About the AEZ

What is the AEZ?

When Tucsonans for Sound Solutions (TSS) refers to the 'AEZ', we specifically mean the changes to the Tucson Land Use Code (LUC) regarding the Airport Environs Zone (AEZ) which would theoretically protect residents from Davis- Monthan Air Force Base ("DMAFB" or "the Base") jet noise and accident hazards. This was to be done by restricting how land in defined accident potential and high noise zones could be used. To see these zones, click any of the links below:

• 500 pixel X 375 pixel GIF file, approximately 45K -- fastest loading.
• 720 pixel X 720 pixel JPEG file, approximately 142K.
• 8.5" x 11" PDF file from the JLUS (page labelled 5-14, 67th page of document), approximately 392K.

Guiding these LUC changes was a Joint Land Use Study (JLUS, pronounced "JAY-loos" or "JAY-luss") conducted by the State of Arizona, the City of Tucson, and the Air Force; please see our JLUS page for more details on the study.

In addition to ostensibly protecting residents from jet- borne hazards, the adoption of such code changes would enable City of Tucson officials to "send a message" to Washington, DC, that they are "serious about the Base", just in time for the Department of Defense (DoD)'s 2005 round of Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) activity. (For those not familiar with BRAC, every five years or so the DoD makes a list of military bases that can be closed or re- purposed as a way to cut defense spending. Williams Air Force Base east of Phoenix was ordered closed by the BRAC Committee in 1991 and was converted to civilian use in 1993.) It was thought by Tucson officials that having such regulations in the LUC would be looked upon favorably by the BRAC Committee, since they would imply that the City of Tucson is serious about mitigating encroachment into DMAFB space.

The AEZ was adopted on 25-OCT-2004 by the Mayor and Council (6-1 in favor, Council Member Steve Leal dissenting) as City Ordinance 10073. This vote came despite the unanimous recommendation by the City Planning Commission on 06-OCT-2004 (some notes from this meeting are here) that the vote on the LUC change be postponed until more research is done on its possible effects (health, noise, property value, &c). See this editorial (or this cached copy if the link has expired) from one of the Planning Commission members as it appeared in the 27-MAR-2005 Arizona Daily Star for further elucidation of the Planning Commission's concerns.

Top of page

What's wrong with the AEZ?

The general idea -- restricting how land in a defined hazard area can be used -- is a good one. However, the AEZ in particular is not a sound way to achieve that goal. TSS's concerns about the AEZ include:

• 8000 homes, most of which were built before jets first came to DMAFB, are on land now classified as "not compatible with residential use".
• It must be purely coincidental that the AEZ narrowly misses the high-income neighborhoods.
• If the AEZ's purpose is to ensure DMAFB's future by staving off encroachment, it has failed.
• The AEZ would seem to be at odds with at least one area of Arizona State Law.

Top of page

Who is affected:

Northwest of DMAFB lie at least a dozen long- established neighborhoods. Many were built in the mid- to late- 1940s as part of the post-WWII housing boom, while many others were built in the early 1900s around the University or as winter retreats for the well-to-do. The AEZ has now grown to cover 8000 homes in these neighborhoods on land now deemed "not compatible with residential use":

• Table 5-1: Noise Compatibility Criteria on page labelled 5-9 (62d page) of the JLUS states that land with a Ldn (night/ day weighted average) noise level of 65 or more decibels is not compatible with residential use.
• Table 5-2: Safety Compatibility Criteria on page labelled 5-10 (63d page) of the JLUS states that land in an Accident Potential Zone is not compatible with residential use.

This newly-reclassified land includes neighborhoods that have existed since before World War II where generations of children have been raised, gone to school, and then raised their own families. These neighborhoods can no longer build new schools, daycare centers, churches, or any other such facilities that make central Tucson family-friendly and liveable.

Top of page

The geography of money:

Northwest of DMAFB, the high- noise and accident boundaries take in the Julia Keen, Arroyo Chico, and other neighborhoods of modest average income while they seem to stop just outside the higher income neighborhoods of Broadmoor-Broadway, Colonia Solana, Sam Hughes, and El Encanto. This does not make sense because the jet noise does not stop at the contour line; jets that fly over Arroyo Chico often fly over Broadmoor-Broadway or Sam Hughes and at similar loudness levels. Additionally, the pilots' training often requires them to perform low- altitude turns and other maneuvres over neighborhoods not covered by any high- noise or accident zoning overlay. Thus any codified high- noise or accident zones would appear to be arbitrary: if one house is in said zone while the house across the street is not, the noise from a passing jet will be perceived as similarly loud in both backyards. Why should one home be, for all intents and purposes, "downzoned" while the other is not if they are both subject to the same noise?

While the AEZ is a zoning overlay and not a zoning change per se (meaning that homeowners may not seek remedy under laws which address downzoning of property), there are still consequences to being in the accident and noise overlays:

1. Homeowners' insurance rates will increase in the high- noise and accident zones; some residents have already seen such increases.
2. Lower- income residents will have fewer opportunities to become homeowners because the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) will not guarantee mortgages for homes in high noise areas.
3. One neighborhood, Julia Keen, lost the 50- year- old elementary school from which the neighborhood took its name because the noise and accident zones were deemed incompatible with it.

Thus the burden of DMAFB's noise is being shunted onto the backs of those least able to bear it.

Southeast of DMAFB, in contrast, is largely vacant land. While much of it is owned by the State of Arizona's Land Department, the City of Tucson has plans for the area dating back to 1986. The current Houghton Area Master Plan (HAMP) is named for Houghton Road, a major arterial road east of DMAFB and envisions much commercial and residential development. While little, if any HAMP land is within the DMAFB noise or accident zones, the City's enthusiasm for the HAMP project specifically and the southeast area in general -- "The city has identified most of the southeast as the growth area; it is our future city there 20 to 30 to 40 years into the future," is how one city official put it -- has understandably made land southeast of DMAFB more valuable. The JLUS itself echos this sentiment on page labelled 2-20 (30th page) under the heading "Tucson General Plan (Adopted December 6, 2001)":

"The area of the Evolving Edge adjacent to the Base contains large tracts of undeveloped or partially developed land, a significant portion of which are State Trust Lands. The Plan states, 'much of the projected growth in the Evolving Edge Growth Area would occur in the southeastern portion of the City,' which is located adjacent to or in the vicinity of the Base."

There would appear, then, to be some vested interest in not doing anything to endanger the property values of lands southeast of DMAFB.

Top of page

Why the AEZ will fail:

As written, the AEZ does nothing to prevent encroachment, it DEFINES what this encroachment will be.

Currently, DMAFB is surrounded by long- standing neighborhoods on three sides; its southeast side is currently facing vacant land and is the only possible direction into which it could expand if need be. Since much of the land southeast of DMAFB is currently owned by the State of Arizona Land Department, Pima County, and the City of Tucson, and since these three entities claim to be eminently concerned with protecting DMAFB against encroachment, it would seem an obvious solution to set aside lands southeast DMAFB solely for runway and DM expansion, performing whatever land swaps and buyouts would be necessary to compensate the comparatively small number of speculators who own land in the DMAFB trajectory.

Top of page

What does Arizona State Law have to say about the AEZ?

Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS) require municipalities near airports or military bases to enact building codes and zoning laws to protect citizens from the hazards of these facilities. While this is a laudable goal, the AEZ would seem to butt heads with Section 28-8468 of ARS. Subsection A of ARS 28-8468 says "Airport zoning regulations adopted under this article shall be reasonable and shall not impose a requirement or restriction that is not reasonably necessary to effectuate the purposes of this article." The purposes of Article 7 ("Airport Zoning and Regulation") of Chapter 25 ("Aviation") are, broadly, to ensure that airports, military bases, and the operations thereof within Arizona are compatible with the surrounding environs and vice versa.

Given the following facts, we fail to see how the AEZ meets the "reasonable" standard of ARS 28-8468:

1. There is at present vast undeveloped acreage southeast of DMAFB onto which its operations could be expanded so that it is not forced to fly jets over the city.
2. The high noise zones as drawn in the AEZ as an amendment to the LUC seem to be speculative; the JLUS (which is incorporated by reference as part of the AEZ) describes them as "notional".
3. DMAFB pilots do not always "fly inside the lines".
4. The high- noise zones drawn for the AEZ seem to encompass only low- to middle- income neighborhoods northwest of DMAFB while avoiding the adjacent higher- income neighborhoods.
5. The AEZ will not solve the problem it was ostensibly written to solve, and, upon closer inspection, more closely resembles a land deal than a responsible answer to DMAFB's encroachment issues.