LRAAC Meeting of 11-19-99 (rough draft for comments) 1. Attendance: 1.1 Members: Dave Brewer, Willow Trent, Trey Loy, Tom Goncharoff, Tim Scully, Dick Ahrens. 1.2 Guests: Robin Bell. 2. Minutes of last meeting: 2.1 Approved. 3. Correspondence: 3.1 Keith Paulson: traffic. 3.2 Chuck Boyer: APFD update. 3.3 Stan Townsend: GPS. 3.4 Tim Scully: signs. FAA has sent ACs. 4. Signs: 4.1 Four more signs: get a quote from Dave Thorpe's contact in Santa Rosa who makes airport signs; let DOT know; have the signs made if DOT still says to go ahead. 4.2 Trey Loy moved to proceed, find out costs, report to Boyer. Tim Scully seconded. Vote 5/0/1: passed. 4.3 Suggestion by Goncharoff to include background details to DOT, to bring new personnel up to speed. 5. GPS Approach: 5.1 Trey Loy questions whether some trees can be left. What is the least that can be done? He gave an explanation of the airport zones and heights for guest Robin Bell, and dis- cussed bull pines and cypresses. 6. Non-aviation Uses of Airport: 6.1 Dave Brewer wants Committee approval to go to a public meeting. He has used Keith Paulson's numbers as typical, but is not recommending him or anyone else. We have no reason for not changing to "plus water and septic", and we are questioning "telephone-based security", because we think that a resident will be necessary, and the plan should not be presented without this. 6.2 Trey Loy thinks that this public meeting is too soon. Hangars should have priority. 7. Directions: 7.1 Discussion of priorities for committee: hangars. 7.2 Discussion of priorities for hangar sub-committee. 7.3 Discussion of goal of hangar sub-committee: get hangars. 8. Airport operations: 8.1 Brewer discussion. Conclusion: 6500 - 7000 per annum. 9. Next meetings: 9.1 17 December 1999 9.2 21 January 2000 -------------------------------------------------------------------- The agenda for the next meeting is: Approve the minutes of the last meeting Communications (letters, FAXes, etc, sent/received since last meeting) Report on the status of the GPS approach Analysis of traffic at the airport (report by Dave Brewer) Non-aviation uses of the airport Additional hangars at the airport Noise Abatement policy signs 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 Tom Goncharoff 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 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From: Paulson Excavating Inc. Sent: October 30, 1999 7:48 AM To: dmb001 Cc: Tim Subject: Self Storage units Dave, I just read the minutes from the September AAC meeting. Everything looks fine except the number of visits per day figure. My research indicates that 50 units will generate 1.9 visits per day. This is significantly different than the number quoted in the minutes. My information is from Greg Hughs in the Butler Building, Self Storage Division. It agrees with other information from Tom Litton who operates units in the Stockton area. Obviously, the amount of traffic generated by such a project is of great concern to neighbors of the aiport. Please communicate to the committee the need to correct the minutes. Thanks, Keith --------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dave Brewer Sent: November 04, 1999 10:09 AM To: Paulson Excavating Inc. Cc: Tim Subject: Re: Self Storage units Hi Keith, I assume that this is new information. The 1 1/2 trips per day per phase (50 units) was from my notes of our meeting. It was also in the summary I sent you for verification. What was the source for that number (1 1/2 per day)? Do you know of any organization of self storage owner/operators? The updated summary follows. I will let the committee know of the change. Dave ............................................................................ Proposed Self-Storage for Little River Airport Property Land required: at least 5 acres. Location: to be determined. One location off Little River Airport Road west of the airport access road and one location off Albion Airport Road are being considered. Phases: three of 50 storage units each. One phase to be built initially. Others to follow as demand dictates. Structure: single story, about 5000 square feet per phase. Approximately 15,000 square feet total. Services: electricity and telephone. No water or septic. Security: Fence with telephone based security system. Access roads: Asphalt entry; gravel around the building. Estimated traffic: about 1.9 trips per day per phase. About 5.7 trips per day total. Construction cost: approximately $100,000 per phase. Approximately $300,00 total. Financial return to the county: approximately $10,000 per year per phase. $30,000 per year total. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dave Brewer Sent: November 07, 1999 2:56 PM To: tim.scully Cc: Keith Paulson Subject: Re: 9/11/99 Minutes If one uses msword to read the letter to Mike Scannell, one sees what I will describe as: "Estimated traffic: About {the numeral 1, followed by a rectangle, followed by a a double 'less-than' sign, followed by abother rectangle} trips per day." It looks a little like "... { 10.0 } trips per day." Likewise the traffic for the full buildout looks like 40.0 trips per day. Looks like some kind of code translation problem. I wonder what Mike saw in his copy? Keith, did you get the rectangles and the double less-than sign? Dave ----- Original Message ----- From: Here are the 9/11 minutes. I'm not sure where Keith saw anything about 10 > trips. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dave Brewer > Sent: November 04, 1999 3:41 PM > To: Tim > Subject: 9/11/99 Minutes > > > Please send me a copy of the 9/11/99 minutes of the AAC. Unfortunately I did > not read them carefully. > > Keith called in response to my email message. He says that the minutes talk > about 10 trips per day per phase and 40 trips per day for the full buildout. > My handout used to say 1.5 per day and now says 1.9 per day. > > Dave > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tim Scully 11/3/99 Chuck Boyer Department of Transportation Ukiah, CA 95482 Dear Chuck: Now that the cardlock fuel is up and running (thank you!), it is time to send an update to the FAA for the Airport/Facility Directory and to the publishers of pilot guides. Here are the addresses of pilot guides which are candidates for a mailing: Pilots Guide To California Airports Optima Publications 180 Second St Los Altos, CA 94022 Jeppesen Sanderson, Inc. 55 Inverness Drive East Englewood, CO 80112-5498 Airguide Publications P.O. Box 1288 Long Beach, CA 90801 AOPA Airport Directory Publications Division AOPA 421 Aviation Way Frederick, Maryland 21701 Air Chart Systems 12061 Jefferson Blvd - Suite A Culver City, CA 90230-6219 The address for the Airport/Facility Directory is: Federal Aviation Administration Aeronautical Information Services ATA-100 800 Independence Ave SW Washington, DC 20591 Toll free 1-800-457-6656 FAX (202) 267-5322 The updated information should include the following: * Little River Airport is now attended from 8am to 5pm Thursday-Monday. * Cardlock 100LL fuel is available 24 hrs a day, 7 days a week. * Noise sensitive area, noise abatement procedures in effect, check with airport supervisor. No right hand Runway 29 departures. No more than 4 consecutive touch and go landings As you can see, we haven't included all of the grim details of the noise abatement policy. This is because it has become clear that the publishers of the guides don't have room to publish it all. The committee agreed on this summary. Thank you for your patience and your help. Respectfully Yours, Tim Scully, Ph.D. Chair, LRAAC ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tim Scully Sent: November 12, 1999 2:21 PM To: 'Stanley Townsend'; Tim Scully Cc: Chuck Boyer (E-mail) Subject: RE: GPS The letter from the FAA pointed out that "current standards are not met" for threshold siting, i.e., there are obstacles penetrating the 20:1 approach surface. The FAA wants to know if we will remove to obstacles, displace the threshold or ask them to live with the penetrations (which they may or may not agree to do). I sent one proposed draft response many months ago, but it has become obsolete since the idea of displacing the threshold of Runway 29 has become moot, and the surveying of additional trees has shown that it wouldn't help as much as I had originally believed. Now the response depends on what will be done about the trees which are too high. If you can tell me what the County plans to do with respect to the trees, I can easily draft an appropriate response. I'd be happy to talk this over with you on the telephone if that would be helpful. I'm sure you know that the users of the airport do very much want to have a GPS approach. Thank you very much for following up on this. > -----Original Message----- > From: Stanley Townsend > Sent: Friday, November 12, 1999 9:05 AM > To: Tim Scully (E-mail) > Cc: Chuck Boyer (E-mail) > Subject: GPS > > > Tim, > > We got a voice mail from Ron Clenney (310)725-7124 at FAA/FPO > asking: Do we > want a GPS approach at Little River Airport? He mentioned > awaiting a reply > to his 7 May 1999 letter to Michael Scannell. The last I > remember, you were > working on a draft response. I know we have received a lot > of information > from you on tree heights that, quite frankly, we haven't had time to > thoroughly review. I'm not sure exactly how that relates to Clenney's > inquiry. Do you have any suggestion on what to say to > Clenney at this time? > > -- > Stanley Townsend, Director > Mendocino County Department of Transportation > 340 Lake Mendocino Drive > Ukiah CA 95482-9432 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4/26/99 letter to FAA Airports office (for discussion of signs) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dave Brewer's handout - rough draft report on traffix estimates --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DRAFT To: Subject: Operations Estimates for Little River Airport We have two estimates of operations at Little River Airport 1) An estimate by the State Department of Transportation based on measurements made by a device which records the number of loud noise incidents associated with takeoffs. The device was used at Little River during three two-week sampling periods in May and October 1998 and March 1999. The device operates 24 hours a day. The resulting estimate for the period July 1, 1998 through June 30, 1999 was 7741 operations. The estimate is documented in a letter of June 23, 1999 from Jeffery Slusarz to Chuck Boyer. Table I is a summary of results taken from the letter. 2) An estimate based on logs of operations kept by the airport supervisor. These logs cover the period November 1, 1997 through October 31, 1998. The logs are kept only while the airport is open (Thursday through Monday, 8:00am to 5:00pm) and when the supervisor is not busy with other duties. Based on the logs for the time the airport was open, I estimated total operations. The resulting estimate for the period November 1, 1997 through October 31, 1998 was 5268 operations. This estimate is summarized in Table 2. The first seven columns of Table 3 are a comparison of the state and log estimates for comparable periods. Note that since the two estimates are for different, partially overlapping periods I used comparable periods in a different year in some cases. Each of the estimates has advantages and disadvantages. The state estimate is based on readings from a device which, during the time it is being used, never sleeps and records every takeoff. The disadvantage of the state method is that it bases an estimate of 365 days of activity on 43 days of readings. In particular, it appears that the state used two sampling periods which were not representative of the four-month periods they were used to predict. The logging method covers 260 days of the year, but only the hours of 8:00 am to 5:00 pm and then is only accurate when the airport supervisor has nothing more important to do. In particular, it appears that the log is least accurate on busy days and during busy periods of the day such as times when there are touch and go operations. We can use the broader coverage of the log estimate to attempt to correct for the fact that the state sampling periods may not be representative. This correction is shown in the last three columns of Table 3. For example, for the period 5/11/98-5/24/98, we can use the operations from the logs for that period (which are much lower than the state counts) and for the period July-October/98 to come up with a factor by which the state count should be multiplied to better predict the four-month period. The calculation results in an increase in the state number from 22/day to 33/day. Calculations for the other sampling periods result in a reduction of 935 to the state number or a net of 6806 operations. Of course the precision of this estimate is much greater than its accuracy. It seems fair to say that the total number of operations for FY1999 was about 6500-7000. TABLE 1 ------- California Department of Transportation Aeronautics program Estimated Annual Operations (take-offs and Landings) Airport: Little River Airport ------------------------------------------------------------------ Week 1 2 3 4 5 6 Season Summer and Fall Winter Spring Months July to October Nov. to February March to June Start 5/11/98 10/20/98 04/07/99 End 5/24/98 11/02/98 04/21/99 ------------------------------------------------------------------- Daily take-offs as per Acoustical Counter Day 1 4 1 2 2 1 22 2 9 11 14 4 2 19 3 7 6 13 7 14 15 4 12 9 12 14 1 24 5 8 18 9 3 20 7 6 25 10 17 11 6 7 7 8 23 18 11 7 5 8 no no no no 18 no ------------------------------------------------------------------- days sampled 7 7 7 7 8 7 total weekly ops: 146 156 170 104 138 198 Avg daily ops 21 22 24 15 17 28 Seasonal avg 22 20 22 Ops = take-offs x 2 Estimated annual operations based on 43 days of take-off counts recorded between May 1998 and April 1999 - 7,741. TABLE 2 ------- Little River Airport Summary of Operations by Month* November 219 December 277 January 128 February 123 March 380 April 459 May 442 June 466 July 600 August 667 September 684 October 823 ------ Total 5268 * One operation is one takeoff or one landing TABLE 3 State diff diff ------- State State Log Log Seasonal in in Period Days Ops Ops/day Ops Ops/day ave Note aves ops ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5/11- 5/24/98 14 302 21.6 212 15.1 1 July-Oct 1998 123 2774 22.6 22/day 2 11 +1353 10/20- 11/2/98 14 274 19.6 10/20- 10/31/98 12 230 19.2 254 21.2 3 Nov97- Feb98 120 747 6.2 20/day 4 -15 -1800 4/7- 4/21/99 15 336 22.4 5 March- June99 22/day 4/7/- 4/21/98 15 260 17.3 6 March- June 98 122 1747 14.3 7 -4 -488 ----- -935 State Estimate 7741 Corrected State Estimate 6806 NOTES: 1. State numbers much higher. Under logging of touch and gos? 2. State ave should be 22 x (22.6 / 15.1) = 33 3. Fairly good agreement between state and logs 4. As above, state ave should be 20 x (6.2 / 21.2) = 6 5. No logs for this period 6. Corresponding period one year earlier 7. As above, state ave should be 22 x (14.3. / 17.3) = 18