12--1-05 staff report on modifications of permit
December 1, 2005
TO: Wayne Rew, Chair Pat Modugno, Vice Chair Esther L. Valadez, Commissioner Leslie G. Bellamy, Commissioner Harold V. Helsley, Commissioner
December 14, 2005 Regional Planning Commission
Meeting Special Permit No. 1404 (Permit) was approved by the Regional Planning Commission on October 27, 1959 to supersede and authorize the modification of a number of approved conditions of the previous permit and to allow the expansion, operation and maintenance of a private commercial airport (Airpark) with appurtenant facilities located at 33638 Agua Dulce Canyon Road, Agua Dulce. This special use permit has no expiration date.
The Permit allows the extension of the runway and development of additional hangars and other accessory structures and uses of the Airpark. The decision of the Commission was appealed to the County of Los Angeles Board of Supervisors by several community groups. The Board of Supervisors on May 24, 1960, denied the appeal and upheld the Commission's decision. The Permit was approved without an expiration date and limitation on plane storage. The Permit authorized the following developments:
A 5,000-foot long runway
An aircraft tie-down area (approximately 250,000 square feet)
Fifty-five (55) 30'x40' or 40'x50' storage hangars
Four (4) 90'x100' service hangars
Two (2) 120'x150' maintenance hangars
A 2,400-square foot building for a flight school
A 2,400-square foot utility building
A 3,150-square foot lounge and cafe
A 1,500-square foot manager's house
A fuel storage area with a 600-square foot office and shop
One(1) caretaker trailer and a water pump
One (1) 20-unit airtel with a pool, a restaurant and a parking area
On August 10, 2004, the Board of Supervisors instructed the Regional Planning Commission to initiate modification/revocation proceedings on Special Permit No. 1404(5) pursuant to Section 22.56.1785 of the County code. Accordingly, the Regional Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 23, 2004. The operator of the airport and representatives of the Agua Dulce community requested that the public hearing be postponed to allow additional time to meet and to address concerns expressed by the local residents of the community. Subsequently, a public hearing was rescheduled for January 22, 2005, to continue proceedings on the Permit.
January 22, 2005 Public Hearinq
On January 22, 2005, the Regional Planning Commission conducted a public hearing at the High Desert School in Acton. The Regional Planning Commission heard the staff report and testimony from the operator of the Airpark and his representative. The Airpark representative presented a proposal to address the concerns of the community. Members and representatives of the Acton Town Council, the Agua Dulce Civic Association, the Concerned Citizens of Agua Dulce and the Federal Aviation Administration also testified regarding the revocation/modification proposal. Supporting and opposing testimony were also received from local residents, local business owners and patrons of the Airpark. Approximately 400 people attended the public hearing but not all testified. After receiving testimony, the Commission discussed various issues presented at the public hearing and directed the operator of the airport and his representative to meet with local residents and community groups to discuss the proposal. Consequently, the Regional Planning Commission continued the public hearing to March 16, 2005, to allow additional time to attain input from local residents regarding the proposal and instructed the operator to hold meetings with all of these parties participating together.
March 5, 2005 Field Trip
The Regional Planning Commission also scheduled a field trip to the Airpark on March 5, 2005. Commissioners Bellamy, Helsley, Rew and Modugno were in attendance during the visit to the Airpark. Staff gave the Commission a tour of the Airpark. At the request of the Board of Supervisors, the Commission also observed flight demonstrations and heard associated noise levels involving six different aircraft at the homes of two local residents. Representatives from the Department of Health Services were present during the demonstration to measure the noise levels of the aircraft at these locations. A representative from the County Department of Public Works Aviation Division was also present.
March 16, 2005 Public Hearing
At the March 16, 2005 continued public hearing, the Regional Planning Commission received additional verbal and written testimony from the airpark representatives, local residents, representatives of the Acton Town Council, the Agua Dulce Civic Association, the Concerned Citizens of Agua Dulce, the Agua Dulce Pilot's Association and the Overall/Brink Group. The Commission discussed the possibility of revoking the Permit and the needs to retain the public use status of the Airpark. The Commission determined that the modifications as proposed by the Airpark cannot address the concerns of the Community. The Commission closed the public hearing and directed staff to prepare potential reasons for the revocation of the Permit.
April 20, 2005 Discussion
On April 20, 2005 the Commission heard the potential reasons to support the revocation of the Permit and received comments from the airpark representatives and two local residents. The Commission reviewed and discussed the potential reasons to support the revocation of Special Permit 1404-(5) pursuant to Part 13 of Chapter 22.56 of the Los Angeles County Code. The Commission find that there is insufficient cause to revoke the Permit. The Commission also discussed comments from the state and federal agencies regarding airport operations. The Commission concluded that some of the concerns expressed by residents of the community such air traffic volume and noise levels are associated with flight operations of an airport, which are govern by federal regulations and beyond the control of the airport operator and the enforcement of the County. Although the Notice of Violations issued to the Airpark shows that the operator did not follow County code and procedures, however, the operator has taken appropriate remedial actions to correct the violations, as such, the violations did not substantiate the need to revoke the Permit as prescribed in Section 22.56.1780. The Commission concluded that it would not be appropriate to revoke the Permit and voted for the modification of the permit and instructed staff to prepared conditions for modification of the Permit.
December 14, 2005 Public Hearing
On November 3, 2005, the Commission determined that there is a need to re-open the public hearing to allow public testimony of the draft modified conditions for the Airpark. A public hearing has been scheduled on December 14, 2005 to allow public comments of the draft modified conditions of the Permit. County Counsel has advised staff to preclude conditions relating to certain type of operations of the Airpark as part of the modified conditions for the Permit. Conditions such as restriction on the types of aircrafts, operation of aircrafts, development of runway facility and hours of flight operations are preempted by federal regulations. A copy of the letter from County Counsel and original conditions of the Permit are included as an attachment to this report (Attachment).
Condition Nos. 2, 5-a, 5-c, 5-d, 5-e, 11 and 12 of Special Permit No. 1404 have been recommended for removal. The following conditions of Special Permit 1404 will be replaced by the proposed draft conditions:
Condition No. 1 This condition which requires a development plan showing the improvement of the Airpark will be replaced by Draft Condition No. 20;
Condition No. 3 The requirement of a paved parking area will be replaced by Draft Condition No. 39-d;
Condition No. 4 This condition will be replaced by Draft Condition No. 39-f to provide adequate physical access to the property;
Condition No. 5-b The condition regarding the development of the airtel will replaced by Draft Condition No. 38-j
Condition No. 5-f This condition will be replaced by Draft Condition No. 39-o to prohibit major engine repair
Condition No. 5-g This condition will be replaced by Draft Condition No. 39-p to prohibit outdoor storage of aircraft parts
Condition No. 6 This condition will be eliminated to allow color scheme that is consistent with the rural characteristic of the Community
Condition No. 7 This condition will be replaced by Draft Condition No. 39-p to prohibit wrecking of aircraft
Condition No. 8 & 9 These two conditions will be replaced by Draft Condition No. 27 regarding runway improvements
Condition No. 10 Draft Condition No. 26 will replace this condition to ensure conformance with federal and state regulations
Condition No. 13 This condition will be replaced by Draft Condition No. 16 to comply with County grading and drainage guidelines
Condition No. 14 Draft Condition Nos. 3, 6 and 7 will replace this condition; and Condition No. 15 & 16 These two conditions have been updated as Draft Condition Nos. 11 and 12.
The following table is a comparison between the proposed draft conditions and the original conditions of the Permit:
As approved b SP 1404 Draft Modification
* A 5,000-foot [one runway --- Maintain existing runway as (approx, 4,600 feet
Aircraft tie-down area (approximately 250,000 square feet-no limitation on the number of aircraft --- 30 tie-down spaces (25 lease spaces & 43,000 sq. ft. area as temporary parking for aircrafts •
55 storage hangars (110,000 sq. ft, total) --- 55 personal aircraft storage hangars (up to 3,000 sq. ft. max each; 110,000 sq. ft. total area
• Four Service hangars (up to 9,000 sq. ft. each, 36,000 sq. ft. total) --- Four service hangars (up to 9,000 sq. ft. each, 36,000 sq. ft. total)*
• Two 120'x150' maintenance hangars 36,000 sq. ft. total) --- Two 120'x150' maintenance hangars (36,000 so. ft. total
• A 2,400-square foot building for a flight school with 2 training planes (Fri-Sun, 8 am-4 pm --- No flight school -
• A 2,400-square foot utility building --- Maintain existing 2,400 sq. ft. utility biding
• A 3,150-square foot lounge and cafe --- A 3,150-square foot lounge and cafe
• A 1,500-square foot manager's house • 1,500-square foot mannager's residence
* A fuel storage area with a 600-square foot • 600 sq. ft. office building appurtenant to office and shoo existing aircraft fueling station
• One caretaker trailer and a water pump • No caretaker trailer and water pump
• One 20-unit airtel with a pool, a restaurant and parking area --- 20-room airtel with accessory restaurant, and a .parking area pool
• Auxiliary uses (aircraft repairs, storage of parts --- Auxiliary uses (aircraft repairs, storage of • arts
* Propeller driven Iight twin-motor aircrafts --- Preempted b Federal Regulations
• No acrobatic flyings --- Preempted b Federal Resulations
• Light twin-engine aircraft; heavier aircraft not to exceed 15% of annual flight ops and no fight ops for aircraft over 30,000 lbs. --- Preempted by Federal Regulations
Emergency landing field and staging area --- Preempted b Federal Regulations
• No expiration --- 20 year expiration with one 10-year extension subject to Director a.pproval
• No limitation on the number of based aircraft and flight operations flight --- No limitation on number of based aircraft and operations
• Emergency landing field and stain• area • Preempted
• N/A --- Six special events per year, subject to specified restrictions
• N/A --- No filming between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. (30 days or 30 permits per year) and increased filming control on filming activities (additional noticed, lighting controls, etc.
• N/A --- Increased community input through regular community meeting.
• N/A --- Flight operation log subject to FAA & State reguiations
• N/A Biannual inspection
110,000 sq. ft. of hangar space for aircraft storage, 36,000 sq. ft, of hangar space for aircraft maintenance, and 36,000 sq. ft. of service hangar space --- 110,000 sq. ft. of hangar space for aircraft storage, 36,000 sq. ft. of hangar space for aircraft maintenance, and 36,000 sq. ft. of service hangar space;
182,000 sq. ft. total hangar area --- 182,000 sq. ft. total hangar area
According to the County Dept of Public Works Aviation Division, service hangers at other airports are considered aircraft storage hangers (aka, 'communityhangers) with service amenities i.e. fueling detailing. &minor repair' s).
The proposed conditions are to update the operating conditions of the Airpark and appurtenant uses to ensure compliance with current regulations and standards, and to address concerns raised by local residents and Notices of Violations issued by the County. The following is a summery of the proposed conditions:
• Conditions Nos. I through 5 are standard conditions imposed on current permits.
• Condition No. 6 indicates the effective date of the modification.
• Condition No. 7 binds the modified conditions to the subject property.
• Condition Nos. 8, 9 and 10 stipulate the termination period of the permit, the inspection fees and the ability of the County to enforce the conditions.
• Condition Nos. 11 and 12 are standard conditions required on current permits.
• Condition Nos. 13 through 18 will ensure that the Airpark will comply with County regulations.
• Condition No. 19 is the standard "graffiti removal" condition.
• Conditions Nos. 20 though 24 required the submittal of an updated site plan, landscape plan, lighting plan signal plan of the Airpark. An exhibit to identify parking for film crew is also required.
• Conditions No. 25 to mitigate potential construction impacts.
• Condition Nos. 26 and 27 will ensure that the Airpark will comply with State and Federal regulations
• Condition No. 28 entail the permitted to removed the paved area located southerly of the runway and
Condition No. 29 ensure grading activities are consistent with AQMD standards.
• Condition No. 30 establishes regular community meeting involving the permittee and the Agua Dulce Town Council.
• Condition No. 31 requires the operator to respond to written complaints.
• Condition No. 32 limits the number of special events at the Airpark.
• Condition Nos. 33 though 37 regulate filming activities at the Airpark.
• Condition No. 38 (a-m) identifies the improvements of the Airpark.
• Conditions No. 39 (a-t) regulates the operation and maintenance of the Airpark facilities.
The proposed modifications will be a significant improvement compared to the current conditions which the Airpark is operating under. Additional conditions to regulate the occurrence of temporary events and filming activities are proposed. Restrictions on the hours of operation for appurtenant Airpark uses such as the restaurant and maintenance facility have been established. An expiration of the Permit and biannual inspections have been proposed. The amount of approved tie-down area will be significantly reduced. The approved tie-down area is approximately 250,000 square feet (or 5.74 acres), under the current proposal, the Airpark is allow to have 25 designated parking spaces (for lease or rent) and approximately 43,000 square feet of temporary parking area to accommodate itinerant traffic at the Airpark. The current proposal also eliminated the development of a flight school and a caretaker residence.
The operator of the Airpark is also proposing to convert the maintenance hangars to storage hangars. The removal of the maintenance facility can have an indirect effect on itinerant traffic as aircraft repair and maintenance facility can encourage non-based aircraft onto the Airpark. This request is subject to the Commission's consideration.
As part of the modification proceeding, it is within the Commission's discretion to modify the development authorized by Special Permit 1404, such as the number and size of the hangars and the amount of tie-down area. The Commission can also determine the appropriate number of aircrafts to be stored in each hangar and reduce or eliminate airport auxiliary uses and structures. Staff is of the opinion that the current proposal to modify the conditions of the Permit can address the concerns of some local residents and community groups. The modified conditions would be a viable option to regulate the Airpark and to ensure the health and safety of local residents in the Community.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION Prior to taking an action on this case, Staff recommends the Planning Commission consider the facts, analysis and correspondence contained in this report along with the oral testimony and/or written comments received during the public hearing. If the Commission agrees with the draft modified conditions, staff recommends the following motion:
SUGGESTED MOTION: "I move that the public hearing be closed and that the Regional Planning Commission indicate its intent to approve modification to Special Permit No. 1404-(5) with the modifications recommended by staff and instruct staff to prepare the final environmental documentation and findings and conditions for approval."
Attachments:
Draft modified conditions County Counsel letter Original 1404 conditions Approved site plans
Airpark permit/revocation Issues Index
Vanguard News Home page