HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-078 - Notifying the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission LS 10.16.20
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-078
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA ANA NOTIFYING THE ORANGE COUNTY
AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION AND THE STATE
DIVISION OF AERONAUTICS OF THE CITY'S INTENTION
TO FIND THAT THE CITY OF SANTA ANA
COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE, GOLDEN
CITY BEYOND (2045) IS CONSISTENT WITH THE
PURPOSES OF THE STATE AERONAUTIC ACT AND TO
OVERRULE THE ORANGE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE
COMMISSION'S DETERMINATION THAT THE
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN UPDATE IS INCONSISTENT
WITH THE 2008 JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT ENVIRONS
LAND USE PLAN
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines
and declares as follows:
A. The City has prepared a comprehensive update to its existing General Plan.
The "Golden City Beyond: A Shared Vision" General Plan will guide the City's
development and conservation for the next 25 years through 2045. The
update will provide long-term policy direction and communicate the vision,
values, and goals for the City's physical development, fiscal and
environmental sustainability, and overall quality of life. The new General Plan
will serve to identify areas of opportunity and provide options to enhance
development potential in key areas of the City while ensuring the City's
compliance with recent State laws. The new General Plan will also reflect
updates to current conditions and input from the general public, City staff, and
other stakeholders.
B. Because the Project is an update to the City's General Plan, Public Utilities
Code Section 21676(b) requires the City of Santa Ana to refer the proposed
Project to the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission ("ALUC") for
consistency with the 2008 John Wayne Airport Environs Land Use Plan
("AELUP").
Resolution No. 2020-078
Page 1 of 10
C. At a duly noticed public hearing on October 15, 2020, the ALUC found the
proposed Project to be inconsistent with the AELUP.
D. As a final review authority on legislative acts, the City Council may, after a
public hearing, choose to overrule the ALUC decision with a two-thirds vote of
the City Council, if the City of Santa Ana makes specific findings that the
proposed project is consistent with the purposes of Public Utilities Code
Sections 21670, 21676, and 21676.5. This two-step procedure requires the
City Council to conduct two public meetings. At least 45 days prior to the
decision to overrule ALUC, the governing body shall provide the ALUC and
the State Division of Aeronautics ("Caltrans") a copy of the proposed decision
to overrule along with supportive findings. The ALUC and Caltrans may
provide written comments to the City Council within 30 days of receiving the
proposed decision and findings. If comments by the ALUC or Caltrans are
not available within this time limit, the City Council may act without them. The
comments by ALUC and Caltrans are advisory to the City Council. Should
comments be received from the ALUC or Caltrans, the City Council must
include such comments in the public record of any final decision to overrule
ALUC. The second meeting shall be a public hearing to make the specific
findings that the proposed overruling is consistent with the purposes stated in
Public Utilities Code Section 21670.
E. The Council's adoption of this resolution is procedural and does not constitute
the proposed project's approval nor does it predispose the City's future action
on the project or the decision to overrule or not.
Section 2. The City Council finds that this Resolution is not subject to the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the
CEQA Guidelines as the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the
environment. The proposed project will be independently reviewed and evaluated
pursuant to CEQA. Environmental Impact Report No. 2020-03 (SCH No. 2020020987)
has been prepared for the project as a whole and will be presented to the City Council
for consideration, along with the requested general plan amendment, at a future hearing
date.
Section 3. The City Council directs staff to forward a letter to the ALUC and
Caltrans, indicating the City of Santa Ana's intent to overrule the ALUC's determination
that the Project is inconsistent with the 2008 John Wayne Airport Environs Land Use
Plan.
Section 4. The City Council directs staff to forward this resolution and the City's
Proposed Findings of Fact (attached hereto as Exhibit A) to the ALUC and Caltrans, in
support of the City's intent to overrule the ALUC's determination that the Proposed
Project is inconsistent with the 2008 John Wayne Airport Environs Land Use Plan.
Resolution No. 2020-078
Page 2 of 10
Section 5. This resolution was approved, passed and adopted at a special
meeting of the City Council of the City of Santa Ana, held on the 16th day of October,
2020.
ADOPTED this 16th day of October, 2020.
•
Mi A. Pulid
M or
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Sonia R. Carvalho
City Attorney
By: cc A. Rau
for Lisa E. Storck
Assistant City Attorney
AYES: Councilmembers Bacerra, Mendoza, Penaloza, Pulido, Solorio,
Villegas (6)
NOES: Councilmembers Sarmiento (1)
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers None (0)
NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers None (0)
CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY
I, DAISY GOMEZ, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify the attached
Resolution No. 2020-078 to be the original resolution adopted by the City Council of the
City of Santa Ana on October 16, 2020.
Date: /0" a/ -a0<)0
Daisy omen
Clerk of the Council
City of Santa Ana
Resolution No. 2020-078
Page 3 of 10
EXHIBIT A
[PROPOSED] FINDINGS OF FACT
SUBJECT: CITY OF SANTA ANA NOTICE OF INTENT TO OVERRULE THE ORANGE
COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION'S DETERMINATION OF
INCONSISTENCY FOR THE CITY OF SANTA ANA COMPREHENSIVE
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE, GOLDEN CITY BEYOND (2045)
I. INTRODUCTION
The City of Santa Ana ("City") is required to provide findings supporting the overrule of the
Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's ("ALUC") determination of inconsistency as
required in the California Public Utilities Code ("PUC") Section 21676(b). Based on the
following Findings of Fact and the associated substantial evidence in the public record, the
proposed action by the City on the General Plan Update, Golden City Beyond (2045) ("Project")
is consistent with the purposes of the State Aeronautics Act as stated in PUC Section 21670,
which provides, in relevant part:
"It is the purpose of this article to protect public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring
the orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize
the public's exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public
airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses."
Specifically, the City's proposed action on the Project provides for the orderly development of
John Wayne Airport ("JWA"), and its surrounding area and promotes the overall goals and
objectives of the State noise standards by avoiding new noise and safety problems, and
protecting the public health, safety and welfare through the adoption of land use measures that
minimize the public's exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards to the extent that this
area is not already devoted to incompatible uses.
II. FRAMEWORK
It is in the public interest to: (1) provide for the orderly development of each public use airport in
this state and the area surrounding these airports so as to (2) promote the overall goals and
objectives of the California airport noise standards adopted pursuant to PUC Section 21669 and
to (3) prevent the creation of new noise and safety problems.
A. To provide for the orderly development of JWA and the area surrounding the airport, the
ALUC adopted the 2008 Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport ("JWA
AELUP") on April 17, 2008. The JWA AELUP guides development proposals to provide
for orderly development of the airport and the area surrounding the airport through
implementation of the standards in Section 2.1 (aircraft noise, safety compatibility zones,
building height restrictions).
B. The ALUC also adopted a separate Airport Environs Land Use Plan for Heliports
("Heliports AELUP") on June 19, 2008.
Resolution No. 2020-078
Page 4 of 10
C. The ALUC is required to use the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook
("Handbook") that was updated by the California Department of Transportation, Division
of Aeronautics ("Caltrans") in 2011. Neither the JWA AELUP nor the Heliports AELUP
have been updated to incorporate the Handbook's guidance. Likewise, the JWA AELUP
has not been updated with information about the operation and environmental effects of
JWA as reflected in its most recent Final Environmental Impact Report ("EIR"), certified
by the Orange County Board of Supervisors on June 25, 2019 for the General Aviation
Improvement Program ("GAIP").
D. On September 17, 2020, the City of Santa Ana presented the Project to the ALUC for a
determination of consistency with the JWA AELUP and Heliports AELUP.
E. The ALUC staff report dated October 15, 2020 ("Staff Report") recommends that the
ALUC find the Project inconsistent with the JWA AELUP per Sections 1.2, 2.4.1, and
3.2.1 of the JWA AELUP, and per PUC Section 21674, due to 1) proffered aircraft"noise
and safety issues" relative to the allowed placement of residential units "within the flight
corridor" in the 55 Freeway/Dyer Road Focus Area; and 2) proffered building height
issues in a portion of the South Bristol Street Focus Area (between MacArthur Boulevard
and Sunflower Avenue).
F. The ALUC Staff Report recommends that the ALUC find the Project consistent with the
Heliports AELUP, with the condition that the City include a statement in the General Plan
Update (Safety Element Policy S-4.4)that any proposals for heliports/helipads within the
City be submitted through the City to ALUC for a consistency determination.
G. On October 15, 2020, the ALUC held a public hearing and adopted a resolution finding
the Project inconsistent with the JWA AELUP for the stated reasons set forth in the Staff
Report, and further finding the Project consistent with the Heliports AELUP on the
condition set forth in the Staff Report.
H. The City of Santa Ana has the general police power to control land use within its
territorial jurisdiction. (Cal. Const., art. XI 11, § 7). This constitutional authority is
acknowledged in State law (PUC §§ 21670, 21676) and the ALUC process (JWA
AELUP § 4.11) allowing for overrule of an ALUC finding of inconsistency.
I. Pursuant to PUC Section 21676(b), the City may overrule the commission by a two-
thirds vote of the City Council if it makes specific findings that the Project is consistent
with the purposes of the State Aeronautics Act, as stated in PUC Section 21670.
J. The City finds that the Project is consistent with the JWA AELUP and with the purposes
of the State Aeronautics Act based on the following Findings of Fact and substantial
evidence.
III. FINDINGS OF FACT
A. General Plan Update. The Project encompasses the entire City of Santa Ana. The
General Plan Update set forth in the Project will change zoning and land use within five
(5) geographic Focus Areas within the City. The comments in ALUC's Staff Report and
ALUC's determination of inconsistency refer only to changes in land use within these
five (5) Focus Areas.
Resolution No. 2020-078
Page 5 of 10
1. The vast majority of the Project falls outside of the JWA AELUP planning area, which
is defined in Section 1.7 of the JWA AELUP as "the furthest extent of the 60 CNEL
Contour, the FAR Part 77 Notification Surface and the runway safety zones
associated with the airport."
2. Both the Grand Ave/17th Street Focus Area and the West Santa Ana Boulevard
Focus Area fall completely outside of the JWA AELUP planning area.
3. The 55 Freeway/Dyer Road Focus Area and South Bristol Focus Area are both
located entirely within the JWA AELUP planning area.
4. The South Main Focus Area is located partially within the JWA AELUP planning
area.
B. Justification for Finding Project Consistent with the Purposes of PUC Section
21670.
1. Noise. The residential and commercial land uses under the proposed Project are
consistent with the aircraft noise standards of the JWA AELUP and the requirements
of PUC Section 21670.
a. The majority of the Project falls outside of the 60 dBA CNEL aircraft noise
contour(Exhibit 2).
(1) Per the JWA AELUP, all land uses are normally consistent within the 60 dBA
CNEL aircraft noise contour using conventional construction methods. No
special noise reduction methods are required. See JWA AELUP at 23,
Table 1.
b. The vast majority of the Project is located outside of the JWA 65 dBA CNEL
aircraft noise contour.
(1) Per the JWA AELUP, commercial (e.g. retail and office), community facilities
(e.g. churches, libraries, schools, preschools, day-care centers, hospitals,
nursing/convalescent homes, & other noise sensitive uses), and industrial
uses are all normally consistent within the 65 dBA CNEL aircraft noise
contour. See JWA AELUP at 23, Table 1.
(2) Per the JWA AELUP, single and multifamily residential uses are conditionally
consistent within the 65 dBA CNEL aircraft noise contour.
c. Of the five (5) Focus Areas that will include a change in zoning and land use
designation under the Project, only the 55 Freeway/Dyer Road Focus Area lies
partially within the 65 dBA CNEL aircraft noise contour.
d. The General Plan Update states, as Policy N-1.3, that it shall be City policy to
"[c]ollaborate with local and regional transit agencies and other jurisdictions to
minimize regional traffic noise and other sources of noise in the City."
e. Consistent with the JWA AELUP, the General Plan Update states, as Policy N-
3.3, that it shall be City policy to "[r]equire all residential land uses in 60 dB(A)
Resolution No. 2020-078
Page 6 of 10
CNEL or 65 dB(A) CNEL Noise Contours to be sufficiently mitigated so as not to
exceed an interior standard of 45 Db(A) CNEL."
f. Based on the foregoing, the Project will not result in the exposure of City
residents to excess noise within the meaning of PUC Section 21670.
2. Safety. The residential and commercial land uses under the proposed project are
consistent with the safety standards of the JWA AELUP.
a. Section 2.1.2 of the JWA AELUP describes the airport's safety compatibility
zones.
(1) Per Section 2.1.2 of the JWA AELUP, "Safety and compatibility zones depict
which land uses are acceptable and which are unacceptable in various
portions of airport environs."
(2) The purpose of these zones, per the JWA AELUP, is to "support the
continued use and operation of an airport by establishing compatibility and
safety standards to promote air navigational safety and to reduce potential
safety hazards for persons living, working or recreating near JWA."
b. The JWA AELUP identifies the following Safety Zones:
(1) Zone 1: Runway Protection Zone
(2) Zone 2: Inner Approach/Departure
(3) Zone 3: Inner Turning Zone
(4) Zone 4: Outer Approach/Departure Zone
(5) Zone 5: Sideline Zone
(6) Zone 6: Traffic Pattern Zone
c. The Project is not in the JWA runway protection zones (RPZ).
d. None of the Project Focus Areas are in any of the JWA AELUP safety zones.
JWA AELUP Safety Zone 6 overlays a small portion of the City south of
MacArthur Boulevard, however the Project does not propose any change in land
use or zoning in this area.
e. The ALUC Staff Report states that "The proposed changes in Land Use in the
55/Dyer Focus Area would result in 9,952 total residential units within the flight
corridor for John Wayne Airport subjecting future residents to noise and safety
issues."
(1) As noted above and in Section 2.1.2 and Appendix D of the JWA AELUP, the
"flight corridor for John Wayne Airport" is not an identified Safety Zone for
JWA. Nor is a "flight corridor" a defined, restrictive term in the JWA AELUP,
the PUC, or the Federal Aviation Regulations.
Resolution No. 2020-078
Page 7 of 10
f. No part of the Project will be inconsistent with the policies set forth in Section
2.1.2 of the JWA AELUP regarding Safety Compatibility Zones. Furthermore, the
ALUC did not find, and cannot find, that the Project is inconsistent with Section
2.1.2 of the JWA AELUP.
g. Based on the foregoing, the Project will not result in the exposure of City
residents to excessive safety hazards within the meaning of PUC Section 21670.
3. Height. The residential and commercial land uses under the proposed project are
consistent with the height standards of the JWA AELUP, which are stated in the
Federal Aviation Regulations, 14 C.F.R. Part 77, relating to Safe, Efficient Use and
Protection of the Navigable Airspace.
a. The General Plan Update states, as Policy S-4.1 Structures above 200 feet,
"[p]roposed projects that would exceed a height of 200 feet above existing grade
shall be required to file a Form 7460-1 with the Federal Aviation Administration
("FAA").
b. In response to Recommendation 1.b. from the ALUC Staff Report, the General
Plan Update is revised to state, as Policy S-4.2 Federal Aviation Regulation Part
77, "[d]o not approve buildings and structures that would penetrate Federal
Aviation Regulation ("FAR") Part 77 Imaginary Obstruction Surfaces, unless,
consistent with PUC Section 21240, such building or structure is determined by
the FM to pose "no hazard" to air navigation." Additionally, under this Policy,
applicants proposing buildings or structures that penetrate the 100:1 Notification
Surface will be required to file a Form 7460-1 Notice of Proposed Construction or
Alteration with FAA and provide a copy of the FM determination to the City and
the ALUC. Referral to FM for study under its Form 7460-1 process is
appropriate because:
(1) "The United States Government has exclusive sovereignty of airspace of the
United States" (49 U.S.C. § 40103(a)(1)).
(2) In order to use this airspace, the FAA Administrator is responsible for
(i) Plans and policy for the safe use of the navigable airspace (49 U.S.C. §
40103(b)(1)); and
(ii) "[R]egulations on the flight of aircraft (including regulations on safe
altitudes) for (A) navigating, protecting and identifying aircraft; (B)
protecting individuals and property on the ground; (C) using the navigable
airspace efficiently; and (D) preventing collision between aircraft, between
aircraft and land or water vehicle, and between aircraft and airborne
objects" (49 U.S.C. §40103(b)(2)).
(3) The FAA's aeronautical studies under FAR Part 77 are the definitive standard
for assessing compliance with federal aviation safety laws and regulations
(49 U.S.C. § 77.1(c)). This federal authority is recognized in State law. (PUC
§ sb21240).
Resolution No. 2020-078
Page 8 of 10
c. The maximum allowable building heights in the zoning and land use designations
proposed in the 55 Freeway/Dyer Road Focus Area range between 6 and 10
stories, or about 60 and 100 feet above ground level ("AGL"). These maximum
allowable building heights would not exceed the FAR Part 77 imaginary
obstruction surfaces for JWA, including the sloping, three-dimensional 50:1
Departure Surface, the sloping, three-dimensional 20:1 conical surface, and the
206' above mean sea level ("AMSL") horizontal surface.
d. The maximum allowable building heights in the zoning and land use designations
proposed in the South Bristol Street Focus Area range between 10 and 25
stories, or about 100 to 250 feet AGL. Proponents of future structures exceeding
200 feet AGL and/or structures penetrating the 100:1 Notification Surface will be
required to file a Form 7460-1 Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration with
FAA and provide a copy of the FAA determination to the City. Per Policy S-4.2,
the applicant would be required to obtain an FM determination of no obstruction
or no hazard to air navigation before seeking City approval.
e. The maximum allowable building heights in the zoning and land use designations
proposed in the South Main Street Focus Area range between 2 and 3 stories, or
about 20 to 30 feet AGL. These maximum allowable building heights would not
exceed the FAR Part 77 imaginary obstruction surfaces for JWA, including the
sloping, three-dimensional 20:1 conical surface, and the 206' AMSL horizontal
surface.
f. The Project's requirement that future construction and development comply with
the FAA's 7460-1 process ensures that building heights within the Project area
will not pose a hazard to air navigation. This is consistent with and furthers the
purposes of PUC Section 21670 by minimizing the public's exposure to safety
hazards.
g. The Project is an approval only as to land use designation and zoning. No
specific structures are contemplated as part of the Project. Therefore, nothing in
the Project will create an obstruction or hazard to air navigation within the
meaning of 14 C.F.R. Part 77, and no part of the Project involves the proposed
construction or alteration of any structure. Accordingly, no aeronautical study is
required as part of the Project. See 49 U.S.C. §44718; 14 C.F.R. Part 77; FAA
Order JO 7400.2M.
h. The Project does not create a safety hazard pursuant to PUC Section 21670.
4. Heliports. Heliports are not permitted in any residential (R1, R2, R3, or R4) District
pursuant to Santa Ana Municipal Code section 41-621. Outside of residential
Districts, heliports are only allowed with a conditional use permit ("CUP").
a. The General Plan Update states, as Policy S-4.4 Heliport/helistop approval and
requirements, "Approve the development of a heliport or helistop only if it
complies with the ALUP for heliports." Policy S-4.4 further makes it City policy to
"[e]nsure that each applicant seeking a conditional use permit or similar approval
for the construction or operation of a heliport or helistop complies fully with the
state permit recommended by the FAA, by Orange County ALUC, and by
Resolution No.2020-078
Page 9 of 10
Caltrans/Division of Aeronautics. This requirement shall be in addition to all other
City development requirements."
b. As described in Draft PEIR Section 5.8, any applicant proposing a heliport "shall
undergo review by the ALUC, obtain an Airspace Analysis from the FAA as
specified in Section 2.1.5 of the JWA AELUP, and confirm consistency with the
JWA AELUP prior to construction, as specified in Section 4.7 of the JWA
AELUP."
c. The Project and existing provisions within the Santa Ana Municipal Code restrict
the establishment of heliports within the City. Heliports are only allowed in non-
residential districts, and only once the applicant obtains a CUP following FAA
Airspace analysis and other review procedures. These restrictions minimize the
public's exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards, in furtherance of the
purposes of PUC Section 21670.
d. ALUC has determined that the Project is consistent with the Heliports AELUP on
condition that the City include a statement in the General Plan Update (Safety
Element Policy S-4.4) that any proposals for heliports/helipads within the City be
submitted through the City to ALUC for a consistency determination.
Resolution No. 2020-078
Page 10 of 10