HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 02241987 - S.16 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra
* r C� n¢r�aI
Supervisor Sunne Wright McPeak CJVo�JtCd
DATE: Introdduced4Febru87ry 10, 1987 for Action on Courly
FebruaySUBJECT: Review of Safety Considerations for Buchanan Field Development
I
i
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS) $ BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION
Refer the attached letter from Reynolds and Brown to the
Director of Public Works, Airport Land Use Commission,
Community Development Department as staff to the Airport Land '
Use Commission, and County Counsel to review the feasibility
of:
(a) a reduction in the height of the buildings and
number of stories approved for the 13-acre parcel on
Buchanan Field along Concord Avenue (particularly in
light of the Board of Supervisors aggressively
pursuing more sophisticated instrumentation at the
airpoft and the expected consequence of a lower
decision point altitude) ; and
(b) an alternative land use to mid-rise offices , or
other land uses to best address considerations of
safety and traffic mitigations while allowing the
County to generate revenue from the airport
development.
BACKGROUND
I am in receipt 'of a copy of the attached letter and
information. I believe we must be extremely cautious in
allowing land uses on the airport and around the airport which
may jeopardize the safety at Buchanan Field. When the Board
of Supervisors approved the Reynolds and Brown development on
the 13-acre parcel along Concord Avenue, it was with the
condition that it must meet all FAA safety considerations.
The attached material is worthy of review for safety reasons.
Perhaps the 10-stories should be reduced to as few as seven in
order to further avoid an obstruction to a pilot flying a
"missed approach procedure" which is an immediate left turn
from the airport if the runway cannot be sited at the
"decision point altitude" . A plane approaching on Runway 19
might make a left turn over the Reynolds and Brown buildings.
While the decision point altitude is now about 400 feet (well
above a 10-story building as approved) , when more advanced
radar or instrumentation technology is installed, it is likely
to be reduced to about 200 feet. This is new information that
I
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: x YES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S)
ACTION OF BOARD ON February 24, 1.987 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT r I 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
/LYES: NOES: AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
CC: Public Wdrks Director ATTESTED
Community Development Director PW 84the of ft Bm" of
Airport Land Use Commission &"ryian*WCounty A at"
County Counsel
County Administrator G
BY __ � _ _ . DEPUTY
Review of Safety Considerations for
Buchanan Field Development
February 24, 1987 Page 2
was not before the Board of Supervisors when the 10-story
project was approved. While the developer has considerable
rights to pursue the approved project, I sincerely believe the
Board of Supervisors should ask the appropriate departments
and Airport Land Use Commission to review the matter.
Further, if office use is not feasible, then the Board of
Supervisors should examine alternative land uses to generate
income from the airport but in a manner consistent with safety
and traffic considerations.
i
i
6 July 1986
Peter Reynolds
Reynolds & Brown
Box 4057
Concord , CA
94524-4057
i
i
Dear Peter ,
Enclosed are two copies each of the TERPS and FAR 77 analysis relative
to your proposed Airport Center Office Park in Concord , CA .
After more detailed study I was able to establish that your project
is not in conflict with TERPS criteria . This conclusion was possible
even allowing for successful completion of the earlier attempt by the
FAA to convert the runway 19R LDA system to a precision ILS or MLS
system.
These analyses also recognized the desire of the Buchanan Field
authority to obtain a ;precision instrument approach system for both
runways O1L and 32R an'd assumed they were successful in removing the
existing obstacles . ani
'd
FAR 77 analysis noted one instance where the proposed Airport
Center Project penetrated the imaginary surfaces of that document . I
would not classify the penetration as serious except for the safety
aspect . The concern for safety will likely be generated by a pair
of issues ; i . e . ( 1 ) Use of runways 19 L and R by departures and
arrivals ; and (2) the number of people occupying the complex .
Published FAA flight procedures authorized landings on runway 19R with
3/4 statute mile visibility and takeoffs with one mile . If a pilot is
unable to complete his approach he is directed to make a left turn
( over the site ) and proceed to the north . Also , . a pilot taking off
from runway 19L or R is allowed to make a left turn , and overfly the
site.
TERPS criteria is predicated on normal aircraft operation and
reasonable pilot knowledge of instrument procedures . Therefore a
pilot would be expected to climb straight ahead to 400 ' in either case
above before commencing a left turn . This maneuver would keep the
aircraft clear of the office complex or well above it .
If you have any questions please give me a call .
i
P.S. I reviewed briefly the development across Concord Avenue from you
as requested . It appears to have been constructed in accordance with
TERPS . The buildings are either below or clear' of the TERPS surfaces .
Since relly
Ck ,
,rj Rebuschatis
Encl : TERPS Analysis
FAR 77 Analysis
i
i
F
j
I
Pn" Onnrincn hirpnrt n N I strict nt H r�,
%rHrqnn, , Cali lorrin IWO-
CCEi
"r J Yoh unchnr 1 .9
VOW! 017N,
penr Ov. InAnnnn AM , AncM , Q�
FIA Form 7161-1 Wed July 1, 19A
The WernI Avintion AdAristrPrIon (VAA) hum rn"Oncted a st"Ov ef nW
ornnnsed &Pvejnpmrnr "nd-r MaR M-APP-191 -UrA, nor review hal inai-carld
rhat We bqvr no OhIpction to this nrnpnn-d constr"Wor of three
WAIdinpi and one Imchir; rnrapr prnvidpd W nrrurfmr-s nre
IWORd it "ccnrdnrcr with MAW Avinrion h0vinintruin71. AC 70/7060-14,
Chapters 4, are 1.
J. z',AVTATVI
Vistrict MEN,-
JO/8/86
Copy to: Jon Reynolds qn, Ira-ninon Mrpnrts Nstrick Mic-
Dave Babcock P31 Hirr-n "on!
Burl Mra-- , CA jAQ p
10/15 Copy to: Bob Rebuschatis
FYI from Peter Reynolds
17i AV- Qj-r-
f�nnnvo ,
Afroart : ""Onna- NO& , Concord , 01
The rjo--r! Aviopyn, hvs rard"rtoo a arrov " I rV
"royovid ""I"r Cox, O"r roulpa hip hdicnt-'�
Aut WO KAVS on oh;"Wrn 10 thin UUMPOW C""' rr' Wy A thrrp QW.,
HAIfs NOR To n-m "Pr1k; viraor prpvidrd too nvrnoy"ryn mim -WracKO!,
11cht-d j,
To" nr- r'-IrdpA ThAV thin "Mi"Inn"mr -y"t on" b; FKU-7 nr : 40 -7t r--
vinjcn rn 71,� Afrra"r lovant plan .
Tn- 100--r; in W-jnr rnrilf-A A own 71" 'S PnOTP- hy ropy Oki -
9�. ..',i
.av-
----------
IMPACT 01! FED'FRAL Ali; i EGULATICII 77 BY THE PROPOSED Al.,,PC.RT
MITER OFFICc PARK: (ACOP)
T AND ATI 14 �OF THE FOUR, STRUCTURES PROPOSED FOR THE ACOP PROJECT
T;1E Helcl Loc c. ..0 c
I1: CONCORD, CA WERE STUdIED FOR COl:PL1ANCE VITH T14E STANDARDS OF FA`: 77. Ili
THE INITIAL REVIEW THE WORST CASE WAS CONSIDERED; 1 . E. THE TALLEST E'UILDING
(10 `,TORIES AT 131 PER LEVEL PLUS All 81 ELEVATOR SHAFT HOUSIIIG FCR 138' TOTAL)
VAS LOCATED AT A POINT 011 THE SITE CLOSEST TO THE P.Url.;AY. A GROUND ELEVATION
OF 291 HSL UAS ASSUMED FOR AN [,.SL HEIGHT OF 1671 . WHERE PENETRATICPI5 DERE
NOTED All ADJUSTMENT OF THE BUILDING LOCAT I CN AIID/OR HEIGHT WAS CONSIDERED. THE
RESULT 15 SHOWN LATER WITH THE INDIVIDUAL CASE. SEE FIGURE 1
I
PARAGRAPH 77.2 DEFINITIONS - °110ti-PRECIS1O11 INSTRUi:ENT RUM'.1AY" t-:EANS A RUNWAY
HAVING Atl EXISTING INSTP.UIENT APPROACH PROCEDURE ( IAP) UTILIZING AIR NAVIGATION
FACILITIES WITH ONLY HORIZONTAL GUIDANCE. . . . .FOR WHICH A STRAIGHT-IPI NON-PRE
cistor! IAP HAS BEEN APPROVED, OR PLANNED, OR INDICATED Oil AN FAA PLFJIt•IING
DOCUMENT. . . . . SEE FIGURE 2
"PRECISION IIISTRUh!ENT RUNWAY11 MEANS A RUNWAY HAVING AN EXIXTING IAF UTILIZING
All ILS OR 1,LS. . . . . IT ALSO MEAI1S A RUNWAY FOR WHICH A PRECISION APPROACH SY5TEt•I
IS PLANNED AND 15 SO INDICATED BY Ali FAA APPROVED AIRPORT LAYCUT PLAN (ALP) .
"VISUAL RUNWAY" NEANS A RU14WAY INTENDED SOLELY FOR THE OPEPATIO:I OF AIRCRAFT
USING VISUAL APPROACH PROCEDURES, WITH 110 STRAIGIIT-111 IAP AND NO 11`15TRVIIEt1T. DES-
IGNATION INDICATED ON AN FAA APPROVED ALP.. . . .OR BY AIIY PLMININ:S DOCUI:ENT. SUE"
:BITTED TO THE FAA BY COI-IPETENT AUTHORITY. -
PARAGRAPH 77.3A - TIIE STANDARDS ESTAEL 1 SHED IN THIS PART (FEDERAL, AI R. REGULAT IOl1)
FOR DETERI111!ING OBSTRUCTIONS TO AIR IIAVIGATION APE USED BY TPE Al-10111STRATOR IN -
1 - ADHINISTERIHG TM: FEDERAL-AID AIRPORT PROGRAI;;
2 - TRAMSFERII:G PROPERTY;
3 - DEVELOPING T ECH'I11 CAL STAIIDARDS AND GU 1 DANCE 111 TIIE DES I GN. ....OF A I RPGRT S
4 - IM.POS I MG REr;U 1 RE1tENTS FOR PUBLIC NOTICE OF CONSTRUCTION. . . . .
PARAGRAPH 77.3E - THE STANDARDS USED BY THE AD:IItI1TP,1,TOT! III THE ESTABLIS1it.:ENT OF
FL I GIIT PROCELIORES AND /,I'f,CRAFT OPERATIONAL L IL:ITAT IOI! _'. ARE NOT SET FCRTIi Ili Tills
PART BUT ARE CONT." I NED Ill OTHER PUBLICATIONS OF THE r10::1111 STRATOR (TE.-PS).
SUUPART C FAIR 77 - OBSTRUCTION STAIIDARDS
POTENTIAL II:PACT OF TM: ACOP PROPOSAL nil FA:'. 77 STAKE,%RUSE CY P;.F.AGRAP1i1 15 AS
FOLLOI15:
FAP,AGRA,M! 77.23AI.- i10 111PACT AS A%CCIP STRUCTURES ARE LLSS THA:! 5CC1 AG..L.
APAGr,,&li 77.23A2 - I'.i iiIPACT AS ACOP ST2UCTUR2 S ARE LESS TI!;,ll 2CG1 k! L.
FARAGRAPII 77.23A3 - i'O IHP'ACT AS STRUCTURES ARE NOT C.T - HEIGHT 7:1 .T WOULD RESULT
IH THE VERTICAL DIET1.::CF. 13ETIJEEII /,IIY POINT ON THE CEJE:CT AI1D Ai: ESTAGL1SHED
L.1P!II;U1.i ItISTRU!.IENT FLIGHT ALTITUDE t:•IT!IIII TEAT ARCA C,E: SEMA-.:!T T CE LESS THAN
THE REQUIRED OCSTACLE CLEARAIICE.
i
IIIc ACOP SITE: 15 t:ITHIP ,THE CUSSED APPROACH SEGI:ENT (i,AS) OF T:!E E:;15TING i1CN"
P1!ECISICr!! TAPS TO RU:!VAY 191; A1;C THE PLAMIcD PRECI ;;iC;; IAPS TO Utl'.'l.YS 19P, i 2;:.
i 111: PRO!'CSI:D STRUCTURES, H019EVE:R1 UOULD HOT RESULT I '' THE VE''T I C;.L UI STAI!CE T?E-
'V%JVI:II !JI`( PCMIT ON 711 f: PROPOSED STRUCTU.^.E AI:D ,E i:ST,,11L1AILD I !1',(!111: INSTPU-
I.CIlT FL1C.!!T ALTITUDE Ti GE LESS TI!F.II THE f !:nt!IRLU COST;-CLE CLE:.Ri,:'C�.
T11E ACCP SITE IS WITIM-1 T11E CIPtCLIPIG AREA OF THE E::IETII:C, T1,!0
-ND THE PL„1:!!!:D PP.ECISIO!! IAP TO Ut::1AY THE PC1-1,-,0SED :TRUCTUP S ARE ALL CE-
1-011 THE f:l;' I::Ut.E II!STrutJ-IJJ FLIGHT ALTITUDE::.
I
1
` Prrr
PARAGRAPt! 77.23A3 COH7. THE 1,C(.;P SITE IS CLEAT OF FCU:: RUH%1AYS (0-1L/R. AND
32L/R) . AIRSPACE USED G.Y. DEPARTURES FP.OL! T::F OTHEi. F'•UR RUNWAYS (i9L/R ACD
AUR) WOULD OVERLIE THE ISITE. THE Ii11;l;;Ul: MSTMI'.EA;T FLIGHT ALTITUDE, FOP (jPER-
ATIOIIS FR011 THESE RUNUAYS MOULD NOT HEED T;: i:E ItICRCASE-02 HOl1EVEr, TO PROVIDE
1•I1t111;U11 OBSTACLE CLEArAtICE.
PARAGRAPI-1 77.23A.4 - THF, PROPOSED ACUP STRUCTURES UNDE'LIE FEDERAL AIRIIAY V6 AND
THE BAY 1RAC014 RADAR VECTORING AREA. THE HEIGHT OF THE ACOP STRUCTURES WOULD
NOT DECREASE THE killitiUi.lIOOSTACLE CLEARANCE PROVIDED IN THE ENP,OUTE AREA OF V6,
INCLUDING TURN AND TERIMIATICH AREAS, RADAR VECTCRI:!G OF APPROVED OFF-AIRWAY
ROUTES.
PARAGRAPH 77.23A5 - ALL FOUR OF THE ACOP BUILDINGS A '.E IltGHER THAII THE BUCHAFIAt.,
FIELD TAKEOFF AND LANDING AREA. THE TALLEST BUILDIi!G , AT 1381 AGL (167 I.SL) ,
LOCATED IN THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED SECT I Ot15 OF THE SITE WOULD BE HIGHER TITAN All
II.1AGtNARY SURFACE ESTABLISHED UNDER PARAGRAPH 77.25 As FOLLOWS.
A - IF LOCATED IN THE EASTERN TIP OF THE SITE, THE TALLEST BUILDING WOULD
PENETRATE TI!E 20 ; 1 APPROACH SURFACE OF Ru!:,cr•v .32L BY 1°), . SEE
FIGURES 3 P,iiD 4. THE WESTERN MOST PORTION OF THE PENETRATION APPEARS TO
BE 1751 FROM THE SITE BOUNDARY. A LOWER ST UCTURE (73, AGL.) 15 PRO-
POSED FOR THIS AREA AND MOULD BE 261 BELOW T'IC 11•IAG I NARY SURFACE AND WEST
OF THE PENETRATION AREA.
B - IF LOCATED It! THE EASTERN HALF OF THE SITE, THE TALLEST BUILDING WOULD
PENETRATE THE 7:1 TRANSITION AREA" OF P,Ut111AY 32;'. BY .451 . SEE. FIGUPEs-5
AND 6. TH,iEE STPUCTURLS WOULD LIE IN THE PEIIETRATIOH AREA, THE TALLEST
BEING v,51 AGL. Ti-I I S is 71 BELOU Ti!E I IIAG 1:l,' PY SUPFACE.
C IF LOCATED It! THE SOUTIMESTERN QUAr^,TER OF THE SITE, T1117 TALLEST
CUILDING 410ULD PENETRATE THE 7:1. TRAHSITIG;I A7. E-A GF RumiAY 01R 6Y 411 .
FIGURES 7 AND C. Ti:C TALLEST ST.),UCTURZ IS PLAPlHEn FOR THIS AREA.
TO AVOID PEI:ETRAT MG THz FAP, 77 I;.hG I tIARY Sl:RFACE IT 140ULD 61. t1ECES5ARY
TO EXCHAHG FOS,IT10!iS llETk!FEN THE 10 STORY A::.- 6 STORY BUILDINGS. TiiIS
WOULD PROVIDE A CLEARANCE OF 111 .
As NOTr..0 cr,RL I ER, FAif 77 15 A PLANNING DOCI;F;G_r!T. +(_L STRUCTURES IDENTIFIED Ii F,^.E
AS PENETRATING THE 11.AG I NARY SURFr.CES OF Fi%!) 77 WOULD rE CONS)DErf-_D AS AN 005TACLE
CY THE FAA. A STUDY EY THE FAA MOULD BE PEC;UIRED, IIf ;1EVEP, TO CLASS THESE O[;-
5TACLES AS A "HAZArb". NOR6!ALLY, UNLESS A;: 013JECT PEi:CTPATES TE-;PS CRITERIA THE
FAA WILL HOT CLASSIFY IT AS A H,, ARO.
IN ACCORDANCE WITH VOUP REQUE.E-T , FAA Fora; 7460"1, ..':T ICI: OF CeNST RUCT 1011,
H".S BEEll PREPARCU FGF: TIiC AM, PRCJECT. IT IS EtICLC': D HEREWITH FCi? YOUR R'_VIF11
AND FORW,.rtDlllG. TO T!,E FAA IN T;IE ENCLOSED SELF-ADDRE_.'.;':D ENVELOPE.
(.ilCl_, F1•"�URI:S ? TFIPti f. OF FA.: 77 r.IIALYSt ;, �
I 11CllA1;At1 F i [I_C ( (, CIIA;!T
,.
FAA FOF;1: 7 uC-.l A;io A'r'I'i•,(,III:LI:TS
OC CHART
TERI i CHART
CU I LD1;?C PLOT
PAILT 7NAVIOABIA; AIMS M:1-1 19
(5011[1 A!!741 / 1
- [SIA BE ISHLD A111 III
ELI VAI 10t;
-j---- II,!R!MENS10NAL STANDARDS (FEET)--,
vOR.Pfr---� -
`DIM ITER! Vv15Ual fl :+vAY il;itR 1MC N1 FJN'N'AT IPP.(C15:Ut.yf
0. I 9 1 A B RUI(ka
( �N'IDtH Or CgIN ARY S:iR(AC'. CGD r �— ' ,
A IAPI'q OACH 5U1 CC WIDTH At 1250 500 4 SCD I 500 1,000 ! I,000
Ivt!A(P.EGD I ,
F�IgAp,U.` OF HORI?0111}i 5118(AC( !5,00 P—I S.0oo 1 S C00 '0.0D, l0 OGD IC..CC
- - - -- ------ - --Z-- I --- ----
i !!CN-PRt C1$IGI:
rq(C!S!""
Don .- I i 11 ArPRD:GH I'titflUv[ut A�cn:.n�d I '
.A �--_-- - ---1 AF PR laCH.
I CC__ f
`--C-I1.Pr R_COCH SURr ACC W19TH Al M1 I.2`.'011.5_0012,OC•O 1 )ti0D-��."CO I 16,0 UC._J
C—(' J4lPHf,,_f15UF.fAC( LC nClll ",CO!';5.000 5,000;10 Dcl0 t10�'OG i -
' I E 4PPRUACH SLOPE I _. ._ .,_.—._.�._.�
>4 .
A. pvLlix P.U17N15's
- � 1 P- RUNWAY'S LARGE- THA!:V'iLIIY
(<`• \ j ("
\� \� C r' 1 D- VISIBr,nY u;NIr.11MI AS LOA A: l;4 VILE
1 ;' O f•,� • rNCC151014 I1;S1 RU\It Nt aC':4.p1(11 SLOPE IS 501 fOR MNE9 IC.003
FEET AIIO 401 rOR Ar; A,(.n IP!+a: 40,000 FEE'
"VII,ILI
!t6,
1'H'-i.: .'::. III 1.1 NUM(t:I APPR0-'It
:'"'rI 5�,�\ I . ..4":.UAI •:fit; I,R(C151O r1 Ar P1.;i.:;,H
l !�_ (SI DP(.C1 1
\� --
. 2
ISOMETRIC VIEW OF SECTION A-A
E 77.25 CIVIL AIRPORT 1MAGIUARY SURFACES
fl
P u 7WATt 0A/ -
a
N
i coo ZUs t 5 t7_?� >tv1.JWAY
0 S7AC L
,
�, � 1C)
P
1
I G U T:.
c
i
1
i
317`
-73
1L2
1qL 31K
0 -1
etJtT)�ATIcA I$ 85�� r2cNt .s-+fir• r of ZO : I
T I
20 2 -t foo 7 423 122 M5(,
'1:-zn1CTRATrvn1 of 7:15 vRf*ACE IS y ,
I
i
1Z . J-.1 . 0 � V 0 VV N
� Y N 7 �._, I_� `� I
u RECEIVED
\�V/\✓'U FEB 2 i 7
U Ans d..
January 30, 1987
I
Mr. Alan Pfeiffer
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
General Services Department/Lease Management
1220 Morello Avenue, Suite 100
Martinez, CA 94553-4711
Dear. Alan:
Enclosed please find and review the TERPS and FAR-77 Buchanan Airfield
safety analysis for the proposed Development Plan for Airport Center, as
prepared by Mr. Robert Rebuschatis. Both these studies have been submitted
to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and have been approved. I also
enclose copies of three letters from Mr. Michael Mavrakis, Manager, Airport
District Office in San Francisco: J.) August 4, 1986 to Mr. Harold Wight
. acknowledging receipt of the Airport Center "Notice of Proposed Construction
Alteration" ; 2) October 6, 1986 to Mr. . Harold Wight. indicating "no objection
to this proposed construction" after FAA's study of the development; 3)
October 28, 1986 to Mr. R. J. Rebuschatis indicating "no objection to this
proposed const.r.uction" . Also enclosed is a letter from Mr. Rebuschatis to
Reynolds & Brown dated ,July 6, 1986.
Mr. . Rebuschatis raises the issue of penetration of the FAR-77 imaginary
surface by the proposed Phase I 10-story office tower as shown on the
Development Plan, but does not classify the penetration as "serious except
for the safety aspect" . Ile goes on to suggest that aircraft landing on
runway 19R, if unable to complete the approach, are directed to make a left
turn over the proposed development site and proceed to the north. Under
TERPS criteria, pilots are expected to follow normal aircraft operations and
to have knowledge of instrument procedures. Under such circumstances, they
would be required to climb straight ahead to 400' before commencing a left
turn. Although it is unclear exactly what Mr. Rebuschatis meant, I infer
that the "safety aspect" issue is raised at the prospect of pilots not
following the procedures.
The FAA has ruled that no safety hazard exists which would cause objection
to our proposed construction. Under the terms and conditions of the
DevP-.Iopment Agr.eemeiit between the County of Contra Costa and Reynolds &
[gown, and under the terms and conditions of the Option to Ground Lease, we
17(11?( „nni,l;lvrnn, P.f:,ilh,>:AQ�hr.,.; 1�h hlun,•.F.
5uilc t p 1',C?.I „x�05i 115 674 tS 100
Colic(11 J.(.A 0,17,20 Cn ,rm(i,Cil
91,;2,1.105;
"v
Mr. . Alan .Pfeiffer U�
January 30, 1987
Page 2
intend to continue preparation of the Design Development documents. Article
H.8. of the Development Agreement addresses development of the proposed
project compatible with Buchanan Field. Appendix 4 of the Development
Agreement references verification of exact height contours in accordance
with criteria in Federal Air Regulation (FAR) Part 77. Since transmittal by
Mr . Mavrakis to Mr. . Wi.clht of the FAA' s "no objection" letter of
October 6, 1986, we. have received no objections from the County in respect
to the FAA's findings on Mr. . Rebuschatis's preparation of the TERPS and FAR-
77 analysis.
In response to the public concern being strongly expressed over the tragic
crash of a light aircraft into the Sun Valley Mall on an approach to
Buchanan Field, the "safety aspect" of our proposed buildings as addressed
by Mr. Rebuschatis must be thoroughly studied, if it hasn't already. We
request that the County again review all pertinent information, including
the TF.RPS and FAR-77 analysis, and confirm in writing to us that the County
is satisfied our buildings are safe and in compliance with all airport
safety regulations, and that the previous representations and warranties of
the County regarding safety are accurate.
Sincerely,
REYNOLDS & BROWN
PETER M. REYNOLDS
Enclosures
CC* Sunne McPeak, County Supervisor
Hal Wight, Buchanan Field
Robert Drake, ALUC
PMR:blp
I
113
L 1°11.61'R
SuRi^,�cE
At
, YENS-rka��G+�
t
,i
i
i
t Q-1
Cu
A
a
TERPS AIiALYSIS OF Pi(;POSED AI PC ?T CEDE.; CFFICE PARK (COP)
Tit S ANALYSI 5 IS I IITErJDED TO SHOW THE COP:PATI [I IL ITY OF THE ACOP PROJECT WITH
AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS AT 13UCItArl/.t4 FIELD IN ACCORDAPICE WITH FEDERAL AV 1 t.T ION AD-
I•itt11 STRAT IOt1 (FAA) Pt.w)icooK 3 ERPI IMAL 11J5TRUI;ENT PROCEDURES (TERFS) . TERPS
CONTAINS CRITERIA WHICHI SHALL BE USED TO FCRIULATE, REVIEW, APPROVE AND PUBLISH
PROCEDURES FOR I NSTRUtillI APPROACH AND DEPA.RTURE OF A 1 RCP,t,FT TO AND FP.OH CIVIL
AND HILITARY AIRPORTS ITJ THE L1tiITFD STATES, j
TE'.PS CRITERIA COVERS FOUR TYPES OF TERIIIIIAL INSTRUtoErJT PROCEDURES. THESE ARE:
(1) PRECISION APPROACII;j A STRAIGHT-111 DESCEIIT WHERE THE NAVIGATION FACILITY IS
HORMALLY AL I G14ED TO THEA CENTER OF THE RUNWAY AND GLIDE SLOPE 1 NFOR14AT ION Is PRO—
VIDED TO CONTROL AIRCRAFT DESCENT. (2) 11ON—PRECISION APPROACH; A DESCENT INT11—
OUT ELECTRONIC GLIDE SLOPE 111FORtIAT ION III 1-1111CH THE F It1t.L APPROACH COURSE AL IGN—
ItEr1T AND DESCENT GRADIENT PERI:IT5 A STRAGFIT—IN LANDING; (3) CIRCLING APPROACH;
A DESCENT III A PRECISION, 'OR NON-PRECISION, APPROACH PROCEDURE 'AtIICH DOES NOT
HEET' CRITERIA FOR AUTHORIZING A STRAIGHT—IN LANDING; (4) DEPARTURE PROCEDURES;
PROCEDURES DESIGHCD 1'0 PROVIDE OBSTACLE CLEARAIICE DURING INSTP.UNEHT DEPARTURES.
SEE FIGURE 1
THE RUNWAYS AT EUCHANAu FIELD HAVE ONE OR I:ORE OF THE ABOVE INSTRU14EIIT PROCEDURES
AUTHORIZED, OR PLAIIIiED, AS FOLLOWS:
(A) RUMMY 19'R
(1) Noti-^PREC 1 S t Otl LOCAL J Z ER D 1 RECT I OJ!AI- AID (LDA)
(2) 11ON-'PRECISION VEPY PAGH FREQUEt:CI' Ot:t:i'-DIRECTIOI;AL RANGE (VOR)
(3) PLANNED PRECISION I'.1 CROPAVE LAPID t::S SYSTEM (1 LS)
(4) DEPARTURE PROCEDURE
(6) RUNWAY 19L
(1) DEPARTURE PROCEDURE
(C) RUNWAY OIL
(1) PLANNED PPF-clslOII
(2) DEPARTU:!L PROCEDURE
(D) RUNIdAY 01R
(1) DEPARTURE PROCEDuaE
(E) Ruw-!AY 32
(1) PLANNED PNECISIOtI 1'1:;
(2) DEPARTURE PROCFUUR�
(F) RUNI!AY 32L
(1) DEPARTURE PROC�EDUPE
(1) DEPARTURE PROC�EPURE
W) Rur1W;,Y 14i;
(1) DEPA,PTUPE PROCEDURE
It: TI!E FEDERAL- AV1 ;,T1011 ACT, Ci:NGREss CI!t,R:;EU THE: �;�,� 'r:ITI+ FOGTC '.11:G AVIATION. IN
Kr.EPIHG 111T11 THIS R' :ROH>1131[_ ITY, THEY P[1'.;t. ISHEU AIR i{LGULAT10t1 77 (FA'; 77)
I
{
• PAGE 2
WHICH CONTAINS II•;AG i NARY OBSTACLE SURFACES 011 ACID AROU1iD A I R�•O?'1S. THE REG-
WHICH
ALSO REQUIRES NOT1FICATIOW FRO1•; PERSONS PLANNING TO BUILD lit THE V1CIll-
ITY OF AN AIRPORT. lit TIM RVVIEVI OF NOTICES OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION FILED UNDER
FAR- 77, THE FAA OPERATES Oil A "FIRST COiIE" BASIS Ai.D 001151 DEPS A "PLAIT Oil FILE"
AS JUSTIFICATION TO PROTECT A PARTICULAR RUNWAY FCR FUTURE Ii1STr.Ut:ENTAT ION.
SEE FIGURE 2
IT SHOULD DE NOTED TIIAT RUNWAY IIiSTRUliEPITAT IOfl CAN EE ACCCI'PL 1 SHED BY EITHER OF
TUO HETHODS; (1) PY THE FAA UNDER THEIR FACILITIES Alm EQU1P1•:ENT TEN YEAR
BUDGET PROGRAIi; OR (2) BY TiIE AIRPORT OWNER AT HiS F--PEiISE. THE FiRST wETHOD
15 AT I•;1111WAL EY.PENSE TO THE AIRPORT AUTttORITY BUT IS ON A Pi?IORITY BASIS AHD Ifl-
VOLVES AREA COI;PET IT 1 OtJ AND rUAL i F I CAT IOIJ BASED Oil THE IIUHI3ER OF FLIGHTS,
Ei4PLANED PASSENGERS ACID ETC. . THE SECOND I;ETHOD IS TE•'.iED "NON'-FEDERAL" AND 15
AT LOCAL EXPENSE. 1.1111LE A NUi4BER OF AIRPORTS HAVE INSTALLED HOII-FEDERAL AIDS 1T
IS A DIFFICULT METHOD WITH iiAiJY PITFALLS At!D 1;ORE THAI! CINE FAILURE AFTER. EXPEND-
ING A LOT OF DOLLARS.
SUDHISSION OF FAA FORId 7460-1 BY REY110LDS AND DROI•N1 FOR TL'E ACCP PROJECT IS
OCT14 REQUIRED UNDER FAR 77 AND ADV I SABLE AS YOUR i;EA[15 OF GETTING A "PLA.11 Old
FILE". SUBliISSION IS DEIHG ACCOi•IPLISHED UNDER SEPARATE COVER IliTH THE REPORT
"ANALYSIS OF FAR 77 IMPACT" . TmsmALYsiS OF TERPS CRITERIA WILL IDENTIFY, THE
SEGI•lEt1T5 OF THEVARIOUS FOREGOIiJG PROCEDU?ES THAT OVc?LIE THE PRC'POSED ACOP DE-
VELOPHEtiT. IT WILL ALSO REPORT THE ALLOWAULE CONSTRUCTiCU HEfGHTS It: ACC6RD—
At10E 4lITFI TERPS AiID [i!.I,E C011HEl1TS WHERE APPROPRIATE. IT IS Ii;PORTANT FOR CLAR-
ITY TO EtIPiIASIZE AT THIS 1101117 THAT WE WILL GE ANAL1'ZIt!G TE,-),PS APPROACH PROCED-
URE CRITERIA, NOT FAR 77 AND tIOT THE COUTRA COSTA CGUi:TY AIRPORT LAitO USC.
CO11,14ISSIOi! STRUCTURAL HEIGHT LIMIT PLAN (ALLIC) . FAR 77 1S A PL-,,IiIIIIG STANDARD.
IT 15 VOPE E;:TEt151VF AND OCC1,SIONALLY HORE RESTRICTIVE Twi: T--, ,PS. TIIE ALUC
PLAN 15 A COPY OF FAR 77. THE FAA IN ITS REVIEW OF ,• GU1LDING PROPOSAL 411L1_
ALt•!OST ALWAYS ACCEPT TE.;PS CRITE!:IA.
FOLL041itM iS THE Af1ALYSIS, BY RU1141AY, OF THE it•,P1aCT Tl-..T- PROPOSED ACCP PROJECT
WILL HAVE Oli THE EXISTING AHD PLAIIIIED APPROACH AIID C-PARTURE PROCEDURES AT
CUCI!Ali1,t1 FIELD. ONLY THE TEI�PS SEGHENTS INVOLVED ARE INCLUDED ANC THESE ARE
1_11•11TED TO THE hissrD APPROACH, CIRCLING AidD TA',ECFF SEG1-:E1:T5. T1;E TERPS
SURFACES ARE REPORTED FOR E;:CII SEGHEHT AS 4IELL AS TIIE PLAIN:ED STRUCTURAL BUILD-
IiJG HEIGHTS. THESE HEIGHT COi.PUTATIONS HAVE BEEtt i•1-DE AT THE i:CST CRITICAL roINT
IN EACII CASE TAUS GREATER SEPARATiON OF TE,-IPS SURFACES AiLD STRUCTURAL HEIGHTS
COULD nE EXPECTED GY ADJUSMENT OF THE BUILDING LOC:.TIOi!S. THERE ARE t!O It!—
STAt!CES, HOWEVER, WHERE IHADECUi•TE CI_E;.RAt10E (PENETRATl01lS OF TF—TS SURFACES)
RESULTS. A IiATRiY. PRr-r0,,Tloll 15 PROVIDED FOR QUIC1' -�EVlua.
•TNF AFFECTCC TE,:P , ::L"Ci1EIiTS ARE P•R-SENT'ED AS TREY '000UR !1t TiIE a?C'Cr_DURE;
Ii I SSLD APPROA*Cll (� 'IS) , C 1 ROLA NG• ((SAS) AID DEPARTURE. TIIE GTHFR _•:_r;•:EtiTS;
INITIAL, I[ITERi•iEDIA•TE AND FIIIAI_ AP+E ALL CLEAR. AND !•/ILL IIAVE NO li•;PACT ON 'Ir,',,PS
EACH SEGi.Et1T COi1 ..IDERED._UE:3E HAS AN AREA OR t10^IZC1lTAL (.•It:F:151G11 A5 WELL AS A
SU!ZFACF OR SLOPE. THC i;AS STARTS AT Til[: I ISSED AFP?•OACH PC 1t;T (; JP) 1-!HICtI 15 ,
DEFINITIVE POINT ALOIIG THE FINAL APPROACH CC.URSE 1.111 P. IOP TO THE RUiWAY THRESI
OLE) IN THE CAST ct PRF_ciS10N !•Prf?OAC!i('S. lit THE C1,',- OF HC'!!-PRECI5I0t1 0[:
e
CIPCLIiIG APrR0AC11Ls Tilt:. i•IAP idAY AF. 1, P01 ;!T Orl BUT :ICT CZYOi;r:• TI!_ AIRPORT. TIIE
Ai'.GA IIA5 A IIII)TI! EQUAL !TO Tl!AT OF TIII: Pi:F.CI'.UI:lG f' i:l, L A1'1'RC:,C11
RF:U I:XPAtlDS Ui!I FOR!;I_Y TO 1 NAUTICAL i;i l_E (; I.) AT 1-�:- .; ;:G OBSTACLE LFIALL ;-Etl-
!"TRATC Tl!f: I'.I S '•ED A.i`rR I1,Cll Stl.^.F/.0 E. Tit I C.• sURFACF 5:". I::S OVER TIIE ; AP AT A
HEIGHT UET CP.1. MED BY "JIMTRACT 1 iIG THE F I i!/,i_ APPROAC!? _ST1.CL E CI_ P.1-110E FR01: T!!E L�
I
PAGE 3
APPROVED LAHDIIIG 1:Iri11MI (DECISICH EIrIGHT - D!I FOR PRECIS1011 APPROACH::S OR Eii111-
::UL1 DE5Crt1T ALTITUDE -i.DA FOR 11011-PRECIS1011 AI)U CIICLIiIG APPROACHES . IT ASCENDS
Utl I FORT LY AT TETE RATE OF 1 FOOT VERTICALLY FOR EACIi 4C' HORIZONTALLY (40:1) .
SEE FIGU;.ES 4, 5 & 6 .
CIRCLING APPROACH SE,hFrIIT (CAS) .
THIS 15 THE OBSTACLE CLEARANCE AREA WHICH SMALL BE C�-NSIDE,:EV FC'R AIRCRAFT
11AtlEUVERIiIG TO LAUD !IIICII THE FILIAL APPROAC'.: COURSE IS %CT ALIGI:ED l- mi THE RUti-
WAY CENTEi?LINE. THE SITE OF THE CIRCLING APEA VARIES :.'ITEI TiiE A1;:Crtt.FT CATEGDPY
AS 51401,111 111 TABLE 4 OF TERPS. SEF FIGURE 7. TO DEFirE TI:E LII.IT5 OF THE
CIRCLING AREA FOR TETE APPROPRIATE CATEGORY, DRAW Ail APCOF, SUITAL)LE PADIUS FRG6i
THE CE11TEP OF THE END OF EACH USABLE RUNWAY. COMIECT Tt:E :.RCS WITH LINES TAEIGf_I)T
TO THE LRCS. A EIr11lI.Ui.i OF 3001 OBSTACLE CLrt.RAIICF 511l.LL CE PROVIDED 111 TIIE
CIRCLING AREA.
DEPARTURE AREA
TURNING; DEPARTURE RUNWAYS 14, 19 & 32 _
A TURNING DEPARTURE IS ONE IN WHICH THE AIRCRAFT CLI.:ES STRAIGHT AHEAD UNTIL
REACHING 400' ABOVE THE AIRPORT ELEVAT1ON l•11 TE;1 N 2 Nh- AND THEN I,'AHED 1 ATELY BEGINS
A TURN TO INTERCEPT A DEPARTURE COURSE. THE DEPARTURE A'.F_t. IS CIVICED INTO TWO
SECTIONS. SECT ION 1 BEG 1 NS AT THE DEPARTURE END OF THE RUNWAY (f)i :, t.i:D HAS A
BEG I tiN i HG WIDTH OF 1000' . THE AREA SPLAYS 15 DEGREES Olt EACH SIDE CF THE PUN-
WAY CEHTLRLIIIE EXTEtIDED FOR 2 t!6.. SECTION 2 STARTS AT THE Er!L' OF SECTIO14 1. THE
FLIGHT TRACK AND OUTER DOUNDARY RAD) I ARE DETEREIINED FROM T:_' ?PS TALL'. 31 . SEE
i FIGURE E
A 40:1 OBSTACLE IDEwriFICATIOH SURFACE (C-IS) OVERLIES S CTIOE: 1. IT BEGINS NO
HIGHER THAM 351 AEOVE TETE ELEVAT1Or4 OF THE DE-101 AND RISES III THE DIRECTION OF
DEPARTURE. A 40:1 SLOPE ALSO OVERLIES SEC'rIGN 2. IT BEGINS AT THE HEIGHT OF
SECTION ? AT THE DIVIDIEIG LINE, THr TALI-EST PROPOSED EUILDIUG IS 1381 ACL.
A - RUN:9;,Y 19rt
1 Nor:-PRccisiori LGA
A 1- I SSFD APPP,Ol,cii SEGMENT (I.AS)
THE ENTIRE PROJECT SITE IS 111THIN TIIE LAS. THr CLOSEST EDGE. OF THE SITE
is 35501 FROh THF IAP. TEic CIS AT TIIE FRONT EDGE OF THE SITE 15 1791
(3'.350140:1Y25� OBSTACLE CLEARANCE f2C.1 RUW.AY ELEVATICFI.) (155U1.;ING A 10
STORY OFFICE_ CUILDING AT 13' PER FLOOR (13G' ) + &' ELEVATCR SH,-.FT HOUSING
f 291 PROJECT Si ITE ELEVATION AT THE CLOSEST EDGE OF THE SITE EQUALS
1671 I:SL t.i,u RESULTS IN A NET CL[;,P..LCE OF _17' . -
B C I RCL I NG APP RO, CII SEGMENT CAS)
THE ENTIRE /��{.{' I SITE IS WITHiH Ti-,E CAS. CI `?1:1. 16:G OF THE AIRPORT 15 PRO-
li1 ^ITED It! TF!e. QUADRAi:T !-:EST OF THE AIRPORT CE:Tr-!EEL! ftUritit.Ys G?.L A11D 14
A 3T0 STACK I:Ci2TH1.1EST OF TI'E All?PG%T 1.:1D THE. F-FtoPosFu 2791 LANK OF AI:•CI;ICA
CO[.:PLEX E1.Sl- OF THE IRFORT :.RE T';E CrINTROLLI::: OBST,'!UCTM:S. Ti!E ACCP
STRUCTURES WULD GE 4131 !'ELOW `FHE t.l":Ii:UEI C1 '.CLING FLIrHT ALT:TUUE.
Cl .-CLING 56C' - ACUP f;!r 11_N 11:G 1G7' ' ..0 UALS 4131 ) . * SEE LATER
CoM.:ENT REC,Ar1U11.'G LDA AND VC1:1 IWSS.`:D
I
I
2 1:otl-rr:r.clsloH W-1
A 1. I SSf:D APPRO; CH SEGI.E:!T
T1iE ENTIRC P;!OJi.CI SITr IS IN TE!F .S. THE I.lr.:i UIS E)EGI1!5 ovvr,. T!'I: i AF
j
I
PAGE 4
AT 2101 . THE DISTANCE DET1,EEI1 Tl:l. i.AF't.NV TETE CLOSEST_ EDSC GF TP.E `JITE 15
36001 . TEEE SURFACE AT Till S PO11!T 15 3CG1 (-GCC t 40 t 21C = 3(:0) . TI:E
CbEARANCE DETWEEII THE TEF; STORY STPUCTUPC AIID THE TE;J'S SURFACE IS 1331
DOC — 167) .
0 CI RCL I NG APPPOACI-Ij SEGL:EI!T
TIIE E!ITIRE SITE ISi WITHIN TIME CAS. TIME OCSTACLE CLEARM!CE IS 601 EIGHER
TIIAII FOR THE FOREGOItic LDA P^OCEDURE Dr-CAUSE T:'E I,UA 15 -K' HIGIIER AIID
EACH SEGt:ENT BEGINS WHERE THE PRIOR ONE LEAVES OFF. I. li: 11.U,3; CIRCLING
ALTITUDE 64C' - 167' ELI I LU I I1G = 4731
* C011t1ENT CC•I'CCR;1'I IlG LDA AIM VOR HISSED APPROACII PROC'CDUR!=.
THE I•:ISSED APPROACH PROCEDURE 15 THE S.MiE IN EITHER, C,'.SE. THE PROCECUPE
SPECIFIES A CLII•IBIHG LEFT TUR;) TO 25001 BEGINNING AT THE RUNWAY APPROACH
THRESHOLD THEN DIRECT TO THE CoNcorD VOR, WHICH ES 3.1 Ili-; CORTH. THE t.Al!tIER
1N WHICH TIME PILOT ACCOI'PLISi1ES THE TURN WILL C•ETERI•11NE 14HETHER THE AIR-
CRAFT 14ILL OVERFLY TI!E ACOP SITE. ANY THREAT OF OVER FLIGIiT WILL LIE:EI_Y
GENERATE At1TAGON1511 TO THE PROJECT DUE TO THE LARI:-E IlU14GER OF PEOPLE THAT
WILL OCCUPY THE EU1LD11!GS. THE FACT THAT THE PROJECT PE;!E7RATE5 FAR, 77
AND ALUC STANDARDS WILL ALSO CE GROUT?DS FOR OPPOSIT10t!. THE 014PISTHAS E-5
ACCIDENT AT CUCIIANAm FIELD MILL PROCACLY RAISE THE ISSUE THAT PILOTS DO
1107 AL4!AYS FOLLOW I::GTWUCT10HS.
3 PPEc t store I.LS' — FLANIIF_O.
A I. I SSED APPROACH SEGI!ENT
TIIE E;ITIRC PROJECT SITE IS WITHM T!:E IiAS. A :C:1 CIS GErlt15 AT THE IAAF
AT A HEIGHT EQUAL TO TItF_ ASSUNCO DI! (2201 ) LBS:. THE oFSTACLE CLEARANCE
PE:OVIDEL' AT THE I!AP (1101 ) . 111 TPE CASE OF THE PRECISIC;II APPROACII THE INI'
15 APPRO::IL!/,TELL' 26001 PRIOR TO TI:F_ RUI:UAY THRESPOLO ,'.JD THUS FARTHER FPO[:
Ti1C ACC.'r SITE. fIIIS PROVIDrs 110P1= DISTANCE (:. 0(•1 ) F^_P, THE PILOT To rAltl
ALTITUDE (1GC1 ) AM) IIAVE GREATER CLEARAIICE OVER TI!E PPCFO CD DUILD111CS (3-C3) .
CC 1 40 } 220 Uhl - 110 OrSTACLE CLEARANCE - CUILDII;G 1I7.1c, T 1G7 = 3.031
CLEi,RAi10E) AIli1THER ADVA!ITG.GE TO THE GREATER i' 1 STANCE EET;'.:EN THE I.AP AND
TP;-. ACOP SITE IS T14E I:AHEUVEP,I NG ROOtt.
0 CIRCLING APP IlC,;CH _SLGI.1=I:T .
Til_- EI!T I PC SITE 1,S IIIT;:I:! TIIE OAS. IME SURFACE :',ilD CBSTi ALES IN THE FORE—
GOIIIG LDA RU;!1'AY '192 Pt?pCEDURE (A1C) ALSO APPLIES HERE A;!L• THE CLEi.RAE!CF
OVER THE SITE is :4131 .
n
COI:I_:E::T - I NSTALAT IO:: ('F Al! EI_ECTP.f,I! 1 C GI_ I L'E _r-LOPE TC ..C";:VERT TI!E LDA
/*.PPROi,Cl: TO /, PPr'.CIS10i! PRt"+CEDU^E, I- LS OR ILS, 14;.5 ATTCI FTi_D PREVIOUSLY AS
P/,RT OF THE FAA' -,I FACILITIES :,!!D LQU I PI_:EHT LL:L' "T PROCPi,: . I'OI:EVER,
OV,STACI_ES IN THE IF111i,L /,PPPOi,CII SFC,:-ENT PREVC;:TLL' ALIGN;.C!;T GF TIIE LOCALIZER
COl1RSE I•IITIIIN TEPPS C^! M,: I21A. Tlir EY1STIt:G LIT, (LOCAI.1.i_r) COU..^.SF. 15 CANTED
U uu;nCCS C.(•lll!TI:R ct.UCi;1!156 FRO;, TIIL rx,r,,t1D1.0 Poi WAY CEi:Ti ?LI;IE. IT 15
11i:PED THAT T!!L r1EL1 I L; EQUIMCNT '111..L EVENTU/,I.LY PERNIT A CURVED FI11i,L
i
APPROACH COUIl5E CID TI!U, AVOID TE;1; 1llE 119 Tl:,,-. S7hi1DARD ILS F 111AL APPROACII
C1 LiUNT . AT THIS '111;E, l;Ot1LVER, CRITERIJ, Hi„ !!(',TDEEEI !.-_VE: .QPED TO Pl_PI:IT
SUCP USE. Ilii: PIIAI! FCR i,(! I.LS/ILS .);1 RU!14!/,1' 1'. ' IS 0.! FI !.:- I:ITII TI;E FAA
/,IIU TIIC_REFor Ti11.:IRUPII!/.1' :111_L RLCEIVE I`ROTECTIf` . FROI: LUILL MC PROJECTS Tl!-IIT
UOULD II:P/,C.'I 01! TLRI'S CI:iTEI'IA.
I
4 DEPARTURE PROCEDURE
A TAKEOFF SEGI•IEIIT
THE ENTIRE PROJECT SITE IS WITHIN SECTIO;! c OF THE DEPARTURE CE`:ITERIA.
THE UIS OVER THE CLOSEST PORT101; OF THE PROJECT SITE IS 4531 (r21 AT
TFIE END OF SECT IO11 1 PLUS L'1 STA.!CE TO SITE (1300) DIVIDED £Y 4C-1) .
THE OBSTACLE CLEARANCE IS 2061 - (453 - 167 CUiLDING HEIGHT) .
D RuuWAY 19L
1 DEPARTURE PROCEDURE
A TAKEOFF SEGI.iEIIT
THE ENTIRE PROJECT SIT[ IS WlTH111 SECTION 2 OF THE DEPARTURE CRIREFRI!'..
THE DEPARTURE END (DER) OF RUNWAY 19L IS 825' FROM THE SITE THUS PRO—
DUCIIIG AN C, IS OF 4411 . (625 : 40:1 } 421 = 441) . THE OBSTACLE CILEAR-
AHCE Is 2741 . (441 —..167- 274)
COI-tMENT REGARDING THE APPLICATIOFI OF TERPS CRITERIA, THE VALIDI" OF
60TH THE APPROACH ACID DEPARTURE CRITERIA DEPEIIDS III PART OI! THE PILOT' S
ACT iONS. TERPS HAS I•iADE All EFFORT TO ALLOW FOR PILOT SI; 1LL AND ERRONEOUS
IJAV I GAT I OII EQU I PI!EFIT III DETEPP I N I NG THE SIZE OF THE PPOCEDIJRAL SuG.,vEl•ITS
AND I:I IJ 1 ilUtt FLIGHT ALTITUDES AS 15 EV I.DENCED III TERPS PArAGRAPIIS 2EG TO
2E6. IN THE CASE OF PROTECTING BOTII A I P.CRAFT DEPARTING 191 AND PrLRS0115
OCCUPYING TuE AIRPORT CENTER OFFICE PARK, COI•IPLIANCE UIT11 PAI'.kGrATM 1203
WOULD BE EXPECTED. APPLICATION OF TFIIS CRITE^il, EXPECTS TI:E PILOT TO
REI.1AIN HITIIIN T14E D,lt:Ei!SIOl1S OF THE RUNWAY UNTIL REACHING EITHER TME DER,
OR 4001 ABC•VE TFIF DER, UU 1 CfICVER OCCURS F I pST. Ir- ADDI T IOIIAL CL-11r.1; IS
REQUIRED TO REACT! 4001 THE PILOT 1 S EXPECTED TO ACCOI PL i SII Tit 1 S 1.111T.111I1
SECTION! 1 . [!PON REACHII!G 4001 AGOVE DER, TURNS ARE AUTHOP,IZED.
C — RuNHAY OtL
1 PREC 1 S I Oil 111
A N1SSED APPrOACH SrGl.• ENT
APPROXIIiATELY TIIE UESTEr1'I 3001 OF Ti;E ACOP SITE LIES %IITI11•I1 THE h-XS. THE
IIEIGFIT OF THE, CIS OVER THE SITE t•1GULD DEPEIID ( ;1 THE EXTFNT OF ODSTACLE RE-
NOVAL ACCOVPLISIIED IN THE FIt1AL APPROACII SEGI.ENT AND THE AUTHORIZED DI'I.
MAX IIILIM REMOVAL 15 AS5t1FiED III THIS AIIALYSI S IN VIE11 OF THE EFFO?TS. OF THE
AIRPORT AVT11',1RITY TO TIIIS POINT. BASED O1: CLLARAI;CE TO THE 50:1 .51.OPE RE-
QUIRED FOR At! US APPROACII. TI:E itAXII*,U1i BUILDING HEIGHT IN THE 1•IEST:ERI1
PORTION OF THE SITE t:OULD' DE 176' i:SL, 0.^. 91 HIGHER THAN T11E TALLEST PRO-
POSED STRUCTURE: (DI'I 2211 - 110 ODSTACLE CLE/.R/.I1CC T• 2000 : 4G:1 = !761 )
(1G STORIES E13' f 61ELEVATOR t!OLI- tWG } 291 SITE ELCVATIoN c 167')}
COI I:LiNT - T:1t: '?UGIT/a!/,N FIELD ::?,;::;t'. '; EF:T HAS I)EE N ACQUIRING LAND EXSE:;F.IIT5
FOr A 50:1 SLOP[ TC PRCTE:CT FUTURE !:ores TO P:C-VIDE A PRCCISJON 1,AP.
n VARIOUS C:C15TING OI:JFCTS PEIIETRATE� A 20:1. SLGPC 'ATIIIN ].'_iC01 OF THE RUIII:AY
TIIRFS1;OLl) A Q.LIDE SLOPE t!:GLE AGOVE 1, DEC:rEES. A SEI.II:D.RY cow-
PLEX 01: AC.01 T7PPAII; LIES 0IT1I111 T!!E FIN/.L APPROACH ` L-C-i•!CI!T AT 1730CI Fv.ov.
THL TIIR1:G11OLD. jSTRUCTLIRES To /.PPi'.U:;IIIATCLY 4G'' AI!E LOC/,TKD CII THR PRCP-
ERTY. THI: !;LIDS SLOPE ELCVATIC'I AT TEIS PCIi!'i '.:CVLD ISE 9GG' 1' SL. T1i1' OD-
Si ACLF. CLC.'.i ANCC REQU 1 PED AT TI!1 5 D I STANCE is 41-:C1 . AUD I'i IONAL HIIGI!F.I:
T;-.11111,11! OF 33' ;AL Ci 1- 175 1 :: T;!t F I I!AL SEC::'.::i:7 �].r�'(',1 FI;CI; T!!E Tlil'LSI!OLD.
T I!I S T CrRl� I t: OF i i T;CLF 110 M-D rt:Cti I RE A GLIDE OF 3.4 1?tC(?rEES.
TEiW';i Prii111D1TS! A11 Al-WILE II! EXCE55 CF 3 DLGRLE'-, UITI!(`U7 /dIrROVAL OF T!'1: FAA
'.1AS11I TIC TMI I117t.o ?l1 .RTEr
PAS 6
0 CIRCLING APPROACH SCGI:Er1T.
THE ENTIRE SITE' WOULD LIE It! THE CAS FUT IS CLE;.R OF THE TERPS SURF/.CCS.
Tvic IJEIGHT CF Ti1C CIS OVER THE SITE IS THE SAI! E AS FC•R TPE RUMMY ? LDA
PROCEDURE DESCRinED PREVIOUSLY IN Air, (CLEARI,t:CE 43.311 .
2 — DEPARTURE PROCEDURE
A TAKEOFF SEGIiEI)T I
AIRCRAFT HU5T PROCEED DIRECT TO THE COIICORD VDR OEFCRE TURN111G. TFI'
Q SITE IS CLEAR OF, SECTION 1 OF A STRAIGHT DEPARTURE.
!
D - RUNWAY 011R,
1 DEPARTURE PROCEDUREi
A TAKEOFF SEGhENT 1
SMIE AS C21, ADOVE.
E RUNWAY 32R
i RREcI51o1J V.LS — PLAUNCD
A Ii i SSCD APPROACH SEGI.IEJJT
THE APPRO):I:IATE JJORTHE-i n u;.LF OF THE ACOP SITE LIES 11IT1?1:J THE hAS OF A '
PRECISION APPROACH ALIGNED TO RUNWAY CEUTERLINE. T11E CLOSEST EDGE OF TI!F
ACOP SITE TO THC 1'IAP JOIN,' . ASSUk I NG REfiOVAL OF TPE EXISTING COSTRUCT ►Ot1S
..Ii1SiDE THE IIAP, . AS ,lJJ.- CIA- ABOVE, TNN OIS CVER THE SITE !rOULD EE 1401 . IF
THC TEN STORY CUILDl11G WERE IN THE ilORT1!EMI HALF OF THE SITE IT WOULD PEN—
ETRATE THC TEI'PS CRITERIA EZY 27' MID REQUIRE RcI:OVAL, OF AT LEAST 2 FLOORS.
IF THE TEII -TORY CUILDING 15 LOCATED 111 THE SO!JT111IESTERII PORTION OF THE
SITE AS S11Ot:tl III THE LAM)SCAPE ARCHITECTS DRAUMG5 IT 1J0uu) CE CLEAR of
THE TERPS SURFACES. ALL OTIICR CUILCJING5 ARE CLEAR.
CGi•!,1,rNT — 111STALLATION OF A PRECIS1011 APPRCACIi SYSTE!! 01! RUNWAY 32R I11LL
REQU 1 RE AT LEAST A 3 DEGREE CLOC1.111 SE SHIFT 11: !,L I CG1I:EIIT FRCH TIIE RVI141AY
CEIJTERLIHE TO AVOID TERP,A111 AROUCD l.T. DIAGLe . CLOSE-1:1 OCJECTS THAT PEi!—
ETPATE T1JL TERPS SURFACES MUST BE REI:OVED. I1:5TALLA1 IOV ^F A SURVEILLAJJCE.
Ri,DAR SYSTl:l; 110ULD nC NEEDED TG VECTOR AIRCRAFT ONTO THE FINAL APPROACH
COURSE. ACCowlLlsH;.;EI!T OF TIIE FIRST TWO I FkS 15 FE,,SACLE CUT THE .
RADAR WOULD CE A Low PRIORITY ITEI'•. FROG! THIS STUDY, IT 10OULD l.PPEAR
THAT PL.ACCIICHT OF THE FOUR STRUCTURES ON THE SITE, AS PLA"MED, CLEAR OF
TERPS, IS POSSIGLE.
D CIRCLING APPROACH SCGIlCIlT
THE ENTIRE PROJECT SITE LIES !!ITIIirl THE CAS U, IS CLEAR OF Tiic TERPS
SUPFACES. THc 11cIG1!T' OF T11E CIS CVct; Ti:E SITE IS TIJE 5:.:.E AS FOR CIRCLING
W l! TIIE LDA !:UJ;1;i,5 192 i.rPr.OACIi CE CI:I i;cD EAR!_I ::R 11! A13.
2 DF.rARTLINE PMc'CF.GURE
Tm:. FUILDIIiC "ITE IS CLEAR OF ALL IE :PS SEC;:E::TS.
F - RUNWAY 32L
1 DEPARTURE PROCEDURE
A TAKEOFF, [JIT
THE GUl!_L.ING SITE IS CLEAR OF ALl_ TEI;JS
Ruriwi,Y 14L
1 UEFA,TURF. PROCCI E
A TAKEOFF SUG11.:Et1T I
FADE 7
APPROXIMATELY 15.011 OF THE EASTERN PORTION OF THE SITE LIES WITHIN SECTION
1 OF THE TAKCOFF AIREA. ALL FOUR STRUCTURES APPEAR TO BE CLEAR OF THIS
PORTION OF TIIE SITE. THE CLOSEST BUILDING IS THE 5 STORY OFFICE BUILDING
AND IT 1"IEASURES TO OE 2251 INSIDE THE EASTERCI PROPERTY I_ INC AND 150' IN-
SIDE THE NORTHERN BOUNDARY. THE SECTION 2 CIS HEGINS AT A HEIGHT OF 4231
AND THEREFORE ALL 'CUCHANAN FIELD FLIGHT OPERATIONS FROM RUNWAY 14L WOULD
BE WELL CLEAR OF TFIE TEIRPS SEG14ENTS.
2 CIRCLING APPROACH SEGI•IEIJT
THE ENTIRE ACOP SITE 15 WITHIN THE CAS. THE CO6ITROLLING OBSTRUCTIONS AND
MINMUM FLIGHT LEVELS ARE THE SAME AS AIB ABOVE. THE OBSTACLE CLEARANCE IS
ALSO THE SAI-,E - 413t .
{I -
DUN WAY 14R
1 DEPARTURE PROCEDURE
A TAKEOFF SEG: ENT
ALL BUT APPROXIMATELY TI-IE WESTERN 1501 OF THE ACOP-SITE LIES WITHIN SECTION
1 OF THE TAKEOFF AREA AND ALL BUT THE WESTERN TIP (2C01 ) LIES WITHIN
SECTION 2, THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE DER AND THE CLOSEST EDGE OF THE SITE
15 20001 . THE SECTIOM 1 01S OVER THE SITE IS 17G' . (2000 '4C;1 + 211
RUNWAY ELEVATION "-� (0.2 X 3501 CLIi,!E GRADIENT) + 351 AIFCRAFT PERFORMANCE
1761 )" THIS MEETS TEMPS CRITERIA CY 91 . THE SECTION 2 CIS BEGINS AT A
HEIGHT OF 421' AND THEREFORE ALL FLIGHT OPERATION'S FROM RUNWAY 14P WOULD
BE WELL CLEAR OF THE SITE.
CONI•IENT - T111 S CLEARANCE is POSSI IiLE BY TAKING ADVANTAGE OF PARAGRAPH
1203A2 OF TERPS AND THE 3501 Puz t•ILE CLIMB GRADIEIIT SPECIFIED IN THE
DEPARTURE PRCCEDURE. AMY POSSI LLE SC'UTHERLY I•:OVEI.:EMT OF THE TEN STORY
OFFICE BUILDING WILL INCREASE TIIE CLEARANCE AT TNC RATE OF (: