in Room 915G on controls through zoning and other
Malnt ance I pector, ho may dd weekdays between 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 authorities. But even when
corn encs an then sI'
to t Mana r, p.m., except on Federal holidays. governmental bodies are themselves
Sm I Alrpl a Direct rate.
ote 3: I ormatlo concer Ing the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: airport operators, the noise effects of
existence f approv d alter tive m hods of Alan Trickey, Policy and Regulatory their airports often occur in areas
complia ce with is AD, ' any, y be Division, AEE -300, Federal Aviation outside their jurisdictions. Land use
obtat from t Small lrplane Administration, 800 Independence decisions generally reflect the needs of
Direct rate. Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591: the community, which include but are
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 98/Thursday, May 21, 1998/Proposed Rules 27877
not limited to considerations of aviation by state and local authorities and to techn al cha es that ould co ect the
noise. discourage development of defi tion o 'tight -ft Ing gar nt." t
The FAA is charged with the noncompatible land uses around T propo ed chan es will c ify the
responsibility to maintain a safe and . airports. The FAA is particularly ints w ere ga ent mea remen
efficient national airspace system. The Interested in bold, innovative, and shoul a made
FAA fosters compatible land use creative options that could be DATE : Writte comme conce Ing
planning both to facilitate access to implemented quickly to discourage thi propos amend ent are ue no
airports commensurate with the development of noncompatible land I er than ugust 4. 998.
demands of air commerce and to abate uses, as well as long-term solutions. ADORE S: Com encs sh Id be
the aviation noise effects in the airport Comments that provide a factual basis maile to the O ce of Secret
vicinity. Even though the Federal for the suggestions are particularly Con mer Pro uct Saf Com Sion,
government lacks the authority to zone helpful. The more specific the W hington C.20 7, tele one:
land, the FAA may use its influence to suggestions for FAA action, the better. 1) 504- 00 or livere o the
encourage compatible land use in the Ultimately, any process should achieve Office of a Secr ary, ro 501, 30
vicinity of an airport. The agency exerts long-term cost avoidance for all levels of East -W st High ay, Be esda, ryland
this influence through airport government. 2081 . Comm nts sho d be s mitted
development grant agreements, The FAA will review information 11"If e cops and c tioned
environmental review requirements, from public comments and other eepwe ."Com ents m also b
grants for airport noise compatibility sources to identify methods that might led by lefacsi sle to ( 1) 504- 127
planning, and educational instruments assist State and local governments in or by all to sc-os@ sc.gov
on compatible land use planning. The achieving and maintaining land use FOR RTHER FORMA ON C Cr:
FAA has issued guidelines for land use compatibility around airports.Further M garet N ly, Pro t Man er,
compatibility around airports to assist action would depend on the nature and rectora for En neerin cienc
those responsible for determining land scope of the methods identified. Consu r Prod t Safe omm ion,
use. These guidelines are primarily Communications should identify the Wash gton, D . 2020 , teleph e
contained in 14 CFR Part 150 and notice docket number and be submitted (30 504 -OS 0, exte ion 23
related guidance. in triplicate using one of the media S PLEME ARY IN MA710
In January 1995, an FAA -sponsored specified in the ADDRESSES paragraph
Study Group on Compatible land Use, above. All communications will be filed A. Back ound
which was composed of community, in the docket. The docket is available for In 71, the ecreta of Co erce
airport, and aviation representatives, public inspection both before and after iss d a fl abili tandar for
produced a report with the closing date for receipt of comments. c dren's eepwe in siz 0 thro
recommendations for Federal initiatives The FAA will acknowledge receipt of , whit ecam effects in 197 .
to promote compatible land use a comment if the commenter includes a That st dard, I ued der Se on 4 of
planning and controls around airports. self-addressed, stamped postcard with the F1 mmabl ab Act (" A'j, 15
The group's recommendations included the comment. The postcard should be U. 1193 rescri es tests or
the following concepts: marked "Comments to Docket No. c ldren's eepw garm is and
• Provide direct Federal funding [29231]." When the comment is abrics s ended or use childre s
through the Airport Improvement received by the FAA, the postcard will sleepw ar. Th amm ility s dard
Program (AIP) to non -airport sponsors be dated, time stamped, and returned to for c Idren' sleepw ar in siz 0
who have land use planning the commenter. thr ugh 6 s codi d at 16 FR P
Jurisdiction; Issued in Washington, D.C. on May 15, 1 15.
• Encourage cooperative agreements 1998. In 19 3, resp ibility or
between airport sponsors and James D. Erickson, admi stratio and en rcemen of the
communities: Director of Environment and Energy. FF was t sferred the C uer
• Revise FAA regulations in Part 150 mP duct S e Co issio
or supporting guidelines to recognize [FR Doc. 98-13577 Filed 5-20-98; 8:45 am) provisi sof sec on 30(b of type
and publicize successful land use eluiNa cone asa�o-�a-+w Cons er Pro ct Safe Act. 1 U.S.C.
compatibility concepts, encourage more 207 ),In 1 4, the mm on issued
effective public participation and a mmabi y Stan rd for ildren'
encourage innovative land -use control CON ' MER P ODUC SAFE eepwe n sizes throu 14, to
techniques: CO ISSI
q becom ffectiv n 197 .The tes in
• Strengthen the linkage between Part CFR its 16 and 16 6 that s ndazd -subs ntially a Sam
150 noise compatibility programs and as se int stand d for c dren'
existing Federal programs that reinforce prop ed T nical C anges; sl epwear ' sizes throug X.
land use planning, such as Federal Sta dard fo the Fla mabillty t ffammab' ty sta and for ildre s
Housing Administration and C Idren' leepw r: Sizes Throu sleepw in Si s 7 thr gh 14
Department of Veterans Affairs policies X; Sta ard for a Flam ability coda d at 1 FR Par 1616.
not to accept properties in high -noise Child 's Slee wear: S as 7 Th ugh B th scan ards re ire th test
areas for mortgage insurance. 14 s cimen must se -extin ish w en
The FAA has implemented portions expose o a sm open- ame i itio
of these recommendations. These ideas A NCY: C sumer P oduct S ety sourc Self -ex ' guish g fab cs an
are presented here only to stimulate ommiss n. gar nts are ose t stop umi
thought for addition ideas. ACTION. ropose ethnic chang w n remo ed fro an Ign tion s urce.
Request for Comments sum Y: Th ommi son pro oses t
The FAA is solicitingcomments on a nd the mmabl Stan rds for The Commission voted to issue the proposed
changes 2-0. Commissioners Mary Call and Thomas
any concepts that might serve to ildren's leepwe in size 0 thro gh Moore voted in favor of issuing the proposed rule.
promote compatible land use planning 6X and 7 through 4 to m e seve I Chairman Ann Brown abstained.
t
+BUTT E COUNTY AIR I PORT LAND USE COMMISSION+
■ Department of Development Services ■ 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA 95965 ■ (530) 538-7601 FAX (530) 538-7785 ■ ,
REGULAR MEETING NOTICE OF THE COMMISSION
Location:
Date/Time
BUSINESS ITEMS
Butte County Administration. Building, Supervisors' ,Chambers , G�
25 County Center Drive, Oroville, California
June 17, 1998 - 9:00 a.m.
VVI
SUPPLEMENTAL
C�
AGENDA . �.
Butte County Specific Plan Amendment #97-01 (Kammerer) and Butte County*.
General Plan Amendment 97-02 on APN 047-250-141: This proposal is an
amendment to the North Chico Specific Plan changing the land use designation on
-approminately 187 acres located on the west side of Hicks Land, approximately 1 mile -.
south of Keefer Road, in the north Chico Area.
This item wasfound inconsistent by the Airport Land Use Commission on November
11, 1997 and is on this,agenda as a discussion item at the request of Chairman
Hennigan. r
.• (This request was received June 11, 1998 and could not have been included in the
regular agenda which had already been posted.)
Any disabled person needing special accommodation to participate in the Commission proceeding is requested to contact
Paula Leasure at (530) 538-760.1 prior to the meeting and arrangements will be made to accommodate you.
"Any person may address the Commission during the "Business From the Floor" segment of the Agenda.
'Copies of the.Agenda documents relative to an Agenda item may be obtained from the Clerk of the Commission at cost of
$.08 per page.
RULES APPLYING TO PUBLIC COMMENTS
E
1. Members of the public wishing to address the Commission upon any subject within the jurisdiction of Butte
ALUC may do so upon receiving recognition from the Chairman at the appropriate -time.
2. Comment on items not on the agenda should be made at the time indicated for "Public Comment" on the.
agenda. The Commission may not act on any matter so raised and will have to put off action until a
meeting at which the matter can be put on the agenda.
3. v Comment on specific agenda items may be made during the discussion of that agenda item, upon
recognition by the Chair. ,
4. After receiving recognition, please stand and state your name and address before making your
presentation, so that the Clerk may take down this information.
5. All documents to be presented to the Commission shall be given to the Clerk of the Commission (original
and seven copies) prior to Call of Order of meeting. Such documents shall be distributed to the
Commission and made available for public inspection.
Posting Locations: Bunte County Administration Building, front entrance and glass case
■ Butte County ■ Airport Land Use Commission 0
+BUTT E COUNTY AIRPORT T LAND USE COMMISSION +
• Department of Development Services • 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA 95965 • (916) 538-7601 FAX (916) 538-7785 •
y
1 MEMORANDUM
TO: Department of Development.Services, Planning Division
FROM: ALUC Staff
DATE: 6-8-98
SUBJECT: Project Review and Preliminary Findings for GPA97-02/SP97-01 Planning
Division Staff Alternative
The proposal being evaluated is a Department of Development Services, Planning Division
alternative to the applicant's proposal. Under this alternative, the North Chico Specific Plan
would be modified to change the land. use designation on 126 acres from SR -1, SR-1/OS to SR-
1/PD. The change creates a Planned Development (PD) combining zone that will allow lot sizes
smaller than that allowed by the base zone, provided the overall density of the base zone is not
exceeded. The result will be a potential of 126 dwellings on 126 acres with the retention of at
least 25% open space within the SRA/PD lands.
This proposal is being compared for consistency with the. Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan
(CMAEP).
• Comments
1) With the exception of the northwest and southwest corners of the property, the entire site
is located within the Light Aircraft'Traffic Pattern shown in Figure CIC -2 of the CMAEP.
In addition, the northeast corner of the site is located within_ the Tanker Practice Drop
Pattern depicted on the Flight Tracks map within the North Chico Specific Plan. The
remainder of the site is located within the Light.Aircraft Pattern shown on the same map.
2) The northeast portion of the 126 acres is located within the future 55 CNEL Contour shown
in Figure CIC -3.
3) The project site is located within the Horizontal Surface depicted on Figure CIC -5.
4) Zoning for the site, depicted, on Figure CIC -7 of the.CMAEP, is A-2 (General). A-2
specifies a wide variety of non-residential uses including most conceivable industrial and
commercial uses. Any use, however is subject to securing a permit. A=2 (Ltd.), zone is a
derivation of the A-2 (General) zone and provides for single-family and multiple _family
residences. A-2 (Ltd.) Also permits public or quasi -public uses. Generally density
restrictions in an A-2 zone will depend on water and sewage disposal characteristics of the
site. ' One, dwelling unit per acre is allowed if individual wells and septic tanks are
available, whereas four dwelling units per acre are allowed if community water and septic
Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission •
tanks are available. A minimum iot size of 6,500 square feet is possible if both water and
sewer systems are available.
5) The site is shown as Agriculture on the proposed Land Use Plan for the City of Chico,
Figure CIC -9.
6) The project site is located within Compatible Land Use Zone,(CLUZ) Category (V), CNEL
55-60 Out of Corridor, on Figure CIC -13.
7) According to Exhibit 8-1 "Compatible Land Use Zone (CLUZ) Criteria;" mobile home parks
are required to achieve indoor-CNEL 45 -by Butte County/Chico City Ordinance as a
recommended action.
8) Section 8.3.6 of the CMAEP "states that CLUZ Area V "... requires the least restriction on
development and, for the most part, carries a suitable zoning classification at the present
time. The exception would.be the parcels included in the so-called Hays Re -Zone area.
The one parcel in this area which' is' included in the Interim Zone area should be
constrained to an SR -1 zoning to limit the density of development. The remaining parcels
could carry the zoning classification SR as the least restrictive category.
` Recommendations in Section 8.3.6 of the CMAEP include:
(1) A zoning classification of SR -1 should be applied to the single parcel east of CIC
contained within the Interim Zone boundary. Note - This item does not apply.to the
Stephens' property. ,
(2) The least restrictive zoning for the remaining' parcels should be SR.
(3) The parcels with segments intruding into the flight corridor should not be developed
in these segments. Note - This item does not apply to the Stephens' property.
(4) Noise control construction procedures should be distributed for. applications in this
area at the time of the building plan check:
Analysis' aI
The Planning Division's Alternative appears to be consistent,with the CMAEP in that the overall
density of development will not exceed an average of one unit per acre. The 25% open space
requirement and development flexibility associated with the PD will result in a clustered
development.. Such a development, pattern will provide more unobstructed space adjacent to the
residential development which could be.utilized in an emergency landing situation. Because of
the location of aircraft traffic patterns, 55 CNEL contours, and general proximity to the airport,
it is recommended that the residential development cluster be located within the southern half of
the 126 acre area.
• Butte County • Airport.Land Use Commission •
ti
Section 1: ENVIRONMENTAL' FINDINGS
A. No environmental documentation was submitted in conjunction with this review request.
Section 2: PROJECT CONSISTENCY FINDINGS
A. The proposal is consistent with the Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan and compatible
with the viable, responsible operation of the . Chico Municipal Airport subject to the
following recommended conditions.
Section 3: RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS
A. Residential development associated with the project should be clustered and located
within the southern portion of the site.
B. The property owner shall sign an avigatiori easement granting the right of continued use
of the Chico Municipal Airport in the airspace above the subject parcel and acknowledging.
any and all existing or potential airport operational, impacts.
C. An advisory document shall be used to notify prospective buyers or tenants near the
airport that they may be subject to overflight impacts associated with fixed -wing or'rotary
. aircraft.
D. All dwelling units shall incorporate appropriate noise insulation features to ensure that a
maximum interior noise level of 45 dB is achieved.
E. All project lighting should be directed within the project site and shielded to prevent
adverse impacts on adjacent properties and aircraft flight activities.
Reviewed by: v
Laura Webster, ALUC Staff
• Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission •
3
+BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE, COMMISSION +
• Department of Development Services • 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA 95965 (916) Si8-7601 FAX (916) 538-7785 •
MEMORANDUM
TO: Honorable Chair and Airport Land Use Commission
FROM: ALUC Staff
SUBJECT: -Monthly Status Report
DATE: For the Meeting of June 17, 1998
1. Status of Caltrans Grant for CLUP Preparation - On May 19, 1998, the Butte County ALUC
received written notification from the Department of Transportation Aeronautics Program,
that the California Transportation Commission (CTC) approved -the allocation of 'an
additional $40,000 to the Butte County ALUC from the California AidtoAirports Program.
This supplemental allocation, togetherwith,the earlier allocation of $41,000 is intended to
assist with funding updates to the Comprehensive Airport Land Use Plans (CLUP) for all
four public use airports within'the County. ,
V
The combined allocation of $81,000 is considered by the CTC, and Caltrans to be up to
• 90% of the total project cost. Therefore, the match for the total grant amount is 10% of the
total project cost or $9,000. This can be a cash match, an "in kind":match, or some
combination of both. Although the precise project cost will not be known until proposals
are submitted by qualified consultants and a firm isselected, the grant funding that has
been approved is expected to be adequate for a majority of the total project.
According to previous information provided by the Department of Transportation, the
allocated funds are not released as a lump sum. They are released as a reimbursement
for monies which the ALUC pays to the consultant, less the 10% county match and a 10% .
holdback until the project is completed..•.Since the funds can only be released in the form
of a reimbursement, it is likely that the '98-99 annual budget for the Butte County ALUC
will need to be modified in some fashion to'ensure that'adequate funding is available for
up front project costs.
In order to complete the grant agreement process, an authorized official of..the sponsor
identified by minute order or resolution must sign and return an executed copy of the
Public Entity's Acceptance of the Allocation for Additional Funds on oi� before June 18,
1998. The necessary resolution will be presented to the Board of Supervisors for approval
at their regular meeting on June 9, 1998 to ensure that acceptance of the funds is
completed -well in advance of the deadline.
a • Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission • F
L
2. Status of the RFP for CLUP Preparation - At the time of this report (June 1, 1998), ALUC
staff has not received written comments from the Department of Transportation
Aeronautics Program regarding that agency's suggestions for changes to the Draft RFP
for preparation of the CLUP for all public use airports within the County. The Draft RFP
was originally submitted to Caltrans for their authorization on May 6, 1998. Prior to and
following ALUC's regular meeting on May 20th, staff has kept in close contact with Christa
Engle of the Aeronautics Program to help expedite completion of that agency's response.
The last estimate from Caltrans for the submittal of formal comments was June 5, 1998.
Following the receipt of Caltrans' comments on both the Draft RFP and Airport Layout
Plans for the Chico Municipal Airport, Paradise Skypark Airport and Ranchaero Airport,
staff will finalize the RFP and distribute it to a list of qualified consultants. The tentative
due date for proposal submittal is one month following the release of the RFP.
3. Airport ,Land Use Workshop (Visalia - June 25, 1998) - An Airport Land Use Workshop
sponsored by the California Pilots Association will be conducted on Friday, June 25, 1998,
between 9:00 A.M. AND 3:00 P.M. in Visalia (see attached flyer). Presentations will be
given by experienced land use planners and specialists from the Caltrans Aeronautics
Program. The focus of the workshop will be the practical. creation and implementation of
Comprehensive Airport Land Use Plans. This is an excellent educational opportunity for
all ALUC members, particularly in light of our upcoming CLUP preparation process. There
is also a possibility that the Northern California Pilots Association may be able to provide
• air transportation to the event. Advanced registration is required for the workshop.
Interested parties should contact Chairman Hennigan at (work) 891-1862 or by (fax) 898-
9341. This workshop notice has also been distributed to appropriate officials and agency
staffs at Butte County, all cities within the county, and the Chico Airport Commission.
4. North Chico Specific Plan Signage. The North Chico Specific Plan requires the installation.
of 8 signs that are 5' by 2'/z' in size. The Butte County Public Works Department does not
prepare signs of the size required. However they do prepare signs that are 36" x 45" in
size. Planning staff is checking with County Counsel to see if an amendment to the
Specific Plan is required in order to amend the sign size. The signs cost $143.50 each
plus $100.00 per installation if all are made and installed at the same time. The total cost
of preparing and installing the signs is $1,964. The Development Services Department is
making arrangements for Public Works Department to install signs in the near future. The
signs are to read:
. AIRCRAFT OVERFLIGHT ZONE
This area is subject to noise impacts and safety hazards
related to the operations of the Chico Municipal Airport
and from aircraft overflight.
5. ALUC Staff Time Accounting - Pay periods 09 and 10 (4/18/98 through 5/15/98). Total
hours dedicated to work on ALUC.issues by individual staff members.
• Butte County • Airport Land Use Commission •
•
•
�
r
... 1
. It
•
•4
r,
•
•
Tom Parilo 4.0 hours _-
Paula Leasure 1.3.25 hours
Laura Webster 37.5: hours (4/8/98 through 5/15/98)
Paula Atterberry 18.0 hours
6. Ranchaero Airport - The Moorehead's have signed the `agreement with the
Ranchaero Airport. However, Gary Griggs, Ranchaero Airport owner has not yet ,
signed. Mr. Griggs, wanted --to be.assured by Cal -Trans that the restriction to flight
operations would be lifted.. Subsequently, Jim Michaels, required detailed drawings
of the encroachment .area prior to lifting restrictions. Mr. Griggs is having
professional drawings prepared: After, submission to Cal -Trans it is anticipated that r
the. restrictions will be lifted.
7. Preparation of Draft County Ordinance _ALUC Staff is in the process of making
revisions to the County Ordinance as it applies to airports in Butte County. During
a detailed review of the current ordinance, staff determined that there were several
questions that needed to be answered. Staff also needs ,to meet ✓with county
' counsel. The draft ordinance may be ready for the'Commission to review at the
„ July meeting. .
8. Chico Masfer'Plan Technical Advisory Committee - Craig Sanders has. been
appointed as the Butte County Department of. Development Services - Planning
• Division representative.
9. Cell Tower Ordinance'- Preparation'of the draft ordinance is underway by the f
Planning Division. It is, expected that'the draft ordinance will be scheduled for
r hearing before the Planning Commission sometime this'summer. ALUC'will have,
the opportunity to reyiewyand comment on the draft ordinance.
10. Follow-up on Letters to City of Chico and the Federal Aviation Administration'- At
the January 21•; 1998 meeting the Commission directed staff to send a letter to the
City of Chico requestingthem not to represent the FAR PART 150 Noise Study a's '
an ALUC adopted document and to send a separate letter notifying the, FAA also
' that the document was not,adopted by ALUC. Staff prepared the letters as directed
f and did not request a response. '
r w .
• suite County • Airport Land Use Co'm'mission-
3.
ommission. • '
3 ,
1d _
May -22-98 02:1.1P z
P.01
STATE OF CALIFORNIA -BUSINESS. TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY PETE WILSON. Governu
EPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
RONAUTICS PROGRAM M.S. #40
1120 N STREET - ROOM 3300
P.O. BOX 942874 May 19, 19.9.8
SACRAMENTO, CA 94274-0001
(916) 6544959
FAX (916) 653-9531
r
- Mr. John Franklin, Chairman
Airport Land Use Commission. '
Butte County ALUC -
7 County Center Drive
Oroville, CA 95965
Dear Mr. Franklin: ,
We are pleased to inform you that the California Transportation Commission on
May 7, 1998, acting on the Department's recommendation, allocated an'additional $40,000
of California Aid to Airports Program (CAAP) funds for project CAAP #But -VAR -96-1.
The total amount available,for this project is $81,000. The scope of work is to update the .
Comprehensive Land Use Plans (CLUPs) for. Butte County's four`public-use airports.
The following steps must be followed to complete the grant agreement process and
ensure timely completion of the,project. ti
1. Authorized official of the sponsor shall sign and return to the Department within
30 days from date of this letter the enclosed "Acceptancewof Allocation of
Additional Funds" LL
2. Complete and sign the grant agreement (initiated by the Department) and return
it with 'a resolution or minute order authorizing an individual by name and title to
execute the grant agreement.
' •3. The project scope of work shall be in accordance with the work plan to update
the CLUPs for Butte County's four public -use airports. The work plan is to be - .
approved by the Aeronautics Program:..
4. Adoption of the CLUPs by the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission
(ALUC) shall constitute completion of the work. '
5: The Department will return the fully executed grant agreement with
• authorization to award the contract.
May -22-98 02:11P P.02
Mr. John Franklin, Chairman
May 19, 1998
Page 2
Please note that noncompliance with these requirements could. result in the
allocation for your project either being withdrawn or being reprogrammed to a future
year.
If you should have -any questions about the allocation and the grant agreement
process, or anticipate problems with the timely completion of this project, please call me
immediately at (916) 322-9947.
Sincerely,
MICHAEL J. FARMER, Chief
Office of Programs and
Support Services
Enclosure
c: Herman Bliss - FAA
John Pfeifer FAA
TO: ALUC Commissioners
FROM: Paula Atterberry, Office Assistant III
SUBJECT: List of Attachments
DATE: June 17, 1998
1. Airport Land Use Workshop in Visalia, on June 25, 1998.
2. Employee Recognition letter for Steve Lucas, dated May 14, 1998.
3. City of Chico Airport Commission Meeting
0
-From LANDLOOK INVESTIGATIONS PHONE No. 916 898 9341 Jun,01 1998 10:43AM 001
- Airport and Use Workshop
" Airport Land Vse Commisginaers, Planning Division
ALUC staff, 'JUN 0 1 1998
" City Planners,
" ('nnnty Planners, - Oroville, California
Elected Officials,
* Airport Managers .
* YAW developers `
* Anyone interested in knowing about airport -land ince plantllug
Presentations will be given by e:pericaccd land use planners and speciallsts.fronn the
Caltrans Aeronautics Program. The focus will be ou practical facet of how. to create alld
implement an Airport CotaprebenAve Laud Use Plan.
Topies.will Include: —
* Why have anALUC' `
* ALUC Member Composition
Legal status, authority and duties of an ALUC,
" Planners' tools aa.d resources such as the Airport Lard Use Planning Handbook,
* Conflicts of members' interests, dutles and loyalties,
* Litigation by or against an ALUC,
* ALUC pitfalls: Yes, No, Maybe
* Politics of Land use Planning `
Workshop Locations: Tulare'County Department of Education, Elderwood Room,
Doe Avenue complex, 7000 Doe Avenue, Visalia, CA 93291 F
When: June 2S, 1998, 9:00 AM sharp end 3:00 PM ,
Advance registration is required. A registration fee of $IO will be collected at the door. -
.includes lunch
To register for the Workshop: Send this form by FAX to Andrew Remus, (209)
730-2604, or mail to Tulare County ALUC, 5961 South Mooney Blvd., Visalin,'CA 93277.
Name M Telephocie FAX Number
County a Position orntitle E-mail address
For more intorutation about the workshop call California Pilots Association at 1-800-244-
1949, op FAX (650) 366-1915: The Workshop will be facilitated by the Callibrnia Pilots
Association.The Caltrans Aeronautic3Trogram will be a participating agency along with
legal counsel and experienced city and county planners.
.i
ul
To Hanford
0 , 0.25 0.5 ' 0.75 1 Mles
Eldww*w EkdId
Tule Co. Omm Id"lon,
7M 069 AVG.'
Visalia, CA
Pwidng
Area
am AVIA.
s
Visalia .
Im
+BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND, USE COMMISSION +
• Department of Development Services 9 7 County Center Drive, Oroville, CA 95965 • (530) 538.7601 FAX (530) 538-7785 •
,
May 14, 1998
Steve Lucas, Associate Planner
Department of Development Services
7. County Center Drive „
Oroville,. CA 95965
Re: Employee Recognition
Dear Steve:
On behalf of the Airport Land Use Commission, I would like to formally recognize your efforts. with
regards to the operation of the Airport Land Use Commission.
Over the last three years, your assistance and dedication to solving problems associated with various
airports within Butte County has created an awareness of encroachment problems and the problems
encountered due, to the lack of a current Comprehensive:Airport Land Use Plan. Your energy and
dedication to the preservation of airports within Butte County.has been an asset to the Commission.
On behalf of the Commission I ;give you our sincere appreciation for your years of service.
Since ly
John Fran In, Chairman
Airport Land Use Commission
cc: 'Airport Land Use Commissioners,'
Personnel- File. ,
planning Division
JUN 0 3 1990
NOTICE OF ADJOURNMENT OF -MEETING
AIRPORT COMMISSION -
Notice is hereby given that the regular adjourned meeting of
the.Airport Commission of the City of Chico has been duly
and regularly adjourned from Thursday, May 28, 1998, at the
hour of 8:55 p.m. to Tuesday, June 9, 1998, at the hour of
4:00 p.m., and said adjourned meeting will be held .at the
Chico Municipal Center, 421 Main Street, Chico, California,��
in Conference Room No. 1. The Commission will then adjourn
to Tuesday, June 30, 1998, at the hour of 3:30 p.m., and
said adjourned meeting will be.held at the Chico Municipal.
Center, 421 Main Street, Chico, California, in Conference
Room No. 1. :.
Dated: May 29, 1998 ,
Thomas J. Lando
City Manager/Airport Manager
Distribution- A/C Industrial, Nick Buck
Aero Union Corp., Vic Alvistur
Commission - 5 Allan, Ella
News Media - 11 Aviation Committee, Sandy McLean
CM/RM/AA-Airport - 3 Baldridge, Brian
City Clerk and Council.. 3 Beachfront Deli, Pam Wilson
City Attorney - 1 Butte County Admin., John Blacklock
ACA - 1 Butte County Dev. Svcs, Tom Parilo
DPW/ADPW-E/ADPW-0&M - 3 Butte County Supervisor Dolan
CDD/P1.Dir./CDA - 3 Butte County Supervisor Houx
MA -ED CDF Air Attack Base
AS -ACM Chico 'Chamber of Commerce, CEO
Chief of Police - 1 FAA Control Tower, Martin Clark
Finance Director - 1 Fleetwood Motor Homes
Fire Chief/Station„#3 -.2
Fortress -Independence;, -Karl Hall
Post Hennigan, Bob & Barbara
File Herfi,Aircraft, Retta Herfi
League of.Wmn Voters,, Catherine Monceau
Merit Medi-Trans,`Inc., Stan•Gungl
Paradise Town•Manager, Chuck Rough
Schooler Flying Co., Harold Schooler
Team Chico, Bob Linscheid.