HomeMy WebLinkAbout; ; COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN PALOMAR AIRPORT; 1974-05-01COMPREHENSIVE
LAND USE PLAN
PALOMAR AIRPORT
MAY 1974
Comprehensive Planning Organization of the San Diego Region
Suite 524 Security Pacific Plaza
1200 Third Avenue
San Diego, California 92101
(714) 233-5211
This report was financed with state funds and local funds from CPO member jurisd ictions.
MEMBER AGE NCI ES: Cities of Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Del Mar, El Cajon, Escondido, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, National City, Oceanside, San Diego,
San Marcos, Vista, and County of San Diego / EX-OFFICIO MEMBER: California Department of Transportation I HONORARY MEMBER: Tijuana, B. CFA.
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
The Comprehensive Planning Organization (CPO) is a voluntary association of local governments formed to
assure sound overall area-wide planning for the San Diego Region. Voting members include the County of
San Diego and the Thirteen Incorporated Cities ... Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Del Mar, El Cajon,
Escondido, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, National City, Oceanside, San Diego, San Marcos, and Vista.
Advisory members include the State of California, through a memorandum of understanding with the
California Department of Transportation.
The City of Tijuana, Baja California, Mexico, is an honorary member of CPO.
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING ORGANIZATION
OF THE SAN DIEGO REGION
CITY OF CARLSBAD
Honorable Robert C. Frazee, Mayor
(A) Honorable Lewis L. Chase, Councilman
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Honorable James Hobel, Councilman
(A) Honorable Thomas D. Hamilton, Jr., Mayor
CITY OF CORONADO
Honorable Ben Cohen, Councilman
(A) Honorable Rolland M. McNeely, Mayor
CITY OF DEL MAR
Honorable Richard G. Rypinski, Mayor Pro-Tern
(A) Honorable Dr. John H. Weare, Councilman
CITY OF EL CAJON
Honorable Howard Pierce, Councilman
(A) Honorable James Snapp, Mayor
CITY OF ESCONDIDO
Honorable Lorraine H. Boyce, Mayor
(Al Honorable Jerry Harmon, Councilman
CITY OF IMPERIAL BEACH
Honorable Henry R. McCarty, Councilman
(A) Honorable Elvin C. Ogle, Councilman
CHAIRMAN: James Hobel
VICE CHAIRMAN: Lorraine Boyce
CITY OF LA MESA
Honorable Robert Helland, Mayor
(A) Honorable Mark Uselton, Councilman
CITY OF NATIONAL CITY
Honorable Luther (Joe) Reid, Councilman
(A) Honorable Kile Morgan, Mayor
CITY OF OCEANSIDE
Honorable William D. Bell, Councilman
(A) Honorable Howard T. Richardson, Mayor
CITY OF SAN DIEGO
Honorable Pete Wilson, Mayor
(A) Honorable Lee Hubbard, Councilman
CITY OF SAN MARCOS
Honorable William D. Shubin, Vice Mayor
(A) Honorable F .A. Rodeschek, Councilman
CITY OF VISTA
Honorable Frank Meyer, Mayor
(A) Honorable Orbee Mihalek, Vice Mayor
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
Honorable Dick Brown, Board of Supervisors
(A) Honorable Jim Bear, Board of Supervisors
STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (Ex Officio Member)
Howard Ullrich, Director
(A) J. Dekema, District Director
June 27, 1974
iii
TIJUANA, B. CFA. (Honorary Member)
Marco Antonio Bolanos-Cacho, Mayor
COM PR EH ENSIVE
PLANNING ORGANIZATION
Suite 524, Security Pacific Plaza
1200 Third Avenue
San Diego , California 92101
(7 ~4Jr®!l-9"200
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, the Comprehensive Planning Organization was recognized as
the agency empowered to act as the Airport Land Use Commission for the San Diego County
region_
Acting as the Airport Land Use Commission, it is the responsibility of CPO to prepare Compre-
hensive Land Use Plans for all civilian airports in the region and the land impacted by the flight
operations. Palomar Airport was selected as one of the first plans to be prepared because it is
located in a fast growth area and because the County, which owns the facility, is preparing a
Master Plan for the airport.
In October, 1973, the consulting firm of Wilsey and Ham was retained to work with the Ad
Hoc Committee from the Palomar Airport area in preparing the Comprehensive Land Use
Plan. Following a public hearing, this "Comprehensive Land Use Plan: Palomar Airport was
adopted on May 20, 1974_"
The program for achieving compatible land uses in the vicinity of Palomar Airport consists of:
Evaluation and revision of the Airport Influence Area Zoning and Proposed Land
Uses;
Coordination of citizens and public agencies to resolve the incompatibilities;
Limitation of the operational level to the airport's Practical Annual Capacity (PANCAP);
Development of an Instrumental Landing System for the existing Runway 24;
Noise Monitoring to better determine the impact of the airport.
Successful implementation of this program for insuring compatible development will require
the cooperation of both the City of Carlsbad and the County of San Diego.
JAMES HOBEL
Chairman
Board of Directors
J H:gi
SAN DIEGO REGION'S COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS
Member Agencies: Cities of Carlsbad, Chula Vista, Coronado, Del Mar, El Cajon, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, Lemon Grove, National City, Oceanside,
San Diego, San Marcos, Vista, and County of San Diego/Ex-officio Member: California Department of Transportation/Honorary Member: T ijuana, B. CFA.
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING ORGANIZATION OF THE SAN DIEGO REGION
fiUllf ');>I.
~Ec.un:tv P/.,(.,111'. PL .l-(t.
12<10 lHIOf, /.\'~tJLll
SAr.; D1tGO. CALlr 9210~
171<, 233-~?l 1
RESOLUTION #74-29 ADOPTED ON _..c...M.;..;a=y'--""2..c...OL..., -=1:...::9-'7-=4'--_
ADOPTION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN:
PALOMAR AIRPORT
WHEREAS, CPO has prepared a Comprehensive Land Use Plan for Palomar Airport in
order to preserve the public health, safety and welfare of the region's citizens; and
WHEREAS, CPO is designated as the Airport Land Use Commission for the San Diego
County region pursuant to the State of California Public Utilities Code, Article 3.5,
Chapter 4, Part 1, Division 9; and
WHEREAS, CPO contracted with a consultant to prepare the Comprehensive Land Use
Plan: Palomar Airport; and
WHERFAS, the Comprehensive Land Use Plan: Palomar Airport was prepared with input
from an Ad Hoc Committee composed of representatives from jurisdictions in the Palomar
Airport area; and
WHEREAS, the completion of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan: Palomar Airport pre-
cedes the completion of the Palomar Airport Master Plan and the City of Carlsbad
General Plan Revision; and
WHEREAS, public hearings were held on the proposed Plan on March 18, April 15,
and May 20, 1974, to take testimony from the public; NOW THEREFORE
BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the Comprehensive Planning Organi-
zation acting as the Airport Land Use Commission for the San Diego County region
hereby adopts the Comprehensive Land Use Plan: Palomar Airport, subject to review
and revision following the adoption of the Palomar Airport Master Plan and the City
of Carlsbad General Plan Revision.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Comprehensive Planning Organi-
zation this 20th day of May
ATTE~ SECRETARY
MEMBER AGENCIES: Ci1,es of ca,lsbad. Ch~la v,sia. Coronado. Del Mar. El Ca1on. Escondido. lmpe,ial Beach. La Mesa. NaI,ona1 c,1y. Oceans,de. San O,ego.
San Marcos, V,sla, and Counly of San Diego / EX-OFFICIO MEMBER: Callfom,a OeparImen1 of T1anspor1aI,oo / HONORARY MEMBER· l11uana, B. CFA
ABSTRACT
TITLE: Comprehensive Land Use Pl an: Palomar
Airport
AUTHOR: Wil sey and Ham
South Pasadena, Californi a
SUBJECT: Land Use Compati bility Surround ing
Palomar Airport
DATE: June 1974
LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY: Co mprehensive Pl anning Organizatio n of
the San Diego Region
SOURCE OF COPIES: Co mprehensive Pl anning Organization
1200 Third Avenue, Sui te 524
San Diego, CA 92101
NUMBER OF PAGES: 53
ABSTRACT: This report has been prepared to ass ist in
achievin g compatible land use development
in and around Palomar Airport. Specifi c
consideration of aircraft noise and hazard
potential has evolved an Airport Influence
Area as a basis for the development of a
Comprehensive Land Use Plan.
,)(
The methodology developed in th is study
is believed to be valid for definition of an
acceptable Airport Influence Area as guided
by the California Noise and Safety Laws to
protect the benefi cial coexistence of both
the airport and the community.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Many persons have aided in the preparation of this report. In particular the cooperation
and assistance of the members of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Palomar Airport Lan d Use
Plan are acknowledged.
Don Agatep, Planning Director, City of Carlsbad
Mary Casler, City of Carlsbad Planning Commission
Richard Empey, Chief, Special Projects, San Diego County Planning Department
Robert Frazee, Mayor, City of Carlsbad
Lovell Hurlbut, Manager, Palomar Airport
Marshall Linn, Lampman Associates
Jeff Okun, City of San Marcos Planning Department
Ted Richmond, San Diego Gas and Electric
Al Waldman, Director, Airport Operations, San Diego County'
Kris Duncan, City of Vista Planning Department
In addition, .the following staff of the Comprehensive Planning Organization participated in
the technical work:
Richard J. Huff, Executive Director
Kenneth E. Sulzer, Director of Planning and Program Coordination
Stuart R. Shaffer, Associate Director for Land Use and Public Facili ties Planning
George M. Franck, Associate Regional Planner
The Comprehensive Plan ning Organization would also like to acknowledge the wo rk of the
consulting firm of Wilsey and Ham:
R. Dale Beland, Vice President
Terence M. Wachsn er, Project Planner
X
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART SUMMARY . . 3
PART II BACKGROUND 8
A. Physical Setting 8
B. Population . . 8
C. Development Patterns in Surrounding Areas 8
D. Accessibility. . . . . . 8
E. Utilities and Servi ces . . 9
F. Pl anning Responsibilities . 9
G. Operations . . . . . . 9
PART Ill COMPATIBILITY OF LAND USES WITH AIR OPERATIONS . 15
A. Defining the Noise Problem. . . . . . . . . . 15
B. Defining the Air Safety Problem . . . . . . . . 19
C. Modifying Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
D. Impact of Noise and Safety Conflicts on Operational
Capabilities at Palomar Airport. . . . . . . 25
E. Recommended Airport Influence Area Definition 25
PART IV ACHIEVING COMPATIBLE LAND USE . . .. . . 31
A. Noise Abatement Alternatives . . . . . . . . 31
B. Application of Noise Abatement Strategies to Palomar
Airport. . . 31
PART V IMPLEMENTATION 41
APPENDICES . . . . . .
Figure A
Figure B
Figure C
Existing Zoning
Existing Land Use
Land Use Plan
BIBLIOGRAPHY
xi
46
46
47
48
51
LIST OF FIGURES
1-1 Preliminary Plan ........ .
11 -1 General Location . . . . . . . . .
11-2 Existing Flight Patterns ..... .
11-3 Reserved Airspace, San Diego County .
111-1 CNELContours ........ .
111-2 Land Use Suitabili ty in Noise Impact Areas.
111-3 Ex isting Hazard Zones with Accid ent Data . ,
111-4 Airport In fl uence Area at 1990 PANCAP Operational Level
111-5 Airport Influence Area Impact Zones ........ .
IV-1 The Airport/Aircraft/Land Use System ........ .
V-1 City Proposed Land Use Incompatibilities within Airport Influence
Area at 1990 PANCAP Operational Level. . . . . . . . .
LIST OF TABLES
11 -1 Current and Forecasted Aircraft Mix . . . . . . . . . . . .
111-1 Estimating Response of Residential Com munities from Co mm unity
Noise Equivalent Level. . . . .
I V-1 Outline of Noise Abatement Strategies . . . . . . . . . . .
xii
4
7
11
12
17
20
24
26
27
32
43
10
19
38
PART I
SUMMARY
Summary
Palomar Airport is presently operating as a general aviation airport at the intersection of
Palomar Airport Road and El Camino Real near the City of Carlsbad. A predominate
amount of its current 210,000 annual operations* are single engine aircraft. Current opera-
tions produced a significant impact on the surrounding land uses. With the forecasted in-
crease in the neighboring population, a doubling of aircraft operations is expected by 1990,
as this type of faci lity is largely dependent on residential population. Consequently, the
area of impact will expand with the increase in anticipated aircraft operations. Therefore,
noise and air safety confli cts would result from unrestricted land deve lopment around
Palomar Airport.
For this reason, this study was prepared to define any potential problems of development in
the Palomar area and to develop a plan for compatible development around the field.
The Practical Annual Capacity (PANCAP)** of 435,000 operations for 1990 and a forecasted
operational mix consisting primarily of single and twin engine aircraft with 3% business jets
(½ conforming to noise standards specified in Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR), PART
36 and the other ½ non-conforming) and the development of a parallel runway 700' to the
north of the existing runway, were used as basic assumptions. Scheduled air carrier use of
the airport, uti lizing airplanes such as the DC-9, was not considered in deriving the airport
influence area. It was assumed that the airport would continue to accommodate the same
kinds of operations it does today. It is intended that this Airport Land Use Plan be reviewed
and amended, if necessary, after the adoption of the Airport Master Plan and the r~vised
Carlsbad Master Plan. Utilizing the state noise criterion of 65 dB CNEL and the relative prob-
ability of accidents of light aircraft, the 1990 Airport Influence Area was cooperatively
developed with the Airport Land Use Commission, Ad Hoc-Committee and Wilsey & Ham.
By superimposing this Airport Influence Area over the City of Carlsbad's General Plan (which
is currently in preparation), a compatible land use plan was developed (refer to Figure 1-1 ).
The program for achi eving compatible land uses consists of:
• Evaluation and revision of the Airport Influence Area Zoning and Proposed Land Uses;
• Coordination of citizens and public agencies to resolve the incompatibilities;
• Limitation of the operational level to the PANCAP;
• Development of an instrument Landing System for the existing Runway 24;
• Noise Monitoring to better determine the impact of the airport.
Successful implementation of this program fo r insuring compatible development will require
action in priority areas of moderate noise and air safety zones that face deve lopment in the
near future.
• Each take-off and each landing is defined as one operation.
•• PANCAP is the theoretical capacity of an airport based on the physical configuration of the facility. In practice,
PANCAP is frequently exceeded at general aviation airports.
3
.:,.j
. \.,
\ \~ \ \-" \7~
\"'
\\ \~
\
~OST RESTRICT_l_~E C(?M_!A"l"IBLE USES I
?if:(:): residential I ... ~irport fadT,ties l
-commercial I -open space I
_,.
,/ I _____ / '
i
i
FIGURE 1-1
PRELIMINARY PLAN
public facilities \ llll llOll-reSidential _ I
Ill industrial I SOURCE: Wilsey & Ham
COMPREHENSIVE LANO USE PLAN -PALOMAR AIRPORT
'ff' l:,OC lOOC. )(//)
SGA...f 9ii:t"tf,
WILSEY & HAM
PART II
BACKGROUND
-.J
f ,
/1 _____ /-'
i
i ,,.._
A / -----~ ,/\....-1' ~ / ~-/ / / /
--dJ '~---7
Unincorporated Area
/ / /
.............
i
)
City of Carlsbad
PAI.OMAR
\
-_) ,---
i ~ I
i
Bl"°
COSTA
FIGURE 11-1
GENERAL LOCATION
I
-v-·1
i
~
r·-------
j
7
i
I i
i
I
i r-·-----o
j N
i i
F££T
t..000 2.000 3.000 --SCALE N F&T
Background
Palomar Airport is currently operating as a general aviation airport, being used primarily for
recreational and business purposes.
A. PHYSICAL SETTING
Pal omar Airport li es approximately 4 miles southeast of Central Carlsbad and approxi-
mately 30 miles north of Centre City San Diego. Palomar is bounded on the east by
hills and is generally encompassed by hilly terrain. Elevation of the terrain ranges from
valleys varying from 100' to hil ls on the east measuring 600'. The topography of the
physical setting is a factor in determining the pattern of flight to and from Palomar's
328 foot elevation.
B. POPULATION
According to Existing Trends growth projections of the Comprehensive Planning Organ-
ization, Carl sbad may experience a 263% increase in population between 1975 and
1995, from 19,500 to 70,700, and constitute 2.9% of the region's total population in
1995. The areas to the east, San Marcos and Vista, could, together, increase from
40,300 to 70,700 and constitute another 2.9% of the total region's population in 1995.
C. DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS IN SURROUNDING AREAS
Palomar Airport is in a rapidly growing area of north San Diego County. The City of
Carlsbad is expanding in a southerly direction with industrial, commercial and residential
development. The existing and anticipated growth will have a direct effect on the gen-
eral aviation activity at Palomar, si nce general aviation is essentially generated by the
suburban population.
Currently, the land to the immediate north of the airport is vacant with expected
development of an industrial park. East of El Camino Real agriculture and vacant land
are predominant. Existing and proposed industrial facilities lies to the south of the
airport. Commercial, recreational, housing and agriculture share the usage to the west
of Palomar.
On-site development consists of aviation-related facilities.
D. ACCESSIBILITY
Palomar is located in an area having adequate accessibility as a result of being served by
El Camino Real running north and south and Palomar Airport' Road in an east-west
orientation .
8
I
I
E. UTILITIES AND SERVICES
1. Water
Water for the Cit y of Carlsbad, the airport ,111d the unincorporated area of San
Diego si tuated near Palomar is supplied by the Carlsbad Municipal Water District.
Extension of major water transmission and distribution systems, including filter-
ing and pumping pl ants, reservoirs, etc., may be on a local improvement assessment
district basis for the lands benefited or paid by the first developer, depending on
the magnitude of the construction requirements.
Thus, lands in the City and unincorporated areas are provided with water supplie,s
at time of need by o ne of several plans avai lable. The small parcels frequently can-
not be served until an area faci lity is planned and developed under assessment
district arrangements, or when facilities are brought in as part of larger adjacent
deve lopments.
2. Sewerage
Other than the trunk servicing Palomar, there are no lines in the unincorporated
area surrounding the airport. The provision of sewer service facilities to develop-
ing land areas is handl ed in somewhat the same manner as for water service fac ilities.
3. Electricity, Natural Gas and Telephone
Services are ava ilable to Palomar Ai rport and to the incorporated cities and various
communities. Gas and electric service is provided by San Diego Gas and Electric
Co mpany and telephone service by the Pacific Telephone Company.
F. PLANNING RESPONSIBILITIES
Planning for the study area is conducted by the City of Carlsbad, the County of San
Diego, and the Comprehensive Planning Organization acting as the region's Airport
Land Use Commi ssion. Developm en t of general and community pl ans by the City of
Carlsbad and the County reflect concern over the noise issue at Palomar. The CPO,
in pursuing its responsibilities as the Airport Land Use Commission, has appointed an
Ad Hoc Com mittee to aid in the preparation of this Airport Land Use Plan.
G. OPERATIONS
1. Assigned Aircraft
Operations at Palomar include activities by nearly 200 based aircraft, aircraft using
the field periodically but not based at Palomar, and itinerant aircraft. Currently,
the aircraft utili zin g the airport are primarily single an d twin engine prop planes.
The aircraft mix, according to Mr. Love! Hurlbut, Palomar's Airport Manager, and
Mitchell Research Associates, for 1973 and 1990, respectively, is:
9
TABLE 11-1
CURRENT AND FORECASTED Al RCRAFT MIX
Single
Twin Engine
Business Jet
2. Current Operations
1973
85%
14%
1%
1990
75%
22%
3%
Current annual operations for the airport total approximately 210,000 with the
majority utili zi ng Runway 24's right hand pattern.
3. Trends in Aircraft and Operations
Palomar is currently operating near or at the Practical Annual Capacity of its exist-
ing runway.
Operations are anticipated to increase as the north county population increases.
The air operational limit of this airport is expected to occur with the second
parallel runway by the mid to late 1980's. The 3600' parallel runway has been
proposed in the preliminary Airport Master Plan and is designed to lie north of
the existing runway. Th e PANCAP for the proposed runway system is forecasted
to be 435,000 operation and the demand is expected to be 500,000 annual opera-
tions by 1990.
4. Aviation System
The current airspace situation at Palomar constrained by commercial
ai r traffic along the coast.
5. Safety
The air safety problem at Palomar is currently centrali zed on the facility, however,
accidents have occurred throughout the surrounding area.
10
~,
I
\ \
\l ~
-.) ,--·
i ~ i
_/·1 _____ / ' i
I
~
cosn
FIGURE 11-2
I I
i L----·-·-7r·7 L------·-·7 V i
I . ' . I I , . I
) .✓----!
/ ,/
,/ \
-~ I \ \ \ ~
\
\ r·-·-·-·-i \ ~ . . ........ r·J ., ,::;!: "-1:--------___ ,. • • • •==o-,, ---------:.c: -7-
i
i
i i i i r-·---· .... ' 0 ! N
SCALE• F"ttT
+ I FEfT
I O 1.000 2.00Q l.000
I
-Runway 24 right pattern-70%
Runway 24 left pattern-20%
.......,, Straight in approach
EXISTING FLIGHT PATTERNS
...... VORTAC approach l SOURCE: Palomar Airport
COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN -PALOMAR AIRPORT WILSEY & HAM
FIGURE ll-13
RESERVED AIRSPACE, SAN DIEGO COUNTY
~e Wohlford
SOURCE:" San Diego Plan for Air Transportation" Interim Report 2
by Daniel, Mann, Johnson & Mendenhall
12
PART Ill
COMPATIBILITY OF LAND USES
WITH AIR OPERATIONS
Compatibility Of Land Uses W ith Air Operations
The current level of operations at Palomar generates noise levels which adversely impact
land surroundin g the airport. Residential development under the VORT AC approach and
various departure patterns have resu lted in some complaints from the residents. Emergency
landings and serious accidents on and in the flight pattern of Palomar were primarily in
smaller aircraft. Significant in jury and property damage might have occurred to structures
and people other than those in the aircraft had the surrounding area been developed. Navig-
able obstructions have not been a factor in the prior accidents and with the proposed intro-
duction of a precision landing system, the mountainous terrain to the east is not expected
to pose navigation problems.
Defining the level of confl ict between air operations and land uses requires measuring the
potential noise and hazard potential and relating these impacts to sensitivity of various kinds
of activities. The potential noise and hazard of operations can then be used to define zones
around Paloma r where land development may result in confli cts with operations. It is these
zones that defi nc the "Airport I nfluencc Arca" which will act as the basis for the land use
plan.
A. DEFINING THE NOISE PROBLEM
Defining a noi se problem involves identifying where the existing noise environment con-
fli cts with human activities. The defini tion of the noise problem has three steps:
1. Describing the noise environment;
2. Identifying noise sensit ivity of activities;
3. Identifyi ng the nature and extent or confl icts between noise-sensitive activities
and the noise environment.
1. Describing a No ise Environment: Noise Measures
Any noise one hears has a number of different qualities that determines how he
wil l react to the noise. At any instant a noise may be loud or soft, or high or low
frequency, or a combination of many frequencies. It may have identifiable tones.
Over time, a noise may be sudden and startling, or bui ld slowly and fade away. It
may waver or contain an identifiable pattern.
Aircraft noi se has a number of attributes which differentiate it from other environ-
mental noise. Many different measures have been developed for rating the noise
produced during aircraft operations. In general, these measures attempt to des-
cribe quantitative ly the acoustic energy of the sound and relate this to the sub-
jective fee li ngs of loudness, noisiness or annoyance experienced by the observer.
a. No ise Descriptors
15
Noise descriptors have been developed for various purposes:
( 1) Noise Level Descriptors:
The base measure of noise, which is the level occurring at a gi ven instant.
(2) Noise Event Descriptors:
In tegrates the noise level descriptor over the duration of time of the
noise event.
(3) Noise Environment Descriptors:
A measure describing the total aircraf t no ise environment over a day or
longer period. Weighting factors arc applied to account for increased
se nsitivity to noise in the eve ning and nighttime hours. Three noise
environmen t desc riptors are currently in use: Th e Composite Noise
R;iting (CNR); the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNE L); and,
th e Noise Exposure Forecast (NEF). The CNEL is used onl y in
Californi a.
b. California Noise St;indard
The Calirornia Legislature adopted legislation concerning aircraft noi se in
1969. Implementing standards were deve loped by the State Department of
Aeronau tics in ·1970 and went into effect January 1, 1971. These standards
establish legislative objectives for compatibility of land uses in the vicinity
of the c1irport.
The regul.11io11s establi sh as .1 gennal standard that single fa mily and multiple
ramily dwcl li11g-., mobile ho mes ,ind schools of standard conslruclion arc in-
com p,1l ihle with levels .tbow GS dB CNEL.
According lo Ca lifornia's stanc.l.1rd, the criterion CNEL for ex isting civili an
ai rports is 70 decibels (dB ) until December 3 1, 1985, and 65 dB thereafter.
2. Noise Impact Areas at Palomar Airport
Noise measures must be related to aircraft operations to define an area of noise
impac t for an ;1irport.
Noise impact Meas may be determined by actual noise measurements at the air-
·port site or by estimating or simul ating this effect from known data about aircraft.
The latter method was used lo define the noise impact of operations at Palomar.
Projected contours from the San Diego Plan for Air Transportation (SANPAT)
study and Wil sey & Ham were utilized to evaluate the impact of existing and
future mixes o f aircraft and patterns of o perat ions on land uses. The 1973 noise
contours arc representative of an annu;tl level of approxi mately 210,000 opera-
ti ons at Palomdr Airport.
The 1990 noise contours developed by Wilsey & Ham were based on the PANCAP
or 435,000 annual operati ons. An Aircraft mi x consisting of 3% jet operations
was also forecast. One half of these jets were assumed to meet the noise standards
promulgated by Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) PART 36. The remainder of
the jets were assumed to be old er or foreign, non-conforming aircraft.
16
~i
\
\\ ,~
\
PAt.Qflllil!
_,,... __
/\_/ -_,,,,,-
/ / / /
L~---7 . I
i
i
! I
1990 65 CNELi
PANCAP
,---
1 ~ I i .
-,)
-----✓-
/A/
I
I
/
/ /
' .......
i .:..
........ I
CO!i,t&
... ...,
FIGURE 111-1
CNEL CONTOURS\
SOURCE: Wilsey & Ham
I I
j L--·-·-·-v·-·7 ._ _______ 7 i
I .
I ' I I . . I
J ✓----~ ,,---, // / ~ I ./ \ I ' I . ---...... \
\~
\
I ,•-•-•-•-\ '
~
. I \ . , rJ L------!11-, r=: ·-•~-=------=
+
~
I
\
I
\ i i
\ r-·------. 0 ! N
I ,m
0 1.000 2 000 l.000 i !IOtlf .. f[E'T
Daniel, Mann, Johnson & Mendenhall
COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN -PALOMAR AIRPORT WILSEY & 11,AM
Contours b,bl'd on 1wist· 1mmitoring, on till' other h,tnd, h,,ve the ;1dv.i 11t.1gc of
being b,1scd 011 .1ctu.1I 1m•,1surcments of sound kvds from individu;tl opcr.1 tio11s in
the (llllllllllllily, .111d thus .l~COlllll ror speri.il rli111.itic errccts or noise disscminc1-
ti on not ronsidncd in romputcr simul ation of noise.
3. Effects of Noise on Land Use
a. Effects of Noise on People
Th e response to aircraft noise is varied and complex, and depends on a num-
ber of psychological and social factors as well as physiological response to
noise. Three aspects of noise response have been used to judge levels of inter-
ference with people's activities:
-Physiological effects, both temporary (e.g., startle reactions and temporary
hearing threshold sh ifts) and enduring (e.g., permanent hearing damage or
the cumulative physiological effects of prolonged sleep loss).
-Behavioral effects involving interference with on-going activities such as
speech, learning, TV-watching, sleep or the perform ance of various tasks.
-Su bjective effects, described by such words as "annoyance", "nuisance",
"dissatisfaction", "disturbance", etc., as a result of behavioral and
physiological effect.
The upper limits of aircraft noise, considering the levels and durations en-
countered away from the immediate vicinities of runways and maintenance
areas, are generally not severe enough to produce measurable long-term
physiological effects. For example, the noise levels produced by aircraft
fl yovers even at community positions relatively close to the runways are not
intense enough to cause permanent loss of hearing. Thus the last two cate-
gories of noise effects -behavioral and subjective -provide the most usable
guides for establishing aircrart noise criteria.
b. Compatibility of Land Uses with Aircraft Noise
The many characteristics of aircraft noise and the many ways it interferes
wit h activities combine to pose a complex problem of defining compatibility
with the many human activities that make up any common land use classifica-
tion. This problem has been approached in two ways. The first of these is
the basis for most ex isting land use interpretation guidelines commonly
published with NEF, CNR, or CNEL contours and is based primari ly on
complaint experience from various land uses compared to measurements of
noise levels at airports where the complaints occur. This method defines
acceptability by what people are willing to tolerate in terms of noise impact.
( Refer to Table 111-1.)
The second method uses a detailed analys is of a number of human activities
and the ways they may be interfered with by noise impact. These activities
are then related to land uses, and the land use sensitivity is defin ed by weight-
ing the sensitivity of the various activities according to their importance to
the proper function of the land use as a whole, their ability to be re located
or insulated, etc.
18
Both of these methods were combined in the noise impact assessment method-
ology deve loped for Aircraft Noise Impact, Planning Guideli nes for Local
Agencies prepared by Wilsey & Ham and Bolt, Beranek and Newman for
HUD. The su mmary table relati ng land uses to aircraft noise developed in
this reporl has been modified from the HUD study to reflect the different
noise measures used in the Palomar Study. Interpretation of the noise levels
has been changed from an orientation to complai nts expected to an assess-
ment of the degree of suitability of the land use in t he noise environment.
(See Figure 111-2.)
TABLE 111-1
ESTIMATING RESPONSE OF RESIDENTIAL
COMMUNITIES FROM COMMUNITY NOISE EQUIVALENT LEVEL
Community Noise Equivalent Level
Takeoffs and Landings Runups
Less than 65 Less than 45
65 to 80 45 to 60
Greater than 80 Greater than 60
Noise Zone
Low
Moderate
High
SOURCE: Bolt, Beranek and Newman. Modified by Wilsey & Ham.
B. DEFINING THE AIR SAFETY PROBLEM
Description of Expected Response
Essentiall y no complaints would
be expected. The noise may, how-
ever, interfere occasionally with
certain activities of the residents.
Individuals may complain, per-
haps vigorously. Concerted group
acti on is possible.
Individual reactions would li kely
include repeated, vigorous com-
plaints. Concerted group action
might be expected.
It is difficult to assign a compatibility rating of land uses to such potentially catastrophic
events as aircraft accidents. No attempt in this study is made to quantify the dollar risk
or life risk of accidents or to identify specif ic accident probability. Instead, available
data on aircraft accidents at Palomar in conjunction with information comparing general
aviation aircraft to other aircraft will be utilized to identify areas of greater or less prob-
abi lity of accidents.
The impact of aircraft accidents and the predictability of the accid ent location varies
with t he type of aircraft and the specific problem resu lting in the accident. Accidents
of small aircraft from high altitude may result in a steeply descending spirali ng flight
path or a long glide. When the ai rcraft is at a low altitude on a landing glid e slope,
acc idents may invo lve a flat stri ke and long sl ide area, generally less than 300 feet long.
Most problems may be expected to occur within the normal flight patterns.
19
FIGURE 111-2
LAND USE SUITABILITY IN NOISE IMPACT AREAS
LAND USE
Residential-Single Family,
Duplex, Mobile Homes
Residential-
Multiple Family
Transient
Lodging
School Classrooms,
Libraries, Churches
Hospitals,
Nursing Homes
Auditoriums, Concert Halls,
Music Shells
Sports Arenas,
Outdoor Spectator Sports
Playgrounds,
Neighborhood Parks
Golf Courses, Riding Stables,
Water Recreation, Cemeteries
Office Buildings, Personal,
Business and Professional
Commercial-Retail,
Movie Theaters, Restaurants
Commercial-Wholesale, Some
Retail, Ind., Mfg., Utilities
Livestock Farming,
Animal Breeding
Agriculture ( Except
Livestock), Mining, Fishing
Public
Right-of-way
Extensive Natural
Recreation Areas
55
Community Noise Equivalent Level
60 65 70 75 80
INTERPRETATION
l:!ttttttt%1
CLEARLY ACCEPTABLE
The noise exposure is such
that the activities associated
with the land use may be
carried out with essentially
no interference from aircraft
noise. ( Residential areas:
both indoor and outdoor
noise environments are
pleasant.)
~ NORMALLY ACCEPTABLE
The noise exposure is great
enough to be of some concern,
but common building con-
struction will make the indoor
environment acceptable,
even for sleeping quarters. -NORMALLY UNACCEPTABLE
The noise exposure is signifi-
cantly more severe so that
unusual and costly building
construction is necessary to
insure adequate performance
of activities. ( Fiesidential
areas: barriers must be erec-
ted between the site and
prominent noise sources to
make the outdoor environ-
ment tolerable.) -CLEARLY UNACCEPTABLE
The noise exposure is so
severe that construction costs
to make the indoor environ-
ment acceptable for performance
of activities would be prohibitive.
(Residential areas: the outdoor
environment would be intoler-
able for normal residential use.)
SOURCE: HUD, "Aircraft Noise.Impact; Planning Guidelines for Local Agencies", by Wilsey & Ham
and Bolt, Beranek and Newman, 1972.
20
In terms or 11.ivig.1bil' ohstrt1lliollS, the cbssificalioll .tlld utili1,1tion or the rullway sys-
tem will dl'll'r111i1H' 1lw l''-ll'lll ol thl' potenti.11 prohkms. /\ vrR and non-precision
runw.1y .m· 111nrl' pc1111 i,,iw i11 1lw ,1111011111 .111d ll',lri1.:tivl'11ess of the land surrounding
till' .1i rp11r1 . /\1 prl'',l'l11, l'.ill1111,11 is prim,1rily opn.11i11g with Visu.11 rlighl Reg11l.1tions
.111 d :1 VOR I /\C sys1rn1. I Ill' proposed lnstrunw111 L.111ding System requires ~lricter
stand.m is ,111 d 1.:011Sl'(]lll'lllly ih .1pprnach surf.ice is l,1rger. P.dom.ir would then need to
in sure th.it more are,1 oil ,1ppro:1ch is fr ee of height obstructions. In terms of topography,
there doesn't appear to be any potential obstructions with the ILS.
1. Available Accident Data
Data on accidents for Palomar was provided by Mr. Lovell Hurlbut. The air safety
zone for Palomar is designed to reflect the existing operations and accident history.
The overall size of the impacted area will expand with th e construction of a parallel
runway 1850' to the north.
Data presently availa ble arc insufficient to define the likely area of impact of air-
craft accid ents in terms of the likelihood of death, inj ury and property damage
from accidents. However, the relative probability of accidents within the proposed
haza rd zones for Palomar ca n be estimated based on acc ident history and compari-
sons to other airports of similar size in operations. The current rate of ai rcraft
acciden ts is I accident per 200,000 operations, with o n-runway incidents amount-
in g to approximately ·1 a month.
H.11.ird Zonl'S .ire developed so th.it estimated probability of accidents is about 4
time~ ,1s high ill the considerable zone .1s in the limited zone. For light general
.wiation aircr.1 11 , these probabilities <1rc: Considerable Hazard: 1.25/sq. mi./y r.,
Limit ed Hazard: .33/sq. mi./yr.
Contributing to the :1nalysis of the probable accidents within designated hazard
zones was the information provided by airport managers of major general av iation
airports within Southern C.ilifornic1. Orange County, Long Beach and Van Nuys,
all operating at leve ls in excess of 550,000, have experienced 1-2 major accidents
annually off the runways, generall y within a mile of the runways. Incidents on
the· ru nways occurred 1-2 times a month. This is a rate of 1 accident for every
250 · -500,000 operations. The record at Palomar, with approximately 1 accident
fdr each 200,000 operations, indi cates a similar or slightly increased probability
wit h the forecastcd operational level.
2. Land Use Compatibility with Air Safety
Objectives fo r land uses in these hazard zones are recommended as foll ows:
-Extreme Hazard: No construction involving extensive investment or life risk.
County or City ownership of land.
-Considerable Haza rd : No residential construction or facilities involving large
assemblages of people, except necessary transportation routes. County or City
ownership or highly restrictive control of land uses, such as restrictive use ease-
ments.
-Limited Hazard: No residential construction except very low densities or
agricultura l/open space uses. No uses invol ving large assemblages of people at
times when aircraft are in operation.
21
The major physical environmental influences on airport operations are topo-
graphy and weather. Steep topography wi ll limit the angle of approach and
departure. Since general aviation ai rcraft do not have a great reserve of power
to execute a steeper approach or departure procedure, all that can be required
is a normal climb and descent for the aircraft. Topography also restricts avail-
able approach and departure paths.
Climati c conditions which influence noise include wind conditions, humidity
and inversion layers. Wind conditions determine the layout of runways and
usage of runways. This, in turn, determines the areas affected by aircraft
noise. High humidity decreases the rate of absorption of sound by air, in-
creasing noise impact, particularly at a distance. Inversion layers reflect
sound back to earth and also increase areas of noise impact. These last two
climatic effects are generally seasonal and will vary noise impact by the time
of year.
The prevailin g winds at Palomar are from the west and are in effect 90% of
the time, thus determining the 24 alignment.
The topography around Palomar warrants careful execution of takeoff and
landing.
b. Physical Environmen tal Influences on Land Development
While physical factors change the way that airport operations and subsequent
aircraft noise affect surrounding areas, they also influence the manner in which
noise abatement strategies should be attempted.
Many physical factors are in themselves constraints to development. These
factors tend to support a strategy of non intensive development or no develop-
ment at all.
Although there are areas surrounding Palomar that inhibit growth as a result
of the steep slope contours, most of the land is suitable for development.
The conservation of areas of scenic value and signifi cant or endangered flora
and fauna, also present additional criteria for controlling development in
noi se impact areas. State mandated legislation has encouraged local agencies
to document these areas and San Diego has done a great deal in this area
(e.g., I REM Study).
Conversely, physical environmental conditions which are in themselves more
sens itive to aircraft noise will tend to increase the use of operational or air-
port system changes as noise abatement strategies. At the present time, there
is little data on which to base such a discussion. For example, little is known
about the effects of noise on wildlife.
3. Aviation System Relationships
The San Diego Region's airspace is one of the most crowded in the country and
airspace restrictions on operations at Palomar are somewhat constrained. In other
words, airspace situation preve nts movement of the VORTAC and necess itates
flight over residential development. Designation of this faci lity as a general aviation
airport in the overall system essentially retains the prevailing airspace situation.
22
At this time, the zones defined as extreme hazard are in t he immediate vicinity of
the runways. The considerable hazard zone covers the clear zones and unimproved
land.
The limited hazard zones impact the fo llowing:
-North of Palomar
Unimproved land
-East of Palomar
Unimproved land
A portion of Carlsbad Raceway
-South of Palomar
Unimproved land
Some industrial faci lities
-West of Palomar
Unimproved land
Standards for compatibility in hazard zones are developed with two objectives in
mind. First is the objective of reducing the probability of any death or injury re-
sulting from an aircraft accident. This objective is reached by reducing the gross
density in the potential accident area. The second objective is reducing the likeli-
hood that a large number of casualties would be associated with a given accident.
This objective is reached by controlling the densities of asse mbly that may occur
in the hazard zones.
C. MODIFYING FACTORS
1. Pl anning and Zoning Differences
a. Impact of Pl anning and Zoning on Palomar Airport
Pl anning and zoning decisions determine how and what land uses will develop
around Palomar. Limitations may be imposed on development by the local
agency or the developer because of hazards to life from potential aircraft
accidents or aircraft noise impact. Conversely, decisions for development
within the influence of Pa lomar may lead to limitations in air operations.
In an effort to maintain a good relationship with the community, Palomar
Airport has in effect several programs to ac hieve this end (refer to Recommend-
ed Airport Influence Area Definition).
The City of Carlsbad and the County of San Diego have attempted to take
noise impact into account in its zoning, as illustrated in the commercial
manufacturing zoning surrounding the field (refer to Figure A). A major
effort to take noise impact and navigational hazards into consideration began
with the development of a comprehensive Land Use Plan. Height restrictions
have been taken into consideration in development around the airport.
2. Physical Environment Influences
a. Influences on Airspace Use and Palomar's Activity
23
tv ; ~
-/r-. ........_
/,/\...-/ -
/
/
+ //
,. l ·-:-·7
P&LOlll,lJt -_) ,--·
• major accidents 1•
o minor ac:cidents
i ~ i i
.,...,
CO.TA
FIGURE 111-3
I I
i L--------71·7 -----·-·7 V i
I . ' i ! . I
/J -✓----~
/ / .
• :Sl. r ✓-\
\
\~ \
\ r·-------
\ D !
' . j "J -·-·· l--------~ ----=~ ------------~ ... -,
+
-I
i
\
i i i i r-·-----o , N !
I FU'!
0 1.000 2 00C l..OOO i $CAU .. fU'T
EXISTING HAZARD ZONES
WITH ACCIDENT DATA
SOURCE: Palomar Airport, Wilsey & Ham
COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN -PALOMAR AIRPORT WILSEY & HAM
I
4. Assumptions and B,tsis for Future Projection of Operations
For the twenty yl',tr projection the fo llowing ,1ssumptions were made:
-Thl' function of this ,1irport will be to continlll' tu provide only general ,1viation
services.
--There will be an increase in twin engine and business jet operations .
-The level of operation will be maintained at the PANCAP of 435,000 annual
operations with ½ of the forecasted business jets not conforming to FAR
PART 36 and the remainder generating noise comparable to the Cessna Citation
aircraft.
-Accommodating this increase in operations will be the construction of a smaller,
parallel runway located 700 feet to the north of the existing runway.
-Planned installation of an Instrument Landing System on the existing runway
was considered in the formulation of the influence area.
The assumptions used in the development of the Airport Influence Area was considered
conservative in nature and protective of the area, until the Airport Master Plan is finalized.
Commercial aircraft were not included. Introduction of commercial service would prob-
ably expand the influence area, depending on the type of commercial aircraft which
would use the facility.
Technological advances were also considered, such as retrofitting and quieter engines,
but total application by 1990 was deemed unlikely. Contingent upon changes in
technology and impl ementation, the Airport Operation and Airport Land Use
Commission may review the operational level and permit an in crease if no further
environmental degradation occurs.
D. IMPACT OF NOISE AND SAFETY CONFLICTS ON OPERATIONAL CAPABILITIES
AT PALOMAR AIRPORT
The data presented in previous discussions indicate that proposed land uses will en-
croach in some degree in both noise impact and hazard zones at Palomar. The impact
of these developments on operational capabilities depends on the willingness of the
Airport Operator to cut back operations in response to citizen complaints. Although
compensation for this impact may be cal led for, the unquantifiable public relations
cost of noise impact and a possible accident disaster may, however, be much more
important in the long term.
It is therefore assumed in the following discussion that land development in 65 CNEL
and above would involve a restriction of operations due to the reaction of residents.
This restriction in operations may take a number of forms, including reduction of
numbers of flights and restriction of hours of operations (including weekend and night
operations).
E. RECOMMENDED AIRPORT INFLUENCE AREA DEFINITION
The Airport Influence Area is defined by California's Title 4 as the area within 65
CNEL. This noise zone is not to enclose houses and is to be incrementally achieved by
1985. Wilsey & Ham has developed some modifications to this definition with the ob-
25
I'.)
0)
\
\
\\ \'i
\
A /,,...•,,
/,/\...-,/
/
,/
//
_____ / ,/·"'1
i
/
·• L -----7 .----
-
,.J ,---
! .. ..,
CO.T&
Figure 111-4 1
Airport Influence Area at I
1990 PANCAP Operational Level I
COMPREHENSIVE LANO USE PLAN -PALOMAR AIRPORT -
I I j L ________ v_ ·7
'--------7 . , I
'
I , , I I ,
' REFERRAL AREA•
~
+
i
\ I
i
\
\
\ r-------o
j N
I ,..,
t O I ~ 1000
I SCA..E w,cn
WILSEY & HAM
'
w en ::::>
C z < ..J
.... . .. . -:-:-:-: -:-:-:-::-.• ... · .. ·.· .. ·.·.·.·.· .... .... .... ... . ·.·.·.· .. ·.·.·.· .. ·.·.· ........... . .... .... .... .... .... . ...... .... . ............. . se;,;v uo ! 1 p;>.1 ~il\l I eJ nl eN ill\! sUill x3 . . . · · · · ...... · ..... ·.·.· .. ·.·.·.· .. ·.·.·.·.· 1--------------------9::n".n,-;-;.,.;-~·;-;:-;.: . .;-·.r-. -;. .. .;-.r-";-;·-;.·r ::::-::: ~::::::::: :)/: :):): :)\)
l------•-il_! l_! _I _! i_n __ • u_o_p_e_l_J_o_d_su_e.1_1 ___ !;15,~~=~.., .. ..,·~·r".' .. ..,·'.'i-·t:i'. .. i'.'·'.'i-·t-:".i'.\ t;\:/ I/< \I/ i\\
~:)~:):): :):): :):): :):):~ l-------------------1.S~~~~~w.~½~~t.~:.:.~:.:.:.:.: :.:.:.:.: :.:.:.:.: :.:.:.:.:.
a.1 nl In:,! .1611 :::::a:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~-------------------1.,.~~~MW~~,._,~;.;.;~·..;,···· o········· .·.·.·.· .. ·.·.·.· .. ·.·.·.·.· \it:>:::>>\:{ i??
~S !}J 46!H
Ai! suilQ 46!H
A1,suilQ wn,p.iw
A1 !Wl?j a16u ,s
[PJ nl 1n:>!J61/
S3W0H il I! qow
-
I I?! JUilp ! Sil\!
1epuap !Sil\l
il?!lUap!Sil\f
I I?! l uap ! Sil\!
1epuilp!Sil\f
1e11uilp!Sil\f
<(
uJ a:
<(
LU u z LU
::JV)
...J LU
Lt') u. z , ~o
I-N
LU a: 1-
C: Q u
::JC. <(
C!) a: C. --~ u. <( -
27
,, ...
"' N "' :,::
.c "' "' ... w
,, '1J '1J ... ... ...
"' "' "' N N N co "' ...., fQ ...., ..... z zux ~ ~u~ ~ ~u~
tQ L L ttl L L L ttl L .c .co..c It) ttl O.tQ tO rgo,,a 1/'1 ...., 1/'1 E 1/'1 N µ N E N N .µ N E N f0Vt0 -t0 -t->t0UIO -fQ +-'IOU l'IJ-l'O..., '-ltl"-LU:C,O:C :::r::u ::r:IU:I: IV U O.UVUfQ V fQ Q ~ fQ
E t11 O..CE.Cl/'IL O .C E .I:.111.r.o V -V ·-V E 1/'1 -1/'1 ·-1/'1 E t11 -1/'1 •-1/'1 E -o --lTJ ro o ro -,u ro o n::i-D~~Z D LVLZ L L~LZ L
,Ol/'lttl fQV U l/'IU uvu~u v ~ L •-L ~ L ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 a.> .., ~ ·-""C O ""C "-' ""C ·--0 -..,. ~z~~~~~z~~~~~z~~~~
"'~"'~"' •-.c-~--£•-~-8-8~8a!-!~!a~-~~~a uxuxu ~JI~L~J4ILLX~
C"') ·(\I ,... C"') (\I ,... C"') (\I ,... <mmmoooccc
jcctivc of maintaining the existi ng pattern of operations at Pa lomar Airport by protecting
this Lone lrom incomp;1tible development.
Figure 111 -4 represents the Airport Influence Are.t developed by the consultant. These
reflect the ;1bove assumptions. The major parameters used by the consultant to develop
this Airport Influence Area are noise impact and hazard zones.
CN EL Contours and the Hazard Zones were combined in the fo llowing manner to provide
the basis for the Airport Influence Area. The alpha-numeric designation for each area of
influence was designed to reflect the sensitivity of land uses to noise and to accidents. This
method facilitated the defining of impact and consequently enabled the consultant to exa-
mine the suitability of City proposed land uses. Figure 111-6 displays the different impact
zones with the corresponding acceptable land uses. This list identifies nine zones of decreas-
ing need for protection in the Airport Influence Area.
A. Extreme Hazard Zone
B3. Considerable Hazard Zone, 75 CNEL
B2. Considerable Hazard Zone, 65-7 5 CN EL
B1. Considerable Hazard Zone, 65 CNEL
C3. Limited Hazard Zone, 75 CNEL
C2. Limited Hazard Zone, 65-75 CNEL
Cl . Limited Hazard Zone, 65 CNEL
D3. Minimal Hazard Zone, 75 CNEL
D2. Minimal Hazard Zone, 65-75 CNEL
·D1. Minimal Hazard Zone, 65 CNEL
Modifying the qefinition of the Airport Influence Area were the existing operational mitiga-
tion measures. Among these arc:
Present Noise Abatement Procedure
• Displaced VORTAC approach angle from 1·19° to 120° with an increase in the
approach altitude by 300'.
• Attempts by the City of Carlsbad to dissuade incompatible deve lopment in the vicinity
of the flight pattern or considerable and limtted noise zones.
Proposed Noise Abatement Procedure
The introduction of an Instrument Landing System was considered in the formu lation
of the Airport Influence Area in conjunction with the existing VORTAC Approach.
Figure 111-5 shows the area which would be subject to Airport Land Use Commi ssion review.
As required in proposed State and Local Rules and Regulations, this area includes all land
projected to experience noise levels over 65 dB CNEL.
28
l
PART IV
ACHIEVING COMPATIBLE LAND USE
Achieving Compatible Land Use
Though areas of conflicting existing land use are relatively small, proposed developments
within the Palomar Airport Influence Area will include residential uses of serious incompat-
ibility.
Strategies to prevent these conflicts are needed. Potential strategies include both operational
changes to reduce areas in noise and air safety zones and land use changes to reduce levels
of conflict in these zones.
A. NOISE ABATEMENT ALTERNATIVES
Figure I V-1 shows the relation between the a ircraft noise system and some of the many
other elements of the urban environment. Strategies to reduce noise conflicts between
the airport and surrounding areas may be applied at a number of points in the system :
-The no ise source:
-The noise path:
-The noise receiver:
-Feedback con trol:
The airport and its aircraft operations.
The linkage between the source and receiver of noise.
Those land uses and activities which occur in areas impact-
ed by aircraft noise.
The coordination of noise abatement strategies.
The following outline groups noise strategies by their point of application: The no ise
source, path, receiver and feedback control. The fourth group is something of a "catch-
all " and includes various means of coordinating noise a batement as a problem with t he
entire system rather than a problem of compatible land uses. Airport location of air-
craft coordinating mechanisms can be formal or informal; control need not be vested
in an individual or group, but in some cases may be best achieved by "greasing the
wheels" of the entire system so it is self-regulatory.
B. APPLICATION OF NOISE ABATEMENT STRATEGIES TO PALOMAR AI RPORT
The recommended Airport Influence Area developed in Section Ill is based o n continued
operation of Palomar Airport with a general aviation classification, and considers expan-
sion in the number of operations to the PANCAP. Ex isting noise abatement strategies
at Palomar Airport, including displaced VORT AC approach and unallowable low altitude
power approaches are assumed in the definition of the recomme nded Airport Influence
Area. Further potential operational alternatives involving major changes in noise impact
are discussed in this section.
31
FIGURE IV-1
THE AIRPORT/AIRCRAFT/LAND USE SYSTEM
-Regu l ation
System
Pl anning
P lanning➔
Planning➔
Zoning
Regional Pattern
of Land Use and
Noise
System
Airport 'Aircraft Economic Activity Noise Source
System Constraints 1--+-----------•• Airport / Aircraft
Safety Location
Ai rcraft capabi lity DEMANDFORGOODS AND Des i gn
System capacity SERVICES Number of
Access • operations
Regu 1 at i ons EMPLOYMENT Schedu 1 i ng
costs AIR TRANSPORT
Land Use
Demand
Markets
Transpo,·tation
Ta s Les
S<>c i a l factors
Location
Constraints
RcsoL,rces
Costs
Transportation
Tooography
Legal system
Pol itical factors
·~---------~
DEMAND FOR
AI R TRANSPORT Noise Path
Temperature
Humi d i ty
Barr i ers
Ground cover I r------------------------~ Non-Airport ---------I Land Use Noise Receiver I
Pattem of Activities 1
and Land Uses I
Popu 1 at ion I
Area I
Va 1 ue I
Amount of I ....ii.. Uncertainty
Insul ation...,, Noise sensit ivity
economic I
activi ty I ..,_ ______ ...
-----------------------~
Reaction to noi se conf licts --------------------------------------WILSEY &HAM
32
1. Operational Strategies
Operational strategies have the fundamental objective of reducing conflicts between
land use and air operations by changing the pattern of impact. Changes may reduce
the area of noise and hazard impact or shift this impact from areas with severe con -
fli ct to areas where lesser conflict would result. The planned introduction of the
Instrument Landing System is endorsed and recommended by Wilsey & Ham. Al-
though the VORTAC approach will continue to operate, a de-emphasis will be
placed on its usage due to the more sophisticated I LS. Noise created over Carlsbad
fro m aircraft using the VORTAC will be reduced. Limitation of the operational
level to the PANCAP increases the efficiency of the airport. Maintenance of the
PANCAP, provided there is an acceptable mix of aircraft, would dramatical ly
facilitate the noise abatement objective. This strategy was utilized as the opera-
tional baseline for Palomar.
When limitation of the opertional level to that of the PANCAP is recommended,
accomplishment of such a state requires limitation of various support fac ilities
and services to prevent the demand exceeding the capacity. This would allow
administrators of the airport to efficiently operate the field while optimizing pilot
safety. Among the regulating factors are the amount of Fixed Based Operators,
tie down space and limitation of certain aircraft types, i.e., turbojets.
Addressing this complex issue requ ires consideration of the problems and trade-
offs. Economically, the viability of the airport may suffer if there are restrictions
imposed upon the utilization of the facility. On the other hand, limiting growth
may result in a less burdensome situation for the airport administrators and thus
place less of a demand on the fac ility. Env ironmentally, the decreased operational
level allows for a more compatible arrangement with neighboring residential
developments.
Attempting to control the usage of the airport by ai rcraft runs the risk of con-
frontation with the federal government. It is the vital federal aid to the airport
that is contingent upon non-discriminatory usage of the airport. However, opera-
tional reduction for environmental reasons may receive FAA acknowledgement
and not disapproval.
A well coordinated program with adequate publicity to concerned parties, espec-
ially pilots, may resu lt in a voluntary reduction in the daily operations of the
airport.
2. Land Use Strategies
Land use strategies include a wid e range of strategies that vary greatly in costs,
effectiveness, and abi lity of the City of Carlsbad and County to effect their imple-
mentation. The objective of land use related strategies is to reduce noise conflicts
by changing existing or proposed land uses in impact areas rather than reducing
impact of air operations. The City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, and property
owners in the impact area therefore play important roles in implementation of
these strategies.
a. Planning and Zoning Strategies
Application of planning and zoning strategies depends on the existing and
proposed land use, existing zoning, likely time of deve lopment, and intensity
33
of potential noise and air safety conflicts. Planning and zoning strategics
apply principally to the following types of ,ncas:
-Areas now Loncd for uses compatible with air operations.
-Undeveloped areas now zoned for residential use, but suitable for compat-
ible development because of conditions of slope, soils, and access.
-Undeveloped areas now zoned for residential use and unsuitable for other
than residential use.
The degree of applicability of planning and zoning strategies differs among
the above areas, with the first area being the most applicable and the last
type of area being the least applicable.
(1) Areas now zoned for uses compatible with air operations.
In areas now zoned for uses compatible with air operations, the County
and City of Carlsbad should insure that zoning for compatible use is
maintained.
(2) Undeveloped areas zoned for residential development but suitable for
other, more compatible development.
Changing ex isting zoning in undeveloped areas is likely to be more
difficult to implement than changing plans in areas under interim zon-
ing. The County and City of Carlsbad may be unwilling to initiate
rezoning action, particu larly where property owners have requested
residential zoning. Rezoning of such areas may be best im plemented
as part of a re-evaluation of all plans for the Airport Influence Area
based on the conclusions of this study.
Potential strategies for the Airport Land Use Commission in achieving
compatible development in the Palomar area include:
-Informing the County and City of Carlsbad of areas where conflicts
exist between existing zoning and objectives for compatibility in the
Airport Influence Area.
-Encouraging a review of all existing plans and zoning for the Airport
Influence Area.
-In areas of potential severe conflict where development is imminent,
taking other action, such as acquisition of restrictive use easements,
to prevent residential development.
If compatible zoning cannot be achieved, then other action may be
taken, depending on li kely time of development and severity of conflicts.
(3) Undeveloped areas now zoned for residential use and unsuitable for
other development.
Reduced density is again t he principal objective in areas zoned for
residential development where conflicts are not so severe as to mandate
no residential development.
34
b. /\cqt1isitin11 Str.itcgil''
/\rqt1isiliP11 ol soI1w i11tncsl in bnd is .1 l.111d llSl' str.1t l'gy lh,11 c.11 1 i11~mc l,111<.I
usl' ru111p,1tibili1y rl'g,1rdlcss of pl,inni11g ,111d 1011i11g .iclion.
( 1) Restrictive Use Easements
One objective of acquisition strategies is to acquire sufficient interest
in the property to prevent development of incompatible land uses. Such
interest is commonly called a restrictive use easement, and the easement
may be acquired by gift, agreement, or condemnation. Restrictive use
easements restricting development to agricultural uses or restricting
height of structures are commonly used in approach zones around both
civil and military airports to insure structures do not interfere with air
operations.
Restrictions contemplated in areas outside apporach zones are less severe,
and vary with the degree of noise impact and hazard potential. Restric-
tive use easements are recommended in all areas except those where
compatible development is assured by either existing committed develop-
ment or where zoning exists with sufficient restriction to prevent in-
compatible development. Besides the very restricted uses in the extreme
safety zone, the following indicates the degree of restrictiveness in the
respective zones.
-65 CNEL: No residential development or other noise-incompatible
use such as schools, churches, etc.
-Air Safety Zone B (Considerable Haza rd): No residential use, no use
involving assembly of groups of more than 25 people.
-Air Safety Zone C (Limited Hazard): No residential use of more
than 10 dwelling units per acre, no use involving assembly of groups
of more than 100 people.
Because zoning restrictions in commercial and industrial zones allow a
wide range of intensity in development and occupancy, zoning to
commercial and industrial use is an inadequate strategy to meet compat-
ibility objectives in hazard zones. Restrictive use easements are therefore
required in such areas as well as compatible zoning to insure uses of
high occupancy do not develop as a potential safety hazard.
(2) Noise Easements
Acquisition of noise easements, giving Palomar the right to produce
moderate noise levels on the property, but involving no restrictions
on use, is a strategy that has been proposed for other airports. Court
cases have dealt with noise damages an d individuals have been awarded
damages in some cases in some states. This strategy would compensate
property owners prior to any legal pro<;eeding.
Purchase of noise easements may result in some reduction of complaints.
Granting of ease ments may be tied to insulation of structures on the pro-
perty, and the amount of the easement may be applied to insulation
35
expc11sl'. l-lowcvcr, the real comp,ttibility ol' land uses in the i111p,1ct
arc,1 is likl'ly to (hange little with purchase of noise casements.
(3) Fee Simple Title
Fee simple acquisition would enable Palomar Airport to direct the
compatibi li ty of the land as needed. This strategy would only be con-
sidered when all other strategies do not resolve noise and hazard problems.
c. Sound Insul ation Strategies
Sound insulation is a limited noise abatement strategy for residential use
since residents are protected only inside their homes. However, insulation
can provide protection to interior areas and is an appropriate strategy for
schools.
Insulation is also an appropriate strategy for commercial, industrial and office
uses located in noise zones. Such uses requi red to be on or near Palomar Air-
port may be insulated to reduce distractions, interruptions and improve work
performance. Insulation should be conside red for offices in 65 CNEL Zones,
depending on requirements of specific uses. Air conditioning or forced air
ventilation is necessary for effective sound insulation in such areas.
3. Information and Coordination Strategies
Information and coordination strategies apply to all operational and land use
strategies and may aid in their implementation.
a. Noise Monitoring
Noise monitoring is the onl y certain way to determine noise impact on the
community. To provide full information, monitoring should be continuous,
should all ow identification of aircraft associated with specific anomalous
noise events, and be wide-band to allow presentation in any of the many
noise measures used by various agencies. Monitoring by the Division of Air-
ports would provide credibility to the CNEL noise contours. Civ il airports
with noise problems are required by California law to provide such noise
monitoring, and monitoring would be helpful to both the Airport and the
community in determining the true impact of operations. Monitoring would
also provide immediate information on the assessment of noise impact of
operational alternatives.
Noise monitoring would provide identification of violators of restrictions on
control of aircraft in flight altitudes, and better legal definition of noise im-
pact zone boundaries. Monitoring would assist in assessing the seasonal
effects of inversion layers and humidity on noise impact.
The California Noise Law states that airports with less than 1000 homes in
the 70 dB CNEL shall intermittently monitor the noise to obtain the result-
ing annual CNEL. As a minimum, measurements are to be taken continuous-
ly for 24-hour periods during 7-day samples throughout the year. This can
be accomplished by a single portable monitoring instrument. Palomar falls
in to this category as a result of the defined influence area.
36
b. Disscmin,1tion of lnform,1tion
Free dissL·min,1tion of information to the public can be a much more product-
ive str.itl'gy th.111 crc,1 ting b;1rricrs to receiving full information. Maps of the
Airport Influence Arca and a short discussion of the objectives for land use
in the Airport Influence Area should be readily available to al l interested
parties.
c. Planning Coordination
Planning of commun ity planning groups in the revision of the General Update
has shown to be productive in coordinating efforts in community planning
for the purpose of encouraging compatible development between Palomar's
operations and impacted land uses.
d. Information to Property Owners
The California Department of Real Estate now notifies property owners in
noise zones of the fact that high to moderate noise levels are being generated
on the properties at time of purchase. However, the full impact of such
noise levels is not made clear, and stronger statements about the degree of
impact should be added to these notices. A simi lar procedure should be
implemented for rental units.
37
I.
II.
•
TABLE IV-1
OUTLINE OF NOISE ABATEMENT STRATEGIES
Applicable to General Aviation Airports
Noise Source 11 1. Noise Receiver Changes
A. Aircraft Operational Changes
1. Approach operating changes
-Steeper glide slopes
-Two-segment approach
2. Takeoff operating changes
3. Takeoff and approach route changes
-Preferential runways
-Displaced thresholds
-Relocation of corridors
4. Regulation of ground operations
5. Schedule changes
6. Aircraft type changes
B. Engine/ Airframe Technology Changes
C. Airport Location and Utilization Changes
1. Construction
2. Abandonment of existing airports
3. Traffic allocation among airports
D. Airport Design
1. Runway length and direction
2. Location of maintenance areas
3. Size of site
4. Management of airport property
Noise Path Chanaes
Barriers
38
A. Receiver Location Changes
1. Encouraging compatible development
Public acquisition
-Market service (redevelopment)
-Acquisition for public use
2. Relocation of incompatible use
-Public acquisition for redevelopment
-Market service for relocation
3. Prohibiting incompatible use
Zoning
Subdivision regulation
Public services planning
Advance land acquisition
B. Receiver Sensitivity Changes
1. Insulation of structures
Building codes
-Housing codes
-Public insulation programs
2. Sound masking
3. Public relations
IY, Feedback and Control Mechanisms
A. Planning
1. Planning by local government and airport authority
2. Public hearings
3. Citizen involvement
B. Compensation
1. Easements
2. Tax credits
PART V
IMPLEMENTATION
Implementation
Strategies outlined in Section IV vary in cost, effectiveness, and applicabil ity to specific land
uses. These strategies must be in terrelated in a program and schedule of implementation to
achieve compatible development in the Airport Influence Area.
Implementation priorities are established with the objective of achieving a minimum cost
for the total program and achieving maximum compatibility at ultimate development of the
Airport Influence Area. With t hese objectives in mind, priorities are established based on
the following criteria:
Areas of high potential conflict have priority over areas of low potential conflict
(refer to Figure V-1).
Strategies of low cost have priority over strategies of high cost.
Strategies of high effectiveness have priority over strategies of low effectiveness.
Undeveloped areas have priority over areas where development is already established.
Areas of development potenti.al within severe confl ict areas are recommended for first
priority action. Second priority should be given to all zones designated with potentially
moderate impact.
In conformance with the above guidel ines the following implementation steps should be
taken in order of their priority:
1. Dissemination of airport compatibility information.
2. Review of all resoning applications, subdivision maps and building permits within the
Airport Influence Area ( Figure 111-5) by the Comprehensive Planning Organization act-
ing as the Airport Land Use Commission of the San Diego County region. Review
should focus on the conformance of proposals to this Airport Land Use Plan.
3. Review and revision of the proposed Carlsbad General Plan and San Dieguito Community
Plan to eliminate proposed Land Use-Airport conflicts.
4. Review and revision of zoning surrounding Palomar Airport to eliminate potential
Land Use-Airport confl icts.
5. Formulate building code amendments protecting future development from exterior
noise sources.
6. Nothing shall be done operationally to expand the area impacted by the Airport. If
further improvements in quieter aircraft are not ach ieved, this may require limiting
41
the number and type of aircraft using the Airport. Collection of complaint data should
be continued at Palomar and an effort be made to record specific incidents associated
with compl.iints to provide bet tcr information on the nature of operations resulting in
complaints.
7. Implement operati onal procedures to ach ieve the quiest level or operation consistent
with air safety.
8. Stringently enforce height restrictions, in accordance with FAR PART 77.
9. Purchase in fee title or of restrictive easement of land lying west of the existing runway
for open space or other compatible use.
10. Restrict intensity of land use in the Limited Hazard Zone by zoning, clustered residential
development or restrictive easements.
11. Implement noise monitoring to allow better evaluation of the noise impact of operations
and operational alternatives. Monitoring will assist in defining climatic conditions that
increase or decrease noise impact enabling airport officials to control operations during
periods of hi gher impact.
42
I ~,
i
_/i ____ ,,,,, r
I
i ,r-• ......_ , ,/\.../ -~~ ,/ ..... ~
/ -
/
I I i L--------0 ---7 '------·--7 i
I . ' . I I . . I J ____ : r·-1 /' , ,, . . / /
/
/
~ I ./ \ ,-!....... I . -.__. \ ,/ ____ 7
PALOII.U
\
\.
~'j_
\
~ modetate incon¢ability
----inc:off1>atabiiy
i
i . I
I .
!
I
I
,----_.,)
i
~ i
i
......,
c:is~a
Figure V-1
City Proposed Land Use lncompatabilities
within Airport Influence Area at 1990
PANCAP Operational Level
COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN -PALOMAR AIRPORT
\~ \ \ ,--------
. J'":J ...,,.... L=-------·:; '"''°""•
\
I
I
I i
\
I r-------6
. N I
I 'lf' 0 lOO(' •XX: 3,x.•
I s.cA.E ., •er
WILSEY & HAM
APPENDICES
""' --ii
\
\\ \\
\
AA.10
I I /'1 _____ .~,/ '
i i
i i_ ________ ,?j __ 7
~-------7 V j
E.1.A
aa.c.
I . ' . I I , . I
J ----~ / . /
/ ,/
>-I 'i
c.M.
COST&
FIGURE A
EXISTING ZONING
~
SOURCE: City of Carlsbad
County of San Diego
~A.1181
anc.
A.3CBJ
a.DC
P.C.
+
COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN -PALOMAR AIRPORT ~
c.•
6
N
''" O 100( l OOC l..OOC
S,C.A...E .. ~U'T
WILSEY & HAM
&f
-:
•
•=dwny ··••cilll -publc---lndullrtll
.. alrportfaclitiN --~epac:e -agrlcullural
;;!"~,..~~' !£,i$~ wali1IN(Mld land
/·"1 -_____ /,
i
i
FIGURE B
EXISTING LAND USE
SOURCE: City of Carlsbad
County of San Diego
COMPREHENSIVE LAND use PLAN -PALOMAR AIRPORT
I I ,, <J7 I L _ _, ______ _
-----·-·7 -i
I , ' . I . -! . i
) ✓----!
/
,/·
...
FUT o , ooc a ooo 1000
SClil.l: .. S"IEf
WILSEY & HAM
I ~1
\\ ,y \~ \f"""
\\
\\ \~
\
·•·•·•··•····· .. :•·•:•:•:•:•:· I i 9 .. .....__.....,. .-:•.········· 3 . .........,_
/'I I I ,.----✓-{ i L._ __ ~ """"'II(._ I .__ ----.. : -------
'
' . .
. . .
! :-::,.,.~ --.i.;-:~-_-~ I ......
... , ....... i .:,,····
'· --------· ---~--s:1 \ e: i--·--, .--·
Figure C
~ wwwasudll -ope,i apec:e/ .eawt1o11
City Proposed Land Use
Tentative
Source:
§::~ W Ci T3d 1111M t 111 611 City of Carlsbad
COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN -PALOMAR AIRPORT
i:tr
0 \OOC •JOC l.;;..c ~
sc.A..( .. i"[£T
WILSEY & HAM
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bibliography
1. Comprehensive Planning Organization, "Existing Trends -1995" Community Areas,
San Diego, California, June 1973.
2. Dan iel, Mann, Johnson and Mendenhall , "San Diego Plan for Air Transportation',',
Los Angeles, California, July 1972.
3. William L. Periera and Associates, "Palomar Airport Master Plan", unpublished draft,
undated.
4. Wilsey & Ham and Bolt, Beranek and Newman," Aircraft Noise Impact, Planning
Guidelines for Local Agencies", Los Angeles, California, November, 1972.
53