CHAPTER TWO Airport Facility Requirements ChapterChapter OneOne

To properly plan for the future of Livermore DESIGN CRITERIA Municipal Airport, it is necessary to translate forecast aviation demand into the speciic types The FAA publishes Advisory Circular (AC) and quantities of facilities that can adequately 150/5300-13A, Airport Design, to guide serve the identiied demand. This chapter uses airport planning. The AC provides guidance the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on various design elements of an airport approved forecasts, as well as established intended to maintain or improve safety at air- planning criteria, to determine the airside (i.e., ports. The design standards include airport runways, taxiways, navigational aids, marking elements such as runways, taxiways, safety and lighting) and landside (i.e., hangars, areas, and separation distances. According parking apron, and automobile parking) to the AC, "airport planning should consider facility requirements. both the present and potential aviation needs and demand associated with the airport." The objective of this effort is to identify, in Consideration should be given to planning general terms, the adequacy of the existing runway and taxiway locations that will meet airport facilities and outline what new future separation requirements even if the facilities may be needed, and when these may width, strength, and length must increase be needed to accommodate forecast demands. later. Such decisions should be supported by A recommended airport layout concept will the aviation demand forecasts, coordinated be presented that consolidates all facility with the FAA, and shown on the Airport requirements into a single development Layout Plan (ALP). concept for the airport.

2-1 FINAL - SEPTEMBER 2014 FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Airport Design is based upon planned development with was published on September 28, 2012. It no operational component, while the RRC replaces AC 150/5300-13, Airport Design describes the current operational capabil- which was dated September 29, 1989. ities of a runway where no special operat- The latter was subject to 18 published ing procedures are necessary. The RRC changes over 23 years. for a runway is established based upon the minimum runway to taxiway center- The previous Airport Design AC estab- line separation. lished the design standards based primar- ily on the Airport Reference Code (ARC). Paragraph 4 defined the ARC as “a coding DESIGN AIRCRAFT system used to relate airport design crite- ria to the operational and physical charac- The selection of appropriate FAA design teristics of the airplanes intended to oper- standards for the development and loca- ate at the airport.” tion of airport facilities is based primarily upon the characteristics of the aircraft In the current AC, the definition of the which are currently using or are expected Airport Reference Code is found in Para- to use the airport. The critical design air- graph 102.i. and reads, “An airport desig- craft is used to define the design parame- nation that signifies the airport’s highest ters for the airport. In most cases, the de- Runway Design Code (RDC), minus the sign aircraft is a composite aircraft repre- third (visibility) component of the RDC. senting a collection of aircraft classified The ARC is used for planning and design by three parameters: Aircraft Approach only and does not limit the aircraft that Category (AAC), Airplane Design Group may be able to operate safely on the air- (ADG), and Taxiway Design Group (TDG). port.” In the case of an airport with multiple runways, a design aircraft is selected for The RDC is defined in Paragraph each runway. The first consideration is 102.mmm. as, “A code signifying the design the safe operation of aircraft likely to use standards to which the runway is to be the airport. Any operation of an aircraft built.” Paragraph 105.c. indicates that the that exceeds design criteria of the airport Aircraft Approach Category (AAC), the may result in either an unsafe operation Airplane Design Group (ADG), and the or a lesser safety margin unless air traffic approach visibility minimums combine to control Standard operating Procedures form the RDC of a particular runway. (SOPs) are in place for those operations; These provide the information needed to however, it is not the usual practice to determine certain design standards that base the airport design on an aircraft that apply. uses the airport infrequently.

The current Airport Design AC introduces The design aircraft is defined as the most not only the RDC, but also the Runway demanding category of aircraft, or family Reference Code (RRC). The RRC is de- of aircraft, which conducts at least 500 fined as, “A code signifying the current op- operations per year at the airport. Plan- erational capabilities of a runway and as- ning for future aircraft use is of particular sociated parallel taxiway.” Like the RDC, importance since the design standards the RRC is composed of the same three are used to plan separation distances be- components: the AAC, ADG, and runway tween facilities. These future standards visibility minimums. The RDC, however, must be considered now to ensure that

2-2 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 short term development does not pre- to the visibility minimums expressed by clude the long range potential needs of runway visual range (RVR) values in feet the airport. of 1,200, 1,600, 2,400, 4,000 and 5,000. The third component should read “VIS” Exhibit 2A summarizes representative for runways designed for visual approach design aircraft categories. As shown on use only. Generally, runway standards the exhibit, the airport does not currently, are related to aircraft approach speed, nor is it expected to, regularly serve larg- aircraft wingspan, and designated or er commercial transport aircraft such as planned approach visibility minimums. Boeing 737, 747, 757, or 767. Large Table 2A presents the RDC parameters. transport aircraft are used by commercial carriers which do not currently use, nor are they expected to use, the airport TAXIWAY DESIGN GROUP (TDG) through the planning period. However, some of the largest business jets, such as The TDG relates to the undercarriage di- the are capable of operating mensions of the design aircraft. Taxi- at the airport under certain conditions. way/taxilane width and fillet standards, and in some instances, runway to taxiway In order to determine airfield design re- and taxiway/taxilane separation re- quirements, a design aircraft, or group of quirements are determined by TDG. It is aircraft with similar characteristics, is de- appropriate for taxiways to be planned termined for each runway. This determi- and built to different TDG standards nation begins with a review of aircraft based on expected use. currently using the airport and those ex- pected to use the airport in the future The TDG standards are based on the Main planning period. Gear Width (MGW) and the Cockpit to Main Gear (CMG) distance. The taxiway design elements determined by the appli- RUNWAY DESIGN CODE (RDC) cation of the TDG include the taxiway width, taxiway edge safety margin, taxi- The AAC, ADG, and approach visibility way shoulder width, taxiway fillet dimen- minimums are combined to form the RDC sions, and in some cases, the separation of a particular runway. The RDC provides distance between parallel taxi- the information needed to determine cer- ways/taxilanes. Other taxiway elements tain design standards that apply. The first such as the taxiway safety area (TSA), tax- component, depicted by a letter, is the iway/taxilane object free area (TOFA), AAC and relates to aircraft approach taxiway/taxilane separation to parallel speed (operational characteristics). The taxiway/taxilanes or fixed or movable ob- second component, depicted by a Roman jects, and taxiway/taxilane wingtip clear- numeral, is the ADG and relates to either ances are determined solely based on the the aircraft wingspan or tail height (phys- wingspan (ADG) of the design aircraft uti- ical characteristics) - whichever is most lizing those surfaces. restrictive. The third component relates

2-3 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 A-I • Beech Baron 55 C-II, D-II • Citation X (750) • Beech Bonanza • Gulfstream 100, • 200,300

12-MP-12-2A-02/04/13 • • Challenger 300/600 • • ERJ-135, 140, 145 • Eclipse 500/550 • CRJ-200/700 • Piper Archer • Embraer Regional Jet • Piper Seneca • Lockheed JetStar •

less than B-I • Beech Baron 58 C-III, D-III 100,000 lbs. • ERJ-170 • Beech King Air 100 • CRJ 705, 900 • • Falcon 7X • • Gulfstream 500, • Piper Navajo 550, 650 • Piper Cheyenne • Global Express, Global 5000 • Swearingen Metroliner • Q-400 • (525)

over B-II • Super King Air 200 C-III, D-III 100,000 lbs. • ERJ-90 • Cessna 441 • Boeing • DHC Twin Otter • B-727 • Super King Air 350 • B-737-300, 700, 800 • Beech 1900 • MD-80, DC-9 • Citation Excel (560), • A319, A320 Sovereign (680) • Falcon 50, 900, 2000 • Citation Bravo (550) • Embraer 120 A-III, B-III C-IV,, D-IV • DHC Dash 7 • B-7B-75757 • DHC Dash 8 • B-7B-76767 • DC-3 • C-130C-130 Hercules • Convair 580 • DDC-8-70C-8-70 • Fairchild F-27 • MD-1MD-111 • ATR 72 • ATP

C-I, D-I • Beech 400 D-V • B-747-4B-747-40000 • Lear 31, 35, 45, 60 • B-77B-7777 • Israeli Westwind • B-7B-78787 • A-330A-330,, A-340

Note: Aircraft pictured is identified in bold type.

Exhibit 2A AIRCRAFT REFERENCE CODES

TABLE 2A Runway Design Code Parameters Aircraft Approach Category (AAC) Category Approach Speed A less than 91 knots B 91 knots or more but less than 121 knots C 121 knots or more but less than 141 knots D 141 knots or more but less than 166 knots E 166 knots or more Airplane Design Group (ADG) Group # Tail Height (ft) Wingspan (ft) I <20 <49 II 20-<30 49-<79 III 30-<45 70-<118 IV 45-<60 118-<171 V 60-<66 171-<214 VI 66-<80 214-<262 Visibility Minimums RVR (ft) Flight Visibility Category (statute miles) VIS 3-mile or greater visibility minimums 5,000 Lower than 3 miles but not lower than 1-mile 4,000 Lower than 1-mile but not lower than ¾- -mile) 2,400 Lower than ¾-mile but not lower than ½-mile (CAT-I PA) 1,600 Lower than ½-mile but not lower thanmile ¼ (APV-mile ≥ (CAT ¾ but-II

CRITICAL DESIGN AIRCRAFT A critical design aircraft will be deter- mined for each runway. The largest de- The critical design aircraft is defined as sign aircraft in terms of approach speed the most demanding category of aircraft and airplane design group will determine which conduct 500 or more itinerant op- the appropriate design standards for pri- erations at the airport each year. In some mary Runway 7L-25R and the associated cases, more than one specific make and taxiways. Parallel Runway 7R-25L may model of aircraft comprises the airport’s have the same or a different design air- critical design aircraft. One category of craft. The first determination is the most aircraft may be the most critical in terms critical design aircraft for Runway 7L- of approach speed, while another is most 25R. critical in terms of wingspan and/or tail height, which affects runway/taxiway aircraft using the airport width and separation design standards. include a variety of single and multi- The critical design aircraft for a general engine piston-powered aircraft, turbo- aviation airport may be a specific aircraft props, business jets, and helicopters. model or it can be a combination of sev- While the airport is used by helicopters, eral aircraft within the same design code they are not included in this determina- that, when combined, exceed the 500 op- tion as they are not assigned an approach erations threshold. speed or an airplane design group.

2-4 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 Based Aircraft business jets that may contribute to meet- ing the itinerant operations threshold of The determination of the design aircraft 500 annual operations. These aircraft (or family of aircraft) will first examine types typically have higher utilization the types of based aircraft followed by an rates than smaller aircraft and rarely per- analysis of itinerant activity. The majority form local operations. These aircraft of the based aircraft are single and multi- types can represent the critical aircraft on engine piston-powered aircraft which fall their own, due to high utilization, or in within approach categories A and B and combination with other aircraft with ADG I and II. These smaller aircraft are similar characteristics. often used for local operations which are not included in the critical aircraft deter- Airport management provided a list of mination. aircraft N-numbers of those aircraft based at the airport. The characteristics of the The next step is to identify the larger largest based aircraft are provided on based aircraft including and Table 2B.

TABLE 2B Based Turboprops and Business Jets Livermore Municipal Airport Aircraft Type Engine Type AAC ADG TDG Pilatus (3) B II 1 Cessna 510 Mustang Jet B I 1 50 Jet B II 2 Lear 25 Jet C I 1 Gulfstream II (1159A) Jet C II 3 AAC: Aircraft Approach Category ADG: Aircraft Design Group TDG: Taxiway Design Group Source: Airport records; Aircraft specification.

There are three Pilatus single engine tur- Itinerant Aircraft boprop aircraft based at the airport. These aircraft fall within AAC-B and ADG- The FAA maintains the Traffic Flow Man- II. The based business agement System Counts (TFMSC) database jet also falls in AAC-B and ADG-II. The which documents certain aircraft opera- based Lear 25 falls in AAC C and ADG I, tions at certain airports. Information is meaning this aircraft has a faster ap- added to the TFMSC database when pilots proach speed and shorter wingspan than file flight plans and/or when flights are the Falcon 50. The based Gulfstream II detected by the National Airspace System, (1159A) falls within ACC C and ADG II. usually via radar. It includes documenta- The Cessna Mustang is a light jet and falls tion of commercial traffic (air carrier and in ACC B and ADG I. All of these aircraft air taxi), general aviation, and military are known to be active at the airport. aircraft. Due to factors such as incom-

2-5 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 plete flight plans and limited radar cover- percent of annual operations and aver- age, TFMSC data cannot account for all aged 675 operations annually. Approach aircraft activity at an airport. Therefore, category D activity has represented 17 it is likely that there are more operations percent of operations annually and aver- at an airport than are captured by this aged 363 operations annually. methodology. Nonetheless, this infor- mation provides a reasonable estimate of certain activity. Runway 7L-25R Design Criteria

Since business jets are larger and faster, Livermore Municipal Airport experiences they will typically have a greater impact frequent business jet operations and on airport design standards than smaller should be designed and planned to ac- aircraft. The following analysis will focus commodate these types of aircraft to the on itinerant activity by jets at Livermore greatest extent possible. Over the last 10 Municipal Airport. The TFMSC database years, the airport has averaged more than is the primary source for business jet ac- 500 operations by aircraft in ACC C and tivity at the airport. A secondary source, ADG II. The airport has not exceeded the www.airportiq.com, was also consulted. 500 operations threshold for AAC D and/or ADG III. While no single aircraft Exhibit 2B presents the TFMSC jet activi- model in ACC C and ADG II has accounted ty at Livermore Municipal Airport from for 500 operations on its own, a repre- 2003 through November of 2012. As can sentative aircraft would be the Cessna Ci- be seen, most types and sizes of business tation X (750). Therefore, the current de- jets can and do operate at the airport. sign aircraft for Runway 7L-25R is repre- From 2003 through 2012, the airport has sented as C-II-3. The last figure desig- averaged 2,184 annual business jet opera- nates the taxiway design group for the tions. The range of operations has been Citation X aircraft and indicates that asso- fairly narrow with a low of 1,550 opera- ciated airfield taxiways should be at least tions in 2012 and a high of 2,880 opera- 50 feet wide. tions in 2007. The current ALP identifies the Falcon The slight decline in business jet opera- 900B as the critical design aircraft and is tions since 2007 can almost certainly be therefore the design aircraft for Runway attributed to the significant economic re- 7L-25R. The design aircraft, as defined in cession that began in late 2007 and ran the new AC, would be B-II-3. Thus, there through late 2009. The recovery since is a difference between the reference code emerging from the recession has been associated with the design aircraft today slow to date; however, many airports are (C-II-3), as defined by actual activity, and beginning to see reversals as of late 2012. that of the design aircraft on the current ALP (B-II-3). The exhibit also shows the breakout of these business jets by approach category A change in the design aircraft can have a and airplane design group. On average, significant impact on how the airport is over the last decade, 52 percent of the planned for the future. For example, to business jet activity was by aircraft in ap- meet C-II-3 design standards, the parallel proach category B, accounting for 1,145 taxiway to Runway 7L-25R separation annual operations. Business jets in ap- would need to be no less than 400 feet, proach category C have represented 31 centerline to centerline, where the cur-

2-6 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 JET OPERATIONS BY AIRPORT REFERENCE CODE (Minimum) ARC Aircraft Type 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Eclipse 500 - - - - - 20 22 32 28 32 Premier 390 - 8 24 24 64 12 12 26 22 18 12-MP-12--02/04/13 Beechjet 400/T-1/ 268 268 312 484 470 320 130 88 66 68 Cessna 500/Citation I 14 24 26 12 8 - - 2 2 8 Cessna 501/Citation I/SP 6 14 6 18 18 10 6 8 18 8 B-I Cessna Mustang 510 - - - - 6 38 68 48 146 194 Cessna 525 CitationJet/CJ1 108 124 78 62 44 24 20 32 42 30 ------4 14 32 58 Falcon 10 34 18 2 6 36 16 8 6 2 4 MU-300 12 8 - 4 4 - - - - - Rockwell Saber 40/60 8 8 4 2 - - - 2 2 - Total B-I 450 472 452 612 650 440 270 258 360 420 Cessna 525A (CJ2) 28 32 40 40 22 12 6 - 8 10 Cessna 525B (CJ3) - - 16 60 10 20 20 18 20 12 Cessna Citation II Bravo 550/551 136 182 210 96 118 66 32 48 26 16 /Ultra/Encore 560 158 308 272 280 280 204 124 88 132 126 Cessna 560 XLS 94 158 160 206 322 214 156 178 178 186 Cessna Citation III/VI/VII 650 84 60 48 54 18 30 22 18 6 12 B-II Cessna Citation Sovereign 680 - - 16 16 36 36 62 56 38 54 ------22 12 Falcon 20 24 6 10 12 6 12 8 6 2 - Falcon 50 56 78 44 82 54 28 32 42 56 18 Falcon 900 20 18 38 40 48 30 26 22 50 30 Falcon 2000 26 42 30 48 52 34 16 48 58 74 Total B-II 626 884 884 934 966 686 504 524 596 550 BAe HS 125-1/2/3/400/600 22 8 18 10 2 - - - - - BAe HS 125/700-800/Hawker 800 158 108 190 280 320 202 118 106 86 86 23/24 10 18 4 2 - 2 - 4 - 6 C-I /28 50 64 54 22 18 38 50 68 44 26 A/B 14 40 46 30 30 6 8 8 6 2 20 18 46 8 8 22 20 30 2 28 IAI Westwind 48 76 102 76 36 16 8 6 4 6 Total C-I 322 332 460 428 414 286 204 222 142 154 IAI Astra 1125 14 6 18 14 24 4 2 - - 4 IAI Galaxy/ 6 24 26 24 38 18 22 14 12 28 Cessna Citation 750 (X) 118 126 100 92 114 112 60 108 72 62 Challenger 300 - 2 32 30 56 114 110 186 200 168 C-II Challenger 600/604 174 108 94 96 114 86 84 78 60 34 Lockheed 1329 Jetstar - 2 ------Gulfstream III/G300 40 78 86 90 78 28 62 56 32 28 Hawker 800XP, 1000, 4000 40 20 10 6 - 2 4 - - 6 Falcon 900EX & F-Series ------2 Total C-II 392 366 366 352 424 364 344 442 376 332 Global Express/5000 6 6 2 18 14 6 4 - 8 10 C-III Gulfstream V/G-500/G550 14 16 26 48 52 24 22 32 44 22 Total C-III 20 22 28 66 66 30 26 32 52 32 /36 104 218 183 162 136 118 140 92 52 24 D-I 60 84 112 100 86 46 54 26 44 36 36 62 86 70 42 22 12 56 46 24 Total D-I 200 364 381 332 264 186 206 174 142 84 Gulfstream G150 - - - - 12 22 24 42 26 14 D-II Gulfstream II (G200) 12 12 2 10 2 - 6 8 6 2 Gulfstream IV/G400 92 100 92 82 82 80 44 60 74 114 Total D-II 104 112 94 92 96 102 74 110 106 130 Total Jet Activity 2,114 2,552 2,665 2,816 2,880 2,094 1,628 1,762 1,774 1,702

TOTAL JET OPERATIONS BY APPROACH CATEGORY AND AIRPLANE DESIGN GROUP Aircraftf Approach Category 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 B 1,076 1,356 1,336 1,546 1,616 1,126 774 782 956 970 C 734 720 854 846 904 680 574 696 570 518 D 304 476 475 424 360 288 280 284 248 214 Airplane Design Group I 972 1,168 1,293 1,372 1,328 912 680 654 644 658 II 1,122 1,362 1,344 1,378 1,486 1,152 922 1,076 1,078 1,012 III 20 22 28 66 66 30 26 32 52 32 Source: Traffic Flow Management System Counts (TFMSC) - FAA activity database. Exhibit 2B BUSINESS JET ACTIVITY rent separation is 250 feet. To accommo- the design standard that the airfield date a parallel taxiway at this distance, (runways/taxiway system) layout cur- the northwest flood control berm would rently meets. With the availability of a have to be relocated, portions of the golf CAT-I instrument approach and Taxiway course would have to be acquired, and A located at a separation distance of 250 approximately 115 feet of the main apron feet from the runway, the current RRC for would be unusable in order to accommo- Runway 7R-25L is B-II-4000/B-I-2400. date the taxiway object free area. The This means that the runway and taxiway runway safety areas (RSA) beyond each system meets design standards for B-II runway end would increase from 600 feet aircraft with a 1-mile instrument ap- to 1,000 feet. At this length, both RSAs proach and for B-I aircraft with a ½-mile would have penetrations (the golf course instrument approach. to the west and water treatment plant to the east). Runway 7R-25L Design Criteria Due to the significant obstacles to meet- ing the design standards associated with a Runway 7R-25L is the parallel runway change in the design aircraft, the design which is situated 500 feet, centerline to aircraft for Livermore Municipal Air- centerline, from the primary runway, and port is recommended to remain B-II-3. is 2,699 feet long and 75 feet wide. This Continued utilization of this design air- runway is unlit and is considered the craft is recognition that while the airport training runway. The current ALP classi- does experience frequent activity by larg- fies this runway as ARC B-I (small air- er aircraft, this airport cannot reasonably craft) and identifies the Beech C99 Airlin- be improved to such a level to fully meet er as the representative aircraft. The design standards intended for a larger length of this runway effectively limits the design aircraft. Since airport sponsors utilization of this runway to light twin- cannot legally prohibit any aircraft from engine aircraft and smaller. In fact, the using the airport, future improvements current length is less than what the FAA should be planned to meet C-II-3 design recommends for small aircraft with 10 or standards to the greatest extent practica- more passenger seats, such as the Beech ble. C99 Airliner (up to 4,200 feet). The cur- rent design aircraft classification for The RDC for each runway is the design this runway is B-I-1 (small aircraft). standard to which the runway is planned Analysis of the adequacy of the current to be built. The RDC is a planning stand- runway length will be presented later in ard that considers the AAC, ADG and the this chapter under the heading Runway RVR. The RDC for Runway 7L-25R is Length. based on a critical design aircraft in B-II-3 would be B-II-2400. Since the airport Runway 7R-25L is currently available for cannot reasonably be improved to meet visual daytime operations only; therefore, C-II-2400, the future RDC is planned to the current RDC is B-I-VIS (small). The remain B-II-2400. RRC for Runway 7R-25L is B-II-4000 be- cause the runway and parallel taxiway The RRC is differentiated from the RDC in meet the design standards for B-II aircraft that it reflects the current operational ca- with an instrument approach as low as ¾- pability of both the runway and associat- mile (although not currently available). ed parallel taxiway. In essence, the RRC is An instrument approach with visibility

2-7 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 minimums down to 1-mile are considered patibilities to the RPZ. As a result, im- for this runway in the future. The same provements to the runway that would al- design standards, including the size of the ter the size of the RPZ are not planned. RPZ, are the same whether the runway is for visual operations or instrument oper- Table 2C presents the runway design cri- ations with not lower than 1-mile visibil- teria for each runway. With this infor- ity minimums. It should be noted that in- mation, the applicable design standards strument approaches with visibility min- can be applied to various airfield ele- imums lower than 1-mile or a change in ments such as runway safety area (RSA), design aircraft would necessitate a larger object free area (OFA), and separation RPZ which would introduce new incom- standards.

TABLE 2C Runway Design Criteria Livermore Municipal Airport Existing Existing Future Runway 7L-25R Runway 7R-25L Runway 7R-25L Design Aircraft B-II-3* B-I-1 (small) B-I-1 (small) Example Aircraft Falcon 900B/Citation 750* Beech C99 Airliner Beech C99 Airliner Runway Design Code B-II-2400 B-I-VIS B-I-5000 Runway Reference Code B-II-4000/B-I-2400 B-II-4000 B-II-4000 Visibility Minimums Visual (7L)/½-Mile(25R) Visual 1 Mile * Composite aircraft with Falcon 900B representing AAC/ADG and Citation 750 representing TDG

AIRFIELD REQUIREMENTS RUNWAY CONFIGURATION

As indicated earlier, airport facilities in- The airport is currently served by two clude both airfield and landside compo- parallel runways. Primary Runway 7L- nents. Airfield facilities include those fa- 25R is 5,253 feet long and is orientated in cilities that are related to the arrival, de- an east/west manner. Parallel Runway parture, and ground movement of air- 7R-25L is 2,699 feet in length and situat- craft. These components include: ed 500 feet to the south of the primary runway. By standard, the minimum sepa- • Runway Configuration ration for parallel runways to accommo- • Safety Area Design Standards date simultaneous VFR operations is 700 • Runways feet. Since the runways are only 500 feet apart, the airport operates as a single • Taxiways runway system. • Navigational Approach Aids • Lighting, Marking, and Signage

2-8 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 For the operational safety and efficiency ownership of the RPZ is the purchase of of an airport, it is desirable for the prima- avigation easements (acquiring control of ry runway to be oriented as close as pos- designated airspace within the RPZ) or sible to the direction of the prevailing having sufficient land use control wind. This reduces the impact of wind measures in places which ensure the RPZ components perpendicular to the direc- remains free of incompatible develop- tion of travel of an aircraft that is landing ment. The various airport safety areas or taking off. are presented on Exhibit 2C.

FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13A, Dimensional standards for the various Airport Design, recommends that a cross- safety areas associated with the runways wind runway be made available when the are a function of the type of aircraft ex- primary runway orientation provides for pected to use the runways as well as the less than 95 percent wind coverage for instrument approach capability. Table specific crosswind components. The 95 2D presents the FAA design standards as percent wind coverage is computed on they apply to the runways at Livermore the basis of the crosswind component not Municipal Airport. exceeding 10.5 knots (12 mph) for RDC A- I and B-I, 13 knots (15 mph) for RDC A-II and B-II, and 16 knots (18 mph) for RDC Runway Safety Area (RSA) A-III, B-III, C-I through C-III, and D-I through D-III. At Livermore Municipal The RSA is defined in FAA AC 150/5300- Airport, the parallel runway system pro- 13A, Airport Design, as a “surface sur- vides for 97.79 percent wind coverage at rounding the runway prepared or suita- 10.5 knots and above 99 percent for high- ble for reducing the risk of damage to air- er wind speeds; therefore, a crosswind planes in the event of undershoot, over- runway is not recommended. shoot, or excursion from the runway.” The RSA is centered on the runway and dimensioned in accordance to the ap- RUNWAY DESIGN STANDARDS proach speed of the critical design aircraft using the runway. The FAA requires the The FAA has established several imagi- RSA to be cleared and graded, drained by nary surfaces to protect aircraft opera- grading or storm sewers, capable of ac- tional areas and keep them free from ob- commodating the design aircraft and fire structions that could affect their safe op- and rescue vehicles, and free of obstacles eration. These include the runway safety not fixed by navigational purpose such as area (RSA), runway object free area runway edge lights or approach lights. (ROFA), runway obstacle free zone (ROFZ), and runway protection zone The FAA has placed a higher significance (RPZ). on maintaining adequate RSA at all air- ports. Under Order 5200.8, effective Oc- The entire RSA, ROFA, and ROFZ must be tober 1, 1999, the FAA established the under the direct ownership of the airport Runway Safety Area Program. The Order sponsor to ensure these areas remain free states, “The objective of the Runway Safe- of obstacles and can be readily accessed ty Area Program is that all RSAs at feder- by maintenance and emergency person- ally-obligated airports…shall conform to nel. The RPZ should also be under airport the standards contained in Advisory Cir- ownership. An alternative to outright cular 150/5300-13, Airport Design, to the

2-9 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 LEGEND 0 600 1200 Airport Property Line SCALE IN FEET Easement 12-MP-12--02/04/13 Runway Safety Area

Obstacle Free Zone Dr. Airway

Object Free Area St. Armstrong Nissen Dr. Nissen

RPZ Incompatibilities NORTH OFA Penetration Precision Obstacle Free Zone (POFZ) POFZ Penetration Direct Apron to Runway Access Hot Spot

Terminal Cir. SSeparationeparation Airway Blvd. shouldshould bbee 300’300’ WWideide tthroathroat pavementpavement DDirectirect apronapron toto WWideide expanseexpanse OOFAFA PPenetrationsenetrations RunwayRunway aaccessccess HHoldold llinesines aatt 175’175’ sshouldhould bebe 250’250’ 6

250’ PPOFZOFZ ppenetrationsenetrations 540’ RunwayRunway 7L-25R7L-25R ((5,253’x100’)5,253’x100’) 3 5 1 Ave. Isabel LLocalizerocalizer AntennaAntenna withinwithin RRSASA OOFAFA ppenetrationenetration 84 4 RRunwayunway 77R-25LR-25L ((2,699’x75’)2,699’x75’) 2

DDirectirect apronapron toto RunwayRunway aaccessccess

Jack London Blvd.

Exhibit 2C SAFETY AREAS/AREAS OF CONCERN extent practicable.” Each Regional Air- each runway at the airport and perform ports Division of the FAA is obligated to airport inspections. collect and maintain data on the RSA for

TABLE 2D Runway Design Standards Livermore Municipal Airport Runway 7L-25R Runway 7R-25L Design Aircraft B-II-3* B-I-1 (small) Falcon 900B/ Example Aircraft Citation X (750)* Beech C99 Airliner Runway Design Code (RDC) B-II-2400 B-I-VIS Runway Reference Code (RRC) B-II-4000/B-I-2400 B-II-4000 Visibility Minimums Visual (7L)/½-Mile(25R) Visual (1-mile - Ult) RUNWAY DESIGN Runway Width 100 60 Runway Shoulder Width 10 10 RUNWAY PROTECTION Runway Safety Area (RSA) Width 300 120 Length Beyond Departure End 600 240 Length Prior to Threshold 600 240 Runway Object Free Area (ROFA) Width 800 250 Length Beyond Departure End 600 240 Length Prior to Threshold 600 240 Runway Obstacle Free Zone (ROFZ) Width 400 250 Length Beyond End 200 200 Precision Obstacle Free Zone (POFZ) Width 800 NA Length 200 NA Approach Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) Length 1,000 (7L)/2,500 (25R) 1,000 Inner Width 5007L)/1,000(25R) 250 Outer Width 700(7L)/1,750(25R) 450 Departure Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) Length 1,000 1,000 Inner Width 500 250 Outer Width 700 450 RUNWAY SEPARATION Runway Centerline to: Parallel Runway (dual visual approaches) 700 700 Holding Position 250 125 Parallel Taxiway 300 150 Aircraft Parking Area 400 125 * Composite aircraft with Falcon 900B representing AAC/ADG and Citation X (750) representing TDG Note: All dimensions in feet Source: FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Airport Design

For Runway 7L-25R, the RSA is 300 feet antenna is situated within the Runway 7L wide and extends 600 feet beyond the RSA, 540 feet from the runway threshold. runway ends. The FAA owned localizer Localizer antenna are typically not con-

2-10 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 sidered “fixed by function” and have been Runway Obstacle Free Zone (ROFZ) relocated at airports across the country in order to provide full RSA. The localizer The OFZ is an imaginary volume of air- antenna at Livermore Municipal Airport space which precludes object penetra- should be relocated outside the RSA by tions, including taxiing and parked air- the owner. craft. The only allowance for OFZ ob- structions is navigational aids mounted The RSA design standard for Runway 7R- on frangible bases which are fixed in their 25L is 120 feet wide and 240 feet beyond location by function, such as airfield signs. the runway ends. The RSA meets the de- The OFZ is established to ensure the safe- sign standard and should be maintained. ty of aircraft operations. If the OFZ is ob- structed, the airport’s approaches could be removed or approach minimums could Runway Object Free Area (ROFA) be increased.

The runway OFA is “a two-dimensional The OFZ for Runway 7L-25R is 400 feet ground area, surrounding runways, taxi- wide as centered on the runway. The tax- ways, and taxilanes, which is clear of ob- iway hold lines on the north side Runway jects except for objects whose location is 7L-25R are situated 175 feet from the fixed by function (i.e., airfield lighting).” runway centerline. Therefore, holding The OFA does not have to be graded and aircraft will be located within the OFZ. If level like the RSA; instead, the primary feasible, the hold lines should be moved requirement for the OFA is that no object outside the OFZ. in the OFA penetrates the lateral eleva- tion of the RSA. The runway OFA is cen- The OFZ for runway 7R-25L is 250 feet tered on the runway, extending out in ac- wide and it extends 200 feet beyond the cordance to the critical design aircraft uti- runway ends. The OFZ meets design lizing the runway. standard and should be maintained.

The southeast corner of the ROFA extends A precision obstacle free zone (POFZ) is beyond airport property into the water further defined for runway ends with a treatment plant property and is penetrat- precision approach, such as the ILS ap- ed by the fence surrounding this proper- proach to Runway 25R. The POFZ is 800 ty. On the Runway 7L end, the OFA has feet wide and extends from the runway numerous penetrations, including the threshold to a distance of 200 feet. The berm and fence separating the airfield POFZ is in effect when the following con- from the golf course and the localizer an- ditions are met: tenna. If the full OFA cannot be provided, then a modification to standard should be a) The runway supports a vertically sought. guided approach. b) Reported ceiling is below 250 feet The OFA design standard for Runway 7R- and/or visibility is less than ¾-mile. 25L is 250 feet wide and it extends 240 c) An aircraft is on final approach within feet beyond the runway ends. The OFA two miles of the runway threshold. meets design standard and should be maintained. When the POFZ is in effect, a wing of an aircraft holding on a taxiway may pene-

2-11 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 trate the POFZ; however, neither the fuse- • Airport service roads, as long as they lage nor the tail may infringe on the POFZ. are not public roads and are directly controlled by the airport operator. Taxiways A and J penetrate the POFZ. • Underground facilities, as long as they Appropriate taxiway markings are pro- meet other design criteria, such as vided to alert pilots of the location of the RSA requirements, as applicable, POFZ when it is in effect. If feasible, the • Unstaffed navigational aids taxiway layout should be redesigned to (NAVAIDs) and facilities, such as re- prevent inadvertent aircraft penetration quired for airport facilities that are of the POFZ. fixed-by-function in regard to the RPZ.

Any other land uses considered within Runway Protection Zones (RPZ) RPZ land owned by the airport sponsor must be evaluated and approved by the The RPZ is a trapezoidal area centered on FAA Office of Airports. The FAA has pub- the runway, typically beginning 200 feet lished Interim Guidance on Land Uses beyond the runway end. The RPZ has within a Runway Protection Zone been established by the FAA to provide an (9.27.2012) which identifies several po- area clear of obstructions and incompati- tential land uses that must be evaluated ble land uses in order to enhance the pro- and approved prior to implementation. tection of people and property on the The specific land uses requiring FAA ground. The RPZ is comprised of the cen- evaluation and approval include: tral portion of the RPZ and the controlled activity area. The central portion of the • Buildings and structures (exam- RPZ extends from the beginning to the ples include, but are not limited to: end of the RPZ, is centered on the runway, residences, schools, churches, hos- and is the width of the ROFA. The con- pitals or other medical care facili- trolled activity area is any remaining por- ties, commercial/industrial build- tions of the RPZ. The dimensions of the ings, etc.) RPZ vary according to the visibility mini- • Recreational land use (examples in- mums serving the runway and the type of clude, but are not limited to: golf aircraft (design aircraft) operating on the courses, sports fields, amusement runway. parks, other places of public assem- bly, etc.) While the RPZ is intended to be clear of • Transportation facilities. Examples incompatible objects or land uses, some include, but are not limited to: uses are permitted with conditions and - Rail facilities - light or heavy, pas- other land uses are prohibited. According senger or freight to AC 159/5300-13A, Airport Design, the - Public roads/highways following land uses are permissible with- - Vehicular parking facilities in the RPZ: • Fuel storage facilities (above and be- low ground) • Farming that meets the minimum • Hazardous material storage (above buffer requirements, and below ground) • Irrigation channels as long as they do • Wastewater treatment facilities not attract birds, • Above-ground utility infrastructure (i.e., electrical substations), including any type of solar panel installations. 2-12 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 The Interim Guidance on Land within a an avigation easement covering the com- Runway Protection Zone states, “RPZ land mercial buildings on the south side of the use compatibility also is often complicat- RPZ. The commercial buildings within ed by ownership considerations. Airport the RPZ on the north side are uncon- owner control over the RPZ land is em- trolled. In addition, a small retention phasized to achieve the desired protec- pond associated with the water treatment tion of people and property on the plant is in the RPZ. On the Runway 7L ground. Although the FAA recognizes that end, the RPZ extends over the golf course, in certain situations the airport sponsor including a small pond. The Runway 7R may not fully control land within the RPZ, RPZ extends over a portion of Taxiway H the FAA expects airport sponsors to take and the Runway 25L RPZ extends over all possible measures to protect against Taxiway K. and remove or mitigate incompatible land uses.” The airport sponsor should make reason- able efforts to own the RPZ in fee simple if Currently, the RPZ review standards are possible or obtain positive control applicable to any new or modified RPZ. through avigation easements or land use The following actions or events could al- zoning measures. ter the size of an RPZ, potentially intro- ducing an incompatibility: Runway/Taxiway Separation • An airfield project (e.g., runway ex- tension, runway shift), The design standards for the separation • A change in the critical design aircraft between runways and parallel taxiways that increases the RPZ dimensions, are a function of the critical design air- craft and the instrument approach visibil- • A new or revised instrument ap- proach procedure that increases the ity minimum. The separation standard for RDC B-II with ½-mile visibility mini- size of the RPZ, mums is 300 feet from the runway center- • A local development proposal in the line to the parallel taxiway centerline. RPZ (either new or reconfigured). Taxiway A is situated 250 feet from Run- way 7L-25R. As discussed previously, it is Since the interim guidance only addresses impracticable to relocate Taxiway A; new or modified RPZs, existing incompat- therefore, a modification to standard ibilities are essentially grandfathered un- should be considered. der certain circumstances. While it is still necessary for the airport sponsor to take Taxiway L is 240 feet from Runway 7R- all reasonable actions to meet the RPZ de- 25L, which exceeds the design standard of sign standard, FAA funding priority for 150 feet. This separation should be main- certain actions, such as relocating existing tained. roads in the RPZ, will be determined on a case by case basis. Hold Lines The precision RPZ serving the approach to Runway 25R currently has several in- The design standard for taxiway hold compatibilities. These include airport lines for Runway 7L-25R is 250 feet from hangars and taxilanes, which are on air- the runway centerline. The hold lines are port property, and numerous off-airport currently at 175 feet. Meeting the design commercial buildings. The airport owns standard for hold lines is impracticable, 2-13 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 as they would be located in the middle of a thriving transportation hub and region- the parallel taxiway. The previous ALP al economic engine. At the same time, identified this as a non-standard condi- FAA design standards have evolved. As a tion to remain in place. The hold lines on result, there are several existing condi- the south side of Runway 7L-25R are 250 tions at the airport that do not meet cur- feet from the runway, thus meeting rent design standards. In some cases it is standard. not practicable to meet the design stand- ards. If the FAA directed the airport to The hold lines for Runway 7R-25L are undertake various improvements in order 125 feet from the runway centerline, to meet design standards in the future which meets design standard. (and funded them), then more detailed planning analysis should be undertaken including an update to the airport layout Non-Standard Conditions Summary plan. Table 2E summarizes the current non-standard conditions. Livermore Municipal Airport has grown from a more rural recreational airport to

TABLE 2E Non-Standard Conditions Livermore Municipal Airport Design Criteria Location Design Standard Existing Condition Disposition Maintain current separation. Parallel Runway ATCT provides aircraft se- Separation Rwys 7L/R-25L/R 700' separation 500' separation quencing. Maintain current separation. Parallel Taxiway to Not practicable to relocate tax- Runway Separation Twy A and Rwy 7L-25R 300' separation 250' separation iway. Maintain current location. 250' from Rwy cen- Impracticable to relocate hold Hold Lines North of Rwy 7L-25R terline 175' separation lines. RSA West of Rwy 7L-25R 600' beyond Rwy end 540' beyond Rwy end FAA to relocate localizer. ROFA West of Rwy 7L-25R 600' beyond Rwy end 540' beyond Rwy end FAA to relocate localizer. Maintain current condition. Northwest of Rwy 7L- Obtain modification to stand- ROFA 25R 800' wide 350' to perimeter fence ard. Maintain current condition. Obtain modification to stand- ROFA Southeast of Rwy 25R 600' beyond Rwy end 500' to perimeter fence ard. Roads, hangars, taxi- RPZ Compatible Maintain clear of ways, commercial build- Maintain current condition. No Land Use All RPZs incompatibilities ings new incompatibilities.

RUNWAYS length, width, and strength are now pre- sented. The adequacy of the existing runway sys- tem at Livermore Municipal Airport has been analyzed from a number of perspec- Runway Length tives, including runway orientation and adherence to safety area standards. From The determination of runway length re- this information, requirements for run- quirements for the airport is based on five way improvements were determined for primary factors: the airport. Runway elements such as

2-14 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 • Mean maximum temperature of the clude an evaluation of aircraft types ex- hottest month pected to use the airport, or a particular • Airport elevation runway now and in the future. Future • Runway gradient plans should be realistic and supported • Critical aircraft type expected to use by the FAA approved forecasts and should the runway be based on the critical design aircraft (or • Stage length of the longest nonstop family of aircraft). destination (specific to larger aircraft) The first step in evaluating runway length The mean maximum daily temperature of is to determine general runway length the hottest month for Livermore Munici- requirements for the majority of aircraft pal Airport is 89.1 degrees Fahrenheit (F), operating at the airport. The majority of which occurs in July. The airport eleva- operations at Livermore Municipal Air- tion is 400 feet above mean sea level port are conducted using smaller single (MSL). The runway elevation difference and multi-engine piston powered aircraft is 27 feet for Runway 7L-25R and 16 feet weighing less than 12,500 pounds. Fol- for Runway 7R-25L. Both runways meet lowing guidance from AC 150/5325-4B, gradient requirements. The RDC for to accommodate 95 percent of small air- Runway 7L-25R is B-II-3, and for Runway craft with less than 10 passenger seats, a 7R-25L the RDC is B-I-1 (small aircraft). runway length of 3,200 feet is recom- Aircraft stage length can vary, but in gen- mended. To accommodate 100 percent of eral, aircraft operating to and from the these small aircraft, a runway length of airport will have a regional destination. 3,800 feet is recommended. Small aircraft Therefore, a maximum stage length con- with 10 or more passenger seats require a sidered for runway length analysis is runway length of 4,200 feet. 1,000 miles. Runway length requirements for business Advisory Circular 150/5325-4B, Runway jets weighing less than 60,000 pounds Length Requirements for Airport Design, have also been calculated. These calcula- provides guidance for determining run- tions take into consideration the runway way length needs. Airplanes operate on a gradient and landing length requirements wide variety of available runway lengths. for contaminated runways (wet). Busi- Many factors will govern the suitability of ness jets tend to need greater runway those runway lengths for aircraft such as length when landing on a wet surface be- elevation, temperature, wind, aircraft cause of their increased approach speeds. weight, wing settings, runway condi- AC 150/5325-4B stipulates that runway tion (wet or dry), runway gradient, vicini- length determination for business jets ty airspace obstructions, and any special consider a grouping of airplanes with sim- operating procedures. Airport operators ilar operating characteristics. The AC can pursue policies that can maximize the provides two separate “family groupings suitability of the runway length. Policies of airplanes” each based upon their rep- such as area zoning and height and haz- resentative percentage of aircraft in the ard restricting can protect an airport’s national fleet. The first grouping is those runway length. Airport ownership (fee business jets that make up 75 percent of simple or easement) of land leading to the the national fleet, and the second group is runway ends can reduce the possibility of those making up 100 percent of the na- natural growth or man-made obstruc- tional fleet. Table 2F presents a partial tions. Planning of runways should in- list of common aircraft in each aircraft

2-15 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 grouping. A third group considers busi- for these aircraft must be based on the ness jets weighing more than 60,000 performance characteristics of the indi- pounds. Runway length determination vidual aircraft.

TABLE 2F Business Jet Categories for Runway Length Determination 75 percent of the na- 75-100 percent of Greater than 60,000 tional fleet MTOW the national fleet MTOW pounds MTOW Lear 35 20,350 Lear 55 21,500 Gulfstream II 65,500 Lear 45 20,500 Lear 60 23,500 Gulfstream IV 73,200 Cessna 550 14,100 Hawker 800XP 28,000 Gulfstream V 90,500 Cessna 560XL 20,000 Hawker 1000 31,000 Global Express 98,000 Cessna 650 (VII) 22,000 Cessna 650 (III/IV) 22,000 IAI Westwind 23,500 Cessna 750 (X) 36,100 Beechjet 400 15,800 Challenger 604 47,600 Falcon 50 18,500 IAI Astra 23,500 MTOW: Maximum Take Off Weight Source: FAA AC 150/5325-4B, Runway Length Requirements for Airport Design

Table 2G presents the results of the run- length needs on a contaminated runway way length analysis for business jets de- (wet and slippery). Dry runways would veloped following the guidance provided require approximately 5,000 feet, while in AC 150/5325-4B. To accommodate 75 5,400 feet is needed to accommodate percent of the business jet fleet at 60 per- business jets landing in wet conditions. cent useful load, a runway length of 5,500 To accommodate 100 percent of the busi- feet is recommended. This length is de- ness jet fleet at 60 percent useful load, a rived from a raw length of 4,707 feet that runway length of 5,700 feet is recom- is adjusted, as recommended, for runway mended. gradient and consideration of landing

TABLE 2G Runway Length Requirements Livermore Municipal Airport Airport Elevation 400 feet above mean sea level Average High Monthly Temp. 89.1 degrees (July) Runway Gradient (0.5%) 27' Runway 7L-25R Runway Length Wet Surface Raw Runway With Gradient Landing Length Recommended Length from Adjustment for Jets Runway Fleet Mix Category FAA AC (+50') (+15%)* Length 75% of fleet at 60% useful load 4,707' 4,977' 5,413' 5,400' 100% of fleet at 60% useful load 5,456' 5,726' 5,500' 5,700' 75% of fleet at 90% useful load 6,644' 6,914' 7,000' 7,000' 100% of fleet at 90% useful load 8,378' 8,648' 7,000' 8,700' *Max 5,500' for 60% useful load and max 7,000' for 90% useful load in wet conditions Source: FAA AC 150/5325-4B, Runway Length Requirements for Airport Design.

2-16 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 Utilization of the 90 percent category for way is intended to accommodate small runway length determination is generally aircraft exclusively. The current pave- not considered by the FAA unless there is ment strength is 12,500 pounds for single a demonstrated need at the airport. This wheel struts. To accommo- could be documented activity by a cargo date all small aircraft including those with carrier or by a business jet operator that 10 or more passenger seats, a runway flies out frequently with heavy loads. To length of 4,200 feet is recommended. To accommodate 75 percent of the business accommodate all small aircraft with nine jet fleet at 90 percent useful load, a run- or fewer passenger seats, a runway length way length of 7,000 feet is recommended. of 3,800 feet is recommended. The design To accommodate 100 percent of business aircraft on the current ALP (and the jets at 90 percent useful load, a runway planned future design aircraft) is the length of 8,700 feet is recommended. Beech C99 Airliner, which is a small twin engine aircraft with greater than 10 pas- senger seats. Runway 7L-25R Length To fully meet the FAA recommended Runway 7L-25R is the primary runway runway length for the parallel Runway and it is 5,253 feet long. To fully accom- 7R-25L, a length of 4,200 feet would be modate at least 75 percent of the business recommended. Various extension options jet fleet at 60 percent useful load, a run- have been considered. The first consid- way length of 5,400 should be provided. ered adding the extension on the west To accommodate the next category of end of the runway. The new landing business jets, 75 percent at 90 percent threshold would be located 248 feet to useful load, a runway length of 5,700 feet the west of the landing threshold to pri- would be recommended. mary Runway 7L. To access the new threshold, a short, 248-foot parallel taxi- The current length of the primary runway way would have to be located between can and does accommodate all general the runways. Such a partial parallel taxi- aviation aircraft, including the largest way would not meet runway/taxiway business jets in the national fleet. At separation requirements. A parallel taxi- times, particularly on very hot days, some way should be at least 300 feet from the of the larger aircraft may be impacted by primary runway and 240 feet from the the current runway length. The impact to parallel runway. In addition, this layout operators will typically include taking on would create a potentially confusing jog a lighter load (less fuel, passengers or in the taxiway. cargo), or making an intermediate stop for additional fuel. While it is recognized Another option considered splits the ex- that the current runway length is some- tension between both ends. In this op- what less than optimal, the close proximi- tion, 1,253 feet would be added to the ty of Isabel Avenue to the east and the golf west end of the runway and 248 feet course to the west make additional run- would be added to the east. The exten- way length highly impractical. sion to the east may be problematic, how- ever. The RPZ would shift to the east, which would place Taxiway B within the Runway 7R-25L Length RPZ. Design standards for the RPZ may not permit the introduction of new in- Runway 7R-25L is the parallel training compatibilities (subject to FAA review). runway and is 2,699 feet long. The run- However, on the west end of the runway,

2-17 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 both runway thresholds would be paral- operate to a parallel runway that is 3,952 lel, which would permit a threshold taxi- feet long would be medium and large way that connects between the Runway business jets. 7L and Runway 7R threshold. This is a much more familiar layout for pilots. There is a safety benefit that can be achieved if the parallel runway were a For purposes of this planning effort, no more optimal length. Most of the avia- extension will be considered on the Run- tion-related businesses are located on the way 25L end. An extension of 1,253 feet south side of the airfield closest to the will be considered on the Runway7R end, parallel runway. Those aircraft that are which will line up the runway thresholds. currently unable to use the parallel run- A total runway length of 3,952 feet is rec- way due to length limitations must utilize ommended for parallel Runway 7R-25L. the primary runway. From the primary runway, they have a long taxi using the There are numerous potential benefits for end-around taxiways or they must cross the airport and community to planning the parallel runway. The FAA’s Runway for a runway length of 3,952 feet for Safety Area Program indicates that Runway 7R-25L. The primary community movements across an active runway benefit is economic. By having a parallel should be reduced or eliminated through runway length that meets the FAA rec- design when possible. Since additional ommendation for most small aircraft, the length of the parallel runway would per- runway can serve a greater variety of air- mit a wider variety of aircraft to use it, the craft. This becomes particularly im- need for runway crossings to access south portant for those times when the main side businesses and hangars would be re- runway may be closed, typically for duced. The same would hold true for air- maintenance or a disabled aircraft. At craft based on the south side that must 3,952 feet in length, most turboprop air- currently use the primary runway. craft such as the Beech King Air or Pilatus, as well as a portion of the small business The efficiency of aircraft ground and air movements would also be greatly en- jet fleet, could also use the runway. These hanced. Tower personnel indicated that a types of aircraft are highly utilized for longer parallel runway would provide business activity. By making the parallel them with more options for routing air- runway available for a greater variety of craft, particularly for arrival or departure. aircraft, business activity can continue uninterrupted to the benefit of the com- As a busy general aviation facility, capaci- munity. ty of the airfield may be a concern. The forecasts of aviation demand indicate that Planning the parallel runway to the rec- by 2030, the airport could experience up ommended length for the current design to 220,000 annual operations. A longer aircraft would provide a back-up capabil- parallel runway would have the added ity that would benefit the community be- benefit of enhancing airfield capacity by yond economic growth. Many air ambu- increasing the efficiency of aircraft lance operators could then utilize the movements, both on the ground and in parallel runway. Fixed wing law en- the air. For ground movements, aircraft forcement operations could continue. can be instructed to land or takeoff on the The list of benefits includes just about all closest runway, thus reducing the time on the benefits that aviation brings. The only the ground. In the air, aircraft may not group of aviation activity that could not have to hold in the traffic pattern as long

2-18 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 while waiting for the main runway to tion No. 2010-058. Appendix B is a copy clear. Currently, the tower may have to of the resolution. extend the traffic pattern in order to properly sequence arriving aircraft. This In conclusion, it is recommended that the leads to more overflights of the communi- ALP show a future condition where Run- ty and additional emissions released into way 7R-25L is planned to 3,952 feet in the air. Instead, aircraft can potentially length. The additional length will be land sooner, to the parallel runway, thus planned for the west end because the de- reducing time in the air. sign standards, including RPZ land use compatibility, can be met on the west end A reduction in taxi times would present only. At 3,952 feet in length, the runway additional benefits. Shorter taxi times re- would fully accommodate all small air- sult in a reduction of emissions by aircraft craft with nine or fewer passenger seats. engine, which means cleaner air for the A portion of those small aircraft with 10 community. Shorter taxi times would also or more passenger seats may be slightly benefit aircraft operators in that they weight restricted. There are so few of would not burn as much fuel while on the these types of aircraft in the national fleet, ground. Less fuel burn means lower op- the operational impact of not fully achiev- erational costs and greater range. ing 4,200 feet is likely to be minimal.

Naturally, local citizens may have con- The recommended extension to the west cerns about the impact that additional will increase safety and efficiency by re- runway length may present to them. Typ- ducing runway crossings and taxi times. ically the impact of an airport on people is It will provide a backup capability for related to noise. A longer parallel runway those times when the primary runway is is only intended to more efficiently ac- closed (e.g., maintenance, accident). commodate existing users of the airport. While not all aircraft that utilize the pri- It would not, in and of itself, attract addi- mary runway will be capable of using the tional operations. As a result, the current parallel, a meaningful portion will, includ- noise contours for the airport are not like- ing turboprops and some small business ly to change to any significant degree. In jets. The overall utility of the airfield will fact, significant advancements have been be improved with an extension of the made by aircraft and engine manufactur- parallel runway. ers to reduce noise generated by aircraft. As a result, many airports are seeing their noise contours shrink even while total Runway Width operations are increasing. The runway width standard is a function It should be noted that the Livermore City of the runway design code (RDC). The Council passed Resolution No. 2010-058 current and future RDC for Runway 7L- on March 23, 2010. The resolution estab- 25R is B-II-2400. The current runway lished various operational and develop- width of 100 feet meets the design stand- ment policies. Item number four states, ard and should be maintained. “The City does not intend to extend the existing runways.” Should the City Coun- Runway 7R-25L is 75 feet wide and has a cil, in the future, choose to pursue the current and future RDC of B-I-1 (small recommendation to extend parallel Run- aircraft). The minimum runway width way 7R-25L to a length of 3,952 feet, they design standard is 60 feet. The existing will need to address the status of resolu- width provides an added safety margin

2-19 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 for this busy airport and should be main- now and into the future; therefore, this tained. strength rating should be maintained. The strength ratings of a runway do not preclude operations by aircraft that weigh Runway Strength more; however, frequent activity by heav- ier aircraft can shorten the useful life of An important feature of airfield pavement that pavement. is its ability to withstand repeated use by aircraft. The FAA Airport/Facility Direc- tory places the pavement strength for TAXIWAYS Runway 7L-25R at 45,000 pounds single wheel loading (S) and 60,000 pounds dual The design standards associated with tax- wheel loading (D). This pavement iways are determined by the taxiway de- strength is adequate for the type of air- sign group (TDG) or the airplane design craft frequently operating at the airport group (ADG) of the critical design aircraft. and should be maintained. As determined previously, ADG-I applies The strength rating for Runway 7R-25L is to parallel Runway 7R-25L and ADG-II 12,500 pounds (S). This runway is applies to Runway 7L-25R. Table 2H planned to accommodate small aircraft presents the various taxiway design standards for the airport.

TABLE 2H Taxiway Dimensions and Standards Livermore Municipal Airport STANDARDS BASED ON WINGSPAN ADG I ADG II Taxiway Protection Taxiway Safety Area (TSA) width 49' 79' Taxiway Object Free Area (TOFA) width 89' 131' Taxilane Object Free Area width 79' 115' Taxiway Separation Taxiway Centerline to: Fixed or Movable Object 44.5' 65.5' Parallel Taxiway/Taxilane 69' 105' Taxilane Centerline to: Fixed or Movable Object 39.5' 57.5' Parallel Taxilane 64' 97' Taxiway Centerline to*: Runway 7L-25R Centerline NA 300' Runway 7R-25L Centerline 150' NA Wingtip Clearance Taxiway Wingtip Clearance 20' 26' Taxilane Wingtip Clearance 15' 18' STANDARDS BASED ON TDG TDG 1 TDG 2 TDG 3 Taxiway Width Standard 25' 35' 50' Taxiway Edge Safety Margin 5' 7.5' 10' Taxiway Shoulder Width 10' 10' 20' *Based on RDC for each runway ADG: Airplane Design Group TDG: Taxiway Design Group Source: FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Airport Design

The table also shows those taxiway de- standards are based on the Main Gear sign standards related to TDG. The TDG Width (MGW) and the Cockpit to Main 2-20 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 Gear (CMG) distance of the critical design terline. The design standard is 300 feet. aircraft expected to use those taxiways. Due to the impracticality of relocating the Different taxiways/taxilane pavements taxiway, it is planned to remain in its cur- can and should be designed to the most rent location. A modification to standard appropriate TDG design standards. may need to be issued and documented on the ALP. The TDG for Runway 7L-25R is 3, which means that the taxiways associated exclu- sively with this runway should be 50 feet Taxiway Design Considerations wide. The taxiway standards for Runway 7R-25L is 1, which means taxiways exclu- FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Airport Design, sively associated with this runway should provides guidance on recommended tax- be at least 25 feet wide. iway and taxilane layouts to enhance safe- ty by avoiding runway incursions. A Table 2J presents the existing taxiway runway incursion is defined as “any oc- dimensions and separation distances at currence at an airport involving the incor- the airport. The current taxiway widths rect presence of an aircraft, vehicle, or generally accommodate those aircraft person on the protected area of a surface types likely to use them. Taxiway L, designated for the landing and takeoff of which is parallel to Runway 7R-25L, is 35 aircraft.” The taxiway system at Liver- feet wide, which exceeds the design more Municipal Airport generally pro- standard of 25 feet. Since this taxiway vides for the efficient movement of air- may on occasion be utilized by larger air- craft. The following is a list of the taxiway craft to access the Runway 7L threshold, design guidelines and the basic rationale it should be maintained at its current behind each recommendation: width to provide an additional safety

margin. Taxiway B north of the Runway 25L threshold is 57 feet wide. This 1. Taxi Method: Taxiways are designed should be reduced to 50 feet at the time of for “cockpit over centerline” taxiing next reconstruction. with pavement being sufficiently wide to allow a certain amount of wander. On turns, sufficient pavement should TABLE 2J Existing Taxiway Condition be provided to maintain the edge safe- Livermore Municipal Airport ty margin from the landing gear. Taxiway Width When constructing new taxiways, up- Taxiways A, C, D, E, F, J, K 50' grading existing intersections should Taxiway B (north of Rwy 25R) 57' be undertaken to eliminate the need Taxiway B (south of Rwy 25R) 50' Taxiway G (north of Rwy 7L-25R) 50' for pilot “judgmental over-steering,” Taxiway G (south of Rwy 7L-25R) 35' which is when the pilot must inten- Taxiway H (north of Rwy 7L) 50' tionally steer the cockpit outside the Taxiway H (south of Rwy 7L) 35' marked centerline in order to assure Taxiway L 35' the aircraft remains on the taxiway Existing Taxiway Separations Taxiway A to Runway 7L-25R 250' pavement. Taxiway L to Runway 7R-25L 240' 2. Steering Angle: Taxiways should be Source: FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Airport Design designed such that the nose gear steering angle is no more than 50 de- grees, the generally accepted value to As discussed previously, Taxiway A is 250 prevent excessive tire scrubbing. feet from the runway, centerline to cen- 2-21 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 3. Three-Node Concept: To maintain exits provide for greater efficiency pilot situational awareness, taxiway in runway usage, but should not be intersections should provide a pilot a used as runway entrance or cross- maximum of three choices of travel. ing points. A right angle turn at Ideally, these are right and left angle the end of a parallel taxiway is a turns and a continuation straight clear indication of approaching a ahead. runway. 4. Intersection Angles: Design turns to - Avoid “Dual Purpose” Pavements: be 90 degrees wherever possible. For Runways used as taxiways and tax- acute angle intersections, standard iways used as runways can lead to angles of 30, 45, 60, 120, 135, and 150 confusion. A runway should al- degrees are preferred. ways be clearly identified as a 5. Runway Incursions: Design taxiways runway and only a runway. to reduce the probability of runway - Indirect Access: Do not design tax- incursions. iways to lead directly from an - Increase Pilot Situational Aware- apron to a runway. Such configu- ness: A pilot who knows where rations can lead to confusion when he/she is on the airport is less like- a pilot typically expects to encoun- ly to enter a runway improperly. ter a parallel taxiway. Complexity leads to confusion. - Hot Spots: Confusing intersections Keep taxiways systems simple us- near runways are more likely to ing the “three node” concept. contribute to runway incursions. - Avoid Wide Expanses of Pavement: These intersections must be rede- Wide pavements require place- signed when the associated run- ment of signs far from a pilot’s eye. way is subject to reconstruction or This is especially critical at runway rehabilitation. Other hot spots entrance points. Where a wide ex- should be corrected as soon as panse of pavement is necessary, practicable. avoid direct access to a runway. 6. Runway/Taxiway Intersections: - Limit Runway Crossings: The taxi- - Right Angle: Right-angle intersec- way layout can reduce the oppor- tions are the standard for all run- tunity for human error. The bene- way/taxiway intersections, except fits are twofold – through simple where there is a need for a high- reduction in the number of occur- speed exit. Right-angle taxiways rences, and through a reduction in provide the best visual perspective air traffic controller workload. to a pilot approaching an intersec- - Avoid “High Energy” Intersections: tion with the runway to observe These are intersections in the aircraft in both the left and right middle third of runways. By limit- directions. They also provide op- ing runway crossings to the first timal orientation of the runway and last thirds of the runway, the holding position signs so they are portion of the runway where a pi- visible to pilots. lot can least maneuver to avoid a - Acute Angle: Acute angles should collision is kept clear. not be larger than 45 degrees from - Increase Visibility: Right angle in- the runway centerline. A 30- tersections, both between taxi- degree taxiway layout should be ways and runways, provide the reserved for high speed exits. The best visibility. Acute angle runway use of multiple intersecting taxi-

2-22 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 ways with acute angles creates pi- The first areas to consider are FAA- lot confusion and improper posi- identified hot spots, of which there are six tioning of taxiway signage. at the airport. These were previously - Large Expanses of Pavement: Tax- identified on Exhibit 1B. Hot Spots are iways must never coincide with usually identified because of previous the intersection of two runways. runway incursions. The first solution to Taxiway configurations with mul- consider for mitigating a hot spot is the tiple taxiway and runway intersec- geometric design of the location. If the tions in a single area create large location already meets geometric design expanses of pavement, making it standard, then additional safety measures difficult to provide proper signage, can be considered such as pavement marking, and lighting. marking, lighting or signage. 7. Taxiway/Runway/Apron Incursion Prevention: Apron locations that al- There is a wide variety of pavement low direct access into a runway markings that can be used to enhance pi- should be avoided. Increase pilot sit- lot awareness when on the airfield. Po- uational awareness by designing taxi- tential markings may include surface ways in such a manner that forces pi- painted holding position markings or lots to consciously make turns. Taxi- runway hold position markings on taxi- ways originating from aprons and ways. At Livermore Municipal Airport, all forming a straight line across runways taxiways that connect to the runways at mid-span should be avoided. have runway hold position markings on - Wide Throat Taxiways: Wide the taxiways. The addition of surface throat taxiway entrances should painted holding position markings may be avoided. Such large expanses of enhance pilot situational awareness. pavement may cause pilot confu- sion and makes lighting and mark- Airfield signs can assist pilots as they ing more difficult. travel on runway and taxiway pavements. - Direct Access from Apron to a Run- These signs will typically include runway way: Avoid taxiway connectors hold position signs, taxiway location that cross over a parallel taxiway signs, runway boundary signs, directional and directly onto a runway. Con- signs, and destination signs. sider a staggered taxiway layout that forces pilots to make a con- There are several airfield lighting solu- scious decision to turn. tions that can enhance pilot situational - Apron to Parallel Taxiway End: awareness while on the airfield. These Avoid direct connection from an include taxiway centerline lights, clear- apron to a parallel taxiway at the ance bar lights, stop bar lights, and run- end of a runway. way guard lights (commonly referred to as wig-wags). FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Airport Design, states that “existing taxiway geometry Consideration should be given to a com- should be improved whenever feasible, bination of markings and lighting to en- with emphasis on designated “hot spots.” hance pilot situational awareness, partic- To the extent practicable, the removal of ularly at the hot spot locations. Marking existing pavement may be necessary to of the runway designation on the taxiway correct confusing layouts. pavement immediately before the hold

2-23 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 bar and installation of runway guard lots aware that they are approaching a lights (wig-wags) should be considered if taxiway. This may be adequate since the problem of runway incursion is acute. it is locally based pilots who would presumably be aware of the approach- ing Taxiway L. The hold apron at the Taxiway Geometric Solutions intersection contributes to a wide ex- panse of pavement; however, it is There are several pavement geometries at marked with a taxiway hold position the airport that are of concern. The fol- marking which may be acceptable. If lowing is a discussion of those areas and the location of this hold apron is not potential solutions. acceptable, then it would need to be marked, lighted, or painted as unusa- 1. A portion of Taxiway B north of the ble or removed. runway threshold is 57 feet wide and should be reduced to 50 feet with a fil- 5. The hold apron on Taxiway B south of let entrance to accommodate TDG 3. the Runway 25R threshold is situated 2. The intersection of Taxiways A, B, and in the POFZ. To maintain this apron, J constitute a wide expanse of pave- an SOP should be established with the ment. In addition, there is an aircraft tower in which they do not allow air- hold apron that extends into the POFZ, craft to use the hold apron if an air- to the east of the lateral edge of the craft is on final approach to Runway runway threshold. The extra taxiway 25R in instrument conditions. With- pavement should be removed and the out the SOP, the hold apron should be hold apron should be relocated. An al- marked as unusable. ternative to relocating the hold apron is to have established Standard Oper- 6. Taxiway D and E provide direct access ating Procedures (SOP) with the tower from the north terminal apron to so that no aircraft are on the hold Runway 7L-25R; however, the taxiway apron as an aircraft is approaching centerline as marked does not indicate Runway 25R in instrument conditions. direct access. This solution may be acceptable to the FAA. If simple cen- 3. Taxiway C, north of Runway 7L-25R terline marking is not acceptable to extends from the north apron, across prevent direct access from an apron to Taxiways J and A to the runway. Di- a runway, then two other solutions rect access from an apron to the run- are available. The first is to relocate way should be avoided. The portion those portions of Taxiways D and E of Taxiway C between the apron and connecting from the apron to Taxiway Taxiway A should be relocated to A, thus forcing pilots to turn before force pilots to make a turn before en- entering the runway environment. tering the runway environment. The second is to construct islands of unusable pavement at the terminal 4. Taxiway C south of Runway 25L pre- apron which forces pilots to turn onto sents a potentially confusing taxiway the taxiways from the apron rather layout. This portion of Taxiway C pro- than having direct access to the run- vides direct access to the Runway 25L way. threshold from the last row of T- hangars. Currently, there is a hold line 7. Taxiway J at the west end of the air- marked on the pavement to make pi- field has a 200-foot wide throat where

2-24 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 it intersects with Taxiway A. This approach utilizes the constellation of GPS should be reduced to 50 feet in width. satellites to provide both vertical and hor- izontal guidance for approaching aircraft Taxiway geometry is receiving higher without the need for extensive ground priority from the FAA. The FAA’s goal is based equipment. None of the other run- to reduce or prevent runway incursions. way ends have instrument approaches Technically, the above mentioned taxi- and are to be utilized in visual conditions ways do not meet the current design exclusively. standards; however, the most appropriate solution will need to be determined on a Recent advancements in the accuracy of case-by-case basis. For example, taxiway GPS instrument approaches has led to the centerline markings may be acceptable to possibility of new or improved approach preventing direct access from an apron to visibility minimums across the country at the runway. In other cases, the FAA may little or no expense to the airport. Any recommend construction of an island of new instrument approaches considered unusable pavement or relocation of the for the airport should be GPS based. Cur- taxiway. rently, the FAA is considering an RNAV (GPS) instrument approach to Runway 7L. Future planning will consider this in- Taxilane Design Considerations strument approach to Runway 7L with visibility minimums not lower than ¾- Taxilanes are distinguished from taxiways mile. in that they do not provide access to or from the runway system directly. Tax- Runway 7R-25L does not have an instru- ilanes typically provide access to hangar ment approach. It is recommended that areas. As a result, taxilanes can be de- future planning consider 1-mile visibility signed to varying design standards de- non-precision instrument approaches to pending up on the type of aircraft utilizing both ends of the runway. The RPZs for the taxilane. For example, a taxilane lead- the runway would remain the same size ing to a T-hangar area only needs to be and no new incompatibilities would be designed to accommodate those aircraft introduced. typically accessing a T-hangar. The tax- ilanes at Livermore Municipal Airport are appropriate for the type of aircraft to be VISUAL NAVIGATION AIDS served. The airport beacon is located in the ter- minal area vehicle parking lot. When re- INSTRUMENT NAVIGATIONAL AIDS placement of the beacon is considered, it should be relocated to the airside of the The airport has a sophisticated ILS (CAT- airport. A location adjacent to the admin- I) instrument approach to Runway 25R. istration building is considered. This approach provides for visibility min- imums as low as ½-mile and cloud ceil- As discussed in Chapter One – Inventory, ings down to 200 feet. An LPV (Localizer Runway 25R has a four-box VASI on the Performance with Vertical Guidance) in- left side of the runway. Many airports are strument approach is also available to upgrading their older VASIs with PAPIs. Runway 25R with a visibility minimum of If the VASI serving Runway 25R needs ¾-mile and cloud ceiling of 320 feet. This replacement, then PAPIs should be in-

2-25 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 stalled. Runway 7L has a four-box PAPI by the FAA, the windsock should be relo- on the right side of the runway. This unit cated outside of the ROFZ. should be maintained. Livermore Municipal Airport is equipped A basic approach glide path lighting sys- with an Automated Surface Observing tem should be made available on both System (ASOS). This is an important sys- ends of parallel Runway 7R-25L once the tem that automatically records weather runway is outfitted with runway edge conditions such as wind speed, wind gust, lights. A basic system might be a PAPI-2L wind direction, temperature, dew point, which provides the same indication of the altimeter setting, visibility, fog/haze con- appropriate glide path as the PAPI-4. If dition, precipitation, and cloud height. non-precision instrument approaches are This system should be maintained made available to this runway, then the through the planning period. PAPIs become more important. The airport has an airport traffic control Runway end identification lights (REIL) tower (ATCT) that is operated by the FAA. are strobe lights set to either side of the The tower should be maintained. runway. These lights are directed in the air and provide rapid identification of the runway threshold. REILs should be in- LANDSIDE REQUIREMENTS stalled at runway ends not currently providing an approach lighting system Landside facilities are those necessary for but supporting instrument operations. A the handling of aircraft and passengers REIL system should be considered for the while on the ground. These facilities pro- approach to Runway 7L. vide the essential interface between the air and ground transportation modes. The FAA recommends an approach light- The capacity of the various components of ing system for instrument approaches not each element was examined in relation to lower that ¾-mile and requires one for projected demand to identify future land- lower visibility minimums. Runway 25R side facility needs. This includes compo- has a medium intensity approach lighting nents for general aviation needs such as: system with runway alignment indicator lights (MALSR). This system is required • Aircraft Hangars as part of the ILS approach and allows for • Aircraft Parking Aprons the visibility minimums to be ½-mile. • Administration building Services This system should be maintained. • Auto Parking and Access

• Airport Support Facilities

WEATHER AND COMMMUNICATION AIDS HANGARS

A lighted windsock is situated within a Utilization of hangar space varies as a segmented circle in between the two function of local climate, security, and runways. These should be maintained. A owner preferences. The trend in general supplemental unlit windsock is located aviation, whether single or multi-engine between Taxiways A and J at the west end aircraft, is toward more sophisticated air- of the airfield. This windsock is outside of craft (and consequently, more expensive the RSA but within the ROFZ. If required aircraft); therefore, many aircraft owners 2-26 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 prefer enclosed hangar space to outside ars. Typically, box hangars will house tie-downs. larger multi-engine, turboprop, or jet air- craft. At Livermore Municipal Airport, The demand for aircraft storage hangars there are 36 box hangar spaces encom- is dependent upon the number and type passing approximately 125,200 square of aircraft expected to be based at the air- feet of floor space. For future planning, a port in the future. However, hangar con- standard of 2,500 square feet per aircraft struction should be based upon actual is utilized for box hangars. demand trends and financial investment /conditions. Conventional hangars are the familiar large hangars with open floor plans that While a majority of aircraft owners prefer can store several aircraft. At Livermore enclosed aircraft storage, a number of Municipal Airport, conventional hangars based aircraft owners may still tie-down are estimated to encompass 18,200 outside (due to the lack of hangar availa- square feet of floor space and provide 9 bility, hangar rental rates, and/or opera- aircraft storage positions. For future tional needs). Therefore, enclosed hangar planning needs, 2,500 square feet per air- facilities do not necessarily need to be craft is utilized for conventional hangars. planned for each based aircraft. At Liv- ermore Municipal Airport, it is estimated Table 2K presents aircraft storage needs that 84 of the 495 based aircraft utilize based on the long term demand forecasts. tie-down space. In the long term, based Assumptions have been made on owner aircraft are forecast to grow to 720, of preferences for a hangar type based on which 122 may utilize tie-down space. trends at general aviation airports. All Therefore, hangar storage space should turboprops, business jets, and helicopters be made available for 598 aircraft by the are assumed to be stored in box or con- long term. ventional hangars. T-hangars are as- sumed to house single engine piston air- There are three general types of aircraft craft and a small portion of multi-engine storage hangars: T-hangars, box hangars, piston aircraft. and conventional hangars. T-hangars are similar in size and will typically house a A portion of executive box and conven- single engine piston powered aircraft. tional hangars often are utilized primarily Some multi-engine aircraft owners may for maintenance activities or for office elect to utilize these facilities as well. space. A planning standard of 15% of the There are typically many T-hangar units structure footprint is considered for these “nested” within a single structure. There purposes in addition to the aircraft stor- are 355 T-hangar units at the airport en- age needs. Nested T-hangar facilities typ- compassing an estimated 339,200 square ically have small storage units on the end feet of floor space. For determining fu- as well. ture aircraft storage needs, a planning standard of 1,200 square feet per based It is estimated that there is 482,600 aircraft is utilized for T-hangars. square feet of hangar storage space avail- able currently. This includes 339,200 Box hangars are open-space facilities with square feet for T-hangars, 125,200 square no interfering supporting structure. Box feet for box hangars, and 18,200 square hangars can vary in size and can either be feet from conventional hangars. Hangar attached to others or be standalone hang- calculations indicate that there is an im-

2-27 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 mediate need for all hangar storage types. conventional hangars. In total, it is fore- By the long term planning period, an ad- cast that the airport needs an additional ditional 176,800 square feet of T-hangar 454,400 square feet of hangar space and space is forecast, 169,800 square feet for an additional 36,600 feet dedicated for box hangars, and 107,800 square feet for maintenance and office activities.

TABLE 2K Hangar Needs Livermore Municipal Airport Total Need Less Currently Supply Long Term Current Supply Based Aircraft 495 720 Aircraft to be Hangared 411 598 187 T-Hangar Positions 355 430 75 Box Hangar Positions 36 118 82 Conventional Hangar Positions 9 50 41 Hangar Area Requirements T-Hangar Area 339,200 516,000 176,800 Box Hangar Area 125,200 295,000 169,800 Conventional Hangar Area 18,200 126,000 107,800 Total Storage Area (s.f.) 482,600 937,000 454,400 Maintenance Area 26,600 63,200 36,600 Source: Coffman Associates analysis.

Hangar requirements are general in na- apron is large enough to accommodate ture and are based on standard hangar transient airport users as well as a por- size estimates. If a private developer de- tion of locally based aircraft. Often, sires to construct or lease a large hangar smaller aprons are available adjacent to to house one plane, any extra space in FBO hangars and at other locations that hangar may not be available for other around the airport. The apron layout at aircraft. The actual hangar area needs Livermore Municipal Airport follows this will be dependent on the usage within typical pattern. each hangar. It is estimated that there are 71,500 It should be reiterated that the airport square yards of apron utilized for local has a significant current demand for aircraft tie-down activity. These apron hangar storage space as evidenced by a areas provide for approximately 250 air- wait list of over 150 aircraft owners. craft tie-down positions. There is an ad- ditional 20,000 square yards of pavement utilized for transient activity. There are AIRCRAFT PARKING APRON 37 transient positions for small aircraft and nine positions for larger business jets. The aircraft parking apron is an expanse of paved area intended for aircraft park- FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13A, ing and circulation. Typically, a main Airport Design, suggests a methodology by apron is centrally located near the airside which transient apron requirements can entry point, such as the administration be determined from knowledge of busy- building or FBO facility. Ideally, the main day operations. At Livermore Municipal 2-28 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 Airport, the number of itinerant spaces was used. The current need for transient required is estimated at 13 percent of the apron area is 22,600 square yards. By the busy-day itinerant operations (181 x 0.13 long term planning period, approximately = 24). This results in a current need for 37,500 square yards is estimated. 24 itinerant aircraft parking spaces. Of these, 19 (approximately 80 percent) An aircraft parking apron should provide should be for small aircraft and five space for the number of locally based air- should be for turboprops and business craft that are not stored in hangars, tran- jets. By the long term planning period, 39 sient aircraft, and for maintenance activi- spaces are estimated to be needed, with ty. For local tie-down needs, an addition- 31 identified for small aircraft and eight al ten spaces are identified for mainte- for larger planes. nance activity. Maintenance activity would include the movement of aircraft A planning criterion of 800 square yards into and out of hangar facilities and tem- per aircraft was applied to determine fu- porary storage of aircraft on the ramp. ture transient apron area requirements Calculations indicated that local aircraft for single and multi-engine aircraft. For tie-down positions are adequate through turboprops and business jets (which can the long term planning period. Total be much larger), a planning criterion of apron parking requirements are present- 1,600 square yards per aircraft position ed in Table 2L.

TABLE 2L Aircraft Apron Requirements Livermore Municipal Airport Currently Available Calculated Need Long Term (2012) (2012) Forecast Local Apron Positions 250 115 132 Local Apron Area (s.y.) 71,500 40,400 46,300 Transient Apron Positions 46 24 39 Piston Transient Positions 37 19 31 Turbine Transient Positions 9 5 8 Transient Apron Area (s.y.) 20,000 22,600 37,500 Total Apron Area (s.y) 91,500 63,000 83,800 Source: Coffman Associates analysis

The current transient apron area is esti- AIRPORT ADMINISTRATION BUILDING mated to provide an adequate number of spaces, but is slightly undersized. If feasi- General aviation administration facilities ble, a larger transient apron should be have several functions. Space is neces- made available and parking space separa- sary for a pilots’ lounge, flight planning, tion increased. The apron area dedicated concessions, management, and storage. for local tie-downs is larger than recom- More advanced airports will have leasable mended. As demand dictates, portions of space in the administration building for the local apron can be converted to tran- such features as a restaurant, FBO line sient needs. services, and other needs. This space is

2-29 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 not necessarily limited to a single, sepa- feet per design hour itinerant passenger. rate administration building, but can in- Design hour itinerant passengers are de- clude space offered by FBOs in their termined by multiplying design hour itin- hangars/offices for these functions and erant operations by the estimated num- services. ber of passengers on the aircraft (multi- plier). An increasing passenger count The methodology used in estimating gen- (from 1.9 to 2.3) is used to account for the eral aviation administration facility needs likely increase in the number of passen- is based on the number of airport users gers utilizing general aviation services. expected to utilize general aviation facili- Table 2M outlines the general aviation ties during the design hour. General avia- administration facility space require- tion space requirements were then calcu- ments for Livermore Municipal Airport. lated based upon providing 120 square

TABLE 2M Administration Building Facilities Livermore Municipal Airport Existing Long Term Design Hour Operations 66 110 Design Hour Itinerant Operations 27 45 Multiplier 2 2 Total Design Hour Itinerant Passengers 51 104 Administration Building Space (s.f.) 2,600 12,500 Note: Additional space may be needed for amenities such as restaurant, conference room, and leasable space. Source: Coffman Associates analysis

The existing administration building at istration building which may include ad- Livermore Municipal Airport encom- ditional amenities such as a restaurant or passes approximately 2,600 square feet of community conference room. floor space. It is estimated that a building of approximately 6,200 square feet would The City of Livermore is in the process of more adequately meet the current needs planning for a new administration build- of the airport. By the long term, an ad- ing to be located to the immediate east of ministration building of 12,500 square the existing facility. The planned facility feet is recommended. would meet the needs of the airport now and into the future. The airport administration building is the entrance to the community for most air passengers utilizing the airport. It should SUPPORT REQUIREMENTS be assumed that these passengers include decision-makers who may be considering Various facilities that do not logically fall investment in the community. Therefore, within classifications of airside or land- it is recommended that the airport spon- side facilities have also been identified. sor be cognizant of the appearance of the These other areas provide certain func- airport and the administration building in tions related to the overall operation of particular. Some communities will pro- the airport. vide a separate general aviation admin-

2-30 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 AUTOMOBILE PARKING vehicle spaces needed for transient users. Locally based parking spaces are calculat- Planning for adequate automobile park- ed as one-half the number of based air- ing is a necessary element for any airport. craft. Parking needs can effectively be segment- ed between transient airport users, local- A planning standard of 315 square feet ly based users, and airport business per space is utilized to determine total needs. Transient users include those em- vehicle parking area necessary, which in- ployed at the airport and visitors, while cludes area needed for circulation and local users are those with an aircraft handicap clearances. Parking require- based at the airport. A planning standard ments for the airport are summarized in of 1.9 times the design hour passenger Table 2N. count provides the minimum number of

TABLE 2N GA Vehicle Parking Requirements Livermore Municipal Airport

Existing (Estimate) Long Term Design Hour Itinerant Passengers 51 104 VEHICLE PARKING SPACES GA Itinerant Spaces 200 197 GA Based Spaces 44 360 Total Parking Spaces 244 557 VEHICLE PARKING AREA GA Itinerant Parking Area (s.f.) 64,000 62,000 GA Based Parking Area (s.f.) 45,000 113,000 Total Parking Area (s.f.) 109,000 175,000 Source: Coffman Associates analysis

There appears to be enough designated the aircraft movement areas, many gen- vehicle parking through the long term eral aviation airports are providing sepa- planning period for itinerant airport us- rate parking in support of facilities with ers. Parking should be made available in multiple aircraft parking positions, such close proximity to the administration as T-hangars. Planning for future hangars building and airport businesses. Ade- should consider segregating vehicle park- quate parking should be planned to ac- ing from the aircraft movement surfaces. commodate the new administration building and to account for the spaces lost due to the installation of the solar array in AIRPORT ACCESS ROADS the current administration building park- ing lot. The Livermore Municipal Airport has ex- cellent access to Interstate 580 from Air- Currently, most aircraft owners will drive way Boulevard. Terminal Circle and to their hangar and park their cars in the Clubhouse Drive provide a loop road sys- hangar when utilizing their aircraft. In an tem to the administration building. Ter- effort to limit the level of vehicle traffic on minal Circle may need to be extended to

2-31 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 accommodate future development to the their own desired reserve, a 14-day re- east of the existing administration build- serve is common for general aviation air- ing. ports. When additional capacity is need- ed, it should be planned in 10,000 to Access to the south side of the airport is 12,000 gallon increments to accommo- available via West Jack London Blvd., date fuel tanker trucks which commonly which was recently extended on the south have an 8,000-gallon capacity. side of the airport to the west and con- nects with El Charro Road. This road Underground fuel farms are more difficult provides a means to traverse on all sides to monitor for leaks or other deteriora- of the airport. tion. Where feasible, older underground fuel storage should be replaced with above-ground facilities which are easier AIRCRAFT RESCUE AND FIRE to monitor. FIGHTING (ARFF) FACILITIES A summary of airside and landside needs Livermore Municipal Airport is not a Part is presented on Exhibit 2D. 139 (under Title 14 Code of Federal Regu- lations), airport and, therefore, is not re- quired to have on-site firefighting capabil- RECOMMENDED CONCEPT ities. Livermore-Pleasanton Fire Depart- ment temporary station No. 10 is located The recommended airport layout plan on the north side of the airfield. This is a concept preserves the current nature of great benefit to the airport as quick re- the airport by maintaining the focus on sponse times are possible. supporting small single and multi-engine piston-powered aircraft. The airport will continue to experience activity by busi- FUEL STORAGE ness jets as well. The recommended air- port layout plan concept, as shown on The airport maintains an underground Exhibit 2E, presents the ultimate configu- fuel farm on the north edge of the main ration for the airport that preserves the apron. There are three tanks, each with a role of the airport while meeting FAA de- 15,000 gallon capacity. Two of the tanks sign standards to the greatest degree fea- are reserved for 100LL () and one is sible. A phased program to implement for Jet A fuel. The airport leases four fuel the recommended development concept delivery trucks. Two of the trucks are for will be presented in Chapter Three - Capi- AvGas and have capacities of 2,000 gal- tal Improvement Program. The following lons and 1,200 gallons. Two of the trucks will describe the recommended concept are for Jet A fuel and have capacities of and the rationale behind it. 3,000 gallons each. The airport maintains a self-serve fuel island immediately in front of the administration building. AIRSIDE CONCEPT There are two fuel pumps for AvGAS. The airside plan generally considers those Additional fuel storage capacity should be improvements related to the runway and planned when the airport is unable to taxiway system. Primary Runway 7L-25R maintain an adequate supply and reserve. is planned to stay the same. The length is While each airport (or FBO) determines recommended to remain at 5,253 feet and

2-32 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 AIRSIDE REQUIREMENTS LANDSIDE REQUIREMENTS CURRENT FUTURE BASE YEAR SHORT INTERMEDIATE LONG (2012) TERM TERM TERM

12-MP-12-1E-02/04/13 RUNWAYS Based Aircraft 495 620 650 720 Primary Runway 7L-25R Primary Runway 7L-25R Design Aircraft B-II-3 Same AIRCRAFT TO BE HANGARED Single Engine 375 459 469 498 Runway Design Code B-II-2400 Same Multi-Engine 30 43 53 73 Runway Reference Code B-II-4000/B-I-2400 Same Jet 4 9 13 20 Dimensions 5,253' x 100' Same Helicopter 24 57 Pavemente Strength 45,000 (S), 60,000 (D) Same Total to be Hangared 411 515 540 598 Runway Safety Area (RSA) Localizer in RSA FAA to relocate/remove localizer HANGAR POSITIONS Modification to Standard or maintain Runway Object Free Area (ROFA) Numerous penetrations non-standard condition T-Hangars Positions 355 394 404 430 Box Hangar Positions 36 85 96 118 Runway Obstacle Free Zone (ROFZ) Holdline in OFZ Relocate hold lines or maintain non-standard condition Conventional Hangar Positions 9 35 40 50 Runway Precision Obstacle Free Zone (POFZ) Hold apron, taxiway, and service road penetrate Clear POFZ or institute SOP with ATCT Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) Numerous incompatibilities Clear if feasible HANGAR AREA T-Hangars (s.f.) 339,200 473,000 484,000 516,000 Runway Markings Precision Same Executive Box Hangar (s.f.) 125,200 213,000 240,000 295,000 Runway Lighting MIRL Same Conventional Hangar (s.f.) 18,200 88,000 100,000 126,000 Hold Lines 175' from centerline Move to 200' (outside OFZ) if feasible Maintenance Area (s.f.) 32,200 45,200 51,000 63,200 Parallel Runway 7R-25L Parallel Runway 7R-25L AIRCRAFT PARKING Design Aircraft B-I-1 (small) Same Local Apron Positions 250 115 121 132 Runway Design Code B-I-VIS (small) B-I-5000 Local Apron Area (s.y.) 71,500 40,400 42,200 46,300 Runway Reference Code B-II-4000 Same Transient Apron Positions 46 33 35 39 Dimensions 2,699' x 75' 3,952' x 75' Piston Transient Positions 37 27 28 31 Pavemente Strength 12,500 (S) Same Turbine Transient Positions 9 778 Runway Safety Area (RSA) Meets standard Same Transient Apron Area (s.y.) 20,000 32,100 33,800 37,500 Runway Object Free Area (ROFA) Meets Standard Same Total Apron Area (s.y) 91,500 72,500 76,000 83,800 Runway Obstacle Free Zone (ROFZ) Meets standard Same AUTO PARKING Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) Numerous incompatibilities Clear if feasible Total Spaces 244 457 487 557 Runway Markings Basic Non-precision Total Area (s.f.) 109,000 144,000 153,000 175,000 Runway Lighting NA MIRL ADMINISTRATION BUILDING Runway Separation Runway are 500' apart Same (No duel approaches) Area (s.f.) 2,600 9,300 10,200 12,500 TAXIWAYS Taxiway Design Group 3/2 (Twy L) Same SOP - Standard Operating Procedures MALSR - Medium Intensity Approach Lighting System Marking Centerlines Same with Runway Alignment Indicator Lights NP1 - Non-precision instrument approach with 1 to 3-mile visibility minimums ##-S/D/DT - Runway Strength Rating in Thousands of Width Narrow Twy B to 50'. Maintain all others. Same Pounds for Single (S), Dual (D) Wheel Struts Lighting MITL Same PAPI - Precision Approach Path Indicator ATCT - Air Traffic control Tower Hot Spot and layout deficiencies Correct Hot Spots and redesign layout where feasible Same LPV - GPS with Localizer Performance and Separation Standard Taxiway A is 250' from Rwy centerline Maintain non-standard condition Vertical Guidance ATIS - Automatic Traffic Information Service NAVIGATIONAL AND WEATHER AIDS MIRL - Medium Intensity Runway Lighting ASOS, Two windsocks, beacon, ATCT, ATIS Same MITL - Medium Intensity Taxiway Lighting Primary Runway 7L-25R Primary Runway 7L-25R ASOS - Automated Surface Observation System Instrument Approach CAT-I ILS and ¾-Mile LPV (25R) Same (25R)/ ¾-Mile (7L) Approach Lighting System MALSR (25R) Same

Approach Slope Lighting VASI-4L (25R) Upgrade to PAPI 4L (25R) KEY ABBREVIATION PAPI-4R (7L) Same Runway End Identification Lighting None Consider REIL (7L) Parallel Runway 7R-25L Parallel Runway 7R-25L Instrument Approach Visual 1-Mile Approach Slope Lighting None Consider PAPI-2L Exhibit 2D AIRPORT REQUIREMENTS 84 Exhibit 2E RECOMMENDED CONCEPT

Armstrong St. Airway Blvd. Corporate Hangars Corporate Nissen Dr. s

r

a 125’ g n

a 250’ H

-

T T-Hangars 240’ s r a x g Airway Blvd. o n B Box a e H Hangars v i t g a r n ) i ’ t s d 5 i l s i 7 n r i x u ’ a Building B 2 m g 5 d n 9 a A Administrative

,

H 3 Terminal Circle Terminal - ( )

’ T T-Hangars e 0 t 0 a E 1 S m x A 1 1 i ’ H t 3 l P PHASE 5 e Ultimate (3,952’x75’) Ultimate U s t 2 r , a E ) a ’ r S 5 ( E A 5 g 3 3 o

S H 7 n p R E A 4 4 P PHASE r x S a 5 H ’ A 2 2 o P PHASE 2 H Hangars 9 H - C Corporate P PHASE 9 L 6 7 ,

2 y ( e n

a v o L i r w 5 t e n a 2 s i - u e v R Runway 7L-25R (5,253’x100’) 7L-25R Runway R R A Aviation Reserve 7

y

a Jack London Blvd. London Jack w 1000 n u Runway 7R-25L (2,699’x75’) 7R-25L (2,699’x75’) Runway R Runway

e

s t 500’ r a a r g o n p r a o H Hangars C Corporate SCALE IN FEET

ORTH

N e n 0 500 v o i r t e a s i e v R A Aviation Reserve 1,253’

7 LEGEND Airport Property Line Area Safety Runway Zone Obstacle Free Area Object Free Airport Pavement Future be Removed to Pavement Building Future Parking Future

r e a e t n z a i n l c e a o t l c n e o

Relocate R Relocate L Localizer A Antenna 12-MP-12--02/04/13 the width at 100 feet. The design aircraft typically impacted by the availability of is planned to remain B-II-3, which is rep- instrument approaches. For this runway, resented by a combination of the Falcon these elements are the same for non- 900B and (750) busi- precision instrument approaches of not ness jets. The runway design code (RDC) less than 1-mile and for visual conditions. will remain B-II-2400 and the runway As a result, the parallel runway is planned reference code (RRC) will remain at B-I- to have non-precision instrument ap- 2400/B-II-4000. Under ideal conditions, proaches to both runway ends (provided the RDC and the RRC would be the same; there are no hazardous obstacles). however, the existing runway system predates the FAA design standards. At 2,699 feet in length, the parallel run- way does not meet the recommended Analysis was presented that indicated length for the current design aircraft. The that the airport exceeds the 500 annual runway is recommended to be extended operations threshold for a design aircraft to the west, bringing the total runway in C-II-3, which would be represented by length to 3,952 feet. At this length, the medium and large business jets. It is im- runway will increase the safety and effi- practicable to fully meet design standards ciency of aircraft currently operating at associated with C-II-3. Parallel Taxiway A the airport. would need to be relocated to a distance of 400 feet from the runway and the RSAs The taxiway system is recommended to would change from 600 feet beyond the be improved in order to provide greater runway ends to 1,000. Adjacent proper- efficiency of ground movement and im- ties, including the golf course, would be prove safety by increasing pilot situation- negatively impacted. al awareness through design. The taxi- way improvements include removal of As a result, Livermore Municipal Airport excess pavement, removing direct access is one of many general aviation airports from aprons to active runways, and insti- that cannot reasonably be designed to ful- tuting Standard Operating Procedures ly accommodate a change to a more re- with the tower to increase safety. strictive design aircraft (B-II-3 to C-II-3). As a result, planning for Runway 7L-25R is intended to meet design standards for a LANDSIDE CONCEPT B-II-3 design aircraft to the greatest ex- tent practicable. Generally, landside issues relate to those airport facilities necessary, or desired, for Parallel Runway 7R-25L is recommended the safe and efficient parking and storage to remain the same as well in all aspects of aircraft, movement of passengers and except runway length and the availability pilots to and from aircraft, airport land of instrument approaches. The current use, and overall revenue support func- design aircraft for the runway is B-I-1 tions. In addition, elements such as fuel- (small) which is represented by the Beech ing capability, availability of services, and C99 Airliner. The RDC and RRC are cur- emergency response are also considered rently B-I-VIS. In the future, this runway in the landside functions. is planned to have edge lighting installed, making the runway available for Landside planning focuses on facility lo- nighttime operations. The approach cating strategies following a philosophy of slope and RPZ are the design standards separating activity levels. To maximize

2-33 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 airport efficiency, it is important to locate The medium-activity category defines the facilities intended to serve similar func- next level of airport use and primarily in- tions. For example, it makes sense to plan cludes corporate aircraft operators that T-hangar structures in a designated area may desire their own box or conventional rather than haphazardly building them as hangar storage on the airport. A hangar needed on the next available spot at the in the medium-activity use area should be airport. It is also important to plan for at least 50 feet by 50 feet, or a minimum facilities that users of the airport desire of 2,500 square feet. The best location for and to group those facilities together, medium-activity use is off the immediate whether they are T-hangars, box hangars, flightline, but still with ready access to the and larger conventional hangars. runway/taxiway system. Typically, these areas will be adjacent to the high-activity The orderly development of the airport areas. Parking and utilities such as water terminal area (those areas parallel to the and sewer should also be provided in this runway and along the flightline) can be area. the most critical, and probably the most difficult development to control on the The low-activity use category defines the airport. A development approach of “tak- area for storage of smaller single and ing the path of least resistance” can have a twin-engine aircraft. Low-activity users significant effect on the long term viabil- are personal or small business aircraft ity of an airport. Allowing development owners who prefer individual space in T- without regard to a functional plan can hangars or small box hangars. Low- result in a haphazard array of buildings activity areas should be located in less and small ramp areas, which will eventu- conspicuous areas or to the ends of the ally preclude the most efficient use of val- flightline. This use category will require uable space along the flightline. electricity, but may not require water or sewer utilities. Activity in the terminal area should be divided into three categories at an air- In addition to the functional compatibility port. The high-activity area should be of the terminal area, the proposed devel- planned and developed as the area opment concept should provide a first- providing aviation services on the airport. class appearance for Livermore Municipal An example of a high-activity area is the Airport. Consideration to aesthetics aircraft parking apron, which provides should be given high priority in all public outside storage and circulation of aircraft. areas, as the airport can many times serve In addition, large conventional hangars as the first impression a visitor may have housing fixed base operators (FBOs), oth- of the community. er airport businesses, or used for bulk aircraft storage would be considered Livermore Municipal Airport has approx- high-activity uses. A conventional hangar imately 495 based aircraft which is fore- structure in the high-activity area should cast to grow to 720 provided adequate be a minimum of 6,400 square feet (80 hangar space is available. There are over feet by 80 feet). If space is available, it is 150 aircraft owners on the wait list for more common to plan these hangars for hangar space. The landside concept pri- up to 200 feet by 200 feet. The best loca- marily addresses the location and type of tion for high-activity areas is along the hangar space planned for the airport in flightline near midfield, for ease of access the future. to all areas of the airfield.

2-34 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 Not all aircraft owners will necessarily rent FAA approved forecasts which ex- want an enclosed aircraft hangar space; tend to 2030. In an effort to provide a therefore, hangar planning is not neces- more flexible plan, the yearly forecasts sary to house all based aircraft. At Liver- have been converted to planning horizon more, it is estimated that approximately levels. The short term roughly corre- 17 percent of aircraft owners will elect to sponds to a five-year timeframe, the in- utilize outside aircraft tie-down space. In termediate term is approximately 10 the future, it is estimated there is a need years, and the long term is 20 years. By for 75 T-hangar spaces, 82 box hangar utilizing planning horizons, airport man- spaces, and 41 conventional hangar spac- agement can focus on demand indicators es. A total of 454,400 square feet of addi- for initiating projects and grant requests tional hangar space is estimated to be rather than on specific dates in the future. needed through 2030. The Livermore Municipal Airport has The recommended future layout of hang- evolved over the years from a more rural ars has been established through previ- general aviation facility accommodating ous planning efforts as detailed in the Liv- small single and multi-engine piston ermore Municipal Airport General Plan powered aircraft to one that experiences Amendment and Rezoning EIR (2009). frequent business jet activity. Frequent The future layout has been analyzed in activity is defined as 500 or more annual terms of efficiency and capacity. The fu- operations. As such, the airport sponsor ture layout does generally follow the must consider meeting design standards strategy of separating activity levels at associated with the aircraft type operat- the airport. For example, new FBO facili- ing frequently. ties are planned on the north side of the airport in high activity areas along the The Runway Design Code (RDC) for pri- flight-line. Future box hangars, corporate mary Runway 7L-25R is B-II-2400. This hangars, and T-hangars are grouped to- runway is planned to remain in its cur- gether. rent capacity. Parallel Runway 7R-25L is classified as RDC B-I-VIS (small aircraft). The future hangar layout plan provides If 1-mile visibility non-precision instru- for approximately 594,000 square feet of ment approaches are introduced to this new aircraft storage space, which would runway then the future RDC falls in B-I- meet the long term need as calculated 5000. previously. The plan provides approxi- mately 193,000 square feet of new T- The most significant change considered hangars, 175,000 square feet for new for the runway system is the recommen- box/corporate hangars, and 226,000 dation to extend the parallel runway from square feet for larger conventional hang- 2,699 feet in length to 3,952 feet in length. ars. This extension is intended to accommo- date aircraft currently operating at the airport and is not intended to attract any SUMMARY new aircraft larger than what is currently operating at the airport. The planned The intent of this chapter has been to out- length of 3,952 feet does not fully meet line the facilities required to meet poten- the FAA recommended length of 4,200 tial aviation demand projected for Liver- feet. This is due to a desire to line-up the more Municipal Airport based on the cur- thresholds of the two runways in order to 2-35 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014 avoid creating potentially confusing ac- On the landside, planning calculations cess taxiways. show a need for additional hangars of all varieties. The availability of additional The purpose of the recommended exten- hangar space is a significant factor as to sion of the parallel runway is to increase whether the airport will experience and the safety and efficiency of the airfield. can accommodate the forecast growth in Currently, due to inadequate runway based aircraft. The airport has a wait list length, many aircraft must wait longer on of over 150 aircraft owners desiring an the ground or in the air to utilize the pri- enclosed hangar space as of January 2013. mary runway. This increases operator The hangar layout plan includes the addi- costs and fuel burn. It also means opera- tion of 454,400 square feet of aircraft tors must cross active runways to get to storage space. This would accommodate their destination on the airfield. This is forecast needs at the airport. particularly true at Livermore Municipal Airport because most of the airport busi- nesses are located on the south side of the airport.

2-36 FINAL – SEPTEMBER 2014