Marina Municipal Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan
Monterey County Airport Land Use Commissio n Adopted November 18, 1996
Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission P.O. Box 1208 Salinas, CA 9390 2 (408) 755-5025
The Monterey Airport Land Use Commission adopted th e Comprehensive Land Use Plan for the Marina Municipal Airport on November 18, 1996
Commissioners Nick Ford, Chairman Jack Barlic h Sherman Blandin Eugene Cabalun a Mari Antonia Dudley Theodore Larso n Carl Potter
Proxies to Commissioners Jim Chappel l Denis Hor n Dave Mackie Blaine Michaeli s Joseph Pope
Project Staff
Robert Slimmon, Jr.: Secretary to the Commission and Director of Monterey County Plannin g & Building Inspectio n
William Hopkins : Staff to the Commission and Project Manager
Gale Foss: Computer Graphic s
Jim DiMaggio : Graphics
Patricia Hernandez: Administrative Support
Table of Contents
Chapter One-Introduction 3
PURPOSE AND AUTHORIZATION 3 Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission 4 PLAN ORGANIZATION 4 PLAN ADOPTION PROCESS 4
Chapter Two-Marina Municipal Airport 5
LOCATION AND SETTING 5 HISTORY 5 EXISTING LAND USE 5 PROPOSED LAND USES OF SURROUNDING LAND 6 AIRPORT INFRAS'1'RUCTURE 7 AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS 7
Chapter Three-Compatibility Issues 1 1
1. NOISE 1 1 Noise Impacts at the Marina Municipal Airport 1 1 2. SAFETY 12 Safety Issues at Marina Airport 1 3 3. FLIGHT HAZARDS 14 Flight Hazards at the Marina Airport 14 Ground Hazards 1 4 Height Hazards 1 4 4. OVERFLIGHT IMPACTS 1 5 Overflight Impacts at the Marina Airport 1 5
Chapter Four-Plan Policies 1 6
1 . GENERAL POLICIES 1 6 1 .1 Planning Area 1 6 1
1 .2 Types of Impacts Addressed 1 6 1 .3 Review Criteria 76 1 .4 Review Process 1 8 2. COMPATIBILITY POLICIES 1 8 2.1 Noise Compatibility Policies 1 8 2.2 Safety Compatibility Policies 1 9 2.3 Flight Hazard Policies 20 2.4 Overflight Policies 21 2.5 Armstrong Ranch Planning Area Policies 2 1 APPENDICES A-Methods of Calculating Density and Building Occupanc y B-Runway Approach Protection Standards (FAA Regulations, Part 77 ) C-List of Sources Used
List of Figures
Figure 2- 1 Regional Location fp 5 Figure 2-2 Airport Location fp 5 Figure 2-3 Airport Land Use Plan fp 5 Figure 2-4 Surrounding Land Use fp 6 Figure 2-5 Airport Layout Plan fp 6 Figure 3-1 Effects of Noise on People fp 1 1 Figure 4-1 Airport Planning Area fp 1 5 Figure 4-2 Projected Noise Contours (2010) fp 1 9 Figure 4-3 FAR Part 77 Imaginary Surfaces fp 20 Figure 4-4 Airport Safety Zones fp 20 Figure 4-5 Armstrong Ranch Constraints Map fp 20 Figure 4-6 Armstrong Ranch Conceptual Land Uses fp 20
List of Tables
Table 2-1 Airport Specifications p . 9 Table 2-2 Aviation Activity Forecast p . 1 0 Table 4-1 Noise Policies p . 22 Table 4-2 Safety Policies p . 23-24
2 Chapter One-Introductio n
PURPOSE AND AUTHORIZATION
The California State Aeronautics Act (Public Utility Code section 21670 et seq.) provides for the creation of local Airport Land Use Commissions (ALUCs) and conveys on ALUCs th e responsibility for preparing Comprehensive Land Use Plans (CLUPs) for all public use airport s within their jurisdiction . The purpose of a Comprehensive Land Use Plan is to provide for the orderly development of new land uses surrounding public use airports while at the same time protecting the health, safety, and welfare of persons who live and work around the airport.
Toward that goal this plan adopts a comprehensive set of policies designed to ensure that propose d development surrounding the Marina Municipal Airport will be compatible with the noise, safety , and overflight impacts created by the operation of the airport . In addition, by adopting policies with regard to flight hazards, the plan ensures that such development will not cause a hazard t o aircraft in flight.
California Public Utilities Code (Section 21670 et seq .) sets forth the requirements for the establishment of Airport Land Use Commissions and provides the following statement of purpos e for their creation:
"It is in the public interest to provide for the orderly development of each public use airport __ in this state and the area surrounding these airports so as to promote the overall goals an d objectives of the California airport noise standards adopted pursuant to Section 21669 an d to prevent the creation of new noise and safety problems . "
"It is the purpose of this article to protect public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring th e orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize th e public's exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses . "
In order to achieve the above stated purpose, the law requires each ALUC to prepare a comprehensive land use plan for each public use airport within its jurisdiction as follows :
"Each commission shall formulate a comprehensive land use plan that will provide for th e orderly growth of each public airport and the area surrounding the airport within the jurisdiction of the commission, and will safeguard the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of the airport and the public in general. " (RUC Section 21675)
3 Monterey County Airport Land Use Commissio n The Monterey County ALUC is made up of seven members . Two members are appointed by th e Board of Supervisors, two members by the mayors selection committee, two members selected b y the managers of the public airports in the county, and one member of the general public selected by the other six commissioners . Each commissioner is required to appoint a proxy to provide for alternate representation. Although the County provides administrative and staff support to th e ALUC, the Commission is its own entity; decisions made by the Commission are not appealabl e although they may be overruled by a two-thirds vote of the affected jurisdiction, which is the Marina City Council or Monterey County Board of Supervisors in the case of this CLUP . In addition to preparing CLUPs, the ALUC is responsible for reviewing general plan amendments and rezonings within airport planning areas, as well amendments to airport master plans . By agreement with the local jurisdiction, the ALUC may also review other land use actions related to aviatio n impacts and/or safety .
PLAN ORGANIZATION
This CLUP'is organized into four chapters. Chapter One provides the purpose and goals of the plan as well as a dèscription of the enabling legislation and the organization of the plan . Chapter Two uses data from the Marina Airport Master Plan to describe the airport infrastructure, propose d improvements, and predicted flight activity through the year 2015 . By state law the policies in a comprehensive land use plan must be based on the airport master plan. Chapter Two also provides a short history of the Marina Municipal Airport. Chapter Three explains each of.the airport compatibility issues addressed by this plan (noise, safety, flight hazards, . and overflight impacts) , and addresses the specific compatibility issues that exist at the Marina Airport. Chapter Four contains the Plan policies that, once implemented, will ensure that new development will b e compatible with airport operations . This plan also contains an appendix containing a copy o f Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) part 77 height restrictions, a procedure for calculating person s per acre density, and a list of sources used in preparing the plan .
PLAN ADOPTION PROCESS
The Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission developed this plan through a series of publi c meetings held in late 1995 and early 1996 . The Commission adopted the plan on November 18 , 1996 . After plan adoption, the commission must review the General Plans of both the City o f Marina and the County of Monterey to determine the consistency of those Plans with the newl y adopted CLUP. If a General Plan is found to be inconsistent with the adopted CLUP, the Count y and/or City then have 180 days to either amend their General Plan or overrule the ALUC' s adoption of the CLUP by a two-thirds vote of the City Council and/or Board of Supervisors . The overrule must be accompanied by findings based on substantial evidence that the City Council or Board of Supervisors action is consistent with the purpose of the State Aeronautics Act (PU C section 21676) .
4
Chapter Two-Marina Municipal Airport
LOCATION AND SETTIN G
The Marina Municipal Airport is an 845 .5 acre site located within the City of Marina approximately two miles from the shore of Monterey Bay and approximately 10 miles north of th e City of Monterey . (See Figure 2-1 and 2-2) . Development on the site consists of one 3,000 foo t runway and several aviation related structures . The topography of the site ranges from flat to stee p bluffs sloping down toward the Salinas River . The dominant vegetation type is annual grassland. The property contains several species of plant and animal life identified as threatened, rare, o r endangered. In order to protect these biological resources, approximately 167 acres has been se t aside as a habitat protection area .
HISTORY
The airport is on the site of the previous Fritschze Army Air Field which served as the airport for Fort Ord, the former U .S. Army base which was substantially downsized in 1994 as a result of post- Cold War defense cutbacks . The airfield had been used by the Army since the 1950's, primarily for helicopter training although it was also used by the U .S. Air Force and the U .S. Navy fôr approach training.' The conversion of the airfield to civilian use is one of the key elements of the Initial Fort Ord Base Reuse Plan, approved in April, 1993 by Monterey County and local cities workin g together as the Fort Ord Reuse Group. In August, 1995 the 845 .5 acre site was officially conveyed by the Army to the City of Marina for use as a municipal airfield.
EXISTING LAND USE
The "Airport Land Use Plan" (Figure 2-3), contained in the Master Plan for the Airport, shows th e airport property to consist of 845 .5 acres. The proposed use of the property is as follows :
Aviation 401 .8 Acres Non-Aviation (Revenue Producing) 265 .0 Acres Habitat Protection 167.1 Acres FAA Lease 3 .5 Acres Highway Easement 8.1 . Acres TOTAL 845.5 Acres
Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments,Regional Airport System Plan; August, 1995; p. 2
'Phase II : General Aviation Feasibility/Airport Master Plan Study for Fritzsche Field, Marina, CA ; November 8 , 1993; prepared for Fort Ord Economic Development Authority by P & D Aviatio n
5 Figure 2-1
MARINA MUNICIPAL AIRPORT COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLA N
P&D ,AVIATIO N AMENDED BY MO . CO . PLANNING & BUILDING INSP . Figure 2- 2
MARINA MUNICIPAL AIRPOR T COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLA N
P&D AVIATIO N AMENDED 'BY MO . CO . PLANNING & BUILDING INSP .
USE SUMMAR Y
- 401.8 Acre s NUE PRODUCING - 265 .0 Acre s - 167 .1 Acre s • 3.5 Acre s 8.1 Acres AG3*li STHOa e ▪ QL icCO4i 845.5 Acre s
FAA DISCLAIME R The contents do not necessarily reFlect the ofF;C;aI views or pol ;Cy of the FAA. Acceptance of this plan by the FAA does not ;n any ma y Constitute o commitment on the port of th e United States to participate in any development depicted there nor does it indicate that the proposed development is environmentally acceptable in accordance with appropriat e puolic lows .
River Salinas %7/f///,vr•ii
AVIATION HIGHWAY EASEMENT
anew r...n OM roITCP .ous t NON-AVIATION -- REVENUE PRODUCIN G
VWUVtW*SUT1 * - i ` \ F /i *♦ / /6WL OFOWUVIIW\ /// / 2- 3 uaodEat ()\
■ . . l \\* / QuL-aCN.Ml= u:. t rsn•:•,.*•1* .49#:Flfcti9 • * . w d*ll \* PF`/iSFO rnttTnllP(Ivlnlly RNnRT iA1 *tl! *::JJJ A LL* DLF© t tt/* 4l c pa[ NO EWE PENSON _ no AR. MONTEREY COUNTY AIRPORT LANDUSE COMMISSIO N MAMA BIUWCIIPAL AIRTOK T MARINA CALIFORNIA AIRPORT LAND USE PLA N APPROVED HY: N -tom & FUTURE SURROUNDING USE S 1x na..on wm,w,Pm ♦IO Awlw■ o w ar. CC5■GHCO : Y.IY * CH[0%M... SHCCT 3 or 3 atAYwh now * DATE: rEE.u..Y 199.
p .. Figure 2-4 shows the existing uses of the land surrounding the airport property . With the exception of the existing improvements on the airport property itself, the site is completely surrounded b y open space and/or agricultural uses. Approximately 3,500 feet south of the runway is Reservation Road, a major traffic artery for the City of Marina . The portion of Reservation Road within th e Marina City limits is zoned commercial and there are several existing commercial uses along the road. South of Reservation Road are residential areas in the City of Marina . Approximately two miles to the north of the end existing runway is the Marina landfill which provides solid wast e disposal services for the Monterey Peninsula.
PROPOSED SURROUNDING LAND USE S
There are three locations surrounding the airport that could see large scale development within th e next 15 years:
1. The master plan designates a 265 acre area of the airport property to the north and east of the runway as "Non-aviation Revenue Producing"_ Anticipated uses in thi s area include commercial, industrial, and resort/recreation developments as well as corporate aviation uses. Most of this area is located in the Traffic Pattern Zone (TPZ).
2. The Armstrong Ranch is a 2,000 acre property located northwest of the airport, portions of which are directly under the departure/approach path of runway 29/11 . Approximately 322 acres of the Armstrong Ranch are within Marina's city limits. However, the majority of the property is currently unincorporated and is i n agricultural production or is used as grazing land although it is within Marina' s Sphere of Influence . The Monterey County General Plan designates the property as Permanent Grazing, 40 acres/unit with an Urban Reserve Overlay . The Marina General Plan calls for the area to be developed as a residential subdivision with associated commercial uses . This CLUP incorporates a conceptual land use plan for the Armstrong Ranch which shows the type, location, and density of uses both within and outside the Airport Planning Area boundary .
3 . As part of the Fort Ord Base conversion process, the University of California has accepted land adjacent to the airport to develop the UC Monterey Bay Education , Science, and Technology Center (UC MBEST Center) . The Center is "envisioned to be a multi-institutional center for science, technology, education, and policy .. ." ?
'Draft Environmental Assessment/EnvironmentalImpact Report: City of Marina, California, Airport Plans Permits , U.C. Technology Center, Airport Area General Plan and Zoning Amendments and Redevelopment Plan ; Prepared for the City of Marina and the Federal Aviation Administration ;February 21, 199 5
6
■ PUBLIC ASSEMBL Y CHURCHE S
RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL S LAND FILL
Figure 2-4 Existing Surrounding Land Uses DRAWN BY MONTEREY COUNT Y PLANNING & BUILDING INSPECTIO N
A. N FAA DISCLAIME R The contents do not necessarily reflect th e ofFical views or policy of the FAA. Acceptanc e of this plan by the FAA does not In any ra y cansbtutc a commitment on the part of the United States to participate N any development depicted therein nor- does it indicate that the proposed development is environmentally acceptable in accordance with appropriate - public laws.
IaIwl wt. wi fra 'arr.,. Owl app rrIe am nano! .oAO
✓
- t-
/ / u4 // I . t icy
/ *9 u,i`é / // sa*mm*-*ir..r=•**:srialr,*.c*cr*I.,imra€** CGJLIF ® oifI47L•h7* e,I*.., „ * i* O . DATE REVISION R y IAw 8 MONTEREY COUNTY AIRPORT LANDUSE COMMISSIO N YARNA AIIUINRCNP AL AIRPORT MARINA CALIFORNIA
APPROVER ETV: AIRPORT LAYOUT PLA N mew ac aao.c at>
I N
aCSIGii YR. OICOa37.L11Y SMELT I Of 3 0w.wlt 1011 DATE FEHRINRT 17. l IR A
The property is located in the vicinity of the Blanco Road/Reservation Road intersection and is proposed to consist of 437 acres of developed land and 60 5, acres of natural habitat lands (open space) .4 The northern portion of this site lies in the Runway Protection and Approach Protection Zones . The Master Plan Study prepared for the project proposes Outdoor Recreation/Playfields for this area .5
AIRPORT INFRASTRUCTURE
The Airport Master Plan proposes a three stage capital improvement program for the airport .
Stage One (1995-1999) consists of the basic improvements that are necessary to operate the airfiel d in a safe and efficient manner . These include security lighting and fencing, approach slope indicators, and the replacement of fuel storage and distribution facilities .
Stage Two (2000-2004) proposes an expansion of the existing runway from 3,000' X 75' to 5,240 ' X 100', associated taxiway and lighting improvements, the installation of an instrument landin g system using either conventional or satellite based (GPS) technology, and expanded renovation o f existing structures and utilities .
Stage Three (2005-2009) proposes construction of an access road to the north side of the airport and development of utilities and drainage systems in that area . These developments would serv e the "non-aviationrevenue producing" uses proposed for that area .
Figure 2-5 contains the "Airport Layout Plan" which shows both the existing and the ultimat e airport configuration . The policies in this plan are based on the implementation of the propose d airport improvements through stage three .
AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS
The Master Plan foresees 39,000 aircraft operations during the opening year of 1995, climbing t o 61,000 in the year 2010 . This compares to annual military operations (primarily helicopters) o f 156,000 to 219,000 in the years just prior to the closing of Fritchze Field . It is expected that th e phase two capital improvements planned for the years 2000-2004 (runway expansion & instrumen t landing system) will not only increase the number of aircraft operation but also change the mix o f aircraft using the field . Table 2-2 shows the forecasted number of aircraft operation broken dow n by aircraft type. It should be noted that the AMBAG "Regional Airport System Plan", dated August, 1995, forecasts a significantly lower number of aircraft operations than the airport maste r plan. Table 2-2 includes the AMBAG forecast, however section 21675 (a) of the California Publi c Utility Code requires Comprehensive Land Use Plans to be based on airport master plans an d therefore this CLUP uses the higher forecasts when formulating compatibility policies .
a Letter to ALUC staff from Graham Bice, UC MBEST Center, dated 11/27/96 . 5 Sedway Cooke Associates,Master Plan Study for the University of California Monterey Bay Education, Science and Technology Center, March 1995 e An aircraft operation is one take-off or landing. 7 FLIGHT TRACKS In addition to showing projected CNEL noise contours, figure 4-2 shows the expected flight track s for aircraft using the airport . Because of prevailing winds, runway 29 will be the active runway fo r the great majority of operations . The traffic pattern for both runways is located north of the airport which should limit noise and safety impacts south of the airport where the more developed areas o f Fort Ord and the City of Marina are located. In addition, a 45 degree departure track from runway 29 is called for in the airport Master Plan in order to limit noise impacts to developed areas o f Marina, however, the 45 degree track does overfly portions of the Armstrong Ranch area.
8
Table 2-1 MARINA AIRPORT SPECIFICATION S 1995 200 0 Runway Length 3,000' 5,240' Runway Width 75' 100' Flight Pattern' North Side of North Side of Airport Airport Runway Approach Type 2 Visual Rwy. 29: Precision Instrument Rwy. 11 : Non-Precision Instrument Airport Reference Code B-I B-II (ARC)3
Source: Airport Master Plan Study for Fritzche Field (11/8/93 )
Notes:
1 . Instrument arrivals and departures are straight-in and straight-out from runways .
Nonprecision instrument runway means a runway having an instrument approach procedure utilizing air navigation facilities with only horizontal guidance, or area typ e navigation for which a straight-in non precision instrument approach has been planned o r approved. Precision instrument runway means a runway having an instrument approac h procedure with both horizontal and vertical guidance for a runway where a precision instrument approach has been planned or approved .
3. Airport Reference Code B-I designates a runway designed to accommodate aircraft with approach speeds between 91 and 121 knots and a wingspan of less than 49 feet . Airport Reference Code B-II designates a runway designed to accommodate aircraft with approach speeds between 91 and 121 knots and a wingspan between 49 and 79 feet . The Master Plan indicates that the airport will serve aircraft less than 12,500 pounds gross take-off weight.
Table 22
General Aviation Operations Forecast at Marina Municipal Airport (1995 to 2010)
Marina Municipal Airport Master Plan : General Aviation Forecast (Annual Operations ) 1995 2000 2005 201 0 SE Propeller 29,200 33,000 34,000 35,000 ME Propeller 7,800 11,000 14,000 17,000 Turbo Prop 1,000 1,500 2,500 3,600 Turbo Jet 0 0 2,000 2,400 Helicopter 1,000 2,000 2,500 3,000 TOTAL 39,000 47,500 55,000 61,000
AMBAG Regional Airspace System Plan (October, 1995 ) General Aviation . Forecast for Marina Airport .. 1995 2000 2005 2010` SE Propeller 10,590 9,490 8,840 8,660 ME Propeller ' 0 0 0 520 Turbo Prop 0 0 0 0 Turbo Jet 0 0 0 0 Helicopter 0 1,000 2,000 2,500 TOTAL 10,590 10,490 10,840 11,680
Note: Numbers represent forecast take-offs and landing s
i o
Chapter Three-Compatibility Issues
There are four types of compatibility issues associated with land uses around airports .
1. Noise Noise is the most common complaint regarding airports . Its impact can range from slight annoyance to severe interference with everyday activities .
2. Safety The risk of an aircraft accident is greater in the vicinity of an airport than in other areas . Because of this risk, it is important that land uses surrounding an airport be restricted t o ensure that risks are limited for both humans and structures .
3. Flight Hazards Flight hazards consists of land uses that have the potential to interfere with aircraft in flight .
4. Overflight Impacts Overflight impacts are noise and safety impacts occurring outside precisely defined nois e and safety zones. Some people are unaffected by overflight impacts while others may fin d that the impacts cause extreme annoyance or even fear . Because of the varying effect on different people, overflight impacts are difficult to measure.
This chapter examines each of these impacts in detail and describes the specific comparabilit y issues that exist at the Marina Municipal Airport.
1. NOISE Aircraft noise is the most pervasive and noticeable impact of airport activity because of its constan t nature. As long as an airport is in operation, there will be noise impacts . Airport noise impacts ar e measured using the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) method . This method calculates the average noise generated by aircraft over a 24 hour period, giving extra weighting to noise occurring during the evening and night hours. CNEL levels are based on existing and/or forecas t aircraft operations and are usually depicted in the form of contours around the subject airport .
Noise impacts on humans vary widely, however several studies have been conducted whic h identify generally accepted noise compatibility levels for humans . Figure 3-1 contains guidelines indicating which types of uses are considered acceptable at each CNEL noise level . Almost all compatibility standards set CNEL 65 dB as the maximum level for residential areas . The California Airport Land Use Planning handbook recommends a limit of CNEL 55 dB for rural areas, 60 dB for suburban areas, and 65 dB for urban areas. The Marina General Plan sets a limit o f CNEL 60 dB for single-family residential uses within the City and 65 dB for multi-family uses.
Noise Impacts at the Marina Municipal Airport Figure 4-2 shows the projected CNEL noise contours for the Marina airport for the year 2010 . 1 1 Figure 3-1 Characteristics of Noise / Chapter 6
Effects ' Day-Nlgh t Averag e Annoyanc&Z Sound Leve l Hearing Loss Averag e Genera l (Qualitive (Percentage of Community Community Attitud e (Decibels) Population Highly Description) Reactlon 4 Toward Are a Annoyed)
Noise Is likely to be th e most important of al l 275 May begin to occur 37% Very sever e adverse aspects of th e community environment.
Noise Is one of the mos t Important adverse aspects 70 Will not likely occur 22% Severe of the community environ- ment.
Noise is one of the Import- 65 Will not occur 12% Significan t ant adverse aspects of th e community environment .
Noise-may be considere d 60 Will not occur 7% an adverse aspect of th e Moderate community environment. to Slight Noise considered no more 2.55 Will not occur 3% Important than variou s other environmental factors .
1. All data Is drawn from National Academy of Sci- 4. Attitudes or other non-acoustic factors can modif y ence 1977 report Guidelines for Preparing Envi- this. Noise at low levels can still be an important ronmental Impact Statements on Noise, Report o f problem, particularly when It Intrudes into a quie t Working Group 69 on Evaluation of Environmenta l environment. Impact of Noise . NOTE : Research Implicates noise as a factor producin g 2. A summary measure of the general adverse reac- stress-related health effects such an heart dis- tion of people to living In noisy environments that ease, high blood pressure and stroke, ulcers and cause speech Interference ; sleep disturbance ; de- other digestive disorders . The relationships be- sire for tranquil environment ; and the inability to tween noise and these effects, however, have not use the telephone, radio or television satisfactorily . as yet been conclusively demonstrated. (Thomp- son 1981 ; Thompson et ai. 1989; CHABA 1981 ; 3. The percentage of people reporting annoyance to CHABA 1982; Hattie at al . 1980; and U.S . EPA lesser extents are higher In each case . An un- 1981 ) known small percentage of people will report bein g 'highly annoyed' even In the quietest surround- ings. One reason is the difficulty all people hav e In Integrating annoyance over a very long time . USAF Update with 400 points (Flnegold et al. 1992)
Source : Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (1992)
Table 6C
Summary of Effects of Noise on Peopl e Residential Land Uses
: California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook Source of AnrnnoI (tire December 1993 G-30 r-- r A I To A MC rl;„in ;nn
This figure indicates that the areas with the greatest noise impact (CNEL 65 dB +) are locate d entirely on the airport property and that portions of the CNEL 55 dB and 60 dB extend off th e airport property. This does not result in any compatibility conflicts on the land to the east since tha t area is expected to remain in agricultural use for the foreseeable future. To the west of the airport, portions of the Armstrong Ranch property are located between the 55dB and 65dB CNEL contours , and, although currently used as grazing land, the Marina General Plan designates the ranch area a s being developed for residential and neighborhood ..commercial use. The area of the Armstrong Ranch between CNEL 65 dB contour and the CNEL 60 dB contour is currently designated single- family residential by the Marina General Plan, but may be limited to multi-family use because of noise policies. Policy 2.1 .2 in the next chapter sets a standard for single-family residentia l development around the Marina Airport at CNEL 60 dB and at CNEL 65 dB for multi-family development.
2. SAFETY Ensuring the safety of persons and/or structures on the ground is a critical component of al l comprehensive land use plans . While certainly not as obvious as noise impacts the safety impact s of an airport are no less important, and ignoring these issues has the potential to lead to tragedy . To ensure safety, land surrounding an airport is first divided into different zones, each containing a different level of risk. Land use policies addressing that risk are then developed for each zone .
The establishment of risk zones surrounding an airport is based on the number of aircraf t operations, type of aircraft, and the location of flight tracks . In addition, the California Airport Planning Handbook contains the results of a national study that shows which areas in the vicinity of airports have in the past had the greatest concentrations of aircraft accidents. Special attention should be paid to these areas of accident concentrations when establishing safety zones .
The State Aeronautics Act provides very little specific guidance as to the content and format o f comprehensive land use plans, and Airport Land Use Commissions are given a great deal o f latitude in determining how to ensure the safety of persons and structures surrounding an airport . This comprehensive land use plan divides the land surrounding the Marina airport into 4 safet y zones: 1) the Runway Protection Zone (RPZ), 2) the Approach Protection Zone (APZ), 3) the Traffic Pattern Zone (TPZ), and the Overflight Protection Zone (OFPZ) . Each of these zones is discussed in detail below . Their location is shown on figure 4-1 . Specific land use policies fo r each of these zones can be found in policy section 2 .2 (Safety CompatibilityPolicies) of this plan .
Runway Protection Zone: The Runway Protection Zone is a trapezoidal shaped area defined by the Federal Aviation Administration that begins 200 feet off the end of each runway. Its size is based on the category of runway and type of approach being used at the airport. At Marina Airport the RPZ at the east end of the runway is 2,500' x 1,000' x 1,750' . At the west end the dimensions are 1,700' x 1,000' x 1,425' . The RPZ is a high risk area subject to frequent overflight by low flying aircraft and high noise levels . Only very low density land uses, such 1 2 as parks, golf courses, and other open space uses are allowe d in this area.
Approach Protection Zone: The Approach Protection Zone maintains the same shape of the Runway Protection Zone while extending further fro m the runway. It is an area of moderate risk that incorporate s areas of the airport traffic pattern where aircraft woul d normally be turning from base leg to final leg and descending toward the runway . Uses allowed in this zone include low density commercial and/or industrial uses, an d very limited residential uses.
Traffic Pattern Zone : The Traffic Pattern Zone is the area under which aircraft normally fly while approaching the airport to land. Generally, aircraft are at 1,000' AGL in this area . The traffic pattern for the Marina Airport is located solely to the nort h of the field. It is an area of minimal accident risk, however adequate levels of open space should be maintained in thi s area to allow for emergency landings . Uses allowed in this area include commercial, industrial ; and low density residential. uses. High . concentrations of people and uses whose occupants would have low mobility are not allowed .
Overflight Zone: The Overflight Zone is the area subject to overflight impacts . It encompasses all the land within the Airport Planning Area. All new developments in . this area are required to provide notification to buyers regarding potential airport impacts.
Safety Issues at Marina Airport
As is indicated in figure 2-4, the Marina Municipal Airport is currently surrounded by open space and/or agricultural, land . This makes for a high degree of safety compatibility . . The Runway Protection Zone at the west end of the runway is owned by the City of Marina and is entirely on th e airport property and is therefore protected from development . The Approach Protection Zone to the west partially overlies the Armstrong Ranch and may restrict the use of this residentially designate d property. The Runway Protection Zone to the east of the runway extends off the airport property over Blanco Road to the east. The potential hazard to vehicles on the road is minimal because, a t that location, Blanco Road is in a depression about 50 feet below adjacent terrain . Further to the east, the RPZ is partially protected by approach easement. The remaining land in the eastern Runway Protection and Approach Protection zones is primarily agricultural although severa l existing structures are located in this area, as is the northern portion of the U.C . Technology Center property.
The majority of the land under the Traffic Pattern Zone is currently undeveloped ; however, the are a 1 3 is identified as "non-aviation revenue. producing" in the Airport Master Plan . Portions of the Armstrong Ranch Property also lie in the TPZ .
This comprehensive land use plan addresses safety hazards primarily by limiting the populatio n density in specific zones. Policy section 2 .2 specifies the maximum allowable density in each zon e as well as the allowable and prohibited land uses . Residential uses are not permitted in the Runway Protection Zone and are allowed at limited densities in the Approach Protection Zone and the Traffic Pattern Zone. Hospitals, schools, daycare centers, and other uses whose occupants hav e limited mobility are permitted only in the Overflight zone .
3. FLIGHT HAZARDS Flight hazards consist of structures, activities, and uses occurring on the ground that may cause hazards to aircraft in flight. Federal Aviation Regulations, Part 77 (Objects Affecting Navigabl e Airspace) describes a series of "Imaginary Surfaces" which set standards for the maximum heigh t of objects around airports and require that the FAA be notified of any proposed construction that exceeds those standards. Policies in this CLUP prevent the construction of new . structures that penetrate the FAR part 77 surfaces . In addition, policy 1 .3.5 requires ALUC review of any proposal fora structure over 35 feet in the Runway Protection and Approach Protection Zones, an d over 45 feet in the Traffic Pattern and Overflight Zones. Figure 4-3 shows the FAR part 77 surfaces for the Marina Airport.
Other flight hazard issues include activities that have the potential to create interference to aircraf t such as the creation of glare, smoke, radio emissions or bird hazards.
Flight Hazards at the Marina Airport The area in the immediate vicinity of the Marina airport is generally free of flight hazards althoug h some potential hazards can be found within 2 miles of the airport .
Ground Hazards The primary potential ground hazard is the Marina Landfill which is located approximately 7,00 0 feet to the northwest of the airport runway. Landfills usually attract large numbers of birds whic h have the potential to be a significant flight hazard. There is no evidence that a hazard exists at the present level of airport operation. However, both the airport operator (City of Marina) and the landfill operator (Monterey Regional Waste Management District) have recognized that airport expansion may lead to increased hazard potential . Consequently, these parties have entered into a "Memorandum of Agreemenf', dated August 31, 1995, requiring a "Bird Hazard Study" before th e airport runway is expanded . Policies in this CLUP require the implementation of any necessary mitigation measures that may be identified by the study .
Policies also prohibit the establishment of new uses that have a potential to create a hazard to aircraft in flight . This potentially includes the establishment of new landfills and other uses tha t would create glare, smoke, radio emissions, or other uses that may interfere with aircraft operation .
• Height Hazards There are two existing radio towers with a height of 369 feet above mean sea level (MSL) (349 ` 14 AGL) located approximately 7,500 feet to the west of the airport runway . The FAR part 77 horizontal surface' elevation is 285 feet MSL which means that the towers penetrate the surface b y 84 feet. These towers have the potential to present a hazard to low flying aircraft arriving or departing the airport, and their presence needs to be taken into account when establishing a non- precision instrument approach for the airport. Both of these towers are lit with aircraft warnin g lights. . On the airport itself, approximately 2,000 feet south of the runway, is located a 281 foo t high (MSL) water tower, which is just 4 feet below the elevation of the horizontal surface.
4. OVERFLIGHT IMPACTS Overflight impacts consist of the potential annoyance that aircraft create even when outside areas o f identified noise contours or safety zones . These usually occur under flight tracks when aircraft transit to and from,the airport . Overflight impacts are somewhat subjective because the level o f annoyance varies significantly with each person .
Overflight Impacts at the Marina Airport The Master Plan for the Marina Airport identifies a traffic pattern that is exclusively on the north side of the airport. This restriction should eliminate most overflight impacts to the develope d portions-of the City . In this comprehensive land use plan, the overflight impact zone consists of all areas within the airport planning area (figure 4-1) :, This area is currently used as agricultural or grazing land although it does include portions of the proposed Armstrong Ranch and the U .C. MBEST Center . Policies in this CLUP require that buyers of new developments be notified o f potential aircraft impacts.
' The "Horizontal Surface" is an imaginary plane located 150' above the elevation of the airpor t runway and extending in a 10,000 foot arc from the end of the runway . Appendix C contains the full text of FAR part 77 . 15 Figure 4-1
Monterey Count y Monterey County Airport Landuse Commissio n Planning an d Building Inspectio n MARINA MUNICIPAL AIRPOR T Department
PLANNING AREA 0 Adopted 1/22196 FEET
Chapter Four-Plan Policies
1 . GENERAL POLICIES
1.1 Planning Area
1 .1 .1 The Airport Planning Area consists of all the land which may be adversel y impacted by present or future aircraft operations at the Marina Municipal Airport. The specific boundaries of the planning area are shown in figure 4 - 1 .
1 .2 Types of Impacts Addressed
1 .2.1 The Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission and th e Comprehensive Land Use Plan for the Marina Airport are concerned only with the potential impacts related to aircraft noise, land use safety, fligh t hazards to aircraft, and overflight impacts.
1.3 Review Criteria
1 .3 .1 Pursuant to Public Utility Code section 21676(a) the Commission -shal l review the General Plans, Area Plans, and Specific Plans for the County of Monterey and the City of Marina to determine if such plans are consisten t with the policies of this comprehensive land use plan. Such review shal l take place within 180 days of the adoption of this comprehensive land us e plan. In addition, the Commission'shall review the final Fort Ord Base Reuse Plan, as soon as it is completed, and determine its consistency wit h this comprehensive land use plan .
1 .3 .2 Until such time as the Airport Land Use Commission has determined that the General Plans, Area Plans, and Specific Plans, of the County and th e City are consistent ; or until the County or the City has overruled the Commission's determination, all discretionary peimits shall be referred t o the Commission for a consistency determination, pursuant to Public Utility Code section 21676.5.
1 .3 .3 The Commission shall review all subsequent amendments to the General Plans, Area Plans, and Specific Plans, and all adoptions of zoning and building regulations, that may affect land use in the airport planning area . The Commission shall determine if the amendments and/or adoptions ar e consistent or inconsistent with this comprehensive land use plan . (Public Utility Code section 21676(b) .
1 .3 .4 The Commission shall review any modification to the Marina Airport Master Plan to determine consistency with this comprehensive land us e 1 6
plan. (Public Utility Code section 21676 .c)
1 .3 .5 In addition to the referrals required by policy 1 .3 .3, the ALUC shall review all the following actions within the Airport Planning Area :
For Projects within the Runway Protection and Approach Protection Zones :
1. Proposals for residential subdivisions . or Planned Uni t Developments consisting of 5 or more units with in th e airport planning area;
2. Proposals for transient lodging facilities consisting of more than 10 units;
3. Proposals for commercial development that will result in a density of more than 100 persons per acre ;
4. All requests for structures over 35 feet in height within the airport planning area;
5. Any proposed land use action that may involve a question o f compatibility with airport activities .
For Projects within the Traffic Pattern and Overflight Zones :
1. Proposals for residential subdivisions or Planned Uni t Developments consisting of 30 or more units;
2. Proposals for transient lodging facilities consisting of more than 100 units;
3. Proposals for commercial development that will result in a density of more than 150 persons per acre ;
4. All requests for structures over 45 feet in height ;
5. Any proposed land use action that may involve a question o f compatibility with airport activities .
When reviewing the above proposals the ALUC should determine the project' s consistency with the policies of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and also, i f necessary, provide recommendations for changes in the project that woul d enhance the project's compatibility with the airport. Such recommendations shall be based on the guidelines found in the California Airport Land Use Plannin g Handbook. 1 7
1.4 Review Process
1 .4.1 The proposed actions referred to in section 1 .3 shall be referred to the Commission at the earliest possible time in order that the Commission' s findings may be considered by the local agency prior to finalizing the proposed action.
1 .4.2 When reviewing a proposed land use action, the ALUC may find a proposal either, 1) consistent with the comprehensive land use plan, or 2) inconsisten t with the comprehensive land use plan . If the Commission finds a proposal to be inconsistent it may state under which conditions the proposal would be consistent.
In the interest of promoting the public health and safety, the ALUC may recommend additional changes for projects that come before the Commission and have been deemed consistent with this comprehensive lan d use plan.
1 .4.3 The Commission must take action on a request for a consistency determination within 45 days of the referral . If the determination is no t made. within . 45 days, the proposal shall be deemed consistent with the comprehensive land use plan.
1 .4.5 The Airport Land Use Commission may, at the request of the loca l jurisdiction or interested party, provide an interpretation of any of the policies found in this comprehensive land use plan .
2. COMPATIBILITYPOLICIE S
2.1 Noise Compatibility Policie s
2 .1 .1 Noise impacts shall be evaluated using the noise contours depicted in Figur e VI-1 of the Marina Airport Master Plan (1993), a copy of which is shown a s figure 4-2 in this comprehensive land use plan. These contours show the expected noise impacts from the airport at 60,000 annual operations, a leve l expected to be reached in the year 2010. The Commission shall revie w updated noise contours when they become available, and if appropriate, us e the updated contours when evaluating noise impacts .
2.1 .2 The Noise Compatibility Policies, as shown in Table 4-1, shall be used to determine if a specific use is compatible .
1 8
2.2 Safety Compatibility Policies
2.2.1 The location of the Runway Protection Zone, Approach Protection Zone , Traffic Pattern Zone, and the Overflight Area are shown on the diagra m depicting the Airport Planning Area (figure 4-1). A more precise map, showing the location and exact dimensions of the zones is shown in figur e 4-4.
The location and configuration of these zones were established based on the expected completion of the airport improvements as envisioned by the Airport Master Plan, as well as the projected flight tracks, type of aircraft, and number of aircraft operations expected. The location and configuration of these zones should be reevaluated if more precise data becomes available or if any of these components change . The location and configuration o f these zones shall be changed only by the Airport Land Use Commissio n subject to the plan amendment process described in Public Utility Cod e section 21675.
2.2.2 The Land Use Compatibility Policies, as shown in Table 4-2, shall be use d to determine if a specific use is compatible .
2 .2.3 The primary method of limiting risk to persons on the ground is to limit th e number of persons allowed in a given area. For this reason, each zone i s assigned a maximum allowable density in Table 4-2 . The density limit s shown in the table may be adjusted pursuant to policy 2 .2.6.
2.2.4 Uses whose primary occupants are persons of impaired mobility shall not b e allowed in the Runway Protection Zone, the Approach Protection Zone, or the Traffic Pattern Zone . Such uses include, but are not limited to, hospitals , schools, day care centers, and nursing homes.
2.2.5 Unless directly related to the operation of aircraft, the above ground storag e of large quantities of flammable materials or other hazardous materials shal l not be permitted in the Runway Protection Zone, the Approach Protection Zone, or the Traffic Pattern Zone.
2.2.6 Potential aircraft accidents can often be avoided if large areas of open spac e are preserved around airports in order to allow for emergency landings . Open space can generally be defined as an area measuring at least 75 by 30 0 feet that is free of obstructions such as trees, power lines, and fences .
In order to preserve as much open space as possible in the environ s of the Marina Airport, the following design criteria shall be applie d to all new development projects :
1 . Development should be clustered and contiguous landscape d 1 9
v 0 ! \ •-- *alq 4t•fff **a.•anan rtr a•r ``, •* , \''*`, /_,/*/*`-* i**+ ••* 7 * rauu .iu uuuuua'ta`•nn•uuau••• ■ . • :• . .. ■. , ; _ / r vwés< 4 • . .. . . F• .•t wa•w•ar•*r(iai•*al••*(iYtf((t7`1••rtt•top ■ /h. • a••• ■ au•auu•u••uura•a rK a°y( .•(••_ / u•* •••r uuuu•r j•i* •4pg 4 ara=tsl
Figure 4-2 PROJECTED FLIGHT TRACK S AND NOISE EXPOSUR E 160,000 ANNUAL OPERATIONS I
■■■ ■• ■■ •• ••■■■■ . NOISE CONTOU R My oil OA@PBw@ 9 C@OB40PWB a (CNEL 60 dB AND ABOVE) P&D Aviation/MoCoPBI/gf APRIL 7, 199 3 and parking areas should be provided. The population and housing unit densities for individual projects in the Traffi c Pattern and Approach Protection Zones, as required b y policy 2 .2.3, may be increased if it can be demonstrated that such an increase results in the provision of substantial open space. In no case shall the density increase be more tha n 250% of the normally allowable density . If a density increase is allowed in the Approach Protection Zone, the open space provided must be located along the extended airport runway centerline. Before allowing such an increase the local jurisdiction shall refer the proposal to the ALUC for revie w and recommendation.
2.2.7 The Airport Operator shall make every effort to acquire control of lan d located in the Runway Protection Zone. This control may take the form o f outright purchase, lease, acceptance of an easement, or any other workabl e method that would allow the Airport Operator to enforce the policies of this plan related to the placement of structures in the Runway Protection Zone .
2 .2.8 If the implementation of policy 2 .2.7 is not feasible, non-residential structures may be allowed in the Runway Protection Zone provided that th e population density levels contained in policy 2 .2.3 are maintained. Such structures must be located at least 250 feet away from the extended airpor t runway centerline and no part of the structure may extend above the plane o f the airport runway .
2.3 Flight Hazard Policies
2 .3 .1 A structure or object that penetrates the Federal Aviation Regulations par t 77 surfaces is an incompatible land use.
2.3 .2 New uses which may cause a hazard to aircraft in flight are not permitted within the airport planning area. Such uses include electrical interference, high intensity lighting, bird attractions, and activities that may produc e smoke, dust, or glare.
2.3.3 Any land use permits granted for the expansion of the Marina Landfill shal l include conditions to ensure that appropriate measures are taken to limit bir d attraction to the site .
2.3 .4 Prior to any expansion of the airport runway, a "Bird Hazard Study" shall b e prepared pursuant to the "Memorandum of Agreemenf' between the City o f Marina and the Monterey Regional Water Management District, which became effective on August 31, 1995. If that study concludes that additional measures are necessary to reduce bird strike hazards, such measures shall b e incorporated into the conditions of any land use permit approvals for th e
2 0
300 2 FAA DISCLAIME R The contents do not necessarily reflect th e official views or policy of the FAA . Acceptanc e wATEI of this plan by the FAA does not in any wa y 5T OR/ TAN k constitute a commitment on the part of th e United States to participate in any developmen t 25 0 depicted therein nor does it indicate that th e proposed development is environmentall y acceptable in accordance with appropriat e public laws.
200 .MARINA MUNICIPAL AIRPOR T MARINA, CALIFORNIA
15 0 F. A. R. PART 77
wry 100 Figure 4- 3 DESIGNED: uR u CHECKED : MRM SHEET 2 OF 3 nQAWN•Tru/FAR I nnTC- GrAP! _PV 17 taa 4
Monterey County Airport Landuse Commissio n PROPOSED SAFETY ZONES MA P MARINA MUNICIPAL AIRPORT COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN LEGEN D RUNWAY PR OT EC TION ZONE (FAR 152) AREA REQUESTED FOR PUBLI C NO S TR UCT UR ESO RASS EMBL AG E BENEFIT CONVEYANC E OF PERSONS
-••-••- MARINA CITY LIMIT S APPROACH PROTECTION ZON E
_ ._ ._ AIRFIELD PERIMETER/FENCING TRAFFIC PATTERN ZOHC - - HIGHWAY EASEMENT Amended by Monterey Caunky Planning k Building Inv. Amendment includes buildings horn mopping created b y RUNWAY CENTERLIN E Associales, Inc. and Jonas Br Stokes Associates for boss reuse plon ning. March I I , 1996gl IMPROVED (PAVED) ROAD NOTE . SEE POLICY SECTION 2.2 FOR SAFETY ZONE COMPATIBILITY POLICIES .
Figure 4-5
LEGEN D
Potanllalll .lnlrnad Water Rosen * IOW Roder Tower Ensamont Gas Line and Sower Force Main I n CNEL 60dB - 65d B rq Burled Sewer MIM I gK Instrument Arrival and Dopndurc Water Towe r ; Noise Abatement Dapartu m Mature Windrow Tree Planting I: Flood Wing Training Paltam WI Tree Cluste r N7J\ Traf I lc Pattern Zone (ITZ) SE ['Manila! Vernal Pond M Approach Protection Zone (APZ) City Limit Line Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) /
h A LavtLhv tluwlm».■Dalpi Fmi Armstrong Ranc .iwiw,rrv is-wa,cwvvi
Armstrong Ranch Land Use Plan OCTOBER 199 6 LEGEN D , tinSingle Family Residential (4-6 du/gross acme) ® Multi-Family Residential (7-21 dulgroas acre) Industrial/Business Perk . ® Multi-Family/Neigh. Comm'l . with Hotel Opp. School (Floating Designation) ® Neighborhood Commercia l ® Neighborhood Park (Floating Designation) 22 Visitor Serving Commercial 1-1 Recreation/Open Spac e I Public/ 0uaslPub11c1NelghboelNad Camm'i : Single Family Residential Reserve g EgRi PubllrlOuael-Pobllc timup)'tinnin hm ; Single Family Residential Reserve/ EMC Potential Reclaimed Water Reservoi r A '4g1c*1** aunt ae•lpnueun
runway extension.
2.3 .5 All new exterior lighting within the Airport Planning Area shall be designe d so as to create no glare or interference with aircraft in flight . Such lighting shall be constructed and located so that only the intended area is illuminated and off-sight glare is fully controlled . The lighting shall be arrayed in such a manner that it can not be mistaken for airport approach or runway lights b y pilots.
2.4 Overflight Policies
2.4.1 All new uses within the airport planning area shall provide an avigatio n easement to the City of Marina or the current owner of the airport . The text of the easement shall be mutually agreeable to the Airport Land Us e Commission, the City of Marina (or current airport owner), and the lan d owner. The language of the easement may differ depending on which safety zone the affected property is located.
2.4 .2 Local jurisdictions shall establish a method of notifying buyers of new developments within the airport planning area of potential airport impacts. The notificationmay take the form of avigation easements, deed noticing, or real estate disclosures. A copy of the method(s) to be used for suc h notification shall be forwarded to the Airport Land Use Commission .
2.4.3 Local jurisdictions are encouraged to provide for the same type of notice required in policy 2.4.2 for existing uses .
2.5 Armstrong Ranch Planning Are a
2.5 .1 Figure 4-5 shows a constraints map and Figure 4-6 shows a conceptual lan d use plan for the Armstrong Ranch properties . The constraints map and conceptual land use plan include properties of the Armstrong Ranch both within and outside the Airport Planning Area. The type, location, and density of the land uses within the Airport Planning Area shown on this pla n are incorporated into this Comprehensive Land Use Plan . Changes in thi s conceptual land use plan may be allowed so long as the land uses resulting from the changes are . consistent with the policies of this Comprehensive Land Use Plan.
2.5 .2 The Flight Hazard policies (Section 2.3) and the Overflight policies (Sectio n 2.4) shall apply only to the portions of the Armstrong Ranch Planning Area that fall within the Airport Planning Area.
2 1
Table 4-1 Noise Compatibility Policies for Marina Municipal Airport
CNEL LEVEL (in decibels) LAND USES 55-60 60-65 65-70 70+ single family, mobile home parks, nursin g Y N NN homes multi-family residential Y C N hotels, motels, bed & breakfasts Y C C N schools and daycare facilities Y NN N hospitals Y C C N churches, libraries, indoor auditoriums Y . C C N parking lots, cemeteries Y Y YY professional and business offices, research Y Y C N facilities retail stores and shopping centers, indoo r Y Y C N restaurants, movie theaters outdoor restaurants Y N NN service businesses YY C C manufacturing, warehousing, wholesale trade YYYY cropland and grazing YYY Y golf courses and stables Y YY Y neighborhood parks, playgrounds, and zoos Y Y NN outdoor arenas Y NN N
Y= Permitted Use N= Not Permitte d C= Conditionally permitted provided measures to achieve an interior noise level of CNEL 4 5 dB are incorporated into the design and construction of all portions of the structure wher e people may be located.
2 2 Table 4-2 Safety Compatibility Policies for Marina Municipal Airpor t
MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE SAFETY CHARACTERISTICS DENSITIES' ZONE Residential Non-Residential
Runway area of high risk; frequent 0 10 persons per Protection Zone overflight by low flying acre aircraft; high noise levels Approach area of moderate risk; frequent 1 Dwelling Unit/ 50 persons/acre Protection Zone overflight area where aircraft 40 acres(gross) are normally turning and descending or climbing Traffic Pattern Area of lower risk ; Frequent •4 to 6 Dwelling Units 150 persons/acre Zone overflight by aircraft at 1000' per acre (gross) AGL Overflight Zone Area of low risk; may be N/A N/A overflown by aircraft in transit to or from the airport
(continued on next page)
8 Densities may be adjusted pursuant to policy 2.2.6 . 2 3 Table 4-2 (continued)
SAFETY NORMALLY PROHIBITED USES DEVELOPMENT ZONE ALLOWABLE USES CONDITIONS Runway open space, agriculture , All residential uses, ne w Avigation easement per Protection golf courses structures (except as policy 2.4. 1 Zone allowed by policy 2 .2.8), assemblages of people , hazards to flight Approach all uses in Runway Most residential uses, day Development should be Protection Protection Zone; care facilities, schools, located as far from th e Zone Industrial uses; Other hospitals, nursing homes , runway center line as non-residential uses of shopping centers possible; development limited density should be clustered to provide open space ; avigation easement pe r policy 2.4. 1 Traffic all uses in Approach Schools, day care Development should be Pattern Protection Zone; facilities, hospitals, clustered to provide open Zone residential uses nursing homes. Some space; avigation easement residential uses per policy 2.4. 1 Overflight all permitted uses N/A ; avigation easement per Protection policy 2.4.1 ; buyer Zone notification
2 4
Appendix A
Methods of Calculating Density and Building Occupanc y
The safety policies for non-residential areas in this comprehensive land use pla n limit the persons per acre in certain safety zones . This appendix is intended to provide a methodology for determining if a proposed project meets these densit y standards . The following steps should be taken to determine if a project i s consistent with the density limitations :
1 . Determine the maximum number of persons the proposed project i s likely to attract.
Determining the maximum number of persons likely to occupy a structure is no t an exact science; however, there are a number of methods that can be used t o provide a reasonable estimate of how many persons will use a proposed facility :
a) Parking Ordinance : Most jurisdictions have parking regulation s which specify how many parking spaces are required for particula r types of uses. Once an assumption is made regarding the number of persons per car, an estimate can be made of the maximum number of persons that could occupy the structure . The assumption of persons per car must be based on the type(s) o f use. For example, if the structure is an office, one could assum e there would be one person per car . If the use is a restaurant, 3 or more might be a reasonable figure .
b) Number of Seats : If the proposed use provides seating for it s patrons, such as a restaurant or theater, it is relatively easy t o determine the maximum number of people that could occupy th e structure.
c) Uniform Building Code : The Uniform Building Code (UBC) specifies a certain number of square feet per occupant that are required for certain uses . This number can be determined b y contacting the local building department. The problem with this method is that buildings are rarely occupied at maximum capacity . In fact, a survey conducted by the City of Sacramento found that many office and retail uses are generally occupied at 50% of thei r maximum occupancy levels, even at the busiest times of day .' If
' Napa County Airport Land Use Commission, Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, adopted Apri l 22, 1991, (amended through 1994), Appendix D
this method is used, it would be reasonable to adjust the maximu m occupancy figure to a number that more accurately reflects realty.
d) Survey of Similar Uses : If the use of the proposed structure is similar to other structures, a survey of those uses can be used to determine building occupancy .
2. Determine the size of the project in gross acres . This normally would consist of the individual parcel or parcels on which the projec t is located .
3. Divide the maximum number of persons expected by the size, i n acres, of the project site.
4. The resulting number is the maximum number of persons per acr e the project will attract.
Example 1 (Monterey County):
Proposed project: 55,000 square foot office building (50,000 sf net floo r area) on a 1 .5 acre parcel.
Parcel Size : 1 .5 Acres
Estimated Occupancy : 200 persons (The Monterey County Zoning Ordinance requires one parking space for every 25 0 square feet of nee floor area in an office building . It is likely that some cars would contain more than on e person, however it is also likely that not every parking space would be filled . Therefore, it would b e reasonable to estimate occupancy at one person pe r 250 square feet.
50,000 sf/250 = 200 persons maximum occupancy
Density: 200 persons/1 .5 acres=133 .33 persons per acre
2 Net Floor Area is the area of a structure excluding areas used for restrooms, utilities, stairways , mechanical rooms, and elevator rooms.
Example 2 (City of Marina) :
Proposed Project: 60,000 square foot office building ;
Parcel Size: 1 .5 acres ;
Estimated Occupancy: 200 Persons (The Marina Zoning Ordinance requires one parking space for every 300 square feet of gross floor area in an office building . It is likely that som e cars would contain more than one person, however i t is also likely that not every parking space would b e filled. Therefore, it would be reasonable to estimate occupancy at one person per 300 square feet. 60,00 0 sf./300 = 200 persons. )
Density: 133.33 Persons per acre (200 persons/1 .5 acres)
Appendix B
Federal Aviation Administratio n Runway Approach Protection Standard s
Federal Aviation Regulations Part 77 - Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace
Subpart A-Genera l is planned and is so indicated by an FA A ! 77.1 Scope . approved airport. layout plan ; a military t This Part- service approved military airport layou (a) Establishes standards for determining plan ; any other FAA planning document, or obstructions in navigable airspace ; military service military airport plannin g (b) Sets forth the requirements for notice document. to the Administrator of certain proposed con- "Utility runway" means a runway that struction or alteration ; is constructed for and intended to be used (c) Provides for aeronautical studies of ob- by propeller driven aircraft of 12,500 pounds structions to air navigation, to determine thei r maximum gross weight and less. effect on the safe and efficient use of airspace ; "Visual runway" means a runway in- (d) Provides for public hearings on th e tended solely for the operation of aircraf t hazardous effect of proposed construction o r using visual approach procedures, with no alteration on air navigation ; and straight: in instrument approach procedure (e) Provides for establishing antenna farm and no instrument designation indicated on areas. an FAA approved airport layout plan, a military service approved military airpor t ! 77.2 Definition of terms . layout plan, or by any planning document : For the purpose of this Part submitted to the FAA by competent au- "Airport available for public use" mean s thority. an airport that. is open to the general publi c with or without a prior request to use the ! 77.3 Standards. airport. (a) The standards established in this Part "A seaplane base" is considered to be an for determining obstructions to air navigation airport only if its sea lanes are outline d are used by the Administrator in- by visual markers. (1) Administering the Federal-aid Air- "Nonprecision instrument runway" mean s port Program and the Surplus Airport Pro- a runway having an existing instrumen t gram ; approach procedure utilizing air navigatio n (2) Transferring property of the United facilities with only horizontal guidance, States under Section 16 of the Federal Air- or area type navigation equipment, fo r port Act; which a straight-in nonprecision instrumen t (3) Developing technical standards an d approach procedure has been approved, o r guidance in the design and construction o f planned, and for which no precision ap- airports ; and proach facilities are planned, or indicated o n (4) Imposing requirements for publi c an FAA planning document or military serv- notice of the construction or alteration of an y ice military airport planning document . structure where notice will promote air "Precision instrument runway " means a safety. runway having an existing instrument ap- (b) The standards used by the Administra- proach procedure utilizing an Instrument tor in the establishment of flight procedures Landing System (ILS), or a Precision Ap- and aircraft operational limitations are not proach Radar (PAR) . It also means a run- set forth in this Part but are contained in other way for which n precision approach system publications of the Administrator .
Source: Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, prepared for CalTrans Division o f Aeronautics, December, 1993 ; Appendix E E-
FAA Runway Approach Protection Standards / Appendix E
OBJECTS AFFECTING NAVIGABLE AIRSPACE PART 77
1 77.5 Kinds of objects affected . § 77.13 Construction or alteration requirin g This Part applies to- notice. (a) Any object of natural growth, terrain, (a) Except as provided in § 77.15, each or permanent or temporary construction or sponsor who proposes any of the following alteration, including equipment or materials construction or alteration shall notify the Ad- used therein, and apparatus of a permanent ministrator in the form and manner prescribed or temporary character ; and in § 77.17 : (b) Alteration of any permanent or tempor- (1) Any construction or alteration o f ary existing structure by a change in its heigh t more than 200 feet in height above the (including appurtenances), or lateral dimen- ground level at its site. sions, including equipment or materials use d (2) Any construction or alteration o f therein. greater height than an imaginary surfac e extending outward and upward at one o f Subpart B-Notice of Construction the following slopes :. or Alteratio n (i) 100 to 1 for at horizontal distance !.77.11 Scope. of 20,000 feet. from the nearest point of (a) This subpart requires each person pro- the nearest runway of each airport speci- posing any kind of construction or alteratio n fied in subparagraph (5) of this para- graph with at. least one runway more than described in § 77.13(a) of this chapter to give adequate notice to the Administrator . It speci- 3,200 feet in actual length, excluding heli- fies the locations and dimensions of the con- ports. struction or alteration for. which notice is re- (ii) 50 to' 1 for a horizontal distance quired and prescribes the form and manner of of 10,000 feet from the nearest point o f the notice. It also requires supplemental the nearest runway of each airport speci- notices 48 hours before the start and upon the fied in subparagraph (5) of this para- completion of certain construction or altera- graph with its longest runway no more tion that was the subject of a notice under than 3,200 feet in actual length, excluding §77.13(a) . heliports. (b) Notices received under this subpart pro- (iii) 25 to 1 for a horizontal distanc e vide a basis for- of 5,000 feet from the nearest point of the (1) Evaluating the effect of the construc- nearest landing and takeoff area of each tion or alteration on operational procedure s heliport specified in subparagraph (5) o f and proposed operational procedures ; this paragraph . (2) Determinations of the possible haz- (3) Any highway, railroad, or other ardous effect of the proposed construction or traverse way for mobile objects, of a height alteration on air navigation ; which, if adjusted upward 17 feet for an (3) Recommendations . for identifying Interstate Highway that is part of the Na- the construction or alteration in accordanc e tional System of Military and Interstate with the current Federal Aviation Adminis- Highways where overcrossings are designe d tration Advisory Circular AC 70/7460-1 en- for a minimum of 17 feet vertical distance , titled "Obstruction Marking and Lighting," 15 feet for any other public roadway, 10 fee t which is available without charge from the or the height of the highest mobile object Department of Transportation, Distributio n that would normally traverse the road , Unit, TAD 484 .3, Washington, D .C. 20590 ; whichever is greater, for a private road, 23 (4) Determining other appropriate meas- ures to. be applied for continued safety o f feet for a railroad, and for a waterway o r air navigation ; and ° any other traverse way not previously men- (5) Charting and other notification to air- tioned, an amount equal to the height of th e men of the construction or alteration . highest mobile object that would normall y
E-2 December 1993
FAA Runway Approach Protection Standards / Appendix E
PART 77 OBJECTS AFFECTING NAVIGABLE AIRSPAC E
traverse it, would exceed a standard of § 77.15 Construction or alteration not requir . paragraph (1) or (2) of this section. Ing notice. (4) When requested by the FAA, any No person is required to notify the Admin- construction or alteration that would be i n istrator for any of the following constructio n an instrument approach area (defined in th e or alteration: FAA standards governing instrument ap- proach procedures) and available informa- (a) Any object that would be shielded by tion indicates it might exceed a standard of existing structures of a permanent and sub- Subpart C of this part . stantial character or by natural terrain or topo- graphic features of equal or greater height , (5) Any construction or alteration on and would be located in the congested area o f any of the following airports (includin g a city, town, or settlement where it is evident heliports): beyond all reasonable doubt that the structure (i) An airport that is available for so shielded will not adversely affect safety in public use and is listed in the Airpor t air navigation. Directory of the current Airman's Infor- (b) Any antenna structure of 20 feet or mation Manual or in either the Alaska less in height except one that would increas e or Pacific Airman's Guide and Chart Sup- the height of another antenna structure . plement. (ii) An . airport under construction, (c) Any air navigation facility, airpor t that is the subject of a notice or proposa l visual approach or landing aid, aircraft ar- on file with the Federal Aviation Admin- resting device, or meteorological device, of a istration, and, except for military air- type approved by the Administrator, or a n ports, it is clearly indicated that the air- appropriate military service on military air- port will be available for public use . ports, the location and height of which is fixed by its functional purpose . (iii) An airport that is operated by an • armed force of the United States . (d) Any construction or alteration for which notice is required by any other FAA regulation . (b) Each sponsor who proposes construc- tion or alteration that is the subject of a notice § 77.17 Form and time of notice . under paragraph (a) of this section and i s advised by an FAA regional office that a (a) Each person who is required to notify the supplemental notice is required shall submi t Administrator under § 77 .13(a) shall send one that notice on a prescribed form to be receive d executed form set (four copies) of FAA For m by the FAA regional office at least 48 hours 7460-1, Notice of Proposed Construction o r before the start of the construction or altera- Alteration, to the [Manager] , Air Traffic Divi- tion. sion, FAA Regional Office having jurisdictio n over the area within which the construction o r (c) Each sponsor who undertakes construc- alteration will be located . Copies of FAA Form tion or alteration that is the subject of a notic e 7460-1 may be obtained from the headquarters under paragraph (a) of this section shall , of the Federal Aviation Administration and the within 5 days after that construction or altera- regional offices. tion reaches its greatest height, submit a sup- plemental notice on a prescribed form to th e (b) The notice required under § 77.13(a) (1) FAA regional office having jurisdiction ove r through (4) must be submitted at least 30 the region involved, if- days before the earlier of the following dates- (1) The construction or alteration i s more than 200 feet above the surface leve l (1) The date the proposed construction o r of its site; or alteration is to begin . (2) An FAA regional office advises hi m (2) The date an application for a con- that submission of the form is required. straction permit is to be filed.
Ch . 1 (Arndt. 77 . 11, Ett . 10125189)
December 1993 E-3
FAA Runway Approach Protection Standards / Appendix E
OBJECTS AFFECTING NAVIGABLE AIRSPACE PART 77
However, a notice relating to proposed con- § 77.19 Acknowledgment of notice. struction or alteration that is subject to the (a) The FAA acknowledges in writing the licensing requirements of the Federal Com- receipt of each notice submitted under § 77.13 munications Act may be sent to the FAA at the (a). same time the application for construction i s (b) If the construction or alteration pro- filed with the Federal Communications Com- posed in a notice is one for which lighting o r mission, or at any time before that filing. marking standards are prescribed in the FAA Advisory Circular AC 70/7460-1 entitled (c) A proposed structure or an alteration "Obstruction Marking and Lighting," th e to an existing structure that exceeds 2,000 fee t acknowledgment contains a statement to tha t in height above the ground will be presumed effect and information on how the structure to be a hazard to air navigation and to resul t should be marked and lighted in accordance in an inefficient utilization of airspace and the with the manual. applicant has the burden of overcoming that (c) The acknowledgment states that an aero- presumption. Each notice submitted under the nautical study of the proposed construction or pertinent provisions of this Part 77 proposin g alteration has resulted in a determination that the construction or alteration - a structure in excess of 2,000 feet above ground, or an alteration that will make an existing (1) Would not exceed any standard of Subpart C and would not be a hazard to ai structure exceed that height, must contain r a navigation; detailed showing, directed to meeting thi s (2) Would exceed a standard of Subpar t burden. Only in exceptional cases, where the C but would not be a hazard to air naviga- FAA concludes that a clear and compelling tion; or showing has been made that it would not re- (3) Would exceed a standard of Subpart sult in an inefficient utilization of the airspace C and further aeronautical study is necessary and would not result in a hazard to air naviga- to determine whether it would be hazar d tion, will a determination of no hazard be to air navigation, that the sponsor may re- issued. quest within 30 days that further study, and that, pending completion of any further (d) In the case of an emergency involv- study, it is presumed the construction o r ing essential public services, public health, o r alteration would. be a hazard to air naviga- public safety that requires immediate con- tion. struction or alteration, the 30-day requiremen t Subpart C-Obstruction Standard s in paragraph (b) of this section does not ap- ply and the notice may be sent by telephone , § 77.21 Scope . telegraph, or other expeditious means, with an (a) This subpart establishes standards fo r executed FAA Form 7460-1 submitted within determining obstructions to air navigation . five days thereafter. Outside normal busines s It applies to existing and proposed manmade hours, emergency notices by telephone or tele- objects, objects of natural growth, and terrain . The standards apply to the use of navigabl graph may be submitted to the nearest FA A e airspace by aircraft and to existing air naviga- Flight. Service Station. tion facilities, such as an air navigation aid, airport, Federal airway, instrument approach (e) Each person who is required to notify th e or departure procedure, or approved off-airway Administrator by paragraph (b) or (c) of § 77 .13, route. Additionally, they apply to a planned or both, shall send an executed copy of FAA facility or use, or a change in an existing Form 117-1, Notice of Progress of Construction facility or use, if a proposal therefor is on file or Alteration, to the [Manager], Air Traffic with the Federal Aviation Administration o r Division, FAA Regional Office having jurisdic- an appropriate military service on the date th e tion over the area involved . notice required by § 77 .13(a) is filed .
Ch . 1 (Arndt. 77.11, Eff . 10125188)
E-4 December 1993
'FAA Runway Approach Protection Standards / Appendix E
PART 77 OBJECTS AFFECTING NAVIGABLE AIRSPACE
(b) At those airports having defined run- obstruction to air navigation if it is of greate r ways with specially prepared hard surfaces , height than any of the following heights o r the primary surface for each such runway ex- surfaces : tends 200 feet beyond each end of the runway . (1) A height of 500 feet above ground At those airports having defined strips o r level at the site of the object . pathways that are used regularly for the takin g (2) A height that is 200 feet abov e off and landing of aircraft and have been ground level or above the established air- designated by approriate authority as runways, port elevation, whichever is higher, withi n but do not have specially prepared hard sur- 3 nautical miles of the established reference faces, each end of the primary surface for each point of an airport, excluding heliports, with such runway shall coincide with the cor- its longest runway more than 3,200 feet in responding end of the runway . At those air- actual length, and that height increases i n ports, excluding seaplane bases, having a de- the proportion of 100 feet for each addi- fined landing and takeoff area with no define d tional nautical mile of distance from th e pathways for the landing and taking off of airport up to a maximum of 500 feet . aircraft, a determination shall be made as to (3) A height within a terminal obstacl e which portions of the landing and takeoff are a clearance area, including an initial approach are regularly used as landing and takeoff segment, a departure area, and a circlin g pathways. Those pathways so determine d approach area, which would result in th e shall be considered runways and an appro- priate primary surface as defined in § 77 .25(c) vertical distance between any point on th e object and an established minimum instru- will be considered as being longitudinall y ment flight altitude within that area o r centered on each runway so determined, and segment to be less than the required obstacl each end of that primary surface shall coincide e with the corresponding end of that runway . clearance. (4) A height within an en route obstacle (c) The standards in this subpart apply t o clearance area, including turn and termina- the effect of construction or alteration pro- posals upon an airport if, at the time of filin g tion areas, of a Federal airway or approve d of the notice required by §77 .13(a), that air- off-airway route, that would increase the port is- minimum obstacle clearance altitude. (1) Available for public use and is liste d (5) The surface of a takeoff and landing e in the Airport Directory of the current Air- area of an airport or any imaginary surfac . man's Information Manual or in either the established under §§ 77.25, 77.28, or 77.29 g Alaska or Pacific Airman's Guide and Char t However, no part of the takeoff or landin Supplement ; or, area itself will be considered an obstruction . (2) A planned or proposed airport or an (b) Except for traverse ways on or nea r airport under construction, that is the an airport with an operative ground traffi c subject of a notice or proposal on file wit h control service, furnished by an air traffic con- the Federal Aviation Administration, and, trol tower or by the airport management an d except for military airports, it is clearly in- coordinated with the air traffic control service , dicated that that airport will be available the standards of paragraph (a) of this section for public use ; or, apply to traverse ways used or to be used fo r (3) An airport that is operated by a n the passage of mobile objects only after the armed force of the United States. heights of these traverse ways are increased (d) [Deleted] by : (1) Seventeen feet for an Interstate High- 1 77.23 Standards for determining obstruc- way that is part of the National System o f tions . Military .and Interstate Highways where (a) An existing object, including a mobil e overcrossings are designed for a minimu m object, is, and a future object would be, an of 17 feet vertical distance.
December 1993 E-5
FAA Runway Approach Protection Standards / Appendix E
OBJECTS AFFECTING NAVIGABLE AIRSPACE PART 77
(2) Fifteen feet for any other public road- the primary surface extends 200 feet beyon d way. each end of that runway : but when the run- (3) Ten feet or the height of the highes t way has no specially prepared hard surface, o r mobile object that would normally traverse planned hard surface, the primary surface ends the road, whichever is greater, for a private at each end of that runway. The elevation o f road. any point on the primary surface is the sam e (4) Twenty-three feet for a railroad. as the elevation of the nearest point on the (5) For a waterway or any other travers e runway centerline . The width of a primary way not previously mentioned, an amoun t surface is : equal to the height of the highest mobile (1) 250 feet for utility runways having object that would normally traverse it . only visual approaches. t 77.25 Civil airport imaginary surfaces . (2) 500 feet for utility runways having The following civil airport imaginary sur- nonprecision instrument approaches . faces are established with relation to the air- (3) For other than utility runways the port and to each runway . The size of each width is : such imaginary surface is based on the cate- (i) 500 feet for visual runways having gory of each runway according to the type o f only visual approaches. approach available or planned for that run- (ii) 500 feet for nonprecision instru- way. The slope and dimensions of the ap- ment runways having visibility minimum s proach surface applied to each end of a run- greater than three-fourths statute mile. way are, determined by the most precis e (iii) 1,000- feet for a nonprecision in- approach existing_or planned for that runwa y strument runway. having: a nonprecision end. instrument approach with visibility mini- (a) Horizontal surface-a horizontal plane mums as low as three-fourths of a statute 150 feet above the established airport eleva- mile, and for precision instrument . run- tion, the perimeter of which is constructed b y ways. swinging arcs of specified radii from the center The width of the primary surface of a run- of each end of the tirimary surface of eac h way will be that width prescribed in this runway of each airport and connecting th e section for the most precise approach existing adjacent arcs by lines tangent to those arcs. or planned for either end of that runway. The radius of each arc is : (d) Approach surface-a surface longitu- (1) 5,000 feet for all runways designated dinally centered on the extended runwa y as utility or visual ; centerline and extending outward and upwar (2) 10,000 feet for all other runways d . from each end of the primary surface. An The radius of the arc specified for each en d approach surface is applied to each end of each of a runway will have the same arithmetical runway based upon the type of approac h value. That value will be the highest deter- available or planned for that runway end . mined for either end of the runway . When a 5,000-foot arc is encompassed by tangents con- (1) The inner edge of the approach sur- necting two adjacent 10,000-foot arcs, the face is the same width as the primary 5,000-foot arc shall be disregarded on the con- surface and it expands uniformly to a struction of the perimeter of the horizonta l width of : surface. (i) 1,250 feet for that end of a utility (b) Conical surface-a surface extendin g runway with only visual approaches ; outward and upward from the periphery o f (ii) 1,500 feet for that end of a run- the horizontal surface at a slope of 20 to 1 way other than a utility runway with only for a horizontal distance of 4,000 feet . visual approaches ; (c) Primary surface-a surface longitu- (iii) 2,000 feet for that end of a utility dinally centered on a runway. When the runway with a nonprecision instrument runway has a specially prepared hard surface, approach ;
E- 6 December 1993
FAA Runway Approach Protection Standards / Appendix E
PART 77 OBJECTS AFFECTING NAVIGABLE AIRSPAC E
(iv) 3,500 feet for that end of a non- is constructed by scribing an arc with a precision instrument runway other tha n radius of 7,500 feet about the centerline at utility, having visibility minimums greater the end of each runway and interconnectin g than three-fourths of a statute mile ; these arcs with tangents. (v) 4,000 feet for that end of a non- (2) Conical surface-A surface extendin g precision instrument runway, other than from the periphery of the inner horizonta l utility, having a nonprecision instrumen t surface outward and upward at a slope o f approach with visibility minimums as low 20 to 1 for a horizontal distance of 7,000 as three-fourths statute mile; and feet to a height of 500 feet above the estab- (vi) 16,000 feet for precision instrumen t lished airfield elevation. runways. (3) Outer horizontal surface-A plane, (2) The approach surface extends for a located 500 feet above the established air- horizontal distance of: field elevation, extending outward from th e (i) 5,000 feet at a slope of 20 to 1 for outer periphery of the conical surface for a all utility and visual runways ; horizontal distance of 30,000 feet . (ii) 10,000 feet, at a slope of 34 to 1 (b) Related to runways. These surface s for all nonprecision instrument runways apply to all military airports . other than utility; and, (1) Primary surface-A surface locate d (iii) 10,000 feet at a slope of 50 to 1 on the ground or water longitudinally with an additional 40,000 feet at a slope of centered on each runway with the same 40 to 1 for all precision instrument run- length as the runway . The width of th e ways. primary surface for runways is 2,000 feet . (3) The outer width of an approach sur- However, at established bases where sub- face to an end of a runway will be that width stantial construction has taken place in ac- prescribed in this subsection for the mos t cordance with a previous lateral clearanc e precise approach existing or planned for criteria, the 2,000-foot width may be reduced that runway end. to the former criteria. (e) Transitional surface-These surfaces ex- (2) Clear zone surface-A surface located tend outward and upward at right angles to on the ground or water at each end of th e the runway centerline and the runway center- primary surface, with a length of 1,000 fee t line extended at a slope of 7 to 1 from the and the same width as the primary surface . sides of the primary surface and from th e (3) Approach clearance surface-An in- sides of the approach surfaces. Transitional clined plane, symmetrical about the runway surfaces for those portions of the precisio n centerline extended, beginning 200 feet be- approach surface which project through and yond each end of the primary surface at the beyond the limits of the conical surface, ex- centerline elevation of the runway end an d tend a distance of 5,000 feet measured hori- extending for 50,000 feet . The slope of the zontally from the edge of the approach surfac e approach clearance surface is 50 to 1 along and at right angles to the runway centerline . the runway centerline extended until it reaches an elevation of 500 feet above the § 77.27 [Revoked ] established airport elevation. It then con- § 77.28 Military airport Imaginary surfaces_ tinues horizontally at this elevation to a (a) Related to airport reference points. point 50,000 feet from the point of begin- These surfaces apply to all military airports . ning. The width of this surface as the run- For the purposes of this section a military air- way end is the same as the primary surface , port is any airport operated by an armed force it flares uniformly, and the width at 50,00 0 of the United States . is 16,000 feet. (1) Inner horizontal surface-A plane is (4) Transitional surfaces-These surface s oval in shape at a height of 150 feet abov e connect the primary surfaces, the first 20 0 the established airfield elevation . The plane feet of the clear zone surfaces, and the ap-
December 1993 E-7
FAA Runway Approach Protection Standards / Appendix E
OBJECTS AFFECTING NAVIGABLE AIRSPACE PART 77
broach clearance surfaces to the inner hori- (b) Heliport approach surface. The ap- zontal surface, conical surface, outer hori- proach surface begins at each end of the heli- zontal surface or other transitional surfaces . port primary surface with the same width a s The slope of the transitional surface is 7 to 1 the primary surface, and extends outward an d outward and upward at right angles to th e upward for a horizontal distance of 4,000 feet runway centerline . where its width is 500 feet. The slope of th e approach surface is 8 to I for civil heliports § 77.29 Airport imaginary surfaces for hell- and 10 to 1 for military heliports . ports. (c) Heliport transitional surfaces . These (a) Heliport primary surface. The area of surfaces extend outward and upward from the the primary surface coincides in size and shape lateral boundaries of the heliport primar y with the designated takeoff and landing area surface and from the approach surfaces at a of a heliport. This surface is a horizonta l slope of 2 to 1 for a distance of 250 feet meas- plane at the elevation of the establishéd heli- ured horizontally from the centerline of the port elevation. primary and approach surfaces.
FAA Runway Approach Protection Standards / Appendix E
PART 77 OBJECTS AFFECTING NAVIGABLE AIRSPACE
Zt
DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS (FEET ) rOh- PRECISIO N DIM ITEM vlwu RUNWAY INSTRUMENT RUNWAY PRECISION INSTRUMENT I A D RUNWAY A C WIDTH OF PRIMARY SURFACE AN D A APPROACH SURFACE WIDTH AT 250 S00 500 300 1,00 0 1,00 0 INNER END R RADIUS OF HORIZONTAL SURFACE 5,000 _ 5,000 5,000 10,000 -10,000 10,00 0 NOM- P11EG :SION VISUAL IRSTRUNERT IPPROACH PRECISION APPROACH I IMSTRUMDII APPROACH A I C D C APPROACH SURFACE WIDTH AT ENO 1,050 1,500 1,000 3,500 4,000 _ 15,000 .. 0 APPROACH SURFACE LENGTH 5,000 5 .000 5 .000 10,000 10,000 • E APPROACH SLOPE 20•I 2O . 1 LO .1 34 .1 34 .1 •
A- UTILITY RUNWAY S R- RUNWAYS LARGER THAN UTILIT Y C- VISIBILITY MINIMUMS GREATER THAN 3/4 MIL E D- VISIIILITY MINIMUMS AS LOW AS 3/4 MIL E • PRECISION INSTRUMENT APPROACH SLOPE IS 50 . 1 FOR INNER 10,00 0 FEET AMD 40•I FOR AN ADDITIONAL 40,000 FEE T
December 1993 E-9
FAA Runway Approach Protection Standards / Appendix E
Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteratio n FAA Form 746 0
DO NOT REMOVE CARBONS Aeronautical Study Number NOTICE OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OR ALTERATIO N -s :•eccttmee• 0' Ire-v,oor Ianp n fAeetlon Adnwwl,*. 1 . Nature of Proposal 2. Complete Description of Structur e
- .pe 8 Clas s C Wo r k Scneame Dale s A Inuuoe et tec lrve ract.ate000wer andass,gflea trecuencyat ❑ :•tinion ❑ Permanent Begmnmg all ex .stino prooosecot rnoad .ea AM FM or Tv broadcast Nev. "a1s stations unntIn g m.s snucMr e ❑ A In ral,cn ❑ Temporary (Duration monlnsl Era B Intrude see an d cort.gtiral .on of power Iranvm .ss.oe lanes Name and address of individual, company, corporation, etc. proposing th and Ines suooort .no towers .n tee v CIn.IY of FAA 1act1 .l.es 3A . e and pualc'airpon s construction or alteration. , Numbe r Street Cny Stale ano zit) Coder C InCluae mlormat .gn Snowing site orientation ai r*ten5•In s and construction materials of the prooosec str .ic :ure area code Telephone Number r 1
L a Name address and teteptlone number of proponent's representative II dtherent than 3 above
111 more space Is recurred, Continue on a separate sheet ) 4. Location of Structure : 5. Height and Elevation (Compfate to the nearest loot) Coora•nate s B Nearest City or Town and State C Name of nearest airport neutron ttigntpar k A Etevat•on of ate above mean sea level • -nea rest Second . or seaplane case
01 ) " . i • Dis :artce n -B t t I DstanCe lion, structure to nearest punt o f B Ne,gnt of Structure Inauotng al l nearest runway appurtenances and tigntrng (It any, abov e • _a :aece Miles ground, or water d so situated oI ' 2. D,recnon to nZ t2t Direction from structure to airport C Overall netgnt above mean sea level IA d:
- _es :e h' 0 O 'rcCa :cn of see wan •esoec• to mgnways streets airports prominent terra., estates ectssng structures etc Allacn a US ûeo.og .cat Survey euaorangle mac or et: . .a•e^• snowlhg :ne rerallonsnto of construct.bn site to nearest atrportls) f rfmore space's recurred conttnue on a separate sneer of paper and attach to tars nonce I
••Ce s rec..•reo try Par : 77 of me Federal ArIatlon Regutarrons . la C F R Parr 771 pursuant to Section ' 10t of me FederalAm.anon Act of 1958 as amenaed•49 U S C 1'0 t Pe • s ales who v now .ngry and wtaingfy vrorate tie Nonce reouuemenrs of Part?? are suoleCl to a line t cr .mnat penalty t of not more roan 5500 for me lest ollense and not mor e •^a, S2 'or suoseeuenr orlenses. pursuant ro Section 902tai of the Federal Awatron Act of 1958 as amended rag U S C 14721 a .I I HEREBY CERTIFY that all of the above statements made by me are true, complete, and correct to the best of m y knowledge . In addition, I agree to obstruction mark and/or light the structure in accordance with established marking & lighting standards if necessary. Date Typed Name•Ttlle o1 Peron F .I.ng Notice IS.gnature
FOR FAA USE ONLY ... FA A will either [atom this form or issue a separate acknavledgemant. is required any time the protect' is abandoned . o r The Proposal : Supplemental Nobs* of Construction FAA Form 7480.2 At least 48 hours before the start of coastruchon, ❑ Does not require a notice to FAA- ❑ MNit five daya.alter the construction reaches its greatest height UI tis not identified as an obetruCion under .. .. .: . :: . a.' • _. - any standard of FAR. Part 77, Subpart C . "- - Thls determination exptrel bit unless : and would not be a hazard to air navigation . (a) extended . revised or terminated by the issuing office ; LJ Is etenufed as an obstruction under th e (b).the construction is subject to the licensing authority of the Federal Communications Commission and an standards of FAR, Part 77, Subpart C . bu t appllcalton tone construction permit Is made to the FCC on or before the above expiration date. In such would not be a tsazantY to air navigation. - , ..' cue the determination expires on the data presatbed by the FCC for completion of construction, or on the data that FCC denies the application S h oul d be obstruction mar k e d . lighted per FAA Advisory Circular ' ...NOTE; Request for extension of the effective period of this determination must be postmarked or delivered to th e . " issuing office at east 15 days prior to the expiration date- 70r7480.1. Chapter (s) - ' It the structure la subject to Um iiceraing auNOttry of the FCC, a copy of this determinatron will be sent to tha t ❑ Obstruction masiong and lighting are not Astern''. necessary. Remarks: ...
moodd In Signature Data
Fret. Fenn 7466-1 • - . DO NOT REMOVE CARBONS
E-1 0 December 199 3
FAA Runway Approach Protection Standards / Appendix E
Airport Design Standards FAA Advisory Circular No. 150/5300-1 3
Table 2-4 . Approach surface dimension s
Facilities Runway End Approach Surface Dimensions
Expecte d Inner Outer Approach Opposite Length Width Width Slope To Serve End End feet feet feet run/ris e (meters) (meters) (meters )
V V 5,000 250 1,250 20 : 1 (1 500) (75) (375 )
NP 5,000 500 1,250 20 : 1 Only (1 500) (150) (375 )
Small NP 3/4 5,000 1,000 1,250 20 :1 P (1 500) (300) (375 ) Airplanes NP V 5,000 500 2,000 20 : 1 NP (I 500) (150) (600)
NP 3/4 5,000 1,000 2,000 20 : 1 P (1 500) (300) (600)
V V 5,000 500 1,500 20 : 1 NP (1 500) (150) (450 )
NP 3/4 5,000 1,000 1,500 20 : 1 Large P (1 500) (300) (450)
Airplanes NP V 10,000 500 3,500 34 : 1 NP (3 000) (150) (1 050 )
NP 3/4- 10,000 1,000 3,500 34 : 1 P (3 000) (300) (1 050)
Large NP 3/4 V 10,000 1,000 4,000 34 : 1 NP (3 000) (300) (1 200) or NP 3/4 P On ly P V 10,000 1,000 4,000 50 : 1 Small ' NP (3 000) (300) (1 200) NP 3/4 PLUS Airplanes P 40,000 4,000 16,000 40 : 1 (12 000) (1 200) (4 800)
V - Visual approach NP - Nonprecision instrument approach with visibility minimums more tha n 3/4-statute mil e NP 3/4 - Nonprecision instrument approach with visibility minimums as low a s 3/4-statute mile P - Precision instrument approac h
December 1993 E-1 1
FAA Runway Approach Protection Standards / Appendix E
-Table 2-5.-Runway--protection-zone--(RP-2<)-dlmensinns----
Facilities Runway End Dimensions For Approach End
Expected Inne r Oute r Approach Opposite Length Width Width RPZ To Serve End End L W1 W2 feet feet feet acres (meters) (meters) (meters)
V V 1,000 250 450 8 .03 5 (300) (75) (135)
NP 1,000 500 650 13 .200 Only (300) (150) (195)
• Small NP 3/4 1,000 1,000 1,050 23 .542 P (300) (300) (315 ) Ai rp l anes NP V 1,000 500 800 14 .92 2 NP (300) (150) (240 )
NP 3/4 1,000 1,000 1,200 25 .25 2 P (300) (300) (360 )
V V 1,000 500 700 13 .77 0 NP (300) (150) (210 )
NP 3/4 1,000 1,000 1,100 24 .10 5 Large P (300) (300) (330 )
Airplanes NP V 1,700 500 1,010 29 .46 5 NP (510) (150) (303 )
NP 3/4 1,700 1,000 1,425 47 .320 P (510) (300) (427 .5 )
Large NP 3/4 V 1,700 1,000 1,510 48 .97 8 NP (510) (300) (453 ) or NP 3/4 P O n l y P V 2,500 1,000 1,750 78 .914 Small NP (750) (300) (525 ) NP 3/4 Airplanes P
V Visual approac h NP Nonprecision instrument approach with visibility minimums more tha n 3/4-statute mile NP 3/4 - Nonprecision instrument approach with visibility minimums as low a s 3/4-statute mil e P Precision instrument approach
E-1 2 December 1993
FAA Runway Approach Protection Standards / Appendix E
3N
8
a
NOTE : 1. See Table 2-5 fo r dimension WI, W2 , L 2. See Tables 3-1 through 3-3 for dimensions R, Q
Figure 2-3 . Runway protection zone
December 1993 E-1 3
Appendix C
LIST OF SOURCES
P & D Technologies, Phase II: General Aviation Feasibility/Airport Master Plan Study fo r Fritzsche Field, Marina, California ; Prepared for Ford Ord Economic Developmen t Authority, November 8, 1993
Draft Environmental Assessment/Environmental Impact Report: City of Marina, California. Airport Plans Permits, U.C. Technology Center, Airport Area General Plan and Zonin g Amendments and Redevelopment Plan; Prepared for the City of Marina and the Federal Aviation Administration; February 21, 1995
Hodges & Shutt, Airport Land Use Planning Handbook; Prepared for California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics, December 1993
Wadell Engineering Corporation, Regional Airport System Plan; Prepared for Association o f Monterey Bay Area Governments, August, 1995
Napa County Airport Land Use Commission, Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan., Adopted April 22, 1991
Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission, Comprehensive Land Use Plan for the Montere y Peninsula Airport., Adopted March 23, 1987
Imperial County Airport Land Use Commission, Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for Imperial County Airports, Adopted June 5, 199 1
Sacramento Area Airport Land Use Commission, Franklin Field: Comprehensive Land Use Plan, Adopted December,1988; Amended December, 1992
Alameda County Airport Land Use Commission, Alameda County Airport Land Use Policy Plan , Adopted July 16, 1986