Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-95-0459J-95-511 5/24/95 RESOLUTION NO. 9 5- 459 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO PREPARE AND ISSUE A REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS ("RFQ") SOLICITING RESPONSES FROM PRIVATE AIR CARRIERS) INTERESTED IN OPERATING, MANAGING AND SERVICING, AS A SINGLE FIXED BASE OPERATOR, THE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT FACILITY ON APPROXIMATELY TEN (10) ACRES OF CITY -OWNED LAND LOCATED AT WATSON ISLAND, MIAMI, FLORIDA; PROVIDING FOR A SELECTION COMMITTEE TO EVALUATE THE QUALIFICATIONS SUBMITTED; TO NEGOTIATE A CONTRACT AND RECOMMEND SAME FOR COMMISSION APPROVAL AND AWARD. WHEREAS, the City of Miami Charter, Section 3(11), provides that the City shall have the power to construct and equip, on City property, such improvements as may be necessary for an airport, to operate and maintain such facilities; to provide rules and regulations governing their use or means of transportation within or over the same; and to enter into contracts or otherwise cooperate with other government entities or other public or private agencies in all matters relating to such facilities; otherwise to exercise such powers as may be required or convenient for such establishment, operation, and maintenance; and WHEREAS, the Watson Island Master Plan, adopted February 23, 1989 by City Commission Resolution No. 89-199, provides for the development of 10.5 acres of land on Watson Island as public air CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF J U N 0 1 1995 Resolution No. 95- 459 1 i transportation facilities including, but not limited to, seaplane and helicopter services utilizing a private air carrier to provide operational services for the provision of said air transportation services to the public; and WHEREAS, Watson Island is currently designated by the FAA as a "non -hub", commercial service" facility (X44-FAA Identifier per Florida Airport Directory 1992) and thereby entitled to FAA Airport Improvement Program trust funds, currently available in the amount of $1,644,591.00 exclusively and specifically for the design and improvement of public airport infrastructure and facilities on Watson Island; and WHEREAS, the FAA has approved by written memorandum of March 31, 1995, the Master Plan for Air Transportation Facilities for Watson Island, March 1995, which provides an Airport Layout Plan for municipal airport services on Watson Island and a categorical exclusion from requirements for a formal environmental assessment; and WHEREAS, it is in the public interest to provide vital air transportation services linking Metropolitan Miami to regional, state and international destinations for emergency medical, evacuation, courier, tourism, intergovernmental services, and economic development purposes; and WHEREAS, Watson Island Offers the only feasible location for air transportation services to the urban center in consideration z- 95- 459 J of environmental and safety requirements for the operation of such aviation facilities; and WHEREAS, at such time as the City Commission approves the development and funding sources for a Municipal Airport Facility on Watson Island, and pursuant to such approval, the City undertakes the construction of said facility, it will be necessary to contract with private air carriers for the conduct of such air transportation services to the public at a municipal airport; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA: Section 1. The recitals and findings contained in the Preamble to this Resolution are hereby adopted by reference thereto and incorporated herein as if fully set forth in this Section.I Section 2. The City Manager is hereby authorized to prepare and issue a Request for Qualifications, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, for purposes of evaluating qualifications from private air carriers interested in contracting with the City for purposes of operating, servicing and managing the airport facility. 1 The herein authorization is further subject to compliance with all requirements that may be imposed by the City Attorney, including but not limited to those prescribed by applicable City Charter and Code provisions. 3- 95- 459 i i Section 3. The City Manager is hereby authorized to appoint, from City staff, a five (5) person selection committee to: (i) evaluate the qualifications submitted in response to this RFQ; -i (ii) rank the respondents in accordance with criteria set forth in the RFQ; (iii)negotiate with the private air carrier ranked first by the selection committee a contract for Fixed Base Operator services; and (iv) recommend, if negotiated satisfactorily, a contract to the City Commission for its consideration and award, if approved. Section 4. This Resolution shall become effective I immediately upon its adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of June 1995. STEPYiEN P. CLAIW, MAYOR ATTEST: i ALTER a E CITY CLERK PREPARED AND APPROVED BY: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND <' CORRECTNESS: dElf—E O. BRU A. INWJES, I I ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY CIT ATY W124:csk:JOB 95- 459 -4- TO FROM CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM Honorable Mayor and Members Xof the Commission Cesar H. Odio City Manager RECOMMENDATION: DATE : May 24, 1995 13 sua.,EcR.esolution Authorizing Issuance of a Request for Qualifications for a Fixed Base Operator for the REFEREt3son Island Airport Facility For Commission Mtg of 6/l/95 ENCLOSURES: FILE : It is respectfully recommended that the City Commission adopt the attached Resolution authorizing the preparation and issuance of a Request for Qualifications ("RFQ") in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, soliciting responses from private air carrier(s) interested in operating, managing and servicing as a Fixed Base Operator, the Municipal Airport facility on Watson Island. BACKGROUND: On February 23, 1989 the City Commission adopted the Watson Island Master Plan by Resolution 89-199 providing for the development of a municipal air transportation facility to accomodate the historical services of seaplane and helicopter operations. On September 7, 1993 the City Commission adopted Resolution 93-564 authorizing the consultant contract with TCI International for the preparation of the Watson Island Air Transportation Facilities Master Plan. The plan was completed and accepted by the Federal Aviation Administration (who paid 90% of the planning study cost) on March 31, 1995. The attached plan is the final consultant report for your review and represents a conceptual framework for establishing a modem aviation facility on Watson Island for providing seaplane and helicopter services to the City. The City has available for funding the construction of the aviation facility over $1.6 million in Federal Aviation Airport Improvement Program trust fund monies earmarked for Watson Island. Each year approximately $400,000 is added to the fund and remains for three years before expiring. To accomplish the objective of constructing and operating a municipal airport facility, the City must establish through private air carriers regularly scheduled aviation services from the Watson Island site, much as Chalk's Airways has done for close to 75 years on the island. The preferred means of establishing those services is through a long term contract 95- 459 - with a "Fixed Base Operator" who provides on -going operational management, servicing and maintainance for the facility and secures the facility's economically self-supporting status. The City administration believes that a qualified operator can operate the airport facility at no cost to the City while paying the City a fee for essential services (police, fire, sanitation, etc.) The Department of Development recommends the drafting and issuance of an RFQ to select the most qualified operator for the facility as provided in the attached resolution. 95- d59 AI'L INA., m !Mrl? omr, -i, Submitted into the pu lbiic - record in connea',don with item 13 olq 459 City C;lesk ,r^ .blaster .Flan c�* f Air Transportation Facilities Watson Island, Miami, Florida Prepared for Miami Department of Development and Housing Conservation By Thompson Consultants International Williams, HatfCeld & stoner, Inc. M.C. Harry & Associates, Inc. Julius Levine Llerena & .Associates, Inc. March 1995 95- 459 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS THOMPSON CONSULTANTS INTERNATIONAL, INC. PROJECT MANAGER Edward M. Whitlock, P.E., Vice President Ronald F. Price, P.E. Principal Associate Harle J. Bishop, II, NCARB, Principal Associate WILLIAMS, HATFIELD & STONER, INC. Carroll R. Sanders, P.E., Vice President Charles K. Deeb, P.E. Jean E. Lindsey, AICP Joanne Helfin MILTON C. HARRY & ASSOCIATES, INC. James W. Piersol, AIA, Principal Thomas M. Carlson, AIA, Principal Julio C. Webel, Associate Joseph A. Auld, Associate JULIUS S. LEVINE LAURA LLERENA & ASSOCIATES, INC. Julius S. Levine, AICP, President Laura Llerena, RLA, ASLA, President Jacqueline A. Boivin i CITY OF MIAMI ' Department of Development and Housing Conservation k< lr Jack Luft, Assistant Director Courtney Allen, Assistant Development Coordinator Maria Perez, Project Representative 9 _ 4 il E TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................... ES-1 CHAPTER 1 - EXISTING CONDITIONS 1.1 REGIONAL LOCATION ...................................... 1-1 1.2 HELIPORT/SEAPLANE AIRPORT ROLE ........................ 1-1 1.3 METEOROLOGICAL DATA ................................... 1-1 1.4 AIRSPACE UTILIZATION .................................... 1-4 1.5 CURRENT AVIATION ACTIVITY .............................. 1-4 1.5.1 Helicopters ............................................ 1-4 1.5.2 Seaplanes ............................................. 1-6 1.6 EXISTING MARKETS ........................................ 1-6 1.7 EXISTING HELIPORT/SEAPLANE FACILITIES ................... 1-8 1.7.1 Approaches/Runway..................................... 1-8 1.7.2 Chalk's Seaplane Terminal and Administrative Facilities .......... 1-8 1.7.3 Taxiways/Water Access/Egress Seaplanes ..................... 1-12 1.7.4 Lighting .............................................. 1-13 1.7.5 Apron Areas ........................................... 1-13 1.7.6 Fixed Base Operators and Aviation Businesses .................. 1-13 1.7.7 Utilities ............................................... 1.7.8 Airport Rescue and Fire Fighting Facilities (ARFF) .............. 1-13 1-14 1.8 ON -SITE LAND USE AND ACCESS ............................. 1-14 1.9 ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE LAND ........................ 1-16 1.10 VICINITY LAND USE ........................................ 1-17 1.10.1 Existing Land Use ....................................... 1-17 1.10.2 Future Land Use ........................................ 1-17 1.11 LAND USE REGULATIONS ................................... 1-17 1.12 EXISTING NOISE IMPACTS ................................... 1-17 1.12.1 Ldn Noise Contours ............................ ... 1-17 95- 59 2886-MP.TOC/59P/32395 i Watson Island J 91 TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont'd) PAGE 1.13 AIRPORT FINANCIAL CONDITIONS ........................... 1-19 1.13.1 Leases ................................................ 1-19 1.13.2 Airport Finances - Revenue and Expenses ..................... 1-19 CHAPTER 2 - AVIATION FORECASTS AND AIRFIELD CAPACITY ANALYSIS 2.1 AVIATION FORECASTS ...................................... 2-1 2.1.1 Tourism, Public Safety, Police, Medivac, Military, City and Other Sectors ........................ 2-1 2.1.2 Socio-Economic and Population Trends ....................... 2-7 2.1.3 Air Traffic Forecasts ..................................... 2-10 2.1.4 Projected Watson Air Traffic ............................... 2-18 2.1.5 Projections Methodology .................................. 2-18 2.1.6 Operations and Passengers-Helicopters/Seaplanes ............... 2-19 2.2 HELIPORT/SEAPLANE AIRPORT CAPACITY ANALYSIS .......... 2-22 CHAPTER 3 - FACILITY REQUIREMENTS 3.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................ 3-1 3.2 APPROACHES .............................................. 3-1 3.3 TAXIWAYS/WATER ACCESS/EGRESS FOR SEAPLANES .......... 3-1 3.4 AIRCRAFT PARKING POSITIONS .............................. 3-2 3.4.1 Heliport Takeoff and Landing Area .......................... 3-3 3.4.2 Helicopter Hover Taxilane................................ 3-4 3.5 TERMINAL BUILDING REQUIREMENTS ....................... 3-4 3.6 AUTOMOBILE PARKING REQUIREMENTS ..................... 3-6 3.7 AIRFIELD MARKING AND LIGHTING ......................... 3-6 3.8 NAVIGATIONAL AIDS ....................................... 3-6 3.9 AIR CARGO REQUIREMENTS ........................9 .. 6-6 288&MP.TOC/59P/11195 H Watson Island TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont'd) PAGE 3.10 HELIPORTS/SEAPLANE RESCUE AND FIREFIGHTING FACILITIES ................................. 3-7 3.11 MAINTENANCE FACILITIES NEEDS ........................... 3-7 3.12 HIGHWAY ACCESS/EGRESS................................. 3-7 3.13 SECURITY FENCING AND LANDSCAPING ...................... 3-8 3.14 UTILITIES ................................................. 3-8 3.14.1 Fuel Storage ........................................... 3-8 3.15 CITY OF MIAMI POLICE DEPARTMENT ........................ 3-9 3.16 FACILITY REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY ........................ 3-9 CHAPTER 4 - EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES 4.1 ALTERNATIVES ............................................ 4-1 4.1.1 No Build Alternative ..................................... 4-1 4.1.2 Moderate Expansion Alternative ............................ 4-1 4.1.3 Maximum Development Alternative .......................... 4-1 4.2 SITE CONSTRAINTS ......................................... 4-6 4.3 EVALUATION CRITERIA .................................... 4-6 4.4 EVALUATION PROCESS ..................................... 4-8 4.5 EVALUATION OF FACILITY OPTIONS ......................... 4-9 4.5.1 Option A ............................................. 4-9 4.5.2 Option B.............................................. 4-10 4.5.3 Option C.............................................. 4-10 4.6 PREFERRED OPTION ....................................... 4-11 4.6.1 General Description ..................................... 4-11 4.6.2 Seaplane Terminal Building ................................ 4-11 4.6.3 Helicopter Terminal Building .............................. 4-12 4.6.4 Future FBO Accommodations .............................. 4-12 4.6.5 Police Helicopter Terminal Building ......................... 4-12 288&MP.TOC/59P/11995 iii v 5— 459 Watson Island TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont'd) PAGE 4.6.6 Construction Phasing ..................................... 4-12 4.6.7 Cost Options and Construction Time ......................... 4-13 CHAPTER 5 - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 5.1 PURPOSE AND NEED ....................................... 5-1 5.2 THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE ............................. 5-1 'A ... . .............................. 5-1 5.3 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 5.3.1 Incompatible Land Uses .................................. 5-1 5.3.2 Affects of Other Development Projects ....................... 5-3 5.4 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES - SPECIFIC IMPACT CATEGORIES ............................. 5-3 5.4.1 Noise Impacts .......................................... 5-4 5.4.1.1 Noise and Performance Data ......................... 5-4 5.4.1.2 Operations Data .................................. 5-5 5.4.1.3 Noise Contours ................................... 5-10 G 5.4.2 Compatible Land Use .................................... 5-10 r, 5.4.3 Social Impacts .......................................... 5-10 5.4.4 Induced Socioeconomic Impacts ............................. 5-13 5.4.5 Air Quality ............................................ 5-13 5.4.6 Water Quality .......................................... 5-13 5.4.7 Department of Transportation Act Section 4(f) ................. 5-14 r 5.4.8 Historical, Architectural, Archeological, and Cultural Resources .................................. 5-14 5.4.9 Biotic Communities ...................................... 5-15 5.4.10 Endangered and Threatened Species of Flora and Fauna ....................................... 5-15 5.4.11 Wetlands .......................................... 5-16 5.4.12 Floodplains............................................ 5-16 5.4.13 Coastal Zone Management Program ......................... 5-16 5.4.14 Coastal Barriers ........................................ 5-16 5.4.15 Wild and Scenic Rivers ................................... 5-16 5.4.16 Farmland.............................................5-16 5.4.17 Energy Supply and Natural Resources ........................ 5-16 5.4.18 Light Emissions ......................................... 5-17 5.4.19 Solid Waste Impact ...................................... 5-17 2886-MP.TOC/59P/11995 iv 9 5- 459 Watson Island i I TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont'd) PAGE 5.4.20 Construction Impacts ..................................... 5-17 5.4.21 Environmental Consequences - Other Considerations ............. 5-17 5.5 CONCLUSION .............................................. 5-17 CHAPTER 6 - AIRPORT PLANS 6.1 AIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN .................................... 6-1 6.2 AIRSPACE PLAN ........................................... 6-1 6.3 APPROACH AND RUNWAY PROTECTION ZONE PLAN ........... 6-1 6.4 LAND USE PLAN ........................................... 6-2 6.5 EXHIBIT "A" PROPERTY MAP ................................ 6-2 6.6 LANDSCAPE PLAN .......................................... 6-2 CHAPTER 7 - FINANCIAL PLAN 7.1 OPERATING INCOME AND EXPENSES ......................... 7-1 7.1.1 Operating Income ....................................... 7-1 7.1.2 Operating Expenses ...................................... 7-3 7.1.2.1 Heliport/Seaplane Airport Management and Professional Services ...................... 7-10 7.2 CAPITAL COSTS AND FINANCIAL EXPENSES ................... 7-10 7.2.1 Capital Costs ........................................... 7-10 7.2.2 Financing Costs ......................................... 7-12 7.2.3 Pro Forma Statement .................................... 7-15 7.2.3.1 Net Operating Income ......................... 7-15 � - A59 28WMP.TOC/59P/11995 v Watson Island TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont'd) PAGE CHAPTER 8 - THE RECOA04ENDED PLAN 8.1 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS ........................... 8-1 8.1.1 Airside and Landside ..................................... 8-1 8.1.2 Buildings and Hangar(s).................................. 8-1 8.2 STAGING OF THE PLAN ..................................... 8-2 8.3 OPERATIONS PLAN ......................................... 8-3 8.3.1 Permitted Uses .......................................... 8-3 8.3.2 Rules and Regulations .................................... 8-4 8.3.3 Hours of Operation ...................................... 8-5 8.3.4 Daily Operations and Facility Management .................... 8-5 8.4 FINANCIAL PLAN ........................................... 8-7 8.5 LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS ................................... 8-8 8.6 MINIMUM STANDARDS ..................................... 8-8 APPENDIX A Meeting Notes - Chalk's, Dade Helicopter, Police APPENDIX B introduction to Noise Evaluation APPENDIX C Cost Estimate APPENDIX D Standard Lease Provisions BIBLIOGRAPHY INTERVIEW REFERENCES 2886-MP.TOC/59P/32395 vi 95- A-59 Watson Island w� LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 1.1 Inventory of Existing Facilities ................................... 1-10 1.2 Land Use..........................................1-14 1.3 Aviation Land Use........................................... 1-14 2.1 Greater Miami Overnight Visitors ................................ 2-1 2.2 Domestic & International Overnight Visitors ...................... 2-2 2.3 Business/Convention & Vacation/Cruise/Special Event/Pleasure tr, Overnight Visitors ........................................... 2-2 2.4 Overnight Visitors Dade County .................................. 2-3 2.5 Average Monthly Overnight Visitors .............................. 2-3 2.6 Past Trends & Forecast Average Monthly Overnight Visitors ............ 2-4 2.7 Cruise Passengers Port of Miami ................................. 2-5 2.8 Miami Police Aviation Division Air Activity ......................... 2-6 2.9 Population Trends ............................................ 2-7 2.10 Population Projections .......................................... 2-8 2.11 Employment Trends ........................................... 2-8 2.12 Employment Forecast ......................................... 2-9 2.13 Downtown Miami Employment Trends and Trends ................... 2-9 2.14 Household Income ............................................ 2-10 2.15 Scheduled Air Carrier Passenger Trends and Forecast ................. 2-11 2.16 Scheduled Air Carrier International Passenger Trends and Forecasts ...... 2-11 l 2.17 Total Aircraft Operations Forecasts ............................... 2-12 j 2.18 Airport Operations ........................................... 2-13 2.19 Total Aircraft Operations Forecast ................................ 2-14 2.20 Forecast Operations Miami International Airport ..................... 2-14 -; 2.21 Forecast General Aviation Operations Tamiami and Opa Locka Airports ... 2-15 2.22 Registered Helicopters, South Florida, Florida, United States ............ 2-16 2.23 Dade County Helicopter Operations 2-17 2.24 .............................. Forecast Registered Helicopters .................................. 2-17 2.25 Forecast Watson Helicopter Operations ............................ 2-20 2.26 Forecast Watson Helicopter Passengers . 2-20 < 2.27 Forecast Watson Seaplane Operations ............................. 2-21 2.28 Forecast Watson Seaplane Operations ............................. 2-21 4.1 Competitive Evaluation of Options ................................ 4-7 5.1 Average Daily Operations, 1995.................................. 5-6 5.2 Average Daily Operations, 2015.................................. 5-6 5.3 Average Daily Seaplane Operations by Flight Track, 1995 .............. 5-8 5.4 Average Daily Helicopter Operations by Flight Track, 1995 ............. 5-8 9r d59 288&MP.TOC/59P/11195 vii Watson Island LIST OF TABLES (cont'd) TABLE PAGE 5.5 Average Daily Seaplane Operations, 2015 Case ...................... 5-8 5.6 Average Daily Helicopter Operations, 2015 Case ..................... 5-8 7.1.1 Estimated Operating Income - 1995 ............................... 7-4 7.1.2 Estimated Operating Income - 2005 ............................... 7-5 7.1.3 Estimated Operating Income - 2015 ............................... 7-6 7.1.4 Estimated Operating Expenses - 1995 .............................. 7-7 7.1.5 Estimated Operating Expenses - 2005 .............................. 7-8 7.1.6 Estimated Operating Expenses - 2015 .............................. 7-9 7.2.1 Estimated Capital Costs ........................................ 7-11 7.2.2 Estimated Financing Costs ...................................... 7-14 7.2.3 Estimated Cost -Income Summary - 1995 ............................ 7-16 7.2.4 Estimated Cost -Income Summary - 2005 ............................ 7-17 i 7.2.5 Estimated Cost -Income Summary - 2015 ............................ 7-18 9N- d59 288&MP.TOC/59P/11195 viii Watson Island J 0 LIST OF EXHIBITS EXHIBIT PAGE E 1.1 Vicinity Map ................................................ 1-2 1.2 Wind Rose ................................................. 1-3 1.3 Chalk's International Airlines Photograph .......................... 1-9 1.4 Dade Helicopters, Inc. Photographs ............................... 1-11 1.5 On -Site Land Use Plan ........................................ 1-15 1.6 Vicinity Land Use ............................................ 1-18 4.1 No Build Option ............................................. 4-2 4.2 Option A - Year 2015......................................... 4-3 4.3 Option B - Year 2015......................................... 4-4 4.4 Option B - Year 2015......................................... 4-5 4.5 Option A - Year 2015 with Police Facility .......................... 4-14 4.5A Alternate Layout for Multi -Operator Configuration ................... 4-15 4.6 Seaplane Terminal Building ..................................... 4-16 4.7 Helicopter Terminal Building/Hangar ............................. 4-17 4.8 Police Helicopter Building/Hangar ............................... 4-18 4.9 Helicopter Parking Conditions ................................... 4-19 5.1 The Preferred Alternative ...................................... 5-2 5.2 Existing Case (1995) Flight Tracks ................................ 5-7 5.3 Future Case (2015) Flight Tracks ................................. 5-9 5.4 Existing Case (1995) Ldn Noise Contours ........................... 5-11 5.5 Future Case (2015) Ldn Noise Contours ........................... 5-12 6.1 Airport Layout Plan ........................................... 6-4 6.1A Enlarged Airport Plan ......................................... 6-5 6.2 Airspace Plan ............................................... 6-6 6.3 Approach and Runway Protection Zone Plan ............... c� 7 288&MP.T0C/59P/12095 ix Watson Island 0 LIST OF EXHIBITS (cont'd) EXHIBIT PAGE 6.4 On -Site Land Use Plan ........................................ 6-8 6.5 Airport Property Map Exhibit "A" ................................ 6-9 6.6 Watson Island Master Plan Concept ............................... 6-10 6.7 Watson Island Master Plan Development ........................... 6-11 6.8 Landscape Plan .............................................. 6-12 6.9 Plant List ................................................... 6-13 95- 459 28WMP.TOC/59P/11995 x Watson Island EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Watson Island has served passive recreational needs of Miami's citizenry for 75 years. It is conveniently located in Biscayne Bay and affords land area for the MacArthur Causeway; a regional highway linking the mainland and Miami Beach; a restaurant, marinas, a small heliport and a seaplane terminal. Visionary City Planners foresee further opportunity in upgrading the air facilities and for development of a mega -yacht marina with supporting hotel(s). The Master Plan of Air Transportation Facilities addresses, according to Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) procedures, the feasibility of developing new facilities for helicopters and seaplanes on approximately 17 acres of this 86-acre site. The study delves into existing conditions and operations, land uses, vehicular access, environmental aspects, regulations, financial conditions, existing and future markets, forecasts of air transport activity, capacities, system facility needs, constraints, alternative options for air facilities development, facilities requirements, airport plans, costs, a recommended plan, staging plans, operations plans, legal considerations, and a financial plan with pro -forma projections of income and costs of development. FINDINGS Forecasts and Facility Requirements Two tenants offer fixed base operations for air transport accommodations; Dade Helicopters, Inc., helicopter charters for sightseeing, and landing/takeoff facilities for the itinerant helicopters; and Chalk's International Airlines, Inc., seaplane scheduled service from Fort Lauderdale through Watson and onto points south in the Bahamas and the Caribbean. Rents for these operations are nominal and operations are modest and informal. Helicopter operations in 1991 comprised some 16,700 takeoffs and landings. Operations have fluctuated from about 9,000 last year to 18,000 in 1985. These values change depending upon the reports made by the operator. As many as 25,000 passengers annually are served. Seaplane operations reports are more reliable and include as many as 5,700 operations (a landing and takeoff) annually, serving as many as 26,000 passengers. Forecasts of aviation activity have been developed for three horizon planning years, 1995, 2005 and 2015, giving a 20-year basis of operations. The sponsor is obligated to the FAA for 20 years if they accept a grant for a development project. 95- 459 288&MP.ES/59P/11195 ES-1 Watson Island A bullish market exists for these services and substantial growth is expected for helicopter and seaplane travel. To best serve this business the City is encouraged to respond to the market with development of ground facilities needed to accept the necessary interface of the traveling public. Watson is the major heliport for South Florida regional network of helicopter operations. Joining Watson is the Miami International Airport (MIA), Tamiami, Opa Locka, Homestead, Fort Lauderdale Executive, a proposed helistop in the Fort Lauderdale central business district atop a municipal parking garage, and West Palm Beach. If developed to the standards identified in this study, Watson Island's air transportation facilities will surpass the convenience of the destinations via helicopters offered by the others in the regional network. Watson Island and the seven other helicopter facilities mentioned comprise a network of inter -county links for helicopter transportation. Watson provides a vital link in this network as a destination point for helicopter travel to and from the other seven heliports/helistops. Additionally, in consideration of the importance of this network, the Florida Department of Transportation has initiated a regional study of helicopter operations in South Florida. This study is being addressed by the Continuing Florida Aviation System Planning Program (CFASPP). Forecasts of aviation activity via helicopter and seaplane have been ascertained. An increase of 120 percent for helicopter service and a 116 percent increase for seaplane passengers served are expected in the next two decades. Facility requirements to serve this market include two new terminal buildings for seaplanes and helicopters. A hangar will be needed for overnight storage of Dade Helicopter's aircraft, as well as space for Customs and Immigration Services and the seaplane operator. Itinerant helicopters are not expected overnight due to City policy of restricting service, maintenance, and heavy sales of aircraft and parts. Seaplane operations will continue as is for the foreseeable future and the new terminal building for this market will be served by the existing ramp extending from the seaplane parking areas to the water in the Government Cut. Additionally, auto and bus parking spaces, helicopter parking, roads, and minimum fueling operations will be provided. The airside systems for control, lighting, and communications will also be developed. There is a possibility the aviation division of the Miami police department will also occupy the air facilities on Watson, providing negotiations are consummated. This will better facilitate on -call operations of helicopter landings and takeoffs, compared to the existing terminals at the Tamiami Airport. The police will require an administrative building with hangar facilities for four helicopters and minimum maintenance services; and separate off- street parking space in a fenced area apart from other service functions provided for others. 95- 459 I 2886.MP.ES/59P/11195 ES-2 Watson Island J11 I .- I .l VJ Planning. Considerations Florida Department of Transportation is now constructing a high level bridge over Biscayne Bay in the vicinity of Watson Island to improve capacity and operating efficiency and safety of the MacArthur Causeway. This plan for new air transportation facilities on Watson suggests elimination of the existing grade crossing intersection affording vehicular and pedestrian access/egress on the Island. Rather, a grade separated crossing with an underpass facility at the western extremity of the Island is recommended to replace the function of the existing at grade intersection. A new truck tunnel is further contemplated for construction in 1997 by the Miami Seaport Authority, connecting Dodge and Watson islands. This tunnel will surface on portions of Watson at the southern end. Care has been taken in the preliminary planning of the air facilities for Watson to accommodate the tunnel's construction and ultimate operations in the Watson Island Master Plan. In addition to the air transport facilities it is proposed to extend further planning of a park- like atmosphere on the southwestern portion of the Island adjacent to the Government Cut for passive vistas and leisure time and recreational activities. A boardwalk, catering services, park benches and heavy landscaping, low level, are contemplated. Views and vistas from the Causeway have also been taken into account in developing the conceptual Master Plan of facilities development, preserving the views of the Seaport and Central Business District's impressive skyline. Alternatives Analysis Twenty functional arrangements of air transport facilities for Watson were identified and evaluated. In addition, a "no build" plan was studied. The bases for comparison involved (1) Passenger and Public Convenience, (2) Operations Efficiency, (3) Expendability and Adaptability, and (4) Economic Effectiveness. Three concept types emerged for further study, Options A-C. After much evaluation and competitive rating, Option A was considered the best of three plans. It is detailed as the recommended plan at a cost estimated at $2.57 million, excepting the costs of developing the park environment and police facilities. Environmental Impacts An environmental assessment has determined that no significant environmental impacts will be superimposed upon existing conditions with development of the master plan facilities for air services. The FAA agreed that the proposed development is categorically excluded from further environmental review based on the information supplied to the FAA at the time of the determination. 95- A59 28a6-MP.ES/59P/11395 BS-3 Watson Island J Financial Analysis Financial considerations for potential sponsorship of air transport facilities on Watson suggest three possible administrative options for the investment, as follows: • City/State/FAA Partnership; • City Bonding; and, • City/Developer Partnership (privatization) Should the first option result, the City will have to invest minimally of its funds, since FAA and MOT should underwrite 1/3 to 1/2 of the development costs. City bonds are self explanatory in that the full faith and credit of the City will have to be pledged in case of default on the bonds. With privatization City and developer funds will be required with a host of assurances and guarantees from the private sector sponsor required by the banking community. t ° i On the other hand, FAA requires covenants, operational regulations and restrictions and will have much to say about the operations of the air transport facilities as long as it is involved as a co-sponsor. Financial projections of cost and income suggest the most feasible option financially to be the partnership with FAA/City/FDOT. This is largely due to the fact much of the cost to develop the facilities will be paid by the Federal and State Governments. Resulting funds estimated from operations are given for the three projection years, suggesting that with assumed sources of income; landing fees, rents, concessions, and vehicle access fees, some subsides will be expected to defray operating losses. In the event the City decides to open operations options to the operator(s) of the air facilities, this gap would close and in some cases a break even result would likely occur. With privatization, fewer institutional covenants and restrictions will prevail and more latitude of running a profit motivated business will be possible. Airport Management Operationally, it is suggested a third party be designated to manage Watson's new air transportation facilities. This could be a newly designated fixed base operator (FBO), or the City's designated manager. With this approach, collection of landing fees, daily routine preventive maintenance functions, and management of facilities will be more effectively undertaken. An operations plan and model lease agreement are furnished for guidance in the implementation of the recommended air transport facilities master plan. 95- 4-59 289&MP.PS/59P/11195 ES-4 Watson Island ion/Recommendation The new air transportation facilities enumerated herein are necessary and recommend. It is further recommended the City of Miami move immediately to implement this Master Plan and do as much to encourage private sponsorship as possible within reason. The plan qualifies for government financial assistance, as well. Should private sector negotiations fail, the government partnership is the most viable option to follow in bringing this Master Plan to fruition. It is most necessary and viable as a means to encourage travel by helicopter and seaplane in South Florida, and will measurably aid in increasing the economic viability of the City of Miami and its environs. 2886-MP.ES/59P/11195 95- 4-59 ES-5 Watson Island CHAPTER 1 EXISTING CONDITIONS P1 I 1.1 REGIONAL LOCATION Within sight of Miami's Central Business District, Bayside and South Miami Beach; and only 10 minutes drive to the Miami International Airport (MIA), and the Seaport, Watson Island is strategically situated in close proximity to many popular r r destinations in the Miami Metropolitan area. Exhibit 1.1 depicts its location in relation to the above mentioned developments serving all of Miami's residents and visitors. 1.2 HELIPORT/SEAPLANE AIRPORT ROLE Present operations at Watson (X44 - FAA Identifier per Florida Airport Directory 1992) focus on helicopter and seaplane activities in connection with Dade Helicopter Services, Inc., a sightseeing and charter organization, and Chalk's International Airlines which runs fixed scheduled trips to the Bahamas year round and to other locations during certain seasonal periods. The role of Watson is to accommodate these two basic operations together with other supplementary uses which include: itinerant helicopter commuter and charter activities; daily traffic reporting and news flights of local radio and television stations; military and such other operations as may be required in emergency circumstances. 1.3 METEOROLOGICAL DATA r1 The meteorological data for Watson Island were derived from Miami International Airport wind information and the wind rose shown in Exhibit 1.2 is a replication of MIA's wind rose. Wind coverage, the percentage of time a runway can be used without exceeding allowable crosswind velocity, is calculated on a 10.5 knot crosswind vector. �1 The wind conditions do not have a major impact on operations since the seaplanes can arrive and depart in almost any direction within the Intracoastal Waterway. Wind and weather conditions influence Watson's operational capacity by affecting the percentage of time that traffic can operate under Visual Flight Rule (VFR) conditions. Weather observational data collected by the National Climatic Center (Asheville, North Carolina) shows VFR conditions occur approximately 94.879o' of the time in the Miami area. 2886-MP1.RPr/59P/32395 1-1 95- 459 Watson Island WIND ROSE SOURCE: MIAMI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT WIND DATA PERIOD: JANUARY 1982 - JULY 1991 FROM THE NATIONAL CLIMATIC DATA CENTER 350 360 70 20 N -10 0.01 0.0 AO (IV 0.02 0.11 �l� SO 0.18 0.0 0.15 0.90 90 p.41 0.12 �O / 2 0.03 0.55 0.09 `0.41 3.58 0.06 0 / / 0.42 .. 1.36 2.70 1.94 � ` 0.39 O co00 0.02 0.09 1.13 1.20 1.40 \ 2.05 O `\ 0.29 ` 1. 0.82 28.19 4,16 2.88 0.49 0 0� rl N 0.b2, 0.08 0.30 0.81 6.13 O 0.85 \ 0-5 . , 2.77 5.62 ` , ` 0.29 0.02 0 p O N Q28 0.84 � 5.22 0.06 1.34 3.78 3,02y 256 . r'W 0 / o 0.02 0.24� 2.97 0.36` / C� a 1O 0.07 0.38 1 06 2.40 ` 0.43 0.04 0.0 0.08 11-15 0.20 ` � 0.52 `�Q / cv 16-20 0.0 �20 0.05 ?/ SiSkr 0.02 1-OVER S� -611 �\ / 200 S N60 190 180 1. . ALL WEATHER COVERAGE RW 12-30 RUNWAY 94.87% FOR 10.5 Knots 94.87% FOR 10.5 KNOTS 97.73% FOR 13.0 Knots 95- 459 EXHIBIT 1.2 The area's subtropical climate is characterized by an average daily temperature of 82 degrees Fahrenheit and 54 inches of annual rainfall. The area is subject to the effects of air masses from the Atlantic Ocean during the summer and to a lesser extent in the fall and winter. Rain storms occur almost daily during the summer. Wind speed during late evening and early morning hours from June to September are frequently calm (wind speeds less than five knots.) High density altitude conditions occur during most of the year. ' 1.4 AIRSPACE UTILIZATION Watson Island International Seaplane Base has a waiver from the FAA for aircraft to enter into the Class B airspace of Miami International Airport due the close V proximity of Watson Island to MIA. The altitude for arrivals and departures, for both seaplanes and helicopters, is much lower than air carrier operations from MIA allowing safe utilization of the airspace. I 1.5 CURRENT AVIATION ACTIVITY 1.5.1 Helicopters Dade Helicopter Services, Inc. operates two Bell Jet Rangers which are 4 passenger aircraft plus a pilot. Four general categories of activities are distinguished for use of the helicopter landing facilities at Watson. The classes of use include: Air Taxi: encompassing chartered operations furnished by Dade Helicopter and other non -Watson based operators that arrange to drop-off or pick-up charter passengers at this location by prior arrangement. Fees for air taxi are: $49.95 one person sight seeing tour $79.95 one person extended tour $500.00 per hour for long term rentals General Aviation (GA)Local: covering general aviation Dade Helicopter sightseeing operations of six minute, 15 minute, or longer durations originating and terminating at Watson as a round trip. The opportunity of offering flight training services continues on Watson Island by Dade Helicopters, Inc. Additionally, it is expected the same flight training services will be offered in the future to all applicants including persons desiring this training from overseas countries. 2886.MPI.RPT/59P/32395 1-4 Watson Island h y GA Itinerant: extending to helicopter services of others, apart from Dade Helicopter, operating charter flights in and around the Miami area, to still others temporarily landing or picking -up passengers who may be commuting to or from the city or environs. Military: counting air force, army or other Defense Department organizations responding to emergencies or carrying out general missions. With respect to helicopter activity the most recent information obtained through the City of Miami Department of Development for Calendar Year (CY) 1993 indicate that 9,000 operations were recorded at Watson Island consisting of the following estimates: Helicopter Qperations Air Taxi: 1,000 Operations GA Local: 2,500 GA Itinerant 5,000 Military M Total 9,000 Operations Past helicopter activities can offer insights into the level of operations that may be accommodated at Watson. This information, which has been compiled in reports submitted to the Orlando office of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is, at best, only a broad indicator since it represents general estimates which are not confirmed on an independent basis. Nonetheless these data show declining trends for annual operations for 12 month periods ending in mid -year, 1985, 1991, and 1992 as follows: Operations 1985 * 1991 1992 Air Taxi 8,400 2,600 2,000 GA Local 4,900 7,000 5,000 4 GA Itinerant 5,000 5,000 2,000 Military 35 21100 1.000 Total 18,335 16,700 10,000 * Rounded to nearest 100 except for Military. 95— A59 288&W1.RPT/59P/32395 1-5 Watson Island c;7'� 5 1.5.2 Seaplanes Chalk's International Airlines operates a fleet of 7 Grumman Mallards (17 passenger), 12 Grumman Albatross G-111s (28 to 30 passengers), and 2 Grumman Albatross G-111 (HU16 cargo only). Seaplane operations at Watson include the aforementioned fixed based scheduled departures and arrivals from the Bahamas, and at certain other times charter and sightseeing flights as well. Seaplane operations of Chalk's International Airlines originating and arriving at Watson Island include scheduled flights to Bimini and seasonal flights to locational destinations in the Keys in addition to charters to various locales. These operations have fluctuated in recent years as the economy and associated travel declined. Data for the recent past, compiled by the FAA Orlando office, highlight these changes as may be seen immediately below: 5,720 2,190 4,368 3,500 For 12 months Ending 14 June 1988 15 May 1990 08 May 1991 23 March 1993 j Despite the recessionary decrease for the twelve months ending 15 May 1990, traffic i has increased over the past few years. That has accounted for a substantial level of passengers departing from and arriving at Watson Island. According to information furnished by Chalk's these recent volumes are as follows: Passengers Calendar Year 22,356 1991 25,915 1992 19,791 1993 * For the first three quarters only; full year totals not available at this time. 1.6 EMSTIPIG MARKETS Helicopter services at Watson accommodate cover markets for: sightseeing tourists; charters for industries such as movie, fashion, and a broad array of other business users; commuters engaged in various commercial trips to downtown Miami and other nearby locations; convention -oriented travel in conjunction with events at the Miami r 2886-Wl.RPT/59P/32395 1-6 Watson Island Beach Convention Center or meetings and exhibitions at major hotels in the Greater Miami area; media news and traffic reporting flights; and civil and military missions necessitated by periodic emergencies. Demand for seaplane services spans: tourist travel between south Florida locations and the Bahamas; sightseeing flights at seasonal times of the year, and charter operations on -call as arranged by private parties. The "mix" of these existing markets varies throughout any twelve month interval, and no precise information is readily available as to present helicopter operations at Watson. Tourist sightseeing, however, continues to represent a significant proportion of the demand. Nevertheless Dade Helicopter reports an increasing share of charter business reflecting Miami's growth as an entertainment and fashion center. Other operators, such as Biscayne Helicopters based at Tamiami, indicate similar trends. This perspective is also reflected by information obtained in discussion with the regional helicopter operators' association. Thus the outlook is enhanced for these services from this market segment in the future. One additional sector with respect to potential helicopter use lies in the courier field, a large and increasingly integral part of the commercial activities in all major metropolitan areas. Discussions with Federal Express, Airborne Carrier, and DHIs- viewed as a representative sample --indicates that there may be some possibilities of employing rotorcraft within their delivery and pick-up networks. At the present time, however, no specific plans have been formulated along those lines. Accordingly while this prospect may become more tangible in the future, especially to meet the needs of downtown Miami establishments, it has not been reflected in the forecasts that follow below in this report. Helicopters also are integral to emergency medical services. These operations have been assigned to the Dade County Fire Departments' Medivac unit which covers both the City of Miami and other area -wide needs. The County's air rescue division is headquartered at Tamiami and flies accident victims directly to the trauma units of various hospitals, many of which have helipads, to maximize life saving treatment during the so called golden hour for such medical care. As such the division indicates that Watson Island is not required in relation to the established rescue patterns that have proven so effective. Thus the heliport here will not be used for Medivac operations with the exception of emergencies that might arise on the island itself, or in the nearby vicinity. Scheduled flights, directed to tourism, entail an overwhelming share of existing seaplane markets. Even in this discrete sector, however, appreciable growth has been noted in charter activity. Sightseeing, in comparison, appears to be supplementary to these principal service lines. 95- 459 288&MP1.RPT/S9P/3239S 1-7 Watson Island 1.7 EXISTING HELIPORT/SEAPLANE FACILITIES 1.7.1 Approaches/Runway Seaplane: The runway for Watson Island International Seaplane Base is along the waterway of the Government Cut between Watson Island and Dodge Island (Port of Miami). The runway has an approximate orientation �. of 116 degrees from true north which would designate it as Runway 12-30. The approach to the seaplane base is generally from the west along the 12 degree alignment, however, there is no defined approach pattern since the seaplanes are considered as watercrafts. Approximately 85% of the i operations are along the 12-30 alignment with the other 15% being at various angles within the ship turning basin in the Intracoastal Waterway west of Watson Island. Helicopters: The approach pad for helicopters is in the open field south of Dade Helicopters. Helicopters arrive and depart into the wind, however, once they are airborne at least 50 feet, they can readily maneuver in any direction regardless of the wind. There exists a portion of the overhead power lines along the old MacArthur { Causeway that is underground to provide an opening for helicopter 1 approaches from the west, although, the pilots are free to arrive and depart from any direction. Watson is not equipped for Instrument Flights (IFR) and therefore operates under Visual Flight Rules (VFR). 1.7.2 Chalk's Seaplane Terminal and Administrative Facilities The Chalk's Seaplane terminal is situated on the south/southeast end of Watson Island directly on the Government Cut shoreline. The facility consists of two buildings; one is a modular/relocatable structure housing U.S. Customs and Immigrations (FIS). It is currently staffed on a part-time basis coinciding with selected Chalk's seaplane arrivals. The main terminal complex is comprised of a 1-story CBS residential scale building; approximately 2,100 sq. ft., with a wood framed, pitched, shingle roof. A photograph of the building is shown in Exhibit 1.3. Entrance to public areas is from the north. The passenger's departure lounge is located directly off ( and to the left) of the small entry lobby and seats approximately 12 to 15 people. The passenger ticket lounge and bag check area is located to the right side of the entry lobby. Queuing space is very limited. Small public toilet facilities (the only toilets) separate a souvenir counter and vending machines from the lounge area. — A J 9 288&MPI.RPT/59P/11195 1-8 Watson Island Departing passengers access the airside ramp via a hallway and exterior wood boardwalk and stairs. The airline operations area consists of two small offices (approximately 8'x8') and an unfinished storage/cargo sort/bag handling area. An open wood deck is located directly off (west) of the storage area. It serves as a crew lounge in good weather. Aircraft fueling facilities are located further west on the opposite side of the aircraft ramp area. Watson Island Helicopter Base Dade Helicopters, Inc. currently operates out of a ±2,400 sq. ft. masonry building originally serving Goodyear's blimp base operations. Other components of the heliport base include a temporary lounge/waiting area for helicopter passengers which is approximately 700 sq. ft. in area, a quanset-type hangar of approximately 2,000 sq. ft. for helicopter storage and two elevated "hot -spot" landing pads. Photographs of the site and buildings are shown in Exhibit 1.4. Table 1.1 Inventory of Existing Facilities A. Physical Site 1. Location: Watson Island, Miami, Florida, 1 mile east of U.S. 1 2. Aviation Land Area: Chalk's: 2.0 acres Dade Helicopters: 1.0 acres Helicopter Approaches: 11.5 acres 3. Ground Access: via MacArthur Causeway 4. Utilities: FPL (power), Southern Bell (telephone), Miami -Dade Water and Sewer Department (water). 5. Elevation: 7.0 NGVD (average) B. Aviation Facilities 1. Runways: Primary Runway Orientation 12W-30W Length 15,000' ± Width 600' 9 ,% - A 5 9 2886-MPI.RPT/51P/11195 1-10 Watson Island 1 2886-MPI.M/51P/72694 1-11 Watson Island Exhibit 1.4 J Type Water a Effective Gradient 0.0% 2. Taxiways: Concrete ramp from water to apron. 3. Aircraft Parking Apron: 5,000 Square Yards Pavement Type: Flexible Pavement Strength: Unknown ah�Pavement Condition: Poor - cracking and deterioration 4. Navigational Aids: Wind Sock 5. Lighting: Apron Flood Lights _i 6. Traffic Control: FSS Miami (MIA) Unicorn 122.8 Airplanes, 123.05 Helicopters C. Terminal &Administrative Facilities 1. Commercial Service Terminal: None 2. General Aviation Hangars: Storage for 6 small helicopters. 3. Vehicle Parking: 25 spaces ± at Chalk's International 25 spaces at Dade Helicopters, Inc. 64 4. Security Fencing: Chalk's apron only - none elsewhere. 1.7.3 TaAways/Water Access/Egress Seaplanes The seaplanes exit the runway at the ramp which leads from the water onto the pavement at the south side of Chalk's Airlines. This is the only access for the seaplanes to and from the aircraft parking apron. 95- 459 288&MP1.RPT/68P/32395 1-12 Watson Island J `9 1.7.4 Lighting There is presently apron flood lighting on poles along the east edge of the aircraft parking apron. There are no edge lights for the apron, taxiway ramp or the runway. 1.7.5 Apron Areas r The existing aircraft apron consists of approximately 5,000 square yards of asphaltic concrete pavement in the southwest comer of the Island at Chalk's International. This apron provides parking for up to 6 seaplanes. Based on visual observation, the pavement appears to be structurally sufficient for the present use, however, there is considerable deterioration of the pavement ti. surface. 1.7.6 Fixed Base Operators and Aviation Businesses Helicopter facilities at Watson Island presently include: • two elevated landing pads i • customs and immigration facilities (Federal Inspection Services - FIS) • a large adjoining grass, open space area to accommodate overflow operations • a passenger check -in building • a near -by general office structure previously used by the Goodyear Blimp operation (which has relocated elsewhere), and • a service building for equipment storage and maintenance Chalk's International Airlines seaplane facilities include: • a terminal building for passenger check -in • customs and immigration facilities (Federal Inspection Services - FIS) • the seaplane ramp, and • a fenced -in area within which fuel trucks and other support equipment are kept. 1.7.7 Utilities There are existing services for potable water, electricity and telephone to P ty P Chalk's International. The utilities serve the existing terminal building and the apron area. Dade Helicopters is provided with the same services. �✓ Currently, the above ground power and phone lines are within the old MacArthur Causeway right-of-way. These will need to be relocated outside a of the aviation -use area as part of any ultimate development program. � — A 9 p 288&MP1.RP'r/68P/11195 1-13 Watson Island IIn"l Overhead power facilities near paths of flight should be replaced underground. 1.7.8 Airport Rescue and Fire Fighting Facilities (ARFF) The existing on -site fire fighting facilities consist of 3 portable fire extinguisher units on wheels. Additional fire fighting and rescue capabilities are provided by the City of Miami from its Number 1 station located approximately 1.5 miles to the west at 144 Northeast 5th Street. 1.8 ON -SITE LAND USE AND ACCESS The primary land uses on the Island include recreational, marine and aviation uses. The location of each of these uses is shown on Exhibit 1.5. The recreational areas include a public park, public beach, and two open field areas. Marine uses include the Miami Yacht Club; Miami Outboard Club; the Public Boat Ramp and Marina; and the Phillips 66 fuel dock. Aviation uses include Chalk's International Airline, Dade Helicopters and the now dormant airship field. The remaining acreage on the Island is right-of-way for traffic circulation. A summary of the existing land uses by acre is provided below. Table 1.2 Land Use Acres Recreation 31 Marine 13 Aviation 14.5 Right -of -Way 27.5 The areas specifically associated with the aviation land uses are as follows: Table 1.3 Aviation Land Use Acres Chalk's Airline 2.0 Dade Helicopters 1.0 Helicopter Approaches 11.5 Access to the Island is dependent on automobile, trucks and buses . This tends to limit the Island's linkage with downtown developments, many of which rely heavily on pedestrian and transit interconnections. 95- A59 289&MPI.M/68P/11195 1-14 Watson Island IB I S C A Y N E I S L A N D 1 I I I S A N M A R C 0 I I I p0' V E N E T I A N C A U S E W A Y c I S L A N D I I�I ID: al Ir a = I I Z I l; G R A S S g Q BEDS B I S C A Y N E BAY I CAUSEWAY A R T J r a 4 �UR M o c ` BULKHEAD LIVE Lol \ 1 0 700 400 j ................��_ \ Q%A9MrOpIED'LaC�NifM1W'.CYISCI'4T.'.:':.:':.�.':.':. • 1\ � \ N .. ::: ienrr�.ur:::::::.�: :•. :::::. M A R I N E W \ \ \ \ E C R E A T 1 0 Q� A R I N A 1co SE C �C J \ 5 9 1 \ a J (A `" Z \ \ O \ `el9urres \ n Y Q = 7. mi SHIP TURN_IN6 \ BASIN ` - Z 3 ........ �+� POWER C. Lu D C \ Zi o v { o MFro 2. l IFol 1. w 1 _ ~ /0 lo a ` = i M I A M I R I N A _ I O� i M \\ g 4Ml \ `O0O`\\\ 4 MUM L6 Access to the Island is from MacArthur Causeway via a median opening at approximately the midpoint of the Island. A two-lane, two-way roadway feeds from the median opening to Chalk's International. The present helicopter terminal has access from MacArthur Causeway at the western end of the Island via the eastbound lanes with a right turn in and out operation. The reconstruction of MacArthur Causeway maintaining the same six -lane cross- section was recently completed from Star Island to the mainland. The bridge just west of the Island over the Intracoastal Waterway is currently under construction. Formerly a bascule bridge, it is being improved to a high level (65 feet above sea level) fixed span bridge. It is anticipated that the bridge will be completed in the fourth quarter 1995. Though this construction has improved traffic conditions to and from Miami Beach, the internal traffic conditions on Watson Island could still be improved by eliminating the intersection for traffic crossing and turning off of MacArthur Causeway in the middle of the Island. This at -grade, non -signalized intersection between local Island traffic and MacArthur Causeway is very hazardous, particularly for vehicles leaving the Island and attempting a left turn to enter the Causeway. Pedestrians crossing the Causeway to attend special events in the park (after parking on the south side) can create } disruptions to traffic and is not safe for pedestrians. 1.9 ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE LAND Watson Island is an entirely man-made spoil Island consisting of dredge material from Government Cut. The soil materials are not particularly suited for development of sensitive eco-systems. The perimeter bay bottom grass beds near the north and east shorelines (shown on Exhibit 1.5), however, are considered environmentally sensitive and should be protected from negative impacts from marine construction. It is not anticipated that any of the changes that may be proposed to the aviation facilities and operations on Watson Island will have any detrimental effects on these benthic marine communities. There are many native trees at Watson that are in excellent condition and will be preserved as part of the future landscape of the facility. These trees include: • Sea Grape a Green Buttonwood • Royal Palm • Thatch Palm • Silver Buttonwood • Cabbage Palm • Canary Island Palm There are some non-native trees that will be removed within the limits of the proposed facility. These include Australian Pines, Tabebuia, Black Olives and Pongam Trees. q r� _ 159 288&MPI.RPT/68P/11195 1-16 Watson Island J J 1.10 VICINITY LAND USE " Exhibit 1.6 shows the land in the vicinity of Watson Island. MacArthur Causeway i connects the mainland and Miami Beach. In between these major destinations are four small islands. Moving eastward the first island encountered is Watson Island, followed by Palm and Hibiscus Islands, and Star Island, which are exclusive residential communities. Immediately south of Watson Island is the Port of Miami (Dodge Island). 1.10.1 Existing Land Use The three islands east of Watson Island are home to the very wealthy and are part of the incorporated area of the City of Miami Beach. The primary land use on these islands is single family residential. Miami Beach is a high density, fully diversified City accommodating all of the land uses commonly associated with an urban community. 1.10.2 Future Land Use The future land uses in the area are planned to remain in the same land -use patterns that exist today. Though some infill development and redevelopment is, of course, expected, general land -use categories and associated activities are not expected to change in the foreseeable future. The only addition to Watson Island itself will be the new aviation facilities to replace the existing facilities, and a potential mega -yacht marina at the west side of the Island. 1.11 LAND USE REGULATIONS The City of Miami adopted a Master Development Plan for Watson Island in January, 1989. This plan provides the conceptual framework for the entire Island, including the aviation activity area. The development proposed in this Seaport/Heliport Master Plan must be consistent with the Watson Island Master Development Plan and compatible with the other land uses on the Island. 1.12 EXISTING NOISE IMPACTS 1.12.1 Ldn Noise Contours Aircraft noise has not been an issue at Watson Island and it is anticipated that even with the forecasts of air traffic for the seaplane base and the heliport, the noise will not be a hinderance to improving the aviation portion of the Island. A complete noise analysis is provided in Chapter 4 herein. 95- 459 288&MPI.RPT/68P/11195 1-17 Watson Island J 1.13 AIRPORT FINANCIAL CONDITIONS Given a long history of active and meaningful public use, and a unique relationship to the City and Region, Watson Island is a public open space deeded to the City of Miami by the State of Florida to be retained primarily as open space, undeveloped, for use by all residents and visitors. It is to belong to no neighborhood, but to all communities and fostering public gatherings of all local citizens. 1.13.1 Leases ;* Leases for the use of portions of the Island exist for a period of only 30 days, maximum. All except Chalk's International Airlines observe these agreements. Chalks pays the City $15,000 per year which is deposited into a fund for City r.4r Parks. Dade Helicopters, Inc. observes a use agreement with the City Commission as the responsible operator of air transport facilities and pays the City $2,000 each month for this occupancy. Should the City agencies require helicopter transportation service, they are credited this flight time at the rate of $200 per hour. These terms are specified in the City Resolution #89-723. ,{ If the City of Miami is obligated to the FAA by acceptance of a grant, then all revenue generated by the facilities at Watson must be placed in a separate fund and used for operation and maintenance of the facility. 1.13.2 Airport Finances - Revenue and Expenses Only the monies mentioned above are considered income to the City from existing operations. Additionally, FAA accumulates entitlement funds annually from all passengers originating trips on Chalk's facilities from Watson Island. These monies are placed in an escrow account for the City's use in planning and supporting operations of air transportation facilities and services on Watson Island. The funds are earmarked for the City of Miami's use and accumulate for three consecutive fiscal years before lapsing for other uses as designated by FAA with permission from the City of Miami. An approximate amount per year escrowed is $500,000. This amount fluctuates annually depending upon patronage levels of passengers served by Chalk's. 95- 459 2ss&W1.RPT/68P/32395 1-19 Watson Island CHAPTER 2 AVIATION FORECASTS AND AIRFIELD CAPACITY ANALYSIS 2.1 AVIATION FORECASTS 2.1.1 Tourism, Public Safety, Police, Medivac, Military, City and Other Sectors Tourism - remains a key segment of the Greater Miami economy even as other service and related sectors have taken on increasing importance in recent years. Among the various indicators reflecting the region's strength in tourism is the level of overnight visitors recorded in the recent past and anticipated in the years ahead. According to data collected by the Greater Miami Convention & Visitors Bureau these visitors (who take lodging in hotels and other transient accommodations) were estimated at approximately 7.7 million in 1989 and 8.5 million in 1992 as shown below in Table 2.1. Table 2.1 Greater Miami overnight Visitors 199-2 Year Overnight Visitors 1989 7,717,400 1990 8,072,500 1991 8,402,000 1992 8,497,400 Source: Greater Miami Convention & Visitors Bureau. The effectiveness of Miami's continued efforts to gain greater shares of international tourist markets is reflected in the number of visitors from abroad. As shown below this group increased sharply between 1989 and 1992, going from about 2.9 million to 4.7 million for those respective years. The corresponding level of domestic visitors declined over the same period, a measure of the recessionary impact. As the national recovery improves a return to former domestic visitor flows and further growth in that respect is expected as shown in Table 2.2. 95- A-59 Watson Island 288&MP2.RPT/59P/11195 2-1 Table 2.2 Domestic and International Overnight Visitors Greater Miami, 1989-92 Overnight Visitors (000) Year Domestic International Total 1989 4,823.4 2,894.0 7,717.4 1990 4,617.5 3,455.0 8,072.5 1991 4,377.4 4,024.6 8,402.0 1992 3,823.8 4,673.6 8,497.4 Source: Greater Miami Convention & Visitors Bureau. The purpose of trip for overnight visitors represents another measure of the region's economic strength in this sector. Data compiled by the Greater Miami Convention & Visitors Bureau for 1992 show that 5.7 million of this group were drawn for travel in connection with vacations, cruises, pleasure and special events. Of equal importance to aviation prospects for Watson Island, 1.96 million of these visitors arrived on business or to attend conventions as shown in Table 2.3. Table 2.3 Business/Convention an Vacation/Cruise/Special Event/Pleasure Overnight Visitors Greater Miami, 1992 Purpose of Visil Overnight Visitors Vacation/Cruise/ Pleasure/Special Event 5,735,700 Business/Convention 1,962,900 Total 7,698,600 Source: Greater Miami Convention & Visitors Bureau. Within Dade County, which serves as only one component of the larger Greater Miami area, an appreciable volume of overnight visitors also have been recorded. The Metro -Dade Planning Department reports that this group numbered 1.5 million in 1990, up from about 1.3 million in 1980. As shown in VQ5_ 459 M&MP AVr/59P/11195 2-2 Watson Island the following table annual overnight visitors r d o g g s tors for the last decennial decade averaged 1.4 million as shown in Table 2.4. Table 2.4 Overnighl Yisitors a. Dade County. 1980-90 Year Overnight Visitors 1980 1,368,100 1985 1,391,200 f. 1990 1,552,800 Average 1980-90 1,423,700 Source: Seasonal -Transient Population, Metro -Dade Planning Departments (Revised December 1992). Visitor fluctuations throughout the year provide important guidelines for aviation and facility planning purposes. In that respect the winter months continue as the peak season for visitors to South Florida. Almost 40 percent of this flow takes place between November and February, as shown by Metro - Dade Planning Department reports on seasonal -transient population as shown in Table 2.5. i Table 2.5 Average Monthly Overnight Visitors Dade County, 1980-90 Monthly Percent Distribution i January 8.8 % 1 4 February 8.1 March 8.6 April 8.0 May 7.6 June 7.7 July 7.2 August 7.3 September 7.6 9 5- 459 October 7.7 M&MP2,RPT/59P/11195 2-3 Watson Island f November 9.8 December 11 100.0 % Source: Seasonal -Transient Population, Metro -Dade Planning Departments (Revised December 1992). Forecast levels of tourism, reflected by overnight visitor projections, show continued growth in this sector. On average, monthly flows are expected to increase from 138,000 in 1990 to 176,000 in 2015. Corresponding peak months for these respective years are estimated at 219,600 and 246,000. These data, focus only on Dade County and do not include the larger Greater Miami area which can be expected to grow significantly over the same period as well as shown in Table 2.6. Table 2.6 Past Trends and Forecast Average Monthly Overnight Visitors Dade County 1980 - 2015 Overnight Visitors Year Average Monthly Peak Month 1980 114,000 150,900 1985 115,900 181,800 1990 129,400 219,600 1995 138,000 193,000 2000 148,000 207,000 2015 176,000 246,000 Source: Seasonal -Transient Population, Metro -Dade Planning Departments (Revised December 1992). Cruise traffic at the Port of Miami --not included in the overnight visitor account above --presents a case in point for the substantial, and larger Greater Miami visitor potential. Between 1982 and 1992 passenger volumes went from 1.7 million to 3.1 million. By the end of the current decade this level will grow to an expected 4 plus million. While forecasts into the next century are broadly based, a doubling of cruise passengers by 2020 appears to be a conservative outlook as shown in Table 2.7. 2886-MP2.RPT/59P/11195 2-4 95- 459 Watson Island 1 �t Table 2.7 ruise Passengea Port of Miami 1982-92 Year Passengers 1982 1,760,300 1983 2,002,600 1984 2,217,100 1985 2,326,700 1986 2,520,600 1987 2,633,000 1988 2,502,400 1989 3,100,100 1990 2,734,800 1991 2,928,500 1992 3,095,500 Source: The Port of Miami. Public Safety - a basic service provided by the City of Miami, covers activities of the municipal police force and Medivac emergency responses (EMS) currently afforded by the Metro -Dade Fire Department. At the present time no change is expected with respect to the EMS delivery program and thus these operations will continue to be headquartered at the Tamiami Airport, with adjunct activities at Opa Locka. Police - Aviation services of the City of Miami Police Department, which were �l fully incorporated within that agency in the early 1990s, on the other hand are �i expected to expand substantially. Of equal importance, the relocation of that service from Tamiami Airport to a more central hub --such as Watson Island -- will enhance operating efficiencies and enforcement response time as shown in Table 2.8. Medivac - Helicopters also are integral to emergency medical services. These operations have been assigned to the Dade County Fire Departments' Medivac unit which covers both the City of Miami and other area -wide needs. The County's air rescue division is headquartered at Tamiami and flies accident victims directly to the trauma units of various hospitals, many of which have helipads, to maximize life saving treatment during the so called golden hour for such medical care. As such the division indicates that Watson Island is not required in relation to the established rescue patterns that have 95- 459 =&MP2.R"/59P/11195 2-5 Watson Island i proven so effective. Thus the heliport here will not be used for Medivac operations with the exception of emergencies that might arise on the Island itself, or in the nearby vicinity. Table 2.8 Miami Police Aviation Division Air Acti Estimated Year Qperations Flight Hours Service Duration 1990 200 400 4 afternoons per week 1991 400 1,000 7 afternoons per week and limited service during balance of day 1992 250 600 City assumed complete responsibility, separating from shared Metro Dade operations; transition resulted in 5 afternoons per week coverage 1993 400 800 7 days per week/ 10 hours per day coverage 1994 600 1,200 7 days per week/ 20 hours per day coverage 1995 1,000 2,000 7 days per week/ 24 hours per day coverage The Aviation Division's activities, while taking on increasing importance, are still in a "growth mode". This may be seen in the changing complexion of these operations from inception in 1990. The extent of these annual changes is also reflected in the growth of personnel and training. In 1990, the Division included one pilot and three police observers. That complement has now increased to three pilots, two others in training and five full-time observers. For major contingencies it consists of 20 additional reserve observers to increase the force's effectiveness. While future plans are still formative, the remainder of the 1990s will likely see an addition of four new aircraft bringing the fleet total to six. Three of 95-- 459 2886-MP2.RPT/59P/11195 2-6 Watson Island this supplement will be on-line regular patrol helicopters with the other devoted to VIP missions. Apart from aviation needs in support of tourism and public safety, other requirements associated with emergencies (such as Hurricane Andrew) and general commerce may be expected in the future. By way of example these relate to military support in the event of calamities and medical helicopter traffic reporting, an integral part of today's news coverage. These and other business activities requiring base operations will complement those for sightseeing and public safety in the years ahead. 2.1.2 Socio-Economic and Population Trends Population, employment, and personal income are key indices of a regional economy. Sharp gains have been noted in Dade County's resident population over the last decennial decade, increasing from approximately 1.6 million inhabitants in 1980 to 1.9 million in 1990 as shown in Table 2.9. Table 2.9 Population Trends Dade County. 1980-90 Year Population 1980 1,625,800 1985 1,759,300 1990 1,937,100 Source: Dade County Facts; Metro -Dade Planning Department's; May 1993. es� The gains recorded in the recent past are expected to continue throughout the 1990s with even sharper increases forecast into the early 21st century. The Metro -Dade Planning Department estimates the County's population will be w` approximately 2.2 million in the year 2000 and over 2.5 million by the year 2010 as shown in Table 2.10 95-- A-59 2M6-MP2.RPT/59P/11195 2-7 Watson Island Table 2.10 Population Projections Dade County. 1990-2010 Year Population 1990 1,937,100 2000 2,234,900 2010 2,536,500 Source:Metro-Dade Planning Department, 1993 (Adjusted for Hurricane Andrew impact). Employment, interrelated with population changes, has also expanded appreciably in Dade County. Between 1980 and 1990 jobs, by place of employment, went from approximately 900,000 to 1.1 million. Trade and service sectors in support of area residents and the tourist industry lead this expansion, followed by an array of other sectors in conjunction with the Greater Miami's increasing role as a major national and international business center, as shown in Table 2.11. Table 2.11 Employment Trends Dade County, 1980-90 Year Employment 1980 896,500 1985 976,500 1990 1,105,300 Source: Metro -Dade Planning Department. As in the case of past trends, growth in the County's employment base is expected to expand appreciably in the period ahead. According to forecasts of the Metro -Dade Planning Department local based jobs will go from 1.1 million in 1990 to 1.29 and 1.35 million, respectively, in the years 2010 and 2015, Table 2.12. 95- A59 M6-MM.M/59P/11195 2-8 Watson Island Table 2.12 Employment Forecast Dade County 1990 - 2015 Year Employment ' 1990 1,105,300 2000 1,136,600 2010 1,288,700 2015 1,345,500 Source: Metro -Dade Planning Department. Aviation prospects for Watson Island, in addition to market supports from tourism, sightseeing, business charters and the like, will relate also to commuter opportunities. In that respect proximity to downtown Miami and its substantial economic base is of considerable importance. This proximity ,1 presents an outstanding locational advantage to Watson Island's transportation potential. As an indicator of the prospects afforded, downtown employment will go from 100,000 and 108,400, respectively, in 1985 and 1990 to an estimated 145,000 jobs in 2010--a conservatively forecast 35 percent increase over the next two decades. See Table 2.13. Table 2.13 9 Downtown Miami Employment Trends and Trends 1985-2010 Year Employment 1985 100,000 1990 108,400 2010 145,000 Source: Traffic Analysis Zone Data, Metro -Dade Planning Department. qr�` 459 2886-MP2.RPT/59P/11195 2-9 Watson Island Miami, as with the nation at -large, has been affected by the recession of the past four to five years. Notwithstanding that impact, which has increased the level of poverty among low income residents, personal income has increased for a great number of the region's households. Median and mean income in Dade County, compiled by the United States decennial census, reflects these changes and continued job creations during the 1980's. See Table 2.14. Table 2.14 Household Income Dade County. 1979 - 89 Mean Income Household Year Income 1979 $20,402 1989 $37,903 Median Income Household Year Income 1979 $15,571 1989 $26,900 Source: U.S. Bureau of Census. 2.1.3 Air Traffic Forecasts An appropriate frame of reference for the aviation outlook for Watson relates to forecast activity nationwide and for the South Florida region. Viewed from the broader context of the United States, air traffic is expected to be up sharply over the coming decade. As projected by the FAA, total passengers carried on scheduled air carriers will go from about 444 and 472 million in 1987 and 1992, respectively, to 738 million by 2004. Domestic enplanements will continue to constitute the largest share of this traffic, but international travel will grow even more substantially as may be seen in Table 2.15. 95- A-59 M&MP2.Rn/59P/11195 2-10 Watson Island Table 2.15 Scheduled Air Carrier PgAsenger Trends and Forecast United States. 1987 - 2004 Passengers (Millions) Fiscal Year Domestic International Total 1987 415 29 444 1992 (Estimated) 429 43 472 1995 480 54 534 2000 573 74 647 2004 647 91 738 * Revenue Passenger enplanements, includes both originating and connecting passenger boardings; rounded to nearest million. Source: FAA Aviation Forecasts; February 1993. Of particular importance to South Florida, and its increasing role as a gateway to North America, the level of passengers enplaning for Latin America will almost double between 1995 and 2004. That international flow will surpass for the first time, that for travel across the Atlantic, and remain a close second to passengers destined to the Pacific Rim as shown in Table 2.16. Table 2.16 Scheduled Air Carrier International Passenger Trends and Forecast United States. 1987 - 2004 Passengers (Millions) lAtin Fiscal Year Atlantic America Pacific Total 1987 12.4 10.4 6.6 29.4 1992 (Estimated) 14.8 13.6 14.2 42.6 1995 17.9 17.7 18.2 53.8 2000 23.3 24.4 25.9 73.6 2004 27.8 30.5 33.0 91.3 * Revenue passenger enplanements, includes both originating and connecting passenger hoardings. Source: FAA & ation Forecasts; February 1993. 9 5 ` d 5 9 2886-MP2.RPT/MP/11195 2-11 Watson Island J As a result of the expansion of revenue passenger markets and overall increased reliance on air travel, all principal categories of operations are expected to grow appreciably. Scheduled air carriers will be up about one- third by the year 2004 compared with 1992 operations. Of special significance for well located heliports like Watson, both air taxi/commuter and general aviation operations will also increase sharply to 12.9 and 44.8 million, respectively, by 2004 (Table 2.17). It is also worthy to note, as set forth in the FAA February 1993 Aviation Forecast report, that "today's regional/commuter airlines have a large variety of aircraft from which to choose". Consequently, they can tailor their fleet to the specific markets they serve. That development may portend renewed attention to commuter markets in large urban conurbations where helicopter fleets can serve new and expanded roles. Table 2.17 Total Aircraft Operations Forecast United States (In Millions) Fiscal Year Operation Category _1992. 1995- 2QOO 2004 Air Carrier 12.4 13.4 15.0 16.1 Air Taxi/Commuter 9.3 10.4 11.9 12.9 General Aviation 36.9 39.2 42.5 44.8 Military _n 2.$ 2.8 2,8 Total 61.5 65.6 72.2 76.6 " At airports with FAA traffic control service. Source: FAA Aviation Forecasts, February 1993. The broad distribution of air traffic categories, reflecting national patterns, has been evident at Dade County's principal airports. Miami International, one of the country's key facilities in the past 30 plus years, has accommodated major air taxi/commuter and general aviation operations in addition to those for regularly scheduled air carriers. Due to MIA peaking volumes both Tamiami and Opa Locka have provided relief for that facility with respect to expanding general aviation and for air taxi requirements as shown in Table 2.18. 95- A-59 288&MP2.Rn/59P/11195 2-12 Watson Island Table 2.18 Airport Operations. FY '92 Number of Operations* Operations Cat_—_tegory Miami Int'l Tamiami Opa Locka Air Carrier 275,000 0 0 Air Taxi 126,000 600 7,000 General Aviation 1 75,600 280,700 155,300 Military 2 9.600 6.600 23,500 486,200 287,900 185,800 * Rounded to the nearest 100. 1 General aviation operations cover: Itinerant Ucal Tam'ami 119,500 161,200 Opa Locka 81,700 73,600 2 Military operations cover: Tamiami 6,200 400 Opa Locka 16,000 7,500 Source: FAA Air Traffic Activity, FY 1992. Helicopters, which were introduced to aviation public markets much later than other aircraft, are now well established in meeting a wide cross-section of demand. The gains for recent years are expected to continue in the period ahead. According to forecasts by the FAA, the hours flown by rotorcraft will double from an estimated 2.8 million in 1992 to 5.8 million in 2004 (Table 2.19). As will be seen further, comparable increases are anticipated for the South Florida area. 2886-MP2.RPT/59P/11195 2-13 qr�— 459 Watson Island j Table 2.19 Total Rotorcraft Operations Forecast U ted States (In Millions) Fiscal Year As of Januau 1 Piston Turbine 1987 0.6 1.5 1992 (Estimated) 0.6 2.2 1995 0.6 3.0 2000 0.6 4.6 2004 0.5 5.3 Source: FAA Aviation Forecasts, February 1993. Total 2.1 2.8 3.6 5.2 5.8 The outlook for Dade County airports, like that nationwide, is for large increases in operations into the coming century. Miami International will go from 521,000 operations in 1995 to 635,000 in 2005. By the end of the next 10 years air taxi/commuter traffic will grow to 152,000 operations and that for general aviation will grow to 82,000 as shown in Table 2.20. Table 2.20 Forecast Operations _Miami International Airport 1991 - 2005 Year 912eration Cate ;ory 1991 1995 2000 2005 Air Carrier 281 301 349 391 Air Taxi/Commuter 12.1 131 142 152 General Aviation 73 77 79 82 Miliary 6 10 10 iQ Total 482 521 580 635 Source: FAA Terminal Area Forecasts, 1993 - 2005; July 1993. The increased importance assigned to Tamiami and Opa Locka in connection with general aviation is reflected in projected traffic for both of these airports, respectively forecast at 371,000 and 233,000 operations for 2005 (Table 2.21). 4%_ plc;© 288&MP2.PXr/59P/11195 2-14 Watson Island W4 Of special significance is the high level of itinerant operations at both facilities, which include business travelers who place a premium on their time. Many of these individuals, likely destined to downtown Miami, constitute a potential market for helicopter service at Watson to meet time constrained appointment schedules. Table 2.21 Forecast General Aviation Operations Tamiami and Qpa Locka Airports 1991-2005 Qperations (0000) Year Itinerant Local Total Tamiami 1991 132 208 340 1995 136 165 301 2000 164 172 336 2005 192 179 371 Qpa Locka 1991 83 90 173 1995 95 78 173 2000 117 86 203 2005 140 93 233 Note: A nominal number of military operations (estimated at 6000 for Tamiami and 23,000 for Opa Locka for the forecast years) are not included above. Source: FAA Terminal Area Forecasts, 1993-2005; July 1993. The use of helicopters for commerce in addition to sightseeing and other tourist travel, is indicated by the growth in registered rotorcraft within South Florida, the state and the nation. Counting Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, and Monroe counties, registered helicopters were up 66 percent between 1977 and 1987 (Table 2.22). This gain was twice that for the United States and slightly down from that for Florida overall. The rapid expansion noted is a direct indicator of the strength of this market and its potential into the future. 95-- 4-59 =&MP2.RPT/59P/11195 2-15 Watson Island Table 2.22 Registered Helicopters South Florida, Florida. United States 1977 " 87 Year (Percent Chanel Area 1977 1987 1977-87 Dade County 80 143 79% Broward County 48 72 50 a Palm Beach County 23 38 65 Monroe County 5 6 20 i Total South Florida 156 259 66 Florida 453 806 78 United States 6,848 10,361 34 Source: Southeast Florida Helicopter System Plan; Preliminary Draft; March 1989. By the mid-1980s helicopter service had begun to serve a variety of south Florida needs. In a preliminary draft report titled Southeast Florida Heliport System Plan, prepared for the Dade County Aviation Department in March 1989, Howard Needles Tammen & Bergendoff (HNTB) estimated that 93,600 operations had taken place in 1986 within Dade, Broward, and Monroe counties and nearby areas. About one-third of these were carried out by Dade County based operators with the remainder by other County operators as shown in Table 2.23. The plan also reported that helicopter basing and operating facilities in Dade County were limited, restricted to the three general aviation airports, Watson Island, and various private facilities. Of the 46 heliports in Dade County licensed at the time by the Florida Department of Transportation, only Watson Island --located one-half mile from downtown Miami --and the Dade County airports were public heliports. That limitation accounted for the distribution of operations in 1985, according to the plan study, in which seven out of ten of the flights estimated for that year originated or terminated at these public heliports. Of importance to the present planning study, fully one -fifth (21.7 percent) of the 1985 County operations were carried out at Watson Island. 95- 4-59 288&MP2.RPTJ59PJ11195 2-16 Watson Island Table 2.23 Dade County Helicopter Operations. 1985 Areas Percent of Operations Downtown (Watson Island) 21.7% Miami International Airport 18.5 Opa Locka Airport 12.4 Tamiami Airport 19.7 Subtotal 72.3% Balance Dade County 27.7 Total 100.0% Source: Southeast Florida Helicopter System Plan; Preliminary Draft; March 1989. The value of the central location afforded by Watson Island will be enhanced by anticipated growth of the South Florida helicopter market. As a measure of that potential, the number of registered helicopters within the region will go from 343 in 1995 to 421 in 2005 and 500 in 2015. 'These projections, presented in the aforementioned study, are detailed in Table 2.24. Table 2.24 Forecast Registered Helicopters South Florida 1995 - 2015 Year Court 1995 2005 2015 Dade 175 190 205 Broward 97 124 151 Palm Beach 64 98 133 Monroe 7 --9- 500 Total 343 421 500 Source: Southeast Florida Helicopter System Plan; Preliminary Draft; March 1989. 95- A59 2886•MP2.RP r/59P/11195 2-17 Watson Island 2.1.4 Projected Watson Air Traffic Watson is uniquely located to serve a broad range of helicopter and seaplane markets. Among these are those presently accommodated in the tourist, sightseeing, and charter segments. In line with the growth of the use of these aircraft in South Florida the prospects are for new demands to emerge for commuter travel as well. 2.1.5 Projections Methodology The FAA has recognized this potential and emerging use for helicopters. In a 1989 report titled "Rotorcraft Activity Survey", the FAA Administrator noted that helicopters are playing an increasing role in U.S. aviation, and have become a dominant force in such specialized areas such as air taxi charter, executive and business transportation. This assessment goes on to state that new and improved all-weather, turbine -powered helicopters should be in a position to capture an increasing market share of short - haul passengers. As a result by 2010 FAA estimates that rotorcraft could provide as much as 10 percent of intercity air passenger operations in the National Airspace System due to the growing number of capacity -constrained airports, and improved capability to operate reliably, and independently of congested air routes and runways. Given that expectation, the FAA is committed to facilitate this development in support of state and local governments and developers in their efforts to bring public use heliports on line. This outlook for the nation parallels that for South Florida. While the mix of market sectors will vary throughout a given year, their diversity and firm demand will balance activity at Watson. Thus operations at this location will be relatively insulated from wide fluctuations even as overall expansion takes place throughout the balance of this decade and into the next. The forecast level of helicopter operations presented herein reflects these factors as it does optimal site criteria, and broader nation-wide developments in the outlook for air travel. With respect to the former, proximity to demand centers such as the downtown employment base --an increasingly important commercial center --is a decided advantage. This represents one of Watson's strongest assets, hi addition to other technical attributes in connection with its separation from conventional aircraft traffic patterns, relative over water non-residential flight paths, and expansion capabilities as future demand may require. The projections which follow are predicated on several factors. These include: the population and employment gains for Dade County noted previously; the growing base of jobs in downtown Miami; a sharp expansion in operations at MIA, Tamiami, 95- 459 2986.Mn.RPT/59P/11195 2-18 Watson Island UO i and Opa Locka; and the rapid increase in registered helicopters in South Florida during the 1980s and forecast into the future by the System Report Plan. A defined regional network of rotorcraft operations has emerged and all planners of air transport facilities in South Florida are interfacing operations accordingly. More specifically these forecasts are based on the restoration of Watson operations in 1995 at the approximate levels recorded during the initial half of the 1990s. This is in line with expectations that the national and local economies will recover from the recent recessionary downturns. Thereafter the rate of growth in activity is expected to equal that projected by FAA for rotorcraft nation-wide between 1995 and 2000. Into the 21st century Watson helicopter operations are also predicated at a growth level comparable to FAA national forecasts coupled with a nominal added increase of five percent annually to reflect expansion of commuter traffic. Several factors warrant emphasis with respect to these projections. First, the estimates presented herein are conservatively based. This reflects consideration of the long-range nature of such forecasts and their likely monitoring and revision with passing time as operating experience in the years ahead is taken into account. Equally as important, no speck attribution has been made for changes that might occur when normal relations are reestablished with a post -Castro Cuba. When that situation arrives the new circumstances governing commercial and other travel between Cuba and the United States should be readdressed. The following projections of helicopter activity on Watson include a concept of helicopter -heliport networking in South Florida. This includes the interface relationships of helicopter air communications between all public accessed heliports- helistops in South Florida encompassing MIA, Tamiami, Homestead, Opa Locka, Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach and as far north as Orlando and Tampa. It is not practical to include Dodge Island as a helistop to accommodate port -to -port helicopter travel in the greater Miami area due to the close proximity of the Port of Miami to Watson, an established and proven heliport. Further, clear zones for landings and take -offs via helicopters are not as safe on Dodge Island as on Watson, due to the presence of hoisting cranes and ship masts. 2.1.6 Operations and Passengers-Helicopters/Seaplanes Helicopters - It should be noted that the estimates set forth in Table 2.25 do not include helicopter operations of the Police Department's Aviation Division, were these to move from Tamiami to Watson. These estimates should be made by the Police Department's Aviation Division beyond 1995. 95- A59 288&MP2.RPT/59P/11195 2-19 Watson Island t Table 2.25 FFQrecast Watson Helicopter Operations* 1995-2015 Year Operations 1995 9,900 2000 14,200 2005 17,300 2015 21,800 * Excludes police operations. In addition to estimated operations, the number of passengers anticipated in connection with helicopter service has also been considered for planning purposes. While no data are collected in this area, the FAA indicates an average of 1.5 to 2.0 passengers per trip is likely in relation to national patterns. The forecast herein is based on a higher ratio, ranging from 2.0 to 2.5 as a measure of the market for sightseeing/tourist operations which constitute one of the major demand segments for Watson. Reflecting that factor, the associated projections of helicopter passengers for the forecast time horizon are provided in Table 2.26. Table 2.26 Forecast Watson Helicopter Passengers Passenger Range Year LOW-- Hiah 1995 19,800 24,750 2000 28,400 35,500 2005 34,600 43,250 2015 43,600 54,500 Seaplanes - operations at Watson will benefit from increased exposure as helicopter markets expand at this location, complementing the traditional sectors presently served by Chalk's International. The major focus of that market is South Florida which constitutes primarily the four County (Monroe, Dade, Broward and Palm Beach) area over which a growing commuter demand for helicopter service is also mr - ArQ 268&MP2.RFr/59P/11195 2-20 Watson Island I expected to emerge. The growth in travel from Latin America, previously noted for the United States and at MIA as a key gateway, will also enhance seaplane operations potentials to the Bahamas, and other destinations served by Chalk's expanding network. As in the case of helicopter forecasts, projections for seaplane travel are based on a recovery by 1995 to levels equivalent to those in the early 1990s. Thereafter a range between 3 to 4 percent per year, respectively, is expected over the latter half of this decade and from 2000 to 2015. These forecasts are conservative in that they do not reflect possible changes resulting from an opening of Cuba. Additionally, the supply of hotel rooms which currently constrains expanded operations to the Bahamas and so-called "free sky agreements" with various governmental agencies there, is expected to ease thus enabling continued growth in activities to take place. This suggests the conservatism in projections provided in Table 2.27. Table 2.27 Forecast Watson ,Seaplane Operations 1995-2015 Year Operations 1995 4,000 2000 4,600 2005 5,500 2015 6,300 The outlook for seaplane passengers set forth herein reflects increased utilization of the larger Grumman Albatross 28 to 30-passenger planes on -hand replacing the smaller 17 passenger Grumman Mallards in line with Chalk's business plan. These forecasts also envision a high load factor for such flights as has been achieved through closely monitored management practices in place at the airline. See Table 2.28. Table 2.28 Forecast Watson Seaplane Passengers Passenger Range Year IOW High 1995 32,000 44,000 2000 36,800 50,600 2005 44,000 60,500 2015 50,400 69,300 95- d59 2N&Mn.R"/59P/11195 2-21 Watson Island 21 HELIPORT/SEAPLANE AIRPORT CAPACITY ANALYSIS The preparation of an aircraft capacity analysis for a conventional airport normally follows procedures developed for and approved by the FAA in Advisory Circular 15015060-5. Various factors considered in the determination of a conventional airport's capacity analysis involve: • Aircraft mix - the number and type of aircraft using runways and taxiways; • Runway use, which depends upon: Length; Weather (wind, ceiling and visibility); Navigational aids; Pilot preferences; Location of terminal area facilities on the airport; and, Airspace constraints • Airfield Configuration - orientation of runways, and the number and location of taxiways; • Air traffic control and radar coverage; and, • Amount of touch-and-go traffic. Watson Island, the destination and point of origin for only helicopters and seaplanes, should be considered a special facilities "hybrid" in its capacity classification. Helicopters and seaplanes utilize visual flight rules when taking off and landing at Watson, using pilot's discretion as to vision and minimum ceilings due to variations in area weather. Pilots of helicopters make final decisions as to landings and take -off approaches at Watson, depending on predominant wind direction. Pilots of the seaplanes make these final decisions on approach directions for landings and take -offs and location of the touch down and water departure areas not only upon wind directions, but also of proximity of water-bome vessels (ships and boats) in the Government Cut Channel. The frequency of safe arrivals/departures depends upon a proper integration of the two types of aircrafts now using Watson. Another consideration is the facilitation of aircraft and passengers on the ground before take -off and after landing. At present, Watson's use of helicopters permits adequate parking of the aircraft while on the ground due to the large amount of open space available. The storage space for seaplanes is restricted and limited by the size and location of the ramp adjacent to the Chalk's terminal building. It is b' estimated that as many as six seaplanes can be parked simultaneously on this facility to accommodate passenger and cargo loading and unloading. 95- �J9 2886-MP2.PPT/59P/11195 2-22 Watson Island J For planning purposes, the capacity of the airspace in and around Watson Island is as follows for the two types of aircraft frequenting the facility: Helicopters - 30 operations/hour Seaplanes - 30 operations/hour This is much more than the market needs today based upon existing landing and departure patterns. 95- 459 288&MP2.Rn/59P/11195 2-23 Watson Island CHAPTER 3 FACILITY REQUIREMENTS 3.1 INTRODUCTION Seaplane activity at Watson Island consists of scheduled and charter flights operated by Chalk's International Airlines. There are no facilities to accommodate privately - operated seaplanes. Helicopter activities at Watson Island include corporate and sightseeing activities conducted by Dade Helicopter Services and private operators. In the very near future, the City of Miami Police Department may operate its Aviation Division from Watson Island. Facility requirements to support these activities are discussed below. 3.2 APPROACHES Seaplanes operating at Watson Island utilize the Government Cut which is a wide body of water also used by cruise ships and other marine craft. Marking the area used for seaplane operations is not considered viable. All users of the Cut operate under visual controls to maintain necessary aircraft and seacraft separations. The orientation is essentially southeast -northwest which permits most operations to be into the prevailing easterly winds. All approaches are conducted in visual flight rule (VFR) conditions because the aircraft utilized by Chalk's International Airlines are not certified for instrument flight rule operations. Helicopter operations to the heliport area are also conducted under VFR procedures with most approaches to the single final approach and takeoff area made from the southeast or northwest. The seaplane and helicopter operations are not controlled and all pilots fly on a "see and be seen" basis. Based on the existing and potential levels of aircraft activity, the present operating mode is adequate. Further, the nature of the operations conducted do not support the need for terminal navigational aids. As air traffic increases, it is recommended that study be given to the need for Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) and more guidance for takeoffs and landings by appropriate air traffic control mechanisms. 3.3 TAXIWAYS/WATER ACCESS/EGRESS FOR SEAPLANES An inclined ramp leading from the water to the apron facilitates seaplane access. This ramp is sufficient to accommodate projected seaplane activity into the foreseeable future. Repairs will be necessary for the seawall along the west portion of the seaplane apron. This will require replacement of the seawall cap and possibly repairs to the pilings. 95- 459 288&MP3.R"/59P/11195 3-1 Watson Island J 3.4 AIRCRAFT PARKING POSITIONS The discussion below establishes area requirements for aircraft parking positions and their relationship to other aircraft operating areas. These have been reflected graphically in the plans describing alternatives and the final recommended layouts of the Watson Island Air Transportation Facility. The overall land area requirements for the facility have been influenced by the resultant layout. Aircraft parking jj positions are required to support the seaplane and helicopter operations at the ,1 facility. The existing apron can accommodate up to six positions for seaplanes (Grumman Mallards) utilized by Chalk's International Airlines. When the larger Grumman Albatross operates at the facility, the number of parking positions is reduced, however, as many as four of these aircraft can be positioned simultaneously on the existing apron. Future scheduling of seaplane operations should not involve the simultaneous operation of more than four aircraft, therefore, there is no a requirement to expand the site for this purpose. It would be desirable to make available an apron area for transient seaplanes operated by others. Due to the nature of Chalk's operations involving international transport of passengers and cargo, it will be necessary to segregate their operations from those of others. Consequently, in time, the need for a separate water -to -apron ramp and parking position apron for three seaplanes should be evaluated An area should be allocated for the transient apron area. Docking for those seaplanes not equipped with wheels, is not practical due to the wave action in the sea lane. Parking positions for helicopter operations associated with the corporate and sightseeing operations at the heliport are presented below. Those facilities intended to support the operations of the City of Miami Police Department are addressed in Section 3.15. Parking positions to support the corporate and sightseeing activities at Watson Island were related to the number of helicopter operations. Annual activity levels were reduced to a busy day/peak month value under the following assumptions: • The peak month is 20 percent more active than the average month • The busy day is 10 percent more active than the average day of the peak month • Average ground time for each operation is 2.5 hours during a 12-hour operating day. Parking position requirements were identified for a typical 2- blade helicopter (Bell Jet/Long Ranger 206) and 3/4-blade helicopter (Sikorsky 76) based on the anticipated mix of these helicopters operating at the facility. The percentage of 2-blade helicopters was anticipated to decrease from about 95 percent of the total activity to about 80 percent through the forecast horizon in favor of the 3/4-blade helicopters. The resulting requirements for helicopter parking positions are as follows: 95— 459 M&MPIM/59P/32395 3-2 Watson Island Helicopter Parking Positions Year 2_ blade 314-blade Total 1993 6 1 7 1995 7 1 8 2000 10 1 it 2005 11 2 13 2015 13 3 16 Area requirements for the parking positions were based on a ramp configuration which incorporates a looped taxi route from the final approach and takeoff around a group of parking positions. This permits the helicopters to be maneuvered on or F; above the taxi route and positioned to enter the parking positions. The hover taxi route has a width of 77 feet (1.0 times the rotor diameter of the Jet Long/Ranger 206 {37'} plus 20-feet of clearance on each side). This taxi route dimension is larger than the 64 feet required for a Sikorsky 76, a wheeled helicopter which ground taxis. Each parking position for a 2-blade helicopter would have a dimension of approximately 50 feet (side of square or diameter). A parking position for a 3/4- blade helicopter would be sized to about 62 feet. Each dimension is based on twice the distance from the rotor hub to tail. A clearance distance of about 30 feet (15 feet to all sides or circle radius) should be added to the parking position dimension; however, clearance requirements between adjacent parking positions overlap. It would be desirable to operate one or two of the parking positions as "hot spots" where carefully controlled operations allow for passenger enplaning/deplaning within a span of a few minutes while the helicopter blades remain turning at relatively fast speeds. Hot spots should be elevated at least six feet above the ground for reasons of safety. In this manner, passengers and others walking in the vicinity of the helicopter will be below the blades and the potential for injuries and fatalities is substantially reduced. All other helicopter parking positions can be at ground level. It is suggested that only certain portions of the helicopter parking position be paved in order to reduce surface water runoff volumes and create an aesthetically pleasing appearance. This will not diminish the effectiveness of the heliport facility provided that the remaining grass areas are mowed regularly. For the 2-blade helicopter parking position, an area of 15 feet by 11 feet (length by width) is appropriate. The 3/4-blade helicopter parking position requires a paved area of 25 feet by 12 feet. 3.4.1 Heliport Final Approach and Takeoff Area (FATO) 4 Helicopters arriving and departing the heliport operate from a final approach and takeoff area. Because the heliport is uncontrolled, only one final approach and takeoff area should be designated. The final approach and j] takeoff area should be paved, marked and lighted. Due to the variety of fi'38 v i 288&Mn.RPT/59P/11195 3-3 Watson Island urus� I helicopters using or anticipated to operate at the heliport, the FATO should be sized for the largest helicopter which can be reasonably expected at the heliport. The Sikorsky 61N was selected for this purpose and therefore the takeoff and landing area is a circular area with a diameter of 110 feet based on 1.5 times the overall length of this helicopter. The approach and departure paths associated with the FATO area should be established by such factors as: • prevailing winds • the location and elevation of surrounding obstacles • environmental impacts; primarily noise • the operation of the seaplanes at Watson • ships oriented to the Port of Miami Two approach and departure paths separated by an angle of at least 90 degrees are desirable. These paths are presented in the layout plans for the facility and were utilized as input to the planning of the terminal and landside components of the facility. The final approach and takeoff area should be equipped with a wind direction indicator (wind cone) and, depending on the designated approach paths, visual glide path indicators. The heliport should be readily visible given its Island setting and consequently a heliport identification beacon should not be required. 3.4.2 Helicopter Taxi Route The taxi route should be paved for its length and width (18 feet based on twice the undercarriage width of the Sikorsky 76), marked, and provided with edge lights or reflective markers. The parking positions can be lighted with strategically positioned apron lighting. 3.5 TERMINAL BUILDING REQUIREMENTS The proposed terminal buildings are intended to accommodate several functions. The primary purpose of the facilities is for scheduled and itinerant seaplanes and for the fixed base operator serving helicopters. A secondary function of the building is to provide space for U.S. Customs and Immigration personnel to perform their processing of international passenger and cargo arrivals. The space requirements for the facilities for the year 2015 activity level are summarized as follows: 95- 459 M&MM,RPT/59P/11195 3-4 Watson Island J Seaplane Carriers Public Toilets 120 s.f Concessions 180 s.f. Mech./Elec./Strg. 100 s.f. Offices 200 s.f. Passenger Processing * 1250 s.f. Bag Make-up/Cargo 450 s.f. Circulation 100 s.f. FIS 2600 s.f. Total Helicopter Services Public Toilets 120 s.f Concessions 180 s.f. Mech./Elec./Strg. 100 s.f. Offices 200 s.f. Passenger Processing * 1250 s.f. Bag Make-up/Cargo 450 s.f. Circulation 100 s.f. Total Grand Total 5000 s.f. 2400 s.f. 7400 s.f. * Includes area for ticketing, lobby/waiting area, security check and departure lounge. These area requirements translate into a total building area of 7,400 s.f. after allowing for circulation and utilities space. Given the area requirements of the structure at the planning horizon year level of activity, it would be prudent to construct the facilities to their ultimate size initially rather than add small area increments over time; a process which could add considerably to the overall cost of the facilities. The layout of the terminal facilities should consider that employees and passengers ► have access to both the heliport and seaplane activity areas and that proper security controls be implemented in accordance with federal regulations. The latter is particularly important with respect to the controlled movement of international arriving passengers and cargo to the Federal Inspection Services facilities. Additionally, the functional area for each activity center should be capable of expansion independently of each other and without adversely affecting the operations of the terminal complex. 95- 1-59 288& ms.M/59P/11995 3-5 Watson Island The terminal facilities should also be able to accommodate other operators within the same building or within the expansion of either terminal. 3.6 AUTOMOBILE PARKING REQUIREMENTS Parking demand for automobiles has been determined on the basis of passenger activity per departure level and consideration of the trip durations. A total of 100 spaces are required initially to meet the demands of the seaplane and helicopter users, and employees of the facility. Additionally, there is a need to accommodate taxicab and other vehicles which arrive at the terminal facility for passenger drop- off/pick-up. This can be provided at curbside. Both Chalk's International Airlines and the helicopter operators receive passengers via tour buses. These vehicles can be parked for several hours and require an area in which to remain. An area allowance of 3,500 s.f. should be provided to accommodate 4 buses for this purpose. 3.7 AIRFIELD MARKING AND LIGHTING The "runway" utilized by seaplanes for takeoff and landing cannot be reasonably marked in a conventional manner since it is a navigable waterway used by watercraft also. VFR conditions and regulations provide for adequate operational procedures into the foreseeable future. Areas utilized for the helicopter FATO and taxi route should be marked and lighted as indicated in Sections 3.4.1 and 3.4.2. Apron areas and those used for automobile parking should be provided with security lighting. These systems need to be strategically located so as to not interfere with flight activities or become obstructions to associated approach and departure paths. 3.8 NAVIGATIONAL AIDS Due to the nature of the flight operations at Watson, there is no need to provide an instrument approach to the seaplane "runway" or the helicopter final approach and takeoff area (initially). However, visual glide path indicators for the approach to the helicopter FATO may be desirable. In time, NAVAIDs should be considered for future application as traffic warrants. 3.9 AIR CARGO REQUIREMENTS Air cargo requirements are primarily associated with the operation of Chalk's International Airlines. There is a requirement for covered storage to organize the shipment of goods to the islands, especially during holiday periods when the residents 95-- 14- 59 288&MP3.RPT/59P/11995 3-6 Watson Island of the islands served by the airline travel to the Miami area for shopping. The building program allocates 400 s.f. for cargo storage requirements. ' 3.10 HELIPORT/SEAPLANE RESCUE AND FIREFIGHTING FACILITIES The aircraft rescue and firefighting function at Watson Island has historically been performed by the City of Miami's Number 1 Fire Station at 144 N.E. Fifth Street, approximately 1.5 miles west of Watson Island. The travel time is about two minutes 1 without bridge interruptions. Existing firefighting facilities at Watson Island consist of three portable fire extinguisher units on wheeled apparatus. Federal Aviation Regulations Part 139, concerning aircraft rescue and firefighting requirements, are applicable when operations are conducted by aircraft seating more than 30 passengers. Because this passenger limit is not exceeded under current or anticipated future conditions, Part 139 does not apply. With the new MacArthur Causeway high-level bridge affording a shorter and more reliable travel time from N.E. Fifth Street, response time to incidents at Watson Island should be reduced. It is recommended that the existing arrangement to utilize the City's capabilities from the Number 1 Fire Station continue. 3.11 MAINTENANCE FACILITIES NEEDS } Chalk's International Airlines performs maintenance on its aircraft at its main base i at Ft. Lauderdale -Hollywood International Airport. Consequently, the need for maintenance facilities center on those for private seaplanes which may utilize the facility and helicopters operated by Dade Helicopter Services and others. No new maintenance facilities for seaplanes are suggested at this time. Dade Helicopter Services utilizes a hangar for helicopter storage of its own fleet at 1 Watson Island for protection from the elements, security and maintenance. A single hangar of approximately 65 feet by 70 feet should be satisfactory for this purpose. 3.12 HIGHWAY ACCESS/EGRESS Vehicular access/egress to Watson Island is via the MacArthur Causeway, a major arterial highway linking the Miami central business district and western destinations with Miami Beach. It traverses essentially an east -west orientation and accommodates more than 50,000 vehicles per day in four lanes. Prior studies by the FDOT and their consultants in 1991 and 1992 project these volumes to exceed 60,000 vehicles per day in the foreseeable future, usurping all capacity of this high level facility. Additionally, when the existing draw bridge is raised to facilitate boat traffic, Level of Service F is common from a capacity standpoint. There are many accidents at the at -grade intersection with the Causeway on Watson Island, as this is the only location for crossing the Island and for crossing vehicles going east and west. 9 5 _ 11 v 9 288&MP3.RPT/59P/1199s 3-7 Watson Island The referenced prior studies of FDOT, the City, and other regional transportation planning agencies have supported removal of the at -grade intersection, and replacing the crossing movements on the Island under the Causeway Bridge, now under construction, at the western end of Watson Island. Adequate vertical clearances have been planned for this roadway, which should be constructed as soon as possible, so that the intersection can be closed to all crossing traffic, vehicles and pedestrians. The new link, under the Causeway Bridge, should be two lanes in width, with lanes approximately 15 feet wide and a minimum turning radius of 250 feet for two-way traffic. 3.13 SECURITY FENCING AND LANDSCAPING The extent of security fencing and landscaping requirements will be considered as part of the layout plan for the air transportation facility. The recommended layout plan will permit a definitive assessment of the linear feet of fencing required and the type and placement of landscape features. It is recognized that the operations areas for seaplane and helicopter landside and terminal functions will require appropriate security fencing and lighting and that the facility to serve as the base for the City of Miami Police Department Aviation Division will require similar treatment. 3.14 UTILITIES Utility services include potable water, electricity and telephone. A sewer system is being contemplated by the City to serve the Island. The present level of services and capacities are sufficient for the activity levels at the forecast horizon year. It would be appropriate to place all utility lines below ground as they are expanded and/or replaced in order to minimize the potential for obstructions to aircraft flight. Parking lot lighting should afford a minimum lighting intensity of four to five foot-candles, on average. 3.14.1 Fuel Storage Fuel storage for Chalk's International Airlines is accomplished with two fueling trucks positioned on the secure apron area. These vehicles can be re- supplied on a daily basis as necessary and should be adequate for the continued operation of the airline. Additionally, Dade Helicopter Services maintains an 8,000-gallon above ground tank for fueling. Fixed fueling facilities are recommended for the future development at Watson with each FBO having the option of installing their own system. This would be for their own use or for selling fuel to transient or other operators. The fueling systems should generally consist of 6,000 gallon tanks for Avgas/Jet A type fuel and be equipped with electric dispensing systems. The tanks should be double wall and meet the requirements of all local, state and federal agencies having jurisdiction over fueling facilities. Hose lengths can 288&MP3.RPT/59P/32795 3-8 Watson Island i be up to 75 feet and underground piping shall have a secondary containment system. 3.15 CITY OF MIAMI POLICE DEPARTMENT This section addresses separately the needs of the City of Miami Police Department Aviation Division which may base four or more Bell Jet/Long Rangers and two MD 500 helicopters at Watson Island. Due to the nature of the Department's operations, these facilities are to be separate and secure from the public areas on Watson Island. The helicopters will be hangared at night for protection from the elements, and for security and maintenance functions. A hangar area of 130 feet by 65 feet will be satisfactory for these purposes. An office/locker/operations facility of about 15 feet by 65 feet can be added to meet these requirements. Based on staffing requirements, there will be a need for 16 automobile parking spaces. Allowing for flying time and downtime for maintenance, the ramp for helicopter parking positions should be sized to accommodate three Jet/Long Rangers and one MD 500. Based on a common taxi route from the FATO with parking positions to either side, the parking position area for each Jet/Long Ranger is about 50 feet and for each MD 500, 38 feet (each dimension is the side of a square or diameter of a circle and is based on twice the distance from the rotor hub to the tail). A clearance of 15 feet between adjacent parking positions should be provided and these may overlap. The layout of these facilities should permit the designation of one or two of the parking positions as hot spots. As with the parking positions for corporate and sightseeing operations, only the area to support the skids of the helicopters plus some buffer need be paved within the parking area -- 15 feet by 11 feet each for the Jet/Long Ranger and MD 500. The taxi route should be paved and lighted as previously described. The apron area can be lighted with flood lamps, likely to be installed at the top of the hangar facility. The facility layout plans presented graphically illustrate the alternative and recommended location for the Police Department facilities and their spatial relationships to the other aviation facilities on Watson Island. 3.16 FACILITY REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY The principal facility requirements for the air transportation facilities on Watson Island can be summarized as follows: 1. Seaplane operations will continue to utilize the Government Cut and ramp to an apron area to gain access to terminal facilities. 288&MP3.PYr/59P/32495 3-9 Watson Island I t"i 2. The air transportation facilities will continue to be VFR controlled with a future assessment for IFR as air traffic warrants. 3. Parking positions for seaplanes and helicopters are based on unit requirements which are reflected in the alternative facility layouts. 4. A single heliport final approach and takeoff area (FATO) is required owing to the uncontrolled nature of the heliport operations function. Helicopters will use a taxi route to reach elevated hot spot parking positions. 5. The passenger terminal complex will serve the needs of scheduled seaplane and helicopter operations. An 11,000 s.f, facility supported with a 100-car parking lot and space for four buses will be suitable for the forecast horizon levels of activity. In time, there may be a need for more automobile parking. 6. Aircraft rescue and firefighting services should continue to be provided by the City of Miami's Number 1 Fire Station at N.E. Fifth Street. 7. The terminal area for helicopter activities should include hangar facilities for maintenance and overnight storage of transient aircraft. 8. Improvements to the vehicular access/egress is desirable and is being incorporated in the recommended layout of the facilities. 9. Future on -site fuel storage should be in above ground storage tanks or fueling trucks. 10. The City of Miami Police Department Aviation Division may establish a base of operations at Watson Island and this facility will be separate and secure from other public areas on the Island. 11. Terminal facilities should allow for accommodation of multiple tenants within the same building and/or expansion of the facilities to provide space for other operators. 12. Local TV and radio stations will likely desire to become long-term tenants of Watson Island for storage and possible service of their helicopters. q5- A59 288&MP3.RPT/59P/32495 3-10 Watson Island CHAPTER 4 EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES 4.1 ALTERNATIVES The alternatives developed for air transportation facilities on Watson offer three primary solutions based upon degree and extent of build out. These are: No Build Moderate Expansion Maximum Development A. preferred alternative of the three options has been identified and developed for consideration. ! 4.1.1 No Build Alternative 1 This alternative assumes that the air service facilities remain as they are today, without improvement or expansion, Exhibit 4.1. With this alternative it is important to note that if the existing helicopter facilities are not relocated, they will continue ` to use land and water space currently designated by the City for the development of a mega -yacht marina on the west end of Watson Island. 4.1.2 Moderate Expansion Alternative The difference in requirements for facility structures, both for year 2005 and the planning year 2015, is relatively small. Increases for the various components, offices, passenger processing and F.I.S. are minor. Therefore, full build -out of the buildings and infrastructure is recommended. The only difference would be in the amount of auto and aircraft parking, and hangar space for overnight storage. As needs for these functions increase more space can be provided in later stages of development. 4.1.3 Maximum Development Alternative The maximum build alternative is identical to the moderate expansion alternative with regard to road access, perimeter road, building facilities and general site development. The difference in demand between the years 2005 and 2015 lies in requirements for automobile, seaplane and helicopter parking and hangar facilities. There are three layouts suggested for this alternative, shown in Options A, B, and C, (Exhibits 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4) which address the full demand for auto and aircraft parking and hangar space for overnight storage. 95- A59 268&MP4.RPT/59P/11195 4-1 Watson Island NEW UNDERPASS ROAD �, `/ �/•f� ,\�1� \,`� ` `\'• :: ��" 8 bSG la IL h. DADE MLICA�TERD 1Ndc � \\ ` lv✓/ � \ - pis ,� \ � ~ � ^ XBTIRG•SEAPLANE pON^`�nngqAIIKINO AREA BOUNDARY FENCE—_—_--_t--__---�r----_—_-- `- HALK' INTNLwvy IRLiNEB \ \ \ \ \ LEGERD\ \ \ \ \ \ L !EA PLANE PARKING AREA • \ 1. HELW"TER FARXNG POSITION \ :. HOT -SPOT �. \ [� A'( \- \ ILLAKONG PAD \ \ \ \NO BUILD OPTION \ G°OVERNMENT CUT \ ---------------------------------------------------- i ---- 5 - -� G ; ------ --------- C) Lo f u'a e — — — — — — _ — NEW UNpEgpASS it0 f. Ap p� Id \ ♦ ® ORco P PLO � � � ♦ G ��/� ��s�: \ \ q9 ` Q v O P P W W.. ♦ \ \ U 3 9 �- LU � \voet QPa col � s \ \ \ NO\gE O \, tJG �FOi . . F\ . \ D r G ♦ Ito �, O � \ G \ S O D Z W t_ a N z a d D F Z -------- ° ---Z -------------------- 9° a --\ ----- ----' fee - ------------------ \; O ---- - `� ----- 1 --- W F- ` P R O P O S E D \ ♦\\\O PARK N( P�� OAR/k/�y MEGA-YACHT D \ \0\� p //0 MARINA ` ` \\\ // ��` y`� \ / O / ` ♦ \\\\ HELICOPTER /// m qq�1 O\� TERMINAL Z i$&s �` ♦ /� sF R�'NP 0`� s� D ♦ 41 PROPOSED C�`�` y G 2 c� q \` I ��UCK TUNNEL / Q O p. ( `, F Q !J OBS � 1 `♦ i R fl • �Q 3 2 POLICE HELICOPTERS PARKING POSITIONS t III I \ \ \ "9 y � c���' \ / _ _ ram•' I - - _ R e A T �— _ _ ' �- _ j �8 �- _ E)OST. ` — — _ ~PUBLR: PARrtMI: _ _—•— — —_r_ TI I I N )"' o � E F RA4P PER R ROAn / \��\\\\\ \�\�I I I V 9 t!Ilj�( IIUU[tt (l(tttll[ull(uf(tliult[ lNR!!RR4t0.11 .[lt ulltllll tutu u.11l Il Il[ 4 Ill !Iy! !llTt nt TU4i i4lQttlltt4tlTRlCYltittOtiitit4(IfT(Q4 I!144tI11At4iCR1 11ltl!itNttt4it4itt4itl11lu�T)[14t14TtTRTu,tR°iUilit >r)u ..,�111�II111111IIII�QI(f(II'i�iiir�ilpu?[��i1�Iu�ll � �- O q 1tIl 1 W SgI �\ p ^ e,/ I II111 1 i; OBSERVATION AREA a $ 3 B A Y �S°RFq I IIIII I LEGEND W -1)�►_ 'qre t II t II I , ZBEAPt.AIE ►ARKA10 Alter I111 1 4.e01RDARr P0I= W (L ri O I Iltl OPTION - A (REV. MAY 09-1994) @ YEAR 2015 (WITH POLICE FACILITY) W u) IA I ° I00' soo• a 1 I I I II 1 so' 200' W i y Iill 1 = ny' 0.0 I lilt de" II111 1 ---------------- ---- ---- -------------------------- I--------------------------- µµ—i— o9" G 0 V E R N M E N T C U T--- - - - - _ _ o b I - ------------------------------------------ 0_ — N -- — — — — — — _ _I It < +$ ----------------------------------- R U N W A Y 1 2 3 0 Itl — — �— 0 0 — — — a nu 0 0 0 a _ Itllill I ----------- 0 \289\ExHB4 \ S NE s P �N JPPRO \G IN NN t N. SEAPLANE HELICOPTER\\ AN:EFFICE `"�"_ ""-' "'"-`'--" - •-� • --`♦`� `irI'^ TERMNAL TERMINAL oEFFICE PARIkING POSITIONSIN ♦ '/ C Will AWE P/1RKi+iO RA ' \= ♦.e �Illlllllllllllllllllllllllllllllilllllr I : -2, w � s.¢:.. � ,4'" -r:� z a 2:y�r�AE• ,.y �.,� a',c'",-' ;r-? .h .°';r.. .Y �-??':>:d' 4 �4 J Y `9IL �' _ _ o ��BI�bU>Ii�o19�U>791p@III��U"�I&�Uf�&�991Ii1������1�8'ORDWA'�IV� �1>lU�dl)�9��NaI�IIAG1�d�U�II�U�1U�8����11 BOUNDARY FENCE B A Y ff }} \ \ I PROPOSED \ TRUCK TUNNEL ♦ i ♦ ;: I ' I I -------------'------'---'—'--'—'!— ----._G 0 V E R N MiE N T— C_U T -\28S6\EXM84-3DWG 5 , 0 r0 0 ' s� T S C) 9 2 IL \ I � • t LAND PAD 2 HOT-SPO'j \ S. SEA ZZPARKING AREA BOUNDARY Fb= ``\`\�` \`\`\ I ♦\♦\ QPTION - BON \♦ xo' !:;� IN 1 N \ �:' ------�--- `� ----\ -- \ \ IN y Lu U Q YL 00 Q V) N CL zzQ Q� �a F �w W QF z Q Q� J z 0 F Q m � NEW UNDERPASS ROAD DA2B86\EMB4-lDwG -04 B A S NUNS 19 N" IN" *0 -zz -9 9) I 4b ;p"-, m .... ..... . . . . A —BOUNDARY FENCE PROPOSED TRUCK TUNNEL--A-1111� "43 0 V,,E R N M E T CUT 1 5 alo 0!1 LEGEND t LANMG PAD 2. NOT -SPOT 3. SEAPLANE PARKING AREA 4. BOUNDARY FENCE OPTION c 0 loo, -- - — - — - — - — --- — - — ----- — - — - 4.2 SITE CONSTRAINTS The proposed site for the Watson Island Air Transportation Facility is defined by the existing MacArthur Causeway alignment to the north, the Government Cut bulkhead line to the south and the Miami Seaport turning basin to the west. The net usable site available for this development is further defined and significantly constrained by the following: o Proposed realignment of the Causeway, o Proposed new Causeway ingress and egress movements, o Proposed truck tunnel to/from Dodge Island, and o Future Mega -Yacht marina. Other constraints imposed on the site include maintaining use of the existing `s} seaplane ramp accessing the Government Cut. Relocating or modifying this ramp will require extensive environmental study and permitting. Also, the north/west to l south/east primary helicopter approach and departure paths with a secondary path position a minimum of 90 degrees to primary must be considered. All of the options developed acknowledge the relocation and reconfiguration of the mid -Island roadway intersection along MacArthur Causeway. The access to and from the Causeway for all of the functions on Watson Island will be by means of "right turn only" movements. Eastbound traffic from the Causeway will exit right onto the southside of the Island, while westbound traffic will exit right onto the north side. A perimeter road will need to be developed with a grade separated underpass at the north end of the Island. Conversely, the traffic leaving the Island onto the Causeway will be by right turn only movements. The proposed tunnel to the Port of Miami will require the exit/entrance from the Island to the Causeway to shift approximately 150 feet east from its present location. Crossing of the Causeway by vehicles and pedestrians will not be permitted at this location. The gross land available on the southside of the Island is approximately 36.25 acres. J The remaining areas will be available for development of other recreational activities J and associated roads ranging from 19.45 to 22.75 acres, depending on the option selected. 4.3 EVALUATION CRITERIA The evaluation matrix, depicted in Table 4.1, was developed to judge the three options within four categories. Passenger and Public Convenience, Operations, Expandability/Adaptability, and Economic Effectiveness. 288&MP4.R7T/59P/11195 4-6 Watson Island i Table 4.1 Competitive Evaluation of Options Site Concepts 1. Passenger and Public Convenience • Walking Distances • Building Orientation • Landside Vehicular Access Orientation • Vehicular Access to Parking • Convenient Curbside • Preserves Existing Site Amenities Subtotal 2. Operations • Operations Clarity • Functional Separation • Police Segregation • Maintenance of Operation During Construction • Service and Emergency Access • Functional Balance of Facilities Subtotal 3. Expandability/Adaptability (year 2005-2015) • Phasing Flexibility • Impact on Existing Operations • Vehicle Parking • Gate and Aircraft Parking Utilization • Recognizes Existing Constraints Subtotal 4. Economic Effectiveness • Time to Construct • Phasing Impact • Project Cost Factors • Site Utilization Subtotal Total Scores (Scoring: Best = 4, Least = 1) A B C 4 2 3 2 1 3 3 2 1 3 1 3 4 3 3 -2 4 -2 19 13 16 3 1 2 3 1 2 1 3 2 4 1 2 3 2 3 3 -2 17 11 14 3 1 2 4 3 2 3 1 3 3 2 1 -2 -2 -2 16 10 11 4 3 2 3 1 2 2 3 4 2 1 3 11 8 11 63 42 52 288&MP4.RPT/59P/11195 4-7 Watson Island A brief explanation follows: Passenger and Public Convenience The elements under this criteria are judged from the passenger point of view. How accessible are the parking, terminals and other amenities? Can the buildings be easily found and is the approach logical? And lastly, does the plan preserve the site's natural amenities? Qperations This criteria looks at the functional characteristics of the plan. It evaluates the major functional aspects and their relationship to one another. Functional aspects include the needed separation of the police facilities, the location of emergency access to the field, and the location of the flight paths regarding other major functions. Expandability/Adaptability This segment of the evaluation attempts to assess the site development between the years 2005 and 2015. It also reviews the site development assuming not all the elements would be constructed at one time. Economic Effectiveness This criteria looks at relative estimates for time and difficulty to construct and construction cost differentials. The values given are comparative rather than value - based. Each of the criteria were reviewed and given a value ranging from four to one, with four being best and one being least. In some cases, none of the options were considered best. For the most part, the options were judged competitively against one another. The value given is generally that one option is better than the other and not necessarily unsatisfactory. 4.4 EVALUATION PROCESS A total of 20 separate conceptual layouts responding to the program requirements delineated for the Watson Island Air Transportation Facilities were developed. Options A, B and C were determined to be the best as a result of the evaluation process. Some specific concerns addressed included the need to keep the approach/departure clear zone over land because helicopter pilots find it difficult to control flight directly over water within 50 feet of the surface. V Through this initial evaluation process the Team reduced the number of working alternatives to three, and scored each using the evaluation of alternatives matrix, Table 4.1. Option A scored the highest, totaling 63 points out of 84. This compares with 42 points for Option B and 52 points for Option C. 288&MP4.M/59P/11195 4-8 Watson Island 4.5 EVALUATION OF FACILITY OPTIONS Each of the three options were developed with similar features. The main difference being the location of the helicopter landing area and positioning of the buildings. Each option incorporates the following common elements: • Seaplane terminal • Seaplane apron parking area utilizing existing water ramp • International passenger processing and F.I.S. offices • Helicopter landing pad with designated clear zones • Helicopter terminal and hangar • Helicopter parking areas • Elevated helicopter "hot -spot" loading/unloading areas • Police administrative building and hanger • Police helicopter parking • Police vehicle parking (secured) • Pus and public parking • Access roadways to/from the Causeway • New road under Causeway linking both sides of the Island • A perimeter road system • Public boardwalk and park along the southeast shoreline The two hot -spot landing pads are elevated to provide for safer loading and unloading of passengers when tail rotors and overhead blades are in motion. I To comply with the intent of the Master Plan as required by the City, helicopter 1 servicing is to be minimal. Accordingly, only minor preventive maintenance and fueling is anticipated. In response to FAA guidelines relating to the ability to accommodate additional tenants servicing air transportation needs, the sizing of the proposed terminals is 1 designed to facilitate additional needs of any new tenants, as approved by FAA and ! the City. All of the options assume that the existing seaplane ramp is fixed in it present location and should not be moved due to the extensive environmental impact that a new location would impose. Also, each of the options has been developed to allow development of the proposed tunnel from the Causeway to the Port of Miami without adverse effects on the air transportation facilities. 4.5.1 Option A Option A, year 2015, is organized around a helicopter landing pad located t, approximately 150 feet from the Government Cut bulkhead line and 125 feet east of the existing Chalk's seaplane ramp accessing Government Cut. This pad location ij 'i 2886-MP4.RPT/59P/11195 4-9 Watson Island Ala positions the approach and departure paths primarily over water with the exception jj of the 250-foot clear zone areas which are situated over land. The two elevated helicopter loading/unloading parking positions are located adjacent to and north/northeast of the landing pad near the new helicopter terminal building. f The seaplane terminal, helicopter terminal and the City of Miami Police Department $1 helicopter facilities are located in three separate buildings north of the elevated helicopter hot -spot parking positions. Helicopter taxiway and at grade parking for additional helicopters are located east of the landing pad. Seaplane parking positions are located to the west. A single roadway is used to access both the air transportation complex and other southside Island developments. The maximum build out of this option requires approximately 16.8 acres of land. 4.5.2 Option B ,Ael This option in the year 2015 configuration, positions the helicopter landing pad 200 j feet east of the existing Chalk's seaplane ramp and immediately south of the proposed east bound MacArthur Causeway off -ramp and tunnel linking MacArthur Causeway with Dodge Island and the Seaport. This pad positions approximately 800 feet of final approach and initial departure paths over land. The two elevated helicopter loading/unloading parking positions are located south/southwest of the landing pad. The seaplane terminal, helicopter terminal and the City of Miami Police Department J helicopter facilities are located in separate buildings paralleling Government Cut. The helicopter taxiways and parking for additional helicopters are split into two } separate areas. One to the south/east end of the terminal building complex serving the police, the other to the north/west serving the facility. Seaplane parking positions are located west of the terminal. Two separate vehicular access roadways are required, one leading to the air transportation facility and public parking, another to the remaining portions of the Island's southside development. The maximum build -out of this option requires approximately 16.3 acres of land. 4.5.3 Option C Option C, year 2015, positions the helicopter landing pad in the southeast portion of f Watson Island, south of MacArthur Causeway and approximately 50 feet north of the Government Cut bulkhead line. This landing pad may need to be elevated if the proposed Seaport tunnel ventilation building is constructed to avoid its encroachment on the 2:1 sloping transitional helicopter approach surface. The approach and departure paths are located primarily over water with the exception of the 250-foot clear zone areas which are situated over land. w1 2&WMP4.M/59P/11195 4-10 Watson Island The two elevated helicopter loading/unloading parking positions are located north/west of the landing pad and linked by a 600 foot dedicated ferryway (taxiway). The seaplane terminal, helicopter terminal and the City of Miami Police Department e helicopter facilities are located north/northwest of the elevated helicopter parking positions. The police facility is physically separated from the seaplane facility and the helicopter facility by a secured police vehicle parking area. Helicopters will be parked on grade along a secondary ferryway. Police helicopters are intended to park in those positions closest to the police hangar. Seaplanes should be parked west of the new seaplane terminal building along the bulkhead line. A single roadway is used to access both the air transportation complex and other southside Island developments. The maximum build out of this option (year 2015) requires approximately 13.5 acres of land. 4.6 PREFERRED OPTION Option A is considered the best plan. There is a clear separation of function. The approach to the site allows the users to see their destination and to access that destination without unnecessary involvement with the functional aspects of other air space or air activity. At the same time it allows the users to see the aircraft and to see and use the natural amenities of the Island. For the aircraft pilots, the access to the airfield is clear and the parking area is accessible to the landing area. The construction of new facilities can be phased easily over time without difficulty. 4.6.1 General Description Eastbound traffic exiting from the Causeway can approach the complex and can go directly to the centrally located public parking lot or bypass it to gain access to a landside vehicular drive and curbside drop-off area serving the seaplane terminal, the helicopter terminal, and the City of Miami Police Department. Those destined for other parts of the Island can bypass the terminal complex and access the proposed marina development or continue to Watson Island's north side via the proposed bridge underpass at the northwest end of the Island. A public park is proposed to be located in the southeast corner of the Island south of MacArthur Causeway to preserve the unique Government Cut and Seaport vistas that exist today. This area is equally accessible for vehicles. 4.6.2 Seaplane Terminal Building The seaplane terminal building is positioned approximately 300 feet north of the existing ramp access to Government Cut and can be accessed directly off the terminal curbside. The building totals approximately 5,000 s.f. including an international arrivals inspection facility, serving both seaplane passengers and any international passengers arriving by helicopter (see Exhibits 4.5 and 4.6). Exhibit 4.5 289&MP4.M/S9P/1199S 4-11 Watson Island shows the FBO as a single tenant layout, while Exhibit 4.5A shows the same building concept with a multi -tenant layout. The existing seaplane apron area is sized to accommodate five parked aircraft. A sixth position has been situated immediately adjacent to the terminal building, as the designated loading/unloading gate position. 4.6.3 Helicopter Terminal Building c: The FBO helicopter terminal comprised of administrative offices, public areas and a hangar totaling 6,770 s.f., is located between the seaplane terminal and the police facilities (see Exhibits 4.5 and 4.7). 4.6.4 Future FBO Accommodations Based on the demand for seaplane and helicopter services at Watson, it is not anticipated that other FBO's will locate at Watson, however, other FBO's could be accommodated if necessary as shown in Exhibit 4.5A. This plan shows expanding the 1 terminal facilities by filling the gap between the seaplane and the helicopter terminal. l It is also possible to accommodate other 17130's within the proposed terminals should the operators choose to enter a joint use agreement. Note: Option A-1 (Exhibit 4.5A) has been included to define a modified Option A terminal layout which can accommodate multiple seaplane and/or helicopter FBO's. 4.6.5 Police Helicopter Terminal Building The police helicopter building is comprised of administrative offices and a hangar totalling 9,430 s.f. This building will be located to the eastern end of the terminal area, see Exhibit 4.5 and 4.8. Refer to Exhibit 4.9 for dimensional information on helicopter parking clearances. 4.6.6 Construction Phasing It is recommended that all existing air transportation facility buildings except the CBS building presently used by Dade Helicopters, Inc. be removed from the Island immediately after the new facilities become operational. There is no need to construct the new FBO facilities in phases since the plan provides for relocation of existing facilities. The parking may be phased based on demand levels, but all other facilities will be built in the initial phase. Also, phase one of the plan accommodates the entire 20 year projected forecast. There may be alternative phasing plans developed for the new construction based upon the need for existing Island space to accommodate the new tunnel to Dodge Island and/or the proposed mega -yacht marina. J 1 288&MP4.RPT/59P/11995 4-12 Watson Island r� 4.6.7 Cost Options and Construction Time It is estimated that on a relative basis, since there is no land acquisition required for any of the options, and since each contains the same amount of new construction, the costs of each option will be similar. Construction time is estimated to consume nine to twelve months following all required permits and project approvals. 288&MP4.RPT/59P/11995 4-13 Watson Island I I I I I I t uuc 111UT- aaw EY aMou I e 0 1 ` � o �0 o ^� [cl) F -4. LIOD 'may f - 4.5A l r _------- �i_ I1 1 1 i 1 l 1 SPACE RESEI l FOR POTENT FUTURE EXPANSION 1 4 ` 1 :} 1 4 I 1 1 1 y 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i,: 3 1 1 1 i S EP_ 4r� I� T 0 EXHIBIT 4.6 i i i SPACE RESERVED FOR POTENTIAL FUTURE EXPANSION (3,000 SO. FT.) HELICOPTER TERMINAL BUILDING/HANGAR 6,770 SO. FT. 4-17 EXHIBIT 4,7 J P❑LICE HELIC❑PT❑R BUILDINGMANGAR 9,430 SQ. FT. EXHIBIT 4Z r / I e00 It os \ prop w� \ // —� e F JETLRANGER 7C}Al \\ \ a / / / 0.50 FT. EGO DIA 1 // OV Att-1TH0 FT m / 11.11 FT. E OD. DIA. \ 7.76 FT — I�IPTi°�'r�'1 / 1 FT JETLRANGER 2g6L l I / / I (. EOD. DIA. \ ROTOR DIA/ / +J.D AFT l \\ \ 37.00 FT/ TH. \\ / 4V]9 FT. o p EOD. DIA. , 7.71 FT. —I 6 / / 1 LL I / I \ ` RANGER 211 IJET O f \ / I �LI _ _ e ( / 42.39 FT. / 1 JETLRANGER 7f1 1' ` 705'F T_/// EGO. DIA. / \ DIA/ / 7.76 FT. ROTOR / \\\ \ ]7.00 / O7 JB FT�� / / E. IA. / 7.78ODFIT. 0 j.'TEFTLF ANGER �1 l TOR DA/ 00FT/ 111l / / 42.39 FT. / 1 /Ll JET RANGER tOrGl b EOD. DIA. / / ROTOR DIA/ ]7.00 FT/ Ot 30 FTttH. EOD. DIA, / 11.70 FT. 1 SI 76RSKY / R000 F OI/ 1 , JETRANGER O V LTH J cb \ / EOD. DIA OV AK / 41.]9 FT.� / \ EOD. DIA. LTO FT. \ I SIx 76ASKY LL ( I 1 \ JE.YIfANGER 2L)Gl / \ \)JIROTOR DIA. ROTOR DIA/ / \ J4 00,./ , HELICOPTER PARKING CONDITIONS THO&WBON CO"MTANTS NTEANATN)NAL, MC, I1Oµ14(• IT+ 1 * nM.— . �. T -Iql 95- 459 Wl.L1ANR MATF)FL.O i tTOIEl4 NC, �.�h M. WlIA • Nb'fh� . V.t•PI Il ,h4+Ht Ao�ch Taal WATSON ISLAND AIR TRANSPORTATION FACILITIX8 MASTER PLANNING STUDY -__ KC. HARRYL AiiOCL1TFt, INC. Faxjus i. LiVINEi UUII LL[RlNA L M{OCIATEi, NN], iN t• ov;.+a ww ,w ,cas+.o.o �w �h �r .w.a IaeI1O�.l+pL �.I� n� !w1 �Iaii�rVintl uriaaT or anarr r: C � CHAPTER 5 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA) 5.1 PURPOSE AND NEED The purpose of implementing the recommended alternative for development of the Watson Island's Air Transportation Facilities is to formalize existing operations which will improve safety for both the aviators and the people on the ground. As forecast operations are realized and traffic increases, the need for these additional safety measures will become even more prevalent. It is projected that by the year 2015, Watson will need to accommodate 28,100 operations (21,800 helicopter and 6,300 seaplane). Currently, the air operations area on Watson is not secured. The public has been observed wandering in the area where helicopters are landing and taxiing which creates unnecessary risk to both the individuals on the ground and to pilots and passengers. In addition, helicopter landing procedures and flight tracks are not formalized. 5.2 THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE The preferred alternative for development of Watson is graphically depicted on Exhibit 5.1 and described in Chapter 4. 5.3 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT j The maps and graphics necessary to describe the affected environment in the vicinity of Watson (location map, vicinity map, existing aviation facilities, existing and future land uses, etc.) are provided in Chapter 1 of this Master ]Plan Report. 5.3.1 Incompatible Land Uses No schools, places of public assembly, hospitals, shopping areas, or adjacent political jurisdictions will be affected by development of the preferred alternative on Watson. The population, industrial and commercial growth �} characteristics of the area served by Watson are described in Chapter 2. 288&MP5.RPT/59P/11195 95- 459 5-1 Watson Island i NLN UNDERPASS r ROAD 'o- IL oLp" ID \ o\ \ <1\ W zW`rg� \ \ \ q R LIL� \5�`NG oGPol \ F h q } lAID \ F 1>IL z z dr A w yy y-_ `__-____ ..1 <� w \ \I Lj I I IO ti Q F- ` F PROP 0 S E D S' �II1110I I I I I I III p/ �. Q \ C� / \ \\\\� eusNc PouCE v�R�N�// // o 'z m MEGA - YACHT \ \ ��\�� /� \ / y Q \ \\\ HELICOPTER �8i �G)z \ \ TERMINAL /� v \ \`� \ ` / 0/3b PROPOSED it, !� `#�a� 2 f ' �-.� pq \\ 1 'T$UCK TUNNEL / Q 0 o Y ( \ \ POLICE HELICOPTERS PARF:INC POSITIONS yl _JI d oy F — - _ A _ �� w T > ag- --�-- I ,ul I �N °•�� F EXIST. - - _ wax P�RR�wG - - _ - - - _ RAW R ROM , `�1l\��`�;w. l`1�����`� \\�\\\ �� \\\��\� °�<<.,z lU. 11 W ll llllll lilll ... 1 111 if 111U1. )l ln.tl!Il t1. Rl R Uinj ; , 111 .Wild([ t(tltI l U.11 JUU !W(3A!U 11 nm II) IT (R ¢Lit 11IRWI fill[) 11 Ill 1 lRumnp>nTr 0 q ill W .61 t o g_ loll I i o r` '-to tjljl I OBSERVATION AREA Q 4 111 �RFq I l I LEGEND G BAY �F I 1. LAND aoT AD mocl W Qq i ,I111 I i411AW FARXM AREA Ww lilt I aROUWDA"FeCE W I III" I OPTION - AI�REV. MAY 09-1994I @YEAR 2015 (WITH POLICE FACILITY) Lu III soo' d Z sg I iTo t w• 2W Lu 0.0 nl _ till- - - - - - - - - j ____ CV __ - - I - V E R N M E N T C U T-------------------- I+e-------- _ Q Ion —0 — - - - - lel------- -----------------------------� oQ ------------------- - - - - _ !d I ----- ------------------- R U N W A Y 1 2— 3 0 11l o --------------- W 14n n� L-ju EXHIBIT 5.1 i 5.31 Affects of Other Development Projects The reconstruction of the MacArthur Causeway and its bridge is currently underway. Though that project is not being influenced by the improvement of the aviation facilities at Watson, it is likely to increase the use of the aviation facilities. The poor access to the Island due to traffic congestion on the Causeway today has been a factor in suppressing the demand for use of the existing aviation facilities, The FDOT is also considering development of a tunnel under Government Cut connecting Watson Island and the Port of Miami. The effects of these plans on traffic patterns on the Island were considered in the development of the preferred alternative. In combination with the improvements to the surface transportation system and the aviation facilities at Watson, the City of Miami is working towards implementation of the Watson Island Master Development Plan (dated January 1989). As part of this implementation, the City is considering developing a mega -yacht marina. This project was a consideration in the development of the preferred alternative for air transportation facilities. The existing helicopter activity area would interfere with the landside support area for the proposed mega -yacht marina in its current location and thus its relocation is part of the preferred development alternative for the aviation area. The City's goal is to make Watson Island a showcase center for entrance into the City of Miami. The beautification of the entire Island, the development of the mega -yacht marina, improvements to and formalization of the aviation facilities and the improved access via the new MacArthur Causeway and potential tunnel from the Port will all complement one another to make this vision a reality. Specific impacts addressed in this EA focus only on those that may be "} generated by implementation of the preferred alternative for the seaplane -? base and heliport on Watson Island. The only "cumulative impacts" anticipated to be caused by the proposed modifications to the aviation facilities, the reconstruction of the Causeway, development of the tunnel and ° J the implementation of the Master Plan for Watson Island, are those that will result in positive changes to be enjoyed by both residents and visitors of the City of Miami. 5.4 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES - SPECIFIC IMPACT CATEGORIES Development of the preferred alternative at Watson will not create significant impacts on off -site properties. To assist in an evaluation of the environmental consequences of the preferred alternative, several maps in Chapter 1 can be used as references. These include the 288&MP5.RPT/59P/11195 S-3 Watson Island general location map, vicinity map, existing airport facilities and land use plan, maps of existing and future land uses in the area which also show environmentally sensitive areas, and the map showing the area affected by existing noise contours. 5.4.1 Noise Impacts The computer model NOISEMAP, Version 6.1, was used in developing the Ldn contours for this study. NOISEMAP is one of the two models approved by the FAA for use in airport noise studies. The other is the Integrated Noise Model, INM, developed by the FAA. NOISEMAP was selected for use for this study primarily because of its flexibility in modelling helicopter operations. The FAA's civilian aircraft noise data base is available for use by either model. Use of the model requires several inputs. These inputs fall into two principal categories: (1) aircraft noise and performance data and (2) aircraft operations data. 5.4.1.1 Noise and Performance Data NOISEMAP uses noise data to identify how loud specific aircraft types are at different distances from the point of concern - distances ranging from 200 to 25,000 feet. These data are available for typical thrust settings used on takeoff, landing, level flight, and when conducting patterns such as touch-and-go training operations. The performance data used by NOISEMAP define how quickly aircraft lift off on takeoff, how rapidly they climb, their rates of acceleration, their speeds at different distances from takeoff, and any changes in thrust levels which occur during standard procedures. Standard data for the INM aircraft type BEC58P (Beech Baron 58P, a twin -engine piston aircraft) were used to model both the G-111 Albatross and the Mallard aircraft. The BEC58P is the only small twin -engine piston aircraft included in the FAA database, and is used as an equivalent to other twin piston aircraft in noise modelling. Bell 206L noise and performance data were extrapolated from Helicopter Noise EKposure Curves for use in Environmental Impact Assessment (published by the U. S. Department of Transportation, FAA, November 1982), to model the Bell Jet Rangers and police helicopters. 95- A59 288&MP5."r/59P/11195 5-4 Watson Island 0 5.4.1.2 Operations Data Operational inputs describe activity at Watson during the period of interest. Required operational inputs include the following: - level and mix of aircraft operations, - day -night split of operations (by aircraft type), - physical description of the airport layout, - runway utilization rates, - prototypical flight track descriptions, and - flight track utilization rates. Tables 5.1 and 5.2 present the quantity and mix of average daily operations for the 1995 and 2015 cases. Nighttime operations are defined as those occurring between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. The largest difference is seen in the number of total helicopter operations. For modelling purposes, short "runways" were created in the direction of helicopter arrivals and departures. The "runway" for the seaplanes lies in the center of the Government Cut with the touchdown and start of takeoff point defined as approximately the center of the ship turning basin. Exhibit 5.2 depicts the existing case flight tracks. Each track is labeled with a 2-character name, with A indicating arrival tracks, and D indicating departure tracks. Tables 5.3 and 5.4 show average daily operations by flight track. For the seaplanes, there are three arrival tracks; one along the centerline of the Government Cut and two others representing natural dispersion to either side of the centerline. All seaplane departures were assumed to follow one track along the Government Cut. In the existing case, all helicopter arrivals are modelled approaching from the west and all departures are modelled heading southeast. 95- e59 2s8&MP5.RPT/59P/11195 5-5 Watson Island 1 Table 5.1 Average Daily Operations, 1995 Arrivals Departures Day Night Day Night *Totals Seaplanes Mallard 0.88 0.22 0.88 0.22 2.2 G-111 3.51 1.76 3.51 1.76 10.54 Helicopters Jet Ranger 12.88 0.68 12.88 0.68 27.12 Police - - - - 0 *Totals 17.27 2.66 1 17.27 2.66 11 39.86 Table 5.2 Average Daily Operations, 2015 Arrivals Departures Day I Night Day Night *Totals Seaplanes Mallard 1.39 0.35 1.39 0.35 3.48 G-111 5.53 1.38 5.53 1.38 13.82 Helicopters Jet Ranger 28.37 1.49 28.37 1.49 59.72 Police 5.60 10.40 1 5.60 10.40 32.00 *Totals a4O.89 1 13.62 40.89 1 13.62 11 109.02 i * All totals rounded to the nearest whole number. i 7� 95- A59 M&MIP5.RYr/59P/11195 5-6 Watson Island !0=00.0 Al 6-c-1 6-1 ui LL 0 P ;_, VI/ Gam, a 4exl it Ll ov% z I Orl, -j GRAPHIC SCALE z MO 600 0 1200 0 IN FEET 1 inch - 1200 ft f? HIs c Gyn, e D011 �y l I EXHIBIT IV Table 5.3 Average Daily Seaplane Operations by Flight Track, Existing Case Al A2 A3 Di Totals Day Night Day Night Day Night Day Night Mallard 0.07 0.02 0.75 0.19 0.07 0.02 0.88 0.22 2.22 Albatross 0.26 0.13 2.98 1.50 0.26 0.13 3.51 1.76 10.53 Totals .33 1 .15 3.73 1.69 .33 .15 4.59 1.98 12.75 Table 5.4 Average Daily Helicopter Operations by Flight Track, 1995 Case A4 A5 D2 D3 Totals Day Night Day Night Day Night Day Night Jet Ranger 5.15 0.27 7.73 0.41 5.15 0.27 7.73 0.41 27.12 Police - - - - - - - - Totals 5.15 0.27 7.73 0.41 5.15 0.27 7.73 1 0.41 27.12 After implementation of the preferred plan in 1995, the helicopter pads will be relocated approximately 700 feet to the south and 100 feet to the east, and both arrivals and departures are expected to occur in each of two directions. This is accounted for in the 2015 case. The modelled flight tracks for the seaplanes remain the same as the existing case. Exhibit 5.3 depicts the 2015 case flight tracks. Tables 5.5 and 5.6 show the average daily operations for the 2015 case by flight track. Table 5.5 Average Daily Seaplane Operations, 2015 Case Al A2 A3 DI Totals Day Night Day Night Day Night Day Night Mallard 0.10 0.03 1.18 0.30 0.10 0.03 1.39 0.35 3.48 Albatross 0.41 0.10 4.70 1.17 0.41 0.10 5.53 1.38 13.80 Totals .51 0.13 5.88 1 1.47 .51 0.13 6.92 1.73 17.28 Table 5.6 Average Daily Helicopter Operations, 2015 Case A6 A7 D4 D5 Totals Day Night Day Night Day Night Day Night Jet Ranger 1135 0.60 17.02 0.89 1135 0.60 17.02 0.89 59.72 Police 2.24 4.16 3.36 6.24 2.24 4.16 3.36 6.24 32.00 Totals 13.54 1 4.76 20.38 L 7.13 13.59 4.76 20.38 7.13 91.72 288&MP5.RPT/59P/11195 5-8 Watson Island 0 3 C-/7 Al A3 PZI— 'o" I , ­ .... 0 ..... < LL 00 it 0 z zz < CL LU w ZZZZZ,-, GRAPIflC SCALE z 1200 6D0 0 1200 0 (IN FEE-r) I imh - 12DO M 1f', :I.- OR - 5.4.1.3 Noise Contours Exhibits 5.4 and 5.5 offer the computer -generated noise contours for the 1995 and the 2015 cases, respectively. The contours are presented for Ldn values 50, 55, 60, and 65 dBA. The limit of noise/land use compatibility suggested by the FAA's Part 150 guidelines is 65 dBA Ldn, however, noise levels at Watson are currently below the 65 Ldn threshold. In recognition of this fact, the 50, 55 and 60 dBA Ldn ` contours are provided to enable a comparison between 1995 and 2015 conditions. The inputs to the noise model for the two cases differ by the m� helicopter pad locations and the numbers of operations of both seaplanes and helicopters. The contours are similar in shape, but broader 1n the 2015 case. This is due to the increase in the number of operations expected to occur by 2015. 5.4.2 Compatible Land Use The 65 Ldn noise contour projected based on 2015 operations and the preferred development alternative is entirely over water and the area designated for aviation use. Of all of the contours modelled, only the 50 Ldn contour affects any lands other than Watson Island itself. The preferred alternative, therefore, is compatible with the land uses on and in the vicinity of Watson Island. The preferred alternative involves the formalization of the airside functions including the landings and takeoffs of seaplanes and helicopters. The formalized flight tracks proposed, particularly for helicopters, would direct both departures and landings over water and the aviation area only. This should reduce noise impacts over the remainder of the Island and will increase safety for people on the ground as compared to the no build alternative. There are no anticipated land use conflicts associated with the preferred development alternative for Watson. 5.4.3 Social Impacts I No relocation or other community disruption will be caused by implementation of the preferred alternative at Watson. 95- 459 M&MP5.RPT/59P/11195 5-10 Watson Island f tt g yAM •�et0 IetAMO , \l L3 OIL /1.l�—� r•^'t : : �. t""t i`.` ---] e._-.- sr.—__....s } a+r` \. '--"I -it LA — it it 't #f f • i { 14 ue cw u.•, ; l:_. IM _JK= ii . `-' GRAPHIC SCALE 2400 1200 800 0 1200 IN FEED ) I Imhh.1200 n it ii=•� f t 55 Co 41 t Moen ° Yt•e ir♦ ieti f , � • mr (i ; 7 \ 0 0 0 f.+ --� � 1 - 1 {•--- �^^ ) F 11 � F � yq��., . - E t{{ t 3 � 4 }{ Lf t[[[[�3 a. •,sc4rw[ s4r .j} } C.usC.sr t GRAPHIC SCALE 2400 1200 600 0 1200 ( IN FEET ) I Each - 1200 It- 1.__1 •iiELj `4 ! 50 1 60 \•wh' ,.`5 tit LJ i 1� S it L.1 1 s \/ Cy95- cl U) W J U Q LL z O y H Q i It is assumed in the preferred development alternative that Chalk's Airline and Dade Helicopters will relocate their operations into the proposed new terminal and hangar facilities. This is not considered a significant impact as no long term leases are held by these lessees and the new facilities will be provided by the Airport sponsor to be leased back by the existing tenants in all likelihood. 5.4.4 Induced Socioeconomic Impacts There will be no induced socioeconomic impacts generated by implementation of the preferred alternative at Watson. 5.4.5 Air Quality Dade County is included in a non -attainment area and a conformance determination will be required. However, the preferred development alternative for Watson will not increase airport capacity and therefore will not generate any adverse impacts on air quality in the area. Some of the existing Chalk's and Dade Helicopter buildings may be demolished after those businesses have been relocated into the proposed new terminal buildings. To reduce any potential air quality impacts from demolition of these facilities, a vacuum system should be used during demolition that collects airborne particles (such as fugitive dust and airborne asbestos, if present) in a bag which can then be disposed of properly. Air quality impacts during construction should be minimized by utilizing wetting techniques to reduce dust emissions on cleared lands, seeding and mulching areas that are temporarily disturbed, and applying permanent seeding, mulching and/or placement of sod immediately after final grading. 5.4.6 Water Quality Implementation of the preferred alternative will have no adverse impacts on water quality and may result in improvements to the quality of stormwater runoff. Currently, there is no formal drainage system to manage stormwater runoff in the airfield area. The formal development of the aviation facilities proposed in the preferred alternative, however, will include a formal drainage system which will incorporate the required pretreatment of stormwater prior to discharge into Government Cut. This will improve the quality of stormwater runoff and will provide assurance that adequate pretreatment of stormwater is occurring prior to discharge. 95- 459 j 2 &MP5.RPT/59P/11195 5_ ] 3 Watson Island 9 7 Fueling areas will be designed to current standards to ensure that potential fuel spills are properly contained and are not allowed to contaminate surface waters or soils in the vicinity. Heavy maintenance of helicopters or seaplanes will not be allowed on the Island. Such activities will continue to be accomplished at other inland airports. Light maintenance areas will be designed to current standards to ensure protection of the environment from oil spills or other potential hazardous by-products of light maintenance activities. A sewage lift station and force main are included in the MacArthur Causeway improvement project. FDOT has agreed to provide both a water and sewer crossing over the new bridge leading to Watson. The availability of central sewer and water on Watson could also improve the quality of water leaving the site by eliminating the use of septic systems on the Island. 5.4.7 Department of Transportation Act, Section 4(f) All of Watson Island is publicly owned land and nearly all of the area that is not used for aviation is used for recreational purposes. The preferred alternative for development of the aviation area will not increase any adverse impacts of the Watson Island Heliport and Seaplane Base on these recreational lands than will occur with the no build alternative. The formalization of flight tracks that minimize flights over the nonaviation portions of the Island should decrease any noise impacts on these recreational lands. 5.4.8 Historical, Architectural, Archeological, and Cultural Resources The historic Brown House was moved to the north shore of Watson Island from Edgewater by the Dade Heritage Trust. It is unoccupied and was severely damaged from the partial collapse of the structure during the move. If the house can be restored, it may be used as the dock master's house for the proposed mega -yacht marina. The preferred development alternative for the aviation facilities on Watson will have no effect on this structure. The new location for the helicopter landing area is farther away from the Brown House than the current landing pad. There has been some question regarding the historical significance of the existing Chalk's terminal. To be eligible for an historical designation the structure must be: 9 5- A 5 9 288&MP5.PXr/59P/11195 5-14 Watson Island i (1) 50 years old or older; (2) Unaltered; (3) Architecturally significant; and/or, (4) Historically significant. The Chalk's terminal was built in the late 1950's and thus is not yet 50 years old. It has been altered several times since its construction to the extent that very little of the original configuration remains. It is not architecturally significant nor does it have any particular significance in Miami's history. The City of Miami has concluded, therefore, that the Chalk's terminal is not historically significant. Watson Island is an entirely man-made spoil Island which was created when Government Cut was dredged in the early 1900's. There are no archeological resources on the Island to be affected by the preferred alternative. The Japanese Gardens on Watson Island can be considered a cultural resource. The preferred alternative will have no negative effect on this area. 5.4.9 Biotic Communities The perimeter bay bottom grass beds near the north and east shorelines are considered environmentally sensitive. They are remote from the aviation activity area and no impact on these resources is anticipated. Biotic communities will be protected during repair of the existing seawall. Sand bagging, berms, on -site storage, silt screens and other appropriate best management practices should be used during construction to minimize any adverse environmental impacts caused by construction erosion. Implementation of the preferred alternative, therefore, will not generate any long-term impacts on any biotic community. The preservation of native trees, where appropriate, and the removal of exotic plant species, to the extent practical, that will be accomplished as part of the implementation of the preferred alternative, will enhance the natural characteristics of Watson Island. 5.4.10 Endangered and Threatened Species of Flora and Fauna There are no endangered or threatened species of flora or fauna on Watson Island. Implementation of the preferred alternative will have no impact on any of these species. 95- A59 Wj 288&MP5.RPT/59P/11195 5-15 Watson Island f"I 5.4.11 Wetlands There are no wetlands on Watson Island. Implementation of the preferred alternative will have no effect on wetlands. 5.4.12 Floodplains According to the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM panel # 183 and #191), the 100-year base flood elevations on Watson Island range from 9 feet to 11 feet. All of the proposed structures included in the preferred alternative will have floor elevations as required by the City of Miami's regulations regarding construction in a 100-year floodplain. The preferred development alternative will not generate adverse impacts to the floodplain as compared to the no build alternative. 5.4.13 Coastal Zone Management Program The City of Miami has not adopted a State approved Coastal Zone Management Program. The probable impacts on coastal resources are addressed in the water quality, biotic communities and construction impact categories. 5.4.14 Coastal Barriers Watson Island is not within the Coastal Barriers Resources System. 5.4.15 Wild and Scenic Rivers Development of the preferred alternative at Watson will have no impact on =► any river segment in the National Inventory of River Segments which qualify for inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic River System. 5.4.16 Farmland No farmland will be affected by development of the preferred alternative at Watson. 5.4.17 Energy Supply and Natural Resources Development of the preferred alternative at Watson will have no measurable effect on the local energy supply. It also does not require the use of natural resources or materials that are unusual or in short supply. 95- A59 288&MP5.RPT/59P/11195 5-16 Watson Island 5.4.15 Light Emissions Lighting is proposed for the vehicle parking lots, and floodlights off the terminal/hangar buildings will provide area lighting for the landing -take -off pads and plane parking. r, The proposed lighting at Watson is for security purposes and to enable occasional emergency helicopter operations after dark. This lighting will have no impact outside of the area designated for aviation use. SA.19 Solid Waste Impact No solid waste disposal facilities are located within 1,500 meters of Watson Island and there will be no appreciable difference in the quantity or type of solid waste or the method of collection or disposal. The only solid waste impacts associated with the preferred alternative will be those generated by demolition and construction activities and are thus short-term in nature. 5.4.20 Construction Impacts The anticipated construction impacts addressed in this chapter relate to potential asbestos removal if demolition of the existing Chalk's and Dade Helicopter facilities is necessary, and measures to be taken to avoid any adverse water quality impacts during construction. These potential impacts were addressed in the section regarding air quality (5.4.6) and water quality (5.4.7). Procedures recommended in the FAA Advisory Circular 150/5370-10, Item P-56, "Temporary Air and Water Pollution, Soil Erosion and Siltation Control" should be incorporated into the construction plans and specifications. 5.4.21 Environmental Consequences - Other Considerations No other environmental consequences or considerations apply to the proposed development of the aviation facilities on Watson Island. 5.5 CONCLUSION ,.1 Based on the criteria set forth in the FAA Environmental Handbook 5050.4A (paragraph 23), the improvements that constitute the preferred alternative and the analysis of environmental impacts provided herein, it has been concluded that all the proposed improvements for Watson Island can be categorically excluded from the requirements for formal environmental assessment. 95- A59 2M&MP5.RPT/59P/11195 5-17 Watson Island __J All of the proposed improvements fall within the categories included as categorical exclusions in the above referenced handbook as follows: + relocation and construction of helipads at an existing heliport where such actions will not create environmental impacts off airport property (5050.4A, 23(a)(1)); + installation of helipad lighting (5050.4A, 23(a)(2); • installation of segmented circle and lighted wind cone (5050.4A, 23(a)(3)); • construction, expansion of passenger handling facilities (5050.4A, 23(a)(4)); • construction, relocation, of entrance and service roadway (5050.4A, 23(a)(5)); + erosion control actions with no off -airport impacts (5050.4A, 23(a)(6)); and, + general landscaping (5050.4A, 23(a)(7)). It is assumed that the environmental impacts of constructing the proposed tunnel between Watson Island and Dodge Island have been addressed in studies by others. The proposed improvements to the aviation facilities on Watson Island are not subject to any extraordinary circumstances (as described in 5050.4A par. 24) which would require the preparation and formal review of an environmental assessment. In addition, there are no anticipated cumulative impacts (as described in 5050.4A par. 26) that could be caused by previous or future aviation -related actions that would create the need for formal environmental review of the proposed action. It is concluded, therefore, that the preferred alternative is eligible for a categorical exclusion and can be exempted from the requirements of a formal environmental assessment. 95- A59 28WMP5.RPT/59P/11195 5-18 Watson Island CHAPTER 6 AIRPORT PLANS 6.1 AIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN The Airport Layout Plan (ALP) for the Watson Island Air Transportation Facilities is shown on Exhibits 6.1 and an enlarged airport plan is shown in Exhibit 6.1A. The airport seaplane apron and runway are configured in accordance with FAA Advisory Circular 150/5070-6A, Airport Master Plans. The heliport portion of the airport is .'µ configured in accordance with the same document and Advisory Circular 150/5390- 2A, Heliport Dui . The main features of the plan are: • Construct new terminal and hangar facilities for the seaplane and helicopter operations. o Construct new apron for the seaplane parking. • Construct helicopter touchdown and liftoff area (TLOF), and taxiways for hovering to new parking positions. • Construct new access roads to the terminals. • Provide space for future police helicopter facilities. 1 The ALP formalizes the takeoff and landing areas that are presently used by the j seaplanes. It also provides for delineated approach patterns for the helicopter operations. 6.2 AIRSPACE PLAN The Airspace Plan (Exhibit 6.2) shows the three-dimensional surfaces surrounding Watson, for both the seaplane runway and the helicopter approach surfaces, through which no object should penetrate. The surfaces were derived from the FAA Regulations Part 77, ejects Affecting Navigable Airspace. These surfaces are superimposed on the United States Geological Survey 7- a minute quadrangle map. No natural or man-made objects penetrate the surfaces. No approach surface is shown for Runway 30 since the approach is over an open waterway that is used for takeoffs and landings. `"' 6.3 APPROACH AND RUNWAY PROTECTION ZONE PLAN The Approach and Runway Protection Zone Plan (Exhibit 6.3) is an expanded view of the Airspace Plan depicting the approach surface profile views of the Part 77 surfaces at the runway ends and the helicopter approaches. The plan indicates no f penetrations to the Part 77 surfaces. 95- 459 J J28M-MP6.RPT/59P/11995 6-1 Watson Island 6.4 LAND USE PLAN 6.5 The On -Site Land Use Plan is illustrated on Exhibit 6.4. All the land on the airport portion of Watson Island is designated for aviation use. Key features of the Airport Land Use Plan are: • Relocation of the existing helicopter facility from the northwest area of Watson Island to the new airport location. • Reservation of areas for future helicopter parking positions including police helicopters. • The existing helicopter office building may remain to service the future mega - yacht marina. • Removal of all other buildings. Key features of the off -site land uses, and off -site improvements are: • Construction of a new access road beneath the MacArthur Causeway bridge connecting the east side of Watson Island to the airport and west side facilities. • Closure of the existing median opening on MacArthur Causeway at the access road to the airport. This will provide for right turns in and out of Watson which should afford safer conditions. This coincides with the new access road connecting both sides of the Island. • The off -site land uses of Watson Island are shown per the City of Miami's Master Development Plan (1989) for the Island (Exhibits 6.6 and 6.7). This includes the air transportation facilities described in the recommended plan. EXHIBIT "A" PROPERTY MAP The Exhibit "A" property map (Exhibit 6.5) shows the land use and individual lease parcels within the airport boundaries. This map is provided to the FAA as a requirement for Federal grant requests. LANDSCAPE PLAN As one travels along MacArthur Causeway, there are many delightful experiences that are encountered along the way. The first experience on the overpass from downtown Miami, is the view over the top of the trees and palms and through the breezeways between the facility buildings toward Government Cut. 2886-MP6.RPT/59P/11195 6-2 95- A59 Watson Island The second experience looking toward downtown Miami, is the spectacular view of the Miami skyline through a frame of flowering trees, native palms and a high canopy of shade trees. When entering the facility grounds, there is a choice to head toward the palm canopied boardwalk or to continue on to the aviation facility or even by-pass and meander through a tree shaded boulevard. This boulevard will afford a sense of ifl separation from the aviation facility so that there is a cohesive experience that feels as one is in a park setting. ,Tw The users of the aviation facility will experience an entrance flanked by majestic palms; a shaded connector road to the parking area will alight with flowering trees. he pedestrian will experience dappled shade from the overhead tree canopy. The landscape elements to be utilized for this project shall encompass large native trees, large native palms, accent palms, slender palms, medium native flowering trees, and small native trees. The understory plant material shall be salt and drought tolerant, native and flowering species. There are many native trees at the airport that are in excellent condition and will be preserved as part of the future landscape of the facility. These trees include: • Sea Grape • Green Buttonwood • Royal Palm • Thatch Palm • Silver Buttonwood • Cabbage Palm • Canary Island Palm These are some non-native trees that will be removed from within the limits of the proposed facility especially those within clear zones and navigable airspace. These include Australian Pines, Tabebuia, Black Olives and Pongam Trees. 2886-MP6.RPT/59P/11195 6-3 95- A-59 Watson Island TOOEYEPLIRa OMFCXpOWE pCAF1QT0MYE0ULT1AYACTANTRDIOE6URDD 0PCNR(OT.8ONI(iIYAXYUYI aASE FAA D�IIIMnAME[R+iTADTAc TTTPIMTOANW IAfTm£TVICTOiOM EF6[GFOR i�RiDvH1pFAAPARASNTL,RWORTEA OHf4DCVPtAWIR%S1cOSIA0E7S6P1SIE9DKI3�TAT!DOO0TC0tFeEON10�1IE73RE(0IIViNfp{QEENOT.tNvT'OOCEII.VoElITP,flCfMAfiEyY1ETTETLNRHIT@(OEYFmlRSFDEETI;¢lUtRIpTEE�.AFINA EE ELAIFETAIQEyARyICmONYEM 1�TTrTNTNPAFNEND I.MArItlffi�Pr[lTAwVLRIiIIESBECIDTTxTlAUTTrDrEi: aON1TiOUF9DN0N1:OC�60TFER15JTIEGTHFTt1RCFES1IAIT EE ATvTTNITAOFNI�aNEARAArCIIOtNIYEmEFTLPAfiDLYOrOUNNiVTEIDT bfES ffr i IT D SO L Oiw Aqb.O7YUsT BE nOI�EXIOSTIDNEG SRCtRAI1FDTINiOCNEMSmLL WpE PROPOSED "NO CONE NE AHNO *TFEHRM PROPOSED .11,111FEr.C wt 2 <I y of 'N I Y' i •ARiHU R--^�U�Ew A- __� �T \ 1 1 r I SNIP TVANIND 9ASIN I � 9 1 S C A Y N E ISLAND a IiCAYNE 0AY zm0 -w} caJ a CL t- H w Oaaaa z 0 4 =i 8 NAOEIIC 08&C7 FREE AREA . I HORN �N1 ___-- RUNWAY SAFETY AREA 6 —" RWiT-CF-WAY UNE Sj PROPERTY UNE > N13 4E 1 PROPOSED TAXIWAY/RDADWAY r!! BUUOiEM UNE 7!{ '\ O PROPOSED HELIPORT MAGNETIC DECUNATION CE POINT {HRP) :3 SAN MARCO ISLAND iW2 RfTEREN- -_-- DaSTINO (ROUND CONTOUR WIND ROSE a I SOURLL- MAM NIERNATION& ARPORT %NO DATA MOM THE NXn-N CUMATC DATA CENTER -----_--_,_--_—_ --.-/ PEIDCO: J UARY 1982 - JAY 1891 � Lu t� IL i F Q � 0 z d — 1Aa lag to C / i l WEATHER CDVFRACF z '=i y —WAY ala � t e Ea im omrs J t S44 OU APPROVALS _ z D REDERAL AYUDW ADNN6'iRATIQI \\` CITY ff NYAO F =r By d 4}IOIi 1\\ v A c n l N DATE Ne arAnETD,� D oUWCT N1E9NAipNAL NAfat'Y. W�■p 2 CYSTCA6 .i zA �► z g `\ > ee,v ooN© colr�oRr srATwN E- $ 1 F 4 '`� a PRtIDO5E0 IiwEovaR FAaurY A4 'tl '\1 v PRCPo4n sAvt v¢ FAou.Y z w a is E RITURE Pu,� HrycDPnA PAaurr � !K4F \\ y TNIE—AY-WT. 2DB9S]0' a Y bTINAY ENO CODNOnA AD a]t40 !£ET t2 a».vov.W N 921,9tt.]1 E sANE SANE CAT. 23 A> OIJ2 LPNG a6 1D Sn30 S.WE SANE 11lNWAY END GOORDAU M a]/m fEEf � 521.312a3 N BSaAi2� E SANE ur. 2D —n LON u STAUE sANE �,IBPOWT D�—tA "" YtSICDlp>t rtD1E SEAPutxB............_kN BFNOUMN TAPE UEGCS SANE YA L VEWaMT N6FJQ'NCE PNNTNAD N D26STZta x si»)]yT N 9M.Y>0.05 E 02SA013a E Loxc. ao ro n]> Lvk m io w.n VENAS u �EtEYATNN AANCAT uEW NAIL TE31P. NDTnSf Ma >.6 Y.iL SANE WND CONE NIND CONE 91F %F I R 0 P 0 S E D\,�-------------- A,,.� 1`� �•� ,., PUBLIC BEACH = \ � t t i M AR`NA ` �O \\\ ` \ ! �- \� �� SAILt\N'C� V ! 03 !\ li\•. \ ! \t t cn t ! \ EXISTING HELICOPTER `� \\ ! ! j ( t a \ \\ OPERATIONS TO \\ \\ P U 8 L I C EXISTING \\ BE RELOCATED \� 0 P E N LAN I PPTER \\ \\ �\ \ \ SPACE L'�\NDt G PADS 1 o tI i AkNDO 9 t� ( MccARTHUR\ \ t 1 CAUSNWAY \i \ i1 l i 1 f it 17�""�.--EXI!4lgG I \k 9p / TLOF\ M A R I N E �. � 90.,\\\\ \\\\ N \ RECREATION j MARIN� E R \C?1C E S.01 1 Vv LATE \\ ��--•� 1 t \\ \ \ \ \� p U B C CD o \ I I it T- 1 mr \AP rq 10 ARKING LAN P POSITI �s \ arD ITY FEf3,C \ \ If + _ `~`+w EXISTING �'• `''�. ^� A "' _ i t \\ \ �~~S _ v "� \• ,` T/W RAMP \• /f EL 5.5 ` o \\\ / Z -•.,l INTERNAL'`' tn �' 1 •`' ^ ! t t y \ \ / ' / SERVICE ROAD tt tt t \` \\ _ EL 5.5 c* BUILDINGS 1 AND' 1\ `� ~� `5 `� �\ `\ \ 8 0 A T R C., / / \TO BE REM O \ hoo `\ GATE `~� g `�� t �. ``� n \\ �\ `\ ` ` \ Inn) \ \ FUTORE TUN L r.\\r A i llr 9 ............. .......... I .......... ........... n J; IR g, ....... .... ...... 1. .. .. . ....... % . .. .................. . . ...... . ....... H %tt ....... . ...... % t It ....... .. Zl . � n it N I% %T ........... WN 4 4 .%Pmgvgo 'A.4 AIRSPACE PLAN WATSON ISLAND AIR TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES MASTER PLANNING STUDY Kam 010=11 —.urn-LTANTS INTIERNATIONZ We. H 'A TIP' IKE I STON14. M, m , A ASSOCIATE INC, 4ULius 1, LXVINK LAM LL iV[""NA 11"Al"CIATIt.. I Fl— 0.0 PRIMARY SURFAL� RUNWAY LL RUNWAY 12W PROTECTION ZONE PLAN 1 2 -6-0 o'_�- aoo................... ................... ------------------- ................... ................... ................... ...----..--_---.------_.__...__________ ' ' ' '_-'—�--'------�-'--'''----� 300 200'---'--'--'-------''''---'—'-----'---'.--'-�----------'''-----�-_--.....--�...-.--.--.�------_-_�___._____.. ' � ' ' ' ' '—''--''---�''---''''—'-'� 1 ' ��^0 2D� �-_ _-_ --_' � -_-' '--� �-_ '--_ ---- -�_� _-- --_ --� -_- --_ --_ � 200' ' 100 EL 0.0 ' o � xm� -100.---'--'--'.----'--'--'.---------'----'----'-------....................................... ................... ----'--- 1000 500 O 500 1000 1500 2000 3000 --''------''''-''-'------'-------'-1OO APPROACH TO 12 HORIZONTAL SCALE: l. ~ 200' VERTICAL SCALE: 1' = 100! \ OomTR UCT1or« oATA �-1 I NO. I RUNWAY APPCH. I DESCRIPTION I ELEV. I PENETP, I PENETFL I REMARKS I I � i I B I S C A Y N E I S L A N D ' 1 1 1 I S A N M A R C 0 5s5 I 1 I VENETIAN CAUSEWAY € I S L A N D n I - �I < I I w I =1 I CRASS •• ir,,,- ^�. BEDS BISCAYNE BAY iI :.,.-•-^ _-; yr a plaeARTNU R CAUSEWAY BULKHEAD L� ` M Fff A00[tt ...... ROAD ::: r:.^. •-.: ..... :..•4- 1f74•••tMD t• \ I I I \ �•P.U-S L I C '���r?..: ..::1 ~1`^ ).EGMr) r pry \ \ \ %'1 - - • PROPOSED AIRPORT BOUNDARYIN V it M > - ••• Zc I I PROPOSED�_7 `\` I MEGA -YACHT * p Papua ma 3's%; 1�F MARINA " \ \ O Cc UBLt i- \ \ \ OPEN WE FUTURE ♦ 1 •.' 11-:: aZ X HOTEL Z C 1 I SERVICE Z< u� AeA KMARINE ' y a � M uusFlar . \ wf W W R l ECREATIO•;V - F•S P oc cc \ \ N 7 S E VdXC Z \ _ \\ 9@ C 4 \ p \ \-•. to p NOTES- t. LAm) AREAS MDTHIN THE PROPOSED 5� AIRPORT BOUNDARIES WILL BE ALL �. '.. �. q aa AVIATION REI.ATm USE q-te \ SHI P TU RN`! G \ \ Z. LAND AREA USAGE OUTSIDE THE B A S i N AIRPORT BOUNDARIES IS PER THE F \ ` ♦ i!�-�'` r:� �,..; WATSON ISLAND MASTER DEVELOPMENT 'z it - - - - \ \ \ \ ` \ \ ♦ ' , 1 •_. • PLAN. CITY OF MIAMI. 1989. Q L POKER f O. 0 o 4 1 ` \ Q � r, ZPI-1 OCK'TOKK[ Nqpnoosgo S I MIAMIRINA =/ / / Rr pA• \�1 \QO I \ \ E® \ o• \ E7kH181T a.4 PR POSED 1974 "= Sy0R} ACCE S ROAD '� E. PUBLIC LINT B E A C H D' W P R O P O S E D M E G A— Y A C H T x -0 EVES GH op M A R I N A m ` 0 RELOCA Be a HELICOPTER :I LANDING PADsEUTURE z \ V( \ \ SP A HOTEL \ i 1 1 S E R V I C E 1 \ r a ' ----EXISTING 0 \— l TLOF \ \` ABANDONED MACARTHUR CAUSEWAY N RIGHT—OF—WAY \'s � m 4 A R I N A 7SERV(�i C1 \� C N C) — 9 \ G p O -.G 2 sE+s jE 9}�tji TENM M/ry r \'c \\ �0 \ � � o \ h ( 1 ISAILIN 0 PROiOStDT DdINDAiT! p 2 i ALL LAND ON AvpoFrr IS OWNED BY THE MY OF 1OAUL 3 _tt4' Y Z Q 0 MARINE aco E C R E A T I O N€ CC 02 i IL p 03 zz 4 J ma 9 0 ¢ ��. g, PUBLIC p G� -. 5 Q:. T G j z — 0 of "R A im Q w4 tis r oF- \ A QIL m i 9�� r POWER F,\ \ B0ATc\� MASTER .PLAN CONCEPTS* EXHIBIT 6.6 i t � M A S T£ R P l AN City of Miami Vnnlna Oeosttmtnt 5- 459 ��s� MAJOR PA1.11� SLENDER PALM Y« �` ACCENT PALM �- & ►u�uto �A - . CANOPY TREES NATIVE "a SMALL TREE \ • � 4T`� '�'. i -- - - !; rem _ � �/� . J/: _ '� FLOWERING THE S - _ s 9M���{. r„'��&i�res' ' t -.. f Y � {' '.f, t'`r•�`�`k � � j �•S - \ .t� ty,"'. �_ ,}}' t„ "` rr 1'v..riifl.j r `' 6 • , �'` 2 . rh c t v' •, - \ , .. :., : _' . ` • �r.,-�w. ' t _ 4, +.�""�� y.-'i 1 +�i,� t � -/.��,.� �.- >• : `�L,',� ,�" 't`�=i' '� �~� `� � a�ti: W, roos�n'a ,. � .., sAwn ■� .. '� ,_.: ; �� .,.. .a• yt�, �, : � �r ;" Nl: tl':., +-�' �, t' t'r --�` ni. i°:'- ',�•� <.- � _ 'Y't y fi v'-� i - ? 1T �-. -1-{" i. zr i'- ,i e�t • 1t _ ��� �. WE YM." r.+._ . ; t r "�♦ s . u-' ,LLB J NW -- -= m - _- - : ..4 +r.� .. sYi` .:... .... ....' :_ .. -...:.-+:rx,•.='a: .-,.',: ... ,: ' �,. . .-,*"':cid9a+ .r-h-..•.:..i K»'✓.:""C «--.��,:` r.. -.. .. ,..� ate{ ..rr:,.... ...r-. �.. .—c.�.,' Js., ..-..._. �- -t.. : . •.� . m 'w.•... , .. .. �"K �F�, --.. ,...,. ,L? ,/.� _� ux > __...r.4� • ..- .s v .:- �..- ... - . .. .:-r-V`�,. �14°�._.- .,'\ ..mow ....riles. � _:.� ....,, t � �.. ,. - y . -r -r'31' t. ,�... . , . ._. ,. -. , �- __ � ,.., r.: „FL®ViP;ERING T E -. ,.� :..n<. .., .: :. _.. .- -e•.n ,ram.. -.iYr .�:.. ,. ._ ,::. .. .. i "�.y 5:.'3 y,.:. a . _2NDT-8D0T ,?>•-i''. SOEAPLAtE VAAKBIG AWA %+f+ P s OPTION - "A'` (REV. 'JUKE 20 1994 50* 200' , NATIVE PALM - CANOPY TREE �, , y.9RUd Ask- - �1Jy.-�b4bu @' YEAR 2015 VWITH POLICE FACILI T Y) 500 G C' E P N M, E N T C U T — — 0 U ---'— 6 1 LANDSCAPE PLAN 9 5_ d 5 9 EXHIBIT 6.8 .n*Ib?k'Jti% 5Y'sxr- eexw� ;araeri�n ��•�rvvaq ,...»n>nuo, ,,,,,r �.nrt &r ,5 Exhibit 6.9 Plant List Botanical Name Common Name D.T. S.T. S.T. D.T. Size and Remarks Large Canopy Trees Bursera Simaruba Gumbo Limbo • 0 * * 16' HT. X 6' SP., 5' C.T., 5" CAL., F.G. Quercus Virginiana Live Oak • 0 * * 18' HT. X 6' SP., 6' C.T., 6" CAL., F.G. Swietenia Mahogani Mahogany • 0 * * 16' HT. X 5' SP., 5' C.T., 5" CAL., F.G. Small Canopy Trees Coccoloba Uvifera Sea Grape • 0 * * 10' HT. X 4' SP., 4' C.T., 4" CAL., F.G. Conocarpus Erectus Green Buttonwood • 0 * * 10' HT. X 4' SP., 4' C.T., 4" CAL., F.G. Cordia Sebestena Geiger Tree • 0 * * 6'-8' HT. X 2' SP., 2' C.T., 2" CAL., F.G. Large Palms Phoenix Canariensis Canary Island Date Palm • * * 18' OA. HT., 8' C.T., F.G. Phoenix Dactylifera "Medjool" Medjool Date Palm • * * 18' OA. HT., 8' C.T., F.G. Roystonea Elata Royal Palm t] 0 * 24' OA. HT., 8' Grey Wood, Matching F.G. Small Palms Rhapis Excelsa Lady Palm 13 * 6' OA. HT., F.G. Thrinax Radiata Thatch Palm • 0 * * 6' OA. HT., F.G. Veitchia Montgomery Ana Christmas Palm A * * 10'-IT OA. HT., F.G. Shrubs Conocarpus Erectus "Sericeus" Silver Buttonwood • 0 * * 3 GAL. 22"-24" HT., 24" O.C., T.S. Galphimia Gracillis Thryallis 13 * 3 GAL. 18" HT., X 18" SP., O.C., T.S. Ilex Vomitoria Dwarf Yaupon e * * 3 GAL. IT HT X 14" SP, 24" O.C., T.S. Ground Covers Bougainvillea SPP Dwarf Bougainvillea • * * 1 GAL. 18" O.C. Evolvulus Glomeratus Blue Daze • * 1 GAL. 18" O.C. Lantana Montevidensis Trailing Lantana • * 1 GAL. 18" O.C. Drought Tolerance (D.T.) 1 * Moderate Drought Tolerance wla * * Very Drought Tolerant Ct� 0 Native Salt Tolerance (S.T.) C Moderate Salt Tolerance • High Salt Tolerance CHAPTER 7 FINANCIAL PLAN 7.1 OPERATING INCOME AND EXPENSES Implementation of the heliport/seaplane facilities plan and improvements as presented in Chapter 6 involves considerations of operating income to meet operating expenses and capital improvement costs. Results of these financial analyses of feasibility are presented in this chapter. 7.1.1 Operating Income Historically, revenues from the general aviation industry have been derived from sales of aircraft and parts, maintenance services, and other aviation - related services. For the Watson Island Air Transportation Facility, selected income categories are considered due to policies set forth by the City of Miami related to the types of activities which are permitted at the facility. Should these policy constraints change, the additional monies to be collected would improve the economic outlook for operations of air transport facilities on Watson. These sources potentially include rents for ground leases, concessions, landing fees, auto and bus parking, overnight tie - downs, aircraft storage, fuel flowage fees, maintenance, parts, and access fees for commercial vehicles, i.e., taxis and limousines. Additionally, revenues from flight/pilot training could be considered feasible should these services be offered by the FBO on Watson. For purposes of this evaluation of revenue potential, the following categories of income are identified: J • Rents • Concessions "� • Commercial Vehicle Access Fees e Landing Fees Adjacent heliports in South Florida, with the exception of Miami International Airport (MIA) and Fort Lauderdale -Hollywood International Airport (FLL), do not charge landing fees for helicopter operations since many provide fuel and servicing to the aircraft. MIA and FLL charge $15 per landing for all helicopter operations. It is considered within the market and not excessive to inaugurate landing fees of $20 per landing for all itinerant helicopters using Watson after provision of the new air transport facilities. This is a primary source of income from the users of the new heliport to assist in defraying development and operating expenses. �— 4 �4 288&W7.RPT/59P/3U95 7-1 Watson Island , J The landing fees suggested for all scheduled carriers servicing Watson are to be levied on the assumption these will be derived for each passenger frequenting the scheduled carrier for use of the new facilities. The levels of income derived from landing fees are a function of the per aircraft/passenger estimates using projections of the traffic for the horizon years as presented in Chapter 2. A final category of "other income" is presented to account for miscellaneous monies which should be collected as a result of special situations such as the sale of fuel or minor repairs to enable aircraft to continue operations. The year 1995 is assumed as the first year of operation of the new air transportation facilities. Rents will be charged to the tenants operating air facilities at that time, with the exception of scheduled airlines, such as Chalk's International Airlines. These companies will be assessed landing fees, to be inaugurated at the time of opening. It is assumed Dade Helicopters, Inc. will pay rents in lieu of landing fees for their operations and that any new operator will also pay rent to the City. Landing fees will also be assessed for landing privileges for itinerant helicopters and/or seaplanes. These fees are presented in Tables 7.1.1, 7.1.2 and 7.1.3, for years 1995, 2005 and 2015, respectively, and include income from the sources mentioned above. The estimated operating income is summarized below: Estimated Operating Year Income 1995 $204,000 2005 $351,625 2015 $488,300 The escalation in income categories reflects increases in the numbers of aircraft operations and passengers served, charges for services due to added 1 costs of doing business and overall expectations of increased costs due to normal inflation. 95- 459 288&Mn.R"/59P/11195 7-2 Watson Island 7.1.2 Operating Expenses The operating expenses anticipated largely constitute costs for operations and maintenance (O&M) of the air transportation facility. Principal items of O&M expense are salaries and benefits for operating and management staff, routine preventive maintenance of buildings and grounds, utilities for the operation, liability and business interruption insurance, and a miscellaneous category to cover unforeseen costs of operations. These operating expenses are anticipated to increase annually due to more business activity and the normal anticipated need for additional staff, and escalation of business operations expenses. As presented in Tables 7.1.4, 7.1.5 and 7.1.6, the estimated operating costs for the three horizon projection years are: Estimated Operating Year Expenses 1995 $89,500 2005 $135,500 2015 $189,000 95- 459 2 &MP'7.RPT/59P/11195 7-3 Watson Island Table 7.1.1 iflyipamawepmeIw!a wGily Aw Item Annual Amount Rents(') $ 7,500 Concessions(2) 30,000 Landing Fees(3) 149,500 Parking (Auto)(4) - 0 - Overnight Tie-Down(5) - 0 - Monthly Storage(6) - 0 - Fuel Flowage Fee(7) - 0 - Aircraft Maintenance, Parts Replacement(a) - 0 - Commercial Vehicle Access(9) 15,000 Other(10) 2,000 Total $ 204,000 (1) Includes helicopter operator at $ 7,500 per year. Chalks' rents waived in lieu of landing fees. (2) Estimated at $0.50 per passenger from vending machines' food services. (3) Includes itinerant helicopters at $20 and seaplanes at $50 per landing. (4) No parking charges anticipated. (5) Not permitted. (6) Not permitted. (7) Not permitted. (8) Not permitted. (9) Estimated at $1.00 per terminal pick-up. (10) Unusual storage, maintenance overnight tie -downs and emergency fueling income. M&M"."r/59P/32395 7-4 0 95- 459 Watson Island Table 7.1.2 Estimated Operating Income r Transportation Facilities Watson Island 2M Item Rents(') Concessionsc2) Utilities(') Insurance(4) Overnight Tie-Down(5) Monthly Storage(6) Fuel Flowage Fee(') Aircraft Maintenance, farts Replacement(8) Commercial Vehicle Access(9) Other(10) Total .Annual Amount $ 9,000 44,000 273,125 -0- -0- -0- -0- -0- 23,000 2,500 $ 351,625 (1) Includes helicopter operator at $ 9,000 per year. Chalks' rents waived in lieu of landing fees. (2) Estimated at $0.60 per passenger from vending machines' food services. (3) Includes itinerant helicopters at $25 and seaplanes at $60 per landing. (4) No parking charges anticipated. (5) Not permitted. (6) Not permitted. (7) Not permitted. (8) Not permitted. (9) Estimated at $1.00 per terminal pick-up. (10) Unusual storage, maintenance overnight tie -downs and fueling income. 2886-MP7.RPT/59P/11195 7-5 95- 459 Watson Island Table 7.1.3 Estimated Opera Income Air Transportation Facilities Watson Island 2015 Item Rents(') Concessions(2) Landing Fees(3) Parking (Auto)( ) Overnight Tie-Down(5) Monthly Storage(6) Fuel Flowage Fee(7) Aircraft Maintenance, Parts Replacement(e) Commercial Vehicle Access(9) Other(10) Total Annual Amount $ 11,250 76,300 368,250 -0- -0- -0- -0- -0- 28,500 4.000 $ 488,300 (1) Includes helicopter operator at $11,250 per year. Chalk's rents waived in lieu of landing fees. (2) Estimated at $0.70 per passenger from vending machines' food services. (3) Includes itinerant helicopters at $30 and seaplanes at $65 per landing. (4) No parking charges anticipated. (5) Not permitted. (6) Not permitted. (7) Not permitted. (8) Not permitted. (9) Estimated at $1.00 per terminal pick-up. (10) Unusual storage, maintenance overnight tie -downs and fueling income. 95- 459 M&MM.Fr/59P/11195 7-6 Watson Island N Table 7.1.4 Estimated Operatin Expenses Air Transportation Facilities Watson Island 1995 Item Annual Amount Administration(') $ 65,000 Grounds and Building Maintenance(2) 5,000 Utilities(3) 12,000 Insurance(4) 5,000 Other(') 2.500 Total $ 89,500 (1) Includes allowance for a part-time manager, salary and benefits, plus two part-time employees. (2) Clean-up grounds, janitorial, minor preventive maintenance. (3) Includes cost of electric power, water, sewer. (4) Includes annual premium of business interruption and liability insurance. (5) Includes unusual expenses not enumerated. 95- 459 288&MP7.RPT/59P/11195 7-7 Watson Island —1 Table 7.1.5 Estimated Operating_EMenses Air Transp6nation Facilities Watson Island 2005 Item Annual Amount Administration(') $ 100,000 Grounds and Building Maintenance(2) 7,500 Utilities(3) 15,000 Insurance(4) 8,000 Other(5) 5,000 Total $ 135,500 (1) Includes allowance for a part-time manager, salary and benefits, plus two full-time employees. (2) Clean-up grounds, janitorial, minor preventive maintenance. (3) Includes cost of electric power, water, sewer. (4) Includes annual premium of business interruption and liability insurance. (5) Includes unusual expenses not enumerated. 2 &NIP7.RPT/59P/11195 95- 459 7-8 Watson Island Table 7.1.6 Estimated Operating Expenses Air Transportation Facilities Watson Island 2015 Item Annual Amount Administration(') $ 140,000 Grounds and Building Maintenance(2) 10,000 Utilities(3) 20,000 Insurance(4) 11,000 Other(5) 8-000 Total $ 189,000 (1) Includes allowance for a full-time manager, salary and benefits, plus two full-time employees. (2) Clean-up grounds, janitorial, minor preventive maintenance. (3) Includes cost of electric power, water, sewer. (4) Includes annual premium of business interruption and liability insurance. (5) Includes unusual expenses not enumerated. 95- 459 2 &Nff 7.RPT/59P/11195 7-9 Watson Island J 7.11.1 Heliport/Seaplane Airport Management and Professional Services As addressed in other sections of this report, the City should assign management responsibilities to a single firm, person, or organization to ensure adherence of the City's operations goals and objectives and to also ensure that a high quality of service is afforded to all air services and users. For the inception years of operations, a part-time manager and two part-time operations staff members are anticipated. As business escalates in volume, this personnel category will necessarily be increased in number until the year 2015, when a full- time manager and two full-time staff members will be warranted. 7.2 CAPITAL COSTS AND FINANCIAL EXPENSES The estimated costs of developing the air transportation facilities on Watson Island total $2,568,922. These costs, combined with estimates for providing facilities for the City Police helicopter services, and for a new City park on the Island are presented in Appendix C and total $4,025,572. Table 7.2.1 presents the estimated capital costs for construction of the air transportation facilities. For a total perspective of cost implications for sponsoring these facilities, one must add annual expenses for debt service (financing costs), O&M expenses, and allowances for a developer's costs should private means of financing and development of the facilities be the selected mechanism for the venture. 7.2.1 Capital Costs Capital costs for construction, demolition, and relocation of today's tenants to the new terminal and hangar buildings comprise the largest expenses. Police functions to be accommodated, should it be decided to relocate this activity from the existing accommodations at the Tamiami Airport, are estimated to cost $957,930; as compared with $498,720 for the park environment depicted on the plans along the Government Cut. These air transportation facility costs include construction of two terminals; I one for Chalk's International Airlines, Inc. and/or other interested scheduled I seaplane carriers, and the other for Dade Helicopters, Inc. or a substitute FBO. The helicopter facility will have hangars for storage and light maintenance of helicopters owned and operated by Dade Helicopters. Federal Inspections Services will be in a combined facility with the seaplane terminal in one building. Other costs include landside and airside facilities. Implicit with these expenses are allowances for site preparation, relocation and provision of new utility services, roads, curbs, sidewalks, lighting, retaining walls, repairs to the existing seawall, parking lot, security fencing, helicopter and seaplane accommodations and landscaping. 95- A59 2M&MM.RPT/59P/11195 7-10 Watson Island Table 7.2.1 Estimated Capital Costs Air Transportation Facilities(') Watson Island Item Amount Demolition/Relocation FIS $ 27,360 Chalk's $ 26,400 Dade Helicopter $ 16.800 Subtotal $ 70,560 Terminals(2) FIS $312,000 Chalk's and $576.000 Dade Helicopter Subtotal $888,000 Hangar(3) $424,020 Landside Facilities(a) $803,360 Airside Facilities(5) $382,282 Total $2,568,922 (1) Includes 5% for general conditions, 10% for contractor's overhead and profit, and 5% for contingent items. Does not include costs for police facilities ($957,930) or landscaped park development ($498,720). (2) Includes all building components. (3) Helicopter storage and light maintenance space. (4) Includes costs for site preparation, utilities, roads, curbs, sidewalks, lighting, retaining wall, parking lot and landscaping. (5) Includes costs for site preparation, excavation, utilities, helicopter and seaplane accommodations, security fencing, landscaping and seawall repairs. 288&Mn.RPr/59P/11195 7-11 95- 459 Watson Island KI 7.21 Financing Costs r' There are three viable options available to the City of Miami in sponsoring and financing this investment in new air transportation facilities on Watson Island: Option A - Partnership among the Federal Aviation Administration, Florida Department of Transportation (FAA & FDOT) and the City. Option B - The sale of conventional revenue or general obligation bonds by the City. Option C - Partnership with a private developer to take the responsibility of providing the air transportation facilities for a developer's l fee (privatization). Implicit with these options are special conditions and terms unique to each ` which have to be taken into account as follows: jOption A - The federal government has an open door policy toward all prospective tenants at a facility for which federal grants are provided. FAA (and the FDOT) require the owner of the air facility to accommodate any and all parties interested in doing business on the property. Other criteria apply, such as adoption of FAA approved design standards, FAA criteria of reviewing and approving any and all physical plans and improvements, acceptance of union labor rates (the Davis -Bacon Act) for construction activities, adherence to grant agreement assurances, compliance with requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act, and review of all t lease terms and other specified and agreed terms. jOption B - This arrangement essentially binds the City with prospective ,J bondholders and trustees to meet all requirements of payments and quality operations as established by the bond prospectus prepared by independent j underwriters. Certain mechanical arrangements must be agreed upon in terms of meeting all payments on schedule and in meeting coverage tests at the inception of the bond sale phase. There are fewer operational guidelines to be agreed upon than with the FAA/FDOT partnership. Option C - Should a partnership be established with a private developer and the City, there will more than likely be less interference from the developer than with the first two option sponsors. A developer's primary objective, other than establishing a good business relationship, is protection and establishment of insurance and security of his invested monetary resources. He will want a number of guarantees in the event of default f the loan. but �,_ 55 2U6-MP7.RPT/59P/11195 7-12 Watson Island J otherwise the daily operations and ways and means of managing the air transport facilities will be solely the responsibility of the City. Terms of the FAA/FDOT/City partnership (Option A) suggest 20 years for financing the project. In all likelihood, a term of 25 years will produce the most cost effective financial tool for City bonds (Option B), and privatization (Option C) will most likely suggest a term of financing of perhaps 30 years or longer. As presented in Table 7.2.2, the City's financial obligation in the support of air transportation facilities at Watson Island are as follows for the three options, prior to O&M and financing expenses: Option Estimated Capital Expense A $1,466,879(1) B $2,568,922 C $2,568,922 (1) Subject to negotiation with FAA/FDOT on cost sharing. Debt service (principal and interest) is computed on the basis of the assumed term of loan, interest rate, and the relative rate of risk of security assurance, by reputation, of the sponsor. For Options A and B, the interest rate and risk factor will be less than that for Option C because the developer must negotiate the loan based upon his down payment, collateral, and signature, which will be of a personal nature. In turn, he will want more income from the financing procedures dictated upon him per terms of Option C. In this evaluation, the following assumptions have been made relative to financing terms in order to compute a level annual debt service requirement. 2886-MP7. RPT/59P/11195 Option Terms A 20 years, 8% Interest B 25 years, 8% Interest C 30 years, 10% Interest 7-13 Annual Debt Service $149,405 $240,653 $190,757 95- 459 Watson Island Table 7.2.2 Estimated Financing Costs Air Transportation Facilities Watson Island Item Option A - Debt Service(') Option B - Debt Service(2) Option C - Debt Service(3) (1) FAA - FDOT - City Partnershi Annual Amount $ 149,405 $ 240,653 $ 190,757 Total Capital Cost $2,568,922 FAA Share $1,027,043 FDOT Share $ 75,000 Balance for City $1,466,879 (Annual Debt Service P & I $149,405) (20 years, 8% Interest, Factor = 0.1018522) (2) Conventional City Bonds: Total Capital Cost City Share (3) Private Sector Funding: Total Capital Cost Loan Value(A) 70% Equity @a 30% Bank Loan Debt Service $2,568,922 $2,568,922 (Annual Debt Service P & I $240,653) (25 years, 8% interest, Factor = 0.0936788) $2,568,922 $1,798,245 $ 770,677 $ 190,757 (Annual Debt Service P & I $190,757 (30 years, 10% Interest, Factor = 0.1060793) Return on Investment (B) $ 154,135 Return on Equity(c) Negotiable (A) Collateral in the form of developer's assets, personal signature for security. (B) Based upon 20% return on investment (ROI). (C) Return on equity negotiable and not included in calculations. 2686MP7.RPTJ59P j11195 7-14 95- A59 Watson Island .. t For the private developer to acquire a loan for the $2,568,922 investment, he will likely have to place his money as a down payment, since he will not own the real estate. His loan will likely be for 70 percent of the principal, leaving him to make as down payment the remaining 30 percent. And, for the use of his monies, his collateral, and his name guaranteeing the economic viability of the loan, he will charge at least 20 percent of the loan value annually for his return on investment (ROI) or profit. Banks loaning monies to a private developer for construction of the facilities will also demand a lease agreement between the City and the developer for the life of the loan (30 years) or longer. A return on equity (ROE) has not been factored in this analysis as this is a negotiable amount. 7.2.3 Pro Forma Statement Table 7.2.3 presents a summary of income, costs, and the potential profits/losses estimated from the operation of air transportation facilities on Watson Island for the three horizon projection years, and for the three administrative options of development. Capital costs, annual O&M expenses, debt service costs and developer surcharges are added for the total cost package. Tables 7.2.3, 7.2.4 and 7.2.5 offer summary statements for the three options and horizon years, respectively. 7.2.3.1 Net Operating Income } The net operating income to service all loans or bonds has been estimated for 1995, 2005 and 2015 for Options A, B and C. This analysis suggests a marginally feasible investment with } Option A, and doubtful results for Options B and C over the life of the loan agreements. In measuring the relative competitive costs versus the estimated incomes for the three options, it is apparent that the only economically viable option is Option A. The coverage ratio for „ the life of the project must be 1.25 or better to pass muster with money lending establishments with the full faith and credit of the City. 288&MP7. RPT/59P/ 11195 s� 7-15 95- 459 Watson Island f �a I Sa+q, 7,1 Financing Option A(') B(2) i i C(3)(4) f� Table 7.2.3 Estimated Cost - Income Summary Pro Forma Statement Air Transportation Facilities Watson Island 1995 Annual Item and Amount Capital Debt Net Cost O&M Service Income Income Coverage(s) $2,568,922 $89,500 $149,405 $204,000 ($ 34,905) - - $2,568,922 $89,500 $240,653 $204,000 ($126,153) - - $2,568,922 $89,500 $190,757 $204,000 ($230,392) - - (1) FAA - MOT - City Partnership. (2) Conventional City bonds. (3) Private sector financing. (4) Further subtract developer's ROI - $154,135. (5) Ratio of average annual net income to annual average debt service. J ..w J U� 298&MP7.RPT/59P/11195 7-16 95- A59 Watson Island Financing Option A(1) B(2) C(3)(4) Table 7.2.4 Estimated Cost - Incomg SummaU Pro Forma Statement Air Transportation Facilities Watson Island 2005 Annual Item and Amount Capital Debt Net Cost O&M Service Income Income Coverage(s) $2,568,922 $135,500 $149,405 $351,625 $ 66,720 0.45 $2,568,922 $135,500 $240,653 $351,625 ($ 24,528) - - $2,568,922 $135,500 $190,757 $351,625 ($128,767) - - (1) FAA - FDOT - City Partnership. (2) Conventional City bonds. (3) Private sector financing. (4) Further subtract developer's ROI - $154,135. (5) Ratio of average annual net income to annual average debt service. 95- �J9 2U&Mn.RPT/59P/11195 7-17 Watson Island J Table 7.2.5 Estimated Cos - Income Summa Pro Forma Statement Air Transportation Facilities Watson Island 21 Annual Item and Amount Financing Capital Debt Net i n Cost O&M Service Income Ind Coverage(5) A(1) $2,568,922 $189,000 $149,405 $488,300 $149,895 1.01 P(2) $2,568,922 $189,000 $240,653 $488,300 $ 58,047 0.24 C(3)(4) $2,568,922 $189,000 $190,757 $488,300 ($ 45,592) - - (1) FAA - FDOT - City Partnership. (2) Conventional City bonds. (3) Private sector financing. (4) Further subtract developer's ROI - $154,135. (5) Ratio of average annual net income to annual average debt service. 95- 459 2M&MM.RPT/59P/11195 7-18 Watson Island The net operating incomes for the three options and for the three horizon projection years are estimated at: Estimated Annual Net Operating Income Year OptionA i nB Option 1995 ($34,905) ($126,153) ($230,392) 2005 $ 66,720 ($ 24,528) ($128,767) 2015 $149,895 $ 58,647 ($ 45,592) From an economic standpoint, Option A is the only one which can show a return from revenues within the range of positive feasibility, based upon all income projections and assumptions about potential sources of revenue. Another review of . potential income sources would be in order, by the City, to ascertain which sources mentioned on page 7-1, Section 7.1.1 could be added for a more positive economic projection. 95- 459 288&MP7.RPr/59P/11195 7-19 Watson Island CHAPTER THE RECOMMENDED PLAN ' 8.1 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS The recommended plan for air transportation facilities on Watson Island is presented in Chapter 4. It includes airside and landside improvements, new Island roads, off- street parking for autos and buses, a landing area for helicopters, parking areas for helicopters, new terminal buildings for tenants, passengers and other users, and a new hangar for helicopter storage and light maintenance. The landing area for seaplanes is Government Cut. Seaplane parking is also provided in the same areas as at present, adjacent to Government Cut on Watson Island. In addition, provision is made for the accommodation of the City's Helicopter Police j Division, should it be decided to provide for them on Watson Island and not continue operating from the Tamiami Airport. A new terminal and hangar facilities are included in the master plan for the police function, with auto parking and } security fencing. A park environment, with landscaping, a boardwalk, eating and sitting areas, and more auto parking is also contained in the master plan. This will add amenity to Watson Island and afford sightseeing visitors a nice, pleasant vista for viewing the Miami skyline. 8.1.1 Airside and Landside All airside and landside facilities will have to be designed and constructed within guidelines of the FAA and FDOT, provided joint funding is negotiated. Additionally, the South Florida Building Codes, the Miami Land Development Code, and the Dade County Public Works Criteria must guide and govern all design and construction details and practices. These criteria have been taken into account in the master planning. It is also important to note that the salt water environment prevailing for Island construction will take its toll on materials selected for all new facilities. The designers must anticipate results of this type of potential deterioration in selecting materials for all Watson Island air transportation systems and facilities. 8.1.2 Buildings and Hangar(s) Construction of the new buildings at the Watson Island Air Transportation Facility to serve the terminal activity, accommodate FIS functions, and N - � 4 288&Mn.RFr/59P/11195 8-1 V - 'Watson Island house helicopters at night, with light maintenance, will involve conventional construction techniques. The site layout of the new developments for air transportation facilities will allow a continuation of existing functions. The new buildings should be designed to be constructed using readily available materials and methods. Durable materials and finishes should be selected and carefully detailed to afford a complex that will be easy to maintain and at the same time be aesthetically pleasing. The architectural character has not yet been developed, but should be responsive to the "South Florida Tropics" as a theme. Existing buildings occupied by Chalk's International Airlines and used for FIS functions should be demolished and removed from the site. Since one is a single -story structure and the other a double -wide trailer on foundations, no significant problems are anticipated with this process, following construction of the new buildings. There has been discussion as to the re -use potential of the old administrative building now serving Dade Helicopters, Inc., in connection with the proposed mega -yacht marina, which makes economic and service sense. It can remain at its present location, or be demolished and removed from the Island and have no negative consequences in the long-term for a proper functioning heliport. The quonset hangar and trailer reception building should be easily removed from the Island following construction of new facilities to serve helicopters. 8.2 STAGING OF THE PLAN The master plan for air transportation facilities comprises new buildings, new work on airside and landside facilities, new perimeter security fencing, new roads and modifications to existing ones, parking for autos, buses, helicopters, and seaplanes. All facilities, with the exception of additional parking for autos and helicopters, should be provided within a time frame of one year. Financing arrangements should be made with this in mind. J Finer details of the staging plan are anticipated to be completed in a three -step process, as follows: Phase I - Construct the main access/egress road to the heliport/seaplane jarea with connections to the new MacArthur Causeway at the east end of the Island, and the old Causeway facility at the west extremity. Traffic will be permitted to access the west side of the Island on this new roadway, under the Causeway Bridge, permitting vehicular access south of the road for Phase R construction. This work needs to be coordinated with FDOT i and the truck tunnel contractor. Phase II - Construct the entire air transportation facility up to the old MacArthur Causeway right-of-way, which will continue to sergee C") 2U&MP8.R7T/59P/11195 8-2 Watson Island terminal while operational. Construct the eastern half of the new seaplane apron, while maintaining the existing parking apron. This work needs to also be coordinated with FDOT and the truck tunnel contractor. Phase III - New facilities become operational. Demolish the old Chalk's terminal, re -lease or abandon the Dade Helicopter building, remove the double -wide Dade Helicopter terminal room, complete construction of the west portion of the seaplane apron, and repair the seawall. All other landside and airside systems can be constructed at will, providing the facility remains open at all times to vehicular and airborne traffic. The new boardwalk, public park environment and the police facilities can be constructed independently from the remaining elements of the air transportation master plan. In addition to the above, two major independent public works projects are being planned for near term connections, i.e., the proposed new truck tunnel linking the MacArthur Causeway, through Watson Island, to Dodge Island and the proposed new mega -yacht marina. Depending upon the actual timing of these projects, the three step staging plan above, may require restudy. It is recommended that the entire staging plan for air transportation facilities respond to this new construction. 8.3 OPERATIONS PLAN The City of Miami is the owner of the Watson Island Air Transportation Facility, which is utilized at present by two tenants -- Chalk's International Airlines, Inc. and Dade Helicopters, Inc. Each tenant operates from a leased area and is principally responsible for maintaining the leasehold property. The City of Miami provides oversight on the tenants' operations as they relate to the use of the property. The operations management plan for the facility addresses several factors which relate to its use. These include the following: • Permitted uses as presented in the Master Development Plan for Watson Island in accordance with the City of Miami Commission Motion 88-253 • Rules and regulations as they relate to the service objectives of the facility • Hours of operation • Facility management 8.3.1 Permitted Uses The Master Development Plan for Watson Island presents, among other active and passive land uses, a scheduled seaplane operation and a heliport facility. Deed restrictions associated with the conveyance of the Island from the State of Florida to the City for public purpose uses provide that the City not sell, 288&MP8.RPT/59P/11195 8-3 Watson Island convey or lease the land resource to private entities for their exclusive use. However, the City has obtained a waiver of these restrictions when requested leaseholds were found to be in the public interest and purpose of the Island and in furtherance of municipal purposes. Therefore, the present aeronautical uses on the Island are considered to be in conformance with the deed restrictions as waived. These waivers imply that an expansion of the aeronautical uses to meet a growing public demand can be obtained, provided that the lease terms are sufficiently long to permit the amortization of the capital investment. 8.3.2 Rules and Regulations The proper use of the air transportation facility should be governed by appropriate rules and regulations intended to protect the public interest and enhance safe operations. These rules and regulations would be monitored by the City or its designated management representative. Rules and regulations y which typically apply to aeronautical activities include: 1. A limitation to engage only in activities which are an intrinsic part of the aeronautical operation. 2. Observe environmental regulations as they apply to the aeronautical operation including refuse removal, fuel storage and handling, and hazardous and toxic materials. 3. Charge fair, reasonable and not unjustly discriminatory prices for goods and services provided. 4. Maintain the leasehold in good condition including the grounds, facilities and landscaping and for fire prevention control, and be in compliance with building codes. 5. Secure and maintain necessary operating permits and licenses from appropriate official agencies to conduct the aeronautical activity. 6. Comply with all laws, ordinances and other rules and regulations of the United States, State of Florida, City of Miami and Miami -Dade County. 7. Recognize the authority of the City or its designated representative in supervising the conduct of aviation activities. 8. Respect the rights and privileges afforded to other users of the Island. 9. Maintain suitable liability insurance for all aeronautical and facility -related uses. 9 5— 4 5 9 289&MP8.RFr/59P/11195 8-4 Watson Island 10. Conduct aircraft flight operations in accordance with Federal Aviation � P Regulations and observe operating rules specific to the facility including radio communications with aircraft. 11. Operate vehicles in accordance with safe practices and by duly licensed drivers. 12. The City of Miami and the FBO(s) will have the initial responsibility of setting forth official interpretations of ground rules in administering and collecting landing fees of all Watson users. Items such as definition of landing, touch and go operations, monthly user permit rates, and other daily operation matters will have to be addressed and established to the mutual satisfaction of both parties. Usually, the rules and regulations at an aeronautical facility are printed and distributed to all tenants and are incorporated into each lease document. 8.3.3 Hours of Operation The hours of operation of the facility should reflect the needs of the tenants and their clients and be balanced with community expectations. Operating hours may also change, depending on the season. The facility should be open each day of the week of the year. Operating hours should, at a minimum, be from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Those operations which are conducted on a scheduled basis only should be announced and the tenant should be on the premises at least one hour before and after the schedule period. 8.3.4 Daily Operations and Facility Management Daily operations and facility management typically includes the following activities: 1. Maintenance of the overall facilities, including interior public spaces (the extent of maintenance would be defined in the agreement). 2. Collection of landing and commercial vehicle access fees and other per event charges for remittance to the City of Miami. 3. Surveillance of activities. 4. Provision of janitorial services. 5. Monitoring of compliance with minimum operating standards. 95- 459 29B&MP8.RPT/59P/32495 8-5 Watson Island J Irrespective of the form of daily operations management, the cost for this activity would be paid in the form of a management fee. Ultimately, however, this cost is a factor used in deriving lease rates for the tenants of the facility. The future daily operations management of the facility can take one of several forms: 1. Continuation of present arrangement with two tenants as FBO's. 2. Designation of a tenant to assume overall responsibility of an FBO. 3. Assignment of responsibilities to the City of Miami staff. 4. Assignment to a third party. In the event the City obtains airport improvement grant funds as administered by the Federal Aviation Administration, the future use of the facility will be open to all those parties which might want to establish a base of operations. This factor alone speaks to the desirability of assigning the daily operations management to a third party. Further, other assurances made by the City j when accepting grant funds, such as suitably operating and maintaining the facility; economic nondiscrimination in terms of rates and charges to be paid by tenants; avoidance of exclusivity rights; and reports and inspections all suggest that third party management of the facility be pursued. Additionally, the preference of the City to combine all tenants into two terminal facility structures lends itself to this form of management. The third party manager 1 could be an outside private business or the City itself. The costs to the City and the facility tenants under either option are considered to be equivalent for j the purpose of selecting an operations management plan. Third party management, either by the City or an organization other than a tenant, poses no adverse impacts on implementation of the development plan for the facility or to the net revenues to the City. It presents a positive business -like approach to the management of the important Watson Island ( land resource and as such should be acceptable to the general public and the -' facility tenants. Notwithstanding this form of facility management, the City as owner of the facility is obligated with certain responsibilities. These include: 1. Maintaining those portions of the facility which are not assigned to the facility manager. 2. Obtaining and maintaining appropriate licenses from federal and state agencies to enable aeronautical activities at the facility. 95- 459 M&MPB.RPT/59P/32395 8-6 Watson Island 3. Seeking funding from appropriate sources to enable capital improvements to the extent they are not made by the tenants and to the extent that the City elects to undertake such investment. 4. Providing oversight of the facility manager and serving as an arbitrator, mediator or rendering final decisions with regard to activities at the ' facility. 8.4 FINANCIAL PLAN Chapter 7 addresses the options of financing the improvements of air transportation facilities on Watson Island. After weighing all options, the City will decide whether to proceed with a development program If the decision is one to proceed with implementation, more analyses would be appropriate in refining the cost and income projections. If Option A is the decided new plan approach, negotiations should commence with FAA and MOT for their share of the funding. If negotiations are completed, the City will decide as to their avenues for funding the balance. In this process of negotiation, the FAA should advise the City as to the possibility of applying for Passenger Facility Charges (PFC) for more monies for this development and operation, over and above the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) entitlements (as they may be reduced by the PFC collections) and grant funds for construction. Once the final obligation of the City is ascertained, Phase II of the design contract work by this Consulting Team should be considered in order to keep the project on schedule. After the final cost estimates are firmed, the City will then want to explore the most logical and feasible avenue for funding the balance of the development costs. Should bonds be the avenue for their financing, as in Option B, the City will want to retain a bond underwriter to aid in preparation of a prospectus for the bond(s) sale. This firm will take over at that time and proceed to advertise and sell bonds in the denominations required and at the time appropriate for the sale. It is expected the prospectus will cost more monies than are contained in this planning document. These should be determined at the time the prospectus is prepared and budgets reflect the increased amounts accordingly. If Option C is considered the most appropriate option for financing the plan's implementation, the City should advertise for developer proposals by stating the nature, description and size of the program for development. After receiving, reviewing and evaluating developer proposals, a decision should be made as to which proposal to accept and initiate negotiations with the selected developer. Guidelines presented in Chapter 7 should be utilized where appropriate to steer these negotiations with the favored developer. 95- .4-59 2M&MN.M/59P/32395 8-7 Watson Island 8.5 LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS At the time Watson Island's real estate was deeded to the City, certain covenants were imposed as to the type of uses permitted and limitations were placed not only upon its use potential, but the City was also not permitted to enter into profit -making leases for more than 30 days at a time. The imminence of change in the possible use of this very valuable real estate is upon the City. Possibilities of a mega -yacht marina „ and other expensive developments will necessitate a change of policy and potential i use -lease agreements with private developers. These circumstances further exacerbate the need for legal opinions as to the legality of negotiating leases for periods greater than 30 days, the possible permitted land uses, the length of the maximum time lease, and other ramifications of entering into the new era for Watson Island with a new heliport and seaplane aviation facility. It is recommended that consideration and study for these permitted new uses and operations undergo a legal review with the thought in mind of opening the door for private and public funding and operations resources. 8.6 MINIMUM STANDARDS Minimum standards apply to fixed base operators and other tenants of an air 1 transportation facility. They serve to establish a minimum level of service and development and economic commitment required of those entities seeking to operate from the facility. Minimum standards provide assurance to others operating or considering establishing an operation at the facility that the facility owner will i conduct its business in a consistent and on an equitable basis. Minimum standards serve to attract the best service providers and also discourage uneconomic duplication of facilities and services. Minimum standards and requirements for <.,.a commercial aeronautical activities are established in the public interest for the safe and efficient operation of the air transportation facility; to enhance its orderly growth; to preclude the granting of an exclusive right to conduct aeronautical activity in violation of Section 308(a) of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958; to conform to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Part 21 of the Department of Transportation Regulations; and to assure to all lessees the availability of property on fair and reasonable terms and without unjust economic discrimination. The items below serve to highlight those minimum standards which could be adopted for the Watson Island Air Transportation Facility and in subsequent lease agreements. Use of the term Lessor or City refers to the City of Miami. Appendix ,_J D provides a listing of standard lease provisions. 1. All fixed based operators and tenants shall protect the public generally, the customers or clients of such fixed based operators, and the City from any and all lawful damages, claims, or liability and shall carry comprehensive general liability insurance with a company authorized to do business in the State of 2886-MPB.M/59P/32395 8-8 Watson Island i Florida with limits prescribed in the respective lease agreement, with the City named as an additional insured, which policies must be approved by the Lessor. It is further understood that as circumstances in the future dictate, the Lessor may require an increase in bodily injury and property damage insurance. 2. A fixed based operator shall satisfy the Lessor that it is technically and financially able to perform the services of a fixed based operator. In addition, fixed based operators must demonstrate a continued ability to conduct business and remain financially solvent by submitting an annual balance sheet, credit references and any other proof that the Lessor may require from time to time. In cases of doubt by the Lessor, the Lessor may conduct an audit to determine appropriate action. In each instance, the Lessor shall be the final judge as to the qualifications and financial ability of the Lessee. The Lessor will not accept an original request to lease land area unless the proposed Lessee puts forth in writing a proposal which sets forth the scope of operation he proposes, including the following: • Services to be provided s Amount of land required i 9 Building space he will construct or lease • Number of aircraft on the premises • Number of persons to be employed • Hours of operation e Compliance with the applicable lease terms and conditions • Evidence of his financial capability to perform and provide the services and facilities contemplated 3. Any person, firm or corporation capable of meeting the minimum standards set forth herein for any of the stated fixed based operator services is eligible to become a fixed based operator at the facility, subject to the execution of a written lease containing such terms and conditions as may be determined by the City. A fixed based operator tenant shall not engage in any business or activity on the facility other than that authorized under his lease agreement. Any fixed based operator desiring to extend his operation into more than one category or to discontinue operations in a category, shall first apply in writing to the City, for permission to do so, setting forth in detail the reasons and conditions for the request. The City shall then grant or deny the request on such terms and conditions as the City deems to be prudent and proper under the circumstances. Each fixed based operator shall provide, if agreed with the City, any new buildings or facilities, personnel and equipment, and other requirements as herein stated upon land leased from the City, or subleased from other tenants. 95- A59 M&MPs.RPT/59P/32393 8-9 Watson Island 4. All fixed based operators at the facility shall provide ample lounges and rest rooms for their customers and shall make telephone service conveniently and readily available for public use. 5. All construction required of such operators shall be in accordance with design and construction standards required or established by the City for the facility or activity involved. Title to any and all buildings and appurtenances, which may be built on facility property, shall vest to the City upon completion, subject to continuing leasehold rights of lessee. All operators shall be required to furnish the City with payment and performance bonds, or an acceptable substitute, commensurate with any contract or lease by and between such operator and the City. �.. 6. The rates and charges for any and all activities and services of such operations shall be determined by the operators, and all such rates or charges shall be reasonable and be equally and fairly applied to all users of the services. j7. All operators at the facility shall be full-time, financially sound and business enterprises, with adequately manned and equipped facilities, including ample office facilities, and who observe normal or specifically required business hours. 8. All fixed base operators shall, at their own expense, pay all taxes and assessments against any buildings or other structures placed on the premises by them, as well as all taxes and assessments against the personal property used by them in their operations. 9. All operators shall abide by and comply with all state, county, and city laws and ordinances, and the rules and regulations of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). 10. In the event the City constructs the physical plant facilities (terminal, hangars, etc) for use by any operator under the provisions of any lease or other contract, such lease or contract with such operators shall be on such terms and conditions as to guarantee a full return of the investment within years, plus interest and reasonable rental for use during such period. 11. All operators shall provide and pay all gas, electrical current, water and sewer charges and garbage collection charges used or incurred anywhere in or about the leased premises, and shall pay the charges made therefor by the suppliers _I promptly when due. 12. All contracts and leases between such operators and the City shall be subordinate to the provisions of any existing or future agreement(s) between the City and the United States, relative to the operation or maintenance of the facility. 9 5— 459 288&MP8.RPr/59P/32395 8-10 Watson Island r' 13. No fixed based operators shall sublease or sublet any premises leased by such operator from the City, or assign any such lease, without the prior written ' approval of the City, and any such subletting or assignment shall be subject to all of the minimum standards set forth. 14. In the event the Lessee sublets any portion of his lease, the sub -lessees must agree to assume the full obligations of the lease as set out herein and must agree to fully cooperate with the City in seeing that these standards are complied with. The sub -lessees shall immediately comply with any reasonable request or direction of the City as it relates to the enforcement of these standards. 15. In the event the Lessee or sub -lessee fails to comply fully with these standards or fails to comply with the reasonable request or direction of the City as it relates to these standards, said Lessee or sub -lessee shall be in default. If said default continues for more than days after notice of said default, the City may terminate the lease. Said Lessee is responsible for the performance of the sub -lessee. 16. Fixed based operators shall have the right to use common areas and facilities of the facility, including runways, taxiways, aprons, roadways, floodlights, landing lights, signals and other conveniences for the takeoff, flying and landing of aircraft of Lessee. 17. Beginning with the effective date of adoption of these minimum standards, leases to fixed based operators and facility tenants shall be limited to a maximum of years, including options. In addition, rental rates shall be subject to review and reevaluation at the end of each one-year period thereof, in relation to changes in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for the Miami Area. If at the end of the previous 1 year period the CPI has increased, the rental terms shall be increased to such percentage of increase; if there has been a decrease in the CPI during the previous 1 year period, the City shall take no action to review or reevaluate the lease. 18. Lessees will, at all times during the continuance of the term of the lease and any renewal or extension thereof, conduct, operate and maintain for the benefit of the flying public, the fixed based operation provided for and described therein, and provide all parts and services as defined and set forth, and will make all such services available to the public and that it will devote its best efforts for the accomplishment of such purposes and that it will at all times charge fair, reasonable and not unjustly discriminatory prices to patrons and customers for all merchandise or materials and services furnished or rendered. 95- 459 28M&Mn.M/59Pj32395 8-11 Watson Island 7 Notwithstanding anything contained in a lease that may be or appear to the contrary, it is expressly understood and agreed that the rights granted thereunder are nonexclusive and the Lessor reserves the right to grant similar privileges to another operator or operators upon formal application by that operator, and upon demonstration of compliance with the applicable standards. 19. All contracts and leases between such operators and the City shall be subordinate to the right of the City during time of war or national emergency to lease the landing area or any part thereof to the United States Government for military or naval use, and if any such lease is executed, the provisions of any contracts or leases between such operators and the City, insofar as they are inconsistent with the provisions of the lease to the Government, shall be suspended. 20. Upon adoption of these standards, all leases entered into and any amendments to existing leases shall be in accordance with these standards. 21. The Lessee shall remove from the facility or otherwise dispose of in a manner approved by the City, all garbage, debris, and other waste material (whether solid or liquid) arising out of its occupancy of the premises or out of its operations. Said Lessee shall keep and maintain its leased premises in a neat and orderly manner; Lessee shall keep the grass cut and the building painted. Any garbage, debris, or waste which may be temporarily stored in the open shall be kept in suitable garbage or waste receptacles, the same to be made of metal and equipped with tight fitting covers and to be of a design to safely and properly contain whatever may be placed therein. The Lessee shall use extreme care when effecting removal of all such waste. 22. The City reserves the right to enter upon any premises leased to fixed based operators at reasonable times for the purpose of making such inspections as it may deem expedient to the proper enforcement of these minimum standards and for the proper enforcement of any covenant or condition of any fixed base operator's contract or lease agreement. 23. The City recognizes the rights of any person, firm or corporation operating aircraft at the facility to perform services on its own aircraft with its own regular employees (including, but not limited to maintenance, repair and fueling) that it may choose to perform. Aircraft fueling accomplished under this provisions shall be in strict accordance with fueling standards in force or hereinafter promulgated. 24. All operations conducted at the facility will be conducted in the safest manner possible and for the maximum benefit of the flying public. 288&MP8.RPT/59P/32395 8-12 95- 459 Watson Island _J 0 25. Where these standards call for a minimum square footage of space, and the applicant is permitted to conduct more than one activity, then such applicant shall have the minimum square footage for that activity which requires the greatest minimum square footage. 95- 459 2 &MM.RPT/59P/32395 8-13 Watson Island J 1 1.11 .11 re -I F_! £'� 95- A59 BIBLIOGRAPHY American Association of Airport Executives. SurvU of Airport Rates and Charges. 1991-1992. Alexandria, Virginia. Cuban American National Foundation. Cuban Paper Series: Blue Ribbon Comrn� the Ri-nnnmin Recnnstniction of Cuba. Mav 1993. Washinjzton, D.C. Dade County Aviation Department. Master Plan Update, Windrose and associated data, 11/23/93, 1994 (DRAFT). Florida Department of Transportation. Port of Miami Tunnel and Access Improvements. Concgl2WAl Plan. Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan. April 1, 1994 (DRAFT). Florida Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration. Airport Environmental Handbook, Order 5050.4A. October 8, 1995. Florida International University; The Cuban Research Institute. Transition in Cuba. February 1994. Herwald, Kurt A. Stevens Aviation, Inc. "Using Minimum Standards to Encourage General Aviation Growth." Speech. May 11, 1993. Dallas, Texas. Howard Needles Tammen & Bergendoff. Southeast Florida Heliport Systgm Plan. March 1989. Howard Needles Tammen & Bergendoff. ,Environmental Assessment Downtown Heliport. �ity of Fort Lauderdale. March 1994. Infanger, John F. "Against All Odds." Airport Business. April 1994. KPMG Peat Marwick. Dade County Aviation System Plan. July 1988. Landrum & Brown. Forecasts of Aviation Demand;, Miami International Airport. March 17, 1992. BIBLIO/59P/011195 95- 459 Bibliography Page 1 "i Miami Herald. "Water Taxis - A Nice Alternative." March 13, 1994. Miami, Port of. The Port of Miami Estimated Economic Impact and Related Materials. April 2, 1992. Metro -Dade County Planning Department. Demographic Profile. Dade County 1960-90. December 1992. Metro -Dade County Planning Department. Changes in Non -Agricultural Employment. November 1990. Metro -Dade County Planning Department. Changing Structure of the Dade Economy. December 1987. Metro -Dade County Planning Department. Growth and Change in the Dade Economy. February 1985. Metro -Dade County Planning Department. Population Projections 1990-2020. February 1992. Metro -Dade County Planning Department. Seasonal -Transient Population. December 1992. Metro -Dade County Planning Department. Employment and Jobs Projections: Dade County. December 1992. Metro -Dade County Planning Department. fopulation by Age and Area; Dade County. December 1988. Metro -Dade County Planning Department. Dade County Facts. May 1993. Miami Planning Department, City of. Watson Island Master Development Plan. January 1989. Miami Convention & Visitors Bureau, Greater. Quarterly Update Convention Calendar: August 1993 - February„ 2005. August 1993. National Air Transportation Association. Financial Performance Survey: An Economic Profile of the FBO/Air Taxi Industry. 1985. Alexandria, Virginia BIBLIO/59P/011195 Bibliography Page 2 National Air Transportation Association. Negotiating Aviation Agreements. 1986. Alexandria, Virginia. National Climatic Data Center. "MIA has only wind data in the area." Phone conversation. May 2, 1994. United States Department of Transportation. Find Engineering Report, S.R. A-1-A/MacA- rthur Causewgy Bridge. United States Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration. Advisory Circular 150/5070-6A, Airport Master Plans, June 1985. United States Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration. Advisory Circular 150/5390-2A, Heliport Deign. January 20, 1994. United States Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration. Advisory Circular 15015300-13 CHG 3, Airport Design, September 29, 1989. United States Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration. FAA Aviation Forecasts (FAA -APO 93-1; February 1993). United States Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration. FAA Terminal Area Forecasts FY 1993-2005 (FAA -APO 93-9; July 1993). United States Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration. FAA Air Traffic Activity FY 1992 (FAA -APO 110; June 1993). United States Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration. FAA Air Rotorcraft Activity Survey (FAA-AMS 420; 1989). United States Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration. FAA Air U.S. Civil Airmen Statistics (FAA-APO-93-6; June 1993). United States Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration. FAA Air Statistical Handbook of Aviation (FAA-AIT-420; 1990). BIBLIO/59P/011195 95- 459 Bibliography Page 3 95- •459 J INTERVIEW REFERENCES Airport Consultants Council. Alexandria, Virginia. Armstrong, Nancy. American Helicopter Society. Atwood, Connie. Vice President, Chalk's International Airlines. Atwood, Seth. President, Chalk's International Airlines. Beaudreau, Mark. Air Park Supervisor, Pompano Beach Air Park, Florida. Britt, Quinn. Federal Express Overnight Delivery Service. Bullock, Claude M. Deputy Port Director, Port of Miami. Burke, Jack H. Heliport Specialist, Federal Aviation Administration, Washington, D.C. Busch, Frederick R. Deputy Chief Planning and Programming, Development Division, Miami International Airport. Carreras, William. Airport Engineer, Development Division, Miami International Airport. Cebula, Andrew V. Vice President, Government and Industry Affairs. The National Air Transportation Association. Charles, Pamela. Executive Director, Helicopter Association International. Alexandria, Virginia. Cox, Tim. Cuban American Institute, Washington, DC. Crouch, William. Director, Fort Lauderdale Executive Airport. Cruz, E. Metropolitan Dade Planning Department, Research Division. BIBLIO/51P/011195 95- 459 Interviews Page I Cuba Oversight Congressional Committees. Cutillo, Richard T. Chief, General Aviation and Heliports, City of New Orleans. Duley, Richard. Florida Department of Transportation - Miami. Federal Emergency Management Agency. Field Representatives, Washington Headquarters Office. Glaze, Ken. Vice President Operations, Helijet Airways, Vancouver Heliport, British Columbia. Haggerty, Thomas. Federal Aviation Administration, Chief Librarian, Washington. Helm, John C. Manager, Portland Heliport, Oregon. Henry, Thomas. Federal Aviation Administration, Statistics and Forecast Branch, Washington. John, S. DHL Overnight Delivery Service. Jones, Bill. Vice President - Operations, Chalk's International Airlines. Kinnaman, President, Indianapolis Heliport Corporation. Luft, Jack. Assistant Director, Development and Housing Conservation, City of Miami. Mance, Mayra Usta. Manager, Opa Locka General Aviation Airport, Florida. Manion, George. Opa Locka, General Airport, Florida. Metro -Dade Library Department. Research Department Specialists, Florida Collection. Miami Planning Department, City of. Land use and information specialists. BIBLIO/51P/011195 95- J59 Interviews Page 2 Mitchell, Donald B. Air Rescue Division, Miami -Dade Fire Department. President of Miami Helicopter Operators Association. O'Leary, Paddyrick. Pilot Chalk's Airlines. Interview regarding seaplane operations. Watson Island, Miami, Florida, January 25, 1994. Panos, L. Metropolitan Dade Planning Department, Research Division. Perez, Lisandro. Director of the Cuban Research Institute, Florida International University. Rhodes, Nelson. Manager, Boca Raton General Aviation Airport, Florida. Rodriguez, Eduardo. City of Miami Asset Management and Capital Improvements, Florida. Taggert, Tom. Airborne Overnight Delivery Service. Talbert, III, William D. Chief Operating Officer, Miami Convention and Visitors Bureau. Tamargo, Anna. University of Miami Caribbean Institute. Turkheurst, William. Owner of Dade Helicopters, Inc. Interview regarding helicopter usage on Watson Island. Watson Island, Miami, Florida, February 25, 1994. Turner, Sargeant Jeff. Chief Pilot, City of Miami Police Department, Aviation Division. Shelnut, Philip. Watson Island Base Manager, Action Helicopters, Inc. Vernace, Bart. Federal Aviation Administration - Orlando. Young, Allen. Vice President Engineering, Lockheed Air Terminal. Burbank, California. 95- 459 Interviews BIBLIO/51P/011195 Page 3 i APPENDIX eA Minutes of key meetings with Chalk's International Airlines, Bade helicopters, Inc. and the Miami Police Department J ' CHALK'S INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES - MEETING NOTES February 24, 1994 Y�11 i The consultant team met with a representative of Chalk's International Airlines to gain perspectives on the nature of their activity and prospects for future growth at the Watson Island Air Transportation Facility. A summary of the principal comments and opinions offered are presented in the sections below: EXISTING FACILITIES AND OPERATIONS The existing airside and terminal facilities can accommodate current and short-term demands fairly well. There is a need for secured automobile parking (a moderate parking fee could be charged) and more covered space for cargo storage. The latter is more of a =� factor during holiday periods when the Islanders come to the Miami area for shopping. At times, Chalk's needs to operate a few cargo -only flights to accommodate this demand. U.S. Customs and Immigration personnel meet each arriving flight and this arrangement is working well. For this reason, the deplane ramp is "sterile". This implies that seaplanes operated by others have no ramp space at the Watson Island Air Transportation Facility; however, the demand for such activity is practically non-existent. The Chalk's fleet consists of 7 Grumman Mallards (17 passengers); 12 Grumman Albatross (G-111, 28-30 passengers); and 2 Grumman Albatross (HU16, cargo -only). None of these aircraft are certified for IFR operations. Therefore, when the weather is at IFR conditions, operations are delayed until the flights can operate. All passengers arriving at Watson and continuing to another destination, deplane, enter the terminal building and then enplane the aircraft. During this period, the aircraft is fueled (2 trucks are available) and readied for flight. Turnaround time can be as qui( k as 30 minutes; some aircraft may occupy ramp space for 2 hours. This all depends on the schedule. All bags are checked; no carry -on is permitted. February, March and April are the peak months for tourists. July and August are the peak months for Miami area residents' travel to the islands. The Albatross replaces the Mallard on a one-to-one basis during the peak months. They are not in use now as they are undergoing engine retrofits. Chalk's present service (week of February 20, 1994) includes three daily flights to Bimini, one of which continues on to Paradise Island (Nassau), and one daily flight to Key West. The first two flights arrive from Fort Lauderdale at about 8:00 a.m. These are scheduled flights enroute to either Bimini or Key West. The last two flights arrive at Watson Island at about 5:00 p.m. from Bimini and Key West enroute to Fort Lauderdale. The aircrafts 95- 459 are maintained at Fort Lauderdale and begin their daily cycle the next morning. During the day, there are two other daily flights to and from Bimini. This constitutes the daily schedule, which can change as demand dictates; a total of four daily flights or eight aircraft operations. New service to Walker's Ivey in the Bahamas is starting on March 2, with one daily flight (except for Tuesdays). The 17-passenger Mallard will be used. The biggest factor influencing the use of Chalk's aircraft fleet in response to passenger demand is the hotel capacity at the Islands they serve. The current service to Bimini (3 daily flights) is adequate for the current hotel room capacity. As more rooms become available (and there is such activity at Bimini), it will stimulate more demand. Additionally, as the U.S. government negotiates air service rights to other islands, such as Eluthera for example, passenger travel can also increase. These factors should help Chalk's better utilize their current fleet. At present, they have excess fleet capacity. This allows the airline to respond to requests for charter traffic and add additional scheduled service when required. -IN'I --� \, MEMORANDUM TO: Ned Whitlock - Thompson Consultants International FROM: Chuck Deeb - Williams, Hatfield & Stoner, Inc. DATE: March 2, 1994 RE: Watson Island - Results of Meeting with Dade Helicopters, Inc. The following are my notes taken from the discussion we had on February 25, 1994, with Mr. Bill Turkheurst owner and operator of Dade Helicopters, Inc.: 1. Mr. Turkheurst is considered the Fixed Base Operator for helicopter service at Watson Island. His lease agreement with the City of Miami outlines his responsibilities with respect to the helicopter operations. 2. Mr. Turkhuerst does not report operations figures to the City nor to FAA. He noted that his business has been down approximately 60% since construction began on MacArthur Causeway. An average year would have approximately 20,000 helicopter operations. 3. Dade Helicopter, Inc. (DHI) uses two Bell Jet Rangers for their operations. These aircrafts are equipped to fly Instrument Flight Rules (IFR); however, DHI usually operates when the ceiling is above 1,000 feet. DHI also has four small helicopters that are stored in their hangar. 4. The two elevated landing pads are owned by DHI and are for their exclusive use. The pads are situated approximately 6 feet above the ground to allow 9 feet of clearance for pedestrians. Other users of the island approach the identified landing pad in the middle of the field and then taxi over towards DHI where the parking lot and buildings are. DHI allows others to use their building's facilities (e.g., phones, restrooms, etc.) at no charge. 5. The arrivals and departures are predominately into the wind; however, once the aircraft is 50 feet above the ground it can be flown in any direction easily. 6. Philip Shelnut, who is the chief pilot, does most of the minor maintenance of the helicopters in the hangar; this includes engine replacement. Any major overhaul work is done at Opa Locka Airport. 95- 459 WILLIAMS, HATFIELD £6 STONER, INC. Consulting Engineers • Planners - Surveyors 001 j Watson Island Memorandum March 2, 1994 Page Two 7. Watson Island is a public heliport but only DHI is based there. The island is used by all government entities; some military helicopters fly in from ships, dignitaries have been flown to the island, etc. 8. The helicopters are washed and stored in the hanger at night to protect them from vandalism and the salt water environment. 9. DHI has provided courier service and does see this as a strong potential market that is yet to be developed. 10. DHI has a 8,000 gallon, double wall, fuel tank on skids. They use only Jet A fuel. They do not recommend using sub-terranean tanks for environmental and maintenance reasons. 11. The Terminal Control Area (TCA) for MIA is approximately at the west bulkhead of the Intracoastal Waterway. Most helicopters will fly along the waterway to stay out of the TCA. There exists an opening in the overhead powerlines along the west side of the island for helicopters to approach the land area; however, we noticed only two helicopters flying that route. The helicopter pilots basically approach from whichever direction they choose. The overhead powerlines will probably be placed underground in the future to provide safer approaches to the heliport. 12. Mr. Turkheurst assumed occupancy of the west building from Goodyear and then added the two mobile trailers to the east. There are approximately 25 parking spaces at the facility and Mr. Turkheurst feels this is adequate for future operations. 13. Landing fees are not charged but in the event they are implemented, DHI is prepared to collect them. 14. DHI recommends installing a perimeter fence to secure the airport. cc: Julius Levine Jim Piersol Jean Lindsey WILLIAMS, HATFIELD 8 STONER, INC. Consulting Engineers - Planners • Surver/ors 95- 459 J MUMI POLICE DEPARTMENT - MEETING NOTES The following notes reflect two interviews with Sgt. Turner on December 9, 1993 and January 5, 1994. 1. The detail is currently operating with 2 piston rotorcraft and expects to add two others (turbine) shortly and by the mid-1990s retain a fleet of six craft, at least four of which will be turbine driven. 2. The ideal arrangement for this operation would be to move from its present base in Tamiami to a city location; Watson Island would provide an optimum site for that purpose. 3. Were that to occur current response times from 30 to 40 minutes (40 minutes to downtown) would be virtually reduced to being "on -station" when the 'blades turn"; i.e. moving to the scene of call within moments due to location right in the middle of the city. 4. The city would save appreciable sums of money at its own site. At present the rental for its Tamiami station is $15,000 per year, payable to Dade County. Estimated savings for operating hours "lost" due to extended response times currently required by the more -distant Tamiami site would be on the order of $300/hour. While not able to specifically estimate that savings for a given year at present or in relation to forecast activities in the period ahead (see detail below), that would undoubtedly result in an appreciable additional savings for the city. 1 5. Sgt. Turner believes that the hangar and adjunct office/ready room needs of the a operator would require a structure of about 5,000 sq. ft. There may be a possible requirements for other uses such as: showers, kitchenette, lounge or sleeping area, or both, two helicopter pads with appropriate drain filtration, and hoist capacity (to lift parts of the aircraft in the hangar) of 6,000 pounds. An additional need would be for fuel farm for Jet A 100 fuel. 6. Recent past and near -term future activities anticipate the following: Year Operations Flight Hours Service Duration 1990 200 400 4 afternoons/wk 1991 400 19000 7 aftns/wk limited svc rest of day 1992 250 600 5 aftns/wk city assumes all ops. 1993 400 800 7 days/wk 10 hour coverage 1994 600 1,200 7 days/wk 20 hour coverage 1995 1,000 2,000 7 days/wk round the clock 95- A59 .1J APPENDIX B Introduction to models and evaluation techniques to assess noise impacts at airports 95- 459 W INTRODUCTION TO NOISE EVALUATION Airport noise evaluation is based largely on a description of airport noise exposure using Day -Night Average Sound Level (DNL) noise contours. To assist reviewers in interpreting this complex noise measure, we present below an introduction to relevant fundamentals of acoustics and noise terminology, a discussion of the effects of noise on human activity, and an overview of currently accepted noise -land use compatibility guidelines. 1. Introduction to Acoustics and Noise Terminology The following acoustic metrics are discussed in this chapter: the Decibel, dB; A -Weighted Decibel, dBA; Maximum A -Weighted Noise Level, Lmax; Sound Exposure Level, SEL; Equivalent Sound Level, Lq; and Day -Night Average Sound Level, DNL. 1.1 The Decibel, dB All sounds come from a sound source -- a musical instrument, a voice speaking, an airplane passing overhead. It takes energy to produce sound. The sound energy produced by any sound source is transmitted through the air in sound waves -- tiny, quick oscillations of pressure just above and just below atmospheric pressure. These oscillations, or sound pressures, impinge on the ear, creating the sound we hear. Our ears are sensitive to a wide range of sound pressures. The loudest sounds that we hear without pain have about one million times more energy than the quietest sounds we hear. But our ears are incapable of detecting small differences in these pressures. Thus, to better match how we hear this sound energy, we compress the total range of sound pressures to a more meaningful range by introducing the concept of sound pressure level (SPL). Sound pressure level is a measure of the sound pressure of a given noise source relative to a standard reference value. The reference pressure is typical of the quietest sound that a young person with good hearing is able to detect. Sound pressure levels are measured in decibels (or dB). Decibels are logarithmic quantities -- logarithms of the ratio of the two pressures, the numerator being the pressure of the sound source _J of interest, and the denominator being the reference pressure (the quietest sound we can hear).' ' The equation for this relationship is as follows: _J 2 SPL=101ogp"`O�"" ed z jPreference 95- 459 i i } } The logarithmic conversion of sound pressure to sound pressure level means that the quietest sound we can hear (the reference pressure) has a sound pressure level of about zero decibels, while the loudest sounds we hear without pain have sound pressure levels of about 120 dB. Most sounds in our day-to-day environment have sound pressure levels on the order of 30 to 100 dB. Because decibels are logarithmic quantities, they do not always behave like regular numbers with which we are more familiar. For example, if two sound sources each produce 100 dB operating individually and they are then operated together, they produce only 103 dB -- not the 200 decibels we might expect. Four equal sources operating simultaneously produce another 3 dB of noise, resulting in a total sound pressure level of 106 dB. In fact, for every doubling of the number of equal sources, the sound pressure level goes up another 3 dB. A tenfold increase in the number of sources makes the sound pressure level go up 10 dB. A hundredfold increase makes the level go up 20 dB, and it takes a thousand equal sources to increase the level 30 dB! It is also true that if one source is much louder than another, the two sources operating together will produce the same sound pressure level (and sound to our ears) as if the louder source were operating alone. For example, a 100 dB source plus an 80 dB source produce 100 dB of noise' when operating together. The louder source "masks" the quieter one. But if the quieter source gets louder, it will have an increasing effect on the total sound pressure level such that, when the two sources are equal, as described above, they produce a level three decibels above the sound of either one by itself. A simple procedure for estimating the approximate sum of sound pressure levels from different sources is shown in Table 1. 1, below. When using it for more than two sources, always start by adding the lowest two sources together first, then the higher sources in increasing order. From these basic concepts, note that one hundred 80-decibel sources will produce a combined j level of 100 dB; if a single 100-dB source is then added to the group, they will produce a total sound pressure level of 103 dB. Clearly, the loudest source has the greatest effect on total noise. Two useful rules of thumb to remember when comparing sound pressure levels are: (1) most of us perceive a 6 to 10 dB increase in the sound pressure level to be about a doubling of loudness, and (2) changes in sound pressure level of less than about 3 dB are not readily detectable outside ! of a laboratory environment. Table 1.1 Approximate Decibel Addition Source: HMMH, 1993 When two decibel values differ by: Add the following amount to the higher value: 0 or 1 dB 3 dB 2or3dB 2dB 4 to 8 dB 1 dB 9 dB or more 0 dB 95- 459 is 1.2 A -Weighted Decibel, dBA Another important characteristic of sound is its frequency, or "pitch". This is the rate of repetition.of the sound pressure oscillations as they reach our ear. Formerly expressed in cycles per second, frequency is now expressed in units known as Hertz (Hz). When analyzing the total noise of any source, acousticians often break the noise into frequency components (or bands) to determine how much is low -frequency noise, how much is middle - frequency noise, and how much is high -frequency noise. This breakdown is important for two reasons: Our ear is better equipped to hear mid and high frequencies than lower frequencies. Thus, we find mid- and high -frequency noise to be more annoying. High frequency noise is also more capable of producing hearing loss. svy� Y Engineering solutions to a noise problem are different for different frequency ranges. Low - frequency noise is generally harder to control. The frequency range of hearing for most people extends from a low frequency of about 20 Hz to a high of about 10,000 to 15,000 Hz. People respond to sound most readily when the predominant frequency is in the range of normal conversation, around 1,000 to 2,000 Hz. Psycho -acousticians have developed several filters which match this sensitivity of our ear and thus, help us to judge the relative loudness of various sounds made up of many different frequencies. The so-called "A" filter does this best for most environmental noise sources. Sound pressure levels measured through this filter are referred to as A -weighted levels (measured in A- weighted decibels, dBA). The A -weighted filter significantly deemphasizes those parts of the total noise at lower frequencies (below about 500 Hz) and also at very high frequencies above 10,000 Hz where we do not hear as well. The filter has very little effect, or is nearly "flat", in the middle range of frequencies between 500 and 10,000 Hz where we our hearing is most efficient. Because this filter generally matches our ears' sensitivity, sounds having higher A -weighted sound levels are usually judged to be louder than those with lower A -weighted sound levels, a relationship which otherwise might not be true. It is for this reason that A -weighted sound levels are normally used to evaluate environmental noise sources. .a Other weighting networks include the B, C, and D filters. These are shown in Figure 1.1 below. They correspond to four different level ranges of the ear. The rarely used B-weighting is similar to the A -weighting in that it attenuates low frequencies (those less than 500 Hz), but to a lesser degree. The D-weighting network, also used only rarely, is similar to the B-weighting at low '• frequencies, but includes a significant amplification of the sound (up to about 10 dB) in the 2,000 to 8,000 Hz range. C-weighting is nearly flat throughout the audible frequency range, hardly deemphasizing at all the low frequency noise. C-weighted levels are not used as frequently as A -weighted levels, but they may occasionally be preferable in evaluating sounds whose low -frequency components are t responsible for secondary effects such as the shaking of a building, window rattle, perceptible vibrations, or other factors that can cause annoyance and complaints. Such applications include the evaluation of blasting noise, artillery fire, and in some cases, aircraft noise heard inside buildings. �a 95— 459 I a� 0 J W m U W 0 z_ w a w w cr W F= 4 J W 2 20 10 A 0 B AND C C B -10 -20 -30 A -40 _an 20 50 100 200 500 1000 2000 5000 IOA00 20,000 FREOUENCY IN HERTZ Figure 1.1 Frequency -Response Characteristics of Various Weighting Networks Source: Harris, Cyril M., editor; Handbook of Acoustical _Measurements and Noise Control, (Chapter 5, "Acoustical Measurement Instruments"; Johnson, Daniel L.; Marsh, Alan H.; and Harris, Cyril M.); New York; McGraw-Hill, Inc.; 1991; p. 5.13. Because of the correlation with our hearing, the A -weighted level has been adopted as the basic measure of environmental noise by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and by nearly every other agency concerned with community noise throughout the United States. Figure 1.2 on the following page presents typical A -weighted sound levels of several common environmental sources. An additional dimension to environmental noise is that A -weighted levels vary with time. For example, the sound level increases as an aircraft approaches, then falls and blends into the background as the aircraft recedes into the distance (though even the background varies as birds chirp or the wind blows or a vehicle passes by). Figure 1.3 illustrates this concept. 95- 459 Some Sound Level Measured Maximum Common Levels dBA Levels CONCORDE, LANDING 1000 m. FROM RUNWAY END -7ff— 110 - 747.100 TAKEOFF 6500 m. FROM START OF TAKEOFF ROLL 727 - 200 65M m. FROM START OF TAKEOFF DIESEL TRUCK AT 50 fL NOISY URBAN DAYTIME 757 - 200 6500 m. FROM START OF TAKEOFF COMMERCIAL AREA CESSNA 172 LANDING 1000 M. FROM RUNWAY END QUIET URBAN DAYTIME QUIET URBAN NIGHTIME QUIET SUBURBAN NIGHTTIME •1 QUIET RURAL NIGHTIME 100 INSIDE SUBWAY TRAIN (New York) 90 FOOD BLENDER AT 3 ft. 80 GARBAGE DISPOSAL AT 3 ft. SHOUTING AT 31L 70 VACUUM CLEANER AT 10 IL NORMAL SPEECH AT 3 ft. 60 LARGE BUSINESS OFFICE 50 DISHWASHER NEXT ROOM 40 SMALL THEATRE, LARGE CONFERENCE (Background) LIBRARY 30 BEDROOM AT NIGHT CONCERT HALL (Background) 20 BROADCAST & RECORDING STUDIO 10 THRESHOLD OF HEARING 0 i Figure 1.2 Common Environmental Sound Levels, in dBA F Source: Hams, A.S., and Miller, R.L., Airport Noise Seminars, documentation prepared for the Airports Division, Southern Region, Federal Aviation Administration, November 1977. 95- 459 9 J Figure 1.3 Variation in the A -Weighted Sound Level over Time Source: HMMH, 1991 1.3 Maximum A -Weighted Noise Level, Lmax Because of the variation discussed in the previous section, it is often convenient to describe a particular noise "event" by its maximum sound level, abbreviated as Lam. In the figure above, it is approximately 85 dBA. However, the maximum level describes only one dimension of an event; it provides no information on the cumulative noise exposure generated by a sound source. In fact, two events with identical maxima may produce very different total exposures. One may be of very short duration, while the other may continue for an extended period and be judged much more annoying. The next section introduces a measure that accounts for this concept of a noise "dose". 1.4 -Sound Exposure Level, SEL The measure of cumulative noise exposure for a single aircraft flyover is the Sound Exposure Level, or SEL. It may be thought of as an accumulation of the sound energy over the duration of an event, where duration is defined as the time, in seconds, when the A -weighted sound level first exceeds a threshold level (normally just above the background or ambient noise) to the time that the sound level drops back down below the threshold'. The lightly shaded area in Figure 1.4 below illustrates that portion of the sound energy included in this dose. ' Mathematically, SEL is expressed by the following equation: SEL=10log f alo[SPLOPOI& Where: t, is the start of the event, tZ is the end of the event, and L(t) is the time varying A -weighted sound level between t, and t2. 95- A59 W I Figure 1.4 Sound Exposure Level Source: HMMH, 1991 To account for the variety of durations that occur among different noise events, the dose is normalized (standardized) to a one -second duration. This "revised" dose is the SEL; it is shown as the darkly shaded area in Figure 1.4. It has exactly the same sound energy as the actual event though it is presumed to last for a much shorter (one -second) period. Note that because the SEL is normalized to one second, it will almost always be larger in magnitude than the maximum A - weighted level for the event. In fact, for most aircraft overflights, the SEL is on the order of 7 to 12 dB higher than the I.. Also, the fact that it is a cumulative measure means that not only do louder flyovers have higher SELs than do quieter ones, but also flyovers that stretch out longer in time have greater SELs than do shorter ones. With this metric, we now have a comprehensive way to describe a noise event for use in modelling noise exposure. ' 1 1.5 Equivalent Sound Level, Lq l We tend to think of maximum A -weighted levels and SELs as measures of the noise associated with j individual events. The remaining metrics in this section describe longer -term cumulative noise W exposure that often include many events. The first, the Equivalent Sound Level, abbreviated Lam, is a measure of the exposure resulting from the accumulation of A -weighted sound levels over a particular period of interest -- for example, an hour, an eight hour school day, nighttime, or a full 24-hour day. However, because the length of the } period can be different depending on the time frame of interest, the applicable period should always be identified or clearly understood when discussing the metric. Such durations are often identified through a subscript, for example L.,24). 'J 95- 459 1 Conceptually, Lq may be thought of as a constant sound level over the period of interest that contains as much sound energy as the actual time -varying sound level with its normal peaks and valleys. This is illustrated in Figure 1.5. It is important to recognize, however, that the two signals (the constant one and the time -varying one) would sound very different from each other if compared in real life. Also, be aware that the "average" sound level suggested by Leq is not an arithmetic value, but a logarithmic, or "energy -averaged" sound level. Thus, loud events clearly dominate any noise environment described by the metric. As for its application to airport noise issues, Leq is often presented for consecutive one -hour periods ( to illustrate how the hourly noise dose rises and falls throughout a 24-hour period as well as how certain hours are significantly affected by a few loud aircraft. Figure 1.5 .Example of a One Minute Equivalent Sound Level Source: HMMH, 1991 1.6 Day -Night Average Sound Level, DNL FAR Part 150 requires that a slightly more complicated measure of noise exposure be used to describe cumulative noise exposure during an average annual day: the Day -Night Average Sound Level, DNL. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency identified DNL as the most appropriate means of evaluating airport noise based on the following considerations (from "Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety," U. S. EPA Report No. 550/9-74-004, September 1974): (1) The measure should be applicable to the evaluation of pervasive long-term noise in various defined areas and under various conditions over long periods of time. 95- 459 rot 1 011) i eA11 ._l i I iod t I 1 11_wN (2) The measure should correlate well with known effects of the noise environment and on individuals and the public. (3) The measure should be simple, practical and accurate. In principal, it should be useful for planning as well as for enforcement or monitoring purposes. (4) The required measurement equipment, with standard characteristics, should be commercially available. (5) The measure should be closely related to existing methods currently in use. (6) The single measure of noise at a given location should be predictable, within an acceptable tolerance, from knowledge of the physical events producing the noise. (7) The measure should lend itself to small, simple monitors which can be left unattended in public areas for long periods of time. DNL has been adopted formally by most federal agencies dealing with noise exposure, including the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the Department of Defense, and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Part 150 requires that DNL be used in describing cumulative noise exposure and in identifying aircraft noise - land use compatibility issues. In relatively simple terms, DNL is the average noise level over a 24-hour period except that noises occurring at night (defined as 10:00 p.m. through 7:00 a.m.) are artificially increased by 10 dB. This weighting reflects the added intrusiveness of nighttime noise events attributable to the fact that community background noise levels typically decrease about 10 dB at night. Typical DNL values for a variety of noise environments are shown in Figure 1.6 to indicate the range of noise exposure levels usually encountered. DNL can be measured or estimated. Measurements are practical only for obtaining DNL values for relatively limited numbers of points, and, in the absence of a permanently installed monitoring system, only for relatively short time periods. Most airport noise studies are based on computer -generated DNL estimates, depicted in terms of equal -exposure noise contours (much as topographic maps have contours of equal elevation). Part 150 requires that the 65, 70 and 75 dB DNL contours be modeled and depicted. 95- 459 QUALITATIVE DESCRIPTIONS Ldn DAY —NIGHT SOUND LEVEL' DECIBELS —on— OUTDOOR LOCATIONS LOS ANGELES — 3rd FLOOR APARTMENT NEXTTO FREEWAY LOS ANGELES — 314 MILE FROM TOUCH DOWN AT !"— MAJOR AIRPORT T CITY NOISE —BD— LOS ANGELES — DOWNTOWN WITH SOME CON - (DOWNTOWN MAJOR STRUCTION ACTIVITY METROPOLIS) HARLEM 72nd FLOOR APARTMENT VERY NOISY -4- -70- 8OSTON — ROW HOUSING ON MAJOR AVENUE NOISY URBAN WATTS— B MILES FROM TOUCH DOWN AT a MAJOR AIRPORT NEWPORT — 3.5 MILES FROM TAKEOFF AT o URBAN —gp� SMALLAIRPORT w LOS ANGELES — OLD RESIDENTIAL AREA SUBURBAN FILLMORE — SMALL TOWN CUL—de—SAC SMALL TOWN A •--50 SAN DIEGO —WOODED RESIDENTIAL QUI ET SUBU RBAN. CALIFORNIA—'TOMATO FIELD ON FARM Figure 1.6 Examples of Day -Night Average Sound Levels, DNL Source: United States Environmental Protection Agency, Information on bevels of Environmental Noise bevels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Protect Public Health and Welfare with an AdeguateHealth and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety, Safety, March 1974, p. 14. 95- 459 J 2. The Effects of Airport Noise on People To residents around commercial and even general aviation airports, aircraft noise can be an annoyance and a nuisance. It can interfere with conversation and listening to television, it can disrupt classroom activities in schools, and it can disrupt sleep. Relating these effects to specific noise metrics helps in the understanding of how and why people react to their environment. This section addresses the various ways we are affected by airport noise. 2.1 Speech Interference A primary effect of aircraft noise is its tendency to drown out or "mask" speech, making it difficult to carry on a normal conversation. The sound level of speech decreases as distance between a talker and listener increases. As the level of speech decreases in the presence of background noise, it becomes harder and harder to hear. Figure 2.1 presents typical distances between talker and listener for satisfactory outdoor conversations in the presence of different steady A -weighted background noise levels for three degrees of vocal effort: raised, normal, and relaxed. As the background level increases, the talker must raise his/her voice, or the individuals must get closer together to continue talking. �a al E 20 m ... „ 1 o o lu l5 70 CoMnw�le.11rq Dlo.K. In M.t. Figure 2.1 Outdoor Speech Intelligibility Source: United States Environmental Protection Agency, Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety, March 1974, p. D-5. 95- 459 As indicated in the figure, "satisfactory conversation" does not always require hearing every word; 95% intelligibility is acceptable for many conversations. This is because a few unheard words can be inferred when they occur in a familiar context. However, in relaxed conversation, we have higher expectations of hearing speech and require complete 100% intelligibility. Any combination of talker - listener distances and background noise that falls below the bottom line in Figure 2.1 (thus assuring 100% intelligibility) represents an ideal environment for outdoor speech communication and is considered necessary for acceptable indoor conversation as well. One implication of the relationships in Figure 2.1 is that for typical communication distances of 3 or 4 feet (1 to 1.5 meters), acceptable outdoor conversations can be carried on in a normal voice as long as the background noise outdoors is less than about 65 dBA. Indoors, the interior background level must be less than about 45 dBA. If the noise were to exceed either of these levels, as might occur when an aircraft passes overhead, intelligibility would be lost unless vocal effort were increased or communication distance were decreased. A second implication of these relationships is that an acceptable background level of 60 to 65 dBA outdoors does not guarantee an acceptable background level indoors. This is because, with windows partly open, housing construction typically provides about 15 decibels of sound attenuation (reduction) from outside to inside. Thus, only if the outdoor sound level is 60 dBA or less is there a reasonable chance that the resulting indoor sound level will afford acceptable conversation inside. With windows closed, 25 dB of attenuation is typical. It follows, then, that the amount of time per day that aircraft noise exceeds either 60 or 65 dBA outdoors is indicative of the time during which speech interference can be expected. The U.S. EPA has used these same relationships to identify an outdoor criterion of DNL 60 as requisite to protect against speech interference indoors, and a criterion level 5 decibels less than that to provide for an additional "margin of safety".' 2.2 Sleep Interference Research on sleep disruption from noise has led to widely varying observations. In part, this is because (1) sleep can be disturbed without causing awakening, (2) the deeper the sleep the more noise it takes to cause arousal, (3) the tendency to awaken increases with age, and other factors. However, under Congressional mandate, the FAA has reviewed literature on sleep disruption in a study of soundproofing hospitals where sleep is an important factor in patient care. That study4 identified a maximum level of 40 dBA as a conservative threshold of sleep disturbance. Separately, the EPA identified 35 dBA L. as a threshold of sleep disruption in the presence of steady noise, with maximum levels of 40 dBA resulting in a five percent probability of awakenings Assuming an interior threshold level of 40 dBA requisite to maintain sleep (with windows open) and 15 decibels of outside -to -inside noise reduction, this means that levels exceeding about 55 dBA outdoors have the potential to cause arousal.b s Op. Cit., EPA Report No. 550/9-74-004, March 1974. 4 Wyle Labs, "Study of Soundproofing Public Buildings Near Airports", FAA Report No. DOT-FAA- AEQ-77-9, April 1977. s Op. EPA Report No. 550/9-74-004, March 1974. i .yJ 6 Newman S.J., and Beattie, K.R., "Aviation Noise Effects", FAA Report No. FAA-EE-85-2, March 1985. IJ 95- 459 Figure 2.2 shows a summary of laboratory findings on the topic. 50 s -- SLEEP STAGE CHANGED O — AWAKENED FROM SLEEP 40 30 20 0 [ ( rill 1 1 1 30 40 50 60 70 -CD- RECOMMENDED THRESHOLD MAXIMUM A -WEIGHT LEVEL, dBA COMPOSITE OF LABORATORY DATA FOR SLEEP INTERFERENCE VERSUS MAXIMUM A —WEIGHTED NOISE LEVEL Figure 2.2 Sleep Interference Source: Newman S.J., and Beattie, K.R., "Aviation Noise Effects", FAA Report No. FAA-EE-85-2, March 1985. 2.3 Community Annoyance It has long been clear from social survey data that individual reactions to noise vary widely for a given noise level. Nevertheless, as a group, people's aggregate response to factors such as speech and sleep interference and desire for an acceptable environment is predictable and relates well to measures of cumulative noise exposure such as DNL. Figure 2.3 shows the most widely recognized relationship between noise and the percentage of people highly annoyed by it regardless of the noise source. Based on data from 18 surveys conducted worldwide, the curve indicates that at levels as low as DNL 55, approximately five percent of the people will still be highly annoyed, with the percentage increasing more rapidly as exposure increases above DNL 65.' 7 Schultz, T.J., "Synthesis of Social Surveys on Noise Annoyance", Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, Vol. 64, No. 2, August 1978. 9 5 — 459 9 80 a UJ 0 60 Q = 40 C� 20 0 All 161 DATA POINTS Given Equal Weight All SURVEYS Given Equal Weight 90% of the Data Points 40 50 60 70 80 90 L do I J Figure 2.3 Percentage of People Highly Annoyed Source: Schultz, T.J., "Synthesis of Social Surveys on Noise Annoyance", Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, Vol. 64, No. 2, August 1978. Separate work by the EPA has shown that overall community reaction to a noise environment is also Ij dependent on DNL. This relationship is shown in Figure 2.4. Levels have been normalized to the i same set of exposure conditions to permit valid comparisons between ambient noise environments. Data summarized in that figure suggest that little reaction would be expected for intrusive noise levels five decibels below the ambient, while widespread complaints can be expected as intruding noise exceeds background levels by about five decibels. Vigorous action is likely when the background is exceeded by 20 dB. 95- 459 Community Reaction Vigorous community action Several threats of legal action, or strong appeals to local officials to stop noise 6� widespread complaints or single threat of legal action r r.� 1 Sporadic complaints No reaction, although noise is generally i i noticeable /� ./ Mean Envelope of 90% Data / / Data Normalized to: i Some Prior Exposure Windows Partially Open /i No Pure Tone or Impluses 1• -10 Ambient +10 +20 +30 Figure 2.4 Community Reaction as a Function of Outdoor DNL Source: Wyle Laboratories, Community Noise, prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Noise Abatement and Control, Washington, D.C. 20406, December 1971, page 63. 95- 4-59 4 J 3. Noise / Land Use Compatibility Guidelines DNL estimates have two principal uses in a Part 150 study: I (1) Provide a basis for comparing existing noise conditions to the effects of q noise abatement procedures and/or forecast changes in airport activity. (2) Provide a quantitative basis for identifying potential noise impacts. Both of these functions require the application of objective criteria for evaluating noise impacts. Government agencies dealing with environmental noise have devoted a great deal of attention to this problem, and have proposed many different sets of noise - land use compatibility guidelines. In addition to establishing DNL as the official cumulative noise exposure metric for use in airport noise analyses, Part 150 provides the FAA's recommended guidelines for noise -land use compatibility evaluation. These guidelines are reproduced in Table 3.1. These guidelines represent a compilation of the results of extensive scientific research into noise -related activity interference and attitudinal response. However, reviewers of DNL contours should recognize the highly subjective nature of response to noise, and the special circumstances that can either increase or decrease individuals' tolerance. For example, a high non -aircraft background _ or "ambient" noise level can reduce the significance of aircraft noise, such as in areas constantly exposed to relatively high levels of traffic noise. Alternatively, residents of areas with unusually low background levels may find relatively low levels of aircraft noise annoying. Response may also be affected by expectation and experience. People often get used to a level of noise exposure that guidelines indicate may be unacceptable, and changes in exposure may generate ' response that is far greater than that which the guidelines might suggest. The cumulative nature of DNL means that the same level of noise exposure can be achieved in an essentially infinite number of ways. For example, a reduction in a small number of relatively noisy operations may be counterbalanced by a much greater increase in relatively quiet flights, with no net change in DNL. Residents of the area may be highly aroused by the increased frequency of operations, despite the seeming maintenance of the noise status quo. With these cautions in mind, the Part 150 guidelines can be applied to the DNL contours to identify the potential types, degrees and locations of incompatibility. Measurement of the land areas involved can provide a quantitative measure of impact that allows a comparison of at least the gross effects of existing or forecast operations. Part 150 guidelines indicate that all uses normally are compatible with aircraft noise at exposure levels below 65 DNL. This limit is supported in a formal way by standards adopted by the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The HUD standards address the issue of whether sites are eligible for Federal funding support of housing construction. These standards, set forth in Part 51 of the Code of Federal Regulations, define areas with DNL exposure not exceeding 65 dB as acceptable for funding. Areas exposed to noise levels between DNL 65 and 75 are "normally unacceptable," and require special abatement measures and review. Those at 75 and above are "unacceptable" except under very limited special circumstances. 95- 459 Table 3.1 FAR Part 150 Noise / Land Use Compatibility Guidelines Source: FAR Part 150 Yearly day -night average sound level, DNL, in decibels (Key and notes on following page) Land Use <65 65.70 70-75 75.80 80-85 >85 Residential Use Residential other than mobile homes and transient lodgings Y N(1) N(1) N N N Mobile home park Y N N N N N Transient lodgings Y N(1) N(1) N(1) N N Public Use Schools Y N(1) N(1) N N N Hospitals and nursing homes Y 25 30 N N N Churches, auditoriums, and concert halls Y 25 30 N N N Governmental services Y Y 25 30 N N Transportation Y Y Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) Y(4) Parking Y Y Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) N Commercial Use Offices, business and professional Y Y 25 30 N N Wholesale and retail —building materials, hardware and farm equipment Y Y Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) N Retail trade --general Y Y 25 30 N N Utilities Y Y Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) N Communication Y Y 25 30 N N Manufacturing and Production Manufacturing general Y Y Y(2) Y(3) Y(4) N Photographic and optical Y Y 25 30 N N Agriculture (except livestock) and forestry Y Y(6) Y(7) Y(8) Y(8) Y(8) Livestock farming and breeding Y Y(6) Y(7) N N N Mining and fishing, resource production and extraction Y Y Y Y Y Y Recreational Outdoor sports arenas and spectator sports Y Y(5) Y(5) N N N Outdoor music shells, amphitheaters Y N N N N N Nature exhibits and zoos Y Y N N N N Amusements, parks, resorts and camps Y Y Y Y Y Y Goff courses, riding stables, and water recreation Y Y 25 30 N N 95- 459 Key to Table 3.1 SLCUM Standard Land Use Coding Manual. Y(Yes) Land use and related structures compatible without restrictions. N(No) Land use and related structures are not compatible and should be prohibited. NLR Noise Level Reduction (outdoor to indoor) to be achieved through incorporation of noise attenuation into the design and construction of the structure. 25, 30, or 35 Land use and related structures generally compatible; measures to achieve NLR of 25, 30, or 35 dB must be incorporated into design and construction of structure. (1) (2) (3) (4) Notes for Table 3.1 Where the community determines that residential or school uses must be allowed, measures to achieve outdoor to Indoor Noise Level Reduction (NLR) of at least 25 dB and 30 dB should be considered in individual approvals. Normal residential construction can be expected to provide a NLR of 20 dB, thus the reduction requirements are often stated as 5, 10 or 15 dB over standard construction and normally assume mechanical ventilation and closed windows year round. However, the use of NLR criteria will not eliminate outdoor noise problems. Measures to achieve NLR of 25 dB must be incorporated into the design and construction of portions of these buildings where the public is received, office areas, noise sensitive areas or where the normal noise level is low. Measures to achieve NLR of 30 dB must be incorporated into the design and construction of portions of these buildings where the public is received, office areas, noise sensitive areas or where the normal noise level is tow. Measures to achieve NLR of 35 dB must be incorporated into the design and construction of portions of these buildings where the public is received, office areas, noise sensitive areas or where the normal noise level is low. Land use compatible provided special sound reinforcement systems are installed. Residential buildings require an NLR of 25. Residential buildings require an NLR of 30. Residential buildings not permitted. 95- 459 w APPENDIX C Architect's cost estimates for Air Transportation Facilities Watson Island - 2015 Layout Plan 95- A59 o�I I `I 1 1 I I I I I , I 1 ,.I I .1 4 I i l { 1. FBO Helicopter & Seaplane Terminal 4,800 Public Access Space 2,880 $100 $288,000 Non -Public Space 1,920 $100 $192,000 2. Federal Inspection Services (F.I.S.) Facility 2,600 Public Access Space 2,450 $100 $245,000 Non -Public Space 150 $100 $15,000 3. FBO Helicopter Hangar 4,370 _ Shops 750 $85 $63,750 _ Aircraft Storage Space _ 3,620 $80 $289,600 4. City of Miami Police 9,430 Administrative Space 975 $85 $82,875 Aircraft Storage Space 8,455 $80 $676,400 5. Building Demolition/Removal 3,680 Existing Chalk's Terminal 1,800 $10 $18,000 Existing F.I.S. Trailer 1,880 $10 $18,800 Dade Helicopter Terminals 1,000 $10 $10,000 6. Tenant Relocation F.1.S. Lump Sum $4,000 $4,000 Chalks Lump Sum $4,000 $4,000 :....:......::.......:....................:::....:......:.:......:...::......::.::...,:..::..::::::.:::. Dade Helicopter Sub:.Toal.:.:::::..::.:::::.::::.:::.::::::::::.:::::::.:::.::..:::.:.:::::::::.:�a::.. Lump Sum $4,000 $4,000 :..::...:....:. B. LANDSIDE COMPONENTS 1. Site Preparation Lump Sum $9,000 $9,000 2. Site Utilities Power Lump Sum $5,000 $5,000 Water Lump Sum $4,000 $4,000 Sanitary Lump Sum $40,000 $40,000 Communications Lump Sum $5,000 $5,000 3. North Access Boulevard Roadway Pavement Lump Sum $60,000 $60,000 Curbing Lump Sum $12,000 $12,000 Sidewalk Lump Sum $15,000 $15,000 95- 459 Lighting Lump Sum $30,000 $30,000 Retaining Wall Lump Sum $25,000 $25,000 WATSON ISLAND AIR TRANSPORTATION FACILITY YEAR 2015 LAYOUT I ............... ............................. ............... .... MAY, 1994 4. MacArthur Blvd. Modifications Lump Sum $19,000 $19,000 (close median) 5. Parking Lot & South Access Road Parking Lot 8700 $12 $104,400 Roadway 3200 $12 $38,400 Curb 4000 $7 $28,000 Sidewalk 200 $15 $3,000 Lighting 15 Poles $2,000 $30,000 6. Landscaping Lump Sum $180,000 $180,000 Irrigation .... ...... Sub T' X . . ........... ..... ........ ........... .. ........ ... ... LumpSum $45,000 $45,000 C. AIRSIDE COMPONENTS 1. Site Preparation/Excavation Lump Sum $8,000 $8,000 2. Utilities Lump Sum $10,000 $10,000 3. Helicopters Landing Pad 1100 $15 $16,500 Hot Spots 2 $4,000 $8.000 Aircraft Apron/Parking 1140 $15 $17,100 Taxilane 180 $15 $2,700 Loop Taxilane 1600 $15 $24,000 Taxilane Reflectors 70 $100 $7,000 4. Seaplanes Aircraft Apron/Parking (New) 5900 $15 $88,500 Overlay Apron 6300 $8 $47,250 5. Security Fencing (8' Chain Link) 1800 $15 $27,000 6. Wind Cone and Segmented Circle Lump Sum $4,500 $4,500 7. Landscaping (Sod) Lump Sum $10,000 $10,000 8. Seawall Repair Cap Removal (Old) 1 300 1 $20 1 $6,000 j Pour New Cap 300 $80 $24,000 WATSON ISLAND AIR TRANSPORTATION FACILITY <:.•:i �'C;���•�iii:':`,•�•.�•'�I:T��•,����':�'>��•••••�''''�%�:%:is�i:%:�%:':�±:ism.�::..}:.�::Y:'�?`::%';:ti:�:+��:y�::;::::.;��,'::�i?�v::ti,:t}{�::;:::,:v�ti:�,`•:::,::;:':'}:'%: :+•: t..:.n........ut.t:..tv.v.......vrv..........t.t....•...................................n..........................•........... n...,...,..........•..n...t...,..•....... n.,...................t. n....... ... n......v......... n.... n.... YEAR 2015 LAYOUT MAY, 1994 9. Police Apron 2600 $15 $39,000 D. ILANDSCAPED PARK ENVIRONMENT 1. Site Preparation/Tree Removal Lump Sum $30,000 $30,000 2. Site Utilities Lump Sum $5,000 $5,000 3. Access Roadway Roadway Pavement 6800. $12 $81,600 Boardwalk 1100 $30 $33,000 Lighting 8 Poles $2,000 $16,000 5. Landscaping Lump Sum $250,000 $250,000 :.:.::.:....::. ...:........ ' :....... :.......... .:.......:....: Total1 1 $3,319,375 General Conditions 5% $3,485,344 O.H. & P. 10% $3,833,878 Contingency 5% $4,025,572 95- 459 APPENDIX D Standard lease provisions used at other airports Standard Lease Provisions Leases prepared between the air transportation facility owner and the Lessees specify the terms of the agreement between the parties and reference or include the t minimum standards as part of the lease agreement. The items below are provided ' as a guide to standard provisions which are normally included in lease agreements. 1. The right to conduct aeronautical activities for furnishing services to the public is granted the Lessee subject to Lessee agreeing: (a) To furnish said services on a fair, equal and not unjustly discriminatory basis to all users thereof, and (b) To charge fair, reasonable and not unjustly discriminatory prices for each unit or service; provided that the Lessee may be allowed to make reasonable and nondiscriminatory discounts, rebates, or other similar types of price reductions to volume purchasers. 2. The Lessee for itself, its personal representatives, successors in interest, and assigns, as a part of the consideration hereof, does hereby covenant and agree as a covenant running with the land that: (1) no person on the grounds of race, color, or national origin shall be excluded from participation in, denied J the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination in the use of said facilities, (2) that in the construction of any improvements on, over, or under l such and the furnishing of services thereon, no person on the grounds of race, J color, or national origin shall be excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination, (3) that the Lessee .� shall use the premises in compliance with all other requirements imposed by or pursuant to 49 CFR Part 21, Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted Programs of the Department of Transportation, and as said Regulations may be amended. 3. The Lessee agrees that it will undertake an affirmative action program as required by these negotiations, to ensure that no person shall be excluded from participating in any employment activities covered in these resolutions. ,I The Lessee agrees that no person shall be excluded on these grounds from participating in or receiving the services or benefits of any program or activity covered by this subpart. The Lessee agrees that it will require that its covered suborganizations will undertake affirmative action programs and that they will require compliance from their suborganizations, as required by 14 CFR Part 152, Subpart E, to the same effect. 95- 459 4. That in the event of breach of any of the preceding nondiscrimination covenants, Lessor shall have the right to terminate the license, lease, permit, etc., and to reenter and repossess said premises and the facilities thereon, and hold the same as if said lease had never been made or issued. 5. During the time of war or national emergency, Lessor shall have the right to lease the landing area or any part thereof to the United States Government for military or naval use, and, if such lease is executed, the provisions of this instrument, insofar as they are inconsistent with the provisions of the lease to the Government, shall be suspended. 6. No right or privilege has been granted which would operate to prevent any person, firm or corporation operating aircraft on the airport(s) from performing any services on its own aircraft with its own regular employees (including but not limited to maintenance, repair, and fueling) that it may choose to perform. 7. It is understood and agreed that nothing herein contained shall be construed to grant or authorize the granting of an exclusive right forbidden by Section 308(c) of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958 or any aeronautical activities such as but not limited to: • Charter operations • Pilot training • Aircraft rental • Aerial photography • Crop dusting • Sale of aviation petroleum products • Air carrier operations • Aircraft sales, and service incidental thereto • Any other activity, because of its direct relationship to the operation of aircraft, can be regarded as an aeronautical activity 8. Lessor reserves the right, in a reasonable and nondiscriminatory manner, to further develop or improve the landing area of the facility as it sees fit, regardless of the desires or views of Lessee and without interference or hinderance. However, Lessor shall notify Lessee in writing, days prior to planned development. 9. Lessor shall have the right, but not the obligation to maintain and keep in repair the landing area of the facility and all publicly owned facilities of the facility, together with the right to direct and control all activities of Lessee in this regard. 95-- A-59 10. All hangars, buildings, properties or land on the facility, shall be maintained in a clean, attractive, weed free, well painted, junk free condition. 11. Lessor reserves the right to take any action it considers necessary to protect the aerial approaches of the facility against obstructions together with the right to prevent the erection of any building or other structure on or adjacent to the facility which would limit the usefulness of the facility or constitute a hazard to aircraft. 12. This agreement shall be subordinate to the provisions of any existing or future agreement between Lessor and the United States, relative to the operation or maintenance of the facility. 13. Incorporated into this agreement, by reference and as though set forth herein verbatim, are the minimum standards for fixed based operators and tenants adopted by the Lessor. Such minimum standards shall be lawful, reasonable and nondiscriminatory. Further, all parties hereto agree to comply with any and all laws and regulations, including those of the FAA, and will not permit the premises covered by this agreement to be used for any unlawful or improper purpose. 14. Each Lessee shall at a minimum at all times have in effect liability insurance for all of Lessee's operations in the amounts set out in the standard for the particular activity in question and referenced in the minimum standards. Such insurance polices shall further name the Lessor as an additional insured. Certificates of such insurance shall be furnished by Lessee to the Lessor, and 1 a Certificate presently then in effect shall be on file at all times. "l 15. The standards and regulations enacted by the governmental agency i responsible for the operation of the facility, now or in the future, may provide for use charges to be paid by those using, occupying, or conducting operations I at the facility. Such charges may be based upon square footage, receipts or I other reasonable basis, to be established by such standards and regulations. Lessee agrees to pay such charges as same are due and owing under any such }� standards or regulations now or hereafter in effect. Any such use charges shall be lawful, reasonable and nondiscriminatory. Ml 16. Lessor may, on account of the breach of any provisions hereof, including the standards and regulations incorporated herein by reference, terminate this agreement and eject the party in violation in accordance with the provisions of this lease. 95- 459 J taM� yy���..°� �y,�,��•n a�r�C- 'ai`�'i`Cf� f�"�k`?�!(!FaY }�l`fi 3�.4 �,'f �n3 t i ,£+� 1v !,+5'�!! cs• r °' � v ^i �*"� �� �t<'+•'r �.�� i4xa�'7S - f7' i4�£,.+5. 9 iS�� "� ''k S�w� { �•:�-•.r x � ✓ v 3 y � . �•' �f �vClj i' 'iv�Ry '¢ w.i g� YQv.X F. �' Ny . �1�riti�3 ram'` 1 ,.? 3 1 � 'ivr'e*°''h'c� zy�?e• 1 i .. !+!wq t --.. x � p.�.,.,.. G 4: � ' far ���F'� s'.�%�`���q.!`,. `""�i• �,�ti'� �,. i r , ! � r�•- v l'S�, •� { .p _ r+- i[{VTR^ � iS �. - WI' ri 77 7 .ry4 Y _ Al 17 ,ice •'.. ...yYb - YWi � 17. Lessee agrees to save and hold harmless the Lessor and its agents, servants, and employees of and from any and all liabilities. expenses, causes of action, damages and attorney's fees resulting from any of Lessee's businesses, operations, occupancy, or use of the airfield or leased premises, or resulting from any act or omission of Lessee's agents, servants or employees. This indemnity agreement shall apply and protect such Lessor and its agents, servants, and employees, even though it be contended, or even established, that said Lessor or its agents, servants, or employees were negligent, or that their conduct or omission in any way caused or contributed to any such liability, expense, damage, cause of action, or attorney's fees. 18. The purpose of the lease and the operations to be conducted by Lessee or sublessee, and the identity of the premises to be occupied by Lessee, are set forth in this lease. No other operations, business, or occupancy may be had or done without the additional written consent of the Lessor. 19. This agreement may not be assigned, in whole or in part, nor may the premises described herein be subleased, in whole or in part, without the prior written consent of the Lessor. Such consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. 20. In the event Lessee becomes insolvent, or the subject of any kind or chapter of bankruptcy proceeding, or if a receiver, assignee, or other liquidating officer is appointed for the business of Lessee, then Lessor may cancel this lease at Lessor's option upon giving written notice to Lessee. 95— 459