Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutChapter 7 - Refined Alternatives I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I REFINED ALTERNATIVES ClT" S~J3PD;~IYii"~,j ~....~~. .c~. "-'---'-::::...:....~ HOME OF PUKAN L"LAND I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SEBASTIAN MUNICIPAL AIRPORT Master Plan Update arrlJl Sf.BAST~ ~ ~~ HOME OF PWCAN ISlAND Chapter Seven - Refined Alternatives INTRODUCTION This chapter revises and/or combines several ofthe individual alternatives presented in the previous chapter. The refined alternatives are based on input from Airport Management, the City of Sebastian, Indian River County, the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), as well as comments received during meetings with the Technical Review Committee and the general public. Refinements to the alternatives analysis essentially follow the same general order of presentation utilized in the previous chapter. However, revisions are predominantly limited to the selected airfield and general aviation facility alternatives, with a discussion of the environmental factors considered. No changes were made to the navigational aids or economic development alternatives. AIRFIELD FACILITIES The facility requirements analysis identified airfield improvements required for the Sebastian Municipal Airport over the course of the planning period. The viability of several key improvements was subsequently analyzed in the analysis of airfield alternatives. These consisted of three options for the required crosswind runway, as well as an analysis of the taxiway alternatives available. The crosswind runway and taxiway enhancements are addressed further in this chapter. All other airfield improvements have been considered necessary for the continued maintenance and development of the airfield system at Sebastian Municipal, and did not possess alternative approaches. Crosswind Runway Alternative Improvement to the crosswind runway is by far the most significant airfield development action facing Sebastian Municipal over the course of the planning period. As such, even the selected alternative to close Runway 13-31 and re-open Runway 9-27 provided a variety of approaches to meet the needs of the airfield. Based on the assessment contained in the airfield alternatives, considerable discussion was generated regarding the potential options to re-open Runway 9-27, their attributes and constraints, and the potential construction and funding considerations that affected their implementation. It was determined in the facility requirements and alternatives analysis that a length of 3,200 feet was required for Runway 9-27 to accommodate A-I and B-1 aircraft. The pavement of the original Runway 9-27 alignment measures 4,000 feet long by 150 feet wide. This provided a number of opportunities for the overlay of the required 3,200-foot long by 75-foot wide runway for small aircraft crosswind operations. The proximity of facilities to the north and south of Runway 9-27 dictated that the lateral alignment would have to follow the original runway centerline. This ensures that the proper offset and vertical clearances are achieved on both sides of the new 75-foot wide runway. Re-opening the runway on either the northern or southern half of the 150-foot wide pavement would create violations to the required transitional slopes. Therefore, the reconstruction of the new 75-foot wide Runway 9-27 will be centered on the existing 150-foot wide pavement surface. With an existing 4,000-foot length, various options existed to displace the new 3,200-foot length east or west along the pavement available. Because the new runway will be a prepared surface, an offset of 200 feet is required off each threshold. It is at this point that the associated 20: 1 approach surfaces begin. As a utility runway (serving aircraft of 12,500 pounds or less), criteria in Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 77, "Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace" necessitate the 20: 1 surface for both visual and non-precision instrument approaches. FAR Part 77 also requires that any public road that traverses beneath a runway's approach, maintain 2002 7-1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SEBASTIAN MUNICIPAL AIRPORT Master Plan Update arrlJl SEBASTIAN ~-' . _r .,,/", -..;: --, _, _..... _n HOMl Of P'WCAN ISlAND a minimum clearance of 15 feet between the road and required approach surfaces. To the immediate west of Runway 9-27 is Airport Drive West, which runs north/south under the proposed approach to Runway 9. This existing road is the controlling factor for the location of the Runway 9 approach. A distance of 300 feet at 20: 1 provides the 15-foot clearance. This is then added to the required 200-foot offset for the beginning of the approach surface to arrive at the overall 500-foot displacement from the end of the original Runway 9-27 pavement surface. This required displacement places the threshold along the eastern half of the old Runway 18- 36 alignment, which is also 150 feet wide. Because it was determined that the eastern half of the old Runway 18- 36 alignment would be utilized for a 35-foot wide north-south taxiway, this provided the final displacement for the Runway 9 threshold. As such, the Runway 9 threshold has been located so that it is perpendicular or flush with the edge of the 35-foot wide north-south taxiway. This provides an overall distance of approximately 590 feet from the centerline of Airport Drive West and the proposed Runway 9 threshold. On the far end of the proposed runway, approximately 400 feet will exist between the proposed Runway 27 threshold and the eastern edge of the original Runway 9-27 pavement. Since more than 300 feet is available beyond the end of the original pavement edge, there is adequate space to provide public road access into the area located just northeast of the future Runway 4-22 and Runway 9-27 intersection. This spacing was made possible by the relocation of the 11th hole of the Sebastian Municipal Golf Course. The final configuration of Runway 9- 27 is reflected on the various sheets of the Airport Layout Plan (ALP) set contained in the following chapter. Crosswind Runway Enhancements It should be noted that since Runway 9-27 will become the new crosswind runway for the airport, all of the runway enhancements identified in the facility requirements for Runway 13-31 apply to Runway 9-27. These include, but are not limited to the following: + Install Medium Intensity Runway Lights (MIRLs). + Construct a full-length parallel taxiway to Runway 9-27 with Medium Intensity Taxiway Lights (MITLs) . + Re-mark Runway 9-27 after reconstruction to include non-precision runway markings. + Install Runway End Identifier Lights (REILs) to both ends of Runway 9-27. + Install Precision Approach Path Indicators (PAPIs) to both ends of Runway 9-27. It is not intended for all of the improvements listed above to be complete when Runway 9-27 is re-opened. The phasing of these projects is included in the 20 year CIP for Sebastian Municipal and are reflected on the ALP. Discussions during the Technical Review Committee and public meetings revealed a desire to provide additional runway length for the crosswind runway. Given the required clearances for the approach surfaces, the only options available would be to utilize displaced thresholds on each end or to extend the runway to the east. The application of displaced thresholds could potentially provide an additional 500 feet of takeoff length for operations on Runway 9 and 400 feet on Runway 27, given the existing 4,000 feet of pavement. However, the application of declared distances at a non-controlled general aviation airport, along with some line of sight issues on the Runway 9 end, limit the viability of this option at this time. In addition, the costs associated with the proper taxiway access, to prevent back-taxi operations, further undermine the feasibility of this option. Nonetheless, it is recommended that the 500 and 400 feet of existing pavement before the proposed Runway 9 and Runway 27 thresholds, respectively, be preserved for potential use in the future. The other option to extend the runway to the east is simply not justified at this time. 2002 7-2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SEBASTIAN MUNICIPAL AIRPORT Master Plan Update Ol!lI SEBAST~ ~-' ,- ,"-"" " _-,_ "i-',~- HOME OF PtuCAN ISlAND Taxiway Enhancements The taxiway options discussed in the alternatives analysis were somewhat limited due to the airfield configuration. Based on the recommended airfield and facility development options, there are no refinements necessary. The recommendation to ultimately provide a full-length parallel taxiway to both Runway 4-22 and Runway 9-27 remains. Likewise, the recommendation of placing the Runway 4-22 parallel taxiway to the northwest and the Runway 9-27 parallel taxiway to the north are necessary to support the existing facilities of the airfield and those proposed. Due to existing conditions and operational considerations, the phasing of airfield improvements will require the construction of the full-length parallel taxiway to Runway 9-27 to occur simultaneously with or immediately after the runway re-opening. While the option to provide a parallel taxiway to the south of Runway 9-27 has some merit, the north parallel better supports the proposed development of general aviation facilities. While not shown on the ALP plans, a taxiway to the south of Runway 9-27 may prove essential for the development of the airport beyond the needs identified in the 20 year planning period. Run-up areas are proposed for each end of the two full-length parallel taxiways. The run-up area for Runway 4 has been situated to take full advantage of the existing pavement in this location. Similarly the run-up area on the west end of the parallel taxiway to Runway 9-27 has been positioned on a portion of the old Runway 18-36 pavement. All of the run-up areas have been configured to allow use by multiple aircraft and to minimize the affects of prop wash on tenant leaseholds. A fifth run-up area was included on the south side of Runway 9 along the north-south taxiway. Because of the aviation related development between the approach ends of Runway 4 and Runway 9, this space provides pilots an area to conduct run-ups when departing on Runway 9, without having to cross the runway. This area, which has also been situated on existing pavement from the old Runway 18-36 alignment, should be marked to minimize any prop wash for the tenants located south of the Runway 9 approach. The five run-up areas are depicted on the ALP in the following chapter. GENERAL AVIATION FACILITIES Essentially, three alternatives were proposed for the development of additional Fixed Base Operator (FBO) facilities. The recommendations for pursuing development of an FBO and general aviation facilities relied upon the re-opening of Runway 9-27. Before this airfield alteration can occur, the facilities of three existing tenants would have to be accommodated in different places. The following sections provide the proposed locations to mitigate the displacement of these tenants. All of the following recommendations are based on the logical sequence of events that must transpire in order for the closure of Runway 13-31 and re-opening of Runway 9-27 to occur with the minimal amount of interruption to airport operations. The following sections address the issues related to those tenants that will be impacted by the proposed airfield development plan. Relocation of Velocity The four acres of Velocity's southern leasehold will be relocated to a site across the north-south taxiway, from their northern leasehold. The configuration of this property is essentially the same as in the alternatives analysis, but has been slightly adjusted to accommodate all of the setbacks required for the airfield. It is expected that the site plan will have slight adjustments made before the relocation is conducted. Taking this into consideration, the final site plan needs to consider all of the required airport design criteria, so as not to prevent the development of airport facilities reflected in this study. The site reserved for Velocity is depicted on the ALP. 2002 7-3 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SEBASTIAN MUNICIPAL AIRPORT Master Plan Update 0l!1JI SE~AST~ ~-' ~'_ r- u_ _ . ~ -:-',7';'-"',> -- HOME Of PELlCAN ISlAND JS Aviation Leasehold Although there have not been a lot of discussions held between the City and JS Aviation to date, a space has been reserved on the west side of the airport for the relocation of JS Aviation's facilities. Primary considerations for this location were based on terms contained in the existing leasehold between the City of Sebastian and JS Aviation. With respect to the relocation of leased premises, the existing leasehold states: "Following the Landlord's receipt of adequate funding for the re-activation plan for runway 9-27, as depicted by the Master Plan for Sebastian Municipal Airport and contained in the Capital Budget of the City of Sebastian, the Landlord shall construct a comparable building on an alternative site at the Airport, comparable in size with the Existing Premises and with appropriate access with comparable frontage on an existing taxiway of the Airport and to relocate the tenants existing fuel farm or in the alternative install another of comparable size and capacity. ("New Premises") Landlord shall give Tenant written notice of completion of the New Premises. Tenant shall, within sixty (60) days from receipt of notice, relocate its business to the New Premises." The site reserved on the west side of the airport is the only site that can truly meet the provisions required of the leasehold. The problem with most other sites is that there are no existing taxiways available. Only the north- south taxiway and the partial parallel taxiway to Runway 4-22 will be available when the re-activation of Runway 9-27 begins. The partial parallel to Runway 4-22 has no 1andside access, especially while Runway 13-31 is still active. The partial parallel to Runway 13-31 does not provide adequate airfield access and is inaccessible while Runway 13-31 is active. With respect to airfield location, the site reserved for JS Aviation on the west side ofthe airfield is the only site that provides "comparable frontage on an existing taxiway of the Airport." This location will place JS Aviation right between the approach to Runway 9 and Runway 4, very much like their current location which is between the approaches to Runway 22 and Runway 31. Distinct advantages of the proposed site include: + + Better, safer, and more efficient access to the primary and crosswind runways. Offers the opportunity for JS Aviation to operate in a location that has a lot of visibility and access with respect to the operations of the airfield. Provides a site that is compatible with the focus of activity and future development of the airport. Removes the existing facility from the side of the airport with the highest density of non- compatible residential development. + + All of the facilities depicted are comparable with those currently in use by JS Aviation. The most significant impact noted is the additional drive time it may take for some of the users to access the west, versus the eastside of town. This impact, which was timed between five and seven minutes depending on origination and route of travel, is considered minor. The area reserved for the relocated facilities of JS Aviation are depicted on the ALP. Skydive Sebastian Landing Zone As mentioned previously, there is no lease between the City and Skydive Sebastian for the exclusive use of a landing zone. Therefore, as reflected in the previous Master Plan and Airport Layout Plan, the area that currently serves as the Runway Protection Zone for Runway 13 has been reserved for the future landing zone. During the course of this study, an alternative landing zone was considered in the South Infield area. However, after meeting with the FAA, it was agreed that the site in the South Infield area was considered unsafe. The FAA stated that the South Infield area suffers from the same safety problems that exist for the current landing zone in the North Infield area. This problem is that either location requires the skydivers to cross an active taxiway and in some 2002 7-4 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SEBASTIAN MUNICIPAL AIRPORT Master Plan Update 0Tr1Jl Sf.BAST~ ~-' .~. . .'~ -..::;:: -. - -,'--" .-, HOME Of Pt:UCAN ISlAND cases an active runway after landing. This practice is considered unacceptable by the FAA as it increases the risk for an incursion to occur on the airfield. In addition, during the course of the study, the ownership of Skydive Sebastian changed. Placing the future sky diving landing zone to the northwest of Runway 13 keeps the airfield configuration the same as it was in the previous Master Plan and Airport Layout Plan. Therefore, under this update, nothing directly related to Skydive Sebastian will be changed, except for increasing the size of the landing zone as described below. This allows the current owners of Sky dive Sebastian to continue operating under the same terms and conditions that were in place when they purchased the business. Previously the two proposed skydiving landing zones depicted in the alternatives analysis (Exhibit 6-4) were shown as having a radius of 300 feet. While staff of Skydive Sebastian provided this dimension during the inventory phase of the study, the current owners and users of the facility expressed a concern about the drop zone size. As a result the 2001 Skydiver's Information Manual, which is published by the United States Parachute Association, was consulted. The following excerpt is from Section 2 - Basic Safety Requirements (page 9) of this document: H DROP ZONE REQUIRMENTS 1. Areas used for skydiving should be unobstructed, with the following minimum radial distances to the nearest hazard: a. solo students and A-license holders - 100 meters b. B- and C-license holders - 50 meters c. D- license holders - unlimited 2. Hazards are defined as telephone and power lines, towers, buildings, open bodies of water, highways, automobiles, and clusters of trees covering more than 3,000 square meters. 3. Manned ground-to-air communication (e.g., radios, panels, smoke, lights) are to be present on the drop zone during skydiving operations. Using these industry guidelines, the landing/drop zone reserved for Skydive Sebastian was increased from the original radius of 300 feet to 328 feet (100 meters). This zone, reflected on the ALP set, is unobstructed and clear of any hazards, especially those called out in the 2001 Skydiver's Information Manual. Other General Aviation Facilities Adjustments were made to the selected FBO alternative from what was presented in the original alternatives analysis. Changes were made to ensure Design Group II aircraft could utilize the facilities proposed. Key improvements were made to allow this size of aircraft to access the fuel farm and parking area in front of the clearspan hangar and general aviation terminal building. Similarly, the layout of various sized private hangar facilities incorporate the required setbacks to accommodate Design Group II aircraft. The only exception was the design criteria (Design Group I) used for the layout of the T -hangar facilities. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS The purpose of this section is to provide a review of the environmental factors that were taken into consideration during the analysis of airfield development alternatives. This section also addresses the existing and future noise contours that were developed as part of the study. 2002 7-5 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SEBASTIAN MUNICIPAL AIRPORT Master Plan Update 0Tr1Jl SEBAST!AN ~ ~~~ HOME Of PWCAN ISLAND Environmental Assessment for Re-Opening Runway 9-27 As stated in the alternatives analysis, a detailed Environmental Assessment (EA) for the re-opening of Runway 9- 27 was conducted as part of the previous master plan. The FAA approved this EA in a letter dated March 9, 1994. This letter details the FAA's "Finding of No Significant Impact" after evaluating the various categories required for analysis. Since a significant amount of time has passed since the assessment was conducted, the EA will need to be re-eva1uated. This re-eva1uation will necessitate the documentation, in letter form, of any changes that have occurred since the original EA submittal. The only significant changes since 1994 relate to the proposed runway length and level of operations. The original 1994 plan to re-activate Runway 9-27 and close Runway 13-31 required a length of 4,000 feet for Runway 9-27. All elements of this study reflect only a length of 3,200 feet for Runway 9-27. It is assumed that the reduced length would not create any additional impact to the environment. If any, it is anticipated that the reduction to the length of Runway 9-27 would lessen the impact to the surrounding community. As for the changes in activity levels, the EA was based on the forecasts contained in the 1993 Master Plan. The update to these figures (Chapter 3) documented how the projections contained in the 1993 Master Plan were never realized. Therefore, any community impacts that were attributed to aircraft overflights and/or noise will be less. The noise contours generated as part of this study, and which would be used to update the EA, are described in the following section. Generation of Noise Contours Noise contours for the 65, 70, and 75 Day Night Sound Level (DNL) were generated using the latest version of the FAA Integrated Noise Model (INM) software. DNL was developed as a single number measure of community noise exposure. Introduced as a simple method for predicting the effects on a population of the average long-term exposure to noise, DNL is an enhancement of the Equivalent Sound Level (Leq) metric through the addition of a 10 dB penalty for nighttime (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.) noise intrusions. The incorporation of the 10 dB penalty is in recognition of the increased annoyance that is generally associated with noise during the later night hours. DNL employs the same energy equivalent concept as Leq and uses a 24-hour time integration period. For assessing long-term noise exposure, the yearly average DNL is the specified metric by the FAA in their FAR Part 150 Noise Compatibility Planning process. The DNL metric was also accepted by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Council on Environmental Quality for use in assessing aviation related cumulative noise impacts. The DNL noise metric has emerged as a highly workable tool for land use planning and in relating noise, particularly aircraft noise, to community reaction. DNL has also been employed to establish specific criteria relative to the compatibility between various forms ofland use and increasing levels ofDNL noise exposure. The contours for Sebastian Municipal were based on the activity levels and aircraft types for the base year (2000) and 2012. Existing noise contours were generated using the Runway 4-22 and Runway 13-31 configuration, while the 2012 model utilized the Runway 4-22 and Runway 9-27 layout. As depicted on the Airport Land Use Plan, only the 65 and 70 DNL contours for 2012 are depicted, neither of which extend beyond the current airport property line. While it was modeled, the 75 DNL did not appear in the INM results. Close scrutiny of the contours will show that more operations were modeled on Runway 9-27 versus Runway 4-22. This is based on the information provided by the tenants and users interviewed as to which runway they would use most should Runway 9-27 re-open. The shorter taxi times for most tenants to the east-west runway supports this utilization. This plan also depicts the aircraft traffic patterns for both runways. Standard traffic patterns at an airport have aircraft making all turns to the left. The left-hand turn facilitates the pilot's ability to keep the runway environment in sight since he sits on the left-hand side of the aircraft. However, right-hand traffic patterns are also utilized for various reasons, not the least of which is for noise abatement and the prevention of aircraft 2002 7-6 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SEBASTIAN MUNICIPAL AIRPORT Master Plan Update Ol!lI S[BAST~ ~ ~~~ HOME OF PWCAN ISlAND overflights. Currently, all four runway ends at Sebastian Municipal have standard left-hand traffic patterns. It is the intention of Airport Management and the City of Sebastian to publish right-hand traffic patterns for Runway 22 and Runway 27. This means that all of the traffic and turns associated with Runway 4-22 will be on the northeast side of the runway and all of the traffic and turns associated with Runway 9-27 will all be on the north side of the runway. The intent is to reduce as much as possible the number of aircraft flights over residential areas. It should be noted that proper procedures at an uncontrolled field like Sebastian Municipal require that aircraft enter the traffic pattern in level flight, abeam the midpoint of the runway, and at pattern altitude. These procedures are documented in the FAA's Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM) -Basic Flight Information and Air Traffic Control Procedures. While these changes in traffic patterns will not eliminate those aircraft that deviate from the proper traffic patterns or those that use straight-out departures, it should help reduce the number of flights over the communities surrounding the airfield. However, it is difficult to control those aircraft that operate beyond the boundaries of the standard sized traffic pattern. Scrub Jay Buffer The Florida scrub jay has been well documented in the vicinity of the airfield by the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. In 1999, a Florida scrub jay management plan was written, which incorporated portions of the Sebastian Municipal Airport. To facilitate recommendations in this plan, the City of Sebastian, the FAA, and FDOT agreed to provide a 100-foot wide flight corridor for the Florida scrub jay. This buffer zone is depicted on the ALP set. During the layout of the proposed facilities, no impacts were made to this lOO-foot wide path that primarily follows the property line on the north side of the airport. Wetlands and Water Quality At the onset of the master plan, a field investigation was conducted to determine the extent of wetlands on the airport property. This study did not include any wetland flagging, nor was it coordinated with the Army Corps of Engineers or St. John's River Water Management District. However, it did provide useful information that was utilized in the location of future facilities. As for water quality, a complete master drainage study is also being conducted simultaneous with this master plan. The master drainage study incorporates all of the existing and proposed facilities depicted on the ALP set in the following chapter. Future Land Use Sebastian Municipal Airport has committed much of its available land area for development of either airfield or general aviation facilities. Additional land to the east and west of these facilities is available for commercial and industrial development. Remaining areas of land not presently committed to development in most instances are situated in areas either difficult to develop, such as off the ends of runways, or surrounded by active airfield pavements. Throughout the study, the goal has been to satisfy the needs of the airport and facilitate revenue generation, all while ensuring the safety and compatibility of the areas surrounding the airport. The airport developments proposed in this study and on the ALP set do not require any of the current City of Sebastian or Indian River County land use designations to change. Likewise, no property acquisitions for the airport are required for the planned development. SUMMARY The preceding sections have reviewed a series of issues and questions that arose from discussions of the alternatives as well as the review of the previous chapters. With these refinements in mind, the next step of the 2002 7-7 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SEBASTIAN MUNICIPAL AIRPORT Master Plan Update Ol!lI Sf,BAST!AN ~-' <" ',r-" -~i1"""'" --, HOME Of PWCAN ISI..AND process is to develop the ALP set to depict the existing and future airport facilities. The drawings that make up this set are discussed in the following chapter. 2002 7-8