HomeMy WebLinkAbout208-91 RESOLUTION7
r
RESOLUTION NO. .208-91
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FINAL DRAFT OF THE
MASTER PLAN UPDATE FOR THE FAYETTEVILLE
MUNICIPAL AIRPORT.
1
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:
Section 1. That the Board of Directors hereby approve the
final draft of the Master Plan update as voted on and approved by
the Airport Board on October 3, 1991 for the Fayetteville Municipal
Airport. A copy of the master plan authorized for execution hereby
is attached hereto marked Exhibit "A" and made a part hereof.
PASSED AND APPROVED this
ATTEST:
By
5th day of November , 1991.
APPROVED:
By:aoMay
•
AGENDA REQUEST
November 5, 1991
For the Board meeting of
•
FRON!
Dale Frederick
Name
BOARD ACTION REQUESTED: Request approval of the Master Plan Update for Fayetteville
Municipal Airport. Formal notification has been received from the Planning Section
of the Federal Aviation Administration that the final draft has been reviewed and
approved . The Airport Board, in their meeting of 10-03-91 voted and approved the
plan. A public presentation of the developmental plan was done in April of this year.
No negative public comments were received.
Airport
Division Department
COST TO CITY!
n/a
Cost of this request
i of Program completed
Line item budgeted amount Account name
Funds used to date Account Number
Remaining balance
BUDGET REVIEW; tt e
Lk" hJ.r t & cC ! m,AA4 r4 4•Alt•
Budgeted Item Budge A uetment Attached
AWCIS4k
Budget rdinator Administr ive Services Director
GRANT APPLICATION REVIEW:
CONTRACT/LEASE REVIEWS
Finance Director Date
City Attorney Date
Purchasing Officer Date
Internal Auditor Date
Internal Auditor Date
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval.
•
•
Di io -sad Date
ii 10-11-91
p 171s - 441.• irector Date
Admini trative Services Director Date
i'‘:(3/01.
C C2
IS
Dat
•
FAYETTEVILLE
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE. ARKANSAS
AIRPORT DIVISION
TO: The City of Fayetteville Board of Directors
THRU: Scott C. Linebaugh, City Manager
FROM: Dale Frederick, Airport Manager
DATE: October 11, 1991
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF THE MASTER PLAN UPDATE FOR THE FAYETTEVILLE
MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
The Airport has received formal notification from the planning section of
the Federal Aviation Administration that approval has been given for the
Draft Master Plan Update for Drake Field.
The project consultants, Barnard Dunkelberg & Company in association with
McClelland Consulting Engineers provided a public presentation for the
development plan in April of this year, prior to submission of the
document to the FAA. No negative public comments were received on the
plan which contains a two scenario approach for projects, one without a
regional airport, and one with a regional airport.
Copies of this final draft were provided to the Board of Directors and
the Airport Board prior to the public presentation in April.
On October 3, 1991, the Airport Board voted to approve the Master Plan
Update.
Staff recommends adoption and approval of this planning document.
Attachments: One copy of the final Draft Master Plan Update
Agenda Request Form
113 WEST MOUNTAIN 727111 501 121-4710
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
FAYETTEVILLE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT/
DRAKE FIELD
MASTER PLAN UPDATE
Fayetteville, Arkansas
DRAFT REPORT
Prepared for
CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE
Prepared by
BARNARD DUNKELBERG & COMPANY
MCCLELLAND CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.
March, 1991
The preparation of this document was financed in part through a planning grant from the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) as provided under Section 505 of the Airport and Airway
Improvement Act of 1982 as amended by the Airway Safety and Capacity Expansion Act of 1987.
The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policy of the FAA. Acceptance of this
report does not in any way constitute a commitment on the part of the United States to participate
in the development depicted herein, nor does it indicate that the proposed development is
environmentally acceptable in accordance with appropriate public law.
Contents
Contents
Tables vi
Illustrations viii
Inventory
Introduction A.1
Airside Inventory A.4
Landside Inventory A.4
Airspace System/Navigation and Communication Aids A.8
Airports Inventory A.10
Airport Environs A.14
Issue Identification and Inventory A.18
Airport Activity Foivcasts
Introduction B.1
Histoncal Airport Activity B.2
Passenger Enplanement Forecast B.4
Air Carrier Operations Forecast B.6
Military Aircraft Operauons Forecast B.9
General Aviation Operations Forecast 8.10
Operations Forecast By Aircraft Type B.12
Local and Itinerant Operations Forecast B.13
Peak Penod Forecast B.14
General Aviation Based Aircraft Forecast B.15
Air Freight Forecast B.17
Summary 8.18
iii
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Capacity Analysis
Introduction C.1
Airfield Capacity Methodology C.1
Airfield Capacity Analysis C.9
Ground Access Capacity C.11
Summary C.14
Facility Requirements
Introduction D.1
Airfield Requirements D.1
Landside Facility Requirements D.9
Summary D.16
Development Concepts and Alternatives Analysis
Introduction E.1
Goals for Development E.2
Noise and Land Use E.3
Airside Development Concepts and Alternatives E.4
Landside Development Concepts E.15
Conceptual Airport Development Plans E.17
Altport Plans
Introduction F.1
Airport Layout Plan F.1
Airspace Plan F.4
Runway/Approach Profiles and Runway Protecuon Zone Plans F.5
Terminal Area Plans F.5
Development Program
Introduction G.1
Cost Estimates G.1
Phasing Plans G.2
Summary G.3
iv
Tables
Table Al Approach Procedures A.10
Table A2 Airports Inventory Summary A.13
Table 131 Historical Aviation Activity, 1980-1990 B.2
Table B2 Air Carrier/Commuter Enplanements Forecast, 1990-2010 B.5
Table B3 Histoncal Enplanement/Departure Ratio, 1980-1990 B.7
Table B4 Unconstrained Air Carver Operations Forecast, 1990-2010 B.8
Table 135 Military Operations Forecast, 1990-2010 B.10
Table B6 General Aviation Operations Forecast, 1990-2010 B.11
Table B7 Summary of Operations by Aircraft Type, 1990-2010 8.13
Table B8 Summary of Local and Itinerant Operations, 1990-2010 B.14
Table B9 Peak Period Aircraft Operations, 1990-2010 8.15
Table B10 General Aviation Based Aircraft, 1985-2010 B.16
Table 1311 General Aviation Based Aircraft Fleet Mix, 1990-2010 B.17
Table B12 Air Freight and Air Mail Activity Forecast 1990-2010 B.18
Table B13 Summary of Aviation Activity Forecasts, 1990-2010 8.20
Table C1 1FR Wind Coverage Summary C.7
Table C2 Aircraft Class Mix Forecast, 1990-2010 C.8
Table C3 Airfield Capacity Forecast Summary, 1990-2010 C.11
Table C4 Ground Access Facility Volume C.12
Table C5 Auport Access Demand Forecast, 1990-2010 C.13
Table D1 Dimensional Standards for ARC C-111 Airports (In Feet) D.3
Table D2 Runway Length Requirements D.6
Table D3 Passenger Terminal Gate Requirements, 1990-2010 D.10
Table D4 Passenger Parking Requirements, 1990-2010 D.12
Table D5 General Aviation Facility Requirements, 1990-2010 D.14
Table D6 Fuel Storage Capacity Requirements, 1990-2010 D.15
Table D7 Representative Air Camer Aircraft Lengths (In Feet) D.16
Table El Scenario B Summary of Aviation Activity Forecasts, 1990-2010 E.21
Table 01 Scenario A & Scenario B Phase 1(0-5 Years) Development Plan
Project Costs 0.4
Table G2 Scenano A Phase 11(5-10 Years) Development Plan Project
Costs G.6
Table G3 Scenario A Phase m (10-20 Years) Development Plan Project
Costs G.7
Table G4 Scenano B Phase n (5-10 Years) Development Plan Project
Costs G.9
vi
Illustrations
Figure Al
Figure A2
Figure A3
Figure A4
Figure A5
Figure A6
Figure A7
Figure Bi
Figure B2
Figure B3
Figure CI
Figure C2
Figure C3
Figure El
Figure E2
Figure E3
Figure E4
Figure E5
Figure E6
Figure E7
Figure E8
Figure Fl
Figure F2
Figure F3
Figure F4
Figure F5
Figure F6
Figure GI
Figure G2
Airport Location Map
Airport Vicinity Map
Existing Airport Layout
Airspace/NAVAIDS Summary
Existing Land Use
Existing Zoning
Future Land Use
Historic and Forecast Air Career/Commuter Operations,
1980-2010
Histonc and Forecast General Aviation Operations,
1980-2010
Operations Forecast Summary, 1990-2010
All Weather Wind Rose
IFR Wind Rose -Daytime
WR Wind Rose -Nighttime
Existing Noise Contours With Existing Land Use, 1990
Future Noise Contours With Existing Land Use, 2010
Altemative One
Alternative Two
Alternative Three
Alternative Four
Scenario A Conceptual Airport Development Plan
Scenano B Conceptual Airport Development Plan
Airport Layout Plan
Airspace Plan
Runway and Approach Profiles
Runway and Approach Profiles
West Side Terminal Area Plan
East Side Terminal Area Plan
Phasing Plan Scenano A
Phasing Plan Scenano B
A.2
A.3
A.5
A.9
A.15
A.17
A.19
B.9
B.12
B.I9
C.4
C.5
C.6
E.5
E.6
E.9
E.10
E.11
E.13
E.18
E.22
F.3
F.6
F.7
F.8
F.10
F.14
G.8
G.11
viii
r
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Inventory
Introduction
Fayetteville Municipal Airport/Drake Field is owned and operated by the City of
Fayetteville As illustrated in the following figures, AIRPORT LOCATION MAP and
AIRPORT VICINJTY MAP, the airport is located in northwest Arkansas, in
Washington County, and m the southern portion of the City of Fayetteville,
approximately three (3) miles south of Fayetteville's central business distnct. The
Airport Reference Point (ARP) is located at Latitude 36° 00' 18.1" N, and Longitude
94° 10' 11.5" w. The airport, designated as Site 00975.A by the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), has an elevation of 1,251 feet above mean sea level (AMSL).
The airport property occupies approximately 530 acres. The airport is classified as
a primary commercial service airport by the FAA's National Plan of Integrated
Airport Systems (NPIAs). Currently, the airport is served by five (5) commuter
airlines, including American Eagle, Northwest Airlmk, Atlantic Southeast, Air
Midwest and Trans World Express (operated by Air Midwest at Drake Field).
This Master Plan Update for Drake Field is concemed with the planned growth of
the airport facilities in order to meet future demand. The need for future facilities
will be evaluated not only from the standpoint of aviation needs but also from the
standpomt of the relationship of airport facilities to the surrounding land uses and
the community as a whole. The planning focus of this document will be on the total
aviation facility and its environs, with the overall planning goal bemg the
development of an aviation facility which can accommodate future demand and
which is not sigmficantly constrained by its environs. Therefore, this inventory
will examine four (4) basic elements involved with the existing and future
development of Drake Field. These elements are: airside facilities (runways,
taxiways, and supporting facilities), landside facilities (aircraft parking aprons,
temunal, hangars, maintenance facilities, ground access, etc.); the relationship to
the airport/airspace system; and, the airport environs.
Ar.
i
Figure A2 Akport Vicinity Map
Drake Field
Master Plan Update
BARNARD OUNKELBENG & COMPANY
Mc(LELLAND CONSUL MG ENGINEERS
A.3
Airside Inventory
Drake Field currently is operated with one (1) runway (Runway 16/34), along with
parallel and connecting taxiways which serve the runway and provide aircraft access
to the terminal and other facilities on the airport. Figure A3, entitled EXISTING
AIRPORT LAYOUT, provides a graphic presentation of the existing airport facilities.
Runways
Drake Field's one runway, Runway 16/34, is 6,006 feet in length, 100 feet in
width and is constructed of asphalt. Runway 16/34 is used by air carrier, military
and general aviation aircraft and is equipped with Medium Intensity Runway Lights
(MIRL); a localizer and a Medium Intensity Approach Lighting System (MALS)
serving Runway 16; Visual Approach Slope Indicators (vASI) on Runway 16; and
Runway End Identifier Lights (REILs) on Runway 34. Runway 16/34 has a gross
weight bearing capacity of 70,000 pounds single wheel, 95,000 pounds dual -
wheel, and 156,000 pounds dual-tandum-wheel main gear configuration.
Taxiways
The airside at Drake Field, in addition to the runway mentioned above, is composed
of several taxiways which provide access from the runway to the landside aircraft
use areas Basically, each side of the runway is served by a partial parallel taxiway.
On the west side of the runway, the partial parallel taxiway extends from the
southern runway end to within approximately 1,000 feet of the northern runway
end. The partial parallel taxiway on the west side of the runway provides access to
the passenger terminal apron, as well as the general aviation aprons and hangars
located north of the terminal area. The partial parallel taxiway on the east side of the
runway is approximately 1,900 feet m length, and extends from the north end of the
runway to the east/west stub taxiway which provides access to the east hangar
development area.
Landsrde Inventory
The major components of an airport's landside development are the aircraft parking
aprons, the passenger terminal complex, and other on -airport components,
including such elements as hangars, maintenance centers, manufactunng facilities
and access roadways. Each of these components at Drake Field will be discussed
in detail m the following narrative, and are illustrated in the following figure,
EXISTING AIRPORT LAYOUT.
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Repon. March, 1991. A.4
MI
NMI
Aprons
There are basically four (4) major apron areas at Drake Field for aircraft parking and
storage. Three (3) of these apron areas are located west of Runway 16/34. The
first is the terminal apron. It is located directly east of the passenger terminal and
provides eight (8) commuter aircraft parking positions. The other two apron areas
on the west side of the airport are located north of the terminal apron and serve
primarily general aviation aircraft. These two aprons are directly east of the general
aviation hangars, north of the passenger terminal and west of the parallel taxiway
on the west side of the Runway.
The final apron area is located on the east side of Runway 16/34. This apron area
(referred to as the east hangar development area) serves general aviation aircraft and
currently accommodates three T -hangar structures.
Terminal Complex
The passenger terminal complex at Drake Field is located west of Runway 16/34
and east of U.S. Highway 71 The passenger terminal building contains
approximately 20,272 square feet of gross bwlding area and has two (2) passenger
loading gates with a common passenger holding area. In addition, the termmal
building contains facilities for airline ticketing, baggage handing, rental car leasing,
a restaurant, limousine ticketing, and the airport management offices. The existing
bulldmg provides for five (5) rental car counters and four (4) airline ticketing
counters (one counter is shared by Air Midwest and Trans World Express), along
with the necessary area for offices and support facilities.
Automobile parking facilities serving the passenger terminal are located directly
west of the ternlmal building. There are currently a total of approximately 504
hard -surfaced automobile parking spaces available on-site. Approximately 418 of
the hard -surfaced parking spaces are allocated for public parking and 86 are
allocated for rental car parking In addition, a gravel surfaced parking area located
northwest of the terminal blinding is also utilized for rental car parking.
Hangars/Airport Structures
In addition to the passenger terminal at Drake Field, there are numerous other public
and pnvate structures located on airport property.
General Aviation Facilities. Drake Field also has several facilities which serve general
aviation. The majority of the general aviation facilities at the airport are located
north of the passenger terminal and on the west side of the general aviation aircraft
parking apron. In this area there are two (2) mo/maintenance hangars, two
corporate hangars, and the Arkansas Air Museum hangar. On the east side of the
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March. 1991.
A.6
airport, there are presently three (3) T -hangar structures [one containing ten (10)
hangar units and two containing thirteen (13) hangar units] and one (1)
FBO/mamtenance hangar.
Airport Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) Facility. The ARFF facility at Drake Field is
located north of the general aviation aprons and hangars and west of Runway
16/34. As required to serve the type and number of air camer aircraft operations at
the airport, Index A ARFF facilities and equipment are provided at Drake Field.
Flight Service Station (FSS). Drake Field is served by an FSS which is located on the
airport. The FSS building is west of the runway and directly north of the passenger
terminal facilities The FAA is presently conducting a program to consolidate and
automate the FSS system throughout the nation. The Automated Flight Service
Station (AFss) for the State of Arkansas is located in Jonesboro, Arkansas. The
FSS located on Drake Field is expected to be closed, with its function bemg
relocated to the AFSS in Jonesboro, sometime in the early 1990's.
Air Traffic Control Tower (ATCT). The ATCT serving Drake Field is a Level 1 facility
and is located east of the Runway, northwest of the east hangar development area.
The ATCT at the airport operates from 6 a.m to 10 p.m. daily.
Rental Car Service. In addition to the facilities mentioned above, there is also a small
structure located north of the terminal parking area, which serves as a rental car
maintenance and service center.
Noise Runup Facility. The airport is served by an aircraft runup apron with a noise
barrier which is located east of the runway and south of the east hangar
development area.
Ground Access
Ground access is an important element in the overall ability of an airport to function
properly. Not only is it vital that passengers have easy access to and from the
terminal building using ground transportation, but also surface transported freight
must be easily shipped to and from cargo and other facilities located on the airport
property. Also, because airports are employment centers, proper access for people
employed on airport property must be provided. The existing system of ground
access for Drake Field is discussed in the following paragraphs.
Vehicular Access. Drake Field is accessed by U.S. Highway 71, which runs in a
north -south direction along the westem airport boundary. The majonty of existmg
airport facilities are located on the western portion of airport property between U.S.
Highway 71 and the runway. Six (6) access drives off of U.S. Highway 71
provide access to the airport's westem facilities.
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. A.7
The facilities on the east side of airport are provided with vehicular access by &nest
Lancaster Drive, which intersects with U.S. Highway 71 north of the approach end
of Runway 16.
Railroads. The Arkansas -Missouri Railroad is located generally parallel to and west
of U.S. Highway 71. Currently, there is not a railroad spur which supplies direct
rail service to airport property.
Airspace System/Navigation and Communication Aids
As with all airports, Drake Field functions within the local, regional, and national
system of airports and airspace. The following narrative gives a bnef description of
Drake Field's role as an element within these systems.
Air Traffic Service Areas and Aviation Communications
Overall, there are some twenty-five air traffic service areas in the nation, with
control centers located generally m each area's central area. Drake Field is located
in the Memphis Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC) service area.
Aviation communication facilities associated with the airport include an FAA Air
Traffic Control Tower (ATCT), an Aeronautical Advisory Station (UNICOM) and the
Flight Service Station (Fss) located on the airport.
Navigational Aids
As can be seen in the following illustration, AIRSPACEINAVAIDS SUMMARY, a
vanety of navigational facilities are currently available to pilots around Drake Field.
These include facilities which are based at the airport and those which are based at
other locations in the region. In addition, there are navigational aids (NAVAIDS) that
allow mstrument approaches to the airport during periods of inclement weather.
The terminal area navigational and landing aids available at Drake Field include a
localizer (LAC), a VHF Omnidirectional Range (VOR) and a VHF Omnidirectional
Range with Distance Measuring Equipment (VOR DME). Published mstrument
approach procedures at Drake Field are listed m the following table, entitled
APPROACH PROCEDURES.
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March. 1991.
A.8
V 140
•Crystal
�— To TWeVORTAC
•
Strom Springs NDB
264 KO
Sig RAW
MANN *ins
• BYnemRA
MulelpM
•Carle
Room /
4#
Razorback VORTAC
116.4 Cb 111 R2C
$ SP• •rtrg6ab
1 • Municipal r
QRamibadi
To some
1r
sr
z
z�
INmNvY4WAaon
Courcy Regional •
Ozark FraM1n
Carry.
LEGEND
• Pubic We Alport
O PMala On ANpa1
✓ VORTAC
C NDB
•
NOB L Nowt
O
Lor Aldo a
FA6Ytl Airways
Poor S Controlled Airspace
Troy AOL
Control tar
VOy1-DME
• VOR
Figure A4 Alrspace/NAVAIDS Summary
Oak NOB
329 022
0 5 10
Scale in Miles
Drake Field
Master Plan Update
15
BARNA RD DINRELBERe A COMPANY
MACLELLarm CcWSUTNOE/4GNEERS. ND.
Table Al
APPROACH PROCEDURES
Drake Field Master Plan Update
Type of Approach Runway Designation
LOC Runway 16
VOR -A* • Runway 16 & 34
VOR DME -B* Runway 16 & 34
Circle -To -Land Only
The localizer approach has minimum straight -in landing criteria of 549 feet AGL for
the ceiling requirement and a visibility requirement of one, one and one-half, or one
and three-quarters miles, depending on the category of aircraft. The circle -to -land
critena for this approach are 749 feet AGL for the ceiling requirement, with a
visibility requirement of one, one and one-quarter, two and one-quarter, or three
miles, again depending on the category of aircraft.
The VOR -A approach (circling only) has a ceiling minimum of 749 feet or 1,029 feet
AGL depending on the category of aircraft and a visibility minimum of one, one and
one-quarter, two and one-quarter, or three rules, also depending on the category of
aircraft.
The VOR DME -B approach (crclmg only) has a ceiling minimum of 949 feet or
1,029 feet AGL depending on category of aircraft; and a visibility minimum of one
and one-quarter, two and three-quarters, or three miles depending on the category
of aircraft.
Circle -to -land approaches are not authorized east of the runway.
Abports Inventory
There are several existing public and pnvate airports located in the general vicinity
of Drake Field, within an approximate twenty-five nautical mile (25 NM) range.
Accordmg to the U.S. Department of Commerce Kansas City and Memphis
Sectional Aeronautical Charts, these airports include five (5) public airports, one (1)
privately -owned and publicly -used airport and three (3) privately -owned and
privately -used airports. Each of the publicly -used airports is described here, in
terms of relevant physical charactensucs and facilities. The public airports mclude.
Bentonville Municipal Airport, Carter Field/Rogers Municipal Airport, Smith Field
(Siloam Spnngs), Huntsville -Madison County Regional Airport, and Springdale
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991.
•
A.IO
Municipal Airport. The privately-owned/publicly-used airport is Crystal Lake
Airport.
Bentonville Municipal Airport. This airport is 1,296 feet AMSL and has coordinates
of 36° 20' 43" N, 94° 13' 09" W. The airport consists of one runway, Runway
17/35, which is 4,090 feet long and 65 feet wide, is constructed of asphalt, and is
equipped with low intensity runway lights (LIRL) In 1989, there were 57 based
aircraft and approximately 36,000 annual operations at Bentonville Municipal
Airport. Airport services include aircraft charter, rental, sales, and instruction;
major power plant and airframe repairs; and fuel sales. The airport facilities include
a rotating beacon, a lighted wind indicator, and aircraft tie -downs and hangar
storage for transient aircraft. There are two (2) published instrument approaches
for Bentonville Municipal Airport. The first is a VOR•A approach (circling only).
This approach has cethng minimums of 524 feet or 624 feet AGL depending on
category of aircraft; and visibility minimums of one mile, one and three/quarters
miles and two miles, depending on category of aircraft The second is also a
circling only approach, a VOR -DME B approach. This approach has ceiling visibility
minimums which are dependent on the category of aircraft. The ceiling minimums
are 604 feet or 624 feet AGL, and a visibility minimum of one mile, one and
three/quarters miles or two miles. The airport is located approximately twenty (20)
NM northwest of Drake Field.
Carter FieldlRogers Municipal Airport. This airport is 1,361 feet above mean sea
level (AMSL) and has coordinates of 36° 22' 20" N, 94° 06' 24" W. The airport
consists of one runway, Runway 01/19, which is 6,000 feet in length; 100 feet in
width; is constructed of asphalt; and is equipped with medium intensity runway
lights (MIRL), VASI, and Ron on Runway 01. The airport services include fuel;
major power plant and airframe repairs; and aircraft rental, sales, charter, and
instruction. Airport facilities include a segmented circle, a lighted wind indicator, a
rotating beacon, and transient aircraft tie -downs. In 1989, at Carter Field, there
were 84 based aircraft and approximately 82,000 operations.
The airport has three published instrument approaches. The first is a VOR approach
to Runway 01, with a straight -in ceiling minimum of 359 feet AGL and a visibility
minimum of one mile. Depending on the category of aircraft, this approach has
circle -to -land minimums of 419 feet or 459 feet for ceiling requirements, and one or
one and one-half miles for visibility requirements. The second approach is a VOR
DME approach to Runway 19 with a straight -in ceiling minimum of 339 feet AGL,
and a visibility mmunum of one mile. Depending on the category of aircraft, the
circle -to -land ceiling minimum for this approach is 419 feet or 459 feet AGL, and
the visibility minimum is one mile or one and one-half miles. The third approach is
a NDB approach to Runway 19 with a straight -in and circle -to -land ceiling minimum
of 539 feet AGL, and a visibility minimum of one mile or one and one-half miles,
depending on category of aircraft. An Instrument Landing System (ILS) with an
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March. 1991. A.11
Approach Lighting System (AIS) is scheduled for installation by 1991, which will
provide a precision approach to Runway 19. The airport is located approximately
twenty-two (22) NM north of Drake Field
Siloam Springs/Smith Field. This airport has an elevation of 1,193 feet AMSL and
coordinates of 36° 11' 30" N, 94° 29' 23" W. The airport has two runways,
Runway 18/36 and Runway 13/31. Runway 18/36 is an asphalt runway 4,985 feet
in length, 75 feet in width, and is equipped with medium intensity runway lights
(MRL). Runway 13/31 is a turf runway 1,650 feet in length and 85 feet in width.
The airport has fuel, major airframe and power plant repairs, tie -downs, aircraft
rental, flight instruction, a rotating beacon, a lighted wind indicator, and a
segmented circle The airport has one published instrument approach, a circle -to -
land VOR -A approach, with a ceiling minimum of 467 feet, 547 feet or 567 feet
AGL, and a visibility minimum of one mile, one and one-half, or two miles,
depending on the category of aircraft. In 1989, there were 31 based aircraft and
approximately 14,000 annual operations at Smith Field. The airport is located
approximately nineteen (19) NM northwest of Drake Field.
Huntsville -Madison County Regional Airport This airport is 1,748 feet above
mean sea level (AMSL) and has coordinates of 36° 04' 40" N, 93° 45' 14" W. The
au -port has one runway, Runway 12/30, which is 3,600 feet in length, 60 feet rn
width, is constructed of asphalt, and is equipped with medium intensity runway
lights. In 1989, there were some 700 aircraft operations with two (2) based aircraft
at the airport. The airport has a rotatmg beacon and a lighted wind indicator. There
are no published instrument approach procedures for the airport and it is located
approximately twenty-one (21) NM east-northeast of Drake Field.
Springdale Municipal Airport. This airport is 1,353 feet AMSL and has coordinates
of 36° 10' 34.8" N, 94° 07' 08.6" w The airport has one (1) runway, Runway
18/36, which is 5,302 feet long, 75 feet wide, constructed of asphalt, equipped
with high intensity runway lights (HIRL), and has VASI on Runway 36 Facilities
include an air traffic control tower, a rotating beacon, a lighted wind indicator, a
segmented circle, tie -downs, and hangar storage. Services include fuel; major
airframe and power plant repairs; and aircraft charter, rental, and instruction.
Springdale Municipal Airport has three (3) published instrument approaches. The
first is an ILS approach to Runway 18 with a straight -in ceiling minimum of 250
feet AGL and a visibility muumum of three-quarters of a mile. The ILS approach has
a circle -to -land ceiling muumum of 647 feet AGL and a visibility minimum of one,
one and three-quarters or two miles depending on the category of aircraft. The
second is a VOR approach procedure to Runway 18. The VOR approach has
straight -in minimums of 669 feet AGL for the ceiling reginrement; and one, one and
three-quarters or two miles, depending on the category of aircraft, for the visibility
requirement. Circle -to -land minimums for the VOR approach are 667 feet AGL for
the ceiling requirement; and one, one and three-quarters or two miles, dependmg on
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Repon. March, 1991. A.12
I
L
the category of aircraft, for the visibility requirement. In 1989, there were 142
based aircraft and approximately 72,300 annual operations at the airport. The
airport is located approximately ten (10) NM north of Drake Field.
Decatur/Crystal Lake Airport. This airport is 1,180 feet above mean sea level
'• (AMSL) with coordinates of 36° 20' 39" N, 94° 26' 43" W. The airport has one
asphalt runway, Runway 13/31, which is 3,400 feet long, 75 feet wide, is
equipped with low intensity runway lights, and VASI on Runway 13. Facilities and
' services include fuel sales and a lighted wind indicator. In 1989, at Crystal Lake
Airport, there were some 5,000 annual operations and eight (8) based aircraft. The
airport has a published VOR DME approach to Runway 13. The straight -in ceiling
' minimum is 600 feet AGL and the visibility minimum is one mile or one and one-
half miles, depending on category of aircraft. Also depending on the category of
aircraft, the circle -to -land minimums associated with this approach are 660 feet or
720 feet AGL for a ceiling requirement and one mile or two miles for the visibility
requirement. The airport is located approximately 24 NM northwest of Drake Field.
The privately-owned/privately-used airports within the vicinity of Drake Field are
Lollars Creek Airport, Razorback Airport and Stilwell (Oklahoma) Airport.
' Table A2
AIRPORTS INVENTORY SUMMARY
Drake Field Master Plan Update
Owna Direction & Distance Runway
Ai port Use from Drake Field Letgth(sxfeet)
' Bentonville Municipal PU/PU 20 NM north 4,090
Carter Field/Rogers Municipal PU/PU 22 NM north 6,000
' Smith Field (Siloam Springs) PU/PU 19 NM northwest 4,985 & 1,650
Huntsville -Madison County PU/PU 20 NM east 3,600
Springdale Municipal PU/PU 10 NM north 5,302
' Crystal Lake PU/PU 24 NM northwest 3,400
Lollars Creek PRIPR 16 NM southeast 1,500
Razorback PR/PR 5 NM north 1,900
' Stilwell PR/PR 24 NM southwest 1,700
PU designates a publicly owned airport or one which is open to public use.
PR designates a privately owned airport or one which is closed to public use.
I
' Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. A. 13
I
I
I
L
I
P
I
LJ
I
I
I
I
I
H
I
Li
I
Aliport Environs
Drake Field is located in Washington County, Arkansas, in the southern portion of
the City of Fayetteville. The area around the airport is generally hilly with the
airport itself located in a valley. The following narrative will provide a general
description of the land uses and zoning surrounding Drake Field. A proper
inventory of existing land uses within the environs of an airport, along with zoning
patterns, and future land use is important in an airport planning effort so as to
ensure land use compatibility with future airport development.
Existing Land Use
Existing land use within the vicinity of the airport is basically agricultural in nature
to the east and south of the airport, with areas of urbanization to the north and west
of the airport. Existing land use surrounding the airport is illustrated in the
following figure, Figure A5 entitled EXISTING LAND USE.
The areas east and southeast of the airport are devoted to agricultural uses, except
for some scattered farm dwellings. There is an extensive floodplain associated with
the west fork of the White River to the east of the airport, which actually encroaches
upon airport property south of the runway. The area directly south of the airport is
also mostly undeveloped, although there are some industrial uses. In addition, the
community of Greenland is adjacent to the southwest and western boundaries of the
airport. The Greenland City Hall, high school, grade school and police department
are directly south and west of airport property. In addition, there are commercial,
industrial and residential uses between airport property and U.S. Highway 71, and
along the highway south of the airport. Across the highway, southwest of the
airport, there is residential development as well as two churches and a library.
Directly west of the airport across U.S. 71 is scattered residential development, plus
some commercial development along the highway. This area is not intensely
developed and there is considerable open space. There is also a church in this area.
To the north and northwest of the airport there is commercial and residential
development west of the highway, up to approximately Bailey Street. Farther
north, industrial and commercial development exists, with some residential
development, north to the intersection of U.S. 71 By -Pass. On the east side of the
highway is open space, industrial and commercial development, with some
scattered residential development and an armory. To the north of Willoughby Road
is scattered residential development and a golf course (approximately one-half mile
north of Willoughby Road).
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March. 1991. A.14
m m m= m m m= m= m m n M M Ei m= m
Source: AeSI Phmogwphy and Ground Survey
750
375
0
750
11500
a
I
a
r
g a� `,' _
Z
m
v
C '° a c a
_ m B e
m
�
�
3
I
n
IZoning
•' Generalized existing zoning within the vicinity of Drake Field is illustrated in the
following figure, EXISTING ZONING, reflective of the City of Fayetteville and City
of Greenland zoning, which are inclusive zoning regulations. For purposes here,
zoning is categorized into the following types: residential, commercial, industrial
and agricultural.
City of Fayetteville zoning, which incorporates the airport property and the area
north of the airport, is described in the following sentences. The airport itself is
zoned agricultural along with the area northeast of the airport bounded by the city
limits, Willoughby Road and Willoughby Avenue. The area northwest of the
'• airport, bounded by the railroad, the city limits and U.S. 71 By -Pass, is also zoned
as agricultural. The area north of the airport, bounded by the railroad track,
Willoughby Road and McCollum Road, is zoned for industrial use. Just north of
t this area, on both sides of U.s. 71, are areas of commercial zoning, with some
industrial zoning on the west side of the highway. In addition, to the north there is
an area of residential zoning which is bounded by the highway by-pass, the railroad
'track and Highway 71. There is also a large area of residential zoning east of
Highway 71 bounded by Willoughby Road, City Lake Road and Cato Springs
Road.
Zoning of the area directly to the west of the airport falls under the jurisdiction of
the City of Greenland. East of Highway 71, the area is zoned residential and
industrial. West of Highway 71, the area is zoned residential primarily, with a strip
of commercial zoning along the highway.
Washington County has the authority to enact zoning regulations (Arkansas Statutes
Annotated § 17-1113), but has chosen not to exercise it. Therefore, the areas
directly south and east of the airport which are outside of municipal corporate
boundaries are not zoned.
Comprehensive Plan
The City of Fayetteville is currently reviewing and revising a recently prepared draft
of its future land use plan, City of Fayetteville, Arkansas General Plan 2010. The
plan depicts future growth patterns and land uses.
The area along U.S. 71 and north of the airport will continue to develop as industrial
and commercial uses, with industrial uses occurring west of the highway (east of
the railroad tracks) and residential occurring north of Willoughby Road. The area
east of the airport should remain in agricultural uses with scattered residential
development. The community of Greenland is not expected to grow at a rapid rate,
although further residential development most likely will occur as infill
' Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March. 1991. A.16
L
Source: _ "-- _. . _ .. ...
761
276
1
a
761
1511
r
®® a
•e 1111 1 0)
Q.
mg
development, utilizing the open area now available. The area directly west of the
airport, along U.S. 71, will continue to develop with commercial uses, many
aviation related, with residential development occurring west of the commercial
strip adjacent to the highway. The area directly south of the airport, which is
outside the floodplain, will develop with industrial uses. The future land use plan
of the City of Fayetteville is illustrated in the following figure, Figure A7 entitled
FUTURE LAND USE.
The community of Greenland does not have a future land use plan nor does one
exist for the unincorporated portions of Washington County. The Northwest
Arkansas Regional Planning Commission (NWARPC) is the regional planning
agency for the Fayetteville area. NWARPC has no authority to enact land use
controls although it does provide several planning functions and acts as a
coordinating agency for the various communities involved in the association.
• Issue Identification and Inventory
' The identification of the current and future issues which may impact the use of a
public facility is an important step in the planning process. This is particularly true
of an airport where the infrastructure investment is great; where the development
' issues are complex (often not only affecting the airport itself but also the entire
region); and where the entire airport facility, along with its environs, must be
planned in unison to avoid incompatibility between the airport and its surroundings.
The following narrative identifies present and future development issues which face
'Drake Field.
Airport Role
Drake Field currently serves as the major commercial service aviation facility for
northwest Arkansas. The growing number of enplanements at the airport indicates
'• that it will continue to serve this role for the immediate future. The airport's ability
to accommodate the demand placed on it with proper airfield and passenger terminal
facilities will dictate whether or not it will serve this "primary commercial service"
' role in the long-term.
Runway and Approach Facilities
' The existing Airport Layout Plan calls for the expansion of airside development at
Drake Field with the construction of a crosswind runway, Runway 03/21. In
' addition, the construction of a turf runway (Runway 15/33) and the construction of
a parallel runway have received serious consideration in the past. The possible
addition of these facilities will not only impact the the airport's ability to
accommodate aircraft operations safely and efficiently, but the additional runway
1
1 Drake Field Muter Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. A.18
I
i i i i i i i i i i i i 4m i i i i i
sauce:
750
375
0
700
1000
m
(:::] iii,
Z N
Cr
ii
m m
a w
I
I
facilities could also impact the function of other areas of the airport, including
hangar development areas and areas available for commercial or industrial
development. In addition, aircraft traffic mix and allocations will be affected by the
• construction of new runways as well as noise abatement requirements and
opportunities.
Future runway approaches and approach facilities, along with the possible
obstructions associated with those approaches, have also been the subject of past
planning studies. Improved approaches are a vital need at the airport due to the
increased commercial service aircraft activity which has occurred at the airport over
the past several years.
' Passenger Terminal
The issues which effect the passenger terminal development at Drake Field are
among the most complex of any facing the airport. The issues involve the ability to
efficiently use the terminal as the point on the airport where passengers purchase
tickets, check baggage, and board commercial aircraft. This is the point on the
' airport where the landside and the airside must interface, where efficient access for
both aircraft and ground vehicles is essential.
Surface Transportation. As stated earlier, automobile access to the terminal area is
provided by U.S. Highway 71 which forms a portion of the western boundary of
the airport. U.S. Highway 71 currently forms an integral part of the passenger
' terminal loop roadway system. Traffic accessing the one-way terminal roadway
loop enters directly off of the highway at the southern most airport entrance. That
loop roadway then passes by the terminal automobile parking area and provides
access to the arrival and departure curb at the passenger terminal building before it
leads back to U.S. Highway 71. The roadway access to the Drake Field passenger
terminal works efficiently at present; however, additional enplanements at the
airport will provide increased demands on the access roadway system and
' improvements should be planned which will mitigate future problems.
There are two roadway improvement projects in the vicinity of the airport which
should be mentioned and considered in planning for future airport development.
First, Willoughby Road (located approximately one-half mile north of airport
property) is programmed for paving improvements and slight realignment. Second,
1 and perhaps even more significant, a new north -south interstate highway is being
constructed approximately 2 miles west of the airport. This new highway will
likely decrease the volume of traffic on U.S. Highway 71 along the western
boundary of airport property.
Automobile Parking. Along with automobile access needs generated by the
passenger terminal complex, automobile parking demand will increase in
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. A.2ll
Li
I
' conjunction with increased enplanements. During peak periods, automobile
parking demand fills the existing 418 public parking spaces available at the
passenger terminal.
Rental Car Facilities. Rental car companies will need increased facilities in the future
t to store and maintain their automobile fleets. The ready car storage facilities must
be easily accessible to terminal users either by being within walking distance or
through the use of a shuttle bus.
' Aircraft Access. At the present time, the terminal apron at Drake Field can
accommodate the demand which is placed on it by the commuter aircraft fleet.
However, terminal expansion or relocation and the increased commercial aircraft
movements expected in the future will change the demand placed on the taxiway
and apron system which supports the airport's passenger terminal area. The
existing inadequacies in the parallel taxiway system along with the expected
' increased future demand will result in the possible need to reconfigure the terminal
taxiway and apron system to accommodate future aircraft access.
Mass Transit Access. At present, the automobile is used by the majority of landside
visitors accessing Drake Field (taxi service is available at the airport, but there is no
regularly scheduled bus service). Increased use of mass transit access at Drake
Field would relieve demands placed on airport facilities by automobile use and thus
would be advantageous in the future.
Future Terminal Expansion. The growth in the number of passenger enplanements at
'
Drake Field over the past several years indicates that the passenger terminal will
need to be expanded at some point in the future. The expansion of the existing
passenger terminal structure to accommodate long-term demand is a complex
' problem which involves several issues. These issues include:
• Is there adequate land area in the existing terminal location to expand
the facility, along with all of its ancillary functions, to enable it to
• meet the long-term demand (10-20 years)?
• Can the existing terminal location properly serve Drake Field with the
addition of future runway and/or taxiway facilities?
• Can the terminal function at Drake Field be feasibly relocated on the
existing airport site? Would the need to relocate the terminal also
dictate the need to relocate the entire airport?
I
I
1 Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. A.21
I
H
LI
Air Cargo
Because
of local and national
growth in the
air cargo industry, the possible need to
'
identify
an expansion area
for
the
air cargo
function at Drake
Field
is an issue.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
C�
I
I
I
Industrial Facilities
Because they are usually compatible land uses, airports and industrial facilities are
often located adjacent to each other. At the present time, the number of industrial
facilities (both aviation and non -aviation related) located on airport property is
limited by the availability of developable land and vehicular access. However, the
opportunities provided for the development of industry adjacent to the airport are
greater, and there are currently several industrial facilities located adjacent to airport
property.
General Airport Ground Access
In addition to the air carrier terminal, easy ground access is vital to all commercial
and employment areas located on airport property. At the same time, airside
security with restricted access to the actual airfield is vital at the airport. Drake Field
will need to continue to adapt to this landside access dichotomy in the future as the
airport grows to meet future demand.
General Aviation
Drake Field is not only a facility which accommodates commercial service aviation
activity, but it also functions as a major general aviation facility. An indication of
the continued importance of the general aviation activity at the airport, is the demand
for indoor aircraft storage facilities. The airport's combined role as a commercial
service aviation center and a center for general aviation activity creates some
opportunities, some conflicts and some questions which pertain to the future use of
the airport facilities.
Air Traffic Control Tower
The Air Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) at Drake Field is located on the eastern
portion of airport property, southeast of the approach end Runway 16. This
location appears to work well with the existing airport layout; however, the location
of future hangar facilities should be sited to avoid the creation of ATCT line -of -sight
problems. In addition, any proposed runway configuration changes should be
evaluated for its ability to work well with the existing ATCT site (e.g. line -of -sight
issues, obstruction problems, etc.).
Land Acquisition
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991.
A.22
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
As future development concerns are identified and future development areas are
located on the site of Drake Field, recommendations will be made on the need for
additional land acquisition along with the best use of the existing airport land.
These recommendations will include land acquisition for facility expansion as well
as also for land use compatibility and approach protection purposes.
Airport Management
The City of Fayetteville owns Drake Field and, until recently, has operated Drake
Field as a division of the Public Works Department. The City of Fayetteville Board
of Directors is the ultimate decision -making body for the complex. The Airport
Manager is charged with the day-to-day activity of operating the airport.
It is common practice for airports of the size and complexity of Drake Field to be set
up under an Airport Authority or Advisory Committee which runs the airport or
which assists the city in formulating airport policy decisions. As such, the City has
set up an Airport Advisory Board which will help guide the development and
operation of the airport, and advise the City of Fayetteville Board of Directors on
airport matters. Because the Airport Advisory Board will be able to focus on the
single issue of the airport, its advice to the City Board of Directors (who are
responsible for overseeing the entire City's operation) should be invaluable.
Summary
' The above mentioned issues are certainly not all of those which will impact the
future of Drake Field. These issues are, however, the major ones which the airport
' will face in the near future. These major issues along with secondary related issues
will be explored in detail in later sections of this document.
The recommendations which are made as part of this Development Plan for Drake
Field are couched in the context of demand -dictated implementation, as well as the
traditional time line planning concept, which is used in most master planning
efforts. In other words, it has been found that forecasting the date when
development need will occur is difficult, if not impossible, particularly during the
long-term time frame. However, the demand which will trigger the need for
development, and the different "what if' alternatives which will satisfy that
' particular type of demand under a particular set of circumstances can be more easily
identified and documented.
' Because of the current consideration which is being given to the development of a
new Regional Airport to serve the growing commercial service and air cargo
demand in Northwest Arkansas, one of the "what -if' alternatives which will be
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Dtaf Report. March, 1991. A.23
I
I
7
b
I
I
Airport Activity Forecasts
Introduction
A review and analysis of historical and current aviation activity, and an evaluation
of anticipated activity for short -tern and long-term periods for Drake Field (FYv)
' has evolved from a comprehensive examination of historical airport records and
recent planning documents relative to the airport [i.e., the 1983 Airport Noise
Control and Land Use Compatibility (ANCLUC) Study and Master Plan, FAA
National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems and FAA Terminal Area Forecasts].
'
These documents were assembled in different years, making the base year data
quite variable, and emphasizing the need for establishing a well-defined and well -
documented set of base data from which to develop forecasts of aviation activity.
' Historical data through calendar year 1990 did provide a solid basis for establishing
and defining recent trends of aviation activity. With an established and accurate
point of beginning, the development of new forecasts was initiated.
' The Drake Field ANCLUC Study and Master Plan, published in 1983, used 1982
base data to forecast aviation activity at the airport. Numerous fluctuations in both
' the nation's and area's economy since that time have influenced the forecasting
assumptions used in the existing master plan, as well as some of the other forecast
documents. One of the most significant factors which was considered but not fully
understood in the 1983 ANCLUC Study and Master Plan centers on the inauguration
'
and impact of airline deregulation at this airport. Rather significant, and even
dramatic changes have transpired since deregulation which have and will continue
to influence aviation activity and the forecasting of that activity. To name a few,
' these changes include different aircraft types serving particular airports, differing
fare structures, centralization of operational activities by many airlines and
decentralization by many others, growth and expansion at many airports and loss of
air service at others. The effects of deregulation are still being discovered in many
areas, but it is a factor which plays an important role in developing projections and
assessing future airport activities.
The Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA's) Terminal Area Forecasts, published
in 1989, reflect the FAA's official view of aviation activity through the year 2005.
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Dtaft Report. March, 1991. B]
The FAA also publishes the National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS),
which includes aviation activity forecasts to the year 1995, based on 1986 data.
Several forecasting elements are pertinent to airport planning efforts at Drake Field:
enplaning (boarding) passengers, operations by certificated air carriers, operations
by commuter airlines, operations by general aviation aircraft, operations by military
aircraft and the type of air carrier and commuter aircraft operations (fleet mix).
Valid passenger enplanement forecasts are necessary prior to determining air carrier
operations and fleet mix, since the latter are significantly dependent on passenger
boardings. To enable a procedural review of the forecast evaluation, the following
sections will examine each of the above mentioned forecasting categories.
Historical Airport Activity
A tabulation of Drake Field's historical aviation activity since 1980 is presented in
Table B1, entitled HISTORICAL AVIATION ACTIVITY, 1980-1990. This table presents
the numbers of passenger enplanements and four categories of operations,
including total operations, followed by their respective percentages of change from
the previous year shown in parentheses.
Table BI
HISTORICAL AVIATION ACTIVITY, 1980-1990
Drake Field Master Plan Update
Year'
Passenger
Enplanements
Air Carrier/
Commuter
Operations'
General
Aviation
Operations'
Military
Operations'
Total
Opeations*
1980
69,382
18,788
29,692
463
48,943
1981
57,189 (-18%)
16,937 (-10%)
40,867(+38%)
329 (-29%)
58,133(+19%)
1982
51,881 (-9%)
17,587 (+4%)
28,219 (-31%)
352 (+7%)
46,158 (-21%)
1983
53,045 (+2%)
18,661 (+6%)
25,143 (-11%)
422(+20%)
44,226 (4%)
1984
60,591(+14%)
23,632 (+27%)
33,955(+35%)
247 (41%)
57,834(+31%)
1985
65,963 (+9%)
22,436 (-5%)
31,416 (-7%)
272 (+10%)
54,124 (-6%)
1986
83,225(+26%)
17,114 (-24%)
33,544 (+7%)
267 (-290)
50,925 (-6%)
1987
101,592(+22%)
18,467 (+8%)
39,912(+19%)
303(+14%)
58,682(+15%)
1988
117,762(+16%)
18,169 (-2%)
33,526 (-1690)
315 (+4%)
52,010 (-11%)
1989
136,196(+16%)
18,402 (+1%)
28,565 (-15%)
256 (-18%)
47,223 (-9%)
1990
153,093(+12%)
21,716 (+18%)
25,666 (-10%)
3180-24%)
47,700 (+1%)
I Complete Calendar Year Figures
• Actual Counts During Hours of ATCr Operation
Figures
in parentheses represent
change from immediately preceding year.
Source:
Drake Field ATCT and
Airport Administration
Records.
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. 8.2
II
7
• Passenger Enplanements. There has been a general increase in
' boardings since 1980. Boardings have increased each successive
year since 1982, to a high of some 153,093 in 1990. This general
increase is reflective of the growing population base of Fayetteville
' and the market area served by Drake Field, along with the
introduction of larger aircraft, aggressive airline marketing and
good frequency of service by several regional commuter airlines
' who have interline agreements with the nation's largest air carrier
airlines. The trend of increasing passenger enplanements is
expected to continue in the future.
' • Air Carrier/Commuter Airline Aircraft Operations. Air
Carrier/Commuter Airline Aircraft operations have fluctuated since
1980. This fluctuation is due to the unsettled nature in the
' commuter airline industry over the past several years and the
influence of deregulation. The data indicates that the number of
commuter aircraft operations has stabilized over the past several
' years while the number of passenger enplanements has steadily
increased. This would indicate the airline companies serving
Fayetteville are in a stable operating condition and have established
' consistent operation schedules which are attracting additional
passengers onto aircraft which have not as yet reached their seating
capacity. This also indicates that the more successful carriers have
' stayed in the market while others have left and that profitable load
factors are being achieved. In addition, the increasing enplanement
numbers are a product of a growing northwest Arkansas air travel
market. This analysis and all subsequent analysis will consider air
carrier, commuter and air taxi operations together, and classify
them as air carrier/commuter aircraft operations.
' • General Aviation Operations. General aviation operations are more
directly tied to economic conditions than air carrier operations.
This trend is reflected in historical data. The data available for
' general aviation operations at Drake Field generally reflect
economic conditions in the region, with operations fluctuating from
1980 to 1990, although as a trend, general aviation operations have
increased over the past sixteen years (only data from the years 1980
to 1990 is presented in the preceding historical aviation activity
table; however, sixteen years of data was considered in the
' formulation of trend projections). As economic conditions change
in the future, fluctuations in the number of general aviation
operations at the airport are expected to continue in the future.
1
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. B.3
J
I
I
• Military Operations. Military operations have not in the past played
an important role at the airport. Military operations are composed
' mostly of helicopters using the airport for fueling activity. It is
expected that this type of military activity will continue in the
future, although it will not increase to the point where it will be a
' significant portion of the total aircraft operations which are
conducted at the airport.
Passenger Enplanement Forecast
' Passenger enplanement forecasts are an important part of the forecasting effort as
they form the cornerstone for formulating air carrier operations projections.
Historical enplanements have increased from 1980 by an average annual percentage
rate of over 8% per year. As can be seen from the historical data, the relationship
between enplanements and operations is not always positive, in that enplanements
can increase with a corresponding decrease in operations. This is indicative of
larger aircraft with greater seating capacity and more efficient scheduling, which
' makes enplanement/air carrier operations forecasting more challenging. It can be
assumed, in this climate of deregulation, that if passenger demand is present at an
airport it will be satisfied by an air carrier airline of one type or another, however,
'• the type and size of aircraft is not easily predicted. It is a matter of small aircraft with greater frequency versus larger aircraft with less frequency.
' The passenger enplanement forecasts presented in the 1983 Airport Master Plan,
and those developed by the FAA were examined for comparison purposes. These
enplanement forecasts are presented in the following table. The columns include
' data from: NPIAS (National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems, FAA, 1987), 1983
MP (1983 Airport Noise Control and Land Use Compatibility Study and Master
Plan), TAP (Terminal Area Forecasts, FAA, 1989), AASP (Arkansas Airport System
Plan, 1989) and TP (trend projection based on historical growth rate).
I
I
I
I
' Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. B.4
I
Table B2
AIR CARRIER/COMMUTER ENPLANEMENTS FORECAST, 1990-2010
Drake Field Master Plan Update
YOF NPIAS 1983 MP TAF AASP Ti' MPUpdate
1990`
---
---
---
---
153,093
1993
---
124,000
114,156
1995
111,000
---
137,000
---
110,232
195,000
1998
--
---
---
126,721
---
2000
--
160,607
175,000
---
167,794
227,000
2003
---
--
---
135,409
---
2005
---
---
213,000
---
192,839
263,000
2008
---
---
---
144,096
2010
---
---
---
---
217,884
305,000
a Actual
NPLkS National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems, FAA
1983 MP 1983 Drake Field ANCLUC Study and Master Plan
TAP Terminal Mn Forecasts, FAA
AASP Arkansas Airport System Plan, 1989
TP Trend Projection, based on historical growth rate
MP Update Drake Field Master Plan Update, 1991
Because of the strong growth in the number of enplanements which has occurred at
Drake Field over the past several years, the majority of the forecasts listed in the
above table appear to be low. Thus, the selected forecast numbers (MP Update)
were developed to appropriately reflect current enplanement numbers and provide
realistic projections for the twenty-year planning period.
During the period 1970 through 1986, Fayetteville's population has grown at an
average rate of 1.6% per year and the population of northwest Arkansas has grown
at an average annual rate of 1.9% (City of Fayetteville, Arkansas General Plan
2010, Review Copy dated May 30, 1989). As stated earlier, the historical annual
average increase for enplanements since 1980 has been over eight percent (8%) per
year. Because of growing demand in northwest Arkansas, it is anticipated that the
recent trend of rapidly increasing enplanements at the airport will continue (although
tempered somewhat) through the first five -years of the planning period. In the
latter years of the planning period, the airport should also experience growth in
enplanement numbers; however, the growth rate will be reduced. During the period
1990 through 1995, the Master Plan Update forecast indicates that passenger
enplanements will increase at a rate of five percent (5%) per year, while during the
years 1995 through 2010, the selected forecast numbers indicate an increase of
three percent (3%) per year.
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March. 1991. 8.5
u
I
H
I
Li
I
I
IH
[1
7
I
C
I
I
I
I
I
I
Air Carrier Operations Forecast
Fleet Mix. The 1983 ANCLUC and Master Plan for Drake Field provided an
evaluation of air carrier fleet mix forecasts. Some of the airlines serving the airport
at the time the 1983 Master Plan was developed have since ceased service to Drake
Field, either by merger with other airlines or complete departure from the market,
and others have entered the market; thus, an evaluation of the types of air carrier/
commuter aircraft serving the airport is important and the forecast fleet mix needs to
be reevaluated.
Because of market size, hub locations, stage length and airport facilities the air
carrier/commuter aircraft fleet which utilizes Drake Field will continue to be
primarily turboprop or regional jet type aircraft. Nationally, the nineteen to fifty
passenger turboprop aircraft dominate the regional (commuter) market (Saab -
Fairchild 340, Swearingen Metroliner, Embraer Bandeirante and Brasilia, AIR -42,
among others); however, the use of sixty to one hundred passenger regional jets
(Fokker F-28, BAe 146, etc.) are also beginning to be utilized in this market. The
larger jet aircraft (MD -80, s-737, etc.) continue to be utilized by the true national air
carrier airlines for their shorter stage length routes. Although some charter
operations of larger jet aircraft will occur, it is not anticipated that there will be a
significant number of large jet air carrier aircraft operations at the airport during the
planning period. Information supplied by the airlines indicates that the primary air
carrier aircraft at Drake Field will continue to be turboprop aircraft during the initial
stages of the planning period, with more utilization of regional jets occurring during
the latter stages of the planning period.
Operations. The establishment of projected passenger enplanements, in addition to
identifying fleet mix, is required to properly project air carrier operations. The
Boarding Loading Factor (BLF) of the airlines serving an airport is one method of
determining forecasts of air carrier operations. The BLF is the ratio of seats
available for passenger boarding on a particular aircraft to the number of passengers
actually boarding (for example, if an aircraft has fifty seats available and twenty-
five passengers board, the BLF is 50%). However, based on the myriad of aircraft
types historically and presently using Drake Field, the utilization of the BLF to help
forecast operations is not a viable forecasting technique. Instead, the ratio of
passenger enplanements to air carrier aircraft departures was projected to aid in the
forecasting of air carrier/commuter aircraft operations. The historical enplanement
to departure ratios for Drake Field are shown in the following table, entitled
HISTORICAL ENPLANEMENTIDEPARTURE RATIO, 1980-1990.
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March. 1991. B.6
I
I
U
Table B3
HISTORICAL ENPLANEMENT/DEPARTURE RATIO, 1980.1990
Drake Field Master Plan Update
' Air Carrier/
Commuter
Year Enp�eruents Aircraft Departures Ratio
' 1980 69,323 9,394 7.4
1981 57,189 8,469 6.8
1982 51,881 8,794 5.9
'• 1983 53,045 9,330 5.6
1984 60,591 11,816 5.1
1985 65,963 11,218 5.9
'• 1986 83,225 8,557 9.7
1987 101,592 9,234 11.0
1988 117,762 9,085 13.0
' 1989 136,198 9,201 14.8
1990 153,093 10,858 14.1
An approach has been taken to the forecasting of future air carrier aircraft operations
which is based on the enplanement/departure ratio. Due to increased enplanement
'• activity, it is anticipated that the airlines serving Drake Field will steadily need to
increase the capacity of their service to the airport. This can be done either by
increasing the frequency of flights or by utilizing larger aircraft As stated
' previously, it is anticipated that the 30-50 passenger turboprop aircraft which
presently serve the airport will continue to dominate the airline aircraft fleet which
serves Drake Field, with more use of regional jet aircraft occurring during the latter
'• stages of the 20 -year planning period. Thus, it is not anticipated that the airlines
will increase the size of the aircraft serving the airport and the only avenue available
to increase the seating capacity of aircraft fleet is to increase the frequency of
' flights. Initially, increased frequency of flights will tend to lower the
enplanement/departure ratio (when flight frequency is increased passenger demand
will be spread out and, on the average, each aircraft will not carry as many
passengers).
' As presented in the following table, the selected forecast (MP Update) was
formulated in anticipation of a slightly lower enplanement/departure ratio during the
• initial portion of the planning period. The enplanement/departure ratio should then
' increase through the mid- and late -stages of the planning period.
I
' Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. B.7
Table B4
UNCONSTRAINED AIR CARRIER OPERATIONS FORECAST, 1990.2010
Drake Field Master Plan Update
Yea
NPIAS
TAF
1983
MP
AASP
13.0
Ratio
TP
MP
Updse
1990'
---
---
---
21,716
1993
---
26,000
—
20,230
---
---
---
1995
39,000
29,000
--
---
22,000
23,138
30,000
1998
---
---
--
21,998
---
---
2000
---
36,000
26,768
---
24,500
25,125
34,000
2003
---
---
--
23,817
---
---
---
2005
---
44,000
--
---
27,000
27,113
39,000
2008
---
---
---
25,786
---
---
--
2010
---
---
---
---
30,000
29,101
42,000
a Actual
NPIAS National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems 1986 - 1995, FAA
TAF Terminal Area Forecasts 1989 - 2005, FAA
1983 MP 1983 Drake Field ANCLUC Study and Master Plan
AASP Arkansas Airport System Plan, 1989
7P Trend Projection
MP Update Drake Field Master Plan Update, 1991
This forecast for air carrier/commuter operation numbers reflects a positive yet
realistic growth scenario in air carrier/commuter aircraft operations. This is based
on several factors specific to Drake Field including the desire of some airlines to
significantly increase their operations at the airport within the short-range time
frame.
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. B.8
I
I
Military Aircraft Operations Forecast
'• Military aircraft have historically utilized Drake Field as a fueling location. In the
past, the majority of the military aircraft utilizing the airport have been helicopters.
It is expected that this type of military activity will continue in the future and
' increase moderately, although it will not increase to the point where it will be a
significant portion of the total aircraft operations at the airport.
I
I
' Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March. 1991. B.9
LI
' Table B5
MILITARY OPERATIONS FORECAST, 1990-2010
Drake Field Master Plan Update
I
Year TAF MP Update
1990 318
1995 0 350
' 2000 0 400
2005 0 450
2010 0 500
' a Actual
TAF Terminal Area Forecasts. FAA (Numbers Rounded
to Nearest 1.000)
MP Update Drake Field Master Plan Update. 1991
' General Aviation Operations Forecast
General aviation operations at Drake Field have historically been affected by
changes in the country's economic cycle. Although more of the general aviation
'
fleet is now used for business purposes than it was ten years ago, the economy
continues to affect total general aviation operations. Throughout the past ten-year
historical period, general aviation operations have fluctuated around the 30,000
' annual operations level. General aviation operations at Drake Field reached a high
in 1981 with approximately 41,000 operations, and that record number was
approached again in 1987 when general aviation operations totaled approximately
40,000.
In recent years, growth in the number of general aviation operations has been
' inhibited by high costs. One of the major factors contributing to these high costs
has been insurance expenses, which through legislative action are expected to
decrease in the future. Because of this and the fact that the economy in northwest
' Arkansas is in a growth period, general aviation operations are expected to increase
at a moderate rate through the planning period. General aviation operations are
projected to grow at a 4% per year rate during the initial portion of the planning
' period and at a 3% per year rate during the latter portion, while the population in
Fayetteville is projected to grow at an average annual rate of between 1.6% and
1.9% (City of Fayetteville Arkansas General Plan 2010, Review Copy dated May
30, 1989). The general aviation activity forecasts are presented in the following
' table.
L
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March. 1991. B.10
I
Table B6
GENERAL AVIATION OPERATIONS FORECAST, 1990-2010
Drake Field Master Plan Update
Ya
1983 MP TAF
AASP
TP
MPUpdate
1990`
---
25,666
1993
--- 55,000
45,210
---
1995
--- 63,000
---
34,158
32,000
1998
--- ---
49,971
---
---
2000
90,000 81,000
---
35,585
40,000
2003
--- ---
53,883
---
2005
--- 100,000
---
37,013
46,000
2008
--- ---
56,691
---
---
2010
— ---
---
38,440
53,000
a
Actual
TAF
Terminal Area Forecasts
AASP
Arkansas Airport System Plan, 1989
IP
Trend Projection
1983 MP
1983 Drake Field ANCLUC Study and
Master Plan
MP Update
Drake Field Master Plan Update, 1991
The overall trend in the general aviation operations forecast is one of growth
remaining fairly constant with increases in activity as the economy continues to
grow and as conditions relating to the operating and ownership of general aviation
aircraft improve. Most of the general aviation activity at Drake Field have
historically been of a business/corporate nature. The business/corporate traffic is
expected to increase in the future, over the long-term and beyond the planning
period of this study.
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. B.1I
Operations Forecast By Aircraft Type
As can be noted, total annual operations are anticipated to increase rather
significantly during the planning period. Overall, total annual operations are
• forecast to increase by approximately one -hundred percent (100%) by the year
2010. It is forecasted that as a percentage of total operations, air carrier/commuter
aircraft operations will decrease from 46% presently to 44% in 2010; military
operations will remain approximately the same and represent less than one percent
(1%) of the total operations; and general aviation operations are forecast to increase
' from approximately 54% of the operations presently to approximately 56% of total
operations at the airport at the end of the planning period.
In the air carrier/commuter category of operations, turboprop aircraft are expected to
remain as the dominant aircraft in the fleet which serves the airport, with more use
of regional jet type aircraft during the latter stages of the 20 -year planning period.
In the general aviation operations category, the airport currently experiences a high
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Daft Report. March, 1991. B.12
11
I
I
I
I
fl
H
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
El
I
percentage of multi -engine and business jet operations when compared with single
engine operations. This is reflective of a high percentage of business aircraft use, a
trend which is expected to continue in the future. It is also projected that the
number of operations of single engine aircraft will increase more swiftly as
conditions favorable to the operation of small general aviation aircraft improve
through the planning period. Currently in the general aviation category 15% of the
total operations are single engine aircraft, 40% are multi -engine piston aircraft, 35%
are turboprop aircraft and 10% are business jets. In the year 2010, the forecast of
general aviation operations breaks down to be: 25% single engine aircraft, 35%
multi -engine piston aircraft, 30% turboprop aircraft and 10% business jets.
Table 87
SUMMARY OF OPERATIONS BY AIRCRAFT TYPE, 1990-2010
Drake Field Master Plan Update
Operations By Type
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
Air Carrier
21,716
30,000
34,000
39,000
42,000
Jet
26
35
40
2,400
6,500
Turboprop
21,690
29,965
33,960
36,600
35,500
Military
318
350
400
450
500
Fixed Wing
28
35
40
45
50
Helicopter
290
315
360
405
450
General Aviation
25,666
32,000
40,000
46,000
53,000
Single Engine Piston
3,850
5,760
8,400
10,580
13,250
Multi -Engine Piston
10,266
12,160
14,800
16,560
18,550
Turboprop
8,983
10,880
12,800
14,260
15,900
Business Jet
2,567
3,200
4,000
4,600
5,300
TOTAL ANNUAL OPERATIONS
47,700
62,350
74,400
85,450
95,500
Local and Itinerant Operations Forecast
During recent years, Air Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) records indicate that local
operations have constituted approximately twenty-two percent (22%) of the total
operations at the airport, and itinerant operations approximately seventy-eight
percent (78%). Of the local operations, less then one percent (1%) were attributed
to military aircraft with general aviation aircraft accounting for the remaining ninety -
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. 8.13
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I_l
nine percent (99%). This indicates a lower percentage of local operations than what
would be generally expected at most commercial service/general aviation airports,
such as Drake Field. This lower than expected percentage of local operations can
be attributed to the fact that, with respect to general aviation, Drake Field is a center
for itinerant business aircraft operations and that it experiences a relatively low level
of flight training activity.
It is forecast that the level of flight training at the airport will increase with the
anticipated upturn in general aviation activity which has been previously discussed.
This increase in flight training activity will increase the number of local operations;
however, as can be seen in the following table, entitled SUMMARY OF LOCAL AND
ITINERANT OPERATIONS, 1990-2010, Drake Field will remain primarily a center for
itinerant commuter airline operations and business related itinerant general aviation
operations, and the percentage of local general aviation operation activity will
remain low.
Table 88
SUMMARY OF LOCAL AND ITINERANT OPERATIONS, 1990-2010
Drake Field Master Plan Update
yew
Local
Operetiats
Itinerant
Operations
Total
Operations
1990
10,494
(22%)
37,206
(78%)
47,700
1995
14,964
(24%)
47,386
(76%)
62,350
2000
19,344
(26%)
55,056
(74%)
74,400
2005
23,926
(28%)
61,524
(72%)
85,450
2010
28,650
(30%)
66,850
(70%)
95,500
a Actual
Peak Period Forecast
An additional element of assessing airport usage and determining various
requirements necessitated by capacity and demand considerations is the
determination of peak period activities. Actual ATCT records at Drake Field, along
with statistics regarding operations at airports with similar activity and operational
characteristics have been utilized to formulate peak period forecasts. The peak
period operational activities are depicted in the table entitled PEAK PERIOD
AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS, 1990-2010.
Dtahe Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991.
B.14
I
I
ITable B9
PEAK PERIOD AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS, 1990-2010
Drake Field Master Plan Update
' Average Day Peak Hour/ Average
Year Annual Peak Month of Peak Month Average Day Ratio Peak Hour
1990 47,700 4,609 154 9.2% 14
' 1995 62,350 6,024 201 8.5% 17
2000 74,400 7,189 239 8.4% 20
2005 85,450 8,256 275 8.1% 22
' 2010 95,500 9,228 307 7.8% 24
BD&Co. Forecast Based on Actual Airport Records and Methodology From FAA AC 150/50704A Airport Master
' Picas and FAA AC 15015060-5 Airport Capacity and Delay
General Aviation Based Aircraft Forecast
The number of general aviation aircraft which can be expected to base at an airport
facility is dependent on several factors, such as airport communication practices,
available facilities, airport operator's services, airport proximity and access, and
similar considerations. In order to be able to plan for the proper number and size of
future aircraft storage areas, it is important to forecast the number of general
' aviation based aircraft.
There is also a direct relationship, in many cases, between general aviation
' operations and based aircraft levels. Because historically these two elements have
followed similar growth patterns on an overall basis, they are frequently compared,
each affected by the factors listed above. In other words, the relationship of these
' two functions is examined in terms of the number of annual operations per based
aircraft (oPBA). Such a review and resultant calculation can establish a trend for
both based aircraft and annual operations. Over the past five years, the average
annual OPBA for general aviation aircraft at Drake Field has been approximately
700, with the OPBA being approximately 620 in 1989. Because of the predicted
upturn in general aviation aircraft operations and the fact that there is a predicted
trend of increasing future hours flown by the general aviation aircraft fleet and
because the size of that fleet is expected to remain constant or grow only slightly
(FAA Aviation Forecasts Fiscal Years 1989-2000), it is anticipated that the OPBA
will increase somewhat through the planning period. In addition, because there is a
' waiting list for hangar space at the airport, it is known that additional aircraft will
base at Drake Field when new hangar facilities are constructed.
fl
' Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. 8.15
The following table, entitled GENERAL AVIATION BASED AIRCRAFT, 1985-2010
presents the forecasts for the twenty-year period. For information and comparison
purposes, also noted are the forecasts developed as a part of the FAA National Plan
of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS), the 1983 Drake Field Master Plan (1983
MP) and the Arkansas Airport System Plan (AASP).
Table B 10
GENERAL AVIATION BASED AIRCRAFT, 1985-2010
Drake Field Master Plan Update
YEAR
1983 MP
NPIAS
AASP
MP Update
1985'
---
---
---
42
198•6
---
---
---
43
1887•
---
--
---
58
1988'
---
---
---
57
1989°
--
---
---
46
1990b
62
41
---
52
1993
--
---
66
---
1995
75
48
---
63
1998
---
---
73
2000
90
---
---
71
2003
---
---
79
---
2005
---
---
---
82
2008
---
---
83
2010
---
---
---
92
NPIAS National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems, FAA 1984
1983 MP 1983 Drake Field ANCLUC Study and Master Plan
AASP Arkansas Airport System Plan, 1989
MP Update Drake Field Master Plan Update, 1991
a Information Taken From FAA Master Record Form 5010
b Information From Actual Count Taken at Airport
E
L
I
I
The number of based aircraft at Drake Field is expected to increase by
approximately seventy-seven percent (77%) during the twenty-year planning
period. On an incremental basis, a 21 % growth is anticipated by 1995 to 63 based
aircraft; a 37% growth to 71 by 2000; a 58% growth to 82 by 2005; and 77%
growth to a total of 92 by the year 2010. The mix of based aircraft for incremental
periods throughout the planning period is shown in the following table. The
percentage of business jets and turboprop aircraft is expected to increase as a part of
the total based aircraft population at the airport. This is in line, first of all, with
overall trends in general aviation, but even more importantly, parallels the
industrial, economic development and growth expectations and projections
Drake Feld Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March. 1991.
B.16
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
J
I
I
I
I
characteristic of the region. By the end of the planning period, multi -engine aircraft
are anticipated to comprise approximately 41% of the total based aircraft at Drake
Field, with approximately five percent (5.4%) being business jet aircraft,
approximately ten percent (9.8%) being turboprop aircraft and approximately
twenty-six percent (26.1%) being multi -engine piston aircraft.
Table BI1
GENERAL AVIATION BASED AIRCRAFT FLEET MIX, 1990-2010
Drake Field Master Plan Update
Ainraft Type
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
Single Engine
34
(65.4%)
38
(60.3%)
41
(57.8%)
46
(56.1%)
52
(56.5%)
Multi -Engine
14
(26.9%)
17
(27.0%)
19
(26.8%)
22
(26.8%)
24
(26.1%)
Turboprop
1
(1.9%)
4
(6.4%)
6
(8.5%)
8
(9.8%)
9
(9.8%)
Business Jet
3
(5.8%)
4
(6.4%)
4
(5.6%)
5
(6.1%)
5
(5.4%)
Helicopter
0
(0.0%)
0
(0.0%)
1
(1.4%)
1
(1.2%)
2
(2.2%)
TOTAL
52
(100.0%)
63
(100.0%)
71
(100.0%)
82
(100.0%)
92
(100.0%)
a Actual
Air Freight Forecast
As shown in the following table, AIR FREIGHT AND AIR MAIL ACTIVITY
FORECAST, 1990-2010, air cargo activity at the airport is expected to increase
significantly during the twenty-year planning period. The quantity of air freight
handled at Drake Field has fluctuated over the past several years, although records
have only been kept on air cargo quantities at the airport since 1987 and reporting
practices changed in 1989. Therefore, no trends in enplaned air freight and air mail
at Drake Field can as yet be interpreted.
' The trend of increased quantities of air transported freight has been occurring
nationally during the past several years. According to the April 18, 1989 issue of
the weekly newsletter Airports, enplaned air freight quantities during 1988
' increased an average of over twenty-four percent (24%) at large airports nationally
over quantities recorded during 1987. This is indicative of the increasing air cargo
quantities which has been occurring nationally at both large and small airports.
' It is anticipated that air freight and air mail quantities will continue to increase both
locally and nationally during the planning period. As a conservative measure, the
1
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. B.17
I
I
' projections of future air freight and air mail quantities at Drake Feld listed in the
following table are based on a three percent (3%) increase per year.
Table 812
AIR FREIGHT AND AIR MAIL ACTIVITY FORECAST 1990-2010
('m Pounds)
Drake Field Master Plan Update
Enplaned Air Freight
Ya and Air Mail %Change
1990' 89,683 ---
1995 104,000 3%/Year
1 2000 121,000 3%/Year
2005 140,000 3%/Year
2010 162,000 3%/Year
a Actual (Source: Airport Records)
' Summary
The following illustration and table summarize the forecasts of aviation activity
1• which have been presented in this chapter. This information will be utilized in the
subsequent chapters to analyze the capacity of the airport, develop facility
requirements and develop a noise model which will help determine future noise
1 impacts and exposure. In other words, the forecasts of aviation activity are an
important part of the information base which will be used to develop future plans
for the airport.
1
I
I
I
1 Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. 8.18
I
IH
LJ
H
H
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
[I
I
I
I
I
Figure B3
OPERATIONS FORECAST SUMMARY, 1990-2010
Drake Field Master Plan Update
TOTAL
OPERATIONS
74,400
1990 1995 2000
Airoratt Operations
I GUERt AT 101 O MCMp4N
TOTAL
OPERATIONS
95,500
500
42,000
2010
The most dramatic increase in operations on a percentage basis can be noted in the
General Aviation category, with an approximate 107% increase during the planning
period. The second most significant increase between 1990 and 2010, again on a
percentage basis, is expected in the Air Carrier category, with an approximate 93%
increase. These are followed by the Military category where operations are forecast
to increase by approximately 57%; however, the total number of military operations
is expected to remain small. Overall, the aircraft operations at Drake Field are
forecast to increase by some 100% over the course of the twenty-year planning
period.
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991.
B.19
I
Table B13
SUMMARY OF AVIATION ACTrVITY FORECASTS,1990-2010
Drake Field Master Plan Update
Operations
1990'
1995
2000
2005
2010
Air Carrier
Military
General Aviation
21,716
318
25,666
30,000
350
32,000
34,000
400
40,000
39,000
450
46,000
42,000
500
53,000
TOTAL OPERATIONS
47,700
62,350
74,400
85,450
95,500
Local Operations
Itinerant Operations
10,494
37,206
14,964
47,386
19,344
55,056
23,926
61,524
28,650
66,850
Passenger Enplanements
TOTAL ENPLANEMENTS
153,093
195,000
227,000
263,000
305,000
General Aviation Based Afrmaft
Single Engine
Multi -Engine
Turboprop
Business Jet
Helicopter
34
14
1
3
0
38
17
4
4
0
41
19
6
4
1
46
22
8
5
1
52
24
9
5
2
TOTAL BASED AIRCRAFT
52
63
71
82
92
Enplaned Air Cargo
AIR FREIGHT & MAILb
89,683
104,000
121,000
140,000
162,000
a Actual
b In Pounds
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. B.20
I
I
L
I
n
I
I
E
I
n
Capacity Analysis
Introduction
The capacity analysis for Drake Field is composed of two distinct elements: the
ability of airport facilities to accommodate existing and projected aircraft operations
(airfield capacity) and the ability of airport facilities to accommodate existing and
projected ground vehicle operations (airport access capacity). The capacity of the
airfield is primarily a function of the major aircraft traffic surfaces that compose the
facility and the configuration of those surfaces (runways and taxiways), but it is
also related to, and considered in conjunction with, wind coverage, airspace
utilization, and the availability and type of navigational aids. Airport access
capacity is a function of the automobile access roadways and the interface of those
roadways with the passenger terminal facility (the terminal curb frontage).
The capacity of the existing airfield and access facilities is analyzed with respect to
their ability to accommodate current and forecasted demand. This analysis aids in
the identification of possible deficiencies in the present and/or future airport
physical plant.
Airfield Capacity Methodology
' This section deals with the evaluation method used to determine the capability of the
airside facilities to accommodate aviation operational demand. Evaluation of this
capability is expressed in terms of potential excesses and deficiencies in capacity.
' The methodology utilized for the measurement of airfield capacity in this study is
described in FAA Advisory Circular 150/5060-5, Airport Capacity and Delay.
From this methodology, airfield capacity is defined in the following terms:
' • Hourly Capacity of Runways: The maximum number of aircraft that
can be accommodated under conditions of continuous demand during
a one -hour period.
Li
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. C.1
P1
H
' • Annual Service Volume: A reasonable estimate of an airport's annual
capacity (i.e. level of annual aircraft operations that will result in an
' average annual aircraft delay of approximately one to four minutes).
The capacity of an airport's airside facilities is a function of several factors. These
' factors include the layout of the airfield, local environmental conditions, specific
characteristics of local aviation demand and air traffic control requirements. The
relationship of these factors and their cumulative impact on airfield capacity is
examined m the following paragraphs.
Airfield Layout
The layout or "design" of the airfield refers to the arrangement and interaction of the
airfield components, which include the runway system, taxiways, and ramp
entrances. As previously described, Drake Field is served by one runway.
' Runway 16/34 has a partial parallel taxiway located on both its east side and west
side. The parallel taxiway system is supplemented by several runway exit taxiways
which are designed to minimize aircraft runway occupancy time, thus increasing the
' capacity of the runway system.
Most of the landside facilities are located to take best advantage of the existing
parallel taxiway system. The passenger terminal, along with the majority of the
general aviation facilities, are located west of Runway 16/34. East of the runway,
there are additional general aviation storage facilities (hangars and apron), an
aircraft runup position with a noise barrier and the Air Traffic Control Tower
(ATCT).
Environmental Conditions
' Climatological conditions specific to the location of an airport not only influence the
layout of the airfield, but also impact the utilization of the runway system.
' Variations in the weather resulting in limited cloud ceilings and reduced visibility
typically lower airfield capacity, while changes in wind direction and velocity
typically dictate runway usage and also influence runway capacity.
' Ceiling and Visibility. The Capacity and Delay Advisory Circular describes three
categories of ceiling and visibility minimums for use in both capacity and delay
' calculations. Visual Flight Rules (VFR) conditions occur whenever the cloud ceiling
is at least 1,000 feet above ground level and the visibility is at least three statute
miles. Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) conditions occur when the reported cloud
ceiling is at least 500 feet, but less than 1,000 feet and/or visibility is at least one
statute mile, but less than three statute miles. Poor Visibility and Ceiling (PVC)
conditions exist whenever the cloud ceiling is less than 500 feet and/or the visibility
is less than one statute mile.
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. C.2
Li
I
I
I
I
I
11 I
II
H
The available meteorological data (NOAA Ceiling -Visibility Wind Tabulation) for
Drake Field categorizes weather conditions in slightly different terms:
• Ceiling equal to or greater than 1,500 feet above ground level and
visibility is equal to or greater than 3 statute miles. These conditions
occur at the airport approximately 89.6 percent of the time during day-
time hours and approximately 87.7 percent of the time during night-
time hours.
• Ceiling less than 1,500 feet and/or visibility less than 3 miles, but
ceiling equal to or greater than 400 feet and visibility equal to or
greater than 1 mile. These conditions occur at the airport
approximately 8.9 percent of the time during day -time hours and
approximately 10.2 percent of the time during night-time hours.
' • Ceiling less than 400 feet and/or visibility less than 1 mile, but ceiling
equal to or greater than 200 feet and visibility equal to or greater than
1/2 mile. These conditions occur at the airport approximately 0.8
'• percent of the time during day -time hours and approximately 1.1
percent of the time during night-time hours.
• • Ceiling less than 200 feet and/or visibility less than 1/2 mile, but
• ceiling equal to or greater than 100 feet and visibility equal to or
greater than 1/4 mile. These conditions occur at the airport
approximately 0.3 percent of the time during day -time hours and
approximately 0.4 percent of the time during night-time hours.
• Ceiling less than 100 feet and/or visibility less than 1/4 mile. These
conditions occur at the airport approximately 0.3 percent of the time
during day -time hours and approximately 0.6 percent of the time
during night-time hours.
tWind Coverage. Surface wind conditions have a direct effect on the operation of an
airport; runways not oriented to take the fullest advantage of prevailing winds will
t• restrict the capacity of the airport to varying degrees. To determine wind velocity
and direction at Drake Field, wind data were obtained and an all-weather wind rose
was constructed.
I
I
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. C.3
1
H
I
I
Li
I
I
I
I
I
I
1J
I
I
[J
I
I
I
Figure C1
ALL WEATh ER WIND ROSE
Drake Field Master Plan Update
Source: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Station 93993 - Fayetteville, Arkansas
Period of Record - 1950-1978
The wind data to construct the all-weather wind rose was obtained for the period
1950-1978 from observations taken at Drake Field. For runways under seventy-
five feet in width (intended for use by utility type aircraft under 12,500 pounds), a
10.5 -knot (12 -MPH) crosswind component is considered maximum. With a wider
runway, aircraft can safely operate with a greater crosswind component (13 knots
for a runway 75 to 99 feet in width and 16 knots for a runway 100 to 149 feet in
width). The desirable wind coverage for an airport is ninety-five percent (95%).
This means that runway orientation should be developed so that the maximum
crosswind component is not exceeded more than five percent (5%) of the time.
Based on the wind analysis for Drake Field, Runway 16/34 provides 99.6% wind
coverage for the 16 -knot crosswind component, 98.3% wind coverage for the 13 -
knot crosswind component and approximately 94.8% wind coverage for the 10.5 -
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March. 1991.
C.4
fl
L
I
I
knot crosswind component. This analysis indicates that the existing runway
configuration provides adequate wind coverage for the 16- and 13 -knot crosswind
' components and is only minimally lacking in consideration of the 10.5 -knot
component.
As mentioned previously, the airport currently has a non -precision instrument
approach from the north (to Runway 16) with a straight -in landing ceiling minimum
of 549 feet and a visibility minimum of one mile. In an effort to analyze the
' effectiveness of this approach and the need for an additional instrument approach,
day and night Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) wind roses have been constructed and
are presented below.
' Figure C2
IFR* WIND ROSE - DAYTIME
' Drake Field Master Plan Update
I
I
I
I
IJ
I
I
' ' Ceiling less than 1,500 feet and/or visibility less than 3 miles, but ceiling equal to or greater than 400 feet
and visibility equal to or greater than 1 mile.
Son: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
' Station 93993 - Fayetteville, Arkansas
Period of Record - 1950-1978
' Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. C.5
I
iH
H
I
L
I
I
I
I
I
Figure C3
fl • WIND ROSE - NIGHTFIME
Drake Field Master Plan Update
• Ceiling less than 1,500 feet and/or visibility less than 3 miles, but ceiling equal to or greater than 400 feet
and visibility equal to or greater than 1 mile.
Source: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Station 93993 - Fayetteville, Arkansas
Period of Record - 1950-1978
Data for the IFR wind roses was collected at Drake Field from 1950 and 1978. The
'
data does not directly correlate with the existing published approach minimums;
however, it is the only information available and its use provides a good indication
of the IFR wind coverage provided by the existing runway. The data which has
been used to construct the u wind roses is for the following weather conditions:
ceiling less than 1,500 feet and/or visibility less than 3 miles, but ceiling equal to or
greater than 400 feet and visibility equal to or greater than I mile. As mentioned
' previously, these metrological conditions are experienced approximately 8.9 percent
of the time during daylight hours and approximately 10.2 percent of the time during
nighttime hours at the airport.
' Drake Field Master Plan UpdaWDraft Report. March, 1991. C.6
I
The following table, IFR WIND COVERAGE SUMMARY, quantifies the wind
coverage offered by the existing runways under IFR meteorological conditions.
Table Cl
IM WIND COVERAGE SUMMARY
Drake Field Master Plan Update
' Wind Coverage Provided Unda FR Conditk s*
16 -Knot Maximum Crosswind
' 3 -Knot Tailwind 10 -Knot Tailwind
to Max. Headwind to Max. Headwind
Runway 16 -Day 45% 77%
' Runway 34 - Day 71% 87%
Runway 16 - Night 49% 79%
Runway 34 - Night 79% 93%
Runway 16 & 34 - Day 100% __
Runway 16 & 34 -Night 100%a
• Ceiling less than 1,500 fed and/or visibility less than 3 miles, but ceiling equal to or greater
'
than 400 feet and viabilityequal to or greater than 1 mile.
Source: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Station 93993 - Fayetteville, Arkansas
' Period of Record - 1950-1978
From this IFR wind coverage summary, it can be determined that if a single runway
' is considered, Runway 34 offers the greatest wind coverage during the day and the
night for the 16 -Knot crosswind component. If both runways are considered, wind
coverage provided is more than adequate for the 16 -Knot crosswind component.
Characteristics of Demand
•' Certain site specific characteristics related to aviation use and aircraft fleet makeup
impact the capacity of the airfield. These characteristics include runway use,
aircraft mix, percent arrivals, touch-and-go operations and exit taxiways.
' Aircraft Mix. The capacity of a runway is dependent upon the type and size of
aircraft which are capable of utilizing the facility. Aircraft are categorized into four
classes: Classes A and B consist of small single -engine and twin -engine aircraft
1
(both prop and jet), weighing 12,500 pounds or less, which are representative of
the general aviation fleet. Class C and D aircraft are large jet and propeller aircraft
typical of those utilized by the airline industry and the military. Aircraft Mix is
defined as the relative percentage of operations conducted by each of these four
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report March, 1991. C.7
I
I
classes of aircraft The Aircraft Mix for Drake Field is depicted in the following
table, AIRCRAFT CLASS MIX FORECAST, 1990-2010.
Table C2
AIRCRAFT CLASS MIX FORECAST, 1990.2010
Drake Field Master Plan Update
VFR Conditions IFR Conditions
Ye;r Class A& B ClassC Class D Class A& B Class C Class D
' 1990 33% 67% -% 25% 75% --%
1995 32% 68% -% 24% 76% --%
2000 35% 65% -% 27% 73% --%
' 2010 38% 62% --% 30% 70% --%
Class A - Small Single Engine, < 12,500 pounds Class B - Small Twin Engine, < 12.500 pounds
Can C - 12,500 - 300,000 pounds Class D - > 300,000 pounds
Percent Arrivals. Runway capacity is also significantly influenced by the percentage
' of all operations that are arrivals. Because aircraft on final approach are typically
given absolute priority over departures, higher percentages of arrivals during peak
periods of operations reduce the annual service volume. The operations mix
' occurring on the runway system at Drake Field reflect a general balance of arrivals
to departures; therefore, it was assumed in the capacity calculations that arrivals
equal departures during the peak period.
' Touch -And -Go Operations. A touch-and-go operation refers to an aircraft maneuver
in which the aircraft performs a normal landing touchdown followed by an
immediate takeoff, without stopping or taxiing clear of the runway. These
operations are normally associated with training and are included in local operations
figures reported by the air traffic control tower. Touch-and-go operations presently
comprise approximately twenty-two percent (22%) of all operations at the airport.
'
The percentage of touch-and-go operations at the airport is expected to increase to
represent approximately thirty percent (30%) of total operations by the end of the
planning period.
Runway Use. The configuration of the runway system is defined by the number,
location, and orientation of the active runway(s) and relates to the distribution and
' frequency of aircraft operations to those facilities. Presently, annual operations
occur to the south (Runway 16) approximately sixty-eight percent (68%) of the
time, and to the north (Runway 34) approximately thirty-two percent (32%) of the
' time.
Drake Field Master Plan UpdawJDna Report. Match, 1991. C.8
C
L
Li
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
L
L
L
L
I
Exit Taxiways. The capacity of a runway system is greatly influenced by the ability
of an aircraft to exit the runway as quickly and safely as possible. Therefore, the
quantity and design of the exit taxiways can directly impact aircraft runway
occupancy time and the capacity of the runway system.
The number of exit taxiways at Drake Field is minimal. The capacity analysis gives
credit to only those located between 3,500 and 6,500 feet from the threshold of
each runway. The Airport's runway received an exit rating of two, with four being
the maximum rating.
Air Traffic Control Rules
The FAA specifies separation criteria and operational procedures for aircraft in the
vicinity of an airport contingent upon aircraft size, availability of radar, sequencing
of operations and noise abatement procedures, both advisory and/or regulatory,
which may be in effect at the airport. Air traffic controls impact on runway capacity
is most influenced by aircraft separation requirements dictated by the mix of aircraft
utilizing the airport. Presently, there are no special local air traffic control rules in
effect at Drake Field which significantly impact operational capacity.
Airfield Capacity Analysis
As previously described, determination of capacity and delay figures for Drake
Field will utilize the throughput method of calculation, as prescribed in FAA
Advisory Circular 150/5060-5 Airport Capacity and Delay. These formulae,
applying information generated from the preceding analyses, illustrate capacity and
demand in terms of the following results:
• Hourly Capacity of Runways
• Annual Service Volume
The following capacity computations provide assistance in evaluating the ability of
the existing airport facilities, both airside and landside, to accommodate forecasted
demand.
Hourly Runway Capacity
Calculations of hourly runway capacity begin with an evaluation of each possible
runway -use configuration at the airport. With consideration of the airport's aircraft
mix index, annual percentage of touch-and-go operations and taxiway exit rating,
an hourly capacity was calculated. At Drake Field the the vFR hourly capacity was
determined to be 60 operations and the IFR hourly capacity was determined to be 50
Drake Field Master Plan UpdawDnft Report. March. 1991.
C.9
I
L
Li
H
I
I
I
U
I
I
operations. The FAA's NPIAS identifies the Airport's VFR capacity as 57 operations
per hour and the IFR capacity as 48 operations per hour.
Annual Service Volume
After determining the hourly capacity for each potential runway use configuration, a
weighted hourly capacity of the entire airport can be calculated. The weighted
hourly capacity takes into consideration not only the aircraft mix index but also the
percent utilization of each possible runway use configuration. The weighted hourly
capacity for Drake Field was determined to be approximately 43 operations per
hour. This weighted hourly capacity can then be used in calculating the Annual
Service Volume (ASv) for the airport. The ASV is calculated using the following
formula:
ASV=CWxDxH
Cw weighted hourly capacity
D ratio of annual demand to average daily demand
H ratio of average daily demand to average peak hour demand
Under existing circumstances, the airport has been determined to have a daily ratio
(D) of approximately 310 and an hourly ratio (H) of 11, and thus, an ASV of
approximately 147,800 operations.
Conditions which are involved with the determination of the weighted hourly
capacity and the daily demand are not forecasted to change significantly in the
future, and those numbers will remain fairly constant through the planning period.
The hourly ratio, as specified in the formula, is the inverse of the daily operations
which occur during the peak hour. In other words, as operations increase, the peak
periods tend to spread out, increasing the hourly ratio (H). As the hourly ratio
increases the ASV will increase. Thus, as presented in the following table, even
t• without additional runway facilities the ASV at Drake Field will increase to
approximately 165,000 operations by the year 2010. The FAA's NPIAS estimates
the ASV for Drake Field at 175,000 operations.
In addition, potential improvements to the existing facilities which could improve
the airport's capacity should be considered. In the case of Drake Field these
potential improvements include the provision of a full parallel taxiway on the west
side of the runway and the provision of a precision instrument approach. Using the
methodology presented in Airport Capacity and Delay Advisory Circular, the
provision of a full parallel taxiway on the west side of the runway does not
significantly increase the Annual Service Volume of the airport (although from a
practical standpoint the provision of a full parallel taxiway will certainly increase the
efficiency and safety of the runway/taxiway system). As listed in the following
table, entitled AIRFIELD CAPACITY FORECAST SUMMARY, 1990-2010, the provision
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. Much, 1991. C.1O
11
LI
I
LI
I
I
Li
I
I
I
II
I
ET
7
L
I
LI
Li
I
of a precision approach with minimums as low as those provided by a Category I
ILS would significantly increase the Airport's Annual Service Volume.
Table C3
AIRFIELD CAPACITY FORECAST SUMMARY, 1989-2010
Drake Field Master Plan Update
Year
Annual
Operations
Design Hour
Operations
ASV w/Existing
Approach Minimums
ASV w/CAT I
Approach Minimums
1989
47,700
14
147,800
193,600
1995
62,350
17
148,400
194,600
2000
74,400
20
153,600
200,100
2010
95,500
24
165,300
216,800
Ground Access Capacity
The capacity of the landside passenger terminal access system is a function of the
maximum number of vehicles which can be accommodated by a particular ground
access facility. At Drake Field, this relates primarily to the access roadway system
capacity, the number of vehicles which can utilize a certain roadway section in a
given time period; and the passenger terminal curb capacity, which is equal to the
linear length of curb required to adequately accommodate peak period passenger
use.
Terminal Access Roadways
The capacity of roadways providing access to the airport as well as the terminal
roadway system are based on the Highway Capacity Manual, published by the
Transportation Research Board, Special Report 209, 1985.
It is normally preferred that a roadway operate below capacity to provide reasonable
flow and minimize delay to the vehicles using it. The Highway Capacity Manual
defines different operating conditions, known as levels -of -service. The levels -of -
service are functions of the volume and composition of the traffic and the speeds
attained. Six levels -of -service have been established, designated by the letters A -F.
providing for best to worst service in terms of driver satisfaction. Level -of -service
F defines a road operating beyond its maximum capacity. Traffic is almost at a
standstill causing major delays to road users. Level -of -service A is defined as a
road with free flow operational characteristics at average travel speeds. Vehicles on
Drake Field Muter Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991.
C.11
I
I
a level -of -service A roadway are completely unimpeded in their ability to maneuver
within the traffic stream. A level -of -service C is generally the preferred level of
service on an urban road system such as in the vicinity of Drake Field. At level -of-
• service C the traffic flow is stable and delays are minimal. Average hourly volumes
of airport service roadways of typical facilities at level -of -service C and D are
summarized in the following table.
' Table C4
GROUND ACCESS FACILITY VOLUME
Drake Field Master Plan Update
Average Hourly Volume'
1 Facility Type (Vehicle/Hour/Lane)b
Main -access and feeder freeways
(controlled access, no signalization) 1,000-1,600
Ramp to and from main -access freeways,
single lane 900-1,200
Principal arterial (some cross streets,
two-way traffic) 900-1,600
Main -access road (signalized intersections) 700-1,000
Service road 600-1,200
' a Highway level of service C and D
b Passenger -car equivalents
Source: "Measuring Airport Landside Capacity", Transportation Research Board, 1987
The breadth of the ranges given in the above table make their use in defining
roadway capacity analysis useful primarily in initial testing for problems. The
focus of the access roadway capacity assessment is on the service provided between
the terminal curb or parking area and the interchange linking the airport with the
regional transportation system. Thus, the analysis for Drake Field is focused on the
' roadway which loops the terminal parking area and that section of U.S. Highway 71
which borders airport property on the west and which connects the terminal loop
road with Fayetteville's population centers and the regional highway system.
'• Using the information presented in the previous table would indicate that U.S.
Highway 71 has a capacity of 900 to 1,600 vehicles per hour and that the terminal
roadway loop has a capacity of 600 to 1,200 vehicles per hour at a level -of -service
in the C to D range. The following table presents existing and forecasted peak hour
passenger cars in the peak direction. This is based on the majority of passengers
arriving at the airport in private automobiles or taxis and the low vehicle occupancy
rates typically observed at airports similar to Drake Field.
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. C.12
1
I
I
I
I
I
Table C5
AIRPORT ACCESS DEMAND FORECAST, 1990-2010
Drake Field Master Plan Update
EM
•
1990 202
'
1995 258
2000 300
2010 402
1
I
F
LI
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Li
As can be seen, it appears that both u.s. Highway 71 and the terminal loop road
have adequate capacity to accommodate forecasted passenger traffic through the
planning period. This analysis does not, however, take into consideration
background traffic (traffic utilizing the roadways which is unrelated to passenger
generated traffic) or the capacity of the existing intersections. The volume of
background traffic could particularly effect the future capacity of U.S. Highway 71.
In addition, the intersections where the terminal loop roadway joins with U.S.
Highway 71 and where entrances to passenger parking are located could well be the
limiting factor of the access roadway system. These factors can be compensated for
by adding additional lanes to u.s. Highway 71 or with intersection improvements,
and should be analyzed periodically to determine if improvements are needed.
Terminal Curb Frontage
Most passengers, their baggage, and sometimes accompanying visitors are dropped
off and picked up at the terminal building curb frontage. In this area passengers
leave ground transportation (automobile, taxi, bus, limousine, or courtesy van) and
become pedestrians on their way to or from the aircraft loading gate. Therefore, the
terminal curb is the interface between the terminal building and the ground
transportation system. The length of curb required for the loading and unloading of
passengers is determined by the type and volume of ground vehicle traffic
anticipated in the peak period on the design day.
As with the terminal access roadway system, levels -of -service have been identified
for the terminal curb (Airport Curbside Planning and Design, Transportation
Research Record 840, published by the Transportation Research Board, 1985).
The five levels of service for the terminal curb range from level A, defining a curb
which experiences no traffic queues and no double parking; to level E. which is
indicative of a curb area with numerous operational breakdowns and an effective
curb utilization equal to two (2) times the actual curb frontage. A curb length which
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. C.13
I
I
I
I
I
I
1J
I
I
IJ
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
will provide a minimum of a level -of -service C is generally the goal for airport
passenger terminals. Level -of -service C defines a curb with an effective curb
utilization equal to 1.3 times the actual curb frontage.
The one-way roadway in front of the passenger terminal at Drake Field consists of
four (4) lanes: a loading and unloading lane adjacent to the terminal curb, two
center driving lanes, and a short-term parallel parking lane on the opposite side of
the roadway from the terminal. The existing curb frontage adjacent to the terminal
totals approximately 320 feet in length (there is no physical distinction between
enplaning and deplaning curbs). Based on estimates of peak period passenger
enplanements and deplanements and as demonstrated through local observations,
the current curb length has adequate capacity to accommodate current passenger
demand.
Summary
This chapter has analyzed the capacity of exisiting facilities at Drake Field. Both
adequate airfield and ground access facilities are critical elements in the ability of the
airport as a whole to efficiently serve the public. Capacity breakdowns which cause
delays associated with one component will be reflected in the ability of the entire
facility to function properly.
The next chapter, FACILITY REQUIREMENTS, will delineate facilities needs which
will be necessary to properly accommodate future demand. That information along
with the capacity analysis will provide the basis for the evaluation of airport
development alternatives, which will then lead to the formulation of a long-term
Development Plan for Drake Field.
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March. 1991.
C.14
I
1l
I
I
Facility Requirements
' Introduction
In order to accommodate demand at the airport it is necessary to translate the
forecast aviation activity into specific types and quantities of facilities necessary to
adequately serve future needs. This chapter deals with the actual physical facilities
' and/or improvements to existing facilities needed to safely and efficiently
accommodate the projected demand which will be placed upon the airport. The
chapter consists of several separate analyses: those factors impacting airfield
requirements, terminal area requirements, ground access requirements, air cargo
requirements, general aviation requirements and requirements for miscellaneous
airport support facilities.
As a prelude to the Facility Requirements discussion, it should be pointed out that
Drake Field is severely restricted in its ability to expand. Due to terrain, flood
' prone land and surrounding land uses, the airport is essentially land locked.
Although in most areas this fact may not prevent the provision of facilities to
accommodate forecasted demand, it will impinge upon the flexibility of the airport's
facilities and their ability to accommodate any unforeseen demand.
Airfield Requirements
Airfield requirements include the need for facilities related to the actual operation of
aircraft on the airport and include: airfield dimensional criteria, runways, taxiways,
' airfield instrumentation and lighting.
Airfield Dimensional Criteria
' The types of aircraft which currently utilize Drake Field and which are projected to
utilize the airport in the future are important in order to plan appropriate airport
facilities. Knowledge of the aircraft utilizing the airport provides information
concerning dimensional requirements; runway length; and runway, taxiway, and
apron strength. The requirements relate to the "Design Aircraft" which either
currently utilizes the airport or which is projected to utilize the airport in the future.
'It has been determined that there are two design aircraft at Drake Field which are the
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March. 1991. D.1
1
most critical aircraft which will operate at the airport with regard to physical
dimensions and approach speed. At the present, both aircraft regularly operate at
' the airport.
The Convair 580 sets the parameter for wingspan, 105.3 feet; and the Gulfstream III
' sets the approach speed parameter, 136 knots. According to FAA Advisory Circular
150/5300-13, Airport Design, the first step in defining an airport's design geometry
is to determine its Airport Reference Code (ARC). An airport which accommodates
' aircraft with an approach speed as great as 121 knots but less than 141 knots and
with wing spans as great as 79 feet but less than or equal to 118 feet should be
designed utilizing ARC C -III design criteria. An airport designed with this criteria
' will also accommodate the regional jet aircraft which are forecast to utilize the
airport during the latter stages of the planning period.
Determination of airport geometric design criteria is an important factor in providing
'
for future airport expansion and development. The design criteria for an airport is
dependent upon the design aircraft dimensions, the type of, or lack of,
instrumentation available or programmed at the airport and the type of aircraft
'• projected to use the airport. The design criteria shown in the following table are
those required for ARC C -III airports, along with the existing dimension for the
corresponding facility.
Conclusion. Drake Field's facilities have some deficiencies in meeting the specified
development standards, particularly in the area of the passenger terminal [the
•' passenger terminal building is inside of the prescribed Building Restriction Line
(BRL) and the terminal apron and westside parallel taxiway are too close to the
runway]. These deficiencies will restrict the airport's ability to accommodate larger
air carrier aircraft.
I
I
I
I
I
' Drake Field Master Plan Update/Dtaft Report. March. 1991. D.2
I
I
I
Table D1
DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR ARC C -III AIRPORTS (In Feet)
'Drake Field Master Plan Update
'
bun
ARC C-lII
Dimension
Existing
Dimension
Runway Centerline to Runway Centerline
700+
N.A.
Runway Centerline to Taxiway Centerline
400
300-390
Runway Centerline to AC Parking
500
400
Runway Width
100
100
'
Runway Safety Area Width
500
500
Runway Safety Area Length (beyond R/W end)
1,000 (R/W 16 200':R/W 34 470')
Runway Centerline to BRL
745
520-750
'
Taxiway Width
50
40-50
Source: AC 150/5300-13, Federal Aviation Administration
Runway Safety Area: An area adjacent to the runway which is
capable of supporting
the occasional passage of
'
aircraft without musing structural damage under dry conditions.
BRL: The Building Restriction Line (BRL) encompasses the runway protection zones
(RPZ), the runway
visibility zone, areas required for airport traffic control tower
clear line of sight, and all airport areas with less
than 35 feet clearance under the FAR pan 77 surfaces.
N.A. Not Applicable
N.D. Not Designated on Previous Airport Layout Plan
IRunways
In light of the forecasts of future aviation activity, the adequacy of the runway
system was analyzed from a number of perspectives. These include runway
orientation, airfield capacity, runway length and pavement strength. The analysis
of these various aspects pertaining to the runway system has led to
recommendations for improvements.
Runway Orientation. Drake Field currently operates with one runway, Runway
16/34, which has a northwest -southeast orientation. As a general planning
principal the primary runway should be oriented in the same direction as the
prevailing wind. When landing and taking off, aircraft are able to properly operate
on a runway as long as the wind component perpendicular to the direction of travel
(defined as a crosswind) is not excessive.
I
1l
I
Conclusion. As previously stated, because Runway 16/34 is 100 feet wide and in
consideration of the 16 -knot crosswind component, it provides adequate wind
coverage. Therefore, no additional runway will be required to provide additional
wind coverage.
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March. 1991.
D.3
I
I
Airfield Capacity. The evaluation of airfield capacity presented in the previous
chapter indicates that the airport will not exceed the capacity of the existing
' runway/taxiway system before the end of the planning period.
Under current operating conditions, the Airport's Annual Service Volume (ASV)
' was determined to be 147,800 operations. FAA planning standards indicate that
when sixty percent (60%) of the ASV is reached (88,680 operations) the airport
should start planning ways to increase capacity and when eighty percent (80%) of
' ASV is reached (118,240 operations) construction of facilities to increase capacity
should be initiated. These conditions should be monitored as trends and not just as
one-time occurrences. This trend monitoring will provide lead time in recognizing
' demand for facilities before the need occurs and will help to keep expenditures
within budgetary constraints.
During 1990, total aircraft operations at Drake Field totaled approximately 47,700
'
operations. In other words, the airport has not as yet reached the sixty percent level
of the ASV. Forecasts of aircraft operations indicate that by 1995 there will be
approximately 62,350 operations at the airport and that by 2000 there will be
' approximately 74,400 operations at the airport, with 95,500 operations forecast by
2010. These forecasts indicate that the airport will surpass sixty percent (60%) of
its capacity (88,680) before the year 2010.
The capacity analysis in the previous chapter also indicates the ASV of the existing
airport configuration will increase with increasing operations and the resulting
spread of peak period operations. However, even before an airfield reaches
capacity it begins to experience certain amounts of delay in aircraft operations. As
an airport's operations increase toward capacity, delay increases exponentially.
' Conclusion. The capacity calculation indicates that Drake Field will not exceed the
capacity of its airfield facilities before the end of the planning period. No additional
runway facilities will be required for capacity considerations.
Runway Length. The determination of runway length requirements for Drake Field
is based on several factors. These factors include:
' • Airport elevation;
• Mean maximum daily temperature of the hottest month;
I. Runway gradient;
• Critical aircraft type expected to use the airport; and,
• Stage length of the longest nonstop trip destination.
' The runway length operational requirements for aircraft are greatly affected by
elevation, temperature and runway gradient. The calculations for runway length
requirements at Drake Field are based on an elevation of 1,251 feet AMSL, 95
Drake Field Master Plan UpdudDrf Report. March, 1991. D.4
I
I
degrees Fahrenheit NMT (Mean Normal Maximum Temperature) and a maximum
Effective Runway Gradient (ERG) of 0.2% (the existing ERG of Runway 16/34).
Drake Field is a Transport Airport, defined as "an airport that accommodates aircraft
with approach speeds of 121 knots or greater". The Convair 580 belongs to
• Airplane Design Group m, which dictates certain design parameters and criteria.
• Generally, runway length requirements for design purposes at Commercial Service
Airports are premised upon the specific requirements of the most demanding air
•' carrier aircraft which regularly utilizes the airport. This information concerning the
runway length requirements is then supplemented with information related to the
percentage of the Transport (business jet) aircraft fleet to be accommodated at the
' airport. In the case of Drake Field, because the air carrier fleet will be made up
primarily of turboprop and regional jet passenger aircraft, the business jet fleet will
require longer runways than the air carrier fleet; therefore, the business jet fleet will
' be used as the basis for runway length recommendations.
As can be seen in the following table, entitled RUNWAY LENGTH REQUIREMENTS,
there are four (4) runway lengths shown for small aircraft type runways. Each of
these provides the proper length to accommodate a certain type of aircraft that will
utilize the runway. The lengths range from 3,000 to 4,200 feet in length, with the
runway length shown for small aircraft seating more than ten (10) passengers being
' 4,600 feet.
There are four (4) different lengths given for large aircraft under 60,000 pounds.
' The large aircraft runway lengths in the table pertain to those general aviation
aircraft, generally jet -powered, of 60,000 pounds or less maximum certificated
takeoff weight. Each of these lengths provides a runway sufficient to satisfy the
' operational requirements of a certain percentage of the fleet at a certain percentage of
the useful load, (i.e., 75 percent of the fleet at 60 percent useful load). The useful
load of an aircraft is defined as the difference between the maximum allowable
structural gross weight and the operating weight empty. In other words, it is the
load that can be carried by the aircraft composed of passengers, fuel and cargo.
Generally speaking, the following aircraft comprise seventy-five percent of the
transport fleet: Learjets, Sabreliners, Citations, Fan Jet Falcons, HS -125, and the
' Westwind.
7
I
Drake Field Muter Plan Update/Draft Report. March. 1991. D.5
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table D2
RUNWAY LENGTH REQUIREMENTS
Drake Field Master Plan Update
Runway Requirement Length (Feet)
Small Aircraft with less than 10 seats
75% of Small Aircraft 3,000
95% of Small Aircraft 3,600
100% of Small Aircraft 4,200
Small Aircraft with more than 10 seats 4,600
Large Aircraft less than 60,000 pounds
75% of fleet /60% useful load 5,500
100% of fleet /60% useful load 6,200
75% of fleet 190% useful load 7,300
100% of fleet /90% useful load 9,500
Gulfstream In' 6,250
All Lengths Based on 1.251' AMSL, 95'F NMT and Maximum EFG 0.2%
a Manufactureer's Operation Manual, Maximum Gross Takeoff Weight
An important factor to note when considering the generalized large aircraft runway
length requirements given in the above table is that the actual length necessary for a
runway is a function of elevation, temperature and aircraft stage length. As
temperatures change on a daily basis, the runway length requirements change
accordingly. The cooler the temperature, the shorter the runway necessary;
therefore, for example, if an airport is designed to accommodate 75 percent of the
fleet at 90 percent useful load, this does not mean that at certain times a larger
business jet cannot use the airport or that aircraft cannot use it with heavier loadings
than that represented by 90 percent of the maximum useful load.
' By examining the various runway lengths provided in the above table it was
determined that to adequately provide for the demands of the aircraft fleet, the
primary runway at the airport should accommodate 100 percent of the large aircraft
' fleet at 60 percent useful load. This requires a runway length of approximately
6,200 feet. Runway 16/34 is presently approximately 6,006 feet in length and,
thus, provides a runway only minimally inadequate in length according to
generalized runway length requirements. No runway extension project will be
required at Drake Field to accommodate the existing or forecasted aircraft fleet. It
should be noted that this does not take into consideration the airline's jet transport
fleet. Although no airlines are currently planning scheduled jet service to Drake
I
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. D.6
I
I
Field, a runway length of 6,000 feet will be limiting if this service should be
contemplated at some point in the future.
In addition, because the wind analysis indicates that the wind coverage offered by
Runway 16/34 is somewhat lacking with respect to the 10.5 -knot crosswind
' component (which is a consideration in accommodating the small aircraft fleet), a
crosswind runway length should be determined. In relation to the small aircraft
fleet, crosswind runways are usually designed to be eighty percent (80%) of the
' required runway length as specified in the above table. Thus, a crosswind runway
to serve Drake Field should be between 2,400 and 3,360 feet in length.
Conclusion. The existing runway length provided by Runway 16/34 is adequate to
accommodate the existing and forecasted aircraft fleet (business jets and turboprop
commuter aircraft), but will be limiting to possible service with larger air carrier jet
aircraft. Due to terrain and surrounding land uses, the extension of Runway 16/34
'
will be difficult.
Runway Pavement Strength. Currently, Runway 16/34 is rated as having an existing
' runway pavement strength of 70,000 pounds single, 95,000 pounds dual, and
156,000 pounds dual-tandum wheel loading.
•' The current critical aircraft utilizing the airport with dual wheel gear is the
Gulfstream in which has a maximum gross takeoff weight of 68,700 pounds. In
the future, the critical aircraft will be the regional jets which also have a dual wheel
' main gear configuration. The Fokker F-28 has a maximum takeoff weight of
approximately 72,800 pounds and the BAe 146 has a maximum takeoff weight of
approximately 89,300 pounds. The pavement strength of Runway 16/34 should be
' designed to accommodate these aircraft. In consideration of the Utility Aircraft fleet
which will be utilizing a possible future crosswind runway, its pavement strength
should be a minimum 12,500 pounds single wheel loading (SwL).
' Conclusion. The rating of the pavement strength of the existing runway indicates
that it is adequate to accommodate the existing and forecasted aircraft fleet;
however, periodic testing needs to be conducted to properly ascertain pavement
' strengths.
Taxiways
Taxiways are constructed primarily to enable the movement of aircraft between the
various functional areas on the airport and the runway system. Some taxiways are
' necessary simply to provide access between apron and runways, whereas other
taxiways become necessary to provide more efficient and safer use of the airfield.
I
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. Much. 1991. D.7
C
I
Runway 16/34 is served by a partial parallel taxiway on its west side with five (5)
taxiway exits. On the east side of the runway, at its northern end, it is served by a
' short parallel taxiway (approximately 1,900 feet in length).
The most important improvement necessary for the Runway 16/34 parallel taxiway
system would be to extend the existing west partial parallel taxiway to the north, in
order to provide a full parallel taxiway on the terminal side of the runway. The
extension of this taxiway will be difficult, because of the close proximity of the
' approach end of Runway 16 to u.s. Highway 71. In addition, the construction of a
full parallel taxiway on the east side of the runway will become necessary as the
number of general aviation facilities grows in the East Hangar Development Area.
' Instrumentation and Lighting
' The existing navigational aids at and around Drake Field provide a straight -in non -
precision instrument approach to Runway 16 and a circling approach to Runway
34. Runway 16/34 is equipped with Medium Intensity Runway Lights (MIRL).
' Runway 16 is equipped with a localizer, a Medium Intensity Approach Light
System (MALS), and Visual Approach Slope Indicators (VAST). Runway 34 is
equipped with Runway End Identifier Lights (REIL).
' Future Approaches. A precision approach serving Drake Field would greatly
enhance the airport's ability to accommodate aircraft operations during times of
inclement weather. The problem with providing an instrument approach at Drake
Field is the surrounding mountainous terrain and resulting obstructions.
The TFR wind analysis in the preceding chapter indicates that a precision approach to
' Runway 34 would provide the best IFR wind coverage. However, obstructions
will probably make a precision approach to Runway 34 unfeasible. The possibility
of providing a precision approach at Drake Field is impacted by the changing state
of the art in instrument approach equipment. Up until recently, FAA has intended
phasing in Microwave Landing Systems (MLS) at some of the nation's air carrier
airports. For several reasons, the future of the MLS program is now uncertain.
' Because mm systems offer the ability to provide curving approach paths, their use
at airports in mountainous areas could be beneficial. Because of the terrain
surrounding the airport an MLS system might be more beneficial at Drake Field than
an ms system; however, because of the uncertainty concerning the future of the
MLS program, the possibility of installing an ms at Drake Field should be closely
examined. If an ILS installation would lower the airport's landing minimums or
•' increase safety and if an ILs could be installed within a time frame which would be
significantly shorter than an MIS installation, its benefit to the efficient and safe
operation of aircraft at Drake Field would be significant.
I
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. D.8
C
L
I
El
I
I
I
I
L
TI
I
Li
I
Conclusion. Because of of existing and potential obstructions in the vicinity of
Drake Field, the installation of a precision approach (ILS or) which will lower the
airport's landing minimums is difficult. An ILS or MLS system should be installed
which will offer precision approach capabilities to Runway 16. In addition a non -
precision approach should be provided to Runway 34. The provision of better
approaches is critical to the ability of the airport to serve as a commercial service
facility.
Future Lighting. Glide path indicator lights are a system of lights which provide
visual vertical approach slope guidance to aircraft during an approach to the
runway. Currently, Runway 16 is equipped with Visual Approach Slope Indicators
(VASI). Runway 34, along with any future runways, should also be equipped with
with glide path indicator lights; however, VASIs are no longer the FAA's standard
recommended equipment. New glide path indicator lights at the airport will be
Precision Approach Path Indicators (PAPI).
Runway End Identifier Lights (REIIs) are a system of lights which provide an
approaching aircraft a rapid and positive identification of the approach end of the
runway. Currently, Runway 34 at Drake Field is equipped with REILs. In the
future, all runways which are not equipped with an approach lighting system
should be equipped with REILs.
Runway 16/34 is equipped with Medium Intensity Runway Lights (MIRL).
Because Runway 16/34 will have a precision approach in the future, High Intensity
Runway Lights (HIRE) should be planned for this runway. In order to provide a
complete facility which will be most beneficial in supplementing the airport's
operational capacity, if a crosswind runway is constructed, it should be equipped
with MIRL. In addition, Medium Intensity Taxiway Lights (MITE), which are
presently in place on all taxiways at the airport, should be placed on all future
taxiways.
Landside Facility Requirements
'• Landside facilities are those facilities which support the airside facilities but are not
actually a part of the aircraft operating surfaces. These consist of such facilities as
terminal buildings, aprons, access roads, hangars and support facilities.
Terminal Area Requirements
Components of the terminal area complex include the terminal building, gate
' posiuons, apron area and ground access. The following paragraphs identify the
facilities required to meet the airport's needs through the planning period.
I
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report March, 1991. D.9
1
I
H
' Along with the information provided in the INVENTORY, FORECAST and CAPACITY
sections of this document, the analysis of the requirements for the various terminal
complex functional areas was performed using the guidance of FAA Advisory
Circular 150/5360-13, Planning and Design Guidelines for Airport Terminal
Facilities.
Gross Terminal Building Area Requirements. The existing temtinal building at Drake
Field contains approximately 20,272 square feet of gross building area. A rule -of -
thumb from FAA Advisory Circular 150/5360-13, Planning and Design Guidelines
'
for Airport Terminal Facilities, indicates that for long-term passenger terminal
planning purposes, the gross passenger terminal building area should provide
between 0.08 and 0.12 square feet per annual enplaned passenger. Using this
' long-term planning guideline would indicate that in the year 2010, when
approximately 305,000 passengers are forecasted to be enplaned at Drake Field, the
terminal building should contain between 24,400 and 36,600 square feet.
' Gate Positions. At the present time there are two (2) passenger loading gates with a
common holding area. Apron loading of passengers is utilized and there are eight
' (8) commuter aircraft parking positions.
The following table provides the requirements for passenger loading gates through
the 20 -year planning period.
Table D3
'
PASSENGER TERMINAL GATE REQUIREMENTS, 1990-2010
Drake Field Master Plan Update
Actual/1990 1995 2000 2010
Number of
Loading Gates 2 3-4 4-5 4-5
Source AC 150/5360.13 - To Be Used In Obtaining Order of Magnitude Estimates Only
Security. The Civil Aviation Security Field Office has classified Drake Field as
requiring Category IV Law Enforcement Officers (LEO) coverage. A project is
under way to update the airport's security fencing. The airlines serving Drake Field
currently have passenger boarding metal detection screening equipment in place.
Ground Access/Parking Requirements. Terminal area ground access facility
requirements based upon the previously presented demand and capacity analysis
' Drake Field Master Plan Update/Dmft Report. March, 1991. O.10
I
I
were developed for the access roadway system, the terminal curb frontage
requirements and vehicle parking.
Terminal Area Access Roadways. The capacity analysis presented in the previous
chapter, indicated that both U.S. Highway 71 and the passenger terminal loop road
' system have adequate capacity to accommodate the forecasted passenger traffic
demand through the planning period. There are, however, two areas in which
future access problems could occur. First, non -terminal related traffic on U.S.
' Highway 71 could negatively impact its ability to properly accommodate ground
traffic accessing the terminal area. Second, the two intersections where the terminal
loop roadway joins with U.S Highway 71 could experience capacity problems. The
demand being placed on the U.S. Highway 71 adjacent to the airport and on the
' intersections of the terminal loop roadway with U.S. Highway 71 should be
analyzed periodically to determine if facility improvements are needed.
' Terminal Area Vehicle Parking. Three types of automobile parking are needed in
the terminal area of the airport. These include public (passenger), rental car and
employee parking. Currently, public parking and employee parking are
' accommodated in a hard -surfaced lot located in the center of the terminal access
roadway loop, while rental car ready parking is located in a hard -surfaced parking
area directly north of the terminal and rental car maintenance parking is located in a
' gravel parking area northwest of the terminal. All of the existing parking areas are
ground level parking lots. The public/employee parking area can accommodate
approximately 418 vehicles. The rental car ready lot can accommodate
approximately 86 vehicles in addition to the gravel surfaced maintenance rental car
'lot.
The following table presents the existing and future projected passenger parking
' space requirements. The numbers are based on the rule -of -thumb that one
passenger parking space should be provided for each 500 annual enplaned
passengers (Planning and Design of Terminal Facility at Non -hub Locations, FAA
Advisory Circular 150/5390-9, April, 1980) and that an increase of 15% in the
necessary number of estimated parking spaces should be provided to minimize the
amount of time to find a parking space (Planning and Design Guidelines for Airport
'• Terminal Facilities, FAA Advisory Circular 150/5360-13, April, 1988). Because
these projections are based on broad rules -of -thumb, their use should be limited to
judging the order of magnitude of future demand.
' The projections in the following table also reflect national statistics which indicate
that 70%-80% of available public parking at airports are occupied by long-term
parkers and a planning guideline which suggests that separate short and long-term
' parking should be provided when the total annual passenger enplanements exceeds
150,000 to 200,000. It is evident from these numbers and local observations that
I
' Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. D.11
I
LI
L
I
I
I
n
L
I
I
I7
J
u
I
I
H
Table D4
PASSENGER PARKING REQUIREMENTS, 1990-2010
Drake Field Master Plan Update
Type Actual
1990'
1995
2000
2010
Short -Term --
Long -Term --
106
246
135
314
157
365
210
491
TOTAL 418
352
449
522
701
a Existing Conditions - No Separation of Short and Long -Tenn Parking
b Projected Requirement
the existing public parking area, with the recently completed additional parking
spaces, is adequate in size to accommodate existing passenger parking demand;
however, additional passenger parking will be required in order to adequately
accommodate future demand.
Terminal Curb Frontage. As presented in the previous chapter, the length of
existing passenger terminal curb (approximately 320 feet) is adequate to
accommodate existing demand (approximately 225 peak hour passengers). In
addition, according to rule -of -thumb planning guidelines (Measuring Airport
Landside Capacity, Transportation Research Board, 1987) the existing terminal
curb frontage will accommodate up to approximately 470 peak hour passengers,
which is approximately the number of peak hour passengers projected at the end of
the planning period. In order to provide adequate capacity and properly
accommodate increasing demand, additional enforcement may be necessary to
prevent use of the terminal curb area by longer term parkers and, as the terminal
building expands, advantages of opportunities should be taken to increase the
length of the terminal curb frontage.
Conclusion. The existing passenger terminal development area at Drake Field is
restricted in size and is located too close to the runway. The passenger terminal
building and passenger parking area can be expanded to the south to adequately
accommodate demand; however, space to develop ancillary facilities for rental cars,
access roadways and other facilities is very limited. Because the terminal building
itself is located inside the FAA specified Building Restriction Line (BRL), the size of
the terminal's aircraft parking apron is limited and, in turn, the size of the aircraft
which can utilize the apron is limited.
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. D.12
H
I
Air Cargo Requirements
' Air cargo at Drake Field is currently handled primarily on the terminal apron and
FBO aprons on the west side of the airport. Air cargo coming into the airport, both
air mail and air freight, is carried primarily on board passenger aircraft and to a
' limited extent by exclusive air cargo aircraft. With regards to future air freight
facilities, it is expected that passenger aircraft will continue to carry air cargo and
that this will require a certain portion of the airport's freight/mail handling facilities
Ito be located in close proximity to the passenger terminal.
In 1990, the airport enplaned approximately 89,683 pounds of air cargo. It is
' forecasted that by the end of the planning period Drake Field will enplane
approximately 162,000 pounds of air cargo. Typical cargo building requirements at
small and medium hub airports range from 300 to 500 annual pounds of cargo per
square foot of cargo building. However, freight carriers who transfer their cargo
' directly from aircraft to trucks, decrease the demand for on airport cargo buildings.
Because of uncertainty about the type of freight carrier which will serve the airport
in the future and the limited amount of historical enplaned cargo data on which to
base forecasts, it is difficult to formulate future facility need guidelines.
Conclusion. Perhaps the most definitive statement which can be made on the need
' for air freight facilities at Drake Field is that demand will increase through the
planning period, and the location of additional air cargo facilities should be
designated and incorporated in the Airport Master Plan.
' General Aviation Requirements
The number and type of projected general aviation operations and based aircraft can
be converted into generalized projections of landside facility needs. The
accompanying table shows the type of facilities and the number of units or acres
needed for that facility in order to meet the potential demand for each development
' phase. As can be seen, the number of acres of itinerant general aviation aircraft
apron increases to nearly nine (8.8) acres by the year 2010. Because the majority
of based aircraft at the airport have historically been stored in hangars, the based
' general aviation aircraft apron needs are projected to less than one (0.6) acre by the
year 2010. This is based on the premise that approximately ninety percent of all
based aircraft owners would require some type of indoor storage (currently 99% of
' based general aviation aircraft are stored in hangars at the airport). Currently, the
airport has approximately ten (10) acres of general aviation apron. The quantity of
existing based aircraft apron will be decreased as additional T -hangars are
' constructed on the apron in the East Hangar Development Area.
The actual type of indoor storage facility to accommodate based aircraft has been
identified as T -hangars and corporate/executive hangars. It is also recognized that
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March. 1991. D.13
L
I
large corporate and/or FBO type hangars will accommodate some of the aircraft
storage demand, although the actual number, size and location of these large
' hangars will depend on user needs and financial feasibility. Therefore,.the quantity
of future large FBO hangars has not been projected; however, potential development
sites will be identified in the AIRPORT PLANS chapter of this document.
Access and perimeter roadway locations and land requirements, as well as auto
parking requirements, are not included in this tabulation because the amount of land
necessary for these facilities will be a function of the location of the other facilities
as well as the most effective routing of these roadways. The table depicts the area
required for general aviation landside facilities during all stages of development.
This will assist in the development of a detailed facility staging discussed in a later
section of the document.
Conclusion. The airport has adequate room to develop the needed facilities to
accommodate general aviation demand through the 20 -year planning period.
Table D5
GENERAL AVIATION FACILITY REQUIREMENTS, 1990-2010
Drake Field Master Plan Update
Total Number Required (In Acres)
Facility 1990' 1995 2000 2010
Itinerant/GA Apron 3.8 6.5 7.5 9.1
Based A/C GA Apron 6.2 0.5 0.6 0.7
Hangar Space
T -hangars (no/acres) 36/5.2 45/4.7 50/5.1 67/6.4
Corporate/Executive(noJacres) 2/1.8 6/4.6 7/5.1 9/6.7
Total 17.0 16.3 18.3 22.9
a Actual existing conditions
BD&C Projections based on FAA AC 150/5300-13
Support Facilities Requirements
In addition to the aviation and airport access facilities described above, there are
several airport support facilities which have quantifiable requirements and which are
vital to the efficient and safe operation of the airport. Facility requirements for the
airport's fuel storage facilities are described below.
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. D.14
I
I
I
LJ
I
El
I
I
I
I
L
L
I
Fuel Storage. The aircraft fueling operation at Drake Field is conducted by the Fixed
Base Operator (FBO). Fuel storage facilities are currently located directly north of
the Airport Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) facility. The fuel storage facility
contains three (3) underground storage tanks: a 12,000 -gallon 100 LL Avgas tank;
a 12,000 -gallon Jet A tank; and a 20,000 -gallon Jet A tank. The existing fuel
storage tanks were installed in 1985 and will be equipped with a leak detection
system by 1994. Future fuel storage requirements listed below are based upon the
provision of a level of storage capacity equal to a week's worth of Jet A fuel
consumption and two week's worth of Avgas consumption. During 1989, an
average of approximately 1,500 gallons of Avgas and approximately 23,200
gallons Jet fuel per week were delivered to the Airport.
Table D6
FUEL STORAGE CAPACITY REQUIREMENTS, 1989-2010
Drake Field Master Plan Update
Actual'
1989"
1995
2000
2010
Avgas (gallons) 12,000
Jet A (gallons) 32,000
3,000
23,200
3,400
32,700
4,400
37,700
5,100
46,800
a Existing Fuel Storage Capacity
b Projected Regwtement
Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) Facility. The ARFF facility at Drake Field is
located on the west side of the airport, directly south of the fuel storage facility.
According to FAR Part 139.317, Drake Field is an Index A airport and, therefore, is
expected to meet Index A requirements with its ARFF equipment and staff (which it
does). Although the current ARFF facility is large enough to meet Index A
requirements, it does not have an adequate training area, which indicates that the
facility will need to be expanded or relocated during the 20 -year planning period.
The Index of a particular airport is determined by a combination of the following:
the length of air carrier aircraft; and the average daily departures of air carrier
aircraft.
, • Index A airports are those which have at least five daily departures of air
carrier aircraft less than 90 feet in length.
' • Index B airports are those which have at least five daily departures of air
carrier aircraft at least 90 feet in length but less than 126 feet in length.
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. D.15
H
I
I
• Index C airports are those which have at least five daily departures of air
carrier aircraft at least 126 feet in length but less than 159 feet in length.
' The following table presents representative commuter and air carrier aircraft along
with their respective lengths. As can be seen the airport will remain an Index A
' facility as long as turboprop aircraft continue to serve as the primary air carrier
aircraft type; as use of the regional jets increases the airport will become and Index
B facility.
' Table D7
REPRESENTATIVE AIR CARRIER AIRCRAFT LENGTHS (In Feet)
'Drake Field Master Plan Update
Turboprop Airaaf Length Jet Aira of Length
BAe Jetstream 31 47.2' BAe 146 200 93.7'
' Embraer Bandeirante 49.5' Fokker F28 89.9' to 97.2'
Beach 1900 57.9' B-737 94.0 to 119.6'
Saab 340 63.8' DC -9 104.4' to 147.8'
'• Embraer Brasilia 64.4' 8-727 133.2' to 153.2'
ATR-42 74.4' B-757 155.3'
DHC Dash 8 300 75.6'
' DHC Dash 7 100 80.7'
Convair 580 81.5'
AIR -72 89.2'
' Summary
• The need for facilities which have been identified in this chapter will now be utilized
• to formulate the overall future airport Development Plan. The formulation of that
overall plan will begin by establishing goals for future airport development and an
' analysis of development alternatives whereby demand for future airport facilities
can be accommodate. These are presented in the following chapter entitled,
DEVELOPMENT CONCEPTS AND ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS.
I
I
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March. 1991. D.16
L
I
I
II
I
n
I
I
I
I
FT
L
I
n
I
Development Concepts and Alternatives Analysis
Introduction
The purpose of this chapter is to present the Development Plan for Drake Field, in
terms of its concept and its reasoning. This chapter is a prelude to presenting the
Conceptual Airport Development Plan. It provides a presentation of the various
influences that formed the basis of the ultimate plan and program for airport
development.
In concert with the status of the airport, some basic assumptions have been
established. These assumptions are intended to direct the future thrust of airport
development and are supported by the aviation activity forecasts and the various
considerations on which the forecasts have been based. Because these assumptions
focus on airport growth and development, they do not subscribe to a static
condition or even minimal expansion. Instead, these assumptions center on
aggressive airport enhancement and development, and directly relate to community
needs and the regional economy.
The first assumption states that Drake Field is the primary commercial service
airport serving northwest Arkansas. With this role in mind, the airport facility will
be developed to transport criteria with a precision runway approach desirable.
Commercial air service at the airport will increase during the planning period. It
was determined that the role of the airport would be that of serving and
accommodating the transport aircraft fleet including business jet and regional
commuter aircraft, with runway lengths and airside dimensional criteria sufficient to
accommodate this type of traffic under most weather conditions. Thus, the airport
should be designed to precision approach standards, with the proper clearances
appropriate to that designation. As identified in the previous FACILITY
REQUIREMENTS chapter, the existing runway length of approximately 6,000 feet is
capable of accommodating the existing and forecast aircraft fleet under virtually all
conditions, with stage lengths specified by current operators. Therefore, no
runway extension is recommended during the planning period.
The second assumption is that this Master Plan is intended to identify a
Development Plan and Strategy which will maximize the long-term viability of
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991.
E.1
J
H
I
J
H
nfl
I
I
H
I
J
C
I
L
I
I
H
Drake Field as the primary commercial service airport serving Northwest Arkansas.
The forecast numbers presented previously indicate that the airport in its present
location can accommodate the anticipated demand through the end of the 20 -year
planning period. However, as identified in the FACILITY REQUIREMENTS chapter,
the airport is physically constrained in several areas and, as air carrier aviation
activity increases through the latter stages of the planning period, these constraints
will begin to severely impact the ability of the airport to properly and safely
function.
The third assumption focuses on the need to accommodate and attract the forecasted
operations of all aviation types: commercial airline, business oriented general
aviation, and recreation oriented general aviation (including antique aircraft) as
expressed by the Annual Service Volume capabilities. Drake Field's role as a
commercial service airport and a business/corporate aviation activity center is
increasing. The increasing numbers of enplanements and the great number of
itinerant aircraft operations (many of which are corporate jet and turboprop
operations) is indicative of the significant role that the airport is playing in the
regional business economy.
The fourth assumption focuses on the relationship of the airport to off -airport land
uses and the compatible and complimentary development of each. This is inherent
in the design considerations and placement of facilities so as to complement, to the
maximum extent possible, off -airport development, and to ensure the continued
compatibility of the airport environs with the operation of the airport.
In addition, the potential development of a new Regional Airport to serve
Northwest Arkansas must be taken into consideration. Because of growing
commercial service and air cargo demand in the region, along with the constraints at
Drake Field, the possibility of developing a new Regional Airport is currently being
discussed. If the new airport is built, there will be an impact on the type and
amount of aviation demand occurring at Drake Field. One basis for the formulation
of the Development Plan for Drake Field will be the forecasts which have
previously been presented (without the new Regional Airport). In addition, the
final section of this DEVELOPMENT CONCEPTS AND ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
chapter will examine the impact of the new Regional Airport on Drake Field. As a
result, two Conceptual Development Plan Scenarios for Drake Meld will be presented. The
first wig be based on Drake Field continuing to serve Northwest Arkansas as the primary
commercial air service airport. The second will be based on the development eta new
Regional Airport for commercial air service and air freight activity.
Goals for Development
Accompanying these assumptions are several goals which have been established for
purposes of directing the plan and its content and establishing continuity in the
[hake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. E.2
C
J
El
future for airport development. These goals take into account several categorical
considerations relating to the needs of the airport both in the short-term and the
' long -terra, including safety, noise, capital improvements, land use compatibility,
financial and economic conditions, public interest and investment, and community
recognition and awareness. While all are project oriented, some obviously
represent more tangible activities than others. However, all are deemed important
and appropriate to the future of the airport. These are inherent in the following
goals as well as the Development Plan and Program.
It is the intent of this Airport Master Plan to:
I. Provide effective direction for the future development of Drake Field
through the preparation of a sound plan and through adherence to the
adopted development program.
I. Enhance the self-sustaining capability of the airport and ensure the
financial feasibility of airport development.
• Accommodate forecast aircraft operations in a safe and efficient
' manner by the provision of proper facilities and services on or near
the airport.
• Encourage the development of additional business and industrial
operations at the airport.
• Encourage the protection of existing public and private investment of
land and facilities, and encourage the resolution of existing and
'
potential land use and environmental conflicts both on and off airport
property.
I. Plan and develop the passenger terminal area to be coordinated and
integrated with all other aspects of the airside and landside
development at the airport.
I. Develop land acquisition priorities related to future airport
development, airport safety and land use compatibility.
INoise and Land Use
Certainly noise impacts are significant ingredients in establishing a basis for sound
land use planning practices within the full environs of the airport. In many cases
noise impacts encompass a greater area than those covered by other considerations;
however, safety factors in the form of runway protection zones and approach
surfaces are additional ingredients on which to base land use decisions and
implementation practices. The same land use planning practices and mechanisms
are appropriate for both noise and safety concerns and should be employed in terms
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. E.3
J
I
I
I
L
I
I
J
I
of establishing a proper and realistic set of land use recommendations for the airport
environs.
Noise levels, noise contours and noise metric methodology, along with impacts on
surrounding land uses have been presented in two previous studies, the Drake Field
Airport Noise Control and Land Use Compatibility Study and Master Plan
(ANCLUC) published in 1983 and the Drake Field FAR Part 150 Noise Exposure
and Land Use Compatibility Program published in 1986 and approved in 1989.
Operation forecasts, flight tracks and aircraft fleet mix presented in these previous
documents were compared with existing and forecast operations presented in this
Master Plan Update. Except for the commuter airline maintenance run-up operation
which no longer occurs at Drake Field, it was found that the aircraft operations data
used to generate the previous studies' noise contours were not significantly
different from the data generated in the formulation of this Master Plan Update;
therefore, with the deletion of the run-up noise, the previous noise contours remain
valid. The noise contours which reflect the existing noise environment and the
future noise environment are illustrated in the following figures, entitled EXISTING
NOISE CONTOURS WITH EXISTING LAND USE, 1990 and FUTURE NOISE CONTOURS
WITH EXISTING LAND USE, 2010.
In addition, the land use recommendations which were presented in the ANCLUC
and in the Part 150 Study remain valid.
Airside Development Concepts and Alternatives
Introduction
' To meet the projected demand through the year 2010 (the end of the 20 -year
planning period) several alternatives for airport development, were evaluated as to
the feasibility of each. The forecast operations and the goals of the community
' relative to aviation development and economic enhancement were considered.
These generalized alternatives are outlined and discussed in the following narrative.
Following a review of these airside development alternatives, the purpose of which
'• is to fulfill major facility requirements (basic runway and taxiway configuration),
alternatives and recommendations for landside development are presented.
I
C
I
C
Concepts
There are two primary elements of the airport which compose the airside category
of facilities: runways and taxiways. Since these elements represent the nucleus of
the aviation facility, around which all other elements or development activities
revolve, it is paramount that this "framework" be established initially. Essential,
also, is that this base be established with a commitment and knowledge that the
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991.
E.4
I
= = = = = m = = = = = = = m = = m m m
Sowc: __ogiaphyand __y
f
. \
' ` k §
§ s n_ ±�
%.
r / >
/11/4
® /
/
LJJ
T ■ ■ /
E F ■
■| E % | I
@ c E a — 22
E E
�■
ig
> ��
| ■
m= r m r m=== m= r = m m m m
Sown: Aerotl PhclopraPMy and Ground Survey
//
J W
� 3
a>s
lv F73/
1SN tit` J7/( `` i
_� � • �• m m
,s
ii c v_
w C .Ca. 3 e FA
n oz
I II
I
I
I
Li
ultimate development of this framework will be commensurate with the needs,
demands and expectations of the airport, and that the demonstrated and expected
associated uses, facilities and activities can be accommodated, and will be
positioned appropriately and beneficially as the airport matures.
' Runways. Specific requirements concerning the number of required runways, their
orientation, length and types of approaches were identified in the previous chapter.
The main objective of the following alternative analysis is to present and assess
' those alternatives which will produce a runway system that will satisfy the
previously identified runway facility requirements.
' Drake Field is structured around a single runway, Runway 16/34. As mentioned
earlier, Runway 16/34 is 6,006 feet in length having a width of 100 feet. Runway
16/34 is adequate in length to accommodate the majority of the existing and
' forecasted aircraft fleet. With the present forecast of aircraft types utilizing Drake
Field in the future, there is no proposed runway extension within the planning
period.
' Runway 16/34 currently has a non -precision approach from the north and a visual
approach from the south. A future precision approach is planned from the north,
with a non -precision approach planned from the south. Where the existing and
' future Runway Protection Zones (RPzs) extend off of airport property or beyond
existing avigation easements, land or RPz easements should be acquired, and
development in the area of the existing and future RPZS should be restricted to
' conform with FAA requirements.
In addition to the primary Runway 16/34, operational demand from the small
t general aviation aircraft fleet (including antique aircraft) could justify the future
development of a separate general aviation runway. In order to properly
accommodate antique aircraft, a turf runway may be preferred. From a planning
standpoint, the ability to develop a future general aviation runway should be
protected and the location of that facility is explored in the following alternatives.
It should be pointed out that funding for an additional runway at Drake Field for
small general aviation aircraft hinges upon the demand for such a facility.
Taxiways. The existing taxiway system at Drake Field, consists of a partial parallel
taxiway serving the west side of Runway 16/34 and a partial parallel taxiway
'• serving the Runway's east side. This system often requires taxiing aircraft to cross
the Runway, which encourages unauthorized runway incursions and potential
safety problems. As such, one of the taxiway development priorities at Drake Field
•' is to reduce the potential for runway incursions. The taxiway alternatives specify
several taxiway improvements which will provide varying degrees of improved
aircraft access to future airport development areas and which will improve the flow
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March. 1991. E.7
1
P
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
of taxiing aircraft as demands on the taxiway system increase with the anticipated
increases in aviation activity.
Alternatives
The following written and graphic descriptions of alternatives for the airside
development at Drake Field include both taxiway and runway elements. These are
intended to illustrate potential runway and taxiway configurations, although
individual elements from one alternative could be matched with elements from
another alternative. In other words, the selected alternative is likely to be a
combination of the individual elements contained in the alternatives described in the
following paragraphs.
Alternative One. This alternative, illustrated in the following figure entitled
ALTERNATIVE ONE, indicates the development of a future hard -surfaced parallel
general aviation runway located approximately 700 feet east of existing Runway
16/34. This future runway would also serve as a parallel taxiway and provide
access between the approach end of Runway 34 and the East Hangar Development
Area.
Alternative Two. As indicated in the following figure, Alternative Two illustrates the
' development of a new turf runway with a 15/33 alignment. This alignment allows
the southern end of the new runway to be located as far north as possible without
the Air Traffic Control Tower becoming an obstruction problem as defined by FAR
' Part 77 criteria. The new turf runway as illustrated in Alternative Two can be
developed to a length of approximately 2,500 feet.
Alternative Two also illustrates the development of full parallel taxiway on the west
side of the runway. This is accomplished by extending the existing taxiway to the
north, from its existing northern end to the northern end of Runway 16. The
centerline of the taxiway extension as illustrated in Alternative Two is separated
from the runway centerline by approximately 300 feet. The development of this
taxiway extension would require the relocation of a portion of Highway 71.
' Alternative Three. This alterative illustrates a proposed alignment for a new turf
runway which is parallel to the primary runway and has a 700 foot separation
between runway centerlines, which is the minimum allowed by FAA planning
' standards. The location and height of the Air Traffic Control Tower, along with
consideration of FAR Part 77 obstruction criteria, dictate that the northern threshold
of this runway can be located no closer than approximately 400 feet south of the
' taxiway leading to the East Hangar Development Area (Taxiway C). This new
runway can be developed to a length of approximately 2,450 feet without crossing
the drainage channel on the south end of airport property.
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. Much, 1991. E.8
1
r--_=-_ m r m m m 0 0 m r m r
400
000
400
100
.l
u 0 0
P Co
Q c 0 . 9P0o11�
n 011111
I
O
LjJ
Fb
O
0
a " 0
P
a
O
O
I
1
I
I
400
200
0
400
000
m
0
m m m m m m m m m m m m S m m m= m
400
CD
200
0
400
1,00
Co
m
R
I
I
I
I
I
El
II
I
I
I
I
Alternative Three provides for the development of a full parallel taxiway on the east
side of the runway. This will aid in runway access for the general aviation aircraft
utilizing the East Hangar Development Area. The new parallel taxiway on the east
side of the primary runway is illustrated as being separated from existing Runway
16/34 by 400 feet (the minimum separation specified for a facility accommodating
Transport Airport Design Group Three aircraft).
In addition, Alternative Three illustrates the extension of the parallel taxiway on the
west side of the runway. As with Alternative Two, a runway/taxiway separation of
300 feet is utilized; however, the last section of the taxiway will leave the alignment
which is parallel to the runway and run parallel to Highway 71. This will allow the
development of a full parallel taxiway on the west side of the runway without
displacing Highway 71. This alignment would also require that the aircraft hold
line be located farther away from the runway threshold than usual in order to
achieve minimum hold line to runway centerline separation (250 feet).
Alternative Four. This alternative calls for the development of a new turf runway
with a 03/21 alignment. This northeast/southwest alignment avoids possible
obstruction problems related to the Air Traffic Control Tower. The new runway is
provided access to the existing runway/taxiway system through the use of a stub
taxiway which connects the approach end of Runway 34 and the approach end of
Runway 03. The development of Runway 03/21 provides the advantage of leaving
the airport property directly east of the main runway open for aviation and
commercial/industrial development; however, much of the land on which Runway
03/21 would be developed is within or near the flood hazard zone of the West Fork
of the White River.
Alternative Four also illustrates the modification of the west side taxiway system to
provide the 400 foot separation between the runway centerline and the parallel
taxiway centerline. This change in taxiway alignment will require extensive
modification of existing aircraft parking aprons in order to accommodate proper
'
taxiway clearances. In addition, the new taxiway alignment near the approach end
of Runway 16 will require the realignment of Highway 71.
L
L
I
I
Li
Conclusion
Runways. All of the runway alignments satisfy the need to provide a future general
aviation runway. Alternative Four with Runway 03/21 provides a crosswind
orientation with an ultimate length of approximately 3,000 feet. The crosswind
orientation is good for small aircraft when considered in conjunction with the
primary runway. However, Runway 03/21 does not provide the best single
orientation for wind coverage. With the intention of the new runway being to
provide a specialized facility for small general aviation aircraft, the reduced wind
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991.
E.12
I J
a
n
0
on lnbO
p a0
9POa
•
G
'INIi
nLl
et-
a 44
I
9
• ` o
_
e
FmF�
�
o
a
a
„ig
m
F
O
0
O
w
I
I
coverage somewhat reduces the effectiveness of the runway. In addition, the 03/21
alignment places the runway within the 100 year flood hazard zone of the West
Fork of the White River. Because of the reduced wind coverage and the flood
hazard, Alternative Four's Runway 03/21 alignment is less attractive.
' Runway 15/33, as illustrated in Alternative Two, provides similar wind coverage to
the alignment of the primary runway and avoids obstruction problems related to the
existing ATCT. This alignment is, however, awkward because it is only 10off the
primary runway alignment. Because of potential approach conflicts, runways with
narrow heading differences are to be avoided. As a result, a parallel runway
alignment with the secondary runway being offset 700 feet east of the existing
primary runway is considered to be the most advantageous location for a new
general aviation runway. As illustrated in Alternative Three the new runway would
provide good wind coverage, does not generate crossing approach conditions and is
not within a flood hazard area. The turf runway accommodates use by antique
aircraft and provides the opportunity for a properly located taxiway on the east side
of the primary runway to serve the East Hangar Development Area. In addition, if
long-term demand dictates, the turf runway can be paved to provide a second hard
surfaced runway at the airport.
The negative aspect of Runway 15/33 is that the length of the runway is limited
both to the north and to the south. On the north end, to allow for adequate
approach slope clearance of the Air Traffic Control Tower, the northern threshold
must be set approximately 400 feet south of Taxiway C. On the south end of the
runway, the length is limited by the drainage area on the southeast side of airport
property. These conditions limit the runway length to approximately 2,450 feet.
Taxiways
Taxiways. On the west side of the existing runway, the parallel taxiway extension
as illustrated in Alternative Three is the most practical. It can be accomplished with
a minimum of cost, preserving the existing aircraft parking aprons and without
requiring the displacement of u.s. Highway 71. This option does not, however,
provide the prescribed runway/taxiway separation (400 feet for Transport Airplane
' Design Group m) and it requires the hold position be located slightly south of the
runway end.
East of the existing runway, the taxiway development as illustrated in Alternative
Three is the preferred option. Providing a parallel taxiway which is offset from the
existing runway by 400 feet meets design criteria and allows the development of a
' parallel turf runway which would be offset 700 feet from the existing runway. This
parallel taxiway would provide access from the East Hangar Development Area to
the approach end of Runway 34. The existing partial parallel taxiway on the east
side of Runway 16/34 (north of Taxiway C) is currently offset 300 feet east of
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. E.14
I
n
Runway 16/34. When a full parallel taxiway is developed on the east side of the
runway, the Development Plan indicates that the existing east side partial parallel
' taxiway should be relocated to provide a 400 foot runway centerline to taxiway
centerline separation. It should be noted that several factors may influence the
location of the parallel taxiway on the east side of the runway (i.e. future location of
' precision approach instrumentation, cost of earthwork embankment, and
relationship with floodplain southeast of the airport). Although 400 feet separation
between runway centerline and taxiway centerline is specified by criteria, a
' separation of 300 feet should also be considered during engineering construction
studies due to the influence of these rated factors.
' Landside Development Concepts
Landside facilities consist of aircraft parking aprons, hangar development areas,
'
terminal area development and airport access. With forecast activity levels, landside
facility deficiencies relate primarily to the passenger terminal, aircraft storage,
vehicular access and automobile parking.
Terminal Area. Several improvements are recommended for the terminal area at the
airport. The terminal building itself contains approximately 20,000 square feet and
t is adequate to accommodate short-range passenger needs at Drake Field. The
terminal building is a single story structure and utilizes apron loading and unloading
of passengers. Forecasts of passenger enplanements indicate that the terminal
facilities will need to be expanded to accommodate future demands. When
expansion is required, the building can be extended to the south.
' Future expansion of the terminal at Drake Field will require a careful examination of
the building's functional layout and the ability of that layout to efficiently and safely
serve increased passenger volume and the resulting increased number of air carrier
and/or commuter aircraft operations. Current estimates, based on forecasts of
passenger enplanements, indicate that a terminal facility with up to 34,000 square
feet in total area and with as many as five (5) passenger loading gates will be
required before the end of the 20 -year planning period. This would require the
' addition of approximately 14,000 square feet of terminal building area and three (3)
gates.
' The automobile parking area west of the terminal has recently been expanded to
accommodate approximately 150 additional parking spaces. In consideration of the
forecasts of passenger enplanements and the resulting facility requirements
' determination, this expanded parking area will accommodate demand until the mid -
1990s. When additional expansion of the passenger terminal parking facility is
required, it should take place on the west and south sides of the existing parking
' area.
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. E.15
C
P
Access to the terminal area is currently provided via U. S. Highway 71 which is
located west of the airport. The terminal access road is a one-way "horseshoe"
' configuration with both ends connected to U.S. Highway 71. The access roadway
encircles the terminal parking area and widens in front of the terminal building to
provide a passenger drop-off/pick-up area. Required improvements to this
roadway include: widening the existing one lane sections to two lanes and the
development of a recirculation road adjacent to U.S. Highway 71 which will allow
exiting terminal visitors to "recirculate" to the terminal entrance or parking entrance
'• without utilizing the highway. In addition, the entrance roadway will be required
to move south to accommodate the expansion of the terminal building and the
expansion of the passenger parking facility.
' Aircraft Storage. Increased aircraft storage is represented on the Development Plan
by apron, T -hangar and executive/corporate hangar development areas. Drake Field
is presently served with adequate aircraft parking aprons to accommodate existing
numbers of based aircraft, however the space for itinerant aircraft is limited. The
• terminal apron is adequate to accommodate existing demand by commuter aircraft.
As demand increases the terminal apron will be expanded to the south in
'• conjunction with the required expansion of the terminal building. Apron areas
serving itinerant general aviation aircraft are primarily located on the west side of
the airport, south of the passenger terminal. This area is limited in size
' and its expansion will be difficult. The Development plan calls for several "infill"
apron areas to be constructed to maximize development on the west side of the
airport
' Additional T -hangar, executive hangar and FBO/corporate hangar development is
proposed for the East Hangar Development Area. In addition, "infill" sites for two
corporate or FBO hangars have been identified on the west side of the runway. This
recognizes the need to maximize the opportunity for the development
business/commercial aviation uses on the west side of the Drake Field.
' The development of the executive/corporate hangars and the T -hangars is demand
dictated. The number, size and location of these hangars will vary depending on
the demand for the particular type. The important criteria which airport
' management should keep in mind when making placement decisions within the
hangar development areas are:
' • Each executive/corporate hangar should be supplied with taxiway
access, automobile access and adjacent automobile parking. This is
most efficiently accomplished when a row of hangars is developed
and supplied with taxiway access on one side and automobile access
and parking on the other side.
F
' I Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March. 1991. E.16
C
I
• Each T -hangar should be developed with taxiway access to both sides
of the hangar. Automobile access and parking should be provided to
• the taxiway area near the T -hangars. This will allow T -hangar users to
• park an automobile in their hangar while flying their aircraft or to park
in a relatively close automobile parking lot.
• It is most efficient to "double load" both the taxiway access and the
automobile access routes with hangars. In other words the access
taxiways are lined with hangars on both sides and the automobile
roadways/parking areas are lined with hangars on both sides.
Associated Development. Directly east of the runway and to the south of the East
Hangar Development Area is a tract of land (approximately 16 acres) which could
be developed into commercial or industrial facilities. It is preferable that
development in this area be for businesses which find it advantageous to be located
in an area which offers taxiway access to an airport facility such as Drake Field.
Conceptual Airport Development Plans
As previously stated, serious consideration is currently being given to the
' development of a new Regional Airport to serve the growing air cargo and
commercial service demand in Northwest Arkansas. If that airport is developed, its
presence will certainly impact the type and quantity of aircraft operations occurring
' at Drake Field. The following narrative and illustrations describe Conceptual
Development Plans for Drake Field with and without the development of a new
Regional Airport.
Scenario A Conceptual Development Plan
(Without New Regional Airport)
' The Development Plan for Drake Field without a new Regional Airport has been
described verbally in the preceding paragraphs and was formulated to accommodate
future demand at the airport as presented in the AIRPORT ACTIVITY FORECASTS
chapter of this document. A graphic presentation of that plan is presented in the
following illustration, SCENARIO A CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
I
L_1
' Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. Much, 1991. E.17
I
a
0
04
ow,
It -1
a
W
a
I
ca
I
I
J
J
I
• The intent in developing a new Regional Airport is to provide
' improved commercial air service and air cargo facilities. If the new
airport cannot be developed to provide better facilities than those
offered at Drake Field, it will not be constructed. Therefore, it can be
' assumed that development of a new Regional Airport which provides
commercial air service will effectively end the operation of commercial
airlines at Drake Field.
• The improved facilities at the new Regional Airport could also impact
the amount and type of general aviation traffic expected at the airport.
On the negative side, business and corporate general aviation based
' aircraft and operations will to some degree be drawn to the best airport
facilities in the region (longest runways, best all-weather operational
capabilities, best FBO facilities, etc.).
I
Scenario B Conceptual Development Plan
(With New Regional Airport)
The development of a new Regional Airport to serve Northwest Arkansas will
impact the demand for future facilities at Drake Field. Several assumptions can be
derived concerning that impact.
'J
I
I
I
L
L
I
L
On the positive side, the relocation of business and corporate aviation
operations from existing airports to the new Regional Airport will be
tempered by travel time between the new airport and the business
location. In addition, because of the impact and scale of the industrial
infrastructure planned in association with the new Regional Airport
and the resulting economic spinoffs, corporate and business aviation
activity could increase at all of the airports in the Northwest Arkansas.
It will be assumed that Scenario B general aviation operations will
increase at the same rate and to the same levels as those forecast in
Scenario A.
The third assumption relates to the time -frame for the development of
the new Regional Airport. Because of the strength of the support
currently being demonstrated (from both the public and private
sectors), the planning and construction of the new airport could
proceed rapidly. Optimistic projections indicate that the new airport
could be operational within three years. There are many
opportunities, however, for there to be delays in the construction of a
complex facility such as an airport and a ten year period between the
start of planning and initial operation could realistically be
encountered. The important implication in this time -frame formulation
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March. 1991.
E.19
I
I
for the new airport construction is that Drake Field will continue to be
the primary commercial service airport for Northwest Arkansas until
1 the new airport is complete. Although the date is uncertain, Scenario
B forecasts are based upon the new airport becoming operational in
the five- to ten-year time frame.
' It is important that safety and efficiency improvements planned for
Drake Field, in its role as the primary commercial service airport in
' Northwest Arkansas, continue to be implemented until the
development of the new airport is a certainty (the start of construction
is the best indication of that certainty). In order to guarantee the
' provision of adequate aviation facilities to serve Fayetteville and
Northwest Arkansas, it is suggested that Scenario One Development
Plan recommendations be followed until the development of the New
Regional Airport is a certainty. At that time, recommendations
provided in Scenario B Development Plan should be utilized.
Utilizing these assumptions, the previously presented forecasts of aviation activity
' can be modified to provide a basis for the Scenario B Development Plan. A
summary of those modified forecasts is provided in the following table entitled,
SCENARIO B SUMMARY OF AVIATION ACTIVITY FORECASTS, 1990-2010.
I
Li
I
Li
I1
I
I
' Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. E.20
I
Table El
SCENARIO B SUMMARY OF AVIATION ACTIVITY FORECASTS, 1990-2010
Drake Field Master Plan Update
Operations
1990'
1995
2000
2005
2010
Air Carrier
18,402
30,000
0
0
0
Military
256
300
400
450
500
General Aviation
28,565
32,000
40,000
46,000
53,000
TOTAL OPERATIONS
47,223
62,350
40,400
46,450
53,500
Passenger Enpianements
TOTAL ENPLANEMENTSb
153,093
195,000
0
0
0
General Aviation Based Aircraft
Single Engine
34
38
41
46
52
Multi -Engine
14
17
19
22
24
Turboprop
1
4
6
8
9
Business Jet
3
4
4
5
5
Helicopter
0
0
1
1
2
TOTAL BASED AIRCRAFT
52
63
71
82
92
an' —
b Commercial Airline Passenger Enplanements
For Additional Information See Preceeding Airport Activity Forecasts Chapter
The impact of these assumptions, and the resulting aviation activity forecasts, on
the requirements for future facilities at Drake Field can now be categorized and
detailed. The following paragraphs and illustration, entitled SCENARIO B
CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, describe the development of Drake Field if a
new Regional Airport is constructed which provides commercial airline facilities.
Runway Facilities. The primary Runway at Drake Field will remain at its existing
length and width. In addition, because its construction will only be undertaken if
the demand for a specialized general aviation facility is demonstrated, the proposed
turf runway remains an element of the Scenario B Development Plan.
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report March. 1991. E.21
400
IN
W
IN
II
N A
2
0
0„
30.
�
v
n
m�
W
a o 0
oo 0b0
0 �
CIO ,.
C °
00
o
0
a
ou
�0 0
I.:
E!Ii'
O
I
I
H
I
' Taxiway Facilities. Because of existing runway incursion and safety concerns the
proposed extension of the parallel taxiway on the west side of the runway remains a
'• viable improvement project in Scenario B. The east side parallel taxiway has been
deleted from proposed improvements in Scenario B.
Approaches. The improvement of approaches should remain a priority project at
Drake Field in both Scenario A and Scenario B. Therefore, the Scenario B
Development Plan indicates the development of a precision approach from the north
and a non -precision approach from the south.
' Terminal Area Requirements. Obviously, this is the area of the airport which is most
severely impacted by the relocation of commercial service operations to a new
airport. It might seem most practical and economical to stop all improvements to
terminal facilities in anticipation of the new airport. In reality, this solution is not
considered practical. The smooth and efficient operation of the passenger facilities
' at Drake Field is too important to the City of Fayetteville and Northwest Arkansas
to simply ignore needed improvements.
' The two passenger related facilities which are most indicative of demand
outstripping the facility's capacity are passenger parking and passenger loading
gates. The passenger parking improvements which have recently been completed,
will, according to forecasts and projections of facility requirements, accommodate
'
demand until approximately 1995. Because apron loading of passengers is utilized
at Drake Field, the two (2) existing passenger loading gates offer some flexibility in
accommodating a greater number of passengers than planning guidelines indicate.
' The forecast of enplaned passengers and resulting projection of facility
requirements indicates that the airport will require additional passenger loading
gates by the mid -1990s.
' The day-to-day operation and capacity of terminal passenger facilities (especially
parking and loading gates) should be watched closely for indications of needed
' improvements. Improvements which will enable Drake Field to efficiently
accommodate passenger demand will have to be implemented until a new airport is
operational. Once the new Regional Airport is operational, the terminal area at
' Drake Field can be rehabilitated for another use. The Scenario B Development Plan
indicates that the terminal area will be utilized for general aviation purposes,
although other users, including non -aviation uses, should be considered.
'• General Aviation Aircraft Storage Facilities. The availability of based and itinerant
aircraft parking aprons at Drake Field will be greatly enhanced if commercial air
service facilities are relocated to another airport. Therefore, the Scenario B
' Development Plan does not call for the the additional construction of apron facilities
in the terminal area.
1 Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March. 1991. E.23
I
n
H
As stated above, the development of the new Regional Airport will almost certainly
impact the amount of forecasted general aviation activity at Drake Field. However,
' the degree to which the development of the new airport will impact general aviation
activity at Drake Field cannot at this point be quantified. Because the development
of new general aviation hangar facilities at the airport is totally related to exhibited
' demand (hangars will not be built unless demand is present), Scenario B
Development plan identifies the same potential corporate, executive and T -hangar
development areas which were identified in Scenario A Development Plan.
I
I
n
I
I
I
I
Li
I
I
n
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March. 1991. E.24
I
I
7
Airport Plans
' introduction
' The Development Plan for Drake Field has evolved from an analysis of many
considerations. Among these are: aviation demand; aviation forecasts; a capacity
analysis; aircraft operational characteristics and requirements inherent to the airport;
'• facility requirements and modifications; physical issues and conditions; and, the
general development direction for the airport as expressed in the previously
presented statement of goals.
' Because previous chapters have established and quantified the future development
needs of Drake Field, the various elements of the "Plan" are categorically reviewed
'• here in an outline and graphic format. A brief written description of the individual
elements of the Development Plan for Drake Field, is accompanied by a graphic
description presented in the form of the Airport Layout Plan (ALP), the Approach
' and Clear Zone Profiles, the Airspace Plan and the Terminal Area Plans.
It is realized that future demand for facilities cannot be totally predicted at Drake
Field, and that the development of the new regional airport, which is presently
being considered, will impact the need for facilities at Drake Field. Therefore,
where appropriate, along with the following summary of the proposed
Development Plan's individual elements, the demand which will trigger the need for
'• the future facility will be identified. In addition, although there can be only one
Airport Layout Plan, the text will discuss the impact of the new Regional Airport on
facility requirements at Drake Field and two sets of projects, phasing and costs will
' be presented in the following Development Program chapter (one set with and one
set without the new regional airport).
IAirport Layout Plan
•' The Airport Layout Plan (ALP) is a graphic depiction of existing and ultimate airport
facilities which will be required to enable the airport to properly accommodate the
forecasted future demand. In addition, the ALP provides detailed information on
airport and runway design criteria which is necessary to define relationships with
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. F.1
LJ
n
n
applicable standards. The ALP illustrates both airside and landside facilities. The
following illustration, entitled AIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN, and the following
' paragraphs describe the major components of the future airport development plan.
Runway System
' The existing runway, Runway 16/34, is adequate in length and width (6,006' x
100') to accommodate the demand which has been forecast to occur at Drake Field.
' In addition, the existing runway has adequate capacity to safely accommodate the
forecast number of aircraft operations at the airport.
The ALP also illustrates the development of a future parallel turf runway. The new
runway is to be located approximately 700 feet east of the existing runway. The
need for the new turf runway will be dictated by the increased use of the airport by
' antique aircraft and/or by increased general aviation training activity.
Taxiway System
' The primary taxiway improvement illustrated on the ALP is the extension of the
parallel taxiway on the west side of Runway 16/34. This taxiway (Taxiway B) will
be extended to the north approximately 1,000 feet to provide a full parallel taxiway.
Because of planned development on the east side of the airport for general aviation
purposes, a full parallel taxiway is also planned on the east side of the runway. The
future full parallel taxiway on the east side of the runway will be separated from the
' runway (centerline to centerline) by approximately 400 feet and will require the
relocation of the existing east side partial parallel taxiway, which is located 300 feet
from the runway centerline.
Landside Development
As illustrated in the previously presented CONCEPTUAL AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT
'
PLANS, the ALP also allocates development areas for landside facilities. Those
allocations include:
• West of Runway 16/34: This area presently contains the majority of
the airport's landside facilities, including: the passenger terminal
building, automobile parking and ramp; rental car facilities; flight
'• service station facilities; FBO hangars; corporate hangars; ARFF
facility; and, general aviation ramp area. Recommended future
facilities include the expansion of the passenger terminal, along with
' terminal auto parking and the terminal apron; the construction of new
general aviation apron and hangars; and, the relocation of the ARFF
facility.
1
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March. 1991. F.2
I
I
U
U
I
I]
I
The landside development on the airport is further detailed in the Terminal Area
' Plans section of this chapter. Illustrations and accompanying discussion of the
Terminal Area Plans are contained in the following pages.
The need to maintain and expand the passenger terminal facilities to
meet demand at Drake Feld is critical until these facilities are provided
at another airport serving the passenger needs of Northwest Arkansas.
If Drake Field's passenger terminal facilities are diminished or
eliminated, the area which is presently occupied by the terminal and its
support facilities can be utilized for other aviation or non -aviation
functions.
• East of Runway 16/34: This area presently contains a large general
aviation apron with three T -hangar structures, an FBO hangar and an
aircraft runup apron with a noise barrier. As illustrated on the ALP,
This area will continue to accommodate general aviation facilities in
the future.
Impact of New Regional Airport
The impact of the development of a New Regional Airport to serve Northwest
' Arkansas upon facility requirements at Drake Field primarily relates to passenger
terminal facilities. The proposed taxiway improvements listed above are related to
safety and, therefore, should be completed whether or not a new regional airport is
' developed. The improvements related to the new turf runway and other general
aviation facilities are related to demand. If the demand generated by antique aircraft
and training increases significantly, the new turf runway will be necessary. The
same justification applies to general aviation hangars, demand will indicate the need
'
to develop such facilities. If the demand does not occur the facilities should not be
developed.
' The passenger terminal facilities at Drake Field relate to the new airport in a
somewhat different manner. If the new regional airport is constructed to
accommodate commercial airlines, Drake Field will no longer provide commercial
' passenger service. This would mean, if the Regional Airport is established, that the
area which is presently occupied by passenger terminal facilities at the airport
should be utilized for other functions (either aviation or non -aviation activities).
' Airspace Plan
' The Airspace Plan for the airport is based on Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR)
Part 77, Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace. In order to protect the airport's
airspace and approaches from hazards that could affect the safe and efficient
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. F.4
I
I
I
I
I
operation of aircraft, Federal criteria contained in FAR Part 77 has been established
to provide guidance in controlling the height of objects in the vicinity of the airport.
FAR Part 77 criteria specify a set of imaginary surfaces which, when penetrated,
designate an object as being an obstruction.
The AIRSPACE PLAN, presented on the following page, provides a plan and a
profile view which depicts these criteria as they specifically relate to Drake Feld.
The plan is based on the ultimate planned runway alignments and lengths, along
with the ultimate planned approaches to those runways. Therefore, for existing
Runway 16/34, it is based on larger -than -utility airport criteria with a precision
instrument approach to Runway 16 and a non -precision instrument approach to
Runway 34. For future Runway 16L)34R, the plan is based on use by small aircraft
only with visual approaches to both runway ends.
' Runway/Approach Profiles and Runway Protection Zone Plans
To provide a more detailed view of the inner portions of the Part 77 imaginary
' approach surfaces and the Runway Protection Zones (RPZs), the following set of
drawings is provided. An RPZ is trapezoidal in shape, centered about the extended
runway centerline and begins 200 feet beyond the end of the runway. The RPzs are
' safety areas within which it is desirable to clear all objects (although some uses are
normally acceptable). The size of the RPz is a function of the design aircraft, the
type of operation, and the visibility minimums of the approach.
The following RUNWAY AND APPROACH PROFILES provide large scale drawings
with both plan and profile delineations. They are intended to facilitate identification
of the roadways, levees, utility lines, railroads, structures and other possible
obstructions that may lie within the confines of the RPz associated with each
runway end. As with the Airspace Plan, the Runway and Approach Profiles are
based on the ultimate planned runway alignments and lengths, along with the
ultimate planned approaches to those runways.
' Terminal Area Plans
The following TERMINAL AREA PLANS present a detailed view of the more
' intensely developed landside use areas illustrated on the Airport Layout Plan. There
are two (2) areas depicted by the Terminal Area Plans: the first is the existing
passenger terminal and general aviation development area located on the west side
' of Runway 16/34; the second is the area on the east side of Runway 16/34 and
includes the East Hangar Development Area.
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. Much, 1991. F.5
I
I
' West Side Terminal Area Plan
' As illustrated in the following figure, WEST SIDE TERMINAL AREA PLAN, this area
contains several proposed and existing facilities.
' Passenger Terminal Facilities. With the exception of the establishment of the runway
and taxiway system at Drake Field, the proper location of the passenger terminal
and its support facilities is the most critical issue faced in planning for future
development at the airport. The existing location of the passenger terminal has
'
available space for expansion of the terminal and parking and can accommodate
forecasted demand. Therefore, the terminal will remain in its present location, west
of the runway. When the need for increased capacity dictates, there is room for
'• expansion of the existing terminal building along with its support facilities (apron,
parking, access roadway, etc.) to the south. The Terminal Area Plan indicates the
following passenger terminal facility improvements:
' • Passenger Terminal Building. An expansion area for the Passenger
Terminal Building has been indicated south of the existing facilities.
' If Drake Field continues to serve as the primary commercial service
airport in Northwest Arkansas (Scenario A), estimates based on
forecasts of passenger enplanements, indicate that a terminal facility
t with up to 36,000 square feet in total area and with as many as five (5)
passenger loading gates will be required before the end of the 20 -year
planning period. This would require the addition of approximately
14,000 square feet of terminal building area and three (3) gates.
' In the short-term, although a change of the terminal building footprint
may not be required, remodeling to maximize passenger seating
' capacity, airline ticketing counter space and a renovation of the bag
claim area will be necessary.
' • Terminal Area Vehicle Parking. There are currently approximately
418 passenger parking spaces provided at Drake Field. Projections
indicate that approximately 700 parking spaces will be required at the
' end of the 20 -year planning period. The Terminal Area Plan indicates
the expansion of the passenger terminal parking area to the west and
the south.
I
LI
I
• Terminal Area Access Roadway. In order to accommodate the
expansion of the terminal parking, the terminal access roadway will be
relocated to the south. In addition, a recirculation roadway is
programmed and the single -lane portions of the access roadway
system will be widened to two lanes.
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991.
F.9
H
C
H
I
I
I
I
I
I
El
I
I
H
I
Li
Li
I
17
If the New Regional Airport is built to accommodate commercial airline operations
(Scenario B), Drake Field will not require passenger terminal facilities.
Rental Car Facilities. The Plan identifies areas for the development of additional
rental car parking and rental car maintenance facilities. These expanded rental car
facilities are to be located directly north of the passenger terminal building in the
vicinity of the existing rental car facilities. If the New Regional Airport is built to
accommodate commercial airline operations (Scenario B), the need for rental car
facilities at Drake Field will be negligible.
Air Cargo Facilities. In order to accommodate freight which is carried on passenger
aircraft, there will always be a demand for air freight related facilities in, or adjacent
to, the passenger terminal. This function is presently carried out within the
passenger terminal at Drake Field. It is anticipated that the passenger terminal
building can continue to house the air cargo facilities required to serve the need
generated to handle freight carried on passenger aircraft. If the New Regional
Airport is built to accommodate air freight operations (Scenario B), the need for air
cargo facilities at Drake Field will be insignificant.
General Aviation/FBO Facilities. The area north of the passenger terminal and west of
Runway 16/34 is primarily dedicated to general aviation facilities. At the present
time the area contains the Flight Service Station along with general aviation storage
hangars, aircraft parking aprons and the Arkansas Air Museum. The Plan indicates
that the use of this area should be maximized with infill construction of general
aviation hangars (corporate or maintenance) and aircraft parking aprons.
Automobile parking and other necessary general aviation support facilities will
continue to be provided in this area.
Airport Support Facilities. In addition to the above mentioned landside facilities,
several other airport related functions which require locational consideration and are
critical to the operation of Drake Field are located on the west side of Runway
16/34.
• Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) Facilities. Because of the age
and condition of the existing ARFF facility and its close proximity to the
fuel storage facilities, it is recommended in Scenario A that the existing
ARFF facility should be relocated. Because it is a joint use facility,
being utilized for fire protection for the airport and surrounding areas of
the City of Fayetteville, it should remain on the west side of the airport
where good taxiway and highway access can be achieved. The plan
recommends that the facility should be relocated to the area just south of
the Arkansas Air Museum.
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Daft Report. March, 1991.
F.11
I
I
I
• Airport Fueling Facilities. Existing fuel facilities have capacity for
storage of 12,000 gallons of Avgas and 32,000 gallons of Jet A fuel.
'• The capacity of both facilities will meet the forecasted facility
requirements through the short-term planning period, with the storage
capacity for Jet A fuel needing to be increased in the mid -tens. The
' existing fuel farm facilities have recently been renovated (a new fuel
tank in 1987 and a leak detection system will be installed by 1994). The
plan indicates that the fuel storage facility at Drake Field should remain
m its existing location and be expanded as required.
East Side Terminal Area Plan
Development on the east side of airport property is illustrated in the following
figure, entitled EAST SIDE TERMINAL AREA PLAN.
' General Aviation Storage Facilities. The Plan calls for the continued development of
general aviation hangars on the east side of the airport. There are currently three (3)
T -hangar structures, an FBo hangar and a large aircraft parking apron within the
' East Hangar Development Area. T -hangars should continue to be developed upon
the existing apron. In addition, an area has been allocated for the development of
executive hangars on the east side of the existing apron.
' Air Cargo Facilities/Large Scale Aviation Facilities. The Plan allocates the area north
the existing aircraft parking apron for air cargo and other large scale aviation
'• facilities (FBo hangars, maintenance hangars, speciality aviation facilities, corporate
hangars etc.). This area should be utilized for facilities which require taxiway
access. The air cargo facilities in this area would accommodate specialized air
freight aircraft, not joint use aircraft which carry passengers and air cargo (the joint
use aircraft would continue to utilize the passenger terminal ramp for loading and
unloading passengers and freight).
' Aviation or Non -Aviation Development. In addition to the aviation related
development, the open space to the south of the T -hangar area can accommodate
both aviation -related and non -aviation commercial and/or industrial tenants.
Air Traffic Control Tower. The future turf runway has been sited to allow the Air
Traffic Control Tower to remain in its existing location through the end of the
' planning period.
Landside Access. Landside access is provided by Ernest Lancaster Drive to the
' various development areas located on the east side of airport property. To keep
automobile traffic off of aircraft taxiing surfaces, the existing FBO hangar should be
provided with a new entry drive and an automobile parking area which are to be
physically separated from the aircraft operating surfaces. In addition, each
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. F.12
C
L
development area (air cargo/large scale aviation development, executive hangar, and
aviation or non -aviation development) is to be provided with roadway access and
• automobile parking. The parking area for the executive hangars can also be utilized
• by T -hangar users.
I
n
I
I
I
I
I
I
Li
Li
Li
I
I
' Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. F.13
4191
ii
I
IS
e
~�
m
m
2T^
I
n
I
H
U
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Development Program
Introduction
The airfield and landside facility requirements necessary to satisfy the forecasted
aviation demands for Drake Field have been placed into three phases: short-range
(1995), intermediate -range (2000), and long-range (2010). These facility
requirements are illustrated by time period graphically on the phasing plan and in
conjunction with cost estimates presented on the following pages.
Cost Estimates
Cost estimates have been categorized by: the total cost for each project or im-
provement; that portion of the total cost anticipated to be paid by the Federal
Aviation Administration under the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) or similar
program; that portion eligible for payment by the Arkansas Division of Aeronautics;
and that portion to be borne by the community, the airport or related entity. The
local share can include additional sources such as regional commissions and
organizations, and other local organizations and units of government.
The percentage of costs borne by each of these agencies is subject to change de-
pending upon their appropriate funding legislation and policy at the time of con-
struction. The relationship between local and anticipated federal funding as shown
in this document is based on current FAA participation of ninety percent (90%) of
the total project cost. The State of Arkansas Division of Aeronautics (ADA) has a
policy of funding appropriate projects at a participation level of fifty percent (50%)
from the ADA and fifty percent (50%) being the responsibility of the locality or
airport sponsor. This funding ratio applies to federally funded projects as well,
wherein the ADA provides fifty percent (50%) of the local share of such projects up
to a maximum state grant of $40,000.
' In the following cost tables the allocation for FAA and ADA eligible projects is listed
as 90% federal, 5% state and 5% local funding. Before detailed planning on a
particular project is developed, the funding structures and requirements should be
1
IDrake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. G.1
I
I
I
identified to determine the current funding policies by the various funding entities.
All project cost estimates presented in this report are based on 1991 costs.
Phasing Plans
The following illustrations and cost estimates indicate the suggested phasing for
projects during the short-, intermediate-, and long-range planning periods. These
' are suggested schedules and variance from them may be necessary, especially dur-
ing the latter time periods. Attention has been given the first five years as being the
most critical and the scheduled projects outlined in that timeframe should be adhered
to as much as is possible and feasible. The demand for certain facilities, especially
'
in the latter timeframe, and the economic feasibility of their development are to be
the prime factors influencing the timing of individual project construction. Care
must be taken to provide for adequate lead time for detailed planning and con-
'• struction of facilities in order to meet aviation demands. It is also important to
minimize the disruptive scheduling where a portion of the facility may become in-
operative due to construction and to prevent extra costs resulting from improper
t• project scheduling. All land acquisition and avigation easement acquisition have
been scheduled for the short-range time period. This is to protect the airport's abil-
ity to implement the plan and to eliminate long-term uncertainty on the part of the
' property owner.
The Development Plan for Drake Field is based on two ultimate development
' scenarios, one with and one without the development of a new regional airport.
The first phase, the 0-5 year time frame, is the same in both scenarios. This
indicates that the new airport, if its development is found to be feasible and it does
in fact become a commercial service facility, will be in the planning and
'
construction stage during the majority of the the first five years of the planning
period; therefore, during that time frame Drake Field will need to continue to serve
as the commercial service airport for the region.
During the latter two phases the development which will be required at Drake Field
will be dependent upon whether or not the new regional airport is operational.
Scenario A Phasing Plan and accompanying project list is based upon the new
regional airport not being developed and Drake Field continuing to serve as the
primary commercial service airport for Northwest Arkansas through the end of the
planning period. Scenario B Phasing Plan and project list is based upon the
development which will be required at Drake Field if a New Regional Airport which
provides commercial airline service becomes a reality.
I
' Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. G.2
n
P
I
' Summary
' As presented in the accompanying table, the Development Plan cost estimates for
the twenty-year planning period, not including maintenance and operation ex-
penses, amount to approximately $18,280,800 for Scenario A and $9,924,600 for
'• Scenarios. In Scenario A, the anticipated FAA share is approximately
$12,778,200, the local share being approximately $4,706,650, and $795,950 is
eligible for potential funding by the Arkansas Department of Aeronautics. In
' Scenario B, the anticipated FAA share is approximately $6,637,620, the local share
being approximately $2,713,840, and $573,140 is eligible for potential funding by
the Arkansas Department of Aeronautics. Of the local share, approximately
' $2,590,000 in Scenario A and approximately $1,370,000 in Scenario B will
generate revenue and could be financed using revenue bonds or private financing.
The reason that the overall federal and local share does not follow the anticipated
90/5/5 ratio is because some items recommended are ineligible for federal or state
funding and must be totally financed through local sources.
In Scenario A, of the local share, approximately $1,115,985 are required during the
short-term period, $1,842,310 during the intermediate -term period and the
' remaining $1,766,355 during the long-term period. In Scenario B, of the local
share, approximately $1,115,985 are required during the short-term period,
• $477,545 during the intermediate -term period and the remaining $1,120,310 during
• the long-term period. In addition, maintenance and operation expenses will
increase as the airport develops and more airport facilities are completed. Revenues
generated by these facilities should also increase. This relationship should,
however, be monitored closely so that future imbalances can be anticipated and
provided for in the budgeting and capital improvements process. In Scenario A, the
' federal share includes programmed expenditures of $5,113,830 during the short-
term period, $3,572,580 during the intermediate -term period, and $4,091,790
during the long-term period. In Scenario B, the federal share includes programmed
expenditures of $5,113,830 during the short-term period, $1,035,810 during the
' intermediate -term period, and $487,980 during the long-term period.
I
LI
I
I
Drake Field Master Plan Updae/Dlaft Report. March, 1991. 0.3
1
Table G1
SCENARIO A & SCENARIO B PHASE 1(0.5 YEARS) DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROJECT COSTS
Drake Field Master Plan Update
Total Recommended Financing Method
'Project Description Cost Local State Federal
' A.1 Install Emergency Gtr ** $30,000.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $27,000.00
A.2 Phase I Obstruction Removal Study
and land Purchase ** $518,900.00 $25,945.00 $25,945.00 $467,010.00
A.3 Improve Safety Area Runway 34 ** $850,000.00 $45,000.00 $40,000.00 $765,000.00
A.4 Access Roadway Lighting, Security
Fence and Isolation Fence** $118,800.00 $5,940.00 $5,940.00 $106,920.00
' A.5 Security Fencing •* $104,300.00 $5,215.00 $5,215.00 $93,870.00
A.6 Update Part FAR 150 Study $90,000.00 $4,500.00 $4,500.00 $81,000.00
A.7 Land Acqusition for Runway
' Protection Zones and Obstruction
Removal/Lighting $2,500,000.00 $125,000.00 $125,000.00 $2,250,000.00
A.8 Constuct Additonal Entry Road Lane
' Adjacent to Parking Toll Plaza $10,000.00 $500.00 $500.00 $9,000.00
A.9 Renovate Terminal Bag Claim Area * $105,000.00 $105,000.00
A.10 Extend Parallel Taxiway to the North
' On the West Side of Runway 16/34
With Holding Area $376,700.00 $18,835.00 $18,835.00 $339,030.00
A.11 Construct Turf Runway $434,600.00 $217,300.00 $217,300.00
IA. 12 Renovate Runway and Taxiway
Lighting Systems $225,000.00 $11,250.00 $11,250.00 $202,500.00
A.13 Install PAP! Runway 34 FAA FUNDED
' A.14 Install Runway Monitoring System $100,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $90,000.00
£15 Renovate/Expand Passenger
Terminal $250,000.00 $62,500.00 $187,500.00
' A.16 Expand Rental Car Parking * $135,000.00 $135,000.00
A.17 Construct General Aviation Apron
(Southeast of Flight Service Station) $550,000.00 $27,500.00 $27,500.00 $495,000.00
A.18 Construct Thirteen T -hangar Units * $190,000.00 $190,000.00
A. 19 Construct Air Freight Facility * S100,000.00 $100,000.00
A.20 Relocate High Pressure Gas Line $30,000.00 $30,000.00
£21 Install Non -Precision Approach
Equipment to Serve Runway 34 FAA FUNDED
• Local Share Subject to Revenue Bond or Private Financing.
c' g.
' ** Projects On Which Federal Grants Have Been Obligated
Note: Costs are intended for planning purposes only and should not be used for construction cost estimates.
H
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991.
0.4
Table Gl (continued)
SCENARIO A & SCENARIO B PHASE I (0-5 YEARS) DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROJECT COSTS
Drake Field Master Plan Update
Total Recommended Financing Method
Project Description Cost Local State Federal
A.22 Install Precision Approach Equipment
to Serve Runway 16 FAA FUNDED
A.23 Install RVR FAA FUNDED
Sub-Total/Phase I "' $6,718,300.00 $1,115,985.00 $488,485.00 $5,113,830.00
• Local Share Subject to Revenue Bond or Private Financing.
'Projects On Which Federal Grants Have Been Obligated
** $1,622,000 of Phase I Federal Share Projects Have Obligated Grants
Note: Costs are intended for planning purposes only and should not be used for construction cost estimates.
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report March, 1991. G.5
ii
I
Table G2
SCENARIO A PHASE 11(5-10 YEARS) DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROJECT COSTS
Drake Field Master Plan Update
Total Recommended Financing Method
Project Description Cost Local State Federal
' B.la Expand Passenger Terminal $700,000.00 $175,000.00 $525,000.00
B.2a Relocate Terminal Entry Road and
Construct Recirculation Roadway $312,000.00 $15,600.00 $15,600.00 $280,800.00
' B.3a Expand Passenger Terminal Parking • $100,000.00 $100,000.00
B.4a Overlay, Crack Seal & Coat Aprons $713,500.00 $35,675.00 $35,675.00 $642,150.00
B.5a Security Improvements $100,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $90,000.00
' B.6a Construct Rental Car Wash Facility • $180,000.00 $180,000.00
B.7a Expand Rental Car Parking • $130,000.00 $130,000.00
B.8a Expand Terminal Apron $670,000.00 $33,500.00 $33,500.00 $603,000.00
' B.9a Expand West Side General Aviation
Apron (North of FSS) $195,000.00 $9,750.00 $9,750.00 $175,500.00
B.10a Update Airport Planning Documents $150,000.00 $7,500.00 $7,500.00 $135,000.00
B.11a Construct Eight T -hangar Units * $120,000.00 $120,000.00
B.12a Construct One Corporate Hangar
(90' x 70') * $140,000.00 $140,000.00
' B.13a Construct Executive Hangar Apron $54,000.00 $2,700.00 $2,700.00 $48,600.00
B.14a Construct Two Executive Hangars
(60' x 60') * $160,000.00 $160,000.00
' B. 15a Construct East Side Fuel Storages $200,000.00 $200,000.00
B.16a Relocate ARFF Facility $215,000.00 $10,750.00 $10,750.00 $193,500.00
B.17a Overlay (strengthen) Taxiway C $88,500.00 $4,425.00 $4,425.00 $79,650.00
' B.18a Purchase New ARFFTruck $250,000.00 $12,500.00 $12,500.00 $225,000.00
B.19a Renovate General Aviaion Terminal' $250,000.00 $250,000.00
B.20a Storm Sewer System Improvements $250,000.00 $12,500.00 $12,500.00 $225,000.00
' B.21a Crack Seal, Sealcoat and Restripe
Runway and Taxiways S388,200.00 $19,410.00 $19,410.00 S349,380.00
B.22a Expand Jet Fuel Storage . $200,000.00 $200,000.00
Scenario A Sub-Total/Phase II $5,566,200.00 $1,824,310.00 $169,310.00 $3,572,580.00
• Local Share Subject to Revenue Bond or Private Financing.
' Scenario A assumes that Drake Field will continue to save as the primary commercial service airport for
Northwest Arkansas.
Scenario B assumes that a new Regional Airport will be built and that Drake Field will not provide commercial
service.
' Note: Costs are intended for planning purposes only and should not be used for construction cost estimates.
Drake Field Marta Plan UpdatelDraft Report. March. 1991. G.6
I
II
Table G3
SCENARIO A PHASE III (10-20 YEARS) DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROJECT COSTS
Drake Field Master Plan Update
Project Description
Total Recommended Financing Method
Cost Local State Federal
•
C.la
Construct Southern Portion of East
•
Side Parallel Taxiway With MITL
$1,850,000.00
$145,000.00
$40,000.00 $1,665,000.00
C.2a
East Side Utility Improvements
$200,000.00
$200,000.00
C.3a
Expand Passenger Terminal
$700,000.00
$175,000.00
$525,000.00
'
C.4a
Expand Passenger Terminal Parking'
$140,000.00
$140,000.00
C.5a
Expand Fuel Storage Facility
$80,000.00
$80,000.00
C.6a
Construct Eight T -hangar Units •
$ 120,000.00
$120,000.00
'
C.7a
Construct One Corporate Hangar
(90' x 80') •
$160,000.00
$160,000.00
C.8a
Construct Executive Hangar Apron
$54,000.00
$2,700.00
$2,700.00 $48,600.00
'
C.9a
Construct Two Executive Hangars
(60' x 60') •
$160.000.00
$160,000.00
C.loa
Update Airport Planning Documents
$150,000.00
$7,500.00
$7,500.00 $135,000.00
'
C.l la
Overlay, Groove and Mark Runway
Taxiways
$950,000.00
$55,000.00
$40,000.00 $855,000.00
C.12a
Extend Eastside Access Roadway
S273,200.00
$273,200.00
'
C.13a
Construct Fastside Parking
$200,000.00
$200,000.00
C.14a
Relocate Northern Portion of East
Side Parallel Taxiway With
'
Holding Area
$759,100.00
$37,955.00
$37,955.00 $683,190.00
C.15a
Security Improvements
$200,000.00
$10,000.00
$10,000.00 $180,000.00
' Scenario A Sub-Total/Phase III S5,996,300.00 $1,766,355.00 $138,155.00 $4,091,790.00
' SCENARIO A GRAND TOTAL •* $18,280,800.00 $4,706,650.00 $795,950.00 $12,778,200.00
• Local Shire Subject to Revenue Bond or Private Financing.
" $1,755,000 of the Total Local Shale is Subject to Revenue Bond Cr Private Financing.
' Scenario A assumes that Drake Field will continue to serve as the primary commercial service airport for
Northwest Arkansas.
Scenario B asswnes that a new Regional Airport will be built and that Drake Field will not provide commeroial
service.
Note: Costs are intended for planning purposes only and should not be used for construction cost estimates.
U
Drake Field Master Plan Up&tyDraft Report. March. 1991. G.7
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
11
I
J
C
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table G4
SCENARIO B PHASE 11(5-10 YEARS) DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROJECT COSTS
Drake Field Master Plan Update
Project Description
B.lb Construct Fight T -hangar Units •
B.2b Construct One Corporate Hangar
(90' x 70') •
B.3b Construct Executive Hangar Apron
B.4b Construct Two Executive Hangars
(60'x60') •
B.5b Expand West Side General Aviation
Apron (North of Flight Service
Station)
B.6b Update Airport Planning Documents
B.7b Overlay, Crack Seal and Fuel Coat
East and West Aprons
B.8b Overlay (strengthen) Taxiway C
Total Recommended Financing Method
Cost Local State Federal
$120,000.00
$120,000.00
$140,000.00
$140,000.00
$54,000.00
$2,700.00
S160,000.00
$160,000.00
�� tt :.tt tt
$195,000.00
$9,750.00
$9,750.00
$175,500.00
$100,000.00
$5,000.00
$5,000.00
$90,000.00
$713,500.00
$35,675.00
$35,675.00
$642,150.00
$88,400.00
$4,420.00
$4,420.00
$79,560.00
Scenario B Sub-TotallPhase 11 51,570900.00 $477,545.00 $57,545.00 $1,035,810.00
• Local Share Subject to Revenue Bond or Private Financing.
Scenario A assumes that Drake Field will continue to save as the primary commercial service airport for
Northwest Arkansas.
Scenario B assumes that a new Regional Airport will be built and that Drake Field will not provide commercial
service.
Note: Costs are intended for planning purposes only and should not be used for construction cost estimates.
Drake Field Muter Plan UpdatelDntt Report March, 1991.
G.9
Table G5
SCENARIO B PHASE III (10-20 YEARS) DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROJECT COSTS
Drake Field Master Plan Update
Total Recommended Financing Method
Project Description Cost Local State Federal
C.lb
East Side Utility Improvements
$200,000.00
$200,000.00
C.2b
Construct Eight T -Hangar Units •
$120,000.00
$120,000.00
C.3b
Construct One Corporate Hangar
(90' x 80') *
$140,000.00
$140,000.00
C.4b
Construct Executive Hangar Apron
$54,000.00
$2,700.00
$2,700.00 $48,600.00
C.5b
Construct Two Executive Hangars
(60' x 60') *
$160,000.00
$160,000.00
C.6b
Update Airport Planning Documents
$100,000.00
$5,000.00
$5,000.00 $90,000.00
C.7b
Crack Seal, Sealcoat and Restripe
Runway and Taxiways
$388,200.00
$19,410.00
$19,410.00 $349,380.00
C.8b
Extend Eastside Access Roadway
$273,200.00
$273,200.00
C.9b
Construct Eastside Parking
$200,000.00
$200,000.00
Scenario B Sub-TotallPhase LU
$1,635,400.00
$1,120,310.00
$27,110.00 $487,980.00
SCENARIO B GRAND TOTAL ••
$9,924,600.00
$2,713,840.00
$573,140.00 $6,637,620.00
• Local Share Subject to Revenue Bond or Private Financing.
•• $965,000 of the Total Local Share is Subject to Revenue Bond or Private Financing.
Scenario A assumes that Drake Field will continue to serve as the primary commercial service airport for
Northwest Arkansas.
Scenario B assumes that a new Regional Airpon will be built and that Drake Field will not provide Commercial
service.
Note: Costs are intended for planning purposes only and should not be used for construction cost estimates.
I
I
[l
I
Drake Field Mauer Plan Update/Daft Repot. March. 1991.
G.10
I
I
I
I
Financial Program
' Introduction
The various projects relating to the continued development of Drake Field are
determined by local authorities; as such, the primary responsibility
for developing the financing program becomes that of the Airport Staff, the Airport
I.
Board, City Management and the City Board of Directors. Financing a program or
a series of programs can be accomplished through various methods or techniques,
by utilizing certain sources or a combination of sources such as taxes, general
obligation bonds, revenue bonds, private financing, state funds, government
' assistance and city financing from present revenue sources, and possible others.
To review these potentials, this section deals with the economic feasibility of
accomplishing the actions recommended in the preceding portions of this document.
This evaluation includes an analysis of existing revenue and indebtedness, an
analysis of existing leasing arrangements, a management analysis and a financial
plan.
Financial Analysis
' Local governments fund airport developments for the resultant benefits, such as
transportation convenience and need, and attraction of business and industrial
' concerns. With the assistance of various funding approaches and programs,
including airport generated operation money, airport development can be feasibly
accomplished for the benefit of the community as a whole. Most public airport
operations, particularly those that have no or limited air carrier service, do not
'
necessarily generate adequate revenue over and above operating and maintenance
costs to fund capital improvements and debt retirement. This is not the case at
Drake Field. In fact, the airport is self-financing with respect to operation and
' maintenance, and also generates additional funds which are used in conjunction
with Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) grants and other government matching
monies for capital improvements.
Leasing Practices. Leasing practices should be examined to determine what
improvements could be made toward yielding more revenue and attracting new
I
1 Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. H.t
I
I
I
U
I
I
I
I
commercial and industrial activity, and to establish minimum performance standards
for all operations in order to maintain quality services and facilities which would
promote the airport. In general, leases should not be a burden to the airport or the
city, but at the same time, should be designed so as to promote activity at the
airport. They should generate revenue for the airport on a continual basis versus a
one-time income. Leases, also, should not be executed for long periods of time
unless they include frequent options with escalation clauses.
At no time should the leasing practices of the airport be established so as to be
discriminatory, restrictive, or in any other way designed to eliminate competition
among the services and facilities provided. In fact, this is in violation of the grant
agreement executed between the Sponsor (the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas) and
the Federal Aviation Administration.
Leasing Rates. The following discussion concerns various methods which might be
utilized to increase leasing rates at an airport. These methods are in use at many
airports in the country. At a minimum, future rental rates should be reviewed, and
revised if necessary, based upon a study of lease rates at other airports with
comparable services in Arkansas and the region.
Appraisal Rate. The land at the airport should be appraised. The rental rate should
be a percentage of the appraised value sufficient to bring in an annual revenue that,
over a ten- to fifteen -year time span, would equal the appraised value of the land.
The appraisal should be conducted frequently since the value of land increases as
the airport develops. To entice aviation -related activity into the airport, a smaller
percentage than normal of the appraised value could be paid the first few years,
with a higher percentage rental rate in the last few years to make up the difference.
' Rate Per Square Foot of Land. The rental rate can be established as a fixed rent per
square foot of land or tied to an appraised value of land. If tied to the appraised
value, the rent per square foot rises as the land value increases. Raising rents,
' however, will depend on how often appraisals are conducted. If the rental per
square foot is a fixed rate, an escalation clause should be included in the lease to
cover rising maintenance and operating costs and the increasing value of land.
' Percentage Of Sales. The financial benefits which accrue to firms as sales increase
at the airport complex should also accrue to the complex itself in order to defray
increasing operations and maintenance costs. As is common at many general
' aviation airports, commercial facilities are charged a fixed rental rate plus a
percentage of sales. In this way, the airport benefits from the success of the fines
located there. The firms realize revenues because the airport has provided the
• facilities which enable their business to exist, and additional improvements to the
airport will enhance each firm's business. That is to say, if the City of Fayetteville
had not expended funds to establish and maintain the airport, then in order for the
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. H.2
I
I
commercial operations to exist, they would have had to personally invest in the
establishment of runways, taxiways, aprons, etc. By this method, they are sharing
in the cost of those investments in proportion to the success they realize as a result
'
of the investment. As a general rule, the percentage of sales should apply to
commercial establishments that deal in sales. Industrial firms, which normally do
not rely on local sales for support, provide revenue for rising operation and
' maintenance costs through escalation clauses in their leases. Non -income
producing tenants, such as those renting hangar space, should have rent based on
the appraised value of the land, plus the cost of the improvements and amortization.
' Site Selection. Various sites at the complex are more valuable than others due to their
location and relationship to nearby facilities. For example, property with direct
1 access onto an apron is better situated for hangars than land which is away from the
apron area. Each site should be evaluated based on its locational advantages for
various uses, and its rental rate adjusted accordingly. Another example are sites
which do not have access to the taxiway and runway system but still might be
appropriate for non -aviation oriented industrial or commercial activities.
Minimum Performance Standards. Minimum Performance Standards should be
'
included in the leases of commercial aeronautical firms to ensure that the necessary
services are provided and that the quality of the services adequately promotes the
airport. Performance standards should apply to the following categories: fuel and
' oil sales; flight training, crop dusting and spraying; hangar construction and rental;
and specialized aircraft repair services. The FAA has suggested Performance
Standards for these categories. It is recommended that coordination be undertaken
' with the FAA Regional Office when formalizing additional standards at Drake Field.
Industrial Sites. Any property on the airport which is ultimately utilized for industrial
'• purposes, either aviation or non -aviation oriented industries, should provide
continuous income to the airport. In other words, properties should not be sold to
individuals, corporations or even industrial trusts. The airport should lease this
property to desirable tenants or managers at rental rates established in the
marketplace by comparable properties. Rents from airport property used in this
manner should be deposited directly with the Airport. This will provide continued
income to the airport and enable it to be maintained in a manner which will not only
meet the needs of the community and the industrial users, but also be a credit to the
overall community of Fayetteville. It should be remembered that to many people
the airport is the front door to Fayetteville.
' Maintenance. The requirement that the tenant be responsible for maintenance of
facilities leased is an important item to include in any lease agreement. If a tenant is
' leasing a structure, then a specific amount of land adjacent to the structure should be
included and the maintenance made the responsibility of the tenant. The tenant
should be required to maintain the property in a visually acceptable manner. The
1
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. H.3
I
I
same would be true if the tenant is strictly leasing land without any structures.
Also, the maintenance responsibility for buildings which are owned by the airport
' and are being leased by the tenant should be identified so that the airport is not
burdened with minor maintenance responsibilities. At no time should the airport
maintain insurance on the buildings which insures the contents of those buildings.
The cost of maintenance and insurance in such cases can exceed the established
'rental rate, especially if escalation clauses are not included.
Management Analysis
The City of Fayetteville owns Drake Field and, until recently, has operated Drake
Field as a division of the Public Works Department. The City of Fayetteville Board
of Directors is the ultimate decision -making body for the complex. The Airport
Manager is charged with the day-to-day activity of operating the airport.
' It is common practice for airports of the size and complexity of Drake Field to be set
up under an Airport Authority or Advisory Committee which runs the airport or
•' which assists the city in formulating airport policy decisions. As such, the City has
set up an Airport Advisory Board which will help guide the development and
operation of the airport, and advise the City of Fayetteville Board of Directors on
airport matters. Because the Airport Advisory Board will be able to focus on the
single issue of the airport, its advice to the City Board of Directors (who are
responsible for overseeing the entire City's operation) should be invaluable.
' The potential advantages of creating an Airport Authority or Airport Trust to
manage Drake Field should also be examined. Often state statutes offer an
Authority distinct advantages in its ability to financially manage and develop a
public facility.
The 1989 Consultant's Report City of Fayetteville Arkansas Municipal Airport
•' indicated that Drake Field is "presently understaffed". One indicator of this is the
growth which has occurred at the airport over the past five years. During that
period the number of enplanements at the airport has grown by approximately 84%,
' while the airport's staff size has remained the same. The present airport staff
accomplishes the provision of a safe and efficient airport and should be commended
for the professional manner in which the airport is operated; however, the present
staff is spread too thin to provide the proper amount of attention to long-range
planning, financial management and grants administration. Although the Airport
Advisory Board can help in these matters to some degree, additional staff is
required to properly attend to the day-to-day responsibilities involved with
' planning, funding and grants.
I
' Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. H.4
I
I
I
' The Fayetteville Board of Directors, the Airport Advisory Board and the Airport
Manager should establish a continual program to educate the general citizenry about
the importance of aviation to the community and its service area. With such a
promotional campaign, support for the airport can be greatly improved in the
community, making it comparatively easier to obtain financing for not only
operation and maintenance but also for major capital improvements. The Chamber
'
of Commerce and community service groups can be of immense help in such a
campaign.
Economic Benefits and Impacts
Airports contribute to the community's well-being in many different forms. The
two major indicators of an airport's influence which may be measured are its
economic impacts and its transportation benefits. Economic impacts are the
' regional economic activities, employment, and payrolls that can be attributed,
directly and indirectly, to the operation of a local airport. They describe the
importance of aviation as an industry. Benefits are the services that a local airport
' makes available to the surrounding area. The two services emphasized here are
time saved and cost avoided by travelers, but benefits also include other
advantages, such as improved transportation safety and comfort. Benefits are a
measure of the improved transportation that the airport provides, and thus reflect the
'primary motive of a community in operating a public airport.
In the operation of a private business, profit is a valid measure of the viability of the
business. A public airport is usually operated as a public utility or community
facility, with service, rather than profit, being the primary motive. Thus, profit is
not of great significance in the determination of the regional economic significance
of an airport.
As discussed above, benefits are those services that a community enjoys through
' the development and operation of an airport. Airports provide a variety of public
benefits to the surrounding service area, the most obvious and of greatest value
being time saved and cost avoided through the use of air transportation. Other
' benefits include the access to the national air transportation system that an airport
provides; high levels of safety, comfort and convenience of aviation; and overall
enhancement to the community. An airport such as Fayetteville's, with commercial
airline service, provides passengers and citizens of a community access to the entire
'
national air transportation system through the regional hub airports, such as
Lambert -St. Louis International Airport, Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport,
Memphis International Airport, and Kansas City.
Many other benefits can be attributed to an airport, including the stimulation of
additional business in the community, medical emergency and transportation
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. H.5
I
I
benefits, civil defense facilities, community service aspects and public safety
aspects, among others. Not all of these benefits can be expressed in terms of
dollars, but all are real and must be considered when addressing the value of an
airport to a community.
Economic impacts generally fall into three categories: direct impacts, indirect
impacts and induced impacts. Direct impacts are the result of activities performed
on the airport by personnel with a direct involvement with aviation. Employment,
purchasing of local goods and services, construction activities and capital
improvements are examples of direct impacts. They may occur both on and off the
airport. Indirect impacts are those impacts which are a result of off -airport activities
that are attributable to airport activities. Induced impacts are those impacts which
are the multiplier effect of the direct and indirect impacts. These can occur both
locally and regionally.
' Based on a methodology presented in the Federal Aviation Administration
publication Measuring the Regional Economic Significance ofAirports, the benefits
and economic impacts of a typical commercial service/general aviation airport such
' as Drake Field are presented in the following table, entitled AIRPORT ECONOMIC
SIGNIFICANCE. These figures are based on the number of enplaned passengers,
both now and in the future, with an average number of both on -airport and off-
' airport employees attributed to these enplanements. In addition, an average salary
is assigned each employee, with a multiplier then added to estimate induced
benefits. The figures also represent the benefit that airlines have to the overall good
of the community, taking into consideration the time and distance saved in driving
• to another commercial service airport (i.e., Fort Smith Municipal Airport) plus the
• benefits assigned to general aviation aircraft. The measure of economic impact in
this methodology is based on rules -of -thumb and averages derived for different
types of airports, on a national basis, by the Federal Aviation Administration.
I
I
'u
I
I
1 Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March. 1991. H.6
I
I
' Table HI
AIRPORT ECONOMIC SIGNIFICANCE
Drake Field Master Plan Update
Total Annual Transportation Benefit Direct Plus Induced
Yer (Indirect Benefit) Benda Tdal
1990 $14,686,000 $10,176,000 $24,862,000
' SCENARIO A (WITHOUT NEW REGIONAL AIRPORT)a
2010 $29,565,000 $20,223,000 $49,788,000
SCENARIO B (WITH NEW REGIONAL AIRPORT)b
2010 $450,000 $496,000 $946,000
' a Assumes Drake Field will continue to serve as the Primary Commercial Service Airport for Northwest
Arkansas
' b Assumes Drake Field will not provide Commercial Service
Because the FAA methodology uses some generalized assumptions in the
' formulation of these amounts, the figures are considered conservative (low) for
Drake Field. The above methodology does not take into consideration the amount
that business people spend in the community (lodging, meals, rental car,
• entertainment, etc.) during their stay in the community; however, data compiled
from the State of Arkansas Department of Tourism indicates that in 1989 in
Washington and Benton Counties, visitors spent approximately $155,639,000, that
' travel related payrolls amounted to approximately $27,514,000, and that the two
counties had approximately 1,117,000 visitors. Using these figures as a basis, and
considering that there were 136,000 enplanements at Drake Field in 1989 (of which
' 80% are estimated to be non-resident), would indicate that approximatlely
$18,000,000 in additional dollars were generated in regional economic benefit by
travelers passing through Drake Field.
' As can be seen, the regional economic contribution of Drake Field is significant
and, in Scenario A, is expected to increase in the future, as the airport's role in
providing aviation and non -aviation related facilities and services increases. It
should also be noted that if the commercial service function is relocated to a new
Regional Airport (Scenario B), Drake Field's regional economic contribution will be
drastically reduced. This will occur because the portion of Drake Field's economic
' significance attributed to commercial service will be transferred to the new Regional
Airport.
I
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. H.7
I
I
IFinancing Plan
Funding for the Development Plan can be derived from a variety of sources. Each
of these are discussed under the categorical headings of Grants, Revenue Bonds,
General Obligation Bonds, Sales Tax, Bank Loans, Private Investment, and Airport
' Revenues.
Grants. Under the Airport Improvements Program (AIP) the FAA grants funds to
sponsors to cover a portion of the cost of airport construction. This includes land
• acquisition. Current legislation is set with a ninety/ten split for both planning and
• construction projects at airports such as Drake Field. Eligible items under the AIP
program are normally restricted to airfield facilities. There are some landside
' improvements eligible but they are normally those utilized for public purposes only.
They do not include hangars and other facilities which would be used by
individuals in a business nature.
' The Arkansas Department of Aeronautics (ADA), also participates in airport
construction projects by providing grants to sponsors. At airports with commercial
' service, the ADA currently (as of February 1991) provides grant funds on an
fifty/fifty ratio with the sponsor. The ADA will also provide up to fifty percent of
the local sponsor's share on FAA AiP grants (up to a maximum of $40,000). The
ratio and maximum amount has historically varied, with the rate of participation
tchanging from time to time.
According to airport records, over the past six years (1985-1990) the Federal
'
Government has obligated approximately $3,788,000 and the State of Arkansas has
obligated approximately $331,000 in grants for projects at Drake Field. This
represents an average annual federal and state grant allocation of approximately
' $686,000.
Revenue Bonds. One possible source of financing and one which is very often used
' for airport improvements throughout the United States is the sale of revenue bonds.
These are bonds which are retired from revenues generated by the facility
constructed or from all revenues occurring to the municipal airport. This method of
financing does not impose an additional burden on the property owner as in the case
of general obligation bonds. Also the indebtedness created does not count against
the city's bonding capacity and the revenue from a sales tax could be applied to
' retiring revenue bonds.
General Obligation Bonds. These bonds must be voted on and approved by the
people, and the cost is paid for by tax assessments on property owned by them.
'
The issuance of General Obligation Bonds is governed by Arkansas Statutes
concerning the amount of indebtedness allowed. In most cases General Obligation
Bonds are utilized for capital improvement projects for "essential" local services
Dmke Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. H.8
I
I
' (e.g. streets, schools, police, fire protection, etc.) and are only occasionally used
for projects at facilities which generate user fees, such as airports.
' Sales Tax. Where revenues are sufficient, a certain portion of the sales tax can be
earmarked for various improvements. Some communities have voted an additional
' sales tax levy to be applied towards specific projects. These sales tax revenues can
be used to retire revenue bonds or they can be used to go directly towards the
improvements.
Private Investment Often private enterprise will construct hangars and other
commercial oriented structures on the airport in return for the opportunity to do
business and hopefully make a profit from operating business out of those
' structures. The airport in turn agrees to provide a long-term lease to the investor,
and receives ground lease revenues during the term of the lease. At the end of the
lease period the airport receives ownership of the structure or it is removed from
airport property.
Airport Revenues. Sound leasing practices are very important in the development of
a financial program for an airport. An airport is both a public service and a
business; therefore, it must be operated as both. Financial assistance to the airport
will be provided by the county, city, state, federal, and private sources where
available. In return, the airport helps promote jobs, development, and economic
benefits to those areas which it serves, as well as providing a major element of the
public transportation system. This is the public service component From a
' business standpoint, the airport has the ability to generate certain revenues and
therefore the obligation to do so. The most successful and satisfactory method of
accomplishing this, whether it be through the leasing of aviation activities or
industrial activities, is through rental rate methods. Three such rental rate methods
' used at many of the airports around the country are land appraisal rates, per square
foot rates, and percentage of sales, as outlined earlier. Airport generated revenues
are responsible almost totally for funds used in the operation of Drake Field. As
detailed in Table H2, STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENSES 1985-1990, Drake
Field has generated an average of approximately $169,000 per year during the past
six years in net income.
Financial Feasibility
Due to Drake Field's relative financial autonomy from local government, sales tax
revenue and general obligation bonds are not likely sources of future development
funds. All other categories listed above should be considered as capital revenue
sources in the future. However, FAA grants, private investment, revenue bonds
and airport revenues will almost certainly continue to be the major sources of capital
improvement funds. Therefore, the funding of Drake Field's recommended
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. H.9
Development Program is not only dependent upon the availability of Federal funds,
but also dependent upon continued revenue generation at the airport, public/private
' development ventures, and community support. The FAA receives requests from
airport sponsors which exceed the amount of funds available in the Airport
Improvements Program. Drake Field will be competing for Federal funds with the
other airports in the region. With this Airport Master Plan, Drake Field can
'document its need for Federal Aviation Administration development grant funds.
As mentioned previously and as shown in Table H2 entitled STATEMENT of
REVENUES AND EXPENSES, 1985-1990 on the preceding page, Drake Field,
operationally, is completely self-supporting. Not considering depreciation, the
airport generates more operating revenue than it spends on operating expense. For
the twenty-year planning period it is estimated that the local share of development
costs for Drake Field will be a total of $4,706,650 if Scenario A is followed and
$2,713,840 with Scenario B. Of that amount, $2,590,000 in Scenario A and
$1,370,000 in Scenario B will be spent on projects which can be financed using
revenue bonds or private funds. This leaves approximately $2,116,650 in Scenario
A and $1,343,840 in Scenario B, or an average of approximately $106,000 and
$69,000, respectively, per year for the twenty-year planning period, to be funded
by the City of Fayetteville or other local sources.
As noted, the average annual amount of net income at the airport for the past six
years has been approximately $169,000. In Scenario A, it is expected that
operating revenues will continue to increase through the planning period as facilities
are added and improved at Drake Field and that operational revenue can be expected
' to continue to generate funds in excess of operational expense. However, it is also
anticipated that operational expenses will continue to increase as facilities are
improved at the airport.
As stated above, the development plan in Scenario A calls for an average local
investment of $106,000 per year over the twenty-year planning period, while
' Scenario B calls for an average local investment of $69,000. This amount is
substantially below the average annual historic net income amount of $169,000;
however, it should be pointed out that if Scenario B is followed and the airport is no
' longer served by commercial airlines, the airport's ability to generate income will be
severely restricted.
' The City of Fayetteville has historically been aggressive in the airport's capital
improvements program, taking advantage of not only operational revenues, but also
state and federal grants-in-aid to improve the airport. As stated previously, during
the past six years the airport has received an average of approximately $686,000 per
year from state and federal grants. For the twenty-year planning period, improve-
ments as detailed in the Development Plan are estimated to cost approximately
$18,280,800 in Scenario A and $9,924,600 in Scenario B.
1 Drake Field Matter Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. H.10
I
88888888
O'0088 8 8 8888 8 88 g 8
mra8 '6 •n r o0 c. ei o
_
.9 .ri V n H-, V �O 00 ft W1 1- O O O - I�).,
•+•+N N N1 PI 'o m r 7 O r N t+1 H 00 en j ci
—
NN00H00r O r en — N 00 po
' HHHH '4.-. 00
H q 544,H H H H H
n p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p A vp
S 8. 8 1 S 0 8 O O O O O O O O O O 8 O
a ao rvi n r
H r0TO • r -O. — NO 00 en O'm N N N � b
00 O H N H r 7 O 'O a0 — H N 0100 00
HHHH HH H HH H H H N H en
yy p p p p p p p a
i✓
�NI O Nr�♦+r�p en
pp OO�'• 8 M O1ef 008 N O 8 OHO
.N+ V.,
a e•1 orrm r Nn r 7v17 vl en ae
•.n 000' 0—
H HH H HHH H 1� N H ON
I.
I.
S
�v o�p N {fV N 0V N O) O O pO OHn
O a �'i OONe9•�r� 00 "' � ,N° 4* enOro mtHj Oo
NHNHH— H 5n4N H N HHO H
ay y
H
gPdm888�o 8 88 8 8a p8888 x 88 g V 8 g
a0O O0 �D H. aVa aen0�N em�l Q '0 N 't en 5!f N
wN r VHnHe+1 �D r ern HH1•Hf ? 0� N '�'• N .+HHH H- H �+N m .+ H -
ti H H H HH H H H H .H..
• y
p p p p p p p p p p
~ 8H+N8888 b 88 8 0700 v, 8 8 8 O,
C oo r Q O .� e4 o a0 ai a oo .d •G gyp• C. X1
Cl) yr ZS e1 vl ../off H `v't •'S ci c1 •p orj a
' a 4HHH �H H 4, 4, H N
5 r y a d eM
a w
yx
0 `C r' en U W
y V W y e S s az 0.
z Z z
W ti W a� O a 7k1-�g-.,J..i a O OCR' F� 01 V C3 1 woo
OC V
I. 0.0
g u.flk
F '� E.' O
Pz<v w�a�3$C Wo �,� ci0
wF o. oc�6'oc �O Aw,rn� p5 3m' zp w g
Fv�O O 0 X Z O ZF
' Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. H.11
1
I
I
Excluding those portions which are expected to be funded using local funds, the
state share is anticipated to be approximately $795,950 in Scenario A and $573,140
if Scenario B is followed. The federal share is estimated to be $12,778,200 in
Scenario A and $6,637,620 in Scenario B. This is a yearly average of
approximately $679,000 and $361,000, respectively, over the twenty-year planning
period to be provided by federal and state grants. Thus, the development calls for a
continued investment of FAA and state grant funds at levels which are equal to or
less than those which have occurred over the past five years.
Summary
' The monetary commitments for the City of Fayetteville, the State of Arkansas and
the FAA which would be taken on to enable the development of Drake Field to
safely, efficiently and properly meet future demand, do not seem to be excessive
' when compared with the past expenditures as cited above. The continued level of
FAA funding commitment at Drake Field is governed by congressional
appropriations to the Airport Improvements Program, and need that is demonstrated
' at this airport when compared with need that is demonstrated at other airports within
the regional and national airport system. Therefore, the level to which FAA will
fund airport improvements at any specific airport is somewhat unclear. However,
' the future level of FAA funding does not alter the basic premise upon which this
Airport Master Plan and the resulting list of improvement projects were developed.
That basic premise is demand dictated development. The objective is to provide
Drake Field with a flexible master planning document which it can utilize to direct
'
airport development to meet future demand as it occurs. Increased demand will
require improvements to achieve a safe airport facility which will supply the
necessary capacity. If demand does not occur, additional development will not be
' called for, and the funds specified in the Development Plan for those projects will
not be expended.
' To add to the flexibility of this planning document, two scenarios have been
formulated. The development specified in Scenario A is premised upon Drake Field
continuing to serve as the primary commercial service airport serving Northwest
' Arkansas. Scenario B assumes that a new Regional Airport will be built and that
Drake Field will not serve commercial service airlines in the future. Although the
financial commitment on all levels (local, state and federal) in higher in Scenario A,
' the demand and income generated at the airport will also be significantly larger than
in Scenario B. In other words, the funding amounts specified in Scenario B,
although lower than Scenario A, are likely to be more difficult to achieve. Again it
should be pointed out that the basis for all projects is demand. If demand does not
'occur, funds for those projects will not be expended.
n
Lj
Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March, 1991. H.12
I
I
Drake Field is a vital component of the local, regional and national transportation
infrastructure. Airport users benefit from a safe, well -maintained, and well -
operated airport, as do the citizens and businesses of the surrounding communities.
The future development of Drake Field will call for the continued utilization of the
multiple funding strategies which have been used at the airport in the past for capital
improvement projects.
C
r
I
L
I
I
I
Ii
I
E
C
H
1 Drake Field Master Plan Update/Draft Report. March. 1991. H.13
I L. p.
itI.
150
300
SI
Lw
hxMwyE .r -