Final Report ce ntu rywest ENGINEERING CORPORA TION Prepared for October 1997 Prepared by Century West Engineering 825 NE Multnomah, Suite 425 Portland, Oregon 97232 (503)231-6078 in association with Gene Leverton and Associates Fishman Environmental Services Aron Faegre and Associates Miller-Cook Architects DKS Associates Study Participants Ci~ of Salem Richard A. Hayden Tom Long Rod Propst Barbara Shields Urban Development Administrator Airport Superintendent Airport Superintendent (former) Associate Planner Airport Master Plan Subcommittee Salem Airport Association Airport Advisory Commission Salem Air Center Salem Air Center Salem Convention and Visitors Assn. Oregon Army National Guard SESNA Neighborhood Assoc. SEDCOR Chamber of Commerce Salem Planning Commission Airport Advisory Commission Airport Advisory Commission Oregon DOT -Aeronautics Cathe Springer. Chair Michael Beringer Lisa Buswell Mark Ramer Bill Domey Todd Fanner Jon Gerhardt Larry Glassock Bob Jackson Richard Munford Bill Rothrock Muriel Stieber Gary Viehdorfer Consultants Century West Engineering David M. Miller Joe Rosbak, P .E. Matt Hall Karl Platbler Karen Wagner Mike Hayford. P .E. Tom Gainer, P.E. Will Romanelli Project Manager, Senior Aviation Planner Airport Engineer Airport Engineer Senior CADD Designer CADD Designer Senior Structural Engineer Senior Environmental Engineer Environmental Specialist Other Study Team Consultants Gene Leverton and Associates DKS Associates Miller-COOk Architects Aron Faegre & Associates Fishman Environmental Services TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY vii 1 INVENTORY 1 1 2 2 5 5 5 8 8 8 9 9 9 10 10 12 12 17 17 17 18 18 20 21 INTRODUCnON . AIRPORT SE'ITIN G Locale. Climate Location AIRPORT mSTORY . EXIS TIN G AIRFIELD F A c llJTJES Runways and Taxiways Airport Lighting and Signage . Airfield Support Areas Aircraft Parking Apron Tenninal Facilities Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fi~ting Airport Security Fuel Facilities . Maintenance . Utilities Airspace and Air Traffic Control Navigational Aids Air Traffic Activities SOCIOECONO:MIC DATA. Population Economy LAND-USE AND ZONING PHYSICAL FEATURES . mGH SPEED RAn. ACCESS FORECASTS I I 2 2 3 3 5 6 7 7 10 INTRODUCnON . Events Since the Last Master Plan. . Forecast Update. Socioeconomic Conditions . Economy Airport Service Area Primary Forecasting Assumptions. General Aviation Forecasts . BASED AIRCRAFf Based Aircraft Forecasts Based Aircraft Fleet Mix 10 II 12 14 15 15 15 16 16 AIR.CRAFf OPERA nONS Aircraft Operations Forecasts Commercial Activity Airport Shuttle Service . Air Taxi and Cargo Military Forecasts Instrument Approaches Aircraft Fleet Mix Peaking Characteristics DEMAND-CAP ACITY ANALYSIS 1 1 2 4 4 5 5 5 5 6 7 8 9 AIRFIEW CAP ACITY Airfield Layout Meteorology. Runway Utilization Aircraft Mix Percent Arrivals T ouch- And-Go Operations Exit Taxiways Hourly Aircraft Capacity Annual Service Volurne Annual Delay. AIRSP ACE CAP ACITY OmER rrEMS FACILITY REQUmEMENTS I 3 3 5 3 6 6 6 7 7 10 12 15 15 15 16 16 16 Summary -Facility Requirements . Section I -Physical Airport Facility Requirements. . Design Aircraft Design Standard Conclusions Instrument Approach Capabilities AIRSmE F ACll.JTIES Runways Runway Orientation Airfield Capacity Runway Length Runway & Taxiway Pavements Taxiways Airfield Instrumentation and Lighting . Tenninal Area Navaids Instrument Approach Navaids . Visual Navaids Runway & Taxiway Lighting . Air Cargo 11 17 18 19 21 21 22 22 22 23 24 25 25 27 27 27 28 28 28 28 29 29 29 30 30 31 32 33 33 33 33 34 34 34 35 36 36 GENERAL A VIAnON REQUIREMENTS Hangars Local and Itinerant Apron SUPPORTFACILmES Airport Rescue and Fire Fighting Fuel Storage Airport Utilities Airport Fencing Access Roadways Airport Property Section n -Airport Tenninal Area Requirements. FAA Design Standards Gates and Ramp Positions Departure Lounges Ticket and Waiting Lobby Airline Ticket Counter . Security Baggage Claim Tenninal Services Ground Access Requirements . Tenninal Access Roadway Tenninal Curb Frontage Tenninal Area Vehicle Parking. Surnrnary (fenninal Area) Section ill -F AR Part 77 and F AA Design Standards . Approach Surfaces Primary S urface Transitional Surface Horizontal Surface Conical Surface FAA AIRPORT DESIGN STANDARDS Runway Object Free Area Runway Obstacle Free Zone. . Runway/faxiway Safety Area Parallel Taxiway Separation Surnrnary 5 AIRPORT ALTERNATIVES Preliminary Alternative Concepts. South Airport Development Alternative. West Side Airport Development Alternative East Side Airport Development Alternative Preliminary Alternatives. West Side # I. West Side # 2 . 2 3 4 8 8 9 111 10 10 II II 17 18 22 West Side # 3 . WestSide#4 . West Side # 5 . South Alternative #1 South Alternative #2 Refined East Alternative Preferred Alternatives 6 NOISE AND LAND USE COMPATIBILITY 1 1 2 4 4 5 5 6 6 INTRODUCnON DNL Methodology Noise Contours 1995 Contours 2000 Contours 2015 Contours COMPATIBLE LAND USE Noise Compatibility and Land Use Airport Overlay Zoning 7 AIRPORT LA YOUT PLANS 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 Airport Layout Plan Tenninal Area Plan Airport Airspace Drawing Runway Approach Surface Profiles Runway Protection Zone Plan & Profile Airport Land Use Plan w/2015 Noise Contours On Airport Land Use Plan 8 FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM 1 7 7 8 Airport Development Schedule and Cost Estimates Financing ofDevelopment Program Financing Local Share of Capital Improvements Cash Flow Analysis APPENDICES A B Air Service Assessment City of Salem Ordinance Adopting Master Plan IV T ABLES and FIGURES ~ 4 7 10 13 16 17 5 6 8 9 10 11 13 13 18 18 4 6 7 4 6 8 11 13 14 17 20 21 23 38 7 3 3 4.5 6 7 1-1 1-2 1-3 1-4 1-5 1-6 2-1 2-2 2-3 2-4 2-5 2-6 2-7 2-8 2-9 2-10 3-1 3-2 3-3 4-1 4-2 4-3 4-4 4-5 4-6 4-7 4-9 4-10 4-11 4-12 6-1 8-1 8-2 8-3 8-4 8-5 Existing Facilities Pavement Summary Fuel Storage Capacities Instrument Approach Capabilities 1995 Activity Summary Historic and Projected Population Historic and Projected Population Historical Aviation Activity Existing Based Aircraft Forecasts General Aviation Aircraft/Population Updated Based Aircraft Forecasts Fleet Mix Forecast . Existing General Aviation Forecasts . General Aviation Operations Forecasts Forecast of Peak Activity Summary of Air Traffic Forecasts Weather and Wind Conditions Aircraft Classifications Demand/Capacity Summary Design Group/ Approach Categories . Business Jet Activity F AA Dimensional Standards F AA Runway Length Requirements Pavement Condition Summary Pavement Maintenance Navigational Aid Requirements Hangar Requirements ApronlTiedown Requirements Fuel Storage Requirements . Facility Requirements Summary Land Use Compatibility Summary ofDevelopment Costs Operational Revenues and Expenses Capital Improvement Program CIP -Project Eligibility CIP Funding Projection v FiWes 3 6 II 15 16 4 19 20 3 8 9 5 6 7 12 13 14 15 16 19 20 21 24 25 26 3 10 II 12 13 I-I 1-2 1-3 1-4 1-5 2-1 2-2 2-3 3-1 3-2 4-1 5-1 5.;.2 5-3 5-4 5-5 5-6 5-7 5-8 5-9 5-10 5-11 5-12 5-13 5-14 6-1 6-2 6-3 6-4 6-5 Vicinity Map Existing Facilities Airport Utilities Area Airspace Instrument Approach Procedures Air Service/Vicinity Map Forecast Based Aircraft Forecast Aircraft Operations Runway Wind Coverage ASV vs Demand Part 77 Airspace. South Airport Development Alternative. West Side Airport Development Alternative . East Side Airport Development Alternative . West Side # I West Side # 2 West Side # 3 West Side # 4 West Side # 5 South Alternative # I South Alternative #2 Refined East Alternative Preferred Alternatives Preferred Alternatives Preferred Alternatives Typical Noise Levels Aircraft Flight Tracks 1995 Noise Contours 2000 Noise Contours 2015 Noise Contours DRAWINGS Contained in Chapter 7 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Airport Layout Plan Tenninal Area Plan Airport Airspace Drawing Runway Approach Surface Profiles Runway Protection Zone Plan & Profile Airport Land Use Plan w/201S Noise Contours On Airport Land Use Plan "' Salem Airport-McNary Field Airport Master Plan Executive Summary Salem Airport-McNary Field, is a civil aviation facility that also accommodates military facilities with the Oregon Anny National Guard. The airport is certified by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as a commercial service airport under Federal Air Regulations (FAR) Part 139. The airport is included in the National Plan of Integrated Airport Systans (NPIAS) as a public use airport. As part of the national airport system, Salem Airport- McNary Field is considered to be in the public interest and is eligible for financial assistance for airport planning and development under the Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982. This Airport Master Plan updates previous master planning conducted in 1979 and 1987. The master plan documents and airport layout plan drawings contained herein, replace all earlier versions as the official planning guidance for the airport. To guide the preparation of the master plan update, a twelve-member AilpOrt Master Plan Subcommittee was fonned. The subconunittee held eight meetings to review and comment on the draft materials as prepared by the consultant. A public forum was held to present plan recommendations; the draft plan was presented to the City of Salem Airport Commission, Planning Commission, and the City Council through a series of public meetings. The substantial participation of the Airport Master Plan Subcommittee was a very important contribution to the success of the master planning process. The master plan provides a clear direction for the future development of the ailpOrt while maintaining an effective balance with the overall spirit and values of the community . The objective of the master plan is to provide a ten to twenty-year guide for future operation and development of the airport. The airport is in conformance with the City Comprehensive Plan. including the Airport Overlay Zone which coincides with FAR Part 77 airspace ~. The predominate zone designation on the airport is PS-Public Service, with IP-Industrial Park on the southwest portion of the airport, near Airway Drive and the southeast portion of the airport adjacent to Turner Road. The portion ofIP zoning located adjacent to the taxiway connecting the ends of Runways 31 and 34 should be changed to PS, to reflect recommended development of aircraft hangars and other related aviation activities. Beyond this change, the existing zoning on the airport appears to have adequate flexibility to accommodate projected development needs. Salem's potential for commercial air service was evaluated as part of the master plan. The air service market is dynamic, highly competitive, and ever-changing. Although the market area available to Salem is sufficient in size to support scheduled service, competition from established service points (portland and Eugene) with convenient access via Interstate 5, currently accommodates demand. Factors such as convenience (travel time to/from the airport), cost (ticket prices), and choice (frequency of flights, number of airlines, destinations, etc.) are weighed by the traveling public when choosing among many options. Airport and community leaders believe that Salem and the surrounding market will soon be sufficient to attract scheduled air service. An aggressive community-based effort is generally required for any airport seeking to establish service or expand on existing service. Salem Airport-McNary Field is strategically located to playa role in accommodating the region's future air service needs. The primary airport facilities-runways, taxiways, aircraft parking, tenninal, navigational aids, control tower, lighting, and airport rescue and fire fighting (ARFF)-are all capable of accommodating scheduled service without significant upgrades. Longer tenn improvements to tenninal facilities may be addressed as demand materializes. A terminal area reserve has been identified to accommodate potential expansion requirements of the tenninal building, curbside, surface access and parking which may be associated with the resumption of scheduled air service through and beyond the twenty-year planning period. The master plan identified alternative OOvelopment concepts which were each capable of acconunodating projected airport needs. The preferred alternative protects the fundamental aviation needs of the airport, while also identifying areas of the airport that can be developed to support non-aviation tenants. It is the primary objective of the City of Salem to facilitate private sector development at the airport through the lease ofland, thereby generating additional income for airport operations, maintenance, and capital improvements. There is existing demand for hangar space on the airport. Recommended taxilane improvements on the west side of the airfield will pennit the development of several conventional hangars for larger business aircraft. Areas at south end of the existing aircraft parking apron have been identified as sites for aircraft T -hangars, which will require minimal site preparation or improvements (i.e., extension of electrical power). Aviation and light industrial development opportunities are identified for the approximately 38 acres located on the east siOO airport, adjacalt to Turner Road. This property is available for development with services adjacent to ~ sites. Careful consideration must be given to construction pad elevations, detention basins, and changes in the existing floodway located in the area along Turner Road. In south portion of the airport approximately 61 acres may be available for light industrial/aviation development. These prope~ will ~uire fill and utility extatSion. This area is also located within the Fairview Urban Renewal Area. Resources of the renewal process, as they become available over the next three to five year period, are planned to be utilized in readying this area for development. In summary, the master plan provides an effective tool to manage and improve the airport as community needs continue to evolve. The master plan bas the flexibility to respond to unanticipated needs without abandoning the overall OOvelopment concept. McNary Field bas both the existing facilities and the undeveloped land necessary to accommodate a wide range of users through the current twenty-year planning period and beyond. note. Portions of this executive summary were drawn from a summary staff report prepared by Richard A. Hoyden. Urban Deve/opment Director, City of Sa/em. Chapter One INVENTORY AIRPORT SETTINGINTRODUCTION LocaleThe r ' H-.:..-- , r.' I YAMHILL COUNTY ~- \ ./' ) " I-' r C.0 I"- ( ( ., '\ \\, Cl.ACKAMAS COUNTY '\ \( I fJ I(.'< i1J () 0 '\t , \ t I t 1 I \ : McNARY \ I \ I.I POLK COUNTY \ { \'- 1--'- '--, ~---~; I \ \ I ALBANY .1 CORVALLIS --, LINCOLN COUNTY :\. ~ I.. ) , \ \.'-'- \" .)...SALEM/ .I\ + \-\. -, \ o G:.- o 0: MARION COUNTY \ // FIELDI \-, I I .- \ ~-- \-- ~ / 0; \. ,--~ --- " , . t~1 / ~ - /' LlNN COUNTY / TO BEND ..r--- '\ .: BENTON C..OUN1YI--. '\. I ~ , ( l-., ~., 0" r--- I' r- / 'I. , ---v- ./ ' (5) ~ ",'----- LANE COUNTY!~ EUGENE .'../o!i~~ SPRINGFIELD 30-MINUTE SURFACE TRAVEL TIME 60-MINUTE SURFACE TRAVEL TIME 0 15 30 VICINITY MAP APPROXIMATE SCALE IN MILES note: this map is for illustrative purposes only and does not include all major roads, communities. etc. FIGURE 1-1 century west ENGINEERING CORPORATION TABLE 1-1 MCNARY FIELD -AIRFIELD FACILITIES Owner: Classification : City of Salem Service Level (NpIAS): Commercial Service-Other; Design Type: Basic Transport Certification: F AR Part 139 Airport Airport Rescue and Firefighting (ARFF) Index: A Runways: 13-31- 5,811 x 150 feet (Asphalt); HIRL; VASI; ODALS; MALSR 16-34- 5,145 x 140 feet (Asphalt) Taxiways: Parallel Taxiways -Runway 13-31 (east side)~ Runway 16-34 (west side)~ access taxiways Aircraft Parking/Hangars: Local and Itinerant Tiedowns (150+?) Corporate Parking; conventional and T - hangars (west side of airfield) Lighting: Runway 13-31: High Intensity Runway Edge Lighting (HIRL), Medium- Intensity Approach Light System with Runw~ Alignment Indicator Lights (MALS-R) (Rwy 31); Visual Approach Slope Indicators (VASI) -Rwy 13; Omnidirectional Approach Light System (ODALS) -Rwy 13; Threshold Lighting. Runway 16-34: Medium Intensity Runway Edge Lighting (MIRL); V ASI; Threshold Lighting. Rotating Beacon; 3 Lighted Wind Cones NavAidsl Communication : ILS, Localizer, DME, NDB; GPS; Air Traffic Control Tower (ATCT); Class DIE Airspace (based on A TCT hours of operation) Services: Fixed Base Operator- Fuel (A V GAS, Jet A), Aircraft Maintenance; Avionics Repair; Aircraft Charter; Aircraft Sales; Flight Training Water, Electrical, Sewer, TelephoneUtilities: Maintenance: City of Salem 4 EXISTING AIRFIELD FACILITIES Runways 16 and 34 have visual approach slope indicators (V AS!). A 350-foot stopway is designated at the Runway 16 end.Airfield facilities include nmways, taxiways, aircraft parking aprons, and airfield lighting. These items are included in the following paragraphs, as they serve both an air carrier and general aviation fimction at the airport. Existing airport facilities at McNary Field are depicted in Figure 1-2 and summarized in T able 1-1. A summary of airfield pavements is provided in Table 1-2. The taxiway system at the airport provides parallel taxiways for Runways 13-31 (Taxiway B) and 16- 34 (Taxiway A). All runway ends have taxiway access, although the end of Runway 31 cannot be reached directly via Taxiway B. Aircraft accessing Runway 31 from the east side of the airfield must back-taxi approximately 800 feet to reach the runway end, or use one of the mid field crossing taxiways to access Taxiway NF .The section of Taxiway G located between Runway 13-31 and the end ofRtmway 16, is closed The main taxiways are 50 feet wide and have medium-intensity taxiway lighting (MITL). AIRFIELD FACILITIES Runways and Taxiways McNary Field has two runways, which are oriented in a north-south direction. 3 O degrees apart. The airport has an air traffic control tower (A TCT), which operates on a 14-hour per day schedule. Airport lighting & Signage As noted above, both runways and the main taxiways have edge lighting; the runways also have threshold lights located along the edge of approach/departure edge of the runways. The airport beacon is located west of the intersection of the runways. Three lighted wind cones are located between, and south, of the intersection between the two runways. Runway 13-31 is the primary runway, 5811 feet long by 150 feet wide. The runway has an asphalt grooved surface and precision markings. The nmway is equipped with high intensity runway edge lighting (HIRL). R1B1way has a medium-intensity approach light system, with runway aligmnent indicators (MALS-R); Runway 13 has a visual approach slope indicator cY AS!), and an omnidirectional approach lighting system (ODALS). A 200-foot stopway is designated at the Runway 13 end. The airport completed an upgrade of airport signs in 1993, which included the installation of 66 new signs (i.e., mandatory instruction, location, direction, destination, runway distance remaining). The updated signage plan meets all F AA standards outlined in Advisory Circular 1S0/S340-18C. Runway 16-34 is the secondary runway, 5,145 feet long by 140 feet wide. The runway has an asphalt concrete surface with basic markings. The runway has mediwn in~ity runway edge lighting (MIRL). 5centurywest ENGINEERING CORPORATION > ~ ~ ~ :JC/) 1-Z w ~w > ~ c-J w u: > ~ ~ Z u ~ NI .- W -J m ~ 1- ,~~,,;::: ~~11111 c."."c I i I ..."' --. f-4 Oon ~ ~ ON N- ~{/) 0 ~ ---'0 0-~ .5 ] ~ ] 1=' 9 5 =g ~ 0 ~ ~ "''V -~"' ~ I?\C -1 ~ .a, < e s "ae om :'i::.:,:l::! :millrrj .1i1jjtjjj :.ilf~j~. .&'$ ;::,,:;.x*, .$~:$*'$i::' :.i$::$$:.~.' .!~ ,~ $o,v<$,,$ 11'1 :~.::fj~:::j:l ~ ::*llil~ I I ;f IIIIIJ' ~ ~ I I I u ]11.. ~ '"t :b- E o~ ~ o o "!."" ~ -a. < ~ -8. ~ ~0 - ~ ~"' ff\ ~V1 O ~ ~ u ]~ ~ ";IM E o..,. ~ oo 1"').~ ~~ -a. < ~= 1-4 = ~ () j . ~ ~u ] ~ 1 ~ -& ~ u i O ~= ! ~ OI/"\ ~ 8 \O~""' 13 ? "a 13 o~ ... ~ - 1';1- ("1 !... ~= =o u 0.,.. )( oo t--.- ~ :t f-4 O.,., ..,- ~ 0 ~ V)~ \I) .. .;I ~ 0 ~~ 1 9VI ff) >< oo .,. -'a .a, ~ ~I ~ - ~= ~ ~ ~ - ~ -a.., < ~ ~ j I t:J ~ ... ~ 2o ~ .I<~ 9 ~ OVI "' - '>< ~ O -0 >< o o ~ 0- ~ - ~ -a. ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ] - "x ~ O.,. ~ Ot'"\ ~ = .?~ -a ~ ~u j ~ ~ v ~ ~ \0 - I M . SI ... ~~ ~o U \I\M ~ 8".. '; "8.~ < < 0 ~ .~a.. ~ 1 ~z 1:.~:i~:~~t I I! ; t:I: z 0f") ~ o0 M -a .~~ z - -0; .g, < ~. ~ ] ~ a :J:: ~ ON ><" ~ Oon ~~ o"' ~O O ~O on v-, ~ -& ~ ~~ ... '; ~ !::1f1]::~~1 "itillff i II If ~~~~ii~~~;~: ~ l~!~:~~!!!!; ~ ","0':,""' I I I I --a .~ E--. z ~ -& ~ E-t Oo - ~ 0"' r"I- ~~ 9 -g'a IS ~~ ().., ~c: !f.-f ? ~.., c: 9..,. c:0 .., ~ I... i ~ ~ ~~~ u ""c:~ o .cI:U ';;-4) .~> '-' ] O N '0 ~ OVI '""' ~() =~ 8 .2!.~C.A <0, ~ ~~ V} V} ~o-"" ] .s0' ~ ~ ='=o~ .~.?~.-. u ., >, "? ~~ :g ? e'eu ~ ...~ ., 8~P;- () ..c:.a o ~u .:g O IC/\ ] O o-N >( O'1"1 ~ ~ -?."' < ~I ~ ?.~ ~ f ~:i2 Qe u .=. ~ ..:. ~ ~ .s~ =. ~ ! ~~ = .~~- ..~=~ ~~ ~ t ~~ t:o... " " ~:c bDf!.S .i ~ EQ. = , . ~8 ~~ ~~ ~ = -.s ~f/J ~bD -! -. ." 6= ~:i~ " .~~ ~~ ~c .81~ ., ~:? ~ .. !~ ~ 6 1u~ = ~~ ~ " .t: "Q~ .s ., f/J = II f ~? &iU -o~ =~ ~ -& < O"" - >< -- ~,"" AIRFIELD SUPPORT AREAS The southern apron is approximately 19,000 square yards, has an asphalt surface, and accommodates 40 light aircraft tiedowns. Access to the southern hangar area taxilanes is provided from the west side of the apron. Aircraft Parking Apron McNary Field has three primary aircraft aprons on the west side of the airfield. The northern apron area is the tenninal apron. The tenninal area portion of the main apron is approximately 23,000 square yards and can accommodate up to four Hoeing 737/Douglas DC9 aircraft. The apron is marked with four aircraft taxi lead-in lines (170-foot separation between lines), which accommodate unassisted taxiing in/out of the ramp positions. The terminal apron has an asphalt concrete surface and has received sealcoat applications. The airport has three general aviation hangar areas on the west side of the airfield. Two hangar areas are located north of the temlinal apron, which accommodate approximately 21 aircraft hangars. The third hangar area is located adjacent to the South Apron. The southern section of this area has six taxilanes which access approximately 50 T - hangar and conventional hangars. New hangars reca1tly constructed west of Salem Air Center have taxiway access which connects to the taxilane located immediately south of the building. tefmina1 apron fronts the Oregon DOT Aeronautics office and hangar .The asphalt-surfaced apron is approximately 2,400 square yards and ~ limited transient parking. The apron is in poor condition, with extensive cracking, depressions, and areas of failed pavement. The outer portion of the apron, which is showing the most wear, also receives regular fuel truck traffic. The Oregon Anny National Guard maintains an aircraft apron (approximately 28,000 sq.yds.) immediately adjacent to airport property for their fixed-wing and rotor-wing aircraft. The apron is connected to the Runway 13-31 parallel taxiway (Bravo) via Taxiway N. Aircraft access is also provided to ll-Morrow via Taxiway G. The mid apron area consists of a two parking areas which combine for approximately 52,000 square yards. The portion of the apron which extends in an east-west direction, fronts Val Avionics and West Coast Washer hangars. The concrete surfaced ramp (30,000 sq.yds.), which extends from north of the Airport Restaurant, to the south of the Salem Air Center fueling area, accommodates based and iti1le1-ant including corporate parking. The concrete section of the apron is in good condition, although it requires additional joint-filling. Salem Air Center also has a small apron (approximately 1,600 sq.yds.) located at the north end of its hangar/office for aircraft parking. TERMINAL FACIliTIES Tem1inal facilities at McNary Field consist of a one- floor building which accommodates air carrier gaming charter operations, Hut Airport Shuttle, and office space for rental tenants. The tenninal houses offices, passenger secured boarding areas, passenger areas, baggage claim area, public restrooms, public telephone and vending machines. Charter carriers are responsible for passenger security screening and control for their flights. Security screening of passengers is accommodated in the departure area adjacent to the main lobby. One ground-level gate is available for passenger boarding. The terminal does not have a covered 8centurywest CORPORATION MC~Y FlaD MAsTER PLAN UPDA TE -OW~ ,*N\;N;:oR~ --- foroling foam (AFFF); and 450 pounds of dry chemical agent. A 3,000-gallon tanker is also maintained downtown by the Fire Department. The fire equipment is located at the station which is adjacent to the North Hangar Area, on the west side of the airfield. A dedicated fire lane connects directly from the station to Taxiway Alpha. walkway or enclosed loading bridge. Passengers walk to the aircraft across the apron to one of four aircraft parking positions. The ground floor of the tenninal also accommodates the Airport Manager's office and maintenance offices. Vehicle parking is available along the north side of the passenger tenninal building. The parking area accommodates short and long-teffil parking. Visitor, employee and tenant parking areas are located on the south side of the tenninal building. A gravel-surfaced overflow parking area is located on the west side of the tenninal access road. Additional parking is available adjacent to FBO lease areas, aitport-based businesses, and in aircraft hangar areas. Airport Security Passenger security clearance for charter operations is provided by each carrier in the passenger terminal and apron areas. City staff provides airport maintenance and the required ARFF service for unscheduled air carrier flights. The City of Salem Police Department is available to respond to the airport on an as-needed basis. McNary Field has security fencing arO\md the perimeter of the airfield. Access to secw-ed areas is controlled through several keypad en by gates located along the airport fence. Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) McNary Field has an "Index A " certificate under the Code of Federal Regulations 14, Part 139. Part 139 govt211S operation of land airports serving DOT - certified air carrier activities. Within these regulations, specific requirements for the operation of airport rescue and fire fighting equipment and service have been established. Under Index A, prior permission is required for unscheduled air carrier operations with aircraft having more than 30 seats. During these periods, Salem Fire Department personnel are dispatched to the airport 15 minutes prior to arrival, and remain 15 minutes after departure. Fuel Facilities Salem Air Center provides retail fuel sales on the field. They maintain their own fuel storage tanks and trucks. Salem Air Center presently has three underground storage tanks and two trucks. The fixed tanks are located adjacent to their hangar on the west side of the airport. Other fuel storage on the airport includes the Oregon Anny National Guard, and several corporate tenants with both above-ground and underground storage tanks. Table 1-3 lists the aviation fuel storage capacities available for commercial sale; individual fuel storage and the OANG capacities are not included The ARFF equipment at McNary Field consists of one Oshkosh fIre/rescue vehicle equipped with 1,500 gallons ofwata and 180 gallons aqueous film ~ centurywest ENGINEERING CORPORATION 9 Mc~Y RElD M.AsTER PLAN UPDATE o-wTER I*NVENTORY T ABLE 1-3 FUEL STORAGE CAPACITIES Jet Fuel 1 -12,500 gal- l -2,500 gal. Underground Truck Salem Air center (Fixed Base Operator) Salem Air Center A V GAS 80/87 A V GAS IOOLL A V GAS IOOLL 1 -10,000 gal 1 -12,100 gal. 1 -1,200 gal. Underground Underground Truck AVGAS Above Ground: Underground Trucks: Total A V GAS Storage Ogallons 22,100 gallons -2 Tanks 1.200 gallons -1 Truck 23,300 gallons Jet Fuel Above Ground: Underground: Trucks: Total Jet Fuel Storage: 0 gallons 12,500 gallons -1 Tank 2.500 gallons -1 Truck 15,000 gallons Maintenance Airport maintenance services are provided for both airside and landside facilities at McNary Field by the City of Salem. Maintenance responsibilities include airfield facilities, parking areas, apron and ramp areas, public and employee parking areas, and all airport property not leased. Snow removal, minor pavement repair, runway/taxiway cleaning, brush removal, and general airport upkeep are included among the tasks performed by field maintenance personnel. by the City of Salem; telephone service is provided by U.S. West; natural gas service is provided by Northwest Natural Gas. Major utility lines run immediately east and west of the airport, providing service to airport tenants. Major water, sewer, and electrical utility lines serve existing developments on the eastern and western sides of the airfield. Future development of the southern section of the airfield will require extensions of utilities from existing service points. Figure 1-3 depicts the location of existing utilities on the airport. Electrical power to the airport area is provided by Pacific Power; water and sewer service is provided ~ centurywest ENGINEERING CORPORATION 10 AIRSPACE AND AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL McNary Field has controlled airspace (Class D) extending five statute miles from the airport. This airspace category is associated with an operating control tower. The air traffic control tower at McNary Field operates on a frequency of 119.1 Megahertz (MHz), an automatic terminal information service (ATIS) at 124.55 MHz. Airspace configuration is important in detennining whether existing facilities and procedures allow optimum use of the airport. Arrival and departure routes are situatOO the most compatible positions, relative to the surrounding terrain. Further development must be consistent with sustaining a safe operating environment for all aircraft that use the airspace and airport. The Federal Aviation Administration holds the ultimate responsibility for all Ol Salem Hospital, Norpac Foods, U.S. Government, AGRIP AC, City of Salem, SAIF , State Farm Insmance, Marion County, Chemeketa Community College, and Willamette University. Airport Service Area Unemployment within the region has declined steadily since the early 1980s, when the Salem meb"o area had peak season unemployment rates as high as 12.2 percent. Current unemployment levels average between 5 and 6 percent, and are expected to continue at low-to-moderate levels into the near future. An " Airport Service Area" is the geographic area which provides the majority of airport users for a particular airport. The boundary of the service area is usually OOfilm by the surface travel time (usually not more d1an 30 to 60 minutes) between populated areas and the airport. The availability of other airports within the service area will often affect demand for facilities. The McNary Field Service Area is depicted in Figure 2-1 Although the region is heavily dependent on govemment-related employment, it provides a relatively stable base. State projections of employment within the region reflect an overall increase of 27.9 percent in the next nine years. Manufactm"ing-related which now account for approximately 15.2 percent of the region's employment, are expected to increase by 15.5 percent, but will account for a smaller portion of the Other general aviation airports within the McNary Field service area include Independence State, Albany Municipal, Corvallis Municipal, McMinnville Municipal and Lebanon State Airport. This group of airports provides general aviation users a wide range of options for basing aircraft. 3centurywestENGINEERING CORPORATION note: this map is for illustrative purposes only and does not include all major roads. commIJnitiA". Marion Polk Yamhill Oregon u.s. 186.658 151,309 35,349 40,213 2,091,500 203,302,0001970 45,203 55,332 2,633,100 226,546,000 228,483 49,541 65,551 2,842,300 248,710,000 72,800 a 3,126,873 259,157,0001994a/1995b 313,186 b 252,800 a 54,400 a 61,710 84,123 3.351.591 274,634,000 319,729 71,604 99,925 3,773,678 297,716,000 Sources: Portland Statc University Ccnter for Population and Ccnsus; u.s. Ccnsus. 1 -1970-1994/52 -1994/5-2010 McNary Field is unique within the service area by offering a full range of facilities, instnunent approach capabilities, and aircraft services including fuel and maintenance. Commercial service passengers located within the airport service area are currently required to use Portland International Airport (pDX) or Eugene Airport. Cargo/express service is available to customers within the trade area, although most of the inbound and outbound freight is transported by truck to and from PDX. twenty-year planning period: I. Government employment will continue to be the leading employment segment within the locaVregional economy. Demand for trade and services will also increase as the economy expands and diversifies. 2. The population growili projected for Marion and Polk Counties over the next 20 years reflects a continued trend of moderate growth. sustained over an extended period. Primary Forecasting Assumptions 3. The Airport Service Area for McNary Field will experience an increase in population, thereby creating additional demand for aviation services. Forecasts of aviation demand at McNary Field will be developed based on current conditions, past trends, and expectations about the future. Several basic assumptions are made regarding growth in demand for aviation activity during the current 4. The short surface travel time to PDX has historically affected commercial passenger and cargo service at Salem. This factor is expected to continue during the current planning period. Area will offer local and itinerant aircraft owners and users increased choices for obtaining aviation services. 5. Military activity will remain relatively steady at cwrent levels, based on current fleet projections and mission requirements GENERAL A VIA TION FORECASTS General aviation activity, which basically includes all activity other than commercial, air taxi and military, is examined to evaluate the impact future general aviation activity may have on facilities. Based aircraft, fleet mix, and annual operations are fonx:ast for the cwrent twenty-year planning period. Historical data is presented in Table 2-2. 6. Cargo activity at the airport will continue to be limited primarily to light aircraft used by express camers. 7. General aviation activity will increase as both the area's population and economy expand. 8. Improvements in facilities at other general aviation airports within McNary Field's Service Table 2-2 Historical Aviation Activity Operations Year Enp. Pass Air Taxi Military Total 1995 2,800est. 243 556 36,828 19,752 5.610 62,989 1994 3,736 918 n/a 31,995 18,058 6.l85 57 ,456 1993 6,220 949 312 31,234 17 ,940 6.195 56,630 1992 4,045 66 385 35,021 18,223 8,349 62,054 1991 5.010 45 597 38,186 19,978 8,288 64,094 1990 694 1,289 620 35,014 18,510 10.013 65,446 1989 2,174 77 1,813 35,433 21,793 9,612 68, 728 1988 3,427 64 1,227 34,969 18,493 9,021 63,774 Source: Airport Records 6centurywest CORPORATION Based Aircraft levels not seen since the early 1980s. The continued strength of turbine-powered business aircraft production. and the growth in non-traditional genaal aviation aircraft (i.e kit planes, homebuilts, newly certificated production models, etc.) suggests that general aviation activity may experience a modest resurgence in the late 1990s. According to airport reAX)I"ds, are currently 186 aircraft based at the airport, including OANG aircraft: Based on both local and industry factors, it appears that modest growth in general aviation activity can reasonably be expected during the current planning period. If past trends continue into the future, short- term fluctuations in activity may also be expected at McNary Field. 141 -Single-engine 17- Multi-engine 3 -Business jet I -Helicopter (Civilian) 1 -Glider .1:J.. -Military (2 f1Xed-wing; 21 rotor) 186 -Total The previous master plan listed 182 based aircraft for 1986, including 141 single-engine, 38 multi- engine, and 3 jet aircraft. It also appears that the total of 182 aircraft did not include Oregon Army National Guard {OANG) aircraft located at the airport. The number of based aircraft have fluctuated over the last twenty years. with a low of 156 and a high of 219. As noted earlier, it is not clear in all historical years whether military aircraft wo-e included in the totals. Over the last ten years, the based aircraft have ranged from 184 to 210 . The Oregon Anny National Guard indicates that changes in their aircraft fleet are expected to occur within the next five years, although the number of overall aircraft should remain stable at current levels. For planning purposes, the current number of militmy based aircraft will be maintained through the forecast period. As a result, when calculating growth rates and evaluating activity ratios, military airaaft will not be included, but will be added to the totals for each forecast year. The 1987 Airport Master Plan (Foresite) forecast based general aviation aircraft to increase from 182 (1985) to 310 in 2006, reflecting an average aIU1ual increase of 2.6 percent. The master plan projected based aircraft in 1995 to be 240, well above the current level of 163. The 1989 Oregon Aviation System Plan (OASP) Forecast Update projected based general aviation aircraft to increase from 169 (in 1989) to 199 in 2000. The 1995 OASP Forecast Update projects based general aviation aircraft to increase from 147 (in 1994) to 182 in 2014. The FAA'sTerminal Air Forecasts (TAF) projects based aircraft to increase from 238 to 271 by 20 10; it appears that the T AF includes military aircraft, although the base year also appears high. Based Aircraft Forecasts Updated forecasts of based aircraft were prepared using three different techniques, described below. In addition, historical data was compared to existing forecasts in order to evaluate the forecasts and identify recent trends. A nwnber of general indicators suggest that general aviation, while not yet regaining the strength enjoyed during the 1970's, may be entering a renewed period of activity. Piston-engine aircraft prod~on by major manufacturers ( Cessna, Piper, Beechcraft, Mooney), is expected to resume to 7centurywestENGINEERING CORPORATION When reviewing existing forecasts, it became evident that there is a wide range among base year aircraft totals, even when excluding military aircraft. Airport records indicate a current total of 163 general aviation aircraft and 23 military aircraft. Because of the apparent counting inconsistencies, it may be more useful to focus on the updated projected growth rates for each forecast, rather than the specific numbers. The existing forecasts and their average growd1 rates are summarized in Table 2-3. population. is considerably lower than the peak levels (6.9:10,000) experienced fifteen years ago. However, the 5.2 ratio provides a level which has been maintained over the last 25 years. Based on this established trend, it is considered a reasonable benchmark for future projections. For population- based projections, a ratio of 5.2 was held constant through the forecast period. This method results in an average growth rate of 1.6 percent per year, over the twenty year planning period. The initial forecast years from the previous master plan and 1989 OASP forecasts can now be compared to actual data. For the 1995/1996 forecast year, the master plan and system plan projected 240 and 189 based aircraft, respectively. Table 2-3 Existing Based Aircraft Forecasts updated forecasts ofbased aircraft were developed using three techniques: First, a comparison between historical based aircraft and area population was made. From this, a ratio of aircraft-to-population was identified, which could then be applied to future population forecasts. The second method is a time- series projection, which reflects a twenty-two year trend of based aircraft at the airport. A third projection was prepared by evaluating McNary Field's activity as a percentage, or market share, of the statewide totals for Oregon. This approach evaluates the historical relationship that the airport has within a larger segment of activity 2015 n/a n/a I 182 i n/a .Forecast years 1996; 2001; 2006; ..Forecast yean 1994; 1999; 2004; 2014. AAR%: Average Arutual Growth Rate Growth in area population has been relatively consistent, with a continuous upward trend over an extenW1ted 45 to 50 percent of general aviation activity. The higher percentage of local traffic would be consistent with the popularity of flight training during the period. Another indication of changing conditions at the airport is that local GA operations in 1978 (62,657) exceeded all operations (GA, Commercial, and Military) at McNary Field in the last several years. on mission requirements. However, military activity is expected to account for an average of 10 percent of total traffic during the current planning period. In recent years, the average number of general aviation operations per based aircraft at Salem has ranged between 280 and 360 with operations fluctuating between 49,000 and 57 ,000 over the last eight years. Overall, 1995 GA operations were only 6 percent above 1990 levels. Aircraft Operations Forecasts The 1987 Airport Master Plan forecast general aviation operations to increase from 48,345 (1985) to 100,700 in 2005, reflecting an average annual increase of 3.6 percent. The master plan projected GA operations in 1995 to total 67,900, which is about 20 percent above current levels. The 1989 Oregon Aviation System Plan (OASP) Forecast Update projected general aviation operations to increase from 56,680 (in 1989) to 67,000 in 2000. The 1995 OASP Forecast Update projects general aviation operations to increase from 51,261 (in 1994) to 63,620 in 2014. The F AA's Terminal Air Forecasts (TAF) projects general aviation Military activity has also fluctuated, but in recent years typically accounted for 9 to II percent of total airport traffic. In some years, military activity has accounted for up to 15 percent of total traffic. Annual totals will vary from year to year, depending 11centurywestENGINEERING CORPORATION operations to increase from 54,078 to 79,821 by 2010. For purposes of comparison, the 1989 OASP and the T AF projections have been extrapolated to the year 2015. activity. McNary Field's historic market share of statewide general aviation operations since 1988, has averaged 4.2 percent. The market share range during the last eight years is 3.2 to 5.5 percent. A projection was prepared using a static market share of 4.2 percent (.042) against the most recent forecasts of statewide aviation activity. This projection results in an average annual growth rate of 1.8 percent through the 20-year planning period. The existing forecasts ratios of operations per based aircraft ranging from 260 to 360. The most recent forecasts (1995 OASP) utilized a constant ratio of 350 operations per based aircraft through 2014, although the base year data is ten percent lower than actual. The actual ratio between operations and based aircraft in 1995 was 347, although the average over the last six years was 309. The average annual growth rates for general aviation opecations in the four existing forecasts range from 1.1 to 3.6 percent. Existing and updated forecasts of general aviation operations are summarized in Tables 2- 7 and 2-8. The projections utilizing a ratio of operations per based aircraft was selected as the preferred forecast. This projection is consistent with the airport's historical performance over the last several years and provides a modest expectation of growth at 1.14 percent, per year. Updated forecasts of general aviation operations were developed using two techniques. A third method, utilizing a time-series projection, was attempted for periods varying from 5 to 22 years. However, the overall trend over the extended periods results in a negative trend line, which would continue to decline through the planning period. Although traffic has fluctuated in recent years, projecting a continued decline in activity does not reflect potential strengthening of general aviation and continued growth in the local area. A comparison between historical based aircraft and aircraft operations was made. From this, a ratio of operations per-based-aircraft was identified, which could d1en be applied to the preferred based aircraft focecast A ratio of320 operations per based aircraft was selected for use in the based aircraft utilization projection. This ratio is comparable to recent year av~ages and it provides a slightly more aggressive expectation of activity. This projection results in an average aIU1ual growth rate of 1.14 percent. Commercial Activity Commercial air service activity at Salem has historically included regional air carriers, such as Horizon Airlines and Air Oregon, and prior to the deregulation of the airline industry, larger carriers such as United Airlines. The United Airlines service, which ended in 1980, consisted of two daily departures (one to Portland, one to Medford/San Francisco) with Boeing 737-200 aircraft. The second forecast method evaluated McNary Field's general aviation operations as a percentage of the statewide totals for Oregon. This market share approach evaluates the historical relationship that the airport has had in terms of statewide 12 centurywest ENGINEERING CORPORATION Exi Table 2- 7 istina General Aviation Forecasts Act.: 96 66680 1987 MP Ope" 1987 MP Based AC 1989 OASP Op8 1989 OASP Ba..d AC 19960ASP OPS"" 19950ASP Based AC. . FAATAF OPS FAATAF Ba..d AC 63,600 1891995 67,900 240 51.261 147 54,078 236 2000 86,100 280 67,000 199 53,120 152 64,705 252 2005 100,700 310 n/a n/a 56,240 161 73,547 261 n/a 59,930 171 79,821 271 2015 n/a n/a n/a n/a 63,620 182 n/a n/a 3.6% 2.6% 1.5% 1.5% 1.1% 1.1% 2.6% 0.9% .Forecast y~ 1996; 2001; 2006; ..Forecast y~ 1994; 1999; 2004; 2014. AAR%: Aru1ual Average Growth Rate. + Focecasts Extrapolated by Century West Engineering .Extrapolated by Century West Engineering; note: AAR peI1:entages existing forecasts tied to forecast base years Updated forecast AAR based on 1995 actual base year- Air Oregon, which later merged with Horizon Air, began offering service with 6-seat twin-engine aircraft and later, 18-seat Fairchild/Swearingen Metroliners, which continued until scheduled service ended in 1994. Horizon Air departures from Salem were typically connected to Portland, Seattle, or North Bend. The level of service to Salem provided by Horizon was limited. In 1993, Horizon operated 534 departures with 18-seat Metro ill aircraft, with a total of 1,733 passenger enplanements. The 13centurywest CORPORATION enplanements represented a utilization of approximately 18 percent of available outbound capacity with an average of 3.2 passengers per departure. expected to exceed recent year highs. For forecasting purposes, air carrier activity will be estimated at 100 operations per year through the planning period. A separate assessment of scheduled commercial air service potential for Salem is included in Appendix A. of limited gaming charter flights to Reno, Las Vegas, or Laughlin, Nevada. Four companies (Casino Express, Great American Airways, Viscount Air Service, and Empire Air) have combined to serve Salem with several trips each month. McDonnel1 Douglas DC-9-15, Boeing 737- 200, and BAE 146 aircraft seating between 85 and 115 passengers, are typically operated by these carriers. According to airport records, the number of charter departures has gradually declined over the last three years from 92 departures in 1993 to 57 in 1995. One factor which may be reducing demand for gaming charter flights is the development of several casinos within convt21ient distance of Salem. Airport-to-Airport Shuttle Bus Service (Salem-Portland) Although not categorized as airline activity, the leading commercial passenger transport at McN ary Field is Hut Airport Shuttle. Hut currently offers ten departures daily to Portland International Airport (pDX) with 18-passenger vans, providing more than 70,000 available seats annually. Although traffic data was not available, it appears that approxintately 16,000 to 18,000 passenger boardings are currently accommodated at the aitport annually. The volume of passengers carried by Hut appears to have remained strong over an extended period. (Note: by late summer 1997, Hut departures have increased to 18 per day).In the last full year of Horizon scheduled service (1993), gaming charter flights accounted for nearly 72 percent of the 6,220 passenger enplanements at the airport. In 1994, charta enplanements increased to 87 percent of total enplanements, as Horizon terminated service to Salem in March. Charter flights now account for virtually all commercial passenger activity at McNary Field with 2,500 to 3,000 enplanements. It is expected that the current level will be maintained, or will decline gradually through the planning period. Changes to this segment of activity are ex~ted to be driven by competition from Oregon-based casinos. Although these hoardings are not included in airport traffic statistics, they do represent the majority of commercial passenger movement within the Salem area. From a planning standpoint, the airport terminal is a true intermodal transportation facility , accommodating commercial passenger movements by surface and air transportation. It is expected that the number of surface boardings at the airport will keep pace with the overall population growth in the area. AIR TAXI AND CARGOAircraft operations by commercial charter operators have declined over the last three years from slightly more than 200 to around loo. It is expected that the current level of activity will be maintained for the near future, although growth in activity is not Air taxi and cargo activity at Salem is currently estimated at approximately 800 to 1,000 annual operations. The activity consists of the charter 14 centurywest ENGINEERING CORPORATION activity , and daily UPS contract flights. Currently, Sport Air Travel, based in Troutdale, operates one flight per weekday under contract to UPS, with Cessna 402 aircraft; this activity totals approximately 520 operations annually. purposes, it is estimated tl1at military operations will account for approximately 10 percent of total airfield operations through the planning period. INSTRUMENT APPROACHES Due to the short driving time to PDx, the express flights are limited to the most time-sensitive items. The level of air taxi and cargo operations is expected to inaease at a rate comparable to general aviation activity (1-1.5% annually) during the planning period. Forecasts of Amlua1 Instnm1ent Approaches (AlA's) provide guidance in determining the need for navigational aid facilities. An instrument approach, as defmed by the FAA, is "an approach to an airport, with intent to land, by an aircraft in accordance with an Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) flight plan, when the visibility is less than 3 miles and/or when the ceiling is at or below the minimum initial approach altitude." MlLIT ARY FORECASTS As notOO earlier. the majority of military operations at McNary Field are related to Oregon Anny National Guard aircraft. In recent years. military traffic has accounted for 9-11 percent of total airfield operations. and as high as 15 percent in some years. Historical data on AlA Is was obtained from the FAA for the years 1976 through 1995. Separate categories are maintained for air carrier, air taxi, general aviation, and military aircraft. The number of annual lAPs ranged from 778 to 2,798 during the period. In any given year, instnnnent approaches total1 to 2.5 percent of total operations. The F AA T AF projects instnnnent approaches to remain below 1,000 per year, through the year 2010. For forecasting pwposes, instnnnent approaches will be estimated at 1.5 percent of total airfield activity. Approximately 21 helicopters are based at the OANG facility on a year-round basis. The OANG also supports two fixed wing aircraft at the airport: one Shorts SD3 Sherpa-30 passenger twin engine turboprop transport and one Beechcraft Cl2 (KingAir 200) 8 passenger twin-engine turboprop. Instrument operations are also recorded during periods of non-VFR weather. At McNary Field, instrument operations have typically accounted for between 10 and 15 percent of total airfield operations. Instrument operations will be projected to be 12 percent of total operations, through the planning period. In 1995, 5,610 military operations accounted for approximately 9 percent of total airfield operations. A review of historic traffic data indicates that military traffic is often equally divided between local and itinerant operations. It is estimated that helicopter traffic normally accounts for more than 90 percent of total military operations. OANG fixed wing operations are estimated at less than 500 per year, and are expected to remain relatively stable. This split between fixed wing and rotor wing activity is expected to continue. For forecasting 15centurywestENGINEERING CORPORATION Aircraft Fleet Mix development of facility requirements for the study are as follows: The fleet mix ofbased aircraft was presented earlier in the chapter. However, itinerant activity at McNmy Field includes a limited amount of transport category aircraft. a Peak Month -the calendar month in which peak aircraft operations occur. Q Design Day -the average day in the peak month. This indicator is derived by dividing the peak month operations by the nwnber of days in the month. The aircraft fleet mix defmes a nwnber of key parameters in airport planning, including critical aircraft (for pavement designs and airport geomeby), terminal complex layout, and maximwn stage length capabilities (affecting runway length evaluations). a Busy Day -the busy day of a typical week in the peak month. This is used primarily to determine apron space requirements. Based on operations, it is estimated that 97 percent of the fixed-wing air traffic activity on the airport consists of light single-engine and multi-engine aircraft. Large turboprop aircraft and business jet traffic is estimated at approximately 2.75 percent; with transport category jet traffic estimated at less than 0.25 percent. This percentage of transport jet activity is expected to remain well below I percent of total traffic; the percentage of business jet and large turboprop activity is expected to increase gradually through the plamling period, to approximately 4 percent by the end of the period. O Design Hour -the peak hour within the design day. This is used in airfield demand/capacity analysis, as well as is determining terminal building and access road requirements. O Busy Hour -the peak hour within the busy day. This is used in facility requirements determinations. The peak month for operations is July or August, whicll has typically accounted for approximately 11 to 12 percent of overall activity in recent years. This peak month factor is expected to continue through the planning period. In 1993, the last full year Horizon Air served Salem, the large turboprop activity specifically related to commercial service, accounted for approximately 2.1 percent of total fixed-wing activity. Combined scheduled and charter commercial activity accounted for 2.4 percent of total operations, with large transport jet aircraft accounting for 0.35 percent. A review of air traffic control tower records indicates that busy day operations averaged 5 to 6 percent of peak month activity. Busy hour is estimated at 15 percent of the busy dayoperations. Design hour operations are estimated to account for 15 percent of design day operations. It is expected that these factors will remain relatively steady during the planning period. A sUmmary of forecast peaking activity is presented in Table 2-9. Updated forecasts are presented in Table 2-10. PEAKING CHARACTERISTICS Many facility needs at McN ary Field are related to the levels of activity during peak periods. The periods used in demand-capacity analysis and the 16centurywestENGINEERING CORPORATION Table 2-9 Forecast of Peak Activity 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 I Annual Operations 62,989 66,400 69,200 73,600 80,400 Peak Month 7,244 7,630 7,950 8,450 9,240 Design Day 242 255 265 282 308 I Busy Day 350 355 370 390 430 Design Hour 36 38 40 42 46 Peak Hour 50 53 56 59 64 Table 2-10 Summary of Air Traffic Forecasts 2~0 !...3~~ r... i ! 100 ! i ~ 1.100 i i j 42.2()( i ! 1 4.400 ! ! 1 47.8()( 2015..!~.~.~ 1.. j 1 j 1 ]tinerant Operations 1 1 1 !.~ AirTaxi ~ r !. General Aviation 1 !. ..~~~~ 1 ToW Itinerant LocalOperations , General Aviation 1 ~ Militmy 1'.. T oW Local I Total Operations Inst. Approaches 1 ~- Based Aircraft i : c,o-.~ ; c ~ 100 1 100 i ! , ~ 1,100 1 1,200 ! ! 1 46,200 ! ! 1 4,800 ! ! 1 52,300 ~ ; 100 900 38,200 4,000 43,100 i 36,828 i ~ ! i ., . ~ ~ t 1 .i 1 19,752 1 20,600 1 21,400 1 22,800 1 24,900 ~ ~.. ~ ~ 3,000 1 3,200 , ,': : : : : I 1 22,362 i 23,300 1 24,200 j 25,800 1 28,100 ~ ~.. ~ ~ 73,600 i 80,400 ~ ~.. ~ ~ 1,100 1 1,200 ~ i-. ~ ~ 226 ~ 245 ~ ! 17 centurywest ENGINEERING CORPORATION I 0 U) M \ o o ~ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ , 0 I.() N \ \ ~\ \ 00 , 000.\ ?~\ . \- I ... ~() ~~ -gQ G) ~ Q) \ :.-: t : \ .-. .. \ \\ . :. ~\ :\-.. -. -\ ~ -\ : -.-.: -. -- - - - - ?eJ~J !V o 0 N ~ .g < ~ 0 tl)~ o o~ ,~ ] .-,VI r.-I'-' U .p ~ .gU = = .-o !!1 'p"' U ~ ~U'= e e OQ. ~~ U ~ OU Z.a 0 L() U)~ 0 N 0~ 0 Na. C (/) 0~ .- 0 ~ ll') :J .'"' 0> a. ..., 0> O 0 ~Q. 0 N . ] ] 0 0 0 N a.U. ~ ~, ~ U) CO~ O')ro ~u. O')~ ~ : I ! f ~ . i. 0 .0') 0')~ t/)Q) .cQ) -(/)ro Q) U) .fl .? CX) ~.- 0') ~ . . : 0 .CX) 0') ~ U) to... 0') ~0 \ \ o o o o ~~ ~ o o o o (\I T- o o o o 0 T- suo!JeJado o o o o 0:> o 0 0 0 <0 o o o o ~ ~ o 0 0 0 ("\1 ~ Lt) ~ O N O~ m ~ Ca.C- 0 O (/)(/) ~ ~ c-??U.. ~ o -~O O ~= Nm ~ ~ .- ::J I.t) a> 5-(X) a> (X) ? ?u a> a> a> ? (,) ~~~u..? I ..Lt) : : I. o 1 : : I I..- 0 o o 0 N 1- rn Q) >- 0> ~ Chapter Three DEMAND-CAPACITY ANAL YSIS TOO previous chapter, forecasts of aviation demand were presented for McNary Field through the year 2015. These forecasts include aircraft operations, based aircraft, peaking characteristics, and aircraft flret mix. With this information. the capabilities of the airside and landside facilities can be evaluated to determine if they are adequate to accommodate the f~ aviation demands without significant delay or deterioration of service levels. analysis of airfield capacity. The cUITent technique recommended by the F AA, employed in this study, is described in F AA Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5060-5, Airport Capacity and Delay. The method presented in this chapter produces statements of airfield capacity in the major terms: Hourly Capacity of Runways: The basic measure of capacity related to peak hour activity , is the maximum number of aircraft operations that can take place in one hour. facilities are identified, a more specific detennination of the approximate sizing and timing of new facilities is made. The requirements for new facilities are presented for the short-, mediwn- and long-range periods for the twenty-year Master Plan. Once the overall facility requirements are defined for the current planning period, preliminaIy airport development alternatives can be created which can address facility needs through specific development concepts. Following review of the preliminaIy alternatives, a preferred alternative will be selected which can provide the best overall combination of facility improvements for the airport. Annual Service Volume: The amlual capacity or a maximum level of aircraft operations that may be used as a reference in planning the runway system. Annual Aircraft Delay: Total delay incurred by all aircraft on the airfield in one year. The capacity of an airport is affected by several factors including airfield layout, meteorological conditions, aircraft mix, runway use, percent arrivals, percent touch-and-go's, and exit taxiway locations. These items are described below. AIRFIELD CAPACITY Airfield Layout The capacity analysis for McNary Field was conducted to detennine the existing and future capacity ofthe airfield and to identify any present or potential deficiencies in the airfield system. A variety of techniques have been developed for the Airfield layout refers to the location and orientation of the I1lnways, taxiways, and tenninal area. McNary's two I1lnways are situated in an acute angle intel'Section configuration, with approximately 30 degrees of separation. Runways 13-31 and 16- 1centurywest CORPORATION 34 are both served by taxiway systems, which include partial-Iength parallel taxiways and access taxiways to/from the nmway ends. Field. Table 3-1 indicates the individual and combined coverages for the two runways at McNary. Figure 3-1 presents the all-weather wind rose for McNary Field. At aitports with an operating air traffic control tower, arriving and departing aircraft traffic can be more efficiently managed. With multiple runways, aIriva1s. departures. and touch and go traffic can be assigned to specific runways. Although limitations do exist. this type of configuration can increase airfield capacity above a single runway coofiguration. In addition, Runway 31 is equipped with an instrument landing system (ILS). An n..S enables an efficient flow of arriving aircraft during poor weather conditions. Figure 1-2. contained in Chaptel' One depicts the existing layout of McNary Field The primary effect of ceiling and visibility conditions on airport capacity is on required spacing between aircraft during IFR conditions. The F AA Airfield Capacity and Delay Advisory Circular (AC 150/5060-5) recognizes three categories of ceiling and visibility minimums: Visual Flight Rule (VFR) conditions occur whenever the reported ceiling is greater than 1,000 f= and visibility is greater than three statute miles. Instrument Flight Rule (IFR) conditions occur when the reported ceiling is less than 1,000 feet but ~ than 500 feet above the ground and/or when visibility is less than three statute miles but more than one statute mile. Meteorology Runway use is normally dictated by wind conditions, ceilings and visibility, with the direction of the takeoffs and landings generally determined by the prevailing winds. The type of insb11mentation and the adequacy of the associated insttument approaches each runway will also dictate runway use during inclement weather conditions. Poor ViSibility and Ceiling (PVC) conditions occur when the ceiling is less than 500 feet and/or visibility is less than one statute mile. For purposes of calculating capacity, the percentage of weather conditions (based on available data) at McNary Field on an annual basis are presented in Table 3-1. Wind conditions are very important in deterDlining nmway use in a capacity analysis. For planning and design, a crosswind component is considered excessive at 15 miles per hour for aircraft over 12,500 })OWlds and at 12 miles per hour for smaller aircraft. Wind data (100,013 observations) covering a period from 1948 to 1978 have been summarized for all weather conditions at McNary 2centurywest CORPORATION 16 34 \ (1., ~ N vo- 1 ~~a ).0 '1--(' 0.0 1 \ {"0.0 0.0 I\ -- ~ ~-:- r'1'0.0 I O 0.0 10.0 0.0O-M~ ~ 0- 01 0.0 0.0 /R; 3 , 01;)G 0.0Vl2 ().3 7 ~ a ;:) ~L01 ~,~" McNARY FIELD ALL WEATHER WIND ROSE PERIOD 1948- 1978 100,013 OBSERVATION SOURCE: US DEPT. OF COMMERCE (NOAA) 16 34 RUNWA Y WIND COVERAGE RUNWAY 12 MPH 15 MPH 95.1% 98.7% 99.2% 99.7% DATE: 8/15/97 CHECKED BY: RUNWAY WIND COVERAGE SCALE: , "= l'.DRAWN BY: KSW FIGURE: 3-1fILE: 4030BOO201\4102\60B-.DWG ~ ~ McNARY FIELD SALEM, OREGON centuryweat ENGINEERING CORPORATION 13-31 for operations; arriving and departing mi1itaty helicopters are coordinated witlt fixed-wing 1raffic on tlte same runway. Table 3-1 McNary Field Weather Conditions & Runway Wind Covera e 13-31 95.1 98.7 Aircraft Mix Aircraft mix is defmed in tenns of four fixed-wing aircraft classes described in Table 3-2. The aircraft mix at McNary consists of Classes A and B (small propeller aircraft andjets weighing 12,500 pounds or less, and Class C consisting of large multi-engine aircraft including business and transport category jets weighing more than 12,500 pounds and up to 300,000 pounds. Class C aircraft are typically associated with airline, corporate aviation, and military activity. Class D consists oflarge aircraft weighing more than 300,000 pounds; there are no Class D aircraft presently operating at McNary Field and none are forecast during the study period. .Below Minimums j 1 %, Surrounding terrain limits radar coverage in the local area to approximately 200 feet above the runway. This reduces hourly capacity slightly during IFR conditions. The previous master plan estimated IFR hourly capacity at 42 aircraft operations; this appears to be reasonable based on existing procedures, radar coverage, and the ILS. The fixed-wing aircraft mix is currently 96 percent Class A and B aircraft, and 4 percent Class C aircraft during VFR conditions. As noted in the Forecast Chapter, the number of air carrier charter opa-ations, as a percentage of total operations, is not expected to increase during the study period. However, larger business jet and turboprop operations are expected to increase during the planning period. Runway Utilization Air traffic controllers at the airport estimate that approximately 80 percent of air traffic at McNary Field occurs on Runway 16-34 with 20 percent on RlUlway 13-31. Seasonal wind conditions typically favor R\lDway 13 or 16 during the winter months, and RlUlway 31 or 34 during the summer. Runway 13-31 is the primary runway during poor weather conditions, with precision and nonprecision instrument approaches available. Larger aircraft also use RlUlway 13-31 due to its pavement strength and Imgth. The Oregon Army National Guard uses two helipads located on Taxiway B, east of Runway 1k largest portion ofhelicoptec traffic at the airport consists of Oregon Army National Guard activity . 1k majority of OANG helicopter operations utilize the runway-taxiway system of Runway 13-31. The helipads located on Taxiway Bravo provide a fIXed 4centurywestENGINEERING CORPORATION McNARY AElD MAsTER PLAN UPDATE OWTER 3 -DE;,jt;arAOTY ANAL YS/S point for arrival and departure; these operations are coordinated with other fixed wing operations. For capacity planning purposes, each helicopter arrival or departure occupies available capacity for that runway. Therefore, rotor operations will be included when calculating runway capacity estimates. expected to remain relatively steady through the end of the study period. Exit Taxiways Exit taxiways affect airfield capacity since their locations directly detemline the occupancy time of an aircraft on the runway. Based on traffic mix at McNary, the capacity analysis gives credit to exits locatal within a prescribed range of 2,000 to 4,000 feet from the runway thresholds. Under this criterion, both runways have three exits located within the specified range. Percent Arrivals The percentage of aircraft arrivals as they relate to the total operations of the airport is important in determining capacity. Except in unique circwnstances, the aircraft arrival-departure split is typically 50-50. At McNary Field, traffic information indicated no deviation from this pattern, and arrivals were estimated to account for 50 percent of peak period operations. Hourly Runway Capacity The fIrst step in the analysis involves the computation of the runway hourly capacity. Wind direction, the percentage oflFR and PVC weather, and the number and locations of runway exits then become important factors in determining the weighted hourly capacity . Touch-and-Go Operations A touch-and-go operation involves an aircraft making a landing and an immediate takeoff without coming to a full stop or exiting the runway. These opa-ations are normally associated with training are included in local operations data. Touch-and-go activity is counted as two operations since there is an arrival and a departure involved. Based upon the existing runway system, an aircraft mix of 4.0 percent Class C operations, and 18 percent touch and go operations, and taxiway exit rating of three, the existing weighted capacity was developed. Dwing IFR oonditions, the mix of Class C aircraft is unchanged, although there is no touch and go activity.At McNmy Field, the GANG helicopters conducted approximately 2,610 local operations in 1995; general aviation local operations were estimated at 19,752. Almually, it is estimated that 50 percent of local operations are touch-and-goes. Therefore, touch-and-go operarions account for approximately 18 percent of total operations. This percentage is The hourly runway capacity during VFR condition is estimated at 104 operations; the lower weighted capacity available during IFR conditions (approximately 60 operations)reduces the weighted 5centurywest CORPORA TION Table 3-2- Aircraft Classifications Aircraft Class Typical Aircraft Class A: Small single-engine, gross weight 12,500 pounds or less Cessna 172/206/210 Beechcraft Bonanza Cessna Caravan Mooney 201/231/252 Piper Warrior/Cherokee TBM 700 Beechcraft Baron Cessna Citation I Beech King Air 9011001200 Class B: Small twin-engine, gross weight 12,500 pounds or less Cessna 310/402/421 Piper Cheyenne I/II/Ill Beech C99 Airliner Class C: Large aircraft, gross weight 112,500 pounds to 300,000 pounds Beech King Air 300/350 Douglas DC-9 Boeing 727n37n57 Cessna Citation ll/III/X Shorts SD 330/360 Fairchild Metro m Hawker Siddley 125 Westwind 1/11 Class D: Large aircraft, gross weight more than 300,000 pounds Airbus A300/A340 McDonnell-Douglas MDll Boeing747/767/777 Lockheed LlOll Source: FAAAC 1S0/S060-S,Airport Capacity and Delay hourly capacity. month (design hour). The daily and hourly peaking activity identify specific demand ratios which are used in calculating the ASV. The following equation is used to calculate annual service volume: The current weighted nmway capacity is estimated to be 98 operations per hour. The weighted hourly capOC;ities. reflect the capacities of the nmway in VFR. IFR. and below minimum conditions. are compared to forecast design hour volumes in Table 3-3. Annual Service Volume Once the weighted hourly capacity is known, the annual service volume (ASV) can be determined. The forecasts of peaking activity prepared in Chapter Two provide estimates of the average daily activity during the peak month (design day), and the average peak hour activity within the peak ASV=CxDxH C = weighted hourly capacity D = ratio of annual demand to average daily demand during the peak month H = ratio of average daily demand to average peak hour demand during the peak month. ~ centurywest ENGINEERING CORPORATION 6 The ctnrent ASV for McNary Field was detennined to be 172,300 operations. The ASV is not expected to change significantly during the planning period, based on projected activity levels, peaking factors, and type of aircraft use. ability to accommodate increasing traffic levels, peak hourly demands and hourly runway capacity will provide a more immediate indication of capacity problems. Increased delay for aircraft will be realized during periodic peak periods initially; the frequency of these periods of congestion will be a strong indicator of potential capacity constraints touch and go percentages are also not projected to change significantly during the study period. Based on the capacity analysis listed in Table 3-3 and depicted in Figure 3-2, it is apparent that demand can be accommodated with existing capacity through the planning period. The factors which combine to reduce annual capacity levels at McN ary do not affect all operations equally. While the relationship of annual capacity and demand provides a broad-based gauge for evaluating the airport's Annual Delay As an airport approaches capacity. it begins to experience increasing amounts of delay to aircraft operations. Delays can occur to arriving and departing aircraft during both VFR and IFR conditions. As an airport's operations increase, delay increases exponentially. Based on the ratio Table 3-3 Demand/Capacity Summary McNary Field Year Annual Operations Design Hour Operations Weighted Hourly Capacity Annual Service Volume Average Delay per Operation {minutes) Total Annual Delay (Hrs.) 1995 62.989 36 98 172,300 0.22 231 38 171,850 27766,400 98 0.25 2005 69.200 40 98 170,500 0.28 323 2010 73,600 42 98 172,600 0.29 356 2015 80,400 46 98 172,300 0.32 429 7centurywestENGINEERING CORPORATION McNM.y AElD MA-STER PLAJ'J UPDATE Gw>TER 3 -DE~-CAPAOTY ANALYSIS Figure 3-2 Annual Service Volume vs Demand 2000 2005 Year 2010 2015 ~ ASV Demand AIRSPACE CAPACITY annual delay is currently estimated at 231 hours, witll an increase to 429 hours projected by 2013. This level of delay will result in an average delay of less tIlan one minute per aircraft through tIle planning period. Table 3-3 compares tIle levels of delay projected for tIle airport during tIle planning period. Generally, F AA criterion recommends evaluating improvements for capacity when operations exceed 60 percent of tIle annual service vollmle. With forecast activity at McNary Field projected to reach 47 percent of capacity at the end of the planning period, no capacity-related facility improvements are anticipated during the current planning period. A review of the McNary Field Obstruction Chart (AOC) and instrument approach plates was conducted to identify obst11lctions near the airport. The airspace in the in1mediate vicinity of McNary was depicted in Figure 1-3, in Chapter One Straight-in instrument approaches are available for RWlway 31 and 13 ~ circ1e-to-1and minimums allow landings on the remaining runways when ceiling and visibility conditions pennit. The airspace surrounding McNary Field is not significantly affected or constrained by other airports in the area. As noted in the Inventory Chapter, there are a nwnba- of public and private airports located in the vicinity of McNary airspace. Albany Municipal Airport (17 miles south-southwest) has a ~ centurywest ENGINEERING CORPORATION 8 VORJDME or GPS-A approach which uses the Corvallis VORJDME. The approach and missed approach procedures are designed to keep aircraft west and south of the McNary ILS. Independence State Airport, located 9 nautical miles southwest, does not currently have an instrument approach. existing taxiway access. Additional hangar development areas and taxiway access have been identified by airport users as a significant existing need. The airport has adequate undeveloped land area available for hangar development. Additional discussion of apro~ tiedown, and hangar requirements is contained in the Facility Requirements chapter (Chapter Four).Other Items In Task 4.1 of the master plan scope of work, an analysis of air carrier service requirements, relative to capacity was identified. From a runway capacity perspective, the re-introduction of air carrier service would not significantly affect airfield capacity . With an annual service volume exceeding 170,000 operations, and twenty-year baseline projections (not reflecting resumption of air service) of slightly more than 80,000 operations, the runway system has a considerable amount of unused capacity available to accommodate a nwnber of air carrier service scenarios. The primary capacity-related considerations would be related to terminal capacity (i.e., gate capacities, enplanement capacities, etc.). These items will be discussed in the Facility Requirements section of this chapter. The existing capacity of airport tiedowns is greater than demand. With more than 150 tiedowns available of the west-side aprons, locally-based and transient aircraft are easily accommodated. It is estimated that approximately 80 percent of based aircraft at McNary Field are stored in hangars. Aircraft hangar space is currently running with virtually no vacancy .Demand for new hangars does exist and the airport currently has space for approximately four conventional hangars with 9centurywest ENGINEERING CORPORATION Chapter Four FACILITY REQUIREMENTS ANALYSES This chapter contains information such as existing and recommended dimensional standardS, facility condition information, and other related items. The material is divided into the following sections: The previous chapter, the capacities of various McNary Field facilities were detennined through the year 2015. With this information and the earlier forecasts of aviation activity , the capabilities of the airside and landside facilities can be evaluated to determine if they are adequate to accommodate aviation demands without a significant delay or deterioration of service levels. Summary -Faci/ity Requirements Section I -Physical Facility Requirements Section 11- Termina/ Area Requirements Section 111- FAR Part 77 and FM Design Standards The Facility Requirements analysis will outline the spa;i:fic needs associated the airside and landside areas of the airport. To plan for the future of the airport. it is necessary to translate forecast demand into the spa;i:fied types and quantities of facilities that will be needed during the current planning period. This section uses the results of the forecast and demand capacity analyses, and established planning criteria, to determine the airside (i.e., runways, taxiways, navigational aids, marking and lighting) and landsi~ (i.e., hangars, aircraft parking apron, fueling, automobile parking and access) facility requirements. Summary -Facility Requirements The material contained in this chapter includes information on the adequacy or condition of existing airport facilities, recommended airport design standards, ~AR Part 77 Imaginary Surfaces (airspace), and the existing facility's compliance with these standards. Due to the amount of infom1ation contained in this analysis, the chapter has been divided into three sections, with a brief summary of the overall facility requirements provided at the beginning of the chapter . Detailed summaries of the individual facility requirements categories are provided in the chapter . Once existing or potential deficiencies in airport f~ilities are identified, a more specific determination ofthe approximate sizing and timing of new facilities is made. Airport development alternatives are then created which can address specific facility needs. Following review of the preliminary alternatives, a preferred alternative will be selected to provide the best overall combination of facility improvements for the airport. The overall facility needs are summarized on the following page. 1centurywest ENGINEERING CORPORATION Facility Requirements Summary Runways -13-31 Resutfaced in 1996; length a'dequate for majority of users; design aircraft (medium-size business jet) requires approximately 6, 500 feet for balanced field length in hot temperatures, Runway reserve from an earlier master plan (transport category air carrier service) should be retained to protect long-term option, Dimensions and separations exceed Airplane Design Group If standards, 16-34 length is adequate for general aviation users; meets or exceeds ADG If standards. Restriction for use by aircraft over 30,000 pounds regardless of landing gear type should be reviewed. Weight bearing capacity may be increased during next pavement overlay. Runway 16-34 width exceeds standards for ADG If; however, cost-benefit analysis should be completed as part of pavement design to determine best course of action. Taxiways- Access throughout airporl is good; additional taxiway connedions required for new hangar areas.; taxiway reserves required for potential extension of Runway 13-31. Taxiways generally meet or exceed ADG II standards. Aircraft Parking Aprons -Tiedowns for small general aviation aircraft adequate; parking and loading/unloading areas for itinerant business aircraft, and helicopters require reconfiguration. Hangars -High percentage of based aircral1 stored in hangars; vacant lease areas with taxiway access very limited; existing and sholt-term demand for hangar lease area appears to be strong. Site improvements (taxiway connections, vehicle access, utilities, etc.) required to attract tenants. Lighting & NBVBids -Runway and taxiway lighting, approach lighting, visual guidance indicators adequate. Runway end identifier lights (REIL) may be added to Runways 16 and 34. Existing navigational aids are adequate: global positioning system (GPS) approaches will come on-line during cu"ent planning period: ground-based navigational systems are expected to be phased out over an extended period. T Blminal -Existing tenninal generally adequate for existing use and limited air service activity. Potential introduction of scheduled air service may require an expansion or upgrade of facilities, depending on level of service and timing. Vehicle parking is adequate for existing activity. A tenninal area reserve should be maintained to protect future expansion of building, parking areas, and reconfiguration of the landside access. 58curity -Existing security is adequate for level of use. Additional fencing and controlled access points may be required for new hangar areas. Future non-aviation activities should be physically separated from aviation activities. Utilities -Existing developed areas have good access to utilities. New development in the southern and eastern areas of the airpolt would require extension of basic utilities. Non-aviation development will have greater utility requirements. Roadways -Existing roadways generally adequate; extensions to new industrial or aviation development areas will be required. Upgrade of SE 25th Street on west side of airport may be required at terminal area" Property -Existing airport has adequate undeveloped land to accommodate aviation and non-aviation uses. 2centurywest CORPORATION Section I -Physical Airport Facility Requirements below and Airplane Design Groups lor ll; the airport also accommodates some aircraft which are included in Design Group ill. Airport specifications are determined by analyzing the aircraft mix and detennining the most demanding airplane to be accommodated. Although one aircraft may determine runway length, another may detennine pavement strength or other appropriate design standards. AIRSIDE REQUIREMENTS Airside facilities are those directly related to tl1e arrival and departure of aircraft: Design Aircraft .Runways .Taxiways .Airfield Marking and Lighting .Navigational Aids The 1987 Airport Master Plan identified the Fokker F27 twin-engine turboprop as the cWTent design aircraft and the McDonnell Douglas MD80 as the future design aircraft. Both aircraft are included in Airplane Design Group III; the F27 is included in Approach Category B and the MD80 is included in Approach Category C. The selection of these aircraft was based on specific expectations of commercial air service, which have not been realized during the last nine years, nor are expected during the cWTent planning period. The selection of the appropriate design standards for the development of the airfield facilities is based primarily upon the characteristics of the aircraft which are expected to use the airport. The most critical characteristics are the approach speed and size of the critical design aircraft anticipated to the serve the airport. The airport reference code (ARC), as defmed in F AA Advisory Circular 15015300- 13, Airport Design, reflects the type of aircraft which are intended to operate at the airport. The advisory circular groups aircraft into five categories based upon their approach speed and six categories based on wingspan, as described in Table 4-1. As noted in Chapter Two, a limited amount of charter air carrier service currently exists at McN ary Field. Douglas DC-9-15, Boeing 737-200, and similar aircraft operated by charter carriers account for approximately 100 operations per year. These aircraft are included in ADG ill and Approach Category C. The current level of activity is expected to remain relatively constant during the current planning period. Categories A and B include small, propeller aircraft and certain smaller business aircraft. Categories C, D, and E consist of the remaining business jets as well as larger jet and propeller aircraft generally associated with commercial and military use. Most aircraft using McNary Field fall into Category C or 3centurywestENGINEERING CORPORATION jet activity is estimated to be 50 percent Approach Category B aircraft types (Falcon 50, Citation ill, etc.), 35 percent Approoch Category C (Challenger, Hawker 125, Astra, Saberliner, Lockheed Jetstar, etc.). and 15 percent D (Gulfstream IJ/IV Lear 35). Three business jets are currently based at the airport, including one Bae125-800, one Westwind I, and one Beechjet 400A. The locally-based business jet airaaft are included in ADG I; two of the aircraft are included in Approach Category C and one aircraft is included in Category B. Table 4-2 summarizes the distribution for McNary Field's business jet activity. Table 4-1 Airplane Design Groups and Approach Categories Approach Category Approach Speed (knots) A Less than 91 B 91-120 c 121 -140 D 141- 165 E 166 or greater Based on F AA operational criteria. the design aircraft must have a minimum of 500 itinerant operations per year. At McNary Field, no single aircraft can meet this operational threshold. However, the collective activity of comparable aircraft types, in addition to the limited transport- category activity, will meet the F AA threshold. Airplane Design Group Wingspan (feet) I Less than 49 n 49 but less than 79 ill 79 but less than 118 IV 118 but less than 171 The most demanding aircraft, based on nm}MJ length, are ~ group of medium-size business jets, such as ~ Bael25 aOO ~ Westwind I, which are included in Approach category C and Design Group I. 100 most demanding aircraft type based on physical dimensions (i.e., wingspan), is the large turboprop, represented by the OANG's Shorts Sherpa SD3. The Sherpa is a twin-engine turboprop, with a 74-foot wingspan and a maximum gross takeoff weight of 25,600 pounds. The Sherpa is included in ADO n and Approach Category B. In addition to the Sherpa, the OANG operates a C12, military version of a Beechcraft King Air B200, which is also included in design v 171 but less than 197 VI 197 but less than 262 Business jet activity at McNary Field is currently estimated at approximately 1.400 operations per year; approximately 32 percent of total business jet activity is generated by loca1ly-based aircraft, with the remaining activity associated with transient corporate aircraft. Based on data maintained by SalTER 4 -F~aIJTY ~IREMENTS N-IAI.- YSES Table 4-2 Business Jet Activity Distribution McNary Field (1995) Jet Aircraft Activity (Current) Transient Business Jet Locally-Based Business Jet Operations Percentage Operations 10% 100 35% 150 25% 230 65% 300 40% 380 -0- -0- 25% 240 -0- -0- 100% 950 100% 450 FAR Part 77 Imaginary Surfaces and FAA Airport Design Standards perspectives including runway orientation. airfield capacity, runway length, and pavement strength. From this infonnation. the requirements of the runway system were determined.A summmy of applicable F AA airport design standards and F AR Part 77 Surface dimensions is presented in Table 4-3. A review of the standards and identification of any existing deficiencies is provided below and at the end of the chapter. Additional dimensional data for Part 77 Surfaces is provided in Figure 4-1. Runway Orientation As noted earlier, the existing orientation of the two runways at McNary Field provides very good wind coverage, meeting the FAA's desired 95 percent coverage standard for both individual runways and combined. A wind rose analysis is used to determine airport wind coverage. Figure 3-1, contained in Chapter Three, depicts the all-weather wind rose for McNary Field. The wind rose indicates that both runways have a high level of wind coverage for both small and large aircraft. AIRSIDE FACILITIES Runways The adequacy of the existing runway system at McNary Field was analyzed from several ~ centurywest ENGINEERING CORPORATION 6 Airfield Capacity stop distance. This is the distance in which the aircraft accelerates to V 1 (decision speed), has a failure of the critical engine, and stops using maximwn braking. With an existing runway length of 5,811 feet, aircraft of this type are currently required to reduce fuel or passenger loads, or choose to depart with lower temperatures to meet the balanced field length during hot conditions. An evaluation of airfield capacity presented earlier in the Chapter, outlined the capacity of the airport at cmrent, intermediate-tenn, and long-term stages of the planning period. The capacity for individual runways is acceptable. Runway length The F AA IS Airport Design Computer Program, Version 4.2c, provides guidance for runway length requirements, based on local conditions. The primary runway length recommendations listed in Table 4-4 reflect dry runway conditions. Wet runways with all other conditions being the same, increase distances by approximately 10 to 15 percent for most aircraft. The determination of the reconunended runway length is based primarily upon five factors: The runway lengths listed in Table 4-4 provide an indication of the requirements for the entire general aviation fleet. Many aircraft included in the large aircraft category (up to 60,000 pounds) consist of large business jets which often require exceedingly long runways at high elevations or temperatures when operated with heavy loads. Aircraft in this category often experience fuel or payload limitations at airports where they routinely operate. This type of limitation, as experienced throughout the fleet, is reflected in the percentages referenced in the F AA model. Airport elevation; Mean maximum daily temperature of the hottest month; Runway gradient; Critical aircraft type expected to use the nmway; and Stage length of the longest nonstop trip destination. For calculating runway length requirements at McNary Field, the airport elevation is 210 feet above mean sea level (MSL) and the mean maximwn temperature of the hottest month is 83.2 degrees Fahrenheit. The runway gradient on Runway 13-31 is 0.33 percent; Runway 16-34 is 0.33 percent. According to manufacturers data, the representative design airCl"aft (HS125-800) with a maximum gross takeoff weight of 27,400 pounds, with ISA +15 Centigrade, and zero-wind, would require approximately 6,500 feet for balanced field length. The balanced field length provides an accelerated- 7centurywestENGINEERING CORPORATION Table 4-3 FAA RUNWAY DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS (in feet) Item Runway 13-31 Runway 16-34 Existing Dimensions ADG II App Cat C Existing Dimensions ADGII App Cat B Runway Length 5,811 See Table 4-4 5,145 See Table 4-4 Runway Width 150 100 140 75. Runway Shoulder Width 10 10 10 10 Runway Safety Area Width 500 500 300 150 I Runway Safety Area (le~~~->- - z~ 0< NO Z : ~ Q;:o: ID / ~ ,- ! ( " \ .., --- / , ~ \ " \ \\ jj" \~I ~ , ~II. ~II II ~ - w (I) ? :1: 0..I 1- ~ , ~~ , 0 ?0.. ~-J-? ?- ~ :1:~ ~ 1-(1) ~ :):) 00(I)~ ~---". ~ r ) ;:c..;::: --- 1 -"'tt .",.. : ,,/; ~~ \'~ J N iW '\~~ -, ~" ~ ~ ~ ~tn ~z .. ~ ~0. 0')U~ t;RIZ ~ ~ < ~ ~ " "~ @ 0 9"" 0 ~ 0 w VJ ? :I: Go J t.? wO Loo-.t H Loo' O~ ~g '/1'/1 ,~ '~~,~ . . \ / I~ I b ~ x in... ~ ;. ...>- . ~ .'I, IR ~I ,~ !"- ~ >- ; x ~ z 0 ...'f= ~~ G)o ~~~ ~~u h,5() ...,~ c~ G)~ C.)~ () z I. w > IF < z fI: i~;..J .< /; ~ W ~ a.. O -;..J W ~~ I 5: I ~fI: I < I ? ~o \00i I ~ I U < ~ \l ~ I U') Q)'- ~ 0" L1. > ~z u 2 z 0 f= cn? G)~ ~~~ ~>-u 1iJ5() ~ clr Q)~ (,)~ () z w w> ~ za: ~ <{ ~ w ~D- o-.J w [Lj o 11: o0- a: < w O 00 ~ ~ (\II Ll') Q)i. ~ 0') ir MI L() 0.)~ :; 0) ii: West Side #1 (North Hangar Area) (Figure 5-4) This alternative would require the relocation of an existing building that is leased to Marion County . The building was moved to its present location in the past; relocation elsewhere on or off the airport appears to be feasible. This alternative involves hangar development in the area immediately north of the Federal Express facility .The preliminary concept for this area addressed the majority of facility needs; several comments from the Master Plan Advisory Committee have been incorporated into the concept to produce West Side Alternative #1. Additional vehicle access and parking are required for this alternative. A new parking area would be located adjacent to the FedEx facility on the south side of the development. This new parking area could be used to accommodate both hangar users and FedEx employees. construction of a taxilane from the existing nmway- taxiway system to the new hangar area. As depicted, a 25-foot taxilane would extend 700 feet from a connection at Taxiway " A." The taxilane would provide access to a row of conventional hangars on each side. Although designated as a taxilane, this alternative uses a 131-foot taxiway object free area setback. The additional clearance will peIn1it larger business aircraft to move through the area. Access to the northern row of hangars would be provided by a new roadway which would travel approximately 500 feet along the western edge of the development Additional vehicle parking would be provided between the northern hangar row and the fIfe station. The original commercial/retail lease area located east of 25th Street SE has been reduced to the area immediately adjacent to the hangar area (north of the northern tenninal access road). One concern identified with the original concept was a need to avoid congestion in and around the entrance to the tenninal area. With the area inunediately west of the tenninal area now reserved as open space, the long-tenn utilization of the tenninal area can be ensured. Depending on the actual building sizes, this area would accommodate 8 to 10 hangars. Two additional hangar lots would are also in areas with existing taxiway access. The hangar area is relatively level and will require only minor site preparation. Total hangar lease area in this alternative is approximately 120,000 square feet, plus an additional 18,000 square feet for the two spaces with existing taxiway access. The commercial/retail lease area is approximately 150 feet wide and has a setback that would 8centurywestENGINEERING CORPORATION accommodate an 80-foot wide right-of-way for a reconfigured 25th Street SE. This area has approximately 60,000 square feet available for lease and 300 feet of frontage on 25th Street SE. As noted earlier, the existing zoning in this area is "PS" (Public Service), which is the category applied to most aviation-related lands on the airport. It would be appropriate to change the zoning to reflect commercial/retail uses. The existing divided access road would be closed and a new two-Iane roadway would be located approximately 80 to lOO feet south. The new roadway would be approximately 400 feet long and ~ d1e southwest comer of the existing vehicle parking area. Existing access to Salem Air Center and the private hangars located to the south would not be changed. The land immediately north of the new access road would be converted into leasable area for aviation- related and non-aviation uses. The area would provide approximately 60,000 square feet for development. Access to the lease area would be provided from a frontage road that connects to the new access roadway. The frontage roadway would be located in approximately the same location as the southern (ently) lane of the existing restaurant access road. The option of accommodating future T -hangar demand on the southern portion of the main apron was favorably received when presented. A review of past F AA grants will be conducted to identify if any portions remain outstanding. The reimbursement, if any, will be identified in the detailed cost estimate for the project. ~elopment options for the southern section of the west side of the airfield are presented in the following alternatives: Additional lease area is located north of the redeveloped restaurant access corridor (behind the existing commercial hangars). This area does not have adequate access to airside facilities. therefore. aviation-related or non-aviation uses that do not require airfield access, would be well suited for the site. The existing gravel-surfaced-access road now used to access the commercial hangars. would be upgraded to provide access to the entire lease area. Additional vehicle parking would be provided immediately west of the existing commercial hangars. A SOO-foot long spur road. connecting to the main access road. would serve the interior building sites. West Side Alternative #2 - South Apron (Figure 5-5) In this alternative, the existing restaurant building and/or site, would remain in place. Continued use of the existing building or redevelopment of the site are options. The primary changes to the area include a reconfigured access roadway, with development of the non-aviation land located between 25th Street SE and the existing facilities. Improvements in access, and utilities would also be required. 9centu rywest hangar site. The area located immediately west of the expanded apron and reconfigured parking lot, would provide approximately 25,000 square feet of leasable land for aviation-related or non-aviation uses. The area would provide approximately 120,000 square feet of leasable land. An existing drainage channel would require culverting or realignment. A landscape buffer would be located along the eastern edge of25th Street and the relocated access road to the restaurant. The frontage road described in the previous alternative will also be used for access to the lease area contained within the existing restaurant access road corridor. West Side Alternative #3 South Apron (Figure 5-6) This alternative involves redeveloping the restaurant site and the divided lane access road. The restaurant building would be removed and the overall area--the building site, parking lot, etc.--would be lowered to more closely match the elevation of the apron and other buildings. In addition to the primary access roads that connect to 25th Street SE, an internal vehicle access road is provided between the two development areas. The road would extend from the relocated main access road, north into the non-aviation development area. The configuration of the non-aviation lease area is slightly different from West Side Alternative #2, although the total area available for development and vehicle parking are comparable. As with West Side Alternative #2, the access road would be relocated approximately 80 to 100 feet south to utilize the land within the existing roadway corridor better. The existing vehicle parking area would be reconfigmed to approximately one-half its current size. West Side Alternative #4 South Apron (Figure 5-7) The redevelopment of the site in this alternative would provide nearly 4,000 square yards of additional apron. The apron would be used to support one or two large commercial hangars. This area could accommodate an expanded full-service FBO operation, a common-use general/corporate aviation terminal, or other commercial aviation users. Possible hangar sites are depicted, including the area immediately north of Salem Air Center, which is now aircraft apron. The reconfigured access roadway and parking area would provide efficient curb side access and parking to the new This alternative is similar to West Side Alternative #3, with the exception of an expanded aircraft apron and reconfigured hangar, roadway, and vehicle parking layout. The expanded apron is approximately 5,500 square yards in area. Depending on the type of development, apron could be used as a corporate ramp or a designated passenger loading/unloading area for transient aircraft. 10centurywestENGINEERING CORPORATION Two or three large hangars could be accommodated along the south and west sides of the expanded apron. The entire existing vehicle parking area would be redeveloped to accommodate the hangars and apron. Additional vehicle parking would be provided adjacent to the hangars and the access road. This alternative is also compatible with the common-use general aviation temllnal concept. The relocated main access road would serve both hangars. The southwest comer of the expanded apron was removed to provide better access to the Salem Air Center hangars. Vehicle parking areas are moved to the west and behind the existing commercial hangars. The landside portion of the development, as depicted, is nearly identical to West Side Alternative #4. The cross-connecting access roadway described in the previous alternative is retained to provide internal circulation in the non-aviation area. The amOlU1t non-aviation lease area is comparable to the other alternatives. The addition of auto parking on the west side of the existing commercial hangars is intended to replace the parking spaces lost in the main parking area reconfiguration. South Alternative #1 (Figure 5-9) This alternative was slightly modified from the original conceptual layout The primary concept is that aviation-related development is located in the areas with prime airside access and non-aviation development is located in the remaining areas. Building height limitations (40- and 50-foot elevation lines) have been added in this area. West Side Alternative #5 South Apron (Figure 5-8) This alternative is similar to West Side Alternative #4, although the expanded apron area is significantly larger (approximately 10,600 square yards). According to the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance (Section 160.200), sbuctW'es on PS-zoned land may be a maximwn of 70 feet high, although on lots of less than 10,000 square feet, a maximwn structure height of35 feet is permitted. As noted earlier, the specific limitations of the F AR Part 77 Imaginary Surfaces will dictate the maximwn allowable heights of structures near the runways, while complying with the height limitations associated with the zoning. This alternative provides area for large hangars which could be associated with FBO maintenance facilities or a common-use tenninal. The apron would be configured to accommodate larger corporate aircraft parking. fueling, or passenger loading/unloading. The expanded apron could accommodate a significant amount of business aviation activity. Within the "IP" (Industrial Park) zoning category, no structures shall exceed 45 feet in height (Section 157.070). 11 centurywest ENGINEERING CORPORA TION The locations of wetlands in the south area have also been added to the figures. It appears that most of the wetlands can be avoided with this layout. In some cases, small wetland areas located adjacent to roadways may need to be filled; enhancement of the more valuable on-site wetlands may be a mitigation option for any required fill. The existing drainage ditch that runs from near the south end of the runway to 25th Street SE may also be categorized as a wetland. This drainage would likely be realigned and culverted to accommodate new buildings, taxiways, and roadways. A nmway!taxiway extension and long-tenn reserve, have been identified for the Runway 31 end. South Alternative #2 (Figure 5-10) This alternative retains the same division between aviation and non-aviation development as South Alternative #1, but shifts the hangar rows into a north-south alignment. Three hangar access taxiways ranging from 800 to 1,000 feet long connect to Taxiway "F." The three taxiways could also be connected at the southern end to provide improved circulation and access. A review of existing floodplain mapping indicates that the majority of the southern portion of the airport is located within this area. The City of Salem is currently reevaluating the accuracy of existing floodplain mapping in light of recent flood events. Development in this area will require fill to raise structures above the potential flood level. Specific floodplain elevations in this area may change because of the mapping updates. The outside hangar rows are configured to accommodate very large hangars, while the inner rows would accommodate smaller conventional hangars on typical lots of 150 by 100 feet. The height limitations in this area are depicted in the 40- and 50-foot lines. Some outside lease lots would be limited to building heights of between 40 and 50 feet, while other lots could accommodate higher buildings. The total developable hangar lease area is approximately 570,000 square feet. non-aviation development area has not changed significantly from the original development concept. The three rows of hangar lease lots combine for approximately 480,000 square feet. The non- aviation land area available on both sides of 25th Street SE is approximately 60 to 70 acres. Wetlands account for approximately 5 to 8 acres in the southern airport area; two larger wetlands located south of 25th Street SE account for the majority of the total acreage. The hangar development would be phased in based on demand. One advantage of this configuration is that a single 800-foot hangar access taxiway could be initially constructed to serve eight to ten hangar sites. The second and third taxiways would be added as demand occurred. Vehicle access to the hangar areas would be provided at the east and west ends. Changes in the existing fencing to include controlled gates would be required. 17centurywestENGINEERING CORPORATION Refined East Side Alternative (Figure 5-11 ) materialize, the area should be reserved until other areas of the airport are fully developed. The eastern portion of the airfield is unique in its ability to accommodate large scale aviation-related development. Accordingly, it should be preserved for its highest and best use. This alternative is a refined version of the original concept for the east side of the airport. A large undeveloped area located between II-Morrow and the Oregon Anny National Guard is available for development. This area is unique in its ability to accommodate large aviation-related users. The east side area consists of approximately one million square feet (23 acres+- ). not including the parcellcx:ated south of West Coast Washers (10-12 acres). A portion of the land area located adjacent to Turner Road is identified on existing flood plain mapping as , a designated floodway. No buildings are permitted within the floodway, although access roads and vehicle parking areas are permitted. The existing non-aviation land available for lease south of West Coast Washers is zoned IP .This area does not cwrently have airside access, although potential runway extensions and modification of the glide slope critical area would allow access to the runway- taxiway system. With other options available to accommodate corporate and general aviation development and non-aviation development, it would be appropriate to reserve the east side of the airfield for tenants with larger land area requirements and aviation- related use. Preliminary Alternatives Summary As depicted, the area could support a split development concept with aviation facilities occupying the prime airside access area and non- aircraft uses located further to the east. Alternatively. the area could be developed with considerably larger aviation facility components such as aircraft parking apron or hangars. The alternatives for the west, south, and east portions of the airport can be implemented independently. However, to accommodate all airport facility requirements, it may be necessary to combine the components of several alternatives into a single "preferred alternative." The review of preliminary alternatives will provide specific infornlation which can be used to refme these alternatives or create new options for the airport. military operations; air cargo lease area; aircraft maintenance facilities. The primary criterion associated with developing this area should be a need for a large land area. A minimum lease area should be defmed to avoid splitting the area into small parcels. If demand from larger users does not 18centurywestENGINEERING CORPORATION 0>I I.() 0>i.. ~ 0'> i.I: O T"". Ln Q)1.., = 01 i.L Preferred Alternatives The existing divided roadway access to this area would be reconfigured into a single two-lane roadway. The existing parking lot adjacent to the airport restaurant would also be reconfigured in conjunction with the redevelopment. A preferred alternative has been identified which includes several elements from the preliminary alternatives. The preferred alternative includes development in the west. south, and eastern areas of the airport. The primary focus of the alternative is to provide adequate development area for aircraft hangars, industrial land development, and other airport related facilities. The preferred alternatives can also accommodate future intermodal transportation facility development needs. The preferred alternative will be depicted on the airport layout plan and terminal area plan. Other west-side improvements are provided in the terminal area. A terminal development reserve, terminal loop roadway, and bypass roadway would enable this portion of the airport to be redeveloped as demand warrants. The City of Salem indicates that the existing airport access at the Madrona intersection will be eliminated at some point in the futw-e. As part of that project or independently, the internal airport access roadways may be modified to improve vehicle flow and provide access to additional lease areas. The internal roadway may also be configured to connect with the northern and southern access roads on the west side of the airport. Figures 5-12, 5-13, and 5-14 depict the primary refmements associated with the preferred alternative. West Side DeveloQment South A!mort Develop:ment The preferred alternative includes hangar-related improvements in the North Hangar Area and in the south apron/restaurant/FBO area. These areas already IK:cOOmxJdaIe development, but require expansion, reconfiguration, or improvements to meet current and projected needs. Development in these areas will provide new taxilane access, hangar lease areas, and vehicle parking/ access improvements. The facility layout included in Airport Development Alternative #2 was selected as the preferred alternative for that part of the airfield. The prefm-ed altemative provides development areas for conventional hangar leases, aviation-related, and non-aviation industrial development. Portions of this area will require fill to raise buildings above the flood plain; some of the smaller wetland areas would be filled, although the largest wetlands located near the southern end of the airport would not be affected. Roadway access and utility extensions to these areas will be required before significant development can occur. The southern portion of the airport has approximately 61 acres of The hangar area located behind Salem Air Center will have reconfigured taxilane access, which would coincide with the development of a new FBO building on the current restaurant site. 22centurywest CORPORATION developable land located north of Airway Drive. An additional 49 acres located south of Airway Drive contains two larger wetland areas in addition to a designated floodway. The fmallayout of this area will depend on further wetland studies and a flood management plan for the airport. However. based on general floodway and wetland considerations, is anticipated that 40 to 50 percent of the southern 49 acres will remain undeveloped. designated areas, etc.). The 25-acre parcel located between II-Morrow and the Oregon Anny National Guard area is zoned "PS." The eastern edge of this area is also located within the designated floodway. Specific design enhancements for the floodway will be needed as development expands in the area. This area has been identified as a prime location for aviation- related developments requiring larger acreage. For this reason, developments requiring less acreage should be acconunodated the western or southern sections of the airport. The configuration of this development will be flexible. Vehicle access and aircraft access needs will be dependent on the specific type of development which is implemented. As noted earlier, a 100-foot runway extension is identified at the end of Runway 31. The need for this improvement is expected to be long-tenn and may be related to increased activity by larger business jet or transport category aircraft. A parallel taxiway section would extend from Taxiway F to the runway end. Taxiway development on the east side of the runway is limited by the glide slope critical area. The runway extension would require relocation of the existing approach light system and the glide slope. Relocation of the glide slope critical area would also permit an extension of Taxiway B. East Side Develo~ment The preferred development for the east side of the airport involves the 25- and l3-acre areas located adjacent to Turner Road The 13-acre parcel located between West Coast Washers and the animal kennel is zoned "IP ." The area has limited airside access via a narrow taxilane located immediately east of the glide slope critical area and a small wetland (located in the floodway). As with the ll-Morrow and West Coast facilities, future developments in this area will need to be compatible with the floodway (i.e., locating vehicle parking within these 23centurywestENGINEERING CORPORATION dwd ~\C 101:0 (\I T""I U) 4)1- ~ 0) ii: /-r ~. h.-1 90: ;:)1- ;:) .!=, "'"'" 1(:'1 .oos; J~ ~ ~ "' I I I I I I I II I I i II II 1 I I 1 I I I II I I , . ~V1~ ::>Q: 1< 0(:> ,~ 0):1: , ':\ IIi R~ \ I I Z -I I r < 'i I i II! :I: \ II oa , I ~ I-~ W II:> Q: II (:>0 ::> I' I Z~ F-, .1 -W ::> I aQ: t..i I I. : ~w , S' I I I aIal z IIi 1.-F ,II ",IISI I I : ...II a (~ ' I I >- w >- 0 II ~ ZV1 <.Ii ~ (:>V1 -II SI :JW~ .)( 11 1 ' ~;< - -..: : z~..w ~ ..'Iii F'iQ.~~ oa 111-- Zl l l U< ~11 wO ~ " i II a: ~ I=:: II I I I ~ 0 : :~ z II ~ IiJF 1 / : ~ ~~ I I II~ II II ~ II I ' II 1 II II ~ ) 1 I Q II \" : 1:j -t,; II ~ \ IiI w \ II ~ II IIn- II ~ I~ O : I ~ IJ!\W I1 S 11! \111.- II ~I I I : z a ..! ! \ O 1 !! \ n- II: .a: II I I ~ I I J ~ 1I , II II Q II I Inlt'W~ le ~ ~I ~i a:: "" 0,0 , >, ~x- ,\, ~ Ct: , i!'"~<, c c~~~ ~ ~ / -0., "' ,~\ ~1:::::::?' ~~ox z:< ~ , <.? z o~ I-~ =:1< ~ ~. ~\J ~"d-'0-.:1 ~ ~~{ ~ .""'- -~, , -.~ v ~ ~.<2"r..--:.. I~G ~ ~ \ ~ .. >! fiit 1 W WZ 1-V1< ::) - <~ ~~<0 ~Q:J;J ~ z -JQ..z ::) 0 .< '0 ~ ~-J Q:..J ~< I ~(~ ~ ZQ: ?~-r' ~j""' , , \1 r ~r 1- ~u ,A. ~ Do , ~ n "0:'., >o E., ~ -0., c .2' a ~ .,-0 O(:>- w ~ Z(/J 0: (:> ~& ~ LIJ,-, oL D cr- /t ~~ o 0 v , .0 0 0 w 0 v 0. N II I') . ()~ ~N ~Ri w IV z o~ < < () ~ cn r-L- h n z Q co~ G)g ~& >-0 ~O ~" Z C(t G)l:j (,)~ () 7 C") .,-I Lt) Q)'- :J 01 ii: . . "'~ II~ ...<;I I XI:<, 11" ~ i ~0 ~ ~~ ~!r ~ ~~ -# ~~ z '~~ ~< 'w ztn 0< I=W ""..J , -Z..J .a Ow ..JZ[k: < -)? ..Jtn <, Z3: :'itn [k:tn ~w <.> [k:<[k: ?~ ~w:> [k:[k:L.. Cl-< ~ j::: ~ ffi~ ..J ~ 1- ~ ~ 0 ~$ ~ 1- ~ & ~ @ ~ ~ ~~ ~ .,...I t.n 0,)~ :J 01 ii: Chapter Six NOISE AND LAND USE COMPATIBILITY Summary: As part of the master plan update for McNary Field. updated noise contours were generated for current, 5- and 20-year forecast activity. Upon review of the contours, it has been determined that no residences are located within the current 55, 60, or 65 DNL noise contours for the airport. It is understood that occasional noise complaints occur from residential areas that are located outside these noise contours. Efforts by air traffic controllers and pilots to avoid the areas whenever possible when arriving or departing, should be continued. A review of the 20-year contours indicate that no (existing) residences are located within the 60 or 65 DNL contours. of the human ear. The A-weighted decibel scale (dBA) is calibrated to the faintest sound audible to the average young human ear. The human ear often judges an increase of 10 decibels as a doubling of sound. The difficulty lies in determining what amount and what kind of sound constitutes noise. The vast majority of people exposed to aircraft noise are not in danger of direct physical harm. However. research has shown that individual responses to noise are difficult to predict. Some people are annoyed by each perceivable noise event. while others show little concern over the most disruptive of events. However. predicting Ute responses of groups of people is possible. As a result. community response. not individual response. has emerged as the prime index of aircraft noise measurement. Note: The master plan scope ofwork (l'ask 6.3) requires a determination ofwhether more detailed noise analysis (i. e., FAR Part 150 Noise Compatibility Plan) will be required based on the finding of this evaluation. With no incompatible land uses located within the 65 DNL (or 60 or 55 DNL) noise contours, more detailed analyses do not appear to be required at this time. DNLMETHODOLOGY A methodology has been devised to relate measurable sound from a variety of sources to community response. Termed "Day-NightAverage Sound Level" (DNL), this metric has been adopted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), and the Federal Aviation Administration to use in evaluating noise impacts. INTRODUCTION Noise is most often defmed as unwanted sound. However, sound is measurable, whereas noise is subjective. The relationship between measurable sound and human irritation is the key to understanding aircraft noise impact. A rating scale has been developed to relate sound to the sensitivity ~ centurywest ENGINEERING CORPORATION 1 The basic unit in the computation of DNL is the sound exposure level (SEL). A SEL is computed by adding the dBA level for each second of a noise event above a certain threshold. For example, a noise monitor located in a residential area with a background noise level of 45 dBA receives the sound impulses of an approaching aircraft and records the dBA reading for each second of the event as the aircraft approaches and departs the site. Each of these one-second readings is then added logarithmically to ccxnpute the SEL. Because of the logarithmic calculation, noise levels below 10 dBA of the maximum level are significant in tenns of DNL value. A comparison between individual aircraft takeoff noise levels and common noise levels is presented in Figure 6-1. The noise contours depicted begin at 55 DNL, and in 5 DNL increments, extend to 65 DNL. Noise impacts upon adjacent land uses are discussed in the "Compatible Land Use" section of this chapter. As desaibed below, the existing and future noise levels projected for McNary Field will not create significant impacts on the surrounding community. The aircraft noise contow-s were generated using the FAA's Integrated Noise Model (INM) (Version 5.1 );helicopter noise modeling was conducted using the Helicopter Noise Model (HNM). Noise Contours Figure 6-2 depicts the general location of aircraft flight tracks for McNary Field. These tracks represent the most common arrival, departure and touch & go paths for aircraft operating at the airport. The location of these tracks were determined by direct observation, with additional information provided by air traffic control tower pa-soonel and local aircraft operators. While some aircraft may deviate from these tracks, most of the aircraft use these paths in and out of the immediate airport area. The computation of an airport DNL involves the addition. weighting, and averaging of each SEL to acl1ieve DNL level at particular location. The SEL of each noise event occurring between the hours of 10;00 p.m and 7;00 a.m. is automatically weighted by adding 10 dBA to the SEL to account for the assumed additional irritation perceived during that period. All SELs are then averaged over a given time period (day, week, year) to achieve a level characteristic of the total noise environment. Figures 6-3, 6-4, and 6-5 depict the cWTent, five- year and twenty-year noise contours for McNary Field The contours were generated using the F AA IS Integrated Noise Model and Helicopter Noise Model, and reflect cWTent and forecast air traffic levels. The twenty-year contours will also be depicted on the Airport Land Use Plan, which will be included in the official Airport Layout Plan drawing set. Stated simply, a DNL is approximately equal to the average dBA level dwing an entire time period, with a weighting for nighttime noise events. The main advantage of DNL is that it provides a common measure for a variety of different noise environments. The same DNL level can describe both an area with very few high-noise events and an area with many low level events. ~ centurywest ENGINEERING CORPORATION 2 A comparison with the 1985 Airport Master Plan reveals two major factors affecting aircraft noise. The 1985 plan projected traffic levels were 40 to 50 percent higher than current activity and the recently updated forecasts. The 1985 plan also projected much higher air carri~ activity through the planning period. These two factors combined to create significantly larg~ noise contoW"S the earlier plan. A venue near the north and south ends of the airport. Based on available mapping, no residences are located within the 55,60, or 65 DNL contours. The nearest residential areas to the 55 DNL contour are located in the mobile home park along Turner Road and a block of houses located immediately west of the Kmart store at SE 25th and Mission Street. 2000 Noise Contours 1995 Contours The 65 DNL contour is contained almost entirely within aiJPOrt property boundaries. A small portion of the 65 DNL contoor extends beyond the northeast COrne2" the airport over the large gravel pit located near the end of Runway 16 and Turner Road. The 65 DNL contour is contained almost entirely within airport property boundaries. A small portion of the 65 DNL contour extends beyond the northeast comer of the airport oveJ: the large gravel pit located near the end of Runway 16 and Turner Road. The 60 DNL contour is contained almost entirely on airport property , with small areas extending approximately 500 feet beyond the northeast comer and 100 feet beyond the southwest comer of the airport (near Runway 16-34 ends). These adjacent land areas have industrial zoning (Industrial Commercial, Industrial Business Complex and General Industrial). The 60 DNL contour is also contained almost entirely on airport property , with small areas extending beyond the northeast comer and southwest corners of the airport (near Runway 16- 34 ends) and near the end of Runway 13 along SE 25th Avenue (north of the large gravel pit/lake). These adjacent land areas have industrial zoning (Industrial Commercial, Industrial Business Complex and General Industrial). The 55 DNL cootow" follows the extended centerline of both nmways and the primary military helicopter arrival/departure route. Portions of the 55 DNL contour extend approximately 2,000 to 2,500 feet beyond the north and south ends of the airport (beyond Runway 16-34); approximately 2,200 feet east of the airport. (near the OANG helicopter area); and approximately 300 to 500 feet west of SE 25th A venue near the Il(Xfu and south ends of the airport. Based on available mapping. no residences are located within the 55, 60 or 65 DNL contours. The The 55 DNL contow" follows the extended centerline ofboth rwlways and the primary military helicopter arrivaJ/departure route. Portions of the 55 DNL contour extend approximately 2,500 to 2,800 feet beyond the north and south ends of the airport (beyond Runway 16-34); approximately 1,000 feet east of the airport along its northeast comer; and approximately 400 to 600 feet west of SE 25th 4centurywestENGINEERING CORPORATION at dle soudl end of dle airport. No residences are located within dle 60 or 65 DNL contours, although an estimated dlree or four residences are located within dle year 2015 55 DNL contour (located at the south tip of contour near 27th Avenue SE). The mobile home park along Turner Road is just outside dle 55 DNL contour for dle year 2015. nearest residential areas to the 55 DNL contour are located in the mobile home park along Turner Road. The most significant difference between the 1995 and 2000 contours is the reduction in transport category jet operations associated with gaming charter flights. The level of transport aircraft activity such as the Boeing 737, is projected at approximately 100 operations per year , Jess than half of recent years activity . COMPATIBLE LAND USE 2015 Noise Contours The compatibility of existing and planned uses in the vicinity of an airport is generally associated with the level of noise and safety impacts related to the airport. Compatibility or incompatibility of land use is determined by comparing the DNL noise contour with existing and potential land uses. The F AA has developed guidelines for land-use compatibility based on noise levels and the nature of the land use being impacted. Commercial, industrial, and most public uses are considered compatible with airport operations, as long as they are consistent with performance standards of Federal Aviation Regulation (F AR) Part 77 relative to height and safety. Residential use is compatible in areas below the 65 DNL noise contour. Table 6-1 provides the federalland-use compatibility guidelines. As with earlier forecast years, the 65 DNL contour is con~ almoot entirely within airport property boundaries, with only a small portion extending beyolxl the northeast corner of the airport over the large gravel pit. The 60 DNL contour has areas extending approximately ~ to 700 feet beyond the northeast correr and 400 feet beyond d1e southwest corner of the airport (near Runway 16-34 ends). The adjacent land areas have industrial zoning (Industrial Commercial, Industrial Business Complex and General Industrial). In addition to federal guidelines, the State of Oregon DEQ has corresponding guidelines for noise compatibility and requires that an II Airport Noise Impact Boundary" be included in Airport Master Plans, with contours depicted down to 55 DNL. While 55 DNL establishes the parameters of the study area, federal guidelines provide that noise- sensitive land uses located in areas with impacts The 55 DNL contour follows the extended centerline of both runways and the primary military helicopter arrival/departure route. Portions of the 55 DNL contour extend approximately 3,(XX} to 3,500 feet beyond the north and south ends of the airport (beyond Runway 16- 34); approximately 3,(XX) to 3,500 feet east of the airport (near the OANG helicopter area); and approximately 300 feet west of SE 25th Avenue rear the north end of the airport and 800 feet west 5centurywestENGINEERING CORPORATION below 65 DNL are considered compatible with aviation activity. Like the F AA, DEQ recommends mitigation measures for noise-sensitive land uses lying in areas with impacts exceeding 65 DNL. As noted in Table 6-1, all land uses are compatible with noise levels at or below 65 DNL. Based on F AA noise compatibility planning standards and existing zoning, no conflicts exist between airport noise and existing land use. No residences or sb1lctw"es identified within the 55 DNL contour or higher. As a result, the airport does not create a significant noise impact on the surrounding community . Noise Compatibility and Land Use The airport is located within the Salem city limits and Urban Growth Boordary (UGB). The southern edge of the city limits is located within two miles of the airfield's south side. Noise impacts of the Preferred Alternative are not expected to be significant, due largely to the existing two-runway configuration and the forecast aircraft operations levels and fleet mix. AIRPORT OVERLA y ZONING The City of Salem Zoning Code includes an Airport Overlay Zone (Chapter 125). As desaibed in section 125.040, "the following zones [airport overlay zoneJ...include all of the land lying beneath the approach surfaces, transitional surfaces, horizontal surfaces, and conical surfaces as they apply to McN ary Field Airport. " Airport overlay zoning exists for this facility, although a review will be conducted to insure that the full length of the Runway 31 precision instrwnent approach surface is contained within the overlay zone. Overlay zoning does not affect existing surface zoning, but is designed to protect the airspace surrounding an airport, by providing height and hazard guidance for lands located beneath FAR Part 77 imaginary airspace surfaces. The existing overlay zone provides specific guidelines for sb"ucture height limitations, marking and lighting, and other related items. With the adoption of the 1997 Airport Master Plan Update, local land use planning officials should ensure that the Airport Overlay Zone boundaries reflect the FAR Part 77 surfaces depicted on the updated Airspace Plan (Drawing 3). The aviation-use areas of the airport are zoned PS (Public Service); other portions of the airport are zoned IP (Industrial Park) and PA (public Amusement). The airport is surrounded primarily by industrial and commercial zoning, with some residential zoning located between the southeast comer of the airport and U.S. Interstate 5. Large areas of residential zoning are located within one to two miles of the airport in all directions. The defInition of the overlay zone does not require revision; however, references to the updated airport master plan should be incorporated into the ordinance. 6centurywestENGINEERING CORPORATION Table 6-1 LAND-USE COMPATIBILITY WITH YEARL Y DAY-NIGHT AVERAGE SOUND LEVELS Yearly Day-Nigbt Average Sound Level (DNL) In J)Prih..l~ Below Over -65-6S:1O1O,,1S15:80~-8.L Land Use Re.~idential Residential, other than mobile homes & transient lodgings Mobile Home Parks Transient Lodgings y y y N(l) N N(l) N(l) N N(l) N N N(l) N N N N N N y y y y y y N(l) 25 25 y y y N(l) 30 30 25 Y(2) Y(2) N N N 30 Y(3) Y(3) N N N N Y(4) Y(4) N N N N Y(4) N Pllh1ic TT~ Schools . Hospitals aOO Nursing Homes Churches, Auditoriums, aOO Concert Halls . Governmental Services Transportation . Parking . y y 25 30 N N y y y y y y y y Y(2) 25 Y(2) 25 Y(3) 30 Y(3) 30 Y(4) N Y(4) N N N N N CnmmerciAI TT~" Offices, Business aOO Professional Wholesale aOO Retail--Building Materials, Hardware aOO Fann Equipment . Retail Trade-General . Utilities .. Communication 7 Table 6-1 (Continued) LaOO Use Below -65- Over -85- y y Y(3) 30 y y Y(2) 25 Y(4) N N N Y(6) Y(6) Y(1) Y(1) Y(8) N Y(8) N y y Y{8) N MArnIfA"hInng Arvi Prcv111"tinn Manufacturing General Photographic and Optical . Agriculture (except livestock) and Forestry Livestock Farming and Breeding . Mining and Fishing, Resource Production and Extraction y y y y y y y y y y Y(S) N y y Y(5) N N Y N N N N N N N N N N N N R~ tinnJlJ Outdoor Sports Arenas, Spectator Sports Outdoor Music Shells, Amphitheaters Nature Exh1Dits am Zoos . Amusements, Parks, Resorts and Camps Golf Courses, Riding Stables and Water Recreation . y y 25 30 N N y (Yes) N (No) NLR 25, 30 or 35 Land-use and related structures compatible without restrictions. Land-use and related structures are not compatible and should be prohlDited. Noise Level Reduction (outdoor to moor) to be achieved through incorporation of noise attenuation into design and construction of the structure. LaOO uses and structures generally compatible; measures to achieve NLR or 25, 30, or 35 dB must be incorporated into design and construction of the structure. NOTES: 1. Where the coDJIIRmity detenilines that residential uses must be allowed, measures to achieve outdoor to indoor Noise Levels Reduction (NLR) of at least 25dB aIKl 3OdB should be incorporated into building codes aOO be considered in individual approvals. Normal residential construction can be expected to provide a NLR of 20 dB; tJ.JS, the reductioo...'U are often stated as 5, 10, or 15 dB over standard construction aIKl normally assume mechanical ventilation aIKl closed wiIKlows year-round. However, the use of NLR criteria will not eliminate outdoor noise problems. 8centurywestENGINEERING CORPORATION 2. 3. Measures to achieve NLR of 25 dB must be incorporated into the design and construction of portions of these buildings where the plblic is received, office areas, noise sensitive areas, or where the normal noise level is low. Measures to achieve NLR of 30 dB must be incorporated into the design and construction of portions of these buildings where the public is received, office areas, noise sensitive areas, or where the normal noise level is low. Measures to achieve NLR of 35 dB must be incorporated into the design and construction of portions of these buildings ~ ~ p.Jblic is received office areas, noise sensitive areas , or where the normal noise level is low. Land-use compatible, provided special sound reinforcement systems are installed. Residential buildings require an NLR of 25. Residential buildings require an NLR of 30. Residential buildings not permitted. 4. s. 6. 7. 8. SOURCE: Federal Aviation Regulations, Part 150, Airport Noise Compatibility Planning, dated January 18, 1985. ~ centurywestENGINEERING CORPORATION 9 Chapter Seven AIRPORT LA Your PLANS In Chapter Five, Airport Development Alternatives, an evaluation was made of future options for airside and landside development at McNary Field. This effort has resulted in the selection of airport development alternatives that will accommodate the facility requirements projected through the current twenty-year planning period, and beyond. The purpose of this chapter is to describe in narrative and graphic form, the recommended airport development contained in the twenty-year master plan. Reduced-size copies of the drawings are included at the end of this chapter. Federal Aviation Administration Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5300-13, a.ange 5 Airport Design, provides criteria for runways, taxiways, and other airside facilities, in addition to recommended fomlat and content of airport layout plan drawing sets. Federal Air Regulation (FAR) Part 77 - Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace, provides criteria for establishing and depicting the airspace intaginary surfaces surrounding the airport. Airport Layout Plan The Airport Layout Plan (ALP) presents the existing and ultimate airport layout and depicts the improvements which are recommended to meet forecast aviation demand Airport and Runway data tables provide additional information on existing conditions and dimensions. A set of plans, referred to as the Airport Layout Plans have been prepared to graphically depict recommendations for airport layout, land use, and possible disposition of obstructions located within the runway protection zones, approaches, or other airfield imaginary surfaces. The set of plans includes: The primary improvements at McNary Field are located along the west, south, and eastern sides of the airport. The west side of the airfield currently accommodates virtually all civil aviation development. Expansion or reconfiguration of hangar areas, FBO facilities, and other related facilities is planned to optimize the potential of the existing development areas. Development of new facilities is identified for the south and east portions of the airport. These areas will accommodate aviation and non-aviation users with larger land requirements. The southern portion Drawing 1 -Airport Layout Plan Drawing 2 -Terminal Area Plan Drawing 3 -Airport Airspace Drawing Drawing 4- Runway Approach Profiles Drawing 5 -Runway Protection Zone Plans and Profiles Drawing 6- Airport Land Use Plan with 2015 Noise Contours Drawing 7 -On Airport Land Use Plan 1centurywest ENGINEERING CORPORATION of the airport has previously been identified for industrial development. The configuration depicted on the Airport Layout Plan protects aviation-related land requirenmts, while providing opportunities for the airport to strengthen its financial base. tenniru1l will eventually require major renovation or replacement The terminal reserve will accommodate a larger building, access roadways, and expanded vehicle parking areas which will be configured based on actual demand and user requirements. Several infrastructure improvements (i.e., utilities, site fill, etc.) for the non-aviation areas will not be eligible for F AA funding. A 700-foot extension for Rlmway 13-31 (with taxiway extension) is depicted on the Airport Layout Plan. The timing of this improvement will be based on specific aircraft requirements. The fWlway extension will require the relocation of the glide slope and the approach lighting system for Runway 31. Changes in the internal roadway system are also planned for the west side of the airfield. The roadway reconfiguration will improve vehicle movement and provide access to new lease areas. The planned redevelopment of the south general aviation area includes space for new multi-function FBO/GA taminal facilities, reconfigured corporate aviation apron, and expanded corporate hangar areas. Existing vehicle access will be redesigned to improve land use efficiency .T -hangar development is identified for the southern end of the general aviation apron. Terminal Area Plan The Tem1ina1 Plan provides a larger scale view of facilities and improvements on the western side of the airfield. The drawing provides additional tbail for hangar, apron, and terminal area facilities. As noted above, the primary focus on the west side of the airport will be to improve efficiency and maximize the use of available space. The cost of accommodating near-term hangar demand in this area is expected to be significantly less expensive than developing other areas of the airport. New taxilane access will be required for both the north and south corporate hangar areas. Airport Airspace Drawing The Airport Airspace Drawing for McNary Field was developed based on Federal Air Regulations (FAR) Part 77, Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace. In order to protect the airspace and approacl1eS eacl1 nmway, federal criteria has been established for use by local planning and land use jurisdictions to control the height of objects in the vicinity of airports. The Part 77 Drawing graphically depicts in plan view, the imaginary surfaces for the airport. The drawing also includes a listing of noted obstructions in the vicinity of the airport. Obstruction data was provided from Airport Obstruction Chart (OC) produced by A terminal area reserve is identified for the area ~g the existing terminal. New commercial air service at Salem may occur during the current planning period. It is anticipated that the existing 2centurywestENGINEERING CORPORATION National Ocean Survey (NOS). The majority of obsb11ctions crees and terrain located south and w~ of the airport. Where crees are identified close to the nmways or within the approaches, removal or lowering is recommended. It is recommended that other fixed obsb11ctions (poles, buildings, etc.) which do not create a critical obsb11ction, lighted. As noted earliet" several trees penetrate the Runway 31 approach surface. Trees within the approach swface should be lowered or removed. The Runway 13 approach nonprecision approach surface has one obstruction noted (tree). The visual approach for Runway 34 has several minor penetrations (trees) which should be removed/lowered. Vehicles traveling on Twner Road beyond the end of Runway 16, penetrate the visual approach surface, per F AR Part 77 standards. The 50,000-foot precision approach surface for Rmway 31 is relatively free of terrain penetrations, although some trees are identified within the initial 10,000 f~ of the surface. The terrain located west and south of the airport penetrates the horizontal surface (elevation 361 feet mean sea level) and the conical surface (elevation 361-561 feet MSL). For most of this area, tall trees are identified as obstructions; however, since the terrain also penetrates large areas of airspace, it is not considered practical to remove the trees. Runway Protection Zone Plan and Profile The runway protection zone drawing provides plan and profile views for each runway. Obstructions identified and numbered on the Airspace Plan, have also been added to this drawing. The runway profiles also provide elevation data and the approacl1 which correspond with each runway protection zone. The runway protection zones have existing avigation easements the portions located off airport property. However, based on available infonnation, additional easements will be required for portions of the Runway 31, 16, and 34 protection zones. Runway Approach Surface Profiles This drawing depicts the approach profiles for each runway end. Nwnbered obsttuctions noted on this drawing correspond to the listing provided on the Airport Airspace Drawing. Runway 31 has a standard 50: I approach slope which extends 10,000 feet beyond d1e runway end arxl primary surface. At 10,000 feet the surface continues at a slope of 40:1 until 50,000 feet beyond the runway end. Runway 13 has a 10,000-foot nonprecision instrwnent approach slope of34:1. Runways 16 and 34 have visual approach surfaces with a slope of 20: 1 and extend 5,000 feet. The futw"e extension of Runway 13-31 will result in a shifted runway protection zone. A tree currently located slightly east of the Runway 31 protection zone (uansitiooal surface) will be located within the future RPZ and approach surface and should be removed/lowered. 3centurywest CORPORATION On Airport Land Use PlanTurner Road traverses the Runway 16 protection zone; vehicles traveling on the roadway penetrate the visual approach slope. The Runway 34 protection zone is traversed by a roadway and railroad, although no penetrations to the approach surface exists. This drawing depicts existing zoning on the airfield. As noted earlier, the majority of airport property is zoned PS (public Service), which is the primary zoning used for airfield facilities in Salem. Industrial land on the airport is zoned IP (Industrial Park). The area located between the Runway 31 and 34 protection zones is zoned IP. The northern-most portion of the area will accommodate aviation- related development (large hangars, taxilanes, etc.). The City of Salem should determine whether the existing IF zoning has sufficient flexibility to ~ primaIy aviation-related uses without special consideration. Airport Land Use Plan (with 2015 Noise Contours) The Airport Land Use Plan drawing depicts existing land use and zoning in the vicinity of the airport and noise contours for the year 2015. The noise contours represent the level of noise exposure anticipated in twenty years, based on updated activity forecasts, aircraft mix, and runway use patterns. Additional infonnation, including current and 10-year noise contours and a description of the noise methodology utilized, is presented in Chapter Six, Noise and Land Use Compatibility. If aviation-related development is not easily accommodated. this area should be converted back to PS zoning. The area located between II-Morrow and the National Guard is also zoned PS. The planned aviation-related development is compatible with PS zoning. Potential commercial/retail development along the 25th Street frontage may also warrant a change in zoning to permit this activity as an outright use. However, aviation-related commerciaVretail development may also be compatible with the existing PS zoning, depending on the proposed use. The drawing illustrates that the twenty year 60 and 65 DNL contours fall largely within airport boundaries. The twenty year 55 DNL contour extends beyond airport boundaries to the north, northeast. south, and west. although most of the adjacent land uses are industrial or commercial. A portion of the twenty year 55 DNL contour along the extended centerline of Runway 34 is located OV(2" a low-density residential area. It is estimated to three to six existing homes are located within the year 2015 55 DNL contour. Efforts should be made by local land use authorities to limit new residential development in areas expected be beneath future contours. 4 ',: ,/; " !i ~ ~ 0 - r-, r- , ~ -1 I I ~\ ~ ~ ~ I! ! . ! ~ ! '~ ~ ~ \I I .~i lisI. !!. n'= G= ~ , , ,.- \ "~ ;--~-~.i', (, " ~* ." " \ T ';0:;;,. , f \,"' ~ '\ !- / / : : ~:,. # , = ~-:.,:l" / ~ -.} -- \,,=- / / / -r ", -, ';-',- ~/ ~. "",~' < ~ 'iy;-:' A, "-, \.;:~i;.; / \/ , y ;; -.'.,;. " , / ;:,",--- -.,"44,'.,~;;~ .., - 'r'-;;,f: \ \ :,;;. , ". \ """ ',~..- , 1it' , " -c~ .-":~- -;i;~..i ,;:"t" c' i c,' "':;' :.~;;~"~~!~ik;~' ! 0, " , :: " ," "'ii t!:~~ ~:: c'-, ~. i~- , 1 ;! ..0' , , /'[" c;- ~,::= .,; ., , ~.,,/: ")::f i-':::.: '\,: I ,"":,.,: .~:'- ~ e. ~" ~d ~ ~ !1- ~ 0 ~@~::' i~ ~ ? i g~i~ ~~ ~ Wm a a if ~ ~0~.i :t 8 !-.!15 ~ !" gi~a~ ~e ~i ~g~~i~. ~~ 8~~!. ~~ ~~ o/i ~~o zil ~,,~... ~0/ ~ J~~S~ ~~ ~a i~?~g .0 ~S ~~~~e ~~~ ~~ g~~~~ ...~~ g!,"~.f~~ ~~ iI~oZ a~ ;; ~~. .t; ,.~~ '" .~ ~ "'~,.u ~ -"0 N" i;c" -' , /;"- '-j'--'01 r. , , , r:;."..~- .~ b i 11? ~. , ~, ~:t .>- , .< \ " ~, .. ; .J,. ..)1 .; ,~;< ,"';;.;;., ~ >- 5 :" ~" ..0 ; .,~Io! :7 ,-v ,j '; :i ..; "'. ," }., ?~ ~? o 9 0. "'::> [;:z >-?Q:..J <0. ~Ct:2W ~ (/) ? ~ 1'- lL O "' I ~ ~ c . u " z ~o w ~UJ ~ < ~ I ~. ~~'- ~N." ~~~~ ."-"~W. ~~?a~.-. ; } , .2i L -l"- ,I L I :,' : Bf~~ .I i -I , ..~I -,"i N "- ;.. IV, .-9 t ~ ~ ~!: 0~ ~ a i l !1 ~ . "'-' 0"'N "-' "::!N , :.J"' \ ~~ I - --:-1 -..~ ~N . ~I:!-; ~~ ~~ ~t ~ s~ ~.. 1! ~ ~ ~il a \of i ~ :i '- -, , S .I" 01 , ~ 51 11 ~~ 1 ?..' ~ ~ " j?!1 8 "? j: ~" ~ ~ -' ~ "'< ~-' -~ -' ~ ..- ~ "' < " ~ ~< Z- --~ Z.." ~ .." ..< "' Z ~ I ..~ -' " -~ ~~ ~ = x ~ "' < ~~ Z ~ :x-'?-'~" ~ ~51J", -,-' < ~:X:; .. ~ ~ ~ ..Z ,. ,. I:: " ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "' "'< ..Z ..-~ -' -' ..~ Z ~ ., .."' ~ ~ 0 < < ,. o 22 0 ~ ~ ~ "' 0 ~ < ~ O "" .. N ~ -' = '" ~ < -' ~ 2 0", " m ..O Z :;:; ? 2 ~ < ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ X ~ " m ~ -' -' ~ -:Xmm ~ ~ > " ~ ..~ ~ " .." < < < ~ ~"'~ ~ '" Z x ~ -' ..0 ~ ~ "' "' "' ~ > ~ ~~ ..a.~m~ ~~~ ..~ 3 ? ~ ~ " " 2 X < ffi ~ "' "' "' ffi ~ ~II 0 ,,01..a.-,~2U~Zz~~~z~m a.~ x ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ O O O ~ ~ ~"'..a.< ..0 ~ .."' O 2 ~ " Z.. " " ~ ~ ~ " ~ ..~ < ~ ~<"'O2XOZ m "" "' " " " " " ~ ~ Q, Q = .. z ~ "'~ "' w~ -'"<~ <" z 10! g~.. ~ .."'~o z ~ ~~~ 10! ~ '"::!..~ ~ " ~ wx~~ '-Q~ zw ~ ~~~"' ~ ~ 9 ~~~;;;- ~ '< .; ;:~~..s. i?-,~ "' "' ~.., ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~:?Q u w>- ? z i5 ~; ..8 ~ ~z~ u "'~ < w ~~ ~ ~ ~ a~~ z >- '" < "' ~ ~S"' O z Uw ..."' < w~O ~ III "'0 ~~ ~ ~ ~g ~-' N ~ .. ~ , ~ ~~ ~.'0- ~i N ~.:J i~IVI o ~~ i ~ 1"- 1.. O 00 Chapter Eight FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT and DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE AND COST ESTIMATES The analyses conducted in the previous chapters have evaluated airport development need based on forecast changes in aircraft activity , environmental factors, and operational efficiency .One of the most important elements of the master planning process is the application ofbasic economic, financial, and management rationale so that the feasibility of the implementation can be assured. The presentation of this program and its feasibility has been organized in several sections. First, the airport development schedule and cost summaries will be presented, outlining the costs for each project and the staging of development through the twenty-year planning }X"riod Secondly, projections of operating revenues and eXpeJ1ses provided through a basic cash flow analysis showing the airport's ability to support the capital program through the first five years of the planning period. The analyses presented in Chapter Five described the airport's overall development needs for the next twenty years. However, for subsequent feasibility analyses, details need to be included for these capital expenditures. This has been accomplished by applying estimates of cost for projects within the development program. Cost estimates for each project are based on 1997 dollars. A 30 percent contingency overhead for engineering, administration, and unforeseen circumstances has been included in the estimated component and total costs. In future years, as the plan is carried out, these cost estimates can continue to assist management by adjusting the 1997-based figures for subsequent This may be accomplished by converting the interim change in the United States Consumer Price Index (USCPI) into a multiplier ratio through the following formula: Historically, fw1ding of major capital projects at the airport has been through Federal Aviation Trust Fwld monies, local fimding, and private investment. The primary source for airport development funds has historically been through aviation user fees. In cases wht2"e fe(b'aI grant monies and local funds are not sufficient to conduct a particular project or group of projects, ~ fw1ding sources may need to be pursued, or the project deferred until adequate funding may be obtained. x = y 160.1 Where: X = CPI in any given future year y = Change Ratio 160.1 = USCPI in May, 1997; (1982-1984 = 100) 1centurywestENGINEERING CORPORATION Multiplying the change ratio (Y) times any 1997- based cost figures presented in this study will yield the adjusted dollar amounts appropriate in any future year evaluation. However, national CPI data should be used. as local or region measures may vary. not typically participate in vehicle parking, hangar development, and costs associated with non-aviation developments. Preliminary coordination with the Seattle Airports District Office of the F AA indicates that three projects are currently included in the five-year CIP: Before swnrnarizing staged capital costs, two important points should be emphasized. First, the staging of development projects is based upon projected airport activity levels. Actual activity levels may vary from projected levels, therefore, the staging of development in this section should be viewed as a gO1eral guide. When activity does vary from projected levels, implementation of development projects should occur when demand warrants, rather than according to the estimated staging presented in this chapter. FY 1997 Regional Fire Training Simulator FY 1998 No F AA fimding is expected to be available for this year. FY 1999 Runway 16-34, Apron Slurry Seals. The master plan update will provide a revised list of project priorities which will be used by the City of Salem and the F AA in developing their capital project scheduling. Stage I of the capital improvement program includes the highest priority projects to be conducted during the fIrst five years. Secondly, due to the conceptual nature of a master plan, implementation of recommended capital projects will occur following further refmement of design and cost estimates through architectural or engineering analyses. Capital costs presented in this chapter should be viewed only as estimates, subject to subsequent refmement. Nevertheless, these estimates are considered accurate for performing the feasibility analysis in this chapter. A sumInaly of development costs during the twenty-year master plan is presented in Table 8-1. Recent airport operational revenues and expenses are presented in Table 8-2. Projects have been listed for 1998, despite the F AA ' s preliminary indication that no funding will be available in that year. The City will pursue project funding in the event that some projects can be completed. Alternatively, the projects will be deferred to the following year. The capital improvement program provides planning-level estimates of project costs. Additional engineering analyses will be required Cost estimates for each development project are presented in Table 8-3. Table 8-4 identifies each project's eligibility for F AA funding. The F AA will 2centurywestENGINEERING CORPORATION Table 8-1 Summary of Development Costs Stage I 1997-2001 $1,870,837 Stage II 2002-2006 $2,685,266 2007-2016 $6,242,344 T otal Development Costs $10,79~,447 Table 8-2 McNary Field -Operational Revenues and Expenses I Revenue Sources 1993-1994 Actual 1994-1995 Actual 1995-1996 est. $5,812 $10,485 $11,000 9,430 11,200 13,543 10,584 14.000 230,097 215,000I Land/Building Rent 7,601 30,750 14,874 19,200 6,887 10,500 $289,958 S311,650 i Expenses $120,801 $132.042 $141,370 416,875* 3,000: Debt Service $307,618 $561.245* ($249.595)* Source: City of Salcm * This figure inc/udes Contract SetVices of $296,450 re/ated to specific projects with a funding source other than operationa/ revenues. Typica/ expense for this category: $13,4961994-95; $46,5021995-96. ." centurywestENGINEERING CORPORATION 3 T ABLE 8-3 McNary Field Master Plan Update Capital Improvement Projects S~e II (2002-2006) 30% Engineering & ContingencyQuantity Total 1 South Industrial Area Utilities -Phase I LS 1 $95.500.00 $95.500 $28.650 $124.150 2 South Ind. Access Road -Phase I (1650 If) SY 5500 $35.00 $192.500 $57,750 $250.250 3 South Ind. Site Fi" -Phase I cy 48150 $9.00 $433.350 $130,005 $563,355 4 South Ind. Fencing -Phase I LF 1700 $14.00 $23.800 $7.140 $30940 5 Taxiway C Sealcoat SY 20000 $1.26 $25,200 $7.560 $32.760 6 Taxiway A Sealcoat sy 41400 $1.26 $52.164 $15.649 $67.813 7 South Airport Taxiway -Phase I sy 2500 $26.00 $65.000 $19.500 $84,500 8 South Airport Access Road, Parking sy 2300 $35.00 $80.500 $24.150 $104,650 9 Runway 16-34 Overlay sy 57200 $5.60 $320,320 $96.096 $416,416 10 PAPI- Rwy 16 & 34 Ea 2 $15,000.00 $30,000 $9.000 $39,000 11 Rwy 16 & 34 REIL Ea 2 $14,000.00 $28.000 $8.400 $36.400 12 North HangarTaxilanes Sealcoat sy 10000 $1.26 $12.600 $3.780 $16,380 13 South Hangar Taxilane 2 & 3 Overlay sy 2780 $5.60 $15.568 $4.670 $20.238 14 South Hangar Taxilane 1.4.5.6 Sealcoat sy 5560 $1.26 $7.006 $2.102 $9.107 15 South Apron Overlay sy 57800 $5.60 $323.680 $97. 104 $420.784 16 Runway 13-31 Sealcoat sy 96900 $1.26 $122.094 $36.628 $158.722 17 Taxiway A Overlay sy 36300 $5.60 $203.280 $60.984 $264.264 18 Taxiway B Sealcoat SY 27800 $1.26 $35.028 $10.508 $45.536 Total Stage" $2,065,590 $619,677 $2,685,266 30% Engineering & Contingency Stage III (2007-2016) TotalUnit Type Quantity Unit$ Cost $122,018 $291,200 $145,600 $273,000 $116,350 $150,150 $2,070,034 $206,242 $126,750 $242,515 $101,140 $32,760 $4,554 $36,400 $705,432 $202,384 $59,459 $32, 760 $869,050 $36,400 $65,000 $126,750 $226,395 3610 40000 20000 6000 1 3300 176926 28330 3750 5330 38900 1800 2780 5000 96900 27800 36300 20000 19100 700 1 3750 27000 $26.00 $5.60 $5.60 $35.00 $89,500.00 $35.00 $9.00 $5.60 $26.00 $35.00 $2.00 $14.00 $1.26 $5.60 $5.60 $5.60 $1.26 $1.26 $35.00 $40.00 $50,000.00 $26.00 $6.45 $93,860 $224,000 $112,000 $210,000 $89,500 $115,500 $1,592,334 $158,648 $97,500 $186,550 $77,800 $25,200 $3,503 $28,000 $542,640 $155,680 $45, 738 $25,200 $668,500 $28,000 $50,000 $97,500 $174,150 $28,158 $67,200 $33,600 $63,000 $26,850 $34,650 $477,700 $47,594 $29,250 $55,965 $23,340 $7,560 $1 ,051 $8,400 $162,792 $46,704 $13,721 $7,560 $200,550 $8,400 $15,000 $29,250 $52,245 SY SY SY SY LS SY cy SF SY SY SY LF SY SY SY SY SY SY SY LF ea SY SF 1 South Airport Taxiway -Phase II 2 Center Apron Overlay 3 Taxiway C Overlay 4 Terminal Area Bypass Roadway 5 South Industrial Area Utilities -Phase II 6 South Ind. Access Road -Phase II 7 South Ind. Site Fill -Phase II 8 Main Apron Overlay 9 East Side Taxiway 10 East Side Access Roadway (1600 If} 11 East Side Site Prep/Floodway Grading 12 East Side Fencing 13 South Hangar T axilane 2 & 3 Sealcoat 14 South Hangar Taxilane 1,4,5,6 Overlay 15 Runway 13-31 Overlay 16 Taxiway B Overlay 17 Taxiway A Sealcoat 18 Taxiway C Sealcoat 19 Runway 13-31, Parallel Txy Extension 20 Extend Edge Lighting 21 Relocate MALSR 22 South Airport Taxiway -Phase III 23 Terminal Area Loop Roadway $4,801,803 $1!440-,~1 $6,242,344Total Staqe III ~!!1,798,447-T~II ~~~~ T ABLE 8-3 McNary Field Master Plan Update Capital Improvement Projects 30% Engineering & ContingencyUnit Type Unit$ Cost TotalStage I Projects (1997-2001) Year 1- 1997 1 ARFF Training Equipment Total Year 1 1 $550,0 00.00 $550,000.00 $550,000 $550,000 ea $0 $0 $550,000 $550,000 n/a sy sy sy To be privately funded 1944 $26.00 5350 $40.25 1960 $19.00 $50,544 $215,338 $37,240 $303,122 $15, 163 $64,601 $11,172 $90,936 $65,707 $279,939 $48,412 $394,058 Year 2- 1998 1 T -Hangar Development 2 North Hangar Taxiway 3 N. Hangar Access Road, Parking 4 Apron Rehabilitation (@ ODOT Hangar) Total Year 2 Year 3- 1999 1 Runway 16-34 Sealcoat 2 West Side Apron Sealcoat 3 Airport Flood Management Plan Total Year 3 SV SV LS 82900 127000 $1.26 $1.26 $104,454 $160,020 $100,000 $364,474 $31,336 $48,006 $0 $79,342 $135,790 $208,026 $100,000 $443,816 Year 4 -2000 1 Demo Flight Deck Restaurant Bldg. 2 Reconfigure FBO/GA Terminal Apron 3 Reconfigure FBO Access Road 4 SW GA Parking Lot Reconfiguration 5 SW Hangar Taxiway (new) Total Year 4 LS SV SV LS SV 1 $20,000.00 11000 $17.73 600 $60.00 1 $95,000.00 980 $26.00 $20,000 $195,030 $36,000 $95,000 $25,480 $371,510 $6,000 $58,509 $10,800 $28,500 $7,644 $111,453 $26,000 $253,539 $46,800 $123,500 $33, 124 $482,963 Year 5 -2001 No Projects This Year Total Year 5 $0 $0 $0 Total Stage I (Years 1-5) $1,589,106 $281,732 $1,870,837 TABLE 8-4 McNary Field Master Plan Update Capital Improvement Project Eligibility Total Cost $550,000 $550,000 $0 $65,707 $279,939 $48,412 $394,058 $135,790 $208,026 $100,000 $443,816 $26,000 $253,539 $46,800 $123,500 $33,124 $482,963 FAA Eligible $495,000 $495,000 Local $55,000 $55,000 Stage I ProJects Yr 1 ARFF Training Equipment Total Year 1 $0 $59,136 $139,970 $43,571 $242,677 $122,211 $187,223 $90,000 $399,434 $0 $228,185 $42,120 $0 $29,812 $300,117 $0 $6,571 $139,970 $4,841 $151,381 $13,579 $20,803 $10,000 $44,382 $26,000 $25,354 $4,680 $123,500 $3,312 $182,846 Yr 2. T -Hangar Development (Privately Funded) Yr 2. North Hangar Taxiway Yr 2. N Hangar Access Road. Parking Yr 2. Apron Rehabilitation (@ ODOT Hangar) Total Year 2 Yr 3 Runway 16-34 Sealcoat Yr 3 West Side Apron Sealcoat Yr 3 Airport Flood Management Plan Total Year 3 Yr 4 Demo Flight Deck Restaurant Bldg. Yr 4 Reconfigure FBO/GA Terminal Apron Yr 4 Reconfigure FBO/GA Terminal Access Road Yr 4 SW GA Parking lot Reconfiguration Yr 4 SW Hangar Taxiway (new) Total Year 4 Yr 5 No Projects This Year Total Stage I $1,870,837 $1,437,228 $433,609 .Note: For Year 2 (1998), No FAA Funding is Currently AvaIlable; ProJects will be deferred if funding Is not avail $0 $0 $0 $27,846 $29,484 $61,032 $76,050 $52,325 $374,774 $35, 100 $32,760 $14,742 $18,214 $8, 196 $378,706 $142,850 $237,838 $40,982 $1,530,899 $124,150 $250;250 $563,355 $3,094 $3,276 $6,781 $8,450 $52,325 $41,642 $3,900 $3,640 $1,638 $2,024 $911 $42,078 $15,872 $26,426 $4,554 $1,154,366 $124,150 $250,250 $563,355 $30,940 $32,760 $67,813 $84,500 $104,650 $416,416 $39,000 $36,400 $16,380 $20,238 $9,107 $420,784 $158,722 $264,264 $45,536 $2,685,265 Stage 11 ProJects 1 South Industrial Area Utilities -Phase I 2 South Ind. Access Road -Phase I (1650 If) 3 South Ind. Site Fill -Phase I 4 South Airport Fencing -Phase I 5 Taxiway C Sealcoat 6 Taxiway A Sealcoat 7 South Airport Taxiway -Phase I 8 South Airport Access Road, Parking 9 Runway 16-34 Overlay 10 PAPI- Rwy 16 & 34 11 Rwy 16 & 34 REIL 12 North Hangar Taxilanes Sealcoat 13 South Hangar Taxilane 2 & 3 Overlay 14 South Hangar Taxilane 1,4,5,6 Sealcoat 15 South Apron Overlay 16 Runway 13-31 Sealcoat 17 Taxiway A Overlay 18 Taxiway B Sealcoat Total Stage II $122,018 $291,200 $145,600 $273,000 $116,350 $150,150 $2,070,034 $206,242 $126,750 $242,515 $101,140 $32,760 $4,554 $36,400 $705,432 $202,384 $59,459 $32,760 $869,050 $36,400 $65,000 $126,750 $226,395 $6,242,343 $10,798,445 $109,816 $262,080 $131,040 $245,700 $0 $0 $0 $185,618 $114,075 $218,264 $0 $29,484 $4,099 $32,760 $634,889 $182,146 $53,513 $29,484 $782, 145 $32,760 $58,500 $114,075 $203,756 $3,424,202 $6,392,329 $12,202 $29,120 $14,560 $27,300 $116,350 $150,150 $2,070,034 $20,624 $12,675 $24,252 $101,140 $3,276 $455 $3,640 $70,543 $20,238 $5,946 $3,276 $86,905 $3,640 $6,500 $12,675 $22,640 $2,818,141 $4,406,116 Stage /I/ Projects 1 South Airport Taxiway -Phase II 2 Center Apron Overlay 3 Taxiway C Overlay 4 Terminal Area Bypass Roadway 5 South Industrial Area Utilities -Phase II 6 South Ind. Access Road. Phase II 7 South Ind. Site Fi\l- Phase II 8 Main Apron Overlay 9 East Side Taxiway 10 East Side Access Roadway (1600 If} 11 East Side Site Prep/Floodway Grading 12 East Side Fencing 13 South Hangar Taxilane 2 & 3 Sealcoat 14 South Hangar Taxilane 1,4,5,6 Overlay 15 Runway 13-31 Overlay 16 Taxiway B Overlay 17 Taxiway A Sealcoat 18 Taxiway C Sealcoat 19 Runway 13-31, Parallel Txy Extension 20 Extend Edge Lighting 21 Relocate MALSR 22 South Airport Taxiway -Phase III 23 Terminal Area Loop Roadway Total Stage III Total All Stages for specific projects to detennine costs associated with actual design and construction. Several projects such as the South Industrial Area fill, may differ significantly depending on the fmal design of floodways, building areas, etc. As in the past, federal grants are expected to playa significant role in the fmancing of the airport's projected capital expenditures. FINANCING THE LOCAL SHARE OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FINANCING OF DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Several airport improvement projects recommended in the master plan are not eligible for large amounts of federal funding. The City has in the past, used local government bonds as a funding source to support major airport development projects. For larger projects such as terminal building construction or infrastructure improvements, airports often use local bonds for funding. The south airport industrial area site improvements are divided into two phases with the overall development cost estimated at approximately $3.3 million, including site preparation, utility extensions, and roadway improvements. Most of these improvements will not be eligible for F AA funding. The use of local bond issues should be evaluated as part of the City's overall airport funding program. A description of bond types which are often used by airports to fund capital projects is presented below: Federal Grants The primary source of funds which have been identified in this plan are from the Federal Airport Improvement Program (AlP). Funds from this program are derived from the Aviation Trust Fund. which is the depository for all federal aviation taxes collected on such items as airline tickets, aviation fuel, lubricants, tires, aircraft registrations, and other aviation-related fees. These funds are distributed under appropriations set by Congress to all aiIports in the United States which have certified eligibility. The funds are distributed through grants administered by the Federal Aviation Administration. Under current guidelines, the airport sponsor receives 90 percent participation on eligible projects. According to F AA guidelines " As a general aviation airport, McNary Field is eligible under the Airport Improvement Program (AlP) to receive what is called State Apportionment funding, which is discretionary to the extent that it is not an "entitlement." It is also eligible to receive "pure discretionary" funding as wel1...Projects at all airports are subject to a priority coding system in the AlP ." General Obligation Bonds General Obligation (GO) bonds are a common form of municipal/borough bonds in which payment is secw-ed by ~ full faith. credit, and taxing power of the issuing agency .GO bonds are insb"uments of credit and, because of the community guarantee, reduce the available debt level of the sponsoring community .This type of bond uses taxes to retire 7centurywest ENGINEERING CORPORATION the debt and the key element becomes the approval of the electorate of a tax levy to support airport development. If approved, GO bonds are typically issued at a lower interest rate than other types of bonds. lack ilie guarantees of oilier municipal bonds. Revenue bonds also require that the borrower must maintain specific coverage ratios between income and debt service. This often requires that surplus cash, which might otherwise be available for use in fwlding operations or improvements, be maintained mreserve. Self-Liquidating General Obligation Bonds As with other GO bonds, self-liquidating general obligation bonds are secured by the issuing agency and also require voter approval. They are retired, however, by the adequate cash flow from the operation of the facility. Since the credit of the local government bears the ultimate risk of default, the bond issue is still considered, for the purpose of fmancial analysis, as part of the debt burden of the community. Therefore, this method of fmancing may result in a higher rate of interest on all bonds sold by the community. The aD1ount of increase of the interest rate depends in part upon the degree of exposure risk of the bond. Exposure risk occurs when there is insufficient net operating income to cover debt service plus coverage requirements, thus forcing the community to absorb the residual. Third Party Support Private development on the aiJport is expected to consist ofhangar construction, expanded fixed base operator facilities, and other tenant-sponsored projects. It is also noted that approximately 55 acres of industrial use property located in the south airport development area, is included within the boundaries of the Fairview Urban Renewal Area. This designation provides a potential vehicle for funding specific infrastructure improvements. CASH FLOW ANAL YSIS Revenue Bonds The review of the airport's cash flow analysis (Table 8-5) focuses on the relationship between operating revenues and expenses. According to data provided by the City of Salem, operating expenses and revenues at McNary Field are running about even. at approximately $310,000 per year. Revenue Bonds are payable solely from the revenue of a particular project or from operating income of the borrowing agency .Generally, they fall outside constitutional and statutory limitations and in many cases, do not require electorate approval. Because of the limitations on other public bonds, airport sponsors are increasingly turning to revenue bonds whenever possible. However, revenue bonds typically carry a higher rate of interest because they Current operations do not provide significant surplus funds for use in facility development It is expected that airport revenues will increase during 8centurywestENGINEERING CORPORATION the planning period as additional aviation and non- aviation lands are leased. Revenues from land and building income will be projected to increase based on new leases for hangars and light industrial developments. Other airport revenues are projected to increase at an average of 3 percent annually. Operational revenues are assumed to increase at a slightly greater rate, mostly from increased land lease revenues. In order to create an implementation strategy for land development, it will be necessary to establish realistic goals for the current planning period. While there are nwnerous opinions about the demand for leased land on the airport, it is evident that without a well-coordinated effort of improvements and promotion, there will be minimal change from the status quo. The rate of land development will be partly dependent on the ability to fund basic infrastructure improvements. Operational expenses at the airport are expected to increase at a modest rate (2 percent annually). The cash flow projection provides a general indication of the typical capital costs and the funds available to support development. However, the airport's ability to improve its revenue-generating capabilities will be heavily dependent on completing infrastructure improvements and the effective promotion of available airport lands. With the "exception of some hangar lease areas on the west side of the airport, most new lease areas on the airport will require site preparation. airside or landside access, and utilities. The improvements which involve considerable initial investment will be implemented as funding becomes available. It is recognized that in order for the airport to fully benefit from increased land lease revenues, an investment in infrastructure is required. It is apparent that the funds generated through airport operations and F AA AlP grants will not always be sufficient to fully support the entire capital improvement program. It should also be noted that although most of the projects are eligible for federal funding, it is unlikely that AlP grant monies will be available every year. The limitations of AlP funding will dictate in large part, the actual schedule for completing airport improvement projects. As a result, many projects included in the twenty-year CIP may be OOfmed beyond the twenty- year time frame. For planning pmposes, it is assumed that additional land leases will conbibute to airport revenues. Initially, approximately 2 acres per year, with an average lease rate of SO.10 per square foot is assumed. Following the fIrSt phase of indusbial area infrastructure improvements, this could be expected to increase to 5-8 acres per year, depending on market conditions and the marketing program used. The new leases would include hangars and other aviation-related developments and non-aviation developments around the airport. ,., centurywestENGINEERING CORPORATION 9 Depending on the project requirements, several possible options may exist for the City to consider: . Seek alternative F AA funding Pursue other federal funding (Congressional Appropriations. Economic redevelopment funds, etc.) Pursue state funding (Lottery funds, Tourism and Economic Development Funds, etc.) Local Bond Issues Jnird Party Development Airport Rates and Fees Increases Defer Project(s) until funding is obtained FtI centurywestENGINEERING CORPORATION 10 c o.- (J Q).- 0I.. a. C') c.- "'C c ~ L1. a.- (J "'C- Q).- L1. ~ C'a z (J Lt)~I I ~ Q) E -Q) .c- C'a C'a I-(/) c o ; u 0> .0'- 0.. '- ca 0>1 >-i 0> > ii: I'- m m 00 m m mm m ~I ~ o 0 N 0000 0000 001t)1l) ~ ~mO=-C')r N ER-N C") 14 CX>N(D1t) (D..-(D~0>CX>(t)~ 00 ..-~Y7N M ~ Mr--MM Ou. Q) > Q) In (k:W"OC - (k: .U> Q) c' ~"Ocr= '.0:.z c .cu m C1 ... --J"O Q) 1 Q.. ~ Q)m .-"0 Q) W~C.c-caQ. .-m O?-JO~ 00000000 0000 ...:Iri'M~ -.rCO~O~~ M ~~ ~ 0000NO~N Q)M N ~< Q.Q)~ W x .2 ~ ~W ~ .Q) - "' Q) Q; u ... U) a. .-~ Z- O ~Q) i= ro Q) a. ~ C:UU)O o"Q)...I/)=.a,: W'-L-Q)~ .-O ? OC-<{ 1- c o ~cu 'u 0)... 0. 0) c 0)... .20) m '0III 0 -I- 0) E0 (.) -E o0 II)~ N- inM Q)~ <0- 0 0) t-..~ 0)".. M ~ 1'00- N ~ fh ~ N ~ II) ~ ~ ~o O m It>~ ~~ - a)N \l)\l) OCD ,.:f ~- O>\l) (")(") f/)~ -q-<') EA- fjt. Mr::: w o ~ ~ u !1:: -J ? u 0-J 1-- W z O o 0- 10 10 ~ <0"'o .q-- 0)M ~, N00 C")- "f""f" ~ (0' ~-N a>..- ~ O fA- '0c 0:0:; ~(1) 0. O E e ~ ~ O-J u. :I: (/) ? u 1-W z Oo Lt>. (0) Lt> ~ - ID -q- ~ ID M !I'*'. 00 '0 10- 00 (0) ~ - <0 t-.. ~ Lt) t-.. ~ ~ NU) U)- mfA D.MILLEA CWEC SALEM AIRPORT 21 9198; 5:30PM; ?B-e9-98 e~:39 PM Received 158331525"58 p.et A BILL FOR ORDINANCE NO.BILL NO.78 3-98 AN ORDINANCE rcJatlng to the AilJ>?rt Master Plan. amending SRC 64.230. rnE cay OF SALEM ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. SRC 64.230 is amended to read ADOPTION OF DETAII.ED PLANS. The following dctai1cd plan:; tIre hercby adoptcd a.~ part of this Code tho samc as if fully roproduccd h~rcin One copy of each is kcpt on filc in the office ofthc city rccordcr. Any portion of an adopted dctu.il pJlln found not to be in cOnrOfn!imCC with thc cornprehensivc plan shall be considered null and void. Park and Recreation Technical Study, July 1977. RcgionaJ Parks and Rccrc.1tion Agency(a) Adopted July t I, 1977 (Long-range Facilities Plan)of thc Mid- WiJIamCI[e Vallcy. Salem Area Wastewater MCU\agemcnt Master Plun. t 996, CH2M-HiI1. Adopted Dccember(b) 16,1996. St()rmw~tcr M.magcmcnt PI~In, City nfS.llcn'l, Departmcnt of Public Work~. Adopt~d May(c) 14, 1984. Adoptcd April 25, 1994, und amendedWarcr Systcm Mt\ster PIt\n. 1994, CH2M-Hill(d) Septcmbel" 23. 1996, McN.\ry Ficld Airport MLIstcr Plan, SaJcrn, Oregon, Hodgcs and Shutl, M.ly 1979. Adoplcd(e) JulIe 18, 1979"";1nd. April 27 .) 987;:~n~Ii\rl~~f'~?l~U~Nciy~W.Wf~1:~97, Vrbnn Growth Managcmcnt Program- A~ mnended and adoptcd JuJy 23, 1979, and ;J!i further(f) , 1982, and Novcmbcr 28, 1983. and Septcmber 23. 1996,amcl1dcd J ,\Iluary Will.lmcttc Rivcr Grccnway P'an. July. 1979. Adoptcd Scptember 24, 1979,(g) Wcst Salem Scctor P!,\n. S3VC and exccpt the ~ewer clement. ",'hich is supcrseded by the (I\) Salcm Arca W.Istcwater Management M.\.'itcr Plan and tho \.vater clcmcnt. which is supcrseded by thc Watcr .1982.Sy~tem Mastcr Pl:m. Adoptcd January COUNCIL OF TI1F: CITY OY SAI.EM, OREGONORDfNANCE nnJJ -Pagc 15033152550 => D.MILLER CWEC SALEM AIRPORT 219198; 5:30PM; F~B-09-98 0~:39 PM leceived l~e331~2~~e P.02 Northeast Salem Sector Plan, savc and except the sewer clcrncnt. which is superseded by the(i)1 SaJem Ar~ Wastewater Management Master Plan and the water elemr.nt, which is supcrseded by the. Water2 , 1982, and revised Apri19, 1984, amended March 8, 1993. and3 System Master PluJl. Adopted January further amcnded September 12, ) 994.4 SoutJt Libcrty Road Corridor Study. Approvcd Dcccmbcr 27. 1982s I 0) Fairvicw Sector PIan. .~ave and except the sewer element, which is superseded by the Salem6 (k) Area WtL~tcwater Management MMter Plan and the water element, which is superseded by the Water Systcm7 Master Plan. Adoptcd May 291 1984, revised January 26,1987.8 Ea.~t SaJcm Sector Plan, save and except the sewer clemcnt, whjch is superscdcd by thc Salcm9 ~ (I) Arca W.tstcwater Management Master Plan and the water element. which is supcrscdcd by the Wutc.r Systcm10 Master Plan. Adopted December 10, 1984, and amended March 8, 1993. South S~ll(!m Sector Plan, save and cxcept the sewer clcment, which is superseded by (hc12 (m} Salcm Arca Wustcwatcr Management M~"ter PIOlI1 and lhc water clcmcnt, which is supcrscdcd by thc Water13 Syslcm M;l...ter Plan. Adopted Fcbruary 10, 1986, amcndcd NOvclllbcr 26, 1990 and further arncndcd March14 15 Croisnn Scctor Plan, save and cxcept the scwer etemcnt, which is supcrscdcd by the Salem16 (n) Aren WOL..tcwatcr M~U1ngement Master Plan and the water eIement, \a,'hich is superseded by tho Wntcr Sy~rem17 Muster Plan. Adoptcd february 10, 1986.18 Southeast Salem Scctor PI.tn, sa..'e and cxcept the sewcr elcment, which is !tupcrscdcd by the 19 (0) 20 Adopted July 28. 1986.System Mastl.:r Pl.\n.21 Yeilr 2005 Area Wide Tran.'il)Ortation Plan for thc S,,!em-Keizer Urban Arcn dated l\priI t . 22 (p) 1987 SaJcm Tr:msportation Plan adoptcd August J 3, t 990. and amended Novembcr 26, 1990;24 (q) 25 COUNCIl. OF TIlE CITY OF Si\L~M, O~I':(;ON26 15033152550 :> D.MILLER CWEC; SALEM AIRPORT 219198; 5:30PM; FEB-09-98 0~:40 PM P.031 ~0;'S';'S'1~2~~0 Satcm Urban Area Public Facj!itics Plan. Adopted Octobcr 12, 1992.(r) REVISIONS ADOPTED AND FINDINGS. Th~ revi~ions to thc Airport Ma$ter PlanSection 2. City Recorder and Custodian of City Records Approved by City Attorney:...JL (..~UNCIL OF THE CITY OF SALEM, OREGON PASSED by the council this ~ day ofr1~199L. A TruST;