BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 662
Page 1
Date of Hearing: January 11, 2012
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Cameron Smyth, Chair
AB 662 (Hueso) - As Amended: January 5, 2012
SUBJECT : Airport land use compatibility plans.
SUMMARY : Requires the military Air Installation Compatible Use
Zone (AICUZ) of a military airport within the jurisdiction of an
airport land use commission (ALUC) to provide for reasonable
public comment and participation and specified environmental
review; and deems an AICUZ inapplicable if these conditions are
not met. Specifically, this bill :
1)Requires the military AICUZ of a military airport within the
jurisdiction of an ALUC to provide for reasonable public
comment and participation, including a public process that
resulted in the adoption of an environmental impact statement
pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
2)Provides that if an environmental impact statement under NEPA
was done on an AICUZ, which included a public process, then
the airport land use compatibility plan (ALUCP) shall be
consistent with the safety and noise standards in the AICUZ
prepared for that military airport.
3)Provides that if an AICUZ was adopted without a public process
and NEPA review then the ALCUP does not have to be consistent
with the safety and noise standards in the AICUZ.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Requires each ALUC to formulate an airport land use
compatibility plan that will provide for the 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.
2)Requires the ALUC's airport land use compatibility plan to
include and be based on a long-range master plan or an airport
layout plan, as determined by the Division of Aeronautics of
the Department of Transportation, that reflects the
AB 662
Page 2
anticipated growth of the airport during at least the next 20
years
3)Requires the airport land use compatibility plan to be
consistent with the safety and noise standards in the AICUZ
prepared for the military airport.
4)Requires that, once an ALUC has adopted or amended an ALUCP,
the county - if it has land use jurisdiction within the
airport influence area - and any affected cities must a)
update their general plans and any applicable specific plans
to be consistent with the ALUC's plan within 180 days; or, b)
take the required steps to overrule all or part of the ALUC's
plan. If a county or city fails to take either action, then
it is required to submit all land use development actions
involving property within the airport influence area to the
ALUC for review.
5) Provides that a local or public agency may propose to
overrule an airport land use commission's action or
recommendation affecting an airport within the jurisdiction
of that public agency after a hearing, by a two-thirds vote
of its governing body if it makes specific findings that
the proposed action is consistent with the purposes of
protecting public health, safety, and welfare, minimizing
the public's exposure to excessive noise, and minimizing
safety hazards within areas around the public airport.
6) Requires local governments to a) revise their
development permit application forms; and, b) notify
branches of the military when proposed general plan actions
and amendments, and development projects might have an
impact on military facilities and operations.
FISCAL EFFECT : None
COMMENTS :
1)An ALUCP is a plan, usually adopted by a county ALUC or other
entity established to accomplish land use compatibility
planning, which sets forth policies for promoting
compatibility between airports and the land uses which
surround them.
AB 662
Page 3
The AICUZ program is a Department of Defense planning program
that was developed in response to incompatible urban
development and land use conflicts around military airfields.
The AICUZ program has two objectives: a) to assist local,
regional, state, and federal officials in protecting the
public health, safety, and welfare by promoting compatible
development within the AICUZ area of influence; and, b) to
protect operational capabilities from the effects of land uses
that are incompatible with aircraft operations. While prepared
by or for a military installation, the primary users of an
AICUZ study are the local communities surrounding the
installation or an offsite location.
Areas contiguous to military installations often provide
attractive land development opportunities. Certain types of
development are not compatible with the high noise and high
potential for aircraft accidents associated with airfield
activities.
2)Pursuant to SB 1468 (Knight), Chapter 971, Statutes of 2002,
the provisions of the AICUZ become mandatory when incorporated
into the ALUCP. In a letter to the Senate Journal, Senator
Knight wrote "Ŭt]he purpose of SB 1468 is to address and
resolve urban encroachment impacts on military activities."
Prior to SB 1468 the inclusion of the AICUZ in an ALCUP was
voluntary.
ALUCPs and the AICUZ study are interrelated. An ALUCP must be
consistent with the safety and noise standards in the AICUZ
study prepared for a military airport. According to the
Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Supplement to
the General Plan Guidelines: Community and Military
Compatibility Planning, the AICUZ program "facilitates
involvement of military installations in the local land use
planning process and outreach to local civic groups, realtors,
and other key stakeholders in local government
decision-making. An AICUZ study contains an analysis of
accident potential, and noise produced by military operations.
The aircraft noise is analyzed using computer modeling that
produces noise compatibility zones. The study also identifies
areas of current and future encroachment based on local land
use plans, and provides local communities with compatible
land use recommendations for consideration in development of
AB 662
Page 4
their comprehensive plans and zoning ordinances. The
compatible land use recommendations for aircraft noise have
been endorsed and adopted by Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA), Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development, and the U.S. Department of
Veterans Affairs, and are used nationwide for military and
commercial airfields."
3)In the 2005 case of Muzzy Ranch Co. v. Solano County Airport
Land Use Commission it was found that an ALUCP, which in some
cases may include an AICUZ, must go through the appropriate
environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA). Conversely, an AICUZ prepared by the
military is not subject to CEQA or the national environmental
policy act (NEPA). However, it should be noted that once an
AICUZ is incorporated in to an ALUCP, it cannot be amended.
Moreover, an AICUZ is an advisory document for the military
but once adopted into an ALUCP, it is mandatory for the ALUC
and local cities and counties to follow. This issue is the
crux of AB 662. The City of Coronado, the sponsor of this
measure, believes that this inconsistency in environmental
review is challenging given that the ALUCP must be consistent
with the AICUZ, which has not gone through a similar review
process.
4)The current AICUZ for Naval Air Station North Island (NASNI)
was approved by the Navy in January 1984. At that time it was
advisory and the City of Coronado (City) treated it as such.
The Navy is currently finalizing a new AICUZ for NASNI, which
was completed in December 2010 but still requires review and
approval through the Navy chain of command before it will be
released, which could take several more months. The mandatory
application of the AICUZ on zoning and land use regulations in
Coronado could impose significant residential and commercial
development restrictions inconsistent with the City's existing
land uses, zoning regulations and General Plan. Because of
Coronado's unique history as a community predating the
development of military aviation it is unlike other cities.
5)Just like CEQA not all projects that go through NEPA need to
receive an environmental impact statement (which is the
equivalent to an environmental impact report under CEQA).
However, the provisions of AB 662 require that an AICUZ
receive a full environmental impact statement even though a
lesser environmental review under NEPA may be appropriate in
AB 662
Page 5
some cases. The Committee may wish to consider if it is
appropriate to require a full environmental impact statement
or if any appropriate review under NEPA is sufficient.
6)Existing law provides that a local or public agency may
propose to overrule an ALUC's action or recommendation
affecting an airport within the jurisdiction of that public
agency after a hearing, by a two-thirds vote of its governing
body if it makes specific findings that the proposed action is
consistent with the purposes of protecting public health,
safety, and welfare, minimizing the public's exposure to
excessive noise, and minimizing safety hazards within areas
around the public airport. According to the Airport Land Use
Planning Handbook, written by the Division of Aeronautics in
the Department of Transportation,
"a local agency cannot simply overrule an ALUC determination
without first documenting the basis for the overruling action
and relating that basis directly to the purposes for which the
ALUC statutes were adopted. The purpose of findings is to
assure compliance with state law?Findings were defined in the
decision (Topanga Association for a Scenic Community v.
County of Los Angeles (1974) 11 Cal.3d 506) as legally relevant
conclusions that explain the decision-making agency's method
of analyzing facts, regulations, and policies and the
rationale for making the decisions based on the facts
involved. In other words, findings provide the connection
between the evidence in the record, and the decision reached."
7)Support arguments: The sponsor argues that "since the
inclusion of an AICUZ in the Airport
Authority's ACLUP for North Island Air station does not
trigger CEQA, the residents of
Coronado whose properties will be impacted by the plan and
associated zoning
requirements do not have a venue to voice their concerns or
even have an opportunity to request changes to the document.
AB 662 attempts to address this problem by ensuring that there
is some process for the public to participate and comment on
the development of the AICUZ."
Opposition arguments: The opposition, the Department of
Defense and U.S. Coast Guard installations in California,
write that "Ŭa]n AICUZ Study is not a decision document; it
does not authorize new air operations nor does it alter
AB 662
Page 6
existing operations. It uses standardized methods to develop
a public document that depicts the location of accident
potential zones and noise contours based on existing and
future operations, and makes land use recommendations to
promote public safety. Therefore, given the nature and
purpose of an AICUZ Study, the public participation sought in
the amended bill is inappropriate."
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
City of Coronado ŬSPONSOR]
Opposition
Department of Defense
U.S. Coast Guard installations in California
Analysis Prepared by : Katie Kolitsos / L. GOV. / (916)
319-3958