California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook

4D Overflight Compatibility Summary 4-15 4E Average Intensities for Nonresidential Uses 4-19 4F Safety Compatibility Summary 4-32 4G Airspace Protection Compatibility Summary 4-40 5A General Plan Consistency Checklist 5-4 5B Possible Airport Combining Zone Components 5-9 California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook v I N T R O D U C T I O N I N T R O D U C T I O N Introduction Introduction to the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook i-1 ENABLING LEGISLATION The purpose of the California State Aeronautics Act (SSA) pursuant to Public Utilities Code (PUC), Section 21001 et seq., “is to protect the public interest in aeronautics and aeronautical progress.” The California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics, administers much of this statute. The purpose of the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook (Handbook) is to provide guidance for conducting airport land use compatibility planning as required by Article 3.5, Airport Land Use Commissions, PUC Sections 21670 – 21679.5. Article 3.5 outlines the statutory requirements for Airport Land Use Commissions (ALUCs) including the preparation of an Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP). Article 3.5 mandates that the Division of Aeronautics create a Handbook that contains the identification of essential elements for the preparation of an Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (PUC Sections 21674.5 and 21674.7). This Handbook is intended to (1) provide information to ALUCs, their staffs, airport proprietors, cities, counties, consultants, and the public, (2) to identify the requirements and procedures for preparing effective compatibility planning documents, and (3) define exemptions where applicable. i-2 APPLICABILITY This Handbook applies to ALUCs established under the SAA, who are charged with providing for compatible land use planning in the vicinity of each existing and new public use airport within their jurisdiction. Most notably, it provides guidance for the preparation, adoption, and amendment of an ALUCP. Several PUC sections identify the Handbook as a resource for airport land use compatibility planning, including Sections 21674.5 and 21674.7. i-2.1 Scope of the Handbook Update This volume represents the fourth edition of the Handbook. While this Handbook will present some additional information on the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and present new information on the topic of Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen), the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook vii INTRODUCTION TO AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY PLANNING primary purpose of this edition is to update and clarify concepts and processes that were described in the 2002 Handbook. Some of the more general discussions have been condensed or removed in order to prevent confusion about what must be done and what might be done. Throughout the text, anytime the term “shall” is used it indicates that there is a statutory requirement to be followed and a legal code reference will be given. The term “may” indicates that the action is statutorily permitted but not required. And lastly, the terms “should” or “could” indicate that the action is simply a best practice recommendation. Any reference to the “Department” means the Department of Transportation, or Caltrans, unless otherwise stated. The “Division” shall mean the Division of Aeronautics. The 2011 Handbook provides guidance for meeting the baseline safety and compatibility requirements; however, ALUCs may choose to be more restrictive than the State’s guidance when their local conditions warrant doing so. With respect to how land is used and regulated by local governments, the Division does not have the authority to adopt land use development standards. Conversely, ALUCs are statutorily permitted (i.e. they have the option and authority) to include building standards, height restrictions and land uses in their Airport Land Use Compatibility Plans (PUC Section 21675(a)). When an ALUC chooses to establish development standards in an ALUCP to prevent airport noise and safety hazards, they are indirectly setting development standards for local government because local government general and specific plans (and therefore their implementing standards) must be consistent with the ALUCP (Section 21670.1(c)(2)(D) and Government Code Section 65302.3(a)), unless the conclusion of the overrule process allows otherwise. It is not the intent of the preparers of this edition to fully replicate the extensive research that was performed in support of the previous Handbook editions. The intent was to analyze and determine if the data and conclusions that were reached in the 2002 Handbook are still valid today. As discussed in Appendix E, recent accident data does not support changes to the safety zones (presented in Chapter 3). Similarly, while tools for estimating and monitoring aircraft noise continue to improve, the basic compatibility standards for aircraft noise have not changed at the federal or state level. i-2.2 Handbook Organization The Handbook is organized to assist a variety of participants with the airport land use compatibility planning process. The Handbook is composed of an Introduction and six chapters that follow a logical progression. The Introduction gives the statutory authority, purpose and applicability of the Handbook and presents the basic concepts behind airport land use compatibility planning. Chapter 1 describes the ALUC formation options, the basic functions of an ALUC, and an overview of the airport land use compatibility planning process. Chapter 2 describes the ALUCP, its contents, and its relationship with other planning documents. The Introduction, Chapter 1 and Chapter 2 provide the guiding principles for the remainder of the Handbook. The information in Chapters 3 through 6, and the appendices, provide ALUC staff and consultants with “how to” advice for preparing and using an ALUCP and for other related ALUC duties. Chapter 3 de scribes the development of compatibility planning policies while Chapter 4 addresses the development of compatibility criteria. Chapter 5 explains the role of local agencies (cities and counties) in the implementation phase of compatibility planning and California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook viii INTRODUCTION TO AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY PLANNING their responsibilities in the airport land use planning process. Chapter 6 discusses the ALUC’s role in reviewing local actions. The appendices contain technical information, including some of the information that was in the main body of the 2002 Handbook. They also include check lists and sample implementation documents (Appendix H, I and J) to assist the ALUC as they conduct airport compatibility planning. i-2.3 Transition Between the 2002 and 2011 Handbooks The transition between a new edition of the Handbook is understandably a concern for those ALUCs who are in the process of updating their ALUCPs. The 2011 Handbook update supersedes the 2002 Handbook. For an ALUCP update that is in process, but not yet adopted, the ALUC will need to consider how far along they are in the planning process, how expansive the update is, and to what extent the revisions and additions in the 2011 Handbook apply to a particular airport. The publication of the 2011 Handbook does not trigger the need to update a previously adopted ALUCP. However, ALUCs are well served to consider the adequacy of their adopted ALUCPs with regards to: statutory changes since the last ALUCP update, changes in current or forecasted operations at the airport(s) covered by the ALUCP, and changes in development patterns or land use plans in the vicinity of the airport(s) covered by the ALUCP. If, as a r esult of legislative action, there is a conflict between the Handbook and the State Aeronautics Act, or any other California statute, the adopted statue shall govern. The Divisions legal approach to interpreting regulations and the PUC is prescriptive, rather than permissive. When a p rescriptive statute is silent and does not address an issue or subject, its language is mandatory and limited to what is explicitly stated in the statute. i-3 BACKGROUND A brief description of aviation in California today will help the reader to understand the context in which airport land use compatibility planning exists and the importance of preserving airport facilities. i-3.1 Airports in California California has a diverse variety of airport types, ranging from large hub commercial airports to small, privately owned airstrips. Additionally, California supports a large number of facilities in a wide range of categories. Although commercial service airports handle most of the public’s air travel needs, the most common type of airport in California is the general aviation airport. General aviation airports offer a wide variety of services, ranging from flight instruction and recreation, to air cargo, emergency medical transportation, law enforcement, and firefighting operations. Each ALUCP must be customized to reflect the individual conditions of each airport. California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook ix INTRODUCTION TO AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY PLANNING i-3.2 Economic Importance of Airports in California Aviation is a vital link in the local, national, and global transportation system. Air cargo, consisting mainly of high-value, time-sensitive documents and goods, plays a significant role in the vitality of the state’s economy. In today’s international and technology-oriented economy, businesses use the speed and reliability of air service to achieve operating efficiency. California’s airports are critical for providing services such as business travel, tourism, emergency response, fire suppression, and law enforcement. Airports, airlines, and businesses that support airports provide direct and indirect jobs and income throughout the State. The vital role that airports play in economic development and as a means of passenger and cargo transportation cannot be understated. In 2009, 163.9 m illion passengers (enplaned and deplaned) traveled through California’s commercial service airports; making up 11.6 percent of the national enplanement total. Furthermore, 3.5 million tons of air cargo moved through 24 of California’s commercial and general aviation airports in 2009. i-3.3 Reciprocal Impacts: Airports and the Surrounding Community It is important to understand the ways in which an airport interacts with the land uses around it. Despite the mutually beneficial economic relationship that airports can have with the communities around them, the reality is that airports also create certain unwanted impacts. Airports can create impacts such as noise, vibration, odors, and risk of accidents. Likewise many land uses can cause direct or indirect impacts on the way airports grow and the safety of their operations. Development around an airport, particularly in the approach and departure paths, can create obstructions in the airspace traversed by an approaching or departing aircraft. Additionally, certain land uses have the potential to attract wildlife or to create hazards to aircraft such as a distracting glint or glare, smoke, steam, or invisible heat plumes. i-4 THE GOAL OF AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY Airport land use compatibility is the reconciliation of how land development and airports function together. The concept of compatibility has been defined as: “Airport compatible land uses are defined as those uses that can coexist with a nearby airport without either constraining the safe and efficient operation of the airport or exposing people living or working nearby to unacceptable levels of noise or (safety) hazards. Compatibility concerns include any airport impact that adversely affects the livability of surrounding communities, as well as any community characteristic that can adversely affect the viability of an airport (PAS 2010, p. 39)”. Incompatible development near an airport can lead to a p olitically contentious relationship between an airport and the communities around it, resulting in complaints and demands for restrictions on airport operations, ultimately threatening the airport’s ability to operate efficiently and serve its function in the local economy. California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook x INTRODUCTION TO AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY PLANNING i-5 BASIC ELEMENTS OF AIRPORT - LAND USE COMPATIBILITY i-5.1 Compatibility Planning Goals The desired outcome or result of airport land use compatibility planning is to “minimize the public’s exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards” while providing for the “orderly expansion of airports” (Section 21670 ( a)(2)). This planning effort is applied to “the area surrounding these airports” (Section 21670 (a)). i-5.2 Noise and Overflight Noise is sometimes perceived to be the most significant concern generated by aircraft operations, and it can be audible for miles from an airport. The challenge of determining appropriate land use compatibility policies regarding aircraft noise is that not everyone responds to noise the same way. A sound that is an annoyance to one person may be barely perceived by another. Furthermore, one community may deem a l and use acceptable within a certain noise level, while another does not (e.g. urban environments may have less restrictive residential noise standards than suburban or rural ones). With regard to noise and overflight, the goal of airport compatibility planning is to reduce annoyance and to minimize the number of people exposed to excessive levels of aircraft noise. i-5.3 Safety and Airspace Protection The concept of safety is more difficult to define than the concept of noise. Safety issues are considered for both those living and working near an airport as well as those using the airport. The issue of safety compatibility is one of evaluating “risk”, and determining the locations around an airport that are at the greatest risk of experiencing an aircraft accident. Research was performed during the preparation of this Handbook update to identify any potential changes in aircraft accident patterns. Nothing substantial has changed with respect to where the highest number of aircraft accidents are occurring. Typically accidents occur along the extended runway centerline. Proper safety and airspace protection minimizes the number of people on and off of the airport that are exposed to the risks associated with potential aircraft accidents and avoids flight hazards that interfere with aircraft navigation. California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook xi C H A P T E R 1 A I R P O R T L A N D U s E C O m m I s s I O N s C H A P T E R 1 Chapter 1 Airport Land Use Commissions 1.1 PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY OF AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSIONS The purpose of an Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) is to conduct airport land use compatibility planning. ALUCs 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. The statutes governing ALUCs are set forth in Division 9, Part 1, Chapter 4, Article 3.5, Sections 21670 – 21679.5 of the California Public Utilities Code (PUC). The statutorily defined responsibilities of ALUCs have not changed since publication of the January 2002 edition of the Caltrans Handbook An ALUC has the following powers and duties, per PUC Section 21674:  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.  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.  To prepare and adopt an airport land use compatibility plan pursuant to Section 21675.  To review the plans, regulations, and other actions of local agencies and airport operators pursuant to Section 21676.  The powers of the commission shall in no w ay be construed to give the commission jurisdiction over the operation of any airport.  In order to carry out its responsibilities, the commission may adopt rules and regulations consistent with this article. This chapter focuses on: • The purpose of ALUCs • ALUC formation choices • ALUC compatibility planning process • Statutory requirements and options • Intergovernmental roles California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook 1-1 1 FORMATION AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSIONS 1.2 ALUC FORMATION CHOICES The state law governing creation of airport land use commissions applies to every county in California having an airport “operated for the benefit of the general public” (PUC Section 21670(b)). Each county subject to Article 3.5 of the State Aeronautics Act (SAA) must choose the means by which they will accomplish proper airport land use compatibility planning. This section does not apply to the City and County of San Francisco because it does not have a public use airport. Thus, there are 57 counties in California that fall into one of the following six types of ALUCs: an ALUC, an Exempt County, a Designated Body, a Designated Agency, an Exception County, and an Intercounty ALUC. The six types and their statutory authorization are shown in Table 1A below. Table 1A: ALUC FORMATION CHOICES BY STATUTE DESCRIPTION PUC SECTION ALUC 21670(b) Self-declared Exempt 21670(b) Designated Body 21670.1(a) Designated Agency 21670.1(c) Statutory Exceptions Los Angeles County 21670.2 San Diego County 21670.3 Kern County 21670.1(d) Santa Cruz County 21670.1(e) Intercounty ALUC 21670.4 1.2.1 ALUC The basic procedure established by Article 3.5 of the SAA is the creation of a single-purpose (or stand- alone) ALUC comprised of seven members. The county board of supervisors, a city selection committee, and a public airports selection committee each select two members, with the seventh commissioner appointed by the other six commissioners to represent the general public (PUC Section 21670(b)). The selection process is described in Section 1.4.1, below. While the ALUC uses county staff, the commission’s autonomous decision-making authority is separate from other actions of the County and the board of supervisors. The terms and duties of the commissioners are further discussed in Section 1.4.2. 1.2.2 Self-Declared Exemption The PUC contains provisions for a self-declared exemption from the SAA (PUC Section 21670 (b)). A county declaring itself exempt from the requirements to form an ALUC is required to consult with airport operators and affected cities, hold a public hearing, and adopt a resolution stating that there are no noise, safety or land use issues affecting any airport in the county. A copy of the resolution must be transmitted to the Division of Aeronautics. California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook 1-2 FORMATION AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSIONS 1 The procedures for conducting this action are found in Section 21760(b) and read in part: “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 formation 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” (Section 21670 (b)). For matters of practicality, the Board may transmit their resolution of exemption directly to the Division of Aeronautics who will advise the Director of receipt of the resolution. Counties that may qualify for this exemption, or want to verify their exemption status, are encouraged to contact the Division’s land use planner assigned to their geographic area. 1.2.3 Designated Body If the board of supervisors and the mayors’ committee in a county each determine that another body can accomplish airport land use compatibility planning, then such a body can be designated to assume the planning responsibilities of the airport land use commission and a separate commission need not be established (Section 21670.1(a)). The designated body must have at least two members with aviation expertise or, when serving as the ALUC, be augmented to have two members thus qualified (Section 21670.1(b)). In most of these instances, a regional planning agency (a Regional Transportation Planning Agency or Metropolitan Planning Organization) serves as the ALUC. Other options include the board of supervisors, the county planning commission, or the county airport commission. A designated body has the same responsibilities as an ALUC County as defined in Section 21670, including the preparation and adoption of an airport land use compatibility plan (ALUCP). 1.2.4 Designated Agency In lieu of an ALUC or designated body, the county and each affected city may incorporate airport compatibility concerns into their land use planning and permitting processes per PUC Section 21670.1(c). Subject to Division review and approval, the county and each affected city determine the processes to accomplish proper land use planning and determine the agency responsible for preparation of each ALUCP. This format of compatibility planning has the same responsibilities as an ALUC county, including general and specific plan consistency with the ALUCP(s). The designated agency, identified as the “alternative process” in the 2002 edition of the Handbook, was created in 1994 to provide a potentially lower cost option for compliance with the SAA. The processes of a designated agency are described in PUC Sections 21670.1(c). One of the distinguishing features of this option is that the ALUC functions within the County may be carried out by more than one agency, unlike the single-purpose ALUC or designated body. Counties who have chosen this compatibility planning method incorporate various planning tools to carry out their responsibilities. While the Division has the authority to review and approve the proposed processes, California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook 1-3 1 FORMATION AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSIONS its main concern is with the ability of the county and affected cities to meet the objectives of the SAA, and not with the individual methods employed. 1.2.5 Statutory Exceptions Statutory exceptions were created by legislation for counties who requested relief from some of the provisions in Article 3.5. Exceptions were granted based on the unique conditions in these counties. None of the statutory exception counties are required to form an ALUC. The PUC includes four counties as statutory exceptions, namely Kern (Section 21670.1(d)), Santa Cruz (Section 21670.1 (e)), Los Angeles (Section 21670.2(a)), and San Diego (Section 21670.3(a)). Additionally, Santa Cruz County has been identified as being a “no procedures county.” The organizational structure and processes of a s tatutory exception county can resemble either a designated body or a designated agency. The applicable Article 3.5 p rovisions are slightly different in these counties. Kern County Section 21670.1(d) provides a conditional waiver from the requirement to form an ALUC for a county that contracts with the Division to prepare ALUCPs. This exception requires that the County and the affected cities (1) “agree to adopt and implement” an ALUCP(s) and (2) to incorporate applicable federal regulations and Handbook compatibility criteria into their general and specific plans. Kern County is the only county currently with this arrangement. Santa Cruz County Santa Cruz County uses exception (Section 21670.1(e)) as they are a County which “has only one public use airport that is owned by a (single) city.” The City of Watsonville is identified as owning the airport. The City of Watsonville is required to include all applicable federal regulations and the Handbook’s compatibility criteria noted in PUC Section 21670.1(d)(2) as part of its general and specific plans. The original statutory exception did not specify the preparation of an ALUCP, however, the City of Watsonville must submit its general and specific plans to the Division of Aeronautics (21670.1(e)(1)(B)(ii)) for review. Los Angeles County Los Angeles County formed their ALUC type pursuant to PUC Section 21670.2(a), which identifies a specific governmental entity, in this case Los Angeles County Regional Planning Commission, to be responsible for airport compatibility planning. The Regional Planning Commission is required to prepare and adopt the necessary ALUCP(s) (PUC Section 21670.2(b)). If there is a conflict between the affected cities and the County’s Regional Planning Commission regarding airport land use compatibility, there is an appeal process that triggers a city’s ability to overrule the Regional Planning Commission by a four-fifths vote of its governing body. San Diego County San Diego County is exempt from the requirement to form an ALUC pursuant to PUC Section 21670 and to name a designated body pursuant to PUC Section 21670.1. PUC Section 21670.3 requires the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority to conduct a collaborative planning process when preparing, adopting or amending the ALUCP(s). California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook 1-4 FORMATION AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSIONS 1 1.2.6 Intercounty ALUCs In the case w here any airport is bisected by a co unty line through its runways, runway protection zones, inner safety zones, inner turning zones, outer safety zones, or sideline safety zones, that county is provided the option to form an intercounty ALUC pursuant to Section 21670.4. Intercounty ALUCs may take one of two forms: (a) a new airport land use commission as authorized under Section 21670.4(c)(1), or (b) an existing appropriate entity designated by the two counties, as authorized under Section 21670.4(c)(2). Alternatively, each affected ALUC may adopt provisions for its portion of the airport impacts in their individual compatibility plans. 1.2.7 Reported Formation Choices The Division conducted a survey in 2010 that asked all ALUCs to describe which of the six ALUC types they formed themselves as. The results are shown in Table 1B, below. The counties noted with a plus sign (+) participate in an intercounty ALUC, in addition to their respective county ALUCs. The two ‘unknown’ counties had incomplete data by the time of printing. Table 1B: ALUC FORMATION SURVEY COUNTY ALUC FORMATION ADMISNISTRATIVE AGENCY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Alameda Alpine Amador Butte Calaveras Colusa Contra Costa Del Norte El Dorado Fresno Glenn Humboldt Imperial Inyo Kern Kings Lake Lassen Los Angeles Madera Marin Mariposa Mendocino Merced Modoc Mono Monterey ALUC Self-declared exempt ALUC ALUC ALUC Designated Body ALUC Unknown Designated Body Designated Body ALUC ALUC ALUC ALUC Statutory exception Designated Body ALUC Unknown Statutory Exception ALUC Designated Body ALUC ALUC ALUC Self-declared exempt ALUC ALUC County None County County County County Airport Advisory Committee County Planning Department. Unknown RTPA-EDTC MPO-FresnoCOG County County County County County and Cities RTPA-KCRPA County Unknown County Regional Planning Commission County County Planning Commission County Public Works Department. County County None County County California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook 1-5 1 FORMATION AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSIONS Table 1B: ALUC FORMATION SURVEY COUNTY ALUC FORMATION ADMISNISTRATIVE AGENCY 28 Napa ALUC County 29 Nevada Designated Body+ RTPA-NCTC Nevada/Placer Intercounty ALUC RTPAs-NCTC & PCTPA 30 Orange ALUC County 31 Placer Designated Body+ RTPA-PCTPA 32 Plumas ALUC County 33 Riverside ALUC County 34 Sacramento Designated Body MPO-SACOG 35 San Benito Designated Body MPO-SBtCOG 36 San Bernardino Designated Agency County and Cities 37 San Diego Statutory exception San Diego County Regional Airport Authority 38 San Francisco No Airport – ALUC None requirement not applicable 39 San Joaquin Designated Body MPO-SJCOG 40 San Luis Obispo ALUC County 41 San Mateo Designated Body MPO-C/CAG 42 Santa Barbara Designated Body MPO-SBCAG 43 Santa Clara ALUC County 44 Santa Cruz Statutory Exception Santa Cruz County & City of Watsonville 45 Shasta Designated Body County Planning Commission 46 Sierra Self-declared exempt None 47 Siskiyou ALUC County 48 Solano ALUC County 49 Sonoma ALUC County 50 Stanislaus ALUC County 51 Sutter Designated Body MPO-SACOG 52 Tehama ALUC County 53 Trinity ALUC County Planning Department 54 Tulare Designated Body County Planning Commission 55 Tuolumne ALUC County 56 Ventura Designated Body RTPA-VCTC 57 Yolo Designated Body MPO-SACOG 58 Yuba Designated Body MPO-SACOG Table 1C: ALUC FORMATION SURVEY TOTALS ALUC 29 Designated Body 18 Designated Agency (formerly “alternative process”) 1 Self-declared Exempt 3 Statutory Exception 4 Intercounty ALUC (in addition to the 57 required counties) 1 Unknown 2 TOTAL 58 California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook 1-6 FORMATION AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSIONS 1 1.3 ALUC COMPATIBILITY PLANNING PROCESS OVERVIEW 1.3.1 Background The ALUC is a statutorily created, quasi-legislative, public administrative agency that is responsible for conducting airport land use compatibility planning and preventing the creation of new noise and safety problems in the vicinity of public use airports. Pursuant to PUC Sections 21670 (a) and (b), an airport land use commission shall be established for the purposes of ensuring the orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of appropriate land use measures. California’s airport land use compatibility planning is unique because the legislature has created ALUCs, which are separate from both the airport operators and the local agencies (cities and counties) in which those airports are located. ALUCs have been granted the statutory authority to prepare an ALUCP and to review local government general and specific plans for consistency against the ALUCP. ALUCs oversee the consistency between local plans and the ALUCP. In some cases, they also review the compatibility of individual land use projects with the ALUCP. When an airport layout plan (ALP) or airport master plan (AMP) is amended, the ALUC must review their ALUCP for any changes that may be needed as a result of the airport updating its plan(s). An ALUC’s consistency determination should be given substantial consideration by their local agency, as their determinations stand on their own. As discussed below, when review by the ALUC is required under the PUC, the determination of the ALUC is binding unless overruled by the local agency. 1.3.2 Airport Land Use Compatibility Plans One of the primary responsibilities of an ALUC is the preparation and adoption of an ALUCP (PUC Sections 21674(c) and 21675). As further described in Chapter 2, the ALUCP is the basis for compatible planning within the vicinity of a public airport. The ALUCP may include land use measures specifying land use, height restrictions, and building standards (PUC Section 21675(a)). The planning boundary of the ALUCP is the “airport influence area,” and is established by the ALUC after a h earing and consultation with the involved agencies (PUC Section 21675 (c)). Involved agencies are primarily the cities and the county, but also include special districts, school districts, and community college districts (PUC Section 21670(f)). An ALUCP must also address any military airport within the jurisdiction of the ALUC (PUC Section 21675(b)). 1.3.3 Plan Consistency Government Code (Gov. Code) Section 65302.3 (a) states that a county’s or city’s general plan, as well as any applicable specific plans, “shall be consistent” with an ALUCP and that every affected county or city must amend its general and specific plans as n ecessary to keep them consistent with the ALUCP. The ALUC reviews the general plan (and applicable specific plans) and makes a consistency determination (PUC Section 21676(a)). If the ALUC determines the local plan to be inconsistent with the ALUCP, the local agency shall reconsider its plan, or overrule the ALUC’s decision. The overrule is accomplished by a two-thirds vote of the local agency’s governing body, accompanied by specific findings that its action meets the intent of California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook 1-7 1 FORMATION AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSIONS Article 3.5 of the SAA (PUC Section 21676(a)) and other published case law. Any local agency seeking to amend its general plan, a specific plan, or adopt zoning ordinance or building regulation within the airport influence area must first refer its proposed amendments to the ALUC for a determination if the proposed action is consistent with the airport land use compatibility plan. If the ALUC determines that the amendment is not consistent, the local agency may not enact the plan or regulation unless a two-thirds of the local agency’s governing body votes to overrule the ALUC’s inconsistency determination and the local government makes specific findings that its proposed action is consistent with the purposes of the Article 3.5 of the SAA (PUC Section 21676 (b)) and other published case law. The significance of this is that even if a local agency invokes the overrule provision, the local agency’s actions must be in compliance with SAA. 1.3.4 ALUC Review The ALUC’s other main tool for compatibility planning, besides the preparation of the ALUCP, is the review of plans, regulations, and other actions of local agencies. Review of local agency actions occurs as follows:  Prior to the adoption of an ALUCP, the ALUC shall review all local agency actions, regulations, or permits within the vicinity of a public airport. (PUC Section 21676(b)). “Vicinity” is the proposed planning boundary, or in the absence of a planning boundary, within two miles of the airport boundary.  Upon the adoption of an ALUCP, the ALUC shall review the general plan and any applicable specific for consistency with the ALUCP (PUC Section 21676(a)).  Prior to the amendment of a general plan or specific plan, or the adoption of a zoning ordinance or building regulation within the ALUCP planning boundary, the ALUC shall review the plan, ordinance, or regulation for consistency with the ALUCP (PUC Section 21676(b)).  If a l ocal agency has neither revised its general plan or applicable specific plans, nor overruled the ALUC by a two-thirds vote of its governing body (with required findings), the ALUC may require that all local agency actions, regulations, and permits be submitted for review to determine consistency with the ALUCP (PUC Section 21676.5(a)).  Prior to the modification of an AMP1 (by a public agency owning the airport), the ALUC shall review the proposed action (PUC Section 21676(c)).  The ALUC reviews plans for the construction of new airports (PUC Section 21661.5) and the expansion of existing airports within its jurisdiction (PUC Section 21664.5).  The local agency and ALUC may mutually agree that certain individual projects shall be reviewed by the ALUC (PUC Section 21676.5(b)). A complete discussion of the recommended procedures and considerations for ALUC review is found in Chapter 6 of this Handbook. 1 Note that the AMP includes the ALP. California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook 1-8 FORMATION AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSIONS 1 1.3.5 The Overrule Process ALUC consistency determinations for local agency plans and projects (described in Section 1.3.4, above), are subject to overrule by the local agency. The overrule process preserves local government’s constitutional land use authority and local government’s ability to implement its plans and projects. When a plan or project is found inconsistent by the ALUC, the local agency has a choice to stop or amend the plan or project, and thereby accept the ALUCs inconsistency determination, or to overrule the ALUC with a two-thirds “supermajority” vote of the local agency’s governing body.2 The overrule process, described in PUC Sections 21675.1(d), 21676, and 21676.5 requires the local agency’s governing body to make specific findings that show the project is consistent with the purpose of Article 3.5 of the SAA. When a public agency overrules an ALUC’s action or recommendation, pursuant to PUC Sections 21676, 21676.5 and 21677, a non-public operator of a publicly owned airport shall be immune from liability from damages resulting directly or indirectly from the override decision. At least 45 days prior to the decision to overrule the ALUC, the local agency shall provide the ALUC and the Division a copy of the proposed overrule decision and accompanying findings. The ALUC and the Division may provide comments to the local agency’s governing body within 30 days of receiving the proposed decision and findings. While the ALUC and Division comments are advisory, they must be included in the public record of any decision to overrule the ALUC. 1.4 ALUC STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS AND OPTIONS This section states the basic requirements of the ALUC under Article 3.5 and identifies where actions and procedures are mandatory, and where they are optional. The complete ALUC statute, in addition to other pertinent statutes, can be found in Appendix A. 1.4.1 ALUC Membership and Selection Per PUC Section 21670(b), each ALUC shall consist of seven members to be selected as follows:  Two representing the cities in the county, appointed by a selection committee comprised of the mayors of all the cities within that county. If there are any cities contiguous or adjacent to the qualifying airport, at least one city representative shall be appointed from there. If there are no cities within a county, the number of representatives selected by the county and the airport managers shall be increased by one each (as of this Handbook edition, only the counties of Alpine, Mariposa and Trinity have no incorporated cities).  Two representing the county, appointed by the board of supervisors.  Two having expertise in aviation, appointed by a selection committee comprised of the managers of all of the public airports within the county. 2 An exception to this rule is found in PUC Section 21677, which allows local agencies in the County of Marin to overrule the ALUC with a simple majority. California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook 1-9 1 FORMATION AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSIONS  One representing the general public, appointed by the other six members of the commission. A person “having expertise in aviation,” as used above, means a p erson who, by way of education, training, business, experience, vocation, or avocation has acquired and possesses particular knowledge of, and familiarity with the function, operation and role of airports, or is an elected official of a local agency which owns or operates an airport (PUC Section 21670(e)). While this person is often a pilot, that is not required by law. A person who already holds an elected or appointed public office, may be appointed and serve as a member of the commission during their term of public office (PUC Section 21670(c)). Each member of the ALUC shall appoint one proxy to represent him or her in commission affairs and to vote on all matters when the member is not in attendance. The proxy must be made in writing and kept on f ile with the ALUC. The proxy serves at the pleasure of the member who appointed him or her. A vacant proxy position shall be promptly filled (PUC Section 21670(d). Designated Body The membership of a designated body is governed by the rules of that body (for example, a regional transportation planning agency). However, if the designated body does not include among its membership at least two members having expertise in aviation (as defined above), it shall augment its membership with at least two members having that expertise when acting in the capacity of an ALUC (PUC Section 21670.1(b)). 1.4.2 Duties of Members Term of Office The term of office is four years (PUC Section 21671.5(a)). All terms are to end on the first Monday in May. The terms of membership are staggered so that no m ore than two commissioner terms expire in the same year (see PUC Section 21671.5(a) for the exact procedure). Members serve at the pleasure of the body which appointed them (see the discussion under Section 1.4.1, above) and may be removed at any time without cause. Vacancies will be filled by the body that originally appointed that commissioner. Compensation, Staffing, and Fees Compensation for commissioners, if any, is determined by the board of supervisors of the county (PUC Section 21671.5(b)). Staff assistance, including the mailing of notices, keeping of minutes, and the keeping of equipment and supplies, is provided by the county. The necessary operating expenses of the ALUC shall be a county charge (PUC Section 21671.5(c)). The ALUC shall not employ any personnel either as employees or independent contractors without the prior approval of the board of supervisors (PUC Section 21671.5(d)). California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook 1-10 FORMATION AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSIONS 1 The ALUC may establish a schedule of reasonable fees necessary to carry out their statutory responsibilities (PUC Section 21671.5(f). Those fees shall be charged to the proponents of actions, regulations, or permits. Per state law (Gov. Code Section 66016), the fee shall not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service, and may be levied only after a public hearing. Please refer to Appendix H for information on how some ALUCs have structured their fee schedules. Generally, an ALUC cannot charge a fee until it has adopted an ALUCP (see PUC Sections 21671.5(f) and (g)). Meetings and Conflict of Interest The ALUC shall meet at the call of the commission chairperson or at the request of the majority of the commission members. A majority of the commissioners shall constitute a quorum for conducting business. No action shall be taken by the ALUC except by the recorded vote of a majority of the full membership (PUC Section 21671.5(e)). In practice, most ALUCs have a regular schedule for meetings. ALUC meetings are subject to normal open meeting requirements (the Brown Act, Gov. Code Section 54950 et seq.). Each ALUC shall adopt rules with respect to the temporary disqualification of its members from participating in the review or adoption of a proposal because of conflict of interest (PUC Section 21672). The SAA does not provide guidance on what constitutes a conflict of interest; the ALUC should seek guidance from their legal counsel as to the appropriate state requirements. California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook 1-11 C H A P T E R 2 A I R P O R T L A N D U s E C O m PAT I b I L I T y P L A N s C H A P T E R 2 Chapter 2 Airport-Land Use Compatibility Plans 2.1 PURPOSE OF AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY PLANS 2.1.1 Introduction Public Utilities Code (PUC), Section 21675(a) requires preparation of an airport land use compatibility plan (ALUCP) for each public use airport in the state. This requirement applies regardless of whether a county chooses to establish and maintain an airport land use commission (ALUC) or to utilize one of the other authorized formation types for airport land use compatibility planning. The ALUCP is designed to encourage compatible land uses in the vicinity surrounding an airport. It provides for the “orderly growth of each public airport and the area surrounding the airport” while safeguarding “the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of the airport and the public in general (PUC Section 21675(a)).” The ALUCP contains criteria for making consistency determinations, including building standards and height and land use restrictions. ALUCPs are the fundamental tool used by ALUCs in fulfilling their purpose of promoting airport land use compatibility. 2.1.2 Responsibility for ALUCP Preparation The ALUC (or the body designated to carry out the responsibilities of a commission) is responsible for preparing, adopting and amending the ALUCP. As a practical matter, responsibility for the preparation is typically assigned to staff and/or consultants working under the direction of the ALUC. 2.1.3 Information Resources A variety of information resources are available to assist ALUCs and their staffs with the process of preparing compatibility plans. Among the most important of these are the following: This chapter addresses: • The purpose of ALUCPs • Scope of an ALUCP • ALUCP Contents • Adoption Process • Consistency Review California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook 2-1 2 PREPARATION AND ADOPTION OF A COMPATIBILITY PLAN  California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook – The Handbook serves as a s ource of information regarding compatibility plans and policies. It also identifies many of the problems and issues faced by ALUCs when preparing, using, and updating their plans. A 1994 addition to the State Aeronautics Act requires that ALUCs “shall be guided by” information in the Handbook when formulating airport land use compatibility plans.  Division of Aeronautics—Division staff is available to respond to inquiries regarding state law, compatibility criteria, review procedures, and any other matters involving airport land use commissions.  Other ALUCs—The experience of other ALUCs is another valuable information resource. Copies of adopted plans can generally be obtained from individual commissions. Also, commission members and their staffs are usually willing to discuss particular issues that they have faced. The Division maintains a list of contact persons and phone numbers for each of the airport land use commissions in the state.  Consultants—Airport and land use planning consultants often provide services to ALUCs, including review of airport layout (ALPs) and drafting of ALUCPs.  Seminars and Workshops—ALUC seminars and workshops are held periodically by the Division and other organizations. These gatherings of airport land use commission members, staffs, and others involved in airport land use planning facilitate the exchange of information about airport land use compatibility planning issues.  Transportation Research Board's Airport Cooperative Research Program—The ACRP carries out applied research on pr oblems that are shared by airport operating agencies and other interested stakeholders. A number of studies have been published by the ACRP regarding land use compatibility issues, noise and safety concerns, and other topics of interest. 2.1.4 Funding for ALUCP Preparation Obtaining funds with which to prepare and/or update ALUCPs is an on-going problem for the majority of ALUCs. Potential funding sources include the following:  State Funding—The Division of Aeronautics has provided grants to local agencies for the preparation of many ALUCPs. This funding has primarily come from the California Aid to Airport Program (CAAP) Acquisition and Development (A&D) grant, which covers up to 90% of the cost for plan preparation. The availability of A&D grant funds varies from year to year depending upon f unding levels provided by the legislature and on p rioritization guidelines established for airport-related projects by the California Transportation Commission. In addition to the A&D grant program, the state also provides a $10,000 annual grant to each public-use general aviation airport in the state (except those designated as air carrier reliever airports).  Department of Defense Funding—Funding for ALUCPs that cover areas around military airports is potentially available through the Defense Department’s Office of Economic Adjustment. California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook 2-2 PREPARATION AND ADOPTION OF A COMPATIBILITY PLAN 2  ALUC Fees—A portion of the fees that ALUCs are permitted to collect for the purpose of conducting compatibility reviews can be allocated to amending or updating an airport land use compatibility plan. ALUCs are not authorized to collect fees if they have not previously adopted an ALUCP (PUC Section 21671.5(f)).  Other Local Funds—Preparation of an ALUCP can include funds from the local government’s general fund or airport-derived revenues (particularly at larger airports). For designated bodies who are also a MPO or RTPA, local transportation planning funds could be used for the ALUCP. 2.2 BASIC SCOPE OF ALUCPs 2.2.1 Overview When preparing or updating an ALUCP, several decisions must be made regarding the scope and funding of the plan. Issues to be considered include:  Each public use and military airport must be included in the ALUCP(s) (PUC Section 21675(a) and (b));  The types of impacts to be addressed;  The airport influence area (AIA);  The availability of FAA approved ALPs or airport master plans (AMPs);  Types of projects to be reviewed for ALUCP consistency determinations; and  Procedures for the review of plans, ordinances, and other local agency actions. 2.2.2 Airports Perhaps the most basic scoping issue is to determine which types of airports the ALUCP should address.  Public-Use Airports—An ALUCP must be formulated for “each public airport” (that is, each airport served by a s cheduled airline or operated for the benefit of the general public) within the jurisdiction of the ALUC (Section 21675(a)). In addition to existing public-use airports, ALUCs have, on occasion, also developed ALUCPs for proposed public airports even though it is not required.  Military Airports—Commissions shall include the area surrounding any federal military airport in their ALUCP. The ALUCP shall be consistent with the safety and noise standards in the military’s Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) plan (PUC Section 21675(b)). (See also Muzzy Ranch Co. v. Solano County ALUC (2008) 164 Cal.App.4th 1 [finding that compatibility plan could be more restrictive than the AICUZ and still be consistent with the AICUZ].)  Airports Impacting Adjacent Counties—Although often overlooked, when an airport impacts multiple counties, each ALUC should adopt compatibility policies for any California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook 2-3 2 PREPARATION AND ADOPTION OF A COMPATIBILITY PLAN airport that impacts the area within its jurisdiction; even if the airport itself is located in an adjacent county. Typically, the county in which the airport is situated will take the lead in development of an ALUCP and then request concurrence or adoption by other affected jurisdictions. Another option is for both counties to jointly establish a separate ALUC for these “intercounty” airports. That commission would then be responsible for preparation of a compatibility plan for all of the airport’s influence area. 2.2.3 Airport Impacts Noise and safety are the two primary airport impact concerns that have the potential to affect the health, safety and welfare of people within the vicinity of an airport. The related issues of overflight (noise) and airspace protection (safety) should also be considered when preparing the ALUCP. Approaches to addressing these concerns are outlined in Chapters 3 and 4. The Appendices contain additional background discussion of noise and safety compatibility concepts and issues. People’s reaction to aircraft noise varies widely with some people reacting vigorously to very low levels of aircraft noise, while other people have no reaction to very high levels of aircraft noise. The objective of compatible land use planning is to prevent people from being exposed to the most intensive and disruptive cumulative aircraft noise exposure levels. Aircraft noise exposure is depicted with cumulative noise exposure contours—measured in California in terms of community noise equivalent level (CNEL). CNEL contour maps are typically prepared for airports. However, aircraft noise exposure in areas beyond the outermost CNEL contours can also be annoying to some people and may be regarded as locally significant. These levels of aircraft noise exposure are generally described under the heading of overflight impacts. Safety impacts from aircraft accidents near airports are typically handled by specifying the types of land uses and thus limiting the number of people who would be exposed to the risk of an accident. The other major safety concern is related to land uses that can create hazards to flight. Airspace protection primarily involves limitations on the height of objects on the ground near airports. Additional flight hazards to be considered are activities that can cause electronic or visual impairment to navigation or attract large numbers of birds. 2.2.4 Airport Influence Area The geographic boundary of the ALUCP is known as the airport influence area (AIA). ALUCs establish the AIA after a hearing and in consultation with the involved agencies, as required by Section 21675(c). ALUCs sometimes describe the AIA as t he referral area (as it is the area within which projects are potentially referred to the ALUC). The ALUC usually establishes the AIA boundary based on:  The location and configuration of the airport(s) included in the plan; and  The extent of the noise and safety impacts associated with the airport(s). California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook 2-4 PREPARATION AND ADOPTION OF A COMPATIBILITY PLAN 2 The geographic area for noise impacts is typically described by CNEL contours and overflight areas, while safety impacts are mapped according to airport safety zones and the airspace surfaces. These areas are discussed in Chapter 3. 2.2.5 Document Format: Separate versus Countywide ALUCPs ALUCP documents can be formatted to include only one airport or to cover all of the airports located within the county. Each of these two approaches has its advantages and disadvantages.  Individual Airport Plans—Some ALUCs have separate ALUCP documents for each airport within their jurisdiction. This approach allows the plan to focus on t he specific issues relevant to the individual airport, its surrounding land uses, and affected local jurisdictions.  Countywide Plan—Other ALUCs have prepared a single ALUCP document that includes all of the airports. This format promotes consistency among the policies for all of the airports within the commission’s jurisdiction. A disadvantage is that, especially for counties with many airports, the ALUCP can become unwieldy in size and much of it will be irrelevant to jurisdictions affected by only one airport. A variation on the countywide plan is to prepare one document containing introductory information, policies, and other material that apply countywide, and separate sections that include maps and background data for each individual airport. 2.2.6 Airport Master Plans and Airport Layout Plans Planning Requirements Section 21675(a) requires that each ALUCP “shall include and be based either on a long range master plan or an airport layout plan, as determined by the Division of Aeronautics of the California Department of Transportation, that reflects the anticipated growth of the airport during at least the next 20 years.” The Airport Master Plan An AMP is an airport-sponsored, comprehensive planning study that usually describes existing conditions as well as interim and long-term development plans for the airport that will enable it to meet future aviation demand. An AMP contains an FAA-approved activity forecast and an ALP. “An airport master plan is a comprehensive study of an airport and usually describes the short-, medium-, and long-term development plans to meet future aviation demand . . . The elements of a master planning process will vary in complexity and level of detail, depending on the size, function, issues, and problems of the individual airport (FAA 2007, p. 1).” The FAA reviews all elements of the AMP to ensure that sound planning techniques have been applied. However, the FAA only approves the following two elements of the AMP: 1) the 20-year forecast of demand and 2) the ALP. The AMP functions as a long range, comprehensive study of the airports facilities and property needs. Even though an AMP may be “suggestive” of property outside of its boundaries, this document cannot dictate changes beyond the airport boundary (unless owned by the airport). California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook 2-5 2 PREPARATION AND ADOPTION OF A COMPATIBILITY PLAN Thus an ALUCP and an AMP have fundamentally distinct and separate functions. The ALUCP focuses on the area outside of the airport property that is within its AIA, while the AMP focuses on airport operations and the area under the control of the airport. AMPs therefore cannot be used to achieve both purposes, i.e. AMPs cannot be a su bstitute for an ALUCP. Simply incorporating an ALUCP chapter into the AMP does not constitute an adequate ALUCP. The Airport Layout Plan An ALP is a scaled drawing of existing and proposed airport facilities including airport property lines and the information required to demonstrate conformance with applicable FAA regulations. A current FAA-approved ALP is required for airports identified in the National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS) that receive Federal assistance. ALPs remain current for a five-year period or until major changes are made or are planned to be made at the airport. The ALP is one of the components of an AMP. All airport development at Federally-obligated airports, i.e. those airports who receive federal funds, must be done in accordance with an FAA approved ALP. An approved ALP indicates that the existing facilities and proposed development shown on the ALP conforms to the FAA airport design standards in effect at the time of approval, and it indicates that the FAA finds the proposed development to be safe and efficient (FAA 2005, pg. 8). Non-NPIAS Airports Since the eligibility for federal FAA assistance does not extend to non-NPIAS public use airports, the Division will accept a signed ALP drawing in lieu of an FAA-approved ALP as the basis of an ALUCP update, provided the drawing is prepared consistent with the California Code of Regulations, Title 21, Section 3534. The ALP drawing must reflect existing conditions and proposed changes, i.e. anticipated growth over a 20 year period. Only non-NPIAS airports that do not already receive state funds under the California Aid to Airports Program (CAAP) will be eligible for this exception (to the requirement of an AMP/ALP). Non-NPIAS airports and ALUCs are eligible to apply directly for A&D state funds to update their ALPs and ALUCPs respectively. A funding request for an ALP update as part of an ALUCP update can be made or the ALP update can be a separate funding request. 2.3 ALUCP CONTENTS State law provides only limited guidance regarding the specific components of the ALUCP. One of the most important parts of an ALUCP is a cl ear statement of the ALUC’s compatibility review criteria upon which their decisions are made. Table 2A provides a checklist of typical ALUCP contents. California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook 2-6 PREPARATION AND ADOPTION OF A COMPATIBILITY PLAN 2 TABLE 2A: CHECKLIST OF ALUCP CONTENTS  Scope of the Plan—In a preface or introductory chapter, provide a clear statement describing the scope and function of the plan. Specifically: • Purpose and Authority: Refer to PUC statute that requires the formation of ALUCs and requires preparation of an ALUCP. Include the resolution that formed the ALUC and the resolution that adopts this ALUCP. The plan’s purpose should be defined as a vehicle for conducting airport land use compatibility planning. • Airport Identification: List the airport(s) addressed by the plan and the city or unincorporated county in which they are located. • Airport Influence Area: Provide a general description and map of the area that comprises the jurisdiction of the ALUC. Also include a map covering the planning boundary of the ALUCP if it varies from the AIA boundary. • Jurisdictions Affected: Identify all local jurisdictions and any military facilities that are affected by the ALUCP. Listing the general and specific plans of local jurisdictions also may be valuable. • Limitations of the Plan: Note the limitations on ALUC jurisdiction over existing land uses; state, federal and tribal land; and airport operations as stated in the law and how they are applied by the individual ALUC.  Airport Information—Include essential information about the airport(s) that shows the ALUCP has been based upon an FAA-adopted AMP or ALP. • Planning Status: Indicate the FAA approval date of the current ALP and activity forecasts (see below). Indicate local government or airport adoption date for the AMP. • ALP: Include a copy of the FAA-approved ALP. • Airport Activity: Document existing and projected airport operational levels. Include data indicating the known or estimated distribution of operations by type of aircraft, time of day, and runway used. As necessary, extend the 20 year forecasts included in adopted AMPs to ensure that the ALUCP reflects the anticipated growth of airport activity over a 20 year period.  Compatibility Policies and Criteria—State all policies and criteria as clearly, precisely, and completely as possible, in a separate chapter from background information. As appropriate, use tables to present primary criteria. Address each of the following compatibility concerns: • Noise: Indicate maximum normally acceptable exterior noise levels for new residential and other noise- sensitive land uses. Note interior noise level standards. • Overflight: Indicate how aircraft overflight noise concerns are addressed. • Safety: Indicate maximum acceptable land use densities and intensities and the manner in which they are to be measured. List any uses explicitly prohibited from certain zones. • Airspace Protection: Note reliance upon FAR Part 77 and Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS) if relevant. If applicable, indicate policies addressing objects where ground level exceeds FAR Part 77 criteria. List criteria regarding hazards to flight such as bird strikes, solar panels, wind turbines, stationary smoke plumes and electronic interferences with flight operations.  Compatibility Zone Maps—For each airport, provide either a composite compatibility zone map or individual compatibility zone maps. On base map, identify roads, water courses, section lines, and other major natural and man-made features. Showing the local government zoning as a background layer is also helpful. • Noise Contours: Show CNEL contours to be used for planning purposes. • Compatibility Policies: If compatibility policies are based on separate assessment of compatibility concerns, indicate boundaries and dimensions of safety zones. When basing zones on guidelines in Chapter 3 of this Handbook, make adjustments as appropriate to reflect traffic pattern locations and other factors particular to each individual airport. • FAA Airspace Protection Surfaces: Include map derived from FAR Part 77 standards indicating allowable heights of objects relative to the airport elevation. Indicate locations where ground exceeds these limits. Base map should show topography. • Composite Compatibility Zones: When using compatibility criteria representing a composite of the above individual compatibility concerns (noise, overflight, safety, and airspace protection) provide a map showing the boundaries of each zone. Indicate distances of boundaries from the airport runways. • Airport Influence Area: Clearly identify the AIA boundary on a map and with a written description.  Review Policies—Describe the process and list the steps that the ALUC will use in reviewing local government plans and projects. • Types of Actions for ALUC Review: List the types of local government plans or projects that are to be submitted to the ALUC. Distinguish between mandatory and voluntary submittals. • Project Information: List the types of information to be included when a project or plan is submitted for an ALUC consistency decision. California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook 2-7 2 PREPARATION AND ADOPTION OF A COMPATIBILITY PLAN TABLE 2A: CHECKLIST OF ALUCP CONTENTS • Timing: Define when ALUC reviews are to be conducted and the time limits within which the ALUC must respond. • ALUC Staff Responsibilities: Define staff duties in the ALUC compatibility review process.  Preliminary Review of Plans and Projects for Consistency determinations—If applicable, describe the steps involved when an affected local jurisdiction requests the ALUC to provide a preliminary assessment of the general plans, specific plans, and relevant land use ordinances and regulations prior to their official submission for an ALUC determination. The ALUC should make a reasonable effort to identify any direct conflicts needing to be resolved as well as criteria and procedures that need to be defined in order for the local plans to be considered consistent with the ALUCP.  Land Use Information—Include maps such as the following: • Existing Land Use Development: Show locations in the airport vicinity where development exists by using current, high-altitude aerial photographs and/or GIS data. • Planned Land Uses: Show locations in the airport vicinity where development is planned by including current general plan and zoning maps.  Discussion of Compatibility Issues—Discuss the basic concepts and rationale behind the compatibility policies and criteria.  Local Government Implementation—Discuss the general plan and specific plan ALUCP consistency requirement. Refer Local jurisdictions to the Handbook appendices for sample implementation documents such as, Methods for Calculating Usage Intensities, Buyer Awareness Measures, and an Airport Overlay Zone Ordinance.  Supporting Materials—For quick reference, include: • State Aeronautics Act: Provide a copy of the current state laws pertaining to airport land use commissions (PUC Sections 21670-21679.5). Indicate the date of the most current legislative amendment. • Federal Aviation Regulations Part 77: Provide a copy of regulations governing objects affecting navigable airspace. • Glossary: Prepare a glossary of common aviation terms, particularly those associated with airport land use compatibility planning topics. • A website link to the Caltrans Division of Aeronautics 2.4 ALUCP ADOPTION PROCESS 2.4.1 Involvement of Local Agencies Information and input from local agencies is essential to the preparation of airport land use compatibility plans. Adoption and, ultimately, successful implementation of compatibility plans requires that cooperation between ALUCs and affected local governments be continued beyond the plan development stage. Informal Consultation In many cases, the majority of issues that arise during the review of a draft ALUCP result more from lack of clarity in proposed policies than from fundamental disagreement over the policy objectives. Informal negotiations between the affected jurisdictions and the ALUC frequently can resolve many of these issues. Initially these negotiations can take place at the staff level, then involve elected county and city officials and commission members at a later date. Formal Consultation Requirements PUC Section 21675(c) requires formal consultation between ALUCs and affected local jurisdictions when an AIA is established. Although the statute does not distinguish between California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook 2-8 PREPARATION AND ADOPTION OF A COMPATIBILITY PLAN 2 establishing and amending an AIA, consultation is strongly recommended when the AIA is amended. 2.4.2 ALUCP Amendments PUC Section 21675(a) limits amendment of all ALUCPs to no more than once per calendar year. A comprehensive review and update is recommended at least every five years. The review and amendment process should follow essentially the same steps as the original adoption process which includes preparation of a draft ALUCP and environmental document, circulation for review and comment among affected agencies and the public, a noticed public meeting, incorporation of comments, and adoption by resolution of the ALUCP and its CEQA document. Coordination with local jurisdictions is important, particularly if the changes affect general and specific plan consistency with the ALUCP. When an ALUCP is amended, as with its initial adoption, local government again has 180 days within which to amend its general and specific plans to be consistent with the ALUCP or to approve findings and overrule the ALUC. It is recommended that ALUCs differentiate between major and minor amendments. A major amendment, which can occur only once per year, involves revising the policies in a manner that would change their applicability to a public agency, add new policies, or revise maps. A minor amendment, by contrast, addresses grammatical, typographical, or minor technical errors that do not affect policies or the manner in which those policies are applied to consistency and compatibility reviews. 2.5 ALUCP CONSISTENCY REVIEWS 2.5.1 Types of Local Government Actions Reviewed by ALUCs Review of local government plans and projects pertaining to airport land use compatibility is one of the fundamental responsibilities of ALUCs. These local government actions fall into two broad groups: (1) Land use related, including general and specific plans, zoning ordinances, building regulation, or individual development projects; and (2) airport related, including the modification of an AMP or plans for the construction or expansion of an airport. ALUCP policies should clearly specify the types of local government plans or projects that are to be submitted to the ALUC for a review that will result in a compatibility determination. The ALUC determines whether the plan or project is consistent with the ALUCP and therefore compatible with airport operations or it is determined to be inconsistent and incompatible. The ALUCP should also provide guidance on which plans or projects require mandatory review and which are subject to voluntary review. 2.5.2 Consistency Review Procedures The procedures that the ALUC will use in reviewing local plans and projects should be defined in the ALUCP. Among the procedural matters that should be addressed are: California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook 2-9 2 PREPARATION AND ADOPTION OF A COMPATIBILITY PLAN  The types of plan or project information that needs to be submitted;  At one point in the local land use process that a plan or project should be submitted to the ALUC;  ALUC staff responsibilities, if any, for certain ALUCP consistency reviews; and  Notification procedures. Some ALUCs append to their determinations various local government documents that memorialize necessary changes to a p roposed project. The use of such documents is permissible, provided the determination from the ALUC is either “consistent” or “inconsistent” with the ALUCP. California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook 2-10 C H A P T E R 3 b U I L D I N g A N A I R P O R T L A N D U s E C O m PAT I b I L I T y P L A N C H A P T E R 3 Chapter 3 Building an Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 3.1 OVERVIEW While compatibility policies, including both criteria and maps, comprise the substantive body of any airport land use compatibility plan (ALUCP), the compatibility concerns behind them (i.e., noise, safety, airspace protection, and overflight) provide the underlying context. The purpose of this chapter is to provide the foundation for developing an effective ALUCP. As such, the following sections introduce the basis and methods of measuring the four compatibility concerns. Furthermore, this chapter also covers common issues that arise when preparing an ALUCP and formulating the policies contained therein. Specific policy guidance regarding noise and safety compatibility concerns is provided in Chapter 4. 3.2 TYPES OF COMPATIBILITY CONCERNS As indicated in the preceding chapters, the land use compatibility concerns of airport land use commissions (ALUCs) fall under two broad headings identified in state law: noise and safety. However, for purposes of formulating compatibility policies and criteria, further dividing these basic concerns into four functional categories is more practical. These categories are:  Noise: As defined by the exposure to noise attributable to aircraft operations.  Overflight : As defined by the annoyance and other general concerns arising from routine aircraft flight over a community.  Safety : As defined by the protection of people on the ground and in the air from accidents.  Airspace Protection: As defined by the protection of airspace from hazards to flight. Chapter 4 provides strategies for formulating policies that will help achieve these objectives. Before that discussion can occur, however, an understanding of the regulatory and conceptual basis for these policies, and the scale at which attainment of these objectives can be measured, must be understood in order to develop effective land use compatibility criteria. Topics addressed in chapter include: • Types of compatibility concerns; • Noise contours; • Overflight and notification; • Safety zones; • Airspace protection; • Options in presenting compatibility criteria; • Compatibility planning for different types of airports; • Existing land uses; and • Limits on ALUC land use controls. California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook 3-1 3 BUILDING AN AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY PLAN 3.2.1 Noise Noise is one of the most basic airport land use compatibility concerns. Moreover, at major air carrier airports, many busy general aviation airports, and most military airfields, noise is usually the most geographically extensive form of airport-related impact. Noise Policy Foundations Federal and state statutes and regulations establish the basis for local development of airport plans, analyses of airport impacts, and enactment of compatibility policies. Brief descriptions of selected statutes, regulations, and policies having particular significance to noise issues are provided in the following paragraphs. Federal Statutes and Regulations While there are a number of federal statutes and regulations addressing the issue of aircraft noise, the following are perhaps the most influential from a land use compatibility standpoint. Statutes Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Act of 1979 (ASNA)—Among the stated purposes of this act is “to provide assistance to airport operators to prepare and carry out noise compatibility programs.” The law establishes eligibility requirements for noise compatibility planning funding. The law does not require airports to develop noise compatibility programs—the decision to do so is within the discretion of each individual airport proprietor. Regulations implementing the act are set forth in Part 150 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR). FAA Regulations and Policies FAR Part 150 Airport Noise Compatibility Planning—As a means of implementing ASNA, the FAA adopted these regulations, which establish a voluntary program that airports can utilize to conduct airport noise compatibility planning. “This part prescribes the procedures, standards, and methodology governing the development, submission, and review of airport noise exposure maps and airport noise compatibility programs, including the process for evaluating and approving or disapproving these programs.” FAR Part 150 also prescribes a system for measuring airport noise impacts and presents guidelines for identifying incompatible land uses. Airports that undertake a FAR Part 150 study are eligible for federal funding both for the study itself and for implementation of approved components of the local program. FAR Part 150 noise exposure maps are depicted in terms of the average annual Day-Night Average Sound Level (DNL) contours around the airport. FAR Part 150 considers all land uses with noise levels less than 65 DNL to be compatible with aircraft operations. At higher noise exposures, selected land uses are also deemed acceptable, depending upon the nature of the use and the degree of structural noise attenuation provided. he FAA allows use of Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) contours Tfor airports in California. California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook 3-2 BUILDING AN AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY PLAN 3 In setting the various compatibility guidelines, however, the regulations state that the designations : “…do not constitute a Federal determination that any use of land covered by the [noise compatibility] program is acceptable or unacceptable under federal, state, or local law. The responsibility for determining the acceptable and permissible land uses and the relationship between specific properties and specific noise contours rests with the local authorities. FAA determinations under Part 150 are not intended to substitute federally determined land uses for those determined to be appropriate by local authorities in response to locally determined needs and values in achieving noise compatible land uses.” Military Airfields Air Installations Compatible Use Zones (AICUZ ) Program—The AICUZ program was established by the U.S. Department of Defense in 1973 i n order to protect the federal government’s investment in military airfields. The current noise compatibility criteria (as set forth in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 32, P art 256) are basically the same as those indicated in the Federal Interagency Committee on Urban Noise (FICUN) report and the FAA’s FAR Part 150 program; as a r esult, AICUZ compatibility standards for residential use suggest consideration of acoustical treatments above 65 dB DNL. AICUZ plans prepared for individual airfields are primarily intended as recommendations to local communities regarding the importance of maintaining land uses that are compatible with the noise and safety impacts of military aircraft operations. State of California Laws, Regulations, and Guidelines State Aeronautics Act —Public Utilities Code (PUC) Section 21669 requires Caltrans to adopt—to the extent not prohibited by federal law—noise standards applicable to all airports operating under a state permit. California Airport Noise Regulations —The airport noise standards promulgated in accordance with PUC Section 21669 are set forth in Section 5000 et seq. of the California Code of Regulations (Title 21, Division 2.5, Chapter 6). The current version of the regulations became effective in March 1990. In Section 5006, the regulations state that: “The level of noise acceptable to a reasonable person residing in the vicinity of an airport is established as a community noise equivalent level (CNEL) value of 65 dB for purposes of these regulations. This criterion level has been chosen for reasonable persons residing in urban residential areas where houses are of typical California construction and may have windows partially open. It has been selected with reference to speech, sleep and community reaction.” In accordance with procedures listed in Section 5020, the county board of supervisors can declare an airport to have a “noise problem.” As specified in Section 5012, no such airport shall operate “with a noise impact area based on the standard of 65 dB CNEL unless the operator has applied for or received a variance as prescribed in…” the regulations. California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook 3-3 3 BUILDING AN AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY PLAN The compatibility criterion (i.e., 65 dB CNEL) identified in the Airport Noise Regulations only is mandated for a few airports (less than a dozen) that are declared to have a “noise problem.” The regulations do not establish a mandatory criterion for evaluating the compatibility of proposed land use development around other airports. Section 5004 of the regulations specifically notes: “It is not the intent of these regulations to preempt the field of aircraft noise limitation in the state. The noise limits specified herein are not intended to prevent any local government, to the extent not prohibited by federal law, or any airport proprietor from setting more stringent standards.” As discussed later in this chapter, setting the threshold for land use compatibility lower than 65 CNEL is appropriate at many airports. For designated “noise problem” airports, the “noise impact area” is the area within the airport’s 65 CNEL contour that is composed of incompatible land uses. Four types of land uses are defined as incompatible: • Residences of all types; • Public and private schools; • Hospitals and convalescent homes; and • Churches, synagogues, temples, and other places of worship. However, these uses are not deemed incompatible if certain mitigation actions have been taken, as spelled out in Section 5014. Among these measures is airport acquisition of an avigation easement for aircraft noise and, except for some residential uses, acoustical insulation adequate to ensure that the interior CNEL due to aircraft noise is 45 dB or less in all habitable rooms. California Building Code (California Code of Regulations, Title 24)—The California Building Code contains standards for allowable interior noise levels associated with exterior noise sources (California Building Code, 2007 edition, Part 2, Volume 1, Chapter 12, Section 1207.11). The standards apply to new hotels, motels, dormitories, apartment houses, and dwellings other than detached single-family residences. Although the building code does not apply the 45 CNEL interior noise level standard to detached single-family residences, the Division of Aeronautics encourages communities to adopt this standard (or lower) for these uses. Many communities have done so as part of their general plan noise element policies. The standards state that: “Interior noise levels attributable to exterior sources shall not exceed 45 dB in any habitable room. The noise metric shall be either the Day-Night Average Sound Level (Ldn) or the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL), consistent with the noise element of the local general plan. Worst-case noise levels, either existing or future, shall be used as the basis for determining compliance with [these standards]. Future noise levels shall be predicted for a period of at least 10 years from the time of a building permit application.” With regard to airport noise sources, the code goes on to indicate that:  “Residential structures to be located where the annual Ldn or CNEL exceeds 60 dB shall require an acoustical analysis showing that the proposed design will achieve the prescribed California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook 3-4 BUILDING AN AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY PLAN 3 allowable interior level. For public use airports or heliports, the Ldn or CNEL shall be determined from the airport land use plan prepared by the county wherein the airport is located. For military bases, the Ldn shall be determined from the facility Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AICUZ) plan. For all other airports or heliports, or public use airports or heliports for which a land use plan has not been developed, the Ldn or CNEL shall be determined from the noise element of the general plan of the local jurisdiction.”  “When aircraft noise is not the only significant source, noise levels from all sources shall be added to determine the composite site noise level.” General Plan Guidelines—Section 65302(f) of the Government Code requires that a n oise element be included as part of local general plans. Airports and heliports are among the noise sources to be analyzed. To the extent practical, both current and future noise contours (expressed in terms of either CNEL or DNL) are to be included. The noise contours are to be “used as a guide for establishing a pattern of land uses…that minimizes the exposure of community residents to excessive noise.” Guidance on t he preparation and content of general plan noise elements is provided by the Office of Planning and Research in its General Plan Guidelines publication (last revised in 2003). This guidance represents an updated version of guidelines originally published by the State Department of Health Services in 1976. Included in the document is a table indicating noise compatibility criteria for a variety of land use categories. Another table outlines a set of adjustment or “normalization” factors that “may be used in order to arrive at noise acceptability standards which reflect the noise control goals of the community, the particular community’s sensitivity to noise…, and their assessment of the relative importance of noise pollution.” Noise Contours for Compatibility Planning Although supplemental metrics may be useful for certain purposes, cumulative noise exposure metrics and the noise contours associated with these metrics continue to represent the best available tools for the purpose of airport land use compatibility planning. The following discussion focuses on issues to consider when projecting future noise impacts and selecting contours for compatibility planning purposes. Noise Analysis Time Frame PUC Section 21675 (a) requires that ALUCPs be based on an airport development plan “that reflects the anticipated growth of the airport during at least the next 20 years.” Forecasts having the required 20-year time horizon are normally included in airport master plans. The FAA, Caltrans, and some regional planning agencies also prepare individual airport forecasts, some of which extend to 20 years. For compatibility planning, however, 20 years may be shortsighted. For most airports, a lifespan of more than 20 years can reasonably be presumed. Moreover, the need to avoid incompatible land use development will exist for as long as an airport exists. Once development occurs near an airport, it is virtually impossible—or, at the very least, costly and time consuming—to modify the land uses to ones that are more compatible with airport activities. California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook 3-5 3 BUILDING AN AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY PLAN The “at least” phrase in the statute warrants emphasis. The 20-year time frame should be considered a minimum for compatibility plans. Noise impacts (as well as other compatibility concerns) should be viewed from the longest practical time perspective. Past improvements in aircraft noise reduction technology—or, more to the point, the elimination of older, noisier aircraft from the fleet—have caused noise contours at some airports to shrink. One result of shrinking contour sizes during the late 1990s and early 2000s was pressure to allow residential and other noise-sensitive development closer to airports. The decrease in contour size due to the elimination of aircraft reached its pinnacle at most airports in the mid 2000s and contours began to increase again due to increased operations. Barring vast new improvements in aircraft noise reduction technology, the growth in aircraft operations expected at most airports will continue to result in larger noise contours. In conducting noise analyses for ALUCPs, the long-range time frame is almost always of greatest significance. A possible exception to this is that, at some airports, planned changes in runway configuration or approach procedures could reduce noise exposure in some portions of the airport environs, or change the shape of the contour to include new areas. In these instances, a combination of current and future noise contours may be the appropriate basis for compatibility planning. This would allow for compatible land use planning until the changes are implemented. Other Factors in Noise Contour Selection In addition to time frame and forecasting issues, several other factors warrant consideration in selection of noise contours for compatibility planning functions. Lowest Noise Contour Level Calculating at least one 5 dB CNEL contour interval below the threshold level can provide valuable supplemental information for land use planning. Aircraft noise does not become suddenly unnoticeable just beyond the CNEL contour that delineates the threshold for determining compatible versus incompatible land uses. The additional contour(s) can show where noise levels are below the level at which residential and certain other noise-sensitive land uses may need to be prohibited or substantially restricted, yet still may be noticeable and may warrant some form of land use compatibility measure. When applying this concept, it is important to recognize that CNEL contours become less precise the further they are from the airport. Supplemental Forecast Scenarios At some airports, the distribution of activity throughout the year or among aircraft types is such that an annual average forecast is insufficient for full assessment of noise impacts. For instance, an airport may have distinct seasonal or even daily variations in its activity. Such circumstances may warrant examination of noise contours reflecting these shorter periods in addition to the annual average impacts. These variations are particularly interesting when activity by the noisiest aircraft is concentrated into one part of the year. The predominantly summertime operations of fire attack aircraft is one common example. California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook 3-6 BUILDING AN AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY PLAN 3 As long as the assumptions used in supplemental forecast scenarios are consistent with the defined role of the airport, it is within reason for ALUCs to consider them. Another situation in which supplemental forecast scenarios may be needed is when there is substantial uncertainty regarding a major component of airport activity. Examples include: possible changes in airline aircraft fleet mix and/or volume of operations; potential addition or elimination of particularly noisy aircraft; and/or, uncertainties in activity levels by aircraft that follow unique flight tracks (such as helicopters or agricultural applicator aircraft). Special Noise Sources As noted in Appendix D, most noise contour calculations only take into account the noise from approaches/landings, takeoffs/departures, and closed traffic pattern (touch-and-go) activity. In some circumstances, other sources of aircraft noise may also need to be considered. These include:  Helicopters —Because helicopters have distinct noise characteristics and usually follow different flight tracks than those used by airplanes, their noise can be particularly noticeable. Inclusion of helicopter noise in computation of airport noise contours is desirable, especially at airports having moderate or high levels of helicopter activity. Including helicopter operations in noise contour calculations generally will not have much effect on the size or shape of noise contours unless the traffic volumes are quite high. In these instances, the location of common helicopter flight tracks and the single-event noise levels of helicopter overflights may be appropriate to consider in compatibility planning.  Agricultural Aircraft—Another group of aircraft with unique noise characteristics is agricultural “crop duster” aircraft. For example, unless numerous flight tracks are modeled, the calculated contours tend to maintain a constant width along the flight tracks and never reach an end point.  Ground Operations—For most airports, aircraft ground operations are not a si gnificant source of noise. Noise from engine run-ups can be included in integrated noise model (INM) calculations, however. At airports where such activity is a n oise factor, the INM calculations should account for the aircraft ground operations. If included, some reference to the fact should be noted in the description of the contours. Sources of Noise Contours Potential sources of noise contours can be summarized as follows: The preceding discussion focuses on issues concerning the development of noise contours suitable for compatibility planning. However, it may not be necessary for ALUCs to develop the contours. Noise contours are available from a variety of sources. Some of these are potentially useful for compatibility planning purposes, others are of limited value.  Airport Master Plans—As indicated above, an adopted airport master plan is one of the preferred sources for airport activity forecasts and noise contours. Even when the forecasts and contours in a master plan do not extend at least 20 years into the future, information Californ