Extracted text (via pymupdf)
39113 characters
WHAT IS A MASTER PLAN?
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) recommends that airports update their long‐term planning
documents every seven to 10 years, or as necessary to address local changes at the airport. The last
master plan update for Chandler Municipal Airport (CHD) was completed in 2007. The City of Chandler
(City), the sponsor of the airport, received a grant from the FAA to update the Airport Master Plan.
The City is responsible for funding capital improvements at the airport, as well as obtaining FAA and Ari‐
zona Department of Transportation (ADOT) – Aeronautics Group development grants. In addition, the City
oversees facility enhancements and infrastructure development conducted by private entities at the air‐
port. The Master Plan provides guidance for future development and justification for projects for which
the airport may receive funding through an updated capital improvement program (CIP) to demonstrate
the future investment required by the City, as well as the FAA and ADOT – Aeronautics Group.
The Airport Master Plan follows a systematic approach outlined by the FAA to identify airport needs in
advance of the actual need for improvements. This is done to ensure that the City can coordinate envi‐
ronmental reviews, project approvals, design, financing, and construction to minimize the negative ef‐
fects of maintaining and operating inadequate or insufficient facilities. An important outcome of the
Master Plan process is a recommended development plan, which reserves sufficient areas for future fa‐
cility needs. Such planning will protect development areas and ensure they will be readily available when
Introduction and Summary | DRAFT FINAL
I-1
required to meet future needs. The intended outcome of this study is a detailed on‐airport land use
concept which outlines specific uses for all areas of airport property, including strategies for revenue en‐
hancement.
The preparation of this Master Plan is evidence that the City recognizes the importance of the airport to
the surrounding region and the associated challenges inherent in providing for its unique operating and
improvement needs. The cost of maintaining an airport is an investment which yields impressive benefits
to the local community. With a sound and realistic Master Plan, the airport can maintain its role as an
important link to the regional, state, and national air transportation systems. Moreover, the plan will aid
in supporting decisions for directing limited and valuable City resources for future airport development.
Ultimately, the continued investments in the airport will allow the City to reap the economic benefits
generated by historical investments.
Some common questions regarding what a master plan is / is not are answered in the graphic below.
WHO IS PREPARING THE MASTER PLAN?
The City has contracted with the airport planning firm Coffman Associates, Inc. to undertake the Airport
Master Plan. Coffman Associates is an airport consulting firm that specializes in master planning and
environmental studies. Coffman Associates will lead the planning team, with support from the following
firms:
Dibble Engineering | Engineering support primarily to offer insights into development alterna‐
tives and estimates of probable costs;
MakPro Services | Community outreach and involvement support;
Introduction and Summary | DRAFT FINAL
I-2
Quest Energy | Evaluating the airport in terms of its energy use and efficiency;
SWCA | Conducting field surveys in support of the environmental elements of the plan; and,
Woolpert | Aerial photography, ground survey, and Geographic Information System (GIS) prod‐
ucts to meet FAA 5300‐18B requirements for Airports GIS data submittal.
The Airport Master Plan Update has been prepared in accordance with FAA requirements, including Ad‐
visory Circular (AC) 150/5300‐13A, Airport Design (as amended), and AC 150/5070‐6C, Airport Master
Plans (as amended). The plan will be closely coordinated with other planning studies relevant to the area
and with aviation plans developed by the FAA and ADOT – Aeronautics Group. The plan will also be
coordinated with the City of Chandler, as well as other local and regional agencies as appropriate.
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The primary goal of this Master Plan is to develop and maintain a financially feasible, long‐term devel‐
opment program, which will satisfy aviation demand of the region; be compatible with community de‐
velopment, other transportation modes, and the environment; and enhance employment and revenue
for the local area. Accomplishing this goal requires an evaluation of the existing airport to decide what
actions should be taken to maintain a safe, adequate, and reliable facility.
Specific objectives of the study include the following:
Document the issues that proposed development will address.
Justify the proposed development through the technical, economic, and environmental investi‐
gation of concepts and alternatives.
Provide an effective graphic presentation of the development of the airport and anticipated land
uses in the vicinity of the airport.
Establish a realistic schedule for the implementation of the development proposed in the plan,
particularly the short‐term capital improvement program.
Propose an achievable financial plan to support the implementation schedule.
Provide sufficient project definition and detail for subsequent environmental evaluations that
may be required before the project is approved.
Present a plan that adequately addresses the issues and satisfies local, state, and federal regula‐
tions.
Document policies and future aeronautical demand to support municipal or local deliberations
on spending, debt, land use controls, and other policies necessary to preserve the integrity of the
airport and its surroundings.
Introduction and Summary | DRAFT FINAL
I-3
Set the stage and establish the framework for a continuing planning process. Such a process
should monitor key conditions and permit changes in plan recommendations as required.
To enhance/expand general aviation services to accommodate tenants/users, thus increasing the
socioeconomic benefits to the community.
BASELINE ASSUMPTIONS
A long‐range planning study requires several baseline assumptions that will be used throughout this
analysis. The baseline assumptions for this study are as follows:
CHD will continue to operate as a regional general aviation reliever airport through the 20‐year
planning period;
CHD will continue to accommodate general aviation tenants, as well as itinerant and/or local air‐
craft operations by air taxi, general aviation, and military operators;
The aviation industry will develop through the planning period as projected by the FAA. Specifics
of projected changes in national aviation industries are described in Chapter Two – Forecasts;
The socioeconomic characteristics of the region will generally change as forecast (see Chapter
Two); and,
A federal and state airport improvement program will be in place through the planning period to
assist in funding future capital development needs.
MASTER PLAN ELEMENTS AND PROCESS
The Master Plan has 11 elements that are intended to assist in the evaluation of future facility needs and
provide the supporting rationale for their implementation. Exhibit IA provides a graphical depiction of the
process involved with the study.
Element 1 – Initiation includes the development of the scope of services, schedule, and study website.
Study material will be assembled in a workbook format. General background information will be estab‐
lished that includes outlining the goals and objectives to be accomplished during the Master Plan.
Element 2 – Inventory is focused on collecting and assembling relevant data pertaining to the airport
and the area it serves. Information is collected on existing facilities and operations. Local economic and
demographic data is collected to define the local growth trends, and environmental information is gath‐
ered to identify potential environmental sensitivities that might affect future improvements. Planning
studies which may have relevance to the Master Plan are also collected.
Introduction and Summary | DRAFT FINAL
I-4
Airport
Master
Plan
OH #1
Working
Papers
AC #1
AC #2
AC #3
OH#2
Working
Papers
Working
Papers
AC #4
OH #3
INVENTORY
• Area Socioeconomic Data
• Local Planning and Land Use
• AGIS Survey
• Airport Access and
Parking, Utilities, and
Aerial Photography
• Airport Facilities
• Airspace and Air
Traffic Activity
• Based Aircraft and Fleet Mix
• Annual Operations
• Peaking Characteristics
• Critical Aircraft Analysis
FORECASTS
• Goals and Objectives
• Establish Advisory Committee
INITIATION
• Support Facilities
• Taxiways
• Airfield Capacity
FACILITY REQUIREMENTS
• Aprons
• Navigational Aids
• Hangar Facilities
• Terminal Building
• Design Categories
• Runway Length
and Strength
• Evaluate Development Scenarios
- Airside - Landside - Support
AIRPORT ALTERNATIVES
• Detailed Master Plan Facility
and Land Use Plans
• Cost Estimates
• Funding Sources
RECOMMENDED MASTER PLAN CONCEPT AND
CAPITAL FINANCIAL PLAN
• Airport Capital
Improvement Plan
• Review/Evaluation of NEPA
Environmental Categories
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS/
SUSTAINABILITY PLAN/
• Energy Assessment
• Noise Exposure
• Recycling Plan
• Airspace/Approach Drawings
• On-Airport Land Use Plan
AIRPORT LAYOUT PLANS
• Property Map
• Land Use Plans
• Airport Layout Plan
• Landside Drawing
AC: Advisory Committee
OH: Open House
FINAL
Master Plan
FINAL
Master Plan
DRAFT
Master Plan
DRAFT
Master Plan
Master Plan/
ALP Approvals
Master Plan/
ALP Approvals
Exhibit IA
PROJECT WORK FLOW
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Introduction and Summary | DRAFT FINAL
I-5
Element 3 – Forecasts examines the potential aviation demand at the airport. The analysis utilizes local
socioeconomic information, as well as national air transportation trends to quantify the levels of aviation
activity which can reasonably be expected to occur at CHD over a 20‐year period. An existing and ultimate
critical design aircraft, based upon AC 150/5000‐17, Critical Aircraft and Regular Use Determination, is
also established to determine future planning design standards. The results of this effort are used to de‐
termine the types and sizes of facilities which will be required to meet the projected aviation demand at
the airport through the planning period. This element is one of two elements that are submitted to the
FAA for approval.
Element 4 – Facility Requirements determines the available capacities of various facilities at the airport,
whether they conform with FAA standards, and what facility updates or new facilities will be needed to
comply with FAA requirements and/or projected 20‐year demand.
Element 5 – Airport Alternatives considers a variety of solutions to accommodate projected airside and
landside facility needs through the long‐term planning period. An analysis is completed to identify the
strengths and weaknesses of each proposed development alternative, with the intention of determining
a single direction for development.
Element 6 – Recommended Master Plan Concept and Capital Financial Plan provides both a graphic
and narrative description of the recommended plan for the use, development, and operation of the air‐
port. A capital improvement program (CIP) is established to define the schedules, costs, and funding
sources for the recommended development projects.
Element 7 – Airport Layout Plans is the preparation of the official Airport Layout Plan (ALP) drawings
based on the recommended development concept. The ALP set is used by the FAA and ADOT – Aero‐
nautics Group in determining grant eligibility. This element is the second element of the study that is
submitted to the FAA for approval.
Element 8 – Environmental Considerations involves providing environmental information to assist in
the evaluation of airport development alternatives and to provide information that will help expedite
subsequent environmental review under NEPA.
Element 9 – Sustainability Plan consists of two tasks, a recycling plan and an energy assessment. These
tasks are intended to help the airport reduce its operating costs and its environmental impacts.
Element 10 – Public Coordination and Communication includes tasks related to the establishment of a
Planning Advisory Committee (Committee) for the Master Plan, as well as conducting periodic public
information workshops with the aim of engaging the community in the study process. A study website
is also developed for the purpose of distributing study materials and notices of public meetings.
Element 11 – Final Reports and Approvals provide documents which depict the findings of the study
effort and present the study and its recommendations to appropriate local organizations. The final doc‐
ument incorporates the revisions to previous working papers prepared under earlier elements into a
usable Master Plan document.
Introduction and Summary | DRAFT FINAL
I-6
COORDINATION AND OUTREACH
The CHD Master Plan is of interest to many within the local community and region. This includes local
citizens, local businesses, community organizations, City officials, airport users/tenants, and aviation or‐
ganizations. As a component of the regional, state, and national aviation systems, CHD is of importance
to both state and federal agencies responsible for overseeing the air transportation system.
To assist in the development of the Master Plan, a Master Plan Committee was established to act in an
advisory role in the development of the Master Plan. Committee members met four times at designated
points during the study to review study materials and provide comments to help ensure that a realistic,
viable plan was developed.
Draft working paper materials were prepared at various milestones in the planning process. The working
paper process allows for timely input and review during each step within the Master Plan to ensure that
all issues are fully addressed as the recommended program develops.
A series of three open‐house public information workshops were also conducted as part of the study co‐
ordination and outreach efforts. Workshops are designed to allow all interested persons to become in‐
formed and provide input concerning the Master Plan process. Notices of meeting times and locations
were advertised through local media outlets. All draft reports, meeting notices, and materials were made
available to the public on a website: www.chandler.airportstudy.com.
SWOT ANALYSIS
A SWOT analysis is a strategic business planning technique used to identify Strengths, Weaknesses, Op‐
portunities, and Threats associated with an action or plan. The SWOT analysis involves identifying an
action, objective, or element, and then identifying the internal and external forces that are positively
and negatively impacting that action, objective, or element in a given environment. A SWOT analysis will
be conducted at the first Advisory Committee meeting.
SWOT DEFINITIONS
This SWOT analysis groups information into two categories:
Internal – attributes of the airport and market area that may be considered strengths or weak‐
nesses to the action, objective, or element.
External – attributes of the aviation industry that may pose as opportunities or threats to the
action, objective, or element.
Introduction and Summary | DRAFT FINAL
I-7
The SWOT further categorizes information into one of the following:
Strengths – internal attributes of the airport that are helpful to achieving the action, objective,
or element.
Weaknesses – internal attributes of the airport that are harmful to achieving the action, objec‐
tive, or element.
Opportunities – external attributes of the industry that are helpful to achieving the action, ob‐
jective, or element.
Threats – external attributes of the industry that are harmful to achieving the action, objective,
or element.
SWOT ANALYSIS EXERCISE
The SWOT analysis for CHD is based upon information gathered, including a kick‐off Master Plan Com‐
mittee meeting that was conducted in October 2019. As previously discussed, the Committee is a diver‐
sified group of stakeholders, community leaders, and governmental agencies that represent several in‐
terests in the airport. A SWOT analysis was conducted with this group to identify key factors that might
be addressed in the Master Plan. A summary of the results from the SWOT analysis exercise is shown in
Table IA. These results were used to frame the subjective or judgmental processing of the data pre‐
sented in the Master Plan.
TABLE IA
SWOT Analysis Results
Chandler Municipal Airport
Strengths
Strong humanitarian segment
Fast growing community drives demand
Various demand segments operating at CHD
Attracts national/global business
Economic impact of airport on local community
Fully developed airfield/lack of delays
Opportunities it provides to economic climate of the com‐
munity and wider area
FBOs available providing full range of GA services
Good climate (weather)
Infrastructure in place to support future development
Location/accessibility from highway
Flexibility of airspace/cooperation with regional airspace
controllers
Interest in local entities in airport activities
Great airport staff
On‐site airport traffic control tower
Large engineering schools in area
Available property for development
Runway length; Can be extended, but only so long
Underutilized large helipad
Flight testing areas close
Close to Phoenix but not too close ‐ away from the worst
of land and air congestion
Encroachment on the airfield (at this point) has not re‐
stricted operations. Current city administration intent on
keeping it that way.
Favorable city government
New fueling capability
Population familiar with unmanned motor vehicles ‐ recep‐
tive to UAVs
Expansion areas around the airfield for airport related in‐
frastructure. (Especially since Wingspan fell out.)
Strong business development benefits from CHD’s role as a
GA reliever
Proximity to Tucson in relation to the other airfields in the
Valley
Large industrial base in area
Hangar Cafe
City finances solid ‐ can provide grant matches
Introduction and Summary | DRAFT FINAL
I-8
TABLE IA (continued)
SWOT Analysis Results
Chandler Municipal Airport
Weaknesses
Aging infrastructure/pavements
City owned hangars are nearing end of life/poor condition
Climate
Accessibility to south side of airport/deters development
Available runway length/aircraft insurance restrictions
Low airport staffing levels
Difficult political history/lack of political support
Organizational structure of airport within City departments
(airport moves from one department to another leads to
confusion)
Land lease renewals have not been renewed
Lack adequate dust control for larger military helicopters
Hangar availability
Environmental issues
All existing instrument approaches cross
Runway length; Can be extended, but only so long
Runway length and ordinance
Land locked ‐ limited areas
Opportunities
Fast growing community drives demand
Potential for revenue generation
City is visioning to support future development of
the community
Sustainability component/considerations
Better cooperation with current mayor and city council
Airpark area development/surrounding land use
development
Preparing this master plan to educate/engage local elected
officials and public
Available amenities near airport to support
businesses/industry
Aircraft hangar waiting list/demand for new hangars
Expanded services/hotels/rental cars to support airport
growth
Utilizing data gathered in master plan to supplement eco‐
nomic development tools
Capitalizing on city’s welcoming of innovation and startups
provides opportunity to airport
Local businesses that supply aviation industry
Attract new aircraft maintenance/rehab (upholstery/air‐
craft painting) service operators
Attracting new business aviation operators
New staff to attract business aviation
Hangar for experimental aircraft final assembly
Develop a consistent marketing strategy for the airport
(business/tourism/educational)
City transportation department is updating its master plan
and has a dedicated section on airport
Educate youth in community ‐ next generation ‐ integrate
local schools
Engaging with youth
Funding availability from FAA/ADOT
Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs)
More hangar space ‐ more comfortable for tenants
Lengthened runway increases fuel sales &
business travelers
Strategic partnerships with technology companies
ALP shows longer runway
Update Airpark Area Plan
Favorable political climate to consider runway length
Additional revenue generation for airport = more improve‐
ments
Pilot training ‐ next generation
Connection to Intel and all the corporate structure that has
grown up around it.
Longer runway = more options
As a somewhat underutilized airfield, opportunity to be‐
come the one airfield which can service a new player in the
Valley (Especially if the runway is extended)
Building more of a community at the airport / sense of legacy and belonging
Threats
Encroachment of surrounding development
Multi‐family housing development near airport/residential
encroachment
Difficult political history
Pilot shortage/aging pilot population
Potential future constraints of regional airspace
Drop in aircraft ownership among pilots/less investing in
aircraft
Lack of hotel accommodations in area/losing tax dollars to
other communities
Economic downturns/impact of worldwide events
Introduction and Summary | DRAFT FINAL
I-9
TABLE IA (continued)
SWOT Analysis Results
Chandler Municipal Airport
Very strong/committed local/regional competition for
business aviation operators
Funding availability/uncertainty
Voters/lack of knowledge of airport activities
Cyber security/threats
Public perception ‐ history from longtime residents
Climate change ‐ summer temperatures
Strong competition from other airports
Demographic changes ‐ aging GA pilot population
Traditional airport/aviation businesses will change
Pressure on traditional airport revenue streams
Threat of economic downturn
Legislation (fed, state, local)
Election can change climate/support
Future city administration that values the land more than
they value the economic impact of the airport
Change in pilots ‐ more drone pilots, more single
pilot aircraft
Chandler City is in late stages of buildout ‐ land around the
airport will get more and more premium
Change in air traffic ‐ busier with UAVs
Increasing noise aversion as the population fills in
SUMMARY
Planned development at CHD is focused on accommodating projected growth in activity and meeting
FAA airfield design standards. The capital improvement program (CIP) that has been developed identi‐
fies both airside (runways, taxiways, navigational aids, etc.) and landside (aprons, access roads, vehicle
parking, etc.) facility needs.
To properly plan for future demand that may occur, aviation demand forecasts were prepared. Because
of the cyclical nature of the economy, it is virtually impossible to predict with certainty year‐to‐year
fluctuations in activity when looking five, ten, and twenty years into the future. Recognizing this reality,
the Master Plan is keyed toward potential demand “horizon” levels rather than future dates in time.
These “planning horizons” were established as levels of activity that will call for consideration of the
implementation of the next step in the Airport Master Plan program. By developing the Airport to meet
the aviation demand levels instead of specific points in time, the Airport will serve as a safe and efficient
aviation facility which will meet the operational demands of its users while being developed in a cost‐
efficient manner. This program allows the City of Chandler to change specific development in response
to unanticipated needs or demand.
The forecast approach utilized historical and forecasted general aviation and economic trends resulting
in modest growth projections for CHD through the planning period of the Master Plan. The forecast
planning horizons are summarized in Table IB. These forecasts were reviewed and approved by the FAA
on May 5, 2020 (see Appendix C).
Introduction and Summary | DRAFT FINAL
I-10
TABLE IB
Aviation Demand Planning Horizons
Chandler Municipal Airport
Base Year
(2019)
Short Term
(1‐5 Years)
Intermediate Term
(6‐10 Years)
Long Term
(11‐20 Years)
BASED AIRCRAFT
Single Engine
379
424
469
552
Multi‐Engine
26
24
20
15
Turboprop
6
7
9
13
Jet
8
10
13
20
Helicopter
22
25
29
40
TOTAL BASED AIRCRAFT
441
490
540
640
ANNUAL OPERATIONS
Itinerant
Air Taxi
2,990
3,900
4,400
5,100
General Aviation
67,647
72,500
77,300
87,400
Military
199
213
213
213
Total Itinerant
70,836
76,613
81,913
92,713
Local
General Aviation
149,754
158,300
165,800
181,900
Military
72
62
62
62
Total Local
149,826
158,362
165,862
181,962
TOTAL OPERATIONS
220,662
234,975
247,775
274,675
Source: Coffman Associates analysis
It should be noted that aviation activity can be affected by numerous outside influences that may
occur locally, regionally, or nationally. At the time of this writing in March 2021, the biggest factor
currently influencing the aviation industry is the COVID‐19 pandemic that has resulted in a significant
reduction in air travel. While general aviation and business aviation operations have been returning
to pre‐COVID levels, there is still much uncertainty as to how this health crisis will affect airports in
the coming months, or the lasting impacts it may have on the industry as a whole. With that in mind,
it is important to note that aviation demand forecasts should be used for advisory purposes only. It is
recommended that planning strategies remain flexible to accommodate unforeseen events, and that
airport decision‐makers be prepared to adapt plans as necessary.
MASTER PLAN CONCEPT
The Master Plan concept includes improvements to the airfield and landside area to satisfy FAA design
and safety standards and to meet current and forecast needs. Runway design standards are based upon
the characteristics of each runway’s critical design aircraft, which is the most physically demanding air‐
craft that uses each runway for at least 500 operations annually.
Airside Summary
CHD is classified in the FAA’s National Plan of Integrated Airports System (NPIAS) as a general aviation
reliever airport of regional importance. In this role, CHD is meant to relieve the commercial service airports
in the Phoenix Metropolitan Area (Phoenix Sky Harbor and Phoenix‐Mesa Gateway) of general aviation
Introduction and Summary | DRAFT FINAL
I-11
traffic including small single‐engine aircraft up to mid‐sized business jets. The existing airfield, which con‐
sists of two runways, is well situated to serve in its role. However, improvements are necessary to meet
FAA design standards and the needs of a new generation of aircraft and the businesses that support airport
activities. Table IC provides a summary of airside improvements, which are depicted on Exhibit IB. A more
detailed discussion of recommendations can be found in Chapter Five of the Master Plan.
TABLE IC
Airside Summary
Chandler Airport
EXISTING CONDITION
ULTIMATE CONDITION
RUNWAY 4R‐22L (Primary Runway)
Runway Design Code (RDC)
RDC B‐II‐5000
RDC B‐II‐5000
Critical Design Aircraft
Beechcraft King Air 200/300/350
Cessna Citation CRJ4/Citation X
Runway Dimensions (l x w) (in feet)
4,870' x 75'
Extend to 5,550 feet to increase utility for mid‐sized
business jets
Runway Pavement Strength
30,000 lbs. Single Wheel Loading
Maintain
Safety Areas
Standard RSA, ROFA, and ROFZ
Maintain
Runway Protection Zones (RPZs)
RPZs are contained entirely on airport property
The Runway 22L RPZ will shift with the runway ex‐
tension but will remain on airport property.
RUNWAY 4L‐22R (Parallel Runway)
Runway Design Code (RDC)
RDC B‐II‐VIS (small)
RDC B‐II‐5000 (small)
Critical Design Aircraft
Beechcraft King Air 90
Beechcraft King Air 90
Runway Dimensions (l x w) (in feet)
4,401' x 75'
Maintain
Runway Pavement Strength
30,000 lbs. Single Wheel Loading
Maintain
Safety Areas
Standard RSA, ROFA, and ROFZ
Maintain
Runway Protection Zones (RPZs)
RPZs are contained entirely on airport property or on
property controlled by avigation easements
Maintain
TAXIWAYS
Taxiway Design Group (TDG)
TDG‐2
TDG‐2
Taxiway Width
All taxiways at least 35' wide
Maintain
Taxiway Geometry Issues
Taxiway fillets throughout airfield do not meet de‐
sign standards
Modify taxiway fillets to meet design standards
Direct access points: Taxiways F, M, and Q
Relocate Taxiway F and Q and eliminate a portion of
Taxiway M
High‐energy area intersections: Taxiways H and N
Eliminate Taxiway H intersection with Runway 4L‐22R
and shift a portion of Taxiway N outside the Runway
4R‐22L high‐energy area
Holding aprons near the ends of both runways are
non‐standard design
Replace holding aprons with holding bays that meet
new FAA design
NAVIGATIONAL AND APPROACH AIDS
Instrument Approach Procedures
2 published approach procedures
including GPS and VOR to Runway 4R
Establish GPS‐based instrument approaches with 1‐
mile or greater visibility minimums to all runway ends
Weather Reporting Station
Automated Weather Observation System (AWOS)
Maintain
Airport Traffic Control Tower
ATCT on north side of airfield
Maintain
Visual Approach Aids
PAPI‐4s – all runways
Maintain
REILs ‐ Runways 4R, 22L
Install REILs on Runway 4L, 22R
LIGHTING, MARKING, AND SIGNAGE
Lighting
Rotating Beacon
Maintain
MIRL – both runways
Consider gradual replacement with LED technology
MITL – all taxiways
Consider gradual replacement with LED technology
Marking
Non‐Precision Markings ‐ Runway 4R‐22L
Maintain
Basic Markings – Runway 4L‐22R
Potential upgrade to non‐precision markings to sup‐
port instrument approaches
Runway 4R‐22L ‐ Holding position markings 200'
from runway centerline
Maintain
Runway 4L‐22R ‐ Holding position markings 125'
from runway centerline
Maintain
Signage
Lighted airfield location and directional signage
Consider gradual replacement with LED technology
Introduction and Summary | DRAFT FINAL
I-12
A
J
B
C
M
C6
C5
C4
C3
C9
C8
B9
B8
B7
B4
A4
A9
A8
A7
C7
A6
A5
A3
A2
B2
A1
B1
B3
B6
C2
B5
C1
B10
C10
Germann Road
Germann Road
E Ryan Rd
S Stinson Way
E Yeager Dr
E Yeager Dr
S Cooper Road
S Cooper Road
S Heliport Way
S Heliport Way
Insight Way
Insight Way
Emmett Dr
Emmett Dr
S McQueen Rd
S McQueen Rd
S Airport Blvd
Aviation Dr.
S Curtiss Way
S Cooper Rd
S Cooper Rd
Runway 4R-22L 4,870’ x 75’
Runway 4R-22L 4,870’ x 75’
Runway 4L-22R 4,401’ x 75’
Runway 4L-22R 4,401’ x 75’
( 5,550’ x 75’ Ultimate)
( 5,550’ x 75’ Ultimate)
( 5,550’ x 75’ Ultimate)
E Queen Creek Rd
E Queen Creek Rd
S Cooper Rd
S Cooper Rd
0
800
SCALE IN FEET
Photo: Woolpert 11/2019
RUNWAY DESIGN CODE (RDC)
Runway 4R-22L | RDC B-II-5000
Runway 4L-22R | RDC B-II-VIS (small airplane)
LEGEND
Existing Airport Property Line
Existing Avigation Easement
Taxiway Designation
Taxiway Object Free Area (TOFA)
Runway Safety Area (RSA)
Runway Object Free Area (ROFA)
Runway Obstacle Free Zone (ROFZ)
Runway Protection Zone (RPZ)
High-Energy Area
Pavement to be Removed
Ultimate Pavement
Environmental Site
A
FBO - Fixed Base Operator
MRO - Maintenance/Repair/Overhaul Operator
SASO - Specialty Aviation Service Operator
ACRONYMS
Exhibit IB
AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT
S Stinson W
S Stinson W
E Ryan R
E Ryan Rd
S Ai
t Bl d
S Ai
t Bl
Relocated Above Ground
Self-Service 100LL Fuel Storage
Airport Operations/
Maintenance
16,000 sf New Terminal
Building/Airport Administration
Environmental Site to be Redeveloped
as Apron/Aircraft Wash Rack
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Pedestrian Gate
REILs
680' Extension
Holding Bay
Holding Bay
Apron Pavement
Holding Bay
Reroute
Perimeter Road
DRAFT CONCEPT FOR
DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY
Holding Bay
Holding Bay
REILs
Self-Service
Fuel Station
Reroute
Perimeter Road
Environmental Site
(~10.7 Acres)
Small
Aircraft
Facilities
Development
Reserve
(~4.9 Acres)
Small Aircraft
Facilities
Development
Reserve (~10 Acres)
Mixed Use Reserve
(Aviation/
Non-Aviation)
(~7.6 Acres)
Mixed Use Reserve
(Aviation/
Non-Aviation)
(~8.8 Acres)
Executive Hangar
Development
Reserve
(~18.6 Acres)
FBO/SASO
Development
Reserve (~19.5 Acres)
Large-Scale
SASO/MRO
Development
Reserve
(~15.5 Acres)
Non-Aviation Development
Reserve - Floodplain Restrictions (~11.4 Acres)
Non-Aviation
Development
Reserve
(~4.8 Acres)
Small Aircraft
Facilities
Development
Reserve
(~3.3 Acres)
Executive
Hangar
Development
Reserve
(~4.3 Acres)
FBO/SASO
Development
Reserve (~3.1 Acres)
Introduction and Summary | DRAFT FINAL
I-13
This page intentionally left blank
Introduction and Summary | DRAFT FINAL
I-14
Landside Summary
Landside facilities at CHD consist of aircraft storage hangars, parking aprons, and businesses providing
aviation services (fixed base operators [FBOs] and specialty aviation service operators [SASOs]). Addi‐
tional landside support facilities include fuel storage tanks, maintenance facilities, and vehicle parking
lots and access roads. The master plan provides recommendations on the development of new landside
facilities to accommodate the needs of existing and future users.
All hangar‐related development should occur only as dictated by demand. The locations of hangar
development proposed in the recommended concept are conceptual and are subject to modification
based on the needs of a developer and their target customers. The recommended concept is intended
to be used strictly as a guide for CHD staff when considering new developments.
A summary of landside recommendations is included below.
North Side | Recommended facilities include a new 16,000 square foot (sf) terminal building to
be developed adjacent to the airport traffic control tower (ATCT) to provide a more modern fa‐
cility for pilot and passenger amenities, as well as offices for airport administration. This site has
frontage to the terminal apron that makes it highly visible from the airfield and takes advantage
of an existing vehicle parking lot that is currently underutilized. The airport’s operations and
maintenance equipment storage are planned to be moved to a new facility adjacent to the new
terminal to provide a consolidated airport administrative complex. An existing underground stor‐
age tank located along S. Airport Boulevard is planned to be replaced with a new above ground
tank equipped with spill containment on the terminal apron adjacent to the existing self‐service
fuel distribution system. Apron pavement on the north side is planned to be expanded by ap‐
proximately 11,825 square yards (sy). Approximately 39.3 acres of undeveloped property on the
north side is planned for a variety of uses including new specialty aviation service operators (SA‐
SOs), maintenance/repair/overhaul (MROs) operations, executive hangars and small aircraft fa‐
cilities, and non‐aviation development. The existing terminal building and adjacent unoccupied
hangar are planned for redevelopment for FBO/SASO activities.
South Side | The south side of the airport is predominantly undeveloped with approximately 82
acres (excluding 10.7 acres of an environmental site) available for development. Helicopter op‐
erations associated with Quantum Helicopters are the primary activity on the south side. It is
anticipated that once the north side reaches a built‐out condition, new development will begin
on the south side. A major barrier to development of the south side is a need for expanded utility
infrastructure and vehicle access roads. The plan also identifies extensions of Insight Way and S
Cooper Road into the south side of the airport for vehicle circulation. Once this infrastructure is
in place, the plan reserves parcels for new FBO/SASO development, executive hangar develop‐
ment, small aircraft facilities, and mixed‐use development that could include aviation‐related or
non‐aviation related development.
Introduction and Summary | DRAFT FINAL
I-15
DEVELOPMENT FUNDING
The full implementation of the Airport Master Plan is likely to take two decades or more at a cost of
$100.8 million in 2020 dollars. The breakdown of funding over the three planning horizons is presented
in Table ID. Approximately 40 percent of the total is eligible for grant funding from the FAA or the Ari‐
zona Department of Transportation (ADOT) – Aeronautics Group. The source for FAA funding is the
Aviation Trust Fund, which is funded through user fees and taxes on airline tickets, aviation fuel, and
aircraft parts. A more detailed discussion of the Capital Improvement Program can be found in Chapter
Six of the Master Plan. Private funding is also anticipated for the bulk of the development of new landside
facilities including at least partial contribution towards the new terminal building. Private funding
sources represent approximately 43 percent of the total capital program.
With the Airport Master Plan Update completed, the most important challenge is implementation. The
cost of developing and maintaining aviation facilities is an investment which yields impressive benefits
for the City of Chandler. This plan and associated development program provide the tools the City will
require to meet the challenges of the future. By providing a safe and efficient facility, CHD will continue
to be a valuable asset to the City of Chandler and the surrounding region.
TABLE ID
Development Funding Summary
Chandler Municipal Airport
Planning Horizon
Total Cost
AIP‐Eligible
Share
ADOT
Share
Airport Sponsor
Share
Private Funding
Short‐Term Program
$21,030,775
$12,569,012
$3,404,474
$5,057,289
$0
Intermediate‐Term Program
$49,856,500
$20,982,045
$1,029,977
$2,395,977
$17,448,500
Long‐Term Program
$29,985,200
$2,351,169
$115,415
$1,415,415
$26,103,200
Total Program Costs
$100,872,475
$35,902,226
$4,549,867
$8,868,682
$43,551,700
Note: Funding subtotals do not add up to the estimated total cost due to the uncertainty of funding sources for the new
terminal building, which is estimated at $8,000,000.
Sources: Project cost estimates prepared by Dibble Engineering and project staging established by City of Chandler and
Coffman Associates.
Introduction and Summary | DRAFT FINAL
I-16