DOCSLIB.ORG

Inventory of Existing Conditions

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Inventory of Existing Conditions Buchanan Field Airport Master Planning Program Field A. INVENTORY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS Buchanan A > Inventory of Existing Conditions INTRODUCTION. Buchanan Field Airport (CCR) is the major general aviation reliever airport serving Contra Costa County and multiple communities located in the northeastern portion of the greater San Francisco Bay Area (see Figure A1). The Airport has been a catalyst for business growth in the region and has served as an anchor for the local employment base, as well as meeting the aviation transportation needs. Situated in an unincorporated portion of Contra Costa County, directly adjacent to the thriving urban heartbeat of the City of Concord, Buchanan Field Airport is a vital component of the transportation infrastructure serving the region for tourism and business. Buchanan Field Airport is well equipped to serve regional demand related to general aviation and business aviation needs. The Airport has a reputation as being an excellent aviation facility that offers a safe and efficient operational environment. The Bay Area continues to experience significant increases in business activity, commercial and residential growth, and economic development. Because of this, Buchanan Field Airport is also being presented with increasing operational and facility demands. Many of the areas surrounding the Airport, with many high quality homes and environmental amenities, have experienced significant residential development, resulting in homeowner concerns about the effect that the Airport may have on their lifestyle. Some of these homes and facilities are located within a two to three mile radius of the Airport. Thus, the Airport may influence the social, economic, and physical environments of the area in which it operates. All of these effects must be carefully evaluated in considering airport development options associated with this planning effort. Previous Buchanan Field Airport planning studies include a Master Plan, which was completed in 1990, and an FAR Part 150 Noise Exposure and Land Use Compatibility Study, which was completed in 1989. Local, regional, and national aviation issues have evolved significantly during the years that followed the completion of the last Master Plan. This evolution indicates that long-term planning considerations previously identified should be re-evaluated and that an updated set of planning assumptions should be formulated. These assumptions will serve as a basis for airport development recommendations. The purpose of this Airport Master Plan is to determine airport development needs, examine viable and reasonable alternatives, recommend a realistic plan, and identify potential environmental effects. The requirement for future facilities will be evaluated from an aviation utilization standpoint, along with considering the relationship of airport facilities to the A.1 surrounding community. The focus of the Master Plan is on the physical development of airport property to meet aviation demands; however, it will also identify potential non-aviation development areas on airport property. The overall planning goal is the development of an aviation facility that can accommodate future demand, is not significantly constrained by its environs, and minimizes its adverse effects on its surroundings. Airport History and Regional Aviation Environment Buchanan Field Airport began in Spring 1942 when Contra Costa County purchased 407 acres for the development of an airport, with construction scheduled to begin later that summer. However, prior to the completion of airfield improvements, the U.S. Government, through the War Department, acquired the entire airport for use as an army airfield for the duration of World War II. Concord Army Airfield operated from 1943 until 1946. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers constructed many temporary and permanent facility improvements during this time period, including the runways currently designated 1L/19R and 14L/32R. In 1946, the Air Corps deactivated Concord Army Airfield, and the property and buildings were deeded to Contra Costa County (with a reversion clause to the Federal Government). In August 1946, Buchanan Field Airport was opened as a public-use airport operated by the County and has been in continuous operation since that time. During the post-war period, Runway 6/24 was constructed and operated until 1961, when it was closed for the first time due to a conflict with the newly constructed airport traffic control tower (ATCT). Runway 6/24 was opened again in 1963 until 1976, at which time it was permanently closed and has served as Taxiway “C” since then. In late Fall 1966, Runway 1R/19L was relocated from its former location, and the then-existing runway was converted into parallel Taxiway “A”. During 1968 and 1969, Runway 14R/32L was created from the existing taxiway system, lengthened and supported by a newly constructed parallel taxiway, labeled Taxiway “B.” Since this time, the airfield has seen the development of several other minor improvements to support airside access with the most notable being the construction of Taxiway “J” in 1975. The Buchanan Field Airport airside has operated in this configuration to the present day. Buchanan Field Airport’s history also includes periods of commercial air service beginning in the 1960s and continuing into the 70s with commuter service to San Francisco International Airport and Oakland International Airport by fixed wing aircraft and helicopters. The most significant period of commercial service, however, took place from 1986 to 1992, providing service from Buchanan Field Airport to Los Angeles International Airport and San Jose International Airport. Commercial service ended in Fall 1992, due to the prevailing economics of the airline industry. A.2 Federal Obligation Buchanan Field Airport is a federally obligated airport. The original obligation stems from the transfer and conveyance of real property from the War Department to Contra Costa County (through what was then known as an “AP-4” Land Transfer Agreement) that placed restrictions and covenants upon the use, development, and disposition/disposal of the original 407 acres, as well as any additional land parcels acquired since then with federal grant funds. These covenants run with the title of the land and require, among other things, that the land be utilized for the purposes of a public airport and that the Airport is to be operated and developed upon fair and reasonable terms, that the County must protect the Airport, and, that all classes of aviation users be granted equal access to the Airport and its facilities. Moreover, each time a federal grant is accepted, the County obligates itself for additional operational and development requirements as incorporated in FAA’s “Part V Grant Assurances” attached to the grant offer from the Federal Government. A.3 The Barnard Dunkelberg & Company Team Dixon Santa Rosa 505 YOLO Yountville NAPA Vacaville SONOMA Boyes Hot Springs Napa 101 Fairfield Petaluma Suisun City 80 SACRAMENTO 680 SOLANO MARIN Suisun Vallejo Bay Novato 780 San Pablo Bay Buchanan Field Airport San Rafael Antioch 580 Lafayette Walnut Creek Berkeley Oakland CONTRA COSTA San Francisco San Ramon SAN FRANCISCO 580 Livermore Pacific Ocean South San Francisco Hayward San Francisco Bay Pacifica San Bruno 880 ALAMEDA Fremont SAN MATEO Belmont 280 East Palo Alto 680 Palo Alto SANTA CLARA San Santa Clara Jose {N} APPROXIMATE SCALE: 1 = 10 Miles Figure A1 Airport Location Map SOURCE: Microsoft Street & Trips, 2005. A.4 Regional Aviation Plans The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) published a report entitled: Regional Airport System Plan – General Aviation Element, which was released in April 2003. This plan lists 20 publicly-owned general aviation and four commercial air carrier (commercial service) airports within the nine-county Bay Area. This plan describes conditions, issues, and trends and notes future system issues and considerations. This plan includes specific discussion of the following issues as they relate to each airport and to the regional airport system as a whole: Regional Interest and Plan Recommendations Overview; General Aviation Trends and Issues; Airport Inventory and Highlights; and, Specific Airport Highlights. This plan presents a solid summary of Bay Area general aviation airports and common issues and provides supporting basis for further reference. Specifically, the Regional Airport System Plan – General Aviation Element 2003 mentions Buchanan Field Airport in association with the following topics: growing business use of general aviation airports; possessing a surplus of based aircraft tiedown spaces; lack of available hangar space; having commercial service in the past; and, being in a good position to cater to corporate aircraft operations. Within a 25-nautical mile radius of Buchanan Field Airport, there are nine (9) other civilian airports that serve various segments of the general aviation community. The table below, entitled GENERAL AVIATION FACILITIES WITHIN THE VICINITY OF BUCHANAN FIELD AIRPORT, describes the character of neighboring aviation facilities. A.5 Table A1 GENERAL AVIATION AIRPORT FACILITIES IN THE VICINITY OF BUCHANAN FIELD AIRPORT Distance from CCR Size of (Nautical Based Annual Longest Facility Airport Location Miles) Aircraft Operations Runway (Acres) Rio Vista Airport 20 NE 56 35,000 4,200’ 273 Nut Tree Airport 24 E 245 101,000 4,700’ 262 Byron Airport 23 SE 106 60,000 4,500’ 1,307 Livermore Airport 21 SE 601 235,000 5,253’ 643 Hayward Executive Airport 20
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Omnibus Appropriations Conference Report for FY2003 and California Implications -- February 27, 2003
    THE CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE FOR FEDERAL POLICY RESEARCH 419 New Jersey Avenue, SE, Washington, D.C. 20003 202-546-3700 Fax: 202-546-2390 E-mail: [email protected] Web: http://www.calinst.org SPECIAL REPORT: Omnibus Appropriations Conference Report for FY2003 and California Implications -- February 27, 2003 CONTENTS: On February 12, 2003, congressional negotiators agreed to a Department of Justice .................2 $397.4 billion FY03 Omnibus Appropriations Conference Report, H.J. Res. 2, which incorporates the eleven unfinished appropriations measures Department of Commerce ..............3 for non-military domestic spending into one package. After four months Department of the Interior ..............4 passing temporary stop-gap spending measures to maintain government Army Corps of Engineers ..............6 operations, the House passed the bill on February 13 by a vote of 338-83, after the Motion to Recommit failed by a largely party line vote of 193- Department of Energy .................8 226. The Senate passed the Conference Report on February 14. Department of Labor ..................8 The final funding level is about $11.5 billion more than the Department of Health and Human Services $385.9 billion limit the White House had imposed on Congress. In order ................................9 to offset additional spending for education and other programs, the bill Department of Education ............. 12 includes a 0.65 percent across-the-board spending cut. However, Head Department of Transportation ......... 15 Start, the Space Shuttle program, VA medical care, and the Women Infants and Children’s (WIC) program are exempted from the cut. Department of Agriculture ........... 20 The following updates the preliminary analysis that the Department of Veteran Affairs .......
    [Show full text]
  • United States Air Force and Its Antecedents Published and Printed Unit Histories
    UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AND ITS ANTECEDENTS PUBLISHED AND PRINTED UNIT HISTORIES A BIBLIOGRAPHY EXPANDED & REVISED EDITION compiled by James T. Controvich January 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTERS User's Guide................................................................................................................................1 I. Named Commands .......................................................................................................................4 II. Numbered Air Forces ................................................................................................................ 20 III. Numbered Commands .............................................................................................................. 41 IV. Air Divisions ............................................................................................................................. 45 V. Wings ........................................................................................................................................ 49 VI. Groups ..................................................................................................................................... 69 VII. Squadrons..............................................................................................................................122 VIII. Aviation Engineers................................................................................................................ 179 IX. Womens Army Corps............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
    Napa County Airport Land Use Commission Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan Calistoga Gllderport NAPA COUNTY AIRPORT [AND USE COMMISSION Daniel M. Jonas, Chairman (1989-91) Kathryn J. Winter, Chairperson (1991-92) Tony Holzhauer, Chairman (1 992-94) Mary E. Handel, Chairperson (1 994-95, 1998) John W. Whitridge, Ill, Chairman (1995-96) Juliana Inman, Chairperson (1996-98) Jim King, Chairman (1 998-2000) COMMISSION STAFF Jeffrey R. Redding, Executive Officer Michael Miller, Deputy Planning Director/ALUC Staff Laura J. Anderson, Deputy County Counsel SHUT[ MOEN ASSOCIATES STAFF Michael A. Shutt, Principal David P. Dietz, Director of Planning Projects Coleen AL more, Word Processing and Publication Todd Eroh, Graphics Technician Revised 12/15/99 Table of Contents PART I — INTRODUCTION 1 — INTRODUCTION PURPOSE 1-1 ROLE 1—1 Napa County Airport Land Use Commission 1-2 AUTHORITY 1-2 RELATIONSHIP TO LOCAL PLANS 1-2 Overruling 1-4 GENERAL APPROACH 1-4 ORGANIZATION OF THE PLAN 1-5 2 — COMPATIBILITY CONCERNS NOISE IMPACTS 2-1 Assessment of Airport Impacts 2-1 Noise Compatibility Concepts 2-2 FLIGHT HAZARDS 2-4 Assessing Hazards to Flight 2-4 Limiting Flight Hazards 2-4 SAFETY 2-5 Assessing Safety mpacts 2-5 Limiting Risks of injury or Damage 2-5 OVERFLIGHT IMPACTS 2-6 Assessing Overfligh: Impacts 2-6 Overflight Compatibility Concepts 2-7 PART III * POLICIES, PLANS, AND CRITERIA 3— POLICIES SCOPE OF REVIEW 3-1 Geographic Area o’ Concern Types of Airport Impacts 3-1 Types of Actions Reviewed 3-2 Review Process 3-3 PRIMARY REVIEW POLICIES 3-4 Land
    [Show full text]
  • Solano 4 Wind Project EIR 8 References Executive
    Solano 4 Wind Project EIR July 2019 8 References Executive Summary No references are cited in this chapter. Chapter 1, “Introduction” No references are cited in this chapter. Chapter 2, “Project Description” California Energy Commission. 2018 (August). Operational Wind Projects, Solano Wind Resource Area, 2018. Map scale 1:24,000. Available: https://www.energy.ca.gov/maps/renewable/wind/WindResourceArea_Solano.pdf. Accessed March 27, 2019. CEC. See California Energy Commission. Solano County. 1987 (May). Solano County Wind Turbine Siting Plan and Environmental Impact Report. Department of Environmental Management, Fairfield, CA. U.S. Geological Survey. 2019 (January). U.S. Wind Turbine Database. Available: https://eerscmap.usgs.gov/uswtdb/viewer/#14.02/38.16164/-121.79729. Accessed February 9, 2019. USGS. See U.S. Geological Survey. Chapter 3, “Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures” Section 3.1, “Aesthetics” Black & Veatch. 2019 (January 3). Solano Wind Energy Project, Wind Project Shadow Flicker Assessment. California Department of Transportation 2019. Scenic Highway Mapping System. Available: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/. Accessed March 18, 2019. Federal Aviation Administration. 2018 (August 17). Obstruction Marking and Lighting, including Changes 1 and 2. Advisory Circular 70/7460-1L. Chapter 13, “Marking and Lighting Wind Turbines.” Federal Highway Administration. 2015 (January). Guidelines for the Visual Impact Assessment of Highway Projects. FHWA-HEP-15-029. Washington, DC. Page 8-1 Solano 4 Wind Project EIR July 2019 National Research Council. 2007. Environmental Impacts of Wind-Energy Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. NRC. See National Research Council. Sacramento Municipal Utility District. 2007 (September). Draft Environmental Impact Report for the SMUD Solano Wind Project Phase 3.
    [Show full text]
  • City of Pittsburg
    City of Pittsburg Emergency Operations Plan December 2018 City of Pittsburg Emergency Operations Plan This page intentionally left blank. ii December 2018 City of Pittsburg Emergency Operations Plan Emergency Operations Center Activation QuickStart Guide The City of Pittsburg (City) Emergency Operations Center (EOC) serves as support to the command and control by the on-scene incident response. When an incident occurs, there is often insufficient information to determine if the EOC should be activated or how long an activation may last. If this condition occurs, a virtual or partial EOC activation may be initiated. More detailed information on emergency activations levels is contained in Section 4.2.3. Once an EOC activation is commenced, the first arriving staff should use the QuickStart Guide to efficiently setup and operate the EOC. When activated, the EOC responds to the impacts that any incident has on employees, facilities, critical and other infrastructure, and business functions. The EOC carries out this function through: • Information Collection and Evaluation • Operational Planning • Resource Management • Priority Setting • Overall Priorities - Life/Safety - Incident Stabilization - Property Preservation iii December 2018 City of Pittsburg Emergency Operations Plan EOC ACTIVATION CHECKLIST COMPLETED Date/Time TASK Activate the City EOC by assuming the role of EOC Director. Follow building inspection instructions. Consider which EOC should be activated based on damage and inspections. Establish the level of activation with the City Manager’s Office. Use Everbridge to send an EOC Activation notification to staff. The EOC Supply Cabinets are in various areas and contain appropriately titled boxes for each EOC Section. Place the appropriate material at each of the identified workstation locations.
    [Show full text]
  • Rio Vista Airport Pavement Management Plan, Drainage Assessment, and Electrical Plan
    Statement of Qualifications for Rio Vista Airport Pavement Management Plan, Drainage Assessment, and Electrical Plan Prepared for City of Rio Vista Prepared by Statement of Qualifications for RioRio VVistaista AAirportp Pavement Management Plan, DrainageiA AsseAssessment,ssment,ment,nt, and Electrical Plan July 22, 2010 765 The City Drive Suite 400 Mr. John Andoh Orange, California Transit & Airport Coordinator 92868 City of Rio Vista TEL 714 939 1030 FAX 714 938 9488 One Main Street Rio Vista, CA 94571 Re: Statement of Interest and Qualifications for Professional Airport Engineering Design and Planning Services for the City of Rio Vista and the Rio Vista Municipal Airport Dear Mr. Andoh: The City of Rio Vista is looking for the most qualified airport consultant to work with the City to improve the Rio Vista Municipal Airport. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (Kimley-Horn) is that firm. We believe that Kimley-Horn is the right choice for the City based on the following: History of Stability and Strong California Presence. Kimley-Horn is an employee owned, national firm. Since its inception in 1967, our firm has never been sold or acquired, or merged with other entities. Furthermore, we are ranked in the top 20 national aviation firms by ENR, have been ranked No.1 firm to work for by CE News several times, and are in the top 100 companies to work for by Fortune. Kimley-Horn is stable. We are consistent and we’re not going anywhere. We are confident that the people and the company you see in California today will be the people and company you see for the life of your projects.
    [Show full text]
  • American Canyon Emergency Operations Plan
    CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON AMERICAN CANYON FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN 2009 - 1 - American Canyon Emergency Operation Plan LETTER OF PROMULGATION Approval Date: 11/17/2009 To: Officials, Employees and Citizens of American Canyon The preservation of life, property and the environment is an inherent responsibility of local, state, and federal government. The City of American Canyon has prepared this emergency operations plan to ensure the most effective and economical allocation of resources for protection of people and property in time of an emergency. While no plan can completely prevent death and destruction, good plans carried out by knowledgeable and well-trained personnel can and will minimize losses. This plan establishes the emergency organization, assigns tasks, specifies policies and general procedures, and provides for coordination of planning efforts of the various emergency staff and service elements utilizing the National Incident Management System (NIMS). The objective of this plan is to incorporate and coordinate all the facilities and personnel of the City into an efficient organization capable of responding effectively to any emergency. This emergency operations plan is an extension of the State Emergency Plan. It will be reviewed and exercised periodically and revised as necessary to meet changing conditions. The American Canyon City Council gives its full support to this plan and urges all officials, employees and the citizens, individually and collectively, to do their share in the total emergency effort of American Canyon. This letter promulgates the American Canyon Emergency Operations Plan, constitutes the adoption of the American Canyon Emergency Operations Plan and the adoption of the National Incident Management System by the City of American Canyon.
    [Show full text]
  • Complaint Summary 2015
    Charles M. Schulz - © P N Sonoma County Airport T S 2015 Complaint Summary www.sonomacountyairport.org 2015 Complaint Summary Charles M. Schulz - Sonoma County Airport (STS) The Runway Safety Improvement Project maintained Sonoma County Airport’s compliance with FAA standards and further enhanced operational safety in 2015. The Airport recorded a total of 229 complaints in 2015, which represents a 33% reduction from 2014, which had a total of 343 complaints. Of these 229 complaints, 200, or 87%, were Airport –related (as defined at the bottom of page 3 of this report). Having weathered temporary shifts in air traffic during 2014 due to the 6-month closure of Runway 14- 32 (during which period many residents lodged complaints for the first time), the Airport enjoyed fewer complaints in 2015, especially early in the year. The Airport recorded 152 complaints from first and second time callers in 2015, compared to 193 in 2014. New callers still inquired if there were changes to the flight pattern, perhaps indicating lingering effects from the previous year’s closure. First and second time callers accounted for 66% of overall complaints in 2015. The noise complaints were generated from all over Sonoma County, at various times of the day and night, primarily involving airline, corporate, and general aviation aircraft. A breakdown of Airport-related complaints shows that concerns about noise and low-flying craft account for the largest percentage, with a combined 73% of the total. Related issues, such as overflights and maneuvering, accounted for 27%. Non- Airport-related complaints accounted for 13% of the total.
    [Show full text]
  • CACAP 0506.Pmd
    Spring 2006 The Official Magazine of California Wing Civil Air Patrol Dark Passages California’s Most Perilous Air Routes 10 Tips for Surviving Plus: • Rough Air Over Riverside Summer Encampment • Altoids-Can Engineering Puts CAWG Cadets Speak Out of School DFing in a Shirt Pocket Into the Mystic Slipstream • Cessna 182Ts Land in NorCal The Late Col. Don Towse Let His Soul and Spirit Fly— • Handling Electrified And Left Us a Lovely Memoir Emergencies EAGLE EYE 2 Dark Passages Flying California’s Most Perilous Air Routes COLUMNS Commander’s Comments 11 Eagle Call is an authorized publication serving the Bird’s Eye View 15 interests of the California Wing of the United States Air Force Auxiliary Civil Air Patrol. It is published by a private firm in no way connected with the FIELD MANUAL 17 Department of the Air Force or with the Civil Air Breathtaking Ingenuity Patrol Corporation. The appearance of advertisements You’ll Never Look at Your Altoids in this publication, including supplements and inserts, Tin the Same Way Again does not constitute an endorsement by the U.S. Air Force or CAP of the products and services advertised ES101 23 herein. Scorch this Hot Quiz for a Cool Summer Eagle Call encourages contributions from all CAP members, military personnel, and related agencies. THE CADET COSMOS 27 Material must be original, free of copyright constraint, unpublished, and submitted only to Eagle 10 Tips for Surviving Encampment Call, which reserves the right to approve, reject, edit, abridge or expand any submission. Features should be discussed in advance with the Editor, Capt.
    [Show full text]
  • Buchanan Field Airport and Byron Airport Minimum Standards, Development, Facility Use & Lease Policies
    Buchanan Field Airport And Byron Airport Minimum Standards, Development, Facility Use & Lease Policies Approved Date: August 14, 2012 Table of Contents Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................................... 6 Section 1 – Definitions ................................................................................................................................. 8 Section 2 – General Standards (GS) .......................................................................................................... 15 GS-1 The County will to the best of its ability operate the Airports ......................................... 15 GS-2 Airports Open on Nondiscriminatory Basis ....................................................................... 15 GS-3 Compliance with Ordinances, Laws, Rules and Regulations ............................................ 15 GS-4 Regulatory Fines.................................................................................................................. 15 GS-5 Vehicle Operations .............................................................................................................. 16 GS-6 Security Areas ...................................................................................................................... 16 GS-7 Aircraft Operation ............................................................................................................... 17 GS-8 Aircraft Parking ..................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Aviation in California: Benefits to Our Economy and Way of Life
    Aviation in California: Benefits to Our Economy and Way of Life JUNE 2003 PUBLIC USE AIRPORTS BY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION Commercial/Primary (29) Metropolitan (20) Regional (66) Community (102) Limited Use (33) Joint Use — Military/Commercial (2) The contents of this report reflect the views of the author who is responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the State of California or the Federal Highway Administration. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. This report was prepared with funds from a grant provided by the United States Government (80%) and funds from the State of California (20%). Aviation in California: Benefits to Our Economy and Way of Life FINAL REPORT Prepared for BUSINESS,TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DIVISION OF AERONAUTICS Submitted by Economics Research Associates JUNE 2003 ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY ADVISORY COMMITTEE Nancy Benjamin Alan R. Tubbs Study Project Manager District Field Services Manager California Department of Transportation Airborne Express, Mather Field Division of Aeronautics Chuck Oldham R. Austin Wiswell Robert Chung Chief California Transportation Commission California Department of Transportation Division of Aeronautics Carl Williams Senior Policy Director Michael Armstrong California Space Authority, Inc. (CSA) Senior Lead Planner Southern California Association of Governments Bonnie Cornwall (SCAG) Program Manager Division
    [Show full text]
  • AIRPORTS COMMITTEE Agenda Items: Items May Be Taken out of Order Based on the Business of the Day and Preference of the Committe
    AIRPORTS COMMITTEE May 8, 2019 11:00 A.M. Director of Airports Office 550 Sally Ride Drive, Concord Supervisor Diane Burgis, Chair Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, Vice Chair Agenda Items may be taken out of order based on the business of the day and preference Items: of the Committee 1. Introductions 2. Public comment on any item under the jurisdiction of the Committee and not on this agenda (speakers may be limited to three minutes) 3. Review and approve record of meeting for February 13, 2019 (Chair) 4. Receive an update from the Aviation Advisory Committee Chair (Maurice Gunderson) 5. Discuss progress regarding the Byron Airport General Plan Amendment (Will Nelson, Department of Conservation and Development) 6. Discuss resolution of crane height issues at Buchanan Field associated with Highway 4 project 7. Discuss JetSuiteX passenger traffic growth between 2016 and 2019 8. Discuss recent FAA grant funding issues related to Runway 14L/32R pavement rehabilitation project 9. Discuss new UAS (drone)/technology business activity at Buchanan Field and Byron Airports 10. Discuss the State Water Quality Control Board Water Code Section 13267 Order WZ 2019-0005-DWQ for the Determination of the Presence of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl (PFAS) Substances at Buchanan Field Airport 11. Airport Director's Report (Items 11.a through 11.e) a. 36-acre non-aeronautical development project, Byron Airport b. 3-acre business park development, Buchanan Field c. 4.6-acre development, Buchanan Field d. Proposed relocation of Confire Station 9 to Airport property, Buchanan Field e. Release of 17-acres for non-aeronautical use, Buchanan Field 12.
    [Show full text]