DOCSLIB.ORG

5.6 Aviation §¨¦5

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
5.6 Aviation §¨¦5 Chapter Five locational diagram of public use airports within the Fresno 5.6 Aviation County region to the specific details of individual airport facility development. Overview The Aviation Element is focused on aviation related There are nine (9) public use airports in Fresno County, as planning efforts of the COG, its member agencies and shown in Figure 5-14. The precise location, facility design other local entities. The Element ranges from a broad and detailed costs of specific facilities are contained in the Figure 5-14: Airports Locations in Fresno County COPPER Firebaugh SE U NEES County O q® Municipal Airport dera ·|}þ168 TOLL H Ma Clovis Firebaugh q® Sierra Fresno Sky Park ·|}þ99 Fresno Yosemite % Mendota q® q® International Municipal WHITESBRIDGE WHITES BRIDGE KIN ·|}þ180 GS CANYON Airport q® Mendota Kerman Chandler Sanger Downtown ·|}þ33 GOLDEN STATE Reedley JEFFERSON Airport TEMPERANCE DICKENSON Orange San Municipal Airport q® ·|}þ41 MADERA Cove Joaquin MANNING Fowler Parlier C O MCMULLIN LO R Selma Selma Reedley A DERRICK q® D O Aerodome Tulare County ·|}þ43 Kingsburg ·|}þ145 HARLAN MOUNT WHITNEY A G IN L A ·|}þ269 Kings County CO 5 O ¨¦§ N FRES q® Primary airport, publically owned Harris LASSEN Ranch Airport q® Reliever airport, publically owned DORRIS ·|}þ198 q® q® General aviation airport, publically owned Coalinga Huron Municipal q® General aviation airport, privately owned Coalinga q® Airport JAYNE Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA Page 5-78 2014 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy Actions: Assessing Our Transportation Investment Needs Master Plans of the individual airport facilities. The Master Existing System Inventory Plans address long-term planning goals, potential land The California Aviation System Plan (CASP) is a multi- use, noise and safety impacts, and the means by which to element plan prepared by the California Department of implement the short and long range improvements. Transportation (Caltrans), Division of Aeronautics, with the goal of developing and preserving a system of airports An integral next step in the Master Plan process is responsive to the needs of the State. A segment of the delineation of airport impacts on the surrounding land CASP, the Central California Aviation System Plan, includes area. The responsibility for coordination of land use all the public use airports in Fresno County (can be found planning among state, regional and local agencies in the at dot.ca.gov). The Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is a area surrounding an airport facility lies with the Airport ten-year compiled listing of capital projects submitted Land Use Commission. Through adoption of land use to Caltrans for inclusion in the CASP predominantly policy plans, the Commission delineates a compatible based on general aviation airport master plans or other environment for the airport facility and, in turn, protects comparable long-range planning documents. The CIP a valuable local investment. COG member agencies with allows Caltrans partners to actively participate and assist jurisdiction over an airport also incorporate these policies in the coordination of its ongoing, statewide, aviation into their Airport Master Plans and general planning system planning and project funding effort. The CIP is efforts. updated biennially (every two years) per PUC section 21704. Biennial updates to the CIP provide the basis for Regional airport system planning is required by both the development of the funding program, which consists state and federal funding agencies in order to inventory of airport development and land use compatibility plan facilities, evaluate needs (both on the airport and as projects selected by Caltrans based on a priority matrix. a result of aircraft activity in the surrounding areas), The California Transportation Commission adopts the forecast demand, and determine funding levels and Aeronautics Program from the projects listed in the CIP, apportionment. The Central California region of the therefore projects must be in the CIP to obtain State California Aviation System Plan is integrated into the funding. The CIP is published California Aviation System every odd year, and the Plan (CASP) and, ultimately, Aeronautics Program, based into the National Airport on the CIP, is adopted every System Plan, which even year. identifies the existing airport relationships on a state and Coalinga Municipal Airport national level and the service The old basic utility airport and facility needs. All non- that had served the NPAIS airports are considered community of Coalinga worthy of consideration for since 1930 was officially improvement through state closed on June 1, 1999. In funding since these airports 1996, Coalinga completed are not eligible for federal construction of a new basic funding. utility airport facility located about four miles east-northeast from the center of the city Many of the public airports in Fresno County are, in the southwest portion of the County of Fresno on 1,002 subsidized by the jurisdiction’s general fund. However, city-owned acres, about 248 of which are devoted to the the cost of capital improvements currently needed by the airport and have been annexed into the city. The balance airports cannot be met by local funding sources alone. of the property is either retained in agricultural use or Both the Federal Airport Improvements Program (AIP) and included in a Regional Habitat Conservation Plan. At an the California Aid to Airports Program (CAAP) are also not elevation of 625 feet, the airport is relatively fog-free year adequately funding airports in Fresno County. round. It is classified as a General Aviation Airport in the Fresno Council of Governments Page 5-79 Chapter Five National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS) and Chandler currently has 204 based aircraft, five fixed based a Community General Aviation Airport in the California operators and handles approximately 25,000 operations a Aviation System Plan (CASP). year. Chandler is classified a Reliever Airport in the NPIAS and a Regional General Aviation Airport in the California The airport has one runway (12-30), 5,000 feet long and Aviation System Plan. 100 feet wide with a 2-light PAPI system on each side and medium intensity runway edge lights. A gravel-surfaced Fresno Yosemite International Airport (FAT) crosswind runway (1-19), available for daytime use only, Fresno Yosemite International Airport (FAT) is Fresno’s is 2,471 feet long and 60 feet wide. An asphalt helipad primary commercial air carrier airport facility and is the (H1), 50 feet by 50 feet, is also available. A parallel taxiway largest and busiest airport in the San Joaquin Valley. The is located on the south side of Runway 12-30 with five airport is owned and operated by the City of Fresno. FAT is entry/exit taxiways. A hangar building houses 15 based at an elevation of 336 feet and encompasses 1,700 acres of aircraft and a 60 foot by 50 foot maintenance hangar is land located approximately five miles east of downtown available for aircraft maintenance activities. The on-site Fresno. It has two runways, a principle runway (11L/29R) flight facility center accommodates pilot and crew flight 9,539 feet long and 150 feet wide and a parallel general preparation, and includes restrooms, a public telephone, aviation runway (11R/29L) 8,008 feet long and 150 feet and a kitchenette. Airport services include 100LL fuel wide. This two-runway system is supported by full-length (24-hour, “fast pay”). Aircraft operations at the airport total parallel taxiways on both the north and south. An FAA approximately 2,400 on an annual basis. Airport Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) is located on the south side of the airport and provides 24-hour traffic control Firebaugh Airport services at the airport. Category III Instrument Landings The Firebaugh Airport is a Basic Utility airport. It is at are available to Runway 29R and non-precision landings to an elevation of 157 feet and encompasses 37 acres. It Runway 11L. has one runway that is 3,102 feet long and 60 feet wide. It has about 13 based aircraft, 2 fixed based operators FAT has 174 based aircraft, and aircraft operations total and handles about 9,855 operations per year. There is approximately 126,670. Enplanements in 2013 were a Firebaugh Airport Commission that meets regularly 702,259, passenger count was 1,401,582 and air cargo to discuss airport projects and priorities. The Firebaugh tonnage was 11,863. Within the last two years direct flights Airport is classified a General Aviation Airport in the to Honolulu began, San Diego service was reestablished, NPIAS and a Community General Aviation airport in the Frontier Airlines began service to Denver, Aeromexico California Aviation System Plan. added another international destination (Morelia, Mexico), and other airlines have upgraded their aircraft (added Fresno Chandler Executive Airport more seats into the market) in response to the region’s Fresno Chandler Executive Airport is a federally sustained economic growth. International flights to designated “reliever” airport. Chandler is at an elevation of Mexico began in 2006, have been very successful, and 279 feet and encompasses 200 acres. Runway 30/12 was account for 9.6% of all passengers using FAT. recently extended to 3,630 feet long and is 75 feet wide. This joint civil-military public airport is the site of the 144th Page 5-80 2014 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy Actions: Assessing Our Transportation Investment Needs Fighter Wing/California Air National Guard (CANG) base, Harris Ranch Airport which supports a west coast air superiority mission. The Harris Ranch is a privately owned and operated, public Army National Guard has an Aviation Classification Repair use airport near the Harris Inn and Restaurant. It is at an Activity Depot (AVCRAD) facility on site. The mission of elevation of 465 feet and encompasses 80 acres. It has one this unit is to perform high-level maintenance and repair runway that is 2,820 feet long and 30 feet wide.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • UNDERSTANDING REGIONAL CHARACTERISTICS California Adaptation Planning Guide
    C A L I F O R N I A ADAPTATION PLANNING GUIDE UNDERSTANDING REGIONAL CHARACTERISTICS CALIFORNIA ADAPTATION PLANNING GUIDE Prepared by: California Emergency Management Agency 3650 Schriever Avenue Mather, CA 95655 www.calema.ca.gov California Natural Resources Agency 1416 Ninth Street, Suite 1311 Sacramento, CA 95814 resources.ca.gov WITH FUNDING Support From: Federal Emergency Management Agency 1111 Broadway, Suite 1200 Oakland, CA 94607-4052 California Energy Commission 1516 Ninth Street, MS-29 Sacramento, CA 95814-5512 WITH Technical Support From: California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 July 2012 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Adaptation Planning Guide (APG) has benefited from the ideas, assessment, feedback, and support from members of the APG Advisory Committee, local governments, regional entities, members of the public, state and local non-governmental organizations, and participants in the APG pilot program. CALIFORNIA EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY MARK GHILARDUCCI SECRETARY MIKE DAYTON UNDERSECRETARY CHRISTINA CURRY ASSISTANT SECRETARY PREPAREDNESS KATHY MCKEEVER DIRECTOR OFFICE OF INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION JOANNE BRANDANI CHIEF CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION DIVISION, HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING DIVISION KEN WORMAN CHIEF HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING DIVISION JULIE NORRIS SENIOR EMERGENCY SERVICES COORDINATOR HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING DIVISION KAREN MCCREADY ASSOCIATE GOVERNMENT PROGRAM ANALYST HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING DIVISION CALIFORNIA NATURAL RESOURCE AGENCY JOHN LAIRD SECRETARY JANELLE BELAND UNDERSECRETARY
    [Show full text]
  • Planning for Complementarity
    MTI Planning Complementarity: for Opportunities Cities for High-Speed Along California’s Rail Network Planning for Complementarity: An Examination of the Role and Funded by U.S. Department of Transportation and California Department of Transportation Opportunities of First-Tier and Second-Tier Cities Along the High-Speed Rail Network in California Report Number 11-17 MTI Report 11-17 March 2012 March MINETA TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE MTI FOUNDER Hon. Norman Y. Mineta The Norman Y. Mineta International Institute for Surface Transportation Policy Studies (MTI) was established by Congress as part MTI BOARD OF TRUSTEES of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991. Reauthorized in 1998, MTI was selected by the U.S. Department of Transportation through a competitive process in 2002 as a national “Center of Excellence.” The Institute is funded by Con- Honorary Co-Chair Rebecca Brewster Steve Heminger Stephanie Pinson gress through the United States Department of Transportation’s Research and Innovative Technology Administration, the Califor- Hon. James Oberstar ** President/COO Executive Director President/COO nia Legislature through the Department of Transportation (Caltrans), and by private grants and donations. Chair American Transportation Metropolitan Transportation Gilbert Tweed Associates, Inc. House Transportation and Research Institute Commission New York, NY Smyrna, GA Oakland, CA Infrastructure Committee The Institute receives oversight from an internationally respected Board of Trustees whose members represent all major surface Hans Rat House of Representatives Donald H. Camph Hon. John Horsley # Secretary General transportation modes. MTI’s focus on policy and management resulted from a Board assessment of the industry’s unmet needs Washington, DC President Executive Director Union Internationale des and led directly to the choice of the San José State University College of Business as the Institute’s home.
    [Show full text]
  • Region V Local Emergency Planning Committee Hazardous Materials Emergency Plan September 2008-2009
    REGION V LOCAL EMERGENCY PLANNING COMMITTEE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS EMERGENCY PLAN SEPTEMBER 2009 There are six California Emergency Management Agency (CalEMA) mutual aid regions in California which have the same boundaries as the Local Emergency Planning Committees (LEPCs). The LEPCs are designated as emergency planning districts to prepare Hazardous Materials Emergency Plans pursuant to the Superfund Amendments an Reauthorization Act (SARA), Title III (Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know) found in Title 42, United States Code §110003(a). The Region V LEPC district is comprised of the seven inland central California counties of Fresno, Kern, Kings, Madera, Mariposa, Merced and Tulare. Region V LEPC prepared a Hazardous Materials Response Plan in 1990 and it is being updated in the 2008-2009 Hazardous Materials Emergency Planning Grant cycle. This Hazardous Materials Emergency Plan builds on the Hazardous Materials Area Plans of local government and facility Hazardous Materials Business Plans located within the emergency planning district. It is a regional planning tool that describes the identity, location and emergency contacts for facilities that handle above threshold quantities of extremely hazardous substances, procedures for immediate response to a chemical release, ways to notify the public about actions they must take if a release occurs, emergency coordinators at the county government level and plans for exercising the Hazardous Materials Emergency Plan. The Region V Hazardous Materials Emergency Plan is organized into three basic sections: Part I, Part II and Part III. Part I - Regional Plan Basics Part I provides background information, facilities in the planning basis, concept of operations including notification and response procedures, training and emergency equipment information as well as public notification requirements.
    [Show full text]
  • City of Kerman General Plan Background Report
    City of Kerman 2040 General Plan Update Background Report PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT January 2019 This page is intentionally left blank. Acknowledgements/Table of Contents Acknowledgements CITY COUNCIL Rhonda Armstrong, Mayor, At Large Gary Yep, Mayor Pro Tem, District 1 Ismael Herrera, District 3 Raj Dhaliwal, District 4 Espi Sandoval, District 4 PLANNING COMMISSION Robert Bandy, Chairman Kevin Nehring, Vice Chairman Scott Bishop Leopoldo Espino Bob Felker Mario Nunez Katie Wettlaufer LEAD CITY STAFF Olivia Pimentel, Planning and Development Services John Kunkel, City Manager Ken Moore, Public Works Phillip Gallegos, Parks and Recreation Department Carolina Camacho, Finance Department Public Review Draft Background Report | January 2019 Page i 2040 General Plan LEAD CONSULTANTS TO THE CITY Mintier Harnish Rick Rust, AICP, GISP, Principal Planner, General Plan Update Project Manager Renée Funston, Associate Ryan Lester, Graphic Production Manager SUPPORTING CONSULTANTS Applied Development Economics (ADE) Doug Svensson, President Rincon Consultants, Inc. Eric VonBerg, MRP, Senior Project Manager Page ii Public Review Draft Background Report | January 2019 Acknowledgements/Table of Contents Table of Contents 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 What is a General Plan? ............................................................................................................ 1-1 1.2 Using the General Plan ..............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • BULLARD COMMUNITY PLAN and Falalad
    . 1988 . BULLARD COMMUNITY PLAN and falalad FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT No. 10096 DeC8D1iJlIr >-20-., 198-8 ----.- First Printing June, 19a9 Second Printing July, 19QO t- . Third Printing April, 1991 i CITY OF FRESNO DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION 1( i r':' IL COUNCILMEMBERS PLANNING COMMISSIONERS Dale Doig, Mayor Nora Laikam, Chairperson Les Kimber, Mayor Pro Tempore Octavia Diener, Vice Chairperson Rod Anaforian Bill Brewster Karen Humphrey Rutherford B. Gaston Tom MacMichael Sheridan Loyd Chris Petersen Leslie Moore Craig Scharton John Quintero CITY MANAGER James E. Aldredqe CITIZEN'S ADVISORY COMMITTEE FRESNO CITY STAFF John Krikorian, Chairperson Development Department Ron Asadoor George A. Kerber, Director , . : George Bramlett Al Solis, Assistant Director Steve Dodd Stan Rys, Deputy Director , . Mike Epling Nick Yovino. Development Manager /' Olivia Gonzales Lois Johnson. Supervising Planner !. Dot Healy Kathy Chung. Planner III Joni Johnson Donn Beedle. Planner II Elizabeth Knapp David E. Fey. Planner II Grace Kooyumjian Joe Simone. Planning Illustrator II Robert McCaffrey Pamela Garr. Mike Parr Sr. Administrative Clerk Krys Pusher Verna Sharpton. " \ Jeff Roberts Sr. Administrative Clerk John B.ocha Scott B. Odell • Charlotte Savona . Michael Paoli &A~sociaCes Lonnie Schardt Joe Skopp Margaret Steele Gary T. Vigen S. Thomas McLaughlin c· ~' i l L, .--r .:~~- ­ {.c l:_ i SUMMARY OF LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 9553, November 16, 1988 Certified Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 10096; Found that certain mitigation measures have been incorporated into the plan or are the responsibility of another public agency; Found that the no project alternative is infeasible; Approved various attachments to the plan document; Recommended repeal of the Corona-Tierra, Blackstone/Bullard, Nelson Area, and San Joaquin Bluffs Environs Area Specific Plans, and the West Shaw Avenue Amendment; Approved the amendment to the Sierra Sky Park Land Use Policy Plan.
    [Show full text]
  • “B” City of Kerman 2040 General Plan Facts, Findings, and Statement Of
    Attachment “B” City of Kerman 2040 General Plan Facts, Findings, and Statement of Overriding Considerations Regarding the Environmental Effects from the Environmental Impact Report State Clearinghouse # 2019049018 May 2020 01236.0405/645016.3 City of Kerman General Plan EIR | Findings/SOC Table of Contents City of Kerman 2040 General Plan............................................................................................................. 1 FACTS, FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS .................................. 4 1.0 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 4 2.0 Project Summary ............................................................................................................................... 4 2.1 Project Description ........................................................................................................................ 4 2.2 Project Location and Study Area Boundaries ........................................................................... 7 2.3 Project Objectives .......................................................................................................................... 8 2.4 Actions Covered by the EIR ....................................................................................................... 10 Subsequent Use of the EIR .............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • City of Selma Housing Element 2015-2023
    City of Selma Housing Element 2015-2023 Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration Lead Agency City of Selma 1710 Trucker Street Selma, California 93662 Consultant MIG 537 S. Raymond Avenue Pasadena, California 91101 December 2015 This document is designed for double-sided printing Table of Contents 1 PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY......................................................................................................................................................................1 CONTENTS 1 TIERING 1 ANALYTICAL APPROACH..................................................................................................................................................................................3 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...........................................................................................................................................................................5 PROJECT TITLE ..............................................................................................................................................................................................5 LEAD AGENCY/PROJECT SPONSOR NAME AND ADDRESS .................................................................................................................................5 CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER .........................................................................................................................................................5 PROJECT LOCATION .......................................................................................................................................................................................5
    [Show full text]