Public invited to speak out on airport plan

 

The open microphone for public comments on the future of the Santa Ynez Airport has been moved to 5 p.m. on Sept. 9 at Solvang Memorial Veteran’s Hall, when the planning and development department is to hear public input on a draft mitigated negative declaration related to proposed improvements at the airport.

The first set of improvements, labeled Group 1, will address the need for more hangars and office space. Approximately 75 current airport users have been on the waiting list for hangars for the last 10 years. The second phase of improvements scheduled, identified as Group 2, will only be completed if funding is provided by the county because most of those improvements involve county operations, according to Willie Chamberlin, chairman for the Santa Ynez Valley Airport Authority, who spoke at a press conference  Aug. 7.

 

Chamberlin, a past 3rd District supervisor, said that the proposed modifications will not allow larger airplanes at the small airport. They also will not allow an increase in air traffic at the airport, he said.

 “There is some confusion that we need a full environmental impact report. The county has identified every requirement they could come up with, and they were incorporated into the project description. We’re happy with the requirements. Most were needed and were an improvement” to the project, Chamberlin said. “Why would we need a full EIR?”

According to Chamberlin, “a group out there thinks we should be looking at the entire package. We don’t need to address everything on the airport plan, only the projects listed in this project description.”

The Group 1 project description includes the construction of new hangars, additions to existing hangars, and fencing around the entire perimeter of the airport. Group 2 development identified in the project description would include the construction at the northeast corner of the property of an apron to include six helicopter parking pads and two hangar rows, one for fixed-wing aircraft and one for county emergency helicopters.

 

Chamberlin also said that because Santa Ynez is a county airport, any proposed project needs prior approval from both the board of supervisors and the Santa Barbara County Association of Governments. The management agreement and lease for the Santa Ynez Airport between the County of Santa Barbara and the airport authority requires updates to the Airport Master Plan to be approved by the departments of public works and planning and development, the association of governments (acting as the Airport Land Use Commission), the Santa Barbara County Planning Commission, the Federal Aviation Administration and Caltrans.

The proposed project under consideration now includes providing increased hangar space for existing users in lieu of a tie-down space by adding 32 new hangars to the facility and removing 32 tie-down locations, “resulting in a net effect of zero increase in the number of aircraft to be served,” states the negative declaration. There are 118 tie downs at the airport.

The county has decided that construction of a county emergency operations center at the Santa Ynez location is not likely, said Chamberlin.

 

Two elements in the airport layout plan requiring a conditional use permit approval are for runway extension and updated fixed-base operation.

The runway extension is a safety measure already approved and in planning since 1985 to move the runway 500-feet by creating a displaced threshold, which allows an airplane on takeoff to achieve higher altitude within the airport boundaries. In addition to enhancing operational safety, the change would create a smaller noise footprint outside the airport. It would not, according to Chamberlin, allow larger aircraft to use the airport. The runway improvement falls under the jurisdiction of the Federal Aviation Administration.

 

Modifications to the existing airport administration building will be necessary to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act, which sets standards for accessibility.

Should any other aspect of the overall Airport Layout Plan be proposed for construction in the future, it would need to undergo separate environmental review and the public hearings process as well, and receive conditional use permits before construction, according to Chamberlin.

The improvements will not be paid for by taxpayers, said Chamberlin. “No county taxpayer dollars will be used. The Airport Authority is self-supporting” and has $300,000 to $400,000 in the bank, he said.

 

“The cost for the project cannot be determined until after the plans are approved,” said Chamberlin. Caltrans is expected to loan some of the project cost, he said, and the project will be structured so that the loan payment will not exceed the airport’s income received from lease payments on the new hangars.

Areas of concern include extension of current land-lease hangars. The project as shown extends three hangar rows, aligned with existing hangars. The addition would not be visible from Highway 246.

A bermed hill visible from Gainey’s vineyard and the county landfill area will not be built upon, and will be lowered. The dirt would be moved out into the adjacent field near the runway to create a flat, buildable area for the proposed ramp leading to the county helicopter operations area. No trees will have to be removed in the proposed plan, and additional landscaping is in the project description.

Noise concerns over increased county use should not be a concern because the consolidation and relocation of the county’s fire and sheriff aviation unit will be approximately 600 feet from Gainey Winery and will not increase helicopter activity. The Gainey Winery sits beneath an existing easement for aircraft operations recorded in 1950.

 

“But to be a good neighbor,” the authority conducted a noise study anyway, “and concluded that the sound levels would (be) far below the threshold for even noise-sensitive areas, and would in fact lessen the noise levels currently experienced,” says the report.

Concerns over the landfill dirt impacting the groundwater have been addressed since 2004, and in 2005 the county submitted a groundwater remediation and capping proposal in response to public concerns.

For copies of the mitigated negative declaration report, or other pertinent information, contact Kim Joos at (805) 350-1288, or Jim Kunkle at 688-8390, or visit http://sbcountyplanning.org/projects/03DVP-00025/index.cfm. The deadline for written public comments is Sept. 12.