8NTENTS

CHANDLER MUNICIPAL AIRPORT

Chandler, Arizona

AIRPORT MASTER PLAN

INTRODUCTION

AIRPORT USERS I-I

STUDY OBJECTIVES 1-2

AIRPORT ROLE 1-3

Chapter One

INVENTORY

AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT HISTORY 1-2

Chandler Airport Commission 1-2

AIRPORT SETTING 1-3

AIRPORT FACILITIES 1-3

Airside Facilities 1-3

TERMINAL AREA FACILITIES 1-8

General Aviation Terminal Building 1-8

Aircraft Parking Apron 1-8

Aircraft Hangar Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1-8

Fixed Base And Specialty Operators 1-9

Fuel Facilities 1-10

Utilities 1-10

AIRSPACE AND AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL 1-11
Chapter One (Continued)

Airspace Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1-11

Area Airports 1-13

Air Traffic Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1-15

SOCIOECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS 1-15

Population 1-15

Employment 1-16

Income 1-17

AIRPORT AREA LAND USE AND

TRANSPORTATION CONSIDERATIONS 1-19

Transportation Network 1-19

CLIMATE 1-19

SUMMARY 1-21

Chapter Two

AVIATION DEMAND FORECASTS

FORECASTING METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2-2

NATIONAL AVIATION TRENDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2-3

AIRPORT SERVICE AREA 2-6

SOCIOECONOMIC PROJECTIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2-7

Population 2-7

Employment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2-9

GENERAL AVIATION FORECASTS 2-10

Based Aircraft Forecasts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2-10

Based Aircraft Fleet Mix 2-16

Annual General Aviation Operations 2-17

MILITARY ACTIVITY 2-20

PEAKING CHARACTERISTICS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2-21

ANNUAL INSTRUMENT APPROACHES 2-22

FORECAST SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2-23

Chapter Three

FACILITY REQUIREMENTS

AIRFIELD CAPACITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3-1

Capacity Analysis 3-3

Conclusions 3-5

AIRFIELD REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3-6

Runways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3-9

Taxiways 3-12

Navigational Aids And Lighting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3-12
Chapter Three (Continued)

LANDSIDE REQUIREMENTS 3-14

General Aviation Facilities 3-14

AVIATION SUPPORT FACILITIES 3-18

Air Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3-18

Airport Access And Vehicle Parking 3-19

Fuel Storage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3-20

SUMMARY 3-22

Chapter Four

DEVELOPMENTALTERNATnffiS

DO-NOTHING ALTERNATIVE 4-2

TRANSFER AVIATION SERVICES 4-3

CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW AIRPORT SITE 4-4

AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES 4-5

Airfield Alternative Considerations 4-5

Airfield Alternative A 4-11

Airfield Alternative B 4-13

Airfield Alternative C 4-13

Airfield Alternative D 4-14

Landside Alternative Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4-15

Landside Alternative A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4-17

Landside Alternative B 4-19

Landside Alternative C 4-20

SUMMARY 4-20

Chapter Five

AIRPORT PLANS

DESIGN STANDARDS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5-2

AIRPORT LAYOUT DRAWING 5-2

TERMINAL AREA PLAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5-4

AIRSPACE PLAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5-5

Approach Zones Profiles 5-6

Runway Protection Zone Plans and Profiles 5-7

ON-AIRPORT LAND USE PLAN 5-7

Airport Property Plan 5-8
Chapter Six

FINANCIAL PLAN

AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULES

AND COST SUMMARIES 6-1

Short Term Improvements 6-2

Intermediate Term Development 6-5

Long Range Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . .. 6-5

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUNDING 6-5

Federal Aid To Airports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 6-5

FAA Facilities And Equipment Program 6-7

State Aid To Airports. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 6-8

Local Funding 6-9

SUMMARY 6-14

MARKET RENT ANALYSIS

EXHIBITS

lA LOCATION MAP after page 1-4

IB EXISTING AIRPORT FACILITIES 0 •••••• after page 1-4

lC AREA AIRSPACE after page 1-8

1D CHANDLER MUNICIPAL AIRPORT

LAND USE PLAN after page 1-20

2A U.S. ACTIVE GENERAL AVIATION

AIRCRAFT FORECASTS after page 2-6

2B AIRCRAFT SERVICE AREA after page 2-8

2C BASED AIRCRAFT PROJECTIONS after page 2-16

2D ANNUAL OPERATIONS PROJECTIONS after page 2-20

3A AIRPORT REFERENCE CODES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. after page 3-8

3B WINDROSE after page 3-10

3C AIRFIELD REQUIREMENTS 0 •••••••••• after page 3-22

3D LANDSIDE REQUIREMENTS after page 3-22

4A AIRFIELD ALTERNATIVE A

1,700' NORTH - 250' SOUTH After page 4-12

4B AIRFIELD ALTERNATIVE A

NOISE EXPOSURE CONTOURS After page 4-12

4C AIRFIELD ALTERATIVE B

1,450' NORTH - 500' SOUTH After page 4-14

4D AIRFIELD ALTERNATIVE B

NOISE EXPOSURE CONTOURS After page 4-14
EXHIBITS (Continued)

4E AIRFIELD ALTERNATIVE C

1,450' NORTH - 250' SOUTH After page 4-14

4F AIRFIELD ALTERNATIVE C

NOISE EXPOSURE CONTOURS After page 4-14

4G AIRFIELD ALTERNATIVE D

1,700' NORTH - 500' SOUTH After page 4-14

4H AIRFIELD ALTERNATIVE D

NOISE EXPOSURE CONTOURS After page 4-16

4J LANDSIDE ALTERNATIVE A After page 4-18

4K LANDSIDE ALTERNATIVE B After page 4-20

4L LANDSIDE ALTERATIVE C After page 4-20

COVER SHEET . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. after page 5-8

AIRPORT LAYOUT DRAWING after page 5-8

TERMINAL AREA DRAWING after page 5-8

PART 77 AIRSPACE DRAWING after page 5-8

APPROACH PROFILES DRAWING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. after page 5-8

INNER PORTION OF RUNWAY 4R APPROACH

SURFACE DRAWING after page 5-8

INNER PORTION OF RUNWAY 22L APPROACH

SURFACE DRAWING after page 5-8

INNER PORTION OF RUNWAY 4L-22R APPROACH

SURFACE DRAWING after page 5-8

ON-AIRPORT LAND USE DRAWING after page 5-8

AIRPORT PROPERTY MAP after page 5-8

6A SHORT TERM PLANNING HORIZON

IMPROVEMENTS, FY-2000 THROUGH FY-2004 ..... after page 6-4

6B INTERMEDIATE TERM PLANNING HORIZON

IMPROVEMENTS (6 to 10 years) after page 6-6

6C LONG RANGE PLANNING HORIZON

IMPROVEMENTS (10 to 20 years) after page 6-6
INTRODUCTION ,I~..... ---------------------- II' v CHANDLER MUNICIPAL AIRPORT

P AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
INTRODUCTION CHANDLER

MUNICIPAL

AIRPORT

The Chandler Municipal Airport Master

Plan is being fina11ced through a

cooperative effort by the City of

Cha11dler and the Arizona Department of

Tra11sportation (ADOT), Aeronautics

Division. This Airport Master Plan is a

comprehensive study providing a11

analysis of airport needs, defi11i11g its role

within the regional airport system, and

evaluating alternatives with the purpose

of providing direction for the future

development of this facility.

This Master Plan will replace the

previous Master Pla11 which was

completed in 1982. It is typical for

communities to periodically update their

Airport's Master Plan particularly in

view of the dramatic changes occurri11g

in both the aviation industry and in the

Phoenix Metropolitan Area.

The commitment to conduct this Master

Plan is evidence that the City of

Chandler recognizes both the challenges

inherent in providing for the future

I-I

aviation needs as well as the importance

of Chandler Municipal Airport to the

community and Phoenix Metropolita11

Area. The cost of maintaining a viable

airport is an investment which can yield

impressive benefits to a commu11ity. By

maintaining a sound, flexible master

plan, Chandler Municipal Airport will

continue to be an eco11omic asset and a

source of pride for the residents of the

City of Cha11dler and the surrou11ding

regio11.

AIRPORT USERS

The FAA currently defines three broad

categories of aviatio11 activity: air carrier,

ge11eral aviation, a11d military. Cha11dler

MU11icipal Airport is served only by

general aviation activity. General

aviation includes every type of civil

flying other tha11 certificated air carriers

and military. General aviation flyi11g or

usage falls into four major categories.
STUDY OBJECTIVES

To accomplish the objective of this

study, the Airport Master Plan will

supply the following information:

• Inventory of Existing

Conditions - Assemble and

organize relevant information

and data for Chandler Municipal

Airport, the City of Chandler,

and Maricopa County.

•

•

•

Business - The use of an

aircraft for executive or business

transportation. This category

consists of aircraft used by an

organization and operated by

professional pilots to transport

its employees and property (not

for compensation or hire) and

aircraft used by an individual for

transportation required for his

or her business.

Commercial - The use of an

aircraft for commercial purpose

(other than commuter and air

carrier), including: air taxi,

aerial application, special

industrial usage, aerial surveys,

advertising, aerial photography,

and emergency medical

transportation.

Instructional - The use of an

aircraft for flight training under

the supervision of an instructor.

•

•

Forecasts - Develop detailed

projections of future aviation

activity, by quantity and type.

Facility Requirements

Estimate the current and future

levels of airfield capacity and

delay. Identify the facility

requirements needed to meet

projected demand for existing,

short, intermediate, and long

term time frames.

• Personal - The use of an

aircraft for a variety of personal

reasons.

General aviation is the largest and

most significant element of the national

air transportation system. According

to the National Plan of Integrated

Airport Systems (NPIAS), general

aviation aircraft constitute

approximately 98 percent of all aircraft

in use today. Certificated airlines

serve fewer than 600 airports in the

country, while there are more than

15,000 general aviation airports in the

United States. General aviation

provides the time saving link for

corporate travel that has made the

shift to smaller communities feasible

and extremely attractive.

1-2

•

•

•

Airport Alternatives

Evaluate concepts of the various

alternatives for airport

development as determined by

current and future facility

requirements.

Airport Layout Plan - Refine

the recommended airport

development concept into the

airport's final plan for

development.

Financial Plan - Prepare a

capital improvement program to

assist in the implementation of

the recommended development

plan. Establish development

priorities, schedule proposed

development items and estimate
development costs, as well as a

determination of the airport's

future cash flow. Conduct a

rates and charge analysis and

prepare "draft" policy regarding

rates and charges.

One of the most important elements of

the planning process is the direct

involvement of those parties which

could potentially be most affected by

the results of this study. This is

accomplished through the use of a

Planning Advisory Committee (PAC),

which reviews the work of the study

team. The PAC will meet four times

during the preparation of the Airport

Master Plan document. In addition,

two Public Information Workshops will

be held during the preparation of the

study, providing the general public

with an opportunity to obtain

information about the study and to

present comments and concerns. With

the assistance of local input, the

Master Plan for Chandler Municipal

Airport will reflect the necessary future

development needed to meet the

growing aviation demands of both the

community and the region.

1-3

AIRPORT ROLE

Owned and operated by the City of

Chandler, the Chandler Municipal

Airport is classified in the NPIAS as a

reliever airport to Phoenix Sky Harbor

International Airport. The 290 reliever

airports across the country have an

average of 207 based aircraft and

account for 29 percent of the nation's

general aviation fleet. Reliever

airports are located in major

metropolitan areas and serve to provide

pilots with an attractive alternative to

using congested hub airports. Airports

classified in the NPIAS are eligible for

federal funding from the Airport

Improvement Program (AlP).

This Master Plan will examine and

consider all of the activities currently

taking place at Chandler Municipal

Airport and strive to produce a plan

that will support all airport users while

at the same time remain sensitive to

environmental and community

concerns.
Chapter Three

FACILITY REQUIREMENTS

CHANDLER MUNICIPAL AIRPORT

AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
CHAPTER THREE

1\C L Y

EQUIREME TS

CHANDLER

MUNICIPAL

AIRPORT

To properly plan for the future of

Chandler Municipal Airport, it is

necessary to translate forecast aviation

demand into the specific types and

quantities of facilities that can adequately

serve this identified demand. This

chapter uses the results of the forecasts

conducted in Chapter Two, as well as

establishing planning criteria, to

determine the airfield (i.e., runways,

taxiways, navigational aids, marking and

lighting), and landside (i.e., hangars,

general aviation terminal building,

aircraft parking apron, fueling,

automobile parking and access) facility

requirements.

The objective of this effort is to identify,

in general terms, the adequacy of the

existing airport facilities, outline what

new facilities may be needed, and when

these may be needed to accommodate

forecast demands. Having established

3-1

these facility requirements, alternatives

for providing these facilities will be

evaluated in Chapter Four to determine

the most cost-effective and efficient

means for implementation.

AIRFIELD CAPACITY

Analysis of airfield capacity and delay

was examined for this master plan

utilizing FAA Advisory Circular (AC)

150/5060-5, Airport Capacity and Delay.

The methodology presented in this

advisory circular and utilized here

produces statements of airfield capacity

in the following major terms:

Hourly Capacity of Runways: The

maximum number of aircraft operations

that can take place in one hour.

Weighted Hourly Capacity: Average of

hourly capacities for various runway
use scenarios weighted according to

percentage of use.

Annual Service Volume: The annual

capacity or a maximum level of aircraft

operations that may be used as a

reference in planning the runway

system.

Annual Aircraft Delay: Total delay

incurred by all aircraft on the airfield in

one year.

The capacity of an airport is affected by

several factors including airfield layout,

meteorological conditions, runway use,

aircraft mix, percent arrivals, percent

touch-and-go's, and exit taxiway

locations. These factors are described

in the following paragraphs.

• Airfield layout refers to the

location and orientation of the

runways, taxiways, and terminal

area. Exhibit IB depicted the

existing layout of Chandler

Municipal Airport including two

runways in a parallel configuration.

Primary Runway 4R-22L is 4,850

feet long by 75 feet wide, while

parallel Runway 4L-22R is 4,395 feet

long by 75 feet wide. The runways

are separated by 700 feet runway

centerline to centerline. Designed

primarily for general aviation

operations, Runway 4R-22L is

strength-rated at 30,000 pounds

single gear wheel loading (SWL)

while Runway 4L-22R is strength

rated at 14,000 pounds SWL.

• Meteorological conditions

analysis considers weather

conditions as they affect runway

utilization, orientation, and aircraft

separation requirements. With the

3-2

desert climate, Chandler Municipal

Airport operates under VFR

conditions over 98 percent of the

time, while IFR conditions exist

approximately two percent of the

time.

• Runway use refers to the

percentage of time each runway

configuration is utilized, the number

of runways, and the runway

orientation. Discussions with air

traffic control tower (ATCT) staff

indicates that Runway 4R-22L is

utilized primarily for training

operations in order to keep traffic

patterns on the south side of the

airport. Because it is located nearer

the terminal area, Runway 4L-22R is

utilized for transient operations and

some training operations.

Approximately 60 percent ofthe total

operations at the airport are

conducted on Runway 4R-22L. The

direction oftake-offs and landings is

often determined by the direction of

the prevailing winds. Wind data

collected from the area and

discussion with ATCT indicate that

winds are generally from the eastsoutheast or west-southwest, thus,

Runways 4 and 22 are utilized an

equal percentage of the time.

• Aircraft mix for the capacity

analysis is defined in terms of the

four aircraft classes. The aircraft

mix at Chandler Municipal Airport

currently includes three of the four

classes. Classes A and B consist of

small and medium-sized propeller

aircraft and some jets, all weighing

12,500 pounds or less. These aircraft

are associated primarily with general

aviation activity, but do include some

air taxi and commuter aircraft. The
current aircraft mix also includes a

small percentage of Class C aircraft

which consists of aircraft weighing

between 12,500 pounds and 300,000

pounds. These aircraft include all

business jets as well as larger

general aviation and commuter

propeller aircraft. Most businessjets

and propellor driven aircraft which

fall into Class C weigh less than

60,000 pounds. For Chandler

Municipal Airport, current and

future Class C aircraft utilizing the

airport will be large turbo-prop and

business jet aircraft.

• Percent arrivals as they relate to

the total operations of the airport is

important in determining capacity.

Under most circumstances, the lower

the percentage ofarrivals, the higher

the hourly capacity. Except in

unique circumstances, the aircraft

arrival-departure split at general

aviation airports is typically 50-50.

At Chandler Municipal Airport,

traffic information indicated no

significant deviation from this

pattern, and arrivals were estimated

to account for 50 percent of design

period operations.

• Percent touch-and-go analyzes the

percentage of total aircraft

operations that are training

operations. A touch-and-go operation

is normally associated with general

aviation training and involves an

aircraft making a landing and an

immediate take-off without coming

to a full stop or exiting the runway.

A high percentage of touch-and-go

traffic normally results in a slightly

higher operational capacity. At

3-3

Chandler Municipal Airport, touchand-go operations currently account

for 60 percent of annual operations.

It is likely that Chandler Municipal

Airport will remain primarily a

training facility. Therefore, this

percentage is expected to remain

relatively stable in the short term,

then decrease slightly over the

remainder of the planning period as

corporate aircraft usage increases.

• Exit taxiways have a significant

effect on airfield capacity since their

locations directly determine the

occupancy time of an aircraft on the

runway. Runway 4L-22R is

equipped with seven exits while

Runway 4R-22L is equipped with a

total offive exit taxiways which can

be used for aircraft operations.

Given the runway configuration, the

capacity analysis gives credit to exits

located within a prescribed range

from a runway's threshold. This

range is based upon the mix index of

the aircraft that use the runway.

Under this criteria, the exit range for

both runways is 2,000 to 4,000 feet.

The exits must be at least 750 feet

apart to be credited as separate

exits. Runways 4R, 22L, and 22R

have an exit rating of two, while

Runway 4L has an exit rating of

three.

CAPACITY ANALYSIS

The preceding information was used in

conjunction with the airside capacity

methodology developed by the FAA to

determine airfield capacity for Chandler

Municipal Airport.
Hourly Runway Capacity

The first step in the analysis involved

the computation of the runway hourly

capacity. Wind direction, the

percentage of IFR and PVC weather,

and the number and locations of

runway exits then become important

factors in determining the weighted

hourly capacity.

Considering the existing runway

system, the existing and forecast

aircraft mix, a touch-and-go factor of 50

percent, and the taxiway exit rating of

the existing runway, the hourly

capacity was computed. The existing

maximum hourly capacity during VFR

conditions totaled 263 operations per

hour, while IFR operations totaled 57

operations per hour.

The percentage of Class C aircraft is

projected to increase from three to

approximately eight percent for the

airport over the long range planning

horizon. This factor contributes to a

decline in the hourly capacity of the

runway system. In the long range, the

maximum hourly capacity ofthe current

runway system under VFR conditions

will decline to 243 operations. The

capacity of the airfield, however, will

not be exceeded by design hour demand

within the planning period.

The weighted hourly capacity averages

the hourly capacities of the runway in

VFR, IFR, and PVC conditions. At

Chandler Municipal Airport, the

weighted runway capacity is equal to

the hourly capacity because IFR and

PVC conditions occur an insignificant

percentage of the time.

3-4

Annual Service Volume

Once the weighted hourly capacity is

known, the annual service volume

(ASV) can be determined. ASV is

calculated by the following equation:

ASV= C xDXH

The current weighted hourly capacity

(c) is 247 operations per hour. The

current ratio of annual demand to

average daily demand (D) was

estimated to be 336. This is expected to

remain constant over the long range

planning period. The ratio of average

daily demand to average peak hour

demand (H) was estimated to be 5.5 in

1998. As operations increase, the

percentage of hourly operations is

expected to increase as operations will

spread out throughout the day

becoming less concentrated in any given

hour.

The current ASV for Chandler

Municipal Airport was determined to be

456,000 operations. As mentioned

earlier, the percentage of Class C

aircraft utilizing the airport is expected

to increase to approximately eight

percent. Although a higher Class C mix

would result in a lower ASV, the

increase in the hourly ratio contributes

to a ASV increase to 512,000 operations

in the long range. With operations in

1998 totaling 190,192, the airport is

currently at 42 percent of its annual

service volume. Long range annual

operations are forecast to reach 300,000

operations which would equal 59

percent ofthe airport's ASV. Table 3A

summarizes the airport's ASV over the

long range planning horizon.
Annual Delay

As an airport approaches capacity, it

begins to experience increasing

amounts ofdelay to aircraft operations.

Delays occur to arriving and departing

aircraft during both VFR and IFR

conditions. Arriving aircraft delays

result in aircraft holding in the airport

traffic pattern or waiting. Departing

aircraft delays result in aircraft holding

on the taxiway or apron until safety

allows for the aircraft to depart.

As an airport's operations increase,

delay increases exponentially. Because

Chandler Municipal Airport is primarily

utilized as a training facility and

weather conditions do not play an large

role in aircraft delay, annual delay at

Chandler Municipal Airport is currently

estimated at 634 hours. Analysis of

delay factors for the long range

planning horizon indicate that annual

delay can be expected to reach 3,000

hours. Table 3A summarizes the

capacity analysis conducted for

Chandler Municipal Airport.

TABLE3A

Demand/Capacity Summary

Chandler Municipal Airport

Short Intermediate Long

1998 Term Term Range

Annual Operations 190,192 207,000 250,000 300,000

Annual Service Volume Inputs

Weighted Hourly Capacity 247 242 235 228

Daily Demand Ratio 336 336 336 336

Hourly Demand Ratio 5.5 5.9 6.3 6.7

Annual Service Volume 456,000 480,000 497,000 512,000

Average Delay per Operation 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.6

(min)

Total Annual Delay (hours) 634 1,035 1,667 3,000

CONCLUSIONS

From the analysis, it was determined

that annual operations at Chandler

Municipal Airport are anticipated to

reach approximately 59 percent of the

airport's ASV in the long range of the

planning period. FAA Order 5090.3B,

Field Formulation of the National

Plan ofIntegrated Airport Systems

(NPIAS), indicates that improvements

to capacity should be planned once

operations reach 60 percent of the

3-5

airport's ASV. If operations and

aircraft mix equal levels projected for

the long range, the airport will not need

to make capacity improvements.

In addition to the basic capacity

requirements, several other facility

components must be examined to

ensure that the airport is properly

planned to meet the future needs. The

following sections will outline the

facility needs associated with future

demand. That information, combined
with this capacity analysis, will provide

the background for examining various

alternatives to meet future aviation

demands of the Chandler area.

AIRFIELD REQUIREMENTS

Airfield requirements include those

facilities related to the arrival and

departure of aircraft. These facilities

are comprised ofthe following items:

• Runways

• Taxiways

• Airfield Marking and Lighting

• Navigational Aids

The selection of the appropriate FAA

design standards for the development of

the airfield facilities is based primarily

upon the characteristics of the aircraft

which are expected to use the airport.

The most critical characteristics are the

approach speed and the size of the

critical design aircraft anticipated to

use the airport now or in the future.

The critical design aircraft is defined as

the most demanding category ofaircraft

which conducts 500 or more operations

per year. Planning for future aircraft

use is of particular importance since

design standards are used to plan

separation distances between facilities.

These standards must be determined

now since the relocation of these

facilities will likely be extremely

expensive at a later date.

The Federal Aviation Administration

has established criteria for use in the

sizing and design of airfield facilities.

These standards include criteria which

relate to aircraft size and performance.

According to Federal Aviation Admini3-6

stration Advisory Circular CAC)

150/5300-13, Airport Design, an

aircraft's approach category is based

upon 1.3 times its stall speed in landing

configuration at that aircraft's

maximum certificated weight. The five

approach categories used in airport

planning are as follows:

Category A: Speeds of less than 91

knots.

Category B: Speeds of 91 knots or

more, but less than 121 knots.

Category C: Speeds of 121 knots or

more, but less than 141 knots.

Category D: Speeds of 141 knots or

more, but less than 166 knots.

Category E: Speeds of 166 knots or

greater.

The second basic design criteria relates

to aircraft size. The Airplane Design

Group (ADG) is based upon wingspan.

The six groups are as follows:

Group I: Up to but not including 49

feet.

Group II: 49 feet up to but not

including 79 feet.

Group III: 79 feet up to but not

including 118 feet.

Group IV: 118 feet up to but not

including 171 feet.

Group V: 171 feet up to but not

including 214 feet.

Group VI: 214 feet or greater.
Together, approach category and ADG

identify a coding system whereby

Airport design criteria are related to the

operational and physical characteristics

ofthe aircraft intended to operate at the

airport. This code, the Airport

Reference Code (ARC), has two

components: the first component,

depicted by a letter, is the aircraft

approach category and relates to

aircraft approach speed (operational

characteristic); the second component,

depicted by a Roman numeral, is the

airplane design group and relates to

aircraft wingspan (physical

characteristic). Generally, aircraft

approach speed applies to runways and

runway-related facilities, while airplane

wingspan primarily relates to

separation criteria involving taxiways

and taxilanes. Exhibit 3A graphically

depicts typical aircraft within their

associated ARC.

FAA advises designing all elements to

meet the requirements of the airport's

most demanding, or critical aircraft. As

discussed above, this is the aircraft, or

group ofaircraft conducting 500 or more

operations per year. In order to

determine the airport's facility

requirements, the ARC of the critical

aircraftshould first be determined, thus

enabling the application of appropriate

design criteria.

Chandler Municipal Airport is presently

utilized primarily by general aviation

aircraft ranging up to ARC B-II.

Discussions with ATCT officials

indicate that the airport is also utilized

by general aviation aircraft in

Categories C-I and C-II. Future

aircraft mix will likely include a larger

percentage of corporate aircraft falling

in Category C and D, Group II.

3-7

Increased corporate aircraft utilization

is typical at general aviation airports

surrounded by growing population and

employment centers. Once utilized only

by large conglomerate type

corporations, corporate aircraft

(especially jets) have been increasingly

utilized by a wider variety of

companies. According to FAA statistics,

active general aviation turbojet aircraft

and hours flown by these aircraft are

expected to increase on an average

annual basis of 2.7 percent and 1.9

percent respectively over the next

decade.

As companies shift away from

downtown locations to suburban areas

and smaller communities, utilization of

corporate aircraft has become a costeffective manner in which to transport

executives and other personnel. The

cost benefit can be attributed to the

newer, fuel efficient jet aircraft which

can close the expense gap between the

seat on the corporate jet versus the seat

on the commercial carrier.

Furthermore, many businesses simply

prefer the convenience provided by

corporate aircraft use versus utilizing

commercial air carriers at busy hub

airports such as the Phoenix Sky

Harbor International Airport.

Considering the sizeable industry

(especially high tech) and population

growth in the Chandler/Gilbert area, it

is not unlikely that area airports,

including Chandler Municipal Airport,

will be frequented by larger corporate

aircraft on the order of 500 or more

operations per year within the planning

period. The continued southwesterly

growth of the City of Chandler,

expansion of the Town of Gilbert, and

development of the adjacent airport
industrial park will likely contribute to

an increase in corporate aircraft activity

at the airport over the planning period.

It should be noted that Williams

Gateway Airport will likely serve the

majority of large jet aircraft needs of

the area due to the facilities and

development potential available at the

facility (longer runways, permanent

ATCT, larger apron space, etc.). Also, if

demands of the Phoenix area warrant

another cargo/commercial service

airport in southeastern Phoenix,

Williams Gateway would be capable of

accommodating this demand.

The existence or future potential of

Williams Gateway, however, will not

preclude the use ofChandler Municipal

Airport by the full range of corporate

aircraft. The development of an airport

industrial/commercial airpark and

growth of the population and

employment bases will likely increase

corporate aircraft usage at the Chandler

Municipal Airport. Thus, future facility

planning must include the potential for

the airport to be utilized by the full

range of business jets.

In the future, it is very likely that the

airport will be utilized on a regular

basis by a range of aircraft weighing up

to 30,000 pounds. The use of the

airport by aircraft weighing more than

30,000 pounds will depend upon the

employer make-up in the community

and/or near the airport. Most

companies prefer to operate business

jets versusflying on commercial aircraft

because ofconvenience and time saving.

Thus, most companies prefer to base

their aircraft closer to their business

location if at all possible. For planning

purposes, facility planning must

3-8

consider the possibility of business jets

weighing over 30,000 pounds basing or

utilizing the airport in the future.

In order to identify the critical aircraft

which will make at least 500 annual

operations, it is necessary to analyze

what type of aircraft corporate

operators might base at and/or utilize at

Chandler Municipal Airport on a

regular basis. It can be expected that

the majority of corporate aircraft

utilizing the airport in the future will be

multi-engine piston and turbo-prop

aircraft. It can also be expected that

business jet usage will increase above

the 500 annual operational level which

is used to identify the critical aircraft.

Thus, determination of the critical

aircraft must consider the business jet

most likely to operate at the airport

more than 500 times annually.

The previous chapter indicated that

eight business jets are forecasted to be

based at the airport in the long range of

the planning period. Thus, the

combination of operations by based

business jet aircraft along with

transient corporate jet operations will

determine the critical aircraft for the

airport.

According to FAA general aviation

business jet aircraft data, the Cessna

and Lear seriesjet aircraft comprise the

largest portion of active business jet

aircraft. Therefore, the most

demanding of these aircraft should be

considered. The Lear 35 and 55 are

classified as ARC D-I and C-I

respectively. The series of Cessna

Citation aircraft fall within ARC B-1

and B-II. Because it can be expected

that a mix of these aircraft will utilize

the airport more than 500 times
o Reference Codes that will not be served at Chandler Municipal Airport

Lear 25, 35,55

Israeli Westwind

HS 125

B727-200

B737-200

B737-300, 400, 500

DC-9

Fokker 70, 100

MD-80

A320

B-757

B~767

DC-8-70

DC-10

MD-11

L1011

B-747 Series

B-777

C-II, D-II

Gulfstream II, III, IV

-' Canadair 600

Canadair Regional Jet

..-.~~m·\\\~\\ Lockheed JetStar

Beech Baron 58

Beech Ki ng Ai r 100

Cessna 402

Cessna 421

Piper Navajo

Piper Cheyenne

Swearingen Metroliner

Cessna Citation I

Super King Air 300

Beech 1900

Jetstream 31

Falcon 10, 20, 50

Falcon 200, 900

Citation II, III, IV, V

Saab 340

Embraer 120

DHC Dash 7

DHC Dash 8

DC-3

Convair 580

Fairchild F-27

ATR 72

ATP

Beech Baron 55

Beech Bonanza

Cessna 150

-~'~-__I Cessna 172

Piper Archer

Piper Seneca

Super King Air 200

~~(;~~~~~~ Cessna 441

DHC Twin Otter

B-1, II

over 12,500 Ibs.

Exhibit 3A

AIRPORT REFERE CE CODES
annually, airport design standards

should at a minimum conform to FAA

criteria for Approach Category C and

Design Group II. It should be noted,

however, that larger aircraftsuch as the

Gulfstream IV (ARC D-II) could utilize

the airport 500 or more times annually.

Analysis presented below will consider

the runway lengths required by both CII and D-II aircraft.

The airfield facility requirements

outlined in this chapter correspond to

the design standards described in FAA's

Advisory Circular 150/5300-13,Airport

Design. The following airfield facilities

are outlined to describe the scope of

facilities that would be necessary to

accommodate the airport's role

throughout the planning period.

RUNWAYS

The adequacy of the existing runway

system at Chandler Municipal Airport

has been analyzed from a number of

perspectives, including runway

orientation, airfield capacity, runway

length, and pavement strength. From

this information, requirements for

runway improvements were determined

for the airport.

Runway Orientation

The parallel runway configuration at

Chandler Municipal Airport is oriented

in a northeast-southwest direction.

Ideally the primary runway at an

airport should be oriented as close as

practical in the direction of the

predominant winds to maximize the

runway's usage. This minimizes the

3-9

percent of time that a crosswind could

make the preferred runway inoperable.

FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13,

Change 1, Airport Design

recommends that a crosswind runway

should be made available when the

primary runway orientation provides

less than 95 percent wind coverage for

any aircraft forecast to use the airport

on a regular basis. The 95 percent wind

coverage is computed on the basis ofthe

crosswind component not exceeding 10.5

knots (12 mph) for Airport Reference

Codes (ARC) A-I and B-1; 13 knots (15

mph) for ARC A-II and B-II; and 16

knots (18 mph) for ARC C-I through DII.

Wind data specific to the airport was

not available, however, data for nearby

Williams Gateway Airport (1976-1986)

provides adequate information for this

study. This data was utilized in the

previous master plan and is graphically

depicted on the wind rose in Exhibit

3B. As depicted on the exhibit, Runway

orientation 4-22 provides 98.02 percent

coverage for 12 mph crosswinds, 99.88

percent at 15 mph, and 99.95 percent at

18 mph. Thus, the current runway

orientation provides adequate wind

coverage for aircraft expected to utilize

the airport and construction of a

crosswind runway is unnecessary.

Runway Length

The determination of runway length

requirements for the airport are based

on five primary factors:

• Critical aircraft type expected to use

the airport.
• Stage length of the longest nonstop

trip destinations.

• Mean maximum daily temperature of

the hottest month.

• Runway gradient.

• Airport elevation.

An analysis of the existing and future

fleet mix indicates that business jets

will be the most demanding aircraft on

runway length at Chandler Municipal

Airport. The typical business aircraft

range from the Cessna Citation I, with

minimal runway length requirements,

to the Citation III and the Lear Jet

models 25 and 35, requiring longer

runway lengths.

Aircraft operating characteristics are

affected by three primary factors. They

are the mean maximum temperature of

the hottest month, the airport's

elevation, and the gradient of the

runway. The mean maximum daily

temperature of the hottest month for

Chandler Municipal Airport is 103.8

degrees Fahrenheit. The airport

elevation is 1,242 feet MSL. Gradient

for Runway 4L-22R is 0.18 percent

while gradient for Runway 4R-22L is

0.16 percent.

Table 3B outlines the runway length

requirements for various classifications

of aircraft that utilize Chandler

Municipal Airport. These standards

were derived from the FAA Airport

Design Computer Program for

recommended runway lengths. As with

other design criteria, runway length

requirements are based upon the

critical aircraft grouping with at least

500 annual operations.

3-10

Based upon the existing aircraft fleet

operating at Chandler Municipal

Airport and the forecasted aircraft fleet

projected .through the long range

planning period, Chandler Municipal

Airport should be designed to

accommodate, at a minimum, the

Cessna Citation and Lear business jets

for domestic flights within the

continental United States. Currently,

the length of the longest runway

(Runway 4L-22R) is 4,850 feet. This

length exceeds the requirements for

small airplanes, but falls short of the

requirements for ARC C aircraft.

According to the FAA design program,

to fully accommodate 75 percent of

these aircraft at 60 percent useful load

(ARC C aircraft), the runway length

should be 5,500 feet. Thus, in order to

accommodate the critical aircraft,

Runway 4L-22R should be extended

1,100 feet, or Runway 4R-22L should be

extended 650 feet.

Analysis ofrunway length requirements

should also consider the possibility of

larger corporate aircraft basing or

operating at Chandler Municipal

Airport. The Gulfstream IV (G-IV) is an

example of a large, D-II aircraft which

could utilize the airport 500 times

annually. According to FAA statistics,

there are currently 203 G-IV aircraft

operating in the U.S. In fact, one G-IV

aircraft is owned by the Dial

Corporation which has offices in

Scottsdale. If a company which owns a

G-IV aircraft locates to the Chandler

area, or if a company owning a G-IV

aircraft conducts business in the

Chandler area, it is possible that the GIV could operate at the airport 500

times annually. Thus, runway length

requirements should consider this

aircraft.
MAGNETIC VARIANCE

RATE OF CHANGE: 0.2' W

12° 18' E (FEBRUARY 1997)

"fjiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiil

C\I

III

C?

"

o

CO

C»

WIND COVERAGE

12 MPH 15 MPH 18 MPH

(14 KNOTS) <17 KNOTS) (20 KNOTS)

Runways 4-22 98.02% 99.88% 99.95%

SOURCE:

USAFETAC

Air Weather Service (MAC)

DATA STATION:

Williams Air Force Base

Mesa, Arizona

OBSERVATIONS:

53,403 Observations

1976-1986

Exhibit 3B

WINDROSE
According to Table 3B, a runway

measuring 6,800 feet would be needed

to accommodate the G-IV aircraft (100

percent of business jets at 60 percent

useful load). This would require a 1,950

foot extension to Runway 4R-22L, or a

TABLE3B

Runway Length Requirements

Chandler Municipal Airport

2,400 foot extension to Runway 4L-22R.

Alternative analysis conducted in the

next chapter will further refine runway

lengths needed to accommodate aircraft

for the planning period.

AIRPORT AND RUNWAY DATA

Airport elevation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1,042 feet

Mean daily maximum temperature of the hottest month. . . . . . . . . . . .. 103.8 F

Maximum difference in runway centerline elevation 8 feet

RUNWAY LENGTHS RECOMMENDED FOR AIRPORT DESIGN

Small airplanes with less than 10 passenger seats

75 percent of these small airplanes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3,100 feet

95 percent of these small airplanes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3,700 feet

100 percent of these small airplanes 4,300 feet

Small airplanes with 10 or more passengers seats 4,800 feet

Large airplanes of 60,000 pounds or less

75 percent of business jets at 60 percent useful load . . . . . . . . . . .. 5,500 feet

100 percent of business jets at 60 percent useful load 6,800 feet

REFERENCE: FAA's airport design computer software utilizing Chapter Two of AC

150/5325-4A, Runway Length Requirements for Airport Design,

no Changes included.

Runway Width Runway Strength

Both runways at the airport are

currently 75 feet wide. This width is

adequate for aircraft in Approach

Categories A and B. However, FAA

design standards call for a 100-foot

width for Approach Category C and D.

Therefore, any runway that will serve

Category C or D aircraft on a regular

basis should be widened to 100 feet.

Alternative analysis conducted in the

next chapter will determine which

runway should be widened to 100 feet.

3-11

As previously mentioned, Runway 4L22R has a pavement strength of 14,000

pounds SWL while Runway 4L-22R is

strength rated at 30,000 pounds SWL.

This is adequate for aircraft that

currently use the airport on a regular

basis. For example, the Cessna

Citation VI can weigh up to 22,000

pounds on dual wheel gear loading

(DWL).
As mentioned earlier, the airport could

potentially be served by larger business

jets such as the G-IV. Aircraft such as

the G-IV would need a pavement

strength of 60,000 pounds DWL.

Alternative analysis conducted in the

next chapter will further refine the

pavement strength needs for the

runways over the long range planning

period.

TAXIWAYS

Taxiways are constructed primarily to

facilitate aircraft movements to and

from the runway system. Some

taxiways are necessary simply to

provide access between the aprons and

runways, whereas other taxiways

become necessary as activity increases

at an airport to provide safe and

efficient use of the airfield.

Both runways at the airport are served

by a full length parallel taxiway.

Runway 4L-22R, however, has only a

partial parallel taxiway on the north

side of the runway providing access to

the current terminal area. The runway

is served by a full length parallel

taxiway on the south side ofthe runway

which was constructed to serve future

development on the south side of the

airport.

In order to Inaximize operational

efficiency, the partial parallel taxiway

serving the north side of Runway 4L22R should be extended the full length

of the runway. Runway 4L-22R is

served by seven exit taxiways while

Runway 4R-22L is served by five exit

taxiways. Ifthe runway is extended, an

additional exit taxiway will be required

at the extended end. For airfield

efficiency, an additional midfield exit

3-12

should also be considered on Runway

4R-22L.

The width of all existing taxiways is 40

feet. This will be adequate for the

aircraft that are anticipated to operate

at Chandler Municipal Airport over the

long range. All planned taxiways

should be a minimum of 35 feet wide in

order to accommodate aircraft

anticipated to utilize the airport in the

future.

NAVIGATIONAL AIDS

AND LIGHTING

Airport and runway navigational aids

are based on FAA recommendations as

depicted in DOT/FAA Handbook

7031.2B, Airway Planning Standard

Number One and FAA Advisory

Circular 150/5300-2D, Airport Design

Standards, Site Requirements for

Terminal Navigation Facilities.

Navigational aids provide two primary

services to airport operations, precision

guidance to specific runway and/or nonprecision guidance to a runway or the

airport itself. The basic difference

between a precision and non-precision

navigational aid is that the former

provides electronic descent, alignment

(course), and position guidance, while

the non-precision navigational aid

provides only alignment and position

location information. The necessity of

such equipment is usually determined

by design standards predicated on

safety considerations and operational

needs. The type, purpose and volume of

aviation activity expected at the airport

are factors in the determination of the

airport's eligibility for navigational

aids.
Global Positional System

The advancement of technology has

been one of the most important factors

in the growth ofthe aviation industry in

the twentieth century. Much ofthe civil

aviation and aerospace technology has

been derived and enhanced from the

initial development of technological

improvements for military purposes.

The use of orbiting satellites to confirm

an aircraft's location is the latest

military development to be made

available to the civil aviation

community.

Global positioning systems (GPS) use

two or more satellites to derive an

aircraft's location by a triangulation

method. The accuracy ofthese systems

has been remarkable, with initial

degrees of error of only a few meters.

As the technology improves, it is

anticipated that GPS may be able to

provide accurate enough position

information to allow Category II and III

precision instrument approaches,

independent of any existing groundbased navigational facilities. In

addition to the navigational benefits, it

has been estimated that GPS

equipment will be much less costly than

existing precision instrument landing

systems.

Currently, Chandler Municipal Airport

is served by an NDB approach to

Runway 4R and VORJGPS approach to

Runway 4L. The VORJGPS approach

provides the best weather minimums

allowing the airport to remain

operational with reported cloud ceilings

of at least 400 feet and one mile

visibility. With the evolution of GPS,

however, it is likely that Chandler

Municipal Airport will have the

opportunity to be served by a GPS

3-13

instrument approach in the future

which would allow the airport to remain

operational with Category I (CAT I)

weather minimums. Therefore, the

airport should be planned for GPS

approaches.

Because the cost of implementing a

CAT I GPS approach is much lower

than traditional instrument landing

system (ILS) equipment, at least one

end of the runway system should be

planned for a CAT I approach. A CAT I

approach will allow the runway to

remain operational with visibility of

one-half mile and cloud ceilings of at

least 200 feet. The main consideration

in implementing a CAT I approach is

the required separation and obstruction

clearances. A cleared 50 to 1 approach

slope is desired, however, a cleared 34

to 1 approach slope can accommodate a

CAT I approach. The next chapter will

further discuss separation and

obstruction clearance criteria and

analyze which runway end should be

planned for a CAT I GPS approach.

Airport Visual Approach Aids

Visual glide slope indicators (VGSI) are

a system of lights located at the side of

the runway which provide visual

descent guidance information during an

approach to the runway. Both ends of

the runway are currently equipped with

VGSI systems at Chandler Municipal

Airport. Runway 4R-22L is equipped

with a four box precision approach path

indicator (PAPI-4) while Runway 4L22R is equipped with a two-box visual

approach path indicators (VASI-2).

While two-box systems are adequate for

use by propeller aircraft, four-box

systems are recommended for use by

business jet aircraft. Therefore, the
primary runway should be served by a

four box system.

Airfield Lighting and Marking

Runway identification lighting provides

the pilot with a rapid and positive

identification of the runway end. The

most basic system involves runway end

identifier lights (REIL's). REIL's

should be considered for all lighted

runways not planned for a more

sophisticated approach light system

(ALS). Currently, both ends ofRunway

4R-22L are equipped with REIL's, while

Runway 4L-22R should be planned for

REIL's in the future.

An approach light system should be

planned for at least one runway end in

order to establish CAT I minimums for

the planned GPS approach. A medium

intensity approach light system with

runway alignment indicator lights

(MALSR) is required for a GPS

approach to attain the visibility

minimums to one-half mile. If

obstructions and/or clearances

surrounding the airport dictate that the

runway can only be served by a GPS

approach with three quarters of a mile

visibility, an omni-directional approach

lighting system (ODALS) would be

required.

The medium intensity runway lighting

(MIRL) and medium intensity taxiway

lighting (MITL) currently serving both

runways and taxiways areas will be

adequate for the planning period. The

runway ultimately served by a GPS

precision approach should be upgraded

to precision marking while the other

runways should be marked with

nonprecision marking.

3-14

The airport also presently has a wind

cone and segmented circle which

provides pilots with information about

wind conditions. In addition, an airport

beacon assists in identifying the airport

from the air at night. Each of the

facilities should be maintained in the

future.

LANDSIDEREQUIREMENTS

Landside facilities are those necessary

for handling ofaircraft, passengers, and

cargo while on the ground. These

facilities provide the essential interface

between the air and ground transportation modes. These areas will be

subdivided into two parts: general

aviation facilities, and supportfacilities.

The capacities of the various

components ofeach area were examined

in relation to projected demand to

identify future landside facility needs.

GENERAL AVIATION

FACILITIES

The purpose of this section is to

determine the space requirements

during the planning period for the

following types of facilities normally

associated with general aviation

terminal areas:

• Hangars

• Aircraft Parking Apron

• General Aviation Terminal

Hangars

The space required for hangar facilities

is dependent upon the number and type

of aircraft expected to be based at the
airport. Based upon an analysis of

general aviation facilities and the

current demand at Chandler Municipal

Airport, percentages representing

hangar requirements for various types

of general aviation aircraft have been

calculated. The analysis indicates

approximately 60 percent of based

aircraft at the airport are hangared

while the remaining aircraft remain

tied down on the apron area or in

shaded tie-downs.

Weather conditions at Chandler

Municipal Airport, including blowing

dust and extreme heat in the summer

as well as an active three year hangar

waiting list, suggests most based

aircraft owners prefer hangar space to

outside tie-downs. Since this is their

preference, it is necessary to determine

what percentages of these aircraft

would utilize conventional-type and

shade tie-down hangars as opposed to

individual T-hangars. T-hangars are

relatively inexpensive to construct and

provide the aircraft owner more privacy

and greater ease in obtaining access to

the aircraft. The principal uses of

conventional hangars at general

aviation airports are for large aircraft

storage, storage during maintenance,

and for housing fixed base operator

activities.

From the analysis in Table 3C, it

appears that conventional hangar

storage space is currently needed. Also,

additional conventional hangers are

needed in the intermediate term and

long range as an increase oflarger and

more sophisticated aircraft base at the

airport. Also, as existing conventional

hangars age, they may need to be

replaced. Furthermore, the

3-15

airport should always have space

available to accommodate corporate

hangars as an attraction for new

businesses considering relocation to the

Chandler/Gilbert area.

Presently, all ofthe T-hangar positions

on the airfield are occupied and there is

a waiting list to obtain space. Also, the

City ofChandler is currently requesting

proposals from firms interested in

constructing, maintaining, and leasing

additional T-hangar units.

The airport provides 12 nested Thangar storage facilities. Analysis of

the T-hangar facilities indicates that

ten of these T-hangar facilities (each

providing 10 nested individual units)

provide an area of 1,280 square feet per

individual storage unit, while two Thangar facilities (providing 8 nested

individual units) provide an area of

2,000 square feet ofspace per individual

storage unit. Total T-hangar space

available at the airport totals 160,000

square feet ofstorage space. Analysis of

future T-hangar requirements, as

depicted on Table 3C, indicates that an

additional 124 T-hangars will be needed

within the long range planning horizon.

Currently, there are two shaded tiedown facilities at the airport providing

20 individual spaces. Shaded tie-down

facilities are typical at airports located

in warm climates with little annual

precipitation and a high amount ofsun

days. These units are typically less

expensive to lease and are preferred by

aircraft owners not concerned with

enclosing their aircraft, but still

wanting protection from sun. Thus,

future requirements must account for

these desires.
TABLE3C

Hangar Requirements

Chandler Municipal Airport

Currently Current Short Intermediate Long

Available Need Term Term Ran2"e

Based Aircraft

Single Engine 233 267 304 380

Multi-Engine 15 19 22 30

Turboprops 1 4 8 15

Jets 0 1 4 8

Rotorcraft _5 _9 --.l1

Total 254 300 350 450

Aircraft to be Hangared

Single Engine 151 174 198 240

Multi-Engine 13 16 19 26

Turboprops 1 4 8 15

Jets 0 1 4 8

Rotorcraft __3 __6 __8

Total 168 201 237 301

T-Hangar Positions 116 148 170 195 240

Shade Hanger Positions 20 8 10 11 13

Conventional Hangar

Positions 10 12 21 31 58

Conventional

Hangar Area (s.f.)

Aircraft Storage 9,000 15,200 31,000 52,900 88,800

Aircraft Maintenance 20,100 23,000 27,800 33,600 43,700

Total 29100 38,200 58,800 86,500 132,500

T-Hangar Area (s.f.) 160,000 207,200 238 000 273 000 336,000

Shade Hangar Area (s.f.) 25,920 7,200 9000 9900 11 700

Total Hangar Area (s.f.) 215,020 252,600 305,800 369,400 480,200

Current utilization indicates that one

shaded facility provides 2,040 square

feet per storage unit while another

facility provides 800 square feet per

unit. A planning standard of 900

square feet per unit was utilized in

determining future shade hangar

facilities.

As indicated by Table 3C, the existing

shade hangar facilities should be

adequate for shade hangar

3-16

requirements by the end ofthe planning

period. This can be attributed to

aircraft owner preferences for Thangars if available.

The final step in the process of

determining hangar requirements

involves estimating the area necessary

to accommodate the required hangar

space. Typically, T-hangar facilities

provide 1,200 square feet of space per

individual storage unit. For Chandler
Municipal Airport, however, some

aircraft owners prefer the existing

larger T-hangar's. Thus, for planning

purposes, an average of 1,400 square

feet per based aircraft stored in Thangars was used to determine future

storage space requirements.

A planning standard of 1,000 square

feet for piston and 2,500 square feet for

turbine aircraft was then applied to the

aircraft to be hangared in conventional

hangars. Shade hangar space

requirements considered 900 square

feet per aircraft. Also, an area equal to

10 percent of the total hangar space on

the airport should be allocated for

maintenance shop facilities. It is

assumed that this maintenance area

would be housed in conventional hangar

space.

Aircraft Parking Apron

A parking apron should be provided for

at least the number of locally-based

aircraft that are not stored in hangars,

as well as transient aircraft.

Currently, the airport maintains 122

aircraft tie-down positions on 90,500

square yards of apron space. The apron

provides area for fueling, taxiing, and

aircraft tie-down. At the present time,

approximately 112 based aircraft are

stored full-time on the ramp, although

some aircraft stored in conventional

hangars may be moved to the ramp

during the day to provide hangar area

for aircraft maintenance. In the future,

based aircraft are expected to continue

to be stored in hangars.

FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13

suggests a methodology by which

3-17

transient apron requirements can be

determined from knowledge ofbusy-day

operations. At Chandler Municipal

Airport, the number ofitinerant spaces

required was determined to be

approximately 17.5 percent ofthe busyday itinerant operations.

A planning criterion of 700 square

yards per aircraft was applied to the

number ofitinerant spaces to determine

future transient apron requirements.

For based aircraft, apron space

requirements is 500 square yards per

aircraft. The results ofthis analysis are

presented in Table 3D. As evident

from the analysis, 109 additional

aircraft spaces and approximately

41,400 square yards ofpavement will be

required as additional aircraft base at

the airport and itinerant aircraft use of

the airport increases.

General Aviation

Terminal Facilities

General aviation terminal facilities

have several functions. Space is

required for passenger waiting, pilot's

lounge and flight planning, concessions,

management, storage and various other

needs. This space is not necessarily

limited to a single, separate terminal

building but also includes the space

offered by fixed base operators for these

functions and services.

The existing general aviation terminal

building is located on the northwestern

portion of the ramp providing 5,500

square feet of space. The FBO's,

specialty operators, and restaurant

provide approximately 10,000 square

feet ofspace.
TABLE 3D

Aircraft Parking Apron Requirements

Chandler Municipal Airport

Current Short Intermediate Long

Need Term Term Range

Locally Based Aircraft Apron

Based Aircraft Positions 86 99 113 149

Apron Area (s.y.) 43,000 49,500 56,500 74,500

Itinerant Ramp Requirements

Busy Day Itinerant

Operations 296 311 392 468

Itinerant Aircraft Positions 52 54 69 82

Apron Area (s.y.) 36,400 37800 48300 57400

Total Positions 138 153 182 231

Total Apron Area (s.y.) 79,400 87,300 104800 131 900

The methodology used in estimating

general aviation terminal facility needs

was based upon the number of airport

users expected to utilize general

aviation facilities during the design

hour as well as FAA guidelines. A

planning average of 1.8 passengers per

flight increasing to 2.5 passengers per

flight by the end ofthe planning period

was multiplied by the number ofdesign

hour itinerant operations to determine

design hour itinerant passengers.

Space requirements were then based

upon providing 90 square feet per

design hour itinerant passenger. Table

3E outlines the general space

requirements for general aviation

terminal services at Chandler

Municipal Airport through the planning

period. Analysis of future general

aviation terminal area space

requirements presented in Table 3E

indicates that current general aviation

terminal building space will be

adequate for the remainder of the

planning period. However, it should be

noted that the FBO and specialty

operators have duplication of space

3-18

because of similar services provided.

Thus, the terminal building may need

to be expanded in the future to

accommodate future transient demand

which may not utilize FBO space.

AVIATION

SUPPORT FACILITIES

Various facilities that do not logically

fall within classifications of airfield,

terminal building, or general aviation

facilities have been identified for

inclusion in this Master Plan. Facility

requirements have been identified for

these remaining facilities:

• Air Traffic Control Tower

• Airport Access and Vehicle Parking

• Fuel Storage

AIR TRAFFIC

CONTROL TOWER (ATCT)

As previously mentioned, Chandler

Municipal Airport is served by an air
traffic control tower (ATCT) which

began operating at the airport in June

of 1995. The ATCT is operated by

BartonATC International, Inc. through

a contract agreement with the FAA.

The establishment ofa temporary tower

was mandated by the U.S. congress for

a trial period ofJune 95 to June of97 in

order to determine ifthe construction of

a permanent tower was required. In

1998, a permanent location for the

location of an ATCT was identified

under another study. The ATCT has

been constructed and IS now

operational.

TABLE3E

General Aviation Terminal Area

Chandler Municipal Airport

Currently Current Short Intermediate Long

Available Need Term Term Ran2"e

Design Hour

Itinerant Passengers 82 95 135 180

General Aviation

Terminal Space (s.f.) 10,000 7,377 8,550 12,150 16,200

AIRPORT ACCESS

AND VEHICLE PARKING

Access to Chandler Municipal Airport is

available from Germann Road to the

north, and Queen Creek Road to the

south via Airport Boulevard. Germann

Road is currently being improved and

will be adequate to serve airport needs

in the future.

Queen Creek Road is a two-lane

roadway running east-west south ofthe

airport. It is unlikely that automobile

traffic generated by demand at the

airport will drive the need for Queen

Creek to be widened. However, as

residential and commercial/industrial

development nears the airport and

airport activity increases, Queen Creek

will most likely need to be widened to

four lanes.

3-19

On-airport access is provided by Airport

Boulevard, Stinson Way, and Ryan

Road (which leads directly to the

terminal building). These roadways are

two-lanes and should be adequate with

proper maintenance.

As mentioned in Chapter One, a

proposed four-lane freeway (SANTAN

Freeway) will run east-west

approximately one mile north of the

airport. It is planned that the freeway

will have interchange access at

McQueen, Cooper, and Gilbert Roads.

The freeway will aid airport traffic by

providing a high speed roadway near

the airport for transient passengers

needing regional access to the north.

Vehicle parking demands have been

determined for Chandler Municipal

Airport. Space determinations were
based on an evaluation of the existing

airport use as well as industry

standards. General aviation spaces

were calculated by multiplying design

hour itinerant passengers by the

industry standard of 1.8.

Currently, approximately 60

individuals are employed on a part-time

and/or full-time basis at the airport.

Employee parking spaces typically

equals 10 percent of total parking

spaces on the airport.

Total parking area was calculated by

multiplying the total parking spaces by

315 square feet. Parking requirements

are summarized in Table 3F.

Currently, parking spaces/areas are

available near the new and old terminal

buildings and adjacent FBO and

specialty operators on the airport.

Approximately 245 automobile parking

spaces providing approximately 75,000

square feet ofspace are available on the

airport. Currently, approximately 135

spaces are provided by the parking lot

adjacent the old terminal building. The

new terminal building provides only 30

spaces. Thus, the analysis of parking

space requirements may indicate

adequate space for the planning period,

however, individual areas on the airport

could be undersized to meet future

parking demands. As new facilities are

constructed, new parking facilities

should be built to adequately

accommodate demand.

TABLE3F

General Aviation Automobile Parking Requirements

Chandler Municipal Airport

Currently Short Intermediate Long

Available Term Term Range

Total Parking Spaces 245 170 240 325

Auto Parking Area (s.f.) 75,000 53,550 75,600 102,375

FUEL STORAGE

The City of Chandler owns four fuel

tanks located underground, adjacent to

the heliport. Included in the fuel farm

is a 10,000 gallon tank storing 80/87

octane fuel, two 8,000 gallon steel tanks

storing 100LL, and one fiberglass

12,000 gallon tank leased to Venture

Aviation for storage of 100LL Avgas.

The City also operates a self-service fuel

island located on the apron west of the

terminal building. The fuel farm meets

EPAIADEQ environmental standards.

3-20

As previously mentioned, Chandler Air

Service has constructed an above

ground 12,000 gallon fuel storage tank

which is utilized for storing 100LL

Avgas. The FBO also sells jet fuel

which is stored in a 2,200 gallon

capacity fuel truck.

Future fuel storage requirements

analysis considered historical fuel sales

at the airport. Until August of 1994,

the City of Chandler conducted all fuel

sales at the airport. Mter August 1994,

the City allowed the FBO's the
opportunity to retail fuel at the airport

via fuel truck while maintaining only a

fuel farm for its fuel sales.

According to fuel sales records, total

fuel sold at the airport was 315,758

gallons in 1996. A sales high was

recorded in FY 1991/1992 of 347,432

gallons.

Fuel storage requirements are typically

based upon maintaining a one month

supply offuel during an average month,

however, more frequent deliveries can

reduce the fuel storage capacity

requirement. For 1996, monthly fuel

sales averaged 1,193 gallons of 80/87

octane, 22,999 gallons of 100LL, and

2,122 gallons of Jet A. With 156,209

annual operations, the average rate of

fuel consumption for 1996 was 2.2

gallons per operation.

The airport is currently utilized

primarily by aircraft requiring 100LL

fuel. Because an increasing percentage

of future aircraft utilizing the airport

will require Jet A fuel, future fuel

storage requirements must consider the

specific requirements of 100LL and Jet

A fuel separately.

Approximately 92.5 percent of annual

operations in 1996 were conducted by

aircraft requiring 100LL fuel, which

would equate to 144,493 operations. In

1996,275,982 gallons of100LL fuel was

sold. Therefore, 1.9 gallons of 100LL

fuel was sold per operation. For

planning purposes, future storage

requirements of 100LL fuel utilized a

constant amount of 2.0 gallons per

operation. Table 3G presents future

fuel storage requirements for the

airport.

TABLE3G

Fuel Storage Requirements

Chandler Municipal Airport

Short Intermediate Long

1998 Term Term Range

Annual Operations 191,121 190,000 250,000 300,000

Average Month Operations 15,930 15,850 19,175 25,000

Monthly Operations

Requiring

80/87 Octane 630 600 525 4,500

100LL 12,500 15,750 19,065 22,650

Jet A 600 900 1,250 2,000

Operations Per Gallon Ratio

80/87 Octane 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0

100LL 1.9 2.0 2.0 2.0

Jet A 5.4 5.5 5.7 6.0

Monthly Storage

Requirements

80/87 Octane 1,260 1,200 1,100 9,000

100LL 27,930 31,500 38,100 45,300

Jet A 3,240 4,900 7,100 12,000

3-21
Currently, approximately three percent

of aircraft operating at the airport

require Jet A fuel. This would equate to

4,686 annual operations by these

aircraft. In 1996, 25,463 gallons ofJet

A fuel was sold. Thus, 5.4 gallons ofJet

A fuel was sold per turbine operation.

Forecasts conducted in the previous

chapter indicate that operations by

turbine aircraft will increase to

approximately eight percent over the

long range planning horizon. As

operations by turbine aircraft increase

and more turbine aircraft base at the

airport, this figure can be expected to

increase. For planning purposes, the

gallons per operation ratio for Jet A was

increased to 6.0 for the long range

planning horizon.

Consideration was given to the future

storage requirements of 80/87 octane

fuel. Because this fuel is utilized only

3-22

by older, and smaller aircraft it was

determined that the current 10,000

gallon storage tank would be adequate

for the long range planning horizon.

SUMMARY

The intent of this chapter has been to

outline the facilities required to meet

potential aviation demands projected

for Chandler Municipal Airport for the

planning horizon. A summary of the

airfield and general aviation facility

requirements is presented on Exhibits

3C and 3D.

Following the facility requirements

determination, the next step is to

develop a direction for development

which best meets these projected needs.

The remainder of the master plan will

be devoted to outlining this direction,

its schedule, and its costs.
RUNWAY 4R-22L

• 4,850' X75'

• 30,000 Ibs. SWL

RUNWAY 4L-22R

• 4,395' X75'

• 14,000 Ibs. SWL

RUNWAY 4L-22R

Same

PARALLEL RUNWAY

• 4,300' X75'

PARALLEL RUNWAY

• 4,300' X75'

RUNWAY 4R-22L RUNWAY 4R-22L PRIMARY RUNWAY PRIMARY RUNWAY

• Full length parallel Same • Fu II length parallel • Full length parallel

south side 40' wide • Six exits • Seven exits

• Partial Parallel • 40' wide • 40' wide

north side 40' wide

• Five exits

RUNWAY 4L-22R RUNWAY 4L-22R PARALLEL RUNWAY PARALLEL RUNWAY

• Full length parallel Same • Full length parallel Same

• 40' wide • Five exits

• Seven exits • 40' wide

·ATCT Same Same Same

RUNWAY 4R-22L RUNWAY 4R-22L PRIMARY RUNWAY PRIMARY RUNWAY

• PAPI-4 Same • GPS (CAT I) Same

• NOB (4R) • VGSI-4

RUNWAY 4L-22R RUNWAY 4L-22R PARALLEL RUNWAY PARALLEL RUNWAY

• VASI-2 Same • GPS Same

• VOR (4L) • VGSI-2

• GPS (4L)

• Wind Cone,

Segmented Circle

• Airport Beacon

.~~~~~~~~. MITL

RUNWAY 4R-22L

• MIRL :.-;~--~~>-="':'--""'-~~---·"''-~~--I· REI L

• Non-precision Marking

RUNWAY 4R-22L

Same

RUNWAY 4L-22R

Same

PRIMARY RUNWAY

• MIRL

• MALSR

• Precision Marking

PARALLEL RUNWAY

• MIRL

• REIL

• Non-precision Marking

PRIMARY RUNWAY

Same

PARALLEL RUNWAY

Same

Exhibit 3C

AIRFIELD REQUIREME TS
Exhibit 3D

LA DSIDE REQUlREME TS
EXHIBIT 9

EXHIBIT 10