The Little River Airport Advisory Committee minutes, 5/21/99 meeting A meeting of The Little River Airport Advisory Committee was held at the Woods Clubhouse on Friday, April 21, 1999, at 9:00 am. The agenda had been posted at the Little River Airport and at the Little River Post Office. Present at the meeting were committee members: Tim Scully, Trey Loy Dave Brewer and Dick Ahrens. Also participating in the meeting was: Naomi Jarvie. The minutes of the last meeting were approved with no changes. Tim Scully spoke of the correspondence of the past month. It is appended below. Trey Loy reported that there may be a change in management at the Department of Transportation. He has heard that Eugene Calvert may be leaving because he got a better offer. The committee agreed that they would all be sorry to see Mr. Calvert leave. There was a brief discussion of the FAA's request for information for the GPS approach. The committee agreed to let the Little River Pilot's Association gather the information for this. There was a brief discussion of Bruce Raabe's letter. Trey said that Chris Coffin was a founder of Gnoss Field and may know Mr Raabe. Dave Brewer spoke briefly about the non-aviation uses survey. He said, let's not do the survey - it wouldn't be meaningful unless we put an incredible amount of effort into it. Trey Loy said that he never was in favor of the survey. He said that we have a tentative green light for work on a master plan revision. We learned from the motorcycle request that the airport isn't a suitable location for many activities. He also mentioned the soil limitations of the airport. He suggested that we should designate areas as compatible with this or that activity. We should find a place for community activities. He said that a storage area seems valid. The huge problem is control and ownership. Trey Loy strongly favors public ownership and control, but on the other hand there are private investors offering to participate. Dave Brewer asked, if we get an opinion from the County that they don't want to run it, would you say nix? Trey Loy said, probably not. Trey Loy said, some fellows have the wherewithall to build a hangar and others do not. The land use has some limitatons. Should investors be allowed to make a profit? FBOs do this. Balancing the airport budget: they cut trees 2 years ago and took $220,000 from the airport. The airport "loses" $20,000 per year. This more or less balances out. Dick Ahrens said, the norm is that ownership reverts to the County after the investor has recovered the investment and a profit. Trey said, these contracts can be complex. Dave Brewer said, if we consider self storage, what services are needed? Trey Loy said: we need to consider where should it be built, who will build it, and what will it be like in 20 years? What about simple fenced outside storage? The airport should run it. Dave Brewer gave David Colfax's correct email address: dmcolfax Hangar committee: Trey Loy handed out copies of a letter and photos of RailSpan TM bridges, which could be used to bridge the ditch, if the Master Plan is followed. We discussed the width that might be required - two flatcars side by side would be enough. Concrete abutments would be needed at each end, along with a railing or curb. The bridge would have to be paved and painted. An 8 to 10" curb would be adquate. Trey Loy said, I still don't want private ownership on public land. There seems to be a constant base of traffic at the airport. Not that many more parcels can be created for hangars. But just a few more hangars are needed. We briefly discussed updating aviation publications regarding the noise abatement policy and agreed to wait until we can also update the fuel status at the same time. The new fuel system should be in by mid- to late- July. Trey Loy contributed $5 for postage. There was a brief discussion of the upcoming slurry seal of the runway. Trey Loy said that he thinks the use of Roundup for the weeds in the cracks of the runway is a good idea. The committee adjourned after agreeing on the date, time and agenda for the next meeting. The next meeting will take place June 18 at 9am. The agenda for the next meeting is: Approve the minutes of the last meeting Communications (letters, FAXes, etc, sent/received since last meeting) Make recommendation for filling the open non-pilot seat on the committee Report on the status of the GPS approach Non-aviation uses of the airport Additional hangars at the airport Noise Abatement policy, what will we send to publishers of pilot guides regarding noise, flight training, etc.? The airport budget, actual income and expenses Reports from subcommittees Public comment Report on finances (contributions received, expenses incurred) Agree on a date, time and place for the next meeting Agree on agenda for next meeting Members of the Little River Airport Advisory Committee ------------------------------------------------------ Dick Ahrens pilot, airport neighbor Dave Brewer pilot, lives near airport Trey Loy non-pilot, lives near airport Tim Scully pilot, computer programmer, lives near airport commutes by air to Oakland weekly Willow Trent airport neighbor, non-pilot Susan Winding airport neighbor, non-pilot, business owner ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Notes from a visit with Stan Townsend and Chuck Boyer, April 1999 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tim Scully met briefly with Stan Townsend and Chuck Boyer of the Department of Transportation in Ukiah. He told them that the airport Master Plan is due for an update, and asked if it would be appropriate for the Airport Advisory Committee to slowly work on that project. He was told that this was a good plan. He explained that the committee is working on the question of additional hangars: their number, location, funding, etc. He asked if they know of any reason why additional hangars couldn't simply continue down the taxiway toward the departure end of runway 11. The answer was that it would be good for the committee to develop a plan for more hangars, and that, as long as there isn't a problem with the drainage ditch or setback from the runway, they didn't know of a problem with continuing to add hangars to the existing row. Tim Scully said that it is generally more expensive to build stand-alone hangars than it is to build a block of them in a single building. So, this is one of the alternatives being explored by the hangar subcommittee. The question is, where to put a block of hangars to minimize site preparation costs without causing future problems for the airport. He said that the hangar subcommittee has been discussing a possible location NorthEast of the fuel island. No objection was raised to this idea. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4/20/99 email from Dave Brewer ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dave Brewer [dmb001] Sent: April 20, 1999 11:55 AM To: 'Lee Edmondson' Cc: Tim Scully Subject: AAC Hi Lee, The AAC is unamious in wanting you back on the committee. I hope you're still interested. If so, I suggest you get in an application ASAP. Dave ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4/26/99 letter to FAA PLight Procedures ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tim Scully 4/26/99 Ron Clenney U.S. Department of Transportation LAX FPO P.O. Box 92007 Worldway Postal Center Los Angeles, CA 90009 Dear Mr. Clenney: I'm writing as chair of the Mendocino County Airport Advisory Committee. We've received a number of queries about the status of the pending request for nonprecision GPS instrument approach procedures for O48, Little River Airport. Is it possible for you to let us know were our application is in the process and, if possible, when we can hope to have approaches commissioned? Thank you for your help. Respectfully Yours, Tim Scully, Ph.D. chair, Airport Advisory Committee ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4/26/99 letter to FAA Airports office ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tim Scully 4/26/99 FAA Airports District Office re: Little River Airport (O48) 831 Mitten Road., Suite 210 Mendocino County Burlingame, CA 94010 Dear Sir: I am chairman of the Little River Airport Advisory Committee. We have a noise abatement policy at Little River, and a couple of small signs are posted indicating this. However the signs are very small and use black lettering on a white background. Very few pilots notice them. We have recommended to the airport manager that larger signs be installed, using the new ICAO colors of black lettering on a yellow background. The manager has asked us to solicit your opinion of our plan before any signs are made. Install signs with black lettering on a yellow background, as follows: - At the mid-field intersection: "No intersection takeoffs - noise abatement". - At the West end of the hangar line - "Please do RWY 11 runups here. Noise sensitive houses to the Northwest." - We recommend a sign at least 2x3', off the pavement to the North of the taxiway at the East end of the runway "Left turn on departure for noise abatement. Please avoid right-hand and straight out departures. Safety supercedes noise abatement." - at the entrance to the airport parking lot: "Noise Sensitive Neighborhood. See details of noise abatment procedure in the airport office." Your comments would be appreciated. Thank you. Respectfully Yours, Tim Scully, Ph.D. Chair, Airport Advisory Committee --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4/27/99 email exchange with Dave Brewer re meeting with David Colfax --------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tim Scully Sent: April 27, 1999 12:40 PM To: 'Dave Brewer'; Tim Scully Subject: RE: Colfax Meeting Good question. How about these? 1) The airport is a valuable community resource which has been a topic of many hot debates in the community. The AAC has proven to be an effective forum for resolving these (e.g., the GPS approach, noise abatement, etc.). It takes a long time and a lot of research and discussion to resolve each issue. 2) The AAC is working on several major projects: non-aviation uses, more hangars (= more income) and a possible master plan update. 3) We'd like to maintain good communication between the AAC and the BOS, so we can be sure that we don't wander off-course in our work. -----Original Message----- From: Dave Brewer [mailto:dmb001] Sent: April 26, 1999 8:10 AM To: Tim Subject: Colfax Meeting Susan and I are meeting with David Colfax at my house Wednesday at 4:00pm. Since this will be an opportunity to talk about our group, what are the three things you would have him take away concerning the committee as a whole? (We'll handle the airport use survey) Dave ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5/3/99 letter from FAA Flight Procedures ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration, LAX FPO Los Angeles Flight Procedures Office P.O. Box 92007 Worldway Postal Center Los Angeles, CA 90009 May 3, 1999 Mr. E.C Calvert / R.V. Parks, Tim Scully Mendocino County Transportation Dept. Attn: Little River Airport Mgmt. 340 Lake Mendocino Drive Ukiah, California 95432 AND 32191 Albion Ridge Rd. Albion, CA 95410 Dear Messrs. Calvert / Parks / Scully: Based on a correspondence status request from Tim Scully, I take this opportunity to let you know that the project file for Little River Airport is still active in working towards publication of GPS instrument approach procedures. Numerous actions must take place within the FAA for publication of a approach, especially for an airport previously with only VFR status. We have completed our internal coordination with Air Traffic, Airway Facilities, and Flight Standards. We now only need to finish with the Airports Division. We have just recently completed our back coordination from Airports on their Non-Rule Making actions towards changing the Little River Airport from its VFR to IFR airport status. Now, all we need from Airports is for their position on the current state of the runways, signage, visibility and mininimum height above touchdown that the runway configuration will support. Once full regional coordination is completed, it is all collated here in the Flight Procedures Office and then the formal request is sent to the National Flight Procedures Office in Oklahoma City for actual development. After all the numerous charts are obtained, assembled, and the procedures developed upon them, official forms are filled out for flight inspection, and then to procedure goes to the National Flight Data Center in Washington for their action, after which it is sent to the National Oceanic Service for publication. I wish I could provide you with a publication date, but at this point I can only project that IF we were to receive the final Airports Division coordination today, it would still probably be November before it got published. I just hope we can get it in place before winter. Please don't hesitate to contact me at (310) 725-7124, if you need further assistance. Ronald H. Clenney, Airspace Eval Programs Splst. Los Angeles Flight Procedures Office, LAX FPO ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5/1/99 email from Dave Brewer re meeting with David Colfax ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dave Brewer [dmb001] Sent: May 01, 1999 2:52 PM To: Tim Cc: dmb001 Subject: Colfax Meeting Susan and I met with David Colfax on Wednesday 4/28/99 at 4:00pm at my house. Some results and observations: Up until his election, he worked as a consultant and expert witness for defendant's attorneys who were looking for a change of venue. His expertise is in surveys of the makeup of the set of people from which the jury would be selected. His argument is that our survey as we planned it is a bad idea. The results, which would require a lot of compilation, would not be valid. For example, if a few people objected passionately to an idea we could not make the (valid) argument that "Yes, but 85% of the people in the community are in favor." He described a methodology which would result in a valid sample. Assuming that the community we want to poll has 3500 households, pick 8% or 280 households at random. This can be done using a phone book and a die and a procedure he described. Then send the survey to the 280 and then make follow-up phone calls until 65% or 182 have responded. This would give results which are +/- a few % of the actual results for the community as a whole. He estimated that this process would require about 60 person-hours, most of it on the phone. It is clear that he would not accept any results from our survey and I would have to agree with him. Susan and I didn't have much time to talk after the meeting, but I come out the hole that our survey is a bad idea. If we want to hear from the people who want to be heard, we should probably use newspaper coverage, followed by a meeting. Maybe we should just work with the one concrete proposal for self storage. Colfax doesn't think that Mike Scannell(?) will get $40,000 for a study of uses of the airport. I got the impression that Colfax thinks that there are far more important uses for the money. I asked what his position on uses of the airport is. He had obviously not had a lot of time to think about it. He said that he would support a use which would not cause 25 people to rise up in violent protest. Somewhere in the conversation I picked up a Pennsylvania accent . Turns out he grew up in southwest Pa. (Susan is from West Virginia and I am from southeastern Pa.) David was in the class of 58 at Penn State and his wife was in the class of 59. I was in the class of 59. Penn State, even then, was a huge university and he was in sociology, she was in political science, and I was in engineering so we didn't know one another. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Email to Stan Townsend, DOT 5/12/99 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tim Scully Sent: May 12, 1999 5:47 AM To: 'townsens' Cc: Tim Scully Subject: FAA letter & telcons re GPS approach at Little River Airport This all started yesterday with a phone call from Ron Clenney, in which he told me that the San Francisco Airports District Office has sent a letter to Mike Scannell requesting more information needed before the GPS approach can proceed. Ron urged a quick response to keep the process moving along. I'll collect as much data as I can for a response and forward it to you. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- FAX cover sheet from LAX FPO, 5/11/99 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Federal Aviation Administration Los Angeles Flight Procedures Office, LAX FPO P.O. Box 92007, WPC Los Angeles, CA 9009 5/11/99 Tim Scully Tim: Here is a copy of the letter we spoke of on the phone. In reference to the 20:1 surface (Item 1), for instrument approaches is begins 200 feet out from threshold and for straight in minimums is 400 feet each side of center line at the beginning. Keep in mind that just because this surface may be penetrated doesn't keep you from getting an approach. It just means your visibility can not be less than 1 mile. Ron Clenney --------------------------------------------------------------------------- FAXed copy of FAA Airports District office letter, received 5/11/99 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Federal Aviation Administration Western-Pacific Airports Division San Francisco ADO 831 Mitten Road, Suite 210 Burlingame, CA 94010 May 7, 1999 Mr. Michael K. Scannell County of Mendocino 501, Low Gap Road, Room 1010 Ukiah, California 95482 Dear Mr. Scannell: Subject: Little River Airport; GPA Approaches We have been asked to review Runways 11 and 29 for stand-alone GPS instrument approach procedures. In order to analyze all elements required in Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5300-13, Appendix 16, Table A16-1 the following information is needed in writing for: Runway 29; 1) Threshold Siting Criteria- according to the form 5010-1 on file current standards are not met. The required surface is 20:1 from the threshold. For further information Reference AC 150/5300-13, Appendix 2, figure A2-1. Please report 2) Obstacle Free Zone- confirm that standards are met and include dimensions with response. Runway 11/29; 3) Hold Signs and lines- report hold line distances from runway centerline and confirm that all hold signs are in place. Please send your response as soon as possible; we are unable to complete our review until you do so. In addition we request that you revise your ALP and include the requirements stated in AC 150/5300-13, Appendix 16, Table A16-2. If you have any questions please call me at 650 876-2823. Sincerely, Dan Morse Supervisor, Safety Standards Section Cc- LAX-FPO --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Notes from telephone conversation with Dan Morse, 5/11/99 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Item 1 in the letter refers to the "Airport Master Record". It currently shows brush within 200 feet of end of the runway. Dan suggested that we mark up a section of the existing Obstruction Chart [I have this] to indicate which obstacles have been removed and which are still there. And we should add a note indicating that no new man-made obstacles have been added. I asked if we need to do a survey and he said "no". Item 2 - we should walk the Obstacle Free Zones and confirm that they are clear. We also need to confirm the dimensions. If there is anything in the obstacle free zone, we need to detail what it is and where. Item 3 - new lines need to be painted at each of the 3 places where taxiways join the runway. Three new signs need to be added, with white letters on a retroreflective red background, "29" at the apprach end of 29, "11-29" at the central taxiway and "11" at the approach end of 11. The signs should eventually be lit when the runway lights are on, but this doesn't have to happen right away. Dan is sending me the Advisory Circulars giving dimensions and other details for the signs and lines. Dan said that I (or you) could send him an unsigned draft response for review and he would help us correct any technical errors. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5/12/99 letter from Bruce Raabe re hangars ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- May 12,1999 Tim Scully, Chairman Airport Advisory Committee Dave Thorp, Airport Super-visor 43001 Little River Road Little River, CA 95456 Chuck Boyer Ukiah, CA 95482 Gentlemen: I am a local property owner and a pilot who fly's to the Little River Airport. I am interested in building new hangers at the Little River Airport. As you know, there is currently a shortage of hangers at the airport and offering additional hanger space is a benefit to the community and a source of revenues for the County and the airport. My partner and I are currently building eight new hangers at the Gnoss Airport in Novato. We are confident we have the experience and expertise to provide a valuable improvement to your facilities. Based on my inspection of the Airport and conversations with Mr. Thorp, it appears additional hangers can be added along the taxiway to Rwy 11. This would involve minor grading and consideration of the existing drainage ditch. Specifically, I'd like to build 6 matching hangers. Each would be approximately 50 Ft. wide and 40 Ft. deep. With the proper terms and conditions to a ground lease, these improvements could be accomplished without cost to the County. Please contact me if you are interested in exploring this proposal in more detail. My work number is xxx size Bruce Raabe CC: J. Iversen Mendocino County Board of Supervisors ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5/18/99 letter to Bruce Raabe ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tim Scully 5/18/99 Bruce J. Raabe Dear Mr. Raabe: Thank you for your letter of May 12 regarding hangars at Little River Airport. I will present your proposal to the committee at its meeting on May 21. The Airport Advisory Committee has an active subcommittee researching the issue of additional hangars. We are researching the number of hangars needed, where they should be located and how they should be funded. There is considerable debate on each of these points, and I expect it to take some time for us to resolve the questions. I assume you are proposing to build hangars for rental to pilots, and that eventually these hangars would become County property, after you have recovered your investment and a profit. Would you like to propose some specific terms, such as the projected rental cost and the period before the hangars revert to County ownership? This information would help the subcommittee when it discusses your proposal. Thank you again for your letter. Yours, Tim Scully, Ph.D. Chair, Airport Advisory Committee ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ April 27 letter to Trey Loy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 27 April 1999 Mr. Trey Loy Little River Airport Commission P.O. Box 381 Little River, CA 95456 Dear Mr. Loy: We appreciate your interest in our bridges. In the enclosed information on Railspan TM flatcar bridges, and railing styles, you will see photographs of both permanent and temporary bridges. Our Railspan TM flatcars come in many different types and dimensions. The longest flatcars are 85' and 89'long. The optimal span for 89'flatcars is 66'because this was the span between the truck (wheel) centers when the structure was a working flatcar; however they may be used at longer spans, depending on the projected loading, These have an integral steel orthotropic deck 8'-2", 8'-6" or 9'-O" wide depending on the model. The most common models are 8'-6" wide. We offer two types of shorter Railspan TM flatcars. One series is the M53, 53'-6" x 10'-4". We also have a similar, slightly longer model, the H62, 62'x 10'-4" steel deck heavy duty flatcars. We remove the original wood deck on both models of these flatcars and replace it with new continuously welded 3/8" steel diamond plate. We also fabricate 62'x 12'wide Railspanl TM flatcar bridges which come complete with an integral railing; metal beam guard rail, tube steel rub rail or one of various other railing styles that may better suit your individual needs. To further reduce the span, all of the shorter models may also be cut symetrically in length to 52'-6", 48'-8", 44'-8" or cut in half for 25-30' bridges. Most projects require railings, and we certainly recommend they be installed prior to the use of the bridge. We frequently install them before delivery of the structure. We recommend steel posts and prefer all steel railings. We occasionally deliver bridges with steel posts prepared for wooden railings to be mounted on site. Public projects tend to require steel guard rail while residential clients may prefer something more aesthetically pleasing. The support systems for a railcar bridge are site specific. Concrete abutments, steel pile bents and drilled & cast-in-place concrete columns are all used. The flatcar typically bears on its center box beam. When placed on concrete we normally recommend steel anchor plates placed over cast-in anchor bolts, The flatcar will then be placed on the anchor plates, and welded in place. An allowance should be made at one end of the installation to permit the steel room to expand and contract during temperature fluctuations. Elastomeric bearing pads are often placed under the 'floating' end of the bridge anchor plate, where the anchor bolt holes are slotted. The steel deck of the flatcar bridge may be used "as is" for the driving surface, or it may be covered with a crowned 2" AC overlay at the same time the road is paved. For permanent projects it is sensible to have the complete steel structure abrasive grit-blasted to commercial grade metal and re-coated with a (2) coat moisture cure urethane system. We commonly use Wasser High Tech Coatings' zinc rich, rust-inhibitive MC MioZinc TM primer and MC Tar TM (color bronze) topcoat. Custom colored topcoats are available at an additional charge. Please consult our sales staff, When a urethane re-coating is not required we offer a complimentary enamel paint job on all railings, and visible flatcar sidesills. We normally stock brown green or tan, however, again Custom colors are available. Each full length 89' Railspan TM flatcar, or full length 62' Railspan TM flatcar weighs about 44,000 pounds. We deliver to the site by truck and a crane may be used to unload and place the bridge on the abutments. In some cases where cranes are not available or the access is difficult, other equipment such as large loaders, or excavators may be used. The 12' wide Railspan TM flatcar will weigh in excess of 53,000 pounds. Many projects use more than one flatcar to attain the dimensions required. Similar flatcars may be placed side by side to increase width, and end to end for a longer bridge. A support would be placed where two ends join. We can suggest a number of typical connection details. As Railspan TM bridges are derived from a recycled product, and our inventory fluctuates weekly, we recommend securing all flatcars required for your project before designing a final project. We will then suggest the best Railspan TM flatcar type available for the project, and supply any dimensions you need for drawings or calculations. We are also happy to recommend engineers familiar with railcar bridge design. Best regards, Katie Gibbs ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Letter from the Board of Supervisors ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- County of Mendocino Board of Supervisors 501 Low Gap Road, Room 1090 Ukiah, CA 95482 May 11, 1999 Richard Ahrens Dear Mr. Ahrens: Congraturations on your recent appointment to the Little River Airport Advisory Committee. In the near future, a staff member of the Little River Airport Advisory Committee will contact you regarding meeting dates, etc. Again, contratulations on your appointment and thank you very much for your willingness to serve. Very truly yours, Joyce A. Beard Clerk of the Board cc: Tim Scully, Little River Airport Advisory Committee