HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-09-16; City Council; 8760; McClellan-Palomar Airport Conprehensive LandCIT OF CARLSBAD — AGEND BILL
O<
OO
AR« <?7&0
MTG. 9A6/86
DEPT. rLM
TITLE: MC CLELLAN-PALOMAR
COMPREHENSIVE LAND
AIRPORT
USE PLAN
DFPT HD W*$T
PITY ATTY\J p^l
CITY MGR. 3$"'
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Direct Council representative to SANDAG to support adoption of
the draft McClellan-Palomar Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan,
ITEM EXPLANATION
A draft Comprehensive Land Use Plan has been prepared for the
McClellan-Palomar Airport and surrounding areas. The Planning
Commission received a presentation by SANDAG and accepted the
report. Members of the Palomar Advisory Committee heard the
report given to the Commission and spoke to the findings.
A public hearing will be held by the Board of Supervisors when
the matter comes before them. Although no public hearing is
required at the City level, Council may wish to hear from
citizens who wish to speak on the report and its findings.
EXHIBIT
1) Draft Compehensive Land Use Plan McClellan-Palomar Airport
(June 1986)
DRAFT
COMPREHENSIVE
LAND USE PLAN
McCLELLAN-PALOMAR
AIRPORT
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA
JUNE 1986
San Diego
ASSOCIATION OF
GOVERNMENTS
1200 Third Avenue
Suite 524 ^Security Pacific Plaza
San Diego, California 92101
(619) 236-5300
D
This report was financed with local funds from the County of San Diego.
MEMBER AGENCIES: CITIES Of CARLSBAD. CHULA VISTA, CORONADO. DEL MAM, EL CAJON, ESCONOIDO, IMPERIAL BEACH, LA MESA,
LEMON GROVE. NATIONAL CITY, OCEANSJOE, POWAY, SAN DIEQO, SAN MARCOS, SANTEB, VISTA AND COUNTY OF SAN DIEQO.
ADVISONY/UAISON MEMBERS: CA. DEPT. OP TRANSPORTATION/US. OEPT. OP DEFENSE * TUUANA/BAJA CFA. NORTE
Board of Directors
SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS
The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG)is a voluntary public agency formed by
local governments to assure overall areawide planning and coordination for the San Diego region.
Voting members include the Incorporated Cities of Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Del Mar,
El Cajon, Escondido, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, Lemon Grove, National City, Oceanside,
Poway, San Diego, San Marcos, Santee, Vista and the County of San Diego
Advisory and Liaison members include CALTRANS, U.S.Department of Defense
and Tijuana/Baja California Norte.
CHAIRMAN: Jess Van Oeventer
VICE CHAIRMAN: Ernie Cowan
SECRETARY-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Kenneth E. Sulzer
CITY Of CARLSBAD
Mary Caster, Mayor
(A) Richard Chick, Councilman
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Greg Cox, Mayor
(A) Leonard Moore, Councilman
CITY OF CORONADO
Lois Ewen, Mayor Pro Tem
(A) Robert G. Odiorne, Councilman
CITY OF DEL MAR
Scott Barnett, Councilman
(A) John Gillies, Councilman
CITY OF EL CAJON
Harriet Stockwell, Councilwoman
(A) Richard Smith, Mayor Pro Tem
CITY OF ESCONDIDO
Ernie Cowan, Mayor
(A) Doris Thurston, Councilwoman
CITY OF IMPERIAL BEACH
Bill Russell. Mayor
(A) Alfred B. Hughes, Councilman
CITY OF LA MESA
Art Madrid, Mayor Pro Tem
(A) Fred Nagel, Mayor
(A) Ernest W. Ewin, Councilman
CITY OF LEMON GROVE
Lois Heiserman, Councilwoman
(A) James V. Dorman, Mayor
CITY OF NATIONAL CITY
Jess E. Van Deventer, Councilman
(A) Marion F. Cooper, Councilman
CITY OF OCEANSIDE
Lawrence M. Bagley. Mayor
(A) John MacDonald, Deputy Mayor
CITY OF POWAY
Carl Kruse. Mayor
(A) Robert Emery, Councilman
CITY OF SAN DIEGO
Ed Struiksma, Deputy Mayor
(A) Mike Gotch, Councilman
CITY OF SAN MARCOS
James D. Simmons, Vice Mayor
(A) Lionel G. Burton, Mayor
CITY OF SANTEE
Gerry Solomon, Councilman
(A) Jack Doyle, Mayor
CITY OF VISTA
Mike Flick, Mayor
(A) Lloyd von Haden, Councilman
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
George Bailey, Supervisor
(A) Brian Bilbray, Supervisor
(A) Susan Golding, Supervisor
STATE DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
(Advisory Member)
Leo Trombatore, Director
(A) Bill Dotson. District Director
U.S.OEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
(Liaison Member)
Captain Jan Cook, U.S.N.
C.O., Public Works Center, San Diego
TIJUANA/BAJA CALIFORNIA NORTE
(Advisory Member)
Rene Trevino Arrendondo,
Presidente Municipal
Revised April 1986
ii
San Diego
ASSOCIATION OF
GOVERNMENTS
Suite 524, Security Pacific Plaza
12OO Third Avenue
San Diego, California 92101
16191 236-5300 June 27, 1986
TO THE CITIZENS OF THE SAN DIEGO REGION
In 1970, the State Legislature created Airport Land Use Commissions in each county within
the State. The following year, SANDAG was recognized as the agency empowered to act as
the Airport Land Use Commission for the San Diego Region.
Acting as the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC), it is the responsibility of SANDAG to
prepare Comprehensive Land Use Plans, based on aircraft produced noise and flight activity
considerations, for each airport within the region. The Comprehensive Land Use Plan for
McClellan-Palomar Airport was prepared by SANDAG with review by the Paloraar Airport
Advisory Committee. The plan is based on the noise contours prepared for San Diego County.
The plan recommendations for achieving compatible land uses for the Cities of Carlsbad and
Vista and the County of San Diego include:
1. Prohibit incompatible uses within the Area of Influence, as defined by this plan.
2. Use this plan to review pertinent proposals for revision of the General Plans of Carlsbad,
Vista, and the County of San Diego.
3. Adopt an ordinance making the requirements of the existing and applicable California
Noise Insulation Standards (CAC, Title 25) apply to single family detached residences in
the same manner as they are applied to multiple family residences, hotels, motels, and
other buildings addressed in that law.
4. Direct the appropriate County Department to record the location of any aircraft
accidents within five miles of the airport property boundaries.
5. Review the aircraft mix assumptions and forecasts of aircraft operations and update the
existing and projected Community Noise Equivalent Levels (CNEL) contours every five
years or when warranted.
Successful implementation of this plan will require the cooperation of the Cities of Carlsbad
and Vista and the County of San Diego, SANDAG acting as the ALUC, and the aircraft
owners and pilots operating at McClellan-Palomar Airport.
Sincerely,
JESS VAN DEVENTER
Chairman, Board of Directors
iii
MEMBER AGENCIES: Cities of Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Del Mar, El Cajon, Escondido, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, Lemon Grove,
National City, Oceanside, Poway, San Diego, San Marcos, Santee, Vista and County of San Diego.
ADVISORY/LIAISON MEMBERS: California Department of Transportation, U.S.Department of Defense and Tijuana/Baja California None.
San Diego
ASSOCIATION OF
GOVERNMENTS
Sulta 524, Sacurlty Pacific Plaza
12OO Third Avanu*
San Diago, California 92101
619/236-53OO
-DRAFT-
ADOPTION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE
LAND USE PLAN FOR McCLELLAN-PALOMAR AIRPORT
WHEREAS, SANDAG is designated as the Airport Land Use Commission
for the San Diego Region pursuant to the State of California Public Utilities Code,
Article 3.5, Chapter 4, Part 1, Division 9; and
WHEREAS, SANDAG has prepared a Comprehensive Land Use Plan for
McClellan-Palomar Airport in order to preserve the public health, safety, and
welfare of the region's citizens; and
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for McClellan-Palomar
Airport was prepared with input from an advisory committee composed of repre-
sentatives of the jurisdictions and organization who might be affected by the Plan;
and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held to take testimony from the public
on the Plan's findings and recommendations; and
WHEREAS, the County of San Diego has determined that there will be
no significant environmental impact caused by the implementation of the Plan;
NOW THEREFORE
BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the San Diego Asso-
ciation of Governments, acting as the Airport Land Use Commission for the San
Diego Region, hereby adopts the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for McClellan-
Palomar Airport.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this__day of , 1986.
ATTEST:.
CHAIRMAN SECRETARY
v
MEMBER AGENCIES: Cities of Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Del Mar, El Cajon, Escondido, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, Lemon Grove
National City, Oceanside, Poway, San Diego, San Marcos, Santee, Vista and County of San Diego.
ADVISORY/LIAISON MEMBERS: California Department of Transportation, U.S.Department of Defense and Tijuana/Baja California Nortc.
Abstract
TITLE:
AUTHOR:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY:
SOURCE OF COPIES:
NUMBER OF PAGES:
ABSTRACT:
Draft Comprehensive Land Use Plan for
McClellan-Palomar Airport
San Diego Association of Governments
Land Use Compatibility Surrounding
McClellan-Palomar Airport
June 1986
San Diego Association of Governments
San Diego Association of Governments
1200 Third Avenue, Suite 524
San Diego, CA 92101
32
This report has been prepared to assist in
ensuring compatible land use development
in the area surrounding McClellan-Palomar
Airport. The plan contains the Airport's
Influence Area, projected noise contours,
clear zones, flight activity zone, land use
compatibility matrix and plan recommen-
dations.
vii
Table of Contents
L INTRODUCTION 1
IL AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS - THE BASIS OF THE CLUP 4
HL AIRPORT INFLUENCE AREA 5
IV. PROJECTED NOISE CONTOURS 5
V. CLEAR ZONES, FLIGHT ACTIVITY ZONE AND AIR SAFETY 10
VL GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY AND NONCONFORMING USES .. 14
VIL PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS 15
VHL ALUC DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS 16
DC. PLAN UPDATE 17
APPENDICES:
A. ADVISORY CIRCULAR - PALOMAR AIRPORT NOISE
CONTROL PLAN 19
B. ALUC RULES AND REGULATIONS 28
REFERENCES ...'.' 31
List of Figures
FIGURE 1
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 4
EXISTING REGIONAL AIRPORTS SYSTEM
AIRPORT INFLUENCE AREA, PROJECTED NOISE
CONTOURS, CLEAR ZONES, AND FLIGHT ACTIVITY
ZONE ,
LAND USE COMPATIBILITY WITH PROJECTED
ANNUAL COMMUNITY NOISE EQUIVALENT
LEVELS PRODUCED BY AIRPORT OPERATIONS
CLEAR ZONES AND FLIGHT ACTIVITY ZONE
WITH ACCIDENT DAT A
8
11
List of Tables
TABLE 1
TABLE 2
AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS MIX FOR McCLELLAN-
PALOMAR AIRPORT
1985-2005 DATA SUMMARY TABULATED BY CNEL
CONTOUR
xi
COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN
FOR McCLELLAN-PALOMAR AIRPORT
L INTRODUCTION
The Airport Land Use Commission
In 1970, the State of California enacted a law requiring the formation of an Air-
port Land Use Commission (ALUC) in each county containing a public airport.
According to the Act, it is the responsibility of the Commission to:
"formulate a comprehensive land use plan that will provide for the
orderly growth of each public airport and the area surrounding the
airport within the jurisdiction of the Commission, and will safeguard
the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of the airport
and the public in general. The Commission plan shall include a long-
range master plan that reflects the anticipated growth of the airport
during at least the next 20 years. In formulating a land use plan, the
Commission may develop height restrictions on buildings, may specify
use of land, and may determine building standards, including sound-
proofing adjacent to airports, within the planning area."
The San Diego County Board of Supervisors, by unanimous vote on December 15,
1970, recommended that the San Diego Association of Governments be designated
to assume the responsibilities of an Airport Land Use Commission. A similar
resolution was passed and adopted by the Selection Committee of Mayors of the
San Diego County Region on February 8, 1971. The Secretary of State was noti-
fied of this determination on February 25, 1971, and an acknowledgement of this
determination was received from the Secretary of State's office on March 2,
1971.
SANDAG, as the Airport Land Use Commission for the San Diego Region, has
approved and adopted Comprehensive Land Use Plans (CLUP) for Montgomery
Field, Brown Field, Oceanside, Gillespie and Palomar Airports and NAS Miratnar.
A draft CLUP for Ranaona Airport is under review. This CLUP for McClellan-
Palomar Airport will replace the original CLUP adopted for McClellan-Palomar in
1974. (See Figure 1 for locations of public airports.)
McClellan-Palomar Airport
The North County area served by McClellan-Palomar Airport is the fastest
growing portion of the Region. It is expected to increase from its 1980 population
of 389,000 to over 700,000 by the year 2000. Employment is forecast to increase
from 117,000 to 219,000, an 87% increase. The rapid growth in employment is due
largely to-the extensive industrial development taking place in the North County,
much of it located around the McClellan-Palomar Airport. Industrial development
was encouraged by local agencies to ensure that the land use change from agri-
culture to more intensive uses would remain compatible with the operation of the
airport.
The purpose of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) adopted in 1974 was to
identify areas likely to be impacted by noise and flight activity created by air-
craft operations at the airport. This update was required to keep the CLUP
current. It was prepared in cooperation with the County of San Diego, using the
County's Airport Layout Plan revised in 1982. The revised Plan indicates a single
runway. Additionally, it incorporates a new approach and clear zone. Noise
contours used in the CLUP were prepared by CH2M Hill under contract with the
County of San Diego in 1985. This Plan should permit the reader to determine if a
particular property is impacted by aircraft-produced noise or flight activity, what
the land use or construction implications are, and mitigation measures needed to
permit development that is compatible with airport operation.
Figures 2 and 3 in the Plan identify the areas and land uses impacted by aircraft
operations from the airport. The narrative includes the plan assumptions, the area
of influence, noise contours, clear zones, flight activity zone, the noise abatement
plan, the ALUC review process, and recommendations. The ALUC rules and regu-
lations, including definitions, are contained in the Appendix, followed by a list of
References.
Imperial County
The recommendations contained in this report apply to both the current situation
at McClellan-Palomar Airport and to future operations as well.
II. AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS - THE BASIS OF THE CLUP
There were 376 aircraft based at McClellan-Palomar Airport in 1984. Most of its
180,000 annual (1985) operations involve single engine aircraft. Current opera-
tions produce noise impacts on the surrounding area. With the forecasted increase
in North County population and employment, aircraft operations are expected to
increase to about 326,000. The area of noise impact will expand with the increase
in aircraft operations and change in aircraft mix. Therefore, noise and safety
conflicts could result from unrestricted land development around the airport. This
Plan provides guidance in land use development to assure compatible uses when
the airport reaches its practical annual operational capacity.
The future aircraft operations shown in Table 1 were developed by the consulting
firm of CH2M Hill for the County of San Diego. It shows the mix of aircraft by
type and percent of operations by each type.
TABLE 1
FUTURE AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS MIX FOR
McCLELLAN-PALOMAR AIRPORT
Daily Percent
Aircraft Type Operations of Fleet
Commercial 5.36 0.6
Single engine propeller 683.30 76.5
Multi-engine propeller 115.22 12.9
Jet 44.66 5.0
Helicopter 44.66 5.0
Total 893.20 100.0
The practical capacity of the airport, in number of daily operations forecasted in
the 1974 CLUP, was 1,192; the number has been reduced in Table 1 because the
revised airport layout plan eliminates the once-planned second runway. However,
Each takeoff and each landing is defined as one operation.
the flight patterns remain almost unchanged. The great majority of the aircraft
operations will continue to impact the area north of the airport. It is also in the
area north of the airport that helicopter practice takes place, at a lower altitude
(700 feet MSL). A significant change has taken place in the forecasted increase in
the jet operations. The anticipated increase to 5%, rather than 3%, of aircraft
operations by jet aircraft will increase the flight activity straight in from the east
and straight out to the west. All of these changes affect the Area of Influence,
the area impacted by noise and flight activity, all of which are described in the
following sections.
EL AIRPORT INFLUENCE AREA
The A LUC establishes an Airport Influence Area for each airport in the Region.
The Influence Area encompasses those areas adjacent to airports which could be
impacted by noise levels exceeding the California State Noise Standards or where
height restrictions would be needed to prevent obstructions to navigable airspace
as outlined in Federal Aviation Administration regulations. It represents the
boundary of the ALUC's planning and review authority. The ALUC procedure
ensures a regional overview to protect the airport's operations and to prevent the
creation of new noise and safety problems.
The McClellan-Palomar Airport Influence Area is shown on Figure 2. The Area of
Influence encompasses all of the area designated in the CLUP in 1974, plus the
area to the west impacted by the noise increase anticipated from straight out
departures, and the first 10,000 feet east of the airport below the Instrument
Landing System (ILS) approach. The Cities of Carlsbad and Vista and the County
of San Diego, through their community planning processes and zoning ordinances,
retain land use control within the Airport Influence Area.
IV. PROJECTED NOISE CONTOURS
In California, the technique used for quantifying aircraft noise is the community
noise equivalent level (CNEL). The CNEL is a descriptor of daily noise environ-
ment. It accounts for the magnitude, the time of day, and the frequency of occur-
rence of noise intrusions. The CNEL is calculated from the hourly noise by a
I-cco
0.
E
OC
z
111
uo
$z<E z8° oy UJQN
5SliDQ< t
«^"SSl^g
§^2
U. < Q.O
formula prescribed in the California Noise Standards. The outside boundaries of
the areas generally subject to such noise are usually portrayed by lines overlaid on
a map of the area around the airport.. These boundary lines are referred to as
"noise contours". The noise contours provide one of the bases for delineating the
airport's Area of Influence. Individual contours appear on the map because the
noise is loudest at the airport and dissipates at varying distances away from the
airport depending on the location of the flight activity, the types of aircraft in-
volved, and topography.
The 60 and 65 CNEL contours are important because each of them has a different
significance in developing compatible land uses around an airport. The 60 CNEL
contour is important because the California Noise Insulation Standards, which
became effective on August 22, 1974, state that residential structures (all dwell-
ings other than detached single-family dwellings) which are located within the 60
CNEL contours, require an acoustical analysis showing that the structure has been
designed to limit intruding noise to levels which would not interfere with speech
or sleep. This contour does not define a land area in which residential uses are
unsuitable. Rather, the contour identifies an area in which a mitigation measure
may have to be utilized to reduce the impact of aircraft noise on dwelling units
other than single-family detached.
The 65 CNEL contour is the value defined by the adopted State Noise Standards
which identifies the noise impact boundary of airports; that is, a boundary within
which the noise environment is not suitable for residential use. Other non-
residential uses are generally suitable within the contour.
The 70 CNEL contour defines a boundary within which the area is not suitable for
numerous land uses. CNEL's above 70 are not projected far beyond the airport
boundary. Active, outdoor recreation, commercial uses and manufacturing uses
are acceptable. CNEL's above 75 remain within the airport boundary.
Figure 3 presents the range of land uses compatible with various projected annual
CNEL's. It can be used to determine the appropriateness of various planned land
uses. McClellan-Palomar Airport, with the level of operations and CNEL's pro-
jected, should not be limiting to the uses permitted by San Diego County's,
Carlsbad's or Vista's General Plans within the Area of Influence.
8
10
11
12
13
14
FIGURE 3
LAND USE COMPATIBILITY WITH PROJECTED ANNUAL
COMMUNITY NOISE EQUIVALENT LEVELS PRODUCED
BY AIRPORT OPERATIONS
LAND USE
Annual Community Noise Equivalent Level
in Decibels
55 60 65 70 75
Outdoor Amphitheaters (may not be
suitable for certain types of music)
Schools, Libraries
Nature Preserves, Wildlife Preserves
' Residential-Single Family, Multiple
Family, Mobil* Homes, Transient
Motels and other forms of Housing
Retirement Homes, Intermediate Care
Facilities, Convalescent, Hospitals,
Nursing Homes
Parks, Playgrounds
Office Buildings, Business and
Professional
Auditoriums, Concert Halls, Indoor
Arenas, Churches
Riding Stables. Water Recreation
Facilities
Outdoor Spectator Sports, Golf
Courses
Agriculture, Extractive Industry,'
Farming
Commercial-Retail, Shopping Centers,
Restaurants, Movie Theaters
Commercial-Wholesale, Industrial,
Manufacturing, Utilities
Cemeteries'
COMPATIBLE
The average noise level is such that
indoor and outdoor activities associated
with the land use may be carried out with
essentially no interference from noise.
INCOMPATIBLE
The average noise level is so severe
that construction costs to make the envi-
ronment acceptable for performance of
activities would probably be prohibitive.
The outdoor environment would be intol-
erable for outdoor activities associated
with the land use.
Soiirce:HUD,"Aircraft Noise Impact; Planning Guidelines for Local Agencies",
by Wilsey & Ham and Bolt, Beranek and Newman, 1972, as revised by
the ALUC, 1974.
The area immediately surrounding the airport is planned for industrial and com-
mercial uses, which are compatible with the noise levels forecast around the
airport. Residential uses are planned in the area south of the airport beyond the
forecast 65 CNEL. Nevertheless, some homes will be impacted by noise in the 60
to 65 CNEL. Mitigation measures, such as air conditioning to allow windows to
remain closed, would be appropriate to reduce the noise level inside these homes.
Little can be done to reduce aircraft noise levels outside.
A review of current land use and general plan data summarized on Table 2 shows
little noise impact currently on existing uses. A number of parcels within the 60
to 65 CNEL are designated multiple residential; future development will require
noise attenuation studies for these units. Noise impact expected from future
airport operations also could impact many single family dwellings; such units could
be insulated to protect them from noise exceeding 60 CNEL. Alternatively, the
parcels zoned for residential use could be revised to non-residential uses within
the 60 to 65 CNEL, so that there would be little noise impact for residential units
in the future. In order to reduce the noise impact of the airport, a noise control
plan was prepared for pilots; it is included in the CLUP as Appendix A.
TABLE 2
DEVELOPMENT WITHIN AIRPORT NOISE LEVELS
McCLELLAN-PALOMAR AIRPORT
CNEL 60 - 65 65 - 70 70 or More
Year 19802000 19802000 1980 2000
Total Population 104 830 0 0 0 0
Household 104 830 00 0 0
Group Quarters 00 00 00
Occupied Housing Units 57 457 00 00
Single Family 51 440 0 0 0 0
Multifamily 6 17 00 0 0
Civilian Employment 803 4,382 350 2,480 439 615
Note: New multifamily dwellings will require noise attenuation studies.
Sources: SANDAG Regional Growth Forecasts, Series 6 and
Carlsbad General Plan, 1985
V. CLEAR ZONES, FLIGHT ACTIVITY ZONE AND AIR SAFETY
It is one of the purposes of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan to preclude incom-
patible development from intruding into areas of significant risk resulting from
aircraft takeoff and landing patterns. For the purposes of this report, such areas
of significant risk are identified as "Clear Zones" and "Flight Activity Zone."
They are delineated on Figure 4, along with accident data in the vicinity of the
airport.
Clear Zones
The Clear Zones for McClellan-Palomar Airport are the land areas adjacent to the
ends of the runway's primary surface, over which aircraft using the airport must
pass for each operation, either arrival or departure. The "Clear Zones" shown on
Figure 4 reflect the dimensions of the airport "clear zones" as'promulgated by
Federal Aviation Regulations Part 77 (Obstruction Hazards) and Part 15Z (Runway
Clear Zones). The runway clear zone is an "area'at ground level that begins at the
end of each primary surface ... and extends with the width of each approach
surface ... to terminate directly below each approach surface slope at the point,
or points, where the slope reaches a height of 50 .. feet above the elevation of the
runway end or 50 feet above the terrain at the outer extremity of the clear zone,
whichever is shorter."
Because the Clear Zones lie mainly on the airport property, they are mostly
protected from private development.
The only land uses considered to be compatible with the restrictions required of
the Clear Zones are:
1. Natural Recreation Areas or Habitat and Species Preservation Areas.
2. Public rights-of-way.
3. Agriculture, except livestock, and sand and gravel extraction.
10
e
OQ.OC
UJ
uO
l>?<t$(2>*
zfc9
CE <£^<
11
4. Storage facilities, not including flammables, explosives and corrosives, and
low intensity land uses characterized by a low number of employees and
customers per square foot of building area.
Areas immediately adjacent to the airport in every direction are zoned with a
height limit of 35 feet. This height limit could assure that new construction will
not penetrate either the approach surfaces at the runway ends or the transitional
surfaces along the length of the runway. However, the 35 foot height limit allows
an average height of 35 feet (e.g., an average of a sloping roofline could be 35
feet although the roofline could slope from 25 feet to 45 feet). Additionally,
penthouses, smokestacks, etc. can extend higher than 35 feet. These zoning
requirements are not adequate to protect the approaches to the airport runways.
For this reason the approval of an industrial subdivision west of the airport in-
cluded conditions set by the City of Carlsbad: meet the height limitation set by
FAR Part 77 and also limit the uses to warehouses and some office uses in the
area immediately west of the airport.
Flight Activity Zone
The additional air safety considerations are shown graphically in the CLUP as
Flight Activity Zone. They are based upon the data presented in the 1974 CLUP
which identified areas where most problems may be expected to occur, namely the
normal flight patterns. These typical flight patterns will remain much the same
as in the 1974 CLUP. 'Thus, the areas most likely to experience a crash remain
those beneath the flight pattern, especially in the final approach to the runway.
These are the areas identified as flight activity hazard areas in the 1974 CLUP,
updated to 1986 in this Plan to include two important changes:
r»
1. The construction of a smaller, parallel runway located 700 feet to the north
of the existing runway has been deleted from the airport layout plan.
2. The planned installation of an Instrument Landing System on the existing
runway which was considered in the formulation of the influence area was
implemented in 1982. The approach surface has a 34:1 slope for 10,000 feet
east of Runway 24.
12
Due to the elimination of a parallel runway, a portion of the flight activity zone
previously based on the north runway of the airport has been moved 700 feet
south. The other part of the designated flight activity zone remains the same as
in the 1974 CLUP. The changes are shown on Figure 4, together with accident
data to 1986.
Both the CNEL contours and the Flight Activity Zone were delineated on Figure 2,
to indicate areas of land use concern. The land uses compatible with the greatest
levels of noise shown on Figure 3 are not identical with uses compatible with
increased flight activity, in the areas under the final approaches to Runway 24 and
to Runway 6.
The Flight Activity Zone overlays private properties. It identifies land areas
which should be hekl free of intensive development, including high rise
development and all uses which involve the assembly of large groups of people
(more than 100). This zone should be used as a guide in consideration of any
proposed increase in density or high rise development. It also should be used in
review of assembly-type uses, which usually require a conditional use permit from
the land use agency. The Cities of Carlsbad and Vista and San Diego County
should find such uses to be inappropriate in the Flight Activity Zone, by finding
them to be incompatible with this CLUP.
Noise Abatement Procedures
The delineation of the Airport Influence Area was modified somewhat by the
existing Noise Control Plan prepared by San Diego County in 1984. The Noise
Control Plan is a voluntary plan for pilots, developed in accordance with FAA
guidelines. The intent of the plan is to advise pilots of noise-sensitive areas, so
that they will approach the airport at not less than 2000 feet above ground level
under visual flight rules. This can reduce the noise pressure at ground level con-
siderably. In addition, jets are required to use the ILS (from the east) and are
advised to depart straight out until reaching the shoreline. These practices revise
the noise contours, so that the Airport Influence Area is increased to the west.
The increased use of jets also increases the Flight Activity Zone identified to theeast.
13
VI. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY AND NONCONFORMING USES
The Carlsbad General Plan, revised in. 1985, is consistent with this CLUP. There
are no non-conforming uses within the Area of Influence of the airport, although
one of the City's zoning designations would allow incompatible uses, the R-l-10
zone on El Camino Real occupied by the Costa Real MWD. It should be revised.
The only other areas of land use concern relate to height limits and hazard
zones. Because the Carlsbad zoning ordinance does not specifically limit the
height of rooftop appurtenances, there is no assurance that new construction will
not create hazardous conditions near the airport. This concern was addressed in
the approval of the industrial subdivision west of the airport, by requiring ad-
herence to the FAR Part 77 guidelines. The area east of the airport, especially
along the ILS approach, is not so protected. It will be necessary for the City of
Carlsbad to review heights of all structures to ensure that they conform to the
FAR Part 77 guidelines, using the site development plan review procedure.
The City of Carlsbad has established an overlay zone, called a Special Treatment
Area, for the ALUC-designated Area of Influence. For parcels over 25 acres the
procedure requires a specific plan; for smaller parcels it requires review of all
proposed structures to assure adequate safety of aircraft and persons and struc-
tures on the ground. The procedure has allowed buildings to be located close to
the clear zones, but developers have met the requests of FA A to provide
obstruction lighting when appurtenances have penetrated the transitional surface
(a 7 to 1 slope from the runway primary surface). It would be appropriate for the
FAA guidelines to be made a part of the zoning requirement around the airport, so
that building designers are made aware of these concerns in advance of design. It
could reduce the possible need for obstruction lighting on new construction north
(and possibly south) of the airport in transitional zones, as well as new construc-
tion in the east and west approaches. The community plan should continue to
designate land uses consistent with this CLUP.
In order to be protected from inappropriate land uses not readily covered by the
criteria of this CLUP, one additional concern must be addressed. Any use,
whether within or outside the defined Airport Influence Area, found to be a
"hazard" by the FAA should be determined not to be in conforrnance with the
CLUP. Such a provision would assure that approval of a discretionary use (such as
14
a very high smokestack in an industrial area) which might otherwise be considered
acceptable, would not create a hazard to the operation of the airport. The FAA
has no authority to limit land use and can only direct that changes be made in
airport operations when the determination of a "hazard" is made. Therefore, the
CLUP would be the determining factor by indicating that such a use would not be
in conformance with the Plan.
VH. PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendations for Actions by the City of Carlsbad,
City of Vista and County of San Diego
1. Prohibit incompatible uses within the Airport Influence Area, as defined by
this plan, including inappropriate heights which would penetrate the 34:1
airport approach surface which extends 10,000 feet to the east.
2. Use this plan to review pertinent proposals for revision of the General Plans
of Carlsbad, Vista and the County of San Diego.
Include, as part of the General Plans' implementing ordinances, a provision
for assurance that no construction permitted in the vicinity of McClellan-
Palomar Airport will constitute a "hazard" as determined by FAA.
3. Adopt an ordinance making the requirements of the existing and applicable
California Noise Insulation Standards (CAC, Title 25) apply to single family
detached residences in the same manner as they are applied to multiple
family residences, hotels, motels, and other buildings addressed in that law.
4. Direct the appropriate County Department to record the location of aircraft
accidents within five miles of the airport property boundaries.
5. Review the aircraft mix assumptions and forecasts of aircraft operations,
update the existing and projected Community Noise Equivalent Levels
(CNEL), and reevaluate the impacts of noise summarized on Table 2 in five
years or when warranted.
15
Recommendations for Action by the San Diego
Association of Governments (ALUC)
1. Monitor the plans and regulations adopted by the Cities of Carlsbad and Vista
and the County of San Diego and act in accordance with the rules and
regulations adopted by SANDAG (ALUC).
2. Use the Land Use Compatibility with Projected Community Noise Equivalent
Levels matrix contained in this plan for the determination of consistency of
proposed development within the Airport Influence Area.
3. Use the Clear Zones and Flight Activity Zone suitability guidelines in deter-
mining compatible land uses (including height limits) for areas subject to risk
resulting from aircraft takeoff and landing patterns. Stipulate that any
proposed discretionary construction found to be a "hazard" to navigation by
FAA is not in. conformance with the CLUP.
4. Work with the Cities of Carlsbad and Vista and the County of San Diego,
FAA, and National Transportation Safety Board to review the Flight Activity
Zone and land use compatibility matrix contained in this CLUP.
5. Attempt to establish a method by which all potential property buyers are
informed as part of the public reports when the properties are affected by an
annual 60 CNEL or greater.
6. Discourage federal or state expenditures on projects intended to support
residential or other forms of incompatible development within areas subject
to excessive noise levels and/or accident potential as defined in this plan
(e.g., sewer projects, FHA mortgage insurance).
VUL ALUC DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS
The following steps are identified as the process by which a development or pro-
posal is determined to be consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for
McClellan-Palomar Airport.
16
1. The local public agency staff notifies the ALUC of proposed changes in land
use plans, zoning regulations (including height limits), or discretionary devel-
opments on lands lying wholly or partially in the airport's area of influence.
2. The ALUC staff determines whether or not such proposed actions would be
clearly consistent with the ALUC adopted land use plans covering such areas
and so notifies the local public agency.
3. The local public agency governing body takes action on the proposed action(s)
and notifies the ALUC of its action.
4. If the action of the local public agency governing body is considered by the
ALUC staff to be potentially inconsistent with the adopted land use plan, the
Commission shall hold a hearing to determine whether or not the proposed
action would be inconsistent.
5. If it is determined by the Commission that the proposed action would be
inconsistent with the CLUP, then the local public agency shall be notified and
the public agency shall have another hearing to reconsider its actions. The
public agency proposing the action or regulation may overrule the ALUC
after such a hearing by a two-thirds vote of its governing body.
IX. PLAN UPDATE
This plan should be updated every five years from date of adoption or when the
information upon which the plan is based has been changed sufficiently to warrant
a review of noise contours, flight activity zones, or land use compatibility.
17
Appendix A
RULES AND REGULATIONS
AIRPORT LAND USE
COMMISSION FOR THE SAN DIEGO REGION
San Diego Association of Governments Board of Directors
Revised March 1986
The State of California, in 1970, enacted a law regarding the formation of an
Airport Land Use Commission in each county. If the Board of Supervisors and the
selection committee of mayors in each county made a determination by a majority
vote that proper land use planning could be accomplished through the actions of an
appropriately designated body, then such body could assume the planning respon-
sibilities of an airport land use commission and a separate commission need not be
formed in that county.
The San Diego County Board of Supervisors, by unanimous vote on December 15,
1970, recommended that the San Diego Association of Governments be designated
to assume the responsibilities of an airport land Use commission. A similar reso-
lution was passed and adopted by the Selection Committee of Mayors of the San
Diego County Region on February 8, 1971. The Secretary of State was notified of
this determination on February 25, 1971, and an acknowledgement of this deter-
mination was received from the Secretary of State's office on March 2, 1971.
The authority, powers, duties, and limitations of this appropriately designated
body are defined in the California Public Utilities Code, Division 9, Part 1,
Chapter 4, Article 3.5, commencing with Section 21670. In accordance with the
authority with which it has been invested, and in performance of the duties with
which it has been charged, the San Diego Association of Governments Board of
Directors hereby adopts and promulgates the following rules and regulations which
shall provide advice and guidance to the Commission in carrying out their duties,
and inform public agencies and private parties of the Commission's procedures.
ARTICLE I
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Section 1.1 Name
The San Diego Association of Governments is designated the Airport Land Use
Commission in San Diego County. The Association shall hereinafter be referred to
as the Commission.
19
Section 1.2 Purposes
The Commission hereby finds and declares that:
(a) It is in the public interest to provide for the orderly development of
each public use airport in this county, and the area surrounding these
airports so as to promote the overall goals and objectives of the Cali-
fornia Airport Noise Standards adopted pursuant to Public Utilities
Code Section 21669, and prevent the creation of new noise and safety
problems; and
(b) It is the purpose of this Commission to protect public health, safety and
welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports and the adoption
of land use measures that minimize the public's exposure to excessive
noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the
extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses.
Section 1.3 Powers and Duties
The Commission shall have the following powers and duties, subject to the limi-
tations set forth in Section 21676 of the Public Utilities Code:
(a) To assist local agencies in ensuring compatible land uses in the vicinity
of all new airports and in the vicinity of existing airports to the extent
that the land in the vicinity of such airports is not already devoted to
incompatible uses.
(b) To coordinate planning at the state, regional and local levels so as to
provide for the orderly development of air transportation, while at the
same time protecting the public health, safety, and welfare.
(c) To prepare and adopt airport land use plans pursuant to Article EL
(d) To review the plans, regulations, and other actions of local agencies and
airport operators pursuant to Article IV.
(e) To act upon applications for the construction of new airports.
The powers of the Commission shall in no way be construed to give the Com-
mission jurisdiction over the operation of any airport.
Section 1.4 Creation of Ad Hoc Committees and Appointment of Members
The Commission Chairperson may, subject to review and ratification by the Com-
mission, create Ad Hoc Committees and may appoint ad hoc committee members
representing those jurisdictions, agencies, or groups who will be most directly
affected by the determination of the Commission on any airport land use plan.
20
ARTICLE n
DEFINITIONS
As used in these rules, the following terms shall have the meanings indicated.
Section 2.1 Aircraft
Any manned contrivance used or designed for navigation of, or flight in, the air
requiring certification and registration as prescribed by federal statute or regu-
lation. Manned lighter-than-air balloons and ultralight vehicles as defined in the
regulations of the Federal Aviation Administration (14 C.F.R. Part 103), whether
or not certified by the Federal Aviation Administration, shall not be considered to
be aircraft for purposes of these rules and regulations.
Section 2.2 ' Airport
Any area of land or water which is used, or intended for use, for the landing and
take-off of aircraft. Included are any appurtenant areas which are used, or in-
tended for use, for airport buildings or any other airport facilities or rights-of-
way, and all airport buildings and facilities located thereon. Heliports, helipads
and helistops. shall be considered airports for purposes of these rules and regu-
lations.
Section 2.3 Airport Influence Area
A planning area designated by the Commission around each public airport which is,
or reasonably may become, affected by airport related noise, fumes, or other
influence, or which is, or reasonably may become, a site for a hazard to aerial
navigation.
Section 2.4 Airport Land Use Plan
An airport land'use plan'presents the Commission's determination of the areas
currently impacted or likely to be impacted by noise levels and flight activities
associated with aircraft operations of a particular airport. It presents in narrative
and graphic form the noise, safety and other criteria which will enable local
agencies to compatibly plan and develop the land within the airport influence
area.
Section 2.5 Airport Layout Plan
An airport layout plan is a graphic presentation to scale of existing and proposed
airport facilities, their location on the airport, and the pertinent clearance and
dimensional information required to show confortnance with applicable standards.
Section 2.6 Airport Master Plan
An airport master plan presents an operator or proprietor's conception of the
ultimate development of a specific airport. An airport master plan should present
in graphic and written form an inventory of existing airport facilities, forecasts of
aviation demand, demand/capacity analysis, facility requirements determinations
and environmental study.
21
Section 2.7 Airport Operator
Any person or entity having the authority and responsibility for the establishment
and operation of an area of land or water that is used or intended to be used for
the landing and take-off of any type of heavier-than-air flying vehicle including
the buildings and facilities, if any, thereon. An airport proprietor may also be an
airport operator as those terms are herein defined.
Section 2.8 Airport Proprietor
Any person or entity having the legal right or exclusive title to an area of land or
water that is used or intended to be used for the landing and take-off of any type
of heavier-than-air flying vehicle including the building and facilities, if any,
thereon.
Section 2.9 . Helipad
Any area of a structure which is used, or intended for use, for the landing and
take-off of helicopters. Included are any appurtenant areas which are used, or
intended for use, for helipad buildings or other helipad facilities or rights-of-way,
and all helipad buildings and facilities located thereon.
Section 2.10 Heliport
Any area of land or water which is used, or intended for use, for the landing and
take-off of helicopters. Included are any appurtenant areas which are used, or
intended for use, for heliport buildings or other heliport facilities or rights-of-
way, and all heliport buildings and facilities located thereon.
Section 2.11 Helistop
Any area of land, water, or a structure not designated as either a heliport or a
helipad which is used, or intended for use, for the landing and take-off of heli-
copters. Such areas generally provide only minimal facilities to accommodate
helicopter landings and take-offs.
Section 2.12 Local Agencies
A County, a city, more than one city, a combination of a County and cities, and
special districts which have the authority to adopt general or specific land use
plans and to establish land use zones that include any part of the land which has
been designated by the Commission as being in the airport influence area.
Section 2.13 Private Airport
Any airport which allows use of its facilities only by the owner or his invitees.
Section 2.14 Public Airport
Any airport which offers the use of its facilities by the public in general without
prior notice and without specific invitation or clearance. An airport proprietor or
operator may preclude use by a size or type of aircraft for which the facilities are
not adequate without altering the public status of the airport.
22
ARTICLE m
AIRPORT LAND USE PLAN FORMULATION AND ADOPTION
Section 3.1 Formulation of the Airport Land Use Plan
The Commission shall be responsible for the formulation of an airport land use
plan for each public airport in the region, as required by state law. The following
documents shall be used as primary sources of information:
o General Plans, Specific Plans, Zoning Maps and Ordinances of Local Public
Agencies
o Airport Master Plans
o California Administrative Code, Chapter 9, Title 4, Subchapter 6, NOISE
STANDARDS
o Federal Aviation Regulations, OBJECTS AFFECTING NAVIGABLE AIR-
SPACE
o San Diego Plan for Air Transportation
(a) The Commission shall formulate an airport land use plan that will
provide for the orderly growth of each public airport and the airport
influence area within the jurisdiciton of the Commission, and will
safeguard the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of
the airport and the public in general. The Commission's plan shall
include the airport master plan that reflects the anticipated growth of
the airport during at least the next 20 years. In formulating an airport
land use plan, the Commission may develop height restrictions on build-
ings, may specify use of land, and may determine building standards,
including soundproofing adjacent to airports, within the influence area.
(b) The Commission may include within its plan formulated pursuant to
subdivision (a) the area within the jurisdiction of the Commission sur-
rounding any federal military airport for all the purposes specified in
subdivision (a). This subdivision shall not give the Commission any
jurisdiction or authority over the territory or operations of any such
military airport.
(c) The airport influence area boundaries shall be established by the Com-
mission after hearing and consultation with the involved agencies. In
order to provide some immediate guidance to local agencies, pending
the adoption of an airport land use plan for each public airport, the
Commission shall designate airport influence areas. Boundaries shall be
'determined for those areas adjacent to public airports which could be
impacted by noise levels exceeding the California State Noise Standards
or where height restrictions would be needed to prevent obstructions to
navigable airspace as outlined in Federal Aviation Regulations. The
airport influence areas shall serve as a basis for formulating the airport
land use plan. It is the intent of the Commission to make it possible for
individual property owners to readily ascertain whether or not a
particular parcel of property is located within an airport influence
area. To the maximum extent practical these boundaries shall be
described with reference to prominent features or landmarks of a
permanent nature such as roads, power lines, railroad tracks, etc.
23
(d) Preparation of each airport land use plan shall be a cooperative effort
of the Commission staff, airport proprietors and operators, ad hoc com-
mittee, and representatives of the local agencies.
Section 3.2 Plan Amendments
A request to amend or revise an airport land use plan may be submitted to the
Commission at any time by the airport proprietor, the airport operator, or an
affected local agency. Plan amendments or revisions may be necessitated by a
change in airport use, size, number and type of aircraft accommodated, or a
change to the airport master plan, among other reasons. In addition, the Com-
mission shall periodically review adopted airport land use plans and initiate any
plan amendment or revision that may be required. An airport land use plan shall
not be amended more than once in any calendar year.
Section 3.3 Adoption of Airport Land Use Plan and Amendments
The airport land use plan and any amendments thereto shall be approved and
adopted by the Commission, and shall constitute the Commission's recommen-
dation to the local agency for compatible land uses within the airport influence
area. Prior to adopting each airport land use plan or amendment, the Commission
shall hold a public hearing in accordance with Article VI (Public Hearings).
ARTICLE IV
IMPLEMENTATION OF AIRPORT LAND USE PLANS
Section 4.1 Determination of Consistency for Local Agency Actions
Prior to the adoption or amendment of a general plan or specific plan, or the
adoption or approval of a zoning ordinance or building regulation within the in-
fluence area established by the Commission, the local agency shall first refer the
proposed action to the Commission. If the local agency does not refer the pro-
posed action to the Commission in a timely manner, the airport operator may
refer the proposed action to the Commission. The Commission staff shall, within
three days, notify the local agency of the operator's referral. If the Commission
determines that the proposed action is inconsistent with the Commission's plan,
the local agency shall be notified. The local agency may, after a public hearing,
overrule the Commission by a two-thirds vote of its governing body if it makes
specific findings that the proposed action is consistent with the purposes stated in
Public Utilities Code Section 21670.
Section 4.2 Determination of Consistency for Airport Master Plans
Each public agency owning any airport within the boundaries of an airport land use
plan adopted by the Commission shall, prior to modification of its airport master
plan, refer such proposed change to the Commission. If the Commission deter-
mines that the proposed action is inconsistent with the Commission's plan, the
referring agency shall be notified. The public agency may, after a public hearing,
overrule the Commission by a two-thirds vote of its governing body if it makes
specific findings that the proposed action is consistent with the purposes stated in
Public Utilities Code Section 21670.
24
Section 4.3 Further Commission Review of Local Agency Actions
(a) If the Commission finds that a local agency has not revised its general plan or
specific plan or overruled the Commission by a two-thirds vote of its governing
body after making specific findings that the proposed action is consistent with the
purposes stated in Public Utilities Section 21670, the Commission may require
that the local agency submit all subsequent actions, regulations, and permits to
the Commission for review until its general plan or specific plan is revised or the
specific findings are made. If, in the determination of the Commission, an action,
regulation, or permit of the local agency is inconsistent with the Commission plan,
the local agency shall be notified and that local agency shall hold a hearing to
reconsider its plan. The local agency may overrule the Commission after the
hearing by a two-thirds vote of its governing body if it makes specific findings
that the proposed action is consistent with the purposes of this article as stated in
Public Utilities Code Section 21670.
(b) Whenever the local agency has revised its general or specific plan or has
overruled the Commission pursuant to subdivision (a), the proposed action of the
local agency shall not be subject to further Commission review, unless the Com-
mission and the local agency agree that individual projects shall be reviewed by
the Commission.
Section 4.4 Authorization for Staff Review
The Executive Director is authorized to determine the consistency of proposed
actions referred to the Commission, but only where such actions are clearly
consistent with the airport land use plan. The Executive Director.shall officially
notify the local agency and the airport operator (where the operator makes the
referral) of such finding within 60 days from the date of referral of the proposed
action.
Section 4.5 Determination Deadlines
Each Commission determination pursuant to Section 4.1 or 4.2 shall be made
within 60 days from the date of referral of the proposed action. If the Com-
mission fails to make the determination within that period, the proposed action
shall be deemed consistent with the Commission's plan.
Section 4.6 Immunity From Liability
With respect to a publicly owned airport that a public agency does not operate, if
such public agency, pursuant to Section 21676 or 21676.5 of the Public Utilities
Code, overrides the Commission's action or recommendation, the operator of the
airport shall be immune from liability for damages to property or personal injury
caused by or resulting directly or indirectly from the public agency's decision to
override the Commission's action or recommendation.
25
ARTICLE V
REVIEW OF NEW AIRPORTS
Section 5.1 New Airport Plan Submission
No political subdivision, any of its officers or employees, or any person may
submit any application for the construction of a new airport to any local, regional,
state, or federal agency unless the plan for such construction is first approved by
the board of supervisors of the county, or the city council of the city, in which the
airport is to be located and unless the plan is submitted to the Commission exer-
cising powers pursuant to Article 3.5 (commencing with Section 21670) of Chapter
4 of Part 1 of Division 9 of the Public Utilities Code, and acted upon by the Com-
mission in accordance with the provisions of such article.
Seciton 5.2 Hearings
Commission action will be taken in accordance with Article VI (Public Hearings).
ARTICLE VI
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Section 6.1 Scheduling
Hearings shall be held as required by law.
Section 6.2 Processing of Hearing Requests
Requests for hearing should be submitted in writing. The request should fully and
fairly state the reason for the request and should include detailed property de-
scriptions, maps and other material necessary to fully understand the matter for
which a hearing is being requested. Within the 15 working days immediately
following the receipt of a request for hearing, the Commission's staff shall deter-
mine if the matter for which the hearing is being requested is within the purview
of the Commission in assuming airport land use planning responsibilities. If the
matter is a proper subject for a hearing, a date for the hearing shall be set and the
date for hearing shall be not more than 60 days from the date of referral of the
proposed action.
Section 6.3 Hearing Notice
The date and subject matter of each hearing shall be "Noticed" by publication at
least one time in a newspaper having general circulation in the part of the region
in which the subject matter of the hearing is situated. At the same time the
published notice is submitted to the newspaper, notice shall be sent to the local
public agency and to all public agencies having an interest in the matter to be
heard.
26
Section 6.4 Rules of Hearing
The order of the hearings held by the Commission shall be:
(a) Staff to present evaluation and recommendations
(b) Commission members question staff
(c) Hearing opened to public testimony
(d) Proponents present case
(e) Opponents present case
(f) Proponents present rebuttal
(g) Opponents present rebuttal
(h) Hearing closed
(i) Commission members request clarifications or additional information
(j) Commission members discuss and deliberate
(k) Motions and voting.
ARTICLE VH
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Section 7.1 Disqualification
Pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21672, Commission members shall dis-
qualify themselves from participating in the review or adoption of a proposal
because of conflict of interest in accordance with the provisions of the Political
Reform Act of 1975, as amended, and the SANDAG Conflict of Interest Code.
Alternates to the Commission may participate in the event of a regular Com-
mission member's disqualification.
27
Appendix B
V)LUu
o<cca.
>oc<I-zD
'5 5 2 S S «I •- x 3 * „ 15i: *««ia • — "> "*~ "T 3; — - <o i: £ c
m = --o<• 2 *• S< =S a-0 S_ "S c >- i 10 ,« "". 5 < c gf"> v o 2?
HSllIsa£g§!
« „•"§«:.3
Q. _
-5 0
Z 2
to -2V
!*§
_2 3 10
3co
. .^ 10 CO t-S
>2it- wtIII
*""potens from1 3S .2
ec33
Typical of noischurches, hospitnoise-sensitive bprogram, and NaWilderness Areasments. NationalAreas).iu. S S
*- 3o *••g </»
(A "O
'i ^.2 5S c
co
2)1 -I -0-2u a. wi5 p >.
o -SSo-jjf-o >_ c -a8 ™ SO a>* M
™5 S
a, 2 i.
!*§
o£ c
c'i ~« a, To•£2e
« £ 5•=•*?
rl^ill
& £ <£ aiTo =o
11<J -o
•s'ou. >
2 ™S-om a.*l
2 «< "a .c to IA
1 E S
•i jj a
52.|'E g-SSo 2 c^•S 3i
Sf*
3*2
!55!5a. i_ «uoc
"°"" «*- V? c -oCm-
|8iQ -a to
It)
X
Q O
o
Ol
*\<J J< u
U.te: 10/19/84InilUted by: ATO-230H-Z
U
Zj
"-CO
QC uj
55
VISUAL FLIGHT RULES (NEAR NOISE-SENSITIVE i.1
1
•= >.3 -aC -D
Q] Mvt y* *A+* ZZ t9
.§ES
- »J=oe °-o
U. C 3
> § C.HIiii
E o>r*. -c <o
li-i
^£«sL *- y
ello j: —S « ~S|s
-2.i|
o"5 S
RPOSE. This advisory cise sensitive areas to fly atulation and on flight pathsii?
»™
o>>
*<A
1
3!oZ
is03Z
.1
u.
ccu.>
COIDn" "den £
!5«is.i u
U.i«NCELLATION. Advisoryas, dated March 19, 1982,< £
U !o
CM CKGROUNO.2
CO
V) W> (U >» L.
c c"° X S•— •- 3 O >js jo ~ s ga a±: to -a
E S " » go o * «0o|SS
S tf) (Q <<7
> Sffs 2
i continually receise sensitive areas. Tfy action prohibitirtions. We believe thelilot/industry coopeess.i - J; iO U 0•2 c 2 g •» 2£? _ •2-'S 0.t oj 3 a> otn > O) > w* ^•S og - c o"C ^: " *2
'cC - c "5•a 2 o S £ g,<eMs?S1
The Federal Aviationconcerning low flying aihave prompted request!flight over identified noi:solution can be realized 1rather than through the i(b
VI01
'5
?•
c 50) C
c is
uality of the envirorotection from aircr°a
4) 13•£ =IO
?-5il
d <uP2
Increased emphasis on iicontinued effort to provJ2
S 5 e"-2 c2 * S *• "c t S f'C'- 10 C «> Qi_ ^ u -a 2o ^ a -a 2-, oj _ aj bd, a o
CJ oj u>F > S S «•a -2 = •? TJ ai
iscomfort, inconvenproperty, and can cear outdoor assembhomes, noise-sensitshould be preserveour national heritac=!-?"!- c5'5^ 2a turn 2 5 oiE-sg;|£o-S .8*
S I i "5 < 2
"^ ^0 ^ 3
Excessive aircraft noiseference with the use antwildlife. It is particularlychurches, hospitals, schareas, and National Parthistoric, cultural, and naiu
0.2
(Q **.« o
1!
.82
ow would be a pracrovement, would buy action.5 IsE-— 10
"5 3•-! en'C c aU OJ *-SE «•a c ja«> O '5O< W (M
Adherence to the practiciof pilot concern for enviaviation, and forestall poT3
REFERENCES
City of Carlsbad
Michael Holz miller, Planning Director
Report of the Citizens Committee for the Review of the Land Use Element
of the Carlsbad General Plan, July 1985.
San Diego County:
Richard W. Severson, Department of Public Works, Airport Division
Palo mar Airport Advisory Committee
San Diego Association of Governments
Comprehensive Land use Plan, Palo mar Airport, 1974.
Aviation Facilities Inventory, 1983.
Aviation Development Plan: Land Use and Development Concerns, 1986.
Noise Consult ar.t
CH2M Hill, unpublished study, 1985.
California Department of Transportation
Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, 1983.
Duane Ferguson, Aviation Division
California Coastal Commission
Charles Damm
31