City of Camarillo 601 Carmen Drive  P.O. Box 248  Camarillo, CA 93011-0248

Office of the City Manager (805) 388-5307 FAX (805) 388-5318

June 10, 2020

VIA EMAIL

Board of Supervisors County of Ventura c/o Clerk of the Board [email protected] 800 S. Victoria Avenue Ventura, 93003

Re: Final Mitigated Negative Declaration for the CloudNine Project at Camarillo Board Meeting: June 16, 2020

Dear Supervisors:

The City of Camarillo (‘City”) hereby submits the following comments in regard to the Final Mitigated Negative Declaration for the CloudNine Project at Camarillo Airport. As noted below, the City is requesting that the Board require that the Final Mitigated Negative Declaration for this Project include the following language:

The Project must comply with the terms and restrictions in the October 13, 1976 Agreement Between County of Ventura and City of Camarillo Pertaining to Camarillo Airport Development and Surrounding Land Use except to the extent, if at all, a term or restriction of that Agreement is preempted by federal or state law.

BACKGROUND

On October 17, 1976, the County of Ventura and the City of Camarillo entered into an Agreement Between County of Ventura and City of Camarillo Pertaining to Camarillo Airport Development and Surrounding Land Use (“1976 Agreement”). A copy of the 1976 Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit “1” and Exhibit B to the 1976 Agreement includes “Camarillo Airport Restrictions” including Restriction #4 which reads: “An aircraft weight limitation of 115,000 lbs. (twin wheel) shall be in effect.”

The Final Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the Project includes language which expressly conflicts with the limitations imposed by the 1976 Agreement in that the MND allows for aircraft in excess of the 115,000 lbs limitation by including business jets. Attached hereto as Exhibit 2 is a copy of excerpts from the MND which include the following statements: Board of Supervisors June 10, 2020 Page 2

Page 6: “This depth can accommodate an aircraft such as the Boeing Business Jet 737- 800 or a Gulfstream G650, two of the largest types of aircraft that are anticipated to use the airport.

Page 8: As noted in the table (page 9), the Proposed Project contours were modeled with additional turboprop and business jet aircraft which are anticipated to operate at the airport as a result of the proposed Cloud 9 development.

Page 9: Table Bottom of page lists the G650 and Boeing Business Jets with each to have Annual Operations of 312.

On November 19, 2019, the Applicant for this Project (RKR Incorporated) submitted a letter to the Ventura County Department of (attached as Exhibit “3”) which includes the following statement on page 1: “To be clear, RKR, Inc is NOT and has NO intention now or in the future to allow Boeing 737 aircraft to operate from the CloudNine location.” (bolding in original letter).

On November 20, 2019, the City submitted a letter to the Department of Airports commenting upon the Mitigated Negative Declaration and noted that the MND fails to acknowledge the 1976 Agreement and the Airport Restrictions (see pages 1 to 2 of the City’s letter attached hereto as Exhibit “4”).

On December 31, 2019, Kip Turner submitted a letter to the Ventura County Transportation Commission which included the following statement on page 1 (Exhibit “5” hereto):

“The CloudNine project is currently undergoing environmental review, with a draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) having been opened for public comment on October 21, 2019, and closed on November 20, 2019. The County’s review of those public comments is ongoing, and it is anticipated that the MND, including any revisions that come out of the public-comment process, will be presented to the County’s Board of Supervisors in early 2020 for approval.” (Emphasis Added)

On February 26, 2020, the City Council voted unanimously to adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Camarillo in Support of Requiring CloudNine Project at Camarillo Airport to Comply with 1976 Agreement between City of Camarillo and County of Ventura (Exhibit “6” attached hereto) which resolves that the Resolution be submitted to the County recommending that the County, among other things: “amend the MND to require that the Project comply with the 1976 Agreement between the City and County including, but not limited to, the Camarillo Airport Restrictions except to the extent, if at all a term or Restriction of the 1976 Agreement is preempted by federal or state law.”

On March 12, 2020, Camarillo City Attorney Brian Pierik appeared before the Camarillo Airport Authority and made comments regarding the draft MND regarding the restrictions of the 1976 Agreement between the City and County, the provisions of the MND regarding business jets, the letter from Mr. Rasak of November 19, 2019 which stated that RKR had no intention now or in the future to allow Boeing 737 aircraft to operate from the CloudNine location, the City’s letter of November 20, 2019 commenting upon the MND and the December 31, 2019 letter from Mr. Turner. Mr. Pierik requested the Camarillo Airport Authority to agree to add to the MND the underlined language in the response to comments (Exhibit “7”) attached hereto: “The Project must comply with the restrictions in the Board of Supervisors June 10, 2020 Page 3

Agreement except to the extent, if at all, a term or Restriction in the 1976 Agreement is preempted by federal or state law.” The Camarillo Airport Authority voted to approve the MND as submitted without the additional language requested by the City.

REQUEST

The City is hereby requesting that the Board of Supervisors take action at its meeting on June 16, 2020 approving the addition to the MND following language: “The Project must comply with the restrictions in the Agreement except to the extent, if at all, a term or Restriction in the 1976 Agreement is preempted by federal or state law.”

There is ample reason to add this language since otherwise the Applicant could, under the terms of the MND as presently written, argue at some time in the future that this Project can allow for business jet aircraft. Since the Applicant has expressly stated in the letter of November 19, 2019 that it has “NO intention now or in the future to allow Boeing 737 aircraft to operate from the CloudNine location”, there is no reason that commitment should not be memorialized in the MND. A letter from the Applicant is not a commitment, it is just a letter. This commitment needs to be confirmed in the MND.

The City further requests that the Board not approve the MND unless the language requested by the City regarding compliance with the 1976 Agreement is added to the MND.

We urge the Board to take the action the City has requested herein and include in the MND the language set forth in this Request and not to approve the MND unless this language is added. .

Thank you for your cooperation.

Sincerely,

Carmen Nichols Interim City Manager cc: Supervisor Steve Bennett - [email protected] Supervisor Linda Parks - [email protected] Supervisor Kelly Long - [email protected] Supervisor Bob Huber - [email protected] Supervisor John Zaragoza - [email protected] Leroy Smith, County Counsel Camarillo Mayor Anthony Trembley Camarillo Vice Mayor Susan Santangelo Charlotte Craven, Camarillo City Council Member Shawn Mulchay, Camarillo City Council Member Kevin Kildee, Camarillo City Council Member Enclosures: Exhibit 1 to 7 as noted agreement between county of VENTURA AND CITY OF CAMARILLO PERTAINING TO CAMARILLO AIRPORT DEVELOP MENT AND SURROUNDING LAND USE

THIS AGREEMENT is entered into by and between the COUNTY OF VENTURA (hereinafter "COUNTY") and the CITY OP CAMARILLO (hereinafter "CITY") and shall become binding and effective upon the date of the last signa ture hereupon. The parties make the following recitals: A. COUNTY has been granted possession of the major portion of the former Oxnard Air Force Base under lease from the Federal Government for use as a public airport facility (which facility is hereinafter referred to as the

"Camarillo Airport"). B. COUNTY and CITY anticipate that fee title to the Camarillo Airport will be transferred from the Federal Government to COUNTY in the near future

« in accordance with COUNTY'S application therefor. , C. COUNTY'S application for transfer of Camarillo Airport calls for the establishment of a joint powers body representing COUNTY and CITY to oversee airport development. D • Most of the Camarillo Airport and much of the land surrounding the airport is located within CITY. E. COUNTY and'CITY desire to achieve maximum mutual cooperation in the development of Camarillo Airport and to" maintain a balanced perspective in fulfilling COUNTY aviation requirements within a framework of continuing community sensitivity.

10/13/76

^ Ml EXHIBIT 1 s?

F. COUNTY and CITY objectives will be realized by a joint exercise of powers by and between COUNTY and CITY to form a joint review body to

oversee airport development and surrounding land use planning.

Based upon the foregoing recitals, the parties do hereby agree as

follows:

• I

V 1. COUNTY and CITY do hereby jointly exercise their powers and

create the Camarillo Airport Authority (hereinafter "Authority").

2. The Authority shall be composedI of two methbers of the Ventura

County Board of Supervisors, which members shall be selected by the Board

of Supervisors; two members of the Camarillo City Council, which members shall be selected by the City Council; and a fifth member to be selected by a

majority of the other four members.

• 3. The Ventura County Board of Supervisors shall not give formal

approval or otherwise act upon any matter brought before it pertaining to

development, operation or any other matter at the Camarillo Airport until the

matter shall have first been submitted to the Authority and a recommendation

received therefrom.

4. The,Camarillo City Council and the Ventura County Board of

Supervisors shall not grant any approval or take any other action in respect to any land use matter within the Camarillo Airport Zone until the matter shall ^ ,

have first been submitted to the Authority and a recommendation received there

from. "Any land use matter within the Camarillo Airport Zone" shall mean actions

relating to zoning, master or general planning, use permits and all other exercises of th« police power whicu regulate the dovelopincut of the .ea designated in

Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.

5. COUNTY shall operate the Camarillo Airport in a manner consistent

■with the restrictions specified in Exhibit B. attached hereto and incorporated herein by thir-; reference. The restrictions shall not be modified, except in emergencies, until the proposed modification shall ha've first been submitted to the Authority and a recommendation received therefrom.

0!. COUNTY and CITY shall ^exercise their police pov/ers so as to main tain the compatibility of the land within the Camarillo Airport Zone with aviation ! use and shall not allow uses inconsistent therewith. 7. The Authority shall act expeditiously and avoid unreasonable delays in formulating recommendations for the Ventura County Board of Super visors and the Camarillo City Council. Any matter submitted to the Authority shall be deemed to have been approved following the expiration of sixty (60) days following submission unless a majority of the members of the Authority . shall have'denied or taken other action on a matter submitted toit. 8. Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraphs 3 and i, the Camarillo City Council and the Ventura County Board of Supervisors may act on any matter prior to (1) receiving a recommendation from the Authority or (2) the expiration of sixty (60) days, whichever occurs first, to the extent that such action may be required by law. In the event of a requirement for early action on any matter to be submitted to the Authority, such matter shall be submitted,to the Authority at the earliest possible date and the A.uthority shall be given notice of the date by which action must be taken. 9. The Ventura County Board of Supervisors and the Camarillo City

Council shall each give full consideration to all recommendations of the Authority and shall not take any action inconsistent therewith unless by at least a four- fifths vote.

10. The Authority shall hold monthly meetings at a time chosen by

I ^ members of the Authority. Special meetings may be called by the chairman, vice chairman or any three members. The Authority shall promulgate and adopt rules for the orderly conduct of its meetings and affairs. 11. The Authority shall elect from its members a chairman and vice chairman to serve for one year. Elections shall be held in January.

12. COUNTY shall, without cost to CITY, provide staff and secretarial support to the Authority, which said support shall include the taking of minutes at all Authority meetings, the preparation and distribution of agendas for Authority meetings and coordination of Authority business with CITY staff. 13. All additional expenditures which are recommended by Authority shall be paid by COUNTY subject to COUNTY'S prior approval. The provisions of paragraph nine, pertaining to the four-fifths vote requirement, shall not apply to funding approvals. In the event COUNTY fails to approve any pro posed expenditure, the expenditure shall not be incurred unless and until the manner/ of payment is mutually agreed upon between the parties hereto. 14. The debts, liabilities and obligations of the Authority shall be solely the debts, liabilities and obligations of the Authority and neither the

CITY nor the COUNTY shall be liable therefor.

4. 15. The term of this agreement shall be for perpetuity; provided, however, that if COUNTY is precluded from operating the Camarillo Airport for public airport purposes, then this agreement shall be of no further force

or effect.

16. This agreement may be modified at any time by mutual agreement

of the parties.

COUNTY OP VENTURA

airiijjih, Board di^upervisors

ATTEST:

ROBERT L. HAIUM, County Clerk, County of Ventura, State of Cali fornia, and ex officio Clerk of the Board of Supervisors thereof.

By\ /^ Deputy Clerk

CITY OF CAMARILLO

* Mayor

ATTEST:

By.

5. f

EXHIBIT A

The "Camarillo Airport Zone" shall consist of the area bounded by

the following:

Highway 34 to the south; the southerly extension of Carmen

Drive to the east; Highway 101 to the north; the. western boundary of the Camarillo sphere of interest, as designated

on the 1974 Camarillo General Plan, to the west. EXHIBIT B

CAMARELLO AIRPORT RESTRICTIONS

1. The airport shall be operated for- purposes only. General aviation is defined in Attachment 1, affixed hereto and incorporated herein.

2. The airport operating hours firom 7:00 AM to 10:po PM.

3. The usable run\?ay length shall not exceed 6,000 feet and.shall be the most •westerly 6,000 feet of the existing runv/ay.

4. An aircraft ViTeighf limitation of 115,000 lbs. (twin ■wheel) shall be in effect.

5. The airport \'PR traffic pattern shall .be to the south of the airfield as designated on Attachment 2, affixed hereto and incorporated herein.

6. Airport development shall be guided to ensure that residential areas are not exposed to noise levels greater than 60 CNEL average noise and 90 dBA single event noise. •V ■ >• .• ,j. /> *'* //y/ ...-.; • ./;• f* , V*V » '..*«. V.u^/^\». L-/>^^ *••• ■_• •' •.* ■'■V \\ • /*' • ^ f^- ■y- lA' /.■ . • 51;* '. ■ 20i

«» ■« •« _r I 1 1 I I ' •■ r -n ■ " ■ ■':^rikf)uc. i PRTTtm

r—-—\/'aA/AAr »r , »* oC ^ / / /' ^ A A/A ' rA/' *../ A /':A ✓A/ p«»^* AA lA A/ . /A^ •«• M

,. • * s»*^ 1**^f i«l' mw^m^w^mw-.. 7 'i / , •■•', •■ v # • ■ t . • • , ■ i - ■ V . ; /, ! i ' L.j! .. Y \ • ' ■ • . 1 A X •- * I . . I * . I ••p*.*'' /\ Ti:.ro""-jp K I iD I • 7

ATTTVClIIffiHT 1

CEHBT'j^.L AVi.vriOij General aviation includes all 3:>usinGss and cor.:mcrpia3. trarninr;, personal transportation, proficionov, and suort flying no-> ci.;;:=..;i.ried ns nil- carrior. Cc-noral aviation incluuefj arr rani or charter for revenue on a noa-schotlulc oasis (rntcirstatc United to 30 passengors, 7,i300 2.]jrs, cargo), and xntrastate freight carriers and interstate carriers wh.ich operate through "exclusive long-tern contiacts (rvon-cojiuaon carriers). Excluded fron general_aviation are all air carrier operations. Air carrier operations consist of operations whicn aro c;:rtificated by the CAB or the PUC and conprise tne following;

(a) CAB Certificate of Convenience & Necessity covers all interstate con-.ion carriers (services offered to public at large) on a regular schedule and route, CAB also certiricates interstate air taxi and ciiartor aircraft v/ith nore than 30 seats which operate for revenue on a non-scneduled oasis, CAB certificates all interstate common carrier freight also, including air taxi over 7/500 pounds of cargo carried. (b) PUC certificates all air carrier (paopls) of any size, v/hich operate on a regularly scheduled bas^,i.s o'/er sc]jedulcd routes for revenue. This includen third level carriers such as Golden VJest, PUC does not ooi^tificate intrastate freight air carriers. :#• W^!r.NDKi:NT

"ACSnEE'-TF.NT JiETWEEN COUNTY OF VENTURA AND' CITY.OF CAMAHILLO PERTAINING TO CAMARILLO ATHPORT DEVELOPMENT AND SURROUNDING LAND USE"

1. WHEREAS, the County of Ventura and the City of Camarillo in October of 1976, entered into a joint powers agreement pertaining to Airport Development and Surrounding Land Use: and , , 2. WHEREAS, said agreement provides for the formation of the Oxnard AirportAuthority and selection of members thereof; and . V-'HEHEyiS, the Authority how wishes to amend the "Agree ment." to allow alternate members to be appointed and vested with certain 'voting authority; ' nov;, THEF^EFORE, it is hereby resolved that tlie "AGR'="EM~MT HETWEEN COUNTY OF VENTURA AND CITY OF CAMARILLO PERTAINING .0 CAI4ARILL0 AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT AND SURROUNDING, LAND USE" be amended as follows: P9 2 para 2 "Composition .of Authori'ty." . Add: ."Members of the Board"of Supervisors may .. be selected by. the Board" of Supervisors as -alterna-tes, and members-of the City. *' ' Cbuncil may be 'selected by the City" Council as alternates". An alternate to the fifth member (publiq member) siay be selected by a majority vote of the other four Authority members. "Such designated alternate(s) may'be a voting particijiant(s) af an Authority meeting at such'time as the regular niember(s) representing his/her jurisdiction is not in attendance".

C EXHIBIT 2 BBniiiTBr«cf«nia4 *1 'DMfeM. Bt^AATMBWr vr CAMARiaO AIRPORT

2. PROJECT NAME/APPUCANT

CloudNine at Camanlio

Applicant RKR incorporated

3 PROJEaLOCATtON

The Proposed Project would be located on an approximate seven-acre site located in the northeast cor ner of the Camanlio Airport (Exhibit Al) The project site would be accessed via las Rosas Road for vehicles and by a taxilane ofFTaxiway G1 for aircraft The project site ts generally bordered by the Cam anlio Drain to the norths Las Posas Road to the east, privately developed hangars on County land to the south, and the site of proposed County-owned hangars to the west Camanlio Airport has one available for use (Exhibit A2) Runway 8-26 is oriented in a west-east manner and is 6,013 feet long and 150 feet wide The airfield taxiway system consists of two parallel taxiways(Taxiways F and H)on the south side of the runway with five entrance/exit taxiways (Taxiways A through E), as well as a partial parallel taxiway (Taxiway G)

4 PURPOSE OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT

The purpose of the Proposed Project is to provide additional commercial hangars at Camanlio Airport to meat increased aircraff storage needs The type of hangars proposed would allow for storage of larger aircraft in a pnvate setting, which currently is not available at the airport Each hangar/office space would feature amenities such as executive offices with energy-efficient light-emitting diode(LED) light ing, private lounges, flight department offices, and fitness rooms To maintain self-sustaining sources of revenue (as required by the airport's federal grant assurances), the County needs to plan for ways to continue and augment the airporfs revenue stream and to provide a range of aeronautical services in keeping with aviation business trends

5 EXISTING ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION

Camanlio Airport is owned by the County and operated by the County Department of Airports, it is des ignated as Urban on the County of Ventura Land Use Map(South Half)(County of Ventura 2019c)

The airport is also within the corporate limits of the City of Camanlio (City), three miles west/southwest of the 01/5 central business district The air^rt, including the project site, is designated as Public on the Qty ofCamanlio GeneralPlan (City of Camanlio 2017)and is zoned as M-1,Light Manu^ctunng (City of Camanlio 2019} The Oty generally defers to the adopted Camanlio Atrport Master Plan(AMP) as the

'-f A'." - ■ 's 'r:- 'IV '\,

, ; i r^-- ''-vMi i.' i i-^11' ,i 1'/-^ r il'-S ;.:n; ts-.,

i^r75:iL'JSiKT5 ■trrMaig^ifil:;' 'V isfJ: «?i7i!j"-; * rr r -TT'" f" - ' ., J.1 'a

''iT^ytLx-'i.-SpA X'a=--v l-r ;. .*> 5;i<-S(i. 77,~a 5^5 V-'^—^'S-rf ,1 nrlF,g; : s>r •"■'-■■ "Tfr-] lJOd.n\; ir;J 7*t'! iSHgjg;!

a;:iMia

Sit jL ^C'^iwm

A. 7 /' tK'f/

S ^ Q ;----.... .~..--r__,..

an>licable plannii^ document for development vnthin the airport's boundanes (see Section 101111, Development Controls,Community Design Element) The Proposed Project is consistent with the current Camanlh Airport Master Plan (Cdunty of Ventura Department of Airports 2011), which'included four large oommeraa! hangars proposed as private investments with ground leases maintained with the Cbuhty

6 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT

The Proposed Project is the development of approximately seven acres of open land on the northeast quadrant of the airport with four private commercial hangars and offices under a leasehold from the airport The Proposed Project Includes the following elements (Exhibit A3) • Four proposed hangar structures, each 168 feet wide by 150ieet deep by 44feet high, would be constructed These adjoining structures would provide a total overall length of approximately 672 feet by 150 feet Each hangar would include 25,200 sf of hangar space Single-story ofhce space ranging from 5,095 to 5,365 sf would adjoin each hangar with one office located a^acent to the east ofthe easternmost hangar and the other offices located north of the respective hang ars Total building area proposed for the project is 100,800 sf of hangar space and 20,650 sf of hangar office space

• Approximately 100,000 sf of landscape, hardstape, and vehicular parking and driveways are pro posed On-site Vehicular parking would be north of the hangars and is planned to include 114 standard stalls and stxAmerrcan D/sab/AtyAct[ADA}-compliantstalls A two-way vehicular dnve- way IS proposed m the northeast corner of the project site from Las Posas Road The Proposed Project includes an acceleration/deceleration traffic lane as well as a bike lane, sidewalk, and landscaping

• The proposed hangars would be accessed by a ramp (also called an apron) on the south side of the hangars, with a portion of the existing taxilane reconstructed south of the ramp The pro- the new hangars and ewsting toilane pavem "l^is;d@pth can asGommodat® an airerartsuch / ^ as the Boeing Business Jet 737-800,or a Gulfstream 6650,^ two of the largest tvp«s of aircraft ^ ' that are anticipated to use the :airpart Based on the geot^nical report, tte recommended taxilane pavement design could consist ofsix inches ofasphalt, over five inches of stabilized base, over 10 inches of crushed aggregate base Compliance with FAA pavement standards will be required

^The Boeing Business Jet 737-800 has a wingspa n of34 meters and a length of almost40 meters,the Gulfstieam 6650 has a wingspan and {engUi of approximataiy 30 meters each (SKYbrary w^site 2019)

iiW' Appendix B NOISE, AIR POLLUTANT, AND GREENHOUSE GAS MODELING

NOISE MODELING METHODOLOGY

The standard nfiethodology for analyzing noise conditions at airports involves the use of a computer sim ulation model The Airport Environmental Design Tool, Version Zd (AEDT) is required by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)for developing noise exposure contours AEDT is designed to predict an nual average aircraft noise conditions at a given geographic location The purpose of the noise model is to produce noise exposure contours that are overlain on a map of the airport and vianity to graphically represent aircraft noise conditions

For the purposes ofthis report. Community Noise Equivalent Level(CNEL) noise eiqiosure contours were prepared CNEL accounts for the increased sensitivity dunng the evening hours (7 00 PWI to 10 00 PM) and nighttime hours(10 DO PM to 7 CO AM) A 10>decibel weighting is applied to noise events occurring at night, and a 4 8-decibeI weighting is applied to those occurring during the evening hours CNEL is a summation metric which allows for objective analysis and ca n describe noise exposure comprehensively over a large area In addition to being widely accepted, the pnmary benefit of using the CNEL metric is that It accounts for the average community response to noise as determined by the actual number and types of noise events and the time of day they occur

To achieve an accurate representation of an airporfs noise conditions, the AEDT incorporates a combi nation of industry standard information and user-supplied inputs specific to the airport The software provides noise characteristics,standard flight profiles, and manufacturer-supplied flight procedures for aircraft within the United States(U S} civil and military fleets, including those which commonly operate

Brl at ^manllo Airport(airport) As each aircraft has difiererrt design and operating characteristics(number and type of engines, weight,and thrust levefs),each aircraft emits different noise levels Based on AEOT- provided and user inputs,aircraft sound exposure for the annual average day is calculated for the points in a end covenng the airport and surrounding areas The gnd values, represented with the CNEL, at each intersection point on the grid represent a noise level for that geographic location To create the noise contours, a line linkmg equal values, similar to those on a topographic map, is drawn u^ich connects points of the same DNL noise value In the same way that a topographic contour represents the same elevation, the noise contour identifies equal noise exposure The AEDT contains database tables correlating noise, thrust settings, and flight profiles for most of the civilian aircraft and many common military aircraft operating in the U S This database, often referred to as the noise cun/e data, has been developed under FAA guidance based on rigorous noise monitoring in controlled settings This information was developed through more than a decade of research, includ ing extensive field measurements of more than 10,000 aircraft operations The database also includes performance data for each aircraft to allow for the computation of airport-specific flight profiles (rates of climb and descent) Airport-specific information, including runway configuration, flight paths, aircraft fleet mix, runway use distnbution, elevation, atmospheric conditions, end numbers of daytime and nighttime operations, are also used as modeling inputs Specific modeling assumptions for Camarillo Airport are discussed in the following sections and were derived from the Camanllo Airport Master Plan(County of Ventura Depart ment of Airports 2011)

AIRCRAFT FLEET MIX AND OPERATIONS

Database Selection

Noise emissions from an aircraft vary by the type and number of engines, as well as the airframe AEDT provides more than 3,000 engine and airframe combinations to represent many of the aircraft operating m,the United States Table 11; lists, th® existing condition wsth and without operations' associated with' the proppsed.Cfoud 9' d&elopmeht Asrnotsd ih the table, the Proposed Project contours were modeled with additional turboprop and biisiness jet aircraft which are anticipated-to .operate atthe airport as a result ©fthe proposed Cloud 9 development- ,

Based on prelimmary assumptions, ten fixed wmg aircraft and one helicopter will be stored in the Cloud 9 hangars The additional aircraft associated with the Cloud 9 hangars assumed for the noise modeling are summarized in Table 82 It is assumed that each hxed aircraft will perform six cperabons (takeoff or landing) per week, for a total of 312 annual operations per aircraft For the helicopter, two daily operations are assumed, for a total of 730 These operations are m addition to the Existing baseline condition

B-2 TASIEDI ,AireraR Fteot Mis and Oporatienii C^raanila Airport

Knerant Single Engine Fixed Pitch Propeller GA5EPF 27^60 27,450 Smgle Engine Variable Pitch PropcDer GASEPV 27.450 27,450 Beuh Baron BECSBP 5,876 5,876 Turboprop. 0HC6 954 9S4" Turboprop CNA441 2,233 2,233 Vurbopmp nfata$PM2 590 1.214 Turboprop SF340 20 20 Tuibo'proo CNA208 52 52 Turboprop C130 90 90 Small jet CNA510 626 626 { Small Jet CNAS25C 883 883 Small M ECUKESCO 266 266 i SrnallJet CNA5D0 688 688 1 Medium Jet CNAfflD 112 112 1 M^'iimJet CNASeOU 118 118 1 Medium Jet LEARSS 464 464 1 Medium Jst MliS X4 2,622 r Lame Jet GIV 2S0 572 i tofaeJet GV 722 1446 ! Large Jet TSJfQO 14 526 1 LarceJet CL600 842 842 Large Jet C17 4 4 i Largely CNA750 1,020 1.020 1 Large Jet EMBM5 28 28 1 Mllltarv FlEA lA 14 1 Udaopto' B20BL 6,012 G.742 Local ~ "1 Smgle Engine Fixed Pitdi Procetfer GASEPF 30,519 30.519 Single Engine Variable Pitch Propeller GASEPV 30,519 30,519 i Mult! Engine Poton BECSBP 6,404 6404 ! Itinerant Total I 77,151 I 51,001 i Local Total 67M1 i 67,441 i Total 144,592 1 148.442 Source RKR,Incur; orated end CoflinanAsfociatw anal ,

; TABLE B2 j Cloud 9 Hangar Aircraft i Camanllo Airport

t Falcon TX ! 312 3 hewker BOO 312 1 I PC-12 . i. 312 3 .pC-12 312 1 1 Hawker 800 1 312 3 3650 312 1 i Hawker BOO 1. 312 , 4 pdaing Business Jet 312 i z GZBO j 312 4 pell Jet Ranger 206 730 ! -i> 2. 6650 1 312 TOTAL OPBtATIONS 3,850 Source NCR,Incorporated and CofTman Associates analysis ;

B-3 .MR-INCOHPOKAfKD-

November 19,2019

Rip Turner Airports Director, County of Ventura Ventura County Dept. of Airports 555 Airport Way. Suite B Cainarillo CA 93010

RE: Boeing 737 Operations fi-oin CIoudNine

Dear Kip, It has been brought to my attention that there is a rumor being circulated through-out the airport and local community that the CIoudNine hangars are being constructed to accommodate and house Boeing 737 aircraft(See attached Ad in ). I would like to address this on tlie record to help clear up any misconceptions there may be and to reassure the tenants and locail community of the intent of the CIoudNine development. As you know narts of the CIoudNine development and sunnorting taxi-lane are designed and engineered to the Airports current design group(ADG III) which does include the Boeing 737 aircraft among others. When engineering certain elements of this project RKR must always take into consideration continuity of the current airport design standards while also ensuring this project stands the test of time far beyond RKR's initial lease. Please do not mistake RKR's desire to comply with the cuiTent airports design group as anything other than that. RKR is also aware of the current Joint Powers Agreement that exist between the city of Camarillo and the County of Ventura that limits aircraft operating weight at 115,0001bs as such RKR Inc. seeks to always operate within the safe operating limitation set forth by the County of Ventura and the Federal Aviation Administration.

Although one party approached RKR early in the development phase with a Boeing BBJ request, RKR Inc and the development team in coordination with the interested party ultimately determined Camarillo and the CIoudNine development were not a suitable location for their aircraft to operate from. Additionally, the cost of engineering the hangars to accommodate the additional wingspan and tail height were cost prohibitive. For that reason, among others, the CIoudNine development as a whole is NOT physically designed to accommodate the Boeing 737 aircraft. To be clear, RKR Inc is NOT and has NO intention now or in the future to allow Boeing 737 aircraft to operate from the CIoudNine location. Attached you will also find a section of CloudNine's current design packet showing the various elements of the structures

31280 Oak Crest Dr. Suite 2, Westlake Village, CA 91361 (805) 946-1665 [email protected]

EXHIBIT 3 RKRINC.COM design dimensions including door height limited to 28 feet again making the structure unusable by the Boeing 737 which boast a tail height of over 41 feet. We hope this letter helps dispel any rumors and demonstrates RKR Inc's willingness to commit to a development that tlie community can be proud of. Feel free to contact me for any questions or concerns you might have.

Sincerely,

Ronald K. Rasak CEO RKR Inc.

cc: Supervisor Kelly Long Supervisor John Zaragoza Co. of Ventura CEO Mike Powers Ail-port Authority Chair Bill Thomas Camarillo City Manager Dave Nonnan

31280 Oak Crest Dr. Suite 2, Westlake Village, CA 91361 (805)946-1665 [email protected]

RKRINC.COM 601 Carmen Drive •P.O. Box248 •Camarilla, CA 93021-0248

Office ofthe City Manager (805)388-5307 FAX(805) 388-5318

November 20, 2019

Ms. Erin Powers {Sent via email and hand delivered) Department of Airports, County of Ventura 555 Airport Way, Suite B Gamarillo, CA 93010

RE: City of Gamarillo Comments on Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration for Proposed Cloud Nine Hangar Development at the Gamarillo Airport

Ms. Powers: I The City has received a Notice of Availability and Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed Cloud Nine hangar development, located on the northeast quadrant of the Camarillo Airport and provides the following comments: 1. An Agreement Between County of Ventura and City of Camarillo Pertaining to Camarillo Airport Development and Surrounding Land Use ("Agreement") was entered into in October of 1976 (attached). Specifically, the Agreement includes Exhibit B - Camarillo Airport Restrictions ("Airport Restrictions"), which state:

1. The airport shall be operated for general aviation purposes only. General aviation is defined in Attachment 1, affixed hereto and incorporated herein. 2. The airport operating hours will be from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. 3. The useable runway length shall not exceed 6,000 feet and shall be the most westerly 6,000 feet of the existing runway. 4. An aircraft weight limitation of 115,000 lbs. (twin wheel) shall be in effect. 5. The airport VFR traffic pattern shall be to the south of the airfield as designated on Attachment 2, affixed hereto and incorporated herein. 6. Airport development shall be guided to bnsure that residential areas are not exposed to noise levels greater than 60 CNEL average noise and 90 dBA single event noise. The iS/MND fails to acknowledge the Agreement and the aforementioned Airport Restrictions contained in Exhibit B of the Agreement as applicable land use policies/regulations the project must comply or be conditioned to comply with. The

EXHIBIT 4 City of Camariiio Comments on Draft MND for Proposed Cloud Nine Hangar Development November 20, 2019 Page 2 of 5

IS/MND ignores the restrictions placed on the operation of the Airport, especially the aircraft weight limit of 115,000 lbs and runway location/length limit of the most westerly 6,000 feet. Tables B1 and B2 of the IS/MND disclose the various types of aircraft that will potentially use the proposed hangars and the numbers of operations annually (3,850 operations annually). The IS/MND indicates that the project may facilitate the operation of Boeing Business Jets, which could weigh up to 171,500 lbs., which is in violation of the Agreement. Even if this aircraft will not be operated at the maximum weight, it does not answer what the standard weight of such aircraft, or in other words, how can such aircraft operate without exceeding the weight limitation in the Agreement. The IS/MND does not address any safeguards or mitigation measures to ensure the maximum weight limit established in the Agreement is not exceeded. The IS/MND also completely fails to acknowledge that the Agreement created the Camariiio Airport Authority ("Authority") specifically so that the County of Ventura and City of Camariiio could jointly review and oversee all airport development and surrounding land use planning. As such, it similarly fails to acknowledge that the Agreement clearly requires that this proposed Airport land use project and its environmental document be submitted to and brought before the Authority for a recommendation first, before the Ventura County Board of Supervisors considers granting its approval of the project. (Agreement, Sections 3 and 4.) Indeed, the Agreement requires the Ventura County Board of Supervisors to give full consideration to all Authority recommendations and precludes the Supervisors from taking any action inconsistent with the Authority's recommendations unless by at least a four-fifths vote.(Agreement, Section 9.)

At a minimum, the MND should be revised to:

• Acknowledge the existence and important role of the Authority and ensure the Project and the IS/MND are submitted to the Authority first, as required by the Agreement, so the Authority can provide recommendations to the Ventura County Board of Supervisors regarding the adequacy of the MND and on whether to approve the project; and

• Acknowledge the proposed project's potential conflict with the Agreement's Airport Restrictions as a potentially significant land use impact and develop concrete mitigation measures to impose on the Project to ensure compliance ' therewith, including but not limited to measures to ensure no aircraft above the 115,000 lbs limit and that only the westerly 6,000 feet of the runway will be used and ensure those measures are monitored and enforced by the County going forward.

2. The Project Description on Page A-4 states, "The proposed hangars would be accessed by a ramp (also called an apron) on the south side of the hangars...The proposed aircraft ramp would be 84,000 sf(782.7 feet wide by 120 feet deep)to be located between the new hangars and existing taxilane pavement. This depth can SS5 Airport way, Suire B COUNTY OF VENTURA Camariixo, CA 3Sa 1 o PHOMC: laoB} 38S-A.Z74 aXR V CMA Fax;(sasi sae-Asee DEPARTMENT OF AIRPORTS ,n^a^

December'31, 2019 received JAN 22020 Ventura County Transportation Commission ATTN: Darren Kettle, Executive Director administration 950 County Square Drive, Suite 207 Ventura, CA 93003 Re: December 6, 2019, Letter from City of Camarillo Regarding CloudNine Project

Dear Mr. Kettle: The County of Ventura has reviewed the above-described letter to your Commission requesting various actions relating to the CloudNine project at the Camarillo Airport. The City's letter lacks legal and factual support. The County therefore requests that your Commission take no action regarding the CloudNine project.

The CloudNine Project The CloudNine project is a proposed ground lease between the County and a private developer, RKR Incorporated, to develop an approximately six-acre site in the northeast corner of Camarillo Airport. The project will eventually include the construction of four 25,000 square-foot aircraft hangars, plus associated offices and ramp space. Although the lease was approved by the Ventura County Board of Supervisors on September 25, 2018 the County has not yet executed the lease. The lease was also approved by the Camarillo Airport Authority on August 9, 2018. The CloudNine project is currently undergoing environmental review, with a draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) having been opened for public comment on October 21 2019, and closed on November 20, 2019. The County's review of those public comments is ongoing, and it is anticipated that the MND, including any revisions that come out of the public-comment process, will be presented to the County's Board of Supervisors in early 2020 for approval.

The City's Letter Lacks a Factual Basis The City's letter claims that the CloudNine project will "facilitate" Boeing Business Jets. (City letter, p. 1.) This is not correct. The hangar facility contemplated in the CloudNine project is not suitable for, is not being designed for, and will not house, Boeing Business Jets (a type of Boeing 737). The CioudNine project is intended to develop hangars for private jet aircraft, consistent with the Camarillo Airport's current and planned operations and within all legal restrictions under which the Camarillo Airport currently operates including the 1976 Joint Powers Agreement(JPA) between the County and the City.

EXHIBIT 5 RESOLUTION NO. 2020-29

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAMARILLO IN SUPPORT OF REQUIRING CLOUDNINE PROJECT AT CAMARILLO AIRPORT TO COMPLY WITH 1976 AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF CAMARILLO AND COUNTY OF VENTURA

, The City Council of the City of Camarilio resolves as follows;

SECTION 1: The City Council of the City of Camarilio finds and declares as follows: A. In 1976, the City of Camarilio "City") and the County of Ventura ("County") entered Into an "Agreement Between County of Ventura and City of Camarilio Pertaining to Camarilio Airport Development and Surrounding Land Use"("Agreement"). B. Paragraph 1 of the Agreement provides: "COUNTY and CITY do hereby exercise their powers and create the Camarilio Airport Authority (hereinafter "Authority")."

C. Paragraph 3 of the Agreement provides: The Ventura County Board of Supervisors shall not give formal approval or otherwise act upon any matter brought before It pertaining to development, operation or any other matter at the Camarilio Airport until the matter shall have first been submitted to the Authority and a recommendation received therefrom." D. Exhibit B to the Agreement Is entitled "Camarilio Airport Restrictions". E. The Camarilio Airport Restrictions Include the following restriction: "4. An aircraft weight limitation of 115,000 lbs. (twin wheel) shall be In effect." F. A project has been proposed at the Camarilio Airport ("Airport") by RKR Incorporated ("RKR"),which project Is known as "CloudNlne at Camarilio" ("Project"). G. A draft Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study ("MND") has been prepared for the Project which describes the Project(Page A-4) In the following manner: "The Proposed Project Is the development of approximately seven acres of open land on the northeast quadrant of the airport with four private commercial hangers and offices under a leasehold from the airport." ^ H. The MND at page A-4 lists the elements for the Proposed Project which Include the following:

"The proposed hangers would be accessed by a ramp (also called an apron) on the south side of the hangars, with a portion of the existing .taxllane reconstructed south of the ramp. The proposed aircraft ramp would be 84,000 sf(782.7 feet wide by 120 feet deep) to be located between the new hangars and existing taxllane pavement. This depth can accommodate an aircraft such as the Boeing Business Jet 737-800 or a Gulfstrearri G650, two of the largest types of aircraft that are anticipated to use the airport. Based on the geotechnlcal report, the recommended taxllane pavement design could consist of six Inches of asphalt, over five Inches of stabilized base, over

EXHIBIT 6 10 inches of crush aggregate base. Compliance with FAA pavement standards will be required."

I. On November 19, 2019, Ronald K. Rasak (CEO of RKR) submitted a letter to Kip Turner (Airport Director, Ventura County Department of/Airports) re: "Boeing 737 Operations from CloudNine" which states: "To be clear, RKR Is NOT and has NO intention now or in the future to ailow Boeing 737 aircraft to operate from the CloudNine location." (boided text by RKR)

J. On November 20, 2019, the City submitted a letter to Erin Powers of the Department of Airports with comments on the draft MND and the letter included the following statement: "The IS/MND fails to acknowledge the Agreerhent and the aforementioned Airport Restrictions contained in Exhibit B of the Agreement as applicable land ,use policies/regulations the project must comply or be conditioned to comply with. The IS/MND ignores the restrictions placed on the operation of the Airport, especially the aircraft weight limit of 115,000 lbs and runway location/length limit of the most westerly 6,000 feet. Tables B1 and B2 of the IS/MND disclose the various types of aircraft that will potentially use the proposed hangars and the numbers of operations annually (3,850 operations annually). The IS/MND indicates that the project may facilitate the operation of Boeing Business Jets, which could weigh up to 171,500 lbs., which is in violatiori of the Agreement. Even if this aircraft will not be operated at the maximum weight, it does not answer what the standard weight of such aircraft, or in other words, how can such aircraft operate without exceeding the weight limitation in the Agreement. The ,1S/MND does not address any safeguards or mitigation measures to ensure the maximum weight limit established in the Agreement is not exceeded."

K. On December 6, 2019, the City submitted a letter to the Ventura County Transportation Commission ("VCTC") requesting that the VCTC schedule an agenda item in its role as the Ventura County Airport Land Use Commission ("ALUC") for a consistency determination of the Project with the Camarillo Airport Master Plan ("CAMP").

L. On December 31, 2019, Mr. Turner submitted a letter to VCTC in reference to the City's letter of December 6, 2019 In which Mr. Turner said on page 1:

"The CloudNine project is currently undergoing environmental review, with a draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) having been opened for public comment on October 21, 2029 and closed on November 20, 2019. The County's review of those public comments is ongoing, and It is anticipated that the MND, including any revisions that come out of the public-comment process, will be presented to the County's Board of Supervisors in early 2020 for approval."

M. Steve Mattas is the General Counsel for the VCTC. Mr. Mattas wrote a Memorandum on January 10, 2020 ("Memorandum") to the VCTC regarding the City's request for a consistency determination. The Memorandum notes the County has approved but not yet signed a draft lease with RKR for the location of the proposed Project which is at

Resolution No. 2020-29 Page 2 of 3 EXHIBIT 6 an unimproved area of the Airport. The Memorandum acknowledges the weight iimit of 115,000 lbs included in the 1976 Agreement. The Memorandum (pages 8-9) state that the "proposed lease terms arguably require the Project to compiy with the weight restrictions in the 1976 Agreement but for clarity it could be revised to expressly require compliance with the weight limit". N. The City Council intends by this Resolution to confirm the City's strong recommendation that the County: (1) amend the lease with RKR to require that the Project comply with the 1976 Agreement between the City and County including, but not iimited to, the Camarjilo Airport Restrictions except to the extent, if at ail, a term or Restriction of the 1976 Agreement is preempted by federal or state law and (2) amend the MND to require that the Project compiy with the 1976 Agreement between the City and County including, but not limited to, the Camarillo Airport Restrictions except to the extent, if at all, a term or Restriction of the 1976 Agreement is preempted by federal or state law.

SECTION 2: The City Council hereby resolves that the City shall submit this Resoiution to the County recommending that the County: (1) amend the lease with RKR to require that the Project comply with the 1976 Agreement between the City and County inciuding, but not iimited to, the Camarillo Airport Restrictions except to the extent, if at all, a term or Restriction of the 1976 Agreement is preempted by federal or state law and (2) amend the MND to require that the Project comply with the 1976 Agreement between the City and County including, but not limited to, the Camarillo Airport Restrictions except to the extent, if at aii, a term or Restriction of the 1976 Agreement is preempted by federal or state law.

SECTION 3: The City Council hereby requests the City Manager to send a copy of this Resolution to the County of Ventura Board of Supervisors and to the County Department of Airports forthwith.

PASSED AND ADOPTED February 26, 2020.

Attested to on '^|'2-11^02.0

)ity Clerk

I, Jeffrie Madland, City Clerk of the City of Camarillo, certify Resolution No. 2020-29 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Camarillo at a regular meeting held February 26, 2020, by the following vote: AYES: Counciimembers: Craven, Kiidee, Mulchay, Santangelo, Mayor Trembiey NOES: Counciimembers: None ABSENT: Counciimembers: None

City Clerk iO\ |/

Resolution No. 2020-29 'X v>> pases of 3 EXHIBIT 6 Insert in Section A.l of Final IS - "The County of Ventura and the City of Camarillo entered into a Joint Powers Agreement(Agreement) in 1976 at the time that the major portion ofthe former Oxnard Air Force Base was granted to the Countyfor use as a public airport. The Agreement created the Camarillo Airport Authority, which is comprised ofboth County and City decision-makers. The purpose ofthe Camarillo Airport Authority is to review policy matters pertaining either to the airport or to land use within the Camarillo Airport Zone and make recommendations to the appropriate governing body, i.e.. the Ventura County Board ofSupervisors and/or the Camarillo City Council. The Agreement defines the boundaries ofthe Camarillo Airport Zone as well as specific restrictions placed on the operation ofthe airport at that time. The Proiect must comply with the restrictions in the Agreement except to the extent, if at all, a term or Restriction of the 1976 Agreement is preempted by federal or state law

EXHIBIT 7