Airport Master Plan

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
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
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
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)
Master Plan Check List
• Operational simulations (capacity and delay analyses)

• Airport plans (ALP)
• Plan implementation
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.)
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
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
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
Data Requirements
Costs
• Construction
• Detail costs
• Finishing costs
• Equipment costs
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
Sample Master Plans
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)
Los Angeles International Airport
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/
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 )
• 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
• 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
• APPENDIX P - Preliminary property acquisition and

relocation plan
• APPENDIX Q - Westchester southside development
• APPENDIX R - Detailed Simmod reports for air quality
purposes
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
• 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.
• 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.
• June,2001 - Public Hearings will be held to provide

opportunity for the public to voice their comments on the
Draft documents.
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.
Current Situation (1999)
Airports in the Los Angeles Basin
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.
No Action (2005-2015)
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.
• 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.
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 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.
• 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.
Expressway, which would draw traffic off of the San Diego
(405) Freeway.
• The expressway would connect to an airport ring road to
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 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.
• 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.
Expressway.
• The expressway would draw traffic off of the San Diego
(405) Freeway and connect to an airport ring road to
Alternative C - No New Runway
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 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 Airport (Current Layout)
Source: 1995 Virginia Tech Airport Master Plan
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
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
Baseline Scenario Noise Contours
35
40
DNL Contours
55
45 60
50 65
70
50
35

Airport Master Plan

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Airport Master Plan

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Airport Master Planning Notes

CEE 4674 Airport Planning and Design

Dr. Antonio A. Trani

• Planning concept to develop the ultimate version of an

Coordinated effort between groups of people

• Organization and study groups

• Operational simulations (capacity and delay analyses)

• Operational capacity (airspace issues, obstructions)

• Demand and traffic data

• Local and national noise regulation

Document(s) that detail the development of the airport

• Large hub airport

• An excellent example of how a complex airport master plan

• APPENDIX A - Flight to gate assignments

• APPENDIX I - Passenger activity profiles (2,385 KB)

• APPENDIX P - Preliminary property acquisition and

October, 1994 LAX Master Plan is initiated to address

• December, 1996 Four airport development alternatives are

• June,1999 - A new four-runway alternative is added to the

• June,2001 - Public Hearings will be held to provide

Do nothing (No action alternative)

• No new improvements will be made at LAX before 2015,

• This alternative adds a new runway on the north airfield

• The improvements included in Alternative A would enable

• This alternative adds a new runway to the south. The existing

• No new runways to the airfield at LAX.

• Cargo facilities would be expanded to meet the needs of

• An Important output of the Master Plan process if the

• Small rural airport

Source: 1995 Virginia Tech Airport Master Plan

• Represents the level of activity recorded between August 1999

Baseline Noise Contour Results for BCB Airport (Average Day).

You might also like