Introduction - Martin SD Airport Plan · 2019-06-24 · Martin Municipal Airport: Airport Master Plan Study June 2019 Chapter 4: Facility Requirements Page 4-3 . aircraft will stay

Martin Municipal Airport: Airport Master Plan Study June 2019 Chapter 4: Facility Requirements Page 4-1

CHAPTER 4: FACILITY REQUIREMENTS In t roduct ion This chapter of the Airport Master Plan analyzes the existing and anticipated future facility needs at the Martin Municipal Airport (9V6). The report is divided into sections that assess the needs of primary airport elements including general aviation, support, and landside facilities.

Airside requirements are those necessary for the operation of aircraft. Landside requirements are those necessary to support airport, aircraft and passenger operations. Proposed airport needs are based on a review of existing conditions, capacity levels, activity demand forecasts and airport design standards using FAA guidance and industry standards. This chapter identifies existing facility deficiencies along with facility needs to meet demand through the planning period. The level of review completed is sufficient to identify major elements that should be addressed in this comprehensive airport plan.

This chapter provides a review of the facility needs for the following airport infrastructure categories:

• Airside Facilities • General Aviation • Support Facilities • Landside Facilities

Specific alternatives that propose solutions to address facility needs are evaluated in Chapter 5: Alternatives Analysis.

Planning Act iv i ty Leve ls (PALs) There are various airport activity measures used to determine airport facility requirements including annual operations, peak hour activity, and based aircraft. Airport activity can be sensitive to industry changes, national and local economic conditions. This results in difficulty in identifying a specific calendar year for associated demand-driven improvements.

For this study, PALs are used to identify demand thresholds for many recommended facility improvements. If an activity level is approaching a PAL, then the airport should prepare to implement the improvements. Alternatively, activity levels that are not approaching a PAL can allow improvements to be deferred. The demand forecasts developed in this study correspond to an anticipated planning level calendar year to each PAL (2022, 2027, 2032, 2037) from the preferred aviation forecasts as seen in Table 4-1.

Table 4-1 – Planning Activity Levels (PALs) Key Activity Metrics Base PAL 1 PAL 2 PAL 3 PAL 4

Forecast Year 2017 2022 2027 2032 2037 Airport Operations 1,523 1,594 1,665 1,738 1,811 Based Aircraft 7 7 8 8 8

Source: KLJ Analysis


Airs ide Faci l i t ies Airfield Design Standards Airport design standards provide basic guidelines for a safe, efficient, and economic airport system. FAA guidance is found in FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Airport Design. Careful selection of aircraft characteristics for which the airport will be designed is important. Airport designs based only on existing aircraft can severely limit the ability to expand the airport to meet future requirements for larger, more demanding aircraft. At the same time, airport designs that are based on large aircraft unlikely to operate at the airport are not economical. Key FAA airport design standards are listed below.

• Critical Design Aircraft • Airfield Design Classifications

o Aircraft Approach Category (AAC) o Airplane Design Group (ADG) o Approach Visibility Minimums

• Airport Reference Code (ARC) • Runway Design Code (RDC) • Runway Reference Code (RRC)

o Approach Reference Code (APRC) o Departure Reference Code (DPRC)

• Taxiway Design Group (TDG)

Critical Design Aircraft The critical design aircraft types must be identified to determine the appropriate airport design standards to incorporate into airport planning. The existing and future critical design aircraft characteristics at Martin Municipal Airport (9V6) are summarized in the following sections.

In general, the critical design aircraft for 9V6 is an A/B-I Small aircraft. Even though this is the critical design, please note that in this chapter the safety standards for an A/B-II Small aircraft will be discussed to protect a slightly larger area. Table 4-2 below provides a summary of the critical design aircraft that are being considered in this chapter. One unique element is the inclusion of the Bell 407 helicopter which is anticipated to regularly use the airport through the planning period and space will be identified to separate this use and not impede on fixed wing traffic.

Table 4-2 – Overall Design Aircraft Operations Metric Base PAL 1 PAL 2 PAL 3 PAL 4

Critical Design Aircraft Operations A-II (Small) [Pilatus PC-12] 73 77 83 87 91 B-II (Small) [Beech 90 and 200] 132 138 150 156 163 A-I (Small) [Ayres SR2 Turbine] 161 168 183 191 199 Bell 407 Helicopter 30 48 67 70 72

TDG 1A 235 245 267 279 291 TDG 2 131 137 149 156 162

Source: KLJ Analysis. AAC = Aircraft Approach Category, ADG = Airplane Design Group, TDG = Taxiway Design Group. Large Aircraft: >12,500 lbs. Maximum Takeoff Operating Weight (MTOW), Small Aircraft: < 12,500 lbs. MTOW.

The overall design aircraft fleet mix is currently an A/B-I (small), TDG-1A aircraft. The heaviest aircraft to regularly use the airport is up to 12,500 pounds maximum aircraft weight. In the long-term the design


aircraft will stay as A/B-I (small), TDG-1A since the A/B-II aircraft operations will not achieve the 500 operations level through the planning period. Airport operations should be reviewed regularly using available data.

Figure 4-1 – Example ARC Aircraft ARC A-I/Small Aircraft ARC A-II/Small Aircraft

Ayres S2R

Pilatus PC-12

ARC B-I/Small Aircraft ARC B-II/Small Aircraft

Piper Navajo

Beech King Air 90

Citation CJ1

Beech King Air 200

Other

Bell 407 (Small Helicopter)

Photography Source: Airliners.net and iskyteam.com For a crosswind runway, a minimum of 500 operations is necessary for FAA funding. This is determined at 9V6 by evaluating the fleet mix and wind coverage. The existing unpublished crosswind runway is only available during daytime visual conditions. During these times, there is a wind coverage deficiency of 4.40 percent without a crosswind runway. This means that 4.40 percent of the time the design aircraft A/B-I(small) requires a crosswind runway to achieve 95 percent total wind coverage. Forecasts show that aircraft needing a crosswind runway at 9V6 does not exceed 500 annual operations and therefore maintaining the unpublished turf crosswind runway 9-27 is not recommended.

Table 4-3 – Crosswind Runway Operations Metric Base PAL 1 PAL 2 PAL 3 PAL 4

Crosswind Runway Operations (AAC-A/B, Small Aircraft, ADG-I) Single, Multi & Other Operations 1,523 1,594 1,665 1,738 1,811 Day VMC* Wind Coverage “Gap” 4.40% Crosswind Runway Operations 67 70 73 76 79

Source: KLJ Analysis. AAC = Aircraft Approach Category, ADG = Airplane Design Group. Small Aircraft: < 12,500 lbs. Maximum Takeoff Weight. *Visual Meteorological Conditions Rules, 6 a.m. to 8 p.m. standard time


Summary The existing design airplane characteristics is described in Table 4-4. The future design airplane will remain as it exists currently as an A/B-I (small) aircraft.

Table 4-4 – Existing/Future Runway 14/32 Design Aircraft Summary Design Characteristics Existing Future Aircraft Make/Model Ayers S2R Various

Airplane Approach Category A A Airplane Design Group I I Taxiway Design Group 1A 1A

Wingspan 44’ 4” 48’ Length 33’ 0” 33’ Height 9’ 2” 14’

Cockpit to Main Gear - - Main Gear Width 8’ 7” -

Approach Speed (1.3 x Stall) 75 knots 90 knots Maximum Takeoff Weight 9,700 pounds 10,000 pounds

Landing Gear Configuration Single Wheel Single Wheel Source: Beechcraft, Cessna, Transport Canada, KLJ Analysis

Meteorological Considerations Meteorological conditions that affect the facility requirements of an airport include but are not limited to wind direction, wind speed, cloud ceiling, visibility, and temperature. Hourly metrological data was reviewed data from the Pine Ridge (IEN) Automated Weather Observation System (AWOS) facility available from the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC). Periodic “special” weather observations within each hour were removed. This method provides the true average weather trends at an airport without skewing conditions toward IFR where multiple observations may be taken each hour due to changing conditions.

Wind coverage and weather conditions are evaluated based on the two different flight rules, Visual Flight Rules (VFR) and Instrument Flight Rules (IFR). VFR operations occur in Visual Meteorological Conditions (VMC) which is when the visibility is 3 nautical miles or greater, and the cloud ceiling height is 1,000 feet or greater. Conditions less than these weather minimums are considered Instrument Meteorological Conditions (IMC) requiring all flights to be operated under IFR.

Wind Coverage Wind coverage is important to airfield configuration and utilization. Aircraft ideally takeoff and land into a headwind aligned with the runway orientation. Aircraft are designed, and pilots are trained to land aircraft during limited crosswind conditions. Small, light aircraft are most affected by crosswinds. To mitigate the effect of crosswinds, FAA recommends runways be aligned so that excessive crosswind conditions are encountered at most 5 percent of the time. This is known as a “95 percent wind coverage” standard. Each aircraft’s AAC-ADG combination corresponds to a maximum crosswind wind speed component.

Small Aircraft Crosswind Landing Diagram (faasafety.gov)


Even when the 95 percent wind coverage standard is achieved for the design airplane or airplane design group, cases arise where certain airplanes with lower crosswind capabilities are unable to utilize the primary runway. The maximum crosswind component for different aircraft sizes and speeds are shown in Table 4-5.

Table 4-5 – FAA Wind Coverage Standards AAC-ADG Maximum Crosswind Component A-I & B-I 10.5 knots

A-II & B-II 13.0 knots Source: FAA AC 150/5300-13A – Change 1, Airport Design

Wind coverage for the airport is separated into all-weather and IMC periods. All-weather analysis helps determine runway orientation and use. Local weather patterns commonly change in IMC. An IMC review helps determine the runway configuration for establishing instrument approach procedures.

Table 4-6 – All-Weather Wind Analysis

Runway AAC-ADG Crosswind Component (Wind Speed) 10.5 knots 13.0 knots

Runway 14-32 A/B-I 90.63% 95.51% Runway 9-27 A-I 84.59% 89.61% Combined* - 95.46% 98.47%

*Combined assumes up to maximum design aircraft crosswind component for each runway Source: National Climatic Data Center data from Pine Ridge ASOS (2007-2016; hourly)

For all-weather conditions, the A/B-II aircraft crosswind component (13 knots) is accommodated on Runway 14/32 during all-weather conditions with airfield wind coverage exceeding 95 percent. For A-I and B-I small aircraft, the combination of Runway 14/32 and Runway 9/27 provides adequate wind coverage (10.5 knots) exceeding 95 percent. Unfortunately, as noted previously, there are not sufficient aircraft operations at the airport to justify the crosswind runway. Therefore, the current runway 14/32 is the only runway which can be sufficiently justified for funding through the planning period.

Table 4-7 – IMC Wind Analysis

Runway AAC-ADG Crosswind Component (Wind Speed) 10.5 knots 13.0 knots

Runway 14-32 A/B-I 90.96% 95.52% Runway 14 Only A/B-I 33.95% 35.26% Runway 32 Only A/B-I 68.36% 71.59%

*Combined assumes up to maximum design aircraft crosswind component for each runway Source: National Climatic Data Center data from Pine Ridge ASOS (2006-2014; hourly)

Runway 32 is currently the only runway capable of accommodating operations in IMC. Wind coverage to this runway however does not meet recommended levels for the design aircraft during IMC. However, as previously stated there are not sufficient operations at the airport to support funding for a crosswind runway. Improving Runway 14/32 to add an instrument approach for Runway 14 is recommended in the planning period.


Weather Conditions Cloud Ceiling & Visibility When IMC weather occurs, aircraft must operate under IFR and utilize instrument approach procedures to the runway. Table 4-8 Meteorological Analysis provides a summary of existing conditions and the impact of potential improvements.

Table 4-8 – Meteorological Analysis

Weather Condition Cloud Ceiling Minimum

Visibility Minimum

Total Observation Percentage

Hours Per Year (avg.)

VMC 1,000 feet 3 miles 94.62% 8,288 Existing IFR Minimums 400 feet 1 mile 4.09% 358

Potential IFR Minimums* 250 feet 1 mile 0.29% 25 Closed (Below Minimums) < 250 feet < 1 mile 1.00% 88

Source: National Climatic Data Center data from Pine Ridge Municipal Airport ASOS (2007-2016; hourly), KLJ Analysis *Potential additional capture assumes IFR minimums lowered to 250-foot cloud ceiling and 1-mile flight visibility.

A unique situation with 9V6, that affects the usability of the airport, is the source of weather information. This impacts the majority of aircraft needing the airport in IMC weather which are those for medical flights within the requirements of Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 135. Since the weather reported at 9V6 is not certified, Part 135 operators cannot use it and cannot fly to 9V6 until the weather improves to a 1,000-foot ceiling and 3-mile visibility. This means currently for Part 135 operators, they would be able to use the airport an additional 4.09% of the time but cannot legally because of the lack of certified weather. Improving the weather reporting will provide an increase in usability by 4.09% or 358 hours a year.

In addition, the minimums could be lowered to as little as 250-feet and 1-mile without other improvements on the airport. This would increase usability an additional 0.29% or 25 hours a year. No action is needed by the airport for this improvement and will be dependent on assuring there are no obstructions that restrict the flight procedures from being lowered.

Infrastructure and navigational aid standards for improvements are outlined further in this chapter. Options for improvements will be evaluated in Chapter 5: Alternatives Analysis.

Temperature Average high temperature data for the hottest month was reviewed from climate data recorded with the National Climactic Data Center (NCDC) for Pine Ridge. Using local data, the average high temperature in the hottest month from 2007-2016 was 87.0 degrees Fahrenheit. Temperature affects recommended runway lengths.

Instrument Procedures Instrument approach procedures to a runway end are used by landing aircraft to navigate to the airport during instrument conditions when the cloud ceiling is less than 1,000 feet and/or visibility is less than 3 miles. Establishing approaches with the lowest possible weather minimums allow the airport to maximize its operational utility. Each approach type requires differing infrastructure and navigational aids. Types of approach procedures include non-precision approach (NPA), approach with vertical guidance (APV) and precision approach (PA).

This section discusses instrument procedure upgrades/options that can be explored for 9V6. FAA airport design standards must be met as shown in Figure 4-2. Coordination with FAA Flight Procedures Office is recommended to review the feasibility of implementing any new approach procedure.


Figure 4-2 – FAA Airport Design Standards for Instrument Approach Procedures

Source: FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Airport Design

Runway 14/32 Approaches 9V6 has a GPS-based procedure established for Runway 32 with 400-foot cloud ceiling and 1-mile visibility minimums. These achieve the lowest possible weather minimums with the current infrastructure. The airport is interested in exploring upgraded approach procedures to accommodate lower instrument minimums to increase airport utility. This is important to support the presence of regularly medical flights. A review of the basic airport design standards to upgrade the existing approaches was completed.

The next development step would be for the airport to establish an instrument approach procedure for Runway 14 for 400-foot ceiling and no lower than 1-mile visibility. While the winds favor Runway 32 approximately 70% of the time, the remaining time of 30% favors Runway 14.


Runways The Martin Municipal Airport has one existing runway. This section will look at the variety of design issues to assure the runway will meet needs through the planning period. The design issues begin with identifying the applicable design codes and then follow with design standards and other design aspects.

Runway Design Code The design aircraft and instrument approach minimums drive the RDC designation for each runway.

Runway 14/32: The existing RDC is A/B-I(Small)-5000 for 32 and A/B-I(Small)-Vis for 14. Recommended future A/B-I(Small)-5000 (Not lower than 1 mile) for both ends. It is not anticipated Runway 14/32 will need to accommodate larger or heavier aircraft greater than 12,500 pounds in the future. However, planning for RNAV (GPS) approaches for both runway ends with vertical guidance will increase usability of the runway and provide flexibility of runway utilization during IMC. Specific information regarding instrument approach procedures is provided later in this chapter.

Approach/Departure Reference Codes The Approach and Departure Reference Codes (APRC & DPRC) indicate current operational capabilities where no special operations procedures are necessary, and without consideration of the actual runway length. The existing operational capabilities of the runway is identified based on a parallel taxiway separation distance. Detailed information about APRC and DPRC can be found in Appendix B: General Aviation Airports 101 (Airport Design Standards). For 9V6 a partial parallel taxiway is included in the ultimate configuration and this has been used to establish an existing and future APRC or DPRC. See Table 4-9 Existing/Future RDC, APRC and DPRC for these classifications at 9V6.

Table 4-9 – Existing/Future RDC, APRCs and DPRCs

Runway Existing Future RDC APRC DPRC RDC APRC DPRC

14 A-I(S)-Vis B-II-Vis B-II A-I(S)-5000 B-II-5000 B-II 32 A-I(S)-5000 B-II-5000 B-II A-I(S)-5000 B-II B-II


Design Standards Basic Safety Standards One primary purpose of this master plan is to review and achieve compliance with all FAA safety and design standards. The design standards vary based on the RDC and RRC as established by the design aircraft. Some of the safety standards include:

• Runway Safety Area (RSA) • Runway Object Free Area (ROFA) • Runway Obstacle Free Zone (ROFZ)

Other basic design standards include runway width, runway surface gradient, runway shoulder width, blast pad, and required separation distances to markings, objects, and other infrastructure for safety. Critical areas associated with navigational aids as well as airspace requirements are described further in this chapter.

The existing RSA, ROFA and ROFZ standards for all runways meet existing airport design standards. The basic safety standards dimensional requirements for the runway is summarized in Table 4-18.


Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) The Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) is a trapezoidal area at ground level prior to the landing threshold or beyond the runway end. The RPZ’s function is to enhance the protection of people and property on the ground. The RPZ size varies based on the runway’s RDC. The RPZ is further broken down an Approach RPZ and Departure RPZ.

Airport owners should, at a minimum, maintain the RPZ clear of all facilities supporting incompatible activities, such as residential structures. It is desirable to clear all above-ground objects from the RPZ. Protection of the RPZ is achieved through airport control over RPZs including fee title ownership or avigation easement. The following roadways and other significant man-made land uses are within the existing approach RPZs at 9V6:

• Runway 14: Highway 18 is located 820 feet from runway threshold and extends for 490 feet through the RPZ. Approximately 2 acres of private commercial/industrial property is located within the RPZ beginning 920 feet from the runway threshold. There are no residences in the RPZ. An avigation easement for height restrictions exists for this private property.

The land uses in the existing RPZs appear to be acceptable now. Further review is required if new land uses, runway end locations or a change in the size of the RPZ is proposed and a land use requiring FAA coordination is in the RPZ. There are no land acquisition or land use changes recommended for RPZ purposes.

Runway Length Runway 14/32 is the longest runway at 9V6 with a length of 3,699 feet. As of the date this Master Plan study was initiated, FAA AC 150/5325-4B, Runway Length Requirements for Airport Design is the current guidance for determining runway lengths at airports. A detailed analysis using the advisory circular is in Appendix D: Runway Length Analysis.

Small Airplanes Up to 12,500 Pounds The FAA design approach to determine recommended runway length in small aircraft is identified in Chapter 2 of FAA AC 150/5325-4B. The method requires several steps to be performed including identifying percentage of fleet and using airport data to calculate runway length based on curves. Calculations for 9V6 are identified in Table 4-10.

Table 4-10 – FAA AC 150/5345-4B Runway Length Requirements (< 12,500 lbs.) Airport and Runway Data

Airport Elevation 3,294.6 feet Mean Daily Maximum Temperature of Hottest Month 87.0°F

Aircraft Classification Recommended Runway Length Small Airplanes 12,500 Pounds or less 10 or more passenger seats 4,750 feet Less than 10 passenger seats at 100 percent of fleet 5,000 feet Less than 10 passenger seats at 95 percent of fleet 4,600 feet Specific Aircraft (Performance Charts Available) Recommended Runway Length Pilatus PC-12 (30 degree flaps) 3,600 feet Pilatus PC-12 (15 degree flaps) 4,000 feet Beech King Air 200 (flaps up) 3,100 feet Beech King Air 200 (approach flaps) 2,600 feet

Source: FAA AC 150/5325-4B, KLJ Analysis Note: Runway length requirements estimated based on charts for airport planning purposes only.


For small general aviation aircraft, the FAA runway length requirements of 95 percent of fleet would apply at 9V6. The recommended runway length for small general aviation aircraft is 4,600 feet and is being recommended as the ultimate length for 9V6. This is less than the existing runway length for Runway 14/32.

Runway Width Runway width is driven by the RDC and approach visibility minimums for each runway as identified in FAA AC 150/5300-13A. Based on the existing and recommended future design standards, no changes are recommended to the existing runway width (see Table 4-18). The width for 9V6 is currently 60 feet and is recommended to remain at this width.

Pavement Strength & Condition Airfield pavements should be adequately maintained, rehabilitated and reconstructed to meet the operational needs of the airport. The published pavement strength is based on the construction materials, thickness, aircraft weight, gear configuration and operational frequency for the pavement to perform over its useful life.

Table 4-11 – Pavement Strength Requirements Runway Capacity

Runway 14/32 12,500 Single Wheel (SW) Source: 9V6 FAA 5010 Airport Master Record, KLJ Analysis The typical useful life of a bituminous pavement ranges from 20 to 30 years if properly maintained. The useful life for a concrete pavement can extend to 40 years and beyond. In 2018, the South Dakota Department of Transportation, Office of Air, Rail and Transit (SDDOT) completed a pavement management system update for 9V6. For simplicity, the runway, taxiway, taxilane and apron pavements are all addressed in this section for the runway. A summary of the existing pavement condition with recommendations is contained in Table 4-12:

Table 4-12 – Pavement Condition & Recommendations

Pavement ID Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Action Plan (Lowest PCI) 0-5 Years 6-10 Years 11-20 Years

Runway 14/32 89 Maintain Maintain Major Rehab.

Taxiways 88-97 Maintain Maintain Major Rehab.

Taxilane 98 Maintain Maintain Major Rehab.

Aprons 84-85 Maintain Maintain Major Rehab. Source: SDDOT Pavement Condition Assessment (2018), KLJ Analysis

Deficiencies To Airf ield Design Standards There are only a few obstruction related deficiencies to the runway design standards at 9V6 for the A/B-I Small standards. For the A/B-II Small standards there are similar deficiencies but also include approximately 25 feet of property on the east side which would extend the object free area outside existing property. Figure 4-3 Airfield Design Standards & Deficiencies for A/B-I Small and Figure 4-4 Airfield Design Standards & Deficiencies for A/B-II Small depict the planned airfield design standards with deficiencies and key facility needs. Finding related to obstructions will be addressed in detail in the Airport Layout Plan’s Inner Approach sheets.


Figure 4-3 – Airfield Design Standards & Deficiencies for A/B-I Small


Figure 4-4 – Airfield Design Standards & Deficiencies for A/B-II Small


Airspace Protection Airspace is an important resource around airports that is essential for safe flight operations. This master plan effort includes an obstruction analysis to identify obstructions to Part 77 and other airspace surfaces utilizing Aeronautical Survey data collected in September 2017. Some obstruction information will be provided in this section but due to the complexity of which surface an obstruction penetrates and the planned disposition, the full results of this analysis will be identified in the ALP drawing set.

Area Airspace The existing Class E airspace is considered sufficient to support any enhancement to instrument approach procedures.

Part 77 Civil Airport Imaginary Surfaces Title 14 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) Part 77 Safe, Efficient Use, and Preservation of the Navigable Airspace is used to determine whether man-made or natural objects penetrate “imaginary” three-dimensional airspace surfaces and are obstructions. Table 4-13 depicts the existing, future, and ultimate approach airspace surfaces for 9V6:

Table 4-13 – Part 77 Approach Airspace Requirements Runway

End Approach Standards Part 77 Code

Inner Width*

Outer Width Length Slope

Existing

14 Visual Utility As low as 1 mile A 250’ 1,250’ 5,000’ 20:1

32 Non-Precision Utility As low as 1 Mile A 500’ 2,000 5,000’ 20:1

Future/Ultimate

14 Non-Precision Utility As low as 1 mile A 500’ 2,000’ 5,000’ 20:1

32 Non-Precision Utility As low as 1 Mile A 500’ 2,000 5,000’ 20:1

Source: Title 14 CFR Part 77, KLJ Analysis *Inner width is also the Primary Surface width driven by the most demanding approach to a runway. Bold indicates change from existing standard.

Obstruction penetrations were found to the Part 77 surfaces. Many of these obstructions such as trees are within existing avigation easements and will be able to be addressed with a trimming project. All existing, future, or ultimate Part 77 obstructions located around 9V6 will be identified on the ALP for further action.


Runway Approach/Departure Surfaces FAA identifies sloping approach surfaces that must be cleared at an absolute minimum for safety for landing aircraft. These surfaces are identified in Table 3-2 of FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Change 1.

The departure surface applies to runways with instrument departures available. It begins at the end of the takeoff distance available and extends upward and outward at a 40:1 slope. No new penetrations are allowed unless an FAA study has been completed and a determination of no hazard has been issued. The applicable approach/departure surface standards are identified in Table 4-14.

Table 4-14 – Approach/Departure Surface Requirements Runway End(s)

Table 3-2 Row Description Slope

Existing

14 2 Approach end of runways expected to serve small airplanes with approach speeds of 50 knots or more (visual, day/night) 20:1

32 4 Approach end of runways expecting to support instrument night operations greater than or equal to ¾ mile visibility 20:1

All 7 Departure runway ends for all instrument operations 40:1 Future/Ultimate

14, 32 4 Approach end of runways expecting to support instrument night operations greater than or equal to ¾ mile visibility 20:1

All 7 Departure runway ends for all instrument operations 40:1 Source: FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Change 1 with Engineering Brief 99, KLJ Analysis Note: Most critical row(s) shown. Only changes from existing shown in future.

All runway ends are available for instrument departures. There are penetrations to the existing Runway 14 and 32 instrument departure surfaces that are noted in FAA publications (see adjacent figure). All existing FAA approach surfaces are clear of obstructions.

There are several items noted as takeoff obstacles for 9V6 as shown in the Takeoff Minimums information from the FAA’s most current Terminal Procedures. Information on these obstacles will be updated with the new information from Aeronautical Survey. Table 4-15 Departure Surface Obstacles identified in FAA Departure Procedures provides a detail of these obstacles and recommended disposition.


Table 4-15 – Departure Surface Obstacles identified in FAA Departure Procedures

Object Distance from Runway End

Distance/Direction from Centerline

Height above Runway End Disposition

Runway 14 Departure Surface (3,277’ End Elevation) Lt Support Structure 9’ 20’ L 3’ Frangible Lt Support Structure 10’ 9’ R 1’ Frangible

Ground 13’ 408’ L 5’ - Ground 27’ 199’ L 5’ - Fence 74’ 219’ L Up to 10’ Relocating

Vehicle on Road 145’ 289’ R 6’ No Public Access Runway 32 Departure Surface (3,294’ End Elevation) Building, Pole, Ground,

Vehicle on Road 1’ 9’ L Up to 23’ Frangible, No Public Access

Tree 1083’ 19’ L 29’ Trim Tree 1095’ 387’ R 88’ Trim Tree 1172’ 130’ L 46’ Trim

Tree, Pole 1270’ 9’ L Up to 47’ Trim Trees 1315’ 219’ L 49’ Trim

Trees, Poles 1366’ 174’ L Up to 55’ Trim Trees 1463’ 94’ R Up to 40’ Trim

Trees, Poles 1481’ 406’ L Up to 56’ Trim FAA Aeronautical Surveys The FAA has implemented Aeronautical Survey requirements per FAA AC 150/5300-18B: General Guidance and Specifications for Submission of Aeronautical Data to NGS: Field Data Collection and Geographic Information System (GIS) Standards. FAA airport survey requirements require obstruction data to be collected using assembled aerial imagery for the airport. This data is used in aeronautical publications and to develop instrument approach procedures.

An aeronautical survey was completed with this planning effort as required by FAA. Imagery was acquired in September 2017. When safety-critical data is needed to update runway end data or enhance an instrument approach then a new aeronautical survey is required.

Navigational Aids (NAVAIDs) Airfield NAVAIDs are any ground or satellite based electronic or visual device to assist pilots with airport operations. They provide for the safe and efficient operations of aircraft on an airport or within the vicinity of an airport. The type of NAVAIDS required are determined by FAA guidance based on an airport’s location, activity and usage type.

Area Navigation For area navigation (RNAV), satellite-based NAVAIDs will primarily be used for air navigation with ground-based NAVAIDs used for secondary purposes. Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS) provides the framework for satellite–based navigation and approach procedures. 9V6 has satellite-based approaches for runway 32.

Runway Approach Other NAVAIDs are developed specifically to provide “approach” navigation guidance, which assists aircraft in landing at a specific airport or runway. These NAVAIDs are electronic or visual in type. FAA


Order 6750.16D, Siting Criteria for Instrument Landing Systems and FAA Order 6850.2B, Visual Guidance Lighting Systems defines the standards for establishing these systems.

Visual Guidance Slope Indicator (VGSI) A VGSI system provides visual descent guidance to aircraft on approach to landing. A Precision Approach Path Indicator (PAPI) system is a typical VGSI system installed on runway ends to enhance visual vertical guidance to the runway end. 9V6 currently has 2-box PAPI systems on Runway 14 and 32. There are no recommended changes to the VGSI systems at 9V6 other than maintaining the equipment through the planning period. All PAPIs should meet obstacle clearance requirements.

Runway End Identifier Lights (REIL) REILs consist of high-intensity flashing white strobe lights located on the approach ends of runways to assist the pilot in early identification of the runway threshold. 9V6 currently does not have REILs on either Runway 14 or 32. It is recommended REILs be installed for Runway 14 and 32. REILs are currently unidirectional, but omnidirectional could be acceptable as well. Unidirectional could be considered if circling approaches are common.

Airfield Visual Visual NAVAIDs provide airport users with visual references within the airport environment. They consist of lighting, signage and pavement markings on an airport. Visual NAVAIDS are necessary to enhance situational awareness, operational capability and safety. FAA AC 150/5340-30, Design and Installation of Airport Visual Aids defines the standards for these systems.

Airport Beacon The airport beacon serves as the airport identification light so approaching pilots can identify the airport location from sunset to sunrise. The airport beacon’s location at 9V6 adequately serves the airport without known obstructions to its line of sight. The beacon was installed in 2006 and the minimum light beam angle is 2 degrees. There are no recommended changes to the Airport Beacon.

Runway & Taxiway Lighting Runway edge lights are placed off the edge of the runway surface to help pilots define the edges and end of the runway during night and low visibility conditions. Runway 14/32 is equipped with Medium Intensity Runway Lighting (MIRL) which was installed in 2001. A MIRL replacement on Runway 14/32 is recommended in the planning period.

Taxiway edge lighting delineates the taxiway and apron edges. The taxiways at 9V6 have a combination of Medium Intensity Taxiway Lighting (MITL) and reflectors. It is recommended the airport continue to maintain the MITL system and reflectors on the airfield.

Airfield lighting is pilot controlled through Common Traffic Advisory Frequency (CTAF). There are no known issues with how airfield lighting is activated at 9V6.

Airfield Signage 9V6 has mandatory, location, and directional signage on the airfield. All signage was in accordance with FAA standards when installed. Upgraded signs to latest FAA standards are recommended when lighting upgrades are completed.


Wind Cone(s) 9V6 has an existing primary lighted wind cone west of Runway 14/32. There are no supplemental wind cones at the airport. Wind cones provide pilots a quick confirmation of wind speed and direction when taking off and landing. A supplemental wind cone at the Runway 32 end is recommended since it is such a distance from the primary wind cone.

Pavement Markings Pavement markings help airport users visually identify important features on the airfield. FAA has defined numerous different pavement markings to promote safety and situational awareness as defined by FAA AC 150/5340-1, Standards for Airport Markings.

Runway - The minimum required runway markings for a standard runway are as follows:

• Visual (landing designator, centerline) • Non-Precision (landing designator, centerline, threshold)

Runway 14/32 is marked with non-precision markings on both ends. There are no recommended changes to runway markings.

Taxiway and taxilane markings are important for directional guidance for taxiing aircraft and ground vehicles. 9V6’s taxiway/taxilane markings are maintained by airport maintenance staff and are in good condition. They include taxiway/taxilane centerlines and runway hold-lines on applicable taxiways/taxilanes. There are no long-term modification recommendations for taxiway/taxilane markings at 9V6.

Holding position markings are a visual reference to prevent aircraft and vehicles from entering critical areas such as an active runway environment. The required holding position setbacks for runways at 9V6 are 125 feet from runway centerline. Existing hold line markings are 125 feet for Runway 14/32.

Meteorological Equipment 9V6 has an existing SuperAWOS (Automated Weather Observation System) located west of Runway 14/32. The unit is owned by the airport and was installed through a state grant along with 28 other units across South Dakota. The equipment is not currently certificated by the FAA for use by FAR Part 135 or 121 operations. Part 135 and 121 are the type of operations used to provide current medical flights to 9V6. The city should coordinate with the state to get this equipment certificated for such use or seek replacement equipment that meets FAA requirements such as an AWOS II or III. AWOS II provides Altimeter, Wind, Temperature, and Visibility. AWOS III provides the same as AWOS II plus Cloud Ceiling and Cloud Cover.

Communications & ATC The ability for pilots to communicate with other pilots and air traffic control (ATC) is critical for the safety and efficiency of the overall air transportation system. 9V6 will continue to be an uncontrolled airport. Communications with ATC are made possible through the Crawford RCAG transmitter allowing communications starting at 3,000 feet above ground level. Radar coverage is available starting at approximately 7,000 feet above ground level. Coverage with ATC is expected to be enhanced down to approximately 1,800 feet above ground level with the establishment of satellite-based ADS-B infrastructure over time. No airport action is necessary now.


Taxiways Taxiways provide for safe and efficient movement of aircraft between the runway and other operational areas of the airport. The taxiway system should provide critical links to airside infrastructure, increase capacity and reduce the risk of an incursion with traffic on the runway. The taxiway system should meet the standards design requirements identified in FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Change 1.

Design Standards FAA identifies the design requirements for taxiways. The design standards vary based on aircraft geometric and landing gear characteristics. The Taxiway Design Group (TDG) and Airplane Design Group (ADG) identified for the design aircraft using a particular taxiway. Some of the safety standards include:

• Taxiway Width • Taxiway/Taxilane Safety Area (TSA) • Taxiway Edge Safety Margin (TESM) • Taxiway/Taxilane Object Free Area (TOFA)

Other design standards include taxiway shoulder width to prevent jet blast soil erosion or debris ingestion for jet engines and required separation distances to other taxiways/taxilanes. More information can be found in Appendix B: General Aviation Airports 101 (Airport Design Standards).

The existing taxiways and taxilanes meet the ADG-I and TDG-1A design standards. Table 4-16 and Table 4-17 describes the specific FAA taxiway design standards for various ADG and TDG design aircraft, respectively.

Table 4-16 – FAA Taxiway Design Standards Matrix (ADG)

Design Standard Airplane Design Group (ADG) ADG-I ADG-II

Taxiway Safety Area 49 feet 79 feet Taxiway Object Free Area 89 feet 131 feet Taxilane Object Free Area 79 feet 115 feet Taxiway Centerline to Parallel Taxiway/Taxilane Centerline 70 feet 105 feet Taxilane Centerline to Parallel Taxiway/Taxilane Centerline 44.5 feet 65.5 feet Taxiway Centerline to Fixed or Movable Object 64 feet 97 feet Taxilane Centerline to Fixed or Movable Object 39.5 feet 57.5 feet Taxiway Wingtip Clearance 20 feet 26 feet Taxilane Wingtip Clearance 15 feet 18 feet

Design Standard ADG-I ADG-II Taxiways Y N Taxilanes Y N Apron Y N

Source: FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Change 1, KLJ Analysis NOTE: Taxiways include respective entrance taxiways to runways

http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/150-5300-13A-chg1-interactive.pdf


Table 4-17 – FAA Taxiway Design Standards Matrix (TDG)

Design Standard Airplane Design Group (TDG) TDG-1A TDG-1B TDG-2

Taxiway Width 25 feet 25 feet 35 feet Taxiway Edge Safety Margin (TESM) 5 feet 5 feet 7.5 feet Taxiway Shoulder Width 10 feet 10 feet 15 feet

Design Standard TDG-1A TDG-1B TDG-2 Taxiways Y N N Taxilanes Y N N Apron Y N N

Source: FAA AC 150/5300-13A, Change 1, KLJ Analysis NOTE: Taxiways include respective entrance taxiways to runways The existing airfield conditions has the apron and taxiways sufficiently separated from Runway 14/32 for the design aircraft. The only recommended change through the planning period is to reconfigure the turnarounds as depicted in Figure 4-5 when it is time to reconstruct or extend the runway.

Figure 4-5 – Taxiway Turnaround Layout

http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/150-5300-13A-chg1-interactive.pdf


Airside Data Summary The following tables provide summary data of the facility requirements and recommendations associated with the runway at 9V6 through the planning period(s) identified in this study. One key to note is that it is recommended to increase the safety surface dimensions to the A/B-II Small as an ultimate configuration but maintain the runway width at 60’. These enhancements are included in Table 4-18 Runway 14/32 Design Standard Matrix.

Table 4-18 – Runway 14/32 Design Standard Matrix

Design Standard Actual Condition

Requirement or Recommendation Existing Future Ultimate

Runway Identification 14/32 14/32 14/32 14/32 Runway Classification Utility Utility Utility Utility Aircraft Classification Small Aircraft Small Aircraft Small Aircraft Small Aircraft

Runway Design Code (RDC) A/B-I-Vis (14) A/B-I-5000 (32)

A/B-I-Vis (14) A/B-I-5000 (32) A/B-I-5000 (Both) A/B-II-5000 (Both)

Approach Reference Code (APRC) B-II-Vis/ B-II-5000

B-II-Vis/ B-II-5000 B-II-5000 (Both) B-II-5000 (Both)

Departure Reference Code (DPRC) B-II/B-II B-II/B-II B-II/B-II B-II/B-II Pavement Strength (Wheel Loading) 12,500 (DW) 12,500 (DW) 12,500 (DW) 12,500 (DW) Effective Runway Gradient 0.45% 2.0% Max. 2.0% Max. 2.0% Max. Runway Width 60’ 60’ 60’ 60’ Runway Safety Area (RSA) Width 120’ 120’ 120’ 150’ RSA Length Beyond Threshold 240’ 240’ 240’ 300’ Runway Lighting MIRL MIRL MIRL MIRL RPZ Start from Runway

No Objects

200’ 200’ 200’ RPZ Length 1,000’ 1,000’ 1,000’ RPZ Inner Width 250’ 250’ 250’ RPZ Outer Width 450’ 450’ 450’ Visibility Minimums 1 mile (32) 1 mile (Both) 1 Mile (Both) 1 Mile (Both) Approach Type Vis / NPI NPI (Both) NPI (Both) NPI (Both) 14 CFR Part 77 Approach Slope 20:1 / 34:1 34:1 (Both) 34:1 (Both) 34:1 (Both) ROFA Width 250’ 250’ 250’ 500’ ROFA Length Beyond Threshold 240’ 240’ 240’ 300’ ROFZ Width 250’ 250’ 250’ 250’ ROFZ Length Past Runway 200’ 200’ 200’ 200’ Threshold Siting Surface (TSS) Type Type 2 / Type 4 Type 2 / Type 4 Type 4 (Both) Type 4 (Both) TSS Start from Runway End 0’ / 200’ 200’ (Both) 200’ (Both) 200’ (Both) TSS Length 2,250’ / 10,000’ 10,000’ (Both) 10,000’ (Both) 10,000’ (Both) TSS Inner Width 250’ / 400’ 400’ (Both) 400’ (Both) 400’ (Both) TSS Outer Width 700’ / 3,400’ 3,400’ (Both) 3,400’ (Both) 3,400’ (Both) TSS Slope 20:1 (Both) 20:1 (Both) 20:1 (Both) 20:1 (Both) Visual and Instrument NAVAIDs PAPI PAPI, REIL PAPI, REIL PAPI, REIL Runway and Taxiway Separation 330’ 150’ 150’ 240’ Runway and Parking Separation 300’ 125’ 125’ 250’ Runway and Hold Line Separation 125’ 125’ 125’ 125’ Centerline Distance to 35’ BRL 495’ 495’ 495’

Note: RED indicates a known deficiency to existing minimum design standards; GREEN indicates ultimate difference Source: FAA AC 150/5300-13A – Change 1, Airport Design, KLJ Analysis


General Aviat ion Background General Aviation (GA) includes all civil aviation activities except for commercial service. Providing facilities and access for general aviation users at 9V6 will continue to be important for the vitality of the Martin community. Based aircraft is projected to grow a total of 14 percent with operations growing by 19 percent through PAL 4. Facilities should be planned to provide flexibility for growth including a large storage hangar for itinerant traffic at 9V6. General aviation facilities evaluated in this section include aircraft storage hangars, aircraft parking apron and arrival/departure terminal building.

Aircraft Storage Aircraft storage requirements are driven by operational requirements, aircraft size, local climate, and owner preferences. For based aircraft, the harsh winters in the upper Great Plains drive all owners to seek aircraft storage facilities rather than outdoor parking on an aircraft parking apron. Owners prefer to have covered, secure storage for their aircraft with space for other aeronautical facilities including an office or maintenance/storage areas. All based aircraft at 9V6 are stored in aircraft storage hangars. Transient aircraft travel to airports for up to a few days at a time. These aircraft typically park on the aircraft apron or seek temporary indoor aircraft storage, especially during adverse weather conditions.

A facility space model was developed to estimate aircraft storage hangar size needs. The model uses the based aircraft fleet mix forecast and estimates a size per aircraft type to determine recommended facility space. The 9V6 based aircraft forecasts estimate one additional based aircraft through the planning period (PAL 4) which would be a single-engine aircraft.

Based Aircraft All 7 based aircraft are currently stored in approximately 11,800 square feet of available aircraft storage space. The following assumptions were made about aircraft storage space requirements:

• Single-Engine Piston/Other/Ultralight: 40’ x 30’ storage area (1,200 SF) • Multi-Engine/Turboprop: 60’ x 50’ storage area (3,000 SF) • Turbojet: 60’ x 60’ storage area (3,600 SF) • Helicopter: 50’ x 40’ storage area (2,000 SF)

Using these assumptions with based aircraft forecasts, a projected need for based aircraft storage space is determined. It is important to understand that this projection provides a broad estimate of needed


space into the future for facility planning. Actual space needs are demand-driven. For example, the presence of an FBO may require additional space for aircraft maintenance.

Table 4-19 – Based Aircraft Storage Requirements Category Existing Base PAL 1 PAL 2 PAL 3 PAL 4

Based Aircraft Storage Space (SF) Aircraft Storage Space 11,800 10,225 10,701 11,205 11,640 11,971 Capacity/Deficiency - 1,575 1,099 595 160 171

Source: KLJ Analysis. Note: RED indicates a deficiency to existing capacity.

The above analysis suggests, except for possibly replacing existing aged hangars, sufficient aircraft storage space exists to accommodate based aircraft needs through the planning period. All hangar space is dedicated for exclusive use and may not be available for all types of additional based aircraft storage.

The recommended hangar types to accommodate aircraft storage depend on airport and aircraft owner preferences and financial position. There are two main hangar types:

• T-Hangar: Nested small aircraft storage units within a rectangular building. • Conventional Hangar: Commonly known as “box” hangars are square/rectangular.

Hangars are constructed with public or private funds as demand warrants. This facility requirement analysis shows there is a need for little additional hangar space through the planning period however replacement of hangars which are beyond their useful life may be necessary.

Transient Aircraft Transient aircraft storage is utilized on an as-needed basis as aircraft require temporary storage. Aircraft types that require this type of storage are typically larger and more expensive airplanes such as turboprop and turbojet aircraft. Storage timeframes vary but can be for a few hours to several days. Transient aircraft storage should plan to accommodate one single-engine and one multi-engine/turboprop airplane through the planning period.

Table 4-20 – Transient Aircraft Storage Requirements Category Existing Base PAL 1 PAL 2 PAL 3 PAL 4

Transient Aircraft Storage Space (SF) Corporate Hangar - 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 Capacity/Deficiency - 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400



Aircraft Parking Apron GA aircraft parking is utilized by transient and based aircraft. With all the based aircraft at 9V6 stored in hangars, the aircraft parking necessary for transient aircraft requiring parking for a few minutes to a few days. Itinerant aircraft seldom require covered aircraft storage and typically use apron parking space.

Table 4-21 – Aircraft Parking Requirements Category Existing Base PAL 1 PAL 2 PAL 3 PAL 4

Itinerant Aircraft Parking Itinerant Operations (43% of Total) - 661 684 713 751 798 Busy Day (5.8% of Peak Month) - 5.7 5.9 6.2 6.5 6.9 Apron Req. (50% of Design Day) - 2.9 2.9 3.1 3.2 3.4 Itinerant Aircraft Parking by ADG - ADG-I Aircraft (880 sy each) - 2.0 2.1 2.1 2.3 2.4 ADG-II Aircraft (1,300 sy each) - 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 Based Aircraft Parking by ADG ADG-I Aircraft (880 sy each) - 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 Total Aircraft Parking (sy) ADG-I Aircraft 2,400 2,500 2,600 2,700 2,800 ADG-II Aircraft 1,100 1,100 1,200 1,300 1,400 In-Out Hangar Space (+10%) 400 400 400 400 400 Entry Road/Taxilane 1,100 1,100 1,100 1,100 1,100 Total Apron Space (sy) 5,000 5,000 5,200 5,300 5,500 5,800 Capacity/(Deficiency) - - (200) (300) (500) (800)


Apron size must accommodate both the required aircraft parking positions and maneuvering standards. Aircraft maneuvering at 9V6 are required to accommodate safety setbacks for FAA ADG-I wingspan for the design aircraft to access aircraft parking positions, the fueling area and aerial applicator area.

Through PAL 4 a total of 4 equivalent aircraft tie-downs is needed to meet demand so the existing 5 tie-downs should be maintained through the planning period and paving for the aerial applicator area should be added which will provide sufficient apron space for the planning period.

In addition, since medical helicopter operations will be relocated to the airport in the future when the hospital helipad is removed, it is recommended that a helipad/parking position be added adjacent to the apron.


GA Terminal Building There is not a GA terminal building at 9V6. A GA terminal is used for passengers and flight crews to have access to various types of services such as:

• Passenger Waiting Area • Restrooms • Vending • Pilots Flight Planning

Terminal buildings should be located adjacent to the transient aircraft parking apron with good visibility to the airfield and be in close approximately to the automobile parking and waiting area. In most cases the terminal building is located within or near a Fixed Base Operator (FBO) providing aeronautical services. There is no FBO at 9V6 so a location near the main apron is recommended.

The estimated planning-level size of the terminal building is based on peak hour total airport operations, 2.5 passengers per peak hour operation and 130 square feet of space per passenger as identified in ACRP Report 113. These figures provide an estimate of the number of passengers to arrive, depart and generally flow through the GA terminal. Calculations are summarized in Table 4-21.

Table 4-22 – GA Terminal Building Size Requirements Category Existing Base PAL 1 PAL 2 PAL 3 PAL 4

GA Terminal Building Size (SF) Peak Hour GA Operations - 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.0 Number of Passengers - 4.3 4.5 4.8 5.0 5.0 Total Building Size 0 430 450 480 500 500 Capacity/Deficiency - 430 450 480 500 500


A GA terminal located as a part of a hangar for transient aircraft would meet the existing and projected future GA itinerant passenger needs.


Support Faci l i t ies Support facilities are necessary to support a safe and efficiently run airport supporting airport operations and the travelling public.

Airport Administration 9V6 is owned and operated by the City of Martin. Airport administration is the responsibility of city staff located in off-airport city offices. This arrangement is expected to continue and be sufficient. A small office area in a GA Terminal would meet needs through the planning period.

Airport Maintenance & Snow Removal The City of Martin does not have a dedicated facility to store airport maintenance equipment. Typical equipment is used to cut grass or control snow and ice. All equipment is currently stored in city facilities off the airport. For 9V6, a dedicated equipment storage building should be considered.

Snow and ice control equipment typically required includes a carrier vehicle (i.e. dump truck or tractor), snow plows, spreaders, sweepers, and blowers. For non-winter operations, grass cutting is accomplished with a carrier vehicle (i.e. tractor) and mower attachment. Smaller equipment is also used to facilitate snow removal or grass cutting. Equipment should be stored in a dedicated heated building for timely access and protection from the weather. North facing building doors should be avoided if possible, to minimize prolonged snow and ice accumulation.

Total equipment storage space needs are determined by type of equipment planned to be stored. Per ACRP Report 113, Guidebook on General Aviation Facility Planning, the assumption of 2 equipment bays (dump truck, tractor w/ mower, equipment/material storage) was made with an estimated 600 SF for each equipment storage bay.

Table 4-23 – Equipment Storage Building Size Requirements Category Existing Base PAL 1 PAL 2 PAL 3 PAL 4

MES Building Size (SF) Equipment Storage Bays 0 2 2 2 2 2 Total Building 0 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 Capacity/Deficiency - 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200

Source: KLJ Analysis. Note: RED indicates a deficiency to existing capacity. An Equipment Storage building of approximately 30’ x 40’ in size should be planned at 9V6 to store airport equipment. It should be noted that not all space areas described in this section are eligible for FAA funding.

Fueling Facilities There is not currently a publicly available fuel facility at 9V6. Little demand for fuel was identified in the research of existing conditions. Even with little demand, it is recommended that a location be identified for a fuel facility which could include aviation gasoline and/or jet fuel (JET-A). Dispensing units available 24-hours a day with a credit card should be considered if a facility is installed.


Fencing, Security & Wildlife Security & Fencing Security is an important consideration when operating a safe airport. Transportation Security Administration (TSA) published a Security Guidelines for General Aviation Airport Operators and Users document in 2017 providing recommended airport design guidelines. The guidelines address people, aircraft, and infrastructure. Perimeter fencing is the primary element of security at 9V6 and this is being enhanced with new wildlife fencing being installed.

Wildlife Control & Mitigation Controlling wildlife on or near the airport helps mitigate existing and prevent the creation of potential new hazards to aircraft. The airport can take steps to help increase safety of the airfield as identified in the Wildlife Hazard Management Plan (WHMP). The WHMP recommends the following action items:

• Form a Wildlife Hazard Working Group. Designate a Wildlife Coordinator • Follow the grass habitat management guidelines and work towards maintaining a dense grass

habitat on the airfield that contains minimal non-grass vegetation. • Remove all trees from the airfield. • Develop an effective program to haze hazardous birds (hawks, waterfowl and gulls) from the

airfield. A no-tolerance policy for these species should be enforced whenever these birds are seen on the airfield. Lethal control, with proper permits should be taken when necessary to reinforce the non-lethal techniques.

• Enclose the airfield with an effective deer proof perimeter fence. • Train employees in the safe and effective application of wildlife dispersal methods and

equipment, including the safe use of firearms and pyrotechnics. • Develop a Wildlife Activity Log or Database for Recording and Tracking Wildlife Activity, Wildlife

Strikes and Control Efforts The perimeter fencing noted above is under construction with a phased project. The other items are operational in nature and are being undertaken by the City of Martin.

Utilities The existing utilities were addressed in Chapter 2: Facility & Environmental Inventory. The airport has electricity, water, and telecommunications. It only lacks sanitary sewer and natural gas which are in place as needed with septic systems and propane tanks. The use of septic systems and propane tanks will be adequate as needed to support the potential development at the airport through the planning period.

Landside Faci l i t ies Ground Access, Circulation & Parking The overall design objective is to provide ground vehicles with access to and from the terminal area and hangar facilities using a primary access road. To achieve this, access points should limit automobile access to the apron, hangar area and any field access points. The number of hangar access points should be limited to reduce the possibility of vehicle/aircraft incidents which improves safety. Access roads should be paved to reduce the likelihood of foreign object debris (FOD) on the airside areas where it may become a hazard to aircraft.


The airport access is by a gravel road connecting Highway 18 to the hangar area. The road provides access to the general public as well as maintenance equipment and emergency equipment. The alignment of the access road should continue to provide controlled access to airside facilities.

Automobile parking at general aviation airports should accommodate landside access needed to serve aeronautical facilities. Facilities requiring automobile parking include terminal areas, aircraft storage hangars, administration, maintenance equipment storage buildings and FBOs. Vehicles should be discouraged from parking in airside areas. Automobile parking lots should be sized for the demand, have appropriate number of handicapped spaces and be lighted for night-time use and security.

Gravel parking areas exists adjacent to the apron and adjacent to a hangar at the north end. It is recommended that the access road and parking by the apron be paved during the planning period.

Summary This chapter identifies safety, capacity and development needs for the Martin Municipal Airport based on forecasted activity levels. These recommendations provide the basis for formulating development alternatives in Chapter 5: Alternatives Analysis to adequate address recommended improvements. The following summarizes the facility recommendations:

Airside Facilities • Maintain Runway 14/32 as 60’ wide to accommodate A/B-I Small aircraft. • Expand Airport Property by approximately 25 feet on the east side to meet A/B-II Small design

standards (except for runway width). • Extend Runway 14/32 from 3,699’ to 4,600’ by PAL 4. • Relocate SuperAWOS and assure the unit is certified by FAA for use by Part 135 and 121

operators (or replace with AWOS II or III). • Expand apron in aerial applicators area. • Add helipad at the airport.

General Aviation Facilities • Replace and add hangars as demand requires. • Construct a hangar for transient aircraft with public waiting/terminal space.

Support Facilities • Complete second phase of Wildlife fence around south end of airport. • Construct an equipment storage building. • Identify location for fuel facilities.

Landside Facilities • Construct paved access road from highway to apron area. • Construct paved parking adjacent to apron area.

Documents

Introduction - Martin SD Airport Plan · 2019-06-24 · Martin Municipal Airport: Airport Master Plan Study June 2019 Chapter 4: Facility Requirements Page 4-3 . aircraft will stay