Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Conditional Exception 70-50 - John Turner - Meadowlark Airpo
a.41F0 M-9(JSIN $&11At&"tAnON AND HO1JO4 AGVWY - C4OKU 0e1 C"WWW &)EPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DIVISH N OF AEROKkk=5 ., 1130 h STREET-4TH FLOM + MAN.:Fa rot:94297s WRAs1ENT0.CAIN21440C1 011(322.3090 TOo(914 323.7066 October 29, :987 No. Diana blaisure Assim�snt Planner City of Huntington Beach P. 0. Box 190 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Dear He. Blaisurel Thank you for the opportunity to meet with Mrs. Laura Phillips, Mr. Robert Franklin, and you to review proposed developments adjacent to tits H.nadowtark Airport and the effect of said developments on safe aircraft i operati/ms at the airport. As we discussed on October 0, 1987. the buildings as proposed on the west side of Meadowlark will penetrate the transitional ■urfazes. How ouch they will penetrate ctn only be determined by casct measurements from the runway center- line and elevations of the runway and building sites. Transitional surfaces extend outward and upward at right angles to the runway centerline and the runway centerline extended at a slope of 7 to 1 (7 horizontal to 1 vertijul) from the sides of the primary surface and from the sides of the approach surfaces. 111e primary surface for Yeadowlark Airport is 250 feet wide, 125 feet each side of the runway centerline, and extends 200 feet beyond each end of the runway. The approach surface extends from the primary surface for a horizontal distance of 5.000 feet at a slope of 20 to 1. At 5.000 feet, zhe width of the approach surface is 1,250 feet. For more details concerning iaaginary surfaces around an airport. you should refer to Federal aviation Regulation Parr. 77 — Objects Affecting Navigab7.a Airspace. During out discussion. it was mentioned that Roosevelt Lane would be extended. The approach and transitional surfaces must clear a public roadway by 15 feet. It appears that the road will not only penetrate theme surfaces but also the runway primary surface. We know that these terse and definitions are difficult for nonaviation— I oriented people to comprehend. If you require further clarification, please do not hesitate to let us know. Sincerely. JACK D. KEMrERLY, Chief j Division of Aeronautics Duane H. Fargusotl J Aviation Consultant 1 cc: Art Norio. Meadowlark Airport • I 143 AI„ 7 b ofange CouniqPilafs Ossocialion (` 70N BIRCH TTRIRT H9WoXT BEACH. CALIFORNIA 020" I July 21, 1980 i T !.'MO TC: Members of the City Council of Huntington Beach t ' SUBJECT : Zone Change for Meadowlark fsirport i jThe Board of Directors of the Orange County Pilots A asociatioz S requests your consideration of the following factors concerning the question of reznning Meadowlark Airport. i 1. We like and rospcct the Norio family and are most appre- ciative because they have provided Huntington Beach with a vitally needed airport for over 25 years. i In most citieq across the nation, the citizens recognize 1 the need for transportation facilities and take it upon themselvea to build and maintain highways and streets, harbors and airports. In the case of Huntington Beach, we have had to rely on the Norio family Ito provide us with an airport. 2. In 1972. the City of Huntington Beach had an opporturlty to meet its rk.sponstibility to its citizens and the aviation cornmenity by purchasing Meadowlark Airport and combining it with Meadowlark golf course. A plan to accomplish this was prepared by the County Airport Division. Because of anti-airport bias, the City Council passed up this opportunity, loaving it to the Nerio family to maintain the City's airport. 3. The Nerio family has endured not only financial loss as a result of operating the airport, but also the cruelest kind of abuse from airport oponents. This abuse peaked in 1977 when a concerted effort was made by the anti-airport faction to close the airport. The resulting crisis led to many public hearings. After a thorough study of the issue, the City Council concluded that the airport was its fact a vital transportation resource. The Council then voted unanimously to support the Norio family in keeping the airport open. 4. Since that time, despite some tax relief resulting from Proposition 13, the Norio fancily has been unable to realize a fair return from their property in comparison with other uses. Huntington Beach has enjoyed an airport---but at the Nerio's expense. Huntington Beach, one of the most affluent cities in,the world, has been free loading at the expense of the Norio family. ' I S. The time has come for t1sie City to measure up to its responsibilities to provide :.nd maintaia an airport. There are at least two ways that this: can be done: a 4 a. The City can negotiate along term lease with the Nerio family and operate the airport with the help of Airport Develop- ment Aid funds from the state and federal governments. Our Aasocia- tim has researched this approach and we are convinced it is feasible, b. The City can support the Norio ;amily in obtaining federal funds under the Now Airport acid Airways Development Act which will provide tax subsidies to privately-owned public-use airports such as Meadowlar,c. Thin approach in also feasible, however, the bill in question is still before Congress and won't become law before October. i 6. I have mentioned two alternatives,, and there may be others ncch as County sponsorship of the airport. The point is this---it should be possible to meet the Nerio's objectives and at the name time retain the airport. However, we all need more time to investigate the various alteznati yes. j7. Based on our conversations with the t:exi7 fa-ally, we believe t?Aey would consider withdrawing their request for a zone change under certain ccajditione -the conditions being continued ownership of the land with a fair rate of return from the We need time for property. research and to develop a formal presentation of a plan which would meet these conditions. j i As a consequence of the foregoing factors, we respectfully requoot that the zone change decision ')a continued for six months---or denied i without prejudize---and tl.at the Issue be referred to the planning staff for a study of ways and means of preserving the City airport. The Orange County Filets Associsation pledges the support of its 600 members and the enthusiastic backing of several thousand "Friends of Meadowlark Airport' who are residents of our fair City. -, 7 ! JAMES R. EVANS President, Orange County Pilots Association MINUTES MiAU(VI ARK A11J'OIYf I:(1tir1IT1Tli rcbm►ary 15, 1979 ccimnittee Members Present: Chet Drnhos Tom LivengooLl .Dim Evans Jolin Long; Dan Keegan Art Norio Committee rkmbers absent: Frank ("Xiellar Council members present: Ruth Bailey Staff Present: Jeri Chenelle Co-chaitmzn Evans called the neeting to order at 7:40 p.m. in Room B-8 of the Civic Center. Mr. Liveng;ood moved, seconded by Air. Keegan, to approve the minutes of the January 18, 197Q meetbig. Motion passed 6 - 0. Mr. Keegan reported he is continuing; to talk to pilots about violations. It was mentioned that the airport is experiencing lighting; problem; and the runway has not been lighted the past three nights; a plane was observed, cLiking; 'couch and go landings in the dark. Mr. Evans will call the Division � of Aeronautics to determine if airnlanes are allowed to land at lieadow- lark on an unlighted runway. If not, the assistance of the Huntington Beach Police Department will be requested if this happens again. 1 Student pilots and rental planes were discussed, as these seem to be tine most difficult to control. The school and rental plane company will bn. kept infar=d of violations. The information on Meadowlark Airport in the AOPA Airport index does not include the 100 turn, but Mr. Deegan sent a letter requesting; the change to be made in the 1980 issue. 1 The letter which was sent to airport managers ip, Southern California in- forming them of the noise abatement procedures at Meadowlark was dis- cussed. Mr. Evans reported that the manager of the Long; Beach airport responded with a request for 50 copies of the noise abatement procedure flyers. J 11ic drainage problem e:cperienced by the airport on Heil was discussed as was the memo from the Public Works Director. It was the feeling -)r the com- mittee that it appears that the City created the problem and the city should solve the problem at its earcnse, not fir. Keriols. A communica- tion will be sent to the Public Works Director. Councilwoman Bailey brought up a drainage problem she hod been contacted about by the owner of a mobile home park adjacent to the airport. She stated the water from the airport drained into the mobile home park, stays under no coach^s and deteriorates the park's streets. 77u! cimer wanted to dig; a drain- age ditch at his expense on the airport property. ?fr. Nerio stated he does 04 blinutcs Fi1:Jllxrit'IMK MUM' CC I-11'1'11:1 i'ebruary 15, 1979 NIgo 'Rvo not want the ditch on his property and the oirncr leas no right to interfere with the drainage of his property. ilia letter to Supervisor ilarrictt Ifiedcr requesting that the Conenittce be put on a mailing list to receive a copy of as airport site survey was briefly discussed. The report from Public Works on the underg round i ng of utilities on 10'rirner Avenue was discussed rind the Cwrmittee ri.enticned their appreciation for such thorough infornaation. t'1s. Chenelle reported she ha-1 uo new information to report on the Shy Ad liti- gation. Fir. Nerio stated lie did not wish :a pursue the installation of a Wind-T at this time. Mr. Drahos reported that vice during the heavy fog 1,st week, he heard tiro planes landing. Discussion revealed that the FM has strict raguiations regarding landing in fog, and the FM should be called if this happens again. Councilwoman Dailey soRgested that the Committee might w.•uit to submit a progress report to Council. Comnittee members thought this was a goo:l idea and will do so. Meeting was adjourned. Vic next meeting will be held Harch 15, 1979. 1 I d1TV OF HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 76-31 COUNCIL-ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNICATION ►v.ItW.10N MA04 To Honorable Mayor and From Richard A. Harlow City Council Members Acting City Administrator Subject MEADOWLARK AIRPORT Date March 10 , 1978 C0101ITTEF. j 1 At the meeting of March 6, 1973, the City Council adoptrd it resolution supporting Meadowlark Airport and establishing an Airport Committee. The Committee would consist of three local homeowners , three members of the Meadowlark Pilots Association, the Meadowlark Airport owner/ operator, and two nonvoting liaison Crinttc-il members . No pan P were made. RECOWIFNDED ACTION: 1 . Direct the Public Information Office to issue a press release requesting applicants. 2 . Appoint two Council liaison members . 3 . Direct staff to inform the current Committee members that the Airport Committee is being reconstituted and they may submit their applications for the new Committee. ANALYSIS: The Council agreed on the format of the Committee but did not address the matter of appointments or procedure. It is recommender: that if this is to be a permanent Committee, the above procedures be followed. ALTERNATIVES: Appoint current members of the Meadowlark Airport Committee to the now Committee and then take applications for additional members . Resp 1 su i e i 'L kiLar&d A. Barlow APPROVEDlY CRY-1-3=ftaxl Acting City Administrator RAH:JC:bb � f' s\ � I t 1 NIEADOWLARh AIRPORT FACT FINDING SESSION i SEPTEMBER 21 , 1977 i COUNCILMEMBERS RICHARD SIEBERT F, HARRIETT WIEDER OPPGSE AIRPORT OPERATION Tom Whaling - j 1 , uncontrolled: no FAA control J 2. personally observed violators :,f :Light pattern 3. ppersonally observed 4 night flights 4 . has heard that chemical emissions drop on cars II S . surrounding houses too close to airport ' i Jeanne Collins - 1 . planes bank over her house at Z00-300 ft . 2 . origii.: l county Permit given on basis of future J expansion to Z7511 ft . Stated Lhey uWnv:d land they + do not . 3 . using other side of Roosevelt Road which is not theirs . 4 . under L. B. flight pattern S . non-conforming; use permit - new business not allowed f 6 . no clear zone 7 . not policed 8 . be:ve liqucr at airport { Mildred F.uenne - 1 . noise level louder 2 . student pilots fly over homes i 3. newspaper clippings of accidents 4 . night flying keeps them awake Hen Borcoman - 1 . Bonfa f2iling; to give proper local advice L . frequent flights on weekends 3. says most pilots are not Huntington Beach residents 4 . night flying noise Tom I.ivengood 1 . CE 70-50 prohibits night flying Z. Constal Co. not to operate in illegal building, according to business I i ecisse. Isu c are 3. Building Dept. violations sent to attorney office, being ignored. _J ri Meadowlark Airport Fact Finding; September 21 , 1977 SUPPORT AJRPORT OPMATION Art Nerio - 1 . Raised flight pattern from 5O0 ft. to 800 ft . 2. Recent accident no reason to close airport. 3. Petition 1111600 signatures supporting; airport Dnvid Larsen (Nerio's attorney) 1. Developments near airport since 1973 had EIR's approved by Council 2. Recent accident not related to nuisance aspect James Evans - (Orange County Pilots Association) 1 . Closure of airport significant loss to great number or people 2. Airplanes safest $ least polluting; form of transportation. 3. ate Division of Aeronautics inspects monthly and states airport is safe . 4. County Noise st :y shows it meets acceptable level. S. Has been in exiscanre for 30 yrs without being; nuisance . 6. 30 people would lose employment, business would close, pilots would have no place to put planes . 7. City should build municipal aviation facility; FAA and Cal Trans would contribute funds. 8. Believes City Foes not nave right to detarmine safety standards relating; to banner towing;. Only FAA and Cai ':rans. have authority. �. Forming; rnmmittee to a `icate pilots on noise abatement L,�ocedures 10. Little incentive to i, ,Vs-ove airport when under cor.ztant 'threat of closure . 11. Requests Council adopt resolution supporting; airport. Don Dodge - 1. City Police y County sheriff are authorized to enforce FAA violations 2. Installation of visual slope indicator would solve problems of low descent 3. "uncontrolled" means simply no IAA tower. Thcra are other controls and riles 4. Problems occur mainly with out of town pilots . Jim Petit 1. City has failed to deal with the airport because of politics . Meadowlark Airport Fact Finding; Scssion 001 September 21 , 1977 11oh Fallon - 1 . 0. C. Pilots Associatiun developing 1'7adowlark ©iapter to deal with negligent pilots . Z . General aviation important to industrial development in County. 3. City should buy airport and realign with golf course . Harold Seifert - i 1 . lives under flight pattern and does not object to it airport and says neighbors do not object, either. 2. need municipal airport ; would also bring business ;nto town . i REBUTTAL PERIOD iI Jeanne Collins - 1. no room to expand on current land Tom Livergood - 1. Noted both ;ides acknowledge that no one authority has total control Ban Borcoman - -� 1 . FAA Chief Allen said City controls airport business license Bob Cannon - 1 . Police can enforce violations of CAR' . (low- flying,etc Pam Bunker - 1 . Airport has unicorn system in which pilots can communicate with airport. 2 . low flying complaints should be directed to FAA. 3. transient pilots create the problems, not locals . (Name Unknown) - 1 . sees very little night flying Z . accidents lie knows of are planes who come in too high, not too low. Craig; McCarty - } 1. small businessman who needs airport for his bus- iness . Checked with FAA before buying; business , anJ FAA. said airport is safe. ` Ralph Ricks - 1. Most airports do not have FAA control towers. Orange � _j County airport tower closed at nights . ' Crag Ilcin - 1. Owns Consta,. . Moved to Warner Ave. because City } won 't allow new buildings on airport. Iles legal business license . y s. Meadowlark Airport Vact "indinl-, Session Septenlicr 21 , 1977 Gre1; Ilein cont 'd - 2. former Newport Ileach City hol icopter pilot . City can enforce violat'ions but there are very few to enforce. ADDITIONAL C%261UNTS James Evens (supports Airport) 1 . Many people could not come because of unreasonable hour of this meeting. Mildred Kuehne (opposes airport) 1 . FAA no% requires call numbers only 3 inches high. Cannot see to report . (Name Unknown) (sul.ports airport) 1 . Itand and Robinson designing quieter airpInnes here in Iluntington Iiesch. i Tom Livengood -(opposes airport) 1 . unicom not used for control . There is no control at airport . CIASING REMARKS BY COUNCILMEMBERS SIEBERT AND WIEDER Richard Siebert - must look at laws and rules 1 . City did not create problem 1 . lawsuit against City when tried io stop housing tract . 2. FAA can rule on safety of surrounding development plans . 2. Lives more important than dollars 3. Will tour airport with Mr. Nerio 4. City would probably not be held liable in lawsuit 5. Business license cannot be revoked; is strictly revenue producing. Narriett Wieder - 1. Would like to see pilo' organization police itself. 2. Allegations should be investigated. I I r► I SIAIE Of CA17101k1A-•BUSINESS AND TRAY._.JIT44110H AGENCY IWAUND O. MOWN M. Gov~ f m4. .W. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DIVISION OF AERONAUTICS % "N" STREET CRAMENTO. CA 95814 (e1e1 a7�•�o90 �����(.- LI Jcpteiilber 2'l, 1777 5 E P 30 197. CITY OF IIUNIINGION UEACH CITY COUNCIL OFFICE Ms. Jeri Ct_enelle City of lluntlnBton Beach 2000 Hain Strcot P. 0. Box 190 Huntingtcn Beac' CA 02648 Dear Ms .Niene e : I As you requested, we are sending a copy of the law rewarding nuisance and the three-year limitation. r� If you need addit lonal information, pleal;e contact i us. Sincerely, E_ j . WKENNEY, Chi.cl 1.rXe� or Aeranautitcs uc cer 'j Area Chl.or i AL'L'aclurtent• i r • APNIrT t.11llVIATION 1 ('UIII II;%jnll. IC."a1•111IIg III iIt no,l,rinI,• ,•Iit- bl- rim II•N'lrrlmet :1111-rll;llit'1't: ' I err mmi.r lUlparl 1►II.,n rnlnll:1;illlr 411111 tl.,•. +brill hr imrlrlll-'ll in fill,„rt1• (� j rral pt:tll. 'I III'AI;II1 im,';II, elr lll'1{ills'i,;!v;U'Y rlrr Itu• ru11mr11r'Ib'tl 11r ! mnfuien;nue ui .ur•Il Ir:ul.luerl;it inn farililit-; lclll 111'rtt'il.l• lit Iht• 141,111 t1i :1„rlll'1' priOlIvill;.• fill- ;'e'lle':';11 I,lan, 11 .lall'1111•I'l fir lilt, Ill'Tr'llt null , lnmjrl'Irll nmi�r II•t•ris ,I, mi. rn1•ilil%•, moll ;old iufurvn;llinrt tt11'eh asly i m.cll ill tile cict'rlulron ut air t:mr•h lrtrls. , I ' r '1'lin r•tinir'rturmlx air 11jf41.1•rli,eu r.11;lll uliply In rharler vilim. ' ('Wile•Il ley Sulk. 1901. ('11. thhll; ;11111'tllll rl It1' Sims. 1967. Cll. 111-51:; ' ly :.04;. 1:114), (_'If. 9,12; by SIAN. 1970, ('11. la"11; ;rinl ley S1.114. 1971, I I'h. 1 tilla,) i + 1 Trtinsportstion Element 10,53!13. Tlw l;rnr•ral lel;ul tonv iul tulle Ifu' rI,IIr,will;,• mr mw llnrt or lthlhr tbrrrrrr: (r) A II'111i%por'tllilell ell lul•nl sbim ill;•• n rulnprl'hrllMt'e• llilll�llurla• l Illell lyhl,•Ill, ill,•Ill,lell;! l„r•;IIIlrtly or rl;•I11l:•,11.11';I�', I,•r111It1;111, t'1.1,1111'Iti, I a1ol ;;rillll•�rlernclliuoti. 'I'llk rlr•Inrnl ill' lilt- Ill;nl In;l%• 111-41 iol•lu,lr• fuel, ! Iharlmr, oviolinn,will rrlulrll flu•ilitie'ti, i j (,�Illll,d Itt' ti1:11•:. 1.`liia, (:I1. P1 l'll: rltlll':I,il•el ley N -4. 1:1117, (*It. Ilia:{; 1 �•\ Irk• Sl'll%. ('I1. 1:2; III• :,I:It-.. 1970, Clo. i I7; null )I;•Slab;. 1971, I'll. 1 11126.) ' I I S. Prctumplion That Mimi Is:col a Ivuismira for l Abolr71cnt Prucccdinps(Coda of Card Prccedul'c) Nuisances; Ur:ca in Airport Zon;s 73IIt. Wliviirt•e•r nn3• city, ril:• will rrlmnty, fir erflmlly sll;►ll have I rclnblimhrd renew mr Ilit,trirlx miller lntll mrily (of her whrre'im rl•e•laim I IIIrt111triv.1Urim nr rlllnnu•rrial air mirllart Ii.l•!t are c%Iern%r.ly lmrnlillrel, Pseri►t ill .an aulilm In aleale n iltlf,lic unismice lsreim;l]t ill the n:umn ur Lilt- prol,le or Lite tit:,':or Calireerttin, mn person or pttr)71'l, lirm or car- ' lturtltimn N111111 ba elljrlfnrd or restrained by the injmnrlive prorm from IN- rrasnnnble and tlrreusary operation in ally t:nah iodmslrial or com- 1 snrrvial Il!nlle or nlrport or nab' ime exprc•'ay porulitted therein, lllnr tchall rich ime lie Ilrrtnerl it rsatis mve a ithmrtt evillrnee of the rolillny- ; turnt nr mulr,•rw.•Iry mill injnriumis menims or operation. Nillhim" in ' ll:fx rlrt N11:111 bt1 devilled to nlllrly to tile. 1•1-;;Il1n1itou and warkin;t )nnsrm ! of ramp-rir!l, fertilizing pl:oll., rr'rrurrio. will mlbrr sumilarul,lis.h- m enll, N'let-, hl,rt•;ltinll prnelatre 11( mi%,1t•1• /alnrrt. (.111.1rd by Still%. 111:15, (a. fill i n l•Itluled by Stak. 19'17, (:h, al$, I Awl by atats. 1959, (:It.795.) At:atement of Airport, etc.:Presumption No Tfniranco l 73111. Tit nnv n04111 ^r prnevedfnn In nlmie the mar, nr nn nirllnrl nr nn nirpark, prmnf tbnt the :Iirpnrl or airprerk lim leer-, in e!ce:Irnra fur '• J r Rev.2(6-72) r• WON • ICU 1'.U.II'UIINIA LAWS 111A.ATI':U TO A11:1111NAUTICA 1 Ilrr're yr.mr, ruu.litulr.v it ri-low.Ihh! lllr.umpli„n %%hirh hall be prima ! I I favio evidrnrt+ that :hv nlu•r;Itiuu of Ow nirpurl tir uirlunk Juts I►ut ! euua it linv n tlui-allev. -d by Sulls. 19-11:1, (:It.521.) 6, Aecepic,uo of Nonrgur Situ 'w Ilia Sfole ' I An serf o►rlhuri:ing the film, of ('olif,rruio In rrrrelll and receive title , i I to rrrtoirl rral prollrrly to be -ird at the site fur• llle crediuml of a f (SIA., 1931, Ch.217, ,1lllrrutr,) by Ow 11r•trrn„r April'27, 1931. � Ill rfl'rrl .�u„`u�t 1 1, Jtla l) I The purple of Ihr :;tolr'r,f Catijurn.el da rmir't a.x/all,wx: i I Director of Finance to Accept Cerlam Property I ticl:ruly 1. The direvIiii' of finlllrc iq herrhy Illrlh„1•izol find cm. powerrrl to aecl`10 awl reecho by I;ift litl-: to Il!r rollowin;; dem-ribed i real properly or any ,Ilia progeny nlljurmt or jivar therctn in Ilia I urlmr loin Air nn•1 nn of I,,,, sime fir enliromin limialrll to the Stale of Califurvfill to be. well Ire lulu f-:r Ili' l,t,rlm�-! or a sitrt for lime rrrolion of:►haiiimr. D,..crilltion 'flint, property bel•iviiu`:tit :i 1whil.r,,, Ihr easterly Nidr. of Ilm smilh. i 1vi-O rnadway; tmid l,rrint brio;; (urdwr desr•ribr',l a5 brim- 1'1'alc,l S., 8.I" 20' M. 81I11.6:1 fc':t; Ilw1we .5., aa° 35' S'., V.0.17 fca; tllcaeo S., ! rill° 0., 21; reel, rrim, a mi-mimr.rllt marldiij, life. emiler Him illler• weliull of file llrnllotirrl 5011 fret rmmay.-i elf the! Sar'r:uurnto immidlfal oirl:,lrl, SHIc ,If Valifill•11""; 1111'I:r'r! Until fill! paint j llr,;lllllill!., �., It;° «�:1' li.,:iI 1 fet-1, Ina point oit lllr iwsterly lute Ilt Ihr sun111%' st rni1w.1y; illm.•c .i., :1:1" P;i W., 12131,17 fort, ulna„ Ilia j ►Irstrrly 11m, I,f l;md "onlliw%l, rmovay, to n pnint, which K:►d point 1 bears N., P1" 59.3 1' N'., "12•I,-I11 f wt, rrmn IN, ulumhr'nst rimer (ir :hG tiurralru'llla \dill,il,al Airl,nrt: Ihru:'e N'., 56" 25' W., :111 frrl, In n 1 pnir►1 an lh^ rno,o), I ir!r of rail :,olfl intro rrl:ulway: I llrure N., 31" 35' H.. 28•1.17 feet, Ilia exmi-rly Atli, of raid c„ntlim-st rondway, In I the Unlit of he.`-,innin„; mill ronlnNing '�'211 nrrem. ' All of the ablive dt"vrihrd Infid iq Inrrlr'1 ill the Faii(Imeat (lllnrler (9w,) of I:celion 25, in R R., It. 4 E., M. 1). R and M. V$0 1t:r.. 2. .Snid property In he fir the. ow find bencfit of the 91r,te or .^404nrnia. Thr, nrreptnnce r;hal nil lit- midi- hrrnre July 1, 19.11, Slnr , nrier.Tnnc alp, 19:12, I 7 Traffic on Airparl I'm-perly Nehiclo Codu/ I,oc,11 Reg llatiun I 21109. lrnenl mnll►nritien may nllopt rifles and rer•►Ilatimis by ordi. rmnnee nr resolation regulating ve'Moulnr traMe on priti•nlely amled and Rev.2 O-M Wild N CITY 01" HUNTINGTON BEACH I'd Be CITY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION • • Jaw11MIRIP1.1(11 TO llonorablcs Mayor and City Council FROM Harriett IViedor Councilwoman SUBJECT MEADOWLARK AIRPORT DATE October 3, 1977 At the fact finding; meeting; held September 21 , 1977 , Jim Evniis of the Vilots Association stated a committee :aa:; being formed for the pilcits to Police the:mselve.s . We don' t want to take the license away from :he ,airport or declare it a public nuisance if the different groups :involved can learn to live together. We cnn learn, to live together if the pilots ' policing; committee is formed . In addition, I recommend the formation of a liaison committee composed of pilots and residents who have experienced problems with the airport. Igl4:bt I I I '1 I Pik i, %14 U /JrUt� .�� .E.-yc,e'—� ���--�+�-ws�rJ G[.•—fCt,c.�—./ ��-t I �� /)t,C-c�4.4'�'-�-=ice • � . c.�L11-tJ't:�,,G�[7c/ �7ki�' '�i.J ��t� �"�-•[.i.��� �:?''Lc�t�� i I [Y{C.�t.�' �-Z�:�11���t'.'�.c�+txlc.�-�✓ 4I,1'- t.C�/ � YL.���Gcry�_J � 4el r � i i .ieptemtx�t' I1E, 1�77 I'anclottlnric Cities on Ca,nm.'tt.tc�c, FFuntino;tcn P-jrictl,. Crilif. , 92,",49 Dour 3irat ;,rtor obnorving ;`enclot,larl; 111i,part unc? 1:ho pilots flying habit- .3 ci' annoying citiwona, failftn3 to Le;op thoir word on improvemonta . to tho airport crcl the very :'act, tt1!tt un oycoorc ca.•lica an airport ciugradoa nropo►!%t;j vai-tica, 1 do frocly clool-rive 1'cadcirlarl= Airpo.,- u:, public nuionnco. I Lim a Fiuntin-ton Oaaca Funino:lnman an nttttod bo 1 ott. 11nm) I;ocation Saptembor 14, 1977 1.1amdowlarl: C:lti-,,an Committoo Hunting,ton B)ririi,. Cnlif. , n?61EcI Do•tr, 9irn: Actor obaorving Vondovlark Airport and tho pilota flying habitn of annoying oitizonn, to illn7 to lcerp their vc-rd on imp•:ovomontn to tho airj:o.7t and the vary fact tho oyonoro All airport d ,wade a proy:orty valuen, I do frooly &.Clara Veadowlarl: Airport a- public nuiorinco., I an a HLIntInc;ton `loricii Fiininom m;in an ntateri. r, ?- l 0111 0 n w I;nmr) L/ ► L'ncation ,r ,.L>�cam- �_- - ICJ •�,�� L-1 ��L� i r i 1� `I f 1 i 11opteml-ni, 14, 1977 1•'ondovinz•1: Citizen ;oinmIt.tor. Ii intj.nvton ?•orrch, Gril,.f. Donr Sim : A'ftor oboorving ;!ondowlnrk Airport and tho pilots flying hnbita of annoyinG citizonn, failing to hoop Choir word on improve ainnto , to tlio airport and tho very fact that tho oyonorn cii-11cd nn nirport dogrRdou propo!•ty valuon, 1 do froely d.eclaro IloadoIrizrk Airport t', public nui©nncu,. T Lim a fiuntizigton Smc;i F.uninormim n no ntat-1l be l ou.. (.:no(I T:1.101110e3 �, l Sri l?1Q L,�,V.'.. L, 1r..) Location_ -/.,(.[.r.. ,y,-�,,� e .!� .901)tembei• 111 , 1577 ME)till cl11ark CIALA-on Committoo Fiuntinr,ton Poach.. Call.f. Doar- Sirn: Aftc)r obaorving i:ondov1nrI, l lrport and the piloto flying habits of annoylrlr citizona, railing t,c, hoop thair word on improvomontcl to tho airport P-ncl tho very fact tlutt tho oyenovo on-fled an airport degraded propo_•t:y vnluon, I do rror ly doclriro Vendmilnrlc Airport a. rub11 c wilunco, I am n Hunt.?n l-ton Eori ch [=uni11C>•nnr.:nn an ntntod c:�loir, ,91Cn�'d / i !/LG zLIX �._ I'll a 11�0 n t3 r'i ; ) ( ( I I I t l i i I ►9olit,cmbov 14, IF-77 I•rondculark CltiryOri Commit ton Bunt iziF,t on P•vt ch,. Cnl i f. , c12F,li9 Dortr Sirn t A'rtor oboorvinr :;vr'.ati►1ar•1: Airport and tho piloLa flying hnbitn or annoying c:ltizona, to troop their word on irnprovomonto . to tho airrort and thO vory fact that tho oyQuoro cr.•llocl nn niv}_•ort dogrtulon proporty vnluca, I do froely (1:icl_wro Veadow1nrk 1lirnort a, publir, ruinttnro. I zim l.ttnt ir)ctort f3arich RIM.fin simn.rin an ntato(I b�lotro J 7 jinr*tC V n I:o c n t i on 5�;.(�.�a� ��.c,,�..... �� I C(.Ja,.�..—•.� i i I e f soptembor 14, 19P I-'ondc,rinric Citi:,on Commi.tton Huntinrtot: Poach, Calif. , 9120/119 Donr Sir. ; ATtor abnorving ;'ondowlarlc Airport atA--the p.il-etr to the verb, fact. that tho oy--vnoro culled nn airport depradon propoi•zy v111u00 , I do fronly d^.clnrn I ondc)vIni1c Airport a. irablic r,xilranneoe l ari za !1mitinnton t'onch Flujinonmmrin no ntatod 1-3 1 Olt, I;nno 1- 07j, -0cati oil , ;I 1 i r �a aiAomt-or 14, 397 t You.dculPrlc Citizorn Committeo Fiunt inrt on Rmch,. Cnl if. , 9'1'r31E 9 Doan- Strn Aftor ob©orving 1Soadoirlarlc Airport and tho pilots flyin,r; hnbltn of annoying, cAtizona, £r_iliti r to Loon thoir word on inprovomorit-+ to tliv airr^oz't MI(I thn v,)ry f,1ct thRt tiio 03-onoro c:•lled cu: airport dofrrnclou proporty valuers, I do fronly declnro Yendoiilarl: Airport. u.; public nuinnnco, S nri "t fi�1r_` inrtr�� D�-tC;1 ,-t�ni'�v�e�nr!nn an at.nto(t b=.].o;ram. Unmo -7 locritiorl�� �I 9/107? ISf:AU ULARK AIRFOILT COlu'11'.T-112: My husbai.a and I tinve lived undor the T+U P.-OFF PATIM; of HUWNLARK AIRMBT, eince Aug. lot, 1957 We have uitnevued over a dozen aircraft acci derta, that have occurred ninco U=.Wo huvu newpapar artic-2.aa and picturce to back our claims. Ono picture is of txo planes that crashed piggy back, in midair over KE-MIU11K AIRPORT on Feb. 2nd, 1967. N9045J And N89105. AFlight Instructor was hurt. Just knowing that new ntudmts aro piloting planco over our horse, every single day is very dinconserting. Wu live in jenpardy, every day of our livas. One other picture wo have is of a Slane pilotod by a Mr. Richard 5enton that crashed into a parkod p1rno at said airport on March 31st, 1974. N89425. The nci.o factor has cauRed both my huobnnd and I many yew:x of going to Docturs for help with our nerve proble;us. Dack in 1957, and even in 1974, there was a greon belt for the pilots to lEAd when their engicioc felled, butthat is no longer true. Thorn in now large buildinga nn the Hest Kde of F=%4' CNICA RD, The 3 story ona r just across the street, from our ham© is having difficult., ranting their 2nd and 3rd stories. Just being up there, watching approaching aircraft, is very frighttining. Yours ver-f truly, .�NCO.r✓J /I?'' ���.-c. I 17032 Dolsu Chica Rd. Huntington Deach, Calif. 92640 . 'T 1 1 _ I Orange counigPilots nssocialion U40 NIRC11 SrMEET NEW ORT 0CAC11, CALIFORNIA 93"0 R ESOLUTION WHEREAS, the best Interests of pilots in Orange Counts, are served by the continued operation of Meadowlark Airport, and WHEREAS, Meadowlark is threatened with closure because humeowners in the area have claimed it is a public nuisance, and WHEREAS, the experience and expertise which the Grange County Pilots Association has developed can be helpful in establl:hing procedures to abate noise and reduce airport complaints, and WHEREAS, the OCPA has at, obligation to address comp!aints about aircral, operation anywhere in the county so as to improve community relations, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the OCPA sponsor a chaptt at Meadowlark Airport and assist that chapter in taking positive steps to reduce causes for complaint by Investi f,ating violations of regulations and taking appropriate action to edate pilots using Improper techniques and showing lack of concern for homeowner . The Meadowlark Chapter will strIve fop, the betterment of general aviation in Orange County and will specifically work toward the improvement of operations and relationships at Meadowlark Airport. The Chairman of the hteadow;arl< Chapter will serve as a Director of the Orange County Pilots Association. L pZ ev Ln�� OF ARTMFNT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATIDN ADMINISTRATION Fligl;t Standardn Diatriet offices#65 r 2815 East Spring Street �•'` "''�, Long Deach, California 901106 0 �I August 30, 1977 ~� Ma. Jeri Chenelle Administrative l.ide City of llutttingtort Beach P. 0. gox 190 11untin6ton Beach, California 92648 Donr Ms, Chene112; Enclosed is a compilation of aircraft accidents on or in the vicinity of Meadowlark Airport evince June 1972. The information win; compiled from our accident logs. We do not have any infonintion on accidents prior to that date. Copies of accident reporta may be ob►:a' from the National s Transportatton Safety Board per the t sped information ahee.t. Sincerely, F, A. ALLEN Chief Enclo3uresLei D •- SEP 1 1977 CITY OF HUPITINGTON BEACII CITY COUNCIL OFFICE �--•- .5•-�r'�,; L�y` �_ �M• '�.ie•� .+e v1��..f_ ,_ f'.w,.yfys.•• ��i rl./' ,yJ ��+• '�.rJ`rj�•:V���J�+v��(�s.. ` r J`4/tire•-'✓L�I;M./7�:-�.1ti""C�'fV'.�L.a. C�•.YY1",�;.�t��lKj" F"`�w,},.''��• "�xr *'�.�"�✓"���.'��;+�,;iY+v.�:..�' .F.. r ,�.stiry►"1� w.wtr��i.SM� "�+".J--�,�i i`rl.l'���f��.��.•�' 'y t� ..�'..`���...�..� •��i�.`����.`ti�ic��'�•�'���. ��.• � )t.� r� DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL MIATION ADMMISTRATION Flight Stnnd= a District orficu-65 2815 E. Spring Street a Long Beach, California 9080G �•(4.. °s 0 r Y. August 26, 1977 ACCIDENTS ON OF WITHIN FIVE (5) MLES 01' HEADOIII.ARK AIRPORT SINCE NNE, 1972 1-26-73 N3955Q, Cessna 172, P!lot - Melvin llerLichler, nonit.jtiry • accident, collapsed nos., wheel and bloim tire 1-30-73 N1310)1, Cessna 310, Pilot - Thonns Tepper, noninjury accident, hard landing,, collapsed Fear 2-22-73 N4326V, Cessna 195, Pilot - Rodney Delp, noninjury accident, lout di.rertional control on landing; 8-26. 0 148248X, Cessna 172, Pilot - Charles Dodd, noninj,ity accident, hard landing 2-15-74 117266, Derjager Scout, Pilot - John Turner, nuninjury accident, engine failure on takeoff, struck two other aircraft 3-30-74 1189425. Cessna 140, Pilot - Richard Menton, noninjury accident, list power on takeoff 7-11-74 N71665, Cessna 182, Pilot - Willl!= Ivey, noninjury accident, hard landing collapsed nose wheel 8-1-74 N51342, Cessna 150, Pilot - Larry Lindinberg, noninjury accident, lout power on takeoff 4-23-75 N3869P, Piper PA-22-150, Pilot - Jerry D. Ilnrdin, piles in jur:.s, c^-•ced landing at Navy Wenpone Station 9-7--75 N6441L, American AA-lA, Pilot - Willie C. Lane, nonittj,iry accident, hard landing 10-30-75 N1215D, Cessna 172, Pilot - Warner Marhold, non--injury accident, landed long. .r 1-6-76 N6441L, American AA-I , Pilot - Willie C. Lane, noninjury ar cide-it, hard landing t. \.�-��• .��..��b�1'I`."'n�r'T`'I�'T.:,�1. `���„r���i�✓•+-yti�a 3?�� �.LY...� _ `�+.� . /v'is .. i .�1 i� 1�' \ i 11.-�•ti f �� -`�.�1� ti 1 �'V G-�N. •�K• / ` ♦T L.' •�.� ,�� � /Y• � } .r �;� �1I.� i`�r�,�Vi _ .�MM��~�!`�'_ 1... _..�yyjei:'�'�:?.�+�r�ryV�`��.Nw�*rf•����w:�- A �X+��,•r•�,,•�•' `a•r0�• I i. Page A" ... 5•-5-77 N26260, 8eechcraft 35 (Sec :cote), Pilot - Herman L. Ilesaendorf, fatal injuries to pilot and three paosengers. Aircraft crashed in field four mile:; southeast of Meadowlark Airport 5-8-77 1119034, Cessna 150 (See note) , Pilot - Kalph D. Reeve, noninjury accident, forced larding in field b� miles goutheant of Meadowlark Airport a-147 N70335, C.ssna 150, Pilot - Ronald C. Bybee, night lilndi.ng :---- lost power on go-around, turned back to field and struck flight school building in line with runway. Seriouv injurie►ti to pilot and two paonengers liur.e: Accidents that c,ccurred on 5-5-77 and 5-8-77 Were nos in connectian wirli cfeadowl.arlc operations. Both aircraft were euroute to Fullerton Airport from airports other than Meadowlark. Per request darad 8-18-77 the following Information in on tl:e t► bunner toaring accident at: Sun Juan Capistrano.' 5-28-77 N5189T, Champion 7RCA, Pilot - Albert It. Sibi, fatal injury wl:en aircraft struck child playin, in drainage area io' riill.w n } �I �• I } jl �► i �►�+ Gb'1"r �'�!-K^�•71t��•►•�^�.tih"q�(y��,�`►`►y+ ..Mw:n.jY.tfR'�.!►.a,e,,��.�Jy��Mkw'�h. tYJ/! " � V'��q�Y�f��f}''�� •4. -�,,.,��"���?.•�:,Y..�-`1.\•y calf V fr� t. yr 1 r.��7.1.•ti^y/ n r. �a��•• �, �• �w«if ,'Ss �r. .�_r•..�1r ,^yam,y _a.'r, J•' * :' � .. � ,;.�.. ( ��/ ��r ��►,�! ���'.. �vim/ fR.. � .�. G���f�����.����� ��+ ��� �-i't�-�~Y�'i• l�yi�%,w+�(�J.�"Y�.^../�'�f�.'^ 1�fit/ . �,Rvr• •.�s� :'V�;.+ f� � i :+. •�71... J'. 4.�. .G'.v,� /...rd�.T�_. _.w ..•+.... � r.. ..FY <. ♦ ..�: � 1• .:�. .t� .. �� ...k..•' aw• • i- SrcclAL (apyiu c1 _ QU913C DfXlltfflTS AtiD RltCe11r1�b COA11fIC SEpYlCES Or{ttiral f=ttati �"�tee pt atL alrar reef lento :fYyujjp�ttecf'by tl}e ,1aticw t 2hosporrai.&A 40f of boa c'tc/ the Fardarot Av(Afk,. AJwlRia• tri tier. my on fact# 1n Ahr VlahlirVtoli, D. C. ofjiae of tha Safety &%Ld. ,.kiaat, and t o;fear, .�.roparja. or fury PrHo" of. than. I. II fast•raproduaid clisif q%Titod to Mae ,'equasfor. Requests for lsproductfoa of loard rsports ahould spactfy the data ' aril place of the aeeideat aral the operator or carrier. Requesta f should bz forwarded Lot ILATIONA16 TAMS?OATATICN SAFETY 80An0 Adfslnistrative Opsratlons Dlvislon Accident Inquiry Soctlou Washington, D. C. 20591 , Fees and srrangsocrita for the provision tit this srrvive air a■ Enl lave i f A. A $2.00 user service charge is Blade by the Srfety Board tar researching the filer and preparing the esaterlal for reproduc- tion. •' b. Actual reptrodur:tlon of the films is done sander contract by 1 a cormerclal business firm In Washiniltcn. D. C. Uiiefer our currtnt contract the average cost to the requester to W per page for • printed canter and SdC per pate for photographs. plus protege. 'These prices are subject to change At ■itch clue As a new :slnttect is nego- ttcted. UP titnium charp.e Lu 61,U0. hors rharges are In iJdition to the 72,00 user chatttt dreerlbed abn%,e. fir c. Copl.s,nf tepottn orderrd will be mailed frun the V.,►li!ol- ton, D. G. bualneon firm that holds the caCrenr_ contract for ros- eu cciiiL reproductti,n of the Dnard'n puGllc file$_ puling rill ba direct tit the gequ•eter ty the same cnnipany and will Includt all charges Incident [a the request. COfPUTCft idpE COMI G SEWCE lapepy cNirttiniW Public r..tia ',in afrcru"t ao.- crfa rr ala jiroo- CJat►il �r'i),71tid'ii t-Lf' F proD'drd :afopi YI•ittraf ri-qural. .:a1:f fist"+:nt :f faril. AdJre'dn repivaito to; ' NArl0t1AL 7R,'00oORfATION SAFETY COAItu Alm. fccidant Data Branch 1lashir4ton, D. C. 20591 e Lhargen Iot IIt14 ArrvI-a' .air a-: frli.•va: Providilig duplteate .lots • tap"• i'•l.h Cl'C1 of [il,,r• ur lfAall•ail llu•r.:r-t. J40.III). fit 1'i ItL L� Inrludrr Ilu• h1Ank t✓pr, wits, whith thr vilotrimirn u! Il : t' :a-pl.-d, tho computer cj91t nl.Surl.ilvI filth ,r.ln 111p, Il,o I.lpr., -,,I rr•.i•• of -.1i1i--1R Ilia• t4sleb to thr t,r%w-,trr. r r •�'�VMt7••'.Gla\.;.`S�' �•��:I--'.w'W��fr �[7'....r:.::.Mtr�'v..'�J.,f'.ZJ��fA�J��,;.�-• t.'��.:r W�!`• •ti.M�?'�...�.i t, .V•...� �� -..... ^•Kv '�M J • tir`L'4}L�/t't �.• f, S.'Y .r �v ��-• cy '�`!e-�' i ..Y, •}�,S, �� ✓. ' ':tom�"�_.�`.•''[,.><•`�.f..•^��fit(!.s/�`rN�`�L .L'�� r °, Av^r- `j�'►f.•t'� :.r- •.7+��• .y��...�_ ;r,,� �" �-1'•- .t•r'.i w• a'/.� � 7,t >7.3•�z +,+�►'i _ r.YEN}": .v„� �•+�.��� � . _ -•y A ow� TO: Floyd 0. Bel-ito, City Administrator FROM: City Attorney DATE: 23 August 1977 SUBJECT: Findings Re Meadowlark Airport as a Public Nuisance On August 1 , 1977, this office was directed by the City Council to prepare proposed findinga of fact relative to the operation of Meadowlark Airport a:i a public nuisance . Fere- with are the propoacd findings: 1. The parcel known as the "Meadowlark Airport" came into the city of Huntington Beach as a part of Sunset 3Feiehtu Annexation No. 3 by adopiion of Ordinance No. 1095 adopted on Novembnr 2, 1964. 2 . The parcel known as the "Meadowlark Airport" was placed in an R-1 district . 3 . The "Meadowlark Airport" its a nonconforming use in an R--1 district wit:zin the city of Huntington Beach. G . The "Meadowlark Airport" is a use which is prohibited in an R-1 district and one for which a conditional use permit may nor. be granted. 5. A tionconformi.ng use of land within the city of Huntington Beach may be continued or changed to a conforming use or to use of a more restrictive classification or abated as a public nuisance . 6. The "Meadowlark Airport" is bordered and surrounded by pareels of land containing, inter alia, multi.ple family and single family dwelling un{.ts, a baseball park, a public golf course and shopping centers, ten schools within a one-mile radius , including two ele- mentary schools and a high school directly in the flight path. 7. Some 237 inhabitants of the aforesaid bordering surrounding area have petitioned the city of Huntington Beach to abate the Meadowlark Airport as a public nuisance alleging that the noise and rear of accidents created by users of the airport facility have caused them annoyance, inconvenience, interferred with the use of their property, and nuneroua persons have spoken to th.-3 Council of their complaints concerning the airport . A. On at least three occasions in the past nine months, aerial ac- cidents have occurred at the Meadowlark Airport including a plane Memo to t'loyd G. Helsito , City Administrator August 23, 1977 Fie: Findings - Meadowlark Airport crash with serious personal injury, a power line failure duie to a hit-run collision between a plane and power lines. 9. The state and federal governments have altogether preempted the field of aircraft regui-nrior. to the extent that local regu- lation: is ineffective. 10. The 11I4eadowlark Airport" is a small, private facility sub- ject to owner 'e control . 21. Neither the owner, the state or federal governmento, in fact, effectiv%ly control the: Meadowlark Airport. CONCUISION: The City Council of the city of Huntington Beach finds that as presently situated and located and because of the lack of effective control over it, the Meadowlark Airport has become and is now a public nuisance and, as such, should be abated. I r . qO r� %a CITY OF HUN"TINGTON BEACH !�•j INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION �Mwiwc.uw�i�cu To City Administrator From City Attorney Subject Meadowlark Airport - Abatement Data August 22, 1977 Progress Report The Council on August 1, 1977 directed the City Attorney to prepare findings of fact relative to the operation of Meadowlark Airport in connection with the filing of a petition for injunctive action before the Superior Court . Attached are proposed findings and decision relating to the nuisance. Declaring the airport a public rniisance and abrupt closure of the air- , po. c by court action, while entirely satisfactory to some, would cause serious diblocation and hardship to others. For this reason, an al- ternate solution might be the adoption of a "rollback" ordinance which would terminate the airport use by exercise of the police power of the city through its zoning laws by allowing for amortizatica of the fa- ;:ility. An example of such an ordinance is attached. E:lidenee presented at the various public hearings over the past several years could lead one to the conclusion that there are excessive numbers of planes permanently based at the airport which condition has caused excessive numbers of overflights of nearby residences, schools and com- raeroial establishments , night takeoffs and landings . There alp o ap- pears to be a failure to provide any management at the airport. The use of the premises is on a catch-as-catch-can basis . There is no radio control, radar or other navigational aid present, only an it-. luminated wind sock and some runway lights . The general condition of the promises can be described as from "rundown" to "decrepit ," and these terms are used advisedly. Admittedly, the fact that the airport is a nonconforming use in an R-1 zone works against any incentive on the part of the property owner to upgrade the facility or to increase his inves"mert in the property. A brief' discussion in lay terms of the doctrine if nonconforming use as it might apply to Meadowlark is attached. Review of our files and those in the City Clerks Office indicates that the use if ;he airport has materially expanded since the airport was annexed cn the 13th day of October, 1964. That is, there are substan- tially greater numbers of planes based there now than then, however, - similar activAties were conducted at that time, i.e. , flight school and' business aircraft sales. Mr. Tom Livengood, in his communication to the Council received August 11, 1977, maintains that tie-downs have doubled since 1970. A perpetual injunction was issued by the Orange County Super�.or Court in 1966 which limited tie-downs to sixty-seven Ile Memorandum to City Administrator August 22 , 1977 Meadowlark Air1port - Abatement Progress Report, Page 2 04 p lanes . This injunction teas been ignored by the operators. The State Division of Aeronautics and the IAA consider night flying at Meadowlark nonhazardous, the numbers of aircraft based at the airport and the num- ber of rlights reasonable, and the controls adequate. Representatives of theac agencies are not disturbed by the recent accidents or the com- plaints of residents. Both of these agencies are primarily concerned with ennouragement and development of flying, not in land use regulation. The city is the only agency concerned with both sides of the question and, yet, is the least empowered to regulate or control the activity . A list of accidents recorded %sithin five wiles of the airport as com- piled by the FAA is attached . 'I Our opinion is that the city can regulate land uses within its border In a nonarbitrary and equitable manner, while at the same time allowing a property owner an adequate opportunity to recoup his investment. Amortization of Improvements doer not appear to be an issue at Meadowlark Airport, but bear in mind that we are not experts in the appraisal of property. It appears to us to be a fully amortized facility at this time. If this is the case, zoning enforcement such as would result from adoption of an amortization ordinance could be the ultimate solu- tion to the problem. Similar ordinances have been held to be a valid exercise of the police power of the community in those cases where the amortization period was sufficiently long. Other alternatives might be to attempt to obtain an injunction rolling back the use to the time the airport was annexed and became nonconforming. In this connection, we ure exploring the possibility that the present use of the western por- tion across Roosevelt Road was never a valid use in county times. Por the reasons contained in our memorandum opinion of December 8, 19'16, we do not feel that the city can regulate the activities of the airport except as a public nuisance, by court action or through land use regu- lation. Further, that attempts to regulate by using the zoning powers that are preempted by the state or federal law would compound the existing problems rather than solve them. A copy of the December 6, 1976 opinion is attached. ' I AIISHAR Assistant city A o ey ,ISA :ahb Attachments i • CITY OF HUN VINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT C0MMUNICATI0N Itl'hilhl.IIIY�111 II To City Administrator From City Attorney Subil-tt Meadowlark Airport Date December 8, 1976 MEMORANDUM OPINION There have been a serieR of charges brought against the operation of Menaowlark Airport and against the users of the field itself. This memorandum opinion seeks to addrou s each of those charges in a candid manner, setting forth what: we feel are the strengths and weaknesses of' the various positrons that could be taken vie-a--vis the operators of the airfield, its users and the City of Huntington Beach. Airport Licensing, Control and Plying Operations The control of airports within the State of California and the regulation of the use of airspace per se is vested in the state and not in the various municipalities of the state. Laws pertaining to the licensing of airports, the operation3 of airports , and the manner in which aircraft may be operated within the state are round in the "State Aeronautics Act, ' California Public Utilities Code §521000 et seq. Municipalities may regulate airports throy h application of their zoning ordinances (Public Utilities Code §22005) or through the exerciae of the general police power �9 enjoin the maintenance of a public nuisance (Civil Code §§3479 , 3480) , to enforce penal provisions of the Act or in areas not preempted by the state or federal governments . The control of pilots and airplanes is undertaken by the United States Government through a lice-.sing progi,am. 3Jicensed pilots only may operate licensed planers only within the state. The only city ordinance extant in re airports is Huntington Beach Municipal Code Chapter 9 .56 relating to noise control at Meadowlark at night. The ordinance was adopted in 1971. Tn 1972 the United States Supreme Court in the opinion Burbank v. Lockheed Air Terminal 36 LEd 2d 547, rul-ed that noise regulation-airports was preempted by federal law, i.e. , 49 USCA §1431(a) , thus Chapter 9 .56 of tha Huntington Beach Municipal Code is now invalid and should be repealed. The Huntington Beach Police Department has not beer. enforcing the Provisions of Chanter 9. 56 since the opinion by this ofi'ice was released following the decision in Burbank. The Huntington Beach Police Department has , for the past eight years , and continues, vigorous enforcement of valid state laws and. Federal Aviation Administration regulations in regard to those who fly over the city. Local police agencies are obliged to enforce .he penal sections �/ the statutes of the State of California relating to flying and fliers . For example , a local policeman can arrest a pilot for operating an air— i • _2- craft while under tl►ct Influence of f�7ntoxicating liquov or�c�rugs, 5/ reelclons operation or an aircraft , 101-1 altitude f'ly:ing, or for a myriad of other acts proscribed by state law, inclucliiZj� those which arise from incorporated federal law or regulatioP7 The state licenses airports throUSY/the issuance of an airport permit, anu revofces such permits for ca►.!a 3. The state has aGopted and has in effeet a comprehensive scheme for the licensing and regulation of airports and of flying within the state. The state has entered and to a large extent occupied the field and the subject matter of regulation is one of state►side concern. Therefore, excepting as noted, the individual municipalities have few, if any, regulatory powers in this field. Zonin4 Regrulat•:i.on Regulation by application of the zonin laws is multi-faceted. first , the r.onJng law usually provides a criminal sancti:.n for Its violation. Because this remedy is commonly inadequate (obviously many persons would prefer to apy a small fine for violating a land use or zoning law in order to gain a greater economic use of their property) , zoning laws usually provide that their viulati.on constitu► es alublic y9 sance. The Huntington Beach Ordinance Code , Article 902, §59021, 9022 are local exprea-- slonai of this philosophy. Our ordinance and state laws both apparently require that prior to commencement of enforcement activity, the City Attorney he ordered to do so by the City Council. Therefore, prior to inotitution of An action to enjoin a public nuisance existing at Meadow-r^ lark Airport , the City Council must proceed to find the existence of an ordinance code violation at the site and the existence of a public nui- sance before the City Attorney can institute legal action. Zoning Meadowlark_Airport The Mleadowlark Airport property is situated in an R-1 zone. In such a zone, residential uses only are permitted. There can be no use permit, issued for an airport in an R-1 zone because it is a residential zone . When the airport was established in the mid 1940 's , it was located within an unincorporated area of the County of Orange. The area was at that ti:iie zoned "M-3," (unclassified zone) . County Use Permit No. 305 was Issued for the airport operation. This permit contained no express conditions. [Not all "use permits" contain conditions. ] Therefore, Meadowlark Airport operations cannot. be said to be in violation of any of the conditions of Orange County Use Permit No. 305. There is the argument that the airport as finally established and as used today does not conform to Orange County Permit Application• No. 305, however, after the lapse of nearly thirty years, the facts are so obscure and the intent so diluted that we are confident that the doctrines of lashes or equitable entoppal would apply to any move to revoke the permit at this time. Further, the City of Huntington Beach has no power to revoke a County of Orange permit, valid or not. -3- og �nnexed real property Is ordinarily brought into the oily as III zoned I y ordinance and when the airport property came into the city , it , therefore, came in as a nonconforming use in the RI zoning applied to the property . The County 's Use Permit No. 305 at that time became moot and invalid as the property was then and there outside the countyI3 Jurisdiction. Nonconforming uses are provided for in Article 971 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code . In 1970 the airport operator ap- plied for Conditional Exception No . 70-50 to permit a five hundred (50n) font extension of' the runway . Conditional Exception No. '10-50 contains the following conditions ; "1 . The runway extension shall be reduced to 320 ft. ; however, In no case shall the extension be closer than 375 ft . from houses on Heil Ave. 112, A blast fence shall be installed 100 ft . north of the end of the runway. The precise location, size and building material: shall be approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustments . "3. That portion of the runway and taxiway north of the blast fence shall be removed. "4. Obstruction lights shall be installed on the blast fence and any trees along the nurth property line. Also, any trees along the north property line shall be limited to 20 ft . in height. Placement _and type of lights shall be approved by the Board of Zoning, Adjustments . "5. Provisions shall be made for dust and noise control on the site. Such dust and noise control methods shall be approved by the Bore of Zoning Adjustments . 116. Signs shall be posted to inform pilots of the proper use of the airport and runway area. "7. All violations of the City Code shall be corrected within 60 days . 118. Night flying prohib±ted. Runway lights off from two hours after sunset or 10 p.m. until sunrise, whichever first occurs ." (Condition 8 added by council action on a'anuary 4, 1971 . Extract from City Clerk' s minutes of January 4 , 1971 attached. ) From the testimony given at the public hearing on November 1, 1976 and Staff reports, the only violation of Conditional Exception No. 70-50 is that there are no obstruction lights on the perimeter trees (Con- dition No. 4) . This office has prepared a finding to that effect. Evidence was adduced at the hearing that two additional violations may i be occurring at the property , violations of provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code , not of the conditions o:" Conditional Except- tion No. 70-50 , These violations allegedly have occurred because the �1^ rorrtrrg; Ss It- 3.. They include the maintenance of' a horse stable on the property and the maintenance of an airplane sales operation. We are not preppred to state that; either use is prohibited on the property . First, there is no e-►idence Lhat the horses allegedly stabled on the property con:3titoate .: commercial use of the property. `1'hcr!!fore , Huntington Bunch Ordinance Code Article 963, "Equine Standard-.-floncorn:ner'cial,'' applies. This section requires 'ghat a person keeping horses in any zone obtain a permit . If such permit has been obtained, no violation exists; Mr. ?lerio states as of this writing that the appropriate 1%crmit has been obtained. The airplane sales operation presents a more, complicated problem. This in because airplane sales may be considered an accessory use in connection with allowable airport operation.. Consider this , an airport is. firat a place for uhe taxiing, landing; and taking; off of airplanes . This is the primary use of the property but it appears that a customarily Incidental uce of an airport is the showing; and harborage of aircraft for sale . Thus it can be argued that this; is an accessory use to the permitted use of airport operation. Only a court of competent juris- diction can answer this question. The Meadowlark Airport as Constituting, a Public Nuisance Notwithstanding; the public policy encouraging; the establishment and operat-lon of airports , the operation.of a private airport "42py other bucineua is nubject to injunction for creation of a nuisance . The maintenance or operatioT3pf ai. airport- may be enjoined or abated where it f constitutea a nuisance . Whether or not such relief will be granted is it matter rrrtinE; in the sound discretion of the court and the issues must be determined on a consideration of all of the circumstances , which circumstances include the public i.nturest in maintaining the airport as well aH the extent or degree of injury, annoyance or damage to individuals . Contiguous property owners may be required in some cases and to a reason- able degSree, yield their desired privacy to the g;enTul welfare which is advanced by the operation of' legitimate businesses. The City attorney in empowered by state law to bring an action in the name of the People of the State of California to enjoin a nuisance and must do so when directed by the City Council.. The City may not summarily abate a nuisance , that is , without resort to court jg�ion excepting; when an immediate hazard and danger to the public exists . No such c_rcumstances exist at Meadowlark as explr.ined below. In attempting to abate E,.►i airport nuisance , the following; gust be considered: "CCP §731b. [Evidence that airport , etc . , does not conr.titute nuisance] In any action.or proceeding to abate the use of an airport or an.airpark, proof that the airport or airpark.has been in �T ' -dos -5-- existence for three years constitute a rebuttable presumption which shall be prima facie evidence the.t the operation of the airport-or airpark does not con: ti t:ut e a nuisance ." 'Phis pre.umption clearly would make any attempt on the City'c part to declaro Meadowlark Airport a public nuisance almost an insurmountable tank. More importantly ; it is necessary to go to the record. What is the evidence of nuisance? On the issue of noise, t'iere ii now being conducted a noise study by the County of Orange at the City's rer!':est. However, pacL studies have :Indicated that small aircraft such as are capable of being operated out of Meadowlark cannot generatc noise in excess of :Mate established noise levels . This is not to say that such standards absolutely decide the nui3ance . question on the issue of noise, however, they would be of great weight if not determinative. But bear in mind there is little evidence of excessive noise generation. The other complaints consist of "buzzing" of hom.es,and schools , low flying, lack of enforcement- by ci;;y, state and federal officials , excessive numbers of flights and other related complaints. On the other hand there is evidence of enforcement , careful flight , a public need for the field and other evidence supportive of the land use. ' s we.have earlier discussed, Meadowlark Airport is a valid operation where located pursuant to the zoning law of this city. The question is is it a public nuisance because of ita parttuular method of operation? A lawful business may by its )articular method of operation or by its location constitute a nuisance chough it may have adopted the most approved appliances and methods . Judson %,. Los Angelen Suburban Gas Co. 157 C 168, 106 P 581. McIntosh v. Bremer 6U'CA 7702 230 P 203. A nuisance.on property may exist without any negligence on the part of the property owner or user. Sturges v. }Iarney,__Inc. 165 CA2d 3062 331 P2d 1072 . Given the premise that a late comer has a; much right to the beneficial use of his property as the early comer, it would appear that there should be no vested right to maintain forever an existing nuisance. That is , the changing conditions of a neighborhood may makes unl awful an activity which was formerly lawful. It is not clear gust to what extent the activities at the airport constitue • a "nuisance ," nor to what extent the "public" is harmed. A very few persons have complained very loudly of the airport 's existence, but do those.persons truly represent the public? It is the quanturn of the injliry to a suMcient number of persons that constitutes a nuisance, not excessive injury to the few, I.e . , material. damage to the whole •. ars us. the.pers onal discomfort to ! the few that is important. Prior to taking any legal action, it would be necessary to determine the number of persons in the community affected and the extent of -she Injury to such. persons. Conclusion 1. There is no substantial basis•.,for revoking Conditional Exception 14c . 70-50 and the one remaining violation of the conditional exception f that rio llght•n have been placed on perimeter tree:43hould be immediately corrected, but such violation is not. riufficient to ,justify revocation of I the permit . 2 . There was insufficient evidence adduced at the public hearing; that a public nuisance, e,:is is frcrn the.maintenanr.e or operation of Mead- owlark Airport 3. There is insufficient evidence to conclude that the aircraft Sales operation: being conaucted at Meadowlark Airport are unlawful . 4 . Regulation of airports is largely preempted by the state and federal governments . Chapter 9. 56 or t-he. Huntington beach Municipal Lode ahou'ld be repealed. 5. Findings in conformance ,with the opinion are supplied herewith. DON P. BONFA WILLIAM S. AMSBARY City Attorney Assistant City Attorney DPD:WSA:cs FOOTNOTES 1/Public Utilities Code §21005 "This part shall not be construed as limiting any power of the State or a political subdivision. to regulate airport- hazards by zoning." Civil Code §3479: "Anything{ which is injurious to health, or is indecent or offensive to the senses, or an.obatruction to the free use of property, so as to interfere with the com- fortable enjoyment of life or property, or unlawfully obstructs the free passage or use, in the customary manner, of any navigable lake, or river, bay, stream, canal, or basin, or any public parks , square, street, or highway, is a nuioance." Civil Code §3h8o: "A public nuisance i, one which affects at the same time an entire community or neighborhood, or any cons-,+(-:able number of persons , although the extent of the annoyance or damage inflicted upon individuals may be unequal. " 3/Public Utilities Code §211109: "It is unlawful for any person to engage in aeronautics as an airman .in the. State...unless.,he.,nas,,an ,appropriate 3' effective <<.rrnan certificate , permit, rating, or license Is surd by the united States authorizing him to engage in the particular class of aeronautics in which tie is engaged, If' the certificate, permit , rating or :License Is required by the United States ." Public Utilities Code §211111: "It is unlawful for any person to operate , o., cause or authorize to be operated, any civil aircraft within this State unless the aircraft ha, an appropriate effective certificate, permit , or 11cense issued by the United States if required by the United St,_tes." 1+�Public Utilitieu Code §21252: " (a) The dei:artment, its members, the director, officers and employees of the department , and every state and peace officer charged with the enforcement. of state and subordinate laws or ordinances , nhall enforce and assist in the enforcement of this part, the rules and orders issued under this part, and all other laws of t•hts state relating to aeronautics . In the enforcement of such rules , orders , and laws, the director, and such officers and employees as the director may designate, shall have the authority, as publid officere , to arrest without a warrant , ,any person tirt1:o, in his presence , has violated or as to whom them is probable cause.to believe has violated any of such rubes , orders or laws. " 5/Pul)lic Utilities Code §21407, 5: "It is unlawful for any person to operate an aircraft In the air, or on the ground or water, while cinder the influence of intoxicating liquor or narcotics ." G/Public Utilities Code §21407: "It Is unlawful for any person. to operate an airerat't in the n1r, or on the ground or water in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another. In any p2occeding charging operation of aircraft in violation of this section, the court in determining whether the operation was careless or reckless shall consider the standards for safe operation of aircraft prescribed by federal statutes or regulations governing aeronautics. " lop—.. ._.. .�tilitie;; Gode §211103: Oft I711ghL in aircraft over the land and waters of this state it; lawful, unless tit . altitudes below those prc-G cribed by feder,..l authority , or unless so con- duc4,)d as to be imminently dangerous to person. or Property lawfully on the land or water beneath. The landi»g of an aircraft on the land or waters of another, without; his consent, in unlawful except in the case of a forced landing. The owner, lessee , or operator of the aircraft is liable, as provided by law, for damages caused by a forced landing. " (b ) The land, takeoff or taxiing of an aircraft on a public freeway , highway, road or :street is unla;•iful except: "( 1) In the case of a forced landing; or 11( 2) A landing during a natural disaster or other public emergency if the latiding has received prior approval from the public agency having primary Jurisdiction over traffic upon the freeway, highway, road, or street ; or "( 3) When the, landing, takeoff or taxiing has received prior approval from the public agency having primary Jurisdiction over traffic upon, the freeway, highway , road or street. "The prosecution bears the burden of proving that none of the exceptions apply to the act which is alleged to be unlawful. " (c) The right of flight in aircraft includes the right of safe access to public airports, which includes Ghe right of flight within the zone of approach of any public airport without restriction or hozar:'. The zone of approach of an airport; shall eonf orr« to the specifi- cations of Part 77 of the Federal Avia,i.on Regulations of the Federal Aviation Administration, Department or Transportation." i d�Public Utilities; Code §21666: "The department shall grant approval of an airport site and issue an airport permit if it is satisfied that all of the following requirements have been met: s i ■ " (a) `l'he s Its meets or exceeds the minimum airport >trrndarc?n ispecl fi ed by thn department in its rules and regui ,,tionrj , provided, however, that the department may modify i Ls it1nirnurn a:Irport: standards when issulti(; a prrrmit or site approval if it determines that the proposed airport, if constructed or establi.ntied, will conform to minimum standards of safety . "(b) Srlfe air traffic patterns have teen estatlisned for the proposed airport and for all exi.stini, airports and approved airport :sites iti its vicinity. ;'(a) The zone of approach of the airport ha, been engineered in conformity with the provisions of Section 2140�, the documents relratinl, thereto are available for pub11 inspection, "(d) The department when approving an airport site or issuing a permit :,iay impose reasonable conditions which it, deems necessary to effectuate the purposes of this article . "Each airport Permit or :site approval, or a.menJinents thereto, issued by c:he department shall set forth any conditions imposed thereon, and any modification of the general minimum airport standarclu prescribed by the department relative to such airport or airport site. "The department- may refuse to approve an .airport aite or ir:sue a permit, under this article if it determines after notice and hearing held pursuant to this part tha', the airport site does not meet the requirements of this section. " 9/Fublic UtMtlen . Cude §21668: "The department may ,revoke any airport permit if it determines that any of the following condition:; are present;: "(a) There has been -in abandonment of a site or an airport. " (t) There has been a failure within the time prescribed to develop the site as an:airport ot, to comply with the conditions of the approval as set forth In the permit. "!c) The airport or site no longer conforms 10 the mirrlrnum airport standards prescribed by the department, f i i 9' "or no longer complies with the .conditions imposed in the airport permit or site approval. i "(d) The owner or operator of a permitted airport has failed to comply with any rule.or regulation of the department. i i "(e) The site may no longer be• safely used by the general public because of a change in physical or legal conditions either on or off the airport site ." i 10/Huntington Beach Ordinance Code 59021: "Any person violating or causing violation of the provisions of this Division shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be punishable by a fine of not more,than Five Hundred Dollars ($500) or by imprisonment in the county Jail of Orange County or in the city jail of the City of Huntinon Beach, if there be one , for not exceeding six (bgt months, or by both fine and impr{sonment, as the judge of a court of competent Jurisdiction may direct . Such person shall be deemed to be guilty of a separate offense for each and every day during any portion of which any violation of this Division is committed or continued by such person, and shall be punishable as herein provided." IV Huntington Beach Ordinance Code §9022: "Any building or structure set up, erected, constructed, altered; enlarged, converted, moved or maintained contrary Ito the provisions or this Division, and any use of any land, building or premises established, conducted, operated or maintained contrary to the provisions of. this Division shall be, and -the same is -hereby declared to be unlawful and a public nuisance; and the City Attorney shall, upon the order of the City Council, immediately commence action or proceedings for the abatement and removal and enjoinment thereof in the manner provided by law, and shall take such other steps and shall apply to such courts as may have jurisdiction to grant such relief as will abate and remove such 1 building or structure, and restrain and enjoin any i person from setting up , erecting, building, maintaining or uning any such property contrary to the provisions of this Division." 12/Anderson v. Souza, 243 P2d 497 yn+ 0� ._1 x OwSwe�etland v. Curtiss Airports, 55 F2d 201 14/Califomia Code of Civil Procedure §733. 15/Lqppo v. City of Petaluma, 97 Cal Rptr 840 `r ,f l It I i i ti i Comm"$&* wrlD� ��� riwslt+rwsw� Ui+rliti/!M• too 080416"• 24 Pit MIlty.ietq 0i1ir� C: C&W4tMd reiaep"ted Meadowlark Airprt OW sri*ft*tor SIM* W.tb repro to the oxlttinC violations. or twit date smwatalti od,tics el"Vele sl violations was 951 cwpleta. taw. dsW SmleriW ;, 1970o to"Nyrl• kilMw# City AAeiaistretee bow obits C• OtWetaids CS !0 ttw�ristlw SppoaLsd t0 MY CAMii. Msarim."t Am Jtirrei► i,y. Low.. . x lie .�iwrj 4, toil silo rose a nre:tMpnrtiwt we ,wit `f the Nsedowla rk Airport i Inspictors /rr tfatl0a!!�I AWY tattelwap RLestricali .tan Seadect piss ' 1.slrtwwtf Ciitla�i ilasrdw; fYrriso YsSrpectar. lindiassn i• 1►11 sUntai eL rietrtlaw is thej r entirety bars bents '+sue lanotr r d blast sea lighting h" btw z• ALI PRO grportwt vlolatiesm' sct" have badmi cstr"w W dth liir;Omptias od tlls iastsilatio► of a fire prot"kion • sy►St+w'iaM''tb• lissdwrlaartc Csta's csvkis� hood. l• zmip"tot "ar&% imm"ted tbo airport property seed fe"A it, is "Wow to stl sanditiom of approval •s sr«YlaW Iq CB 1040 &9A do Board of Using Adjoatum so smim with the wcptim of On blest fame'a specific eerrtswaUm aid tip Istt that the blut !seem to as liter Uslt+tdo 310 J410AM loll . 06 Ely Ceawil hard UN appeet of ter PIONANG Carriasionr'S �tetswCMM of CS 70-500 fJh Mstrias by 9kCraekeng Gwmll overruled the decision of the Plaiming f Comak eiw semi ap"Oved C"Witiawl ix&eptioa 70-50 with conditifto q lmiposed by the t1maing Commission t►getber with the following additiaal owaditLe�sae . L. that emit the State issue: a perrstt to allow mitrit flying, e40-t flylag be prohibitod asd rway lishts turned off free auuet to sweise; 2. that, after tbs State !taws a permit to allow night flylssi misht f lyivg be prohibited and nwway lights turord off from two bone-after sunset of 10100 P.M.# whickevsr first occars, to swriaea • NON-CONFORMING USE A "non-conforming use" or land is a land use which usually occurs after the zoning (or change in zoning) or a parcel . This concept arose in the law or zoning because it was felt that it would deprive a landowner of a "vested" right he had in his property to use it as he always had and that it would be an i "unconstitutional taking of property without due process of law" to not allow the use. California has not followed the "vested rights" theory. Our law is that q municipality may with proper safeguards do away with a "non-conforming use." The practical problem of the "non-conforming use" is to ` J describe it at some later time. Let uo consider the Meadowlark Airport as an example. Meadowlark Airport was a permitted use when the parcel was located in County territory subjict to a use permit issued by the County of Orange. Upon annexation, the land was zoned "R-1." The. Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, §9710 allows the continuation of non-conforming uses; that is, we have followed for some purposes, generally, the "vested rights" j theory. [However, as to junk yards, out door privies, and the like, we have not . They have been abated.] Section 9711 appears to be applicable to the airport prop- erty. It limits a non-conforming use not housed in a structure to lots or portions in actual use at the time the lot became non- -1 • I I TO: Floyd 0. Belsito, City Administrator FROM: City Attorney DATE: 23 August 1977 SUBJECT: Findings He Meadowlark Airport as a Public Nuisance On August 1, 19779 this oi'tice was directed by the City Council to prepare proposed findings of fact relative to the operation of Meadowlark Airport as a public nuisance . Here- with are the proposed findings : 1. The parcel known as the "Meadowlark Airport" came into the city of Huntington Beach as a part of Sunset Heights Annexation No. 3 by adoption of Ordinance No. 1095 adopted on November 2, 1964. 2. The parcel known as the "Meadowlark Airport" was placed in an R-1 district . 3. The "Meadowlark Airport" is a nonconforming use in an R-1 district within the city of Huntington Beach. 4. The "Meadowlark Airport" is a use which is prohibited in an .., R-1 district and one for which a conditional use permit may not be granted. 5. A nonconforming use of land within the city of Huntington Beach may be eontinueu or changed to a conforming use or to use of a more restrictive classification or abated as a public nuisance. 6. The "Meadowlark Airport" is bordered and surrounded by parcels of land containing, inter alia, multiple family and single family dwelling units, a baseball park, a public golf course and shopping centers, ten schools within a one-mile radius, including two ele- mentary schools and a high school directly in the flight path. 7. Some 237 inheInitanta of the aforesaid bordering surrounding area have petitioned the city of Huntington Beach to abate the Meadowlark Airport as a public nuisance alleging that the noise and fear of accidents created by users of the airport facility have caused them annoyance, inconvenience, interferred with the use of their property, and numerous persons have spoken to the Council of their complaints concerning the airport. 8. On at least three occasions in the past nine months, aerial ac- cidents have occurred at the Meadowlark Airport including a plane �1 i I I I Memo to Floyd G. Belsito , City Administrator August 239 1977 Be:OWN Findings - Meadowlark Airport crash with serious personal injury, a power line failure due to a hit-run collision between a plane and power lines. 9. The state and federal governments have altogether preempted the field of aircraft regulation to the extent that local regu- lation is ineffective. 10. The "Meadowlark Airport" is a small, e' . Ivote facility sub- Ject to owner' s control. 11. Neither the owner, the state or federal g)vernments, In tact, effectively control the Meadowlark Airport . CONCLUSION: The City Council of the city of Huntington Beach finds that as presently situated and located and because of the lack of effective control over it, the Meadowlark Airport has become and is now a public nuisance and, as such, should be abated. {I i � i i I KPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION F90MM AWATION ADMINISTRATION Plight Standards DLstrict Offices #65 2815 East Spring Street ��► �r,�� Long peach, California 90806 4b °s • r August 10, 1977 Ns. Jeri Chenelle Administrative Aide City of Huntington Beach V. 0. Box 190 Huntington Beach, California 92648 Dear Me. Chenelle; Enclosed is a compilation of aircraft accidents on or in the vicinity of Meadowlark Airport since June 1972. The information was compiled from our accident logs. We do not have any information on accidents prior to that date. 1 Copies of accident reports may be obtained from the National Transportation Safety Board per the enclosed information sheet. sincerely, p. A. ALLEN Chief Enclosures Fes' i l i I J .. D SEP 1 1977 CITY OF HUNTINGTON OfACII CITY COUNCIL OFFICE cm 9� 1 i 96. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FECOU AVIATION ADMINISTRATION Plight Standards District Office-65 �.• 2815 U. Spring Street a�+''` '`r,., Tong Beach, California 90006 •" e 1 • August 26p 1977 I ' I I ACCIDENTS ON OR WITHIN FIVE (5) ?ALES OF MEADOWLARK AIRPORT SINCE JUKE, 1972 i i 1-26-73 X3955Q, Cessna 1729 Pilot - Kelvin Herschler, noain;ury LF ' - accident, collapsed sons wheel and blown tire 1-30-73 W1310HO Cessna 310, Pilot - Thomas Tepper, noninjury accident, hard landing, collapsed gear t I i 2-22-73 114326V, Cessna 195, Pilot - Rodney Delp, aoAiujutry accident, `){ I lost directional control on landing 5-26-73 MUSK# Cessna 172, Pilot - Charles Dadd, noninjury accident, hard landing 2-15-74 N7266, Derjager Scout, Pilot - John Turner, nonisnjury accident, engine failure on takeoff, struck two other aircraft 3-30-74 089425, Cessna 140, Pilot - Richard Kenton, anninjury � accident, lost power on take) I 7-11-74 N71665, Cessna 1820 Pilot - William Ivey, noainjury accident, hard landing collapsed nose wheel - 8-1-74 U51342, Cessna 150, Pilot - Larry Lindinberg, noninjurp accident, lost power on takeoff 4-23-75 N3869P, Piper PA-22-1500 Pilot' - Jerry D. Hardin, pilot injured, forced lauding at Navy Wespous Station 9-7-75 N6441L, American AA-Ug Pilot - Willie C. Lane, noninjury► accident, bard lauding 10-30-75 N12151), Cen&na 172, Pilot - Warner Harhold, non-injury accident, landed long. 1-6-76 96441L, American AA-Up Pilot - Millie C. Lane, nonizsjuty 5"— accident, hard landing M. JP""s,' i I i rr • •. r r I ft doll, ".� . it Tolle 2 r. 5-5-77 N242609 Beechcraf t 35 (Sea note), Pilot - Haman L. Wava ndorfj fatal injuties to pilot and three passengers. Aircraft crashed in field four miles southeast of Headowlark Airport 5-8-77 N19034, Cessna 150 (See nots)p Pilot - Ralph D. Reese, noninjury accident., forced landing in field 411 miles southeast, of Meadowlark Airport 8-1-77 N70335, Cessna 150, Pilot - Ronald 0. Bybee, night landing .:••:•:. lost power on go-around, turned back to field and struck flight school building in line with runway. Serious injuries to pilot and two passengers Notai Accidents that occurred on 5-5-77 and 5-8-77 were not in connection with Meadowlark operationx. Both aircraft were enroute to Fullerton Airport from airports other than Meadowlark. 1 For request dated 8-18-77 the following information is on the r.,... banner towing accident at San Juba Capistrano: 5-28-77 N5189T, Champion 7fCho Pilot - Albert M. Sibi, fatal injury when aircraft btruck ebild playing in drainage area t� i i w +, +u�if�r7�� ��'�j� /n� r y' r'� ♦ �.` .�' �� r.��+rly.iy'� �p�ry'�. �.J�r sue ' .�:..71rr.• ~ a !/..� '~J r rF� wi�. . '"f.�•rM�L. ;!':LSl:•l-"1G"�all J 1 OWN i •• 1 iL . • , •.,!/�iK 91 mom, � t Nbr/j at aii "i•J�r tM f�lr �yHA fto-d Od On Fdd mt tissWiew AitilKi• anrjat We M J to A Nile wt�f+yM�i. 0. �, Of of 61110 "Ifo r 1Nar1. �•? `• so. Adl�m yrtt Ofts.eo 1a1+�,��ol�twt�. Mgwata for ve ndrutiA of Mai+/ repeats, shemM specify ilea eats , ai{ Mt yea K 00 aalatesat Md UW e/erater or aerritr. Mtiesau cwru M Comes" COI - IiAT11ft 1'MML MATIIN %AF9TV IOMM AelllAltittliMw "Ormileais NIvlslea • A"14Mt Im"IFY Section veshl"Num, 1. C. Us91 .0. . Tess and attsagemaats fer the previsloo of this service are as fol3swt A.- A 13.00 deer service charge is nods by 9ko safety bard • for researching the films aad•preparinrg the material for reproduc- . • tiM. b. AOtwl taprode'tlan of On ltlre to dose Meat contract by ,� • a commorcid bsolname fimr in Wmablagtom, 0. C. Nagar our carrvat costracc the arernge•oost to the requester is 10 per page fat printed matter ad !10 per rage for /holographs, plus postage. Theae , prig" aro •object co change at such ties as a new cootract In aaso- UasN, 1W misim m chirps Is 11,00, These thargeo are In %4ditina to Cho 02.00 war 6*1e deecribeA above. • e. C+fpdes,oi rsperto I ._errd •tltl be smiled true the slashing- ' , • tear. O. do bueiasee firm that holds the euirent toatraet for etas- • marciil fepradvetUa of the hoard'■ public filep. ■Itliq will be direct to Me te"otar by the aw coepaey and irt11 trclude all drarsos incident is the rsguomi. , C01KUR WE MING SOVICE . ta"tsr toss oontoriatty p.bt& duta"dn aimem L oaciJents or .late pivo- • essind progravw vilt be pttt ded stun wittrn regarot and ravvnt r.j r jKe. Address requests to. NATIONAL 1AAMSPOITATICN SAFITT DOARD Aim Accident Oats $ranch Washington. 0. C. 10591 i Charges for thin service are as fullers: Travldtng duptt.ate Jaca tapes - ea.tr rrel of taps, or trAeelon thrtent, 940.00. this tee' tnrludta the blank. Capon gmen which the infortmtirm will be copled. ,s t1W eonpucer coat aasuriated artth copylug file tapes, 116d e•ratr of Meiling the tapes to the tegsrrter. ` f • i I POECITY OF HVMTIMGTON BEACH CA 76-204 COUNCIL-ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNICATION �narrGw+r� To The Honorable Mayor and From Floyd G. Belsito City Council Members City Administrator Snbint MEADOWLARK AIRPORT Date December 14 , 1976 v j f Attached is an opinion from the City Attorney which addresses � the various issues presented at the Meadowlark Airport Public Al V !tearing held November 1 , 1976. � Proposed Findings ' The City Attorney recommends that the City Council make the r0 findings as listed below: Pursuant to the public hearings on the revocation of Conditional Exception No. 70-50 pertaining to Meadowlark Airport, held on November 1 , 1976, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach finds : 1. Conditional Exception No. 70-50 is not now in violation as to any legally enforceable condition and, therefore, there are no grounds for revocation. 2. At the present time, Meadowlark Airport io. not being operated or maintained in such a manner so as to create a public nuisance. 3. Due to preemption by state and federal laws, the City of Huntington Beach has no authority to control the operation of the airport or to control the planes or Pilots using the airport . , 4. The City of Huntington Beach does have the power to enforce applicable state and federal laws regarding flying and airport operation and continues with its enforce- ment efforts through the Huntington Beach Police Department ; however, the City has no authority to revoke the California State Airport Permit for such violations. If the violations require criminal proceedings, the prosecution would be handled by the District Attorney' s Office. � ! Condityons of CE 70-50 Both the State Division of Aeronautics and the City's Director of Building and Community Development have recommended that Condition No. 2 of Conditional Exception 70-50 requiring a blast fence be deleted. There is no longer a need for a blast fence because the oleander bushes at the property fence are now dense enoug;i to serve 1 CA 76-204 MEADOWLARK AIRPORT .2- the same purpose. They have also recommended that, if the blast fence is removed, the use permit be amended to alloti the use of the existing run- way northeast of the present blase fence. This would allow the pilots a longer runway for takeoff so that they would reach a higher altitude over adjacent residential areas. In addition, Condition No. 4 requiring obstruction lighting not only on the blast fence but on the trees has been held to be outside the powers of the City. The City has been preempted by the State on the matter of obstruction lighting. This condition should be removed from CE 70-50. Night Flying Chapter 9.S6 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code prohibits night flying at Meadowlark Airport. The Attorney's Office previously issued a legal opinion that this prohibition is invalid and unenforceable . There have been a number of cases which hold that a city does not have the power to regulate the hours of flight from a privately-owned airport within its territorial boundaries. The City Attorney recommends eliminating these existing, unenforceable ordinances from the municipal code to conform with the law. Noise Study The Orange County Board of Supervisors directed its Airport Department to negotiate with the City to pay a portion of the costs of conducting a noise study at Keado-ilark Airport. It is estimated that the study will cost $3 ,000 to perform. If the City were to pay half the costs, an expenditure of $1 ,500 would need to be authorized by Council from the Contingency Fund (current balance is $295,500 ) . Since it is generally accepted that small general aviation aircraft cannot create enough noise to violate state noise laws , and since previous studies conducted at Meadowlark Airport (the most recent in 1974) have shown there f is no noise problem, it seems unnecessary to incur this expense. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Make the findings of the public hearing as recommended by the Ci-cy Attorney. 2. Delete Condition No. 2 of Conditional Exception 70-50 requiring the blast fence. 3. Delete requirement for obstruction lighting from Condition No. 4. CA 76-204 -3- MEADOWLARK AIRPORT 4 . Amend the use permit to allow the use of the exiting runway northeast of the present blast fence. S. Adopt Ordinance No. eV .S1 T©pealing Chapter 9.56 which prohibits the taking ort an anding at Meadowlark Airport between certain hours. 6. Inform the Orange County Board of Supervisors that the City wishes to withdraw its request .Eox an additional noise study. Respectfully submitted, Floyd Belsito City Administrator FGB:JC:bb Attachment i f ` I I ,s- e ` I . AWL.__ �I-c L i , This is an attempt to GUI-Ify stateasnta- =ds at the recent ,puba.lo hearing.. ?b 41ty Attoa•Aey has-an fii• material to I (C�76 verify faotk Wasented'. T'as requesting that this. be entered into tin file' co the-publi,z hearingr as allowed by law.. Td! LTVhh ooar Wl Neadcwlark Drive Kuntington lwach,. Calif.. 92649 1 "Then city cannot ocotaol Ths. city has aontrols with C:C, ff"dowlark Airport,, be— 70trv- non-,!cnforuing use permit oaU00 it is privately 305., declaring the airport a- owned.. public nuisance (C-ourt decision: .Anderson vas. souta•, plus more) In oaing additional conditions, act up ordlnnnea such as- Man Juan Capistrano,. enforce planning administration (on 8.9637.2). ate. STALE,MEW -- "There hove been no- A brother " sister were killed rirplano- fatalities in when their plans crashed in a-n Huntington Bssch." open field.-(where the hone oosponr is. now located The plarA had juet taken off from Sunset Airport (now Meadowlark) on 9/26/62.. A- party of three were killed on 1%11/67- Their plans crashed in an open field on 9dinger Ave., near Monterey Wive. �Tv loop "f sdowlark 11rport is. a: A plans overshot runway, and safe airport oraehed through the chain link fence.. We planes were involved in r aid-air collision at Y,eadowiark AArport--Instructors from Long Beach Flying School.. "Both planes were tasking a landing approach to narrow runway" Residents will tastiry to witnosm. ibg a minimum of wi ght acoidenty. STA ITT F'Q_ "Pilots areteo-operating, Most recent exaxple: Arter Kov.l but Hmeownera;are not. Council meetingp pilots wars taking off from Meadowlark long a-ftar 11200 P.P.. pap- MUM UM ya 0nw-private pilots. 16eaord k Private pilots: determined to be aav•Sovds cause of 7,948 persoas killed, sad 3,338 injured. its r five year period that snded. an DeeeabGr 31 19T A.(U.46. General Accounting A Muntingtow beach pilot, age 440 was char�,ed with flying drunk. 1W took off -rem Rwdowlark Airport,, and landed at Mile Square Pa-.to ! "Aarplanse are safre A. plans ine center located an the co4 In the rner of VkMer ♦te, and 2o2sa Chigro ' (where Conch blunders; is now located) uplane snipped electrical wire as ths, shay betwoon MeD. and Arlington fitreetsj the broken lie+ larded in r■wiaming pool, where just mosseuts. before, or group a ohlldren were- swisaing,. Be* Superior Court Ccder 123328 lists one aoeldent Iiot no 3uffor Zone around the Airport--Rext crash may be into a-home, business, or school. STAT=lr!' FAMw "Ridioulcus to Rut IC took mix years to- (set com- 11SMA on trees pllence to C.$': 7I:-50o Llehts one the blast rands is important to pilots,; was also just !nstallbd days before public, hearing« 9TA!'B!�1rT FAO "Children love adrplanee:" !here have been two plane accidante � wdthin 5a feet or the Little Loagus Ball Park,. Some childron might f love a•irplaneso but should not be endangered by them. - StA7VdEt1T FAQr "ASrplapes do not fly FZighC pattern shows planes ovor rror schoolW- • edge of sohool.. pilots off course have been ss`n ovor V1113ge View, Meadow Vie*, and I!arina-Flush.. i M.plaue crashed cis the sahcol grovn at Meadow ox Bohool c.i a Saturday during a school carnival whera cFny 0,11dren wore. Mirnals-- no lnju:-io tx�V !FT TtF" PACT ."Th* Airport was here first.! Touaty records. show there were rsa14enta* here first.. The first Protest ?stition ap inst the ►.irport van Y.sadoxlark Oolf Club and residents in 12/28/4E. 1Ian= --LAM iRftw:airplanes are Suiete rountain Valley has passed Noise oospsre4 to truoke« Abatement law.. Mby can't H9nt1n7,- too Beach! Lot 'it nantrol planes _mA truoke t: ? F ..FAM Meadowlark Airport aouU be Meadowlark Air art can not wet t used as:as interearrivr !AA;requireconta.. j : atrpart ttr aster airports, .. A_ACT ."Xerio^requests fliers to- Ia' the pilots Viability insurance ; turnover CFubrldEa Apts,P coverage'adequstet It a pilot arashst into the throe story build- sns„ sues the city,. collects, millions of dollars because of (r.M". 70-60 and Court Crdsto tl.6. 5040.21 eta*; theft what? r ! W foot boom its front of new three st.vey executive building.. Emig "Tbe Airport owner/maaaRer Add of the buildin6 activity, end ..trys to oo•operate." abang** at the airport-- teas an 1t:It.Yt: ever users tiled? businesses are being run an R-1 proysrty without proper author-- Isa iotie. 11aonNes„ or building rs�raits..Caimas refuse* to be licensed* i. j� Xr« Merl* (Airport rm*r/■stayer) must be forced< to appear refers the City Coucoil,, before he will oco*ider abe ing the lawn, and oaap:ying with city ordlenaas, permits, eto. Ar. Porio-admitted via Mr. Robert DinMwall of T"2 Lc.*ge Circle, of the-existsme of a-horse stable located' on R31 property, mad by ! i+ 6 Norio. r' r i ff.� sup 4 I� 6ji11 or the airport Me•planom tbst are running tbe. busineseve are trying advertloiag business-- apes it to obonp the 1aM.M ' have r business licen"t T VA21 1 ■Tbe.a-lrport. will not be The airport �a, se� be olod as a sa 1clod tf alM ?a50 is: private businneffes.**altos doldblatt. 'ressored,M"a/r gdoted by wA Other laws. Mr. Tooker of C11-Trsus. i' pig. I"?hs- airport is legal."' The airport ovaor,. Mrs Heria, denied useage of certain lots by C-305. but is sysIM these.. ACT_. NO* night flytrig,P' Felice stater ulapoesible for local ' aathoritiss to control pilots". San Juan Capistrano Dots curfewp flight pattern; why can't Huntlai- ton Beach? STATEMU'rr PACT" 112;o written violations." .c curront lint of thirty violations ,raw.. submittod to the city atcornsy tt'the 11/1/76 public hoaxing, that Fad boon submitted to the rtato and FAA:. F MIT if'305 REQUEST ACTUAL FACTS atipulatear i atatrol tower None exists:. No drinking Beer le serve& at thi nirport cafe. No "Junkyard Cbodition" Take w tour of the airport. Block 5 Lot 3-4 HISMOs If tho lr.nd wasn't ownod Blo+ik 4 I.ot 1-2-3-4 by the airport evner, tho pornit ! was obtained by Illegal deans.. 2600 foot Runway Superior court Crder #12332e limits i runway to 187R foot rsaximum. .I i ' V i. j • �r. rig v ,��yd, ,�+� tt „ . • r ,.� ,+ ,�, , # +., jJ '9• ,M+' 1 �.'' ♦ Tyy.f,�� M �1 . t rt'Y`N 4 tl A { 4 :y V� � d+ y/,... y�� r• �,r� ��-'` --':-.:•..IM XW^VAI.,AhUL 3/•N11 rMIC 7 :tel:+.�:•:r :�- r � L . .'• �++rr�• ►�• u�• ` •'+�`l�` �.�..�.�.+� Tj•�L'�A.ri.� _r�`y.►._r..:r. -.• .r� C1• ,••✓ ram_ •,� ' •... . A►IwAug%at f cr■!M-Ow chafed!\rlrlan a(■/k■e. Ita/lFul csc■reA 0.T k■�ie�pws• �"��`�`--� ewkee lrr4 cra {. - +—...... -: Hunthigton Leach pilot remain - -- : in $Orions ronditlon act or c r c Pa .. .._ . ...• r A IMIUMM er■2"0 ON• it awl cr tWr w4 ehrssp A 0" So AM of bsbn XWft NO dal 1■ hose■! edaw" us U"Awes am erne■w vas. rw• .••.."... ■srb bw butt a dam Rama PON etsllw6 Awd be 0" fesW Ns asp Alb!was •••••..•�•�.•�. satW rb■e w Mf/ellkt"saw lrbwow Inw Irsw at*A$ UUM!!el Baia eJb YAil1�,Mr . b AA■iea a ow ar■"010e11 !M Mime u aa■41+Ma"' etseWlbh■feae►A■rueYls■tes• w eser Af AN am felts mvid Abeae 7e AN tsw the wrseh■w. 4uee■e bressaA It■u - M t um, bar 1� W was N afalf wbw MewAe7r Ist./.1)rwd■DeaaM• �. •••••- ,.. esi f�lArsssla, bslaer tee - A.Mt Mbi, eas'At the Mal beef �a�rf D. IterM■. M. was brV/ra 0"Mau■ o••a ■efts"17r/■rfasN■NAa1plAer, • _••'•. • �;-• nsarsil�rllsialrtf■fM■e/Ire nsrultiga■!sr'bYrrasnlMd 1lhatnlAr4r /■■realat+All.� +"�•::..:_"��= -• r1lfsrlrest aransalrA slat IAacass•. ss/ 9iC■�;ra brAef fare ■ • rlsdaaiy a1Mr so row Trl- A NIMMO a ba■sb$00 nu Mra lvudlt/rW _. /ae■t hs W JW DOW DIN /bed■ ■se fbrs.be Maw r ae1A NOW ndpnd ktai■a+Ar• __ _.~� eta■/ra l�rf durlA eats last bwa Al VW%■W R hod bbj, em thllKb ow Imill a■wt _.- .�-.....' tae MerM rkM Abwt bur,.. I - ArMMltw/eArd•■rrttat/■Ra{IAkr MA 61 'In 0V W dk Yw, t"UM ■ Ar,me FMl■ . saw NAAa■t ~- •..•_ _`�••.- -«- •--- t- hm ON 1st "raddd woo _ easwe N om b snab,raA •`; `•._ r`�.:.�«_ turrtiA for b1A owl.Codals .. .._. . .- '�. . __..� .rlfr!bAe b011 IN ftFWAend6 .— __ v� - - •• _ II.A b1 as foaeel■MA bw■■Y� ,,.. �«^+,n ��....•�'.-o._..� _.�� Into yb�w"Ater"Pw east Ae ' -=•_- .. . .•.. � � M��. . ..--.. ..�.. Us do hAwa art tea odn"". '`"-"•';lalA Mt htres■i lgrrt■a. . - A ItAq erA1alr■•salfsr■e1• '.'. _ - ,.,,,�: _ _. ■n■N we Arid AAA af1t1M _.+._----••- {-'� seNrara ars drisHwoaR .. , .�••r.—._ ..�«�r��'...-•• -:.::.:: ��' .......... _.......�........._- eel a iMef aaea nrl■rka - ._.... _.... ... .. .'�.."' " ' . .... Of PkOhA.r.A{4RAvyBreftWrra __:.,�,'���-....��• ..�.�_ -- - —_ - - cud"US1.1*Moro•is!a{■KteAh ..- _ k•ham lima1KMR I1eaa,Rho MA y bM an Irtipit'ja rl NW1 ! .. I r �-�,.•r.r++ `. � ice.,:. � PLANI a %Y IN Sffo►PING CINTIR—Werekorp of Torrome-pas inlur-d His#We rem.f- V a L;M s.' . ! ti+ei crooled in o 010rt"n7 cents gars.rre no hurt. r Ace x J Wits fried o land• .I..q 1-, 'Vorner Ave.one !also Chen M, uLI of a IV xby air 00, fit d 10 lake off ""' • - I..r.r,Mtty` • ii,SSrr+!VY.Print hfarry CA NIIn,Uo r"MW into o idle)%4w b y and then s111hed.,__ , .. ..M r+r.-.. •ai.++-.., -Y.�....ter ..7�./►•w1• ..r an.rW. ...... .. . , , . • ...r.._. .. _mow..-_... •ti G ,� ii:` � '! it � t!��'� ''�` " !' '� �!' i,'t.';��•=t: ; :•',I ! �� .Sl'fT 1^ f�f'• � �;• �� f.�f�l1l�ljy'{1+� ;�t f" 1 � ' � 11 �t�.i:.4� ,��!. �ir�',�;I,i�. I i;1:,•f .1 ��', {t ;1 E� . , � �,;rtl� dap -:?'.-- . -;-----r•r . j:" �{_� i _ ,....- •t � � z~ •• ,,r � ., � awl• ; �. _ �• ` ����� ! '! ��i is ' - ., �.:.:.:J __..._ . ji dim fill r art nap IrLy D p f yl •) ��1 r �� t , rr.. Ir I' ,{{Illill�l{j1�T ��i i,J'• 1;. {1lt: :►fillill1111ir�;� !i �.;�!trrisi,,� �� 1 .+ � t •� -� '� :l, 1 {� � i• T ts,�. �., 'I j �;. , � � � � �J �rt� ,��aklLF�i �, 1,�, r •i (•+ r #I! t � �f �1 i!, /��� �RRtts ■rji7�- �w r .�;� rR � aj.G * ,,'��I�� I¢p �8fs6• ' tfi t I�Tr �3 �i !{j t 1 �, . ;:'; I 1�� f .li` � �•T1 C r Fgt 6 +rL�L•rl��$y� rF' r !1 '� II��'. ��i' •�� I I ii { r wR�s it; lig iIr �iy'1fGar3r •lr �J • �4nff CITY OF *turn'Ia mama imAcH j INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION ►�«iwcu�n+cii To City Administrator From . City Attorney Subject Meadowlark Airport Date December 8, 1976 MEMORANDUM OPINION There have been a series of charges brought against the operation of Meadowlark Airport and against the users of the field itself. This memorandum opinion seeks to address each of those charges in a candid manner, setting Forth what we Feel are the strengths and weaknesses of the various positions that could be taken vis-a-vis the operators of the airfield, its users and the City of Huntington Beach. Airport Licensing. Control and Flying Operations The control of airports within the State of California and the regulation of the use of airspace per se is vested in the state and not in the various municipalities of the state. Laws pertaining to the licensing of airports, the operations of airports, and the manner in which aircraft may be operated within the state are found in the "State 1 Aeronautics Act ," California Public Utilities Code §§21000 et seq. Municipalities may regulate airports throy¢h application of their zoning ordinances (Public Utilities Code §21005) or through- the exercise of the general police power �7 en oin the maintenance of a public nuisance (Civil. Code 6§3479, 3480) , to enforce penal provisions of the Act or � in areas not preempted by the state or federal governments. The control of pilots and airplanes is undertaken by the United States aovernment through a licensing program. STicensed pilots only may operate licensed planes only within the state. The only city ordinance extant in re airports is Huntington Beach Municipal Code Chapter 9 .56 relating to noise control at Meadowlark at night. The ordinance was adopted in 1971. In 1972 the United Statec Supreme Court in the opinion Burbank v. Lockheed Air Terminal 36 LEd 2d 547, ruled that not,=e regulation of airports was preempted by federal law, i.e. , 49 USCA §1431(a) , thus Chapter 9.56 of the Huntington -Beach Municipal Code is now invalid and should be repealed. The Huntington Beach Police Department has not been enforcing the provisions of Chapter, 9.56 since the opinion by this office was released following the decision in Burbank. The Huntington Beach Police Department has, for the past eight years, and contJnues , vigorous enforcement of valid state laws and Federal. Aviation Administration regulations in regard to those who fly over the city. Local, police agencies are obliged to enforce the penal sections the statutes of the State of California relating to flying and fliers. For example, a local policeman can arrest a pilot for operating an air- I .�r -2- craft while under the influence of6�,ntoxicating liquor or7Yrugs,s� reckless operation of an aircraft, low altitude flying, or for a myriad of other acts proscribed by state law, including those which arise from incorporated radera]l law or regulatiogy The state licenses airports throug4/the issuance of an airport permit, and revokes such permits for cause. The state has adopted and has in effect a comprehensive scheme for the licensing and regulation of airports and of flying within the state. The state has entered and to a large extent occupied the field and the subject matter of regulation is one of statewide concern. Therefore, excepting as noted, the Individual municipalities have few, if any, regulatory powers in this field. Zoning Regulation Regulation by application of the zoning laws is multi- faceted. First, the zoning law usually provides a criminal sanction for its violation. Because this remedy is commonly inadequate ( )viously inany persons would prefer to pay a small fine for violating a land use or zoning law in order to gain a greater economic use of their property), zoning laws usually provide that their violation constitutes ai yblic W sance. The Huntington Beach (Ordinance Code, Article 9022 §§9021, 9022 are local expres- sions of this philosophy. Our ordinance •and state laws both apparently require that prior to commencement of enforcement activity, the City Attorney be ordered to do so by the City Council. Therefore, prior to institution of an action to enjoin a public nuisance existing at Meadow- lark Airport, the City Council must proceed to find the existence of an ordinance code violation at the site and the existence of a public nui- sance before the City Attorney can institute legal Action. Zoning at Meadowlark Airport The Meadowlark Airport property is situated in an R-1 zone. In such a zone, residential uses only are permitted. There can be no use permit issued for an airport in an R-1 zone because it is a residential zone . When the airport was established in the mid 19401s, it was located within an unincorporated area of the County of, Orange. The area was at that time zoned "M-3," (unclassified zone) . County Use Permit No. 305 was Issued for the airport operation. This permit contained no express conditions. [Not all "use permits" contain conditions. ] Therefore, Meadowlark Airport operations cannot-be said to be in violation of any of the conditions of Orange County Use Permit No. 305. There is the argument that the airport as finally established and as used today does not conform to Orange County Permit Application- No; 305, however, after the lapse of nearly thirty years, the facts are so obscure and the intent so diluted that we are corXident that the doctrines of lashes or equitable estoppal would apply to any move to revoke the permit at this time. Further, the City of Huntington Beach has no power to revoke a County of Orange permit, valid or nest. -3- Annexed real property is ordinarily brought into the city as R-1 zoned by ordinance and when the airport property came into the city, it, therefore, came in as a nonconforming use in the R-1 zoning applied to the property. The County' s Use Permit No. 305 at that time became moot and Invalid as the property was then and there outside the County's jurisdiction. Nonoonforming uses are provided for in Article 971 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. In 1970 the airport operator applied for Conditional Exception No. 70-50 to permit a five hundred (500) foot extension of the runway. Conditlonal •Exception No. 70-50 contains the following conditions : "1. The runway extension cyall be reduced to 320 ft . ; however, in no ease shall the extension be closer than 375 ft . from houses on Heil Ave. "2. A blast fence shall be installed 100 ft. north of the end of the runway. The precise location, size and building materials shall be approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustments . 113. That portion or the runway and taxiway north of the blast fence shall be removed. 114. Obstruction lights shall be installed on the blast fence and any trees along the north property line. Also, any trees along the north property line shall be limited to 20 ft . in height. Placement and type of lights shall be approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustments. 1t5. Provisions shall be made for dust and noise control on the site: Such dust and noise control methods shall be approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustments. i "6. Signs shall be posted to inform pilots of the proper use of the airport and runway area. ` 197. All violations of the City Code shall be corrected within 60 days . Staff reports Indicate that there are no obstruction lights on the perimeter trees as described in Condition No. 4 above. The permit for operation of the a:.:port issued by the California State Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics, contains requirements that ob- struction lights be placed on poorer lines to the north of the airport's boundaries, runway lights and obstruction lights on the blast fence at the foot of the runway and, thus, the state ha.a preempted the matter of obstruction lights. Evidence was adduced at the heal•ing that two additional violations may be oaourring at the property, violations of provisions of the Hunt- ington Beach Ordinance Code, not of the conditions of Conditional Excep- tion No. 70-50. These violations allegedly have occurred because the zoning is R-1. They include the maintenance of a horse stable on the property and the maintenance of an airplane sales operation. We are not prepared to state that either use is prohibited on the property. First, there Is no evidence that the horses allegedly stabled on the property constitute a commercial use of the property. Therefore, Huntington Beach Ordinance Code Article 963, "Equine SDandards-Noncommercial," applies. This section requires 'that a person- keeping horses in any zone obtain a permit. If such permit has been obtained, no violation exists; Mr. Nerio states as of this writing that the appropriate permit has been obtained. The airplane sales operation presents a more complicated problem. This is because airplane sales may be considered an accessary use in connection with allowable airport operations. Consider this, an airport is first a place for the taxiing, landing and taking off of airplanes. This is the primary use of the property but it. appears that a customarily incidental use of an airport is the showing and harborage of aircraft for sale. Thus At can be argued that this is an accessory use to the permitted use of airport operation. only a court of competent juris- diction can answer this question. The Meadowlark Airport as Constituting_ a Public Nuisance Notwithstanding the public policy encouraging the establishment and operation of airports, the aperation.of a private airport likj,,py other business is subject to injunction for creation of a nuisance . The maintenance or operatioY39f an airport.may bo enjoined or abated tahere it constitutes a nuisance. Whether or not such relief will be granted is a matter resting in the sound discretion of the court and the issuers muut be determined on a consideration of all of the circumstances, which circumstances include the public interest in maintaining the airport as well ac the extent or degree of injury, annoyance or damage to individuals. Contiguous property owners may be required in. some cases and to a reason- able degree, yield their desired privacy to the gen171 welfare which is advanced by the operation. of legitimate businesses . ` The City Attorney Is empowered by state law to bring an action in the name of the People of the State of California to enjoin a nuiaar•n,and must do so when directed by the City Council. The City may not summarily abate a nuisance, that Is, without resort to court jq�ion excepting when an ii=ediate hazard and danger to the public exists. No such. eireumstances exist at Meadowlark as explained below. In attempting to abate an airport nuisance, the following must be considered: "CCP 5731b . [Evidence that airport, etc. , does not constitute nuisance] In any action%or proceeding to abate the use of an airport or an.airpark, proof that the airport or airpark.has been in '"^'..�---_._�` ^"'�'..""'^r�w-.siv.�.c•w.+.�.-:....a.aVw��.a...a.r�...r—_ _. _ - �w -5— "existence for three years constitutes a rebuttable ' presumption which shall be prima facie evidence that the operation of the airport..or airparl. does not constitute a nuisance." This presumption clearly would make any attempt on the City's part to declare Meadowlark Airport a public nuisance almost an insurmountable task. More importantly , it is necessary to go to the record. What is the evidence of nuisance? On the isaue of noise, there is now being conducted a noise study by the County of Orange at the City's request. ! However, past studies have indicated that- small aircrarL such as are 1 capable of being operated out of Meadowlark cannot generate noise in j excess of state established noise levels. This is not to say that such standards absolutely decide the nuisance. question on the issue of noise, however, they would be of great weight if not- determinative. But bear in mind there is little evidence of excessive noise generation. The other complaints consist of "buzzing" of homes and schools , low flying, lack of enforcement by city, state and federal officials , excessive numbers of flights and other related complaints. . On the other hand there is evidence of enforcement, careful flight, a public need for the field and other evidence -supportive of the land use. As we.have earlier discussed, Meadowlark Airport is a valid operation where located pursuant to the zoning law of this .city. The question is is it a public nuisance because of its particular method of operation? A lawful business may by its particular method of operation or by its location constitute a nuisance though it may have adopted the most approved appliances and methods. Judson v. Los Angeles Suburban Gas Co. 157 C 168, 106 P 581. McIntosh v. Brimmer 6U CA 7703 230 P 203. A nuisance.on property may exist without any negligence on the part of the property owner or user. Sturges v. Harney-,__Inc. 165 CA2d 306, 331 P2d 1072. Given the premise that a late comer has as much right to the beneficial use of his property as the early comer, it would appear that there should be no vested right to maintain forever an existing nuisance. That is, the changing conditions of a neighborhood may make unlawful an activity which was formerly lawful. It is not clear just to what extent the activities at the airport constitueea "nuisance," nor to what extent the "public" is harmed. A very few persons have complained very loudly or the airport's existence, but do those,persons truly represent the public? It is the quantum of the injury to a sufficient number of persons that constitutes a nuisance, not excessive injury to the few, e to the whole versus the. � i.e . , material damage ersonal discomfort to p o Prior o taking an lc al action it would the few that is important. io t c g y !; , be necessary to determine the number of persona in the community affected and the extent of the injury to such.persons. Cunclusion 1. There is no substantial basis for revoking Conditional Exception No. 70-50 and the one remaining violation of the conditional exception I -6- that no lights have been placed on perimeter trees is probably unenforce- able inasmuch as obstruction lighting may well be outside the juris- diction of the City by reason of its preemption by the State Division of Aeronautics. 2. There wan insufficient evidence ad:lueed at the public hearing that a public nuisance exists from the maintenance or operation of Mead- owlark Airport. 3. There is insufficient evidonce to conclude that the aircraft sales operations being conducted at Meadowlark Airport are unlawful. 4 . Regulation or airports is largely preempted by the state and fedepal governments. Chapter 9. 56 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code should be repealed. 5. Findings in conformance with the opinion are supplied herewith. DON P. HONFA WILLIAM S . AMSBAfYCity Attorney Assistant City Aey DPB:VSA:cs Attachment FOOTNOTES 1�Public Utilities Code 521005 "This part shall not be construed as limiting any power of the State or a political subdivision to regulate airport hazards by zoning." i 21CIvil Code 53479: "Anything which is injurious to health, or is indecent f or offensive to the senses, or an obstruction to the • free use of property, so as to interfere with the com- fortable enjoyment of life or property, or unlawfully obstructs the free passage or use, in the customary manneis, of any navigable lake, or river, bay, stream, canal, or basin, or any public parks, square, street, or highway, is a nuisance. " Civil Code 63480: "A public nuisance is one which affects at the same time an entire community or neighborhood, or any con- siderable number of persons, although the extent of the annoyance or damage inflicted upon individuals may be unequal. " *.r • 3/Public Utilities Code §21409: "It is unlawful for any person to engage in aeronautics as an airman in the State unless he has an appropriate effective airman certificate, permit, rating, or license issued by the United States authorizing him to engage in the particular class of aeronautics in which he is engaged, if the certificate, permit-, rating or license is required by the United States." Public Utilitiea Cade §21411: "It is unlawful for any person to operate, or cause or authorize to ne operated, any civil aircraft within thib State unless the aircraft has an appropriate effective certificate, permit, or license issued by the United States if required by the United States." /PublIc Utilities Code 521252: "(a) The department, Its members, the director, officers and employees of the department, and every state and peace officer charged with the enforcement of state and subordinate laws or ordinances, 'shall enforce and assist in the enforcement of this part, the rules and orders issued wider this part, and all other laws of this state relating to aeronautics. In the enforcement of such rules, ordF+-s, and laws , the director, and such officers and employees as the I director may designate, shall have the authority, as public officers, to arrest without a warrant, any person who, in his presence, has violated or as to whom there is probable cause.to believe has violated any of such rules, orders or laws. " 5/Public Utilities Code §21407. 5: i . "It is unlawful for any person-to operate an aircraft j in the air, or on the ground or water, while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or narcotics." 6/Public Utilities Code §21407: "It is unlawful for any person,to operate an aircraft in the air, or on the ground or water in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another. In any proceeding charging operation of aircraft in violation of this section, the court In determining whether the operation was careless or reckless shall consider the standards for safe operation of aircraft prescribed by federal statutes or regulations governing aeronautics." 1 .,'► ` i• I r • a• r.._.r !7- •. t'p n..,.� 't jlr7`• 7�i\w 5y r �k "l7 ` w.l '� A;r'�t•. �,;,v.. r�A� I 4J •a t4i .�� t.r ..,� '� ii.. Ad ,L.., t I 4! r� tl a• _ i.t '�{, . r t�l.! Pu/. r,, Y.c�,'�•/ •Y 1. �P'. r��'"I � 1',' t '�. ti" ; . p - jL I �Ci 1 ! ( • r r 1, r� '� / ' t ( n a ! ; . q+ �, 1,•# h, ' "r r !. P ti fv (fr1 1 �yAV �! yk Nr.1 / gyp i, atl � l ;}!!# / ;s " ! I .r l• -' Y �. .. �{' T' �: r !r 4. �i� T,�� :} �l.� �5,��' r '�'tir' f'!Jt4'"`i/4 'C.r 1 aS•� � rt I '{ / y r• r r.. �l•.: 1 °•'J �� i 7, r�;..., F. t. y ,� , f � a i.,r r t� ,� t ' �M I { "`! �i a o '�� W.°l,•h �, I }, + �'.Ip 1:, ••' ' t,ti �'` iEr" �',+ L � I �a,. t.,'��;�`irM''� � .• . r * tf�� y• "AVrY(�,.. 'liX_ -f��.�r f0{11+1.M• �r•If1..v 1_ ,ir .7�,�� {.{ ey�s / 1A �1:yLwr, }, ,w' il. }f:J1 . '.YY�k•- •_M.':}.�A?lA1r,�j ill i!i.r���_.1..G M"���i•1� .'R 7/Public Utilities Code 521403: " (a) Flight in aircraft over the land and waters of this state is lawful, unless at .altitudes below those prescribed by federal authority , or unless so con— ducted as to be imminently dangerous to persons or property lawfully on the land or water beneath. The landing of an aircraft on the land or waters of another, without his consent, in unlawful except in the case of a forced landing.. The owner, lessee, or operator of the aircraft is liable , as provided by law, for damages caused by a forced :landing. ''(b) The land, takeoff or taxiing or an aircraft on a public freeway, highway, road or street is unlawful ` except: j "(1) In the case of a forced landing; or 11(2) A landing during a natural disaster or other public emergency if the landing has received prior approval from the public agency having primary ,jurisdiction over traffic upon the freeway, highway, road, or street ; or "(3) When the landing, takeoff cr taxiing has received prior approval from the public agency having ' primary jurisdiction over traffic upon the freeway, highway, road or street. "The prosecution bears the burden of proving that bone of the exceptions apply to the act which is alleged to be unlawful. j "(c) The right of flight in aircraft includes the right of safe access to public airports, which includes the right of flight within the zone of approach of any public airport without restriction or tinzard. The zone of approach of an airport shall conform to the specifi— cations of Part 77 of the Federal Aviation Regulations of the Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation." Public Utilities Code §21666: "The department shall grant approval- of an airport site and issue an airport permit if it is satisfied that, all of the following requirements have been met : • I, I R� " (a) The site meets or exceeds the minimum airport standards specified by the department in its rules and regulations, provided, however, that the department may modify its minim= airport standards when issuing a permit or site approval if it determines that the proposed airport, if constructed or, established, aril? conform to minimum standards of safety. "(b) Safe air traffic patterns have been established for the proposed airport and for all existing airports and approved airport sites in its vicinity. "((-) The zone of approach of the airport has been engineered in conformity with the provisions of Section 21403, the documents relating thereto are available for public inspection. "(d) The department when approving an airport site or issuing a permit may impose reasonable conditions which it deems necessary to effectuate the purposes of this article. "Each airport permit or site approval, or amendments thereto, issued by the department shall set forth any conditions imposed thereon, and any modification of the general minimum airport standards prescribed by the department relative to such airport or airport site. "The department: may refuge to approve an airport site or issue a perrait under this article if it determines after notice and hearing held pursuant to this part that the airport site does not meet the requirements of this section. " 9/Public Utilities Code §21668: "The department may revoke any airport permit if it determines that any of the following conditions are present: "(a) There has been an abandonment of a site or an airport . " (b) 'there han been a failure,wi.thin the time prescribcd to develop t•he olt,: its Lnn.z0rrporL ov to comply with the conditions of the approval as set forth in the permit. " (c) The airport or site no longer conforms to the minimum airport standards prescribed by the department, • --10-- 9/ tror no longer complies with the .conditions imposed in the airport permit or site approval. "(d) The owner or operator of a permitted airport has failed to comply with any rule • or regulation of the department. "(c) The site may no longer be safely used by the general public because of a change in physical or legal conditions either on or off the airport site ." 10/Huntington Beach Ordinance Code 59021: "Any person violating or causing violation of the provisions of this Divisica shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof" shall be punishable by a. fine of not more• than Five Hundred Dollars ($500) or by imprisonment in the county jail of Orange County or in the catty jail of the City of Huntington Beach, if there be one, for not exceeding six (6) moriths, or by both fire and imprisonment, as the judge of a court of competent ,jurisdiction may direct. Such person shall be deemed to be guilty of a separate offense for each and every day during any portion of which any violation of this Division is committed or continued by such person, and shall be punishable as herein provided." IV HuntingtonBeach Ordinance Code §9022: "Any building or structure set up, erected, constructed, altered, enlarged, converted, moved or maintained contrary to the provisions of this Division, and any use of any land, building or premises established, conducted, operated or maintained contrary to the provisions of this Division shall be, find -the same is -hereby declared to be unlawful and a public nuisance; and the City Attorney shall, upon the order of the City Council, immediately commence action or proceedings for the abatement and removal and enjoinment thereof in the manner provided by law, and shall take such other steps and shall apply to such courts as may have ,jurisdiction to grant such relief as will abate and remove such building or structure, and restrain and enjoin any person from netting up, erecting, building, maintaining or using any such property contrary to the provisions of this Division. " 12/Anderson v. Souza, 243 P2d 497 ..._ ��.�..__ �_.�..+��. wr ,. . . �..n.. ... .�.., ............ -.r...�..� .... ... .�.�_�.�. _. ..._�...._. �•���.r. ...r.ti.r.wn..' .LAYI.i.W'M\4'�Y r 13/Sweetland v. Curtiss Airports, 55 r2d 201 14/California Code of Civil Procedure §731 �5/Leypo v. City of Petal"ma, 97 Cal Rptr 8110 I I r I • i I I I i I I I 1 PROPOSED FINDIIJOS i Pursuant to the public hearing on the revocation of Conditional Exception No . 70-50 pertaining to Meadowlark Airport , held on November 1, 1976, the City Council of the Citj of Huntington Beach finds: 1. Conditional Exception No. 70-5U is not now in violation as to any legally enforceable condition and, therefore, there ara no grounds for revocation . i . At the present time, Meadowlark Airport is not being operatedcr maintained in such a manner so as to create a public nuisance. 3 . Dlie to preemption by state and federal la►is, the City of Huntington Beach has no authority to control the opera- tion of the airport or to control the planes or pilots using the airport . G . The City of Huntington Beach does have the power to enforce applicable state and federal laws regarding flying and airport operation and continues ►rith ita envorcement efforts through the Huntington Beach Police Department; however, the City has no authority to revoke the California State Airport Permit for such violations. If the violations require criminal proceeding:, the prosecution would be handled by the District Attorne:y 's Office. i s fvr r:c f, novembor 24,. 1976 Office: of Governor gown State of CaTlfornia- Oaorsmercto, WA11torniwr 95814 lattention: Governor Edmund a. Brown Re: Meadowlark Alrport,, Huntington Boaah,. California, Dear Governor Brown; We are very mush disappointed in your answer to our letter via- the very man whom we have stated door not tell, she truth. Are you not a servant of the people or are the people supposed to a'erve you? The enclosed letter from Mr. Frank A: Allen of F.A'.N. does- state that pilots have had their license lifted . Mr,. MoSenney called ,Kre. Allen and asked if their, was any violation of regulation during takeoff. There can be none during takeoff regardless how sloppy or poor the plane is operated per F.A'.A. regulations.. Mr. MoKenney know that, These fall in the area of ' Cal-Tran are&. Very C!ever indeed,. Ai new, way t,;f double talk,' ,' jNCW TEE FlOrION: t t Wo quote McKenney-- To this date, no violations of Federal AVIation Regulatlens � ,have been observed. We. quote Mr. Frank A': Allen. who does_ i not 11e: 1 j We have, in the past,. taken enforcement action against e'• tea pilots. fcr vnrioua infractions of the regulatione; TO BE ExAaT"* THERE WAS FC•'JR WHOM LICENSE WERE LIFTED e�* The Wn whose plane crashed and fr.,..,.ed to report the crash is not Qhunted.- .� I flcwernor Brown, WHAT' DOES IT TAKE Tin OBTAIN OfRRBCTIW ACTTO AGAINST' MR, MORENNEY????7 PLEASE FURNISH THE ATCK BC1"IB WE ARP ' TO' USE T a' MCEFUL LM OBr`A IN ACTTaN AMU SUET-=a Sinc©r y yours,. �r The Concerned Fees p ;I ffa�ezt i AD i DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION i FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION Flight Stundards District Office 2615 1 lst Spring Street Long Beach, California 90806 = ors-•. November 15, 1976 Mr. Robert Nowak 17171 Bolaa Chic. Street Apartment 123 %intington Beach, California 92649 Dear Mr. Nowak; -- Thin is in response to your request cf November 10, 1976, for clari- cication of my reported statement to California Division of Aeronautics personnel that no violations of Federnl Aviativa Regulations had been observed by FAA inspectors monitoring Meadowlark Airport traffic pattern operations. Consequently no enforcement action was taken against pilots by FAA. They quoted your letter to Governor Brown as saying FAA had observed 25 violations by aircraft flying ?ver the Cambridge apartment, after takeoff to the south. Y informed them that I had observed numerous aircraft fly over or near the apartments but since it Haan necessary to do so in th-- process of takeoff and landing, they were in compliance with Federal Aviation Regulations, therefore, enforcement action was not warranted. i We have, in the past, taken enforcement action against a few pilots whose aircraft were based at Meadowlark Airport, for various infractions of the regulations. "However, none of these actions involved non- compliance with minimum altitude over the apari -:its in the takeoff path, • i Sincerely, F. A. ALLEN Chief I I I iTAT 01 CALI/ORML"UIIN!!! AMC TW.JITATION ACINCY SMWND a rNOWN /R, Comp t DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DIVISION OF AERONAUTICS EXECUTIVE AIRPORT SACRAMENTO,CALIFORNIA 95822 (916) 322.3090 Octob-r 27, 1976 i Mr. Robert Nowak j 17171 Aolssa ChiLa Street, Apt. 123 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Dear Mr. liuvak: I Governor Brown has requested we to respond to your =at recent letter concerning the Meadowlark Airport. + t have studied your letter with interest, and it appears that you zV have been given inaccurate information concerning the airport. I Host, of youx areas of concern are addressed in the Division's evaluation of the airport Which was conducted at the request of Assemblyj= Robert Burke. The stuck• report Vas transmitted to Mr. Burke on July 30, 1976, On that date merwers of your group were advised of the report. In addition, a copy was furnished to the City of Huntington Beach, and & member pf Mr staff prese!I Led a brief of the report to the City Council at their meatus on August 16, 1976. It is also rV understanddng that Ftgyar Weider made a copv of the report available to meabers of your group. To ensure you ari aware of the contents of the study, a copy is enclosed. f The follcvl.ng items are not included in the study, and are addressed in the et-der they appear in your letter. Mr. Frank Allen, Chief FAA, Long Beach FSDO, stated that the FAA is continually � monitoring the flyirg activities at Meadowlark. To this date, no violations of Federal Aviation Regulations have been observed. Consequently, according to Mr. Al en, no enforcement action ban been taken by the FAA against pilots at Meadowlark. Mr. Peter Boyes waa assigned as the Division of Aeronautics Couthern California Area Chief until June 309 1976. As such, I had delegated to him the responsi- bility for the State's aviation activities in the: area, supervised by zW Deputy Chief. Any cG-erespondence prepared by Mr. Boyes reflected his Fro- feslpional assessment :if the situation. Since I am responsible for aviation activities in the er.,;' ;e State,, it is appropriate that rw signature block appear on his corraipoudence pertaining to aviation matters. i i I Mr. Robert Nowak Page 2 October 27, 1976 I am particulnrly concerned with your statement concerning vV remarks to Hr. Long. My visit to Mr. Long's residence va9 ganerutpd by ay desire to Place myself in the position of those making the complaints, and obtain first hand information concerning the scope of the noise 'intrusions. labil(i at Mr. l,ong's apartment I observed four different aircraft fly 'aver the building. My statement to Mr. Long van that the pilots of the aircraft were not making the 10 degree turn after takeoff which is a violation of the airport regulations. Airport regulations (commonly kncrm as airport operating rules) are enforced by the airport operator, and are not within the ,jurisdiction of local, State or Federal governments. California Airport Regulations, Section 3535, establishes the requirement for an amended site approval permit wnen there are changes in the use of the airport or changes in the class of the airport. Changes in land use surrounding the airport, in accordance with current lav, do not establish the requirement for an amended airport permit and assocluted public hearing. As of this date, I have been unable to confirm that a noise monitoring program has been conducted at the airport. Section 5012, California Soise Standards establishas the criterion co=u '.ty noise equivatert level (MiEL) for existing civilian airports is 70 DB until December 31, 1985, and 65 CNEL thereafter. You are cauticned not to confuse a single event occurrence with the CNEL, which is a weighted average of all the aircraft events occurring in a 24-hcur period. The method far calculating the CNEL is contained in Section 5o06(f) of the enclosed regulation. I have attempted to respond to each comment contained in your letter to the Governor. rf you desire additional information, please contact qr present arsa chief, Mr. Earl Tucker. He is well versed un Headovlark, and is readily available to respond to wW questions concerning the State's past and present Involvement with the airport. Sincerely, 11 E. J KMTEY, Cbie! Di ipn of Ae nautics cc: /Mr. Frank Ailen, Chief Long Beach FSDO Ms. Jerri Chenelle, Adm. Aid City of Huntington Beach Enclosure • A i I, Ron Shenkman, do affirm that I have read the transcript ' of the Meadowlark Airport Public hearing held on November 1 , 1976, in the Huntington Beach City Council Chambers. I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true. ounce man Ron en man Date r 1 I• 1I i I 1 I , Ron Pattinson, do affirm that I have read the transcripts of the Meadowlark Airport Public Hearing held on November 1 , 1976, in tie Huntington Beach City Council Chambers. I certN"fy unger penalty of perjury that the foregoir.; is true. uncl man on 'attxnson Date I f f i•` CITV OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION 11INT114I11V 11 Ulf To John F. Behrens, Fronl Sn ter pa, Director Chief Land Use Technician Subject Status Report Date November 1, 1976 Meadowlark Airport 5141 Warner Ave. An inspection today at the subject location reveals the following i violation of the Conditions of Approvai C.R. 470-50 still exists Condition 04 obstruction lights shall be installed on the blast fence and any trees along the north property line. Also any trees along the north property line shall be limited to 20 feet in height. Placement and type of lights shall be approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustments. Condition #4 has been met except for lighting on the trees along the north property line. No Lights have been installed to date. Requests for prosecution have been filed against Art Nerio and Greg Hein, operator of Coastal Aviation, formerly known as "Red Barnes". The r^.quest against Fir. Neri.o is regarding the horse stable, recently built and the request against Fir. I{ain is regarding the establishment of an airplane sales use. No administrative approvals have been r :.- ,►:ed for these uses. l WDL/ied , i f I r • f HUNTI NGTON BEACH CITY COUNCIL MEETING PUDLIt. HEARING: N meadowlark Airport 11/1/76 A A I A is I t r I I 2 1 MAYOR iVIL'QCR: The next public hearing on our 2 agenda is h- Zc which is the Revocation of Conditional ' AS, 3 Exception Number 70-50 on the Meadowlark Airport. l 4 how many people here in the audience are here 5 for this public hearing? 6 In order to get the most out of the public 7 hearing and make it as fair as we possibly can, I would .like 8 to set some ground rules. Usually we have three-minute 9 presentations on the part of the speakers . I vould lire to , i 10 City Clerk, abide by that ruling with the exception of any 11 one person who is representing a group and within limits � 12 there ill not be any timing on such presentations or input. � 13 7. hope I u:11 have your ccoperYt_�on or. that. i 14 Public hearings, as best, are very often 15 charged with a great deal of strong convictions and very 16 strong emotions , and I do want to tell you that your City 17 Council sits here yn public hearings without preconceived 19 ideas to the best of our ability. We are here for the 19 purpose of getting the input in order to make out decision. 20 Also ; wr►uld like to ask the City Council's 21 pleasure andalso ask the public's feeling on this: Two 22 vary important member: of our Council were not able to be 23 here , Councilman Shenkm"7, and Councilman Patt.inson. It is 24 Councilman Psttinson's anniversary and fie aiked to be L excu:ted, I only mention that because Councilmen Pattinson s 26 and Shenkman are two of the three new members of the Council � I V 1213) 1J)•137) MACAUL.CY at MANNING.GANTA AFJA.CALIF. !l1-9100 -- r, I and have not had the benefit of directing their attention 2 to the Meadowlark Airport situation which has come up before 3 the City Council in the .past. 4 It has been suggested to me by Administration 5 that in light of this that it might be arise to have our • 6 public hearing, certainly , but riot make a decisior. tonight 7 and give the Opportunity to the other Council members to 8 listed to the tape of tonight' s Council agenda discussion 9 and continue the public hearing for decision at a future 10 date . OL 11 Before I formally open the proceedings , 12 can 1 get a reaction from the Cite Council membctrs as to 13 hov you think we should do ,chat'' 14 Councilwoman Gabbs? 15 COUNCILWOMAN GIRDS: That 's fine with me as lung 16 as when we open it to vote we don' t re-hear the public 17 hearing. I have: sat through six years of A;ryadowlarl: . 1 18 don' t mind doing it tonight , I came prepared for that; but 19 not to repeat it in another couple weeks . 20 MAYOR WILDER: Well, the thought was because -- COUNCILWOMAN GIBBS : I know. As long as it is 22 understood that we are not going to repeat the public hearing 23 I 4 MAYOR IVIEDER: It is suggested, and I an bringing 24 it to your attention , that we might cont�nuc it if it is i j 25 voter pleasure , for decision , not for a continued public 26 I I hearing. i i I j d . 12131 437.1377 MACAULEY ek MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALUr. 17u, $31.9400 e � i 4 1 Mr . Bonfn , as the City Attorney , is that rij,htw 2 Mri. BONFA: Yes . In fact , it is almost essential • 3 because for the Council , to take any kind of action, for 4 example , to reiio'.:e Conditional Exception 70- 50 or tc declare 5 it a public nuisance it uoti.ld be necessary for the Council • 6 to make fact findings , and after listening; to all the 7 evidence it would be rather difficult to formulate findings 8 instantaneously. 9 Plow, we have a court reporter present here 10 tonight and the court reporter will be preparing a transcript W, 11 of these proceedings , and we in the Attorney' s Office would -' 12 appreciate having the opportunity to receive a copy cif the 13 transcript and study it and analyze it and come up with 14 recommended findings for the benefit of the Council , and 15 that will take a period of time. So that would be our 16 request . 17 MAYOR 19IEDER: What do you call a period of time? 10 MR. BONFA: I don' t know. It depends on how fast 19 we can get the transcript from the court reporter, 20 MAYOR WIEDER: All right, Can we say a month from 21 now? 22 MR. BONFA: Very well . b 23 MAYOR WILDER: That would make it ,lie first meeting 24 in December. 2.6 MR. BONFA: The other point I would like to make 26 is this : If the Council does make findings and if the w (7131 417.1317 MAGAULEY 6 MANNING. 9AMTA ArIA. CALIF. (7U1 538•9400 �1 I Council instructs the City Attorney to File .an action in the Z Superior Court , for exar.ple ,' to abate the nuisance, we want 3 as Rood and complete a record to be made at this public. 4 hearing as possible . In that connection, inasmuch as the transcript is going to be matte and night be used -- well , • 6 would be used in the court proceedings we are suggesting 7 that the witnesses be sworn under oath before testifying. g I•IAYOR IIIEDr.1t: This evening? 9 MR. BONFA: This evening. Ile are prepared to 10 proceed on that basis . 11 MAYOR WILDER: All right. Can we use the procedure 12 of a group swearinL in or do you wish to have each witness 13 do it at the tine they testify? • 19 MR. BONFA: We can swear all thosewho intend to 15 testify at one time, and then as they take the microphone 16 we can ask them if they took the oath. 17 MAYOR IIIEDER: Thank you very much. :: 10 Councilman Coen? I 19 COUNCILMAN COEN: Thank you, Madam Mayor. lI 20 Mr. Bonfa, at whose request is the court 21 reporter here ; is that the City 's? 22 MR. BONFA : The City's request , yes , sir. 23 COUNCIG;+iAN CO3iN: My sccon3 qaestien then has no 24 relevance . i j 25 MAYOR IVIEDER: Mr. Belsito? • 26 MR. DELSITO : Following tip on Councilman Coen' s I I I 1:171 437.1327 S ACAULEY d MANNING. SANTA Allk CALM. 158.9400 ws ( � 6 1 request , I did want to brim; back to the Council , since it wa 2 felt through the City Attonfey 's Office and myself that it wa 3 essential to have the court reporter because of whatever 4 ramifications could come from this , that we had to hire the 5 court reporter after the last Council meeting. I am bringing 6 it to the Council ' s attention that based on the action you 7 gave me on tl *i contingency account to bring it back to the g Council for subseauent approval. � M g MAYOR WIEDER: Then we have: the pleasure of having 10 the service at the discretion of the City Administrator? 11 MR. BU SITO : That is correct and I believe the 12 amount was somewhere around - - P MR. BONFA: I don,' t knot,. It depends on how long 14 the hearing lasts and hots many pages the transcript would be. 15 These are normal , routine charges . 16 MYOR WII:DFR: All right . Then I will be guided 17 accordingly from the comments that are made and for the 18 Public 's information , for the Co11nci1 's information, we i 1$ will not be making a decision tonight, but ac will come back, 20 not for a public hearing again , but for a (.ecision , a vote 21 at the first meeting in December of the Civy C,outtcil after 22 which time the absent members of the Council will sit 2.1 and listen to the tapes of the proccddings of thz public 24 hearing . 25 A11 right. Is there any staff information ?6 that is not in our kit that anyone would like to offer at 1 " _� (1131 417•1327 MACAULEY A MANNING. IIANTA ANA.CALIF. 1)11) !!i•V100 I this time? 2 Mr . Bonfa again? Z MR. BONI'A: hiay I suggest that, we ndminister the q oath now? This would include staff menbers to testify as 5 well. as the members of the public . I would suggest , Madam 6 Miyor, to ask all those who intend to testify to Please rise 7 and then to ask the City Clerk to administer the oath. 9 MAYOR IVIEDEI: All right . Thank you, Mr. City 9 AZ1,orney. 10 Ms. Wentworth , our City Clerk, would you take • 11 cognizance of those that are going to participate? 12 All those in the audience, members of the 13 public who Will be testifying at this public hearing, would I 14 you please rise , and members of the staff who will be testi- I 15 fying as well. Please give your attention to our City Clerk 16 and would you please join with her in administering the oath. i 17 (All participants Ditending to testify were s 18 thereuport duly sworn. ) 19 MAYOR iVIEDER: Thank you. Now, this does not 20 nreclUie if, after listening to the discussion and debate, 21 if there are those of you who have not so participated in the 22 administration of the oath, you can do so at the time you I 23 testify. 24 fleeing no comment from staff -- oh , Mr. Behrens , 25 our Building and Community Development Director. 26 flow many are here for the first tine to rs ' OA OD J77.13V MACAULEY lk MANNING. BANTA AN^. CALIF. SS11•9400 v. 1 Council Chambers? 2 1 I;uess that would be the majority of people here . � I3 Well , so you know who the actors and players 4 .-to , Mr. Donfa is our City Attorney , and our Assistant City 5 Attorney Mr. Amsbary is seated with him. Our department 6 heads are seated below you, in front of is , with the City 7 Clerk. I don't know .f you :an see them, but if you hear a a voice you will know where it is coming from. That ' s the 9 way they built the Chambers . 10 Mr. Behrens is right below us . 11 M. BOVFA: Since we are making a transcript , 12 Mr. Behrens ani all others , before you testify would you 13 please state your name and state that you did take the oath: 14 Then we will proceed . 15 MR. BEHRENS : My name is John Behrens , I am thn 16 Director of Building and Community Development For the ip 17 City. I did take the oath. 18 Our' department has submitted to the Council 19 previously two reports , one dated October 6th, one dated i 20 October 2?, 1976. I just wanted to point out that we have 21 submitted this evening another s!iort rf;port to the City 22 Council under today 's date that states that as a result of 23 inspections today of Meadowlark Airport there is one conditior• 24 of the original Conditional Exception 70- 50 that remains not 26 satisfied. That is the fact that there has not been any 26 obstruction lights placed on the trees on the south side of J Ab (717) 437.1321 MACAUI.CN* I.ti<MANNING. SANTA ANA. CAL10. (714) 551.9&J0 � i 9 l Heil Avenue north of the airport . With that sole 2 exception , nil of the remainder of the conditions are 3 complied with as of today . 4 MAYOR IVIEDER: Thank you vey mu,�i , Fir. Behrens , 5 Is there any other staff information at this 6 time? 7 I don ' t have any lights for the staff, so 8 do this (indicating) so I can see if you want my attention. 9 Seeping none I will ask the City Council , do 10 you have any questions at this time before we open the public lI hearing? 14o questions? 12 All right. At this time I now declare the 13 1public heaing of Revocation- of Conditional Exception 70-50 14 now open , and the procedure I am going to follow and ask you 15 to folloii is - - let me see, We (to have Mr. Earl Tucker of 16 the State Division of Aeronautics - - are you in the room? 17 MR. TUCKER: Yes , ma' am. 1Q .MAYOR IVIEDER: Would you please come. forward? 19 And the Director of the Orange County Airport , 20 Mr. Bob Bresnahan. Am 1 pronouncing that correctly? ► I 21 AIR. DRESNAIIAN: Yes . MAYOR IVIEDER: Come forward, please. i 23 How many people now will be speaking in suppor 29 of the Revoc-ation of the Conditional Exception? All right. Would, you please came forward and 26 you will follow this presentation. I i A r� (713) W.1377 MACAJLEY d MANNING, GANTA ANA CALIF. ("++r 539.9A00 ter. I 'rhen I will assume that the balance of the 2 sneakers will be speaking, against the revocation, the item a 3 on the agenda, q Councilman Coon is making a flood point here , 5 In order to clarify ghat is really before us , it has been 6 brought. to our attention by members of the H.O.M. E . Council , p 1 g Mr. Tom Liven ood in articular -- I will call on him to $ make the first presentation. That motivated this public q hearing , it their request , for the Revocation of Conditional Exception that was ranted Meadowlark it and,10 1� C 1 Airport,;t, n , thereby, 11 after discussion an that subject we would thereby have to 12 add- ::ss ourselves to whether it is a fact that there is a 13 public nuisance involved here. 14 5o if you are speaking in support of the 15 Conditional Exception Revocation you i—ght -- if you wish 16 at that time, if you are in agreement that that would fo.11vv 17 that you would then grant the City Council to pursue whether 18 the airport is a public nuisance. I would then assume that 19 people w1io .re speaking for the revocation will also be 20 aJdressing themselves to the public nuisance element. 21 That would be true for those of you who 22 speak in opposition to that . Would you incorporate your 23 findings and your comments and yo>>r evidence as to the 24 fact of whether it is not a public nuisance, 25 All right. Without further ado I am going to y/ 26 ask Mr. 'fucker to please come forward firs* and Mr. Tucker is 1 (:171 411•1. 1 MAGAULEY MANNI VG. SANTA ANA.CALIV. (7141 3589400 VO- ,1 1 with tile. State Division of .Aeronautics. 2 Would you please state your name and identify 3 yourself? 4 MR. TUCKER: Yes . I am Harl Tucker. I am the 5 Area Chief for the California Division nf Aeronautics for . v 6 this area. I did take the oath. 7 The State' s position on feadowlark was 8 thoroughly examined during oil.,- report on Meadowlark which 9 was accomplished through July and August of last year. The 10 City was provided a copy of that report. 11 Ife feel that it is comprchensive, that nothing 12 has changed since the report was submittee'., and, so, as of 13 this evening this is our position on the airport itself, 14 Very briefly, on the conditional exception, 15 I was speci£i.cally asked that if this exception was revoked, 16 would the State rule aga..nst the airport permit. Our answer 17 is no because the presence of the blast fence and the runway 18 that is behind the blast fence not being used has no off-ea 19 on ;he use of Cie airport at the present time, 20 1 will make some recommendations later on. 21 These recommendations are the same ns those contained in 22 our report of August 1n , 1974 for this same blast fence as j 23 was addressed at this Council. At that time we suggested . i 29 that in order to improve the environmental acceptance of 25 this airport that the blast fence be remover] entirely sand 26 -that hundred thirty-one feet of runway behind the blast fence i (713) 417.1321 MACAULEY [k MANNING. sANTA ANA. CALIF. 1714) $51.9400 - I anti south of the cyclone fence along Heil Avenue and another 2 some 8o feet of runway to the sout!i of the existing blast 3 fence prior to the ncces.s taxiway be titilized for takeoff, 4 Due to the growth along Heil Avenue and the 5 fact that the Cyclone fence has been slanted, . , in fact , s 6 prevents more of a sound, dust , noise, or dirt barrier than 7 the existing blast fence does . Nos>r of the complaints, as S we understand it , at the airport have been frnm the apartn.Qnt 9 on the other side of {Varner Avenue . i 10 If this sum, almost NO fret of runway, Isere 11 used for takeoff there would be a ,ignificant increase sn 12 altitude over the houses to the south of the airport which 13 would to some extent reduce- the noise exposure. This can 14' be accomplished strictly by taking down the blast fence. iS There would be no legal action required by the State or 16 City to accomplish this as far as we're concerned. 17 Do you have any questions? 18 MAYOR IVIEDER: Yes , Mr. Tucker. Do you have your I 19 previous report that you can enter into the public hearing A 20 at this time? 21 MR. TU':KFR: You mean the report that we made on 22 Meadowlark? I have a copy of it , yes , and I 'm sure you have i 23 a copy too . 24 MAYOR {VIEDER: Mr. Donfa, would it be important to 25 Ihave that information? 26 MR, 13014FA: Yes , it would. r� �, 12131 417.1327 MACAULEY 411 MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF. (714) 558.9400 • — 1 -1 /1 1 I f you have a copy with you tonirlit , Mr . I+ 2 Tucker, we ..ould appreciate it if you would submit that to • 3 the court reporter here . as the document in evidence in this 4 proceeding. That was the 1976 report , and you also mentioned 5 an August, ' 74 report. Po you have a copy of that? 6 MR. TUCKER: Yes , I do. l have a copy of thac 7 that 1 received From your files that I had for my informations 8 You can have that also . 9 MR. I30NFA : If this depletes your copies we will 10 be glad to furnish you a copy in return after the proceedings 11 NIR. TUCKER: Well , I 'm not concerned about: that. 12 I an, concerned about what I have in my flight bag. 1 do 13 need one cap), of the report. 14 MR. ..OVF_1: Very well. Then we will receive the 15 two reports , the August , 174 report , and also the 1976 report 16 MR. TUCKER: I will get that to you tomorrow at 17 the latest if I do not have an extra copy. 18 NIS. WENTWORTII : I could go up and Produce it right 19 now. 20 MR. I30;4171A: I don't think that is necessary . s 21 MAYOR 1VIEDER: bar . Tucker , it is important: for yoti 22 to slake reference: to it , but for the benefit of the City 23 Council ar.d the public , I think it is important for you and 24 ac otlic':ly as possible to do a summary of your previous 25 report recommendations . 26 NIP.. TUCKER: I will read the conclusions of the w I7171 177.1777 MACAU<.El' It MANNING. 5nN7A ANA. CALIF. f7111 SSO 9400 I report . The first was - - maybe I should go back and lay 2 just a little groundwork . This report on the airport was s 3 done at the request of Assemblyman Burke , and we did quite 4 an in-depth analysis . This then was given back to the 5 Assemblyman and the City for information. M 6 The conclusiL,,s of the rer.ert, number one , 7 was that no reason was found for the State or the City to 8 take action against the airport. 9 The second conclusion was that there would 10 bz ,ao point in establishing noise monitoring ,is there; appears 11 to be no way the small airplanes using; the airport could be y 12 in violation of the State Noise Standards. Ou ;, jisc studies 13 of similar 4irports show that incompatible noi..e levels do 14 not extend beyond the and of the runway. 8. 15 Our third conclusion was : It is questionable 16 whether th-- airport would qualify for a permit under today' s 17 requirements . However, the airport does conform to the 19 "GrandfatheT Clause" permit issued in September, 1949. 19 The fourth is : There is no cause to revolve 20 the existing State airport permit under the provisions of 21 Section 21668 of the California Public Utilities Code 7-2 (Appendix 5) . The conditions under which an Airport Permit i 23 can be revoked are specific and do not exist at Meadowlark. 24 The last conclusion : There is no need for 25 a formal public lie aring about conditions at the airport. 26 All pertinent facts have beta obtained and nearby residents 12131 431•I]?1 MACAULEY f4 MANNING. 4ANTA A!!A. CALIF. I1141 539 9400 s 1 have hail the opportunity to express their concerns to the I 7 California Aeronautics Board, which can aut on appeals to ^ 3 actions taken by the Division. 4 The City has a ropy of that , most of the 5 interested persons have a copy of this report . I will 6 provide another group with a copy of it this evening. 7 MAYOR I1MER: Thant: you. 8 Clc:k Wentworth , did you have your light on? s., 9 MS. IVE14TWORT11 : I already made my statement , that 10 I was willing to copy it tonight. 11 MR. BONFA: May I inquire? 12 Mr. Tucker; these conclusions you just read, 13 what report were you reacting rrcm? I14 I.111. TUCKER: I was reading from the report on 15 Meadowlark that was provided at the -request of Assemblyman `b Burke. � 17 AIR. BONFA: What is the date_? 18 1.1R. TUrait: The date of the investigaticit war 19 in July , 1976; however, the letter of transmittal -- I don't 20 have it with me . I believe it was in the last part of 2.1 August or the first part of SEptember . 22 AIR. BONFA: Of ' 7G? 23 AIR. TUCKER: Yes . 24 AIR. BONFA: And you will provide a copy of this ! 25 to the City? 26 r, MR. TUCKER: Yes . ~ 12111 437.1327 MACAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALK'. (1141 559.940 sca t 16 1 MR. AONFA : Nay I further inquire , if the City 2 Council would revoke Conditional Exception 70-50 , what 3 effect would that have on the airport and what , if anything , 4 woul(i the Division of Aeronautics dn? S AIR. TUCKER: As I previously stated , that particula • r' U condition vould have no effect on the airport as far as the 7 State is concerned. Ile would take no action whatsoever. 8 MR. DCIPIFA: It would reduce the length of the 9 runway 320 feet ; is that r:orrcct? 10 MR. TUCKER: No. It would reduce the runway for 11 landing aircrafts , yes , but that threshold was already � 12 displaced at a distance greater than that , so that runway , f� 13 in effect , is not available. at the present time . ( 14 MAYOR WII.Dr-R: Thank yoil very much, Mr. Tucker. • 15 Before you leave the podium though , while these things are 16 fresh in the minds of the Council . t' ,,y might want some 17 questions. 18 Councilwor►an Gibbs and Councilman Siebert, '.9 then Councilman Coen, ILI COUNCILIM-1AN GIBBS: I£ I understand correctly, 21 even if wt qhould vote in to revoke . the license , it vould 22 still be operable? • 23 MR. TUCKER: Yes , it would. 24 COUNCILWOMAN GIBBS: Tlecaus-,, you have precedence 25 over whatever we might do. 26 MR. 'TUCKER: Yes , that is correct. OM 437,1317 MACAULEY &MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF. (114) 554.9400 . 9•' A 1 C0UNCIl.l'OMAN (;IB?)S : What is the point? ' So I am going; to sit through another hearing . Iw .1 It really se( ms like it-. is an academic point really. Okay. 4 I don't see the point. MffOR IVIEDER: Ile did have this information, as you recall , prior to the 1I. O.M.E. Council 's request for this I p lilic hearing;, and in the interest of 11car ng rum all paints of vier in the community, I thin): we maybe wanted c to rut this to rest once and for all. 1C COUNCILWOMAN GIBBS : We did that three tim-i's ago. 11 MWOR WIE—R: I %vasn' t on three time 's ago. 12 Councilman Siebert? 1:3 Thank you, Mrs . Gibbs . 11 COLENCIL?4AN SIEBERT: Air. Tucker, if you could go 15 over the question of if the issue use eras revoked and the if landing , the runway, was shortened, ycu stated it wouldn' t - 1"1 he State wouldn ' t take official action. Then you made a 10 statement about a displaced area. I didn' t understand that. 1� MR. TUCYER: I think that a little explanation is i 20 in order. For an airport such ns Meadowlark the Federal and Zs the State guidelines require an unobstru:-ted twenty-to-one f 22. approach slope for -Anding; aircraft an the: run%�Oay. Using 23 1 the very end of the runway at Meadowlark , either at the 2= blast fence or at the very end, behind the blast fence , due 75 to the power lines on Heil Avcnuc , I believe it is , that 26 approach is not there . Ah ia�n ui u:r MAcnuL.EY Cc MANNING. tAr4t►, ANA. CALL', 17111 SS! viO3 1 A very comnk�n tool that is used in aeronautic 2 circles is to, in effect , displace the runway , the landing 3 threshold , down the rumqay to a point where it does clear q the obstruction. This is what has happened at Meadowlark, 5 the threshold has been displaced and it has been displaced g some please don 't tie me to a figure, but it 's in the 7 -vicinity of 500 i'cet or so. I do know that there' s a hundred 8 thirty-one feet between the fence line and the blast !`cuce. 9 There is another two to three hundred feet 10 from the blast fence to the existing -iisplaced threshold. 11 That runway is not available for landing aircraft because the - ,on 12 end of the runway has been, in fact , moved down the runway 13 that far to provide this obstruction fence and the same thing 14 is true on the other end. 15 Now , by doing that , physically taking that 18 runway ont , it wouldn' t help the landing aircraft, but it 17 would certainly penalize aircraft taking off and this would 18 possibly increase the noise generation on the other end of 19 the runway because the longer the runway available, the longer 20 the takeoff, the higher would be the aircraft at the other 21 end of the runway. 22 Does that answer your question? 23 COUNCILMAN 5THBCRi: Yes . Thank you. 24 MAYOR Iff HER: Councilman Coon? 25 COUNCIL MN COON : My question is basically the �I 26 same, but to crake sure I understand it : You are recommending A1ACAtJLEY C4 MANNING. sANTA An►.CALIF. 171A1 SSE,94OC w� I I that the blast fence be removed to Five at least an additional 2 131 feet and conceivably more t,xkeoff runway? 3 MR. TUCKER: Yes , sir. 4 C017"1CILMAK COEN : And you are , I assume , also 5 recommending we retain, you know, if possible , the existing 6 320 feet ►which was as a result of the granting of the 7 conditional exception? I' 8 MTt. TUCKER: Absolutely. Ile are trying to negate 1W 9 some of the noise on the other end of the runway. It will 10 have no erfect whatsoever on landing aircraft if you take j 11 this action. It certainly would penalize the diparting 12 aircraft and it could conceivably increase the noise gener- I i3 ation on the other end of the runway. 14 1-WAOR WILDER: flow about the hazard? lS MR. TUCKER: Hazard? The existing blast fence is 16 below the twenty-to-one approach level and so there ir, no 17 hazard associated with it. 10 Now , people landing on runway 0 in the 10 opposite direction, well , sure, having that fence across i 20 the runway -- it' ll kind of spoil, your entire day. 21 It's so tar down the runway and the establishe 22 cse of the airport , really, I don' t believe hazards are the :�stion here. I think it is environmental noise is the 24 problen here now. 25 MAYOR IYIEDE:R: I guess we will hear otter points ,+ 26 of view on that. 17171 411.1327 MACAULEY lk MANNING. SANTA A1.A. CAL1r. 17141 SO Y+co -2 1 Councilnan Bartlett? 2 COUNCILMAN BARTLETT : I would like to talk to w 3 M-. Tucker on this . On. thiF conditional exception, if we q did revoke it , it would have no effect on the airport , you 5 say? g MR. TUCKER: I have to say it would have no effect 7 on the State 's involvement.. 8 COUNCILMAN BARTLETT: Yes , the State involvement 9 on the closing of the airport , and about the only thing 10 we 've got to talk about is the public nuisance then tonight w 11 if that 's the case, and I 'm just wondering, sitting here 12 war lering what action , t-:hat is your action if that would 13 have no effect on the airport as far as you people anti I 14 imagine the State has a certain input on the closing of an I 15 airport. 16 MR. TUCKER: I can only address the noise , the 17 fence , the noise aspects. As far as the public nuisance Y 18 goes, I would be pleased to try to address that. 19 Our positinn, and as T mentioned, this is ' i 20 covered in our report itself which states that there is no 21 grounds for the State to take action on the airport. MAYOR 111EDER: Thank you very much, Mr. Tucker. 0 23 Mr. Bob Bresnahan -- am I pronouncing that 2"9 correctly? -- of the Orange County Aviation Department. 25 Would you s;ate your *tame, address , and whether you 26 administered the oath? • 12111 AN•172) 161ACAULEY Ac MANNING. SANTA ANA, CALIF. 1)IU SS! 9no 1 MR. BRESNAHAN: Rohert Bresnahan , P1-92 Oriole 2 Avenue, Fountain Valley, and I (lid not take the oath. I ^ 3 had no intentions of testifying. I am only here to answer I q any questions tho City Council may have in regard to the I 5 County involvement with Meadowlark. g MYOR WIEDCP.: ?,fr . City Attorney? 7 MR. BONFA: Do you have any objectio;: to taking 8 the oath? g MR. BRESNAHAN: I was subpoenaed twice today. I i 10 have no objections. I 11 (Mr. Bresnahan was duly j(hrinistered the 12 oath.) 13 '•fAYOR IVIEDER : All right. Do you want to stand ld and and wait for us to ask you questions? 15 MR. BRESNARAN : Yes. May I ask one question? 16 Am I to understand that the meeting tonight is whether to 17 withdraw the pei -nit for the a;rport based on the conditions 18 that were issued :n 1970 of which there is only one that has 19 yet to be fulfilled , obstruction lights on trees o.n Neil 20 Avenue; is that correct? 21 MAYOR MEDCR: The matter before us at this time 22 is to determine whether the conditional exception that was � 3 granted the airport is being complied with, and that is the 29 only jurisdi-rtion really that the City has as a regulatory 25 agency is over the conditional exception. As far as qualifyi g 26 for a license as an airport , that is not within our jurisdict on rm (913)4171327 MACAULEY &MANNING 3411TA ANA, CALK. 538 VJCO i _____2 1 and so the only other thin; that we can address ourselves to • 2 then is the - - if we would revoke the conditional exception 3 we would have no jurisdiction to do anything about the 4 airport unless vie determined it was a public nuisance . * 5 Am I right, Mr. Bonfa? 6 MR. BONFA : Yes , b:rt if I may add to that to 7 clarify our present thinking hers, the airport was in S existence under County permit prior to the annexation of 9 that territory by the City of Huntington Beach. Therefore , 10 the scope of the permit issued by the County I think is of • 11 interest to us because the use of the airport from and after 12 time of annexation would have to have been limited in scop,.; 13 to the scope of the permit -issued by the County. Therefore, i 14 I think it is a fair area of inquiry. 15 V11. BRBSNAW: My only concern, Mr. Bonfa, was 16 that if the end result of the hearing on the conditional 17 use permit or the local approval to operate the airport 18 were to be withdrawn, it would seein to me that that action 19 would be a project on behalf of the r'ry in regard to the 20 California Environmental Quality Standards and that there 21 would be an environmental impact of those 120 airplanes ' 22 that would not be able to fly out of Meadowlark and would 23 either have to go to Orange County Airport or Long Beacli. 24 Do you agree with that position? 25 MR. BONFA: Well, I don't really have sufficient 26 date or information to permit me 'to disagree with it and, so, 11131 431-1121 MACAULEY A MANNING. SANTA MIA. CALIF. 111A1 559VJ00 rr n I I think you should be permitted to pursue your line of 2 discussign. • ^ 3 MR. BRESNAHAN: I have no other points . I will 4 answer any questions . I 5 MAYOR WIEDER : All rig`li. Than! you, Mr. r 6 Dresnah-in. 7 Flembers of the Council , do you have any r ' 8 :iupstions that you would like to ask? i _ 9 All right. Thank you very much. 10 MR. BONFA: Madam Mayor, let me a.k, are you i � i 11 familiar with the terms and conditions attached to the 12 Orange County Perm" t? 13 MR. 3RESNAIIAN: I can't say that I am, no. l i 14 MR. BONFA: Would it he possible -- what department i 15 are you with? 16 MR. BRESNAHAN: Aviation, airport. ' 17 y MR. BONFA: Would it be possible for you to i 16 examine this matter to see chat the County's permit was 19 and what the scope of it was at the time that the airport 20 came to the City and to give that information to my office? 21 MR. BRESNAHAN: Yes . 22 MR. BONFA: All right. I will appreciate it if 23 you would do that. Thank you. 24 DfAYOR WIF.DER: And, ?.fr. Bonfa , will you make that 25 information available to the City Council as Boor as you have 26 received it? MACAULEY ON MANNING. SAWA AIIA. CALIF. 17141 551 9400 • 1 MR. BONFA: Yes . i 2 MAYOR WILMER: Thank you very much. 3 Now tiro will go into the debate portion. 4 Mr. Tom Livengood representing the V S Council, would you sign in, please , your name , and tell us 6 Viether you have taken the oath. 7 MR. LIVENGOOD: fly name is Tom Livengood. I an d representing the 1f.0.H.E. Council , and, yes , I did take the 9 oath. 10 MAYOR VIEDER: Your address , please. 11 MR. LI E'1G00D: 5461 Meadowlark Drive. 12 MAYOR WHOM You know what we might do to save 13 time , for those people who - are going to testify, pass that 14 sign-in paper and you won' t have to take time to sign your 15 name. 16 MR. LIVENGOOD: Again I would like to state that Y 17 represent il.O.M.E. Council and a group of residents around . 18 Meadowlark Airport.. My presentation will cover facts and 19 some pertinent questions concerning the airport that not 20 only affect the nurthern section of our city, but affect 21 the entire City as well and shots our City can control 22 operation of the ai••port and address the question: Is 23 R Meadowlark Airport a public nuisance? 24 I would like to quote a Court decision, 25 Anderson versus Souza. "An airport is rit a nuisance, per se , but it may become a nuisance either because of 12101 431•1121 MACAULEY 1k MANNING. SANTA ANA.CALIV. 11141 sse 9400 104 1 unsuitable location or improper operation or hc*h. The 2 licensing and regulation of airports by the State Aeronautics • ~ 3 Commission foes not confer right to ..;o operate an airport 4 as to constitute a private nuisance to surrounding property 5 owners , " unquote. 6 Also I would like to quote Planning Adninistra ion 7 r9837. 2. "Any building or structure set up , erected, built, 6 moved or maintained and/or any use of property contrary to 9 the provisions of this article and/or any conditions attached 10 to the granting of any Conditional Exception pursuant thereto • 11 shall be and the same is hereby declarcu to be unlawful and 12 a public nuisance. Failure to abide by and faithfully comply 13 with any and all conditons .that may be attached to the A 14 granting of any Conditional Exception pursuant to the 15 provisions of this article shall constitute grounds for 16- the revocation of said Conditional Exception by the City 17 Council . All remedies provided for herein shall be cumulstiv 18 and not exclusive. (1093) ." 19 59711 , "Extending of use of lot . A non- 0 20 conforming use which is not housed in a building; or structure 21 that occupies a lot or portion thereof shall not be enlarged 22 or extended to any other portion of the lot or any other 23 lot not actu::l) y so occupied at the time such use became 24 non-conforming as a result of the adoption of Ordinance Numbe 25 495 .(1 26 To me this is the portion that has been used (717) 437.1327 MACAULEY d MANNING. OAPaA An A. CALIF. (711) 535.0403 i 26 1 to determine if I'leadoulark Airport is considered a nuisance I 2 or not so we wish to prop ,.1 that Meadowlark Airport has gone 3 Nay beyond being a public nuisance . It has been in constant q violation of both County, and City regulations from the day 5 it was given its County non-conforming use permit Number 305. a 6 We feel safe in stating that it has never had a completely 7 legal day since its inception. Meadowlark is only a private g business , and as :such should be subject to City regulations r 9 in the same manner as other City businesses are. 10 The airport was here first. This statement is 11 not entirely true. Idany homes were in the area prior to 1946 . I 12 The airport started out in a controversial area where there 13 were many citizens' complaints. At the tfine the planes 14 were ju,,t larding is a bean field. A permit then was 15 requested, and we have some old timers in the area who 16 could not make it tonight who would be available to talk { .r 17 to the Council concerning this. 16 Let's visually look at the 19,16 letter and i 19 plot plan outlining the proposal for the area, County Permit 20 30S and CAA, now FAA, recommendations. The letter you have 21 on the board there , which is almost impossible to read I 22 am sure, is just some of the highlights and to cut down on j r 23 the amount ' of time. The letter states -- and it is quite 24 interesting. If you would like to , you can read the entire 25 letter. . This is what the original permit was granted under. 26 "Buildings will be neat and presentable , never r (2131 431 1327 MACAULEY &FANNING.SAI4TA AMA. CALIF. 0141 553 9400 s. e 1 I to he in a junkyard condition." This is written in the I 2 letter. "No drinking to be allowed," and there would be a 3 control tower. 4 This is the original plot plan and as you can I 5 see it says 2600 feet of runstay. I think you will find it 4! 6 interesting the way the airport runs. Wintersberg Avenue, 7 N1iich now is Warner Avenue (indicating) and Graham Road 8 where it goes over Meadowlark Golf Course (indicating) . 9 And also I have - • I 'm not very good at this , 10 this is the first time I have used these funny things. 11 COUNCILWOMAN GIBBS: Tom, excuse me. That says 12 Long Beach Public Golf Course. j 13 MR. LIVENGOOD: Yes, it was called that at that 14 time . The airport was called the Long Bench East Airport in i � 15 1946 . It really serviced the City of. Sunset Beach. That 16 was the Chamber of Commerce that backed the airport at that 17 time for its inception. :y 18 So this is the: original permit, and I don't 19 want to go through all of this . This its the records that � 20 Don Bonfa requested and you're welcome to these . I have all 21 these here. I27 Note thes05 Permit , and I think this is O 23 basic on the public nuisance . It states, "Note : Block 4 has 24 hones ,day nursery. Blocks 3 , 4 , and 5 has a shopping center. ' 25 Let me short you on this . Block 4 was supposed to be part of 26 the airport and presently -- now we et an expert. Thank you I � P Y g P (:1]) 411 1321 MACAULEY & MANNING.SANTA ANA. CALIF. 0141 551 9400 i I I i 1 Block 4 wan to be part of the airport tinder 2 this permit and now this land has been released by someone 3 and is now being used as. homes and a day nursery. Blocks 4 3, 4 , and 5 is a shopping center at Warner and Bolss Chica. 5 In the original permit this was listed as part of the airport 6 This is the original document that states 7 t;_e `locks that belong to the airport. Today them are some 8 blocks missing. The question is: there are they? 9 To recap - - I apologize for the - - 10 MR. BONFA: For the purpose of a transcript , could 11 you tell, us what blocks were supposed to be included and are 12 missing as you say? 13 MR. LIVENGOOD: Block 4 -- let's see. It is listed 14 there and I will turn to the written sheet on it. 13 Block 4 -- Blocks 3 , 4 , and S. I don' t have 16 the exact number on that. �r 17 MR. BONFA: Are those the ones -that are missing? � 18 MR. LIVCNCOOD: Yes. 19 MR. BONFA: All right. Wfould you provide all of 20 these documents then to the reporter -- 21 AIR. LIVENGOOD: Yes. 22 MR. BONFA: -- during o: after this hearing? 23 MhYOR PJIEDER: Excuse me. Is !here a t1r. Ward in 24 the audience? We don' t have' a first name. I f there is a 25 Mr. Ward we have an emergency call. Would g y you come down here .. 26 and see the City Clerk , plea-e? " (7171 477 1377 MAGAUL t:Y A MANNING. SANT^ AtO^.CALIF. (7111 Sse 9400 I • 29 1 Please continue. 2 MR. LIVPNGOOA : I 'm sorry about the visual. As I air 3 said, I am not very good at this . Lot me give you n recap 4 an it . 3 Khen the City annexed Property they took over i 6 responsibility of enforcing non-conforming use per,Tit 305. 7 The airport is in violation of several roints of the 305. 0 it specified 17 lots the airport can operate g on. The question is raised: Why doesn ' t the airport own 10 Lots 3 and 4 of Block 5 and 1 , 2, 3, 4 of Block 4 originally • 11 required on the permit? 12 If the land wasn't owned by the airport fraud 13 was used to obtain the permit. If owned by the airport I 14 property cwner, why wasn' t the land kept as part of the 15 airport as required by the permit for a buffer zone? 16 The request for the permit stated that it 17 would be a first class CAA , now FAA , field with a tower. 18 Also the request states 100 tie-downs. The architect 's 19 plans submitted stated a 2 ,600-foot runway. The runway I 20 has never come close to that length. Presently, the figure 21 I have is 2,070 feet, ;I Z2 The airport will never be a junkyard as ' .� 2:3 stated by letter in 1046. Anyone that has been by the 24 airport recently can tell at a glance that this statement 25 has not. been upheld. Meadowlark Airnort has fast become one of the biggest eyesores in the City. I213) 4311321 MACAULEY &MANNING. SANTA AMA. CAur. 17141 SS/ 9403 4 30 I Three re(luests for expansion were denic.? by 2 t}le County before all the housing tracts and shopping; center 3 were ever built . The County knew the limitations of Meadow] ark. 4 Fact , Conditional Execution 70-50 has never 5 been fully complied with in the over sir sears it hzs beer. i 6 in existence as reported by City staff. It has cost hundreds 7 of dollars for lcgz.1 notices , etcetera. Items not complied 8 with were designed for safety of pilots arLd the safei:y of I .� 9 re:,idents . 10 Fact „ businesses are being run on R-1 property 11 without proper authorization, licenses or building permits 12 a!, reported by City staff. 13 Note, the airport owner refuses to respond 14 to notifications of violations as reported by City staff. i 15 Three items : A, currently ther!: is a horse 16 stable , no permit , on R-1 land. A new fence is installed. i 17 My question is : Is there a permit? Is this fence proper 16 for R•-1 land? 19 Item three , airplane sales on airport property, 20 denied for airport use , County Number 805 , Block 5 , Lot 2. 1 21 No City business license to my knowledge, no permit. 22 Again I)roperty owner did not respond to 23 notices within specified time as required by ordinances . j 24 Fart , our police department his flatly stated 25 that they cannot enforce the curfew night flying law. This 26 is outlined in CE70-50 for police statements. Statements are 17131 437 13V MACAUI_EY tt MANNING. GANTA AIIA• CALIF. (114) 551 9400 1 also made: Impossible for local authority to control pilots. See various reports. s 3 Fact, our City Attorney's Office in IL litter 4 from Willis Movis , Assistant City Administrator, compared 5 Meadowlark, an uncontrolled field, to two or three airports 6 in the area, une being Capistrano. 7 1 Let me read you a recent news article from 8 the Daily Pilot_. 9 "Noise complaint. 5JC law controls airport 1Q activity. 11 "San Juan Capistrano City Councilmen have 12 adopted an ordinance setting landing and departure patterns 13 and hours for the Capistrano airport runway. 14 "Complaints from residents of new housing i + 15 tracts near the airport prompted the City to develop the 16 ordinance. It is designed to reduce :he nuisance of low- ; j 17 flying aircraft and planes which du not follow established ` � 18 flight patterns , according to John O'Sullivan, City Director 19 of Administrative Services . 20 "Pilots of planes not based at Capistrano 21 Airport are required to register with tha City Manager up011 22 landing in San Juan. Transient Pilots also will be required 23 to pay a landing permit fee , valid for 24 hours. The fee I 24 has not been set as yet. 25 "No planes can land or take off before darn 26 or 7:00 a.m. ," :.alled the curfew law, "whichever is later, or I7171 f77.1771 MACAULEY &MANNING. dANTA ANA.CALIF. I71+; 558 9400 1 i n 1 after dark or 5: 00 p.m. , whichever is earlier. 2 "Exceptions will be made in cases of emergency i 3 or by permission of the .City Manager. 4 "Information on the ordinance has been sent 5 to more than 1 ,000 pilots in the area, according to a 6 spokesman for the privately owned airport. About 60 planes 7 are based at the San Juan facility." 8 My question is : Why can't we do the same i 9 here? 10 MR. BONFA: !►fay I ask a question on that one? ( * 11 The runway in San Juan Capistrano is owned by the City; is 12 that correct? 13 MR. LIVENGOOD: That is correct. It has nothing II14 to do with flight patterns , etcetera. The airways -- and i 15 this can be proven -- can be controlled by the City. 15 MR. BUNFA: But my question is : The runway there 17 is owned by the City of San Juan? I 15 MR. LIVENGOOD: No, it is leased. They accept 19 the responsibility of it. 20 MR. BOYFA: Leased by the private owner to the ( 21 City and is regulated by the City? 22 1M. LIVENG00D: The understanding I have, and you j 23 can check it, is that it was a gift that was given to them. 24 Thus, you know, so the operator can continue to operate and 25 there Is control over the airport . 26 Fact, Court injunction 123328 has been appeale 12131 43r.1227 MACAULEY 6 MANNING. BANTA ANA. CALIF. 17141 551.0�00 1 twice , limiting tic-downs to 67 planes . There is now an 2 estimated nearly 200 tie-downs now on the field. I.hy isn' t 3 this being enforced? Granted, it 's a civil matter, but there 4 must be some exceptions that can be enacted by the City as 5 was 70-00 to control use of the land so the intent of this 6 injunction can be enforced, j ? Fact , quote from the City Attorney's Office 8 concerning Meadowlark Airport; Increased use may create 9 problems giving a cause of action under a iuisance theory 10 for damage and/or injunction. This would be limited ter 11 adjacent property owners. Los Angeles International Airport 12 cases. Cal Trans on March 17 , 1976, guestimated 100,000 13 annual operations , and also stated this is possibly five 14 times the operations in early 19501s . That' s a Jurp from I IIli 15 20,000 to 100 ,000. Great ammunition for a nuisance theory r 16 suit . i 17 Question, all the building activity , changes , 18 at the airport , has an E.I . R. ever been filed? It is my i 19 understanding it should have been. By law doesn' t an E.I. R. , i 20 have to be filed? Ile have lists back to 1970 of the building 21 that have been built and after the E. I.R. Bill went into 'I 22 effect, etcetera, etcetera. t 23 Fact , Fountain Valley has passed a noise a 24 abatement law. Why can't Huntington Reach? 25 Fact , a home recently purchased on Arlington r� 26 Drive had a one-half percent mortgage insurance charge added. � .V, i (213) 431.1321 MACAULEY 8i MANNING. SANTA ANA.CALM 11111 558 LIDO r 34 n 1 The lending company gave the reason for the charge, Meadowlar 2 Airport. The question: Isthts a trend? ^ 3 The area .arnund the airport has created a 4 wall around the airport leaving no buffer zone for pilots 5 to safely land in case of power failure. Many accidents ^ 5 have been reported and fatalities with many accidents not 7 being reported since 1966. Wo have many witnesses and many 8 photos . Without the buffer zone and increased flights, 9 increased activity of flight schools , at what rate will f 10 fatalities increase? I • 11 A now three-story office complex directly in � ^ 12 front of take-off is already framed. New apartments are 13 designed, a two-story Huntington Beach Racket Club already I4 on the Meadowlark property. New housing tracks are cn the i 15 drawing board for the area. 16 The Council has the power and responsibility 17 to take the following action to protect City residents . and I ^ � pilots : Pull non-conforming use 305 for non-compliance and 19 revoke CS 70-50 for non-compliance if they rule the airport i 20 as a public nuisance. Meadowlark has already had 30 years � 21 to comply. 22 If 305 requirements are met and CE 70-50 , 23 now regulations such as San Juan Capistrano Airport, I � 24 Fountain Valley noise abatement need to be iniatod. A 25 new conditional exception including points of Court 26 Injunction 123328 , plus any conditions recommended by j i 17171 W-1777 MACAULEY&MANNING.SANTA ANA, CALIF. 17141 356.9400 ■M • 35 n 1 proper authorities , need to by implemented. 2 If requirements are not met , the Council r' 3 by law has responsibility of declaring the airport a public 4 nuisance as outlined in WS.9837. 2 . , 5 The serious question the Council shuuld n 6 consider tonight is : If a tragic accident occurs, has our 7 City done everything in its power to safeguard the lives 8 of its citizens and the pilots? 9 Thank you. 10 MAYOR WIEDER: Thank you, Mr. Livengood. Stay I at the microphone, please. 12 Are there any questions the Council would 13 like to ask? 14 Seeing none, Mr. Livengood, have you discussed 15 some of the points you raised such as the alleged violations 16 of the condtional exception and the City Noise Ordinance , 17 etcetera; have you discussed this with staff? 16 MR. LIVENGOOD: At this point, no, I have not. 19 MAYOR WIEDER: All right. 20 MR. LIVENGOOD: My understanding was that we would 21 just present the facts and that it would be reviewed in 30 22 days . • 23 MAYOR WIEDER: Ail right. 24 Also , Mr. Donfa, in the history of the 25 Meadowlard Airport in our City, was the State not the 26 regulatory agency all these years? I.J �I i - (713) 171.1341 MACAULEY 0.MANNING. •ANTA ANA.CALIF. (1: 1 151 900 • Of 36 1 MR. HONFA: Well , the operation of the airport, 2 yes , that is correct. 3 MAYOR WIEDER: . All right. Could the City Couns-rl 4 have before our next meeting some answers to some questions 5 that have been raised and address themselves to that as well r' 6 as query as to the responsibility of the State Department 7 of Aeronautics as to theLr role in these years. $ flow far back did you go, 1946? 9 MR. LIVENGOOD: 1946. I 10 MR. HONFA: Yes . I would ask that Mr. Livengood • 11 to present to us copies of all the materials that he has 12 referred to tonight and we can send copies of this material 13 to the Division of Aeronautics of the State, asking them to 14 review the material and give us an answer. 15 There was one question. I would like to ask and 1 16 that is: Who was in charge of the airport because on I 17 January 6th, 1949 , I have a letter from the District Airport a• 18 Engineer and Civil Aeronautics Administration. I 'm not sure 19 vhnt area it covered. 20 One thing that I did mention was that the 21 letter does point out that they recommend that the landing 22 strip be 500 to 600 feet back from Veil Avenue. The letter 23 is dated 1949. 24 If lair. Tucker is still in the audience at 25 the conclusion of all this testimony you might want to ask 26 him to testify again at which time we could ask him if he M (2131 431.117! MACAULEY A MANNING,MANTA ANA.CALIF. 1111) 55I•�100 vow i I is aware of this material and whether or not he has considered 2 it and, if not , whether he could do that within the next 30 3 days . 4 MAYOR WIEDER: Mr . Tucker, are you still with us? 5 MR. TUCKER: Yes , I am listening and writing notes 6 MAYOR WIEDER: I hope you will be able to stay 7 through our public hearing. 8 MR. TUCKER: I will. T 9 MAYOR WIEDER: Thank you very much. i 10 Thank you very much, Mr. Livengood, From here i 11 on in do I understand we will have individual speakers? 12 MR. MUNRO: I am representing about four people. j 13 MAYOR WIEDER: All right. Twelve minutes. 14 MR. MUNRO: I am representing two people who are 15 here in the audience tonight. 16 MAYOR WIEDER: All right. We want to hear everybod . 17 Would you please limit your presentation as near to three 18 minutes as possible. Before you begin, Councilwoman Gibbs? 19 COUNCILWOMAN GIBBS: I just wanted to comment that 20 I learned a great deal. There was some new information here 21 tonight. Thank you. 22 MAYOR WIEDER: All right. Would you please announc 23 your flame and your address , whether you have taken the oath. 24 MR. MUNRO: My name is Larry Munro. I have taken Z5 the oath. I am a resident of Huntington Beach, 6362 Newbury. -71 26 I am also a property owner of a piece of property directly 1 ; A 1 ti 12131 417.1327 MACAULEY 6 MANNING, SANTA ANA.CALIF. (7141 Sig 9400 i I • .� 38 1 adjacent to the airport on the western boundary , R- 1 house. 2 I am also a Navy pilot and also make my living flying as a , ~ 3 commercial pilot with one of the major airlines . 4 1 do have to address fir. Tucker's report on 5 Meadowlark Airport. I have a copy in front of me. This is 6 the report dated July 28 , 1976. 7 I did submit a three-page letter at that 8 hearing, but I find very little, if any, included in this 9 report of my observations or my recommendations or my feeling 10 about the airport. 11 On their conclusions they conclude that there 12 is no way that small aircraft have the power to violate the j 13 State Noise Standards. I don't know what the State Noise 14 Standards are , but I know from personal experience from 15 being around aircraft most of my life, my adult life, that 16 there are and have been twin-engine aircraft operated out 17 of Meadowlark and there is also experimental aircraft rt 18 operated out of Meadowlark which are extremely noisy. Very 19 seldom, but these are extremely noisy, not in keeping with 20 the normal type of aircraft which does use it. 21 They also stated that it is questionable if 22 the; would come under today's requirements , but because of 23 the grandfather clause. They said that there was no need 24 for a formal public: nearing. All pertinent facts have been 25 obtained from nearby residents . That is false. 26 Two of the residents that live by there today l7171 �7T•1�21 MAGAULEY & MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF. I>11l 558.9400 I I I 39 1 are in the audience and they have no knowledge of this 2 report or that it was even taken at these hearings . So the 3 residents there , unloss .they were actively in support or 4 against this , did not have a chance to speak at that. 5 He states that the runway was 29070 feet long 6 including that extension. Most of his that I understood I 7 when he was talking about it would be landing to the south 9 in a normal procedure , not during Santa Ana kind of condition 9 in which they would be approaching right over the new Racket 10 Club which is being lowered because of a State or FAA survey. 11 They are having to redesign that building and lower it , and Am r, 12 I understand that there is a SOn-foot displaced threshold 13 which gives you 1500 feet . . You take 300 feet off the other 14 end and you have a 1200-foot runway to land on in Santa Ana 15 conditions. 16 They said that the desired airport standards 17 is not met , but , again, it is under the grandfather clause. �� 1$ There is considerable deferred maintenance, } 19 we have heard testimony on that. 20 Night flying. When I brought my property I 21 was told that there was no night flying. I was also told I ' 22 that it was 9-1 property. Since then► they have initiated 23 night flying. I complained. I complained to Mr. Turner, 24 the former operator. I complained to Mr. Nerio. I complains 25 to the police department. There has been no -- I mean no 26 response to my complaints . l 1213) 4)7.13)7 MACAULEY Dt MANNING.SANTA ANA.CALIF. 17U) Sil•N00 I � 4 i i • I i ao 1 I am speaking of aircraft landing at 10:00 , 2 11:00 , 12 :00. The other residents have heard planes through +r 3 the night . I don't consider that compatible with residentiu 4 housing. 5 There is also even a lot of night touching. 6 I have seen aircraft landing without landing lights which 7 1 would never want to attempt in that short of a runway. 8 It can be done. Usually they have to make a low path over rc 9 the field with the landing lights to determine whether or 10 not there are ,any obstructions on the runway. + 11 The police department is concerned about 12 aircraft coming in there in the evening, late evening hours, 13 with questionable , as I understand, cargo because there has jo 14 been some evidence and they are trying to obtain -- my point i 15 is that there is no control over the .airp ort. I have 16 personally observed during fog where I could just see the A 17 top of the trees on the east side of the field which would n 18 be a hundred, at the most 200 feet, aircraft attempting to 19 make an approach, trying time and time again through the 20 fog, trying to find the field. On his fifth attempt he 21 made it. 22 I have personally observed aircraft making 23 simultaneous approaches from different directions under light r 24 wind conditions. It sounds funny, but it is not, believe me. 25 Making my living flying, this is not funny. (I( 26 MAYOR WIEDER: Would you sum up, sir? t ~ 12131 g1.1i27 MAGAULEY 01 MANN1}10• SANTA ANl1.CALIF. 17141 558.0400 41 1 MR. MUNRO: In summution I also would like to state 2 that there's a lot of tax dollars lost. My preperty, my e� :! little piece of property,, 6,000 square feet, has an appraised) 4 value by the County Assessor of $16 ,000. Mr. Norio' s propert 5 is appraised under the current County Tax Records at $22,000 6 per acre which as I understand -- fir. Coen could probably 7 bitck me up , would be quite low for this type of property in 6 this area. 9 MAYOR WILDER: You don't have to pay us much taxes. 10 MR. MUNRO: I have to pay more . lie has to pay less 11 MAYOR WIEDER: All right. i 12 MR. MUNRO: These are facts. These are facts , but 13 the primary fact that I want to present is that there is no i + 14 control. Mr. Norio or whoever operates the airport as 15 Mr. Turner did has no control over the pilots which they 16 have stated to me, in the day or night. 17 They say they cannot stop aircraft from i 18 landing at night, they cannot stop aircraft ;from making low 19 passes , they cannot control the pattern of the aircraft in 20 the 'vicinity. They have nu control over them as I have been 21 told. ZZ I have seen an uncontrolled situation which I 23 consider hazardous . 24 MAYOR WIEDER: Thank you very much, Fir. Munro. 25 flow many speakers do we have? 26 MR. NOVAK. A total of seven. r>r (2171 I31•I311 MACAUL.EY 8t MANNING. SANTA AN A. CAllr. $S/ 9J00 fi 1 Al MAYOR WIEDER: Who is addressing the City Council 2 besides you? • 3 MR. NOVAK: Four on the list. 4 MAYOR WIEDER: Thank you very much. MR. NOVAK: mayor, I have a problem. I have a 6 three-minute speech. Somebody entered a report which I think 7 is fictitious and I would like an extra few minutes to enter 8 a report which says the report is fictitious . May I have 9 that extra minute? 10 MAYOR WIEDER: State your name. • 11 MR. NOVAK: I have taken the oath. I live at 12 17171 Bolsa Chica at the Cambridge Apartments , Apartment 123. 13 My question •is the Meadowlark liability. 14 How does the pilots benefit Huntington Beach? la Does their spouse join them and do they dine out in our fair 16 city as do the active Pilot's Association? Does the 17 Association benefit the City by their visit? What can our n 18 pilots do? Do they visit ,other airports? No. Do they 19 have an active purpose for their flights that benefit the ! 20 City and themselves or do they fly around, fly around, get 21 bored, flying low, became noisy and becoming a large nuisance. 22 Mr. John Long who is currently in the hospital r+ 23 who represents 400 people at the Cambridge and Monticello has 24 outlined in his letter a continuous problem, lack of action, 25 broken Promises , and Lt. Morrison trying and giving up. 26 lie does state two interesting things. He does • (213)431.1331 MACAULEY Ot MANNING,MANTA ANA, CiAUr. 11111 331•9400 l 1 state Mr. E.J. McKenney , Chief of the Division of Aeronautics , 2 while visiting the Cambridge Apartments noted five flights i 3 and stated three were in violation. Mr. E.J. McKenney did 4 not see fit to do the job he is paid to do and do something 5 about the violators. Note , rand.am selection, three violators 6 out of five flights. 7 Some time ago we noted the planes were flying 8 extremely low over the south end of the Cambridge Apartments. .� 9 Mr. Long called Art Nerio and asked why. fir. Nerio said, 10 "There is a 60-foot boom in front of the new three-story ` 11 executive building. We cannot clear the boom." I think 12 this tells us something. 13 We asked Alicia Wentworth on August the 7th �I 14 in our :-sport to her, Item 7 -- pilot liability. Are all IS pilots using Meadowlark Airport fully covered by proper 16 insurance? Due to the high-risk factor in the crash hazard 17 zone is there a way to protect the City, residents , pilots `� 10 and businessmen? 19 The aircraft expert hired by the Ci•'y to 20 study the aircraft and airport when the CE 70-SO was being 21 drawn up discovered certain facts. rZ Let me put W S map on the wall. Unfortunately, a Z3 my little map is drawn in pencil and can' t be projected, but 24 it will be given to Mr. Bonfa. It was taken from the Planning 25 Department map today. 26 Now, this export noted -• let me get back and t'S 1213)/21.1327 MACAULC.Y 0.MANNING,MANTA ANA. CALIF, 1714) SSI.9400 r - - - q ry 1 start here. 2 When the CE 70- 50 was being drawn up he ON 3 discovered certain facts. Note it is 1700 feet, 1700 feet 4 from the center of the 500- foot -- rock from Roosevelt Road, 5 from that point to the boom of the new building. 6 MAYOR WIEDER: You have one. minutie . 7 MR. NOVAK: Yes. Right here: (indicating) . I am 9 taking the map and right here (indicating) we have the -- �' g where they take off to the center of the boom. We also show 10 the line going to the Cambridge Apartments and we estimate 11 the extended distance. 12 Let we parry on. We are going back to this 13 man's report. We have a Table 2 here and the table is 14 entitled Altitude at the End of the Runway. He made one 15 mistake, but let's go on. 16 It is done by aircraft, and this gives data, 17 good for cool days , not for hot days. No load except for 18 pilot. 19 The Cessna 150 will be 70 feet above the 20 ground at the boom or 1700 feet. It would clear the boom. 21 A Cessna 172 will be crashing into the boom at a point six 22 feet below the top of the boom. An Apache one-engine will 23 take down the light poles and hit the boom eight feet above r 24 the ground. 25 Now, Superior Court has a record via copy of r, 26 CH 70-50 that the City of Huntington Beach has a seven-year diI ' 1717) 437.1327 MACAULeY a MA"NING. VANTA ANA. CALM 1714 1 559,9400 • a 1 history of nuisance. 2 Please listen carefully now. A plane takes 3 off from the Meadowlark.Airport and crashes into the new 4 three-story building. His tenants move out and new tenants 5 won' t move in and the owner sues the City of Huntington Beach 6 for 15 million dollars . He will win automatically because 7 of the CE 70•SO record now currently in Superior Court and 8 Court ord,)rs U.S. 5048S.2 and Anderson versus Souza, 1992, 9 243 and so on. These state, ,r£ the City knowingly lets a 10 nuisance exist, they are liable. " i 11 Isn't it nice to provide a land owner with r 12 15 years' income or 1S million dollars? Just because the 13 C.&ty of Huntington Beach failed to do the job , j 14 The other thing, very quickly! Mr. Tucker jr 15 stated in his report -- and by the way , lie just gave me a I 16 letter in ansKer to our letter to Governor Brown that states i I� 17 that Mr. Allen did not remove any license. ? 18 I would like to have Mr. Allen give me a letter 19 to that effect because he personal'y told me that on one i r 20 item in this report -- and let me get the correct page. 21 Page 11C of Mr. McKenney's report he states no violations . 22 The man stayed at the Cambridge Apartments I ! 3 for 30 days and he logged '2S violations one weekend and five 24 licenses were lifted. 25 Let's go back ant do somathinl; concerning 26 Huntington Beach . Page S-H. No night flying. Lt. Morrison i (211) 43) 1777 MACAUL.EY d. MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF. 551.9400 sr 46 1 is dreaming and he's running that helicopter for nothing. 2 Let 's go back one more. It has a single 3 runway of 2,000 feet. Runway by law is 1499 feet glide path , 4 14000 187S feet total by virtue of Court order 123328 which * S is enforceable in court . 6 These documents are of available and we hLve 7 given them to Mr. Bonfa. 8 Thank you o ! 9 MAYOR WIEDER: Thank you, Mr. Novak. 10 NS. COLLINS : I 'm Joanne Collins and 1 live on � i11 Newbury Street and first 1 would like to read a letter from , r . � 12 Glen Slater. 13 MAYOR WIEDER: Have you taken the oath? M 14 MS. COLLINS: I took the oath. I am going to read 15 a letter from Glen Slater who is ill . i 16 Dear City Council. I live on Dunbcr Street. « 17 The planes are not supposed to go over my house. They are 19 supposed to go over Ceaser's Corner and make a five-degree 19 turn. i 20 1 am enclosing a list of time and dates that I � !I 21 they went directly over my house, particularly during the I i 22 Santa Ana winds . The blue wnd white planes are the worse 23 violators. There are also I don't think I understand ' 24 what is so funny. This is the type -- 25 MAYOR WIEDER: Don' t waste your time, Jeanne. ... 26 MS. COLLINS : Okay. I2131 437.1»f MAGAULKY di MANNING, 504NTA AN^.caw. (7U) Uo 9400 • 47 1 There is also a red •ind white number N76525. • 2 I called the airport and asked them to, please, obey the 3 flight patterns and was ignored. In fact, they flew over 4 our property even more. 5 I called the airport again at 5: 15 and they 6 kept on. I called the police department and was told they 7 could do nothing. I then called City (tall and was told to g talk to Jerry Shamell and was told City couldn' t do anything;. 9 On the 28th I called Mr. Frank Allen of FAA. 10 Its said he would come and watch. They obeyed only when he 11 was watching . 12 You can see our problem with the attitude here . ' i 13 I personally, know of 12 plane accidents. Now 14 laugh at that one. 15 I f !!rsonally know of 12 plane accidents. Most y 16 when there were big empty fields around. I 'm quite concerned 17 where they will all come down now since it 's almost all built 18 up in this area. 19 1 have a family and our lives are valued and 20 Mrs. Glen Slater on Dunbar -- I don' t know hr,w the woman can 21 live in a house with 12 plane crashes around her. But I Z2 don' t think it 's a joke . 23 We are going to he scraping one. of these 24 people off the wall with a spatula. 25 I think the main problr:m with Meadowlark is : 26 Why didn't the City do something when Long Beach put in that I 11131 437.1327 MACAUL[Y d MANNIN o. SA11TA ANA.CALIF. I7141 SSI 9400 I ,r 48 1 flight pattern there? Everybody sat here and knew that that 2 new runway was going directly over Meadowlark. r 3 Mr. Nerio should have sued. The City should 4 have sued because by not suing the City took something away 5 from us home owners . Basically they took more than 200 feet 6 because the FAA says a thousand-foot flight pattern is 7 standard. 8 Just now they are supposed to take a hundred. g This is a joke. They don' t reach over my house, they don't 10 reach 200. i1 But the point is , why didn't the City do 12 something and say to Long Beach , why are you putting this ' 13 stupid runway .going directly over Meadowlark so they're D 14 scared to fly up there because the big guys are sneaking in ' 15 on the low overcast. I 16 MAYOR WIEDER: Your light is on. You have one 17 more rr•inute to wind up . 16 MS . COLLINS: It 's too much to ask us home owners 19 to live in a community r:-:•:e we can't phone the police, we 20 can't complain to anybody. We want it either municipally ` 21 owned or get rid of it. We deserve some action. We 're 22 not going to just sit here and be pigeons . 23 MAYOR IVIEDER: I hope that our State Representative 24 will have some answers for some of the questions Ms. Collins 25 raises. . It is not the City's jurisdiction. lie are not the 26 regulatory agency and so we will turn to you. 17171 437.1327 MACAULEY A MANNING. *ANTA ANA. CALIF. 11111 558.9400 , l 49 1 HR. DIEDRICH: My name is Bruce Diedrich. I live 2 on Mulberry Circle which is in the California Classics. 3 MAYOR WIEDBR: , Would you hold it? Would you turn 4 the light off and give him a fair shake? 5 MR. DIEDRICH: Thank you. I have taken the oath. 6 We ,are here tonight because we don't represent special 7 interests. We don' t represent pilots . We don' t represent 8 the owner of the airport . I represent myself. 9 I sit here and tell you tonight that the 10 State cannot control an airport that does not exist. The 11 State can only Control airports which are, in fact, in 12 existence. 13 I am going to read you this briefly. I have 14 two ladies up here and a gentleman who have offered me their 15 time. I will read you some law that allows you to condemn 16 the entire airport or condemn it partially. 17 First we have Goldb lott versus Hemstead. In 18 this situation here they had an open pit. Years went by 19 and the open pit wasn't dangerous. The guys were mining 20 out the coal , okay? 21 People moved in new houses . They said, no 22 more open-pit mining . They closed down the beneficial use. "I can't use my land. If you a 23 Ile goes to court and says , . 24 take it you have to pay me money." 25 The Supreme Court of the United States said 26 that this was not a taking , that conditions have changed and a 12131 431.1321 MACAULEY &MANNING.SANTA ANA• CALIF. 0141 558.9400 I • SO 1 the State applies power to protect itself any time there is 2 a public nuisance . • 3 I quote to you now from Airport Condemnation 4 Government Law Code 50485. The Airport Approach Zoning Law 5 empowers local governments , that's city 's oN county agencies 6 to eliminate airport hazards by exercising their police 7 power, Government Code 554852 or by condemning the total g airport if no correctior,ls can be made. g Don't stand here and believe one man from the 10 State whose total job depends on the airports that the City r 11 cannot condemn this land. 1 quote from zoning laws . A 12 continuing plan may be used to re-effect rezoning. We don't 13 have to rezone here . All we have to do is jerk the permit , 14 make it beneficially impossible for these people to fly. 15 I 'm not saying that I mind or do not mind the I 16 airport, that is immaterial. What I am saying here is that 17 through the years you have only lights to be corrected. That r 18 is not true. 19 1 have a boat , put in a $10,000 pool. My • 20 taxes are up $30 more a month. I sit out there and count 21 airplanes because I am distracted by the additional noise. 22 There's no way for me to do it. i 23 We' cannot do anything because we have a i J 24 grandfather clause . Let me paint out to you: In 1949 there 25 was a law in L.-A. which controlled fire escapes to hotels. 26 For three years they went to court because I I I{I ' I • 1213)I37.1321 MACAUL.EY 81 MANNING.SANTA ANA. CALIF. (111) SSI.0100 I s 51 1 what happened is that all these people had fire escapes in 2 the interior and they said we cannot control this . • 3 The Supreme Court of the United States said, 4 yes , you can control it . You have (inaudible) and all those 5 hotels were forced by the Supreme Court to put in exterior 6 fire escapes or close down. 7 There'3 no such thing, no such thing as the 8 City has no control . They have control in 60 governmental 9 agencies. 10 In closing I would like to say that I will • 11 submit to Air. Bonfa a proposed guideline for new airports 12 that show the minimum level of 2200 feet for small aircraft 13 and we have 2700 feet for some of the aircraft listed as i 14 tie-down. 15 But remember, we are not here for special 16 interest groups , we are not here fur the pilots. We are 17 here for the people. We are paying the bills , the taxpayers. 18 Thank you. 19 MAYOR WIEDER: Bruce Diedrich. Thank you for your i 20 elequence. 21 Mr. Borcoman. 22 MR. BORCV10: I am Ben Borcoman. 23 MAYOR WIEDER: E::cuse me, Councilman Siebert, did 24 you want to ask a question of Mr. Diedrich? 25 COUNCII,MkV SISBERr: Yes . 26 MAYOR WILDER: Councilman) Siebert would like to i (213) 437.1327 MACAULEY $MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF, 17UI 553•940 JdW 51 1 question you. 2 COUNCILMAN SIEBERT: I am sure that it has some 3 relevance to what you hod to say , but I am having difficulty 4 placing i, . You made a statement that the State airport 5 authorities can only enforce airports that exist. That 6 seems obvious . What relevance did it have? i 7 MR. DIEDRICH: The relevancy here is that when we 6 started this meeting we started with the premise: Why are 9 we here for the sixth time? That is not a legitimate premise 10 An example , if you have a piece of land and 11 you wish to put an airport in, now, I have to get a State 12 license from this gentleman. I have to get a City business j 13 permit. If I do not have an airport, I don' t need a City 14 license or State llcenso. If we eliminate the airport by !� 15 condemnation or by police power , they, have no airport , so 16 the State says that we're not P^3.ng to close it dowAt, you 17 pull the flight pattern permit. That is nonsense bEcause 1 16 pulling the permit Is not the issue as far as the public 19 nuisance is concerned. 20 Public nuisance is created only, when we have 21 changed circumstances. Now, we have over 2,000 new houses 22 in the immediate area by the airport. That is changed 23 circumstances. That's how I relate it. Is that understood? 24 Any other questions? 25 Thank you. 26 MAYOR WIEDTR: I have been asked by they City f� I i I� 1217!437.137f MACALLEY &MANNING.SAWA ANA. CAL:r. U117 356.9400 • I Attorney , he reminded the Chair, that when we have a court I 2 stenographer it is customary to offer a break. I will do so 3 upon completion of the testimony - - there is one more after 4 you; am I correct , in support of the revocation and declaring 5 a public nuisance? 8 MR. BORCOUN: I am Ben Borcoman. I live at 7 16262 Birdie Lane, Huntington Beach. Primarily I speak for 8 myself. ; r 9 MAYOR WIRDBR: Excuse me , have you taken the oath, 10 sir? i 11 MR. BORCODJAN: Yes , ma' am. 12 Primarily I speak for myself, my family, and i 13 my surrounding neighbors . •But I think vicariously I speak i 14 for all of the children that go to Meadowlark School . 15 Now, I live on -- I can 't show you this map 16 exploded, or expanded, but I can explain it a little. I live 17 on Birdie Lane, and I live with my back lot to the Meadowlark School and that would be about almost in the center of the i 19 west end of the Meadowlark School yard. Is that understood? 20 Now, the flight pattern, if it's a< pattern, 21 I don' t think it 's a pattern. But this is the way they fly. 22 They fly around back , come across the school yard. If they M 23 don' t come across the school yard, they go a little north of ' 24 it and go across all of that complex of businesses and it 25 would be just as bad for an accident to happen in a business 26 area as in a school yard. But it does seem to me that this i (2111 .111.1321 MACAU LEY !k MANNING.SANTA ANA. CALIF. 011) 151.9400 I Attorney, he reminded the Chair, that when we have a court 2 stenographer it is customary to offer a break. I will do so 3 upon completion of the testimony -- there is one more after 4 you; am I correct , in support of the revocation and declaring * 5 a public nuisance? 6 MR. BORCOMAN: I am Ben Borcoman. I live at 7 16262 Birdie Lane, Huntington Beach. Primarily I speak for 0 myself. 9 MAYOR WIEDER: Excuse me, have you taken the oath, 1 10 sir? 11 MR. BORCOMAN: Yes , ma'am. 12 Primarily I speak for myself, my family, and 13 my surrounding neighbors. -But I think vicariously I speak 14 for all of the children that go to Meadowlark School . 15 j Now, I live on -- I can't show you this map 16 exploded, or expanded, but I can explain it a little. I live :. 17 on Birdie Lane, and I live with my back lot to the Meadowlark 16 School and that would be about almost in the center of the 18 west end of the Meadowlark School yard. Is that understood? 20 Now, the flight pattern, if it's a pattern, 21 I don't think it' s a pattern. But this is the way they fly. 22 They fly around back, come across the school yard. if they 1� 23 don' t come across the school yard, they go a little north of 24 it and go across all of that complex of businesses and it 25. would be just as bad for an accident to happen in a business 26 area as in a school yard. But it does seem to me that this I I+ l! _� 017) 43YI1327 MACAULEY 6 MANNING, SANTA ANA.CALIF. SWIAD0 I w _.. • 54 I � 1 is a perpetual, continual violation of some law which I can' t 2 state, that they are not permitted to fly in a pattern over 3 an occupied school yard.. 4 Now, the school yard is also occupied by 5 children on Saturday. Now, as they go across my house which 6 is on Birdie Lane and the next - - two streets over is Graham, 7 and then going down one block is 11ei1 and on the southwest 6 corner is the airport. So maybe some of you can about get 9 an idea where I am located. 10 Now , I would say that many times those planes 11 are not 200 feet higher than my house. Not onl/ that, but 12 some of those planes are doing something and technically I 13 don' t know what it is , but -I call it buzzing. They art makin 14 a terrific noise. This is deliberate. They are not always J 15 making the noise, but there was one or two times in the last 16 -- this year when one of those planes -- and it's a biplane K 17 incidentally, and it 's a red one and it 's easily recognized 18 and it makes a hell •of a noise. 19 Now, for 16 years I have lived under this 20 noise. I have watched them go by. I h.:•:s read the letters , 21 easily identified. They are r_ot supposed to be readable at 22 that point , but I will just say one good thing for those 23 flyers , only one. That's the good one , all the rest is bad. r 24 They can land on a postage stamp and they can land from a 25 . height I would say I would be afraid to even try. But the 26 thing is that this is noise pollution. This is a potential v 11131 431.1777 MACAULEY & MANNING.SANTA ANA.CALIF. fTla) HII.9400 I • 04 SS 1 danger. 2 If you read the papers at all you know that 3 not a week goes by but that one, two , or three private small 4 planes fall to earth somewhere and this is true , and in 5 California I an talking about. 6 Now , they are making too much noise . They 7 distract us constantly. When I called up , a gentleman. told 9 me that he had no control over them when they are in the air. 9 I guess he would slap their wrists when they came down. The 10 next time I called which was recently, tried to get hold of 11 someone in authority, a young lady who sounded like a teenage 12 slammed the receiver down. 13 Now , we're not getting anywhere with these 14 people. They are violating, I think, all kinds of rules. 15 I don't know the rules . But your common sense tells you this 16 Now , there's a lot of night flying and I 17 can't see how they can even see that airport from up there 18 at night ; and I believe that the time has come when this 19 airport should be removed. 20 This is what I 'm saying atld I 'll not stop 21 saying it until it is . But the fact that they're flying over 22 that school yard when children are there should condemn them. 23 Any questions? 24 MAYOR WIEDER: Thank you. 25 M. BORCOMAN: Any applause? 26 MAYOR WIEDCR: Are there any questions by the City "T ..J (7131 437.1777 MACAULKY MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF. 1714) 551-9400 low. 56 1 1 Council? 2 Are you t!,e Mast speaker in support of the 3 revocation? I was told there were four more. 4 MR. BORCO?1AN: I didn 't check. S MAYOR WIEDER: No, no , no. I 'm sorry, sir. 6 Eiow many in addition to this gentleman are 7 s.till going to speak? i • 8 For the record, in the debate we are hearing 9 now, those people who are speaking in the public hearing in 10 support of the revocation and toward the public nuisance , I 11 how many are there? 'Vould you raise your hands so I can seo 12 All right. At this time , after this gentleman i 13 speaks , I am going to have- to call a recess . Thin wa will 14 continue. 15 Would you state your name and your address 16 and whether you have taken the oath? I � 17 MR. BOB: My name is Nathan Bob, B•o-b. I have �~ 1e ! the good fortune to live at 17171 Bolsa Chica, Cambridge 19 that has to listen Complex, and I 'm one of the lucky people 20 to the planes flying over there all day long because the 21 take-off pattern seems to take them right over Cambridge. 22 Now they're building another building next to it that is 23 going to be three-stories high. There is one man who must 24 go to work every day about 4:00 to 6:00 and they fly a lot 25 at night. If you try to sleep 26 MAYOR WIEDER: Excuse me, Mr. Bob. Did you state i j 1l171 171.1711 MACAULEY & MAf IQ. sANTA ANA.CAT. 111�1 Sf�•1r�00 I I a i 1 whether you have taken the oath? I 2 MR. BOB: I took the oath when they administered it!. YOR WIEDER: We just have to state so. Thank you 3 MA. 4 very much. It is all very legal. 5 MR. BOB: The Meadowlark Cafe , it reminds me of 6 one of them places in New Mexico on Route 66. That 's one of 7 the crummiest airports I ever saw. g 1 won't take up your time. I come from the 9 East. I moved out to California because I like the climate. 10 But I don't like those damn planes flying over there . 11 Thank you. 12 MOOR WIEDER: This is a good time to tako our i 13 coffee break. 14 Mr. Belsito, is the cafeteria open? It is 15 not? It is usually open for public hearings . 16 We will recess until 9 :00. 17 (Recess .) 18 MAYOR WIEDER: Before the next speaker begins , then i 19 was an inquiry made during the recess as to what a Conditions I � 20 Exception Number 70-SO is and I would like to ask Mr. John 21 Behrens , our Building Community Development Director -- would 22 you please stand? We made an assumption that everyone in 23 the audience might understand what that is. 24 Why don't you come to the podium? 25 MR. BEHRENS: In October of 1970 the then owner/ I „ 26 operator of the airport , Mr. John Turner, made application 17171 ��t.�»1 ►v1ACAlJL6Y Oe MANNING.e►NTA A►+A• CALIF. U1�1 SSt•0�00 i I 58 1 to the City for the extension of a non-conforming use. 2 !MAYOR WILME► # Would you hold it". I would ;ike to w IS ask the staff, would thgy -- maybe the people out there 4 don' t realize the meeting has convened and their noises 5 are coming in and it sounds like our Clty Attorney. 6 MR. BEIV ENS: The original application to the City 7 requested an extension of the runway at that tim., of some 8 500 feet. After hearing , the City agreed to grant the 9 conditional exception which is in the form of a variance 10 from the nnrmal City ordinance requir--ments , and they grante rr 11 the conditional exception and allo;.ed an extension of 320 I 12 feet rather than the 500 originally requested. 13 In doing so- the City imposed a series of 14 conditions and the subject of the revocation tonight deals 15 with certain of those conditions . As reported earlier, the 16 airport at the present time complies with all the conditions 17 imposed with the exception of the obstrurtion lights at the 18 trees along the south side of Heil. 18 MAYOR WiEDER: Thank you very much, Mr. Behrens. 20 We will now continue with the !;poakers in 21 support of the revocation rnd to declare it a public nuisanc . 22 Who is the next speaLer? Would you Come 23 forward? Have you signed in? 24 MR. COLLINS: Hy name is Frank Collins . I live on 25 Newbury. Drive and I have taken the oath. 26 I simply want to state that I was in the I w 17131 131 1121 MACAULEY 6 MANNING, SANTA ANA. CALIF. 11141 551.9400 I I ! I United States Navy all my life. I an now retired. My main 2 complaint is the low- flying aircraft coming over my house 3 every day, 200 to 300 fget. 4 I live near the corner of Talbert and Edwards , 5 quite a ways from the Meadowlark air field. I know they are 6 no more than 200 or 300 feet . 1 have been on tin cans and I flattops all my life and I know altitudes of aircrafts very 8 well and the noise is tremendous through there . 9 The noise is my big complaint and my fellow 10 residents around there continue to complain about the darn ! o, 11 aircraft and night flying, all hours of the night, which I 12 have reported many , many times. 13 I have reported numbers of low- flying aircraft 14 to the FAA, at least seven times . I have heard no further 15 information on my reports other than , "thank you, sir.f1 I 16 would like to see some action on that , too. 17 primarily it is certainly an annoyance to 18 me as a property owner and I am retired in good old Iiuntingto 19 Beach. I hope to stay here , but if this keeps up I am sure 20 not going to stay here. 21 MAYOR IVIEDER: Thank you. 22 MR. ROSE : My name is Jeffrey Rose and I live at 41 16271 Fantasia Lane , Huntington Beach. I have not taken the 24 oath vet. 25 (Air. Rose was duly sworn. ) 26 MR. ROSE : I would just like to make some observati ns . 017) 43YA 11 MACAULEY A MANNING. SANTA ANA.CALIF. (714) 5!1.9400 r �l 60 1 I used to work at Mendowlarl: Airport when I was in high 2 school and my first year of college. This dates back to s 3 1964 , IS , and 16 , and subsequent, after that time I worked 4 with my father in 1971 , 172 , and 173 with a small company 5 he had called Barn Stormers . fie flew a biplane out of there . A 6 So just some observations I have made during 7 those times . When I worked there Iflew heli,:opters out of 8 there. We were then asked to leave by the then ownar, 9 Air. Turner, because of the clanger factor. We were coming 10 in all ways - - we were coming across the pattern all the time. 11 We were very noisy. lie asked us to leave personally so the d 12 company did leave. All right? 13 Secondly , during that time that I worked there � 14 I saw many planes of a small nature which Meadowlark caters 15 to , the Piper Cubs , the Aroneas (sic) , othe. small aircraft. 16 During heavy winds , which are frequent enough 17 around here , they take as much as an entire minute after 10 airborne to bet out of the way so a second aircraft could 19 take off. They just didn't have the power. 20 Secondly, when coming into the runway on the r 21 normal pattern there is a tendency most of the time for gusty 22 wines , and it's not too uncommon knowledge that a plane can A, 23 drop as much as a hundred foot instantly as they come down 24 over the trees and down in -- right into the airport. They 25 can drop very fast. I know this because I have had it happen 26 numbers of times, I2I3I 431.1]7) MAGAULEY &MANNINC3, fANTA AN A, CALIF. f71�1 Ssf v00 ,r • 61 � t 1 The two patterns that still exist, the normal 2 rtLnway and the second runway used for biplanes at this time 3 and sign-carrying; aircraft , they come in acruss the pattern. i 4 There is no tower and no radio, they have to fly in pattern, S shortcutting , if possible , until it is clear visually, to * i 6 their vision , that they can ce,ne down and pick up or drop 7 a. sign. There is no power to control this , so a plane , pilot. I' 8 -- it's a rule of thumb in flying , they have to look out for 9 everybody. So they look out for everybody. 1p Blit it 's still -- there can be two planes 11 coming in two different directions on any occasic:._ 12 The last thing that I would like to mare a 13 note uE is the fact that Roosevelt Street runs right across 14 the end of the runway and if passers-by , such as myself and 16 other people , want to go across the runway and all they need 16 do is just look to see If a plane is coming. Okay? Some peo le 17 don 't !rnderstand that completely and just go across the runwa 18 anyway. i 19 Now, at that point if a plane is coming in a 20 little fast and has to use up the entire runway, which happen 21 frequently, there 's a possibility of an accident. Planes 2.2 were moved out of the end of the runway just for that reason, 2.3 so there 's an extra runoff. Okay? I � S4 That is all I have to say at this point. 25 MAYOR WIEDER: Thank you very much, Mr. Rose. 26 in looking at the clock, we have had discussion w MACAUt.LY d MANNING. fANfA AN+. cALir. 171�1 sst•OOt+ I .J I in support of Conditional Exception 70-50 for a public 2 nuisance for an hour and a 'ialf' s tine. I am going to ask, � 3 how many people still want to speak in support? Ono? Are 4 you the last one? There's two more. b 1 am Suing to stop the discussion at this w d point and allow an hour and a half because we have an 11:00 7 closing time for the City Council , in fairness to the people 8 who want to speak in opposition. I am going to begin that 9 discussion at this point. 10 flow many in the audience will be representing 11 from the public will be representing a group of people or ~` ]2 organization? Would y)u please make yourself known? All 13 right. Would you please come forward? 14 Is there anyone else besides Oils gentleman? 15 You represent the Pilot 's Association or are you speaking i6 as an individual? Would you come on down, please? 17 All right. Now, after these speakers make 18 their presentations , how man s P , y people indicated -- afia. n , how 19 many of you want to address the microphone? All right. In the interest of time , would 21 you please come down here so that we can go quickly? ? i22 i' apologize for the darkness. Be careful coming down the . !� stairs . 24 All Might. The first speaker representing -- 25 who is a representative cf -- whatever. . 26 MR. GAMBLE: My name is William Gamble. I took the (713) 47,•17x1 MACAULEV &MANNING.CANTA ANA. CALIF. 1714) 551.9400 ♦ �1 oath. I 'm an attorney. I live in Huntington Beach , 9502 63i 2 Smokey Circle, and about three months ago or six months i 3 ago , whenever it was , we had some initial confrontation 4 here in the Council Chambers and it was decided that one 5 of the methods we would use to explore solving the problem A 6 at Meadowlark and one surrounding community was to appoint 7 a group of people from the airport and a group of people g representing the home owners . I know that the Mayor :,as v 9 present at least three of those occasions when we met. 10 I thought that as a result of those meetings 11 that we had aired out almost all those problems that there 12 were and we had some kind of mutual understanding. Basically 13 initially , as I understood the problem, the people, the 14 people that are bringing the complaint primarily are the 15 same , Mrs.. • Lang, Mrs. Collins , Mr. Livengood from the:lHome 16 Owners -- I suppose he represents a group. 17 But the basic complaints at that time when 18 We sat through 't'ae meetings and hearings was that there was 19 too much noise at Meadowlark Airport and there were some 20 isolated com�laints , although nobody ever really said who 21 did it or when they did it , about low flying. 22 Primarily ghat we did in an effort to eleviate .cT 23 the problem was raise the traffic pattern from 500-800 foot 24 which was done at the request of the Home Owners Association 25 and Air. Collins and Mrs. Long to accommodate them to some 26 extent as much as we could. That seemed to satisfy them. w (21)) 477.1327 MACAULEY aI IIIANNING. II NTA ANA. CALIF. (71A) 538 9J00 6 1 lie had hearings . Three members were appointed 2 from the airport to be present at these hearings and we 3 heard the complaints , and the only ones that I really heard 4 that had any facts or substance to them were the ones 5 concerning noise. The group that was appointed to represent 6 the airport at the hearings and Mr. Nerio himself made 7 substantial efforts in the last five to six months toward i 8 controlling any problem that might arise at the airport. 9 Although I gave my name out at each of those 10 he..ings as did the other two individuals that were appointed f 11 to cope with the complaints , I never received one complaint 12 from any of the individuals or from the Home Owners Associati0 . 13 I think we came in good faith , the pilots , i 19 in an effort to join with the cc-mmunity and resolve any ; 15 problems at Meadowlark Airport. There seems to be a group 16 of people that rather than just want to live with the airport 17 are dcadset on wanting to extinguish the airport. For those � 18 people there's no remedy that I can offer as a solution 19 because we don't intend to be extinguished. 20 I think 4hat we' re there lawfully, and we're 01 attempting to comply with the laws and regulations of this Y 22 community and we 're willing and we 're able to attempt in one 23 way or another to cooperate with the Home Owner's As:jodiation 24 and we want to do that. We want to be good neighbors. Every 25 pilot there Francs to be a good neighbor. 26 Is my time up? i ,� ;�l]I •S>.I�=� MAcAULEY Os MANNING. sAnr•wNA. CALIF. 1111 SSt.O�OD I l 1 DIAYOR IVIEDER: No. I 2 MR. GAMBLE : All we need really is some good i 3 faith operation from the, other end. We 've done what we i 4 think we can do . We 've raised the traffic pattern as far es 5 the noise as pointed out in the hearings. 6 As you know, Mayor, there is nothing we can 7 do. about the a^artment building. It is going to be a little 8 bit noisy there. Ive devised a five-degree right-hand curve 1 rq g in an attempt to cope with it. 10 . Now, I just say this , I want to emphasize 11 _o the people that are present in the audience that live speak for the pilots at the and I know I s 12 around the area, P 13 airport , that we want to cooperate with you , we want to 14 comply with the laws ; and, certainly, we don't want to 15 create an undue hazard. Ive' ll go back to the committee 16 ;-f ynu want , any way you want it set up to cooperate with 17 the people in the area. 18 Ilowever, we can 't answer charges that are 19 just bald conclusions , just statements from people that say, 20 ''Well, I saw a bl ie low-flying aircraft over there." Or, I� 21 "I live three miles from the airport. On two days last ' ?Z year somebody buzzed my house . " There 's always no matter 23 what type of, business you are in, thr,re 's always some type 24 of minor violations. As a whole. we want to be good 25 neighbors , we want to cooperate , and we 'll do anything we 26 can in that regard. (2131 431-1321 MACAIJLRY a. MANNING. 6ANTA AMA.CALIr. t114) 152.4100 r 66 ] It's a little bit difficult for me to answer - I 'm finding it difficult For me to answer specific facts do g about the nuisance as it exists today , which is the issue, 4 not what happened back in 1946. The question that is and S should be before the Council , as I understand it, Is whether 6 tl` ere's a nuisance today, not whether there was a nuisance, 7 as the last speaker spoke, ten years ' ago. g As far as I know, lie has no knowledge of the 9 present-day operation at the airport , but said that back in 10 1966 he was at the airpurt and there was some violation back 11 in 1966. I wasn' t there in 1966. I lived in Fluntingtcn 12 Beach, but I wasn' t at the airport. I don't know what the 13 conditions were there at that time I don't s s how it is i 14 relevant, pertinent , or important to what is taking place 15 today. 16 Mr. Livengood, when he got up and went into _ 17 his dissertation about how the airport performed in 1946 and 18 the land plot and where Plots 3, 5 , and 7 -- whatever they i . 19 are , that's •rery interesting history, something I was never I ' 20 aware of, but how does that pertain to whether there's a 21 creation of a nuisance today? That is what we are talking �t� I� 22 about, not what happened 30 years ago. 23 As you view this problem, it is just not a 1 24 matter of a lot of people out flying around the airport: ' 25 having a good time. There are businesses at that airport , i � T 26 substantial businesses. There is a flight school there, i 4 (1131 417.1327 MACAULEY &MANNING, $ANTA ANA.CALM SIR-740O i s.. 1 there 's a restaurant there, there's an advertising business I 2 and there are a lot of busincs!:es. 3 Secondarily, as one of the speakers asked, 4 how does It benefit the City? Myself, I fly as part of my 5 business . It is necessary for me to fly out of that airport 6 at least two or three times a week to go to other courts 7 that 1 wouldn't otherwise be able to get to in an automobile. r 6 So there are taxpaying businesses there. It 's not an issue 9 that should be taken lightly whether you are for or against 10 an airport. 11 The real problem, as I think the initial 12 speaker spoke , is a question of what are we going to resolve 13 here. It is my understanding that the City Council really 14 doesn't have the rower to stop the airport from operating 15 and that' s certainly not a challenge. Why not cooperate 16 in some manner and try to get along? We have sonle kind of � - 17 a policing policy within our own ranks. 1g There are always people that are going to be 19 disgruntled and there are a lot of 8 people here in support of �r? 20keeping the airport , and I want to emphasize that we are 21 ready to work with the people. We're not afraid of you *2 closing the airport because I don't think that 's going to �► 23 happen. But we are interested in being good neighbors . � 24 I live in IIuntington Beach , as I have . indicated as do most of the people who fly out of there 26 live in this community. I think it would be arbitrary to say I 19g1 411•1"? MACAULEY &MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF. 11141 331•9400 ,... 68 1 "Nell , there are a fe'.' people that moved here from back East. 2 I don ' t like the airplanes flying over." I think that 's 3 a choice you have to make when you move into the airport. 4 And that' s not the old addage , "The airport was there first; 5 therefore, we are going to do what we want to do. " Because 6 that's not what I am saying . 1 am saying the airport was 7 there. It was there probably when every single speaker who 8 got up and spoke today moved into the area and , ►.herefore, 9 you can't arbitrarily say, "We are just going to close down. 10 the airport for no reason at all other than we don 't like A 11 airplanes . " 12 Thank you. ;+ 13 MAYOR WIEDER: Thank you, Ni . Gamble. 14 I am very pleased to learn that the Pilot 's 1 15 Committee that was organized when I first took over as Mayor ! 16 is still in existence. I am pleased to hear that. I don' t 17 I:now whether anyone has been in touch with you, I wasn' t rf 18 aware you were still in existence. 19 Next speaker? 20 MRS. PACE: Virginia Page. I have been sworn. i j 21 MAYOR WIEDER: Where do you live?22 � MRS. PAGE: I live at 16851 Cayon Lane, Huntington 23 Beach. I have a statement here. 24 I am a taxpayer and nearby residen-C , so I 2 Would like to give my views of the airport. I have written ._ 26 a statement because I don' t think I can say it impromptu. v 12171 43? 1317 MACAULEY &MANNING. 6ANTA AN A. CALIF, U141 351.9400 w 69 1 Of course, it hits been brought nut that a 2 Meadowlark will alleviate congestion at Orange County 3 Airport . I am sure we all realize that. However, I do 4 feel that the dangers of the airport arc grossly exaggerated * 5 and, in fact, axe practly pill. 6 During the nearly 11 years that I have lived 7 here there has been one minor collision directly over the 8 airport , more of a brushing together, in which no ore was j 9 hurt. Once a very soft landing was made by a student pilot i 10 in the field directly outside of my home , damaging the plane 11 very little and the pilot not at all. ij I � 12 One other time the accelerator apparently 13 stuck on a plane and it went about in circles for a short 14 while , all incidents which were quickly gotten under control 15 and without danger. (J ly accidents that nappen betWeerl 16 airpla,tes or involving nem are not directly over the airport 17 but occur many blocks or really mile= away. Airplanes can If1 18 fell anywhere in the world, you can't stop freeways ar.d 19 airports just because th+-_e are accidents on them. 20 They can happen anywhere , like automobile 21 collisions , but seldom. close to the airport itself and so 22 the point of danger is actually minute. 23 As to noise , 1 live closer to Meadowlark than r 24 anyone, I am sure. 1 live a few feet from that red crop- 25 duster plane , and I enjoy that airport more than anything 26 in the world; and I think those private planes are less iAt. ` f2131 W-1121 MACAULEY &MANNING.SANTA ANA. CALIF. (1111 SS1 7�OG • 70 1 noisy than there and I cai. tell you, they are a great deal I 2 less noisy than power mowers , 3 As well as serving; a very utilitarian purpose , 4 Meadowlark is a rLcreationa] area , and I think this point 5 is very important. It has � y ortant p great emotional appeal and drawing � 6 power. People come out to the airport on weekends to simply 7 enjoy watching the planes taking off, talk with the owners , 8 examine the lanes weekend flveis planes , , family groups with their 9 children and their animals , people who like airplanes and 10 motion like myself to enjoy comradery and excitement. 11 The planes that carry the advertising banners 12 along the beach on Sundays take off from Meadowlark and ve � 13 1 all love to watch that. Everyone is attracted by that on 14 weekends and occasionally the Good Year B' imp dips down in 15 greeting which is really quite a thrill. 16 Huntington Beach has a unique entity in the i 17 airport if only it would realize it as well as having an 18 opportunity to develop a really desirable and different 19 area of open space and recreation, taking in the area, the r� 20 eucalyptus grove we have and the golf course, Old Pirate 21 Lane near the same location is a grassy woodsey residential 22 area beside eucalyptus groveswhose: character adds to the 23 general exceptionability as well as the Little League Field 24 and attractively landscaped daycare center, 25 In these days of crowded, overdeveloped tracts r 26 and less and less open land this sm: it area in Huntington Bea h 11131 431.1327 MACAULCY ♦'c MANNING. SA,/?A ANA. CALIF. (7111 551.9400 , y+ 71 1 rewains a reminder of what once was. Meadowlarks do, indeed, 2 still sing there and I can see them on the hangers outside I R 3 my porch. Possum and raccoons live thera and appear 4 occasionally, all contributing to Ohe region' s singularity. S It would be a pit; to see it go. 6 I respectfully urge that you consider letting 7 Meadowlark and its surroundings continue to exist for the jot 8 enjoyment of the people of the City . 9 Thank you. 10 MAYOR WIEDER: Thank you very much. !p H I would like to ask Mr. ramble -• I thought 12 of this after you walked array from the microp;:one. There i 13 - were some allegations made that have been made throughout 14 the different �istimonies such as flying over school grounds , 15 etcetera, and the alleged low flying over houses . for orr 16 own evidence if you can put into our testimony any informatiol 17 in regard to that as we will ask those people who have mad,.- is allegations for actual documentation. Do you want to do it 19 at this time? 20 MR. GAMBLE: I will. r.. 43 MAYOR WIEDER: I don't know if this is relevant 22 to the rest of the Council. Ar I lock at my notes , I see 23 Certain allegations that we would address to the pilots . I :2¢ MR. GAMBLE : First of all regarding flying S S over 26 26 the. schools. There are two schools at the approach end of I Meadowlark Airport , and just rougly if the -- if this were � »>I U7•I]�) MACAULEY A MANNING, SANTA ANA. CALIF, fll�) SSt•OOJ i 7z ] a school (inclicatinl;) in this location, there ti�oul+a tic anotliez- 2 school in thi s location, Aetua:1)' you have - - there is a great deal of space. YrJu fly around the school.. That 's the 4 pattern. You d•1n' t fly over them. It is clearly Poste.'. at 5 the airport and all the pilots are urged to fly that 6 particular pattern. You fly between the schools and not over the $ schools , and in a practical rn�at,ter, an airplane strnight over isn' t going to f-311 straight down on top of you anyway. 10 Any other questions? 11 MAYOR 1VIL•DL•R : {Nell , as far as the allegation of 12 200 feet -- the l.ow flying. 13 MR , GAMBLE: I have heard those allegations made , 11 you have heard them made . Nobody can ever be specific as to «i 15 Mine , date, place , 111in did it , what is the. number of the 16 aircraft. It ' s the same reason why the FAA , Lt. {Morrison :7 no one can enforce the so-called violations because no one 18 gets the aircraft number , nobody will make a specific report 19 so you can 7o and say th.t•' s the pilot that did it. 20 Most of the complaints , if yots will observe 21 when you listen, are general allegations . 'there's just Tio 22 way to answer that type of evidence. if someh -idy comes and 23 scys , "It is a blue and white Cessna ," the number -- you 29 don' t hLve to know -the name. It has gren t bi.-, numbers 25 painted. on the side . At 200 feet you ought. to be able to 26 sec it. Take the number and then complain to the FAA. dh 17131 491.1771 MAGAULEY 8i MANNING. SANTA A►+A. CALIF. 17141 55B.9AOO • 73 i 1 I have been to FAA Violation hearings with I 2 pilots and I l:now darn well that the), enforce the regulations; 3 If you Fly 200 feet over a residential area you ' re not. going I 4 to have a lie Anse . 5 All you' ve got to do, what Mr. Morrison in 6 those hearings indicated, you've got to 1)e specific. You 7 can' t go out and get every pilot that flys in the vicinity g because somebody flew low. r; 0 MAYOR WILDER: All right:. Than): you, Mr. Gamble. 10 I an going to ask our staff if they can 11 solicit additional -- Mr. Relsito , would you solicit additional 12 information: from the schools in the area? I have not had any 13 complaints from them; tins staff? And also find cut from the 14 school as to the %: )lidity of the allegations . 15 The next speaker? 16 MR. LIVENGJOD: I would like to turn in to the 17 City Attorney 20 violations turned in to the FAA. 78 MAYOR 111EDER: Thank you, Mr. Livenl;, Over what 19 period? 20 MR. LIVENGJOD: January 7th, 1973 ; January 11th -- 21 , there ' s quite a few. All of those are violations that were 22 turned in to the FAA. 23 MYOR WIEDER: Thant: you. Make that available to 24 the City Clerk. 25 MR. HUFSTETLER: My name is Loren llufstetler. I 26 lave in the woodsey, rustic, community of Old Pirate Lane (1131 4)7 1727 MACAULEY a MANNING, SAN?A ANA. CALIF. IIIAI SS!0/00 I _ 74 next to the airport . 2 I have been selected, I suppose , to speak for r i ` 3 most of the people in the block most of which are in attendan-e 4 tonight probably because I live closest to the airport than 5 anyone else. I have airplanes running about 20 feet from my ' 6 backyard, dusting the geraniums and my clean laundry , and I i 7 ain simply here to say that 1 believe at least 80 percent of 8 the people in our community are totally in favor of the 9 airport, do not consider it a nuisance. Certainly less than 11I a nuisance than, say, the golf balls that we have found 11 Whizzing through the air from the golf course which we are -' 12 still in favor rf, much less a nuisance than the congestion 13 and the traffic from much of the apartment houses that have 14 been Proliferating in the recent past . 15 In general, all I am saying is that from our 16 community we find no evidence of any sort of public nuisanc:- 17 from the airport. 16 MAYOR IIIEDE-11: Next speaker? 19 MR. POLE: My name is Thomas Pole. I 'm the operato 20 of the Meadowlark Cafe , renamed Route 66. 21 MAYOR 1VIEDER: Pole did you say? V MR. POLE: Lilce a telephone pole that we have *, 9-3 obstruction lights on . P-o-1-e. I 24 MAYOR VIIEDER: And have you been sworn in? 25 MR. POLE: I have taken the oath and do swear to 26 tell the truth, the whole truth , and nothing but the truth , (:IJI Q7.1]77 MACAULEY Ck Mi.NNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF. (714) 555 YAOG r • —r 75 1 so help me God . 2 MYOR IJIEDER: This is not facetious , sir. • 3 MR. POLE : Well , I am not facetious either. But 4 I thought we were having a hearing that boiled clown to high 5 emotions witlr people who have homes . It is very difficult 6 for any of us not to understand their problem. 7 MAYOR WIFT)ER: Excuse me, did you state your. 8 residence? 9 MR. POLE : I live in Corona Del Mar, 501 Ror.kford 10 Place , 3 hope to move into the area closer to the airport. 11 Since 1 have owned the operation of the cafe 4 12 the last six months I have been the owner -- we have. had 13 nothing but sort of a threat of closing it. However, when 14 I came into the airport to do my little thing at Route 66 15 Cafe I ended up with betting a re-roofing permit immediately 16 from the City of Huntington Beach and I still have it. I 17 also have the paint to repaint the entire building and upgrad 18 the property; but it ►lidn' t seem too wise to do it because I 19 have come to several meetings and we didn 't have them. Now .� 20 I 'n at a meeting where we arc, being sworn in as t'iough it 21 were going to be our trial . . 22 Thank goodness I came to this meeting because Z3 now I will re-roof and paint the place because I know tic 24 aren' t going to close the meadowlark Airport , we are going to 25 try to work out our problems. 26 1 have special qualifications , too. I am a - _ l I1101 �!7.17J7 MACAULEY d MANNING. GANTA ANA.CALIF. 17141 SSB 9400 r 1 Navy pilot . I flew for 21 years for the Navy , I am a _ 2 helicopter pilot. I also am a prefessiunal restaurateur and 3 I ryas director of training and wrote the Training Post for I 4 gar West Services , probably the most successful restaurant A 5 in the country. Se, the gentleman whe didn' t think we had 6 anything worthwhile Hasn' t eaten in nor restaurant . 7 I think Mr. Live ngood would probably feel 8 the effects most important to him if the airport had moved z 9 out and left . however , if his youngster happened to be a 10 youngster who I have flown over at nighttime and picked up 11 off a host and taken to an emergency hospital to save their A. 12 lives , when you ha a that happen to you you get a little more I 13 feeling for the person who -is willing to fly at night, who is A 14 willing to take the risk of going and picking somebody off a 15 vessel and taking them to the hospital to sarc their life. 16 Then you have a different feeling for aviation. 17 Right now we get credit :'or any aircraft that 18 lys by , whether it ,came from Orange County, or it carve f roan rg Meadowlark , or it came from Long Beach. {tie get credit for it 20 I Irish I were the person up there in the 21 airplane. I don '* get enough time to fly. But the main 22 thing that you have and we have here is why can' t we as people 23 w resolve oter problems without drawing; swords? I have been in 24 that war game. I probably would win if wr, got into the 25 battle of flying :.n airplane bacause I am trained for it. 26 Why can't we get together and solve this without: taking this l� (2131 4:7 1U1 MACAULEY 0:MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALM UU1 551-9400 �1 77 i - 1 expensive problem tC1 try to take one person oi::. of business , for what? 'i'a Five somebody else the business of digging it 3 up and putting houses tl1tre? I i It' s a recreation area. The kids from those 4 I 5 schools come - over and their eyes pop out and it 's just like 6 the youngster that I serve with the ladies who coma to me i someone was visiting and flew right down to that airport. 7 8 They didn' t have to drive up to Los Angeles Airport or down I 9 into Orange County and their little youngster Has there and 10 he had had something to cat ahead of time and I thought, poy ,11 " i don' t really want to serve these people at this time � 12 of night. I closed five minutes :190. " 1 brought the hot 13 dog and that little two-year-old , ho: said , "Oh . boy. A hot N! 14 dog." { 15 well , that' s what we need to do , get that i 16 enthusiasm of that youngster that they startwith and solve i 17 the problem, not come up with what happened 25 years aFo 18 when they gave the, charter. The City doesn' t even look lire 19 it did 25 years ago. Pay-to-day , that is the way we have t- 20 look at it. 21 Thank you very much. 22 MAYOR 141EDER: Thank you, flow many more speakers 23 do we have? 24 I au. going to ask that those who will be 25 speaking will. please present -- not repeat wliat evidence and 26 statements that have be-n already presented and unless you a. M/1l:AUl.EY &MANNING. sANrA APIA• CALIF. 17141 SSe 9400 78 i ] have something new to add, speak only on that , unless you 2 have something new to ;idd. II' dB 3 MR. S, '113f: My name is Georg,. Sandy. I live in q Santa Ana.. I didn ' t take the oath. 5 14AYOR IVIEDER: You (lid not? F0 6 MR. SANDY: I did, 7 MAYOR WIETMR: Than: you. ,I 8 MR. SANDY: I was elected by the pilot 's group over � there to their small committee of three people. I can't add 9 p- P Ii 10 too much to what Mr. Dill Gamble has alrea►iy stated on our 11 behalf except to lend my support in the same direction and ~� 12 I also want to let everybody know that I 'm available as an j 13 interested flier who derives my livelihood from flying to I 14 help resolve any problems arising. ;5 I I make myself available as much as I can and 16 1 anybody should feel free to call me ai:d Mr. Gamble , I 'm sure, 17 and Darkness (sic) . There are Circe of us on this cnmmittef. r I 10 I believe that if we as reasonable men -- I hope to claim I 19 that t;-le. If we can' t resolve some of these little problem , � 20 tlic'.z we should all be sitting here and spending our late ni gh� ?1 hours , but a lot of these things , I believe, could be settled 22 on a person-to-person basis by interested and compassionate, r 23 understanding people. 24 Thank you. 25 MAYOR 1VIEDER: Thank you very much. 26 Next speaker? i (7131 437-13)7 MACAU(.EY L4 MANNING. sAUTA ANA, CALIF. (7I.1 SSI 9400 AI 79 1 MR. DINGWALL : I+tavor 19ieder ,, members of the Counci 1 , 2 my name -- I am sure you all know, I will state it: anyway ~ 3 for these who don 't knoir mt , Bob Dingwall. I live at 7462 4 Lordes Circle , Huntington Beach. I have not been sworn. 5 (Mr. Dingwall was duly rcworn.) M 6 MR. DINGWALL: Before I get starter'., Mayor Ilieder, 7 1. have a question to ask. I would like to get something 8 straightened out here. Let' s start off with my question of 9 the staff. I have heard this conditional exception being I0 referred to as -- 70-60 and 70- 50 and exactly what is thr 11 number? Let' s get that straight right off the bat. Exactly 12 what is the number? 13 MAYOR IVIEDER: I have seen it 70-50 , BOT). 14 MR, DINGLALL: Earlier it wis 70-60 this eve7il1g. 15 MAYOR WIEDER: That was slip of my tongt2e. It was 16 corrected. I think you have it on the agenda. w 17 MR. DINGWALL: Okay, I don' t have a copy of the 1E agenda. I got here a little bit late this evening. 19 May I ask that portion of the staff that has 20 to do With making the inspections relative to this conditiona 21 exception, I heard someone say that everything had been i 22 complied with with the exception of lights on the trees. MAYOR IVIEDER: And the horse facility. 24 MR. DINGWALL: G}:ay. I 25 I didn' t catch that person's names but I would like for them to go over that aga:tn , please, at this point. r� (1121 431 1327 NOACAULCY _k MANNING. SANTA ANA.CALIF, (1141 MG 9400 r so it is extremely important. 2 MAYOR 1VIEDER: Mr. Behrens , did you hear that 3 charge as far as violation? q The City Clerk has it . 5 MR. BEHRENS: Well , as far as the special report , 1 6 we verified again tcday that all. of the conditions originally 7 unposed on CE 70- 50 have been satisfied with the exception H that obstruction lights have not bc## n placed on the trees 9 along the south side of Heil Avenue. 10 MR. DI NGI ALL: Thank you. w 11 Okay. Now we get to the ineat of the thing. 12 All right? 13 I was chairnan of the committee appointed by A 14 the City Council that looked into this situation way hack in ' 15 the beginning and it was our recommendations that brought up 11 Conditional Exceptiep. 70-50. Okay. 17 Never, never was there a condition that lights 18 would be placed on trees. I challenge whonver rakes that 19 statement to show it tc me in Writing. Lights weie to be I ' 20 placed en the power lines in the alley to the north of 21 Ile-'I. They were so placed. 22 Lights were to be placed on the blast fence. rw 23 They were so placed. 24 Lights were to be placed along the periphery 2$ of the runway. They were su placed. 26 Never was there a requirement that lights had 1313) ♦P-1337 MACAULEY &'MANNING. tWfA AriA. CALIF- I71e1 SSe t�CQ 1 81 1 to be placed on Che trees . I challenge that statement. 2 1.10011 wir-m ia: would you hold it? I an looking at O I 3 the Min Acs of June 2nd of 175 at the tine that that I 4 Conditional exception 70- 50 was approved and I would like 5 to ask our Plannini, Director. 6 fir. Selick, can you zespond to that? 7 MR. SELICK: I wasn' t here at the time. g MAYOR WIEDER: Mr. Belsito or Mr. Harlow" In our g backup material , Councilman Gibbs was presiding as Mayor at 10 the time , and the only reference made to conditional exceptio • 11 had to do vrit}s the blast fence , I recall , and it is so state.1 12 here . 13 Anybody that. can answer Mr. Dingwall? A 14 Mr. Bels i to? 15 MR. BELSITO: The conditions of approval , Number 4 , 16 unless I am reading it 4rrong , "Obstructis,n lights shall be 17 installed -on the blast fence and any trees along the north 'T 16 p.,operty line. " 79 MAYOR IVIEDER: Why arc you reading that? I 20 MR. BELSITO: October 20 , 1970, Conditional 2.1 Exception Number 70-50 , conditions of approval , E2 .C. 22. 22 MAYOR IVIEDER: Oh , I see . There is a list of ten �i 23 different conditions. 24 MR. BELSITO: That 's the one. It is Condition 25 Numter g. 26 MAYOR IVIEDER: Okay. (717) 177.(777 MACAULEY &MANNING. SANTA AMA. CALIF. (7111 558 9400 s 82 1 V!0111c1 you like to see- it? 2 MR. DINGWALL: The point being at the time there 3 were no trees . It was never intended there would be. It 4 was never intended that we would place lights on trees . It 5 is almost impossible because as the trees grow the conduit N 6 going up to the light doesn 't grow and something has to give. 7 So it presents a technical Problem right off e the bat. It is an absurd thia6 that we would require lights 9 to be placed on the tops of the trees. 10 Now , subsequent to this , the writing of this 11 paper, someone inserted that without the committee's knowledg 12 or approval. or without the recommendation of the City Council 13 that it be done. I 'm not Ccing to accuse anyone of doing any 14 wrongdoing, 1 think it was inadvertently done. 15 WOR WIEDER: Excuse me , hold it a minute . 16 Mr. Belsito, the action that was taken, the � ..1 17 last action that was taken, was five years after this paper, 10 this backup material , October, 170 , June, 175. When was this 19 action acted or.? 2C MR. BELSITU: The one in 17S were conditional 21 conditions of approval. I think that that's when you had 22 your bl.st fence installed and some other conditions were i 23 added cn to ti`at. f 24 So I really think that what we are just 25 discussing an issue here that according to the Building 26 Director is really not a critical violation of the CD. You 17U1�37.137J MAGAULEY h MANNING. SANTA ANA. CAW. I7U1 551 Vi00 i I I I 8 j � ! 1 already Beard testimony that said that even if the violation 2 of CH' were determined you would still Have that airpor: 3 operational. 4 MR. DINGWALL : I am going, to brine; us back to the 5 subject. Back in the days when we went through this original y , 6 did our original investigation , were appointed by the City 7 Council to dig into all this stuff -- on behalf of the 6 residents who live north of the airpor4 along 110il and to 9 the north of that , it was the committee 's recommendation to 10 the City Council that a blast fence be installed as an intcrii 11 measure to relieve dust and noise that was generated by I (` l I?. aircrafts sitting at that end of the airport until such time 13 , as. the -foliage that we asked the airport people, tr, at would 14 grow to the extent that it would then become a ba-evier and 15 the blast fence would no longer be needed. 16 Now we've reached that point. The plants that 17 were planted along the chain link fence on the north boundary I9 of the airport have grown up to considerable height and depth j 19 and they now are effectively a barrier for dust and noise. 01 ?A That was the original design , the intent , to have a natural 1 � 21 living wall across the north boundary of the airport, not a 22 blast fence paintcd with red and white barber stripes , but 23 something that was grcen and natural and good to look at. 24 We have reached that point in time , so the matter of 25 obstruction lights on the blast fence, as Bud says , is a V 26 mute thing. lie czn dispense with that and be much safer in i (7131 431 13V MAGAULHY It MANNING. SANTA ANA. CAL,r. (71t) 550 940O I 84 I 1 operation of the airport in so doing. 2 The matter of the Horse stables on airport ' 4 3 property, I inquired about this on behalf of the airport 4 operator, the present operator, just recently and he pleads 5 guilty to the charge. It is , in fact , there, but it' s only 6 technically there , and when I say that, the property -- there 7 arc two houses there , two single-family residences and a 0 small corral with a horse in it . 9 Thesc structures are located on property that 10 for 15 years has been the private family residence of that 11 family. It has never been art of the airport operation. � p I 12 It was never intended to be part of the airport operation. 13 There is documentation going all the way back to the originals 14 A airport operators with their original leases wherein those I 15 parcels were excluded in the lease to the airport operators, 16 Now , when Conditional Exception 70-50 was 17 written someone at the staff level did a very thorough job 18 and they researched all the legal descriptions of all the 19 parcels that were under the Norio family ownership and they jA 20 included them in this Conditional Exception 70-50. No one 21 picked it up at that time because no one bot►Iered to read ' 22 the fine print. life were all involved in a lot of emotional ( � 23 turmoil at the time . 24 So, as a result of this , those two single- 25 family residences and tiie adjoining parcel that were never 26 part of the airport operation were inadvertently included in I 12131 437 1171 PAACAULSY 4 MANNING.SANTA APJA. CALIF. 0141 331•9100 r. 0 I the conditional cxc(-,, .ion and have been there ever since that 2 t :me . It i5 the request of the people vito own the property A 3 that their hume , thei- private family thiclling , be removed 4 from the airport operation by the City and it he established 5 as just a regular residence like anybody elses. it was never 6 designed or intended to he part of the airport (operation. 7 MA'LOR wir n: Would you wind it tip? : think the 8 City Clerk Rave you special privilege, 9 MR. DINGWALL: So that brings us to the point why 10 there is a stable there , it was installed without benefit 11 of the permit . The party that ;nstalled it pleads guilty 12 to the charge . tie will do anything that the City requires 13 to straighten out the problem , But it is not part of the A' 14 airport operation and was never Fart of the airport operation. 15. MAYOR IVIEDEr: Thank you. i6 MR. DINGIVALL: So that' s the point. One more 17 second here Mayor IVieder. 18 Thcrc has been several obligations and charges 18 of what transpired back in the days of this conditional Ir.9 20 exception an3 I learned a few things. I was chairman of is 21 the committee. Ile did several things we didn' t realize 22 we did. Ile are being given credit for a lot of things that 23 �} never took place . 24 I avant to ask you ••- let 's dig into the facts 2a . a little bit on this stuff. There's been some allegations 26 made here tonight that are absolutely and totally wild and (7131 417.1321 MACAUL.EY Lk(MANNING, fiANT4. ANA,CAUr. (7141 S58 9400 I i 86 1 when we are in a court of laa: - - I ' m sure Mr. l;onfa will 2 agree , it wow ld he cha l l en keel and k1r ,, Coen will agree. You 3 just can ' t make these kind of wild allegations against a 4 legal going r-,eration. You have to substantiate them and S hufore the City Council can take any action they have to be �M G tiubstantiated. You can' t go out on a limb because someone 7 wants to point a finger wildly. It has to be duruntented and p proven. 9 MAYOR UIEVER: Thank you, We are well aware of 10 that responsibility . 11 M. E INGWALL: All right . Thank you very much and, 12 pleasv , dig a little deeper. 13 MAYOR iVIEDER: Thank you , Bob , ver), r,:uch. 14 I ti-ould like to ask the Building Director , 15 , in your transmittal of October 6 you state that the condition) 16 w7CE-70-50 as it related to the warning lights and about the 17 horse corral has been in violation and has nct been carreeted 10 Thar is as late as - - from September, 23rd to October 6 that 19 the owner of the property had not complied, 20 MR. BEHRENS : As far as we know, aside from CE 70-5 21 there appeared to us to be two violations on this prm�t•ty 22 and adjacent to it. Gne is the existence of the horse 2-1 corral , and one is the addition of a business formerly 24 known as Red Barrens . We .are pursuing these separately as 25 violations of the zoning regulations. Vie Have requested 26 . _ the City Atto-cncy 's Office that they take legal steps to 1213) 417.131, M:.CAUL,EY 1, MANNING SANTA ANA, CAUr 171 ') SSA D100 87 1 eaforce the ord-- nance and they hive commenced that enforcement t 2 Process . 3 I was advised by Mr . Neri o tonight that he 4 did file last Thursday, I believe lie said, the necessary 5 application for administrative review which is the process 6 req-aired is order to :authorize the establishment of a private 7 stable. Those are being pursued separately. We believe. the 8 are separate from this CE 70-50. 9 MAYOR 11HUDER: All right. I would ask the City 10 Administrator, the material that we have that Air. Dingwall 11 questioned of October 27th of the Planning Comc.;ssion, could 12 we have some evidence that the City Council acted on it 13 because these were requests , stipulations and we have no 14 documentntion they cane before the City Council according 15 to the Planning Commission. 16 Next speaker? 17 MR. RICKS: Mayor Ilieder, City Council , I am Ralph 18 Ricks , 5362 Old Pirate Lane. I have taken the oath. 19 1 have come tonight of course I heard of 'w the meating being brought by the H.O.M.E. Council. When 1 21 first heard they were bringing objections about the airport 22 1 thought, "There must be a lot of People behind this . The 23 1I.O.M. R. Council is representative of all the Home Owners ' 24 Associations in the City." 25 Since I live on the cast side of the airport 26 1 called the president of the Meadowlark home Owners' � 17131 431 1777 MACAULEY & 1.1ANNING. SANiA ANA. CALIF. 11111 SSI 9400 'M . * 88 I Association to join them. I was told they haven' t ha,1 a 2 meeting in over a year because no one had anything to object 3 to. 4 Since I am buying a home on the north side 5 of Meadowlark Airport I tried to join that !tome Owner:: ' 6 Association. There has never been one. 7 Tom Livengood who lives in the area, lie S represents that area as a member of H .0. M. E. Council . 1 9 go to the II.0- M.E. Council last Wednesday night to a meeting. 10 'rhey had nine members present out of 32. They called it 11 a quarum. 12 So let's get down to what the H.O.M. E. Council 13 is . I mean , it sounds impressive, but I just wonder how 14 many people are really represente►l by this organization. iS It might be all the machinery we have, but it needs to be 1S strengthened. 17 This whole consideration of !Meadowlark as 'i 18 a pub:.ic nuisance is just about as valid as calling ::he I 19 San Diego Freeway a public nuisa( :e. Now, some people that 20 Live within three blocks of the San Diego Freeway , if they 1 21 wanted to object to it I wonder if you Would hold a public j 22 hearing and consider having thr, San Diego Freeway closed. 23 There arc people killed t.-Iere, there is noise , there is 24 pollution , eveTything th:.A we have heard the airport accused 25 of. The airport is serving the public just as much as that 26 freeway is . But instead of costing tax money c is paying I � Aft 1717> 131.1171 MACAULEY Lk MANNING.SAWA ANA. CALIF. I1141 SSA V+GO s.. • _ 89 1 taxes . 'L 1,1AYOR WILDER: Thank you. 3 MR. RICKS : Sq I think this has been said before, 4 preserve Meadowlark as oiler, space that pays taxes . Looking 5 into the future the airplanes are getting quieter, the EPA 6 is gutting into this problem of noise Cron, small .airplanes 7 and in the next five years we are going to sec mt,ch quieter 8 airplanes , we are going to see retrofitting nufflers that 9 everybody is going to scream about , but it is going to ,I 10 happen and it 's going; to be for the good of everybody and 11 the potential of having this airport as a feeder facility 12 to Los Angeles International -- anytime you want to go to 13 Sacramento or San Diego ..t • takes you an hour to two and a 14 half hours to get to your ticket counter in Los Angeles .. 15 International . 16 With the air taxi service at Meadowlark you 17 could be there in 20 minutes. This is the potential we have 18 at this airport. i I 19 MAYOR WILMER: Your light is on. Woul(. you sum up, 20 Slr? 21 MR. RICKS : Okay. As far as safety is conccrned, 22 we hear all thc. . :. scares and of course when there is a mid- 23 air collision like a couple of weeks ago everybody is 24 panicked because there are planes falling; out of the sky. 25 In all of last year in all of the United �. 26 States there were 14 people killed in mid-air collisions , s ' 12171 437 1777 MACAULEY & MANNING. GANTA ANA. CAMr. 17141 558 P ^� .w i 90 1 nobody on the grouted, Nobody in Huntington reach has ever Z died as a result of an airplane , in the laity of Mintingtan � I3 Beach. There have been accidents. There has never been u 4 by-stander injuried to my knowledge. 5 MVOR WIEDER: Would you please wind up? 6 Mit. RICKS: That 's it . 7 MAYOR M EDER: Thank you very much. Any further 6 evidence? g Hold it a minute . I would like to ask the 10 City Attorney, we have an hour -- we have been at this; an i 11 hour. I would like to offer the stenotypist another break, 12 but we will not recess . Can we move the agenda and take rip 13 some other business while she takes her break? 14 MR. BONPA: Yes , ma' am. 15 MAYOR WIEDER, All right. lie are going to keep the 16 public hearing open and defer, continue the public hearing 17 for ten minutes to give our stenotypist a chance -- you can 18 relax now. 19 (Other matters.) 20 MAYOR WIEDER: We will resume the public hearing. 2l It is 10: 15. We will go until five minutes to 1I :00 and we 22 trill have annoueements and recess the Council and have the 1 w crecutive meeting at 11 :00. 24 MR 5111MION: My name is Ivan Shimmon. I live in 25 Long Beach , and I have taken the oath. 26 I cone down here tonight to your Council meeting I 1 17131 /77.1 i;7 MACAULEY 6c SIANNINCi. SAWA ANA. CALtr. 17141 556 9JOQ 1 because I understood that Meadot+larl: Airport was in dire nec,ii 2 of being closed. I was afraid it was going, to be closed. N♦ � 3 I fly for a major airline , I have been flying 4 for an airline 27 years . I was a Navy pilot also for 33 5 years . I enjoy flying light airplanes . 6 I have a little Red Pit Special that maybe 7 somebody was making reference to as flying around. I cannot 0 afford to go out and break any Federal Aviation Regulations. 9 If I do, my career is down the drain. I don' t break 10 regulations . 4 11 MAYOR WIEDCR: Do you fly in and out of that n 12 airport? 1� MR. SIMMON: I most certainly do. I fly in and 14 out of Meadlowlark Airport. My airplane is in a hanger in 15 Lone, Beach. But I cannot buy a sandwich at the Long Beach � 16 Airport. There is not a cafe there . I come to Meadowlark 17 to have my s andwi-ch there. 18 I an) a. member of the Civil Air Patrol at 19 Long Beach. There are 25 airplanes parked in our Civil Air 20 Patrol lot , about 25 more of them at the Long Beach Airport . 21 We spend a lot of time at Meadowlark Airport coming over 22 Sunday afternoons for pleasure. 23 We enjoy flying in and out of there and we ' re 24 not there for violations. Now, we have an awful problem with 25 scheduled airiines and that's why I 'm down here, closing 771 26 airports , noise; , regulations . 1311) 431.1321 MAGAULEY d MANNING. 5ANTA AUA. CALM 1,11) SSE 9400 1 1 Today when 1 landed in 1,os Angeles Internation1al I 2 Airport after 11: 00 .at night if the wind is ten miles an 3 hour or less from the Hest I must land to the east , downhil.L , 4 with the wind because of action of people around the airport 5 that have no regard foi the safety of people flying tho.,e 6 airplanes . I don' t like it an), more than anybody else. 7 Los Angeles International Airport has been 8 branded by the Airline Pilot's Association , they put the 5 number one airport on the black list because of that , because 10 oA. the► public reaction around that airport. 11 Long Beach Airport, a major airline quit 12 flying in and out of that airport five years ago because 13 they were asked not to fly -an airplane nut of there after i p 14 9 :00 or land before 7 :00 in the morning . That major airline 15 said if we sign that paper with the C;.ty of Long Beach we 16 are going to have to sign it all around the United States , 17 we cannot afford to do it. And they had to take their planes 18 out o:E there. 19 Now, I don' t want to see airports closed. But , i 20 yes know, you close Meadowlark and ix gives them a little 21 more ammunition. We might see Los Angeles Inter.riational 22 Airport closed. Where are we doing to go if they close that? �! 23 We' re going to drive 80 mules. We' re not going to fly 80 24 miles out of Sunset Beach or Meadowlark Airport to Palmdale 25 to get on a scheduled airline because Meadowlark won't be 26 there either. (7131 407.1777 'ACA.ULEY Lk MANNING. LANTA ANA. CALIF. 9400 1 _.-.___9 3 1 1 We nerd theya airports . We need them dogg one 2 bad. 3 Now, we 1}ave got .a lot of emotion going here 1 and I 'm just as emotional as the other people. But take a 5 look at the majority of then. I don' t Know how many citizens 6 you have living in Huntington Beach but I ' ll bet you that 7 500 ,000 people are in Luntington Beach. When you take the: 8 percentage of tine people that are complaining about your •i 9 airport against the percentage of the people that are not , 10 there's an awful lot of people that are very, very happy 11 with that airport and don 't be misguided by a lot of noise 12 that this airport has got to go. That airport is doing an 13 awful fine job. That airport is operated under some very 4 14 adverse conditions . 15. I had an airplane at that airport in 1959 and 16 I know that at that time it was having all kinds of trouble , 17 then because of groups of people hollaring about the noise. 18 I had an injunction not an injunction , a subpoena served 19 on me to go testify in court because I was parkins my airplan 1 20 on the Wrong side of the runway. That i,as in 1959, but they 21 survived. Thank goodness . 22 I hope you people will helr it out and give 23 them a pat on the back. These pilots that are flying in and 24 out of this airport -- 25 MAYOR WILDER: Would you wind tip , please? 26 M. S11I1 MON: Surely. I didn' t mean to talk so lon . M 12131 A77 1377 MACAULEY 1k SIANNNG. SANTA ANA. CALF. 11141 SSA 9JGO sue. 94 I I They will cooperate with you. Evc.-ry ene of these pilots will • 2 cooperate witli you . They are flying, in and out of it. .lust 3 ask them to -- you don' t have to ask them to, they are 4 cooperating. There is a lot of emotion here that is not 5 necessary. Keep your airport . 6 MAYOR IVI EDER : Thank you. 7 Our population is 151 ,000 . 8 Do you have something nei% to add? I 'm going 9 to try to rush along. I am not going to deny you. 10 MR. RABURN: I am not representing anybody but - 11 myself. 12 MAYOR IVIEDER: That is good enough. 13 MR. RABURN: My name is Vern Raburn. I live at 14 16871 Canyon Lane and I did take the oath. 15 MAYOR WIEDER: Is that in Huntington Reach? 16 MR. RABURN: Yes . I live right next to Meadowlark 17 Airport . My house faces right on the east side of beadowlark 18 and my bedroom window opens up on Meadowlark Airport . 19 I represent myself, no one else. I am a I � 20 pilot, and I came down here tonight not really intending 21 to say anything on this eve of our national election when 22 we are often asked to exprer•. ourselves. There have been a ii 23 lot of allegations tonight. I thought maybe it would bo. good 24 to answer tliem, but I don' t know if it would do any good. 25 It is an extremely charged and emotional issue. 26 Some of the allegations , I feel , have been ver 1701 431.1177 MACAULLY &MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF. ills) S:1 9400 I unfounded , made by pool)le wlio don' t know anything; about 2 aircraft . Sone of then have been made by cxtrcmr, ly knowledge,- 3 able people that know about aviation and the operation of an 4 airport. 5 As far as being; a public nuisance , I sleep 6 at night with my window wide open. I have never been woken 7 tap by aircraft at Meadowlark. I have been awakened by trucks , 11 drag; racing , police sirens on (Varner Avenue. I don't thin}: 9 we want to consider Warner Avenue a nuisance. 10 As far as accidents , I have seen five times the 11 number of accidents at the major intersections surrounding I 12 Meadowlark Airport than I have seen on the airport involving 13 aircraft. Again , it is an element of risk , let' s face f 14 reality. Accidents are going; to happen. 15 It' s an open space . I find it extremely 16 enjoyable to me to look ou-t my window at something other than 17 apartments , homes , at a little bit of space, at the suit 16 setting over the aircraft, the sun setting; over the trees 19 behind the airport. 20 It is an area that is becoming scarcer and 9.1 scarcer in our cities or in our area, and I believe it is 22 something that we should look at from recreational standpoi t. 23 It does benefit a lot of people. Not just the pilots , but 24 people who enjoy aviation, people who enjoy the airport , 25 people who enjoy coining; out and seeing something;. _i 26 MAYOR iVIEDER: The light is on, sir. Would you (710) A31.1327 MACAULrY & MANNING. GAN1A ANA. CALIr. (1141 556 9100 f 1 mind - - 2 M. R/1t111RPJ : I guess I would like to close by sayin' : 3 I would like to cooperate . I 've tried to cooperate . IVlien 4 I fly out of t•teadowlark I try to maintain my altitude , I 5 try to maintain my pattern , I try to follow the patterns 6 established. 7 But something that has struck me tonight in 8 listening to all of this , I haven ' t head From the , unquote, 9 opposition, I haven' t heard any desire to cooperate from them. 10 I don 't know why that is . I know the pilots -could like to ! � 11 Cooperate. I think we can reach a workable situation . 12 MAYOR IVIEDER: Thank you. Excuse me , Mr. Belsito, 13 do you have your light on? . t � 14 MR, BELSITO: I 'm sorry. 15 • MAYOR IVIEDER: Yes , sir. 16 MR. DRAKE: My name is Ilarland Drake. I have 17 taken the oath. I live at 7601 Whitney Drive , in Huntington 18 Beach . I have been a resident of the City for 15 years , a 19 property owner. At, one time I lived in the apartments at the 20 end of Bolsa Chica. 21 I show on my log 'book that I have been flying 22 out of the East Lop, - Reach Airport since the late '40 's. 23 A few comments that I would like to make , no 24 law quoted or anything , but just personal observations that. 25 I have seen over the years . r 26 Turner may have turned a lot of people off. A 1213) 431.1321 MACAULEY (Si MANNIMG. SANTA ArIA. CALIF. (7111 SSB•9�U0 r w 97 1 lie was an activist , but he was trying; to make the, airport 2 safe by r xtending the runway so we would have more room to 3 take off and it could bG hiLher over the streets in the 4 north and south as we take off, cutting down noise and 5 improving the safety factor . 6 Another big point that hasn' t been touched on 7 tonight is that the Huntington Beach Airport has brought a 8 lot of business and industry to Huntington Beach providing 9 employment for the people who live here. I have been with 10 McDonnell Douglas for 24 years. I am not speaking for them, 11 I am speaking as an individual. But I was the schedule 12 supervisor for the Saturn Program before the plant cane j 13 down here. One of the big considerations for Douglas to 14 relocate was the fact that it had an airport. Many other 15 businesses have been attracted to this City and to the 16 I industrial park that you ara pushing south of McDonnell 17 Douglas because there is an airport. It is an asset. It' s 18 not a public nuisance , not a liability , an asset to build 19 up the tax base for the City , to keep the property tax down 20 for the home owners , myself and everyone else , 21 Thank you. 22 MAYOR Mr-DER: Thank you, Air. Whitney. 23 flow puny more speakers do we have? Will we 24 be hearing from Air, yerio? All right. You ' ll be the last 25 speaker. 26 All right . ,after this gentleman. They will r• �4 12131 431 1327 MACAULEY !k MANNING. SANT% ANA. CAUr. MA) 550 9+00 98 1 he the last speakers . 2 MR. DE NUCC10: Fred DeNuccio. I have been sworn. 3 I live at 17092 at. Andre%.s Lane , Huntington Beach. I live 4 two blocks jus� a little southeastof the airport . I purchase 5 my home there in 1965 . I granted to live near the airport . 6 I came to California in the first place becaus 7 I . love aviation in 1949 anti worked for Douglas . I worked for 8 Northrup. Y, 9 My purpose for having; a home there was because 10 I have a very large family and a very large home. Most of: 11 the kids are grown now because it has been about ten years 12 and unly two are at home . But I use my airplane at Meadowlar 13 to commute to work. I work in 1awthorne. For three years 14 straight I have commuted daily to Hawthorne because. it was 15 my feeling that it was a comfortable way to get to and from 16 work and it was a hobby. It is a sport for me . It is ona I 17 of the few recreations that I have. During; this period of 16 time, two or three years ago, there was a lot of hassel abolit 19 Meadowlark. I was down at about a year's worth of meetings , k 20 Planning Commission meetings . A few of you are still here 21 who were present at that time , but I watched the Planning ?? Commission. 1 watched conditional variances come before tltr. 23 Council from a lot of businesses in town. 24 I look at Meadowlark as just one of many 25 businesses in town and I think it has a right to exist as ' r. 26 a business , as a piece of private property. I have a piece i (111) MACAULEY Oc MANNING. SANTA AMA. CALIF. 111Al 5530400 W� 1 For 11 rivate property. 1 don ' t want my H-Hits encroached upon 2 as a residential piece of property, I feel as though maybe 3 something more definitely has to be established to bet-in 4 wi.th. When I bought my house from a developer in the first 5 place 1 had my brochure that was made from a Dire Department 6 map . It purposely doesn' t show the airport . It show; 7 Meadowlark golf course there . B I nm simply sayin- that when I came to the g Council Chambers several year.,; : o I looked at the yoning 10 map that was out of date on the wall. and I had to go to 11 get the proper maps because various zones had been changed. 4 12 I think that a lot of information is available 13 Like, I think , for instance. , right now on our agenda you say 14 that it is R- 1 property. I doubt that. I think that it is 15 R-3, R - - there are various zonings in there. I think that 16 sometimes we don' t have the information correct in the first 17 place. I look forward to more on that. If people don' t 18 come and seek it out, like I have, to find out , then we really 19 don't know where we stand. A 20 MAYOR iVIEDER: All right . flow is that property 21 zoned? R-1. How is it on the fire map , Chief Picard? On i 22 our fire maps is that allegation valid? 41, 23 CHIEF PICARD: I would have to look. I don' t � 24 recall an airport designation on our fire response maps , 25 on our individual quarter section maps for whatever district 26 that is. It is cc -tzinly designated there , but on the r� (JI]I /]l•1]i1 MAGRULCY MANNING. SANTA ANA. CALIF. MAI $59 1400 100 1 individual or major map that we duplicate we generally don' t 2 specify areas other than schools. 3 MR. DE NUCCIO: This was a real estate map for 4 Prestige Homes and used for part of the printing. The fire 5 map is the background. It is a nice job of leaving the 6 airport off. 7 MAYOR WIEDER: All right. We will bring that to 8 the attention of the Board of Realtors . Thank you, 9 Mr. DeNuccio , for your testimony. 10 The last speakers before we close -- we are 11 not closing the public hearing , before we close testimony on 12 this hearing will be Mr. Nerio. 13 Your name sir, our address ? Itave you taken � � � Y 14 the oath? 15 M11%. NERIO: Art Nerio. 17122 Marina View Place , 16 Huntington Beach. I 'm the owner and manager of the airport 17 and I decided not to say anything because of all the emotion 18 involved. 19 MR. BONFA: Did you take the oath, sir? i A 20 MR. NERIO: Yes , I took the oath. 21 1 decided not to say anything tonight because 22 everyone has been so emotional and hold it for some other tim I ,.� 23 with my attorney' s concurrence. 24 I did bring a couple of letters that someone 25 called and said, "If you are going to the meeting, I would i 26 love to go , but I can't make it ," and asked ne to bring :t I I � l7171 471.1777 MACAULEY Oi MANNING. 6ANfA ANA. :ALtF. 171A! SSL 9100 � o I over and here it is . 2 MAYOR IVIEDER: Do you want to submit it to the 3 Clerk as evidence? 4 MR. NERIO: Yes. Thank you, 5 MAYOR WIEDER: Thank you. 6 Are there any questions the City Council at 7 this time would like to ask any of the participants in the 8 public hearing? 9 Are there any questions that you would like 10 to ask the staff at this time? 11 All right. Seeing none- we will cut off the 12 testimony and that portion of the public hearing where 13 witnesses present testimony and evidence. We will continue 14 the public hearing at which time we will make a decision on 15 the revocation of the conditional exception an well as whether 16 the City of Huntington Beach, the City Council , will declare 17 Meadowlark Airport a Public Nuisance. 18 We will do that after Councilman Shenkman 19 and Councilman Pattinson have listened to the tape of all 20 the evidence presented in almost three hours ' of testimony. 21 I will close the public hearing. We won' t 22 make a decision. Okay, �. 23 At this time then -- is there anyone else J 24 who would like to address the City Council? 25 Mr. Novak? .� 26 MR. NOVAK: One minute. I have taken the oath. j MACAUL.EY d MANNING. SANTA ANA.CALIF. 358.9400 1 Identified myself before . 2 It was stated that there were no accidental 3 deaths . You have our list of the accidents and the deaths. 4 I would like that evidence to be put into the recurd, please. 5 MAYOR WIEDER: Thank you, Mr. Novak. The last 01 6 speaker and then I will close the public hearing. Do you 7 want to come forward? Give us your name again . 8 MR. BARDFRI- N: Ben Barderman. I would like to say 7 9 that it has been said several times that we didn' t want to 10 cooperate with the people who are in favor of the airport. i 11 Now , that is not true , but the things that we did say have 12 just been completely disregarded. That is , the noise, the 13 deliberate noise. I am talking about an airplane or two 14 that can do something with their muffler, whatever they have 15 - on .1t, that really makes a buzzing sound. 16 Now, one of those biplanes was making S curves 17 over our area quite high and then coming down low, but this • 19 wasn' t following any pattern. tie was buzzing and making a ' 19 noise that was really obscene. 20 Now , I would like to say that we can cooperate � 21 with these people .if they do fly a pattern if they stay over 22 -- from flying over the school yard which they do consistentl 23 and if they cut down the noise. 24 Now, can they do that? Can someone here 25 answer that? 26 MAYOR IVIEDER: All right . I am going to close the r t217i 43?-1727 MACAULLY 8c MANNING, OANrA ANA. CALIF. (7U1 SSB•v�00 I i � 103 1 public hearing and I am going to ask Mr. Gamble and who is 2 the other gentleman? There were three members of the 3 committee. 4 MR. SANDY: George Sandy. i 5 MAYOR W.IEDER: George Sandy. Can you give us your 6 telephone number publicly so that those citizens in the 4 7 audience who might want to show their offer of cooperation .- 8 er I ' ll tell you what . If there is any hesitancy, for those s, 9 citizens in the audience who would like to offer cooperation 10 as Mr. Barderman has just done and would like to get 'in touch 11 with the representative representing the pilots who fly in 12 anJ out of there , would you do so by letting Mr. Belsit.o 13 know. and we' ll get in touch with the pilots committee. 14 All right? 15 Now I will declare the public hearing closed. 16 We will make a decision at the City Council meeting the first 17 meeting in December. 18 19 20 j 21 + 22 23 24 25 26 (2131 AP.III? MACAULEY & MANNING. /ANT^ ANA. GAUr. 1?141 Jim 9400 sr 1 2 3 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE 4 5 is Prtricia J. Sniidcrn a Shorthand 1 6 Reporter and a Notary Public' of the State of California with i 7 principal office in the County of Orange, do hereby certify 8 that the foregoing proceeding was written by me in Stenotypy, 9 and transcribed into typewriting and that the foregoing is a I 10 true and Correct copy of my shorthand notes thereof. i 11 � 12 . 13 14 �r ,r wr • 15 Dated: Povewber 15, 197617 o:l '�• • - . i5 18 • 19 t� 20 21 22 23 24 25 i 26 • M31 431.1321 MACAULiY 0k MANNING,SANTA ANA,CALIF. (7141 $51•9400 • r 0 I vr I _-_ - _.C[ COIN G/L /iv�o� .�,ft-Tr o�✓ Cr'wc�iz�r'/�✓G— - -I - _. . 44iwbGwti.� - V/0. `14r-P D erry_ o,edrftNrC,s/ . C17-� -- C fop Pp/:NlNrliS� = " IT L - 6A1 G-vsZ— �-7i t 17-7j A M eMr - U.�a�_�4Tio-+.� lve'i�E L/ST�1}- . 'T�wc �e0��•► /�� rG_/.��4-�. . -. ._.__ � 1-7-761 c2rn� lq. Al INgR . sFi✓T- !.✓/T" r 774���� ..__ .. _... 1V O 7— - i __.._//o . . .0 r T3' �-T'T�'-t�s-�'Y /�. Nam' C'�•h!'�-�e'/�. _.Tu __/'�✓ _ - _ ----- Gvi4�r� L r pps / _ C/�f�r� L/,�-�✓d_ _ (/.S'C' 7`�'/��.-� � i�9ry _. C_'! r- c-ri-S _Gi-r.r.t-e— 4e,C.rrF/C,IJ_ ��✓-. - - ----- - W /Z_r-Trrv6, -- Nc7 Cb.v►, Lr�4i,, G..F - -/�7--? . . =.Q�•�.,� _._.. --- - Lv. 7;4'A rr S. .�'. .�?i - � - R C S ���� /sir c°SC-c a� rim.✓ FC'�NI. 1-T' ? --- �,o!'i R/{ �. L`�C� T� n Ji./ 11lc L A Trc.✓ , -- rc TrD�,. � 77' /2j- a 4/s cam.-i M. ess t,�. rrtr.✓ . /C, D /V C-_C q-rz y. L3�. v M C-.Yr S l+i fiS "7S A T-c . .. . rs Nc•tt� l'�c'c� c"sy iyc-- �.4/.•.�,Acr ,��C'cc E'�d.0�' . __ _ - . __ � l _ lS C Gov C o S 5i✓ / �✓a�; /�✓G— 77(c. /E'!J`t=S �i ,�Nv R t u�,�r� o.✓.� or Q r�s t D v.✓ i�C— _ C CLINAIL i. X-C lz ►d ' rlh' J; TC .s C� � /'v�4-1 L � /A/ 3C 7�14 �3 c r--5 s CP - C oJ,/ p l;r oN p C X C e rr r ur✓ o - S"6 G on.1 c c�C.���✓ /ViC40owitoRt< A-lp, IVr T AND /4L Sc as1< . 7'f!A — - g T-lir r r< T-A K& m m E h'P i E 1j [: r-r vA1 `rO E AJ FO.,e C.G - C oM fir ►4 w_c-,� OF _ V SG-5 P Ey r rrets Sec r!o,✓ Prt' UCC=55 OF REVI&t,/ln/6- G97f'hft�ll` �,p6x� LE•�tS __.. S� u/VV IWC.-- '� Ct-rfE5 l rr-vTI , rtr,�+/� L CXCC-PT7oA✓ 11ACCUbVAC ( fl-n.fA �I li _. T -1 - 1d4 - 71 9it,A P Moilt fKtr*i to cone hr.•te toi tpu , horeoet o '66COLued a tettaa at W and the btrnasaUps aould be ro,t�thtasa by yams "jA araatlart. A" U !.e tepstid& U tha *so /it Ika.eboa R"M4 C", Ow4 ptawalAt dept. ash" thwo to tat e+e *R app"Z"I of tSU wsa bal.4"V. :AAA 9" opl,6104 doe Mot oaaw that 9AW eerie +tole the Rst•rst ". Ala Aad thta oa os -tl-go t400s is ISO N"46 sips aUA the &&U6 "U snot R&ttott bmlidlt " *K aoratdalt do "yAtoj... 9t aasew► that Mils "a Ro# s6 cUb bsAU L" of U &4"J t o4A the a0-/ r I UA4-0 t f by trier+ 44M owe #t,. 7A►a GUI Ikea Mass alkol"a. 1 let 44 441 A"p Pop#4 * tU dot, &ad too" Mier knildiwt. 9A" dell Mat ao.t "t a" o f t & dswy}eeaa's ao adr" peas &UamUoaa we now bans.. i f Cat Le rood sser to" daP4 cad to.at atty "avadl lhst SAsy awes batwsws a Ot ���Gc.a�wE�,l+ C r Cdvs.�.roe � •A i .eoa+k mad s A"d spot,. We 0000M Cst*4"" 4A" 9W 44pe49 algid say that e'~tty Ike► spp"usd 44 bauWat„ Cot t4a44 •".1. &AWA Iwws to it ZU oG 64mp of 614po4t the.astabs booe+e+s it oo#$4 mast 90-1 &Upon. ; 9Art& act a mU l tat d/ra " ent o f the lar&sLt,r that &W sere mAww p" lane a bwLtdtap ed owe p4malAp dSept la At. Na4U sett Jw e s ahote►e... Kwy ulr the #.N &Lips so As 4Ao* d Aware dons 10 ye4.a spa, o4 clods dosK ahtclk A►a &hao'd do wao { ahl& Ong the Af k Ra#"t 4jab eau poet the &,ty out s f a dad &pot. Rnd per°&` 1 t • DEPARTMENT CW YRAbtOOIDRYA" 00`1 FIDIRAL AVIATION ADAUN SiNATION M►pT�AmNIN ' /.�1st Ii11t.1rMuoM/MTK taI1M ' u1 AMil1.wsele�earl �,► pry r • September 15, 1976 TO ALL =C12 t6D t Aeronautical Study No. 764M-401-0E Los Angeles Informal Airspace heating No. 49 will be bald In the Executive Conference Roca, Federal BuiLding, 15M Aviation Blvd., Rawthorma, California, commencing at: MOO as on Friday, October 159 1976. h This meeting has been called to assemble all persons having a valid I� interest in Aeronautical Study Mo. 76-M-401-Ot. Study 76-WE-401-0E is an obstruction evaluation of a proposed 2-story Racquat Ball facility near Meadow Larl: Airport at. Huntington Beach, California. The purpose of the mceting is to gather facts relevant to the effect the proposed structure would have un the safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace. . Details of this cue ara being furnished on the enclosed notice. Correspondence relative to this came should be addressed to my office. interested persons may ccoment orally or in writing at the :nesting. Written conumfts may also be submitted to fay office up to Five days following the meeting. Due consideration will be given all Comments received so the Federal Aviation Administration may stake a decision which vill be in the public interest. I DM M. DAVZS ` Chief, Airspace and Procedures Branch Air Traffic Division Elnclosura i i it 'i DEPARTMENT Of TRANSPORTATION FIDI1RAL AVIATION AVAINISI'AATIO^ In any Wo ry AIIN10111f IIAL IM e o AIR TIiA►M DIVISION. VAtS If+g. 76-fiE�4D1�0E ,vI Itah` ISIMI Avletlat Blvd. ""a me, Ca. f? M Moil: F. 0. dos 9=07 WWW Way PC • Los MRMK Ca. OWN AERONAUTICAL STUDY OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OR ALTERATION Mole Davelopa> Ut T TlMI {.9c� A_t1�M 419 ]!Bain Street P Ijuntixagton gesche Califortaia 92648 ti>agton Eeat:hr ogw"; , AM: Peter E. Von Eltonest >b>Klosed) ' General Counsel tatflltNt �atratft� . 33042 t 34" 113e111 sticalwrla "is" li. /utl CONiTAYCTION ,ems a,� �vr sI t rllore�io 2 Story lwquet Ball >lrecility 26 64 .... w A notice has been filed with the Federal Aviatioe Administration that tiro above doscrlW stroottwo Is pepo*W for r ti • ties. As proposed the sa u xure would ascwed the otadards of Sebifut C of Part 17 of the Federal Aviation Regolalson r would be identified as an obstrucilon to air nevfgotics. Accordingly, the FAA Is condastlar as swe"MAJoal sooty of Site posal to determine its affect upon the sale and efficient sae of the navigable airspace by aircraft sad oa the opueNes of air; +, navlierioo facilities. r�. .t In the study,consideration will be given to all hers relevant to the alfaet of the proposal oa existing sad plsasel altwpwea owl sir nevlgatloa facilities;•airparte; aircraft spared Ono, procedues sad aislaunt fllobt altitudes; sad the Irk erafffd ov Wel feat. Jfowovw.osly tboom pis" on(fit with the FAA.=the date the notice soecsrnlsg the above described prwpoesd%nonetnta dos was received. will be conside ted. Interested persons are Invited to participate in tbw aeronautical study by eabotitting comments to the FAA office lssafeg this actles. To be eligible for coneiderstloe, comowrsts nowt be relevant to the effect the proposed conamodon would have as aid~ atics,provide sufficleat detail to permit a clew raderstsaWing, and be received on or before September 10 r 1976, Please refer to the awanoutical study amber printed is the upper risht head cornet of this notice. This notice may be reproduced and teciraulated by say interested parson. The proposed structure would exceed 77.23(d)(2)(i) Runway Approach Surface by its entire balght. Using the 5001 displaced threshold of Mm�ay 01 however would result in the 291 portion of the structure exceeding the 20:1 slope by .9 fast; the 21 parts of the structure would not exceed this slope. l F t s 1 Chiefs Airspace and Procedures Branch dfirerQN -M. D I9 Air Traf€ia Division t Los Angeles, California on &jot 11. 1976 i FAA Farm 7440.1 14.71► AIRPORT MANAGERS-PLEASE POST I I r 011A oW Lwxk 44APAt l I r h J r J WH � hl � A wr • I i • i LEROY H. BROWN AUI►00f 4q ALTS1 l 0 ON/TRUCTIOp 9VALU6TmM Wt 01t AN Rt01011 NLiDOYiIITtU/ I/O/0 AVIAT10N DLVO. IiIfI/f�•/1'l• 04AWTPOMfIL.CA./03" • i • I l 1 ' • i l s to Hill ji is Bill, fig s t + _ i m I - ill a U • f • 1 • • 9L�at 9 ramie 1.1�:s to fw rosla 1MelC sep Ipe �e� t�iw�t e+ �/�WWI aalrtsS" e.44ai "P s4pe44 Le 74 (104 Not orKLlf apsopso lad to stisrt to 7-1 .44101466a+it I that U a" Cal-trio, o6tLf..t!** to 4t4&l}hte* sat the as" by 4e1644eQin¢ that ffleadoo&4k meet the 74 amity .te"44emeKU , lna,tead of te-ore.tt+tg 94495 than again oa the old 62 lard, that rete ■sale before •any 6KLUL994 rc4e, bK.tlt atognd at. j&td. 7hlA 010,61Y have a044ected the p-tobtf-4 4tght the#$ and thece..,. weartUlt all fteld aogld haue ttoo�cytoee, beea"e Lt ptohty comUlt neet tht 2,600 it 4amml tegm a&&nt, Moreuk be1#$q tha pa�tcore�twt of attpotta, eel -tta#$a rowld #$ot alone the f4a". i 9 1"te j,"a a AdCen+ey lettat , "s,tsdaZ*f Us p"" the &4ht to yore to loesl gou"Mosi t, #$ot the $late," ""qgote... Mae 4a 62 4kw the*e �tme#$tt to sect re4c, 20-1 take off ctea wwes, 7-1 &Ue alestaneo, h"d tmcray and it fee l.tghta jot f o¢gy da yt.. As, lrsn¢ a4 the allfZetd haY.tho 20-1 ex.4c c.". Cat tit " does not 9.4e: a da" .hax U gnde-t tleat cLUb, beaagae, "eg-&tAtL.tg tar ;taea the tight to 7o#$e to local g oetnxent, not .the State" f+lhen Cat-tta►" sayti the. f U7U pa•tte-ta to ",safe", they meat& that jdtnAc4t cast a tt c mb at to 20-/.... Cat t.tant does Psot wean that & td "aafe'l to haje. Rpta, dtoted, ho■ee. LLtttt. teaq.te of aehoolq d4Aeotly 94de.4 the jttfAt pCLUC4 c� ZU A 014 a 6tead yore. She aase foes f of the 4e4db4 pallet#$. Cast haws opsGy na *oat planet caps doll a" oat o L #We !a. At J04 the shoo 4"maq Cal tars" dues not even anars. i# owl lsztesa on hoe *oak 4ray da sa#mtly r+e46te sad ho r wm4 I t j was pap" t~aq.. We Loo a Mat a A f lW ootty hew. 207G eosin" the 120 it " yava thus and U A" to dedwct fo* a 220 thseahotd dssptacasen-t. Without the 720 ft ptoblabte &one of the plants roKU have to atop gait¢ the IZeU at. a.tt. 0 bet.teue that Meadarta4k La the ahotteyt .t► Way to cast f that !a to a c:.ty..... 6ajPe4st pUota have told m4 U La ham place to ude and so•t ptlot3 shou.[d .sot eves be Leyij4. Moo L f Cat-.leans eared about of pe drape it Za Aauip t to .,ay had pope.L ova-c.. the pnb4 a4deA tab.e-o t f that plane K.p nn tth onmtd not have pl.o1+ed Zltto 9ceu.ells Zee rcea�e peke and bwtrrp chW•een.. Noo LheXoa& a second ray that ..he al tpa" coK/d have been made as f lt;; n4. Ne-tio com.ld have boufht Kp tnough4 land to have a cleat apace wde.c take f f.. but he did "t.. 9 dorset .think he evp`cted aZyoa..t to be here thU tonf .. Nor this °hot potstre la beLi¢ tossed f.toa a4ty cow wU to east-teens back end forth.. 9M wanit eyed play the "*o.. MeadorLatiE Zs not a paasengs.e aa"yZA4 xUpoet ao M does not yJ,vs ..t r couViloate, ltke t&q do Mwtbswk. Keadow&&L Ls not Zn "me a4" as 8"ba.A and dose not antosati taatt.y f&U �-e � i Ma.Kenny aterjd the a&po.et has daf f eared asiAtaxas/flM bat he Wx Ot 1 p 1 bother to -tare mist At. dsfaeced rswstsa" w", es say Lf hs rat. doZn¢ say- O.JA# about U. o& "uU the city do anythiesp cheat irt....0 ks sayti It Za doobial if ffesdowlstk oo*U weet todsys tsy+cieementr.. ps to top am and hs knooa Jos. date o&U r in evaUnet mete todsys "Jeq ptote tan. boast the people, of k.K. dois, & tedsye 1976 safety p4otee,CLoa0??? fl" os s+sppoae to be hrsppy XUA t 1&4 Lana ssda 14 yesta, d" e/he,s thin tosrs sea woitly J94M IW*&"???? Ike" people arts sa 44 eUy aoms&U fame 76 -=f sty psoteetLon... 9hsy dos it wsAt to be told that they rum .9 hsas i t be&"" AisPost Z& nadee g4dad Path" clrtaas... Me PwM4 fathae "Ppossd Zan Haus4 swat to be roved to pat peopt Uo" Z% &wjy ee e4 &ad Zt has bw j ea •area .ee ache b y SUI aowae.14 t+s loom ohe es Lt rss It a.a f sty f sotoa.... i 1 i • flow to GAS"& tlia ewbka.. be VOM alb Rweo rh"s lha tel Phooa baudLp noo aosda?? well " &d if" pil,ta lost ewntast of Chao p/sas th"e and &404 ed o* awwa spot hb1J.. llf thew both. Who wZU be ill lsd lass "vC, not J46t pZiota . live Aeat tha K&Awehy 94isd sblaha+r araod. Wet //" NU" coaabad IOU plus thsxs, whs,c 4Nd row oasaNt. Oe la oosb if and sheppUt th"a wool? Moo abowC Soles ChUma and FdZafes. 'VA"a oesb&" of As 1l4omeh fast4 dW aK a OMMM4 let thass. Ohs" p4mS dwp a too foot hats lu tha f"Ma cold boasaad on" and aooe to resat. who b tfsrl t an tA" spot todayM 0" JoM wo*nlAp low pilots lost thete Uv" ossshl++F a"t to the oo,witsy dry eakost of 69408 s, Vd aps-L+ydsto, s+wtha.spta+ee s,sMANi on MCOJorvlsr shoo4 p so da. RMoth" owl tha etse Want oZ"4 w d dropped Rot tlase into o _ ,,vsa maZa" pool wiawotsa oft" ahbldes+e lied etLsbed oat at Mobt st. Nl." Kahewe ha` ptat**" of ors that cat off it psis fete and a"shod as" -.• �,v >i..s. hose.. 7odal Carat opticwt co has o f ft" on spot.. A" Rat U *sashed at Fdln¢em and 1104a Chase ajod su f f ertod 6weoi oase 20% of A" bo4q.. #)hoses the" age.. SN44 Stet a hsd to 14s6 hey: s.al.0 deaflitc-e and ram feow anoth" aessh xt to hot howae.. focA tAo 4444a.ea Bohee ro.tksd sit day ahs has 41alt ssom d Meadaa4 A a•es4Jies Bros h" Ikosa. { 4 S*i k/&A `'-`-- `" ssasabetheawt,.�p s blanks,t ow" is pl.4t rli UA U" 096 flss, while aLtpaet ac*t a 4es4Db)4L owes to pw.tl plane yKliw 4 b"A to f UU. M.s. loaf watched cos smpl s f aU orn,;4. Alva spta sold the pilot "awZn Za p4o and toms 180 dagAt" and o4a4h baeh on fZ-aU f w_r 2 so" apo. No one a6 w.Le(UU •tepoeRad IA .to 9m, ?hoes w"a ewe* soot, bmt of poiAt Agim. th.Za;;;; 74e raca*c fz6u& ,ns pows, so x" t c days 4 f tka pilots f+ss t thosselves. 7" o" no "4* te4 J"t Und mndettahe-off fo-s the pVwu to *.hash sh" they hone a494ns fatlatea. rJhaes area AM"Oent people aK thy: aid ccaah syeon+ids... IVow CG*U this CUV teU p"peAty oaneLti that they eoKtd not bwtl.t 04 %" theU i o sre Und became It &"ax be 4Pt 1-tee 40 that the Ne,:las camU a ke scary ?tam 4 thti c baa.Lnu-... 91" suert r44ed and a Jx49.e dam .t9 they cb*ug ft. U a teat ease. Fapee.ia.tty the ably cu*u►set do Ll beca.4s.e att the othe't bwt ldZn;... ats on potp"ty lone land... 9t IA Meadowla4A that -tench on a-/ ptopet.ty... Mi sd o wtaak U the orct at atop oe•teh"... M&"owtd4 raa not 4644 fLart.... �i+CirGX Meadomtaak 0" jA4t f"ml P44Pe't't'1 "we se, the -.eat o f pao pds... 744 too ow 2 8" wuod lK trio Plead- on 64FUCCOU leswd.. SPA& Ws" !arse ppaots-t th the ae,asty. Okay os" told to be pstattia and 149 the two &"vt w "#% pa#fie t" ptam" thus. Jks�y rsas paoaZ&ed 4" soald ba ox4 taro pls+sea surd ~64 " awssp !alit VWA a 0 oh" lit 46 Mmo P"AUP 10a pls4e4.7T? P"1.9 U Im" wksa 6*449 344se ao A91128 &tstsa thAt IMssdow44s4k oaty hsua 07 plsMsa.. khu it purse kUla sons ZJWO ast Neopte IY"40 mLLI be 4M4 end sakod sbcwt th" aid a lot o f other tht+ega.,.. -1ke ditty o"Al br. aaed fo4 bed plan.:l,af Cot tas" shoMl d be, -Med 104 Mat Mpdd4L,3} the ss f&ty tame, .Ls U. awc.... Ike 6dppsssd1.e, aet a ds met LU244f People. 9hsde`4awe/ft" sattomm' that the-etLty can ftke; nu,t and beat; /?ak the Nesto fa>r Url tt they +ostU be L to "t.d Za any others b"i'se-e, taste... Of the cul ohan¢c tU Prstnr} 1400 a-/ to sosethlnq. t I bettet to #Lue Masto` a eAdnes to post Ls on tesat oat s►sothea: type bMatf trwa..... � SeaoMd. i .Sera �wsn Captat mw aUf hte comtv l of the silt ftsld 4~ay by *akZmf it deaf ghe sLtft eld deedlt-#414 deed of ""vay .to cLty t&C 4wwe tU beck to the eZ.t f L&U oh" ihsy os+`t lt,,.. 7lso aLs flAld ¢sta. 21l•. .ewiasM tsked s f t tke .ttt 61.1.1 tl.e ally oea so" "4" ebox t the JUFA4 ... tom; 9,4 aPLU of what eo*6 pilot ottoa"— aas peLlao powte- As, am Mss. 7hs gold III-et amp4essk ao",t dsoLa.toa asld that a 61AV aomU ask& a bass- **a pat JA Mwt " sefa type of bm&jac a end Mot pay &U Wq sorsdy heae pmk w. f�ty 7hsaa ass oth" rosy- &WA a- pmbuc norsUsas, se we,- Go Maa�Rl1d.. aorsda.slrc} J i I I �I 1 i 0 arrICK or CITY ATTORNEY F.a. ■o x ua owi HUNTINGTON BEACH � CALI'ORNIA 93/1/ DON F.W MIFA JI4 June 1 76 � Ti�9ftme r 9 City AIr"A"1 p1�1 Efi I Mrs. Jean Collins ' 6271 Newbury Huntington Beach, California 92647 r Re: Injunction Issued in Case No . 123328 Atkinson, et al. v. Turner, et al. Dear Mrs . Collins: Encloaed herewith are copies of the following: letter, dated February 9, 1973, from the City Attorney to Honorable Alvin M. Coen, Mayor, re Current Legal Status of Meadowlark Airport; memorandum, �! dated February 24, 1973, from Aasistant City Attorney to City Attorney re Legal Effect of Actions at Meadowlark; and memorandum, dated April 6, 1973, from Assistant City Attorney to City .Attorney re Meadowlark Airport. Said memoranda deal with the in.lur:ction issued in Atkinson et al. v. Turner, et al. , and are self-explanatory. In summary, the litigation is a private civil matter between the par- ties involved and the city would have no standing to enforce the in- junction. The purpose ,of the injunction was to prevent interference with the use of a private roadway (Roosevelt) and was not issued against noise emanating from the operation of airplanes, which has been- your concern. Sincerely, DON P. BONFA City Attorney DPB:ahb cc: Members of the City Council Acting,City Administrator Director, Planning Department Direct6V, Building and Community Development J Enos. i i �I ' or P11:1 of CITY /A'T !'O n N E Y • MYNTNIOTON •RACM M TANA 9 February 1973 1iiS01 ION � r Honorable Alvin M. Coen Mayor City o; Huntington BeaZ 18582 Beach Boulevard Huntington Beach, California Re: Current Legal Status of Meadowlark Airport Dear Mayor Coen: You have requested that I prepare a resume of, the history of Meadowlark Airport. The first action regarding the airport pas taken by the Orange County Board of Supervisors on March 6, 1946 when that body approved Use Permit #305 for the operation of a privately owned airport. On September 10, 1947 an application for expansion , of the existing airport (Use Permit 01118) was denied. The same request was again made and denied on February 1, 1949 (Use Permit #1925) . Another application for expansion (Conditional Permit #805) was denied on October 29, 1957. Sometime in 1964 a legal action was filed in the Superior Court of Orange County entitled "Marge S. Atkinsrn, et al . vs . John Turner, et al. " , No. 123328, asking that the defendant, John Turner, operator of the airport, be restrained from using certain portions of the airport and surrounding property including the Roosevelt Road right-or-way . The Superior Court granted an in-- Junction and further insued its Judgment perpetually restraining the defendants "from permitting or suffering any -more than 67 air- planes to tie tied down, parked, based, operated from, flown out or, or remain overnight at or upon the Main Airport Property and at or -upon the Western Property at any given time. ". This matter was appealed to the. Court of Appeal, Fourth District , Second Division anti In an opinion certified for nonpublication the appellate court genet-ally upheld the trial. court. The court hold in part: "It necessarily follows that the defendants to the future would certainly be in a position to base any number of planes at their facility in the event that they could do no without impairing the plaintiffs ' rights to use the read. In the event of such a con- ; 'itbar to Nerve All"A Coen' Febru�try ' 1973 .,Ai•Neadvalark Airpo•1 t tangency and upon a proper ohowing of chungod aonditlons and oirousetances, the trial court would tlio:i he in a position to grant a modification of the injunction with respect to the 67- plane limitation." Since the spring of 1970 there has been a - considerable amount of activity between the City and John Turner conecrning the operation of the airport. I am attaching a summary of activity regarding Meadowlark Airport whioch was prepared by the Building Department. Activity which is particularly germane to the City-Meadowlark Airport relationship is Conditional Exception 70-50 which was conditionally approved by the Planning Commission on October 20, 1970. Francis Connolly appealed the Planning, Commission decision on a portion of Conditional Exception 70-50 to the City Council and the Council denied the appeal on November 16, 1970. On December 15, 1970 the Planning Commission: reviewed Conditional Exception 70-50 and revoked same, declaring Conditional Exception 70-50 to be -null and void. • r The revocation was appealed to the City Council and on January 11 , 1971 the' Counell overruled the decision of the Planning Commission I and approved Conditional Exception 70-50 with conditions . Copies 4 of the minutes of the October 20, 1970 and January , 1971 pro- ceedings are attached, setting forth the conditions and modifications . Sincerely, i r DON P. BORFA City Attorney DPB:lm Attachments cc: Council members City Administrator ,_,,1 J� CITY Or HUNTINGTON BEACH Y INTER•DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION r4w1iMGN�+MM�'N •To Don p. 'gonfa From Willis Mevis City Attorney Assistant City Attorney Subject Legal Effect of Actions at pate February 14, 1973 Meadowlark The facts are set forth in your memo to Mayor Coen, a copy of which is attached hereto, and will not be repeated in this inemo. I Briefly, the county granted a use permit in 1946, and refused to � expand the use. It now exists as a nonconforming use on R-1 property in the city. An injunction was obtained by several citizens in 1967 . It pro- vided in part: ' "Defendants, and all persons in privity with them, are perpetually restrained and enjoined from either directly or indirectly, by any lease, license, rental, franchise, concession, agreement or contract, or otherwise, grant- ing any authority, permitting or suffering any more than 67 airplanes to be tied down, parked, based, operated from, !Town out of, or remain overnight at or upon the Main Airport Property and at or upon the Western Prop- erty at any given time." I Two points should be made in this respect. First, the city is not a party. Secondly, the appellate court decision seems to in- vite the modification of the decision of the parking of only 67 planes so long as it does not curtail with or interfere with the use of the read: rrlt necessarily followa that the defendants 1h the future would certainly be in a position to base any pumber of planes at their facility in the event that tney .eould do so without impairing the plaintiffs " rights to use the road. In the event of such a contingency and upon a pro- per showing of changed conditions and circumstances, the trial court would then be in a position to grant a modifi- cation of the injunction with respect to the 67-plane limitation." In 1971, the Council granted a conditional exception subject to conditions. Memo to Don P. Honfa, City. Attorney February 14, 1973 He: Meadowlark Airport QUERY.: What is the effect of a conditional exception on a ' nonconforming use? It would seem to lend an area of legitimacy to the nonconforming use at the least. It.Vould authorize or legalize the expanded use, L.e. , the Flying school and extended runway. CONCLUSION: The injunction is a private matter: By its wording, the limitation is more likely to be expanded than rigidly enforced by any court. As to the use; I am of the opinion that the conditional exception legalized the expansion of the nonconforming. uee subject only to the onditione imposed by the conditional -exception.' • r w s MZV1S A nt City Attorney :be Attach ent i f { I i • MI-AII iAND11M DOM P. 110N?A9 City Atturney FROlM: WILLIS MEVIS, Assistant City Attorney � • 4 HE: Meadowlark Airport DATE: April 6, 1973 ii The City Administrator has asked the question, "Is there any reason why the Planning Commission could not place limitations on the operations of this (Meadowlark) airport i to preclude further expansion of this facility?" I In my opinion the Planninj; Commission has little, if any authority; over the Meadowlark Airport. The Planning Commission' s authority is limited to zoning and land use. I The airport exists as a nonconforming use in a R-1 zone. 1 � While it 'is a general rule of law that a nonconforming use may not be expanded upon, in this .particular situation the City Council approved CE 70-50 which expressly approved the lengthening of the runway and authorized the maintenance of a flying school, both of which may be reasonably inter- preted as giving the City 's blessing and approval to an expansion of the nonconforming use. , The conditional exception does not place any limitation on the increased expansion I In the present status of the law, the City has ve little ,I or no authority under its police p_i.er to contr a pri✓ately- owned Airport. Lockheed vs. City of Burbank 7 F 2cl 667 (1972) . now on appeal to the United States-supreme Court. 1 Our ordinance on airports, Article 608, enneted before the �0 forc±go:ng decision, is in jeopardy under tli:tt decision. 4 That decision holds that state and local regulation in the rield of air commerce; has been preempted by federal regulations . Should matters get out of hand, relief should be requestea of state and federal aviation authorities . - The last time it was requested, we were turned down. i I��1 II 1 I�nrrl'n Alm 1 6 1 ')'/ i Two liv Menclowlark A.1vpovt Jnnreancif unr my create problem , giving n csrus3e of action under n nuinance throry for dnmager, and/or injunction. This would be limited to adjacent property owners . Los Angelen InternatEonal Airport casen . CONCLUSION: The Planning Commission probably Iran no authority to restrain :she expansion or Meadowlark Airport . The City has little or no authority under its police power to control the operation of Meadowlark Airport unless Lockheed vs. Hui-bank is reversed. WM:Lm �I J � I X&7 24v 1976 Mrs. Herbert a. Ellimrvood Effloe of tho Attorney Ganeral .arrartmont er Justice 55.5 Capitol Hall, Suite 550 Waaramato, GA., 95C14 Bear W. EllinSvood t •. 01tissns involvod with the McAdowlark Asrpert (M.A.) have been trying to work tbrouZ.h channels -to ;et an impartial and fair lnspoat. Ion on tho safety of the airport, =& obtain answors to quoations concerning scninj5p vould 1I.A. paws safety rules and rogulaticna It It oponod today, whet is the comatunity squivalont noiso loyal (=I.%9L) An -short -- is the airport "fe and compatiable to tho comautaitj. 'ftr. S.. J.. }iokenney, Chief of Division. of Aoronautios, has failed to report the facts In his letter addressod to you dated April 14p. 1976.. .HO also has failod to act as required by Qoneral lax and as required by his Cffiaet and Safety lnw as owtlinod in;CH 1052 law node, and rert•sed to aakncriledgd or respond to violation■ of CEIN'L ECto=vz1ty Equivalent I;olee bevel)--70 deaAbols. Facts, n1ss1n, .!.n Mr. E. J; Maaelluer's 7.&tt*r s- 1— Time factor Sn rospondinG to requosts of aitizons and elected officials.. ` Ar- Februany 16, 1976, Mr. Long requested in writ-ing.., to We. MaNdway to review M.A. frcm Uxbrid-e Apartment. Hr. Gordon A. Miller, Deputy Chiof on February 23,. 1976 responded that lam. Boyne waild answor the requost—no response van ever made by Mr.. Boyes« See attach 5nt -1, ' I B.••A.ese mblynan Robert Burke requested ors March 30, 1976 that Mr. Holanney Imspect 114*e. and provide details for the April 22 California Aerenautiov Board Meeting. Minutes of that meoting will show nothInG who done prior to the neetlnZ; by Mr. Be J. • A ..-XC {;onnay or his offloe. • . C-- Jasxi Collins sort in a lint of questiot10 ccnoerning the basis fdr the liconsinZ of ) A** To date no rampenao from Mr. E. J. Mdwauoy.. Dr Aa unofficial viclation of tho•70 decibel CENL was 4rorbally e1van to* Mr. Boyes (tho lravol wan o:*eer 140 peck decibels at the �s�trt�ld�e Apartments) by an• aide in Mr. 9tihmita offioo, cn Cronge Obunty Bvperviserr The aldo, Tort Schreiber, Woo extoraive .experience as a noiso inspgator for the construction industry.. AUy neitra level over 700I:I. la in viclotlen of the law. To dito fib, UoXonnoylb office has lZaorad all roquvato for an C.friaial BEi,1L reading. • I r`1 Continued PAGE 2- pararr:. h 3 la misleading. ( Horb see April 14, 1976 Boyes to F11inJ,1110031 Mks is uncontrollod but there In no compnrison to the airports listed.. MeA.. has no clear zone, has an 800 loot flight pattern (othoro have 1lC000, M.A. has shortest runway A major airport landinC pattern directly over 14A.'s (lose Long BeachL a. caution road crosses i» front of -mavay, 15 foot clearance zone in required. All data is taken from A..C.P.A. Airport Dlrectury. paragraph 4 Cn Jaruary let 1976 fiftoon violationa smitten on V'AA forms and wore sub-fitted to TAA' and returned, then forwarded to Calif. Division of Aeronautics by you, Herb, with it follow up call from Federal Aviatlon Authoruty (FAA) to Calif.. Div. of Acro. , to date no action. para3raph.5 -needn.to be reworded, Calif. Trans. (Calif, Div. of Aero.) and City of Huntington Eaach okayed existing construction around the M. A. including a three story structure in the DUCT tcke- off pattern. Public Utility Code, Section 0111052, eeotion 160 `'_eotion 17 and Section 2166 Port% As B, N require by. lax that Calif. Trans. to review the licensing of an airport when new construction may create hazards and hold public hearings when requested. No publaa hearings are acheduled to date and a formal request has been made .for hearinga. paragraph 6 Huntington Beach Police Department, in stronger language stated they are Slaving a. Hell of a• time policing the airport. (name of source on requoat). Para3raph 7 The, first mouth{; called by the.then 141yor pro tem, Harriet ;laidor.# 'raw Mayor City of Huntington Heaah, No CM from Calif. Trans. attended or reapondod to the invitation. Four not two people . attended- Livengood, Collina, Novak# and Loing.. All were upset (mild termingoIC;y-Thank God tar and feather worn root available or Nowak would have made a turkey our 'ot NWKinney) for not providiriS data ' requeated by Aaaomblyman Robert Burke and tire. Collins.. Paraeraph 8 The rrain6 of the trafflo pattern attitude came about by a• request or.;;inated by Jean Collins, second public meetin3 called by ! Harriet Voider and by thor000mmendation of Mr F. A: Allen of FAA' (213-426-77.34) 0 basod on hin Inspection of homou and of the M.A: operation.. lire EaKenrey's office provided no data or input on this . docician, Cn one day an FAA: inapeotor (Mrs. Jack Dondad lived at OambridEo Apartments for 3 months) logged 25 violations while residing at ftmbrid;e Agartmonta.. We have seen mo•record of any violationa reportod by the Calif.. Trrao. Cfflce.. Dl% Boyea in a lotter dated March 23, 1976 ( See attcchnomt) indicated pilots were operstltS I%i x BALD manner. Paragraph 9 Many officials have expressed concorn over the oAfoty of M.A: (names on roqueot), Me©oor Mcl{enney and Doyos has oonsistantly failed to provide and initiate positive actica.to Insure the safety of pilotsp. citizens, and State of California regarding M.A:. We doctor declared Mak. a. health hazard for Kra. Collinc. (gee attachment). O=tinuod 091 Pop 3 We ara requesting leGal action be taken by your office against b:o?Cerney EoyGs for their failure to tell tho truth, Failure to carry out asaiCned duties, adhere to the Publio Utility 9odeap and follow my on alleged violationn. Herb, we will bo glad to give whatever assintanae it takes to correct this problem. We will not more *or give up.- 0 oncerne d Citizens f Robert ire. 00. Nowak I .I • Woo Jean Call.tus •I i' T L lago9d John Long i i i I ,I I! I' • I� l �I STATE 01 CAUT0lN1A-%U111%t5S ANO TRANS►OATATION AO[NCY [DUUND 0. RROWN 1i1, G...r..r DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DIVISION OF ACRONAUTICS P. 0. BOX 231 y . 247 W. 3nD STREET SAN DCRNAnDINO, CALIFORNIA 92403 March 23, 1976 Mr. John Long 17171 Bolea Chico Road, Apt. #35 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Dear Mr. Long: In response to your letter to Mr. B. J. McKenney. va Thursday, March 18th, I visited Meadowlark Airport. . As you recall, Reg Petty of the Soutbetn Califuraia DOA office =%Ic an car lia r visit to Humtington Beach; however, the weuther 'tevuitted rLe witnessing of any flight operations at Meadowlark. Z arrived at Meadowlark at 10:00 a.m. (left at 2:30 p.m.) and met with Mr. Art Nerio. He showad me the posted instructions regarding takeoff procedures, the traffic pattern, and the pattern altitude. During the period I was in the area, I observed Wenty-five arrivals and departures. Of-the depar- t tares, two were light twins, a Cessna 310 and a Piper Apache. Bo*-b were airborne prior to the displaced threshold for Runway 01 and made the prescribed turn for a ground track between the apartment buildings. All of the patterns I observed, including two while I was airborne, were standard in execution with the most distant downwind being less than half a mile from the active runway (19) . ' It appeared one pattern might have been flown at 500' , however, the rest looked to be at 8001 . Traffic pattern 1 noise was very low. i Since touch-and-go landings are not allowed, every takeoff utilized all of the available runway. Solo and student pilots were noted operating aircraft, each in a safe manner. I i 004 Mr. John Long Page 2 March 21, 1976 The light twins made substantially more noise when passing the apartment houses. Again, there was nothing intrinsically hazardous in their depparture. It is unfortunate the builders of the two apartment buildingsIopted to place them off the end of an already existing airport a runway. It is my impression that Mr. Nerio and the pilots association are sincerely interected in having a safe operation at Meadowlark, one primarily fat aircraft based 3t Meadowlark. The landing fee indicated on the runway discourages the vagrant flyer. Please contact me :if I can be of further assistance. Sincerely, E. J. HbXENNEY, Chief Division of Aeronautics k E. Boyce I Aviation Cbneul Ant i . i i 1 f f STATE Of CAU/OWIA—iUSINESS AND TRANSPORTATION AO[NCY 104MD O. KID" M 0«ei.w DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DIVISION OF AERONAUTICS +: EXECUTIVE AIRPORT BACRAMENTC,CALIFORNIA 958Z2 (9161 322.3M February 23, 1976 i 1 i Mr. John• W. Long 17171 Bolsa Chic Bond, Apt. 135 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 I Dear Mr. Long: ! This letter is in response to yours of February 16 Rskia6 for either Mr. 2. J. McKennry or Fr. Pete Boyoo to rLsit the Ca b::ilgc /part- ; went Complex in Uuatington Beach to vitness the flight operations I out of Meadowlark Airport. Mr. Boyer ie. opr area representative in Southern California and I have taken the liberty of forwarding your letter to him with a request that, he contact you to discuss a visit by him as you have requested. I am sure you will be hearing from Mr. Boyes in tho near future. Binc�r>r•1,tr, 7 d I. . N ,A. MILLER, Deputy Chief Division of Aeronautics cc: Pete Boyes, , Southern California Office l 94-,7 -� E ,calantA QNICL coe:�rrtLfs sly.CDOWWn OW Memo s�+•�w.cs.w... iw..u.l. ' i ���,• T.M.N.f.w.. _ r 41f1R1Ct O/IICL �� � C 1/081w� 1lydiyq�Imh n6a Gn4 ru ia4 ROBERT H. BURKE . �Assra�Lt�asx . 73rb pistrw March 30, • 1976 E. J. McKenney, Chief Division of Aeronautics Executive Airport Sacramento, Ca. 95822 Dear_ Mr. Mt:Kenney: As yob know from iril previou:s letter to you, there has been a growing concern over the operation of Mea3dawlar)c Airport in my district. There have been meetings between the ow-ners of the airport, pilots, home owners and residents of the area, nit'y officials, and members of my staff and rte. There have been some changes in operating procedures and some compromises reached but there are• still eompiaintss .from some of the residents of the area. ' } r believe the differences between the parties could be resolved if there were a comprehensive, factual evaluatiai; of the airport opera- tions available upon which to make rational judgmentn, I rim, therefore, requesting the Division of Aeronautics, as the agency responsible for i licensing airports in Califoriiia, to makes such an evaluation of Meadowlark Airport. In my judgment, the study should determine whether or not the* airport is fully m^eting t:ie requirements of Section 21666 of the pLalic utilities Code, under which the Meadowlark Airport is licensed. Also, the study should evaluate the current conditions ourrounding tLe airport to determine its impact on tho general public as specified in Section 21668 of the Public Utilities Code. Special emphasise should be given both to safety and noise, both at the airport site and 'in• the surrounding areas. However, 'the study should not in any way, be limited to these subjects✓. it is mry understanding that the State Aeronautics Board will hold its April meeting in Costa Mesa. I would very much appreciate having the subject of the Meadowlark Airport operation placed on the Beard's agenda for that meeting. hopefully, the evaluation I have. requested i would be completed so that it could be reviewed by the Poard at that time and public comet.ert accepted. f i R. J. McKenney, Chief Division of Aeronautics -2-- March 300 1976 I would appreciate ar. early response confirming the date of the Costa Mean Meeting an3 the setting of this subject for hearing. Thank you in advance for your cooperation. S &. 0 R BE RHb:rw cc: Dick Nerio lion. Harriet Wieder Icon. Laurencd Schmit David Rowlands Jeanne Collins Robert Nowak ✓ . I j A. $11.3 Of CA0.110MIA—IIISINESS ANU TIAHSIORAIION AOINCY IPMUND G. {iOWN W. G.r.c.ur it�.L'S7J.r•s.-s�._.�.�.r�s+txassssC.:ss•c�' •s_.,.. '_-..�.r r,.., - .z�.•� �-.�_ - ,'S^ •Y,..iJ t.'. .. J 7' "PARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ' .�. ..'kVISION OF Arno,'ruTlcs P. 0. BOX 231 '•'�;, 247 W. 3RD STREET SAN DLMNAIDINO, CALUORNIA 92403 I; April 14, 1P75 Mr.. Herbert E. Ellingwood Office of the Attorney General Depnrtment of Justice 555 Capitol Hall, Suite 550 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear. I•ir. Ellingaood: ' Mr. HeXenney has asked that I respond to your letter of April 8, 1976 concerning the letter about Meadowlark Airport dated January 18, 1976, Meadowlark Airport is a privately owned and operated.airport • that has been in existence since 1946 and is permitted by the State. It Us a single paved runway. o The airport is `uncontrolled" in the sense there is not a control tnaer on the airport. The 'Level of acti•13ty does not warrant f.he establishment of such a faci.l;ty by t;,n FAA. There nre fives other general aviation airports in the L. A. area in the sane category: Sfihiteman; San Fernando: Cable; Compton and Caput r. _.o. The Division of Aeronautics has advised suer►-ideals thnt it will assist in seeing that .-appropriate actioe agftinszt ri.lota i.s taltan where thb necessary doctwuntati.on for ah alleged violation 5s provided: Time, place, aircraft description, and tail nuatber. ITithout this informati.ori all wo can do is cnsl: the pilot groups, fixed base operntors, and airport managers to help self-police ai.roprtcc violati.onc. The fact the City of lltmt:i.ngton 13cacli aliowed roulti-f.•tm:ily clvel,lingu to be constrccted off the end of tho alrcady e::'sti.n; � airport runway its indeed unfort vonte, However, t:lfe dealpned approac b/departure path (,`.he 20:1 surface) doer mast estnbl abed cri,tcri n with the contrelllny obstruction bei.ti;;' prnrer11.nas between the airport property and t.lie bu;.ldin&s.1 • 11r. Herbert E. Cllingwond • Office of the Attorney General. Pago 2 April 14, 1976 The City of Iluntin-ton Beach has an ordinance Iim:tti.ng night operat_ona at the airport. At a recent meeting the City Police Department indicated they were endeavor;n; to minlniize co-mg1ninta wherever possible. The Div'.sion of Aeronautics has been warkinq with the, city, residents, pilot groups, the FAA, and the alkport nanager to revolve insofar as is practicable problems noaociated with Meadowlark and will continue to do so. 01r. Lon- and sir. Norval; attended the California AeronnuLics Board meetin; at Conte Neang April 12, 1976, for which an agenda item was the pi•.sentati.on by concerned citizens about lleadowlark.) As we have responded to other concerned individuals the Division of Aeronautics *wi11 continue to seek problem resoluti.onr wherever possible. The DOA suggestion; adopted by Meadowlark Airport, find approved by the FAA, was the raining of the traffic pattern altitude from•500' to 600' above ground level. Since. the tmi,ti.ng of the January. 16, 1976 letter on Hearlcwlark, several meetings and inspections of operational activity at the airport have occurred. The Aeronautics Board agenda item and the traffic pattern change resulted from them. We appreciate this opportunity to provide information and will.1. be pleased to respond to any further inquiries, for public safety in of major and continuing importance to us, Sincerely, i F. J. McKENHEY, Chief: Division of Aeronautics -Kil Peter E. Boy Area Chief i '"0"K"• t"ogsut•Prpldaa fills(Do Sot•lmoviNl) A•Msaua+o.l P•Pikas.(All 00(40 wool Mre aisMtw+ scare wo, frA fille o(po«oa 001a4•airy.)Carliaw a lwono. C PA) . .z`".7 '7 I�i li 117 V r !�t �� .;� �7 ltl•� �l C�1't/�,�t� Lt.0 �v�l � r aw „� .�%l�e�e G :r.� L�� ��•t'� .-c.�l .. �J �2••..e�../.:.--mot 1' '. �`�:f d• (�N01+L�M QitlFttfFn . PA0G!QU% NOTIS i • i�sadertaa�Fa far �t.�Z+aq a.tsaeo�t car.ac� ii i "dust p40616" to US 4u psop/A 1A CA-lot gon CA►1TOL II1110 r .;,.., ' co►lultnms Ilafr 181 ••N•• � Rules,Y140 CAoltnwn irclrwafly i r Yfamporlr11M PA14 "w� ways an/Mons (11d)4454U" . $0441 Crin.Mliffe en DUTAICT OF/ICI ' C~mcallro! 1T733 eras NA. 11va"104 bad "W ROBERT H. BURKE March 30, 1976 E. J. McKenney, Chief Division of Aeronautics Executive Airport Sacramento, Ca. 95822 Dear Mr. McKennay: As you know from my previous latter to you, there has been a growing concern over the operation of Meadowlark 'irport in my district. There have bean meetings between the owners of the airport, pilots, home owners and residents of the area, city officials, and members of my staff and me. There have been some changes in operating procedures and some compromises reached rut there are still complaints from some _ of the residents of the area. 3 believe the diffevences between the parties could be resolved if there were a comprehensive, factual evaluation of the airport opera- tione available upon which to make rational judgments. I am, therefore.. requesting the Division of Aeronautics, as the agency responsible for licensinq airports in California, to make such an evaluation of Meadowlark Airport. In my judgment, the study should det3rmine wwether or not the airport is fully meeting the requirements of Section ' ;66 of the Public Utilities Cade; under which tine Meadowlark Airpor _ s licensed. Also, the study should evaluate the current conAitions surrounding the ,:4.rport to determiine its impact on the general public j as specified in Section 21669 of the Public Utilities Code. Special emphasis shoull be given both to eafety and noise, both at the airport site and in the surrounding areas. However, the study should not in n•zy way be limited to these subjects. It is my understanding that the State Aeronautics Board will hold its April meeting in Costa Mesa, I would very much appreciate having the subject of the Meadowlark Airport operation placed on the Board's agenda for that meeting. Hopefully, the evaluation I have requested would be completed so that it could be reviewed by the Hoard at that time and pliblic coimneht accepted. E. J. McKenney, Chief Division of Aeronautics -2- March 30, 1976 1 would appreciate an early response confirming the date of the Costa Mesa Meeting and the setting of this subject for hearing. Thank you in advance for your cooperation. S yr 6 R HE U RH 8:rw cc: Dick Neo io Hon. Harriet kinder Hon. Laurence Schmit David Rowlands Jeanne Collins Robert .Nowak George Snider, Pres. H.O.M.E. I I i �I i ohadE tlst'. Polata to bs444 @at j AardorLa�k l� es R'-/ yews+; lssd. • N N � 0/! a aonPaoa�O�� aas prssLt � Nandarlash A" sKp&ditd opctatls" Oran tb en WOM-800'04MUf A" pg&XU. by alt,�r 9t Ls s aab-.rsa4a altp* t gist oorsld ast psaa "1&4 .4pat"4" t f opsasd ae�r P 9t •!.a .tLLI spseatlar sm Ap4a /0 i2 stets psasl t la sipuo, e j AU As*" aadsa I { t4da -off sad Uadur. CUJ " ZO" lasgd sr+ "t Of *446 axe JA /alas 944" bsas+awa of R'sadoola4A 9t h" aaa " paid l41a JWU abaes tioaoda " 6et "asat UA* Up" hssa b ears �s.aes� to 1.s. aldossl�Es, sttssts, 64t41� .sL/�� ate, oPsw .erase Jss. &U So ass not �+ast pLLets. 9t JU" ouss ? ot t aehest V"da m du ftd46t don�6 K"sh lass, taAda &U apsas s" fao• IV.lf. N Asadorls,elE asK nit soot 9.N.11 4"a"t lag of /OCO it JUP14 pous" ss do oth" suppass• jaueaea, Coapton Seats NsWA-. &U. . �l�t ssNmet ;Lars UjAata ti Ls 1l'llni elolstoas,r 9lusa hsu4 bs•sn Mars fa`.Lt.r " ar44 sets. Vka" bars bsem narcUaats wet •ups+ttad U pOU" 84 Strdo+it �lAs;a sa yoaw} sa /E yda� P"OUas 144" to rst k ri hors" � bs�at,s ths� aars C.Las+aes. suss. oaa 4aaU614. N4 pllota earl atadawta do trot U-*s r da.}& golrp to" Cahb,6tdgs dad no nos cam pwalah Mere aksaE l.�.et. N $M t/Is MLePO4t dU"U41 Lt La oaly A post P"A Ca+t.tarf 4404 1w6""" i !s !f ft esta •� t }etr� byltl 11.ttCs lss�s a f Am^44ods e f aAW.tsa p►Cy K+odse be" tAke and aid" J IMdZ+rf p�stxas+w. Raasa5s4 9is&"U pip so a"6A ap me AU UNp se 1 plGots AsYa tAAAW •f f t,e atts+w . ow Aoos k%AdOA. 14V41ftf P&CU44, &4" eat -,-ataA 04es+9 AUOFPU* Z*U food mod V644. 9ka-ss la no too" to ttda tLa e f f " t&4dzj4 L+e'.•saa�Cta+a. 44 ay U ZOO 4h&4t 104 60SO PUMA to 4,--J$k 011- 0e44 b9VdZAya. ko4umooa Ar"Ch 44 toa c21114640 fore Aa 44--4amu to d4a4m to III , 44pea av - •�ars A�aadorl f�N eaa� P*a of b4 ku fal:v mo. 9t sior!.S sat saws ie�e aK flsld to p�tlau. sw1 stnlanta, AIssdadls aE U a m4- te+ ", risw-aeN f oea , xaaeKtwU", A ap&a to �satduot+ oa f f,4 Bad As." Asaa &a &;Wou bs ao MQ. 9Z :was focused zu i i i .-�1.��n.�a,• =eru j �,.•y�,��G� � �i7'1 . ��t-E�/ � �: �L LLt`'L�-'u�C.a.L. �.`LZJ � ` � / ON •�[• ( , n 7' pia "�-c-�-���`1..�.�.�.�''� C'.��—�-ti� � '�-= ,�'-►-�t'�..�''�"9 . ` ^ _��L�,�Vr J1r �' �Z .` 17V•�•��- ./_ �L�L. �'.C.' rL.%f�F 4�.f-.' l� ` i 9i.79 Min;n;um gale aliiludes; £mural. \ Except it•hcn necmary for tnPcoff or lanrl- ir.r, nu person mny opera la nn viRr► r %r ' 7iI lluWhi" altitudes: l � (is) Avytvhere. 'An altitude allowing, it n • Mrcr unit fails, sit emergency Innding n•itit- 1' u nut unduo linzard to persons or property oil tho astrfaco. ItIkJ (b) Over eonpeated areas. Over nny cos!- � gested nrca of it city, town, or settleiiiont, or � over nny open ttir n-j-mrnbly of persons, All � Lte/l1-�. Zvi altitude o 1000 feet nhovii the iticltest, L5g:tc1a-- Within n lori;'ontal racluts of 2000 feet of the I i a r r It.'i c a / --- 0�v 'i (c) Over other than emyested arcas. An j t altitude of 600 feet nbovo tiro Surface, except F`+` . over open n•4ter or spangly populated areas. ' In that-==e, tho aircraft may not bo operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, ve- hiclo, or r:tnicturu. (d) flelicoptert. IIcliropterss may be oper- Mod at less than the minimums lirrscritkd in . ' paragraph (b) or (c) of this section if the 4 .' operation is conducted rilhont h iunl to per- son-, or property on tho surfucc. In addition, = - cath percon opurnting a Itclivoldcr shall cant-ply with runlcs or nit itndes,6pcci4c,111y lire- scribed for helicopters by'thil Atlinittistrator. ' b 91.01 Altimeter sellinps. aF (i<) '.aclt person oparating nn niramft shall { maiiilain At- crud-ling aliilmlr or ilighl It-rel . I ., ., .. -.tea....•...: ii Who OVA HOW safe?t How dan&to us a I Alt ct.e bt(as equal.flYlns h nor as alto u dr(rlaftr !r csr aa4 tso: everyons can a should learn to By,--1VMdm CaiB Lk�7irefoe The daasen that s aaapilat caaV--!;- Ap"• f�vlrteally n�rttti><sat for a seriaa,tue:ul,well•usioe C u u pilot In a weU-matatalaed wd eyuipprA Akcraft.—:iany JI ssA�ft.!'a1J/. Why's right? Valid comparable firm ara trot tail tcracrtie . 1n,1974, 1,7.d0 people!.a that Ututed States Were ki1W in raa•swlise fiyms accl- de.1b about 413,000 in highway widents. In fatslllier per million mils traveled. airplane travel in getxral is danonstrably safer than automobile ' travel. �srsoual 11 unit a ou • :...-apMet VWJ*"'"nx ams almost two, a total —t2l ak ,,,,�,.• Tads much rto ow denies:Flying is irva-30-M linforsivial of laapat-M or of n9sjodgment than driving. Yen after yar, tlm FAA An&that the cause of ala at all aft accidents pilot or: dytns into worsening wealb ov, seeking help too late*hen . tuhdng out of gas and in other ways dying imprudently. Aa'the sa to goo, tb►are are olr� piloti and aura are bold pills--but no old boid IL All 06 doer Dot $t well with Us:astuawe,06 at+a. F-xi+tt Policies usually cover the presumed sddetlst^:.81:ter'.oMd'r,�tw pelican,most cam},an[ets charge as ad$idotud Pre for itrs ' Uots,or pilots under a cet'tsda age,or t'aose with tetit 1b4100 b4ft 0(t tuna:. "i'� ha / 1;•. K Ti r / • Urged t � Tih�#er Rer�s fifind MA ` . � ';' For Pr"l-iratc-A.- Pflofsr By VATX E4t r ,;+ WASIi MION (AP) The Muse•kill �L a and ,'• .I1>sifsfte•t 1t it Central Acme mting Office,.,my. Injured s,s,: others lbe fly ` li'O I mi lY Y A L L 1c Y tan p� halve been a N use in �r Pst Z Uu t ended on D Jobsf.roaard:tR AabEe tt • 31. W4. tip ira' w•s�4;get bir.Wsmr'" mom than eC p+r cent or aU enesal avWion accidents ra• it said VO NatlOW Trans• tip ,�!ar a� onuneoded Tuesday the agaim n Ea Ms Aoaforrd, i n. • Ir gotetg 4ia a 60L o rs. Mitt u8btan up raatrols saes a�t� for lit• a The lboena of vy,. haung expresaw ����' g,,• �� gam• 'rw order,is a report JWon• VMMW twist=safely for sn. borketlE~;art *mk •Py*: rM,saw aceldnis Where Pd.oral pears. eflaeilss by •vbtmfidtt rate ply;b Vem determine! by 1?W (;AO aid gW Fdeial • yxA%sayer us PUM amino to` , tat es al jotrestigators to be a 1v+.atbn AdML:istratlort tssods a 1 t 1M i M11t ear to gfw closer sftst oon to bob Me twd lidaiue 1rdloe9tse ` the bnitW Unaing of priple pilots and to lute Mvlevs-lt now r[�e Sgnse+r�Pirlt hStt� L•b regtrlt•es those pilots to tAW ev abort d p.Z _..�..•aye �j,.t ery 91M yearn to ItLMN they re. A spobasmsat Ose; that►.. main comwAd abaafra•dspaetoesot,-tttektt:. Almost afl AW tests and abs sent a trait bads 6 biendaa mews are given by sold OL wtilsti tltatt not Prot r_amiaers and btsirmion Me ow w �y� _ b who fl- flan ad � m 7 Tsn. tta�• k.#, 'i..:.. ; Pbyes. Mtb ixO tbs FM rec- A talta t I& "Z, ommen& areas that obeuld be Fi+eQ ad,llebetrt-jlsiW ; cbeckod dtq lion n tedI:4, �7��-__1 w� 01q 'I , these Iaatrssclors decide n'Nut tewrvJ gdllti, are"actually Will be doled oounra tt�6 tirNir edMit "Ite a;sixy WAAI doss rwt I-AM be Air JIL�Attbbt�} We an eUecti►e system of do. • termk*x whether the tau 201 °'lTe :•d ,4 r lstbttas. a.�d�t+tt.Sts t�tgfrte twrbl6 tw fi 1D to bra Saw � M; ; .. ;I '�f�F.•,r�•"� -,'�.«r.ri.�.... /10 dimfie• , 'i s '�►I!., '•� 590 OC.'OBER TERM, 1081. GOLDBLA'IT v. HE.MMSTEAD. ;.91 Opinion of the Gnat. 3G9 U.S. 5IM Opin'san of the Caurt. prior to the ensct_ment of the crdinance, claim that it in GOLDBLATT E'. Ali. V. TOWN OF HEYOSTE AD. •� effect: prevents tacmm from enntinuing their business and AMAL rMM THE COURT OF APP_MZ OF NEW YOBr,. �;, therefore takes their property, without due promrs of No. 78. Am3ed Jsn 15-18 19D2.D•-ided M 14 i ,2. �'' `� Isar in violation of the Fourtenzita 1�-n.iment. Tile t*it:l errs y 0� i court held that the ordinance :i-as a valid excr..ise of the Thr individual appcllint otrr:ai a 33-acre txset ai<ia the To." of ! W �B � power, v~ tilise. 2d 178, . S. 2d Heripstrad on rhieh the corporate rpptllnrit and been miuin,; nand and gravel contitinowly hate 191-7. Duriri; the fast yr-ir � 577, at` L pp 8:o Diviion aliirn[d, J App. Div. the cxcm-ation reached the water table,lea:•ing a rater-filed criter 2d 941, 190 N. Y. S. 2d 573. ':'he Veto fo k Court of J 1-hich had since been uidancd and deepened until it bceame a 2D- APpe:Is in P. divided upiuion aMrm;a. 9 _i. Y. ?d 10:, acre Inge isith an average depth of 25 feet,around which the Town 172 N. E. 2d 502. We noted probable jurisdictio-i, 3GG had rspa>+dcd until, Within a radius of 3P2 icct there were more than 2,M0 homes and 4 public ccliools with a combinrd enrollment U. S.g�� And ha-An- heard argument eve :jor• air.: itie of 4,5W pupil. In 1958 the Town amended its ordia-ince rrulat- judgment. ing such excavations so as to prohibit any excav--tin: belt v Cit. ' Appelinnt Goldblatt owns a 3r-rcrc tenet with:n the water table. AlthouZh this coaredeXy prohibited the benc5ci-i Town of Hempstead. At the time of the pr,ent litiQa- • c to which the property had previously been devotcd, a wtc �tours g lion AppaIlant Buildc*s Sand and Gavel Car gorati;in sv^s rtntcd the Totirn an injuactieu to enforce ibis prohibition. pining end and gta;Cl on this lot, u use to which the 11c1d:On Elie rreord is this mee,appellants have not rustuned the burden of shovin: that the depth thnitation i3 so onemus and lot had been put continuously since 1027. Before the unrrzanable as to rteult in a tll:ina of tl,rlr property%rilltout dtm end of the first;scar the r_xcavatIOr+had ro.•iched the watcr procc= f-C laa in violation of the Fourteenth Atncndment. Pp. table Ieaving a water-filled crater which has been w ideneu' mid deepclictl to �!m point flint it is now a 20-ar-rc Idler. 9 N.Y.lit 101, 172 N. E. 2•' SM?, ritlinned. with an L'vcrabe depth of 25 feet. The town has r.n- Milton I. Newa:an argued the cause for appciiantm panded around this exem vation,and today within it radius Witli him on the briefs were John J. Bennet! and Ed- of 3,500 feet there are more thar. 2,200 lionies and four ward Al.JIGHer. public schools with a combined enrollment of 4,500 pupils. lViRiam C. Mattison argued the cause for appellee. J The preen action is but one of c series of steps under- With hint on,the briefs were Richard P.CJi=lea acid Mario ! taken by the town in an cziort to regulate mining ^..:t:,c- ofatthew Cuomo. f vationa within its ,Tmits. A 1945 ordinance, Nu. 16, John F. Lane and Jmmc Powell filed a brief for the provided that welt pits must be enclosed by a wire fcnc National Grusbed Stone Association, as a%iieus curiae, and comply wish certain berm and' slope requir.r_ients. urging reversal. MILhough uppellanLr complied with this aidinance, ilic town sought an injunction against furtheF excavation as JUSTICE Clam delivered the opinion of :he 'hurt. ? beuio violative rii a:orias ordice. This faikxl because A The Town of HempsL-ad has enacted an ordinance mg- � appellants treat found to be "conducting r.prior:ton-con- ulating dredging and pit excavating on property within "orming use on the premier . . . : 135 N. Y. L. J.. is limits. Appellants, who engaged in such operations I _u se 52;p.?2 CI95G). The town did rot appeal. . i {S7?I7 o■6z-13 592 OCTOPIER TERM, 1981. GOLDBLATT v. HEMPSTEAD. 593 OpW= o! the Court. 30 U.S. 590 Opinion of the Qurt. In 195S the .�:rn amended Ordinance No. lfi to pro- 394(1915);Rcirmar►v.Little Rock.,237U.S.171 (1915); ' hibit any excavating below the tsaftr table= and to Mugler v. Kansa2, 123 U. S. 6M (1967); see Laurel 11il; impose an affinputive duty to refill any cmavation pies- Cemeterg v. San Francisco, 216 U. S. 353 {I9I0}. As envy below that lavel. The new amendment also made pointed out in Dopler v.K�"-=,aulyra,at 668-U9: the barn,slope, and fence requirements more onerous. . [T]he present case must be governed by l.rin- In 1959 the town brought the present action to P.njoin � c:plea that do not involve the power of eminent further mining by the appellants on the grounds that they zomain, in the exercise of which property nay not had not complied with the ordinance, as emended, nor be taken for public use without compensation. A Ar acquired a mining permit as required by:w' Appellants contended inter alit, that the ordinance was nnsti- prohibition simply upon the use of property for pur- - uco poses that are decla-c3, 3y valid legislation, to be Lutional bemuse (1) it was not regulatory of their burl= injurious to the health,mot&Ls, or safety of the Crem- iiess but completely prohibitory and confiscated their munity,cannot,in any just sense,be deemed a takingproperty without compensation, (2) A deprived them of the benefit of the favorable judgment arising from the or an appropriation of property fo.. e-e public benefit. Such Ice!dation does not disturo the owner in the previous zoning litib�atioa, and (3) it constituted expost c,n!roI or use of his property for lawful purposes,. � facto Ic-slation. However,the tzW court did zot agree, and the appellants wmee enjoined from conducting further nor restrict his ngh� to dispose of it, but is only a operations on the lot until they had obtained a permit declerntion by the State that its use by any one, for and had complied with the new provisions of Ordinance certain forbidden purposes,i3 prc judicial to the public No. 16. interests. . . .' The power which the States have Concededly the ordinance completely prohibits z ber.e- of prohibiting such use by individuals of tucir prop- &cial use to which the property bus previously been cr�r as will be prejudicial to thebealth,the morals,or devoted. However, such a charucterization does not tell the safety of the public,is no'_:snd,consistently with us whether or not the ordinance is unconsatutioncl. It I the exiatence and safety of organized society, cannot be—burdened with the condition that the State must is an oft-repeated by•sm that-_-very regulation necessarily compensate such individual owners for pecuniary _ speaks as a prohibition. If this ordinance is othor�rise a losses they rosy Yu6tain,by reason of their not being valid exercise of the town3 police powers, the fact that it deprives the property of its most Beneficial use does not permitted, by a noxious use of their property,•to render it unconstitutionaj Walls v.Midland Carbon Co., i inflict injury upon the community." 254 U. S. 300 (1020); Hadacheck v. Sebastian, 239 U. S. � Nor is it cf controlling signifimnee that the "use" pro- hibited hem is of the soil itself as opposed to a"um"upon I SneeiiicalIy The ordinsnee provides Um."[n]o e=vatien chap be the sail, cf. United States v. Central Eureka Mining Co., made-below t1vo ics: above the mas3mum ground tester Ierel st the � site (I458), or that the u.,, �. prohibited is srbu- 'Under the mdi wee the torn=y deny a paralt if the pro,^x1 ably not a common-law numnec, e. g..R►inman T.Little vmvstion wM tiolste star of the previsions of the ordiasnce. Rack, suprc. 596 OCTOBEIt. '1'ERT1d, 19fi1. GOLUBL.ATT v. REMPSTEAD. Jai Opinion of the Caurt. 3M U.S. 5�0 Opi&jn c! tl;- Cc=-t. makes it unnac=ary for tc to decide to what ectcnt tlTe we would be unable to say the ordinance is unreasonable; i . for all we know, the ordinance mey have : de mir.imis berm end slope of such excavation round be lu::itea by I effect on appellant& Our past cam leave r o doubt , the ortiinancc. that appellants had the burden on "ressonableness:' AFF�ants' other contentions-warrant only a psssing 3$9 U. S. 52G, 529 word. The ciaint that rights acquire-i in pr ivious Ltiga- E. g., Bibb v. Navajo freight; Limes, tion are being undermined is comple:cly unfounded. A (1959 (exercise of police power is presume3 to be con- successful defense to the imposition of one regulation does stitutionally valid); Salsbury v,Maryland,346 U.S.5451 t ct aen 553 (1954) (the presumption of reasonableness is with not ca;atutior_al barrier to all other regulation. : The first suit-�_s brought to enforce a zonin ordin , U. S. 194, 154 (193£) (exercise of go the State); United States v, Caro?one Products Co.r3Q4 g 8 { ! while the present one is to enforce a�fety ordinance. r. i ut~ Bower will he j fact-io relevant i=-ues presented here werr decided in the .� upheld if any state of facts either Imown or which could , t frt.uiV We therefore do not need to consider to what be reasonably assumed affords support for it). This bur- pztent such issues would have come under wie ratcctivc den not having been met, the: prohibition i excavation t P on the 20-acre-lake tract most stand as a valid police wing of due proces3. regulation. Appellants aLro contend t�ir:t the ordina-ce k uncon- stitutional b^_cause i; imposes under penalty of line ane. We now tuna our attention to the remainder of the lot, the 18 acres surrounding the nr,.sent pit which have not imprisonment such afirma:ij•c duties as refilling the exit- yet been mined or excavated. Appellants themselves ir.g excavation anti the construction of a new fence. This contend that this area cannot be mined. They my that claim is fcurdcd principrll, on the coattituticnal pro- hibitions again; hills of attainder no es pGSt facto this surface space is necesawy for the processing op..p ra-. ]e�islation.= Thcsc provisions are severable, bath in' Lions incident to mining and that no other space is obtain- � nature and by ex r� declaration from °he �roLihi- rtble. This was urged as an important factor in their � lion agai:,st furtl:cr excavation. Since cniorcerne:it of contention that upholding the depth limitation of the thest provisions wry not sought in t e p-es"nt iga- ordinance would confiscate the entire mining utility of i ' tion this Court under tt•ell-t:stabliihcd rincipW%%.jll ` their property. However,we have upheld the validity of � P � t the prohibition even on that supposition, if the d,-•�.i not at this time undertrtl:c to decide their constitutional limitation in relation to deepening the wdsting pit is:►alit), ity. B, g., Ohio Tex Cases, 232 U. S. 570594 u94 (1914) it follows a fort ari that the?imitation is constitutionally er. United ,States v. Rcrncs, 302 U. S. 17 'Ioem)). T'hs Permissible as applied to prevent the creation of now pits. ► I All't^tL-h it oats adj_ditatcd th,, nt thnt i;me sr;x•liattrs i.•t Nlre also note Utat even if appellanr+s were able to obt..•tin made ssLaLttttial unproti^tncrlly on tleC lot, this f:!c[ acx►!ct :gat t indi=tive of the low appell;nts would presrritig narer it aw min suitnhie proving space the geology of the 1S-acre tract t would prevent any &YeavatioIl. The rater table, appel- were cloecti; Ixrba"m the :n!pmvrmen!! arr conimrrriany claLlc. # '7` ]ants admit, is too close to the ground surface to permit , 'Thr npgllcs ;,sscrts tl�s tbtr» t,:o:nds were not pmperiy pit mrred below. Be-! to our dpT=liavn of thcc commercial mining in the face of the depth restrictions ir;nnrnts, it . -= of the ordinwice. The impossibility of further mining Unm*etry to r--itch this Gues'�im. 59•t OCTOBER TM- 1, 1OG1. GOLDBLATT v. HEN12 PSTEAD. S9� Opkdon of the Court. 3 G 9 U.S. ! Sa9 Opinioa ni the Cort- This i not to say, however, that governmental action the intermts of the public . . . rc-quire such imer- in the forzn of regulation cannot be so one- .:s as 0 con- ferer.ce; and, second, &at the means are reasoraSly stitute a taking which constitutionally require.. compen. necessary for the accomplishment of t:te purpose,srd sation. Pemuylvaaia Coal Co. V. Mr-hon, 200 U. S. 303 not unduly oppressive •ipan indiriduals." (1922); we Knifed States v. Central Eureka Mining Co., >,van thiss wile is not applied with str:;t precision,for this supra. Fhere is nc eet formula to determine where rgu- - Court has often said that "dcb.teble question:, as to:ca- lation ends and taking begins. Although a comparison. on sanablcness are not for the courts but for the lcgislr- oi values before and after is relevant, see Pern.-ylvania turn , . , .+ E. g.�LproIcs v.Bir.f ord, 296 U. S.37., 3 S Coal � 5 'o. v, Mahon, supra, it is by no means conclusive, (1932). see Hadacheck v.Sebastian,supra,where a diminution in The ordinance in question ryas passed as a safety value from $800,000 to S60,000 res upheld. How far is attempting measure, and t regulation may go before it becomes a iaking we n_ed 1 1=e town rnpting to uphold it on that not now decide, for there is no evidenM in the pres_rt ! b To evaluate its reasonableness we therefore aced record which even remotely suggests that prohibition of to know ouch things as the nature of the menace :eainst further mining will reduce the value of the let in qucs- t which it will protect, the availability znd efie:.ti~veness cf I i tion? Indulging in the usual presumntior, of constitu- tionality, infra, p. 596, the find no ir.diz--,ion that the appellants will suffer from the imposition of the ordinance. princhibitory effect of Ordinarim No. 16 is sufficient to A careful e=ination of the record rry als a dearth i render it an unconstitutional taking if it is otherwise a of relevant cvidenrc on these points. One fair infcr•i:c* A valid police --gulation. arising f.om the evidence is that since a few holes had + The question, tnarefore, narrows to whether the prohi- been burrowed under the fence surrounding the lake it bitioa of further excavation bel,.i:— the water table is a night be attractive and danbr pus to children. B!t t thcrc valid e.Ycreise of the town's police power. The term was no indication wh:Cher the lake as it srooU "IA "police power" connotes the tinic-tested conceptional actual dander to the public or whether dnpening the limit of public en-.roachment upon private interests. c o+ild inrse:Le ' :_ danger. In terms of dalIn- or -.0..ic Except for the substitution of the familiar standard of other ob;cctive standard,them was no shotring ho,r:nuch, "reasonableness,"this Court has generally refrained from' i if nnpthiag, the imposition of the ordinance would cost announcing any specific criteria. The classic statement the appellants. In short,the evidence produced is clearly of the rule in Mw1an v.Stccle, 152 U. S. 133, 137 (1894), indecisive on the reasonableness of prohibituib further is still valid today: ` excavation b0ow the Crater table. 1 "To justify the State in . . . ir.:erpos'rng its author- ! Although one could imagine that prevci�tird furtl�e. } it,-in behalf of the public,it must,appear, first, that deepening of a pond already 'I5 fect deep n•ould have a de ;mirimis effect on public safety, we cannot say dint Then is a simiUr setrei'y of evidence relathe to the value of the 1 such a conclusion is compelled by facts of t�-hiA we prat -aac m=biarry in the event mia,,g operations acre:hut down. cwi taYe notice. E-,en if we coup draw such a"orclusior., i f ..-t IMF ra Elias Ax ••. t I,— WA r 5 s t. fir w ` s• G -4 Orb In �a P. JIL• �al a ..D. .� ,. r .0 ill I Uri ,.. R , 1 y k .IL 42.1 y 4. ••' � �bA � y r: at gg� gg � p � �� r � M �d� I a � 1 p >: Hit P&I ,. log, R I AN "rill! pit.i' tox P. r si p• g� I PRO, t. r g; Ir fit a-Ili ft 04 i I V, 0-1p a rV J • M 7 , 598 OCTOBER T - DA, 1061. OVnion of the Court- determination must await soother day. NVe pass only on the provisions of the ordinance here invoked, noi; on probWdities not now before us, and to that extent the judgment, is 1 d�jLrnud. ->. 1 lYln.JIIsric$FluxX7v=Look no Hart in the decision } of this case- F ! Nb, duerice W=E took no part in the consideration or decision cf this case. i� 4- 1 i 1 ReW"" pluast aAwi6; Jos 'so o m o 004 016"k 14 76 $a*- ►ps (n040 *Caa4 d t• tW Ms s►t-W •ran Cda"UM Y4, i $0644" u'!1ad4aw pUfjA* &.t. l+s lat plGt wata a If# da*+aa tea 0040 Caabt..Ctld f.a n ad as" a a"4A lawdjAp 6aoL to a/.41latd. Mw not to 9.1A •+ psGtaa .a*W 84, 104f •I C0444upa did .• nagt "f. 7rkU a" *"#ad awp,. JaL4"6tn ;J.thim aks*t a oga& @V" Csa64qdfw XA4 a:Aaa PU*t 46tA4jMd s• jJ.6U NUA 6419 I&SW P �wa 70 A/asdsfi;144k lnaS.taatoa llwatla a,ad ha-a 4twts�t Ut enotk" p4ma mad f p4apts A11...W. 'fan 7 76 `/Z." laws a+.a..W Into Ck4taUmA ism", it4pped puma oras at ARsWooZAA a. d Dtg 7f q•A-, St. fl*SZK Cakae Oil fj•sd.nt&4. 1AMU deAMA la PA" lw S 10 Oot d 7S 5C4@*t eS 4k l di eta,&Aed Zmto 2 elk" pt4*" •a JUld,, i $ort W 90406d la*dlAf •w IIJ 644oAi. Ap u 2,6 7f 96"q PZa@.c 414 //.If. pi.!.at rd 1440 44XIAP &L40 J4 nhL" tau total at Sol" Ckt+es &A fd&q&4. &"A it' 74- Cn#U4 ISUM46 lfw4om d2 mx4 non Math 0 ls.v-0 p4esa ema*had Iota paskal ataaaa ft. 9a3 74 o pa *U4 Viv o a atsaW vUh a+• 14" tatimu. atAt� aa�da�. i pPllot s+4+t aCsat. rt4oa and aLsOU&f led 601CONS as} p•ol !a4 tWd a? A,ra J. •w 1141E at. CUU444 Pat 4 it pv SZ wtn+1444 as h Llc.t,. Cxas/isd as Maaedaaslss &aAos4 poxmdsb WA" snt 04 #4U .5t da attl b"&W •Loma J04 7 i +t ard:. aGa+rtrtattq �•s ka4" awd {'a' p>4 da fte&tWi J"a lima aria i I I AU l6 not a asaplaCa ldrt , Jat as U" a aaoldanta. A S" 44 Caa.tw Aria vsa Atuam', if aa4 aJ.opl�sa s•..tl"t , //a 0" vota4b f 1 LU UVA 60d 6!0n0d aka Al eLeplasN isle m serrtm yas;s s}a. 0 whe Pay& Tr O't a C 0 q4*C+ lob, vtoiatft if"Ch hdbds arty tuna 044t A (e•t •it14 own ptoteetLo►t a& oth" CU-UA do ;T f gampu Santa ly0)"Ca. SECTION 10103.fademnity.The ppriv. �.; ileges of usin,- the alrport and Its facll- a,[1.1'�mot- I Ile s shall be conditioned on the assump• Lion of full responsibility and risk by Wo „r1-1x I,.A-c- user therrcf, and he &hall release, hold harmless and Indemnity the city, rncm- �(LIUCL bers of the My Council Boards of Com• mWlans Its officers and emplo e�es tram any!!Ability or loss resulting from such use..All alrrraft ownr:s and eperatom shalr be coverer! at their a..pense by pul Ile liability btsunince In the amounts of 5100 000 for any onj Injury and :{00;0011`Tor any Injury more then one '�-ft'"'' -U !thy one accident. and property danr- agfie Insurance In the amuunt of 100.- O00 for r Inds Ut' IUAUtrA/ rrttitlt o�t��MFtz their aircraft. ECI'ION 101OI, UparatJon of Air- -raft Over City._No aircraft shaU bo flown or operated below the mWm►rm sir traltic pattern altitude of one thous. and feet above mern sea ICVC, t 'tvltE<:tvpproschlrtq a'tunvnyy for landing or while climbing to pattern altitude for a takeoff. No aircraft shall be frown rr operated in the traffic pattern when the cloud bate is reported to t* c�Ei"lhan one thausand feet rneat:urcrl r from mean sea level. 0 ! person shAH navigate any aircraft or land upon or take off froth. or service, ' repair or maintain any aircraft on air- port otherwise Man In conformlly v.ith r i �I NIA—SUSINUS AND TRAIISIORTATION AGINC7 tDAAUNO d. "OWN 1R., G.peMer RENT OF TRANSPORTATION j PION OF AFAMMUTICS . J. BOX 231 j ,7 W. 3RD STRrET SAS] BERNARDINO, ChLIFORNT'1 92403 March 17, 1976 Mrs. Jeanne Collins 6271 Newbury Huntington Beach, CA 92647 Dear Mrs. Collins : In Teaponse to your undated letter, quite possibly one week isn't a long enough period of time for all pil.otc using Meadowlark Airport to set the word tlu3t the pattern altitude is now 8001 , not 500' . Hopefully you will be able to provide the FAA with the Lail numbers of aircraft flying over your home at 2501 and maybe a complete description. There is no other vay of identifying the few who seem to re1•'.ab violating regulations And established procedures. It would seem there is no alternative to obtain relief for people who have moved invo residences off -the ends of existing airport runways. Aircraft climb at different rates and gome are much slower in climbing than others, particularly on hot days„ TJ 0-. regard to your questions: An approach surface is an imag-Liery plane providing an unobstructed path to the end of the runway or threshold. ; Where obstacles have subsequently appeared (trees, . buildings, wires, etc.), .the threshold is displaced to provide the obstrucLion free approach surface. For L airports such as Meadowlark the approach surface has a 20:1 ratio as related to the runway surface. With a displaced threshold the full length would not be available. tor takeoff or landing. The number of aircraft is limited by spahe, allowing pro- per clear,ance for taxiway, and not intruding into the approach surfaces or the transitional eurfaces (7: 1.) . D'')e, O J Uv.uvcC4 z aU . Jeanne Collins . age 2 "irrh 17, 1976 I - extending upward from the aides of the airr,,.-t primary surface upon which the runva•y is centered. 3. With only a runway involved, at sea level on a standard day (15°C), a strip of land W1 by 2,600', with unob- structed approrachas, would riePw the current criteria of , FAA Advisory Circular 150/53C.1-IIA which ante the State's standards. Ilacicvex,_there arc ai'r. orts with permit 7t,U�•D established prior to the adoption o he current "tate standards thPt do not meet, in all cases, thecae criteria. The Permits were granted where it Was felt the public safety was not Jeopardized. V 4. . Since Meadowlark dces not have a tearer, the operations for any year is a "guesstimate". The FAA figures for 1971 shave "00,000 annual operations, which is possibly five times that it would have been in the early '50a. Vitt that is a Suess. I /t .� 5. It is possible that through the Ci,ty's conditional land I94 use permit, airport regulations might be effected. The cities of Simi Valley and Santa Paula are exploring that possibility. A City ordinance on night operations was passed in 1971. 6. Condi.tions to the airport permit issued April 10, 1962 are: ----�� a. Maintain 20:1 clear glide slopes to each runway threshold. b. Maintain .7:1 transition zones to each aide of the runway. c. Night operations to be conducted under certified adequate lighted conditions only. d. Maintain rutrway in well-drained; compacted all condition. 7. It tni.ght be useful to determine if the new Traffic altitude is being broadcast over "Unicorn" to arriving aircraft, at least for the first month. 1'0%OURts6 NOTIS MORAw FOrwl•ProbIRM rilb(Cdnol AbkoVintalS•56*1196 O.Objw-firs A•vtsuuoolflP•Plow(Allwomoval Mw 11twon DAYS f orA thlo of po soo Mk*eslrrrl CxJuyo Oe roverts. r4"If oil t ( -tl .ram -� st.•-c.�� '� a, � I . r co rROPLIM M"dONUA0a. Lfs fj 4* 414042¢4 "J"" r IS&( osl.p4,eb4" ail rtU 4U psePIU lw SUU of �M�OtA .• ,'' �} , •r�to�y .. .',•Ay;,• ' The rollaAng is t,akon fror.l th© m3nuten of a Council, moOM-4 'A173's ratio ir9 Tho runiray vntwision urns installed fo., tho purp000 of providing it safer aircraft departuress thereby increasing the safety faobor for he homes adjacent the rUnlaY. Conditional Exception 70-50 wo-5 approved by Council with aondit- ,aris as inponod by the Planning Comm issiontogthor with the following additional. conditions �. (2) Thais actor tho State issues a porinit to allow night tlyings Sight T3.ying by prohibtod. and rummy ;13ghtrr 'be turned nff ,from two hours rftor suraot or S0 :00 Pjlt.s whichovor first occurs, aunrIao. (3) That any viol.nt3.on of any condition not forth by this conditional Exceptions including the above" conditions* still bo grounds SUSMIISION orREVOCATION " of said conditional exception, on -orevious +notice to app2leant and honing by the City Council. Follo-aing is a documented LIST! of,Tho Night Kying .Violatloiza !Urge of rich occuranco and dato. - ! .7/Z/76-...------- 1�:1}5 All � 10 :22 pmw..rr 8/5/76 16 71 /76 rw-wrw ww I:50 Ake I0:28 8/5/76 { j 7/26/76 nv.w....ww-rr11:8© PPI. , • 7/29/76 w»rwwrrNIV:20 Fm •7,/3�/76 r...�..«�wrrw 10:05 iH _?? 7/31/7 b.....w�r�rr..'r.r�iioU �l•T 8/1/76 ---- ►rwwwwH 10 :15 141 i w TO: CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF HU11TINGTON REACH MCH: CONCEMMD FESIDENI'S, BUSINESS PROPRIETORS, PILOTS SUBJECT: Kr',AU04LA42K AIIt RT CONITOL Contrary to popular belief the city of Huntingdon Hach hoo acv- Ural cont;-ols it can unc over the operatio" and safety of Mendowla-k Airport. _ As outlined in California Public Utilitie6 Code Suction 21674, a public hearing can be requested to review the permit allowing the operation of Mondawlark• Airport (utilities code attached) a public hearing in.needod to answer the question 'IcEui thin airport. be safely operated?" _ The city has granted, and can r©voke, conditional excoption 70= 50 which permits the extension of the ruuuay on R1 property. UUo conditions outlined in 70-50 were to be royiewed after three yearn or enactment. Attor 5 roars lino the City Council been given e. ro- port?An ordinance was passed in 1971 that prohibits flying betwooh 10 pro and m=is% A tine of $500 or 6 months in jail can be im- pooed. Citizens calls to tho 'Police Dopartmout gets the response, "frothing can be don©." The ordinance. empowers the City Al;tornoy and Police Department to enforco the ordinance. By court vrdee .njunctibn•df 1965 -,:-.the •number,of tic downs are limited to 67 basad on public access to Rosevelt Road (conser- vative estimate there are triple that amount-an exact count can be undo.) The city has restricted the growth of tho airport by zoning the land around the airport residential, apartments, and commercial, with the latest permit allowing construction of a three story office building in the tale off pattern of the airport. It is also recommended that dood rostrictionci bQ roviewof, to in- sure the- airport operator is complying with the restrictions.. The city can enact ordinances to control altitude, and noiso of ai.rcrafc (city of Santa Konica Code attached and FAA recommendations.) On September 3, 2974 City Council directed that. vhen the lease between tho property owner (Norio) and airport operator (Turner) is negotiated that the staff would refer back to council a cundition requirlog the Installation of a slope inciicutor. ?fie the indicator � been installed? j i SAM-42y IL4ZA11L, - HEADOYJLUK AnPUtT long Beach airport flight pattern over Iteadorrlark Airport in 1"" tact. As stated by FAA Sale Flight outside of take off or landing pattern-over populated ar►av in l0CKr feet. Meadowlark is flyLng ;00 feet or lower way below safety standards. (Pictures, tape recordia►gs era aYail.able. Aleso list of planes numbe,-3 flying - below thle minimum.) Meadowlark can' b meet 11000 foot level. ru- etriction. An atated before zoning is building it barriur around the airport. Mr. Nerio, owner, operator has igrored all correspondence M.E. Council - November, 19759 Siperricor E_chmit cmd l►csemblyman Burke, February 11, 2976) Citizens including Pilotn complaints and takes no action to improvo tho safety cif the ai:.-port. V;ith three fli.glit achoole at Neadowlrrk there iu a large number of student pilota, with heady conc:ntraticr► of homes, businesses, - und ackools surrounding Meadowlark Airport student pilots ohoul,a nat to practicing in ouch a congecteri area. ACCITA;I%T; DO IVJM-t N - If' plane crashus in a`school, homo, ahoppi.ng center, or of.f�ce building who in liable'? Hilled Jan. 19, 1976 Hendowlark flying instructor -John Burtle,' his studer►t John: Taylor Ut,student G.D: 1lynn of 81.40 Stanton. over October 4, 1975. Stvdr nt Verner Hirhou 46 of HB cranbed into a! other planes at Meadowlark January 7, 1976 Clifford Lane 57 of �66'j. Howurd St. Lou /'lamitoc crashed on 1•ieauowlark airport. Ilorexber, 75, Johu Leonard At. Aubin 44 of 17052 Green St. EB Drunk ending in F.V. Mile Squire Park I-larch 31, 1974, Richard Benton 42 and con Hark 17 of blauhatton. Doach lest power on Head_wlark tah.c off because engine otopped 5 Veet oft grnund. ' Pebruary 16, 1974, Inatructor and Meadowlark operator Turner loot power craebed on takeoff Meadowlark. Sept. 20, 1.974, Mike Caloyannides of .Placentia forced landed on 11B beach. April 24, 1975, Jerry Hardin, 44 NB'pilot leaped from his :►lazing adx- craft ( 4 Beater piper tri pacor frum !icadowlark.) Plane burst into f2ameo p?urged into field at Bolnta Chica and Edinger. Others no data Umded into FIB home owner Bwi=ing pool., crasboO into Keadow View school yard. I � OIty of Hunti?,tg•ton Bauch August 7,1976 Clt_floo of OLty.- Mork P; N. B-ox: 190 Huntington, 5c,aah., Oalifornl i I A.'ttontico*. Jkll.oic Ilaritlrorth Deav Mrs," �,,)xMforbh: se Plea forifard thl n cToaument to the proper autrcritSea And ata on- the Mty Ctsuno= b.., A.tt6uet 16',, 2576 Will be-br ttghtt. abrima t and aurront: by those, rosoarcrning the unrem-1 faonts of the problem betora tho publla hearing azid cra.ty flbuuall meeting YX dsy© sf�azr alxgust:. 16,. ZSr6. Wan do roquuat formal, 01ty Councll mewbi and publia- hoavibg on bJoadovrlurk A%rport problem crayexIn& oevAw, aaytrru4 beloifbe - oat riot, Jafur that -M daya attar AUSUat, x6,'•1976. A=DM 1- Noite Abatement ?rogran:,-- Can City of HGntington Boac:n (FioB. ) join Orange Obunty NoiGV All ntozent Trogram? P.'.ea+ie contact Tom Schri©ber of SupArribor L. Soamidt la office rebardinS CENL (GvmatuA%y Eq;lvalerat .pxee Leval) roadinga of tbo M9adowlark «irport. 9- Q.rndit3.'onal E:tcuptlon-7C-r0 - Ara all tho conditions+ boIn, met? H u YoaZrly roview-baen _ =ado?; TTocumantatton bats Loon submittod as to many *SoWilons during- owrfow%houro. ` %ty of O.P; I'ralloo Enforaement:- lcs thiM atttext of tho lax. being followed? (Example—xdght flying) Itaapouse by TMoll.00 Dopartmout to: citizens oomvAainVrj harp been nexvtivee - I 4- Rovlawv o; *Jaeago anti,' Actual Zoning Surrotx ging- and 1noludi:aS What liubll it j is the city accepting?' 5- l"Urvent Crowded CSonditiona arnd Cran;h Hazard V=o Oomj:at&bll.1.ty,- Duo to crowded "ndlticria In Landing r.nd t:aice-off` pat;:ter7r, which is Ora-uh Ha-%=Ll Zone with Residential hououj Throe. story onmmeraj.!t1 1:u1l,,_7.1nga, Two story, apartmonto r Tyro grudo achool.o, Marine:. High Sahoo•1 t Two- 1.1t'tl© loaguo pavIcu7, Sboppini3 cente.- =d. f`uturo•nanl:ei club building, Is tho alrport largo enough to o::-�•z�t�;�n���.Y�lt�' :�lx��, a=3es,4eck areag _ A- Sufrfl,aient glide slope? B- Suff ioient aide cdi.oaranae? C- Kaom for Lice downs? r,-- Survey by b,,kA, Cal--11!rana--Div.. of 110ronautlac 11n writ•,i116 statoJ elrport Is on-fb? 6- P9:lot. Liability To City of H.H: :d Ara al pilots; uaing Moaftwlark Alrpart fully oortaz���d by pxopar insuratce? Du* to- h"gh riaLc fcator in Oraah Hazard Zone, 1a: thoro xaya to protoczt Mt,�r, Ronl.donta:, Pllats, ants. Bus1n�: Aman�' I i WE 2 'j'-iGrivironme:�ta1 �inpaot:-• � What iJ tte onvironmental Impact of a-Irport to Civy of 11.B.7 8- Summary:.& gomal presentation to City Obunoil by staff and proper authorite- ies with optlona: of. aotton2 for tako proz6nt©d from atoXt andproper authorit2os to- Oity trbunoil by Aubuat 16,. 19?6 with Public Hearinr I halt by City Macuna= be tug uat:. 3CL daya from Auguat 16,, 1976'. i This provides City Uorunoll as means of 1xibg brought abreast avrt�nt ota the _aevoraI facets or thO Maadowlark Airport probinue' ARt ive Ctwernf4 d, y a r • �, . - i City of Huntington Beach Avgutt 7t1976 Orrice of City Clork P. Oi. Box 190 �rl Huntington Beach, California A,t:tentiono AlInc.a wantworth Dear. Kra, 6ant.wort:ht Ploave forward this dcoumer.; to the prop eo authorities and staff me- the City ctounail by August 16, 1976 will be -Nought abreast; ant current by those researching the severed facets of the problem b9fore the public hearing and City abuncil mooting 30 We a-fter A,ugunt. 16,. 1976. We- to request formal City 0ounall moetin ant public hearing on MseAawlark Airport ltroblete acyering agean covered belowbe not not later than 30 days after A•.tguat 1601976. AGENDA' 1- Noise Abatoment- Program:. Can city of Huntington Beach (H.B. ) join Orange C'ount7 Noise � - Aba"..oment Program? Please contact Tom Sahrinber of Supervisor Le i Sohml:Ws office regarding CENL (Conmunl'ty '.1141valent .Pies Level) � . readings of the Y.oalowlark Airport. i 2- Conditi'onhI Exception-70-50: - Are all the conditions being met? Hsi Yearly review been madef Documentation has been submitted as to- many violations during curfew Yours. � 3- city of N.P. Folire Enforcement:- la thn'-letter of the law being follows&? (Example--night flying) Ftespouse by Police Department to citizens complaints han been negative. !!-- Review or Ueoage ant Actual Trming Surrottn#Sea and Ihnluding A:rpui=o i^ What liability is the city ..ucepting?; 5- Current orowdet Conditions and Crash Hazard Tons Compatavility:- Due to crowded conditions in landing and take-off pattern, which is mash tAZ&Td Zone with Residential homes, Three atory aomasrad.al buildings, Two story apertmentut , Two grade aohools, Marina High Schoal, "No l.ittlo loaguo parkas Shopping centrar and future Racket club buildin6i In the r.-A^-iort large enough to op:eratd ea-fely' in this congestod aroaZ A- Sufficient glide 13.opo? B- Sufficient aids c 2looranco? C- Room for do d own. D- Surrey by FAA., Cal-Trana- -Dlv. or Aaronautice in writing I I ata.tod airport is oafe? 6- Pilot Liability To City of It.E. :- � Are all pilots using Meadowlark airport fully covered by proper Insurance? Dui to- high rick factor in Crash Hazard Zone, is there Vaya to protsat City, Hanidonta, Piloter and Uninesamanl ►1 it f FLOE 2 7-Emy1ronmental Impaot =- phat is the environmental impact of airport to OiVT of H.B.t 8- Summary:- Formal presentatim to Oity Obunail by staff and proper authori4- ies with options of aeticu, to- take presented from staff and groper authorities to- City Obunoll by Augvz L 16, 1976 with Public Hearing held by O1ty Towail being pet 30 duys from August 161, 1976. This provides Oity Ocunail ar- weans of beixog brought abreast and current on the several facets of the Meadowlark Airport problon. 1CUve Ubnaernedg r, 1 ; Tom- ♦en o i •s. Joan ULITIna I I� I i i i i i i l PON H13 Mil t] U L P. O.[SOX 1601,HUNTINl;YON 11EACH, CALIF. 92647 February 2, 1976 O V' CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH City Council -�,�� CITY COUNCIL OFFICE City of Huntington Beach VI post Office Box 190 Huntington Bench, Ca. 92648 Dear Mayor Gibbs and Council Mambers , V ' Q We would like to request an opportunity to address the City Council on the evening of February 17 ;,Fith regard to a number of problems arissng from operation© at Meadowlark Airport. The attaohed resolution indicates the aotiono we will urge City Council to take on behalf of certain residents of the city. A presentation on the matter has been prepared by the parties bringing the complaint which should take on the order of twcuty minutes. We would appreciate space on the agenda for this matter since we feel that it merits very serious consideration. Sincerely, HOME COUNCIL George M. Snyde 7 Secretary 1- HOME COUNCIL JJ C".,.,;I P.O. WX 1601, HUNTINOTON BEACH,CAM.496e? MEADOWLARK AIRPORT WHEREAS, the citizens of Huntington Beach residing in the vicinity of the southwest end of the Meadowlark Airport have approached HOME Council for assistance frith their complaint regarding operations at and from Meadowlark Airport, and WHEREAS, said citizens have already appealed to the Federal and State A.:iation Authorities and require support from the City of Huntington Beach to further said appeals, and WHEREAS, said citizens have indicated that serious prohlema j relating to safety and health are arising from the operations at and from Meadowlark Airport and have convinced the membership of HOME Council that such problems are in fact true, now therefore ICE IT RESOLVED, that HOME Council urges the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach to call for immediate hearings I on the operation of Meadowlp -k Airport, to conduct such investigations as may be required to ascertain the facts, and to ensure proper and lawful operation cf said airport ! in keeping with the ordinances and agreements of the City, { and further, to support the appeals of the citizenry ttj the 1 State and Federal Aviation Authorities if such act5.en is found to be warranted. By order of the Membership and the Executive Board of the Homeormers' Mutual and Executive Council, this 28th day of January, 1976. George M. Snyder Secretary IV nJ 2-1 I� Mfg CIV,' OF HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 76,o l2 COUNCIL. - ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNICATION wnurt.nwnuu To Honorable Mayor and From City Administrator City Council Members Subject MEADOWLARK AIRPORT STATUS REPORTp,71L Jantinry 30, 1976 Attached is an opinion from the City Attorney which states that enforcement of FAA regulations are within the jurisdiction of the Federal Government and that the City cannot eliminate a legal con- forming use which has been approved by the City in the past and complies with ordinances. FAA requirements are that airplanes generally must fly at a minimum I of 1 ,000 feet over congested areas and 500 feet over open space. However, this does not apply when entering the traffic pattern to land. At Meadowlark, planes are to enter the traffic Pattern at 500 feet and descend from that point. This means , of coarse , that planes will of necessity be much lower than 500 feet o7c r the residential areas surrounding Meadowlark as they descend to land . And, of course , they W.11 be much lower than 500 feet when they take off. The Air- port does not meet the standards necessary to require an air traffic control tower. I understand that a group of citize7-i has petitioned the State Aeronautics Board to revoke the Airport licr.nse. Tt remains to be seen what their response, will be. Our alternatives appear to be limited. We could revoke their Condit- ional Use Permit, but it was gra;lted to insure improvement of safety conditions and would not result: in closure. It would be senseless to revoke this permit. Our only other alternative seemed to be to hold a public hearing to determine if the Airport is a public nuisance , b,.tt since we cannot elim- inate a legal conforming use which has been approved by the City, our hand-3 are tied. The Council agreed at its January 19 , 1976 meeting that this was not a desirable course of action. Respectfully submitted , A�Z4 00, David D. Rowlands City Administrator DDR/JC:p 1 Attachment IJ, I s r r r r I �•'' INTER•DEPAHTMENT COMMUNICATION '"~:"'` "dati" MEMORANDUM OPINION To City Administrat-l' From Jahn J . O' Connor Doplit.y City Attorney Subject Violation of FAA Rei;ulatiorls Date January 30 , 1976 at Meadowlark Airport (QUESTION: Can the City Council declare violatirin rif FAA regulations at Meadowlark Airport a public nulsanve? ANSWER: Enforcement of FAA regulations ave with the ,jurisdiction ..f the Federal Government and the City cannot declare a valid , conforming use , wi:i..h it has un1„roved and which conforms with all local ordinances ana regUlat.lons , a public nuisance and have it terminated. DISCUSSION: The law is well e:ttablistzed that a legal , conforming uae which has been approved by the City and which complies with all the ordinances cannot be eliminated . The problem as outlined in your memorandum of January 7 , 1976 appears to be that "pilots have been buzzing . . . residents and have been violating certain FAA regulations. " The remedy for violations of FAh regulations lies with the FAA, not with the City of Huntington Beach. The City has no authority to enforce FAA regulations . �Oep'uty O- ONNOR APPROVED : City Attorney r" JJ0' C :ce \ DON P. BOND' City Attor ey January, 1976 August 17, 1970 - The City Council authorized the Home Council to form � a committee to initestigate the safety conditions at Meadowlark Airport. August 18, 1970 - Robert Dingwall dresent the Conunittee 's report on Meadowlark Airport study matter to the City Council but trns continued until the September 8, 1970 meeting. Septeniber 0, 1970 - Robert Dingwall present information from the Meadow- lark Airport Committee to the City Council. In addition, the City approved continued non-implementation of the existing Cease and Desist order until. the meeting of September 21 , 1970. The Council i directed the City Administrator to.. investigate methods that coulb be used by the City to enforce safety rbgulations. I September 30, 1970 - John A. Turner applied for Conditional Exception 70-50, a request to permit a 500 foot expansion of an existing runway and to permit two existing trailers to be occupied as offices until a permanent structure is constructed. October 5, 1970 - The City Council at a regular meeting passed a motion to direct the Administration to take whatever action is needed to enforce a Cease and Desist Order on Meadowlark Airport. October 5, 1970 - The City Council received a report from the Airport Committee and conducted a public meeting. The Council unanimously directed the following action. 1. That thr reports; of the Meadowlark Airport Committee and the Residents Against Airport Hazards (RAAH) be received and filed and be made part of the official records cf the meeting. I 2. That Recommendation #1 of the Airport Committee (to develop a Model Airport Zone complete with pe.ripherii! zone recommenda- tions for use by the City at any location an airport might be operated) be adopted by Council. I 3, That Recommendation #3 of the Airport ^ommittee ( the ,City shall take the initiativ;t in causing the power transmission lines along Warner Avenue and those lying along the alley north of Heil Avenue to be ok-3truction lighted in the areas clnse to the runway at Meadowlark Airl,ort and that the Heil Avenue street light wire be undergrounded in the area close to the runway) be adopted and the City Administrator be directed to immediately contact the Southern California Edison Company to implement same at the earliest poss3ible time. 4 . That Recommendation. #4 of the Airport Committee (night operations at Meadowlark Airport be limited to two hours after legal sunset or 10: 00 p.m. , whichever occurs first) be adopted and t+ie City Attorney and Police Department be instructed to enforce said curfew. z �� 5. That the r►rt,r,rt.:► from the Ai r1x,r't U,mmi lice ,111d IIAAI1 h,- referred to thy_ Arlminir;t:r.,t ivo A►_Liun konimitt,ot, for r'ig,ort to Council dt the' meL-tine) of l cLObtrr' 11), 19711. � October 19, 1970 -- The City Council :evivwc:d the report from t hu chi ty Administrator and approved the followi ncl reconunundationfl: ' f 1. The City staff be directed to define and/or establish the authority and responsibility to enforce applicable legal codes pertaining to airports. 2 . The City staff be directed to enforce local airport ground I reg ulataons and coordinate efforts with other appropriate j agencies. 3. The City take appropriate steps to insure that proper aviation authorities institute proceedings to require compliance with all existing air regulations. 4. Adopt new City codes necessi:ry to provide a safe environment. 5. Request Council approval for. the City to place tie Heil Avenue lighting circuit underground in the vicinity of the runway, at a cost not to exceed $2,000 . 6. Require the airport operator to install appropriate and legally required cuff-site obstruction lights. , 7. Subject to satisfactory installation of off-situ obstruction lights, permit limited night flying operations. Furthermore, if the Planning Commission should approve Conditional Exception 70--50, they should consider the following recommendations: I. Light the blast fence and trees now on the north property line. Limit the height of trees to 20 feet and install obstruction lighting. 2 . Provide proper dust control measures. 3. Post sign,- to inform pilots of proper use ot airport and run- up area . 4 . A one y©ar review. A 5 . Limit the runway extension to 320 feet. 6. IrstaIl a blast fence approximately 100 feet From the northerly end of the runway, 7. Prohibit night flying at Meadowlarh Airport from 10: 00 p.m. to sunrise . 4_, 3 October 20, 1.970 - The Planning Commission livid 41 public- heari.ncl on Conditional Exception No. 70-50, a rc(iuc-:;t: to permit (A) a 500 foot: extension to the runway and (13) to allow use of 2 exinLinq t vailera or temporary offices. 'rho request for extension of the runway was gr,inLod with thy, following conditionn . 1. The runway extension shall be reducer' to 320 ft. ; however, in no case shall the extension bo closer than 375 ft. frorn houses on Heil Avenue . 2. A blast fence shall be installed 100 ft. north of the end of the north property runway. The precise location, size and building materials shall be approved by the Board of Zoning i Adjustments. 3. That portion of the runway and taxiway north of the blast i fence shall be removed. A. Gbstrur_tion lights shall be installed on the Mast- fence and any trees along the north property line . Also, any trees along the north property .line shall be limited to 20 ft. in height. Placement and type oo lights shall be approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustment,. 5. Provisions shall be made for dust and noise control on the. site. Such dust and noise control methods shall be approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustments . 6. Signs shall be posted to inform pilots of the proper use of the airport and runway area. 7. All violations of the City Code shall be corrected within 60 drays . S. A review by the Planning Cormmission of conditions 1 through 7 shall be made on December 15, 1970 to determine the applicant' s compliance with the above conditions . This conditional exception shall become null .and void if the Planning Commission determine that conditions 1 through 7 have not been complied with. 9 . Conditional Exception No. 70-50 shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission during the month of October, 1971 to determine whether or not additional conditions should be required. However, in the event the Planning Co,.nmission determines that added safety precautions should be imposed, said conditional exception may be reviewed prior to October 31, 1971 . In case of a review by the Planning Commission, the applicant shall be notified in writing at least 10 days prior to the review. 1 a The u:ic of the tr.ii li!r:; h,o; I --,Y, �jp,,rovod wi th t hi- ful lowin(l -on ditions : 1 . 'I•hr_ use of t•ho trailors .i:; I , -mp,)rary IarI Iit io!:: :;ha] 1 Lormiiia on October, 1971 or construt•t io n :.hill bl, proc ouditicl un('ue delay on permanent -.;Lructure. And for the following reasons: 1. precedent to else: trailers as Lvinporary ha:.; been ef;tablit'hvd. 2. Use will terminate in one year unless construction will have started on a permanent structure. October 27, 1970 - In a Planning Comfiiis lion Study Session, the conditions of approval for. Conditional Exception 70-50 were amended as f-)llows: 2. A blast fence shall be installed 100 ft . north Of the end of the run-.aay. The precise location, size and building materials shall be approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustments J. That portion of the runway and taxiway north of the blast fence shall be removed. i November 12, 1970 - The Board of Zoning Adjustments reviewed the blast fences as required by the conditions of approval and declined to act due to insufficient information on materials and location of the blast fence was available at that cime and the ar.plicant has not submitted reirised plan to conform with the amended conditions of approval . November 16, 1970 - The City Council field a public hearing on an appeal filed by Francis T. Connolly to the one year restriction on use of the trailers as temporary offices rather than the requested 3 years. The Council sustained the one year restriction imposed by the Planning Commission. November 1.8, 1970 - The Board of 'Zoning Adjustments approved the plot plan for Conditional Exception 70-50 with the following restrictions: 1. The blast fence shall be constructed at a location and to specifications as do] ineated to plot: plan received November 19, 1970. 2. Obstruction .lighting and marking on the blast fence shall conform to State and FAA ,t3ndards. 3. The hoard of zoning Adjustments resorves the right to review for dust control on site at any time. December 15, 1970 - The Planning Commission revio•ied Conditional Exception 70-50 to see if the conditions of ,-approval had been observed as directed. The Commission having found that the conditions were not met declared the Conditional Exception 70-50 null and void. Finding of tact for Revocation of t-he Conditional Except-ion. ■ 5 094 1 . Information contained in a memo dirvcLod to Duyle Miller , City Administrator, frorn Ol l in C. Cleveland, ui r'e ctor of Building and Safety, dated Decomber 1 'i, 1970, indicatod th.tt the applicant had not c_omhl ivil with 1.114- unrldi t: iml.';. 2. A field investigation performed by Comtni.ssiuner Duke Indic:olt_t-d the following : a. The blast fence was not properly con ;Lructed accordi.nq to the plan . b. Wheel stops were not fixed to the runway. c. Electrical wiring pertaining to-' the blast fence dic, not appear to be properly installed. January 4, 1971 - The City Council field a public hearing and in appeal of the action taken by the Planning Commission declaring conditional Exception 70-50 null and void. The Council overturned the Planning Commission's actions, and reinstated Conditional 70-50 with all the previous conditions of approval and imposed the following conditions. 1. Until the State issues a permit to allow night flying, night flying shall be prohibited and runway lights turned off from sundown to sunset; 2. After the State issues a permit to allow night flying, night flying shall be prohibited and runway lights turned off from two hours after sundown or 10: 00 p.m. , whichever first occurs, to sunup; 3. Any violation of any conditions set forth by this conditional exception, including the two above conditions, will be grounds for suspension or revocation of said Conditional Exception, on previous notice to applicant and hearing by the City Council. February 8, 1971 - The City Council directed the City At:tarr.ey to draft an ordinance incorporating control of Might: flying i;-L•o the polico power of the City. Mar 9 T t March ' , 1 71 - he City Council discussed the report of the Airport CQrrmittee, however, no action was taken. October 19, 1971 - The Planning Commission reviewed Conditional Exception � 70-50 as stated in condition #9 of the conditions of approval.. The Commission continued the review process to the November 2, meeting to see if all the previous conditions or approval had been met. November 2, 1971 - The Planning Commission found that the trailers were still being used as offices, violating condition 410. --- Therefore, the Commission recommended to the City Council that Conditional Exception No. 70-50 should be. revoked. However, if it is not revolved, it should be refvrred back for additional conditions. r "1 ON 6 November 15, 1971 - Thu C i Ly C'uun' i-ov i ovi(-(I a L r,,n:;cnI t: Lei 1 11'g)III I lit- ilanning Commission rucluL-St. iII(I revuCaLiun oI' Cc,ndi.LionaI tixce1,tion (� 70-50 . The Council then approved a 1110ti can which granted thc applicant until December 16, 1971 time to comply with condition #10, if at that time it has not been complied with a hearing would be set to revoke Conditional. Exception 70--50. December 6, 1971 - The City Council was inforined that the trailer: had been removed. No further actions were Laken . July 7, 1972 - The City Council. appointed Councilman Duke, City Administrator, and the Director of Planning to :verve on a committee investigating the icasibility for the joint purchase of the Meadowlark Airport lease by the City and Orang_r County. January 29, 1973 - The City Council withdrew its support of the study on Meadowlark Airport Lased on the fact that the airport i, not compatible with the existing surrounding residential area and would rather find a location ;More ,uil-ed for this: use. . i' January 29 , 1973 - The City Council directed the Planning Commission to study the re-zoning of Meadowlark Golf Course and Airport to determine what uses would be made o` the property should the existing uses be terminated by the present owners. May 6, 1974 - The City Council was approached with a problem relating to Meadowlark Airport and the adjacent Tract 7605, the deletion of two lots and a fence to met State Aeronautics and FAA regulations." The Council directed the City Attorney, Director of Public Works and the Director of Building and community Development to prepare a mutual agreement for all. involved parties. May 20, 1974 - The City Clerk presented a report: from the City Attorney regarding the agreements between the City and the Stoll.,-echt-Bartoli tract, number 7305. July 15, 1974 - The Director of Building and Community Development requested that the Council schedule a public hearing for revocation of Conditional Exception 70-50 . The Council set a public hearing for August 5, 1974, however, the nearing mould he dropped provided that the blast fence is constructed to previous stated standards. August 5, 1974 - The City Council continued the public hearing on the revocation of Conditional E%ception 70-50 to August 19, 197.1 due to the report from the Director of Building and Community Develop- ment stating that the blast fence has been substantially completed. August 19, 1974 - The Cicy Council continued the public hearing on the revocation, of Conditional Exception 70-50 to September 3, 1974 due to a meeting between the City, the property own#-r, and the State Division of Acronauti.cs on the matter . September 3, 1974 - The City Council. held a public }searing on the � revocation of Conditional Exception 70-50. The Council agreed not to revoke the Conditional Exception provided that the airport complied with the following conditions: 7 1. The blast fence be relocated to a position as close to the north boundary fence as possible, the slatting of the chain link fence be repaired and thereafter maintained along with the planted screen barrier. 2. The pre-talceoff runup pad be maintained in its existing position and plainly marked "perform engine and pre-takeoff checks here." 3. That the original runup pad adjacent to the very end of the runway (Runway 19) be removed or marked as unusable which means that the paving could be retained and could help in connection with any potential dust problems. 4 . Maintain the existing displaced threshold markings. 5. Establish and effectively enforce an airport rule requiring aircraft operators to conduct pre-takeoff checks in the designated area and when ready for takeoff, and air traffic permits, to move without delay to the very end of the runway and commence takeoff roll without stopping for further aircraft engine checks. In addition, the Council directed that when the lease between the i property owner and the airport operator, Mr. Turner, is negotiated, that the staff would refer back to Council a condition requiring the installation of a slope indicator. May 5, 1975 - The City Council scheduled a public hearing for June 2, 1975 to consider amending the Conditions of Approval for Conditional Exception 70-50. The request is to reduce the height of the blast fence to 4 feet and to provide myoporums directly behind it. June 2, 1975 - The City Council conducted a public hearing to modify the conditions of approval for Conditional Exception 70-50. The modi- fication requested was to retain the blast fence in its present position, but to shorten it to 4 feet and planting material be installed behind the fence. In addition, the slatting in the chain link fence along Heil Avenue shall be repaired and maintained. The request was approved by the Council . it f Progress Report - CA 76-A. 5 Miscellaneous Items - 2- February 6, 1976 Midget appropriation in any respect. In brief, this money would either be replaced in the: existing budget or other activities would have to be reduced or eliminated. Unless I hear from you to the contrary, I shall assume that you do not object to advancing the $1,500 out of this already budgeted parade account as long as it is understood that the maximum to he expended by the City will not exceed the $15,000. 5) Title X Funding - Bob Cunningham, our local Manpower Director, ati1- the County Manpower Director, Mr. Bob Nelson, will be meet- ing in San Francisco next Tuesday with top officials of the Department of Labor and the AFL-CIO with regard to a $107, 000 (Title X) grant which the City recently received for manpower purposes. The controversy which has been raised by the labor representa- tives pertains to whether or not unemployed tradesrr,: n should be paid the going union rate Por their services or the rate paid for their counterparts in city employment . I am talking about such employees as plumbers , carpenters, electricians and others. As the City Council knows., work will be done on several buildings with workmen who will soon be recruited. As soon as the contro- versy is resolved, I shall advise you accordingly. Basically, the pay rates for these :individuals should certainly be comparable to the C,ity's oxisting sates of pay. Unless the work is ' contracted out , it would be very difficult to justify the union position as opposed to the position taken by the Department of Labor. Meadowlark Airport- -Chronolo ical List - Enclosed is a report prepares by the Planning Department w ich provides you with the chronological list of events pertaining to the Meadowlark Airport. You will note that no action has been taken which permits aircraft to fly at a level below State or Federal requirements. 7) Health and Safety-Code - Attached is a memorandum from John Behrens 17i 'Mc'Mch he rs requesting an opinion from the legal department as to whether the Building and Community Development Department can at this time require the installation of smoke detectors under certain circumstances. I thought you should be apprised of this situation in the event that you receive sore citizen inquiries on this subject . R) Beach Parking Fees - Attached is a letter from Director Herb Rhode—not the Department of Parks and Recreation of the State in which he indicates that his staff will be considering the recommen dation from Huntington Beach to the ef!ect that we should increase the parking fees to either $1. 50 or, preferably, to $2. 00 for this coming year. I shall follow-up on this progran from time to -J time and advise you accordingly. 9) One Sto ,Service - Attached is a release concerning the "one stop sery ce in t e Building; Department. This will still require close Progress Report - CA 76-A.5 Miscellaneous Items - 3- February 6 , 1976 cooperation with the Fire, Planning and Public Works Departments , but that appenrs to have been accomplished. Contractors , home association groups and others have been advised of this new concept. Respectfully submitted, xv. David I). Rowlands City Administrator DDR:eh i i I I sJ I 0". .� CONDr riONAL t?XCEPTION Nn. 70-50 Undidonb of A{,1)rave I Applicant.: John Turner 1 . The runway extension shall, be reduced to 320 ft. however, in no case shall the extension be closer than 375 ft. from houses on Heil Ave. 2. A blast .fence shall be installed 100 ft. north of the and of the north property runwayy. The precise location, size and buildinE materials shall' be approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustments. 3. That portion of the runway and taxiway north of the blast fence shall be removed. 4. Obstruction lights shall be installed on the blast fence and any trees along the north propertyy line. Also, any trees along the north property line shr�11 be limited to 20 ft. in height. Placement and type of lights shall be approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustments. 5. Provisions shall be made for dust and noise control on the site . Such dust and noise control methods shell. be approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustments. 6. Signc shall be posted to inform pilots of the proper use of the airport and runway area. 7. All violations of the City Code shall be corrected within 60 days. S. A review by the Planning Commission of conditions 1 through 7 shall be made on December 15, 1970 to determine the applicant' s compliance with the above conditions. This conditional exception shall become null and void if the Planning Commission determines that conditions 1 through 7 have not been complied with. 9. Conditional Exception No. 70-50 shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission during the month of October, 1971 to determine whether or not additional conditions should ! be required. However, in the event the Planning Commission 1 determines that added safety precautions should be imposed , said- conditional exception may be reviewed prior to October 31, 1971. In case of a review by the Planning j Commission, the applicant shall be notified in writing at least 10 days prior to the review. 10. The use of the trailers as temporary facilities shall termi- nate in October, 1971, or construction shall be started and proceeding without undue delay on permanent structures. cn-11TTONZAT. AJL "O-a Cnns o f pprov.- I a Al"', 1"1.cnnr r 4r ft howe ' r tin "75) ft. From llrmnrs rn 'I-o! 1 fvv-7v 114) f'I Tv)rLh of the end thf, I'wisell". ov, Prccj ,-.. size -%nd boi Hal .; 0-.- 1 1 1-ovr d !J'' Lll(. Roarcl of That pni-Linn of tbiL I L. % W--'v lie,rdi of the blast !4. rilintructi mi ILF.ht-- 01- 1 1 bc ;st :; I I ed all L'[-.c blast fence rind qilv Lrt -It-s ;- In% t'--ir vort nr."Ilerty line. Also. nny rrPes ' loni; Llic, north propo- r. - 111;e r*all be I 'mitecl to Pr) ft . in hei.-,Ilt . Flje.emcr-t and type of H hL!- sih,111- 0a npprcovc-cl by the Bcmircl of Zor,l ng :Id itistm-n-s ficovis I ons sha I I br, micit, 1'rr. dust .end noise cm-it-rol on the site. Eucli r1urL and noiE.v control methods shall be npprovrd by the Doarcl of .4%tijustments . 6. Signs shall be Posted to i.-iroi-m pflntr, r)f the proper use Of the H.rport vnd ritniviv --t-ea . 7. MI. vtolations or 011- CIt ., r:0,jc sisal be crii-i-ecte(I w.' thin 60 r1sys 8. ft raview by Lho Plannin- Cc ! vilssion of conditions I througli 7 shn11 Le mpdr., (in Docem 1970 to determine th ber IS. C.- i-Pplictint ' s col'opliance Witi, Lhim obove canditinns . This candi t i orvi I exccr,t ion shn I I brcw: e im 1.1 and -%?Cj1 (I If the P)ann Irg, c*owni ss, aii c1c.t P rin I n, s i:Iwo t concl. I t.1,ons I throm?,h 7 hnvc not been camplImi w5i.h . 9. Conditional 1.xcoptiov- ::r) . 71"- 50 be reviewed by the Plarning CtrrvLssion dlir ',q., the mort-h of ')cLob&r, 1971 to determfner- tiliet-her r).-- ?j^t n-1rHL ! r1nv1 conditions should be rr-q1iirc-r1. Ilm.,eve.-r. ' ii the event. the 11) .nnning 1;ommissi.cin deLermincs that ;%ddcri :af,: ty pi:evit.-,tions shoult! ')a imposed , .qald conditional. PAr-cptlor. be rovi.ewrri prier to October. '31 . 1971 . In r;iqr, i-nvi ie T", ailn.inb Commission, the apj)lit -,w --Nill lie notif"lled in tit lenst. 10 dnys [,r* nr vc - I- 10 . The rise of thr trtl lvi-r = L r-rporzory rict I i tir.r. shm I I Le.rrr,-,-i la t e in 0c t ob c Y, 1971 :1 it s t;ruc.L-.'7*.oi I I tir. ::1;a Y.-t ecl ir.jntl procc-r-olin;-, ve cirta), -))I 7-201ialle-,it Structur(,.s. atR2 R2 CFE ca ! +I up i ■ R tt ■t CF-E ■ RI ■ Rt .� oil � . } r r, r n s to � � •^ ; • M!! �-•--- MH r r r r Ir r to N Q \ d' a • • �RIj J R'2 MR CF-R- '? _ F" ' i cf[ WAI _ a nat I R2 R2 C2 R2 1 ! M R1 �► �Cs-t1. - r - CF-R A06 n •� R� R3 4 R2 R2 R2 R2 f R2 R2�lR2 R2 R2 R2 R3 Im r . r II i } in � I RI Flo C4JII C2 i ' ".y r • lee ra R! - - -+ R3 R3 R3 R3 w-- M M Ott _ C2 L i RS t ! ; , ■ / p � ttt B 3 R3 R3 J _=. .. line R3 Rt R R2 CAR wr..r 1h A2 m ti■r� �. ri �e n r� Rt ` a RI RI Al INIA CF-E in - � � .r_ -lea--, � �- - ■ r . r • w ON ■ III A - r • ;i 11N1NTlltltii or ta• r n rInt ,NA1ir;, Annilr_+.ti hNn •i•I:I.Iaul)� Nr: r;t+u:fir AnoNNii,m.,i) RECEI EN °� stRlnCa RUTAN fr TUCKER, =1' : r r t>r rEo tart: HOMER L. MCCORMICK, JR. , ttMCAIM ; D ID C. LARSEN C[.i v c enter Drive West, Santa Anti, Calif.92102 5 5P ?.F ll 9 tM tie Xrroitvr:tr(si r•Ittt Plaintiffs and Cross- _ Defendants iy IS Telephone: 835-2200 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALI FOR THE COUNTY OF ORANGE CAST: �::1111I'R MA5EO NERIO, SUMIYE NERIO and YUKIO NERIO 213,786 Platntiil11+1 tr JOHN TURNER AND MARJORIE TURNER SUBPOENA Dukes Teeum Defendant(") '111F PFOPIX 01. TnE S•rATE O CAI.IFOWNIA. .1'0... Custodian of Records of the City .of.. )iun.tinwTton...Such........................................................ .. YOU ARE CO.%IIJ ARIA) to appear and attend a session of the above entitled court to be held 1 Sept. 79, 1975 a 9:00 a, m., in the courtroom. t p un ............. .... ......•liY��l' ...... t 1)e�a p�'ii7ni►tie:v" ::'i►'ii:�i.....»..»...... the County CotirthousQ , in the fit} of Santa 1►na, of r1{tid churl, at .. ................_........... ».._.., (�NL LOYN INOY�r. 01t �t�f� •t OtaflOr Or .rt LO.N1t �• California. Then s.nd there In lejair)' as a tsiinrae produced by the, .....,plstintiffs in the above cntilled action. no%% pending in said court. YOU ARF: F R'I'HEll RF01.11 f:I) to bring %%ith %ou and produce, at said time and place, the books, paperts and documenits or other thinFm in your pamsi-lseion or tinder tour control, described in the cop) of the decla- ration fur this rsubpoenn dunes iecunt on the reverse herrof. which is inrurpornted herein b) reference. � Dioubedicnve to Chits nubpnrna mat fir punished n+ to contempt by the above-entitled Court, and for such di+obediener you will allsrs forfrit the parly .tp►;rieved the stunt of one hundr.d dollars (3100.00)end all damages which such pnfly may sustain by your failure to lttlend w, hercinubove required. ' .��, 0 w WILLIAM E.!.T )OW �i ~� ►� Cminly Clerk .anal Clerk of Ihr Superior Court of thr �'•..,,�,w..r� 5111ir al calilurnia, in and fair the cuunly of Orange •!'111'S11' 11F310,41•1' loll :11t1'KAIIANCE 01 RI'I:NF:.tiSI; S............................................... AS PER 11FTF.11r•I' SO................ .._........ S0PtA3dxx, 25, 1915 WILMASI F. ST JOHN. Clark i =�1,74j�"y.�41N�/j .7 !.G�•�%.. t RE;P111T till' �1'lll'III.'.VA I1 1'ALIII It, iF.RI 'lt 11110N .1 .Ur,lllrR Ill-" 711I: CALIFORNIA 111rl1111AV I'ArRol.. A$11KRIFF DEPUTY 1f11 W.V. AHARvit.11.. ill:111,71• MARWIAI., uR.1 (77)' 1101.111"ll.IN Il .�•lll' RI,:Qt IRIiII 7P ATT NIP PIIR.(I'A.V r TO virrit►fi.c I'MO'.1 I..t.SWI-.. ISC1.1.111•F. Lrl1.1•RA IIIAl t 0111• rINI. . N'ffl'N /RI C'/•PITOMT FOR AI PE'riRAWE IMPORS I1 A110IT. Of.)r..1p; ,� , �I'III'lll:� 1 Ilurr. 'I't•s•um } • 1*11113 AIIII(A FOR SIIIIII(IEN't Ill'CES 11 141 ATK OF CALIFORNIA, COUNIT OFORANCK The unJeraipard mialre: '11al he in iatisror) elf revilrd Air Plaintiff WMAnt in the dlitive rplidrd artilis. th-st Sept. 29 1975 900 a6m. said 1'.4upe war jul)• act dogs fory�afy ....................... .......fit......................... .................. in Deparimeni........................................................................ fir The 116)ve entitled (:ourt. Custodian of Records of the City of Huntington Beach That,.........I ....... ................................. I........... .......... ....... ..........................I... .. ...I........... ............... AMa Iwo in his possession or under his control the fallowing documents: (orsixt.itir genii name thr wart tAiliss ite 6e produrrit.) Any and all records concerning Conditional Exception 70-50, including a copy of theConditional Exception, itself, and any modifications thereof, notices Of Violationa of the conditions, and records showing enforcement of said Conditional Exception. Thnittaid books, papers, and documents or other things are material to the proper presentation or his risse, and good ctiuse exialm for Their production by reason of the following facts: One of the fundamental facts of the instant lawsuit is whether the rules and regulations and applicable ordinances of the City of Huntington Beach governing Meadcwlark Air portft h been o mVIied with. Said documents ar e.esw..n..t.ial in establishing those ruleExaiMl rgutitibm &d capiUhde.9.15 at..................Santa..Joa.............. . .. ............................. California. declore undirr penahj-a/perjury tilesit the lorqoiq is our and ror),irct. ...... ....... 111100V OF 5ERVICF. DAVM C. Lax9m I served :he foregoing Subpoena Duces Tecum hs, showing the original thereof to each of the following named persons, and delivering it cap)- thereof together with it copy of the A flida vi t/Certificate!Declars elan upon %,hich maid Subpoena Duces Tecum was issued, to each of said persons, personally, on the date and place met forth opposite each nnme, and I offered to each or said persons at the same time. it demanded by such person as met forth herein- after. and paid the fe,-s to which such person is entitled far travel to and from thy place designated, and one days attendance there, to svit: Foes Dralmaded? Naar of Petition Stewed Address there Stewed Date of Service (YeMIND) Fees Paid ..............I.—............I............ ............................. ....... .............I...... .......................... .......................I...................._.. .. .......I.....,...... ................I.,.............. .... ........................ ....... ................ I....................,....... Neefor mervice $_.................... ............ ............................ Taal ................................. 0 Not n fesistirred callifirettrels places& scryet(CCP 417.401 ................................................... .......County, I drelars- andep penalty o/perjury that the loregoing is IrAjr and coned. Execuici) an _....___..».._...._....................._.................. ............. at........... .......................... ciairnrnia. I I .............6 ......................... ............ City'' of Huntington Beach t F.D. tax ISO CALWON41A W" OFFICE OF WE UTY CLVKK The foMXWng instrument 1s a correct copy of the original an file In this office. City Cleric prod Ex•Offielo Geri; of the City Council of the City of Huntington peach, Col. I I hereby certify that the attached msterial consists of copies of all documentation on record in the City ClPrk's Office, rela- tive to the Meadowlark Airport, to the beat of my knowledge. i Bated: September. 26, 1975 City Clerk City of Huntington Beach Affidavit of �Catio/f ��� t 0 • OnuGr .. �,• -�, `12,-7 aq►.ae blaathtstaa � • � - ' tSeoew ftviamr, be duill swans an oatb, wr: Mtb to a dtl= of the nitrd gtatas4 owe for AW of twenty-am years, rr•~~! "� That he Is tat printer and publisher of lk Huntington Heath News a meekly aawap per of tt WmI dmlNJon printed and pub.. 1� Odd In fiuntlnston Heads, CaDfornk and circulated In the aid County of Orange and elwwhrre and publidW for the diasemination *mow o[ local and other news of a general character, and has a bona tide subseriptlon list of paying suburibem and acid paper hsa been , established, panted and published In the State of California, and County of Orange, for at bast one year next before the publlmtloo of the Mt insertion of this nottoe: and the aid newspaper Is not ai davatctil to the Interest of, or published for the entertainment of any particular class, procession, trade, calling, racy or demmilnatlak or to my number thereat a The Huntington Beach New was ad)udlcattd a legal newspaper i~ of General circulation by Judge Cl. K Scovel in the Superior Court of OmM County,Califorms August 27th, IM7 by order No.A-5931. 1 That tin CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO_ 70-50 :I f � of whldu the annexod is a printed copy, was published In sold news- paps: at least a n. i n awe oam WAft fn:m the 22134_day of i -tr_- n ' I •5 and sadist on the 22nd day at i g iq 75 , both days ineludvv, and as otter during said period and ' times of publication as aatd papa'was regularly issued, and In the EMI' regular and entire Issue of Bald pemPaper proper, and not In a supplement, sat said notke was puhllshed therein an the following � .�• S dates, to4ot: 8 ' r l� blisher i Sutsmibod and sworn to before me this g3rd dry of HaY , 1s 75 Notuy Public f Orange Onmty. California MOMAS" 06 WYWE 1 Now, thbtk+GlfhMde I drag•C.••y, � lMr t'.wwwi..tM tbrin � ti+rlawH•r I2. t97r -..«-......�.��...----•------ OJ - ON dogtss h' ' Cea my of -lb state of CaY1�ro�a d f fidavitof Pub icatim of GEORGE FARQUHAR Public NunUrWon Beseh News I M Clwk 1 Deputy cwk f ; I i i i10 ` La' Huntington Beach Planning Commis:ion L :2.0. 60X 1S0 CALIFORNIA OTiU T0: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Planning Commission DATE: June 2, 1975 ATTN: David D. Rowlands, City Administrator R:: Conditional Exception No. 70-50: 500 ft. Runway Extension at Meadowlark Airport The City Council at its meeting of May 5, 1975 directed the staff to schedule a public hearing for the purpose of considering a proposed modification to the conditions of approval on Conditional Exception No. 70-50. The Council at its meeting of April 28, 1974 approved the exception request and imposed the following conditioner: 1. The blast fence be removed and the slatting of the chain link fence and the oleander screen barrier along Warner be permanently maintained. 2. The pre-takeoff runup pad be maintained in its existing position and plainly marked "perform engine and pre-takeoff.:checks hare. " 3. Remove the asphaltic concrete runup pad that is adjacent to the very end of the runway (Runway 19) and the north boundary fence. 4. Maintain the existing displaced threshold markings. S. Establish and effectively enforce an airport rule requiring aircraft operators to conduct pre-takeoff checks in the designated area and when ready for takeoff, and air traffic permits, to move without delay to the very end of the runway and commence takeoff roll without stopping for further aircraft engine checks. The proposed modification involves Condition Number 1 with the wording to be amended as follows: ' 1. The blast fence shall remain in its present location and shall be reduced in height to four (4) feet. Myoporums shall be planted directly behind the blast fence and maintained to a height of four feet. The slatting of the chain link fence along Heil Avenue shall be repaired and thereafter maintained with the plant screen barrier. Continued � � RECOMMENDATIONS The staff recommends that the City Council amend Condition No. 1 on Conditional Exception No. 70-50 to reflect the above referenced wording. Res tfully sub itt , lard A. Harlow Director of Planning and Environmental Resources RAHsJMC:m 1 I I 'lr i v � a NuIrt Excerpts 52 Publish Once LEGAL NOTICE NOTICH OF PUBLIC HEARING XONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 70-50 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will he held by the City Planning Commission of tho City of Huntington Beach, California, for the purpose of considering a modification to the conditions of approv 1 for Conditional Exce , WhIcn permitted a 500 foot expansion to an existing runway at the Meadowlark Airport. The modification would amend Condition #1 to read approximately an follows, "The blast fence shall remain in its present position and oaall be reduced in height to approximately 4 feet. Plant material shall be installed immediately behind the blast fence. The slatting of the chain link fence along Heil Avenue shall be repaired and thereafter maintained with the plant screen barrier.'e The subject property is located just Bout}► of Neil Avenue, east of Bolea Chic& Street and tenet of Graham Avenue, in the Rl, Low Density Residential District. A legal description is on file in the Planning Department office. Said hearing will be held at the hour of 7:00 P.M. , on , in the Council Chamber Building of the Civic Center, 2000 Main Street , Huntington Beach, California. All interested persons are invited to attand said hearing and express their opinions for or against the proposed Conditional Exception NO. 70-50 4 Further information may be obtained from the City Planning Department. Telephone No. (714) S36. 5271 DATED this day of CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Richard A. hat!.:w Secretary I •riasao Norio rritz if. behi r rki:ng Richard W. Drake 779S Westminster Avenue $242 rInliente Drive 1441 Sublette Street Westminster, Calif )Huntington Bench . Ct.li f Rock Spring, Wye 92683 92649 82901 Koichi Norio Frances A 111 cloy Cone 1' hunches 7795 Westminster Avenue 5391 Appian Way 5292 Caliente Drive Westminster, Calif Long Desch , Cali i' Huntington Beach , Calit 92683 00803 92649 Title Ins . & Trust Co. Le Roy r npfe..r Kelvin Cox P nor Ilse 94SS Rardenin 4vonue 5272 Caliento Drive SE14R i0go , Calif Rountain Valley , Cnllf Huntington Reach, Calif 9 92708 92649 T -78080062xbmxxt�trrs#xgnx Gerald "ntleews Donald '*nchinton YRxitxx 1040S I,u Tortola circle 525z Caliente Drive Fountain Valley . Clil i r Huntington Beach , Calif 9270R 92649 ,t 1 n Jay !tary 1.1 Ciddi o )toy if robbetts 3 Druid Lane 5211 Heil Avenue S251 Heil .Avenue Los Alamitos , Calif Huntington )srar_h , Calif Huntington Beach , Citlif 9 0 92649 92649 r RrOO and M Jeam Victor L. '-tills pee L Eli; btin A Jay a»01 Heil Avenue 5271 Heil Avenues S lied Avenue 0264 Huntington Beach , Calif Huntington Reach, Calif Huntington ']each, Calif 92649 92649 92640 Kerry W. Taanns Vandy T. Scott lla it Sarkaria S191 lied Avonue 5281 flail Avenue 39 Hira Avenue ifuntinl;tnn iienc}� , t:alit iuntington peach, Calif Lo Alamitos , Calif 9Zfi49 92049 90 2fl Aichae3l Cualtieri J3ss K BarriC}man Edward J 'farquardt 5212 Caliente Drive S1n1 Huntington Avench 16411 Del Mar Lane Huntington Beach, Calif 92049ngton l3enrh , Calif Huntington Leach , Calif 92649 92649 9,1.649 John A ,!astrlght James—' Houston Richard C. Carter SxZZ Caliontc Drive 5161 flail Avenue 16412 ))e] star Lane i if 6tington Beach , Calif 92649ngton Beach , Calif liuntingtvn Beach , Calif. i 9Z 4 9..649 92649 John 1). Tarvin " Paul L' Scott Randolph L . )Haynes 5232 Caliente Drive 51S1 Heil :Avenue 5362 Cnliente Drive 4 Huntington Beach , Calif )Huntington Hersh , Caf Huntington Beach , Calif 82649 92649 92640 `U • Janes D Austin 1nble M Web:ite r 11.4. Union Ili•�h Sc S3SZ Caliente Drive 5392 Caliente Drive lgp2 _ 17th Street Huntington Beach , Calif Huntington (leach, Calif Huntington Reach 92649 92649 Attn: Aistrict Su David R. Black Constance C. roster Vept, of transhorti 5342 C413e)ste Drive S382 Caliente drive 120 So . Spring Stri Huntington Beach. , Call f Huntington Beach , Calif Los Angeles , Cali 1 92649 97649 Attn: Staff Assist: Design H 9RA5? Uwe K 11ansen Robert 11. Nichols S Caliente Drive 5381 Itoi 1 Avenue If ngton Seach, Callf Huntington Beach, Calif 9 49 92649 Ar ur Tice 'Thurman Q . Wade 5312 Caliente Drive 5391 flail. .Avenue i1 ngton Beach , Calif 1untington Isonch , Calif 9 92.649 L liliywa Donnld C . 'IcClure 5 Caliente Drive S411 Heil Avenue Huntington Beach , Calif Huntington Bench , Calif 9 926,49 I RFerlh M Parke .fuhn Is Carlin 1 Sflail Avenue '-421 llei 1 Avenue11ngton Beach , Calif Huntington Beach, Calif 92649 92649 L y K Larson Robert !) Pri ve Ga o H Larson 5431 Ifel1 Avenuw 53 Ileil Avenue Huntington Beach , Calif llu ington Beach Calif 92649 92649 Elaine A lVard E. L. Workman 5341 Heil Avenue S451 llei 1 Avenue Iuntington Beach , Acalif Huntington (teach , Calif 92649 92649 Albert it Ward Behrend If Ihnen 5341 Ile!]. Avenue 5471 Heil Avenue Huntington Bench, Calif Huntington Reach, Calif 92649 92649 Mary L. 1111cs Ocean View School District S361 Ileil Avenue 7972 Warner Avenue Huntington Dench , Calif Ilu-ttington Beach , Calif 92649 Attn: District Surt INFORMATION WEFT PLANNING DEPARTMENT us CASE NO. Z REZONE TOs LOTS:.,,_,AI:R*v?.3:,.,,,.� T PLAN CHECKED: LOGGED 1NsLEGAL ININ IV GENERAL. PLAN LOCATION— []PLANNING COMMISS LRDIUS) [:].9.Z.A.(ABUIMNG) APPLICANT OWNER ASSESSOR PARCEL LIST 51) rs I �- i � ri► � � N U11 Ip.,, ,C w w���u� ■/an/��W/1t_ w�� •�n,r,■ illn .��/ uiiui i,�iulli�IW -��� �;= C� �IIt1 /11I rMl �I�/IIINII/1 iuwiiii r.. :� » .. !u/i11 u i nail " �� " . ii ll� fill �. �w ,roil rr X C&M ., lW1lW �i/I IMllUlrl/I1u11/1MM■■�\ � • �`�' . � aw _ �w„wlli/lullllll/l/I�r 9 � • � '' � 1/ ��' �i� ■� ■ Cw ■� !J � ~•,� � ail fum ar Sm WC Q�jam? IS : ON OEM _o Er.� . .rrr . r rw .. NO ra�iBilIll 1111 M1R��r • I�t�w1,lt� ,n,��■ni��r* 'IUI11ll■U/Il//fl =�/��1�1 �■■i��I�ll� �•�� .\ { �r r, rrr .�■ �: ..��III�� _ .mow �w �u, M� �IL11I111/► ,L,�-. ■ ��� " Elf my: xg _ = r irrl& ilii:� loan ►'r11111111r ee "Now ZONING DM 23 SECTIONAL DISTRICT MAP 20 --5 -- II -- ----� ^ -- CITY OF a .Igme" .sand"Cup%0" =moll 1p-r..—1oo... fm atv COYfCIL awwrc! f•ew L[clNO 0 PAN am"or ml Now r.p►y uwl.n m"I"' I-IUNTINQTQN BEACH �rIN a•1•ff loft ..s•.f nw r.wr.M.IN K f•f•M Iwl 1.4ft IfOe { N atmu r�r sir„ .vA.r ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA ....� ORION 1-,.:,. „M ••fo•fe If.f �M Is IT !� rw rrp.r.wpm {glom AM[NO[0 BY i0t1[ CASE: f•M•M ON 1147.69 1411 QI7 pump awsla.m-a ����//�y n,,1e . l��f,�,�e1.NI..MY.hl µ•q M•M ••I-N left M7•ff l..f ,.�Lnr.eaeur..,rw ar..r .M.•Ne.`70.W-0.0400 •II..I.i1. 4mok- .6.o�•p.e�-1•lY•�tl•fe1A.h•Ieb. 10." Mll /•Mull MIO armory after df=41wK,r Il.f•N 1•M f•ff•II 11ef rMi-mm 9410,7 If•1•N Im t•f•tf INf /i■•w Il el AVE 11.1 M IIM un RI RI C+ .. R2 R2 ( _' RI CF E IIIRI CFE � rlelfl Kf arIRY IBM" ml nag RI lqf � r RI rr t CF-R I RI RI RI OVAPOCOU- RI m RI ERI' �A RI RI RI i RI RI ............ b RI MH RI ? c.•i o c r c e ! I 1 R .. R2 R2 C4 I �I CF-R ' It ` 'j elstwrl w.frwlw" j?_ Tw "will..ow CF-E B2rul..c. :*u>fonc CF.R Oki RI RZ RI �CPR�I R3 SHHH a•R RI RI ,,.. J Rr RI r�ww • Rr ' w ��tt es Itr RI R2 R2 R2 R2 R3 er csp RI RI RI Ci4 n R3 s ' 1 u I Ri � I R3 M R3 R3 R3 R3 G2 I RI RI RI E Rl -RI r , • reY."la��-� y�_ tt� 1:is ���• � � ' y �.l4S .. •� � sl r c. r2►1+[ b I tr�ccLAT4 EX PAOJ S 4AJ , t • �'' a �'� F,�...,? _ _�•s, .}�''� . 1 - ww1A�Y.� . . • .w,w.Ylw..•,.irw� •r ,�•r 1 • I ,�r• f 14 r 1� ii JI i l S j; 'fiJd� t 0.4 "N F. �[HRrNf Attached are minutes of the Council meeting of September 30 4 1974, which contain the five conditions imposed on the Meadowlark Airport. Also attached is a letter notice which I drafted back in January, but which has been held up pending your discussions with the airport owners and the resolution of the blast fence problem. if my understanding is correct, I believe the thing that should be done is to amend condition No. 1 to read approximately as follows, "The blast fence Shall remain in its present position And shall be reduced in height to approximately 40. Some plant material, perhaps myoporum, shall be installed immediately behind the blast fence. The slatting of the chain link fence along Heil shall be repaired and thereafter maintained along with the plant 1 screen barrier." 4 The remaining four conditions are unchanged. JPH/ecd i i I 7 i J� City of Huntington Beach F.O. Box 190 CALWORN1A DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPrENT January 27, 1975 Mr. Art M. Nerio c/o Balsa Realty 7795 Westminster Avenue Westminster, California Dear Mr., Nerio: Enclosed are copies of the minutes of the Huntington Beach Cicy Couaeil meeting of September 3, L9741 a copy of our letter to you of October 4, 19 ; and a report of an inspection conducted by this department on January 159 1975. As is evident from the report of the inspection, there has been no compli- ance with 4 of the 5 conditions imposed by the City Council on Conditional Exception No. 70-50 at its September meeting. Condition. No. 4 concerning the displaced threshold markings on Runway 19 has been satisfied. It has been my understanding that you intend to pursue the elimination of Condition No. 1 relating to the blast fence. To date, however, no formal application to eliminate this condition has been filed with the City. I In view of the action of the City Council and the above circumstances this letter is to notify you to comply with the conditions of approvml as met forth in the attached documents within 10 days of receipt of this notice. In the event this is not done, it will again be necesvary to refer thin matter to the City Council for consideration of revocation of Conditional Exception No. 70-50. If there is anything we can do to assist you in complying with the above notice, please contict our office. Sincerely, I DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPHENT JOHN F. BEHRENS, Director JFB/vl Enc. r iL o i iriN�li� ss wvHvtso r---- 1 ... . _ r. Q........... ••,•. W� yy..•.� ' 'L •�1 PVyy.I _:a NI Q SM3 t[Q Ntf 15 OIL x•. :fir:`•;:•::;:?:: O 9a to t� 1rV� t m — 4 v _ — w :::.. U LNtiS 3 d 3 I , M - - vs s� I cz a JC tl� •JC T , V. dcr a i o '?i3 10�3►IC� Ry,l!!v . t _ F _ a I r� ••e L .l + i c I s V t L 1 1 } ! cn N 1S 0 '1 r- Ifl •M 3 N } rh tivw -130 '' ':•k — 1— t � 3 1 J v • Z. - 1 t •• .••••• �s :iA :=: OI f p v W r y a H T7 *1� •• � ..1 1 S • ......... . ... _ m ..... .... ... . ,y m Ql ti t � 1 ti. W — uy ::1•• .mot.:. 1 .1 1 3 rt� tt9 fl0 QL ::,:: :;;:: z a lu 14 W � }'::;.�'�:~: `':.:•::•}:ti:•:�• 1• I 777 aj I :- _ — 'l a ti a.. f ' 1 • A+ Z -144 �+ + ..— :?!^�ti�;•_;_;:::•.:,:as CD • • Ifs c-N • V W V 61 City of Huntington Beach P.O. Box ISO CALIFORNIA 92 M DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT January 27, 1975 Mr. Art M. Nerio c/o Bolan Realty 7795 Westminster Avenue Westminster, California Dear Mr. Nerios E=Icsed are copies of the minutes of the Huntington Beach City Council meeting of September 3, 1974; a copy of our Letter to you of October 4, 1974; and a report of an inspection conducted by this department on January 15, 1975. As is evident from the report of the inspection, there has been no compli- ance with 4 of the 3 conditions imposed by the City Council on Conditional Exception No. 70-50 at its September meeting. Condition No. 4 concerning the displaced threshold markings on Runway 19 has been satisfied. It has been my undbratanding that you intend to pursue the elimination of Condition No. 1 relating to the blast fence. To date, however, no formal application to eliminate this condition has been filed with the City. In view of the action of the City Council and the above circumstances this letter is to notify yorj to comply with the conditions of approval as not forth in the attached documents within 10 days of receipt of this notice. In the event this is not done, it will again be necessary to refer this j matter to the City Council for consideration of revocation of Conditional Exception No. 70-50. If there is anything we can do to egpist you in complying with the above notice, please contact our office. Sincerely, DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING d COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT JOHN F. BERRENS, Director JFB/vl Enc. -�� City of Huntington Beach QUA P.O. sox Ift DEPARTMENT OF CALIFORNIA SUM p��j77 BUILDING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT To: Hosior b yor and City Council from: 4ohd tens, Director Hui d g d Community Development Subjects Re Lion of Conditional Exception f70-50 Date: August 28, 1974 ! Attached is a copy of a letter of August 20, L974p from Mr. Earl A. Tucker# Aviation Consultant with the Division of Aeronautics of the State Department of Transportation. This letter summarizes a meeting hold on August 21, i9741 concerning the Meadowlark Airport., its facilities and operations, The letter very well represents the conditions that now exist at Meadowlark Airport and certain recommendations which, in staff opinion, will result in improved operating conditions at the airport and at the saw time maintain necessary protection from noise and dust. i In view of the above, staff rezommenda to Council that the Conditional Exception not be revoked but that it be amended As followas 1, The blast fence be removed and the slatting of the chein link fence and the oleander screen barrier along Warner be permanently maintained. , 2. The pro-takeoff runup pad be maintained in its existing position and plainly marked "perform engine and pre-takeivff checks here." 3. Remr-e the asphaltic concreto runup pad that is adjaac' ` to the ver-_- -+d of the runway (Runway 19) and the north boundary fence. 40 14aiu' : the existing displaced threshold markings. 5. Establish and effectively enforce an airport rule requiring aircraft operators to conduct pre-takeoff checks in the desiguated area and when ready for takeoff, and air traffic permits, to move ' without delay to the very end of the runway and commence takeoff roll without stopping for further aircraft engine checks. JFB/vl attachment i MA" ov A1�11AN4QB qwq. AOlNCY /011A{a �� O+wrrin 1 DOPARMANT OF TRAN$FORTATX*A ONMM of AMPAP ANO DOW"AWW cwr�arrw► +rw AM 2 61974 RECEIVED AUG 2 81974 pLANNING DEW Mr. Aichud, A. fiarlow Director of Plsaaine Citk of TbAtingtou beach P. $or 2.90 A-Ant3ngton Beach, CA 92648 Dear W. Harlows 04 &IMIst 15 1974 the Division of Aeronautics conducted a routine sa�ety/airport permit compliance inspection of the Meadowlark Airport, Paring this inspection it was observed that the blast � fence had been reinstalled across the north end of the ' runway, The Division is aware of the reason the fence was originally f installe49 and consider that a function of local government. Our concern is with nasty of flight operations at the airport, and in its present position we feel the fence creates a definite hasard. This basard is not r4strtoted to aircraft landing at the alrPaort s but also to aircraft departing to the south by furthor reduclu the amount of runway available for take- � Ott can an alrealy critically short runway. Aircraft mains noise and dust caused by propolles blast .have Ions bee areas of concern in airport ccowmi.ty r 1 t. ons. We recognise our responsibility to airport f operatoro/users, as well as to the residents adjacent to airportsp to recommend procedures that will not only lncrease flight safety but enhance airport/cones pity relatiaus. Macy changes have occurred at Meadowlark since the W ast fonds warm originall installed. The chain link tonne has been slatted the oleander bushes alasg the fence have 1oma until �y now provide an almost impenetrable natural aarrier; the pis-takeoff engine runup pad has been relocated fWthar south and a use pattern has been established and accepted by t airport users. f i 1 __ _ - � =T.,_a-•--f•-,vim,- 1 Ir Mr. Richard A. Harlow Page two In an agp onsive attempt to enhance the overall safety aspects of the airport, the Division of Aaronautles submits tam following recomwndationsr 1. If the requirement for the blast fence still, existx$ we recommend it be relocated(to a position as close to the north boundary fence as Possible)) , 2. Maintain the pre-takeoff runup pad its erSsting position and plainly mark it "perform engine and pre-taken f checks I barO. 3. Remove the asphaltio concrete runup pad that is presently adjacent to the very end of the runway (Hunvay 29) , close ! to the ,north bvnudary fence. 4. Maintain this existing displace)) threshold markings. 8stab and widely advertise to all airport user an airport rule re quiring aircraft operators to conduct pro- takeoff checks is the designated area. When ready for vakeoff t and air traffic permits, grove without delay to the Very end of the rnnvuuyy and commerce takeoff roll withsout stoppisag for further aircraft/engine cheats. 6. Widely advertise to Hatington Beach residents these joint efforts to eahaaas safety and ooasau:ity relations at Headavlarx. These reaasrendationri sb+ou3 d resat in: 1. Rsswving the existing hazard to flight operations an the ruianvsy,. 2. Kaintelaim the existing noise lrvel./dust control at the i north and or the runway. 3. Increased flight sat'ty for aircraft departing to the south by px ding more available runway. 4. RhaU tsg aircraft departing to the south to gain more altitude over airport ropertye wb�i.oh vial result in a higher altitude over warner Ave=* and reduce the noise level and •*posure time to people on the pouad. �. ?bere should be no change in approach/landing procedures. 6. No changes are required 1z the 0413fo=1a State Airport Perteiti. I 1 , Mr. Richard A. Harlow Pass three These proposals were dieoussed at en informal meeting with the airporr, oower and Huntingtrn Beach city officials on, August 21, 1974. During this meeting the nurJeat o reinstalling night lights at Meadowlark was addres;sad. 611 oquent ressexch reveals that an amended airport permit Install runway lights was approved by the Division on A run'pA 5s 1971. This approval is still valid and includes the lights and establishes the requirement for obstruction lights on the power lines to the north. If the blast fence Is retained in its present positions obstruction lights will also be required on the top of the fence. We um4orstand Xeadowl.ark Airport will be the sub ect of a �f public hearing in Huatington Heaoh on Se tember 3, 1974. It additional Wormation to required; or that vs may be of assistance in any ways please reel free to (s•»ntact us. Sincerely s WILLIAN F. SM ( chief u Earl A. Tucker Avtation Ccnsu1t-k4t oat District Transortatios. Office #D7 I John Tarner, adowlark Airport Kanaier Art Norio I I+ 1 I H +� CITY OF HUNTINGTON ®EACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION "vNipaam u.cu To David R. Rowlanda, From John F. Behrens, DirActor City Administrator Building d Community Development Subjert !tearing Regarding Revocation Date August 142 1974 Conditional Exception No, 70-50 An inspection of the reconstruction of the required blast fence at Meadowlark Airport was made this morning. The basic construction has been completed. It was noted, however, that there were two deviations from the Plano as prepared by the engineer and approved by this department. The owner was notified of these problems and advised that the construction moat 1 he revised to comply with the approved plans or the engineer must submit additional plans and calculations demonstrating that the altered cnastruetion e is adequate. Safety obstruction mus . also be installed. The owner was again urge3 to ccmpletc these corrections inmediately so that we mirht report to Council at its meeting on August 19 that the construction has been completed, inspected and approved. JFB/eed Affidavit ofV1#1ication Iq Ccun' or CfiliforaU county er orange 131 City► of Huntington Beach } George FlaMuhar, being duly sworn on oath, says; That he Is a {� citl en of this United States, over the age of twenty-one years. � � �� That he is the printer and publisher of the Huntington Beads News, a weekly newspaper of general circulation printed and pub- IMPd to Huntington Beach, California and circulated In the said County of Orange and elsewhere and published for the dlueminatlon , of local and uther news of a general character, and has a bona fide subscription list of paying subscribers, and said paper has been established, printed and published In the State of California, and County of Orange, for at least one year next before the publication of the first insertion of this notice; and the said newspaper is not devoted to the interest of, or published for the entertainment or any FuaisAad Nvnutom ftech Now. JAY pnrticulalr class, profession, trade, calling, race or denomination, or 1214. i any number thereof. NOTICt for NOW WRA111114 ; The Huntington Beach New was rdjudicated a legal newspaper RtYOaA � A D[TifaNAI of general of Orange Gbunty�oCalifornia Augustt 27tth,,1937 by order l In the No A•5J31.ior Court Wmet Ii NERDY t31Y'01 sera! 1 ! tlo haarft wNl be ItMA Iry• thsF Oft! U!otrnsal of %a OW of Nssn3 m"" sham y That the 110TICE OF PUB' IC HEAR 1NO in uta cew"am f'"'c' W °c the �` L — Canter, Huntincb ao n Nh; st the hoar Of IN F.W. a w loon tfllr W a ' REVOCATION Off' UDIT. E;{CFPT. ' Q-5n , Obo,sns, t M AO of which the annexed Is a printed copy, was published in said news• sidorint re+wtsing and doclulfif tyaRft ioml gacaplion.No. 70-M npN ;sd V"s which was to psrmR a 3W tL erPesralinrl paper at least n u e 1 N e�10_ was «rIND ranwty ae see M..Welad AirpCft'L Tho autaisct'DrR'aRy b leeetsd on tM n jro side of WarrW Aw"49, wall of salsa Chke Strut III Ifs Rl commencing from the ._ 5V1_.day of —STll1Y singe F•rnur Reaidance ftlrict n Most daaerbtlas M.ern HIA•Ira 'lea MAn71i,►r 1l1_� nd a ending on the ? th day of � pAn IOU atad pWMW era Whet to 1 sttww WM hswrine AN arflran nwk opinions for a spirist saw cmeillow�l 1q4 both days inclusive, and as often during srid period and tsceptloa 7tidi0. , times of publication as said paper was regularly Issued, and in the Further information raw %* "'-4 regular and entire issue of said pewspaper proper, aril not In gran taw only of tna GwR. ssu supplement, and sold notice was published therein on the following DATIn'July A 3614 date's Wwlt: CITY OF 11UNYIftOY't1N WRCH firs Alkle K Wan40M i July 25, 1474 !/ r bltsher � Subscribed and slum to before me this 26th day of Jtlly , Levu aA Notary Public L7 f Osage county, California THOMAS D. WYUJE i Notary PSWlc.Caitforats Oraat a co"fy My 101 irrlar Esplro• Sapfaaial 12, 11174 0 a I - - 1 CP'Oy of Huntington B*xeb County of Orange State of California i .1I f f idavit of Publication of GEORGE FARQUHAR Publisher Huntington Beach News j f Filed Clerk By i Deputy Clerk CITY OF HLjNTIINiGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION To Honorable Mayor & City Council From John F. Behrens, Director Building S Community Development Through David D. Rowlands City Administrator Subject Request for hearing concerning Date July 11, 1974 revocation of Conditional Exception 70-50 On September 309 1970, Conditional Exception 70-50 was granted in connection with the expansion of Meadowlark Airport. One of the conditions of approval r^_ads as follows: JA blast fence shall be installed 100 feet north of the end of the runway. The precise lncat;on, size and build- ing materials shall be approved by the BasTd of Zoning Adjustments." On January 4, 1971, the City Council added additional conditions. One of these stated that any violation of any condition set forth by the Conditional Exception will be grounds for suspension or revocation of said Conditional Exception on prior notice to the applicant and hearing by the City Council. On March 4, 1974 an inspection of the airpor!. property revealed that the blast fence had been partially removed. Subsequent inspection revealed that the blast fence had been completely removed. bince that time this Department has been making an effort to have the blast fence re-installed and the conditions of approval satisfied. To date those efforts have been unsuacess£ul. Accordingly, this matter in being brought to the attention of the City Council so that it may proceed with the setting of a hearing to consider the revocation of Conditir-.,al Exception 70-50 in accordance with the conditions of the original approval. Attached is pertinent correspondence in connection with this+ matter. JFB/ecd 7//j�7Y �✓es�+in 5 f T -�'cr 10_117y • a N? C 0A.#4Wd0e +0 II 1 M . . Poo I 0I' GATV CW NLONTING INTER-DEPARTWNT COMMUNICATION n�srr�ciaw� I To Gharl a Gerardec+aC "+ Lloyd Belaitot From Chi sa Technician lxar..uitva AssiatLat Through John vans# Director Su act 6uildt Caaounity Devaiopmeat 1. 8tAtus report sal Request for Date J 1974 211vestigation Meadowlark Airport 20 bequest to set Council hearing. CU March 4, 1974, this departownt was requested to investigate possible violatiooa of the condition of approval atUthad to the flantia# of Conditional Iiceptiou 70-50 to t:w Meadowlark Airport. 'tine investigation revealed that a 'portion of the required bi•lat fenur• hvi b"a rawuved from the sorthesrly portion of rusuay 19. i A notice of violation was issued CO John 'l4.-ruart airport operator, citing violation of the tests of Conditional ExcerciOn 70•30 and ord9ring sit blast fence diswmtlmwnt to caiae imn#diistely (copy of investigation sad action reports ?larch 4, 1974, ateschad). Blocs the initial inspection conducted on March 4t 1974, to the presrat data, this depart2wnt has been in verbal contact with the attormys representing the llerlost airport landowners, and the W-ruars, airport operators, in an effort to rainstatis the blast fencing. The future of Neadwlark Ai.portt or at miulmm the quastiaa as to oho will operate the facility, appear# questionable st this tine. We to civil involvmL:.,t, neither the Nerios nor the Tur.wrs appear willing to retreat the blast fence at this time i The blast fence as wall as all rummy lighting have be sa cmplately removed. An ea-s;te inspection coaductri June 249 1974, by the Deparomant of Building d Caarsusnity Devei,opsaaat conficaa this status, to that there appeass to Us me coatrmplatad effort to comply with the cooditimS of approval by rearecting the blast fence this department bas uo alternative but to Vaguest a hearing be sat before the City Council oo cr4wLder revocation of suspension of Cunditioreal twepti+an 70-900 as provided for An the conditional exception. Floyd reloito Pars 2 ` Jua, 25 o 1974 I+ phase aorvider this rap►Nt a vaquest for the offics of the City AAsiaistratar to at such tossing. "I PIt 8pencas, A8818taut Director, A4tioistsatioo iv4A a Morse Tusuar, c/o Hoodowlask Airpowt 3141 Warne: Aveuuel Huntington Sei.ch, CA Masao Maria, 621 salsa, Wastaftwtsr, CA 92683 Attovwys at Lar, Rutan a Tw:ker, 401 Civic Cbmter Drive Wert, Santa Ana, CA 92701 s Attorney at Lavv John Yiael, 400 WOsL 10th Strast, Suite 203, j Santa Asa, CA 92701 attar.,Mavts f I 1 . i j I 3a Ire^ 1 `�f''Y��`f•. � �^�. f ' ' 0^ p J� ' CIT' fib N1�NTfHti7'0N BdACH �l INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION r1tN114G10M p 4CN 1 To Richard Jones From Charles Cararden Assistant Director thief Land Use Technician Subject Request for investigation Dote March 4, 1974 Meadowlark tirport 5141 Warner Ave. Blast fence dismantlement. 1. On Sunday, March 39 1974 the Police Department responded to Meadow- lark as a result of a cititen's complaint regarding the above. Copy of officers findings attached. Photographs rill be forthcoming. Z. Qn March 49 1974 Mr. Belsito of the City Administrator's office asked the Department of Building and Community Development to investigate prepared to discuss its condition for the airport property and to bL Council meeting on March 41 1974. 3. At 1s19 p.m. March 49 19749 1 personally met Police Sergeant Chadwick at Meadowlark Airport. Chadwick Wis the responding officer to the investigation Sunday. 4. Chadwick and myself had conversations with John Turnery airport operator, rnd toured the fieldp specifically the blast fencep in his presence. Our investigation revealed the followings a. John Turner personally directed his son, Terry, to dismantler La part, the blast fence. b. The dismantling occurred Sunday, March 31 1974. c. John Turner indicated that he anticipates the airport's closing. He is awaiting disposition and possible order for closing of the airport by the Traffic Division, California State Diviaien of Aeronautics - Mr. Wendle being the agent. d. Meeting bat-.:ten Wendle, Turner and Turner's attorneys scheduled j for March 49 1974, p.m. e. Portions of the blast ience Nava bean removed to wits :"he 30 lineal feet of fence located directly over the "19" runs E. way and its clearance lights remain in tact. The remaining 50 lineal flat of fence screening the run-up Area has been dismantled in parts plywood sheets have been removed from the iron framework and A1leframework tcly tWenty been feetdragged £rom orieitial s from the run-up area (moved pproxfma location). 111 ' Assistant Director Fran: Charles L. Gerarden llama tot Richard Jojeer Chief Land Use Tech. page 2 Request for investigation of Data, Match 41 1974 Meadowlark Airporto 5141 Warner Ava. 5. The existence of the blast fence is a condition of approval of Conditional Exception 70-50 granted to the airport by the Huntington Beach City Council on January 4v 1971. Remaval of the fence constitutes grounds for the Council to schedule a public hearing %� revudce or otherw'1ee surpsnd C.E. 70-30. notice of violation as issued votk dito Johnntilemant And rner thatas imdiata stopping 0 that final dispositi with thelCity CouncilitiCopyf fpjootice attached. C.E. 70-50 would re 7. Also accompanying thin report please find- s. Conditions of approval for C.E. 70-50 b. puesnmry of ar.tionrs taken by the Board of Supervisors 1946-1957 c. summary and dispoeitiou: Civil court fiction vegarditZ Meadow- lark Airport 1965-1967 do sw=ry of Administrative Actirais by City of Huntington Basch 1970-1972 i, Prepared and sutxnitted March 41 1974 I V Char as U. Gerarden Chief Land Use Technician CLG/ecd I CASE NO 740 J629 -r.l QOLICE DEPARTMENT - 10"%TINGTON BEACH. CAuFOTINiA INITIAL MISDEMEANOR REPOIT _ -- -...__. ._ _. - .__.� __._ .- _ ___ _ -- --•... -.__^_ It1TMt11 THAN: 041f/0. 111C7T•6E01 p17lNSI -�•+fpl COMUITTfD iNFORNATION I 5141 Warner , Meadowlark Airport _OA�_T I- T I_M[ -fn+11. _41T-_._fL L_.,_—.- (I&TF TIML N[PnAT/D- -- 11fro"T/0TO _ 3-_?-74 , and 3- 1-74 3- 3-74 , 1500 , Sgt . WALKER , HBPD INFORMANT _ Bud BELSITO City Of Huntington Beach IM I AUDA1%6 ►-HONI State of California _ I _ iI III MI MAN[ O7 V+CT1AA _ TIUSIN(5i AD(+K[S9 PNONL ( Kenneth HAULK 5331 Heil , H . B • , 846-9273 Bud BELSITO City of Huntington Beach a surnr.T§ - L Marjorie TURNER 13961 Bowden , Garden Grove (DBA Meadowlark Airport) a ADDRESS REX -MACE - -_AGE - HT WT //Alp LYi! ` ORTAILS Or CRIME. LVIOLNCE COLLSCTrD. f1E9CRIPTION A140 VALuE Or PIIOpr RTY TAKEN 11[MANKS a SYNOPSIS : Suspect allowed removal of portions of -++; nd screen , or blast screen , knowing that maintenance of such screen s required by an agreement with the City of Huntington Beach . STATEMENTS : Statement of Sgt . 'WALKER : "I have received a telephone call from the City Administrator' s Office (Mr , Bud BELSITO) that Meadowlark Airport has allowed removal of its wind screen while a wind screen is required in the airport ' s agreement with the City. " Statement of Mr . HAULK: ' " I saw workmen out them removing the blast screen yesterday ( 3-2-74 ) and this morning ( 3-3-74 ) . " OBSERVATIONS: Upon arriving at the northeast Comer of the airport property , across 4 the street from 5251 Heil , it was noted that the airport property is ; fenced with chain- 1enght fencing and trees are planned insie.e . By look- ing through the fencing and trees, three blast screens can lie observed . Said screens appear to be constructed of two by four framing and covered IINV9fr10ATINO O/rlCNty FtFF-5 0 YY DATE OF REPORT APPR Sgt . CHA01►'ICK same I 3-3-74 laSO I _ A POLICE UPARTMENT 1 HUNTINGTCH BEACH. CALIFORNIA SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT 7.40. Ifin-.justo of -----_-- _ INFORMATION 3-3-ZA L 1850 r1ll~r.L 1,• _. ._ 01,{ 0/ foil ■(Malt I page 2 of 2 VETAILS. INFORMATION NOT Ia0LU0ED IN ORIOINAL REPORT OBSERVATIONS CONTINUE+> : with mustard colored plywood sheets . One of said screens appears i to be framed to hold approx . twenty-four ( 24) plywood sheets , but only twelve ( 1 2) are in place, (approx , ) . The second appears to The framed to hold ten ( 10) plywood sheets and none of the plywood sheets are in place. The third screen appears to hold five (5) p, nels and all are intact . t The three blast screens appear to be installed at the end of one of the runaways . They are several faet apart and overlapped . li IN VESTI 'ATI ON: The U/S was dispatched to the location in question , where the above 1 observations were made . i Witness Kenneth HAULK Has contacted , as was Sgt . NAUKER , Watch Commander. C.S. I . Officer EHRLE was summoned to photograph the scene from the ground and the Huntington Beach Police helicopter , carrying Officers LUL and DAHL were summoned to take photographs of the scene from the air . i � l i i . S.p,ar;re 06 npr.•'ng 01I.L{f S�narurl o Wpe Sgt . CHADWICK c:g -� -- - POLICE DEPARTMENT HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 740 3619 SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT „-Q.I;I,.L - i INFORMATION 3- 3-14 , 1E350 1 DETAIL; INFOAMATIUN NOT INOLUDEO IN ORIGIFAL REPORT INVESTIGATION CONTItiUEU: There was no activity noted around the screens , and there was no physical evidence to indicate that panels had ever been installed on the frames . Orly the statements of witness HAULK, or others who might come forward can establish their removal . Nor is there evidence that said screens are not merely being modified or repaired . I i i i i 1 1 I I{ i 1 1 I S.0101,10 C( ulllc,, S.2n01.100 D Sgt . CHADWI.CK Cg r ,yWy...w aa,l {, GO I t•;^ 5 CfT1 OF NYIrttlepTON eICACN DEPARWARN'7 01p IBUILDIMO A COMMUNITY O!V<LOPM[Nl' � P.O, ■Ox 196 • ctrY HALL ;N ! "t + « �• NVNTINOTON BRACK CALIFORNIA 9244r PHONR 714/IltS•1124I '1 . J ow lerapecdoo was der do of thrr I.rrAliaes of—, L ` mg-"10-,:� ~'—00 of Which you ere G- The l�asp�ec-ion rr/ev'ealeyd./tie follovism Vblatioee of smikahle cpjest ••. +�, I w••i��J.�L1rii.� J � � • r de �P •.<.��. l'• �_ �! . I w �. Ak K �. �Ono. i r • . � , rP I. YOn we hereby ordered to tortsCt tb. vlcJrasloeto as u at ecpiratioa of this tine Ibe TiOWI tinted eb°Te�Ibl�`—=='ceder• !rode the date of e mae bate►et been corrected turf sr acO t will tshea as p Tided top by Imo+two AedCoo h1 wrdea of for r` DIRLCTOR OF BUILDING der COMMUN Sf--L... _i!� •_,��y r TTY 08VLi,OrMISFIT t NOTES !1 you here my goeulaae cw&cemjna'big rtaattat coOtscr the abor♦e1 is AI =1 ` J r ti � i •f '7 {t r c y.r r� 1, CH.CALIF;: V716A ►� 1 ►IUt d5 '!1 18043 ►n,'I 6AV 17 n,, g • �j q ' `' v�. , L SAA049 t:r a l91� i TDtiA HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIF 15 7;OA PST 11AYOR 14CCh► ,7 �CKEN CITY COUNCILMEN AND CITY COUNCILWOMAN ACTINIC CITY A0MI141 x STRATGi� CITY FATTORNEY AND CHIEF OF POLICE 4. II3TI NGTOo HEACII Cn I I i THE INTERT11F'D HOMEOWNERS HAVE ENJ£AVQRED TO ,MAx Mr ADOWLARK � A SAFE AIRPLIRT FL)R PILOTS AND 110MEOWNERS IN ACCORA.'I 1 CE WITH ) THE POLICE CITY STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNOEN7 REQUESTS SINCE WE FEEL THAT vrrg i:FF'CRTS PAVE FsE ,N •'" j £ IN VAIN AND TI(F LESSEE HAS ' NOT CCmP'Ir'D W( T1l CONDITIONAL EXCFPTIO^;5 70••50 G.rr F,FQJ£ST THAT �, I THE 'A I: nvi?r FXT E:`IS! 0*1 B i' RF'0 MVrD A%11) M r �.I R AID OTRFR i3IJSIfV S�t-�. 0'7 1}►!• , , 'Y •'� f _ , LICF.'NSFS nr Rt' rMI�FS Vr'I, p �Y KF.H VAIJI K. r, .r 1 i cc; Phoned to Mayor (4:00 pm) and copy sent to his off4ce Original to Chlef of Police Copy In our Meadowlark File ,i i . i i i , i / 1 Huntington Beach Planning Commission P.O. aox 150 CALIFORNM 02048 I November 15 , 1971 I TO : HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL � FROM: Planning Commission RE : Conditional Exception No. 70-50 (Review pursuant to Condition #9 of Conditions of Approval) ATTN: Brander Castle , Acting City Administrator Paul Jones, City Clerk Gentlemen: Transmitted herewith is a report on Conditional Exception No. 70-50. This application was reviewed by the Planning Commission on November 2 1971, pursuant to condition of approval #9 of Conditional Excep- tion No. 70-50 , which is a request to permit a 500 ft . expansion to the existing runway at Meadowlark Airport . Also , to allow two (2) existing traile-es to be used for temporary offices -.nd flight school . I Applicant: Jahn R. Turner 5141 Warner Avenue Huntington Beach, California i Location: North side of Warner Avenue , east of Bolsa Chica Street, in the Rl zone . When the conditional exception was reviewed by the Planning Commission it was brought out that Condition No. 10 had not been complied with. Condition No. 10 required that the use of trailers as temporary facilities shall be terminated in October, 1971 or construction shall be started and proceeding without delay on permanent +tructu'res . I Condition N'o . 3, established by the City Council, stated that any condition set forth will be grounds for suspension or revocation of said conditional exception on previous notice to the applicant and hearing by the City Council. Therefore, the Planning Commission recormaends that the City Council No.revoke Conditional Exception N . 70-50. They further recommend that the City Council refer the application back to establish additional conditions of approvul , if the conditional exception is not susranded or revoked. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Baxil , Porter , Duke. boyla, Kerins NOESL None ABSENT: Slates , Higgins I —a I Additional Information: This itein was continued frum October 19 , , at a tic i time two property owners spoke in oppos i tion . A t the November z , 1971 meeting there was no one present to speak in favor or opposition. Condition No. 3 imposud by the City Council requires that the applicant be given notice of a liearinR before the Conditional i Iixception can be revoked or suspended. Respectfully submitted, l �. -r.- K . A. Reynolds Secretary KAR: sn I Encl : staff Iteport i I� 1 i I Page 2 + STAFF RRPM 1' Coadltlosnal Exception No. 7a-5a Applicauto JohA Turner Digs October 19t 1971 1. This agenda item is before the Planning Commissiou pursuant to condition of approval f9 of Conditional Exception No, 70-50 a request to permit a 500 ft. expansion of an existing runway at the Meadowlark Airport; also, to allow two existing trailers to be used ter temporary office and flight school. The subject property is located on the uo'rth side of Warner Avenue$ east of balsa Chica Street in the AL giuglos tastily Residence District. • P" i Commission on October 20 1970 2. This application was approved by the aacm ng , � subject to the following conditions of approvals j !. 'the runway extension shall be reduced to 320 ft.1 howevert in no case shall the extension be closer them 375 ft. from houseu on Heil Avenue. i 2. A blast fence shall be installed 100 ft, north of the end of the runway. The precise locationo size and buildig5 materials shall be approved by the Somed of Zoning Adjustn►ents. 3. That portion of the runway and taxiway north of the bleat fence shall be reoovsd. 4. Obstruction lights shall be installed on the blast fence mad any trots alon the north property line. Also, any trees along the north property line shall be limited to ZO fto in height. Placement and type of lights shell be approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustatnts. 3. Provisions shalt be male for duet and noise control on the site. Such dust and noise control ma thuds rhall be approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustments• 6. Signs shall be posted to inform pilots of the proper use of the airport and rurthay areas 7. All violations of the City Code shall ba corrected within 60 days. 8. A review by the Planning Commission of conditions I through 7 shall be nude on December 159 1970 to detemLne the applicant'a complienca with the above conditions. This conditional exception shall bscoam null and void if the Planing Cocaaission determines that conditions 1 througn 7 have not beM� cosrpl ied with. 9. Conditional Exception No. 70-50 shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission during the mouth of Octobe7, 1971 to determine whether or not additional conditions should be required. However, in the event the Planning Commission determines that added s4fsty precautions should be imposed, said conditional exception may be reviewed prior to October 31, 1971. In case of a reviaw by '.be Planning Commission, the applicant shall be notified .."u writing at least 10 days prior to the review. L0. The use of the hailers as tmoparary facilities shall terminate: in October, 1971 or construction shall he started and proceeding Hitbout undue delay on peamaneat structures. I, CP. Woo 70-50 Vase 2 i 3. The Plannina Couraisaiart, at the December 15, 1970 meeting,, revieveo Conditional Exception No. 70-50 for compliance with established conditions of approval as per condition No. 8. The Commission declared the Conditional Exception null and void because conditions Nos. 1 through ' had not been met within the prescribed time. This decision was based on the: following findings of factf a) Informacicn contained in a memo directed to Doyle Hiller, City Administrator from 011in C. Cleveland, Director of Duilding and Safety, dated December 15, 1970 indicated that the applicant had act complied with the requirt-d 1I conditions. b) Field Investigation performed by Co=lssioner Duke indicated tit• following: 1. The blast fence was not properly constricted accordicg to the plan. I , 2. Wheel stops ware not fixed to the runway. 3. Electrical Wriva pertaining to the blest fence did not appear to be properly installed. 4. The Planning Commission's action Was overruled by the City Council on January 49 1971 at which time the City council added the following conditions: a) That until the State issues a permit to allow night flying, night flying shall be prohibited and runway lights tt:rned off frun sunset to sunrise; b) That after the State issues a permit to allow night flying, night flying be: prohibited rnd runway lights turned off from two hours after sunset or IOsCO P.H., w;-iichever first occurs, to sunrise; c) That the vioiai:ion of any caudition set forth by this cocdic.,--nal exception Including the 'two above conditions be grounds for suspension or revocation l of said conditional exception on previous notice to applicant and hearing by City Council. i S. Pursuant to the conditions of approval, the Board of Zoning Adjustments reviewed the plot plan and attached the following conditions of approval: a) 7be blast fence shall be constructed at a location as the specifications as delineated on tho plot plan received November 18, 1970. b) Obstruction lighting and markings on the blast fence shall conform to State and F.A.A. standards. c) The Board of Zoning Adjustments iceserves the right to review for dust control on site at any time. 6. With regard to the conditions of approval established by the Planning Commission and B,.ard of Zoning Adjustmenta, the Building Department has submitted a report giving the status on these requirements. /. copy of this report is attached for your review. �I CE No. 70-51) r Page 3 i t1ith regard to the hours of operation and night flying, it should lie noted that Its addition to the requirements set forth by the City Council on January 4, 1971 the city has adopted an ordinance (Article 608) specifically dealing with this subject. A copy of a memorandum from the Police Cepartment regarding ,LIlis subject is attached for your review. f I' i I I +i I I I ! I i 3• I' MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA July 25, 2972 IN RE: OFFER OF SALE TO TIIE COUN'PY OP ORANGE MEADOWLARK AIRPORT On motion of Supervisor Baker, duly seconded and unanimously carried by Board members present, the fnllowing recommendations from the Orange County Airport Commission are approved regarding the offer of sale of the Meadowlark Airport to the County of Orange, as set forth in the letter dated July 19, 1972. 1. The conduct of a County/City study to determine the feasibility of acquiring property for the operation of Meadowlark Airport, and related developments, under a joint powers agreement between the County of Orange and the City of Huntington Reach, is endorsed. � 2. The County Administrative Officer, Director of Real Property i Services, and Airport'. Commissioner Roger D. Slate, are appointed to the study group to serve on behalf of the County, and the Director of Aviation Is appointed to serve as Chairman. 3. The Chairman of the Board of Supervisors is authorized to i contact the City of Huntington Beach to seek its participation and subsequent - appointmetft of the City Manager, Planning Director and a City Councilman to serve as members on the study group representing the City of Huntington Beach. 4. The study group is instructed to complete the worI: and report its findings and recommends",,ions to the Board of Supervisors, " City Council of Huntington Beach and the Orange County Airport Commission no later than December 1, 1972. TN BE: TRACT MAP NO., 7814 On motion of Supervisor Caspers, duly seconded and unanimously carried by Board members present, Tract Map No. 7814 is received and Bond No. 2-035720 in the sum of $122,000.00 to guarantee payment of 1972-73 taxes on said tract, with Irvine Industrial Complex, a Corporation, as Principal, and General Insurance Company of America, as Surety, is appi-rived. i I r t au•s a n rION REPORT ON COUNTY OF ORANGE PURCHASE ' OF MEADOWLARX AIRPORT LEASE I I I I� f I I I I I i i Prepared by: Robert J. Bresnahan Director of Aviation County of Orange Jr::e 29, 1972 � I SUBJECT On March 1, 1972 John R. Turner, lessee and operctor of the Meadowlark Airport, wrote the Orange County Board of Supervisors a letter in u i.c:h he adv_sed the Board that, in his opinion, it was no longer economically feasible from a property taxation standpoint tc continue ol,eration of Meadowlark Airport as a privately financed airport open to thq public. Mr. Turner .further stated in his letter that he was offering to sell to the County of orange for $7,,000 his master lease together with lei;sehold improvements. The unexpired term of his lease was two years and nine months from March 1, 197-4. sir. Turner stated the offer was to remaia open for. 120 days from March 1. Mx. Turner assumed in his letter that the County of Orange would be able to operate the airport with leas tax burden and with federal and state subsidy. On March 14 , 1972 the Orango County board of Supervisors, by minute order, referred the sales offer to the Orange County Airport Commission f►)r study and report back to the Board of Supervisors. BACKGROUND Meadoowwlark Airport is located on approximately 90 acres in the City of Huntington Beach. The airport is located between Warner and Heil Avenues just east of Bolsa Chica Road. The property is owned i by Masao Merio, Sumiye Nerio and Yukio Nerio, hereinafter referred to as the lessors. It presently accommodates approximately 144 based aircraft which are primarily single-engine, although some light twin-engine aircraft- are based at the airport. General aviItion services and facilities include in-site airport management, fuel i and oil facilities, tiedown areas, rental hangars, flight traini.ng, aircraft sales and service, aircraft maintenance and aircraft parts and accessories. Othc�c accommodations include a small revizaurant, public restrooms and automobile parking areas. Ground entrance to i the airport is from Warner Avenue. I a Operationally the airport is essentially a "Basic Utility - Stage I" type airport with one paved, lighted runway (01-19) and one parallel taxiway on aie east adjacent to the main tiedown area. Ground facilities are principally concentrated at the south exit and of Runway 19. Meadowlark Airport is made up of ten parcelo totalling approx- imately 80 acres. The leased land, acquired in the most recent lease by the airport operators, John and Marge Turner, included a signifi- cant increase in land area over the previous lease. This was neces- sary to prevent further encroachment of surrounding community growth which has undergone significant changes in the last five fears. All of the lard under lease to the airport operators is presently owns! by members of the Nerio family, the principles of whom live in two residences located on the leased airport property. The latest lease, commencing December 1 1969 , cells for a mini- mum total five-year rental of $208,660, plus any increases in real. and personal property taxes over the t age year of the 1969I1--,70 tax year. Thus a base rental fee of $4, 911 per month 'was established, which is now approximately $5.000 per month because of recent tax increases . Property taxes alone for the year 1971/72 on the ten } j airport parcels amount to $36, 000 on a total property valuation of 1192,000. This equates to $3,000 a month for taxes . The mot. thly1C$'_%st of the lease is presently the most significant expense ro.lated f 40 present airport operations and it amounts to 55% of total expenses fo.: the year ending December 1971. Discussion on the profit and loss statement will be later in the report. The FhysiZal rac-lities of the airport consist of one asphalt runway, 2071 ' x 361 , with a runway gradient of 1.0% and runway heading of 01/19. In addition there a.s a 220 ' displaced threshold on the northern end of the ruwsway plus a 10 ' steel and plywood blast II� fence located north of the displaced threshold. Field elevation is I ' 30 MSL. 'ibere is a diagonal, shorter ru -#hkcli is closed and now used for tiedowns. The runway it equipped with lights which are operated from dusk until 2200. There are two 38 ' pole lines At the north end of -he runway. One line is 330' from the threshold -2 y f I� • I of Runway 19 and the second line is 430 ' from the threshold of Runway 19. The airport has two unCerground fuel tanks; one SC,000 gallon capacity and the second 5,000 gallons. ':'he airport is attended from dawn until dusk and the single wheel load rating of thE: runway and taxiway is 10,000 lbs . In addition to the activities of the operator of the airport, there are also several subtenants as follows : i nassee Flight Service, which is primarily a flight school, Meadowlark Aviation, which is a flight school and maintenance operation}, Harbor Aviation, which is a flight school and Cessna dealer, Meadow Air Sales, which is primarily aircraft sales, Dave Wagner, aircraft maintenance, Marshall White, who deals primarily in aircraft supplies, Jou Hughes, who operates one hangar primarily for air show 1 . activities, and Meadowlark Cafe. The mcathly rent charged the various subtenants is as follows: Bassee flight Service $ 300 Meadowlark Aviation 700 Harbor Aviation 550 i Meadow Air Sales 250 }! Dave Wagner 450 I Marshall white 100 f Joe Hughes 230 Meadowlark Cafe 350 I In addition to the above men;.ioned facilities the airport has twelve T-hangarG that rent for $70 per mo;:th each, two T-hangars that i rent for $40 per month each, three airplane covers at $hy per month i each and one large hangar, 40 ' x 601 , which is leased to Hughes . ! The airport dispense-; 00/87 and 100/130 aviation fuel. The t.c gal I fuel sales in 1971 were approximately 145,000 gallons . The only subtenant on th . airport who has a lease is Francis J. Connolly, dba Meadow Air Sales. 19r. Conrolly 's lease i i I i I ( r covers app::oximately 29,000 square feet and is for a period of five years beginning November 1, 1969 and ending October 308 1974. The rental for this parcel of land is $250 per month. Aircraft based at the airport cre ;.s follows: Individually owned and tied mown 105 113rbor Aviation 8 Dassee Flight Service 4 Meadowlark Aviation SLiy!e engine 8 Twin engine 3 Joe Hughes 4 Meadow Air Sales 12 TOTAL 144 Rates at the tiedown areas; are $27.00 per month open. area, $32 .00 per month on asphalt, $40 .00 per month for airplane cover and $70.00 per month T-hangar. Meadowlark Airport for the part four years has shoa•?n a profit and each individual year has produced a profit, w-zth the exception of the yer.r ending December 31, 1971. Listed below is the unaudited statF,ment of income and expense for this period: Period Endinq_December 31, 1960 Income $ GO,643 Total Operating Expenses 50,261 Net Income $ 10,382 Period Ending Decembor 31, 1969 Income $ 80, i47 Total Operating Expenses 73 ,4?5 Net Income $ 6,712 Period Ending December 31, 1970 Income $106,239 Total Operating Expenses 97,749 Net Income $ 8,490 Period Ending December 31, 1971 Income S100,577 Total Operating Expenses 94 ,693 Net Income $ 6,184 -4- During the year 471 an iteir. shown on the statement of Income and Expense was depreciation of $6,309, which produc.%d a net incomes before taxes, of minus, $125. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS After a careful study of the proposal from John Turner, thero appears to be little benefit to the County in acquiring his lease for a purchase price of $75,000. Assistant County Counsel, Robert F. Nuttman, has stated that if the County were to acquire Turner's lease, the County would be required to pay taxes in the same amount � i as thoae being paid by Turner. In addition, all of the assets in- stalled by the present lessee must be, at the lessor's discretion, removed from the premises at the terminatian of the lease . To piAY $75,000 for the assets for a two year, nine month period is not economically feasible_ A long term lease (25 years) is not desir- able because of the taxation problem, as well as the difficulty in getting federal and state funding without holding fee title to the property As. a matter of fact, it is doubtful if the Coun11-.y could receiva federal and state funding unless it owned the property in j I �- fee. Therefore, at this time I am not recommending that the County acquire the Turner interest by a purchase. The term of the present- lease held by the Turners is for a period of five years , commencing on November 1, 1969 and ending October 30 , 1974 . There is no provision in the present lease for f renewal. The only reference is the following statement: ". .Any i holding over after the expiration of the same term, with the con- sent of LESSORS, shall be construed to be a tenancy from month to month, at a rental of $7,500 a month, and shall otherwise be on the terms and conditions herein specified, so far as applicable. " i Neviirtheless , Mr. Turnex advises that he does have a verbal agree- ment A th Mr. Norio to grant another lease upon the expiration of the presun;- lease. Mr. Nerio has also stated that if the County were interFstt--i 1n buying the lease, he would seriously conaidN: granting the County a 25-year lease should they so desire. Ur tunately, the present lease contains a clause that grants the LESSOR the right to terminate the lease within z. six monthu ' notice. � 1 -5- • The rleadowlark Airport has been a controversial issue for the City Council of the City of Huntington B eacn. on occasion, horle- owners in the itinediate area of the airport have: complained about the airport operation with regard to safety and nuisance. On several occasions aircraft landing on Runway 19 have clipped powar l:.nes along Heil Avenue, which has caused great concern to the re-sidonts of the imme hate area. On one occasion power lines ware clipped and dropp�-d into an unoccupied swimming pool.. On occasion j there have been c:oncent7.ated efforts by the home:ownern to close {� the airport permanently. Since the City of Huntington Beach does not own :he airport, it actually has very little control over the I � flight operations and/or the flight patterns used by aircraft arriving and departing the airport, Bath the Federal Aviation Administration and the State Aeronautics Department have investI.- gated these complaints and both organizations have stated that the ` airport is safe and i , being operated in a safe master. urban en- croachment to the present runway is severe, aspacially along the north end of the runway, and developments in the s, ,: 'ierAg departure � pattern are taking place at a rapid rate which ul ..:stely will cause additional operational problems for the airport. Most acci- dents :.ncurred by general aviation happen in the immediate vicinity of an airport. The National firansportation Safety Board advises that of general aviation accidents incurred because of overshooting E or undershooting the runway, three out of five are from overshooting and two out of five are from undershooting. Because of the controversial nature of the airport operation, i the Huntington Beach Planning Commission has placed. restrictions f� on the airport, which is zoned R-1 and currently being operated on the so--called "grandfather clause" . One of the restrictions imposed is that there shall be no improvemenr of the facilities without prior approval of the City of Hunti.n:yton 13each. Also, the runway lights are to be turned off at 10:G:. -).": to restrict nic{ht E activity. However, the City of Huntington rscac', hips not been effactive in totally restricting the airport nz :ts operation. -.1 co..fident that the city would make addir.ional restrictions, 1 r EE4 -G- i b --r such as hours cn :of . crat..on, number of based aircraft and reEtric•- tiona on special events such as air shows, if it could. Unfor- tunately, the city cannot impose these kind of restrictions at the: n:escnt time. Tn recent months there has been considerable interest by some city officials to acquire the DIeadnwlark golf Course, which is I east of the airport. With the alway,i constant pressure of resi- dential development in the immediate area, there is some concern � that the golf course might go out of existence in favor of resi- dential development. I believe the City of Huntington Beach can and does see the merits of :maintaining th.• golf course as a city-owned facility. The Iuntington Beach Planning Commission currently has a land use study under way on the Meadowlark Airport and vicinity which they plan to finish sometime towards the and of 1972. in the study they will be looking at the airport an vac ni y n' two Ways: (1) If the airport remains open what should the land use pattern be and what xoniny controls should be implemented? (2) If the �ff airport is removed flow should the property be developed? On several occasions in the immediate past the City of Hunting- ton Reach has expressed a desire for additional light industrial development in the general area of Meadowlark Airport. The city � i •. planning staff has, in the past, conducted site studies for the development of an airport and industrial park also in the general area of the Meadowlark Airport. I think the city still feels that. an industrial tax base should be developed in this area. Whether the present Meadowlark Airport is good or bad, it has continues] to grow during the past ten years . ?or an eXample, a': j the ens] of 1967 Meadowlark Airport had 80 based aircraft. At the !� present time there are 144 aircraft based at Meadowlark Airport. I Tile history of general aviation here and nationally has showrs that the total number of annual operations is closely related the number of based aircraft:, which is closely related to the •�areral population growth. The area around Nleadcwlark Airport, east four years, has increased substantially population- and, th`reiore, the number of based aircraft and the number 1 of operations have increased substantially. This trend will ccn- -7- _. s a tlane .0 long as M advfrlark is in existence. NIX aviation studies that have been made in t:ie past five years indicate that there Is a dire nee of maintaining every airport currently in Orange County, as well as constructingthree or four new general aviation airports, If .-leadowlark Ai rport were to close tomorrow ahu the 144 airplanes moved to Orange County Airport, it could and prol- _.ily would completely saturate Orange County Airport overnight. Such a move could have a very serious adverse effect on the; continued growth of the fixed ba.3e operators located at Orange County Airport. In 1971 Orange County Airport had a total of 555,381 tikeoffs and landings. If all the airplanes Lt Meadowlark were transferred to i Orange County Airport, total operations would jump to 700,000 � takeoffa and landings. It is estimated by S the management of the j Orange County Ai::port that saturation is somewhere around 625, o00 annual takeoffzi and landings. Operational loads above that: figure f Will land to serious safety Problems in the airspace immediately r.G. It is ab��olutely mandatory for continued, adjacent the airpo progressive growth and safety that additional airport facilities be Provided for general aviation. PROPOSED CONSIDERATIONS Meadowlark Airport can continue to operate as it is durin►j the term of the present lease. e Althou h there is considerable pressure on the landowner to develop the land for other uses, such as R-1 the owner is receiving a reasonable revenue from the operation of, the airport. The taxes are being paid and the land is appreciating in value each year. It is quite passible that the landowner would grans: an additional five-year lease to the lessee for the continued aoeraticn of the Meadowlark Airport. Unrestricted, the numrer of based aircraft at Meadowlrr); Airport' during the next scgen years will PtobabJy grow from the present 144 to 250. Such uncontrolled growth, under the present physical. layout of the airport, wily, cause continued concern of the nearhy homeownexa and continued controversy for the City Council of Huntington Beach. I 0 i On the other hand, there appears to be great merit in investi- gating the possibility of creating a joint powers agreement between thO County of Orange and the City of 1Iunti.ngtoti Dnach to acqui'r'd-- the Meadowlark Airport and control it as required. Under this concept, Meadowlark Airport would be developed as a total recrea- tior.al, aviation and industriall c,orrplex. In addition to the 80 y acres of the airport, the 96 1/2 acre Meadowlark Golf Course would be acquired, as well as other smaller acreage fronting on Dolsa Chica and Graham Avenue, The total acreage involved would be � anproximnt my 222 acres . Under t1i o ern conce t there are a 1 gr t many benefits that: would derive to the City of Huntington/eaand the adjacent area. Under a total development program, uderal fends to f the fullest, a master plan could be develophe property Whichwould call for a relocated runway, to a he g 090/270 degrees, using part of ther�ie—ru;(Ay, Besides air activitiev there wouln be the golf course oFerat•ion, approximately 40 aero;s for light industrial development and all of the adjacent land developed recreationally which would include picnic areas, model airplane flying, archery, horseshoe courts, tennis courts, badminton courts arid other related compatible recreational uses. Under the joint powers concept adequate corlj,r01 Pver-_.the- air port could rer-c frith the City of t:untington Deach. hours of operatio.wl of Lit. a6Eivity soul-'bc re t'ric£eTbo those required to make. .airport compatible with adjacenc residential development. Th.o nut. ;r and typer3 of basod airplanes could he completely contxolleil ' anu the prevent aixpirt facilities could be upgraded to a point where it would he a true asset: to ttic community and to the City 07 � Huntington Beach. The revenue produced by the recreational and - in'2ustx•ia1 operations, as well as aviation, would be sufficient t4 f cperate the total complex at no -oat to f:h(I local taxpayers , All of the schools in the immediate vicinity of Meadowlark Airport axe in the Ocean View School Dlgtrirt. Under the nreaent runway alignment, y aircraft arrivingRunway 19 pass ovc.r or Haar ' Marina High school and in the close vicinity of Meadaw View School, i S r 1 attn Viliuge Vie-v., School. :ender the new runway alignment it is J !cry pu:-.sib'_e that a traffic nattern could be developed in which L:ie aircr4`t would not directly overfly any school and i.. the close nrcs:imity of only one eldw.entary school. This definitely would be an improvement with regard to school cti.vi'ies. Under the joint powers concept the City of Huntingtont peach and the County would have the opportunity to' take a controversial airport and develop a total aviation, recreational; industrial cumnlc:: that could provide lasting benefits to not only the school di::tri ct, adjacenL homeowners, but. the City of Huntington Beach as well. Under the: new concept it would be possible to hold fly-in golf tournaments which would be an asset to the city, additional jobs in the industrial complex, additional jobs in the recreational areas and rovide a new asset that could be used in the promotion o:: the City of Huntington Beach. A relocated runway would eliminLte all of the problems in the vicinity of Heil Avenue, and with the final approach of the new runway over the golf course, increase the safety immeasurably. Although this is 'a preliminary report only, .it seems apparent that the concept of acquiring the golf course and the airport and redeveloping the property through a joint powers agreement has substantial merit and should be fully studied in the immediate future. RECO7414ENDAT ION It is recommended that the Oxar..,e County Airport Commission recommend to the Orang;: Cow .., .roc-..-,. of Supervisors and tha City of Huntington Beach t:h<.: Chem cc. ice of a joint powers agreement to acquire the prapercy autline,l above studied fuil.1 and com- pletely in the im_mediatc..fuk=a.,_. it is further recommended that the study be cur:ducted by L cu:',unittee made up of the following: or tic County of O:.ancle: County Administrative Officer Robert E. Thomas Di_ec::o.r, Real Property Services, Stanley E. Zrause airport Commissioner Roger D. Slates _10- .a f � r ;'or thc: City of mintington Beach: City Administrator David no:i.ands Planning Director K. A. Reynolds A member of the City Council The Orange County Director of Aviation should serve as chairman to p rovidr the necessary aviation technical data, as well as noise daL•a and orh,�r staff functions required. It is further recommended that ho 13ov.rd of Supervisors assign s high priority to this project because of ita importance to the City of Huntington Beach and kilo flying public of Orange County. The committee should be recuLred to finish its study and make a report back to boi:h the Board of Supervisors and the Huntington Beach City Council no later than December 1, 1972. t 1 I Huntington Beach Planning Commission •= P.O. BOX 100 CALIFORNIA i January 17, 1973 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Huntington Beach 1 Dear Council Members : I The Planning Commission has withheld their decision on ` Tentative Tract No. 4419 and continued the matter several times since December 19, pending a decision by the City Council on Meadowlark Airport and Meadowlark Golf Course. The Commission is reluctant to act on the tentative tract, since it would be directly under the approach pattern if recommendations of the City-O.ounty Airport Committee are implemented. The tract will come before the Commission again on February 21, at which time the Commission must make' a decision. It '.is the Planning Commission' s understanding that the City Council will be discussing Meadowlark Airport on January 29. The Commission urges the Council to make a decision on this matter. The Commission would also like to know if you approve the Airport Committee's recommendation and proceed with acquisi- tion of the golf course , will the city be acquiring property covered by Tentative Tract No. 4419 as a portion of the clear zone? Yours very t t11y, i K. A. Reyno ds P1anr ,,g Director „t KAR:bwo attach. Area I-lap - + � f VT T CF-E (: _ 7TI r r - . •RIT l 1%left f- • _ CF_R Rd C 4 GOL COURS ; , ►ii A- MOBILEHOME PAW I TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 4419 MASTER PLAN NO, 72-9 MWTTl+GTO,r iFK`N l�UMYIiMCTWI dEAC01 �'LAiilll!iG QdIR. I � I -"0 3 MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ORANGE OOUNTY, CALIFORNIA i February 27, 19?3 i IN RE; PROPOSED ALLOCATION FEDERAL- REVENUE SHARING FUNDS i ,CONTINUED -on motion of Supervisor Clark, duly seconded and unanimously carried by Board members present, the hearing on the proposed allocation of Federal Revenue Sharing Funds is contini:ed to March 13, 1973, at 10:00 A.M. IN RE: PROPOSED ADOPTION OF 'THIRTY YEAR FMDING YOR F.ETIREPX-NT SYSTEM On motion of Supervisor Baker, duly seconL--1 and unanimously carried by Board members 'Present, the offer of the Board of Retirement, as- presented in the letter dated February 20, 1973, from the Orange County Treasurer, to adopt the thirty year fending provisions of Chapter ' 224, 1971 Session, as set forth in Government Code Section 3,453.5, Is I ordered referred to the Personnel Director for consideration during salary negotiations. Lt> IN RE: AUTHORIZE TERMINATION OF MEAD .41ARK AIRPORT STUDY On motion of Supervisor Baker, duly seconded and unanimously carried by Board members present, the present study on Meadowlark Airport Is completely to n»inated and no new studies are to be undertaken by the County specifically related to this airport, with the exception of those aspects required for inclusion in composite evaluations of airport facilities and services for general aviation in Orange County as part of local, State and/or Federal planning and forecasting programs, -.s recommended by the Director of Aviation in his letter dated February 15, 1973. 11K RE: AGREEMENT TO REIbMURSE ESTABLISHMENT OF COM MITY SERVICES OFFICER PROGRAM 01TY OF FOUNTAIN "TALLEY On motion of Supervisor Battin, duly seconded and unanimously carried by Board members present, the Vice-Chairman and the Clerk are authorized to sign the Agreement to Reimburse dated February 27, 19731 between the County of Orange and the City of Fountain Valley, providing for reimbursement in the amount of $9,360. :,0 for the establishment of a Community Services Officer Program. t r�aia-z : i i-, ON ✓� , ._ OWNERS COMMUNITY ASSOC. 91 IA PLAt1t. n DEVELOPMElJT l P.O.Box 1127 Huntington Beach, Calir. 92CK7 January 20, 1973 The honorable :'!ayor and CiL;- Co-uwil of Iluntington Beach i On behalf of the 120 fnmiliea 114ing in Fornhill, a planned development looated at the North-?iast corner of Warner and Graham Avenues in the City of Iluntington Heaoh, the Board or Governors wishes to expresn thoir emphatic disapproval of any olutnge in the location and/or aotitritiea or the adjacent Ideadowlark Airport other than its ternination. In the ourreat proposal for it realigned and enlarged airport, no consideration rhaterer a emma to have been given to the welfare of our 260 residents whose property, worth in excess of four million: dollars, would be within a few feet of the new rumxay. In fact, most of the elaborate charts prepared by the proponents of the enlarged airport ignore our existence completely and fail to show tba 9 streets in our development. In our opinion this In a willful misrepresentation that amounts to falsification of a major consideration. You are all aware that hw_3reds of residents live within 1000 feet of the proposed runway. Cartainly their oomfort, safety and well-being, to say nothing of the anguish of another hundred whose homes would be destroyed, is more important to the City of Huntington Ba&oh, financially and otherwise, than the pleasure ?, and comronia me an enlarged airport would provide to transient t1yers. FUrtlnermore, we respectfully urge that the City Council not be beguiled into beliering that federal money will somehow make anceptnble a proposition that in itself is economically and environmentally unsound. ✓f Respootfully yours, Ferah:ll Hoard of Governors / Winton T. Warner, Chairriin ►oaw INSTRUCTION FAA APPROV[O 3ROUIYO PT GAIC' AIRCRAAFT ALt9 LXAMININO AUTHORITY STATE APPROVED VCT[IIAN APPROVED HARBOR AVIATION Flight Training Dit)Won O/ HARBOR ENTERPRISES, INC. (714) 846-1100 f� January 20, 1973 l Huntington Beach City Council C-.ty of Huntington Beach City Hall Huntington Beach, Calif. Attentions Honorable Al Coen, Mayor Mayor Coen and Counciln+ent We would like to take the opportunity occasioned by your recent conferences and resultant publicity on bleadowlark Airport°s statue to call for a reasonable, caln and thoughtful approach towards finding a solution. We would further appreciate the opportunity of being invi- ted to discuss our views with the council prior To any decision. We feel that our viewpoint has some major validity since we are, in fact, Meadowlark's largest flight school and only Cessna dealer. We have been in business at Meadowlark for over seven years and operate under the FAA's highest rating standaarda, namely FAR Part 135 and Part 141, Lot us further point out that during this time, no Harbor Aviation pilot or plans has been involved in any fatal accident j and no incidents have occurred that have in any ray caused damage or interference to our neighboring home owners as a result of one of our flights. We feel there is a great need for a general aviation facility in Huntington Beach. We also agroa, however, that there is no need for a commercial "Jetport" or other type of air carrier facility. As one example, we have over 300 currently sctivo, proficient and + professional pilots registered with um who rent our planes during the year. The great number of these pilots use our planes for occasional business trips, vacation flights or proficiency training. Virtually all of -these pilots reside in the tri-community Huntington Beach, Westminster, Fountain Valley area with a significant number residing a and owning hoses in the close vicinity of the airport. Our recor6s 'I are open to you should you wish -to make a definitive study of who really uses an airport and what true function it serves. I� It is strange that the question of "who is served by the air- port" does not seen to have even been looked into by Anyone consi- dering the airport plan. Instead rather definitive statements are made about "homeowners lot wanting its "no need for an airport," etc. It seems that all the focus 3s on 144 planes tied down and a number of assumptions on those planes as to what they are used for. ' hlEADOIVLARK AIRPORT • 5141 Warner Auenac Huntingbn Bcach, Cal!/ornia he obviously cannot testify to each and every use of an airplane movement at Neadowlerh, but we can give you some examples of current flights that -is suspect have not been considereds In into December a Huntington Beach couple was traveling in Arizona and were involved in a bad traffic accident. Thn wife was flown directly in ig Meadowlark by an Air Ambulance service for -transfi r to the central Hospital. In aid-December a local uar dealer wao advised of a special Meeting of the U.S . Olympic Committee swimming* group in Bakers- field, A Harbor Aviation plane and pilot flew 'him to the meeting in tine to represent our area. He could not halo wade the meeting otherwiee. A local electronics company won a bid involving a substantial contract over severt. L western states. A uignificant part of their bid involved use of a- Harbor Avia�Uon airplane to move component parts and the technician quickly from Huntington Beach to small towns in Arizona, New bfoxico and Colorado. A real estate company utilized a H/A plane and pilot to make an aerial survey of tha Orange Coast area to pr- pare, isolate ,and develop a proposal for attracting a new industrial (clean) proopeet. A Universal Studios contvact pilot who lives in Huntington Beach flow the oumnany•s Hughes helicopter in from location in the desert each night for several nights allowing him to be with his family rather than in the desert. These are just some examples of us3e made of general aviation airplanse that we suspect are not recognizod. There are obviously many more such as vacations, eight-ssoing, general business use and others including aeronautics training in co-operation with our local collogea, etc. j Now we are trot euperts in taxation, political governing or 'city bLffairs, Howiver we do read often of Huntington Beach's share of sales tax ravoi,nes. How the state-county-caity breakout Is done, we are not sure, however consider that each time we sell a new Skyle.ne that plane ,alone genorates $1500 In sales taxes, part of which goes to our community. Each and every hour one of our planes is rented encraten about s $1:00 in sales tax. Further we ,are paying about 500 a month as our share of Meadowlark's property tax or by our- selves the equiva).ent of 10 homeowners and we occupy less than the space of one, Should we have to move to Santa Ana or Fullerton, Huntington Bauch tc 0:slly loses onr sales tax revranues. This is pro- � bably not a big factor but i is as. factor when combined with other sales operations on the airport. � I Lets please also consider the recreational aspect of flying as one part of the community's inherent responsibilitieu to its citizentry. Huntington Beach is a leading recreational community. Consider the money we ;thru our taxpayers, contribute to, I r I a Our parks and Chair recreational aspects b our beacheii and their recreational aspects c Our golf course, tennis courts, etc. lontt it somewhat discriminatory to allow citizens only certain kinds of recreational activities? Conbidur that I and my wife are taxpaying homeowners in Huntington Beacho a) We don' t use the beach, but pay our share of taxes to support it. b) We don' t play golf, but pay our iihare to support those who do c) We don' t own motorbikes but support parko for same. ETC. j Flsting is, as one of ito usoo, a fora of recreation, actuall!; safer tihan most others. It probably interfere lose than most other P Y recreational activities with people not using the activity. As an example, I personally am much irritated by big boats pulled along over our streetal by motor homed parked on streets; by golfers prac- ticing in school yards. I submit that the thunder of one motor- cycle being gunned along Heil Avenue at any time during the day or night creates ouch more "noise" pollution than our largest airplane does coming in on final approach. I submit that a pumping oil well generates more dec:bels than a gliding airplane. We feel that the continuation of Meadowlark is a must for the city and the county. Study after study shows that accessibility to aviation usage !e a fActor in new industry location. We do fulfill a busine►ts and recreational need. We do represent a class of user that is better trained ani more proficient than virtually any other "user" of governmental facilities. There is no comparison between the skills, training and judgement necessary for driving, boating, etc. and that required of even the lowest rated private pilot. The opportunity presented by the county proposal offers a far- sighted way to develop and pontrol, aviation for our costal area. It to realistic ,and at the same t me futuristic. We feel it deserved such more consideration than the nominal study given it so far. Lastly (and we appreciate your patience in reading this far) we do not see that this is an issue of emotionalism. Obviously we can gather 300 - 500 licensed pilots and their families to "demonstrate" as homeowners for the airport. We are professional, mature peoplo, however, and don' t believe that confrontation is the way to govern. However we aloo do not feel that the Council, should be swayed by confrontation on the other Fart. Hopefully, instead of either approach the council can adopt a truly reasoned and thoughtful study leading to far-Bighted progress. On our part we will be happy to invite the Council and all opposing groups to`vi�_t wIth`us some Ta`�or even g� ale alwaye want ti0 noM wFtn�"we c-an Ito-Fe' better nei�ib`ors an3"•'Iikevri.se feel that our neighbors would like to hear from us as to hoar we view our activities and our future. r J � 1 ' Certainly if we can all communicate we can build togetheir an equitable and reasonable approach to aviation in our community. We look forward to hvring such opportunity. Very tru youro, i Walt Gulick Vice-President Homeowner ( 322 Hell Ave. ) j MNa/rkg i I 1 ,1 N .J I' 5461 Meadowlark Drive Huntington Beach, California November 29, 11)71 Paul C. Jones, City Clerk City of Huntington Beach Iluntington Beach, California Dear Mr. .Sores: A group of citizens in the area or Meadowlark Airport are requesting that they be given time on the agenda at the December 6, 1971 City Council Meeting at the 7 :30 P.M. session. They will have two spokesmen and plan on not taking more than ton minutes of the Council 's time. Thee to the plane crash at Meadow View Grade School , these people have: some questions to ask the City Council . Sincerely, , Tom Livengobd �' i i ti I November 8,1971 Itunti gton Bauch City Council � r 'y City Clor::s Office P.O.Boz 190 Ifunting-tonBoacho Ca. 92648 - Subject: 1Scadowlark.. AitWrt Attention: City Cotmcil Ve,Ajera i Gentlemen! We atronrly reco=ond that you the city cou.nail, decuind that the runway or. tho Ecadowlark Airport be removed. This ill coal runuay oxtonsion has caused the pianos -to nako unuafe upprotches over our homer. 113 trust that your action will be takon before anothor accident hcppenupporhaps this tune a fatal one. Thie noiso and the dirt and the dust irritation are but a few of the main reasons we imt this runim.y removed. Once again we atrcau it is a hazzard to our homes and children i V trul;► yo ,� � �7'- Arthur R. and Grace G. Tice 5312 Caliento Drive Huntington reach, California 92649 ATIT:L' s • I I Tne City Council City of }luntin,,toii leach RECEIVED Bear air: CITY CLERK CITY t1i HUNTINGT14 AICII,C/LIF. fie .re a,vare of tied tweliLerations you will Le pertalain,, to ti►e private: air- port located ou Heal Ave, ?iuJ1tjL911itpq l iQJi! q 8 Cur none is so cioue to trio airport (it .La i,etyv,�•n two red liL jAv that tiler ulrport uue an guide i'or iandin,) titat vie do have: reauon is' not ceuae to compl:.in at;out tilu airport. 1'he pla:snou comin;, ir, for landing come ao low that our winaows rattle, they start talino..t at Glavin at contie,ue until late at ni,,tit. We are appeaaire;; to your nenue of Justico and fairneab in thin matter. liaturally,` tie owner of the airport iz concerned merely for hLa own monetary Leuei*itu, whereas the homeowners in this area are concerned aLout our ieafety and the value of our property, fer surely somettiinL; lixe thief L&irport will de- valuate our property. Aa we are not expertu on tie matter of air- ports, and our main cunern is that vre he liven fairneau in thi u matter, we are; then aulyilitting this► matter to you for your evaluation. We truat that you would conaide.r tl,:.0 matter with fa3irneas. Than.c you so much, and we shall be closrl;,r follow�n, pro„ress of this subject. :it eta ect 'ull r P � Yr Uwe d Victoria Hansen 5332 Caliente Dr. Hunt3xig,zou 1-:,each, Calif. / M 4w • 1 41 i 165 B June 1971 pep 9� i TO: City Council I FROM: City Attorney SUBJECT: Ordinance Regulating Airports An directed by Council, this office has drafted and now trans- mits to Council an ordinance prohibiting takeoffs and landings at Meadowlark Airport during certain hours . The takeoff pro- vision is patterned after the Santa Montca ordinance which has not been tested In the federal courts . Inasmuch as Meadowlark 1 is not involved In interstate commerce, the proposed ordinance may be sound. There is no precedent for prohibiting landings j during night hours; however, we have included such a provision i which shall apply for all lout "emergency" landings . A require- ment that all night landings be reported to the watch com- mander of the police department is innovative and will, we think, be highly effective in discouraging all but bona fide "emergency" landings . The ordinance provides that none of its i provisions shall be effective if in conflict with any existing state or federal law which permits the activity prohibited by this ordinance . I Respectfully submitted, P. i DON P. BONFA City Attorney DPB: ahb Attachment 1 � s FFICE MEMORAND00% 1110 7. t U T From He Att,ichoul --v- co o j o y I E y C, 7()-90 (Johl, v-.ir,tj'o!v Ine FuloJill't--or, (." t;:., �-tirivll t.r 41 , U73 � 7 r -aTr parai-vaj.h ir ir , pvvPE !-Lat , 1 r! tv ht., o%L.nL th.')I an 111n. - ' 1:11 .! -:-, ..I'IT!1 Ovl'� 311de-d vvf--'._Olt- "11CUld U,'- j (.(i r:�I! ff 'rill,'I'f: r not ill .)f I #-.xci-rj V L flit- ClLy n 1 1.1, N-Ank. I C- 1 1:'.1. S)',wr, v., 71 Tr�,77 'I",t-i u ry :JI-i! 1 .3. -11 '1".' r nd I r r: orb Z I.r (r t: January 11, 1971 z. 4 I' 6� r i i i i l California Department of Aeronautics SveramenLO Califomio 95801. Gentleman: The City Council of Huntington Deach, at its regular ❑ meeting held Monday, January 4, 1971, Imposed certain conditions on Meadowlark Airport in Huntington Beach. Enclosed is a certified copy of a "Statement of Action of the City Council, " listing the conditions ir the motion or. page two. Sincerely yours, 1 i Paul C. Jones City Clerk PCJ:sw Enc. i V. ' My�1 `1 i) 1' l -Affi vit of Pnlication 0% stata,of awoarNa l Ar.d;( Otin�t�on Brach 1 � Oftne Bhrquhar, being duly award on oath, a►ys:That he Is a dum of the United States, over the age of twenty-olio years. ThAt he Is the printer and publisher of the Juntington Beach News a weekly rkWspaper of general circulation printed and pub- Wheel In Huntington Beach, California and circulated In the saidM: County of Orange and elsewhere and publUlxd for the dlswailnatlon of local and other news of a genet*l character, and has a bona fide subscription Hat of paying subscribers, and said paper has been r' established, printed and published In the State of California, and ' "runty of Orange, for at least one y -vent before the publication _ 7f the Ant Insertion of this notice; and the said newspaper Is not devoted to the Interest of, or published for the entertalnment of any particular class, profession, trade, calling, race or denomi"t,lon, or any number thereof. The Huntington Beach News was ad}udicatO a legal newspaper of general circulation by Judge G. K. Scovel in the Superior Court of Orange County,G1Uomla August r1lb, M7 by order No. A-5W1. t APPEAL TO REVOCATION OF ' is CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION 70--50 ' of which the annexed L a printed copy, was published In add news- � paper at lout one iReue from e 24t}l Afty of December th - t p 24th December 19?,and ending on the ,y —D ecember 192f) both days inclusive, and as often during aid period and "f times of publication as mW paper wta regularly issued, turd In the regular and entire Issue of said newspaper proper, and not in a supplement, and said notice was published therein on the following dates, to-wits APPROVED D1 CITY COWAN Subecr.!bed and sworn to before am this 26th ,day of t Notary Public Orange County, California .«.,� TMOhlAS D. 1YYLLIE Nolery NO _California oa Charge Counly l My commission Esoires ��►'' Seplembor 17, 1974 1 ` 1 of Handugtq,39acb I comntt o�•Osaagi Stag of cafLfotaltfaR i ,f fidavitof Publication of GEORGE FARQUHAR Publisher Huntington Beach News Filed Clerk By Deputy Clerk i I Coonly of a I State of Ca�llatalq F .dffidavitof Publication of GEORGE FARQUHAR Publisher Huntington Beach Naves i Filed Clerk i BY Deputy Clerk I i i too • ION i �7 1 �y -•i C3�+eor�� C7.2fa:oChw.ok�ri o¢ � X2VA36 - lxuntinWwm Xkwoh,Calilorrg& 68Ni7 1 873 Beach Boulevard Talioiahoris 714.049-MOEAD _x o z December 22, 1970 Honorable Mayor & City Council City of Huntington Beach, Calif. Attention: Paul C. Jones, City Clerk I wish to appeal the decision of the Planning Commission on December 15, 1970 to revoke and declare Conditional Exception #70-50 null and void. ( Meadowlark Airport ) REASON: Conditional Exception #70•-50 was originally approved by the Planning Commission on October 20th of this year, then modified on October 28th with conditions. One of the conditions required certain work completed within 60 days. ( Dec. 15, 1970 ) In as much as there existed conflicting measurements and general confusion and disagreements as to requirements that needed clarification, the Board of Zoning Adjustments was not able to act on the matter until November 18th, but the deadline remained the same- December 15th. NL In as much as the applicant of CE #70-50 did not have the conts 1 of the elasped time loss, and other factors, I appeal the City Council to consider the action of the Planning Commission. A great deal of time and effort by the City Council, Planning Commission, various committees and staff has been spent on this matter. I feel it is generally agreed that conditions have been imposed which will effectively reduce the noise and dusk: problems for the homeowners on Heil Avenue, but will also greatly increase the safety factor at the Airport in respect to the operators of aircraft and the residents on the peripheral boundaries. Geo ge C. McCracken, Councilman cc: Robert Dingwall, Chairman Airport Committee John Turner j.j. Tam Livengood ✓ � ._.. � � �, _/ Huntington Beach Planning Commission P.O. 60X {o0 CAL{FORNIA >i2646 January 4, 197f TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: Planning Commission SUBJECT: Conditional Exception No. 70-50 - APPEAL ATTN: Doyle Miller, City Administrator Paul Jones , City Clerk Gentlemen: Transmitted herewith is a report regarding the Planning Commission's decision of December 15 , 1970, to declare Conditional Exception No. 70-50 null and void. This action was taken pursuant to Condition No. 8 of the conditions of approval imposed for said application on October 20, 19700 by the Planning Commission. Said condition required the Planning Commission to rsview certain conditions of approval on December 15 , 19700 to determine the applicant's compliance and to declare the conditional exception null and void if the conditions had not been met. Ap2licant: John Turner 5141 Warner Avenue Huntington Beach, California Location: North side of Warner Avenue, east of Bolsa Chica Street. w Present Zone : R1 Planning Commission Action: r r Conditional Exception No. 70-50 declared null and void. Reasons Riven bX the Planning Commission for their action: It was determined by the Planning Commission that the conditions had not been met within the prescribed time. ' ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Higgins, Porter, Duke, Miller, Kerins. NOES: None ABSENT: Slates THE MOTION CARRIED. r FINDINGS OF FACT FOR REVOCATION OF THE CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION: 1. Information contained in a memo directed to Doyle Miller, City Administrator, from 011in C. Cleveland, Director of Building and Safety dated December i5 , 1970, indicated that the applicant had not complied with the required conditions. 2. A field investigation performed by Commissioner Duke indicated the following : a. The blast fence was not properly constructed according to the plan. b . Wheel stops were not fixed to the runway . c. Electrical wiring pertaining to the blast fence did not appear to be properly installed. s Respectfully submi e Richard A. Harlow Acting Secretary RAH:bd Encl: Conditions of approval Memo to City Administrator from Building Dept. i CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO 70-50 Conditions of Approval Applicant: John Turner 1 . The runway extension shall be reduced to 320 ft. ; however, in no case shall the extension be closer than 375 ft. from houses on Heil Avenue. 2. A blast fence shall be installed 100 ft. north of the and of the runway. The precise location, size and building materials shall be approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustments. 3. That portion of the runway and taxiway north of the blast fet:ce shall be removed. 4. Obstruction lights shall be installed on the blast fence and any trees along the north property line. Also, any trees along the north property line shall be limited to 20 ft. in hei ht. Placement and type of lights shall be approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustments. 5. Provisions shall be made for dust and rsise control on ! the site. Such dust and noise control methods shall he approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustments . 6. Signs shall be posted to inform pilots of the proper use of the airport and runway area. ; 7. All violations of the City Code shall be corrected within 60 days. S. A review by the Planning Commission of conditions 1 through 7 shall be made on December 15, 1970 to determine the applicant's compliance with the above conditions. This conditional exception shall become null and void if the Planning Commission determines that conditions 1 through 7 have not bien complied with. 9. Conditional Exception No. 70-50 shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission during the month of October, 1971 to determine whether or not additional conditions should be required. However, in the event the Planning Commission determines that added safety precautions should be imposed, said conditional exception may be reviewed prior to October 31, 1971. In case of a review by the Planning Commission, the applicant shall be notified in writing at least 10 days prior to the review. 10. The use of the trailers as temporary facilities shall termi- nate in October, 1971, or construction shall be started and proceeding without undue delay on permanent structures, e f Number of I';xcerpt:. Publin.h Once LEGAI, 110TICE I10TICE 0.'? 141RIJ0, "EARMO CRIMTQlMIAL EXCEYTION NO 70-5(� 3011ICF U; HVIEW( VVEH that -i ninhH.(' h( ar-ing wi l I be held by, th(h City Planning f:ommi pion of thr- City of Huntington Beach for th,: purnann of consider in It Conditional E•xcepL ionWe + to permit. a 5(ju ft. expan8ion to an caisting runway at the de"dowlark Air;)o:t . to allow two existing trailers to be used f or temporitry of'L ice and fl ik:h,- school. /'The sub j ecC 'property is located on the north side of Waver Avenue, east of 11olsa Chita Street in the R1 Sing16 Family Residence DIstri.cL . A legal ddscription is :jn file Ili L.,e Planning Dep rtment Office. Said hc-aring will be held at thr- hour of 7 s00 P.M. , 0!1 October 20, 1970 , in the Council Chamber of the Civic Center, Huntington Beach, California, un 5th Street betwoen Main Street ani Orange Avenue. All interested persons arn, invited to attend said hearing gnd (:x"rc e� their opinions for or against the proposed Conditional Exception :urther i%formatior. may be obtained from thr City Planning Department. To 1 e phone tin ",36 5271 DATED this 'nth clay of October, 1970 _l CITY PL..,MI1TG COMMISSIOri N.A.. Leytlu lus Secretary f December 29, 1970 Mayor Shipley City Nall Huntington Beach, California Re: Meadowlark Airport Situation Dear Mayor Shipley: In view of the Meadowlark Airport Management's obvious lack of respect for the City's zoning codes, safety codes, governing bodies , and local residents, it would appear at this point a compromise as suggested by Mr. McCracken, in bis letter to you dated December 20, 1970, would be entirely uncalled for. The City Council, the Planning Commission, interested and involved citizens and several committees have spent a good deal of time, -- all looking for ways to enhance the safety of the airport facility. Every single suggestion made by the committees to improve the situation at the airport was either ignored, or reluctantly complied with. Almost every code violation brought to the airport management's attention wr.a either ignored, or reluctantly corrected. The management of the airport has proven time and time again that their true interest is selfish in nature, not the welfare and safety of pilots and local residents as has been implied. The airport management (referred to by many pilots as "that idiot") has demonstrated that the only action to be taken is that which is literally forced upon them. in light of all of the aforementioned, plus the listing of events and circumstances attached to this letter, we respectfully request tiiat the decision of the Planning Commission on December 15th, 1970, to make null and void Conditional Exception 70-50, be upheld. Yours very truly, Residents Around Meadowlark Airport By• ee - Norma Gibbs, Jerry Matney, Al Coen, Ted Bartlett, Jack Green, George McCracken, Doyle Miller, Charles Gerarden, Police Chief Robitaille • 1. ,last fence does not meet the plot plan mutually agreed upon by the City staff, airport manager, Councilman McCracken and homeowners. Specifically, the ©tructure is not permanent (supports are not sunk 30" into the ground) . Electrical wiring not properly installed. The bleat fence is an eyesore and it was our understanding 20 ' trees would be planted on the North end of the field to hide the fence for aesthetic value and as a safety factor making a soft barrier to keep pilots a safe altitude over homes. 111 2. All items listed by the City staff should have been 100% ' corrected as of December 15, 1970. Almost none of the i items were corrected. The delay in approving the blast fence did not stop the management from correcting the rest of the violations . ,4I 3. Some of the violations are as follows: JJ Letter of June 12, 1970 by City Chief Electrical Inspector, 1 Pletcher Dart listed non-compliance with electrical code Letter of June 12 , 1970, by Structural Inspector Hendlin, listed structural violations Letter of uune 17, 1970 by Housing Inspector Gerarden, listed non compliance with City Codes ' Letter Of August 16, 1970 - follow--up letter by Housing Inspector, Gerarden, stating no corrective action had been taken and listed additional work was done without permit The list could go on'and on, and ate you can see, the airport management has had nearly seven (7) months to correct all of the code violations -- not just the 60 days extension granted by the Planning Commission as a courtesy to the management. 4. An inspection of the airport facilities by Mr. Duke of the Planning Commission and interested homeowners found the airport management could alter the length of the runway, by moving the unsecured cement bumpers. The plot plan indicated tlese bumpers should be installed permanently. The location of the bumpers were off over ten (10) feet according to the plot plan. They are supposed to be placed so that there is 100 fret from the blast fence to the point where the planes take off, and they are not 100 feet, but between 80 and 90 feet only. On numerous occamions, planes have started their take-off roll a few feet from the blast fence because the cement blocks have been moved. one pilot has admitted doing this at least 20 times. i i 5: The airport management has also ignored the ruling of the City Council on October 19 , 1970, allowing no night flying • until off site ohotruction lights are installed. Lights have been left on all night and planes have taken off and landed after dart: (the Police Department records will verify complaints and their dates) . The manager of the airport has allowed pilots to ha,:rass homeowners on the North and of the runway by allowing take-offs to the North. This has been a continuing problem since the airport operation became an issue. In the past, planes have had to take off in a Northerly direction 7 to 10 days a year (usually in September or October) due to wind conditions (Santa Ana winds) . Every day for nearly a month planes havfa been taking off in a Northerly direction over the homes. I i•' 1 I• 1 V f December 15, 1970 Mir. Moyle Miller City Administrator SUBJECTt Meadowlark Airport 5141 Warnst Avenue Huntington bdub, California STATUS OF EXISTING V VILATIONS On December 14, 1970, ts►e Departaaea: of building and Safety reinspected the Meadowlark airpot'. property, The inspection revealed the following violations of applicable codes to continue to wrist. ZLECTRICAL VIOLATIONS Out of the nineteen buildings cited for numerous electrical violationis only two have bsen rapairedt bassia flight school and the Meadowlark cafe. y RLUT FENCE AND RUNWAY LIGHTING The blast feats has been arectede It doss not contorts to the structural plan approved by the board of Zoning Adjustanents and on file with the Building Departaasatp although tha fence is structurally naval and its' location dose conform. The runway and blast fence lighting systean do not mat etiaiam electrical standards and cannot bps approved by the building Department. ?ha th; and location of the runway sad blast fence liglits mat be-approved by the Californis Division of Aaronauticne No approvall has boon given to elate. TEU'ORARY OFFICK TRAILERS December 149 1970, the Building Departmorot issued permits for the t•. j temporary office trailers permitted for one year v:n Conditional TwepLlrn #70-5O. INFORFATION SIGNS FOR PILOTS Appropriate signs have beea posts infornin gg pilots of the proper use of the airport and runway areas. FI1RE DEPARTMW The violations cited by the Fire Department have not been corrected. i Reapactfully submitted, 0llin C. Cleveland Director of Building and Safety vl • A d' avit of ^1 caption 01� state of f!allfoE M a10 Hna�Baas t`norxe 1?hrhuhar, being duly sworn on oath, rays: Out he is a I, , dtfus of the Ilalt+td States, over the age of twenty-one years. That he Is the printer and publisher of tb.e Huntington Beach News, a weeke_y newspaper of general dnvlatlon printed and pub. „+ Whed In HuntlWon Beach, Callfornla aM .Irculaled In the said ;t•�1 f County of Orange and elsewhere and published for the dissendutlon of local mul other news of a general character, and has a bona fide subsarlptlon list of paying subscribers, and said paper has been tetablished, printed and published In the State of California, and I County of orange, for at leant one year rext before the publication of the brat Insertion of this notice; and the said newspaper Is notsee ` devoted to the interest of,or published tar the entertainment of any f particular class, profession, trade, calling, race or denominatlor or any number thereof. 7M Huntington Bass&News was adjudkated al legal newspaper f of general cir ulalfoa by Judge O. lr "covel In the Superior Court a I t►f Orange County,California August ?tth, 1937 by order No.A-5931. ' t meal to Condition of Conditional Exoe►ition 0-50 , of which ON annexed Is a printed copy, was pwblls W in sal"_ uewa- paper at least OC10 11l8U e ? Ifs, i i fi conumnclnC from Me ..1 th *y of November ; + .•' 10_�0 � on the t1h y o`, November j i 4 ,970, both days Inclusive, and as often during acid period and L times of publication as Bald paper was regularly Issued, and in thej7f regular and entire Issue of sztd newspaper proper, and not In asuppImnent, and sAd notice was pubUshO therein on the followingdates, to•wit: November19?0 Publlaber Satscribed and sworn to before me this 6 th day of Novndber 19?0 . I•.,rs.z� .��t��„��(�ri Notary Public I (/ orange County, California I 7HOMAS D. WYLLIE 110tary eUU1;t•CAF1*rn1'a 0►enge Courtly • 1dv Commission Emrree September 12, 1$74 t w._ 1 Cr of Nv adnolon $each . . Cvnnty of'arango state of Callra[a i I , f fidavitof Publication of SEORGE FARQUHAR Publlahor Huntington Basch News ' i Filed Clark iUy i ►deputy Clerk I � i` I Board of Zoning Adjuatments Rovicw of Conditional Exception 70-50 Meadowlark Airport, Novenber 18, 1970 Parsons Presents fir. Jahn Turner, Mr. George ScCracken, Mr. Roger Slates, Mrs. Hoffman, Mr. Charles Gerarden Hoard Members: Pat Spencer, Dan McFarland# Jim Palin On November 16, 19709 the Board of Zoning Adjustments reviewed Conditional Exception No. 70-50 to consider conditions number 2,4, and 5, with regard to tho blast fonco, obstruction lighting and duet and noise control. The hearing was opened to the audience by Chairman Spencer. Mr.McCracken began tho discussion by relating that a meeting had boon held between himself, Mr. Turner Iand representatives of the home r.unera group subsequent to this meeting and aubstantial agreement was reached by the parties involved. The items discussed and comments made are as follows: 1. Runway extension. ,Mr. McCracken explained that an agreement had been reached with regard to the length of the runway extension. 't was reported that the extention shall be no closer than 375 feet measured at right angles to the closest house on Heil Avenue. This method of measurement actually reduced the length as allowed by the Punning Commission as the distance allowed at that Limn was measured in line with the runway. 2. Blast fence: The location of the blast fence was discuesed and reported that it was to be located 100 feet north of the runway limit. The construction and height of the fence were considered by the Board. i Mr. Turner stated that he thought that the fence should be farther away from the end or the runway in order to maintain a safe eight angles for pilots taking off. This was discussed and agreed that an adequate night angle and glide elope could be maintained with a fence no higher than 10 feet. Mr. Turner was asked if the fence could be constructed as shown an the Plana. He ctatud that the fence would be constructed of steel frames that were used in a building being demoliehsd. These frames were used for structural members of a glass facade and wars cnpabla of withatending wind loading. i Mr. Turner further stated that there would not be any unusual wind loading i From prop wash as the fence was to be located for enough from the runway that none of the planes at the airport uara large enough to create that pratlem. 3. Dust Control: Oust control was discussed with attention givers to tho question or removing the runway paving and other methods of dust control surrounding the runway. 11r. Turnor and Mr. McCracken stated that the pavamm nt uould be the beet dust control method end felt that it should zemuin. It was thn i -2- donsensus of discussion that the pavement could remain provided wheal stapa were installed to prevent use of the runway portion from the extension limit to the blest fence. The Board discussed other dust control problems. fir.. Turner stated that the area adjacent to the runway and extending to the fence an Hail Avenue was covered with an all seal. It was determined that the operator shell continue to provide dust control measures in the area behind the runway. 4. Ubntructian light4na and t eees Lighting of the blast fence wee diocussed and it Was determined that the bleat fence should be equiped with obstruction lighting and markings ea required by applicable State or Federal agencies. The need for trses and lighting on the trees was discussed at some lEngth. It was determined from the Planning Commission conditions of approval that planting of trees wan not required; hajover, if trees were plentod obstruction lights should be installed and the trans limited to 20 feat in height. S. Night flv3ngs The question of night plying was considered and it was the consensus that the planning Commission did not nandition the use to prohibit night flying. However, it was stated that any night operations would be regulated by the appropriate State or Federal agencies, Based on the discussions as related, a motion was made for approval of the blast Fence as shown on the plot plan at the .location shown and constructed of materiels and specifications indicated. It was also moved that the board reserved the right to review the use for dust control at anytime. In addition obstruction lighting and marking on the blast fence shall be installed as required by, and in accordan:a with State or Federal agency requirements. The motion was seconded and passed by unanimous vote. The description of action and discussion hold by the Board of Zoning is true and correct as recalled by the undersigned. I Danio2 W. McFarland Board Member Department of Building and Safety t • '04E MEMORANDUM ~ , cuiltLa ORRARDBN, Building Department Dak September 15,• 1970 n VILUS 'Mvla, Deputy City Attorney la Be MEADOWLARK AIRPORT The awe 91r. Marge 8. Atkinson, at al. vs. John Turner, at al. . Xc. .123321i' is a' olvil aatioa betwein certain property owners ti WA •Jape► Turner,' Mho. is the operatotl or the airport . In 'that aab�On JoMsb a Law, Joseph P. Evans and William P. Evans, Jr. • .Xfat� .a•X1e=nt agaSnst the defendant, John Turner, for $1 each. .."i+•4at s ult� ir;d-ail persons in •privlty with then are pa wi r:rastra�ne4 and arrjolnied, from obstructing in any wail tlws', su t;es'of tha.:ltoorevelt load -right-of-voy. .ak i11 persons .in privity with then are p+rp� watrf3(Nd it' d anj olhsd, either directly or in4ireetly a for t IgAse"'lioonse rental,'franchise, concession AV_*d Ate :4s' Zit�raot or' othtrmist-i granting wV authority pe o►r surb. .any. morethan 67. airplanes to ba, tied aviC.; 04 `d. basdd' operated from, flown out of, or to remain oVOMAhtit At ot° upon, the main airport property and at, or upon, UW"..•1r4j4Ofin prvpo' • * at my 'given't low. " • �► Jpd�sint i,i YIatt, '$ntipded to :f tiidt tho number- of i►isiting ''rllrplill�es +which ' , �«�; a�ava, o�#ratr; fly and' lane upon, sati;l1`ad�epore flee; Roir osevelt Aoad•'ri�ht-of-weir " !" e,;' , I rnt le not :inher�ded to pArphibt'b 'a. visiting Airplane hsasi; 1p nine ovarr4gbt'-upon,the:iaitl.is .airport yropai�ty. or ,Womst*z%i*'pr*arty, wbon• MpAlred to .4o :sv.by; any genui»p•bona r " ' fide: rgenay i 'cirsumstlm► t ce or, d ditto providing that Sm fie gnat -resrI'Yk�3'orfit attar, such liwirgeney, �j: .Ol tpOR,epT.•Ap�ldi�iotl otldi. .�,ry .� � . ' ; Y•' as thls ti&01'VeN 4 'pivll:' tier between the•,plaSnti ff indant, it;Ma►' ho enlulaed"'2ly .py the plalnts!'t'e in mono S t'. .. , I•:' , Imo! U • ( . .�/ , % �•'' r i lei' ' 16 I I _ Huntington Beach Planning Commission P.O. Box It* CALIFORNIA $2643 November 16, 1970 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: Planning Commission SUBJECT: Conditional Exception No. 70-50 - APPEAL ATTN: Doyle Miller, City Administrator Paul Jones, City Clerk Gentlemen: Transmitted herewith is a report regarding the Planning Com- mission' s decision to 0appove Conditional Exception tion No. 70-50, which will permit a 50 t. expansion to an existing runway at Meadowlark Airport; also, to allow 'Zwo existingtrailers to be used as a temporary office and flight school. That portion of the Planning Commission's decision to permit an existing trailer to be used as a temporary office for one year was ap- pealed by Mr. Francis J. Connolly, Meadow Airsalers, Meadowlark Airport. Mr. . Connelly requested a three year time limit. Applicant: John Turner 5141 Warner Ave. Huntington Beach, Calif. Location: North side of Warner Ave. , east of Rolsa Chica St. Present Zone: R1 Staff Recommendation: Denial of that portion or Me-request to allow an exist- ing trailer to be used as a tem- porary office, Planning Commission Action: Approved upon the o owini condition: 1. Use of the trailer as a temporary facility shall terminate in October, 1971, or con- struction shall be started and proceeding without undue delay on a permanent structure. Reasons given by the Planning Commission for their action: 1. Precedent to use trailers as temporary offices has been established. 2. The use will terminate in one year, unless construction has started can a permanent structure. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Higgins, Kerins, Miller, Porters Duke NOES: Slates ABSENT: None FINDINGS OF FACT FOR APPROVAL OF THE OVERALL REQUEST: 1. Ti = subject property was annexed to the City as Rl. 2.. The property has been used as an airport. 3. Extension of the runway will substantially increase safety of the airport. Additional Information: Mr. Turner and Mr. Peditt spoke in Favor of the trailer use. Robert Dingwall , Dr. Robert Leibeck and Dr. Kirby spoke in favor bf extending the run- way. Tom Livowgood, John Jackson, Mr. and Mrs. Loon Bier- lein, Lon Durhum and Albert Ward spoke in opposition. The ; Commission also received eleven ietters from adjacent pro- perty owners stating their opposition. Respectfully submitted, K. A. Reyna ds , � - Secretary KAR:dr I I i i I . I I I i ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Baril, Higgins, Keritis, Miller, Porter, Duke NOES: Slates ABSENT: None FINDINGS OF FACT FOR APPROVAL OF THE OVERALL REQUEST: 1. The subject property was annexed to the City as R1. 2. The property has been used as an airport. 3. Extension of the runway will substantially increase safety of the airport. Additional Information: Mr. Turner and Mr. Peditt spoke in favor of the trailer use. Robert Dingwall, Dr. Robert Leibeck and Dr. Kirby spoke in favor of extending the run- way. Tom Livewgood, John Jackson, Mr. and Mrs. Leon Bier- leis Lon Durhum and Albert Ward, spoke in opposition. The Commission also received eleven letters from adjacent pro- perty owners stating their opposition Respectfully submitted, K. A. Reyno ds, Secretary KAR:dr L 4• s t November 11, 1970 Mayor Shipley City hall Huntington Beach, California Re: readowlark Airport Conditional Exception 70-50 Dear Mayor Shipley: At the October 16, 1970 Planning Commission, hearing on- the Meadowlark Airport situation, the Commission stated that Meadowlark airport waz licensed for one (1). flight school. They also granted a Conditional Exception 70-50 limiting to one year the temporary office - trailer, used as one of the flight schools. ,� , . . �•. ..: . .% .•. �, I li It was our underiianding' from the Planning Commissioin� Hearing that the airport management was not to use the 320 feet of the extension, nor the runway lights, nor permit flying at night until the violations had been corrected, the 20 foot trees had ,been placid'.at the north fence, the remainder of. the extension' had'been removed•,. a"blast fence had been installed, the street light wires had been placed underground and the obstructions around the airport bad been lighted. Many violations have been observed and reported to the Huntington Beach Police Department. The extension has been used over and over ( again - not only the 320 feet they are permitted to use after the I violations have been corrected, but the entire extension. The I � runway lights have been on several :nights. Planes have been taking off and landing nightly at the airport. We have been ,informed that the police department-can do nothing about: these-'violations, - only make reports on them. We have also been informed that the only way any of these pilots committing the violations can be cited is for J Mr. Gerarden of the Land Use Commission to observe the violation. ' Of course, this is almost impossible, unless Mr. Gerarden camps -at the airport daily and nightly. Because of the fact that there" have been continuous wiolationa together wi;'. the fact that only one (1) flight school is licensed to operate at the airport and the fact. that: one (1) flight school should be sufficient for a small airport such as Meadowlark, we feel that the Conditional Exception 70-50 limiting the trailer to one (1) year should be upheld. Si.acerely, 6'3�i up )6 a!3 % "tee. r �� '1187 CtC 3 ` I � 6 �Cos 01 r ;.et �.4: Vlamai*4 10( Ja�, ., � �1 � a- ►._..SZ. \mil- . i ticiwrd V. uine Jay C. Nash x Cr 7n-S(� �?.0. Box 736 16981 8th St. \ ,� Sunset Beach, Calif. Sunset Beach, Calif. John Turner ;forge S. Atkinson Warner Ave:. Charles L. Smith mith Hntgn, Bch. , Cal . Ages L. Smith 16803 Hoskins 9152 Crawford Cir. dutgn. Bch. , Calif. Hntgn. Bch . , 4.fl l i f. Jack E. Wheelhouse Albert 0. Feller L. R. Tacka berry 5032 Pearce St. 5062 Pierce 620 L. 4th St. Hntgn. Bch. , Cali&.. Hntgn. Bch . , Calif. Olympia, Wash. Car nning Edward Rose Art It. Nerio 140 Kenmore :1ve . 3440 ?tapkeleaf 6721 Bolse ltol ood, CalL[. Riverside, Calif. Westminster, Calif. E. L. Russell Harry K. Olsson John 11. Jones Rte Box 219 16771 Roosevelt 16871 Coach Lane San s Obispo, Calif. Hntgn. Bch. , Calif. Untgn. Bch. , Cal. 92647 I Set Wilson MbtVKHX L•'dith M. Haldeman 1685 Lolsa Chicb 16882 Coach Lone fintl Bch. , CALif. Hntgn. Bch. , Calif. `Wm. Ogden Malcom M. RortJ James A. [lowland 115 W. Olive Margot A. Stzplr. 16862 Coach Lane ±Burbank, Calif. P.O. Box 14511 lint gin. Beh. , Calif. Long Beach, Calif. Wine a Community Water Bank of Americn Trust Terry De Martino Bols Chde Water Co. Savings Assn. 5471 Overland Dr. a � 1 32 Bolea Chica 801 N. Main St. llntgn. Bch. , Calif. Hntg . Bch. , Calif. Santa Ana, Calif. i 4asad Nerlo Stella M. Feller Marjorie M. Sherwood �ML Bolan Ave. 50G4 Pierce St, S465 Overland Dr. estminster, Calif. Hntgn. Bch. , Calif. Hntgn. Bch. , Calif. i Jan Law Shell oil Co. Marjorie V. Read .- 16811 Roosevelt St. 275 Middlefield Rd. 54G11 Overland Dr. Hntgn. Bch. , Cal. Menlo Park, Calif. Hntgn. Bch. , Calif. Jose . Van Calcar Sid Nellie & Ili lard S. Carriere 3065 Cypress Rd . Box 171 16805 Roosevelt Palm Springs, Calif. Sunset Beach, Calif. Hntgn. Bch. , Calif. A. e`) Wcilter A. Plewe 1� szcl Lund 3432 Bonanza CE 70r 50 j381 Bonanza Dr. ilntgn. Bch. , Calif 5,y Fintgn. Ach. , C„11 t . , I ' e,� Clifford Milliken Rather D. Hart He Len D. tdcr 5G22 Bonanza 5322 Overland Dr 5391 Bonanza Dr. tintgn. Bch. , Calif . tintgn. Bch . , Calif . tintgn. 13ch. , Calif . Prances L. Chase James C. Sweeney, ir. Jr.JCarl E. Erickson 5412 Bonanza � ! I 1203 D Bailey 5411 Bonanza Dr• lintgn. Bch. , Calif ." HuntsviLle, Alabama Hntgn. Bch. , Calif. I Joseph D. Fields, J r. rlon Robert M. Layne 5421 Diamond Dr. Mi k P. Me onanza Dr. 5421 Bonanza Dr. lintgn. Bch. , Calif. }{n C. Bch. , Calif - lintgn. Bch. , Calif. R. M. Calkins I Llo d F. Gray Robert E. Moore 5431 Diamond 53 onaltza Dr• 5431 Bonanza Dr• lintgn. Bch. . Calif. 11n itch. , Calif. Hntgn. Bch. , Calif . i , I Ad R. Derkurn Lloyd L. idllson Owen E. O'Dell 5441 Diamond ; 5352: Bonanza Dr. 5441 Bonanza Dr. }inrgn. Bch. , Calif. Hn Bch. , Calif.. ilntgn. l3ch. Hobart G. ilobbs E nd E. De Longfield Elroy J . Marine 5451 Diamond 53 Bonanza Dr . 5451 Bonanzas Dr. lintgn. Bch . , Calif. Hntgn. Bch• , Calif . tintgn. Ech. , Max Smith Charlesto l3. Brown Merrill G. Scott 5461 Bonanza Dr. 5461 Diamond 1-62 E. Sepulveda Blvd. Hntgn. Bch. , Calif. lintgn. Bch• . Calif. Wil ngton, Calif. I Bernardino J. Kuesman Leon J. Bierlein Elsie E. Plant 5462 Bonanza Dr. 16921 Red Rack Cir. 5331 Bonanza Dr. Hntgn. Bels. , Calif. lintgn. Bch. , Calif. Hntgn. Bch. , Calif. ft Charles C. Winslow Ralph L. Cook Gu H'. Patterson Bonanza Dr. 16922 Red Rock Cir. 5452 5% Bonanza Dr.Hntgn. Bch. , Calif. Hntgn, Bch. , Calif. lintgn. Bch., Calif. Cunton !1. 'lutchison John A. Gurley Goo. L. l►Satthiesen . 5442 Bo iza Dr. 16922 Ruby Cir. 5361 Bonanza Dr. lintgn. ��h. , Calif. Hntgn. Bch. , Calif. Hntgn. Bch. , Calif. 0O4George M. ilawthorne Virginia M. Belt 4 J.R. CC 70-50 3k .i361 Overland Dr . Belt ' llntgn. Bch. , Calif. 15958 mariner Dr.. ' llntgn. Bch. , Calif. Carlos T. Powers Charles A. E:irklen, Jr. Nlick C. Leo .276 Knollwood Dr. lOG71 Artcraft Ave. 16875 Canyon Lane Newbury Park, Calif. Garden Grove, Calif. Elntgn. Bch. , Calif. Silbert Laxco Darryl K . Wood Merrill G. Scott 5331 Overland Dr. 5341 Bonanza Dr. 5461 Diamond Dr. llntgn. Bch. , Calif.Hntgn. Bch. , Calif. Elntgn. Bch. , Calif. Richard C. Pommdr Rid a Cli d E. Kendrick 5411 Overland Drab gw y M. Lightholder 544 erland Dr. Hntgn. Bch. , Calif. 16891 Canyon Lane Hnt Bch. , Calif. Elntgn. Bch. . Calif. i Howard L. Larkin, Sr. i Art h A. Pretr•r, Jr. 5315 Overland Dr 16901jille Can , 401 dine Cir. Nntgn. Bch. , Galif. 16901 Canyyon Lane Hnt Bch. , Calif, 1Entgn. Beiz. , Calif. i Loraine E. Dunn Robe M. Leyhe 5311 Overland Dr. 16912y S. Mct•tLane 5421 Bonanza Hntgn. Bch. , Calif. . 16912 Can on Lane Hnt j� Bch. , Calif. llntgn. I3ch. , Calif. U ' Set It. DouL•hett Tema S. Clare William A. Hood 169 Canyyon Lane 5305 Overland Dr. ,16902 Canyon Lave Hnt n. BcEi. , Calif. - lintgn. 73ch. , Calif. llntgn. Bch. , Calif. Newton C. La 1� ve r Lynn May Carl House Y Y 5�11 erland Dr. 5301 Overland Dr. 16892 Can on Lane Hntg Bch. , Calif. llntgn. Bch. , Calif. Nntgn. BT , Calif. Elizabeth A. Nt+rritt Virginia V. Peg.- Doris M. Burke i 5401 Overland Dr. 16851 Canyon Lane 16882 Canyon Lana IHntgn. Bch. , Calif. Hntgn. Bch. , Calif. Elntgn. Bch. , Cali'. Joseph L. Jagger Edwin T. Greenwalt A. D. DuncAn 5391 Overland Dr. 16861 Canyon Lane 16862 Canyon Lane Hntgn. Bch. , Calif. Hntgn. Bch. , Calif. Elntgn. Bch. , Calif. , Carlyle H. Nelson Ben D. Blair 5381 Overland Dr. 16865 Canyon Lane � Hntgn. Bch. , Calif. Hntgn. Bch. , Calif. I . M �.R' ,, r J� �T � 'L;�''rr . !M,• 4 ""'w'''�'it � ' T� .r�.f: A,t �. y t•L' ,r, ka f f'.�i � i �.'i''`� 4rr ti�'�+str ' �.r , ! i`'• M ri !F .r•.� +.�Ali A� S Y ,N � f !� r rt �1 it � 'a. _ (s ) '� y�",j1�. r � ,•� f:. ,�t �..% '`_••,. 1 � >< v'1M'i'� rl.1j(r�Y�f(�� t � . 1�;1 f..:f .�:.,� h ii �. •i3- � I�; s ,, •'ia�? '�n;lt'� ,r lM ) � ,�°l�t,`r� .,(.. ram, ;ti 1 ,: ! 1.. �,i/ t� i i\'t !`. 1. i �.i. "��' 1 !�l�f: �� n �i'�,��rNN tit �a���i• �r�, .fir' 1; ' t! 1 .�1» , I :)l,i.; k .rh. y' . :�! ` �)Fr, �. � r i ! +�� �t t �,• '�f � i 1 � \ .. -� � t f (.r'. ',. ' '. t t•l�1 1A. � � '{ jD,.i:I,y,,, '1y� ?, ( M���'';(,y�:� .( •Y..� '? r S r•'� ,y.+ t t '�yfr }� �1't 1. 4, � , �' �r'• �1 �. i ,•� ,l i i�� '���� 4 ♦�'Y�'f((1•� N�. wM 1 (/. ; � ��'�,/f}.� �, a r. .U�}�yf'�'�,`, �,. r s i. • f� r�y�!)i�n ;r { I�' f►.. "y i1!b 1. y bJ I . "l:,Yi? e -� T' + *�" R ' �• ✓ r�.+ � t +j�y �`� �y } ';�y ,�+F 1t,y � f�y �. }� f 3>,� • Cc 70- 5ct Maude E. Grolitjm - Lanny G. Jackson 3402 Old Pirate lame A3222 Caliente Hntgn. Bch. , Calif Hntgn. Deli. , Cal. 92647 Ruth H. Binns Stanley tdiam St. Robert F. Harvey 16921 Rub Cir. 1ti707 GBr . , Calif. ' a 5232 Caliente St. Hntg. Behy, Calif. Hj�tF,n. D h. , Ctj 1 � f. Hntgn. Ach. , Cal. 92647 Meadowlark Country Chub 11m. K. Son Mj ry in L. Murdock lite. 1, Box 440 5402 old Pirate Lane 5242 Caliente Dr. Hntgn. Bch. , Calif. 1lntgn. Belli . , Calif. lintgn. Bch. , Cal . 92647 Jo Koster Raymond Picard Elvin E. Hickey 77Can Iriquois Dr. 1011 Graham St. 5391 Appian Way In 1�e11s, Calif. lintgn. Bch. , Calif. Long Beach, Cal. 90803 Vernon llami1ton Bernard R. Lopez Peter F. Ciddio 16 Graham St. a5404 Old Pirate 1jjne 5235 Iteil Ave. HnBch. , Calif . lintgn. Bch . , Celif. Hntgn. Bch. , Cal . 92647 RonD. Runyard Hal Nielsen Geo. V. McKenzie 5451 Old Pirate Lance P.O. Box 1595 5221 11cil Ave. InBch. , Calif. lintgn. Bch. , Calif. Hntgn. Bch. , Cal . 92647 l , Bames Coast Batik Mary H. Ciddio 5441 Old Pirnte l.n. 5354 E. 2nd St . 5211 Heil Ave. lintgn. Bch. , Calif. Long Beach, Calif. Hrjtgn. Bch. , Cal. 92647 Ler A. Gaser Anthony C. Tovatt Victor L. Mills 5r43 Old Pirate Lane 16705 Graham 5201 Heil Ave. lint . Bch. , Calif. Hntgtj. Bch. , Calif. Hntgn. Itch. , Cal. 92647 f Ruth M. Kamerev Fredrick H. Miller Jame: D. Morgan 14112 L. Mar Vista 5192 Caliente Dr. 5362 Caliente Dr Whittier, Calif. lintgn. Bch. , Cal. 92647 Hntgn. Bch. , Cal. 92647 i Ralph A. Rackrow George Walker Daniel E. Schwartz 501 Moon Valley Dr 5202 Caliente Dr. 5352 Caliente Dr. 'I Phoenix, Aria. Hntgn. Bch. , Cal. 92647 Hntgn. Beli. , Cal. 92641 t_ Loren Hufstetler Michael Gualtieri David R. Black 2929 Royal Palm Dr 5212 Caliente Dr. 5342 Caliente Costa Mesa, Calif. Hntgn. Bch. , Cal . 92647 Hntgn. Bch. , Cal. 92647 • Lathrop Construction II.B. Elementary School I CE 70-50 it 5172 Warner Ave. 770 17th St . �) Hntgn. Bch. , Ca1 .92647 llntgn. Bch„ Cal . 92646 .Attn: Dist . Supte. i Shizuo Mikawa Joe 0 Campo et at Ocenr.• Vim ,.—.drool Di. tiict 11800 Junietre St. B b J Investments Inc. B(I88X"XIt:mmi Culver City,Cal .90230 % Ilerbert Kirk 22.28 P. MaLn St. \` Snntu Ana, Cal . 92700 Kunio Cita et al G. E. BonecuLter Ocean View School District 5242 Warner Ave. 4173 Larwin Ave. 71J72 U'arner Ave . Elntgn. Bch. , Cal . 92.647 Cypress, Cal . 90630 Hntl;n. Bch. , Cal . 92647 Attn: Dist . Supt . Ke h J. Ferrnra Geo. Kachickas et at Staff Asst . Design B 26 4th St . '13 15604 Gaymont Dr. Stnte Div. o£ Highways Lo Bench, Ca.1.90814 LaMtrnda, Cal. 90638 P.0 Box 2404, Term. Annex Los Angeles, Cal. 90054 Esther F. Szabo Royal T. Trester it urlinghall Dr. 14622 Monroe St . Loseach, Ca1. 90807 Midway City, fail. 92655 Le L. Pierce Marggaret E. .St Ongc 5092 Warner Ave. 16129 Evans Cir. Ifni. Itch. , Cal . 92647 Fountain V1y. , Ca1 .92708 Harold A. Walter Sa C. Hirt ! i, , 17P2Ojai lane 331 Linares Ave. ! llntgn. Bch. , Cal . 92647 Long Beach, Cal . 9081.4 i I Pau 11. Evans Rodolfo Espinoza 1.12 N. Sanborn Ave. 5121 Dunbar Los n elca Cal . 9002�J 1 i S , Hntgn. Bch. , Cal . 926' 7 �5 t� I v Wm. A. Cruikshank Robert E. Fox 9301 Wilshire Blvd. 536 W. Ist St. #1 bL Beverly Hills, Ca1 .90210 Long Beach, Coal . 90802 Quinn McFddters Millie C. Sanders Francis J. Conn011y 5132 Warner Ave. 2236 E. Broadway Meadow Air Sales Hntgn. Bch. , Cal. 92647 Long Beach, Cal .90803 6162 Warner Ave Huntington Beachi CA Y' 9264JI Robert M. Dean 3526 Heather -Rd. Long Beach, Cal. 90808 • CR'���'I V�D rr c ImA+r1kcr;Iry Z R c� c''V 34CH, llf i �i 9I0 OCT 3Q pPl h : 1 O0 ��1►t) lipllt)7a {)��: �%f;I►. It. / � .J►:ilc:� p. o. I'nx 190 T111I1t.iTlf�t;QI1 ..et►r,11, Gr:, , Il►S ie! r `,ii•: i:t3: i:nnri itianc.►i. �.::ccntioli ;70 -50 a 11.i:icAl_►1 T ,•mtilc7 lil;� �.o ►. l+lu�( 1 nnc .t11; ic► �.: Cclt., ,�:ceT�tiic>n I�utr�i�cr �9-50 i!:,:.�!-c� 1 Li�c }:untin�tnll ;3c;c;rr �1!'nrtirl - Co^!!:lia7�.UI1 r.i, ►.' rjr recent nnrt•ir.r- oil October 1970. 'S"i^ r:�l+ee1 reellfi��t is t�� CYtercl t},.e tide limit of �� Oi , t :ictl hos Ice--ti i1Pr fro:: li OI�f: '.'F.'. , been c:a.lm.:ed , ,,o c: three t.c_ r »cri.aci :)f lzoo. 'I Very trul•• 1-011rO t -r ends J". "onnolly i 1, lz_er�drnl �.i SDlen 1, 3 I'eodov.,Ierk Isi1'Port /�-� b ;:untii}rton is�1,eY�, CE+. , 92647 i STAFF' REPORT romn'rIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 70-50 Appl f cni t: .John R. Turner I:i,lr-: OLLober 20, 1970 The staff has reviewed Conditional. Exception No. 70-50 and offers the fcllowing information for your consideration: 1 . The applicant has requested permission to expand the existing Meadowlark Airport by permitting the runway and roll-up etea to be extended approximately 540 ft. Also, to allow two existing trailers to be used as a temporary office and flight school. The property consists of 80 Acres of land that is master planned as an airport except the area within which Lhe ex- pansion took place which is master planned and zoned for residential purposes. j 2. The -ieport was permitted by the Cout:ty Board of Supervisors in 1946. Upon annexation to the City, the use became non-conforming because it was snnexed as R1 property. The Code allows non-conforming uses to continue in the some manner they existed when they became non- conforming 3. This application was filed after the runway was ex- tended and two trailers placed on-site withor:t the benefit of a building permit. This was Alpo done In violation of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code which does not allow the expansion of a :ion-conforming use. The Building Department notified the applicant of code violations and requested that they correct the situation. A committee appointed by the City Council was .formed to study the airport aituatiun and to report their findings back to the City Council . A group of citizens in the area formed another com- mittee known as the Residents Against Airport Hazards (P.AAH) . Hearings were held by the Council Committee. The Council Committee and the RAAH submitted their reports to the City Council on October 5, 1970. 1 These reports were received and filed by the City Council . Copies of both reports have beeo enclosed for your review. InformaLlon pertaining to the violations existing at the airport, accidents I occurring during 1970, maps, etc. , have also been included for your review. The City Council at their October 5, 1970 meeting also instructed the City Administrator to review the reports submitted by the: Council Committee and RAAH and to recommend a solution or course of action to be taken. The Administrator' s report has also been included for your review. 4. T1.ere are numerous violations to the Building and Electrical Codes . ' 5. Roosevelt Road, a private street, intersects with the southerly end of the runway causing an additional safety hazard. This road is one of two access points to the adjacent residential area A means of controlling this hazard is unknown there- fore it is recommended that the City Attorneys office be instructed to investigate possible solutions. 6. Inasmuch as the reports &A supplemental information submitted includes all information that woult! other- wise be Included in the staff report, this report will only offer additional infor.natiun for. considera- tion. The followinginformation is offered us a supplement PP to the ocher reports: e) The basic question that must be answered by the , Planning Commission is whether or not expansion of this non-conforming use should be permitted . it appears that some modifications to the air- i port should be made to reduce present hazards . Most of the reports deal with this problem. Little j if any comment has beer made regarding the use of f the temporary trailers, nor has the .ipplicnnL giver, any justtfication far them in his appli- • cation. The staff feels that codifications performed for safeicy reasons are necessarv; however, the two, trailers do not add to the safe operation f� of the ' '.rport. b) Extensinn of the runway will make it more desirable for the operator to continue to main- tain this non-conforming use because of the possible increase in activities resulting from a better airport. 'thus, approval will perpet- uate a non-conforming use for an indefinite period without the benefit of improvements normally wde when a use is established. These improvements include, full street improvements, drainage fees and other standard fees. c) There has been some discussion of the hazards presented by the power poles along Iferner Ave . This should also be considered if the Commission proposes to permit expansion of the airport. If the Planning Commission concludes that expansion of the airport for safW y reasons, is a -.,sonable, the staff recommends that the report of the City Administrator, of the RAAii and of t'ne Council Committee be reviewp,' and as well as those additional comments submitted b; staff , and that guidelines be set for the staff to establish conditions of approval for the Planning Co=iasion to review at a later regular meeting. With regard to the proposal to permit the trailers for temporary office and flight school, the staffrecommends denial as there appears to be no justification. j 1 -7 b t;i'� c'Lt:AI M E M O R A N D U M i TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council j i FROM: Doyle Miller, City Adminis':•rator � DATE: October 15, 1970 SUBJECT: MEADOWLARK AIRPOPT RECOMMENDATIONS The City Council, at the October S. 1970 meeting, directed the City Administrator to review the reports submitted by the Air art Committee and RAAH (Rissidents Against Airport Haxards5 and recommend a solution or course of action. An airpnrt is a community asset and should receive cecununity support. Meadowlark Airport has been in operation fcr many years and should remain a limited use facility for the bene- fit of local and private aviat on.-� I I I have, along with the staff, reviewed all submitted reference material :nd recommendations. The recommendation submitted by both the homeowners and your Committee are, for the most part, 1 identical extent for the location of the blast fence. It appears the basic issues on this subject are: 1. Safety Will the added runway length provide a safer operation or ' will it encourage the operation of larger, twin engine air- craft resulting in the same conditions that presently exist? 2. Traffic Volume Will the new facilities incrrrase air traffic to the point that thb neighborhood will continue to complain about airpnrt operations, slch as night. flying, violations , noise , etc.1 3 . Conditions for Use Can re:.tractions be placed on airpnrt operations so that ' harmonv can be maintained between the neighborhood and the airport? i i A f 0 2. Honorable Mayor any' City Council October 15, 1970 4. Local Control j i The City has the power to regulate the ground facilities at Meadowlark Airport and may, at any time for just cause, request the State to revoke the airport permit. The j current permit allows the operation of aircraft from both the .north/south and east/west runways. Night operations i and airport lights are local matters and can be so regulated. Since the airpov: is an asset to the community, I feel that efforts should be made to bring about the most compatible arrange- ment between the two land uses. In accordance with the philosophy, I recommend the following course of action: 1. The City staff be directed to define and/or establish the authority and responsi5ility to enforce applicable legal codes pertaining to airports . 2. The City staff be directed to enforce local airport ground regulations and coordinate our efft-rts with other appropriate agencies . 3. The City take appropriate steps to insure that proper aviation authorities institute proceedings to require compliance with all existing air regulations. 4. Adopt new City codes necessary to provide a safe environ- ment. S. Request Council approval for th4 City to place the Heil Avenue lighting circuit underground in the vicinity of the runway. Cost not to exce-d $2,000. 6. Require the airport operator to install appropriate and legally required off-site obstruction lights. 7. Subject to satisfactory irstallatien of off-site obstruction lights, permit limited night flying nperations. R. If the Conditional Exception by the Planning Commission to extend the runway is granted. the following staff recommenda- tions; may be included as coadAtions o: app.uval: a. Reduce runway length in conformance with the Residents Against Airport Hazards' recommendation) S b. Install a blast fence in conformance with the Residents Against Airpo-it Hazards' recommendation. r 3. Honorable Mayor and City Council October 15 , 19:0 c. Remove those portions of the runway not permitted under the Conditional Exception. i d. Light the blast fence and trees now on the north property line. Limit the height of trees to 20 feet and install obstruction lighting. e. Provide proper du;it control measures . j f. Post signs to inform pilots of proper use of i airport and run-up area. g. A one year review. f Doyle Mil' ,!r City Administrator DM:AAC:b I } I i I r i - I i I I . � f �� C> �� S • ARPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL EXCEPT.<aN (VARIANCE ) FILING FEE 0 73 DO S.O.M. � A IV CITY OF FIUNTINGTON BEACH PRESENT ZONE AV__—___ RECEIVED PC). Box. 19 � UV,x.��-�' ' LIC- - '-4 W. 7-e DV NT OR AGENT i �£1 y..f �✓�- �- n � �. Svc . COMMISSION ACTION DATE MAILING ADDRESS H Q APPROVED � �..� n' / �f/'�,•�/ � N CONDITIONALLY APPROVED ,fir �h ffe.acll //bb �-�-� QDENIED PHONE NO. f I- Q WITHDRAWN APPEALED CI'YES 13 NO PRO ERTY 0*NER • H COUNCIL ACTION DATE V c �' c ' H MAILING ADDRESS SUSTAINED COMMISSION 3 M APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS ` o OTHER THAN COMMISSIO?h TO PERMIT z IO DENIED OF �s T'Hf�" g Q WITHDRAWN �uHy✓�y. EFFECTIVE DATE I {P) R xh 7-j;6 Teo-; wks ,6r )rAnpoAApy -F,- ,V . gS . /j Soo- "Sce es' Fi LOCA110N OF PROPERTY (SIDE OF STREET, STREE1 NAME, DISTANCE FROM NEAREST INTERSECTING STREET) 1 'g► r h e�- V !'h So 7h �r j /•�9 rr e DA A40 ✓-T.h . t *LEGAL DESCRIPTION s JUSTIFICATION FILL OUT COMPLETELY (IF MCRE SPACE IS AEAIIiREO ATTACH ADDITIONAL PA ) A) WHAT EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES APPLY TO THIS PROPERTY (INCLUDING ;SIZE ,SHAPE. TOPOGRAPHY, LOCATION OR SURROUNDINGS) THAT DEPRIVE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY OF PRIVILEGES ENJOYED ON OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE VICINITY AND UNDER IDENTICAL � ZONE CLASSIFICATION ? VrS tl A 4 ;r po r 7` eon rt rT14 p) WILL THIS CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION CONSTITUTE A GRANT OF SPECIAL PRIVILEGE INCONSISTENT WITH LIMITATIONS UPON OTHER PROPERTIED IN THE VICINITY AND UNDO IDENTICAL ZONE CLASSIFICATION ? r Yes e i C) WHY IS THIS CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NECESSARY FOR THE PRESERVATION AND � ENJOYMENT OF ONE OR MORE SUBSTANTIAL PROPERTY RIGHTS ? � ro j>,e r m i r' 7ne Jq v-i do w /a rK At'v por•T rc Be U3 rd., v d e I- irs• 1 ftesrvI T C a h F t tl ura•Ti av 3 For r)i* Webb ,-sv- d r- A!l 7h:e Pv b 1 i'c l h v o l y ed. D)iW. F REASONS WH'f THE GRANTCNG OF THIS CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION WILL NOT BE MATERIALLY DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE OR INJURIOUS TO PROPERTY IN THE SAME ZONE CLASSIFIcanoN. To r)l/v ,v rh s P i p e r T 7s 8>° ep•F r u T*rij U h elv r 7"h e S'�•� ts7" /wr � � 1ie Gch s, dQ � S -o �'�le a b1j� -/hv� /vd . w S N EOF P OPERTY OWP iER OR N ITHORIZED AG THE ATTACHED SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET MIST BE READ AND SIGNED BY THE APPLICANT j �. L c'II i MID ~ HEIL --- _./ '-^ i•i• •�i i i i• 1 r^�r.r++rrrn�.r.•rw.•Mn�wT+s /'•�'�` (C'9 .•.::�:.� ` ,; Rollout 'zrea -1 � �� �:•:� :•:•: �: Ex t ems i on 1 �^ y.. VAPANT •::: :: �? VAS�tiT : { I .r :;ti ;:j,' :j•.; '•ii:: yr :•i::•'•r.•.•:i:� :::,�{yti.T,t.ri�:: .1 Si: :R•. }}} ��}•.! •.�.ri: •.ti:; '�r;iv/.{Y �}S3' ;iAii: 'i� .� Y:4:i'.;•;:iii:::.:is r}t:•.'J: ,•f%:: r;r� r'Yi Sv'• ear. ' i%:• •'!�: •1 :r Jr+�• ;iJ:.; rf•.':': •icy:. ! •:'.::'::•i':.'%: F �1-.ii:yir�•'/�: Jl:i{Y !. �•: }::.: '•r:t...li: 'f:r: Ji, • ,y,�474:r .: rr�:'' :%j .j•i:•i::•i::f.,.•: .J. •J� / i :i• i' n:•$i:'ri'•. i•;J it �" i!`:•`F {.J.• 'S ••i�"/•:f i::::.•:•:•.�- •:r,:•'i:.•:. Y ti.: {✓':5 I:[.:•' v'}j-.;�. i f �.: :rr� .! :, .- if.: •!�.{. iJ,�:;#rti J/.•,y ;S:f%' „'�,.,.5:•?: / .f, it::y;;fr'Z' .{i%:;;. i' f/'}•�J_. '•!% f''�'•if{ri 9v q IhLI A I r ram,i• •r.•.{, r, �` ,if:.�i. rtiv,:.• rpv:} r r,�'ii i 'Jl,'•i:%�:�:�;;.,✓ mums L/ :ti � ,••, is '.v.:j' '{�� i:;:::f::!:v.�:;..' u .;f�.<• f ;• ;.fir'':' .�`; ;. ;• i�;:: .;.; , L••�wOtiD Ak � l.. 'ii /r�.�y i r i.vSiYi:�Jv.,ii:�;' r C`.sv�v ��'4ii�• f .,[ /r•J,•i� der. r,.: }/ir. �:r � _� ' is .t .r•�. r. y?': irS}:•::' , - L El. OOPApU OR J zL ; ( PENDLE ON +D ! f✓l It -� W.. , --I ,�i • #';I �J�• Li ( i �,� GLf ►:�^t .. OR { f Ili GiT'i HIN INriMN BF,AC'' « CiT'r LIMIT- I'• � 711— ��I 1, ..'tlticirl . -. -ie of ioarm- ,v,: . . :. r : 'lrl �:c Civic_,, FL . — R1 E 1z,3 I September 30, 1970 i M;'s . Der. Naher Residents Against Airport 11az.,+rds 16352 Nassau Lane Huntington Ar•sch , Calif. 92647 C,•nr Firs . ?lrhPr: I received your )otter requesting nn opportunity to be on the 'I agendr an the Council meeting for Monday, October 5, 1970, ond prosentod the sire to "fayor Donald Shipley. Dr. Shipley re- quested me to inform you thnt there will be no further consi- deration of this matter by the Council until the corrini ttee which has been appointed by the Council to investigate the Me.gdcn;1sr!c situncion is przpnred to male a complete report. Mr. Dingg7nll, Choirnrnn of thst committee , has informed us that he does not know of this t 1me Dion he %,J1.1 be in n position to mnl(e such report. Jr. Shipley directed rant, to ;.form you that at the Zime this re- port 3s made to COLLICil, your o,-gar.ixntion and my others opposing the Mendoiilork Airport c:heration will be given an opport:un. ty to spenic on the matter, but until such time , he preferb to keep it off the ngends , copies of your letter nee betng sent to Vir various members of 010 CQUnc it for their information. Sincerely yours , Paul. C . Jones City C lerl- PCJ:cb 1 l t.3 f' Ob I September 28, 1970 I I I Mr. Paul Jonas, City Clerk Huntington Beach, City llall Runcin3ton Beach, CaliforniP i Re: Meadowlark Airport Dear Hr. Jones. I As a nember of the Residents Against Airport hazards (R.A.A.II.) cocrr,:i.ttee, I would like to requeQt that our issue (Meadowlark Airport) be placed an the agenda at the next City Council meeting on Monday, October 5, 1970, at 7:30 F.M. , or as soon Viereafter as is convenient. Thank you for your anticipated cooperation. 1 Sincerely, 011 4/ A Dee Neher RESIDE AGAINST AIRPORT HAZARDS i I pN4Y 1NFaPMAT�o ; ?a OPT To COUNCrt�l-Q , M f l -------------------------- Rr1;EWE0 Ci;r CL-0 NTr U 1 HUNTihGiCh ?LEtitH,CALIF., se}.tember 14, 1970 1-70 SEP ih Mr. Paul ,Tones City Clerk City of luntington Beach Huntington Bench, Californin 92646 Re: Meadowlark Airport Situation Dear Mr. Jones: Au members of the Residents Against Airport llazarez (RAAII) , we request that our rr_preuentativen be planed in the agenda for the City Council Meeting on tionuay, September 21, 1970, at the beginning of the 7:30 P.M. segment, or as Boon thereafter as possible. We plan to have only one or tvo spokesmen who will be brief in their comments. Thank you for your amicipated cooperation. Sincerely, RESIDENTS AGAINST AIRPORT HAZARDS By: i i i I I DEAR MR DINGWALL$ �Z J � AS A RESilGT OF MY :'R.SONAL IiaSPLC7'i0N OF MEAn(,ARK AIRPORT AND THE ENGINEERING 3ERVI CES PROVIDED BY THE DEPART1!ENT OF IAERONAUTICS •CHIEF ENGINEER? IT IS THE DEPARTMENTS POSITION I; THAT SAFETY OF OPERATIONS HAS BEEN ENHANCED AT THE MEt�DOTlLP.RK .l i C i o AIRPORT. AS YOU ARE AWARE9 TUO MAJOR WORK PROJECTS WERE RECENTLY � e OUT 0 THE 0� T N }{g AIRP RT'. THESE PROJECTS ��£REt lu is PAVING OF RUNWAY OVERRUN ul r 3 2. INS'TALLATION OF LIG}CIS FOR NIGHT OPERATIONS. SINCE THESE PROJECTS WERE COi9°LETEDp SEVERAL INCIDENTS ARC: PURPORT£Dr0 itAVE OCCURED VITH THESE PROJECTS BFINC 1fELD AS THE CAUSE FACTOR. THE DEPARTME-11T TS AWARE OF ONLY ONE INCIDENT ASSOCIATED -WITH AN AIRCRAFT STRIKING A POWER LINE IN ITS APPROACH. � TO THE RUNWAY AT THE AIRPORT• IT Is POSSIBLE T}fA& THE RUNWAY PAVING CONTRIBUTED 70 TttIS INCIDENT= BUT THE PRIME CAUSE WAS PILOT ERROR AND POOR PILOT TECHNIQUL• PILOTS HAVE BEEN KNOVN TO STRIKE POVrRLINYS ON APPRO CH TO RUNiUAYS SEMAL TIMES THE LENGTH OF. THE MEADOWLARK RUNWAY. ' a E A DISCUSSION OF THE END RF'SULT Ob' THE RUMIAY OVERRUN PAVING - I APPEARS TO BE 3N ORDER. THE PRIMARY POINTS ARE AS FOLLOWS $ 1. THE RUNWAY FOR LANDINGS TO THE SOUTH HAS ACTUALLY E i BEEN.SHORTENED APPROxIMATELY 550* CRITERIA DICTATES THIS ACTION i TO INSURE THAT A SAFE LIDE SLOP: RATIO BE AVAILABLE AS AIRCRAFT MAKE APPROACHES TO THE RUNWAY. T}{IS GLIDE SLOPE RATIO INSURES THAT PROPER CLEARANCE_ OVER ANY STRUCTUREp OBSTRUCTION OR GROUTH • � IS MAINTAINED BY AIRCRAFT MAKING APPROACHES TO THE R1INWAY• 711E FACT THAT AN OFFSET THRESHOLD NOU EXISTS WHICH HAS BEEN `. PROPERLY LOCATED PROVIDES A SAFETY FACTOR THAT DAD NOT EXIST . DEF'ORE. - IT MIGHT BE ARGUED THAT THE SHORTENED RUNWAY CREATES � •' , <.,��✓`'.a° A SAFETY FACTORS BUT THE DISTANCE IS SUCH THAT NO APPRECrAELE DIFFERENCE EXISTS IN REGARDS TO THE ROLLOUT. Al A SUGGCSTIONt E I A SMALL PAVED OVERRUN AT THE SOUTH END OF THE RIDIVAY WOULD a 3 OVEURCO{'fE THIS MINIMAL LOSS OF RUNWAY ln[ILE PROVIDING A 5MAT t INCREASE IN SAFETY. 711E ACTION 1;70ULD ALSO ENHANCE SAFETY OF 05 OPERATIONS FOR AIRCRAFT TAKING OFF TO THE NORTH FOR THOSE TIMES THE RUNWAY IS USED FOR SUCH rPURPOSES. 4) 2, THE PAVING OF THE RUNWAY OVERRUN ARF'A HAS CONTRIBUTED MATERIALLY TO SAFETY OF OPERATIONS IN REGARDS TO TAKEOFF OPERATIONS TO THE SOUTH. THIS IS A MATTER OF PRIME CONSIDERATION MIEN IT c flS .REALIZED THAT 'f,ns IS T11F PRIt-1ARY R1I14WAY. .HE ADDTTIONA?. PAVED SURFACE MAi(ES IT NOSSIDLF FOR AIRCRAFT TO nECAME AIROORME 11HERE PREVIOIKLY AIRCRAFT ITE1tF J1rST COMMF.MCING 711E TAKE-OFF 22 ROLL. THFSF. AIRCRAFT NOW GAIN IIJCREASI"D ALTITUDE) STABILIZED CLIMB SPEEDS AND FLIGHT MANEUVERABILITY 13Y THE TIME THEY REACH M THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF THE AIRPORT. THE INCREASE IN SAFETY PROVIDED HEREIN PROVIDES THE REAL JUSTIFICATION FOR THE NEV E PAVING. ! 3. T?{E NEIGHBORS IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE AIRPORT MAY HAVE SOME COMPLAINT' DUE TO THE FACT T}IIiT AIRCRAFT NOV START THEIR r TAKE-OFF ROLL CLOSER TO THEIR HOMES. THE AIRPORT OPERATOR HAS SLATTED THE CHAIN LIUK FENCE AND PLANTED SHRUBS WHIC!1 WILL c PROVIDE A BUFFER BETUEEN THE AIRPORT AND THE ADJACENT PROPERTY6 d AS A SUGGESTION, THE ERECTION OF A BLAST SCREEN MIGHT BE CONSIDERED• THIS WOULD PROVIDE EVEN GREATER PROTECTION AS WELL AS SERVE AS AN ADDITIONAL DU} FER. E K. AS MENTIONED EARLIER p THE NEW RUNUAY THRESHOLD MARKER TO IN THE SOUTH HAS BEEN NARKED TO PROVIDE THE RECOMMEND!D SAFE FLI) E SLOPE ON APPROACH TO THE RUNt)AY. THIS GLIDE SLOPE. CRITERIA E IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION CRITERIA L AND EXISTS AT SIMILAR AIRPORTS THROUGHOUT CALIFORNIA AND IN 0) THE NATIONS THE DEPARTMENT OF AERONAUTIC91 AS A RESULT OF IN •"ITS VES TI GATI ON� I5 I N THE PROCESS OF APPROVING !'}lE AP1lENDED ; SITE APPROVAL" APPLICATION FOR THE RUNWAY PAVING• THIS APPROVAL IS CONTINGENT ON APPROVAL OF LEGAL REQUIREMENTS OF OTHER GOVERNMOTAL AGENCIES. THIS APPROVAL AT PRESENT WILL BE FOR DAY VFR (VISUAL FLIGHT .RULE) .OPERATIANS. PRIOR TO APPROVING NIGHT OPTRATIONSF a THE DEPARTMENT TILL REQUIRE THAT THE. POSTER LINES nE OBSTRUCTION LIGHTED. THIS ACTION IS CONSIDERED ESSENTIAL TO FURTHER ENH.MCE N SAFETY OF OPERATIONS AT THE AIRPORT. IF YOU REQUIRE ALLITIONAL V S INFORMATION JK DESIRE FLIRT}}ER 'ASSISTANCE, PLEASE DO NOT FAIL TO CALL OR WRITE THE DEPARTMENT. SINCERELY. JOSEPH R CROTTI DIRECTOR Le 121 '53' 234 �a.'ti•'�.M ti 10 Mayor Shipley ank Members of the Council, 917170 P.O. Box 190 puntingtin Beach, California 92-W (re Meadowlarciliovoownsry' hearing, 9/8/70) I Doar Sirs: I are both an aircraft owror, basod at Headowlark, and a i resident of the arcs, living within j toile of the airstrip. As my 1 i job requirel toy working ovonings. making it artram.ely difficult for me, to attoiki ntesdays I `searing, I r.iiapoctfull.y subait thin letter in lieu or attendance. I am, an I'm sure are tltn great majority of local pilots using, thin airport, aware of the need for the) intolligant f conoorn of all parties for the rights of all other parties. An far as I know. thero are nova who doliberatol y mako noiso for the sake of nolso, to aggravato .. that would ba atupld. And I hops I am upoaking I for all cf us in plodgi►q contirraed a0forts to troop it dmin. common- aurato with safety. Act for tha added longth of tho strip, I have had porsorAl occanion to alsh it had boon that: length all along, for takeoff....... the difference costing me quito a few dollars (and n feu whito halrei). I I believe tho nafoty considerations of a displaced..thresh1iold length- onod atrip in a oongosted aroa for all concornod .-.- hazoownoro an wall i as aircraft pacoongors - because o: tho added altitude poasible whilo still over the airport, are woll warth ounsvidrring. I believe an airport in this city iz a dofirdto advantage to I the pooplo of the area. I are suro you agroo. Tban)c you. I?ro Ack L. Kidd, INFORMATION ONLY 16W Holsa Chica, COPIES TO COUNCIL /O-S- 70 Huntington Beach, � Calif ornis. R���IVFp CIi YCl,riiK CITY uu►rr�r;ctar UEACI1.CALIF.' September 2 , 1570 j°70 Si-p 3 9 5 a ATI f i . f Mr. Paul Jones City Clerk City of Huntington Reach Huntington Beach, Californili 92646 Re: Meadowlark Airport Situation Scar Mr. .; ,nes I I As members. of the Residents Against Airport Hazards (RAAII) , J we request that our repreae ::atives be placed on the agenda 11 for the City Council ll:!eting on Tuenday , September 8 , 1970, at the beginning of the 7 : 30 P .M. segment, or an soon thereafter as possible. We plan to have only one or two spokesmen who will be brief in their commentn . I Thank you for your anticipated co3peration. ! Sincerely , RESIDENTS AGAINST AIRPORT IIAZARDS By: " �i cc - Don Ronfa, City Attorney CII� i 1 i 1 , 1 17192 Vw,v Prj:�v 11unHn�,ton 2:acIt,C^,,.,926.17 C' Trlephowe(213) 506 7062 ! i I Sept. Z, 1970 D.tl,:All tngir i.2rin11 Huntington Beach City Council Huntington Beach, Calif. Gentlemen: Since we will be out of the city on September 8, your next Council rnecting, the takes this opportunity of expressing our views relative to the Meadowlark Airport issve. We utilize a twin-engine aircraft daily for transportation purposes in the operation of our aviation- oriented engineering consulting service. Our office and our home are within walking distance from the airport and nearly under the take-oaf pattern.. We recently moved our airplane base of operations from Long Beach municipal airport to h4eaduwlark to improve our point-to-point time. Some of the factors which made this possible were the recent improvimients to the hicadowlark Airport bota from the utility standpoint as well as the j safety standpoint. Specifically in improvements in safety from our operation consideration were the lengthening of the runway overrun anti the addition of lights for late home arrivals. Our business, which operates under Huntington Beach city License, is enhanced by the cunvenience of Meadowlark Airport, in our opinion. The noise or nuisances factor is zero as far as we are concerned and i note that we both work and live nearby. We believe that this airport is an asset to the comrnttnity and further believe that "short trip" air transportation such as we are using, will enhance local business and be a necessa.r- part of all futvr�: business-oriented communities. We are in fa�,or of continuing improvements to Meadowlark Airport and urge your continuing st,Ipport of this necessary service to the busineso community. Sincerely, INFORMATION ONLY Harold E. bale COPIES TO COUNCIL HED:es I,ni,t+•. ! li',!'J•) f1'li! t.ul ,ll 1 � ul :tU Itll,l,'. 1r, 11;01• t0.. I..1 rli�;,t'trl IGI :r fit lut:lnrt. 'jl'i1r Ct .(-t,r-V p t.,,t••r111!' at 'ta•nlfltY'i ll l'1. 1 1 I)111 i.• Irl• 1'I. 1t'j t't I 11,1vowll,•t r- 1 1 't: I't t.t .,�..,: 11�. ' l.,•! �11.1.11+' 1'na I tl.(., i nl"I' J(1i111 till -.1'061110 q 1':,`TI' l'U:,f.'1l 11"►. I.,t' fill „t'lt,,, lr'I, n1'( thlt illy..( 1.'11' I:IT:`It,t l i 1)r.:t't/itlle1'F 111:it t1/ L+tlir: (,, Y11117 it :.i('Mlii .IarL I i rim 4.L: 1It LI `•1Ch L !'liIllinaIu illrl;al /•xl Pit nin1; .,I' 1'111lls•n;'. •!. �C1r11(1 [t,1, rtirpi -t a n R::Ia 1 niup(( 1't fill' I-IcaI 1'er i tie nL:.. 1, tll fit t'(:^ 111Aici1q; of I lIu; IuIILrl'ltl: t� [II(' ! I , �;! t ailll I.all(lill,; jlntL('tn: , :1. tlri11iII legal cI1111ciI in tlir• nn::,c I.f t!,1' !Itt•rrr(rllrc: iii il,i, nrt•n, t'. Aei Itoro itruitcrLy t•nittc, �. `l)11('! I .:imIv% rue ltttti','t:R),i of JR11•t(`t', r• e.o. • ntl u'1 L!, +-xi!;Lit. nut.lttll'l Lie N fill- r1i,,irlRll(ta nP 11tt%Itt'l11 n:l or ::►IrrUL'1L'{�` '(.l•/, 1..'.Awl' 1, II(.licin„ of 1,iI'Its in I'll mAt iotl llar. .11 ro ntly Ii-1,It 411)t..1i.lt•t{ t)y Lit Cite &If.!ir;ill tralvtli urfico. nir larct,nuiry nisi ritutl it•4n1 n,1[1117iL: !latl• l.+t Lr Intl . I' is ir+ Ilcrillitely t: 1+ t1•il in Olf. t•i,.;lll ,►11t1 lion. 'f.hll it ii t:t1l:C(`T'l1111t; lrga! ((iarlr'l l; !„' :T tinl FI vII 'm% t• l)r'r!, trl:,r`',. vvi,Lint; nirpurl. 11; 11,1t rr,l' Ill, I'll ^"' lllr•i; 1.(,,.1ttt S'(Ititt'11` it) lllt�• •( (t;•; !11' Lit• dowi1: w !x-Iilleret. l of I.till i i lig t Ill I ;Ictrt'' ..to li!C1t t,A Li d 1'j rrrw, .iaungrrinn t c 1nict, 1 1j tip of I!1 Z ' iIIt. L!li' "t•ir.lr lit I. Rt1ILi,i Ltt•r i9 uttr•L f.,, worl. Sti tit tlJr t•:.:'r 1 iag Airpr)ri. Lurtriltr 1'n 171 L 2; ►'.':Lr119 1 oll (I-to I I I,,x:t i ^L( •/ 0t ;',1,1111'r•I, 1,t t:•r :I nt'r [to A(Itl l t1 rl:,n 7 1:r!1111' 1 L i,t t. I trnul:l UI.1• ttt Itt•l'.rlIt it if, C; t. C.luncil 11L J is tiuir iy the r:i! 'itr z. u11r oil tllt• 1 I!31 — :,l iliiltrl},io., or .l j 1 .r;. �D 111 L1;c G:i"ll-t'v l,-'-e1"{""t w r1//Q/t71! ;. : Ol I.(,It!It' 1! 1','(.,'i�l n C.11i.rurnia Srronatit.iL> LR:rll ,ttrl! I11b''L fllE;!ILs h'rt1 It; If !I(• L Ivco;-i—.i jJc,l nL 'U'entluriarlt ' 1�'r J�SL 111p,)rL :I111,11 :'.(ICIt tiw- at n1l (t�i::1I'l1( L '1:1' al''' 1 „nt • is:1i ivni i,u incIttllr pet _)m"r•r 1 ill• Atnll•!' Yul'Lll 111'1 .1-out!. or 11)1•I r' :1`• rP, r. tli/'C[c/LPCP /s .s7i.✓..�F1) Stp+ So,"" 1 It!: Lt.!- hate(( till it , TO 11,t}i rl'+,:: ,1,• •,•i,',: s'l„l.,:jallnrlo,l _II. ';:uol3rrr(1� IF, 11p A% irlLl(+!. (,I,;i.;itIi.nRL tI) lil'. .liolai :ttrneI-, LRi !',1 i:r+' rt)11Vw. I11t, II•l'I'': rl'(Illil'(• nCLlIt:J: ir•'o ur U:rr•o i01--i': Were c+l;t:itlrt,rll; 1 . 'T'ii(•s!-it 1A t:Iart.tr'l trut)rrlI., �. 1'•)roF,Iol'l light.: �n:. ;tu:( to allot- 11il;lil. fIib!l1. ". Vir thitil ni rl t f- ttr wlt L aallgrrul:� I:R�nrl1 •,vn: J1nL Ola!u cnre !1r: �lRt t•ei. l ;'}1 rs .ur;I, f.!I(' : r,t•rrt ,:•It: t iu• trrl attd 1+ur•irrl tttult't'geuttu(! Oil, Pal ivte !1vp1rt::lPitt. line( s•rccirt•il 1ns.mro 1= rtll:ll,1•rliitL- iru:a hl,: ru,nic,I� con( rrtliv .'1 ltil. L rl l�f11.- a'1rt imi,t1 ts-s. I'.,' CIl l l ; t''•l'(' vm& cnil Ito It ('rl rl n(l 11% v I (r�RAX I{.:;try tr/SrZf N111cr, Dellartuwnt that the3' were rinde urt,-r dnr,c. Ill(- uriginm) reque tell censt• tuu! ueaiat Ur(ier i aicittin; 1ac1: ur proper ptt'taiLt, code rc-quiremente nL the time the lil;?tl.• r.,ere in:t.nlledI also could be used as it � busin fur the City Gc►nnc11 to iiu,►r ntt order (lint Chu If-lttN be tamed off after Vw tint-It. I'1►t- 11ol is . DeprrWent I tt::. -,tire could en Wil i n): t!te time dark occurn. l�rpert Lea tkiony tlu.t night, landitig, takeofr:t, are I► 7ardoud at 11c:nc:uw1nr1c wider c:;iatini; c:ircuastrrtcr�. Cmuplrint�i Trutt honeownerr: on nuitte, rear, Inch ur "Ireps eta., etc. ? I 1 All of thr:►e ere far.Lunl, valid rert,-juns for the City Council Lu nct tumight to I ' urcic•r Lhc ni,;lat 1 ightn turned off. The Pul it: �ehtt }tcr�huttlt! also be regnetttcd to awii:+t federal cuul `�Inte autl,urltlem to eu:Gt*ce lctcutrt not. use ltendutslnrk Airport. Rrr..r rwRk i Mb/ r s c M. fAdOWIAP41 Alk"�Ok7wvw i [AMONA MAW _._. EawlQ Amid. SRODDJNO GQ�1 D E' CCTV M2 SCROO L GQADE a ,y 150 SCOOL V; ' Upi C , HEIL AVf. I QO {.a►NDiNC, QUN uo MfADOWtAP9 6101Ir W xj W4WN Q A Ve. aPrs. /0 ,eiaAir ru�eN ro Gv MOSS ..�._..... AV014 AR.4QTMf.'Vr.5. NOTES AL4 41RCRA r7' OB.f OVe Q d/SPLACED 7'f/R& 0VOi.AS .47 ACC rzmeS. AV2240 ALC SCA100 .5. EX/T No Tuev c?£Low .1000 ABOVE AL 3G0'