Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1975-04-01; City Council; 3331; Proposed Palomar Airport Master PlanAgency Bill No. €i <Q ^/ • Date: Aprilr 1?"1975 Referred Subject: Proposed Palomar Airport Master Plan Submitted by: Planning Director Applicant: Statement of the Matter: The San Diego County Board of Supervisors has recently completed, in conjunction with County of San Diego,, Public Works Agency, Department of General Services (County Airports), and William Pereira and Associates, a master plan for the development of Palomar Airport. The proposed master plan is scheduled for public hearing April 16 at 7:30 P.M. at the Carlsbad High School. It is suggested that the City of Carlsbad make a forma] presentation as to the impacts of the master plan on the City of Carlsbad. See the attached memo of the evaluation of the Palomar Airport Master Plan addressed to the City Manager. Exhibit: Memo addressed to City Manager on evaluation of the Palomar Airport Master' Plan Staff Recommendations to City Manager: . Staff recommends that the City Council request to be heard at the public hearing on Palomar Airport Master Plan scheduled for April 16. Staff also recommends that a prepared statement be presented by City Council or thetr appointed representative, based on the staff report attached, or as amended by the City Council. A3 No. • Date: April 1, 1975 City Manager's Recommendation .Mr. Agatep, in his report dated March 26, 1975, points out several areas of the proposed Palomar Airport Master Plan the Council should give consideration to. The report is primarily to stimulate discussion by the Council. It is anticipated that through that discussion the staff will prepare a policy statement which can be approved by the City Council at its April 15, 1975 Council meeting. Council'Action 4-1-75 By concensus of the Council the staff was instructed to grepare a statement reflecting the Council's position for presentation at the public hearing on the proposed Palomar Airport Master Plan. . . -2- MEMORANDUM March 26, 1975 TO: / CITY MANAGER FROM: ', PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: REVIEW OF THE PALOMAR AIRPORT MASTER PLAN REPORT I have reviewed the subject master plan document. The intent of my review was directed towards a broad review of specific,plan recommendations as they relate to recommendations made in plans or programs currently adopted or underway in the City of Carlsbad. The report will address those issues which I feel should be brought to the City Council and Planning Commission's attention. Specific discussion of these issues, as well as other issues which may be of interest to an individual councilman or planning commissioner, should be addressed separately, s4flee the information is contained in the master plan. This report is intended to address Palomar Airport as it exists, the requirements that will be placed on the airport during the next ten to fifteen years and the proposed airport expansion alternatives which have been proposed in the document. I will also discuss the relationship of the recommended alternative (Alt. #7) to City of Carlsbad policy, plans and/or programs. Facility Description: Palomar Airport is currently classified as a general aviation facility by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). General aviation facilities provide for recreational, business and limited air freight operations. They also provide to some degree, commuter facilities for local air transport. General aviation is not to be construed to mean providing passenger service as a primary aircraft operation. Palomar Airport is currently designated by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as an instrument flight rules (IFR) facility. The IFR designation gives Palomar Airport the ability to direct and handle air traffic during all-weather conditions, including night-time operations. The designation of IFR indicates that Palomar Airport has an instrument tower and some form of instrument landing system (ILS). Currently, Palomar Airport uses the Oceanside TVOR (tactical very high frequency visual omnidirectional range) for navigation purposes. Additionally, an instrument landing system (ILS) will be installed during calendar year 1975 (presumably the Fall) to upgrade instrument approaches and the departures to the airport. The existing runway is currently 4700' long and can handle up to 140,000 Ib. aircraft gross weight. In essence, this means that a small commercial aircraft such as a "727" can land at Palomar providing it is not carrying much more than a few passengers or a small amount of air freight. The airport currently services approximately 100,000 aircraft operations per year. It os anticipated that increased demands for aviation facilities by 1990 will increase aircraft operations to approximately 500,000 operations per year. San Diego County recognizes the need for additional general aviation facilities. To that end, the County Public Works Department, Special Services, contracted William L. Pereira and Associates to prepare a master plan for Palomar Airport. During the period , -2- t of plan preparation, the City was in direct contact with the consultant, as well as with the County in reviewing and assisting in plan's development. The report discusses provisions and requirements that will insure airport compatibility with local communities. The proposed airport also will have requirements for additional points of ingress and egress for surface traffic. It is anticipated that the airport will need to provide facilities to handle up to and including 500,000 aircraft operations per year. Noise currently generated as a result of aircraft activity is minimal and within limits of the California Noise Equivalency Standards (CNEL). Most of the noise generated primarily impacts the airport itself and to a lesser degree impacts property currently zoned planned industrial (P-M), heavy commercial-light industrial (C-M), or other non- residential zoning. Air pollution generated by the airport, according to the report, does not exceed the air pollution generated by surface vehicles. In essence, pollution generated by aircraft and surface vehicles (cars, trucks, etc.) are basically the same. Land uses programmed for the airport are generally land uses which assist in the support of airport activities or are dependent on the airport for transportation. Additionally, land uses proposed at Palomar Airport include commercial activities, such as restaurants, motels, etc. Palomar Airport requirements in the future are directly related to several regional growth trends. The report points out that increased personal leisure time has increased the necessity for alternative modes of travel. Subsequently, a demand will be placed on the airport to provide a growing aviation oriented population in the North County. The area to be served by the airport will consist of communities as far south as Del Mar/Sorrento Valley, east to Escondido and north to and including Camp Pendleton. The fact that Palomar Airport has excellent surface accessibility in Palomar Airport Road, El Camino Real and Interstate 5 lends credence to the f assumption the Palomar Airport is a critical North County aircraft facility. Because of these reasons, as well as others, the relationship of Palomar Airport master plan to the City of Carlsbad is critical. Master Plan Alternatives: Pereira and Associates and the County presented seven different master plan alternatives. Alternative #7, which I will describe in detail, is proposed as the most viable. I will not discuss to any great length the other six alternatives. The staff is of the opinion that alternative #7 not only presents the most acceptable alternative, but also has been recommended by the Palomar Airport master plan Ad-Hoc committee, endorsed by major .property owners, and endorsed by informal council and staff recommendations. Alternative #1 contemplated the expansion of Palomar Airport to a mesa south of Palomar Airport Road. This alternative was discounted because of the cost of construction and the potential impact the airport would have on the City of Carlsbad. The impact area would potentially have involved an area three to four times as large as the impact area of alternative #7. Alternative #2 provided for a second runway some 1800 to 2000' to the north of the existing runway. Additionally, it was anticipated that a second runway would be equal in length (approximately 5,000') to that of the current runway.and that the total intent seemed to be to provide for maximum options for commuter facilities in the future. This alternative was not recommended because of terrain constraints and because of the amount of land that would have to be acquired to provide for the second runway and other airport facilities. For similar reasons, alternatives #3, 14, #5 and #6 were discarded. -3- Alternative #7, the plan recommended to the Board of Supervisors, suggests construction of a second runway approximately 800' to the north of the existing runway. Additionally, it provides for construction of the runway so as to minimize grading and to minimize the total airport impact area. This alternative also minimizes the potential require- ment to acquire additional land. Alternative #7 provides for the immediate needs and the projected General Aviation needs of the airport. It is the staff's opinion that Alternative #7 meets the requirements and policies outlined to date by the City of Carlsbad. Additional major entrances will be required, one to the west and one to the north. City plans currently provide for circulation in the airport area and alternatively seems to be compatible with City's plans. Noise and air pollution potentials which can be attributed to the airport and aircraft activities are limited to the area the City has called non-residential reserve in the Land Use Element of the General Plan. It must be recognized, however, that noise generated by today's aircraft, if aircraft technology does not advance, could impact additional areas beyond the boundaries of the non-residential reserve. Federal standards for aircraft engine noise have required that aircraft engines decrease overall noise production. Federal standards now require that business jet engines and large piston engines must achieve specific noise ratings by 1979 and 1980. These noise ratings will decrease the existing 100 to 110 db. levels to approximately 85 to 90 db. If the increased operations at Palomar Airport meet existing and future Federal noise standards, it is anticipated that 1980 noise levels at Palomar Airport may not exceed substantially the noise levels that are currently generated by today's aircraft. The proposed Palomar Airport land use plan addresses the compatibility of the plan with local plans and programs. It encourages periodic review of not only the Palomar Airport plan, but also local agency plans to ensure that future demands for aircraft, and future land uses are compatible. The report also recommends a number of methods whereby noise compatibility can be achieved. These recommendations include steeper approach and departure patterns, building soundproofing and the just mentioned periodic review of land use compatibilities. The City of Carlsbad has designated a large part of the land around Palomar Airport as non-residential reserve. The intent of non-residential reserve was to preserve local land use options so as not to prematurely commit land to a use which will be incompatible with airport activities. Additionally, local policy has been to insure that in develop- ment proposed near the airport, every consideration is taken to minimize the impact of the airport on proposed uses. Evidence of the City's approach is shown in the C.-C. & R's adopted as part of the Cabot, Cabot and Forbes Industrial Park and as part of the Valle Verde Industrial Park. The plan also describes the necessity of providing fire and crash facilities on the airport. These facilities are proposed to have access to El CanHno Real. Recommendations of the plan also include the acquisition of additional clear zones north, east and west of the existing and proposed runway. Clear zones will mean that no construction can take place on the land purchased. The only activity which would >be allowed would be open space, agriculture or recreational activities. An additional requirement is that the airport acquire an aviation easement east of the existing Palomar Airport clear zone, the implication being, building height and use restrictions would be required of the Valle Verde property. -4- The review of the Palomar Airport plan, as I have outlined it, seems to be consistent with City of Carlsbad requirements. The plan also meets circulation requirements, open space and conservation provisions which can be achieved by implementation of the proposed clear zone and aviation easements. There are a number of other issues which must be pointed out so that policy decisions can be made prior to any formal presentation being given on the airport plan. Among the policy decisions that will have to be made are: (1) County requirements for sewer and water, (2) County requirements and provisions for fire and police, (3) the airport master plan and associated project review to ensure quality construction and land use compatibility with City planning efforts. Questions which will have to be answered are: How will the County and the City mutually address sewer and water provisions? How will the County and City mutually respond to the need for police and fire protection with access being proposed to El Camino Real? We can assume that the County expects the City to participate, somewhat, in manning and construction of the Fire/Crash Facility. Another very important question which must be addressed is the review that the City may want when considering projects and/or plans that will be constructed on the air- port property. The City of Carlsbad has in the past ensured quality industrial con- struction by using planned-industrial (P-M) ordinances. The City's existing planned industrial ordinance contains standards for noise, air pollution, odor, landscaping, etc. Some review mechanism should be developed whereby the City can be assured that airport development will at least meet and hopefully exceed local standards. There has been discussion of a joint powers agreement between the County of San Diego and City of Carlsbad which would permit design or review. However, at this date, it is not known whether design review in the form of a joint power agreement or some other form is more desirable. But, again, design review, whether City controlled or under joint powers agreement, is a policy issue. As part of this presentation, I will be using a number of graphics to more explicitly point out recommendations and findings of the master plan. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact my office at your convenience. DdnalcTA. Agatep DAA/br Note: This report will be given to the Planning Commission at its April 8 meeting.