This post was contributed by a community member. The views expressed here are the author's own.

Health & Fitness

Palomar Airport: The PMP; What Planning Law?, Part 3B, Blog 70

It just seems like such a good starting point. 

If the County is writing a 2015-2035 Palomar Airport Master Plan (PMP), the PMP should first tell us which State, county, and Carlsbad planning and zoning laws the County intends to follow and how.

As noted last week, Carlsbad and the County need to decide (1) whether voters have a voice in the County’s proposed 900-foot extension of the Palomar runway pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code 21.53.015 and (2) whether Carlsbad needs to amend Carlsbad Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 172 that authorizes the County to operate Palomar Airport on certain conditions.

Find out what's happening in Carlsbadwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

The County Counsel Position

In the spirit of candor, the County could perhaps simply say in its 2015-2035 PMP that the County has no intent to allow Carlsbad voters or even the Carlsbad City Council to act on PMP projects such as the Palomar runway extension that the County wants.  Consider the following 2012 letter from the County Counsel to the Carlsbad City Attorney.

Find out what's happening in Carlsbadwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

“We got your voicemail regarding Carlsbad Municipal Code 21.53.015 in relation to the feasibility study that is being prepared for the possible extension of the runway at McClellan-Palomar Airport.  We note that the County is only at the point of assessing the feasibility of a possible runway extension and is in no way committed to a project.  As part of this effort, we are evaluating the requirements of Section 21.53.015. …"

“We note that Section 21.53.015 has two significant limitations.  The Section is only triggered if the Carlsbad City Council is required to approve a legislative enactment necessary to authorize an expansion or commence any action to spend any funds in anticipation of such a legislative action.  With regard to the expenditure of funds, there is no reason the City should have to expend any of it own funds if for some reason a City legislative enactment is ever necessary.  As for a legislative enactment, the extension of the runway, if it ever does happen, shouldn’t require a zone change, general plan amendment or other legislation from the City to complete (Lawler v. City of Redding (1992) 7 Cal. App. 4th 778, GC 53090 & 53091.)  We don’t accordingly see Section 21.53.015 being triggered.”

“If we had any concern over the potential impacts of Section 21.53.015 it was in relation to the need to amend the County’s operating permit.  Public Utilities Code 21664.5 provides that an amended airport permit shall be obtained from the State for runway extensions.  An application for an amended airport permit is subject to the requirements set forth for new operating permits, including the approval of construction plans pursuant to Public Utilities Code 21661.5.  Assuming City rather than County approval of construction plans is required, there is no requirement that the City act by Ordinance or in any other fashion that would amount to a legislative enactment within the scope of Section 21.53.015  Since the State controls the permit process, we will look to the State for guidance as to whether or not City approval is even required.  It may be that Section 21661.5 should be read as requiring either County or City approval for a County owned airport within the jurisdictional boundaries of a city.”

“We are still assessing the steps that may need to be taken, including any need for City approvals, in the event the County ever does decide to extend the runway at McClellan-Palomar Airport.” [See County Counsel Bosworth emailed letter to then City Attorney Ball on February 21, 2012.]

Carlsbad and the County have now had more than two years to assess the issues above – as well as the limitations on expanding Palomar and converting Palomar to an airport for regularly scheduled airlines as set forth in Carlsbad CUP 172, Conditions 8 & 11.

The County could show its good faith to the public and to the FAA by candidly addressing all these issues in its soon-to-be-released 2015-2035 PMP.  Similarly, Carlsbad could show its good faith by discussing these issues in the updated Carlsbad General Plan that is expected to be released within a few weeks.

Next Week: Palomar Airport:  PMP Project Questions for Carlsbad & the County, Part 3C.  Blog 71. 

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here

The views expressed in this post are the author's own. Want to post on Patch?