The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda 04/09/2019 Item #14A104/09/2019 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners, acting as the Collier County Airport Authority, approve and adopt the Airport Layout Plan (ALP) and associated Narrative Update for the Immokalee Regional Airport. OBJECTIVE: To provide a twenty (20) year development program for the Immokalee Regional Airport (IMM) that will help create/maintain a safe, efficient, economical, and environmentally responsible airport facility that is capable of meeting the demand for aviation services and will create additional value for the residents and aeronautical community. CONSIDERATIONS: The Airport Layout Plan (ALP) is a critical planning tool that depicts the existing airport facilities and planned development initiatives. It is indispensable for coordination and planning among the Airport Authority, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). The FAA requires an approved ALP for an airport to receive federal funds for capital improvement projects, and recommends airports perform updates within five to seven-year increments. The last update to the Airport’s Layout Plan and associated Narrative Report, also known as the Airport’s Master Plan, was performed in March 2009. On September 13, 2016, Agenda Item 16G4, the Board accepted an FAA grant in the amount of $152,078 to update the March 2009 plan. Consistent with this purpose, the following goals and objectives were established to guide the development of an updated 20-year visioning for the Airport: 1. Continue to meet and enhance the level of service provided to all airport users and develop an airport facility that will provide adequate capacity to fill its role as a general aviation airport in Southwest Florida. 2. Provide guidelines for future development, while satisfying aviation demand. 3. Provide an airport that is safe and reliable. 4. Develop IMM in a manner which minimizes negative environmental impacts. 5. Promote the development of compatible land uses in the Airport’s vicinity. 6. Develop an airport that supports local and regional economic goals while accommodating new opportunities or shifts in development patterns. 7. Develop an airport that is consistent with federal, state and local plans. The plans were completed based on applicable FAA Circulars and FDOT guidebooks by Atkins, an engineering consulting firm approved by the Board on October 13, 2015 (Agenda Item 16G1) for Contract No. 15-6382-2 Grant Funded Profession Services for Airports. Citizens and stakeholders were provided educational materials and an opportunity to review and provide input to the plans via a variety of forums, including the Airport Authority’s website, press releases, fact sheets, surveys, and a public information presentation. Preliminary FAA and FDOT, Airport Authority staff, and stakeholder comments and recommendations have been incorporated into the plans. As a result of the planning process, numerous projects have been identified for execution within and beyond the forecast period to provide additional airport capacity and facilitate future levels of aeronautical activity. The individual projects, as identified in the overall airport development and phasing plan, form the basis of Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for the Airport. Following approval by the Board, the Plan will be routed to the FAA and FDOT for final review and approval. The final, approved documents will only be brought back to the Board if substantive revisions 14.A.1 Packet Pg. 241 04/09/2019 are requested by either the FAA or FDOT. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no direct fiscal impact associated with the approval of this item, however the plan provides estimated development costs associated with the capital improvement program, which aim to leverage a mix of federal, state, local and other private funding sources. The Board will have the opportunity to consider/approve projects, and their associated capital funding requirements, on an individual project basis as they are identified for execution. GROWTH IMPACT: The Airport Layout Plan with Narrative, as proposed, is consistent with the Growth Management Plan and underlying zoning of the Airport Operations Planned Unit Development (AOPUD), as adopted by BCC Ordinance 2010-07. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: The FAA does not require an airport to have a master plan, although it strongly recommends one. To be eligible for the Florida Aviation Grant Program, capital projects must be part of an FDOT-accepted master plan and/or approved layout plan. Further, a current layout plan of the airport must be maintained in order to receive an airport design, construction, or equipment grant from the FAA and FDOT. Accordingly, this item is approved for form and legality and requires a majority vote for Board approval. - JAB RECOMMENDATION: To accept the findings and recommendations of the attached Immokalee Regional Airport Layout Plan/Narrative Updates and authorize the Airport Manager to submit the documents to the FAA and FDOT for final review and approval. PREPARED BY: Justin Lobb, Airports Manager, Airport Authority ATTACHMENT(S) 1. 4-09-19_IMM_Presentation_FINAL (PDF) 2. IMM_ALP_SET-3-19-19 r1 (PDF) 3. [Linked] IMM_ALP-Narrative-3-19-19_2-Final (PDF) 14.A.1 Packet Pg. 242 04/09/2019 COLLIER COUNTY Board of County Commissioners Item Number: 14.A.1 Doc ID: 8085 Item Summary: Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners, acting as the Collier County Airport Authority, approve and adopt the Airport Layout Plan (ALP) and associated Narrative Update for the Immokalee Regional Airport. Meeting Date: 04/09/2019 Prepared by: Title: Operations Coordinator – Airport Authority Name: Debra Brueggeman 02/20/2019 4:58 PM Submitted by: Title: Division Director - Operations Support – Growth Management Department Name: Gene Shue 02/20/2019 4:58 PM Approved By: Review: County Attorney's Office Jennifer Belpedio Level 2 Attorney of Record Review Completed 03/21/2019 12:27 PM Growth Management Department Gene Shue Additional Reviewer Completed 02/21/2019 9:14 AM Growth Management Department Jeanne Marcella Level 1 Reviewer Completed 02/21/2019 9:43 AM Growth Management Operations Support Christopher Johnson Additional Reviewer Completed 02/25/2019 12:38 PM Airport Authority Justin Lobb Additional Reviewer Completed 02/25/2019 4:27 PM Growth Management Department James C French Deputy Department Head Review Skipped 02/25/2019 8:13 PM Growth Management Department Thaddeus Cohen Department Head Review Completed 02/28/2019 11:01 AM Office of Management and Budget Valerie Fleming Level 3 OMB Gatekeeper Review Completed 03/08/2019 2:57 PM Budget and Management Office Ed Finn Additional Reviewer Completed 03/15/2019 12:23 PM County Attorney's Office Jeffrey A. Klatzkow Level 3 County Attorney's Office Review Completed 03/19/2019 2:49 PM County Manager's Office Leo E. Ochs Level 4 County Manager Review Completed 04/03/2019 11:09 AM Board of County Commissioners MaryJo Brock Meeting Pending 04/09/2019 9:00 AM 14.A.1 Packet Pg. 243 Airport Master Plan Airport Layout Plan Update Presentation Board of County Commissioners Immokalee Regional Airport April 9, 2019 14.A.1.a Packet Pg. 244 Attachment: 4-09-19_IMM_Presentation_FINAL (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) What is an Airport Layout Plan? An Airport Layout Plan graphically depicts an airports boundaries, existing infrastructure, and identifies proposed airport development over a 20 year period. An airport must have a FAA-approved ALP to receive Airport Improvement Program funding. The ALP development process is generally as follows: ›Examination of current assets and infrastructure deficiencies ›Forecasts of aircraft operations and future aviation demand ›Consideration of proposed airport development alternatives ›Phased graphic delineation of proposed development ›Federal, state, and local funding plan April 9. 2019 Airport Layout Plan Update Presentation: Immokalee Regional Airport 2 14.A.1.a Packet Pg. 245 Attachment: 4-09-19_IMM_Presentation_FINAL (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) Project Schedule 3 Existing Conditions Analysis Forecasting & Facility Requirements Alternatives Evaluation Preferred Alternative ALP Approval & Master Plan Adoption Ongoing Public Outreach Current Task April 9. 2019 Airport Layout Plan Update Presentation: Immokalee Regional Airport 14.A.1.a Packet Pg. 246 Attachment: 4-09-19_IMM_Presentation_FINAL (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) Airport Facility Inventory 4 A facility inventory was conducted which catalogued information that was used to identify any facility deficiencies that would need to be addressed by the master plan. ›Runways ›Taxiways ›Structures ›Roadways ›Land Use ›Airspace April 9. 2019 Airport Layout Plan Update Presentation: Immokalee Regional Airport N 14.A.1.a Packet Pg. 247 Attachment: 4-09-19_IMM_Presentation_FINAL (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) 5 Historical Based Aircraft & Fuel Sales Based Aircraft Fuel Sales –Gallons 59 59 17 11 21 26 50 50 60 58 58 54 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 Jet Sales AvGAS Sales 14.A.1.a Packet Pg. 248 Attachment: 4-09-19_IMM_Presentation_FINAL (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 2015 2016 2017 2022 2027 2032 2037 Forecasted Aircraft Operations Historical Operations Forecasted Operations Forecast of Aviation Demand 6 The most important results of the forecast process are identifying future based aircraft and future aircraft operations through the planning period. The planning period for this Master Plan document is from 2017 to 2037. ›Based Aircraft ›Aircraft Operations ›Aircraft Fleet Mix 36,500 Average Annual Growth Rate: 2017 to 2037: 1.35% 2037: 48,400 Operations / Year April 9. 2019 Airport Layout Plan Update Presentation: Immokalee Regional Airport 48,400 14.A.1.a Packet Pg. 249 Attachment: 4-09-19_IMM_Presentation_FINAL (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) Critical Aircraft 7 Existing King Air-200 B-II Future Citation Encore B-II •An aircraft that consistently makes “substantial use” of an airports facilities. •Critical aircraft characteristics: Aircraft wingspan, aircraft tail height, and approach to landing speeds These characteristics determine an airports design standards for runways, taxiways, taxilanes, aircraft parking areas, and other aviation facilities. April 9. 2019 Airport Layout Plan Update Presentation: Immokalee Regional Airport 14.A.1.a Packet Pg. 250 Attachment: 4-09-19_IMM_Presentation_FINAL (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) Airport Development Needs ›Based on the forecast period, the airport is not projected to exceed a capacity that would warrant significant infrastructure enhancement. ›Development projects proposed within this plan, outline infrastructure priorities and safety enhancements necessary to satisfy increases in aviation demand. 8 April 9. 2019 Airport Layout Plan Update Presentation: Immokalee Regional Airport 0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 160,000 2016 2017 2022 2027 2032 ASV 80% ASV 60% ASV Total Operations 2037 ASV = Annual Service Volume 14.A.1.a Packet Pg. 251 Attachment: 4-09-19_IMM_Presentation_FINAL (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) Preferred Priority Development Improvements 9 ›Runway 18-36 Rehabilitation ›Taxiway C Extension ›Additional Hangar Capacity ›Security Upgrades ›Full Perimeter Access Road April 9. 2019 Airport Layout Plan Update Presentation: Immokalee Regional Airport N 14.A.1.a Packet Pg. 252 Attachment: 4-09-19_IMM_Presentation_FINAL (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) Runway 18-36 Rehabilitation 10 ›Complete reconstruction of original pavement that dates back to the airport’s activation as an Army Air Corps training base during WWII (1942). ›Florida Department of Transportation most recent Pavement Evaluation assessed the runways condition as “very poor”. ›Design phase underway ›Construction is expected to commence in late 2019. April 9. 2019 Airport Layout Plan Update Presentation: Immokalee Regional Airport 14.A.1.a Packet Pg. 253 Attachment: 4-09-19_IMM_Presentation_FINAL (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) Taxiway C Extension 11 ›Taxiway C extension has significant benefits: ›Increased Operational Safety by reducing runway crossings. ›Creates additional Airside Access for Aeronautical Development ›20% reduction in taxi time to access the terminal and primary runway. ›Improve airport capacity and operational efficiency. ›Taxiway A perimeter road conversion April 9. 2019 Airport Layout Plan Update Presentation: Immokalee Regional Airport 14.A.1.a Packet Pg. 254 Attachment: 4-09-19_IMM_Presentation_FINAL (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) Taxiway C Extension 12 ›The future Taxiway C Extension will impact the existing raceway leasehold ›The impact to the leasehold will be approximately 3.3 acres. ›Potential to shift the operation to the northeast to avoid impact ›Project anticipated to commence in late 2020 ›Leasehold is set to expire in March of 2021 Leasehold Impact Raceway Leasehold Taxiway C Extension April 9. 2019 Airport Layout Plan Update Presentation: Immokalee Regional Airport N 14.A.1.a Packet Pg. 255 Attachment: 4-09-19_IMM_Presentation_FINAL (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) Terminal Area Improvement 13 ›Addition of two 10-unit T-Hangar complexes ›Conventional Hangar Development 60’ x 79’ box style facilities with associated parking ›Small terminal and terminal parking facility enhancements. ›Private Development Interest April 9. 2019 Airport Layout Plan Update Presentation: Immokalee Regional Airport N 14.A.1.a Packet Pg. 256 Attachment: 4-09-19_IMM_Presentation_FINAL (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) Central Airport Development 14 •Runway Visibility Zone (RVZ) is no longer required due to runway uncoupling •It’s removal created significant area for infield airport development N 14.A.1.a Packet Pg. 257 Attachment: 4-09-19_IMM_Presentation_FINAL (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) Runway 9-27 Extension 15 ›Ultimate Runway of 10,000 feet is not warranted within the forecast Existing Runway 9 -27 = 5,000’ Future Runway 9 -27 = 7,000’ Ultimate Runway 9 -27 = 10,000’ ›If airport jet traffic continues to increase at it’s current rate, a future runway extension will likely be warranted within the 20-year forecast period. April 9, 2019 Airport Layout Plan Update Presentation: Immokalee Regional Airport N 14.A.1.a Packet Pg. 258 Attachment: 4-09-19_IMM_Presentation_FINAL (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) Land Use Development Plan 16 Non-Aeronautical –233 Acres ›Businesses ›Manufacturing ›Shipping ›Storage Aeronautical –276 Acres ›T-Hangars ›Conventional Hangars ›MRO (Maintenance Repair Overhaul) ›ATCT (Air Traffic Control Tower) ›Cargo N 14.A.1.a Packet Pg. 259 Attachment: 4-09-19_IMM_Presentation_FINAL (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) Capital Improvement Opportunities 17 Development Costs Funding Federal FDOT Local / Other Private / Other SHORT RANGE (Federal Fiscal Years 2019 –2023)$22,923,600 $5,399,000 $9,439,400 $2,399,600 $5,685,600 MID RANGE (Federal Fiscal Years 2024 –2028)$8,355,700 LONG RANGE(Federal Fiscal Years 2029 –2038)$15,654,700 Program Total:$46,934,000 ›20-Year Horizon ›$47 Million in Development Identified ›Funding Sources are varied with available federal and state grants along with potential private investment to assist with development initiatives. April 9, 2019 Airport Layout Plan Update Presentation: Immokalee Regional Airport 14.A.1.a Packet Pg. 260 Attachment: 4-09-19_IMM_Presentation_FINAL (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) Public Involvement 18 ›CCAA Web Page Project Updates ›Media Announcements ›Educational Materials ›Public Meetings ›Surveys ›Comments Collection April 9, 2019 Airport Layout Plan Update Presentation: Immokalee Regional Airport 14.A.1.a Packet Pg. 261 Attachment: 4-09-19_IMM_Presentation_FINAL (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) Next Steps 19 ›Master Plan and Airport Layout Plan will be routed to the FAA and FDOT for review and approval. ›Final documents will be provided to the county upon approval by the FAA and FDOT. April 9, 2019 Airport Layout Plan Update Presentation: Immokalee Regional Airport 14.A.1.a Packet Pg. 262 Attachment: 4-09-19_IMM_Presentation_FINAL (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) Thank you!14.A.1.a Packet Pg. 263 Attachment: 4-09-19_IMM_Presentation_FINAL (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) G U L F O F M E X I C OATLANT I C OCEAORANGEOSCEOLALAKESEMINOLEBAYCALHOUNGULFLIBERTYLEONWAKULLAFRANKLINJEFFERSONMADISONTAYLORHAMILTONLAFAYETTEDIXIECOLUMBIABAKERDUVALCLAYUNIONGILCHRISTLEVYMARIONPUTNAMST. JOHNSFLAGLERVOLUSIACITRUSSUMTERHERNANDOPASCOPOLKHILLSBOROUGHPINELLLASBREVARDMANATEEHARDEEDESOTOHIGHLANDSINDIANRIVERST. LUCIEMARTINGLADESCHARLOTTEOKEECHOBEESARASOTALEEHENDRYPALM BEACHBROWARDCOLLIERMIAMI-DADEMONROEBRADFORDALACHUASWANNEEFLORIDAOKALOOSAOPERATED BYPREPARED BYAIRPORT LAYOUT PLANImmokalee, FloridaIMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORTIMM - IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORTINDEX OF DRAWINGSTITLESHEET NO.COVER SHEETEXISTING FACILITIESAIRPORT LAYOUT PLANTERMINAL AREA PLANRUNWAY 9-27 INNER APPROACH PLAN & PROFILERUNWAY 18-36 INNER APPROACH PLAN & PROFILERUNWAY DEPARTURE SHEETPART-77 AIRSPACE SURFACES PLANLAND USE MAPAIRPORT PROPERTY INVENTORY MAPAIRPORT PROPERTY INVENTORY MAP DATA1 OF 112 OF 113 OF 114 OF 115 OF 116 OF 117 OF 118 OF 119 OF 1110 OF 1111 OF 11March 18, 2019Collier County Airport Authority (CCAA)Scale: N.T.S.LOCATION MAPVICINITY MAPIMMOKALEE, FLORIDAScale: N.T.S.Atkins North America Inc.7175 Murrell RoadMelbourne, Florida 32904Tel. (321) 775-6231www.atkinsglobal.com/northamericaAIRPORT SPONSOR APPROVALNAME:TITLE:(SIGNATURE)DATE:THIS AIRPORT DRAWING IS APPROVED BY:REVISIONSDATEDESCRIPTION14.A.1.bPacket Pg. 264Attachment: IMM_ALP_SET-3-19-19 r1 (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) PLPLPLPLPLPLPL PL PLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPL PL PL PL PL PL PL PLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPL PLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPL PL PLPLPLPLC.R. 846S.R. 29AIRPORT RD.NEW MARKET RD. E./ALT 29ALACHUA ST.JEFFERSON AVE. E.AIRPORT RD. AGRI BLVD. NEW MARKET RD. E./ALT 29 ALA C H U A S T .XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XX X X X X XXXXXXXX X XXXXX X X X X X X XXXX XXX XX XXXXX X X X XXXXXXXXXXX XX X X X X X XXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X143256789101112131415TAXIWAY A TAXIWAY A2TAXIWAY B1TAXIWAY BTAXIWAY B2 TAXIWAY BRUN-UP PADRUN-UP PADTAXIWAY A1EXISTING RWY 36 ENDLAT - 26° 25' 24.60"'LONG - 81° 24' 16.88''El. 33.0 'EXISTING RWY 18 ENDLAT - 26° 26' 14.09"'LONG - 81° 24' 18.78''El. 36.1'EXISTING RWY 9 ENDLAT - 26° 26' 13.32"'LONG - 81° 24' 19.58''El. 35.4' (TDZE)EXISTING RWY 27 ENDLAT - 26° 26' 15.03"'LONG - 81° 23' 24.60''El. 33.2' (RWY LOW POINT)EXISTING RUNWAY 18-36 5,000' x 150' 358.02 TRUE EXISTING RUNWAY 9-27 5,000' x 100' / 88.03 TRUEEXISTING ARPLAT - 26° 26' 02''LONG - 81° 24' 08''TAXIWAY C BEACON109'64'64'67'A B A N D O N E D R U N W A YDRAG STRIPRV FACILITIESAUTOMATEDWEATHEROBSERVING SYSTEM(AWOS)UPLAND RESERVE AREAEXISTING 34:1 PART 77 APPROACH SURFACEEXISTING NON-PRECISION APPROACH SURFACESLOPE 34:1EXISTING THRESHOLD SITING SURFACESLOPE 20:1EXISTING THRESHOLD SITING SURFACESLOPE 20:1EXISTING NON-PRECISION APPROACH SURFACESLOPE 34:1EXISTING FENCE LINEHEIGHT: 7'EXISTING FENCE LINE 7'TDZE EL: 34.1TDZEEL: 35.1TDZEEL: 36.5LOW POINTEL: 32.7'POND1617EXISTING 20:1 THRESHOLD SITING SURFACEEXISTING 40:1 DEPARTURE SURFACEAWOS 500-FTCLEARANCERADIUSF1F3B3EXISTING BLASTPAD:150' LENGTH120' WIDTHEXISTING BLASTPAD:150' LENGTH120' WIDTHEXISTING BLASTPAD:150' LENGTH150' WIDTHROADWAYEL. 44.6' MSLEL. 51.0' MSLEL. 30.0' MSLEL. 30.0' MSLEL. 30.0' MSLROADWAYEL. 52.4' MSLROADWAYEL. 51.6' MSLROADWAYEL. 51.6' MSLAPRON AREA~160,000 SQ. FT.FUTURE AIRPARK BOULEVARDFUTURE AIRPARK BOULEVARDAVIATION VIEWING AREAROFAROFARSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFA ROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFARPZ RPZ RPZRPZRPZRPZTOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFABRLBRLBRL BRL BRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRL BRL BRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZRSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFARPZRPZRPZRPZRPZRPZRPZASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSAS AS AS AS AS ASASASASASDS DS DS DS DS DSDSDSDSDSDSDSAS AS AS AS AS AS ASASASASASASASAS DS DS DS DS DS DS DS DSDSDSDS DSDSDSDSDSDSTSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFA TSATSATSATSATSATOFATOFATOFATSATSATSARPZRPZRPZ RPZ RPZRPZRPZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSS TSS TSS TSS TSS TSS TSSTSS TSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSS TSS TSS TSS TSSTSSTSSTSSPAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPI PAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPINOTE: AIRCRAFT TAIL HEIGHTS IN THIS AREA MUSTFALL BELOW THE OVERLYING 40:1 DEPARTURE SURFACESERVICE ROADREVISIONSDATEDESCRIPTIONCLIENTPROJECTCHECKED:JOB NO.:SHEET TITLEDATE:SHEETDESIGN:DRAWN:OFAIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN UPDATEIMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORTIMMOKALEE, FLORIDACOLLIER COUNTYAIRPORT AUTHORITY7175 Murrell RoadMelbourne, Florida, 32904Tel. (321)-775-6231www.atkinsglobal.com/northamericaJANUARY 2019100053410 A.M.M.J.D.H.C.M.H.11EXISTING FACILITIES35' BRLRSAROFAROFZRPZTOFA1560'RUNWAY CENTERLINERUNWAY SAFETY AREARUNWAY OBJECT FREE AREARUNWAY OBSTACLE FREE ZONERUNWAY PROTECTION ZONETAXIWAY OBJECT FREE AREABUILDING RESTRICTION LINEAIRPORT PAVEMENTAIRPORT REFERENCE POINTAIRPORT BUILDINGSAIRPORT PROPERTY LINEFENCEROADS / PARKINGWETLANDSGROUND ELEVATION CONTOURSPAPIPERIMETER ROADRUNWAY END IDENTIFICATIONTHRESHOLD LIGHTSDESCRIPTIONEXISTINGLEGENDASAPPROACH SURFACEWINDCONEN/AHORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD83VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88APRIL 2017ANNUAL RATE OF CHANGE0° 6' WNDECLINATION 6° 6' WTRUE NORTHMAGNE T I CPL2 Feet0400800TSATAXIWAY SAFETY AREAPAPI OBSTACLE CLEARANCE PAPI14.A.1.bPacket Pg. 265Attachment: IMM_ALP_SET-3-19-19 r1 (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X XXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X XXXXXX X XXXX X X X X X XXXXXXX X XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX X X X X X XXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXPLPLPLPLPL PLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPL PLPLPLPLPL PLPLPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFPL143256789101112131415TAXIWAY A TAXIWAY A2TAXIWAY B1TAXIWAY BTAXIWAY B2 TAXIWAY BRUN-UP PADRUN-UP PADTAXIWAY A150'50'50'50'50'50'EXISTING RWY 36 ENDLAT - 26° 25' 24.60"'LONG - 81° 24' 16.88''El. 33.0 'EXISTING RWY 18 ENDLAT - 26° 26' 14.09"'LONG - 81° 24' 18.78''El. 36.1'EXISTING RWY 9 ENDLAT - 26° 26' 13.32"'LONG - 81° 24' 19.58''El. 35.4' (TDZE)EXISTING RWY 27 ENDLAT - 26° 26' 15.03"'LONG - 81° 23' 24.60''El. 33.2' (RWY LOW POINT)FUTURE RWY 27 ENDLAT - 26° 26' 15.85''LONG - 81° 22' 57.66''El. 30.1'EXISTING RUNWAY 18-36 5,000' x 150' 358.02 TRUE EXISTING RUNWAY 9-27 5,000' x 100' / 88.03 TRUEFUTURE TAXIWAY C EXISTING ARPLAT - 26° 26' 02''LONG - 81° 24' 08''TAXIWAY C35'523'416'BEACON775'150'500'400'150'500'150'500'700'700'700'375'109'64'64'67'ABANDONED RUNWAYDRAG STRIPRV FACILITIES250'500'AUTOMATEDWEATHEROBSERVING SYSTEM(AWOS)UPLAND RESERVE AREA224'131'131'FUTURE ARPLAT - 26° 26' 02''LONG - 81° 23' 58''150'EXISTING 34:1 PART 77 APPROACH SURFACEFUTURE NON-PRECISION APPROACH SURFACESLOPE 34:1FUTURE THRESHOLD SITING SURFACESLOPE 20:1EXISTING THRESHOLD SITING SURFACESLOPE 20:1EXISTING NON-PRECISION APPROACH SURFACESLOPE 34:1EXISTING THRESHOLD SITING SURFACESLOPE 20:1EXISTING NON-PRECISION APPROACH SURFACESLOPE 34:1EXISTING FENCE LINEHEIGHT: 7'EXISTING FENCE LINE 7'FUTURE FENCE LINEHEIGHT: 7'FUTURE FENCE LINEHEIGHT: 7'TDZE EL: 34.1TDZEEL: 35.1TDZEEL: 36.5LOW POINTEL: 32.7'BAAAAAACPONDFUTURE PONDFUTURE PONDFUTURE PONDPONDFUTUREFUTURE PERIMETERROADFUTURE PERIMETERROADF U T U R E A I R P A R K B L V D FUTURE AIRPARK BLVDAREA RESERVED FOR F U T U R E N O N - A V I A T I O N D E V E L O P M E N T A R E A R E S E R V E D F O R F U T U R E N O N - A V I A T I O N D E V E L O P M E N TAREA RESERVED FORFUTURE NON-AVIATIONDEVELOPMENTAREA RESERVED FOR FUTURE AVIATION DEVELOPMENTAREA RESERVED FOR FUTURE NON-AVIATION DEVELOPMENT400'500'1510'1617EXISTING 20:1 THRESHOLD SITING SURFACEEXISTING 40:1 DEPARTURE SURFACE1700'400'400'AWOS 500-FTCLEARANCERADIUS75'ULTIMATE TAXIWAY558'303'187'86'325'166'F1F3B4B3500'FUTURE BLASTPAD:150' LENGTH100' WIDTHEXISTING BLASTPAD:150' LENGTH120' WIDTHEXISTING BLASTPAD:150' LENGTH120' WIDTHEXISTING BLASTPAD:150' LENGTH150' WIDTH(PROPOSED 7,000' x 100', ULTIMATE 10,000' x 150' )ROADWAYEL. 44.6' MSLEL. 51.0' MSLEL. 30.0' MSLEL. 30.0' MSLEL. 30.0' MSLROADWAYEL. 52.4' MSLROADWAYEL. 51.6' MSLROADWAYEL. 51.6' MSL79'79'APRON AREA~160,000 SQ. FT.1000'35'50'FUTURE AIRPARK BOULEVARD495'FUTURE AIRPARK BOULEVARD 200'300'131'79'250'150'300'AVIATION VIEWING AREAPROPOSEDSR-29 BYPASS RE-ALIGNMENTBFUTURE DRYDETENTION POND(TOFA)(TOFA)(TOFA)(TOFA)(TOFA)(TOFA)(TOFA)(TOFA)ROFAROFARSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFA RPZ RPZRPZRPZTOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFA TOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFABRLBRLBRLBRL BRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRL BRLBRL BRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZRSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSA(RSA)(RSA)(RSA)(RSA)(RSA)(RSA)(RSA)(RSA)ROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFA(ROFA)(ROFA)(ROFA)(ROFA)(ROFA)(ROFA)(ROFA)(ROFA)(ROFA)RPZRPZRPZRPZRPZRPZASASASASASASASASDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS(AS)(AS)(AS)(AS)(AS)(AS)(AS)(AS)(AS)(AS)(AS)(AS)(AS)(AS)(AS)(AS)DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSASASASASASASASASDSDSDSDS DSDSDSDSDSDS AS AS AS AS ASASASASASAS DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS TSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSA TSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFA TSATSATSATSATOFATOFATSATSA(RPZ)(RPZ)(RPZ)(RPZ)(RPZ)(RPZ)(RPZ)(RPZ)(RPZ)(RPZ)(RPZ)RPZRPZ RPZ RPZRPZRPZ(TOFA)(TOFA)(TOFA)(TOFA)(TOFA)(TOFA)(TOFA)(TOFA)(TOFA)(TOFA)(TOFA)(TSA)(TSA)(TSA)(TSA)(TSA)(TSA)(TSA)(TSA)(TSA)(TSA)(TSA)OFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZ(ROFZ)(ROFZ)(ROFZ)(ROFZ)(ROFZ)(ROFZ)(ROFZ)(ROFZ)TSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSS(TSS)(TSS)(TSS)(TSS)(TSS)(TSS)(TSS)(TSS)(TSS)(TSS)(TSS)(TSS)(TSS)(TSS)(TSS)(TSS)(TSS)(TSS)(TSS)(TSS)TSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPI PAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPI PAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIC.R. 846S.R. 29AIRPORT RD.AIRPORT RD.AGRI BLVD.NEW MARKET RD. E./ALT 29 ALACHUA ST.NOTE: AIRCRAFT TAIL HEIGHTS IN THIS AREA MUSTFALL BELOW THE OVERLYING 40:1 DEPARTURE SURFACESERVICE ROADCONSTRUCTION NOTICE REQUIREMENTTo protect operational safety and future development, all proposed construction onthe airport must be coordinated by the airport owner with the FAA Airport DistrictOffice prior to construction. FAA's review takes approximately 60 days.AIRPORT SPONSOR APPROVALNAME:TITLE:(SIGNATURE)DATE:THIS AIRPORT DRAWING IS APPROVED BY:NO OFZ OBJECT PENETRATIONSNO THRESHOLD SITING SURFACE PENETRATIONSFAA APPROVAL STAMPTHE CONTENTS OF THIS PLAN DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE OFFICIAL VIEWS OR POLICY OFTHE FAA. ACCEPTANCE OF THIS DOCUMENT BY THE FAA DOES NOT IN ANY WAY CONSTITUTE ACOMMITMENT ON THE PART OF THE UNITED STATES TO PARTICIPATE IN ANY DEVELOPMENTDEPICTED HEREIN NOR DOES IT INDICATE THAT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ISENVIRONMENTALLY ACCEPTABLE IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPROPRIATE PUBLIC LAWS.MODIFICATION TO STANDARDS APPROVAL TABLEITEMFAA STANDARDDISPOSITIONREMARKSNONEREQUIREDN/AN/AN/AREVISIONSDATEDESCRIPTIONCLIENTPROJECTCHECKED:JOB NO.:SHEET TITLEDATE:SHEETDESIGN:DRAWN:OFAIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN UPDATEIMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORTIMMOKALEE, FLORIDACOLLIER COUNTYAIRPORT AUTHORITY7175 Murrell RoadMelbourne, Florida, 32904Tel. (321)-775-6231www.atkinsglobal.com/northamericaJANUARY 2019100053410 A.M.M.J.D.H.C.M.H.11AIRPORT LAYOUT PLANAIRPORT DATA TABLEMEAN MAX. TEMP OF HOTTEST MONTH( NAD 1983 )AIRPORT ELEVATION, MSLAIRPORT REFERENCE POINTITEMLONG.LAT.36.5'081° 24' 07.46" W26° 26 ' 01.76" NEXISTINGPROPOSEDAIRPORT REFERENCE CODE (ARC)NAVAIDSROTATING BEACONNPIAS SERVICE LEVELGASAMECRITICAL AIRCRAFTMAGNETIC VARIATION6.01°W / DATE: AUG. 2017 / SOURCE: NGDCMISCELLANEOUS FACILITIESAWOS, TAXIWAY LIGHTING, LIGHTED WIND CONEWINGSPANMAIN GEAR WIDTH / COCKPIT TO MGAPPROACH SPEEDKING AIR45.98'120 KTS120 KTS~13.0'B-IICITATION ENCORE63.90'~13.0'081° 23' 58.23" W26° 26 ' 01.97" NALL WEATHER WIND COVERAGE10.5 Knots13.0 Knots16.0 KnotsCROSS WINDCOMPONENTALL WEATHERCOVERAGE99.78%99.96%99.09%RUNWAY18/36RUNWAY9/2791.77%95.63%99.08%99.24%97.52%95.22%IFR WEATHER WIND COVERAGE10.5 Knots13.0 Knots16.0 KnotsCROSS WINDCOMPONENTIFR WEATHERCOVERAGE99.28%99.76%98.21%RUNWAY18/36RUNWAY9/2792.63%95.59%98.31%97.91%95.43%92.43%Station: Southwest Florida International Airport(722108)Source: National Climatic Data CenterPeriod: 2007-2016All Weather Observations: 16,934IFR Weather Observations: 2,02093º F ; JULYSAMESAMESAMESAMEPROPOSED DECLARED DISTANCESRUNWAY 9RUNWAY 27RUNWAY EXISTINGFUTURETORATODAASDALDATORATODAASDALDARUNWAY 185,000'RUNWAY 365,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'7,000'5,000'7,000'7,000'7,000'7,000'7,000'7,000'7,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'31020NNE3040NE5060ENE708090 E100 110 ES E 12 0 1 3 0SE1 4 0150SSE160170180S190200SSW210220SW 230240WSW250260270W 280 290 WN W 30 0 3 1 0 NW3 2 0 330NNW340350360N2827222117161110KNOTS.2.3.3.3.4.3.4.3.3.3.3.2.2.4.4.4.4.3.3.4.5.5.5.5.4.3.2.2.2.3.2.2.2.1.2.3+++.1.2.1+.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1+.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.1.1.1+++++.1.1+++++.1++++.1+++.1.1+++++.1.1+++++++++.1+++++.1+++++13.0 Knots 16.0 Knots 10.5 Knots 13.0 Knots16.0 Knots10.5 Knots9273618WIND CALM84.7%1020NNE3040NE5060ENE708090 E100 110 ES E 12 0 1 3 0 S E 1 4 0150SSE160170180S190200SSW210220SW 230240WSW250260270W 280 290 WN W 30 0 3 1 0 NW 3 2 0 330NNW340350360N2827222117161110KNOTS.2.2.3.4.5.7.91.0.8.6.5.3.2.3.3.3.3.3.3.3.4.5.7.6.4.2.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.1.2++++.1.1.1.1.1++++++++.1.1.1.1.2.1.1++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++13.0 Knots16.0 Knots10.5 Knots13.0 Knots 16.0 Knots 10.5 Knots 9273618WIND CALM85.5%BRLRSAROFAROFZRPZTOFA(BRL)(RSA)(ROFA)(ROFZ)(RPZ)(TOFA)N/AN/A(FPL)N/ARUNWAY CENTERLINERUNWAY SAFETY AREARUNWAY OBJECT FREE AREARUNWAY OBSTACLE FREE ZONERUNWAY PROTECTION ZONETAXIWAY OBJECT FREE AREABUILDING RESTRICTION LINEAIRPORT PAVEMENTAIRPORT REFERENCE POINTAIRPORT BUILDINGSAIRPORT PROPERTY LINEFENCEROADS / PARKINGWETLANDSGROUND ELEVATION CONTOURSPAVEMENT TO BE REMOVEDPAPIPERIMETER ROADRUNWAY END IDENTIFICATIONTHRESHOLD LIGHTSDESCRIPTIONEXISTINGFUTURELEGENDAS(AS)APPROACH SLOPEWINDCONEN/AFACILITY DEMOLITIONN/AAIRPORT PROPERTY EASEMENTESMTPLN/AFUTURE AVIATION DEVELOPMENTFUTURE NON-AVIATION DEVELOPMENTN/AN/AFEN/A00150'300'HORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD83VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88APRIL 2017ANNUAL RATE OF CHANGE0° 6' WNDECLINATION 6° 6' WTRUE NORTHMAGNE T I CULTIMATE AVIATION DEVELOPMENTN/ATAXIWAY & TAXILANE WIDTHTAXIWAY & TAXILANE SAFTEY AREA WIDTHTAXIWAY OBJECT FREE AREATAXILANE OBJECT FREE AREATAXIWAY / TAXILANE LIGHTINGTAXIWAY EDGE SAFETY MARGIN (TESM)TAXIWAY SHOULDER WIDTH50'10'N/A79'131'35'7.5'TAXIWAY DESIGN GROUP32TAXIWAY / TAXILANE SEPARATIONTAXIWAY DATATAXIWAY ATAXIWAY BTAXIWAY CEXISTINGPROPOSEDEXISTINGPROPOSEDEXISTINGPROPOSEDSAMESAMESAMESAMESAMESAMESAME79'131'115'115'CLEARSAMECLEARSAMESAMESAMESAMEN/ASAMESAMESAMESAMEMITLSAMEMITLSAME50'10'N/A79'131'3SAMESAMESAME115'CLEARSAMESAMESAMESAMESAMEMITLSAMEELEVATIONS (NAVD88) OF RUNWAY ENDSRUNWAY END COORDINATES% WIND COVERAGE (ALL)RUNWAY SURFACE TYPERUNWAY DESIGN CODE (RDC)( NAD 1983 )RUNWAY LENGTHRUNWAY WIDTH% EFFECTIVE GRADIENTRUNWAY LIGHTINGITEMVISUAL AIDS% MAXIMUM GRADIENTAPPROACH VISIBILITY MINIMUMSFAR PART 77 APPROACH TYPETOUCHDOWN ZONE ELEVATION (TDZE)NAVIGATIONAL AIDSRUNWAY SAFETY AREA (RSA)RUNWAY OFARUNWAY OFZBEYOND RWY ENDWIDTHBEYOND RWY ENDWIDTHBEYOND RWY ENDWIDTH11.50 MPH / 10.5 KTS14.96 MPH / 13.0 KTSPART 77 APPROACH CATEGORY (SLOPE)PAVEMENT STRENGTH (LBS.)DUAL WHEELSINGLE WHEEL2D WHEEL IN TANDEMRUNWAY PROTECTION ZONE (RPZ)INNER WIDTHLENGTHOUTER WIDTHMARKINGSAERONAUTICAL SURVEY REQUIRED FOR APPROACHRUNWAY DEPARTURE SURFACETHRESHOLD SITING SURFACE THRESHOLD ELEVATIONRUNWAY APPROACH REFERENCE CODE (APRC)RUNWAY DEPARTURE REFERENCE CODE (DPRC)PCNRUNWAY SURFACE TREATMENTDESIGN AIRCRAFT37.1' / 34.0'5,000'EXISTINGRUNWAY 9 / 27ASPHALTMIRL/REIL300'200'250'-0.1%-2.69%34:1GPS35,000 LBS26°26'13.4767" N081°24'14.6283" W1,000'500'700'NON-PRECISION40:137.1' / 34.0'20:1 NO TSS PENETRATIONSB / II / VISNONEB-II100'PAPI-4LB-II150'NVGS300'500'35.4'KING AIR60,000 LBS110,000 LBS95.22%97.78%26°26'15.1752" N081°23'19.6537" W150'200'250'200'250'-5.28%VOR & GPS20:1 NO TSS PENETRATIONS23/F/A/X/T8/F/B/Y/TNONENONENVGSNVGSKING AIRKING AIRB-IIB-II35,000 LBS35,000 LBS60,000 LBS60,000 LBS110,000 LBS110,000 LBSASPHALTASPHALT-0.1%0.1%4,550'4,550'150'35.9' / 33.3'MIRL/REILMIRL/REIL300'300'150'150'26°26'09.6375" N081°24'18.6077" W26°25'24.6019" N081°24'16.8798" WPAPI-4LPAPI-4L91.77%95.63%36.3' / 35.1'RUNWAY DATANON-PRECISIONNON-PRECISION34:134:1NON-PRECISIONNON-PRECISIONNON-PRECISION1 MILE40:140:120:1 NO TSS PENETRATIONSB-IIB / II / VISB-IIB / II / VIS≥ 3/4 MILE91.77%95.63%300'500'300'500'1,000'500'700'1 MILEPROPOSEDCITATION ENCORE7,000'ASPHALTMIRL/REIL300'200'250'-0.1%-2.69%34:135,000 LBS1,000'500'700'NON-PRECISION40:1B / II / VISNONEB-II100'PAPI-4LB-II150'NVGS300'500'35.4'60,000 LBS110,000 LBS95.22%97.78%NON-PRECISION> 3/4 MILE26°26'15.8530" N081°22'57.6637" W37.1' / 31.0'26°26'13.4767" N081°24'14.6283" W* To protect areas for development in the post 20 year planning period, the ultimate configuration of the airport facilities is depicted in blue. However, the need for these facilitiesare not justified in this master planning effort, and therefore no planning analysis was completed. Justification and planning analysis must be provided for these projects prior toconsideration for FAA funding. Ultimate surface dimensions were preserved from the previous ALP.20:1 NO TSS PENETRATIONS//37.1' / 31.0'GPSRUNWAY 18 / 36EXISTINGPROPOSED-5.28%35.9' / 33.3'/26°26'09.6375" N081°24'18.6077" W26°25'24.6019" N081°24'16.8798" W/35.9' / 33.3'35.9' / 33.3'1,000'500'700'VOR & GPS36.3' / 35.1'23/F/A/X/T23/F/A/X/T14.A.1.bPacket Pg. 266Attachment: IMM_ALP_SET-3-19-19 r1 (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) XXXXXX X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X XX X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X XXXXXXXXXX X X XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X XX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXX XXXXXX X X X X X X X X X XXXXXPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPL PLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPL PL PL PL PL PLPLPLPLPLPLPLPL1432567891011121314151617TAXIWAY A150'EXISTING RWY 36 ENDLAT - 26° 25' 24.60"'LONG - 81° 24' 16.88''El. 33.0 'EXISTING RUNWAY 18-36 5,000' x 150' 358.02 TRUE TAXIWAY C35'523'416'150'700'109'64'64'67'RV FACILITIES250'131'LOW POINTEL: 32.7'BAAAAAACPONDFUTURE PONDPONDFUTUREAREA RESERVED FORFUTURE NON-AVIATIONDEVELOPMENT500'558'303'187'86'325'166'EL. 30.0' MSL79'APRON AREA~160,000 SQ. FT.1000'35'250'150'300'AVIATION VIEWING AREAEL. 30.0' MSLPROPOSEDSR-29 BYPASS RE-ALIGNMENTBFUTURE DRYDETENTION PONDROFAROFAROFARSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFA ROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFATOFABRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRL BRL BRL BRL BRL BRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLBRLOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZAS AS AS AS AS AS AS AS ASASASASASASASASASASDS DS DS DS DS DS DS DS DS DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSTSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSATSARPZRPZRPZRPZRPZ RPZ RPZ RPZ RPZ RPZ RPZRPZRPZRPZRPZRPZRPZRPZRPZ(TOFA)(TOFA)(TOFA)(TOFA)(TOFA)(TOFA)(TOFA)(TOFA)(TOFA)(TSA)(TSA)(TSA)(TSA)(TSA)(TSA)(TSA)(TSA)(TSA)(TSA)TSS TSS TSS TSS TSS TSS TSS TSS TSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSPAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIC.R. 846S.R. 29AIRPORT RD.NEW MARKET RD. E./ALT 29JEFFERSON AVE. E. AGRI BLVD. NEW MARKET RD. E./ALT 29 NOTE: AIRCRAFT TAIL HEIGHTS IN THIS AREA MUSTFALL BELOW THE OVERLYING 40:1 DEPARTURE SURFACESERVICE ROAD00150'300'REVISIONSDATEDESCRIPTIONCLIENTPROJECTCHECKED:JOB NO.:SHEET TITLEDATE:SHEETDESIGN:DRAWN:OFAIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN UPDATEIMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORTIMMOKALEE, FLORIDACOLLIER COUNTYAIRPORT AUTHORITY7175 Murrell RoadMelbourne, Florida, 32904Tel. (321)-775-6231www.atkinsglobal.com/northamericaJANUARY 2019100053410 A.M.M.J.D.H.C.M.H.11HORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD83VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88TERMINAL AREA PLANBRLRSAROFAROFZRPZTOFA(BRL)(RSA)(ROFA)(ROFZ)(RPZ)(TOFA)N/AN/A(FPL)N/ARUNWAY CENTERLINERUNWAY SAFETY AREARUNWAY OBJECT FREE AREARUNWAY OBSTACLE FREE ZONERUNWAY PROTECTION ZONETAXIWAY OBJECT FREE AREABUILDING RESTRICTION LINEAIRPORT PAVEMENTAIRPORT REFERENCE POINTAIRPORT BUILDINGSAIRPORT PROPERTY LINEFENCEROADS / PARKINGWETLANDSGROUND ELEVATION CONTOURSPAVEMENT TO BE REMOVEDPAPIPERIMETER ROADRUNWAY END IDENTIFICATIONTHRESHOLD LIGHTSDESCRIPTIONEXISTINGFUTURELEGENDAS(AS)APPROACH SLOPEWINDCONEN/AFACILITY DEMOLITIONN/AAIRPORT PROPERTY EASEMENTESMTPLN/AFUTURE AVIATION DEVELOPMENTFUTURE NON-AVIATION DEVELOPMENTN/AN/AFEN/AAPRIL 2017ANNUAL RATE OF CHANGE0° 6' WNDECLINATION 6° 6' WTRUE NORTHMAGNE T I C 4AIRFIELD DRAINAGEN/A14.A.1.bPacket Pg. 267Attachment: IMM_ALP_SET-3-19-19 r1 (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) 0'20'40'60'80'100'120'140'RUNWAY 9 ENDEl. 35.4'0'200'400'600'800'1000'1200'1400'1600'1800'2000'-200'2200'2400'2600'2800'ASASASAS3200'3000'200'EXISTING 34:1APPROACH SURFACERPZRPZEXISTINGAPPROACH RPZEXISTINGDEPARTURE RPZX X X TSSTSS1513111214161767891012543T-10'20'40'60'80'100'120'140'EXISTINGRUNWAY 27 ENDEl. 33.2'0'200'400'600'800'1000'1200'1400'1600'1800'2000'-200'2200'2400'2600'2800'ASASASASFUTURE RUNWAY 27 ENDEl. 33.2'ASTSSTSSEXISTING 20:1THRESHOLD SITINGSURFACETSSFUTURE 20:1THRESHOLD SITINGSURFACEEXISTING 34:1APPROACH SURFACEFUTURE 34:1APPROACH SURFACE3000'3200'3400'RPZRPZEXISTINGDEPARTURE RPZEXISTINGAPPROACH RPZ200'XX X X 2221201918T-3T-2T-4PLPLPLPLPLPLRSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASASRPZRPZRPZRPZRPZRPZRPZRPZRPZRPZRPZRPZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZOFZTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIT-2T-3T-42221201918EXTENDED RUNWAYCENTERLINEEXISTING RUNWAY 27 ENDEl. 33.2'FUTURERUNWAY 27 ENDEl. 33.2'PLPLPLPLPLPL TAXIWAY BTAXIWAY ARSARSARSARSAROFAROFAROFARPZRPZRPZRPZRPZRPZRPZASASASASASASASASASASASASASASOFZOFZTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPI PAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIAIRPORT RD.T-11716151413121110987654321RUNWAY 9 ENDEl. 35.4'RUNWAY 9-27INNER APPROACHPLAN & PROFILEREVISIONSDATEDESCRIPTIONCLIENTPROJECTCHECKED:JOB NO.:SHEET TITLEDATE:SHEETDESIGN:DRAWN:OFAIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN UPDATEIMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORTIMMOKALEE, FLORIDACOLLIER COUNTYAIRPORT AUTHORITY7175 Murrell RoadMelbourne, Florida, 32904Tel. (321)-775-6231www.atkinsglobal.com/northamericaJANUARY 2019100053410 A.M.M.J.D.H.C.M.H.11RUNWAY 27 PROFILE VIEWRUNWAY 27 PLAN VIEWRUNWAY 9 PROFILE VIEWRUNWAY 9 PLAN VIEWRUNWAY 9-27 5,000'20'0'200'VERTICAL: 1" = 20'HORIZONTAL:1" = 200'0'APRIL 2017ANNUAL RATE OFCHANGE0° 6' WNDECLINATION 6° 6' WTRUE NORTHMAGNE T I C DESCRIPTIONLEGENDEXISTINGFUTUREAPPROACH SURFACEPOWERPOLEBUILDINGFENCETSSASXN/AN/AN/AN/ADSDEPARTURE SURFACETRAVERSWAY,CL/EDGE CROSSINGXXXEXTENDED RUNWAY C.L.RUNWAYN/AN/APROPERTY LINETHRESHOLD SITTINGSURFACE5PLFPLTSSASDSPAPIPAPIPAPI OBSTACLECLEARANCE14.A.1.bPacket Pg. 268Attachment: IMM_ALP_SET-3-19-19 r1 (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) 0'20'40'60'80'100'120'140'0'200'400'600'800'1000'1200'1400'1600'1800'2000'-200'2200'2400'2600'2800'RUNWAY 18 ENDEl. 36.1'200'EXISTING 34:1APPROACH SURFACEEXISTINGAPPROACH RPZEXISTINGDEPARTURE RPZ3000'3200'RPZ RPZ 6589101114X 732X X X EXISTING 20:1THRESHOLD SITINGSURFACETSSTSSASASASAST-50'20'40'60'80'100'120'140'0'200'400'600'800'1000'1200'1400'1600'1800'2000'-200'2200'2400'2600'2800'RUNWAY 36 ENDEl. 33.0'ASASASAS200'EXISTING 34:1APPROACH SURFACEEXISTINGAPPROACH RPZEXISTINGDEPARTURE RPZ3000'3200'RPZ RPZ 24252619202122231213272830312932X 14X 15X 16X 17X 18TSSTSSEXISTING 20:1THRESHOLD SITINGSURFACE33341110986754231ALACHUA ST.PLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPL TAXIWAY BRUNWAY 18 ENDEl. 36.1'ROFA RSARSAROFAROFAROFAROFARPZRPZRPZRPZ RPZRPZOFZOFZASASASASASASASASASASASASASASTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPIAIRPORT RD.ALACHUA ST.T-51213151417181920212223345272829303132RUNWAY 36 ENDEl. 33.0'16C.R. 846 PL PL PL PL PL PLEXTENDED RUNWAYCENTERLINEROFARSA RSAROFAROFAROFAROFAOFZOFZASASASASASASASASASASASASASASRPZRPZRPZRPZRPZ RPZRPZTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSTSSPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIAIRPORT BLVD.ROUT E 2 9 NEW H AR V E S T RD .RUNWAY 18-36INNER APPROACHPLAN & PROFILEREVISIONSDATEDESCRIPTIONCLIENTPROJECTCHECKED:JOB NO.:SHEET TITLEDATE:SHEETDESIGN:DRAWN:OFAIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN UPDATEIMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORTIMMOKALEE, FLORIDACOLLIER COUNTYAIRPORT AUTHORITY7175 Murrell RoadMelbourne, Florida, 32904Tel. (321)-775-6231www.atkinsglobal.com/northamericaJANUARY 2019100053410 A.M.M.J.D.H.C.M.H.11RUNWAY 36 PROFILE VIEWRUNWAY 36 PLAN VIEWRUNWAY18 PROFILE VIEWRUNWAY 18 PLAN VIEWRUNWAY 18-36 5,000'20'0'200'VERTICAL: 1" = 20'HORIZONTAL:1" = 200'0'APRIL 2017ANNUAL RATE OFCHANGE0° 6' WN DECLINATION 6° 6' WTRUE NORTHMAGNETIC6DESCRIPTIONLEGENDEXISTINGFUTUREAPPROACH SURFACEPOWERPOLEBUILDINGFENCETSSASXN/AN/AN/AN/ADSDEPARTURE SURFACETRAVERSWAY,CL/EDGE CROSSINGXXXEXTENDED RUNWAY C.L.RUNWAYN/AN/APROPERTY LINETHRESHOLD SITTINGSURFACEPLFPLTSSASDSPAPIPAPIPAPI OBSTACLECLEARANCE14.A.1.bPacket Pg. 269Attachment: IMM_ALP_SET-3-19-19 r1 (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) 0'100'0'1000'2000'RUNWAY 18 ENDEl. 36.1'EXISTING 40:1DEPARTURE SURFACERUNWAY 36 ENDEl. 33.0'DSDSEXISTING 40:1DEPARTURE SURFACE3000'300'400'100'0'1000'2000'3000'200'300'400'4000'5000'6000'7000'8000'9000'10000'11000'0'1000'2000'3000'0'1000'2000'3000'4000'5000'6000'7000'8000'9000'10000'11000'200'6282911121516453091322-26, 46313234353336172,3171819202137384039414243448101445DSDST-1T-2T-3T-4T-5T-6T-7T-8T-9T-10C© 2017 DigitalGlobe Image courtesy of USGS © 2017 GeoEye Earthstar Geographics SIO © 2017 Microsoft Corporation 121175211823273135RUNWAY 18 ENDEl. 36.1'RUNWAY 36 ENDEl. 33.0'19139643151617202124252628293032333436224637383940414243444581014DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDS DSDSDS DS DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSTSATSATSA TSA PAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PAPI PLPLPL PLPLPLPLPL C1814RUNWAY 9 ENDEl. 35.4'FUTURE RUNWAY 27 ENDEl. 33.2'EXISTING RUNWAY 27 ENDEl. 33.2'2019161511109556272829303235384145465049484751313334363739404244123467812131721222324252643525354555758DSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSTSATSATSATSARPZRPZPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPI PAPI PAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPI PAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPAPIPLPLPLPLPLPL PLPLPL FPLFPLT-1T-2T-3T-4T-5T-6T-7T-8T-9T-10T-11T-12T-13T-14T-15T-16T-17T-18T-19T-20T-21T-22T-23T-24T-25T-26T-27RUNWAY 9 ENDEl. 35.4'EXISTINGRUNWAY 27 ENDEl. 33.2'FUTURE RUNWAY27 ENDEl. 33.2'FUTURE 40:1DEPARTURESURFACEDSDSDSDSEXISTING 40:1DEPARTURESURFACEEXISTING 40:1DEPARTURESURFACE0'100'0'1000'2000'3000'300'400'0'100'0'1000'2000'3000'200'300'400'4000'5000'6000'7000'8000'9000'10000'11000'0'1000'2000'3000'0'1000'2000'3000'4000'5000'6000'7000'8000'9000'10000'11000'200'12000'DSDS181614152078112565452171991013-5555361321122243232425262728293032353841454650494847513133343637394042445758T-1T-2T-3T-4T-5T-6T-7T-8T-9T-10T-11T-12T-13T-14T-15T-16T-17T-18T-19T-20T-21T-22T-23T-24T-25T-26T-27RUNWAY DEPARTURESURFACE DRAWINGREVISIONSDATEDESCRIPTIONCLIENTPROJECTCHECKED:JOB NO.:SHEET TITLEDATE:SHEETDESIGN:DRAWN:OFAIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN UPDATEIMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORTIMMOKALEE, FLORIDACOLLIER COUNTYAIRPORT AUTHORITY7175 Murrell RoadMelbourne, Florida, 32904Tel. (321)-775-6231www.atkinsglobal.com/northamericaJANUARY 2019100053410 A.M.M.J.D.H.C.M.H.11RUNWAY 18-36 PROFILE VIEWRUNWAY 18-36 PLAN VIEWRUNWAY 9-27 PROFILE VIEWRUNWAY 9-27 PLAN VIEWDescriptionLEGENDExistingFuturePower Pole Building Fence N/AN/AN/ADSDeparture SurfaceTraversway,CL Crossing/Edge CrossingExtended Runway C.L.Runway N/ARUNWAY 18-36 4,500'RUNWAY 9-27 5,000'001,000'2,000'APRIL 2017ANNUAL RATE OF CHANGE0° 6' WNDECLINATION 6° 6' WTRUE NORTHMAGNE T I CAPRIL 2017ANNUAL RATE OFCHANGE0° 6' WN DECLINATION 6° 6' WTRUE NORTHMAGNETICN/AProperty LinePL100'0'VERTICAL: 1" = 100'100'0'VERTICAL: 1" = 100' RUNWAY 9-27 RUNWAY 18-36 7DSPL001,000'2,000'14.A.1.bPacket Pg. 270Attachment: IMM_ALP_SET-3-19-19 r1 (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) HORIZONTALSURFACE187' MSL187' MSL250' MSL300' MSL350' MSL387' MSL150'100'50'50'100'150'200' MSL 100'150'100'150'187' MSL250' MSL300' MSL350' MSL387' MSL200' MSL100'150'187'187'187'187'EXISTING RWY 36 ENDLAT - 26° 25' 24.60"'LONG - 81° 24' 16.88''El. 33.0 'EXISTING RWY 18 ENDLAT - 26° 26' 14.09"'LONG - 81° 24' 18.78''El. 36.1'EXISTING RWY 9 ENDLAT - 26° 26' 13.32"'LONG - 81° 24' 19.58''El. 35.4' (TDZE)EXISTING RWY 27 ENDLAT - 26° 26' 15.03"'LONG - 81° 23' 24.60''El. 33.2'FUTURE RWY 27 ENDLAT - 26° 26' 15.85''LONG - 81° 22' 57.66''El. (30.1)'OB-21OB-1OB-2OB-3T-01T-02T-03HORIZONTAL SURFACE187' MSL34:1NON-PRECISIONAPPROACHSURFACEEXISTING RUNWAY 36 ENDEL. 33.0'34:1NON-PRECISIONAPPROACHSURFACEEXISTING RUNWAY 18 ENDEL. 36.1'20:1CONICALSURFACE20:1CONICALSURFACET-02T-0334:1NON-PRECISIONAPPROACHSURFACEEXISTING RUNWAY 9 ENDEL. 35.4'34:1NON-PRECISIONAPPROACHSURFACEFUTURE RUNWAY 27 ENDEL. 30.1'HORIZONTAL SURFACE187' MSL20:1CONICALSURFACE20:1CONICALSURFACET-01PART 77 AIRSPACE PLAN02,000'HORIZONTALDIMDIMENSIONAL STANDARDS (FEET)ITEMDABCEAA5,0002,0005,00020:1ABAB2505005,0005,0001,2501,5005,0005,00020:120:1BCDCDB5005001,00010,00010,0003,5004,00010,00010,00034:134:11,00010,00016,000**A - UTILITY RUNWAYSB - RUNWAYS LARGER THAN UTILITYC - VISIBILITY MINIMUMS GREATER THAN 3/4 MILESD - VISIBILITY MINIMUMS AS LOW AS 3/4 MILEE - PRECISION INSTRUMENT APPROACH SLOPE IS 50:1 FOR INNER 10,000 FEET AND 40:1 FOR ANADDITIONAL 40,000 FEETPRECISIONINSTRUMENTRUNWAYNON-PRECISIONINSTRUMENT RUNWAYVISUALRUNWAYPRECISIONINSTRUMENTRUNWAYNON-PRECISIONINSTRUMENT RUNWAYVISUALRUNWAYWIDTH OF PRIMARY SURFACE ANDAPPROACH SURFACE WIDTH ATINNER ENDRADIUS OF HORIZONTAL SURFACEAPPROACH SURFACE WIDTH AT ENDAPPROACH SURFACE LENGTHAPPROACH SLOPEAPPROACH FLARE0.1:10.1:10.15:10.15:10.15:10.15:1REVISIONSDATEDESCRIPTIONCLIENTPROJECTCHECKED:JOB NO.:SHEET TITLEDATE:SHEETDESIGN:DRAWN:OFAIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN UPDATEIMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORTIMMOKALEE, FLORIDACOLLIER COUNTYAIRPORT AUTHORITY7175 Murrell RoadMelbourne, Florida, 32904Tel. (321)-775-6231www.atkinsglobal.com/northamericaJANUARY 2019100053410 A.M.M.J.D.H.C.M.H.11ISOMETRIC VIEW OF SECTIONVISUAL OR NONPRECISION APPROACH(SLOPE E)CONICAL SURFACEPRECISION INSTRUMENTAPPROACHRUNWAY CENTERLINE1/2 C -8 ,000 '5,000 ' 1,200'50,000'10,000'1/2 A4,000'DB1/2A20:17: 1 7: 1 7:17:17:150:140:140:15 , 0 0 0 '1/2CHORIZONTAL SURFACE150' ABOVE AIRPORT EL.FEDERAL AVIATION REGULATIONS PART 77, STATES THAT A STRUCTURE IS PRESUMED TO HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECT UPON THE SAFE AND EFFICIENT USE OF NAVIGABLE AIRSPACE IF ITSHEIGHT EXCEEDS THE FOLLOWING STANDARDS:1.A HEIGHT OF FIVE HUNDRED (500) FEET ABOVE GROUND LEVEL AT THE SITE OF THE OBJECT ANYWHERE IN THE STATE.2.A HEIGHT THAT IS TWO HUNDRED (200) FEET ABOVE GROUND LEVEL OR ABOVE THE ESTABLISHED AIRPORT ELEVATION, WHICHEVER IS HIGHER, WITHIN THREE (3) NAUTICAL MILES OF THEESTABLISHED REFERENCED POINT OF A PUBLIC-USE AIRPORT, EXCLUDING HELIPORTS, AND THE HEIGHT INCREASES IN THE PROPORTION OF ONE HUNDRED (100) FEET FOR EACH ADDITIONALNAUTICAL MILE OF DISTANCE FROM THE AIRPORT UP TO A MAXIMUM OF FIVE HUNDRED (500) FEET.3.A HEIGHT WITHIN A TERMINAL OBSTACLE CLEARANCE AREA, INCLUDING AN INITIAL APPROACH SEGMENT, A DEPARTURE AREA, AND A CIRCLING APPROACH AREA, AS DEFINED BY FEDERAL LAWSAND REGULATIONS, WHICH WOULD RESULT IN THE VERTICAL DISTANCE BETWEEN ANY POINT ON THE OBJECT AND AN ESTABLISHED MINIMUM INSTRUMENT FLIGHT ALTITUDE WITHIN THAT AREA ORSEGMENT TO BE LESS THAN THE REQUIRED OBSTACLE CLEARANCE.4.A HEIGHT WITHIN AN EN ROUTE OBSTACLE CLEARANCE AREA, AS DEFINED BY FEDERAL LAWS AND REGULATIONS, INCLUDING TURN AND TERMINATION AREAS, OF A FEDERAL AIRWAY ORAPPROVED OFF-AIRWAY ROUTE, THAT WOULD INCREASE THE MINIMUM OBSTACLE CLEARANCE ALTITUDE.5.THE SURFACE OF A TAKEOFF AND LANDING AREA OF A PUBLIC-USE AIRPORT OR ANY IMAGINARY SURFACE AS ESTABLISHED BY FAR PART 77. HOWEVER, NO PART OF THE TAKEOFF OR LANDINGAREA ITSELF WILL BE CONSIDERED TO BE AN OBSTRUCTION.NOTE:FAR PART 77 IMAGINARY SURFACES ARE SHOWN ON THIS SHEET FOR THE IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT. THESE SURFACES ARE DEPICTED BASED UPON EXISTING AND ULTIMATE AIRPORTDEVELOPMENT.NOTESPART-77 OBSTRUCTIONSAPRIL 2017ANNUAL RATE OF CHANGE0° 6' WNDECLINATION 6° 6' WTRUE NORTHMAGNE T I CRUNWAY 18-36 PROFILE VIEWRUNWAY 9-27 PROFILE VIEW01,000'HORIZONTAL100'0'VERTICAL8Approach SurfaceTransitional SurfaceHorizontal SurfaceConical SurfacePrimary SurfaceLEGEND14.A.1.bPacket Pg. 271Attachment: IMM_ALP_SET-3-19-19 r1 (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) C.R. 846S.R. 29AIRWAYS RD.NEW MARKET RD. E./ALT 29ALACH U A S T . JEFFERSON AVE. E. AIRPO R T R D . AGRI BLVD. NEW MARKET RD. E./ALT 29 ALAC H U A S T . AIRPARK BLVD.C.R. 846IMMOKALEE HEALTH DEPARTMENTCHURCHIMMOKALEE COMMUNITY PARKIMMOKALEE LIBRARYIMMOKALEE HIGH SCHOOLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLGA TERMINALPUBLIC RAMP(RPZ)(RPZ)(RPZ)RPZRPZRPZRPZRPZRPZRPZ RPZLAND USE MAPRUNWAY PROTECTION ZONERUNWAY OBSTACLE FREE AREAPROPERTY LINEAIRFIELDNON-AERONAUTICALAERONAUTICALON AIRPORT LAND USE EXISTING CLEARANCESFUTURE CLEARANCESRUNWAY PROTECTION ZONERUNWAY OBSTACLE FREE AREAFUTURE PROPERTY LINEPLRPZ(RPZ)REVISIONSDATEDESCRIPTIONCLIENTPROJECTCHECKED:JOB NO.:SHEET TITLEDATE:SHEETDESIGN:DRAWN:OFAIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN UPDATEIMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORTIMMOKALEE, FLORIDACOLLIER COUNTYAIRPORT AUTHORITY7175 Murrell RoadMelbourne, Florida, 32904Tel. (321)-775-6231www.atkinsglobal.com/northamerica100053410 A.M.M.J.D.H.C.M.H.11ROFAFPL(ROFA)AGRICULTURE/ FUTURE AVIATIONCOMMERCE CENTERCOMMERCE CENTER/INDUSTRIALLOW DENSITY RESIDENTIALHIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIALINDUSTRIALAGRICULTURE OFF AIRPORT LAND USEAPRIL 2017ANNUAL RATE OFCHANGE0° 6' WNDECLINATION 6° 6' W TRUE NORTHMAGNETIC OTHERDEVELOPMENT RESTRICTED*WETLAND AREA00500'1,000'HORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD83VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88 9 *Conservation Easement JANURAY 2019914.A.1.bPacket Pg. 272Attachment: IMM_ALP_SET-3-19-19 r1 (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) 498.85'PLPLPLPL PLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPL PLPLPLPLPLPL PLPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFUTURE PROPERTY LINERUNWAY 27- 7,000' TOTAL LENGTHN 79°40'02" E897.38'S 01°47'51" E3001.15'S 89°06'30"W392.71'S 00°37'54"E330.00'N 89°06'24"E399.43'S 01°47'58"E595.40'S 46°56'01"E114.19'S 48°03'57"W354.44'S 38°23'24"W512.27'S 35°35'17"W790.74'N 00°37'52"W 1545.15'N 88°58'04"EN 00°37'52"W320.01'S 88°58'04"W498.85'N 00°37'52"W196.16'N 27°58'56"W856.22'N 15°06'23"E207.92'N 15°28'01" E 2315.69'S 74°31'59" E280.02'S 10°19'48" E954.97'S 89°01'33"W351.68'S 88°16'17"W657.11'S 88°23'05"W666.72'S 00°12'19"W 670.12'S 88°52'25"W686.43'S 00°18'39"W 665.62'S 88°58'33"W 2580.08'N 89°57'51"WS 01°24'24"E 1338.87' S 02°01'06"E 1337.64' S 00°03'26"E 1334.66' S 00°33'18"E S 00°37'21" E N 89°52'18" E 1323.54'N 89°35'19" E 2658.01'N 89°35'07" E 2658.08'N 88°52'49" E 1636.79'1350.11'2652.60'1325.57'S 89°01'27"W1982.31'S 88°37'37"W 1348.53'N 15°28'01" E966.71'N15°28'01"E 6020.10'N 83°16'16" W703.78'POINT OFCOMMENCEMENT (POC)1) EASEMENT PARCEL "A"2) ROADWAY PARCEL "ONE"3) ROADWAY PARCEL "TWO"4) EASEMENT PARCEL "B"5) ROADWAY PARCEL "THREE"FOR:POINT OFBEGINNING (POB)EASEMENT PARCEL "A"REVISEDCONSERVATIONEASEMENT "B"(10.383 ACRES GROSS)POINT OFBEGINNING (POB)EASEMENT PARCEL "B"POINT OFBEGINNING (POB)ROADWAYPARCEL THREE (UNPAVED)25263635363512353425363031CURVE #1CURVE #5BCURVE #5A262727REVISEDCONSERVATIONEASEMENT "A"(121.287 ACRES GROSS)POINT OFBEGINNING (POB)ROADWAYPARCEL TWO (UNPAVED)RSA RSA RSA RSA RSA RSARSARSARSARSARSARSAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFA ROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFARPZRPZRSARSA RSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSA(RSA)(RSA)(RSA)(RSA)ROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFA(ROFA)(ROFA)(ROFA)(ROFA)RPZRPZRPZ(RPZ)(RPZ)(RPZ)(RPZ)(RPZ)(RPZ)RPZRPZRPZ (ROFZ)(ROFZ)(ROFZ)(ROFZ)POINT OFBEGINNING (POB)ROADWAY PARCELONE (PAVED)CURVE #3CURVE #4CURVE #2NOT INCLUDED PER O.R. 70, PG. 635 POINT OFCOMMENCEMENT (POC)1) PARCEL 2 - RELEASED PROPERTYFOR:PARCEL 2RELEASED PROPERTYREVISIONSDATEDESCRIPTIONCLIENTPROJECTCHECKED:JOB NO.:SHEET TITLEDATE:SHEETDESIGN:DRAWN:OFAIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN UPDATEIMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORTIMMOKALEE, FLORIDACOLLIER COUNTYAIRPORT AUTHORITY7175 Murrell RoadMelbourne, Florida, 32904Tel. (321)-775-6231www.atkinsglobal.com/northamericaJANUARY 2019100053410 A.M.M.J.D.H.C.M.H.11AIRPORT PROPERTYINVENTORY MAPPROPERTY LINEPOTENTIAL FUTURE PROPERTY LINEMETES AND BOUNDSSECTION CORNER MARKERSRUNWAY PROTECTION ZONE (RPZ)FUTURE RUNWAY PROTECTION ZONEFPLN 89°35'07" E 2658.08'132400400'800'APRIL 2017ANNUAL RATE OF CHANGE0° 6' WNDECLINATION 6° 6' WTRUE NORTHMAGNE T I CHORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD83VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88RUNWAY SAFETY AREA (RSA)FUTURE RUNWAY SAFETY AREARUNWAY OBJECT FREE AREA (ROFA)FUTURE RUNWAY OBJECT FREE AREACONSERVATION EASEMENTPROPERTY RELEASED FROM AERONAUTICAL PROVISIONSLEGENDRPZRPZRSARSAROFAROFAPL10EXISTING AIRFIELD PAVEMENTFUTURE AIRFIELD PAVEMENT14.A.1.bPacket Pg. 273Attachment: IMM_ALP_SET-3-19-19 r1 (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) AIRPORT PROPERTY INVENTORYMAP DATAREVISIONSDATEDESCRIPTIONCLIENTPROJECTCHECKED:JOB NO.:SHEET TITLEDATE:SHEETDESIGN:DRAWN:OFAIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN UPDATEIMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORTIMMOKALEE, FLORIDACOLLIER COUNTYAIRPORT AUTHORITY7175 Murrell RoadMelbourne, Florida, 32904Tel. (321)-775-6231www.atkinsglobal.com/northamericaJANUARY 2019100053410 A.M.M.J.D.H.C.M.H.111114.A.1.bPacket Pg. 274Attachment: IMM_ALP_SET-3-19-19 r1 (8085 : Immokalee Airport ALP Update) Immokalee Regional Airport, Airport Layout Plan Update Airport Layout Plan Narrative Collier County Airport Authority March 19 2019 IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 3 March 2019 Table of contents Chapter Pages Executive summary 6 1. Introduction 7 1.1. Purpose, Goals & Objectives 7 1.2. Airport Organization 8 1.3. Review of Existing Studies 9 1.4. Key Planning Issues 12 2. Inventory of Existing Conditions 13 2.1. Airport Background 13 2.2. Airport Facility Inventory 16 2.3. Navigational Aids 23 2.4. Airspace Structure 24 2.5. Land Use and Zoning 34 2.6. Environmental Consideration 34 2.7. Existing Utilities and Infrastructure 43 3. Forecast of Aviation Demand 46 3.1. Introduction 46 3.2. Data Sources 46 3.3. Historical Aeronautical Activity and Based Aircraft 48 3.4. Based Aircraft Projections 49 3.5. Aviation Operations Projections 52 3.6. Peaking Characteristics 58 3.7. Summary 59 4. Design Criteria and Facility Requirements 60 4.1. Introduction 60 4.2. Demand and Capacity 60 4.3. Critical Aircraft 65 4.4. Airside Facility Requirements 66 4.5. Landside Facility Requirements 71 4.6. Support Facilities 75 5. Airport Development Plan 76 5.1. Airport Development Alternatives and Concepts 76 5.2. Future Airport Land Use Concept 84 5.3. Preferred Airport Development Concept 86 6. Development Phasing and Capital Improvement Program 88 6.1. Introduction 88 6.2. Sources of Funding 88 6.3. Development Phasing 91 6.4. Cost Estimates 92 6.5. Development Considerations 93 6.6. Capital Improvement Program 93 7. Airport Layout Plan 99 7.1. Airport Layout Plan Set 99 8. Public Involvement 102 IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 4 March 2019 8.1. CCAA Web Page Project Updates 102 8.2. Media Announcements 102 8.3. Fact Sheets & Project Flyers 102 8.4. Public Meetings 102 8.5. Surveys 103 8.6. Comments (Collection and Reporting) 103 Appendices 104 Appendix A. Runway Length Analysis 106 A.1. Fleet Mix and Critical Aircraft 106 A.2. Surveyed Jet Fleet Mix 107 A.3. Runway Length 108 A.4. Airplane Weight Categorization for Runway Length Requirements 109 A.5. Runway Length Adjustments for Contaminated Surface 110 Appendix B. Solid Waste & Recycling Plan 112 Appendix C. Capital Improvement Program Estimate Details 113 Appendix D. Reduced Size ALP 114 Appendix E. Public Involvement Details 115 E.1. Meeting Notifications 115 E.2. Public Meeting Minutes 116 E.3. Working Paper Publication May 2nd 2017 120 E.4. Airport Layout Plan Update - 30% Milestone Public Comment Forum Results 121 E.5. Airport Layout Plan Update - 60% Milestone Public Comment Forum Results 122 Tables Table 2-1 Runway Characteristics 16 Table 2-2 Declared Distances 18 Table 2-3 Pavement Condition Report Overview 19 Table 2-4 Airports Surrounding Immokalee Regional Airport (IMM) 34 Table 3-1 FAA TAF - Based Aircraft 49 Table 3-2 FAA FASP - Based Aircraft 50 Table 3-3 IMM Market Share Forecast - Based Aircraft 51 Table 3-4 Preferred Based Aircraft Forecast 51 Table 3-5 Based Aircraft by Type Forecast 52 Table 3-6 Operations Per Based Aircraft Forecast 53 Table 3-7 FAA TAF - Operations 53 Table 3-8 FDOT System Plan Forecast 54 Table 3-9 Trend Analysis 55 Table 3-10 Market Share Analysis - Operations 56 Table 3-11 Preferred Operations Forecast vs. FAA TAF 57 Table 3-12 Preferred Forecast by Operation Type 58 Table 3-14 Peaking Characteristics 59 Table 4-1 IMM Runway Utilization Rates 61 Table 4-2 FAA Aircraft Certifications 61 Table 4-3 Annual Service Volume vs. Annual Demand 64 Table 3-13 Fleet Mix Analysis 65 Table 4-4 Aircraft Approach Category 66 Table 4-5 Airplane Design Group 67 Table 4-6 Visibility Minimums 67 Table 4-7 Runway ARC Designations & Required Safety Areas 67 IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 5 March 2019 Table 4-8 Runway Object Free Area 68 Table 4-9 Runway Protection Zones (RPZ's) 68 Table 4-10 Runway Magnetic Bearing 70 Table 4-11 Critical Aircraft & Respective TDG 71 Table 4-12 GA Terminal Building Requirements 72 Table 4-13 GA Apron Requirements 73 Table 4-14 T-Hangar Requirements 73 Table 4-15 Conventional Hangar Requirements 74 Table 4-16 Parking Requirements 74 Table 5-1 Evaluation Criteria for Selected Development Plan 76 Table 6-1 Eligible and Ineligible AIP Projects 89 Table 6-2 Summary of Cost Estimates 93 Table 6-3 Phase I CIP Projects 94 Table 6-4 Phase II CIP Projects 96 Table 6-5 Phase III CIP Projects 96 Table 6-6 Phase IV (Ultimate) CIP Projects 97 Figures Figure 1-1 CCAA Organizational Chart 9 Figure 1-2 SR-29 Bypass Alternatives 11 Figure 2-1 Location Map 14 Figure 2-2 Vicinity Map 15 Figure 2-3 2017 FDOT PCI Analysis 20 Figure 2-4 Runway 18 VOR Instrument Approach procedure 25 Figure 2-5 Runway 36 GPS Instrument Approach Procedure 26 Figure 2-6 Runway 18 GPS Instrument Approach Procedure 27 Figure 2-7 Runway 27 GPS Instrument Approach Procedure 28 Figure 2-8 Runway 9 GPS Instrument Approach Procedure 29 Figure 2-9 FAA Airspace 30 Figure 2-10 VFR Sectional Chart - IMM Area 31 Figure 2-11 FAA Part 77 Typical Section 33 Figure 2-12 Land Use Zoning 35 Figure 2-13 Currently Vacant and Underutilized Land 36 Figure 2-14 Wind Roses 38 Figure 2-15 Soil Composition 40 Figure 2-16 Floodplain Locations 41 Figure 2-17 Wetland Locations 42 Figure 2-18 IMM Panther Habitat 44 Figure 2-19 IMM Utilities 45 Figure 3-1 Historical Aircraft Operations 48 Figure 3-2 Historical Based Aircraft 49 Figure 3-3 Preferred Forecast Methodology 57 Figure 4-1 Annual Service Volume vs. Annual Demand 64 Figure 4-2 FAA AC 150/5300-13A – Taxiway Design Groups (TDGs) 70 Figure 5-1 Alternative 1 80 Figure 5-2 Alternative 2 82 Figure 5-3 Alternative 3 83 Figure 5-4 Airport Land Use Concept 85 Figure 5-5 Preferred Airside Development Concept 87 IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 6 March 2019 Executive summary Immokalee Regional Airport (IMM) is undertaking an Airport Layout Plan (ALP) update. The purpose of this study is to provide a 20-year development program that will create the safe, efficient, economical, and environmentally responsible airport facility capable of facilitating the demand for aviation services which can be reasonably expected, meet the development goals of the CCAA, and create additional public value for residents in the Immokalee area and the entire aeronautical community. These updates will provide CCAA and IMM with a method and proposed schedule for correcting identified airport design deficiencies as well as accommodate future growth in aviation demand. This report was completed based on applicable Federal Aviation Administration Advisory Circulars and Florida Department of Transportation Guidebooks. CCAA’s specific goals for this analysis are to: 1. Understand the existing and future fleet mix demands 2. Understand the future operational demand and capacity gaps 3. Create a viable, and sustainable path for airport development and future capital investment. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 7 March 2019 1. Introduction 1.1. Purpose, Goals & Objectives The purpose of this study is to provide a 20-year development program that will create the safe, efficient, economical, and environmentally responsible airport facility capable of facilitating the demand for aviation services which can be reasonably expected, meet the development goals of the CCAA, and create additional public value for residents in the Immokalee area and the entire aeronautical community. Consistent with this purpose, the following goals and objectives were established to guide the development of a 20-year visioning for the Airport. These goals will guide the project development alternatives and serve as the ultimate criteria for the selection of a preferred development plan. The objectives coupled with each goal aim to create measurable milestones to be addressed within this planning effort. 1.1.1. Goal No. 1 Continue to meet and enhance the level of service provided to all airport users and develop an airport facility that will provide adequate capacity to fill its role as a general aviation airport in southwestern Florida. Objectives: • Provide adequate runway capacity for estimated demand in terms of annual and hourly operations. • Provide adequate runway length to meet forecasted regional market and operational needs. • Provide opportunities for development of services associated with corporate aviation, industrial aviation, and other general aviation uses. • Provide necessary ancillary facilities and equipment to support anticipated operations at IMM. 1.1.2. Goal No. 2 Provide guidelines for future development, while satisfying anticipated aviation demand. Objectives: • Provide adequate airside and landside facilities to meet anticipated demand while adhering to FAA safety and design standards. • Effectively market commercial and non-commercial GA operators and facilities. • Develop synergies between IMM and its community sponsors and beneficiaries that will benefit the Airport and the entire region. 1.1.3. Goal No. 3 Provide an airport that is safe and reliable. Objectives: • Provide navigational aids, flight support services, and meteorological facilities which enhance the safety and reliability of operations under all weather conditions. • Protect FAA-mandated safety areas, runway protection zones, and other clear zones. • Minimize obstructions to air navigation. • Develop facilities to meet the demands of the proposed critical aircraft. 1.1.4. Goal No. 4 Develop IMM in a manner which minimizes negative environmental impacts. Objectives: • Identify the major environmental issues of concern, including noise impacts. • Minimize potential environmental impacts in developing future facilities. • Create an efficient development layout to provide ease of air and ground access. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 8 March 2019 1.1.5. Goal No. 5 Promote the development of compatible land uses in the Airport’s vicinity. Objectives: • Promote land use planning and development objectives for on- and off-airport land uses which are compatible with the anticipated long-range needs of the Airport and community as a whole. • Designate areas for future development (i.e. on-Airport land uses). • Encourage the adoption of airport protective zoning. 1.1.6. Goal No. 6 Develop an airport that supports local and regional economic goals while accommodating new opportunities or shifts in development patterns. Objectives: • Achieve a level of service and user convenience such that the Airport is a positive factor in regional economic development decisions. • Achieve capacities of the airfield so that the Airport may be an attractive location for corporate operations, aircraft maintenance and/or manufacturing operations, or other aviation-related businesses. • Provide appropriate and achievable commercial opportunities on and around the Airport. • Assure economic feasibility through equitable distribution of user charges, capital investment, maintenance, and operating costs, while keeping overall costs within an acceptable level. • Identify financial alternatives and funding sources available for the implementation of aviation related and non-aviation related development projects. • Develop an airport layout plan which easily integrates with existing and proposed transportation infrastructure and encourages economic growth. 1.1.7. Goal No. 7 Develop an airport that is consistent with federal, state, regional, and local plans. Objectives: • Develop IMM in accordance with local comprehensive plans, land use plans, and transportation plans. • Ensure applicable FAA standards for airport development are met. • Comply with FAA established safety area and design criteria. These goals and objectives reflect policy goals to be reached throughout the planning process. These goals include the ultimate development of facilities to serve the existing and future aviation needs of the region, and provisions for the type of development that will yield the most public benefit from the required investment. Finally, these goals must be manageable within existing limitations of funds and design principles 1.2. Airport Organization IMM is a publicly owned airport and operated by the Collier County Airport Authority (CCAA). Created in 1993, CCAA was given the purpose of overseeing the management and development of three general aviation (GA) airports that serve the county. Those airports include Marco Island Executive Airport (MKY), Everglades Airpark (X01), and Immokalee Regional Airport (IMM). Their overall mission is to operate and develop those airports for the benefit of the surrounding communities. The overall CCAA organizational chart and how it relates to the Collier County Board of Commissioners is depicted in Figure 1-1. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 9 March 2019 Figure 1-1 CCAA Organizational Chart Source: Collier County Airport Authority, 2017 1.3. Review of Existing Studies There have been multiple studies that have been completed or are in progress for IMM. The following subsections provide a summary of prior and current studies that will be valuable when determining the Airport’s future needs. It is important to become familiar with these studies when analyzing future airport needs to ensure compatibility, efficiency, and effectiveness with local, state, and federal plans or to address issues regarding potential future land use incompatibilities. 1.3.1. National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS) – FAA The National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS) was submitted to Congress under 49 U.S. Code § 47103 on September 30, 2016. This plan identified 3,340 existing airports that are significant to national air transportation and contain estimates that $32.5 billion in infrastructure development will be needed over the next five years to meet the needs of all segments of civil aviation. The airports selected are comprised of all commercial service airports, all reliever airports, and qualified GA airports. The NPIAS’s primary purpose is Collier County Airport Authority Board / BCC County Manager's Office Growth Management Department Head / Operations Support Director Airports Manager Operations Supervisor (1) Marco Island Airport Line / Customer Service Staff (6) Opeartions Analyst (1) Operations Supervisor (1) Immokalee Airport Line / Customer Service Staff (3) Everglades Airpark Line Staff (1) Manager Financial & Operational Support (GMD) Accountant (1) (Airport) Budget Analyst (GMD/Airport) IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 10 March 2019 to determine the identified airport’s specific eligibility to receive a portion of the grant fund under the Airport Improvement Program (AIP). IMM is classified as an eligible Public Use, Regional General Aviation Airport under the NPIAS. This is due to the requirement for GA airports to have a minimum of 10 based aircraft and within the 20-mile vicinity of a NPIAS qualified airport. IMM has 58 based aircraft, which places them under a qualified NPIAS category. 1.3.2. Florida Aviation System Plan- FDOT In 2005, The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) along with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Florida’s Public Airports developed the Florida Aviation System Plan (FASP). In accordance with the Continuing Florida Aviation System Planning Process (CFASPP), the FASP identifies seven strategic goals and the appropriate approaches, analysis, and overall recommendations to achieve these goals. Those goals include having a well-planned system of airports for the projected capacity growth in the coming years. That includes identifying major development projects for all of Florida’s airports and accurate long- range plans to ensure the capable planning for the future. The FASP is also attempting to provide a diversified system of airports that is capable of meeting user demands by providing convenient air travel. In the most recently updated (2010) FASP, the plan predicted there would be substantial growth within IMM in the coming years, due primarily to the rapid growth in the surrounding regions, particularly looking towards Naples Municipal Airport as capacity for GA services reduces. Another notable growth factor comes from the town of Ave Maria, as a larger market will be present in the immediate vicinity of IMM. FASP will assist CCAA with both funding and planning of major development projects needed at IMM. 1.3.3. Florida State-wide Aviation Economic Impact Study- FDOT In August of 2014, the FDOT completed the Florida State-wide Aviation Economic Impact Study. That study analyzed the total economic impact coming from airports within the state, which included both direct and indirect impacts. Factors considered included airport tenants, businesses located at the airport, and airport construction projects. It was calculated that as of August 2014, IMM contributes over $27 million per year to the local economy. This comes from $16 million direct impact and $123,000, with multiplier impacts of over $11 million dollars. 1.3.4. Long Range Transportation Plan 2040- Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization The Collier 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), completed by the Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization, intends to identify necessary transportation improvements to ensure efficient operations while considering factors such as environmental impact, economic development, etc. In relation to IMM, this study identified two major projects which could have a significant impact on the Airport. High levels of congestion are foreseen on the SR-29 in and around Immokalee. A widening of SR-29 and a bypass is planned for the Immokalee area which if completed will bring transient vehicular traffic out of the congested downtown residential areas. There are currently three proposed alternatives to the SR-29 bypass, with Alternatives 2 & 3 potentially impacting the southwest portion of the airport property to include areas currently occupied by the Immokalee Aviation Viewing Area. Alternative 1 is not anticipated to impact the airport. Figure 1-2 depicts the potential routes presented at the November 2017 project public meeting. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 11 March 2019 Figure 1-2 SR-29 Bypass Alternatives 1.3.5. FDOT District 1 Freight Mobility & Trade Study The Immokalee region is grouped into District 1 for the FDOT categorization of Florida area. The FDOT District 1 Freight Mobility and Trade Study analyzed the potential for an integrated and connected regional freight transportation network. Along with this, the study analyzes the necessary investment areas of development to gain a strong freight network. Seven objectives were proposed to promote the implementation towards increased freight operations: 1. Capitalize on the freight transportation advantages of Florida through collaboration on economic development, trade, and logistics program. 2. Increase operational efficiency of goods movement. 3. Minimize costs in the supply chain. 4. Align public and private efforts for trade and logistics. 5. Raise awareness and support for freight movement investments. 6. Develop a balanced transportation planning and investment model that considers and integrates all forms of transportation. 7. Transform the FDOT’s organizational culture to include consideration of supply chain and freight movement issues. Each objective has specific actions that can be taken towards promoting the full implementation towards increased freight mobility. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 12 March 2019 Immokalee Regional Airport is discussed under the General Aviation airports with opportunity for freight operations. This places IMM into a strategic position to begin development for becoming an intermodal transportation hub. 1.3.6. Immokalee Area Master Plan (IAMP) The IAMP was conducted to analyze the status of the region while planning for the growth within said region. Specifically, the development of commercial land within the region is necessary to promote the industrial viability for Immokalee. The Immokalee Regional Airport has vacant land, which will be discussed in subsequent chapters, that is feasible for development. Industrial parks are vital to the community and to the airport, and the identification of land available for use is necessary. The Florida Tradeport is as well a large aspect for the continued growth of the Immokalee Region. This tradeport status will allow IMM to market towards industrial organizations that can be brought onto airport property. This will serve as a positive driver for the local economy as well as the airport. In terms of freight operations at IMM, the IAMP has recorded concerns from “freight stakeholders” that will allow for the strengthened case towards an intermodal transportation hub. 1.3.7. International Air Transport Association (IATA) Air Freight Market Analysis The March 2017 report on the air freight market shows a strong demand within the planning period for increased air freight operations. The report notes a steady annual increase in global freight. This was established due to global conditions improving. Certain conditions include the increased export orders globally that shows the increase of trust and demand for the global air freight network. Specifically focused on the United States, the air freight demand has shown a boost since the west coast seaports were disrupted in the early months of 2015. Yet since then, the trend for the United States has stalled waiting for the next development towards increasing air freight operations. 1.3.8. Environmental Protection Agency Brownfield Grant Assessment Provided through the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Brownfield Grant Fund allows for the allocation of funds to provide for the financial support to perform planning and action towards cleaning up these declared brownfield sites. As of 2008, IMM has been given the designation of having a Brownfield status, which makes them qualified for funds that are under the Brownfields Redevelopment Act. CCAA placed a grant application to begin testing and planning in December 2016. Those efforts will be done by the Regional Planning Council administering the program and procuring environmental consultants to carry out the task of the environmental testing and planning on the IMM property. If after the analyses are complete and the sites are determined contaminated, an additional grant request will be placed to perform clean-up and remediation for any identified sites. 1.4. Key Planning Issues CCAA identified the following key issues to be considered during the development of the ALP and its associated drawings: • Increasing industrial & non-aviation areas within the airport boundary to allow for the expansion of non-aeronautical land uses, and increase lease revenue. • Increase economic development within the immediate region of the Airport. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 13 March 2019 2. Inventory of Existing Conditions The development of an Airport Layout Plan (ALP) for the Immokalee Regional Airport (IMM) requires the collection and evaluation of baseline information relating to the Airport’s property, facilities, services, location, and tenants, as well as access, utilities, and environmental considerations. The developed information will be used in determining any necessary airport improvements or expansions that are indicated by aviation activity forecast and the demand/capacity analyses. The information covered in this chapter was obtained through a variety of sources, including: Airport site visits, interviews with Airport staff and tenants, and through examination of airport records and other public documents. This chapter includes the following sections: • Airport Background • Airport Facility Inventory • Airspace Structure • Regional Setting and Land Use • Environmental Considerations 2.1. Airport Background IMM located on approximate 1,381-acre property in the unincorporated community of Immokalee, Collier County, Florida. The airport is located approximately one-mile northeast of downtown Immokalee, and 30 miles northeast of Naples Municipal Airport (APF). The town of Ave Maria is located just over six miles to the southwest, and was founded in 2005. Ave Maria is currently a developing college town which has anticipated high population growth within the next decade. Figure 2-1, Location Map, illustrates the location of IMM within the State of Florida. Figure 2-2, Vicinity Map, illuminates the Airport in relation to its surround communities. As the Airport is less than one-mile northeast of the Town of Immokalee, there are several major roadways that are serving traffic through the community. State Road 29, which runs north and south through Immokalee serves as a transition point on County Road 846. County Road 846 joins into the town of Immokalee from the east, where it runs approximately 20 miles east and joins with County Road 833. As part of the ALP update, the existing airport reference point (ARP) for IMM has been calculated to be 26° 26’ 01.7599” North Latitude, 81° 24’ 7.4600” West longitude. The Airport’s elevation is approximately 36.5 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). 2.1.1. Airport History IMM was originally established as Immokalee Army Airfield, which was assigned to the United States Army Air Forces East Coast Training Center. Activated on July 5th, 1942, the Airport was primarily used for Air Force Pilot Training (4-engine B-17 & B-24 aircraft). In 1945, after the war ended, the Army Corps affirmed IMM as surplus and it then became a civil airport. In January 1960, the U.S. Government deeded the Immokalee Army Airfield property to Collier County for use as a civilian airport. From the declaration of surplus in 1945, there were limited crop dusting operations being served out of IMM. It was not until 1993, when the Collier County Airport Authority was created, that plans for updating the runway and building infrastructure was put into motion, growing the into the local resource that it is today. Immokalee Regional Airport Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Layout Plan Update Location Map Figure 2-1 Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Layout Plan Update Vicinity Map Figure 2-2 IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 16 March 2019 2.2. Airport Facility Inventory The identification of existing aviation facilities, their locations, and their abilities to meet the daily needs to airport users are vital elements to updating the ALP. The existing airside and landside facilities at IMM are defined in the following sections. 2.2.1. Airside Facilities The existing airside facilities at IMM will be described in the following pages. The facilities that will be designated will include: Runways, taxiways, airfield pavement conditions, lighting, markings, signage, apron areas, and specialized airfield facilities. Figure 2-3 identifies the location on the airfield of the airside infrastructure. 2.2.1.1. Runways The existing airfield runway configuration consists of two bi-directional runways. Runway 9-27 is considered the Airport’s primary runway, and is approximately 5,000 feet long and 100 feet wide. The surface is asphalt in composition which is currently listed in good condition. Markings for Runway 9-27 include non-precision for both runway ends. Runway 18-36 is approximately 4,550 feet long and 150 feet wide. The surface is asphalt and is currently described as being in poor condition, with non-precision surface markings for each runway end. In 1998 Runway 4-22 was closed and repurposed as one of only three of Florida’s IHRA sanctioned race tracks; the Immokalee Regional Raceway. Table 2-1 summarizes the Airport’s current runway characteristics. Table 2-1 Runway Characteristics Dimensions Runway 9-27 Runway 18-36 Length (ft.) 5,000 4,550 Width (ft.) 100 150 Surface Material Asphalt Asphalt Markings Non-Precision Non-Precision Load Bearing Capacity by Gear Type SWL (pounds) 35 35 DWL (pounds) 60 60 2DWL (pounds) 110 110 Approach Slope 3.00 3.00 Effective Gradient 0.1% 0.1% Runway End Coordinates Runway 09 Runway 27 Runway 18 Runway 36 Latitude N 26° 26' 13.478" N 26° 26' 15.175" N 26° 26' 09.638" N 26° 25' 24.602" Longitude W 081° 24' 14.628" W 081° 23' 19.654" W 081° 24' 18.608" W 81° 24' 16.880" Sources: FAA 5010, Atkins, 2018. SWL = Single Wheel Load, DWL = Double Wheel Load, and 2DWL = Double Tandem Wheel Load Declared Distances The FAA requires GA airports having certain operational limitations to publish declared distances for each runway. This information informs pilots what the available runway lengths are for different types of operations to maintain standard safety areas and protection zones. Declared distances include the following: •Take Off Run Available (TORA) – The runway length declared available for the ground run of an aircraft. RUNWAY 9-27RUNWAY 18-36TAXIWAY BTAXIWAY ATAXIWAY C4-LIGHT PAPI4-LIGHT PAPIGA APRON AREA4-LIGHT PAPI4-LIGHT PAPIRUNWAY ENDIDENTIFICATION LIGHTSRUNWAY ENDIDENTIFICATION LIGHTSRUNWAY ENDIDENTIFICATION LIGHTSPLPL PLPLPL PLSEGMENTED CIRCLEWIND SOCKWIND SOCKBEACONAWOSB3B2B1A2A1Immokalee Regional AirportAirport Layout Plan UpdateFigure2-3Existing Airside Facilities IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 18 March 2019 • Take Off Distance Available (TODA) – The runway length declared available for the ground run of an aircraft plus any remaining clearway. • Accelerated Stop Distance Available (ASDA) – The length of runway plus any stop way declared available and suitable for the safe deceleration of an aircraft after aborting a takeoff. • Landing Distance Available (LDA) – The length of runway declared available for landings. The declared distances for IMM are not published and/or not calculated. The below table shows a general assumption of distances for each category for each individual runway: Table 2-2 Declared Distances Runway TORA TODA ASDA LDA 9 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 27 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 18 4,550 4,550 4,550 4,550 36 4,550 4,550 4,550 4,550 Source: Atkins Analysis, 2018 2.2.1.2. Taxiways IMM has three primary taxiways that currently provide access from the aircraft apron areas and hangar facilities to each runway end. These taxiways are designed to satisfy the conditions of the runways and associated critical aircraft that they function for. A summary of IMM’s taxiways is as follows: • Taxiway Alpha (A) is a 50 foot’ wide full length parallel taxiway on the west side of Runway 18-36. Taxiway A lies approximately 525’ from the Runway 18-36 centerline. There is a connection at both Runway 18-36 thresholds and a connector located 1,052 feet from the Runway 36 threshold (Taxiway A1). • Taxiway Bravo (B) is situated on the northern portion of the airfield, and serves as a 50- foot- wide full length parallel taxiway south of Runway 9-27. Taxiway B supports a run up pad designed for ADG III aircraft at each runway end. There is a midfield taxiway connector located approximately 2,010 feet from the Runway 9 threshold. The western portion of Taxiway B is located approximately 750 feet south of the centerline of Runway 9-27. East of taxiway connector B-2, Taxiway B angles north and aligns again near the Runaway 27 approach end, 400 feet south of the Runway 9-27 centerline. Bravo also connects with Runway 18 approach end, which provides direct access to Taxiway Alpha. • Taxiway Charlie (C) is a 35-foot-wide connector between the Runway 36 end and into the main apron. Charlie has a connector (Taxiway C-1) that is 1,052 feet from the Runway 36 threshold. Taxiway C terminates just south of the abandoned Runway 4/22. Taxiway Charlie and Runway 18-36 centerline separation is approximately 417 feet. 2.2.1.3. Airfield Pavement Condition IMM’s most recent pavement condition index (PCI) analysis and report, completed in 2017, indicates that the airfield pavement ranges from good to serious condition. Most pavement areas analyzed at the time of that study were rated good, or satisfactory. As of current standings, there are some areas that are of major concern at IMM in terms of airfield pavement condition. These areas include Runway 18-36 and a portion of Taxiway B. Three out of four portions of pavement for Runway 18-36 are listed as very poor, where the final portion of pavement is listed as serious. This indicates that the current runway condition may increase the overall increase of risk while operating on said runway pavement. Taxiway B, a 101,170-square foot section, has been listed in serious pavement condition. The majority of Taxiway A pavement has been classified to be in serious condition. The entire pavement area of Runway 9-27 has been classified as in good condition, due to its recent rehabilitation. Table 2-3 lists the various pavements analyzed as part of the PCI study, their PCI values, and their PCI IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 19 March 2019 ratings. Additionally, Figure 2-4 graphically depicts IMM’s pavement conditions as of 2017. This is currently the earliest PCI report available through FDOT. Table 2-3 Pavement Condition Report Overview Pavement Section Name Section PCI Rating Runway 18-36 6105 28 Very Poor Runway 18-36 6110 29 Very Poor Runway 18-36 6115 24 Serious Runway 18-36 6120 28 Very Poor Runway 9-27 6235 94 Good Taxiway A 205 25 Serious Taxiway A 207 94 Good Taxiway A-1 210 20 Serious Taxiway A-2 225 94 Good Taxiway A-2 230 94 Good Taxiway B 105 94 Good Taxiway B 110 25 Serious Taxiway B 120 92 Good Taxiway B 125 93 Good Taxiway B 415 91 Good Taxiway B2 420 94 Good Taxiway B3 425 91 Good Taxiway C 310 81 Satisfactory Taxiway C 315 83 Satisfactory Taxiway to Crop Apron 305 61 Fair Crop Apron 4105 33 Very Poor South Apron & Fuel Ramps 4205 78 Satisfactory South Apron & Fuel Ramps 4210 76 Satisfactory South Apron & Fuel Ramps 4215 87 Good South Apron & Fuel Ramps 4220 92 Good Apron to Hangars 4405 83 Satisfactory Apron Rup-Up Runway 27 5105 94 Good Apron Run-Up Runway 9 5205 94 Good Apron Run-Up Runway 36 4305 77 Satisfactory Apron Run-Up Runway 36 4310 70 Fair Apron Run-Up Runway 36 4315 88 Good Source: 2015 Statewide Airfield Pavement Management Program, District 1 Report, FDOT, 2015 Airfield Pavement Condition IndexFigure2-4482 South Keller RoadOrlando, FL 32810Tel. (407) 647-7275Fax (407) 806-4500www.atkinsglobal.com/northamericaImmokalee Regional AirportAirport Layout Plan Update IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 21 March 2019 2.2.1.4. Lighting A variety of lighting aids are available at IMM to facilitate identification, approach, landing, and taxiing. These aids are essential during night operations and operations during adverse weather conditions. The systems, categorized by function, are further described in the following paragraphs. Obstruction Lighting Existing obstructions that cannot be removed are lighted. Obstructions near the Airport are marked or lighted during both daylight and night time hours, to warn pilots of their presence. These obstructions may be identified for pilots on approach charts and on the official Airport Obstruction Chart, published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Visual Approach Aids Visual approach aids consist of a series of visual cues which help pilots with aircraft alignment and position relative to a runway. The primary visual approach aids located at IMM include a precision approach path indicator (PAPI) for each runway end. The PAPI light systems are located near each runway’s approach end positioned to the left of each end. This provides pilots with a visual descent guidance during a visual approach to the appropriate touchdown point on the runway. Each of the Airport’s PAPI systems has a four light configuration which indicates a 3.00-degree angled glide path. Runway End Identification Lighting (REIL) Runway End Identification Lights (REIL) systems are put in place to help pilots rapidly identify runway thresholds in areas of light pollution, or large open spaces. These systems consist of two synchronized flashing unidirectional white lights situated near the runway threshold. Runway 9-27 and Runway 18-36 are both equipped with REIL systems. Runway and Taxiway Edge Lighting Runway edge lighting is used to shape the edges of a runway during night operations and/or periods of low visibility. This system of lights is often identified by the intensity of the lights installed. Both Runways at IMM are equipped with pilot controlled Medium Intensity Runway Lighting (MIRL) systems. Taxiway A, B, and C are equipped with Medium Intensity Taxiway Lights (MITL). The lighting systems for the newly reconstructed areas, such as Runway 9/27 and Taxiway B, were upgraded to light-emitting diode (LED) systems. Apron Lighting The FBO apron is lit by an overhead seven-mast lighting system. No other apron lighting is known to exist on the airfield. 2.2.1.5. Markings All IMM’s runway ends are striped with non-precision instrument markings. The runway markings were identified to be in good condition at the time of the last field inspection, and no issues have been identified since that last airfield inspection. 2.2.1.6. Signage IMM’s airfield signage consists of all required signage for a public use GA airport. These airfield identification signs assist pilots in recognizing their locations on the airfield and direct them to their desired end point. The Airport currently has all required directional signage, location signage, and mandatory signs including holding position signage. 2.2.1.7. Airport Apron Areas IMM has one primary apron area which is operated by the CCAA, and located on the southeast portion of the airfield. The apron allows for aircraft parking, re-fueling, and other aircraft ground support services. The support services provided by CCAA include fueling, pilot lounge, and courtesy car. The primary apron space is approximately 20,000 square yards, not including the apron area reserved for the three T-hangars which sit on the north side of the CCAA apron area, and the additional buildings in the vicinity. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 22 March 2019 A secondary apron area is located on the western portion of the Airport, connected to Taxiway A. That apron area is accompanied by a conventional hangar operated by Three Mayhoods, LLC, and is not available for public use. It is approximately 5,330 square yards. 2.2.2. Landside Facilities IMM’s existing landside facilities include a GA fixed base operator (FBO) and associated building, aircraft storage hangars, fuel farms, automobile parking located to the south of the FBO building, and an airport maintenance building. Turbo Service Inc. is currently leasing out a testing facility for jet engine testing east of Airport Boulevard. There are non-aviation use cargo facilities located on the southeast portion of the abandoned Runway 4-22. 2.2.2.1. Fixed-Base Operator and General Aviation Terminal As previously stated, the FBO is operated by the CCAA, along with the lease agreements for the hangar facilities and the other facilities on airport property. Fueling is available 24 hours a day (100LL & Jet A). On- call service for fueling is available during out of FBO service hours. The FBO terminal is located on the southernmost part of the apron area and includes pilot supplies, rental cars, a pilot lounge, etc. Access to this facility is provided by the Airpark Boulevard located east of the building, via SR 846. 2.2.2.2. Hangar Areas Multiple hangars currently exist at IMM, which include a conventional hangar, T-hangars, and box hangars. The Airport’s FBO manages all leased hangars on the IMM property with exception of one private hangar located southwest of the Runway 36 threshold. Conventional Hangars A conventional hangar is typically rectangular or square in shape of facility and can hold multiple aircraft while allowing for additional equipment to be present within the facility (based on size). There are currently four conventional hangars at IMM, which are being leased by individuals of companies performing business on airport property. Two of those hangars are located directly east of Taxiway C, one is located on the secondary apron, west of Taxiway A, and the last is located southwest of Runway 36’s threshold. Shade Ports Shade port aircraft storage consists of a shed roof structure with open walls. The structure offers some protection from the elements, but does not completely enclose an aircraft. There are two overhang structures on the airfield. The first, located just south of the existing FBO is owned by CCAA and is currently scheduled for demolition. The second, located southwest of Runway 36’s threshold is privately owned and operated. T-Hangars T-Hangars are designed to maximize aircraft storage utilization. They typically allow for the complete protection of aircraft stored inside and are often scaled for small recreational aircraft. The facilities are usually rectangular and store aircraft in a line by alternating direction of aircraft by nose and tail. Currently, there are three T-hangar units at the Airport, with the capacity to house ten aircraft each. Those hangars are located directly north of the main apron area, where the FBO and majority of tie-down spaces are also located. 2.2.2.3. Fuel Storage The Airport’s fuel storage is maintained by the CCAA, IMM’s FBO operator, which provides fuel service during operating hours and on-call service outside of set hours. The fuel storage is located directly on the east side of the FBO Ramp. Each tank at the self-serve facility holds approximately 10,000 gallons of fuel. One tank is used for the storage of 100LL (low lead) Avgas and the other is used for Jet-A. The area of the tanks and containment area is approximately 5,000 square feet. 2.2.2.4. Automobile Parking IMM has multiple parking areas on airport property. A parking area on the south side of the facility services the GA terminal and FBO building. That parking area has a fifteen-vehicle capacity. The conventional hangar located to the east of the southernmost part of Taxiway C has a large parking area to accompany the sheriff IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 23 March 2019 department which leases that area. On the east side of Airport Boulevard there are multiple parking areas for the facilities and leasehold which operate within those landside facilities. 2.2.2.5. Security Fence Developed and non-developed areas within the airfield and landside regions need to be protected to ensure the safe and secure operations at IMM. As such, perimeter fencing has been installed around the appropriate areas to ensure this safe environment. This includes airfield access from different points on the property using access gates where only authorized personnel can gain entrance. The airfield operations area (AOA) is completely enclosed by fencing of varying height and structure, however fencing does not completely envelope the entire airport property. The AOA fencing has deficiencies which will be addressed in subsequent chapters of this report. 2.2.2.6. Industrial Sites Industrial development is key to IMM in terms of providing additional lease income and to further develop the airport overall. Currently, there are multiple industrial organizations that are present on the airport property and are conducting operations. The further development of the landside industrial aspect for IMM will allow for the increase of industrial organizations on property. These specific sites lie to the Southeast of the property, and additional area is available for further pre-certified and permit ready industrial sites to be developed. An emphasis can be placed on the existing utilities on airport property that allows for a wide variety of industrial organizations to lease out said sites. There are currently three incubator warehouse buildings located east of Airpark Boulevard. 2.3. Navigational Aids Navigational aids, commonly referred to as NAVAIDs, assist pilots with enroute navigation and approaches and departures into and out of airports. These aids consist of both ground-based electronic systems and space-based satellite radio systems. NAVAIDs for an airport vary in complexity, which is primarily based on the type of operations that will be occurring at that certain airport. The more sophisticated the NAVAID, the lower the minimums are at an airport. The basis that categorizes these aids consider the type of guidance pilots are receiving while on approach. If there is both vertical and horizontal guidance, then this can be classified as a precision- approach. Yet if there is only horizontal guidance, it is classified as a non-precision approach. The systems available at an airport play an important role in determining weather minimums and overall day to day operations. 2.3.1. Terminal Area NAVAIDs and Landing Aids Included in this group are NAVAIDs located at or near the airfield for providing aircraft guidance information while arriving, departing, or overflying the area under all weather conditions. Landing aids provide either precision or non-precision approaches to an airport or runway. Airport has five non-precision instrument approach procedures (IAPs), all of which provide straight-in approaches to each of the Airport’s runways. The non-precision IAPs utilize global positioning satellite (GPS) data and a ground based VOR system. The Airport’s GPS approaches all offer wide area augmentation system (WAAS) which augments GPS signals for improved accuracy. The WAAS augmentation of GPS signals permits approach minima lower than approaches supported by ground based equipment. Figures 2-5 through 2-9 depict the Airport’s published approach procedures as of February 3, 2017. At the time of the finalizing of this report, the RNAV GPS approach procedures for Runway 9, 27, and Runway 18 have minimums of ¾ statute miles. Due to RPZ, and obstruction removal requirements, the Airport Sponsor is in the process of returning all instrument approach minimums to 1 Statute Mile Visibility or greater. As shown on Figure 2-5, the VOR IAP to Runway 18 uses a 3.04-degree glide slope with a runway threshold crossing height (TCH) of 50 feet above ground level (AGL), and provides a descent to 560 feet above mean-sea-level (AMSL); or 524 feet above the Runway’s 36-foot touchdown zone elevation (TDZE) IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 24 March 2019 during visibility conditions as low as 1 statute mile visibility. This information is often referred to by pilots and the aviation community as an airport’s “approach minimums”, “minimums” or “approach minima”. As shown on Figure 2-6 the non-precision area navigation (RNAV) LPV, GPS IAP to Runway 36 uses a 3.00-degree glide slope with a runway TCH of 43 feet AGL, and provides a descent to 284 feet AMSL; 250 feet above the Runway’s TDZE during visibility conditions as low as 3/4 of a mile. As shown on Figure 2-7, the non-precision RNAV, GPS IAP to Runway 27 provides a standard 3.00-degree glide slope and a runway crossing height of 50 feet. This approach allows for descents as low at 285 feet; 250 feet above the Runway’s TDZE during visibility conditions as low as 1 statute miles. As shown on Figure 2-8, the non-precision RNAV, GPS IAP to Runway 18 provides a standard 3.0-degree glide slope with a runway TCH of 51 feet AGL, and provides a descent to 286 feet AMSL; 235 feet above the Runway’s TDZE during visibility conditions as low as 1 mile. As shown on Figure 2-9, the non-precision RNAV, GPS IAP to Runway 9 provides a standard 3.00-degree glide slope and a threshold crossing height of 53 feet. This approach allows for descents as low at 325 feet; 272 feet above the Runway’s TDZE during visibility conditions as low as 1 statute miles. Other NAVAIDs at IMM, such as the Automated Weather Observation System (AWOS), segmented circle and lighted wind cone (located southeast of the Runway 9 threshold), and supplemental lighted wind cone, provide weather condition information to pilots operating at the Airport. Those NAVAIDS provide electronic and visual indication of wind direction and velocity, which assists pilots in determining the proper runway end to conduct their operations. The AWOS also reports current conditions such as ceiling, visibility, temperature, dew point, altimeter setting, as well as any recorded remarks. 2.4. Airspace Structure Congress granted the FAA the authority to control all airspace over the United States, via the Federal Aviation Act of 1958. The FAA then established the National Airspace System (NAS) to protect persons and property on the ground, and to establish a safe and efficient airspace environment for civil, commercial, and military aviation. The NAS is defined as the common network of U.S. Airspace, including air navigation facilities, airports, and landing areas, aeronautical charts and information, associated rules, regulations and procedures, technical information, personnel, and material. System components shared jointly with military are also included. 2.4.1. Airspace Environs Airspace is classified as controlled or uncontrolled. Controlled airspace is supported by ground-to-air communications, NAVAIDs, and air traffic services. In September 1993, the FAA reclassified major airspace. The new classifications are graphically depicted in Figure 2-10, The types of airspace around Immokalee Regional include: • Class A airspace, which includes all airspace between 18,000 feet AMSL and 60,000 feet AMSL (as well as waters 12 NM off the cost of the 48 contiguous states). • Class C airspace (formerly referred to as the Airport Radar Service Area), includes around Southwest Florida International Airport (RSW) from either the surface or 1,200 feet AMSL to 4,000 feet AMSL. This variation can be determined based on the location within the five-nautical mile coverage from the airport property Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Layout Plan Update Runway 18 VOR IAP Figure 2-5 Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Layout Plan Update Runway 36 RNAV (GPS) IAP Figure 2-6 Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Layout Plan Update Runway 18 RNAV (GPS) IAP Figure 2-7 Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Layout Plan Update Runway 27 RNAV (GPS) IAP Figure 2-7 Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Layout Plan Update Runway 9 RNAV (GPS) IAP Figure 2-9 Class D Class B Class C Class E Class G Sea Level to 1,000-ft AMSL 1,000-ft to 2,000-ft 2,000-ft to 3,000-ft up to 6,684-ft 1,200-ft AGL Class E Class GClass G TERRAIN & OBJECTS 0-ft Above Mean Sea Level (AMSL) Minimum Pilot Qualification Communication Requirements and Weather Minimums Class A Class B Class C Class D Class E Class G Instrument Rating Student *Student *Student *Student * Entry Requirements IFR: ATC Clearance VFR: Operations Prohibited ATC Clearance IFR: ATC Clearance VFR: Two-Way Communication w/ ATC IFR: ATC Clearance VFR: Two-Way Communication w/ ATC None VFR Visibility Below 10,000 AMSL ** N/A 3 Statute Miles 3 Statute Miles 3 Statute Miles Day: 1 Statute Mile Night: 3 Statute Miles VFR Cloud Clearance Below 10,000 AMSL Clear of CloudsN/A 500 Below 1,000 Above 2,000 Horizontal 500 Below 1,000 Above 2,000 Horizontal 500 Below 1,000 Above 2,000 Horizontal *** VFR Visibility 10,000 AMSL and Above ** N/A 3 Statute Miles 3 Statute Miles 3 Statute Miles 5 Statute Miles VFR Cloud Clearance 10,000 AMSL and Above Clear of CloudsN/A 500 Below 1,000 Above 2,000 Horizontal 500 Below 1,000 Above 2,000 Horizontal 1,000 Below 1,000 Above 1 Statute Mile Horizontal Airport Application N/A ·Radar ·Instrument Approaches ·Weather ·Control Tower ·High Density ·Radar ·Instrument Approaches ·Weather ·Control Tower ·Instrument Approaches ·Weather ·Control Tower Special VFR Permitted?No Yes Yes Yes N/A * Prior to operating within Class B, C, or D airspace (or Class E airspace with an operating control tower), student, sport, and recreational pilots must meet the applicable FAR Part 61 training and endorsement requirements. Solo student, sport, and recreational pilot operations are prohibited at those airports listed in FAR Part 91, Appendix D, Section 4. ** Student pilot operations require at least 3 statute miles visibility during the day and 5 statute miles visibility at night. *** Class G VFR cloud clearance at 1,200 AGL and below (day): clear of clouds. Class A 18,000-ft AMSL Class E TERRAIN & OBJECTS 700-ft AGL 700-ft AGL 14,500-ft AMSL Student * IFR: ATC Clearance VFR: None 3 Statute Miles 500 Below 1,000 Above 2,000 Horizontal 5 Statute Miles 500 Below 1,000 Above 1 Statute Mile Horizontal ·Instrument Approaches ·Weather Yes 60,000-ft AMSL 1,200-ft AGL 700-ft AGL Class G 3,000-ft to 5,000-ft 1,200-ft AGL Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Layout Plan Update General Airspace Classification Figure 2-10 Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Layout Plan Update Regional Airspace Figure 2-11 IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 32 March 2019 • Class E airspace, which includes all controlled airspace other than Class A, B, C, or D. Class E airspace extends upward from either the surface of the designated altitude to overlying or adjacent controlled airspace. Class E airspace includes transition areas and control zones for airports without air traffic control towers (ATCTs). • Class G airspace, which is uncontrolled airspace. The only airspace classification that pertains specifically to IMM (Class E) will be explained in further detail. The Fort Myers Approach Control is responsible for enroute control of all aircraft operating in an instrument flight rules (IFR) flight into IMM. See Figure 2-10 for a depiction of the visual flight rules (VFR) Sectional chart for the Immokalee Region 2.4.1.1. Class E Most of the surrounding controlled airspace is designated as Class E airspace, which includes several different segments. When an airport is designated as Class E, it has usually been established to allow IFR traffic to remain in controlled airspace while transitioning between the enroute and airport environments. Generally, Class E airspace extends either from the surface or 700 feet, up to 1,200 feet above an airport’s elevation (charted in AMSL) surrounding those airports that are non-towered yet are equipped with an instrument approach. Each pilot operating at a Class-E airport should provide situation and directional information via radio communications with other pilots operating within the airspace. 2.4.1.2. Uncontrolled Airspace and Air Traffic Procedures The FAA has developed various airspace classifications to address the need for controlling the airspace based upon the type and level of operations occurring at a specific airfield. IMM is a non-towered airport and designated as Class E airspace. This airspace consists of a circle centered on the Airport that encompasses a radius of approximately six-nautical miles, and up to an altitude of 1,200 AGL. No ATC clearance is required for aircraft entering or operating in the Airport’s Class E airspace. 2.4.2. FAR Part 77 Surfaces and Existing Obstructions Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77, Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace, defines standards for determining obstructions to navigable airspace. These imaginary surfaces are used to protect operations around airports from high structures that can pose a threat to aircraft landing at or departing an airport or operating within an airport’s terminal airspace. Obstructions are primarily determined by superimposing the Part 77 “imaginary surfaces” over an airport and its surrounding areas. An analysis is performed to determine the elevations of various objects (structures, terrain, trees, towers, etc.). The objects’ elevations are then compared to the elevations of the associated Part 77 surfaces. Objects that are found to be higher than the Part 77 surfaces are considered obstructions. Within the ALP set developed in conjunction with this report, an airport airspace sheet will illustrate the various obstructions and objects located within the Part 77 areas. Dimensions of the “imaginary surfaces” are derived from the type of approaches and aircraft operating at the Airport. Federal regulations require that the primary and horizontal surfaces, identified within the Part 77 imaginary surfaces guidance, of the most demanding approach be applied to the entire runway. The typical Part 77 configuration and dimensions of the Part 77 surfaces for IMM are illustrated in Figure 2-12. The approach surface present at Runway 9-27 begins at 200 feet from the runway ends, and goes upwards along a 34:1 slope. This surface continues as such out to 10,000 feet from the starting point. The width of the approach surface expands from the 1,000-foot beginning width to a 4,000-foot width at the surface’s end. The approach surface present at Runway 18-36 has lower dimensions due to the overall utility of the runway. The approach surface is similar to the Runway 9-27 surface as it begins 200 feet from the runway end. The beginning width of the approach surface for Runway 18-36 is 500 feet expanding out to 3,500 feet. The overall length of the approach surface is still 10,000 feet, like Runway 9-27. The approach slope is 34:1. Horizontal Surface 150 Feet above Established Airport Elevation Visual or Non-Precision Approach Surface Precision Approach Surface 20:17:17:17: 1 7:1 7:15 0 : 1 4 0 : 1 4 0 : 1 Horizontal Surface - 150 feet above Established Airport Elevation 7:1 Transitional Surface 20:1 Conical Surface Runway Centerline Primary Surface 5,000'1,200'50,000'10,000' 4,000 ' 5,000' DIM DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS (FEET) ITEM A B C D E A A 5,000 2,000 5,000 20:1 A B A B 250 500 5,0005,000 1,250 1,500 5,000 5,000 20:1 20:1 B C D C D B 500 500 1,000 10,00010,000 3,500 4,000 10,000 10,000 34:1 34:1 1,000 10,000 16,000 50,000 A - UTILITY RUNWAYS B - RUNWAYS LARGER THAN UTILITY C - VISIBILITY MINIMUMS GREATER THAN 3/4 MILES D - VISIBILITY MINIMUMS AS LOW AS 3/4 MILE E - PRECISION INSTRUMENT APPROACH SLOPE IS 50:1 FOR INNER 10,000 FEET AND 40:1 FOR AN ADDITIONAL 40,000 FEET PRECISION INSTRUMENT RUNWAY NON-PRECISION INSTRUMENT RUNWAY VISUAL RUNWAY PRECISION INSTRUMENT RUNWAY NON-PRECISION INSTRUMENT RUNWAY VISUAL RUNWAY WIDTH OF PRIMARY SURFACE AND APPROACH SURFACE WIDTH AT INNER END RADIUS OF HORIZONTAL SURFACE APPROACH SURFACE WIDTH AT END APPROACH SURFACE LENGTH APPROACH SLOPE 50:1 (1st 10,000) 40:1 (Remaining 40,000) Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Layout Plan Update Typical Part 77 Surfaces Cross Section Figure 2-12 IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 34 March 2019 2.4.3. Airports in the Region There are currently six public-use airports and about six private airstrips within an approximate 35 NM radius around IMM. Table 2-4 lists the surrounding airports and provides information on distance and direction from the Airport. Among those six public-use airports, two are considered as commercial service. Table 2-4 Airports Surrounding Immokalee Regional Airport (IMM) 2.5. Land Use and Zoning Land use and zoning around an airport is critically important to the future utility and sustainability of airport operations. Without the security and support provided by compatible land uses around an airport property, airports and their sponsors can face a variety of safety difficulties, health and human safety concerns, and social/political dissent, which in the long run detracts from the airports ability to reach its full public value potential. Figure 2-13 identifies the existing land use and zoning condition around the Airport. There is currently only a small area (24 acres) of existing aviation related development, which is located to the east/southeast of Runway 36’s approach end. Other areas under this category are located southwest of the Runway 36 approach end, and to the west of Runway 18-36 which runs into the upland management area. This upland management area spans a majority of land holdings on the western portion of the property, and was established to ultimately preserve the land in terms of biodiversity associated with this area along with overall environmental protection. That area is approximately 154 acres. Most of the Airport’s property is zoned under the category of industrial development tract, and most of the land outside of the airport property line is also categorized as such. The intent of those lands are slated for agricultural use, along with generic industrial use. 2.5.1. Currently Vacant or Underutilized Land Multiple areas on the Airport’s property have been identified as future development areas which are still currently vacant. They could reasonably serve as sites for some form of future development and are not unreasonably restricted. Figure 2-14 identifies those lands. This future development land includes both land side and air side property. In terms of the land side available land, the development of industrial pre-certified sites can allow for the expansion of IMMs industrial present. 2.6. Environmental Consideration Gaining perspective on existing environmental considerations at the Airport during the inventory portion of the planning process enables the preparation of future development options which have the highest possibility for implementation by seeking to minimize negative environmental affects up front, and reviewing environmental considerations as part of the analysis of development alternatives. The following sections will Airport Name (I.D.) Location from IMM Use Everglades (X01) 35 NM S GA-Public Marco Island (MKY) 30 NM SW GA-Public Naples (APF) 26 NM SW Commercial Service Southwest Florida International (RSW) 20 NM NW Commercial Service La Belle (X14) 18 NM N GA-Public Air Glades (2IS) 26 NM NE GA-Public Big Cypress 23 NM E Private Source: Airnav.com, Atkins Analysis, 2018 PLPLPLPLPLPL PL PLPLPLAirport ZoingImmokalee Regional AirportAirport Layout Plan UpdateFigure2-13Immokalee Regional Airport PLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPL PL PL PLPLPLPLImmokalee Regional AirportAirport Layout Plan UpdateFigure2-14Vacant / Underutilized Property IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 37 March 2019 identify different environmental issues present at IMM which have the potential to affect future development. These issues include wind and meteorological data, aircraft noise, surface water management, soils and geology, and floodplain and wetlands areas. 2.6.1. Wind and Meteorological Data The climatic conditions commonly experienced at an airport can play a large role in the layout and usage of the facility. Weather patterns characterized by periods of low visibility and cloud ceilings often lower the capacity of an airfield, and wind direction and velocity dictate runway usage. 2.6.1.1. Ceiling and Visibility FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5060-5, Airport Capacity and Delay, identifies three categories of ceiling and visibility minimums. These categories include VFR, IFR, and Poor Visibility and Ceiling (PVC). Meteorological data obtained through the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) consisting of 10 years of hourly wind observations for Page Field Airport (FMY) was used to analyze the ceiling, visibility, and wind conditions at IMM. Although IMM is equipped with an Automated Weather Observation System (AWOS), a 10-year climatic history was unavailable from this piece of equipment as it was installed in 2017. According to a detailed review of the wind information obtained from the RSW AWOS the following conditions can be reasonably expected at IMM: • VFR conditions, when the ceiling is equal to or greater than 1,000 feet AGL and when visibility is equal to or greater than three (3) statute miles, occur at the Airport approximately 92.03 percent of the time. • IFR conditions, when the ceiling is less than 1,000 feet AGL and/or when visibility is less than three (3) statute miles, but when ceiling is greater than 200 feet AGL and visibility is greater than 0.5 miles, occur at the Airport approximately 8.05 percent of the time. 2.6.1.2. Wind Coverage Local wind conditions at an airport play a large role in the runway usage at the field as aircraft operate most efficiently when taking-off and landing into the wind. Runways not oriented to take full advantage of prevailing winds are often not utilized as frequently. Aircraft can operate on a runway when the crosswind component, or wind component perpendicular to the direction of travel, is not excessive. Crosswind components differ slightly depending on the size of aircraft. The appropriate crosswind components for IMM’s runways were determined by the type of aircraft typically operating on those runways. Figure 2-15 depicts the all-weather and IFR wind rose when considering 10.5 or 13 knot crosswind components for Runway 9-27 and 18-36. The FAA indicates that the desired wind coverage for an airport is at least 95 percent, meaning that the maximum crosswind component is not exceeded more than 5 percent of the time. Yet due to this present factor of crosswind component, the need for a crosswind runway is key for the continuous operations at IMM. At a capacity point of view, the utilization of a crosswind runway will allow for safe and continuous operations during these crosswind conditions. When calculated together, nearly 100 percent wind coverage is achieved in both the all-weather, VFR, and IFR weather conditions. 2.6.2. Aircraft Noise Noise is generally the most apparent impact an airport has on the environment. The FAA recommends the average day-night sound level (DNL) in decibel values as the national standard for measuring airport noise. The FAA has determined that a sound level of 65 DNL or less is compatible with most residential land uses. Therefore, noise levels greater than this measurement should be contained within an airport’s property limits to the greatest extent possible. In areas around an airport where noise levels exceed 65 DNL, other methods of mitigation such as land acquisition, zoning requirements, and the purchase of easements may be used as possible remedies for incompatible land uses. Currently, IMM does not have an aircraft noise 13.0 Knots 16.0 Knots 10.5 Knots 13.0 Knots16.0 Knots10.5 Knots 13.0 Knots 16.0 Knots 10.5 Knots 13.0 Knots16.0 Knots10.5 Knots13.0 Knots16.0 Knots10.5 Knots13.0 Knots16.0 Knots10.5 KnotsRUNWAY 9-27 & 18-36 WIND COVERAGESource: National Climatic Data Center/National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration10.5 Knots13.0 Knots16.0 KnotsCROSS WINDCOMPONENTVFR WEATHERCOVERAGE99.92%99.99%99.35%Source: National Climatic Data Center/National Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationSource: National Climatic Data Center/National Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationStation: Southwestern Florida International Airport (722108) Station: Southwestern Florida International Airport (722108) Station: Southwestern Florida International Airport (722108) ALL WEATHER WIND COVERAGE10.5 Knots13.0 Knots16.0 KnotsCROSS WINDCOMPONENTALL WEATHERCOVERAGE99.78%99.96%99.09%RUNWAY18/36RUNWAY9/2791.77%95.63%99.08%99.24%97.52%95.22%IFR WEATHER WIND COVERAGE10.5 Knots13.0 Knots16.0 KnotsCROSS WINDCOMPONENTIFR WEATHERCOVERAGE99.28%99.76%98.21%RUNWAY18/36RUNWAY9/2792.63%95.59%98.31%97.91%95.43%92.43%ALL WEATHERIFRVFRWeather Wind RosesImmokalee Regional AirportAirport Layout Plan UpdateFigure2-15 IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 39 March 2019 analysis or DNL footprint. This is due to a rural environment and a limited number of non-jet operations occurring daily do not create a significant nuisance to the community. 2.6.3. Soils and Geology The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Collier County Soils Survey (2016), indicates that within the region of IMM there are twelve different soil types. A significant percentage of the areas on and around IMM are made up of types of fine sand, which is extremely typical in southwest Florida soils profile. A map depicting these soil types at IMM is depicted in Figure 2-16. Most soils on the Airport’s property are comprised of Immokalee Fine Sand with other significant areas being made of up of Myakka Fine Sand, and Holopaw Fine Sand. 2.6.4. Floodplains Floodplains are defined in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Executive Order (EO) 11988, Floodplain Management, 1977. They include lowland areas adjoining inland and coastal waters, especially those areas subject to a one percent of greater change of flooding in any given year. EO 11988 directs Federal agencies to take action to reduce the risk of flood loss, minimize the impact of floods on human safety, health, and welfare, and restore and preserve the natural and beneficial value served by floodplains. Under the EO, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has produced flood insurance rate maps (FIRMs) for communities participating in the National Flood Insurance Program. Detailed maps illustrate the 100-year and 500-year base flood elevations. Figure 2-17 indicates that most of the airport area is categorized as Zone AE Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA), which is delineates areas where there is a one percent annual chance of flooding, or those which fall within the 100-year flood plain. 2.6.5. Wetlands Under Executive Order (EO) 11990, Protection of Wetlands (1977), Federal agencies are prohibited from undertaking or providing assistance for activities, including new construction, located in wetlands unless no practicable alternatives and measures to minimize harm to wetlands have been implemented. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (CoE) and EPA share responsibility for wetland protection and permitting under the Clean Waters Act of 1972. Both define a wetland as, “those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions.” Such areas typically include swamps, marshes, and bogs. Other agencies with non-regulatory responsibilities to create or protect wetlands include the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Marine Fisheries Service, and the Soil Conservation Service. Based on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife’s National Wetlands Inventory, depicted in Figure 2-18, there are a significant number of wetlands of varying types on and around the airport property. All wetland areas shown have been verified by US. Army Corps of Engineers and locations and extents of wetlands are approximate. The largest wetland feature at IMM includes the large freshwater forested/shrub wetland (PSS1/3Ad). The total acreage of this wetland is 5.58 acres and is in the center of the airport property (east of Runway 18-36, south of Runway 9-27). Small wetland locations include freshwater emergent wetlands (PEM1Fd), which are located north of Runway 9 approach end and on the Airport’s east side. Both locations are under 5 acres. Immokalee Regional AirportAirport Layout Plan UpdateFigure2-16IMM Area Soils Map Immokalee Regional AirportAirport Layout Plan UpdateFigure2-17IMM DFIRM Floodplains Immokalee Regional AirportAirport Layout Plan UpdateFigure2-18IMM Wetlands IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 43 March 2019 2.6.6. Florida Panther Habitat Established by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, the Immokalee Regional Airport boundary is within an existing National Panther Refuge area. There are approximately 120-230 panthers in the wild in Florida. The Florida panther is an endangered species. The current refuge covers approximately 26,400 acres of land in Collier County. This refuge, which lies on the northern and eastern portion of the airport property, is to promote the preservation of the panther population. Development within these areas will require a thorough environmental and permitting process which will have extremely costly mitigation impacts. Figure 2-19 depicts the panther habitat in and around the airport. 2.7. Existing Utilities and Infrastructure The availability and capacity of the utilities serving IMM are important factors to consider when evaluating future development opportunities. The primary concern is the availability of adequate power, water, and sewer sources. 2.7.1. Electricity Power is available from Lee County Electric Cooperative Inc. This organization supplies power for the Airport and surrounding communities. 2.7.2. Wastewater Wastewater management is provided to Immokalee Regional Airport through Immokalee Water and Sewer District. This District operates and maintains the water and sewer plants and systems as an Independent Special District of the State of Florida. A 6’’ PVC Forcemain runs on the east side of Airpark Boulevard from Route 846. A sewer line runs in the center of Airpark Boulevard for the extent of the street. Starting from Route 846, the sewer line serves all facilities that are located on this road. Figure 2-20 identifies the locations of all stated wastewater infrastructure at and surrounding IMM. 2.7.3. Potable Water Water service is provided to Immokalee Regional Airport through Immokalee Water and Sewer District. A water treatment plant is located on the west portion of IMM property, and is maintained by Immokalee Water and Sewer District. The plant can be accessed through Airport Access Road. A 12’’ watermain serves potable water to IMM facilities. This water main begins at Route 846 and runs to the west side of Airpark Boulevard for the extent of the road. This watermain allows for transportation and delivery of potable water to the IMM facilities. Figure 2-20 identifies the locations of all stated water infrastructure at and surrounding IMM. 2.7.4. Natural Gas There are currently no natural gas sources available at IMM. Immokalee Regional AirportAirport Layout Plan UpdateFigure2-19IMM Area Panther HabitatLEGENDPRIMARY HABITATSECONDARYHABITATAIRPORTPROPERTY LINE PLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLImmokalee Regional AirportAirport Layout Plan UpdateFigure2-20IMM UTILITIESON - AIRPORT UTILITIESWATER MAINSEWER LINEFORCE MAIN IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 46 March 2019 3. Forecast of Aviation Demand 3.1. Introduction The ultimate goal of the groups and agencies involved in running and overseeing an airport is to best serve the needs of current and future users. Critical to meeting this objective is having the appropriate facilities to accommodate General Aviation (GA) user’s needs. Because of the scale, expense, complexities and safety requirements that factor into any airport’s capital improvement projects, those projects need to be planned, and ideally begun, well in advance of when the airport demand airport requires increased capacity. Thus, the importance of developing forecasts of aviation demand. This section will present the existing and projected socio-economic conditions of the area and the forecasts of anticipated unconstrained aviation demand that is expected at Immokalee Regional Airport (IMM) through 2037. Forecasts form the basis for the type, amount and timing of facilities developed for an airport. The forecasts presented in this section will help guide the site evaluation presented in the remaining chapters of this report. 3.1.1. Characteristics of Activity The characteristics and types of aeronautical activity an airport accommodates determines the facilities required. These factors broadly include annual operations and based aircraft information, and more specifically the variation between local and itinerant operations, the mix of aircraft being based at the airfield, and the peaking characteristics of operations – on an annual, monthly, and hourly basis. Each of these characteristics will be quantified by the forecast of demand and further evaluated through the development of facility requirements. 3.1.2. Measuring Operational Activity With no control tower located at IMM, it is difficult to validate historical operational information reported to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Further, since a procedure to count future operations at IMM is not practical, the Collier County Airport Authority (CCAA) should continue to monitor based aircraft and fuel sales to identify changes in demand over time. Furthermore, the potential impact of new tenants at the airfield could affect this forecast and its associated findings. Thus, the activity forecasts should be re- evaluated and updated as conditions change so that airport activity may be accurately reflected. 3.2. Data Sources The projections of aviation demand relied on a wide range of information about IMM, the aviation industry, and the U.S. economy. The primary data sources utilized in the development of this study are described below. Woods & Poole Economics, Inc. Woods & Poole Economics, Inc. is an independent vendor and nationally recognized firm that provides expert economic and demographic analysis. Historical and forecast data of socio-economic data including population, per capita income, and employment were provided by this resource. Federal Aviation Administration • BasedAircraft.com provides information on based aircraft and fleet mix for the base year (2016). • Airport Master Record (Form 5010) provides information on based aircraft and fleet mix for the base year (2016). • The 2017 TAF for IMM, The State of Florida, FAA Southern Region, and the U.S. was downloaded from the FAA website. The TAF contains data on a federal fiscal year (12 months ended September 30) for enplanements (air carrier and regional), operations (air carrier, air taxi/commuter, general aviation and military), and based aircraft. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 47 March 2019 • The FAA’s FAA Traffic Flow Management System Counts (TFMSC) provided arrivals, departures, and fleet mix. TFMSC source data are created when pilots file flight plans and/or when flights are detected by the National Airspace System (NAS), usually via RADAR. Traffic Flow Management System Counts (TFMSC) records are assembled by the FAA Air Traffic Airspace (ATA) Lab. Flightwise.com Flightwise.com maintains a database of all operations which complete a VFR or IFR flight plan. The database includes arrival and departure information such as time, date, and locations, as well as aircraft type and N-number information. Florida Department of Transportation Airport System Plan The most recent and up to date version of the Florida Aviation System Plan (FASP) predicts a forecast from 2011 to 2030. This document provides projected forecasts for most Florida Airports and gives a comprehensive overview of operations forecasts over the planning period. 3.2.1. Emerging Trends in U.S. Aviation Each year, the FAA publishes its national aerospace forecast. Included in this publication are forecasts for air carriers, regional/commuters, general aviation, and air cargo activity. The forecast is prepared to meet budget and planning needs of the FAA and to provide information that can be used by state and local authorities, the aviation industry, and by the general public. The current edition used in this analysis is the FAA Aerospace Forecast- Fiscal Years 2016-2036. The FAA forecasts use the economic performance of the United States, as well as trends within the aviation industry, as an indicator of future aviation industry growth. The following subsections identify some notable trends in the U.S. aviation industry which could be reasonably expected to impact the activity of IMM. 3.2.1.1. General Aviation Trends Significant achievements in the advancement of aviation technology have been occurring since the beginning of American aviation history over a century ago. These technological advancements have regularly changed the way in which our aviation system operates, and these types of changes will undoubtedly continue to impact airports of all sizes and uses in the future. In many cases, the general aviation (GA) airports are much more adaptive to technological changes than larger commercial service airports, which can be slower to institutionalize new technologies. Continual monitoring of GA trends will assist the planning of future needs. Current trends in GA with the potential to impact operations at IMM include the general steady growth of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), which is showing in increased sales of turbine and rotorcraft aircraft. Experimental GA hours have also contributed to a projected increase of 1.2 percent of hours flown in all of GA hours. The emerging market of light-sport-aircraft (LSA) is also projected to grow by 4.5 percent annually, within the 20-year forecast period. 3.2.1.2. Airspace and Navigation Trends Noteworthy airspace and navigational trends revolve almost exclusively around the proposed Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) currently under the implementation stages in some areas, with full operation in others. NextGen represents a comprehensive overhaul of our National Airspace System (NAS) to make air travel more convenient and dependable, while ensuring safety and security of the system. NextGen is largely the result of new technologies introduced into the aviation industry within the last decade. GPS technologies, along with improved radar and communication systems, have created an environment where the historic model for air navigation and pilot/air traffic control communication seem outdated and inefficient. The FAA is using NextGen technologies to build into the capacity of the NAS the ability to guide and track air traffic more precisely and more efficiently allowing for a more proactive approach to preventing accidents, will save aircraft operators money through fuel-savings, will reduce aircraft emissions, and provide for a safer and less congested airspace. ADS-B coverage for the United States was completed in May 2016. 3.2.1.3. Developing Trends - UAS International industry development, growth, and investment over the past several years have allowed Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) to evolve from remotely piloted vehicles with limited capabilities to semi and fully autonomous systems for commercial applications. More focused on Small Unmanned Aircraft IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 48 March 2019 Systems (sUAS), the FAA has projected that from a fleet size of 101,300 in 2017 it will increase to a fleet size of 542,500 by 2020. Currently, the FAA has established a UAS Focus Area Pathfinders initiative which will help explore opportunities to ease regulations for UAS operations while keeping a high level of safety in our NAS. The projected fleet size listed previously takes in account the easement of UAS regulations, allowing for the exponential increase of total fleet size. IMM is well suited for future UAS operations as IMM and it is fair to assume that IMM could be expected to potentially facilitate UAS operations over the planning period. At this time the FAA does not count and forecast for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) and UAS as based aircraft and operations at specific airports, primarily due to uncertainties in application, market, and potential for sustained and predictable growth. Until the FAA makes changes to the “based aircraft” designation, UAS vehicles, UAS based and operating at IMM will not impact the based aircraft or airport operations counts and forecasts. Therefore, the forecasts within this report will not consider UAS operations. 3.3. Historical Aeronautical Activity and Based Aircraft This section provides a discussion of IMM’s historical activity levels to begin a context for the forecast of aviation demand at the Airport. It answers the question of who IMM serves and why. The past is not always a good prognosticator for the future; however, an analysis of historical data provides the prospect to comprehend those factors which have historically caused traffic to increase or decrease and how those factors may change in the future, thus influencing the forecast. Figure 3-1, Historical Aircraft Operations at IMM, and Figure 3-2, Historical Based Aircraft, depict the historical operational trends at the airport. Figure 3-1 Historical Aircraft Operations Source: FAA Terminal Area Forecast (TAF), 2017 Approximately 36,000 operations (arrivals and departures) were recorded at IMM in FY2016. Itinerant GA operations accounted for 19 percent of total operations, and local GA operations accounted for 81 percent of total annual operations. The number of based aircraft at IMM have fluctuated significantly over the past 10 years from a low of 11 in 2009 to a high of 60 in 2014. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 49 March 2019 Figure 3-2 Historical Based Aircraft Source: FAA Terminal Area Forecast (TAF), 2017. *BasedAircraft.com data 10/2017 3.4. Based Aircraft Projections Typically, the number of based aircraft is dependent on the local demand for aircraft storage facilities, the amenities provided by an airport, and the capacity of other airports in the vicinity with comparable facilities. A projection of GA aircraft that will be based at IMM is required for the proper planning of future airside requirements such as runway usage, aircraft parking apron, and the number of hangars needed. Based aircraft can also be indicative of the level of operational activity expected at an airport. The forecast of based aircraft was developed using the forecasting techniques as described in the following sections. 3.4.1. FAA TAF The FAA publishes a based aircraft forecast as part of its annual Terminal Area Forecast (TAF) for Immokalee; however, at the present time (February 2017), the FAA does not have a suitable or realistic forecast for IMM, but rather projects no operational growth at the airfield in the future. That zero growth is inconsistent with both historical airport trends and local, state, and regional aviation trends. Table 3-1 outlines the FAA TAF for IMM for the forecast period. Table 3-1 FAA TAF - Based Aircraft Year FAA TAF 2017 59 2018 59 2022 59 2027 59 2032 59 2037 59 AAGR 2017-2032 0.00% Source: FAA 2017 TAF, Compiled by Atkins, 2018 IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 50 March 2019 3.4.2. Florida Aviation System Plan Forecast The most recent and up to date version of the Florida Aviation System Plan (FASP) projects a forecast from 2016 to 2035. That document provides projected forecasts for most Florida Airports and gives a comprehensive overview of based aircraft forecasts over the planning period. As this was applied to IMM’s forecasting effort, it was found that within the FASP a 2.6% average annual growth rate (AAGR) was identified by the FDOT for based aircraft growth over the next 20 years. Applying that AAGR of 2.6% to the base year 2016 operations results in an operational growth to 90 based aircraft operations by 2037. The FASP forecast is outlined in Table 3-2. The FASP presents an aggressive based aircraft growth that is not supported by other forecasting methods, therefore it is not considered as the preferred alternative. Table 3-2 FAA FASP - Based Aircraft Forecast Year Based Aircraft FDOT Forecast 2008 56 2028 90 AAGR 2.6% Modified FDOT Forecast 2017 53 2018 55 2022 61 2027 69 2032 79 2037 90 AAGR 2.6% Source: FDOT Airport System Plan, 2010. Atkins Analysis, 2018 3.4.3. Market Share – Based Aircraft The market share analysis methodology is a top-down approach to examine the Airport’s historical share of the national, state, and regional market. This approach assumes the growth in activity at an airport to be proportionate to the activity of the nation, state, and region. Therefore, as market shares are held constant over the forecast period, the resulting increases in the activity occur based on the growth rates established in the FAA’s Aerospace Forecasts and TAF. Once a market share projection is developed, it can then be reflected as an increase or decrease in the share of the national, state, and regional market for the airport. The results of the market share analysis are shown in Table 3-3, and described in the following paragraphs. IMM and the Southern Region: The Airport’s historical share of based GA aircraft for the Southern Region has slightly fluctuated during the past 10 years. Applying the FY 2016 ratio (0.17 percent), total based GA aircraft at IMM are projected to reach 62by FY 2037, an average annual growth rate of 0.81 percent. IMM and the State of Florida: The Airport’s historical share of based GA aircraft for the State of Florida has also fluctuated from a high of 0.51 percent to a low of 0.10 percent during the past 10 years. Applying the FY 2016 ratio (0.45 percent), total based GA aircraft are projected to reach 69 by FY 2037, an average annual growth rate of 1.32 percent. IMM and the U.S: The Airport’s historical share of based GA aircraft for the entire U.S. has also fluctuated during the last 10 years. Applying the FY 2016 ratio (0.03 percent), total based GA aircraft are projected to reach 62 by FY 2037, an average annual growth rate of 0.81 percent. The results of the market share analysis are included in Table 1-1. The IMM market share of the State of Florida was selected as the preferred GA forecast of based aircraft and is discussed in more detail within the section identified as the preferred based aircraft forecast. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 51 March 2019 Table 3-3 IMM Market Share Forecast - Based Aircraft Year FAA TAF IMM Market Share Southern Region State of Florida U.S. Total IMM Southern Region State of Florida Share of U.S. Historical 2006 36,534 13,269 197,301 59 0.16% 0.44% 0.03% 2007 36,297 13,170 199,608 59 0.16% 0.45% 0.03% 2008 32,482 11,238 175,579 17 0.05% 0.15% 0.01% 2009 32,670 10,624 177,432 11 0.03% 0.10% 0.01% 2010 30,853 10,931 165,472 21 0.07% 0.19% 0.01% 2011 29,277 10,832 160,374 26 0.09% 0.24% 0.02% 2012 30,202 11,292 163,333 50 0.17% 0.44% 0.03% 2013 31,163 11,554 166,953 50 0.16% 0.43% 0.03% 2014 32,190 11,838 170,375 60 0.19% 0.51% 0.04% 2015 30,814 11,360 163,994 58 0.19% 0.51% 0.04% 2016 31,094 11,536 165,480 52 0.17% 0.45% 0.03% Forecast 0.17% 0.45% 0.03% 2017 31,348 11,700 166,822 52 52 53 52 2018 31,606 11,853 168,247 52 53 53 53 2022 32,668 12,517 173,903 52 55 56 55 2027 34,026 13,382 181,076 52 57 55 57 2032 35,388 14,264 188,280 52 59 64 59 2037 36,825 15,206 195,856 52 62 69 62 Average Annual Growth Rate 2006-2016 3.14% -1.39% -1.74% -1.14% 2017-2037 0.81% 1.32% 0.81% 0.00% 0.81% 1.32% 0.81% Source: FAA TAF 2017, Atkins Analysis, 2018 3.4.4. Preferred Based Aircraft Forecast When selecting the preferred forecast of based aircraft, the previously mentioned forecasting methods were considered. Forecasts were analysed, reviewed, and compared to determine how they compare to the expected growth at the Airport. The selected based aircraft forecast should be the best representation of what is expected to occur at IMM. As mentioned above, the market share analysis produced results of what is likely to occur at IMM during the planning horizon. Specifically, the IMM share of the State of Florida 2016 market share results was taken to project future based aircraft at the Airport. The market share forecast for based aircraft identified growth (1.32 percent) is higher than those projected by the FAA’s no growth forecast provided in the TAF (0 percent). However, the State of Florida is a unique environment for GA activity and IMM is expected to grow in step with the state growth in based aircraft. The preferred based aircraft forecast is listed in Table 3-4. Table 3-4 Preferred Based Aircraft Forecast Year Preferred Forecast FAA TAF 2017 53 59 2018 53 59 2022 56 59 2027 55 59 2032 64 59 2037 69 59 AAGR 2017-2032 1.32% 0.00% Source: FAA TAF 2017, Atkins Analysis, 2018 IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 52 March 2019 3.4.5. Based Aircraft by Type The forecast of based aircraft presented in Table 1-3 was used to predict the types of based aircraft (the fleet mix) that can be reasonably anticipated at IMM. The current fleet mix (2016) was identified by aircraft class: single-engine piston, multi-engine piston, jet aircraft, and rotorcraft. This information was sourced from the Airport’s master record (FAA form 5010). The future fleet mix was projected by applying the 2016 fleet mix. As shown in Table 3-5, Based Aircraft by Type Forecast, the share of each of the aircraft types at IMM is anticipated to remain constant throughout the forecast period. Table 3-5 Based Aircraft by Type Forecast Year Single Engine Piston % of Total Multi- Engine Piston % of Total Jet % of Total Helicopter % of Total Total 2016 38 73.08% 4 7.69% 3 5.77% 4 7.69% 52 Forecast 2017 39 73.08% 4 7.69% 3 5.77% 4 7.69% 53 2022 41 73.08% 4 7.69% 3 5.77% 4 7.69% 56 2027 44 73.08% 5 7.69% 3 5.77% 5 7.69% 60 2032 47 73.08% 5 7.69% 4 5.77% 5 7.69% 64 2037 50 73.08% 5 7.69% 4 5.77% 5 7.69% 69 Source: Atkins Analysis, 2018 3.5. Aviation Operations Projections Forecasts for aviation operations and activity for IMM will serve as the basis for airport facility planning over a 20-year planning horizon and beyond. Although the prepared forecasts cover an extended timeframe, aviation, social, and economic trends identified and considered to affect aviation demand at IMM can only be reasonably projected for the first five years. It is difficult to predict with a great deal of certainty the year-to- year trend changes in a dynamic aviation industry while forecasting activity 20 years into the future. Unexpected events in any of these trends, which cannot be factored into the assumptions of the forecast, can cause dramatic changes across the twenty-year period. Therefore, aviation activity forecasts must continually be evaluated and updated on a regular basis, approximately every five years. 3.5.1. Methodologies The most reliable approach to estimating future aviation demand is to use one or more analytical techniques. Various methods of forecasting aviation demand exist and are widely used throughout the industry including, trend line analysis, regression analysis, and market share analysis, operations per based aircraft. National and local trends and influences were also considered in projecting aircraft activity for the Airport and are reflected in the prepared forecasts. These methods have been applied to develop the most accurate forecast possible for IMM and are further described in more. 3.5.1.1. Operations per Based Aircraft Analysis Forecasts of total GA operations were prepared using a ratio of local GA aircraft operations per based aircraft (OPBA) from historical data. The OPBA is then applied to forecasts of based aircraft to develop estimates of future local annual operations. Then the local versus itinerant split percentage is applied to calculate itinerant and total operations. This methodology is a common forecast technique because it directly links the based aircraft to their average level of annual utilization at the Airport. This number is particularly useful in facility planning and is an important indicator in the aviation forecasting process. As shown in Table 3-6, the historical GA OPBA has fluctuated since FY 2006 from a high of 1,725 in FY 2009 to a low of 595 in FY 2006. For the purposes of projecting future aircraft operations at IMM, it was assumed that the 5-year average OPBA value (from 2012 to 2016) of 665 would be used to forecast future operations. Applying this average OPBA, total annual GA operations reach 50,570 by FY 2037. Although the OPBA approach is a common forecast technique and a typical indicator of future GA operations, it was not the preferred method for this forecast due to the major fluctuations in the historical OPBA values. However, this methodology is useful as a supporting factor in establishing the preferred forecast. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 53 March 2019 Table 3-6 Operations Per Based Aircraft Forecast Total Based Aircraft Total GA Operations (TAF) Operations Per Based Aircraft Historical 10 Year Average 5 Year Average Historical 2006 59 35,096 595 817 2007 59 35,096 595 2008 17 18,980 1,116 2009 11 18,980 1,725 2010 21 18,980 904 2011 26 18,980 730 2012 50 36,500 730 665 2013 50 36,500 730 2014 60 36,500 608 2015 58 36,500 629 2016 58 36,500 629 Forecast 2017 53 43,114 35,092 2018 53 43,678 35,551 2022 56 46,124 37,543 2027 55 44,864 36,517 2032 64 52,562 42,783 2037 69 56,033 45,608 Average Annual Growth Rates 2006-2016 -0.17% 0.39% 2017-2037 0.80% 2.1% 1.1% Source: FAA TAF 2017, Atkins Analysis, 2018 3.5.1.2. Federal Aviation Administration Terminal Area Forecast The FAA publishes an annual Terminal Area Forecast (TAF) for each airport listed in the National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS); however, at the present time (February 2017), the FAA does not have a suitable or realistic forecast for IMM, but rather projects no operational growth at the airfield. That zero- growth outlook is inconsistent with both historical airport trends and local, state, and regional aviation trends. Therefore, the FAA TAF for IMM is not considered to be a reliable forecast method. Table 3-7 outlines the FAA TAF for the forecast period. Table 3-7 FAA TAF - Operations Year FAA TAF 2017 36,500 2018 36,500 2022 36,500 2027 36,500 2032 36,500 2037 36,500 AAGR 2017-2032 0.00% Source: FAA TAF 2017 IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 54 March 2019 3.5.1.3. FDOT Aviation System Plan Forecast The most recent and up to date version of the Florida Aviation System Plan (FASP) projects a forecast from 2011 to 2030. That document provides projected forecasts for most Florida Airports and gives a comprehensive overview of operations forecasts over the planning period. As this was applied to IMM’s forecasting effort, it was found that within the FASP a 1.3% average annual growth rate (AAGR) was identified by the FDOT for operational growth over the 20-year forecast. Applying that AAGR of 1.3% to the base year 2016 operations results in an operational growth to 48,361 operations by 2037. That forecast is outlined in Table 3-8. Table 3-8 FDOT System Plan Forecast Forecast Year Operations FDOT Forecast 2008 18,980 2028 24,813 AAGR 1.35% Modified FDOT Forecast Base Year: 2016 36,500 2017 36,992 2018 37,491 2022 39,556 2027 42,296 2032 45,227 2037 48,361 AAGR 1.35% Source: FDOT Airport System Plan, 2010 & Atkins Analysis, 2018 3.5.1.4. Operational Trend Line Analysis Trend line analysis examines historical growth trends in activity and applies these identified trends to current demand levels to produce projections of future activity. Trend line analysis assumes that activity, and the factors that have historically affected activity, will continue to influence demand levels at similar rates over an extended time. Linear trend projections are typically used to provide baseline forecasts that reflect stable market conditions. Based on a review of historical aeronautical activity at IMM, an AAGR of 0.4 percent was determined for the 10-year historical timeframe between 2006 and 2016. An AAGR of 0.0 percent was determined for a 5-year period between the years 2012 and 2016. Due to recent large fluctuations in operations and based aircraft, the operational trend line analysis was not considered within the preferred forecast as the 5 and 10 year there is very little variation between the forecasts due to the nature of the historical reported operations. The results from the operational trend line analysis is depicted in Table 3-9. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 55 March 2019 Table 3-9 Trend Analysis Historical Operations AAGR 10 Year Average 5 Year Average Historical 2006 35,096 0.4% 2007 35,096 2008 18,980 2009 18,980 2010 18,980 2011 18,980 2012 36,500 0.0% 2013 36,500 2014 36,500 2015 36,500 2016 36,500 Forecast 2017 36,643 36,500 2018 36,787 36,500 2022 37,369 36,500 2027 38,109 36,500 2032 38,864 36,500 2037 39,634 36,500 Average Annual Growth Rates 2006-2016 0.39% 2017-2037 0.4% 0.0% Source: FAA TAF 2017, Atkins Analysis, 2018 3.5.1.5. Regression Analysis The market data which was acquired through Woods & Poole Economics Inc. for the State of Florida was utilized for a regression analysis for both operations and based aircraft at IMM. A regression analysis allows for the examination of variables to possibly identify any relationship between the two. After retrieving population, employment, and per capita income (PCI) of the determined airport service area, a regression analysis of each data set was conducted. This analysis regressed individual elements of population, employment, earnings, and per capita income from historical data compared to the number of airport operations to determine if a positive relationship existed that could serve as the basis for a forecast. The three socioeconomic variables of population, employment, and per capita income produced R² values of 0.19, 0.31, 0.21, respectively. Overall, the regression methodology resulted in very low correlation coefficients across all the categories. Given that GA operations have fluctuated since 2006, as regression variables (population, employment, etc.) have steadily increased these factors are not a valid tool for predicting future GA operations at IMM. It was determined that any possible direct relationship between the three data sets from the market data and historical aircraft operations and based aircraft amounts are not considered reliable and corelating forecast data was not generated for this study. 3.5.1.6. Market Share Analysis The results of the operations TAF market share analysis are shown in Table 3-10, and described in the following paragraphs. IMM and the Southern Region: The Airport’s historical share of operations by GA aircraft for the Southern Region has fluctuated over the previous 10 years from a low of 0.1 percent in FY 2008 to a high of 0.23 IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 56 March 2019 percent in FY 2016. Utilizing the 2016 percentage share of 0.23 percent, total GA operations at IMM are projected to reach 39,042 by FY 2037, reflecting an AAGR of 0.3 percent. IMM and the State of Florida: The Airport’s historical share of operations by GA aircraft for the State of Florida grew from 0.28 percent in FY 2008 to 0.61 percent in FY 2012. Utilizing the FY2016 percentage share of 0.6 percent, total GA operations at IMM are projected to reach 42,076 by FY 2037, reflecting an AAGR of 0.7 percent. IMM and the U.S.: The Airport’s historical share of operations by GA aircraft for the entire nation grew from 0.026 percent in FY 2008 to 0.053 percent in FY 2016. Utilizing the FY 2016 percentage share, total GA operations at IMM are projected to reach 39,492 by 2037, reflecting an AAGR of 0.4 percent. Table 3-10 Market Share Analysis - Operations Year FAA TAF IMM Market Share Southern Region State of Florida U.S. Total IMM Southern Region State of Florida Share of U.S. Historical 2006 17,229,047 6,754,183 80,148,503 35,096 0.20% 0.52% 0.04% 2007 17,366,661 6,885,700 80,185,281 35,096 0.20% 0.51% 0.04% 2008 17,112,143 6,717,194 78,020,289 18,980 0.11% 0.28% 0.02% 2009 16,013,813 6,309,482 73,598,797 18,980 0.12% 0.30% 0.03% 2010 15,439,990 5,799,356 71,230,624 18,980 0.12% 0.33% 0.03% 2011 15,528,304 5,859,864 69,900,768 18,980 0.12% 0.32% 0.03% 2012 15,514,588 5,948,404 69,577,152 36,500 0.24% 0.61% 0.05% 2013 15,605,360 6,109,491 68,808,247 36,500 0.23% 0.60% 0.05% 2014 15,533,256 6,085,670 68,183,393 36,500 0.23% 0.60% 0.05% 2015 15,625,588 6,135,264 68,334,308 36,500 0.23% 0.59% 0.05% 2016 15,660,151 6,109,590 68,365,883 36,500 0.23% 0.60% 0.05% Forecast 2017 15,744,090 6,180,506 68,583,877 36,500 36,696 36,924 36,616 2018 15,787,856 6,217,632 68,817,281 36,500 36,798 37,145 36,741 2022 15,832,235 6,255,315 69,054,567 36,500 37,220 38,067 37,258 2027 15,877,251 6,293,578 69,295,434 36,500 37,784 39,300 37,946 2032 15,922,890 6,332,408 69,538,767 36,500 38,389 40,633 38,688 2037 15,969,195 6,371,846 69,785,784 36,500 39,042 42,076 39,492 Average Annual Growth Rate 2006-2016 -1.0% -1.0% -1.6% 0.4% - 2017-2037 0.3% 0.7% 0.4% 0.0% 0.3% 0.7% 0.4% Source: FAA TAF, Atkins Analysis, 2018 3.5.2. Selected Methodology and Preferred Aeronautical Forecast The selected forecast is based on the Florida Airport System Plan forecasts which were supported by the projected income and population growth of the Airport Service Area. Specifically, the preferred forecast presented below in Figure 3-3, Preferred Forecast Methodology, depicts all the methodologies used in the operations forecast analysis. The “FL- State Sys Plan” being represented as the preferred forecast for aircraft operations. This approach considers current trends within the surrounding community and the potential for growth from growing populations and income in the region. The system plan forecast also correlates well historical operations per based aircraft values, resulting in an average number of operations per based aircraft of 702 throughout the forecast period. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 57 March 2019 Table 3-11 compares the preferred forecast with the FAA’s 2016 TAF for IMM. Given that the FAA TAF is a flatline forecast, even a modest operational growth rate exceeds 15% thresholds. Table 3-11 Preferred Operations Forecast vs. FAA TAF Forecast Year ALP Update 2011 FAA TAF % Difference from TAF Base Forecast Year 2017 36,992 36,500 1.35% Base Year + 5 Years 2022 39,556 36,500 8.37% Base Year + 10 Years 2027 42,296 36,500 15.88% Base Year + 15 Years 2032 45,324 36,500 24.18% Source: Atkins Analysis, FAA TAF, 2018 Figure 3-3 Preferred Forecast Methodology Source: Atkins Analysis, 2018 Note: Regression analysis not included, forecast not generated due to extremely low correlation coefficients. 3.5.3. Aeronautical Forecast by Type Applying the forecasted growth profile to the existing distribution of users at IMM allows an understanding of how each type of airport user will need to be accommodated in the future. In the case of IMM, there was one recorded instance in 1992 where two Air Taxi and Commuter operations were marked for the airport. All other recordings were GA operations; therefore, all projections will be considered as GA operations within the aeronautical forecast by type. The 10-year average for distribution of operational types at IMM is as follows: • Itinerant GA 22.3% • Local GA 77.7% Table 3-12 applies each type of user to the preferred forecast for IMM, keeping the distribution of users constant throughout the planning period. 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 2006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021202220232024202520262027202820292030203120322033203420352036203710 Year Trend Operations Per BA 10 Year Average Operations Per BA 5 Year Average FL TAF AAGR SR TAF AAGR US TAF AAGR FL-State Sys Plan Historical IMM TAF IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 58 March 2019 Table 3-12 Preferred Forecast by Operation Type Year Itinerant Local Total Operations Operations Share Operations Share Historical 2006 10,045 29% 25,051 71% 35,096 2007 10,045 29% 25,051 71% 35,096 2008 4,380 23% 14,600 77% 18,980 2009 4,380 23% 14,600 77% 18,980 2010 4,380 23% 14,600 77% 18,980 2011 4,380 23% 14,600 77% 18,980 2012 7,000 19% 29,500 81% 36,500 2013 7,000 19% 29,500 81% 36,500 2014 7,000 19% 29,500 81% 36,500 2015 7,000 19% 29,500 81% 36,500 2016 7,000 19% 29,500 81% 36,500 10-Year Average 6,601 22% 23,273 78% 29,874 Forecast 2017 8,254 22% 28,738 78% 36,992 2022 8,826 22% 30,730 78% 39,556 2027 9,438 22% 32,859 78% 42,296 2032 10,091 22% 35,136 78% 45,227 2037 10,791 22% 37,570 78% 48,361 Source: FAA TAF 2017, Atkins Analysis 2018 3.6. Peaking Characteristics Many of the facility planning requirements calculations that will be presented in subsequent chapters are based on accommodating peak periods of activity. Peaking characteristics are usually defined as peak month, average day, and peak hour activity. A peak month has been established by utilizing fueling data received from the CCAA. The fueling data received covered a period between 2003 and 2016, with a breakdown of gallons sold per month within the year. The FAA defines the theoretical “peak-hour operations” as the total number of aircraft operations expected to occur at an airport, averaged for two adjacent peak hours of typical peak time. Peaking characteristics are determined from peak monthly activity, average daily activity within the peak month, and then estimating the peak hourly activity from the average day peak month (ADPM) calculation. The first step in this analysis is to identify IMM’s peak month. Based on a review of available airport fueling data, April was revealed as the peak month, accounting for 13 percent of the annual fuel sales. That percentage was applied to determine future peak month total operations at IMM. As shown in Table 3-14, approximately 4,745 operations occurred during IMM’s peak month in 2016. By 2037 the peak month operations are expected to total approximately 6,486. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 59 March 2019 Table 3-13 Peaking Characteristics Year Total Operations Peak Month Operations Average Day Operations Peak Hour Operations 2016 36,500 4,745 158 16 Forecast 2017 36,992 4,809 160 16 2022 39,556 5,142 171 17 2027 42,296 5,499 183 18 2032 45,227 5,880 196 20 2037 48,361 6,287 210 21 Source: Atkins Analysis, 2018 The peak month operations are divided by the average number of days in a month to calculate an airport’s ADPM level of operations, which in this case in 30 days. Therefore, IMM’s average daily operations were approximately 158 in 2016 and expected to increase to 216 by 2037. The Peak Hour is the busiest hour during the average day of the peak month. Typically, between 10 and 20 percent of the daily activity occurs during the peak hours at GA airports. This analysis utilized 10 percent of the ADPM for the peak hour calculations. As shown in Table 3-14, the peak hour operations in 2016 were 16 and are expected to increase to 22 by 2037. It is important to remember that these calculations are for planning purposes only and represent totals used in FAA approved planning procedures. It is acceptable and probably likely that the peak hour, day and month calculations do not exactly match up to actual conditions. 3.7. Summary Each annual aircraft growth rate was selected while keeping in mind many aspects which apply directly to the Airport and its operations forecast. Since the population for Collier County and the surrounding counties is anticipated to grow significantly within the forecast period, there can be a conclusion drawn from this that the demand for aviation services will increase, including GA operations and based aircraft amounts across the Airport Service Area. To supplement this growth in population to the airport service area, the predicted per capita income shows large growth potential within the forecast period. It is also important to note that with that expected growth in local GA, surrounding airport facilities that cater to GA traffic are starting to reach capacity. As this occurs, it can be reasoned that such traffic will flow over to IMM as a suitable alternative. The preferred forecast for IMM is summarized below: • Based Aircraft is forecast to have an AAGR of 1.32 %. This forecasted growth rate results in a based aircraft count of 69 by 2028. • Airport Operations is forecast to have an AAGR of 1.35%. This forecasted growth rate results in an operations count of 48,361 by 2028. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 60 March 2019 4. Design Criteria and Facility Requirements 4.1. Introduction This chapter presents design criteria that will be used for airport-specific facility planning, as well as the basis of the demand/capacity and facility requirements analysis for the Airport. All design standards presented in this section have been established by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for developing airport facilities to meet existing and forecast levels of activity. This chapter compares the projected aviation demand to the existing capacity of the facilities at Immokalee Regional Airport (IMM). This comparison is then used to determine future facility requirements over the 20- year planning period. The facility improvements are directly related to the forecasted aviation activity, and will allow the Airport and surrounding community to be adequately prepared to accommodate the potential demand over the 20-year planning period. This chapter examines how anticipated activity levels translate into the Airport’s ability to serve forecasted traffic, focusing on the following distinct elements: • Demand and Capacity Calculations • Airside Facility Requirements • Landside Facility Requirements • Support Facility Requirements. Any shortcomings in the ability to serve the forecast demand are identified, and recommendations are made regarding physical improvements that may be needed to mitigate recognized deficiencies. 4.2. Demand and Capacity 4.2.1. Airspace Capacity Airspace capacity at an airport is of concern when the flight paths of traffic at nearby airports or local navigational aids (NAVAIDs) interacts to adversely impact operations at the airport of study. Another concern is the need to alter flight paths to avoid obstructions during aircraft approaches. While numerous public and private general aviation (GA) airports were identified within 30 nautical miles of IMM, only one private airport and no public airports were located within 5 nautical miles. The largest airport in IMM’s vicinity lies 20 nautical miles north west (RSW; Southwest Florida International). Along with this, there are currently no present military operations in the area, which can negatively impact capacity due to special use airspace. In conclusion, the airspace surrounding IMM is not congested with commercial, military, and/or special use airspace. GA airports in the region are far enough from IMM to not negatively impact operations or capacity. 4.2.2. Airside Capacity A demand and capacity analysis of airfield or airside systems and facilities, such as IMM’s runways and taxiways, results in separate calculated hourly capacities for Visual Flight Rules (VFR) and Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) conditions. Additionally, an annual service volume (ASV), which identifies the total annual number of aircraft operations that may be accommodated at the Airport without excessive delay, is calculated. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) defines total airport capacity as a reasonable estimate of an airport’s annual capacity, which accounts for runway use, aircraft mix, weather conditions, etc. that would be encountered over a year’s time. The parameters, assumptions, and calculations required for this analysis are included in the following sections. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 61 March 2019 4.2.2.1. Runway Orientation, Utilization, and Wind Coverage IMM’s two bi-directional runways, Runway 9-27, Runway 18-36 were evaluated to determine the overall capacity of the airfield, which is defined as the sum of capacities determined for each aircraft operation (takeoff or landing). Each operation is defined by its direction which is most commonly influenced by wind direction and speed, available instrument approaches, airspace restrictions, and/or other operating parameters. The Airport’s capacity calculations considered all runway ends (9, 27, 18, and 36) available for operations during VFR or IFR conditions. The overall runway utilization rates were calculated based on the past ten years of historical wind data associated with the Airport’s closest automated weather observing system (AWOS) which is at Page Field Airport (FMY). Immokalee has its own AWOS, however its historical data is insufficient to make such calculations as there are not ten years of data collected from the IMM station. Table 4-1 identifies the Airport’s approximate existing runway utilization rates. Table 4-1 IMM Runway Utilization Rates Runway Percent of Operations Served 9 70.0% 27 10.0% 18 10.0% 36 10.0% Total 100.00% Source: KRSW AWOS Published by the FAA, September 2017: Atkins Analysis, 2018 Providing adequate wind coverage is an important criterion for determining a runway’s orientation. Runways should be provided at an airport to maximize the opportunity for aircraft to take-off and land heading into the wind. When a bi-directional runway orientation provides less than 95 percent wind coverage for any aircraft using an airport on a regular basis, a crosswind runway is required by the FAA. If provisions for a crosswind runway cannot be met, the FAA recommends that the runway be widened to the next largest airport reference code (ARC). Per Change 1 of FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5300-13A, Airport Design, the 95 percent wind coverage is computed based on the crosswind not exceeding 10.5 knots and 13 knots for smaller aircraft and 16 knots and 20 knots for larger aircraft. As can be seen from the all-weather, VFR, and IFR wind roses depicted in Figure 2-14, the existing airfield configuration at IMM exceeds the 95 percent combined wind coverage requirement. However, looking at each runway’s individual 10.5 knot crosswind coverage during IFR conditions, each covers approximately 91 percent. Combined, their IFR crosswind coverage exceeds 98 percent. 4.2.2.2. Aircraft Mix Index The FAA has developed a classification system for grouping aircraft, based on size, weight, and performance. Table 4-2 illustrates the classification categories as they are presented in FAA AC 150/5060-5, Airport Capacity and Delay. Table 4-2 FAA Aircraft Certifications Aircraft Class Max. Cert. Takeoff Weight (lb) Number of Engines Wake Turbulence Classification A 12,500 or less Single Small (S) B 12,501 – 41,000 Multi Small (S) C 41,000 – 300,000 Multi Large (L) D Over 300,000 Multi Heavy (H) Source: FAA AC 150/5060-5, Airport Capacity and Delay. The classification system presented previously in Table 4-2 is used to develop an aircraft mix which is the relative percentage of operations conducted by each of the four classes of aircraft (A, B, C, and D). The IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 62 March 2019 aircraft mix is used to calculate a mix index which is then used for airfield capacity studies. The FAA defines the mix index as a mathematical expression, representing the percent of Class C aircraft, plus three times the percent of Class D aircraft (C+3D). The FAA has established mix index ranges for use in capacity calculations as listed below: • 0 to 20 (IMM’s mix index) • 21 to 50 • 51 to 80 • 51 to 120 • 121 to 180 A review of the aviation demand forecast from the previous chapter indicates that the Airport experiences most of its traffic from aircraft falling into either the A or B weight classifications outlined previously. Per historical and forecast data, the mix index range is between zero and twenty throughout the planning period, as operating aircraft with a maximum certified takeoff weight between 41,000 and 300,000 pounds are not expected to consist of more than 20% of the Airport’s total annual operations. 4.2.2.3. Arrivals Percentage The percentage of arrivals is the ratio of arrivals to total operations. It is typically safe to assume that the total annual arrivals will equal total departures and that average daily arrivals will equal average daily departures. Additionally, the percentage of arrivals for IMM was estimated to be approximately 50 percent based on a review of IMM’s flight plan records and operational understandings. Therefore, a factor of 50 percent arrivals was used in the capacity calculations for IMM. 4.2.2.4. Touch-and-Go Percentage The touch-and-go percentage is the ratio of landings with an immediate takeoff to total operations. This type of operation is typically associated with flight training. The number of touch-and-go operations normally decreases as the number of total operations approach runway capacity and/or weather conditions deteriorate. Typically, touch-and-go operations are assumed to be between zero and 50 percent of total operations. Given the GA nature of IMM and that it is known to be a popular flight training destination, touch-and-go operations are anticipated to account for 40 percent of the Airport’s total operations. 4.2.2.5. Taxiway Factors Taxiway entrance and exit locations are an important factor in determining the capacity of an airport’s runway system. Runway capacities are highest when there are full-length, parallel taxiways, ample runway entrance and exit taxiways, and no active runway crossings available. These components reduce the amount of time an aircraft remains on a runway. FAA AC 150/5060-5, Airport Capacity and Delay identifies the criteria for determining taxiway exit factors, which are generally based on the mix index and the distance between taxiway exits and runway landing threshold and other connector taxiways. Connector taxiways that are between 2,000 and 4,000 feet from the threshold of each runway and spaced at least 750 feet apart contribute to the taxiway exit factor. Taxiways that met these parameters were considered in completing the capacity calculations for all directions and for all conditions. Taxiway exits were evaluated for operations in all directions on both Runway 9-27 and Runway 18-36. Both runways are equipped with partial parallel taxiways with at least one exit being located between 1,000 and 3,500 feet away from the runway thresholds. However, the overall taxiway placement on the airfield may cause constraints. In terms of flow of operations, nearly all the Airport’s aircraft support and storage facilities are in the southern most area. To reach that area, aircraft operators landing on Runway 9-27 must take parallel Taxiway B across the Runway 18 approach end onto Taxiway A. From there, pilots would taxi southbound via Taxiway A to the approach end of Runway 36 where another runway crossing is needed to gain access to Taxiway C. That taxiway accesses the IMM FBO on the airfield. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 63 March 2019 4.2.2.6. Instrument Approach Capabilities Instrument approach capability is qualified based upon the ability of the airport to safely accommodate aircraft operations during periods of inclement weather. Weather, in this regard, is characterized by two measures, local visibility in statute miles and height of a substantial cloud ceiling above airport elevation. These two measures are termed “approach minima”. All of IMM’s runways are supported through RNAV (GPS) procedures. In addition to this, VOR procedures are supported for Runway 18. Table 4-? Instrument Approach Minimums Runway Approach Minimums Runway 9 1 Mile Visibility Runway 27 1 Mile Visibility Runway 18 1 Mile Visibility Runway 36 3/4 Mile Visibility Source: FAA IMM Instrument Approach Charts 4.2.2.7. Weather Influences Weather data obtained from the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) identified that IFR conditions (ceilings less than 1,000 feet above ground level [AGL] and/or visibility less than 3 miles) occur roughly five percent of the time at IMM. Operational limitations during such times of inclement weather were accounted for in the ASV computation. 4.2.2.8. Airfield Capacity Calculations The airfield capacity calculations in this section were performed using the parameters and assumptions discussed in the previous sections. The calculations also utilize data from the preferred aviation demand forecast, as presented in Chapter 3, Aviation Demand Forecast, for portions of the capacity projections. The following sections outline the hourly capacities in VFR and IFR conditions, as well as the ASV for IMM. For simple, long range planning purposes, the FAA’s Airport Capacity and Delay 150-5060-5 AC provides Figure 2-1. Airport operations are estimated to occur on one runway at a time based on weather; simultaneous runway operations are not expected to occur on a regular basis. Hourly Capacity The hourly VFR capacity for IMM was calculated based on the guidance and procedures in FAA AC 150/5060-5, Airport Capacity and Delay. Hourly VFR capacities were calculated to be 107 operations during VFR conditions and 58 operations during IFR conditions. Annual Service Volume An airport’s ASV is the maximum number of annual operations that can occur at an airport before an assumed reasonable operational delay value is encountered. ASV is calculated based on the existing runway configuration, aircraft mix, and the parameters and assumptions identified herein; and incorporates the hourly VFR and IFR capacities calculated previously. Utilizing this information and the guidance provided in FAA AC 150/5060-5, Airport Capacity and Delay, the ASV for existing conditions at IMM was calculated to be 148,969 operations. It should be noted that the ASV represents the existing airfield capacity in its present configuration, with one east-west runway, one north-south runway, existing taxiway infrastructure, and VOR and GPS instrument approach capabilities. The equation and calculations used to obtain the ASV were taken from the aforementioned AC, and are presented as follows: The weighted hourly capacity (Cw) is an expression of hourly capacity which considers the percentage of time each runway use configuration is used for both VFR and IFR conditions. The Annual/Daily Demand (D) represents the ratio of annual demand to average daily demand during the peak month. The Daily/Hourly Demand (H) represents the ratio of average daily demand to average peak hour demand during the peak month. ASV Equation: Weighted Hourly Capacity (Cw) x Annual/Daily Demand (D) x Daily/Hourly Demand (H) = Annual Service Volume (ASV) IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 64 March 2019 Cw x D x H = ASV → 103.176 x 231.012 x 6.25 = 148,969 The current aviation demand in number of aircraft operations for the base year 2016 at IMM, as presented in Chapter 3, Aviation Demand Forecast, is 36,500 operations. This equals approximately 16.4 percent of the present ASV. Per the FAA, the following guidelines should be used to determine necessary steps as demand reaches designated levels of airfield capacity: • 60 percent of ASV: threshold at which planning for capacity improvements should begin • 80 percent of ASV: threshold at which planning for improvements should be complete and construction should begin 100 percent of ASV: threshold at which the total number of annual operations (demand) that can be accommodated has been reached and capacity-enhancing improvements should be made to avoid extensive delays Table 4-3 & Figure 4-1 illustrate the preferred aviation demand forecast for IMM and its relation to IMM’s ASV. Table 4-3 Annual Service Volume vs. Annual Demand Year Annual Operations Annual Service Volume Percent of Annual Service Volume Base Year 2016 36,500 148,969 24.50% Forecast 2017 36,992 148,969 24.83% 2022 39,556 148,969 26.55% 2027 42,296 148,969 28.40% 2032 45,227 148,969 30.36% 2037 48,361 148,969 32.46% Source: Atkins Analysis, 2018 Figure 4-1 Annual Service Volume vs. Annual Demand Source: Atkins Analysis, 2018 IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 65 March 2019 Based on the calculated relationship between the Airport’s existing ASV and forecast of aviation demand, the airfield is well suited to handle future capacity demands. 4.3. Critical Aircraft An initial step in identifying an airport’s potential runway and taxiway facility requirements is the establishment of fundamental development guidelines for the largest or most critical aircraft anticipated to make use of the airfield facility or portion thereof. Thus, airport improvements are planned and developed according to the established Airport Reference Code (ARC) for the airport and then for each runway. An airport’s ARC is determined by the critical aircraft (aircraft with the widest wingspan, tallest tail, and fastest approach speeds) that consistently makes substantial use of the An airfield’s critical aircraft affects key aspects of airport design, such as the sizing of runways, taxiways/lanes, and the location of aircraft parking areas, hangar facilities, and safety and clearance surfaces. 4.3.1. Fleet Mix FAA Order 5090.3C, Field Formulation of the National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS), defines “substantial use” as 500 or more annual aircraft operations or scheduled commercial service (an operation is classified as either an arrival or departure). The critical aircraft is typically defined as that of making substantial use of the airport. Without an ATCT at IMM, it is difficult to obtain the fleet mix information as reporting is minimal by the FAA. The only data available for the current fleet mix and based aircraft was identified by data from the FAA Traffic Flow Management System Counts (TFMSC) from January 2016 through December 2016. It is important to note that the TFMSC only captures a limited amount of operations at non-towered general aviation airports. Therefore, a significant number of VFR operations go unrecorded in the TFMSC. Despite existing operations being 36,500 only 716 operations were captured in the TFMSC within the queried observation period. For this reason, the TFMSC information is best used as a data sample of operations at IMM in which to infer overall fleet mix. Within the TFMSC data sample, there is no single aircraft that meets the NPIAS substantial use threshold. However, utilizing a family grouping of aircraft employing ADG and AAC to group TFMSC operations, paired with a representative aircraft of that group, an overall fleet mix can be generated for IMM. Table 3-13 represents the Fleet Mix findings for IMM for FY 2016. Table 4-4 Fleet Mix Analysis ADG AAC Representative Aircraft Recorded Operations (TFMSC) % of Total Recorded Operations % Applied to FY 2016 Operations A I Cessna 172 562 78.93% 28,810 A II PC12 - Pilatus PC-12 16 2.25% 820 B I TEX2 - Raytheon Texan 2 50 7.02% 2,563 B II Cessna Citation Encore 68 9.55% 3,486 B III CN35 - CASA CN-235 8 1.12% 410 C II ASTR - IAI Astra 1125 2 0.28% 103 C II GL5T - Bombardier BD-700 Global 5000 2 0.28% 103 D I LJ35 - Bombardier Learjet 35/36 2 0.28% 103 D I GLF5 - Gulfstream V/G500 2 0.28% 103 Total 712 100% 36,500 Source: FAA TFMSC for IMM CY 2016, Atkins Analysis, 2018 The major composition of aircraft that currently operate at IMM include aircraft from ADG/AAC A I, to B-II. A conclusion can be drawn the fleet mix analysis that the representative critical aircraft at IMM will be the IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 66 March 2019 Cessna Citation Encore throughout the planning period. Therefore, Runways 9-27, 18-36, and all supporting taxiways and safety clearances, should to conform to the design standards established by the FAA for B-II aircraft. Based on a review of the aeronautical forecast, the operating conditions of the Airport and the trends in aeronautics on different scales the current ARC at the airport to remain constant throughout the planning period. However, it is anticipated that the mix of B-II aircraft will change with jet aircraft operations increasing throughout the planning period. This is due to the consistently rising population in the airport service area, as well as the rising per capita income. It can be reasoned that airports such as Naples (APF) and Marco Island (MKY) will potentially reach capacity within the planning period due to projected increase of aviation demand in the State of Florida, as well as the constrained nature of the facilities. Both airports are within 30 nautical miles of IMM, and it is anticipated that IMM will likely increase market share of jet aircraft within the planning period. 4.4. Airside Facility Requirements Airport design standards, as established by Change 1 of the FAA’s AC 150/5300-13A, were employed in this Development Plan for developing airport facilities capable of meeting existing and forecast levels of aviation activity. 4.4.1. Runway Design Code (RDC) Runway Design Code (RDC) is a code signifying the design standards to which the runway is to be built. Aircraft Approach Category (AAC), Airplane Design Group (ADG), and approach visibility minimums are combined to form the RDC of a specific runway. The first component of the RDC, AAC, is depicted by a letter. The AAC portion of the RDC relates to the aircraft approach speed, as depicted in Table 4-4. The second component, called the Aircraft Design Group ADG is depicted by a Roman numeral as depicted in Table 4-5. The ADC portion of the RDC relates to the aircraft wingspan or tail height. The third and final component of the RDC relates to the visibility minima for the Runway Approach as depicted in Table 4-6. The existing and future design aircraft for Runways 9-27 and 18-36, Cessna Citation Encore, has an RDC of B-II-4000. 4.4.2. Airport Reference Code (ARC) Per FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Airport Design, the Airport Reference Code (ARC) is a coding system used to relate airport design criteria to the operational based on physical characteristics of the airplanes intended to operate at an airport. Airport improvements are planned and developed per the established ARC for an entire airport, instead of individual runways. The ARC is based on a combination of aircraft approach speed, wingspan, and tail height, as depicted in Tables 4-4 & 4-5. The existing ARC for IMM is B-II. Table 4-5 Aircraft Approach Category Aircraft Approach Category Approach Speed A Approach speed less than 91 knots B Approach speed 91 knots or more but less than 121 knots C Approach speed 121 knots or more but less than 141 knots D Approach speed 141 knots or more but less than 166 knots E Approach speed 166 knots or more Source: FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Prepared by Atkins 2018 IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 67 March 2019 Table 4-6 Airplane Design Group Group # Tail Height (ft [m]) Wingspan (ft [m]) I < 20' (< 6 m) < 49' (< 15 m) II 20' - < 30' (6 m - < 9 m) 49' - < 79' (15 m - < 24 m) III 30' - < 45' (9 m - < 13.5 m) 79' - < 118' (24 m - < 36 m) IV 45' - < 60' (13.5 m - < 18.5 m) 118' - < 171' (36 m - < 52 m) V 60' - < 66' (18.5 m - < 20 m) 171' - < 214' (52 m - < 65 m) VI 66' - < 80' (20 m - < 24.5 m) 214' - < 262' (65 m - < 80 m) Source: FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Prepared by Atkins 2018 Table 4-7 Visibility Minimums RVR (ft) Flight Visibility Category (statute mile) VIS Visual Approach 4000 Lower than 1 mile but not lower than ¾ mile (APV ≥ 3/4 but < 1 mile) 2400 Lower than 3/4 mile but not lower than 1/2 mile (CAT-I PA) 1600 Lower than 1/2 mile but not lower than 1/4 mile (CAT-II PA) 1200 Lower than 1/4 mile (CAT-III PA) Source: FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Prepared by Atkins 2018 4.4.3. Runway Requirements This section of the report will look specifically at IMM’s two runways and their future requirements. Specifically, the runways’ general characteristics will be analyzed with respect to FAA design and safety requirements and conformance with the recommendations. Runway designation and length requirements will also be reviewed. 4.4.3.1. Runway Protective Surfaces Runway Safety Area A Runway Safety Area (RSA) is a graded surface centered on a runway, free of any objects, except for those objects which are ‘fixed by function’. The purpose of the RSA is to protect aircraft in the event of an under- shoot, over-shoot or excursion from a runway during landing or takeoff operations. In case of an emergency, the area must be able to support emergency vehicle operations and maintenance vehicles. The width and length of an RSA depend upon an airport’s ARC and approach visibility minima. The RSA has specific requirements to be graded to slope away from the runway at 1.5 to 5 percent. Meeting RSA requirements is one of the FAA’s highest priorities in maintaining safety at the nation’s airports. Table 4-7 lists the Airport’s existing and future RSA requirements. Table 4-8 Runway ARC Designations & Required Safety Areas Airport Reference Code (ARC) Safety Area Width Safety Area Length Beyond Runway End Runway 9-27 B-II 150’ 300’ Runway 18-36 B-II 150’ 300’ Source: FAA AC 150/5300-13A Change 1, Airport Design & Atkins Analysis 2018 The RSAs for Runway 9-27 and 18-36 currently meet the requirements set forth by the FAA for B-II runways. Any future runway extensions should be planned in accordance with standard RSA surfaces. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 68 March 2019 Runway Object Free Area - ROFA Similar to the RSA, the Runway Object Free Area (ROFA) must be free of objects except those required to support air navigation and ground maneuvering operations. The function of the ROFA, also centered on the runway, is to enhance the safety of aircraft operating on the runway. It is not permissible to park an airplane within the ROFA. The width and length of the ROFA depend upon an airport’s ARC and approach visibility minima. The ROFA does not have specific slope requirements, but the terrain within the ROFA must be smooth and graded to be at or below the edge of the RSA. Table 4-8 notes the ROFA dimensions for IMM: Table 4-9 Runway Object Free Area Runway Airport Reference Code (ARC) Object Free Area Width Object Free Area Length Beyond Runway End Runway 9-27 B-II 500’ 300’ Runway 18-36 B-II 500’ 300’ Source: FAA AC 150/5300-13 Change 1, Airport Design & Atkins Analysis 2018 The ROFA for Runways 9-27 and 18-36 currently meet the requirements set forth by the FAA for B-II runways. Runway Protection Zones A Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) is an area centered symmetrically on an extended runway centerline. The RPZ has a trapezoidal shape and extends prior to each runway end. The RPZ is aimed at enhancing the safety of people and property on the ground by limiting and/or restricting the construction of certain structures within its bounds. This area should be free of land uses that create glare, smoke, or other hazards to air navigation. Also, the construction of residences, fuel-handling facilities, churches, schools, and offices are not recommended in the RPZ. New roadway construction is also required to remain clear of RPZs. The inner and outer widths and the length of an RPZ depend on an airport’s ARC and approach visibility minima. With no proposed reductions in approach with visibility minima the size and dimensions of the existing RPZ’s at IMM are not anticipated to change throughout the planning period. Table 4-9 illustrates the RPZ requirements for B-II ARC’s, along with the future proposed approach minima. Table 4-10 Runway Protection Zones (RPZ's) Approach Visibility Minimums Aircraft Approach Category Length (ft) Inner Width (ft) Outer Width (ft) Approach RPZ Runway 9-27 >1SM B-II 1,000 500 700 Runway 18 >1SM B-II 1,000 500 700 Runway 36 >3/4 SM B-II 1,000 500 1,510 Departure RPZ Runway 9-27 >1SM B-II 1,000 500 700 Runway 18 >1SM B-II 1,000 500 700 Runway 36 >3/4 SM B-II 1,000 500 700 Source: FAA AC 150/5300-13 Change 1, Airport Design & Atkins Analysis 2018 It is recommended by the FAA that an airport operator control the land use within their RPZ’s in order ensure that these areas do not develop in a hazardous or incompatible manner. Currently, the Collier County owns most of the RPZ’s, at IMM however, the Airport does not currently own or maintain easements for portions of IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 69 March 2019 Runway 36’s RPZs. It is proposed that any future development plans incorporate the acquisition of an easement for 6.2 acres of the Runway 36 RPZ which are not within the airport property line. 4.4.3.2. Runway 18-36 The critical aircraft for Runway 18-36 has also been identified as the Cessna Citation Encore with the required ARC design standards of B-II. Runway 18-36 is currently 4,450 feet long and 150 feet wide which conforms to the standard of B-II runway width requirements. Due to the poor condition of the Runway 18-36’s pavement, it is a constant safety and maintenance issue due to the amount of foreign object debris (FOD) that the crumbling pavement produces. Pieces of pavement are likely to be dislodged anywhere on the runway at any time, and safe operations requires constant vigilance on the part of airport operations staff. There is no question that all the runway pavement is in poor condition, and it is recommended that it be rehabilitated as soon as possible. 4.4.3.3. Runway 9-27 As previously identified, the critical aircraft for Runway 9-27 is the Cessna Citation Encore which requires airfield infrastructure design to ARC B-II standards. The runway is currently 5,000 feet long and 100 feet wide which meets the width requirement for an B-II runway. The B-II designation of Runway 9-27 also requires standard lengths and widths for the protective surfaces associated with the runway. 4.4.3.4. Runway Length Runway length requirements are developed based upon the airport role and local conditions. According to FAA AC 150/5325-4B, Runway Length Requirements for Airport Design, recommended runway length is a function of airport elevation (noted in mean sea level- MSL); mean maximum temperature of the hottest month, (degrees Fahrenheit), aircraft maximum takeoff weight (MTOW) (in pounds), number of passenger seats, aircraft engine performance, and the maximum elevation difference in runway longitudinal gradient. A runway length analysis was conducted for Runway 9-27 in accordance with FAA AC 150/5325-4B. This analysis found that due to high ambient temperatures and frequent rainy conditions creating surface contamination, the existing runway length of 5,000 feet is insufficient to accommodate the jets currently operating at the airfield without significant load penalties. Therefore, a runway length of 7,000 feet is recommended in order to accommodate the increasing jet traffic at the airport. Details of this analysis are included in Appendix A. of this report. 4.4.3.5. Runway Designations A runway designation is identified by the whole number nearest the magnetic azimuth of the runway when oriented along the runway centerline as if on approach to that runway end. This number is then rounded off to the nearest unit of ten. Magnetic azimuth is determined by adjusting the geodetic azimuth associated with a runway to compensate for magnetic declination. Magnetic declination is defined as the difference between true north and magnetic north. The value of magnetic declination varies over time and global location. Magnetic declination is a natural process and does periodically require the re-designation of runways. Current information for magnetic declination was derived from the National Geophysical Data Center (NGDC) database in April 2017. Magnetic declination for the Airport’s reference point (ARP) was calculated as being 5.98° west and changing by 0.10° west per year. The true bearing for each runway was identified through the development of the ALP set and its sourced survey data. Using the “west is best – east is least” method for adjusting a bearing for magnetic declination would result in the magnetic bearing and runway designation shown in Table 4-10. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 70 March 2019 Table 4-11 Runway Magnetic Bearing Runway True Bearing Magnetic Declination Magnetic Bearing Runway Designation Required 9 N 88° 12’ 39.36” E 5° 58’ 48'' West 94° 10' 54.681" 9 27 N 268° 12’ 39.36” E 5° 58’ 48'' West 274° 11' 27.36" 27 18 S 178° 12' 6.68'' E 5° 58’ 48'' West 184° 10' 54.68" 18 36 S 358° 12' 6.68'' E 5° 58’ 48'' West 4° 10' 54.68" 36 Source: Atkins Analysis, 2018 Considering the Airport’s runway’s current true bearing and existing magnetic declination, re-designation of the runways is expected to be needed towards the end of the planning period. Runway 9-27 is expected to need re-designation around year 2032, whereas Runway 18-36 is expected to need re-designation around year 2026. It is important to note that magnetic declination can vary over time due to fluctuations in the earth’s magnetic fields. It is critical that the declination be checked on a semi-annual basis and before any runway work requiring marking modifications. 4.4.3.6. Runway Strength The existing runway strength of Single Wheel - 35,000 pounds, Dual Wheel - 60,000 pounds, and 2 Dual Wheels in Tandem of 110,000 pounds should be suitable to support the projected fleet mix throughout the forecast period. Should any runway extension or rehabilitation occur within the forecast period, it is suggested to increase the weight bearing characteristics for the pavement. This will enable IMM to gain operations from larger aircraft, and to not restrict potential operations for the future. 4.4.4. Taxiway Requirements Taxiway Design Group (TDG) was introduced by the FAA with their release of AC 150/5300-13A in 2012. As depicted in Figure 4-2, there are eight TDGs which are determined by aircraft undercarriage (gear) dimensions such as main gear width and the distance between the cockpit and main gear. Table 4-11 presents the Airport’s anticipated critical aircraft during the planning period, along with the associated TDG dimensions. Figure 4-2 FAA AC 150/5300-13A – Taxiway Design Groups (TDGs) Source: FAA AC 150/5300-13A Change 1, Airport Design 2017. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 71 March 2019 Table 4-12 Critical Aircraft & Respective TDG Airplane Design Group Aircraft Manufacture/Model Main Gear Width (ft.) Cockpit to Main Gear (ft.) TDG Cessna Citation Encore 15.5 18.6 2 Source: Atkins Analysis, 2018 4.4.4.1. Full Length Parallel Taxiway Serving Runway 18-36 The northern portion of the current airfield at IMM is only accessible via a parallel taxiway located to the west of Runway 18-36. Taxiing originating from the southern located FBO to Runway 9-27 requires the crossing of Runway 18-36 twice. This has been identified as a safety concern in the Airport’s current layout. Crossing a runway twice allows for an increased chance of incursions during operations. Additionally, such crossing of Runway 18-36 can be seen to decrease capacity due to the additional time needed for taxiing operations. To best mitigate these currently identified issues, there shall be a proposed full length parallel taxiway located to the east of Runway 18-36. This will allow for the free flow of operations from Runway 9-27 to the FBO apron with no runway crossing. The proposed parallel taxiway will connect to the existing Taxiway Bravo and extend south approximately 2,670 feet, with a width of 50 feet. 4.4.4.2. Airfield Lighting Section 2.2.1.4 describes the existing condition of airfield lighting equipment at IMM. In the future, the implementation of an approach lighting system should be considered Runway 9-27. Such a system would create additional safety for aircraft operations during times of inclement weather or poor visibility. Approach lighting systems often coupled with ILS approaches and WAAS enabled GPS approaches include: ALSF-II, ALSF, MALSR, MALS, and ODALS. Each has different lighting configurations and spatial requirements. It should be noted that any future improvements to the airfield should include airfield lighting as necessary. To reduce the overall energy demand of the lighting systems at IMM, LED technologies should be used where able and when practical. 4.4.4.3. Signage Section 2.2.1.5 describes the existing condition of airfield signage equipment at IMM. While no specific recommendations for signage improvement are identified, airfield signage should be expanded and updated as necessary in conjunction with any airfield improvement project. 4.4.4.4. Airfield Marking Section 2.2.1.5 describes the existing condition of airfield markings at IMM. While no specific recommendations for marking improvements are identified, airfield markings should be expanded and updated as necessary in conjunction with any airfield improvement project. 4.5. Landside Facility Requirements 4.5.1. GA Terminal The existing GA terminal is described in Section 2.2.2.1 of this report. Chapter 5 of ACRP Report 113, Guidebook on General Aviation Facility Planning, provides general guidance as to the sizing of general aviation terminals. The primary consideration is that the facility can support the number of pilots, passengers, and visitors which could reasonably be expected during peak hour operations. GA facility sizing can range from 100 to 150 square feet of space per person, which is considered to accommodate the peak hour operations. It was concluded that 100 square feet per person would be adequate for IMM. For planning purposes, the ACRP suggests using a factor of 2.5 people per peak-hour operation (pilots and passengers). However, this factor has been lowered to 1.75 as there are little to no air taxi operations currently occurring with predominantly single engine aircraft operating at IMM. The requirements for the General Aviation Terminal Building can be found in Table 4-12. The Terminal facilities are slated to become deficient in square footage between 2022 and 2027, this deficiency becomes larger over the planning period as the peak hour operations are forecast to increase at IMM. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 72 March 2019 Table 4-13 GA Terminal Building Requirements Base YR Forecast 2016 2022 2027 2032 2037 Peak Hour Operations 16 17 19 20 21 Required General Terminal Building Space (sq ft.) 2800 2975 3325 3500 3850 Current Capacity 3000 3000 3000 3000 3000 Surplus/Deficiency 200 75 325 500 850 Source: Atkins Analysis, 2018 4.5.2. General Aviation Aprons General aviation aprons are areas that provide for the tie-down and storage of aircraft, as well as provide access to terminal and fuel facilities. FAA AC 150/5300-13, Airport Design, provides guidelines for sizing aircraft aprons based on the number of aircraft anticipated to be utilizing the aircraft on a busy day. At IMM, the total operations can be classified in two categories: based aircraft operations and itinerant operations. Aircraft aprons were analyzed across each category in accordance with FAA guidance. One primary apron areas exist at IMM. The South FBO apron is located near the midpoint of Taxiway C and covers an area of approximately 15,400 square yards. This apron is generally intended for use by itinerant aircraft as it is connected to the GA terminal and supports limited hangar access, however some based aircraft utilize this apron for aircraft storage. At present, a total of five based aircraft at IMM are stored at the south FBO apron, representing 8 percent of the based aircraft fleet. For planning purposes, it is reasonable to assume such a utilization rate will continue. The FAA indicates that planning at least 300 square yards for each based aircraft will provide sufficient tie-down space for a mix of aircraft. Using these assumptions, Table 4-13 depicts the based aircraft apron requirements for IMM over the planning period. Itinerant apron space is intended for relatively short-term parking periods, usually less than 24 hours. For the purpose of this study, it is assumed the average itinerant aircraft occupies the apron for five hours. Utilizing the peaking characteristics established in Section 3.6 of this report, recognizing that itinerant operations represent approximately 30 percent of total airport operations, and applying the FAA recommendation of 360 square yards per itinerant aircraft, Table 4-13 identifies the itinerant apron requirements at IMM over the planning period. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 73 March 2019 Table 4-14 GA Apron Requirements Base Year Forecast 2016 2017 2022 2027 2032 2037 Based Aircraft Apron Requirements Total Based Aircraft 52 53 56 60 64 69 Based Aircraft on Apron (15% of total) 4 4 4 5 5 6 Total Based Aircraft Apron Required (sq. yards)1 1,498 1,526 1,613 1,728 1,843 1,987 Itinerant Aircraft Apron Requirements Average Day Peak Hour Operations 16 16 17 19 20 22 Average Day Peak Hour Itinerant Operations 4 4 4 4 4 5 Transient Aircraft Positions Required (5-hr avg stay) 18 18 19 21 22 24 Total Transient Apron Required (sq. yards)1 7,603 7,603 8,078 9,029 9,504 10,454 Total Apron Requirements Total Apron Required (sq. yards)1 9,101 9,130 9,691 10,757 11,347 12,442 Existing Aircraft Apron (sq. yards) 14,600 14,600 14,600 14,600 14,600 14,600 Surplus/Deficiency (sq. yards) 5,499 5,470 4,909 3,843 3,253 2,158 ¹Includes 20% planning buffer. Source: Atkins Analysis, 2018 4.5.3. Aircraft Hangars ACRP Report 113 notes that an airport should plan to accommodate between 75 and 90 percent of based aircraft in hangar facilities. Currently IMM has 58 based aircraft with approximately 34 of those aircraft stored in hangar facilities. The remaining aircraft are stored on the apron, in shade structures, or on turf tie down areas. 4.5.3.1. T-Hangars Future T-hangar requirements will be representative of the type and sophistication of future based aircraft and the preferences of aircraft owners. Existing T-hangar facilities at IMM cater exclusively to small (Group I) aircraft – single aircraft. At present, roughly 30 single engine aircraft are stored in T-hangars accounting for 75 percent of all based single engine aircraft at the Airport, with a small waiting list for T-Hangar facilities. It is reasonable to anticipate that the T-Hangar storage requirement will continue at existing utilization rates, therefore it is forecast that 80 percent of future based single-engine will require T-hangar storage throughout the planning period. Utilizing these assumptions, Table 4-14 projects the need for additional T-hangar units at IMM over the planning period. Table 4-15 T-Hangar Requirements Base Year Forecast 2016 2022 2027 2032 2037 Based Single-Engine Aircraft 38 41 44 47 50 Single-Engine Aircraft Requiring T-Hangar/T-Shed Storage 30 33 35 38 40 Current Capacity (units) 30 30 30 30 30 Surplus/Deficiency 0 3 5 8 10 Source: Atkins, 2018 IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 74 March 2019 4.5.3.2. Conventional Hangars Those single engine aircraft not forecast to be based on the apron or in a T-hangar/T-shed unit are assumed to be based in a conventional hangar. Further it is assumed that all multi-engine and jet aircraft, as well as all rotorcraft, based at the Airport will require storage in a conventional hangar. For planning purposes, the spatial requirements for each aircraft type is as follows: • Single-Engine Aircraft – 1,800 Square Feet • Multi-Engine Aircraft – 3,200 Square Feet • Jet Aircraft – 5,200 Square Feet • Rotorcraft– 3,200 Square Feet Utilizing those planning metrics, Table 4-15 projects the need for conventional hangar space at IMM across the planning period. Table 4-16 Conventional Hangar Requirements Base Year Forecast 2016 2017 2022 2027 2032 2037 Based Multi-Engine Requiring Hangar Space 4 4 4 5 5 5 Based Jet Requiring Hangar Space 4 4 4 5 5 5 Based Helicopter Requiring Hangar Space 4 4 4 5 5 5 Total Aircraft Hangar Space Required (sq. ft.) 45,600 45,600 45,600 57,000 57,000 57,000 Total Existing Hangar Space (sq. ft.) 30,850 30,850 30,850 30,850 30,850 30,850 Surplus / Deficiency (sq. ft.) 14,750 14,750 14,750 26,150 26,150 26,150 Source: Atkins, 2018 4.5.4. Automobile Parking and Access Clearly defined parking areas near an airport’s terminal building and hangar facilities are essential elements of general aviation airports. One primary parking area exists at IMM as described in Section 2.2.2.4 of this report. This includes the GA Terminal / FBO Lot which has 13 standard vehicle spaces and 2 handicap spaces. When summed, the FBO parking lot provides approximately 514 square yards of area, with parking for approximately 15 vehicles. The number of automobile parking spaces required is generally calculated as a function of peak hour users as well as tenant and employee demand. Parking requirements are shown in Table 4-16 Table 4-17 Parking Requirements Base Year Forecast 2016 2017 2022 2027 2032 2037 GA Peak Hour Airport Users 16 16 17 18 20 21 Employees 4 4 5 5 6 6 Simultaneous Parking Area Users 20 20 22 24 26 27 Parking Area Required (sq. yards)1 840 840 924 1,008 1,092 1,134 Existing (sq. yards) 514 514 514 514 514 514 Surplus / Deficiency (sq. yards) 326 326 410 494 578 620 1 Includes 20% planning buffer. Source: Atkins, 2018 ` IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 75 March 2019 4.6. Support Facilities 4.6.1. Security and Fencing The characteristics of the Airport’s existing fencing are described in Section 2.2.2.5 of this report. Currently the Airport has a partial perimeter fence of varying types and heights. However, FAA AC 107-1 provides guidance for perimeter fence line for security purposes and recommends a standard six-feet high, full perimeter fence around airfield facilities with razor wire lining the top in a tiered setup. Consideration should be made to upgrade the existing deteriorating line to meet AC 107-1 acceptable standards. At a minimum any additional fence improvements or additions should match the existing south side fence structure in both height and equipment. Additional gate access may be required in conjunction with any new development on the Airfield. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 76 March 2019 5. Airport Development Plan The primary objective of this chapter is to outline a logical development plan for the Immokalee Regional Airport (IMM), which meets the aviation needs over the planning period as well as satisfies the ultimate development goals of the Collier County Airport Authority (CCAA). The identification of alternatives was completed based on the information presented in the previous chapters of this report in conjunction with reasonable foresight into industry trends and associated facilities. The alternatives were evaluated and the result is a selected development plan. The alternatives and selected development plan is based on the following general criteria in Table 5-1. Table 5-1 Evaluation Criteria for Selected Development Plan Criteria Description Operational Any selected development plan should be capable of meeting the Airport’s facility needs as they have been identified for the planning period. Further, preferred plans must resolve any existing or future deficiencies as they relate to Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) design and safety criteria. Environmental Airport growth and expansion has the potential to impact the Airport’s environs. The selected development plan should seek to minimize environmental impacts in the areas outside the Airport’s boundaries. The preferred development plan should also recognize sensitive environmental features that may be impacted by the development plan. Cost Some alternatives may result in excessive costs as a result of expansive construction, acquisition, or other development and/or environmental requirements. For a preferred development plan to best serve the Airport and the community it must satisfy development needs at reasonable costs. Feasibility The selected development plan should be capable of being implemented. Therefore, it must be acceptable to the FAA, CCAA, local governments, and the community served by the Airport. The preferred development plan should proceed along a path that supports the area’s long-term economic development and diversification objectives. Source: Atkins Analysis, 2018 5.1. Airport Development Alternatives and Concepts The airport development plan outlines the necessary development and facility requirements to not only meet the forecast demand, but to ultimately ensure competitiveness and financial viability for the Airport, and to provide the Airport and surrounding community with the greatest overall benefit. The following sections provide a description of the future airfield development alternatives at IMM. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 77 March 2019 5.1.1. Airfield Alternatives Airfield facilities are, by their very nature, the focal point of an airport complex. Because of their role, and the fact that they physically dominate a great deal of the airport’s property, airfield facility needs are often the most critical factor in the determination of viable airport development alternatives. The runway system requires the greatest commitment of land area and is often the greatest influence on the identification and development of other airport facilities. The potential for physical expansion of an airport to accommodate airfield development is the primary factor that determines development in the long term. The runway and taxiway system directly affects the efficiency of aircraft movements both on the ground and in the surrounding airspace - not only in the terminal area, but in regional airspace as well. It also limits the ability of the Airport to handle certain aircraft, which can directly affect the types of air service the airport can offer or accommodate. In addition, the efficiency of aircraft movements is also affected by local approach and departure procedures, which can be influenced by local restrictions due to noise, airspace congestion, or other considerations. The previous airport master planning effort included an extremely focused landside development visioning process for the airport. This visioning process included planning for storm water and significant roadway infrastructure on the north and east sides of the airport, as well as varied detailed landside and airside development alternatives for each of the areas. CCAA has effectively utilized this document as guiding criteria since its inception. This scope of this ALP update was to update the findings in the previous master planning effort to reflect today’s market conditions, regulatory environment and depict the airport’s as-built conditions. Therefore, the focus of the alternatives analysis of this Airport Layout Plan update is on the airfield facilities which are required within the forecast period. Land use, landside roadway infrastructure, and drainage planning which falls outside of what is required from a demand/capacity need is carried over from the previous Airport Master Plan and will remain relatively unchanged. 5.1.1.1. Required and Recommended Airfield Improvements The airfield’s existing configuration accommodates the existing aircraft fleet mix and traffic levels with the use of two bi-directional runways, Runway 9-27 and Runway 18-36, and supporting taxiways and taxi lanes. However, the airfield’s volume and fleet mix is estimated to slowly increase and change during the forecast period. The previous chapters identified areas for improvement on the airfield to mitigate capacity issues while encouraging growth and promoting safety. These elements are discussed in detail in the following sections. Runways Runway 9-27 is the primary runway at IMM and is approximately 5,000 feet long by 100 feet wide. It is anticipated that this runway will continue to serve as the primary runway at the Airport and accommodate most corporate and general aviation (GA) aircraft operations. The Runway length of 5,000 feet currently serves most of the needs of the airport and the surrounding community. However, within the forecast period if current trends continue, operations by jet aircraft are anticipated to increase. As outlined in Appendix A. Runway Length Analysis, additional runway length may warranted within the forecast period, it is recommended that the airport plan for the eventual extension of Runway 9-27 of at least 2,000 feet to accommodate future jet traffic operational growth. An ultimate runway extension of up to a total 10,000 feet length has been identified on previous Airport Master Plan efforts and been identified as a priority by local community development organizations. Therefore, an ultimate Runway 9-27 length of 10,000 feet has been proposed reserve the associated land from inhibiting development. The airport sponsor understands a runway length of 10,000 feet is not justified within the planning period. The secondary runway at IMM, Runway 18-31, is approximately 4,550 feet long by 150 feet wide and is made up of original World War II era pavement in poor condition. It is recommended that this runway be rehabilitated to a width of 100 feet supportive of ARC B-II aircraft and continue to support operations by recreational and corporate GA aircraft in crosswind conditions. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 78 March 2019 A turf runway is recommended based on the interest expressed from both the agricultural companies based at IMM as well as the GA community that utilizes the facility. The proposed location, north of Runway 9-27, will provide sufficient area for the turf runway and will serve as a cost-efficient alternative to a paved runway. Taxiways At present, the lack of a full length parallel taxiway to the east of Runway 18 is a safety hazard, and significantly increases taxi time at the airport. Full-length parallel taxiways in conjunction with adequate entrance and exit taxiways on a runway are necessary to obtain the highest level of airfield capacity and safety. As a safety measure, it is recommended that Taxiway C be extended to Taxiway B to provide Runway 18-36 with an east side full length parallel taxiway to reduce runway crossings. Taxiway Fillets Due to the recently issued update to the AC 150/5300-13A, taxiway fillet geometry has been re-modeled in terms of value engineering. The most recent taxiway remodeling, Taxiway B, has all appropriate taxiway fillet geometry current to the updated AC. Taxiways A & C have non-compliant fillet geometry, and it is suggested that airfield taxiway improvements occur to have all taxiway geometry comply with the FAA AC. 5.1.1.2. Proposed Airfield Improvements Some airfield improvements have been proposed at the Airport to enhance the existing aeronautical capacity of the airfield and make available taxiway accessible land for future aviation related development interest. Additional airfield facilities should be planned to represent the ultimate development goals of the Airport. While these ultimate airfield development initiatives may not be justified for immediate implementation, planning for their eventual implementation serves to preserve the required land area for such improvements and guides the creation of development concepts for the other functional areas of the airport property. The property owned by the airport located north of Runway 9-27 should be developed in a way to capitalize on potential airside development opportunities. Airport has sufficient land between North of Runway 9-27 to allow for ultimate taxiway development, while still maintaining the recommended 400’ separation between the taxiway and Runway 9-27 set forth for ARC D-III airfields. A future parallel taxiway will provide airside access for approximately 524 acres of undeveloped property north of Runway 9-27. A proposed ultimate runway length of 10,000 feet will have all appropriate taxiway accommodations, where Taxiway B will be extended down to the ultimate runway end as well as the proposed north side taxiway will accommodate the ultimate runway end as well. Local economic development agencies note that there are significant development opportunities at IMM with many large areas of vacant and underutilized land. Future development at IMM has the potential to increase the size and frequency of certain types of large aircraft operations such as cargo and air taxi. Therefore, it is prudent to evaluate development alternatives which may attract this type of operator. 5.1.1.3. Alternative 1 Airfield Alternative 1 is depicted in Figure 5-1. Components of this alternative were proposed in the previous master plan and there was interest expressed in re-evaluating this alternative within this mater planning effort. Alternative 1 proposes a 5,000-foot runway extension and runway widening effort for resulting in a future 10,000 foot by 150-foot-wide Runway 9-27. This alternative would allow the largest aircraft operators to operate at IMM on hot and rainy days. Airfield Alternative 1 also calls for the construction of a parallel Taxiway C to Runway 18-36 on the east side of the runway providing a fully linked airfield taxiway system without runway crossings. Also, by constructing a full length parallel taxiway north of Runway 9-27, this development initiative would make vacant land on the north side of the airfield accessible and available for airside development. This alternative would require the acquisition of approximately 184 acres of property to east of the airport. While this alternative does allow for the maximum possible utility at IMM, the layout is considered operationally excessive within the forecast period. Although the area considered for the Runway extension is relatively flat and vacant of existing development, the costs associated with this alternative would be extremely large considering the amount of property to be acquired, as well as significant wetland mitigation IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 79 March 2019 which would need to occur. At the current level of activity at IMM, airfield development on this scale is not justifiable. Finally, ILS equipment required to support a precision approach on Runway 27 is relatively expensive and rarely eligible for funding at GA facilities. Key Benefits of Alternative 1 include: • A 10,000-foot Runway 9-27 would accommodate most if not all commercial service aircraft in difficult weather and operating conditions. • A full-length Taxiway C would provide significant safety improvements by reducing runway crossings and a 20 percent reduction in taxi time from the Runway 27 end. • Precision approach would allow for operations in the lowest weather minimums. • Disadvantages of Alternative 1: • Significant environmental impacts requiring mitigation of the wetland areas surrounding the runway extension. • Substantial costs associated with development, which would not currently be eligible for Airport Improvement Program funding. • Requires significant property acquisition. • Due to changes in RPZ guidance and land use, the proposed Future Airpark Blvd would require a significant re-route when compared to the previous master planning visioning process, requiring additional property acquisition. PLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPL PLPLPLPLFEFEFEFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFPL FPL FPL FPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLTAXIWAY CHARLIE EXTENSION~2,400' LENGTH~50' WIDEPROPOSEDTAXIWAY DRUNWAY 27 EXTENSION- 5,000' EXTENSION(10,000' TOTAL LENGTH), 100' WIDERPZRPZRPZRPZRPZRPZTAXIWAY B EXTENSIONULTIMATE FULL LENGTH PARALLEL TAXIWAYFUTURE AIRPARK BOULEVARD EXTENSIONFUTURE PERIMETER ROADImmokalee Regional AirportAirport Layout Plan UpdateFigure5-1Alternative 1 IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 81 March 2019 5.1.1.4. Alternative 2 Alternative 2 is depicted in Figure 5-2. This alternative call for a 2,000-foot runway extension to Runway 9- 27. This alternative is proposed to have a non-precision instrument approach with minimums greater than ¾ statute mile, but less than one mile. This increase in minimums from precision approach criteria in Alternative 1 allows for a significant reduction in the size and shape of the Approach RPZ and therefore a reduced property acquisition. This alternative provides a full length parallel taxiway C to the east of Runway 18-36. Due to the recent runway decoupling process, the airfield no longer requires a Runway Visual Zone (RVZ) clear area. By relocating the drag strip facilities, Alternative 2 would make available land on the airfields interior accessible and available for development. Key Benefits of Alternative 2 include: • A 7,000-foot Runway 9-27 would accommodate the anticipated fleet mix throughout the forecast period. • A full-length Taxiway C would provide a 20 percent reduction in taxi time from the Runway 27 end. • This development concept would provide a fully linked airfield taxiway system without runway crossings, significantly increasing safety. • Makes underutilized property in the central portion of the airport accessible and viable for development. • Reduced property acquisition required (acres) when compared to alternative 1 • Reduction in required approach minimums when compared to existing airport conditions. Disadvantages of Alternative 2: • Alternative 2 Roadway would have environmental impacts requiring mitigation of the wetland area in the central portion of the airport to be addressed. • A non-precision approach would not allow for approaches when minimums were lower than ¾ statute mile. 5.1.1.5. Alternative 3 Alternative 3 is depicted in Figure 5-3. Alternative 3, like Alternative 2 also calls for a 2000’ Runway extension to Runway 9-27 for a total runway length of 7,000 feet by 100 feet. Runway 27 is planned to support a non-precision instrument approach to with minimums greater than or equal to ¾ statue mile but less than one statue mile. This alternative provides a future full length parallel Taxiway C for significant taxi time savings maneuvering on a fully connected taxiway system. In addition, a turf runway will be proposed north of Runway 9-27. PLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPL PLPLPLPLFEFEFEFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLTAXIWAY CHARLIE EXTENSION~2,400' LENGTH~50' WIDERUNWAY 27 EXTENSION- 2,000' EXTENSION(7,000' TOTAL LENGTH), 100' WIDETAXIWAY B EXTENSIONULTIMATE FULL LENGTH PARALLEL TAXIWAYFUTURE AIRPARK BOULEVARD EXTENSIONImmokalee Regional AirportAirport Layout Plan UpdateFigure5-2Alternative 2 PLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPL PLPLPLFEFEFEFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLTAXIWAY CHARLIE EXTENSION~2,400' LENGTH~50' WIDERUNWAY 27 EXTENSION- 2,000' EXTENSION(7,000' TOTAL LENGTH), 100' WIDEPROPOSED TURF RUNWAY-3,000' LENGTH, 75' WIDETAXIWAY B EXTENSIONFUTURE AIRPARK BOULEVARD EXTENSIONImmokalee Regional AirportAirport Layout Plan UpdateFigurex-xAlternative 3 IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 84 March 2019 Key Benefits of Alternative 3 include: • A 7,000-foot Runway 9-27 would accommodate the anticipated fleet mix throughout the forecast period. • A cross field Taxiway C would provide a 30 percent reduction in taxi time from the Runway 27 end. • This development concept would provide a fully linked airfield taxiway system without runway crossings, significantly increasing safety. • Minimal wetland and other environmental impacts • Reduction in required approach minimums when compared to existing airport conditions. Disadvantages of Alternative 3: • A non-precision approach would not allow for approaches when minimums were lower than ¾ statute mile. • Requires additional property purchase- Approximately 11 acres • Does not capitalize on internal developable areas 5.1.1.6. Preferred Airfield Development Alternative Based on a detailed review topographic conditions, nearby land uses and property types, as well as environmental constrains, Airfield Alternative 2 was identified as the preferred airfield development alternative as it is anticipated to meet the ultimate operational needs of the Airport at the lowest cost and least environmental impact. The future extension of Airpark Boulevard will allow for future aviation development east of future Taxiway C. However, it was decided to add a parallel taxiway north of Runway 9- 27 as depicted in Airfield Development Alternative 1. This feature allows the operator to maximize the value of developable property north of Runway 9-27 by providing airside access to this area. Northern partial parallel taxiway is shown as an Ultimate development, in the preferred alternative as it makes available approximately 524 acres of aviation development property to the north of Runway 9-27. While considering the timeline for the development listed above, each will be sorted out into future and ultimate. In regard to the future development, this will include the Runway 9-27 extension to a total length of 7,000 feet. The Airpark Boulevard will be within the future timeline to further open the underutilized land for airside and landside development. The extension of Taxiway C to Taxiway B is key in improving the overall capacity of the airport and to rid of several runway crossings during taxi operations. The ultimate development will include the proposed 10,000-foot runway, with associated full length parallel taxiway for Runway 9-27 which will be placed to the north of the runway. This will allow for the airside and landside development of the northern portion of IMM. 5.2. Future Airport Land Use Concept As a preliminary guideline for the creation of airside development alternatives for IMM, a conceptual on- airport land use map was created to highlight the general development areas for each functional airport area. The on-airport land use concept was created after thorough review and consideration by CCAA staff. The concept incorporates criteria designed to protect approach/departure paths, airfield safety areas, and Part 77 surfaces; limit environmental impacts, and enhance compatible land use near the Airport. Figure 5-4 depicts the on-airport land use plan for IMM which serves as a general framework for the location of future landside facilities and portrays a realistic vision of the Airport’s unrestricted growth plans. Future property acquisitions are illustrated in the IMM land use concept so that it may service as a long-range PLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPL PL PL PLPL PLPLPLPLPLPLPLFPLFPLFPLImmokalee Regional AirportAirport Layout Plan UpdateFigure5-4Airport Land Use PlanON - AIRPORT LAND USEAIRFIELD USEAIRPORT COMPATIBLENON-AVIATION DEVELOPMENTAVIATION DEVELOPMENTDEVELOPMENT RESTRICTED IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 86 March 2019 planning tool. The following on-airport land uses were considered and included in the development of the Future on-airport land use plan for IMM: • Future Airport Compatible Non-Aviation Development • Development Restricted Areas • Future Airfield Use • Future Aviation Development • FBO Relocation/Development 5.3. Preferred Airport Development Concept The preferred airport development concept serves as a graphical depiction of the unrestricted development of the IMM airport which is consistent with the established airside development and on airport land use plan established as part of this planning process. Specific development represented in the preferred development concept is representative of the programmed use of the area and is designed to meet safety standards consistent with its purpose. Figure 5-5 presents the preferred airport development concept for IMM which will serve as the basis for what is depicted on the Airport Layout Plan documents for the Airport and submitted to the FAA and FDOT for concurrence and approval at later stages in this project. PLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPL PLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPL PLPLPLPLImmokalee Regional AirportAirport Layout Plan UpdateFigure5-5PREFERRED AIRFIELDDEVELOPMENT PLAN IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 88 March 2019 6. Development Phasing and Capital Improvement Program 6.1. Introduction The preceding chapters have outlined the improvements necessary for the Immokalee Regional Airport (IMM) to facilitate the forecast levels of aviation demand and meet the general development goals of the Collier County Airport Authority (CCAA) within the forecast period and beyond. As has been identified a series of facility improvements will be required within the next twenty years to provide additional airport capacity and facilitate future forecasted levels of aeronautical activity. The purpose of this chapter is to provide cost estimates for phased development through the planning period, examine funding sources on the federal, state, and local levels, summarize capital needs at Immokalee Regional Airport (IMM). The individual projects included in the overall airport development plan form the basis of the capital improvement program (CIP) for the Airport. Additionally, the proposed improvements reflect strategic development initiatives intended to maximize the utilization of the Airport. Although the CIP includes projects which support the facility’s planned growth objectives over the next 20-years and beyond. This plan should be periodically reviewed and updated to reflect existing airport needs, as well as progress completed. As part of the development process, project phasing and cost estimate are developed and included in the CIP to manage and plan for the implementation requirements associated with the development projects. 6.2. Sources of Funding Financing for capital improvements comes from several sources. Contributors to the airport’s development from its users, through a system of user taxes, lease rents, fees and other chargers. These sources include not only the rate and chargers for airport use improved by IMM, but also federal airport improvement programs and passenger facility charges. The following paragraphs outline the key sources for funding. 6.2.1. Airport Improvement Program The Airport Improvement Program (AIP) has been providing federal grants for airport development and planning since the passage of the Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982. AIP funding is typically spent on projects that support aircraft operations such as runways, taxiways, aprons, noise abatement, land purchase, and safety or emergency equipment. The funds obligated for the AIP are drawn from the Airport and Airway Trust Fund (hereafter referred to as the trust fund), which is supported by a variety of user fees and fuel taxes. The AIP is one of four major sources of airport capital development funding for general aviation airports. The other sources are tax exempt bonds, state and local grants, and airport operating revenue. Different airports use different combinations of these sources depending on the individual airport’s financial situation and the type of project being considered. Small airports are more dependent on AIP grants than large or medium-sized airports. The larger airports, whose projects tend to be much costlier, are more likely to participate in the tax-exempt bond market or finance capital development projects with PFCs. The multi-year authorization of the AIP under the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 enacted on February 14, 2012 authorized appropriations to the FAA from Fiscal Year 2012 through Fiscal Year 2015. Since then, a series of short-term extensions has authorized and provided funding for AIP, most recently since October 1, 2017, FAA has operated under the short-term extension enacted under the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018. The Consolidated Appropriations Act extended FAA's funding and authority through September 30, 2018. The AIP issues that have been considered during the ongoing debate regarding the reauthorization of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) include the national level of need for airport development and the appropriate AIP funding level; the appropriate federal role in airport development; the criteria for the distribution of funding across airports of different types and sizes; the IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 89 March 2019 sufficiency of AIP discretionary funding, especially for major capacity enhancing projects; airport privatization; defederalization of large airports; and the use and tax treatment of airport bonds. Under the AIP program the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) can contribute a portion of the capital costs for airport development. This portion ranges from 75 percent of eligible projects at large and medium hub primary commercial service, to 95 percent funding of eligible projects for small hub primary commercial service and non-hub commercial service, reliever, and general aviation airports. IMM is typically eligible for 90 to 95 percent grant funding for eligible projects from the AIP depending on the type of capital project. Table 6-1 provides examples of eligible versus ineligible AIP projects. Table 6-1 Eligible and Ineligible AIP Projects Eligible Projects Ineligible Projects Runway or Taxiway construction/rehabilitation Maintenance equipment and vehicles2 Apron construction/rehabilitation Office and office equipment Airfield lighting or signage Fuel farms¹ Airfield drainage Landscaping Land acquisition Artworks Weather observation stations (AWOS) Aircraft hangars¹ NAVAIDs such as REILs and PAPIs Industrial park development Planning studies or Airport layout plans (ALPs) Marketing plans Environmental studies Training Safety area improvements Improvements for commercial enterprises Access roads only located on airport property Maintenance or repairs of buildings Notes: ¹May be eligible. Source: Airport Improvement Program Handbook. Prepared by: Atkins, 2018 6.2.1.1. Discretionary Funding IMM is also eligible for discretionary funds, which are of two types. One type is discretionary set-aside funds which are designed to achieve specified funding minimums: 1) an amount equal to 31 percent of the discretionary fund is reserved for noise compatibility planning and implementing noise compatibility programs. Such minimums can be met with apportioned or discretionary funds; 2) four percent of the discretionary fund is used for the Military Airport Program (MAP). The second type of discretionary funding consists of those funds remaining after the apportionments are made and the set-asides are accommodated. Of these remaining funds, 75 percent, known as capacity/safety/security/noise (C/S/S/N), is to be used for preserving and enhancing capacity, safety, and security, at primary and reliever airports. The remaining 25 percent, known as remaining or pure discretionary, may be used for any eligible project at any airport. While the discretionary funds can cover a large portion of the capital development of an airport, there are limited funds available through the AIP. As such, an application for AIP discretionary funds must be submitted to the FAA, who will prioritize these applications against other projects in the southern region. Currently, the projects that receive the highest priority are those associated with C/S/S/N. Unlike AIP entitlement funds, availability of discretionary funds to IMM is not certain on an annual basis, as discretionary funding varies from year to year. 6.2.2. State Funding The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) annually funds a state–sponsored airport development program supported by statewide aviation fuel taxes. The program generates over $100 million per year to assist publicly-owned and operated Florida airports. The FDOT will participate in projects not funded with IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 90 March 2019 FAA monies on 80-20 basis for general aviation service airports, depending upon the nature and eligibility requirements of the projects. The state will also participate with federal and local agencies on a project on a 90 percent federal, 5 percent state, and 5 percent local share basis. Typically, projects funded through this aviation development program have been developed on a pay-as-you-go basis. FDOT also provides interest free loans for 75 percent of the cost of the airport land purchases for both commercial service and general aviation airports. These loans are to be repaid when federal funds become available or in 10 years, whichever comes first. FDOT has developed a program to manage capital improvement programs in conjunction with the FAA, the Joint Automated Capital Improvement Program (JACIP), as a tool to assist airports in coordinating their capital improvement program with the FAA and FDOT. FDOT uses the projects included in the JACIP to prioritize projects into the FDOT Work Program. The Work Program includes five years of projects that have been approved for funding if funds are approved by the Legislature for the current year. 6.2.3. Local Funding The Collier County Airport Authority is a division of the local government, and is overseen by the Collier County Board of Commissioners. The CCAA’s financial statements are combined, with those of Collier County. The local Collier County share of projects have historically been covered by general fund transfers from Collier County, however local matching also can be funded through excess airport operating revenue. Small general aviation airports such as IMM typically are unable to create significant revenues, therefore large-scale capital project matching through general fund transfers is routine. It is a priority for the CCAA to generate airport revenues greater than operating expenses to lessen the Airport Authority's reliance on Collier County General Fund transfers for capital improvement projects. 6.2.4. Third Party Development Third Party Development is a funding source which private entities share in the cost of developing on airport facilities. Frequently this type of funding is attracted by a project which has the potential to make revenue, such as aeronautical (hangars, FBO’s) or non-aeronautical business facilities which require land leases for development. Third party funding does not typically occur for public use facilities like airside improvements (runways, taxiways, NAVAIDS). This type of development is typically structured using long term leases, and after the lease period has ended, the development and facilities within the lease reverts to airport ownership. This type of development allows the airport to develop additional airport assets and facilities while minimizing the impact to CCAA operating budgets. Typically projects which attract Third Party Developers are those which have a strong potential to generate revenue stream and have prepared sites which can quickly accommodate development. To make airport property the most conducive for third party development it is recommended that proper land use allocation and infrastructure development occurs to effectively market and recruit third party investment opportunities. This requires investment from the airport operator in projects like site preparation, and the addition of utilities and or roadway access. The preferred alternative phasing focuses near term on the most readily developable sites adjacent to Airpark Boulevard for airside and landside development opportunities. 6.2.5. Funding Sources – Other Several federal assistance-funding programs (other than FAA) are available to Airports. It is important to note that the availability or amount of funds from any of these sources cited is not predictable on an annual basis for inclusion into this analysis. These include the following: • U.S. Congressional Line Item Appropriations - It is not uncommon for commercial airports to seek funding assistance through their local congressional representative. Through lobbying efforts, the U.S. Congress annually appropriates Federal (non-AIP) funds for airport development, which become the responsibility of the FAA to administer to the recipient airports. • Economic Development Assistance Grants (EDA) - Managed by the US Department of Commerce, this program provides grants available to finance industrial park development. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 91 March 2019 • Florida Economic Development Transportation Fund Agency - Administered by Enterprise Florida, Incorporated, this program provides funding to local governments for transportation projects serving as an inducement for a company’s Florida location, retention, or expansion project. • Florida Small Cities Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) - Available through the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA), the purpose of this program is to provide grants to eligible jurisdictions to provide infrastructure improvements which specific businesses need to create new jobs, and provide eligible jurisdictions with grants which are used for loans to new or expanding businesses when other sources of financing are not available. • Third Party Development - 6.3. Development Phasing This section applies a general schedule to the proposed airport development projects. The schedule represents a prioritized airport development plan to meet forecast increases in aviation demand and/or economic development initiatives. Projects that appear in the first phase are of greatest importance and have the lease tolerance for delay. Additionally, some projects included in an early phase may be a prerequisite for other planned improvements in a later phase, or are vital first steps in securing tenants to newly developable areas. The development phasing for IMM has been divided into four phases as follows: • Phase I: 2018-2023 • Phase II: 2023-2028 • Phase III: 2028-2038 • Phase IV: Beyond 2038 The phasing of individual projects should undergo periodic review to determine the need for changes based upon variation in forecast demand, available funding, economic conditions, and/or other factors that influence airport development. It should be noted that other projects not foreseen in this report may be identified in the future and would therefore, likely necessitate changes in the phasing of projects and the overall capital improvement plan (CIP). Further, the projects and overall development identified in the CIP, though tied to a timetable, will only occur once the demand and/or need is demonstrated for each project. Phasing for the projects included in the development plan is shown in Table 6-1. While the project ID numbers are not necessarily intended to reflect prioritization, the lower project ID numbers do relate to projects programmed for the initial implementation phases while the higher numbers reflect later phases. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 92 March 2019 Table 6-1 Airport Capital Improvement Program Project I.D. Proposed Development Program Phase I 2018- 2022 Phase II 2023- 2027 Phase III 2028- 2038 Phase IV Beyond 2038 1 Design Runway 18-36 Rehabilitation  2 Design, Permit, Construct one 10 Unit T-Hangar Complex  3 Design Taxiway C Extension  4 Construction Taxiway C Extension  5 Construct Runway 18-36 Rehabilitation  6 Enhanced Gate Access Control/Monitoring and Airfield Perimeter Fencing  7 Design, Permit & Bid Perimeter Road & Taxiway A Modifications  8 Construct Perimeter Road & Taxiway A Modifications  9 Design, Permitting, Environmental for Airpark Blvd. Extension Phase I, II, & III  10 Construct Airpark Boulevard Extension Phase 1  11 Design, Permit, Construct, Conventional Hangar Facilities  12 Design Airport Operations & Maintenance Facility  13 Construct Airport Operations & Maintenance Facility  14 Taxiway Fillet Enhancement  15 Construct Airport Boulevard Extension (Phase II)  16 Terminal Parking Expansion  17 Terminal Expansion  18 Property Purchase – Runway Extension  19 Design Runway 9-27 Extension to Total 7,000’ Length  20 Runway 9-27 Extension to Total 7,000’ Length  21 Design, Permit, Construct, Conventional Hangar Facilities  22 Design, Permit, Construct, One 10 Unit T-Hangar Complex  23 Construct Airport Boulevard Extension (Phase III)  24 Construct Airport Boulevard Extension (Phase IV)  25 Runway 9-27 Ultimate Extension to Total 10,000’ Length and Associated South Side Taxiway B Extension  26 Full length parallel taxiway to the north of Runway 9-27  Source: Atkins Analysis, 2018 6.4. Cost Estimates Project cost estimates were developed for each project from 2018 through 2038. The project costs were based on projects shown on the airport layout plan (ALP) for IMM. The cost estimates are based on adjusted FY 2018 dollars and are calculated for order-of-magnitude purposes only. Estimated quantities of major items, such as pavement or fill material, were used in conjunction with unit cost values to determine a construction cost. A final project cost was then determined by adding set percentages of the construction cost for mobilization Additionally, a contingency amount of 20 percent of the estimated construction cost was added to account for items that were unknown at the time. Actual construction costs may vary based upon inflation, variations in labor and changes in the type or cost of materials used, as well as other unforeseeable economic factors. Furthermore, federal grant assistance and eligibility may also vary from year to year. Therefore, a review of the development costs and overall capital improvement program (CIP) should occur IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 93 March 2019 as conditions warrant. Cost estimates for each phase are provided in the CIP section of this chapter, with detailed cost estimates provided in Appendix C. 6.5. Development Considerations To determine the approximate funding requirements for the planning period, it is necessary to identify the potential development costs associated with the selected airport development plan. The cost estimates presented in the following pages are based upon 2018 dollars and are calculated for order-of-magnitude purposes only. Actual development costs may vary based upon inflation, variations in labor, and changes in the type or costs of materials used, as well as other unforeseeable economic factors. Furthermore, federal grant assistance and eligibility may also vary from year to year. Therefore, a review of the development costs and overall capital improvement program (CIP) should occur yearly or as conditions warrant. A summary of the development costs for each phase of the 20-year planning period, and beyond, are listed in Table 6-2 below. Table 6-2 Summary of Cost Estimates Development Period Total Phase I (2018-2022) $ 23,108,800 Phase II (2023-2027) $ 8,355,700 Phase III (2028-2038) $15,654,700 Phase IV (Beyond 2038) $38,844,700 Total Estimated Development Costs $ 85,963,900 Source: Atkins Analysis, 2018 6.6. Capital Improvement Program The objective the CIP is to outline the capital improvements for IMM for the next 20 years. The following sections provide a brief description of the projects included in each CIP phase. Special attention has been placed on the first five years of the CIP. These projects slated for immediate or near-term implementation have been identified as critical to the Airport in terms of providing adequate facilities to meet the needs of its users. Phase I projects are provided with additional detail on finding sources and eligibility breakdowns identified. 6.6.1. Phase I Improvements (Five Year CIP) Phase I projects are development initiatives scheduled to take place between 2018 and 2023. Major projects during Phase I include but are not limited to the pavement rehabilitation of Runway 18-36, design and construction of Taxiway C extension, and the completion of an airfield perimeter road. A brief description of those projects, expected time frames, and costs and funding sources are provided in Table 6-3. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 94 March 2019 Table 6-3 Phase I CIP Projects Project I.D. Year Project Title and Description Estimated Total Cost FAA FDOT Local / Other 1 2019 Design, Permit, Construct, One 10 Unit T-Hangar Complex $1,463,200 $0 $0 $1,463,200 This project proposes one 10-unit capacity T-Hangar facility, and associated taxilane be constructed in the developable space north of the existing conventional hangars. 2 2019 Design Runway 18-36 Rehabilitation $440,000 $0 $352,000 $88,000 According to the most recent current FDOT Pavement evaluation Runway 18/36 is considered to be in very poor condition with PCI values ranging from 29 to 35. This project involves the design for the rehabiliation of a 100 foot wide asphalt Runway 18-36. 3 2019 Construct Runway 18-36 Rehabilitation $6,380,000 $0 $5,104,000 $1,276,000 According to the most recent current FDOT Pavement evaluation Runway 18/36 is considered to be in very poor condition with PCI values ranging from 29 to 35. This project involves the construction for the rehabiliation of a 100 foot wide asphalt Runway 18-36. 4 2019 Design Taxiway C Extension $111,300 $100,170 $5,565 $5,565 This project will complete the design and permitting for a 3,000 foot TDG 2 Taxiway C extension. This extension will connect Taxiway B to the existing Taxiway C to increase safety by reducing Runway 18-36 crossings. 5 2019 Enhanced Gate Access Control and Airfield Perimeter Fencing $1,028,800 $0 $823,040 $20,576 Due to current condition of portions of the perimeter fencing, it is advised that fencing identified as insufficient or in poor condition is rehabilitated. Additionally, enhanced gate access control systems with gate monitoring systems are advised to overall strengthen the security of the terminal area. This project includes CCTV cameras, and access control and security systems within the terminal area, as well as approximately 14,500 linear feet upgraded fence line to secure the airport perimeter . Subtotal 2019 $9,423,300 $100,170 $6,284,605 $2,853,341 6 2020 Construction of Taxiway C Extension $1,669,300 $1,502,370 $83,465 $83,465 It is recommended that extending existing Taxiway C by 3,000 feet to connect with existing Taxiway B will allow for capacity enhancement and increased safety. Improvement will reduce runway crossings, and allows for the airside expansion in the airport midfield. This project will include the demolition of the pavement leftover from the closed runway between the proposed Taxiway C and Runway 18-36, and an improved fenceline. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 95 March 2019 Project I.D. Year Project Title and Description Estimated Total Cost FAA FDOT Local / Other 7 2020 Design, Permit & Bid Perimeter Road & Taxiway A Modifications $263,700 $237,330 $13,185 $13,185 This project will design a perimeter road inside the airport fence line. This project will design a single lane paved perimeter road to facilitate vehicular access around the airfield and also utilize portions of Taxiway A, no longer needed after the construction of Taxiway C. Subtotal 2020 $1,933,000 $1,739,700 $96,650 $96,650 8 2020 Construct Perimeter Road & Taxiway A Modifications $3,954,600 $3,559,140 $197,730 $197,730 Currently no perimeter road exists at IMM. This project will construct a single lane perimeter road around the AOA to facilitate CCAA maintenance and operations vehicle traffic. This roadway is proposed to be an unpaved one lane access road unpaved with crushed aggregate. 9 2020 Design,Permitting, Environmental for Airpark Blvd. Extension Phase I, II & III $1,023,200 $0 $818,560 $204,640 The design and permitting for a future northern extension of a Airpark Blvd to create a looped road complex. This roadway is proposed to be a two lane separated drive with street lighting. This design includes additional environmental analysis due to potential wetland impacts. Subtotal 2021 $4,977,800 $3,559,140 $1,016,290 $402,370 10 2022 Construct Airpark Boulevard Extension Phase I $2,019,600 $0 $1,615,680 $403,920 Constructing a northern Airport Boulevard Extension to accommodate both airside and landside development north of the existing terminal area. 11 2022 Design, Permit, Construct, Conventional Hangar Facilities $4,222,400 $0 $0 $4,222,400 This project proposes one 10-unit capacity T-Hangar facility, and associated taxilane be constructed in the developable space north of the existing conventional hangars. with associated parking, apron, and taxilane pavement. Subtotal 2022 $6,242,000 $0 $1,615,680 $4,626,320 12 2023 Design Airport Operations & Maintenance Facility $41,000 $0 $32,800 $8,200 Currently there are no facilities dedicated to Airport Operations and Maintenance . This project proposes the design of operations and maintenance facility adjacent to the existing terminal area to accommodate equipment and staff from CCAA. 13 2023 Construct Airport Operations & Maintenance Facility $491,700 $0 $393,360 $98,340 IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 96 March 2019 Project I.D. Year Project Title and Description Estimated Total Cost FAA FDOT Local / Other Currently there are no facilities dedicated to Airport Operations and Maintenance . This project proposes the design of a 5,000 SQ FT operations and maintenance facility and paved storage yard adjacent to the existing terminal area to accommodate equipment and staff from CCAA. Subtotal 2023 $532,700 $0 $426,160 $106,540 Phase I Total $23,108,800 $5,399,010 $9,439,385 $8,085,221 Source: Atkins Analysis, 2018 6.6.2. Phase II Improvements Phase II projects are those developed initiatives scheduled to take place between 2024 and 2028. Detailed cost breakdowns were not prepared for Phase II initiatives. Some major improvements which are anticipated to occur in this phase include the overall development of the midfield of the airport and addition of hangar facilities. This development will include an access road from the Airpark Boulevard extension to provide access to the proposed airside and landside development within this midfield area. A brief description as well as the estimated total cost of those projects is provided in Table 6-4. Table 6-4 Phase II CIP Projects Project I.D. Year Project Title and Description Estimated Total Cost 14 2025 Taxiway Fillet Enhancement $301,300 This project proposes the construction of modifications of Taxiway C fillets west of Runway 18-36 to upgrade fillets to current design criteria. 15 2026 Construct Airpark Boulevard Extension Phase II $1,889,800 Constructing a northern Airport Boulevard Extension to the northeast to accommodate both landside development north and east of the existing terminal area. 16 2027 Terminal Parking Expansion $70,400 The existing terminal parking area currently has vehicle parking deficiencies. This project proposes a 645 Square yard expansion to the existing terminal area parking lot to allow space and circulation for approximately nine more vehicles 17 2028 Terminal Expansion $808,500 This project proposes a 1000 square foot expansion to the existing terminal facility in order to accommodate for projected space deficiencies. Phase II Total $8,355,700 Source: Atkins Analysis, 2018 6.6.3. Phase III Improvements Phase III projects are those development initiatives scheduled to take place between 2028 and 2038. Detailed cost breakdowns were not prepared for Phase III initiatives. Cost estimates and a brief description of the projects proposed to be executed in Phase III are presented in Table 6-5. Table 6-5 Phase III CIP Projects IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 97 March 2019 Project I.D. Year Project Title and Description Estimated Total Cost 18 2029 Runway 9-27 Extension to Total 7,000’ Length $8,400,000 This project proposes the lengthening of Runway 9-27 to by 2,000 feet to the west. Also included is the widening of the runway by 50 feet for a total runway length and width of of 7,000 feet by 150 feet wide feet. This exension is provided to accomidate forecasted future traffic operational requirements. This project also includes the extension of Taxiway B in order to provide access to the relocated Runway 27 runway end. 19 2031 Design, Permit & Construct, Conventional Hangar Facilities $4,080,200 This project proposes one 10-unit capacity T-Hangar facility, and associated taxilane be constructed in the developable space north of the existing conventional hangars. three 60 x 80 with associated parking 20 2033 Design, Permit, Construct, One 10 Unit T-Hangar Complex $1,291,900 This project proposes one 10-unit capacity T-Hangar facility, and associated taxilane be constructed in the developable space north of the existing conventional hangars on taxiway C. 21 2035 Construct Airpark Boulevard (Phase III) $1,882,600 The constrction of Phase III of Airpark Boulevard will provide access to landiside and airside development areas south of the extended Runway 9/27. 22 2038 Construct Airpark Boulevard (Phase IV) $10,378,700 To finalize the Airpark Boulevard Extension, the Phase IV of Airpark Boulevard aims to connect the north and south of the airfield utilizing an end around raodway east of the Future Runway 27 end. This final phase of Airpark Boulevard will provide roadway access to northside development areas. Phase III Total $15,654,700 Source: Atkins Analysis, 2018 6.6.4. Phase IV Improvements Phase IV projects are considered ultimate development initiatives which are notionally programmed to take place beyond 2038 as is not currently warranted within the planning period. However, it is prudent to depict the preferred ultimate development plan at IMM confirm that the community’s ultimate vision for the airport is documented. These efforts will help to ensure that appropriate actions are taken to preserve the areas required for the ultimate development vision. In Phase IV, developments include extending and widening Runway 9-27 to an ultimate of 10,000’ by 150 feet, creating a full length parallel taxiway to the north of Runway 9-27. A brief description of those projects as well of rough order of magnitude prices are presented in Table 6-6. Table 6-6 Phase IV (Ultimate) CIP Projects IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 98 March 2019 Project I.D. Year Project Title and Description Estimated Total Cost 23 Post 2038 Property Purchase Ultimate Runway Extension $1,290,000 Aquire 300 acres east fo the existing Runway 27 end Ultimate Runway 9- 27 extension efforts. 24 Post 2038 PUH Mitigation for Ultimate Runway Extension $1,500,000 PHU mitigation for Panther Habitat 25 Post 2038 Ultimate Runway 9-27 Extension to Total 10,000’ Length $20,400,000 Not warranted within the planning period, the preservation of the area required to extend Runway 9-27 to a total length of 10,000’ is presented. In addition, the simultaneous Taxiway B extension will take place to allow for appropriate taxiway infrastructure for the extended runway access. 26 Post 2038 Construct full length parallel taxiway north of Runway 9-27 $7,624,000 To provide access to airside development parcels north of Runway 9-27 an ultimate northside full parallel is proposed. Phase IV Total $38,844,700 Source: Atkins Analysis, 2018 6.6.5. Summary The capital improvement program for Immokalee Regional Airport is outlined in this chapter is based on the facility requirements and recommended development initiatives discussed in previous chapters of this Airport Layout Plan update. This is intended to enable the Airport to facilitate its growth potential in the coming decades. The cost estimates developed for these projects are intended for planning and programming only, and actual project costs may vary. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 99 March 2019 7. Airport Layout Plan This chapter is intended to serve as an overview of the Airport Layout Plan (ALP) drawing set required by the FAA for a public use airport such as Immokalee Regional Airport (IMM) to be eligible for federal grant funds available for airport improvement purposes. Generally, the FAA will not provide financial assistance for projects that are not depicted on the ALP. The drawings comprising the ALP illustrate the current (2018) facilities at the IMM and the proposed development in the future. The ALP set has been prepared in conformity with the criteria described in FAA AC 150/5070-6B, Airport Master Plans, FAA AC 150/5300-13, Airport Design, and is adherent to FAA Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) 2.00 ALP checklist and Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) guidelines for airport planning. 7.1. Airport Layout Plan Set The ALP is the primary planning document for the Airport and is a graphic representation, to scale, of existing and proposed Airport facilities, their location, dimensional and clearance data, and the overall infrastructure of the Airport including airside facilities, landside facilities, utilities, and airport property information. The FAA refers to the ALP drawing set when considering grant applications for development assistance and when reviewing potential impacts from off-airport development within the vicinity of the Airport. A reduced size version of the Airport Layout Plan set can be found in Appendix D. The ALP set for IMM includes the following individual drawing sheets: Sheet 1 Cover Sheet Sheet 2 Existing Facilities Sheet Sheet 3 Airport Layout Plan Sheet 4 Terminal Area Plan Sheet 5 Runway 9-27 Inner Portion of the Approach Sheet 6 Runway 18-36 Inner Portion of the Approach Sheet 7 Runway Departure Surface Sheet 8 Airspace Plan – Part 77 Sheet 9 Existing Airport Land Use Map Sheet 10 Airport Property Inventory Map 7.1.1. Existing Facilities The Existing Facilities Sheet provides a detailed view of the existing facilities and condition of the airfield. This sheet provides a plan view of the entire airfield’s existing facilities and equipment overlaid on a high- resolution aerial. This sheet is a graphic representation, to scale, of existing Airport facilities, their location, dimensional and clearance data, and the overall infrastructure of the Airport including runways, taxiways, and aprons. The Existing Facilities sheet is shown as Sheet 2 of 10. 7.1.2. Airport Layout Plan The FAA refers to the ALP when considering grant applications for development assistance and when reviewing potential impacts from off-airport development within the vicinity of the Airport. The ALP is the primary planning document for the Airport and is a graphic representation, to scale, of existing and proposed Airport facilities, their location, dimensional and clearance data, and the overall infrastructure of the Airport including runways, taxiways, and aprons. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 100 March 2019 FAA design requirements that pertain to the Airport and its proposed development have been incorporated into the ALP. Sheet 3 of 10 illustrates the Airport Layout Plan for IMM. 7.1.3. Terminal Area Sheet The terminal area plan presents an enlarged area of the ALP at a reduced scale, usually at 1” =100’, to illustrate the existing and proposed facilities in greater detail. The areas typically shown in a terminal area plan include the terminal building area, corporate hangar areas, publicly accessible and available apron areas, or other airfield development areas of specific interest. Terminal Sheet 1 Terminal Area Sheet depicts the existing development on the south side of the airport adjacent to Taxiway C at a scale of 1” = 100’. This sheet also depicts areas of future aviation development including an apron expansion the addition of 6 conventional hangars, and phased T-hangar development. 7.1.4. Inner Portion of the Approach Plan and Profile Sheets The inner portion of the approach surface drawings examines the existing and ultimate approach surface configurations with respect to the airports airspace environment. Specifically, the analysis conducted in the preparation of these sheets examines the height of every object or structure within the limits of the existing and future approach slopes for the runway to the point where the elevation of the approach surfaces reaches 100 feet above its initial elevation. Object and structure height information was obtained from a variety of sources including the FAA Digital Obstacle File, USGS data, as well as other surveys conducted as part of prior engineering or planning efforts at the airfield. 7.1.5. Airport Airspace Plan – Part 77 FAR Part 77, Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace, prescribes airspace standards which establish criteria for evaluating navigable airspace. Airport imaginary surfaces are established relative to the airport and runways. The size of each imaginary surface is based on the proposed use of the runway and its intended approach slope condition (visual, non-precision, or precision) at each runway end. These imaginary surfaces include the following: • Primary Surface – A rectangular area symmetrically located about the runway centerline and extending 200 feet beyond each runway threshold. The elevation of the primary surface at any point is equal to the nearest point on the runway centerline • Transitional Surface – These surfaces extend outward and upward, perpendicular to the runway centerline, from the edges of the primary and approach surfaces at a slope of 7:1 to a point representing 150 feet above its initial elevation. • Horizontal Surface – An oval shaped, flat area situated 150 feet above the published airport elevation. Its dimensions are determined by swinging arch centered about each runway end and sized based on the runways use. These arcs are then connected by lines of tangent to enclose the area. • Conical Surface – A slopped area extending outwards and upwards from the edges of the horizontal surface at a slope of 20:1 and a horizontal distance of 4,000 feet. • Approach Surfaces – This surface begins at the ends of the primary surface and slopes upward at a predetermined ratio while at the same time flaring out horizontally. The width elevation of the inner most edges of the approach surface are equal to that primary surface in that location. The slope, length and outer width of the approach slope is defined by the type of approaches available to the runway in questions. 7.1.6. Land Use Plan The purpose of the Land Use Map (LUM) is to outline the current and developing areas on and off the Airport. The LUM depicts existing and proposed land uses within the airport property line over the planning period, combined with the existing land use for areas outside of the airport property line. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 101 March 2019 7.1.7. Property Inventory Map The Airport Property Inventory Map shows areas of existing airport sponsor ownership and surrounding property information. The map also shows buildings, aprons, fences, roads, and other features of concern. Tracts are shown for depiction purposes only and this map is not to be used for survey or land acquisition purposes. Property information includes ownership and location. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 102 March 2019 8. Public Involvement The Public Involvement Program (PIP) aims to generate public awareness of the Airport Layout Plan Update project at IMM and to prompt public input. Generating public input will insure the ALP update planning effort meets the stakeholder’s needs. The level of public involvement in airport planning is proportional to the complexity of the planning study and to the degree of public interest. The PIP process for IMM involved public awareness through press releases, information via website and public presentations, and an online feedback process to encourage information sharing between stakeholders and the planning team throughout relevant milestones of the ALP update process. Copies of, meeting minutes, advertisements, surveys, and other elements of the public awareness Campaign are available in Appendix E as the official record of the public involvement program. The project team utilized a variety of forums, such as web online comment forums, press releases, and a public information presentation. The selection of the specific PIP platforms depended heavily on the complexities associated with the airport, the expected public interest in the airport layout plan, and budget considerations. 8.1. CCAA Web Page Project Updates Project materials, and announcements were hosted on the Collier County Airport Authority (CCAA) webpage. This site hosted notifications related to the ALP update process, project deliverables for review, informational and materials, and opportunity to provide project feedback. A link to the CCAA hosted materials is listed below. https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/your-government/divisions-a-e/airport-authority 8.2. Media Announcements Media announcements are important components of the CIP to inform the public of various project milestones, meetings, and circulate project information. Media announcements were made by CCAA staff using various mediums including press releases, website announcements, and newspaper articles. Copies of media announcements are provided in Appendix E. Various media announcement milestones are listed below: • 5/2/2017 Collier County Government Press Release • 5/11/2017 Article in the Immokalee Bulletin • 11/13/2018 Public Presentation, Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency - Immokalee 8.3. Fact Sheets & Project Flyers Educational materials about the Airport Layout Plan update process were available on the project website and at public presentations. These materials were used throughout the project to inform the public of key milestones, project progress, and upcoming meetings. Copies of Fact Sheets, and project flyers are in Appendix E. 8.4. Public Meetings The project team presented at public meeting open to all interested community members on November 15, 2017. This presentation occurred at the regularly scheduled Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency, Immokalee CRA Meeting. The purpose of this meeting was to inform the public of project progress, to solicit input, and gather information for alternatives refinement. Graphics were available for the public to review after the presentation along with comment forms and project handouts. Members of the project team were on hand after the presentation to answer questions and provide information. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 103 March 2019 No public comment cards were turned in after the session. General airport operational questions were raised within the presentation with significant interest the following: • Documentation of actual airport operations at nontowered airports. • Interest in a detailed land use development plan in southern airport regions so assess utility needs and site preparation requirements. • Marketing of airport property to attract business to the region. 8.5. Surveys Two surveys were conducted during the ALP Update process utilizing survey planet online survey platform. Surveys were conducted to collect public comment on at the 30% and 60% project milestones respectively. Detailed information on survey responses are included in Appendix E. • Airport Layout Plan Update - 30% Milestone Public Comment Forum – Posted April 17, 2017 • Airport Layout Plan Update - 60% Milestone Public Comment Forum – Posted October 26, 2017 8.6. Comments (Collection and Reporting) Comments were collected electronically (email/website), during Q&A portion of a public meeting, in writing will be considered formal public comments and will be saved in the project records. Appendices IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 105 March 2019 IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 106 March 2019 Appendix A. Runway Length Analysis FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5325-4B, Runway Length Requirements for Airport Design, states, “Airport authorities working with airport designers and planners should validate future runway demand by identifying the critical design airplanes. It is recommended that the evaluation process assess and verify the airport’s ultimate development plan for realistic changes that could result in future operational limitations to customers. In summary, the goal is to construct an available runway length for new runways or extensions to existing runways that is suitable for the forecasted critical design airplanes.” Federally funded projects require that critical design airplanes have at least 500 or more annual itinerant operations at the airport for an individual airplane or a family grouping of airplanes. In addition to the above-mentioned runway lengthening criteria, AC 150/5325-4B paragraph 306 states, “General Aviation (GA) airports have witnessed an increase use of their primary runway by scheduled airline service and privately-owned business jets. Over the years business jets have proved themselves to be a tremendous asset to corporations by satisfying their executive needs for flexibility in scheduling, speed, and privacy. In response to these types of needs, GA airports that receive regular usage by large airplanes over 12,500 pounds maximum take-off weight (MTOW), in addition to business jets, should provide a runway length comparable to non-GA airports. That is, the extension of an existing runway at a GA airport can be justified by the need to accommodate heavier airplanes on a frequent basis.” A.1. Fleet Mix and Critical Aircraft To evaluate the runway lengths at IMM, data from the FAA Traffic Flow Management SC was utilized to generate a fleet mix and critical aircraft. Table 1 lists the jet fleet mix obtained from an analysis of flightwise.com data. The data analysed captured a sample of the aircraft operations at IMM between February 2012 – February 2017. The FlightWise.com operational analysis, only yields an ARC of A-I which has than 500 operations documented in the data sample. Therefore, the predominant surveyed ARC for IMM is that of a A-I. However, existing operations by larger aircraft (B-I, B-II, B-III, C-II) that require additional runway length are steadily growing at IMM. According to Flightwise.com operations by these types of jet aircraft The jet fleet mix studied in this analysis is outlined in Table 1, along with the Airport Reference Code (ARC), Maximum Take-off Weight (MTOW) for each aircraft. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 107 March 2019 A.2. Surveyed Jet Fleet Mix Aircraft ARC MTOW (lb) Aircraft Type BE40 - Raytheon/Beech Beechjet 400/T-1 B-I 16,100 Jet C25C - Cessna Citation CJ4 B-II 17,110 Jet C501 - Cessna I/SP B-I 12,500 Jet C510 - Cessna Citation Mustang B-I 8,645 Jet C525 - Cessna CitationJet/CJ1 B-I 12,500 Jet C560 - Cessna Citation V/Ultra/Encore B-II 16,630 Jet C56X - Cessna Excel/XLS B-II 20,200 Jet C650 - Cessna III/VI/VII B-II 22,000 Jet C750 - Cessna Citation X B-II 22,000 Jet CL30 - Bombardier (Canadair) Challenger 300 C-II 38,850 Jet EA50 - Eclipse 500 A-I 5,950 Jet GLF4 - Gulfstream IV/G400 D-II 73,200 Jet GLF5 - Gulfstream V/G500 D-III 90,500 Jet LJ31 - Bombardier Learjet 31/A/B C-I 17,700 Jet LJ45 - Bombardier Learjet 45 C-I 21,500 Jet Source: TFMSC 2017-2018, Atkins Analysis, 2018 As stated in the forecast analysis section of this report, TFMSC data is not a comprehensive source for operational data due to database limitations. Therefore, fuel records were analysed for the years 2003 until 2016 to verify the growth of jet operations. These records are indicative of the increase in jet traffic with jet fuel sales (in gallons) growing at an average annual growth rate of 15.5% over the 10-year period, while sales of Avgas sales volumes have remained stagnant. Figure 1 depicts the growth in Jet fuel sales at IMM over for the past 15 years. Figure 1. IMM Fuel Sales history (gallons sold) Source CCAA Records 2017, Atkins Analysis, 2018 0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 120000 140000 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Jet Sales AvGAS Sales IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 108 March 2019 In accordance with AC 150/5325-4B, a family grouping of aircraft was chosen to obtain the future proposed ADG. Being that IMM has shown an increasing number of operations by aircraft larger than 60,000 lbs on a frequent basis, it is suggested that in the future Runway 9-27 be extended to meet the demands of a growing fleet mix. As stated in AC 150-5325-4B, the evaluation process should assess the airport’s ultimate development plan for realistic changes that could result in future operational limitations to customers. Consideration must be given to current operational constraints on existing users, anticipated and committed demand by aircraft that require additional runway length and the estimated future growth of such aircraft types. In addition, the AC states that, “the extension of an existing runway at a GA airport can be justified by the need to accommodate heavier airplanes on a frequent basis.” A.3. Runway Length The proposed runway length for this project is based on criteria established in FAA AC 150/5325-4B, Runway Length Requirements for Airport Design. AC 150/5325-4B uses a five-step procedure to determine recommended runway lengths for a selected list of critical design airplanes. The five steps (somewhat abbreviated) are listed below. 8. Identify the list of critical design airplanes that will make regular use of the proposed runway for an established planning period of at least five years. For federally funded projects, the definition of the term “substantial use” quantifies the term “regular use”. 9. Identify the airplanes that will require the longest runway lengths at MTOW. This will be used to determine the method for establishing the recommended runway length. When the MTOW of listed airplanes is over 60,000 lbs., the recommended runway length is determined according to individual airplanes. 10. Use Table 1-1 in the AC (Table 4 in this document) and the airplanes identified in step #2 to determine the method that will be used for establishing the recommended runway length. MTOW is used because of the significant role played by airplane operating weights in determining runway lengths. 11. Select the recommended runway length from among the various runway lengths generated by step #3 per the process identified in chapters 2, 3, or 4 of the AC, as applicable. 12. Apply any necessary adjustment to the obtained runway length, when instructed by the applicable chapter of the AC, to the runway length generated by step #4 to obtain a final recommended runway length. Adjustments to the length may be necessary for runways with non-zero effective gradients, excessive temperatures, wind conditions, airport elevation, etc. As depicted in Table 2, most of the jet aircraft currently operating at IMM fall within the range of 12,500 pounds to 60,000 pounds. Therefore, it is appropriate to assume a family grouping of aircraft design approach when calculating runway length requirements. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 109 March 2019 A.4. Airplane Weight Categorization for Runway Length Requirements Airplane Weight Category Design Approach Location of Design Guidelines Maximum Certificated Takeoff Weight (MTOW) 12,500 pounds (5,670 kg) or less Approach Speeds less than 30 knots Family grouping of small airplanes Chapter 2; Paragraph 203 Approach Speeds of at least 30 knots but less than 50 knots Family grouping of small airplanes Chapter 2; Paragraph 204 Approach Speeds of 50 knots or more With Less than 10 Passengers Family grouping of small airplanes Chapter 2; Paragraph 205 Figure 2-1 With 10 or more passengers Family grouping of small airplanes Chapter 2; Paragraph 205 Figure 2-2 Over 12,500 pounds (5, 670 kg) but less than 60,000 pounds (27,200 kg) Family grouping of large airplanes Chapter 3; Figures 3-1 or 3-2 1 and Tables 3-1 or 3-2 60,000 pounds (27,200 kg) or more or Regional Jets 2 Individual large airplane Chapter 4; Airplane Manufacturer Websites (Appendix 1) Note 1: When the design airplane's APM show a longer runway length than what is shown in Figure 3-2, use the airplane manufacturer's APM. However, users of an APM are to adhere to the design guidelines found in Chapter 4. Note 2: All regional jets regardless of their MTOW are assigned to the 60,000 pounds (27,200 kg) or more weight category. Source: FAA AC 150/5325-4B Runway Length Requirements for Airport Design. Based on the FAA TFMSC database and fueling trends, there is indication that the number of operations from jet aircraft are increasing, and operations will continue to grow throughout the planning period. Therefore, the runway design curves found in Chapter 3 of AC 150/5325-4B were used to analyse the existing length of Runway 9-27. The design procedure for this aircraft weight category requires the following information: airport elevation above mean sea level (MSL), mean daily maximum temperature of the hottest month at the airport, and the critical design airplanes under evaluation with their respective useful loads. Once this information is obtained is it plotted on a set of performance curves developed by the FAA ffrom FAA-approved airplane flight manuals. The elevation at IMM is 36.5-feet above MSL. The mean daily maximum temperature of the hottest month at the airport is 93.0°F. By plotting this information on the FAA performance curves in AC 150/5325-4B, the following Runway Lengths were obtained. Figure 2 depicts these calculations with Red lines representing FAA example calculations, and blue lines representing conditions at IMM. • In order to accommodate 75% of IMM’s B-II fleet at 60% useful load a runway length of 4,800 feet is required. • In order to accommodate 75 % of the fleet at 90% useful load a runway length of 6,700 feet would be necessary. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 110 March 2019 Figure 2. 75 Percent of Fleet at 60 or 90 Percent Useful Load Source: AC 150/5325-4B, Atkins Analysis, 2018 A.5. Runway Length Adjustments for Contaminated Surface The Runway lengths which are derived from Figure 2 are based on a dry, zero effective gradient runway scenario. Typically, when using AC 150/5325-4B, adjustments are made to the findings to compensate for contaminated and sloping runway surfaces. The effective gradient on Runway 9-27 at Immokalee is extremely small (0.1. %), therefore no adjustment is necessary to combat effective gradient. However, IMM receives on average 49.8 inches of rainfall per year, therefore some of the aircraft which operate at IMM are limited in operational capabilities and payload due to runway surfaces frequently being contaminated by rainfall. Therefore, adjustments have been made to the runway length numbers obtained in Figures 2 and 3 to compensate for runway contaminates. AC 150/5325-4B Section 304.b. defines the methodology for runway length adjustment for wet and slippery runways. This section states “By regulation, the runway lengths for turbojet powered airplanes obtained from the ’90 percent useful load’ curves are also increased by 15 percent or up to 7,000 feet (2,133 meters), whichever is less.” When this 15 percent adjustment is applied to the 6,700-foot recommended runway length for 75 percent at 90 percent useful load calculated in Section 3.3, a length of 7,705 feet is obtained. However, per 150/5300- 4B, the wet and slippery runway adjustment factor is capped at 7,000 feet. Therefore, a future runway length of 7000 at IMM feet is recommended to accommodate the increasing jet traffic at IMM. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 111 March 2019 IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 112 March 2019 Appendix B. Solid Waste & Recycling Plan printed on recycled paper IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT RECYCLING, REUSE, AND WASTE REDUCTION PLAN MAY 2017 Prepared for: Collier County Airport Authority 165 Airpark Boulevard Immokalee, FL 34142 Submitted by: Kessler Consulting, Inc. innovative waste solutions 14620 N. Nebraska Ave., Bldg. D Tampa, FL 33613 Kessler Consulting, Inc. is a member of, or was awarded, the following: This report has been prepared for the use and benefit of the client for the specific purposes identified in the report. The conclusions, observations, and recommendations contained herein attributed to Kessler Consulting, Inc. constitute the opinions of Kessler Consulting. The services provided by Kessler Consulting and this report are not intended for the benefit of any third party and shall not be relied upon by any third party. To the extent that statements, information, and opinions provided by other third parties have been used in the preparation of this report, Kessler Consulting has relied upon the same to be accurate, and for which no assurances are intended and no representations or warranties are made. Kessler Consulting makes no certification and gives no assurances except as explicitly set forth in this report. Copyright 2016, Kessler Consulting, Inc. All rights reserved. i Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan Table of Contents Section 1 Facility Description .................................................................................................. 5 Airport History and Current Use ............................................................................. 5 General Description and History .............................................................. 5 Current Use ............................................................................................... 5 Current Solid Waste Management .......................................................................... 9 County Solid Waste Management System ............................................... 9 CCAA’s Role in MSW Management ........................................................ 10 Airport Solid Waste Activities ................................................................. 11 Airport Recycling Activities ..................................................................... 13 Recycling Drivers .................................................................................... 17 Section 2 Recycling and Solid Waste Audit ........................................................................... 19 MSW Audit............................................................................................................. 19 MSW Composition ................................................................................................. 20 Recycling Audit ...................................................................................................... 20 Material Flow Diagram .......................................................................................... 21 Section 3 Recycling Feasibility ............................................................................................... 24 Technical and Economic Factors and Logistical Constraints ................................. 24 Federal, State, and Local Policies .......................................................................... 25 Section 4 Operation and Maintenance Requirements ......................................................... 26 Section 5 Waste Management Contracts ............................................................................. 27 Current Contracts .................................................................................................. 27 Environmentally Preferable Purchasing ................................................................ 27 Tenant Leases and Service Contracts .................................................................... 27 Funding for Waste Management and Recycling ................................................... 28 Section 6 Potential Cost Savings or Revenue ........................................................................ 29 Section 7 Plan to Minimize Solid Waste Generation ............................................................ 31 Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan Table of Contents ii Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan Airport’s Recycling Program .................................................................................. 31 Policies, Goals, and Objectives .............................................................................. 32 Contracts ............................................................................................................... 32 Capital Improvements ........................................................................................... 32 Conflicts ................................................................................................................. 32 Recycling in New Development Projects .............................................................. 33 Tracking and Reporting ......................................................................................... 33 Future Enhancements ........................................................................................... 34 Re‐evaluation of Constraints ................................................................................. 34 Education and Outreach ....................................................................................... 34 Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan Table of Contents iii Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan Tables Table 1: Building Inventory and Map Key ............................................................................................ 8 Table 2: MSW Container Inventory and Map Key ............................................................................. 11 Table 3: Recycle Container Inventory and Map Key .......................................................................... 14 Table 4: Current MSW Estimates ....................................................................................................... 19 Table 5: Estimate of Recyclable Materials in MSW (% by weight) .................................................... 20 Table 6: Current Recycling Estimates (lb/yr) ..................................................................................... 21 Table 7: Expiration/Renewal Dates for Airport Tenants .................................................................... 27 Figures Figure 1: Relative Diagram of Airport Buildings and Collection Containers. ....................................... 7 Figures 2 & 3: Typical MSW Container Used by Tenants and Roll‐off Used by the Raceway ........... 10 Figure 4: CCAA‐Provided Airside Dumpster (Container #1) .............................................................. 11 Figure 5: Recycling Can at CCAA’s Terminal (Building #1) ................................................................. 13 Figures 6 & 7: FFS Recycling Roll‐Off Container (Outside and Materials Inside) ............................... 15 Figure 8: FFS Baler for HDPE Containers ............................................................................................ 15 Figures 9 & 10: Scrap Metal Collection Containers at GMT and Gulf Connectors ............................ 16 Figure 11: Plastic Totes at SMS for Collecting Scrap Metal ............................................................... 17 Figure 12: MSW Flow Diagram .......................................................................................................... 22 Figure 13: Recycling Flow Diagram .................................................................................................... 23 5 Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan Section 1 Facility Description Airport History and Current Use General Description and History The Immokalee Regional Airport (Airport), is situated on 1,333 acres of land located approximately 35 miles northeast of Naples. The Airport is one of three publicly‐owned general aviation facilities owned by Collier County (County) and managed by the Collier County Airport Authority (CCAA). The Airport was originally a WWII bomber‐training base and was turned over to the county in the 1960s. Shortly after its creation in 1993, the CCAA developed plans to expand and upgrade the runways and airside facilities as well as develop the landside for commercial and industrial use. The Florida Department of Transportation estimates that the Airport has a total local economic impact of almost $2.7 million annually. Current Use The Airport has approximately 36,500 operations per year, 80 percent are local operations and 20 percent are transient. In 2015, the Airport had average monthly fuel sales of 3,328 and 9,710 gallon of gasoline and Jet A, respectively. The Airport is in a designated Florida Rural Enterprise Zone and HUB Empowerment Zone. The Florida Rural Enterprise Zone Program supports economic revitalization in high unemployment or otherwise economically disadvantaged areas within the state by offering tax incentives to businesses located within the Enterprise Zone. The HUBZone Empowerment Contracting Program is a United States Small Business Administration program that provides federal contracting opportunities for qualified small businesses in distressed areas. Additionally, a 60‐acre zone including the Airport and the adjacent Tradeport Technology Park is a designated Foreign Trade Zone (FTZ). The FTZ designation offers companies the convenience of deferring any duties or taxes until the business ships the goods outside of the FTZ.  Airside Activities: the Airport has a variety of general aviation and airside activities. o Private aircraft operations and hangar storage. o Air charter/taxi services. o Glider and sailplane rental services. o Commercial crop duster operations and hangar storage. Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan Section 1: Facility Description 6 Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan o Aerial firefighting operations. o Aircraft detailing services. o County Sheriff’s Office storage and operations. o Drag racing events sponsored by International Hot Rod Association.  Landside Activities: the Airport has a variety of landside tenant and CCAA activities: o CCAA administrative office. o Rental car service. o Steel fabrication and aluminum machining. o Pre‐cast concrete product manufacturing. o Jet engine testing. o Shutter manufacturing. o Small engine repair. General building locations and Airport activities are summarized in Figure 1 and Table 1.1 1 A detailed Airport site plan is provided in other components of the Master Plan. Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan Section 1: Facility Description 7 Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan Figure 1: Relative Diagram of Airport Buildings and Collection Containers. Note: Map is not to scale, but is for general reference only. Refer to Tables 1, 2, and 3 for keys to building and container numbers. Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan Section 1: Facility Description 8 Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan Table 1: Building Inventory and Map Key Building # or Area Tenant(s) Primary Activities 1 CCAA Main airport terminal 2 Private owners T‐hanger storage 3 Private owners T‐hanger storage 4 Private owners T‐hanger storage 5 Fletcher Flying Service Hanger storage and airplane maintenance 6 Collier County Sheriff’s Office Warehouse storage and operations Immokalee Raceway Storage 7 Greg Shepard Storage 8 Fletcher Flying Service Resting area for pilots, storage 9 Salazar Machine & Steel Storage 10 Global Manufacturing Technology Aluminum machining Gulf Connectors Electrical parts machining Automotive Repair Center Small engine refurbishing Toy’s Auto Repair Auto mechanic 11 Wholesale Shutters of Southwest Florida Shutter manufacturing and assembly 12 Greg Shepard Hanger storage 13 Greg Shepard Hanger storage 14 Private owners Hanger storage 15 Collier County Public Utilities Water treatment plant 16 Three Mayhoods Hanger storage 17 Salazar Machine & Steel Steel manufacturing 18 Turbo Services Jet testing facility 19 Tellus Pre‐fab concrete wall fabrication Pad south of Runway 18/36 Fletcher Flying Service Staging area for crop dusting Abandoned Runway 4/22 Immokalee Raceway Hosts public drag race events on weekends Public observation area Collier County Parks and Recreation Part of Airport Park; public space and occasional special event. Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan Section 1: Facility Description 9 Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan Current Solid Waste Management County Solid Waste Management System Collection Collier County has franchise agreements for residential and commercial solid waste collection. The County is divided into two districts: District 2 covers the Immokalee area, while the remainder of the County is in District 1. The Airport is in District 2 where Waste Connections (formerly Progressive Waste Solutions and Choice Environmental) is the exclusive franchise hauler for all residential and commercial waste with the exception of roll‐off containers, which are not included in the franchise collection and generators can choose their roll‐off service provider. The County franchise agreement establishes fixed rates that the franchise hauler can charge for commercial collection services. The County’s franchise agreement includes residential single stream recycling collection. Florida law prohibits the inclusion of commercial recycling service in exclusive franchise agreements. Instead, Collier County has a commercial recycling ordinance. Under this mandate all nonresidential properties must recycle any material they identify as their primary recyclable materials, which is defined by the ordinance as any recyclable material generated in amounts greater than 96 gallons per month. Collier County has an open market for collection and processing of commercial recyclables, provided the haulers and processors are licensed by the County. In other words, commercial establishments can select any licensed service provider or self‐manage their recyclables. Per the franchise agreement between the County and Waste Connections, all municipal solid waste (MSW) must be delivered to the Immokalee Transfer Station. All recyclables must be delivered to licensed recycling facilities. Curbside‐collected single stream recyclables in Immokalee are delivered to a materials recovery facility located in neighboring Lee County. Transfer, Processing and Disposal Collier County owns the Immokalee Transfer Station located 3.2 miles away from the Airport. The transfer station is operated by Waste Management, Inc. Tip fees at the transfer station are set by the County through the landfill operation agreement. The transfer station accepts MSW, construction and demolition (C&D) debris, yard waste, scrap metal, tires, cardboard, e‐waste, and household hazardous waste. The transfer station accepts commercially‐collected materials and has a public drop‐off facility. Per the agreement with Waste Management, all MSW delivered to the transfer station is disposed in the Collier County landfill, located in Naples. C&D debris is transferred and processed to recover recyclable C&D debris at the Collier County landfill, and residues are transferred to a Class 3 landfill in Glades County, northwest of Collier County. Yard waste collected at the transfer station is picked up by a local yard waste composter (GreenCo). Scrap metal and tires are picked up by Garden Street, a local recycler, while cardboard, e‐waste, and household hazardous waste are picked up by other local recyclers. Immokalee is a rural area, relatively isolated from the other developed areas in Collier County; therefore, the area has limited availability for recycling services and markets. However, as will Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan Section 1: Facility Description 10 Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan be discussed further, some commercial recycling exists in the area, primarily for high value material such as scrap metal. All recyclable materials must be transported to more developed areas, such as Naples or Ft. Myers, for consolidation and/or processing. CCAA’s Role in MSW Management Areas Under Direct Control CCAA has direct control over recycling and waste management activities in its main terminal (Building #1), which consists of offices, restrooms, a small concession area, and a waiting area. CCAA also manages the collection of all solid waste generated on the airside. Areas Under Influence Landside tenants directly control their own MSW and recycling management although CCAA can have influence over these activities, through encouraging or requiring recycling in the tenant lease or the tenant rules and regulations, providing educational materials and technical assistance through the County’s solid waste management office. Each tenant contracts separately for waste collection with Waste Connections (see Figure 2) or, in the case of the Immokalee Raceway (Raceway), with a roll‐off service provider (see Figure 3). Some tenants contract for landscape maintenance around their facilities or perform the work themselves. Figures 2 & 3: Typical MSW Container Used by Tenants and Roll‐off Used by the Raceway Areas Not Under Control or Influence Collier County maintains and operates a water treatment plant located on the western edge of the property (Building #15). CCAA has no control or influence over the plant so it is excluded from this recycling plan. On the southwest corner of the Airport property, Collier County Parks and Recreation maintains an airport observation area as part of the Immokalee Airport County Park. This area consists of an open field with a walking path. All MSW generated in the park is collected in trash cans and managed by Collier County Parks and Recreation. Approximately twice annually, a special event is held on the property (e.g. a circus). During these events all waste is managed by the event staff. CCAA has no control or influence over the management of waste on this property, and it is therefore excluded from this recycling plan. Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan Section 1: Facility Description 11 Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan Airport Solid Waste Activities Waste Connections collects all MSW generated at the Airport, with the exception of MSW generated at the Raceway, which is collected in an open‐top roll‐off container. Table 2 provides a description of all MSW collection containers in service at the Airport. Note: The container number in Table 2 is a cross reference to their location in Figure 1. CCAA provides a centralized 4 cubic yard (cy) dumpster near the primary hangers (Container #1, Figure 4). All C&D activities and management of the resulting C&D debris are the responsibility of the party (CCAA or tenant) executing the project. CCAA maintains the landscaping around the terminal, on the airport access road, and all airside areas through a landscape contractor, who manages any resulting yard waste. Figure 4: CCAA‐Provided Airside Dumpster (Container #1) Table 2: MSW Container Inventory and Map Key Container Number Container Type Service Frequency Primary Users 1 4 cy dumpster Weekly Fletcher Flying Services, terminal, hanger tenants 2 4 cy dumpster On‐demand Raceway storage 3 4 cy dumpster Weekly Global Manufacturing Technology, ARC, Gulf Connectors, Toy’s Auto Repair 4 4 cy dumpster Weekly Wholesale shutters 5 4 cy dumpster Weekly Salazar Machine and Steel 6 65‐gal roll cart Every other week Turbo Services 7 20 cy roll‐off On demand* Raceway 8 4 cy dumpster On demand** Tellus Note: Container locations are depicted as gray numbered circles in Figure 1. *Assumed every other week based on conversation with Raceway management **Assumed monthly collection based on Tellus’s activities at the Airport. Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan Section 1: Facility Description 12 Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan As noted previously, CCAA only has direct control over activities conducted in its terminal and over the collection of waste generated on the airside of the Airport. Tenants occupy most of the buildings and are responsible for most of the waste generated. Due to the diverse nature of activities at the Airport, individual tenant’s or building’s waste generation activities are discussed separately. CCAA Terminal Waste from the CCAA Terminal (Building #1) is primarily generated through offices, restrooms, a small concession area, and newspaper, magazines, and flyers received by the CCAA. Waste is collected in the 4 cy airside dumpster (Container #1) that is serviced once per week. Fletcher Flying Service (FFS) FFS has a dedicated hanger (Building #5) for maintaining its aircraft. Waste produced includes various nonhazardous waste associated with these activities (small parts, packaging, etc.). The hanger also includes an office and employee break area from which general MSW is generated. FFS also has a pilot rest area (Building #8) that generates additional MSW. All MSW generated by FFS is collected in the airside dumpster (Container #1). CCAA estimates that FFS generates 50% of the waste collected in Container #1. Light Industrial Operations Global Manufacturing Technology (GMT), Gulf Connectors, Automotive Repair Center (ARC), Toy’s Automotive, Wholesale Shutter, and Salazar Machine and Steel (SMS) comprise the Airport’s light industrial area (Buildings #10, #11, and #18). Most MSW is generated through offices and employee break areas. They also generate packaging materials, e.g. cardboard, expanded polystyrene, plastic film. All MSW is collected in 4 cy dumpsters (Containers #3, #4, and #5) adjacent to each building. Each dumpster is serviced once per week. Turbo Services Turbo Services has a small jet testing facility on the landside of the Airport (Building #18). The building is used intermittently and generates very little waste, mostly packaging materials and general MSW. Material is collected in a 65‐gallon roll cart (Container #6) that is serviced every other week. Immokalee Raceway The Raceway is the largest generator of MSW on the Airport property. The Raceway holds race events on average every other weekend, which include overnight recreational vehicle camping. It has a small concession stand serving food and drinks during events. Waste is generated by spectators, drivers, and crew. The waste is primarily mixed MSW, including disposable food serviceware and any waste associated with the racing activities, including empty fuel cans, packaging from parts, and bulky items such as old traffic cones. All of these materials are collected in a 20 cy open‐top roll‐off container (Container #7) that is serviced every other week, on average. The Raceway also has a storage warehouse located in Building #6. The Raceway has a 4 cy dumpster that is serviced every other week to collect material generated through cleaning out Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan Section 1: Facility Description 13 Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan the storage warehouse. Materials are mostly bulky items such as furniture, tires, and 5‐gallon buckets. Tellus Tellus manufactures pre‐fabricated concrete forms at its facility on the landside of the Airport (Building #19). The facility is intermittently occupied and very little MSW is generated. A 4 cy dumpster (Container #8) is located at the property but it is only serviced on‐call. Monthly service is assumed for the purpose of this recycling plan. Airport Recycling Activities The CCAA provides a recycling can adjacent to the terminal for collection of paper, cans, and plastic bottles (see Figure 5, Collection Point #1); however, the materials collected in the can are placed in the airside dumpster (Container #1) and not recycled. This practice clearly indicates the need for single stream recycling collection service at the Airport, to be discussed later. All other current recycling activities are performed by the individual tenants. The CCAA has some influence over how recyclables are managed. Suggestions for how the CCAA can increase this influence are discussed later. The Airport does not have a unified or coordinated recycling program. There are no defined recycling goals, data tracking, reporting requirements, or performance indicators. Consequently, the primary challenges to implementing further reuse and recovery programs are the diverse nature of the tenants and the Airport’s limited staffing resources. Figure 5: Recycling Can at CCAA’s Terminal (Building #1) Current recycling activities are as diverse as the tenants themselves. In most cases, the primary driver for recycling was to save on disposal costs for the tenants. Most tenants are recycling high‐value materials such as metal and High‐density polyethylene (HDPE) plastics that are Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan Section 1: Facility Description 14 Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan picked‐up for free. Tenants also felt that recycling these materials was the right thing to do. Recycling activities are summarized in Table 3 and described in the following sub‐sections. Table 3: Recycle Container Inventory and Map Key Collection Point Container Type(s) Primary Users Materials collected 1 50‐gal can CCAA Terminal Paper, cans, and plastic bottles 2 30 cy roll‐off FFS Cardboard and HDPE bottles 3 Vertical baler FFS HDPE bottles 4 4 cy dumpster and 55‐gal drums GMT, Gulf Connectors Aluminum and steel scrap 5 55‐gal drum ARC Steel scrap 6 55‐gal drum Toy’s Auto Repair Steel and aluminum scrap 7 Vacuum with bags Wholesale Shutters Wood shavings 8 1.8 cy containers Salazar Machine and Steel Steel and aluminum scrap Note: Container locations are depicted as blue numbered triangles in Figure 1. FFS FFS is currently recycling empty HDPE plastic bottles and cardboard boxes generated through its crop dusting operation. The materials are stored in a 30 cy closed top roll‐off container adjacent to the crop dusting staging area (Collection Point #2, Figures 6 and 7). Whenever possible, FFS staff collects the HDPE bottles from the roll‐off and use a vertical baler (Collection Point #3) to compress the bottles into bales. Generation of these materials is highly seasonal due to the nature of crop dusting; however, FFS estimates it generates on average a bale per week throughout the year. These bales are picked up as needed by various commercial plastic recycling services. The 30‐yd roll‐off is pulled about twice annually by a commercial recycling hauler. Cardboard and any HDPE containers not baled are hauled to a recycling processor in the area. Fletcher is also implementing waste reduction practices by encouraging its suppliers to use reusable mini‐bulk containers instead of single‐use containers. Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan Section 1: Facility Description 15 Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan Figures 6 & 7: FFS Recycling Roll‐Off Container (Outside and Materials Inside) Figure 8: FFS Baler for HDPE Containers GMT and Gulf Connectors GMT and Gulf Connectors are currently recycling aluminum and steel shavings and scrap produced through their machining operation. Material is collected in a 4 cy dumpster and 55‐ gallon drums (Collection Point #4, Figures 9 and 10). GMT estimates it recycles about 2,000 pounds per year (lbs/yr) of aluminum and 500 lbs/yr of steel. Gulf Connectors estimates it recycles about 400 lbs/yr of aluminum. All material is picked up by West Coast Recycling, a Collier County‐licensed metal recycler located in Fort Myers. Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan Section 1: Facility Description 16 Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan Figures 9 & 10: Scrap Metal Collection Containers at GMT and Gulf Connectors ARC ARC recycles any scrap steel it generates through remanufacturing small engines. The owner collects scrap in a 55‐gallon drum (Collection Point #5) and self‐hauls to Garden Street Recycling, a Collier County‐licensed metal recycler in Fort Myers and LaBelle. He estimates he recycles about two drums of scrap every year. Toy’s Automotive Repair Toy’s Automotive Repair is recycling used motor oil from its automotive repair operation. The oil is collected in 55 gallon drums (Collection Point #6) and picked up by World Petroleum. They estimate they recycle about 25 gallons of oil per week. Wholesale Shutter Wholesale Shutter collects wood shavings from its wood shutter manufacturing operation using a vacuum system with 50 gallon plastic bags (Collection Point #7). These bags are picked up monthly by a local rancher for use at his ranch. About 5 pounds of shavings are collected each time. Salazar Machine & Steel SMS recycles any scrap metal it produces through its manufacturing operation. The metal is collected in plastic totes provided by the recycling company (Collection Point #8, Figure 11), which measure approximately 4’x 4’ x 3’. The recycling company picks up 6 full totes annually on average. Each tote weighs approximately 500 pounds. SMS estimates its scrap metal is 70% stainless steel, 20% carbon steel, and 10% aluminum. SMS is also currently reusing most cardboard it receives for repacking products it produces and for mock‐up templates. Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan Section 1: Facility Description 17 Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan Figure 11: Plastic Totes at SMS for Collecting Scrap Metal Immokalee Raceway The Raceway management does not currently have an established recycling system in place. Any recycling that occurs is driven by individual initiative. For example, aluminum cans are collected from the waste receptacles by the staff emptying the containers and recycled at a local facility for scrap. Used vegetable oil generated from the concession stand is collected by a racecar driver, presumably for processing into biodiesel. Neither of these recycling streams are quantified. The Raceway manager mentioned that at one point they attempted the collection of recyclables but found that guests did not use their containers properly, throwing trash into recyclables containers, and it was not worth the effort required for his staff to separate trash from recyclables. Recycling Drivers According to a survey of tenants conducted as part of the research for this project, in most cases the primary driver for current recycling is the composition of their waste streams and economics. Most tenants are recycling high‐value materials (metal and HDPE), which comprise a significant percentage of their waste stream and either are picked‐up for free, or can be taken to a recycler for some payment. Tenants also felt that recycling these materials was the right thing to do. The County’s commercial recycling ordinance is another potential driver; however, it has not impacted recycling activities at the Airport because few of the CCAA staff and tenants were aware of the ordinance when initially contacted for this project. 19 Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan Section 2 Recycling and Solid Waste Audit Prior to conducting the audit, Kessler Consulting, Inc. (KCI) inventoried MSW management practices at the Airport based on discussions with and information provided by CCAA staff. We also conducted an email survey of tenants to determine current recycling and solid waste management activities. This research provided the necessary background and information for conducting a site visit and a recycling and waste audit. Narrative descriptions based on the results of the research, surveys, and site visits were discussed in Section 1. During the site visit we field verified and obtained further information regarding the Airport’s MSW management system. We then conducted a semi‐quantitative audit of recycling and waste collection containers to assess the amounts of potentially recoverable materials in the waste stream. Based on this research we developed estimates of the quantities of recyclables and solid waste discarded at the Airport. The results of this work are summarized in this section. MSW Audit KCI estimated solid waste quantities based on tenant survey responses and interviews conducted during the site visit to determine collection frequency and how full containers are when collected. Table 4 provides a summary of the estimated amounts of MSW discarded at the Airport. Descriptions of solid waste practices are provided in Section 1.2.3. Table 4: Current MSW Estimates Container # Area/Building # Users CY/year tons/yr 1 Airside FFS, terminal, other airside tenants 208 16 2 6 Raceway – storage clean out 108 9 3 10 GMT, ARC, Gulf, Toy’s 208 16 4 11 Wholesale shutters 104 8 5 17 Salazar 156 12 6 18 Turbo Services 4 0.3 7 Raceway Raceway 540 43 8 19 Tellus 48 4 Total 1,376 109 Note: A density of 159 lb/cy is used based on the weighted densities of materials observed during the visual audit. Note: Numbers in table may not appear to sum due to rounding. Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan Section 2: Recycling and Solid Waste Audit 20 Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan MSW Composition To characterize the composition of solid waste generated at the Airport, KCI conducted a one day visual audit of all material collected in the eight MSW containers. The contents of each container was inspected and a representative number of bags were opened in order to estimate the volume of major material types observed. Volume was converted to weight using industry accepted densities of each material. Due to the limited nature of this visual audit, no statistical analysis was conducted on the results. Based on the results of the solid waste audit and composition estimate, KCI developed order‐of‐magnitude estimates of the recyclable materials that may be present in the Airport’s solid waste (see Table 5). It is important to note that the data in Table 5 is based on qualitative information (estimates of how full containers are when collected, a visual assessment of composition, and average material density factors). Table 5: Estimate of Recyclable Materials in MSW (% by weight) Container # Area/ Building # Users OCC Paper Plastic Bottles Metals Glass Containers MSW 1 Airside FFS, terminal, other airside tenants 6.7% 32.5% 2.2% 0.0% 0.0% 58.5% 2 6 Raceway (storage) 2.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 97.6% 3 10 GMT, ARC, Gulf, Toy’s 9.6% 23.3% 2.4% 2.4% 19.2% 43.0% 4 11 Wholesale shutters 3.1% 0.0% 0.5% 17.2% 0.0% 79.2% 5 17 Salazar 15.4% 24.8% 1.7% 10.2% 0.0% 47.8% 6 18 Turbo Services 17.4% 33.8% 2.3% 7.0% 0.0% 39.5% 7 Raceway Raceway 7.7% 24.8% 2.6% 5.1% 20.4% 39.4% 8 19 Tellus 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 46.2% 0.0% 53.8% Total Weighted Average 7.5% 20.3% 1.9% 6.6% 10.3% 53.4% Total Tons/Year 8.2 22.2 2.1 7.2 11.2 58.3 109 Note: Numbers in table may not appear to sum due to rounding. Recycling Audit To characterize the materials currently recycled at the Airport, KCI conducted a one day visual audit of all material collected in the seven recycling collection containers (see Figure 1). To conduct the visual audit, the content of each container was inspected. Recycling estimates are based on tenant survey responses and interviews conducted during the site visit. Table 6 provides a summary of the estimated amounts of materials currently recycled at the Airport. Note: Collection Point #1 is excluded because this material is discarded in Container #1 as MSW. Descriptions of recycling practices are provided in Section 1.2.4. Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan Section 2: Recycling and Solid Waste Audit 21 Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan Table 6: Current Recycling Estimates Collection Point # Tenant Materials Pounds/Year OCC & Paper Metal Plastic Other 1 CCAA/Terminal Paper, cans, bottles * * * 2 FFS OCC 2,250 HDPE containers 32,160 3 GMT Aluminum scrap/ shavings 2,000 Steel scrap/shavings 500 4 Gulf Connectors Aluminum scrap/ shavings 400 5 ARC Steel scrap 123 6 Toy’s Automotive Used motor oil 9,620 7 Wholesale Shutters Wood shavings 60 6 Salazar Stainless steel scrap 2,100 Steel scrap 600 Aluminum scrap 300 Total Total Recycling (lb/yr) 2,250 6,023 32,160 9,680 50,113 Total Recycling (tons/yr) 1 3 16 5 25 Estimated Recycling Rate 19% *Materials collected at the terminal are discarded in the airside dumpster (Container #1). Based on the estimates in Tables 5 and 6, total material generated at the Airport is estimated at 134 tons per year (25 tons recycled + 109 tons MSW disposed) and the current recycling rate is estimated at 19 percent (25 ÷ 134 tons). Material Flow Diagram Figures 12 and 13 below show flow diagrams of all MSW and recyclables collected at the Airport. Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan Section 2: Recycling and Solid Waste Audit 22 Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan Figure 12: MSW Flow Diagram Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan Section 2: Recycling and Solid Waste Audit 23 Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan Figure 13: Recycling Flow Diagram 24 Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan Section 3 Recycling Feasibility Technical and Economic Factors and Logistical Constraints As a small regional airport in a largely rural area, the Airport has some unique factors that affect its ability to recycle. First and foremost, Immokalee is a small, rural community with a population of approximately 24,000 and a relatively isolated area surrounded by farmland and preserved area. The nearest large urban areas are Ft. Myers and Naples (approximately 45 minutes away). This limits access to both recycling collection services and recyclable commodity markets in the local area. As discussed in Section 1, Collier County has an open market for recycling collection services. While some recyclers are currently collecting high value commodities at the Airport (e.g. scrap metal), availability of commercial collection for other materials is either non‐existent or very limited. Similarly, Immokalee does not have a recycling processor, so materials must be delivered to processors elsewhere in the region. This further limits markets for recyclables. Most of the current recycling efforts at the Airport are conducted on an ad hoc basis. For example, a number of tenants self‐haul recyclables and in the case of FFS, their baled HDPE containers are intermittently picked up by different recyclers. The diversified nature of the Airport also presents challenges. As described above, tenants at the Airport are involved in a wide variety of activities, each with their own waste stream. Fortunately, the primary byproducts of several tenants are high value materials and already recycled. However, expanding recovery at the Airport faces several key challenges: heterogeneous composition of MSW, lack of sufficient volumes to provide economies of scale in source‐separation and collection, and the distance and associated transportation costs to recycling facilities. In light of these challenges, the most viable option to increase recovery is to provide Airport tenants the opportunity to participate in the existing County‐sponsored residential recycling collection program. The largest single generator of MSW at the Airport is the Raceway. Because this waste is generated almost exclusively at episodic public events, implementing recycling will present some challenges. The events attract a diverse and transient group of people, as such recycling is not a priority for them. The Raceway attempted to collect recyclables in the past, only to find the public does not use the recycling containers and/or places trash in the containers. Recycling at public events and venues is becoming increasingly common, and a number of best practices have been identified including clearly defined cans, signage, educational material, and volunteer staff to guide attendees with proper recycling procedures. Limited staffing is another factor that constrains waste reduction and recycling efforts at the Airport. Currently, all recycling efforts at the Airport are conducted by the individual tenants without any input from CCAA. If additional recycling efforts were to be put in place or required of the tenants, CCAA staff and other County staff would need to assist with implementation and compliance. With the limited CCAA staff resources currently at the Airport, enforcing Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan Section 4: Operation and Maintenance Requirements 25 Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan additional recycling efforts would be difficult, outside of recycling at the terminal under the direct control of CCAA. Similarly, additional staffing would be required to plan, implement, and monitor recycling efforts at the Raceway. Currently, the Raceway does not have the staff to do this. County staff may be needed to assist, especially with planning and operational support. The Airport does not have major logistical constraints that could limit additional recycling efforts. Based on observations made during the site visit, there appears to be ample space both inside and outside of the buildings for additional recycling collection containers. In most cases, the containers could be placed adjacent to existing MSW containers, so it would not require significant additional efforts for tenants to use these containers. Access to the airside of the Airport is not an issue as commercial haulers are already servicing dumpsters on the airside. Federal, State, and Local Policies Federal, state, and local policies are currently in place that incentivize recycling at the Airport. On a federal level, the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, under which this plan has been developed, mandates the development of a Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan, which creates a strong foundation for subsequent program development and implementation. In 2008, Florida set a goal to recycle 75% of MSW by 2020, under Florida Statute (F.S.) 403.7032. The statute requires each Florida county to develop plans to incrementally reach this goal: 60% recycling by 2016; 70% by 2018; and 75% by 2020. Florida also has a statute (F.S. 403.7065) requiring state agencies and political subdivisions of the state receiving state funds to purchase materials with recycled content. In 2004, Collier County enacted an Ordinance (No. 2004‐05) requiring recycling at businesses. Later, in 2008, this was extended to include multi‐family properties and temporary events. Under this ordinance, owners of commercial properties must provide containers for collection of recyclable materials and arrange for collection of these materials or self‐haul. Commercial generators must separately collect any recyclable material that is considered to be a primary recycled material, defined as any recyclable that is generated in amounts greater than 96 gallons per month. Generators are exempt if there are no collection services available for the recyclable material or if it would cause unnecessary hardship. The County commercial recycling ordinance applies to CCAA and the Airport tenants. Temporary events are defined as any event that require an event permit from the County. Organizers must submit a recycling plan with their permit application. It was determined that the Raceway is not required to have a temporary event permit because it has a long term lease agreement to hold events on County property, and thus is not subject to the County ordinance. Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan Section 4: Operation and Maintenance Requirements 26 Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan Section 4 Operation and Maintenance Requirements Due to its small size, operational and maintenance requirements for waste management at the Airport are minimal and largely the responsibility of the individual tenants. Each tenant is responsible for transporting their MSW to their collection container, although the CCAA and some tenants contract with a janitorial service. Tenant and CCAA have agreements with Waste Connections, or Mays Trucking in the case of the Raceway, for providing, servicing, and maintaining their individual MSW collection containers. All MSW collected by Waste Connections falls under the franchise agreement, which sets collection rates; therefore tenants do not have a formal contract with the hauler. For recycling, each tenant is responsible for collecting any recyclable materials and contracting with a hauler or self‐hauling. CCAA does not currently manage any recycling activities at the Airport. Organic waste generation is minimal at the Airport. CCAA contracts with a landscape service that maintains common areas and areas around some of the tenant buildings, while other tenants maintain their landscape themselves. Collection of any resulting yard waste is the responsibility of the landscaping company or tenant. Because there are no permanent food services, the Airport does not generate a significant amount of food waste. The Raceway does have food vendors during its events and food waste is discarded with MSW. Collection of C&D debris is the responsibility of either the CCAA or the tenant, whoever is responsible for the C&D project. The CCAA does not currently maintain any data pertaining to waste at the Airport. Individual tenants maintain minimal data regarding their recycling activities and the Airport does not have a formalized process for reviewing this data. 27 Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan Section 5 Waste Management Contracts Current Contracts As discussed previously, all MSW collection, with the exception of the Raceway, is managed through the franchise agreement the County has with Waste Connections. As such, the CCAA and tenants do not have written contracts for collection of MSW. The Raceway does not have a formal contract with Mays Trucking, but has an agreement for on‐demand service. Some tenants have agreements (formal or informal) with haulers to collect their recyclable materials. The Airport does not have any active contract for C&D collection. Environmentally Preferable Purchasing The Airport does not currently have any elements of an environmentally preferable purchasing policy in its contracts or tenant leases. Tenant Leases and Service Contracts Tenant leases do not have any stipulations regarding recycling, reuse, or waste reduction. Table 7 identifies the lease expiration and/or renewal dates when these leases could be modified to include such language. Alternatively, the Airport’s published rules and regulations, which are referenced by every lease could be updated to include recycling or waste reduction requirements. Table 7: Expiration/Renewal Dates for Airport Tenants Tenant(s) Expiration/Renewal Date FFS 6/30/23 Collier County Sheriff’s Office Indefinite Raceway Annually KPK Management (manages Building #10)8/10/28 Wholesale Shutters 10/31/20 SMS 11/30/22 Turbo Services 7/31/17 Tellus Annually *Note: This table does not include tenants that rent private hanger space on a monthly or annual basis or ones that do not generate significant waste. Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan Section 5: Waste Management Contracts 28 Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan Funding for Waste Management and Recycling Each tenant is responsible for its costs for recycling and waste management services. Funding for the airside dumpster (Container #1) is included in CCAA’s operational budget. 29 Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan Section 6 Potential Cost Savings or Revenue As mentioned in Section 1, Collier County has a rate resolution that sets MSW collection rates for its exclusive franchise haulers. Once per week collection of a 4 cy dumpster is the most common service the Airport, which costs $181.54/month or $10.48/cy/month including collection and disposal. Costs of collecting commercial recyclables are not fixed in the rate resolution because Collier County has an open market, but based on KCI’s experience in other jurisdictions, recycling service costs are less than MSW. In the visual audit, KCI estimated that approximately 50% by volume of the waste collected in MSW containers at the Airport is potentially recyclable. Of course all of this material would not be diverted to recycling, but if a significant amount was able to be collected in recycling containers, MSW containers could potentially be downsized to a 2 cy container, which is $107.17/month for once weekly service (40% less than the 4 cy container cost). Downsizing to a 2 cy container would also free up space for recycling containers. Although the Raceway does not use Waste Connections, the rate resolution cost for roll‐off service can be used as a proxy, which is approximately $725/month or $18.15/cy/month. If the Raceway, which has over 50% recyclable material in MSW, started a recycling program, they could reduce the collection frequency of their roll‐off container. Because they pay each time the roll‐off container is serviced, the Racetrack could potentially see significant savings. Alternatively, the Raceway could consider implementing recycling and downsizing to an 8 cy container, serviced once weekly. This would be a 20 percent reduction in collection capacity compared to the 20 cy roll‐off serviced every other week, but would only cost $335.15/month. For the CCAA and most of the tenants, costs of implementing additional recycling efforts would be minimal. Most haulers provide customers with collection containers; therefore, roll carts or additional dumpsters would not need to be purchased. Additional deskside recycling containers may be needed to collect single stream recyclables inside of offices, hangers, and warehouses. Additional labor from tenants or custodial staff would be negligible as the collection containers would be located adjacent to most buildings. The exemption to this is the Raceway. The Raceway has approximately 100 trash cans spread around the property. Best practices dictate that recycling containers should be paired with a trash can to reduce contamination in the recycling containers and prevent disposal of recyclables in the trash cans. Therefore, the Raceway would need to obtain additional containers for recycling. Bring recyclables to a central consolidation point in addition to trash would increase labor at the Raceway. The Raceway may be able to defray some of the additional work effort by coordinating with County recycling staff to help develop a comprehensive event recycling program that engages community and volunteer resources. As discussed above, Immokalee is relatively isolated, and this can be a barrier to cost‐effective recycling collection. However, Waste Connections, as required by the County’s franchise agreement, collects single stream recyclables from single and multi‐family residential properties in Immokalee and delivers recyclables to a MRF in neighboring Lee County. Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan Section 6: Potential Cost Savings or Revenue 30 Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan Extending this service to the CCAA and tenants is likely to be the most cost effective way to increase recycling at the Airport. Given the limited number of recycling collection points at the Airport, there would be limited impact on Waste Connections recycling operations. 31 Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan Section 7 Plan to Minimize Solid Waste Generation Airport’s Recycling Program As previously mentioned, many tenants currently recycle major byproducts from their operations (e.g. scrap metal). The next major step in the Airport’s recycling plan will be to add collection of commonly recycled materials (paper and metal, plastic, and glass containers) and possibly cardboard. Recycling collection would be integrated into the County’s current residential single stream program using 96‐ or 65‐ gallon roll carts serviced weekly. The volume of recyclables collected from the tenants, with the possible exception of the Raceway, would not require the use of a dumpster. Recycling collection at the Raceway will require a more comprehensive effort. Because the Raceway holds public events, recycling is inherently more difficult. As previously mentioned, the Raceway manager attempted a recycling program at one point but it failed due to lack of proper segregation by attendees. Raceway staff, CCAA, and County solid waste staff would need to work together to create a successful program that conforms to general best practices for special event recycling. These practices include use of clearly distinguishable recycling containers paired with trash cans, clear and easy‐to‐understand signage, education material, and volunteer staff assistance during events. The type of collection container needed would depend on the success of the program, but it is likely multiple roll carts or a dumpster would be used to consolidate recyclable for collection by a private hauler. As with current MSW collection, collection of recyclables would be the responsibility of the tenants. While adding recycling service would inevitably add an additional cost for waste management, tenants may be able to “right size” their MSW container by decreasing its size or collection frequency, and thus reduce their MSW collection cost. The County’s Solid Waste Division provides free technical assistance to businesses implementing recycling programs including how to “right size” containers and reduce costs. In addition to single stream recycling, the Airport should consider the potential for collecting source‐separated cardboard, which is a higher value commodity than single stream recycling, potentially saving tenants even more money. In the visual audit conducted by KCI, the Airport had sufficient cardboard to support a dedicated cardboard collection container, e.g. a 2 cy dumpster. Each tenant would not need a separate container, but the cardboard container could be placed in a centralized location, perhaps on the landside near Buildings #10, #11, and #17. Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan Section 7: Plan to Minimize Solid Waste Generation 32 Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan Policies, Goals, and Objectives KCI recommends that the CCAA adopt a policy to provide convenient access to recycling at the Airport based on the County’s single stream recycling program. To implement this policy, we also recommend that CCAA collaborates with the County’s Solid Waste Department. CCAA can work with County staff to conduct more detailed waste audits, assist tenants with setting up inside collection containers, and work with them on employee education, collection and consolidation of recyclables, as well as “right sizing” of their existing MSW service. This will be especially critical for establishing recycling at the Raceway. Due to the Airport’s small size and diversity and independence of the tenants, as well as the diversity of waste streams produced, numerical goals for waste reduction are difficult to set. Nevertheless, based on the limited waste audit, KCI recommends a goal of 50% diversion by 2020. KCI recommends the following objectives for CCAA to meet this goal:  Meet with the County solid waste staff to discuss County resources that can be tapped to establish a single stream program for the Airport.  Meet with Waste Connections to discuss the potential of adding the Airport to existing single stream collection routes.  Have single stream recycling available to all tenants within one year.  Work with tenants to determine the potential of segregated cardboard collection. Contracts Once the single stream recycling collection program is in place with existing tenants, CCAA would add language to tenant leases or its published rules and regulations that tenants must subscribe to single stream recycling collection service and provide staff with collection containers in their offices, warehouses, and hangers. New development and construction at the Airport will need to incorporate recycling into the planning and design process, such as identifying sufficient for recycling collection containers. Capital Improvements No significant capital improvements would be needed to implement the recycling plan. Conflicts The proposed recycling plan does not conflict with existing Airport or County plans or programs. Adding a single stream recycling program is expected to have limited impact on current Airport activities. It would not need to impact existing contracts or agreements, which can be modified if necessary upon their renewal. Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan Section 7: Plan to Minimize Solid Waste Generation 33 Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan Recycling in New Development Projects Two new developments are underway at the Airport: a commercial kitchen incubator hub in Building #11 and redevelopment of a taxiway. The commercial kitchen incubator, called the Florida Culinary Accelerator @ Immokalee (Accelerator) will be a shared‐use food processing space for farmers, cooperatives, start‐ups, and entrepreneurs to produce prepared food products (sauces, baked goods, juices, etc.). The facility will open later in 2017 and will be operated by the non‐profit Economic Incubators, Inc. and the County’s Office of Business and Economic Development. The Accelerator could be a significant source of food waste. Since this food waste is pre‐consumer, it will likely be a much cleaner material (i.e. less contaminated with non‐compostable materials) and would be an ideal feedstock for composting or other food waste recycling technology (e.g. anaerobic digestion). As the Accelerator comes online, CCAA should work with the Accelerator to find recycling options for the food waste. One option is Environmental Turnkey Solutions (ETS), which is a private compost facility located east of Naples (about 30 minutes away) permitted for food waste composting. The facility offers collection of organic waste; however, depending on the volume of food waste that would be generated from the Accelerator, Economic Incubators could assess whether collection service can be provided and built into the fees paid by Accelerator users or whether delivery of food scraps to ETS is most viable. Another option to recycle this food waste would be composting on site at the Airport, which would require a more in‐depth feasibility analysis. A number of small scale compost systems are available and technical assistance could be provided through the County’s business recycling technical assistance service. The other major upcoming development is rehabilitation of Runway 18‐36. CCAA should stipulate in contracts related to the project that asphalt millings be reincorporated into new asphalt or otherwise recycled through a certified asphalt pavement recycling company. One option may be cold‐in‐place asphalt recycling, in which recycling occurs on‐site and old asphalt is immediately reused to build the new taxiway. This technology has been used in Florida to rebuild a runaway at a rural regional airport2. If the project entails removal of any subsurface materials construction contracts should stipulate that this material is processed by a certified construction and demolition debris recycling facility prior to any disposal. Also, contractors should be required to submit a materials recovery plan as part of the bidding process and that work includes reporting of materials management. Tracking and Reporting Tracking and reporting are essential to monitoring whether the Airport’s waste reduction and recycling programs are reaching their goals, and for planning further refinements and improvements in the future. CCAA currently has no method of tracking recycling activities at the Airport because most of the recycling activities are autonomously performed by the 2 Polak, Mike. Better Roads. Recycling for Regional Airport Runways. Available from: http://www.ejbreneman.com/resources/Better‐Roads‐Regional‐Airport‐Runways.pdf Immokalee Regional Airport Airport Recycling, Reuse, and Waste Reduction Plan Section 7: Plan to Minimize Solid Waste Generation 34 Atkins (Immokalee Airport)/Recycling Plan/Draft Recycling Plan tenants. At a minimum, the Airport could require tenants to report to the CCAA the approximate amount of material they recycle on a quarterly or semi‐annual basis. Tenants would also report the MSW container size and service frequency they use. They would allow CCAA to calculate an estimated recycling rate, similar to how it is calculated in this report (Section 2), and to quantify the impact of starting the single stream recycling program, relative to existing recycling activities. The CCAA should make this a requirement for tenants in all new and renewed lease agreements. Future Enhancements Future enhancements of the program will be assessed after the initial aspects of the plan are implemented and will depend on the success and acceptance of the single stream recycling program. As the Airport grows and new tenants, facilities, and operations start at the Airport, waste reduction and recycling solutions will be evaluated. Re‐evaluation of Constraints The most significant challenge will be the establishment of a recycling program at the Raceway due to the nature of the facility (i.e. public events). However, this plan recommends that CCAA work with Raceway and County staff to develop a recycling plan and make a concerted effort to start a recycling program at the Raceway. Should the program be deemed impractical at the time, further evaluation of options to reduce or recycle waste will be warranted. Education and Outreach Education and outreach needs focus around educating and encouraging the tenants to start a single stream recycling program. The CCAA would provide pamphlets and signage to tenants explaining what can and cannot be recycled. These resources are currently available from the county. CCAA and County staff would also work with tenants to ensure inside collection containers are appropriate and sufficient for collecting single stream recyclables. Education and outreach would be critically important to recycling at the Raceway to ensure attendees and participants properly recycle and would be an integral component to that specific recycling plan during its development. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 113 March 2019 Appendix C. Capital Improvement Program Estimate Details IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT CIP PROJECTS IMPROVEMENTS 6/7/2018 Bid No. Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Extended Total Site Base Bid 1 Mobilization LS 1 $83,380 $83,380 2 Safety, Security, and Traffic Control LS 1 $40,000 $40,000 3 Subgrade Stabilization, 12‐Inch Depth (100% Compaction) SY 4310 $8 $34,480 4 FDOT Index No. 514, Optional Base Group 5 SY 4310 $15 $64,650 5 Superpave Asphaltic Concrete, 4‐Inch TON 991 $150 $148,695 6 10 Unit T‐Hangar Building LS 1 $514,600 $514,600 7 Earthwork CY 1880 $20 $37,600 8 Drainage LS 1 $200,000 $200,000 9 Sodding SY 431 $5 $2,155 Estimated Total $1,125,560.00 +20% Contingency $225,112.00 Engineering Design Services (10%) $112,556.00 Project Total $1,463,200.00 Pay Item Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Rounded Total 1 General Conditions/Mobilization (10%) LS 1 $485,600.00 $490,000 2 Safety Security and Traffic Control LS 1 $75,000.00 $75,000 3 Temporary Pollution, Erosion, and Siltation Control LS 1 $50,000.00 $50,000 4 Miscellaneous Demolition LS 1 $25,000.00 $25,000 5 Remove Stake Mounted Airfield Electrical Lights EA 51 $100.00 $6,000 6 Remove Airfield Electrical Signs EA 5 $250.00 $2,000 7 Full Depth Asphalt Pavement Removal SY 75000 $8.00 $600,000 8 P-152 Unclassified Excavation CY 12000 $15.00 $180,000 9 P-160 Subgrade Stabilization, 12-Inch Depth SY 55000 $8.00 $440,000 10 P-211 Limerock Base Course, 6-Inch Depth SY 55000 $18.00 $990,000 11 P-401 HMA Surface Course TON 12500 $125.00 $1,570,000 12 P-620 Pavement Markings LS 1 $300,000.00 $300,000 13 T-904 Sodding SY 27000 $4.00 $108,000 14 #8 AWG Cable (L-842C) LF 10000 $2.50 $25,000 15 Bare Copper Counterpoise LF 10000 $5.00 $50,000 16 1" x 2" PVC in Trench LF 10000 $8.00 $80,000 17 LED Runway Edge Lights Base Mounted EA 50 $3,200.00 $160,000 18 LED Threshold Lights Base Mounted EA 16 $3,200.00 $52,000 19 Relocate Base with New Edge Lights EA 16 $1,200.00 $20,000 20 Relocate PAPI's (Sets) EA 2 $10,000.00 $20,000 21 Relocate REIL's (Sets) EA 2 $8,000.00 $16,000 22 Relocate Signs EA 1 $2,500.00 $3,000 23 New LED Signs (2 Panel) EA 2 $10,000.00 $20,000 24 New LED Signs (3 Panel) EA 3 $12,000.00 $36,000 25 New LED Signs (4 Panel) EA 2 $14,000.00 $28,000 Total Construction Costs (Rounded) $5,400,000 Permitting LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000 Engineering Design Services (8%) LS 1 $432,000.00 $440,000 Construction Administration Services (3%) LS 1 $162,000.00 $170,000 Construction Inspection Services ($18k/Month @ 9 Months) LS 1 $162,000.00 $170,000 Total Engineering & Inspection Costs (Rounded) $800,000 Total Project Costs $6,200,000 10% Contingency $620,000.00 Total Project Budget $6,820,000.00 Total Construction Budget $6,380,000.00 Project 2 & 3 - Design & Construct Runway Rehabilitation 18-38 Project 1 - Design, Pemit & Construct One 10 Unit T-Hangar Construction Costs Design & Inspection Services 1 IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT CIP PROJECTS IMPROVEMENTS 6/7/2018 Bid No. Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Extended Total Site Base Bid 1 Mobilization LS 1 $103,050.00 $103,050.00 2 Safety, Security, and Traffic Control LS 1 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 3 Subgrade Stabilization, 12‐Inch Depth (100% Compaction) SY 11980 $8.00 $95,840.00 4 FDOT Index No. 514, Optional Base Group 5 SY 11980 $15.00 $179,700.00 5 Superpave Asphaltic Concrete, 4‐Inch TON 2755.4 $150.00 $413,310.00 6 Full Depth Asphalt Pavement Removal SY 9500 $8.00 $76,000.00 7 Earthwork CY 7160 $20.00 $143,200.00 8 Drainage LS 1 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 9 2” PVC conduit in turf ‐ $10/FT, Counterpoise ‐ $3 per ft , Lighting LF 6000 $15.00 $90,000.00 10 2 MOD Sign, Transformer, New sign pad with base can LS 3 $5,500.00 $16,500.00 11 Sodding SY 10698 $5.00 $53,490.00 Estimated Total $1,391,100.00 Engineering Design Services (8%) $111,300.00 +20% Contingency $278,220.00 Project Total $1,780,600.00 Construction Total $1,669,300.00 Bid No. Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Extended Total Site Base Bid 1 Mobilization LS 1 $44,380.00 $44,380.00 2 Safety, Security, and Traffic Control LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 2 6‐foot High Chain‐Link Fence with Barbed Wire LF 7367 $40.00 $294,691.20 4 Terminal Building and Airside Security Updates LS 1 $250,000.00 $250,000.00 Estimated Total $599,071.20 Engineering Design Services (10%) $59,907.12 +20% Contingency $119,814.24 Project Total $778,800.00 Construction Total $718,892.88 Bid No. Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Extended Total Site Base Bid 1 Mobilization LS 1 $244,110.00 $244,110.00 2 Safety, Security, and Traffic Control LS 1 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 3 Subgrade Stabilization, 12‐Inch Depth (100% Compaction) SY 42480 $8.00 $339,840.00 4 FDOT Index No. 514, Optional Base Group 5 SY 42480 $15.00 $637,200.00 5 Superpave Asphaltic Concrete, 4‐Inch TON 9770 $150.00 $1,465,560.00 6 Full Depth Asphalt Pavement Removal SY 11410 $8.00 $91,280.00 7 Earthwork CY 17960 $20.00 $359,200.00 8 Drainage LS 1 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 9 Sodding SY 15658 $5.00 $78,290.00 Estimated Total $3,295,480.00 +20% Contingency $659,096.00 Engineering Design Services (8%) $263,700.00 Project Total $4,218,300.00 Construction Total $3,954,600.00 Project 4 & 6 Design & Construct Taxiway C Extension Project 5 - Enhanced Access Control and Airfield Perimeter Fencing Project 7 & 8 - Perimeter Road & Taxiway A Conversion 2 IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT CIP PROJECTS IMPROVEMENTS 6/7/2018 Bid No. Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Extended Total Site Base Bid 1 Construct Airpark Boulevard Extension Phase I LS 1 $2,019,600.00 $2,019,600.00 2 Construct Airpark Boulevard Extension Phase II LS 1 $1,889,800.00 $1,889,800.00 3 Construct Airpark Boulevard Extension Phase III LS 1 $1,775,000.00 $1,775,000.00 Estimated Total Construction Total $5,684,400.00 Engineering Design Services (10%) $568,440.00 Environmental Services (5%) $284,220.00 +20% Contingency $170,532.00 Project Total $1,023,200.00 Bid No. Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Extended Total Site Base Bid 1 Mobilization LS 1 $124,670.00 $124,670.00 2 Safety, Security, and Traffic Control LS 1 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 3 Subgrade Stabilization, 12-Inch Depth (100% Compaction) SY 15310 $8.00 $122,480.00 4 FDOT Index No. 514, Optional Base Group 5 SY 15310 $15.00 $229,650.00 5 Superpave Asphaltic Concrete, 6-Inch TON 5282 $150.00 $792,292.50 6 Full Depth Asphalt Pavement Removal SY 2420 $8.00 $19,360.00 7 Earthwork CY 5910 $20.00 $118,200.00 8 Drainage LS 1 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 9 Street light, underground wiring, 200' o.c., each LF 3856 $12.63 $48,701.28 10 Sodding SY 1531 $5.00 $7,655.00 Estimated Total $1,683,008.78 +20% Contingency $336,601.76 Project Total $2,019,600.00 Bid No. Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Extended Total Site Base Bid 1 Mobilization LS 1 $244,350.00 $244,350.00 2 Safety, Security, and Traffic Control LS 1 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 3 Subgrade Stabilization, 12-Inch Depth (100% Compaction) SY 6220 $8.00 $49,760.00 4 FDOT Index No. 514, Optional Base Group 5 SY 6220 $15.00 $93,300.00 5 Superpave Asphaltic Concrete, 2-Inch TON 209 $150.00 $31,395.00 6 Superpave Asphaltic Concrete, 4-Inch TON 1012 $150.00 $151,800.00 7 New Hangar Units LS 1 $2,550,000.00 $2,550,000.00 8 Earthwork CY 2250 $20.00 $45,000.00 0 Drainage LS 1 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 9 Sodding SY 622 $5.00 $3,110.00 Estimated Total $3,298,715.00 +20% Contingency $659,743.00 Engineering Design Services (8%) $263,897.20 Project Total $4,222,400.00 Construction Total $3,958,500.00 Project 9 - Design, Permitting, Environmental for Airpark Blvd. Extension Phase I, II, & III Project 10 - Construct Airpark Boulevard Extension Phase 1 Project 11 - Design, Permit, Construct, Conventional Hangar Facilities 3 IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT CIP PROJECTS IMPROVEMENTS 6/7/2018 Bid No. Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Extended Total Site Base Bid 1 Mobilization LS 1 $30,350.00 $30,350.00 2 Safety, Security, and Traffic Control LS 1 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 3 Subgrade Stabilization, 12-Inch Depth (100% Compaction) SY 960 $8.00 $7,680.00 4 FDOT Index No. 514, Optional Base Group 5 SY 960 $15.00 $14,400.00 5 Superpave Asphaltic Concrete, 2-Inch TON 110 $150.00 $16,560.00 6 Building LS 1 $250,000.00 $250,000.00 7 Earthwork CY 510 $20.00 $10,200.00 8 Drainage LS 1 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 9 Sodding SY 96 $5.00 $480.00 Estimated Total $409,670.00 +20% Contingency $82,000.00 Engineering Design Services (10%) $41,000.00 Project Total $532,700.00 Construction Total $491,700.00 Bid No. Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Extended Total Site Base Bid 1 Mobilization LS 1 $17,170.00 $17,170.00 2 Safety, Security, and Traffic Control LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 3 Subgrade Stabilization, 12-Inch Depth (100% Compaction)SY 2390 $8.00 $19,120.00 4 FDOT Index No. 514, Optional Base Group 5 SY 2390 $15.00 $35,850.00 5 Superpave Asphaltic Concrete, 4-Inch TON 550 $150.00 $82,455.00 6 Earthwork CY 800 $20.00 $16,000.00 7 Drainage LS 1 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 8 Sodding SY 239 $5.00 $1,195.00 Estimated Total $231,790.00 +20% Contingency $46,358.00 Engineering Design Services (10%) $23,179.00 Project Total $301,300.00 Construction Total $278,100.00 Bid No. Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Extended Total Site Base Bid 1 Mobilization LS 1 $116,660.00 $116,660.00 2 Safety, Security, and Traffic Control LS 1 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 3 Subgrade Stabilization, 12-Inch Depth (100% Compaction)SY 14560 $8.00 $116,480.00 4 FDOT Index No. 514, Optional Base Group 5 SY 14560 $15.00 $218,400.00 5 Superpave Asphaltic Concrete, 6-Inch TON 5023 $150.00 $753,480.00 6 Earthwork CY 4860 $20.00 $97,200.00 7 Drainage LS 1 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 9 Street light, underground wiring, 200' o.c., each LF 3589 $12.63 $45,329.07 8 Sodding SY 1456 $5.00 $7,280.00 Estimated Total $1,574,829.07 +20% Contingency $314,965.81 Engineering Design Services N/A Project Total $1,889,800.00 Construction Total $1,889,800.00 Project 12 & Project 13 - Design & Construct Airport Operations & Maintenance Facility Project 14 - Taxiway Fillet Enhancement Project 15 - Construct Airport Boulevard Extension (Phase II) 4 IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT CIP PROJECTS IMPROVEMENTS 6/7/2018 Bid No. Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Extended Total Site Base Bid 1 Mobilization LS 1 $4,080.00 $4,080.00 2 Safety, Security, and Traffic Control LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 3 Subgrade Stabilization, 12-Inch Depth (100% Compaction)SY 650 $8.00 $5,200.00 4 FDOT Index No. 514, Optional Base Group 5 SY 650 $15.00 $9,750.00 5 Superpave Asphaltic Concrete, 2-Inch TON 75 $150.00 $11,212.50 6 Earthwork CY 220 $20.00 $4,400.00 7 Drainage LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 8 Sodding SY 65 $5.00 $325.00 Estimated Total $54,967.50 +20% Contingency $10,993.50 Engineering Design Services (10%) $4,397.40 Project Total $70,400.00 Construction Total $66,000.00 Bid No. Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Extended Total Site Base Bid 1 Mobilization LS 1 $46,070.00 $46,070.00 2 Safety, Security, and Traffic Control LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 3 New Terminal Building Expansion LS 1 $555,000.00 $555,000.00 4 Earthwork CY 40 $20.00 $800.00 5 Drainage LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 6 Sodding SY 12 $5.00 $60.00 Estimated Total $621,930.00 +20% Contingency $124,386.00 Engineering Design Services (10%) $62,193.00 Project Total $808,500.00 Construction Total $746,300.00 Project 16 - Terminal Parking Expansion Project 17 - Terminal Expansion 5 IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT CIP PROJECTS IMPROVEMENTS 6/7/2018 Bid No. Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Rounded Total 1 General Conditions/Mobilization (10%) LS 1 $521,500.00 $530,000 2 Safety Security and Traffic Control LS 1 $75,000.00 $75,000 3 Temporary Pollution, Erosion, and Siltation Control LS 1 $40,000.00 $40,000 4 Miscellaneous Demolition LS 1 $100,000.00 $100,000 5 Stripping AC 26 $10,000.00 $260,000 6 P-152 Unclassified Excavation CY 27,000 $15.00 $410,000 7 P-160 Subgrade Stabilization, 12-Inch Depth SY 40,000 $8.00 $320,000 8 P-211 Limerock Base Course, 6-Inch Depth SY 40,000 $18.00 $720,000 9 P-401 HMA Surface Course (6" Asphalt Thickness) TON 15,000 $150.00 $2,250,000 10 P-620 Pavement Markings LS 1 $125,000.00 $130,000 11 T-904 Sodding SY 22,000 $5.00 $110,000 12 Airfield Electrical System LS 1 $800,000.00 $800,000 Total Construction Costs (Rounded) $5,800,000 Environmental Assessment LS 1 $200,000.00 $200,000 Planning (1%) LS 1 $58,000.00 $60,000 Engineering Design Services (8%) LS 1 $464,000.00 $470,000 Construction Administration Services (3%) LS 1 $174,000.00 $180,000 Construction Inspection Services ($18k/Month @ 12 Months) LS 1 $216,000.00 $220,000 Total Engineering & Inspection Construction Costs (Rounded) $1,200,000 Estimated Total $7,000,000 20% Contingency $1,400,000.00 Project Total $8,400,000.00 Bid No. Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Extended Total Site Base Bid 1 Mobilization LS 1 $219,020.00 $219,020 2 Safety, Security, and Traffic Control LS 1 $30,000.00 $30,000 3 Subgrade Stabilization, 12-Inch Depth (100% Compaction) SY 1,140 $8.00 $9,120 4 FDOT Index No. 514, Optional Base Group 5 SY 1,140 $15.00 $17,100 5 Superpave Asphaltic Concrete, 2-Inch TON 131 $150.00 $19,665 6 New Hangar Units LS 1 $2,550,000.00 $2,550,000 7 Earthwork CY 560 $20.00 $11,200 8 Drainage LS 1 $100,000.00 $100,000 9 Sodding SY 114 $5.00 $570 Estimated Total $2,956,675.00 +30% Contingency $887,002.50 Engineering Design Services (8%) $236,534.00 Project Total $4,080,200.00 Construction Total $3,843,700.00 Project 17 & Project 18 - Design & Construct Runway 9-27 Extension to Total 7,000’ Length Construction Costs Design & Inspection Services Project 19 - Design, Permit, Construct, Conventional Hangar Facilities 6 IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT CIP PROJECTS IMPROVEMENTS 6/7/2018 Bid No. Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Extended Total Site Base Bid 1 Mobilization LS 1 $69,350.00 $69,350 2 Safety, Security, and Traffic Control LS 1 $40,000.00 $40,000 3 Subgrade Stabilization, 12-Inch Depth (100% Compaction) SY 1,600 $8.00 $12,800 4 FDOT Index No. 514, Optional Base Group 5 SY 1,600 $15.00 $24,000 5 Superpave Asphaltic Concrete, 4-Inch TON 368 $150.00 $55,200 6 New 10 Unit T-Hangars LS 1 $514,600.00 $514,600 7 Earthwork CY 970 $20.00 $19,400 8 Drainage LS 1 $200,000.00 $200,000 9 Sodding SY 160 $5.00 $800 Estimated Total $936,150.00 +30% Contingency $280,845.00 Design $74,892.00 Project Total $1,291,900.00 Construction Total $1,217,000.00 Bid No. Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Extended Total Site Base Bid 1 Mobilization LS 1 $99,610.00 $99,610 2 Safety, Security, and Traffic Control LS 1 $20,000.00 $20,000 3 Subgrade Stabilization, 12-Inch Depth (100% Compaction) SY 11,910 $8.00 $95,280 4 FDOT Index No. 514, Optional Base Group 5 SY 11,910 $15.00 $178,650 5 Superpave Asphaltic Concrete, 6-Inch TON 4,109 $150.00 $616,343 6 Earthwork CY 4,110 $20.00 $82,200 7 Drainage LS 1 $200,000.00 $200,000 9 Street light, underground wiring, 200' o.c., each LF 3,590 $13.00 $46,670 8 Sodding SY 1,191 $5.00 $5,955 Estimated Total $1,344,707.50 +30% Contingency $430,306.40 Engineering Design Services (10%) $107,576.60 Project Total $1,882,600.00 Construction Total $1,775,000.00 Project 20 - Design, Permit, Construct, One 10 Unit T-Hangar Complex Project 21 - Construct Airport Boulevard Extension (Phase III) 7 IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT CIP PROJECTS IMPROVEMENTS 6/7/2018 Bid No. Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Extended Total Site Base Bid 1 Mobilization LS 1 $557,100.00 $557,100 2 Safety, Security, and Traffic Control LS 1 $20,000.00 $20,000 3 Subgrade Stabilization, 12-Inch Depth (100% Compaction) SY 84,650 $8.00 $677,200 4 FDOT Index No. 514, Optional Base Group 5 SY 84,650 $15.00 $1,269,750 5 Superpave Asphaltic Concrete, 6-Inch TON 29,204 $150.00 $4,380,638 6 Earthwork CY 4,110 $20.00 $82,200 7 Drainage LS 1 $200,000.00 $200,000 9 Street light, underground wiring, 200' o.c., each LF 22,427 $13.00 $291,551 8 Sodding SY 8,465 $5.00 $42,325 Estimated Total $7,520,763.50 +30% Contingency $2,256,229.05 Engineering Design Services (8%) $601,661.08 Project Total $10,378,700.00 Construction Total $9,777,000.00 Bid No. Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Extended Total 1 Property Purchase - 300 Acres - East of Runway 27 (Based on CC LS 1 $1,290,000.00 $1,290,000.00 2 PHU Mitigation LS 1 $1,500,000.00 $1,500,000.00 Estimated Total $98,849,038.63 +50% Contingency $19,769,807.73 Project Total $118,618,800.00 Bid No. Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Rounded Total 1 General Conditions/Mobilization (10%) LS 1 $1,340,000.00 $1,340,000.00 2 Safety Security and Traffic Control LS 1 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 3 Temporary Pollution, Erosion, and Siltation Control LS 1 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 4 Miscellaneous Demolition LS 1 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 5 Stripping AC 45 $10,000.00 $450,000.00 6 P-152 Unclassified Excavation CY 75,000 $15.00 $1,130,000.00 7 P-160 Subgrade Stabilization, 12-Inch Depth SY 120,000 $8.00 $960,000.00 8 P-211 Limerock Base Course, 6-Inch Depth SY 120,000 $18.00 $2,160,000.00 9 P-401 HMA Surface Course (6" Asphalt Thickness) TON 45,000 $150.00 $6,750,000.00 10 P-620 Pavement Markings LS 1 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 11 T-904 Sodding SY 70,000 $5.00 $350,000.00 12 Airfield Electrical System LS 1 $1,200,000.00 $1,200,000.00 Total Construction Costs (Rounded) $14,800,000.00 Design & Inspection Services Environmental Assessment LS 1 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 Planning (1%) LS 1 $148,000.00 $150,000.00 Engineering Design Services (8%) LS 1 $1,184,000.00 $1,190,000.00 Construction Administration Services (3%) LS 1 $444,000.00 $450,000.00 Construction Inspection Services ($18k/Month @ 9 Months) LS 1 $162,000.00 $170,000.00 Total Engineering & Inspection Construction Costs (Rounded) $2,200,000.00 Estimated Total $17,000,000.00 +20% Contingency $3,400,000.00 Project Total $20,400,000.00 Project 25 - Property Purchase & PUH Mitigation – Runway Extension Project 25 - Runway 9-27 Ultimate Extension to Total 10,000’ Project 22 - Construct Airport Boulevard Extension (Phase IV) 8 IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT CIP PROJECTS IMPROVEMENTS 6/7/2018 Bid No. Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Extended Total Site Base Bid 1 Mobilization LS 1 $413,710.00 $413,710 2 Safety, Security, and Traffic Control LS 1 $20,000.00 $20,000 3 Subgrade Stabilization, 12-Inch Depth (100% Compaction) SY 66,770 $8.00 $534,160 4 FDOT Index No. 514, Optional Base Group 5 SY 66,770 $15.00 $1,001,550 5 Superpave Asphaltic Concrete, 4-Inch TON 15,357 $150.00 $2,303,565 6 Full Depth Asphalt Pavement Removal SY 0 $8.00 $0 7 Earthwork CY 22,260 $20.00 $445,200 8 Drainage LS 1 $400,000.00 $400,000 9 2” PVC conduit in turf - $10/FT, Counterpoise - $3 per ft , Lighting LF 23,400 $15.00 $351,000 10 2 MOD Sign, Transformer, New sign pad with base can LS 15 $5,500.00 $82,500 11 Sodding SY 6,677 $5.00 $33,385 Estimated Total $5,151,360.00 +40% Contingency $2,060,544.00 Engineering Design Services (8%) $412,108.80 Project Total $7,624,000.00 Construction Total $7,211,900.00 Project 26 - Full Length Parallel Taxiway North of Runway 9-27 9 IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 114 March 2019 Appendix D. Reduced Size ALP G U L F O F M E X I C OATLANT I C O C E BAYGULFLIBERTYLEONWAKULLAFRANKLINJEFFERSONMADISONTAYLORHAMILTONDIXIECOLUMBIABAKERDUVALCLAYUNIONLEVYMARIONPUTNAMST. JOHN S FLAGLERVOLUSIACITRUSHERNANDOPASCOPOLKPINELLLASBREVA R D MANATEEHARDEEDESOTOHIGHLANDSINDIANRIVERST. LUCIEMARTINGLADESCHARLOTTEOKEECH O B E E SARAS O T A LEEHENDRYPALM BEACHBROWARDCOLLIERMIAMI-DADEMONRO E ALACHUASWANNEEFLORIDAAOPERATED BYPREPARED BYAIRPORT LAYOUT PLANImmokalee, FloridaIMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORTIMM - IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORTINDEX OF DRAWINGSTITLESHEET NO.COVER SHEETEXISTING FACILITIESAIRPORT LAYOUT PLANTERMINAL AREA PLANRUNWAY 9-27 INNER APPROACH PLAN & PROFILERUNWAY 18-36 INNER APPROACH PLAN & PROFILERUNWAY DEPARTURE SHEETPART-77 AIRSPACE SURFACES PLANLAND USE MAPAIRPORT PROPERTY INVENTORY MAPAIRPORT PROPERTY INVENTORY MAP DATA1 OF 112 OF 113 OF 114 OF 115 OF 116 OF 117 OF 118 OF 119 OF 1110 OF 1111 OF 110DUFK, 2019Collier County Airport Authority (CCAA)Scale: N.T.S.LOCATION MAPVICINITY MAPIMMOKALEE, FLORIDAScale: N.T.S.Atkins North America Inc.7175 Murrell RoadMelbourne, Florida 32904Tel. (321) 775-6231www.atkinsglobal.com/northamericaAIRPORT SPONSOR APPROVALNAME:TITLE:(SIGNATURE)DATE:THIS AIRPORT DRAWING IS APPROVED BY:REVISIONSDATEDESCRIPTION REVISIONSDATE DESCRIPTIONCLIENTPROJECTCHECKED:JOB NO.:SHEET TITLEDATE:SHEETDESIGN:DRAWN:OFAIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN UPDATEIMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORTIMMOKALEE, FLORIDACOLLIER COUNTYAIRPORT AUTHORITY7175 Murrell RoadMelbourne, Florida, 32904Tel. (321)-775-6231www.atkinsglobal.com/northamerica100053410 A.M.M.J.D.H.C.M.H.11EXISTING FACILITIES35' BRLRSAROFAROFZRPZTOFARUNWAY CENTERLINERUNWAY SAFETY AREARUNWAY OBJECT FREE AREARUNWAY OBSTACLE FREE ZONERUNWAY PROTECTION ZONETAXIWAY OBJECT FREE AREABUILDING RESTRICTION LINEAIRPORT PAVEMENTAIRPORT REFERENCE POINTAIRPORT BUILDINGSAIRPORT PROPERTY LINEFENCEROADS / PARKINGWETLANDSGROUND ELEVATION CONTOURSPAPIPERIMETER ROADRUNWAY END IDENTIFICATIONTHRESHOLD LIGHTSDESCRIPTIONEXISTINGLEGENDASAPPROACH SURFACEWINDCONEN/AHORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD83VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88APRIL 2017ANNUAL RATE OF CHANGE0° 6' WNDECLINATION 6° 6' WTRUE NORTHMAGNETIC PL2Feet0 400 800TSATAXIWAY SAFETY AREAPAPI OBSTACLE CLEARANCE PAPI CONSTRUCTION NOTICE REQUIREMENTTo protect operational safety and future development, all proposed construction onthe airport must be coordinated by the airport owner with the FAA Airport DistrictOffice prior to construction. FAA's review takes approximately 60 days.AIRPORT SPONSOR APPROVALNAME:TITLE:(SIGNATURE)DATE:THIS AIRPORT DRAWING IS APPROVED BY:NO OFZ OBJECT PENETRATIONSNO THRESHOLD SITING SURFACE PENETRATIONSFAA APPROVAL STAMPTHE CONTENTS OF THIS PLAN DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE OFFICIAL VIEWS OR POLICY OFTHE FAA. ACCEPTANCE OF THIS DOCUMENT BY THE FAA DOES NOT IN ANY WAY CONSTITUTE ACOMMITMENT ON THE PART OF THE UNITED STATES TO PARTICIPATE IN ANY DEVELOPMENTDEPICTED HEREIN NOR DOES IT INDICATE THAT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ISENVIRONMENTALLY ACCEPTABLE IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPROPRIATE PUBLIC LAWS.MODIFICATION TO STANDARDS APPROVAL TABLEITEM FAA STANDARDDISPOSITIONREMARKSNONEREQUIREDN/AN/AN/AREVISIONSDATE DESCRIPTIONCLIENTPROJECTCHECKED:JOB NO.:SHEET TITLEDATE:SHEETDESIGN:DRAWN:OFAIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN UPDATEIMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORTIMMOKALEE, FLORIDACOLLIER COUNTYAIRPORT AUTHORITY7175 Murrell RoadMelbourne, Florida, 32904Tel. (321)-775-6231www.atkinsglobal.com/northamerica100053410 A.M.M.J.D.H.C.M.H.11AIRPORT LAYOUT PLANAIRPORT DATA TABLEMEAN MAX. TEMP OF HOTTEST MONTH( NAD 1983 )AIRPORT ELEVATION, MSLAIRPORT REFERENCE POINTITEMLONG.LAT.36.5'081° 24' 07.46" W26° 26 ' 01.76" NEXISTINGPROPOSEDAIRPORT REFERENCE CODE (ARC)NAVAIDSROTATING BEACONNPIAS SERVICE LEVELGASAMECRITICAL AIRCRAFTMAGNETIC VARIATION6.01°W / DATE: AUG. 2017 / SOURCE: NGDCMISCELLANEOUS FACILITIESAWOS, TAXIWAY LIGHTING, LIGHTED WIND CONEWINGSPANMAIN GEAR WIDTH / COCKPIT TO MGAPPROACH SPEEDKING AIR45.98'120 KTS 120 KTS~13.0'B-IICITATION ENCORE63.90'~13.0'081° 23' 58.23" W26° 26 ' 01.97" NALL WEATHER WIND COVERAGE10.5 Knots13.0 Knots16.0 KnotsCROSS WINDCOMPONENTALL WEATHERCOVERAGE99.78%99.96%99.09%RUNWAY18/36RUNWAY9/2791.77%95.63%99.08%99.24%97.52%95.22%IFR WEATHER WIND COVERAGE10.5 Knots13.0 Knots16.0 KnotsCROSS WINDCOMPONENTIFR WEATHERCOVERAGE99.28%99.76%98.21%RUNWAY18/36RUNWAY9/2792.63%95.59%98.31%97.91%95.43%92.43%Station: Southwest Florida International Airport(722108)Source: National Climatic Data CenterPeriod: 2007-2016All Weather Observations: 16,934IFR Weather Observations: 2,02093º F ; JULYSAMESAMESAMESAMEPROPOSED DECLARED DISTANCESRUNWAY 9RUNWAY 27RUNWAY EXISTINGFUTURETORA TODA ASDA LDATORA TODA ASDA LDARUNWAY 185,000'RUNWAY 365,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'7,000'5,000'7,000'7,000'7,000'7,000'7,000'7,000'7,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'5,000'31020NNE3040NE5060 ENE 70 80 90E100110ESE120130SE140150SSE160170180S190200SSW210220SW230 240 WSW 250 260 270W280290WNW300310NW320330NNW340350360N2827222117161110KNOTS.2.3.3.3.4.3.4.3.3.3.3.2.2.4.4.4.4.3.3.4.5.5.5.5.4.3.2.2.2.3.2.2.2.1.2.3+++.1.2.1+.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1+.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.1.1.1+++++.1.1+++++.1++++.1+++.1.1+++++.1.1+++++++++.1+++++.1+++++13.0 Knots16.0 Knots10.5 Knots13.0 Knots16.0 Knots10.5 Knots9273618WIND CALM84.7%1020NNE3040NE5060 ENE 70 80 90E100110ESE120130SE140150SSE160170180S190200SSW210220SW230 240 WSW 250 260 270W280290WNW300310NW320330NNW340350360N2827222117161110KNOTS.2.2.3.4.5.7.91.0.8.6.5.3.2.3.3.3.3.3.3.3.4.5.7.6.4.2.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.1.2++++.1.1.1.1.1++++++++.1.1.1.1.2.1.1++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++13.0 Knots16.0 Knots10.5 Knots13.0 Knots16.0 Knots10.5 Knots9273618WIND CALM85.5%BRLRSAROFAROFZRPZTOFA(BRL)(RSA)(ROFA)(ROFZ)(RPZ)(TOFA)N/AN/A(FPL)N/ARUNWAY CENTERLINERUNWAY SAFETY AREARUNWAY OBJECT FREE AREARUNWAY OBSTACLE FREE ZONERUNWAY PROTECTION ZONETAXIWAY OBJECT FREE AREABUILDING RESTRICTION LINEAIRPORT PAVEMENTAIRPORT REFERENCE POINTAIRPORT BUILDINGSAIRPORT PROPERTY LINEFENCEROADS / PARKINGWETLANDSGROUND ELEVATION CONTOURSPAVEMENT TO BE REMOVEDPAPIPERIMETER ROADRUNWAY END IDENTIFICATIONTHRESHOLD LIGHTSDESCRIPTIONEXISTING FUTURELEGENDAS(AS)APPROACH SLOPEWINDCONEN/AFACILITY DEMOLITIONN/AAIRPORT PROPERTY EASEMENTESMTPLN/AFUTURE AVIATION DEVELOPMENTFUTURE NON-AVIATION DEVELOPMENTN/AN/AFEN/A00150'300'HORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD83VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88APRIL 2017ANNUAL RATE OF CHANGE0° 6' WNDECLINATION 6° 6' WTRUE NORTHMAGNETIC ULTIMATE AVIATION DEVELOPMENTN/ATAXIWAY & TAXILANE WIDTHTAXIWAY & TAXILANE SAFTEY AREA WIDTHTAXIWAY OBJECT FREE AREATAXILANE OBJECT FREE AREATAXIWAY / TAXILANE LIGHTINGTAXIWAY EDGE SAFETY MARGIN (TESM)TAXIWAY SHOULDER WIDTH50'10'N/A79'131'35'7.5'TAXIWAY DESIGN GROUP32TAXIWAY / TAXILANE SEPARATIONTAXIWAY DATATAXIWAY ATAXIWAY BTAXIWAY CEXISTING PROPOSEDEXISTING PROPOSEDEXISTING PROPOSEDSAMESAMESAMESAMESAMESAMESAME79'131'115'115'CLEARSAMECLEARSAMESAMESAMESAMEN/ASAMESAMESAMESAMEMITLSAMEMITLSAME50'10'N/A79'131'3SAMESAMESAME115'CLEARSAMESAMESAMESAMESAMEMITLSAMEELEVATIONS (NAVD88) OF RUNWAY ENDSRUNWAY END COORDINATES% WIND COVERAGE (ALL)RUNWAY SURFACE TYPERUNWAY DESIGN CODE (RDC)( NAD 1983 )RUNWAY LENGTHRUNWAY WIDTH% EFFECTIVE GRADIENTRUNWAY LIGHTINGITEMVISUAL AIDS% MAXIMUM GRADIENTAPPROACH VISIBILITY MINIMUMSFAR PART 77 APPROACH TYPETOUCHDOWN ZONE ELEVATION (TDZE)NAVIGATIONAL AIDSRUNWAY SAFETY AREA (RSA)RUNWAY OFARUNWAY OFZBEYOND RWY ENDWIDTHBEYOND RWY ENDWIDTHBEYOND RWY ENDWIDTH11.50 MPH / 10.5 KTS14.96 MPH / 13.0 KTSPART 77 APPROACH CATEGORY (SLOPE)PAVEMENT STRENGTH (LBS.)DUAL WHEELSINGLE WHEEL2D WHEEL IN TANDEMRUNWAY PROTECTION ZONE (RPZ)INNER WIDTHLENGTHOUTER WIDTHMARKINGSAERONAUTICAL SURVEY REQUIRED FOR APPROACHRUNWAY DEPARTURE SURFACETHRESHOLD SITING SURFACE THRESHOLD ELEVATIONRUNWAY APPROACH REFERENCE CODE (APRC)RUNWAY DEPARTURE REFERENCE CODE (DPRC)PCNRUNWAY SURFACE TREATMENTDESIGN AIRCRAFT37.1' / 34.0'5,000'EXISTINGRUNWAY 9 / 27ASPHALTMIRL/REIL300'200'250'-0.1%-2.69%34:1GPS35,000 LBS26°26'13.4767" N081°24'14.6283" W1,000'500'700'NON-PRECISION40:137.1' / 34.0'20:1 NO TSS PENETRATIONSB / II / VISNONEB-II100'PAPI-4LB-II150'NVGS300'500'35.4'KING AIR60,000 LBS110,000 LBS95.22%97.78%26°26'15.1752" N081°23'19.6537" W150'200'250'200'250'-5.28%VOR & GPS20:1 NO TSS PENETRATIONS23/F/A/X/T8/F/B/Y/TNONENONENVGSNVGSKING AIRKING AIRB-IIB-II35,000 LBS35,000 LBS60,000 LBS60,000 LBS110,000 LBS110,000 LBSASPHALTASPHALT-0.1%0.1%4,550'4,550'150'35.9' / 33.3'MIRL/REILMIRL/REIL300'300'150'150'26°26'09.6375" N081°24'18.6077" W26°25'24.6019" N081°24'16.8798" WPAPI-4LPAPI-4L91.77%95.63%36.3' / 35.1'RUNWAY DATANON-PRECISIONNON-PRECISION34:134:1NON-PRECISIONNON-PRECISIONNON-PRECISION1 MILE40:140:120:1 NO TSS PENETRATIONSB-IIB / II / VISB-IIB / II / VIS≥ 3/4 MILE91.77%95.63%300'500'300'500'1,000'500'700'1 MILEPROPOSEDCITATION ENCORE7,000'ASPHALTMIRL/REIL300'200'250'-0.1%-2.69%34:135,000 LBS1,000'500'700'NON-PRECISION40:1B / II / VISNONEB-II100'PAPI-4LB-II150'NVGS300'500'35.4'60,000 LBS110,000 LBS95.22%97.78%NON-PRECISION> 3/4 MILE26°26'15.8530" N081°22'57.6637" W37.1' / 31.0'26°26'13.4767" N081°24'14.6283" W* To protect areas for development in the post 20 year planning period, the ultimate configuration of the airport facilities is depicted in blue. However, the need for these facilitiesare not justified in this master planning effort, and therefore no planning analysis was completed. Justification and planning analysis must be provided for these projects prior toconsideration for FAA funding. Ultimate surface dimensions were preserved from the previous ALP.20:1 NO TSS PENETRATIONS//37.1' / 31.0'GPSRUNWAY 18 / 36EXISTINGPROPOSED-5.28%35.9' / 33.3'/26°26'09.6375" N081°24'18.6077" W26°25'24.6019" N081°24'16.8798" W/35.9' / 33.3'35.9' / 33.3'1,000'500'700'VOR & GPS36.3' / 35.1'23/F/A/X/T23/F/A/X/T 00 150' 300'REVISIONSDATE DESCRIPTIONCLIENTPROJECTCHECKED:JOB NO.:SHEET TITLEDATE:SHEETDESIGN:DRAWN:OFAIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN UPDATEIMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORTIMMOKALEE, FLORIDACOLLIER COUNTYAIRPORT AUTHORITY7175 Murrell RoadMelbourne, Florida, 32904Tel. (321)-775-6231www.atkinsglobal.com/northamerica100053410 A.M.M.J.D.H.C.M.H.11HORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD83VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88TERMINAL AREA PLANBRLRSAROFAROFZRPZTOFA(BRL)(RSA)(ROFA)(ROFZ)(RPZ)(TOFA)N/AN/A(FPL)N/ARUNWAY CENTERLINERUNWAY SAFETY AREARUNWAY OBJECT FREE AREARUNWAY OBSTACLE FREE ZONERUNWAY PROTECTION ZONETAXIWAY OBJECT FREE AREABUILDING RESTRICTION LINEAIRPORT PAVEMENTAIRPORT REFERENCE POINTAIRPORT BUILDINGSAIRPORT PROPERTY LINEFENCEROADS / PARKINGWETLANDSGROUND ELEVATION CONTOURSPAVEMENT TO BE REMOVEDPAPIPERIMETER ROADRUNWAY END IDENTIFICATIONTHRESHOLD LIGHTSDESCRIPTIONEXISTING FUTURELEGENDAS(AS)APPROACH SLOPEWINDCONEN/AFACILITY DEMOLITIONN/AAIRPORT PROPERTY EASEMENTESMTPLN/AFUTURE AVIATION DEVELOPMENTFUTURE NON-AVIATION DEVELOPMENTN/AN/AFEN/AAPRIL 2017ANNUAL RATE OF CHANGE0° 6' WNDECLINATION 6° 6' WTRUE NORTHMAGNETIC 4AIRFIELD DRAINAGEN/A RUNWAY 9-27INNER APPROACHPLAN & PROFILERUNWAY 27 PROFILE VIEWRUNWAY 27 PLAN VIEWRUNWAY 9 PROFILE VIEWRUNWAY 9 PLAN VIEWRUNWAY 9-27 5,000'20'0'200'VERTICAL:1" = 20'HORIZONTAL:1" = 200'0'APRIL 2017ANNUAL RATE OFCHANGE0° 6' WNDECLINATION 6° 6' WTRUE NORTHMAGNETIC DESCRIPTIONLEGENDEXISTINGFUTUREAPPROACH SURFACEPOWERPOLEBUILDINGFENCETSSASXN/AN/AN/AN/ADSDEPARTURE SURFACETRAVERSWAY,CL/EDGE CROSSINGX X X EXTENDED RUNWAY C.L.RUNWAYN/AN/APROPERTY LINETHRESHOLD SITTINGSURFACE5PLFPLTSSASDSPAPIPAPIPAPI OBSTACLECLEARANCE RUNWAY 18-36INNER APPROACHPLAN & PROFILERUNWAY 36 PROFILE VIEWRUNWAY 36 PLAN VIEWRUNWAY18 PROFILE VIEWRUNWAY 18 PLAN VIEWRUNWAY 18-36 5,000'20'0'200'VERTICAL:1" = 20'HORIZONTAL:1" = 200'0'APRIL 2017ANNUAL RATE OFCHANGE0° 6' WNDECLINATION 6° 6' WTRUE NORTHMAGNETIC6DESCRIPTIONLEGENDEXISTINGFUTUREAPPROACH SURFACEPOWERPOLEBUILDINGFENCETSSASXN/AN/AN/AN/ADSDEPARTURE SURFACETRAVERSWAY,CL/EDGE CROSSINGX X X EXTENDED RUNWAY C.L.RUNWAYN/AN/APROPERTY LINETHRESHOLD SITTINGSURFACEPLFPLTSSASDSPAPIPAPIPAPI OBSTACLECLEARANCE RUNWAY DEPARTURESURFACE DRAWINGRUNWAY 18-36 PROFILE VIEWRUNWAY 18-36 PLAN VIEWRUNWAY 9-27 PROFILE VIEWRUNWAY 9-27 PLAN VIEWDescriptionLEGENDExistingFuturePower Pole Building Fence N/AN/AN/ADSDeparture SurfaceTraversway,CL Crossing/Edge CrossingExtended Runway C.L.Runway N/ARUNWAY 18-36 4,500'RUNWAY 9-27 5,000'00 1,000' 2,000'APRIL 2017ANNUAL RATE OF CHANGE0° 6' WNDECLINATION 6° 6' WTRUE NORTHMAGNETIC APRIL 2017ANNUAL RATE OFCHANGE0° 6' WNDECLINATION 6° 6' WTRUE NORTHMAGNETICN/AProperty LinePL100'0'VERTICAL:1" = 100'100'0'VERTICAL:1" = 100'RUNWAY 9-27RUNWAY 18-367DSPL00 1,000' 2,000' HORIZONTALSURFACE187' MSL187' MSL250' MSL300' MSL350' MSL387' MSL150'100'50'50' 100' 150'200' MSL100'150'100'150'187' MSL250' MSL300' MSL350' MSL387' MSL200' MSL100'150'187'187'187'187'EXISTING RWY 36 ENDLAT - 26° 25' 24.60"'LONG - 81° 24' 16.88''El. 33.0 'EXISTING RWY 18 ENDLAT - 26° 26' 14.09"'LONG - 81° 24' 18.78''El. 36.1'EXISTING RWY 9 ENDLAT - 26° 26' 13.32"'LONG - 81° 24' 19.58''El. 35.4' (TDZE)EXISTING RWY 27 ENDLAT - 26° 26' 15.03"'LONG - 81° 23' 24.60''El. 33.2'FUTURE RWY 27 ENDLAT - 26° 26' 15.85''LONG - 81° 22' 57.66''El. (30.1)'OB-21OB-1OB-2OB-3T-01T-02T-03PART 77 AIRSPACE PLAN02,000'HORIZONTALDIMDIMENSIONAL STANDARDS (FEET)ITEMDABCEAA5,0002,0005,00020:1ABAB250 5005,0005,0001,250 1,5005,000 5,00020:1 20:1BCDCDB500 500 1,00010,00010,0003,500 4,00010,000 10,00034:1 34:11,00010,00016,000**A - UTILITY RUNWAYSB - RUNWAYS LARGER THAN UTILITYC - VISIBILITY MINIMUMS GREATER THAN 3/4 MILESD - VISIBILITY MINIMUMS AS LOW AS 3/4 MILEE - PRECISION INSTRUMENT APPROACH SLOPE IS 50:1 FOR INNER 10,000 FEET AND 40:1 FOR ANADDITIONAL 40,000 FEETPRECISIONINSTRUMENTRUNWAYNON-PRECISIONINSTRUMENT RUNWAYVISUALRUNWAYPRECISIONINSTRUMENTRUNWAYNON-PRECISIONINSTRUMENT RUNWAYVISUALRUNWAYWIDTH OF PRIMARY SURFACE ANDAPPROACH SURFACE WIDTH ATINNER ENDRADIUS OF HORIZONTAL SURFACEAPPROACH SURFACE WIDTH AT ENDAPPROACH SURFACE LENGTHAPPROACH SLOPEAPPROACH FLARE 0.1:1 0.1:1 0.15:1 0.15:1 0.15:1 0.15:1ISOMETRIC VIEW OF SECTIONVISUAL OR NONPRECISION APPROACH(SLOPE E)CONICAL SURFACEPRECISION INSTRUMENTAPPROACHRUNWAY CENTERLINE20:17:17:1HORIZONTAL SURFACE150' ABOVE AIRPORT EL.FEDERAL AVIATION REGULATIONS PART 77, STATES THAT A STRUCTURE IS PRESUMED TO HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECT UPON THE SAFE AND EFFICIENT USE OF NAVIGABLE AIRSPACE IF ITSHEIGHT EXCEEDS THE FOLLOWING STANDARDS:1. A HEIGHT OF FIVE HUNDRED (500) FEET ABOVE GROUND LEVEL AT THE SITE OF THE OBJECT ANYWHERE IN THE STATE.2. A HEIGHT THAT IS TWO HUNDRED (200) FEET ABOVE GROUND LEVEL OR ABOVE THE ESTABLISHED AIRPORT ELEVATION, WHICHEVER IS HIGHER, WITHIN THREE (3) NAUTICAL MILES OF THEESTABLISHED REFERENCED POINT OF A PUBLIC-USE AIRPORT, EXCLUDING HELIPORTS, AND THE HEIGHT INCREASES IN THE PROPORTION OF ONE HUNDRED (100) FEET FOR EACH ADDITIONALNAUTICAL MILE OF DISTANCE FROM THE AIRPORT UP TO A MAXIMUM OF FIVE HUNDRED (500) FEET.3. A HEIGHT WITHIN A TERMINAL OBSTACLE CLEARANCE AREA, INCLUDING AN INITIAL APPROACH SEGMENT, A DEPARTURE AREA, AND A CIRCLING APPROACH AREA, AS DEFINED BY FEDERAL LAWSAND REGULATIONS, WHICH WOULD RESULT IN THE VERTICAL DISTANCE BETWEEN ANY POINT ON THE OBJECT AND AN ESTABLISHED MINIMUM INSTRUMENT FLIGHT ALTITUDE WITHIN THAT AREA ORSEGMENT TO BE LESS THAN THE REQUIRED OBSTACLE CLEARANCE.4. A HEIGHT WITHIN AN EN ROUTE OBSTACLE CLEARANCE AREA, AS DEFINED BY FEDERAL LAWS AND REGULATIONS, INCLUDING TURN AND TERMINATION AREAS, OF A FEDERAL AIRWAY ORAPPROVED OFF-AIRWAY ROUTE, THAT WOULD INCREASE THE MINIMUM OBSTACLE CLEARANCE ALTITUDE.5. THE SURFACE OF A TAKEOFF AND LANDING AREA OF A PUBLIC-USE AIRPORT OR ANY IMAGINARY SURFACE AS ESTABLISHED BY FAR PART 77. HOWEVER, NO PART OF THE TAKEOFF OR LANDINGAREA ITSELF WILL BE CONSIDERED TO BE AN OBSTRUCTION.NOTE: FAR PART 77 IMAGINARY SURFACES ARE SHOWN ON THIS SHEET FOR THE IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT. THESE SURFACES ARE DEPICTED BASED UPON EXISTING AND ULTIMATE AIRPORTDEVELOPMENT.NOTESPART-77 OBSTRUCTIONSAPRIL 2017ANNUAL RATE OF CHANGE0° 6' WNDECLINATION 6° 6' WTRUE NORTHMAGNETIC RUNWAY 18-36 PROFILE VIEWRUNWAY 9-27 PROFILE VIEW01,000'HORIZONTAL100'0'VERTICAL 8Approach SurfaceTransitional SurfaceHorizontal SurfaceConical SurfacePrimary SurfaceLEGEND LAND USE MAPRUNWAY PROTECTION ZONERUNWAY OBSTACLE FREE AREAPROPERTY LINEAIRFIELDNON-AERONAUTICALAERONAUTICALON AIRPORT LAND USEEXISTING CLEARANCESFUTURE CLEARANCESRUNWAY PROTECTION ZONERUNWAY OBSTACLE FREE AREAFUTURE PROPERTY LINEPLRPZ(RPZ)ROFAFPL(ROFA)AGRICULTURE/ FUTURE AVIATIONCOMMERCE CENTERCOMMERCE CENTER/INDUSTRIALLOW DENSITY RESIDENTIALHIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIALINDUSTRIALAGRICULTUREOFF AIRPORT LAND USEAPRIL 2017ANNUAL RATE OFCHANGE0° 6' WNDECLINATION 6° 6' WTRUE NORTHMAGNETIC OTHERDEVELOPMENT RESTRICTED*WETLAND AREA00 500' 1,000'HORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD83VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD889*Conservation EasementJANURAY 2019 498.85'PLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPL PLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPL PL PL PL PL PLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFPLFUTURE PROPERTY LINERUNWAY 27- 7,000' TOTAL LENGTHN 79°40'02" E897.38'S 01°47'51" E3001.15'S 89°06'30"W392.71'S 00°37'54"E330.00'N 89°06'24"E399.43'S 01°47'58"E595.40'S 46°56'01"E114.19'S 48°03'57"W354.44'S 38°23'24"W512.27'S 35°35'17"W790.74'N 00°37'52"W1545.15'N 88°58'04"EN 00°37'52"W320.01'S 88°58'04"W498.85'N 00°37'52"W196.16'N 27°5 8' 5 6" W 856.22'N 15°06'23"E207.92'N 15°28'01" E2315.69'S 74°31'59" E280.02'S 10°19'48" E 954.97'S 89°01'33"W351.68'S 88°16'17"W657.11'S 88°23'05"W666.72'S 00°12'19"W670.12'S 88°52'25"W686.43'S 00°18'39"W665.62'S 88°58'33"W 2580.08'N 89°57'51"WS 01°24'24"E 1338.87'S 02°01'06"E 1337.64'S 00°03'26"E 1334.66'S 00°33'18"ES 00°37'21" EN 89°52'18" E 1323.54'N 89°35'19" E 2658.01'N 89°35'07" E 2658.08'N 88°52'49" E 1636.79'1350.11'2652.60'1325.57'S 89°01'27"W1982.31'S 88°37'37"W 1348.53'N 15°28'01" E966.71'N15°28'01"E 6020.10'N 83°16'16" W703.78'POINT OFCOMMENCEMENT (POC)1) EASEMENT PARCEL "A"2) ROADWAY PARCEL "ONE"3) ROADWAY PARCEL "TWO"4) EASEMENT PARCEL "B"5) ROADWAY PARCEL "THREE"FOR:POINT OFBEGINNING (POB)EASEMENT PARCEL "A"REVISEDCONSERVATIONEASEMENT "B"(10.383 ACRES GROSS)POINT OFBEGINNING (POB)EASEMENT PARCEL "B"POINT OFBEGINNING (POB)ROADWAYPARCEL THREE (UNPAVED)25263635363512353425363031CURVE #1CURVE #5BCURVE #5A262727REVISEDCONSERVATIONEASEMENT "A"(121.287 ACRES GROSS)POINT OFBEGINNING (POB)ROADWAYPARCEL TWO (UNPAVED)RSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFA ROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFARPZ RPZ RSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSARSA(RSA)(RSA)(RSA)(RSA)ROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFAROFA(ROFA)(ROFA)(ROFA)(ROFA)RPZRPZRPZ(RPZ)(RPZ)(RPZ)(RPZ)(RPZ)(RPZ)RPZRPZRPZ(ROFZ)(ROFZ)(ROFZ)(ROFZ)POINT OFBEGINNING (POB)ROADWAY PARCELONE (PAVED)CURVE #3CURVE #4CURVE #2POINT OFCOMMENCEMENT (POC)1) PARCEL 2 - RELEASED PROPERTYFOR:PARCEL 2RELEASED PROPERTYAIRPORT PROPERTYINVENTORY MAPPROPERTY LINEPOTENTIAL FUTURE PROPERTY LINEMETES AND BOUNDSSECTION CORNER MARKERSRUNWAY PROTECTION ZONE (RPZ)FUTURE RUNWAY PROTECTION ZONEFPLN 89°35'07" E 2658.08'132400 400' 800'APRIL 2017ANNUAL RATE OF CHANGE0° 6' WNDECLINATION 6° 6' WTRUE NORTHMAGNETIC HORIZONTAL DATUM: NAD83VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88RUNWAY SAFETY AREA (RSA)FUTURE RUNWAY SAFETY AREARUNWAY OBJECT FREE AREA (ROFA)FUTURE RUNWAY OBJECT FREE AREACONSERVATION EASEMENTPROPERTY RELEASED FROM AERONAUTICAL PROVISIONSLEGENDRPZRPZRSARSAROFAROFAPL10EXISTING AIRFIELD PAVEMENTFUTURE AIRFIELD PAVEMENT AIRPORT PROPERTY INVENTORYMAP DATA11 IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 115 March 2019 Appendix E. Public Involvement Details E.1. Meeting Notifications IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 116 March 2019 E.2. Public Meeting Minutes IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 117 March 2019 IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 118 March 2019 IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 119 March 2019 IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 120 March 2019 E.3. Working Paper Publication May 2nd 2017 IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 121 March 2019 E.4. Airport Layout Plan Update - 30% Milestone Public Comment Forum Results Date Q-1 Q-2 Q-3 Location Comment Response What type of stakeholder do you represent you at Immokalee Regional Airport? My comment is regarding: Please use the field below to submit any comments or questions you may have about Working Paper # 1 30% 10/16/2017 Visitor Other No Comment LaBelle, Florida N/A 5/2/2017 Transient Pilot Existing Conditions A people gate from inside with a keypad to exist the ramp area Bay City, Michigan Noted, anticipated to will be addressed as a need within the facility requirements analysis. 5/15/2017 Other: Collier County Business and Econ Dev office Airport Layout Plan Process Note from project Consultant: Comment provided in research memo on May 9, 2017. Formal memo included in this appendix. Naples, Florida Comments were addressed in the formal revisions of the 30% project narrative, and adjustments were reflected in subsequent 60% deliverable. Goal Setting & Visioning Forecasts of Aviation Demand Demand / Capacity Analysis IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 122 March 2019 E.5. Airport Layout Plan Update - 60% Milestone Public Comment Forum Results Date Q-1 Q-2 Location Comment Response What type of stakeholder do you represent you at Immokalee Regional Airport? Please use the field below to submit any comments or questions you may have about Working Paper # 1 30% 3/20/2018 Transient Pilot test Livonia, Michigan N/A 3/28/2018 Transient Pilot 1.The link to the plan document on your website is broken, so I couldn't actually read the document. 2. IMM should actively encourage the reestablishment of glider operations at the airport. Given the size, physical layout, and geographical location, IMM could become the preeminent glider airport in South Florida, attracting glider pilots not only from Naples & Ft. Myers, but also from Miami, Fort Lauderdale and other cities on the east coast of Florida. 3. A local glider operation is the ideal way to introduce High School students to aviation and foster interest in STEM. The Civil Air Patrol has a very active youth glider program that could be a core for such an endeavor. 4. IMM has a layout that is ideal for glider winch launches, which has the potential to draw glider pilots from the entire US for training in the winter months. This was demonstrated about 5 or so years ago, when Cross Country Soaring ran a 6 week winch launch clinic at IMM that drew 29 glider pilots from around the country to IMM. In the winter months, most of the northern glider clubs have their equipment in storage. If IMM had the appropriate facilities, it should be quite easy to get one or more of these clubs to setup winter operations at IMM. The key to make this happen is the make available hangar facilities that can house one or more two place gliders. Another key requirement for a successful glider operation is the availability of grass landing areas. This is also helpful for tail dragger aircraft. A 2,500' grass strip is suitable for aero tow glider operations. The area to the west of runway 18 / 36 would be ideal for this type of grass strip. For winch launching, a 5,000' strip would be ideal (only ~1,000' needs to be landable). In particular, the area on the north side of Runway 9 / 27 should be reserved for glider winch launch operations. Taxiways should not be constructed in this area. The establishment of an active glider operation at IMM would significantly increase airport activity and would attract a substantial number of pilots to Collier County in the winter months. The combination of a good soaring site, coupled with the gulf beaches and other recreational opportunities in SW Florida for non-flying family members makes IMM one of the best potential winter soaring sites in the US. This could result in a significant number of pilots electing to purchase winter homes in this market. Naples, Florida 1. Link verified on 4/5/2018 Documents available. No link correction necessary. 2. Comment submitted after preferred alternative was selected and 90 percent project documentation was generated. Comment will be formally recorded, and airport sponsor was notified of suggestions. IMM Airport Layout Plan Update - Draft Final 123 March 2019 E.6. Airport Layout Plan Update - 95% Milestone Public Comment Forum Results Date Q-1 Q-2 Comment Response What type of stakeholder do you represent you at Immokalee Regional Airport? Please use the field below to submit any comments or questions you may have about Working Paper # 1 30% 6/11/19 Transient Pilot You need a "loop" at the end of runway 27 that could be used as a "run-up area" Additional run up areas can be provided with any additional runway length. 6/11/19 Transient Pilot More windsocks Additional windsocks will be provided with any additional runway length 6/11/19 Other Will the Immokalee Airport have the capacity and qualifications to originate commercial flights to other countries, for the purpose of exporting goods produced in Immokalee, and other adjacent areas in SW Florida? Within the planning period, the requirement for international exports was not identified as a requirement due to the existing and historical facility demand. However, while not warrented within the planning period. This potential was accounted for and this plan does plan for the ultimate (post 20 year) planning period and does not restrict the airport from this type of development. 6/11/19 CRA of Immokalee How will this plan benefit the local citizens of Immokalee. Both short and long term. This plan in the short term provides a development plan for the logical short term growth of the airport. This plan also provides a fundig mechanism to aid the community in obtaining grant funding to maintain and further develop the airport using FAA and FDOT funds. 6/11/19 Local Citizen s there any possibility that Immokalee Regional Airport could be expanded to be an International Airport and receive and send materials to and from International countries? Within the planning period, the requirement for international exports was not identified as a requirement due to the existing and historical facility demand. However, while not warrented within the planning period. This potential was accounted for and this plan does plan for the ultimate (post 20 year) planning period and does not restrict the airport from this type of development. © Atkins Ltd except where stated otherwise. The Atkins logo, ‘Carbon Critical Design’ and the strapline ‘Plan Design Enable’ are trademarks of Atkins Ltd. Anna Marron Atkins 7195 Murrell Road Melbourne FL 32940-7999 anna.marron@atkinsglobal.com