Land Use Policies

The policies of this Comprehensive Airport Land Use Plan shall apply only to new development. Under State law, the ALUC has no jurisdiction over existing development.

Existing land uses which do not conform to the standards of this Plan shall be exempt from those standards except as noted in this subsection. Modification of those uses shall be permissible, provided that the modification does not increase the magnitude of the nonconformity. Examples of prohibited enlargements would be increases in the degree of nonconformity with population density, dwelling unit density, or minimum useable open space standards. (The addition of a room to a nonconforming home would be a permissible enlargement as long as the minimum useable open space standards were not violated and no new dwelling units were being added.)

Where an existing nonconforming building or use has been partially or fully destroyed, it may be rebuilt to a density and intensity not exceeding that of the original construction.

The reinstitution of a legal non-conforming use shall be exempt where the owner has made a good-faith effort to continue the previous use by obtaining the necessary land use permits from the local jurisdiction to re-establish or reconstruct the use within twelve months of the date of destruction of the use which occurred through no fault of the owner. In addition, modification or reconstruction of nonconforming uses shall be subject to the Referral Area Policies of Subsection 8.2.2 and the Airspace Protection Policies of Section 8.5.

Residential lots existing as of the date of adoption of this Plan which do not conform to the minimum lot size requirements of this Plan shall be considered legally nonconforming. They may be used and built upon, provided that all other applicable standards of this Plan are complied with.

The use of a non-conforming parcel would not be totally prohibited where the strict application of the commission’s updated policies would otherwise render the parcel unusable.

Cases may arise where the Airport Land Use Commission must review a proposal for development of a land use which is not explicitly provided for by the land use standards of Table 8A (noise compatibility) or Table 8B and Table 8C (safety compatibility). In such cases, the ALUC shall apply conventional rules of reason in determining whether or not the subject land use is substantially similar to any land use which is subject to regulation. In making these determinations, the ALUC shall review the background analysis used to develop this Comprehensive Land Use Plan document, including technical appendices and “Discussion Papers”. The ALUC shall also review the latest edition of the Airport Land Use Planning Handbook prepared under the direction of the State Aeronautics Program.

With respect to noise compatibility, the ALUC shall refer to the "Suggested Land Use Compatibility Guidelines" of the Federal Interagency Committee on Urban Noise, presented in Table A7 of the Discussion Paper published in October 1997, for assistance in making findings as to similar uses.

Within the TPZ, a variety of land uses are to be avoided and discouraged from being developed. (See Table 8B and 8C.) When development of these uses is proposed, the ALUC shall require the applicant to show that alternative locations have been considered and are not feasible. The applicant shall then be directed to consider a development plan that will minimize as much as possible the exposure to hazard. This might involve reducing structure heights, reducing lot coverage, reducing the overall scale of the project, or considering satellite locations for some of the proposed functions of the facility.

Land uses described as "uses to be discouraged" which were lawfully established before the adoption of

this Comprehensive Land Use Plan shall be permitted to be modified. Modifications which would enlarge the land use shall be discouraged in accordance with the requirements of this section.

Factors to be considered are:

1. Alternative locations are completely unavailable.
2. Alternative locations are not feasible because they would require a material change in the proposed development which would compromise its intended purpose or scope of activity.
3. Alternative locations within the service area of the proposed use are unavailable.
4. Alternative locations are substantially more costly and are beyond the means of the project sponsor.

All projects which received a determination of conformance under the previous policy plan would be exempted from compliance by policies contained in this plan, provided however, that any modifications of those projects from what was presented to the Airport Land Use Commission would be required to be resubmitted to the commission for further review to determine whether or not the proposed modifications would be in substantial conformance with the project the commission approved by the commission under its previous policy plan.

All projects which have been determined to be consistent with the commission’s previous policy plan shall be exempt, except as provided below:

1. The project has not expired under the local jurisdiction’s regulations or state law;
2. The project has not been modified from what was determined by the commission to be consistent with its previous policy plan so as to constitute a new project.

Any project which does not meet either of the foregoing exceptions would, at the discretion of the commission, be subject to meeting the policies contained in this plan.