AIRPORT FACILITY REQUIREMENTS Chapter Three

Chapter Three MESA-FALCONMESA-FALCON FIELDFIELD AAIRPORTIRPORT AIRPORT FACILITY REQUIREMENTS Chapter Three

To properly plan for the future of those facilities that are related to the Mesa-Falcon Field Airport, it is necessary arrival, departure, and ground movement to translate forecast aviation demand of aircraft. The components include: into the specific types and quantities of • Runways facilities that can adequately serve this identified demand. In this chapter, • Taxiways existing components of the airport are • Navigational Approach Aids evaluated so that the capacities of the • Airfield Lighting, Marking, and overall system are identified. Once Signage identified, the existing capacity is compared to the forecast activity levels Landside facilities are needed for the to determine where deficiencies interface between air and ground currently exist or may be expected to transportation modes. This includes materialize in the future. Once components for general aviation needs deficiencies in a component are such as: identified, a more specific determination of the approximate sizing and timing of • General Aviation Terminal the new facilities can be made. • Aircraft Hangars • Aircraft Parking Aprons As indicated earlier, airport facilities include both airfield and landside • Auto Parking and Access components. Airfield facilities include • Airport Support Facilities

3-1 The objective of this effort is to identi- provide flexibility and potentially ex- fy, in general terms, the adequacy of tend this plan’s useful life should avia- the existing airport facilities and out- tion trends slow over time. line what new facilities may be needed and when they may be needed to ac- The most important reason for utiliz- commodate forecast demands. Having ing milestones is to allow the airport established these facility require- to develop facilities according to need ments, alternatives for providing these generated by actual demand levels. facilities will be evaluated in Chapter The demand-based schedule provides Four to determine the most practical, flexibility in development, as the cost-effective, and efficient direction schedule can be slowed or expedited for future development. according to actual demand at any given time over the planning period. The resulting plan provides airport PLANNING HORIZONS officials with a financially responsible and needs-based program. Table 3A Cost-effective, safe, efficient, and or- presents the planning horizon miles- derly development of an airport should tones for each activity demand catego- rely more on actual demand at an air- ry. The planning milestones of short, port than a time-based forecast figure. intermediate, and long term generally Thus, in order to develop a Master correlate to the five, ten, and twenty- Plan that is demand-based rather year periods used in the previous than time-based, a series of planning chapter. horizon milestones have been established that take into consideration the The Mesa-Falcon Field Airport airport reasonable range of aviation demand traffic control tower (ATCT) is not projections. manned 24 hours per day, so the existing operational count is not all- It is important to consider that over inclusive of operations at the airport. time, the actual activity at the airport Certain elements of the planning ana- may be higher or lower than what the lyses, however, require that all the annualized forecast portrays. By airport activity be considered. For planning according to activity miles- these evaluations, it is necessary to tones, the resulting plan can accom- estimate and adjust for operations modate unexpected shifts or changes that occur when the tower is closed. in the aviation demand. It is impor- The Mesa-Falcon Field ATCT hours tant to plan for these milestones so are from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. The that airport officials can respond to operations were increased by three unexpected changes in a timely fa- percent for nighttime adjustment and shion. As a result, these milestones included in the table.

3-2

TABLE 3A Planning Horizon Activity Summary Mesa-Falcon Field Airport Short Intermediate Long Term Term Term 2007 (0-5 years) (6-10 years) (11-20 years) Itinerant Operations General Aviation 134,773 150,000 170,000 195,000 Air Taxi 6,912 8,900 10,800 16,000 Military 1,746 4,000 4,000 4,000 Total Itinerant 143,431 162,900 184,800 215,000 Local Operations General Aviation 170,026 190,000 210,000 235,000 Military 672 1,000 1,000 1,000 Total Local 170,698 191,000 211,000 236,000 Nighttime 3% Adjustment 9,424 10,600 11,900 13,500 TOTAL OPERATIONS 323,553 364,500 407,700 464,500 TOTAL BASED AIRCRAFT 892 1,150 1,300 1,500

AIRFIELD PLANNING The FAA has established a coding sys- CRITERIA tem to relate airport design criteria to the operational and physical characte- The selection of appropriate Federal ristics of aircraft expected to use the Aviation Administration (FAA) design airport. This airport reference code standards for the development and lo- (ARC) has two components. The first cation of airport facilities is based component, depicted by a letter, is the primarily upon the characteristics of aircraft approach category and relates the aircraft which are currently using to aircraft approach speed (operational or are expected to use the airport. The characteristic); the second component, critical design aircraft is used to de- depicted by a Roman numeral, is the fine the design parameters for the air- airplane design group and relates to port. The critical design aircraft is de- aircraft wingspan (physical characte- fined as the most demanding category ristic). Generally, aircraft approach of aircraft, or family of aircraft, which speed applies to runways and runway- conducts at least 500 operations per related facilities, while aircraft year at the airport. Planning for fu- wingspan primarily relates to separa- ture aircraft use is of particular im- tion criteria involving taxiways, tax- portance since design standards are ilanes, and landside facilities. used to plan many airside and landside components. These future stan- According to FAA Advisory Circular dards must be considered now to en- (AC) 150/5300-13, Airport Design, sure that short term development does Change 11, an aircraft’s approach cat- not preclude the long range potential egory is based upon 1.3 times its stall needs of the airport. speed in landing configuration at that aircraft’s maximum certificated

3-3 weight. The five approach categories Field Airport through the planning pe- used in airport planning are as fol- riod. Operations by aircraft in ARCs lows: C-I through D-II are also somewhat limited by available runway length at Category A: Speed less than 91 knots. the airport. Category B: Speed 91 knots or more, but less than 121 knots. The FAA recommends designing air- Category C: Speed 121 knots or more, port functional elements to meet the but less than 141 knots. requirements for the most demanding Category D: Speed 141 knots or more, ARC for that airport. The majority of but less than 166 knots. aircraft currently operating at the air- Category E: Speed greater than 166 port are small single engine aircraft knots. weighing less than 12,500 pounds. The airport also has a significant vo- The airplane design group (ADG) is lume of corporate aircraft ranging based upon either the aircraft’s from the smaller Cessna Citation fam- wingspan or tail height, whichever is ily to the Challenger 600, which can greater. For example, an aircraft may weigh more than 50,000 pounds. fall in ADG II for wingspan at 70 feet, but ADG III for tail height at 33 feet. In order to determine airfield design This aircraft would be classified under requirements, the critical aircraft and ADG III. The six ADGs used in air- critical ARC should first be deter- port planning are as follows: mined, and then appropriate airport design criteria can be applied. This Tail Height Wingspan process begins with a review of air- ADG (feet) (feet) craft currently using the airport and I <20 <49 those expected to use the airport II 20 - <30 49 - <79 through the long term planning pe- III 30 - <45 79 - <118 IV 45 - <60 118 - <171 riod. V 60 - <66 171 - <214 VI 66 - <80 214 - <262 Source: AC 150/5300-13, Change 11 CURRENT CRITICAL AIRCRAFT (March 2007) The critical design aircraft is defined as the most demanding category of Exhibit 3A summarizes representa- aircraft which conduct 500 or more op- tive aircraft by ARC. As shown on the erations at the airport each year. In exhibit, the airport does not currently, some cases, more than one specific nor is it expected to, regularly serve make and model of aircraft comprises aircraft in ARCs C-III, D-III, C-IV, D- the airport’s critical design aircraft. IV, or D-V. These are large transport For example, one category of aircraft aircraft commonly used by commercial may be the most critical in terms of air carriers and air cargo carriers, approach speed, while another is most which do not currently use, nor are critical in terms of wingspan. Smaller they expected to use, Mesa-Falcon general aviation piston-powered air-

3-4 • Beech Baron 55 A-I • Beech Bonanza C-I, D-I • Cessna 150 • Beech 400 06MP17-3A-1/21/09 • Cessna 172 • Lear 25, 31, 35, 45, • Cessna Citation 55, 60 Mustang • Israeli Westwind • Eclipse 500 • HS 125-400, 700 • Piper Archer • Piper Seneca

less than • Cessna Citation III, 12,500 lbs. • Beech Baron 58 B-IB-I less than C-II, D-II VI, VIII, X 12,500 lbs. • Beech King Air 100 • Gulfstream II, III, IV • Cessna 402 • Canadair 600 • Cessna 421 • ERJ-135, 140, 145 • Piper Navajo • CRJ-200, 700, 900 • Piper Cheyenne • Embraer Regional Jet • Swearingen Metroliner • Lockheed JetStar • Cessna Citation I • Super King Air 350

less than 12,500 lbs. • ERJ-170, 190 B-II C-III, D-III • Boeing Business Jet • B 727-200 • Super King Air 200 • B 737-300 Series • Cessna 441 • MD-80, DC-9 • DHC Twin Otter • Fokker 70, 100 • A319, A320 • Gulfstream V • Global Express

over 12,500 lbs. C-IV, D-IV B-I, B-II • Super King Air 300 • B-757 • Beech 1900 • B-767 • Jetstream 31 • C-130 • Falcon 10, 20, 50 • DC-8-70 • Falcon 200, 900 • DC-10 • Citation II, III, IV, V • MD-11 • Saab 340 • L1011 • Embraer 120

A-III, B-III • DHC Dash 7 D-V • DHC Dash 8 • DC-3 • Convair 580 • B-747 Series • Fairchild F-27 • B-777 • ATR 72 • ATP

Note: Aircraft pictured is identified in bold type. MESA-FALCONMESA-FALCON FIELDFIELD AIRPORTAIRPORT Exhibit 3A AIRPORT REFERENCE CODES craft within approach categories A and and jet aircraft using the airport B and ADG I conduct the majority of should also be considered. operations at Mesa-Falcon Field Air- port. Business turboprops and jets with longer wingspans and higher ap- Turboprop and Jet Operations proach speeds also utilize the airport less frequently. A wide range of transient turboprop and jet aircraft operate at the airport. General aviation aircraft using the In order to discern the number and airport include a variety of small sin- type of turboprop and jet operations at gle and multi-engine piston-powered Mesa-Falcon Field Airport, an analy- aircraft, turboprops, and jet aircraft. sis of instrument flight plan data was While the airport is used by a number conducted. Flight plan data was ac- of helicopters, helicopters are not in- quired for this study from the sub- cluded in this determination as they scription service, Airport IQ. The data are not assigned an ARC. available includes documentation of flight plans that are opened and closed As of March 2007, there were 892 on the ground at the airport. Flight based aircraft at Mesa-Falcon Field plans that are opened or closed from Airport. The majority of these are the air are not credited to the airport. single and multi-engine piston- Therefore, it is likely that there are powered aircraft which fall within ap- more turboprop and jet operations at proach categories A and B and ADG I. the airport that are not captured by There are 13 turboprop aircraft and 11 the methodology. Additionally, some jets based at the airport. The most turboprops and jets conduct operations demanding of the turboprops is the within the traffic pattern at the air- King Air B300, with a published ap- port. These local operations are also proach speed and wingspan that cate- not captured on instrument flight gorizes it as an ARC B-II aircraft. Of plans. the 11 jets, three of these are in the Cessna Citation family of aircraft, Table 3B presents private jet and with the most demanding being a turboprop operations at Mesa-Falcon Cessna 550, which also falls in ARC B- Field Airport from June 1, 2006, to II. The remaining jets are warbirds June 2, 2007 (12-month operational that are in various states of restora- count). The privately owned and option. The warbirds that do fly do so erated aircraft are not flown under irregularly and are not considered in Federal Aviation Regulation (F.A.R.) the critical aircraft determination. Part 135 (considered air taxi). These Before making a final determination operations would be considered itine- of the critical aircraft family, an ex- rant general aviation operations. amination of the transient turboprop

3-5

TABLE 3B Private Jet and Turboprop Operations (Minimum) June 1, 2006 - June 2, 2007 Mesa-Falcon Field Airport Aircraft Annual Number ARC Type Operations % of Jets % JETS B-I Cessna 500 62 3.6% 4 1.4% Cessna 501 30 1.8% 12 4.2% Premier 390 29 1.7% 5 1.7% Mitsubishi MU-300 3 0.3% 1 0.9% Falcon 10 7 0.4% 3 1.0% Total B-I 131 7.7% 25 8.7% B-II Cessna 525 121 7.1% 24 8.4% Cessna 550 142 8.4% 17 5.9% Cessna 551 4 0.2% 2 0.7% Cessna 560 90 5.3% 22 7.7% Hawker 800 14 0.8% 5 1.7% Hawker 850XP 2 0.1% 1 0.3% Falcon 20 12 0.7% 2 0.7% Falcon 50 8 0.5% 3 1.0% Falcon 200 2 0.1% 1 0.3% Falcon 900 4 0.2% 2 0.7% Total B-II 399 23.5% 79 27.5% C-I Lear 23 2 0.1% 1 0.3% Lear 24 4 0.2% 2 0.7% Lear 31 5 0.3% 3 1.0% Lear 35 10 0.6% 5 1.7% Lear 45 27 1.6% 6 2.1% IAI Westwind 19 1.1% 3 1.0% Beechjet 400 22 1.3% 5 1.7% Total C-I 89 5.2% 25 8.7% C-II Cessna 650 4 0.2% 2 0.7% Gulfstream G-200 2 0.1% 1 0.3% Challenger 600 31 1.8% 6 2.1% Challenger BD-100 4 0.2% 2 0.7% IAI Astra 1125 6 0.4% 1 0.3% IAI Galaxy 2 0.1% 1 0.3% Embraer 135BJ 2 0.1% 1 0.3% Total C-II 51 3.0% 14 4.9% C-III Global Express 2 0.1% 1 0.3% Total C-III 2 0.1% 1 0.3% D-I Lear 60 2 0.1% 1 0.3% Total D-I 2 0.1% 1 0.3% D-II Gulfstream II 20 1.2% 10 3.5% Gulfstream IV 14 0.8% 7 2.4% Total D-II 34 2.0% 17 5.9% D-III Gulfstream V 9 0.5% 2 0.7% Total D-III 9 0.5% 2 0.7% Total Jet Activity 717 42.2% 164 57.1%

3-6

TABLE 3B (Continued) Private Jet and Turboprop Operations (Minimum) June 1, 2006 - June 2, 2007 Mesa-Falcon Field Airport Aircraft Annual Number of ARC Type Operations % Turboprops % TURBOPROPS B-I Piaggio P-180 10 0.6% 4 1.4% Socata TBM-700 47 2.8% 11 3.8% Turbo Commander 690 70 4.1% 9 3.1% Mitsubishi MU-2 6 0.4% 2 0.7% Beech King Air 100 14 0.8% 4 1.4% Total B-I 147 8.7% 30 10.5% B-II Cessna Conquest II 36 2.1% 4 1.4% Beech King Air C90 259 15.2% 40 13.9% Beech King Air 200 147 8.7% 30 10.5% Beech King Air B300 376 22.1% 15 5.2% Swearingen Metro 17 1.0% 4 1.4% Total B-II 835 49.1% 93 32.4% Total Turboprop Activity 982 57.8% 123 42.9% Total Activity (Jet+Turboprop) 1,699 100.0% 287 100.0% Source: Airport IQ utilizing FAA data

There were a total of 1,699 operations The most demanding privately operat- by privately owned jet and turboprop ed aircraft, in terms of ARC design aircraft. The greatest number of op- standard, has been the Gulfstream V. erations in any single ARC family was The Gulfstream V is classified by the 1,234 in ARC B-II. This number FAA as ARC D-III. Several ARC C-II overwhelmingly accounted for the ma- operations by the Challenger 600 were jority of private jet and turboprop op- also conducted at the airport over the erations, at more than 72 percent. last year.

The table also presents the number of Another segment of corporate aircraft operations by specific aircraft type. users operate under F.A.R. Part 135 The Cessna 550 model, which includes (air taxi) rules for hire and through one of the based jet aircraft at the air- fractional ownership programs. Air port, performed the most jet opera- taxi operators are governed by the tions (142) at the airport. There were FAA rules which are more stringent 17 different Cessna 550 aircraft which than those required for private air- accounted for this total. As for the craft owners. For example, aircraft turboprop aircraft, the King Air B300 operating under Part 135 rules must conducted 376 operations, and the increase their calculated landing King Air C90 recorded 259 operations. length requirements by 20 percent for These aircraft types represent six of safety factors. Fractional ownership the 13 based turboprop aircraft at the operators are actual aircraft owners airport. who acquire a portion of an aircraft with the ability to use any aircraft in the program’s fleet. These programs 3-7 have become quite popular over the erators accounted for an additional last several years, especially since 298 jet and turboprop operations. Ta- 9/11. Some of the most notable frac- ble 3C provides additional informa- tional ownership programs include tion regarding the ARC of many of the NetJets, Bombardier Flexjet, Citation aircraft utilized by the fractional and Shares, and Flight Options. charter companies which operate at Mesa-Falcon Field Airport. From June 1, 2006, to June 2, 2007, air taxi and fractional ownership op-

TABLE 3C Air Taxi Jet and Turboprop Operations Mesa-Falcon Field Airport ARC Aircraft Type Annual Operations % JETS B-I Cessna 500 8 2.7% Total B-I 8 2.7% B-II Cessna 525 2 0.7% Cessna 550 4 1.3% Cessna 560 56 18.8% Cessna 680 10 3.4% Hawker 800 30 10.1% Falcon 2000 10 3.4% Total B-II 112 37.6% C-I Lear 24 2 0.7% Lear 25 2 0.7% Lear 35 24 8.1% Lear 45 4 1.3% Beechjet 400 12 4.0% Total C-I 44 14.8% C-II Cessna 650 2 0.7% Cessna 750 (X) 28 9.4% Challenger 300 10 3.4% Challenger 600 4 1.3% IAI Galaxy 20 6.7% Total C-II 64 21.5% D-I Lear 60 2 0.7% Total D-I 2 0.7% D-II Gulfstream III 6 2.0% Total D-II 6 2.0% Total Jet Activity 236 79.2% TURBOPROPS B-I Socata TBM-700 2 0.7% Total B-I 2 0.7% B-II King Air C90 34 11.4% King Air 200 20 6.7% King Air 350 4 1.3% Swearingen Metro 2 0.7% Total B-II 60 20.1% Total Turboprop Activity 62 20.8% Total Activity (Jet + Turboprop) 298 100.0% Source: Airport IQ utilizing FAA data

3-8 The combination of private and air shold of 500 operations per year to be taxi jet and turboprop operations ac- considered the current critical design counted for a minimum of 1,997 itine- aircraft. In fact, ARC B-II aircraft to- rant operations at Mesa-Falcon Field taled approximately 70 percent of all Airport over a one-year time period, as operations used in this analysis. presented in Table 3D. Based upon Therefore, the current critical design operational estimates, operations by aircraft for Mesa-Falcon Field Airport jet and turboprop aircraft within ARC is defined by cabin-class aircraft in B-II exceed the substantial use thre- ARC B-II.

TABLE 3D Total Jet and Turboprop Operations by ARC Mesa-Falcon Field Airport Aircraft Reference Total Total Total Code (ARC) Turbojet Ops Turboprop Ops Combined B-I 139 149 288 B-II 511 895 1,406 C-I 133 N/A 133 C-II 115 N/A 115 C-III 2 N/A 2 D-I 4 N/A 4 D-II 40 N/A 40 D-III 9 N/A 9 Totals 953 1,044 1,997 Source: Airport IQ

FUTURE CRITICAL AIRCRAFT aviation aircraft. The airport is also capable of serving the majority of The aviation demand forecasts indi- business jet aircraft. The majority of cate the potential for continued business jets in the fleet today are in growth in business jet and turboprop ARC B-I through B-II. With a 5,101- aircraft activity at the airport. This foot main runway, larger business jet includes the addition of 37 based jets operations may be limited due to the and 17 based turboprops through the fact that some of these jets prefer or long term planning period. Transient are required to operate at an airport business jet and turboprop activity is with a longer runway. also expected to continue to be strong. Therefore, it is expected that business Analysis of the operations of larger jet and turboprop aircraft will contin- business jets in approach category C ue to define the critical aircraft para- indicates that 250 operations were meters for Mesa-Falcon Field Airport conducted from June 1, 2006, to June through the planning period. 2, 2007. This includes aircraft such as the Lear 35, Citation 750 (X), and Mesa-Falcon Field Airport is fully ca- Challenger 600. These larger business pable of serving the full breadth of pis- jets will likely never frequent the air- ton-powered and turboprop general port on a regular basis due to the

3-9 amount of runway length available.  Runway Use – Runway use in ca- The hot weather conditions that pre- pacity conditions will be controlled vail during a significant portion of the by wind and/or airspace conditions. year will further limit their capability For Mesa-Falcon Field Airport, the of utilizing the airport. Projecting direction of take-offs and landings their activity in the long term to ex- are generally determined by the ceed the FAA threshold of 500 annual speed and direction of the wind. It operations is not justified. Thus, the is generally safest for aircraft to ta- future critical aircraft is projected to keoff and land into the wind, avoid- remain as ARC B-II. ing a crosswind (wind that is blow- ing perpendicular to the travel of the aircraft) or tailwind components AIRFIELD CAPACITY during these operations. Based upon information received from the Airfield capacity is measured in a va- ATCT, Runway 22L and 22R are riety of different ways. The hourly utilized approximately 60 percent of capacity of a runway measures the the time, with Runway 4L and 4R maximum number of aircraft opera- being utilized approximately 40 tions that can take place in an hour. percent of the time. The availabili- The annual service volume (ASV) ty of instrument approaches is also is an annual level of service that may considered. Runway 4R is the only be used to define airfield capacity runway served by a straight-in in- needs. Aircraft delay is the total de- strument approach procedure. The lay incurred by aircraft using the air- airport is also served by a circling field during a given timeframe. FAA approach. Advisory Circular 150/5060-5, Airport Capacity and Delay, provides a me-  Exit Taxiways – Exit taxiways thodology for examining the opera- have a significant impact on airfield tional capacity of an airfield for plan- capacity since the number and loca- ning purposes. This analysis takes tion of exits directly determines the into account specific factors about the occupancy time of an aircraft on the airfield. These various factors are de- runway. The airfield capacity anal- picted in Exhibit 3B. The following ysis gives credit to exits located describes the input factors as they re- within the prescribed range from a late to Mesa-Falcon Field Airport: runway’s threshold. This range is based upon the mix index of the air-  Runway Configuration – The ex- craft that use the runways. For isting runway configuration con- Mesa-Falcon Field Airport, those sists of a parallel runway system exit taxiways located between 2,000 with full-length parallel taxiways. and 4,000 feet of the landing thre- The runways have a centerline-to- shold count in the capacity deter- centerline separation of 700 feet. mination. The exits must be at The primary runway is 5,101 feet least 750 feet apart to count as sep- long and the secondary runway is arate exits. Under this criteria, 3,799 feet long. there are two exits available within

3-10 AIRFIELD LAYOUT

05MP07-3B-1/21/09 Runway Configuration Runway Use Number of Exits

WEATHER CONDITIONS VMC IMC PVC

AIRCRAFT MIX CC A&B Single Piston Business Jet Commuter

Wide Body Jet

Small Turboprop Twin Piston Regional Jet Commerical Jet DD

OPERATIONS

7 6 Arrivals and Total Annual 5 4 3 Departures Operations 2 1 JFMAMJJASOND Touch-and-Go Operations MESA-FALCONMESA-FALCON FIELDFIELD AIRPORTAIRPORT Exhibit 3B AIRFIELD CAPACITY FACTORS this range for Runways 4R and 22L.  Aircraft Mix – Aircraft mix for the Runways 4L and 22R each have capacity analysis is defined in just one exit within this range. For terms of four aircraft classes. this analysis, the more constraining Classes A and B consist of small circumstance was considered which and medium-sized propeller and lead to the use of one exit taxiway. some jet aircraft, all weighing 12,500 pounds or less. These air-  Weather Conditions – The airport craft are associated primarily with operates under visual meteorologi- general aviation activity, but do in- cal conditions (VMC) over 99.5 per- clude some air taxi, air cargo, and cent of the time. Instrument me- commuter aircraft. Class C consists teorological conditions (IMC) occur of aircraft weighing between 12,500 when cloud ceilings are between pounds and 300,000 pounds. These 500 and 1,000 feet. Poor visibility aircraft include most business jets conditions (PVC) apply for mini- and some turboprop aircraft. Class mums below 500 feet and one mile. D aircraft consists of large aircraft Because IMC and PVC occur less weighing more than 300,000 than one percent combined, they pounds. These aircraft are asso- are considered negligible for this ciated with airline and air cargo ac- analysis. Therefore, airfield capaci- tivities, and include the DC-10, Boe- ty for Mesa-Falcon Field Airport ing 767, and Boeing 747. The air- has been determined assuming that port does not experience operations VMC conditions occur 100 percent by Class D aircraft. A description of of the time. the classifications and the percentage mix for each planning horizon is presented in Table 3E.

TABLE 3E Aircraft Operational Mix - Capacity Analysis Mesa-Falcon Field Airport Short Term Intermediate Term Long Term Aircraft Classification Current (0-5 years) (6-10 years) (11-20 years) VFR Classes A & B 97.5% 96.6% 95.8% 95.1% Class C 2.5% 3.4% 4.2% 4.9% Class D 0% 0% 0% 0% Percent Local Operations (Touch-and-Go's) 52% 52% 52% 51% Definitions: Class A: Small single engine aircraft with gross weights of 12,500 pounds or less Class B: Small twin-engine aircraft with gross weights of 12,500 pounds or less Class C: Large aircraft with gross weights over 12,500 pounds up to 300,000 pounds Class D: Large aircraft with gross weights over 300,000 pounds

 Percent Arrivals – Generally fol- presented in Table 3E. This activi- lows the typical 50/50 percent split. ty typically includes local flight training operations.  Touch-and-Go Activity – Percen- tages of touch-and-go activity are

3-11  Peak Period Operations – For percentage of large aircraft weighing the airfield capacity analysis, aver- over 12,500 pounds, the hourly capaci- age daily operations and average ty of the system declines slightly. As peak hour operations during the indicated in Table 3E, the percentag- peak month, as calculated in the es of Class C aircraft will increase previous section, are utilized. Typi- with the planning horizon activity mi- cal operations activity is important lestones. This results in a slight de- in the calculation of an airport’s cline in the hourly capacity. This pro- annual service volume as “peak de- gression would be representative as mand” levels occur sporadically. corporate aircraft operations will like- The peak periods used in the capac- ly increase at a greater rate than oth- ity analysis are representative of er general aviation operations. normal operational activity and can be exceeded at various times The current and future hourly capaci- throughout the year. ties are depicted in Table 3F. At Me- sa-Falcon Field Airport, the current hourly capacity is 194 operations. CALCULATION OF This is expected to decline to 184 op- ANNUAL SERVICE VOLUME erations in the long term. The dead- line can be attributed to the projected The preceding information was used increase in jet and turboprop activity in conjunction with the airfield capaci- which typically requires additional ty methodology developed by the FAA space and time in the aircraft traffic to determine airfield capacity for Me- pattern and on the runway system. sa-Falcon Field Airport. This is still above the design hour of 166 operations expected in the long term. Hourly Runway Capacity

The first step in determining annual Annual Service Volume service volume involves the computa- tion of the hourly capacity of each Once the hourly capacity is known, the runway configuration. The percentage ASV can be determined. Annual ser- use of each runway, the amount of vice volume is calculated by the follow- touch-and-go training activity, and the ing equation: number and location of runway exits become important factors in determin- ASV = C x D x H ing the hourly capacity of each runway C = weighted hourly capacity configuration. D = ratio of annual demand to the average daily demand during the peak Based upon the input factors, current month and future hourly capacities at Mesa- H = ratio of average daily demand to Falcon Field Airport were determined. the design hour demand during the peak month As the mix of aircraft operating at an airport changes to include a higher

3-12 The ratio of annual demand to average Aircraft Delay daily demand (D) was determined to be 316 for Mesa-Falcon Field Airport. As the number of annual aircraft op- This is expected to decrease slightly erations approaches the airfield’s ca- over the long range planning period. pacity, increasing operational delays The ratio of average daily demand to begin to occur. Delays occur to arriv- average peak hour demand (H) was ing and departing aircraft in all determined to be 7.7. This ratio was weather conditions. Arriving aircraft projected to increase to 8.9 by the long delays result in aircraft holding out- term planning horizon. side the airport traffic area. Depart- ing aircraft delays result in aircraft The current ASV was determined to holding until released by air traffic be 472,000 operations. As peaks control. spread, becoming less concentrated with increased operations, the ASV Table 3F summarizes the aircraft de- will tend to increase, resulting in an lay analysis conducted for Mesa- annual service volume of 516,000 by Falcon Field Airport. Current annual the long term planning horizon. With delay is estimated at 0.4 minutes per operations in 2007 totaling 323,553, aircraft operation or 2,157 annual the airport is currently at 68.5 percent hours. As an airport’s operations near of its annual service volume. Long the annual service volume, delays in- range annual operations are forecast crease exponentially. Analysis of de- to reach nearly 464,500 operations, lay factors for the long range planning which would be 90 percent of the air- horizon indicates that annual delays port’s ASV. Table 3F summarizes the can be expected to reach 6,968 hours, airport’s ASV over the long range or 0.9 minutes per aircraft operation. planning horizon.

TABLE 3F Airfield Demand/Capacity Summary Mesa-Falcon Field Airport Short Term Intermediate Term Long Term Current (0-5 years) (6-10 years) (11-20 years) Operational Demand Annual 323,553 364,500 407,700 464,500 Design Hour 133 150 155 166 Capacity Annual Service Volume 472,000 460,000 493,000 516,000 Percent Capacity 68.5 79.2 82.7 90.0 Weighted Hourly Capacity 194 189 187 184 Delay Per Operation (Minutes) 0.4 0.5 0.7 0.9 Total Annual (Hours) 2,157 3,038 4,757 6,968

3-13 CAPACITY ANALYSIS  Runways CONCLUSIONS  Safety Area Design Standards  Taxiways Exhibit 3C compares annual service  Airfield Lighting, Marking, and volume to existing and forecast opera- Signage tional levels at Mesa-Falcon Field Air-  Navigational Aids and Instrument port. The current operations level Approach Procedures represents 68.5 percent of the airfield’s annual service volume. By the end of the planning period, total an- RUNWAYS nual operations are expected to represent 90 percent of annual service Runway conditions such as orienta- volume. tion, length, pavement strength, width, and safety standards at Mesa- FAA Order 5090.3B, Field Formula- Falcon Field Airport were analyzed. tion of the National Plan of Integrated From this information, requirements Airport Systems (NPIAS), indicates for runway improvements were de- that improvements for airfield capaci- termined for the airport. ty purposes should begin to be considered once operations reach 60 to 75 Primary Runway 4R-22L at Mesa- percent of the annual service volume. Falcon Field Airport is currently de- This is an approximate level to begin signed to ARC B-II standards. Plan- the detailed planning of capacity im- ning and development considerations provements. This range has been will keep this runway as ARC B-II. reached and could be exceeded by the short term planning horizon. An ex- Parallel Runway 4L-22R currently ample of a capacity improvement possesses design standards that con- would include additional taxiway ex- form to ARC B-I in some categories its. Options to increase capacity will and ARC B-II in others. According to be considered and evaluated in the al- Mesa-Falcon Field ATCT personnel, ternatives analyses of the next chap- the majority of aircraft that operate on ter. this runway are in ARC A-I and B-I; however, some larger aircraft, in particular King Air turboprops, do utilize AIRFIELD REQUIREMENTS the runway on an infrequent basis. In an effort to protect the safety areas Airfield requirements include the need related to this runway, future consid- for those facilities related to the arriv- eration should be given to upgrading al and departure of aircraft. The ade- this runway to full ARC B-II stan- quacy of existing airfield facilities at dards. Mesa-Falcon Field Airport has been analyzed from a number of perspec- tives, including:

3-14 6600,00000,000 06MP17-3C-7/18/07

5500,00000,000

5516,00016,000 4493,00093,000 4472,00072,000 4400,00000,000 4460,00060,000

AANNUALNNUAL SSERVICEERVICE VVOLUMEOLUME 4464,50064,500

4407,70007,700 3300,00000,000 3364,50064,500

3323,55323,553 2200,00000,000

OOPERATIONALPERATIONAL DDEMANDEMAND FFORECASTORECAST 1100,00000,000

Existing SShorthort IIntermediatentermediate LLongong TTermerm TermTerm TermTerm

Exhibit 3C AIRFIELD DEMAND VS. CAPACITY Runway Orientation limit the feasibility of a crosswind runway at Mesa-Falcon Field Airport. The airport is served by a parallel Further, the existing runway orienta- runway system orientated in a north- tion fails to meet the 95 percent wind east-southwest manner. For the oper- coverage standard by only 0.49 per- ational safety and efficiency of an air- cent. This equates to only two days port, it is desirable for the primary worth of additional crosswind compo- runway to be orientated as close as nents exceeding the 10.5 knot stan- possible to the direction of the prevail- dard for ARC A-I and B-I aircraft. In ing wind. This reduces the impact of addition, the main runway is 100 feet wind components perpendicular to the wide, which provides a greater safety direction of travel of an aircraft that is margin for aircraft operating in cross- landing or taking off (defined as a wind conditions. Even if feasible, the crosswind). costs of constructing a crosswind runway would far exceed the benefit of FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13, meeting the standard. As a result, no Change 11, Airport Design, recom- additional runway orientations will be mends that a crosswind runway planned. should be made available when the primary runway orientation provides less than 95 percent wind coverage for Runway Length specific crosswind components. The 95 percent wind coverage is computed The determination of runway length on the basis of the crosswind compo- requirements for the airport is based nent not exceeding 10.5 knots (12 on five primary factors: mph) for ARC A-1 and B-I; 13 knots (15 mph) for ARC A-II and B-II; 16  Mean maximum daily temperature knots (18 mph) for ARC C-I through of the hottest month D-II; and 20 knots for ARC A-IV  Airport elevation through D-VI.  Runway gradient  Critical aircraft type expected to Wind data specific to the airport is use the airport available and is depicted on Exhibit  Stage length of the longest nonstop 3D. The runway orientation provides trip destination (specific to larger 94.51 percent wind coverage for 10.5 aircraft) knot crosswinds, 97.73 percent wind coverage at 13 knots, and 99.65 per- The mean maximum daily tempera- cent coverage at 16 knots. Aircraft in ture of the hottest month for Mesa- ARC A-I and B-I could experience Falcon Field Airport is 106 degrees crosswinds exceeding 10.5 knots or Fahrenheit (F). The airport elevation greater 5.49 percent of the year. is 1,394 feet above mean sea level (MSL). The maximum runway end According to FAA planning standards, elevation difference for Runway 4R- a crosswind runway should be 22L is 29 feet, while the elevation dif- planned, if feasible. Topographical ference for Runway 4L-22R is 20 feet. features and surrounding development Runway 4R-22L has a longitudinal 3-15 gradient of 0.6 percent, while Runway tions of general aviation aircraft at 4L-22R has 0.5 percent longitudinal Mesa-Falcon Field Airport. These gradient, both of which conform to were derived utilizing the FAA Airport FAA design standards. For aircraft in Design Computer Program for Run- approach categories A and B, the runway Lengths Recommended for Airport way longitudinal gradient cannot ex- Design. These runway lengths are ceed two percent. For aircraft in ap- based upon groupings or “families” of proach categories C and D, the maxi- aircraft. As discussed earlier, the mum allowable longitudinal runway runway design required should be gradient is 1.5 percent. based upon the most critical family with at least 500 annual operations. Table 3G outlines the runway length requirements for various classifica-

TABLE 3G Runway Length Requirements Mesa-Falcon Field Airport Airport and Runway Data Airport Elevation 1,394 feet MSL Mean daily maximum temperature of the hottest month 106 degrees F Maximum difference in runway centerline elevation 29 feet Length of haul for airplanes of more than 60,000 1,000 miles Dry runways Runway Length Recommended for Airport Design Small airplanes with less than 10 passenger seats 75 percent of these small airplanes 3,200 feet 95 percent of these small airplanes 3,800 feet 100 percent of these small airplanes 4,500 feet Small airplanes with 10 or more passenger seats 4,800 feet Large airplanes of 60,000 pounds or less 75 percent of business jets at 60 percent useful load 5,500 feet Source: FAA Airport Design Computer Program utilizing Chapter Two of AC 150/5325-4A, Runway Length Requirements for Airport Design

The current critical aircraft using the would be recommended. Some aircraft airport falls in ARC B-II. The catego- in approach categories C and D will ry of “100 percent of small airplanes continue to utilize the airport, but with less than 10 passenger seats” they are not expected to reach 500 an- generally corresponds to ARC B-II air- nual operations within the long term craft. As the table shows, conditions planning horizon of this plan. As call for a runway length of at least such, the current length of Runway 4,500 feet to accommodate this air- 4R-22L will be adequate through the craft category. At 5,101 feet, Runway planning period. 4R-22L exceeds this recommended length. The critical aircraft will re- The shorter parallel Runway 4L-22R main within ARC B-II. For ARC C-II is currently 3,799 feet long. This aircraft, 5,500 feet of runway length length exceeds the category of “75 per- 3-16 cent of small airplanes with less than capable of accommodating emergency 10 passenger seats,” which generally and maintenance vehicles as well as corresponds to ARC B-I aircraft. As the occasional passage of an aircraft previously mentioned, in order to sa- veering from the primary runway sur- tisfy ARC B-II aircraft demands, this faces. Typically, runway shoulders runway would need to be at least are paved surfaces, as is the case at 4,500 feet long. After review of safety Mesa-Falcon Field Airport. The run- areas (in particular, the runway safety way shoulders should be maintained area and object free area) associated on both runways. with this runway, it may not be feasible to extend the runway given the obstructions associated with the ap- Runway Strength proach ends of each runway, which include East McDowell Road and North The officially published pavement Greenfield Road. More information strength rating for Runway 4R-22L is will be provided on the safety area de- 38,000 pounds single wheel loading sign standards in the following sec- (SWL). As previously mentioned, tion. SWL refers to the aircraft weight based upon the landing gear configu- The runway lengths available at Me- ration with a single wheel on each sa-Falcon Field Airport are capable of landing strut. The strength rating for accommodating the airport’s current dual wheel configurations (DWL) is and future critical aircraft. As such, 60,000 pounds, and 90,000 pounds for the existing runway lengths should be dual tandem wheel loading (DTWL). maintained in the future. DWL and DTWL include the design of aircraft landing gear with additional wheels on each landing gear strut Runway Width which distributes more of the aircraft weight on the runway and taxiway Runway 4R-22L is currently 100 feet surfaces; thus, the surface itself can wide, and Runway 4L-22R is currently support a greater total aircraft weight. 75 feet wide. FAA design standards Runway 4L-22R provides a strength call for a runway width of at least 75 rating of 12,500 pounds SWL. feet to serve aircraft up to ARC B-II, as long as the instrument approach The strength rating of a runway does minimums are not lower than three- not preclude aircraft weighing more quarters of a mile. Both runways cur- than the published strength rating rently meet FAA criteria for runway from using the runway. All federally width and should be maintained as obligated airports must remain open such. to the public, and it is typically up to the pilot of the aircraft to determine if The runway shoulder width for Group a runway can support their aircraft I and II aircraft is 10 feet on both safely. An airport sponsor cannot re- sides. The shoulder areas provide re- strict an aircraft from using the run- sistance to blast erosion and must be way simply because its weight exceeds

3-17 the published strength rating. On the distances are a function of the ap- other hand, the airport sponsor has an proaches approved for the airport and obligation to properly maintain the the runway’s designated ARC. Under runway and protect the useful life of current conditions (ARC B-II, ap- the runway, typically for 20 years. proaches not lower than three- quarters of a mile), parallel taxiways According to the FAA published Air- need to be at least 240 feet from the port/Facility Directory, “Runway Runway 4R-22L centerline. Aircraft strength-rating is not intended as a parking areas are required to be at maximum allowable weight or as an least 250 feet from the runway center- operating limitation. Many airport line. pavements are capable of supporting limited operations with gross weights Currently, parallel Taxiway D located in excess of the published figures.” on the south side of Runway 4R-22L is The directory goes on to say that those located 250 feet from the runway cen- aircraft exceeding the pavement terline. The aircraft parking apron is strength should contact the airport located approximately 350 feet from sponsor for permission to operate at the runway centerline. These dis- the airport. tances exceed FAA standards.

The strength rating of a runway can Parallel Taxiway E is situated 200 feet change over time. Regular usage by (centerline to centerline) to the north heavier aircraft can decrease the of Runway 4L-22R. This exceeds the strength rating, while periodic runway FAA standard for ARC B-I (small air- resurfacing can increase the strength craft exclusively), but falls short of rating. The current strength ratings ARC B-II standards for a visual run- of Runway 4R-22L are adequate to way, which call for 240 feet. The serve the critical aircraft in ARC B-II north aircraft parking apron is ap- as well as occasional operations by proximately 270 feet from the runway heavier aircraft. The strength rating centerline, which exceeds the 250-foot of Runway 4L-22R is adequate to requirement for ARC B-II. serve small general aviation aircraft weighing less than 12,500 pounds. Consideration should be given to Runway Blast Pad strengthening this runway to 30,000 pounds SWL during the planning pe- The blast pad is a surface adjacent to riod. the ends of the runways provided to reduce the erosive effect of jet blast and propeller wash. Runway 4R-22L Runway/Taxiway Separation is equipped with 130-foot wide by 150- foot long blast pads off each end. This FAA AC 150/5300-13, Airport Design, meets the blast pad length for ARC B- Change 11, also discusses separation II runways with not lower than three- distances between aircraft and various quarters of a mile visibility and ex- areas on the airport. The separation ceeds the blast pad width for the same

3-18 runway ARC. Runway 4L-22R does the approach speed of the critical air- not currently have blast pads, but a craft using the runway. The FAA re- 60-foot by 80-foot pad would meet B-I quires the RSA to be cleared and standards, and a 150-foot by 95-foot graded, drained by grading or storm pad would meet B-II standards. sewers, capable of accommodating the design aircraft and fire and rescue vehicles, and free of obstacles not fixed Parallel Runway Separation by navigational purpose.

The parallel runways at Mesa-Falcon The FAA has placed a higher signific- Field Airport currently have a center- ance on maintaining adequate RSAs line separation of 700 feet. This meets at all airports due to recent aircraft the minimum standard for the exist- accidents. Under Order 5200.8, effec- ing and future critical aircraft under tive October 1, 1999, the FAA estab- visual flight rules (VFR). lished a Runway Safety Area Program. The Order states, “The objective of the Runway Safety Area Program is that SAFETY AREA all RSAs at federally-obligated air- DESIGN STANDARDS ports … shall conform to the standards contained in Advisory Circular The FAA has established several safe- 150/5300-13, Airport Design, to the ex- ty surfaces to protect aircraft opera- tent practicable.” Each Regional Air- tional areas and keep them free from ports Division of the FAA is obligated obstructions that could affect the safe to collect and maintain data on the operation of aircraft. These include RSA for each runway at the airport, the runway safety area (RSA), object and perform airport inspections. free area (OFA), obstacle free zone (OFZ), and runway protection zone For ARC B-II runways with not lower (RPZ). The dimensions of these safety than three-quarters of a mile approach areas are dependent upon the critical minimums, the FAA calls for the RSA aircraft and, thus, the ARC of the to be 150 feet wide and extend 300 feet runway. beyond the runway ends. As depicted on Exhibit 3E, the airport meets the RSA design requirements for Runway Runway Safety Area (RSA) 4R-22L.

The RSA is defined in FAA Advisory Parallel Runway 4L-22R also current- Circular 150/5300-13, Change 11, Air- ly meets the RSA standard for B-I and port Design, as a “surface surrounding B-II aircraft. ARC B-I standards call the runway prepared or suitable for for a runway’s RSA to be 120 feet wide reducing the risk of damage to air- and extend 240 feet beyond each run- planes in the event of an undershoot, way end. ARC B-II standards require overshoot, or excursion from the run- RSAs to be 150 feet wide, extending way.” The RSA is centered on the 300 feet beyond the runway end. In runway, dimensioned in accordance to an effort to protect safety areas to the

3-19 fullest extent possible, the more con- including taxiing and parked aircraft. straining safety design standards The only allowance for OFZ obstruc- (ARC B-II) should be maintained on tions is navigational aids mounted on this runway. frangible bases which are fixed in their location by function, such as airfield signs. The OFZ is established to Object Free Area (OFA) ensure the safety of aircraft operations. If the OFZ is obstructed, the The runway OFA is “a two- airport’s approaches could be removed dimensional ground area, surrounding or approach minimums could be in- runways, taxiways, and taxilanes, creased. which is clear of objects except for objects whose location is fixed by func- The FAA’s criterion for runways uti- tion (i.e., airfield lighting).” The OFA lized by small airplanes (those weigh- is centered on the runway, extending ing less than 12,500 pounds) with ap- out in accordance to the critical air- proach speeds greater than 50 knots craft design category utilizing the requires a clear OFZ to extend 200 runway. feet beyond the runway ends, by 250 feet wide (125 feet on either side of the For ARC B-II aircraft and approaches runway centerline). For runways not lower than three-quarters of a serving aircraft over 12,500 pounds, mile, the FAA calls for the OFA to be the OFZ width increases to 400 feet 500 feet wide (centered on the run- (200 feet on either side of the runway way), extending 300 feet beyond each centerline). runway end. Currently, Runway 4R-22L meets For ARC B-I (small aircraft exclusive- ARC B-II standards for OFZ. Runway ly), the OFA should be 250 feet wide, 4L-22R meets ARC B-I standards but and for ARC B-II, the OFA standard is falls short of ARC B-II standards, as 400 feet in width. Both categories ex- parallel Taxiway E to the north tra- tend the OFA 240 beyond each run- verses the OFZ. way end.

As depicted on Exhibit 3E, the air- Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) port currently meets OFA standards up to ARC B-II aircraft. Since the The RPZ is a trapezoidal area cen- critical aircraft for the airport is not tered on the runway, typically begin- expected to change during the planning 200 feet beyond the runway end. ning period, this OFA standard should The RPZ has been established by the remain the same. FAA to provide an area clear of obstructions and incompatible land uses in order to enhance the protection of Obstacle Free Zone (OFZ) approaching aircraft, as well as people and property on the ground. The di- The OFZ is an imaginary surface mensions of the RPZ vary according to which precludes object penetrations, 3-20 06MP17-3E-1/21/09

NNorthorth GGreenfieldreenfield RRd.d.

East McDowell Rd. McDowell E East

a s

RRunway 4L-22R (3,799’ x 75’) t

u n M

w c

a D y 4 o L w - 2 e

2 l

RRunway 4R-22L (5,101’ x 100’) R l

u R n (

3 d w ,

7 . a 9 y 9 4 ’ R x - 7 2 5 2 ’ L )

(5 ,1 0 1 ’ x 1 0 0 ’)

NNorthorth HHigleyigley RRd.d. * 600 0 mile visibility minimums) - ARC B-II (not lower than 3/4-statute PHOTOGRAPHY: FEBRUARY 2007 DATE OF SURROUNDING AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY: JULY 2006 DATEOF AIRPORT AERIAL BY KENNEY AERIAL MAPPING Current Avigation Easement Ultimate RPZ Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) Runway Safety Area (RSA) Object Free Area (OFA) Line Property Airport LEGEND BY TODD AERIAL

SCALE IN FEET NORTH FIELD AIRPORTF FIELD AIRPORT MESA-FALCONM SAFETY AREAS I E E L S D A 1200

* - A Exhibit 3E F I A R * L P C O O R N T the visibility requirements serving the course and residential area. To the runway and the type of aircraft oper- southwest, the RPZs extend across ating on the runway. North Greenfield Road and into an agricultural area currently owned by The lowest existing visibility mini- the airport. mum for approaches to the runways at Mesa-Falcon Field Airport is one mile. Where possible, the airport should RPZ dimensions for ARC B-I (small have positive control over the RPZ, aircraft exclusively) call for a 250-foot through fee simple acquisition; howev- inner width, extending outward 1,000 er, avigation easements (acquiring control of designated airspace within feet, to a 450-foot outer width. For the RPZ) can be pursued if fee simple ARC B-II, the RPZ has an inner width acquisition is not feasible. Currently, 500 feet, extending outward 1,000 feet, avigation easements totaling 9.15 to an outer width of 700 feet. acres are in place for the areas within the RPZs located outside of airport The RPZs located on the northeast property. The dimensions for RPZs, side of the airport extend across East considering existing and ultimate McDowell Road and North Higley ARCs, are detailed on Exhibit 3E and Road into a large parking lot owned by in Table 3H. The Boeing Company, as well as a golf

TABLE 3H Airfield Design Standards Mesa-Falcon Field Airport Runway 4R-22L Runway 4L-22R Airport Reference Existing B-II Existing B-I [small aircraft] B-II Code (ARC) (feet) (feet) (feet) (feet) (feet) Approach Visibility Minimums 1-mile Visual Runway Width 100 75 75 60 75 Runway Safety Area Width 150 150 150 120 150 Length Beyond Runway End 300 300 300 240 300 Object Free Area Width 500 500 500 250 500 Length Beyond Runway End 300 300 300 240 300 Obstacle Free Zone Width 400 400 350 250 400 Length Beyond Runway End 200 200 200 200 200 Runway Protection Zone Inner Width 500 500 250 250 500 Outer Width 700 700 450 450 700 Length 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 Runway Centerline to: Holding Position 200 200 125 125 200 Parallel Taxiway Centerline 250 240 200 150 240 Parallel Runway Centerline 700 700 700 700 700 Taxiway Width 50 35 40 25 35 Taxiway Object Free Area Width 131 131 131 89 131 Taxiway Centerline to: Fixed or Moveable Object 65.5 65.5 65.5 44.5 65.5

3-21 TAXIWAYS Potential locations for new exit taxiways that may improve capacity or Taxiways are constructed primarily to efficiency will be examined in Chapter facilitate aircraft movements to and Four – Airport Alternatives. from the runway system. Some taxiways are necessary simply to provide Right-angled exits may require an air- access between the aprons and run- craft to be nearly stopped before it can ways, whereas other taxiways become safely exit the runway. Angled exits necessary as activity increases at an allow aircraft to use a higher safe exit airport to provide safe and efficient speed while exiting the runway. use of the airfield. There are presently four angled exits

serving Runway 4R-22L and none on As detailed in Chapter One, Runway Runway 4L-22R. 4R-22L and Runway 4L-22R are each served by a full-length parallel taxiway. Table 3H outlines the runway Dimensional standards for the tax- to taxiway centerline separation stan- iways are depicted on Table 3H. The dards. Parallel Taxiway D is 250 feet airfield taxiways are at least 35 feet from primary Runway 4R-22L. This is wide, with several exceeding 50 feet in adequate for the existing and future width. All taxiways meet or exceed ARC B-II standards. Parallel Taxiway Design Group II standards and should E is located 200 feet from Runway 4L- be maintained through the planning 22R. While this satisfies ARC B-I period. standards for small aircraft exclusively, it falls short of the ARC B-II stan- Holding aprons and bypass taxiways dard that calls for a minimum 240- can also improve the efficiency of the foot separation. taxiway system. Currently, holding aprons or bypass taxiways are located Exit taxiways provide a means to en- at all runway ends except for Runway ter and exit the runways at various 22L, in which the holding apron is lo- points on the airfield. The type and cated approximately 700 feet from the number of exit taxiways can have a runway end. Runway 4R does have a direct impact on the capacity and effi- bypass taxiway but no holding apron. ciency of the airport as a whole. Run- Locations for additional holding way 4R-22L has a total of nine exit aprons will be discussed further in the taxiways on the south side of the run- next chapter. way and three on the north side of the runway. Runway 4L-22R has a total of three exit taxiways on each side of AIRFIELD LIGHTING, the runway. MARKING, AND SIGNAGE

Exit taxiways are most effective when There are a number of lighting and planned at least 750 feet apart. Some pavement marking aids serving pilots of the closely spaced exits are direc- using the airport. These aids assist tional, angled exits, and another acts pilots in locating the airport and run- as a bypass taxiway at the end of the way at night or in poor visibility con- runway, so they serve other purposes. 3-22 ditions. They also assist in the ground ual approach aids are commonly pro- movement of aircraft. vided at airports. Currently, all four runway ends at Mesa-Falcon Field Airport are equipped with a two-box Runway and Taxiway Lighting precision approach path indicator (PAPI-2). These units should be main- Runway identification lighting pro- tained throughout the ultimate plan- vides the pilot with a rapid and posi- ning period. Consideration should be tive identification of the runway and given to upgrading the two-box sys- its alignment. Runway 4R-22L and tems on Runway 4R-22L to four-box Runway 4L-22R are equipped with systems. The four-box systems are medium intensity runway lights better to serve the corporate aircraft (MIRL). Medium intensity taxiway currently using the airport because lighting (MITL) is provided on all tax- they are more visible for faster air- iways at the airport. The runway and craft. taxiway lighting systems are vital to the airport’s operations and should be maintained throughout the planning Runway End period. Identification Lighting

Runway end identification lights Airport Identification Lighting (REILs) are flashing lights located at each runway end that facilitate identi- The location of the airport at night is fication of the runway end at night or universally indicated by a rotating during poor visibility conditions. beacon. For civil airports, a rotating REILs provide pilots with the ability beacon projects two beams of light, one to identify the runway ends and dis- white and one green, 180 degrees tinguish the runway end lighting from apart. At Mesa-Falcon Field Airport, other lighting on the airport and in the beacon is located on top of the air- the approach areas. The FAA indi- port traffic control tower (ATCT). The cates that REILs should be considered beacon is sufficient and should be for all lighted runway ends not maintained through the planning pe- planned for a more sophisticated ap- riod. proach lighting system (ALS).

Currently, REILs are located on each Visual Approach Lighting end of Runway 4R-22L and should be maintained through the planning pe- In most instances, the landing phase riod. Runway 4L-22R, which has of any flight must be conducted in vis- MIRL, does not have REILs. Consid- ual conditions. To provide pilots with eration should be given to the installa- visual guidance information during tion of REILs on each end of this run- landings to the runway, electronic vis- way.

3-23 Pilot-Controlled Lighting The current hold positions associated with primary Runway 4R-22L are Mesa-Falcon Field Airport is equipped marked 200 feet from the runway cen- with pilot-controlled lighting (PCL) for terline. This meets the standard for Runway 4R-22L after the ATCT is ARC B-II aircraft and should be main- closed. With PCL, a pilot can control tained throughout the planning pe- airfield lights from their aircraft riod. The hold positions associated through a series of clicks of their radio with parallel Runway 4L-22R are transmitter. PCL also provides for marked 125 feet from the runway cen- more efficient use of energy. This sys- terline. This meets ARC B-I standard tem should be maintained through the for small airplanes, but would need to planning period. PCL does not apply be relocated to 200 feet from the run- for Runway 4L-22R due to the fact way centerline for the runway to meet that this runway is unavailable for use ARC B-II standards. after the ATCT closes each night.

Helipads Airfield Signs Mesa-Falcon Field Airport does have Airfield identification signs assist pi- two designated helipads on the main lots in identifying their location on the apron area east of the ATCT. These airfield and directing them to their de- areas should be maintained through- sired location. Lighted signs are in- out the course of the planning period stalled on all runway and taxiway in- as they allow for segregated parking of tersections serving Runway 4R-22L helicopters from fixed-wing aircraft, and Runway 4L-22R. All of these which is desirable. signs should be maintained throughout the planning period. NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND INSTRUMENT APPROACH Pavement Markings PROCEDURES

Runway markings are designed ac- Airport and runway navigational aids cording to the type of instrument ap- are based on FAA recommendations, proach available on the runway. FAA as defined in DOT/FAA Handbook AC 150/5340-1F, Marking of Paved 7031.2B, Airway Planning Standard Areas on Airports, provides guidance Number One, and FAA AC 150/5300- necessary to design airport markings. 2D, Airport Design Standards, Site Runway 4R-22L has non-precision Requirements for Terminal Navigation markings, and Runway 4L-22R has Facilities. basic markings. These markings should be properly maintained through the planning period.

3-24 Navigational Aids availability, and integrity. For civil aviation use, this includes the contin- Navigational aids are electronic devic- ued development of the Wide Area es that transmit radio frequencies Augmentation System (WAAS), which which properly equipped aircraft and was initially launched in 2003. The pilots translate into point-to-point WAAS uses a system of reference sta- guidance and position information. tions to correct signals from the GPS The very high frequency omnidirec- satellites for improved navigation and tional range (VOR), global positioning approach capabilities. Where the non- system (GPS), nondirectional beacon WAAS GPS signal provides for (NDB), and LORAN-C are available enroute navigation and limited in- for pilots to navigate to and from Me- strument approach (lateral naviga- sa-Falcon Field Airport. These sys- tion) capabilities, WAAS provides for tems are sufficient for navigation to approaches with both course and ver- and from the airport; therefore, no tical navigation. This capability was other navigational aids are needed at historically only provided by an in- the airport. strument landing system (ILS), which requires extensive on-airport facilities. After 2015, the WAAS upgrades are Instrument Approach Procedures expected to allow for the development of approaches to most airports with Instrument approach procedures cloud ceilings as low as 200 feet above (IAPs) are a series of predetermined the ground and visibilities restricted maneuvers established by the FAA us- to one-half mile. ing electronic navigational aids that assist pilots in locating and landing at Weather conditions at Mesa-Falcon an airport during low visibility and Field Airport are very rarely below cloud ceiling conditions. At Mesa- approach minimums to prevent an Falcon Field Airport, there is a aircraft from landing. The GPS- straight-in GPS approach to Runway WAAS would allow for lower approach 4R and a circling NDB or GPS-A ap- minimums at the airport, and could be proach to the airport. This approach an option in the future for improved allows aircraft to land at the airport approach procedures. It should be when visibility is as low as one mile noted, however, that any approach and cloud ceilings are as low as 419 providing less than one mile visibility feet above ground level (AGL) for air- minimums will require the installa- craft with approach speeds less than tion of an approach lighting system. 120 knots. For higher approach speeds, the visibility minimums increase to as much as 1.5 miles. Weather Reporting Aids

A GPS modernization effort is under- Mesa-Falcon Field Airport has a way by the FAA and focuses on aug- lighted wind cone and segmented cir- menting the GPS signal to satisfy re- cle as well as two supplemental quirements for accuracy, coverage, lighted wind cones. The lighted wind

3-25 cones provide information to pilots re- stallation of an AWOS at Mesa-Falcon garding wind conditions, such as di- Field Airport in order to provide cur- rection and speed. The segmented cir- rent weather conditions at the airport cle consists of a system of visual indi- during times when the ATCT is closed. cators designed to provide traffic pattern information to pilots. A wind cone and segmented circle are re- Air Traffic Control quired since the ATCT is not open 24 hours per day. These should be main- As previously mentioned, Mesa-Falcon tained throughout the planning pe- Field Airport has an operational air- riod. port traffic control tower that is at- tended from 6:00 a.m. through 9:00 The airport also has an on-site weath- p.m. local time daily. The control er observer. The limited aviation tower is owned and operated by the weather reporting station (LAWRS) FAA and provides several control ser- has personnel who report cloud height, vices, including approach and depar- weather, obstructions to visibility, ture clearances, automated terminal temperature, dew point, surface wind, information services (ATIS), and and altimeter settings. ground control.

Two types of automated weather ob- It is estimated that approximately serving systems are currently dep- three percent of the airport’s total loyed at airports around the country. ATCT counted operations occur during Automated Surface Observing System the hours when the tower is closed. (ASOS) and Automated Weather Ob- As traffic continues to grow, the ATCT serving System (AWOS) both measure hours of operation may need to be ex- and process surface weather observa- tended. tions 24 hours per day, with reporting varying from one minute to hourly. These systems provide near real-time LANDSIDE REQUIREMENTS measurements of atmospheric conditions. Landside facilities are those necessary for the handling of aircraft and pas- ASOS systems are typically commis- sengers while on the ground. These sioned by the National Weather Ser- facilities provide the essential inter- vice. AWOS systems are often com- face between the air and ground missioned by the Federal Aviation transportation modes. The capacity of Administration for airports that meet the various components of each area criteria of either 8,250 annual itine- was examined in relation to projected rant operations or 75,500 local opera- demand to identify future landside fa- tions. Mesa-Falcon Field Airport cility needs. This includes compo- meets both these criteria. Future con- nents for general aviation needs such sideration should be given to the in- as:

3-26  Aircraft Hangars types of hangars offer varying levels of  Aircraft Parking Aprons privacy, security, and protection from  General Aviation Terminal the elements. Demand for hangars  Auto Parking and Access also varies with the number of aircraft  Airport Support Facilities based at the airport. Another important factor is the type of based aircraft. Smaller single engine aircraft HANGARS usually prefer shade or T-hangars, while larger multi-engine aircraft and The demand for aircraft storage han- business jets will prefer conventional gars typically depends upon the num- or executive hangars. Rental costs ber and type of aircraft expected to be will also be a factor in the choice. based at the airport. For planning purposes, it is necessary to estimate While a majority of aircraft owners hangar requirements based upon fore- prefer enclosed aircraft storage, a cast operational activity. However, number of based aircraft will still tie- hangar development should be based down outside (due to the lack of han- on actual demand trends and financial gar availability, hangar rental rates, investment opportunities. and/or operational needs). Therefore, enclosed hangar facilities do not nec- Before an analysis of aircraft storage essarily need to be planned for each hangar requirements is given, it based aircraft. At Mesa-Falcon Field should be noted that a certain number Airport, the majority of based aircraft of aircraft were taken out of the total are currently stored in hangars (73 current and forecast based aircraft percent). According to staff inter- numbers to account for MD Helicop- views, there are approximately 230 ters and The Boeing Company. This is aircraft which utilize the tie-down due to the fact that these two compa- spaces available on the airport. nies use their private hangar storage space for aircraft directly related to Airport staff maintains a waiting list their overall operation on the airport. of aircraft owners desiring to store From based aircraft numbers provided their aircraft in a City-owned shade by airport management, a determina- hangar and T-hangar storage space. tion was made that approximately 40 This list is comprised of approximately aircraft (helicopters) are specific to 400 aircraft owners, with 292 waiting MD Helicopters and The Boeing Com- for a T-hangar and 104 waiting for a pany and, therefore, were not included shade hangar. Aircraft owners desir- in the current and forecast based air- ing to be placed on the waiting list craft numbers used to determine han- must pay a deposit equal to one gar storage needs. month’s rent on the particular hangar type they desire. It is assumed that Hangar facilities at Mesa-Falcon Field several aircraft that are currently lo- Airport consist of conventional han- cated in tiedown positions on the air- gars, executive hangars, T-hangars, port would move into a hangar facility and shade hangars. These different as they become available. Conversion

3-27 of the waiting list to signed hangar T-hangar and shade hangar space leases was taken into consideration available at the airport totals approx- when developing hangar storage re- imately 681,000 square feet for air- quirements. craft storage. Analysis of future T- hangar and shade hangar require- Presently, all of the T-hangar and ments, as depicted on Table 3J, indi- shade hangar positions on the airfield cates additional T-hangar and/or are occupied and there is a waiting list shade hangar positions which will be for units. The airport has 49 T-hangar needed through the long range plan- and shade hangar storage facilities, ning horizon. providing a total of 518 storage units.

TABLE 3J Aircraft Storage Hangar Requirements Mesa-Falcon Field Airport Future Requirements Short Intermediate Long Currently Term Term Term Available (0-5 years) (6-10 years) (11-20 years) Total Based 852 1,110 1,260 1,460 Aircraft To Be Hangared 625 833 964 1,190 T-Hangar/Shade Hangar Positions 518 600 660 823 Executive Hangar Positions 20 85 120 160 Conventional Hangar Positions 87 148 184 207 Hangar Area Requirements T-Hangar/Shade Hangar Area 681,000 720,000 792,000 987,600 Executive Hangar Area 63,000 170,000 240,000 320,000 Conventional Hangar Area 250,000 370,000 460,000 517,500 Maintenance/Office Area 78,000 145,700 168,700 208,250 Total Hangar Area (s.f.) 1,072,000 1,406,000 1,661,000 2,033,000 Source: Coffman Associates analysis

Executive hangar space makes up a lized for bulk aircraft storage and by much smaller portion of hangar space airport businesses such as fixed base at the airport. These hangars are typ- operators (FBOs), maintenance pro- ically utilized by owners of larger air- viders, and flight schools. At Mesa- craft or multiple aircraft. Often a cor- Falcon Field Airport, conventional porate flight department will operate hangars provide approximately out of an executive hangar as well. 250,000 square feet of aircraft storage Executive hangar space at Mesa- space. Falcon Field Airport currently totals approximately 63,000 square feet. Fu- Table 3J compares existing hangar ture requirements show a large de- space to the future hangar require- mand for executive hangar space. ments. It is evident from the table there is a need for additional hangar Conventional hangars are typically space throughout the planning period. 10,000 square feet or larger and uti- As previously mentioned in Chapter 3-28 One, Mesa-Falcon Field Airport has needs, an additional 40 spaces are approximately 400,000 square feet of identified for maintenance activity. hangar space, mainly in the form of Maintenance activity would include executive and conventional hangars, the movement of aircraft into and out proposed to be developed over the next of hangar facilities and temporary sto- several years by the private sector. rage of aircraft on the ramp. The analysis also indicates a potential need for additional maintenance and Total apron parking requirements are office area space through the planning presented in Table 3K. Currently, period. It is expected that the aircraft there are 68 transient positions avail- storage hangar requirements will con- able for single and multi-engine air- tinue to be met through a combination craft on the airport. This includes of hangar types through the 20-year City tiedowns and tiedowns associated planning horizon. with FBO leases. A total of approximately ten business jet positions are available. Finally, there are 358 posi- AIRCRAFT PARKING APRON tions available for locally based aircraft. FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13, Airport Design, Change 11, suggests a As shown in the table, there may be a methodology by which transient apron need for additional transient parking requirements can be determined from for single and multi-engine aircraft, as knowledge of busy-day operations. At well as business jet aircraft, in the fu- Mesa-Falcon Field Airport, the num- ture. It appears that there is ade- ber of itinerant spaces required was quate locally based aircraft parking determined to be approximately 15 through the planning period. By the percent of the busy-day itinerant op- long term planning period, there may erations. A planning criterion of 800 be a decreased need for locally based square yards per aircraft was applied aircraft apron positions due to the pro- to determine future transient apron jected hangar storage opportunities on requirements for single and multi- the airport. engine aircraft. For business jets (which can be much larger), a planning criterion of 1,600 square yards GENERAL AVIATION per aircraft position was used. Locally TERMINAL FACILITIES based tiedowns typically will be utilized by smaller single engine aircraft; General aviation terminal facilities thus, a planning standard of 650 have several functions. Space is re- square yards per position is utilized. quired for a pilots’ lounge, flight planning, concessions, management, sto- A parking apron should provide space rage, and various other needs. This for the number of locally based airspace is not necessarily limited to a craft that are not stored in hangars, single, separate terminal building, but transient aircraft, and for mainten- can include space offered by FBOs for ance activity. For local tie-down these functions and services.

3-29

TABLE 3K Aircraft Parking Apron Requirements Mesa-Falcon Field Airport Short Intermediate Long Currently Term Term Term Available (0-5 years) (6-10 years) (11-20 years) Single, Multi-Engine Transient Aircraft Positions 68 92 101 123 Apron Area (s.y.) 31,000 73,400 80,500 98,700 Transient Business Jet Positions 10 13 16 20 Apron Area (s.y.) 15,000 20,800 25,600 32,000 Locally Based Aircraft Positions 358 318 330 303 Apron Area (s.y.) 176,500 206,400 214,400 196,800 Total Positions 436 424 451 442 Total Apron Area (s.y.) 222,500 302,300 324,100 324,500

The methodology used in estimating square feet of current available build- general aviation terminal building ing space listed in Table 3L accounts space needs is based on the number of for the approximate amount of space itinerant users expected to utilize gen- dedicated to general aviation use with- eral aviation facilities during the de- in the terminal building, Tango One sign hour. General aviation space re- Aviation, and Falcon Executive Avia- quirements were then based upon tion. providing 120 square feet per design hour itinerant passenger. Design hour An additional consideration for ter- itinerant passengers are determined minal space is the emergence of a new by multiplying design hour itinerant class of aircraft. As mentioned in a operations by the number of passen- previous chapter, a number of aircraft gers on the aircraft (multiplier). An manufacturers are beginning to pro- increasing passenger count per air- duce low cost microjets, commonly re- craft (from 1.8 to 2.0) is used to ac- ferred to as very light jets (VLJs). The count for the likely increase in the VLJs typically have a capacity of up to number of passengers utilizing gener- six passengers. A number of new al aviation services. Table 3L out- companies are positioning themselves lines the general aviation terminal fa- to utilize the VLJs for on-demand air cility space requirements for Mesa- taxi services. The air taxi businesses Falcon Field Airport. are banking on a desire by business travelers to avoid delays at major As presented in the table, the existing commercial service airports by taking public space will need to be addressed advantage of the nationwide network in the short term of the plan. By the of general aviation airports such as long term, approximately 19,200 Mesa-Falcon Field Airport. General square feet of space could be needed. aviation airports with appropriate As mentioned earlier, the desired terminal building services are better space can be made up of a combination positioned to meet the needs of this of facilities at the airport. The 6,000 new class of business traveler. 3-30 TABLE 3L General Aviation Terminal Area Facilities Mesa-Falcon Field Airport Short Intermediate Long Currently Term Term Term Available (0-5 years) (6-10 years) (11-20 years) Design Hour Operations 133 150 155 166 Design Hour Itinerant Operations 51 72 75 80 Multiplier 1.8 1.9 1.9 2.0 Total Design Hour Itinerant Passengers 92 137 143 160 General Aviation Building Spaces (s.f.)* 6,000 16,400 17,100 19,200 *Includes space provided by the terminal building, Tango One Aviation, and Falcon Executive Aviation.

AUTOMOBILE PARKING The parking requirements of based aircraft owners should also be consi- General aviation vehicular parking dered. Although some owners prefer demands have been determined for to park their vehicles in their hangars, Mesa-Falcon Field Airport. Space de- safety can be compromised when au- terminations were based on an evalua- tomobile and aircraft movements are tion of the existing airport use, as well intermixed. For this reason, separate as industry standards. Terminal au- parking requirements, which consider tomobile parking spaces required to one-half of based aircraft at the air- meet general aviation itinerant de- port, were applied to general aviation mands were calculated by taking the automobile parking space require- design hour itinerant passengers and ments. Most of the general aviation using a multiplier of 1.9, 1.9, and 2.0 parking is located in areas adjacent to for each planning period. This multip- Falcon Drive and Fighter Aces Drive lier represents the anticipated gradual in the south area of the airport. Addi- increase in the number of passengers tional parking is located at MD Heli- per aircraft utilizing general aviation copters on the north side of the air- services. Currently, the terminal port. building has approximately 61 parking spaces. Tango One Aviation and Non-aviation related parking spaces Falcon Executive Aviation could also at the airport total approximately 500 be considered as a high volume of pi- and includes the post office, commer- lots and passengers utilize their FBO cial office complexes, and restaurants. facilities. When taking these facilities This figure, as well as future require- into account, approximately 80 addi- ments for non-aviation related park- tional vehicle parking spaces with ing, was not considered in this analy- 35,000 square feet of parking area are sis. Current and future total parking available. In total, approximately spaces and total parking area take in- 60,000 square feet of parking area to account aviation-related needs only. providing 141 vehicle spaces is pro- Parking requirements for the airport vided. are summarized in Table 3M.

3-31 TABLE 3M Vehicle Parking Requirements Mesa-Falcon Field Airport Future Requirements Short Intermediate Long Currently Term Term Term Available (0-5 years) (6-10 years) (11-20 years) Design Hour Itinerant Passengers 92 137 143 160 Terminal Vehicle Spaces* 141 247 257 288 Parking Area (s.f.)* 60,000 98,600 103,000 115,200 General Aviation Vehicle Spaces 1,056 555 630 730 Parking Area (s.f.) 260,000 222,000 252,000 292,000 Total Parking Spaces 1,197 802 887 1,018 Total Parking Area (s.f.) 320,000 320,600 355,000 407,200 * Indicates space provided by the terminal building, Tango One Aviation, and Falcon Executive Avi- ation.

Throughout the planning period, dedi- FUEL STORAGE cated parking spaces for general aviation uses will not be needed as the There are four fuel farms located on airport provides more than forecast the airport that currently store fuel for need; however, there does appear to be aviation use. Tango One Aviation and a need for additional parking area. Falcon Executive Aviation, the two This may be due to the fact that some major FBOs at the airport, each own facilities do not have enough parking and operate their own fuel storage fa- spaces, while others are oversized for cility. their particular needs. Additional terminal vehicle spaces and parking Tango One Aviation has one 12,000- area will also be needed during the gallon capacity Avgas storage tank planning period. and one 10,000-gallon capacity Jet A storage tank. Both tanks are underground. They use four fuel trucks to SUPPORT REQUIREMENTS deliver fuel to aircraft that include two 1,500-gallon capacity Avgas trucks, Various facilities that do not logically one 2,000-gallon capacity Jet A truck, fall within the classifications of airside and one 3,000-gallon capacity Jet A or landside facilities have also been truck. identified. These other areas provide certain functions related to the overall Falcon Executive Aviation has three operation of the airport. underground fuel storage tanks con- sisting of two 10,000-gallon capacity

3-32 Avgas tanks and one 12,000-gallon ca- peak month, will likely exceed the ex- pacity Jet A tank. They use six fuel isting total storage capacities. One trucks for delivery of fuel that include option to address this potential sto- three Avgas fuel trucks that store 750, rage issue is to increase the frequency 1,000, and 2,000 gallons of fuel, and of fuel deliveries. By the long term three Jet A fuel trucks that store 450, planning period, it is suggested that 2,200, and 3,000 gallons of fuel. Fal- additional fuel storage facilities be con Executive Aviation also provides constructed. self-service Avgas fuel capability. By using a credit card, one can access Av- gas fuel at their convenience. AIRCRAFT RESCUE AND FIREFIGHTING (ARFF) The City of Mesa’s Police Aviation Di- vision has a 12,000-gallon capacity Jet Mesa-Falcon Field Airport is currently A fuel storage tank that is located un- served by an aircraft rescue and fire- derground and dedicated specifically fighting facility (ARFF). The City of to refueling the Police Division’s heli- Mesa’s Fire Station #208, located in copters. The Commemorative Air the southwest area of the airport adja- Force Museum has a 10,000-gallon ca- cent to East McKellips Road, is de- pacity Avgas fuel storage tank that is signed to provide emergency and res- located aboveground. This fuel is used cue services to the airport and the sur- specifically for aircraft associated with rounding area. There are six person- the Commemorative Air Force. Heli- nel present at Fire Station #208 24 ponents has installed a 20,000-gallon hours per day, seven days per week. capacity underground fuel storage One 500-gallon capacity fire engine, tank that will be used exclusively for one 1,500-gallon ARFF certified foam Jet A fuel. truck, and one utility truck capable of carrying equipment specific to aircraft Fuel storage requirements are typical- emergencies are stationed at the facil- ly based upon maintaining a two-week ity. Personnel go through annual supply of fuel during an average training in order for the station to month. However, more frequent deli- maintain its ARFF certification. veries can reduce the fuel storage capacity requirement. Generally, fuel It is not necessary that ARFF services tanks should be of adequate capacity be located at the airport, although it to accept a full refueling tanker, which serves as an added safety enhance- is approximately 8,000 gallons, while ment with personnel and equipment maintaining a reasonable level of fuel located on the airport. Only certified in the storage tank. Maintaining sto- airports providing scheduled passen- rage to meet a two-week supply for ger service with greater than nine each is currently available. passenger seats are required to provide ARFF services. Many corporate Future Avgas and Jet A fuel storage flight departments, however, are re- requirements for the airport, based questing ARFF services at the airports upon a two-week supply during the they utilize. It is recommended that

3-33 Mesa-Falcon Field Airport be able to airport maintenance equipment. This continue providing ARFF services in facility should be maintained through the future as forecasts indicate an in- the long term planning period. creasing amount of business jets utilizing the airport. SURFACE TRANSPORTATION ACCESS WASH RACK Primary access to the majority of The airport has an aircraft wash rack, businesses located on the airport is and it should be maintained through provided via Falcon Drive. Falcon the planning period. Drive connects to East McKellips Road south of the airport and North Higley Road east of the airport. Recent safety PERIMETER FENCING/GATES improvements at the airport included dividing Falcon Drive in the area ad- A large portion of the airport is cur- jacent to the terminal building and rently surrounded by eight-foot tall airport traffic control tower in an ef- chain link security fencing. The air- fort to minimize the amount of vehicle port is currently engaged in the traffic crossing the active taxiway process of designing and constructing leading to hangar development farther remaining portions of perimeter fenc- south. In doing so, a cul-de-sac was ing that will totally enclose airfield built on each side to allow for smooth- sensitive areas and aircraft movement er transition of vehicle movements. To areas. The project is expected to be the north of the airport, MD Helicop- complete within the next six months. ters can be accessed by East McDowell Road. Any future development should The airport is also updating its vehicle include appropriate road construction gate system to include approximately to provide appropriate access. eight to ten electric powered-use access gates operated by the City and approximately 20 additional manual SUMMARY access gates to be located in various locations on the airport to provide en- The intent of this chapter has been to hanced security of the airfield. outline the facilities required to meet potential aviation demands projected for Mesa-Falcon Field Airport for the AIRPORT MAINTENANCE planning horizon. A summary of the BUILDING airside and landside requirements is presented on Exhibits 3F and 3G. The airport maintenance building is located in the southeast area of the Following the facility requirements airport adjacent to North Higley Road. determination, the next step is to de- This facility provides approximately termine a direction of development 7,500 square feet for the storage of which best meets these projected

3-34 06MP17-3F-7/20/07 K Y E TAXIWAYS RUNWAYS LIGHTING ANDMARKING NAVIGATIONAL AIDS Bold Redprintindicates recommended /required changes -Dual DTWL Tandem Wheel Loading AWOS -Automated Weather System Observing System Observing ASOS -Automated Surface ATCT -Airport Traffic Control Tower Segmented Circle/WindconesSegmented (3) 9 exitssouth/3north 3 exitssouth/3north (small aircraft exclusively) All taxiways 35‘-150’ wide All taxiways 35‘-150’ wide ATCT (6:00am-9:00pm) Hold aprons ateachend 38,000 SWL/60,000DWL Hold apron Runway 22L Non-precision Marking MIRL/PAPI-2/REILs/PCL Full parallel Taxiway D Full parallel Taxiway E Hold Positions -125’ Hold Positions -200’ 1-mile visibility (4R) 1-mile visibility VIAL HR EMLONG TERM SHORTTERM AVAILABLE Runway 4L-22R Runway 4R-22L Runway 4R-22L Runway 4R-22L Runway 4L-22R Runway 4L-22R Runway 4L-22R Runway 4R-22L Visual Approach Visual Visual Approach Visual 200’ separation 250’ separation Airport Beacon Airport Basic Markings GPS Approach GPS, NDB, VOR 90,000 DTWL MIRL/PAPI-2 5,101’ x100’ Helipads (2) 12,500 SWL 3,799’ x75’ ARC B-II ARC B-I LAWRS MITL MITL - Medium Intensity Intensity MITL -Medium Taxiway Lighting Runway Intensity MIRL -Medium Lighting LAWRS -Limited Aviation Weather Station Reporting -Dual DWL Wheel Loading Additional taxiways 35’ wide Segmented Circle/WindconesSegmented (3) 9 exitssouth/3north (small aircraftexclusively) All taxiways 35‘-150’ wide ATCT (6:00am-9:00pm) Hold aprons ateachend 38,000 SWL/60,000DWL 2 additionalexitsnorth Additional holdaprons MIRL/ Non-precision Marking MIRL/PAPI-2/ Full parallel Taxiway D Full parallel Taxiway E Hold Positions -125’ Hold Positions -200’ 1-mile visibility (4R) 1-mile visibility Runway 4L-22R Runway 4L-22R Runway 4R-22L Runway 4L-22R Runway 4L-22R Runway 4R-22L Runway 4R-22L Runway 4R-22L Visual Approach Visual Visual Approach Visual 250’ separation 200’ separation ASOS orAWOS Airport Beacon Airport Basic Markings GPS Approach GPS, NDB, VOR 90,000 DTWL 5,101’ x100’ Helipads (2) PAPI-4 12,500 SWL 3,799’ x75’ ARC B-II ARC B-I MITL /REILs/PCL add REILs AIRFIELD FACILITY REQUIREMENTS Additional taxiways 35’ wide Taxiway Eto240’ separation Segmented Circle/WindconesSegmented (3) SWL -Single Wheel Loading REILs -Runway EndIdentifierLights PCL -PilotControlled Lighting PAPI -Precision Approach Path Indicator ATCT (5:00am-11:00pm) 9 exitssouth/3north All taxiways 35‘-150’ wide Hold aprons ateachend 38,000 SWL/60,000DWL 2 additionalexitsnorth Additional holdaprons MIRL/ Non-precision Marking MIRL/PAPI-2/ Full parallel Taxiway D Full parallel Taxiway E Hold Positions -200’ Hold Positions -200’ 1-mile visibility (4R) 1-mile visibility Runway 4L-22R Runway 4R-22L Runway 4L-22R Runway 4R-22L Runway 4R-22L Runway 4L-22R Runway 4L-22R Runway 4R-22L Visual Approach Visual Visual Approach Visual 250’ separation ASOS orAWOS Airport Beacon Airport Basic Markings GPS Approach GPS, NDB, VOR 90,000 DTWL 30,000 SWL 5,101’ x100’ Helipads (2) PAPI-4 3,799’ x75’ ARC B-II ARC ARC B-II MITL /REILs/PCL add REILs Exhibit 3F 06MP17-3G-1/21/09 oa akn pcs ,9 82 8 1,018 887 730 802 630 1,197 555 320,000 141 1,056 Tango One Aviation, andFalcon Executive Aviation. * Indicates space provided by theterminal building, 6,000 Total Parking Area (s.f.) Total Parking Spaces 436 AviationGeneral Vehicle Spaces Terminal VehicleSpaces* AviationGeneral BuildingSpaces (s.f.)* 176,500 222,500 15,000 31,000 358 AREA ANDVEHICLEPARKINGAREA ANDVEHICLEPARKINGA 10 AVIATION AVIATIONGENERAL GENERAL G TERMINAL TERMINAL Total Apron Area (s.y.) Total Positions Apron Area (s.y.) Locally-Based Aircraft Positions 68 Apron Area (s.y.) Transient BusinessJetPositions Apron Area (s.y.) Single, Multi-Engine Transient Aircraft Positions 1,072,000 78,000 63,000 250,000 20 87 625 PARKING PARKINGAIRCRAFT A AIRCRAFT AREA AREA APRON APRON 681,000 518 Total HangarArea (s.f.) AreaMaintenance/Office (s.f.) Conventional HangarArea (s.f.) Executive HangarArea (s.f.) T-Hangar/Shade HangarArea (s.f.) Conventional HangarPositions Executive HangarPositions T-Hangar/Shade HangarPositions Aircraft to beHangared STORAGEAIRCRAFT A HANGARS Red indicates demandneeded R I I E R R N E C C A E R R

R A A A A N F F L T T D

P S V V A T E I O R A H K R T I C I I A O N L G G N E E

A T H A E P A R R R N K M O G I N I N N A

G A R A R S L E A Currently Available vial hr emItreit Long Term Intermediate Term Short Available Long Term Intermediate Term Short Available 1,406,000 1,661,000 2,033,000 1,406,000 1,661,000 302,300 324,100 324,500 302,300 324,100 370,000 460,000 517,500 370,000 460,000 320,600 355,000 208,250 145,700 168,700 320,000 170,000 240,000 987,600 720,000 792,000 206,400 214,400 Short Term 16,400 17,100 19,200 16,400 17,100 20,800 25,600 32,000 20,800 25,600 98,700 73,400 80,500 424 451 442 424 451 148 184 207 148 184 823 600 660 247 257 288 247 257 318 330 833 964 1,190 92 101 123 92 101 13 16 20 13 16 160 85 120 LANDSIDE FACILITY REQUIREMENTS Future Requirements Intermediate Term 303

FIELD AIRPORTF FIELD AIRPORT MESA-FALCONM I E E L 407,200 196,800 S Long Term D A

- A Exhibit 3G F I A R L P C O O R N T needs through a series of Airport De- devoted to outlining this direction, its velopment Alternatives. The re- schedule, and its cost. mainder of the Master Plan will be

3-35