Airport Layout Plan (ALP) Update Report Landside

Transcription

University of Illinois – Willard Airport
Airport Layout Plan (ALP) Update Report
Landside Improvements
September 22, 2010
By
Crawford, Murphy & Tilly Inc.
Airport Layout Plan (ALP) Report
Table of Contents
Section One: History & Demand Projections
1.0
1.1
History ....................................................................................................................................... 1-1
Demand Projections ................................................................................................................. 1-1
Section Two: Key User Interviews ....................................................................................... 1-1
2.0
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 2-1
City of Champaign & Village of Savoy ................................................................................. 2-1
University of Illinois – Institute of Aviation ......................................................................... 2-2
University of Illinois – Department of Intercollegiate Athletics (DIA)............................. 2-3
Flightstar Inc. ............................................................................................................................ 2-3
Section Three: Facility Requirements
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.3
Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 3-1
Airfield ....................................................................................................................................... 3-1
Passenger Terminal Facilities ................................................................................................. 3-1
General Aviation Facilities ...................................................................................................... 3-2
Section Four: Development Alternatives
4.0 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 4-1
4.1 Landside Elements ................................................................................................................... 4-1
4.1.1 Existing Terminal Area Land Use ..................................................................................... 4-1
4.1.2 Terminal Area Redevelopment & Expansion Areas ...................................................... 4-2
4.1.3 Passenger Terminal Complex ............................................................................................ 4-2
4.1.4 General Aviation (GA) Expansion .................................................................................... 4-3
Section Five: Land Use
5.0
Land use..................................................................................................................................... 5-1
List of Tabels
Table 1-1: Aviation Demand Projections ............................................................................................ 1-2
Table 3-1: Aviation Demand Projections ............................................................................................ 3-3
List of Exhibits
Exhibit 4-1: Existing Terminal Area Land Use
Exhibit 4-2: Existing Terminal Area Redevelopment and Expansion Areas
Exhibit 4-3: Passenger Terminal Complex Expansion
Exhibit 4-4: GA Expansion Option One
Exhibit 4-5: GA Expansion Option Two
September 22, 2010
Page i
History & Demand Projections
Exhibit 4-6: Proposed Corporate Hangars Layout
Exhibit 4-7: GA Expansion Option Three
Exhibit 4-8: Preferred Development
Exhibit 4-9: FAR Part 77 Surfaces
Exhibit 4-10: FAR part 77 Surfaces (Terminal Area)
Exhibit 4-11: Preferred Reconfigured Orange & Blue Course
Exhibit 4-12: Alternate Reconfigured Orange & Blue Course
September 22, 2010
Page ii
Section One
1.0
HISTORY
In 2009, the University of Illinois – Willard Airport was absorbed into the University of Illinois
Real Estate division. During this transition period, the Real Estate division identified the need to
analyze landside facility requirements and surrounding land use considerations. Primary
objectives were to identified areas which to preserve for aviation development and surrounding
land uses which could result in incompatible development.
Therefore, the Airport initiated an Airport Layout Plan Update specific to landside
development needs over the 20-year planning period. In addition, the Airport identified
surrounding land use considerations including existing uses and different means to mitigate
and/or prevent non-compatible developments within proximity to the airport environment.
1.1
DEMAND PROJECTIONS
As indicated above, this ALP update effort was focused on identifying general landside
improvements necessary to accommodate aviation demand over the 20-year planning period.
Therefore, a general forecast of aviation demand was developed for commercial airlines
(passengers) and general aviation.
The 2008 FAA Terminal Area Forecast was utilized as the “base” year. As the sponsor sought to
only identify general facility demand for the long-term, the forecasting effort sought to simply
target the “growth envelope” using moderate growth trends. In addition, the Airport held
interviews with key users during the development of the Airport Layout Plan Update to learn
of future growth opportunities and associated need for improvements. Additional information
regarding the interviews will be presented in Section Two.
Specifically, annual growth rates of 3% and 5% were selected to determine various benchmarks
at which demand would exceed available property limits within the existing development
quadrant of the Airport. While these ranges exceed TAF growth rates, the range appears
reasonable to develop general landside facility requirements given the presence of significant
users based at the airport including the University of Illinois – Institute of Aviation and
significant growth by Flightstar Inc. Also, the Airport desires to identify more aggressive
growth trends so as to adequately protect any airport areas that may be necessary for
aeronautical demand.
The Airport will continue to utilize the latest FAA Terminal Area Forecast for programming
purposes. Presently, the Airport has identified an update to its Airport Master Plan scheduled
to begin in 2011. The Airport Master Plan Update will focus on the entire airport environment.
September 22, 2010
Page 1-1
Table 1-1 provides aviation demand projections for 2028 based on the average annual growth
range identified previously.
Table 1-1:
Aviation Demand Projections
Year
2008
2028
-2028
2028
Data
Source
Enplanements
Commercial
Operations
TAF
TAF
113,078
165,072
TAF AAG
3% AAG
5% AAG
General Aviation
Based Aircraft
9,775
12,332
Itinerant
28,509
35,709
Local
62,143
62,143
Total
90,652
97,852
1.8%
1.1%
1.1%
0.0%
0.4%
1.6%
204,231
300,030
17,655
25,936
69,575
102,210
112,512
165,287
182,087
267,498
146
215
81
112
Source: FAA 2008 Terminal Area Forecast, CMT Analysis
September 22, 2010
Page 1-2
Section Two
Key User Interviews
2.0
INTRODUCTION
In an effort to identify landside facility needs over the 20-year planning period, user interviews
were held with key tenants. In addition, interviews were held with officials from the
surrounding communities to recognize any potential development priorities which could be
considered incompatible with airport operations. The following entities were interviewed as
part of this effort:

City of Champaign & Village of Savoy

University of Illinois – Institute of Aviation

University of Illinois – Department of Intercollegiate Athletics (DIA)

Flightstar Inc.
The findings from each entity interviewed will be provided in the following subsections.
2.1
CITY OF CHAMPAIGN & VILLAGE OF SAVOY
The interviews held with the City of Champaign and the Village of Savoy focused on land use
considerations within proximity to the airport environment.

Savoy has annexation agreement down to Old Church Road

Tolono does not have a comp plan

Savoy is updating land use plan
 Looking at industrial inside roads that bound the airport
 Village has not promoted industrial in past

Champaign completed master plan of for quadrants of Curtis road interchange
 Had interest about a year ago for commercial in SE quadrant

Current boundary agreement stops at I-57

Champaign is pursuing sanitary sewer service thru Champaign-Urbana Sewer
District

NW quadrant approach area has best potential for development – could see a master
zone

Champaign-Savoy has become a 2-store community (5-mile buffer)
September 22, 2010
Page 2-1
Key User Interviews
 Want some controls at Curtis Road interchange to not create another strip
mall (10-20 process)

Curtis Road being improved to 4-lane with median next year

Champaign believes industrial in NW and NE C/U because presence of utilities

Utility expansion may be expensive

Monticello & U.S. 45
 Not concerned with development east of tracks
 Maybe have site specific development controls to SW
 Airport compatibility overlay zone

2.2
Develop overlay zone map and land use and height restrictions
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS – INSTITUTE OF AVIATION
The University of Illinois – Institute of Aviation provides a Professional Pilot program to over
250 students each semester. The students complete a number of flight training courses
throughout the program to obtain pilot licenses including but not limited to private, instrument,
commercial, multi-engine, instructor, etc. Over the course of a typical year, the Institute
completes over 20,000 flight hours.

Like the old terminal building

May not re-use quonsets if police move out

Parking lot is in bad shape and road

Flight instructors peak and valley with aviation industry

Put new door in aircraft storage hangar

Looking at improvements to aircraft maintenance shop

Need for parallel to Runway 4-22 would be long term benefit
$22M renovation old terminal building changed everything except structural and
mechanicals

Flightstar provides fueling services and Institute has part of farm

Would like to have an additional 1,200 – 1,500 SF for flight simulators and have
relocated flight department building on flight line
September 22, 2010
Page 2-2
Key User Interviews
2.3 UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS – DEPARTMENT OF INTERCOLLEGIATE
ATHLETICS (DIA)

Blue course has to operate as a course for 50-years which is close to being satisfied

Did not have cash to build course – sold lots along entrance road to generate cash

Like to build championship 18-hole course

72,000 rounds/year

Outsourced maintenance

Would be willing to look at future property exchange to west

Could even look to expand to two 45 holes – 9 holes temporary 180-200 acres
2.4
FLIGHTSTAR INC.
Flightstar Inc employs approximately 110 individuals and is comprised of three lines of
business. Flightstar provides FBO services, air taxi and aircraft management services, and
airline maintenance programs. Flightstar provides a number of maintenance services to
commercial airline aircraft operated by American Airlines.

Long-term storage vs. out-of-service

Majority clean-up plus Class A, B, & C checks

Supposed to have two Global Express – charter/private operator

Don’t have a lot of extra hangar space

Looked at building giant complex at Institute and lease back

Maxed out on office space (maybe 2nd story)

They would like location for ARFF and possibly structure- maybe raze ARFF and
extend hangar

Hangars
 Hangar 4 leased from JM Jones
 Hangar 2 – storage- avionics
 Hangar 8 – maintenance – backup storage
 Hangar 3 – Eagle maintenance
 Hangar 5 - first maintenance – now storage for Eagle and equipment
 Hangar 9 – future Global hangar
 Future Hangar 10 – 125’ x 200’

Exclusive charters go thru Flightstar, scheduled goes thru terminal
September 22, 2010
Page 2-3
Key User Interviews

Staff offices are badly needed – pilots – expansion could go towards ram or west

Most of flying is management – part 91

Parking is not an issue – even with charters

Not looking at paint and interiors

Need another ILS especially with loss of backcourse

Entrance road is a mess where it splits

May need separate service road

Additional corporate hangars
September 22, 2010
Page 2-4
Key User Interviews
Section Three
Facility Requirements
3.0
INTRODUCTION
The following section contains facility requirements which were developed based on the input
received during the key user interview process and from the findings of the aviation demand
projections presented in Section 1.1.
3.1
AIRFIELD
During the development of the Airport Layout Plan (ALP), the Airport elected to make a
revision to the airfield facilities. While not studied as part of the ALP update process, Runway
18-36 has been shown to remain an active runway during the 20-year planning period. This
decision was based on multiple discussions with FAA representatives during the process of
decommissioning Runway 18-36 as a Part 139 facility due to Runway Safety Area (RSA)
concerns. The action of decommissioning Runway 18-36 was taken by the Airport with the
understanding that potential replacement facilities (i.e. Parallel Runway 4L-22R) would be
discussed at a later date. The Airport will revisit the status of Runway 18-36 as an active
runway at a later date based on discussions with FAA representatives regarding the preferred
airfield development plan.
3.2
PASSENGER TERMINAL FACILITIES
This section will identify facilities required to accommodate passenger demand throughout the
20-year planning period. The passenger terminal facilities include the terminal building, aircraft
gates, public vehicle parking, rental car parking, and employee parking.
As indicated in Section 1.1, the Airport should identify facilities necessary to accommodate
between 200,000 and 300,000 passenger enplanements annually by 2028. Based on the projected
annual passenger enplanement levels, the passenger terminal should be configured to
accommodate approximately 250 to 320 enplanements during the peak hour. To accommodate
the anticipated peak hour demand, the Airport should plan on providing between 60,000 square
feet and 80,000 square feet of passenger terminal area which will maintain an acceptable Level
of Service (LOS) to the traveling public.
Currently, the passenger terminal provides six (6) aircraft gates which can accommodate a wide
range of aircraft types. Based on standard planning matrixes, the passenger terminal may
require one additional gate for a total of seven (7) gates to accommodate the peak hour
passenger enplanement level anticipated during the 20-year planning period. However, the
final gate configuration will depend on the aircraft fleet mix utilized by the airlines during peak
hour operations.
September 22, 2010
Page 3-1
Terminal parking facilities consist of multiple areas utilized by the traveling public, rental car
operators, and employees. Currently, the airport provides approximately 640 parking spaces for
public vehicles, approximately 120 parking spaces for rental car operators, and approximately
60 parking spaces for employees. Based on the projected passenger enplanement demand
during the 20-year planning period, the Airport should plan on providing between 1,000 and
1,280 parking spaces for public vehicles, between 130 and 160 parking spaces for rental car
operators, and between 60 and 80 parking spaces for employees.
3.3
GENERAL AVIATION FACILITIES
This section will identify facilities necessary to accommodate general aviation demand over the
20-year planning period. The Airport provides multiple facilities to accommodate general
aviation demand including the University of Illinois (U of I) Community Hangars, U of I Ramp,
Fixed Based Operator (FBO) Ramp, Community Hangars, and Corporate/T-Hangars. While the
projected general aviation demand may be aggressive, the Airport wants to identify areas
which should be preserved for facility development over the 20-year planning period and
beyond. The Airport believes it is prudent to identify and preserve aviation development areas
for two primary reasons; 1) development of new areas require significant resources and should
be fully vetted prior to development commences, 2) if non-aviation development occurs, the
Airport cannot reclaim that area for aviation development without considerable cost and
complexity.
Currently, the U of I occupies two (2) community hangars for aircraft storage and 40 aircraft
ramp parking positions. As indicated in Section 2.2, the University of Illinois – Institute of
Aviation does not foresee significant growth in its operation during the 20-year planning
period. Therefore, no additional facilities are anticipated and the Airport should plan on
minimal facility improvements like pavement rehabilitation, etc. The Airport should, however,
ensure that the same level of facilities are provided in the landside area for the U of I Flight
School in the long-term.
To accommodate the anticipated demand for itinerant general aviation activity, the Airport
should plan on providing between 12 and 35 aircraft parking positions on the FBO ramp. The
final number of aircraft parking positions and the configuration will be dependent on the types
of aircraft utilizing the FBO ramp. The Airport experiences a number of large aircraft charters
during the school year which are assisting the University of Illinois Athletic teams in attending
games. In 2008, the Airport accommodated a number of large size charter aircraft being utilized
to assist in the University of Illinois football team appearance in the Rose Bowl.
The Airport currently provides four (4) Community Hangars which can accommodate a
number of aircraft parking stalls based on aircraft size and parking configuration. Given the
projected growth in based aircraft anticipated over the 20-year planning period, the Airport
should plan on providing an additional four (4) to six (6) community hangars to provide
adequate storage of aircraft. The actual number of additional community hangars will depend
September 22, 2010
Page 3-2
on the number of aircraft wishing to utilize a community hangar, the size of those aircraft, and
the agreed upon parking configuration of those aircraft.
In addition to the four (4) community hangars provided, the Airport also presently maintains 48
aircraft parking stalls through a combination of individual corporate hangars and T-Hangars.
Based on the projected growth in based aircraft anticipated over the 20-year planning period,
the Airport should plan on providing an additional 50+ aircraft parking stalls through a
combination of corporate hangars and T-Hangars to provide adequate storage.
The Airport has identified two locations for development of aircraft storage facilities to
accommodate demand over the 20-year period. The existing general aviation east quadrant
should be utilized first to accommodate demand as this location has existing services in place
(roadways, utilities, etc). Upon reaching capacity in the east general aviation quadrant, the
Airport should begin the development process for the north general aviation quadrant. This
location has been identified on numerous Airport Layout Plans (ALPs) over the years as an area
of development.
Table 3-1 provides a summary of landside facility requirements over the 20-year planning
period to accommodate the anticipated aviation demand.
Table 3-1:
Aviation Demand Projections
Facility
TERMINAL BUILDING
PH Operations
PH Enplanements
Terminal Size (sf)
Gates
Public Parking Spaces
Rental Spaces
Employee Spaces
GENERAL AVIATION
UofI Community Hangars
UofI Ramp Spaces
Aircraft Parking (FBO)
Total Hangars Spaces
Community Hangars
Corporate/T-Hangars
Existing
Capacity
TAF
3% AAG
5% AAG
--60,000
6
640
120
60
4.2
208
51,879
4
830
104
52
5.3
257
64,366
5
1,030
129
64
6.5
320
80,011
7
1,280
160
80
2
40
--4
48
2
40
12
72
5
54
2
40
24
106
7
80
2
40
35
175
11
131
Source: FAA 2008 Terminal Area Forecast, CMT Analysis
September 22, 2010
Page 3-3
Section Four
Development Alternatives
4.0
INTRODUCTION
As a component of the planning process, the generation of development alternatives is
necessary to identify scenarios that will best accommodate both the existing and projected level
of aviation demand. In the previous section, landside facilities recommended to satisfy
projected demand levels were identified. The possible combinations of developments can be
endless, so intuitive judgment should be applied to identify those concepts that have the
greatest potential for implementation. The next step is to evaluate the various ways that these
facilities can physically be accommodated.
4.1
LANDSIDE ELEMENTS
The landside elements consist of passenger and general aviation facilities. The primary element
of the development alternatives will be the expansion of general aviation facilities as substantial
land resources are needed to accommodate the 20-year demand.
4.1.1
Existing Terminal Area Land Use
The existing terminal area is configured into six (6) general classifications based on the type of
activity that occurs within that area. Exhibit 4-1provides a graphic depiction of the functional
areas which include the following:

Passenger Terminal Complex – provides facilities necessary to support the
movement of passengers by air carrier aircraft. This area includes vehicle parking,
employee parking, rental car parking, passenger terminal building, and the air
carrier apron.

Public Fuel Farm – provides storage capacity for aircraft fuel (Avgas & Jet-A).

Flightstar (Fixed Base Operator) – facilities associated with the operation of
Flightstar, Inc. which provides general FBO services, aircraft management services,
aircraft charters, and major aircraft maintenance services.

Airport Support – facilities associated with the operation of the Airport including
Snow Removal Equipment (SRE) storage, airfield vault, cistern, rental car wash, Air
Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) and Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting (ARFF) storage.

University of Illinois (Institute of Aviation) - facilities associated with the operation
of the Institute of Aviation including aircraft storage, aircraft maintenance, fuel farm,
classrooms, etc.

General Aviation Storage – facilities associated with the storage of general aviation
aircraft including T-Hangars and Corporate Hangars.
September 22, 2010
Page 4-1
4.1.2
Terminal Area Redevelopment & Expansion Areas
Prior to initiating the development of alternatives to accommodate the 20-year demand, areas
within the existing terminal area which could support either redevelopment or expansion
activities were identified. Exhibit 4-2 provides an illustration of areas identified for either
expansion or redeveloped.
As a part of this effort, a meeting was conducted with the operator of the University of Illinois
Golf Course (University of Illinois – Department of Intercollegiate Athletics (DIA)). The purpose
of this meeting was to evaluate both expansion potential along the existing terminal area
entrance road and to discuss land use compatibility between the Airport and golf course land
uses. The DIA indicated (from Section Two) that expansion opportunities may exist whereby
the golf course (and associated lands) could be reconfigured to better accommodate existing
and planned uses of the Airport. As a result of this discussion, a revised golf course layout,
provided as Exhibit 4-11 and 412, for both the Blue and Orange courses was developed to
accommodate the previously stated development and land use priorities.
4.1.3
Passenger Terminal Complex
The current passenger terminal complex was constructed in the 1980’s as a result of growing
demand both for commercial air service and general aviation facilities. This quadrant provides
facilities necessary to support commercial airline services to the community and provides
adequate space for expansion. Facilities include vehicle parking, employee parking, rental car
parking, airport access, and the passenger terminal. As indicated in Section Three, the Airport
should plan on providing additional facilities to accommodate an increase in passenger
enplanement demand over the 20-year planning period. The following facility
expansion/addition are depicted in Exhibit 4-3:

Passenger Terminal - approximately 15,000 SF to accommodate the increase in
passenger enplanements. Final configuration will be dependent upon aircraft fleet
mix and peak hour activity.

Air Carrier Apron - approximately 12,000 SY to support aircraft parking

Public Vehicle Parking – approximately 30,000 SY to accommodate
vehicle parking

Proposed Entrance Road Realignment – configured to accommodate the expansion
of vehicle parking and maintain one-way traffic

Consolidated Rental Car Facility – proposed facility to accommodate additional
rental car storage and provide a consolidated area to prep rental vehicles. A
consolidated facility typically includes vacuum, fueling, washing, and light
maintenance activities. Furthermore, the proposed facility reduces the number of
vehicle trips (shuttling for service) on the entrance road thereby reducing loads on
pavement and increase safety in front of the terminal building.
September 22, 2010
Page 4-2
additional

Corporate/Cargo Facilities – proposed facilities to accommodate either dedicated
cargo activities or large corporate flight department development. Proposed site is
configured to contain up to three large box hangars with adequate aircraft parking
apron.
4.1.4
General Aviation (GA) Expansion
The following alternatives were developed to accommodate the 20-year demand for general
aviation facilities. In addition, proposed Airport support facilities are depicted when
appropriate.
4.1.4.1
General Aviation (GA) Expansion – Alternative One
This alternative was developed with a focus on corporate storage while also identifying areas
capable of accommodating FBO expansion. The following developments are depicted in Exhibit
4-4:

Three (3) additional T-Hangar units. Each unit can accommodate up to 10 aircraft
parking stalls based on a nested configuration. These units can accommodate storage
of most single-engine piston aircraft and some multi-engine piston aircraft.

Eight (8) additional Corporate Hangars (approximately 80’ x 80’). These hangars can
accommodate multiple aircraft depending on the owner preference and size of
aircraft. The proposed building size can handle aircraft up to midsized business jets.

Two (2) additional Corporate Hangars (approximately 60’ x 60’). Typically, a hangar
this size will only accommodate one aircraft up to a small business jet.

Construction of New Taxilane – required to service the proposed corporate hangars.
Will require the mitigation of existing structures which have reached the end of their
useful life.

FBO Expansion – the existing FBO (Flightstar) has indicated the need to expand their
facilities over the 20-year planning period. This alternative depicts expansion of the
existing offices and the construction of one (1) additional hangar (125’ x 230’).

ARFF Replacement/Relocation – the existing facility will reach the end of its useful
life during the 20-year planning period. In addition, a new location for the ARFF
building will facilitate the proposed expansion of the FBO facilities.

Entrance Road Relocation – to facilitate the proposed development, some road
relocations and upgrades will be necessary.
Based on the depicted improvements, the Airport can provide up to approximately forty-eight
additional aircraft storage spaces depending on the final configuration of corporate hangars.
Upon reaching a “full” build out scenario, the Airport should begin developing the north
general aviation quadrant. To provide adequate time for necessary approvals, the Airport
September 22, 2010
Page 4-3
should begin the development process upon reaching 80% of the capacity within the existing
terminal area (after construction of approximately 39 aircraft storage spaces).
4.1.4.2
General Aviation (GA) Expansion – Alternative Two
This alternative was developed with a focus on T-Hangar storage while also identifying areas
capable of accommodating FBO expansion. The following developments are depicted in Exhibit
4-5:

Two (2) additional Corporate Hangars (approximately 80’ x 80’). These hangars can

Four (4) additional T-Hangar units. Three of the proposed units can accommodate
up to 10 aircraft while the fourth is designed to accommodate up to 15 aircraft based
on a nested configuration. These units can accommodate storage of most singleengine piston aircraft and some multi-engine piston aircraft.

New Air Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) – the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
is currently in the process of designing a new ATCT. Based on discussions with FAA
representatives, the general proposed location is depicted. It should be noted that the
ultimate configuration of the building, parking, and ancillary development will be
dependent on final design and construction.

Construction of New Taxilane – required to service the proposed corporate hangars.
useful life.

This alternative also proposes additional corporate hangars to the east of the existing terminal
area (not depicted) that occupies existing golf course property Exhibit 4-6. The proposed
facilities consist of three (3) large hangars (150’ x 250’), aircraft apron, and parking
improvements. The proposed hangars are sized to accommodate a wide range of corporate
aircraft types including ultra-long haul aircraft like the Global Express or Gulfstream 650.
Presently, the FBO manages a number of corporate aircraft for private individuals/companies
including some long-haul corporate aircraft.
Based on the depicted improvements, the Airport can provide up to approximately sixty-one
general aviation quadrant. To provide adequate time for necessary approvals/design, the
Airport should begin the development process upon reaching 75% of the capacity within the
existing terminal area (after construction of approximately 48 aircraft storage spaces).
September 22, 2010
Page 4-4
4.1.4.3
General Aviation (GA) Expansion – Alternative Three
This alternative was developed to provide a mix of aircraft storage options while identifying
areas capable of accommodating both FBO expansion and ARFF relocation. The following
developments are depicted in Exhibit 4-7:

Four (4) additional T-Hangar units. Three of the proposed units can accommodate
up to 10 aircraft while the fourth is designed to accommodate up to 15 aircraft based
on a nested configuration. These units can accommodate storage of most singleengine piston aircraft and some multi-engine piston aircraft.

Six (6) additional Corporate Hangars (approximately 80’ x 80’). These hangars can

Two additional Corporate Hangars (approximately 150’ x 250’). The proposed
hangars are sized to accommodate a wide range of corporate aircraft types including
ultra-long haul aircraft like the Global Express or Gulfstream 650.

Construction of New Taxilanes – required to service the proposed corporate hangars.
useful life.

New Air Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) – the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
is currently in the process of designing a new ATCT. Based on discussions with FAA
representatives, the general proposed location is depicted. It should be noted that the
ultimate configuration of the building, parking, and ancillary development will be
dependent on final design and construction.

FBO Expansion – the existing FBO (Flightstar) has indicated the need to expand their
facilities over the 20-year planning period. This alternative depicts expansion of the
existing offices and the construction of one (1) additional hangar (125’ x 230’).

ARFF Replacement/Relocation – the existing facility will reach the end of its useful
life during the 20-year planning period. In addition, a new location for the ARFF
building will facilitate the proposed expansion of the FBO facilities.

Based on the depicted improvements, the Airport can provide up to approximately sixty-five
general aviation quadrant. To provide adequate time for necessary approvals/design, the
Airport should begin the development process upon reaching 80% of the capacity within the
existing terminal area (after construction of approximately 52 aircraft storage spaces).
September 22, 2010
Page 4-5
ALP Update and Land Use Plan
±
University of Illinois - Willard Airport
University of
Illinois Golf
1 inch = 400 feet
"
New Air Traffic
Control Tower
Legend
Existing Airport Property Line
Air Traffic Control Tower Area
Expansion Areas
Redevelopment Areas
Source: Aerial Photo- National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP) 2009.
Existing Terminal Area
Redevelopment and Expansion Areas
Exhibit 4-2
080590500
±
1 inch = 300 feet
Expanded
Auto Parking
Expanded
Auto Parking
Fueling
Island
Relocated
Wash Canopy
Car Wash
Facility
Terminal Expansion
Legend
Future Terminal Road Development
Future Pavements
Future Corporate Hangars
Future Terminal Building Expansion
Source: National Agricultural Imagery Program (NAIP) 1m full color, dated 2007.
Passenger Terminal Complex Expansion
Exhibit 4-3
080590500
±
1 inch = 300 feet
University of
Illinios Golf
Legend
Future Taxiway Centerline
Future Airfield Pavements
Future T-Hangars
Future Support/Aircraft Rescue
& Firefighting
Future FBO Expansions
Source: Aerial - National Agricultural Imagery Program (NAIP) 1m full color, dated 2009.
GA Expansion Option One
Exhibit 4-4
080590500
±
A
Ex Par uto
pa kin
ns g
io
n
To Corporate Exansion
1 inch = 200 feet
Auto
Parking
Expansion
Legend
Future Pavements
Future AirTraffic Control Tower (ATCT)
Future Support/Aircraft Rescue Firefighting
Future T-Hangars
GA Expansion Option Two
Exhibit 4-5
080590500
¬
«7
!
!
.
!
.
!
.
!
ALP Update & Land Use Planning
!
.
¬
«
14
15
¬
«
¬
«3
¬
«
16
10
¬
«
!
¬
«8
¬
«6
!
!
¬
«
!
.
5
III
!
.
!
¬
«4
!
!
H
13
¬
«
"
Service Road
Apron
!
H
!
150'
250'
Auto Parking
Hangars
Future Service Road Extension
Taxiway Centerline
!
.
Future Service Road Extension
250'
¬
«
13
Scale: 1"= 300'
!
H
"
!
H
Object Free Area
12
¬
«
Legend
!
"
"
up
!
!
.
11
¬
«
!
.
162'
!
1 inch = 300 feet
!
.
¬
«9
!
.
G
ro
´
!
Future Ramp
Expansion
Taxiway Object Free Area
12
¬
«
Future Service Road
!
!
!
.
Existing Hole
!
!
H
Existing Hole to be Relocated
!
!
H
Future Hole Realignment
Future Apron Expansion
Future Pavements
Proposed Corporate Hangars Layout
Exhibit 4-6
080590500
Legend
University of
Illinois Golf
Future Airfield Pavements
Future Air Traffic Control Tower Area
Future FBO Expansion
Future T-Hangars
±
Future Support/Aircraft Rescue & Firefighting
1 inch = 300 feet
GA Expansion Option Three
Exhibit 4-7
080590500
´
University of
Illinois Golf
Scale: 1"=700'
Fu
re
tu
Se
e
ic
rv
R
d
oa
r
Ap
on
Fu
t
t
Au
o
P
g
kin
ar
ur
e
Ac
ce
ss
R
oa
d
Auto
Parking
Apron
Legend
Apron
Airport Support Facilities
Corporate Hangars/FBO Improvements
Insitute of Aviation Improvements
Passenger Terminal Improvements
T-Hangar Storage
Future Pavement
Source: Aerial Photo: National Agricultural Imagery Program (NAIP) dated 2009.
Perferred Development
Exhibit 4-8
080590500
!
.
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
16
¬
«
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
.
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
1
!
!
!
!
!
¬
«
¬
«1
18
¬
«
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!!
!
!
.
!!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
¬
«¬
«
14
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
.
!
.
!
¬ «
«
¬8
16
¬
«
¬
«6 !
.
3
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
15
!
!
!
!
17 ¬
«2 !! «
¬
«
¬7 .
!
!
.
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
.
!
.
!
. !!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
10
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
.
!
.
!
!
.!
!
.
!
¬
«9
«
!
.¬
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
11
¬
«
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
.
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
.
!
.
!
.
!
¬
«2
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
17
¬
«
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
12
¬
«
¬
«8
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Scale: 1"=700'
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
.
15
¬
«
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
.
!
!
!
.
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
.
!
!
!
.
!
!
!
¬
«4
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
14
¬
«
¬
«3
!! !
!
!
!
.
¬
«5
!
13
¬
«
!
¬
«
6
!
.
¬
«
´
!
!
.
7
!
!
!
!
!
!
.
.
18
¬
«
!! !
.
!
.
!
.
Orange Course Hole Location
!
Orange Course Tee Box Area
!
.
!
Blue Course Hole Location
!
Blue Course Tee Box Area
!
Existing Orange Course
10
¬
«
Exist Blue Course
!
.
¬
«9
¬
«5
¬
«4
1
3
¬
«
Legend
Reconfigured Blue Course
Reconfigured Orange Course
!
Future Airport Property Line
!
!
.
!
!
.
¬
«
11
Existing Buildings
!
! !
12
¬
«
!
.
!
Existing Approach Surface
!
! !
! !
Future Approach Surface
Future Development
Future Object Free Area
Future Runway Safety Area
Golf Course Water Hazards
!
Perferred Reconfigured
Orange & Blue Course
Exhibit 4-11
080590500
!
.
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
¬
«¬
«
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
17 ¬
«4 !! «
¬
«
¬7 .
!
!
.
!
.
!
.
!
!
!
!
14
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
¬
«
¬
«1
18
¬
«
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
15
¬ «
«
¬8
16
¬
«
¬
«6 !
.
!
!
.
!
!
. !
.
.!!
!
!
!
Legend
!
.
.
18
¬
«
!! !
.
!
.
!
.
Blue Course Hole Location
!
Blue Course Tee Box Area
!
.
!
Orange Course Hole Location
!
Orange Course Tee Box Area
!
Existing Orange Course
10
¬
«
Exist Blue Course
!
.
¬
«9
5
!
¬
«9
10
1
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
11
¬
«
«
!
.¬
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
.
!
.
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
¬
«2
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
.
!
.
!
. !!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
3
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
¬
«2
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
¬
«
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
.
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
.
!
.
!
.
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
.
!
!
!
!
!
.
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
17
¬
«
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
16
¬
«
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
12
¬
«
¬
«8
!
!
!
!
!
15
¬
«
!
!
!
!
!
!
.
Scale: 1"=700'
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
.
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
.
!
.
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
13
¬
«
!
!
!
!
!
!! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
14
¬
«
¬
«3
¬
«7
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
.
!
!
¬
«4
!
!
!
!
.
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
¬
«5
!
!
!
.
!
.
!
¬
«
6
!
´
!
Reconfigured Blue Course
Reconfigured Orange Course
!
Future Airport Property Line
12
¬
«
!
13
¬
«
!
¬
«
11
Existing Buildings
!
! !
!
.
Existing Approach Surface
!
! !
! !
Future Approach Surface
Future Development
Future Object Free Area
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Future Runway Safety Area
!
Golf Course Water Hazards
!
Alternate Reconfigured Orange
and Blue Course
Exhibit 4-12
080590500
Section Five
Land Use
5.0
LAND USE
As previously discussed, a key element of this study was the evaluation of existing and planned
land use compatibility for nearby off-airport property. The City of Champaign and Village of
Savoy have experienced significant growth in areas near the Airport over the last 10+ years. As
this growth continues, a southward and westward progression of this development is
anticipated.
To promote land use compatibility, the Airport desired to evaluate the compatibility of existing
and planned land uses relative to the proposed Airport configuration depicted on the approved
Airport Layout Plan. Most relevant to off-airport land use compatibility are the following
proposed improvements:




Extension of Runway 4/22 to the southwest,
Construction of Parallel GA Runway 4/22,
Establishment of a Precision Instrument Approach on Runways 14 and 22, and
Acquisition of property in proposed runway approach and landside development areas.
Existing/anticipated off-airport land uses and development areas that were of most concern for
incompatibility were the following:




Noise impacts associated with residential, church or park development in the Runway
14, 18, and 22 approach paths and extended approach corridors,
Public assembly and lighting impacts associated with commercial development in or
near the Runway 32 Runway Protection Zone and approach corridor,
Airspace impacts associated with cell tower construction along Interstate 57, and
Water retention facilities on the north and east boundaries of the Airport.
To establish adequate control for these and other land uses, an overlay zone district was
identified as the preferred mechanism. The proposed district will involve Champaign County,
City of Champaign and Village of Savoy and is proposed to control the Land Use Control Area
(LUCA) which is comprised of the immediate approach paths for Runway 14L/32R and 4/22.
The zoning control will be implemented by the applicable land use control organization and the
sample ordinance seeks to incorporate review of all land use changes within the proposed
LUCA. An evaluation of the various elements of land use control, responsible implementing
agencies and draft ordinance are included in Appendix A.
September 22, 2010
Page 5-1
Land Use
Appendix A
AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY CONSIDERATIONS Abbreviated Airport Layout Plan Update University of Illinois – Willard Airport July 13, 2009 Background The University of Illinois is owner and operator of the Willard Airport (CMI) located in unincorporated Champaign County, Illinois. Situated on approximately 1,780 acres of land, the airport provides four runways, a passenger terminal, numerous commercial aviation buildings and support facilities for air traffic control and aircraft rescue and firefighting operations. Operated as a commercially certificated airport (under 14 CFR Part 139), CMI accommodates over 200,000 passengers per year on commercial airline flights. Including other operations such as the University of Illinois Flight School and Flightstar, Inc., the airport generates approximately 100,000 aircraft takeoffs and landings per year. Currently, the University is conducting an abbreviated update to their Airport Layout Plan in anticipation of a new Air Traffic Control Tower to consider the compatibility and efficiency of both on‐ and off‐airport land uses in light of encroaching land development trends near the airport. As the recipient of federal airport development funding, the University must continually assess and work with local governing agencies to insure compatibility between airport operations and surrounding land uses. The FAA encourages public airport sponsors to acquire areas in the immediate vicinity of each runway end to protect against incompatible land uses and offers acquisition of these areas as eligible for federal funding assistance. Further from the ends and sides of the runways, the FAA encourages airport sponsors to work with local municipalities to protect against incompatible land uses through land use planning and zoning controls. This portion of the report addresses the land use compatibility considerations present at CMI, which is comprised of two components. The first component provides an assessment of land use compatibility at CMI, which addresses FAA regulations concerning land use compatibility. The second component offers recommendations for an overlay zoning district, which represents a proactive approach to ensuring land use compatibility surrounding the airport. Land Use Compatibility Assessment Listed below are general assessments of CMI for categories of airport compatibility that are recommended by the Federal Aviation Administration for regulation.  Aircraft Noise – FAA stipulates that the 65 DNL noise level is unacceptable for noise sensitive uses such as residential, churches, hospitals, parks, etc. The most recent aircraft noise contours for CMI indicates that noise levels at or above 65 DNL are maintained on existing airport property. This condition is anticipated to remain even with anticipated growth in activity at the Airport. 1 
Apart from regulated noise levels, some property owners may experience a negative affect from the overflight of aircraft either on approach or departure to the Airport or conducting pattern training flights. Aircraft on approach to a runway end at CMI can be as close as 100 feet above the ground when over private properties. These areas on final approach can be significant single event noise receivers and yet still comply with FAA standards for cumulative aircraft noise. In fact, noise sensitive developments have been the source of many complaints at airports even when meeting FAA criteria. To promote compatibility, the attached Airport Land Use Drawing depicts a proposed Land Use Control Area (LUCA) at each end of the commercial service runways at CMI. This zone is defined as twice the length of the existing RPZ and conforms to FAA eligibility criteria. It is proposed that each LUCA should be controlled from allowing the aforementioned noise sensitive land uses. A review of the current and anticipated aircraft traffic patterns beyond the final approach and departure areas indicated that residential areas to the north of the airport could realize the most exposure from general aircraft overflights associated with extended approach and departure operations or aircraft training patterns. As the Airport plans to install a second Instrument Landing System (ILS) on Runway 14L, there could be induced level of traffic over land to the northwest of the Airport. However, as aircraft conducting these activities are typically several hundred feet above the ground, there appears to be limited concern for the need to restrict land uses based upon this type of activity. Action: Restrict noise sensitive developments from within the LUCA. If local government allows this development, require conveyance of avigation easement for new noise sensitive developments within the LUCA. Residential or High Density Land Uses in Approach Zones – To protect the public on the ground, the FAA prohibits the development of residences, churches, schools, hospitals, shopping malls, office buildings and developments of similar concentrations generally within the approach/departure corridor and specifically within the Runway Protection Zone (RPZ). The Airport’s RPZ’s are generally within airport property but the surrounding municipalities should consider additional controls outside of the RPZ but in the extended runway approach to ensure safety to residents on the ground and to minimize the potential nuisance impact associated with low flying aircraft on approach or departure. It is recommended that the aforementioned uses would be restricted from future development within the previously defined LUCA. Action: Restrict the development of places of assembly within the LUCA. If local government allows this development, require conveyance of avigation easement for places of assembly within the LUCA but outside the RPZ. 2 


Height Restriction – Federal Aviation Regulation Part 77 specify “protective” airspace surfaces that need to be maintained clear by the airport sponsor for the safe operation of aircraft both in and out of the facility. These surfaces slope upward from the ends and sides of each runway to varying heights of 350‐1,200 Above Ground Level (AGL). Figure 1 depicts the entire Part 77 Surfaces for CMI. The State of Illinois has enacted Hazard Zoning for the surfaces above 50’ AGL for the Airport’s Part 77 surfaces. As the runway approach departure path is of critical importance to control object heights, it is recommended that controls be established for development heights in the LUCA that conform to no more than the Part 77 surface elevations in those areas. It is also recommended that the Airport work with the local municipalities to identify developments that would impact Part 77 surfaces and outside of the LUCA and utilize State Hazard Zoning rules for regulation. Action: Restrict developments that would violate FAR Part 77 surfaces within the LUCA. Work with local municipalities to identify and provide notice to the Airport of tall objects outside of the LUCA that would violate FAR Part 77 and coordinate with the Illinois Department of Transportation for enforcement. Light Emissions/Glare/Particulates – Visual impairments to pilots on final approach can threaten the safety of the flying public. Of primary concern to the aviation community are significant generators of bright (white) light or developments that direct lighting upward. The FAA does not offer a lighting standard for the protection against light impairments but care should be taken in the review and approval of development plans to ensure that lighting will not impact pilots within the LUCA. Action: Restrict visual impairments via local zoning controls within the LUCA. Wildlife Attractants – FAA regulations specify that wildlife attractants should be restricted within 10,000 feet of a turbine class runway or 5,000 feet of a propeller class runway. Attractants include: landfills, waste transfer stations, open water, golf courses, etc. This regulation is aggressively pursued by the FAA and airports due to the increasing number of aircraft‐bird strikes that are occurring around the nation. The land uses within 10,000 of the airport’s runway vary significantly from high density residential and commercial to the north to agricultural farm fields and rural residences to the south. The Airport should work with the local municipalities to restrict and/or mitigate developments that would increase the risk for wildlife attractants. Within the LUCA, the Airport should work to strictly prohibit the development of any of the 3 aforementioned attractants and work in a proactive manner towards the removal/mitigation of any existing attractants. Action: Restrict and/or mitigate wildlife attractants within the LUCA. Land Use Control Mechanism Several controls are available to local municipalities to ensure consistent and compatible development with airport operations. The most common mechanism for land use control of aviation regulations is overlay zoning. Overlay zoning simply “overlays” additional regulatory controls for the specified area which are implemented and administered by the subject municipality(ies) with jurisdiction over the airport compatibility zone. For this proposal, an overlay zoning district is proposed for the areas identified as LUCA’s on the attached Land Use Drawing. Three individual governing bodies are involved: 1) City of Champaign, 2) Village of Savoy, and 3) Champaign County. A Sample Overlay Zoning Ordinance is provided for discussion purposes. The intent is for the three governmental entities with jurisdiction over the airport compatibility zone would adopt a common overlay district amendment to affect coordinated control over airport compatibility. An intergovernmental agreement may be needed to address procedures for administering the overlay district. The Sample Overlay Zoning Regulations provide guidance for the following controls: 1) Aircraft Noise, 2) Development with Public Concentration, 3) Height Restriction, 4) Visual Impairment, and 5) Wildlife Attractants. The sample regulations will provide a framework for a zoning ordinance that allows adoption by each municipality for full implementation. The types of regulations to be addressed in the overlay district should combine both FAA mandated controls as well as local land use controls. While the airport is required to address FAA mandated controls, it also should seek to promote compatibility at the community level, which could become an issue as urban development within the planning area increases. The regulations outlined below are intended to serve as a framework for discussions with the three units of local government to build consensus toward adopting an overlay district that promotes compatibility and can be effectively administered. Sample Airport Compatibility Overlay Zoning District Regulations (for discussion purposes only) 1.0 Airport Regulatory Zones The regulations of this Airport Compatibility Overlay District (A‐C District) involve two distinct levels of development control. The broadest geographical level of control addresses height restrictions from the immediate runway ends. Figure 1, Airport Height Restrictive Surfaces (AHRS), identifies the geographical area subject to airport height 4 restriction. Figure 2, Land Use Control Areas (LUCA), identifies the geographical areas close to the runway ends that are subject to land use and site development controls. 2.0 Airport Height Restrictions The intent of the AHRS is to regulate land in the height of objects that may be over flown by aircraft entering, operating within, and departing from a typical airport traffic pattern and to protect persons and property on the ground in those areas. No structure or growth shall exceed the height permitted by the AHRS as shown Figure 1. The Illinois Department of Transport will be contacted for those objects not conforming to the AHRS but outside of the LUCA for enforcement of State Hazard Zoning Regulations. 3.0 Land Use Regulation The intent of the LUCA is to regulate land in the area that is typically over flown by aircraft during initial take‐off and final landing maneuvers. These regulations are intended to protect persons and properties on the ground and to minimize air navigational hazards. These regulations shall apply to the LUCA identified on the official Land Use Drawing of Willard Airport and attached as Figure 2. Land uses existing within the LUCA upon the effective date of this ordinance shall be considered legal nonconforming uses. Prohibited or Controlled Uses: (1) Residential, commercial, industrial, or mixed use development, (2) Any new development where there would be a density of one hundred (100) or more persons per acre, either as employees, patrons, visitors, owners, or occupants at any time, such as theaters, amphitheaters, stadiums, and sports complexes, (3) Hospitals, clinics, nursing homes, religious institutions, schools, and community living facilities or day care facilities which service nine or more persons, (4) Campgrounds, (5) Hunting preserves, or game preserves (including aviaries), wildlife sanctuaries, wildlife ponds, and other similar facilities that may encourage the concentration 5 of wildlife, such as birds, and that may pose an air navigational hazard, (6) Landfills and other similar facilities used to process, bury, store, or otherwise dispose of waste, trash, refuse, or dredge material that would encourage the concentration of wildlife, such as birds, that could pose a hazard to air navigation, (7) Telecommunication towers, (8) Flying of model aircraft or launching of rockets, (9) Any use that may result in glare, particulates, lighting, visibility, electrical/communications interference and/or similar hazards, that would pose a hazard to air navigation. (a) All external lighting fixtures shall be designed to eliminate glare from projecting into the night sky. This shall be accomplished through the use of shields and reflectors to direct light and glare away from the sky. (b) Signage shall be illuminated by means of external illumination directed away from the sky, or other effective methods. (c) Signage and lighting shall not use colors and patterns of illumination that is similar to colors and patterns used for runway lighting at Willard Airport. (d) The maximum measurable level of illumination, measured in foot‐candles at the property line, or within 100 vertical feet of finished grade, shall not exceed 0.5 foot‐candles. (e) No use of land whose normal operations includes the generation of airborne particulate matter shall be permitted within the area delineated in Figure 2. Mining operations, cement plants, industrial operations emitting smoke or steam, other similar uses that generate airborne particulate matter resulting in visual impairment are permitted. (f) No glare‐producing material shall be used on the exterior of any building, including any metal building, which would produce glare that would endanger or interfere with the landing, taking off, or maneuvering of aircraft intending to use the airport. (g) No use of land whose principal use involves communications transmitting or receiving shall be a special use and must be granted a special use permit as a 6 condition of initiating site development. Likewise, any use that uses or generates a large amount of electricity shall be a special use and must be granted a special use permit as a condition of initiating site development. (10) Any detention pond, retention pond or other created water feature or development that would encourage the concentration of wildlife, such as birds, that may pose an air navigational hazard. (a) All storm water detention/retention facilities shall be designed as dry facilities to minimize the attraction of waterfowl that may be hazardous to aircraft takeoffs and landings. 4.0 Conditional Use A conditional use to this regulation may be granted for land uses that do not conform to this standard but meet the following requirements: (1) The planned use does not impede or impair the free access of aircraft to/from the Airport, (2) Residential units and schools within the LUCA shall be constructed to achieve a Noise Level Reduction of at least 30 dB. Hospitals, nursing homes, churches, auditoriums and concert halls within the LUCA shall be constructed to achieve a Noise Level Reduction of at least 25 dB. (3) The petitioner conveys an avigation easement to the University of Illinois – Willard Airport in conformance with Figure 3. The Sample Airport Compatibility Overlay District Regulations is offered to illustrate the potential benefits of using overlay regulations to promote compatibility surrounding CMI. Overlay zoning can be used to regulate development on lands surrounding the airport to ensure long‐term compatibility with airport operations. The use of overlay regulations can minimize the acquisition of land to achieve compatibility. Although the FAA will participate in funding for land acquisition, such acquisition would take land out of productive use and could hamper economic development actions of surrounding municipalities. This would certainly be the case with CMI, as the airport lies within a growth corridor of the greater Champaign‐Urban metropolitan area. Thus, overlay zoning regulations can be used to ensure compatibility without harming the economic development goals of municipalities or the financial interests of land owners. Some Airports have enacted a Commission to oversee the coordination, implementation and consistent enforcement of overlay zoning as it can be a multi‐jurisdictional effort. For CMI, a Commission does not appear necessary as the areas of control are relatively small. However, 7 Airport review of land use or zoning change applications would augment the review process and utilize expertise of aviation officials. As a secondary of the land use control mechanism, it is recommended that a supplemental review be provided to the Airport for all planning zoning and building applications within ½ mile of U.S. Route 45 to the east, Church Street to the north, County Road 900E to the west and Monticello Road to the south, which defines the general Airport boundary. It is also recommended that an Airport representative contact the Illinois Department of Transportation – Division of Aeronautics for applications that have concerns related to height restriction as they are responsible for enforcement of the State Hazard Zoning Regulations. Summary As recipient of federal funding, CMI assures the FAA to work with local municipalities in the control of adjacent land uses for the protection of the Airport and the public. Establishment of an Overlay Zone District for CMI would seek to fulfill that obligation on the Airport Sponsor’s behalf. The land use controls previously identified are consistent with FAA specified guidance for land use and airspace compatibility near public‐use airports. Full implementation and enforcement of Overlay Zoning by each local community will help to ensure the long‐term viability of the Airport as a public asset and promote enhanced living standards for those residing or functioning in the Airport vicinity. 8 FIIGURE 1
9 FIGUR
RE 1 (CON
NT.) 10 FIIGURE 2
11 FIGURE 3 SAMPLE GRANT OF AVIGATION EASEMENT PARCEL ______ WHEREAS, the ______________ (hereinafter referred to as the Grantor), is the owner in fee simple title of a certain tract of land situated in County of ___________, State of Illinois, (hereinafter referred to as Parcel _____) more particularly described as follows: Legal Description: WHEREAS, ________________ (hereinafter referred to as the Grantee), is the owner and operator of the Willard Airport, situated in the County of __________, State of Illinois, in close proximity to said above described land; and WHEREAS, it is deemed necessary that the above described land, which lies beneath a portion of the ___:1 approach surface, as defined in Federal Aviation Regulation Part 77, and the 7:1 side transitional surface for runway end ___ of said Airport, be and remain free and clear of any structure, tree or other object which is or would constitute an obstruction or hazard to the flight of aircraft in landing or takeoff at the said; and NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the sum of __________________ paid by the Grantee to the Grantor, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Grantor does hereby grant a permanent avigation easement and right‐of‐way way for the free and unobstructed passage of aircraft, by whomsoever owned or operated, in and through the air space over and across that portion of the Grantor’s land, to the Grantee described as follows: Describe the avigation easement: Grantor does hereby covenant and agree with the Grantee the following: a) Grantor shall not hereafter construct nor permit any obstruction upon said land that extends above the previously described permanent avigation easement; and b) Grantor does hereby grant and convey, to the Grantee, an initial and continuing right to keep the airspace above the previously described avigation easement clear and free from any structure, tree, or other object; and c) Grantor does hereby grant and convey, to the Grantee, the right of ingress to, egress from, and passage over the land previously described for the purpose of effecting and maintaining clear airspace above the avigation easement and the removal of any 12 and all obstructions which now or may hereafter extend above said avigation easement; and d) Grantee shall also have the right to cause or allow noise, vibrations, fumes, dust and fuel particles inherent in the operation of any aircraft used for navigation or flight, landing or operation at, or taking off from the said airport. Such noise, vibrations, fumes, dust and fuel particles shall not give rise to any claims against Grantee. Use of the airport includes those aircraft operations at or near the airport that are related to the airport; and e) Grantor shall not use nor permit the above described land to be used in such a manner as to create a potential for attracting birds and other wildlife, which may pose a hazard to aircraft using the Albertus Airport. This right does not extend to the existing agricultural use of row cropping or any existing non‐conforming uses such as ponds or drainage ditches; and f) Grantor, further hereby covenants for and during the life of this easement, that it shall not hereafter use or permit or suffer use of the land first above described in such manner as to create electrical or electronic interference with radio transmission and reception between radio‐communications and air‐navigation installations at or near the Airport and the aircraft operating in the vicinity of said Airport, or as to make it difficult for flyers to distinguish between airport lights and others, or as to result in glare in the eyes of flyers using the said Airport, or as to impair the visibility in the vicinity of the said Airport, or as otherwise to endanger the landing, takeoff, or maneuvering of aircraft. To have and to hold said easement and all rights appertaining thereto unto the Grantee until said Airport shall be abandoned and shall cease to be used for airport purposes. IT IS UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED, that these covenants and agreements shall be binding upon the heirs, devises, administrators, executors, and assigns of the Grantor, that these covenants and agreement shall run with the land, and that for the purposes of this instrument, that portion of land described as Parcel ____, which lies under the runway approach and transitional surfaces to runway end ____ shall be the servient tenement and the said _______ Airport, shall be the dominant tenement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor, has hereunto set its hand, and seal this __________ day of __________________, 20____. ______________________________________ 13 ______________________________________ WITNESS: _________________________________ _________________________________ STATE OF ILLINOIS ) )ss. COUNTY OF ) I, _________________________, a Notary Public, in and residing in said County, in the State aforesaid, DO HEREBY CERTIFY, that _____________________________ personally known to me to be the same person, whose name subscribed to the foregoing instrument, appeared before me this day in person and acknowledged that ___________ signed, sealed and delivered the said instrument as _____ free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes therein set forth, including the release and waiver of the right of homestead. Given under my hand and seal, this _____ day of ________________________, A.D, 20 ____. __________________________________ Notary Public My Commission Expires: _______________________, 20 ____. 14

Airport Layout Plan (ALP) Update Report Landside

Transcription

Similar documents

brochure - Aliserio – Bizjet Maintenance

Road Closure - Oregon International Air Show

AIRMAN`S INFORMATiON MANUAL

Fields FIDAE

7851 Horan Wall Perspex Posters3.indd

Airport Open House

Kuala Lumpur International Airport

Preflight Airport Parking

Dining becomes an elevated experience as high

Holiday Houses Costa Brava Airport bus to Barcelona