Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
Airport Master Plan Update
Phase 1 Report
Prepared for Lake Tahoe Airport
By C&S Engineers, Inc. 2020 Camino Del Rio North Suite 1000 San Diego, CA 92108
March 2015
FAA AIP No. 3-06-0249-033
“The preparation of this document was financed in part through a planning grant from the Federal Aviation Administration as provided in the Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982, as amended. The contents of this report reflect the analysis and finding of C&S Engineers, Inc., who are responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policy of the FAA. Acceptance of this report by the FAA does not in any way constitute a commitment on the part of the United States to participate in any development depicted therein nor does it indicate that the proposed development is environmentally acceptable with applicable Public Laws.”
The contents of this planning study are not intended for the purposes of navigation or as an alternative to published Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations or guidance.
Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE NO.
CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION ...... 1-1
1.01 PLANNING SCOPE AND GUIDELINES ...... 1-2 1.02 THE PLANNING PROCESS ...... 1-3 CHAPTER 2 - EXISTING CONDITIONS ...... 2-1
2.01 BACKGROUND ...... 2-1 2.01-1 Airport System Planning Role ...... 2-1 2.01-2 Surrounding Airports ...... 2-3 2.01-3 Airport History ...... 2-3 2.01-4 Airport Setting ...... 2-4 2.01-5 Ownership and Operations ...... 2-13 2.01-6 Airport Economic Impact ...... 2-14 2.01-7 Emergency Services and Disaster Relief ...... 2-16 2.02 INVENTORY AND DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING FACILITIES ...... 2-17 2.02-1 Airspace ...... 2-21 2.02-2 Airside Facilities ...... 2-33 2.02-3 Landside Facilities ...... 2-39 2.02-4 Support Facilities and Equipment ...... 2-45 2.02-5 Access, Circulation and Parking ...... 2-46 2.02-6 Utilities/Energy ...... 2-47 2.02-7 Waste Management and Recycling ...... 2-48 2.03 REGIONAL SETTING AND LAND USE ...... 2-48 2.03-1 Climate and Topography ...... 2-48 2.03-2 Land Use and Zoning ...... 2-53 2.04 SOCIOECONOMIC DATA ...... 2-59 2.04-1 Population Trends ...... 2-59 2.04-2 Industry, Employment, and Personal Income ...... 2-60 2.05 HISTORICAL AIRSPACE ACTIVITY ...... 2-61 2.05-1 Annual Operations ...... 2-61 2.05-2 Commercial Service Activity ...... 2-65 2.05-3 Based and Itinerant Aircraft ...... 2-69 2.05-4 Design Aircraft ...... 2-70 2.05-5 Airport Design Standards ...... 2-71 2.06 POLICIES AND PLANS ...... 2-75 2.07 FINANCIAL DATA ...... 2-77 2.07-1 Operating Revenues and Expenses ...... 2-78 2.07-2 Capital Funding ...... 2-79 i Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
2.08 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS ...... 2-81 2.09 SUSTAINABILITY BASELINE ASSESSMENT ...... 2-103 2.09-1 Defining Sustainability ...... 2-103 2.09-2 Current Initiatives ...... 2-105 2.10 STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK ...... 2-108 2.11 KEY ISSUES ...... 2-109 CHAPTER 3 - FORECASTS OF AVIATION DEMAND ...... 3-1
3.01 FUTURE OPERATIONAL ROLE OF THE AIRPORT ...... 3-1 3.02 GENERAL AVIATION DEMAND FORECAST ...... 3-1 3.02-1 Methodology ...... 3-1 3.02-2 Aviation Demand Forecast ...... 3-2 3.03 DEMAND FORECAST SUMMARY ...... 3-5 3.04 COMPARISON WITH FAA TERMINAL AREA FORECAST ...... 3-5 3.05 DESIGN AIRCRAFT ...... 3-6 CHAPTER 4 - FACILITY REQUIREMENTS AND SUSTAINABILITY OPPORTUNITIES ...... 4-1
4.01 AIRFIELD CAPACITY ...... 4-1 4.01-2 Annual Service Volume ...... 4-3 4.01-3 Hourly Capacity ...... 4-3 4.02 AIRFIELD REQUIREMENTS ...... 4-4 4.02-1 Airport Design Standards and Critical Aircraft ...... 4-4 4.02-2 Runway Orientation ...... 4-8 4.02-3 Runway Length Analysis ...... 4-11 4.02-4 Runway Width Analysis ...... 4-13 4.02-5 Runway Pavement Strength ...... 4-13 4.02-6 Taxiway System ...... 4-14 4.02-7 Instrumentation and Lighting ...... 4-15 4.02-8 Airfield Signage ...... 4-15 4.02-9 Land Requirements ...... 4-16 4.02-10 Airspace & Obstruction Analysis ...... 4-16 4.03 LANDSIDE REQUIREMENTS ...... 4-17 4.03-1 Based Aircraft Storage ...... 4-17 4.03-2 Transient Aircraft Storage ...... 4-18 4.03-3 Support Area Requirements ...... 4-19 4.04 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 4-22 4.04-1 Airfield ...... 4-22 4.04-2 Aircraft Parking ...... 4-23 4.04-3 Terminal ...... 4-23 4.04-4 Aircraft Fueling ...... 4-23 4.04-5 Landside (Parking, Access, Utilities) ...... 4-23 4.04-6 Management Initiatives ...... 4-23
ii Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
4.05 SUSTAINABILITY ...... 4-24 4.05-1 Goals ...... 4-24 4.05-2 Potential Opportunities ...... 4-25
TABLES
TABLE 2-1 GASNA RECOMMENDED MINIMUM STANDARDS ...... 2-2 TABLE 2-2 NEIGHBORING AIRPORTS ...... 2-5 TABLE 2-3 INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES ...... 2-24 TABLE 2-4 RUNWAY SYSTEM CHARACTERISTICS ...... 2-34 TABLE 2-5 TAXIWAY CHARACTERISTICS ...... 2-36 TABLE 2-6 HANGAR COMPLEX INVENTORY ...... 2-43 TABLE 2-7 HISTORICAL ANNUAL AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS ...... 2-63 TABLE 2-8 BASED FIXED WING AIRCRAFT CHARACTERISTICS ...... 2-69 TABLE 2-9 BASED HELICOPTER AIRCRAFT. CHARACTERISTICS ...... 2-69 TABLE 2-10 TRANSIENT AIRCRAFT CHARACTERISTICS ...... 2-70 TABLE 2-11 AIRPORT DESIGN STANDARDS (ARC B-II) ...... 2-73 (NOT LOWER THAN 1 MILE VISIBILITY MINIMUMS) ...... 2-73 TABLE 2-12 AIRPORT DESIGN STANDARDS (ARC C-III) ...... 2-74 (NOT LOWER THAN 1 MILE VISIBILITY MINIMUMS) ...... 2-74 TABLE 2-13 AIRPORT MANAGEMENT DOCUMENTS ...... 2-75 TABLE 2-14 AIRPORT REVENUES – 2014 ...... 2-78 TABLE 2-15 AIRPORT EXPENSES – 2014 ...... 2-79 TABLE 2-16 SPECIES WITH POTENTIAL TO EXIST ...... 2-91 TABLE 2-17 RCRA SITES ADJACENT TO TVL ...... 2-93 TABLE 2-18 RESOURCES IDENTIFIED WITHIN STUDY AREA ...... 2-94 TABLE 3-1 FORECAST OF BASED AIRCRAFT ...... 3-2 TABLE 3-2 FORECAST OF OPERATIONS BY TYPE ...... 3-4 TABLE 3-3 PEAKING FORECAST ...... 3-4 TABLE 3-4 AIRPORT DEMAND FORECAST SUMMARY ...... 3-5 TABLE 3-5 COMPARISON WITH FAA TAF ...... 3-5 TABLE 4-1 ANNUAL SERVICE VOLUME SUMMARY ...... 4-3 TABLE 4-2 HOURLY CAPACITY SUMMARY ...... 4-4 TABLE 4-3 G-V DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS ...... 4-4 TABLE 4-4 AIRPLANE DESIGN GROUP ...... 4-5 TABLE 4-5 AIRCRAFT APPROACH CATEGORY ...... 4-5 TABLE 4-6 AIRPORT DESIGN STANDARDS (ARC B-II) ...... 4-6 TABLE 4-7 AIRPORT DESIGN STANDARDS (ARC C-III) ...... 4-7 TABLE 4-8 RUNWAY LENGTH REQUIREMENTS CALCUALTION DATA ...... 4-12 TABLE 4-9 RUNWAY LENGTH REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY ...... 4-13 TABLE 4-10 TAXIWAY WIDTHS ...... 4-14 TABLE 4-11 EXISTING INSTRUMENTATION AND LIGHTING ...... 4-15 TABLE 4-12 BASED AIRCRAFT STORAGE AND HANGAR AVAILABILITY .. 4-18
iii Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
TABLE 4-13 GENERAL AVIATION BUILDING AREA REQUIREMENTS ...... 4-20 TABLE 4-14 PEAK PERIOD FUEL FLOW ...... 4-21
FIGURES
FIGURE 1-1 AIRPORT MASTER PLAN PROCESS ...... 1-5 FIGURE 2-1 AIRSPACE ENVIRONMENT & ADJACENT AIRPORTS ...... 2-7 FIGURE 2-2 LOCATION MAP ...... 2-9 FIGURE 2-3 VICINITY MAP ...... 2-11 FIGURE 2-5 AIRSPACE CLASSIFICATION ...... 2-22 FIGURE 2-6 NAVIGATIONAL AIDS ...... 2-27 FIGURE 2-7 LANDSIDE FACILITIES ...... 2-41 FIGURE 2-8 TOPOGRAPHY ...... 2-51 FIGURE 2-9 EXISTING LAND USE ...... 2-55 FIGURE 2-10 EXISTING ZONING ...... 2-57 FIGURE 2-11 AREA POPULATION STATISTICS ...... 2-59 FIGURE 2-12 LAKE TAHOE BASIN POPULATION ESTIMATES ...... 2-60 FIGURE 2-13 UNEMPLOYMENT RATE...... 2-61 FIGURE 2-14 ANNUAL OPERATIONS ...... 2-62 FIGURE 2-15 HISTORICAL PASSENGER ENPLANEMENTS ...... 2-65 FIGURE 2-16 HISTORY OF AIRLINES ...... 2-67 FIGURE 2-17 DESIGN AIRCRAFT ...... 2-72 FIGURE 2-18 ENVIRONMENTAL OVERVIEW MAP ...... 2-83 FIGURE 2-19 NOISE CONTOURS ...... 2-97 FIGURE 2-20 SUSTAINABILITY INPUT ...... 2-103 FIGURE 3-1 LAKE TAHOE AIPORT AVIATION ACTIVITY FORECASTS ...... 3-3 FIGURE 4-1 ANNUAL SERVICE VOLUME ...... 4-2 FIGURE 4-2 WIND ...... 4-9
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A AIRSPACE AND AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS/ACTIVITIES APPENDIX B AIRPORT PAVEMENT APPENDIX C LAKE TAHOE AIRPORT COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN APPENDIX D ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION APPENDIX E SUSTAINABILITY APPENDIX F AVIATION DEMAND FORECAST APPENDIX G PUBLIC OUTREACH
iv Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
v Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION
Lake Tahoe Airport (TVL or Airport), owned and operated by the City of South Lake Tahoe (City), is a public-use airport that currently holds a Part 1391 Airport Certification Status that allows for scheduled and/or unscheduled2 air carrier service operations at the Airport. However, there has been no scheduled passenger service since 2001. The previous Master Plan that was prepared for the Airport was completed in 1992. That plan was prepared in conjunction with separate studies, including the following:
1. Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 150 Study to address the potential impacts of aircraft noise; 2. Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to meet the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and 3. Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)/Environmental Assessment (EA) to meet the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
The Master Plan concluded with the adoption of an Airport Layout Plan (ALP) that provided the basis for future development at the Airport. The ALP was conditionally3 approved by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in 1992. A subsequent Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and Environmental Impact Report (EIR) were prepared to address environmental review requirements under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Since its approval, a revised ALP was submitted and approved by the FAA in 2008 that depicted the Airport’s as-built conditions after previously proposed improvements from the 1992 ALP were made.
As part of the City’s adoption of the 1992 ALP a separate Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Settlement Agreement (MPSA) was agreed to by the City, Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (TRPA), California State Attorney General, and the League to Save Lake Tahoe. The settlement agreement provided the framework for commercial service operations at the Airport until October 2012 when the Settlement Agreement expired.
The City initiated this Airport Master Plan Update in 2013, with funding support from the FAA, in order to determine the current and future potential of the Airport. Specifically, the master plan is being prepared to address the following:
1. Since, the completion of the 1992 Airport Master Plan FAA regulations and design standards that govern the operations and development of airport facilities has been updated numerous times. The master plan will address those updates and develop an ALP that meets current FAA standards. An FAA-approved ALP
1 Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 139 (14 CFR Part 139). 2 Unscheduled air carrier aircraft with more than 30 seats. 3 The FAA may approve the ALP drawing set conditionally, based on specific components that will be subject to further review and approvals prior to funding and implementation. 1-1 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
is required in order to receive federal funding to improve and maintain airport facilities.
2. The 1992 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Settlement Agreement has expired and the City will review and determine if the return of commercial service operations at the Airport is within the best interests of the City and surrounding region. 1.01 Planning Scope and Guidelines
The main objective of this Airport Master Plan Update is to outline the vision for the Airport as determined by the community with oversight from the FAA, and document the extent, type and schedule of development needed to accommodate existing needs and future aviation demand. The recommended development shall be presented in the following three planning periods:
. Short-term (2015 to 2019) . Intermediate-term (2020 to 2024) . Long-term (2025 to 2034)
The recommended development program will satisfy aviation demand and be compatible with the environment, community development, and other transportation modes. Above all else, the plan will be technically sound, practical and economically feasible. The following objectives serve as a guide in the preparation of this study:
. Consider the effects of national and local aviation trends and changes in FAA design standards; . Provide a rational, technically sound basis for project development decision- making; . Realize the existing capacity of available airport infrastructure and determine when future growth in activity and/or regional development may require construction or expansion; . Understand the issues, opportunities and constraints of local airport development; . Quantify estimated costs, potential funding sources and a schedule for implementation of proposed projects; . Engage and consider stakeholders and the general public on airport development issues and plans; . Comply with all applicable federal, state and local regulations pertaining to airport development planning and programming; and . Integrate sustainability into the master planning process to ensure a holistic approach to airport management and operation.
The City has proven its commitment to sustainability through its implementation of a number of initiatives; these include its single-use plastic bag ban, aim for zero waste, and outreach to the community to encourage sustainable practices. This commitment 1-2 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
can be easily adapted into airport management decisions and practices via the master planning process. By electing to integrate sustainability into this effort, the City will ensure a holistic and lasting approach to airport management and operation.
Airport sustainability is defined by the Airports Council International – North America as ensuring Economic viability, Operational efficiency, Natural resource conservation and Social responsibility (EONS). The objective is to balance the benefits and impacts to these elements while identifying synergies among them. In order to achieve this, sustainability will be considered in each step of the master plan. The initial effort will involve engaging the Airport’s stakeholders and community to better define sustainability specifically for Lake Tahoe Airport and its connected systems (the surrounding area, people, transportation network, etc.) and identifying ongoing sustainability initiatives at the Airport. These two efforts will compose the Sustainability Baseline Assessment and support the determination of overarching goals for integrating sustainability into the Airport’s management and operation. Specific sustainability initiatives will be in the alternatives development and EONS will be used as a criterion for evaluating all alternatives to ensure a holistic evaluation. Selected recommendations will be included in the proposed plan for the Airport’s future to support the continual integration of sustainability at Lake Tahoe Airport.
1.02 The Planning Process
An airport master planning process is comprised of four basic phases (see Figure 1-1).
The first phase of the Airport Master Plan Update involves an examination of existing conditions including; data collection and an airport inventory, operations analysis, environmental overview, and identification of assets and deficiencies. This phase will also include a baseline assessment of sustainability initiatives currently in place at the Airport and identification of potential areas for improvement. Phase 1 concludes with a needs analysis that involves preparation of aviation demand forecasts, translation of these forecast values into a listing of airport facilities requirements, and analysis of the demand/capacity relationships at the Airport. Sustainability goals and potential opportunities will be identified during this process. These efforts are interwoven throughout Chapters 1 through 4 in this Airport Master Plan Update.
The second phase, using the analyses prepared in Chapters 1 through 4, is to inform the development of alternative concepts. The alternatives are evaluated (using sustainability as a criterion among others) and the findings are presented in Chapter 5.
The third phase involves the identification and detailing of recommended actions and presents a phased Capital Improvement Program (CIP), financial program, and an analysis of economic and financial feasibility for implementation. This step also involves the development of the Airport Layout Plan (ALP) drawing set which will depict proposed development.
1-3 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
The fourth and final phase is the implementation of the plan. This Airport Master Plan Update is meant to be an active guide for the future development of the Airport, and should be used as such.
The City has requested and encouraged public participation throughout the master planning process through public meetings and publishing of project-related information. The general public will have an opportunity to be informed about the project and provide input through public meetings and the project website. The City’s project website (http://www.cityofslt.us/airport) provides copies of materials presented at the public meeting, project documents and contact information to request information or submit comments. The first public meeting occurred on February 13, 2014 and the second occurred on May 29, 2014. A copy of the materials presented at each meeting and responses to public comments are provided in Appendix G.
1-4 Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3
Inventory Formulate Alternatives Select Preferred Alternative Forecasts Evaluation Criteria Cost Estimates Environmental Factors Airport Layout Plans Capacity Analysis Evaluate Alternatives Funding Planning Facility Requirements Draft Final Report Sustainability Goals Report
Report
City of South Lake Tahoe, TRPA and FAA Review Phase 4 Final Report
Implementation Plan
Lake Tahoe Airport Airport Master Plan Process Figure 1-1 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
1-6 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
CHAPTER 2 - EXISTING CONDITIONS
The first step in the preparation of the Airport Master Plan Update is to assemble information about the existing conditions of the Airport and in the surrounding community. The information gathered in this phase of the project will provide a foundation for subsequent analysis.
The inventory step includes an examination of existing airport facilities, air traffic activity and the airspace surrounding the Airport. Additionally, general information regarding the airport setting is gathered. This includes the Airport’s role in the regional and national air transportation system, local economic and development characteristics, local weather and environmental conditions, and the demographics of the surrounding area. 2.01 Background
2.01-1 Airport System Planning Role
Airport planning occurs at local, regional, and national levels, each with its own particular emphasis. The update of the Airport’s Master Plan provides planning at the local level.
At the national level, the Airport is included in the National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems 2013-2017 (NPIAS)4. This planning document includes 3,330 airports that are considered by the FAA as significant to national air transportation system. The document estimates that $42.5 billion in infrastructure development, that is eligible for federal aid, will be needed over the five years (2012 to 2017) to meet the needs of all segments of civil aviation. In administering the Airport Improvement Program (AIP), the FAA uses the NPIAS, which supports the FAA’s strategic goals for safety, system efficiency, and environmental compatibility by identifying the specific airport improvements that will contribute to achievement of those goals. The NPIAS anticipated that Lake Tahoe Airport project development cost that are eligible for federal funding would be in excess of $2.1 million through 2017. This may vary depending on the availability of future funding from the FAA and a reassessment of development priorities as a result of the Airport Master Plan Update.
In May 2012, the FAA issued a report that evaluated the roles that the 2,950 general aviation (GA) airports play in the national air transportation system. This report, General Aviation Airports: A National Asset5, divided airports into four categories based on existing activity: National, Regional, Local and Basic. Lake Tahoe Airport is one of 1,236 airports categorized as a Local airport. These airports are considered the
4 FAA, Report to Congress Nation Plan of Integrated Airport Systems 2013-2017, Sept. 2012,
backbone of the GA system and serve local to regional markets and are characterized by moderate levels of activity. They average about 33 based propeller-driven aircraft with some multiengine propeller aircraft and no jets. Local airports supplement local communities by providing access primarily to intrastate and some interstate markets. Similar to the existing operations at Lake Tahoe Airport, these airports also typically accommodate emergency services (including firefighting and rescue) and charter passenger service.
At the state level, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) designates airports under their Airport Functional Classification System, which includes five separate categories (Commercial/Primary, Metropolitan, Regional, Community, and Limited Use). These classifications are based on unique factors including access the airport provides; population size or geographic location of region the airport serves; type of flying activities that occur; aircraft accommodated; and services provided. Under the Caltrans prepared General Aviation System Needs Assessment (GASNA)6, Lake Tahoe Airport was designated as a Regional airport. This designation is described in the GASNA as follows:
Airports that provide the same access as Community7 airports but may provide international access, located in an area with a larger population base than Community airports, while serving a number of cities or counties, serve the same activities as Community airports with a higher concentration of business and corporate flying, accommodate most business, multiengine and jet aircraft, provide most services for pilots and aircraft including aviation fuel, has a published instrument approach and may have a tower.
Table 2-1 provides the GASNA recommended minimum standards for airports that have been designated as Regional.
TABLE 2‐1 GASNA RECOMMENDED MINIMUM STANDARDS Facility/Infrastructure Description Minimum Standard Sufficient to accommodate 100% of aircraft fleet at Runway length/extension 60 percent useful load Runway width 75 feet Runway weight limit 12,500 lbs. single wheel VASI/PAPI to lighted runway if no approach lights; Visual aids REIL for IFR runway w/o approach lights Approach procedure GPS/VOR 24 hour on‐field Automated 24 hour on‐field weather observation Weather (AWOS/ASOS) Fuel availability Jet A and Avgas Source: 2010 GASNA Report
6 California Department of Transportation, California Aviation System Plan, General Aviation System Needs Assessment Element, September 2010. 7 Airports that provide access to other regions and states; located near small communities or in remote locations; serve, but are not limited to, recreational flying, training, and local emergencies; accommodate predominantly single engine aircraft under 12,500 pounds gross vehicle weight; provide basic or limited services for pilots or aircraft. 2-2 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
The Airport currently meets these recommended facilities and service requirements with the exception of the runway length. In addition, although the Automated Surface Observation System (ASOS) is functional it should be relocated or replaced. According to Caltrans, although Lake Tahoe Airport does not meet their unique minimum standard runway length the commerce and connectivity the airport brings to the Sierra Nevada mountain region make preservation and improvement of the facility a regional priority.
2.01-2 Surrounding Airports
There are 10 GA airports within a 30-nautical mile (NM) radius of Lake Tahoe Airport including six that are open for public use (see Figure 2-1). Descriptions of these airports are included in Table 2-2.
In addition, there are three commercial service airports that serve the South Lake Tahoe area; Reno/Tahoe International Airport (RNO), Sacramento International Airport (SMF) and San Francisco International Airport (SFO). RNO currently has three runways and is located approximately 38 NM north or one-hour driving distance from Lake Tahoe Airport. SMF has two runways and is located approximately two hours driving distance or 75 NM southwest from the Airport. Further to the southwest is SFO (approximately 135 NM or three and a half hours driving distance from the Airport), which is equipped with four active runways.
According to the Lake Tahoe Visitors Authority South Shore Intercept Survey8, conducted by Strategic Marketing Group in winter 2011, approximately 35 percent of visitors to the area arrive via air travel (with the remaining 65 percent arriving via various modes of ground travel but primarily private vehicle). Approximately 31 percent of these air travelers arrive through RNO, while three percent travel through SFO and one percent through SMF.
2.01-3 Airport History
Construction of the Lake Tahoe Airport began in 1958 by the County of El Dorado, CA as part of the larger development of the community in preparation for the 1960 Winter Olympics. A building boom preceding the Olympics resulted in a flurry of commercial and residential development, and El Dorado County, along with the FAA, began operation of the Airport in the summer of 1959. Originally the runway measured 5,900 feet, but was extended to 8,541 feet in 1962. In 1983, the City of South Lake Tahoe purchased the Airport from El Dorado County.
The Airport maintained commercial service operations until they were discontinued in 2001. Commercial operations peaked in 1978 with nearly 300,000 annual passenger enplanements. However, with airline deregulation9 later in that same year (1978) and
8 Strategic Marketing Group, “Lake Tahoe Visitors Authority South Shore Intercept Survey”, 2011, http://tahoesouth.com/ltva/LTVA.org/Winter_Intercept_Survey_2011.pdf (Dec. 2014). 9 92 Stat. 1705, Airline Deregulation Act, 1978. 2-3 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
restrictions adopted on the use of jet aircraft at the Airport those operations began to decrease. In 1992, the Airport’s Master Plan Settlement Agreement (MPSA) was adopted and outlined additional limitations on aircraft noise, operations, and development on the airport property. The MPSA expired in October 2012 but certain provisions that addressed aircraft noise still apply to current operations.
2.01-4 Airport Setting
The Airport is a public use airport that lies within the southernmost boundaries of the City of South Lake Tahoe, CA. Figures 2-2 and 2-3 depict the location of the Airport within the City and El Dorado County. The Airport covers 348 acres and has one runway. The Airport is located on the eastern edge of El Dorado County in Northeastern California on the Nevada border. The City of South Lake Tahoe is accessible from U.S. Route 50 from both the California and Nevada sides as it passes through the City from north to south. The Airport’s elevation is 6,269 feet above Mean Sea Level (MSL); its geographic location is latitude 38° 53’ 38.00” North, and longitude 119° 59’ 43.20” West.
An Airport does not have a single unique study area that can be defined for all planning purposes. For the development of this master plan, the primary study area was based on the nature of this Airport as a destination airport that is comprised of mostly itinerant10 aircraft operations. Based on these factors the primary service area includes the City of South Lake Tahoe; El Dorado County, CA; Placer County, CA; Stateline, NV; Douglas County, NV; and Washoe County, NV.
10 Traffic originating in other markets with Lake Tahoe as a destination. 2-4 Distance from TVL Ownership Runway Instrument Airport Location Airport Type (nautical miles) and / Use Information Approaches* Direction 12‐30 (Asphalt) GPS –A 5,300’ x 75’
Minden Tahoe General Public / 12G‐30G (Dirt) GPS –B Minden, NV 13 Northeast Airport (MEV) Aviation Public 2,200’ x 60’ 16‐34 (Asphalt) 7,400’ x 100’ 17‐35 (Asphalt) Alpine County General Public / Markleeville, CA 14 Southeast None Airport (M45) Aviation Public 4,443’ x 50’ 16‐34 (Dirt) Pinenut Airport General Private / Gardnerville, NV 16 East None (NV55) Aviation Private 2,000’ x 45’
9‐27 (Asphalt) RNAV (GPS) –A Carson Airport General Public / Carson City, NV 22 Northeast (CXP) Aviation Public RNAV (GPS) 6,101’ x 75’ RWY 27
6‐24 (Gravel) Parker Carson General Private / Carson City, NV 23 Northeast None Stolport (2Q5) Aviation Public 815’ x 40’ 7‐25 (Turf) Bailey Ranch General Private / Carson City, NV 24 Northeast None Airport (NV13) Aviation Private 2,600’ x 50’
Bear Valley General Private / 1‐19 (Dirt) Bear Valley, CA 26 South None Stolport (73CA) Aviation Private 3,200’ x 50’ 10‐28 (Asphalt) GPS RWY 20 VOR/DME Truckee Tahoe General Public / 7,000’ x 100’ RNAV or GPS‐A Truckee, CA 26 North Airport (TRK) Aviation Public 1‐19 (Asphalt) 4,650’ x 75’ 16‐34 (Asphalt center on 100’ Farias Wheel General Private / Smith Valley, NV 28 East wide dirt None Airport (NV33) Aviation Private runway) 3,391’ x 22’ 5‐23 (Asphalt) Dayton Valley Dayton/Carson General Private / 29 Northeast None Airpark (A34) City, NV Aviation Public 5,343’ x 75’
Lake Tahoe Airport Neighboring Airports Table 2-2 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
2-6 30 Nautical Mile Radius from Lake Tahoe Airport
Truckee-Tahoe (TRK) Legend
Dayton Valley (A34)
Carson (CXP)
Minden-Tahoe (MEV)
Lake Tahoe Airport (TVL)
Farias Wheel (Pvt)
Alpine Co. (M45)
Carson (CXP) 20 nm 0 5 10 Miles Minden-Tahoe (MEV) 13 nm Alpine Co. (M45) 15 nm Nautical Miles Farias Wheel (Pvt) 28 nm Dayton Valley (A34) 29 nm Lake Tahoe Airport Source: San Francisco Sectional Aeronautical Chart, August 2013 Truckee-Tahoe (TRK) 26 nm Airspace Environment & Adjacent Airports
Lake Tahoe Airport Airspace Map.ppt Tahoe Airport Airspace Lake Figure 2-1 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
2-8 Lake Tahoe Airport El Dorado County
Lake Tahoe Airport Location Map Figure 2-2 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
2-10 El Dorado County
California CITY OF SOUTH CITY OF
18
LAKE TAHOE
Airport Property Line
36
Source: USGS Topographic Maps, Freel Creek, Echo Lake, Emerald Bay 2000 0 2000 4000 Ft. and South Lake Tahoe Quadrangles
1” = 2000’
Lake Tahoe Airport Vicinity Map Figure 2-3 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
2-12 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
2.01-5 Ownership and Operations
The Airport is owned and operated by the City of South Lake Tahoe. The Airport Manager, responsible for oversight of the Airport and its day-to-day operations is hired by the City Manager, and is supported by part-time airport operations staff that primarily focus on the maintenance of the airport infrastructure (e.g. airfield and terminal). This management structure is employed by the majority of small airports in the United States. Airports Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) Report 16: Guidebook for Managing Small Airports summarized a 2009 airport survey that showed that 73 percent of airports are owned and operated by the same entity with a designated airport manager responsible for daily operations. At 13 percent of airports, a Fixed-Base Operator (FBO) serves as the airport manager (although the Airport has an FBO on site it is not responsible for airport management). The remaining airports are managed by commission or public works director or are unattended.
The Airport is classified as providing service to general aviation aircraft; however, the City reserves the right to retain commercial service and maintains a Part 139 Airport Operating Certificate (AOC). FAA Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 139 sets rules that govern the certification and operation of airports that provide scheduled passenger operations of aircraft with more than nine seats and unscheduled passenger operations of an aircraft designed for at least 31 seats.
Lake Tahoe Airport is currently classified as a Class IV11 (inactive) airport12 and must be re-classified to a Class I airport prior to the start of scheduled service with aircraft having over 30 seats or Class II for aircraft between 10 to 30 seats. This can be accomplished through an FAA approved update of the current Airport Certification Manual (ACM) and proof that the Airport complies with the specific directives.13 The directives are dependent upon the Part 139 Classification but primarily cover administrative and safety requirements that must be addressed and performed by the airport sponsor.
The Airport is home to Mountain West Aviation, a full-service FBO located north of the airport terminal. Services provided by Mountain West include ramp parking and tie-downs, aircraft fueling, hangar leasing, and aircraft de-icing. Mountain West currently holds a 30-year lease with the City terminating in 2042. In addition, there are a number of tenants at the Airport that rent space and facilities from the City. These include:
California Shock and Trauma Air Rescue (CalSTAR) Civil Air Patrol (The) Flight Deck Restaurant & Bar Reno Tahoe Helicopters (scenic tours)
11 Operates with unscheduled passenger operations of large aircraft. 12 Part 139 Airport Certification Status List (ACSL),
Lake Tahoe Flight School Tahoe Mortgage Center Hertz Rent-a-Car
2.01-6 Airport Economic Impact
The Federal Aviation Administration published The Economic Impact of Civil Aviation on the U.S. Economy in December 2011.14 This report tabulates the impacts of both commercial (scheduled airline) and general aviation activity in each state, and states that 5.2 percent (or $1.3 trillion) of the total U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) can be attributed to civil aviation. According to this report, civil aviation generated 10.2 million jobs with a cumulative payroll of $394.4 billion. Aviation represents 4.8 percent of the total GDP for California and 15.75 percent of the GDP in Nevada based upon the individual state data in the report.
Lake Tahoe Airport is one of 125 general aviation airports in the state of California as tabulated in the FAA’s report and generates revenue from a variety of sources. Revenue sources on a general airport typically include:
Landing fees – a fee assessed to an aircraft owner or pilot for landing at the airport Fuel flowage fees – a per-gallon fee collected at the airport to assist in offsetting costs of operations Tie-down fees – an aircraft owner pays a fee to store their aircraft on a designated area of the parking apron Hangar rental fees – typically a per-month charge to rent a hangar for aircraft storage purposes Ground leases – collected from tenants that enter into short- or long-term leases for unimproved or improved property owned by the airport Airport facility lease or rental fees – tenants that occupy office or other similar space in airport-owned buildings pay a monthly fee to the airport Other fees – user fees to contribute to repairs caused by infrastructure deterioration
Visitor expenditures from those using the airports include $1.2 billion for general aviation facilities, including Lake Tahoe Airport. Aviation user taxes also generate $350 million in revenue each year in the State of California in which less than two percent is returned to support the state’s Aeronautics Program.
A study15 completed by the Lake Tahoe Airport Commission in 2002 estimated that Lake Tahoe Airport contributed $26 million to the local economy in the year 2000. This was the last full year of commercial service operations at the Airport with 1,900 operations conducted that year. Based on the results of a survey of general aviation
14 The Economic Impact of Civil Aviation on the [2009] U.S. Economy (December 2011) 15 Strategic Lake Tahoe Airport Action Plan, Lake Tahoe Airport Commission, July 2002 2-14 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
passengers completed as part the study it was estimated that over two-thirds of the Airport’s economic impact went to the California side of the South Lake Tahoe Basin, with one-third going to Nevada. The survey also found that half of the visitors surveyed came for skiing and other outdoor activities, one quarter came for gaming and entertainment purposes, and the remaining quarter for business purposes.
City of South Lake Tahoe Source: C&S Engineers, Inc., August 2012
In 2007, the City prepared a separate study16 to review the potential off-airport revenues that could be generated by the Airport from a number of separate scenarios that included both commercial service and general aviation operations and general aviation
16 Modeling of Off-Airport Revenue Impacts of the Tahoe Valley Airport Under Five Enplanement Scenarios, RRC Associates. March 2, 2007. 2-15 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
only. The study concluded that without commercial service operations the Airport would still generate $2.8 million a year in cumulative revenue. This was based off of 18,916 annual operations that took place at the Airport in 2003 by general aviation aircraft only. With respect to current conditions, annual operations have increased 20 percent since 2003 to 23,540 annual operations (see Section 2.05-1 Annual Operations).
The Airport is also an employment source for the community. In addition to City staff, tenants contribute to the local job market. These include but are not limited to the following (employee estimates provided via sustainability survey; not all tenants responded):
Lake Tahoe Flight School One employee Mountain West Aviation: Seven to nine employees dependent upon the season Flight Deck Restaurant: Approximately 10 employees Reno Tahoe Helicopters: Two employees CalSTAR 14 employees Tahoe Mortgage Center Two employees Civil Air Patrol Varies Hertz Rental Car No response
2.01-7 Emergency Services and Disaster Relief
The Airport contributes significantly to emergency services and disaster relief for the Lake Tahoe Basin. As documented in the Lake Tahoe Airport Strategic Action Plan (2002), it is the only airport or heliport in the area that is available for these purposes. One of its main tenants, CalSTAR, has used the Airport as a base of its helicopter EMS operations for approximately 13 years.
The following is excerpted from CalSTAR’s website:
Because of our location within a resort community and recreational area, our missions change with the seasons. During the summer, we can be found responding to injured hikers, boaters, cyclers and horseback riders. During the winter months, we transition to providing medical support to local ski patrols.
2-16 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
CalSTAR has played a critical role during and following natural disasters including the Angora Fire in 2007. CalSTAR has initiated a standardization of its fleet, recently adding two Beechcraft King Air B200s (fixed-wing aircraft). In addition to CalSTAR, a number of law enforcement and emergency response providers use the Airport to support their activities. These include the El
Source: CalSTAR
Dorado County Sheriff’s office, the U.S. Forest Service, the Office of Emergency Services, the American Red Cross, and Angel Flight (which provides non-emergency medical air transportation to those who cannot afford this or cannot fly on commercial transportation due to their health).
The facility has also been used as a base of operations for forest firefighting, search and rescue operations, as well as an emergency staging area for critical supplies when Route 50 was closed. During the 2007 Angora Fire the Airport was essential in providing firefighting aircraft the necessary facilities to operate and conduct follow on efforts to rehabilitate and reseed areas affected by the fire. Due to its location, available runway length, and other amenities (i.e. apron space) aircraft are commonly staged at the airport during the regions fire season.
The Civil Air Patrol (CAP) is also located at Lake Tahoe Airport. The CAP is a federally supported non-profit corporation that performs emergency services, which includes search and rescue (by air and ground) and disaster relief operations; aerospace education for youth and the general public; and cadet programs for teenage youth. 2.02 Inventory and Description of Existing Facilities
The following sections provide background and information regarding the facilities that currently exist at the Airport. These facilities are depicted in detail on Figure 2-4. The specific types and quantities of facilities identified in these sections will be evaluated in Chapter 4, in conjunction with forecast demand and established planning criteria, to determine future needs for the Airport.
2-17 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
2-18 Airport 50 Terminal
BLAST PAD FBO 50 Runway 18
Departure RPZ End Approach RPZ BLAST PAD Runway 36 End
El Dorado Approach RPZ County Airport Property Line Departure RPZ
California
Table of Terms RSA –Runway Safety Area ROFZ –Runway Object Free Zone ROFA –Runway Object Free Area RPZ –Runway Protection Zone Lake Tahoe Airport FBO – Fixed Based Operator Existing Airport Layout BRL – Building Restriction Line Figure 2‐4 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
2-20 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
2.02-1 Airspace
Aircraft navigate from one airport to another using Visual Flight Rules (VFR) or Instrument Flight Rules (IFR). The term VFR refers to rules that govern the procedures for conducting flight under visual meteorological conditions (VMC) where visibility is sufficient for pilots. The term IFR refers to a set of rules governing the conduct of flight under instrument meteorological conditions (IMC) where pilots rely on instrumentation to navigate. Each of these terms (VFR and IFR) are also used to indicate a type of flight plan.
Whether a pilot files a VFR or IFR flight plan depends on the weather conditions at the departing and arriving airports, whether or not Air Traffic Control (ATC) services are required, and the class(es) of airspace the pilot will be flying through. The National Airspace System is controlled by the FAA and involves a classification of airspace (A, B, C, D, E, or G) that defines the altitude of various segments of the airspace, required aircraft equipment, and operational restrictions (see Figure 2-5).
The airspace surrounding Lake Tahoe Airport has been designated by the FAA as Class E airspace. Class E airspace is controlled airspace within which both IFR and VFR flights are permitted. According to FAA Order JO 7400.9W, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, the Class E airspace surrounding the Airport begins at the surface elevation and extends upward to 18,000 feet MSL were it abuts the Class A airspace. As delineated in the FAA published section chart (see Figure 2-1), the Class E airspace surrounding Lake Tahoe Airport is further identified as the following
1. Class E surface area airspace extends upward from the surface to 700 feet above the airport elevation and extends to a radius of 4.3 miles around the Airport; 2. Class E airspace, beginning at 700 feet above the airport elevation, then extends upward to 1,200 feet above the surface to a radius of 6.0 miles surrounding the Airport; 3. Class E airspace beginning at 1,200 feet above the airport elevation then extends upward to 18,000 feet MSL were it abuts the Class A airspace. 4. An additional segment of the Class E surface area airspace is located north of the Airport, extending from the 4.3‐mile radius of Lake Tahoe Airport to 9.8 miles north. This Class E airspace area is effective during specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen.
2-21 FL 600
18,000 MSL KEY 14,500 MSL AGL - Above Ground Level FL - Flight Level in Hundreds of Feet MSL - Mean Sea Level
Source: "Airspace Reclassification and Charting Changes for VFR Products," National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Ocean Service. Chart adapted by Coffman Associates from AOPA Pilot, January 1993.
40 n.m.
Nontowered 30 n.m. Nontowered 20 n.m. Airport Airport 1200 700 AGL 20 n.m. AGL 10 n.m. 10 n.m. 12 n.m.
Classification Definition CLASS A Generally airspace above 18,000 feet MSL up to and including FL 600. CLASS B Generally multi-layered airspace from the surface up to 10,000 feet MSL surrounding the nation's busiest airports. CLASS C Generally airspace from the surface to 4,000 feet AGL surrounding towered airports with service by radar approach control. CLASS D Generally airspace from the surface to 2,500 feet AGL surrounding towered airports. CLASS E Generally controlled airspace that is not Class A, Class B, Class C, or Class D. CLASS G Generally uncontrolled airspace that is not Class A, Class B, Class C, Class D, or Class E.
Lake Tahoe Airport Airspace Classification Figure 2-5 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL
The National Airspace System is divided into various air traffic control sectors for complete origin-to-destination oversight. The primary purpose of air traffic control (ATC) is to prevent collisions between aircraft operating in the system and to organize and expedite the flow of traffic. ATC does this by separating, sequencing, and metering air traffic. Aircraft landing and departing Lake Tahoe Airport Class E controlled airspace are controlled by the Oakland Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC). The ARTCC is responsible for the sequencing and separation of over-flights, arrivals, and departures, in order to provide safe, orderly, and expeditious flow of aircraft filed under IFR. The Reno Flight Service Station (FSS) also provides information and services to aircraft pilots before, during, and after flights, but unlike air traffic control the FSS is not responsible for giving instructions or clearances or providing separation distances.
NOISE ABATEMENT OPERATING PROCEDURES
The Airport is equipped with one runway, designated 18-36. There are several recommended noise abatement procedures at the Airport that aim to limit operations at certain hours or over certain local geographical areas. The following procedures are voluntary and at the pilot’s discretion:
1. Runway 36 Departures: Departing aircraft climb straight out for approximately one mile, turn left to 320 degrees, and track the center of the meadow until aircraft has reached the Lake shoreline. Pilots advised to avoid flying over populated areas to both the left and the right of flight course.
2. Runway 36 Arrivals: Aircraft advised to land past the Displaced Threshold (located 2,037 ft. from the approach end of runway. If possible, maintain a slightly steeper approach and use reduced power setting(s) to assist in reducing engine noise while flying over residential areas.
3. Runway 18 Departures: Departing aircraft advised not to turn left until over 7,500 MSL. Pilots advised to track the Upper Truckee River to the golf course and circle and climb to 7,500 MSL over the golf course. If aircraft is not able to make climb to 7,500 MSL reverse course and return to airport.
4. Runway 18 Arrivals: Pilots advised to descend over the lake and align aircraft to Runway 18 with an approach procedure over the meadow located northwest of the airfield. If possible, maintain a slightly steeper approach and use reduced power setting(s) to assist in reducing engine noise while flying over residential areas.
2-23 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES
An Instrument Approach Procedure (IAP) is a flight procedure that provides a transition from the en route flight environment to a point from which a safe landing can be accomplished. When the cloud ceilings are low and visibility is poor, flights must use published IAPs when transitioning to the landing environment. The FAA has established ceiling and visibility minimums by category of aircraft for each IAP at an airport. Currently there are four non-precision IAPs at the Airport. Three of these are designated for use on Runway 18, the preferred landing runway, and one is a circling approach to land on either runway end; there is no published, straight-in IAP to Runway 36 due to the surrounding terrain.
Table 2-3 is a summary of the approaches available at the Airport. It should be noted that the landing minimums listed are based on full operation of all components and visual aids associated with the particular instrument approach. Higher minimums are required with inoperative components or visual aids. The first number for each aircraft category is the Minimum Descent Altitude (MDA), a specified height above airport elevation below which the pilot may not descend without specified visual reference to the ground, airport or runway environment. The second number is the required visibility for the approach in statute miles. For example a pilot using the GPS approach procedure to Runway 18 with an aircraft that has an approach category C (see Section 2.05-5 Airport Design Standards for an explanation on aircraft approach categories) would have an MDA of 906 ft. above the height of the landing threshold (6,256 MSL) with a visibility requirement of three miles. If the pilot does not have a visual reference of the airport at this height he cannot land at TVL.
TABLE 2‐3 INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES Aircraft Approach Category Approach* A B C D LDA/DME‐1 Runway 18 1,026‐5 2,286‐5 LDA/DME‐2 Runway 18 2,126‐5 2,286‐5 GPS Runway 18 906‐3 2,446‐3 VOR/DME or GPS‐A 2,536‐5 2,536‐5 *Acronyms: Localizer Type Directional Aid (LDA), Distance Measuring Equipment (DME), Global Positioning System (GPS), Very High Frequency Omnidirectional Range (VOR) Source: AirNav, 2014
As evidenced by the high visibility and ceiling minimums, these IAPs provide only marginal IFR capability. This is principally due to the high terrain, trees and manmade obstacles (e.g. antenna and light or telephone posts) that surround the Airport and require limiting approach minimums.
Additional information regarding the existing IAPs to the Airport can be found in the Airspace Analysis that was completed as part of this Airport Master Plan Update (see Airspace Analysis within Appendix A). The Airport’s published approach plates can also be found in Approach Plates within Appendix A.
2-24 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
ELECTRONIC AIDS TO NAVIGATION
The instrument approach procedures described above are aided by a Very High Frequency Omnidirectional Range (VOR), localizer (LDA/DME), Global Positioning System (GPS), medium-intensity approach lighting system with sequencing flashing lights (MALSF), and rotating beacon. The Airport currently has an Automated Surface Observing System (ASOS) installed, which provides meteorological data such as wind speed and direction, air temperature, and visibility to pilots. However, due to the age and location of the ASOS, it doesn’t provide completely accurate weather information, as the wind travels over a nearby hill. The ASOS is located north of the existing aircraft parking apron, west of Runway 18-36. A new automated weather reporting system (AWOS) is listed on the approved ALP for installation east of Runway 18-36. The Automated Surface Observing System (ASOS) AWOS would be funded by the FAA and Source: C&S Engineers, Inc., October 20132013 maintained by the City.
Very High Frequency (VHF) Omnidirectional Range (VOR)
VOR approaches are widely used in the national airspace system, especially by general aviation pilots. The signal emitted from the ground based VOR allows pilots to determine a magnetic bearing from the station to the aircraft. VOR approaches are, however, non-precision approaches and not as accurate as Instrument Landing System (ILS) approaches that provide both horizontal and vertical guidance. As a result they do not provide descents to minimums as low as ILS approaches. A VOR is also subject to line-of-sight restrictions, and the range varies proportionally to the altitude of the receiving equipment.
The Airport has a VOR circling approach that can be used for both runway ends. The Squaw Valley VORTAC is located 8.6 nautical miles (nmi) northwest of the Airport.
2-25 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
Global Positioning System (GPS)
GPS is a satellite-based navigation system that was originally developed by the Department of Defense (DOD) for the military. The system provides highly accurate position and velocity information and precise time on a continuous global basis to an unlimited number of properly equipped aircraft users. The system is unaffected by weather and provides a worldwide common grid reference system based on latitude and longitude coordinates called waypoints or fixes to identify a position.
The Airport has a GPS approach to Runway 18 only.
Localizer (LDA/DME)
A localizer type directional aid (LDA) is a localizer-based instrument approach to an airport used to help pilots reach a point near the runway, where they can see the runway and proceed to land visually. It is used at airports where, due to terrain and other factors, the localizer antenna array is not aligned with the runway it serves. In these cases, the localizer antenna array may be offset (i.e. pointed or aimed) in such a way that the approach course it projects no longer lies along the extended runway centerline (which is the norm for non-offset and non-LDA localizer systems). In the case of the Airport, the offset angle is greater than three degrees, classifying the airport as LDA, as opposed to (for example) full Category III ILS systems that allow a pilot to fly, without visual references, right down to the runway surface or very close to it depending on the exact equipment in the aircraft and on the ground.
The Airport has two LDA/DME approaches to Runway 18. See Approach Plates within Appendix A regarding the differences between the two approaches.
VISUAL AIDS TO NAVIGATION
Visual aids to navigation are extremely important, especially for those flying VFR. The visual aids at the Airport include precision approach path indicators (PAPIs) on Runway 18, localizer antenna array located northeast of Runway 18, Runway End Identifier Lights (REILs) located at the threshold of Runway 36, three wind cones, a segmented circle, obstruction lights, and rotating beacon (see Figure 2-6).
2-26 50 Airport Terminal BLAST PAD
B 50 A D REILs F ASOS 2033.45’ E G DISPLACED F H 800’ THRESHOLD DISPLACED WIND CONE H THRESHOLD A BLAST PAD Runway 36 End WIND CONE J WITH SEGMENTED K MALSF CIRCLE PAPI
El Dorado WIND CONE County
Runway 18 End ROTATING BEACON California LOCALIZER ANTENNA
Lake Tahoe Airport Navigational Aids Figure 2‐6 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
2-28 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
Precision Approach Path Indicators
Owned and operated by the City, the PAPI involves a system of lights, typically on the left side of a runway threshold, that provide visual descent guidance information during an aircraft’s approach. The system’s lights are set at a particular angle so that they will appear white or red to an approaching pilot dependent upon his approach slope; if a pilot is flying too high, all lights appear white; if the pilot is flying too low, all appear red; and if the pilot is correctly positioned on the glide slope, the first set of lights appears white and the second set appears red. The Airport is equipped with a four-box PAPI unit on Automated Surface Observing System Runway 18. Source: C&S Engineers, Inc., October 2013
Runway End Identifier Lights
The Runway End Identifier Lights (REILs) are owned and operated by the FAA. The purpose of REILs is to identify the approach end of a runway. REILs are effective for identification of a runway surrounded by other lighting, lacking contrast with surrounding terrain, or during times of reduced visibility. REILs consist of a pair of synchronized flashing lights on each side of the runway threshold. The Airport has REILs at the displaced threshold on Runway 36.
Localizer Antenna Array
The localizer antenna array provides visual guidance to pilots. At the Airport, the localizer antenna array is owned and maintained by the City. Due to terrain the antenna array is offset from the runway centerline and is located approximately 0.35 miles northeast from the approach end of Runway 18. Due to the offset, only non-precision instrument approaches have been developed by the FAA for arrivals to Runway 18 using the localizer.
Medium-Intensity Approach Lighting System
A Medium-Intensity Approach Lighting System with Sequenced Flashing Lights (MALSF) is part of an approach lighting system that provide pilots direction to the runway end and centerline. The MALSF is typically a component of an ILS approach landing system. However, due to the terrain and other factors a full ILS cannot be used at the Airport. The MALSF is equipped with three flashing lights to assist pilot in
2-29 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report locating the system as it is offset from the localizer antenna. The MALSF is located on the approach end or Runway 18 and is owned and maintained by the City.
Wind Cone
A wind cone indicates wind direction and relative wind speed to pilots so that they can determine the most suitable runway end to take off and/or land. The Airport has three operational wind cones in good condition; the first is located east of the Runway 18 threshold, and the second is located east of the Runway, towards the center of the Runway in the segmented circle, and the third wind cone is located east of the Runway 36 threshold.
Segmented Circle
A segmented circle is a visual indicator which provides traffic pattern information to pilots. This can be seen from the air, which allows pilots to verify the pattern. Segmented circles are typically installed at non-towered airports. The segmented circle at the Airport is located approximately mid-field on the east side of the runway. Located in the center of the segmented circle is a lighted wind cone.
Rotating Beacon
The location of an airport at night is universally indicated by a rotating beacon that projects two beams of light, one white and one green, 180 degrees apart. The beams of white and green light indicate that the airport is a lighted civil land airport. Lake Tahoe Airport has a rotating beacon positioned adjacent to the localizer antenna located northeast of the approach end of Runway 18.
OBSTRUCTIONS
An analysis of Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 77 obstructions was conducted as part of this master plan. The obstruction plans and profiles and recommended action for the Airport are presented in the ALP drawing set (to be inserted in Phase III). These drawings provide detailed obstruction information and depict the imaginary surfaces on and around the Airport, through which no object should penetrate. The dimensions and criteria employed in determining these obstructions on or near the surfaces for the Airport are those outlined in FAR Part 77, Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace and are dependent upon the airport’s visibility minimums and classification of the runway.
The applicable FAR Part 77 criteria were used to determine existing obstructions and the need for mitigation. Obstructions that were identified included trees, ground terrain (e.g. adjacent hillsides), roadways, buildings and other manmade objects (e.g. antenna and light or telephone poles). To account for future growth, any tree or tree canopies that currently reach within 10 feet of a Part 77 Surface are considered obstructions. Additionally, all road points that reach within 17 feet (for interstate highway), 15 feet (for public roadway), and 10 feet (for all other roads) of the Part 77 Surfaces are considered obstructions. The following presents information on the surfaces and 2-30 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
existing obstructions. All penetrations should be field verified prior to mitigation due to the survey tolerances. Please see the Obstruction Analysis within Appendix A for detailed information.
Primary Surface
As defined by FAR Part 77, the primary surface of a runway is defined as an area longitudinally centered on the runway for a width dependent on the type of runway, and extending 200 feet beyond each end of the landing threshold. Runway 18 is defined as a runway with non-precision instrument approaches and Runway 36 is defined as a runway with visual approaches only. Visibility minimums to Runway 18 are not lower than one mile. Therefore, the width of the primary surface for both Runway 18 and 36 is 500 feet.
According to the obstruction analysis, objects that penetrated the primary surface consisted of navigational aids and airport signage. However, due to their function or frangible15 design these objects are allowable within the primary surface.
Approach Surfaces
Approach surfaces are longitudinally centered on the extended runway centerline and extend outward and upward from each end of the primary surface. The slope and configuration of each runway approach surface also vary as a function of runway type and availability of instrument approaches. The approach surfaces for both Runway 18 and 36 have inner widths of 500 feet that correspond to the width of the primary surface. As a designated non-precision approach runway the approach surface for Runway 18 extends outward and upward for a distance of 10,000 feet to an outer width of 3,500 feet; the slope is 34:1. The approach surface for Runway 36 extends outward and upward for a distance of 5,000 feet to an outer width of 1,500 feet; the slopes is 20:1. Existing obstructions to this surface include the following:
Runway 18 – Obstructions to the approach surface of Runway 18 consist of individual trees, tree canopy, and apartment buildings. The obstructions are primarily found northwest of the airport property as the terrain climbs from the airport elevation (6,268 feet) to 6,340 feet along Highway 50.
Runway 36 – Obstructions to the approach surface to Runway 36 consist of tree canopy located on the eastern side of the approach surface as the terrain begins to climb.
15 Retains its structural integrity and stiffness up to a designated maximum load, but on impact from a greater load, breaks, distorts, or yields in such a manner as to present the minimum hazard to aircraft. 2-31 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
Transitional Surface
The transitional surfaces extend outward and upward from the primary and approach surfaces to the horizontal surface at right angles to the runway centerline at a slope of 7 to 1. Due to rising terrain that surrounds the Airport there are several obstructions to the transitional surface. This mainly consists of tree canopy located east and west of the Airport. The City installed and maintains six obstruction lights located on the western side of the Airport, above the existing tree line, to notify pilots of the adjacent tree canopy obstructions.
Horizontal Surface
The horizontal surface is a horizontal plane 150 feet above the established airport elevation, which in the case of the Airport is 6,268 feet above MSL. Thus, the horizontal surface is at an elevation of 6,418 feet MSL. The perimeter of the horizontal surface is delineated by arcs with a radius of 10,000 feet from the center point of each of the runway ends. Due to rising terrain that surrounds the Airport there are obstructions to the horizontal surface. These consists of buildings, trees, telephone poles, ground obstructions (hillsides), and man-made structures located west of the Airport.
Conical Surface
The conical surface extends outward and upward from the edge of the horizontal surface at a slope of 20 to 1 for a horizontal distance of 4,000 feet. Thus the elevation of the conical surface at the outermost edge is 6,618 feet MSL. Due to rising terrain that surrounds the Airport there are obstructions to the horizontal surface except along the northern corridor in which the majority of aircraft operations take place.
Runway End Siting Surface (RESS) Analysis
Runway end siting requirements are outlined in FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Airport Design. This document identifies specific dimensions and slopes for all runway ends based on the type of aircraft operations and instrumentation associated with that runway. In most cases, the threshold is located at the beginning of full-strength runway pavement. However, displacement of the threshold may be required when it is not possible to remove or relocate an obstruction in the airspace required for landing an aircraft. In addition to the need for airspace free of obstructions, some environmental concerns (e.g., noise abatement) may necessitate displacement of a threshold. Design standards for object free area and runway safety area lengths may dictate displacing the runway threshold in some cases. Runway 18 falls within Category 5 for the RESS surfaces meaning that they are meant to support instrument night operations serving greater than approach Category B aircraft. Runway 36 falls within Category 3 for the RESS surfaces meaning that it is meant to support large airplanes under visual
2-32 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
operations (day or night) or instrument operations with visibility minimums equal to or greater than one mile during daytime only.
The FAA Form 5010 (see Appendix A) has identified the following obstructions that penetrate the 20:1 RESS surface, resulting in displaced thresholds at the Airport:
. Runway 18 – Brush located along the Upper Truckee River, 450 feet away from the runway end with a height of 13 feet resulting in a displaced threshold of 800 feet.
. Runway 36 – Trees 5,700 feet from the runway end with a height of 345 feet resulting in a displaced threshold of 2,033.45 feet.
The obstruction analysis identified additional obstructions to both the Runway 18 and 36 RESS surfaces. The identified obstruction to the Runway 36 RESS surface is listed as a vertical point located adjacent to the displaced threshold. The vertical point is associated with the REIL system and due to its function and design is allowable within the RESS surface. The obstructions identified in the Runway 18 RESS surface consist of individual trees located on opposite sides. The tree obstruction located on the west side of the surface penetrates the 20:1 by 6.1 feet. The tree obstruction located on the east side of the surface does not directly penetrate the 20:1 but lies 6.4 feet below the surface, within the 10 foot buffer to account for future growth.
Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS)
In addition to the Part 77 surface obstructions, terminal instrument procedures were reviewed to identify the controlling obstacles to those procedures (see Appendix A). Means to mitigate the impact of these obstacles can result in lower approach minimums, thereby increasing the utility of the runway to users and generating opportunity for increased airport operating revenue. Principally, high terrain, with and without trees, surrounding the Airport controls the fix altitudes use for approach and departure procedures. Trees or manmade obstacles (power pole) control the determination of the approach minimums associated with each instrument procedure.
Recommendations for mitigation of identified obstacles will be included under Phase 2 of this master plan. Mitigation primarily includes the obstacles removal.
2.02-2 Airside Facilities
Airside facilities include runways, taxiways, and lighting. Characteristics of the runway and taxiway system at the Airport and the safety areas and object free areas that surround them are described in the following sections. Navigational aids at the Airport are described in Section 2.02-3 as part of the discussion of the Airport’s airspace environment.
2-33 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
RUNWAYS
The Airport has one runway, designated 18-36, that has a physical length of 8,54116 feet (both ends have displaced thresholds: Runway 18 is displaced 800 feet, while Runway 36 is displaced 2,033.45 feet, respectively) and is 100 feet wide, with a north- south orientation. The asphalt surface on the runway is grooved for better friction in adverse weather. Due to surrounding terrain and weather patterns Runway 36 is primarily used for departure procedures. Runway 18 is primarily used for aircraft arrivals due to the published instrument procedures and flat terrain located on the approach to that runway end. According to the airport management and a review of historical aircraft operations the runway use can be broken down as 80 to 90 percent of departures using Runway 36 and the same percentage can be applied to arrivals to Runway 18.
In 2011, an Airport Pavement Management System Update (see Appendix B) was prepared for Lake Tahoe Airport. The report was prepared for and funded by the California Department of Transportation as part of a state-wide update of the existing Airport Pavement Management System (APMS). The previous plan for the Airport was prepared in 2003. The report concluded that the overall condition of the Runway 18-36 pavement was determined to be good based on a Pavement Condition Index (PCI) score of 93.
The runway system and its physical characteristics are described further in Table 2-4.
TABLE 2‐4 RUNWAY SYSTEM CHARACTERISTICS Characteristics Runway 18‐36 Use Primary Length (feet) 8,541’ Runway 18 – Displaced 800’ Threshold Runway 36 – Displaced 2,033.45’ Threshold Width (feet) 100 (with 12.5’ wide shoulders, each side) Strength (1,000 lbs.) Single Wheel – 70/Dual Wheel – 125 PCI Rating Good Composition Asphalt/Grooved Wind Coverage (All Weather) 12 MPH (10.5 KT) 99.79% 15 MPH (13 KT) 99.92% 18 MPH (16 KT) 99.99% Gradient 2% Maximum Markings Non‐precision/Visual Runway Lighting Medium Intensity (Quartz) Source: FAA Airport Master Record Form 5010 (April 3, 2014) and C&S Engineers, Inc.
16 The 8,541 foot runway length is the length reported on the Airport Master Record (FAA Form 5010) and the approved ALP. Ground survey completed as part of the FAA’s wide area augmentation system (WAAS) survey calculated the runway length at 8,537.95 feet. This is likely due to the high elevation (5,280 +/- feet) of the airport. 2-34 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
RUNWAY PROTECTION ZONES
As defined by FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5300-13A, Airport Design, the function of the Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) is to enhance the protection of people and property on the ground by clearing RPZ areas and maintaining them clear of incompatible objects and activities. This is best accomplished by obtaining property interest in the RPZ area, thus giving the airport owner the desired degree of control. The RPZ is trapezoidal in shape and centered on the extended runway centerline (see Figure 2-4). The dimensions of the RPZ are determined by the type of aircraft that the facility expects to serve, and by the approach visibility minimums for each runway end. The departure RPZ begins 200 feet from each runway end and the approach RPZ begins 200 feet from the runway threshold17. The RPZ for Runway 18-36 is designed for Airport Reference Code B-II standards; it has a length of 1,000 feet, an inner width of 500 feet, and an outer width of 700 feet. Small portions of the Runway 18 Approach RPZ extends off airport property. A more significant area of the Runway 18 Departure RPZ also extends off airport property within the Upper Truckee River and onto adjacent private property; however, the City has obtained an avigation easement over the majority of this area.
TAXIWAYS
The taxiway system at the Airport consists of a full length parallel taxiway and eight connecting taxiway segments, two of which are high speed exits. Edge lighting on taxiways is medium intensity taxiway lighting (MITL). Table 2-5 describes the taxiways and their characteristics. The 2011 Airport Pavement Management System Update recommended pavement rehabilitation measures for the entire taxiway system either by preventative maintenance or full pavement reconstruction for specific portions of the taxiway system. In 2012, design was completed for the rehabilitation of Taxiways (A, B, E, F, H, J and K). Construction of the taxiway improvements are anticipated to be fully completed in 2015.
17 The approach RPZ for Runway 18 would begin 200 feet beyond the displaced threshold (800 ft. from runway end). The approach RPZ for Runway 36 would begin 200 feet beyond the displaced threshold (2033.45 ft. from runway end). 2-35 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
TABLE 2‐5 TAXIWAY CHARACTERISTICS Pavement Dimensions Taxiway Condition Index Length x Width Description (PCI) (feet) Taxiway A Fair to Very Poor 8400 x 60‐75 Full parallel taxiway Taxiway B Serious 192.5 x 75 Taxiway connector to Runway 18‐36 Taxiway from private hangars to Taxiway D Failed 102 x 40 Taxiway A Taxiway E Poor 362.5 x 75 High speed taxiway exit Taxiway from Terminal Apron to Taxiway F Serious 135 x 90 1 Taxiway A Taxiway F2 Very Poor 372.5 x 75 High speed taxiway exit Taxiway from tie‐down area to Taxiway G Failed 95 x 52 Taxiway A Taxiway from tie‐down area to Taxiway H Failed 30 x 40.5 1 Taxiway A Taxiway H2 Very Poor 192.5 x 75 Taxiway connector to Runway 18‐36 Taxiway J Failed 192.5 x 75.5 Taxiway connector to Runway 18‐36 Taxiway K Failed 192.5 x 75.5 Taxiway connector to Runway 18‐36 Source: Caltrans Airport Pavement Management System, 2011
SAFETY AREAS AND OBJECT FREE AREAS
Runways and taxiways are surrounded by rectangular areas known as “safety areas” (also shown on Figure 2-4). These areas have slopes ranging from zero to three percent and should be graded and free of obstructions to enhance the safety of airplanes that undershoot, overrun, or veer off a runway or taxiway. The purpose of the safety areas is to minimize the probability of serious damage to airplanes inadvertently entering the area, and to provide greater accessibility for firefighting and rescue equipment during such incidents.
Under existing conditions, Runway 18-36 is designed to accommodate aircraft in Approach Category B and Airplane Design Group II. The applicable runway safety area (RSA) for Approach Category B and Airplane Design Group II is 150 feet wide centered on the runway and extends for 300 feet beyond each runway end or prior to the runway threshold. Under Airport Reference Code B-II design standards the safety areas for Runway 18-36 are free from obstructions and are compliant with FAA design standards.
Although designed prior to the release of FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13A, the Airport’s taxiway system is designed to meet Taxiway Design Group 3 standards.18 The applicable taxiway safety areas (TSA) are 118 feet wide and centered on the taxiway. At this width the TSA for Taxiway A is free from obstructions and compliant with FAA design standards.
18 Taxiway Design Groups were newly established in the September 2012 publication of this advisory circular. 2-36 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
Areas known as Object Free Areas (OFAs) also surround runways and taxiways. These areas require clearing of objects except for any those whose location is fixed by function and are frangible. The purpose of the OFAs is to provide safe and efficient operations at the Airport. The OFA for Runway 18-36 is 800 feet in width and extends 600 feet beyond each runway end or prior to the runway threshold. The taxiway OFA is 186 feet in width and extends the length of the taxiway. All of these OFAs are clear and meet FAA standards.
LIGHTING, MARKING, AND SIGNAGE
Airfield lighting systems allow aircraft to use the Airport in periods of darkness and/or inclement weather. Pavement markings and guidance signs aid in the movement of aircraft along airport surfaces. The following is a summary of the various lighting and marking systems at the Airport.
Lighting
Edge lighting systems are used to outline usable operational areas of airports during periods of darkness and low visibility weather conditions. These systems are classified according to the intensity or brightness produced by the lighting system. Runway and taxiway edge lights define the longitudinal and lateral limits of the edge of the runway and taxiway pavement. The Airport has medium-intensity runway lights (MIRL) for Runway 18-36. These are required for runways that have published non-precision approach procedures as the Airport does (see Section 2.02-1 Airspace).
The edge of runway pavement is identified by two straight lines of base-mounted lights at an equal distance parallel to the runway centerline. The lights are white or yellow in color depending on their location and direction. Perpendicular to those lights at each runway end are a set off eight red based mounted lights that indicate the end of each runway. Taxiway lights at the Airport are base-mounted medium-intensity lights (MITL) that run the full length of the parallel taxiway. The lights are blue in color and are in good condition.
There are base-mounted lights, flush with the pavement, located on the landing threshold of Runway 18. Threshold lights emit green light outward from the runway. The green lights indicate the landing threshold to landing aircraft. The threshold lights are currently in good condition.
2-37 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
Runway Threshold Lights Source: C&S Engineers, Inc., October 2013
The Airport is also equipped with REILs located at the threshold of Runway 36. REILs are used by pilots in the early identification of the runway and runway end.
Airfield lighting systems at the Airport are controlled through a pilot-controlled lighting system, which allows pilots to turn on or increase the intensity of the lighting systems from the aircraft with the use of the aircraft’s radio transmitter.
Obstruction Lighting
Red obstruction lights are located on poles to the west of Runway 18-36 to delineate the tree lines located north and south of the terminal. These trees are obstructions located in the Part 77 Transitional surface (see Obstruction Analysis within Appendix A); this is the reason they have been identified with lights. Other obstruction lights have been placed upon Angora Mountain, Twin Peaks Mountain, Tahoe Mountain, South Beacon (Sunset Ridge), and East Beacon (see Figure 2-8).
Marking
Runway 18-36 centerline and edge markings are painted white. Runway 18 has non- precision markings, while Runway 36 has visual markings. The taxiways are marked with a yellow centerline and edge markings. Centerline markings assist aircraft and pilots in maintaining proper clearance from pavement edges and objects near the taxilane/taxiway exits. Yellow pavement markings also identify aircraft parking positions. All pavement markings are generally in good condition. Due to snow removal, markings are re-painted each year.
2-38 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
Signage
Standard airport signs provide runway and taxiway location, direction, and mandatory instructions, as well as airport situational awareness for aircraft maneuvering on the ground. Signage is in accordance with FAA regulations and all signs are in good condition.
Airport Signage Source: C&S Engineers, Inc., October 2013
2.02-3 Landside Facilities
General Aviation facilities at the Airport include the terminal building, apron, aircraft storage hangars, and FBO facilities (see Figure 2-7).
GENERAL AVIATION TERMINAL
The existing terminal building was originally constructed in the late 1960s and is a combination of reinforced concrete, concrete block and wood. With approximately 30,150 square feet of available space, the facility consists of three stories including an “A” frame that forms a mezzanine area and attic. Although previously used to support commercial service activities, the terminal is currently used to serve GA activities, house several aeronautical and non-aeronautical businesses at the Airport, and for City administration purposes including City Council chambers. The different uses are divided among the three levels as follows:
The mezzanine and attic primarily provide storage space and mechanical support. The main floor, which is located at curbside level, currently provides office space for several aeronautical and non-aeronautical businesses; City Council chambers and support facilities for City staff including a break room; a lobby and restrooms for visiting pilots; and a restaurant open to both the public and GA pilots.
2-39 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
The bottom level of the terminal building is currently used for City administration offices, the city attorney, airport administration, the airport maintenance office, and support spaces. Access to this level is provided via the stairwell and elevator from the main floor (i.e., there is no access from the terminal curbside) or from the airfield.
The facility is generally in good condition.
Terminal Building Source: C&S Engineers, Inc., October 2013
AIRCRAFT STORAGE HANGARS
There is a hangar complex located on the southern end of the apron area on approximately 20,260 square yards of land including the access taxilanes. There are six facilities offering a total of 48 aircraft storage hangars and seven additional storage areas. These facilities are further described below.
A list of existing hangars and their characteristics is presented in Table 2-6. As shown, aircraft storage spaces within the hangar complex vary in shape among “T,” “L” and box configurations.
2-40 Sources: Base map information like Roads, Streams, etc. are from Esri Base Not to scale Map online service, Airport Property Line (APL) from C&S CAD data
Lake Tahoe Airport Landside Facilities Figure 2-7 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
2-42 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
TABLE 2‐6 HANGAR COMPLEX INVENTORY Total Area Area Dimensions Building No. of Bays/Type (square feet) (square feet) (feet) 3 box 1,560 42 x 39 Hangar A 10,200 1 box 1,920 49 x 39 1 box 3,600 60 x 60 7 Ts 1,350 45 x 39 Hangar B 13,758 2 Ts 1,480 48 x 39 2 storage (non‐aircraft) 674 Unavailable 8 Ts 1,071 42 x 34 Hangar C 11,467 2 Ls 1,271 42 x 34 1 storage (non‐aircraft) 357 Unavailable 9 Ts 1,071 42 x 34 1 Ls 1,271 42 x 34 Hangar D 11,792 1 storage (non‐aircraft) 525 Unavailable 1 storage (non‐aircraft) 357 Unavailable 11,760 10 Ts 1,071 42 x 34 Hangar E 2 storage (non‐aircraft) 525 Unavailable Hangar F 7,680 4 box 1,920 48 x 40 Source: City of South Lake
All buildings are constructed of metal and in good condition, having been constructed in the mid-1990s (following the 1992 Airport Master Plan). The above offers a total aircraft storage area of approximately 63,020 square feet and additional storage area of 3,637 square feet.
Northern Hangars Source: C&S Engineers, Inc., October 2013
In addition to the hangar complex, there are two private hangars and a maintenance hangar located north of the terminal and FBO (pictured above). These include (from left to right):
A maintenance and storage hangar operated by the FBO measuring approximately 60 feet by 85 feet and made of metal. The facility appears to be in poor to fair condition with no planned improvements. An FBO storage hangar measuring approximately 70 feet by 70 feet and made of metal. This facility is in good condition.
2-43 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
A private hangar currently used by the South Lake Tahoe Fire Station #4. This hangar is approximately 61 feet by 51 feet with a total area of 3,111 square feet. It is constructed of metal and is currently in fair condition.
APRONS
The Airport has approximately 80,790 square yards of apron space that is divided by use. The southern portion of the apron area is approximately 11,770 square yards and consists of asphalt concrete. The pavement is currently in excellent condition with a PCI of 100 according to the 2011 Airport Pavement Management System (APMS) inspection conducted by Caltrans (see Appendix B). This area is adjacent to the Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) and California Shock Trauma Air Rescue (CalSTAR) facilities, providing apron space to support their operations. This area is also available for temporary aircraft storage (though there are no tie-downs) and provides based aircraft stored in the T-hangar facilities with access to the terminal apron area.
The center portion of the apron (or terminal apron) is positioned directly in front of the terminal building and is approximately 9,130 square yards. This area is constructed of Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) pavement and is in excellent condition with a PCI of 97. This area is used primarily for temporary aircraft storage by transient (visiting) pilots.
The northern apron area is the largest portion and is approximately 59,890 square yards, constructed of asphalt concrete. The pavement just north of the terminal apron is currently in good condition with a PCI of 90; however, the remaining area located north of the FBO building is in very poor condition with a PCI ranging from zero to two. This area is adjacent to the FBO and used primarily for its services (aircraft storage, fueling, maintenance, etc.) Terminal Apron Facing South and is included in the phased reconstruction (Toward Southern Apron) Source: C&S Engineers, Inc., August 2012 program to be rehabilitated. There are currently 127 tie-downs located on this apron that are leased by the FBO.
FIXED-BASE OPERATOR
Mountain West Aviation is currently the sole FBO serving the Airport. The FBO’s facilities are located north of the terminal building and include an approximately 2,300- square-foot structure, built approximately 30 to 40 years ago and in fair condition. This
2-44 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report structure served as the GA terminal when the Airport offered commercial service out of its current terminal building. According to the Airport’s website, Mountain West Aviation offers the following services at the Airport:
Ramp management and aircraft Pilot lounge parking Internet access and flight Aircraft fueling planning Line services Valet service Concierge services Quick turns Tie-downs Complimentary snacks and Hangar leasing and sales beverages Catering Ground power unit (GPU) Rental cars Lavatory cart Pilot supplies Preheating Auto parking De-icing Nightly hangars Complimentary bicycles
2.02-4 Support Facilities and Equipment
FUEL FACILITY
The Airport has an aircraft fueling facility on the northern end of the property that is accessed via a roadway off of Taxiway H. The facility is leased to and operated by the FBO and offers both 100 LL Aviation Gasoline (AvGas) and Jet-A fuel. There are currently two 12,000-gallon tanks (two AvGas and one Jet-A). The fueling facility also currently houses one additional 10,000 gallon tank that was previously used to provide automotive gas but has since closed.
The FBO provides fueling services to aircraft via two mobile fueling trucks (7,000 gallon JetA and 3,000 gallon 100LL) The FBO also has one truck with a split tank (500 gallons each) that holds unleaded gasoline and diesel for vehicles and equipment.
Additionally, there is a 1,000-gallon diesel tank located north of the airport terminal that is owned and operated by the City. According to the operators all tanks meet containment requirements.
2-45 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
AIRCRAFT RESCUE AND FIRE FIGHTING/MAINTENANCE FACILITY
Joint ARFF/Maintenance Facility Source: C&S Engineers, Inc., October 2013
There is a joint ARFF and maintenance equipment storage facility south of the terminal building. In addition to Snow Removal Equipment (SRE) and other maintenance vehicles, there is one ARFF truck in poor condition stored in this structure. Members of the City Fire Department respond to emergencies from an off-site location.
FLEET VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT
The City owns and operates the following fleet vehicles and equipment (this does not include ARFF equipment, discussed above):
Two pick-up trucks One snow blower One Ford SUV Two loaders Two plow trucks One riding mower One grader
The above are in fair condition excluding the riding mower, which is in good condition.
Several of these pieces are stored inside and surrounding the ARFF/Maintenance Facility.
2.02-5 Access, Circulation and Parking
ACCESS
The Airport can be accessed via U.S. Highway 50 approximately one to one and a half miles south of the intersection of U.S. Highway 50, referred to as the “Y.” U.S. Highway 50 runs along the west side of the Airport property and connects to Airport Road, which provides direct access to the Airport.
Airport Road was recently rehabilitated (along with the southern portion of the vehicle parking lot) and is in good condition. 2-46 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
Lessees of the hangar complex may gain access via a driveway off of Airport Road prior to the main vehicle parking lot. This pavement varies in condition from fair to good. Entrance to this area requires a gate access card.
ON-AIRPORT CIRCULATION
As mentioned, airport visitors enter onto Airport Road from U.S. Highway 50. Airport Road is a one-way, two-lane road that runs generally north-south and provides access to the main vehicle parking area on its west and several facilities on its east including the driveway to the hangar complex, the terminal building, and the FBO and additional parking area. The road continues north then turns west at the decommissioned Air Traffic Control Tower before connecting once again to U.S. Highway 50.
PARKING
There is one main parking area for visitors and employees in front of the terminal building. There are currently 170 parking spaces available. The City estimates that approximately 30 of these spaces are used by City staff and restaurant employees. An additional 50 spaces are used during City Council meetings. There is a Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) station located on this parking lot that is available via self-service to the public.
As mentioned above, the southern portion of the vehicle parking lot was recently rehabilitated along with Airport Road and is in good condition. The northern portion and exit to Airport Road is in poor condition.
There is an additional vehicle parking lot operated by the FBO west and northwest of its facility. This pavement consists of asphalt and is in poor condition. It is used as a long-term parking lot, the revenue of which is received by the FBO. On the north side of the long term parking lot is a secure gate, which provides access to additional parking and the airport ramp. The City/Airport currently allows Clean Tahoe to park two of its trucks in this area at no charge. Clean Tahoe is a non-profit organization focused on improving the aesthetic character of the area through proper litter and trash management and raising awareness.
2.02-6 Utilities/Energy
The City, Mountain West Aviation, FAA, and Flight Deck Restaurant are each on separate meters. Water and sanitary sewer services are provided to the Airport by South Tahoe Public Utility District. Gas is provided by Southwest Gas, electricity by Liberty Energy, and telecommunications services are provided by Charter or AT&T. These utilities and providers are sufficient for the current and future needs of the Airport.
In addition, the Airport has a CNG station located in the vehicle parking lot that is available for public use. This is managed by the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (TRPA). 2-47 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
2.02-7 Waste Management and Recycling
According to the Airport Manager, Maintenance staff currently brings trash from the individual bins to the large dumpster outside of the terminal gate, where it is collected by South Tahoe Refuse. Metal can recycling is available at the soda machine and outside the lobby area; this is also collected by Maintenance staff and recycled through South Tahoe Refuse. Paper recycling receptacles are located at all office copiers and on the bottom floor near the elevator (a large, blue bin). Most paper is recycled through Shred-it.
Besides strategic placement of recycling receptacles, there are currently no promotional efforts to encourage diversion from trash/landfills.
The Airport practices material reuse with its removed soils and grinds up asphalt in construction projects. Construction and demolition materials are stored north of the FBO hangars for potential reuse opportunities. Additionally, green waste (e.g., shrubs, trees, etc. generated through landscape activities) is taken to South Tahoe Refuse for recycling.
Although tenants can use the City’s trash dumpsters for small items during move out, they are responsible for their own waste management and recycling. According to a sustainability survey provided to tenants, half of the respondents currently recycle at the Airport. These practices are discussed further in the Sustainability Baseline Assessment. 2.03 Regional Setting and Land Use
Lake Tahoe Airport is located in El Dorado County, California. The following sections provide information regarding climate, topography, and land use in the vicinity of the Airport.
2.03-1 Climate and Topography
CLIMATE
Lake Tahoe's climate is representative of the Sierra Nevada mountain range. It is the balance between the Pacific Ocean and the Sierra barrier that creates the sharply defined seasonal weather patterns which bring variety and change. August is normally the warmest month at the Lake Tahoe Airport with an average maximum temperature of 78.7 °F and an average minimum of 39.8 °F. January is the coolest month with an average maximum temperature of 41.0 °F and an average minimum of 15.1 °F. Temperatures only exceed 90 °F an average of two days annually. Minimum temperatures of 32.0 °F or lower occur on an average of 232 days annually, and minimum temperatures of 0 °F or lower occur on an average of 8 days annually.
2-48 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
Lake Tahoe’s annual average rainfall is 30 inches. The mountains support between 350 and 600 inches of snowfall annually. Winds generally average less than 15 miles per hour (mph) most of the year. During storms the winds can climb to average of 25 to 35 mph with gusts of over 40 mph. During these high wind periods, downdrafts of significant magnitude exist on the sheltered side of the mountains. Meteorological conditions, especially visibility and low ceiling, can impact operations at the Airport. When the ceiling is below 1,000 feet and or the visibility is below three miles, VFR operations cannot be conducted at the Airport. Existing IFR visibility minimums (see Section 2.02-1 Airspace) are considered high relative to surrounding airports because of missed approach obstacle clearance criteria.
Another meteorological condition that affects aircraft using the Lake Tahoe Airport is icing. When VFR routes to the Lake Tahoe Basin are obscured, IFR routes in clouds at existing en route altitudes could result in icing conditions. This is often true in the late fall, winter and early spring. Icing conditions theoretically do not affect capacity of the airfield, but are a significant consideration to the aircraft user/operator.
TOPOGRAPHY
The United States Geological Survey (USGS) for Lake Tahoe provides the following information regarding the topography:
Approximately one-third of the Lake Tahoe Basin is in Nevada and two-thirds is in California. The basin is bounded by the Sierra Nevada mountain range to the west and the Carson mountain range to the east. The basin was formed by geologic block (normal) faulting about two to three million years ago. The down-dropping of the Lake Tahoe Basin and the uplifting of the adjacent mountains resulted in dramatic topographic relief in the region. Mountain peaks rise to more than 10,000 feet above MSL. The surface of Lake Tahoe has an average elevation of about 6,225 feet MSL. Most of the terrain is mountainous, limiting development mainly to relatively flat lying areas along tributary streams. Lake Tahoe is the second deepest lake in the U.S., with a maximum depth of 1,645 feet. Some of the highest peaks of the Lake Tahoe Basin are located within 10 miles of the Airport. They include (also see Figure 2-8):
Freel Peak (10,891 ft. MSL) located 5.5 miles southeast of the Airport, Monument Peak (10,067 ft. MSL) located 5.5 northeast of the Airport, Pyramid Peak (9,984 ft. MSL) located 9 miles southwest of the Airport Mount Tallac (9,735 ft. MSL) located 5.5 west of the Airport Tahoe Mountain (7,237 ft. MSL) located over two miles west of the Airport, Angora Peak (8,586 ft. MSL) located 4.5 miles southwest of the Airport, and Twin Peaks (6,975 ft. MSL) located less than one mile west of the approach end of Runway 36.
2-49 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
2-50 Not to scale
Lake Tahoe Airport Mountain Elevations Figure 2-8 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
2-52 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
2.03-2 Land Use and Zoning
EXISTING LAND USE
Figure 2-9 presents the various land uses surrounding the Airport. According to information published by the TRPA the land uses adjacent to the Airport are predominantly residential, recreational, mixed-use and conservation. The areas that generally follow the flight paths of arriving and departing aircraft to the north are land uses designated as conservation with some commercial areas and a few small pockets of multiple-family residencies located along the Highway 50 corridor. Located to the immediate south of the airport property are public lands owned by the State of California and U.S. Forest Service in which the Upper Truckee River flows. This area and those located further south, east and west of the airport are dominated again by conservation land uses with some residential and recreational land uses that include a golf course and housing subdivisions.
As required by Article 3.5, Airport Land Use Commissions, Public Utilities Code (PUC) Sections 21670 – 21679.5 an Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) has been prepared for the Airport. As noted in the Lake Tahoe Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan (see Appendix C) the purpose of the ALUCP is to:
1. Protect public health, safety, and welfare through the adoption of land use standards that minimize the public’s exposure to safety hazards and excessive levels of noise. 2. Prevent the encroachment of incompatible land uses around public-use airports, thereby preserving the utility of these airports into the future.
Land use compatibility guidelines developed in the ALUCP are incorporated into updated general plans and land use regulations by the cities and counties with jurisdiction over any geographic area subject to the ALUCP. Plans are tailored to each individual airport and provide guidance to the appointed Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) when making development and land use recommendations to the surrounding jurisdictions. The original ALUCP was prepared in 1981, for the then airport operator El Dorado County, and the most recent update to the plan occurred in May 2007.
The objectives of the adopted ALUCP for Lake Tahoe Airport focus on eliminating encroachment of non-compatible land uses to the airport, reducing the impacts of noise, and to protect the surrounding airspace and persons and property on the ground. Implementation policies include:
1. Airspace protection - Development of height restrictions that correspond to FAR Part 77 surfaces and required notification to the ALUC by project proponent of proposed development that could exceed height restrictions for review.
2-53 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I Report
2. Aircraft Noise - New residential development is not allowed within the 65 dB community noise equivalent level (CNEL) noise contour. There are currently no residential structures located within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour (see Figure 2-19). Additional restrictions with regards to development within the 60 dB or greater CNEL contour include building plans to limit intruding noise such that interior noise levels do not exceed 45 dB CNEL. For any residential development occurring between the 55 and 60 dB CNEL additional mitigation measures may apply.
3. Safety – Safety zones surrounding the Airport have been identified based on aircraft arrival and departure procedures at the Airport. Guidelines for each zone are established to determine the compatibility of land uses within them. The zones address safety only and provide the ALUC the necessary information to make recommendations with regards to new development or reconstruction of facilities.
Additional details on the policies of the adopted ALUCP are provided in Appendix C.
EXISTING ZONING
Figure 2-10 presents the zoning in areas near the Airport. Zoning is regulated by the City of South Lake Tahoe and TRPA, including the airport property to the immediate northwest. El Dorado County has jurisdiction over the other areas surrounding the Airport. According to zoning information supplied by the City of South Lake Tahoe19, the airport property is zoned commercial/public service. All areas to the immediate north are designated as a stream environment zone (SEZ) established for the Upper Truckee River and associated meadowlands. The SEZ is restricted from development. Areas located northeast of the Airport are predominantly zoned as residential or commercial. This includes an area that has been zoned as recreation in which the Tahoe Valley campground is located.
Areas to the immediate south and southeast have been zoned as recreation. To the east and northeast areas are zoned as conservation. As noted, a SEZ has been established within and adjacent to the eastern side of the airport property in which development is restricted. Areas zoned for residential development can be located less than a half of one mile east of the Airport off of Pioneer Trail.
19 http://www.cityofslt.us/DocumentCenter/Home/View/60 2-54 LakeLake Tahoe Tahoe CommunityCommunity College College
Tahoe Valley SIERRA School SIERRA TRACTTRACT VU89 ¤£50
avveen HHeea nlly V a lllleeyy CCrreeeek Legend South Shore Church Church Barton Memorial î Hospital School Hope Lutheran Cold Creek n Church v® Hospital South Tahoe Freeway High School Sierra House Highway School Major Road TAHOETAHOE Rivers VALLEYVALLEY MONTGOMERYMONTGOMERY Airport Property Line r r ESTATES e ESTATES e
v v i i Lake/Pond R ¤£50 R e e
e e
k k Swamp/Marsh
c c
u u
r r C T C T olld r d Cr r Creeeek Land Use ee k pp pp UU Conservation Mixed-Use
L a k e T a h o e Recreation A i r p o r t Lake Tahoe Blvd Lake Tahoe Blvd Residential PIONEERPIONEER Backcountry kk TRAILTRAIL ee e rer CC t t uu oo r r TT
S S a a w w m kk m ee ere i r i l CC ll P P nn o o oo nn xx 1 inch = 2,000 feet d aa SS (when printed on 11"x17" paper) ek rreeek A CC Annggoorraa 0 2,000 4,000 Feet NN . . U U P P P P E E R R Date: 10/31/2014 TRUCKEETRUCKEE
COUNTRYCOUNTRY CLUBCLUB LakeLake TahoeTahoe AirportAirport ESTATESESTATES Washoe Meadows Lake Valley State ExistingExisting LandLand UseUse State Park Recreation Area ¤£50 Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, and the GIS User Community F:\Project\N18 - City of South Lake Tahoe\N18.001.001South Airport Lake Tahoe Master Plan\Planning-study\CADD-GIS\GIS\Projects\LandUse_11x17.mxd FigureFigure 2-92-9 Sources: Basemap information like Roads, City Boundary, Streams, Lakes, etc. are from Esri Base Map online service, Land Use data from http://gis.trpa.org/datadownloader/, Airport Property Line (APL) and RPZ from C&S CAD data [THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] Bijou Community Park ¤£50 Bijou Community Park
LakeLake TahoeTahoe CommunityCommunity CollegeCollege Taylor Creek Taylor Creek
TahoeTahoe ValleyValley VU89 SchoolSchool Legend SouthSouth LakeLake TahoeTahoe î Church
HHeea n School aven nlly k y V eek all rree v® Hospital SouthSouth ShoreShore lleeyy CC ChurchChurch Airport Property Line Freeway FallenFallen LeafLeaf HopeHope LutheranLutheran BartonBarton MemorialMemorial Cold Creek Highway LakeLake ChurchChurch HospitalHospital Major Road SouthSouth TahoeTahoe Runway HighHigh SchoolSchool SierraSierra HouseHouse Rivers SchoolSchool Lake/Pond Swamp/Marsh City Boundary ¤£50 Zoning Residential kk ee e rer Multifamily Residential Co CC oll dd Planned Commercial Industrial L a k e T a h o e A i r p o r t Exclusive Agricultural Recreational Facilities Lake Tahoe Blvd Conservation Mixed-Use rr Pioneer Trl ee viv kk i e Recreation R e R ee ee r r ee CC Backcountry kk tt cc uu uu r oo r rr Tahoe One-Family Residential TT TT rr ee Tahoe Limited Multifamily Residential pp pp UU Tahoe Tourist Residential S a w k Tahoe Commercial m eek m ee rr iil lll CC Tahoe Planned Commercial P P nn o o oo Angorraa Cre n xx Tahoe Transportation Corridor Ango ree d ek d aa S S Tahoe Agricultural
1 inch = 2,500 feet (when printed on 11"x17" paper) rr ee 0 2,500 5,000 v Riiv keeee R Feet Trruucck ppeerr T UUpp Date: 10/31/2014
LakeLake ValleyValley StateState RecreationRecreation AreaArea WashoeWashoe MeadowsMeadows StateState ParkPark ¤£50 LakeLake TahoeTahoe AirportAirport ExistingExisting ZoningZoning
F:\Project\N18 - City of South Lake Tahoe\N18.001.001South Airport Lake Tahoe Master Plan\Planning-study\CADD-GIS\GIS\Projects\Zoning_11x17.mxd FigureFigure 2-102-10 Sources: Basemap information like Roads, City Boundary, Streams, Lakes, etc. are from Esri Base Map online service, Zoning data from El Dorado County, Airport Property Line (APL) from C&S CAD data [THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
2.04 Socioeconomic Data
This section provides background on the socioeconomic characteristics of the area surrounding the Airport.
2.04-1 Population Trends
The Airport’s primary service area consists of the Lake Tahoe Basin (Basin). This includes the counties of El Dorado and Placer in California and Douglas and Washoe counties in Nevada. Overall, the Basin was projected to have a 3.1 percent increase in population from 2010 to 2013. This is above the 2.4 percent estimated increase for the country as a whole and within the range of estimated growth for both California (2.9 percent) and Nevada (3.3 percent). Placer County is anticipated to have the greatest increase in population of the four counties with five percent due to its location within the greater Sacramento Valley area.
FIGURE 2‐11 AREA POPULATION STATISTICS 500,000
450,000 433,731 421,407 400,000 348,432 367,309 350,000
300,000
250,000
200,000 181,058 181,737
150,000
100,000 46,997 47,118 50,000
0 El Dorado Placer Washoe Douglas
2010 2013*
* Estimated statistic Source: U.S. Census Bureau
South Lake Tahoe is the most populous city within El Dorado County, CA with a total of 21,403 residents within the 6,502 acre boundary according to the 2010 U.S. Census. This is down from the 23,609 residents that were reported in 2000. The U.S. Census estimates that the City’s population will remain mostly steady with a slight decrease (0.1 percent) to 21,387 residents in 2013. However, population estimates provided by Woods and Poole estimate that the Basin as a whole (excluding Placer County, CA) will continue to see a modest two percent annual growth for the foreseeable future.
2-59 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
FIGURE 2‐12 LAKE TAHOE BASIN POPULATION ESTIMATES 790,000
770,000
750,000
730,000
710,000
690,000
670,000
650,000 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Note: excludes Placer County Source: Woods and Poole Economic, Inc. 2014
2.04-2 Industry, Employment, and Personal Income
The City of South Lake Tahoe’s primary industries revolve around tourism associated with outdoor recreation and the gaming industry. As statistics show, the unemployment rate of South Lake Tahoe has been reflective of the overall economy and has exceeded national rates during the past seven years as the country moves through the post 2008 economic recovery. According to the U.S. Department of Labor statistics, unemployment in the area reached a peak in the first quarter of 2011 at 13 percent but has since come down closer to national levels (6.2 percent) at 7.2 percent in 2014.
2-60 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
FIGURE 2‐13 UNEMPLOYMENT RATE 14% 13% 12%
10%
8%
6%
4%
2%
0% 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
South Lake Tahoe United States
Source: U.S. Department of Labor, 2014
In order to maintain a sustainable economy, the city has recognized and put a plan into action in order to capture the economic opportunity of shopping. Opportunities for retail businesses will be created that will serve the local population eliminating the need for local residents to shop outside of South Lake Tahoe. The graph above depicts the history of unemployment from 2000-2013 and shows the current downward trend in unemployment.
The median household income for South Lake Tahoe from 2008-2012 was $41,445 compared to $61,400 for the state of California. 2.05 Historical Airspace Activity
The following sections provide baseline information that will be used later in this study in the preparation of aviation activity forecasts and identification of facility requirements for the 20-year planning period (through 2033) for the Airport.
2.05-1 Annual Operations
According to the FAA Air Traffic Activity System (ATADS) and FAA Terminal Area Forecast (TAF) (see Appendix A), the number of annual aircraft operations has fluctuated at the Airport since 1993, dipping below 20,000 annual operations in 1998, and again from 2001 to 2004 (see Figure 2-14). This was primarily due to a 29 percent decrease in the number of General Aviation operations over that time period.
2-61 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
FIGURE 2‐14 ANNUAL OPERATIONS
30,000 27,169 25,000 24,400
20,000
15,000
10,000 10,479
5,000 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Year 2012* 2013*
* Forecasted by FAA TAF Source: FAA Air Traffic Activity System (ATADS) and Terminal Area Forecast (TAF), 2014
Table 2-7 provides a detailed breakdown of annual operations for the years 1990 through 2013 at the Airport. The number of annual operations were taken from FAA ATADS and TAF provided statistics. As the Airport Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) was closed in 2004, records previously provided under ATADS were no longer available after that year.
2-62 Itinerant Operations Local Operations Year Air Carrier & Taxi General Total Operations Military Total Civil Military Total Commuter Aviation 1993 4,050 18,561 387 22,998 3,663 148 3,811 26,809 1994 3,662 16,655 302 20,619 2,935 154 3,089 23,708 1995 3,892 15,468 315 19,675 3,551 146 3,697 23,372 1996 1,935 17,016 399 19,350 4,148 332 4,480 23,830 1997 1,209 17,132 302 18,643 5,744 330 6,074 24,717 1998 1,084 12,116 211 13,411 3,683 278 3,961 17,372 1999 2,001 15,380 529 17,910 4,997 220 5,217 23,127 2000 1,207 18,019 599 20,890 5,959 320 6,279 27,169 2001 1,404 6,553 253 8,210 2,209 60 2,269 10,479 2002 3,617 9,419 319 13,355 3,855 63 3,918 17,273 2003 5,700 9,974 259 15,933 2,929 54 2,983 18,916 2004 3,980 11,328 445 15,753 1,472 91 1,563 17,316 2005 2,319 17,214 603 20,220 4,362 80 4,442 24,662 2006 2,319 17,214 603 20,220 4,362 80 4,442 24,662 2007 2,319 17,214 603 20,220 4,362 80 4,442 24,662 2008 2,319 17,214 603 20,220 4,362 80 4,442 24,662 2009 1,000 16,624 500 18,124 4,209 80 4,289 22,413 2010 1,100 17,440 475 19,015 4,525 80 4,605 23,620 2011 1,100 17,440 475 19,015 4,525 80 4,605 23,620 2012* 1,100 17,777 475 19,352 4,575 80 4,655 24,007 2013* 1,100 18,120 475 19,695 4,625 80 4,705 24,400
* Forecasted by FAA TAF Source: FAA Air Traffic Activity System (ATADS) and Terminal Area Forecast (TAF), 2014
Lake Tahoe Airport Historical Annual Aircraft Operations Table 2-7 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
2-64 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
2.05-2 Commercial Service Activity
Lake Tahoe Airport provided commercial service flights to the region beginning in the 1960s (see Figure 2-15). Between 1960 and 2001, this included passenger flights from approximately 20 different airlines providing service from destinations primarily within California. Aircraft types that were previously used to provide airline service to the Airport included the Boeing 727 (Pacific Air Lines), SAAB 340 (American Eagle), DC-9 (Allegiant Air), and Boeing 737 (Reno Air) (see Figure 2-16). Visitors to the region are now primarily served through Reno-Tahoe International Airport (RNO), Sacramento International Airport (SMF), San Francisco International Airport (SFO), and Oakland International Airport (OAK).
During the 1970s Lake Tahoe Airport maintained a consistent level of passenger service peaking in 1978 with 294,188 passenger enplanements. Due to a number of factors, including the gaming industry, airline deregulation and competition from Reno-Tahoe International Airport (then Reno Cannon International Airport), commercial service began to decline in the 1980s. Although the airport still maintains FAA Part 139 certification, allowing for commercial service operations, there has been no scheduled passenger service at the Airport since 2001.
FIGURE 2‐15 HISTORICAL PASSENGER ENPLANEMENTS 80,000
70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001
Source: FAA Terminal Area Forecast (TAF), 2014
2-65 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
2-66 NO COMMERCIAL SERVICE SINCE 2001 1975 1976 1977 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 1978 1992 2004 1960's YEAR
Notes: 1978 Airline deregulation and peak TVL enplanements 1992 Airport settlement agreement Lake Tahoe Airport 2004 TVL Air traffic control tower closes Airline Progression Figure 2-16 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
2-68 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
2.05-3 Based and Itinerant Aircraft
According to the airport administration, aircraft presently based (2014) at the Airport consist of 22 single engine, three multi-engine aircraft, and three helicopters. Specific details of these representative based aircraft are listed in Table 2-8 and Table 2-9.
TABLE 2‐8 BASED FIXED WING AIRCRAFT CHARACTERISTICS MTOW Approach Wingspan Approach Design Aircraft Type (lbs.) Speed (kts) (ft.) Category Group Cessna 172 SE 2,450 61.0 36.1 A I Cessna 182 SE 3,100 91.0 36.0 A I Piper 34 Seneca SE 4,750 79.3 38.1 A I Cirrus SR22 SE 3,400 78.0 38.4 A I Cessna 210 SE 4,000 75.4 36.9 A I Lake 4‐200 SE 3,140 68.9 38.0 A I Bellanca T‐250 SE 3,150 81.9 31.3 A I Piper 31 Cheyenne TE 9,000 100.0 40.7 B I Source: Lake Tahoe Airport and C&S Engineers, Inc.
TABLE 2‐9 BASED HELICOPTER AIRCRAFT. CHARACTERISTICS Under Under MTOW Rotor Carriage – Carriage – Aircraft. Type (lbs.) Diameter(ft.) width (ft.) length (ft.) Robinson R44 H 1,370 25.2 6.3 4.2 Bell 206 Jet Ranger H 4,450 37.0 7.7 9.9 Eurocopter EC‐120B H 3,780 32.8 6.8 9.4 Source: Lake Tahoe Airport and C&S Engineers, Inc.
Approximately 82 percent of the aircraft operations at the Airport are categorized as itinerant or visiting traffic. In comparison to similar airports within the region, this percentage is significantly higher than what is reported by the FAA TAF at both Minden-Tahoe Airport (47 percent) and Truckee-Tahoe Airport (40 percent). This data implies that predominate users of the facility are not locally based and are likely using the airport to come to the region as second home owners or for recreational or entertainment purposes. Table 2-10 provides a breakdown of some of the itinerant aircraft types that are commonly operating at the airport. Types range from small single engine propeller-driven aircraft up to large business jets that can carry 14 to 19 passengers.
2-69 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
TABLE 2‐10 TRANSIENT AIRCRAFT CHARACTERISTICS Approach Approach Design Aircraft Type MTOW Wingspan Speed Category Group Beechcraft Bonanza SE 3,064 70 33.50 A I Piper PA‐46 Malibu SE 4,850 87 43.00 A I Meridian Pilatus PC‐6 SE 6,107 57 49.70 A II Piper PA‐31T Cheyenne TP 9,000 100 40.70 B II Beech Super King Air TP 12,500 103 54.50 B II 200 Beechcraft 90 King Air TP 10,100 100 50.25 B II Cessna 525A Citation J 12,375 118 49.83 B II Cessna 560 Citation V J 16,630 108 54.08 B II Cessna 650 Citation J 30,997 114 53.50 B II 3/6/7 Dassault Falcon 2000 J 28,660 107 53.50 B II IAI 1124 Westwind J 23,500 129 44.80 C I Canadair Challenger J 43,100 125 61.80 C II 600 Gulfstream G400 (G‐IV) J 73,200 128 77.10 C II Gulfstream G500 (G‐V) J 90,689 140 93.50 C III Source: Lake Tahoe Airport, FlightAware, and C&S Engineers, Inc.
2.05-4 Design Aircraft
The selection of appropriate FAA airport design criteria is based upon the critical or design aircraft that will be using an airport. The design aircraft is defined by the FAA as the most demanding aircraft that performs or is projected to perform at least 500 annual operations at the facility. This can be recognized as a specific aircraft model or composite of similar aircraft models that currently or are forecasted to operate at the facility.
In order to determine the critical aircraft for Lake Tahoe Airport, aviation activity levels and the types of aircraft operating at the Airport shall be evaluated. Currently, no on- Airport entities track operations by aircraft type or N number. Therefore, FlightWise data and landing fee reports (see Appendix A) were reviewed and compared (landing fee reports also lack specific aircraft types but report maximum aircraft landing weights). Based on FlightWise data for the period of May 2012 through May 2013 (see Appendix A) there were a total of 1,972 operations with filed flight plans to and from the Airport. Of those operations, approximately 60 percent were conducted by jet aircraft. The remaining 40 percent were made up of both single-engine and twin-engine turboprop aircraft. According to the FlightWise data, the most frequently operated and demanding jet aircraft at the Airport is the Gulfstream V, which individually accounted for 10 percent of the jet operations that filed flight plans. Furthermore, landing fee reports from the 2012 and 2013 calendar years indicated that operations associated with the Gulfstream V made up a significant percentage (greater than six percent) of the fleet
2-70 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
mix when compared to other aircraft types operating at the Airport. The landing fee report also indicated that the number of operations by the Gulfstream V more than doubled from 2012 to 2013.
Although the number of aircraft operations by the Gulfstream V does not meet the FAA-defined threshold for selection of a design aircraft (exceeding 500 annual itinerant operations), based on projected demand and the recent increase in annual operations the Gulfstream V was selected as the future design aircraft. Currently, the number of operations by a composite of B-II aircraft meets the FAA-defined threshold and is therefore selected as the existing design family of aircraft. In order to address specific FAA design standards the Dassault Falcon 2000 was chosen as the representative aircraft for the B-II design family of aircraft as it is designated as a large aircraft (exceeding 12,500 lbs. Maximum Takeoff Weight [MTOW]) and is considered the most demanding aircraft of the current B-II fleet operating at the Airport.
AIRCRAFT CHARACTERISTICS
The Dassault Falcon 2000 has a wingspan of 53.50 feet, a tail height of 17.42 feet, a MTOW of 28,660 pounds, and an approach speed of 107 knots. Thus, for design purposes, the Dassault Falcon 2000 is categorized as a member of Aircraft Approach Category B (approach speeds 91 knots or more but less than 121 knots) and Airplane Design Group II (aircraft with wingspans up to 49 feet but less than 79 feet and tail heights up to 20 feet but less than 30 feet).
The Gulfstream V has a wingspan of 93.50 feet, a tail height of 25.80 feet, a MTOW of 90,500 pounds, and an approach speed of 140 knots. Thus, for design purposes, the Gulfstream V is categorized as a member of Aircraft Approach Category C (approach speeds 121 knots or more but less than 141 knots) and Airplane Design Group III (aircraft with wingspans up to 79 feet but less than 118 feet and tail heights up to 30 feet but less than 45 feet).
2.05-5 Airport Design Standards
FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13A, Airport Design, identifies the design standards to be maintained at the Airport. These design criteria provide a guide for airport designers to assure a reasonable amount of uniformity in airport facilities. Any criteria involving widths, gradients, separations of runways, taxiways, and other features of the landing area must necessarily incorporate wide variations in aircraft performance, pilot technique, and weather conditions.
As discussed, separate design aircraft were chosen to represent the existing and future conditions of the Airport. The specific airport design standards listed below (Tables 2- 11 and 2-12) have been applied assuming an Aircraft Approach Category B and Airplane Design Group II for existing conditions and an Aircraft Approach Category C and Airplane Design Group III for future conditions. Visibility minimums include visual approaches only to Runway 36 and not lower than one mile for Runway 18.
2-71 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
In addition to runway design standards, the FAA sets design standards for airport taxiway systems based on the established critical aircraft’s ADG and Taxiway Design Group (TDG). The Dassault Falcon 2000 falls within TDG 3 based on a Main Gear Width (MGW) of 16.67 ft. and a Cockpit to Main Gear (CMG) distance of 25.59 ft. The Gulfstream V also falls within TDG 3 based on a MGW of 16.67 ft. and a CMG distance of 43.50 ft. Tables 2-11 and 2-12 presents specific taxiway design standards based on the Airport’s ADG and TDG.
FIGURE 2‐17 DESIGN AIRCRAFT Dassault Falcon 2000
Photograph Source: www. dassaultfalcon.com
Gulfstream V
Photograph Source: http://www.talonairjets.com/gulfstream-v-n691rc
2-72 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
TABLE 2‐11 AIRPORT DESIGN STANDARDS (ARC B‐II) (NOT LOWER THAN 1 MILE VISIBILITY MINIMUMS) Existing Conditions Runway Characteristic B‐II Runway 18 Runway 36 Standard Width 75’ 100’ Runway Safety Area Length beyond runway end 300’ 300’1/ 300’ Length prior to threshold 300’ 300’ Width 150’ 150’ Runway Object Free Area Tree line within Length beyond runway end 300’ ROFA 300’ Length prior to threshold 300’ N/A2/ Width 500’ 500’ 500’ Runway Obstacle Free Zone Length beyond runway end 200’ 200’ 200’ Width1/ 400’ 400’ 400’ Approach Runway Protection Zone Length 1,000’ Small portion of 1,000’ Approach RPZ Inner Width 500’ extends off airport 500 Outer Width 700’ property onto 700’ private property Departure Runway Protection Zone Length 1,000’ Large portion of 1,000’ Inner Width 500’ Departure RPZ 500’ extends off airport property onto private property; Outer Width 700’ majority is included 700’ in avigation easement Runway centerline to: Holding position 200’ 200’ Parallel taxiway/taxilane centerline 240’ 285’ – 292.5’3/ Aircraft parking area 250’ 250’ Taxiway Design Taxiway Width 50’ 60’‐75’4/ Taxiway Safety Area Width 79’ 79’ Taxiway Object Free Area Width 131’ 131’ Source: FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13A and C&S Engineers, Inc.
1/ RSA extends off airport property, avigation easement in place 2/ As directed by AC 150-5300/13A for an ARC B-II use length beyond departure end. 3/ Parallel taxiway centerline is 285 feet from the Runway 18-36 centerline in the southern portion of the airport and 292.5 feet wide in the northern portion of the airport. 4/ Parallel taxiway is 75 feet wide in the northern portion of the airport and 60 feet wide in the southern portion of the airport.
2-73 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
TABLE 2‐12 AIRPORT DESIGN STANDARDS (ARC C‐III) (NOT LOWER THAN 1 MILE VISIBILITY MINIMUMS) Future Conditions Runway Characteristic C‐III Runway 18 Runway 36 Standard Width 150’ Runway currently at 100’1/ Runway Safety Area RSA extends into RSA extends into Length beyond runway end 1,000’ Upper Truckee River Upper Truckee River 1/ RSA extends into Length prior to threshold 600’ 600’ Upper Truckee River Width 500’ 500’ Runway Object Free Area Trees would be Trees/terrain would Length beyond runway end 1,000’ located in ROFA be located in ROFA 2/ Trees would be Length prior to threshold 600’ 600’ located within ROFA Width 800’ Parallel taxiway would be located in ROFA Runway Obstacle Free Zone Length beyond runway end 200’ 200’ 200’ Width1/ 400’ 400’ 400’ Approach Runway Protection Zone Length 1,700’ Larger portion of Larger portion of Inner Width 500’ Approach RPZ Approach RPZ extends onto extends onto Outer Width 1,010’ private property private property Departure Runway Protection Zone Length 1,700’ Larger portion of Inner Width 500’ Departure RPZ extends off airport Departure RPZ now property onto extends onto private property; private property Outer Width 1,010’ majority is included in avigation easement Runway centerline to: Holding position 250’ Design standard not met Taxiway centerline 285’ – 292.5’3/ Parallel taxiway/taxilane centerline 400’ from runway centerline Aircraft parking area 500’ Aircraft parking apron located within 425’ Taxiway Design Taxiway Width 50’ 60’‐75’4/ Taxiway Safety Area Width 118’ 118’ Taxiway Object Free Area Width 186’ 186’ Source: FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13A and C&S Engineers, Inc.
1/ The maximum certified takeoff weight of the Gulfstream V is below 150,000 lb. so the standard runway width is 100 feet, the shoulder width is 20 feet, and the runway blast pad width is 140 feet. 2/ Visual guidance provided by PAPI/MALSF 3/ Parallel taxiway centerline is 285 feet from the Runway 18-36 centerline in the southern portion of the airport and 292.5 feet wide in the northern portion of the airport. 4/Parallel taxiway is 75 feet wide in the northern portion of the airport and 60 feet wide in the southern portion of the airport.
2-74 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
2.06 Policies and Plans
To enhance operational efficiency, airports should develop, maintain and implement a number of management documents. Table 2-13, identifies these documents and which are currently in place at Lake Tahoe Airport.
TABLE 2‐13 AIRPORT MANAGEMENT DOCUMENTS Document Lake Tahoe Airport (date) Master Plan 1992 – New plan in development City‐wide Business Plan includes the Airport (2011 – 2012); Business Plan Strategic Plan developed in 2002 for the Airport Marketing Plan Air Service Marketing Plan (1998) Communications Policy/ City has a Communications Center Community Outreach Program Minimum Standards/Standard Minimum Standards for Commercial Operating Procedures Activity and Service Providers (April 2009) Rules and Regulations Completed by airport management Emergency Plan Completed by airport management Rates and Charges Policy Rental rates available for hangar storage Lease Policy/Standard Lease Language Completed by airport management Annual Report Airport Budget (2013) Source: C&S Engineers, Inc.
Although the Airport had previously developed marketing and strategic plans, these efforts focused on attracting commercial service or developing the Airport as a transportation center, respectively. Likewise, the City’s current Business Plan anticipates the return of commercial service. Due to the time that has elapsed from the earlier plans, development of new plans are recommended.
The following is a brief description of the purpose and content of these documents. Where the content of the documents is interrelated, one or more documents may be combined. It is recommended that the Airport review its current management documents and identify the need for updates to existing documents or development of new documents.
Master Plan – Framework to guide future airport development that will cost- effectively satisfy aviation demand, while considering potential environmental and socioeconomic impacts. The master plan document issues, justifies and provides a graphical representation of proposed development, and establishes a realistic schedule and achievable financial plan. Source/guidance: FAA AC 150/5070-6B Airport Master Plans. Business Plan – Identifies techniques to improve operational efficiency including maximizing revenue and minimizing expenses. A business plan 2-75 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
supports an airport by defining its mission, visions and goals; setting objectives for achieving those goals; identifying strategies and action plans; setting parameters for measuring and checking progress; and providing a means for adjustments as needed. Source/guidance: ACRP Report 77: Guidebooks for Developing General Aviation Airport Business Plans. Marketing Plan – Identifies ways to increase operations, attract new pilots (both transient and based), and market the Airport as a destination for new businesses. Marketing efforts would focus on the benefits the Airport brings to these users and businesses, such as available infrastructure, costs of doing business, and incentives. Source/guidance: ACRP Report 28, Marketing Guidebook for Small Airports. Communications Policy/Community Outreach Program – A community outreach plan focuses on engaging residents, neighbors, and local businesses that do not use the Airport for recreational or business purposes already. The goals of community outreach are to: educate the public on the value of the airport to the community; offer amenities and educational opportunities; and educate the public on airport operations and provide an opportunity for two- way communication with Airport personnel. The Community Outreach Program should address community, media, and government relations. Additional information is provided in the previous section. Source/guidance: ACRP Report 16: Guidebook for Managing Small Airports. Minimum Standards/Standard Operating Procedures – Set forth the minimum requirements an individual or entity wishing to provide aeronautical services to the public on a public-use airport must meet in order to provide those services, such as minimum leasehold size, required facilities and equipment, personnel requirements, insurance requirements, hours of operation, and fees. Minimum standards should be imposed to ensure that an adequate level of safe and efficient service is available to the public. Standards can be broken down by services or service provider (airport sponsor, FBO or Specialized Aeronautical Service Provider [SASO]). Standard Operating Procedures outline the steps necessary to ensure the minimum standards are met. Source/guidance: FAA AC 150/5190-6, Exclusive Rights at Federally Obligated Airports; National Air Transportation Association Airport Sponsors Guide to Minimum Standards & Airport Rules and Regulations, 2009. Rules & Regulations – Govern the ongoing activities of service providers, tenants, and others using the Airport and outline enforcement procedures. The primary intent is to affirm and ensure compliance with minimum aviation policies, procedures and safety standards as prescribed by federal regulations as well as any additional regulations identified by the airport sponsor. Topics considered may include: safety and security procedures; aircraft registration and operation; storage, use and transportation of hazardous materials; motor vehicle operation, pedestrian access and environmental compliance. Source/guidance: National Air Transportation Association Airport Sponsors Guide to Minimum Standards & Airport Rules and Regulations, 2009.
2-76 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
Emergency Plan – Establishes delegation of duties, assigns agency responsibilities, provides coordination of response efforts, and provides an orderly transition between normal and emergency operations. Although small airports not certified under Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 139 are not required to develop and maintain an Airport Emergency Plan (AEP), it is often undertaken as a best practice in recognition of the airport sponsor’s responsibility to public safety. Source/guidance: FAA AC 150/5200-31B, Airport Emergency Plan (2008). Rates and Charges Policy – Acknowledges that the incorporation of rentals and fees for the use of airport property, equipment, facilities, services and buildings help offset the cost of operating the airport. Common methods for establishing airport rates and charges is through surveying other airports to determine a market basis or determining the recovery cost for the development and operations of the facility and services. Rates and charges should be reviewed periodically to reflect current values. Leases should be reviewed when renewed or at five-year intervals for long-term leases. Fuel fees and parking rates should be reviewed on a more frequent basis. Source/guidance: ACRP Report 16: Guidebook for Managing Small Airports. Lease Policy/Standard Lease Language – Acknowledges that airports are unique in their federal and local obligations and potential tenant mix of aeronautical and non-aeronautical uses. The establishment of a lease policy and standard lease language, provides for consistent application of leases which have been tailored to the unique needs of the airport. It also allows potential tenants to quickly understand the unique requirements and operating characteristics of the airport. The policy should address the basic type of leases at the airport including: aeronautical versus non-aeronautical leases, land leases, specialized aeronautical leases and hangar rental leases. Source/guidance: ACRP Report 47: Guidebook for Developing and Leasing Airport Property. 2.07 Financial Data
The Lake Tahoe Airport exists to serve a number of needs for the City of South Lake Tahoe and the surrounding region. Business and recreational air transportation to and from the region along with critical life-safety transportation are some of the more obvious roles that the Airport plays. The Airport also plays a key role in the broader system of transportation and public infrastructure that support the economic activity of the region and provide services for local residents.
Participants in early Master Plan public meetings expressed concern over the level of investment the City makes each year in the operation and maintenance of the Airport and were curious about the benefits of this investment on the regional economy. Like all communities, the City of South Lake Tahoe aspires towards a balanced and sustainable economic future for its residents and the Airport plays an important role in achieving those goals. Many general aviation airports in the United States require some
2-77 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
level of general fund (or other public financial source) contribution from the municipal organization that operates the airport in order to remain operational. An airport is a public asset that serves the needs of a wide segment of the surrounding community and the National Transportation System. Similar to other public benefit infrastructure it requires careful and consistent investment to ensure it remains an asset for the community.
2.07-1 Operating Revenues and Expenses
Information supplied by the City Finance and Accounting Department was used to tabulate the revenue in fiscal year 2014 for the Airport and is summarized in Table 2- 14. As identified in the table an operating transfer from the City’s general fund is required to balance the budget for the Airport. In Fiscal 2014, this transfer was $351,972.00 which is a reduction over prior years due to diligent effort of City staff to reduce expenses (shown in Table 2-15).
TABLE 2‐14 AIRPORT REVENUES – 2014 Percentage of Category 2014 Revenue Total Revenue Rents $603,924.62 57.03% Vending Machines $632.82 0.06% Utility/Phone Reimbursements $15,257.14 1.44% Landing Fees $57,400.12 5.42% Late Fees ‐$289.90 ‐‐ Fuel Flow Fees $29,201.26 2.76% Interest/Dividend Revenue $853.16 0.08% Subtotal $706,979.22 Operating Transfers (General Fund) $351,972.00 33.24% Total Revenue $1,058,951.22 Source: City of South Lake Tahoe
It has been expressed during preliminary master plan public meetings that additional, detailed economic studies would be beneficial to the City. A recommendation of this analysis is that further information regarding direct and indirect economic impacts associated with the Airport would be valuable for the City and the surrounding community. There are professional firms that specialize in this type of analysis and the City is encouraged to solicit proposals to prepare more detailed economic impact analysis as soon as possible.
2-78 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
TABLE 2‐15 AIRPORT EXPENSES – 2014 Percent of Total Expense Category 2014 Expense Expenses Personnel $561,304.45 52.77% RMSA Expense $2,600.00 0.24% Custodial $9,304.42 0.87% Laundry $1,864.20 0.18% Equipment $3,851.30 0.36% Leases $1,655.52 0.16% Insurance $44,752.00 4.21% Communications $7,201.08 0.68% Advertising $0.00 0.00% Visitor Promotion $32,393.01 3.05% Printing & Binding $15.12 0.00% Training/Seminars/Subscriptions $19,5250.24 1.84% Taxes & Fees $7,994.70 0.75% Safety Equipment $820.26 0.08% General Supplies $41,938.39 3.94% Postage $137.16 0.01% Technical Services $86,021.43 8.09% Water/Sewer/Utilities $85,008.44 7.99% Garbage‐Utility $13,000.00 1.22% Fuel $9,943.36 0.93% Disposal $2,000.00 0.19% Repair & Maintenance $23,529.88 2.21% Shop (Motor Pool) $64,759.63 6.09% Medical Supplies $200.00 0.02% Fire Extinguishers $2,698.92 0.25% Principal (Debt Service) $31,438.32 2.96% Interest (Debt Service) $6,449.54 0.61% Project Contingency Expenses $3,325.00 0.31% Total $1,063,726.37 Source: City of South Lake Tahoe
Additional detailed information regarding the Airport’s revenue and expenditures, as well as potential further investments required will be detailed in the final master plan document.
2.07-2 Capital Funding
There are several sources of funding for capital improvements at the Airport.
AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
The Airport is eligible for assistance in funding capital projects through the FAA Airport Improvement Program (AIP). As an eligible participating airport in the AIP
2-79 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
program, the Airport is required to prepare, update annually, and submit to the FAA a five-year Airport Capital Improvement Program (ACIP) to apply for federal grants.
AIP grants typically fund at least 90-percent of development costs for eligible projects. AIP eligible projects include the planning, design, and construction of projects associated with public use non-revenue generating facilities and equipment for the Airport. Typical AIP eligible projects include: Airport Master Plans, Airport Layout Plans; land acquisition and site preparation; airfield pavements for runways, taxiways, and transient aprons; lighting and navigational aids; safety, security, and snow removal equipment; public use passenger terminal facilities that are not leased for exclusive use; and obstruction identification and removal. The highest funding priority, according to FAA’s rating procedure, is generally given to those projects that are safety-related such as runway safety area improvements, obstruction removal, and facility improvements to meet current FAA Airport Design Standards.
STATE GRANT PROGRAMS
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) also provides financial assistance to publicly owned airports. The most common funding is through matching FAA AIP grants with state funds. The current matching rate is five percent of the federal portion of the total project cost. Generally, state matching is limited to projects that primarily benefit general aviation. A project which is being funded by an AIP grant must be included in the capital improvement program (CIP). The amount set aside for AIP matching is determined by the California Transportation Commission (CTC) each fiscal year. Unused set-aside funds are available for Acquisition and Development (A&D) grants which can be used to fund projects for airport and aviation purposes as defined in the State Aeronautics Act.
LOCAL FUNDING
Local funding for the Airport is provided through the City’s general fund, Airport Enterprise Fund, and through the sale of credits acquired from designating portions of the airport property as Stream Environmental Zone (SEZ).
PRIVATE FUNDING
Private investors are a potential source of funds for revenue producing development at the Airport. Tenants and/or investors may finance the purchase of existing facilities or the construction of new facilities from which they derive income. While direct revenues to the Airport are usually limited to purchase or lease charges for land underlying the facilities, the local sponsor does not need to obtain its own funding for these improvements. Additionally, increased activity resulting from Airport improvements often increases the number of based aircraft or operations, which in turn generates additional revenue associated with fuel sales and other aviation services. Examples of private investment at airports include buildings for fixed based operators, fuel facilities,
2-80 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
hangars (i.e. AirspacePlace.com), aviation-related commercial development, and non- aviation commercial development. 2.08 Environmental Considerations
The objective of conducting an environmental overview as part of the master planning process is two-fold: a. to describe the existing environmental conditions at the Airport and surrounding areas, and b. to identify environmentally sensitive areas that may require special management, conservation and/or preservation during the planning, design and construction of proposed airport development projects.
The environmental overview has been prepared in reference to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended; and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Guidance provided in FAA Order 1050.1E CHG 1, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures, effective March 20, 2006 and the 2014 CEQA Statutes and Guidelines were used to prepare the environmental overview. Additionally, FAA Order 5050.4B, National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Implementing Instructions for Airport Actions, dated April 28, 2006, which supplements FAA Order 1050.1E by providing NEPA instructions for proposed federal actions to support airport development was used to determine FAA requirements.
This environmental overview does not replace environmental documents such as an Environmental Assessment (EA), Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), or Environment Impact Report (EIR) that may be required for proposed actions resulting from the Airport Master Plan. To obtain federal environmental clearance for any proposed projects at the Airport, a full environmental evaluation document prepared in accordance with the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) policy, FAA Order 5050.4B, FAA Order 1050.1E, and Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Regulations will be required. In addition, in order to meet state level requirements under CEQA, the preparation of separate or joint environmental documentation will be required as directed by the 2014 CEQA Statutes and Guidelines.
In addition to state and federal requirements, the Airport and its surrounding environs fall under the jurisdiction of the TRPA. The TRPA planning area encompasses approximately 501 square miles, and contains the incorporated area of the City of South Lake Tahoe and portions of El Dorado County and Placer Counties, California and Washoe and Douglas Counties and the rural area of Carson City, Nevada. Through the adoption of the Regional Plan20 the TRPA establishes environmental quality standards, referred to as thresholds, for their goal of the long-term preservation of Lake Tahoe and its environs.
The environmental discussion that follows focuses on describing the current environmental conditions within the Airport and its environs. Discussion of environmental impacts and associated mitigation is not covered in this section as these
20 The latest Regional Plan was adopted by the TRPA on Dec. 12, 2012. 2-81 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
topics relate to specific actions proposed in the Airport Master Plan Update. Detailed impacts and mitigation as they relate to specific development projects will be addressed during the preparation of the appropriate NEPA, CEQA and TRPA required documents when proposed projects are ripe for environmental review.
Level of Analysis
The level of analysis and documentation that is required under NEPA, CEQA and the TRPA is dependent upon the anticipated impacts associated with a proposed action. For NEPA the level of analysis is broken down into actions that can be categorically excluded, those that require the preparation of an EA and those that require an EIS. Actions that have been determined to be categorically excluded are those that the FAA has found, based on past experience with similar actions, do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. An EA is commonly prepared if the action cannot be categorically excluded, has potential impacts in which mitigation may be necessary, but does not require the level of analysis that is required under an EIS. An EIS is primarily reserved for those proposed projects that are highly controversial and where impacts are likely unavoidable.
Similar to NEPA, actions reviewed under CEQA have various levels of analysis that are required prior to project approval. CEQA provides a list of projects that are considered statutorily21 or categorically22 exempted. Actions that cannot be exempted require preparation of an Initial Study (IS) in which the findings determine if the action has no impacts or in which mitigation could be used to lower impacts below established threshold levels. The preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) would be necessary for projects where impacts are anticipated to be significant.
As noted, the Airport lies within the jurisdiction of the TRPA. The TRPA has its own set of exemptions and approval requirements for proposed actions as they relate to environmental review. Impact categories outlined by the TRPA Initial Environmental Checklist must be evaluated prior to project approval. Depending upon the findings of the checklist additional analysis may be required.
Environmental Overview
The Environmental Overview Map, shown in Figure 2-18, depicts various aspects of the Airport property and its vicinity including environmental features discussed in the following sections. In addition to the following Environmental Considerations section a separate report was prepared that focuses on specific environmental resource categories as they relate to Lake Tahoe Airport (see Environmental Constraints Report within Appendix D). These resources were chosen based on a preliminary review of the airport property and surrounding area and the possibility of potential impacts as they relate to future airport development.
21 Projects that the Legislature has determined should be exempt from CEQA. 22 Projects that have been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment. 2-82 BijouBijou Community Community Park Park *# R! LakeLake Tahoe Tahoe*# CommunityCommunity College College *# *#R! *# MARTIN AVE TAHOE ISLAND DR %9*# LODI AVE Tahoe Valley OSBORNE AVE *# 12TH ST School *# 50 VU89 PATRICIA LN ¤£ ELOISE AVE
13TH ST e JAMES AVE HHeeaavvenly ly V *# *# Va ROGER AVE R! all Cre *# *#*# lleeyy Creeek R! R! *# HELEN AVE Legend *#R! JEAN AVE 10TH ST South Shore CLEMENT ST *# Church Church *# Barton Memorial î Hospital GARDNER ST *# n School FallenFallen Leaf Leaf Hope Lutheran *#*# R! Cold Creek Church LakeLake # v® Hospital * FAIR MEADOW TRL South Tahoe FRS Facilities* High School *# AIRS AQS *# Sierra House School *# RCRA JULIE LN
*# HIGH MEADOW TRL *# R! CERCLIS *#*# r ICIS *# r R! e e
v v i i
R *#*# *# ¤£50 R R! NCDB e e
e e
k k
c c %9 NPDES u u
r r C T C T olld r d Cr r Creeeekk Highway ee MARSHALL TRL pp pp UU Major Road GLENMORE WAY
ANGORA RIDGE RD Rivers
L a k e T a h o e Airport Property Line A i r p o r t Lake Tahoe Blvd
Lake Tahoe Blvd Impaired Water Lake/Pond
kk AIRPORT RD ee Park e rer CC t t u NWI Wetlands u TAHOE MOUNTAIN RD oo r r TT 100 Year Flood Zones
JEWELL RD * FRS-Facility Registry System, AQS-Air Quality System, RCRA-Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, CERCLIS -Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation *# and Liability Information System, ICIS-Integrated Compliance Information System, NCDB-National Compliance Data Base, S S NPDES-National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System a a w w m kk m ee ere i r i l CC ll P P nn o o oo nn xx 1 inch = 2,000 feet d aa SS (when printed on 11"x17" paper) ek rreeek A CC Annggoorraa 0 2,000 4,000 Feet
Date: 10/31/2014
LakeLake TahoeTahoe AirportAirport
GRIZZLY MOUNTAIN DR Washoe Meadows Lake Valley State ¤£50 EnvironmentalEnvironmental OverviewOverview State Park Recreation Area Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, THUNDERBIRD DR IGN, IGP, and the GIS User Community F:\Project\N18 - City of South Lake Tahoe\N18.001.001South Airport Lake Tahoe Master Plan\Planning-study\CADD-GIS\GIS\Projects\EnvMap.mxd FigureFigure 2-182-18 Sources: Basemap information like Roads, City Boundary, Streams, Lakes, etc. are from Esri Base Map online service, Airport Property Line (APL) and RPZ from C&S CAD data, FRS data from epa clip ship application, Impaired waters from EPA, National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) data from US FWS (Fish and Wildlife Service), FloodPlain from FEMA ArcGIS online map service Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
2-84 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
Eighteen environmental categories listed under Appendix A of FAA Order 1050.1E and subcategories outlined in the FAA Environmental Desk Reference for Airport Actions were reviewed in order to determine if proposed airport development would create potential impacts to those resources as they relate to the National Environmental Policy Act. In addition, specific environmental resource categories not covered under NEPA, but required under CEQA or TRPA, were also identified and reviewed.
AIR QUALITY
With regards to airport development, impacts to air quality are commonly associated with an increase or change in aircraft operations as a result of an action undertaken or a short-term increase in fuel consumption by both off-road and on-road vehicles required for construction. To determine potential impacts as they relate to NEPA and the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA) the FAA recently published the Aviation Emissions and Air Quality Handbook23. The handbook provides airport sponsors and NEPA practitioners a step-by-step process in which to evaluate if a proposed project warrants an air quality analysis and to formulate an approach to preparing it, if necessary.
Once the scope of a proposed action has been determined, a review of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) designated attainment status should be reviewed for the area in which the airport is located. According to the EPA Greenbook24, the Airport is not located in an area designated as nonattainment or maintenance for any criteria pollutants, meaning that air pollution levels in these areas are below the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Due to this designation an air quality analysis for proposed airport development projects is not required under NEPA or the CAA. However, it is still recommended that the emissions inventory be prepared and the results of that analysis included in the appropriate NEPA documentation.
The Airport is located within the El Dorado Air Quality Management District (District). In order to address CEQA requirements, the District has adopted Thresholds of Significance25 for air quality impacts, which permitting applicants must show compliance with prior to project initiation. If any of the thresholds are exceeded, then the project is deemed to have a significant air quality impact and an EIR should be prepared.
The Airport is located within the TRPA planning area which has additional air quality thresholds for carbon monoxide, ozone, visibility (regional and sub-regional), nitrate deposition, and odor. If any of the thresholds are exceeded, an environmental impact statement must be prepared in accordance with Chapter 3 of the TRPA Code of Ordinances and the Rules of Procedure.
23 Federal Aviation Administration Office of Environment and Energy, Aviation Emissions and Air Quality Handbook Version 3, July 2014. 24 United States Environmental Protection Agency, The Green Book Nonattainment Areas for Criteria Pollutants, as of July 2, 2014, < http://www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/greenbk/>. 25 El Dorado Air Pollution Control District, CEQA Guide, Chapter 3 – Thresholds of Significance, February 2002. 2-85 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
CLIMATE
Greenhouse gases (GHG) are those that trap heat in the earth's atmosphere. Greenhouse gases such as water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4.), nitrous oxide (N2O), and O3 are both naturally occurring and anthropogenic (man-made). There is presently a broad scientific consensus that human activities that produce greenhouse gases (GHGs) are contributing to changes in the earth’s atmosphere. These GHGs, brought about principally by the combustion of fossil fuels, decomposition of waste materials and release of refrigerants, are said to cause an increase in the earth’s average temperature – a phenomenon that is referred to as the “greenhouse effect.”26
Historically, GHG emissions had not been regulated under the CAA as air pollutants. However, after the United States Supreme Court in 2007 clarified that carbon dioxide (CO2) is an "air pollutant" subject to regulation under the CAA, the EPA embarked on developing requirements and standards for GHG emissions from mobile and stationary sources under the CAA. Although there are no federal standards for aviation-related greenhouse gas emissions, it is well-established that GHG emissions can affect climate.27
The CEQ has indicated that climate should be considered in NEPA analyses. As noted by CEQ, however, “it is not currently useful for the NEPA analysis to attempt to link specific climatological changes, or the environmental impacts thereof, to the particular project or emissions; as such direct linkage is difficult to isolate and to understand.”28 However, in those cases where the proposed action could potentially increase GHG emissions, quantification is warranted.
California has increased focus on the need to control GHG emissions, to mitigate their effects and to prepare for adapting to the effects of global climate change. The following summarizes prominent regulations and initiatives in California that address global climate change and GHGs:
Assembly Bill 32 (Núñez, Chapter 488, Statutes of 2006), the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, signed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger on September 27, 2006, required the CARB to lower GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020—a 25 percent reduction statewide, with mandatory caps for significant emissions sources. AB 32 directed CARB to develop discrete early actions to reduce GHG while also preparing a scoping plan (i.e., the Climate Change Scoping Plan) in order to identify how best to reach the 2020 limit. Senate Bill 97 (Dutton, Chapter 187, Statutes of 2007), signed on August 24, 2007, directed the Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to
26 The phenomenon whereby the earth's atmosphere traps solar radiation, caused by the presence in the atmosphere of gases such as carbon dioxide, water vapor, and methane that allow incoming sunlight to pass through - but absorb heat radiated back from - the earth's surface. 27 See Massachusetts v. E.P.A., 549 U.S. 497, 508-10, 521-23 (2007). 28 Council on Environmental Quality, Draft NEPA Guidance on Consideration of the Effects of Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas Emissions, CEQ (2010)
develop guidelines to mitigate GHG emissions identified through the CEQA review process, including the effects associated with transportation and energy consumption. As directed by SB 97, the Natural Resources Agency adopted Amendments to the CEQA Guidelines for GHG on December 30, 2009. On February 16, 2010, the Office of Administrative Law approved the Amendments, and filed them with the Secretary of State for inclusion in the California Code of Regulations. The Amendments to the CEQA guidelines implementing SB 97 became effective on March 18, 2010.
As part of the City of South Lake Tahoe General Plan Update the following recommendations were made with regard to the reporting of GHG:
Policy NCR‐5.12: Support local, TRPA, and statewide efforts to reduce emission of greenhouse gases linked to climate change. Policy NCR‐5.13: Develop a citywide greenhouse gas emission inventory and establish regular time frames for updating the inventory. Policy NCR‐5.14: Establish a greenhouse gas emission reduction target consistent with AB 32 and SB 37529 reduction efforts. Policy NCR‐5.15: Analyze and mitigate significant increases in carbon emissions during project review pursuant to CEQA.
COASTAL RESOURCES
The Airport is not listed within an U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) identified Coastal Barrier Resource System (CBRS)30. No coastal barriers, coastal zones, significant coastal fish and wildlife habitat, or coral reef ecosystems are located on or directly adjacent to the Airport in which airport development would be proposed.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ACT: SEC. 4(f)
In order to preserve the natural beauty of certain areas and/or types of land, Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation (DOT) Act places restrictions on the use of any significant publicly owned recreational land, public park, recreation area, wildlife and waterfowl refuge or historic site of national, state, or local significance. Proposed actions must be reviewed to determine if they will have a physical31 or constructive32 impact to a Section 4(f) property. No publicly owned land from a public park, recreation area, or wildlife and waterfowl refuge of national, state, or local significance or land from a historic site of national, state, or local significance is known to be located within the airport property.
29 The Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008 (Sustainable Communities Act, SB 375, Chapter 728, Statutes of 2008) supports the State's climate action goals to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions through coordinated transportation and land use planning with the goal of more sustainable communities. 30 Official CBRS Maps, http://www.fws.gov/cbra/Maps/index.html#, October 2014. 31 Physical taking of land. 32 Impairment to the resource created when activities, features, or attributes of the resource that contribute to the resource’s significance or enjoyment are substantially diminished. 2-87 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
There are a number of publicly owned recreational areas located in close proximity to the airport property. The Lake Tahoe Golf Course is located approximately one mile southeast of the Airport and Paradise Tahoe Golf Course is located two miles south of the Airport. The Washoe Meadows State Park is located adjacent to the Lake Tahoe Golf Course, 1.5 miles southeast of the Airport. There are no wildlife or waterfowl refuges within 10 miles of the Airport. According to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife the closest wildlife refuge area, Hope Valley Wildlife Area, is located 12 miles south of the Airport in Alpine County. The Truckee River Wildlife Area is located on the north side of Lake Tahoe, near Truckee, CA and over 20 miles from the Airport. As discussed in the section on Historical, Architectural, Archaeological and Cultural Resources, no archaeological sites within or near the Airport’s boundaries have been determined to be eligible or appear to be eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or the California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR). If future sites are found they would be considered Section 4(f) resources that must be protected.
No parcels of land funded under the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act (L&WCFA) are located within close proximity to the airport. According to information provided by the U.S. Forest Service the nearest parcels are located approximately five miles southwest of the Airport at Fallen Leaf Lake and 12 miles northwest at Sugar Pine Point State Park.
FARMLANDS
According to the United States Department of Agriculture, National Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), portions of the airport property located to the west, along Highway 50, and portions of the property located to the northeast have been designated as farmland of statewide importance33 (see Custom Soil Resource Report for Tahoe Basin Area, California and Nevada within Appendix D).These areas are currently not used for agricultural purposes and are dominated by tree growth. Non- agricultural land uses surround the areas, such as transportation and residential development. Although proposed development within the areas designated as farmland of statewide importance may require additional coordination with the local NRCS field office, impacts are not anticipated due to the existing terrain and surrounding land uses.
LIGHT EMISSIONS AND VISUAL IMPACTS
In order to assess the potential light emissions impacts, proposed airport lighting should be evaluated to determine if it will create an annoyance or interference to the surrounding community. A visual impact occurs when consultation with federal, state, or local agencies, tribes, or the public shows that these effects contrast with existing environments and is considered objectionable. Existing lighting consists of red obstruction lights located along the western tree line adjacent to the Airport, terminal
33 According to the NRCS farmland of statewide importance can be defined as “Land that is of statewide importance for the production of food, feed, fiber, forage, and oil seed crops. Criteria for defining and delineating this land are to be determined by the appropriate state agency or agencies.” 2-88 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
and parking lights (white) that are positioned to illuminate downward, and a green/white light located on the airport beacon.
Proposed lighting would be installed on airport property or directly adjacent to mitigate potential airport obstructions and increase the safety of the aircraft operating environment. Lighting is not anticipated to differ drastically from existing installations. Coordination with local residents and owners of light sensitive sights would occur only if significant upgrades were proposed. Lighting improvements are typically eligible for categorically exclusion under NEPA and categorically exempted under CEQA as minor alterations. Proposed improvements will be reviewed for consistency with the TRPA Scenic Quality Standards, Scenic Quality Improvement Program, and Design Review Guidelines to minimize any visual impacts.
NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENERGY SUPPLY
Development projects may have the potential to change or increase energy requirements or use of consumable natural resources. Once specific projects or overall plans are finalized, the City should evaluate any potential impacts to natural resources and energy supply. Although fuel usage could rise as activity at the Airport increases, the Airport has the capacity to handle the increase and has effectively done so in the past (refer to Chapter 4 – Facility Requirements). No significant impacts to natural resources and energy supply are anticipated.
The City is committed to sustainability and has elected to integrate its principles into this master planning process. This will involve seeking ways to reduce natural resource consumption as the Airport develops.
SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACTS, ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE, AND CHILDREN’S ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH AND SAFETY RISKS
Socioeconomic Impacts
Socioeconomic impacts result from an action causing extensive relocation of residents without sufficient replacement housing unavailable; extensive relocation of community businesses that would cause severe economic hardship for affected communities; disruption of local traffic patterns that substantially reduce the Levels of Service (LOS) of roads serving the Airport and its surrounding communities; or a substantial loss in community tax base. Based on the location of the Airport and surrounding land uses, it is unlikely that relocation of residences or businesses would be necessary due to proposed development. Forecasts (see Chapter 3 - Aviation Demand Forecast) have not shown an increase in operations that would indicate a potential future impact to the LOS on surrounding roads.
2-89 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
Environmental Justice
Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, (February 11, 1994) was issued to ensure that each federal agency conduct its programs, policies, and activities that substantially affect human health or the environment in a manner that does not exclude persons or populations from participation, does not deny benefits, and does not subject to discrimination because of race, color, or national origin. When an action would cause disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority and low-income populations, a significant impact may occur.
Any future potential development of the Airport is not anticipated to have a negative impact on minority or low-income populations.
Children’s Environmental Health and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045 (April 21, 1997) requires federal agencies to ensure that their policies, programs, activities, and standards address disproportionate risks to children that result from environmental health risks and safety risks. Federal agencies must identify and assess potential environmental health risks to children. Potential environmental health risks are defined as risks to health that are attributable to products or substances that the child is likely to come in contact with or ingest, such as air, food, water, soil, and products.
No concerns have been raised concerning potential environmental health risks to children in the area of the Airport.
CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS
Resource-specific impacts resulting from construction and potential permits or certificates that may be required are discussed under the applicable resource categories. Additional construction permits and requirements cannot be identified until specific project alternatives are determined. Limited, short-term effects resulting from construction operations may occur due to any proposed development. Potential impacts may include noise from construction equipment, noise and dust from the delivery of materials, air pollution caused by construction equipment, and water pollution from erosion. However, these impacts are temporary in nature and can be minimized with the incorporation of recommended mitigation measures and best management practices (BMP’s) provided under FAA Advisory Circular 150/5370-10G, Standards for Specifying Construction of Airports.34
FISH, WILDLIFE AND PLANTS
The Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 provides federal protection for species that are facing potential extinction due to the loss of habitat. Consideration of biotic
34 Federal Aviation Administration,
communities and endangered and threatened species is required for all proposals under the ESA. If an agency determines that an action “may affect” a federally protected species, then Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA requires the agency to consult with the USFWS to ensure that the action the authorized, funded, or carried out by the agency is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the federally listed endangered or threatened species, or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. If a species has been listed as a candidate species, Section 7(a)(4) states that each agency must confer with the USFWS.
A field reconnaissance survey was conducted on November 15, 2013, as part of the Lake Tahoe Airport Environmental Constraints Report prepared by ESA Airports (see Environmental Constraints Report within Appendix D). The results of the field survey combined with information provided by the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), USFWS list of Federal Endangered and Threatened Species, and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants were used to identify species of concern that have potential to exist on or in the vicinity of the Airport. Overall, 30 plant or animal species were identified to have potential to occur on or within a quarter-mile of the airport property. Of those 30, six species have been identified with a high potential35 of occurring on or around the Airport. Those species are identified in Table 2-16 along with their current federal or state listed status.
TABLE 2‐16 SPECIES WITH POTENTIAL TO EXIST ON OR AROUND AIRPORT Species Status Birds California Species of Concern, TRPA Northern goshawk Special Interest Species State Fully Protected, TRPA Special Golden eagle Interest Species Sierra Nevada willow flycatcher State listed endangered Waterfowl Species TRPA Special Interest Species Fish Lahonton cutthroat trout Federally listed as threatened Mammals Mule deer TRPA Special Interest Species Source: Lake Tahoe Airport Environmental Constraints Report, ESA Airports February 2014
Projects involving a federal agency or federal funding are required to consult with the USFWS to ensure that project actions will not destroy or adversely modify critical habitat. According to the USFWS, there are no critical habitats or National Wildlife Refuges within the immediate vicinity of the Airport. As noted under Section 4(f) Resources, the closest wildlife refuge area, Hope Valley Wildlife Area, is located 12 miles south of the Airport in Alpine County and the Truckee River Wildlife Area is located on the north side of Lake Tahoe, over 20 miles from the Airport.
35 The study area and/or project site provide ideal habitat conditions for a particular species and/or known populations occur in immediate area or within the potential area of impact. 2-91 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
Because habitats within the study area have the potential to support a number of special-status species, a proposed action could potentially have adverse impacts in which further analysis is required. Dependent upon the level of analysis required and the agency providing funding for the proposed action, coordination should be completed with federal, state and local regulatory agencies to determine if the action would likely jeopardize a species’ continued existence or destroy or adversely affect a species’ critical habitat.
FLOODPLAINS
Floodplains (or flood zones) are defined as "the lowland and relatively flat areas adjoining inland and coastal waters including flood-prone areas of offshore islands, including at a minimum, that area subject to a one percent or greater chance of flooding in any given year."36
The Threshold of Significance (TOS) is exceeded when there is an encroachment on a base floodplain (100-year flood). An encroachment involves:
. A considerable probability of loss of life; . Likely future damage associated with encroachment that could be substantial in cost or extent, including interruption of service or loss of vital transportation facilities; or . A notable adverse impact on natural and beneficial flood plain values.
According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the western and southern portion of the airport property falls within a 100-year flood zone. Additionally, there is a 500-year flood zone and Regulatory Floodway south of the Airport. As a result, there is potential for floodplains to be impacted by potential airport development.
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, POLLUTION PREVENTION, AND SOLID WASTE
The development of the Airport Master Plan Update will consider if alternatives may increase the quantity of solid waste generated by the Airport or affect the manner in which the Airport’s solid waste is collected or disposed. Future airport development is not anticipated to significantly impact solid waste services and any permitting should be limited to temporary construction impacts.
The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1981 (CERCLA) and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) are two important statues that govern actions to construct and operate facilities37. CERCLA provides for cleanup of any release of a hazardous substance (excluding
36 Federal Aviation Administration, Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Section 1216.203.
petroleum) into the environment. RCRA governs the generation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous wastes.
In order to determine the potential for the proposed airport development projects to impact hazardous materials, the EPA NEPAssist38 mapping tool was used. The result of the mapping search showed two RCRA sites within a quarter mile of airport property. These sites are listed in Table 2-17 below.
TABLE 2‐17 RCRA SITES ADJACENT TO TVL Facility Name Facility Address Environmental Interest Type 2037 Highway 50 Five Star Texaco Small Quantity Generator South Lake Tahoe, CA 96150 1526 Emerald Bay Road Small Quantity Generator Sierra Tahoe Ready Mix, Inc. South Lake Tahoe, CA 96150 Transporter Source: NEPAssist, Sept. 2014
Since these sites are not located on airport property future airport development is not likely to have an impact on hazardous waste. In addition to the areas identified above, the Airport’s fuel facility consists of three 30,000-gallon ASTs. There is one AST containing AvGas, one AST contains Jet-A fuel, and one AST once contained automotive gasoline for ground vehicles but is no longer operational. According to the operator there is proper spill containment in place at the facility.
Proposed development that does not involve significantly expanding airport operations and passenger terminal facilities, or creating conditions likely to produce a large increase in solid waste collection, control, or disposal other than short-term waste associated with construction activities would not require additional analysis. However, the areas and issues identified above will be considered in analysis of the alternatives developed in this Airport Master Plan Update to minimize impacts and potential for exposure of hazardous materials and solid waste.
HISTORIC, ARCHITECTURAL, ARCHEOLOGICAL, AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA) requires an initial review of a proposed action’s potential environmental impact area to determine if it includes any properties that are listed in, or eligible for inclusion in, the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The State of California implements the NHPA through its statewide comprehensive cultural resource surveys and preservation programs. The California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP), as an office of the California Department of Parks and Recreation, implements the policies of the NHPA on a statewide level. The OHP also maintains the California Historic Resources Inventory. The State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) is an appointed official who implements historic preservation programs within the state’s jurisdictions.
38 http://nepassisttool.epa.gov/nepassist/entry.aspx 2-93 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
The Archeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974 provides for the survey, recovery, and preservation of significant scientific, prehistoric, historical, archeological, or paleontological data when such data may be destroyed or irreparably lost due to a federal, federally licensed, or federally funded project.
A cultural resources survey was conducted by ESA as part of the Environmental Constraints Report in February 2014 (see Custom Soil Resource Report for Tahoe Basin Area, California and Nevada within Appendix D). The survey found 30 previously recorded cultural resources within a quarter mile of the Airport, and identified six cultural resources within the airport property boundary. Table 2-18 describes the six sites that are located on the airport property.
TABLE 2‐18 RESOURCES IDENTIFIED WITHIN STUDY AREA Name Description NRHP Eligibility Collapsed remains of a former dam Historic Dam Determined ineligible in the Upper Truckee River Collapsed remains of a board‐ Historic Dam formed concrete irrigation dam in Determined ineligible the Upper Truckee River Refuse Widespread historic refuse scatter Not evaluated, presumed deposit/scatter dating to 1910s‐1920s ineligible Not evaluated, presumed Lake House Road Historic period road segment ineligible Not evaluated, presumed STPUD‐12 Historic habitation site and dump ineligible Not evaluated, presumed STPUD‐14 Historic road segment ineligible Source: Lake Tahoe Airport Draft Environmental Constraints Report, February 2014, ESA Airports
Two of the six sites were determined to be ineligible for NRHP status, however four of the six were not evaluated and were assumed to be ineligible. In order to be listed on the NRHP, a facility, object, or site must be older than 50 years and meet certain criteria related to its historical significance. Should improvements or demolition be proposed, further cultural analysis would be required as part of the project-specific environmental compliance.
NOISE
As discussed in Section 2.02-2 Airspace, the Airport has implemented a number of recommended noise abatement procedures that aim to limit operations at certain hours or over certain local geographical areas. These include the following:
1. Runway 36 Departures: Departing aircraft climb straight out for approximately one mile, turn left to 320 degrees, track the center of the meadow until aircraft
2-94 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
has reached the Lake Tahoe shoreline. Pilots advised to avoid flying over populated areas to both the left and the right of flight course.
2. Runway 36 Arrivals: Aircraft advised to land past the Displaced Threshold (located 2,037 feet from the approach end of runway). If possible, maintain a slightly steeper approach and use reduced power setting(s) to assist in reducing engine noise while flying over residential areas.
3. Runway 18 Departures: Departing aircraft advised not to turn left until over 7,500 MSL. Pilots advised to track the Upper Truckee River to the golf course and circle and climb to 7,500 MSL over the golf course. If aircraft is not able to make climb to 7,500 MSL reverse course and return to airport.
4. Runway 18 Arrivals: Pilots advised to descend over the lake and align aircraft to Runway 18 for approaches over the meadow located north of the airfield. If possible, maintain a slightly steeper approach and use reduced power setting(s) to assist in reducing engine noise while flying over residential areas.
A noise analysis was conducted to evaluate the noise impacts associated with aircraft operations at the Airport. Information used to determine present and future noise exposure include aircraft fleet mix, number of operations by time of day, current and predicted flight tracks, and percent distribution of runway use. The noise level descriptor used in the analysis is the community noise equivalent sound level (CNEL), which is the average sound level in A-weighted decibels (frequency-weighted sound levels that correlate with human hearing) for an average day. CNEL is the current noise metric used for transportation noise sources in the State of California and is recognized by the FAA. The noise analysis was completed using the FAA-approved Integrated Noise Model (INM version 7.0D). Figure 2-19 presents the noise contours for existing conditions (2014) at the Airport.
2-95 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
2-96 LakeLake Tahoe Tahoe CommunityCommunity College College
Tahoe Valley SIERRA School SIERRA TRACTTRACT VU89 ¤£50
avveen HHeea nlly V a lllleeyy CCrreeeek Legend South Shore Church î Church Barton Memorial Hospital School Hope Lutheran Cold Creek n Church v® Hospital South Tahoe Freeway High School Sierra House Highway School Major Road TAHOETAHOE Rivers VALLEYVALLEY MONTGOMERYMONTGOMERY Airport Property Line r r ESTATES e ESTATES e
v v i i
R ¤£50 R Lake/Pond e e
e e
k k
c c Swamp/Marsh
u u
r r C T C T olld Land Use r d Cr r Creeeek ee k pp pp UU Conservation Mixed-Use
L a k e T a h o e Recreation A i r p o r t Lake Tahoe Blvd Lake Tahoe Blvd Residential PIONEERPIONEER Backcountry kk TRAILTRAIL ee e Noise Contours rer CC t t uu 60 CNEL oo r r TT 65 CNEL 70 CNEL
S S a a w w m kk m ee ere i r i l CC ll P P nn o o oo nn xx 1 inch = 2,000 feet d aa SS (when printed on 11"x17" paper) ek rreeek A CC Annggoorraa 0 2,000 4,000 Feet NN . . U U P P P P E E R R Date: 10/31/2014 TRUCKEETRUCKEE
COUNTRYCOUNTRY CLUBCLUB LakeLake TahoeTahoe AirportAirport ESTATESESTATES Washoe Meadows Lake Valley State NoiseNoise ContoursContours State Park Recreation Area ¤£50 Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, and the GIS User Community F:\Project\N18 - City of South Lake Tahoe\N18.001.001South Airport Lake Tahoe Master Plan\Planning-study\CADD-GIS\GIS\Projects\LandUse_11x17.mxd FigureFigure 2-192-19 Sources: Basemap information like Roads, City Boundary, Streams, Lakes, etc. are from Esri Base Map online service, Land Use data from http://gis.trpa.org/datadownloader/, Airport Property Line (APL) from C&S CAD data Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
2-98 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
Per FAA guidance, the following noise exposure levels were selected for review: CNEL 60 dB, CNEL 65 dB, and CNEL 70 dB. CNEL values are indications of the effect that aircraft noise at these levels has on people living and working in these areas, and are not intended but can be used as guidelines for land use decisions by local authorities. All land uses within areas below CNEL 65 are considered compatible with airport operations. The CNEL 65 noise contour does not extend off the airport property under the 2014 existing conditions into areas (residential land uses) that could generate land use compatibility impacts as identified by 14 CFR Part 150 guidelines. The noise contours should be updated periodically based on any anticipated changes to the number of aircraft operations, aircraft fleet mix, or changes to runway use.
In addition to requirements set forth under NEPA and CEQA, the TRPA has established single-event noise thresholds that were established under the 1992 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Settlement Agreement (see page 11 of the Environmental Constraints Report within Appendix D).
LAND USE COMPATIBILITY
The compatibility of existing and planned land uses in the vicinity of an airport is typically associated with the extent of noise impacts related to that airport. Airport compatible land uses encompass those uses that can coexist with a nearby airport without either constraining the safe and efficient operation of the airport or exposing people living or working nearby to unacceptable levels of noise or hazards. As noted under Section 2.03-2 Land Use and Zoning, existing land use restrictions are established under the Lake Tahoe Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The latest revision of the plan occurred in 2007 and the City plans to again revise it upon the adoption of the Airport Master Plan. Any future development will need to be in compliance with the revised ALUCP.
SECONDARY (INDUCED) IMPACTS
FAA guidance requires consideration of the potential for induced or secondary impacts on surrounding communities associated with proposed airport actions. The FAA requires specific analysis of social impacts associated with potential disruptions such as shifts in patterns of population movement and growth; public service demands; and changes in business and economic activity to the extent influenced by the airport development.
WATER QUALITY
Federal agencies are required to comply with the Clean Water Act (CWA) for any action that may affect water quality, including the control of any discharge into surface or ground water and the prevention or minimization of loss of wetlands. Agencies must also comply with the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act if the proposed action impounds, diverts, drains, controls, or otherwise modifies the waters of any stream or other water body. Section 1424(e) of the Safe Drinking Water Act requires consultation
2-99 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
with the EPA if a proposed action has the potential to contaminate an aquifer designated by the EPA as a sole or principal source of drinking water for the area.
The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act is the primary statute covering the quality of waters in California. The act sets out specific water quality provisions and discharge requirements regulating the discharge of waste within any region that could affect the quality of state waters. Under the act, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) has ultimate authority over state water rights and water quality policy. The nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs) are responsible for the oversight of water quality on a day-to-day basis at the local/regional level, including the preparation and periodic updating of Basin Plans that identify existing and potential beneficial uses for specific water bodies.
As shown on Figure 2-18, the nearest surface water is the Upper Truckee River and borders the eastern edge of the Airport property. The Upper Truckee River is part of the Lake Tahoe basin, which is concerned with long term decline in lake clarity and an increase in algal growth. According to EPA published information39, the segment of the river that is adjacent to the airport is considered impaired by the EPA due to phosphorous and iron levels. The EPA also indicates that there are several monitoring wells operated by the EPA’s Storage and Retrieval Program (STORET) as well as the USGS National Water Information System (NWIS) within two miles of the airport property.
Proposed development at the Airport could potentially impact water quality due to erosion or contaminant exposure from construction. Proposed actions would be required to adhere to the best management practices (BMPs) identified in the Airport’s current Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) (WDID No. 6A09I000036) and the current SWPPP (City of South Lake Tahoe, 2010). The SWPPP identifies areas that may potentially be impacted by pollution from water runoff where aircraft operations including maintenance, fuel services and general activity may occur. Prior to any airport development action the City will also need to obtain and act in compliance with a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) operating permit. The NPDES permit should ensure that storm water pollution prevention practices and BMPs are employed at the Airport to reduce potential impacts to water quality.
While the NEPAssist website indicates that there are no sole source aquifers within the airport property limits, a review of the USGS Scientific Investigations Map 3063 titled Hydrogeology of the Lake Tahoe Basin40 indicates that portions of the airport lie within the boundaries of the South Lake Tahoe/Stateline Aquifer. This has not been identified by the USEPA as a sole source aquifer.
39 Environmental Protection Agency,
WETLANDS
Wetlands are defined in Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands, as "those areas that are inundated by surface or ground water with a frequency sufficient to support...a prevalence of vegetative or aquatic life that requires saturated or seasonally saturated soil conditions for growth and reproduction. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas...”
As shown on Figure 2-18, the wetland and riparian habitats that are supported by the Upper Truckee River are potentially jurisdictional. In addition, the drainage ditch that is located along the western edge of the taxiway also supports potentially jurisdictional wetlands including montane riparian and freshwater emergent wetlands. Other potentially jurisdictional features within the airport property include wetland habitats such as wet meadows, freshwater emergent wetlands, and montane riparian. A formal wetland delineation would need to be conducted for any proposed action project located on or in close proximity to the wetland and riparian habitats identified.
ADDITIONAL IMPACT CATEGORIES
The following list details the TRPA impact categories that require review that were not covered by NEPA and CEQA guidance. These categories are presented in the 2011 Tahoe Regional Planning Agency Threshold Evaluation Report41 and the TRPA Initial Environmental Checklist for Determination of Environmental Impact42:
Land: Impacts relating to the compaction or covering of soil, change in topography or ground surface relief features of a site, unstable soil conditions, changes in undisturbed soil or native geologic substructures, continuation of or increase in wind or water erosion of soils, changes in deposition or erosion of beach sand that may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of a lake, exposure of people or property to geologic hazards.
Risk of Upset: Projects involving a risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances, or interference with an emergency evacuation plan.
Transportation/Circulation: Projects resulting in the generation of vehicle trips; changes to existing parking facilities; an increased demand for more parking or substantial impact on existing transportation systems; alterations to present patterns of circulation/movement of people and/or goods; alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic; or increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians.
41 Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, 2011 Threshold Evaluation Report,
Public Services: Unplanned impacts to fire protection, police protection, schools, parks or recreational facilities, maintenance of public facilities including roads, and other governmental services.
Utilities: Projects that result in unplanned improvements for power and natural gas, communication systems, water capacity, sewage treatment capacity, storm water drainage, solid waste and disposal.
Recreation: Impacts relating to the creation of additional demand for recreation facilities; additional recreation capacity; creates conflict between recreation uses; or results in a decrease or loss of public access to any lake, water way or public lands.
ENVIRONMENTAL OVERVIEW SUMMARY
This section has provided a brief overview of existing environmental conditions at the Airport. In the evaluation of development alternatives, an assessment will be made as to the potential impact on these categories. The evaluation of alternatives is based on a number of factors. Environmental considerations are weighed as completely and fairly as non-environmental considerations. The objective in developing the Airport Layout Plan is to enhance environmental quality or minimize environmental impacts while fulfilling the FAA's principal mission to provide for the safety of aircraft operations.
2-102 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
2.09 Sustainability Baseline Assessment
As discussed, the City is committed to sustainability and has elected to integrate its principles into the master planning process. Before targets can be set, it is essential to understand where the Airport stands today. This baseline assessment will focus on establishing a definition of sustainability tailored to Lake Tahoe Airport and identifying initiatives that are already in place.
2.09-1 Defining Sustainability
The City has been intentional about its community engagement in the master planning process in order to obtain feedback and recommendations on the direction of the Airport. Since the Airport is part of a much larger system and can serve the entire community, they were invited to help craft a definition of sustainability that considers the facility and community’s unique needs and character. Following a public meeting that included a brief introduction to the topic, the attendees (approximately 115 individuals in total) were invited to provide recommendations, concerns, and general comments on the board photographed below that would be considered in developing the definition. The board was purposely designed to prompt community members to consider the four elements of airport sustainability (EONS) in order to show the interrelations of the different areas.
FIGURE 2‐20 SUSTAINABILITY INPUT
2-103 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
Feedback was obtained during the first public meeting and during the inventory collection phase and included the following (some paraphrasing):
1. Bigger jets to bring in more 10. Pursue LEED certification. money and to hold more people 11. More instrument approaches. so there are less cars. 12. Airplanes compatible with the 2. Why do taxpayers have to fund environment – size and noise the Airport? The Airport should control. be self-sufficient. 13. Connect to existing 3. Consider economic impacts of bike/pedestrian network and/or Airport on all recreation. other transportation means for 4. Hold more airshows. safe access to the Airport. 5. Enforce time flight restrictions. 14. Ensure land use compatibility 6. Economic sustainability of and address aircraft noise. Airport is different than 15. Remove the runway and restore “sustainable communities”. the wetland. 7. Be consistent with the Airport 16. Take motorized boats off of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan lake to offset the planes. (CLUP), which affects City 17. What are the Greenhouse Gases zoning in landing/takeoff areas. (GHGs) from aircraft? 8. Need to include environmental 18. Make good use of limited advantages and disadvantages in resources. economic study. 19. Consider how many people will 9. Alternatives should include drive versus use Reno reduced scope and closure. International Airport, etc.
Although there are some diverging opinions, the overwhelming themes within each of the four elements of EONS appear to be:
Economic Viability = Self-sufficiency is important for the Airport. Operational Efficiency = There is a need for better aircraft capabilities and increased connectivity with the rest of the transportation system including alternative transportation modes. Natural Resource Conservation = While airport closure was a prevalent discussion topic, specific environmental concerns appear to be wetlands, air quality and noise. Social Responsibility = Land use compatibility is key specifically as it relates to noise. Additionally, the Airport has potential to provide community benefits such as more airshows and bike paths.
These definitions specific to Lake Tahoe Airport will assist in the goal-setting process (see Facility Requirements section).
2-104 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
2.09-2 Current Initiatives
There are a number of sustainability initiatives in place at the Airport including both City and tenant-led efforts.
CITY OF SOUTH LAKE TAHOE
City-led initiatives involving or at the Airport include the following:
The Airport narrowed the runway width 50 feet in 2008 as 25 feet was repaved with porous asphalt, which enables 100 percent of rainwater runoff to seep into the ground instead of flowing into the Upper Truckee river carrying sediment, and 25 feet was returned to the environment as restored SEZ. The City and Airport continue to play a significant role in the Upper Truckee River restoration program by partnering with the California Tahoe Conservancy (CTC) and Forest Service in their efforts to increase lake clarity. The Tahoe Transportation District (TTD) installed a CNG station in the vehicle parking lot that is available to the public and public transportation/buses. There are three City-owned fleet vehicles that operate on CNG, though none are devoted to the Airport. Currently, the City mows the Airport once a year. This limited schedule reduces air emissions, energy needs, and increases the operational efficiency of the Airport. The City/Airport allows Clean Tahoe to park two of their trucks at the Airport (in the secured area) for free. As previously mentioned, Clean Tahoe is a non- profit organization focused on improving the aesthetic character of the area through proper litter and trash management and raising awareness. As previously discussed, the City currently recycles paper and cans at the Airport. They also recycle used aircraft oil. The Airport practices material reuse with its removed soils and grinds up asphalt in construction projects. Construction and demolition materials are stored south of the new hangar complex for potential reuse opportunities. Green waste (e.g., shrubs, mowings, etc. generated through landscape activities) is taken to South Tahoe Refuse for recycling. Within the terminal building, there are several lights on sensors that turn off automatically. Additionally, the Airport primarily uses florescent bulbs in its offices, which are more energy-efficient than incandescent lights. The City does have a procurement policy but there are no specific sustainability elements incorporated. The Airport provides space for many community events including the Fire Fest, Air Show, voting, Health Days (flu shots), etc. The City has developed noise abatement procedures as discussed in Section 2.02-2 to enhance land use compatibility with the surrounding community and comply with TRPA regulations.
2-105 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
AIRPORT TENANTS
In order to understand the ongoing or planned sustainability efforts led by the tenants of the Airport, a brief online survey was conducted. Below is a summary of the results (see Tenant Survey Results in Appendix E). The following tenants responded to this survey:
Mountain West Aviation (the single FBO at the Airport) Flight Deck Restaurant (the single restaurant at the Airport) Reno Tahoe Helicopters CalSTAR
The following sections are representative of these tenants only.
Waste Management and Recycling
Half of the survey respondents currently practice recycling at the Airport. The restaurant recycles both cardboard and fryer oil that is captured in an oil/water separator and emptied quarterly. The FBO currently manages its own waste (separately from the Airport) and recycles all acceptable materials including but not limited to:
Material Means of Recycling Plastics Aluminum Glass Brought to transfer station Cardboard (CRV redemption if Old tires applicable) Batteries Steel Waste oil Purchased by Clearwater Bad aviation fuel Environmental Used crankcase oil Management of Nevada
Air Quality
The FBO strives to reduce air quality impacts through use of alternative fuels for vehicle transportation and replacement of old, inefficient vehicles and equipment. Their efforts include the following vehicle/equipment conversions:
Replaced two old, gasoline-powered fuel trucks with EPA compliant diesel trucks. Replaced an old engine with new EPA-compliant engine. Replaced the majority of its gasoline-powered equipment with electric or low- gas/low-emission equipment.
2-106 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
The FBO encourages alternative modes of transportation including bicycles. According to the survey results, approximately 50 percent of their employees commute via bicycle during the summer months. (During winter, all employees arrive by single- occupancy vehicle.) In addition, six of the FBO’s nine fleet The FBO encourages transportation to and from the Airport by bicycle. Their fleet of bicycles (pictured) is available to patrons free of vehicles are run on alternative charge. fuels, which are used seasonally.
CalSTAR also reported that two of its 14 employees use hybrid gasoline/electric vehicles and one of its two fleet vehicles is powered by CNG.
Community Outreach
Two of the major airport tenants are involved in community outreach efforts as described below:
FBO CalSTAR
•Hosts luncheons at Airport for •Provide emergency services to special groups community (maintain equipment • Participates in EAA Young Eagles readiness and continuous training) program flying local kids on a •Provide training to local fire, EMS, volunteer basis law enforcement, and other pre‐ •Invites members of the community hospital providers to visit the Airport and take an • Assist with El Dorado County SAR introductory flight team at no cost to community • Participation in Fire Fest, Lake Tahoe Airshow, Ski Safety Week, Avalanche Dog Training, and Barton Hospitals job shadowing
Additional information regarding emergency services provided by the Airport’s tenants is included in Section 2.01-7.
2-107 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
2.10 Stakeholder Feedback
In order to solicit feedback from the community two public meetings and one direct presentation to the City Council have been completed to date. The first public meeting was held on February 13, 2014 at the Airport. The meeting included a presentation, question and answer session, and an open workshop that included project boards and a chance for the public to again ask questions regarding the Airport Master Plan. The meeting focused on the steps of the master plan process and asked for feedback on specific areas in which the plan should focus on. Responses to comments and questions received from the public at and after the meeting were provided on the project website (see Appendix G). The second public meeting was held on May 29, 2014 in a format similar to the first public meeting. The focus of the meeting was to provide the public an update on the results of the aviation demand forecast, which included an analysis on the return of commercial service flights to Lake Tahoe Airport. After soliciting feedback from the public, a City Council meeting was held on August 5, 2014 to discuss the outcome of the commercial service analysis and to make a recommendation on how the Airport Master Plan should proceed.
As noted, the public meetings included a presentation, question and answer session, and an open public workshop. The meetings were advertised in the local paper, radio, and television. Emails and postcards were also sent to those that live in close proximity to the Airport, those that live in the flight paths and those that signed up to receive updates on the planning process.
Presentation and associated materials can be found in Appendix G.
Key information was gathered from the meetings and primarily focused on the following themes:
Master plan process – Is the master plan addressing the right things? Airport benefit – The Airport can be considered a vital regional asset for transportation and emergency services. How does the Airport benefit the community? Economic benefit/strain – Is the Airport being fully used and are there better uses for the airport property? What is the return on investment from the Airport and can revenues be increased to offset costs to the taxpayer? Airport closure – Should airport closure or reduction in size be considered? Environmental impacts – What are the environmental impacts of the airport? Can noise impacts be reduced to the community? Commercial service – Is the return of commercial service flights desired by the community and is a subsidy to the airlines needed? Safety – What can be done to improve the safety of the airport?
2-108 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
2.11 Key Issues
Key issues can be described as airport development issues that the master plan process will review and attempt to resolve. Key issues and needs, summarized below, were identified through an inventory of existing conditions, environmental overview, and coordination with airport management, users and other stakeholders:
Airside
. Airport design standard for an ARC C-III are not met. These include: o Runway centerline to taxiway centerline separation. o Approach and Departure RPZs for Runway 18 and 36 would extend onto privately owned land (Lake Tahoe currently holds an avigation easement over only portions of this area). . Taxiway configuration for Taxiway E and F does not meet new FAA design standards as the pilot is allowed more than three directional decision options. . Taxiway configuration of Taxiway H needs to be re-examined to determine if its width can meet FAA design standards or if additional signage is needed to limit the aircraft types that use it. . Taxiway nomenclature should follow FAA Engineering Brief 89, Taxiway Nomenclature Convention. . Density altitude indicators are recommended for pilot safety information. . Runway length is deficient for large aircraft (12,500 pounds to 60,000 pounds) at 90 percent useful load or greater. . Upgrade to existing navigational aids needed.
Airspace
. Many obstructions (trees, terrain and manmade structures) are identified within the navigable airspace surrounding the Airport. . Lack of instrument approach procedure to Runway 36. . Current visibility minimum are in excess of three miles.
Landside
. Development constraints due to environmental compliance and surrounding topography. . Some airport buildings are in poor condition (excluding the t-hangar facility, which is in fair to poor condition); several tenants use non-permanent trailers. . The existing fuel facility includes one 10,000 gallon tank that is not used or property permitted for use. . No self-service fuel available for aircraft. . The existing vehicle parking lot pavement is in poor condition. . Safety concerns related to Airport entrance road location and signage. . Highest and best use of available apron space. . Lack of usable airport perimeter road.
2-109 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
. Plan or removal of non-functional Airport Traffic Control Tower (ATCT). . Large aircraft storage is not available. . The Airport would benefit from increased FBO maintenance services for based and transient aircraft.
Environmental
. Air Quality – compliance with TRPA established Air Quality Threshold Standards. . Fish, Wildlife and Plants – the Airport should be reviewed for the presence of suitable habitat for federal, state and local protected species. If habitats are present, it may be necessary to determine if species are present. . Floodplains – according to the FEMA, the western and southern portion of the airport property falls within a 100-year flood zone. Additionally, there is a 500- year flood zone and Regulatory Floodway south of the Airport. . Land Use Compatibility/Noise – potential for conflict between airport operations and non-compatible land uses. . Land Coverage – development constraints due to TRPA land coverage requirements. . Water Quality – a surface waterbody (Upper Truckee River) is located on east side of Airport Property and is designated as a Stream Environmental Zone (SEZ) in which development is not allowed. . Wetlands - wetlands are present at several locations on Airport property or adjacent. . Department of Transportation Act, Section 4(f) – potential constructive impacts to surrounding public golf courses and parks. . Historical, Architectural, Archeological, and Cultural Resources – records research indicated previously recorded cultural resources within a quarter mile of the Airport, and six cultural resources identified within the airport property boundary (see Table 2-18). Exact location of artifacts were not provided. . Hazardous Material and Solid Waste Impacts - RCRA-regulated sites adjacent to the Airport . Construction Impacts - potential for construction related impacts associated with future development.
Other Concerns
. Community perception of Airport as a valuable asset. . Reintroduction of commercial service operations. . Closure of airport. . Lack of airport operations and management staff. . Economic cost to operate the Airport by the City.
2-110 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
CHAPTER 3 - FORECASTS OF AVIATION DEMAND
Forecasts of aviation demand are a key element in any airport planning project. Demand forecasts, based upon the desires and needs of the service area, provide a basis for determining the type, size and timing of aviation facility development and a platform upon which this master planning study will be based. Consequently, these forecasts influence all phases of the planning process.
Forecasts of Lake Tahoe Airport’s future aviation activity and demand were developed for the planning period extending through 2033 using various data sources including the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA); Woods & Poole Economics, Inc.; City of South Lake Tahoe; General Aviation Manufacturers Association; and the Lake Tahoe Visitors Authority. The forecast was developed by The Boyd Group based on the best practice standards as defined in FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 150-5070-6B, Airport Master Plans. Documentation of the forecasting effort can be found in Appendix F. 3.01 Future Operational Role of the Airport
Lake Tahoe Airport currently serves General Aviation (GA) activities including emergency services, private use, and air taxi operations. Up until 2001, the Airport also offered commercial service (and still maintains its Part 139 Certification). As part of this forecasting effort, the potential for reinstating commercial service was evaluated. Based on current trends within the airline industry and the character and location of the Airport, it was concluded that there is low potential (without significant subsidies) for a commercial airline entering this market within the planning period. 3.02 General Aviation Demand Forecast
Based on the analysis of the potential for commercial service, the forecasting effort focused primarily on GA activity.
3.02-1 Methodology
Several methodologies outlined in FAA AC 150-5070-6B, Airport Master Plans, were evaluated in consideration of the information available and nature of the Airport. A trend analysis and extrapolation methodology combined with regression analysis was selected for the forecast development. This approach considers key historical data that may affect future growth opportunities within South Lake Tahoe’s leisure and tourism industry while addressing the unique and sometimes volatile nature of the aviation market. Currently, over 75 percent of all traffic at the Airport is associated with itinerant traffic or traffic originating elsewhere with Lake Tahoe Airport as a destination, thus supporting the selection of this methodology.
3-1 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
3.02-2 Aviation Demand Forecast
Forecasts of aviation demand can be developed for a number of elements or parameters. The key demand elements for the Airport include:
. Based aircraft . Aviation activity . Peak period activity
BASED AIRCRAFT
Despite the decline over the past two decades (approximately 45 percent since 1990), the number of based aircraft at the Airport is anticipated to grow throughout the planning period based on FAA projections for the GA fleet; however, the forecast reflects a lag in growth due to the leisure dynamic of the South Lake Tahoe market (according to the FAA, business usage of GA aircraft will increase at a faster rate than personal or recreational use). Growth at Lake Tahoe Airport will be led by the larger, more expensive and sophisticated aircraft including multi-engine aircraft consistent with the FAA Aerospace Forecast for 2013 – 2033. Table 3-1 depicts the resultant forecast of based aircraft by type.
TABLE 3‐1 FORECAST OF BASED AIRCRAFT Aircraft Type 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Single‐Engine 22 25 27 29 32 Multi‐Engine 3 3 4 6 7 Jet 0 0 0 0 1 Helicopter 3 4 4 5 5 Total 28 32 35 40 45 Source: Boyd Group International
AVIATION ACTIVITY
An aircraft operation is a measure of activity that is defined as either a takeoff or a landing; a takeoff and a landing represent two operations. Based on the improving economy, continued marketing efforts of the South Lake Tahoe community, and the forecasted growth of the aviation industry, the number of operations at Lake Tahoe Airport is projected to increase by approximately 17.9 percent through 2023. It is anticipated that growth will continue but at a slower rate through the long-term planning periods after the initial surge subsides.
The annual operations forecast is depicted on Figure 3-1.
3-2 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
FIGURE 3‐1 LAKE TAHOE AIPORT AVIATION ACTIVITY FORECASTS 32,000
30,000
28,000
26,000 Annual Operations 24,000
22,000
20,000 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023 2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 Year Source: Boyd Group International
Aviation activity at Lake Tahoe Airport is divided among four types:
. Local Operations: Originate at the Airport and remain within its airspace. . Itinerant Operations: Originate elsewhere and arrive at the Airport or originate at the Airport and depart to other destinations. . Air Taxi Operations: These activities involve GA aircraft for hire, commonly known as charter aircraft. . Other: Operations that do not fall into the three categories provided above (typically related to military activity or emergency services).
Currently, activity at Lake Tahoe Airport is dominated by itinerant operations. A breakdown of the operations forecast by type is provided below in Table 3-2.
3-3 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
TABLE 3‐2 FORECAST OF OPERATIONS BY TYPE Year Local Itinerant Air Taxi Other Total Operations 2013 3,210 18,555 1,300 475 23,540 2018 4,650 21,330 1,295 88 27,363 2023 4,695 21,650 1,320 110 27,775 2033 4,830 23,120 1,570 125 29,645 Source: Boyd Group International
PEAK PERIOD ACTIVITY FORECAST
Since many of the Airport's facility needs are related to the levels of activity during peak periods, forecasts were developed for peak month and peak hour operations. The peak period operations were calculated using the following methodology:
. Peak Month Operations: This level of activity is defined as the calendar month when peak aircraft operations occur. The forecast developed by Boyd Group International included a monthly breakdown, which showed that during the peak month operations typically represent approximately 14 percent of the annual total. . Design Day Operations: This level of operations is defined as the average day within the peak month (ADPM). Design Day Operations = Peak Month Operations/30. . Design Hour Operations: This level of activity is defined as the peak hour within the ADPM. Typically these operations will range between 10 and 15 percent of the ADPM operations. Therefore, 12.5 percent was used for this calculation. Design Hour Operations = ADPM Operations x 0.125.
Table 3-3 presents the forecast of peaking characteristics for activity at Lake Tahoe Airport.
TABLE 3‐3 PEAKING FORECAST Year Total Operations Peak Month ADPM Peak Hour of ADPM 2013 23,540 3,278 109 14 2018 27,363 3,811 127 16 2023 27,775 3,867 129 16 2033 29,645 4,064 135 17 Source: Boyd Group International and C&S Engineers, Inc.
3-4 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
3.03 Demand Forecast Summary
A comprehensive summary of the aviation demand forecast for Lake Tahoe Airport is provided in Table 3-4.
TABLE 3‐4 AIRPORT DEMAND FORECAST SUMMARY Forecast Parameter 2013 2018 2023 2033 Based Aircraft* 30 34 38 48 Annual Operations Local 3,210 4,650 4,695 4,830 Itinerant 18,555 21,330 21,650 23,120 Air Taxi 1,300 1,295 1,320 1,570 Other 475 88 110 125 TOTAL Operations 23,540 27,363 27,775 29,645 Peak Activity Peak Month Operations 3,278 3,811 3,867 4,064 Average Day of Peak 109 127 129 135 Month (ADPM) Peak Hour of ADPM 14 16 16 17 *Some assumptions made by C&S to align Boyd Group International’s based aircraft forecast with applicable forecast years Source: Boyd Group International and C&S Engineers, Inc. 3.04 Comparison with FAA Terminal Area Forecast
Table 3-5 presents a comparison between the preferred forecast for Lake Tahoe Airport as developed herein and the FAA TAF. As shown, the forecast documented herein does not vary more than 10 percent from the TAF.
TABLE 3‐5 COMPARISON WITH FAA TAF Year Airport Forecast TAF % Difference from TAF Base year = 2013 23,540 24,005 ‐1.96% Base year + 5 years = 2018 27,363 25,449 7.25% Base year + 10 years = 2023 27,775 26,837 3.44% Base year + 20 years = 2033 29,645 29,879 ‐0.79% Source: 2013 FAA Terminal Area Forecast and C&S Engineers, Inc.
3-5 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
3.05 Design Aircraft
The selection of appropriate FAA airport design criteria is based upon the critical or design aircraft that will be using an airport. The design aircraft is defined by the FAA as the most demanding aircraft that performs or is projected to perform at least 500 annual operations at the facility. This can be recognized as a specific aircraft model or composite of similar aircraft models that currently or are forecasted to operate at the facility.
In order to determine the critical aircraft for Lake Tahoe Airport, aviation activity levels and the types of aircraft operating at the Airport shall be evaluated. Currently, no on- Airport entities track operations by aircraft type or registration (N-number). Therefore, FlightWise data and landing fee reports (see Appendix A) were reviewed and compared (landing fee reports also lack specific aircraft types but report maximum aircraft landing weights). Based on FlightWise data for the period of May 2012 through May 2013 there were a total of 1,972 operations with filed flight plans to and from the Airport. Of those operations, approximately 60 percent were conducted by jet aircraft. The remaining 40 percent were made up of both single-engine and twin-engine turboprop aircraft. According to the FlightWise data, the most frequently operated and demanding jet aircraft at the Airport is the Gulfstream V, which individually accounted for 10 percent of the jet operations that filed flight plans. Furthermore, landing fee reports from the 2012 and 2013 calendar years indicated that operations associated with the Gulfstream V made up a significant percentage (greater than six percent) of the fleet mix when compared to other aircraft types operating at the Airport. The landing fee report also indicated that the number of operations by the Gulfstream V more than doubled from 2012 to 2013.
Although the number of aircraft operations by the Gulfstream V does not meet the FAA-defined threshold for selection of a design aircraft (exceeding 500 annual itinerant operations), based on projected demand and the recent increase in annual operations the Gulfstream V was selected as the future design aircraft. Currently, the number of operations by a composite of B-II aircraft meets the FAA-defined threshold and is therefore selected as the existing design family of aircraft. In order to address specific FAA design standards the Dassault Falcon 2000 was chosen as the representative aircraft for the B-II design family of aircraft as it is designated as a large aircraft (exceeding 12,500 lbs. Maximum Takeoff Weight [MTOW]) and is considered the most demanding aircraft of the current B-II fleet operating at the Airport.
AIRCRAFT CHARACTERISTICS
The B-II family of aircraft consists of a number of aircraft types commonly flown at the Airport including the Cessna 525 Citation, Beechcraft Super King Air 200, and Dassault Falcon 2000. This family of aircraft is categorized as having approach speeds
3-6 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I of 91 knots or more but less than 121 knots, wingspans up to 49 feet but less than 79 feet, and tail heights up to 30 feet but less than 45 feet.
The Gulfstream V has a wingspan of 93.50 feet, a tail height of 25.80 feet, a MTOW of 90,500 pounds, and an approach speed of 140 knots. Thus, for design purposes, the Gulfstream V is categorized as a member of Aircraft Approach Category C (approach speeds 121 knots or more but less than 141 knots) and Airplane Design Group III (aircraft with wingspans up to 79 feet but less than 118 feet and tail heights up to 30 feet but less than 45 feet).
3-7 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
CHAPTER 4 - FACILITY REQUIREMENTS AND SUSTAINABILITY OPPORTUNITIES
The requirements for development of airport facilities to accommodate the forecasted demand levels are presented in this chapter. The ability for the Airport to accommodate the demand is based upon the existing capacity of each functional area compared to the forecasted demand. If this analysis indicates a deficit, additional facilities are then necessary to meet the demand.
Capacity of existing facilities at the Airport and requirements to meet projected demand are presented for the various airport functional areas shown below:
Airfield and Airspace General Aviation Support Facilities Ground Access, Circulation, and Parking Utilities
In addition, sustainability goals and potential opportunities have been identified. 4.01 Airfield Capacity
Airfield capacity is a measure of terminal area airspace and airfield saturation. It is defined as the maximum rate at which aircraft can arrive and depart an airfield with an acceptable level of delay. Measures of capacity include the following:
. Annual Service Volume: The annual capacity or a maximum level of annual aircraft operations that can be accommodated on the runway system with an acceptable level of delay. . Hourly Capacity of Runway: The maximum number of aircraft operations that can take place on the runway system in one hour.
A variety of techniques have been developed for the analysis of airfield capacity. The current technique accepted by the FAA is described in the FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5060-5, Airport Capacity and Delay. The Airport Capacity and Delay Model (ACDM) prescribed in the AC uses the following inputs to derive an estimated airport capacity:
. Airfield layout and runway use . Meteorological conditions . Navigational aids . Aircraft operational fleet mix . Touch-and-Go operations.
4-1 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
This level of analysis was not required to determine if airfield capacity would be a planning issue for this Master Plan Study. Using an estimating technique based on general characteristics compared to forecasts of aviation activity shows a wide variance that clearly demonstrates adequate airfield capacity at the Airport. Figure 4-1 shows the high and low estimates for Annual Service Volume and Hourly VFR and IFR Capacity, described further below, based on an airport’s general operating characteristics including number and configuration of runways and fleet mix operating at the airport.
FIGURE 4‐1 ANNUAL SERVICE VOLUME
Source: FAA AC 150/5060-5 Change 2, December 1, 1995
4-2 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
4.01-2 Annual Service Volume
An airport's Annual Service Volume (ASV) has been defined by the FAA as "a reasonable estimate of an airport's annual capacity. It accounts for differences in runway use, aircraft mix, weather conditions, etc., that would be encountered over a year's time." Therefore, ASV is a function of the hourly capacity of the airfield and the annual, daily, and hourly demands placed upon it. ASV is estimated by multiplying the daily and hourly operation ratios by a weighted hourly capacity.
The Airport’s ASV is estimated to be between 195,000 and 240,000 aircraft operations. Given the highest forecasted annual demand of 29,645 operations, it is evident that adequate capacity to meet forecasted demand exists at TVL. Table 4-1 shows the relationship of ASV to forecasted demand.
TABLE 4‐1 ANNUAL SERVICE VOLUME SUMMARY
Annual Service Volume1 Annual Annual (000’s) Capacity Ratio Year Operations 2013 23,540 195,000 ‐ 240,000 10% ‐ 12% 2018 27,363 195,000 ‐ 240,000 11% ‐ 14% 2023 27,775 195,000 ‐ 240,000 12% ‐ 14% 2033 29,645 195,000 ‐ 240,000 12% ‐ 15% Source: C&S Engineers, Inc., and FAA Advisory Circular 150/5060-5
4.01-3 Hourly Capacity
Again, hourly capacity of the Airport is defined as the maximum number of aircraft operations that can take place on the runway system in one hour.
The FAA's ACDM again could be used to calculate the hourly capacity of the Airport, but again given that significant capacity remains at the airfield, an estimation of ranges of capacity being used at the Airport versus number of forecasted operations is sufficient to demonstrate that an additional runway is not needed. The model produces both VFR and IFR hourly capacity figures. The Airport will not reach these levels in the planning period.
The VFR and IFR hourly capacities for the Airport are estimated to be between 74 and 51, and 57 and 50, respectively.
Table 4-2 shows the relationship of hourly capacity of the airfield to forecasted design hour operations.
4-3 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
TABLE 4‐2 HOURLY CAPACITY SUMMARY Design Hour VFR Hourly IFR Hourly VFR Capacity IFR Capacity Year Ops Capacity1 Capacity Ratio Ratio 2013 14 51 ‐ 74 50 ‐ 57 19% ‐ 27% 25% ‐ 28% 2018 16 51 ‐ 74 50 ‐ 57 22% ‐ 31% 28% ‐ 32% 2023 16 51 ‐ 74 50 ‐ 57 22% ‐ 31% 25% ‐ 32% 2033 17 51 ‐ 74 50 ‐ 57 23% ‐ 33% 30% ‐ 34% Source: C&S Engineers, Inc., and FAA Advisory Circular 150/5060-5 4.02 Airfield Requirements
Airfield facilities, as described in this report, include runways, taxiways, minimum land requirement, and airfield instrumentation and lighting. From the demand/capacity analysis, it was concluded that the Airport's present runway system will be adequate to accommodate demand throughout the planning period.
4.02-1 Airport Design Standards and Critical Aircraft
FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13, Airport Design, identifies the design standards to be maintained at the Airport. These design criteria provide a guide for airport designers to assure a reasonable amount of uniformity in airport landing facilities. Any criteria involving widths, gradients, separations of runways, taxiways, and other features of the landing area must necessarily incorporate wide variations in aircraft performance, pilot technique, and weather conditions. The FAA design standards provide for safe and efficient ground movement of aircraft expected to use a facility.
The selection of appropriate FAA airport design criteria is based primarily upon the critical or design aircraft that will be using the Airport. The forecast developed for the Airport presents the Gulfstream V as the future design aircraft.
The Design Aircraft’s design characteristics define the Airport Reference Code (ARC) for an airport. For the Airport, the Gulfstream V (G-V)’s design characteristics define the ARC. These characteristics are presented in Table 4-3.
TABLE 4‐3 G‐V DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS Characteristic G‐V Wingspan 93.5 feet Tail height 25.8 feet Maximum takeoff weight 90,500 pounds Approach speed 140 knots Source: FAA AC 150/5300-13A, September 28, 2014
The various combination of ARCs is derived from an Airplane Design Group (ADG) and Aircraft Approach Category (AAC). Tables 4-4 and 4-5 shows the parameters for each of the ADG’s and AAC’s.
4-4 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
TABLE 4‐4 AIRPLANE DESIGN GROUP Group # Tail Height (feet) Wingspan (feet) I < 20 < 49 II 20 ‐ < 30 49 ‐ < 79 III 30 ‐ < 45 79 ‐ < 118 IV 45 ‐ < 60 118 ‐ < 171 V 60 ‐ < 66 171 ‐ < 214 VI 66 ‐ < 80 214 ‐ < 262 Source: FAA AC 150/5300-13A, September 28, 2012
TABLE 4‐5 AIRCRAFT APPROACH CATEGORY Group # 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 Source: FAA AC 150/5300-13A, September 28, 2012
Thus, for design purposes, the G-V is categorized as a member of Aircraft Approach Category C and Airplane Design Group III. These characteristics define the ARC for the Airport as C-III.
Tables 4-6 and 4-7 show airfield design standards for both the existing B-II and future C-III conditions. Standards for future development have been applied assuming Aircraft Approach Category C, Airplane Design Group III, and visibility minimums not lower than 1 mile. There are four IAP’s to the Airport, none of which have a visibility minimum less than three miles. An airspace analysis that evaluated the development of new aircraft approach procedures at the Airport (see Appendix A) also concluded that while visibility minimums could be lowered from current levels with alterations to existing procedures, due to the surrounding terrain they could not be lowered less than 1 mile.
Under B-II, the Airport meets nearly all design standards. The runway object free area (ROFA) located on the depature end of Runway 18 extends 300 feet beyond the runway end into a tree line located north of the Upper Truckee River. In addition, portions of the approach and departure RPZs for both runways extends off airport property. Portions of the departure RPZ to Runway 18 are included within an existing avigation easement but not entirely.
Under C-III, many of the design standards are not currently met. This includes the runway centerline to parallel taxiway separation which would require 400 feet of separation. The existing separation ranges from 285 feet to 292.5 feet. Other design standards that are not met are primarily focused at the each of runway end as portions of the RSA, ROFA and RPZs extend either off airport property or into the Upper Truckee River.
4-5 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
TABLE 4‐6 AIRPORT DESIGN STANDARDS (ARC B‐II) (NOT LOWER THAN 1 MILE VISIBILITY MINIMUMS) Existing Conditions Runway Characteristic B‐II Runway 18 Runway 36 Standard Width 75’ 100’ Runway Safety Area Length beyond runway end 300’ 300’1/ 300’ Length prior to threshold 300’ 300’ Width 150’ 150’ Runway Object Free Area Tree line within Length beyond runway end 300’ ROFA 300’ Length prior to threshold 300’ N/A2/ Width 500’ 500’ 500’ Runway Obstacle Free Zone Length beyond runway end 200’ 200’ 200’ Width1/ 400’ 400’ 400’ Approach Runway Protection Zone Length 1,000’ Small portion of 1,000’ Inner Width 500’ Approach RPZ 500’ extends off airport Outer Width 700’ property onto 700’ private property Departure Runway Protection Zone Length 1,000’ Large portion of 1,000’ Inner Width 500’ Departure RPZ 500’ extends off airport property onto private property; Outer Width 700’ majority is included 700’ in avigation easement Runway centerline to: Holding position 200’ 200’ Parallel taxiway/taxilane centerline 240’ 285’ – 292.5’3/ Aircraft parking area 250’ 250’ Taxiway Design Taxiway Width 50’ 60’‐75’4/ Taxiway Safety Area Width 79’ 79’ Taxiway Object Free Area Width 131’ 131’ Source: FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13A and C&S Engineers, Inc.
1/ RSA extends off airport property, avigation easement in place 2/ As directed by AC 150-5300/13A for an ARC B-II use length beyond departure end. 3/ Parallel taxiway centerline is 285 feet from the Runway 18-36 centerline in the southern portion of the airport and 292.5 feet wide in the northern portion of the airport. 4/ Parallel taxiway is 75 feet wide in the northern portion of the airport and 60 feet wide in the southern portion of the airport.
4-6 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
TABLE 4‐7 AIRPORT DESIGN STANDARDS (ARC C‐III) NOT LOWER THAN 1 MILE VISIBILITY MINIMUMS) Future Conditions Runway Characteristic C‐III Runway 18 Runway 36 Standard Width 150’ Runway currently at 100’1/ Runway Safety Area RSA extends into RSA extends into Length beyond runway end 1,000’ Upper Truckee River Upper Truckee River 2/ RSA extends into Length prior to threshold 600’ 600’ Upper Truckee River Width 500’ 500’ Runway Object Free Area Trees would be Trees/terrain would Length beyond runway end 1,000’ located in ROFA be located in ROFA 1/ Trees would be Length prior to threshold 600’ 600’ located within ROFA Width 800’ Parallel taxiway would be located in ROFA Runway Obstacle Free Zone Length beyond runway end 200’ 200’ 200’ Width1/ 400’ 400’ 400’ Approach Runway Protection Zone Length 1,700’ Larger portion of Larger portion of Inner Width 500’ Approach RPZ Approach RPZ extends onto extends onto Outer Width 1,010’ private property private property Departure Runway Protection Zone Length 1,700’ Larger portion of Inner Width 500’ Departure RPZ extends off airport Departure RPZ now property onto extends onto private property; private property Outer Width 1,010’ majority is included in avigation easement Runway centerline to: Holding position 250’ Design standard not met Taxiway centerline 285’ – 292.5’3/ Parallel taxiway/taxilane centerline 400’ from runway centerline Aircraft parking area 500’ Aircraft parking apron located within 425’ Taxiway Design Taxiway Width 50’ 60’‐75’4/ Taxiway Safety Area Width 118’ 118’ Taxiway Object Free Area Width 186’ 186’ Source: FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13A and C&S Engineers, Inc.
1/ The maximum certified takeoff weight of the Gulfstream V is below 150,000 lb. so the standard runway width is 100 feet, the shoulder width is 20 feet, and the runway blast pad width is 140 feet. 2/ Visual guidance provided by PAPI/MALSF 3/ Parallel taxiway centerline is 285 feet from the Runway 18-36 centerline in the southern portion of the airport and 292.5 feet wide in the northern portion of the airport. 4/Parallel taxiway is 75 feet wide in the northern portion of the airport and 60 feet wide in the southern portion of the airport.
4-7 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
4.02-2 Runway Orientation
The orientation of runways for takeoff and landing operations is primarily a function of wind velocity and direction, together with the ability of aircraft to operate under adverse conditions. As a general rule, the primary runway at an airport is oriented as closely as practicable in the direction of the prevailing winds. The most desirable runway configuration will provide the largest wind coverage for a given maximum crosswind component. The crosswind component is the vector of wind velocity and direction which acts at a right angle to the runway. Further, runway wind coverage is that percent of time in which operations can safely occur because of acceptable crosswind components. The desirable wind coverage criterion for a runway system has been set by the FAA at 95 percent for any aircraft forecasted to use the Airport on a regular basis.
The all-weather wind rose developed for this master plan at the Airport indicates 99.79% coverage with a maximum allowable crosswind component 16 knots. The VFR and IFR wind roses indicate coverage of 99.92% and 99.99% respectively.
The runway at the Airport is oriented properly in terms of wind coverage.
Figure 4-2 shows the Airport’s wind rose.
4-8 PERCENT WIND COVERAGE 12 MPH ( 10.5 KT) 15 MPH (13 KT) 18 MPH (16 KT) RUNWAY ALL WEATHER VFR IFR ALL WEATHER VFR IFR ALL WEATHER VFR IFR 18‐36 99.79% 99.78% 99.93% 99.92% 99.92% 99.99% 99.99% 99.99% 100%
SOURCE: NATIONAL OCEANIC & ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, NATIONAL CLIMATIC DATA CENTER
OBSERVATIONS TAKEN AT LAKE TAHOE #72584 FOR THE PERIOD BETWEEN 2000-2009 Lake Tahoe Airport Airspace Map.ppt Tahoe Airport Airspace Lake
Lake Tahoe Airport Wind Rose Data Figure 4-2 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
4-10 Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
4.02-3 Runway Length Analysis
Existing Runway 18-36 at the Airport is 8,541 feet long with an 800-foot displaced threshold on Runway 18 and a displaced threshold of 2,033 on Runway 36.
FAA AC 150/5325-4B, Runway Length Requirements for Airport Design, outlines the process to identify runway length requirements. Five steps are used to determine the recommended runway length:
. Step 1: Identify the list of critical design aircraft that will make regular use of the proposed runway for an established planning period of at least five years.
. Step 2: Identify the aircraft that will require the longest runway lengths at maximum certificated takeoff weight (MTOW).
. Step 3: Use Table 1-1 [Airplane Weight Categorization for Runway Length Requirements] and the airplanes identified in Step #2 to determine the method that will be used for establishing the recommended runway length.
. Step 4: Select the recommended runway length from among the various runway lengths generated by Step #3 per the process identified in chapters 2, 3, or 4, as applicable.
. Step 5: Apply any necessary adjustment to the obtained runway length, when instructed by the applicable chapter of this AC, to the runway length generated by Step #4 to obtain a final recommended runway length.
STEP 1 – IDENTIFY CRITICAL DESIGN AIRCRAFT
The selection of appropriate FAA airport design criteria is based primarily upon the critical or design aircraft that will be using the Airport. The critical aircraft is defined by the FAA as the most demanding aircraft that performs or is projected to perform at least 250 annual departures (or 500 annual operations at the facility). The critical aircraft – Gulfstream V – was identified through analysis of operations and consultation with airport management and other stakeholders. This aircraft provides an Airport Reference Code (ARC) of C-III. Further detail regarding identification of the Design Aircraft can be found in Chapter 3 – Forecasts of Aeronautical Activity.
4-11
Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
STEP 2 – IDENTIFY THE AIRCRAFT THAT WILL REQUIRE THE LONGEST RUNWAY LENGTHS AT MAXIMUM CERTIFICATED TAKEOFF WEIGHT
The G-V, the Airport’s Design Aircraft, has a MTOW of 90,500 pounds and has been identified as needing the longest runway length.
STEP 3 – DETERMINE METHOD THAT WILL BE USED FOR ESTABLISHING RECOMMENDED RUNWAY LENGTH
This step involves using the Airplane Weight Categorization for Runway Length Requirements table to determine the method that will be used for establishing the recommended runway length. Since the MTOW of the G-V exceeds 60,000 pounds, the specified method requires a tailored approach specific to the G-V with data available from Gulfstream in the G-V Airport Planning Manual (APM). Gulfstream was contacted and the data provided was used in these calculations.
STEP 4 AND 5 – SELECT THE RECOMMENDED RUNWAY LENGTH
The approach for the method identified in the previous step is outlined in Chapter 4 and demonstrated in Appendix 3 of the AC. The approach takes into account airport elevation, runway gradient, temperature and assumes standard atmospheric pressure. The data in Table 4-8 was used to determine runway length.
TABLE 4‐8 RUNWAY LENGTH REQUIREMENTS CALCUALTION DATA Parameter Lake Tahoe Airport Aircraft Gulfstream V Mean daily max temp hottest month 78.7°F (25.9°C) Airport elevation 6,269’ Max landing weight 75,300 lbs. Max takeoff weight 90,500 lbs. Max runway elevation difference 13.67’ Source: FAA AC 150/5300-13A and C&S Engineers, Inc.
The useful load for this planning effort is the difference between the MTOW and the basic operating weight. FAA guidance requires the selection of 60-percent and 90- percent useful load to be based on stage length and needs of the critical design aircraft. This effort assumes that most aircraft will operate between the 60 and 90-percent load factors.
Table 4-9 demonstrates the takeoff distance required at MTOW as well as distance required at 90-percent and 60-percent useful load. Additionally, the useful load for the existing runway length was calculated and is shown.
4-12
Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
TABLE 4‐9 RUNWAY LENGTH REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY Parameter G‐V MTOW 90,500 lbs. Basic Operating Weight 48,400 lbs. Useful Load 42,100 lbs. % Useful Load Distance Required 100% (MTOW) 11,340’ 90% (86,290 lbs. takeoff weight) 10,040’ 60% (73,660 lbs. takeoff weight) 6,320’ 81% (82,500 lbs. takeoff weight) 8,541’ (existing runway length) Source: FAA AC 150/5300-13A, FAA AC 150/5325-4B, Gulfstream, and C&S Engineers, Inc.
RECOMMENDED RUNWAY LENGTH
Based on information established in previous sections, it is recommended that Runway 18-36 maintain its current length of 8,541. This length allows for existing and forecasted operations of the design aircraft of up to 81-percent of its useful load.
4.02-4 Runway Width Analysis
Runway width is a dimensional standard that is based upon the physical characteristics of aircraft using the Airport, namely wingspan. As discussed, FAA Airplane Design Group III is used for defining future airport dimensional standards for Runway 18-36 at the Airport.
FAA AC 150/5300-13A specifies a runway width of 150 feet for C-III design standards for aircraft with a MTOW of less than 150,000 pounds. The Design Aircraft for the Airport, the G-V, has a MTOW of 90,500 and thus the standard width for Runway 18- 36 is 100 feet. The recommended shoulder width is 20 feet to “provide resistance to blast erosion and accommodate the passage of maintenance and emergency equipment and the occasional passage of an aircraft veering from the runway.”43 Thus, the recommended total width of the runway plus the shoulders is 140 feet. The runway at the Airport is 100 feet wide with 12.5 feet shoulders that should be expanded to 20 feet to satisfy the C-III design criteria.
4.02-5 Runway Pavement Strength
The existing pavement strength of Runway 18-36 is 65,000 pounds for single wheel landing gear, 100,000 pounds for double wheel landing gear, and 150,000 pound for double tandem wheel landing gear. The pavement design is based on an analysis of the various types of aircraft expected to use the Airport and the anticipated numbers of departures for each aircraft over a 20-year period. In the design process, this data is
43 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5300-13A, Airport Design. September 28, 2012. 4-13
Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
converted to Equivalent Annual Departures by the critical aircraft in order to design a pavement section suitable for a 20-year pavement life.
The Design Aircraft for the Airport, the G-V, has a MTOW of 90,500 pounds and has dual wheel landing gear. Thus the pavement strength for Runway 18-36 is sufficient to meet the needs of these aircraft.
4.02-6 Taxiway System
The taxiway system for the Airport should complement the runway system by providing safe access to and from runway and landside areas. At present, Runway 18- 36 has a full parallel taxiway (Taxiway A) and system of stub/exit/access taxiways including high-speed exits at approximately mid-field.
Under FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13A, to meet C-III design standards the taxiway system should be designed to a width of 75 feet at a separation of 400 feet from runway centerline and should have the same strength as the runway system. Currently, taxiways at the Airport range from 40 to 75.5 feet wide. Taxiway widths are shown in Table 4-10. Parallel Taxiway A has a separation from Runway 18-36 that varies from 275 to 285 feet.
TABLE 4‐10 TAXIWAY WIDTHS Dimensions Taxiway Description Width (feet) Taxiway A 60‐75 Full parallel taxiway Taxiway B 75 Taxiway connector to Runway 18‐36 Taxiway from private hangars to Taxiway D 40 Taxiway A Taxiway E 75 High speed taxiway exit Taxiway from Terminal Apron to Taxiway F 90 1 Taxiway A Taxiway F2 75 High speed taxiway exit Taxiway from tie‐down area to Taxiway G 52 Taxiway A Taxiway from tie‐down area to Taxiway H 40.5 1 Taxiway A Taxiway H2 75 Taxiway connector to Runway 18‐36 Taxiway J 75.5 Taxiway connector to Runway 18‐36 Taxiway K 75.5 Taxiway connector to Runway 18‐36 Source: Caltrans Airport Pavement Management System, 2011
4-14
Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
4.02-7 Instrumentation and Lighting
Instrumentation and lighting includes runway and taxiway lighting, approach lighting, wind indicators, and visual approach aids. Current airfield lighting is sufficient for the entire planning period. Table 4-11 outlines the existing instrumentation available at the Airport.
TABLE 4‐11 EXISTING INSTRUMENTATION AND LIGHTING General Rotating Beacon Lighted Wind Indicator Runway 18‐36 Medium Intensity Runway Lights (MIRL) Precision Approach Path Indicator (PAPI) – Runway 18 Medium‐intensity Approach Lighting System with Sequenced Flashing lights (MALSF) – Runway 18 Threshold Indicator Lights – Runway 18 Runway End Identifier Lights (REIL) – Runway 36 Taxiways Medium Intensity Taxiway Lights (MITL) Source: C&S Engineers, Inc.
4.02-8 Airfield Signage
Airfield signage includes runway and taxiway signage and markings. At the Airport these currently include runway and taxiway edge markings, holding position markings, displaced threshold markings, distance to go signage on Runway 36, and runway/taxiway location and approach boundary signage.
Holding Position Markings Source: C&S Engineers, Inc., October 2013
4-15
Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
4.02-9 Land Requirements
As defined by FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Airport Design, the function of the RPZ is to enhance the protection of people and property on the ground by clearing and maintaining the RPZ of incompatible objects and activities. This is best done by obtaining property interest of the RPZ giving the airport owner the desired degree of control. The RPZ is trapezoidal in shape and centered on the extended runway centerline. The dimensions of the RPZ are determined by the type of aircraft that the facility expects to serve, and by the approach visibility minimums for each runway end. The RPZ begins 200 feet from each runway end. Since both runway ends have approach visibility minimums not lower than 1 mile, and are planned for Aircraft Approach Category C the RPZ should have length of 1,700 feet, an inner width of 500 feet, and the outer width is 1,010 feet.
The airport currently owns much of the property within the planned RPZ’s and it is recommended that the remainder of the property within the RPZ’s not under direct control of the airport be acquired.
4.02-10 Airspace & Obstruction Analysis
Airspace and obstruction considerations at the Airport were examined along with the potential for additional instrument approach procedures (IAP’s). The Airspace Analysis can be found in Appendix A.
The results of this analysis indicates that the Airport can support the development of new instrument approach procedures based on RNAV (GPS) TERPS/PBN design criteria to achieve improved operational capabilities to Runway 18. A similar potential may exist to the Runway 36 end. It is recommended that the City of South Lake Tahoe take the following action:
1. Formally request the FAA Flight Procedures Office to investigate, design, flight check and publish a new (replacement) LDA/DME approach procedure that takes advantage of lower terrain elevations associated with Lake Tahoe and aligns aircraft on the final approach course overflying the currently designated voluntary noise abatement meadow corridor north of the Airport. Publication of a new LDA/DME approach procedure to Runway 18 as described above will trigger the need to reposition the LDA/DME facility at its existing location and the costs for that action item should be included the Airport Capital Improvement Plan.
2. Assess community support with respect to the potential to achieve lower approach minimums based on a new RNAV (GPS) Localizer Performance with Vertical Guidance (LPV) procedure to Runway 18 with minimal change to the alignment of the final approach segment course that those associated with the 4-16
Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
existing LDA/DME procedures. If considered an acceptable outcome, formally request that a new RNAV (GPS) LPV procedure be evaluated, designed, flight checked and published to Runway 18.
3. Evaluate compliance with airport facility design standards applicable to the achievable approach minimums for the RNAV (GPS) LPV procedure to Runway 18. If necessary, prioritize and program the Airport capital improvement plan to complement the timing of the establishment of the RNAV (GPS) LPV approach procedure.
4. Concurrent with the recommendations above, request that an offset RNAV (GPS) Localizer Performance without Vertical Guidance (LP) approach procedure be evaluated to Runway 36 based on an offset alignment that does not exceed 20º from the runway heading and takes advantage of lower treed terrain elevations in the Echo Pass corridor. This offset alignment value will allow approach category A, B, C and D aircraft to use the procedure. Should the procedure be considered viable, despite an outcome of relatively high approach minimums, it should be pursued to provide arriving aircraft with a point in space at which a decision to continue the approach may be made in a safe(r) manner. 4.03 Landside Requirements
The planning of landside facilities is based upon a balance of airside and landside capacity. The determination for terminal and support area facilities has been accomplished for the three future planning periods. The principal operating elements covered under these analyses for general aviation requirements include:
. Based Aircraft Storage . Transient Aircraft Storage . Support Area Requirements
4.03-1 Based Aircraft Storage
Based aircraft are typically stored by either parking on the apron at aircraft tie-downs or by storing in hangars (t-hangars or conventional hangars).
Given the number and mix of current and forecasted based aircraft, there is ample storage available at the Airport for the fleet. Table 4-12 demonstrates the availability of based aircraft storage at the Airport.
4-17
Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
TABLE 4‐12 BASED AIRCRAFT STORAGE AND HANGAR AVAILABILITY Number Building # of Units Type Size (depth) Occupied by Aircraft 3 Box 42’ 2 A 1 Box 48’ 0 1 Box 60’ 1 7 T 45’ 3 B 2 T 48’ 2 2 Storage 674 ft2 1 8 T 42’ 5 C 2 L 42’ 0 1 Storage 357 ft2 0 9 T 42’ 5 1 L 42’ 1 D 1 Storage 525 ft2 0 1 Storage 357 ft2 0 10 T 42’ 6 E 2 Storage 525 ft2 0 F 4 Box 48’ 4 Somermeier 1 Box 61’ Unknown Tie‐Downs 127 Tie‐downs varied 5 Source: City of South Lake Tahoe and C&S Engineers, Inc.
Aircraft storage preferences is based on local conditions. Given that the number of both tie-downs and hangars each exceeds the forecasted number of based aircraft, even if 100% of the fleet prefers hangared storage or tie-down storage, capacity exists to meet that demand.
4.03-2 Transient Aircraft Storage
Areas designated for the parking of visiting (also termed itinerant) aircraft are referred to as transient parking. The transient apron areas can also be used by based aircraft for loading, fueling, and other activities. The size of such an apron required to meet transient aircraft demand was estimated using the following methodology:
. Calculate the average daily transient aircraft operations for the most active month. . Assume the average busy transient day is ten percent more active than the average day of the peak month. . Assume that a certain portion of the transient traffic will be on the apron during the busy day (FAA AC 150/5300-13 uses 50 percent). Since 50 percent of the operations are departures, only 25 percent of the daily transient operations will represent aircraft on the ground in need of parking area.
4-18
Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
. Calculate the apron needed using 400 square yards per transient aircraft. Applying this approach to the general aviation operations forecast yields the demand for apron area.
At the Airport, the average daily transient operations for the most active month is 105 operations. Thus, the average busy transient day is estimated to have 116 operations. Using 25% of that to estimate aircraft parking needs indicates that in the long-term forecast, the most demanding in terms of total numbers, parking for 29 transient aircraft will be required.
FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13A, Airport Design, recommends a methodology by which transient apron requirements can be determined from knowledge of peak average annual day operations. The Airport’s transient parking apron is 9,130 square yards. The 29 transient aircraft, with a requirement of 400 square yards (60 x 60 ft.) per aircraft, would require just under 11,600 square yards. However, the northern apron located adjacent to the transient parking apron provides an additional almost 60,000 square yards. The approximate 69,000 square yards of apron space at the terminal and FBO provide a robust amount of space for both itinerant and based aircraft.
As noted previously, there are 127 aircraft tie-downs at the Airport on these aprons. If all based aircraft and the estimated 29 transient aircraft were to park on the apron, there would still be an additional 53 open tie-downs. This additional capacity would serve the Airport many additional ways including the ability to handle more traffic for special events.
However, given the G-V is the design aircraft, it is commonplace that the operators of these types of aircraft often like to park their aircraft in a hangar, even when visiting airports other than their base. There is currently no available transient hangar storage at the Airport to house a G-V aircraft. Often, this is a service provided by the FBO at an airport. These hangars are usually 20,000 to 40,000 square feet.
4.03-3 Support Area Requirements
The support area requirements at the Airport include the administration building, FBO, fuel facility, ARFF, maintenance, utilities, ground access, and automobile parking.
TERMINAL AND AIRPORT ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
A general aviation terminal is needed to provide space for lounge areas, restrooms, food services, and other areas for the needs of pilots and passengers. Table 4-13 shows the standard square footage requirement per general aviation passenger.
4-19
Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
TABLE 4‐13 GENERAL AVIATION BUILDING AREA REQUIREMENTS Area Per Peak Hour Functional Area Pilot/Passenger Waiting Lounge 15.0 SF FBO Operations 3.0 SF Public Conveniences 2.0 SF Concession Area 5.0 SF Circulation, Storage, HVAC 25.0 SF TOTAL 50.0 SF Source: FAA guidance
The FAA’s approach for calculating general aviation terminal requirements uses operational peaking characteristics to determine size of terminal areas. The method relates general aviation peak hour pilots and passengers to the functional areas within the terminal to produce overall building size.
It is assumed there are 2.5 people (passengers and pilots) per general aviation design hour operation and the forecasted design hour operations range from 14 in the near- term to 17 in the long-term. This produces a required GA terminal between 1,750 square feet in the near-term and 2,125 square feet in the long-term.
The General Aviation Terminal at the Airport serves as a multi-purpose facility for aeronautical and non-aeronautical purposes. The building is approximately 30,000 square feet. Aeronautical activity in the terminal includes airport administration, facilities for pilots (lobby/meeting area and restrooms), and offices for the flight school and aerial tours. Non-aeronautical uses of the GA Terminal include City Administration, City Council Chambers, a kitchen, a restaurant, and storage.
The FBO at the Airport is 2,300 square feet and provides a mix of services and facilities including a pilot lounge, pilot supplies, offices and other support functions.
Between the GA terminal and the FBO building there is abundant space to house terminal and FBO functions.
FUEL FACILITY
The Airport’s fuel farm, located at the northwestern end of the airport property, consists of two (2) 12,000-gallon above-ground fuel storage tanks. One holds 100LL AvGas and the other holds Jet-A. There is a third 10,000 gallon storage tank at the site that once held both automobile gasoline and diesel, but that tank is currently empty and unused. The FBO maintains five (5) refueling trucks for servicing aircraft with a total capacity of 7,400 gallons for Jet A and 2,750 gallons for AvGas. Tanks and truck combined provide a capacity of 19,400 gallons of Jet A and 14,750 gallons of 100LL.
4-20
Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
In 2013, there were 23,540 operations at the Airport and 254,385 gallons of fuel were sold. This is a rate of 10.8 gallons per operation. Of the total, 219,506 gallons was Jet A and 34,880 gallons was AvGas. These rates calculate to 9.32 and 1.48 gallons per operation by type.
For planning purposes, ADPM operations were used to calculate ADPM fuel demand. Table 4-14 shows ADPM fuel demand for the existing condition and each of the planning periods. Also shown is the 2-week demand for both Jet A and AvGas based on ADPM demand.
TABLE 4‐14 PEAK PERIOD FUEL FLOW 2013 2018 2023 2033 Annual Operations 23,540 27,363 27,775 29,645 ADPM Operations 109 127 129 135 AVGAS Gallons per Operation 1.48 1.48 1.48 1.48 ADPM AvGas Requirement 162 188 191 200 2‐Week Requirement (gal) 2,261 2,635 2,676 2,800
Jet‐A Gallons per Operation 9.32 9.32 9.32 9.32 ADPM AvGas Requirement 1,016 1,184 1,203 1,259 2‐Week Requirement (gal) 14,230 16,580 16,841 17,624 Source: City of South Lake and C&S Engineers, Inc.
Assuming fuel deliveries occur on average every two weeks, the combined capacities of the Jet A and 100LL tanks and fueling trucks are sufficient to accommodate the future demand at the Airport.
AUTOMOBILE PARKING
The number of auto spaces required at an airport is also dependent upon the level of general aviation aircraft activity at the facility. The methodology for determining parking needs relates peak hour pilots, passengers, and airport employees to the number of parking spaces required. Numbers of peak hour pilots and passengers were previously derived for the general aviation terminal building requirements.
Airport management reports that there are 154 automobile parking spaces at the airport terminal and that City employees occupy approximately 30 parking spaces per day.
Again, the ADPM operations in the long-term forecast is projected to be 17. Assuming 2.5 persons per flight and that each has an automobile at the airport, this requires 43
4-21
Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
spaces. Holding the City staff spaces constant at 30, the long-term requirement for automobile parking spaces is 73. This indicates an excess of 97 parking spaces at the Airport
Using a standard of 22 square yards per vehicle space, the demand for long-term parking requires 1,606 square yards of appropriately configured parking surface.
ACCESS AND CIRCULATION
As identified in Chapter 2 – Inventory, access to the Airport is gained via U.S. Highway 50 to Airport Road and on-airport circulation occurs through multidirectional traffic flows in the terminal parking lot. Airport Road is one-way and traffic recirculation is achieved through return routing on U.S. Highway 50 back to Airport Road.
UTILITIES
As no projects at the Airport are anticipated to induce additional strain on existing utilities by substantially increasing capacity or facilities, and existing utilities meet current demand, no additional utilities are required at the Airport. 4.04 Summary and Recommendations
The following summarizes recommendations based on future demand and the ability of existing facilities to meet that demand. Facility requirements are based on the criteria for the design aircraft and its Aircraft Design Group and Aircraft Approach Category. The design aircraft is the G-V.
4.04-1 Airfield
Many of the airfield components should be designed and upgraded to C-III design standards. This will include:
Runway Safety Area width Runway Object Free Area length beyond runway end Runway 36 Approach Runway Protection Zone length Runway 36 Approach Runway Protection Zone outer width Runway 18 Departure Runway Protection Zone length Runway 18 Departure Runway Protection Zone outer width and control Runway Centerline to Aircraft Hold Position Runway Centerline to Parallel Taxiway Centerline Runway Centerline to Fixed or Moveable Object Taxiway Centerline to Fixed or Moveable Object Taxiway widths
4-22
Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
Given the existing constraints associated with making the necessary improvements to meet C-III design standards, Phase II – Alternatives Development of the Airport Master Plan will address both the C-III and B-II design standards.
4.04-2 Aircraft Parking
Although existing capacity of both hangar and tie-down storage is adequate to meet future demand for both based and transient aircraft, apron rehabilitation on the north apron should be undertaken to preserve the utility of this space.
Additionally, hangar storage should be considered for large transient aircraft.
4.04-3 Terminal
The General Aviation Terminal at the Airport provides adequate space for forecasted demand. Should more space be needed for aeronautical activities, reallocating space in the terminal for these activities should be undertaken.
4.04-4 Aircraft Fueling
Fuel storage at the Airport is adequate for the forecasting period and capacity exists to add storage through additional tanks or fueling vehicles.
4.04-5 Landside (Parking, Access, Utilities)
Supporting infrastructure at the Airport is adequate to meet forecasted demand. However, airport recirculation should be considered so that airport traffic is not required to make left-hand turns onto the public roadway if feasible. Due to the proximity and connectivity to Highway 50 any proposed improvements to airport circulation would have to be coordinated with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans).
4.04-6 Management Initiatives
There are a number of management initiatives that should be considered to improve efficiency and compliance of airport activity. These include:
Vision/Mission/Goal Minimum Standards revision and enforcement Airport Business Plan Rates and Charges Analysis Airport Rules and Regulations revision Surrender of Part 139 Certificate Airport User Outreach/Communication Plan 4-23
Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
Marketing Plan Update
These requirements will be further explored through the development and analysis of the alternatives developed in the next chapter. 4.05 Sustainability
4.05-1 Goals
As discussed in the Sustainability Baseline Assessment, the community was engaged in defining sustainability for the Airport (see Section 2.09). Based on this feedback, as well as information provided by the City, the following sustainability goals have been identified for this Airport Master Plan:
Natural Economic Operational Social Resource Viability Efficiency Responsibility Conservation
Goal 7: Ensure Goal 2: Enhance land use aircraft compatibility Goal 1: Become as capabilities Goal 5: Protect self‐sufficient as wetlands and lake Sub‐Goal 7a: possible clarity Minimize noise Sub‐Goal 1a: impacts (see Goal Goal 3: Increase 6) Increase revenue connectivity with Sub‐Goal 1b: the transportation Reduce resource system including consumption alternative transportation Sub‐Goal 1c: Minimize Goal 6: Minimize Goal 8: Provide maintenance and Goal 4: Increase air quality and community operation costs efficiency of noise impacts benefits Airport management / operation
4-24
Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
These will be considered in the evaluation of alternatives and identification of specific initiatives in the next chapter of the Airport Master Plan. Some preliminary opportunities are discussed below, though this is not a comprehensive list.
4.05-2 Potential Opportunities
ECONOMIC VIABILITY
Capturing Market Share
In order to meet the Airport’s goal of self-sufficiency, a major recommendation will be the development of the following plans that reflect the current vision for this asset:
Business Plan – This plan should also incorporate by reference an updated Marketing Plan, Rates and Charges Policy and Lease Policy/Standard Lease Language. Communications Policy/Community Outreach Program – Discussed below under Community Outreach. Emergency Plan (update).
While the Master Plan focus is on airfield development and infrastructure, an Airport Business Plan strategically identifies techniques to maximize revenue and minimize expenses. Currently, the Airport is included in the City’s Business Plan but this should be expanded upon to specifically identify needs for the Airport. The 2002 Lake Tahoe Airport Strategic Action Plan could also be referenced, though updates are necessary.
According to Airports Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) Report 77: Guidebooks for Developing General Aviation Airport Business Plans, there are three major reasons an airport should develop a business plan:
1. Airports with plans in place are more likely to generate more revenue, reduce or eliminate expenses, secure additional capital funding, minimize reliance on subsidies, and create more jobs. 2. Federally obligated airports are required to be as self-sufficient as possible based on their situation. 3. GA airports are expected to be operated as a public enterprise so a business plan can show good stewardship.
A business plan supports an airport by defining its mission, visions and goals; setting objectives for achieving those goals; identifying strategies and action plans; setting parameters for measuring and checking progress; and providing a means for adjustments as needed. The Business Plan should focus on the following key areas:
4-25
Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
Business Conditions o Historic and current o Challenges and opportunities (the 2002 Strategic Action Plan included a Strength-Weakness-Opportunity-Threat analysis that may prove useful) Market Assessment o Benchmarking sales strategies and pricing Management Plan o Mission, vision and goals Development Plan (that will be provided through this Master Plan) Marketing Plan Financial Plan o Existing and projected o Non-traditional revenue streams Recommendations and Implementation Plan
A key component of the Business Plan will be the reevaluation of nearby airports such as Truckee-Tahoe Airport to determine its comparable strengths and where Lake Tahoe Airport can find opportunities to improve with regard to services, facilities, and rates and charges. Based on this analysis, the Airport may be able to make improvements to increase its competitive edge and capture additional market share.
Revenues and Expenses
The Airport is somewhat constrained with regards to seeking revenue-generating opportunities. For example, airports often pursue hangar development with attractive amenities (such as insulation, heat, pilot’s lounge and conference facilities) to draw in additional corporate aviation. However, the Airport is limited spatially and is committed to environmental standards that may prevent additional facilities if not justified by current demand. Should the City undertake improvements to existing facilities or need to construct additional buildings, the potential for enhanced amenities should be considered as these would justify higher rental rates and may attract corporate aviation.
Despite the constraints, there are still several opportunities to enhance revenue and reduce expenses including:
1. Corporate Aviation – Potential benefits of having the capacity to service additional turboprop and jet GA aircraft include increased fuel sales as turboprop and jet aircraft buy more fuel than piston aircraft. Although total GA jet aircraft represent less than 15 percent of the total GA fleet, jet aircraft fuel purchase five times the gallons of fuel compared to piston aircraft. Currently, the City receives only a small percentage of fuel sales (the majority of which
4-26
Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
go to the FBO). However, an increase could still be worth pursuing so the development of a Marketing Plan should include recommended actions to target corporate aviation. Potential considerations may include additional large aircraft storage, marketing existing availability and/or enhanced FBO services, and a review of aircraft landing fees.
2. Commercial Contracts – Existing commercial contracts should be reviewed every three to five years to assess the need to modify the terms of the lease agreements including a comparison to market rates. The City should actively pursue the potential to attract non-aeronautical uses to the Airport, as it has done for the nine-acre parcel on the east side of Highway 50 just north of the intersection with Airport Road. The City conducted a market analysis of this property in 2012 to determine the optimal use. Such efforts will help the City market this to potential developers and could bring in additional revenue. Currently, there is land available on the north side of the property that is not being used for aeronautical purposes. The City has previously considered a lease arrangement for a recreational facility and should re-evaluate the potential uses and agreements. Many airports seek light industrial uses as these are compatible with airport operations.
3. Concessions – The Airport currently offers a restaurant that can be a significant draw to visiting pilots. This should be maintained and promoted.
4. FBO/SASO – The Marketing Plan should assess the market potential for and if desirable include recommendations to attract an additional FBO and/or Specialized Aviation Service Operation (SASO).
5. Use of facilities – The City currently uses the Airport for its administrative offices and City Council Chambers. This reduces expenses and should be maintained while balancing the needs of pilots and other aviation-related purposes.
6. Utilities – As facilities are improved or developed, the City should incorporate energy efficiency measures to reduce demand. It should also leverage the existing CNG station on site for use in its fleet vehicles and explore the installation of solar panels on existing structures.
7. Funding opportunities – The City should seek available funding opportunities to offset operating costs and/or expenses. For example, the FAA offers funding for zero-emissions vehicles and infrastructure that could offset the upfront cost of purchasing alternative-fuel (e.g., electric) vehicles and installing charging infrastructure.
4-27
Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
8. Airport Management/Maintenance – Contracting with an FBO or airport management firm has the potential to reduce expenditures over the personnel costs associated with the existing management structure (further information provided below). This option has been explored by the City but has been determined to be not advantageous. However, the Airport should closely examine its current structure to determine if there is any redundancy in personnel categories or if there are additional opportunities to share resources with the City, e.g., grounds maintenance equipment and personnel. Opportunities for reduced maintenance of lawn area (low mow) should also be considered.
Service Market
The Airport should again evaluate nearby airports such as Truckee-Tahoe Airport to determine its comparable strengths and where Lake Tahoe Airport can find opportunities to improve with regard to services, facilities, and rates and charges. Based on this analysis, the Airport may be able to make improvements to increase its competitive edge and capture additional market share. This should be a full airport evaluation and include airport tenants to determine if there are also ways to improve their facilities or services.
OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCY
Aircraft Capabilities
Increasing aircraft capabilities is a sustainability goal of this Airport Master Plan but is being evaluated elsewhere in the report.
Transportation System Connectivity
There is significant interest within the community to increase the Airport’s connectivity with other existing and planned transportation modes including alternative transportation. In fact, the City had conducted a Strategic Action Plan in 2002 with the goal of developing a Transportation Center at the Airport. The Transportation Center was envisioned to include services and facilities for aviation, transit, rental car, park & ride, and alternative fuels. This would provide a benefit to the community while serving the Airport’s users and employees. In addition, support of alternative-fueled transportation means reduced air emissions and showcases environmental stewardship. The City should also consider bike and pedestrian pathways/access as recommended during the Airport Master Plan outreach efforts. These options will be further considered under Alternatives.
4-28
Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
Management Structure
The Airport is currently owned and operated by the City of South Lake but there may be alternatives that could increase the operational efficiency of the Airport. This possibility was evaluated in the 2002 Strategic Action Plan. Although this focused on development of a Transportation Center, which has not yet been pursued, the alternative management structures it proposed may be worth considering. Since many of the alternatives were discounted in the Strategic Action Plan due to timing, they should be reevaluated. These included the following:
1. Joint Powers Authority (JPA) – Between the City of South Lake Tahoe, El Dorado County, Douglass County, and potentially other entities.44 This model acknowledges that the Airport serves more than the City’s residents. 2. Airport District – Formation of district by City and County similar to the Truckee Tahoe Airport District. It would be run by an autonomous Board of Directors responsible for financing facilities through operating revenues and taxes. The District would have taxing authority to help support and maintain the Airport as a community resource. 3. Private Management – In 2012 the City sought proposals for a private management contract in which a company would provide airport management services tailored to the Airport’s needs. The request for proposals (RFP) found no viable or reasonable proposals or alternatives. Under this arrangement, companies are paid a fee for their services, which can be provided by a FBO or management firm. While an FBO may provide airport management services they are also typically responsible for commercial aeronautical activities which may include aircraft maintenance, fueling, charter, flight training, sales, rental and parts. For example, fulfilling an industry need, two companies focus on providing airport management services: AV Ports and Lockheed Air Terminals, Inc. The primary challenge with this approach is that the airport management contract needs to be financially beneficial to the private company which often requires a subsidy from the airport owner.
Streamlining Procedures
There are a number of agencies and stakeholders that require coordination with regards to airport activities/actions. These include but are not limited to the FAA, California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (TRPA), and the community. There may be opportunities to streamline coordination and approvals without sacrificing transparency. One example identified by the Airport is obstruction removal, which is currently a burdensome and lengthy process. Some airports have developed Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) with the applicable approval agencies to enable more efficient actions. This would involve receiving buy-
44 The County had previously owned the Airport before turning it over to the City in 1983. 4-29
Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
in from the agencies after an obstruction analysis regarding the areas proposed for mitigation and terms of the arrangement (i.e., what type of notification is needed when the City plans to conduct obstruction removal in the future). This process would also involve the land owners for off-site obstruction removal. While they could also be involved in the MOU, it may be possible to set these parameters in the easement language. According to airport management the City has already begun this process.
NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION
The environmental compliance requirements associated with airport development and, specifically, in Lake Tahoe, will ensure the protection of wetlands and help the City minimize noise and air quality impacts. However, opportunities remain to further protect the environment and reduce natural resource consumption. These may include but are not limited to:
1. Decreased energy and water consumption by replacement of building/facility fixtures and equipment with more efficient alternatives. Targeted replacements may include the airfield and/or building lighting with LEDs; plumbing fixtures; Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) equipment with higher- efficiency alternatives; and/or installation of heating, cooling and lighting controls to reduce use.
2. Material reuse during airport development projects and seeking opportunities for byproduct synergies with other projects in the area (i.e., where the Airport’s waste can be used elsewhere).
3. Encouragement of alternative transportation as discussed above.
4. Expansion of the Airport’s recycling program to reduce waste generation and increase the diversion rate from landfills. This recycling program could consist of a number of recommendations including but not limited to the following: increase availability of recycling receptacles; seek a more comprehensive recycling provider; further engage the public and tenants via awareness campaigns or competitions; and establish a construction waste diversion goal.
5. Establish an environmentally preferable product procurement policy, which can be incorporated into the City’s current procurement policy. This could include requirements for sustainable materials (rapidly renewable, recycled content, low-embodied energy, etc.), local procurement when possible, and/or bulk purchasing to minimize material waste.
6. Consideration of renewable energy technologies such as solar.
These opportunities and others will be explored under Alternatives.
4-30
Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
SOCIAL REPSONSIBILITY
Land Use Compatibility
As documented in the American Planning Association’s (APA) Planners and Planes: Airports and Land-Use Compatibility report, airport compatible land uses encompass “those uses that can coexist with a nearby airport without either constraining the safe and efficient operation of the airport or exposing people living or working nearby to unacceptable levels of noise or hazards.”45 As such airport land use compatibility planning covers two major areas: noise and safety/hazards.
Noise
The FAA has developed guidelines for compatible land use in aircraft noise exposure areas based on various noise levels. These guidelines are discussed in Section 2.08. As part of the Airport Master Plan noise contours were developed for both existing and future conditions, which show that the land uses surrounding the Airport are compatible with current and projected noise levels. The City has nonetheless established noise abatement procedures that aim to limit operations at certain hours or over certain local geographical areas (discussed in Section 2.02-1). In addition, the Lake Tahoe Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan (see Appendix C) states that new residential development is not allowed within the 65-decibel community noise equivalent level (CNEL) noise contour. Additional restrictions with regards to development within the 60 dB or greater CNEL contour include building plans to limit intruding noise such that interior noise levels shall not exceed 45 dB CNEL. For any residential development occurring between the 55 and 60 dB CNEL additional mitigation measures may apply.
There are additional opportunities to ensure land use compatibility with regards to noise including the following:
Review of mandatory noise restrictions that were development as part of the MPSA. Review and enhancement of current voluntary noise abatement procedures including the development of procedures for helicopter operations. Establishment of a community outreach program (see below) where interested parties could learn more about airport operations and express their concerns as it relates to airport noise. Recognition and incorporation of noise level information into community plans.
Further recommendations can be found in the ACRP Report 27 – Enhancing Airport Land Use Compatibility.
45 Shalk, Susan and Stephanie Ward. Planners and Planes: Airports and Land Use Compatibility. 4-31
Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
Safety/Hazards
In addition to noise, safety is a major factor in land use compatibility. As documented in the ACRP Report 27, Enhancing Airport Land Use Compatibility, addressing safety is a more difficult challenge than noise because it involves what may happen versus what is occurring (i.e., noise being generated by aircraft operations). Safety-related land use compatibility can be divided into two categories: land uses that can be hazards to operating aircraft; and land uses that affect the severity of an accident.46
1. Land uses that can be hazards to operating aircraft – Land uses that can be hazards to operating aircraft include land use characteristics such as tall structures; visual obstructions and electronic interference (e.g., dust, glare, smog, light emissions, etc.); and wildlife attractants that could lead to wildlife strikes.
A number of standards and guidelines have been set to minimize these hazards including the Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 77, Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace, and the U.S. Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). Both establish imaginary surfaces around airports (the latter for airports with instrument flight procedures such as Lake Tahoe Airport) but for different purposes. FAR Part 77 serves as a standard for determining obstructions to navigable airspace and their effects on the safety of operations within that airspace. All projects involving construction or alteration of objects near airports or that penetrate these surfaces must submit a Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration (FAA Form 7460-1) to the FAA, which will determine if it is a hazard. TERPS, in contrast, is used to design instrument flight procedures and are typically lower contrast than FAR Part 77 surfaces along the runway approaches but often extend further away from the airport. Another contrast is that TERPS surfaces are not static but can change based on the design of the procedure or due to new obstacles since they are always positioned above any obstacles.
FAA AC 150/5190-4A, A Model Zoning Ordinance to Limit Height of Objects around Airports, is currently being updated (the original was published in 1987) but will support local governments and airport sponsors in their efforts to understand the impacts of incompatible land use related to both safety and the operations of the airport. It will also identify tools and techniques that can be used to support compatible land use development.
The FAA has established standards for mitigating other hazards such as glare (specifically in response to the use of solar energy technologies on airports, which require a glare analysis to ensure there will be no potential impacts on
46 Transportation Research Board, “ACRP Report 27, Enhancing Airport Land Use Compatibility,” 2010. 4-32
Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
pilot visibility) and wildlife attractants (in FAA AC 150/5200-33B, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants on or Near Airports. This will discourage creation of pools, ponds, sewage lagoons, and other attracts on or near airports; recommends management methods for permanent water sources; and provides methods for managing wildlife near airport grounds).
The Airport’s first priority is safety and airport management has made significant efforts to ensure the safety of the operating environment, including the preparation of a Wildlife Hazards Assessment that is ongoing and will likely develop a Wildlife Hazard Management Plan (WHMP). In addition, the ALUCP develops height restrictions that correspond to FAA FAR Part 77 surfaces and required notification to the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) by project proponent of proposed development that could exceed height restrictions for review. (See Appendix C.)
There may be additional opportunities to reduce the potential for hazards. These include the following:
Obtain avigation easements for obstruction removal within the FAR Part 77 and TERPS surfaces. Work with adjacent property owners to eliminate potential for wildlife attractants.
2. Land uses that affect the severity of an accident – The second category is land uses that affect the severity of an accident, which do not increase the likelihood of an accident but can affect the consequences of an accident and therefore requires restrictions on land use development. Examples include land uses that result in high concentrations of people in close proximity to the airport and high risk-sensitive uses such as schools, hospitals, and nursing homes where the mobility of occupants is limited. In contrast to these uses that negatively impact the severity of an accident, the availability of open land (i.e., large areas cleared of obstacles) can minimize the impacts by providing space for emergency landings and reducing the number of people in accident areas. Guidance is more limited regarding these uses and is typically up to the airport sponsor and/or municipality. The exception is guidance for the Runway Protection Zone (RPZ), a trapezoidal shape that extends 200 feet from the runway end and is intended to enhance the protection of people and property on the ground by avoiding certain land uses within these areas that may lead to congregations of people there. The FAA has issued interim guidance on land use compatibility within RPZs, which requires federal consultation when certain uses would enter the RPZ as a result of an airfield project that changes the locations of the runway thresholds/ends, a change in critical aircraft that impacts the RPZ dimensions, a new or modified instrument approach procedure that increases the RPZ
4-33
Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
dimensions, or a local development proposal in the RPZ. Land uses requiring coordination include:
Buildings and structures Recreational land uses Transportation facilities (rail, public roads/highways, auto parking facilities, etc.) Fuel storage facilities Hazardous material storage Wastewater treatment facilities Above-ground utility infrastructure
Prior to consultation, an alternatives analysis should be conducted to determine the feasibility of avoiding these land uses within the RPZ.
The Airport has also made strides to ensure the safety of people on the ground. The ALUCP identified safety zones surrounding the Airport based on aircraft arrival and departure procedures at the Airport. Guidelines for each zone are established to determine the compatibility of land uses within in them. The zones address safety only and provide the ALUC the necessary information to make recommendations with regards to new development or reconstruction of facilities. (See Appendix C.)
Community Outreach
There are two distinct purposes for community outreach:
1. Market the Airport to potential users and tenants, and 2. Educate the public about the value the Airport brings to the community.
Development of a Marketing Plan
A marketing plan for the Airport would focus on attracting new users—both transient and based aircraft—and attracting businesses to locate at the Airport or use the Airport for business purposes. The 1998 Marketing Plan developed for the Airport was focused specifically on commercial service. Updated marketing efforts would focus on the benefits the Airport brings to existing and potential GA users and businesses, such as available infrastructure, costs of doing business, and incentives. A quote by Sean Mauger is referenced in ACRP Report 28, Marketing Guidebook for Small Airports, and encapsulates the intent of marketing: “Marketing is the art of identifying and understanding customer needs and creating solutions that deliver satisfaction to the customers, profits to the producers and benefits for the stakeholders.”47
47 Transportation Research Board, ACRP 28, Marketing Guidebook for Small Airports. 4-34
Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
Report 28 issued by the ACRP (and sponsored by the FAA) provides guidance for airports developing marketing plans and should be reviewed.
Community Outreach Plan
A community outreach plan focuses on engaging residents, neighbors, and local businesses that do not use the Airport for recreational or business purposes already. The goals of community outreach are to:
Educate the public on the value of the Airport to the community. Offer amenities and educational opportunities to the public. By becoming more involved in the community, the Airport has the chance to be perceived as a benefit and amenity, as opposed to a source of noise and inconvenience. Educate the public on airport operations and provide an opportunity for two- way communication with Airport and City personnel.
The Airport has committed to becoming more sustainable in its operations and approach. Sustainability has traditionally been seen as environmentally friendly solutions, such as recycling and energy efficiency, but it actually encompasses so much more. As previously discussed, true sustainability also seeks to improve the lives and well-being of people. The Airports Council International – North America developed the concept of EONS, which defines airport sustainability as a holistic approach to Economic viability, Operational efficiency, Natural Resource Conservation and Social responsibility. This means that airports should go beyond just environmental improvements to include changes that benefit the lives of people who interact with them.
The Airport needs to proactively engage the community and educate the public about the benefits the Airport brings not just to aviation users, but to the entire community. Engaging the community and building a positive relationship with them will help to promote the Airport, address potential negative opinions and allow for cooperation to address any concerns or respond to situations that may arise. The development of an effective community outreach program will build trust with the community through a transparent process of open two-way communication and engagement of senior leadership. There are several resources available to support the development of an effective community outreach program including:
ACRP Report 16: Guidebook for Managing Small Airports ACRP Report 15, Airport Noise: A Toolkit for Managing Community Expectations ACRP Report 58, Airport Industry Familiarization and Training for Part-Time Airport Policy Makers
4-35
Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
FAA Community Involvement Manual
An effective community outreach program should include:
Establishment of a standing committee on airport community relations. Expansion of the Airport’s noise abatement procedures into a Fly Friendly/Fly Neighborly Program that also includes: o Development of promotional materials for pilots (available at the Airport and on the website); o Request that pilots who frequent the Airport complete a Pilot Good Neighbor Pledge to indicate the pilot’s commitment to comply with the recommended noise reduction procedures; o Implementation of an awards program to recognize aircraft operators who consistently comply with the program; and Implementation of permanent, on-going outreach with increased activity during any projects or significant activities at the Airport. Continue to provide on-going community events and programs such as the Air Show. Consider potential opportunities to offer additional community amenities such as: o Charity fun run/walk – The runway is a good location for a fun run, measuring over a mile. Many local not-for-profits already have charitable runs or walks and the Airport could offer to be the site for one of these existing walks or become the site for a new event. Aviation activity would only need to be suspended for a 3-4 hours on a weekend to support this activity. o Animal adoption events. o Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) fueling station – Coordinate with the TTD with regards to the existing CNG station to have it marked and made available to the public. This has an extra advantage of providing cleaner fuel compared to conventional alternatives. o Dog park – By fencing in a portion of the available grassy land, dog owners could have a safe place to bring their dogs to socialize and play. More than one enclosure could be developed to section off the park for different sized dogs. o Walking trail – In an effort to support and promote the benefits of active living, the Airport could provide land for the development of a walking trail. o Outdoor classroom – An outdoor classroom provides an opportunity to experience natural and human-created characteristics of the environment in a natural setting. It is a tool that allows educators to take a hands-on approach and move their educational curriculum outdoors. The Airport could make some land available to local educators for use
4-36
Lake Tahoe Airport Master Plan Update Phase I
as an outdoor classroom. A number of agencies and organizations have grant programs available to develop or furnish outdoor classrooms. o Observation area – The observation deck provides members of the public with a front row seat for watching aircraft take off and land. o Public tours – The City could invite the public to an open house/public tour of the Airport to learn more about how a GA airport operates and see the infrastructure that supports activity.
4-37