facility requirements and preliminary … facility requirements and preliminary alternatives ......

Juneau International Airport Sustainability Master Plan | Working Paper 4 4-1

Working Paper 4 FACILITY REQUIREMENTS AND PRELIMINARY 4

ALTERNATIVES IDENTIFICATION

WP 4.1 INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this paper is twofold. The first is to present a summary of the assessment of existing facilities at Juneau International Airport (JNU) and determine their ability to accommodate the increased demand levels from the Aviation Demand Forecasts. The requirements for new or expanded facilities consider the following:

1) Capacity shortfalls

2) Enhanced security requirements

3) Updated FAA Design Standards

4) Actions necessary to achieve the CBJ’s strategic vision

Alternative strategies to meet the airport’s needs were then developed to address any shortfalls. This will serve as the basis for the development of the Airport Layout Plan (ALP).

The following are the areas where facility improvements have been analyzed for the ALP.

Airfield – including the runway and taxiway system, the float pond, navigation aids, instrumentation, security, and air traffic control.

Terminal Area – including the passenger terminal, commercial aircraft parking apron (both terminal gate positions and remain overnight (RON) positions), and surface access and parking.

Air Cargo – including facilities for both belly-cargo and all-cargo airlines. These include buildings required for cargo age and processing as well as aircraft parking.

General Aviation – including aircraft storage (hangars and tie-downs), Fixed Base Operations (FBO), floatplane parking, helicopter facilities, auto parking and access.

Other – including Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF), Airport Maintenance facilities and storage areas, SRE storage, fuel storage and distribution, and support services.


WP 4.2 SUMMARY OF FORECAST

Since many of the facility requirements are triggered by growth in aviation demand, forecasts were prepared for JNU for the next twenty years (through 2035). The following is a summary of the forecasting results.

• Examining historical records showed that the number of enplaned passengers at JNU fluctuated over the past ten years at about the same rate as did national passenger levels. One interpretation of this relationship is that much of the passenger activity at JNU is tied to tourism and therefore highly influenced by national economic conditions. This is certainly true with the on-demand passengers. The Part 121 and 135 passengers peak during the summer months, indicating that a direct tie to the tourist market exists.

In the future enplaned passengers are expected to continue to increase at about the same rate as passenger nationally as forecast by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The forecast used in this master plan tempered the national growth trends with growth projections for the regional population to reflect that portion of the market that includes connections to other destinations within Southeast Alaska.

• Operationally it is anticipated that the Part 121 carrier traffic will continue to be offered using narrow body jet aircraft having 130 – 140 seats represented by the Boeing 737-900. Flights will continue to include non-stop service to Seattle and Anchorage as well as flights that make multiple stops into and out of Juneau. Overall levels of growth in this category will be driven by the growth in enplaned passengers, the seating capacity of the airline fleet and the passenger load factors.

• Air taxi and commuter flights include the Part 135 carriers, the on-demand carriers, air cargo flights and other for hire air taxi activity. This category comprises the majority of operations at JNU. It is expected that future growth rates will be tied to both passenger growth in the commuter market, growth in the regional population and forecast increases in the amount of freight and mail.

• General aviation activity makes up a small portion of the total operations. The growth in this category is expected to be moderate over the 20-year forecast period and driven primarily by local population growth and economic conditions.

• Military activity at JNU has always been minimal and the future is not expected to see any growth in this category.


Table 1 shows a summary of the forecasts prepared for JNU that will be used in the remainder of this master plan.

Table 1: Summary of Forecasts

Category Base Year 2020 2025 2030 2035

Enplaned Passengers - Air Carrier 262,252 287,289 304,616 323,231 343,272 - Commuter 31,262 33,132 34,212 35,467 36,814 - On Demand 64,965 71,970 77,128 83,000 89,694 Total Passengers 358,479 392,391 415,956 441,698 469,780

Operations Air Carrier 8,319 8,453 8,586 8,720 8,853 Air Taxi & Commuter 70,540 80,531 89,682 99,226 109,992

General Aviation 16,287 16,954 17,625 18,352 19,118 Military 440 775 775 775 775 Total Operations 95,586 106,713 116,668 127,073 138,738 Based Aircraft 332 346 364 383 403

Note: The base year for the forecasts is 2012, the most recent year where comprehensive records where available for all activity categories.

WP 4.3 AIRFIELD REQUIREMENTS

WP 4.3.1 Runway 8/26

WP 4.3.1.1 Runway Design Criteria

Runway 8/26 is classified D-III based on current and future use by the Boeing 737-900 aircraft. With the newly reconstructed runway, most FAA D-III Design Criteria are met. Some exceptions include blast pads on the runway ends and the separation distance between the Runway 8/26 centerline and the centerline of Runway 8W/26W. These exceptions have been reviewed with FAA in the past and it was determined that no changes need to be made to assure continued safe operations. The lack of distance between the runway centerlines requires that they be operated as a unit rather than allowing for independent operations.

It is noted that Runway 8/26 is to be renumbered 9/27 with the next runway marking project to reflect the changes in the magnetic bearing.


WP 4.3.1.2 Runway Length

At 8,857 feet the runway length can accommodate all flights and all aircraft projected to use the airport in the forecasts of aviation demand. In fact the runway length is sufficient to accommodate most aircraft flying today with reasonable weight and stage length assumptions. For instance, the Boeing 747-8, while not expected to make regular use of the airport, could land and take-off on the existing runway length. Figure 1 shows the runway take-off length required for a range of aircraft and illustrates how they relate to the existing length.

Figure 1 – Runway Length Requirements – Various Aircraft

WP 4.3.1.3 Wind Coverage

FAA criteria state that a runway system should provide 95 percent wind coverage with a crosswind of 15 mph under all weather conditions. For this master plan up-to-date wind information was obtained from the National Climactic Center and wind roses were prepared for all-weather, visual flight rules (VFR) and instrument flight rules (IFR) conditions. Analyses of the wind poses show that coverage exceeds 92% under all-weather conditions and is near 100% for IFR conditions. Given the airport's location, 92% is considered sufficient and no consideration will be given to providing additional coverage.


WP 4.3.1.4 Capacity

Using FAA guidance material as contained in Advisory Circular 150/5060-5 the capacity of a single runway is calculated to be approximately 220,000 annual operations, 98 hourly operations under VFR conditions and 59 hourly operations under IFR conditions.

Based on the forecasts annual operations will be 141,582 by 2035, VFR demand will be approximately 109 per hour during peak periods and IFR demand will be 16 during the peak hour. However these numbers include operations by helicopters that do not use the runway system and therefore need not be used in the capacity calculations. Table 2 shows that the operations levels forecast will not cause concern for annual capacity but during VFR conditions demand will approach 60 percent of capacity by 2025.

Table 2 – Capacity Demand Comparison

Annual Capacity 2014 2020 2025 2030 2035

Annual Service Volume (ASV) 230,000 230,000 230,000 230,000 230,000 Annual Demand 62,131 69,618 76,400 83,530 91,534 Percent Capacity 27.0% 30.3% 33.2% 36.3% 39.8%

Hourly Capacity VFR Conditions Peak Hour Capacity 98 98 98 98 98 Peak Hour Demand 47 53 59 64 71 Percent Capacity 48.4% 53.7% 60.4% 65.7% 72.3% IFR Conditions Peak Hour Capacity 59 59 59 59 59 Peak Hour Demand 11 12 13 15 16 Percent Capacity 18.6% 20.3% 22.0% 25.4% 27.1%

WP 4.3.2 Runway 8W/26W (9W/27W)

WP 4.3.2.1 Design Criteria

The design criteria for the water runway 8W/26W are A-II. Given the current dimensions of the floatpond, all design criteria except for the distance from centerline to the centerline for RW 8-26 are met. Since the elevation of the floatpond is lower than the paved runway this does not create an issue. As noted, the runways do not have independent approach procedures.


WP 4.3.3 Taxiways

WP 4.3.3.1 Design Criteria

The design criteria for the taxiway system are TDG -5. All taxiways currently meet these criteria.

WP 4.3.3.2 Safety

The existing taxiway layout presents several situations that have the potential to cause an increase in the number of runway incursions. These include wide expanses of pavement, mid-runway access points, and taxiways that provide direct apron-to-runway access. Taxiway layout decisions will need to be made to increase situational awareness on the taxiways and minimize the potential for safety issues. Figure 2 shows the three areas on the taxiways that have been identified as issues and that will need to be addressed in this plan.

To correct or eliminate this potential, changes to the taxiway geometry need to be considered. These include the following.

1. Do-nothing 2. Reposition exit taxiways 3. Close/realign a portion of Taxiway D 4. Close/realign a portion of Taxiway C. At the same time reconfigure the pavement to 75

feet wide.

Alternative Analyses

In deciding which action will be most beneficial to the airport some criteria for alternative assessment will be required. For the next step in the analyses of the alternatives we will be using the following comparative criteria.

1. Eliminate “four-node” intersections 2. Increase situational awareness for pilots 3. Eliminate wide expanses of pavement 4. Avoid mid runway “high energy” intersections 5. Eliminate direct access from apron to the runway 6. Assure that exits are properly spaced to allow for efficient movement of aircraft from the

runway. 7. All improvements must meet TDG5 standards. 8. Sustainability factors 9. Cost estimates


Figure 2– Taxiway Layout Issues


WP 4.3.4 Helicopter Takeoff and Landing Areas

The Juneau International Airport has a very high number of helicopter operations each year for all purposes. Most of the activity is conducted during the summer months and involves tourist activity and supply runs to the mines and other remote facilities.

Given the high level of helicopter activity it has been suggested numerous times in the past that a more centralized helicopter landing area (or areas) be established or that the helicopter operations be moved off airport to another facility. It has been suggested that having three separate helicopter landing produces noise impacts over a large area.

Previous studies have been conducted to assess the feasibility of constructing a new helicopter facility in the Juneau area and moving all operations to the new facility. This master plan will not revisit that issue; rather it will concentrate on how to best serve the helicopter needs at the airport. Alternatives to be examined are shown on Exhibit 3 and include.

1. Do-nothing 1. Locate a consolidated facility close to users 2. Centralize a location in new GA area


To determine the best future action for helicopter landing and take-off areas, the following criteria are suggested.

1. Safety 2. Airspace compatibility 3. Limited need for hover-taxi activity on the airport 4. Availability and access for use by all helicopter operators 5. Located near transient helicopter parking positions 6. Noise impacts


Exhibit 3 – Helicopter Landing Area Alternatives


WP 4.3.5 Snow Removal Equipment Facility (SREF)

It has been determined that a new Snow Removal Equipment Facility (SREF be constructed to provide protection for the valuable equipment required to maintain airport operations during winter months. A location for this SREF facility was identified in the airport’s northeast quadrant and some site preparation work was completed. However, the SREF location is being reassessed.

Although utilities and a geothermal system were extended to the site it was determined that the selected site was not optimal and the SREF would be better located in the northwest area. This would allow the more valuable land in the north east to be leased and have a positive financial impact on the airport.

WP 4.3.6 Airport Maintenance - Storage

A new airport maintenance and storage building is also needed at JNU. The current building has serious roof issues and a replacement to the facility is being considered. The plan is for the maintenance function to be consolidated with the SREF with the new building serving both uses.

WP 4.3.7 Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting (ARFF) Facility

The ARFF Building is located in the northwestern portion of the airport. The current facility is divided between airport related ARFF facilities and a community fire station. There are several issues associated with this facility including;

1. The current equipment bays are not adequately sized for the equipment required for airport related fire protection.

2. Additional storage space is needed in the building to accommodate the additional equipment required to meet updated FAA criteria to accommodate the larger aircraft being introduces into service at JNU.

3. The building’s orientation requires the ARFF equipment to respond using a road that is perpendicular to the runway system, thereby adding time and complexity to the responses.

4. The roadway system shared by public vehicles transporting passengers to the Coastal Helicopter facility. This creates the potential for traffic interference during a response

There is an active project to correct these deficiencies with an ARFF reconstruction project.


WP 4.3.8 Airport Traffic Control Tower (ATCT)

The current ATCT is located on the northwest corner of the terminal building. This building has been recognized as needing a major upgrade or relocation. While any future action will be made and funded by FAA and any decisions regarding a new site for the ATCT will be conducted by FAA using their procedures, the master plan needs to identify likely locations for a new tower at a new location in order to assure that future FAA plans are consistent with other airport needs. The attached figure (figure 4) shows three general alternatives for the relocation of the ATCT;

1. Do-nothing (maintain ATCT at current site) 2. Relocate tower to a new location to the north. 3. Relocate tower to a new location to the south.


In deciding which location will be most beneficial to the FAA, the criteria for alternative assessment used by FAA will be used to preliminarily locate the new tower. The alternatives we will be using the following comparative criteria.

1. Ability to maintain visibility over the entire movement area. 2. Ability to maintain recognition ability on movement area (ability to identify aircraft by

type.) 3. Airspace considerations (FAR Part 77 and TERPS) 4. Availability of utilities. 5. Public access. 6. Environmental factors. 7. Security. 8. Relationship to other facilities.


Exhibit 4 – Alternative ATCT Locations


WP 4.3.9 Security/Perimeter Fencing

There are identified “gaps" in the airport's perimeter fencing on the south end. These are being addressed in current or proposed improvement projects where construction of fencing is feasible. In other areas it has been determined that the natural obstacles that exist in the unfenced areas create a significant deterrent to access and that no fence is needed to provide adequate security.


WP 4.4 PASSENGER TERMINAL

Within the passenger terminal building, services are required for passengers that are arriving and departing on commercial flights. Enplaning services include ticketing, baggage check-in, airline offices and baggage screening. Processing services include passenger screening facilities operated by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). Deplaning services include baggage claim, rental car facilities, and parking prepay facilities. Other services necessary in a terminal building include concessions (restaurants and gift shops), restrooms, advertising and display areas, mechanical and utility rooms, and janitorial service and storage areas.

The future of the passenger terminal needs to be planned to ensure that additional airlines and larger aircraft are not precluded from serving JNU, as well as ensuring that the current and projected peak passenger and aircraft parking loads are accommodated.

WP 4.4.1 Terminal Capacity

The increase in passenger levels that has been forecast for JNU includes both Part 121 and Part 135 carriers that use the terminal. To accommodate the roughly 30 percent growth expected in passenger levels at a reasonable service level will require additional space in the passenger terminal building. Needing particular attention are

1. The ticketing area for the Part 121 carriers is currently congested at peak hours and additional (or reallocated) space will be needed in the future.

2. Facilities for the in-terminal Part 135 carriers are aging and operating above capacity at present. The north wing reconstruction project will address the Part 135 and support areas.

3. The Part 121 commercial gate area located on the terminal’s second level is undersized at present. This is particularly noticeable when aircraft departures are delayed for any reason. And although peak hour demand for gates is not expected to increase, the number of passengers waiting as well as the need for post-security services such as restaurant and restroom facilities will require an expansion in the future.

Future development of the terminal building has been addressed in the terminal master plan and this master plan incorporates the recommendations made therein. This includes the reconstruction of the north wing in the short-term and an expansion of the terminal building to the west, into the area currently used for the rental car ready and return lot over the long term.

Should the airlines introduce new service concepts, such as developing JNU into a 'southeast hub" with service using smaller (50-75 passenger aircraft), the needs within the terminal would change - particularly in the number of people using the hold rooms.


WP 4.4.2 Terminal Apron Area

The terminal area apron includes the Part 121 aircraft parking positions that are situated on the south face of the terminal building. The current number of aircraft gates will be adequate for peak operations throughout the forecast period. However additional Remain-Over-Night (RON) positions need to be provided for aircraft that remain in Juneau overnight. By providing RON spaces the aircraft can be parked away from the terminal and towed to and from the gate, making it available for active loading and unloading of passengers. This minimized the need for expansion of the terminal. The RON positions need to be located near the terminal to minimize tug distances.

The Part 135 carriers that operate out of the terminal use the apron to the west of the building for aircraft parking and to load passengers and cargo. All passenger and cargo are loaded/unloaded on the apron to the west of the terminal. Passenger loading/unloading is outdoors on apron level and passengers are escorted to and from the building. No outside cover exists for these activities. The current apron is adequately sized for these operations into the future.

The terminal area apron to the west of the building also serves the needs of the air cargo carriers including Alaska Airlines, Empire Air, and Alaska Central. Their needs include adequate area to park cargo aircraft and to process the cargo. At present the area provided is adequate for their needs but future increases will result in the demand for more space.

Finally, the FIS facility for JNU is located in the north wing of the terminal and all aircraft requiring Customs clearance need access to it. Most international flights are general aviation and these are directed to the central apron area while awaiting customs clearance.

Given that the central apron is being used by such a variety of users, the fact is that some extension, reassignment of space or other consideration must be given to assure that all users are being accommodated into the future. Exhibit 5 shows the demands being placed on the apron area and details some of the ideas for assuring long term use of the area for the highest aviation purposes. The apron shows the following alternatives for development.

1. Do-nothing 2. Reassign apron use 3. Add apron area at a different location


In deciding how the central apron area should be used in the future, the criteria for alternative assessment are as follows.


1. Operational safety 2. Flexibility in usage 3. Assure that users of the terminal facilities are given priority 4. Maximize the use of remaining terminal apron area 5. Financial impacts to the airport.


Exhibit 5 – Central Terminal Apron Area


WP 4.4.2.1 Roadways/Curbfrontage and Auto Parking

The terminal curbfrontage experiences congestion during peak period in summer months. This congestion is caused by several factors including.

1. The terminal configuration which results in a right-angled turn at the main terminal entrance,

2. The mixture of private automobiles, taxi/van services and tour busses that are loading/unloading/waiting for passengers along the same section of the access road, and

3. The lack of consistent enforcement of the no waiting policies (due partially to the lack of designated waiting areas).

In addition to the curbfront congestion, roughly 100 additional public parking spaces are required prior to 2035. Fifty additional spaces for rental cars have also been identified as required. Employee parking should be adequate unless a major change (outside the forecast) occurs. To address these issues a number of inter-related alternatives are proposed including;

Parking Alternatives; 1. Do-nothing 2. Maximize existing area 3. Build structured parking 4. Encourage use of other transportation modes.

Curbfront Alternatives: 1. Do-nothing 2. Redesignate lane use 3. Increase enforcement 4. Extend the curbfront 5. Offer free parking off the curbfront


In deciding how to address the access and parking issues the following criteria for alternative assessment are suggested.

1. Cost vs. return on investment 2. Ability to meet demand


Exhibit 6 – Terminal Parking and Curbfrontage


WP 4.5 ALL-CARGO

WP 4.5.1 Cargo storage facilities

Three air cargo facilities operate on the central apron area at JNU. Alaska Airlines maintains a cargo facility consisting of two buildings from which the airline processes freight from both passenger aircraft and all-cargo flights. Their facility is located west of the passenger terminal apron and used for Alaska Airline’s cargo only. The aircraft used for this freight service are Boeing 737 aircraft, most of which also carry passengers either in full passenger mode with cargo carried in the airplanes “belly” or in “combi”-aircraft where a portion of the passenger capacity is given up to allow for Alaska to handle a heavier cargo volume. The freight on these aircraft is loaded and unloaded at the terminal gates. In the near future, these combi flights will be eliminated and Alaska will increase the available cargo lift capacity by increasing the number of all-cargo flights to and from JNU. Alaska’s all- freight flights currently park and receive services at a designated parking position on the central terminal apron.

Also operating on the central terminal apron is Empire Airlines which operates the FEDEX facility using ATR 72 aircraft and Alaska Central Express operating as UPS at Juneau using Beech 1900 aircraft. Their operations also take place on the central apron area.

The current Alaska Airlines ground facility is the only full service facility on the airport offering refrigeration, secure storage, etc. The size and capacity of the facility is adequate to serve Alaska's needs now and in the future.

Members of the public and TAC have identified a potential need for a new air cargo facility that is available to other users. The reasoning is that Alaska Airlines does not fully serve the seasonal fish market. Should a cargo handler or other private investor desire to build such a facility, a location will need to be identified and space set aside for its operation.

The regional cargo carriers (Empire and Alaska Central) provide cargo transfer facilities on the airport. No increase in size or capacity has been identified for either facility.

WP 4.5.2 Aircraft Parking

A single aircraft position is provided for large aircraft cargo operations. This is currently used solely by Alaska Airlines but is available for others. A second position for large aircraft should be constructed in the future.

The aircraft parking/processing spaces for the regional carriers will be sufficient throughout the forecast period and no additional space will be needed.


In determining the optimal way to provide for air cargo expansion area, the alternatives listed below will be examined.

1. Do-nothing 2. Construct a new facility using public funds 3. Identify a site for future expansion should demand arise


To decide how to best address the all-cargo aircraft parking position location the following criteria for alternative assessment are suggested.

1. Ability to meet demand 2. Proximity to the carriers landside operations 3. Access to the roadway system 4. Cost vs. return on investment


WP 4.6 GENERAL AVIATION (GA)

GA facilities are currently located in two distinct areas, the East GA Area and the West GA Area. The west GA contains a combination of facilities including the CBJ Sand Storage building, the Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting (ARFF) facility and numerous T-hangars and conventional hangar buildings. The east GA area generally extends from the terminal building to the eastern airport property line. This area includes the Fixed Base Operator (FBO) and hangar and tiedown facilities.

In the previous master plan it was recommended that GA development be directed to the northwestern and northeastern areas of airport property. The airport staff has been actively pursuing this direction, having completed environmental studies, utility extensions and securing approvals for development. The areas where these approvals are in place are shown in Figure 6.

The development to be accommodated in these areas includes the following.

WP 4.6.1 Relocated/Expanded Fixed Base Operator (FBO) Facilities

The current FBO, Aero Services, is planning to expand to respond to current markets. They have expressed interest in constructing a new "Jet Service" facility. A site for this will include a new hangar/office facility, transient parking apron and auto parking areas.

WP 4.6.2 New Conventional Hangars

As the number of based aircraft increases, the need for additional conventional hangar space will follow. In this case the term conventional hangar relates to any individual hangar facility that is not part of a T-hangar.

WP 4.6.3 New T-Hangars

As the number of based aircraft increases, the need for additional t hangars will also rise.

WP 4.6.4 New Tiedowns

As the number of based aircraft increases, the need for additional outdoor tie downs will also rise.

WP 4.6.5 Transient Aircraft Parking

Transient aircraft parking positions are expected to be associated with the new FBO facilities where the parked aircraft can also be serviced.


To accommodate this need for growth in hangar and aircraft storage the master plan has to use the available land in a manner that returns value to the board as well as serves the needs of the users. In the planning efforts that are underway, the following alternatives have been identified for general aviation development.

1. Do-nothing 2. Develop the new GA facilities with T-hangar development in the west area and corporate

hangars and FBO facilities in the east.


To decide how to best address general aviation needs within the existing land the following criteria for alternative assessment are suggested.

1. Ability to accommodate all demand 2. Potential for phased development to match land availability. 3. Environmental factors 4. Sustainability factors 5. Public access 6. Utilities 7. Land availability


Exhibit 7 – General Aviation Alternatives


WP 4.6.6 Floatpond Docks

Within the floatpond there are currently 51 docking positions for floatplane storage along the north and south banks. During the summer months these positions are generally filled to capacity.

The increase in based aircraft will include floatplanes. These will need additional seasonal docking facilities. These additional docking facilities can be provided in the finger areas off the floatpond as shown in figure 8.

Figure 8 – Floatpond Docking Positions


WP 4.7 OTHER FACILITIES

WP 4.7.1 Utilities

The capacity of the existing utility system that serves the airport is adequate to serve the increased demand on the airport and utilities are available to support future airport development projects. The primary issue at the present time is utility ownership and administration. A previous airport administration caused the CBJ to reassign all on-site utilities to the airport.

WP 4.7.2 FIS Facility

US Customs and Immigration currently leases space in the passenger terminal for processing international flights. They indicated that they would like to have additional space in the terminal building.

The master plan has not identified any future commercial international flights into and out of Juneau. Therefore the FIS facility does not need to be located in the terminal building. In fact, locating the FIS in the future GA area, near the full-service FBO could be the best solution to the future needs of the agency as well as the best service to the customer.

WP 4.7.3 Fueling

Bulk fuel storage is located north of the airport across Alex Holden Way. In this area there are two 25,000 gallon JetA storage tanks and one 25,000 AVGAS 100LL tank. The storage tanks are above ground. Fuel can be purchased from the Fixed Base Operator. In most areas it is desirable to maintain at least a seven day supply of fuel at the airport. In Juneau, since all fuel needs to be barged in, it is likely that a longer supply be maintained to assure that service is not interrupted. Conversation with the FBO indicates that the fuel supplier is Delta Western and they make deliveries several times per week during peak months would indicate a need for some facility expansion.

WP 4.7.4 Perimeter Road

The airport maintains a perimeter roadway to provide for emergency response as well as for operational purposes such as access to the float pond, security and wildlife control. The current perimeter road is not complete in the southeast portion of the airport and provisions should be made to complete this road system if feasible.

facility requirements and preliminary … facility requirements and preliminary alternatives ......

Documents