DRDER N0. c7`3r32 / AP'P'ROVED REVISED AIRPORT LAYOUT FLAN On this the 4th day of Febr~_iary, L~~", ~_ipon mot ion made by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Baldwin, the Co~_~rt unanimously approved by a vote of 4-~D-D, the Revised Airport Layo~_~t Flan, and a~_~thor~i~ed Co~_~nty J~_idge to sign same. a~99a COMMISSIONERS' COURT AGENDA REQUEST PLEASE FURNISH ONE ORIGINAL AND NINE COPIES OF THIS REQUEST AND DOCUMENTS TO BE REVIEWED BY THE COURT. MADE BY: William H. Williams OFFICE: Commissioner, Pct. 2 MEETING DATE: February 24, 2003 TIME PREFERRED: SUBJECT: (Please be specific) Consider, discuss and take appropriate action on recommendation ofKerrville-Kerr County Airport Advisory Board to approve revised Airport Layout Plan and Airport Master Plan Update as presented, and authorize County Judge to sign same. EXECUTIVE SESSION REQUESTED: (PLEASE STATE REASON) NAME OF PERSON(S) ADDRESSING THE COURT: Commissioner Williams, and Paul Knippel, PE, City of Kerrville Director of Public Works. ESTIMATED LENGTH OF PRESENTATION: 15 Minutes IF PERSONNEL MATTER-NAME OF EMPLOYEE: Time for submitting this request for Court to assure that the matter is posted in accordance with Title 5, Chapter SS l and 552, Government Code, is as follows: Meeting scheduled for Mondays: 5:00 P.M. previous Tuesday THIS REQUEST RECEIVED BY: THIS REQUEST RECEIVED ON: All Agenda Requests will be screened by the County Judge's Office to determine if adequate information has been prepared for the Court's formal consideration and action at time of Court meetings. Your cooperation is appreciated and contributes toward your request being addressed at the earliest opportunity. See Agenda Request Rule adopted by Commissioners Court. Page 1 of 2 Paul Knippel From: Michelle Hannah [MHANNAH@dot.state.tx.us] Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 3:50 PM To: cody@bd-c.com; Keith Snodgrass Cc: jglaser@hdrinc.com; paulk@kerrville.org Subject: RE: ALP Status I believe if we can agree to edit a few items with the master plan text, we will be able to publish the final document. The ongoing dilemma of Hwy. 27 still prevails in some small manner. The ALP states that due to the cost of relocation it is not feasible and therefore considered a permanent obstruction. FAA approved the ALP with that statement. The text in the Alternative section does not reflect that same determination and for consistency should include words to that effect. This is mentioned on pages D.2, 1st para., on pages D.4, 2nd para. and on pages D.6, para. 3. I would include a small insert that if the Texas Department of Aviation should alter or make improvements to Hwy. 27, improvements addressing the design standards for the safety areas are demonstrated. Page A.7 states that RW 3-21 has REILs, they do not. Page C.6 states that RW 12/30 currently has REILs, they do not have REILs at this point. Table F1- Please move the time frame of A.15- Acquire Property for future RW 30 RPZ and A.16- Construct Airport boundary Fencing at New Airport Property Line to the 6-10 time frame. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks. Michelle Hannah Project Manager Aviation Division, TxDOT (512)416-4539 e-mail: mhannah dot.state.tx.us »> "Cody Fussell" 02/11/03 04:13PM »> Keith, The mylars were sent to the City of Kerrville for signature last September. It was my understanding that the drawings would be approved, signed, and returned to you early this year. I last spoke with Paul Knippel at the City in early January. I also recieved an email from Michelle before Christmas (see text below), but have never recieved comments. Cody. (Previous E-mail from last December) Hi Cody, Yes, we have a few comments. Did you receive Megan's comments or do I need to forward those to you? Let me know and I will get this out to you by the end of the week. Thanks, Michelle Michelle Hannah Project Manager Bill Williams From: "Paul Knippel" To: Sent: Monday, February 17, 2003 9:18 AM Attach: Agenda Bill to approve Master Plan.doc Subject: Airport Layout Plan and Airport Master Plan Update Commissioner Williams: FYI..attached is the agenda bill that I am submitting for the Feb 25 council meeting... The signature block for local approval on the Airport Layout Plan drawings reads "Title, Airport Sponsor's Representative", which seems to indicate one signature. The agenda bill attached hereto proposes to have two signatures, one from the County and one from the City...an alternative would be to have the Court and the Council designate a single signatory, perhaps Ron Patterson.... Paul «Agenda Bill to approve Master Plan.doc» 2/17/03 BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF RERRVILLE, TEXAS SUBJECT: Approval of Airport Master Plan and Airport Layout Plan FOR AGENDA OF: Feb. 25, 2003 SUBMITTED BY: Paul Rnippel, P.E. Public Works Director DATE SUBMITTED: Feb. 17, 2003 CLEARANCES: EXHIBITS: 1. Copy of Airport Master Plan - Final Draft 2. Final revisions per TxDOT Aviation AGENDA MAILED TO: APPROVED FOR SUBMITTAL BY CITY MANAGER: Expenditure Current Balance Amount Account Required In Account Budgeted Number: (not applicable PAYMENT TO BE MADE TO: APPROVED FOR SUBMITTAL BY ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER: SUbIlKARY STATEMENT The purpose of this agenda bill is to gain Council approval of the Airport Layout Plan and Airport Master Plan Update. The Airport Layout Plan (ALP) is an eleven sheet drawing set that outlines proposed land use and aviation related improvements for a twenty year period. Staff currently has the full sized reproducible mylar drawing set on file. This drawing set has been approved, though not signed, by both FAA and TxDOT Aviation. The next step in the process will be to gain approval by the City Council and the County Commissioner's Court. The drawing set will then be signed by a representative of the Council and a representative of the Court, and then be sent to TxDOT Aviation for their signature. Along with the ALP is a bound document entitled Airport Master Plan Update. The last master plan was completed in 1987. The process for updating that plan, which culminated in the current document, began in 1998. The ALF is included within the Master Plan Update document as 11"x17" exhibits. RECOMMENDED ACTION Staff requests that Council approve the Airport Master Plan Update. the Airport Layout Plan and AGENDAll Page 1 of 1 Comm's Court From: "Comm's Court" To: "Paul Knippel" Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 11:05 AM Subject: Re: Airport Layout Plan Dear Paul - Thank you for your prompt response. Linda ----- Original Message ----- From: Paul Knippel To: 'Comrn`s Court' Cc: Sheila Brand Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 10:12 AM Subject: RE: Airport Layout Plan Linda: There were two items approved on this date by the Court and subsequently approved by the City Council also. One is the Airport Layout Plan and the other is the Airport Master Plan Update. There will be two original Airport Layout Plans that will need signature. I have one in my office and I'm waiting to have another delivered. When I have both in my possession then I will contact you. The Airport Master Plan Update does not require a signature. I am having final copies run and will deliver to you when they are complete. Thank you. Paul Knippel 792-8325 -----Original Message----- From: Comm's Court [mailto:commcrt@ktc.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 3:49 PM To: Paul Knippel Subject: Airport Layout Plan Dear Paul - Do you have the signed documents for this Agenda Item for Commissioners' Court on Feb. 24, 2003? Thank you, Linda Hamilton 3/3/03 ._ 1 ' Revised Draft Report - i i S - ~ , x -~ - - -.~ ~.- ; Municipal Airport/ _ , g _~ Louis Schreiner Meld . Naa~ter Phan Update . ,- ~ ~ ~ _ Ai ,- YXl vfi ~Uf iyJ \ ~i~ -- ~~ Barnard Dunkelberg & Company HDR Engineering, Inc.. r ~ - pw7 Revised Draft Report October 2002 n Kerrville :- Municipal Airport/ Louis Schreiner Field Master Plan Update ~~ Barnard Dunkelberg & Company Cherry Street Building 1616 East 1 5th Street Tulsa, Oklahoma 74120 Phone Number. 918.585.8844 FAX Number. 91 8.585.8857 Email. staff@bd-c.com HDR Engineering, Inc. 2211 South 1.H. 35, Suite 300 Austin, Texas 78741 Phone Number. 512.912.5100 FAX Number. 512.442.5069 Contents Contents aii Tables '' Illustrations vi Inventory Introduction A. i Airport Facilities A.2 Airside Inventory A.5 Landside Inventory A.25 Airport Environs A.29 Forecasts of Aviation Activity Introduction B• ~ Historical Airport Activity Summary B.5 General Aviation Operations Forecast 8-~ Military Operations Forecast 8•~ 1 Operations Forecast By Aircraft Type 8.11 Local and Itinerant Operations Forecast B.12 Peak Period Forecast B.13 General Aviation Based Aircraft Forecast B.14 Summary B.19 Facility Requirements Introduction C• ~ Airside Requirements C.1 Landside Requirements C•~ Summary c. ] 0 Kerrville MunicipaULouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update rrr ^ r ^ V I r Development Concepts and Alternatives Analysis Introduction D.1 Goals for Development D.2 Airside Development Concepts and Alternatives D.3 Landside Development Concepts D.14 Airport Plans Introduction E• ~ Airport Layout Plan E.2 Airspace Plan E.5 Inner Portion of the Approach Surface Plans E.6 Landside Development Area Plan E.14 Airport Property Map E• ~ ~ Land Use Drawing E.t7 Development Program Introduction F•~ Cost Estimates F•t Phasing Plan F.2 Cost Summary F.2 Evaluation of Rates, Fees, and Charges F•8 Financing Plan F.10 Financial Feasibility F.14 Summary F.16 Environmental Overview Introduction G•I Project Setting G.1 Environmental Analysis G2 Appendix One Sample TenantNser Survey Form Appendix Two Environmental Review Agency Letters Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update tv Tables ~ Table A] Approach Procedures A.10 Table A2 All Weather Wind Coverage Summary A.15 Table A3 IFR Wind Coverage Summary A.16 Table A4 Existing Runway Utilization A. ] 8 Table AS Runway 12/30 ARC C-II Dimensional Standards (In Feet) A.20 ' Table A6 Runway 03/21 ARC B-I Dimensional Standards/Small Airplanes Only (In Feet) A.21 Table A7 Runway Protection Zone Dimensions A.24 ' Table A8 Airport Fuel Sales, 1990-1998 A.27 Table B1 Historical Aviation Activity, 1976-1997 B.6 Table B2 General Aviation Operations Forecast, 1997-2018 B.10 Table B3 Summary of Operations by Aircraft Type, 1997-2018 B.12 Table B4 Summary of Local and Itinerant Operations, 1997-2018 B.13 Table B5 Peak Period Aircraft Operations, 1997-2018 B.14 ' Table B6 General Aviation Based Aircraft, 1987-2018 B.17 Table B7 General Aviation Based Aircraft Fleet Mix, 1997-2018 B.18 Table B8 Summary of Aviation Activity Forecasts, 1997-2018 B.2o Table C ] Runway 12/30 Length Requirements C.4 Table C2 General Aviation Facility Requirements, 2003-2018 C.8 Table C3 Fuel Storage Requirements, 2003-2018 C.9 Table C4 Facility Requirements Summary, 2003-2018 C.1 ] Table F] Phase I (0-5 Years) Development Plan Project Costs F.4 Table F2 Phase II (6-10 Years) Development Plan Project Costs F.5 Table F3 Phase III (11-20 Years) Development Plan Project Costs F.6 ' Table Fa Summary of Airport Fees F.9 Table FS Income and Expense Summary F.14 Table G1 Existing and Future Aircraft Operations, 1997 & 2018 G.2 Table G2 Comparative Noise Levels G.3 Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update v i r r i r J J I r r ~` >~ Illustrations Figure A] Airport Location Map A.3 Figure A2 Airport Vicinity Map A_q Figure A3 Existing Airport Layout p.6 Figure A4 Airspace/NAVAIDS Summary A.9 Figure AS All Weather Wind Rose: 16-, 13- & 10.5-Knot Crosswind Components A. ]4 Figure A6 IFR Weather Wind Rose: 16-, 13- & 10.5-Knot Crosswind Components A.17 Figure A7 Generalized Airport Environs Existing Land Use A.30 Figure A8 Generalized Airport Environs Future Land Use A.32 Figure A9 Generalized Airport Environs Existing Zoning A.33 Figure D] Alternative One D.5 Figure D2 Alternative Two D_g Figure D3 Alternative Three D.] I Figure D4 Typical General Aviation Hangar Layout D.16 Figure E] Airport Layout Plan E.3 Figure E2 Airport Airspace Drawing/Plan View Conical Surface E.7 Figure E3 Airport Airspace Drawing/Plan View Runway 30 Approach E.8 Figure E4 Airport Airspace Drawing/Runway Profile Views E.9 Figure E5 Inner Approach Drawing/Runway 12 Plan & Profile E.10 Figure E6 Inner Approach Drawing/Runway 30 Plan & Profile E.11 Figure E7 Inner Approach Drawing/Runway 03 Plan & Profile E.12 Figure E8 Inner Approach Drawing/Runway 21 Plan & Profile E. ] 3 Figure E9 Terminal Area Plan E.15 Figure E1o Airport Property Map E.18 Figure E] ] Land Use Drawing E.19 Figure F] Phasing Plan F.7 Figure G ] Land Use Compatibility Matrix G.6 Figure G2 1997 Noise Contours with Existing Land Use G.7 Figure G3 2018 Noise Contours with Existing Land Use G.9 Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update vi Inventory Introduction Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field is a vital part of the national system of airports, as well as an integral component of the transportation infrastructure that serves the City of Kerrville, Kerr County, and south central Texas. The airport provides transportation facilities that are an absolute necessity for some businesses and area "required" convenience for others. Not to be overlooked, the airport, along with the aviation-related businesses and facilities, represents a vital and significant regional economic asset. In addition to the many aviation-related assets, the airport also provides benefits to local businesses and industries, as well as encourages additional economic development and expansion throughout the City, surrounding communities, and adjacent counties. The existing master planning document, entitled Airport Master PlanlLouis Schreiner Field (i.e., the 1988 MP), was completed in 1988. This planning effort, which will be conducted as an Airport Master Plan Update for the facility, will reevaluate and update the aviation activity forecasts, and revise the existing airfield dimensional criteria in accordance with current Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) design standards. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) revised portions of the airside design criteria for all airports in February 1997, and these design revisions are specified in Change 5 of the Airport Design AC 150/5300-13. In accordance with these changes, the current ALP set must be reevaluated and updated. Additional design and development issues associated with this planning effort update include an evaluation of upgrading the airport's existing Airport Reference Code (ARC), enhancing instrument approach capabilities, and assisting in the recommendations for future general aviation expansion. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update A•1 J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J The requirement for future facilities will be evaluated not only from the standpoint of aviation needs, but also from the relationship of airport facilities to the surrounding land uses and the community as a whole. Therefore, the planning focus of this document will be on the total aviation facility and its environs, with the overall planning goal being the development of an aviation facility that can accommodate future demand that is not significantly constrained by its environs. This initial Inventory chapter will examine three (3) basic elements involved with the existing and future development of Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field. These elements include the airport facilities (runways, taxiways, aircraft parking aprons, hangars, maintenance facilities, ground access, etc.); the relationship of these facilities to the airport/airspace system; and the airport environs. Subsequent chapters will detail the airport's forecasts of aviation activity, the ability of airport facilities to safely and efficiently meet the needs associated with the projected aviation activity, the compatibility of the airport with surrounding land uses, and recommended future development within and around airport property. Airport Facilities As illustrated in the following figures, AIRPORT LOCATION MAP and AIRPORT VICINITY MAP, Kerrville is located in the Texas Hill Country, within the south-central portion of the state, approximately 60 miles northwest of San Antonio. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field, which is owned and operated by the City of Kerrville and Kerr County, is located approximately five (5) miles southeast of the City's Central Business District (CBD), but contained within the corporate boundaries of the city. The airport is designated as Site 24159.A by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and presently classified as a General Aviation (GA) airport by the FAA's National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS). The airport elevation is 1,617 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) and has property consisting of approximately 506 acres. According to information provided by the City of Kerrville, the original Kerrville airport, located four (4) miles west of town on Highway 27, was developed in 1939 on property donated for the purpose by Mr. Louis Schreiner. In 1942 the original airport site was traded acre for acre and additional land was purchased at the present site located five (5) miles southeast of Kerrville on S.H. 27. Louis Schreiner, Hal Peterson, and Charlie Peterson also donated $20,000 to build a hangar at the new airport. Throughout World War II, the airport remained in civilian control, but served as a base for military flight training. From 1945 to 1949 the fixed base operator (FBO) maintained a Civil Aeronautics Administration approved flight training school and provided a full range of services that included aircraft maintenance, repair, and charter service. Mooney Aircraft moved its aircraft manufacturing facilities to the airport in Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update A•2 Tj Barnard Dunkelberg & Company HDR Engineering, Inc. 29 ' t_lano ® ` ~ -- 2s , '~~' ~{~ . - '87~ l 71 ~ 16~-- o ~ _ _ • iii AUSTIN t1o ~ - ~ +i4a Johnson City ~i ~~ Fredencksburg {~ Kcvr N9rVe _ - ~ "~ . - ~'~'"" Kerrville a ~ ~• -_ ~3si - : 39) - - - :~28T. _- -__. _ ____"__ San Marcos e - m Boerne ; ~ .- r :.,_. - 16 B _ - ;183. - - _ New Braunfels Leakey ® Bandera ~ +~ ®Seguin ~~ SAN ANTONIO ~` ~`B0 :83! Hondo •- - 410,E -- - _ ;~: _= y ~~ s7, m Uvalde _ %~1;~ - - - ---- - - ~ - - -- ---- X35: ~. 16 ; t37 _ _ ~~' - Jourdanton e _ ',~ Pearsall Karnes City , 97 , -. 72 .. Kerrville , s7 ~ 7z ® - ~ >~ ®Cotulla Beeville © Appra+rhiateScaki"cZOMles F~CrreAl Airport Location Map Scree: MiericanAufarrabdeAssociation WW Texas RoadA~ 1995 ~~ n Kerrville ~~ Municipal Airport/ Louis Schreiner Field Master Plan Update A3 ~,~.~--~ & ~mpanY ~~ }{pR E 9 neer'~n9 tnc• ~ ~ ., ~. Ciry Park ~ ~~., `Kerrville ~`" t CaN~ --, ~ ; ' 'fit R~+ Hili~ .~' ~ ' f'F, ~ 1 ,~~ H~a ~ ~ , ? ' .yi ~'~ ~; ~ ,~ J ., J J 1 J ~r ~-~ ?z ,` ~/- .~' ~e P~~ _'y %f r~~ F~1 ~----- Kerrville Municip • _ chreiner Feld Louis 5 i,~i;~, grpa,t eon' n ~~ ~~. ,~, ,/ _--- Y _ `~ ~ 3 ', .,; Kerrville Municipal A-rpLouis Schreiner F Master Plan Updat 1953, and the facility even accommodated scheduled passenger service for a brief period the following year. Kerr County has matched funding for improvements at the airport throughout it's history, and in 1952 the City of Kerrville deeded one-half interest in the airport property to Kerr County. In 1978 the City of Kerrville annexed 64 acres along S.H. 27 and 459 acres of airport property into the city limits, with extensive development occurring on the east side of the airport over the next ten years. The FBO and other tenant activities developed around the ramp area as it exists today, and that portion of the airport located west of secondary runway has become completely occupied by Mooney Aircraft Corporation. Airside Inventory • Kerrville Municipal/I.ouis Schreiner Field is currently operated with two (2) runways: Runway 12/30 and Runway 03/21, along with parallel and connecting taxiways that provide aircraft access to the aviation use facilities on the airport. Figure A3, entitled EXISTING AIRPORT LAYOUT, provides a graphic presentation of the existing airport facilities. Initial development of the existing two-runway configuration occurred prior to 1936. Runway 12/30 was extended to 4,400 feet in 1965, with an additional 600-foot extension occurring between 1983 and 1985. The most recent 1,000-foot extension to the approach end of Runway 30 was completed in 1991. Runway 12/30 Designated as the airport's primary-use runway, this facility is 100 feet in width and 6,000 feet in length. The runway is constructed of asphalt and considered in fair condition. An approximate 3,300-foot segment of the runway's base coarse was reconstructed in the summer of 1998, due to pavement failures encountered during the application of a 2-inch runway overlay project. According to 1997 FAA Form 5010 data, this pavement has an existing gross weight bearing capacity of 25,000 pounds single wheel gear configuration. Though past base failures have occurred under construction loads, the pavement has performed satisfactorily under aviation loads in the past. Based on satisfactory historical performance under aviation loads and input from the airport owner, there appears to be no compelling reason to change the 25,000 pound load bearing capacity currently shown on the FAA Form 5010. However, a thorough investigation should be conducted to determine the capabilities of the existing pavement structure, and identify any improvements determined appropriate or needed to protect or strengthen the pavement structure that should be implemented. The runway is equipped with new radio controlled Medium Intensity Runway Lights ~ (MIRE) installed in 1998, with a 4-box Visual Approach Slope Indicator (vASI) ~ Kerrville MunicipaVLouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update A.5 ^ © Approxinate Scale 1"= 2000' Figr~reA3 ExistingAirport Layout O Existing RPZ and Avigation Easement Sasce: Airport Leassirg Play-I(emidle MirctiaalAirport and 1997Airport Layout Play preparedbyFp7 Er~gheenrig,hc n Kerrville ~ °~ Municipal Airport/ ~-J Louis Schreiner Field Master Plan Update A. 6 Barnard Dunkelberg & Company HDR Enaineerina. Inc. serving Runway 30 and a precision approach slope indicator (PAPIs) serving Runway 12. In addition, a localizer antenna facility is located approximately 316 feet west of the approach end to Runway 12. Runway 03/21 Designated as the airport's secondary runway, this facility is 60 feet in width and 4,047 feet in length. The approach end of Runway 03 is currently displaced approximately 123 feet, due to obstructions (i.e., trees) within the approach surface. The runway is constructed of asphalt and in fair condition. According to 1997 FAA Form 5010 data, this pavement has an existing gross weight bearing capacity of 15,000 pounds single wheel gear configuration. As with Runway 12/30, there appears to be no overriding reason to change the load rating of the crosswind runway pavement. However, the pavement should be thoroughly evaluated, with any needed improvements identified by the evaluation being implemented. The completed 1998 pavement improvement maintenance projects to this facility included crack sealing, application of a slurry seal, re-striping and new markings. The runway is also equipped with IvIIRLs, including PAPIs and runway end identifier lights (REILs) serving ~ each runway end. Taxiway System In addition to the runway facilities previously described, the airfield is composed of several taxiways, which provide access to and from the landside aviation use areas. Runway 12/30 is served by afull-length parallel taxiway system and five (5) connector taxiways. The taxiways are 40 feet in width, each is equipped with centerline and edge reflectors, and constructed of asphalt. Runway 03/21 is also served by afull-length parallel taxiway system with two (2) connector taxiways. These taxiways are 40 feet in width and constructed of asphalt, but are not equipped with centerline or edge reflectors. The Runway 03/21 parallel taxiway system was also slurry sealed, with some crack sealing, in conjunction with the other 1998 summer paving projects. At present, each of the parallel taxiway system pavements are rated at an existing gross weight bearing capacity commensurate with the associated runway facility (i.e., 12,500 pounds single wheel gear configuration or less). Air Traffic Service Areas and Aviation Communications Within the continental United States, there are some twent -two eo ra hic areas that Y g g P are under ATC jurisdiction. Air traffic services within each area are provided by air traffic controllers in Air Route Traffic Control Centers (ARTCC). The airspace overlying requirements at Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field are contained Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update A.7 ~ within the Houston ARTCC service area, which includes the airspace in the southern ~ half of Texas and portions of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama. The specified aviation communication facilities associated with the airport include an r Aeronautical Advisory Station (UNICOM) and the San Angelo Flight Service Station ~ (FSS). The UNICOM facility includes a radio communications station designed for the r purpose of providing pilots with information on airport advisory practices when operating to or from uncontrolled airports. The principal function of the FSS is to process flight plans and brief pilots on weather, NAVAIDS, airports, changes in procedures, and new facilities. A ~¢ Airspace and NAVAi~s Analysis ~ Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field is located within general controlled airspace (i.e., Class E Airspace), which offers instrument approach procedures (IAPs). Class E Airspace applies to both general controlled airspace and control zones at airports without air traffic control towers. This area includes the airspace above °~ 14,500 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) within the continental control areas, as well as federal airways and airspace above 1,200 feet above ground level (AGL) or 700 feet ~ AGL for transition areas associated with instrument approaches. Class G airspace, '° which is also located in the vicinity of the airport, applies to uncontrolled airspace not r under the control of any Air Traffic Control (ATC) facility. ' To delineate facilities and airspace meriting examination in relation to Kerrville } Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field, an approximate 25-nautical mile (NM) radius around ~ the airport was evaluated. As can be seen in the following illustration, ~~~ AIRSPACE/NAVAIDS SUMMARY, several regional navigational facilities (i.e., VORTAC and NDB stations) are available to pilots within south central Texas. A vORTAC (vHF ~1 Omnidirectional Range/Tactical Air Navigation) is a ground based electronic -- navigation aid transmitting very high frequency signals, 360 degrees in azimuth ' oriented from magnetic north, with equipment used to measure, in nautical miles, the ~ slant range distance of an aircraft from the navigation aid. A vORTAC provides vOR -~~ azimuth, TACAN Azimuth, and TACAN distance measuring equipment (DME) at one I site. An NDB is a L/MF radio beacon transmitting nondirectional signals whereby the ~ pilot of an aircraft equipped with direction finding equipment can determine his --~ bearing to or from the radio beacon and track to or from the station. There are two vORTACs and one NDB navigational aid located within Kerrville -~- airspace environment. These facilities include: the Center Point vORTAC located 1 approximately 8 NMs southwest of the airport; the Stonewall vORTAC located 11s approximately 25 NMs northeast of the airport; with the NDB being the Shein 263 ER --°• L' outer compass locator (LOM)/initial approach fix (IAF}, located approximately 5 NMs L Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update A.8 © Approxinetes~alei"c 6SlMauticall6fks F~raz'A4 Airspace/NAVAIDs Summary Sarre: SaiMta~ioSectiaelAeraavticalCriarC60tliF~rtionOctober1997. Kerrville _;~, Municipal Airport/ ICI Louis Schreiner Field Master Plan Update Il 9 3~ Barnard Dunketberg & Company HDR Engineering, Inc. J J J southeast of the airport. This region is also traversed by a network of low-altitude published airways (victor airways), which span between the regional ground based vORTAC equipment. Victor airways include the airspace within parallel lines located 4NMS on either side of the airway and extend 1,200 feet above the terrain to, but not ^ including, 18,000 feet AMSL. J Instrumentation and Lighting _.. The specific navigational aids that provide terminal air navigation and instrument approach capabilities to Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field include both the Center Point and Stonewall vORTAC facilities and the Shein 263 ER outer compass ... locator (LOM). The LOM is essentially a low power L/MF radio beacon (i.e., an NDB), which is typically collocated with the outer marker of the instrument landing system (ILS). The Houston ARTCC provides approach and departure services for the airport. ~_ In addition, there are several existing visual navigational aids located on the airport and available to pilots. These include a rotating beacon and a wind indicator. .__ There are presently four (4) published instrument approach procedures at the airport, 1 which are listed in the following table, entitled APPROACH PROCEDURES. Table A 1 J APPROACH PROCEDURES Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update J ._ Type of Approach Runway Designation LOC Runway 30 NDB or GPS Runway 30 VOR/DME RNAV or GPS Runway 12 VOR or GPS-A circling _.._ Source: U.S. Terminal Procedures/South Central (SC) Vol. 3 of 4 ,- The Runway 30 LOC approach has minimum straight-in landing criteria of 413 feet AGL for the ceiling requirement and a visibility requirement of one or one and one- quarter miles, depending upon the category of aircraft. This approach is not __ authorized for Category D aircraft (i.e., aircraft with an approach speed of over 141 ~ knots). The circle-to-land criteria for this approach is 703, 723 or 763 feet AGL for ~ the ceiling requirements, with visibility requirements of one or two and one-quarter miles, depending upon the category of aircraft. ^ I r ~-- Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update A. ] 0 r The Runway 30 NDB or GPS approach has minimum straight-in landing criteria of 713 feet AGL for the ceiling requirement and a visibility requirement of one or two miles, depending upon the category of aircraft. This approach is not authorized for Category D aircraft. The circle-to-land criteria for this approach is 703, 723 or 763 feet AGL for the ceiling requirements, with visibility requirements of one or two and one-quarter miles, depending upon the category of aircraft. The Runway 12 vOR/DME or GPS approach has minimum straight-in landing criteria of 740 feet AGL for the ceiling requirement and a visibility requirement of one or two miles, depending upon the category of aircraft. This approach is not authorized for Category D aircraft. The circle-to-land criteria for this approach is 703, 723 or 763 feet AGL for the ceiling requirements, with visibility requirements of one or two and one-quarter miles, depending upon the category of aircraft. The circling vOR or GPS-A approach has minimum circle-to-land landing criteria of 823 feet AGL for the ceiling requirement and a visibility requirement of one, one and one-quarter, and two and one-half miles, depending upon the category of aircraft. This approach is not authorized for Category D aircraft. 1 Numerous military aircraft operations are conducted in the overlying airspace adjacent to the San Antonio Class C Airspace, due to the close proximity of Randolph and Laughlin AFBs. The nearest Military Operation Areas (MOAS) and special use airspace alert area in the vicinity of Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field are the Randolph 2A & 2B MOA, the Laughlin 2 MOA, and the Alert Area A-640. The Randolph 2A & 2B MOAS are located approximately 201vMs south of the airport, with operations occurring one hour before sunrise and one hour after sunset, Monday through Friday, between 9,000 feet and 17,999 feet AGL. The Laughlin 2 MoA is located approximately 35 NMs southwest of the airport, with operations occurring one hour before sunrise and one hour after sunset, Monday through Friday, between 7,000 feet and 17,999 feet AGL. The special use airspace Alert Area A-640 is located approximately 15 NMs south of the airport, with operations occurring one hour before sunrise and one hour after sunset, Monday through Friday, between 200 feet and 7,500 feet AGL. In addition, there are several existing Military Training Routes (MTRs) located in the vicinity of the airport. These include the vR140 MTIt, located approximately 15 NMs to the north and to the southwest; the IR149 MTR, located approximately 20 NMs to the southwest; and the vxl 123 Milt, located approximately 8 IvMs to the southeast. The existence of the MOAs and the MTRs do not negatively impact the effective use of airspace by civilian aircraft in the vicinity of Kerrville MunicipaULouis Schreiner Field; however, an awareness of these areas and their utilization is important to the users of the airport, as well as in the analysis of operational procedures and runway and navigational aids assessment during the planning process. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update A.I ] Environmental Conditions/Runway Utilization - _ Climatological conditions specific to the location of an airport not only influence the ` layout of the airfield, but also impact the utilization of the runway system. Variations _. in the weather resulting in limited cloud ceilings and reduced visibility typically lower airfield capacity, while changes in wind direction and velocity typically dictate runway usage and also influence runway capacity. _ Ceiling and Visibility. FAA Advisory Circular 150/5060-5, Airport Capacity and ` Delay, describes three categories of ceiling and visibility minimums for use in both _ capacity and delay calculations. Visual Flight Rules (vFR) conditions occur whenever ` the cloud ceiling is at least 1,000 feet above ground level and the visibility is at least Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) conditions occur when the reported three statute miles . _ cloud ceiling is at least 500 feet, but less than 1,000 feet and/or visibility is at least one statute mile, but less than three statute miles. Poor Visibility and Ceiling (PVC) ` conditions exist whenever the cloud ceiling is less than 500 feet and/or the visibility is less than one statute mile. However, meteorological data obtained for South Central Texas from the National Climatic Data Center for use in this study, has been categorized into more specific terms: • vFR conditions -ceiling equal to or greater than 1,000 feet above ground y level and visibility is equal to or greater than 3 statute miles. These conditions occur at the airport approximately 90.5% of the time annually. • Existing Non-Precision Approach minimums (i.e., Runway 30 LOC approach) -ceiling less than 1,000 feet and/or visibility less than 3 statute miles, but ceiling equal to or greater than 413 feet and visibility equal to or _ greater than one statute mile. These conditions occur at the airport approximately 6.8% of the time annually. • Below minimums -ceiling less than 413 feet and/or visibility less than one statute mile. These conditions occur at the airport approximately 2.7% of the time annually. • Potential Category 1 Precision Approach ILS minimums -ceiling less than 1,000 feet and/or visibility less than 3 statute miles, but ceiling equal to or -~ greater than 200 feet and visibility equal to or greater than'/z mile. These ` conditions occur at the airport approximately 8.1% of the time annually. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update A.12 Therefore, in consideration of the airport's existing approach instrumentation (i.e., non-precision instrument approaches to various runway ends) and historical meteorological records, the airport can be expected to experience vi~R conditions approximately 90.5% of the time, IFR conditions approximately 6.8% of the time, and be below minimums approximately 2.7% of the time annually. As can be noted above, the availability of precision approach minimums at the airport with ceilings down to 200 feet and visibilities equal to or greater than th mile, could reduce the percentage of time that the airport is below minimums (i.e., essentially closed) by 1.3% annually. Wind Coverage. Surface wind conditions (i.e., direction and speed) generally determine the desired alignment and configuration of the runway system. Runways, which are not oriented to take advantage of prevailing winds, will restrict the capacity of the airport. Wind conditions affect all airplanes in varying degrees; however, the ability to land and takeoff in crosswind conditions varies according to pilot proficiency and aircraft type. Generally, the smaller the aircraft, the more it is affected by the crosswind component. To determine wind velocity and direction at Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field, wind data to construct the all weather wind rose was obtained for the period 1988-1997 from observations taken in San Antonio, Texas. There were an insufficient number of daily/monthly observations available for Kerrville to provide a reliable data sample for evaluation. The allowable crosswind component is dependent upon the Airport Reference Code (ARC) for the type of aircraft that utilize the airport on a regular basis. According to existing Texas Airport System Plan/Airport Development Worksheet Data (revised 02-20-98), the current Airport Reference Code (ARC) is not defined; however, the projected ARC for the 0-5 year time frame is identified as C-II. It is assumed that this ARC C-II classification applies to Runway 12/30, with Runway 03/21 being specified to accommodate smaller aircraft (i.e., ARC B-I). In consideration of the ARC C-II classification, these standards specify that the 16-knot crosswind component be utilized for analysis. In addition, it is known that the airport will continue to predominantly serve small single and twin-engine aircraft for which the 10.5-knot crosswind component is considered maximum; therefore, both the 16- knot and 10.5-knot crosswind components should be analyzed for this airport. The following illustration, entitled ALL WEATHER WIND ROSE: 16-, 13- & 10.5-KNOT CROSSWIND COMPONENTS, illustrates the all weather wind coverage provided at Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field. Kerrville MunicipaUlouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update A.13 L Figure A5 ALL WEATHER WIND ROSE: 16-, 13- & 10.5-KNOT CROSSWIND COMPONENTS .... Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update L L L ,_' L Source: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Climatic Data Center Station # 12921 -San Antonio, Texas Period of Record - 1988-1997 _,. Total Observations: 87,607 C -~ Kerrville MunicipallLouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update A.14 The desirable wind coverage for an airport's runway system is ninety-five percent (95%). This means that the runway orientation and configuration should be developed so that the maximum crosswind component is not exceeded more than five percent (5%) of the time annually. The following table, entitled ALL WEATHER WIND COVERAGE SUMMARY, quantifies the wind coverage offered by the airport's existing runway system, including the coverage for each runway end. Based on the all weather wind analysis for Kerrville MunicipaULouis Schreiner Field, utilizing the FAA Airport Design Software supplied with AC 150/5300-13, the existing runway configuration provides excellent wind coverage (i.e., in excess of 99%) for both the 16- and 10.5-knot crosswind components. Therefore, no additional runways are required from a wind coverage standpoint. Table A2 ALL WEATHER WIND COVERAGE SUMMARY Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update Runway 16-Knot Designation Crosswind Component Runway 12/30 99.54% Runway 12 73.08% Runway 30 36.42% Runway 03/21 99.69% Runway 03 49.11% Runway 21 60.51% Combined 100.00% 10.5-Knot Crosswind Component 94.06% 70.77% 33.22% 95.49% 48.03% 57.37% 99.75% Source: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Climatic Data Center Station # 12921 -San Antonio, Texas Period of Record - 1988-1997 Total Observations: 87,607 As mentioned previously, the airport is served by four (4) non-precision instrument approaches. In an effort to evaluate the effectiveness of these approaches and analyze the potential benefits of implementing future lower approach visibility minimums, an Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) wind rose has been constructed. The following table and illustration quantifies the wind coverage offered by each runway end in consideration of potential lower precision approach minimums (ceiling less than 1,000 feet and/or visibility less than 3 statute miles, but ceiling equal to or greater than 200 feet and visibility equal to or greater than'/2 statute mile). Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update A.15 From this IFR wind coverage summary, it can be determined that Runway 12 provides -- the best wind coverage (i.e., 94.49% and 99.43%) for the 10.5- and 16-knot crosswind components on the primary runway, with Runway 03 providing superior coverage on ' Runway 03/21. As can be noted from the data, the airport s existing Runway 30 LOC approach does not provide good wind coverage to small general aviation aircraft > Runway Object Free Area Length Runway 12 1,000 1,000 316 (s) Runway 30 1,000 1,000 300 (6) Runway 12/30 Object Free Area Width 800 800 750 (7> Runway Obstacle Free Zone 400 x 6,400 400 x 6,400 (8> 400 x 6,400 Taxiway Width 35 35 40 Taxiway Centerline to Taxiway Centerline 105 105 Not applicable Taxiway Safety Area Width 79 79 79 Taxiway Object Free Area Width 131 13l 131 Taxilane Object Free Area Width l 15 115 --- Taxiway C/L to Fixed or Moveable Object 65.5 65.5 +65.5 Taxilane C/L to Fixed or Moveable Object 57.5 57.5 Not applicable Source: AC 150/5300-13, Federal Aviation Administration. Runway Safety Area (SA): An area adjacent to the runway, which is capable of supporting the occasional passage of aircraft without causing structural damage under dry conditions. Runway Object Free Area (OFA): A two dimensional ground area centered on the runway centerline, which is clear of objects, except for objects that need to be located in the OFA for air navigation or aircraft ground maneuvering purposes. Building Restriction Line (BRL): The BRL encompasses the runway protection zones (RPZs), the run way object free area, the runway visibility zone, NAVAID critical areas, areas required for terminal instrument procedures and areas required for airport traffic control tower clear line of sight. Bold numbers within table indicate existing non-standard conditions. "' Existing runway approach visibility minimums not lower than one statute mile. 12' The existing localizer antenna and airport access road violate the runway SA length boundary. 13' The existing Airport Loop Road violates the runway SA length boundary. j4' The existing SA width can be expanded within the current boundary of the airport. 15~ The existing localizer antenna and airport access road violate the runway OFA length boundary. ib~ The existing Airport Loop Road violates the runway OFA length boundary. ~~~ The existing alignment of S.H. 27 and perimeter fencing violate the runway OFA width boundary. ~8' The standard runway OFZ would be expanded to incorporate the Inner-approach and Inner-transiti onal OFZ boundaries. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update A.20 point five feet (5') above the runway centerline to any point five feet (5') above an intersecting runway centerline within the runway visibility zone (RVZ). There are two existing structures located within Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field's existing RvZ, which violate these specified line-of-sight standards. The first structure, located at the north end of the general aviation ramp, is identified as a large private- use hangar on the current ALP drawing sheet. The second structure, located north of the approach end of Runway 12, is one of the large manufacturing structures associated with Mooney Aircraft Corporation. The FAA will evaluate and make recommendations concerning the future disposition of these Rvz violations through the course of the ALP planning and review process. Runway Protection Zones (RPZs)/Threshold Siting Criteria. The RPZ is trapezoidal in shape and centered about the extended runway centerline. Its inner boundary begins 200 feet beyond the end of the area usable for takeoff or landing. The dimensions of the RPZ are functions of the type of aircraft that regularly operate at the airport, in conjunction with the specified visibility minimums of the approach (if applicable). For runways where declared distances criteria has been implemented, separate approach and departure RPZs are required for one or both ends of the runway. The function of the RPZ is to enhance the protection of people and property on the ground off the end of the runways, as well as regulate and/or control the height of objects within the inner approach surface to the runway. This is achieved through airport control of the property within the RPZ area. This control can be exercised through either fee-simple ownership or the purchase of RPZlavigation easements. According to existing airport property and easement ownership data presented on the 1995 Airport Leasing Plan, the majority of the Runway 30 RPZ is contained within the existing airport boundary; however, only portions of the Runway 12 and Runway 03/21 RPZs are controlled in fee. The Runway 12 RPZ is only partially controlled, with a combination of fee simple and avigation easement ownership, while those portions of the Runway 03/21 RPZs, which extend beyond the airport boundary, are controlled with avigation easements. Various options for acquiring those portions of the existing and possible future RPZs, which extend beyond the boundary of the airport, will be examined in later sections of this document. As can be noted in the following table, entitled RUNWAY PROTECTION ZONE DIMENSIONS, the existing Runway 12/30 approach RPZs are slightly deficient with the dimensions of the specified standard, in consideration of the runway's existing aircraft approach category and approach visibility minimums. These deficiencies are highlighted in bold text within the following table. Kerrville MunicipaULouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update A.23 Table A7 RUNWAY PROTECTION ZONE DIMENSIONS Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update ~~ ~~ - Width at Runway End Item (feet) Width at Outer End (feet) Length (feet) Existing Approach RPZ Dimensions: Runway 12 tl~/30111 500/500 1,000/1,000 1,700/1,700 --- Runway 03/21 250/250 450/450 1,000/1,000 ~ Required Approach RPZ Dimensions for Various Visibility Minimums: Not lower than 1 Statute Mile, i Small- Aircraft Exclusively 250 450 .1,000 it Not lower than 1 Statute Mile, - Approach Categories A & B 500 700 1,0 00 Not lower than 1 Stattaite Mile, . `I Approach Categories C & D 500 1,0.10 1,700 -- Not lower than 3/4 Statute Mile, All 1,000 1,510 1,700 Aircraft Lower than 3/4-Mile, All Aircraft 1,000 1,750 2,500 ~ Required Departure RPZ Dimensions for Various Appro ach Categories: Small Aircraft Exclusively :! Approach Categories A & B 250 450 1,000 _ Large Aircraft Approach Categories A & B 500 700 1,000 I ~ Large Aircraft Approach Categories C & D 500 1,010 1,700 I Source: FAA Advisory Circulaz 150/5300-13, "Airport Design." Bold numbers withi t bl i di t i ti d d di i n a e n ca e ex s ng non-stan ar con t ons. "~ Does not comply with the specified Category C standard for not lower than I statute mile approach v isibility minimums. Each of the airport's runway ends was also reevaluated for compliance with the applicable threshold siting criteria as defined in FAA's Airport Design AC. Based upon this assessment, the approach surface to each of the runways has adequate clearances over adjacent roadways and no existing obstructions were identified. However, these threshold-siting requirements must be reexamined in conjunction L with any future improvements or changes to the airport's approach visibility minimums. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update A.24 Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace. The criteria contained in Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77, Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace, apply to existing and proposed manmade objects and/or objects of natural growth and terrain (i.e., obstructions). These guidelines define the critical areas in the vicinity of airports, which should be kept free of obstructions. Secondary areas may contain obstructions if they are determined to be non-hazardous by an aeronautical study and/or if they are marked and lighted as specified in the aeronautical study determination. Airfield navigational aids, as well as lighting and visual aids, by nature of their location, may constitute obstructions; however, these objects do not violate FAR Part 77 requirements, as they are essential to the operation of the airport. According to the current Airport Obstruction Chart OC 5690, published in September 1994, the current approach surfaces for Runways 12 & 30 are classified as non- precision instrument. The dimensions for these non-precision approach surfaces measure 500 feet at their inner width, 3,500 feet at their outer width, and extend for a horizontal distance of 10,000 feet, at an approach slope angle of 34 to 1. Runways 02 and 20 are classified as visual. The dimensions for these visual approach surfaces measure 500 feet at their inner width, 1,500 feet at their outer width, and extend for a horizontal distance of 5,000 feet, at an approach slope angle of 20 to 1. Based on these defined dimensions, several obstructions have been identified within the primary, transitional, approach, horizontal, and conical surfaces. The majority of the obstructions in close proximity with the airport are associated with trees; however, a portion of the Airport Loop Road (i.e., the primary entrance to the airport) and several power poles located along S.H. 27 are located within the existing FAR Part 77 transitional surface. In addition, there are several existing terrain and tree obstructions located north and northeast of the airport, within the horizontal and conical surfaces. These surfaces will be reevaluated in conjunction with any future changes to the airport's approach instrumentation, which may require an alteration or change to the runway's existing Part 77 surfaces. Landside Inventory The major components of a general aviation airport's landside development are the aircraft parking aprons and other on-airport components, including such elements as storage hangars, maintenance facilities, and access roadways. Each of these components, located at Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field, will be discussed in detail in the following narrative, and were illustrated on the previous figure, entitled EXISTING AIRPORT LAYOUT. Kerrville MunicipaULouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update A.25 Aprons L There is one major apron area at the airport, located east of the approach end of Runways 12 and 02, which is available for aircraft parking and storage. This general aviation apron area consists of approximately 5.0 acres and is constructed of concrete, ~~ which is generally in good condition. It can accommodate aircraft parking (i.e., tiedowns), as well as provide access to existing Fixed Base Operator (FBO) hangars and aircraft maintenance facilities. ~ Hangars, Airport Structures & Associated Facilities --- There are several public and private structures located on airport property, which are described in the following text. --- General Aviation Facilities. The airport currently provides a variety of facilities that serve general aviation operators. These facilities are located along the east side of the ~, two runways, and generally consolidated along the existing apron area. The airport is -- presently served by one FBO, which has office and hangar facilities located at the north end of the general aviation ramp. The FBO provides mobile fueling, aircraft maintenance, and storage. There are two (2) additional aircraft maintenance and --- service hangars located within the existing commercial, general aviation development f area. One facility is located at the south end of the general aviation ramp, with the ~ remaining facility sited near the mid-point of Runway 12/30. In addition to the --•. aircraft tiedown facilities described previously, the airport offers a variety of aircraft J storage facilities (i.e., six T-hangars, ten shed hangars, and two larger corporate-type hangars) to serve both based and itinerant aircraft operators. A detailed description of __ the existing general aviation facilities, which includes dimensions, year of I construction, and condition, is presented on Figure E9, entitled TERMINAL AREA PLAN. ~~ Existing hangar occupancy rates are near 100 percent. ~ Aviation-Related Manufacturing Facilities. Mooney Aircraft Corporation has been r manufacturing aircraft at Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field since 1953. The _.. existing building complex is located on the west side of Runway 03/21, just north of + the approach end of Runway 12, and is incorporated within an existing leasehold of approximately 50.6 acres. Mooney presently manufactures four (4) models of 4-seat _.. single engine aircraft; however, there are plans to cease production of the two "short- body" Mooneys (i.e., the Allegro and Encore) and offer two (2) new single engine aircraft to the product line. These include a new entry-level aircraft, the 1v~20S Eagle, _. and ayet-to-be-named 4-seat pressurized aircraft. Vehicular access to the manufacturing facility from S.H. 27 is provided via Mooney Road, located just west of the approach end to Runway 12. The southern portion of this roadway presently _. intersects the existing airport boundary. r i r ^~ Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update A.26 I r Fuel Storage Facility. Aviation fuel is currently stored in one location on the east side of the airport. The storage site is located north of the existing general aviation development area and near the terminus of Airport Loop Road. The facility consists of three above ground tanks, which include one 10,000-gallon 100LL tank, one 12,000-gallon Jet A tank, and a 600-gallon MO tank for vehicles only. The existing storage facility is owned by the City of Kerrville and leased by Kerrville Aviation (i.e., the existing Fixed Base Operator). According to existing airport fuel flowage records maintained by the City of Kerrville, overall fuel sales have increased at the airport since 1991 at an annual growth rate of over seven percent (7.2%), with gallons sold increasing in 1998 by almost nine percent (8.7%) over 1997 figures. In addition, Jet A fuel sales represented approximately 58% of the total fuel sales at the airport for 1998. A summary of the airport's historic annual fuel sales is presented in the following table, entitled AIRPORT FUEL SALES, 1990-1998. These fuel flowage statistics reflect the level of existing business-related general aviation activity that is occurring at the airport and supports the perceived growth that has occurred within this general aviation sector over the past several years. Table As AIRPORT FUEL SALES, 1990-1998 Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Layout Plan Update Year Total (gallons) 100LL Jet A 1990-91 169,725 --- --- 1991-92 190,175 --- --- 1992-93 206,200 --- --- 1993-94 222,475 --- --- 1994-95 220,050 --- --- 1995-96 225,667 --- --- 1996-97 254,096 --- --- 1997-98 276,245 115,740 160,505 1998-99 343,594 134,213 209,381 Source: City of Kerrville Airport Administration Records Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update A.27 L Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF). Kerrville MunicipaULouis Schreiner Field is not presently FAR Part 139 certificated and therefore is not required to have a designated ARFF facility located on the airport. However, fire protection services for the airport are provided by the City of Kerrville Fire Department. Aviation-Related or Non-Aviation Development. The existing ALP identifies two y potential industrial development areas on the airport, which do not have airside access to the runway/taxiway system. The first site, located east of the existing general aviation development area and on the east side of Airport Loop Road, consists of r approximately 10.8 acres, which is presently subdivided into five (5) lots. The second site, located north of the approach end of Runway 30 and also on the east side of Airport Loop Road, consists of approximately 27 acres. This site, as depicted on the current ALP, would accommodate the relocation of a segment of Airport Loop Road and offer some lots with the potential for airside access. Ground Access °- Ground access is an important element in the overall ability of an airport to function ~ properly. Not only is it vital that airport users have easy access to and from the airport's many general aviation facilities using ground transportation, but also surface --~ transported freight must be easily shipped to and from cargo and other facilities J located on airport property. Also, because airports are employment centers, proper access for people employed on airport property must be provided. The existing -- system of ground access for Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field is discussed in the following paragraphs. -- Vehicular Access. The airport is easily accessible to vehicles utilizing the existing state and federal highway system. State Highway 27 (S.H. 27), which is located along the southern boundary of the airport, provides direct access to downtown Kerrville, -_-. located approximately five (5) miles to the northwest. S.H. 27 is a two-lane highway J that intersects with S.H. 16 just south of Main Street. S.H. 16 also intersects with Interstate 10 (I-10) approximately two (2) miles north of Kerrville, as does S.H. 27, __ which intersects I-10 approximately fifteen (15) miles east of the airport, just east of Comfort, Texas. _.. S.H. 27 is linked to the airport via Airport Loop Road, which provides access to the existing east side general aviation development areas from around the approach end of Runway 30. Mooney Road intersects with S.H. 27 at the west end of airport _.. property, just west of the approach end to Runway 12, and provides public access to ~ Mooney facilities located on the west side of Runway 03/21. Mooney Road also r intersects with Peterson Farm Road north of the Mooney facilities. r r Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update A.28 Airport Environs As previously described, Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field is located approximately five (5) miles southeast of the Kerrville Central Business District (CBD), but contained within the corporate boundaries of the city. A proper inventory of current land uses within the environs of an airport, along with the recommendations of the City/County Comprehensive Plans, is important in an airport planning effort so as to ensure land use compatibility with future airport development. Therefore, a description of both the existing and future land patterns, including existing zoning designations within the environs of the airport, is presented in the following text. Existing Land Use Due to the airport's location outside of the urbanized portion of the city, the airport is surrounded by a variety of land use categories ranging from agriculture/open space and residential to commercial and industrial uses. The majority of development in the vicinity of the airport is located west and northwest of the facility and extends back toward the urbanized area of the city. This development is dominated by rural residential subdivisions, which are predominantly located west of S.H. 27 and adjacent to the Guadalupe River. It should also be noted that the majority of this residential development is located outside the Kerrville Corporate Boundary. Generally, the areas north and south of the airport are dominated by agricultural land uses with a ' mixture of rural residential. A rural residential subdivision is located directly east, and adjacent to the eastern boundary of the airport. Further to the east of the airport, the terrain becomes increasingly hilly and is generally undeveloped, with the exception of some rural residential uses. The following figure, entitled GENERALIZED AIRPORT ENVIRONS EXISTING LAND USE, illustrates the current land uses in the vicinity of Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field. Future Land Use The City of Kerrville adopted the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Strategy in September 1997, which specifies future land use development recommendations within a study area boundary that includes both the City and an expanded area of Ken County. The plan identifies several potential residential growth areas surrounding the city, which are within, or adjacent to, the existing corporate boundaries. Four (4) of these growth areas are located within the southeast quadrant of the city and sited approximately 2 miles northwest of the airport along the extended centerline of Runway 12. A potential population growth estimate of over 3,500 residents is predicted within these designated areas. There are no growth areas identified in direct ~ proximity with the airport and no future land use designations identified for the Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update A.29 r ^ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J ~~ Barnard Dunkelberg & Company HDR Engineering, Inc. ~, Kervilte ~ , - Uetean. Kerrville Hospital ,~ .- C,~ ~ , -~ ' 27 , ; _ --~ ,- Flan ~~ IIJkx\~ Rat Radr Palk hn H~/bo, ~ / , r I ~ `~ H~ y^ ~_/ ~~ ~ ~ ~~nted Valley ~~'~`~ .f~'''-' vii Kerrville Municipal Airport/ Louis Schreiner Field :: ,- \\`~~~ _ ~ ~~~/ . \~ , r. ~`,lt/ ~~ }~;~ , --~' © Apprau~inaMScalel"=640' Fg~A7 Ger~ralized Airport Environs Existing Land Use E~ Kerrville City Limits Public !~ Residential Agricultural ~ Commercial ( Industrial Sdirce: City of HemiNe aMlrgrdm Sheet Mao Pibfished by Texas 7raNs,1997 ardLand Ilse Surrey conducted byFLl4Figineerr~. hc, August 19~. /' __; ' Kerrville ~~ Municipal Airport/ Louis Schreiner Field Master Plan Update A 30 county properties, which surround the airport. However, as identified previously, there are numerous rural residential subdivisions located directly west and northwest of the facility, which could be affected by increasing levels of aviation activity. Future land uses, as reflected by the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Strategy are depicted on the following illustration, entitled GENERALIZED AIRPORT ENVIRONS FUTURE LAND USE. Existing Zoning The City of Kerrville has an adopted zoning ordinance and map to guide the development of property within its corporate boundary. The airport is currently recognized within the Code of Ordinances of the City of Kerrville as an Airport District. The Airport District Boundary encompasses all of the existing airport property and includes land located west of Mooney Road, which >ts also within the city's corporate boundary. As supported by the previously presented existing and ' future land use illustrations, the southeast quadrant of the city is zoned for various categories of residential use, which include single family, residential cluster, and multi-family residential uses. Other zoning districts located within the southeastern boundary of the city include a Public and Institutional District, a Guadalupe River District, and a combination professional office/small retail district. According to information provided by the Aviation Division of TXDOT, the City of Kerrville and Kerr County adopted the Height Zoning Ordinance for the area around the airport on July 16, 1992. Runway 30 was zoned as a Precision Instrument Runway (PIR), Runway 12 was zoned as aNon-Precision Instrument Runway with visibility down to 3/a-mile (NPI-3/a) and each end of Runway 03/21 was zoned as aNon-Precision Instrument Runway with utility standards (NPI-U). Generalized existing zoning boundaries, as reflected by the Code of Ordinances, are depicted on Figure A9, entitled GENERALIZED AIRPORT ENVIRONS EXISTING ZONING. Kerrville MunicipaULouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update A31 J J J J J J J Barnard Dunkelberg & Company HDR Engineering, Inc. ,- Kernl~ -~ `~ vete,ans ~Cerrville Hospital ,, ham., yy \ k ' 4a' t n ~F ~~ ~ ' \ \ ~ Har Rack ~_, . ,a_;' I~ Park ,~~ aar, P ~ , ~~ ~ ~ .~~ ~~: tom' ~. ~~i , ,.r ~-t~ r.-- ~t~~ r~~~ - f { a l~ik i i .r. i _~'~. _- ~,-- _- ,_(, H~~, j, '. aeav~r Jam" , ~ / ~- ~~ ~/ ~ Kerrville Municipal Airport/ Louis Schreiner Field ~\ ~ - - - i.~~~' - \~~~~;~ 1 s ~' ~_ - ~ \ wry y '~ ~~'~ , ~:~ ", '' ~` ~ I i ~~ ~ 27 ~~~ ~ ~~ ~, --- J v -, ~ ~_ © Apprttrimate5eakl"c2640' FigureAB Generalized Airport Environs Future Land Use ® Kerrville City Limits Likely New Residential Growth Area Sarce: City of KemiYe and Dram Street Mao Riblished hl' Texas Trails,1997 aid City of Kerrville, Texas Comprehensive Play Land Use strategy ordi~ce 9522 Kerrville '""':. Municipal Airport/ ~- Louis Schreiner Field Master Plan Update a~ punkelb~9 ~ CornPanY ~~ ~pR E glneering, Inc. ~;' ~errviile F; ~ ` ~„~/ c ~ ~' I' ~~ ~. •[~°' ~~ ~.~'~ at Airp°rt~ ~' Kerr~i~5chre riterp field i ~, Louis ~~~.--'~ . r ,~~ t~ ~' . ~`k` ~~~~ ~~ ~- ~ 3. 4~ ~'~ I ~~~ ,+ \~`\y '\ ,T` ~~~ 1 i ~, ~~` ~ \ . ,,.,, \j,,-, f I~ i~ ~ f ~ - 1 ~ '- ,, r~ ~~ ~i~ ~~~ ~ ~.~ ,~`'`~/ Z.,c ,~ ti`~% I i ,, i' ~-~' Z \~ ~~ ~~ ti ~, _ sao' ~s~1" ~ s ~~stin~ Zpn~ © ~~~ putrlic a~ Institutional ~,,,,,~y ~nera~i~~ A~ j ~ •• -~ ® Kerrville City Limits Airport District Residential - Comrpercial eYT~T~'1~~ saw cxrr or ~ard~ ~ `r~ 9~-o~,~d ~acyotx Kerrville L.--~ Municipal Atrp~ouis Schrei aa~ Master plan Up Forecasts of Aviation Activity Introduction f The orecasting of future aviation activity in terms of aircraft operations and based -- aircraft at Kerrville Municipal/I.ouis Schreiner Field serves as a significant basis for ` analyzing existing airport facilities and identifying future needs and requirements for these facilities. Forecasting, by its very nature, is not exact; however, it does - establish some general parameters for development and, when soundly established, ` provides a defined rationale for various development activities as demands increase. Aviation activity forecasting generally commences by utilizing the present time as an ` initial point, supplemented with historical trends obtained from previous year's activity and recorded information. This data has evolved from a comprehensive -' examination of historical airport records and recent planning documents relative to L the airport (i.e., the 1988 Airport Master Plan/Louis Schreiner Field, FAA's APO TAF summary and Form 5010-1 data, and the FAA Aviation Forecasts Fiscal Years 1998- - 2009). These documents were assembled in different years, making the base year L data quite variable, and emphasizing the need for establishing awell-defined and well-documented set of base information from which to project future aviation L activity trends. Prior to an examination of current and future activit levels at the ai ort, there are Y IP ` several conditions and assumptions, which should be noted, that form the basis or foundation for the development of the forecasts contained herein. These statements _- cover a wide variety of physical, operational and socioeconomic considerations, and although not necessarily in order of importance or priority, include: __ Weather Conditions. A sufficient amount of existing weather data (i.e., ` visibility, ceiling and wind conditions) for Kerrville Municipal/Louis Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update B.l Schreiner Field were unavailable for analysis from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAH). Therefore, NOAA weather data was obtained for San Antonio located approximately sixty (60) miles to the southeast. With the exception of very few days annually, the airport is not adversely affected by poor weather conditions. Visual Flight Rules (VFR) meteorological conditions are experienced approximately 90.5% of the time annually; therefore, aircraft can operate at the airport on a regular basis throughout the year, with limited interruption due to weather. The potential negative impact of poor weather conditions on the operational capability of the airport was documented in the previous chapter of this document. This information will be analyzed and evaluated in later chapters regarding the identification of potential instrument approach facility enhancements and the preparation of development alternatives for their implementation. Airport/Community Location, Proximity and Role. The City of Kerrville is uniquely situated within the heart of the "Texas Hill Country", located one hour northwest of San Antonio and two hours west of Austin by automobile. This area has long been identified as a thriving tourist and retirement community, dating back to the 1920s when Kerrville was first recognized as having one of the best climates in the country. At present, the Kerrville Convention and Visitors Bureau welcomes approximately one million visitors annually, with the area generating more tourism dollars than any other non-metro county in the state. The airport is also conveniently located adjacent to the Kerrville downtown business and financial district (approximately five miles to the southeast), yet far enough to minimize the occurrence of overflights of the city. Vehicular access to the airport from downtown Kerrville is provided by State Highway 27 (S.H. 27), which extends southeastward from the city. Regional Socioeconomic Conditions. The existing socioeconomic condition of a particular region has historically impacted aviation activity within that area. The two primary socioeconomic indicators, which are often analyzed in the forecast of aviation activity, are population and employment statistics. According to March 1998 population estimates prepared by the U.S. Bureau of the Census for July 1, 1997, the population of Kerr County was projected at 42,623 residents and reflects an approximate 2.3% annual growth rate since 1990. According to 1995 census data, approximately 45% of Kerr County's population (estimated at 18,187 residents) resides in the City of Kerrville, which is the county seat. Population projections for Kerr County, were obtained from the Texas State Data Center publication, entitled Kerrville MunicipaVLouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update B.2 L Projections of the Population of Texas and Counties in Texas by Age, Sex, and Race/Ethnicity for 1990-2030, and reflect four possible projection scenarios. The 1990-94 Migration (90-94) Scenario, forecasting an average ` annual growth rate of 2.35% through the year 2030, was selected as the -- preferred forecast. This compares to a projected statewide average annual growth rate of approximately 1.7% for the same period, utilizing the same migration scenario. L According to the Kerr Economic Development Foundation, "the local economy is fueled by light industry, headquarters operations, tourist and -- convention business, medical and health care services, retirement living, retail businesses, and the financial and real estate sectors". The annual in- migration of retirees, seasonal residents and visitors to the region has °~ prompted a steady expansion of employment opportunities within the health care sector, tourism and local services, which complement Kerrville's well established manufacturing base. The health care industry is the major "` employer within the city and consists of three major hospitals, including numerous health care and retirement facilities, which employ approximately 2,600 workers. The manufacturing sector of the local economy is led by Mooney Aircraft Corporation, with aircraft and parts manufacturing facilities located at Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field. Mooney has produced single engine aircraft at this facility since the early 1950s and currently employs over 600 local residents. In addition, James Avery Craftsman, Inc., a local jewelry design and manufacturing facility m employing approximately 300 workers, has been creating original jewelry in the area for over 40 years. The Kerrville area tourism and recreation L industry is dominated by activities associated with the Guadalupe River; _„_ however, it is estimated that the local hunting industry generates over 14 million dollars annually to Kerr County. w The primary trade territory or "regional service area" includes all or part of five counties (i.e., Kerr, Bandera, Gillespie, Kendall, and Kimble), with an estimated population in excess of 63,000. The area's reputation for "Quality _.. of Life" also attracts a diverse workforce that benefits from numerous L customized training programs that provide skilled workers to support local industries. These factors all contributed to a low 1997 unemployment rate --~ of 2.4%. L • Community Support. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field benefits -~ from the support of the city and county government, as well as local industry and the residents of Kerrville. The airport is recognized as a vital City asset, Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update B.3 which contributes to the stability and the future of the area's economy. The overall position of the community is one of continued growth and development, with special focus on the impetus that the airport can provide to attract additional economic and aviation-related development to the region. Additionally, many of the smaller Ken County communities surrounding Kerrville, and much of the "Texas Hill Country" region benefit from the close proximity of a regional aviation facility and, in turn, provide an economic base that can attract additional based aircraft, as well as industrial business development to the airport. J • Facilities Potential. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field currently serves an important role to general aviation operators within the "Texas Hill Country" region. From a runway length standpoint, it is the only airport within the five-county "regional service area" that can accommodate the operation of larger general aviation, business jet aircraft. According to Texas Airport System Plan data sheets printed in February 1998, there are future plans to upgrade the Runway 12/30 Airport Reference Code (ARC) to C-II. This proposed ARC upgrade would likely be required based upon increasing levels of business jet activity, which are presently occurring at the facility. In addition, the airport provides excellent general aviation facilities and aviation-related services to accommodate a variety of general aviation users. These existing landside aviation facilities can be expanded and/or new facilities can be developed as needed, in response to increased aviation- related demand. • Negative or Neutral Factors. Two factors have been identified, which could have a potential negative or neutral impact on the future development of Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field. These include the resolution of existing and future non-standard conditions associated with currently specified FAA ai~eld dimensional criteria, and the development issues associated with implementing lower instrument approach visibility minimums at the airport. The first issue relates to the airport's future design standards with respect to existing airside dimensional criteria and instrument approach capability. It is necessary at times for growing and expanding airports to update their runway and taxiway design standards. These design upgrades or downgrades are typically necessitated by changes in the specified "design aircraft" for the airport (i.e., larger aircraft and/or aircraft with faster approach speeds), but Kerrville MunicipaVLouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update B.4 L could also be dictated by changes in the airport's instrument approach capabilities. Based on existing and projected aircraft utilization, the design standards for the primary runway at Kerrville Municipal must be upgraded. Due to this proposed ARC upgrade for Runway 12/30 and the numerous non- , standard conditions identified by the airport standards compliance inventory for this design category, various development alternatives will have to be investigated to identify the most appropriate resolution to these design .-- deficiencies. L Th d i e secon ssue relates to the airfield development impacts of enhancing the -- instrument approach capabilities to Runway 12/30. As also identified in the ~ airport standards compliance inventory, lowering the existing approach ~ visibility minimums to 3/a mile or less would impose more restrictive setback requirements to development (i.e., buildings, roadways, etc.), as well as require the application of more restrictive dimensional criteria. In addition, ^ the evaluation of new wind and weather data presented in the Inventory -' chapter, identified Runway 12 as the optimum runway end for a low visibility instrument approach from a wind coverage standpoint. This ^ finding, along with the implications of new precision instrument approach ~~' technology, will likely require additional alternative evaluations to identify I r future instrument approach development recommendations. Certainly, the existing operational constraints associated with the airport's instrument approach and navigational aids will be included in this analysis: Each of these considerations and assumptions has been incorporated into the forecast ~~ of aviation operations and based aircraft for Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner { >r Field. Historical Airport Activity Summary L A tabulation of Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field's historical aviation activity since 1976 is presented in Table B1, entitled HISTORICAL AVIATION ACTIVITY, 1976-1997. _,.. This table presents a summary of historic aviation activity at the airport, which 1 includes four categories of aircraft operations, as well as total operations. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update B.5 Table B 1 HISTORICAL AVIATION ACTIVITY, 1976-1997 Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update Year"' General Aviation Operations Itinerant Local Air Taxi Operations Military Operations Total Operations 1976 25,000 16,000 0 0 41,000 1977 25,000 16,000 50 0 41,050 1978 25,000 16,000 50 0 41,050 1979 26,500 16,800 50 0 43,350 1980 16,000 25,000 50 0 41,050 1981 16,000 25,000 50 0 41,050 1982 9,000 13,500 66 0 22,566 1983 4,800 7,200 50 0 12,050 1984 6,200 9,300 100 0 15,600 1985 7,500 12,000 100 0 19,600 1986 7,500 12,000 100 0 19,600 1987 7,500 12,000 100 0 19,600 1988 7,652 12,334 107 0 20,093 1989 7,500 12,000 100 0 19,600 1990 15,846 25,354 100 0 41,300 1991 10,000 16,000 100 0 26,100 1992 10,000 16,000 100 0 26,100 1993 10,000 16,000 100 0 26,100 1994 10,000 16,000 100 0 26,100 1995 13,000 21,000 100 0 34,100 1996 13,000 21,000 100 0 34,100 1997`2j 19,400 23,400 101 0 42,901 Source: FAA's APO/TAF FY 1976-2015. `~' Complete Calendar Year Figures. `~~ According to TXDOT Aviation Division estimates, the total operation count for 1999 was 42,901. As can be seen, total aircraft operations (an operation is defined as either a takeoff or a landing) at Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field have continually fluctuated since the early 1980s. Estimated annual counts have ranged from a low of 12,050 operations in 1983 to a near high of approximately 42,901 operations in 1997, with Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update B.6 several fluctuations occurring in between. Overall, these fluctuations appear to coincide with national trends in the general aviation industry occurring during the 1980s and early 1990s, which have impacted aircraft sales, the number of hours flown, and initiated a steady transition to business-related uses of general aviation aircraft. i r ~~ r L L L L L L General Aviation Operations. General aviation activity is typically more directly related to economic conditions than commercial airline operations. At Kerrville MunicipaULouis Schreiner Field, general aviation activity has fluctuated during the historic period, with operations increasing or decreasing in excess of thirty percent (30%) annually on numerous occasions. Flight training activity has not increased at the airport in recent years; however, the facility has begun to accommodate increasing numbers of itinerant business jet operations, which are currently estimated at twenty (20) operations per week. Air Taxi Operations. Generally speaking, air taxi operations conducted at general aviation airports are generated by a company or individual performing air passenger and/or cargo transportation service, on a non- scheduled basis over unspecified routes. These operations are typically conducted with light aircraft (i.e., maximum payload capacity of 7,500 pounds), but could include larger aircraft capable of accommodating less than 60 passengers. Due to the relatively low number of these operations recorded at the airport, given the airport's existing air cargo activity, it is likely that a significant percentage of this activity is being recorded within the general aviation category. • Military Operations. Due to the numerous air force bases (AFBS) and army airfields (AAFs) located within the state, military operations have not played a role at the airport in the past, with no historic military operations being recorded at the airport. This lack of, or infrequent use of, the airport by military activity will likely continue throughout the planning period. General Aviation Operations Forecast In past years, general aviation activity throughout the country has been constrained by annual increases in aircraft ownership costs. These increases, which resulted from escalating product liability insurance expenses imposed upon general aviation aircraft manufacturers, reduced new general aviation aircraft shipments by approximately Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update B.7 ninety-five percent (95.5%) between 1979 and 1993. However, the product liability reforms contained in the General Aviation Revitalization Act of 1994 established an eighteen (18) year limit on product liability lawsuits against general aviation aircraft and component manufactures (for aircraft of 20 seats or less). The product liability reforms contained in this act have been slowly increasing the availability of new affordable aircraft, as well as reducing the ownership and operation costs of existing aircraft. According to the General Aviation Manufacture's Association, new aircraft shipments increased over thirty percent (30.7%) for the first three quarters of 1997, marking the third consecutive year for an increase in demand for general aviation aircraft. In addition, the July 27, 1998 issue of Avweb's Avflash [Avflash@avweb.com] reports that general aviation aircraft shipments have increased over sixty percent (60%) during the first six months of 1998. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field and two additional aviation facilities (i.e., Gillespie County Airport and Kimble County Airport) primarily accommodate existing general aviation activity within the previously defined "regional service area", which includes all or part of five counties (i.e., Kerr, Bandera, Gillespie, Kendall, and Kimble). Each of the airports is designated as a general aviation facility in accordance with National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS) guidelines; however, due to available runway length, Kerrville can better accommodate the operation of the larger general aviation aircraft within the sector. Gillespie County Airport, located approximately twenty-three (23) miles northeast of Kerrville and three (3) miles southwest of Fredericksburg, is a public-use facility, while Kimble County Airport, also designated as a public-use facility, is located approximately forty-four (44) miles northwest of Kerrville, neaz the City of Junction, Texas. In addition to these airports, there are numerous privately-owned and operated general aviation landing strips located in close proximity to Kerrville, which primarily accommodate the operation of small single and light twin-engine piston aircraft. In 1997, approximately 42,901 general aviation operations were estimated at the airport, marking an increase of over twenty-five percent (25.8%) above 1996 counts. The estimated business-related use of the airport (i.e., the itinerant portion of general aviation activity) increased over 18% between 1996 and 1997. This increase in activity is reflective of a strong and growing regional economy, as well as the airport's ability to accommodate the area's air transportation needs. Certainly, the available runway length at Kerrville and the excellent FBO services and maintenance provided at the facility have contributed to increased operational activity at the airport. These operational assumptions are further supported by the airport's based aircraft ownership data and aviation fuel sales records. KerrviNe Municipat/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Masier Plan Update B•8 L In developing the general aviation activity projections, several existing general aviation forecasts were reviewed. As presented in the following table, entitled GENERAL AVIATION OPERATIONS FORECAST, 1997-2018, this assessment has included an r evaluation of regional and national trends and forecasts as presented by the 1988 MP, _.._ the FAA's TAF and national forecasts for general aviation activity, as well as area j population statistics and based aircraft assessments. The 1988 MP forecast projected L just under a three percent (2.75%) annual growth rate between the years 1985 and -- 2005. No TAF forecasts were available for comparison. In addition, three sets of j I forecasts (i.e., Low, Medium, and High) were developed to address varying levels of growth within the sector. The "Low" forecasts reflect the FAA's APO/TAF annual -- operational growth rate of 0.25% for the overall general aviation category through the year 2010. The "Moderate" forecasts reflect FAA's national general aviation ~ forecasts, as presented in the FAA Aviation Forecasts Fiscal Years 1998-2009, which project an increase in general aviation activity at airports with both FAA and contract ~ tower control service of approximately one percent (1.0%) annually through the year 2009. For comparison, the "High" forecasts apply the county's projected annual -' population growth rate of 2.35% through the year 2030 for the duration of the i r planning period. r L Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update B.9 i i Table B2 t GENERAL AVIATION OPERATIONS FORECAST, 1997=2018 Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Atrport Master Plan Update j 1988 1998 Low Medium High Year MP TAF (0.25%) (1.0%) (2.35%) 1997 "' "' --- --- 42,901 42,901 42,901 1 1998 --- --- 43,000 43,300 43,900 1999 --- --- 43,100 43,800 44,900 2000 73,000 43,200 44,200 46,000 2001 =_= 43,300 44,600 47,100 2002 --- --- 43,400 45,100 48,200 2003 --- --- 43,500 45,500 49,300 t 2005 86,000 --- 43,800 46,500 51,700 2008 --- --- 44,100 47,900 55,400 2010 --- --- 44,300 48,900 58,000 2013 --- --- 44,600 50,300 62,200 2018 --- --- 45,200 52,900 69,900 (s) Actual (Total Includes General Aviation-Related Air Taxi Operations). to According to TXDOT Aviation Division estimates, the total operation count for 1999 was 42,901. 1988 MP 1988 MP prepared by Blackwell & Associates, Inc. 1998 TAF APO TAF Airport Operations Data/February 1998, FAA Given the historic pattern of generally increasing aviation activity levels since the mid 1980s, coupled with the existing demand for additional aircraft storage facilities, it is recommended that the High forecasts be selected for future facility requirement projections. These forecasts reflect average annual growth rates of over two percent (2.35%) through the twenty-year planning period to accommodate a projected increase in the steady growth that has occurred historically with general aviation activity at the airport. The airport should remain responsive to local economic expansion activity, with the business-related general aviation sector representing an increasing percentage of the airport's operations through the planning period. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update B.10 Military Operations Forecast There are generally three components in determining military aircraft use at an airport. The first is Department of Defense (DOD) funding, which has been declining in recent years. The second is a fueling contract the airport or FBO may have with the DoD. The third is the location, or proximity, of the airport with adjacent aviation- related military bases or training areas. Due to the relatively close proximity of Kerrville 1Vlunicipal/Louis Schreiner Field with Randolph and Kelly Air Force Bases (APBs) in San Antonio and Laughlin AFB in Del Rio, the FBO at Kerrville does not have a fueling contract with the DOD and none is anticipated in the future. Therefore, no significant aviation-related military activity is projected to occur at the airport within the 20-year planning period of this document. Operations Forecast By Aircraft Type As can be noted, total annual operations are anticipated to increase moderately through the planning period. Overall, operations are expected to increase by approximately sixty-three percent (62.9%) by the year 2018 over 1997 figures, with general aviation aircraft continuing to generate all of the activity at the airport throughout the period. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update B.1 Table B3 SUMMARY OF OPERATIONS BY AIRCRAFT TYPE, 1997-2018 Kerrville MunicipaULouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update Operations By Type 1997 (a) 2003 2008 2013 2018 General Aviation ~l~ c2) 42,901 ~3> 49,300 55,400 62,200 69,900 Single Engine Piston 36,037 41,166 46,259 51,782 58,017 Multi-Engine Piston 3,432 3,944 4,432 4,976 5,592 Turboprop 2,145 2,465 2,770 3,110 3,495 Business Jet 1,073 1,479 1,632 2,021 2,446 Helicopter 215 246 277 311 350 Military ___ ___ TOTAL ANNUAL OPERATIONS 42,901 49,300 55,400 62,200 69,900 (a) Actual ~1~ Total includes general aviation-related air taxi operations. (2) Operational estimates were prepared by Barnard Dunkelberg & Company. ~3~ According to TXDOT Aviation Division estimates, the total operation count for 1999 was 42,901. The ai ort currentl ex eriences a moderate number of turbo ro and business 'et rP y P P P J operations when compared with single engine operations, with approximately 45% of all activity being associated with business-related aircraft use at the airport. Currently, operations conducted by single engine aircraft represent approximately 84.0% of the general aviation activity, while approximately 8.0% are multi-engine piston operations, 5.0% are turboprop operations, 2.5% are business jet operations, and 0.5%o are helicopter operations. It is estimated that these distributions of operations will transition only slightly to the larger general aviation sector through the balance of the planning period. Local and Itinerant Operations Forecast The Air Traffic Control Handbook defines a local operation as any operation performed by an aircraft operating in the local traffic pattern or within sight of the tower, or aircraft known to be departing or arriving from flight in local practice areas, Kerrville MunicipaULouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update B.12 ` or aircraft executing practice instrument approaches at the airport. According to 1997 FAA Form 5010-1 records, itinerant operations constituted 45% of the total operations at the airport. This existing percentage of itinerant activity can be attributed to the fact that, with respect to general aviation, the airport accommodates a significant number of business-related aircraft operations and experiences a relatively low level of general aviation flight training activity. ___ It is forecast that the level of itinerant business-related aviation activity will likely L increase in conjunction with the anticipated upturn in general aviation activity nationwide and the continued economic development and expansion that is occurring within the region. As can be seen in the followilig table, entitled SUMMARY OF LOCAL AND ITINERANT OPERATIONS, 1997-2018, Kerrville MunicipaULouis Schreiner Field will remain primarily a center for business-related general aviation operations, with the --- percentage of itinerant general aviation operational activity increasing slightly through the planning period. 1 Table B4 r SUMMARY OF LOCAL AND ITINERANT OPERATIONS, 1997-2018 Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update r Local Itinerant Total j j Year Operations Operations Operations -- 1997 c]) ~2> 23,596 (55%) 19,305 (45%) 42,901 j 2003 24,650 (50%) 24,650 (50%) 49,300 2008 27,700 (50%) 27,700 (50%) 55,400 - 2013 31,100 (50%) 31,100 (50%) 62,200 2018 31,455 (45%) 38,445 (55%) 69,900 y X11 Existing local/itinerant operations breakdown was obtained from FAA Form 5010-I ~' (2) According to TXDOT Aviation Division estimates, the total operation count for 1999 was 42,901. Peak Period Forecast An additional element of assessing airport usage and determining various _ requirements necessitated by capacity and demand considerations is the determination of peak period activities. Although specific operational data for Kerrville Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update B.13 Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field was unavailable to project peak period trends, some flying activity information was available to compare with generalized FAA operational statistics for airports with similaz activity and peaking characteristics. This information was then utilized to formulate peak period forecasts. The peak period operation projections are depicted in the following table, entitled PEAK PERIOD AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS, 1997-2018. Table B5 PEAK PERIOD AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS, 1997-2018 Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update Year Average Day Peak Hour/ Annual (1) Peak Month (2) of Peak Month Average Day Ratio Average Peak Hour 1997(2) 42,901 4,290 143 10.5% 15 2003 49,300 4,930 164 10.5% 17 2008 55,400 5,540 185 10.5% 19 2013 62,200 6,220 207 10.5% 22 2018 69,900 6,990 233 10.0% 23 (I) The peak period operational analysis was conducted for the Moderate scenario for annual operation projections. (2) Operation counts were obtained from Airport Management and utilized in combination with BD&Co. forecasts based upon methodology from FAA AC 150/5070-6A Airport Master Plans and FAA AC 150/5060-5 Airport Capacity and Delay. (3) According to TXDOT Aviation Division estimates, the total operation count for 1999 was 42,901. General Aviation Based Aircraft Forecast The number of general aviation aircraft, which can be expected to base at an airport facility, is dependent on several factors, such as airport radio communications, available facilities, airport operator services, airport proximity and access, aircraft basing capacity available at adjacent airports and similar considerations. General aviation operators are particularly sensitive to both the quality and location of their basing facilities, with proximity of home and work often being identified as the primary consideration in the selection of an aircraft basing location. Certainly, the City of Kerrville's existing large percentage of the county population (estimated neaz 45% in 1995) and concentration of major employers has contributed significantly to the overall number of aircraft based at the facility, as well as the increasing Kerrville MunicipaULouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update B.14 percentage of these aircraft which are utilized for corporate and business-related purposes. ` Generally, there is a direct relationship between general aviation operations and based aircraft levels. Because historically these two elements have followed similar growth patterns on an overall basis, they are frequently compared; each affected by the factors listed above. In other words, the relationship of these two functions is - examined in terms of the number of annual operations per based aircraft (OPBA). The OPBA is calculated by dividing the total number of annual operations at the airport by the total number of based aircraft at the facility. Such a review and resultant _--- calculation can establish a trend for both based aircraft and annual operations. The national trend at general aviation airports has been changing, with more aircraft being used for business purposes and less for pleasure flying. This business use is -- impacting the oPBA in that business operations are usually itinerant in nature and business-use aircraft are typically flown more often than pleasure-use aircraft. In 1997, the OPBA at Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field was approximately 386, and below the average oPBA of 478 for the past ten years. Because of the predicted upturn in general aviation activity, coupled with the increasing percentage P` ' of hours flown by the corporate and business sector of the fleet, it is expected that the L number of operations per based aircraft will increase at the airport. In addition, FAA's annual growth rate of active general aviation aircraft nationwide is expected to ~~ increase approximately 0.99% per year through the year 2009. According to FBO management personnel, there is an active waiting list of aircraft owners who desire to ~_ base their aircraft at the airport. This demand for additional aircraft storage facilities was further documented from respondents on a Tenant/User Survey that was distributed to 115 registered aircraft owners within Ken County (see sample survey _ form in Appendix One). Approximately 79% of the respondents (i.e., approximately 22 aircraft owners) identified a need for additional hangars at Kerrville ~ Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field. Because of this existing unmet demand for aircraft _„ storage units at the airport, a higher short-term increase in new hangar construction ~ may be required, with a more conservative straight-line growth scenario being ` implemented after the initial five-year period. The following table, entitled GENERAL AVIATION BASED AIRCRAFT, 1987-2017, presents the forecasts for the twenty-year planning period. Both historical and forecast data on -~ based aircraft at Kerrville were collected from the 1998 TAF and are presented in ` conjunction with the 1992 MP. The Fleet Growth forecast reflects an average annual rate of increase similar to the FAA's annual growth rate of active aircraft for the nation -- (which is approximately 1.0% per year through the year 2009). These projections compare to a Historic Growth estimate of future based aircraft, reflecting a recent ten- Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update B.15 year average annual increase of 1.5%, and a more aggressive Selected Growth estimate that proposes an average annual increase of 2.0%, which is slightly less than the county's projected annual population growth rate. Kerrville MunicipaVLouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update B.16 r r J J Table B6 GENERAL AVIATION BASED AIRCRAFT, 1987-2018 Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update YEAR 1988 MP Form 5010 1998 TAF Fleet Growth (1.0%) Historic Growth (1.5%) Selected Growth (2.0%) Historical 1987 --- 75 76 --- --- --- 1988 --- 75 72 --- --- --- 1989 --- 66 67 --- --- --- 1990 104 63 64 --- --- --- 1991 --- 36 40 --- --- --- 1992 --- 37 37 --- --- --- 1993 --- 44 37 --- --- --- 1994 --- 57 48 --- --- --- 1995 124 57 69 --- --- --- 1996 --- 57 69 --- --- --- 1997 --- 88 --- --- --- --- 1998 --- 88 --- 88 `a' 88 `e' 88 `a' Forecast 1999 "' --- --- --- 89 90 90 2000 146 --- --- 90 91 92 2001 --- --- --- 91 92 93 2002 --- --- --- 92 94 95 2003 --- --- --- 92 95 97 2005 172 --- --- 94 98 101 2008 --- --- --- 97 103 107 2013 --- --- --- 102 110 118 2018 --- --- --- 107 119 131 `a' Actual (Total count obtained from 1998 Texas Airport System P1an/Airport Development Worksheet). `" According to TXDOT Aviation Division counts, the based aircraft total for 1999 was 92. 1988 MP 1988 MP prepared by Blackwell & Associates, Inc. Form 5010 FAA From 5010-1 records. 1998 TAF APO TAF Airport Operations Data/February 1998, FAA. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update B.17 Given national general aviation trends and the local socioeconomic conditions of the region, the Selected Growth rate is the chosen scenario for based aircraft growth within the twenty-year planning period. On an incremental basis, an approximate 10% growth is anticipated by 2003 to 97 based aircraft; 10% growth to 107 by 2008; a 10% growth to 118 by 2013; and an 11% growth to a total of 131 based aircraft by the year 2018. The mix of based aircraft for incremental periods throughout the planning period is illustrated in the following table, entitled GENERAL AVIATION BASED AIRCRAFT FLEET 1-~IIX, 1997-2oI8. With an existing high percentage of single engine aircraft based at the airport, the percentage of turboprop and business jet aircraft is expected to increase as i apart of the total based aircraft population. This is in line, first of all, with overall { trends in general aviation, but even more importantly, parallels the economic development and growth expectations and projections characteristic of the community. By the end of the planning period, single engine aircraft are anticipated to comprise just over 76% of the total based aircraft at the airport, with approximately 10% being multi-engine piston aircraft, over 7% being turboprops, over 5% being business jets, and under 1% being helicopters. Table B7 GENERAL AVIATION BASED AIRCRAFT FLEET MIX, 1997-2018 Kerrville MunicipaULouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update Aircraft Type 1997 (a) ~>> 2003 2008 2013 2018 Single Engine 70 (79%) 76 (77%) 82 (76%) 90 (76%) 100 (75%) Multi-Engine 8 (12%) 9 (13%) 11 (12%) 12 (12%) 13 (12%) Turboprop 5 (4.5%) 6 (5%) 7 (6%) 9 (6%) 10 (7%) Business Jet 5 (4.5%) 5 (4%) 6 (5%) 6 (5%) 7 (5%) Helicopter 0 (o%) 1 (1%) 1 (1%) 1 (1%) 1 (l%) TOTAL 88 (100%) 97 (100%) 107 (100%) 118 (100%) 131 (100%) (a) Actual (1) According to TXDOT Aviation Division counts, the based aircraft total for 1999 was 92. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update B.18 Summary The following table summarizes the forecasts of aviation activity, which have been . presented in this chapter. This information will be utilized in the following chapter to document and analyze both airside and landside facility requirements. Therefore, the forecasts of aviation activity are an important part of the information base, which will -. be used to develop future plans for the airport and formulate implementation ~ decisions relating to airport development. Overall, total aircraft operations at Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field are anticipated to increase by approximately 63% over the course of the twenty-year planning period. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update B.19 Table B8 SUMMARY OF AVIATION ACTIVITY FORECASTS, 1997-2018 Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update Operations 1997 (a) ~1~ 2003 2008 2013 2018 General Aviation 42,901 49,300 54,400 62,200 69,900 Military --- --- --- --- TOTAL ANNUAL OPERATIONS 42,901 49,300 55,400 62,200 69,900 Local Operations 23,596 24,650 27,700 31,100 31,445 Itinerant Operations 19,305 24,650 27,700 31,100 38,445 General Aviation Based Aircraft Single Engine 70 76 82 90 100 Multi-Engine 8 9 11 12 13 Turboprop 5 6 7 9 10 Business Jet 5 5 6 6 7 Helicopter 0 1 1 1 1 TOTAL BASED AIRCRAFT 88 (2) 97 107 118 131 (a) Actual ~l~ According to TXDOT Aviation Division estimates, the total operation count for 1999 was 42,901 (2) According to TXDOT Aviation Division counts, the based aircrafr total for 1999 was 92. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update B•2~ Facility Requirements Introduction To quantify an airport's future facility needs, it is necessary to translate the aviation activity forecasts into specific physical requirements. Therefore, this section addresses the actual types and quantities of facilities and/or the required improvements to existing facilities needed to safely and efficiently accommodate the projected demand that could be placed on the airport. This chapter consists of two separate analyses: those requirements associated with airside facilities and those dealing with landside facilities. Airside Requirements The analysis of airfield requirements focuses on determining needed facilities and the spatial considerations for these facilities that are related to the actual operation of aircraft on the airport. This evaluation includes the delineation of airfield dimensional criteria, establishment of design parameters for the runway and taxiway system, and an identification of airfield instrumentation and lighting needs. A brief description of these various development parameters will be presented in the following text, followed by a summary table depicting the airfield and landside development requirements. Future Airport Reference Code (ARC) Analysis A review of the airport's existing design standards, for compliance with current FAA guidelines, was presented in the Inventory chapter of this document. Based on the specified ARC C-II designation for Runway 12/30, several existing non-standard conditions were identified. For comparison, there were no existing non-standard conditions identified on Runway 03/21, in consideration of the ARC B-USmall Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update C.1 Airplanes Only dimensional criteria. According to the aviation activity updates generated in the previous chapter, it was determined that these ARC designations were appropriate and that the Design Aircraft for each runway should be updated. In consideration of the airport's existing based and itinerant business jet activity, it is recommended that a combination of the Gates Learjet 24 and the Beech Super King Air 8200 be identified as the design aircraft for Runway 12/30. Both of these aircraft are presently based at the airport. Therefore, Runway 12/30 should be designed to accommodate aircraft with an approach speed as great as 121 knots, but less than 141 knots and wingspans as great as 49 feet, but less than 79 feet. In addition, it is recommended that the Piper Twin Comanche be identified as the design aircraft for Runway 03/21. This design aircraft will result in a Small Aircraft Only ARC designation that can accommodate aircraft with an approach speed as great as 91 knots, but less than 121 knots and wingspans up to but not including 49 feet. Also, as presented in the Inventory chapter, various options are available to the airport sponsor to resolve the existing Runway 12/30 non-standard design criteria. These options, which include combinations of access road and highway realignment, relocation of overhead utilities, taxiway relocation, application for modification of standards, runway threshold displacement(s), and the application for declared distances criteria, will be evaluated in the following Development Concepts and Alter~iatives Analysis chapter of this document. However, depending on the feasibility and costs associated with implementing the Category C approach criteria, it may be prudent to also evaluate a downgrade to Category B approach standards for r~ Runway 12/30. Runways In consideration of the forecasts of future aviation activity, the adequacy of the runway system must be analyzed from several perspectives. These include runway orientation, runway length and pavement strength, as well as runway lighting and runway protection zone (RPZ) requirements. The analysis of these various aspects pertaining to the runway system, which is presented in the following text, will result ~ in recommendations for improvements. Runway Orientation. As a general planning principle, the airport's primary runway should be oriented in the same direction as the prevailing wind. Aircraft are able to properly operate on a runway, for landings and takeoffs, as long as the wind component perpendicular to the direction of travel (defined as the crosswind) is not excessive. As identified in the Inventory chapter, the wind coverage provided by the existing runway configuration provides excellent wind coverage (i.e., in excess of 99%) for both the 16- and 10.5-knot crosswind components. While Runway 03/21 provides slightly better single runway wind coverage, Runway 12 provides the best Kerrville Municipal/~ouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update C•2 i ~` single end wind coverage for all runways. Therefore, no additional runways are required from a wind coverage standpoint and, each runway should be maintained to satisfy the airport's specified wind coverage requirements. Runway Length. An evaluation of the runway length requirements at Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field is based upon several factors, which include: • Airport elevation; • Mean maximum daily temperature of the hottest month; • Runway gradient; • Critical aircraft type expected to use the airport; and, • Stage length of the longest nonstop trip destination. The runway length operational requirements for aircraft are greatly affected by elevation, temperature, and runway gradient. The Runway 12/30 length calculations for Kerrville are based upon an elevation of 1,617 feet AMSL, 95.0 degrees Fahrenheit NMT (Mean Normal Maximum Temperature), and a maximum Effective Runway Gradient (ERG) of 0.27%. Generally, for design purposes, runway length requirements at business-use general aviation airports are premised upon the large aircraft fleet under 60,000 pounds (i.e., the business jets that may operate at the airport). There are presently five business jets based at the airport (i.e., two Gates Learjet 24s, two Citation Ivs, and one Citation Jet), including three additional seasonally based jets. As can be seen in the following table, entitled RUNWAY 12/30 LENGTH REQUIREMENTS, there are four (4) runway lengths shown for small aircraft type runways. Each of these provides the proper length to accommodate a certain type of aircraft that will utilize the runway. The lengths range from 3,110 to 4,670 feet in length. It should also be noted that these are the same length requirements specified for Runway 03/21 in consideration of the small airplane criteria (i.e., aircraft less than 12,500 lbs.). Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update C.3 Table C l RUNWAY 12/30 LENGTH REQUIREMENTS Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update Length (Feet) Aircraft Category Dry Wet Airplanes less than 12,500 lbs. with less than 10 seats 75% of Small Aircraft Fleet 3,110 3,110 95% of Small Aircraft Fleet 3,710 3,710 100% of Small Aircraft Fleet 4,360 4,360 Airplanes less than 12,500 lbs. with 1 D or more seats 4,670 4,670 Airplanes greater than 12,500 lbs. and less than 60, 000 pounds 75% of fleet at 60% useful load 5,180 5,500 75% of fleet at 90% useful load 7,340 7,340 100% of fleet at 60% useful load 6,390 6,390 100% of fleet at 90% useful load 9,550 9,550 Runway 12/30 (existing) 6,000 6,000 Runway 03/21 (existing) 4,047 4,047 Source: FAA Advisory Circulaz 1 5015 3 00-1 3, Airport Design. Lengths based on 1,617' AMSL 95.0° F NMT and a maximum difference in runway centerline elevation of 16'. For comparison, there are four (4) different lengths given for large aircraft under 60,000 pounds. These specified large aircraft runway lengths pertain to those general aviation aircraft, generally jet-powered, of 60,000 pounds or less maximum certificated takeoff weight. The requirements of the large aircraft fleet range from 5,180 to 9,550 feet in length and relate to Runway 12/30. Each of these lengths provides a runway sufficient to satisfy the operational requirements of a certain percentage of the fleet at a certain percentage of the useful load, (i.e., 75% of the fleet at 60% useful load). The useful load of an aircraft is defined as the difference between the maximum allowable structural gross weight and the operating weight empty. In other words, it is the load that can be carried by the aircraft composed of passengers, fuel, and cargo. Generally speaking, the following aircraft comprise 75% of the large aircraft fleet weighing less than 60,000 pounds: Learjets, Sabreliners, Citations, Fan Jet Falcons, HS-125, and the Westwind. Following an examination of the various runway lengths provided in the previous table, it was determined that Runway 12/30, with an existing length of 6,000 feet, Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update C.4 r rl w i accommodates 100% of the small aircraft fleet with more than 10 seats and slightly less than 100% of the airplane fleet (less than 60,000 pounds) at 60% useful load. For comparison, Runway 03/21, with an existing length of 4,047 feet, presently accommodates between 95% of the small aircraft fleet with less than 10 seats and 100% of the small aircraft fleet with less than 10 seats. This data will be examined in combination with the evaluation of airfield development alternatives to assist the Kerrville-Kerr County Joint Airport Board in determining recommendations for future airside improvements. Runway Pavement Strength. As identified previously, both Runway 12/30 and Runway 03/21 have existing gross weight bearing capacities of 12,500 pounds single wheel gear configuration. According to the airport's existing and projected operational fleet mix, this pavement strength is adequate for Runway 03/21, in consideration of the existing "small aircraft only" criteria designation. However, it is recommended that Runway 12/30 be strengthened to better accommodate the existing and projected business jet operators. It is estimated that a future gross weight bearing capacity of approximately 30,000 pounds single wheel gear configuration would be adequate for the projected general aviation aircraft operators through the planning period. Runway Approach Instrumentation. The airport is presently equipped with three straight-in non-precision approaches (i.e., a LOC and NDB, or GPs, approaches to Runway 30 and a VOR/DME 1tNAV, or GPS, approach to Runway 12). These existing approach capabilities to Runway 12/30 should be maintained, with no proposed lighting or navigational enhancements (i.e., approach lighting systems or ground based NAVAIDS) to lower existing visibility minimums. However, the future development of GPS technology will likely permit the implementation of a Differential Global Positioning System (DGPS) precision instrument approach at the airport. Therefore, according to IFR wind coverage data and runway utilization patterns documented in the Inventory chapter, it is recommended that airside development alternatives be examined, which evaluate the implementation of a future DGPS precision approach procedure (i.e., with 1/z mile visibility minimums) to each end of Runway 12/30. Runway 03/21 does not presently offer instrument approach capabilities; however, options should be preserved for implementing future Global Positioning System (GPS) approaches that could provide approach visibility minimums of one mile. Runway Protection Zones (RPZs). Based on approach Category C standards and existing visibility minimums, the Runway 12/30 RPZ dimensions are only slightly deficient, while the Runway 03/21 RPZ dimensions comply with the Small Aircraft Only criteria. In conjunction with the preparation of the airside development Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update C.5 alternatives, the Runway 12/30 RPZ dimensions will be revised in accordance with the specified approach visibility minimums. However, the existing Runway ~J3/21 RPZs will likely be maintained due to the "small aircraft only" runway designation and the proposed "not lower than one mile" approach visibility minimums. Runway Lighting. Glide path indicator lights are a system of lights, which provide visual vertical approach slope guidance to aircraft during an approach to the runway. vASI systems are designed for day and nighttime use during vFR (i.e., good weather) conditions. A refined version of the vASI system, referred to as precision approach path indicators (PAPis), are the FAA's current standard recommended equipment. Runway 12 is presently served with a PAPI., however Runway 30 is served by a 4-box vASI located on the south side of the runway. The Runway 30 vASI will likely require replacement within the planning period. Runway 03/21 is presently equipped with PAPIs. Runway End Identifier Lights (REILs) are a system of lights, which provide an approaching aircraft a rapid and positive identification of the approach end of the runway. At present, each of the runway ends at the airport are equipped with REILs, and recommendations for their future relocation on Runway 12/30 must be coordinated with potential approach lighting system (ALS) upgrades. Both Runway 12/30 and Runway 03/21 are presently equipped with Medium Intensity Runway Lights (MIRLs). The existing MIRLs will be sufficient to comply with the lighting requirements of the primary runway through the planning period, and the existing MIRLS serving Runway 03/21 are required to comply with future ~ instrument approach implementation requirements. Taxiways Taxiways are constructed primarily to enable the movement of aircraft between the various functional areas on the airport and the runway system. Some taxiways are necessary simply to provide access between apron areas and runways, whereas other taxiways become necessary to provide more efficient and safer use of the airfield. As stated previously, Runway 12/30 is served by afull-length parallel taxiway system and five (5) connector taxiways equipped with centerline and edge reflectors. Due to the existing non-standard centerline separation of this taxiway from the runway, the airside development alternatives will evaluate the specified ARC C-II separation requirements associated with the various approach visibility minimums and recommend future taxiway improvements and/or modifications. It is also recommended that medium intensity taxiway lights (MITLs) be installed to serve the Runway 12/30 parallel taxiway system. Runway 03/21 is also served by afull-length Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update C.6 Is parallel taxiway system and two (2) connector taxiways, but is not equipped with It centerline or edge reflectors. This taxiway system adequately serves Runway 03/21 and no relocation or alignment modifications are recommended; however, taxiway centerline and edge reflectors should be installed. The estimated existing pavement M strength of 12,500 pounds single wheel for both taxiway systems is considered appropriate to serve the "small aircraft only" requirements of Runway 03121 for the specified planning period; however, the Runway 12/30 parallel taxiway system will aA require strengthening, commensurate with that of the runway to better accommodate the larger general aviation fleet. r Landside Requirements ^ „_ Landside facilities are those facilities, which support the airside facilities, but are not actually part of the aircraft operating surfaces. These consist of such facilities as ~ hangars, aprons, access roads, and support facilities. Following a detailed analysis of these facilities, current deficiencies can be noted in terms of accommodating both ~I existing and future aviation needs at the airport. ,_ Ground Access Requirements ~ As presented in the Inventory chapter, S.H. 27 and Airport Loop Road serve as the primary access roads to the airport. Though no daily traffic counts were available for analysis, it is estimated that these roadways have adequate capacity to accommodate the projected airport-related traffic through the planning period, in consideration of various background traffic generators such as rural residential property owners in the _ vicinity of the airport. However, it should also be noted that the current alignment of ~ S.H. 27, located along the southern boundary of the airport, and the southern portion of Airport Loop Road impact the specified runway oFA width at each end of the runway "~ and runway OFA length on Runway 30. Therefore, various highway and airport entrance road realignment options will likely be investigated in the formulation of ,i airside development alternatives. ~ General Aviation Requirements The number and type of projected general aviation operations and based aircraft can be converted into generalized projections of Landside facility needs. The accompanying table illustrates the type of facilities and the number of units or acres _ ~~ needed for that facility to accommodate the potential demand for each development phase. As can be seen, the itinerant general aviation aircraft apron requirements are projected to increase only slightly, from 1.5 acres to 2.0 acres by the year 2018, while L Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update C•~ based aircraft apron requirements are projected to increase even less, with less than 1.0 acre being required through the planning period. Based on existing aircraft storage practices, it is likely that the majority of future based aircraft will require some type of indoor storage facility. According to responses obtained from the Tenant/User Survey, the existing demand for aircraft storage at the airport consists primarily of T-hangar facilities. The following table, entitled GENERAL AVIATION FACILITY REQUIREMENTS, 2003-2018, depicts the acreage required for general aviation landside facilities during all stages of development. As can be noted, the actual type of indoor storage facility to accommodate future based aircraft has been identified as T-hangars and executive hangars. It is apparent that the acreage demands for future aviation facilities can be accommodated for the twenty-year planning period within the current airport boundary. This facility demand will likely result in the construction of additional aircraft storage facilities and access taxiways in the vicinity of the existing general aviation development area. Because the actual number, size, and location of future large FBO/maintenance hangars will depend on user needs and financial feasibility, the quantity of these facilities has not been projected. In addition, these acreage requirements do not consider the impact of an expansion in the airport's existing cargo operations; however, these projections will assist in the development of a detailed facility-staging plan to be presented in a later section of this document. Table C2 GENERAL AVIATION FACILITY REQUIREMENTS, 2003-2018 Kerrville MunicipaULouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update Total Number Required (In Ac res) Facility 1998 (a) 2003 2008 2013 2018 Itinerant/GA Apron 2.5 1.5 1.6 1.7 2.0 Based A/C GA Apron 2.5 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.9 Hangar Space T-hangars (no./acres) 10/1.5 20/2.8 20/2.8 30/4.0 30/4.0 Exec. /Corp. (no./acres) 2/1.6 2/1.6 2/1.6 2/1.6 12/4.0 Total 8.1 6.6 6.7 8.1 10.9 Barnard Dunkelberg & Co. projections based on FAA AC 150/5300-13. f, (a) Actual. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update C.8 Support Facilities Requirements In addition to the aviation and airport access facilities described above, there are several airport support facilities that have quantifiable requirements and that are vital to the efficient and safe operation of the airport. The support facilities at Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field, which require evaluation, include the fuel storage facility and the future installation of an automated weather observation system (i.e., ` ASOS or AWOS). ~ ~ Fuel Storage Facility. Aviation fuel is presently stored on the east side of the airport, just north of the existing general aviation development area, providing an overall storage capacity of approximately 22,000 gallons. Over the past five (5) years there ~ has been an average of 239,707 gallons of fuel sold per year at the airport. Based on 1997 operation counts, this equates to approximately five (5.1) gallons per operation. As operations increase, fuel storage requirements can be expected to increase ^ proportionately. By increasing the ratio of gallons sold per operation to adjust for _ longer stage lengths and the slight increase in size of aircraft forecast to operate and be based at the airport, an estimate of future fuel storage needs can be calculated as a ~` two week supply during the peak month of operations. As can be seen in the _ following table, entitled FUEL STORAGE REQUIREMENTS, 2003-2018, the airport's fuel storage requirements could likely be accommodated through the year 2018 utilizing existing storage facilities; however, the existing facility may need to be upgraded or modified to comply with future EPA guidelines. It should also be noted that the ~~ existing fuel storage facility is identified for relocation on the existing ALP. M °' Table C3 FUEL STORAGE REQUIREMENTS, 2003-2018 ~ Kerrville MunicipaULouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update r 1997~a> 2003 2008 2013 2018 Average Day of r Peak Month Operations --- 152 160 168 176 _._ Two Week Operations --- 2,128 2,240 2,352 2,464 ~ Gallons Per Operation 5.1 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 ^ Fuel Storage (gallons) 22,000 11,700 13,400 15,300 17,200 ~i (a) Actual. t Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update C.9 r Automated Weather Observation System. Automated weather observation systems are designed to provide pilots and airport users with current weather-related data, which is transmitted by computer-generated voice directly to aircraft in the vicinity of airports using FAA vHF ground-to-air radio. The Automated Surface Observing System (ASOS) is the latest system being sponsored by the FAA. It provides weather observations on temperature, dewpoint, wind, altimeter setting, visibility, sky condition, and precipitation. An alternative system and early generation system to the ASOS is the Automated Weather Observing System (AwOS). The AwOS is a FAA program, but there are no current plans to increase the number of Federal systems. However, non-federal systems are still available for purchase by airports. Approximately 32% of the respondents of the Tenant/User Survey identified a need for an automated weather observation system at the airport and an AWOS facility was installed at the airport in 1999. Summary ~ The need for facilities, which have been identified in this chapter, can now be utilized to formulate the overall future Development Plan of the airport. The following table summarizes the projected facility requirements necessary to accommodate the projected operational demands through 2018. The formulation of this plan will begin by establishing goals for future airport development and an analysis of development alternatives, whereby demand for future airport facilities can be accommodated. These alternatives will be presented in the following chapter, entitled Development Concepts and Alternatives Analysis. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update C.10 i ^ A i 1 4 L Table C4 FACILITY REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY, 2003-2018 Kerrville MunicipaULouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update Facility 1998 (a) 2003 2008 2013 2018 Dimensional Standards Runway 12/30 ARC C-II same same same same Runway 03/2] ARC B-I (1> same same same same Runway Length/Width Runway 12/30 100' x 6,000' (2) (To Be Determined from Selected Alternative) Runway 03/21 60' x 4,047' (2) (To Be Determined from Selected Alternative) General Aviation Apron Requirements (In Acres) Itinerant 2.5 1.5 1.6 1.7 2.0 Based 2.5 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.9 General Aviation Aircraft Storage Facilities (No./Acres) T-hangars 10/1.5 20/2.8 20/2.8 30/4.0 30/4.0 Exec./Corp. hangars 2/1.6 2/1.6 2/1.6 2/1.6 12/4.0 ARFF Index (Not required) AWOS (Installed In ]999) Property/Easement Acquisition (Acres) (To Be Determined from Selected Alternative) (a) Actual. (1) Criteria applies to Small Airplanes Only (i.e., less than 12,5001bs.) (2) Future runway length to be verified through alternatives analysis. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update C.11 Development Concepts and Alternatives Analysis Introduction The purpose of this chapter is to present the Development Plan Alternatives for Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field, in terms of both their concept and reasoning. This chapter provides a description of the various factors and influences that will form the basis for the ultimate plan and program. In concert with the status of the airport, some basic assumptions have been established, which are intended to direct the expansion of airport development in the future. These assumptions are supported by the aviation activity forecasts and the various considerations on which they were based. The assumptions also focus on continued airport expansion, which centers upon aggressive facilities enhancement supports community needs, and generates economic development. The first assumption states that Runway 12/30 will be designed and developed in accordance with Airport Reference Code (ARC) C-11 dimensional criteria and alternatives to improve the instrument approach capabilities to this runway will be investigated. The justification for the ARC C-II classification is demonstrated by the fact that Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field's role as a business/corporate aviation facility continues to grow, with over 1,000 business jet operations being recorded in 1997. The second assumption states that the existing Runway 12 ARC c-Il dimensional criteria deficiencies (i.e., the safety area and object free area) will be resolved utilizing either a displaced threshold with the application of declared distances criteria or a relocated threshold. According to City officials, the realignment of S.H. 27 adjacent to the approach end of Runway 12 would not be feasible due to existing geometric constraints with the existing alignment. In addition, the existing Runway 30 ARC C-11 dimensional criteria deficiencies (i.e., the safety area and object free Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update D.l ` area) will be resolved utilizing a combination of relocating Airport Loop Road and realigning a segment of S.H. 27. ` The third assumption states that Runway 03/21 will continue to be designed and developed in accordance with ARC B-1/Small Aircraft Only dimensional criteria. ` The fourth assumption states that the City of Kerrville will continue to work towards the development of additional aircraft storage facilities at the airport in response to ` increasing demand by airport users. ` Goals for Development ` Accompanying these assumptions are several goals, which have been established for purposes of directing the plan and establishing continuity in the future development of the airport. These goals take into account several categorical considerations ` relating to the needs of the airport both in the short-term and the long-term, including safety, noise, capital improvements, land use compatibility, financial and economic conditions, public interest and investment, and community recognition and _ ` awareness. While all are project oriented, some obviously represent more tangible activities than others; however, all are deemed important and appropriate to the future of the airport. ` The following goals are intended to guide the preparation of this Master Plan Update and direct the future expansion of Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field: L • Plan the airport to safely and efficiently accommodate the forecast aircraft fleet with facilities properly sized to accommodate forecast demand. • Program facilities to be constructed when demand is realized (construction is to ` be driven by actual demand, not forecast demand). -- Ensure that the future development of the airport can accommodate the growing L corporate aviation needs and requirements of the region. • Enhance the self-sustaining capability of the airport and ensure the financial "' feasibility of future airport development. ` • Develop land acquisition priorities (i.e., fee simple and/or easement) related to __ airport safety, future airport development, and land use compatibility. • Encourage the protection of existing public and private investment in land and ` facilities, and advocate the resolution of any existing and/or potential land use conflicts both on and off airport property. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update D.2 • Plan and develop the airport to be environmentally compatible with the community and minimize environmental impacts on both airport property and property adjacent to the airport. • Provide effective direction for the future development of Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field through the preparation of a rational plan and adherence to the adopted development program. • Integrate the airport's ground transportation access requirements with the area's regional transportation goals. Airside Development Concepts and Alternatives Introduction ~ To best accommodate the projected operational demand at Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field through the year 2018, several alternatives for airport and associated facility development were evaluated. The forecast operations and goals of the City of Kerrville relative to aviation development and economic enhancement were considered. These generalized alternatives are outlined and discussed in the following narrative. Following a review of the airside development alternatives, the purpose of which is to fulfill major facility requirements (basic runway and taxiway configuration), recommendations for landside development activities are presented. ~ Because all other airport functions relate to and revolve around the basic runway/taxiway layout, airside development alternatives must first be carefully ' examined and evaluated. Specific considerations include runway/taxiway design and dimensional standards, as well as surrounding airspace considerations and approach protection criteria needed to support the forecast use through the planning period. The main objective of the alternatives analysis presented herein is to analyze those alternatives, which will result in a runway/taxiway system capable of accommodating the forecast aviation activity. Alternatives The following airside development alternatives were investigated. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update D.3 ` Alternative One. Resolve existing Runway 12/30 ARC C-II Dimensional Criteria Deficiencies, strengthen the Runway 12/30 and parallel taxiway pavement, and improve L non-precision approach visibility minimums to Runway 30. •Runwa 12/30. Dis lace the Runwa 12 a roach threshold 1,100 feet and y P y PP implement declared distances standards, which requires specified publication, signing and lighting requirements, to resolve existing Runway 12 safety area (SA) and object free area (OFA) dimensional criteria L deficiencies. The following runway lengths were tabulated utilizing declared distances criteria: "i TORA TODA ASDA LDA ~ Runway 12 6,000' 6,000' 6,000' 4,900' ._ Runway 30 6,000' 6,000' 4,900' 4,900' ~ The existing Runway 30 SA and OFA deficiencies are to be resolved with the __. relocation/realignment of a segment of Airport Loop Road and S.H. 27. In addition, the Runway 12/30 and parallel taxiway pavement are to be r strengthened, with apost-planning period 1,100-foot extension being identified to Runway 30. ~ • Runway 03/21. Relocate the Runway 03 displaced threshold 325-feet to __ eliminate the existing intersection with Runway 12/30 and resolve the current runway visibility zone deficiencies. Maintain the existing ARC B- ~ I/Small Airplanes Only dimensional standards and strengthen pavement to ,_ 12,500 single wheel gear configuration. r • Taxiway System (Runway 12/30). Relocate the parallel taxiway system to a __ 300-foot runway centerline separation to resolve existing ARC C-II design standard deficiencies. Apost-planning period 1,100-foot extension is also ~ illustrated in conjunction with the proposed extension to Runway 12/30. ~I • Taxiway System (Runway 03/21). The existing parallel taxiway system is to ~ be maintained, but strengthened commensurate with Runway 03/21 pavement. • Instrument Approach Criteria. Lower the Runway 30 visibility minimums _ to 3/a mile, with 300-foot ceiling minimums, and install a medium intensity approach lighting system (MACS). The size of the Runway 30 approach RPz ~ is to be enlarged (i.e., 1,000' x 1,510' x 1,700') to comply with the specified _ xPZ design standards for Approach Category C aircraft and visibility ^ r Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update D.4 r r r r ^ ^ ^ ^ i r L L minimums of not lower than 3/a mile. The Runway 12 approach RPZ is to be maintained at its existing dimension of 500' x 1,010' x 1,700', in accordance with the not lower than one statute mile approach visibility minimums. The application of declared distances standards specifies the relocation requirements of the approach RPZ, in conjunction with the proposed Runway 12 displaced threshold, and defines the location/dimensional criteria associated with the establishment of a departure RPZ. Therefore, two RPZs will be illustrated on Runway 12, an approach and a departure RPZ, and each will be dimensioned at 500' x 1,010' x 1,700'. In addition, maintain the existing visual approach minimums to Runway 03/21. • Landside Development. The existing landside development and expansion areas will not be impacted by any previously identified airside design standard revisions. Undeveloped land parcels in the vicinity of the general aviation ramp and adjacent to Runway 03/21 could still be developed. Property/Easement Acquisition. The City of Kerrville does not currently own or control those portions of the existing RPZs, which extend beyond the boundary of the airport. The acquisition of approximately six (5.8) acres, purchased in the form of an avigation easement, would be required to control those portions of the future Runway 12 approach and departure RPZs, which extend along the south side of S.H. 27. Fee simple property acquisition, consisting of approximately twenty (20.3) acres is recommended for those portions of the future Runway 12 approach and departure RPZs, which extend beyond the current airport boundary on the north side of S.H. 27. In addition, approximately forty-seven (46.5) acres of property acquisition are recommended to accommodate the realignment of S.H. 27 and Airport Loop Road, as well as that portion of the post-planning Runway 30 approach RPZ, which extends beyond the current airport boundary. • Development Projects. The major projects associated with the Alternative One development include: 1) Realign/reconstruct asegment of S.H. 27. 2) Relocate and strengthen the Runway 12/30 parallel taxiway system. 3) Strengthen Runway 12/30. 4) Realign reconstruct asegment of the airport entrance road. 5) Install MALS to Runway 30. 6) Strengthen Runway 03/21. 7) Acquire property and avigation easements to control those portions of the future Runway 12 RPZs, which extend beyond airport property [approximately twenty-six (26.1) acres]. Kerrville MunicipaULouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update D.6 8) Acquire property and avigation easements to control those portions of the future Runway 30 RIYLs, which extend beyond airport property [approximately twenty-two (22.3) acres]. 9) Acquire property to accommodate the realignmenUrelocation of s.H. 27 and Airport Loop Road [approximately twenty-four (24.2) acres]. 10) Implement the specified declared distances standards lighting and signing requirements. Alternative One resolves the existing Runway 12/30 ARC C-II dimensional criteria deficiencies and improves the non-precision instrument approach visibility minimums to Runway 30. In addition, the airport's existing runway visibility zone violations are resolved. Alternative Two. Resolve existing Runway 12/30 ARC C-II Dimensional Criteria Deficiencies, strengthen the Runway 12/30 and parallel taxiway pavement, and improve non-precision approach visibility minimums to Runway 12. Runway 12/30. Resolve deficiencies to ARC C-II runway dimensional criteria, with implementation of declared distances standards, including the relocation/realignment of a segment of Airport Loop Road and S.H. 27. In addition, the Runway 12/30 and parallel taxiway pavement are to be strengthened; however, the proposed 1,100-foot extension to Runway 30 is recommended for construction within the specified twenty-year planning period. Therefore, the following runway lengths, which include the proposed runway extension, were tabulated utilizing declared distances criteria: TORA TODA ASDA LDA Runway 12 7,100' 7,100' 7,100' 6,000' Runway 30 7,100' 7,100' 6,000' 6,000' Runway 03/21. As with Alternative One, the Runway 03 displaced threshold would be relocated 325 feet to eliminate the existing intersection with Runway 12/30 and resolve the current runway visibility zone deficiencies.. Maintain the existing ARC B-I/Small Airplanes Only dimensional standards and strengthen pavement to 12,500 single wheel gear configuration. Kerrville Municipat/louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update D.7 e .,~ t ti` ~ .'1X,_-'c^ss'~s, .mac F i ~~c -.. _ ~1r~1"' tiaY i -aaa71 ; R_ r 1 `- ~ BanuNDUnkeltw,gaCOmMm .- c '-.<• P F''; y A~a~ ~. -,~a,~:trs. ft ~4_N~ '~~ ~\'.ne^rls, - RDREn9ima.in9.lnc ~A.,,. ~ ~:~ K' '~.W~~~~a._ .,p "~~sy~1~.'v 1~j iA, y_ `}_'k~ <~ .-~ ~ f;: :r,*=~ ~ Long•TermAvlation-Related ~ R '~, ~.., -_.,,~~ i„ -° ~ ,Q`t~ to ment Area (25.5 Acres) ~..t a~ ~T~: h. ,y~:'~,.m a ~,~n' -Y„ a ~+~ `` ~,# - ~~ Deve P ~>R ^s , ,~~, ~~;° - Fes']`. ~. ~ ^/~~ 's'ue' 1 ~ °M• - ~. z ~ s _ c-s *r. ~~ - _ -I,~ ~~. . k -d Re . - _ i-_ / ~.,. '~ •n r ° •^ c "4k ~`S•M'..R . A IIA + .. "~:: - ~ ~ '~' y 'F-i3c ~ t a` w~'~ "~` ~ G it p O ~ d .~ '•~. "-~°~ } ; w. - ~Fc ~~. . ~ r~eFj t- aLS`i sKi ,~ _ ~ Z ~ a "f,. /'~. 1 }. ~ _ ~._ i~ ~.. * r Future General Avg ? ~2,X~ ~ ~~i'3- ~`~ - a Irl ` o ~. ' ~ ansion rea ~ £ a- ~`' ~ 1 ,,'d` ~ 4 x''s~ Future Aviation-Related / ~ : f ~ l.A ,~ , - ., Developm ~ ~ ~ Industrial Expansion Area ~ • ~ - ~ _,,~ ~~ ~~ .~ , . Future General Aviation . ' '"`4 $ Expansion Area (20.0 Aues) ;„ (10.5 Acres) ~l. rn _ '.Fdtu General Aviation Protection Zone . .~ _ r: o '' '' Area 114.5 Acres ~ E rte.. " '` Existing Runway ,.,::~~.: ~ ~ ~. ~~Expan _~ ~' ~. '~` 1-mile VisibilityMznimums " - -F ~ ,,, ~ _ - ~ _~G 'L;f :, , ~,~~ r,,P Protection Zone ,y ~ 1 ~ ; _ Future Runway x z ~ ~ - ~. \` t ~ ~ Future Aviation-Related ~~.'~~~Fk-P ~1 mile Visibility Minimums _ - ~ ~ '1 ° ment Area 124.0 Acres) ~~~ future Property ~ _~ ~ Develop .?a :` a ~ ~„~;. ,~ _. tw ~, ~ti:' D x ~~'t ,` <:~.~<::., ~'k)},, x i ~ , y.~ ~* Acquisition(4.5Acres)_. ~- - a ;'. f ` - Relocate/Realign Future Parallel : ~ •~ ~z~ - .;- Road Future Property „ tl ! ~ ~ Taxiway Relocation x ,,. .-~ ~ .Airport Loop ,~ Acquisition (20.2 Acres) ~ .r_--.---- x art ^.>j ~ ~ ~ _ ti i ~ _ ~~ j~a~~~- future Dep ure RP2 , i `,, mow;-- ; .~ r r '. ~~,~~,r( ' Future 325' ~--~"' ~ ~ .~.'~' ,. .o- ~/. +s -~. Future RPZ ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ 1 elocated Threshold ~ ~r ~--_ - _ ~ ' +~" '' T Future RPZ Easement Acquisition ~ ~ - _ m~.\~~~ ~ e . "~ -Easement Acquisnion (11.6 Acres) ,~ _ r s 1 ~~t----~.,_~~ ~ { ~ ~ "` Acres) rot # ~(0 I re MA~.S Futurae unway - -- ~,. ~ . _ ~ o ._~ _ . -.-r (yn eme ~~ ,a ~ ~ _ r~~-~ Extension ?t ~'x .. -- - -~-~~- ~`"' "' Future 1,100' Runway _ Future Property Acqulsluon ent ( a.-~ Realignm Q ~ ~ d Th ~~~ Highway 2J „p._t Future 1,100' Displace reshold j _ __ _ _. _ __ ~-~ Q,o~ ~ Protection Zone ~ 'Future RPZ Easement Acq s , Future Runway ~ (0.5 Acres) '~ ` ' ~ ~~ g, 3 f4-mile Visibility Minimums ~ Legend ._ ., _ L Exfsnn9 auJdings ~--~ -~ ______._ _ ____ _ qn m.wrt rroaro -_ ... - _ I'~, y1C1NrT' MAP s~-~ ~ Exisdn9 Bulldtn9s ott Nrpon PfoD.nY _,_-"__-_,.;_ - _. KERRVILLE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT I tea" ,~ Q Runway Protection Zone IRPD J ~~I orlon Easement re~a _~_-.--- _ ~i ~. -~ _ _ s _ . _ "..,....., ExisUin9 ppZ(AVig a r® II`I j1,T`"~~\C\ A,,; n;qn Easem=-6 ---___- -""--- _-_ --- • Taxiway System (Runway 12/30). Relocate the parallel taxiway system to a 300-foot runway centerline separation to resolve existing ARC C-II design standard deficiencies and extend the parallel taxiway system 1,100 feet in conjunction with the proposed extension to Runway 12/30. Taxiway System (Runway 03/21). The existing parallel taxiway system is to be maintained, but strengthened commensurate with Runway 03/21 pavement. Instrument Approach Criteria. Lower the Runway 12 visibility minimums to 3/a mile, with 300-foot ceiling minimums, and install a MALS. The size of the Runway 12 approach RPZ is to be enlarged (i.e., 1,000' x 1,510' x 1,700') to comply with the specified RPZ design standards for Approach Category C aircraft and visibility minimums of not lower than 3/a mile. The Runway 30 approach RPZ is to be maintained at its existing dimension of 500' x 1,010' x 1,700' in accordance with the not lower than one statute mile approach visibility minimums. The application of declared distances standards specifies the relocation requirements of the approach RPZ, in conjunction with the proposed Runway 12 displaced threshold, and defines the location/dimensional criteria associated with the establishment of a departure RPZ. Therefore, two RPZs will be illustrated on Runway 12, an approach and a departure RPZ. The departure RPZ will be dimensioned at 500' x 1,010' x 1,700'. In addition, maintain the existing visual approach minimums to Runway 03/21. • Landside Development. As with Alternative One, the existing landside development and expansion areas will not be impacted by any previously identified airside design standard revisions. However, approximately twenty (20.0) additional acres would be available for landside development following the proposed relocation/realignment of Airport Loop Road. Property/Easement Acquisition. As with Alternative One, property and avigation easement acquisition will be required at each end of Runway 12/30. The acquisition of approximately twelve (11.6) acres of avigation easement would be required to control those portions of the future Runway 12 approach and departure RPZs, which extend along the south side of S.H. 27. Approximately twenty (20.2) acres of property acquisition are also required on the north side of S.H. 27, within those portions of the future Runway 12 approach and departure RPZs, which extend beyond the current airport boundary. In addition, approximately sixteen (15.5) acres of property acquisition are recommended to accommodate the realignment of Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update D.9 S.H. 27 and Airport Loop Road, including approximately ten (10.4) acres of avigation easement to control that portion of the future Runway 30 approach RPZ, which extends beyond the current airport boundary. Development Costs. Major cost items associated with Alternative Two development include: 1) Realign/reconstruct asegment of S.H. 27. 2) Relocate and strengthen the Runway 12/30 parallel taxiway system. 3) Strengthen Runway 12/30. 4) Realign/reconstruct asegment of the airport entrance road. 5) Install MALS to Runway 12. 6) Extend Runway 12/30 & parallel taxiway system 1,100 feet to the east. 7) Strengthen Runway 03/21. 8) Acquire property and avigation easements to control those portions of the future Runway 12 RPZs, which extend beyond airport property [approximately thirty-two (31.8) acres]. 9) Acquire property and avigation easements to control those portions of the future Runway 30 RPZs, which extend beyond airport property [approximately fifteen (14.9) acres]. 10) Acquire property to accommodate the realignment/relocation of S.H. 27 and Airport Loop Road [approximately eleven (11.0) acres]. Alternative Two also resolves the existing Runway 12/30 ARC C-II dimensional criteria deficiencies, but improves the non-precision instrument approach visibility minimums to Runway 12. In addition, the airport's existing runway visibility zone violations are resolved and additional landside general aviation-use property is made available for future development adjacent to the approach end of Runway 30. Alternative Three. Resolve existing Runway 12/30 ARC C-II Dimensional Criteria Deficiencies, strengthen the Runway 12/30 and parallel taxiway pavement, and implement precision approach visibility minimums to Runway 12. • Runway 12/30. Relocate the Runway 12 approach threshold 1,100 feet to resolve existing Runway 12 safety area (SA) and object free area (OFA) dimensional criteria deficiencies, and extend Runway 30 1,100 feet to the east. In addition, strengthen Runway 12/30 and parallel taxiway pavement. The proposed runway extension would also require the relocation realignment of a segment of Airport Loop Road and S.H. 27. • Runway 03/21. Relocate the Runway 03 displaced threshold 325 feet to resolve existing and future runway visibility zone deficiencies. Maintain the Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update D.10 al~a~unRa^w NDR EM~nxrn y1CIrnTY MK N f}~c~~~~. gip- ;` _ _ n~ ""~ ^~ „ n FiguPe 0 veThrse •`~ Legend AMPCn ProPr~ `, Eanuny wna5rw+ a" un aovtnY Ci Ex53t5n9 gV5ldinga oEf AMC ~] 0.unwaY ProlectlCn 2++^trcraft, and the associated L approach visibility minimums. In addition, the application of declared distances L L Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update E.4 standards specifies the relocation requirements of the approach RPZ, in conjunction with the proposed Runway 12 displaced threshold, and defines the location/dimensional criteria associated with the establishment of a departure RPZ. Therefore, two RPZs will be illustrated on Runway 12, an approach and a departure RPZ. The departure RPZ will be dimensioned at 500' x 1,010' x 1,700'. The existing Runway 03/21 RPZ dimensions (i.e., 250' x 450' x 1,000') are to be maintained; however, the Runway 03 RPZ will be repositioned in conjunction with the proposed relocated threshold. Property/Easement Acquisition Property and aigation easement acquisition will be required at each end of Runway 12/30. The acquisition of approximately 51.4 acres of property will be required for the 1,100-foot extension of Runway 12/30, the ultimate realignment of Airport Loop Road, the MALSR light lane, and a large portion of the ultimate Runway 30 approach RPZ, which would extend beyond the current airport boundary. Approximately 3I.5 acres of property acquisition are also recommended along the south side of S.H. 27 to satisfy the existing Runway 30 OFA width requirements, as well as control the future primary surface and a portion of the 7:1 transitional surface out to the 20-foot structure height BRL. Additional RPZ easement acquisition, totaling approximately 31.7 acres is also required at each end of Runway 12/30 and the Runway 03 end. Landside Development The ALP also aIIocates various development areas for landside facilities. It is recognized that the development of these areas will be demand driven; therefore, where appropriate, options have been provided for the type of facilities that are likely to develop in a certain area. Illustrations and accompanying discussion of the proposed landside development are detailed in the LANDSIDE DEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN section described in the following pages. Airspace Plan The Airspace Plan for the airport is based upon Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77, Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace. In order to protect the airport's airspace and approaches from hazards that could affect the safe and efficient operation of aircraft, federal criteria contained in the FAR Part 77 document have been established to provide guidance in controlling the height of objects in the vicinity of the airport. FAR Part 77 criteria specify a set of imaginary surfaces which, when penetrated, designate an object as being an obstruction. Kerrville Municipal/louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update E.5 i r ^ r N ^ J J ~. The Airspace Plan, which is illustrated in the following figures, provides plan and profile views that depict these criteria as they specifically relate to Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field. The plan is based on the ultimate planned runway lengths, along with the ultimate planned approaches to each runway end. Therefore, it is based on larger-than-utility airport criteria with a precision instrument approach to Runway 30, anon-precision instrument approach to Runway 12, and visual approaches to each end of Runway 03/21. Inner Portion of the Approach Surface Plans To provide a more detailed view of the inner portions of the Part 77 imaginary approach surfaces and the Runway Protection Zones (RPZs), the following drawings are provided. An RPZ is trapezoidal in shape, centered about the extended runway centerline, and typically begins 200 feet beyond the end of the runway. The RPZs are safety areas within which it is desirable to clear all objects (although some uses are normally acceptable). The size of the RPZ is contingent upon the approach category of the design aircraft and the visibility minimums associated with the type of approach (visual and not lower than one mile, not lower than three-quarters of a mile, and lower than three-quarters of a mile). Based on the recommended application of declared distances criteria for Runway 12/30, the future approach RPZ to Runway 12 shall be repositioned to a point two hundred feet (200') before the displaced threshold. A departure RPZ (dimensioned at 500' x 1,010' x 1,700'), which is positioned two hundred feet (200') beyond the far end of the Runway 12 end of pavement, will also be required to comply with declared distances standards. In consideration of Runway 03/21, the existing Runway 03 approach RPZ is to be relocated to a point two hundred feet (200') before the specified relocated landing threshold, with the Runway 21 RPZ being maintained at its current location. - Generally speaking, the airport sponsor, as either fee simple acquisition or as an J easement, should control the RPZs. If an easement is purchased, it is a purchase of the ,_. air rights over the actual ground. It is recognized that the City of Kerrville will need to acquire additional property and easement to control the upgraded Runway 12/30 approach and departure RPZs and the relocated Runway 03 approach RPZ. ~i The Inner Portion of the Approach Surface Drawings that are depicted in the Figures r ES through E8 provides large-scale drawings with both plan and profile delineations. They are intended to facilitate identification of the roadways, utility lines, railroads, structures, and other possible obstructions that may lie within the confines of the ~ inner approach surface area associated with each runway end. As with the Airspace _ Plan, the Inner Portion of the Approach Surface Drawings is based on the ultimate planned runway length, along with the ultimate planned approach to each runway. ^ ^ Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update E.6 ~. --- - - - - ~ ~1" - ~ - -- ~, r , -~~ ~' - , ~ - _ __ - -. i i -'4 I .. :cl _ __ _ ~ _ ®', 1 i 4 4~,' _ '+ _ _ \ o - _ ~~ I.~ I \ i. ~1 -T ~ 9 ~- ' I }. ._ I I~ I~ t _ 1 ~ ~ I__~ l I I ..I I ~ 1 I . : . f __ -~ M." _r-~" 1 _ _ ~ ~~ . _ _ 4 _ J \ _ ~ ~` 1~~"! ~ - \ . 1 - •.,, - ~ ~ ~:. ~ ~w -_.~ -,- .--,, , ~.. ,, = ,. __ - .. .... y4F - ~ ...- - - -_ _ _ _ -_- __ %NI NEW CONICAL SUIFACE El wn EI Airport Airspace Drawing/Plan View c;onlcai surtace PART 77 OBSTRUCTIONS q NOTES ~ ~~ ®aa m~a...... ~~ tee. rgxrr r1 Airport Airspace Drawing/Plan View Runway 30 Approach c _ - _- ~ d._ __..-- __ PVYV NE W NW 30 EMEI~EO MRgACM rn 5AY1LL NRCRAR ONLY NON-PRECISION APPROACH SLOPE 20:1 FOR 5.000' Y1pflIZONTAI ACE EL. 1767 - 3495 PRILIARY SVRFACE 1 ]595' RUNWAY NRPORT EL 1617' IB R/W 21 EL 1617' R/W D] EL 1576' RELOCATED TMRESHOID RUNWAY 03 PROFILE VIEW RUNWAY 30 PROFILE VIEW II -' co ~'~+c sr, RUNWAY T2 PROFILE VIEW " 'h'~q _ .crncN sv.A ~ . goo s~o f -, ~o~ ~, ` ~~- HORIZONTAL SURFACE El. 1767' 7500' PRIMARY SVRFACE 7100' RUNWAY NON-PRECISION APPROACH ARPORT EL. 1617' SLOPE 3q:t FOR 10,000' r - 1' a n I RIINVIAT 1x 0. Is7]• RUNWAr ]0 loaoo' NOTES .....mR...w.,,~. ° .-...,.,-q~- ' "~v .w~a .`...°w j Mmw! puallnl! 4^M^~h amaFll h~- .... w.. . aw..... ~>P m u. ~...i ,.... MRI EM~wInF, Hc. ~. ~7~D4~r2 AIRPORT AIRSPACE PROFIlFS 1 v+.~.w .-~,.m ^ ~„ ~,~~ ~» 4 .a. ~ ~.. ~.-.~...u KCAAYILLE MUNICIPAL/LOUIS SCHRfINER i1ClO KERRVILLE, TEXAS 3995' PRIwWY SVRFACE I 3595' RUNWAY ~ 0 2B 5~ 7 NRPORr EL. 1617' 16 R/W x1 El. 161T' R/W O7 EL. 1576' 5000' RELOCATED TNRE5IKKD RUNWAY 21 PROFILE VIEW S1MLL NRCRAFT ONLY v[~ ~' _ 1W NON-PRECISION APPROACH SLOPE 20:1 FOR 5.000' ~ SURG FrgwFr E4 Airport Airspace Drawing/Runway Profile Views I~ ~~~ `ice: ~. ~y, ~.~h Ir 'i. 6 ms I ~ Y `'S' ~,~ i ~, Rrv.v [. iaf f RCf ~J\ ~, 1. ~9~a(Y Y,J-~'11~1. 4' r ~f , . 3' ~~~. 1 a~ 1. ~ ~~~ O Raga ,.,_~ A~,o _oo--•, ~/~ H~ C -. ~/ T ~- p p ~ O .'.n r ~ / _ 00 ~' ~; - paw Q •' F t _ - ?'Y-. RUNWAY 12 PLAN ' l T ---v ~, i j ~ a~~g.~R -. 2E I ~ ~--nr-~.C__- 1 I-~~_= - ~=_-~--- ., - - - - ~ ` ~,~ y~~ -- - - ~J_-- ------- _. " ~. +q~' r .'w„'I~ cN~ n~ °°~kn ~~ ~ Y ~~I ~+ 4 ffl _ n ¢ g x R E ~ y ~e) R ~ dl 8 _ R i _ ~ ~ _ __@ _ \ vlro .IL -.~1I K411 ~l. 7_ _ _ € ~ ........,..,m..n 1. PART 77 OBSTRUCTIONS Y -- v .n n~,w ...~ ES Inner Approach Drawing/Runway 12 Plan & Profile RVNWAY 12 PROFILE µ RUNWAY DATA AIRPO RT DATA ~ LdYOUT PLAN LEGEN D ~ - (^ _ ` - R - - - _ _ - - - ' err°rE D~n~eWr.q f CRmpon~ HDR Cn ln p~r OT U g ne o~ .® ..s .„, ,„- ._ PART 77 OBSTRUCTIONS ~~ ~ RUNWAY DATA ry gIRPORT DATA LAYOUT PLAN LEGEND ~ cn..n ir~6 _. n.. x -_ ~_ _ _ a ~ ~ ~ ~-y .... a..o• er(+ eeaw eos lacloMMae recto a./o. wseeicr~. « . w.y. Figure E6 Inner Approach Drawing/Runway 30 Plan & Profile Bemore DunYeRwrq t [emRO e pR Cn9ineen~y, Inc. ~~* RUNWAY 30 INNER APPR~iOACH PLAN & PROFILE KERRVILIE MUNICIPAL/LOUIS $CHREINER FIELD KERRVILLE, TEXAS E.11 ~~ --r-_ f t-=r- --- -T-,, ~ T ~ ,; IfVNwAr JV PROFILE ~ i -r <1~`yb'~ i ___ / t - ~,~ • ~~y. ~ rA '~ i r' ` r7 ;. rte, -~- --- _ Y Y~ r j r° I ~ -1 . / z ~ / .! ~" ~ I t~,~~ ~ P ! r~ ~~ _~' ~ I ~~ ~- I = ,.. ~ y ~ ~ .,~" -- - - ~ R~ ~-~ - ,~ RVNWAY 03 PLAN r - ~ -~ ` _ rvruir I I I ""a..~ll~~ ~ I I .. I - r '' ,,,~ ~~~~ ~.o III ~~~ ~I I,~ I fi, ~ ~ ~ tl ~ \ } K 5 i u ~ c nncF o 3' ~ _ _ ~ I - - - __. -_ - _- _ ___ --_ _ -- RUNWAY 03 PROFILE -~ ~- ' BwnwU DunYHp.q a Cempgrrl per, ~D--fir HDR (~gin~~nnq, In<- ~f,F DJ/D~ RUNWAY 03 INNER APPROACH PLAN & PROfIIE NERRVIl1E MUNICIPAL/LOUIS SCHREINER FIELD ._= 'Ian & Profile E11 -~ __ -~_~ -' _"'-r--'~ .- _ .a'. n -'- - ~ ~ , ~~ f'" °°` r ~ 4,., dH C ~~w~ . r ~~ crr.~'-'t--V~'F`~..._.1 r!-~S ter) ~` -- - - _ _ _ v ~ _~~`_ ~_ i;~ ~ ~. f~ ~~--'- RUN~AY~ 1 PLAN V I ,. `I I ~~ ,~ l ~~ ~. ~~ ' ~t I I I A 1 `,~ I~ -i i J "' Landside Development Area Plan Figure E9, entitled TERMINAL AREA PLAN, presents a detailed view of the existing ~ landside use areas associated with the general aviation facilities on the airport. This -, development area was also depicted on the previously presented AIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN. r - General Aviation Facilities "' Aircraft Storage. Based on existing aircraft storage practices and airport management - assessments, it is estimated that the majority of future based aircraft will require some I type of indoor storage facility. It is projected that the future demand for aircraft r storage will consist of both T-hangar facilities and larger multi-storage hangars. A - future development area, consisting of a combination of T-hangars and executive hangars, has been identified north of the existing general aviation ramp and ~ positioned on the east side of Runway 03/21. The construction of approximately 46 - hangars is projected within this area for the twenty-year planning period of this document. The remaining infill development sites located along the general aviation ~" ramp, and future development areas positioned further to the east, are identified for a - combination of larger F`BO/maintenance hangars and larger executive/corporate hangars. This proposed hangar layout configuration, which can accommodate a ~" variety of aircraft types, will require the development of additional access taxiways and the redevelopment of existing roadways. In addition, the development plan ~ identifies the proposed expansion of the general aviation ramp approximately 270 feet `' to the north, and the relocation of the existing helipad. Two areas of general aviation - reserve have also been identified on the airport. The first area, consisting of ~ approximately 5.5 acres, is located adjacent to the south end of the general aviation ~ ramp. The second area is located east of the approach end of Runway 21, and - consists of approximately 6.7 acres. Each of the sites can be easily linked with the existing general aviation ramp/taxiway system and provided with direct vehicular Lr~ access from Airport Loop Road. ^ I^ ^ Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update E.14 l r ~.I~ /~ f ' . ~~::°" ~: ,~ f~i ~ / ~ ti ~` ~ ~ ~ wog ~r _ _ , '" i r !! z ~ ~ N az g ,r / /r /y$aa i 1 O a z 1 / J//¢ f/~ r,ra .. ~ ~o ~ R~ , ~~~ ~, ',~ ~ D / t ~f/ I (q ~C'~~ / O / /` ~ p f + hQ~' f ~`C 1 e iL O 1 iil , ` ~ ~ `I ~ ~ *s ~~. e .ar ~ - r ~ . - ~ ~ yy \ O C S. / ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~1 .. o ~ ~ 11 ~ Nv~ 11 ~ 1 ~ `~- 1 1 1 4"0 'o a 1 ~. w5z s 1l 1 \ ~ 1 i ~~ A~ k \ ~~. 1' t 1 t s>t ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ \ ~ - ~I~ ,~\ 1 ~- la='~:i°~'~ ~_~ ~\~~~ ~~ , ~%~~YG~~~ir~~~ °; ~ of - 3 \ a ion t~__R~4 a "~. , i b4 i af•~~- 9, --c 0g e~~ ~~94 ! \ . nib ~~ j \ 1~5 9 ~; ~ ~~ \ O ~~~~~~~i~ t illy ~ 1 i e \ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~A ~ o ,. Q m \\ ~~~~~~x 11 ,, ' _ v. ,~`' ~a~ I ~' ~~ ~ t. ~ tit ,, ,~~ E ~ 9 11 __~~ ~"~SSq~ J ~ R A ~~ g~~~i t" j i ~ S ~_ ~ ~ ; qtr ~g ~~ ~ 6 ~~! ~t~ 0 QD l ~o ~~ J J Aviation Support Facilities Fuel Storage Facility. The existing fuel storage facility is located northeast of the J existing general aviation development area and near the terminus of Airport Loop _ Road. Following the conversion of the adjacent roadway to an access taxiway, fuel trucks will be provided direct access to the airfield without utilizing the public access roadway system. It is also recommended that the Spill Prevention Control and Counter measures (SPCC) plan be maintained and updated as necessary for the airport's fueling operation, and that the future construction and operation of all fuel storage facilities maintain compliance with specified airport rules and regulations, applicable uniform Building Code Standards, fire codes, and recommendations of the National Fire Protection Association. J Rotating Beacon. The airport's rotating beacon is located atop an existing water tower positioned west of the Mooney Aircraft Corporation manufacturing facilities. The water tower is scheduled for removal; therefore, a new development site has been identified on airport property. The proposed site is located southeast of the Runway 21 approach end, located adjacent to FAA's Remote Control Air to Ground ^, J Communication (RCAG) facility. Associated Development Several additional acres of both developed and undeveloped property are available within the airport boundary, which are well suited to accommodate aviation or - aviation-related facilities. Aviation-Related Manufacturing Facilities. The Mooney Aircraft Corporation, located - on the west side of Runway 03/21 and just north of the approach end of Runway 12, J is incorporated within an existing leasehold of approximately 50.6 acres. An additional 10.4 acres have been identified for future expansion north of the existing - building complex. Aviation or Non-Aviation-Related Industrial Facilities. The ALP also identifies several - tracts of undeveloped airport property that are suitable for various future industrial J uses. The first tract, located northeast of the Runway 30 threshold, consists of approximately 27.4 acres that can be provided with direct vehicular access from - Airport Loop Road. The second area, located east of the existing general aviation ' development area, consists of approximately 9.2 acres that are provided with direct r vehicular access from Airport Loop Road. The third area is located within the - northeast quadrant of the airport, directly east of the Runway 21 threshold. This r Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update E.16 L future development area, which includes the existing RCAG facility and future rotating beacon, consists of approximately 33.3 acres. It is recommended that the City of Kerrville continue to market and develop potential development areas, ensuring a long-term revenue stream for use in the operation and maintenance of the airport. Airport Property Map ' The AIRPORT PROPERTY MAP, which is presented in the following illustration, indicates how various tracts of land within the airport boundaries were acquired (e.g., Federal funds, surplus property, local funds, etc.). The purpose of the Airport Property Map is to provide information for analyzing the current and future aeronautical use of land acquired with Federal funds. Land Use Drawing ' Figure El 1, entitled LAND USE DRAWING, depicts existing and recommended use of all land within the ultimate airport property line, including the area contained in the future 65 DNL noise contour. The purpose of the Land Use Drawing is to provide airport management a plan for leasing revenue-producing areas on the airport. It also provides guidance to local authorities for establishing appropriate land use zoning in 1 the vicinity of the airport. i i i Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner field Airport Master Plan Update E.17 ,~;,: ,.. nrw ,,.dam 1 t L=+. - ti•.,~~~'te. ~1, w IrLL ti~ .~ - . ~ _ RmawM i .. ~ ~ ~~~ . q'`A ~~r ~ SSI ~ ~ ^ \ ~\ y ~ , ~ " " ` ~ ~ `s~s ~ , +~ A ~ i"~ ~ r (4 ~~%` ~"`i~` ~ 5) c~,, ®w ® 6 ~~ ~ ~ . 6 ~ ,~. ,~~ '~l~ L` - ,~ X14) ~ ~ . KERRVILLE MUNICIPAL AIRPQRT KERR COUNTY, TEXAS aJ Rrro*d tiff Yo4 6 Pctro31 KC.P P.R ~zi ~~rme ~i :co sw6 Kwc ~'^`~po: ....`. . mss ~¢~iCM r Mr ~ StMd~cMS w WG w+ sv o` m . ~n...n .......b N .....~. •...-,^ ~..,~ ... . .,. .,: ~. .,..~ µ .ro z acrwr .cc~ ax - ` ~ ~\\ ~' L,n ,,,,.~..'w ~1 f ` +-ti-'1~ 5--~-Y -° I`~ --- -- ~12~ tah M.~. I ,~ 1~ _ __ _ _~_ ----~ LEGENO ~~` LAYOUT PLAN ,.~ 1~ -~~„~~n aARCEL DATA ~ .~ ` ---- In,,,, tl~^ ~~ :"+•,• ~~~ f%NIBII 'A AIRPOAS PROPERTY MAP ~!• ~- - KERRVILLE MUtiN:IPAlJl0U15 SCHREINEA f1CL0 x/' ,a a ~~ ~- __ ~ KERRYIIIC. iE%AS ¢.ie ~ ~,., ~- ~ `~ ~i°-~ ~~~`~~1•'••<~ # ~\ ~ LAND USE IEGONOSE I ~ Ir ~,~p ~ ~~ `~~ ~ ~ ~ yr V .~, y i ~ , ,~ ~ y.~x ~ L~ ll." t f ON-AIRPORT E~iC[1 AK.I. •~ Y ,7.~.~ j/`~ . K t ~. Y .: ~°- Y' ~ ..6 '7^` ,y {y 2.~ .. 14N11~M tl4Nil[S OE Ni !0.V l J ~ J t \\ ` +" y „p ~ sK 'gyn. '~ ~'C t ' 'r: ~, ' ~`i_.. £ ~ pCWto ~mvut avt~owt ~ - ~ 2 iL.M ~ 1 ~ c"°, }. F ~ f~ ~ ~: .{ ~.. ye A . `5' ' ~ / -~-<. O rwnC 7~ .1;t~ F ~v i N ~tl+ _ ~ w _ ~ ® AUNWY i~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Y ~~ '" ~ / ,~ ~ ~'`~-~-~. ~r I /ir avtx sP.cq RT L D UsE H.~~'Yi~\ ! '~ J 1 / ^ \ ~ ! `~ rl.+~ 1 } .~~ "T ~' ~ AIRPO AN ~ ~ 1VrA",y~yy~~ N':, rA. h ~ ~ ~'' ~ f . `° ~ ~, v ~~ ~-~_ ®°~P~SIwrA~l~tw svwc ~ - >t~ .~ - x ple nxl c~~ ~, ~, > ~ ~ s 65 DN e .e g~~v~~. ~ £ '~r e "); !~ - _ L Q~~ `row . ,r• -REUTFD ''-I. ~Ex 1 ~ d' t ` `. -,} FUTURF A Tl V IOPMENT . - 9.Z A 4 -tJ `'i K I~ ~-.' -l' Y ~\ tNPUSiRrA aE _ +'.I~ X - ~ - EXPANSrC~ R ALRES) ~ I ~'~ ~~ -.. 9~L ~~ d e~~ ~ a N (APPROX r~! E ~\ 1 ~ Y+ \\ L ~~ I ~t ~„ ~F"a ~F ~` \ ° ~5~ AAFA }~ FXPM' A 5'~ j, ~~ wry { ~ \~~ (p-PFOX. 5.5 . w '~ _ !71I.' , ~ ~a !" ~' L \~\~ IY n ~t ~ _, L -_ - smrM~~r,~, - ^S ..s ~,vaL, ~ ~ nyrwl Awn, ~[ ~~~ati\ - RUNWAY DATA ;r' ~~ ~- I ~IDING LEGEND O IONS I ,~ ~~° ~ ~+'*"YV w. p.:.s "` . ~_~ NON _ST ANDARO ..r+"~ ~,w". ~ v~~~ ~~'.r° t -~ - ' ~ rte,°°m ~ ~~A ~ A? ?-s ..s=° .~'..,~.: ' ~. ,.r'~°°" „v.. ova. ..w . ... ry . _ -- _ _. ~ w~p!~ r Via... --___-'_". - ~~ PLAN LCGEND ~.I ~, ~: aa. °~ytl'++.~~ ~ AIRPORT OATP I`AY ~_ lac °"°,`~ ~ ~'~..-a 'ss~` - ~r "~ 'c- ''''"""~ a„+.a II r.d°'..c - -~~ _ ~ gemeN O~nNAN9 r ~ -N°r~ Il ~~ ~ - x M,,,e„ IAND USL 9PAW1 DINER fKl9 ~~ ~- N 'I ,,,,, ^^ ~:.::~~w~,°~w°`".`~'.,.,,,,,«+«+ KERRVILLE M KfRRVILI[, IEXAS E.~y i _ Development Program r Introduction The airport facilities required to satisfy the forecast aviation demand at Kerrville ~ Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field have been placed into three phases: short-range (0-5 years), intermediate-range (6-10 years), and long-range (11-20 years). These facility _ requirements for each site are illustrated graphically by time period on the PHASING PLAN (see Figure F1) along with the cost estimates that are presented on the following pages. r - I Cost Estimates ~ Cost estimates have been categorized by the total cost for each facility requirement, - that portion to be borne by the airport sponsor or local entity, and that part of the total cost anticipated to be paid by the Federal Aviation Administration under the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) or similar program. In addition to airport sponsor funds, - the local share can include sources such as State or Local Economic Development ` Funds, regional commissions and organizations, other units of local government, as well as funding from private individuals or businesses. Currently, the Texas - Department of Transportation (TxDOT) Aviation Division administers both state and ` federal funding of airport development projects at general aviation airports through the State Block Grant Program. The percentage of costs borne by the FAA is subject to change depending upon current funding legislation and policy at the time of construction. The relationship between - local and anticipated federal funding as shown in this document is based on current L FAA/TxDOT participation of ninety percent (90%) of the total project cost. Before detailed planning on a particular project is developed, the funding structures and L Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update F.l ^ requirements should be identified to determine the current funding policies by the various entities. All cost estimates presented in this report are based on 2000 costs. Phasing Plan The following illustrations and cost estimates indicate the suggested phasing for projects during the short-, intermediate-, and long-range planning periods. These are suggested schedules and variance from them may be necessary, especially during the latter time periods. Attention has been given to the first five years as being the most critical and the scheduled projects outlined in that time frame should be adhered to as much as is possible and feasible. The demand for certain facilities, especially in the latter time frame, and the economic feasibility of their development are the prime factors influencing the timing of individual project implementation. Care must be taken to provide for adequate lead-time for detailed planning and construction of facilities in order to meet aviation demands. It is also important to minimize the disruptive scheduling where a portion of the facility may become inoperative due to construction and to prevent extra costs resulting from improper project scheduling. All property and avigation easement acquisition needed within the runway's existing and future runway protection zones (RPZs) has been scheduled for the short-range time period to protect the airport's future precision instrument approach capabilities. Future property acquisition needed for the ultimate development of the airport has also been scheduled for the short-range time period to facilitate the implementation of the recommended development plan. Cost Summary As presented in the respective tables, the Development Plan cost estimates for the twenty-year planning period, not including maintenance and operational expenses, amount to approximately $11,411,602. The anticipated FAA/T'xDOT share is some $8,618,942 and the sponsor share is approximately $957,660. In addition, approximately $1,835,000 has been classified as revenue-generating expenditures, which are typically financed by tenants or private developers (in some cases, where it j is justified by projected revenue, these projects might be financed by revenue bonds). Of the sponsor's share of funds needed to develop Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field, approximately $658,460 is required during the short-range period, $71,700 during the intermediate-range period, and the remaining $227,500 during the long-range period. Additionally, maintenance and operation expenses will increase as the airport develops and more airport facilities are completed. Revenues generated by Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update F.2 .r r airport facilities should also increase. It is a worthy and feasible goal that operational expenses and revenues should balance at the airport. This relationship should, however, be monitored closely so that future imbalances can be anticipated and provided for in the budgeting and capital improvements process. The federal share required for development of Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field includes programmed expenditures of $5,926,140 during the short-range period, $645,300 during the intermediate-range period, and $2,047,500 during the long-range period. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update F.3 Table Fl PHASE I (0-5 YEARS) DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROJECT COSTS Kerrville MunicipaULouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update Total Recommended Financing Method Project Description Note Costs Sponsor Private State/Federalt' A.l Acquire Property for Future Reloca- tion/Realignment of Aitpon Loop Road (Approx. 1.0 Acre) A_2 Realign Segment of Airport Loop Road with Signage & Landscaping (Initial Relocation) A.3 Displace the Runway 12 Threshold 700' & Implement Declared Distances Criteria with Lighting and Signing A.4 Relocate & Upgrade the Runway 12 VAST with PAPI 2 @ Initia1700' Threshold Displacement A.5 Install Runway 12 REILs @ Initial 700' Threshold Displacement A.6 Construct New Helipad A.7 Acquire Property for Existing OFA Dimensional Criteria, Fu[ure Primary Surface, and BRL Requirements (Approx. 31.5 Acres) A.8 Acquire RPZ Easement for Future Runway 12 & 03 RPZs (Approx. 24 Acres) A.9 Acquirc RPZ Easement for Future Runway 30 RPZ (Approx. 8.3 Acres) A.10 Svengthen Runway 12/30 A.I 1 Relocate and Svengthen the Runway 12/30 Parallel Taxiway System A.12 Install Runway 30 MALSR A.13 Construct Two 8-unit T-hangars with Vehicular Access Road & Parking (Phase One) (b A.14 Construct Phase One Access Taxiway to Serve'I'wo 8-unit T-hangar Facilities A.IS Acquire Property for Future Runway 30 RPZ, and Long-Term Runway Extension (Approx. 50.4 Acres) A.16 Construct Airpon Boundary Fencing at New Airport Property Line A.17 Expand Existing General Aviation Apron (Approx. 7,370 Square Yards) A.18 Install Runway 03/21 PAPI-2 at Each End A.19 Replace Rotating Beacon & Tower A.20 Install Runway 03/21 MIRLs A.21 Install Runway 03 & 21 REILs $200,000.00 $20,000.00 $625,100.00 $62,510.00 (Project has been Implemented) (Project has been Implemented) (Project has been Implemented) $45,000.00 $4,500.00 $375,000.00 $37,500.00 $24,000.00 $2,400.00 $lo,ooo.oo $l,ooo.oo $2,049,300.00 $204,930.00 $1,731,200.00 $173,120.00 $250,000.00 $25,000.00 $620,000.00 $620,000.00 $10.000.00 $1,000.00 $800,000.00 $80,000.00 $so,ooo.oo $s,ooo.oo $345,000.00 $34,500.00 (Project has been Implemented) $35,000.00 $3,500.00 (Project has been Implemented) (Project has been Implemented) $]80,000.00 $562,590.00 $40,500.00 5337,500.00 $2 ],600.00 $9,000.00 $1,844,370.00 $1,558,080.00 $225,000.00 $9,000.00 $720,000.00 $45.000.00 $310,500.00 $31,500.00 Sub-TotaUPhase 1 $7,169,600.00 $654,960.00 $620,000.00 $5,894,640.00 Notes Cost cstimates, based on 2000 data, are intended for preliminary planning purposes and do not reflect a detailed engineering evaluat (a State and Federal Funding is administered by the TxDOT Aviation Division through the State Block Grant Program. (b Subject to private or revenue bond financing. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update F.4 J r ~I r ~f J J :I L ~. L L Table F2 PHASE Il (6-10 YEARS) DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROJECT COSTS Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update Total Recommended Financing Melhod Project Description Note Costs Sponsor Private State/Federal(' B.1 Strengthen Runway 03/21 & Pazallel Taxiway System $480,000.00 $48,000.00 $432,000.00 B.2 Convert Existing Airport Access Road to Connector Taxiway (b $67,000.00 $6,700.00 $60,300.00 B.3 Extend New Airport Access Road to Serve Existing Corporate Hangar $SO,000.DO $5,000.00 $45,000.00 B.4 Construct 14 Executive Hangars with Vehicular Access Road & Parking (b $625,000.00 $625,000.00 B.5 Construct Access Taxiway to Serve Executive Hangars $120,000.00 $12,000.00 $108,000.00 Sub-Total/Phase ^ $1,342,000.00 $71,700.00 $625,000.00 $645,300.00 Notes Cost estimates, based on 2000 data, are intended for preliminary planning purposes and do not reflect a detailed engineering evaluat (a State and Federal Funding is administered by the TzDOT Aviation Division through the State Block Grant Program. (b Subject to private or revenue bond financing. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update F.5 Table F3 ' PHASE III (I1-20 YEARS) DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROJECT COSTS Kerrville MunicipaULouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update Tolal Recommended Financing Method Project Description Note Costs Sponsor Private State/Federal(' C.1 Conswct Two 8-unit T-hangars with Vehicular Access Road & Parking (Phase Two) (b $590,000.00 $590,000.00 C.2 Construct Phase Two Access Taxiway toServeTwo8-unitT-hangar Facilities $]0,000.00 $1,000.00 $9,000.00 C.3 Conduct Environmental Assessment for Runway 12/30 Extension $40,000.00 $4,000.00 $36,000.00 C.4 Realign Segment of Airport Loop Road with Signage & Landscaping $550,000.00 $55,000.00 $495,000.00 C.5 Extend Runway 12130 & Parallel Taxiway Systeml,l00Feet $1,450,000.00 $145,000.00 $1,305,000.00 C.6 Relocate & Upgrade the Runway 30 VASI with aPAPI-2 $30,000.00 $3,000.00 $27,000.00 C.7 Displace the Runway 12 Threshold 1,100' & Revise Declared Distances Criteria with Lighting and Signing $15,000.00 $1,500.00 $13,500.00 C.8 Relocate the Runway 12 PAPI-2 to Future ],100'Threshold Displacement $15,000.00 $1,500.00 $13,500.00 C.9 Relocate Runway 12 REILs to Future 1,100'Threshold Displacement $15,000.00 $1,500.00 $13,500.00 C.10 Implement Runway, Taxiway & Apron Pavement Maintenance Projects $150,000.00 $15,000.00 $135,000.00 C.l 1 Realign Segment of S.H. 27 TXDOT Funded Sub-TotaUPhase Ill $2,865,000.00 $227,500.00 $590,000.00 $2,047,500.00 GRAND TOTALS $11,376,600.00 $954,160.00 $1,835,000.00 $8,587,440.00 Notes Cost estimates, based on 2000 data, are intended for preliminary planning purposes and do not re0ea a detailed engineering evaluat (a State and Federal Funding is administered by the TxDOT Aviation Division through the State Block Grant Program. (b Subject to private or revenue bond financing. Kerrville MunicipaULouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update F.6 DISTANCES I ~- DECLPRED µ ~ ~ I «,~raw .,..r,n+ f ..,,,n. °.: Win... ""„~,.~ ~_---_ _. wEATNER WINDROSE'T~ ~~,,;~.,,,,, j - _-"-~~ YIC1NITy MAP II \ ~ r 511 \~ .~ 7 '~ I ~~.~ ~~. ~ _ dr _ ,°w"' \ _. -~ 'I ,J 11 ~lURE pyt~TtONm ~TRUL` , ,.. _F , _ i we ;o'~. ~Y 1 ~, ~yELOPM~ ~~RE57 O p _ NM ~ _ iwN"' ' (AFPR4x ut wrt' . O ~ pQ i O _ _ ~ 1 ..» ~" a ;11 1 'i I ~ w ~ ~ ~ O - __ ~ww,o: oun+°c°'°m ~^- rotes ~ ~~"-~tiX~~7 I 1, ! ,.4ERy GCNEON pFEp ~ n~^" /'~ °eojs ~~ ,`'\ ~ t tOF7S~ [xRAN5r~5} O _ mM^wWw w ~' " °._: { 1 `~ ~'~~ J . ?C' "" i ~ B - _., ie~vvaax. a. ~ ~eo0 ~ v "'~,°"~,..: ~; ~„",S~ w, s ~ 1 Q ~~V .1 .~i C O cwa"r~ ~ w~ ..r""' ~', A _ ~ G? O rwN ,,, p~~~., 1*f a Fur°~ ~ cxD aN O _ ,aN-FErrTm ~ ,* 11 y.2 nc sJ 4 8 ~\ _ I N .r oM/ovrxENr ~ 1 _ ~xvvaox. O _ ~ - I ~-.".~ rneasirsui~ ~ 1 , B `~ ~~-- ~ tiv.~ ~~ ~~l AACP 1 I E~~ :ax p(RE3J ~ s' ~•- ~ 3 ! ~ O - 16 ^' ~ 5 P .¢ RE AYI4TIQ LppYENT ~, ~.wa .,. -~a .r:..~ .~ - ~.. s ~..~ O / FurN~~STRV° ~ ~ Acar51 - { ~1- ` ~ !ly 00 O ~/ I,~avRO mw~~~. ~~,~ ~ ~~d ;r ~1~1-a~, .. 1 ®~ "' y ~:,:,.rasi- I d 1 i~+? ° `` EVO NERAt AV Tq '~ 1 ~ -___~~J .. ~~ i _ _ ~ ",_" ~ 1, `s . ~/ "o c o~a4 D e 1 T ~~ ,j ii. ~!37~` E~P ~ y~'s £iiACF sJ ~ ,....~""~.:s^.=`'`"~„ ~..~* ~ w+~.`„~"~,. 1 ~ ,/ , `,..««i'°~~a~ .li ~~~ }',. `~`~ r s / _ 1 ~t ~, r # \o-` Lib `s•'"}.- e llw.f -, _ ;w+~'..x';,e'~% o ."~,- ,N.wr~.`1 1n°,w~ .~ " ....r `~„^~,,~"°:"~'°'+, l\ O ~~IMf ; ts'=""+°"",,,Y::•'° ~ a14 -~f~.. ~,.~.-~ °'r`_----~~~~_-~j ~-+~ 1 'I , ` ~, ~ ~ i ~_~ ~~`~ .. ~ ~ 1 ~ R a `: _~-^~".S1 N TiNG FUTJ URE _ ~o `".'~ ~~ ~ ~ .uw:m ,.n: ^!"`. ~~ ..+w, ,+" fir..., rat - I~ `t 21 >•;,~ ` 1 '°'" K 6000 130. _ ~ `, ..~~' ~- ~ y ,_ i ~ ~ ~,~:.w ~ rvr~, v.ro+r; roo ,,,G..w ..» ~.....«m. .~0 100 ~~ f _ ,N m >,. r„,w+~ ~ ,.P ~ ...o+U^ c ~rx, x'°n~ ,°°~' ~ i° a„e ~n> „w.. r a"~" .~ , ~~' .,~"'°"" ,w~~ i "a°' c., py ""°~ ~^ II O~ ti ~ •*_ .' _.. \ - C.9 wm ~ ~' ~ ~ «.s`m'n _ - - _ L LEGEND ~ v'~ ~+ d ~~ vo-n I O ~ „ ~rw'°...~`w w.+",~~r'. _ TA - ~~' _ ~,•„ ~... M1•,.:,:."'.. e:a- .~=-,rr~ O~C O ~ 8'~~ ~ ~ ""'"".~ ~~ ~ _~-~ PIRPORT DA _ " ~~~,.+n"++*--~ "-~.~-,r 1 00 0 ~ ~,rn ~,N. ~ „y,w ' ^' .. ^,,,U'°'.~e+r+ __ _ UrrFq aW6F"~ 7e OO ~O !~ J1 ","sn, :.mow ~~e~" y DATA ,u,.a. ,..: rib d :«'4 .~^" ~. _ yyMr~PrA.rf ~i"a' ~ ~ O ~ ``w,ro'' ,': .o~,°Yi ~ RUNWA ..~:o.""~,... I '",°.,,.~ u - I ~ Nox En9m"^"°, ~ ~~2 o ~w eJ q:,.q~;m'* ND '°" °` ~ ~ ^" ~.:.~.:'„••;.,~:.,, T- ~ - ~ ORAWIl1G ..!,,,. I > O' ~~~"'_` ~~ nr'A"" r~~ BUILDING LEGE I"~,."""~~_ %+ ~,°. M= ~«"". - ..rc- I AIRPORT LAYOUT SCFlRO>rtRFK1D ~~ 1 r.W°" '- ~ :~'" '~n^ .^°'" ""~.w°'""'~ ,,..-. o...~+'..e„^""'"'..~- I EyUNICIPALILWD 5 .m' ~` _ » Via, ~ PhacE; 1 ,..,,,~ W~ ~,,,,,,.:,.~~, b;.:: ~ ;;..-~ ~ ~`•~.s`~~ KERM~- KERRYtIIE, TEYJ" +e? r`'o M~"~'" ~ Phase I] I „~..,,, ..~,~ M ~^~ ~~' •.~~;'~° I ,... ~'~ ~Ph1Ge X11 I ~~~ ~.r='. ,,,n.,~... ...~- ay~. "~~.~ ~:~'"•:,. __~.~ ° CONOIT10N5 ...~ °"` STANDARD ~~x~~~~. 4 ,tea ~~ n ...--~","` NON _ ~,,,...+ ° ~ ~ ~~,,:%°++ 1 `w" L L Evaluation of Rates, Fees, and Charges L The following table, entitled SUMMARY OF AIRPORT FEES, presents a listing of fees for Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field and various airports in the surrounding - region. Fees associated with the operation of the airport are identified, reviewed, and L compared to other airports in the region to assess their "competitiveness", though this is not intended to serve as an in-depth comparative market survey. The intent of this - effort is only to provide a summary of fees at Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner ~ Field in comparison to other comparable airports across the country. To assist in this ~ evaluation, the airports selected for comparison generally reflect comparable general - aviation facilities in terms of operational characteristics. ~ Because each airport fee program is unique, it is difficult to draw a direct comparison - between Kerrville Municipal Airport and the other cited airports from the region. However, from the existing categories that can be compared, it appears that the airport ~ revenue generated from the FBO ground lease is well below the regional and national - averages. Subsequent reviews of the fee structure at Kerrville may indicate the need to raise certain rates, or implement fees not currently charged. However, the sponsor r should make decisions concerning the level of airport fees with input from the - airport's tenant and user community. The goal is to establish fees at a level that will support airport operation and that is fair and equitable to tenants and users. ^ r r I r r• L L L L Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update F.8 Table F4 SUMMARY OF AIRPORT FEES Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update FBO FBO Ground Hangar Fuel Average Average Monthly Airport/ Rental Rental Flowage Fee Tiedown Fee T-hangar Rent Location ($/sq. ft./yr.)($/sq. ft./yr.) (per gal.) Monthly Transient (SE) (ME) Kerrville MunicipaU Kerrville, TX (1) $0.05 N.A. $0.05 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. Altus Municipal/ Altus, OK N.A. $0.60 N.A. N.A. N.A. $65 $106 Arlington Municipal/ $17,000 Arlington, TX $0.18 N.A. (fee/yr.) $40 $5 $165 $300 Brazoria County/ Angleton, TX $0.12 $0.12 $0.06 $15 $2 N.A. N.A. C. E. Page/ Oklahoma City, OK $0.07 $0.04 $0.06 $15 $2 N.A. N.A. Gainesville Municipal/ Gainesville, TX $0.08 $1.12 N.A. $40 $5 $90-150 $150 Grand Prairie Municipal/ Grand Prairie, TX $0.10 $1.05 $0.15 $30 N.A. $170 $170 Greeley-Weld County/ Greeley, CO $0.16 $1.65 $0.06 $25 $5-8 $145 $336 Hutchinson Municipal/ Hutchinson, TX $1.00 $9.43 $0.05 N.A. N.A. $78 $91 Longmont Municipal/ Longmont, CO $0.12 $0.12 $0.06 $45 $7 $190 $190 McGregor Municipal/ McGregor, TX N.A. N.A. $0.10 $25 N.A. $100 $125 Mesquite Metro/ Mesquite, TX $0.14 $0.15 $0.05 $35 $3 $130-170 $350 Data Sources: American Association of Airport Executives Survey of Airport Rates & Charges 1997/1998 Volume 2 (genera l aviation airports). (1) Information obta ined from Ci ty of Kerrville. N.A. Not Available . Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update F.9 t Table F4 (Continued) SUMMARY OF AIRPORT FEES Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update FBO FBO Ground Hangar Fuel Average Average Monthly Airport/ Rental Rental Flowage Fee Tiedown Fee T-hangar Rent Location ($/sq. ft./yr.) ($/sq. ft./yr.) (per gal.) Monthly Transient (SE) (ME) Ponca City Municipal/ Ponca City, OK N.A. $2.00 $O.12 $40 $5 $100 $110 R. L. Jones, Jr./ Tulsa, OK $0.23 N.A. $0.1 $325 N.A. N.A. N.A. Wiley Post/ Oklahoma City, OK $0.07 $0.04 $0.02-0.06 $30 N.A. $125 $250 Regional Average $0.21 $1.48 $0.8 $30.58 $4.44 $128.00 $198.00 National Average $0.33 $1.66 $0.07 $45.63 $9.08 $181.80 $244.22 Data Sources: American Association of Airport Executives Survey of Airport Rates & Charges 1997/1998 Volume 2 (general aviation airports). N.A. Not Avai lable. Financing Plan Local governments typically fund airport development projects for the resultant benefits, which include meeting transportation needs, and the attraction of business and industry. With the assistance of various funding approaches and programs, future airport development can be feasibly accomplished for the benefit of Kerrville, Ken County, and much of the Texas Hill Country region. Historically, the airport has received Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) grants and other government matching funds for capital improvements. At present, FAA grants for general aviation airports within the State of Texas (e.g., Kerrville Municipal Airport) are distributed through the "state block grant program" which is administered by the Aviation Division of the Texas Department of Transportation. In general, funding for the airport's future improvement program can be derived from a variety of sources. Each of these is presented below under the categorical headings of Grants, General Obligation Bonds/Revenue Bonds, Sales Tax, Bank Loans and Airport Revenues. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update F.10 Grants Under the Airport Improvements Program (AIP), the FAA grants funds to sponsors to cover a portion of the cost of airport development, which includes land acquisition. Current legislation provides approximately ninety percent (90%) of the costs for planning and construction projects at airports such as Kerrville. Eligible items under the A1P program are normally restricted to ai~eld facilities. There are some landside improvements eligible, but they are normally those used for public purposes only. They do not include hangars and other facilities that would be used by individuals in a private business nature. The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) also participates in general aviation airport development projects by providing grants to airport sponsors. Currently, TxDOT has a policy of funding non-federally funded projects (e.g., pavement maintenance projects) at a participation level of ninety percent (90%) from the State and ten percent (10%) being the responsibility of the local government or airport sponsor. For federally funded projects, TxDOT has historically not participated in the local ten percent (10%) match for both commercial service airports and designated reliever airports; however, this funding policy has been amended to also apply to the state's smaller general aviation facilities. General Obligation Bonds/Revenue Bonds In some cases, local funding of airport improvements has been accomplished through the use of either general obligation bonds or revenue bonds. Both are interest-bearing certificates of public indebtedness. When a public entity borrows money, it may do so from an investment institution willing to purchase their bond offer. The bond is the written promise of the governmental agency to pay a specified sum of money, at specified dates in the future, together with periodic interest at the specified rate. Interest rates are customarily very low on general obligation and revenue bonds when compared to other commercial loans. Because bonds and other municipal securities are exempt from federal income taxation, they are inviting to investors as a tax shelter. Although the investor may realize only a small percentage return from the bond, the moneys saved by not paying taxes on it may be substantially above the amount returned from alternative investments. General obligation bonds are secured by the general taxing power of the local government and must be voted on and approved by the people. The cost is paid for by ad valorem property taxes and other general revenue sources. They are further guaranteed indirectly by the limitations placed upon total general obligation indebtedness that a local government may have outstanding, as governed by Texas Statutes. Almost universally, the debt cannot exceed a given percentage of the Kerrville MunicipaULouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update F.1 1 L valuation of taxable property. In most cases, General Obligation Bonds are used for capital improvement projects, typically for "essential" local services (e.g., streets, -' schools, police, fire protection, etc.), and are only occasionally used for projects at facilities that generate user fees, such as airports. -' Revenue bonds are retired from the revenue generated by the facility constructed, or L from all revenues collected at an airport. This method of financing does not impose an additional burden on the property owner and does not require voter approval as in - the case of general obligation bonds. Also, the indebtedness created does not count L against the city's bonding capacity and sales tax revenue can be applied to retiring revenue bonds. Where the project to be financed does not have a benefit for all - citizens, and generates revenue, the revenue bond is especially attractive because it has as an underlying concept that the users pay for benefits received. r -' Revenue bonding is not available to all who seek it. The issuer of the bond must be ~ able to demonstrate the ability to generate sufficient funds to repay the loan. r Financing a project designed to generate sufficient income to retire principal and pay -' interest entails analysis of the earnings, past or future, and comparing that with bond performance requirements. These performance requirements often are too stringent to r be met by some airports since they may not have the substantial earnings history - sought by investment institutions. All bonds must be issued pursuant to Texas Statutes. r -- Sales Tax ~ Where revenues are sufficient, a certain portion of the sales tax can be earmarked for - various improvements. Some communities have voted an additional sales tax levy to be applied towards specific projects. These sales tax revenues can be used to retire ~ revenue bonds or they can be directly applied towards capital improvement funding - needs. r Bank Loans Some public entities, where evidence of ability to repay is adequate, have been able to ~ obtain direct bank loans for certain improvements. These can at times be obtained at - low interest rates and with flexibility in the payments. Airport Revenues L Sound leasing practices are very important in the development of a financial program for an airport. An airport is both a public service and a business, and must be - operated as both. Financial assistance to a public airport is often provided by the city, L - Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update F.12 1~ county, state, federal and private sources where available. In return, the airport provides jobs, promotes development, and supplies economic benefits to the area that it serves, as well as providing a major element of the public transportation system. This is the public service component. From a business standpoint, the airport has the ability to generate certain revenues and, therefore, the obligation to do so. The most successful and satisfactory method of accomplishing this, whether it be through the leasing of aviation activities or industrial activities, is through rental rate methods. Airport revenue sources can be divided into five major categories: airfield area, terminal area concessions, airline leased areas, other leased areas, and other operating revenue. The following narrative provides a brief description of each category. ' Airfield Area. The airfield area, or airside, of the airport produces revenues from sources that are directly related to the operation of aircraft. Included in this category are landing fees (charged to airlines, itinerant aircraft, and military or government aircraft), aircraft parking charges related to hangar storage or apron tiedowns, and fuel flowage fees charged to FBOs and other fuel suppliers. i Terminal Area Concessions. The terminal area concessions include all the non-airline users of the terminal area. Food and beverage concessions, travel services and facilities, specialty stores and shops, personal services, amusements, display advertising, and outside terminal concessions such as auto parking and ground transportation provide examples of this type of revenue source. There is presently no commercial airline passenger service provided at Kerrville Municipal Airport, and therefore, no revenue is generated from terminal area concessions. Airline Leased Area. Airline leased areas include revenue derived from the airlines for ticket counters, office rentals, ground equipment rentals, cargo terminals, hangars, operations, and maintenance facilities. There is presently no commercial airline passenger service provided at Kerrville Municipal Airport, and therefore, no revenue is generated from airline leases. Other Leased Areas. All of the remaining leased areas on the airport that produce revenue are brought together under this category. FBOs, maintenance facilities, flight schools, freight forwarders, governmental units and businesses located within an airport industrial complex would be included. Other Operating Revenues. Non-operating revenues include interest earned on investments in governmental securities, local taxes, subsidies, grants, and selling or leasing of properties owned by the airport, but not related to airport operations. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update F.13 Financial Feasibility 1 l1 Ir r i r lr Due to the airport's relative autonomy from local government, sales tax revenue and general obligation bonds are not likely sources of future development funds. All other categories listed above should be considered as capital revenue sources in the future. It is very likely that FAA grants, State grants, private investment, revenue bonds, airport revenues and revenues from the City of Kerrville and Kerr County will be the major sources of capital improvement funds. Therefore, the funding of the airport's recommended Development Plan is not only dependent upon the availability of Federal funds, but also dependent upon continued revenue generation at the airport, public/private development ventures and community support. The FAA receives requests from airport sponsors that exceed the amount of funds available in the AIP; as such, Kerrville Municipal Airport will be competing for Federal funds with the other airports in the region. With this Airport Master Plan Update, the City of Kerrville can both document and prioritize its need for FAA development grant funds. Many smaller general aviation and commercial service airports throughout the country are not self-supporting; however, as shown in Table H1, entitled 1NCOMEAND EXPENSE SUMMARY, Kerrville Municipal Airport has operated with a revenue surplus over the past several years. These revenues have historically been utilized to match federal grants for the funding of long-term airport development and expansion projects. In order to fully implement the Development Program, particularly during the initial years of the planning period, the City and County will need to closely monitor airport expenses and take full advantage of the various funding instruments presented in the Financing Plan section of this chapter. Table F5 INCOME AND EXPENSE SUMMARY Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update Fiscal Year Income Expense Net Income (Expense) 1995-96 $180,573 $83,562 $97,011 1996-97 $200,219 $154,674 $45,545 1997-98 $157,145 $104,575 $52,570 1998-99 $165,250 $134,539 $30,711 1999-00 $173,891 $162,264 $11,627 Source: City of Kerrville Airport Fund Budget Summary. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update F.14 It is often difficult to assess the direct monetary benefits that a general aviation airport provides to a community; therefore, the airport should strive to continue to be self- supporting, and only those projects deemed necessary should be undertaken. The revenues necessary to fund the Development Program can be generated in several ways. One category of funds that will increase over the planning period is ground and facility lease revenues. As the airport develops, lease revenues will increase as additional commercial aviation facilities are constructed. Additional funds will also be generated from new aircraft storage units (i.e., executive and corporate hangars) when completed. However, because revenue bonds are a potential method to finance these improvements, the additional funds would go mainly toward bond retirement after the hangars are constructed. For the twenty-year planning period, it is estimated that the total sponsor share of development costs will be approximately $957,660, with an additional $1,835,000 being spent on projects that can be financed with private funds or revenue bonds. Therefore, an average of approximately $47,883 per year for the twenty-year planning period would be funded by Kerrville Municipal Airport or other local sources. The federally eligible share of development costs will be a total of approximately $8,618,940, or an average of $430,947 per year over the twenty-year planning period. As identified previously, it is expected that airport revenues will increase throughout the planning period as facilities are developed and added, and as private and commercial use of the airport increases. However, it is also anticipated that maintenance and operational expenses will increase as the airport develops and more facilities are constructed. It is a worthy and feasible goal that operational expenses and revenues should balance at Kerrville Municipal Airport. This relationship should, however, be monitored closely so that future imbalances can be anticipated and provided for in the budgeting and capital improvements process. In addition to those funds that will be generated on the airport, off-airport benefits must also be considered in the funding of airport improvements. The existing commercial and industrial development located near the airport directly benefits from the proximity to an adequate and well maintained aviation facility, but does not generate funds that are directly returned to Kerrville Municipal Airport. In a larger sense, certainly the economy of Kerrville and the surrounding region profits from having direct access to a quality aviation facility. Thus, a portion of the indirect benefits that are generated by airport improvements should be returned back into the airport's basic infrastructure, to ensure continued development. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update F.tS r i ~"' Summary The monetary commitments from the City of Kerrville and the FAA that would be r needed to enable the development of the airport to meet future demand safely, efficiently, and properly are significant, but do not seem to be excessive. The level of FAA funding commitment at Kerrville Municipal Airport is governed by ~ congressional appropriations to the AIP, and need that is demonstrated at this airport -- compared with need that is demonstrated at other airports within the regional and national airport system. The level that FAA will fund airport improvements at any ~ specific airport is somewhat unclear. However, the future level of FAA funding does not alter the basic premise upon which this Master Plan Update and the resulting list of improvement projects were developed. That basic premise is demand dictated development. The objective is to provide the City of Kerrville and Kerr County with a flexible planning document that can be used to direct airport development to meet future demand as it occurs. Increased demand will require improvements to achieve a r safe airport facility that will supply the necessary capacity. If demand does not occur, -- additional development will not be called for, and the funds specified in the J Development Program for those projects will not be expended. -- The availability of airport facilities at Kerrville Municipal Airport will continue to be a vital component of the local, regional and national transportation infrastructure. r Airport users benefit from a safe, well maintained, and well-operated airport, as will --- the citizens and businesses of the community. The continued development of the airport, as detailed in the Development Plan, will require the utilization of multiple funding strategies to implement future capital improvement projects. This Master __ Plan Update proposes reasonable development objectives for Kerrville Municipal i Airport, and provides the City and County with realistic funding options to implement -rl the specified Development Program. I v I ^ r • ^ "- Kerrville MunicipallLouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update F.16 r Environmental Overview Introduction The following narrative presents an analysis and inventory of environmental information gathered through correspondence with various state and federal agencies that have an interest in the area surrounding the airport site. The purpose of this analysis and inventory is to provide preliminary information concerning environmental resources in an effort to define and identify critical resources that would need to be addressed in the preparation of an Environmental Assessment for the proposed airport development. Project Setting Kerrville is located in the majestic Texas Hill Country in south-central Texas, in Kerr County, approximately 62 miles northwest of San Antonio. Kerrville Municipal AirportlLouis Schreiner Field Airport is approximately five miles southeast of the Kerrville central business district, but contained in the corporate boundaries of the city. The airport is roughly bounded on the south by State Highway 27, Silver Creek on the west, by Johnson Road on the east, and undeveloped land on the north. The Airport Reference Point (ARP) is located at Latitude 29° 58' 36.246" N, and Longitude 99° OS' 08.447" w. The airport has an elevation of 1,617 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) and consists of approximately 506 acres. The surrounding topography _ _ consists of gently rolling hills and slopes. The climate of Kerr County is characterized as moderate with generally warm summers and mild winters. Average annual precipitation is 31.5 inches and the average annual temperature is 65 degrees F. In winter, the average temperature is 51 degrees and in summer, the average temperature is 78 degrees. Precipitation is fairly evenly distributed throughout the year, with both spring and fall being the wettest season, receiving about 17.2 inches of precipitation normally. November through Kerrville MunicipaVLouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update G.1 L L February is the driest season, but even then about 7.63 inches of rainfall can be expected in a normal year. - Environmental Analysis L Noise L In predicting the approximate noise impacts that could occur from the development of Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field, several assumptions were made to --~ determine the number of operations, type of aircraft, and the airport configuration that would be most reasonable to model for the 1997 base year, and for the end of the 1~ planning period, year 2018. If land use development is strictly controlled within - these contours, then most noise related land use problems should be alleviated before j they develop. The two sets of total operations, defined by aircraft type, that were r used as a basis for generating the noise contours are shown in the following table, _ entitled EXISTING AND FUTURE AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS, 1997 & 2018. _. Table G ~ I EXISTING AND FUTURE AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS, 1997 & 2018 r Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update r Operations by Aircraft Type 1997 t~l 2018 L General Aviation 42,901 69,900 Single Engine 36,037 58,017 Multi-Engine 3,432 5,592 Turboprop 2,145 3,495 L Business Jet 1073 2,446 Helicopter 215 350 According to TXDOT Aviation Division estimates, the total operation count for 1999 was 42,901. ~~l L Day-Night Sound Level. Noise is generally defined as unwanted sound, and as such the determination of acceptable levels is subjective. The day-night sound level (DNL) methodology is used to determine both the noise levels resulting from existing conditions and the potential noise levels that could be expected to occur with the proposed project. The basic unit in the computation of DNL is the Sound Exposure Level (sEL). An SEI. is computed by adding the dB(A) level for each second of a L L Kerrville MunicipallLouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update G.2 noise event above a certain threshold. For example, a noise monitor located in a quiet residential area [40 dB(A)] receives the sound impulses of an approaching aircraft and records the highest dB(A) 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 compute the SEL. Table D2, entitled COMPARATIVE NOISE LEVELS, depicts the typical dB(A) values of noise commonly experienced by people. This illustrates the relative impact of single event noise in "A" weighted level. Table G2 COMPARATIVE NOISE LEVELS Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update Activity dBA Levels Rustling Leaves 20 Room in Quiet Dwelling at Midnight 32 Soft Whisper (at 5 feet) 34 Men's Clothing Department of Large Store 53 Window Air Conditioner 55 Conversational Speech 60 Household Department of Large Store 62 Busy Restaurant 65 Typing Pool 65 Vacuum Cleaner in House (at 10 feet) 69 Ringing Alarm Clock (at 2 feet) 80 Loudly Reproduced Orchestral Music in Large Room 82 Printing Press Plant (medium size automatic) 86 Heavy City Traffic 92 Heavy Diesel-Propelled Vehicle (at 25 feet) 92 Air Grinder 95 Cut-off Saw 97 Home Lawn Mower 98 Turbine Condenser 98 150 Cubic Foot Air Conditioner 100 Banging of Steel Plate 104 Air Hammer 107 Jet Airliner (500 feet overhead) 115 Note: Prolonged levels over 85 dB(A) represent beginning of hearing damage. Adapted from Impact of Noise on People, Federal Aviation Administration Kerrville MunicipaUlouis Schreiner field Airport Master Plan Update G.3 The computation of DNL involves the addition, weighting, and averaging of each SEL to achieve the DNL level in a particular location. The SEL of any single noise event ` occurring between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. is automatically weighted by ' ~ adding 10 dB(A) to the SEL to account for the assumed additional irritation perceived during that time period. All SELs are then averaged over a given time period (day, ~' week, year) to achieve a level characteristic of the total noise environment. Very simply, a DNL level for a specified area over a given time is approximately equal to the average dB(A) level that has the same sound level as the intermittent noise events. -' Thus, a DNL 651eve1 describes an area as having a constant noise level of 65 dB(A) that is the approximate average of single noise events even though the area would experience noise events much higher than 65 dB(A) and periods of quiet. J The main advantage of DNL is that it provides a common measure for a variety of differing noise environments. The same DNL level can describe both an area with -' very few high level noise events and an area with many low level events. DNL is thus constructed because it has been found that the total noise energy in an area predicts community response. DNL levels usually are depicted as grid cells or contours. Grid cells are squares of land of a specific size that are entirely characterized by a noise level. Contours are - interpolations of noise levels based on the centroid of a grid cell and drawn to connect all points of similar level. Contours appear similar to topographical contours and form concentric "footprints" about a noise source. These footprints of DNL contours - drawn about an airport are used to predict community response to the noise from aircraft using that airport. - Computer Modeling. The DNL noise contours were generated using the Integrated Noise Model (INM) Version S.la, specifically developed by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to plot noise contours for airports. The original version was - released in 1977, and the present Version S.la was released in December 1996 (FAA- AEE-120). The program is provided with standard aircraft noise and performance data that can be tailored to the characteristics of individual airports. J J J J J J The INM program requires the input of the physical and operational characteristics of the airport. Physical characteristics include runway coordinates, airport altitude, and temperature. Operational characteristics include aircraft mix, flight tracks, and approach profiles. Optional data that is contained within the model includes departure profiles, approach parameters, and aircraft noise curves. All of these options were incorporated in order to model the noise environment at Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update G.4 Land Use Compatibility Matrix. The Land Use Compatibility Matrix, presented on the following page, indicates those land uses that are compatible within certain DNL noise contours. It identifies land uses as being compatible, incompatible, or compatible if sound attenuated. The matrix can act as a guide to the city for land use planning and control and a tool to compare relative land use impacts that would result from the different development alternatives. It must be remembered that the DNL noise contours do not delineate areas that are either free from excessive noise or areas that will be subjected to excessive noise. In other words, it cannot be expected that a person living on one side of a DNL noise contour will have a markedly different reaction than a person living nearby, but on the other side. What can be expected is that the general aggregate community response to noise within the DNL 65 noise contour, for example, will be less than the public response from the DNL 75 noise contour. This study generated the 60, 65, 70, and 75 DNL noise contours to determine land use impacts. The area between the 60 and 65 DNL noise contours is an area within which most land uses are compatible, but is an area where single event noise complaints are often received. The area between the 65 and 70 DNL noise contours is an area of significant noise exposure where many types of land uses are normally unacceptable and where land use compatibility controls are recommended. Finally, the area inside the 70 and 75 DNL noise contour identifies land uses that are subjected to a significant level of noise and the sensitivity of various uses to noise is increased. 1997 Noise Impacts. Using the existing 1997 aircraft operation counts and types previously presented in Table G1, noise contours were generated and are presented in Figure G2, entitled 1997 NOISE CONTOURS WITH EXISTING LAND USE. That portion of the 60 DNL contour that is centered on Runway 12/30 extends beyond the existing airport boundary at each end of the runway, and laterally from the runway centerline. However, the 65 DNL noise contour is generally contained within the existing airport boundary, with only a small portion of the contour extending over the S.H. 27 right-of- way. Both the 70 and 75 DNL contours are contained entirely within airport property. The 75 DNL noise contour encompasses approximately 45 acres, the 70 DNL noise contour encompasses approximately 91 acres, the 65 DNL noise contour encompasses 1 approximately 200 acres, and the 60 DNL noise contour encompasses approximately 445 acres. The land into which the 60 DNL noise contour extends is presently developed with some residential land uses that extend beyond each end of the runway; however, no other noise sensitive land uses are contained within the contour. There are approximately 4 acres of residential land use within the 60 DNL noise contour located northwest of the Runway 12 end of pavement, and one residential unit t located southeast of the Runway 30 end of pavement. Kerrville MunicipaUlouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update G.5 L L L L L L i r (~ I J 1 i 1 I r r Barnard Dunkelberg & Company HDR Engineering, Inc. Land Use Resfdentla! Residential, other than mobile homes and Yearly Day-Night Noise Level (DNL) in decibels Below Orer 65 65-70 70.75 75-80 80-85 85 transient lodgings Y N(1) N(1) N N N Mobile home parks Y N N N N N Transient lodgings Y N(1) N(1) N(1) N N Public Use Schools Y N(1)1 N(1) N N N Hospitals and nursing homes Y 25 30 N N N Churches, auditoriums and concert halls Y 25 30 N N N Governmental services Y Y 25 30 N N Transportation Y Y Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) Y(4) Parking Y Y Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) N Commercial Use Offices, business and professional V Y 25 30 N N Wholesale and retail-building materials, hardware and farm equipment Y Y Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) N Retail trade-general Y Y 25 30 N N Utilities Y Y Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) N Communication Y Y 25 30 N N Manufacturing and Production Manufacturing, general Y Y Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) N Photographic and optical Y Y 25 30 N N Agriculture (except livestock) and forestry Y Y(6) Y(7) Y(6) Y(8) Y(S) Livestock farming and breeding Y Y(6) V(7) N N N Mining and fishing resource production and extraction V Y Y Y Y Y Recreational Outdoor sports arenas and spectator sports Y Y(5) Y(5) N N N Outdoor music she0s, amphitheaters Y N N N N N Nature exhibits and zoos Y V N N N N Amusements, parks, resorts and camps Y Y Y N N N Goli courses, riding stables and water recreation Y Y 25 30 N N Numbers in parentheses refer to notes. ' The designations contained in this table do not constitute a Federal determination that any use of land covered by the program is acceptable or unacceptable under Federal, Stale or local law. The responsibility for determining the acceptable and permissible land uses and the relationship between specific properties and specific noise contours t intended to substitute federally determined land uses for those determined to be appropriate by n t 150 P ar are o rests with the local authorities. FAA determinations under local authorities in response to locally determined needs and values in achieving noise compatible land uses. Ney to Table i SLUCM Standard Land Use Coding Manual. Y(Yes) Land Use and related structures compatible without restrictions. N(No) Land Use and related structures are not compatible and should be prohibited. NLR Noise Level Reduction (outdoor to indoor) to be achieved through incorporation of noise attenuation into the design and construction of the structure. 25, 30 or 35 Land Use and related structures generally compatible; measures to achieve NLR of 25, 30 or 35 d6 must be incorporated into design and construction of structure. Notes (1) Where the community determines that residential or school uses (3) Measures to achieve NLR of 30 dB must be incorporated must be allowed, measures to achieve outdoor to indoor Noise into the design and construction of portions of these Level Reduction (NLR) of at {east 25 dB to 30 dB should be buildings where the public is received, office areas, noise incorporated into building codes and be considered in individual sensitive areas or where the normal noise level is low. approvals. Normal residential construction can be expected to thus, the reduction requirements are often provide a NLR of 20 dB (4) Measures to achieve NLR of 35 d8 must be incorporated , stated as 5, 10 or 15 dB over standard construction and normally into the design and construction of portions of these buildings where the public is received, office areas, noise assume mechanical ventilation and closed windows year round sensitive areas or where the normal noise level is tow. However, the use of NLR criteria will not eliminate outdoor noise problems. (5) Land use compatible provided that special sound (2) Measures to achieve NLR of 25 dB must be incorporated into the reinforcement systems are installed. design and construction of portions of these buildings where the (6) Residential buildings require an NLR of 25. public is received, office areas, noise sensitive areas or where the normal noise level is low (7) Residential buildings require an NLR of 30. (8) Residential buildings not permitted. Figure ~1 Land Use Compat-bility Matrac Srxice: FARPart150 Kerrville ,I j Municipal Airport/ Louis Schreiner Field Master Plan Update c. s 7,? Barnard Dunkelberg & Company HDR Engineering, Inc. ,~ Kerrville Municipal Airport/ ~:~ Louis Schreiner Field ?' ~~~~ "~; ~~ ~; ~ _ ~~r,. ~ ~^~ ~\ ,~- !75 DNL ~~ ,~~ ,~ © AppmxMsteScaki"c1,500' F~urz G2 1997 Noise Contours with Generalized Airport Environs Existing Land Use E~ Kerrville City Limits ® Public Residential Agricultural Kerrville ~ Commercial M u n i c i pa I Airport/~"''-~ rndustria, Louis Schreiner Field Master Plan Update Sa+~ca CiryofKenvie a~dFgrdmStreetMaoRbfsttedby texas Trdis,1997 ardl$dl.lse Suruey mrdrtedbf'~~~ h4At~at 1951& ~ T 2018 Noise Impacts. The 2018 aircraft operation counts and types presented in Table Gl were used to generate the noise contours that are illustrated in Figure G3, entitled ~~~ 2018 NOISE CONTOURS WITH EXISTING LAND USE. In comparison, the 2018 noise contours are slightly larger than the 1997 contours. The future 75 DNL noise contour encompasses approximately 70 acres, the 70 DNL noise contour encompasses - approximately 130 acres, the 65 DNL noise contour encompasses approximately 270 L acres, and the 60 DNL noise contour encompasses approximately 610 acres. As with the 1997 contours, a large portion of the 60 DNL noise contour and a small portion of - the 65 DNL noise contour would extend beyond the existing airport boundary. Following the recommended property acquisition within the future Runway 30 RPZ, -- there would continue to be no residences or other noise sensitive land uses contained ~~~ within the 65 DNL noise contour; however, a larger portion of the 60 DNL noise contour would extend over existing residential land uses located northwest of the - Runway 12 end of pavement. Approximately 11.8 acres of residential property would be located within this future 60 DNL noise contour. - Nationally, the aircraft fleet, particularly the jet fleet, is becoming quieter. The majority of the business jet aircraft that produce the greatest noise levels will, by age, ~ be removed from service during the twenty-year planning period on which this study --~ is based. In addition, the National Business Aviation Association (NBAA) has passed a voluntary resolution to eliminate the operation of all Stage 1 business jets by the year 2005, and all newly manufactured business jets comply with Stage 3 noise -~ reduction criteria. As can be seen from the previous illustrations, the larger future 2018 noise contours are dictated by a projected increase in business jet and turboprop activity at the airport throughout the twenty-year planning period. Airport Environs Land Use Planning. Noise impacts are significant components in establishing sensible land use planning practices within the environs of the airport, in - many cases encompassing a greater area than those covered by other considerations. Therefore, detailed land use planning practices and mechanisms are appropriate and should be employed in terms of establishing a proper and realistic set of land use recommendations for the airport environs. These practices can ensure longevity of growth in aviation activity beyond that programmed in this Master Plan Update for Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field. An on-airport/off-airport land use drawing is presented as a separate drawing sheet within the Airport Layout Plan Drawing Set. This drawing reflects the recommended _ land uses on and within the immediate vicinity of the airport. As identified on the ! ALP, the future expansion of the airport will result in the acquisition of property, r including one residence, which would occur pursuant to the guidelines contained in - the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act f a ^ Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update G.8 r ~ punkelber9 & Company ~~` DR En9lneering, Inc. \ ~. ~~ '~-- lei - ~ ----_ 1 ~` ~, / i 4 ~~ ~-„ 1. Municipal Airport/ Kerrvil~chreiner Fleld Lours ,z :` , .' ~, `'~, i i" /. 75 DNL 70 DNL ,` i ~. ; .;. ~~ ,' ,` I, 1 ,` ~_ Use ~_ virons misting ~'~ <,• ~,,, ,,,~es~i""',~' ~,~ mineralized pirpo~ ~ Kerrville ~i~l use ~tpurs ® punrc al Airport/ Schreiner F G3 2Q17N0. um;ts Agricultural Municip LOUT Plan UpdatE ® Kerrville City MaSteY ® Residential _ Commercial ` ~ tndustriat ~T~T~75,1997 ~~ ~~~ ~ ~gigtat199E gd Lard ~ SAY ,i +J ~' f r .~ 1~ I J I r~ ~~ 1 i V L L L (URARPAPA) of 1970, as amended. Relocation assistance would be required for the family living in the residence. There are no expected potential problems finding comparable housing, as there are a variety of housing units available in Kerrville and Kerr County. Air and Water Quality The proposed airport development outlined in this Master Plan Update is not expected to have a significant impact on the long-term quality of the air and water in the vicinity of the airport. The forecast 2018 operations (i.e., 69,900) are well below the threshold (180,000 general aviation operations, according to FAA Order 5050.4A) required to do an air quality analysis. During construction of airport improvements, short-term air quality impacts may be expected from heavy equipment pollutant emissions, fugitive dust resulting from the movement of earth for cut and fill, any open burning that may occur on the airport, and the operation of concrete batch plants. Compliance with all local, state, and federal air quality regulations would be required of all contractors (see letter from Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission in Appendix Two). The most significant hydrological feature in the area is the Guadalupe River, located approximately 1,000 feet to the south, paralleling Runway 12/30 and Silver Creek, which transverses the existing approach end of Runway 12. Airport development is not expected to adversely impact the quality of either of these two water resources. Any construction projects requiring earthwork would result in some erosion and sedimentation. However, the contractors would be required to follow guidelines outlined in the Federal Aviation Administration's Advisory Circular 150/5370-10A, Standards for Specifying Construction of Airports, which is the FAA's guidance to airport sponsors concerning protection of the environment during construction. Final plans and specifications for any project will incorporate the provisions of AC 150/5370-10A to ensure minimal impact due to erosion, air pollution, sanitary waste, and the use of chemicals. Additionally, a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit would likely be required for construction projects. Historical, Architectural, Archaeological and Cultural Resources The Texas Historical Commission has been contacted regarding properties documented within the project area that meet the criteria for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. This agency has indicated that they know of no historic or archaeological sites in the area. However, the Commission has stated that the area in question has never been professionally surveyed for such findings and one should be conducted (see letter from Texas Historical Commission in Appendix Two). Should construction activity expose previously unidentified archaeological resources, Kerrville MunicipaVLouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update G.10 work must be interrupted and both the FAA and the Texas Historical Commission would be contacted. Threatened or Endangered Species The Endangered Species Act, as amended, requires each Federal agency to insure that any action authorized, funded, or carried out by such agency is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of habitat of such species. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has provided a listing of all federally listed threatened and endangered species and candidate species that may occur within the environs of the airport (see letter from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Appendix Two). The federally listed threatened or endangered species include three species of birds and one specie of vascular plant: Golden-cheeked Warbler (Dendroica chrysoparia), L Black-capped Vireo (Vireo atricaillus), Bald Eagle (Haliaeetuc leucocephalus), and 1 the Tobusch Fishook Cactus (Ancistrocactus tobuschii). The US Fish and Wildlife Service is also interested in the protection of species that are candidates for official listing as threatened or endangered. One specie that is a candidate for listing that may occur within the influence area of the project is the Cagle's Map Turtle (Graptemys caglie). Other species that are not yet endangered, but according to the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, are of special concern include: Edward's Plateau Salamanders (Eurycea sp 7), Guadalupe Bass (Micropterus treculi), Headwater Catfish (Ictalurus lupus), Mexican Blackhead Snake (Tantilla atriceps), Big Red Sage (Salvia penteminoides), and the Hill Country Wild- Mercury (Argytamnia aphoroides). Prior to implementation of a significant airport improvement project, a biological assessment would need to be performed to determine if any of the above mentioned species occur at, or in, the vicinity of the impacted area and if any critical habitat of ~~ such species would be impacted. Should a biological assessment determine any impacts to such species or habitat, then appropriate mitigation measures would be coordinated with the US Fish and Wildlife Service and the Texas Division of Parks and Wildlife. Wetlands Wetlands are basically defined as areas inundated by surface or groundwater with a frequency sufficient to support vegetation or aquatic life requiring saturated or seasonally saturated soil conditions for growth and reproduction. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, sloughs, river overflows, mud flats, and natural ponds. Wetlands also include estuarine areas, tidal overflows, shallow lakes and Kerrville MunicipaVLouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update G.11 L L ponds with emergent vegetation, and wetland ecosystems, including those areas that affect, or are affected, by the wetland itself (e.g., adjacent uplands or regions - upstream and downstream). The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has been contacted regarding the presence of any - wetlands that may be impacted by airport development. According to this agency, they are unable to determine if the proposed runway extension project would likely require the issuance of a Department of the Army Permit prior to construction (see - letter from the Department of the Army in Appendix Two). However, they have determined several water bodies associated with the project, which could be affected during the construction process, including: Guadalupe River, Silver Creek, Nowlin - Hollow, and an unnamed tributary of the Guadalupe River. Section 4(f) Property Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act (recodified at 49 USC, Subtitle I, Section 303) provides that no publicly owned park, recreation area, wildlife or - waterfowl refuge, or land of a historic site that is of national, state, or local significance will be used, acquired, or affected by programs or projects requiring Federal assistance for implementation. It is anticipated that the improvements - recommended in this Master Plan Update will not impact such properties; however, 1 the Texas Parks & Wildlife Department did not respond to our Section 4(f) inquiry ` (see letter from the Texas Parks & Wildlife in Appendix Two). L Potential and proposed park or recreation improvements in the vicinity of the airport will be required to be coordinated with airport staff and the Federal Aviation - Administration and will be developed in a manner that is compatible with the airport. r Environmental Justice There are no projects proposed by this Airport Master Plan Update that would disproportionately affect any one racial or economic group of people living within the - vicinity of the airport. r Hazardous Substances and Wastes No hazardous substances and/or wastes will be generated from any development proposed by this Airport Master Plan Update. However, construction activities can - generate hazardous wastes, and some construction materials constitute hazardous substances. These include fuel, oil, lubricants, paints, solvents, concrete-curing compounds, fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides. Proper practices can be i - Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update G.12 implemented to prevent or minimize the potential for these hazardous substances to be released into the environment and are included below. Chemicals, petroleum-based products, and waste materials, including solid and liquid waste, should be stored in areas specifically designed to prevent discharge into storm water runoff. Areas used for storage of toxic materials should be designed with full enclosure in mind, such as the establishment of a dike around the perimeter of the storage area. Construction equipment maintenance should be performed in a designated area and control measures, such as drip pans to contain petroleum products, should be implemented. Spills should be cleaned up immediately and disposed of properly. Farmland Information regarding the occurrence of any prime and unique farmland on, or in, the vicinity of the airport was requested from the District Conservationist with the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). A response letter was not received by the MRCS for inclusion in this document. Kerrville MunicipaULouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update G.13 r Appendix One ^ ~S re Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update ~TENANTIUSER QUESTION ' S R E '' I i~1P~F,I'11_l.i ~~. Kerrville Municipal Airportl'-"'' TIJs lnwnrory Data wlli be utllked In Louis Schreiner Field ~~~ the prcp.ratlon o! th. A/rport Layout ~ - ... _ ~' P/an Update for fhe Clry o/Kenvllh. - - ;~`. ;x±~i~ Please send the eompletedform to: I ;~: ,.~::: Bamerd Dunkelberpd Company I-~~ ,'_ :~ .~ ~ Thank you ror your assts Lance. any Street ~ 7616 Ees! 15ht Stroel Tulsa, OK/ehama 7120-6027 ^ Name of Bus/nessl7enant ^ Contact Psrson/Phone Number. _ ^ 8uslnssa/SerWce Provided (N any): ^ Airport use descrlptlon: ^ Why arc youlouted of KerrvNle Munic/pal Alrport7: Ow Miry ^ fb you own alrcrc117: ^ Yes ~ No ^ H so, How many, what type and N-Numbed: ArrvaR Type N-Number ^ Estlmate Sape lanptA o/ awrape bip (naubce/ miss :100, 250, 500, other): ^ List method o/aMcnft srorcpa (AangsrArsdown): ^ Describe eheaWquacy o/your bcelWs: ^ What hnprowmants/chanpes, Many, are needed ro your bdUty7: ^ How would you rcte your aslstlnp facllhfes7: O Erce/Nnf O Good ^ Fafr O MiMmal Runway 72 Runway 30 Runwsy 02 Runway ?0 ^ Estimate runway utili:atbn (% annually): • Dons the silstinp aLfield limit or nsoict your buslnessbperation at the alrport7: ^ Yes ^ No ^ What Improvements/changes, Nany, arc needed ro the runway, taxiway or apron sysfem7: ^ What hnprowments/changes, Nany, are needed ro the sirfrold's navigational aids or InsLUment apprwch upsbUNies7: ^ What Wsle services or /acNitles does the airport rwt provide that arc needed J: ^ What does the a/rport provide fhst u unique7: J J J J J 1 J J J J J J a Appendix Two Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update Robert J. Huston, Chairman cr~t~E C'~>, R. B. "Ralph" Marquez, Commissioner ~ r~ John M. Baker, Commissioner Y lef(rey A. Saitas, Executive Director TEXAS NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION Protecting Texas by Reducing and Preventing Pollution November 1, 1999 Mr. Cody D. Fussell Barnard Dunkelberg & Company 1616 East Fifteenth Street Tulsa, Oklahoma 74120-6027 Re: Kerrville Municipal Airport/Louis Schreiner Field Master Plan Update Dear Mr. Fussell: JAS ~ '.j _. _ .;~-.J .~ _ _. , .. .._ . .. r r±q y _ ~ ryy9 The following staff of the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) have reviewed the above-referenced project and offer the following comments: The Office of Air Quality has reviewed the: above-referenced project for General Conformity impacts in accordance with 40 CFR Part 93 and Chapter 101.30 of the TNRCC General Rules. The proposed action is located in Kerr County, which is unclassified or in attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for all six criteria air pollutants. Therefore, general conformity does not apply. Although any demolition, construction, rehabilitation or repair project will produce dust and particulate emissions, these actions pose no significant impact upon air quality standards. The minimal dust and particulate emissions can easily be controlled with standard dust mitigation techniques by the construction contractors. If you have any questions regarding air quality, please feel free to contact Mr. Wayne Young, Air Quality Planning and Assessment Division, at (512) 239-0774. It has been determined from a review of the information provided that an Application for TNRCC Approval of Floodplain Development Project need not be filed with TNRCC. Our records show that the community is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program and as such has a Flood Hazard Prevention Ordinance/Court Order. Accordingly, care should be taken to ensure that the proposed construction takes into account the possible Flood Hazard Areas within the community's floodplains. Please notify the community floodplain administrator to ensure that all construction is in compliance with the community's Flood Hazard Prevention Ordinance/Court Order. P.O. Box 13087 • Austin, Texas 78711-3087 • 512/239-1000 • Internet address: www.tnrcc.state.tx.us printed on recycled paper using soy-based ink i ~ ~ Mr. Cody Fussell _ Page 2 November 1, 1999 If you have any questions regarding water quantity, please feel free to contact Mr. Mike Howard, ^r Water Quantity Division, at (512) 239-6155. We recommend the environmental assessment address actions that will be taken to prevent surface and groundwater contamination during and after construction. If you have questions regarding water quality comments, please feel free to contact Mr. Clyde Bohmfalk, Policy and Regulations Division, at (512) 239-1315. Thank you for the opportunity to review this project. If I may be of further service, please call me at (512) 239-1454. Sincerely, Mary Live Office of Environmental Policy, Analysis, & Assessment Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission i ~~~zE °~~, 'j'EXAS ~ ~ ~-jISTORICAL COMMISSION The State,~gency for Historic Preservation GEORGE W. BUSH, GOVERNOR JOHN L. NAU, III, CHAIRMAN F. LAWERENCE OAKS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR October 19, 1999 _ Cody D. Fussell _ Bamazd Dunkelberg and Company ~ ~ ~ ? ~ ~~v~ Cherry Street Building 1616 East Fifteenth Street °- _ Tulsa, Oklahoma 74120-6027 Re: Project review under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and the Antiquities Code of Texas City of Kerrville Municipal Airport (FAA and City) Deaz Mr. Fussell: Thank you for your correspondence describing the above referenced project. This letter serves as comment on the proposed undertaking from the State Historic Preservation Officer, the Executive Director of the Texas Historical Commission. As the state agency responsible for administering the Antiquities Code of Texas, these comments also provide recommendations on compliance with state antiquities laws and regulations. The review staff, led by Ed Baker, has completed its review. While we know of no historic or archeological sites in the azeas indicated on your maps, we do not maintain the official list of such sites. Also, an archeologist has never professionally surveyed the azeas outlined. An ~ archeological survey of the project area will be required. ' Areas and landforms with low potential for containing intact archeological sites do not need to be surveyed. The survey should be conducted by a qualified professional and should include shovel testing and backhoe trenching. We recommend that you engage a qualified professional ~ archeologist to determine exactly which areas should be investigated and, in coordination with our office, develop a scope of work, obtain a Texas Antiquities Code permit, and perform the investigations needed. Any cultural materials recovered should be curated according to 36CFR79. We look forward to further consultation with your office and hope to maintain a partnership that will foster effective historic preservation. Thank you for your cooperation in this state and federal review process, and for your efforts to preserve the irreplaceable heritage of Texas. If you or your applicant have any questions concerning our review or if we can be of further assistance, please contact Ed Baker at 512/463-5866. Sincerely, ' ~l~I/-~-~--- ~ /: for F. Lawerence Oaks, State Historic Preservation Officer FLO/elb enclosure: Council of Texas Archeologists Archeological Contractors List r P. O. BOX 12276 AUSTIN, TX 78711.2276 512/463.6100 FAX 512/475.4872 TDD 1-800/735-2989 www.thc.state.tx.us U,t. D APT7 OF INTEP OP 1849-1999 United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Austin Ecological Services Office Compass Bank Building 10711 Burnet Road, Suite 200 Austin, Texas 78758 (512)490-0057 NOV 101999 i ^` ~~ r Cody D. Fussell Barnard Dunkelberg & Company 1616 East Fifteenth Street Tulsa, Oklahoma 74120-6027 Dear Mr. Fussell: . -, ~ _ { - .... ~,`, 2-15-99-I-0884 This responds to your September 27, 19991etter requesting the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service) comments on the potential impacts to federally listed or proposed threatened and endangered species, their habitats, or wetlands that may result from the City of Kerrville's proposed airport expansion in Kerr County, Texas. Some of the projects proposed in the Airport Master Plan Update for the Kenville Municipal Airport/Louis Schreiner Field include a 1,100- foot extension of Runway 12/30, relocation of the parallel taxiway system, relocation of the airport entrance road, installation of a medium intensity approach lighting system with runway alignment indicator lights on Runway 30, and the fee simple property acquisition of approximately 72 acres. The information provided below is to assist you and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in assessing and avoiding adverse impacts to federally listed or proposed species, their habitats, and wetlands. Threatened and Endangered Species For your reference, we have enclosed the most recent list of federally listed or proposed threatened and endangered species that may be found in Kerr County. According to the information provided, the proposed project areas are not currently located within any federally designated critical habitat. However, we are concerned about a federally listed endangered cactus, the Tobusch fishhook cactus (Ancistrocactus tobuschii), that is known to occur in the vicinity of Kerrville. This rounded, biscuit-shaped cactus generally grows to about 2-3 inches tall and can be up to 3.5 inches in diameter. It can be found on the limestone gravels of stream terraces or on limestone ledges or ridges in the upper tributaries of the Guadalupe River. -~ We recommend you evaluate the areas to be impacted by the proposed project to determine if any ' are suitable for this cactus. We have enclosed general life history, distribution, and habitat information to assist you in making this determination. If suitable habitat is present, surveys -' should be performed to determine if the site is used by the species, especially if native vegetation r Mr. Fussell 2 will be disturbed or if the area has not been disturbed within the last two yeazs. Ideal times to survey are when the cactus is in bloom in late January and February, as the cactus is much more difficult to detect at other times. Tobusch fishhook cactus can be easily confused with another similaz variety of cactus. Therefore, if a survey is needed, it should be conducted by a professional botanist experienced with surveys for this species. There aze a number of qualified botanists who could do this work (see enclosure). Generally, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) believes that the best evaluation and determination of endangered species impacts result when surveys are done within the project area. Often endangered species habitat will not be present and the project can then proceed without further concern. If the species is present, the project can often be modified to avoid all impacts, and if this cannot be done, any compensation needed can be fairly and accurately evaluated. We request that completed surveys be sent to the Service for concurrence that no impacts will occur or for assistance in evaluating potential impacts. If occupied habitat for the tobusch fishhook cactus is found in any of the proposed project areas and impacts cannot be avoided, we recommend the FAA pursue formal consultation, on your behalf, through Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (Act). Section 7 of the Act requires that all Federal agencies consult with the Service to ensure that actions authorized, funded, or carried out by such agencies do not jeopazdize the continued existence of any listed threatened or endangered species or adversely modify or destroy critical habitat of such species. It is the primary responsibility of the FAA, as the federal action agency, to determine whether any action it authorizes, funds, or carries out may affect a federally listed or proposed species. We have enclosed literature on the Section 7 consultation process for use in future project planning. We recommend you also contact the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (Endangered Resources Branch), Fountain Pazk Plaza Building, Suite 100, 3000 South IH-35, Austin, Texas 78704 (telephone 512/912-7011) for information concerning fish, wildlife, and plants of State concern. Wetlands Wetlands provide valuable fish and wildlife habitat as well as contribute to flood control, water quality enhancement, and groundwater recharge. Construction activities near riparian zones should be carefully designed and the areas inspected for potential habitat for federally listed or proposed threatened or endangered species. If no potential habitat exists and vegetation clearing is needed in these riparian areas they should be revegetated with native wetland and riparian vegetation to prevent erosion or loss of habitat. Species commonly used for soil stabilization are listed in the Texas Department of Agriculture (TDA) Native Tree and Plant Directory, available from TDA at P.O. Box 12847, Austin, Texas 78711. We also urge you to take all precautions to ensure sediment loading does not occur to receiving streams in the project area. To prevent and/or minimize soil erosion and compaction associated with construction activities, avoid any unnecessary clearing of vegetation and follow established rights-of--way. Mr. Fussell 3 We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the proposed airport expansion and your concern for endangered species and their habitats. If you wish to discuss this matter further, please contact Dianne Williams at 512/490-0057, extension 231. Sincerely, ~~ J M J J J J J David C. Frederick Supervisor Enclosures Botanical Resources The Service does not endorse or promote any particular consultant, biologist, or company. Any qualified botanist with a good working field knowledge will be able to perform botanical surveys. However, the Service frequently encounters situations where people unfamiliar with how to locate a professional botanist will request help in beginning their search for a qualified botanist or company to evaluate their property or project. To facilitate this process, the Service has compiled a list of contacts the Service is aware of who have done field work and surveys for particular species. We make this list available to assist those who request it. Tobusch fishhook cactus (Ancistrocactus tobuschii) Ray Emmett Hicks & Company 1504 W. 5th Street, Ste. 200 Austin, TX 78703 (512) 478-0858 Tony Keeney Biology Department Southwest Texas Junior College in Uvalde, Texas (210) 278-4401 Burford Westland 792 Oakdale Austin, TX 78745 (512) 892-0690 Federally Listed as Threatened and Endangered Species of Texas June 30, 1999 This list represents species that may be found in counties throughout the state. It is recommended that the field station responsible for a project area be contacted if additional information is needed (see enclosed map). ~~ DISCLAIMER This County by County list is based on information available to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service at the time of - preparation, date on page 1. This list is subject to change, without notice, as new biological information is gathered and should not be used as the sole source for identifying species that may be impacted by a project. - Edwards Aquifer species: (Edwards Aquifer County) refers to those six counties within the Edwards Aquifer region. The Edwards Aquifer underlies portions of Kinney, Uvalde, Medina, Bexar, Hays, and Comal Counties (Texas). The Service has expressed concern that the combined current level of water withdrawal for all consumers from the Edwards - Aquifer adversely affects aquifer-dependent species located at Comal and San Marcos springs during low flows. Deterioration of water quality and/or water withdrawal from the Edwards Aquifer may adversely affect eight federally- listed species. - Comal Springs riffle beetle (E) Heterelmis comalensis Comal Springs dryopid beetle (E) Stygoparnus comalensis '~' Fountain darter (E w/CH) Etheostoma fonticola - Peck's cave amphipod (E) Stygobromus (=Stygonectes) pecki San Marcos gambusia (E w/CH) Gambusia georgei ~ Texas wild-rice (E w/CH) Zizania texana Texas blind salamander (E) Typhlomolge rathbuni ~ San Marcos salamander (T Ow/CH) Eurycea nana - * The Barton Springs salamander is found in Travis County but may be affected by activities within the Barton Springs Segment of the Edwards Aquifer, which includes portions of Northern Hays County. - Migrator~pecies Common to many or all Counties: Species listed specifically in a county have confirmed sightings. - If a species is not listed they may occur as migrants in those counties. w - American peregrine falcon (E$) Falco peregrines anatum ' Least tern (E ") Sterna antillarum Whooping crane (E w/CH) Grus americana - Arctic peregrine falcon (TSA) Falco peregrines tundrius Bald eagle (T) Haliaeetus leucocephalus ~ Piping plover (T) Charadrius melodus - Loggerhead shrike (SOC) Lanius ludovicianus I White-faced ibis (SOC) Plegadis chihi ^ - Kerr County ~I Black-capped vireo G ld h k d bl (E) Vireo atricapillus it en-c o ee e war er (E) Dendroica chrysoparia - Tobusch fishhook cactus (E) Ancistrocactus (=Echinocactus=Mammilliaria) tobuschii I Bald eagle (T) Haliaeetus leucocephalus 4 Cagle's map turtle (C) Graptemys caglei - Texas horned lizard (SOC) Phrynosoma cornutum Texas salamander (SOC) Eurycea neotenes L Big red sage (SOC) Salvia penstemonoides l Hill Country wild mercury (SOC) Argyrhamnia aphoroides Sonora fleabane (SOC) Erigeron mimegleres INDEX Statewide or areawide migrants are not included by county, except where they breed or occur in concentrations. The whooping crane is an exception; an attempt is made to include all confirmed sightings on this list. w E = Species in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range. 7' = Species which is likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all ar a significant portion of its range. C = Species for which the Service has on file enough substantial information to warrant listing as threatened or endangered. CH - Critical Habitat (in Texas unless annotated $) P/ - Proposed ... PIE = Species proposed to be listed as endangered. PIT = Species proposed to be listed as threatened. TSA - Threatened due to similarity of appearance. SOC = Species for which there is some information showing evidence of vulnerability, but not enough data to support listing at this time. p - with special rule ~ = CH designated (or proposed) outside Texas = protection restricted to populations found in the "interior" of the United States. In Texas, the least tern receives full protection, except within 50 miles (80 km) of the Gulf Coast. 2 Tobusch Flshhoolr Cactus Mcimocauus toburchfi P2S L STATUS: Endangered (44 FR 6473~November 7, 1979) without critical habitat. DESCRIPTION: Rounded, biscuit-shapod cacti usually 2-3 inches tall (rarety S inches) and up to 3.5 inches is diameter. The dark green stelae arc usually soliary and partially hidden by spines on knobby wbercles about .2S inch long and broad. There arc 3-S txntnl spores that are light yellow with rtd tips (fading gray). The upper 2-3 central spines are erect and straight, shout 1-1.5 inches long. The borer central apincs are booked at the tip and spreading. The 7-12 outer (radian apuxs arc amallcr (.5-.75 inch long), straight sad needle-It7ce. The relatively small flowers (1 to 1.S inches long and wide) arc yellow to cream with green to yellow atigmu. Blooming begins in Febtwry and is futished by mid-April. Fruits are fleshy and green, ripening with a pink ar pinkish-brown flush, mature by late spring or early summer, whh black seeds. HABITAT: Occurs on limestote gavels of stream terraces, limestone ledges, ridges. and openings on the rocky hills of Live-oak juniper woodlands. DISTRIBUTION: 1'c~eseat: Ia Texas: Bar~dcra, Edwards, Kerr, Kimble. Kinney. Real, Uvalde, and Val Verde counties. Iikt ric: Same as prosent plus other counties of the Edward's PWeau of Texas. TIHtEATS AND REASONS FOR DECLII~: Overcolletxing, real elate development, livestock damage, and flooding. Several populations suffered extrtme population reduction as a result of major flooding in 1978. _ OTHER INFORMATION: Seeds are black and caclt plant is capable of producing 20 seeds per fruit. Recovery Plan approved in 1987. REFERENCES: Benson, L. 19ffi. The cacti of the United States and Canada. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California, 1,Od4pp. Marshall, W.T. 1952. Anew and interesting cacnts from Texas. Saguaroland Bull. 6:78-81. _ Poole, J.M. and D.N. Riskind. 1987. Endangered, Threatened, or Protcctod Native Plants of Texas. Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, Austin, Texas. Saustrup, A., and M.C. Johnston. 1977. Report on the status of Ancirnocauus tobuschii. Rare Plant Study Center, _ University of Texas, Austin. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1987. Tobusch Fishhook Cactus Recovery Plan. Endangered Species Office, Albuquerque, NM. Weniger, D. 1970. Cacti of the Southwest. University of Tezas, Austir-. REV. DATE 6/95 i ~\\ L IN'T'ERAGENCY CONSULTATION ON THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT •-- '. (Sec. 7, Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended; 50 CFR 402; I 50 CFR 17, Subpart I; FR 51(106): 19926-19963, 6/3186) ~- Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act requires that all Federal agencies consultlconfer with L the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) or the National Marine Fisheries Services regarding endangered species.. This consultation is necessary to insure that actions authorized, funded, or --~ carried out by such agencies do not jeopardize the continued existence of any listed or proposed (to be listed) endangered or threatened species or adversely modify or destroy critical habitat of such species. The purpose of these requirements is to identify and resolve, at the early planning "' stage, potential conflicts between the action and these species and their critical habitat: .. For Section 7 consultation purposes, actions are placed in two categories: one consistine of j -' major construction actions significantly affecting the qualiry of the human environment and a second consisting of non-construction actions. A major construction action is defined as a construction action which will require preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). ~ " Actions not requiring an EIS are' treated as non-construction actions. r CONSULTATION PROCESS L NON-CONSTRUCTION ACTIONS. For actions in this category, it is incumbent upon the Federal action agency to assess whether its action may effect endangered and threatened species. If no effect will occur, there is no need for further consultation. However, if it is determined ~ that the proposed action "may affect" listed species, the Federal action agency shall initiate formal Section 7 consultation with the Service~unless an exception has been granted: 'EXCeptions may be made if there is a determination by the action agency,' and written concurrence by the r Service, that the proposed action will not adversely impact any endangered or threatened species. While not required, a list of listed or proposed species found in the vicinity of the proposed action may be obtained from the Service by the Federal agency or their designated agent to help _ determine if an effect may occur. L CONSTRUCTION ACTIONS. For proposed actions in this category, the Federal agency or _ their agent requests from the Service a list of any species listed or proposed to be listed that may be affected by the action. The Service will provide this information within 30 days after receiving the request. L Based on the list provided by the Service, the Federal action agency, or their delegated agent, conduce a biological assessment of the total area affected by the proposed project to identify . - impacts upon those species as a result of the proposea action: This assessment shall be completed within 180 days after receiving a list •of species from the Service. If the assessment' is not initiated within 90 days after receipt of the species list, the accuracy of the list should be - verified before conducting the assessment. ~ • L PROPOSED SPECIES AND PROPOSED CRITICAL'I=ABITAT. If the proposed Feder•1 - action is likely to jeopardize species proposed for listing as endangered or threatened, or to L adversely modify proposed critical habitat, Section 7 :equiremenu are me: by having a conference with She Service. Information similar to that Ls:ed above for formal consultation is - needed from the action aQeacv when conferring with the Service on proposed :species and/or proposed critical habitat. • _ . ~ . -.. - . ~ 3/01192 MINIMUM PROCEDURES FOR' DETERMINING THE PRESENCE OF THE GOLDEN-CNF-F-fin WARBLER.OR BLACK-CAPPED ~V1RE0 1. i ~~Conduct the survey on days when weather conditions are suitable for the detection of bird singing. , ' ~ ' 2. ~ The general limits to the survey season are as follows: ~ ~ ~ - - _ a. Black-capped vireo -April 1 to July IS .. - - b. Golden-cheeked warbler -March 15 -May 20 It should be understood that the actual survey season varies from year-to-year and knowledge of the singing activity of the particular target species should. be followed. During 1990 and 1991 the golden-cheeked warbler singing in the Travis County area declined significantly after May 20. Therefore, surveys conducted 'in the .Travis .. County area after that date would not be reliable in determining whether an area was . used as breeding habitat by the warbler.. ~ - - - -- . 3. A minimum of three visits on separate days. 4. The total survey time should be a minimum of eight hours per 100 acres of suitable habitat. - - ~ - 5. Territorial mapping should follow standard methods established by the International Bird Census Committee (Audubon Field Notes, Volume 24, pages 722-726, 1970.) _... SECTIOi~I 7 CONSULTATION PROCESS Federal Action Non-Major Construction Major Construction . Federal agency (agency) requests species list from FWS FWS provides agency with list of listed/proposed species for~action area - Listed/proposed species present ~ ~ No listed/proposed species present I _... Agency conducts a Biological Assessment "May affect" -listed "Jeopardy" -proposed Agency Requests: Formal consultation -listed Conference - proposed "No effect" -listed "No jeopardy" -proposed FWS issues biological opinion and/or conference report r r r ^ r Biological Opinion No jeopardy and no adverse modification of critical habitat with incidental take statement and conservation recommendations Agency implement I incidental take statement New information, action modified, or incidental take exceeded Biological Opinion Conference Report Jeopardy/or adverse modi- with advisory fication of critical habitat recommendations with reasonable and pru- dent alternatives incidental take statement, and con- proposed species nervation recommendations are listed Agency implement Consultation process reasonable and prude^t completed alternatives and incidental take state:reat New information, action modified, or incidentzi take exce°..ded Reinitiate formal consultation r ~ - •.'l t . _.__ .. , - - GUIDANCE CHECKLIST _- . _. - . - :. . If it is determined that the action may affect listed threatened and/or ' endangered sp-ecies; = a_i'equest :to .initiate.. formal Section 7 consultation _ should be .sent to this office, as provided by the Endangered Species Act. A request for formal consultation -should include the following: -~ -_ `- ~ . , _ - -~- ~-1.._- ._ ~ A description of the proposed action.- - -- - -. - - - -- -- --- - ~-- - 2. ' A description of the _.~specific area that the action may affect. 3. A description of any listed species or critical habitat that may be - affected by .the action. - - ~ ~ - 4. A description of the manner in which the action may affect (directly or indirectly) any listed species or critical habitat. 5. ~ Reports, including any environmental impact statement, environmental assessment, -biological assessment, or biological evaluation prepared for the proposed action. 6. Any other relevant information ~on the action, the affected listed species, or its critical habitat. ~ ' Information relating to~ the Section 7 consultation process is enclosed for your use in. project planning (Enclosure 1).- ~ .~ May 10, 2000 COMM15510NERS LEE M. BA55 CHAIRMAN, FT, WORTH CAROL E. DINKINS VICE-CHAIR, HOVSTON ERNEST ANGELO. JR. M IOLANO JOHN AvILA, JR. FT. WORTH RICHARD IDICKI HEATH DALLAS ALVIN L. HENRY HOUSTON KAT MARINE ARMSTRONG IOSAL DALLAS NOV.N RYAN ALVIN MARK E. WAT SON, JR. SAN ANTONIO PERRY R. BA55 CNAIRMAN•EMERITUS FT. WORTH ANDREW SANSOM E %ECUTIVE DIRECTOR CO11tP1'CP 11tP »ntural and cultruttl rcxuurcPs t f TP:ras fnr tlr~ use cold c•r~u~Tnr~n! rJprc~cut turd future ;[rac~ruliun.i. a200 SMITH SCHOOL ROAD AUSTIN. TEXA$ 7 8 7 41-3 29 1 S 1 2.389-4800 v~.vw. tPwd. sta [B. [x. us _ ~~ "J Mr. Cody Fussell . - ' -" Barnard Dunkelberg & Company _ ~~'~ -- - - ~~ ' - " ' - _ ~- -~ ' --- -^- _ 1616 East Fifteenth Street ~ - - ~ - ~ - ~ - : ~ - ~: _ - ' - - ~ ~ ' ~ ": Tulsa, OK .74120-6027 Re: Kerrville Municipal Airport/Louis Schreiner Field Master Plan; Kerr County, Texas Dear Mr. Fussell: Thank you for coordinating with this agency in your planning activities regarding the above referenced project. Texas Parks and Wildlife Department staff has reviewed the information submitted on the proposed project. The following comments are intended to assist in your environmental review and are provided to minimize effects of this project upon fish and wildlife. The proposed project will include a 1,100 foot extension of Runway 12/30, relocation of the parallel taxiway system and the airport entrance road, and the installation of. a medium intensity approach lighting system with runway alignment, indicator'lights on Runway 30. The project will require the (fee simple property) acquisition of approximately 72 acres. The Biological and Conservation Data system (BCD) has known occurrence records for three federal and state listed endangered species, one federal Category One species, and six species of concern in the area which are relevant to this project. These species and their habitats, if known, are briefly described below. Federal and State Listed Endangered Species Golden-cheeked Warbler (Dendroica chrysoparia) - juniper-oak woodlands distributed along steep scarps and canyons; dependent on Ashe juniper (also known as cedar) for ling, fine bark strips used in nest construction which are available only from mature trees; only a few mature junipers or nearby cedar brakes can provide the necessary nest material; nests are placed in various trees other than Ashe juniper; forages for insects in broad-leaved trees and shrubs. Nesting season is March to early summer Black-capped Vireo (Vireo atricapillus) - oak juniper woodlands with a distinctive patchy, two-layered aspect; shrub and tree layer with open, grassy spaces; requires foliage reaching to ground level for nesting cover; returns to same territory, or one nearby, year after year; deciduous and broad-leaved shrubs and trees provide insects for feeding; species composition less important Cody Fussell Page 2 than presence of broad-leaved shrubs, foliage to ground, and required structure; nesting season April -late summer Tobusch Fishook Cactus (Ancistrocactus tobuschii) -very shallow,• gravelly soil over flaggy limestone uplands in seral, shortgrass grasslands among live oak- juniper woodlands and semi-desert shrublands; occasionally in gravel along creek bottoms; absent from or undetected in later seral stage mid-grass grasslands on similar sites; flowers (January or) February-April Federal Category One Species Cagle's Map Turtle (Graptemys caglei) -endemic to the Guadalupe River System; short stretches of shallow water with swift to moderate flow and gravel or cobble bottom, connected by deeper pools with a slower rate and a silt or mud bottom; gravel bar riffles and transition areas between riffles and pools are especially important in providing insect prey; nests on gently sloping banks within 30 feet of the water's edge Species of Concern Edward's Plateau salamanders (Eurycea sp.7) -endemic; springs and waters of some caves in this region Guadalupe Bass (Micropterus treculi) - endemic; known from headwater, perennial streams of the Edward's Plateau region Headwater Catfish (Ictalurus lupus) -probably on omnivorous bottom-feeder possibly restricted to headwater situations Mexican Blackhead snake (T'antilla atriceps) -southern Texas and northern Mexico; shrubland savanna; nocturnal; lays clutch of probably 1-3 eggs Big Red Sage (Salvia penteminoides) central Texas; moist to seasonally wet seepage slopes of limestone canyons; conspicuous for much of the year - endemic to the Edwards Plateau of clay or silts soils in creek beds and flowering June-October; basal leaves Hill Country Wild-Mercury (Argytamnia aphoroides) -grasslands in shallow to moderately deep clays and clay loam over limestone; associated with plateau live oak woodlands, mostly on rolling uplands; flowering April-May; fruit ' persisting until midsummer; recognizable foliage present for most of growing season - Cody Fussell Page 3 -- Given the small proportion of public versus private lands in Texas, the BCD L includes less than a representative inventory of rare resources in many areas of the state. This information is based on the best data currently available to the _ state regarding threatened, endangered, or otherwise sensitive species. Therefore, these data do not provide a definite statement as to the presence or __ absence of special species or natural communities within your project area, nor L can these data substitute for an evaluation by qualified biologists. The BCD information is intended to assist you in avoiding harm to species, which may _ occur in your project area. L The Department recommends the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service be contacted -- for guidance, permitting, and protocols, as applicable, regarding surveying the project area for listed species, especially the Black-capped Vireo. Any survey for threatened or endangered species should be cognizant of the potential _ presence of other rare species of Texas flora and fauna. Attached is a list of threatened and endangered species also potentially occurring in Ken County to be used as a more inclusive list of species to address. You should also be aware that Kerrville State Park is located less than three miles northwest of the project area. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on your project. I apologize for the delay in our response -the threatened and endangered species __ technical reviewer left TPWD June of last year and we did not fill the position until mid-November. As a result, we have encountered a huge backlog of requests. Sincerely, I Kathy Boydston Wildlife Habitat Assessment Program Wildlife Division ` Attachment L KB/TRN/pmo.7438 j TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT ENDANGERED RESOURCES BRANCH SPECIAL SPECIES LIST KERB COUNTY Scientific Name *** AMPHIBIANS EURYCEA LATITANS ' EURYCEA SP 7 ~ *** BIRDS BUTEO ALBONOTATUS DENDROICA CHRYSOPARIA FALCO PEREGRINUS FALCO PEREGRINUS ANATUM FALCO PEREGRINUS TUNDRIUS GRUS AMERICANA HALIAEETUS LEUCOCEPHALUS MYCTERIA AMERICANA STERNA ANTILLARUM ATHALA550S VIREO ATRIC.APILLUS ~** FISHES MICROPTERUS TRECULI l * * * NLAMMALS i CANIS RUFUS (extirpated) MYOTIS VELIFER NASUA NARICA *** REPTILES GRAPTEMYS CAGLEI HOLBROOKIA LACERATA PHRYNOSOMA CORNUTUM i TANTILLA ATRICEPS *** VASCULAR PLANTS ANCISTROCACTUS TOBUSCHII ARGYTHAMNIA APHOROIDES ERIGERON MIMEGLETES { SALVIA PENSTEMONOIDES Common Name CASCADE CAVERNS SALAMANDER EDWARDS PLATEAU SPRING SALAMANDERS ZONE-TAILED HAWK GOLDEN-CHEEKED WARBLER PEREGRINE FALCON AMERICAN PEREGRINE FALCON ARCTIC PEREGRINE FALCON WHOOPING CRANE BALD EAGLE WOOD STORK INTERIOR LEAST TERN BLACK-CAPPED VIREO GUADALUPE BASS RED WOLF CAVE MYOTIS BAT WHITE-NOSED COATI CAGLE'S MAP TURTLE SPOT-TAILED EARLESS LIZARD TEXAS HORNED LIZARD MEXICAN BLACKHEAD SNAKE TOBUSCH FISHHOOK CACTUS HILL COUNTRY WILD-MERCURY SONORA FLEABANE BIG RED SAGE Revise 98-04 Federal Sta Status Sta_ LE E/SA LE E/~A LE LT LE LE T T E E E T E E LE E T C1 T LE E Codes: LE,LT - Federally Listed Endangered/Threatened PE,PT - Federally Proposed Endangered/Threatened E/SA,T/SA - Federally Endangered/Threatened by Similarity of Appearance C1 - Federal Candidate, Category 1; information supports proposing t list as endangered/threatened DL,PDL - Federally Delisted/Proposed Delisted E,T - State Endangered/Threatened ----- continued next page ----- ~ Page 2 -Kerr County r Revised: 98-04-21 ~ Species appearing on these lists do not all share the same probability of _ occurrence within a county. Some species are migrants or wintering resident only. Additionally, a few species may be historic or considered extirpated r within a county. Species considered extirpated within the state are so flat on each list. Each county's revised date reflects the last~ciate any change revisions were made for that county, to reflect current listing statuses ant r taxonomy. i ^ r r ^ I r DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY FORT WORTH DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS P. O. BOX 17300 FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102-0300 HEPIY TO ATTENTION OF December 3, 1999 REC~iil~D DEC - 6 1999 Environmental Division Regulatory Branch SUBJECT: Project Number 199900666 Mr. Cody D. Fussell Barnard Dunkelberg & Company 1616 East Fifteenth Street Tulsa, Oklahoma 74120-6027 Dear Mr. Fussell: Barnard p~nkelber Thank you for your letter of September 27, 1999, concerning a proposal by the City of Kerrville to expand Kerrville Municipal AirportlLouis Schreiner Field, located in Kerrville, Ken County, Texas. We understand that tlae City is considE:ring an extension of Runway 12/30, relocations of the t~uciway and airport Entrance road, installation of a lighting system, and acquisition of additional property. This project has been assigned Project Number 199900666. Please include this number in all future correspondence concerning this project. Failure to reference the project number may result in a delay. We have reviewed this project in accordance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. Under Section 404, the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers regulates the discharge of dredged and fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands. Our responsibility under Section 10 is to regulate any work in, or affecting, navigable waters of the United States. Any such discharge or work requires Department of the Army authorization in the form of a permit. We are unable to determine from the information you provided in your letter whether Department of the Army authorization will be required. However, we have determined that several waters of the United States, including Silver Creek, Nowlin Hollow, and an unnamed tributary of the Guadalupe River, are associated with the project area. In addition, important cultural resource sites are known to occur along the Guadalupe River, and several endangered species, including the golden-cheeked warbler (Dendroica chrysoparia), black-capped vireo (Yreo atricapillus), tobusch fishhook cactus (Ancistrocactus tobuschit~, and bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), occur in' Ken County. For further information about endangered species, please contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. ~` ~~ L L L L L -2- Once more detailed plans for the proposed project are developed, please inform us of the type and amount of material (both temporary and permanent) that would be discharged into waters of the United States, map the location of each discharge, and submit plan and cross- section views of the project. Refer to the enclosed guidance on submitting project proposals to the Department of the Army and then forward your response to this office so that evaluation of your project may continue. Please note that it is unlawful to begin work without Department of the Army authorization when it is required. Thank you for your interest in our nation's water resources. If you have any questions concerning our regulatory program, please contact Mr. David Martin at the address above or telephone (817)978-4625. Sincerely, C~ ~i ayne A. Lea Chief, Regulatory Branch Enclosures Jj GpPP! OF 1 I Q' Q 9p US Army Corps Recommendations for Department of Engineers of the Army Permit Submittals ~~~~~~~~,.~' Fort Worth District Apri16, 1998 . The following recommendations from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE), Fort Worth District, specify information that should be submitted with project proposals for review of permitting requirements under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899: 1. A vicinity map (e.g., county map, USGS quad sheet, etc.) showing the location of the project, including any borrow or disposal site(s) or other outlying features. 2. A delineation and description of wetlands and other waters of the United States in the area that would be affected by the proposed work. Delineations of wetlands must be conducted using the "Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual",USAGE Waterways Experiment Station Wetlands Research Program Technical Report Y-87-1, dated January 1987. The on-line edition of the manual is available on the Internet at http://www.wes.army.miVeUwetlands/wlpubs.html. 3. The purpose of, and need for, the project. 4. Plan, profile, and cross-section views of all work, both permanent and temporary, in or adjacent to waters of the United States, including wetlands. (If a standard individual permit is required, drawings on 8 '/s by 11 inch sheets must be provided.) 5. The type, source, and volume of material proposed to be discharged into and/or excavated from waters of the United States. In cases where the activity may result in a permanent change to pre- construction contours or drainage patterns, provide the reasons why the changes are necessary and a description of the anticipated outcome of the changes. 6. The width and depth of the water body and the waterward distance of any structures from the existing shoreline if located on a navigable water or a USAGE lake project. 7. A description of the project's likely temporary and permanent impact on the aquatic environment. 8. A description of actions in project design to avoid and minimize adverse impacts to the aquatic environment and to compensate for unavoidable adverse impacts to the aquatic environment. 9. The project schedule. 10. A statement disclosing whether or not any species listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act might be affected by, or found in the vicinity of, the proposed project. Direct coordination with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service concerning the potential impact of the entire project on threatened and endangered species is strongly encouraged. 11. Any other relevant information, including available information on cultural resources and hydrology. L ~RP~ OF _ "•,' ~ ~a US Army Corps The U. S. Army Corps of Engineers of Engineers Regulatory Program Overview ~~o ~ ~~~ Fort Worth District April 1999 ~"~`~~ Abstract The Regulatory Program of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) plays a critical role in the _. protection of the aquatic ecosystem and navigation. Important elements of the program under Section 404 L of the Clean Water Act and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 include jurisdictional determinations for wetlands and other waters of the United States and navigable waters of the United _.,_ States, authorizing activities in these jurisdictional areas through individual and general permits, insuring compliance of issued permits, and enforcing the requirements of the law for unpermitted activities. The r Corps works closely with other federal and state natural resource agencies and the public in exercising these responsibilities. Introduction ~ The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), acting under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, ~ provides a vital function in protecting our valuable aquatic resources, including wetlands. The objective of -"'" this Act is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation's waters. Under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the Secretary of the Army is responsible for administering a Regulatory Program that requires permits for the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the --~ United States, including wetlands. The Secretary operates this program through the Corps. Each District I Engineer and his staff carry out the day-to-day functions of this program. The Corps also implements ^ Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 in the Regulatory Program. ti~ r Jurisdiction Areas regulated under Section 404 are collectively referred to as "waters of the United States." Included are any part of the surface water tributary system down to the smallest of streams, any lake, pond, _. or other water body on those streams, and wetlands, whether adjacent to other waters of the United States or isolated. Isolated and other waters such as playa lakes, prairie potholes, old river scars, cutoff sloughs, and abandoned construction and mining pits may also be waters of the United States. An important point is that waters of the United States includes areas that are man-made, or man-induced, as well as natural. L L L L Wetlands are found in many different forms such as bottomland hardwoods, wooded swamps, mazshes, wet meadows, bogs and playa lakes. Wetlands have been identified as being of particular concern because they perform valuable functions in restoring and maintaining the quality of the nation's waters. These functions include sediment trapping, nutrient removal, chemical detoxification, shoreline stabilization, aquatic food chain support, fish and wildlife habitat, flood water storage, and ground water recharge. Prime examples of the adverse impacts associated with the loss of wetlands aze Hurricane Andrew in Florida in 1992 and the Mississippi River flood in 1993. In areas where wetlands were still present, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Program Overview Page 2 of 6 tremendous benefits were realized including flood protection, erosion prevention, and storm surge buffering. Where wetlands had been eliminated, or reduced in extent, storm damages were much more extensive. Wetland delineations under Section 404 are currently made as a part of determinations of waters of the United States primarily by the Corps and occasionally by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) using the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. However, the Department of the Army signed a Memorandum of Ageement (MOA) with the Department of Agriculture (DOA), Department of the Interior, and EPA in January 1994 for wetland delineations on agricultural lands. Under this MOA, the Corps and EPA will accept written Natural Resource Conservation Service wetland delineations for agricultural land under the Food Security Act as the final government position on the extent of Section 404 wetland jurisdiction. This MOA is currently being revised because of recent amendments to the Food Security Act. Corps district offices are also developing local agreements with the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) of the DOA in order to more efficiently integrate the two agencies' programs. The National Academy of Sciences completed a study on wetland delineation in May 1995. The National Academy of Sciences study concluded that the Corps 1987 Manual is scientifically sound, but that improvements to the manual can, and should be made. The Corps, along with the other responsible federal agencies, is evaluating the results of that study and will determine, with full opportunity for public comment, if the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual should be revised. The Corps also regulates navigable waters of the United States under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 in the Regulatory Program. Navigable waters of the United States are those waters that are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide shoreward to the mean high water mark and/or are presently used, or have been used in the past or may be susceptible to use to transport interstate or foreign commerce. Navigable waters of the United States include many coastal waters, including bays, and portions of major rivers, such as the Trinity, Sabine, Brazos, Colorado, and Rio Grande in Texas. PennittinQ Section 404 is the Nation's primary wetland regulatory authority. Under Section 404 a permit is required from the Corps for any activity involving the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands. The term "discharge of dredged material" includes the redeposit of dredged or excavated material into a water of the United States, when such redoposit has the effect of destroying or degrading waters of the United States. This includes the addition or redeposit of material associated with mechanized land clearing, ditching, channelization, and other ground disturbing activities. The term "discharge of fill material" includes the addition of material into a water of the United States for the purpose of replacing an aquatic area, such as a wetland, with dry land or of changing the bottom elevation of a water body. An example of a discharge of fill material would be the placement of clean soil into a wetland to create dry land so that an apartment complex could be built on the site. The Corps issued regulations in August 1993 that included a revised definition of "discharge of dredged material" and clarified that prior converted croplands are not waters of the United States. The definition of discharge of dredged material included discharges associated with excavation activities. L ` U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Re ulatory Pro am Overview Page 3 of 6 However, because of recent decisions by the United States in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia and the U. S. Circuit Court for the District of Columbia in the case of American Mining _,,,. Congress v. Corps, the Corps is no longer regulating incidental fallback discharges of dredged material into waters of the United States associated with excavation activities. Certain activities in waters of the United States are exempted by law from regulation under Section 404(f),-including certain farming, ranching, and forestry activities. Included are normal farming, L silvicultural, and ranching activities, maintenance of recently damaged structures, construction and maintenance of farm ponds and irrigation ditches, construction of temporary sedimentation basins, and _. construction and maintenance of farm, forest, and mining roads using approved best management practices. However, the exemptions are applied carefully and are not intended to exempt activities with more than minor adverse impacts to the aquatic ecosystem. Under Section 10, the Corps regulates all work and structures in, or affecting, the course, condition, S or capacity of navigable waters of the United States. Examples of activities and structures that require -- authorization under this statute include dredging, filling, excavation, weirs, power lines, tunnels, piers, I wharfs, dolphins, breakwaters, booms, bulkheads, revetments, riprap, jetties, permanent mooring structures, aids to navigation, permanently moored floating facilities and pilings. Authorizations may be in one of three primary forms: general permits, letters of permission, and ~ standard individual permits. In any case, the purpose of the permit process is to reduce the potential ._ impact of construction projects on our important aquatic resources. ~ Activities requiring authorization that are similar in nature and would cause only minimal individual __ and cumulative environmental impacts may qualify for general permits. These general permits may be either nationwide or regional in scope. There are 39 nationwide general permits currently in effect which ~ address Section 404 and Section 10 activities. These permits may be used to authorize specified activities as long as the impact of the work on the aquatic ecosystem is minor and the person or group responsible for the work meets certain conditions. Some general permits require that the Corps be notified before work S begins. Other general permits do not require notification as long as all of the conditions of the permit are met. The Corps reissued the nationwide permits on December 13, 1996 (effective date February 11, 1997), with notable changes to some of the permits, particularly nationwide permit 26 for headwaters and isolated waters discharges, and the addition of two new nationwide permits. Most notably, r nationwide permit 26 was scheduled to expire on December 13, 1948, well before the other nationwide -' permits expire on February 10, 2002. ^ In July 1998, the Corps proposed to issue new nationwide permits and modify some existing -- nationwide permits and conditions to replace the expiring nationwide permit 26. The Corps also extended ' the expiration date of nationwide permit 26 to September 15, 1999. Replacement nationwide permits are r expected to be in place before nationwide permit 26 expires. In addition to the nationwide general permits, regional general permits may be issued for certain ~ types of projects and geographic areas. These regional general permits may cover a variety of activities including utility lines and intake and outfall structures; aerial electric power transmission and communication lines and cable crossings; boat ramps and minor facilities; and oil, gas, and water r exploration and production wells. Regional general permits also include conditions that must be met for the authorization to be valid and may require Corps notification. r ^ U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Re ulatory Pro Overview Page 4 of 6 The letter of permission is another Corps pennit option. This is a form of individual permit issued through an abbreviated process which includes coordination with federal and state fish and wildlife agencies and a public interest evaluation, but without the publication of an individual public notice. For cases subject to Section 404, the Corps must issue a public notice requesting comments and offering an opportunity for public hearing on the categories of activities and the proposed letter of permission procedures, and receive water quality certification from the state, before using this approach. Letters of permission require the submittal of an application to the Corps in every case. If a project does not meet the requirements of a general permit and cannot be authorized by a letter of permission, a standard individual permit is required. The project evaluation process for this type of permit includes: pre-application consultation; a public notice and comment period on the permit application; preparation of permit decision documents, including a discussion of the environmental impacts of the project, the findings of the Corps public interest review process and compliance determinations with the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines; and the permit decision. The Corps will issue a permit if the proposal being reviewed is found not to be contrary to the public interest and meets the requirements of the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines. Of great importance to the project evaluation is the Corps public interest review. The public and private benefits and detriments of all factors relevant to each case are carefully evaluated and balanced. Relevant factors may include conservation, economics, aesthetics, wetlands, cultural resources, navigation, fish and wildlife values, water supply, water quality, and any other factors judged important to the needs and welfare of the people. The Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines, published by EPA, are the substantive aquatic ecosystem standazds by which atl Section 404 permit applications are evaluated. To highlight the efforts of the Corps to protect waters of the United States and heighten our environmental sensitivity, the Corps has entered into a MOA with EPA for determining the type and level of mitigation necessary to demonstrate compliance with the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines. The joint memorandum prescribes a sequence of steps for evaluating proposed projects that require an individual permit. This sequence begins with an evaluation of all practicable alternatives. The Corps will authorize only the practicable alternative that is the least damaging to the aquatic ecosystem and does not cause or contribute to significant degradation of waters of the United States. This reflects the objective of avoiding adverse impacts to aquatic ecosystems whenever possible. Once the appropriate alternative is identified, al( practicable steps must be taken to minimize impacts to the aquatic ecosystem. Finally, the Corps must insure that appropriate and practicable compensation is provided for any unavoidable adverse impacts. Mitigation banking is restoration, enhancement, creation, and, in exceptional circumstances, preservation undertaken in advance of multiple projects to compensate for adverse impacts to the aquatic ecosystem. Mitigation banking may be an acceptable form of compensatory mitigation for adverse impacts associated with permits issued by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act under circumstances outlined primarily in "Federal Guidance for the Establishment, Use, and Operation of Mitigation Banks" dated November 28, 1995. Other approaches to mitigation and wetland protection and enhancement are available to those who aze interested. These approaches include joint-project mitigation, in-lieu fee mitigation, federal, state, and local incentive programs, and aquatic ecosystem restoration projects through Congressionally authorized programs. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Program Overview Page 5 of 6 Numerous other environmental laws must be addressed in the evaluation of all permit applications, including the National Environmental Policy Act, Endangered Species Act, and the National Historic i Preservation Act. While the final decision regarding Department of the Army permit applications rests solely with the Corps, federal and state natural resource agencies have an important, sometimes mandatory, advisory role in the Regulatory Program. In addition, no permit can be issued under Section 404 without the issuance of water quality certification by the state certifying agency (the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission in the state of Texas). On March 9, 1999, the Corps published a final re ulation establishin an administrative a eal g g PP process for the Regulatory Program. Effective August 6, 1999, Corps division offices will conduct reviews L of appeals filed by applicants on standazd individual permits denied with prejudice by a district engineer ^ and permits declined by an applicant who objected to certain terms or conditions. The appeal process may -" be expanded to include jurisdictional determinations and wetland delineations in the future. ^ -- Enforcement and Compliance ~ Enforcement authority is shared by the Corps and EPA under Section 404 and is the sole - responsibility of the Corps under Section l 0. The partnering effort with EPA in Section 404 in identifying potential violations is very important in the implementation of the regulatory program. Unauthorized activities may be discovered by a number of methods, including reporting by other agencies and the public. When unauthorized activities are discovered, the Corps works to ensure compliance through various means, including voluntary restoration, other remedial measures, and after-the-fact permitting. Substantial penalties and fines may be used to deter further violations. The Corps also monitors authorized projects for compliance with permit terms and conditions, and to confirm that impacts to the aquatic system aze no greater than expected and that any mitigation work is completed and successful. ^ Federal Wetland Policy I ~ ~ On August 24, 1993, a comprehensive package of improvements to the Federal wetlands program ^" was announced. The Corps strongly supports the interim goal of no overall loss of the Nation's remaining wetlands, and the long-term goal of increasing the quality and quantity of the wetland resource base presented in that plan. Highlights of the package included insuring that regulatory programs are efficient, fair, flexible, and predictable; promotion ofnon-regulatory programs to protect wetlands and accomplish long-term wetland gains; expanding partnerships with state, tribal, and local governments, private groups, ^ and individuals in protecting and restoring wetlands through ecosystem/watershed approaches; and basing federal wetlands policy on the best scientific information available. ~ In the five years since the announcement of these wetland initiatives, the Corps and other federal _. agencies have implemented many of the elements of the plan, including streamlining the wetlands permitting program, responding to the concerns of farmers and small landowners, improving cooperation ~ with private landowners to protect and restore wetlands, and increasing the role of state, local, and tribal ,_, governments in wetlands protection. Actions taken by the Corps include: exempting prior converted cropland from Section 404 requirements; implementing an appeal process for landowners for permit ~ conditions and permit denials; streamlining permit application processing for private landowners; improving mitigation options through development of a mitigation banking policy; and increasing certainty ^ ^ U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Program Overview Page 6 of 6 and flexibility for identifying wetlands through increased coordination with the Natural Resources Conservation Service on agricultural lands. Conclusion The Corps is committed through the Regulatory Program to the protection of wetlands and other waters of the United States. This commitment is a partnership in water; between Federal, State and local agencies, and the general public. For more information about the Regulatory Program for activities in the State of Texas, please refer to the attached map showing district boundaries and contact the appropriate Corps Regulatory Office (Fort Worth District - (817)978-2681, Internet Homepage - http://www.swf.usace.army.miU; Galveston District - (409)766-3930; Tulsa District - (918)669-7401; Albuquerque District, EI Paso Office - (915)568-1359). For information in other states, contact the appropriate Corps Regulatory Office. Table A3 IFR WIND COVERAGE SUMMARY Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update Wind Coverage Provided Under Wind Coverage Provided Under Runway IFR Conditions"x,16-Knot IFR Conditionst'~, 10.5-Knot Designation Maximum Crosswind Maximum Crosswind Runway 12/30 99.81% 96.28% Runway 12 99.43% 94.49% Runway 30 97.47% 69.85% Runway 03/21 99.86% 98.16% Runway 03 98.53% 82.35% Runway 21 96.19% 79.17% Source: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Climatic Data Center Station # 12921 -San Antonio, Texas Period of Record - 1988-1997 "~ Ceiling of less than 1,000 fee[, but equal to or greater than 200 feet and/or visibility less than 3 statute miles, but equal to or greater than'/:statute mile. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update A.16 Figure A6 IFR WEATHER WIND ROSE:: 16-, 13- & 10.5-KNOT CROSSWIND COMPONENTS Kerrville MunicipaULouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update Kerrville MunicipaVLouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update A.17 Source: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Climatic Data Center Station # 12921 -San Antonio, Texas Period of Record - 1988-1997 Total Observations: 87,601 ~1 ~ Table A5 '~ RUNWAY 12/30 ARC C-II DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS (In Feet) -- Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update _ I ~ Approach Visibility Approach Visibility Minimums: Not Minimums: Lower Than Lower Than Existing Item 3/-Statute Mile (1> 3/4-Statute Mile Dimension w Runway Width 100 l00 100 Runway Centerline to Taxiway Centerline 300 400 250 - Runway Centerline to AIC Parking (north side) 400 500 +400 ' Runway Centerline to BRL (north and south side) -- 350 Runway Centerline to Holdline 250 250 --- - Runway Safety Area Length Runway 12 1,000 1,000 316 ~2> Runway 30 1,000 1,000 300 c3) Runway Safety Area Width 400 or 500 400 or 500 150 (4) ~ Runway Object Free Area Length ~' Runway 12 1,000 1,000 316 (5) Runway 30 1,000 1,000 300 (6> ~ Runway 12/30 Object Free Area Width 800 800 750 (7> ~ Runway Obstacle Free Zone 400 x 6,400 400 x 6,400 (8) 400 x 6,400 Taxiway Width 35 35 40 Taxiway Centerline to Taxiway Centerline l05 l05 Not applicable ~ Taxiway Safety Area Width 79 79 79 ~ Taxiway Object Free Area Width 13l 13] 131 Taxilane Object Free Area Width 115 115 --- Taxiway C/L to Fixed or Moveable Object 65.5 65.5 +65.5 ~ Taxilane C/L to Fixed or Moveable Object 57.5 57.5 Not applicable Source: AC 150!5300-13, Federal Aviation Administration. Runway Safety Area (SA): An area adjacent to the runway, which is capable of supporting the occasional passage of aircrafr without causing structural damage under dry conditions. _ Runway Object Free Area (OFA): A two dimensional ground area centered on the runway centerline, which is clear of objects, except for objects that need to be located in the OFA for air navigation or aircraft ground maneuvering purposes. Building Restriction Line (BRL): The BRL encompasses the runway protection zones (RPZs), the runway object free area, the runway visibility zone, NAVAID critical areas, areas required for terminal instrument procedures and areas required for airport traffic control tower clear line of sight. Bold numbers within table indicate existing non-standard conditions. `~~ Existing runway approach visibility minimums not lower than one statute mile. `2~ The existing localizer antenna and airport access road violate the runway SA length boundary. 3 1 ~ The existing Airport Loop Road violates the runway SA length boundary. '- `a~ The existing SA width can be expanded within the current boundary of the airport. ' 15~ The existing localizer antenna and airport access road violate the runway OFA length boundary. `6' The existing Airport Loop Road violates the runway OFA length boundary. "~ The existing alignment of S.H. 27 and perimeter fencing violate the runway OFA width boundary. ^ `8t The standard runway OFZ would be expanded to incorporate the Inner-approach and Inner-transitional OFZ boundaries. Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update ~ A.20 Table A6 RUNWAY 03/21 ARC B-I DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS/SMALL AIRPLANES ONLY (In Feet) Kerrville MunicipaULouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update Approach Visibility Minimums: Not Lower Than Existing Item 3/a-Statute Mile (1> Dimension Runway Width 60 60 Runway Centerline to Taxiway Centerline 150 200 Runway Centerline to A/C Parking 125 200 Runway Centerline to BRL (east and west side) --- 350 Runway Centerline to Holdline 125 --- Runway Safety Area Length 240 240 Runway Safety Area Width 120 120 Runway Object Free Area Length 240 240 Runway Object Free Area Width 250 250 Runway Obstacle Free Zone 250 x 4,447 250 x 4,447 Taxiway Width 25 40 Taxiway Centerline to Taxiway Centerline 69 NA Taxiway Safety Area Width 49 49 Taxiway Object Free Area Width 89 +89 Taxilane Object Free Area Width 79 NA Taxiway C/L to Fixed or Moveable Object 44.5 +44.5 Taxilane C/L to Fixed or Moveable Object 39.5 NA Source: AC 150/5300-] 3, Federal Aviation Administration. Runway Safety Area (SA): An area adjacent to the runway, which is capable of supporting the occasional passage of aircraft without causing structural damage under dry conditions. Runway Object Free Area (OFA): A two dimensional ground area centered on the runway centerline, which is clear of objects, except for objects that need to be located in the OFA for air navigation or aircraft ground maneuvering purposes. Building Restriction Line (BRL): The BRL encompasses the runway protection zones (RPZs), the runway object free area, the runway visibility zone, NAVAID critical areas, areas required for terminal instrument procedures and areas required for airport traffic control tower clear line of sight. NA: Not Applicable. t~~ Existing runway approach visibility minimums not lower than one statute mile. As can be noted from the previous tables, Runway 12/30 has numerous deficiencies in meeting the FAA's specified ARC C-Ii dimensional criteria, while Runway 03/21 has no deficiencies in consideration of the ARC B-I Small Airplane Only standards. The design deficiencies for Runway 12/30 are highlighted in bold text within the tables, and it is apparent that this is the first time Runway 12/30 has been evaluated in consideration of the more restrictive Approach Category C standards. To assist in future development recommendations concerning improved instrument approach capabilities for Runway 12/30 (i.e., the implementation of lower approach visibility Kerrville MunicipaULouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update A.21 J J minimums), the specified dimensional standards for "approach visibility minimums lower than 3/a statute mile" have been included for comparison. The Runway 12/30 - non-standard conditions are as follows: Runway 12/30 ARC C-II Non-Standard Dimensional Criteria: - Runway Centerline to Taxiway Centerline Separation i • Runway 12 SA & OFA length tai • Runway 30 SA & OFA length - • Runway 12 OFA width • Runway 30 OFA width - An increase in the runway centerline to parallel taxiway centerline separation on the north side of Runway 12/30, from 250 feet to 300 feet could be accommodated without impacting the location/alignment of the existing Airport Loop Road. - However, the specified 400-foot separation, required to accommodate lower than 3/a- statute mile approach visibility minimums, would necessitate the relocation of an approximate'/z-mile segment of the roadway. The existing Runway 12 SA and OFA --- lengths are deficient due to the location of the existing localizer antenna and the close proximity of the Mooney Aircraft Corporation's public airport entrance road. The existing Runway 30 SA and OFA lengths are also deficient due to the location of the - Airport Loop Road (i.e., the primary airport entrance road). In addition, the Runway J 12/30 OFA width (adjacent to the approach ends of Runway 12 & 30) is deficient due to the location alignment of a segment of S.H. 27 and perimeter fencing, including - overhead electric lines and power poles adjacent to Runway 12. These deficiencies ~ must be further evaluated in consideration of the existing elevation differential between the adjacent SA edge and the S.H. 27 centerline. Various options are available .._. to the airport sponsor to resolve these existing deficiencies. These options include combinations of access road and highway realignment, relocation of overhead utilities, taxiway relocation, application for modification of standards, runway _ threshold displacement(s), and the application for declared distances criteria. ~ I i + n compar son, there are no existing non-standard conditions identified on Runway 03/21. However, due to the frequent use of the southern segment of this taxiway by Category C and D-II aircraft (utilizing that portion, which provides access between the existing general aviation ramp and the approach end of Runway 12), additional - centerline separation to a maximum of 300 feet may be required. .I Runway Visibility (Line-of-Sight). According to existing runway line-of-sight _ standards, any two (2) points located five feet (5') above the runway centerline must ' be mutually visible for the entire length of the runway. If the runway has afull-length ^i parallel taxiway, the visibility requirement is reduced to a distance of one-half the - runway length. In addition, there must be an unobstructed line-of-sight from any ^ - Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update A.22 r point five feet (5') above the runway centerline to any point five feet (5') above an intersecting runway centerline within the runway visibility zone (RVZ). There are two existing structures located within Kerrville Municipal/Louis Schreiner Field's existing RvZ, which violate these specified line-of-sight standards. The first structure, located at the north end of the general aviation ramp, is identified as a large private- use hangar on the current ALP drawing sheet. The second structure, located north of the approach end of Runway 12, is one of the large manufacturing structures associated with Mooney Aircraft Corporation. The FAA will evaluate and make recommendations concerning the future disposition of these RvZ violations through the course of the ALP planning and review process. Runway Protection Zones (RPZs)/1'hreshold Siting Criteria. The RPZ is trapezoidal in shape and centered about the extended runway centerline. Its inner boundary begins 200 feet beyond the end of the area usable for takeoff or landing. The dimensions of the RPZ are functions of the type of aircraft that regularly operate at the airport, in conjunction with the specified visibility minimums of the approach (if applicable). For runways where declared distances criteria has been implemented, separate approach and departure RPZs are required for one or both ends of the runway. The function of the RPZ is to enhance the protection of people and property on the ground off the end of the runways, as well as regulate and/or control the height of objects within the inner approach surface to the runway. This is achieved through airport control of the property within the RPZ area. This control can be exercised through either fee-simple ownership or the purchase of RPZ/avigation easements. According to existing airport property and easement ownership data presented on the 1995 Airport Leasing Plan, the majority of the Runway 30 RPZ is contained within the existing airport boundary; however, only portions of the Runway 12 and Runway 03/21 RPZs are controlled in fee. The Runway 12 RPZ is only partially controlled, with a combination of fee simple and avigation easement ownership, while those portions of the Runway 03/21 RPZs, which extend beyond the airport boundary, are controlled with avigation easements. Various options for acquiring those portions of the existing and possible future RPZs, which extend beyond the boundary of the airport, will be examined in later sections of this document. As can be noted in the following table, entitled RUNWAY PROTECTION ZONE DIMENSIONS, the existing Runway 12/30 approach RPZs are slightly deficient with the dimensions of the specified standard, in consideration of the runway's existing aircraft approach category and approach visibility minimums. These deficiencies are highlighted in bold text within the following table. Kernrille MunicipaULouis Schreiner Field Airport Master Plan Update A.23