Defending Oklahoma's future : Tinker AFB : joint land use study.

              Prepared for
Midwest City, Del City, Oklahoma City, Spencer, Choctaw,
Nicoma Park, Oklahoma County, Cleveland County, Oklahoma
Strategic Military Planning Commission, Tinker AFB
Association of Central Oklahoma Governments
Submitted by
DFW Advisors Ltd.
with Michael R. Coker Company and Pavlik and Associates
September 2008
Defending Oklahoma’s Future:Tinker AFB
Joint Land Use Study
This page intentionally left blank.
Defending Oklahoma’s Future: Tinker AFB
Joint Land Use Study
Prepared for
Midwest City, Del City, Oklahoma City, Spencer, Choctaw, Nicoma Park,
Oklahoma County, Cleveland County, Oklahoma Strategic Military Planning
Commission, Tinker Air Force Base
Association of Central Oklahoma Governments
21 E. Main Street, Suite 100
Oklahoma City, OK 73104-2405
(405) 234-2264 / FAX (405) 234-2200
Internet: www.acogok.org
E-mail: acog@acogok.org
U.S. Department of Defense, Offi ce of Economic Adjustment
Submitted by
DFW Advisors Ltd. with Michael R. Coker Company and Pavlik and Associates
September 2008
This study was prepared under contract with the Association of Central Oklahoma
Governments, with fi nancial support from the Offi ce of Economic Adjustment,
U.S. Department of Defense. The content does not refl ect the views of the Offi ce
of Economic Adjustment.
Abstract
TITLE: Tinker Air Force Base Joint Land Use Study
POINT OF CONTACT: Holly Massie, Special Programs Offi cer, ACOG
DATE: September 2008
SUBJECT: The Joint Land Use Study was an initiative of Del City, Midwest
City, Oklahoma City, Spencer, Nicoma Park, Choctaw, Oklahoma
County, Cleveland County, the Oklahoma Strategic Military
Planning Commission and Tinker Air Force Base (AFB). The
U.S. Department of Defense, Offi ce of Economic Adjustment
provided project oversight and the Association of Central Oklahoma
Governments served as the study sponsor. The purpose of this
Joint Land Use Study was to evaluate the current status of the
implementation of recommendations issued in the 2006 Air
Installation Compatible Use Zone Study for Tinker AFB and to
make recommendations for additional actions by local governments
designed to improve land use decisions that may affect the missions
of Tinker AFB.
SOURCE OF COPIES: Association of Central Oklahoma Governments
21 E. Main Street, Suite 100
Oklahoma City, OK 73104-2405
(405) 234-2264
www.acogok.org/jlus
NUMBER OF PAGES: 274
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates i
Table of Contents
PREAMBLE ...................................................................................................................vii-xi
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................1
SECTION I — Protection of the Base and its Neighbors ................................................I-1
1.1 Acronyms and Abbreviations .........................................................................................I-2
1.2 Statement of the Issues.................................................................................................I-3
1.3 Tinker Air Force Base — Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.....................................................I-4
1.4 Role of the Department of Defense ...............................................................................I-7
1.5 Financial Support Corrects Confl icts .............................................................................I-8
1.6 Specifi c Actions by Del City ...........................................................................................I-9
1.7 Specifi c Actions by Midwest City ...................................................................................I-10
1.7.a Midwest City Comprehensive Plan .................................................................I-11
1.7.b Midwest City Zoning........................................................................................I-13
1.8 Specifi c Actions by Oklahoma City ................................................................................I-14
SECTION II — Communications Strategies .....................................................................II-1
2.1 Acronyms and Abbreviations .........................................................................................II-2
2.2 Communications Strategies ..........................................................................................II-3
2.3 Public Involvement Plan ................................................................................................II-3
Table 2.1 Tinker AFB JLUS Public Involvement Timeline .........................................II-5
2.4 Community Communication and Support......................................................................II-6
2.5 Tinker’s Communications with Communities .................................................................II-9
2.6 Recommendations for the Community in Support of Tinker AFB ..................................II-12
2.7 Recommendations for Tinker’s Involvement in the Community ....................................II-13
2.8 Recommendations for Increased Cooperation ..............................................................II-14
ii DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates
SECTION III — Components of the Plan ...........................................................................III-1
3.1 Acronyms and Abbreviations .........................................................................................III-2
3.2 Basic Confl icts ...............................................................................................................III-3
3.3 Air Installation Compatible Use Zone Program .............................................................III-4
3.4 Joint Land Use Study ....................................................................................................III-6
3.4.1 Goals of the JLUS ...........................................................................................III-6
Figure 3.1 Joint Land Use Study Area ......................................................................III-7
3.5 Military Readiness and Encroachment ..........................................................................III-8
Figure 3.2 Environmental Factors ............................................................................III-10
3.5.1 Impact of Urbanization ....................................................................................III-10
3.5.2 Development Regulations and Encroachment................................................III-11
3.6 Anti-Terrorism and Force Protection..............................................................................III-12
3.7 DoD: Conservation Partnering Authority .......................................................................III-13
SECTION IV — Technical Information and Analyses ......................................................IV-1
4.1 Acronyms and Abbreviations .........................................................................................IV-2
4.2 Technical Information ....................................................................................................IV-3
4.2.1 Runway Airspace “Imaginary” Surfaces ..........................................................IV-4
4.2.1.a Class A Runway (NOT at Tinker AFB) .......................................................IV-4
4.2.1.b Class B Runway ........................................................................................IV-5
4.2.1.c Primary Surface .........................................................................................IV-5
4.2.1.d Clear Zone Surface ...................................................................................IV-5
4.2.1.e Accident Potential Zone Surfaces .............................................................IV-6
4.2.1.f Approach-Departure Clearance Surface ...................................................IV-6
Figure 4.1 Accident Potential Zones and Clear Zones Surrounding Tinker AFB ...IV-7
4.3 Air Installation Compatible Use Zone Studies ...............................................................IV-8
4.4 2006 AICUZ Study for Tinker AFB .................................................................................IV-9
Figure 4.2 Comparison of Total Acreage in AICUZ Noise Contours .........................IV-10
4.4.1 Air Installation Compatible Use Zones ............................................................IV-11
Table 4.1 Accident Potential Location Analysis .....................................................IV-11
4.4.1.a Clear Zones ...............................................................................................IV-12
4.4.1.b Accident Potential Zone I ...........................................................................IV-12
4.4.1.c Accident Potential Zone II ..........................................................................IV-12
4.5 2006 AICUZ Land Use Analyses ...................................................................................IV-13
4.5.1 Objectives for an AICUZ Study .......................................................................IV-14
4.5.2 Land Use and AICUZ ......................................................................................IV-14
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates iii
4.5.2.a Existing Land Uses within the AICUZ Planning Zones .............................IV-15
Table 4.2 Incompatible Land Use for Runways 17/35 and 12/30 ..........................IV-16
Figure 4.3 Incompatible Land Use ........................................................................IV-17
4.5.2.b Existing Zoning within the AICUZ Planning Zones ...................................IV-18
Figure 4.4 Land Use Within the AICUZ Accident Potential Zones .........................IV-19
4.5.2.c Land Use Classifi cation Systems .............................................................IV-20
Table 4.3 Land Use Compatibility Guidelines ........................................................IV-21
4.5.2.d Existing Land Uses within DNL 65dB Noise Contour ...............................IV-26
Figure 4.5 Land Use Categories (In Acres) Within 65+ dB Noise Contour ...........IV-26
4.5.2.e Existing Zoning within DNL 65 dB Noise Contour ....................................IV-27
Figure 4.6 Zoning Classifi cation Percentages Within 65+ dB Noise Contour .......IV-27
4.5.2.f Summary of 2006 AICUZ Study and Existing Land Uses ........................IV-28
4.5.2.g Summary of 2006 AICUZ Study and Future Land Uses...........................IV-28
4.6 General Effects of Incompatible Land Uses ..................................................................IV-29
4.6.1 Incompatible Land Uses .................................................................................IV-30
4.7 2006 AICUZ Recommendations ....................................................................................IV-31
SECTION V — Compatibility Factors ................................................................................V-1
5.1 Acronyms and Abbreviations .........................................................................................V-2
5.2 History of Land Use Compatibility Planning ..................................................................V-5
Figure 5.1 Community Support — Land Acquisition within CZ and APZ I ................V-6
5.2.1 Tinker AFB General Plan ................................................................................V-7
5.2.2 Management Action Plan and Community Relations Plan..............................V-7
Figure 5.2 Tinker AFB Restoration Sites ..................................................................V-8
5.3 Aerospace Eastern Oklahoma County ..........................................................................V-9
Figure 5.3 Oklahoma MROTC Master Plan — Full Development ............................V-10
5.4 General Compatibility and Comprehensive Plans .........................................................V-11
5.5 General Compatibility and Zoning .................................................................................V-11
5.6 Del City Comprehensive Plan Evaluation......................................................................V-12
5.6.1 Del City Zoning Ordinance Evaluation ............................................................V-12
5.6.2 Del City and Runway 12/30 APZ II .................................................................V-13
5.7 Midwest City Comprehensive Plan Evaluation ..............................................................V-14
5.7.1 Midwest City Zoning Code Evaluation ............................................................V-15
5.7.2 Midwest City APZ I Boundary for Runway 17/35 ............................................V-16
5.7.3 Tinker Business and Industrial Park ...............................................................V-18
5.8 Oklahoma City Comprehensive Plan Evaluation...........................................................V-19
5.8.1 Oklahoma City Southeast Sector Plan Evaluation ..........................................V-19
iv DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates
5.8.2 Oklahoma City Zoning Code Evaluation .........................................................V-22
5.8.3 Oklahoma City Area Regional Transportation Study.......................................V-24
Figure 5.4 2030 OCARTS Plan Street and Highway Network .................................V-26
5.9 2007 Oklahoma County Master Plan ............................................................................V-29
5.9.1 Oklahoma County Zoning Regulations Evaluation .........................................V-29
5.10 City of Spencer Zoning Regulations Evaluation ...........................................................V-29
5.11 Local Government Land Use Strategies ......................................................................V-30
5.11.1 Conservation .................................................................................................V-30
5.11.2 General Land Use Guidelines .......................................................................V-31
5.11.3 Attenuation ....................................................................................................V-31
5.11.4 Disclosure .....................................................................................................V-32
5.11.5 Infrastructure .................................................................................................V-32
5.11.6 Coordination..................................................................................................V-32
5.11.7 AICUZ Land Use Guidelines .........................................................................V-32
5.11.8 Clustering and Transfer of Development Rights ...........................................V-33
SECTION VI — Noise Defi nitions and Attenuation ..........................................................VI-1
6.1 Acronyms and Abbreviations .........................................................................................VI-2
6.2 Noise Levels and Events ...............................................................................................VI-3
Figure 6.1 Common Noise Sources .........................................................................VI-5
6.2.1 Day-Night Average Sound Level .....................................................................VI-6
6.3 Land Use Analysis of Noise Contours ...........................................................................VI-7
Figure 6.2.a 1998 AICUZ Noise Contours ................................................................VI-8
Figure 6.2.b 2006 AICUZ Noise Contours ................................................................VI-9
6.3.1 Incompatible Land Uses by Community .........................................................VI-10
6.3.1.a Midwest City ..............................................................................................VI-11
6.3.1.b Oklahoma City ...........................................................................................VI-11
6.3.1.c City of Spencer ..........................................................................................VI-11
Figure 6.3.a Properties in Midwest City Located in the 65+ dB DNL ....................VI-12
Figure 6.3.b Properties in Midwest City Located in the 65+ dB DNL ....................VI-13
Figure 6.4.a Properties in Oklahoma City Located in the 65+ dB DNL .................VI-14
Figure 6.4.b Properties in Oklahoma City Located in the 65+ dB DNL .................VI-15
Figure 6.4.c Properties in Oklahoma City Located in the 65+ dB DNL .................VI-16
Figure 6.5 Properties in the City of Spencer Located in the 65+ dB DNL .............VI-17
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates v
6.4 Concept of Sound Transmission Class .........................................................................VI-18
6.4.1 Overall Noise Level Reduction........................................................................VI-18
Table 6.1 Structure Performance Standards ............................................................VI-19
Table 6.2 Sample STC Ratings ................................................................................VI-19
6.4.2 Building Codes and Noise...............................................................................VI-20
6.5 Noise Attenuation ..........................................................................................................VI-20
6.5.1 Research, Development and Abatement ........................................................VI-21
SECTION VII — Recommendations: Short and Long Term ............................................VII-1
7.1 Acronyms and Abbreviations .........................................................................................VII-2
7.2 Background .................................................................................................................VII-3
7.3 Consideration of Tinker AFB Flight Tracks ....................................................................VII-5
Figure 7.1 Tinker AFB Departure Flight Tracks ........................................................VII-7
Figure 7.1.a Tinker AFB Arrival Flight Tracks ...........................................................VII-8
Figure 7.1.b Tinker AFB Closed Pattern Flight Tracks .............................................VII-9
7.4 Regulatory Land Use Modifi cations...............................................................................VII-10
7.5 Short Term Recommendations ......................................................................................VII-11
7.6 Recommended Low Density Standards for APZ I and APZ II ......................................VII-12
Figure 7.2 AICUZ APZ/CZ Areas — Del City and Midwest City ...............................VII-16
Figure 7.3 AICUZ APZ/CZ Areas — Midwest City ....................................................VII-17
Figure 7.4 AICUZ APZ/CZ Areas — Oklahoma City .................................................VII-18
7.7 Long Term Recommendations ......................................................................................VII-19
7.7.1 Purchase of Land in AICUZ Accident Potential and Noise Zones ..................VII-19
7.7.2 Acquire Easements for AICUZ Accident Potential and Noise Zones ..............VII-19
7.7.2.a Voluntary Acquisition and Noise Mitigation ................................................VII-20
7.7.2.b Voluntary Avigation Easement Program ....................................................VII-22
7.7.2.c Fee Simple Purchase of Part of Land ........................................................VII-22
Figure 7.5 2006 Average Busy-Day Noise Contours .............................................VII-25
7.7.3 Transfer of Development Rights .....................................................................VII-26
7.7.4 Land Banking ..................................................................................................VII-26
7.8 AICUZ Disclosure and Real Estate Transactions ..........................................................VII-27
7.8.1 Real Estate Disclosure Process......................................................................VII-27
7.9 Bird Management ..........................................................................................................VII-28
Figure 7.6 Landfi lls Within 2 Miles of Tinker AFB .....................................................VII-29
vi DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates
7.10 Building Code Recommendations ...............................................................................VII-30
7.10.1 American National Standards Institute Guidelines .........................................VII-31
Table 7.1 Noise Levels and Land Use Compatibility ................................................VII-33
7.10.2 Development of Construction Guide ..............................................................VII-34
7.10.3 Architectural Design for Noise Reduction ......................................................VII-34
7.10.4 Acoustic Site Design ......................................................................................VII-36
7.11 Closure of a Portion of Douglas Boulevard ..................................................................VII-36
7.12 Tinker AFB Recommendations .....................................................................................VII-37
JLUS Summary of Recommendations ......................................................................VII-38
Section VIII — References and Appendices ................................................................... VIII-1
8.1 References ................................................................................................................ VIII-3
8.2 Appendices: Table of Contents ..................................................................................... VIII-7
Appendix A Oklahoma Municipal Code Section 43.101.1 ........................................ VIII-9
Appendix B Sample Noise Abatement Ordinance ................................................... VIII-13
Appendix C Sample Memorandum of Understanding .............................................. VIII-23
Appendix D Del City’s Interim Regulations .............................................................. VIII-27
Appendix E Tinker AFB – 2005 BRAC Decisions .................................................... VIII-43
Appendix F Tinker Business and Industrial Park ..................................................... VIII-47
Appendix G Engrossed House Bill No. 2472 ........................................................... VIII-55
Appendix H Public Involvement Activities ................................................................ VIII-59
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates vii
PREAMBLE
The mission of the United States Air Force is to deliver sovereign options for the defense
of the United States of America and its global interests—to fl y and fi ght in Air, Space,
and Cyberspace. To achieve that mission, the Air Force has a vision of Global Vigilance,
Reach and Power. That vision orbits around three core competencies: Developing Airmen,
Technology-to-Warfi ghting and Integrating Operations. (Tinker AFB Website)
This Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) was an initiative of Midwest City, Del City, Oklahoma City,
Spencer, Choctaw, Nicoma Park, Oklahoma County, Cleveland County, the Oklahoma Strategic
Military Planning Commission and Tinker Air Force Base (AFB). The Association
of Central Oklahoma Governments served as the study sponsor. The purpose
of the JLUS was to evaluate the current status of the implementation of
recommendations issued in the 2006 Air Installation Compatible Use Zone
Study for Tinker AFB and to make recommendations for additional actions by
local governments designed to improve land use decisions that may affect the
missions of the Base. The objective of the consulting team hired to prepare this
assessment is to recommend actions that will improve the compatibility of land
uses around Tinker AFB now and in the future.
DFW Advisors
Michael R. Coker Company
Pavlik and Associates
viii DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates
What is ACOG?
The Association of Central Oklahoma Governments (ACOG) is a voluntary association of city,
town and county governments within the Central Oklahoma area. The current membership
includes 32 local governments and Tinker Air Force Base as an associate member. The ACOG
region includes Oklahoma, Cleveland, Canadian and Logan Counties, which surround the state
capital, Oklahoma City.
ACOG’s purpose is to aid local governments in planning for common needs, cooperating for
mutual benefi t and coordinating for sound regional development. ACOG helps its member
entities work in partnership to address issues common to many jurisdictions. This serves to
strengthen both the individual and collective capabilities of local governments.
ACOG was originally established in June 1966. It is governed by a Board of Directors, which
makes all policy decisions for the organization. Each member government appoints to the
ACOG Board a representative and up to two alternates from its elected offi cials. Member
entities exercise a weighted vote, which is based on their most recent population estimates.
Contact Information:
Association of Central Oklahoma Governments
21 E. Main Street, Suite 100
Oklahoma City, OK 73104-2405
(405) 234-2264 / FAX (405) 234-2200
Internet: www.acogok.org
E-mail: acog@acogok.org
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates ix
Association of Central Oklahoma Governments
Board of Directors — July 2008
BETHANY
Councilmember Phill Shirey
Mayor Bryan Taylor
Councilmember Randy Luinstra
CALUMET
Mayor Michael Crowly
Councilmember Shawn Davis
CHOCTAW
Councilmember Larry Goeller
Councilmember Roger Malone
DEL CITY
Councilmember Ken Bartlett
Mayor Brian Linley
Councilmember Larry O’Connell
EDMOND
Mayor Dan O’Neil
Councilmember Wayne Page
EL RENO
Mayor Mark White
Councilmember Glen Nichols
FOREST PARK
Councilmember Marianne Yarbrough
Councilmember Elton Matthews
GUTHRIE
Councilmember Doug Hehn
Mayor Chuck Burtcher
HARRAH
Councilmember Bill Lisby
JONES CITY
Mayor Matt Elerick
Councilmember Rusty Fields
Councilmember Ray Poland
LANGSTON
No Designee
LEXINGTON
Councilmember Mark Easton
LUTHER
Councilmember Margaret Graham
Councilmember Leroy Cook
MIDWEST CITY
Mayor Russell Smith
Councilmember Richard Rice
Councilmember Turner Mann
MOORE
Councilmember Kathy McMillan
Councilmember Janie Milum
MUSTANG
Councilmember Keith Bryan
Mayor Jeff Landrith
NICHOLS HILLS
Mayor Kathy Walker
Councilmember Peter Hoffman
NICOMA PARK
Mayor Jim Pumphrey
Councilmember Robert Pittman
NOBLE
Mayor Gary Hayes
Councilmember Tony Parker
NORMAN
Mayor Cindy Rosenthal
Councilmember Rachel Butler
OKLAHOMA CITY
Mayor Mick Cornett
Councilmember Sam Bowman
Councilmember Gary Marrs
PIEDMONT
Councilmember John Brown
Mayor Mike Fina
Councilmember Jodi Lewis
SLAUGHTERVILLE
Councilmember Bobby Cleveland
Councilmember Johnnell Jones
Councilmember Jessica Woodrow
SPENCER
Councilmember Marsha Jefferson
Councilmember Bob Zaring
Mayor Earnest Ware
UNION CITY
Councilmember Larry Kesler
Councilmember Tracy Pappe
Mayor T.J. McCullough Jr.
THE VILLAGE
Councilmember Scott Symes
Councilmember Jerry Broughton
WARR ACRES
Councilmember Jeff Martinez
YUKON
Mayor Ward Larson
Councilmember Earline Smaistrla
CANADIAN COUNTY
Commissioner Grant Hedrick
Commissioner Phil Carson
Commissioner Don Young
CLEVELAND COUNTY
Commissioner Rod Cleveland
Commissioner George Skinner
Commissioner Rusty Sullivan
LOGAN COUNTY
Commissioner Mark Sharpton
OKLAHOMA COUNTY
Commissioner Willa Johnson
Commissioner Ray Vaughn
ASSOCIATE MEMBER
Tinker Air Force Base
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
John G. Johnson
x DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates
Name Title Entity
Dave Howe Chairman
Roger Malone Councilmember City of Choctaw Member
Randy Ross Mayor City of Choctaw Alternate
George Skinner Commissioner Cleveland County Member
Denise Heavner County Assessor Cleveland County Alternate
Brian Linley Mayor City of Del City Member
Dick Carter Councilmember City of Del City Alternate
Russell Smith Mayor City of Midwest City Member
James L. Ray Councilmember City of Midwest City Alternate
Kevin Loudermilk Councilmember City of Nicoma Park Member
Theron Franks Councilmember City of Nicoma Park Alternate
Pete White Councilmember City of Oklahoma City Member
Sam Bowman Councilmember City of Oklahoma City Alternate
Brent Rinehart Commissioner, Dist. 2 Oklahoma County Member
Willa Johnson Commissioner, Dist. 1 Oklahoma County Alternate
Earnest Ware Vice Mayor City of Spencer Member
James C. Talley Councilmember City of Spencer Alternate
Unfi lled position Okla. Strategic Military Member
Planning Commission
Col. Mona Lisa Tucker 72 ABW/Vice Commander Tinker Air Force Base Ex-Offi cio
Gene Gallogly Director, Base Civil Engineer Tinker Air Force Base Ex-Offi cio
JLUS Policy Committee Members and Alternates
July 2008
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates xi
Name Title Entity
Mark Seibold City Planner City of Choctaw Member
Robert Floyd City Manager City of Choctaw Alternate
Dan Cary Emergency Mgmt. Director Cleveland County Member
Robert Wood Building Engineer Cleveland County Alternate
Tom Leatherbee City Planner City of Del City Member
Billy Harless Community Develop. Dir. City of Midwest City Member
Ron Green Current Planning Mgr. City of Midwest City Alternate
Jim Pumphrey Mayor City of Nicoma Park Member
Beverly McManus City Clerk City of Nicoma Park Alternate
Susan MIller Planner IV City of Oklahoma City Member
Aubrey Hammontree Planner III City of Oklahoma City Alternate
Tyler Gammon Planning Director Oklahoma County Member
Ruth Walters Planner Oklahoma County Alternate
Louis Smitherman City Manager City of Spencer Member
Bill Dalke Community Planner Tinker Air Force Base Ex-Offi cio
LouAnna Munkres Community Planner Tinker Air Force Base Ex-Offi cio
JLUS Technical Work Group Members and Alternates
July 2008
This page intentionally left blank.
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
History on display
The Major Charles B. Hall Memorial Airpark is a site open
to the public.
This page intentionally left blank.
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates 3
Executive Summary
September 2008
Introduction
The Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) embodied in this report is a cooperative land use planning
initiative among communities in Central Oklahoma designed to promote community growth and
development that is compatible with the present and future training and operations missions
of Tinker Air Force Base (the Base). The JLUS identifi es ways in which the surrounding
communities can work individually and collectively to prevent future encroachments near
the Base that could hamper its long term viability and military preparedness for America’s
responsibilities.
The Study Partners
The Association of Central Oklahoma Governments (ACOG) served as the study sponsor.
ACOG is a regional planning agency established under the authority of Title 74, Oklahoma
Statutes (1971), Sec. 1001-1008a. Under this authority, ACOG is an extension of state and local
government and is the recipient of study funding from the U.S. Department of Defense, Offi ce
of Economic Adjustment (OEA). The JLUS also benefi ts from guidance and oversight by OEA.
Other project funders are the Oklahoma Strategic Military Commission and the study partners
of Choctaw, Del City, Midwest City, Nicoma Park, Oklahoma City, Spencer, Cleveland County
and Oklahoma County as well as Tinker Air Force Base.
2006 AICUZ Study for Tinker Air Force Base
The JLUS was preceded by the Air Installation Compatible Use Zone Study (AICUZ) conducted
by the Base in 2006. The AICUZ program was established by the Department of Defense to
promote compatible land use around military airfi elds. The military services maintain an AICUZ
4 DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates
program in an effort to protect the operational integrity of their fl ying mission. The purpose of
an AICUZ is to promote public health and safety through the local adoption of compatible land
use controls and to protect the operational capability of the military installation.
Included in the study are land use compatibility guidelines based on noise exposure zones,
Accident Potential Zones (APZ), and obstructions to air navigation. According to the study,
portions of the Clear Zones (CZ), APZ I and APZ II for Tinker’s north-south and crosswind
runways are located within the cities of Midwest City, Del City and Oklahoma City. (See fi gure
on pg 10.) The most recent Day-Night average sound levels of 65 decibels or greater impact
these communities plus the City of Spencer. Nicoma Park and Choctaw lie beneath the Base’s
fl ight tracks.
JLUS Components
With the AICUZ Study as its foundation, the JLUS provides a framework for surrounding
communities to support, in a next phase, adoption and implementation of compatible
development standards. Components of the JLUS are:
Data collection, inventory and mapping of codes, land u • se, zoning and future
development plans that have been adopted by each of the affected areas
• Comparison of the surrounding communities’ development patterns, adopted regulations
and building codes with the 2006 AICUZ Study recommendations
• Evaluation of the differences among the surrounding communities’ adopted development
regulations and building codes concerning noise, height and development within areas
affected by the AICUZ APZs and noise contours
• Analysis of current and potential land use and air facility confl icts
Named by the ACOG Board of Directors to the JLUS Policy Committee were 20 persons
including elected offi cials from each participating jurisdiction, the Oklahoma Strategic Military
Planning Commission and Tinker AFB. The Policy Committee assumed responsibility for
the overall direction of the study effort including development of the study design and work
program, selection of a consultant, and receipt of the report and policy recommendations.
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates 5
The JLUS Technical Work Group, made up of planners and engineers on the staffs of the
jurisdictions and Tinker AFB, assumed responsibility for technical review of the report drafts.
DFW Advisors of Dallas, TX was the prime consultant; also on the team were key persons from
Michael R. Coker Company of Dallas, TX and Pavlik and Associates of Fort Worth, TX. ACOG,
together with the consultant team, led extensive community outreach efforts in development of
the JLUS report.
The Study Area
The study area (see fi gure on pg. 10) includes parts of six cities and two counties. They are:
Choctaw, Del City, Midwest City, Nicoma Park, Oklahoma City, Spencer, Oklahoma County and
Cleveland County.
Choctaw is located in the geographic center of Eastern Oklahoma County. This city has a total
area of 27.1 square miles and a population of 10,803 according to the 2006 census estimate.
Choctaw borders Nicoma Park to the West and lies approximately nine miles northeast of
Tinker AFB.
Founded in 1948, Del City has a total area of 7.5 square miles within Oklahoma County. The
population was 21,904 at the 2006 census estimate. Tinker AFB is located east and southeast
of Del City across Sooner Road.
Founded in 1942, Midwest City lies within Oklahoma County. As of the 2006 census, the city
had a total population of 55,161 and is the seventh largest city in the state. Midwest City is 25
square miles and the southern corporate limit line borders Tinker AFB.
Nicoma Park contains 3.3 square miles within its boundaries and has a population of 2,377,
according to the 2006 Census Bureau estimates. Nicoma Park is also located within Oklahoma
County. The city lies approximately 6.2 miles northeast of Tinker AFB.
6 DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates
Oklahoma City is the state capital and county seat of Oklahoma County, and portions of the city
extend into three other counties. According to the Census Bureau’s 2006 population estimates,
the city is the 30th largest in the U.S. with an estimated population of 537,734. Tinker AFB is
located in Oklahoma City and borders the Base on the west, south and east sides.
Spencer is approximately 10 miles from downtown Oklahoma City and shares borders with the
City of Nicoma Park, to the east, and the City of Midwest City, to the south. The city has a total
area of 5.3 square miles with a population of 3,918 at the 2006 census estimate. Spencer is
located approximately 5.5 miles north of Tinker AFB.
Oklahoma County was one of the original seven counties in Oklahoma organized by Congress
in 1890. Located in the center of the State, Oklahoma County has a population of more than
650,000 residents located in an area of 720 square miles.
Cleveland County is located south of Tinker AFB and had an estimated population in 2006 of
228,594. Its County Seat is Norman, and it has an area of 558 square miles.
The combined estimated population of the greater Oklahoma City metropolitan area is
1,192,989.
General Recommendations
A major obstacle to the continued development of the Base and the local area could be
unabated growth and development without recognition of the possible consequences. This
report provides a comprehensive plan for correction of current encroachments, procedures for
avoiding future encroachments, and recommendations for future compatible land use, as well
as enhancing communication strategies. Recommended options which should be adopted for
action by all of the study’s partners include:
Creation of an oversight committee with representation from a • ll partnering jurisdictions
to monitor changes and relationships and to work closely with the Base on land use and
encroachment issues. Each city and each entity, along with many of the organizations
affi liated with Tinker, have their own relationship with the Base but there is no overall
coordinating system to make sure that all entities—public and private—working with the
Base are in sync with each other.
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates 7
• Guarding against urban encroachment by providing detailed information regarding
proposed development plans and future mission changes to the Base.
• Adoption of a strategy and protocol for ongoing communication between Tinker AFB and
surrounding communities to apprise each other of potential development within AICUZ
accident potential and noise zones.
• Review of fl ight path corridors by seeking Tinker AFB input on siting locations for public
facilities, including schools, libraries, etc.
Area-Specifi c Recommendations
Recommendations specifi c to geographic areas/jurisdictions are divided into four categories:
(1) land use policies; (2) real estate considerations; (3) building and construction guidelines,
and (4) environment and transportation. More detailed information on each of these
recommendations and the communities to which they apply are included in the full JLUS
Report.
Land Use Policy Recommendations
• Modify comprehensive plans and zoning ordinances to minimize incompatible land uses
around the Base, particularly within the AICUZ accident potential zones.
• Establish land use policies against zoning land to any category permitting residential
development within the 75 dB DNL or higher noise contour, or within the 65-74 dB DNL
contour unless sound attenuation will be achieved.
• Ensure height and obstruction ordinances refl ect current Air Force and Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) Part 77 requirements.
• Show APZs I, II and AICUZ noise contours on all adopted comprehensive plan maps
and/or zoning maps.
8 DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates
Real Estate Considerations
Consider purchase of land within the APZ I and 75+ dB noise contour a • s an alternative to
regulatory methods for preserving land and minimizing the development of incompatible
land uses.
• Create a voluntary acquisition program for residential properties and vacant land located
within the APZ I areas.
• Develop a voluntary avigation easement program to allow the acquisition of easements
to ensure land use compatibility of properties within the 65 dB DNL or greater noise
contour.
• Consider purchase of a portion of land if needed to protect open space, sensitive, or
critical areas within AICUZ noise contours and accident potential zones.
• Establish a transfer of development rights program to maintain public safety and mission
sustainability where development rights currently exist.
• Allow land in APZs and 75+ dB DNL areas to be placed in a temporary holding status to
be turned over for compatible development at a future date.
• Implement a real estate disclosure process for structures located within AICUZ noise
contours and accident potential zones at the initial advertisement of property (e.g.,
Multiple Listing Service database).
• Adopt maximum densities for new development within AICUZ APZ I and II for various
land uses. During the course of this study, extensive research and analysis resulted in
the following recommendations in regards to density of new residential, commercial and
industrial developments.
• Commercial and industrial density: maximum of 25 people/acre in APZ I and 50
people/acre in APZ II
• Residential density: no new dwelling units in APZ I and a maximum of four
dwelling units/acre in APZ II
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates 9
Building and Construction Guidelines
• Update building codes to continue to meet or exceed DoD recommendations for noise
level reduction and the most recent version of the International Building Code.
• Develop a construction guide for builders, developers, architects and building inspectors
to clarify noise compatibility guidelines and other requirements for building within
accident potential or noise zones.
• Encourage existing structures and require new construction in the 65 dB DNL and
higher to participate in a sound attenuation program. Once a structure complies with the
program, certifi cation should be awarded to the property owner and recorded along with
all other property ownership records.
• Improve acoustic site design through positioning of new structures within AICUZ noise
contours on a development site for the purpose of reducing noise levels in the most
noise-sensitive buildings.
Environmental and Transportation
• Determine the feasibility of closing a portion of Douglas Boulevard related to
development of the Maintenance Repair and Overhaul Technology Center (MROTC) and
future needs for Tinker AFB expansion.
• Work with the state’s agriculture department to help reduce the number of birds circling
the landfi lls near Tinker AFB.
• Prohibit new sanitary landfi ll or wetland mitigation projects within 10,000 feet of aircraft
runways.
10 DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates
Noise Contours and Accident Potential Zones
Tinker Air Force Base 2006 AICUZ Study
Source: Tinker Air Force Base 2006 AICUZ Study
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates I-1
SECTION I
Protection of the Base and its Neighbors
Midwest City
Midwest City properties focus on beautifi cation.
Source: City of Midwest City.
I-2 DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates
1.1 Acronyms and Abbreviations
A-C Arterial Commercial
AFB Air Force Base
AICUZ Air Installation Compatible Use Zone
APZ Accident Potential Zone
CZ Clear Zone
DoD U.S. Department of Defense
FAR Federal Aviation Regulations
FAR Floor Area Ratio
JLUS Joint Land Use Study
M-H Mobile Home
NGO Non Governmental Organization
OC-ALC Oklahoma City Air Logistics Center
R-4 High Density Residential
SIC Standard Industrial Classifi cation Code
SLUCM Standard Land Use Coding Manual
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates I-3
1.2 Statement of the Issues
Military installations must be able to conduct their various operations, including military training
and testing mission requirements, while still taking into consideration the welfare of neighboring
communities and protection of the environment. Most American military installations were
established in rural areas, well away from major population centers, but their very presence
became a catalyst for growth.
A booming population along with urban sprawl is causing military areas to be encroached
upon by the nation’s neighborhoods. As a decrease in open space between installations and
developed areas occurs, the prevention of infringement on one another is more diffi cult to avoid.
Growing metropolitan areas consume open space in ways that can hamper use of the area’s
natural resources and limit the effective use of the installations.
Development of areas near military installations can create friction points such as interference
with air routes and communications due to construction of power lines, cell towers or other
structures; more competition for data and communication frequencies; concerns expressed
by adjacent locales about noise and safety; depletion of critical ground and surface water
resources; increased air emissions threatening to exceed federal thresholds; and displacement
of other life forms, including endangered species.
Encroachment adversely affects mission accomplishment by:
• Reducing the number of available training days
• Reducing training realism as tactics are modifi ed (departure and arrivals routes, time
of day, types of operations) to comply with local laws, safety requirements, and noise
abatement procedures
• Causing modifi cations to facility access (temporary or permanent)
• Decreasing scheduling fl exibility
• Increasing security demands
I-4 DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates
1.3 Tinker Air Force Base – Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Tinker Air Force Base is a major U.S. Air Force installation located
in Oklahoma City and adjacent to the communities of Midwest City
and Del City, Oklahoma. The base currently employs more than
27,000 military and civilian employees as the largest single site
employer in Oklahoma. The installation itself covers over 5,028
acres and has 697 buildings with a building fl oor space of over 16
million square feet to accommodate its many varied missions.
In 1940, the Oklahoma City Chamber of Commerce purchased
land at the city’s airport to preserve it for aviation and military
development. Later the Chamber, the City of Oklahoma City and
the Civil Aeronautics Administration (CAA) signed an agreement
to lease the land to the CAA, which is known today as the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA).
The Base originally opened as the Midwest Depot in 1941. On
January 13, 1948, it was renamed in honor of Major General
Clarence Leonard Tinker who was part Osage Indian. Tinker was
the fi rst Major General of American Indian descent in the U.S.
Army. He was lost on a mission to Wake Island in 1942.
Tinker Air Force Base is the home of the Air Force Materiel Command, the Oklahoma City
Logistics Center which is the worldwide manager for a range of aircraft engines, missiles,
software, avionics, and accessories and components. It is one of three U.S. Air Force Logistic
Centers. The host unit at Tinker is the 72nd Air Base Wing which provides support for the
Oklahoma City Air Logistics Center (OC-ALC) and its various tenants.
In addition to the many Air Force missions, the U. S. Navy’s Strategic Communications Wing
ONE is the only one of its kind in the Navy. This Wing provides a vital, secure communications
link to the submerged fl eet of ballistic missile submarines. OC-ALC airframe artisans perform
depot work on the Navy’s E-6 Mercury airplanes while sailors perform fi eld level work.
Meteorology documents
Maj. Ernest J. Fawbush,
left, and Capt. Robert
C. Miller were the fi rst
in American history to
forecast a tornado. (Air
Force photo courtesy
of Oklahoma City Air
Logistics Center History
Offi ce)
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates I-5
Oklahoma City Air Logistics Center
Combat Support Through People
War Fighter Support
Continuous Improvement
The OC-ALC is comprised of four wings that
collaborate to ensure the overall success of
the center. It is the largest ALC in the Air
Force Materiel Command and provides depot
maintenance, management expertise, services
and supply chain management as well as
installation, services and information support
for 31 weapon systems, 10 commands, 93 Air
Force bases and 46 foreign nations.
72nd Air Base Wing
• 72nd Medical Group
• 72nd Mission Support Group
The 72nd Air Base Wing (72 ABW) was
activated at Tinker AFB, Oklahoma effective
1 October 1994. Its activation gave rebirth
to the lineage and honors the history of a
World War II combat organization that had
earned Antisubmarine and American Theater
campaign streamers.
76th Maintenance Wing
• 76th Aircraft Maintenance Group
• 654th Combat Logistics Support Squadron
• Propulsion Maintenance Group
• Commodities Maintenance Group
• 76th Software Maintenance Group
• 76th Maintenance Support Group
Mission Statement
Safely Deliver Air Power . . . Defect-Free
Aircraft, Engines, Spare Parts and Software . .
On time . . . On Cost . . . In Compliance With All
Directives.
327th Aircraft Sustainment Wing
• 327th ASG (B-52 & Cruise Missile)
• 727th ASG (Contractor Logistics Support)
• 747th ASG (Combat Systems)
• 827th ASG (C/KC-135)
Mission Statement
The 327th Aircraft Sustainment Wing (ASW)
organizes, directs and controls total life-cycle
management of 94 B-52, 585 C/KC-135, 69
Tinker Air Force Base Missions
I-6 DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates
B-1 and 416 contractor logistics (including
tanker, trainer, telemetry, airlift, command &
control and US Presidential aircraft) aircraft.
The 327th ASW is also responsible for
all modifi cations & sustainment, including
management and engineering of systems
upgrades, acquisition of new systems, fl eet
support logistics, software maintenance,
and programmed depot maintenance and
supporting USAF, Reserve & Guard, sister
service and numerous FMS forces.
448th Combat Sustainment Wing
• 448th Combat Sustainment Group
• 748th Combat Sustainment Group
• 848th Combat Sustainment Group
• 948th Combat Sustainment Group
Mission Statement
Supply chain management, including
acquisition, repair, storage, distribution,
disposal and the technical and engineering
services, for the center’s assigned engines
and aircraft commodities. Support to Air
Force, Army, Navy, Marine Corps, federal
agencies and multiple foreign countries
worldwide.
Tinker is also home to seven major U.S.
Department of Defense, Air Force and Navy
activities with critical national defense
missions.
The 552nd Air Control Wing fl ies the E-3
Sentry aircraft and is part of the Air Force’s Air
Combat Command mobile strike force.
The Navy’s Strategic Communications
Wing One provides a secure communications
link to the submerged fl eet of ballistic missile
submarines.
The 507th Air Refueling Wing is an Air Force
Reserve fl ying unit.
The 3rd Combat Communications Group
provides deployable communications, computer
systems, navigational aids and air traffi c control
services anywhere in the world.
The 38th Engineering Installation Group has
worldwide responsibility for engineering and
installation of all communications and electronic
facilities for the Air Force.
The Defense Distribution Depot Oklahoma
provides the receipt, storage, issue, inspection
and shipment of material.
The Defense Information Systems Agency
Defense Enterprise Computing Center
operates computer systems for the Base and
serves 172 other bases in all 50 states plus 92
foreign countries.
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates I-7
1.4 Role of the Department of Defense
The accelerating pace of urban development can potentially impact military operations and
timely action is needed to protect the military’s ability to test and train. To address regional
land development, environmental issues and depletion of natural resources DoD is required to
work with numerous governmental entities, private organizations and the public which requires
ongoing cooperation, planning and partnerships among government and private organizations.
For decades DoD has encouraged compatible land use efforts. During the later 1940s and
1950s, the DoD built many military installations at least 10 to 15 miles from existing urbanized
areas. To fulfi ll the needs of the employees and the logistical, supply, and construction needs
of the military, these installations became employment centers. As local populations moved
closer to the military installations, complaints about the effects of the military operations
began to increase. Thus, the military began efforts to ameliorate the growing confl ict between
development and its missions. There is also increasing interest in environments that are home
to sensitive and/or endangered species found adjacent to military installations.
The DoD has launched numerous efforts to promote compatible land use around military
installations, each in conjunction with surrounding governmental entities. Programs such as the
Air Installations Compatible Use Zones (AICUZ) were established in the 1970s. More programs
have been authorized that promote conservation buffer partnerships. Efforts employed
today to encourage compatible development around installations range from the Air Force’s
“greenbelt” program, durable compatible land use activities such as the AICUZ program, Joint
Land Use Studies (JLUS) and other noise programs. For more info, please see http://www.
denix.osd.mil/portal/page/portal/content/policy/DoD/dodi471513.pdf. In addition, Congress has
made it easier to acquire conservation easements near military installations and ranges in
partnership with non-governmental organizations (NGOs). The DoD’s fi rst activities to address
land compatibility were mostly with Air Force installations but have since been utilized by all
branches of the military.
I-8 DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates
1.5 Financial Support Corrects Confl icts
The citizens of Central Oklahoma have a long history of supporting the use of local funds
(primarily county bond issues) to eliminate land use confl icts that could jeopardize the mission
of Tinker AFB and/or jeopardize the safety of area citizens. Local efforts include:
In 1973, Oklahoma County bond funds were used to purchase • and clear approximately
836 single-family homes, 32 vacant lots and Glenwood Elementary School from the
Glenwood Addition, which was located on the north side of SE 29th Street north of
Runway 17/35, or the main runway, and east of Midwest Boulevard. The addition
contained approximately 262 acres that were located within a portion of the runway’s
Clear Zone (CZ) and Accident Potential Zone I (APZ I) .
• In 1982, one of the largest churches in the State of Oklahoma was proposing to relocate
to the northeast corner of SE 29th Street and Sooner Road in Midwest City, which lies
within APZ I of the crosswind runway. Oklahoma County helped convince the church
to acquire an alternate site and the new church was later constructed near SE 74th and
Sooner.
• In 1986, public funds were used to acquire a 29-acre tract of land located northwest of
the intersection of SE 29th Street and Sooner Road in Del City to prevent development
of a shopping center within the APZ I of the crosswind runway.
• In 2002, Oklahoma County voters approved a bond issue for the purpose of acquiring
105 homes and fi ve businesses located in the vicinity of Douglas Boulevard and I-40,
near the main runway. These were homes located in the CZ and high noise contours of
Runway 17/35 and some of the 1950’s-era development was considered a security risk.
The properties were purchased and cleared by 2006.
While these actions demonstrate commitment to Tinker AFB by Central Oklahoma’s leaders
and citizens, they also demonstrate that improved communication and coordination between the
Air Force and the surrounding communities through the JLUS process could prevent potential
confl icts at an earlier stage.
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates I-9
1.6 Specifi c Actions by Del City
Highlights of Del City’s efforts to preserve and protect the Tinker AFB APZs as provided by city
staff for this report include:
APZ I
• Rezoned Clanton Trailer Park (SE 29th and Sooner) from high density residential (Mobile
Home Park / M-H) to much lower density commercial (Arterial Commercial / A-C).
Rejected several uses, including a bank, a convenience store, and an automobile sales
lot, all of which would have been a gathering point for large numbers of people.
• Condemned and is vacating large parts of the Kristie Manor Apartment Complex (SE
29th and Sooner). Property is intended for rezoning from high density residential (R-4)
to much lower density commercial (Arterial Commercial / A-C).
• Worked with real estate agent to include specifi c information about APZ I land use and
density restrictions in promotional materials for Tune Up Masters property (SE 29th and
Sooner). Rejected several potential uses, including dry cleaner shop, convenience store,
automobile sales lot, and child care center.
APZ II
• Drafted and adopted Interim Development Regulations for Parcels within the Proposed
APZ II of Runway 12/30, Tinker Air Force Base on Nov. 19, 2007. Interim regulations
include prohibition of incompatible uses, strict lot coverage and density standards, height
restrictions stricter than FAR Part 77, restrictions related to attraction of nuisance wildlife,
and other provisions designed to mitigate the impact of development that may occur
within the APZ II zone before the conclusion of the JLUS study and until such a time as
the City formally adopts the Runway 12/30 APZ II zone.
• Using Interim Regulations, drafted a Redevelopment Agreement for a large mixed use
development to be located at the southwest quadrant of Sooner Road and I-40. The
agreement requires no greater than 10% lot coverage, restricting uses that would be
incompatible. Del City continues to attempt to negate any encroachment that could be
caused by this development.
I-10 DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates
Using Interim Regulations, denied occupancy clearances f • or two churches seeking to
move into a building within the APZ II (South of SE 15th Street and Sunnylane).
• Using Interim Regulations, advised Mid-Del School District that expanding schools within
the APZ II would not be permitted.
• The city purchased an existing gas station within the confi nes of APZ II under eminent
domain and will remove this existing structure.
1.7 Specifi c Actions by Midwest City
The City of Midwest City has long supported Tinker Air Force Base through the adoption of
Airport Zoning Regulations, regulation of Clear Zone and APZ-I areas, and delineation of
Accident Potential Zones on Land Use Plans contained in several of the city’s Comprehensive
Plans. A history of the city’s Airport Zoning regulations can be found on page 1-13 of this
Section.
As previously noted, the city in conjunction with Oklahoma County facilitated the relocation
of 836 single-family homes in Midwest City beginning in 1973. This major relocation of
approximately 2,500 persons caused the city to lose its Community Development Block Grant
entitlement status. If it hadn’t been for Congressional intervention, the city would have lost
approximately $750,000 per year between 1980 and 1990.
The relocation of these homes also had a signifi cant effect on the economic base of the
community. Many of the residents chose to relocate out of Midwest City, thus losing their
purchasing power. The City’s tax structure also was adversely affected with the loss of 836
homes that were no longer on the property tax rolls.
The 2002 bond issue also had an economic impact on the city. Several businesses were
relocated as a result of the purchase of private property by Oklahoma County. Similar to
previous acquisition efforts, the city has experienced losses in sales and property taxes.
Most recently Midwest City and Oklahoma City joined together to fund an engineering study
of the current confi guration of the Tinker/Air Depot gate. This study will identify alternative
alignments which will address congestion issues at this location.
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates I-11
1.7.a Midwest City Comprehensive Plan
Beginning with its 1970 Comprehensive Plan, Midwest City has long recognized the importance
of integrating the needs of Tinker Air Force Base with its planning efforts. In the 1970-1985
Comprehensive Plan, the City delineated two areas titled Tinker Air Force Base Approach
Zones. These areas are shown on the Long Range Plan – 1985 map. Within the text of the
Plan was the following narrative, “Airport
Approach Zones. It is intended that the airport
approach zone of the north-south runway
of Tinker Air Force Base be designated
for open space uses that will not generate
concentrations of people in the area located
between SE 15th Street and SE 29th Street
and 1,000 feet on each side of the extension of
the runway center line. Relocation of housing,
places of public assembly, and other confl icting
uses is to be carried out on a phased basis
as redevelopment becomes economically
feasible.”
The 1970 Comprehensive Plan was
updated in 1985 with the adoption of a new
Comprehensive Plan. Many references to
Tinker Air Force Base can be found in the 1985 Comprehensive Plan. For example, within the
Community Analysis, four pages are devoted to the value and impact of Tinker Air Force Base
to Midwest City. Later, in the Community Analysis in a subsection devoted to Physical Features
of the community, there is additional commentary on Tinker.
“Midwest City has adopted an airport zoning ordinance to regulate land uses that
may confl ict with the operation of aircraft at Tinker Air Force Base. As a part of
this ordinance two areas have been designated as APZs. As shown in Figure 4.1,
one zone is located between Midwest Boulevard and Douglas Boulevard from SE
29th Street to SE 15th Street. The other zone is located near the intersection of
Sooner Road and SE 29th Street. These two zones have been identifi ed by Tinker
Air Force Base to possess a signifi cant risk factor for the possibility of an accident
Midwest City
The success of commercial development is
commensurate with the stability of the Base.
Source: City of Midwest City.
I-12 DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates
involving an airplane to occur. The area east of Midwest Boulevard was purchased
and cleared by Oklahoma County through a bond election in 1973. This area has
been fenced and is leased to the Federal government for a nominal fee.”
The area near the intersection of Sooner Road and 29th Street is privately owned.
The land uses that are allowed in this area, however, are limited to those permitted
in the Airport Zoning Ordinance.”
According to information obtained from Midwest City staff, the City is currently in the process of
preparing a new Comprehensive Plan that will replace the 1985 Plan. Though not completed at
the time this JLUS report was prepared, a draft of the new Comprehensive Plan was available
for review. Similar to the 1985 Plan, the 2008 Comprehensive Plan contains many references to
Tinker Air Force Base. The Land Use Plan map refl ects the AICUZ Accident Potential Zones for
both runways. Among other recommendations, the draft Plan contains the following narrative:
“Midwest City supports land use planning efforts of the AICUZ Study and
recommends that the City:
Continue to incorporate AICUZ policies and guidelines • into the comprehensive
plan;
• Modify ordinances to support AICUZ study, as deemed necessary;
• Modify building codes to support AICUZ study, as deemed necessary;
• Implement height and obstruction ordinances;
• Keep the Department of Defense apprised of any development near Tinker AFB
that may impact the program for Joint Land Use Studies;
• Inform Tinker AFB of planning and zoning decisions that have potential of affecting
base operations;
• Support the Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) for the Tinker AFB area to protect the
area from encroachment.”
It is expected that the 2008 Comprehensive Plan will contain further recommendations stemming
from the JLUS report or some form of an addendum to the 2008 Plan will occur after completion
of the JLUS effort.
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates I-13
1.7.b Midwest City Zoning
Midwest City fi rst enacted an Airport Zoning Ordinance to protect Tinker Air Force Base in
1960. In 1983, revisions to the ordinance were based in large part on the recommendations
contained in the January 1976 AICUZ prepared by Tinker AFB in which CZs and APZs for
runways 17/35 and 12/30 were identifi ed. The Airport Environs Zones APZ 1 and the CZs have
been adopted. However, the actual airport zoning maps delineate an area somewhat different
than the text of the ordinance near the intersection of SE 29th Street and Midwest Boulevard,
an area recently acquired by the County. The APZ I for runway 17/35 on the airport zoning map
actually stops at SE 15th Street and does not extend north of SE 15th Street as the ordinance
describes. One would surmise that SE 15th Street was chosen as the north boundary on the
map since it provided a clear and easily defi nable boundary.
In 1990, the Airport Zoning Ordinance was amended again. Major enhancements to the
ordinance provided for density standards, minimum and maximum building sizes, maximum lot
sizes, maximum coverage, avigation easement requirements and a new land use compatibility
table. The land use compatibility table was revised to incorporate the use of the Standard
Industrial Classifi cation Code (SIC) in lieu of the Standard Land Use Coding Manual (SLUCM).
This was done because the SIC code provided a more up to date classifi cation of land uses
than the SLUCM code. The 1990 Airport Zoning Ordinance was adopted in large part to
address development issues in the APZ I for runway 12/30. The revisions to the zoning
ordinance were accomplished through consultations with area property owners and the City.
(See the January 26, 1990 article in Appendix F of this report.)
As part of the City’s effort to prepare the 2008 Comprehensive Plan, Midwest City will also be
updating its Zoning Ordinances and Subdivision Regulations. It is expected that changes will
be made to the Airport Zoning Ordinance that refl ect those JLUS recommendations which the
City has determined are in the best interests of the City and Tinker Air Force Base.
I-14 DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates
1.8 Specifi c Actions by Oklahoma City
Oklahoma City, over the decades, has worked closely with Tinker AFB to address traffi c
and infrastructure demands as well as commercial and residential development in the area.
Highlights of Oklahoma City’s recent efforts to preserve and protect the Tinker AFB APZs
through its Zoning Overlay and its Southeast Sector Plan, adopted as an amendment to the
OKC Plan, 2000-2020 does the following:
Prohibits new development which inhibits safe and e • ffi cient airport operations within the
APZs
• Requires adjacent development to be compatible with the Tinker AFB related activities
• Limits new construction and redevelopment within the fl ight paths
• Prohibits noise sensitive development such as residences, schools, hospitals, etc. which
do not provide the required noise attenuation features
• Ensures all building regulations (fl oor area ratio and height) are promoted to guarantee
the continued effi cient airport operation to ensure public safety
• Protects the natural areas around Tinker AFB from encroachment
• Addresses traffi c, infrastructure and residential development needs as expansion of
Tinker AFB occurs and endorses future recommendations from this Joint Land Use
Study
• Ensures that new development will not obstruct military aircraft operations
• Ensures that a Tinker AFB representative will be included in the review of all rezonings
and plan amendments within the APZs
• Promotes compatible development within APZs through maintenance of reduced
densities
• Ensures that the City will continue to review impacts of development, their visibility
characteristics, and penetration of airspace within approach zones
• Prohibits construction of communication towers and antennas in APZs
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates I-15
Zoning Ordinance
• Chapter 59, Article XIII of the existing Zoning Ordinance for Oklahoma City addresses
the JLUS study area. The delineation of the APZs on the Future Land Use Plan
map and incorporation of policies into the Comprehensive Land Use Plan have been
implemented by the existing zoning code.
• The Airport Environs Zone One (AE-1) and the Airport Environs Zone Two (AE-2)
regulate development within the APZ I and APZ II respectively. Both zones regulate land
use development, noise attenuation and avigation easements.
This page intentionally left blank.
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates II-1
SECTION II
Communications Strategies
First plane out
An Airman from the 552nd Aircraft Maintenance Squadron marshals
one of several aircraft out of its parking spot and on its way to support
Operation IRAQI FREEDOM March 28, 2007. (Air Force photo by Staff
Sgt. Stacy Fowler)
II-2 DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates
2.1 Acronyms and Abbreviations
ACOG Association of Central Oklahoma Governments
AeroEOC Aerospace Eastern Oklahoma County
AFB Air Force Base
BRAC Base Realignment and Closure
CIP Capital Improvement Program
CRP Community Relations Plan
EOCTC Eastern Oklahoma County Tourism Council
FAR Federal Aviation Regulations
FSC Family Support Center
HOA Home Owners Association
JLUS Joint Land Use Study
MAP Management Action Plan
MRO Maintenance, Repair and Overhaul
the Base Tinker Air Force Base
TLC Tinker Leadership Council
TMA Tinker Management Association
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates II-3
2.2 Communications Strategies
The development, implementation and execution
of a communications plan is the foundation
of a successful partnership. To support the
adoption of recommendations of the Joint Land
Use Study (JLUS) by multiple jurisdictions,
the public involvement plan that was put into
place at the beginning of this initiative should
continue to provide a template for expanding
communications, collaboration and cooperation
between Tinker Air Force Base and the greater
community around the installation. Historically,
the Base has benefi ted signifi cantly from the
support of the State of Oklahoma, local jurisdictions and the private sector. Undeniably, this
emphasis on helping Tinker preserve and expand its missions will continue given the pride
this region has in hosting the Base. During the adoption and implementation of the JLUS
recommendations presented herein, expanded communications among all stakeholders—
including the general public—will be well-served.
2.3 Public Involvement Plan
Over the course of the JLUS, a comprehensive public involvement plan has been developed
and modifi ed frequently as a guide for informing and educating the general public and
stakeholders about the study’s importance and how its recommendations provide a blueprint
for compatible land development around the Base. Given the fact that the Oklahoma City
area and the Tinker military installation have enjoyed a synergistic relationship since the
1940s, it would be diffi cult for the public as a whole to comprehend any changes at the Base.
The mere mention of Tinker being down-sized or closed would not be accepted as possible,
and a tremendous unifi ed voice would most assuredly speak out vigorously against such
changes. However, an on-going public involvement plan should be followed—and enhanced
as opportunities present themselves.
Tinker and the Primes
Tinker and the Primes is a national business
event held annually and is free to all attendees.
(Source: www.tinkerandtheprimes.com)
II-4 DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates
Communication tools utilized throughout the Joint
Land Use Study (JLUS) included: public meetings
of the JLUS Policy and Technical Committees;
constantly updated, detailed information on the
website at www.acogok.org/jlus; development
and application of a graphic presentation for
the study including the theme, “Defending
Oklahoma’s Future: Tinker AFB”; news release
distribution to broadcast and print media in the
region; production and distribution of brochures
about the JLUS, its recommendations and public
meetings; and general information gathering
meetings with the Chambers of Commerce for
Oklahoma City, Midwest City and Del City.
With the publication of this report, outreach
should continue. Stakeholders who are being
encouraged to become involved are home
builders, commercial developers, realtors,
municipal and county planners, independent school districts and other educational institutions,
and civic organizations.
The following table summarizes the activities that occurred throughout the study.
Pilot in training
Checking out communications aboard an E-3
Sentry here, 9-year-old Erin Trace is assisted
by Capt. Jeff Kiger. The aircraft tour was part
of deployment activities 150 children had the
opportunity to experience during Operation Kids
Understanding Deployment Operations. Captain
Kiger is assigned to the 960th Airborne Air
Control Squadron. (U.S. Air Force photo by Kirk
McPheeters)
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates II-5
Table 2.1 Tinker AFB JLUS Public Involvement Timeline
Source: Pavlik and Associates
7/9/2008
II-6 DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates
2.4 Community Communication and Support
Since the 1940s, business and community leaders
have provided the organization, resources and
energy to support Tinker AFB and the active and
reserve personnel—and families—of the various
military services stationed here.
Over the decades, the people of Oklahoma
County have proven their support for Tinker by
passing two signifi cant capital improvement bond
programs (CIP), one in 1973 and one in 2002.
The successful elections resulted in the purchase
by the county of an aggregate total of 396 acres
that were cleared of structures. In 2008, area
communities again came together for Base
operations and voters approved the purchase of
the former General Motors facility by Oklahoma
County. The property is being leased to the Base by Oklahoma County for mission expansion.
This region’s leadership is intertwined among military and civilian professionals. For example,
the economic development director of the Oklahoma City chamber was stationed at Tinker from
1986 until he retired in 1992. The chamber’s consultant from the Greentree Group recently
retired as the civilian Chief Financial Offi cer at Tinker. The executive director of the Del City
Chamber of Commerce retired from Tinker after 27 years on the Base and 35 years in the Air
Force. These relationships are invaluable as the Base seeks to serve and benefi t from the
surrounding communities, and these communities seek to support and benefi t from the Base.
The City of Del City annually sponsors the Armed Forces Day parade which always includes
senior command of Tinker Air Force Base and units of Tinker as showcase of community
support.
Aerospace Eastern Oklahoma County (AeroEOC) is a regional partnership formed in 2005 by
business, military and government leaders to protect and enhance the Maintenance, Repair and
Overhaul (MRO) and aerospace activities of the Base and private sector related industries.
Recycloman
Recycloman and his superheo partner (played
by Trudi Logan) are part of Tinker AFB’s
recycling superduo. They are always ready to
pump you up about recycling! (Photo by Brion
Ockenfels)
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates II-7
AeroEOC is one of the biggest initiatives in
which the Midwest City Chamber of Commerce
participates. Emphasis is on creating government
and contracting opportunities, providing
workforce recruitment and training and providing
business expansion and relocation services.
Tinker and the Primes is a national business
event held annually and is free to all attendees.
Joining the Midwest Chamber in sponsoring
this prestigious event are the Oklahoma Small
Business Development Center of Rose State
College; OG&E Electric Services; Mid America Business Park; North Star Companies LLC and
Midwest Regional Medical Center. Also a sponsor is the Chamber’s “East Is In,” an integrated
marketing campaign that promotes housing development and quality of life in Midwest City and
Eastern Oklahoma County.
The Greater Oklahoma City Chamber of Commerce is one of the Base’s strongest partners.
Its focus is on all economic development initiatives around Tinker as well as facilitating
federal, state and local support for the various missions of the Base. On a local level, when
encroachment issues have threatened base security and given rise to noise concerns, the
chamber assumes a role of helping package programs such as CIP bond elections to be held
by Oklahoma County.
Currently the Oklahoma City Chamber retains a consultant through the national fi rm of
Greentree to serve as a direct liaison with Tinker’s leadership. One role of the liaison is to work
on the annual federal insertions with Oklahoma’s congressional delegation in order to assure
adequate funding for the Base.
The chamber’s economic development department not only supports Tinker’s military
leadership but also supports its contractors and civilian workforce by helping local site
managers for aerospace-related manufacturing, supply and repair facilities to bring more
operations to the Oklahoma City area.
AeroEOC
The partnership’s mission is to brand, promote,
and grow the considerable MRO and Aerospace
assets located in Eastern Oklahoma County,
especially in and around Tinker Air force Base
and its Oklahoma City Air Logistics Center (OC-ALC).
(Source: www.aeroeoc.com)
II-8 DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates
The Tinker Leadership Council (TLC) exists
to facilitate communication and foster an
appreciation for the Base and its staff. Growing
out of the possible impacts of a Base Realignment
and Closure (BRAC), the organization was
started by a group of visionaries who understood
community consensus building. The council
supports economic initiatives and creates
opportunities for the area to recognize outstanding
work by enlisted personnel. Annual dues are $100
and membership is open to the public.
The Tinker Management Association
(TMA) promotes, organizes, and conducts
activities to enhance the professionalism of
public administrators assigned to Tinker. Its
membership, supported by dues, is open to
all civilian and military employees and tenant
organizations. TMA helps to build unity in the management team by providing an interchange
of information and ideas across organizational lines. Examples of its community projects
include: the adoption of the I-40 corridor from Henney Road to Indian Median under the
Oklahoma Adopt-a-Highway Program; a bowling tournament, a golf tournament, Christmas in
April which is a volunteer home repair program, and Holiday Lights Spectacular in the Joe B.
Barnes Regional Park co-sponsored by the Midwest City Chamber of Commerce.
Air Force air shows are valuable community events that inspire patriotism and increase public
awareness of the importance of military preparedness. Tinker AFB, in co-sponsorship with the
communities surrounding it, has a long history of presenting air shows.
Star-Spangled Salute is an offi cial Air Force event held semiannually. In 2007, the air show
became part of a 10-day Star-Spangled Centennial Salute that was sponsored by the
Aerospace America and Eastern Oklahoma County Tourism Council (EOCTC). The event
commemorated the State of Oklahoma’s 100th year of statehood and the 60th anniversary of the
U.S. Air Force.
Tinker Management Association
Petty Offi cer 3rd Class Kristofer Piros,
Strategic Communications Wing ONE, and
state Rep. Gary Banz listen during a Tinker
Management Association luncheon as USS
Oklahoma survivor Paul Goodyear holds a
copy of the U.S. Constitution he presented to
Petty Offi cer Piros in a ceremony. (Air Force
photo by Dave Faytinger)
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates II-9
Aerospace America is a 501(c) (3) nonprofi t, civilian organization. EOCTC is comprised of
nine communities; Choctaw, Del City, Forest Park, Harrah, Jones, Midwest City, Nicoma Park,
Spencer and Tinker AFB. Individuals, organizations and companies become partners when
they donate money and services to the Star-Spangled Salute.
2.5 Tinker’s Communications with Communities
The Tinker AFB General Plan is a comprehensive master planning document which guides on-base
development and assesses the military installation’s infrastructure and resources as a way
to assist in preparing the Base for additional missions.
In 2004, Tinker created a Management Action Plan (MAP) in order to integrate and coordinate
environmental and cleanup activities. At the same time, a Community Relations Plan (CRP)
was formed to engage interested persons in the restoration process. Both the MAP and
the CRP provide signifi cant communication opportunities for the public to learn about the
commitment by Tinker and its personnel to improving and protecting the environment. (For
additional information about the MAP, CRP, and AeroEOC see Section V.)
The Family Support Center (FSC) on the Base offers a wealth of services to military members
and their families, and the surrounding communities rally to help with donations, contributions
and volunteer hours. Programs include Loan Locker, which helps families with appliances and
such until household goods are shipped to their new “home.” Smooth Move is a program that
offers a seminar about how to fi nd housing and schools in the local communities. Heartlink
welcomes new spouses and helps with their orientation to the area. The Air Force Aid Society
provides a “baby bundle” including infant care items when families participate in the Baby
Business class offered by Family Advocacy. Family Services also provides a layette to new
parents from all branches of the military. The FSC coordinates support groups which help
families learn to provide elder care and to cope with the diffi cult process of grieving. The staff
also supports men and women as they prepare for deployment.
II-10 DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates
The community helps the FSC with providing a well stocked Food Pantry, and a commissary
voucher program provides short term relief for military members E-6 and below. The Airman’s
Attic offers military members E-6 and below and their families a place to “shop” for quality
donated items free of charge. Parents often recycle their children’s clothing and toys, donating
outgrown articles and replacing them for “new” items or clothing in the next larger size.
When the time comes for a military person to separate or retire, the Transition Assistance
Program offers an extensive three-day workshop highlighting veteran’s benefi ts, employment
and training information and job search skills. The FSC’s veterans representative offers local
employment assistance to veterans and their families and provides a computer resource room
for clients to use.
Other Base noteworthy activities include:
• The DelQuest program and Youth Excel
program regularly host gifted students
from the Mid-Del School District, offering
them the chance to quiz 552nd Air Control
Wing members on all aspects of their jobs.
• During the Mid-Del Job Shadow Day, high
school students from all school districts
shadow Tinker professionals to learn more
about various careers that are available at
the Base.
• Team Tinker regularly has a booth at the
Oklahoma State Fair. Volunteers from the
Base tell fair attendees about the Base’s
unique multi-service mission.
• Tinker and emergency agencies regularly exercise and plan for unimaginable disasters.
For example, Tinker personnel provided signifi cant assistance to nearby communities
when 1999’s historic tornado fl attened neighborhoods west of the Base. When Ice
Storm 2007 struck and froze roadways, trees and power lines, many Oklahomans found
themselves without heat or power. When the problem hit Tinker, the fi rst sergeants
and associate units worked together to keep on-base families warm and in powered
environments. More than 130 Base dorm rooms were opened to families without heat.
Just the right size
Christie Sanders and 10-year-old Kodie
Swaney hunt for a size during the 727th Aircraft
Sustainment Group’s annual holiday event to
provide new clothes for area students. (Air
Force photo by Margo Wright)
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates II-11
• Members of the Tinker’s Top-3 Organization
have volunteered with Central Oklahoma
Habitat for Humanity. For example, they
helped build three houses dedicated in fall
2007.
• Members of the 552nd Air Control Wing have
helped out their local communities in big ways
from food to shelter to education, including
volunteering with the Citizens Caring for
Children program.
• A tour of science and engineering laboratories
on the Base allows high school students to get
a feel for a science career. Tinker personnel
also support the region’s annual Sciencefest.
• Clothe the Children and the B-52 Program
Offi ce’s Clothe-a-Kid Christmas project raises
more than $8,000 annually via fundraisers and
donations. For example, in December 2007, adult personal shoppers escorted more than
50 elementary and middle school-aged children through Midwest City’s JCPenney for
new outfi ts, winter outerwear and backpacks.
• Sailors from the Navy Operational Support Center through the Take Charge and Move
Out program volunteer their time at a local elementary school and the Norman Veterans’
Center. The sailors participate in “Say No to Drugs” rallies.
• Teen members of the Tinker Youth Center’s Patriot Keystone Club support the
community in many different ways throughout the year. They have organized and
publicized monthly fi tness challenges for youth, assisted with National Kid’s Day and
held the Worldwide Day of Play, an event open to the Tinker community. Tinker AFB
is an exemplary model of environmental stewardship. Annually, Tinker Recycle Super
Heroes greet nearly 4,000 students from schools around the state.
• Over the past two years, the Tinker P2 Program has helped the installation eliminate
pollution by more than 4,000 tons and realize cost savings of over $2 million. The P2
Program is continuing to investigate and coordinate cost saving pollution prevention
initiatives to help preserve the environment for future generations while supporting Tinker
AFB’s military operations at home and abroad.
HFH drywall install
Airmen from the 552nd Air Control Wing
prepare drywall for the roof of a new
garage for a family in need in Oklahoma
City. Airmen in the 552nd participate in
the Habitat for Humanity program at least
twice a year as way to give back to the
communities that surround Tinker. (Air
Force photo by Senior Airman Lorraine
Amaro)
II-12 DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates
2.6 Recommendations for the Community in Support of Tinker AFB
To facilitate even greater involvement and support at all levels of the community is the compelling
recommendation to: (1) broaden an existing nonprofi t organization; or (2) create a new
organization that provides for enhanced participation by more persons. An organization such as
the Tinker Leadership Council could be considered for this role. As what would be Friends of the
Base, the organization should solicit membership from young and old, individuals and families,
and businesses of all sizes. Emphasis should be on recruiting thousands of members and support
from the entities mentioned in this report as well as others. Special membership categories
should be considered for families, seniors, students and retired military personnel.
The Friends of the Base should enhance existing programs by putting into place activities
such as:
Coordinating an on-going billboard campaign, in which businesses e • ach donate billboard
space for a period of one to two months. The
message would be “we support our base.”
As many as 12 businesses could be recruited
to participate in order to keep costs relatively
low for at least a year-long program.
• Creating the organization’s own identity
through the development of a logo and
marketing slogan for use on all materials.
This would brand the organization with the
public.
• Designing and producing a coloring book for
youngsters through which they are introduced
to Tinker AFB in a patriotic way.
• Developing and maintaining a website for members that gives periodic updates about the
Base and activities in which they can become involved.
• Increasing partnerships with retired military and veterans organizations to sponsor public
events that celebrate the mission of Tinker AFB.
Tinker Youth Center
The Missoula Children’s Theatre touring
production of Snow White and the Seven
Dwarfs was held at the Tinker Youth Center.
(Air Force photo by Becky Pillifant)
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates II-13
2.7 Recommendations for Tinker’s Involvement
in the Community
Tinker Air Force Base enjoys exemplary recognition and
respect in the Greater Oklahoma City Metropolitan Area, due
to the Base’s extraordinary presence here. However, much
information about the Base should be targeted to the general
public on an on-going basis. The following are low cost
recommendations that, if implemented, most assuredly would further educate persons living
near the Base about its need to be a part of nearby development decisions as well as to protect
itself from any breaches of security.
The Tinker AFB website should be enhanced to make it more user-friendly for area residents
who are involved with the Base in any way. It could provide specifi c information about the
Base’s environmental initiatives, reasons for unusual noise occurrences, roadway expansion
projects especially as they relate to traffi c fl ow, etc.
The public affairs offi ce, while it appears to be fully staffed and functional, should review
its protocol for providing information and responding to inquiries in a timely way. Presently,
inquiries from the public appear to perhaps be overlooked and/or disregarded.
Tinker‘s leadership, through the Tinker Management Association, should seek to brief,
at least once a year, area City and Town Councils and Oklahoma and Cleveland County
Commissioners in what could be described as a “state-of-the-base address”; i.e. what has
occurred recently; what can be expected in the short term; and capital improvements on the
Base.
A series of community spirit awards should be created by the Base to recognize volunteerism
on the part of civilian individuals and groups who go above and beyond in supporting the
military.
The public affairs offi ce should provide information to area HOAs for inclusion in their
newsletters and on their website. Such material should emphasize land use compatibility with
the Base.
East is In!
Eastern Oklahoma County
is more than just real estate.
(Source: www.eastisin.com)
II-14 DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates
2.8 Recommendations for Increased Cooperation
During the implementation of the JLUS, an Oversight Committee should be created to monitor
community and economic changes and to work closely with the Base on land use and
encroachment concerns. Each city and entity and many of the organizations affi liated with
Tinker have a specifi c relationship with the Base but there is no apparent overall coordination
system to make sure all the entities—public and private—are working with the Base so
everyone is in sync. ACOG is positioned well to facilitate this action and the JLUS Policy
Committee, created for this study, could become the Oversight Committee. It is comprised of
elected offi cials from each of the JLUS partner communities.
In addition, it is recommended that a liaison from Tinker AFB be named to be included in all
Zoning Board hearings and land use policy discussions for each of the Study Partners.
Appendix C of this report provides a sample memorandum of understanding that the JLUS
partner communities and Tinker AFB could utilize to improve their communications on pending
development requests and Base activities.
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates III-1
SECTION III
Components of the Plan
AWACS
An E-3 Airborne Warning and Control System aircraft from Tinker Air
Force Base, Okla., fl ies a mission. The E-3 Sentry is a modifi ed Boeing
707/320 commercial airframe with a rotating radar dome. The dome is 30
feet in diameter, six feet thick and is held 11 feet above the fuselage by
two struts. It contains a radar subsystem that permits surveillance from
the Earth’s surface up into the stratosphere, over land or water. The radar
has a range of more than 200 miles for low-fl ying targets and farther for
aerospace vehicles fl ying at medium to high altitudes. (U.S. Air Force
photo by Tech. Sgt. John K. McDowell)
III-2 DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates
3.1 Acronyms and Abbreviations
AFB Air Force Base
AFH Air Force Handbook
AFGP Air Force General Plan
AICUZ Air Installation Compatible Use Zone
APA American Planning Association
APZ Accident Potential Zone
AT/FP Anti-Terrorism and Force Protection
CRP Community Relations Plan
CZ Clear Zone
DHS U.S. Department of Homeland Security
DNL Day-Night Average A-Weighted Sound Level
DoD U. S. Department of Defense
DOT U. S. Department of Transportation
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
GMP Growth Management Plan
HUD U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
IRP Installation Restoration Program
JLUS Joint Land Use Study
OEA Offi ce of Economic Adjustment
OSD Offi ce of the Secretary of Defense
REPI Readiness and Environmental Protection Initiative
SQSS Southwest Quadrant Stabilization System
the Base Tinker Air Force Base
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates III-3
3.2 Basic Confl icts
People
Military installations have historically been located away from urbanized areas. However,
employment opportunities draw people and businesses closer to military facilities in order to
take advantage of civilian and government business opportunities offered by the installations
and their contractors as well as to provide goods and services to support military operations.
Additionally, many retired service personnel desire to be in convenient proximity to military
facilities in order to utilize their services. It is a natural progression for this population to grow
and for development to encroach on facility land, consequently impacting military operations.
Military Operations
Military operations can be loud and present safety concerns for nearby civilian communities.
Low fl ying, high performance military aircraft can create both noise and accident potential
during landings, take-offs and training exercises. Conversely, when communities build
near active military bases, operational effectiveness, training and readiness missions can
be impaired. Civilian encroachment near a military facility, if allowed to go unregulated, can
compromise the utility and effectiveness of the installation and its mission. Incompatible land
use activities like residences, schools, childcare centers, churches, nursing homes, hospitals,
commercial offi ces and other areas of assembly that are located too close to military base
operations must be identifi ed. Appropriate mitigation measures should be implemented to
preserve the viability of the military installation’s mission, while minimizing the potential adverse
effects on the civilian population.
III-4 DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates
3.3 Air Installation Compatible Use Zone Program
The purpose of the U.S. Department of Defense’s
(DoD) long-standing Air Installation Compatible
Use Zone (AICUZ) program is to promote
compatible land development in areas subject to
noise exposure and where there is the greatest
potential for accidents due to aircraft operations.
The AICUZ program’s goal is to identify actions
designed to protect military airfi elds and navigable
airspace from encroachment by incompatible land
uses and structures. Recommendations from
the 2006 AICUZ Study for Tinker Air Force Base
(AFB) should be included in any planning process
undertaken by Del City, Midwest City, Oklahoma
City, Spencer, Nicoma Park, Choctaw, and
Oklahoma and Cleveland Counties, with the goal of
minimizing and reducing incompatibilities that might
compromise the Base’s ability to fulfi ll its current
and future mission requirements.
The DoD has published a Practical Guide to Compatible Civilian Development Near Military
Installations to provide local communities with tools, techniques and collaborative efforts
that have proven successful for communities to achieve compatible land use near a military
installation through judicious administration of local government policies and regulations. This
guide contains detailed discussion of planning and zoning practices.
Recycling works
Tinker welder Matt Beauford shows Oklahoma
City Air Logistics Center Executive Director
John Over an area within the F100 turbine
frame where a Tinker-developed welding
process now saves parts from condemnation,
keeping them ready for the warfi ghter. (Air
Force photo by Margo Wright)
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates III-5
Aircraft accident potential and aircraft noise on and near military airfi elds should be major
considerations in any planning process that local authorities undertake. Land use guidelines
for Air Force AICUZ outlined in Air Force Handbook (AFH) 32-7084, AICUZ Program Manager’s
Guide, gives preferred land use recommendations for areas underlying Clear Zones (CZs)
and Accident Potential Zones (APZs) I and II. Also included are four noise exposure zones
establishing the decibel day-night average, A- weighted sound level (dB DNL). They are:
• 65-69 dB DNL
• 70-74 dB DNL
• 75-79 dB DNL
• 80+ dB DNL
Noise exposure zones are delineated by connecting points of equal noise exposure (contours).
Land use recommendations for noise exposure zones have been established on the basis of
sociological studies prepared and sponsored by several federal agencies, including the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), and the Air Force, as well as
state and local agencies. The guidelines recommend land uses that are compatible with
airfi eld operations while allowing maximum benefi cial use of adjacent properties. Additionally,
guidelines for maximum height of man-made and natural structures are provided to protect the
navigable airspace around an airfi eld, particularly the approach/departure corridors extending
along the axis of the runways.
The AICUZ program applies the latest technology to defi ne noise levels in areas around Air
Force installations. An analysis of Tinker AFB’s fl ying operations was performed by the Air
Force, including types of aircraft, fl ight patterns, variations in altitude, power settings, number of
operations, and hours of operations. This information was used to develop the noise contours
contained within the 2006 AICUZ Study. The same noise contours will be used for this Joint
Land Use Study (JLUS) analysis. However, the 1983 AICUZ noise contours have been utilized
by some of the jurisdictions surrounding Tinker AFB and some comparisons related to noise
affected areas will also be referenced in Section VI.
III-6 DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates
3.4 Joint Land Use Study
A Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) is a cooperative land use planning effort between an affected
local government or governments and a military installation. The recommendations from a
JLUS provide a policy framework for local jurisdictions to support adoption and implementation
of compatible development measures designed to: (1) prevent inappropriate land use
encroachment; (2) safeguard the military mission, and (3) protect the public health, safety and
welfare of the entire community. Figure 3.1 provides the study area for the Tinker AFB JLUS
and the communities surrounding the Base that were partners in this study.
3.4.1 Goals of the JLUS
Among the primary goals of the JLUS are the protection and support of current operations and
for the potential expansion of the missions of Tinker AFB, the largest single-site employer in the
State of Oklahoma. Other study goals include:
Protection of the long term health and safety of the civilian • and military populations that
live and work near the Base
• Increased public awareness of the importance of minimizing and reducing inappropriate
land use encroachments that could adversely impact Tinker’s missions
• Improved communication and formal coordination between Tinker AFB offi cials and
surrounding community leaders and planners on land development decisions
• Comprehensive evaluation and comparison of existing regulatory measures and land
use plans adopted by surrounding local governments
• Identifi cation of confl icts between the AICUZ Study recommendations and the
surrounding local governments’ existing development, land use regulations and long
range plans
• Recommendations for reducing potential confl icts, including potential changes to
building codes, zoning ordinances, subdivision and site plan regulations and long-range
community plans
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates III-7
Source: Created from Data Received from ACOG and Tinker AFB
Figure 3.1 Joint Land Use Study Area
III-8 DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates
Measures necessary to implement JLUS recommendations may involve revisions to the
communities comprehensive plans and land development regulations, consideration of factors
such as zoning, subdivision regulations, building codes, height restrictions, increased sound
attenuation in existing and new buildings, land exchanges, transfer of development rights and
real estate disclosure.
The Air Force has historically relied on the AICUZ program to address encroachment concerns.
Major commands and installation civil engineers and planners are required to prepare, release,
and maintain AICUZ studies for every installation and auxiliary airfi eld with active runways.
Analyses and recommendations from AICUZ studies support the Air Force JLUS processes
with local communities and other stakeholders. JLUS recommendations are designed to
promote compatible development through comprehensive land use planning and appropriate
development regulations in the surrounding communities. Among recommendations generally
included in JLUS studies are the proposed purchase of real property interest in fee and
appropriate restrictive easements acquired by the Air Force to help minimize inappropriate
land uses. AICUZ policy requires installations to acquire, through fee or an appropriate
restrictive easement, all real property interests within the designated CZs when the land use is
incompatible.
3.5 Military Readiness and Encroachment
“Encroachment” is the cumulative impact of land development pressures affecting military
installations and their ranges by the surrounding communities. Encroachment affects the
military as well as the surrounding non-military communities. The DoD requires access to
the lands it occupies to train its soldiers, sailors, and airmen; to test its weapons systems and
equipment; and to maintain mission readiness. Encroachment limits the military’s ability to fully
utilize its training and testing facilities for their intended purposes and increases the potential for
adverse effects on property in surrounding local jurisdictions. Environmental impacts can also
be a factor of encroachment.
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates III-9
DoD operational training and test ranges are increasingly being hemmed in by adjacent civilian
development. This development results in increased limitations and restrictions on military
operations and training. The growth of civilian communities around military installations
forces the military services to shift training and testing procedures and adjust their readiness
protocols. The military’s civilian neighbors place unforeseen restrictions on the use of natural
and physical resources currently set aside for military training, in addition to restricting the times
and conditions under which these operations can be conducted.
At the same time, military training and testing activities often encroach on the local
communities. DoD operations and their environmental footprint often extend to lands which
DoD does not own or control. State and local governments maintain responsibility for land
use planning (local), environmental regulation (state) and enforcement (both). The sharing of
air, land, and water resources dictates the need for partnerships between the three primary
stakeholders; the military, regional/state/local regulatory agencies, and local populations.
Encroachment pressures boil down to a continuing competition for resources growing ever
more scarce. Resources such as land continue to diminish in availability. History indicates that
the fi nancial resources of state and local governments will continue to be in short supply due to
the increasing demands of their constituencies. Regulatory environments by nature continue
to become more stringent over time. Some regulatory factors include wilderness designations,
cultural sites, unexploded ordnance, commercial development, population increases, maritime
issues, air quality, water quantity and quality, noise abatement, air space congestion and
competition, and endangered species and wildlife habitat. Work needs to be done to identify
and defi ne these resources in order to clearly specify how to preserve those resources for
“compatible uses.”
Understanding state and local regulations and improving coordination across the broad
spectrum of state and local agencies are critical to fi nding and enacting solutions to the
problems of encroachment. Solutions need not entirely restrict the use of land resources;
rather they must ensure the compatibility of uses. Most importantly, solutions must be proactive
in order to prevent encroachment and, if necessary, to take remedial action to minimize or
eliminate inappropriate land uses.
III-10 DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates
3.5.1 Impact of Urbanization
While the effect varies by military service branch and the installation on which operations are
being conducted, in general, encroachment has had a limiting effect on the extent to which
training ranges and facilities are available or on the types of training that can be conducted.
This encroachment may limit the ability of units to train in a simulated environment and/or
requires work around the constraints. DoD and military offi cials report that many encroachment
issues are related to urbanization around military installations. They note that most, if not
all, encroachment concerns—such as noise, airspace, endangered species habitat, and air
quality—result from population growth and urbanization. Furthermore, growth around DoD
installations is increasing at a rate greater than the national average for areas without military
bases. At the same time, the increased speed and range of weapon systems are expected to
increase the range requirements for training.
Figure 3.2 Environmental Factors
Source: www.oea.gov
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates III-11
The Air Force is experiencing encroachment pressures that potentially limit training and testing
capacity and capabilities at operational ranges that ultimately may impact their effi ciency in
maintaining appropriate training and readiness. Encroachment pressures generally fall within
three broad categories: (1) competition for resources (e.g., access to land, water, air, and key
frequencies in the communications spectrum); (2) civilian community concerns regarding military
operations (e.g., complaints about noise); and (3) environmental enforcement and compliance
issues. The Air Force has tried many strategies to limit incompatible land development around
once isolated facilities, although they have not been as effective as needed. Land developers
and home builders often ignore “advisories”, and specifi c zoning restrictions have not been
used by local governments to effect the desired restrictions. Oftentimes, there is no specifi c
requirement to disclose to home buyers and renters that an active military facility is nearby and
that it may be close enough to impact their residences.
3.5.2 Development Regulations and Encroachment
Inappropriate private sector land use encroachment continues to be a signifi cant issue for many
military installations. The communities surrounding the Base have made many modifi cations
to their current and long range land use regulations and policies in order to help minimize
inappropriate land uses that may otherwise encroach upon the installation. Long range planning
efforts tend to be implemented through tools like zoning and subdivision regulations. These
implementation tools tend to be more affected by local legislative activities. Local jurisdictions
should be cognizant of actions that may have an adverse effect on the base and its operations.
Oklahoma statute 11-43-101.1 states that cities with an active-duty United States Air Force Base
are permitted to enact an ordinance restricting or prohibiting uses within fi ve miles of a military
installation that are considered to be hazardous to aircraft operations.
“The city ordinance shall:
Be consistent with the most current recommendations and studies titled “Air
Installation Compatible Use Zone Study” made by the United States Air Force
installations at Altus AFB, Tinker AFB, and Vance AFB or studies made by United
States Department of the Army installation at Fort Sill titled “Army Compatible
Use Buffers” or “similar zoning relating to or surrounding a military installation as
adopted by a county, city, or town or a combination of those governmental entities.”
III-12 DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates
This statute appears to grant local governments the right to create long term or permanent
strategies, i.e. creation of conservation easements and buffering activities, to ensure that areas
near Tinker AFB are permanent buffers against encroachment. This is, of course, in addition to
relying on zoning or other potentially non-permanent land-use control policies and regulations.
3.6 Anti-Terrorism and Force Protection
The September 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade
Center—and other acts of global terrorism since—have
highlighted the ever-increasing importance for the
development and implementation of effective anti-terrorism
policies and procedures. While Anti-Terrorism
and Force Protection (AT/FP) issues are not of pivotal
concern to the JLUS process, they are relevant topics
when examining land use activities in close proximity to
military installations. It was primarily at the federal level
(via the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
and agencies cooperating with or reporting to the DHS)
that a set of targets and criteria focused on anti-terrorist
activities has been established. In 2003, the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) created, in
cooperation with branches of the Armed Forces and
other federal agencies, a Risk Management Series of
manuals, each offering guidance and outlining explicit criteria for designing buildings and sites
to reduce or minimize the impacts of terroristic activities. Although the bulk of the information
that has been developed focuses on increasing the structural integrity of buildings and nearby
areas, the manuals also indicate that smart site planning on surrounding properties can help
lessen the impact of potential terroristic acts.
Combat Readiness School
Master Sgt. Larry Shenold, chief of
academics, teaches how to handle
prisoners, focusing students on
what to expect in areas like Iraq
and Afghanistan. Training in land
navigation, self-aid/buddy care and
fi eld fortifi cations are part of the fi rst
week. By week three, Airmen are living
and defending positions, learning to
survive under sleep-deprived, harsh
conditions. (Air Force photo by Margo
Wright)
DFW Advisors Ltd., Michael R. Coker Company, Pavlik and Associates III-13
3.7 DoD: Conservation Partnering Authority
The FY-03 Defense Authorization Act (Title 10 U.S. Code § 2684a) includes a provision that
authorizes the military departments to enter into agreements with eligible entities to acquire real
estate interests in the vicinity of military installations. The Offi ce of the Secretary of Defense
(OSD) created the Conservation Partnering Program [now known as the Readiness and
Environmental Protection Initiative (REPI)] to implement this authority. Under this program, OSD
funds the services to implement compatible land use partnering projects that aim to relieve
encroachment pressures on training, testing, and support operations at U.S. military bases.
DoD is authorized to enter into service partnership agreements with eligible non-federal entities
that share an interest in preserving and protecting land not under military control, particularly
where incompatible development and/or loss of natural habitat does or would impact military
base operations and readiness. Under such an agreement, DoD funds can be used to acquire
real property in the vicinity of military installations to protect military training, testing operations,
and readiness. Eligible entities include state and local governmental agencies and private
conservation organizations, including local land trusts. The partnership agreement must provide
for the acquisition of all rights, title, and interest, or any lesser interest, in real property by the
eligible entity. The agreement must also provide for the sharing of acquisition costs.
The President’s FY-09 national defense budget continues to provide funding in support of
readiness and environmental protection. Approximately $40 million has been allocated for
REPI, which has protected over 48,000 acres around military bases to date.
This page intentionally left blank.