1. Airport Master Planning Notes
CEE 4674 Airport Planning and Design
Dr. Antonio A. Trani
Associate Professor of Civil Engineering
Virginia Tech
Virginia Tech 1 of 47
2. Purpose
• Planning concept to develop the ultimate version of an
airport
• Includes aviation and non-aviation related sectors
• Specific Goals
• Provides guidelines for future development of the airport
• To develop physical facilities of an airport
• To account for land use impacts and airport noise
compatibility standards
• To establish access requirements
• Schedule priorities in the development process
Virginia Tech 2 of 47
3. Who Participates?
Coordinated effort between groups of people
• Groups involved in master planning
• Airlines
• Airport authorities
• Engineering team
• Environmental groups
• Financial groups
• City council (community)
NOTE: Get the community involved
Virginia Tech 3 of 47
4. Master Plan Check List
• Organization and study groups
• Inventory of existing facilities
• Forecasts of future aeronautical demand
• Capacity and delay analysis
• Facility requirements and concept development (phases and
alternatives)
• Airport site selection (or infrastructure site selection if the
airport is in place)
• Environmental procedures analysis (noise and water
pollution)
Virginia Tech 4 of 47
5. Master Plan Check List
• Operational simulations (capacity and delay analyses)
• Airport plans (ALP)
• Plan implementation
Virginia Tech 5 of 47
6. Factors Considered in Airport Site Selection
• Operational capacity (airspace issues, obstructions)
• Capacity potential (land available, weather conditions)
• Ground access (distance from city centers, existing
highways, etc.)
• Development costs (terrain, land acquisition, cost, soil
conditions, utilities, etc.)
• Environmental consequences (noise, impact on flora and
fauna, air quality, endangered species)
• Socioeconomic factors (relocation of people, changes in
employment patterns, impact on industry, taxes, etc.)
• Consistency in area wide planning (impact on land use,
effort on metro/regional plans, etc.)
Virginia Tech 6 of 47
7. Data Requirements (a list)
• Demand and traffic data
• Passengers (historical annual, monthly and hourly
passengers)
• Aircraft (annual, monthly and hourly movements)
• Cargo (annual, monthly and hourly tonnage of cargo)
• Environmental data
• Local regulations
• Local development plans
• Existing land uses
• Local transportation plans
Virginia Tech 7 of 47
8. Data Requirements
• Local and national noise regulation
• Physical data
• Market an modal share of access modes
• Meteorological data (winds, rain, snow and low visibility
phenomena records)
• Topographical information (10 m. contours or better)
• Detailed information on existing facilities (check out the old
master plans)
• Flora and fauna
Virginia Tech 8 of 47
9. Data Requirements
• Aeronautical data
Holding stacks, approaches, and climb out procedures
Navaids
Airways
• Financial information
Revenue/expenses
Debt structure
Capital expenditures
Assets and liabilities
Legal limitations
Virginia Tech 9 of 47
10. Data Requirements
Costs
• Construction
• Detail costs
• Finishing costs
• Equipment costs
Virginia Tech 10 of 47
11. Outputs of the Master Planning Activity
Document(s) that detail the development of the airport
including future expansion/construction of the airport
Possible complementary documents:
• Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
• Regional air transportation needs
• Regional economic impact study
Virginia Tech 11 of 47
13. Los Angeles International Airport
• Large hub airport
• Busy ATC tower operations and complex airspace around
LAX
• 30.8 million emplanements per year (1999)
• 779,000 aircraft operations per year (equivalent to and
average of 2,135 operations per day)
• Four parallel runways (>10,000 ft. long)
• Many noise complains
• Master plan costs > 10 million (10 engineering firms
involved)
Virginia Tech 13 of 47
15. Sample Master Plan (LAX)
• An excellent example of how a complex airport master plan
is developed.
• A good example on how the airport authority communicates
to the community via the World Wide Web (WWW)
• See sample screens below or go to:
• http://www.lax2015.org/
Virginia Tech 15 of 47
16. LAX Master Plan Contents
• Table of Contents
• Executive Summary
• Preface
• CHAPTER 1 - Air Transportation in the Los Angeles Region
• CHAPTER 2 - Existing Conditions Working Paper
• CHAPTER 2 - Appendices A through Q
• CHAPTER 3 - Forecasts of Aviation Demand
• CHAPTER 4 - Facility Requirements
• CHAPTER 5 - Concept Development (Volume 1)
• Concept Development (Volume 2 )
Virginia Tech 16 of 47
17. LAX Master Plan Contents
• APPENDIX A - Flight to gate assignments
• APPENDIX B - Unconstrained Airside options Simulation
assumptions and results
• APPENDIX C - 2nd Iteration terminal option
• APPENDIX D - Scattergood fuel farm relocation feasibility
study
• APPENDIX E - Executive summary
• APPENDIX F - 1996 Baseline airside simulation
assumption and results
• APPENDIX G - Chapter5 Appendices G through H
• APPENDIX H - Aircraft operations profiles
Virginia Tech 17 of 47
18. LAX Master Plan Contents
• APPENDIX I - Passenger activity profiles (2,385 KB)
• APPENDIX J - Constrained airside alternatives simulation
assumptions and results
• APPENDIX K - Supplemental information provided for the
Draft EIS/EIR
• APPENDIX L - Model update information
• APPENDIX M - Description of automated people mover
systems
• APPENDIX N - LAX Expressway
• APPENDIX O - Assess cargo and Ancillary facilities
Virginia Tech 18 of 47
19. LAX Master Plan Contents
• APPENDIX P - Preliminary property acquisition and
relocation plan
• APPENDIX Q - Westchester southside development
• APPENDIX R - Detailed Simmod reports for air quality
purposes
Virginia Tech 19 of 47
20. LAX Master Plan Timeline
October, 1994 LAX Master Plan is initiated to address
long-term issues of airport capacity, ground access and
environmental impacts.
Three Phases in the Master planning process:
• December, 1995 Phase I of the LAX Master Plan is
completed. Research phase determines demand for air
service by 2015 could reach 98 million annual passengers
and 4.1 million annual tons of cargo.
• February, 1996 Phase II of LAX Master Plan is initiated.
Facility requirements are assessed and a total of 30
concepts are developed and reviewed by LAWA
Virginia Tech 20 of 47
21. LAX Master Plan Timeline
• December, 1996 Four airport development alternatives are
unveiled.
• June-July, 1997 LAWA and the FAA issue Notice of
Preparation/Notice of Intent to prepare EIS/EIR, followed
by a series of public meetings to help define the scope of
the EIS/EIR.
• August, 1997 - As a result of public input, two of the
original four alternatives are eliminated.
• October, 1998 Phase III of the Master Plan is underway. A
new third alternative is developed in response to issues
raised during the initial scoping process and subsequent
public input.
Virginia Tech 21 of 47
22. LAX Master Plan Timeline
• June,1999 - A new four-runway alternative is added to the
Master Plan. The new alternative is introduced to better
balance the needs of the flying public, the business
community, and the airport's neighbors. Under the new
plan, LAX would accommodate 8 million fewer
passengers annually than the other alternatives under study
and 400 fewer daily flights.
• 1999-2000 - Environmental impact assessments are
completed. An Airport Layout Plan and implementation
plan for the preferred alternative is developed.
• January,2001 - The Draft EIS/EIR and Draft LAX Master
Plan are released. An unprecedented 180-day public
comment period commences.
Virginia Tech 22 of 47
23. LAX Master Plan Timeline
• June,2001 - Public Hearings will be held to provide
opportunity for the public to voice their comments on the
Draft documents.
Virginia Tech 23 of 47
24. LAX Alternatives
Do nothing (No action alternative)
• Up to 79 million annual passengers (MAP) by 2015.
Alternative A - North Runway + Terminal Mods.
• Up to 98 MAP and approximately 2,700 daily operations by
2015.
Alternative B - South Runway + Terminal Mods.
• Up to 98 MAP and approximately 2,700 daily operations by
2015.
Alternative C - Terminal and Access Improvements
• Up to 89 MAP and 2,300 daily operations by 2015.
Virginia Tech 24 of 47
27. No Action (Do-nothing) Alternative
• No new improvements will be made at LAX before 2015,
with the exception of any projects that are already planned
at the airport.
• No major vehicle access improvements would occur.
• Capacity and operating constraints would only allow for
future annual passenger growth to 79 million annual
passengers (MAP) by 2015
• Accommodation of only 3.1 million annual tons (MAT) of
cargo by 2015 and approximately 2,300 daily operations.
Virginia Tech 27 of 47
29. Alternative A - Added Runway, North
• This alternative adds a new runway on the north airfield
approximately 400 feet north of the existing runways.
• The efficiency and safety of the taxiway/taxilane structures
on both the north and south airfields would be improved.
• A new west entrance and terminal with additional aircraft
gates, rental car facilities and parking would be added.
• A people mover would provide passenger access from a new
parking garage and the west terminal to new concourses
west of the Tom Bradley International Terminal and all
other terminals.
• Cargo facilities would be expanded in the southeast corner
of the airport.
Virginia Tech 29 of 47
30. Alternative A - Added Runway, North
• The improvements included in Alternative A would enable
LAX to accommodate 98 MAP, 4.2 MAT of cargo and
approximately 2,700 daily operations by 2015.
• Major vehicle access improvements would include the LAX
Expressway, which would draw traffic off of the San Diego
(405) Freeway.
• The expressway would connect to an airport ring road to
provide direct access to terminals and cargo areas, thus
reducing traffic on the freeway and local streets.
• The light rail Green Line would be extended into the airport
to provide non-automobile, direct service to LAX.
Virginia Tech 30 of 47
32. Alternative B - Added Runway, South
• This alternative adds a new runway to the south. The existing
southern runways would be relocated north in order to
increase the lateral spacing between all three runways.
• The efficiency and safety of the taxiway/taxilane structures
on both the north and south airfields would be improved.
• A new west entrance and terminal with additional aircraft
gates, rental car facilities and parking would be added.
• A people mover would provide passenger access from two
new parking garages and the west terminal to new
concourses west of the Tom Bradley International Terminal
and all other terminals.
Virginia Tech 32 of 47
33. Alternative B - Added Runway, South
• Cargo facilities would also be expanded.
• Completion of the improvements included in Alternative B
would allow LAX to accommodate 98 MAP, 4.2 MAT of
cargo and approximately 2,700 daily operations by 2015.
• Major vehicle access improvements would include the LAX
Expressway, which would draw traffic off of the San Diego
(405) Freeway.
• The expressway would connect to an airport ring road to
provide direct access to terminals and cargo areas, thus
reducing traffic on the freeway and local streets.
• The light rail Green Line would be extended into the airport
to provide non-automobile, direct service to LAX.
Virginia Tech 33 of 47
36. Alternative C - No Additional Runway
• No new runways to the airfield at LAX.
• The outboard northern runway would be relocated and the
inboard northern runway would be lengthened to
accommodate larger aircraft.
• Taxiways/taxilanes would be added to the two northern and
southern airfields to improve safety and operational
efficiency.
• A new west entrance and terminal with additional aircraft
gates, rental car facilities and parking would be added.
• A people mover would provide passenger access from new
parking facilities and the west terminal to new concourses
west of the Tom Bradley International Terminal and all
other terminals.
Virginia Tech 36 of 47
37. Alternative C - No Additional Runway
• Cargo facilities would be expanded to meet the needs of
LAX through 2015.
• LAX could serve 89 MAP, 4.2 MAT of cargo and
approximately 2,300 daily operations by 2015.
• Major vehicle access improvements would include the LAX
Expressway.
• The expressway would draw traffic off of the San Diego
(405) Freeway and connect to an airport ring road to
provide direct access to terminals and cargo areas, thus
reducing traffic on the freeway and local streets.
• The light rail Green Line would be extended into the airport
to provide non-automobile, direct service to LAX.
Virginia Tech 37 of 47
42. Airport Noise and the Master Plan
• An Important output of the Master Plan process if the
evaluation of environmental impacts
• Noise is a major problem in the expansion of existing
airports
• Noise is perhaps the most systematic constrain at enhancing
the capacity of airports in the world
• Some airports have taken 30-40 years to evolve due to noise
constraints
Virginia Tech 42 of 47
43. Virginia Tech Airport
• Small rural airport
• Non-tower operations (no ATC system resident at the
airport)
• 17,000 operations per year
• 4,550 ft. runway (serves 100% of the aircraft population
below 12,500 lb.)
• Few noise complains
• Master plan costs = $100,000 (URS-Greiner)
Virginia Tech 43 of 47
44. Virginia Tech Airport (Current Layout)
Source: 1995 Virginia Tech Airport Master Plan
Virginia Tech 44 of 47
45. Virginia Tech Baseline Scenario
• Represents the level of activity recorded between August 1999
and August 2000
• 16,972 operations
• 56% of the operations are instruction flights
• Only 5% of the flights are night time operations
• 11 representative aircraft
• Modeled gyrocopter and local helicopter operations
Virginia Tech 45 of 47
46. INM 6.0a Results (Baseline Scenario)
Baseline Noise Contour Results for BCB Airport (Average Day).
DNL Level Population Area of Contour Area of Con- Area of
Affected (km2) tour Contour
(mi2) (acres)
25.0 90634 261.456 100.949 64607.1
30.0 77926 138.433 53.449 34207.5
35.0 51368 49.682 19.182 12276.6
40.0 12642 18.035 6.963 4456.6
45.0 4206 6.809 2.629 1682.6
50.0 868 2.784 1.075 688.0
55.0 862 1.062 0.410 262.3
60.0 0 0.382 0.147 94.3
65.0 0 0.115 0.044 28.4
70.0 0 0.034 0.013 8.5
75.0 0 0.001 0.000 0.2
Virginia Tech 46 of 47
