Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutGTUSection4-AirportDevelopmentPlans-Revised AIRPORT MASTER PLAN UPDATE SECTION FOUR GEORGETOWN MUNICIPAL AIRPORT AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT PLANS GEORGETOWN, TEXAS This section provides a development plan for Georgetown Municipal Airport (GTU). The consultant recommends a list of projects along with their sequencing over 20 years: short-term (0-5 years), intermediate term (5-10 years), and long-term (10-20 years). The projects and sequencing are reflected in Exhibits 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3. It is important to note that the exhibits represent the consultant's recommended phasing of projects, but do not in all cases reflect the City's policy for airport development. Some projects depicted in the exhibits fall into the category of projects for which the City has no current plans or intention to fund or seek funding and therefore may not be completed within the time frame shown on the exhibits. These proposals were derived to meet anticipated aviation facility demands under the “W/O NCTA & W/ATCT” scenario, as shown in Section Three, Future Facility Requirements. The development costs associated with each project are included in this section. Also addressed in this section are the existing airspace and ground conditions that might constrain the development of the airport, and the corresponding recommendations. Additionally, the Airport Layout Plan (ALP) drawings are briefly discussed in this section. There are two types of projects recommended: (1) items relating to the safe and efficient management of the airport, and (2) projects needed to provide aircraft parking, storage, and maintenance. Under (1) the following projects are recommended: construct ATCT, construct taxiway serving Runway 11-29 (35 feet wide), construct then extend parallel taxiway (35 feet wide), relocate self fueling station, relocate AWOS, relocate windcone and segmented circle, construct emergency road, construct stub taxiways, land acquisition, install PAPI-4, relocate fencing, install signage. Under (2) and under the “W/O NCTA & W/ATCT” scenario, there is a projected need over 20 years for 114 more hangars and 35 tie-down spaces. The recommendation over 20 years is for 8 City of Georgetown Airport Master Plan Update 4.1 storage/maintenance hangars totaling 117,900 square feet, 2 storage buildings totaling 9,400 square feet, 8 T-Hangars (one 8-unit, one 10-unit, one 12-unit, one 14-unit, and four 16-unit), and a 32,380 square yard parking apron. All of these could be developed on the east side of the airport. The numbers for W/NCTA are lower: projected need for 23 hangars and 6 tie-downs. These recommendations, based on the City’s current plans and intentions, can be divided into three categories: • Those projects related to the safe and efficient management of the airport, which the City plans to implement as FAA/TxDOT grants become available (these are shown, with projected costs, in Tables 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3); • Those projects related to the safe and efficient management of the airport, which the City does not plan to implement, unless it alters its plans and intentions at a later date (these are listed, with projected costs but without project dates in Table 4.4); and • Those projects related to aircraft parking, storage and maintenance, which the City does not plan to implement, but can be developed by private investment on leased airport land as shown on the ALP (these are listed with projected costs but without project dates, since they will be developed on a “as desired” basis, in Table 4.5). Category One: Projects related to the safe and efficient management of the airport, which the City plans to implement as FAA/TxDOT grants become available. 4.1 SHORT-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN During the short-term development period (0-5 years), the following projects will be implemented, as grants are available (see Table 4.1): • Construction of the ATCT, for which FAA/TxDOT grants funds have been approved, the design and construction consultant engaged, and the site selected. City of Georgetown Airport Master Plan Update 4.2 • Construct a full-length taxiway serving 11-29, connecting the southwestern apron with existing Taxiway “B.” This connection provides a direct taxi route to Runway 11 for traffic originating from the south side of the terminal. It will encourage pilots to operate on Runway 11-29, which will alleviate heavy traffic on Runway 18-36. • Relocate AWOS. • Relocate windcone and segmented circle. • Install PAPI-4. • Construct emergency road. This will allow access to the airport from fire station. • Install signage. Two other projects, including rehabilitation of airport fencing and rehabilitation of Runway 11-29, are already listed in the City’s airport improvement plan, and are not included here and in Table 4.1. As discussed in Section Three, Future Facility Requirements, the available records of Runway 11-29 pavement strength were not consistent. It is recommended that professional pavement testing and evaluation services be pursued to determine the current pavement strength of Runway 11-29. Table 4.1 summarizes the estimated short-term development costs of projects in Category 1. It should be noted that the participation shares shown listed in Table 4.1 were based on the current federal and state funding programs, and are subject to revision if changes occur in the funding programs during the short-term development period. City of Georgetown Airport Master Plan Update 4.3 Table 4.1 Project Development Cost – Short-Term (0-5 Years) Projects/Actions – Short-Term (0-5 years) Total Estimated Cost TxDOT/ FAA share Local Share Construct ATCT $ 1,200,000 $ 1,080,000 $ 120,000 Construct Taxiway Serving Runway 11-29 (35 feet wide) $ 190,000 $ 171,000 $ 19,000 Relocate AWOS $ 12,000 $ 10,800 $ 1,200 Relocate Windcone and Segmented Circle $ 23,000 $ 20,700 $ 2,300 Install PAPI-4 $ 27,000 $ 24,300 $ 2,700 Construct Emergency Road $ 29,000 $ 26,100 $ 2,900 Install Signage $ 11,000 $ 9,900 $ 1,100 SHORT-TERM TOTAL $ 1,492,000 $ 1,342,800 $ 149,200 Note: Estimates are based on Year 2004 dollars Source: GRW Willis, Inc. 4.2 INTERMEDIATE-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN During the intermediate-term development period (5-10 years), the following projects will be implemented, as grants are available (see Table 4.2): • As shown in Exhibit 4.2, a taxiway parallel to Runway 18-36 with a centerline separation of 300 feet will be built, connecting Runway 18 end with the full-length taxiway serving Runway 11-29. • A new stub taxiway will connect the northern aircraft parking apron with Runway 11-36 by crossing through the new parallel taxiway. Three pieces of pavement will be added to Taxiway “A” at the Runway 18 end, to support two-way taxiways at the Runway 18 end. The taxing route on the Taxiway “A” will be adjusted and marked accordingly. As a result of these improvements, aircraft taxiing circulation will be significantly improved along the building line, especially on the aircraft apron. • Install signage. Table 4.2 summarizes the estimated intermediate-term development costs of projects in Category 1. It should be noted that the participation shares shown listed in Table 4.2 were based on the current federal and state funding programs, and are subject to revision if changes occur in the funding programs during the short-term development period. City of Georgetown Airport Master Plan Update 4.5 Table 4.2 Project Development Cost – Intermediate-Term (5-10 Years) Projects/Actions – Intermediate-Term (5-10 years) Total Estimated Cost TxDOT/ FAA share Local Share Construct Parallel Taxiway (35 feet wide) $ 299,000 $ 269,000 $ 29,900 Construct Stub Taxiways (35 feet wide) $ 107,000 $ 96,300 $ 10,700 Install Signage $ 26,000 $ 23,400 $ 2,600 INTERMEDIATE-TERM TOTAL $ 432,000 $ 388,700 $ 43,200 Note: Estimates are based on Year 2004 dollars Source: GRW Willis, Inc. 4.3 LONG-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN During the long-term development period (10-20 years), the following projects will be implemented, as grants are available (see Table 4.3): • As shown on Exhibit 4.3, on the airfield side, the parallel taxiway serving Runway 18-36 will be extended to connect with Runway 36 end. Similar to Runway 18 end, by adding one piece of pavement to the north edge of Taxiway “A” at the Runway 36 end, a simultaneous two-way exit/entrance route is established. • Relocate fencing. • Install signage. Table 4.3 summarizes the estimated long-term development costs of projects in Category 1. It should be noted that the participation shares shown listed in Table 4.3 were based on the current federal and state funding programs, and are subject to revision if changes occur in the funding programs during the short-term development period. City of Georgetown Airport Master Plan Update 4.7 Table 4.3 Project Development Cost – Long-Term (10-20 Years) Projects/Actions – Intermediate-Term (5-10 years) Total Estimated Cost TxDOT/ FAA share Local Share Extend Parallel Taxiway (35 feet wide) $ 392,000 $ 352,800 $ 39,200 Relocate Fencing $ 34,000 $ 30,600 $ 3,400 Install Signage $ 7,000 $ 6,300 $ 700 LONG-TERM TOTAL $ 433,000 $ 389,700 $ 43,300 Note: Estimates are based on Year 2004 dollars Source: GRW Willis, Inc. Category Two: Projects related to the safe and efficient management of the airport, which the City does not plan to implement, unless it alters it plans and intentions at a later date (these are listed, with projected costs but without project dates). 4.4 OTHER PROJECTS WITH NO CURRENT PLANS TO BE IMPLEMENTED The consultant recommends the following projects related to the safe and efficient management of the airport, which the City has no current plans or intentions of implementing. They are listed with projected costs but without implementation dates in Table 4.5. • As shown in Exhibit 4.1, add a total of approximately 32,380 square yards of apron to the existing aircraft parking apron. If combined with other proposals (especially the relocation of the Avgas self-fuel stations, below), a total of 57 aircraft tie-downs could be installed on the paved apron, and aircraft taxiing flow on the apron would be improved. A revised version of this proposal as related to tie-downs could be developed with private funds, and is included under 4.6. • Relocate the Avgas self-fueling stations, which are currently located near the middle of the existing apron, to the north of the terminal, along with approximately 2,720 square yards of apron. • Acquire land (6.9 Acres) within the runway/taxiway Object Free Area (OFA), to be included in the ultimate airport property. About seven residential land tracts, located along the northwest airport boundary and adjacent to the ultimate property line, should also be City of Georgetown Airport Master Plan Update 4.9 acquired by the City. All residential structures and amenities would need to be removed from these tracts. While the City has no current plans or intentions to acquire these properties, it will seek to obtain any that become available for purchase and the City will apply for all appropriate federal and state funds to assist in the acquisition of these lands. Additionally, to ensure a safe environment around the airport, the runway protection zones should be protected. As discussed in Section Three, Future Facility Requirements, it is recommended that as long-term ultimate development is implemented, the City must acquire avigation easements for all property within the runway protection zones but outside the ultimate airport property line. All residential and public gathering facilities within the proposed avigation easements must be removed. Airport Layout Drawings (ALP), attached in Appendix “C,” illustrates in details the proposed ultimate airport property and avigation easements. Table 4.4 summarizes the estimated development costs of projects in Category 2. It should be noted that the participation shares shown listed in Table 4.4 were based on the current federal and state funding programs, and are subject to revision if changes occur in the funding programs during the short-term development period. Table 4.4 Project Development Cost Other Projects With No Current Plans to Be Implemented Projects/Actions Total Estimated Cost TxDOT/ FAA share Local Share Consultant’s Time Frame Construct Aircraft Parking Apron $ 1,191,000 $ 1,071,900 $ 119,100 Short-term Relocate Self Fueling Station $ 94,000 $ 84,600 $ 9,400 Short-term Land Acquisition (6.9 Acres) $ 1,431,000 $ 1,287,900 $ 143,100 Long-term OTHER PROJECTS TOTAL $ 2,716,000 $ 2,444,400 $ 271,600 Note: Estimates are based on Year 2004 dollars Source: GRW Willis, Inc. City of Georgetown Airport Master Plan Update 4.10 Category Three: Projects related to aircraft parking, storage and maintenance, which the City does not plan to implement, but can be developed by private investment on leased airport land as shown on the ALP 4.5 PROJECTS TO PROVIDE AIRCRAFT STORAGE, MAINTENANCE AND PARKING, TO BE IMPLEMENTED WITH PRIVATE FUNDS The consultant recommends building a number of box hangars, storage buildings, T-hangars, and tie- down spaces to accommodate the projected need over 20 years for 114 more hangars and 35 tie- down spaces under the “W/O NCTA & W/ATCT” scenario: 8 storage/maintenance hangars totaling 117,900 sq. ft., 2 storage buildings totaling 9,400 sq. ft., 8 T-Hangars (one 8-unit, one 10-unit, one 12-unit, one 14-unit, and four 16-unit), and a 32,380 sq. yd. parking apron. Since the City does not plan to build or develop any aircraft parking (e.g., apron) or storage/maintenance (T-hangars and hangars), this projected need will be met by private investment on leased land, and on an “as desired” basis. The Land Use Map provides land for the development of such projects in four distinct areas on the east side of the airport. Table 4.5 provides estimated costs for these projects, but without implementation dates. Table 4.5 summarizes the estimated development costs of projects in Category 3. Table 4.5 Project Development Cost – Projects To Provide Aircraft Storage, Maintenance And Parking, To Be Implemented With Private Funds Projects/Actions Total Estimated Cost Private Share Consultant’s Time Frame Construct 2 Aircraft Storage/Maintenance Hangars (15,000 sq. ft., 11,400 sq. ft.) $ 1,407,000 $ 1,407,000 Short-term Construct 2 Aircraft Storage/Maintenance Hangars (total 28,000 sq. ft.) $ 1,305,000 $ 1,305,000 Intermediate-term Construct 4 Aircraft Storage/Maintenance Hangars (total 65,300 sq. ft.) $ 3,057,000 $ 3,057,000 Long-term Construct 22 T-hangars (one 10 unit; one 12-unit) $ 1,269,000 $ 1,269,000 Short-term Construct 30 T-hangars (one 16 unit; one 14 unit) $ 1,058,000 $ 1,058,000 Intermediate-term Construct 56 T-hangars (three 16 unit; one 8 unit) $ 1,896,000 $ 1,896,000 Long-term Construct Aircraft Parking Apron (32,380 sq. yds.) $ 1,191,000 $ 1,191,000 Short-term Construct Storage Building (3,000 sq. ft.) $ 79,000 $ 79,000 Intermediate-term Construct Storage Building (6,400 sq. ft.) $ 151,000 $ 151,000 Long-term STORAGE etc. PROJECTS TOTAL $11,413,000 $11,413,000 Note: Estimates are based on Year 2004 dollars Source: GRW Willis, Inc. City of Georgetown Airport Master Plan Update 4.11 4.6 OTHER DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS 4.6.1 Airport Emergency Road The airport fire fighting and rescue service is provided by the City's Fire Department. Fire Station #4, which is located at the northeast corner of the airport property along Airport Road, will be the major respondent to any emergency needs at GTU. The double fencing — the Fire Station's perimeter fence and the airport 8-foot game fence — separates the Fire Station #4 from the airport. To respond to emergency calls at the airport, the fire and rescue vehicles have to drive south on Airport road and enter the airport from one of three airport entrance gates. No direct emergency road is currently present at the field. The Airport Advisory Board suggests a direct emergency road to be provided from Fire Station #4 to the airfield. This study recommends a new emergency access road in the short-term development plan directly connecting the Fire Station to the north most hangar apron. The City plans to follow the recommendations of Airport Emergency Road. 4.6.2 Impervious Coverage The maximum impervious cover for all development within the City limits over the Edward’s Aquifer recharge zone is 50%. The City’s Unified Development Code provides the ability to increase impervious coverage to 65% by implementing certain best management practices. The existing airport impervious coverage is approximately 17%. The proposed short-term development will add about 14% more pavement to the total existing paved areas, resulting in the impervious coverage of 20% for the entire airport. The proposed intermediate-term development will construct 6% more pavement to the short-term built-out, raising the total impervious coverage of the airport to 21%. The long-term development will place additional 7% paved areas to the intermediate-term built out. As a result, the impervious coverage of the entire airport after the long-term built-out will increase to 22%, far below the 65% maximum limit. City of Georgetown Airport Master Plan Update 4.12 It should be noted that the proposed development plans, as illustrated in Exhibits 4.1 to 4.3, have already incorporated a design strategy of minimizing the paved areas as necessary. 4.6.3 Stormwater Surface Runoff As mentioned in Section One, Inventory, GTU has two storm water surface runoff detention facilities on the airport. The water detention pond at the southeastern corner of the airport property aims to capture the first half-inch of runoff from the landside of the airport. The initial design of this water detention pond was completed by Espey, Huston & Associates, Inc. in 1994 (1994 water study). The report of this study is attached in Appendix "B". The 1994 water study sized the pond to be approximately 2.5 acres with a 2-foot depth and an ultimate development of 50 acres of impervious cover. In 1998, Raymond Chan & Associates, Inc. conducted a study (1998 water study) and recommended to reduce the size of water quality pond, which is located at the north of Terminal Drive, to only detain runoff from 16.2 acre of area delivering via underground storm sewer system. The report of this 1998 study is also attached in Appendix "B". The 1998 water study concluded that the existing water detention pond at the southeastern corner of the airport property has a capacity of approximately 2.89 acre-feet. Moreover, the 1998 Airport Master Plan shows the detention pond is approximately 5.50 acres in size. The existing combined impervious cover of the drainage areas, which were defined in the both 1994 and 1998 water studies, is approximately 43.83 acres. This study proposes to add additional pavement to the drainage areas of 3.15 acres, 3.61 acres, and 5.05 acres, respectively, by the years 2009, 2014, and 2024. Based on the assumption the first half-inch of runoff from the impervious area shall be detained, the required water quality volume for the year 2024 corresponds to 2.32 acre-feet. The estimated capacity of the water detention pond, which is 2.89 acre-feet according to the 1998 water study, still exceeds the demand by 2024. However, it is recommended in this study that a detailed water quality study be pursued before the intermediate-term development plan is materialized. The City plans to follow both recommendations on Storm water Surface Runoff. City of Georgetown Airport Master Plan Update 4.13 Additionally, it is recommended that every future construction project be carefully tied into the existing drainage pattern on the airport, and the detailed water quality study be conducted if major changes occur. The City plans to follow both recommendations on stormwater surface runoff. As part of the airport’s planned unit development (PUD) zoning district, the northwest quadrant of the airport is set aside as open space to allow higher impervious coverage in the developed areas on the east side of the airport. 4.6.4 Runway and Taxiway Object Free Area (OFA) Encroachments As discussed in Section Three, Future Facility Requirements, encroachments to runway and taxiway OFAs include trees, utility poles, fences, residential houses, as well as parking aircraft. Exhibit 3.1 and ALP drawings in Appendix "C" graphically depict these encroachments. The development plans proposed in this study create more apron areas for aircraft parking, thus eliminate parking aircraft encroachments to the OFAs. The development plans also recommend, within the existing airport property line, removing these trees and the abandoned Lakeway Drive pavement that fall within the OFAs. The utility poles located south to Runway 36 end are to be relocated outside of the OFA and to be clear of the FAR Part 77 Primary and Approach Surfaces and the Threshold Siting Surface (TSS). The other alternative for the utility pole encroachments is to bury the conductor underground. The 8- foot game fencing encroaches on the OFAs at two locations. One is located south of Runway 11-29, running parallel and west to Runway 18-36. The other is located northeast of Runway 18, running parallel to Runway 18-36. These two parts of the fencing must be relocated outside the OFAs. As illustrated in Exhibit 3.1 and the ALP drawings, the existing airport property line does not include the entire OFAs. The OFAs fall outside the existing airport property line at the northwest side of Runway 18 end, both sides of Runway 36 end, and southwest side of Runway 29 end. A number of trees, the airport fencing, and houses are within these OFAs. It is recommended that the City acquire the entire OFAs as the ultimate airport property, City of Georgetown Airport Master Plan Update 4.14 removing trees, demolishing houses, relocating the fencing, and clearing any other encroachments. The City has no current plans or intentions to follow this recommendation. 4.6.5 Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) Encroachments As illustrated in Exhibit 3.1 and ALP drawings in Appendix "C", a number of residences and public roads are within the runway RPZs. The discussion in Section 3.1.5, Runway Protection Zone (RPZ), recommends that the City acquire avigation easements for all four RPZs which are not within the existing and ultimate airport property lines. It further suggests a larger RPZ be protected for each end of Runway 11-29, and the associated land to be acquired as avigation easements. As a part of ultimate development plan, these residences must be removed and the public roads realigned outside the RPZs. The City has no current plans or intentions to follow this recommendation. 4.6.6 Obstructions to FAR Part 77 Primary and Approach Surfaces As required by the FAA and TxDOT, FAR Part 77 Primary and Approach Surface, Obstacle Free Zone (OFZ), and the Threshold Siting Surface (TSS) must be depicted on the ALP drawings. The ALP is attached in Appendix "C". Any obstructions to these three surfaces must be identified along with proposed remediation measures. FAR Part 77 Primary and Approach Surfaces are components of Part 77 imaginary surfaces that are used to identify obstructions that may pose aeronautical hazards to aircraft. The dimensions of Primary and Approach Surfaces vary with the category of a runway, the classification of approaches to the runway, and approach visibility minimums. The Primary Surfaces for both runways at GTU are 500 feet wide and extend 200 feet beyond each runway end. The elevation of the Primary Surface at any point is the same as the nearest point of the associated runway centerline. The Approach Surface for each runway end at GTU starts 200 feet from the runway end at the elevation of the runway centerline at the City of Georgetown Airport Master Plan Update 4.15 runway end, and slopes upward at a ratio of 34 (horizontal) to 1 (vertical). The surface extends 10,000 feet along the extended runway centerline, with a width of 500 feet at the starting point that increases to 3,500 feet at the far end of the surface. As shown on the ALP, clusters of trees along the south side of Runway 11-29 and west to Runway 18-36 are within the FAR Part 77 Primary Surface of Runway 11-29. At Runway 36 end, several individual trees located west of Runway 36 end are within the FAR Part 77 Primary Surface for Runway 18-36. A part of abandoned Lakeway Drive, which is located as close as 60 feet southeast to Runway 36 end, is another obstruction to the Runway 18-36 Primary Surface. It is recommended that all tree obstructions as well as the part of abandoned Lakeway Drive be removed to meet FAR Part 77 Primary Surfaces. As shown on the ALP, three trees penetrate Runway 18 Part 77 Approach Surface, while seven trees, four light poles, and two utility poles penetrate Runway 36 Part 77 Approach Surface. On the Runway 11-29, trees are major obstructions to Part 77 Approach Surfaces. The airport fence at the northeast of Runway 11 end is also higher than Runway 11 Part 77 Approach Surface and considered as an obstruction. It is recommended to remove all tree obstructions, place obstruction lights on the airport fence and light pole obstructions located south of Lakeway Drive, remove the light pole located to the north of Lakeway Drive, and relocate the utility poles or remove the poles and bury the conductor underground. It is anticipated that obtaining landowners' permission for removal of trees outside of airport property may be challenging. It should be recognized that majority of obstructions identified at Runway 18 end and at Runway 36 end north to Lakeway Drive are also encroachments to the OFA. They are required by the FAA to be removed. Once the clearance of the OFA is completed, the extent of work to remediate Part 77 Primary and Approach Surfaces penetration will be reduced significantly. The City has no current plans or intentions to follow this recommendation. City of Georgetown Airport Master Plan Update 4.16 4.6.7 Obstructions to Obstacle Free Zone (OFZ) Obstacle Free Zone (OFZ) consists of runway OFZ and, when applicable, the inner-approach OFZ and the inner-transitional OFZ. The OFZ should clear of taxiing and parked airplanes and object penetrations, except for objects that need to be in the OFZ due to their navigational functions. For GTU, only the runway OFZ is applicable. The runway OFZ is airspace centered above the runway centerline and extends 200 feet beyond each end of the runway. The elevation at any point of the runway OFZ is the same as the elevation of the nearest point on the runway centerline. The width of the runway OFZ varies with the category of runway and approach visibility minimums. The runway OFZ for Runway 18-36 is 400-feet wide. Currently, Runway 11-29 is only serving small aircraft, so its runway OFZ is 250 feet wide. If Runway 11-29 is upgraded to serve both small and large aircraft in the future, the width of the runway OFZ should be expanded to 400 feet. At the present, several trees that are located west to the Runway 36 end penetrate the OFZ of Runway 18-36 and should be removed. 4.6.8 Obstructions to Threshold Siting Surface (TSS) The Threshold Siting Surface (TSS) is utilized to locate runway threshold in order to meet approach obstacle clearance requirements. The dimensions of TSS vary with the type of aircraft operations, the approach visibility minimums, and the types of navigational instrumentation. Both runways at GTU are currently supporting instrument straight-in night operations and are anticipated to retain the same capability throughout the 20-year planning period. However, the TSS is larger for Runway 18-36 than for Runway 11-29 because Runway 18-36 supports C-II category aircraft while Runway 11-29 supports B-II category aircraft. The TSS for each end of Runway 18-36 begins 200 feet out from each runway threshold with the same elevation as the runway centerline at the threshold, and slopes upward at a ratio of 20 (horizontal) to 1 (vertical). The surface extends 10,000 feet along the extended runway City of Georgetown Airport Master Plan Update 4.17 centerline, with a width of 800 feet at the starting point, increasing to 3,800 feet at the far end of the surface. As shown on the ALP, four residences, one light pole, 13 trees, and airport fence at the northwest corner of the airport property, penetrate Runway 18 TSS. On Runway 36 end, one light pole, two utility poles, three trees, and airport fence at the southeast of Runway 36, penetrate Runway 36 TSS. It is recommended in this study to remove those tree and light pole penetrations, and relocate the utility poles or remove them and bury wire underground. For the residences, the existing PLASI or the proposed PAPI-4 is proposed in this study to remediate the penetrations. The remediation measure using those visual glideslope indicators is discussed in the following subsection. Similar to previous discussion on Part 77 approach surface penetrations, the majority of obstructions to TSS that are identified at Runway 18 end and at Runway 36 end are located within the OFA and are required by the FAA to be removed. Once the clearance of the OFA is completed, the extent of work required to remediate TSS penetrations will be dramatically reduced. The TSS for each end of Runway 11-29 begins 200 feet out from each runway threshold with the same elevation as the runway centerline at the threshold, and slopes upward at an upward slope of 20 (horizontal) to 1 (vertical). The surface extends 10,000 feet along the extended runway centerline, and has a width of 400 feet at the starting point, which increases in width to 3,800 feet at the far end of the surface. As shown in ALP, trees are the main sources of TSS penetrations at both ends of Runway 11- 29. The airport fence at the northeast of Runway 11 end is also an obstruction to TSS. It is recommended to remove all tree obstructions and place obstruction light on the airport fence. If necessary, the landowners' permission will be obtained by the City for removal of trees outside of airport property. The City has no current plans or intentions to follow this recommendation. City of Georgetown Airport Master Plan Update 4.18 4.6.9 Glideslope Qualification Surface (GQS) - Obstruction Remediation Measure As previous discussed, several residences located northeast of the Runway 18 end are obstructing the TSS. This study investigated the possibility to remediate these penetrations to TSS by using the existing PLASI and the proposed PAPI-4. The Glideslope Qualification Surface (GQS) was first investigated in this study to determine the possibility of using the existing PLASI and proposed PAPI-4 as a remediation measure for Runway 18 TSS penetrations. If the GQS is clear, the existing PLASI and the proposed PAPI- 4 can be used to light the penetrations. The GQS for all runway ends at GTU begins at each runway end with the same elevation as the runway centerline at the runway end, and slopes upward at a ratio of 29 (horizontal) to 1 (vertical). This slope corresponds to two-thirds of glideslope descent angle of 3-degree. The surface extends upwards to the Descent Height (DH) associated with each runway end, and has a width of 300 feet at the point of beginning, which increases in width ranging from 1,585 feet to 2,235 feet at the far end of the surface. All TSS penetrations that could be remediated by this measure are clear of the respective GQS. 4.6.10 Visual Glide Slope Indicator (VGSI) Obstacle Clearance Surface-Obstruction Remediation Measure The Visual Glide Slope Indicator (VGSI) obstacle clearance surface was studied to determine whether the aiming angle and the location of the existing PLASI are adequate to clear obstructions, and whether the aiming angle and the location of the proposed PAPI-4 can be achieved. The aiming angle of the existing PLASI is 3.5-degrees, resulting in a slope of 22.9:1 for PLASI obstacle clearance surface. The PLASI obstacle clearance surface begins 300 feet from the face of PLASI on the runway centerline with the same elevation as the runway centerline, and City of Georgetown Airport Master Plan Update 4.19 slopes upward at a ratio of 22.9 (horizontal) to 1 (vertical). The surface flares 10 degrees on each side of the runway centerline, and extends 4 statute miles from its point of origin. As illustrated on the ALP, for Runway 18 end, all penetrations on TSS are outside of the PLASI obstacle clearance surface. As a result, the aiming angle and the location of the existing PLASI are adequate to remediate Runway 18 TSS penetrations, namely, residential structure penetrations to TSS. The nominal approach angle of the proposed PAPI-4 is 3-degrees, resulting in a slope of 32.7:1 for PAPI-4 obstacle clearance surface. The shape of the PAPI-4 obstacle clearance surface is the same as PLASI obstacle clearance surface, except the slope. As illustrated on the ALP, for Runway 18 end, all penetrations on TSS are outside of the PAPI- 4 obstacle clearance surface. As a result, the aiming angle and the location of the proposed PAPI-4 are adequate to remediate Runway 18 TSS penetrations, which are residential structure penetrations. It should be noted that, as previously discussed, those residences located northeast of Runway 18 end are encroaching into the runway OFA. The structures must be removed to comply with FAA standards for ultimate airport development. The City has no current plans or intentions to follow this recommendation. 4.7 AIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN (APPENDIX "C") 4.7.1 Airport Layout Drawing The FAA requires a set of several drawings be prepared for each airport included in the National Plan Integrated Airport System (NPIAS). The set of drawings are collectively referred to as the Airport Layout Plan. Specific drawings prepared for GTU are discussed separately as below. City of Georgetown Airport Master Plan Update 4.20 The recommended airport development is graphically shown on the Airport Layout Drawing (ALD), contained in Appendix "C". This plan is a graphic representation of the airport development program from the existing condition through its ultimate configuration. It is intended to provide adequate airport development planning through the 20-year planning period, and to permit efficient and economical development without the over commitment of financial resources. The ALD is also intended to provide basic guidance in the development of the airport and is a result of comprehensive study and an examination of the many factors that will influence aviation activity at GTU in the years to come. The ALD also provides basic technical data, particularly with regard to the engineering and physical attributes of the airport, but does not provide detailed design solutions. The ALD is the basic document for FAA programming decisions and is generally regarded as the cornerstone upon which future airport development will rest. The ALD was developed using the forecast data prepared for the Airport Master Plan; however, it must be recognized that, should activity projections differ materially from the actual traffic experienced in the years to come, facility demand and requirements may change. For that reason, the ALP should be reviewed periodically and updated as required, particularly if significant changes occur in facility requirements or environmental issues relative to airport operations. 4.7.2 Terminal Area Plan The Terminal Area Plan contained in Appendix "C" illustrates a schematic development plan at GTU by the year 2024 under "W/O NCTA & W/ ATC" scenario. Generally, the recommended development as shown on the Terminal Area Plan consists of the development of T-hangars, FBO facilities, maintenance/storage hangars, automobile parking lots, and expansion of the terminal apron area. Office spaces could also be included in the development scheme. City of Georgetown Airport Master Plan Update 4.21 The proposed development of the terminal area is functionally separated into the northern T- hangar area, the northern commercial/business area, the central office/aviation-related public area including a general aviation terminal, and the southern FBO/corporate area. The major development is planned to occur within the northern T-hangar area and the southern FBO/corporate area during the 20-year planning period. The apron is shown to be expanded during the short-term development plan to improve the aircraft tie-down condition and smooth the aircraft taxiing flow on the apron. 4.7.3 Airspace Plan and Approach Plans An Airspace Plan has been prepared according to the current FAA criteria and based upon the ultimate development identified in this study. The purpose of the Airspace Plan is to prevent the construction of structures or natural growth which would constitute hazards or obstructions to aircraft operating from the airport. Such an ordinance can be an effective method of controlling the height of structures and trees around an airport, and of generally improving land use compatibility in the immediate environs of an airport. However, the airspace planning ordinance cannot be used directly for land use controls. The Approach Surface Plans are also contained in Appendix "C". The purpose of the Approach Surface Plans is to identify the objects which penetrate FAR Part 77 Primary Surface, the inner portion of the FAR Part 77 Approach Surface, and the Threshold Siting Surface for each runway end. More important, these Approach Surface Plans are intended to find feasible solutions to solve these penetrations, to protect these surfaces for the future, and continue to maintain the safe operational conditions around the airport. These obstructions identified in the Approach Surface Plans are discussed previously in the Section 4.6, Other Development Considerations. City of Georgetown Airport Master Plan Update 4.22 4.7.4 Obstruction Survey Drawings As required by the FAA and TxDOT, the Type "C" obstruction survey was conducted at the airport and along the FAR Part 77 Approach Surface of each runway end. New aerial photography was obtained and was the primary source for survey data used in this study. The obstructions to FAR Part 77 Surfaces and Threshold Siting Surfaces are identified along with the remediation methods. It should be noted that the obstructions identified in the Survey drawings are also shown in the Approach Surface Plans as the obstructions. 4.7.5 Property Map Appendix "C" also contains the Airport Property Map, showing the existing airport property. The parcels of land that would be affected by the proposed ultimate airport property include the land located northeast to the Runway 18 end, the lands located southeast and southwest to the Runway 36 end, and a small parcel of land southwest to the Runway 29 end. The proposed avigation easement at each runway end is also shown on the Airport Property Map. This map was completed with information obtained from City's records, but must be considered an approximation. A more detailed, on-site survey will be required in order to determine the actual amounts of land tracts involved. The names of the owners are shown as they are recorded by the City's records. 4.8 AIRPORT LAND USE PLAN The airport Land Use Plan is illustrated in Exhibit 4.4. The recommended on-airport land use plan is primarily based upon aeronautical functions and priorities of land uses, and at the same time is intended to be consistent with the airport existing land use pattern as close as possible. The existing land use program at GTU is well defined and managed. It establishes a solid base for developing the future on-airport land use plan. The off-airport land use plan is generally consistent with the City's Future Land Use Plan. As illustrated in the Land Use Plan, aviation facility needs by the year 2024 could be met by efficiently developing at the eastern side of the airport property. The southwestern quadrant of the City of Georgetown Airport Master Plan Update 4.23 airport property, which is currently as an open area, will not be required for aviation development by 2024. However, if the aircraft activities at GTU grow substantially faster than the projected level in this study, the development of the southwestern side could be considered. The faster-than-the- projected level of growth will likely not occur at GTU. However, to protect the airport, it is recommended that the southwestern quadrant be designated as public/semi-public land use. Additionally, the northwestern quadrant is recommended by the Airport Planning Advisory Committee to be designated as green space land use. This land use designation is to preserve adequate undeveloped land to meet the City's impervious coverage requirements. It should be noted that the entire airport is currently designated as public land use in the City's Land Use Plan. If non-aviation land uses are to be considered for the airport, TxDOT and FAA must be consulted before any major commitment is made. TxDOT and FAA grant agreements (assurances) are specific as to the kinds of activity and operations that may be conducted on airports that have been developed through federal and State funding programs. Within its grant assurances, the City plans to designate and possibly use the southwest quadrant as open space or for the establishment of aviation or non-aviation related industrial or commercial development consistent with the City’s economic development policies. • On-Airport Land Uses - There are two major classifications of airport property: landside, which is where facilities and activities for surface based activities occur, and airside which is where aircraft operations directly related to flight are conducted. As illustrated in Exhibit 4.4, on-airport land uses at GTU are also generally classified into four categories: public/semi-public land use at the southwestern quadrant, green space at the northwest quadrant, airfield, and landside on the east side. The landside is further divided into seven sub-categories based upon their existing as well as the proposed future aeronautical functions. These sub-categories of land uses include T-hangar land use, commercial/business land use, corporate/FBO land use, office/aviation-related public use land use, base aircraft tie-down land use, drainage/water detention land use, and green space. This land use plan is consistent with the existing land use patterns at GTU. City of Georgetown Airport Master Plan Update 4.24 • Off-Airport Land Use - Off-airport land uses shown on Land Use Plan follow the City's Future Land Use Plan. As shown, GTU is surrounded by residential land use, mixed land use, commercial land use, industrial land use, and a business park east of the airport. • Land Use Recommendations - A well-established residential area is located adjacent and north to the existing airport property. Residential facilities within that area have posed several aviation safety issues, including encroaching to runway OFA and RPZ, penetrating FAR Part 77 Primary and Approach Surfaces, and obstructing Threshold Siting Surface. Moreover, the proximity of these residential facilities to Runway 18 end and being directly under the aircraft final approach and departure path have created a lot of aircraft noise concerns in the communities. It is recommended in this study that, as the ultimate land use plan, the City acquire the lands falling within OFAs as the ultimate airport property, and acquire the lands falling within the RPZs but outside the ultimate airport property as avigation easements. Land Use Plans as shown in Exhibit 4.4 graphically depicts this recommendation. The City has no current plans or intentions to follow its recommendation. • Zoning of Airport Property – The City of Georgetown currently has the airport zoned as a Residential Planned Unit Development (R-1 PUD). The R-1 PUD Zoning is a reflection of the planned unit development requirements in existence when the original zoning for the airport was adopted. With the adoption of the Unified Development Code, Planned Unit Development zoning can now be created following a more representative base zoning category related to the airport. It is recommended in this study that the City initiate a rezoning of the existing airport property to Planned Unit Development with Industrial as the underlying base district, with a PUD document consistent with the Ultimate Land Use Map, Rules and Regulations, and Minimum Standards of the Airport. City of Georgetown Airport Master Plan Update 4.25