File #: 20-597    Version: 1 Name:
Type: Appeal Status: Passed
File created: 5/8/2020 In control: Aviation
On agenda: 6/2/2020 Final action: 6/2/2020
Title: Overriding the Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency for the Proposed Southern Humboldt Community Hospital in Garberville on APN 032-091-014
Attachments: 1. Staff Report, 2. Attachment 1-Site Maps.pdf, 3. Attachment 2-FAA Building Determination Letter 2018-12-03.pdf, 4. Attachment 3-Coffman letter 2018-08-13.pdf, 5. Attachment 4-LACO letter 2018-03-15.pdf

To: Board of Supervisors

From: Aviation

Agenda Section: Departmental

SUBJECT:
title
Overriding the Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency for the Proposed Southern Humboldt Community Hospital in Garberville on APN 032-091-014
end

RECOMMENDATION(S):
Recommendation
That the Board of Supervisors:
1. Receive the inconsistency determination made by the Airport Land Use Commission on June 19, 2018; and
2. Consider overriding the inconsistency determination made by the Airport Land Use Commission to allow the proposed Southern Humboldt Community Hospital in Garberville on APN 032-091-014.


Body
SOURCE OF FUNDING:
General Fund (1100)

DISCUSSION:
On June 19, 2018, the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) determined that the proposed hospital was not consistent with the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP). Pursuant Public Utilities Code ? 21676(b), the Board of Supervisors may hold a public hearing to override the inconsistency determination of the Airport Land Use Commission.

The Board of Supervisors may wish to consider the following when deciding if the ALUC determination should be overridden:

1. The project site is located near the far edge of ALUCP Zone C; and the zone boundary passes through the property. If the property were located approximately 150 feet to the north it would not be within any ALUCP zone and would not have required review by the ALUC. (Attachment 1).
2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) determined that structure does not exceed obstruction standards and would not be a hazard to air navigation. (Attachment 2).
3. Analysis by airport consultant, Coffman Associates. (Attachment 3).
4. Analysis by LACO. (Attachment 4).
5. The effect that allowing incompatible land uses near airports has on grant assurances that the county makes when receiving airport funding.
6. The effect on the ability to obtain future airport funding when allowing incompatible land uses near airports.

Based upon th...

Click here for full text