Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.worksession.20160322 CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION March 22, 2016 4:00 PM, City Council Chambers MEETING AGENDA I. Airport Improvement Discussion P1 City of Aspen Scoping Workshop March 2015 Environmental Assessment P 2 I . What we will discuss EA Background Proposed Actions Community Input to Date Explain the purpose and need of the projects Define next steps Facilitate Scoping Comments P 3 I . Purpose of This Environmental Assessment (EA) The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires consideration of the environmental consequences of a federal action before the action is taken An Environmental Assessment is prepared to determine if a significant environmental impact may occur Provides an in-depth review of the environmental impacts for the proposed action and alternatives to those actions Discloses alternatives, impacts and mitigation to the public and decision makers P 4 I . Environmental Assessment Content The Environmental Assessment will consist of the following key chapters: Purpose and Need: Why is the project needed? Alternatives: Proposed Projects and the No Action Affected Environment: The environment as it exists today Environmental Consequences: What is impacted by the Proposed Action and the Feasible and Prudent Alternatives Mitigation Measures: How to off-set any impacts P 5 I . Proposed Actions The Environmental Assessment will analyze the following proposed actions: Shifting the runway 80 feet to the west and widening the runway to 150 feet to meet FAA design standards for design group D-III Realignment of the perimeter road and Owl Creek Road and Bike Path to account for the shift in the runway; will not impact conservation easement Associated relocation of NAVAIDs, runway and taxiway lighting, perimeter roadway, etc. Note: West Side Development (including a secondary FBO) is no longer being considered. Airfield Reconfiguration and Terminal projects were combined into one EA for efficiencies and to analyze all impacts. P 6 I . Proposed Actions (continued) The Environmental Assessment will analyze the following proposed actions: Construction of a replacement terminal (2 concepts) Associated parking and roadway reconfiguration and integration with public transit Relocation of the ground service equipment building Demolition of existing facilities Commercial service apron expansion Piping of Owl Creek Construction of a noise barrier along the GA apron area P 7 I . EA Proposed Projects P 8 I . Community Input All community input received thus far will be included, plus all future input Extensive coffee chats, public meetings, local presentations were conducted during the Air Service Study regarding the Airfield Reconfiguration So far, 4 public workshops on Visioning and Terminal Preliminary Design Concept were conducted February, April, September, October 2015 9 Coffee Chats on both the Airfield Reconfiguration and the Terminal EA (Combined) P 9 I . Community Input: Terminal P 1 0 I . Community Input: Terminal P 1 1 I . P 1 2 I . Background to Purpose and Need: Runway Reconfiguration ASE currently has a 95 ft. wingspan restriction in place based on runway to taxiway separation distance Aircraft trends indicated that the aircraft with wingspans less than 95 ft. will be phased out, with half of the U.S. fleet retired by 2021 With wingspan restriction still in place, current air carriers would not be able to operate at ASE with future fleet FAA will not allow another MOD to allow larger wingspan without ASE meeting FAA standards of 400 feet separation In order to have future Design Group-III air service at ASE, the FAA is requiring the airfield to be brought into FAA compliance for that Design Group P 1 3 I . Purpose & Need –Runway Reconfiguration Purpose:The purpose of this project is to meet FAA design standards, allowing ASE to keep commercial service in the long-term. Need: The implementation of the runway reconfiguration will address the following needs: The current airfield does not meet the FAA design standards for D-III aircraft due to the deficient separation distance between the runway and taxiway. P 1 4 I . Purpose & Need –Terminal Replacement & East Side Projects East side improvements were recommended in the Master Plan due to: Existing Terminal Area deficiencies Apron issues Operational issues Roadway/connectivity issues Purpose: The purpose of the terminal replacement and associated east side projects is to optimize the safety and efficiency of the airport. Need: The implementation of the terminal replacement and associated projects will address the following needs: The existing terminal and terminal area is deficient in space with operational, safety and functional issues that does not currently meet the needs of passengers, staff and users. Apron is deficient in size and currently slopes into the terminal, creating safety hazards. GA Apron noise has been identified as an issue for surrounding communities and a need to mitigate this noise was identified in the master plan. P 1 5 I . What is Scoping? An Open Process for determining the issues to be addressed in the EA and identifying issues of critical concern related to the proposed actions. Scoping provides the opportunity to solicit input from those interested and affected parties to: Identify significant environmental issues to be analyzed Identify alternatives Identify other environmental processes occurring P 1 6 I . EA Process Submit to FAA for Finding Submit to BOCC for Local Review and Approval Prepare Final EA Addressing Public & Agency Comments Hold Public Hearing(s) Prepare and Publish Draft EA Conduct Environmental Studies Public Involvement EA Elements Official Public/Agency Review and 30-day Comment Period 18-20 Hold Public and Agency Scoping Meetings Solicit Public & Agency Concerns: 30-day Scoping Extensive Public Involvement Public comment during BOCC Public Hearing P 1 7 I . Environmental Consequences Categories to evaluate per FAA Order 1050.1F include: Air Quality Biological Resources (fish, wildlife and plants) Climate Department of Transportation: Section 4(f) Farmlands Hazardous Materials, Pollution Prevention, and Solid Waste Historical, Architectural, Archeological, and Cultural Resources Land use Natural Resources and Energy Supply Noise and compatible land use Socioeconomics, environmental justice and children’s environmental health and safety risks Visual Effects (including light emissions) Water Resources (wetlands, floodplains, surface waters, ground waters, wild and scenic rivers) P 1 8 I . Visual Resources P 1 9 I . Visual Resources P 2 0 I . Visual Resources P 2 1 I . Proposed Bike Path & Owl Creek Road Relocation P 2 2 I . Socioeconomic Impacts Examine pillow count analysis relative to proposed projects Examine positive and negative impacts Examine impacts of No Action (potential loss of commercial service) P 2 3 I . Proposed Noise Buffer & Monitors P 2 4 I . Air Quality & Climate Aspen/Pitkin County is in attainment for all National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) Currently in maintenance for Particulate Matter-10 Examine Greenhouse Gases Planned analysis includes: Modeled NAAQS emissions related to the project Modeled Greenhouse Gas emissions related to the project P 2 5 I . Existing Water Resources P 2 6 I . Historical & Cultural P 2 7 I . Potential for Larger Aircraft Source: Air Service Study, Manufacturers Coordination, Jviation, 2014 *Data on E-Jets E-2 are preliminary ** Potentially performance capable, but likely limited during hotter summer months. Pending airline coordination will help determine if these aircraft could meet airline safety requirements for performance. Aircraft Technical Specifications -ASE Aircraft Type Wingspan ASE Performance Capable Meets/Does Not Meet ASE Operational Restrictions Feet/Inches Meter Current Regional Aircraft CRJ-700 76' 3"23.2 Yes Meets Q-400 93' 3"28.4 Yes Meets CRJ-900 81' 7"24.9 No Meets CRJ-1000 85' 11"26.2 No Meets E-170 85' 4"26 No Meets E-175 85' 4"26 No Meets E-190 94' 3"28.7 No Meets E-195 94' 3"28.7 No Meets Future Regional Aircraft E-175 E2 101’ 7”31.0 Yes*Does not meet E-190 E2 110’ 6”33.7 Yes*Does not meet E-195 E2 110’ 6”33.7 TBD*Does not meet MRJ-70 Standard 95' 9"29.2 TBD Does not meet MRJ-90 Standard 95' 9"29.2 TBD Does not meet CS100 Base 115’ 1”35.1 Yes Does not meet CS300 Base 115’ 1”35.1 Yes Does not meet Comparison Non-Regional Aircraft Airbus A319 111' 11"34.1 Yes**Does not meet Boeing 737-700 117 '5"35.7 Yes**Does not meet Boeing 717 93' 5"28.5 Yes**Does not meet P 2 8 I . Comments on Other Resources Biological Resources (fish, wildlife and plants) Farmlands Hazardous Materials, Pollution Prevention, and Solid Waste Land use Natural Resources and Energy Supply P 2 9 I . Additional Comments We are collecting additional scoping comments after the meeting, at Kate.Andrus@meadhunt.com by end of March or on Pitkin Connect (www.pitkincountyconnect.com) P 3 0 I .