July 2, 2002
TO: FINANCE AND ADMIN COMMITTEE
FROM: MARY A. HANSEN, Airport Manager
SUBJECT: YUBA COUNTY AIRPORT/CAR RACING PROPOSAL
(Discussion continued from May 28, 2002 – Original Subject: Approval of a
Yuba County Airport/Cart Racing Proposal Feasibility Study)
On May 28, 2002, the subject proposal was brought before your committee
with the intent to discuss proceeding to the Board of Supervisors for
their consideration of conducting a feasibility study to determine the
potential economic benefits for holding an annual car racing event at the
Yuba County Airport and to install permanent car racing facilities at the
airport. The Airport Manager was requested to obtain an opinion from the
Federal Aviation Administration regarding the proposals.
The following are general comments received by email from Racio R.
Cavole, Airports Compliance Specialist, Federal Aviation Administration,
Western Region Office, Burlingame:
"We've reviewed the proposed closure of the
airport to allow for auto
racing, and we do not concur, nor support, the total closure of the
airport
for a non-aeronautical event to take place. I am not familiar with the
circumstances surrounding other airports in other parts of the country
that
allow total closure of the airport to permit such activity, however, those
locations do not have a bearing on this proposal. Each case is reviewed
and a determination is rendered based upon its own merits.
We can appreciate Yuba County's intention to provide activities directed
toward helping it's residents, however, the airport, supported by federal
funding, is geared for activities aeronautical in nature, bringing in
revenue specifically for the airport. Also, potential damage to taxiways
or runways may impact airport operations beyond any anticipated timeframe
associated with the auto racing activities. We, therefore, recommend that
this activity be located elsewhere.
Thank you for an opportunity to review the county's proposal. If you want
an official letterhead response, please provide your request for our
review
in writing and we will respond."
Racior R. Cavole
Airports Compliance Specialist
Further, informal discussions with the Airport’s master plan consultant
and review of the attached Chapter 4, Obligations of Airport Owners,
Airport Compliance Requirements, Order 5190.6A, and Part V, Assurances,
approved by the Board of Supervisors each time a federal airport grant is
accepted, indicate that the FAA would specifically address the following
in a more detailed review of the actual activities to be potential
conducted:
The Yuba County Airport has been funded in the past by a combination of
airport user fees, airport tenant fees, County funds, and FAA and Division
of Aeronautics airport improvement grants. As such, the Airport, in its
entirety, is required to remain fully available for public-use by general
aviation aircraft. Without FAA approval of these activities, the County
could be found in noncompliance with its grant assurances. The FAA could
choose to terminate grant funding to the airport and/or seek County
reimbursement of grant funds expended at the Airport over the past 20
years based on Grant Assurance No. 5, Preserving Rights and Powers,
Assurance No. 19, Operation and Maintenance, and Assurance No. 29, Airport
Layout Plan.
Assurance No. 5 (b)
It will not sell, lease, encumber, or otherwise transfer or dispose of
any part of its title or other interests in the property shown on Exhibit
A to this application or, for a noise compatibility program project, that
portion of the property upon which as Federal funds have been expended,
for the duration of the terms, conditions, and assurances in the grant
agreement without approval by the Secretary.
Assurance No. 19 (a)
It will suitably operate and maintain the airport and all facilities
thereon or connected therewith, with due regard to climatic and flood
conditions. Any proposal to temporarily close the airport for non
aeronautical purposes must first be approved by the Secretary. The airport
and all facilities which are necessary to serve the aeronautical users of
the airport, other than facilities owned or controlled by the United
States, shall be operated at all times in a safe and serviceable condition
and in accordance with the minimum standards as may be required or
prescribed by applicable Federal, state, and local agencies for
maintenance and operation. It will not cause or permit any activity or
action thereon which would interfere with its use for airport purposes.
Assurance No. 29 (a)
It will keep up to date at all times an airport layout plan of the
airport showing (1) boundaries of the airport and all proposed additions
thereto, together with the boundaries of all offsite areas owned or
controlled by the sponsor for airport purposed and proposed additions
thereto; (2) the location and nature of all existing and proposed airport
facilities and structures (such as runways, taxiways, aprons, terminal
buildings, hangars and roads), including all prposed extensions and
reductions of existing airport facilities; and (3) the location of all
existing and proposed non aviation areas and of all existing improvements
thereon. Such airport layout plans and each amendment, revision, or
modification thereof, shall be subject to the approval of the Secretary
which approval shall be evidenced by the signature of a duly authorized
representative of the Secretary on the face of the airport layout plan.
In addition, Federal Aviation Administration Order 5190.6A, Airport
Compliance Requirements, 4-8(e) (2) applies:
Closing for Special Events. Section 511 (a)(3) of the AAIA requires
that any proposal to temporarily close the airport for non aeronautical
purposes must be approved by the FAA,. For example, an airport developed
or improved with Federal funds may not be closed for the purpose of using
the airport facilities for special outdoor events, such as sports car
races, county fairs, parades, etc., without FAA approval.
If the FAA were to approve the concept, the County would be required to
receive fair market rent for the use of the airport property and the
revenue would have to be used for airport purposes:
Assurance No. 25
If the airport is under the control of a public agency, all revenues
generated by the airport and any local taxes on aviation fuel established
after December 30, 1987, will be expended by it for the capital or
operating costs of the airport; the local airport system; or other local
facilities which are owned or operated by the owner or operator of the
airport and directly and substantially related to the actual air
transportation of passengers or property; or for noise mitigation purposes
on or off the airport.
The Airport’s engineer, Shutt Moen Associates, has provided some very
specific concerns and information in the attached letter that generally
reinforces the above concerns based on their experience in similar
nonaviation activities.
This office has received a number of emails and telephone calls
concerning objections to racing on the airport, specifically from the
Aircraft Owners & Pilots Association (AOPA) Airport Support Network, local
airport operators, and local pilots. Interested tenants and individuals
have indicated their attendance at this committee meeting to further
express their concerns and comments.