fletcher aviation consulting - land, water and...

Fletcher Aviation Consulting

March 3, 2015 STATE OF NEW MEXICO COUNTY OF TAOS PLANNING COMMISSION Bill Thomas, Mary Mascareñas, John Trujillo, John Durham, Eugene Sanchez - Members

Ladies and gentleman,

My name is Robert A. Fletcher, principal of Fletcher Aviation Consulting.

In my capacity as an aviation consultant, I have been retained to review certain aspects of the Taos airport crosswind runway project as well as documents and testimony of others in this case.

I ask that you carefully consider the points outlined below when addressing actions regarding the Taos Regional Airport:

1. Although several federal programs include noise standards or guidelines as part of their funding-eligibility and performance criteria, the primary responsibility for integrating airport considerations into the local land use planning process rests with local governments. The Federal government lacks the authority to zone land.

The FAA fosters compatible land use planning both to facilitate access to airports commensurate with the demands of air commerce and to abate the aviation noise effects of the airport. They do not control land use from a safety perspective for land in the vicinity of an airport. However they do provide imaginary surfaces described in the applicable sections of Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77 that are the minimum areas that should be protected under a hazard zoning regulation.

2. The FAA normally prepares Environmental Impact Studies (EIS) for approval and construction of major projects; for changes in projects that substantially increase size, capacity, or incorporate additional purposes; and for major changes in the operation and/or maintenance of completed projects. The FAA identifies those land uses which are normally compatible with various levels of exposure to noise by individuals. It provides technical assistance to airport operators, in conjunction with other local, State, and Federal authorities, to prepare and execute appropriate noise compatibility planning and implementation programs.

The process of meeting National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requirements through the EIS only addressed that there will be no adverse noise level related impacts outside the acceptable range(s) for the surrounding areas and no hazard to air navigation.

The majority of the maps and there outlined zones associated with and documented in the EIS have nothing to do with safety or appropriate land use for other than noise consideration’s. The FAA seeks protection from liability on the project by requiring the avigation easements to protect the portions of the Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) not encompassed on the airport property.

3. The chart prepared by Armstrong Consulting titled Off Airport Land Use, uses the generally accepted imaginary surfaces described in the applicable sections of Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR)

Colorado Office www.fletcher-aviation-consulting.com Florida Office 21122 East Mineral Drive Phone: 1-720-438-5009 USA 8601 Surf Drive, 8W Aurora, Colorado 80016-1926 Fax: 1-888-505-1243 USA Panama City Beach, FL 32408-8700


Part 77; which are the minimum areas that should be protected under a hazard zoning regulation. I concur that the residential development is not normally acceptable in the Approach and Traffic Pattern zones. If they are allowed, Avigation easements and disclosure are required before development.

4. Avigation easements transfer certain property rights from the owner of the underlying property to the owner of an airport. Airport Land Use Commissions may require avigation easement dedication as a condition for approval of development on property subject to high noise levels or a need to restrict heights of structures and trees to less than might ordinarily occur on the property. Also, airports may require avigation easements in conjunction with programs for noise insulation of existing structures in the airport vicinity.

5. The chart makes assumptions as to the Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS) minimums of the yet to be designed instrument approaches to the runways. It also appears to exclude any possibility for an ILS Back Course to Runway 30. The ILS Back Course is also an instrument approach procedure that utilizes the back course of the localizer with a localizer back course approach. This back course approach could improve overall safety during inclement weather in the winter. If such an approach was used the approach area depicted to the northwest would be mirrored to the southeast and needs to be accounted for in the needed zoning scheme.

6. According to NMSA 3-39-5. Planning and zoning laws; all municipal airport facilities are subject to planning and zoning laws, ordinances and regulations applicable to the area in which the airport facility is located.

7. Due diligence concerns become paramount should an accident or incident occur resulting in damage to property, loss of livelihood, injury and/or death. Should an investigation show the jurisdiction(s) ignored relevant safety data or best practices recommendations, that jurisdiction becomes liable to legal action for damage recovery. 8 In March 2001 the Town of Taos wrote a letter to the FAA that states:

“As you know, FAA Order 5050-4A and 47c(2) calls for assurance by an airport sponsor that it will take available, appropriate and reasonable actions to promote land use compatibility.

The Town of Taos, sponsor for the Taos Municipal Airport, recognizes and willingly accepts the requirement under section 51 l(a){S) of the 1982 Airport Act to "coordinate with local jurisdictions to ensure that appropriate action, including the adoption of zoning laws, has or will be taken, to the extent reasonable, to restrict the use of land adjacent to or in the immediate vicinity of the Airport to activities and purposes compatible with normal Airport operations, including landing and takeoff or aircraft", and the similar requirement under 49 U.S.C. 47 107(11)( 10) that "appropriate action, including the adoption of zoning laws, has or will be taken to the extent reasonable to restrict the use of land next to or near the airport to uses that arc compatible: with normal airport operations ."

The Town of Taos will continue to undertake coordination with applicable zoning jurisdictions and where necessary, will also seek to transact directly with nearby landowners to assure land use compatibility.” (Source - EIS, Appendix G)



9. The airport sponsor (City of Taos) and the County of Taos should have worked together to develop a land use plan surrounding Taos Regional Airport in accordance with NMS 3-39-19. Preparation of airport approach plans. The intent of adopting such a plan indicate the hazards, the area within which measures for the protection of the airport's aerial approaches should be taken, and what the height limits and other objectives of such measure should be. In adopting or revising any such plan, the legislative body shall consider, among other things, the character of the flying operations expected to be conducted at the airport , the nature of the terrain, the height of existing structures and trees above the level of the airport , and the possibility of lowering or removing existing obstructions. The legislative body may obtain and consider the views of the agency of the federal government charged with the fostering of civil aeronautics as to the aerial approaches necessary to safe flying operations at the airport. This process still needs be undertaken with the inclusion of owners' and developers' to protect the safety of county residents and the continued viability of the airport. However, while there may not be legal penalties for failure to adopt an airport land use plan (i.e., an airport would not be violating Chapter 3 or other New Mexico laws), there may be significant third party risk and/or financial penalties for failure to adopt airport zoning regulations.

10. The objectives of compatible land use planning are to encourage land uses that are generally considered to be incompatible with airports (such as residential, schools, and churches) to locate away from airports and to encourage land uses that are more compatible (such as industrial and commercial uses) to locate around airports.

11. The generally accepted controlled compatible land use area extends 5 miles beyond each end of an eligible runway and 1.5 miles on each side of the extended runway centerline. These are the minimum limits of the area that can be zoned, not necessarily the limits of the areas that must be zoned. Development in the generally accepted controlled compatible land use area needs to be addressed by the legislative and political parties.

12. There is a difference between a hazard to air navigation and non-compatible with airport operations when developing a land use plan. 13. The areas that should be hazard zoned are not specifically defined. However, it is generally accepted that the imaginary surfaces described in the applicable sections of Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77 are the minimum areas that should be protected under a hazard zoning regulation. 14. The areas that should be non-compatible zoned are also not specifically defined. This is done by assessing the risk. Most research agrees that risk is primarily affected by three factors:

o Probability of a crash occurring near a specific airport. o The probable distribution of crashes with respect to the location. o Size of the probable crash area.

Population density is a major factor in estimating a crash consequence. A pilot who has some control capability of a small aircraft can usually avoid human habitations in low density developments. As population density or aircraft size increases, the destruction of property and possible loss of life on the ground becomes a greater risk. High density development greatly increases the risk for a catastrophic accident involving people on the ground. Residential development, particularly high-density development, is not compatible with airport operations not only due to aircraft noise impacts but also for safety reasons.



15. Arriving and departing an airport are the most critical phases of flight and represent the majority of aircraft accidents.

16. Pilots will normally use the runway(s) most aligned with the wind, taking into account the size and speed of the aircraft.

17. General Aviation flying has more accidents per operation by a factor of approximately eight when compared to Scheduled and Unscheduled Commercial Service Part 121 operations, and a factor of five when compared to Scheduled Commercial Service Part 135 operations.

18. Historical wind data indicates an annual average of 25% of the departures will take-off on Runway 12 and arrivals will land on Runway 30 an estimated 35% of the time annually. These historical wind figures combined with runway length restricting full capacity use of the aircraft currently and projected to use the airport, drove the construction and funding of the airport expansion and cannot be considered de minimus change. (Source – ROD, Section 2.2.2)

Based on historical wind data I estimate departures from the four runways SKX as follows:

Runway Annually Runway Annually

RWY 12 +/- 10% RWY 04 +/- 45%

RWY 30 +/- 25% RWY 22 +/- 20%

Also based on historical wind data I estimate arrivals from the four runways SKX as follows:

Runway Annually Runway Annually

RWY 12 +/- 20% RWY 04 +/- 20%

RWY 30 +/- 25% RWY 22 +/- 40%

19. There is little current development to the north and west; however this is private land that easily could become developed. Prior to any development this area should be addressed in a controlled compatible land use area.

20. The current and proposed development of the land south and east of Taos regional Airport is largely non-compatible.

21. Based upon historical data from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) the areas adjacent to airports are more susceptible to aircraft accidents. Therefore, caution must be exercised when land is zoned and construction permits are issued in areas adjacent to airports in an effort to reduce the severity of an accident, loss of life or injury, based upon historical trends. 22. It is generally accepted that the Accident Safety Zones established by Hodges and Shutt, Institute for Transportation Studies, University of California Berkley, in their report of 1993; are valid for determining density in impact zones as depicted In Figure 1.



Figure 1: Aircraft Accident Safety Zone Diagram

Table 1: Safety Zone Dimension (in Feet)

Recommended land uses and densities of land development are different depending on the particular Airport Impact Zone. Each runway end should be surveyed to the dimensions above and each resulting accident zones addressed according to the densities’ listed in Table 2 below.



Table 2: Accident Safety Zone, Land Use Guidelines

Note: An important caveat with this analysis is that the safety zone shapes and sizes as shown are presented only to illustrate the way in which the accident data should be used to create a set of safety compatibility zones. The expectation is that the results would serve as the starting point for the jurisdiction to use in delineating zoning in the controlled compatible land use. It is important that the process address all of the airports runways. Since the focus is currently on the new crosswind Runway 12/30; I have included Taos Runway 12 departure end safety zones in the illustration below in Figure: 2. as you can see it is critical to control further growth in these safety zones. Additionally I have included Taos Runway 30 departure end safety zones in the illustration below in Figure: 3. all the land shown to the northeast of the Pueblo’s Tract A and north of Hwy 64 is privately owned, except for the airport, and could be developed.

I hope this illustrates, at a minimum, the need to adopt an airport compatible zoning approach to the controlled compatible land use area outlined in number 11 above. I also believe the County should put a moratorium on development in the controlled compatible land use area until it can form an Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) to work through due diligence of the zoning issues. The ALUC charter should require the ALUC to protect and preserve the safety of the county’s residents be using the zones and densities’ in Table 2 as well as the continued viability of the airport by proposing a comprehensive airport zoning scheme. The ALUC will bring their zoning recommendations to the Planning Commission for adoption. Additionally I believe the Town of Taos should be required to disclose to all current non-compatible residential development the safety zone they are in.



Figure 2: SKX Runway 12 Aircraft Accident Safety Zone Diagram



Figure 2: SKX Runway 30 Aircraft Accident Safety Zone Diagram

22. Not addressing the land compatibility around Taos Regional Airport could prohibit future receipt if AIP funds to maintain or improve the airport as outlined in US Code. Title 49, Transportation, Subtitle VII Aviation Programs, Grant Assurances, Airport and Airway Improvements Act of 1982.

“As amended, grant assurances are required as part of a project application from the sponsors (airports or communities) who are requesting funds. Upon acceptance of the grant money, these assurances are incorporated into and become part of the grant agreement that obligates the airport owners to operate and maintain the airport and comply with specific assurances, including maintaining compatible land use surrounding the airport. The numbers of assurances that apply to planning related projects are limited compared to other projects and have stipulations that are outlined in the grant agreement documents.”



23. A new section of the Real Estate Disclosure Act, Section 47-13-1.1 NMSA 1978, needs to be enacted to address proximity to airports as well as inclusion in an Airport Safety Zone and appropriate conformance with zone density. 25. Although it's not currently required, most sellers use the New Mexico Residential Real Estate Disclosure Statement. Section 15 on this form addresses aircraft noise and should be amended to disclose if a property is in an airport safety Zone as well as if it is conforming density. Additionally I would like to point out some items that were presented to the commission reference the airports permit request that are disingenuous at best if not outright false.

Disputed facts presented by Mr. Bellis’ letter to the county reference Taos County Administrative Permit - Admin- 001-2014 Town of Taos Crosswind Runway

“The proposed improvements will increase public safety to the airport and the surrounding neighborhood, as well as reducing the current level of noise and visual disturbance.”

The new runway will improve safety on the airport by reducing the need to land or take off in crosswinds which will likely reduce accidents directly contributable to crosswinds. However, Runway 12/30 will do nothing to reduce noise or visual disturbance, it can only move it to other locations when in use. In fact the new runway introduces accident risk to areas that previously did not have it or were at a lower risk.

“The upgrading and installation of new air control and air safety systems at the airport as part of the overall planned safety improvements will provide better tracking if an aircraft is off course or lost, or if a flight violates air corridors laid out for pilots, and will provide better instrumentation landings in bad weather, as well as will reducing the likelihood of crashes that would pose a risk to the airport and surrounding neighborhoods.”

There are no improvements that would allow “monitoring “an aircraft’s path proposed. The on airport radio coverage is the only improvement that will assist air traffic control at this uncontrolled airport. The ILS is a precision approach which provides a navigation aid to the pilot to better line up and descend to the runway in poor visibility conditions. Having an ILS does not directly tie to a reduction in all accidents on approach.

“Additionally, by providing a longer runway, aircraft departing will have to spend less time and therefore will create less noise revving or powering the aircraft engines (whether jet or propeller driven) to build up power before take-off and can use a steeper power glide in their approach, using similarly lower power settings to land. Because they will be coming in at a higher angle of approach and higher altitude over any development below, the new flight and departure approaches will reduce the visibility and sound of the aircraft to those on the ground below the flight path.”

There are many types of approaches across the country and they're generally classified as Precision and Non-Precision approaches. The difference between precision and non-precision approaches is, a precision approach is one that provides an electronic glideslope. Pilots cannot fly or receive any glideslope information from any current approach to Taos Airport they are categorized as non-precision approaches.



“Additionally, by providing a longer runway, aircraft departing will have to spend less time and therefore will create less noise revving or powering the aircraft engines (whether jet or propeller driven) to build up power before take-off and can use a steeper power glide in their approach, using similarly lower power settings to land. Because they will be coming in at a higher angle of approach and higher altitude over any development below, the new flight and departure approaches will reduce the visibility and sound of the aircraft to those on the ground below the flight path.”

This is incorrect. Lift is created by pressure changes created by the airfoil going through the air, not directly tied to the amount of “powering” up of the engines. In fact the aircraft’s flight manual dictates the power setting based on a number of factors. As Mr. Bellis had indicated density altitude is a factor at Taos. So in order to use the full load capacity of current aircraft the take-off roll will actually be longer on warm days. Conversely the power required to keep the aircraft flying on approach to a runway is not dictated by the length of the runway but by the stall speed of the particular type of aircraft.

“The proposed runway is designed to handle exactly the same maximum size and identical type aircraft as the current runway, meaning that the aircraft capable of using the new runway will be no larger, heavier or more powerful than those already landing at the airport.

“The existing runway was engineered to carry a 30 passenger Global Express Bombardier commercial short shuttle jet aircraft, with a gross flight and landing weight of 60,000 lbs.”

“This was based on the maximum weight limits required for what would be the most likely and practical commercial aircraft in the United States available and designed for service for short regional commercial commuter flights in communities such as Taos”.

This is not true. Taos airport was activated 3/1/1967; Bombardier Aerospace began Global Express studies in 1991 and the aircraft was officially launched in 1993. The first flight occurred on October 13, 1996.

Construction of a new 8,600-foot by 100-foot runway (Runway 12/30) capable of accommodating Airport Reference Code (ARC) C-II aircraft (per the EIS) would allow the following to come in to TAOS to provide commercial air service:

Bombardier CRJ-200 50 seats Bombardier CRJ-700 70 “ Canadair RJ 100/200 50 “ Canadair RJ 900 90 “ Canadian Regional Jet 700 70 “ So if a business case or a negotiated subsidy can be developed these aircraft could provide regional commercial commuter flights into Taos”.

“The new runway is designed for exactly the same model, size and weight aircraft, so there is no truth to the rumors that the new runaway is being built to handle large commercial or military aircraft. The capacity of the airport will be exactly the same. The only actual change is that just that 5% of flights will land or depart from a different runway during adverse weather where crosswind conditions or instrument landing conditions require it.”



The strength of a pavement section is difficult to summarize in a precise manner and will vary depending on the unique combination of aircraft loading conditions, frequency of operation, and pavement support conditions. The technical evaluation method attempts to address these and other site-specific variables to determine reasonable pavement strength. The engineering specifications are for Airport Reference Code (ARC) C-II aircraft which includes those mentioned above.

“It is anticipated that the new runway will only be used in adverse weather or emergency landings that require instrument landings or under cross winds conditions. This means that less than 5% of air flights will actually need to use the new runway or use a flight approach other than what is currently being used. It is anticipated that the new runway will only be used in adverse weather or emergency landings that require instrument landings or under cross winds conditions. This means that less than 5% of air flights will actually need to use the new runway or use a flight approach other than what is currently being used.”

Historical wind data indicates an annual average of 25% of the departures will take-off on Runway 12 (40% in June) and arrivals will land on Runway 30 an estimated 35% of the time annually.

At that time US Highway 64 did not exist and the current road was a dirt road running to the edge of the Gorge, but the Gorge Bridge would not be built for another decade.

This is untrue. The bridge was started in 1963 and completed in 1965. It was dedicated on September 10, 1965 almost 18 months before the airport.

“The fact that the airport already exists at this location (and has operated for decades successfully without community complaints and has, to the contrary, actually been increasingly surrounded by new residential development over that time), and is being considered administratively, implies a recognition of the use and its acceptability at this location, as well as a presumption of permissibility, with appropriate review and possible conditions.”

Neighborhood compatibility should not be an issue. The residences that now exist in the area have over time been self-imposed by their owners or developers as a new land use on the pre-existing airport, including the long proposed cross winds runway. The airport is not imposing a new activity or new heretofore unannounced and unplanned expansion onto the residential property owners. These sparse residents were aware of these plans at the time they purchased their property at discount and located there.

The airport is, when compared to all other non-residential and some residential uses in the area, the least environmentally intrusive and least aesthetically visible land use in the surrounding "neighborhood", was the first land use in the adjacent area, and generates the least impact on the immediate "neighborhood".

The Towns comments appear to want to separate itself from the surrounding areas/neighborhoods, instead of working the zoning issues as it assured the FAA it would do in 2001.



To the best of my knowledge the statements made herein are factual.

Respectfully,

Robert A Fletcher

Vice President Fletcher Aviation Consulting


fletcher aviation consulting - land, water and...

Documents