HomeMy WebLinkAboutAIRPORT CLEAR ZONE (ACZ) DISTRICTAIRPORT CLEAR ZONE (ACZ) DISTRICT
A. PURPOSE
.The Board of Supervisors declares that the ACZ District is
intended to accomplish the following:
1. To recognize the importance of the Butte*County airports
as regional transportation facilities and to prevent,
incompatible development in their vicinity.
2. To protect the health, safety and welfare of persons
-residing and working within the areas of airport influence.
3. To comply with applicable federal and state regulations
and standards as they relate to the subjects of noise
and safety to assure compatibility of uses in and around
airports. -
4. To compile all references to standards, ordinances and
policies concerning airports in one ordinance.
5. To implement standards and policies adopted by the
appropriate Airport Environs Land Use Plans.
B. APPLICATION
1. The following regulations apply in all combined districts
that include the ACZ District and prevail over any con-
flicting regulation of any principal or combined district
with which the ACZ District is combined.
2. It is the intent of the Board of Supervisors that whenever
this district is combined with any.principal or combined
zone district, ,that the policies and standards of the
Airport Environs Land Use Plans shall prevail over any
zoning or other ordinances or regulations which may
conflict with the standards and policies of the Airport
Plan.
3. The ACZ District may be combined with,all zone districts
applied to land within the boundary of the Airport'Plan.
C. USES PERMITTED SUBJECT TO PLAN APPROVAL BY THE PLANNING
COMMISSION
1. Any use permitted by the principal or combined district
that involves structures, improvements or trees, either
of permanent or temporary nature.
2. Any other use.permitted by the principal or combined
district that conflicts with the policies of the
appropriate Airport Environs Land Use Plan.
U
SIGNIFICANT MOMENTS
IN THE HISTORY
OF AIRPORT -LAND USE
: LAWSUITS
Compiled by Larry Thelen, Attorney,
California Division Aeronautics
CONTENTS
1. UNREG:ULATED.OR INCOMPATIBLY ZONED LAND NEAR AIRPORT
ENTITLED TO COMPENSATION WHEN OVERFLIGHTS INTERFERE
WITH ':*TRADITIONAL PROPERTY RIGHTS
11: ZONING WHICH RESULTS IN TAKING IS WQDu.
...III. GOOD NEWS FOR AIRPORT LAND USE REGULATORS:
AS TO THE ZONING OF PROPERTY COMPATIBLE WITH THE
AIRPORT, THERE IS:
�I?RESUMPTION OF VALIDITY
•MAY'EVEN BE A DUTY TO PROTECT BOTH THE AIRPORT
FROM ; ...SURROUNDING LAND AND VICE VERSA W/OUT TRIGGERING
CONDEMNATION EITHER WAY. ,
IV:: OTHER:J.URISD.IC.TIONS
I r
I. UNREGULATED OR INCOMPATIBLY ZONED LAND NEAR AIRPORT ENTITLED TO
COMPENSATION WHEN OVERFLIGHTS INTERFERE WITH TRADITIONAL
PROPERTY RIGHTS .
..Swetland w Curtiss Airports, 1932 i
Owner -has.predominate right only over lower stratum of space, and may bring a
trespass actlon;to prevent low flying aircraft from Invading it, absent an
easement:=h3.v.trig .bee.nobtained by the airport, and 500 ft. min. flight altitude
could:not:de_pri.ve-N'm of this right.
(55 F2d'201.).
U.-S. v.Causb.y, 1946 -
Chicken farmer next to military airport entitled to recover in, eminent domain
...f.or:anvading.his airspace and fact FAA had approved it is of no moment.
(328 U.S.:256) ;.._.
Griggs V 'Allegheny'County, 1962
Where: noise from aircraft landing and taking off made a home located off the end
of the 'runway unbearable for residential use, there was a"taking" of an air
easement'over the property, and county, which had designed. airport for.
public...
use int-onfoftity with rules and segs of CAA was liable.
(369-:U:S.84)
City of. Oakland v. Nutter, 1970 '
Avigation.easement..condemnation includes damages not only. for glidepath, but
.. � als.o:.forio.ise�dust7ft�mes.
(13 CA3d 752)
Dre.nnan=w: Ventura, Co.unty, 1.974 (38 CA3d 84)
Smart.-v 'L.A.,-1.9&0.(112 CA3d 232)
No inverse.liability for flying over a vacant lot, or an adjoining farm while
crop dusting..:_:..;..
Airport doesi'not.get prescriptive easement merely by'repeatedly flying over
vacant.prope:rty..'. ,,'
Nestle.v: Cty-'of Santa Monica, 1972
Although -commercial flights cannot be enjoined, they can still constitute a.
nuisance;:and.whether permanent or continuing depends on whether the harm
suffered has concluded.
Homeowner may sue airport -owning city for violating the zoning of his city by
allowing.�over-flights.
(6'C3d 920)
.........
Parker. v:; City':of. LA,` 1974.
Inv&s.e&when flig.hts.cause
substantial. interference with use and enjoyment of residence,
::, .��suff.iciently direct and peculiar to individual that, .. .
uncompensated, would cause resident to pay more than proper share
.:.of -cost of operation of airport.
(44. CA3d'556)
Aaron v. City of LA, 1974
1nv_eese-w.hen airport operation causes aircraft noise
[to sub,66ritiaily interferemith use/enjoyment of property sufficiently
direct/,-p.ecyliarlhatIJUUncompensated, would pay more -than proper:share to
evidencedby- lost of fair market value v. like homes.not noise impacted.
(40 CA3d.471;).
Gre:aterVestchester Homeowners v. City of L.A., 1979
Same as -:Nestle. v. Santa Monica, supra
Dutton v,. --Mendocino County,1948
Ordinance purporting to limit structure height to 20 feet, for 500 feet around
airport and.higher amounts thereafter void for attempting to take w/out
compensation..:.
(Superior:Court: U.,S::Av 1)
Kissingerrv:,-City of LA.; 1958
While. apartments under construction, city downzones to single family.
Held:'Ordinance void:
;for constituting a taking, since obvious purpose was to prevent
Improvement so airport land could be bought cheaper.
(the -property -taking -device maneuver)
for'restricting heights to protect runway approaches.
Scieed'.v Riverside County, 1963
When "lirpori Approach zoning"height restriction over property from 3
inches,4.6r 24 feet at airport end to 75 feet at other end of property would
impose-'restrictio'ns on property so severe as to constitute a taking; zoning. Is
(218,CA24.205)' ,
.:. BUT -BEWARE -OF:
Peacock V. Sacramento County, 1969
Inverse triggered when:
_:-..-i-Obviousl.y:attempt to keep land cheap for purchase, shown by
•:Inclusion of airport In general plan and conforming formal actions
• All practical economic use has been destroyed
Severe Height Restrictions
:,All development frozen
However-�:!:Significantly, the trial court did not find that any of the county's
enactments, standing alone, constituted .inverse condemnation." (p. 856).
(271-C-A2d 845)
City of Burbank v. Lockheed, 1973
U:S.--Su_preme_ Ct. rules 5 to 4 that ordinance by a non-airport-owning city is
-prohibiting'nig ht.operations Is void, as regulating aircraft nflight, a subject
preempted-by' f=ederal Aviation Act. Airport owners are nevertheless reserved
some .rlghas: in this area. While majority does not comment on land use regs, .
min:orty.stronglygndorses. (pg. 648)
(411.-U:S.•.624). .
•
III. GOOD NEWS FOR AIRPORT LAND USE REGULATORS:
AS TO.THE:ZONING:OF PROPERTY_ COMPATIBLE WITH THE. THERE IS:
-PRESUMPTION.OF VALIDITY �.
-MAY EVEN' BEA DUTY TO PROTECT BOTH THE AIRPORT FROM
SURROUNDING LAND AND VICE VERSA W/OUT TRIGGERING
CONDEMNATION':' EITHER WAY.
Smith v: Santa:Barbara County, 1966
Rezoning :vacant.land near airport from residential to design industrial OK, even
though the. admitted reason Is to accommodate the airportand to prevent future
:s damages.to prospective residents.
No allegation' property made valueless—only that it would be valueless as
:. residentiaP property.
(243 CA20°1:26):
Morse, v..'San:Luis�Otiis o Co., 1967
. .. ... ......
Dowrizoning.1 ac, to 1/5 ac: not void as a take because:
�:O�driance said Its purpose was to encourage agricultural use as v.
. .. � •encroaching subd'evisions. .
Findth'gs supporting ordinances presumed valid, absent contra-
s'' W"'o n
g,
ontrashowing: (also 66 CJ3d 620)
(Proximity of airport to land Is not alone enough to prove Intent to
acquire land for airport cheap
(247 CA2d 600)
Spuc;lndust,r.'tes,,.lnc. v. De.I.Webb, 1972
='•The residential:landowne.r�may.not have relief if he knowingly came to -a
�-neighb& ood reserved for Industrial/agricultural endeavors and has been
damaged thereby:::.: ;
_ Corollary: ResWential zoning Is assurance to purchaser that property L5 fit for
such purpose..,
�... Cattle feedi:r 6-_- '6: to-move,- but d _.veloper had to pay moving costs because home.
purchasers., hada newly obtalned 1ght to rely on residential character of area.
�. (494 P2-d-700)'.::.:,. .F.
' Seib Realty.v.,:Ct of San Buena rentura 1973
Selby tY` ty t
Enactment of general plan for fut re developoment of an area indicating
potential: public uses of.privately ,wned land not Inverse, because no
invasion%appropriation of a grope ty right.
' (10 C3d 1:10):
HFH, LTD.,, . L A Superior Court 1975
Inver se.c.lai-med l0...Commerciai c' )wnzoned to Single Family'Residential:-
tdot entitled,to:highest, most prof::able use, so no legal loss from down-zoning.
'` (15 C3d'S08) ':
IV. OTHER JURISDICTIONS
Idaho: -Any use/height restrictions to protect runway approaches. Roark v.
Coldwe'll,.1964.(394.P2d 641)
Minnesota.: b ri0yty height- restrictions for the sole benefit of airport to the,
burd6h-'olf-the-16w-but suggesting ok when "designed to effect:a comprehensive
plan aridreciprocal: benefit/burdens are exchanged, and diminishmeni. of value
alone not-:a:take when:value before and after agreed upon. McShane v. Farlbault,
1980 (292 NW26253)
Maryland: _6.2/3 it 'to 331/3 ft: 500 ft. away hgt. restriction confiscatory.
1939.(1939:.US:Av 11)
Mississippi::.Jackson Muni Airport Auth. v. Evans 1966, (191 So2d 126)
New Jersey:. Trees/electrical communication restrictions equal taking. See Yara
Eng. v. Neward, 1945, (40 A2d 559)
Ohio: Pop density limits near airport together with height restrictions for
airport hazards a take (Hageman v. Bd. of Trustees, 1969 (251 NE2d 507)
No.. ake: ..
Alabama:. 35.ft hgt IiFnit ok be minimizes hazard and appeals available for
hard cases,. -Pagett v. Montgomery, 1963, (160 So2d 6)
Florida: 28 ft. hgt. restriction ok because no showing that advertising tower to
be lowered would. -lose value, and safety is a legitimate end for. police power.
Sarasota/Nianatee Airport Auth v. Harrell's Candy Kitchen,: 1:957, (1958 US..Av
238)
Illinois:: Wh.ere:structures to 72 ft would have to be reduced from 10 to 38 ft.,
no taking because hgt restrictions are designed to protect public from air
hazard' prop.er.police power function. (La Salle Bank v: Cook.County, 1975,
340.,NE2d 79)
NewHatnpsh:ire:: Depends on effect on each parcel of land. (Manchester Airport
Auth-v..=Romano, 1980; (412 A2d 1020)
Ohio: Not. a,taking:when no showing could have gone higher absent airport
proxirnity::'(Hll§ v:,Corrigan,.1972, (278 NE2d 658)
_ 0 .5 , '
................... .....
— r
L'A.N:D OF NATUR.A.1 WEA,LTFl- AND 'BEA'UTY
r'; d
OMMIS.. ..
PLANNING C.SIO.N.
.?, October .I9, 98.4
7 COUNTY CENTER. DRIVE 'OR
- OVILLE; CALIF :
ORNIA 95965=3397
PHONE: 534-460.1'
" Chico Enterprise Record
Pe 0' Box 9:
Chico, CA .9592.7
The. fivst, neetin-g of the Airport Land Use Commissic(m will
take place on October 22, .1
.9-814 at 1:.3-0..p..IIL-:. in,. the Board
of Supervisors!' R60m,...25 County
Center. Drive., 0r..owi.1le,-. "
California..., .
The. -.purpose of the. irieeting
will .be 'to. empanel :the Commiss'i:on,.
elect off icers,. 'determ.lne :t}ie
-terms .o`f off:ice':pur"su-ar t. to*.'
Public Utilities Code. Section:
2 671,.5, . anal.' to' d 1 sus-.s the '
appointinent of the seventh
member (r.epresenting th.e. general
publ 0 and' each' -member's,
proxy.
Attached: for your conven'ience
is` th-e .agenda fox the'.October 22,
.1984..meeting:
r. _
If you have. -any .que::stions,..pleas-e
feel fre.e to cont,act..t'his .
office.
Sincerely,.
- ki.r.cb e r
Director of Planning-
BAK.: l k t
. .
Attachment
LAND b N:ATUP.AI N!EALTH AN:DBEAUTY
PANNING COMMI'SSION,
OCtObP.2 19 9$4
7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVFLL-E, CALIFORNIA 95965-3397
.
', `• _
PHONE:'S34•A60L' - .
Ridge Gazette.
j
5974 Skyway..
Paradise, CA. 9596.9
The. first meeting of tfie A
rpo.r.t Land 'Use .Commission �a.ill
' take place -on -October _ 22,,.
1984. at 1::30 p:.m: in the'. B.oaard.
.of- S.upervisor.s'. Room, 2'S County'
Center Drive,. Or.ovle;
California.
Th:e purpose. of.. the meeting
will . be -to :empan'el .. the Comm ssion,
.: elect officers,. det,' mine
the terms of, office p lrsuant to
Public Util- ties Code ' Section
.21.67.1:5, and .ta ;d iscuss the
appointment of. the.. seventh.
member (representing th.e g•.eneral..
pub'l'ic.) and e.acb. membe.r's.
proxy: :
' Attached for your co:riven Brice. a. the a�g6hda for the: October 22, .
19$4` .meeting.
I.
If you have any: questions'.,
please- feel fre,e' to' contact this,
office..
Sincerely, ,
Directorof.-.Plana_ing
BAS:: lkt
Attachment
:
~ BUTTE
COUN rRPORT LAND USE CO&�i4T S -S I OI�
• AGENDA
- OctoOr 22 l -
,.. 984 �, 1: 3:0.
.: EALI...TO. ORDER BY BETTYE KIRCHER, . PLA:NN1N.G' .DIRE.CTOR,
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
:.WELCOME.'
Fntrod.uction.: of members - .
BUSINESS
2.
Selection .'of ' Officers and seating of Chairmaxt
2::
De't6rm nat on :of. Terms of: Office' (Ref P.0 C :: 21671-5)
'• 3:,
Naming of Proxies (R.ef :..P t- C16 -70 `.(d);)..
b..
Discussion := Selection of General Public .Representative .
5. ;Ad
opt on of Bylaws
.. 6::.
Claim for I:nJur es —Barbara Vest
. 7 `Claim
for pioperty damage Jacqueline Thomas_
:. 8
Claim for pet.s.onal injuries - Dennis.: Vest:
9.
Selection. of Meeai.ng- schedul.e...
:1.0......Other
business
V....
.'ANNOUNCEMENTS
XI.- ..
ADJOURNMENT -
BOARD
OF
SUPERVISORS
MINUTES
- August
285
I9'84
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - May 3,'I984
The Airport Land Use•Commission was convened at 9-00- P.M.
Vice Chairman Behunin stated he had no problem with.the City of Oroville's
Policies and procedures.
Staff stated that the policies and procedures were close to those of'the
City of Chico.
Vice Chairman Behunin questioned if County.Co.unsel_had seen•the document
being discussed? �2
Vice Chairman Behunin stated that he would .like:.input from County Counsel.
He.. also stated that he-supported this policy and pr,ocedure.:
Commissioner Avis stated_ hehad. no-. problems with this.
It-was. moved by Commissioner Avis, seconded by Co.mmissione.r.Lambert•to
make a motion of.intent to approve subject to the approval of•County Counsel.
AYES: Commissioners Avis, Lambert and Vice Chairman Schrader
NOES.: No one
ABSENT: Commissioners Vercruse and Chairman Schrader
ABSTAINED: No-one.
Motion carried.
Staff was requested.to notify Commissioner Vercruse and'Chairman Schrader
regarding..the 6:30 p.m. starting time of the: meeting for March 1,.19.84.
T.he meeting adjourned at 9:05 p:.m.
PI!ANN+I+NTG CQ,.,1M,ISS+ION MII+NIJTFS - Februa•ry 23, 1984 y
BOARD
1984
OF
SUPERVISORS
MINUTES
- February
14,
Z55
102 Report by Planning Commissioner Otto Behunin regarding the) Airport Environs Plan around Oroville Airport.- (MR. BEHUNIN
REQUESTED THAT THE BOARD HELP IN RESTRICTING SINGLE DWELLING
UNITS IN THE AIRPORT AREA. MATTER TO BE CONSIDERED AT HEARING
'BEING.SET BY BOARD ON OROVILLE AREA LAND USE PLAN TO BE HELD
ON JANUARY 17, 1984.)
}
BOARD QF SUPE VISOPS MINUTES December. 13, 1983
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS' MINUTES - December 6,- 1.983
X83-1003
Report from
the Bute County
Planning Commission acting as the
(982.)
Airport
Land
Use Commission,
clarifying their recommendation
relative
to
representation of
the City -of Chico and Oroville
�-�
as members.
(RECOMMENDATION
THAT THESE MEMBERS SIT AS VOTING
MEMBERS
ON THE
AIRPORT LAND USE
COMMISSION.)
MOTION:
ADD
THE TWO MEMBERS,
REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE..CITY- OF
CHICO
AND A REPRESENTATIVE
FROM THE CITY OF OROVILLE
TO
THE AIRPORT LAND
USE COMMISSION.
M
S
VOTE:
1 Y
2 Y 3 Y
4 Y 5 Y (Unanimously carried)
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS' MINUTES - December 6,- 1.983
839996 Report by Planning Commissioner Otto Behunin regarding the
(144) Airport Environs Plan around the Oroville Airport. _(_CONTINUED
TO DECEMBER 13, 1983.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS' NfINUTES December 6, 1983
83-965 Report and recommendation from the Butte County Planning Commission
2380)
Jacting as the Airport Land Use Commission, to consider representa-
tion of the City of Chico and Oroville as members.
MOTION: ADD REPRESENTATIVES FROM CHICO AND OROVILLE TO
AIRPORT LAND'USE COMMISSION.
M
VOTE: 1. 2. 3. 4 5 ...
- (MOTION WITHDRAWN. REFERRED BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
FOR MORE SPECIFIC INFORMATION; I.E., WHETHER REPRESENTATIVES
WOULD.BE PARTICIPATING OR VOTING MEMBERS.)
- —BOARD OF SUPERVISORS' 'MINUTES NIovember 22, 19,93
The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 8:45,-' m..�
_.
The ALUC meeting convened at 8:45 p.m..
There was a discussion on.the motion submitted by Tom Lando, City of Chico
and the need for a public hearing if the plan is amended.
Staff stated that they need a motion to initiate hearings.
Commissioner Behunin wanted to change the last part of Mr. Lando+s motion
to delete +'75' width" .and add "width of_ CNEL 60 contour within the •aircraf*t
flight. path".
It was moved by Commissioner Behuninseconded by Commissioner Lambert -to
initiate hearings to amend the Airport Land Use—Plan—for Chico airport plan
as stated.in the motion by Tom Lando with.correction as follows:
To amend the Airport Environs Plan for the Chico Municipal Airport adopted
jApril 4, 1979 by the Butte County Planning Commission, acting in its
capacity.as the Airport Land Use Commission to delete the reference to
limiting residential densities in all Compatible Land Use Zones.(CLUZ)
except CLUZ,Area,I and to add a general prohibition against places of
public assembly such as schools and auditoriums in all Compatible Land
Uso Zones. -In -addition to amend the Airport Environs Plan to prohibit
ail new -residential subdivision and development in the area directly
to the north and to the south of.the main runway for a distance of
,10,000 feet in length and
width.of CNEL 60 contour within.the aircraft
flight path".
AYES: C'om.missioners Vercruse, Behunin, Lambert and Vice Chairman Schrader.
NOES: No one
ABST;NT: 'Commissioner Avis
A13STA .NED:. -No one
Mo't":ion carried. ;
Vice Chairman Schrader discussed •the conflicts witli-- the'- City of Orovlle-+'s
Environs Plan.
Staff stated that we need'a.plan to work with before sett:ing,hearings.
Co;nmissioner Behunin discussed restricting all single-family dwellings
Within. the 65 CNEL contours.
P.LANNI+UT-FS-D!(cember 1, 1�J83
Commissioner Behunin was concerned about stopping development around the
Oroville Airport while the Environs Plan was in process. He was concerned
with development occurring before the plan was completed. Discussed sending
a. -recommendation to the Board of concerns,, to limit development in the area.
Del stated that probably the only way would be a'moratorium declared by the
Board of Supervisors to stop building inthearea.
Commissioner Behunin was to present his objections to development in the
..airport area -to the Board as a representative of the ALUC.
Adj*ourne ALUC meeting 9.:10.
C. @ I! !Niffs-R,
, O"IT, (b i -
'. The ALUC was convened at 7:15 p.m.
This hearing was continued from November 3, 1983. r.
Tom Lando, Chico Planning Director, discussed -the Chico Airport Environs
Plan in relation to AB 2920. He discussed the major points of the memo
submitted earlier. The Airport Environs Plan set up the.series of compatible
land use zones -(he pointed to a map showing how these were arranged); the.
controls in these zones were based on existing county zoning at the -time,
(1976 plan - Environs study 1978 and 79) based on sewer study done in -1979.
Discussed S -R zoning as permissible in a compatible land use zone. Mr.
Lando discussed the area shown in.green,on the map as designated Agricultural
on the City's General Plan; the City owns the property 5000 ft. adjacent to
the runway. Discuiss'ed the dB (decibel) noise level areas on.the map.
January 1 of this year a new :law became effective AB 2920 which said.that
the General Plan of the City and County must be consistent with the Airport
Environs Plan. Under this law the City submitted its'General Plan to the
ALUC and the Commission is designated under state law to determine whether
or not the City's General Plan.is consistent with the Airport Environs Plan.
The ALUC responded that the City's General Plan was not consistent. The
problem is with the Drake development; the City researched the development
on how it compared to the guidelines.
The State prepared a book telling how to implement the Planning Airport
Guidelines. Memo Mr. Lando submitted earlier outlined this, first they
submitted their General Plan with all the amendments (the.County General
Plan) to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for review. FAA stated
they have no problems with the City's General Plan as it,currently stands.
Discussed Safety Zones in the Airport Land Use Handbook,an Inner -Safety
Zone which is the first 2500 feet beyond the runway; in this area it is.re-
commended that.no structures or people reside on a permanent basis. Outer
Safety Zone which is the area between 2500 ft. and 5000 feet; in there the
Handbook discu.sses.limited commercial and industrial development as.acceptable,
not residential. Both of these areas are owned by the City, and there is no
development slated for the first 5000 feet. Emergency Touchdown Area was
not an issue since there is no proposed development within 5000.feet and
this land is owned by the City.
The area that is -the issue is the Traffic-Pattern/Overflight Zone, which
includes the entire horizontal surface around the airport and conical surface.
Concerned primarily about the height .of structures and securing noise ease-.
inents. This is where the land use controls effect the General Plan process.
Handbook states that there is.no problem with residential uses in the over-
flight zone, no problem with commercial or industrial uses in this area;
do have a problem with places of.public assembly, churches etc. In the
overflight zone, the City's recommendation is. -.that the-ALUC change the
requirements that now talk about the S -R zoning and instead talk about limit-`
ing places of public assembly.
BLJ'I'T�L C-QIJ��iT1' �.I+RF'ORT LANL` WSE C - M INUTES Noire giber 10, 1.9183
c
C • f y
Specifically, there are a couple of areas of'concern. The entire area
within the 65 dB CNEL is under- public.ownership and will not be developed;
area.was purchased with City funds and FAA.funds. Discussion on the amount
of noise from Pacific Express. The City looked at noise, in combination
with the County, with avigation .easements required for everything within
the 55 CNEL. Their intent is to protect the Airport and it.is intended
to be a warning telling people who live there that they are within the
55 CNEL and the Airport has the right to make noise and dust and vibrations
down to the ground. In terms of safety, Mr. Lando included from the Airport
Environs Plan and from the Airport 'Land Use Handbook a chart of accidents
faith his memo.
Mr. Lando discussed how the problems started. Because of Foothill Park,'
the Northeast Chico Assessment District went ahead, which opened up
development to the east.. They are now proposing an amendment to the area
north of Sycamore Creek: They are proposing changing to a light industrial
as opposed to residential and the City supports this.
Commissioner Behunin stated that he felt this was a good idea;- he felt that
anything north of.Sycamore Creek could cause trouble in the future if there.,
was nothing done now. Look carefully at the flight path out to 60 dB's.
Tom Lando stated that was what the City did, was to look at what would.
happen under two conditions: 1.. What if they doubled the runway lanes?'
Discussion, .the.City would have no objections to.the 10,000 ft. -beyond
the runway where no residential use would ,be allowed.
Commissioner Behunin, talking about 10,000 ft. in both.directions?
Tom Lando stated yes, 10,000 ft. in both directions. He could not speak
.for the north; they did not study that area too closely. The area north
was not a great concern, and he felt that it was consistent with the
adopted plan. Proposed change would be to retain for a width of approx.
equal to the runway or twice the runway width, for areas outside that in
the overflight zone to prevent or limit public assembly.
Commissioner Vercruse questioned the density on the Lupin Avenue area.
Tom Lando stated R-1, for the Lupin Avenue area.-
Chairman
rea.Chairman Schrader stated that he liked what Mr. Lando has proposed, that he
had a lot of concerns. He comes from a community that had a similar problem;
they allowed the residences to get up within 500 ft. of the runway and then
the residents tried to shut the airport down. He asked if staff could help
on a motion.that-would guarantee the 10,000 feet be restricted, he would not
have any problem.
Mr. Lando stated that he expected to have at the next meeting, either by
motion or resolution, that something formally be before the ALUC to look
at for the language on a.motion; he would not want the ALUC to react without
that being before them.'
Commissioner Vercruse stated.they should use the recommendation as stated
-in the memo from Mr. Lando as a basis for the motion, page 5 at the end_ of
his comments.
Fti1'T�r C�tIN'TY 11I�RFgi2T' LAiNiD UST CCatiP�11SS+IN - I�1I�UTES Nott ember E0, 1983
.suggested a motion of intent ?and to bring this back on December 1,
uissioner Vercru.se asked if a motion of intent could be made to state:
_ial ;vrc�� e-ld amend. I the Airport Environs .Plan to delete. specific densities
- ro,
T _j tsri-ctions specified in the compatible land use zones and.
L
thesec
.with a -general prohibition -on development of places Of .public
A
aS'SOMbly s-(.Ich-as hospitals, churches, schools, etc. within the area. that
11" Y` spec--ii.fied and also mention,. the 10,000 foot lestr-.i.ction as pointed*
U. c-.0 the Contour m a P
-
o stated thia4l- from this statement he could draft something -fol,
C 0-miiission.'s review.
o December 1, 1983.
1� w a s contanued tL
Schrader discussed the Oroville Airport. He'.. has half of -.a draft
done, anck ko7L,-es to have it completed by the end..of Nov -ember.
ss o n, e 1_,amber.t d i s u s s ed just for the ALUC, where it is possible. to-
T ii-!'em.bers,. would it be appropriate to have the City of Chico -and the
0 f Or 0 ";A 11. e have members when we meet as ALLIC.
CflAirman Sc'hrader stated 'that Oroville has an. Airport Committee, he stated.
thcat he had no problem with Comi-,lissioner Lambert"s suggestion except gnat
e -Pervisors s
Boar of Su.. ets the requirements.
oi.-i:.-J_sioner Lamber1- made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Avis,. to
to the Board of Super'visors that they include one voting represeint-
lle and. one votino- member from Chic _AJIUC-
_f
at-,�,re -rom -,ovio, making d 7 member.
YkY.' E. S -'Commissioners Avis, Vercruse, Behunin,- Lambert and 'Vice Chairman
S c h r a.A e r
zI,LBSjE_NT:- No- one
B
"
-STATI�,;J: No one
Motion -tarried.
MM CM" ANN" MM M MURM90 - SOMM X-Olvionher. Re... iaip,x
PLANNING
-Y
October
1983
COMMISSIONMINUTES
6,
BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT .LAND USE COMMITTEE
MINUTES - August'18, 1983
Charlie Woods discussed changes in the law, as outlined'in background of
memo dated 8/12/83. He read the recommendations of the memo. There was a
discussion of the map with conflicts with the Airport Environs Plan.
Discussion by Commissioner Schrader about the conflict between the City of
Chico General Pian and the County General Plan with the Airport Environs
Plan. The Chico Airport Environs plan was done in 1-978.
City Commissioner Nelson discussed residential.property and the Specific
Plan of the area around the airport. Mr. Nelson stated that the noise
levels were stated in the deeds of the property near the airport and that
people who bought in the area were aware of the problems.
Commissioner Behunin requested that a map of the proposed developments in
the area with an overlay of the noise zones be made available.to the
committee to -study.
Commissioner Schrader discussed the need to. review the Chico Environs Plan
and a need to hold public hearings.
Charlie.Woods requested that the committee look at the recommendations in
order to meet the time -line of December 31st.
Commissioner Avis recommended deleting. #4.
Commissioner Behunin stated that the main intent is.to protect the airport
in Chico.. Discussion of noise levels.
Charlie Woods suggested looking at the Specific Plan adopted by the City -
of Chico and distribute the Chico Environs Plan for Commissioners to review.
Commissioner Lambert disucssed the possibility of 2 city members sitting on
the ALUC Board. Commissioner Schrader stated he had no problem with. that
idea.
Discussion of rescheduling this meeting.for the 3rd meeting in September or
possibly October 6th.
Commissioner Schrader suggested October 6th for the continued meeting along
with the Oroville.Environs Plan.
Motion was made by Commissioner Avis, seconded by Commissioner Lambert for
recommendations 1 a-& b., 2 a $ b, and 3, deleting.#4, as follows:
RECOMMENDATION
1. Find pursuant to Section 21676 of.the Public -Utilities -Code
that the City of Chico's General Plan and Northeast Chico
Specific Plans are not consistent with the Airport Environs
Plan, the adopted ALUC plan for the Chico Airport for the
following reasons:
� f
BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMITTEE '
MINUTES - August 18, 1983
a. The land use designations described in the General Plan,
Land Use Element and Northeast -Chico Specific Plan conflict
with the'Airport Environs Plan policies for CLUZ 11, IIP,
III and IV which call for residential development with.one
acre per dwelling densities; and
b. The Noise Element does not reflect the noise exposure
contours contained in the Airport Environs Plan.
2. Find -pursuant to Section 21676�of the Public Utilities Code
that the County of Butte's General Plan is not.consistent with
the Airport Environs Plan, the adopted.ALUC plan for the Chico
Airport for the following reasons:
a. The land use designations described in the General
Plan, Land Use Element, Chico Area Land Use Plan
conflict with the Airport Environs Plan policies for.
CLUZ II, IIP, III and IV which all for.residenti.al
development.with one acre per dwelling densities;.and
b. The Noise Element does not reflect the noise exposure
contours contained in the Airport Environs Plan.
3. These findings shall be transmitted to the respective legislative
bodies of the. City of Chico,and County of Butte pursuant to
Section 21676 of the Public Utilities Code.
AYES: Commissioners Avis, Behunin, Lambert and Vice Chairman Schrader
,NOES: No one
ABSENT: Chairman Bennett
ABSTAIN: No one
Motion carried
The Meeting was continued to Octob-er 6th.
There .being.. no further business the. ALUC meeting. adjourned at 9:15 p.m.
- Xz�
MIX5 SCHRADER, Chairman
ALUC Committee.
-2-
4 /'0V
Inter -Depart mental-eVlemorandum
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Planning
SUBJECT: Excerpt from the Board of Supervisors' Minutes of July 3, 1984
DATE: July 11, 1984
Motion: I would like to at least have a little more information
or have our Planning Commission give us some idea what their
feelings are-.
UTILITIES CODE ` § 2167
i'
pUBLIC
noise need not be re j
g 21669.6 taw gbver'ning conduct.
rccement shall be.per. .�
LHea`ring,
Iiearins under'this article required .by the provisions of'. Sections 21665, 21666,
G
. •..
21G6S, 216GS2, and. 21669 or.regulations adopted pursuant`to such prOvI. On shah
1 of
�cnr.ological:feasibiliEy ;, .
:be conducted'pursuant.to Chapter 5 ..(eomfdencing with Section 11500)of Part
t- �•'
Division 3..of Title 2 of the Government Code.
'G, 1969. Amended by �: `:
10.
(Added by Stats 1979 c. 511 p , $ ) y • -� y
vT
i
a ' ,
AItTICi,E '3.5 'AIRPORT LATD USE COMfISSIO*I j'vT£ i1T]
Sec. :.
21610. Creation membership• selection
tions '
21670.1 Action by designated body instead'oY co slow -:
rtoring. program'at an C
236702 Applicability -to counties having over 4 million population
of certain mem
11. into effect on"
Kago
21'671. Ai tt oRned. by city, district or county•'. appointment
•'
b s by cities and counties. ` -
21671.5' Term of office •' removal of members vacancies compensation ; staiP
i
6; 19G9 Amended by
assistance; .meetings
$
,.' Stats19S0, c. 725, p.
!
23672. Rules and regulations :•'`
1
21673. IntLation of proceedings for creation by owner of airport.
:ntaries • -
21674: Powersand duties.
k ncdse; state _regula-
otogy. (is; -i}'48 So.Ca1_ L
21675. Land use plan.
'of of change of development:.plan.:
s
'
2167. Assistance: public agencies; approval
21G77. County of 3larin; ovei•rule'of county: airport land use coiumission_ _
: Ariicte S 5'added by StatsJ967 c 852,-p--.2,2981'§
I1 be deemed a nisde
§ 21670. Creation; membership, seiectlon :. -. :: :':::
There is hereby created., in each county'subject, to this article and coati ing. at.
one thousand• dollars'
least one airport operated for -the benefit of the general. public and served by an.
' ,
earrier.ceitified. by the Public Utilities. Commission .or. the Civil herODP utir
-is situated to enforce
air
Roard, an airport land -use cOmm>>sion; hereinafter"referred to:.as the "commission.".
j
end, the operator of
the
Each commission shall consist of seven members t . b.- selected.ns follo�cs:
iniad' by a city selection
;teci br• the county
(a) Two rerresenting. the citie3 in the county appo. ^_
t the efficient enfotze-
committee comprised of the mayors -of aIl' the cities within that county; 'Pro`.
he county ;or its costs
vided, however, that, if there are an elites colati uons or adjacent to .thequali
+rtic;e S (corrniencing
fyina airport, at least. one such repre§entative shall. be appointed therefro;n:•
the number of representstiVes provided
z Administrative Code;
If there. are no cities a county,
,r for: any ^mounts re
for bs subdivisions Mand (c) shall each -be. increased bs one •-
I',
II,pon request of the
(b) Two representing, the county, appointed Up the board oYaupervisors
the reasoii:�bieness of
(c) Two representing the airports within that county;: ' ppointed by a selection .
all of_ the'pbblic airports R'ithin. that
sport user. fees:
aagers of
committee. comprised. of the mn
shaI] be from <an airport
OAS:Shal1 be used first -
". - ':.cotiaty;however,•one'-such representative .appointed.
ol,erated for the benefit of tine general public. =
appropriated to carry
"
"(d) One representing the general public, nppornted by the other six members
;.':
j
j
fished, and second be
ging airports:
, s
of the commission
1>e appointed
G, 1969: Amended by
• `' ` - Public officers, w'hethe'r elected or appointed, may -and.
during their tcrinc of Public office. '
"
"serve. a5`triemhers of: the. commission
Each tnemUer shall promptly appoint.a sitigle.pro`y to represent bhu in comtnis-
an alrhort located
slow affairs and to rote on aU wntl-er;"whut,tiie member is not in attendance...The
.is
c�bl noise standards:
4!.
-
shall be designated in :> signed written instrument: �elrich shall .be l pi on
of Trgnsp• (1979)
C:n.ad bf �.
proxy
file at Clic cornmiscion offices, and the prosy shall serve ht the pleastirc of.the mem-
licr.nho appointed him. !1 vacancy in the office of Pro f shall he Pilled Promptly. .
_
by. appointment of a. i1ew Proxy.
(Added by St:its.19G7, c.. 8.32, p. 26 -SS,. 1. '.Axnen ccd by Stats.7870, e..•17S_',. p. 20S9, $
I Stats33il.".c. GS7, P•'1345, § I, urgency, efi. Aug. 23, 1.871.;: ri.ats.1H$0, c: 725, p. —,
'Z' w.,
2-167-0.1
PUBLIC UTILI T iES CODE
§ 216701. Action by deslgriated body Instead of commission
r G�
ra
\ot.cithstandin an
t; y Provisions of this article, if the board of superisors an
the city select,ov' Coittee
The: commission shat
guest of.tlte majoritY-61-
w
min of m iyors in a„y county each mal.es'a determination
by a majority vote fhat prgper land
(Added. by Stats:l9137, ,
use plaiining.csn_lie accoi,zpjic},ed throi,gh'thE
Actions of an apPTopriatelti deli -n ,ted body, then such body sh=ill acsuci,e the plan -1
Hing
§ l.}.
1
responc,b,lidji .s of, an airport land use coin irna:,on as pro.idPd for in this anti-'
cle, and a commissionu
need not be forined in.
672
§• 21.. Rules ref
h `
'
that conty. • e •
(Added`. by Stats 1870, C. 3IS3, p. 2p59, § 2. Auienileci by Sats 19S0; c: ,25, p:
§ 10.)
.and
tach conimis�ion cha
di
i .
squalification. of its 'r
proposal
because of cont
d
4'21670.2 Appticabllity to counties Navin over 4 million population
`
members in -such cases.
R ;
Sections 21670 and 211;70.1 do not apply to counties of more :than 4 million 'popula-
(Added Stftts 19G7,_c 85°
tion. Ii► such counties the county regional planning commission has the'responsibility
for coordinating the air art. la ni
P P n ng
§ 21673. .Initiation of p"
+
of public agencies within the. county: In in-
stances wiicre impasses resiiit.relative to this planning, an appeal may be made'to•
In any County• when
owner of a puUlic airpor
rf i
the county regional planning commission U an
y y'public a;ency involved.- The action.
taken by tlae county"regional planning commission
_
by presentin q
g a request
and
,
on.such an appeal may be.over--
ruled by a four=fifths vote of the governing
showing the need; t.
body of a public a enc �liose Tannin^
led to .the appeal: g. y planning a'
(Added Stats.1867, c-852,
z i
!
(Added by .Stfits.197o C. 1182, p• 2080, § 3.).
§ 21674. Powers aed dt
lr
§ 21671 airport owned .by city, district or county; appointment of. certain mem-,
'by.
The ' commission shgl'
limitations upon:its juris
�a
bers cities and counties:(1)
To studs conditio
r
In any county where, there is an. airport operated for the general 'public, and
height. restrictions on bui.
z
served by an airearrier certified -by the.Public Utilities Commissaon.or the Civil
Aeronautics Board,
(2).To make recomme•
•, ?il
L..
which is owned by .a city or district in another COcunty'or by
anotber county,' one of the. repzesentatiNes
ssure safety of 'air navic
U
provided by' subdivision (a) of Section
21670 shall. be appointed by the mayors
(3) To Bold public hen .
of. the cities of the county in which the-
owner of that airport loeated, and one of the representatives procidcd by Sub
r
(2) and make -findings--of
jurisdiction
}!
.is
(b) of Section216i0shall.be appointed by the board of supervisors of the
county in ivbich the owner of that
;
-division
(4) To make and
c
ai sport is located. .:_ ..., '
(Added Ctats 1�G7,.0 8,2, p. 2235, §.1.)
„enfor
of such hearings 'hick
r ,
�,�.i�
Library references ,, _ .. _
"Aviation
plicable to he, bs. coni
«223.
C.J.S..Aerlai Nacigatlon 1' 35..ef seq.' ! •' -:'
` '
(.,J. To acsieve by zonit
�
..° • .. .. , •...::,
and in. tile vicinity of eX
FM;-
FMe
§ 21(7718- Term of office; removal of members; yacaric{es; compensatrort;, staii
. of such ai c .
rilOrtS i, not ,r
assistance; .meetings.
crommissions. sh=all regnirr
x
Except for the terms of office of the members of the first commission, the term
such standards as the dep.
a'e. �?a
- of office of each member shall be four years nrd. until. the Ppointment and qualifi-
`cation of his successor_: The members of the first commission shall classify them-
The powers of the coin
sion jurisdiction over the c
selves by, lot.so that the .term 'of office of one member is one year, of two members
is two
a'
(Added by' Stats.1967, C. b
years, of two members is three years, and of two members. is. four years_"
The body. which ori Hall a
appointed
§ 4; .Stats.1J75, c, 1052 p'
�?
y a member whose term has expire'd.shall appoint
his successor for a full terns of four years. Any member may be remored at any
r,"
-1. 1n general
An airport land use comrr
time and without cause by the body appointing him. The expiration date ofahe'
�
Nage authority under .g 2:. '
term of office of each member shall be the first 111onda s -y
pin May in the" ear in which
his term is to expire- Any i-acancy in the membership the
_«
»_
§ 21675: Land use plan
of commission shall be
fig ed for the unexpired term by appointment by the body which ori mall a
g appointed.
.''. .
(a) The commision shal
Y
the member whose office has become vacanE: The chairman of the commission sha11
for
vide for the orderly grow•
,c
be selected by the members thereof.
;=.
within the. inrisdi!
i
._
Compensation, %f .any shallbe determined by the board of supervisors
'Welfare_ of the inhabitants '
:eral. The comms sion
Staff assistance: including the mailing of notices and the keeping .of minutes, and
pias.
anticipated growth of tlae
I;
'
necessary qua rters,.equipment, and supplies shall be provided by the county.. The
usual and necessary: operating e_cpenses the
.
formulating a land a;ae pi.
biiiid'n.
,g.
of commission shall be a county charge_
l�ottvithstanding any -other provisions of this article, the commission shall not
may specify use .
soundproofing adjacent .to
employ any personnel either as employeesor independent contractors without the
(p) The. commission -.,nay
¢'1
prior approval of. the board of supervisors.
_
f
sion (a);. • •
3
!Inderline Indicates changes. or additions by amendment
area wi
o
Asterisi(s • • In,dlcz,e
t
732
de
i
,PUtt1O.UTILITIES CODE §; 21675
`
r
T commission shell meet athe: e call of the comini5sion. chairman or at.the re-
r�
Mhe
board of supervisors and'
`
quest of the majority of the commission members.
Amended by. Stats:1972, x..413. p 744.
Ch makes a. determination
-
(Added by Stats.1967, c 552, p. 2258, § 1:
:Accomplished tbrough the
1) ;.,' :
4J• spall assume the.plan
' . -
Rules'and reyulatlons
=
pprovided for in this art! --'§21672
Each commission shall' adopt rules .and regulations with respect to the temporary
Stats.19S0, c. 725; p. =-
-
disqualification'of :its members from participating. n tYi6 review or adoption of a
respect.to appointment of snbstitnte
. _
proposal because of' conflict of interest and Frith
memiters in such cases
population
(Added Stats.1967 c. 452, p: 22531' § 1.) '
iore than 4 million popula
g 21673 1 nitiatlon of proceedings for creation 6y owner of afrQort
t
b,gion.has the responsibility
In any county when a commission has not been created by Lection 21670, any
5;
lrithin the county. In .in-
be to
airport may initiate.proceedin s for. the crcatian.ol 3. commission.
owner og'a public. g
.that a commission be created
`by
� -
in appeal may made
presenting a request to the' board of. super4'isois
'
incy iiicolved. 'The action
_ and showing the need ihere;or to their satisfaction.t
Ih. an appeal may be.over-
Hie agency vrhose planning
(Added Stats.1967 c. $52, p. 2288, §.1.)
�1
:
§ 21674: Powers and, duties.
The' commission shall' have .the following, powers .and dutiesi subject to ,the
-
1
ointment of certain mem-
limitations upon its jurisdiction herein set forth:
concernmb the need, for
J
(1) To study conditions and male recommendations
height restrictions on buildings neitr airports
r the general public, and
(2) To make recommendations for tbe� use..of the land surrounding airports. to.
_
ission or the'
safety of air navigation and- the promotion of air commerce:
.CipilAssure
in 'ouother county or by.
'' (3) To bold public hearings 'regarding the suUject :matter in subdi�'isions (1) e.tl,d
�.
6ub(liCl510It (a) of Section
(2) and make findings of fact thereon _which would be advisory only to the involved
the county in which the
jurisdiction. • "`
Pitativrs provided Uy sub
(4) 'To mal•"e and enforce :rules and regttlattous for the orderly and.fairconduct
card of s ipervisors of the
of such hearings shall conform as; neirly as possiLlc to the provisions ap
.which
plicable' to hearings conducted by local agency 'formation comtriissions.
`
(n) To, achieve by zoning compatible lane uses in the:tiIcin'ity of all. new airports
:
and' in ilio vicinity of existing airports. to the extent that the land in the vicinity.,.
of such airports is.nut already dedotto incompatible use:, and to this end the'
rtes; compensation; staff
coromics1ons shalt require that all new construction in_ such areas slia]i conform to
f
'
such standards us the department may. from tirefo time' adopt.
First commission, the term
The powers of the commission shall in no way be. construed to gi�'e the commis-.
y
appointment and and qualifi- .
ission shall classify them-
=
sion jurisdiction over the. operation of any airport.:
(Added by: Stats.19f7, .c. Sat; p- 2288,_ § 1:. Amended by. Stats.1970; C. 1182, p• 2049„
mie,year, of two members
g 4; $tats.1975, c. 1052, p. 2392 § 19.)
,o ntemberS is four years.
1. In general' -. formu]'ate comDrehensiv.e ]and use plans ,for
lty.Ge federal. military•eir
I G
p has expired shall appoint
-5-72
An airport land use commission does not the area ops. 7-5-72-
21670 et' seq, to port.. 55 pDs.tty Gen.
I a
n
r
r may be removed at any
have authority under § .2Sd
l
he expiration date of -the"
§ 21675 Land use plan '
1 May in the year in which
(a) Tlie cbinm,ssion shall forniulate.a Conipriglenel.e'land ns, plln that will pro
!
if the commission shall,lie
Mbich originally appointed'
gide for,tlie orderlyro�eth of ench public tiiUort alid the area snrroundm, the. .
vciil safegnnrd the general
an of. the commission shall.
_
airport a,ithin the jurisdiction of the coinnussion, and
�C'e)fare of the Inhabit..^.its witliin the vicir_ity of.the airporf ind the public in Ken -
oral:` The columissio i plan �b:ill include a lonr range master plan Ella.t reflects tIn
I of supervisors
anticip-ited groi�rth of the nirport during at le 1st the next 20 yP II's.
ie keeping of minutes,. arid:
formalatuin a land lice pi:iii, the contmi.suo. nial develop velop height restrictions on
determine building standards, inclndink
1 idcd by the county. The
UuiJdi i miry specify use of land; and inafy
rshall be a county charge.
.s,
soundproofing adjacent to airports within the planning arca.
the commission shall. not.
(t�) The.commissinn Ina}• inelnile_ within its plan to sulXli�-i-
G'
I ,^
,E eo>itractor� v;ithout the
Sion .(a),- " ° •.. area within the jurisdiction of the commi$sion.surrounding any
adoltlons by amendment
Asterisks.:°..s °. Indlcate deletions by amendment. .
133.':
CHI ' ADMINISTRATIV FFIC2E
COUNTY OF BUTTE
OUTjF 25 COUNTY CENTER DR. / OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3380 / (916) 534-4631
e 1 o
e e
e e r
e u
e MEMBERS OF THE BOARD
C�fJN� AL SARACENI
MARTIN J. NICHOLS JANE DOLAN
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER HILDA WHEELER
BERTHA MOSELEY
LEN FULTON
June 28, 1984
Board of Supervisors
County of Butte
25 County Center Drive
Oroville, CA 95965
Dear Board Members:
Re: Report of City Selection Committee -
Airport Land Use Planning Commission.
Please find attached Butte County City Selection, '*Committee Resolution
No. 84-2, a resolution rescinding its resolution, 'dated November 24, 1970
designating the.Butte County Planning Commission as -the Butte County
Airport Land Use Commission.
Substantially the action taken implements the provisions of California
Public Utilities Code.Section 21670 setting forth a specific seven -member
Airport Land Use Planning Commission in the county. This is as follows:
1., Two representatives of the cities. -appointed by the City Selection
Committee. The City Selection Committee has - appointed Jerry Kenkel
of,Chico and Harry Pietz of Oroville.
2. Two representatives of'the county, appointed by the Board of
Supervisors. In this regard, it -is requested that the Board of
Supervisors authorize the posting of the vacancies for a period
of ten days so that appointments can be made as soon as possible,
perhaps by July 17, 1984.
3. Two representatives of the airports within the county, appointed by
a selection committee 'compri•sed'of the managers of all the public
airports within.the county; provided that one such, -member is to be
appointed from an airport operated for the benefit of the general
public. What this means is that the City of Chico Airport Manager,
i.e. City Manager Fre.d..Davis., would be one of the designated members
and the other would be chosen what we believe to be from the Chico
Airport Manager, Oroville'Airport Manager, Paradise Airport Manager
and Rancho (Chico.) Airport Manager.
Board of Supervisors -2- June 28, 1984
4. One public member appointed by the other six members of the'Airport
Land Use Planning.Commission.
The City Selection Committee also.possed a motion requesting that.the
county Planning staff be designated as'the staff to the Airport Land Use
Planning Commission and that additionally the first organizational meeting
of said commission be held'wit.hin'a period of thirty days.
Action Requested,:
1. Authorize posting of vacancies for the two county representatives
to be appointed to the Airport Land Use Planning Commission.,
2. Approve the designation of the' -county Planning staff as the staff
to the Airport Land Use Planning Commission.
y my o rs,
Martin J. icho1s
Chief A nistrative Officer
MJN/MP/cap
Encl .
cc: Curt Campion, Chairman City Selection Committee
Mayors of Incorporated.Cities
City Pl anning. Directors
Bettye Kircher, County Planning Director
0
a ;ler;vq
r
OuT .
0 .l O
0 0
o
0 O
CHI* ADMINISTRATIVOOFFICE
COUNTY OF BUTTE
25 COUNTY CENTER DR. / OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3380 / (916) 534-4631
MARTIN J. NICHOLS
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
Board of'Supervisors
County of Butte
25 County Center Drive
Oroville, CA 95965.
Dear Board Members:
Buff® Co. Planning Comm.
J U L ' 1984
OroV1ll8, Calitamia
June 28,. 1984
Re: Report of City Selection Committee -
Airport Land Use Planning Commission
. 66-' yam
MEMBERS OF THE BOARD
AL SARACENI
JANE DOLAN
HILDA WHEELER
BERTHA MOSELEY
LEN FULTON
Please find attached Butte -County City Selection'Committee Resolution
No. 84-2, a resolution rescinding its resolution dated November 24, 1970
designating the Butte County Planning Commission as the Butte County
Airport Land Use Commission.
Substantially the action taken implements the provisions of California
Public Utilities Code Section 21670 setting forth a specific seven -member
Airport Land Use Planning Commission -in the.county. This is as follows:
1. Two representatives of the cities. -appointed by the City Selection
Committee. The City, -Selection Committee has appointed Jerry Kenkel
of Chico and Rarry'Pietz of Oroville.
2.. Two representatives of the county, appointed by the Board of
Supervisors. In thisregard, it is requested that the Board of
Supervisors authorize the posting of the vacancies for a period
of ten days so that appointments can be made as soon as possible,
perhaps by July 17, 1984.
3. Two representatives of the airports within the. county, appointed by
a selecti.on committee comprised of' the. managers of all the public
airports within the county, provided, that one such member is to be
appointed from an airport operated for the benefit of the general
public. What this means is that the City of Chico Airport Manager,
i.e. City Manager Fred Davis, would be one of the designated members
and the other would be chosen what we believe to be from the Chico
Airport Manager, Oroville Airport.Manager, Paradise Airport Manager
and Rancho (Chico) Airport Manager.
( Board of Supervisors -2= June 28, 1984
4. One public member appointed by the other six'members- of the Airport.
Land Use Planning. Commission'.
The Ci ty'_ Se1ecti on Committee - a1so: passed <-a°.,moti.onsreq uesti ng .that_ the'-.:
county Planni-ng staff be' designated as the staff' to the Airport.Land Use
Planning Commission and that additionally the-firs.t: organ i zattoin al meeting
of said commission be .he-1 d withina. peri od:. of `thirty days.
Action Requested„
1. Authorize posting of vacancies for the two county representatives
to be appointed to the Airport Land Use Planning Commission.
2. Approve the designation of the'-county Planning staff-as the staff
to the Airport Land Use Planning Co ission.
y my o rs,
G�
Martin. J. ichols
Chief�A nistrative Officer
MJN/MP/cap
Encl.
cc: Curt Campion,°Chairman City Selection Committee
Mayors of Incorporated: Cities
City Planning Directors
a Kircher, County Planning Director
0q
' Resolution -No. 84-2.
'¢ RESOLUTION OF THE BUTTE COUNTY CITY SELECTION ..COMMITTEE RESCINDING
ITS RESOLUTION DATED NOVEMBER .24, 1970. DESIGNATING THE BUTTE COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION AS THE BUT—TE.-COUNTY AIRPORT LAND.USE COMMISSION
1 WHEREAS, pursuant to Section'21670 of the California Public Utilities
2 Code, an airport commission has`been`created-in.each county containing at
3 least one airport operated for:the benefit:of the general public and served.by
4 n air carrier certified by the.Civil Aeronautics Board: Said commission
5 onsists of seven members selected"as- follows:.:
6 (i) Two representing the cities in'the:. county,: appointed by a city
7 selection commi'.ttee comp,.rised of the mayors of -11 the, cities .
8 within. the county:, provided, however, that, if there are any
9 cities contiguous or adjacent to�the:gUa.lifying airport, at. least
10 one -.such representative is to:be appointed therefrom;
11 (ii) Two representing the county, appointed by the board of -supervisors;
12 (iii) Two representing the airports within the-county;`appointed by a
13selection committee .comprised managers of all the public
14 airports within'the county; provided, however, that one such member
15 is to be appointed from an airport operated for the. benefit of the
16 general public;.and
17 (iv) One representing -the general public, appointed by the other six
18 members of the commission.
19 WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 21670..1 of the. California Public Utilities
20 Code, if the board of supervisors and the city selection committee.of mayors in
21 any county each make a determinat.ibn"by a majority vote.that proPer land use
22 planning can be accomplished through the actions of a designated.,body other
23 than the airport land use commis.sion,.then.such body may assume the planning
24 responsibilities of an airport land use commission and a separate commission
25 need not be formed in the county;
26 ////
t.'
r.`
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
•.
WHEREAS., this Committee, -5y resolution dated November -24,...1970
heretofore designated 'the'Butte`County Planning Commission as,the body to assume
the planning'responsibilittes of an airport land'use commission after -determining
by a majority vote that proper"Tand.use planning could be accomplished through
the anti ons' of. the Butte County Pl ann'i ng Commission ; and
WHEREAS., this .Committee now. -des'i'res to: res ci h -d its resolution dated
November 24,1970 designating the Butte'County Planning. Commission as the body
to assume the planning-responsibiliti.es-of-an af`rport land -use commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE TT'RESOLVED by'the Butte County City Selection.
Committee as follows:
1. That -this Committee hereby 'resc.inds'its- resolution dated
November 24',,.1970 designating, the Butte County Planning Commission
as the body to assume the:plann.ing responsibilities of an airport
land.use commission finding that proper land -use planning can no
longer be accomplished.through the actions of the Butte County
Planning Commission;
2. That this Committee intends to appoint two representatives to the
Butte.County Airport Land Use Commission in the manner contemplated
by Section 2167O.of-the Cal:ifornia-Public.Util'ities. Code; and
3. That this Committee requests the. Board of Supervisors.and the
governing bodies of each airport within the county to also appoint
their respective representatives to the Butte County Airport Land
Use Commission inthe manner contemplated by Section,21670 of the
California Publ.ic Utilities Code.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Butte County City Selection Committee,
(CountY of Butte,. State of California, this 28th day of June, 1984, by the
-2-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11.
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
. y -
following. vote:,
AYES: Shelton Enochs,' City of Chico; Richard 'McDowel-l', City of`
Gridley; and'Curt:Campion, Town of"Paradise
NOES: None
ABSENT: Jana Wilson, City of`Oroville and°Harold McDonald, City of
Biggs
NOT VOTING: None
CURT CAMPION, Chairman
Butte County'City Selection Committee
ATTEST:.
MARTIN J. NICHOLS, Chief Administrative
Officer and Clerk of the Board
By-
-3-
To:
From:
•
Butte Co. Planning Comm
u( 7 1984
OrOVIHOA Cahf"UR
Del Siemsen, County Counsel
•
Administrative Office
June 6, 1984
Mike Pyeatt, Deputy Administrative Officer
Subject: Airport Land Use Planning Commission -
Draft Resolution Review
Please find attached a letter from Chico City Manager Fred Davis
dated June 1, 1984 entitled, "Resolution of the Butte County.City
Selection Committee rescinding its resolution dated November 24,
1970 designating the Butte County Planning Commission as the Butte
County Airport Land Use Commission."
Please review the draft `resolution which will be presented to
the City Selection Committee at its meeting of June 28, 1984. I
.would appreciate any comments you have to offer, if any, at an -early
date so that the other parties concerned can be made aware and also
to allow an opportunity for a final resolution to be prepared. It
is requested that your notification be giv-�p to this office by Friday,
June 15, 1984. A X11
DepuY Jminist�r tive Officer
MP/ jac
End
cc: Board of Supervisor Members (w/encl.)
Martin J. Nichols, Chief Administrative Officer (w/encl.)
,,Aettye Kircher, Director of Planning (w/encl.)
f7
4
OFFICE OF THE ,,/ Butte Co. 9 •
CITY MANAGER planning
196 E. Filth Street eo-WJ UIs� - x`984
CITYo} CHICO P.O: Box 3420
INC. 1872 Chico.,CA 95927 �POVI�iB� Q_&_Qw4
(916) 895-4803
ATSS 459-4803
G-GA-1-12/chrono June 1, 1984
Mike Pyeatt
Butte County Administrative Office
25' County Center Drive
Oroville, California 95965
Dear Mike:
In.accordance with our discussion of May 31, 1984 I am.enclosing here-
_ with:a.DRAFT copy of RESOLUTION N0. "RESOLUTION OF THE BUTTE
COUNTY CITY SELECTION COMMITTEE RESCINDING ITS RESOLUTION DATED NOVEM-
BER 24,.1970 DESIGNATING THE BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION AS THE
BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND.USE COMMISSION" which is proposed to be
presented to and adopted by the City Selection Committee at its meet-
ing to be held in the Oroville City Hall conference room on June 28,
1984:.at 3:30 P.M. Further, I understand you will submit this to the
County Counsel for his review.
If the County has comments or modifications, please feel free to call
me at your convenience. Otherwise, I will assume that you will have
it prepared in final form for the City Selection Committee meeting of
June 28 1984.
A copy.of the above DRAFT resolution is being forwarded to the Mayor
in the Cities of Paradise, Oroville, Gridley and Biggs and by copy
of this letter I am asking each of them to review the resolution or
providelit to the Councilmember that will serve on the City Selection
Committee at the meeting of June 28, 1984.
l appreciate the research you have done in connection with the City
Selection Committee and the arrangements for the meeting to be held
June 28'
A
If thete is any additional information I can provide you, please feel
free to call me at your convenience.
Very truly yours,
FD/mb
Fred avis, ity e
enclosure
cc:.Jana Wilson, Oroville Mayor w/att.
Curt Campion, Paradise Mayor w/att.
Doris Long, Gridley Mayor w/att.
Harold McDonald, Biggs Mayor w/att.
Chico City Clerk & Council w/att.
City Attorney Boehm w/att.
Planning Director Lando w/att.
Butte County Admin.Officer w/att.
DCM/.PO/CDC Info
TF • 6-11-84 �, 1.1
'v'�'-"'T"'_"7"IM'^
DRAFT
1 ,.RESOLUTION NO.
2 RESOLUTION OF THE BUTTE COUNTY CITY SELECTION COMMITTEE RESCINDING
ITS RESOLUTION DATED NOVEMBER 24, 1970 DESIGNATING THE BUTTE COUNTY
3 PLANNING COMMISSION AS THE BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
4 WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 21670 of the California Public Utilities
5: Code, an airport commission has been created in each county containing at
6 least one airport operated for the benefit of the general public and served by
7 an air carrier certified by the Civil Aeronautics Board. Said commission
.8 consists of seven members selected as follows:
9 (i) Two representing the cities in the county, appointed by a city
10 selection committee comprised of the mayors of all the cities within
11 the county, provided, however, that, if there are any cities
12 contiguous or adjacent to the qualifying airport, at least one such
13 representative is to be appointed therefrom;
14 (ii) Two representing the county, appointed by the board of supervisors;
15 (iii) Two representing the airports within the county, appointed by a
16 selection committee comprised of the managers of all the public
17 airports within the county, provided, however, that one such member
18 is to be appointed from an airport operated for the benefit of the
19 general public; and
20 (iv) One representing the general public, appointed by the other six
21 members of the commission.
22 WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 21670.1 of the California Public Utilities
23 Code, if the board of supervisors and the city selection committee of mayors
24 in any county each make a determination by a majority vote that proper land
25 use planning -can be accomplished through the actions of a designated body
26 other than the airport land use commission, then such body may assume the
27 planning responsibilties of an airport land use commission and a separate
28 commission need not be formed in the county;
Page 1 of 3
uL
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14:
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2
27
281
WHEREAS, this Committee, by'resolution dated November 24, 1970 heretofore
designated the Butte County Planning Commission as the.body to assume the
planning responsibilities of an airport land use commission after determining
by a majority vote that proper land use planning could be accomplished through
the actions of the Butte County Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, this Committee now desires to rescind its resolution dated
November 24, 1970 designating the Butte County Planning Commission as the body
to assume the planning responsibilities of an airport land use commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Butte County City Selection
Committee as follows:
1. That this Committee hereby rescinds its resolution dated November 24,
1970 designating the Butte County Planning Commission as the body to
assume the planning.responsibilities of an airport land use
commission finding that proper land use planning can no longer be
accomplished through the actions of the Butte County Planning
Commission;
2. That this Committee intends to appoint two representatives to the
Butte County Airport Land Use Commission in the manner contemplated
by Section 21670 of the California Public Utilities Code; and
3. That this Committee requests the Board of Supervisors and the
governing bodies of each airport within the county to also appoint.
their respective representatives to the Butte County Airport Land Use
Commission in the manner contemplated by Section 21670 of the
California Public Utilities Code.
Page 2 of 3
( %Y T. ter'k.rti1K �ft[u'�?�'+�Jr.lti�a'�.��=ifi •�:!'..._..
.►A
1.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
i
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21�
22
23
24
25
27
28
PAGE 3 IS TO BE SIGNATURE PAGE AND IS TO
BE PREPARED BY BUTTE COUNTY STAFF.
Page 3 of 3 y
Y ... ,,.1"''.• f�. .�.. ..., .. ,�r .. .. .... ..� i .. �..., k1 .. .�:.h. El it k�dlTiR.ffi�L.'l�t. tr./T �{[7�nriR�'L19ur 1Y. R'
a dx.lw.+u,
I
MP/jac 5/31/84
DRAFT
Resolution No.
RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION 73=1 REGARDING RULES
AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE CONDUCT OF MEETINGS
OF THE BUTTE COUNTY CITY SELECTION COMMITTEE
WHEREAS, the Butte County City Selection Committee heretofore
adopted Resolution 73-1 setting forth the rules and regulations to govern
the conduct of its meetings and the selection of city representatives to
boards, commissions and agencies as required by Government Code Section
50275; and
WHEREAS, since 1973 changes have occurred which require the
amendment of said rules and regulations.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the following sections of the
Butte County City Selection Committee rules. and regulations are hereby
adopted:
1. Section 101. Regular Meetings: Regular meetings of the City
Selection Committee shall be held annually on the .r2't Thursday in-", at
Oroville, it the Butte County Board of Supervisors Room, 25 County Center
Drive, Oroville, California.
2. Section IOG. OFFICERS: The officers of the City Selection
Committee are a chairman, a vice chairman and a secretary. The chairman
and vice chairman shall be selected by the committee from among its members
for a term of two years. The Clerk of the Butte County Board•of Supervisors,
in accordznce with Government Code Section 50270.5, shall act as the secretary
and recording officer of the committee.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Butte County City Selection Committee,
• County of Butte, State of California, this __—day of June, 1984, by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
I%fiT VOTING:
Chairman, Butte County City Selection -0mmitte
ATTEST:
MARTIN J. NICHOLS, Chief Administrative
Officer and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
• CHIEOADMINISTRATIVEOFFICE
COUNTY OF BUTTE
e0ilTjFe 25 COUNTY CENTER DR. / OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3380 / (916) 534-4631
o e
o e
o , e MEMBERS OF THE BOARD
C�U 1% AL SARACENI
JANE DOLAN
i
MARTIN J. NICHOLS .. HILDA WHEELER
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
p BERTHA MOSELEY
May 31, 1984 LEN FULTON
.Harold McDonald, Mayor
City of Biggs
3044 Sixth Street
Biggs, CA 95917
Karl Ory, Mayor Butte Co. Planning Comm.
City of Chico JUN 1 1984
Attn: Barbara A. Evans, City Clerk
P. 0. Box 3420 • Oroville, Calitornia
Chico, CA 95927
Doris Long, Mayor
City of Gridley
685 Kentucky Street
Gridley, CA 95948
Jana Wilson, Mayor
City of Oroville
1735 Montgomery Street
Oroville, CA 95965
Curt Campion, Mayor
Town of Paradise
5555 Skyway
Paradise, CA 95969
Dear City Selection Committee Members:
In accordance with the.provisions of Government Code Section 50270
et seq and rules governing the conduct of City Selection Committee meetings,
notice is hereby given of the annual meeting of the committee as follows:
Date: Thursday, June 28, 1984
Time: 3:30 p.m. (following meeting of Butte County Association
of Cities)
Place: Oroville City Hall, 1735 Nontgomery Street, Oroville
To: City -Selection Committee -2-` May 31, 1984
Agenda
.1 Appointment of chairman and vice .chairman'.
2. Resolution amending Resolution 73-1 revising the rules and
regulations to govern the conduct of meetings and the
selection of city representatives.
3. Consideration of resolution to rescind declaration by the
mayors of the'cities of Butte County dated November 24,
1970 designating•the Butte County Planning Commission to
serve as the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission and
to recognize the procedure and membership of the Airport
Land Use Commission as set forth in Public Resources Code
Section 21670(b).
e y ;rul yjhols
s ,
Martin (.
Chief Admiative Officer and Clerk
of the Butte County Board of Supervisors
MJN/MP/ jac
Encl .
cc: Fred Davis, Chico City.Manager
Hank Ford, Gridley City Administrator
Titch Copeland, Oroville City Administrator
George Irving, Paradise Town Manager
Del Siemsen, County`Counsel
. . tye Kircher, Director of Planning
a J-11 e D. if. n e -0 ant3 a
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Planning.
SUSJeci-: City of Oroville's Policy 'and Procedure -for. acquisition of- .aviaat.Lon
easements.
-OAT E: January - 26, 1984.
The City of Oroville request the County incorporate II. A.; 6,
and C .into its Procedures for processing.-land divisions, .us.6
and variance-permits; and building-pernits .in order to convey
av:igation easems.nts to the .City of Orovill.e for property located-
in
ocated
in the 'vicinity of the Airport. and within. -the 55 Db (A.) cou-t.our.
Enclosed is a copy of the City of O'roville'•s Policy. and Procedure
for acquisition of.avigation easements.,. This document_ was
approved by C.i-ty Council action January 3,: 1934.. .
Enc.
1733 MONTGOMERY STREET OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA .95985 AREA CODS 916. '533,9551
January 10, 1984
Psis. Bettye Ki rcher,..Di.rector
Butte County Pl.anning Department
7 County Center Drive
Oroville, California 95955
Orovi}le Municipal Airport
Enclosed is a copy of City of Oroville's Policy -and Procedure for
acquisition of avigation easements. This document was approved by
City Council action January 3, 1984.
The City of Oroville requests the County incorporate II: A,.B and'C'
into its .procedures for processing land divisions, use and variance
permits., and building pe lits in order to convey avigation easements
to the City of Oroville for property located in the vicinity of the
Airport a.nd within the 55 db(A) contour.
Please contact me i.F you: have any .questions regarding.this matter..
Kirt M. Hunter
Public Works Director
Enclosure
o
• C.ITY Or OROVILL•E
Policies and Procedures
including but'noL �m� e o su
maps, minor land divisions, boundary line.modifications,
and parcel .. map waivers 1 ocated .within the vi ci.rii ty of
the Oroville h�unicipal Airport and.w.ithin the. 55 db(A)
contour (Exhibit 2) shall be required to convey (unless
previously conveyed for the property). an avigation
easement to the City as. a condition -of the ccimpl eti on
of the land division.
- B. Use and Variance Permits
All persons submitting applications for Use and/or
Variance Permits for property located in the -vicinity of
the Oroville Municipal Airport and within the 55 db(A)
contour (Exhibit 2) shal.1 be required to -convey (unless
previously conveyed for. the property) an avigation ease -
meet to the City as a condition..of the granting of the
permit.
C. :.Bui 1 di ng Perrni is uli thi n the City Limits
All applicants for building permits within the 55. db(A)
contour (Exhibit 2) shall be requested to convey aviga-
tion easements
to the City if not previously -conveyed.. -
D. Land Divisions, Use and Variance.Permits, and Building
Per, .i is Within the Unincorporated Area
Upon finalization of the Public 'Works Policy and Pro-
cedure, the City Engineer shall file a copy of -the A.P.P
with the appropriate County Officials and the Butte
.County Airport Land ,Use Co'rmission. The City Engineer
IivITIATED BY: PUBLIC WORKS AP -PRO. ED B� : COUNCIL 1-3-,84 �
Page 1 of 5
AVIGATIGN EASEMENTS .41ITHIN ,THE 55.db(A)
NUt.IBER: 16
SUBJECT:. CONTOUR OF THE OROVILLE,MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
DATE: 1-3=84
SECTION:. PUBLIC WOUS
J.- PURPOSE:
To establish.a policy and procedure for conveying to the -City
avi.gation easements for private property vii the vicinity
of the O.roville Municipal Airport arrd.w'ithin the 55 db (A)
-contour:
II'. POLICY:
Avigation easements.shall restrict the height .of structures
and other objects -on the property and convey to the City .
certain rights with respect to noise, dust, and vibration
on the property (see attached Exhibits).
A. Land Divisions Within the City Limits
All persons submitting applications :for land divisions,
. 1' 't d t bdivisions map" parcel
including but'noL �m� e o su
maps, minor land divisions, boundary line.modifications,
and parcel .. map waivers 1 ocated .within the vi ci.rii ty of
the Oroville h�unicipal Airport and.w.ithin the. 55 db(A)
contour (Exhibit 2) shall be required to convey (unless
previously conveyed for the property). an avigation
easement to the City as. a condition -of the ccimpl eti on
of the land division.
- B. Use and Variance Permits
All persons submitting applications for Use and/or
Variance Permits for property located in the -vicinity of
the Oroville Municipal Airport and within the 55 db(A)
contour (Exhibit 2) shal.1 be required to -convey (unless
previously conveyed for. the property) an avigation ease -
meet to the City as a condition..of the granting of the
permit.
C. :.Bui 1 di ng Perrni is uli thi n the City Limits
All applicants for building permits within the 55. db(A)
contour (Exhibit 2) shall be requested to convey aviga-
tion easements
to the City if not previously -conveyed.. -
D. Land Divisions, Use and Variance.Permits, and Building
Per, .i is Within the Unincorporated Area
Upon finalization of the Public 'Works Policy and Pro-
cedure, the City Engineer shall file a copy of -the A.P.P
with the appropriate County Officials and the Butte
.County Airport Land ,Use Co'rmission. The City Engineer
IivITIATED BY: PUBLIC WORKS AP -PRO. ED B� : COUNCIL 1-3-,84 �
Page 1 of 5
CITY OF OROVILLE
Policies and Procedures
NU11-MER:. 16
AVIGATION EASEMENTS. WITHIN THE 55. db(A)
SUBJECT:. CONTOUR OF THE OROVILLE MUNi_CIPAL AIRPORT
DATE: 1-3-84.
�SECTTON: PUBLIC WORKS
shall request that -the County .incorporate II.. A, B,. and
C. into its procedures for processing land d-ivis io.ns,
use and variance permits and building. permits in order
to convey avigation easements to the City. of Oroville
for property located in the vicinity of the Oroville
Municipal Airport and within the 55 db(A) contour.
II. PROCEDURE
A. Land Division and Use or Variance Permit.
1. When a condition has been attached to:a land division
or use and/or variance permit, to convey an avigation
- easement to the City for property either inside. the
Oroville City limits or in the unincorporated area,
the Department of Public Works. shall prepare a
"Grant of-Avigation Easement"., herei.nafter referred
to as Grant (Exhibit 5).
.2. The Department of Public Works shall:.
a. Secure from.the applicant a metes and bounds
description or such description approved by the.
Director of Public Works of the property over
which the easement is to be conveyed, to be
attached to the Grant as Exhibit "A".
b. Secure from the applicant a plat Which clearly
delineates .the property over which. the easement
is to be con~ieyed, to be attached to the Grant:
as Exhibit "B".
c. Specify in the Grant (Exhibit 5) the appropriate
elevations as shown on Exhibits 3 and 4.
d. Secure from the applicant a document indicating
.
property ownership. (This may be a preliminary
title report, lot bock or other legal docu��en- .
tation.),
e. Specify in the Grant the grantor's Wane and title
exactly as it appears on the ownership document.
f. Specffy in. the Grant the date that the document
is executed.
Itd:CTIATED BY: PU3LIC 4•11ORKS�AP.PRU`ED
BY: COUNCIL 1-3-84-
Page2of5
e
• 'CITY OF OROVILLE
Policies 'and Procedures
AUI'GATION EASEMENTS WITHIN THE 55 db (A)
NMIBER: 16 SUBJECT: C0NT0UR Of THE OROVILLE MUNICIPAL
DATE: 1-3784
SECTION: PUBLIC''WORKS
3. The " property owner 'or: authorized des i gree shall exe-
cute the Grant and. have the signature(s) notarized an
then submit the Grant to the Department of Public -
Works. (Note: the .property documentation shall be
current with the signature(s).).
4.
The Department of Public Works shall verify the
accuracy of the Grantor's signature.(s).which must be.
exactly as shown in the ownership documentation.
5.
The Public -Works Director shall:
a. Execute the Certificate of Acceptance and Consent
-
b." Record the Grant and the Certificate of Accep.tanc
and Consent.
c. Upon"receipt of the recorded Grant, forward copie
to the Grantor and the City Clerk.
6.
The. Department of Public Works shall record 'the
avigation easement in the City's property book and
maintain a map indicating all recorded avigation
easements.
B. Building Permits
1.
1-1hen an. appl i cant. for a building. permit agrees to
convey.an avigation easement to the City for property
.
both inside the Oroville City Limits or in the unin-.
corporated area, the Department of Public Works shall
prepare a "Grant of Avigation Easement" hereinafter
referred to as.Grant (Exh.ibit"5). "
2.
The Department of Public Works shat I:
a. Prepare a metes and.bounds description of the
property over which the easement is to be convey-
ed or .such other description " approved by the
Director of Public Vlorks, to be attached to
.the
Grant as Exhibit "A".
b. Prapare a.plat which clearly delineates the prop-
erty over which the easement is to be conveyed,
to be attached to the'G, ant as Exhibit "B".
_T • ITIATED BY: PUBLIC 1401RI:S LAPPROVED DY: COUNCIL 1-3-84
Page 3 of 5
• _CITY Or OROVILLE
Policies and Procedures
AVIGATION EASEMENTS WITHIN -THE 55 db. (A)
MOMBER: 16 SUBJECT: COUNTOUR OF: THE.OROVILLE MUNICIPAL ATRPO RT
DATE: 1-3-84 SECTION: PUBLIC WORKS
c. Specify in the Grant .'(Exhibit 5) the appropriate
elevation as shown on Exhibits -'S and 4.
d. Obtain from a title.company,. a lot.book report
indicating property ownership.
e. Specify in the Grant the grantor's name and title
exactly as it appears on the ownership document.
f. Specify in the Grant the date -that the document,
is executed.
.-3. The property owner or authorized designee shall exe
cute -the Grant and have the si,gnature(s) notarized
and then submit:the Grant to the Department of Public
Works. (Note: The property ownership documentation
shall be current with the signature(s).)
4. The Department of Public Works.shall verify the -
accuracy of the.Grantor's signature('s) which ?lust be
exactly as shown in the ownership documentation.
5. The Public Works Director shall: -
a. Execute the Certificate.of Acceptance and Consent.
b. Record the Grant and Certificate. of Acceptance
and Consent.
c. Upon receipt of the recorded Grant, forward copies
to the Grantor and the City Clerk.
6. The Department of Public Works shall. record the aviga.--
tion easement in the City's.property book and maintai
amap indicating all recorded avi gati on easements.-_
C. Oroville Municipal Airport or other City Property Avail
able for Sale or Lease
1. The reservation of an avigation easement shall be in-
corporated in the, deed of conveyance in the connec-
tion with the sale of Oroville i.unicipal Airport
property and other land available for sale by the.
City jqi thi n the .55 db (A) .contour.
INITIATED BY: PUSLIC WORKS 1APPROVEED B:` : COUNCIL 1-3-84
Page 4 of 5
NUhIMER : 16
.DATE 1-3-84
•
CITY OF OROVILLE •
Policies and Procedures
AVIGAT ION EASEMENTS WITHIN T.HE 55 db (A.).
SUBJECT: COUNTOUR Or THE OROV.I.LLE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
SECTION: PUBLIC .WORKS
2. In the case of Oroville Municipal.Airport property
and other land available for lease by the City with-
in.the 55 db(A) contour., a condition of the lease
shall include the same restrictions shown in Exhibit*
5 (modified to reflect leasee rather than grantee).
3,. Copies of the approved sale.or lease agreement shall
be forwarded to the Public Works Department.
4...The Public Works -Department shall note the existenc.e.-
of the provisions in the City's property book for
sale properties: and shall maintain a map showing al 1.
recorded agreements including lease agreements.
.- IV. EXCEPTIONS. -
None unles authorized by the City Cbuncil:
INITIATED BY: PUBLIC t•10RKS APPROVED BY: COUNCIL 1-3-34
Page 5of5
I
RN
THERNAALITO FOREBAY
NUE COUNTY OF BUTTE
CITY OF OR6VILLE
-----------
: C-1
------ CQl
-Uj
ORO SOULEVI
ARO Wr-ST
C4
le 15
TABLE MOUNTAIN
GOLF COURSE
OROVILLE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
SCA .E 91 = 800'
1
PRPOF�T B0UN0ARY------
X6TY LOAMS
Ll
'A 3 11
OROW LE
i ARE
A
MUNICIPAL AUR
0,A
Ifs
zPl-1 RL
-•� -� f�, j — - _ _ .I 1 �� � III 'r
Id
I r��
�J/ AL.AIRPORi 1
OP.OVI_i LE YlN/C P -
-:77q A 55db (A) CONTOUR
t --= 1- - I ----_L-- N % S-
Ee HIDIT 2
REFLRAI/CE : CfTY Or OP.OVILL E
GENEP,AL PLAN 1982
h N
o H ' ` tt N ti
!u R v aZE
h N N i
t —
- 200
200' 2,000'
P uF. l E
2 000'
1,700'.
200,
< p
/V10111PRECISION INSTRUAIENT -CLEAR ZONA'
LOCAL CL EA I' zoo I
Jf N
SCAI L E /'. = 4 00'
r? FCR TO CITY OFOR0ViLL E Ekl -1131 1
2c:'IP.'G OROG'.�a�`✓CE CHAPTER 20
FOP SJ[_DING HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS A �
00'751DE CLEAR AR ZONE BOUNDARIES.
�� � E�`}� ! ��e a�I �� t v d a ���7 s < ¢ c s `o:. ��t-�
h
to
l� p
to pcn
N N
ON i
o�.
� I
200' %00'
PR 'ZLE
1, 700'
1,600,
zoo'
NONFRECISIO �I INSTRUMENT CLEAR ZONE
- L OCAS L CL EAR ZONE
s sA T
«t,4' TO CITY Oa= ORO" ILLS -
ZOP•:lP•' ORDII DICE CHAPT c R 2G � FT e^° ''
FOS:' S'?JILD!NG HEIGHT P. �-J TRICTiO `/ i �wr�, � 4 :'� �` f y A f '•'
OLIT SIDE CL EAR ZOI•�E u0U1/DSP, /ES..
Ct.Sa.a o �r irl s J �e di�I d P
_ UNI -M4 ?
c
•
1
'
3
4
+ •
:.7
..' -
E
:.
10
12
-
13
'
14
)S
'•
76
i
17
is
I
19
20
I
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
2,
29
30
3l
32
GRANT OF AVIGATION EASEMENT
Deed made, this day of by
(hereinafter
referred to as Grantor) to the City of Orovilfe, a municipal corporation of
the State of California. (hereinafter referred. to as Grantee).
In consideration of good and valuable -consideration, the receipt and
sufficiency of wrhich is hereby acknowledged, grantors, for themselves, their'
heirs, adninistrators, executors, successors,.and"assigns,.do hereby grant_,_
and convey to grantee, its successor and assigns, a perpetual. easement and,
right-of-way for the unobstructed passage of all aircraft inthe airspace
above the property located. in the City of Oroville. County of Butte. State_ .
of California described in Exhibit "A" and shown in Exhibit "B", attached
hereto and by this reference incorporated herein (hereinafter called "the
property') .from a height above sea level as shown on Exhibit "3" to an
infinite height above the property'.
Concomitant and coextensive with said easement and right-of-way, grt.nta
shall have the continuing,right to remove ail or any portion of any str:.•c-.:re;
natural growth or other object on the property which extends into the air
spare over the property to a height above sea level of more than that
delineated on Exhibit "B"; the right to mark and light as otstructures to
air navigation, any and all structures, trees or other objects that may at
anytime project into, extend above or infringe upon the clear zone as
delineated on Exhibit "B", and the right of ingress to and egress from, and
passage over the, land within the clear zone area. as delineated on Exhibit 'W".
Grantee. shall have the further right to cruse in all airspace above the
surface of the property such noise, vibrations, fumes, dust, fuel particles "
and all other effects that may be caused by the operation of aircraft landing
at Or taking off from.or operating at or on the Orovi;le Municipal Airpa r
and grantor does heraby.fully waive, remis_a, and release any right or cans=
OF action which it may now have or which it may have in the future acainst
grantee, its successors, and assigns, due to such noise, vibrations, fumes.
8
dust. fuel particles, and all other..effects'that may be -caused or may have
been caused by the operation of aircraft landing at; or taking off from, or
operating at or on the Oroville Municipal Airport.
Grantors, for themselves, their heirs. administrators, executors,
successors, and assigns, do hereby agree not to use or permit the use of
the property in such a manner. -as to create electrical interference with
radio conmun.ications between aircraft and the Oroville Municipal Airport, :.
to make it difficult for flyers to distinguish between airport lights --and
other lights. to impair visibility in the vicinity of the Crovilie Municipal.:
Airport, or to otherwise endanger aircraft landing at or taking off frac .
the Oroville Municipal Airport—
In witness whereof, grantors -have executed this deed on the date first
written above.
Grantor
Grantor
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
ss.
COUNTY OF BUTTE )
On this _ day of in the year 19 ,.before c_,
personally appeared
personally known to me (or proved to me on the.b-sis of satisfactory evid=nce}
to be the person(s) whose name (s) subscribed to this instrumen•_,.and,
I
acknowledged that executed it,
(SEAL) NOTARY
-2-
1
i.
1.
2
i
3
4
7.
= =
9
l0
:.
13
14
I
16
17
II
19
20
• �
�
- 21
22
23
24
23
(f
25 !
27
29
{
j
30
31
32
dust. fuel particles, and all other..effects'that may be -caused or may have
been caused by the operation of aircraft landing at; or taking off from, or
operating at or on the Oroville Municipal Airport.
Grantors, for themselves, their heirs. administrators, executors,
successors, and assigns, do hereby agree not to use or permit the use of
the property in such a manner. -as to create electrical interference with
radio conmun.ications between aircraft and the Oroville Municipal Airport, :.
to make it difficult for flyers to distinguish between airport lights --and
other lights. to impair visibility in the vicinity of the Crovilie Municipal.:
Airport, or to otherwise endanger aircraft landing at or taking off frac .
the Oroville Municipal Airport—
In witness whereof, grantors -have executed this deed on the date first
written above.
Grantor
Grantor
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
ss.
COUNTY OF BUTTE )
On this _ day of in the year 19 ,.before c_,
personally appeared
personally known to me (or proved to me on the.b-sis of satisfactory evid=nce}
to be the person(s) whose name (s) subscribed to this instrumen•_,.and,
I
acknowledged that executed it,
(SEAL) NOTARY
-2-
7 s r _
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY (/l`Gf, rL GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF AERONAUTICS �j t ~
1120 "N" STREET J'
SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 C9i6� Q
(916) 322.3090
' A fan^f"9 C�
Au
gust 11.:1983 O UG 1 � 798,3
g , bvi/le
• Coto",
To: Airport Land Use Commissions
r Enclosed are two copies of the "Airport'Land Use Planning
Handbook" prepared by the Association of Bay.Area Goverhemnts
and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (ABAG/MTC) •for
the Department of Transportation,,Division of Aeronautics.
The Handbook should prove useful as a guide and reference to
local agencies and interested parties involved in land use
planning around airports.
Both ABAG/MTC and the Division of Aeronautics would like to
take this.oppor.tunity to acknowledge the valuable input
provided.by numerous.ALUCs in the preparation of this
document. Marty of.you will recognize material extracted
from your own plans.
If additional copies of the book are needed, please contact
t
me.
Sinc.erely.,
MARK F. MISPAGEL, Chief
Division of Aeronautics
(` c.
Spyridon N. 'Sideris, Chief '
Planning Branch
Enclosures
COMMUNICATIONS DEC
Appointment of Airport Land Use Commission.
Acknowledgment was made of a letter from Butte County
Counsel enclosing copies of the Board of Supervisors'
Resolution and Declaration by the Mayors appointing
the Butte County Planning Commission to serve as the
Airport Land Use Commission for all of Butte County.
l
.e� p
't,,
;,yCjK it' .�• .,0;�•.,.�. - ::¢!M .. ::`i...: .a -? ..'ti'' •. .. :,.ri•. ,,.c.z; iSe :�;. ..' ... 1:.,, 'r. -.:r
�.'J'•.1.. ...-. i...��L._.r._....• ......_..-Jr.... - .c.e��L._'..:.. _. ... a...M.: �:e ..... �..:..u.7!...._..._•4•_e.d�_�., _... . ._...... .. .t-1c.10.�'�<..i•m...'_t.+r..�•
06
, .
;Ito Ulz!!
' COUNTY COUNSEL
Butte County Courthouse -:• Oroville. California 95965.
Telephone (916) 533-1230. Ext. 243
Daniel V: Blackstock
COUNTY COUNSEL
November 27, 1970
William P. Mace "
ASSISTANT COUNTY COUNSEL
Holl H. McCabe
DEPUTY COUNTY COUNSEL
Mayor Conrad L. Weisker
Oroville City Hall
1735 Montgomery
Oroville, California
Dear Mayor Weisker:
Please find enclosed a copy of the Resolution by the Board
of Supervisors and Declaration by the Mayors appointing'
the Butte County Planning Commission to serve the function
of the Airport Land Use Commission for this County.
Yours truly,
DANIEL V. BLACKSTOCK:
Butte County Counsel
DVB/md
Enclosures
RSCE IVE.D'
NOV:3.01970
CITY ADM. OFFICE
r, • ..: `.,.. fry &V Coluni"
COUNTY COUNSEL
Butte County Courthouse -:• Oroville. California 95965
Telephone (916) 533.1230. Ext. 243
Daniel V. Blackstock
COUNTY COUNSEL
William P. Mace November 27, 1970
ASSISTANT COUNTY COUNSEL
Neil H. McCabe
DEPUTY COUNTY•COUNSEL
Honorable H. P. Sullivan
Secretary of State
11.7 State Capitol
Sacramento, California 95814
RE: DESIGNATION OF THE BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION AS-THE
AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION FOR•BUTTE COUNTY PURSUANT:
TO THE PROVISIONS OF PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE SECTION 21670.1
-Dear Mr. Sullivan:
Please find enclosed Resolution No. 70-225 of the Butte:County
Board of Supervisors and a Declaration by the Mayors of the''four
incorporated cities situate within the County of Butte, design:.
ing tree Butte County Planning Commission to assume the function'
of the Airport Land Use Commission pursuant to the provisions of
Public Utilities Code Section 21670.1. *This letter and the
enclosed Resolution and Declaration constitutes notice to you
of the aforesaid determination .pursuant to Public Utilities
Code Section 21670.1.
Yours truly,
• .. c •..�/� 1. % �c �-c �' `e.�..� L, :.,. ;/'"
DANIEL.V. BLACKSTOCK
Butte County Couns&
DVB/md
Enclosures
cc: Clif Mickelson, Administrative Officer
Cities of Croville, Chico,, Gridley and Biggs
Marge Catt,.Clerk' of the Board
� _ i rt�5k �IFc .,�" ' 'i •t v x f � � a ~ jY' , r '.k + � •f+'
':v i ri.4�'�i{—,�'t( ' r r . } i 3.. z� ' ♦ a - r � s. t3: fv y. 4 1 •. ? I .+ C'3 - h
.4
. � is � �
, zr
Resolution No. 70- 225 - -
RESOLUTION DESIGNATING THE -BUTTE COUNTY PLANNING
COMMISSION TO SERVE AS THE'BUTTE COUNTY AIRPORT
LAND USE COMMISSION
WHEREAS, Public Utilities Code section 21670 et seq calls
for the creation of an airport.land use commission;
WHEREAS, Public Utilities Code section 21670.1 allows
:the Board of Supervisors of the County and the mayors of the ..cities
**.--
of the county each to make a designation of an appropriately'
designated body to serve as an airport land use commission;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT. RESOLVED by this Board that the
Planning Commission of the County of.Butte shall assume
the planning
.responsibilities of an airport land use commission-as,provided for
.in Public Utilities Code section 21670et seq.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of'.:.Supervisbrs of the
County of Butte this 24th .�.:day of November 1970, by
the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Howsden., Maxonq.:McKillop,-Reynolds..
and Chairman Dunaway
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
NOT VOTING:
• the'
iso.r s -
THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT IS A CORRECT 'COPY
THE ORIGINAL Of.) FILE AND OF RECORD- 11 - 47HIS OFF.jqC
ATTEST:
-.1
....................... .. ......... : ................ I 9'..7o
C..:: OF piE Sunr,
CLARK A. NUSCSN' OF THE ar,,L.
OF
"*P-_R"1s0,',5 its s -i -*3 rO:? THE COU,,y
Of BUTTE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
E,-___j3UNAWA19 e. County Board of Suyc
Butt
ATTEST:
CLARK A. NELSON, County Clerk'-
and ex -officio Clerk of the
Board of Supervisors Chairman o
1
2.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
12:'
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2?
28
29
30
31
32
D XLARATION BY THL M.4YDRS OF TH24 FOUR INCORPORATED
CITIES IN THC COU147Y OF BUTTE. U14- BUTTL
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION M SERVE AS T11Z BUTTE
COUNTY AIRPORT LtuND USE COMMISSION
WI ER AS, Public Utilities Code section 21670 et seq
calls for the creation of an airport land use commission;
IJHER AS, Public Utilities Code , section 21670.1 allots .
the Board of supervisors of the County and the mayors of the
cities of the county each to make a designation of an appropriately
designated body to serve as -an airport land use co=ission;
NOW THEREX ORr, ve.:.the mayors of the incorporated cities
located within Butte County, to wit the. cities of Bigss.,-:Chico,
Gridley and Oroville hereby,'designate the Planning Commission
of the County of Butte to assume the planning responsibilities
of ran airport -land use commission as provided for in Fublic
Utilities Code section 21670 et seq.
We hereby declare,! -that the vote for this designation,
each city mayor having one vote, %,as as follows:
Mayor Thebseh - Biggs Aye: (.,)/J)—Pdo
Mayor Casamajor -:Chico Aye No
Mayor Shifflet - Gridley 'Aye No
Mayor Weisker - O1"OVille Aye No Cn
D --..ted: November 24 , 1970
.,,'Attested by:
... ,,. .. t., .. - :. •ice. ..
... - . _
�e
T
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE
COURTHOUSE, OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA
November 19, 1970
City Council
City of Oroville
City Hall
Oroville, California 95965 .
Attention Jerrold Gonce, City Administrator
Gentlemen:
The joint meeting of the Mayors
Selection Committee and the Board
of Supervisors has•'been scheduled for
12 o'clock noon, Tuesday,
November 24 at Prospectors Village in
Oroville. I.thought you might
be interested in this correspondence
that we received from the County.
Supervisors Association.
Very truly yours,
Clif Mickelson
County Administrative Officer
COUNTY SUPERVISORS l '.
A S S O C I A T I O N
1100 ELKS BUILDING. SACRAMENTO. CALIFORNIA " 95814 • PHONE 441.4011. AREA CODE 916
�aAll
OF CALIFORNIA
November .18,, 1970
TO: Chairmen, Boards of Supervisors and County Administrative
Officers
^O:t: Denny Valentine, CSAC Staff
SUBJECT: APPOINTMENT OF•AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSIONS
1. Appointment of Airport Land Use Commissions. AB 1856, Chap. 1182.,.
(Badham) enacted this year requires the creation of an airport land
use commission �X Januar 1, 1971, in each county which has at...least
one airport "operated for the benefit of the general public and
x
served by a certified air carrier".
In the event a commission is created, it is to prepare a compre-
hensive land use plan providing for the orderly growth of the public
airport compatible with the surrounding area. In formulating such.a
plan the commission may develop height restrictions on buildings, may
seecify use of land and may determine building standards, including
soundproofing adjacent to airports.' Action or regulation of any
Public agency within the airport planning area which appears to -be
Inconsistent with the commission's airport master plan is subject to
a hearing procedure before the commission; however, the decisions.of
Lire cor.unission may be overruled by a 4/5th vote of the governing body
of tine agency proposing the action .or regulation. The same procedure
e,,,,j,i„e• development plans of the airport itself.
The commission consists of seven members. Two are appointed by .
-Che -mavora' se? ect committee, two by the county board of super..visors
and two by -the airport managers of the public airports within the:
county. The seventh member, representing the general public, is .to.
be selected by the other six. Members of the first commission are to
classify themselves by lot so that the term of office of one member
is one year, two members - two years, two members three years,.and
two members.- four years. Thereafter members shall serve for four..
year terms.
The specific language of the statute relating: to the appointment
of rrie*mbers by the mayors' select committee:. is as follows: "Two'..
representing the cities in the county appointed by'a select committee
comprised of the mayors of all of the cities within the county,.pro-
SIG SANCHEZ. P.rsrorsT
G:LRCY. SANTA CLARA COUS!:
"►1 :_ i' L) RALPH P. THIEL.:Iasr wcs PRESIDENT .
. GROYELAND• TubwmN( COdNTT
fV O V V NORMAN J. DAVIS. SECOND vier PRESIDENT
I �r i t i 11mesiDE. Afvmaos COUNTY: .
JACK M. MGRiLMAN HARPY P., SCHMIDT. TUEAsudEl'
GENERAL COUNSEL AND MANAIGIf CITY AWL LIFFICE GULTIN6. MERCED C•JUNTT,.
COUNTY SUPERVISORS
A S S O C I A T I O N
1 • PHONE •61.4011, AREA CODE 916
1100 ELKS BUILDING. SACRAMENTO,
CALIFORNIA 0381•
OF C A L I F O R N I A
November 18. 1970
hairment. Boards of Supervisors:and
County Administrative
TO: C
Officers
Denny Valentine► CSAC Staff
FROM: USE COMMISSIONS
SUBJECT: APPOINTMENT OF AIRPORT LAND ••
Cha 1182,
Con►mi-sions. AB�56' ort land
ort Land Use an airport
of Air wires the creation of
has. at .least
1 • p, oirtmen.. year req
ZBadha' enacted this Y .1— 99.7 —in Bac he county ublic and
Januar 1, general P
use e o fission for the. benefit of
.one airport Il operate carrier"•
served by a certified air to prepare a compre-
created, it is the public
commission is
the orderly 5r°wth of such a
In the event plan providing area. In formulating may
hensive land use
plan
the surrounding buildings'
compatible develop. height restrictstandards, including
airportmay
plan the commission determine building regulation of n be
use of land and may orts• Action which appears
specify adjacent to airp planning area subject to
soundproofing the airport,
ublic_agency withinos airport master a theldeci!.ng body
p with the commissions-' . however,
commission, the governing
inconsistent a q" r vote of same rte° edu e
a hearing procedure before the elation. The
commission may be overruled by oft itself.
the the action or reg
enc prop laris of the air
of the.ag nth develogment appointed by
Two are .
-o seven members • board of stinP.rvisors.
two by the county within .the
The com��ission consists o� public airports� to
-ors' se- committee? of the P � mineral pU��l3.c, is
the may y the airport managers the q- ission
to .
and .t%�°o '�� representing
"members of the first comm one membzr
The are
seventh member, term of office
county. by the other six• ears,: and
be selected lot so_that the two members three y
classify the by two years,. serve for four
year, two members Thereafter members shall
is one .�. _ four years.
.two Inc-- ointment
year terms. to t'ne aIT
the statute relating
Two
The specific language °f. committee
mayors select committee iS as a Select
the ma. county appointed b}
• .of members by tii.e within the'.county, Pr°" ;
representing the cities in all of the citi�-s,
comprised of the mayors of
SIG SAtdCHfiZ. Princ•,
C.:Iper. 5n1A ra�CA COue.t:
RALPH .P THIEL: I74ST VICi PacsCc
GIj0r6lAN0. TUOWMNi COUNtT
NORMAN J. DAYIS.,SOUNTYaoNo vitt P
• R.casoc.'Rwiasroq C
HARRY 'P. SCHMIDT: Ta0iuc
GucnN:. Mcacco C'.
CITY k -M.. tI"r; ICE
JACK M. MERi IhUN
Cir NiRAI COuwti\ AND 1AAN6Oi...
November 18, 1970
Chairman O. E. Dunaway
Butte County Board of Supervisors
Courthouse
Oroville, Calif.
Dear Chairman °Dunaway:
The City Council-at its meeting' of November 16th
unanimously authorized the Mayor to request that
B. C. A. G. act as the Airport Land Use Commission
as provided in A. B. 1356.
It was felt that B. C. A. G. membership represents all
cities and the County without the, inclusion of non-elected
representatives, and further that the County Planning
Commission did not need additional responsibilities
added to its present workload.
Sincerely,
Jerrold R. Gonce
City Administrator
JRG:wk
cc: County Administrative Officer
This same letter to:
Mayos Clifton Shifflet. ''CdtyI-R l,.i'Gridley
Mayor William ,H. Thebach, Biggs City Hall
November 17, 1970
Mayor Gordon H. Casamajor
City Hall
Chico, Calif. 95926
Dear Mayor Casamajor:
The City Council at its meeting.of November 16th'authorized
Mayor Weisker to request that B'. 'C. A. G. be recognized as
the Airport Land Use Commissi,6h''as allowed -by A. B. 1856.
This request will be made at the.;8. C. A. G.' meeting scheduled
for Thursday, November 19th, and the City Council solicits
your concurrence with this recommendation for the following
reasons:
1 - B. C. A. G. membership is representative of all
the cities and the County without the inclusion of
other than elected officials.
2 - The County Planning Commission has an abundance
of continual projects and a heavy staff workload at
present and furthermore would have the opportunity
to make recommendation's for any development around
airports within the County.
Sincerely,
Jerrold R. Gonce
City Administrator
JRG:wk
..
.......
....
CITY OF OROVILLE
TER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 13, 1970
TO: City Council
FROM: City Administrator
SUBJECT. AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION - AB 1856
AB 1856 enacted this year requires the creation of an Airport Land Use
Commission by January, 1971., in each County having at least one airport
"operated for the benefit of the general public and served by a certified air
carrier". This legislation also sets forth the responsibilities of this Com-
mission and a recommended membership consisting of 2 representatives
appointed by a Mayor's Selection Committee, 2 representatives appointed by
the County Board of Supervisors and 2 representatives by the Airport Managers
of the airports within the County and a 7th member representing the general
public to be selected by the other 6. The legislation also; allows for the
alternative of using an existing' Board or Commission to serve as the Airport
Land Use Commission. The legislation also "requires that the County provide
appropriate staffing for the Comrriissio.n- regardless of its makeup.
After reviewing this legislation with the City Attorney, itis our opinion that
anybody appointed as the "Airport Land. Use Commission.'", will have advisory
authority over the development of not only an airport served by, a certified air
carrier, but over all' airports within the. County,: therefore serious consideration
should be given by the Council to the amount of responsibility they wish to give
to another body for the development in and around the City's Airport.
The County Administrator is recommending that the County Planning Commission
serve as -the "Airport Land Use Commission" for Butte County. Also it has been
discussed that possibly the Chico Airport Commission could serve in this capacity;
however I believe that in the best interest of all agencies .concerned, the best
:representative body now existing that could serve in this .capacity is B. C. A. G.
B. C. A. G. is represented,by the Board of Supervisors and. representatives from
1, each city, and is presently staffed" by the County' Administrative Office and meets
ithe' requirements to consider matters of County=wide importance, therefore it
wduld appear to be the proper body to assume the responsibilities set forth'in
AB ,1856.
It is my opinion that we do not need another commission or board within the
County to involve itself with planning and land use matters: I also believe that
the County Planning Commission has sufficient work on a continual basis to keep
its staff fully occupied and its members involved .in meetings. In addition, the
��y
Planning Commission will ultimately have the opportunity to make recommenda-
tions upon any zone changes and developments affecting airports within the
County. Also, F. A. A. has very stringent rules relating to airports and their
operation, as well as areas adjacent to runways.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Council authorize the Mayor to request that B. C. A. G. 'be approved as the
official body to serve as the "Airport Land Use Commission" as required by
AB 1356.
November 169 1970
Airport Land Use Commission
Acknowledgment wars made of the Administrator's detailed
report on the creation of an Airport Land Use Commission
as required by AB 1-356 enacted in 1970. Discussion of
the desirability -of B.C.A.G. acting as the Airport Land
Use .Commission rather than the Butte County Planning
commi-ssion ensued. It was moved by Councilman Shaner and
second -.ed by Councilman Winstalthat the;•Mayorbe authorized
to request that B.C.A.G. be approved as the official -body,
to -serve as the Airport Lands Use Commission as required by
by.AB•1856. The motion was.passed by the following vote:
AYES: Hadley,, Miller,_Shaner; Tandy, Winston, Weisker
NOES:. None
ABSENT: Church — -_
b 1.
T r 1108 °'o" STREET
• -�'+`v ` SACRAMENT095814
(916) 444.5790
of talifornia" , rI (�A HOTEL EY 94705
444JJJ �J W BERKELEY 94705
��''• . '`(415) 843.3083
Afember National League Of Cifiet "Ir"e°lern City" official Publitalion
702HILTONCENTER
j
t f.OfLtC ,f : ;:;'a� LOS ANGELES 90017
(213) 624.4934
95814
. •.�.,,,•�. Sacramento, Ca.
November 5, 1970
To: Mayors, City Managers and City Clerks in Non -Manager Cities
Subject: 1. Appointment of Airport Land Use Commissions
2. Interim Committee Hearings "
3. Census Service Facility
1. Appointment of Airport Land Use Commissions. AB 1856, Chap. 1182, (Badham)
enacted this year requires the creation of an airport -land use commission by
January 1. 1971, in each county which has at least one airport "operated for
the benefit of the general public and served by a certified air carrier",.
The commission is to prepare a comprehensive land use plan providing for the
orderly growth of the public airport compatible with the surrounding area. In
formulating such a 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.. Action or regulation of any public agency
within ihe'airport planning area which -appears to be inconsistent with the com-
mission's airport master plan is subject to a hearing -procedure before the
commission: however, the decisions of the commission may be overruled by a
4/5th vote of the noverning body of the agency proposing the action or regula-
tion. The same procedure pertains to the development plans -of the airport it-
sehf.
The commission consists of seven member§. Two are appointed by the mayors'
select committee, two by the county -board of supervisors and two by the airport
managers of the public airports within the county. The seventh member,.repre-
senting-the general public, is to he selected by the other six. •Piembers of the
first commission are to classify themselves by lot so that the term of office
of one member is one year, two members -.two years, two members - thf,�-pw V_Lmpj
and two members - four years.Ther6after members shall serve for four year
terms. NOV G
19
The specific language of the statute relating to the appointment of mMt eW.WFICE
-,:the mayors' select committee is as follows: "Two representing the cities in
the county appointed by a select committee comprised of the mayors of all of
the cities within the county, provided however that if there are any cities
contiguous or adjacent to the qualifying airport, at least one such repre-
sentative shall be appointed therefroth." Inasmuch as the county is required
under the statute to "staff" the commission, it is suggested that the names
selected by the mayors be submitted to the county so that they in turn can file
a "certificate of formation" with the Secretary of State on or prior to January
1, 1971. Incidentally, compensation or reimbursement for necessary expenses
for commission members is also'determined by the board of supervisors.
An alternative to the appointment of the commission is also provided, where if
the board of supervisors and the select committee of mayors by a majority vote
11/5/70 /ni
determine that proper land use planning can be accomplished by some other
appropriate body, they can so designate such a body to serve in lieu of the
commission. The Secretary of State'must also be informed of this designation.
One exception is found in Los Angeles County where the County Regional Planning
Commission has been given the responsibility under AB..1856 of "coordinating
the airport plans of public agericies,within the county".
Each year legislation is introduced to remove the planning, zoning and regula-
tory authority of cities adjacent to airports because of the number of juris-
dictional problems that have arisen relating to airport development, noise,
etc. AB 1856 provides a mechanism -for the involved cities and counties to
work coo eratively in this most sensitive area of planning. It is important U
that the
pcommission have qualified members if the intent of the legislation is
to be fulfilled.
peVTt!`p
o :.o
0 0
o p
0 0
�ouht�
CMI, ADM' 1NISTRAT1V FFICE
COUNTY OF BUTTE
25 COUNTY CENTER DR. / OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3380 / (916) 534-4631
MARTIN J. NICHOLS
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
Jana Wilson, Mayor
City. of Oroville
1735 Montgomery
Orovil-le, CA 95965
February 22, 1984
Dear Mayor Wilson and Council Members:
MEMBERS OF THE BOARD
AL SARACENI
JANE DOLAN
HILDA WHEELER
BERTHA MOSELEY
LEN FULTON
Duffs Co. Planning.Comrn.
FEB 2 3 1984
Oroville, California
Please be advised that the Board of Supervisors on February 14,
1984, took action to rescind their prior action of December.6, 1983,
relating to expanding the county's Airport Land Use Planning Commission
to include representatives from the cities of.Chico and Oroville. By
so doing, the Board of Supervisors' action of November 24, 1970 stands.
whereby the Butte County Planning Commission remains as the.;designated
Airport Land Use Planning Commission.
Ver truly, urs,
Martin JJ ichols
Chief Administrative Officer
MJN/MP/jac
cc: Titch Copeland, Oroville City Administrator
vdettye Kircher, Director of Planning
CH110 ADMINISTRATIVi#FFICE
COUNTY OF BUTTE
25 COUNTY CENTER DR. / OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3380 / (916) 534-4631
MARTIN J. NICHOLS
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
Karl Ory, Mayor
City of Chico
P. 0. Box 3420
Chico, CA 95927
February 22, 1984
Dear Mayor Ory and Council Members:
MEMBERS OF THE BOARD
AL SARACENI
JANE DOLAN
HILDA WHEELER
BERTHA MOSELEY
LEN FULTON
Please be advised that the Board of Supervisors on February 14,
1984, took action to rescind their prior action of December 6, 1983,
relating to expanding the county's Airport Land Use Planning Commission
to include representatives from the cities of Chico and.Oroville. By
so doing, the Board of Supervisors' action of November 24,-1970 stands
whereby the Butte County Planning Commission remains Wshsignat d
Airport Land Use Planning Commission.;
Ve y truly y urs,
Martin J. Nacho s.
Chief Administrative Officer
MJN/MP/ jac
cc: Fred Davis, Chico City Manager
g,,B"ettye Kircher, Director of Planning
�ecc.Q�ann�n9�tnt�
orovt\1e..
cau#®��'
CHI ADMINISTRATIV*FFICE
COUNTY OF BUTTE
OUT�E. 25 COUNTY CENTER DR. / OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3380 / (916) 534-4631
o ! o
o, o
0 0
0 0 MEMBERS OF THE BOARD
00 1% AL SARACENI
JANE DOLAN
MARTIN J. NICHOLS
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER February 7, 1984 HILDA WHEELER
BERTHA MOSELEY
Buffe Co. LEN FULTON
Board of Supervisors Planning Comm,
25 County Center Drive FEB 13 1984
Oroville, CA 95965
Oroville, California
Dear Board Members:
Re: Airport Land Use Planning Commission
Please find attached a report prepared for me by -Mike Pyeatt.
covering the Airport Land Use Planning Commission changes your Board
made on December 6, 1983. Apparently the actions your Board took in
expanding the County Planning Commission to include two city repre-
sentatives on December 6, 1983, is contrary to the provisions of the
Public Utilities Code. .The report also indicates a full range of
alternatives for designating a County Airport Land Use Planning
Commission. Based upon Mike's report and my conversations with
Bettye Kircher, the following recommendations are offered:
1 . Rescind your action of December 6, 1983, expanding membership
of the present Planning Commission to include -representatives from Chico
and Oroville when sitting as the'Airport Land Use Planning Commission.
2. Direct the Chief Administrative Officer to notify the respective
City Councils.
3.. Let the prior action of November 24, 1970 stand whereby the
Butte County Planning Commission remains as the -designated Airport Land
Use Planning Commission. Any change from this designation would.require
a majority vote of the City Selection Committee of Mayors.
Uery ruly yo rs,
a -in J. Nichols
of Administrative Officer
MJN/MP/jac
Encls.
cc: City Council, City of Chico
City Council, City of Orovil1e
Fred Davis, Chico City Manager
Titch Copeland, Oroville.City Administrator
/Bettye Kircher, Director of Planning
Del Siemsen, County Counsel
Mike Pyeatt, Deputy Administrative Officer
Inter -Depart onenta Memorandum
•CO UN�y,
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Planning
SUBJECT: City of Oroville's Policy and Procedure for acquisition of avigation
easements.
DATE:. 'January 26, 1984
The City of Oroville request the County incorporate H. A, B,
and C into its procedures for processing land divisions, use
and variance permits, and building permits in order to convey
avigation easements to the City of Oro.ville for property located
in the vicinity of the Airport and within the 55 Db(A) coutour.
Enclosed is,a copy of the City of Oroville's Policy and Procedure
for acquisition of avigation easements._ This document was
approved by City Council action January 3, 1984.
BAK:lr
Enc.
ILL .� ;•� - -
O .,1735 .MONTGOMERY STREET. OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965 .AREA CODE 916 533-9551
Yom` i�
n
NCORpORAiE�
%qC
Planning COMM
Butf13-C
JAN, 1 1984
-January. 10-,, 1984-.. : '
OrovihS, Galitornia
' Ms. Bettye Ki'rcher,: Director
Butte County -Pl anni-ng •.Departmen.t •
,
7 County Center Drive
' Orov i l l e,. Cali forni.a 95965
Oroville Municipal -Airport
Enclosed.'is'-a-copy. of City of Oroville's
Policy and Procedure for
acquisition of.avigat.i.on"easements. This
document was approved by,
. City Council action January 3, 1984.
The City of-Orovi1Te!'re 0U'ests;the County
incorporate II. A, B and C
into its procedures for:.processing-land divisions,
use and variance
permits, and buildi�ng.;p'ermits: i.n-order to
convey avigation easements
to the City of Oroville'fo'r.property.l.ocated
in the vicinity of the
'Airport and -within the'S5 :db(A). contour:
Please contact•me if you'haVe,any a auestions'-regarding
this matter.
Ki rt M. Hunter0�
Public Works Director-
. Enclosure
ADV Cc�uc�� Y Civ r� -a�Q
0
CITY OF OROVILLE
Policies and Procedures
•
I AY NATION EASEMENTS WITHIN THE 55 db(A) I
NUMBER: 16 SUBJECT: CONTOUR OF THE OROVILLE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
DATE: 1-3-84 SECTION: PUBLIC WORKS
I. PURPOSE: To establish a policy and procedure for conveying to the City
avigation easements for private property within the vicinity
of the Oroville Municipal Airport and within the 55 db (A)
contour.
II. POLICY: Avigation easements shall restrict the height of structures
and other objects on the property and convey to the City
certain rights with respect to noise, dust, and vibration
on the property (see attached Exhibits).
A. Land Divisions Within the City Limits
All persons submitting applications::for land divisions,
including but not limited to subdivisions maps, parcel
- maps, minor land divisions, boundary line modifications,
and.parcel.map waivers located within the vicinity of
the Oroville Municipal Airport and within the 55 db(A)
contour (Exhibit 2) shall be required to convey (unless
previously conveyed for the property) an avigation
easement to the City as a condition of the completion
of the land division. I
B. Use and Variance Permits
All persons submitting applications for Use and/or
Variance Permits for property located in the vicinity of
the Oroville Municipal Airport and within the 55 db(A)
contour (Exhibit 2) shall be required to convey (unless
previously conveyed for the property) an avigation ease-
ment to the City as a condition of the granting -of the
permit.
C. Building Permits Within the City Limits
All applicants for building permits within the 55 db(A)
contour (Exhibit.2) shall be requested to convey aviga=
tion easements to the City if not previously conveyed.
D. Land Divisions, Use and Variance Permits, and Building
Permits Within the Unincorporated Area
Upon finalization of the Public -.Works Policy and Pro-
cedure, the City Engineer shall file a copy of the A.P.P.
with the appropriate County Officials and the Butte
County Airport Land Use Commission. The City Engineer
INITIATED BY: PUBLIC WORKSI,APP:ROVED BY: COUNCIL 1-3-84
1 Page 1 of 5
1
I
I
CITY �ROVILLE
Policie 1-.. end Procedures
NUMBER: 16
AVIGATION EASEMENTS WITHIN THE 55 db(A)
SUBJECT: CONTOUR OF THE OROVILLE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
DATE: 1-3-84
SECTION: PUBLIC WORKS
shall request that the County incorporate II. A,.B, and
C. into its procedures for processing land divisions,
use and variance permits and building permits in order
to convey avigation easements to the City of Oroville
for property located in the vicinity of the Oroville
Municipal Airport and within the 55 db(A) contour.
[I. PROCEDURE
A. Land Division and Use or Variance Permit
1. When a condition has been attached to a land division
or use and/or variance permit, to convey an avigation
- easement to the City for property either inside the
Oroville City.limits or in the unincorporated area,
the Department of Public Works shall prepare a
"Grant of Avigation Easement", hereinafter referred
to as Grant (Exhibit 5).
2. The Department of Public Works shall:
a. Secure from.the applicant -a metes and bounds
description or such description approved by the
Director of Public Works of the property over
which the easement is to be conveyed, to be
attached to the Grant as Exhibit "A".
b. Secure from the applicant a plat which clearly
delineates the property over which the easement
is to be conveyed, to be attached to the Grant
as Exhibit "B".
c. Specify in the Grant (Exhibit 5) the appropriate
elevations as shown on Exhibits 3 and 4.
d. Secure from the applicant a document indicating
property ownership. (This may be a preliminary
title report, lot book or other legal documen-
tation.)
e. Specify in the Grant the grantor's name and title
exactly as it appears on the ownership document.
f. Specify in the Grant the date that the document
is executed.
INITIATED BY: PUBLIC WORKS
APPROVED BY: COUNCIL 1-3-84
Page 2 of 5
CITY OF OROVILLE
Policies and Procedures
•
Page 3 of 5
AVIGATION EASEMENTS WITHIN,THE 55 db (A)
NUMBER: 16
SUBJECT: CONTOUR OF THE-OROVILLE MUNICIPAL
DATE: 1-3-84
SECTION: PUBLIC WORKS
3. The property owner or authorized designee shall exe-
cute the Grant and have -the signature(s) notarized an
'then submit the Grant to the Department of Public
Works. (Note: the property documentation shall be
current with the signature(s).)
4.
The Department of Public Works shall verify the
accuracy of the Grantor's signature(s) which must be
exactly as shown in the ownership documentation.
5.
The Public Works Director shall:
a. Execute the Certificate of Acceptance and Consent.
-
b. Record the Grant and the Certificate of Acceptance
and -Consent.
c. Upon receipt of the recorded Grant, forward copies
0. to the Grantor and the City Clerk.
6.
The Department of Public Works shall record the
avigation easement in the City's property book and
maintain a map indicating all recorded avigation
easements.
B. Building.Permits
1.
When an applicant for a building permit agrees to
convey an avigation easement to the City for property
"
both inside the Oroville City Limits or in the unin-
corporated area, the Department of'Public Works shall
prepare a "Grant of Avigation Easement" hereinafter
referred to as Grant (Exhibit 5).
2.
The Department of Public Works shall:
a. Prepare a metes and bounds description of the
property over which the easement is to be convey-
ed or such other description approved by the
Director of Public Works, to'be attached to the
Grant as Exhibit "A".
-.
b., Prepare a plat which clearly delineates the prop-
erty over which the easement is to be conveyed,
to be attached to the Grant as Exhibit "B".
INITIATED BY: PUBLIC WORKS
APPROVED BY:. COUNCIL 1-3-84
Page 3 of 5
CITY OF OROVILLE
Policies and Procedures
Page 4 of 5
AVIGATION EASEMENTS WITHIN THE 55 db (A)
NUMBER: 16
SUBJECT: COUNTOUR OF THE OROVILLE MUNICIPAL
DATE: 1-3-84
SECTION: PUBLIC WORKS
c. Specify in the Grant (Exhibit 5) the appropriate
elevation as shown on Exhibits 3 and 4.
d. Obtain from a title company, a lot book report .
indicating property ownership.
e. Specify in the Grant the grantor's name and title
exactly as it appears on the ownership document.
f. Specify in the Grant the date that the document
is executed.
3. The property owner or authorized designee shall exe-
cute -the Grant and have the si.gnature(s) notarized
and then submit the Grant to the Department of Public
Works. (Note: The property ownership documentation
shall be current with the signature(s).)
4. The Department of Public Works shall verify the
accuracy of the Grantor's signature(s) which must be
exactly as shown in the ownership documentation.
5. The Public Works Director shall:
a. Execute the Certificate of Acceptance and Consent.
b. Record the Grant and Certificate of -Acceptance
and Consent.
c. Upon receipt of the recorded Grant, forward copies
to the Grantor and the City Clerk.
6.
The Department of Public Works shall record the.aviga
tion easement in the City's property book and maintain
a map indicating all recorded avigation easements.
C. Oroville Municipal Airport or other City Property Avail-
able for Sale or Lease
1.
The reservation of an avigation easement shall be in-
corporated in the. deed of conveyance in the connec-
tion with the sale of Oroville Municipal Airport
property and other land available for sale by the
City within the.55 db(A) contour.
.INITIATED BY: PUBLIC
WORKS
IAPP.P.OVED BY: COUNCIL 1-3-84
Page 4 of 5
CITY OF OROVILLE
Policies and Procedures
Page 5 of 5
AVIGATION EASEMENTS WITHIN THE 55 db (A
NUMBER:. 16
SUBJECT: COUNTOUR OF THE OROVILLE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
DATE: 1-3-84
SECTION: PUBLIC WORKS
2. In the case of Oroville Municipal Airport property
and other land available for lease by the City with-
in the 55 db(A) contour, a condition of the lease
shall include the same restrictions shown in Exhibit
5 (modified to reflect leasee rather than grantee).
3. • Copies of the approved sale or lease agreement shall
be forwarded to the Public Works Department.
4. The Public Works -Department shall note the existence
of the provisions in the City's property book for
sale properties and shall maintain a map showing all
recorded agreements including lease agreements.
[V. EXCEPTIONS
None unles
authorized by the City Council.
INITIATED BY.:
PUBLIC WORKS
FAPP:ROVED BY:;. COUNCIL 1-3-84
Page 5 of 5
J
(j
i a) L
I+- O �.
{ O 'W /
>.O
Z
•
o'`
SCALE 1= 800'
THERMALITO FORESAY
S
COUNTY OF BUTTE
CITY OF OR�VILLE. II P
I
I
{�--------------
W W
I y
N� p
N N
0
OROVILLE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
J
AIRPORT BOUNDARY -----
CITY LIMITS -----
EXHIBIT
I
OROVILLE
E° MUNICIPAL AIRPORT AREA
BOU N DARY
J:t
REFERANCE: C/TY OF OROV/LLE
GENERAL PLAN /982
EXHIBIT 2
OROVI L L E MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
FUTURE
L' = 55 db (A) CONTOUR:
ell
oc h ti V ►p N
Qr. v h h N N
4,i p y N
13" N
v � o� v` • N I I
h O N •
4E
a . o,
• i I
I
200'
200' 2,000'
PROFILE
2,000'
I, 700' ,.
�:. 200' _ , .... _._-.. �..... .
s: —
REFER TO C/TYOFOROV/LLE
ZONING ORDINANCE CHAPTER 26
FOR BUILDING HEIGHT RESTRIMDNS
OU-TSIDE CLEAR ZONE BOUNDARIES.
NONPRECIS/ON INSTRUMENT CLEAR ZONE
LOCAL CL EAR ZONE
P-
SCALE / 400'
EXHIBIT 3
CL EAR ZONE A PPROACH AREAS
TYPICAL RUNWAY *I2 - 3.0 MUNICIPAL UNICIPAL AIRPORT
200, 700'
PROFILE
700'
/.000,
NONPRECISION INSTRUMENT CLEAR ZONE
L OCA L CL EA R ZONE
PLAN
N. T S.
,?EPER TO ClrY OF OROVILLE EXHIBIT 4
ZONING ORD/NA NCE CHAPTER 26
FOR BUILDING HEIGHr RES 77RICrIONS CL EA RZONE A PPROA CH AREA
S
OUTSIDE CLEAR ZOVE BOUNDARIES.
TYPICAL RUNWAY' /9
ORO WLLE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
•
1
2
3
4
S
6
8.
>.9
10
it
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
1]
GRANT OF AVIGATION EASEMENT
Deed made this day of by
(hereinafter
referred to as Grantor) to the City of Oroville, a municipal corporation of
the State of California,.(hereinafter referred to as Grantee). .
In considerationof good and valuable -consideration, the receipt and
sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, grantors, for themselves, their
heirs, administrators, executors, successors.. and assigns, do hereby
and convey to grantee.' its successors and assigns, a"perpetual easement and
right-of-way for the unobstructed passage of all aircraft in the airspace
above the property located in the City of Oroville, County of Butte. State
of California described in Exhibit "A" and shown in Exhibit "B", attached
hereto and by this reference incorporated herein (hereinafter called "the
property") from a height above sea level as shown on Exhibit "B" to an
infinite height above the property.
Concomitant and coextensive with said easement and right-of-way, grantee
shall have the continuing right to remove all or any portion of any structure,
natural growth or other object on the property which extends into the air
space over the property to a height above sea level of more than that
delineated on Exhibit "B"; the right to mark and light as obstructures to
air navigation, any and all structures, trees or other objects that may at
anytime project into, extend above or infringe upon the clear zone as
delineated on Exhibit "B", and the right of ingress to and egress,from, and
passage over the land within the clear zone area as delineated on Exhibit "A".
Grantee shall have the further right to cause in all airspace above the
surface of the property such noise, vibrations, fumes, dust, fuel particles
and all other effects that may be caused by the operation of aircraft landing
at or taking off from or operating at or on the Oroville Municipal Airport;
and grantor does hereby fully waive, remise, and release any right or cause
of action which it may now have or which it may have in the future against
grantee, its successors, and assigns, due to such noise, vibrations, fumes.
E".,
� 1
i
2
I
3
1
4
S
6
Y, 7
" g
9.
.10
it
12
13
14
15
16
i 17
18
1 19
I 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
dust, fuel particles, and all other effects that may be caused or may have
been caused by the operation of aircraft landing at, or taking off from, or
operating at or on the Oroville Municipal Airport.
Grantors, for themselves, their heirs, administrators, executors,' .
successors, and assigns, do hereby agree not to use or permit the use of
the property in such a manner as to create electrical interference with
radio co munications•between aircraft and the Oroville Municipal Airport,..c
to make it difficult for flyers to'distinguish between airport lights and
other lights, to impair visibility in the vicinity of the Oroville Municipal
Airport, or to otherwise endanger aircraft landing at or taking `off from
the Oroville Municipal Airport._ :.
In witness whereof, grantors -have executed this deed on the date first
written above.
Grantor
Grantor
Grantor
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
55.
COUNTY OF BUTTE )
On this _ day of in the year 19 , before me,
personally appeared
personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence)
to be the person(s) whose name (s) subscribed to this instrument, and
acknowledged that executed it. -
(SEAL)
NOTARY
-2-
ti a d •�
v_
� 1
i
2
I
3
1
4
S
6
Y, 7
" g
9.
.10
it
12
13
14
15
16
i 17
18
1 19
I 20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
dust, fuel particles, and all other effects that may be caused or may have
been caused by the operation of aircraft landing at, or taking off from, or
operating at or on the Oroville Municipal Airport.
Grantors, for themselves, their heirs, administrators, executors,' .
successors, and assigns, do hereby agree not to use or permit the use of
the property in such a manner as to create electrical interference with
radio co munications•between aircraft and the Oroville Municipal Airport,..c
to make it difficult for flyers to'distinguish between airport lights and
other lights, to impair visibility in the vicinity of the Oroville Municipal
Airport, or to otherwise endanger aircraft landing at or taking `off from
the Oroville Municipal Airport._ :.
In witness whereof, grantors -have executed this deed on the date first
written above.
Grantor
Grantor
Grantor
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
55.
COUNTY OF BUTTE )
On this _ day of in the year 19 , before me,
personally appeared
personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence)
to be the person(s) whose name (s) subscribed to this instrument, and
acknowledged that executed it. -
(SEAL)
NOTARY
-2-
OFFICE OF THEqW
w'= 7 CITY MANAGER Be Co. Planning
,ss E. Firth Street January 6, 1984 IA(� 9 log
4
CITYOFCHICO P.O. Box 3420
wc:1872 Chico, CA 95927 OrOvill9� fad
(916) 895-4803
ATSS 459-4803
PS-D-154.1/Chrono
Mr. Martin J. Nichols
Chief Administrative Officer
County of Butte
25 County Center Drive
Oroville, CA 95965
Re: Chico Representative to County
Airport Land Use Commission
Dear Marty:
At its January 3, 1984 meeting, the City Council acknowledged
receipt of your December 13, 1983 letter in which you asked to
be notified of the City's appointee to the Butte County Planning
Commission when acting as the Airport Land Use Commission.
The City Council appointed the Chairman -of the Airport Commission,
(held at this time by Jerry Kenkel).as the City's representative
and his designee who would serve as alternate. The alternate
representative would be another member of the City's Airport
Commission.
Would you please provide notice of meetings and other information
to Mr. Kenkel at P.O.: Box 3970, Chico, 95927, telephone 345-1396
(business) or 891-5321 (home) and City Manager, Fred Davis, P.O.
Box 3420, Chico, 95927.
The City Council asked that I express its appreciation to the
Board of Supervisors for approving this representation on the
Airport Land Use Commission, and believes this will further City -
County cooperation with regard to airport, planning in the Chico
area.
Sincerely-,
FRED DAVIS
City.Manager
FD:ic.
cc: Jerry Kenkel
City Clerk
PIanni e
�6un
ty Planning Director
upervisor Do an
Supervisor Wheeler
Airport Commission
...7 •
Bu#e Co. Planning Comm.
JA! ! 3 11984
Oroville, California
Administrative Office
January 12, 1984
To: Martin J:'.Nichols,.:Chief Administrative Officer
From: Mike Pyeatt, Deputy Administrative Officer
Subject: Airport Land Use Planning Commission
On December 6,.,.1983 at:the request of the Butte County Planning
Commission, the Board of Supervisors took affirmative action to add
two members, one from the City of Chico and.one from the City.bf
Oroville., when sitting as the County Airport Land Use Planning Commission.
TH.,s :a.ction is found in Minute Order 83-1003. Subsequent to the
;�oard.of Supervisors action, a letter.from this office was prepared
send'i n§' -.notification to the :City Councils of' both Chi to and Orovi l l e. .
Sh'o.r..tly thereafter, I was notified by Director of Planning Bettye Kircher
,of.a need to obtain:.clar-ification from�County Counsel relative to .
whether the city's:were responsible for nominating a member or appointing
a member. This was--:discussed-.with County Counsel Del Siemsen who
advised initially that the Board of -Supervisors may have acted outside
the scope of Public Utilities Code -§21670 et seq. Thereupon, telephone
contact was personally made with both cities asking that no further
action take place relative to'appointments until we had further researched
the matter.
LI
Background
AB 1856, Chapter 1182 of the Statutes of 1970, required the
creation of -an -Airport Land Use Commission by January 1, 1971 in
each county which had at least one airport "operated for the benefit
of the general public and served by a:certified ai.r carrier." This
legislation created two alternative methods for designating an Airport
Land Use Commission.
X71 • •
Martin J. Nichols -2- January 12, 1984
4. Public Utilities Code §21670:.provides that the Commission
will consist of seven members; two representing the cities
of the county, appointed by a::City Selection Committee comprised
of the Mayors of all..the cities within that county; two
representing the county, appointed by the Board of Supervisors;_
two representing the.airports within the county, appointed
by a Selection Committee comprised of the managers of all
the publid:airports within the county; and one member representing
the general public,.appointed by the other six members of
the Commission.
2. Public Utilities Code §21670.1 provides an alternate method
whereby the Board of Supervisors and the City Selection
Committee of Mayors in the county make a determination by
a majority vote designating "some other appropriate body.
In Butte County, the Board of Supervisors.adopted Resolution
No. 70-225 on November 24,'1970 designating the Butte County Planning
Commission 'as the Airport Land Use Commission in accordance with
§21670.1. Similarly, the Mayors of each of the four cities of the
county also made -a declaration on Noveinber 24, 1970 approving the
designation of the'Butte County Planning Commission. Said vote was
on a 3-1 basis with the City of OroviTle in opposition. (The City
of Oroville's opposition was based upon their feeling that the Butte
County Association of Governments would have been a more appropriate
body.) .As.required:by law; the Board -::of Supervisors Resolution and
the. declaration by the Mayors was forwarded to the Secretary of State
on November 27, 1970. Copies.of this correspondence and the documents
are attached.
Recommendation
Based upon the foregoing, and after discussions with County
Counsel, the following recommendations -are offered:
1. The Board of Supervisors be requested to reverse their action.
of December 6, 1983 which expanded the membership of the
present Planning Commission to include representatives from
Chico and'Oroville when sitting as..the Airport Land Use
Planning Commission.. This action is contrary to the provisions
set forth -in Public. Utilities,Code §21670 and §21670.1.
2.' Alternatively, the:Board has: four choices available to
it. .. .. i
A. Let the prior action of.November 24, 1970 stand whereby
the Butte County Planning:Commission is designated as
the Airport Land Use Planning Commission for the county.
U
Martin. J. Nichols -3- January 12, 1984
B. Expand the membership of the Planning Commission as
a whole to include representatives of cities.
C. Set in motion the procedure for designating the Airport
Land Use Planning Commission as a separate_ body as identified
i.n.Public Utilities Code §21670..
D. Have the Board.of Supervisors, with-the.concurrence
of the -:City Selection Committee, designate another appropriate
body to sit ;as the Airport Land Use Planning Commission.
Mike
yea
s
Deputy Administrative Officer
MP/rd ,
Enclosures
cc: Del `emsen,County Counsel
ettye Kircher, Planning Director
•
PLANNING -OFFICE
Fifth and Main Streets
CITYovCHICO P.O. Box 3420
INC. 1872 Chico, CA 95927 '
(916)895-4851
ATSS , 459-4851
Bettye Kircher, Director
Butte County Planning
7 County Center Drive
Orovill-e, CA. 95965
RE: Amendment to Airport Environs Plain for Chico'Municipal-Airport
Dear Bettye:
` Attached for your use i.s.a draft. of'.a motion amending the
Airport Environs Plan for- the Chico'Municipal Airport as per the
discussion of the Planni.ng Commission, acting in its role.as the
Airport Land Use Commission. Based on.my understanding of the
discussion at the Commission meeting, the attached motion
accomplishes the intent of the Commission.
-I hope this is of .some assistance.
• I
Sincerel
Thomas J Lando
Planning Director
TJL:pb
CP 11111
A -BC -3
cc: • CM Info
DPW
Attachment
MOTION
To amend the Airport Environs Plan for the Chico Municipal Airport adopted
April 4, 1979 by the Butte County Planning Commission, acting in its
capacity as the Airport Land Use Commission to delete the reference to
limiting residential densities in all Compatible Land Use Zones (CLUZ)
except CLUZ Area I and to add a general prohibition against places of
public assembly such as schools and auditoriums in all Compatible Land
Use Zones. -In addition to amend the Airport Environs Plan to prohibit
all new-residential subdivision and development in the area directly.
to the north and to the south of the main runway for a distance of
10,000 feet in length and -76
\-�.
.}� •� � X5:61.<' - ,��,I -. '. .' -�,�, -
Resolution No: 70-225 r .
RESOLUTION'DESIGNATING THE BUTTE COUNTY' PLANNING
E AS THE BUTTE COUNTY -AIRPORT
COMMISSION.TO SERV
LAND USE COMMISSION
WHEREAS, Public Utilities -Code section 21670 et seq calls `
a ,
for -the creation of an airport land use commission;.
t WHEREAS, Public Utilities Code section 21670.1 allows
the Board of Supervisors of the County and the mayors of the.cities
of the county each to make,a designation of an appropriately.. -
designated body to 'serve as an airport land use commission;'
' NOW THEREFORE,. BE IT RESOLVED by this Board that the
.. Planning Commission of the County of Butte shall assume the planning
responsibilities of an airport land use commission as•._�.Drovided for
in'Publ`ic Utilities Code section 21670 et .sego
1
PASSED AND. ADOPTED by the Board of Supervisors" of the
County of Butte this 24th day of November ,.1970,.by.
F
the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Howsden,."Maxon, McKillop, Reynolds,
' and Chairman Dunaway
NOES: 1`Torie
F_ ABSENT: None
r NOT VOTING:. :.
, a i rma n o the
Butte County Board of Sup rvisors
ATTEST: " J
CLARK A. NELSON, County Cleric
and ex -officio Clerk of 'the. -
Board of Supervisors 3
By ee�
4
CITY OF CHICO
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: ALL INTERESTED PARTIES DATE: 11-28-83
FROM: CHICO MUNICIPAL AIRPORT COMMISSIONLE REFERENCE: D-90-4.lk/chrono
SUBJECT: CHICO MUNICIPAL AIRPORT TRAFFIC PATTERN --
EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 25, 1983
MESSAGE
In accordance with action taken by the Chico
Municipal Airport Commission at its regular meeting_
of October 25, 1983, the attached traffic pattern
became effective October 25, 1983'at the Chico Muni-
cipal Airport: _..,,.
Please brim this matter to the attention of all
interested parties. _.
If you -desire additional copies of the attachment,
please call my Secretary, Margaret Ballinger, at 895-4803.
Fred Davis
fd/mb
enclosure
DCM/PO/CDC Info
Distr
See attached list BaffeCo.PlennIng
..
OEC 6
1983
Oroville, Calitornia
. r
11.5 5.82 20M -
Ret BY DATE ADOPTED BY AIRPORT COMMISSION AT ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING -29 OeT• 1988
m C7 1.
i TRAFFIC PATTERN NO. I- JET 8t HEAVY AIRCRAFT (RUNWAY 13L -31R) 1750 M.S.L.- 1500 A.G.L.
m
< >
r .0
-n C TRAFFIC PATTERN NO. 2- LIGHT AIRCRAFT (RUNWAY 13L -31R) 1250 M.S.L.- 1000 A.G.L.
ro
o n
-u -0 TRAFFIC' PATTERN NO. 3- LIGHT AIRCRAFT ( RUNWAY 1_3R- 31L)
> V.F.RyUSE ONLY- 1050 M.S.L.-800 A.G.L.
OD
Lw
m > 3000 BUILDING
LINE
O o w
z r• .
p
_ c—o
x
_ w o c� { c»J cmi CL
�1 Z
NOISE AEATEMENT AREA mp 0 O fn O_ ° p=I per
AFTER TArEOFF 6722- - nm -�mmz
CLIMB RU.' JAY ticADIN4 1 Op mp rn
TO 2000 FEET RUNWAY m m � om
m = ~ BMJ
°
B �� °D° ° °
s d 65� ) EIT 40 n! r® Y
�� Com\~ AC. Opti AC • ni _ q� ,' �` °gFOI A.C. zormn i9
o
BUILDING c� fie. o -u. w -a �>-il �z- �+- +�- as �(� � d � �• �o% 4'
LINE
FIXED BASE OPERATOR NOISE AEATEMIEHT AREA
r HANGARS II TERMINAL AFTER TAKEOFF
�` RU I " I BLDG. r-- a TURX LEFT TO GOP
y/�+O 2 F tiCLITAB TO 3000 FEET
0 �Q
�'y� �rti CONTROL TOWERQ• HANGAR-- '
RFs o� TRAFFIC PATTERN NO. 4- JET & HEAVY AIRCRAFT RUNWAY 13�--31R)
Ur- 1750 M.S.L.- 1500 A.G.L.-(REQUIRES CLEARANCE
ti FROM CONTROL TOWER OR SPECIAL CLEARANCE � y ¢tion
FROM CITY OF CHICO)�c
v n bi', e,
NOTES o
INDUSTRIAL AREA r
1� A
1.) M.S.L= MEAN SEA LEVEL p 3 xyo
2.) A.G:L.= ABOVE GROUND LEVEL CO %> m w o i'�, \ v ° �>
3.) FIELD ELEVATION 238 M.S.L. �4`SS
A
T z
CHICO MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
CHICO, BUTTE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
MANAGER - FRED DAVIS
P.O.BOX 3420
196
(916) 895-4980 or
E. 5TH STRErT
CHICO, CA.. 95926
(916 ) 895-480.2
F.5.5.:
Red.Bluff - 800 822-9636
Chico Tower Frequency:
12110 Air Traffic Control Tower
Ground Control Frequency:
121.9 Telephone: 916-345-7332
Aeronautical Chart - Sari Francisco
WHEN AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER IS IN OPERATION_
Airport.I.D..
Latitude
Longitude
Elevation
t
C.I.C.
390 47' 45" N
121 51 23 W
238 S
Gross Weight & Strength_
Surface
S Ingle Dual Dual
Eff: 7 Wind Marking Type Runwa
Li hts
Runway
Length Width
Composition
Wheel Wheel Tanel.
Gredient Coverage Condition Type
Intensity
13L/31R
6722 150
Asph.
63 100 170..
0.48: 99.7 Pr -Good L-862
High
13R/31L
3000. 60
Asph.
25 - -
0.40 99.7 Basic -Good None
None
Approach Surface Data
Runway
End Elevation Approach
Slope
Indicator Obstruction Dist.from Thresh. Apc '. RaC o
13L
238 S
V2 -L +
ILS None
- 50-1.
31R
205 S
V4 -L
'None
- 50-1
13R
224 S
None
None
- 40-1
'31L
212 S
None
None
- 40-1
Taxiway
Lights - Wind Indicators - Segmented Circle
Repairs - major and Minor - Airframe &
Powerplant
Scheduled Airlines: WestAir Commuter
Airlines
Types of fixed Base Operators
- Chtr/Instrn/Survey/Sales/Agri.
Air Chico
Pacific Express
Fuel Available for Public Sale:
- Type F-12
Fire Equipment: 1 Crash Rescue
F-18
500 Gal.Water - 55 Gal.Foam
Jet
A - 40° C Freezing Point
500 Lbs.ABC Dry Chemical
Engine Oil
- Piston
Revised
10-25-83
December 13, 1.983
Karl Ory, Mayor
City of Chico
P.O. Box 3420
Chico, CA 95927
Dear Mayor -Ory:
Recently th.e Butte County Planning'Commission presented a report to
the'Board of Supervisors recommending that representatives of the City of
Chico and City of Oroville be included as members to the Butte County Planning
Commission when acti,ng.as the Airport Land Use Commission. We would sincerely
appreciate notification of your appointee so that such can be forwarded to
the Board of Supervisors and to the Planning Commission.
V ry tr ly yours,
Martin J. Ni hs
Chief Adroini�trati.ve Officer
MJN/MP//er
cc:.✓Bettye Ki:rch.er, Director of -Planning.
eU�OGo C 1� 193
p� al"
O'r0AA9%
CME&DMINISTRATIVE W—F.11-C-E
COUNTY OF BUTTE -
011T1E•°
°
25 COUNTY CENTER. DR: / OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3380 / (916) 534-4631
o °
p °
C�UM�
MEMBERS OF THE BOARD
AL SARACENI
-
JANE DOLAN
MARTIN J. NICHOLS
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
HILDA WHEELER
BERTHA MOSELEY
LEN FULTON
December 13, 1.983
Karl Ory, Mayor
City of Chico
P.O. Box 3420
Chico, CA 95927
Dear Mayor -Ory:
Recently th.e Butte County Planning'Commission presented a report to
the'Board of Supervisors recommending that representatives of the City of
Chico and City of Oroville be included as members to the Butte County Planning
Commission when acti,ng.as the Airport Land Use Commission. We would sincerely
appreciate notification of your appointee so that such can be forwarded to
the Board of Supervisors and to the Planning Commission.
V ry tr ly yours,
Martin J. Ni hs
Chief Adroini�trati.ve Officer
MJN/MP//er
cc:.✓Bettye Ki:rch.er, Director of -Planning.
eU�OGo C 1� 193
p� al"
O'r0AA9%
CHIEOADMINISTRATIVE OF'F'ICE
COUNTY OF BUTTE -
®uTpl�° 25 COUNTY CENTER DR. / OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965-3380 / (916) 534-4631
o
o o
00
° o
MEMBERS OF THE BOARD
�DUptr AL SARACENI
' JANE DOLAN
MARTIN J. NICHOLS
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER HILDA WHEELER
BERTHA MOSELEY
LEN FULTON
December 13, 1983
Jana Wilson, Mayor
City of Oroville
1735 Montgomery St.
Orovi.11e, CA 95965
Dear Mayor Wilson:
Recently the Butte County Planning Commission presented a report to
the Board of Supervisors recommending that representatives of the City of
Chico and City of Orovi1le be included as members to the Butte County Planning
Commission when actinglis ,the Airport Land .Use Commission. We would sincerely
appreciate notification'of your appointee so that such can be forwarded to
the Board of Supervisor's and to the Planning Commission.
t
e y t u your
•� i
Martin J. ols
Chief Admin arative Officer
MJN/MP/er
cc; zBettye Ki rch.er, Director. of Pl anni ng
S'ffigclo•
O�C Ga\`�or�ta
004
--
MUNICIPAL BUILDING .
P.O. Box 3420
CITYoFCHICO Chico, CA 95927
INC. 187Z
(916)895-4800
ATSS 459-4800
PS-D-154.1/G-GA-1-5/chrono
Butte County Planning Commission
7 County Center Drive
Oroville, California 95965
Dear Commission Members:
November 29, 1983
4.
I am writing.on behalf of the City of Chico Municipal Air-
port Commission to express its appreciation for the Commis-
sion's recent actions in regard to both the Airport Environs
Plan and the proposed expansion of the Airport Land Use Com-
mission to include a voting representative from the Cities
of Chico and Oroville (which operate and maintain public -
Airports).
The Airport Commission appreciates your careful study and
cooperation in working to clarify the Airport Environs Plan
to best serve the Chico community. The Chico Municipal'Air-
port Commission is quite concerned adequate steps be taken
to safeguard the Airport and Airport operations and to pre-
vent land use conflicts to arise.
In this light, the Commission would also like to express its
appreciation for your recommendation to the Board of Super-
visors that the Cities of Chico and Oroville be represented
on the Airport Land Use Commission.
The Chico Municipal Airport
working with you on.Airport
that the Board shares your
recommendation.
jk/mb
r
cc: City Council
Board of Supervisors
Airport Commission
'Planning Director
DCM/PO/CDC Info
Commission
matters in
concern and
looks forward to
the future and hopes
will accept your
Sincer ly,
J rr ' Kenk , Chairman
is ipal Airport Commission
Duffe Co. Planning COrrttrM
1983
OfO Alibi `,uuiy�i;ia
Inter-Depart..ne=nta'I Memorandum
•CO
UN�y•
TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Planning
SUBJECT: Representatives to the ALUC from Oroville and"Chico
DATE: December 2, 1983
It was a unanimous decision of the Planning Commission, as
voted on and approved at their meeting of December 1, 1983,
to have the representative from Orovill`e and the repre.sentative
from Chico, should they join the'Airport Land Use Commission,
be.; voting members of said Commission.
BK:lr
.1d 1
rJ
INTER -OFFICE MEPAORANDUMI
TO: ALL INTERESTED PARTIES • DATE: 11-28-83
FROM: CHICO MUNICIPAL AIRPORT COMMISSIONLE REFERENCE: D-90,-4, lk/chrono
SUBJECT: CHICO MUNICIPAL AIRPORT TRAFFIC PATTERN
EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 25, 1983
MESSAGE
In accordance with action taken by the Chico
Municipal Airport Commission at.its regular meeting
of October 25, 1983,. the attached traffic pattern
became effective October 25, 1983 at the Chico Muni-
cipal Airport, __..... _
Please bring this matter to the attention of'a'll
interested parties:
r
If you desire additional.copies of the attachment,
please call my Secretary, Margaret Ballinger, at 895-4803.
Fred Da -vis
fd/mb
enclosure
DCM/PO/CDC Info
Distr :
See attached list Butf®Co- Planning Con%
1`1 0 `i . L'0
1983
Orovdle, �.vu�'u,rs:a ;
-5 5-82 20M
GATE 1
m
0
m
�
m
m
n
O
<
>
-a
n
S,
-�
C
C
p
C7
co
im
D
X
O
NOISE ABATEMENT AREA
AFTER
TAKEOFF
'CLIMB RUNWAY
HEADING
TO 2000 FEET
711��46�41
�
BY AIRPORT COMMISSION AT ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING 29 OCT. 1988 '
TRAFFIC PATTERN NO. I- JET a HEAVY AIRCRAFT (RUNWAY 13L -31R) 1750 M.S.L.- 1500 A.G.L.
TRAFFIC PATTERN NO. 2- LIGHT AIRCRAFT (RUNWAY 13L -31R) 1250 M.S.L.- 1000 A.G.L.
TRAFFIC PATTERN NO. 3 -LIGHT AIRCRAFT �(RUNWAY 13R -31L)
VIER. USE ONLY- 1050 M.S.L.-800 A.G.L.
30001 BUILDING
LINE
CL_ .. w
O
zr
x
rnm
rn o t- Op_ o=
6722- - oo momz
PI 1RI WAYS m. m
IT
U,j
u D G'
n-
gpAC. 7 z
- - �—a- m
BUILDING -OA 94' ,
LINE Q
FIXED BASE OPERATOR k01SC. ABATEMENT AREA
HANGARS II TERMINAL AFTER TAKEOFF
9Ci�, BLDG. TURN LEFT TO aO°
,- CLIMB TO 3000 FEET
NOTES:
I.) N.S.L.= MEAN SEA LEVEL
2.) A.G.L.= ABOVE GROUND LEVEL
3.) FIELD ELEVATION 233 M.S.L.
�:. m6
CONTROL TOWER `a HANGAR
TRAFFIC PATTERN NO. 4- JET a HEAVY AIRCRAFT RUNWAY I3L-3[R)
1750 M.S.L.- 1500 A.G.L. IRES CLEARANCE��-
FROM CONTROL TOWER OR SPECIAL CLEARANCE �'yo
FROM CITY OF CHICO) > 09 x
x
0 _ )m
INDUSTRIAL AREA r
0
v
r C) '
x
aL"
., r�- IVO!/%
„ r.
Egg
F.S.S.: Feed. Bluff - '800 822-9636
Aeronautical Chart - San Francisco
CHICO MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
CHICO, BUTTE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
MANAGER - FRED DAVIS
P.O.BOX 3420
196 E. 5TH STREET
CHICO, CA,. 95926
(916) 895-4980 or
(916) 895-4802
Chico Tower Frequency: 121.0 Air Traffic Control Tower
Ground Control Frequency: 121.9' Telephone: 916-345-7332
WHEN AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER IS IIS OPE TION
L i d E1 atio
6
•
Airport. I.D.. Latitude Ong to a ev n
C.I.C. 390 47' 45" N 121 51 23 W 238 S
Gross Weight & Strength
Surface S Ingle Dual Dual Ef£. 7 Wind Marking Type Runway Li hts
Runway Length Width Composition, Wheel Wheel Tand. Gradient Coverage' Condition Type Intens ty
13L/31R 6722 150 Asph. 63 100 170,; 0.48. 99.7 PI -Good L-862 High
13R/31L 3000. 60 Asph. 25 - - 0.40 99.7 Basic -Good None None
Runway
End Elevation
Approach Slope Indicator
Approach Surface Data
struction Dist.from T res .
Apc . Rat o
13L
238 S
V2 -L + ILS
None -
50-1
31R
205 S
V4 -L
None -
50-1
13R
224 S
None
None -
40-1
31L
212 S
None
None -
40-1
Taxiway Lights - Wind Indicators - Segmented Circle
Types of fixed Base Operators - Chtr/Instrn/Survey/Sales/Agri.
Fuel Available for Public Sale: - Type F-12
F-18
Jet A - 40° C Freezing Point
Engine Oil Piston
Revised
10-25-83
Repairs - Major and Minor - Airframe & PowerPlant
Scheduled Airlines: WestAir Commuter Airlines
Air Chico
Pacific Express
Fire Equipment: 1 Crash Rescue
500 Gal.Water - 55 Gal.Foam
500.Lbs.ABC Dry Chemical • 4+.
Tom. Lando
City of Chico
P.O. Box 3420
Chico, Ca. 95927
LAND OF NATURAL W F A L T H AND BI_AUT`;
PLANNING COMMISSION
7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965'
PHONE: 534-4601
November 15, 19`83
Re: Chico Municipal Airport Compliance with -AB 2920
Dear Mr. Lando:
The Airport Land Use Commission at their regular meeting held
on November 10, 1983 continued consideration of its findings.
relating to the Chico Municipal Airport. A motion will be
-reviewed for adoption on December 1, 1983 regarding findings
about the compatibility of the Ci.ty of Chico and County of Butte.
P1a.ns with the Chico Airport Environs Plan.
We.will'send further notification of the meeting to you. The
item will not be timed on the agenda and so may be placed later
on in the proceedings.'
Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please con-
tact this office.
Sincerely,
B. A. KIRCI-IER
DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
/St 'phenfiSr/eter
Senior Planner
SAS: 1-r
CITYoFCHICO
1,14C. 187Z
P'�ANNING OFFICE
Fifth and Main Streets
P.O. Box 3420 September 30, 1983
Chico, CA 95927 `
(916) 895-4851
ATSS 459-4851
Butte County Planning Commission
7 County Center Drive
Oroville, California 95926
RE: Amendment to Airport Environs Plan
Dear Commission Members:
On August 2; 1983, I forwarded to County staff a copy of Minute Order #5-83
(attached as Exhibit -A), Which.requested the -Butte County.Pl.anning Commission, acting as j
the Airport Land Use Commission, amend the Airport Environs Plan to delete specific density I.
and zoning restrictions specified in the compatible land use zones. The suggested I
amendment would replace these restrictions with a general prohibition on the development of
places of public assembly such as hospitals, churches and schools. It is my understanding
that this matter was.discussed by the Airport Land Use.Commission at your August 18, 1983 E.
meeting and that the Commission indicated that they felt further study of this issue was
necessary.
The City fully supports the caution exercisedin examining any amendment to the Airport o
Environs Plan.and hopes that the Commission will continue to carefully monitor its '
implementation. In light of the Commission's request for further study, I`have attempted to k
outline the basis for -the Airport Commission's request fora modification to the Environs Plan.
BACKGROUND
1
First, by way of background`, as the Commission is aware; the Chico Airport Environs
Plan was prepared jointly by the City and County to act as a guideline for the development
of the area surrounding the Chico Municipal Airport. The Plan was prepared in August of 1978
and subsequently adopted by the Butte County Planning Commission, acting as the Airport Land
Use Commission as their guide in reviewing future development.: The Airport Environs Plan
establishes a series of compatible land use zones (attached as Exhibit B),. which were 3,
developed in relationship to the approach and clear zone plan and projected future Community
Noise Equivalent Levels (CNEL), based on projected usage of the airport. Also, as the
Commission is aware, Assembly Bill 2920 enacted into law last year, requires consistency
between the airport plan, adopted by the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission, and both
the.City and County's General Plans.
In reviewing the City's General Plan in relationship to the Airport Environs Plan,
it was discovered that there are minor inconsistencies between the two: These inconsistencies.
relate to the specific density references contained in the compatible land use zones as containe.dl
in the Airport Environs Plan. These zones were developed and molded around the land use
plan and zoning that were in effect for the area at the time the Environs Plan was developed. +.
Since the adoption of AB 2920, both City and County staff, as well as the Chico
Municipal Airport Commission, have given a great deal of consideration to the specific
r, the plan has been carefully reviewed in
provisions of the Airport Environs Plan. Furthe?
relationship to the Airport Land Use Planning handbook, which was published by the California
Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics, specifically for implementation of.
s
TO: Butte County Planning Commission
RE: Amendment to Airport Environs Plan
Page 2
this piece of legislation. In' addition, the Federal .Avi.ati.on Admi.ni.stration has been.
contacted and requested to carefully review the Gen.eral.Plan of.the City for any potential
land use problems.
Each source has concurred with the suggested amendment..
Once again, it should be stressed that the proposed amendment to the -Airport Environs
Plan is not in any way, intended to weakeh'that.plan, but rather after -reviewing plans
adopted by other jurisdictions and conferring.wi.th the FAA and Civil Aeron.auti.cs.Di.vi.sion. of
California Department of Transportation, the restrictions in the Airport Environs Plan, in
this specific.case, are not necessary:
FAA RFVTFW
Mr. John Pfieffer of the -Federal Aviation Administration. was asked to carefully review
the City's General Plan, including all amendments, and -proposed amendments,. to determine
whether or not FAA had any.concerns or any recommendations regarding the plan, 'FAA
responded through the attached letter (Exhibit C), finding that the Ci.ty's General Plan
conformed in all ways to good and proper planning•in.relati.onshi.p to the.Chico Municipal
Airport.
Further, the FAA, during the'CMA Planning Conference, stre�sed..that the General Plan,
as adopted with. the Land Use controls currently used, in many ways.could act as a model -for
other communities and was quite far-sighted,
AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING HANDBOOK/LAND USE
The California Department of Transportation Division of Aeronautics, in conjunction
with several other groups, has prepared an Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, which was
published in July of 1983 and specifically catered to the implementation of AB 2920. In
reviewing the Handbook, five different safety zones are suggested: (see Exhibit D for further
illustration)
Inner Safety Zone/Clear Zone. For the Chico Municipal Airport, this is the
first 2,500' at the end of the runway. It is recommended no structures or,
people be allowed on a permanent basis'in this area. The City owns the
area contained in the Inner Safety Zone/Clear Zone.
Outer 'Safety Zone. -The Outer Safety Zone is comprised of the 2,500' at the
end of the Inner Safety Zone or 5,000' from the end of the runway. Residential
uses should be discouraged in the Outer Safety Zone with limited commercial
and industrial acceptable. Once again, the City owns the area contained in
the Outer Safety Zone.'
Emergency Touchdown Area. An area extended from the end of the runway 5,0001:
As was previously stated, the City owns this area and no development will
occur here.
TO: Butte County Planning Commission
RE: Amendment to Airport Environs Plan
Page 3
Traffic Pattern/Over-Flight Zone. The Over -Flight Zone is a much larger
area comprised of the FAA Part 77 horizontal'surface and generally consists
of 4 to 20 square miles. The Over -Flight Zone is the zone under discussion
in the proposed amendment and will be reviewed in greater detail below.
Extended Runway Centerline. The extended runway centerline is the area
between 5-10,000' at the end of the runway. It is included -in the Over -
Flight Zone above when discussing land use limitations in the Airport Land
Use Planning Handbook.
.In reviewing the guidelines se -t forth in the Handbook, the focus in limiting land uses
"is clearly on the first -three zones. •In discussing the Traffic Pattern/Over-Flight Zone,
the Handbook says:
"Land use compatibility within the Over,-Fl,gh,t_ Zone for general
aviation airports is not as easily defined. These larger areas,
encompassing about 4 to 20 square miles, are often heavily
urbanized and the hazard to any site within these areas is
quite low...."
The -Handbook then goes'on to suggest:
"That large assemblages of people not be located beneath the
airport traffic pattern because of th-e potential- for injury
if there were a crash. Specific types of land uses that have
been suggested for relocation outside the airport traffic
pattern are:
Schools and hospitals
Spectator sports arenas
Auditoriums
Outdoor amphitheaters".
This basic statement is restated in several other places throughout the Handbook.
"Traffic Pattern/Over-Flight Zone. 'For safety purposes, it
would be desirable to exclude all larger assemblages of
people from underneath the traffic pattern,....."
The Airport Land Use Planning Handbook actually indicates that both residential and
commercial/industrial uses are acceptable ina portion of the area owned by the City. This
is -not being suggested. The attached chart (Exhibit E) taken from the Handbook, once again
supports the recommended change in the Airport Environs Plan.
TO: Butte County Planning Commission
RE: Amendment to Airport Environs Plan
Page 4
NOISE AND SAFETY
It should be emphasized that the amendment suggested in the Airport Environs Plan will
not effect the safety or noise standards of the community.
Noise.
The Airport Land Use Handbook suggests that residential uses be prohibited within CNEL 65.
Further, after 1986, specific provisions relating to construction within CNEL 65 apply,
including the prohibition of residential construction. In this regard,.i.t should be':.
pointed out again that the entire area within CNEL 65, as it relates to the Chico Municipal
Airport, is under City ownership a.nd will never -b==::subject -to devel-opment, - -
Noise complaints which arise outside CNEL 65 tend to be related to single aircraft fly-
overs -and not airport operations.i.n general. As discussed„in,the Airport Environs Plan,
special "avigation easements” are routinely required of all development within CNEL 55
(see attached Exhibit F). These easement include a clear statement of public record that
the properties may be subject to noise,.dust and vibration and that there are specific
height restrictions so as not to impede airport operations. Further, California Administrative
Code Title 25 requires special acoustical analysis and construction standards to minimize
interior sound within the vicinity of the airport.
Sam' -------- _
Once again, to stress the safety concerns, both the Environs Plan and the Land Use
Planning Handbook point out that the presence of accidents in the area being discussed is
negligible and, in fact, reviewing FAA statistics, there is actually no significant difference
in the Over -Flight Zone (1-2 miles from -runway) than further away. The attached (Exhibit G)two
charts.indicate -the location of accidents, both for the U.S. as a whole and for the Chico
Municipal Airport.
BRIEF HISTORY OF DEVELOPMENT SOUTH OF AIRPORT
It should be noted that as far back as 1960 when development in the airport environs was
being discussed, it was indicated that residential development should be permitted at least
up to Sycamore Creek.
As the Commission is aware, the City and County have worked closely together to promote
the specific development which would be affected should the Airport Envi.rons Plan not be
modified.
The specific development is Foothill Park. Foothill Park is comprised of 800 acres
adjacent to Cohasset Road and is shown on the attached map (Exhibit'H). This development
along with Rancho Arroyo, became the corner stone of the Northeast Chico Sewer Assessment
District. It was through the Northeast Chico Sewer Assessment District that the City and
County were ab.le to accomplish major planning goals.of-opening the east side to development
and providing sewer capacity for the entire Sphere of Influence area. As such, there is a
TO: Butte County Planning Commission
RE: Amendment to Airport Environs Plan
.Page 5
major outstanding commitment of millions ofdollars invested by the property owners, which
is contingent upon the appropriate development of their property. The Foothill development
was reviewed carefully by the City in relationship to the airport. In addition, through
the Environmental Impact Report, which was reviewed both by City and County, it was -
determined that there would not be a- significant impact due -to future projected operations
of the airport and that the use was compatible with the intent and spirit of the Airport
Environs Plan.
THE RECOMMENDED CHANGE
In carefully reviewing the Airport Environs Plan`, it is staff's opinion that the Plan
addressed- ex -i -sting --land use and< zoning at. the Aime of development .and .was general ly -
patterned toward that. The emphasis, however, of the Plan in the compatible land use zones.,
appears to be prohibition of large groups -of people and public protection through public
notice.
The. City shares with the Butte County Airport Land Use.Commission,.extreme.concern.for the
proper development of the airport areas. It is our belief, based upon the.above data and
the review of experts in the field, that the amendment proposed is both reasonable and
necessary for the proper development of the Chico urban area. Further, through this review,
it is clear the amendment will not effect the safety of the community.
Specifically, once again, the request'is to amend the Airport environs Plan to delete
specific density or zoning restricti-ons specified in the compatible land use zones and.
replace these with a general prohibition on the development of places of public assembly such
as hospitals, churches and schools.
I appreciate your consideration in this matter.
Sincere ,
1 %
Thomas J. ando
Planning Director
TJL:pb
CP 10844
A -BC -3
cc: Bettye Kircher
Charlie Woods
City Council.
Airport Land Use Commission
CM .Info
DPW
City Attorney
Drake Homes
Attachments
List of Attached Exhibits..
Exhibit A Airport Commission Minute Order #5--83
...Exhibit 6 Airport.Environs Plan - Land Use Compatibility Map.
Exhibit C Letter from Manager, Airports District Office, F.A.A.
Exhibit D Illustrations and Example of Airport Safety Zones
a,
Exhibit E Land Use Guidelines from Airport Land Use Planning Handbook
Exhibit F Sample Avigation Easement
Exhibit G Accident Statistics for Chico Municipal Airport and Nation
Exhibit H Northeast Specific Plan (Foothill Park)
.1r:ii1!-.��i'3:1�:ti.14A'KT^"�••:.�.JyL�WiJ•Y.11.sp�Ii.w:Y.•rd �s'r..LMs.�W..f/fL0MrCM4r...— � �.iL MKir - �y��`�
--- QTY o'= CHIS __"AIRPORTCOMM
Ii�� 7 ORDS
SUBJECT: Revision to Airport Environs Plan T. i�UTE ORDER NO .: 5.- 83 g
Minor htodification to Compatible Land Use FILE: ]0537/A -C -OD -2.1
Zones - A -C -ST -10
EXPLANATION- PROVIDED BY Tom Lando
.i
1. The Airport Environs Plan was prepared for the City and County in August of 1978 to act
as a guideline for the development of the area surrounding the airport. The Butte County
Planning Commission, acting as the Airport Land Use Commission, adopted this Plan to serve
as their guide in reviewing future development. j
2. The Airport Environs Plan establishes a series of Compatible Land Use zones under and
adjacent to the flight corridor which are significantly more restrictive than the require- !
ments of existing law or FAA or State guidelines.
3. Recently adopted law (AB 2920) requires consistency between the Airport Plan adopted by f
the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission and the City's General Plan.
4. There are currently minor inconsistencies between the Airport Environs Plan and the General
Plan,Staff is recommending these'be eliminated through an amendment to the Airport Environs;
Plan which- would delete specific. density. r.e.stricti ons , i n each of.the Compatible Land Use
zones and replace those restrictions with a general restriction prohibiting the development:
of places of public assembly such as hospitals, churches and schools.
5. This in no way, affects the sa.f,e,ty, of either the resi dents or. the pilots and it shout d be.
kept in mind, that the City actually has an ownership the .first mile at both the ;
north'and soM ells of the runwa� In addition 'aviq tion.easemeots are r �u1S't�dPin z
connection wit a deve op en a jacent to he �irpofl as is compliance wi
Administrative Code Title 25 which limits interior noise levels in new homes.
RECO-MCMNDATION r
r
Recommend that the Butte County Planning Commission acting as the Airport Land Use
ommission amend the Airport Environs Plan to delete specific den,-ity or'zoning restrictions f
'specified -in the Compatible Land -Use zones and replace. thes,e-with .a general prohibition -
Ion the development of places of public assembly such as hospitals, churches and schools.
COMIMISSION ACTION H—FETING OF JULY 26. 1983
ere y certify that the Airport Commission took the following action on this
Minute Order at its (XX) Regular ( ) Adjourned Regular ( ) Special Meeting.,
held 7-26-83 j
(x Approved ( ) Disapproved ' ' ( ) Other (explain below)
red Davis,,City Mangger
ERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy of the original
Minute Order on file in the Office of the City Manager
I DISTRIBUTION
?reliminary: Final:
Files - 2
Planning Director - 1
E X�9IT A.
r.
a)
t
0
(';
E-P
'HBO
i B H^ V
Fj ti. ��.. +� F' ,, }�. �• •r I i. ` iA.
iN71 1� .O~ .�lOh �• d1r, f�v� ass+. i.
u� r� ,. BOO 3 ti. W erR .1 J
`4}I / � �� !9 '� /�y `�i. ) br-l5"4,t �4.s�►p!� �y��' y '`i�',�1Z,'"'.g'a Ir
1�n Q • • I T 1, `r` `1. - ti*s + ��N N . N Y" •'Vi x Z • r
•r h 1. .,,{� `- \I� r ,�. aS `, _ -
' '1 1'• � 6 � ��� t .. %�f 1.r } ilk.
47 � \ �• I _fhb �j/ ''+ .� � - /` �,
01,
ltd r L -Al
%rte y
147
.. i F � .f , J .�I -�� i � �„y i4 4L .,..f�• �v� 1� T� r. -ti r/ -
'lei`'
1
77"
'yyti
r/ r r •vt } ,1 1 , R � ';I� f � , - r` �/'� fr--" J'�, Y .. `' '. ; G! .
NIl •s r.
U.S. Department
of Tronsporiation.. San Francisco Airports District Office
Federal Aviation r
831 Mitten Road
Administration Burlingame, CA 940.10
Mr. Edwin R. Palmeri.
Assistant Planner
City of Chico
P.O. Box 3420.
Chico, CA 95927
Dear Mr. Palmeri.: Chico Airport Land Use'n^ ��
Compatibility
We have reviewed the Chico General Plan and Amendments submitted with.
your letter of September 8, 1983.- The Plan as presented meets FAA
land use compatibility guidelines.-
Sincerely,
MI L -J. MAV KIS
Manager, Airports.. District Office.
--- -P.ECEOV
SEP 301983
PLANNING ;OFFICE
CITY OF CHICO
EXHIBITC
17.P�,
Bic
Edward Warren: First American Alotl
1
IC
Ic
Ic 1
F
e
C
-'>. � �' . .. .. � in- , �' _iri. � :�: � Jr� 1 r :t � �- 1�. v' .`t�_,-. �^- 1 /� �� :I 11, •, •r ' A� - � '
1• ,.. •/, -r' l.r�`` '� r , 1 i - nr 1t�S•, , .r S :� - ,r '. '1'{ •'�+ ! - •E- _ ,
• - I `'� ( O.� r . ,n Nn�i - r. Ny •' ,1 1 r S J' ( r _ ,d',� -N J .1"f '1 ,i ..j^ _ - 4 y�i' • /1 / r� •rJ /' ` J
e ' •./ _ )- i - rr - ♦ \ r i - P - I' '•i, A t �\ �.•_:!'.^
TlinNst+�ssioh iwER l , t kl J, .
N:s.` -9P01P •POLE PANSM a . •. r 'i �c. ^i rJ ''� !�-,r
POLES' c._
�' yr, "^. 7 trtA"IsrTroN �i SUqFACE, / • _ / ' %� HORIZONTAL SURFACE, 1 ! .' :I TnAN`�T10N� ' t
f i i i. / r `.:*, "i" Irv. '` M 7 `1 EL. -388
7• i - _ ''d.: rr'%'/'�.SL r'/P `i';v. /• 'a. .J.. Is. �'^ /. Y _ fir' r 1... :� r' ;' Y /�/ 1 °j�♦
'� '/ / J/ a.. s�'` ._ 4'Q '��' ' "` ff f3\' �• '. �, a. '_ '1 1 0 �/ r I A�4
t •� * �r .r :- r •.. \a �'' Y _.j `�W ta'-. T•�Yy .xui '•.� ,r `ll •�' 'r •iii{ •�/� •w•� J,. .., -•.� 4:. 1_
li +:; _.j:, �ff.. •9. _ ,�f-'J,'` .7:1 7:LTRANSITIQIAI SURFACE'<. c '�' r' �•. r� ' _ _
•' -i f' j AAPROAOI _ •. '.� % tl S . _ _ v,. ' fo ' I - -.' •Z•s - • - . .
%� -•,! ( t / �•�40:1 I ACE `r Y �,,.�✓•../-• "s },, t t- •�Q._ ) ✓ rSURFACE % \ 50. PROAd1 SURFACE `�Y. i •:4 / 40:1 APP"'BURFACE
%• .� )! I. / 7`L . 7:1 •�C6
/ :1 7:1 7:1 .x. - .� !� `�•••-- - / f'•' ! ��
• �/ ,. __ J �.. ! SURFACE - „ J. -
j' 1`,�., r" :/ ✓ '1 :�. -��' l�% _ _ %�: !j =r�1 _ `, na �yV$��//pr✓_'e:aR�:"- /' IZ._ - / _�- ��r/ n ,JY.. ... ��-•[�"1� �-
-- 1^ 4r ,J•ai•'a.v .1, �{ r t 3 y �ra'L% is ,/(/. { t� , !
/ _ l r,/ _ / � � �.� `_ •� ^' ! Y � � - LT � • �a _ .' ! _ ^ Y _' j � /. �1; �'_"T��� -� • ''e C , ` • •., •1��_/ �, � M 1 '.
' [, Y. ! �'`�Jj`:(/�' /• SURFACE _ `..'1�.�.�� ,^, !' �,e. '� �.�' ): a •,C..�l' �Jj ��'i. .. -. -ii•' �\� ,
•ii^ \ / ` _ C��_ �.1 'J\ �w . /- r.. j;. --.% _ ,7.� ` i • v'(' `: '' . 7:1 r `;�♦'
�.. T1S171p1gESURFACE '
_ :` / IJ ca� moi' ° Sr•:! _�,,1�L, 7-. j ��`-C✓.. - v \\i �I.a J s/r_,1,��s
r Cr { �; Y �' .K �/ }, 20:LCONICA FA_ �
J' yr/ ._ 1 -• a�' � -1_ - �I- - ,/ter � � �..
\` ``*' � e d ' _ /• l�.• C.l �f'i /.\ "� •„` r .,\ i \� r .a j ;, .'o r"1 i ! �,i' .MY" 1 ..i
c�a .� a L / _!j rl \�., /i1 6` - lJ_/^�- _-` - .1 Qw 'r r; n(`J .♦ / �tA '�_.-.�,_ r-� f,� - \.ry '/,.
• r? a ( F� `^ f\. -.-n:.` �'/�1 _ /� _ � 1 r f`�' Y. _ � l . ! ..� 1 � • '�r .�. �{�; / 1 , 'moi' �• �' �. [It
t_• i+ x _r . ,. � �, `l. s " r. ` ;.. � ... �Y`-�hi -:`= � i" . 7.' , A ��i �•:/��•' :� �. ����. ..'. .^` 1 - { - ,.. � >?,.,'!6i-�
PLAN TERRAIN
SCALE: 1• • 3,000' OBSTRUCTION
450
50:1 APFRl) SLOPE
e0,
W Pj
150
Revision
Approved:
Ely
Date
now
Pm
R. DIXON $PEAS ASSOCIATES. INC.
0
n
J
gg�
W
RUNWAY 13L -31R
=
----
-m� -•
mmmm-
Imak-Mmim
•
0
Designed Drown
TMS JRH
Checked Dole
TMS FE6.21,197E
RUNWAY 13R -31L
PROFILES
SCALE: HORIZ. 1°•2,000'
VERT, 1• • IOd
16•
NOTE: GROUND PROFILES ARE A COMPOSITE soon o S000 6000
OF THE HIGHEST ELEVATIONS ACROSS SCALE IN FEET
THE WIDTH OF THE APPROACH,
SOURCE: U.S.G.S. QUAD. MAPS PHOTOREVISED
1969. SCALE - 1: 24,000
AIRPORT 'ENVIRONS PLAN
CHICO MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
i DRAWING NO.
APPROACH AND CLEAR ZONE PLAN CIC -5
yup kl `,L.
Purl 77 nnnrnnrh nrea
I .
b
1,000
1,750
I .
Precision instrument
1,000
1,750
2,500
2.
Nonprecision instrument for larger than utility with visibility minimums
as low as'/, mi
1,000
1,510
1,700
3.
Nonprecision instrument for larger than utility with visibility minimums
greater than 3/."mi
1,000
1,425
1,700
4.
Visual approach for larger than utility
1,000
1,100
1,000
5.
Nonprecision approach for utility.
500
800
1,000
6.
Visual approach utility
250
450
1,000
SOURCE: Federal Aviation Administration.
Figure IV-- 2
RUNWAY CLEAR ZONES
W
Table IV -10 .
Clear Zone and Part 77 Approach Surface Dimensions
(Dimensions in feet)
Definitions
Visual Runway - runway intended solely for operation of aircraft using visual
approach procedures
Utility Runway - runway constructed for and intended to be used by
propeller -driven aircraft weighing 12,500 lbs or less
Nonprecision Instrument Runway - a runway having instrument approach equipment
that provides horizontal course guidance or.
area type navigation to touchdown
Precision Instrument Runway - a runway having an existing approach procedure
utilizing an Instrument Landing System (ILS)
that provides horizontal and vertical course
guidance to touchdown
Slope - horizontal run in feet: vertical rise in feet (e.g., 20:1)
EXT,
IAI� D
Clear Zone
Slope of
Part 77
Approach Surface
Inner
Outer
Part 77
Inner
Outer
jZpe of Approach
Width
Width
Length
Approach Surface Width
Width
Length
Visual - A
250
450
.1,000
20:1
250
1,250
5,000
Visual - B
1,000
1,100
1,000
20:1
500
19500
5,000
Nonprecision
A
500
800
1,000
20:1
500
2,000
5,000
Nonprecision
Bl'
1,000
1,425
1,700
34:1
500- "
3,500
10,000-
Nonprecision
B2
1,000
1,510
1,700
34:1
1,000
41000
10,000
Precision
1,000
1,750
2,500
50:1/40:1
1,000
16,000
10,000 @ 50:1
40,000 @ 40:1
Legend: A -
utility
runways; B larger than
utility
1 -
visibility minimum greater than 3/4 mile;
2-visibihity minimum
less
then 3/4
mile
_
Definitions
Visual Runway - runway intended solely for operation of aircraft using visual
approach procedures
Utility Runway - runway constructed for and intended to be used by
propeller -driven aircraft weighing 12,500 lbs or less
Nonprecision Instrument Runway - a runway having instrument approach equipment
that provides horizontal course guidance or.
area type navigation to touchdown
Precision Instrument Runway - a runway having an existing approach procedure
utilizing an Instrument Landing System (ILS)
that provides horizontal and vertical course
guidance to touchdown
Slope - horizontal run in feet: vertical rise in feet (e.g., 20:1)
EXT,
IAI� D
Figure IV • 3
AIRPORT SAFETY ZONES USING FAA CLEAR ZONES AND IMAGINARY APPROACH SURFACES
Sacramento Executive Airport
T
Reference 25 86
`� ���
PRECISION INSTRUMENT
RUNWAY
200' 5000'
RUNWAY
0
v
r,�=pix
CZ
INNER
CZ
CZ
I
q
2500' 1
2500
INNER SAFETY ZONE OUTER SAFETY ZONE
VISUAL APPROACH
RUNWAY
TWIN ENGINE AIRCRAFT —
3500' 200'
O
ERC o
LEGEND: CZ = CLEAR ZONE
ETZ = EMERGENCY TOUCHDOWN ZONE
ERC = EXTENDED RUNWAY CENTERLINE
OUTER
INNER
CZ
\\
ZONE.
CZ
2180'
1320'
OUTER
INNER
SAFETY
SAFETY
ZONE.
ZONE
j_
Figure IV • 7
SUGGESTED AIRPORT SAFETY ZONES OFF RUNWAY ENDS
011
RUNWAY
Table IV -13 .
Examples Of Land Use €ui�'elines For Safety Zones
(Source: Various ALUC Plans)
SAFETY AREA DENSITY COVERAGE LAND USE
® Clear Zone No people No structures No residential
o Inner Rectangular Safety Area No more than 10 persons per acre No petroleum or explosives
"at any one time" No above grade power lines
p
- on a regular basis
- "over long periods"
-
No more than 25 persons per acre
at any time
single building (AICUZ)
o Part 77 Approach Surface
No more than 10 people
Maximum structural coverage must be
o Outer Rectangular Safety Area
on an annual average"
less than:
o APZ I
per'acre'.'
-1 20%
No more than 50 persons over long
No more than 25 persons "per acre"
- 25%
Generally same as above.
- at any time"
= 30% a
be less than:
- over long periods"
-•50% (AICUZ)
- "over 24 hours"
- 30%
No more than 50.persons per acre
No more than 200-300 people in a
- for 2 hours"
- at any time"
single building (AICUZ)*
- 75% (AICUZ)
Residential: no more than
a Overflight Zone
- 1 du per 5 acres
1 du per acre
s Traffic Pattern
1 du per 3 acres
Maximum structural
coverage must
- 2 s.f. du per acre
- 2 du per 3 acres
be less than
- ..4 du per gross acre
Loa density residential
No multi -family
No hotels or motels
No restaurants or bars
No schools, hospitals or government
services
No concert halls or auditoriums
No industries involved in flammable
materials or processes
Commercial and industrial generally OK
if density and lot coverage restric-
tions applied
e
- 2 1/2 acre lots, minimum
No more than 100-150 people in a
single building (AICUZ)
.
® Outer Part 77 Approach Surface
No more than 50 persons over long
Maximum structural
coverage must .
Generally same as above.
a APZ II
periods
be less than:
No more than 4 du per acre
- 30%
No more than 200-300 people in a
- 50%
single building (AICUZ)*
- 75% (AICUZ)
a Overflight Zone
No more than 3 du per acre (under
No schools, sports arenas, audi-
s Traffic Pattern
Traffic Pattern)
Maximum structural
coverage must
toriums, or outdoor amphitheaters
be less than
No industries involved with flammable
- 20% (Traffic.Pattern)
materials or processes
Legend
du -dwelling unit(s).
"most recent guidelines do not
specify numbers of persons per building;
however, intent is to
avoid
large concentrations.of persons in a single structure
e
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22.
23
24
25
26
27
28
Recording Requested By:
When Recorded.Mail to:
GRANT OF AVIGATION EASEMENT
Deed made this day. of by I
,(Hereinafter
capacity
referred to as Grantor) to the City of Chico,.a municipal corporation of
the State of California,.(hereinafter referred to as Grantee).
In consideration of good and valuable consideration,.the receipt and
sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, grantors, for -themselves, their
heirs, administrators, executors, successors, and assigns, do hereby grant
and convey to grantee, its successors and assigns,'a perpetual easement and
right-of=way for the unobstructed passage.of all.aircraft in the airspace_
above the property located in the City of Chico,'County of Butte. State of
California described in Exhibit "A" and shown.in Exhibit."B", attached
hereto and by this reference incorporated.herein .(hereinafter called "the
property") from a height of feet above sea level to an infinite
height above the property.
Concomitant -and coextensive with said easement and right-of=way, grantee.
shall have the continuing right to remove all.or any portion of any structure
natural growth or other object on the property which extends into the air
space over the property to a height of more than ' feet above mean
sea level.
Grantee shall have the further right to cause in all airspace above the
surface of the property such noise, vibrations, fumes, dust, fuel particles
and all other effects that may be caused by the operation of aircraft landing
at or taking off from or operating at or on the Chico Municipal Airport; and
grantor does hereby fully waive, remise, and release any right or cause of.
EXHIBIT
1
.2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20.
21
22
23
24
25
26'
27
28
(D o
action which it may now have or which it may have in the future against
grantee, its successors, and assigns, due to such noise, vibrations, fumes,
dust, fuel particles, and all other effects that may be caused or may have
been caused by the operation:ofaircraft landing at, or taking off from, or
operating at or on the Chico Municipal Airport.
Grantors, for themselves, their heirs, administrators, executors,
successors, and assigns, do hereby agree not to cause or permit any structure,
natural growth or other object on the property which extends into --the air
space over the property more than' feet above mean sea level and not
to use or permit the use of the property in such a manner as to create
electrical interference with radio communications between aircraft and -the
Chico Municipal Airport, to make it difficult for flyers to distinguish
between airport lights and other lights, to impair visibility in the
vicinity of the Chico Municipal Airport, or to.otherwise endanger aircraft
landing at or taking off from the Chico Municipal Airport.
This easement and right-of-way shall be appurtenant to the Chico Municipal
Airport and shall be for the benefit of the Grantee and members of the
general public operating aircraft.which land at or take off from the Chico
Municipal Airport.
In witness whereof, grantors have executed this deed on the date first
written above.
Da to
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
-2-
EMIT F
Signature
Title
SAMPLE ONLY
0
AVIGATI.ON EASEMENT
LOT 18 AND `ADJACEP:T LAND OF FOOTHILL
PARK UNIT NO. 1 SUBDIVISION
(Boundary Line Modification No. 35)
All that certain real property situate in the. City .of Chico,
County of Butte, State of California, described as follows:
Lot 18 as shown on that certain map entitled "Foothill Park
Unit No. 1" filed in the office of the County Recorder of the
County ..of Butte, State of California in Book 80 of Maps at page.
23 and a portion of Lots 12, 19, 20, 21, 22, 28,-29, and 30 as
the same are shown on that. certain. map entitled "Map of the ;
Seventeenth Subdivision of the Bidwell Rancho" filed in -the'
office of the County Recorder of the County.of.Butte, State of
California in Book 7 of Maps at page 67 more particularly des-
cribed as follows:
,.Commencing at the Southeast corner -of the aforementioned Foothill
Park Unit No. 1 subdivision;
THENCE North 20039'21" East along the Easterly boundary of Foothill
Park Unit No. 1 also being 'the Easterly right -of -way -line of
Ceres Avenue (formerly North Avenbe) a distance, of .23.70 feet to-
-the True Point of Beginning;
THENCE continuing along said Easterly boundary and right-of-way'
line North 20°39'21" East a distance of 75.42 feet;
THENCE continuing along said Easterly boundary and right-of-way
line along a tangent curve to the left having a' radius of 630.'00
feet through a central angle -of 27136'28" an arc length of 303.56
feet;
THENCE continuing along said'Easterly boundary and right-of-way
line North 6°57'07" West a distance of 926.87 feet;
THENCE continuing along said Easterly boundary and right-of-way
line along a tangent curve to the right 'having a radius of 389.47
feet through a central angle of 13148'16" an arc -length of 93.84
feet to the Northeast corner of the aforementioned Foothill Park
Unit No. 1;
THENCE leaving said Easterly, boundary and right-of-way line
North 83°08'51" West a distance of 60.00 feet to*the Northeast
corner of said Lot 18; -
_ Page 1 of 2
TITBy: M. Qvkv
SAMPLE. ONLY Checked: EXHIBIT "A" Approved:a. c . T
Rev. 3-18-83
In
h\�1Gn1'i0 I:,SEi;i;IJT SA PLE ONLY
�O
THENCE along the Easterly boundary of Lot 18 also -being the
Westerly right-of-way line of Ceres Avenue.(formerly Forth
Avenue} along -a curve to the left having a tangent bearing of
South 6551109" Vest, a radius of 449.47 feet through a central
angle of 13°48'16" an arc length of 108.29 feet;
THENCE continuing along said Easterly boundary and said Westerly
right-of-way line South 6°57'07".East a distance'of 44.64 feet;
THENCE leaving said Easterly line and said T4esterly right-of-way
line along a curve to the right having a radius of 20.00 feet
through a central angle of 90°00',00" an arc length of 31.42 feet,
to a point on the.Southerly line of Lot 18 also being on the
Northerly right-of-way line of Ridgewood Drive;
THENCE. , alo.ng said Southerly line ._a-�d Northerly right-of-w.ay-
line South 83°02'53" West a distance of 160.51 feet;
THENCE continuing along said Southerly line and Northerly right-
of -way line along a curve to the left having a radius of 630.00
feet through a central angle of.14°16153" an arc length of 157.03
feet to the Southwest corner of Lot 18;
THENCE leaving said Southerly line and Northerly right-of-way line
North 21°14100" hest along the Westerly line of -Lot 18 a
distance of 305.00 feet to the 1�orthwest corner of Lot 18;
THENCE North 40°38'26" West along the Northeasterly line of Lot 17
as shown'on the aforementioned map of Foothill Park Unit No. 1
a distance of 175.86 feet to a point on the City of Chico airport
clear zone boundary;
THENCE along said clear zone boundary North 57°21'34" East a dis-
tance of 881.96 feet;
THENCE leaving said clear zone boundary along a curve to the right
having a tangent bearing of South 75°34'47" East a radius of
850.00 feet through a central angle of 68°37'40" an arc length of
1018.11 feet;
THENCE South 6°57'07" East a distance of 1067.46 feet;
THENCE along a tangent curve to the left having a radius of '1250.00
feet through a central angle -of 12°06'32" an arc length of 264.18
feet to a point on the South line of said Lot 30;
THENCE leaving said curve, South 89005'52" West along the South
line of said Lots 30 and 19 a distance of 905.86 feet to the
True Point of -Beginning;
Containing 40.02 acres, more or less.
SAMPLE ONLY
EXHIBIT "A"
Page 2 of 2
By: ti. BYRD
Checked: o.C_L.
oved:
I
Tile ('astern lj(bht-of-
1 ine cor; eSohnds t^
;.he.easterly way line
•Df the proposed, Eaton. Road
extension.
�LOT LINE
EXISTING \ TO BE ADDED
LOT LINE
\ TO BE ELIMINATED
EXISTING LOT LINE
18
TO REMAIN ,
EW 0OD DR'
? 1
-10' �PU.E. BK. 2565
O.R. PG. 636
14 1�
FOOTHILL PARK UNIT NO.I w i
� I
LEGEND
O 000 0 ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER
000 STREET ADDRESS
CITY ZONING
I8 LOT NUMBER,
FOOTHILL PARK UNIT NO. 1
.� LOT NUMBER,
' BIDWELL 17TH SUBDIVISION
LOT LINE,
BIDWELL 17TH SUBDIVISION
-----EASEMENT
CITY OF CHICO
!PLAT TO ACCOMPANY
AVIGATION EASEMENT
Zli 48-2-52 '
w i
Q 11
i
N 1
1 1 1
LASSEN AVE.
20' SS- EASEMENT 1
BK. 2719 O.R. JPG. 307 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
_ 1 1
. 1
/ 1
� 1 t
D OCT' M
n Lu
SAMPLE ONLY'
NOT A SURVEY'- FOR REFERENCE ONLY
PLANNING OFFICE
DRAWN my S.K.M. CHECKED ®T �.S-
DATr 9-16-82 ALE ,1_.300'
APPROVED ®T/�
Cl" PL -N"
it
SAMPLE ONLY
1 ACKNOWLEDGMENT
2 tate of California )
-ss
3 County of Butte )
4
5 On this 71f day -of 198.x, before
6 me,, the undersigned; a Notary Public in and for said State,
7 ersonally appeared V oly" ,)
8 ersonally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactor,
9 vidence) to be the Sic/-r-yuof the
10 corporation that.. executed the within instrument, and known to -me
-11 to be the person -�00 who executed the within instrument on
12 behalf of the corporation named•. therein, and acknowledged to me
13 that such corporation executed the within instrument pursuant to
14 1its by-laws or a resolution of its board of directors.
15
16
17 nano►rls/n►nrwerrrrsrrrrnIan Ross nnu®
ANTHONY G. SYMMES
18 4y, Commission expires: NOTARY PUBLIC — CALIFORNIA
PRINCIPAL OFFICE IN
19. SUTTER COUNTY
/77,9-4,4 . My Commission EzpiresWar. 7, 1984 z
20 ►assure►nnrrrn►►taut►n►mtrial ru►toil er►airs
21
22 SAMPLE ONLY
.23
24
25
26
27 EXHIBIT
28 -
1 0
F1 ER. 1:'_�C,'i;hl�Yt, i•ii�::l• Iv SA`:PLE ONLY
RFD DAVIS, CITY' MANAGER
WNICIPAL bUILD11.4G; CI %IFICATE OF. ACCEPTANCE Ali uONSENT
:RICO, CALIFORNIA
s to certify that the interest in the real property
conveyed by - the GRANT OF AVIGATION EASaIENT_'� . dated March 17 ,.1983
from DELTA DELTA., INC. = - - - - - - - - -
to.the City of Chico, a Municipal Corporation, is hereby accepted by
the undersigned officer on behalf of the City Council .of .the City of
Chico, pursuant to the provisions of Section 2R.04.030 of the Chico
Municipal Code, and the grantee consents to.recordation thereof by
its duly.,authorized officer,
Date • 3--22-83
By
Fr__
ACKNOWLEDGMENTT
STATE OF CALIFOPd\T A )
ss.
COUNTY OF BUTTE )
ico
On this 22nd day of March , 19 83 before
me, Margaret P. Ballinger ,.a rotary Public in and for the
Counfy of Butte, State of California,.personally appeared.
Fred Davis, , known to me (or proved to me on the basis
of satisfactory evidence) to be the City Manager of the Municipal'Cor-
poration described in' the within ,instrument, an3' also known to- me to
be the person who executed the within instrument on behalf of the Muni-
cipal Corporation',therein named, and acknowledged to me that such Muni-
cipal Corporation, to wit, the -CITY OF CHICO, executed -the within
instrument pursuant to the authority granted -by the Chico Municipal Code.
SAMPLE ONLY
a�PC rgayet V. ballinger, Notary --Tub ic,
My Commission -expires in and for the County of Butte,
tnttutttttttt::tttttttt$'rL'8* -�''LOT''zc®n2'5!fornla
7-9, 84 tnZ62
OFFICIAL SEAL'-
_ AVARET P. BALLINSER��QCAU104N11
Table IV -7
Location Of Fatal
U..S. Air Carrier
Accidents (1974-1982)
(Includes Takeoff,
Landing and.Inflight
Phases of Operation)
Location
Number
On Airport
.10
Near Airport
- ..Within 1/4 mile
1.
- Within 1/2 mile
=-
- Within 3/4 mile
T
- Within 1 mile
5
Near Airport Subtotal
7
Within 2 miles
1
Within 3 miles
2
Within 4 miles
2
Within 5 miles
2
Greater. than 5 miles
5
Unknown
3
Total
39
Note: "On Airport" means on
airport property.
Distance from the airport is
*the distance from the
airport boundary.
Table excludes helicopter
accidents and accidents
due to sabotage.
Source: Reference 18
EXHIBIT
80
EXHIBIT 5-1
ACCIDENT STATISTICS
CHICO MUNICIPAL AIRPORT.
ACCIDENT DISTRIBUTIONS I/
—.
Within Two
Within Five
On -Airport
Miles
Miles
Non -Injury Accidents
10
3
.1
Injury Accidents
0
0
0
Fatal Accidents
0
0
1
TOTAL ACCIDENTS
10
3
2
ACCIDENT RATES?-/
1958-1977 Aircraft Operations
1958-1977 Aircraft Hours Flown
` 1958-1977 Aircraft Miles Flown
Accidents per 100,000 Operations
Accidents per 100,000 Flight Hours
Accidents per 1,000,000 Aircraft Miles
875,400
251,700
31,200,000
1.71
5.96
0.48
1� Source: Interviews with airport operators and representatives.
Estimates developed based on extrapolated estimates of activity
levels at Chico for the period 1958 through 1977.
s -a E�H9991 G
Lal
PROPOSED P N� ED NDUSTRIAL PARK U
e 250 acles) h.
s O W u
0
•�LAJ z
e°
°�• °e ® Z
•° 1
00
EATON
Y, ® }
alit X c'
ol
•,ah .., � e 6. ` O` Y
0
w° 3 e
N °0..e•
.. LUPIN • °. ••.° � � PEI
f-- W
rc
Z U • J a.
L„ ir- V
uj
' U-
00.
REVISED FOOTHILL PARK
( SOUTH OF SYCA!"JORE CREEK)'
Area
Breakdown
No.
Size
Use
Density
-1
30 AC
office park
_
2
54
office park
_
3
34
duplex
6.0
6
arterial units
7.5
4
4
21
low•dens resid
6.0
5
20..
low dens resid
6.0
6
53
single family.detached
3.5
7
54
mobile homes
8.0
8
-29
single family detached
3,5-
20 20
multi -family
2.0`
42,-4
arterial units
9
19
townhouse
8.0
10
10
neighborhood commercial
-
11
multi -family
20.0
21
single family detached
.3.5
20
arterial units
7.5
17*
park/school
_
lI
15
multi -family
20.0
21
single family detached
3.5
24.8
arterial
7.5
12
26
townhouse
l8.0
9.3
arterial
7.5
Total
Units
204
44
126
120
186
434
100
-400
318
152
220
74
150
300
74
186
208
70
3,366
- 6 un/AC overall
# This earl: site may be relocated along the eastern property lire including
to the area north of Sycamore Creek to allow for its combination with the
park site on the adacent property at the option of City Council.
EXHIBIT
N,
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIC
DIVISION OF AERONAUTICS
AB 2920: "..'An..:'Analysis. '
Affecting` Airport `Land` 'Us e, 'Commi'ssi'on`. `Legislation ' . - .
The enabling legislation for Airport -Land Use Commissions is found.
in Article 3.5, Sections 21670-21677 of -the Public Utilities. Code..
However, the effects of AB 2920 were not limited to the Public
Utilities Code.' Indeed, perhaps the most -significant change -brought.
about by the legislation was'the addition of Section 65302.3 to the
Government[Code. The'65300 Sections -of the Government Code -pertain
-'to General Plans, the'basic foundations for local -planning.
Since this change'in the law is found outside.the framework of Article
3.5 but represents the main thrust.for achieving compatibility between
an airport.and-its surrounding communities,.it should be looked at
before going on -to the changes affecting the-ALUC directly. Briefly,
Section 65302.3 mandates the following criteria'.for local planning:
"The General Plan and,-any.applicable Specific.Plan'pre-
pared pursuant to Section 65450 shall be consistent with
the plan adopted'or amended pursuant to Section 21675,of
the Public Utilities Code" (emphasis added).
Section 2167.5 is the ALUC Plan.
In the existing legislation there is only -one date specified by which
time an action must occur,. -and that -relates to the.creation of the.
Commission. There are,no deadlines forlany,.other actions specified
in the act.
Section 65302.3(b),.however, does contain dates. The first of these.
specifies that the General .Plan and any applicable Specific Plan shall
be amended no later than December 31, 1983 -to be consistent with the
ALUC Plan as such Plan may provide on July 1, 1983.
In the eventa local legislative body does not concur with the ALUC
plan or determinations of consistency, it may override the Commission
by adopting findings pursuant to revised Section 21676, the so-called
override provision which is often cited as a weakness in the law.
However, the new legislation makes significant changes in this pro-
vision which are discussed later in this paper.
Section 65302:3 is repealed on 1/1/84 (by which time all General Plans
and Specific Plans are to be consistent with the ALUC Plan) and then
reenacted to require that the General Plan and any applicable Specific
Plan shall be amended within 180 days of any amendment to the ALUC Plan.
In essence, by 12/31/83 the General Plan and any applicable Specific
Plan will be consistent with the ALUC Plan and from that day.forward
any amendment to the ALUC Plan will result in an amendment, within
180 days, of the General Plan or Specific Plans. As noted initially,
these requirements will now be found in the Government Code. Don't
look for them in the ALUC legislation --there is no reference to them in
either the existing or amended versions of Article 3.5.
Moving on to Article 3.5 itself, considerable changes were made to
strengthen and clarify the role of the ALUCs. Beginning with Section
21670 the Legislature declared, via the new amendments,.a "public
interest" and a "purpose" for the Commission's task. These two
elements are inserted at the very beginning of the article and state
that:
- 2 -
"(l) It is in the public interest to provide for the
orderly development -of each public -use airport
and the area surrounding such airports in such
a manner, among other things,. to promote the
overall noise standards adopted pursuant to
Section 21669 and prevent the creation of new
noise and safety problems."
"(2) It is the purpose of this article'to protect
public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring
the orderly expansion of airports and the
adoption of land use measures that minimize
the public's exposure to excessive noise and
safety hazards within areas around public
airports to the extent'that such areas are
not already devoted to incompatible uses."
These two amendments are quoted verbatim because despite their innocuous
sounding generalities, any override must make.specific findings that the
proposed action is consistent with these purposes.. A "silent" override
is no longer possible; its rationale must be explicity stated. But
more on the override provision in.a few moments.
Except for paragraph'identifiers, the remainder of Section 21670 is
identical to the existing legislation. That is, the requirement to
create an ALUC and.the makeup of the Commission as determined by what.
is often called the "PUC formula". This formula calls for a seven -
member panel, two representing the cities in the county, two repre-
senting the county, two representing airports within the county and one
representing the general public (the public representative is appointed
the the other six members).
- 3 -
0
The designation of other bodies to function as the ALUC remains
undisturbed. A bit.of cleanup removes the reference to the Public
Utilities Commission in Section 21671 which pertains to ALUC member-
ship (per the P.U.C. formula) for an airport owned by a jurisdiction
not in the same county as the airport (i.e., San Francisco
International Airport).
Section 21674, Powers and Duties of the Commission, is totally
rewritten in the new legislation. Whereas the current statutes lists
five specific "powers and duties", including recommendations for height
restrictions on building near airports, uses of land surrounding airports
to assure safety of air navigation and ..to'achieve by zoning compat-
ible 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...", the
amended section proposes a coordinated/cooperative approach with
local government. Rather than achieving compatibility through zoning
powers, the Commission is directed "...to -assist local agencies in ensur-
ing compatible land uses in the vicinity of..." and ..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...." The latter
task, of course, refers to the purpose of ALUCs as voiced by the
Legislature in Sections 21670(a) and 21670(b).
A new "Power and Duty" directs the Commission "to review the plans,
regulations, and other actions of local agencies and airport operators
pursuant to Section 21676", the statute containing the override
- 4 -
s �►
provisions. By linking this power and duty to the override, it appears
that the Legislature has indicated any'ALUC determination resulting from
its review is final unless overturned per the provisions in Section
21676.
The Legislature specifically prohibited`Commi.ssion jurisdiction over
the operations of -any airport.
No changes were made to Section 21675 which provides some guidelines
for. the ALUC plan as well as specifying that'the Commission may
include in its plan the area -within its jurisdiction surrounding a
military airport.
It should be noted that although the amendments to the powers and duties
section deleted "height restrictions" and "recommendations for the use
of land surrounding airports", the guidelines in Section 21675 indicate
that "the Commission may develop height restrictions on buildings,
may specify.use of land, and may determine building standards, including
soundproofing adjacent to airports--, within the planning area—
For
rea-
For years complaints hay.e.been voiced that,airport land use commissions
have been effectively neutralized in any conflict with a local juris-
diction because of the "silent" override provision, that the "four-
fifths vote" weapon was of dubious.value when faced with the resources
available to aggresive developers and the pressures that could be
brought to bear on local officials. Regardless of the merits in these
criticisms, the fact remains that ALUC decisions have been overriden
time after time. Section 21676, as amended, significantly strengthens
ALUC determinations and expands on the relationship between the
- 5 -
Commission plan and local general plans. First, we'll address the
override and then the new relationship between the plans.
In current law, if the ALUC determines that an action or regulation.
of any public agency within its boundaries is inconsistent with its
plan, it must then hold a hearing to determine if the inconsistency
is "harmful" with respect to the airport and the adjacent area. A
negative determination results in the proposal being returned to the
public agency for another public hearing to reconsider its action.
The public agency proposing the action or regulation, however, may
overrule the Commission after such hearing by a four-fifths vote of
its governing body. Period. No explanation necessary. Just. four-
fifths vote; that was the law until January 1, 1983.
AB 2920 made changes to this procedure. After the ALUC makes a
determination of inconsistency on a proposed action, the local agency
is notified and it (the public agency) will then hold another hearing
to reconsider its plan. The ALUC no longer will hold a hearing to
determine if the proposal is "harmful". It is at this point that the
significant changes enter the picture.
"The local agency may overrule the commission after such
hearing by a two-thirds vote of its governing body if it
makes specific findings that. the proposed action is consis-
tent with the purposes of this article stated in Section. 21670."
Note these changes: the required vote to override is reduced from
four-fifths to two-thirds. Thus it becomes a little less difficult to
round up the necessary votes where a governing body has more than.five
numbers. However, the requirement for specific findings of consistency
with the purposes of the ALUC legislation --to protect the public health,
i
safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion.of airports and
the adoption of land use measures that minimize the publi.c's exposure
to excessive noise and safety � hazards within. areas ar°ound publi.c
airports --introduces the missing elements which made the earlier override
a weakness, as its critics have charged. These two elements are:
rationality and responsibility..
Let me take a moment to explain that the override, in and of iteself,
is not a weakness in the process. -There are ;often alternative ways
to resolving a problem and the override allows for this difference in
viewpoints and interests. The "weakness" perceived by critics in the
current process.is due not to the fact that the governing body may
overrule but due to the fact it may never have.uttered a single word
in the.reconsideration hearing. Its members' vote may have been
influenced by a personal dislike for the chairman of the ALUC, or the
individual presenting the.item.may.be wearing a pink shirt and it's a
Tuesday evening. The genesis of the vote.may or may not have any
relationship to the.issue of land use compatibility. And so -the re
was little basis for a recourse or appeal.
"Specific findings" is something of a legal nature.. Specific findi.ngs
may be the basis for an appeal and adjudicated through the courts.
So at this point AB 29.20 opens up to.public scrutiny the thought -process
or rationality for the override vote.
But the change goes further than just baring the rationality behind
the vote--i•-t insists that the,rationality be consistent with the
purposes of Article 3.5, the same guiding light that is to be followed
by the ALUC. In.essence the amendment is saying:
- 7 .-
■
"You may differ with the ALUC in your solution but your
purpose must: remain. the same." And that purpose is spel.l.ed
out in. the law.
As indicated earlier, a second element--responsibili.ty-- was added
to the process. The requirement for consistency of purpose, of course,
brings into being a sense of responsibility, but the Legislature did
not stop there. A new Section--21678--was added to the code which
makes the cheese a bit more binding. New Section 21678 states that if
a public agency which does not operate the airport in question "over-
rides a Commission's action or recommendation, the operator of such
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." Note that the amendment does not indicate who is
responsible for liability but it does clearly indicate who is not
responsible. No longer will: an airport be faced with liability for
poor land use decisions over which it had.no control.
While the changes in the override are significant in terms of past
practices vis-a-vis ALUCs, they are certainly not punitive, harsh
or biased. It merely requires an agency to act in a rational and
responsible manner.
Although Section 21676 contains the override provision, it isnot
limited to this one item nor are its AB 2920 amendments. Expanding
on the amendment to Government Code Section 65302.3 discussed earlier,
this section sets a date of July 1, 1983 for submittal of the General
Plan to the Commission for consistency determinations and imposes
a two-month. limit (until August 31, 198.3) on the ALUC for. its deter-
minations.
Paragraph (b) of.Section 21676.requires that prior to amending a General
Plan or a Specific Plan, or the adoption or -'approval of a zoning
ordinance or building regulation within the ALUC planning boundary,
the local agency shall first refer the proposed action to the.
Commission for a determination of consistency, subject, of course., to
the override provision. So, even though the power to achieve compati-
bility by zoning has been deleted from the ALUC's powers and duties
(a source of conflict between local governments and airport land use
commissions), AB 2920 does give the Commission the right to have local
government show that its -zoning is consistent with the purpose of
protecting the public health, safety,.and welfare.
Section 21676(c) is the second side of a double-edged sword. Basically,
the same requirements imposed for land use planning in areas around
an airport are extended to an airport in terms of the airport's master.
plan. Prior to modifying its master plan, the airport is required
to refer proposed changes to the Commission, -for a consistency deter-
mination, subject to the override provisions. In Section. 21674 the
statute is careful to indicate that the powers of the Commission
shall'in no way be construed to give the Commission jurisdiction over
th,e operational aspects of any airport.
To avoid bureaucratic delays, the ALUC has 60 days within which time
it must make consistency determinations. Failure to do so deems
the proposal(s) as consistent, which seems fair enough.
9
- 9 -
�7
In.summary, what we will now have for land use planning in the vicinity
of airports is a legislative 1-inkage involving the A.LUC Plan, the
General Plan and the Airport Noise Standards. Thistie-in fills a
void which has preculded effective implementation of the ALUC function.
t
- 10 -
JOINT PLANNING CONFERENCE - June 22, 1983
A Joint Planning Conference was held at 10:00 A.M. in the Conference Room
of the Chico Municipal Airport (CMA) Terminal Building on June 22, 1983.
Chairman Kenkel of the Airport Commission opened the meeting and each person
presented introduced 'himself. Attendance was per the sign-up sheet.
John Pfeifer of the FAA welcomed everyone and noted the FAA holds Joint Planning
Conferences at each commercial activity airport. It uses the information obtained
to: 1) update NAAS - Airport Assistance Plan; 2) evaluate requests for aid; 3)
general discussion of airport growth, problems.
CHICO MUNICIPAL AIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN AND AIRPORT DEVELOPMENTS.. City Manager Davis
explained the CMA Layout,Plan and Airport Devalupments. He pointed out the
recent airport development, current request for aid and future airport development.
He further explained that at the present time the CMA is a non -entitlement or dis-
cretionary airport - this means the City must apply for funds each year. Also that
the funding level has been generally in excess of what the CMA would have been en-
titled to as an erititlement airport. Nally Davis, Chico General Aviation Association,
asked how priorities were established. City Manager Davis stated that the Airport
Commission and the FAA establish the priority items. In addition, meetings of this
type provide an opportunity for the .Airport users and the public to comment and
make suggestions concerning priority projects for AIP funding. John Pfeifer noted
the FAA 'priority system (Matrix.) is based cn the size of the Airport. Every request
received by FAA is rated - discretionary money is available on a nationai basis.
FAA is just now putting the 1984 program in order. information,should be available
within next two months.
Morey Fuqua questioned what criteria or involvement FAA has on tee hangar improve-
ments on airports. John Pfeifer noted the FAA does not have any criteria. FAA can
participate in taxiways only - cannot participate in tee hangar pads or buildings.
Bob Montgomery questioned if there was any problem with the location. Pfeifer re -
Plied the ALP which included the tee hanyar location has been reviewed and approved.
'prey Fuqua - what is the criteria for taxiways to tee hangars. Does a particular
airport have to show a definite need? Pfeifer noted that in the preapplication
there would have to be a justification for the tee hangars. Bill Riesen, CALTRANS -
Division of Aeronautics, noted the CAB has a loan program for the construction of
tee hangars. Presently the interest rate is 8-9a.
NAVA-IDS - Pfeifer noted there will be some updating of existing equipment. City
Manager noted the CMA is qualified for automated weather equipment when it is avail-
able. Dick Williams, Red Bluff A.F. Sector, noted that basically they will be going
to automated remotely controled equipment as it becomes available. City Manager noted
WestAir currently handles weather from the CMN and this is voluntary.
FAA CONTROL TOWER. City i'anager noted that at this time the FAA control tower.
is not on the present list for decommissioning. FAA has agreed to do another
seven day count (within 90 days). FAA has criteria for commissioning and decom-
missioning. FAA recommended decommissioning based on three reporting periods which
fell below their requirements also, the FAA has determined ?acific Express is not
an air carrier. FAA is working to decommission all towers it possible can. Regula-
tions have not been adopted and do not have any information as to when they will be.
There are several items to consider when decommissioning - safety, weather, traffic,
etc.
Joint Planning Conference
Page -2
Steve Woodill, Department of Forestry, questioned what procedure the Forest Service
would have to go through to have FAA provide air traffic control due to the heavy
use during fire season. City Manager Davis noted this would require advance work with
the FAA. He noted the tower could be used immediately as it is still being maintained.
Chairman Kenkel questioned if anything further could be done regarding getting the
Tower re -opened. Pfeifer suggested writing an appeal to the FAA administrator.
City Manager Davis noted the City, local citizens and Congressman Chappie have worked
cooperatively in contacting the FAA, etc. in order to have the tower re -opened.
Gordon Casamajor questioned if the City has any plans to take over the Tourer operation.
City Manager Davis noted that at this time no. The City has contacted private firms
and have several estimates of cost. These usually include two quoted prices - City
provide insurance or the contractor provide insurance. City has received some in-
formation from the FAA that they may have an interim program whereby it would provide
a certain amount of funds to the Agency. If the program becomes available, the City
will apply.
Wally Davis asked about the requirements to provide traffic advisory. Beverly Clark,
Red Bluff Flight Service Station, advised staff is trained to niye airport weather
advisory. FSS expect to be automated by 1987 but FAA is not sur; if Red Bluff %,:ill be
the location for the new base.
GRANT PROGRAMS— Pfeifer advised the old Airport Development Aid Program expir=-d in
979 -Airport Improvement Program (AIP) started in 1982. Further explained the
nationwide program through 1987. City Manager Davis reviewed priorities for Ai= funds.
LAND USE - NOISE, ZONING - Planning Director Lando noted the Butte County Planning
Commission is the Airport Land Use Commission. He briefly explained the Environs
and Specific Plans, Chico Municipal Airport Redevelopment Area, land use, noise
levels and noise contours and aviagation easements. Pfeifer noted the FAA feels the
City has developed more than adequate plans for zoning and noise compatability.
PENDING LEGISLATION - Pfeifer briefly explained procedures on legislation and also
the recently enacted Jobs Bill.
CLOSING REMARKS - City staff and John Pfeifer gave brief closing remarks.
ADJOURNMENT - Chairman Kenkel thanked everyone for attending and presenting their
comments and suggestions.
Qr,f,e Pldnnip9
AtUC '5 q'�.
8`3
�alito'17.��
y�
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF AERONAUTICS _
1120 "N" STREET;.
SACRAMENTO, CA 95814
(916) 322.3090
July 7, 1983
To All Airport Land Use Commissions
Enclosed is a listing of significant comments, questions
and suggestions made at the two recently conducted workshop
sessions and the ABAG/MTC responses as they pertain to the
handbook revision.
Any additional comments are welcomed but they should be
submitted to ABAG/MTC by 7:/15/83.. A cutoff date is necessary
if the handbook -,is to be published by late August.
Sincerely,
MARK F. MISPAGEL, Chief.
Division
/jof Aeronautics
Is Y. , <S`I C.: v. _
Spyridon N. Sideris, Chief
Planning Branch
Enclosure
Bu}}e Co. Planning errs. J -
,JU� 1983 ,
o�o�ate,.
4 '•i
AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING WORKSHOPS SUMMARY
Comment
Handbook should. make clearer how its suggestions
are to be used by ALUCs and local agencies.
Does handbook assume differing standards for
Northern and So.uthern California?
How should ALUCs interpret meaning of "other
actions" in AB 2920 provisions?
Handbook should include statement about what
the Division of Aeronautics. does in granting
permits for schools and State buildings.
Are building permits "other actions"?
What is meant by the term "airport master
plan"? Handbook should indicate greater
guidance about what may be considered in
absence of master plan.
n
Proposed Handbook Revision
Include in Introduction chapter
a statement that the handbook
is furnished to local agencies
as technical assistance --not
as Caltrans' guidelines or
regulations.
No. Handbook's Introduction
will include statement that
recognizes varying conditions
throughout State, and that
local agencies can adopt or
modify suggestions to reflect
local conditions.
Draft handbook recoo.nized that
AB 2920 continued the use of
imprecise language from.old
law This section will be
expanded to include list of
suggestions about what could
constitute "other actions."
These will be included as
among the "other actions"
list.
Probably not. See two comments
above.
This will be done in several
ways including references to
A14CLUC studies, airport layout
plans. Specific revisions will
be made to p. 39, Section VII, P.
227, and p. 231.
_2_
Comment Proposed Handbook Revision
Could redrawing a planning boundary constitute ABAG legal counsel is
a "taking" for which an ALUC might have to reviewing this issue. Handbook
provide compensation? will address if necessary.
When might an ALUC action constitute "inverse See immediately preceding
condemnation"? response.
Handbook should recognize that zoning ordinances Chapter VIII of handbook
do not necessary have to be consistent with local will be revised to reflect
general. plans.of'charter cities. this legal point.
Would ALUC findings of inconsistency, if To the extent that revisions
addressed in -local general plan, create an to the land use element
appeal.process to the State Coastal Commission. must be approved by the
Coastal Commission, there
would be a certain degree
of appeal status. Final
handbook will mention this
point.
Handbook should recognize future changes in The final handbook will
State noise insulati.orL requirements. reference the scheduled
changes in standards.
The handbook should cover the public participation The final handbook will
requirements that should be used by ALUCs in include a brief discussion of
developing plans, or at least mention the Office this, and a mention of the
of Plannirig and.Research guidelines on this OPR guidelines.
point.
The handbook should contain suggestions on how The final handbook will discuss
ALUC plans should treat changes in existing this point, using material from
incompatible uses over time. the Sacramento and San Mateo
ALUC plans.
The handbook should discuss the legal status ABAG legal counsel is reviewing
and enforceability of noise easements. relevent cases. Handbook will
address if necessary.
Handbook should provide guidance about how Handbook will discuss some
airport planning area should be addressed when suggestions in section on
it covers portions of two counties. interagency cooperation.
l
(5) other proposed land uses should be subject to
acceptable noise exposure level guidelines as
recommended by the California State Department
of Health (Exhibit 4-3)..
8.3.2 CLUZ Area IIP
The next level of restriction is applied to areas which would normally
qualify for residential land use if the noise exposure levels constituted
the only constraint to development. There are two additional considera-
tions which have been applied in defining this special category. First,
the land in this category abuts the existing airport south property
boundary. This factor, taken together with the location of the CNEL 65
contour as a second consideration, indicates a for more serious
future land use conflicts than might normally be associated with the
CLUZ II area. The CNEL 65 contour boundary, projected for future flight
operations, extends to the limits of the airport property to the south.
Aniunf_or_eseen increase .in air carrier or business jet traffic a_t CIC
beyond the forecast levels could cause this legal restriction on resi-
dential.land use to extend onto these adjacent parcels. If this situation
were to occur, it would create a clear mandate for future acquisition of
any affected residential properties.
A both r-c„hed
There are two large parcels having boundaries common with the -south
airport property line which are affected by the'CLUZ IIP category. Each .
of these parcels was subdivided for planning purposes when the county
oft #eM
staff created the Interim Zone boundaries. The errrmo-st of these two
parcels is transected by the two branches of Sycamore Creek. These two
creek beds form easily identifiable natural geographic divisions on the
property. It was decided to use these to further refine the CLUZ planning
area in order to avoid a blanket restrictive categorization of the entire
parcel. This has the dual benefit of maintaining practical divisions of
the parcel for planning and reserving a portion of the property for land
8-11
use which would prove more beneficial to the property owner. It is
recommended that the CLUZ IIP boundary be extended to the east to
follow the north branch of Sycamore Creek and continue along the
Interim Zone boundary and the south limit of the two parcels in
question, as illustrated in CIC=13. This allows for maximum pro-
tection of both the CNEL 65 noise exposure area and the flight corridor
concept. Recognizing that most of the Interim Zone property between
the two creek beds falls outside the flight corridor, there is an
argument to be made -for pulling the CLUZ IIP boundary back to the
south branch of Sycamore Creek. This would constitute a "least re-
strictive" option for ultimate zoning of this parcel. The final
decision between this and the recommended "most restrictive" option
should be made locally and should reflect local community attitudes
and priorities.
The second, or westernmost, of the two parcels affected by the CLUZ
IIP category was also subdivided by the county staff in defining the
Interim Zone boundaries. In this case, it is believed that there is -
a clear requirement to use the parcel boundary and the Interim Zone
boundary to define the remainder of the CLUZ IIP area. Again, this
reserves approximately half the total parcel for land uses more bene
ficial to the property owner. The particular characteristics of the
Interim Zone boundary, i.e., the series of ninety degree turns in the
perimeter, result in an intrusion of some small segments of uncon-
strained property into the noise exposure and flight corridor on this
second of two parcels. These small intrusions currently carry an S -R
zoning designation, allowing single family residential development with
a minimum lot size of 8,125 square feet. Any residential land use
would be unacceptable in these small segments of the parcel lying within
the flight corridor. If the existing SR zoning is to be retained for
MWA
r .
remainder of the parcel, it will be necessary to incorporate a more
restrictive zoning on these small segments to protect these areas.
The other (easternmost) parcel has the Interim Zone overlap extending
outside the .flight corridor. This presents the opportunity for a
separate zoning category in the segment outside the Interim Zone area,
consistent with the Interim Zone boundaries.
Recommendations:
roe;:
(1) The parcel segments, within the Interim Zone
boundary, designated as CLUZ IIP areas should
�A zone classification
S_ carr y an A -X (Agricultural) _
r
consistent with the size of parcel.
.. (2) Residential units (one single family) allowed.
under this classification should be restricted
to contiguousproperty outside the CLUZ IIP
area.
(3) Use permits for any uses involving concentrations
of people (parks, golf courses, churches, other
public or quasi -public uses) should not be granted.
8.3.3 CLUZ Area II
All areas falling under the CLUZ II category lie within the Interim Zone
boundaries. The only residential land use specifically excluded under
this category is mobile home park development. This is designed to elim-
inate concentrations of residential un its with potentially unacceptable
outdoor -to -indoor noise reduction characteristics. Other residential
units are subject to' controls over building construction methods and
procedures as specified in existing state law and recommended County
Ordinance.
9
8-13
III
1�
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, TRANSPORT AND HOUSING AGENCY GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION r1
DIVISION OF AERONAUTICS
O 1120 "N" STREET:G.
<.
SACRAMENTO, CA 95814
(916) 322.3090
July 7, 1983
To All Airport Land'Use Commissions
Enclosed. is a.listing of significant comments, questions
and suggestions made at the two recently conducted workshop
sessions and the ABAG/MTC responses as they pertain to the
handbook revision.
Any additional comments are welcomed'but they should be
submitted to ABAG/MTC by 7/15/83. A cutoff date is necessary
if the handbook is to be published by late Auguste
OSincerely,
MARK F. MISPAGE'L, Chief '.
Division of Aeronautics
Spyridon N. Sideris, Chief
Planning Branch
Enclosure
BU}}e Co. Planning Carom•
i�� s: 1983
AIRPORT LAND USE PLANNING; 11ORKSHOPS SU111-IARY
Comment
Handbook should. make clearer how its suggestions
are to.be used by ALUCs and local agencies.
Does handbook assume differing standards for
Northern and Southern California'?
How should ALUCs interpret meaning of "other
actions" in AB 2920 provisions?
Handbook should include statement about what
the Division of Aeronautics does in granting
permits for schools and State buildings.
Are building permits "other actions"?
What is meant by.the term "ai.rport master
plan"? Handbook should indicate greater
guidance about what may.be.considered'in
absence of master plan.
Proposed Handbook Revision
Include in Introduction chaoter
a statement that the handbook
is furnished to local agencies
as technical assistance --not
as Caltrans' guidelines or
regulations.
No. Handbook's Introduction
will include statement that.
recognizes varying conditions
throughout State, and that
local .agencies can adopt or
modify suggestions to reflect
local conditions.
Draft handbook recognized that
AB 2920 continued the use of
imprecise language from.old
law. This section will be
expanded to include list of
suggestions about what could
constitute "other actions."
These will be included as..
among the ".other actions"
list.
Probably not. See two comments
above.
This will be done in several
ways, including references to
ANtLUC studies, airport layout
plans. Specific revisions will
be made to p. 39, Section VII, o.
227, and p. 231.
The handbook should contain suggestions.on how
ALUC plans should treat changes in existing
incompatible uses over time
The handbook should discuss the legal status
and enforceability of noise.easements.
Handbook should provide guidance about how
airport planning area should be addressed when
Q it covers portions of two counties.
The final handbook will discuss
this point, using material from
the Sacramento and San Mateo.
ALUC plans.
ABAG legal counsel is reviewing
relevent cases. Handbook will
address if necessary..
Handbook will discuss some
suggestions in section on
interagency cooperation.
-2 -
Comment
Proposed Handbook Revision
Could redrawing a planning boundary constitute
ABAG legal counsel is
a "taking" for which an ALUC might have'to
reviewing this issue. Handbook
provide compensation?
will address if necessary.
When might an ALUC action constitute "inverse
See immediately preceding
condemnation"?
response:, .
Handbook should recognize that zoning ordinances
Chapter VIII of handbook
do not necessary have to be consistent with local e
will be revised to reflect
general plans of charter cities,
this legal. point.
Would ALUC findings of inconsistency, if
To the extent that revisions
addressed in local general plan, create an
to the land use element.
appeal process to the State Coastal,Commission,
must be approved by the
Coastal Commission, there
would be a certain degree
of appeal status. Final
Q
handbook will mention this
`
Point.
Handbook should recognize future changes in
The final handbook will-
illState
Statenoise insulation. requirements..
reference the scheduled
changes in standards.
The handbook should cover the public participation
The final handbook will
requirements that.should be used by ALUCs in
include.a brief discussion of
developing plans, or at least mention the Office
this, and a mention of the
of Planning and Research guidelines on this
OPR guidelines.
point.
The handbook should contain suggestions.on how
ALUC plans should treat changes in existing
incompatible uses over time
The handbook should discuss the legal status
and enforceability of noise.easements.
Handbook should provide guidance about how
airport planning area should be addressed when
Q it covers portions of two counties.
The final handbook will discuss
this point, using material from
the Sacramento and San Mateo.
ALUC plans.
ABAG legal counsel is reviewing
relevent cases. Handbook will
address if necessary..
Handbook will discuss some
suggestions in section on
interagency cooperation.
0
:r
�. .-tar'-^'(.'--•= --_•-- � - r
TO: --BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OFFICES
RE: NOTICE OF PREPARATION
ti
August 22, 1983
au+te Co. Planning CQUIM
AUG 24 1983
0"il►e, CalitQW4
This Notice of Preparation is being forwarded to you for the
proposed Chico Municipal Airport Redevelopment Project Area
which will include approximately 1,074 acres as defined by
the new project boundaries.
If and when the settlement agreement is finalized, this notice
will be moot and no E.I.R. will be prepared.
•f
4007- 5J60Z.--- T'• -/re,>
' r
- - i
August 22, 1983
NOTICE OF PREPARATION
The City ofChico will be the Lead Agency and will prepare'an environmental impact
report for the following project.
Applicant:
Project Description:
Project Location:
Probable Impacts:
City of Chico
P. O. Box 3420
Chico, California 95927
Formation of the Chico Municipal Airport
Redevelopment Project Area, consisting of
property commonly known as the Chico
Municipal Airport and environs,.for the
purpose of facilitating and encouraging
development within blighted and marginally
developed areas.
Approximately 1,074 acres located within
the City limits and generally located north
of Eaton Road, west of Cohasset Road, and
a portion'of the industrial park (see
attached map):
No significant adverse impacts have been
identified.
A copy of the Initial Study is not included:
An environmental impact report is being drafted as a result of a determination of the
City of Chico Planning Director. This Notice of Preparation is being sent as a
courtesy.to public agencies, groups, and persons who may wish to'comment on the scope
and content of the draft environmental impact report for the.above noted project.
Please respond in writing to the City of Chico Planning Office, P. 0. Box 3420, Chico,
Cal ifornia 95927-3420, be_fo.r_e__.Se:pt_:_6_;_19.83? If we do not receive any comments
by this date, we will assume there are none.
Any further information on this project, all files, applications,. maps, etc. are
available at the City of Chico Planning Office, 5th and Main Streets, Chico, California,
or call (916) 895-4851.,j`
omas J. LaKdo, Planning uirector
TJL:pb
CP 10621
ENV: 83-40
T/F 8/24/83
RICrARDSON SPRINGS, CALIF IA
RICHARDSON SPRINGS QUADRAWE
CALIFORNIA-BUTTE CO.
7.5 MINUTE SERIES �...., -. , '.: .,`..... �`� :• `
-•-� .: ��$�; a 27�^;� : ,n' '
4408 1Nir�dirtil[: ~' u is
. � n i ..•
— :.. �/
r it
440 o n __ -
,
D.
3.. B 34�....
\
...Lu
4406
G y 1�0
Tex'er ' cti `40
I: � ':� ✓�'-:. ���9 � ,,� �eM 249'. `• ,\• .� T. 22 N. I I R ,r(
j OR....
- ..........PRi AIR
V ...
2 � \
47'30" .........'.... ` . `'
4405
20
BM_201
:.'.
` ...� :
• o I ,
....... _ -
•
i /s3
WN 2
2 N I ct iI ?,
to
J J
........
.
W p I • i is ��_ i':
ted •................�.. ....:......... _ •;�- \\\
•�• �r• 'mss `::�
I.•• ,
. • ..1'. • EATON /80 ROAD .•... ••• I�'
RAN
C ♦ t`;
4103
bow
UAIN ; Vz�I'
•`. o\✓ �2 0 _ _;I RM. 203 �.
} 0
STATE OF CALIFORNIA— BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY J GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Governor.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF AERONAUTICS
1120 "N" STREET
.e
SACRAMENTO, CA 95814
(916) 322.3090
15u"e Co. @1an4in9
C:omn' .
February io, 1983 FEB 1b �gB3
Qrov►lle. Ga1►totnla
To: Airport Land Use Commissions:
With funds provided by a Federal Aviation Administration planning
grant, the Division of Aeronautics, in conjunction with the
Metropolitan Transportation Commission and the.Association of
Bay Area Governments, has initiated a study to develop a hand-
book with guidelines for preparing ALUC plans and implementing.
AB 2920. The two-phase., six-month study will address problems,
concerns, procedures and methodologies involving ALUC activities.
Phase I will produce a draft copy of the handbook by mid-May.
During this period various commissionswill be contacted by either:
Chris Brittle, Senior Planner
Metropolitan Transportation Commission -
Hotel Claremont
Berkeley., CA .94705
(415)849-3223
or
Doug Detling, Legislative Affairs Officer
Association of Bay Area Governments
Hotel -Claremont
Berkeley, CA 9470.5
(415)841-9730*
These contacts will ,be aimed at information gathering and discussion
of situations and concerns expressed by ALUCs in the,Division's
October 1982 Survey Questionnaire.
Following circulation of the draft handbook, the Division/MTC/ABAG
will kick off Phase II with seminars in northern and southern
California to refine the final contents of the handbook. These
seminars will be held in the latter part of May.
I would, however, urge you to contact either Chris, Doug or: me to
provide any input. you may have as early as possible. In addition,
those ALUCs that did not include land use plans in their October.
survey response should send copies to either the Division of.
Aeronautics or MTC/ABAG so we may.have,a broader base for evaluations.
0 1,
Airport. Land Use Commissions "
Page 2
February 10, 1983
An outline for the study tasks will.be forwarded to you in the
immediate future.
Sincerely,
MARK F. MISPAGEL,• Chief
Division of Aeronautics
,5oA S'13-vl-to . . .
Spyridon N. Sideris, Chief
Planning Branch
Enclosure
STATE OF CALIFORNIA —BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF AERONAUTICS
1120"N" STREET
SACRAMENTO, CA 9581A
(916) 322-3090
August 23,:19.83
.�Utte Co. Planning Comm.
AUG 2 4 1983
Oroville, California
To: Airport Land Use Commissions
Funding For ALUC Plans
As you will recall from -earlier correspondence-, the Division
of Aeronautics applied:to the Feder.al Aviation Administration
for a Planning Grant to be used to fund.the development of
airport land use plans by Airport Land'Use Commissions. The
enclosed letter.from the Federal Aviation Administration's
Western-Pacific.Regional office informed us that`our
application..."cannot be given favorable consideration"..
The Division will continue to pursue this funding issue at
both the Federal and State level. We welcome any suggestions
.you may have with respect to funding sources or.courses of
action .we might explore in this effort.
Sincerely,
MARK F. MISPAGEL, Chief
Division of Aeronautics
Spyridon N. Sideris, Chief
Planning Branch
Enclosure
U.S. Department
of Transportation
Federal Aviation
Administration
AUG 9 1983
Mr. Mark F. Mispagel
Chief, Division of Aeronautics
Department of Transportation
1120 "N" Street
Sacramento, California 95814
-Dear Mr Mis anal•
V
Western -Pacific Region
R�C�IV�D
AUG 1 1 683, .
Colt
.rots pivisio
Of Aer n
°Routics
P.O. Box 92007
Wodclway Postal Center
Los Angeles, CA 90009 '
This is in reference to your planning grant application for the development
of specific land use plans for airports in California.
One of the conditions for using Airport Improvement Program funds for off
airport land -use plans requires the involvement of the land-us.e agency and
the airport sponsor. Your application is not clear on this condition and
therefore, cannot be given favorable consideration.
We support the objectives of Assembly Bill 2920, and would like to meet.with
you and other appropriate governmental representatives to discuss procedures
through which we can assist.in the development of appropriate land use plans
for airports in the state.
If you have any questions,. please contact me at (213) 536-6250.
in erely,
nil
Gerald M. Dallas, Manager
Planning and Programming Branch
'
1TILPTIES CODE
PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE § 21676
full term of four
cause by the
Amendments:
19770 Amendment: (1) Added "which shall conform as nearly as possible to the provisions applicable to
"be
out
3f office of each
hearings conducted by local agency formation commissions"; (2) deleted advisory only and shall^
after "commission shall'; and (3) deleted "or jurisdiction over any matters relating to zoning or land.
ich his term is t0
use authority of any city or county" after "any airport."
.shall be filled for
1975 Amendment: Added subd (5).
ginally, appointed.
9 Cal Jur 3d Aviation § 41.
1 Of the t:Omm1S-
55 Ops Atty Gen 284 (airport land use commissions not authorized to formulate comprehensive land use
plans for area surrounding federal military airport).
zpervisors.
'eping of minutes,' - f
§ 21675. Formulation of comprehensive land use plan
provided by' the
(a) The commission shall formulate a comprehensive land use plan that will
commission shall::.
provide for the orderly growth of each public airport and.the area surround-
ing the. airport within the jurisdiction of the commission, and will safeguard
shall " : -
'the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of the airport and
commission
;ndent contractor-
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
hairman or at the
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 soundproofing adjacent to airports,
within the planning area.
. h" after "if any" in the
(b) The commission "may include, within its plan formulated pursuant; to
after "minutes," in the
subdivision (a), the area within the jurisdiction' of the commission surround- _ .
aragraph; and (4) added
ing any federal military airport. for all the purposes. specified in subdivision ,
_
(a). This subdivision 'does not give the commission any . jurisdiction or
authority over.the territory or operations of any military airport.
(c) The planning boundaries shall be established by the commission after
.es, subject to the
hearing and consultation with' the involved agencies.
.
Added by Stats 1970 ch 1182 § 5; Amended Stats 1973 ch 844 § 1, eirective September 25, 1973; Stats
-ning the need for
1980 ch 725 §11; Stats 1981 ch 714 § 389.
Amendments
rounding airports
1973 Amendment: Added (1) "(a)";:(2) subd (b); and (3) "(c)" .
1980 Amendment: (1) Deleted the former third sentence which read: "This plan shall not be inconsistent
;oinmerce.
with the State Master Airport Plan.'; and (2) amended subd (b) by (a) adding the comma after "may
n subdivisions (1)
include"; and (b) substituting the comma for "the" before "area within".
advisory Only to
1981 Aruendment: Routine code maintenance. '
55 Ops Atty Gen 294 (airport land use commissions not authorized to formulate comprehensive land use
orderly and fair
--plans for area surrounding.federal military airport).. '.
as possible to the
agency formation',.'-,
§21676. Proposals of public agencies: Hearing on inconsistent plans:. Re-*
hearing by proposing agency: Overruling commission. finding: Changes in
icinity of all new
plans
it that the land in
Each public agency having representation on the commission shall assist in
npatible uses, and. 4
the development of an area plan. All such plans must be filed with the
lstruction in such
commission for its approval. If in the determination of the commission, an
nay from time to
action or regulation of any public agency within the boundaries of the area
. k
plan is inconsistent with .the commission -plan, then, the commission shall
trued to the
hold a hearing -to determine whether or not the proposed action is in the
.give
<<
best interest of the airport and the adjacent area. If it is determined that the
action would be harmful, then the public agency shall be notified and the
+
' 13 Pub W Codej
13 Pub Util Code] 23
W,�
§ 21676. PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE
PUBLIC L. .
public agency shall have another. hearing to reconsider its action: The public
account" ft
agency proposing the action .or .regulation,. , however, may overrule . the
Fund" in s
article, fun
commission after such hearing by a four-fifths vote of its governing body.
for "Fund.:'
Each public agency owning any, airport within the boundaries. -of the area
plan shall file :any. substantive change. in development plans with the
§ 21681. i
such plans are inconsistent with the comis-
commission for its approval. If sm
sion plan, then the public agency shall benotified and shall ' have another
For the pi
• heang to reconsider' its action. Such public agency, however, may overrule
ri
(a) "Own
the commission by a four-fifths vote of its governing body. _
fee simpl .
Added by Stats 1970 ch, 1162 § 6:otherwise
.
55 Ops Atty Gen 284 (airport land use commissions not authorized to formulate comprehensive land use..
control of
plans for area surrounding federal miLtary airport).
of the pi
approved
§ 21677. Marin County: Majority vote
other tha
Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 21676. which* require a four-fifths,
airport as
vote of the governing body of a. public agency in order • overrule a .
.(b) "Mat
.to
.`commission, any. public agency in the 'County .of Marin may overrule the
which do .
Marin County Airport .Land Use Commission by a, majority vote of its •
agencies
governing body.
funds: Th
Added Stats 1975 ch 934 § 1.
(c) "Gen
Note --Stats 1975 ch 934 also provides: § 2. The Legislature finds and declares that this bill is necessary
and milia
since special facts and circumstances applicable to the County of Marin, and not generally applicable ..
(d) "Pub.'
make the accomplishment of this purpose impossible by any general law. Such facts and circumstances
ity, port -
include. the relatively few airports within the County of Marin and the relatively. few public agencies
subdivisi(. .
affected by such airports. The Legislature further finds and declares that the County of Marin is the only
law,
d,
(e) "Pubi
county involved, that the purpose of this act is impossible to accomplish .by any general and that
f.
-special legislation applicable only to the County of Marin is therefore necessary.. '.
and the
(f) "A.rp
ARTICLE 4
provemer.
merit, for
Aeronautics Fund
(1) Land
[The heading of Article 4, consisting of §§ 21680-21688, was amended, to read as above by
aircraft if .
Stats 1970 ch 1417. § 4:]
(2) Grad
§ 21680. Continuation of fund in State Treasury; Appropriations
of runwa, ;
• (a) The Aeronautics Fund is hereby continued inexistence as the Aeronau-
(3) Cons'
tics Account in the State Transportation Fund. The moneys deposited to the
'are
(.�) -Acqu
credit .of the account continuously appropriated for expenditure by the'
the Fedel .
board and the department as provided in this article.. ..
(5) Acqu
(b) Any reference in ..any law or - -regulation-. to the Airport Assistance
be reason
Revolving'. Fund, the Airport Assistance. Fund, or the Aeronautics Fund..'..
an aircra:
shall'be deemed to refer to the Aeronautics Account in the State Transpor=
"fund"
(6) Rem(
tation Fund. As used in this article, shall be deemed to refer to the
Aeronautics Account in the State Transportation Fund.
(7) Origi
Amended'by Stats 1970 ch:14.17 § 5; Stats 1971.cb 1243 § 2, -operative January 1,..1972.
defined it
Amendments:
(8) Origi
1970 Amendment:. (1) Added "(a)"; (2) substituted "Aeronautics" for "Airport Assistance Revolving"; _
together
(3) added "existence in" after "continued in'; and (4) added subd (b).
(9) Origi
1971 Amendment: (1) Substituted "as" for "in" in first sentence; (2) substituted."Aeronautics Account in
an S1rCr$.
the State Transportation Fund" for "State Treasury"; (3) substituted "deposited to the credit of the
rt
..
24 . .(3 Pub'UGl Code)
l3 Pub
rte. M�'t -, �-�n •_�, 4,L.-��.i:. ,� ��j� � .�i ��' �'� .J
LAN D O F N A URA ! VV CA L i FI A i; v o E A U T1'
PLANNING COMMISSION
7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE - OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965
PHONE: 534-4601
August 24,..1983,
The Honorable Jane Dolan
Chair,.Butte County Board of Supervisors
25 County Center Drive
Oroville, CA 95965
Dear Ms. Dolan,
This letter is being sent to you on -behalf of the Butte County
Airport Land Use Commission (BC-ALUC)' regarding the actions
taken at its August 18th meeting.
Pursuant to Section 21676 of the,Public Utilities Code, the
Butte County Airport Land Use Commission finds the Butte County's
General Plan to be inconsistent.with the Chico Airport Environs
Plan, the adopted BC-ALUC Plan for the Chico Municipal Airport.
This situation is brought about largely because the County's
Chico Area Land Use Plan.incorporates the City of Chico's land
use designations for.the incorporated area south of the main
runway.
Specifically, the-BC-ALUC finds as follows':
Find pursuant to Section 21676 of the Public Utilities
Code that the County of Butte's General Plan is not
consistent with the Airport Environs Plan, the adopted
ALUC Plan for the Chico Airport for the following
reasons:
a. The land use designations described
in the General Plan, Land Use Element,
Chico Area Land Use Plan conflict with
the Airport Environs Plan policies for
CLUZ.II, IIP-, III and IV which call for
-
residential development with one acre
per dwelling densities; and
b. The Noise Element does not reflect the
noise exposure.contours contained in
the Airport -Environs Plan.
Jane Dolan
August 24, 1983
Page 2
The -staff report prepared for the BC-ALUC, a copy of which is
attached, provides additional background material on the law
and the current situation.
Rather than amend the Chico Airport Environs Plan to accommodate
the land use plans of the City of Chico, the BC-ALUC wants to
study the issues and plans more closely. Ultimately the BC-ALUC
will make'a recommendation on the best means to resolve the '
conflict and carryout their responsibilities. .The BC-ALUC has
scheduled another meeting on October 6th to discuss this matter
withrepresentatives of the City of Chico Planning Department.
If you have any questions please contact the Planning.Department.
Sincerely,
B. A. Kircher
Director of Planning
Charlie woods
Senior Planner
CW/sk
Attachment:
Staff Report of August 12 to BC-ALUC
cc:' Karl Ory, Mayor City .of Chico
Del Simsien, County Counsel
Tom,Lando., Planning Director
BC-ALUC
LAND OF NATU°A,L V:' r A I T;i A.ND 2c U T
PLAN NI NG COMMI SSI ON
1 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965
PHONE: 53-4501
August 24, 1983
Tom Lando, Planning Director
City of Chico
P.O. Box 3420—
Chico,
420Chico, CA 95926
Re: Minutes and Staff Report from the®Adoption of Chico
Airport Environs Plan by BC-ALUC.
Dear Tom Lando,
Attached are the copies you requested. The item was
introduced to ALUC (the Planning Commission) in early
1979 by the Staff report of January 26, 1983. After
several continued discussions the Planning Commission
(ALUC) adopted the Environs Plan at its April 4, 1979.
meeting. We will be sending you a copy of the letter
to Mayor Ory.
If you have any other questions..plea.se call.
Sincerely,
B. A. Kircher
Director of Planning
OF
Charlie Woods
Senior Planner
CW/sk, .
Attachments.
Butte,®a
-- ...
421
IAND OF. NATURAL 'V1JEALTH A1\1D BEAUTY,
PLANNING COMMISSION
7 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE OROVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95965
PHONE: 534-4601
August 24, 1983
The. Honorable Karl Ory
'Mayor City of Chico
.P,O.''Box 3420
Chico, CA 95927
Dear Mayor Ory
This letter is being sent to you on behalf of the Butte County
Airport Land Use Commission (BC-ALUC) regarding the actions
taken at its August 18th meeting.
Pursuant to Section 21676 of the Public Utilities Code, the.
Butte County Airport Land Use Commission finds the City of
-Chico's General Plan.and Northeast Chico Specific Plan to be.
inconsistent with the Chico Airport Environs Plan, the .adopted
BC.-ALUC Plan for the Chico Municipal.Airport.
.Specifically, the BC-ALUC finds as. follows
Find pursuant to Section 21676 of the Public Utilities
Code that the City of Chico's General Plan and Northeast
Chico Specific Plans are not consistent with the Airport
Environs Plan, the adopted ALUC Plan for the Chico.
Airport for the following reasons:
.a.. The land use designations described in
the General Plan, Land Use Element and
Northeast Chico Specific Plan conflict
with the Airport Environs -Plan policies
for CLUZ II, IIP,; III and IV which call
for residential development with one
acre. per dwelling densities; and
b. The Noise Element does not reflect the
noise exposure contours contained in the
Airport Environs Plan.
Karl dry
August 24, 1983
Page 2
Additional. information on the law, required findings and
nature of the inconsistency is. contained in the staff report
prepared by the.department for the Commission. A copy of which
is attached.
Rather than amend the Chico Airport Environs Plan to reconcile
the conflict, the BC-ALUC opted to study the'City's General Plan
and Northeast Specific Plan. The purpose of this study is to
ensure that long-term safety, noise exposure and land use com-
patibility issues are adequately addressed.' In this regard.it
was suggested that a representative of the City's Planning Depart-
ment be available for the October 6th meeting when this matter
will be discussed again
If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact this
office.
Sincerely,.
B.- A. Kircher
Director of Planning
Charlie Woods
Senior Planner
Cw/sk
Attachment:
Staff Report of August 12 to BC-ALUC
cc: Jane Dolan, Chair, Butte County Board of Supervisors
Del Simsien, County.Counsel •,
Tom Lando, Planning Director, City of Chico
BC-ALUC
�.Depna manl-nl filealoymnQ
To: Butte County Airport Land Use Commission (BC-ALUC)
FROM: .Planning Department
SUBJEcT: Consistency Findings - Chico, File No.: ALUC
DATE: August 12, 1983
BACKGROUND:
AB 2920 enacted last year changed the lass regarding the operation,
authority, and responsibilities of County ALUC's. The new law
more clearly relates the role of ALUC to the planning process.
In general each jurisdiction's general, specific, and airport master
plans must be consistent with the adopted ALUC Airport Plan for
their.respective airport areas. When not found consistent,
Cities/Counties can either amend the plans to make them consistent
or overrule the ALUC by a two-thirds vote if it makes specific
findings. Attached is a copy of AB 2920 and an outline and review
of the law as it relates to Butte County.,
To accommodate the transition from the more individual project
oriented review to the broader review process reflected in the
new law, an initialization period is provided for. All jurisdi-
citions.must submit their general and specific plans to the ALUC
by July"lst. Each ALUC must make its findings on consistency by
August 31 st. In late June the City of Chico submitted their
General Plan and Northeast Chico Specific Plan foi a review and
finding under the law.
The Chico Airport Environs Plan, prepared jointly'by the City of
Chico and County of Butte was adopted by ALUC as its airport plan-
for
lanfor the Chico Airport. A review of these documents indicates that
the City of Chico's General Plan,p.articularly the Land Use Element,
Land Use Map and Northeast Chico Specific Plan are not consistent
with the Airport Environs Plan. The Commercial, Medium and Low
Density Residential designations conflict with the standards/policies
of compatible land use zones (CLUZ): II, IIP, III and IV: The
Airport Environs Plan's recommendations were made when SR -1 zoning
was possible. However, this option has been largely eliminated by
the General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan and Northeast Sewer
District.
An examination of the Draft Airport Land Use Planning Handbook,
prepared for the Division of Aeronautics,,indicates that while the
City's pians are in conflict with the Airport Environs Plan, they.
do not themselves appear.to conflict with or represent a significant
hazard to air traffic or persons on the ground. As a -result the
Airport Environs Plan should be amended to reflect the relative
hazards of the first 5,000 and second 5,000 -feet' of the approach
surface. The City of Chico has acquired the most hazardous and.
restrictive first 5,000 feet while a prohibition on public assemblages
BC-ALUC �--�
Consistency 1Fi� �_eAgs
Page -2-
August 12, 1983
should be adequate for this purpose. Other relatively minor'
inconsistencies exist"between the two documents such as small differ-
ences in.the noise contours, etc: These can more easily be re-
conciled by amendments to the appropriate Element.of the General
Plan. As the review and status outlin,'indicates, the Butte County
ALUC has not adopted an airport land use plan for the Oroville
Airport. Commissioners Schrader and Behunin have done considerable
research on the issue including the development of noise contours
(attached) which will enable the Commission and staff to prepare
a plan for Oroville. The City planning staff has proposed and
the City's Airport Commission adopted an amendment to the*City's
Airport Environs Plan to.overcome the inconsistency. A copy is
attached. The City's.amendment, does not automatically change the
ALUC Environs Plan. Such an amendment would have to be.-consi'dered'
separately by ALUC.
ALUC's responsibilities extend to the County as well as the City of
Chico. Because the County's Chico Area Land Use Plan reflects the
City's land use designations in the same area, the same findings
are applicable. Likewise there"are minor differences between the ALUC
Airport Environs Plan and other Elements of the County's General Plan
which can be resolved through future amendment..
Neither the County nor the City staff is aware of any loss of
status, funding or other punative outcome ..ofa finding of incon-
sistency.In fact the period between July 1, 1983 -and December
31, 198 i
.3 is'established to reconcile local plans with those of the
ALUC.
RE COMIMEN DATI ON
1. Find pursuant to Section 21676 of the Public Utilities Code
that the -City of Chico's General Plan and Northeast Chico
Specific Plans are not consistent with the Airport Environs
Plan, the adopted ALUC plan for the Chico Airport for -the
following reasons:
a. The land use designations described in the General Plan,
Land Use Element and Northeast Chico Specific Plan conflict
with the* Airport. Environs Plan policies for CLUZ II ,, IIP,
III and IV which call for residential development with_one
acre per dwelling densities; and
b. The Noise Element does not reflect the noise exposure
contours contained in the Airport Environs Plan.
2. Find pursuant to Section 21676 of the Public Utilities Code
that the County of Butte's General Plan is not consistent with
the Airport Environs Plan, the adopted ALUC plan for the Chico
Airport for the following reasons:
BC-ALUC
= r Co:zsistercy Fil(Das 1- �
Page -3-
August 12, 1983
a. The land use.designations described in the General
Plan, Land Use Element,.Chico Area Land Use Plan
conflict with the Airport Environs. Plan policies for
CLUZ II, IIP, III and IV which all for residential
development with one acme per dwelling densities; and
b. The Noise Element does not reflect the noise exposure
contours contained in the Airport Environs Plan.
3. These findings shall be transmitted to the respective legislative
bodies of the City of Chico and County of Butte pursuant to
Section 21676 of the Public Utilities Code.
4. While making these findings of inconsistency the Butte County'
.ALUC believes that duties of the ALUC and the public health,
safety and welfare can best be served by.the amendment of the
Airport Environs Plan along.the lines described in the.staff
report. Furthermore itis the intent.of the Butte County ALUC
to initiate and complete such anamendment within a resonable
time.
ATTACHMENTS:
AB 2920 (1982)
Chico Airport Environs Plan Amendment Adopted by.the.Chico
Airport Commission
Outline and Review of Law Relating to Airport Land Use Commission
- Noise Contours Overlayed on Draft Oroville Area Land Use Plan
CDW:1r
�CITYoi CHICO
INC 1971
f`LANNING OFFI
Fill') and k4am S!ree,S.
PC) Bo, 342,'
C••1rc^. CA 9592=
1916; 95�_-<351
ATS$ 459-4851
Bettye Kircher, Planning Director
County of Butte
7 County Center Drive
Oroville, California 95965
RE: Airport Environs,Plan
O
August 2, 1983
"a Co. F anrl;n C=,, -a.
AU G 12 1883
OroYale, C.a;fQgaq
Dear Bettye:
Attached is a copy of Minute Order #5-83 adopted by the City -of Chico Airport
Commission on July 26, 1983. The Minute Order recommends that the Butte County
Planning Commission, acting as the Airport .Land Use Commission, amend the Airport
Environs Plan to delete specific density or zoning restrictions specified in the
Compatible Land Use Zones and to replace these with a general prohibition on the
development of .places of .public assembly such as hospitals, churches and schools.
It should be clearly understood that in making this recommendation, the Airport
Commission is still quite concerned about land use compatibility surrounding the
Chico Municipal Airport. In part, this recommendation is a recognition that the
City owns the clear zone north and south of the airport, which includes the first
mile of the approach zone.
The recommendation made by the Airport Commission .for the change in the Airport
Environs Plan is entirely consistent with federal and state.law and the guidelines
recommended for the implementation of AB 2920 by the Department of 7.ransportation,
Division of Aeronautics, which were released on June 6, 1983.- .
I wduld hope that the Butte County Planning Commission, acting as'Airport
Land Use Commission, could move quickly to amend the Airport Environs Plan. The.
City .is quite concerned in taking all the steps necessary to meet the timing
requirements. sett up by, AB 2920 and would be ,happy to assist you in any way possible.
I appreciate, the cooperation received to date, including the analysis work
done by your staff.. If.I can be of.further assistance, please let me know.
_ Sincerely,
Thomas J. 1fando
Planning Director
TJL : pb
CP 10630
A-BC-3',_
cc.:. Airport Cormission W/o.. attachment
CM Info
DPW
Attachment
;CITY ®F CHIC
SUBJECT: Revision to Airport
Minor hlodification
Zones
AIRPORT" COMIM
Environs Plan
to Compatible Land Use
NUTS ORDS
MM JUTE ORDER NO.: 5-83
FILE: 10537/A -C -OD -2.1
A -C -ST -10
EXPLANATION - PROVIDED BY Tom Lando
1. The Airport Environs Plan was prepared for the City and County in August of 1978 to act
as a guideline for the development of the area surrounding the airport. The Butte County
Planning Commission, acting as the Airport Land Use Commission, adopted this Plan to serve
as their guide in reviewing future development.
2. The Airport Environs Plan establishes a series of Compatible Land Use zones under and
adjacent to the flight corridor which are significantly more restrictive than the require-
ments of existing law or FAA or State guidelines.
3. Recently adopted law (AB 2920) requires consistency between the Airport Plan adopted by
the Butte County Airport Land Use Commission and the City's General Plan.
4. There are currently minor inconsistencies between the Airport Environs Plan and the General
P1an:Staff is recommending these'be eliminated through an amendment to the Airport Environs
Plan which would delete specific density restrictions in each of the Compatible Land Use
zones and replace those restrictions with a general restriction prohibiting the development
of places of public assembly such as hospitals, churches and schools.
5. This in no way, affects the safety of either the residents or the pilots and it should be.
kept in mind, that the City actually has an ownership the .first mile at both the
north jnd sout� p of the runwa� In a�dit on avpi.ltion,easemeeUts are rgu�tade.in
connec ion wi a Neve opment a jacent o he fir o as is compliance wi
Administrative Code Title 25 which limits interior noise levels in new homes.
RECOI D, ENDATION
Recommend that the Butte County Planning'Commission acting as the Airport Land Use
ommission amend the Airport Environs Plan to delete specific density or zoning restrictions
cnarifiPH in the Compatible Land Use zones and realace these with a general prohibition
on the development of places of public assembly such as hospitals, churches and schools.
COMMISSION ACTION MEETING OF JULY 26 1983
hereby certify that the Airport Commission took the following action on this
Minute Order at its (XX) Regular ( ) Adjourned Regular ( ) Special Meeting
held 7-26-83
(X) Approved ( ) Disapproved ( ) Other (explain below)
red Davis Cit M
CERTIFICATION
I hereb certify that the above is a .true and .correct_ copy of the original
Minute 6rder on file in the Office of the City Manager
DISTRIBUTION
?reliminary:
Final:
Files - 2
_
Planning Director - 1
t
Inter-Departm'in, I Memorandum
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Bob Gaiser, Planning
SUBJECT: Chico Municipal Airport Environs Plan
DATE: January 26, 1979
Enclosed are copies of the final draft of the "Chico
Municipal Airport Environs Plan" prepared for the County
and the City of Chico by R. Dixon Speas Associates, Inc.
of Los Angeles. This memorandum is intended to expedite
the Commission's understanding and use of this complex
document by rcviewing the bac?-,ground of the project,
summarizing the report's findings and recommendations, and
proposing possible courses of action.
Background: In P.-Iarch of 1977 the Board of Supervisors, in
considering a private rezone proposal southeast of the
airport, found the rezone EIR insufficient because the
aircraft noise factor had not been adequately considered..
The Board then adopted an interim zoning scheme for the
airport area and directed staff to '.'formulate an EIR. on the
entire area". In April staff contacted several consultants
about the project and invited two qualified firms to present
their proposals at a joint meeting of the Chico Planning
Commission, County Planning Commission. ani Chico Airport
Commission. Staff then submitted a complete work program_
to the two firms and presented their bids to the Board of
Supervisors. The Board approved a $3,600 contract with R.
Dixon Speas Associates to conduct a study of existing noise
factors only,. requested the City to fund half, and directed
staff to perform the other research and.planning activities
outlined in the original work: program.
In July of 1977 preliminary findings of the noise study were
presented ai.a public meeting* at the airport and guided the
Board's extension of "A-40" interim zoning within reduced
boundaries close to the existing., CNEL 60 contour line.
The Commission discussed study findings and airport area zoning
in August and. September but further action at that time was
halted by the Board's October 18 agreement to participate with
the City of Chico in a joint application for a federal planning
grant for a compre}iensive "airport environs plan". A grant
for $27,800 was approved by the Federal Aviation Administration
and R. Dixon Speas Associates was again hired to prepare the
complete plan. Speas began work on the study in February 1974 and
presented preliminary findings in June at a well -attended public
meeting in Chico.. Copies of the final draft -were received by
staff in late December 1978.
1
Planning Commission
Page -2-
Facilities and Operations: Operations of. Chico Municipal
Airport are directed by a 5 -member Chico Airport Commission and
administered by the Chico City r,Ianager. The main runway is
6,722 feet long and is used by all larger aircraft and 700 of
general aviation flights. It is parallelled to.the west by a
3,000 foot runway.used by small general aviation aircraft.
Hughes Airwest is the only air carrier at present with four
daily flights by DC -9s, two each to San Francisco and Klamath
Falls. 6S% of Airwest takeoffs and landings use the south end
of the main runway; the flight path for these operations extends
out .from the runway to Coh asset Road and. then turns eastward
toward the Hooker Oah area. Norcal and Eureka Aero both provide
scheduled air taxi service to nearby cities with twin -engine
propeller aircraft. Cleneral aviation totals include crop
dusters, small jet flights by Japan .airlines pilot trainees,
frequent landings by miscellaneous military aircraft, and
seasonal operation of fire bomrers by Pacific Aero Union for
the State Division of. Forestry.
Total aircraft landings and tal:oof.fs are forecast to increase
from 91,000 in 1977 to bett.;een 270,000 and 372,000 in 1998,
representing a groirth of 5.3% to 6.11% annually. Air carrier
movements alone are predicted to grow from 1.85 to 3.1% annually
and may include the use of Larger Boeing 727 type jets Juring
the next 20 years.
Noise: Typical background noise levels around the airport range
rom 30 to 40 decibels during the day and 27 to 39 decibels at
night. Aircraft noise levels are related to the size, power and
number of engines, the type of operation and the distance to the
listener. The most significant aircraft noise exposures result
from the 8 daily Airwest operations, the occasional Janan Airlines,
training flights and the seasonal fire bomber f.li� hts; noise
levels can reach 95 to 97 decibels on the ground. during DC -9
operations. Areas under small aircraft can experience peak sound
levels of 56 to 62 decibels, comparable to the level of auto
traffic on Cohasset Road from 10n feet away.
As required by State legislation and. the California Department
of Transportation, aircraft noise exposures are expressed as
Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) values. The CNEL method.
combines all noise levels over an average 24-hour day in.to a
single number reflecting typical community response to multiple
noise exposures. Accurate data on flight operations and actual
noise measurements is fed into a comnuterized model which multiplies
noise levels during the evening (7-1.0 n.m.) by 3 an.d. those during
the night (10 p.m. - 7 a.m.) by 10 to account for the increased
annoyance from uch noises.
The 1977 contours for CNEL 55, 60, 65 and 70 are s.'iown on drawing
C1C-2 on Page 4-1.0, and 1994 CNEL contours are shown on drawing
C1C-3 on Page 4-26. CNEL contours are determined largely by
operations of DC -9s and other major aircraft and therefore parallel
`4W
Planning Commission
Page -3-
the main runway, extend .further to the south than the north,
and bulge around the north end of the runway -here aircraft
runup their engines before takeoff. Because many factors ran
cause actual noise exposure levels to vary widely, the CNEL
contours are shown by a band approximately 200 feet in width.
Sound levels for typical noise environments are shown on pages
4-35 and 4-42.
Exhibit 4-4 on page 4-33 shows State Health Department criteria
for compatibility of land uses with CNEL, values. These guide-
lines intend to provide the community with a generally acceptable
noise environment and were included in the Noise.F.lement adopted
by the County in March 1977. The guidelines state that low
density residential uses are normally acceptable in noise
environments up to CNEL 60, multiple family residential un to
CNEL 65, commercial.up to CNEL 70, and industrial and agricultural
up to CNEL 75. In addition, airport noise standards were adopted
into the California Administrative Code in 1970 which established
CNEL 65 as the maximum "level of noise acceptable to a reasonable
person residing in the vicinity of an airport"; by 1946 no dwell-
ings shall be included in CNEL, 65 contours around California
airports'.
The impact of aircraft noise can also be mitigated by a variety
of modifications in aircraft operating procedures,airfield
development or airport operation, but most of the alternatives
.are either not necessary or effective at Chico Municipal .Airport'
or are not supported by the Federal Aviation Administration.
The City should actively encourage all pilots to use the designat-
ed approach and departure corridors. Because of the relatively
undeveloped nature of the approach areas, Speas recommends
prevention of incompatible encroachments rather than remedial
modifications of operating procedures. One noise abatement
option which may be desirable in the future is to limit jet
operations to daytime hours (7 a.m. - 7 p.m.). Design of nearby
residential development should consiJer the noise reduction
potential of earth berms and enhancement of natural terrain
barriers.
Safety: In order to preserve unobstructed airspace around
airports, FAA regulations outline criteria for 5 different imagin-
ary surfaces or 3-dimensional spaces which should not be occupied
by buildings or other obstructions. The only penetrations at
present are 3 ridges and. a power transmission line located 1 1/2
miles east of the airport. The imaginary stir -faces described
should be incorporated into city and county height restriction
ordinances to prevent further manmade obstructions. A sample
height restriction ordinance is presented in Appendix B of the
report which would require use permits or variances for any
proposed new obstructions.
0
Planning Commission
Page -4-
u *y
An examination of aircraft accident causes and locations revealed
that accident rates associated with the Chico Airport are sub-
stantially lower than national averages. Proposed height
restriction ordinances and noise zone criteria should he adequate
to protect flight operations and the general public without any
additional safety restrictions.
Existing Setting and Development
Soils in the area originated from a variety of sedimentary deposits
and volcanic flows,andmost are poorly suited for septic tanks.
Vegetation consists mostly of grasses with a few trees and
shrubs. The airport region is a relatively sparse wildlife
habitat. Slope is very gradual from northeast to southwest with
the exception of several small lava flows just north of the
airport and the foothill ridges 1 1/2 miles to the east. Several
archaeological sites have been identified in the area, and it is
probable that more are located along the seasonal streams.
The City of Chico owned 1100 acres of airport -related property
before 1977 and is in the process of buying S00 more acres for
clear zones in extended approach areas; all of the projected
CNEL 65 -plus area will be on city property when acquisition is
completed soon. City land just east of the terminal and runway
has been developed into an industrial parr: with several manufact-
uring and processing operations.
Unincorporated land around the airport is largely devoted to
cattle grazing with af.ew other isolated agricultural uses.
Some scattered single-family residences within the CNEL 55
contour are located along Hicks Lane, Keefer Road. and just north
of the airport industrial area. The most intensive group of
uses is located along Eaton Road, Lassen Avenue and Cohasset Road
near their intersections; development here includes several small -
lot subdivisions, apartments, a mobile home park, 4 churches and
a variety of businesses. The projected CNEL _SS contour also
includes quite a few single-family residencesand apartment units
along the north ends of North,Ceres, Floral, Mariposa, Ceanothus,
Marigold and Cactus Avenues.
California Water Service Company provides domestic water service
to the airport and to the urban development south of Sycamore
Creek. Sewage disposal is by septic tanks in all unincorporated
areas; only the airport has a community sewer system. Portions
of the major seasonal drainage channels, stud Creek and Sycamore
Creek, have been widened and leveed by the Army Corps of
Engineers.
4
�AA Planning Commission
Page -5-
0
Land Use Recommendations: Noise exposure conditions and. safety
considerations a ong Me_ aircraft flight tracks were combined
with legislative requirements to .form Compatible Land Use Zone
(CLUZ) areas The boundaries of CLUZ areas are shown on drawing
CIC -13 on Page 3-5, the "Land Use Compatibility Map", and
follow parcel boundaries except where Interim Zoning boundaries
have split parcels already.
The criteria presented For each CLUZ area in Section 8 are summariz-
ed on the last page of this memo. Speas' recommendations attempt
to preserve as much freedom as possible for property-oi,glers with-
out jeopardizing airport operations. Residences need be totally
prohibited only on airport property and in the adjacent 160 acres
in the CLUZ IIP area southeast of the airport.. In the other
CLUZ areas (II, III, IV & V) recommended residential densities
range from one dwelling unit per 40 acres to one single-family
residence per small urban -size lot. Single mobile homes and
mobile home parks.are both excluded from all CLUZ areas, either
specifically or by the recommended zoning. New residences in the
CLUZ II and III areas should be constructed to provide an indoor
noise level of CNEL 45 or less.
Commercial and industrial uses may be permitt-ed in all CLUZ, areas
but restaurants, offices and lodging require an indoor noise level
of CNEL 45 or less in the CLUZ I and IIP areas. Speas also rec-
commends that use permits .for public, quasi-public.or recreational
uses not be granted in the CLUZ IIP area and part of CLUZ II. In
the CLUZ I and IIP areas other proposed uses.should be subject to
the State IIealth Department noise guidelines described on Page 3
of this memo.
In the CLTJZ areas permitting residences Speas has also recommended
that the County initiate several procedures which would notify
builders and property buyers of the noise and flight corridor
contraints presented in this report. A Map of Record displaying
noise and safety factors should be filed with the County Recorder's
Office; this map would then become part of the title report pre-
pared for prospective buyers during the escrow period. This in-
formation could also be disclosed through such optional methods as
deed attachments, flight clearance easements, or statement in public
reports for subdivisions. The Chico Board of.. Realtors is encouraged
to voluntarily disclose the findings.in this report. Speas further
suggests that the County distribute guidelines for noise reduction
methods to building permit applicants developing property in the
CLUZ IV and V areas.
Speas recommends that the General Plans of Butte County and the
City of Chico both be modified. to implement the recommendations
contained herein and that County zoning then be changed in conformance
with CLUZ criteria and the revised General Plan. Likewise, the
provision of utility lines and other capital improvements should be
managed so as not to encourage incompatible development.
5
J
Planning Commission
Page -6-
Staff
6-
Staff Comments: Pursuant to requirements of the Public Utilities
Code, t e Board of Supervisors designated the Planning Commission
as Butte County's "Airport Land Use Commission" in 1970. By that
designation the Commission was legally mandated to formulate a
long-range land use.plan .for the area surrounding each public
airport in the county; each plan may include land use specifica-
tions, height restrictions on buildings, building standards, and
soundproofing.
The Speas report represents not only the partial fulfillment of.
the County's responsibilities for airport land use planning
but also the climax of many years of discussion between the
County and the City about the need to protect the airport's
operations by preventing incompatible development nearby. In
order to translate the report's recommendations into enforcable
plans and ordinances, it is obvious that further discussions
will be -required in the cooperative spirit which led to a joint
grant application .and the preparation of a comprehensive report.
The first step for all involved is to reviei;i the document care-
fully and to evaluate the intent and feasibility of Speas'
recommendations. At your next meeting staff will present the
highlights of the report and will be Prepared to answer c;uestions
about its findings and proposals. Subjects which ire believe
merit serious consideration include: the meaning of CNEL values,
State noise guidelines, height restriction ordinances, disclosure
methods, noise insulation, residential densities and the scone
of the planning area.
Recognizing the possible delays in the adoption of the Land Use
Element Text, we propose a careful step-by-step approach to the
completion of the land use plan :for the airport area. Each of
the above subjects must be understood and related issues resolved
before we move on. The Commission must then evaluate the future
development of this area from a comprehensive viewpoint, consider-
ing not only the existing setting, development and facilities but
also the City's plans for sewers acid annexation, industrial needs,
housing* demand, transportation systems, and the many other concerns
of the new Land Use element and entire General Plan. Proposals for
Land Use Plan map changes and rezoning can then be based on a
complete application of adopted policies, site designation criteria
and zoning factors.
s
IV. CNEL 55-60 IN CORRIDOR
a. SR -1 .zoning.
b. No mobile home parks.
c. Map of Record L voluntary disclosure of constraints.
d. Distribute noise reduction guidelines to builders.
V CNEL 55-60 OUT OF CORRIDOR
a. SR -1 zoning on suh-area S,
b. SR zoning otherwise. -
c. No development in flight corridors.
d. Distribute noise reduction guidelines to builders. i �
CRITERIA FOR
COMPATIBLE LAND USE ZONES
1.
CNEL 65 OR
HIGHER: AIRPORT PROPERTYjr^^//�1 r
VV1 1 h� �. ��
,� i�f s
a. No rest
b. CNEL 45
ential evelopment.
indoors for offices,commercial and lodging. G
Own
C. Other uses
subject .to :State Health guidelines../
C
ZahI�q
IIP.
CNEL 60-65
IN CORRIDOR: PROTECTED AREA.
a. No rest
entra-1 development - agricultural zoning.
b. No public,quasi-public
or recreation with people concentrations.
C. CNEL 4S
d. Other
indoors f..ar offices, commercial and lodging. �o
State
uses
subject to Health•guidelines.
Cam-
D►' h�
I I .
CNEL 60-6S
IN CORRIDOR
a. CNEL 4S
in oors -or all residences.
b. No mobile
home par}:s . R
C. Map of
Record ; voluntary disclosure of constrain•ts.
Sub-'a'rea X.
SR -3 zoning F, no public or quasi -public uses.
Sub -area Y.
SR -1 zoning F, public or quasi -public allowed.
Sub -area Z.
SR -1 zoning ; no public or 'quasi -public uses.
III.
CNEL 60-65
OUT OF CORRIDOR
a. CNEL 4S
indoors Eor single-family residences.
b. Map,of
Record F, voluntary disclosure of constraints.
Sub -area J.
,SR -1. zoning.
Sub -area K.
SR -1 zoning.
Sub -area L.
SR- zoning , no residences on east side.?
Sub -area M..
A-40 zoning F7 no residences on east side.?
Sub -area N.
M4- or P�I- zoning F, no residences.?
IV. CNEL 55-60 IN CORRIDOR
a. SR -1 .zoning.
b. No mobile home parks.
c. Map of Record L voluntary disclosure of constraints.
d. Distribute noise reduction guidelines to builders.
V CNEL 55-60 OUT OF CORRIDOR
a. SR -1 zoning on suh-area S,
b. SR zoning otherwise. -
c. No development in flight corridors.
d. Distribute noise reduction guidelines to builders. i �