Item C1
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
MEETING DATE: 04/17/03
DIVISION: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
BULK ITEM:
DEPARTMENT: AIRPORTS
AGENDA ITEM WORDING: Presentation by URS of the Master Plan Update for the Key West International Airport
(KWIA) .
ITEM BACKGROUND: A Master Plan is an inventory of airport facilities that are needed both now and in the future. It
tells us what we need now, which may differ from what we have now, and it also tells us what we will need for the next 20
years. Because meeting these needs almost always requires airport development and expansion projects, Master Plans
tend to be controversial. Our master plan discusses the need for many airport improvements, which include the runway
safety area, a runway extension, and a new airline passenger terminal complex. We tried to make this is a community
document and not just an airport document. Over the last two years, we have invited 25 agencies and organizations in
the Key West area to participate in our master planning process. Many options for airport expansion were presented, Not
all of these groups chose to participate, and those that did were not always in agreement on all airport issues. The
document reflects the majority view of those who attended the Master Plan meetings. URS will also present information
on funding scenarios for the projects proposed in this Master Plan.
PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION: URS Professional Service Order (PSO) to commission the Master Plan
Update approved by the BOCC 3/21/01.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Please review the plan and the presentation. Please adopt the Master plan for submittal
to the FAA for their review and comment, or suggest modifications to the document. If the decision is made to move
ahead with the terminal project, we would need a motion to proceed with a Terminal Concept Study, which would be the
next step in that process.
TOTAL COST: N/A
BUDGETED: N/A
COST TO COUNTY: N/A
REVENUE PRODUCING: N/A
AMOUNT PER MONTHIYEAR: N/A
APPROVED BY: County Attorney N/A
OMB/Purchasing N/A
Risk Management N/A
DIRECTOR APPROVAL
~+r
Peter J. Horton
DOCUMENTATION: Included X
To Follow
Not Required
AGENDA ITEM #
~ ~ c::-/
DISPOSITION:
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
MASTER PLAN UPDATE
DRAFT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Prepared for:
Monroe County, Florida
and the
Feden! A_tion Ad..dnlstration
Prepared by:
URS
Mareh 1003
PREFACE
Key West International Airport is a critical element of the transportation system for Monroe
County and the City of Key West. The airport provides facilities that enable commercial air
service, which in turn, supports the travel needs of residents, businesses and visitors. In addition,
the airport provides important facilities for general aviation and air cargo operators.
To ensure that Key West International Airport continues to meet the aviation infrastructure needs
of Monroe County, an update of the airport's 1986 master plan was undertaken. This master
plan update reassesses projections of passengers and aircraft operations and provides alternatives
for the future development of airside and landside facilities. The plan provides airport
management with a guide to recommended capital improvements and their projected cost.
The study was guided by an Advisory Committee that reviewed the findings of the study at key
intervals and decided on alternatives preferred for future development. The resulting plan is
briefly summarized on the following pages. For full descriptions and illustrations of proposed
projects and other elements of the plan, please refer to the master plan report and the airport
layout plan drawing set.
W:U2637817 _KWIA Master P1an\Exec Sum.doc\3l14103
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Executive Summary
STUDY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The goal of the master plan update for Key West International Airport was to provide a long-
term plan for the development of the airport in concert with the needs of the area it serves. The
objectives that were established to reach this goal are listed below:
.
Inventory existing airport facilities.
.
Forecast future passengers and aircraft operations to determine future demand
levels for airport facilities.
.
Identify the facility improvements needed to accommodate projected levels of
demand.
.
Devise alternate methods of providing the required facilities.
.
Plan future development in a manner that is operationally efficient.
.
Assess the environmental impact of proposed development.
.
Schedule capital improvements to coincide with the projected demand for
each facility.
.
Prepare cost estimates of proposed capital improvements.
W:UUi37817 _KWIA Master PIan\Exe<: Sum.doc\3/14103
ES-l
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Executive Summary
STUDY CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The master plan update provides the following conclusions and recommendations for
consideration by the Monroe County Commission.
.
Existing airfield facilities and pavements will be in good condition once the
rehabilitation of the runway is complete. This project is scheduled for 2003.
.
Existing landside facilities are in good condition except for the passenger
terminal, which is in fair to poor condition, and the terminal annex that is in
poor condition.
.
The master plan projects passenger enplanements will grow to 445,083 by
2021 from 266,413 in 2002. This represents an average annual growth rate of
2.5 percent. The historical growth rate from 1991 to 2001 was 3.3 percent.
.
The master plan projects aircraft operations will grow to 114,080 by 2021
from 91,524 in 2002. This represents an average annual growth rate of 1.1
percent. The historical growth rate from 1991 to 2001 was 0.9 percent.
.
Existing airfield capacity is sufficient to accommodate projected level of
aircraft operations without meaningful delay.
.
The runway's safety area does not meet FAA standards. The master plan
proposes a project to bring the runway safety area into conformance with FAA
requirements. The proposed project would impact up to 38 acres of wetlands.
A feasibility study is currently examining the environmental mitigation that
would be required for this project.
.
The existing runway length (4,801 feet) is not sufficient to serve existing and
future aircraft without incuning payload penalties as high as 40 percent. A
runway length of 5,801 feet would accommodate existing aircraft and aircraft
likely to serve the airport in the future without incuning substantial payloads
penalties. Therefore, the master plan proposes an extension of 750-feet on the
west end of the runway and an extension of 500-feet on the east end of the
runway. These extensions would provide an effective takeoff length of 5,801
feet for departures on Runway 9 and 5,301 feet for departures on Runway 27.
Effective landing lengths would be 5,051 feet on Runway 9 and 4,801 feet on
Runway 27.
.
The existing passenger terminal is seriously undersized to accommodate
existing levels of passengers. All functional areas of the existing terminal are
too small for present passenger levels. Existing passenger demand requires
nearly 40,000 square feet of space. By comparison, the existing terminal,
including non-public areas and the terminal annex, provides only 22,000
ES-2
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
W:U2637817_KWIA Master P1anlExec Sum.doc\3/14103
Executive Summary
square feet of space. The master plan projects that future passenger growth
will increase the required amount of space to approximately 50,000 square
feet by 2021.
.
The master plan proposes a concept for a new 50,000 square foot passenger
terminal to replace the existing terminal. The concept proposes that the
terminal be elevated to meet floodplain requirements and includes the
construction of an elevated roadway and parking structure. The proposed
terminal concept has an estimated construction cost of $23.2 million and a
program cost of $5.3 million for an estimated total cost of $28.6 million.
.
Due to the substantial cost of the concept for a new terminal, the master plan
also includes an alternate concept for providing additional terminal space.
The alternate concept proposes the construction of 8,000 square feet of new
elevated space between the existing terminal and the PIS Building. This new
space would require the demolition of the existing Terminal Annex. This
concept also includes the reallocation and renovation of space in the existing
terminal. The alternate plan has an estimated construction cost of $4.2 million
and a program cost of $1.1 million for an estimated total cost of $5.4 million.
.
Construction of a new passenger terminal would reduce the number of parking
spaces at the airport. Adjustments to parking rates would be required to
encourage use of alternate modes of transportation and manage parking
demand.
.
A new access road is recommended as part of the new terminal concept. This
access road would provide access from South Roosevelt Boulevard to the fuel
farm, general aviation facilities, the air traffic control tower and the Aircraft
Rescue and Fire Fighting Station.
.
The master plan proposes the relocation of Monroe County Department of
Public Works facilities off airport property. Additional rental car facilities are
proposed in the space vacated by public works.
.
The master plan includes third party development for the removal of obsolete
general aviation hangars and replacement with new hangars along with new
tie-down space.
.
Land acquisition is not recommended by the master plan.
ES-3
W:U2Ci37817_KWIA Master P1anlExOi: Sum.do<\3/14103
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Executive Summary
RECO~NDEDPLAN
The recommended development plan for Key West International Airport is divided into short-
term and intermediate-term phases. These phases correspond to two consecutive five-year
periods (2003 through 2007 and 2008 through 2012). The projects within each phase are
intended to meet projected levels of demand. Changes to project scheduling will occur
depending upon funding constraints, changes in demand levels and airport management and
tenant priorities.
Short- Term Proiect (2003 throue:h 2007)
Project priorities during the short-term period include continuing environmental studies to
support the construction of a standard runway safety area and runway extension, the construction
of terminal area projects, and the continuation of the ongoing sound insulation program. These
projects are illustrated in Figure 1. Estimated costs for these projects are shown in Table 1.
TABLE 1
SHORT.TERM (2003 TO 2007)
PROJECT COST ESTIMATES
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
1 NA $1,000,000 $1,000,000
2 $150,000 $40,000 $190,000
3 $1,530,000 $380,000 $1,910,000
4 $160,000 $40,000 $200,000
5 $110,000 $40,000 $150,000
6 NA $60,000 $60,000
7 $4,290,000 $1,070,000 $5,360,000
8 $310,000 $70,000 $380,000
9 $23,810,000 $5,950,000 $29,760,000
10 $2,500,000 $1,000,000 $3,500,000
11 $2,500,000 $1,000,000 $3,500,000
12 $2,500,000 $1,000,000 $3,500,000
13 $2,500,000 $1,000,000 $3,500,000
Source: URS Corporation, 2003.
Notes: 1 These projects to be financed by a combination of third party funding.
W:\12637817 _KW1A Master P1anlExec Sum.doc\3/14103
ES-4
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
J:\KEY WES1\lAASTER PLAN UPDATE\EXHIBITS\F1G 1.0WG 03/12/03 14:48
@@@(9)@@8@@8gee
z z z z z -rj
-0 -0 -0 -0 ~ ~
I I I I ~ )>
-0 -0 -0 -0 :;:0 g
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~~~~)>,(/)
r :;:0
0) 01 ~ Vol 0
)>
o
""' ""' ""' ""'
Z Z Z Z
o 0 0 0
-l -l -l -l
(/) (/) (/) (/)
::J: ::J: ::J: ::J:
o 0 0 0
~ ~ ~ ~
""'-' ""'-' ""'-' ""'-'
'"
o
o
~
>
"
:I:
n
~ O.Z
Z
r:l
fTI
-i
'"
o
o
5"
-
~ ~
CD ~"
~Q)CD
CD _
:;, CP<
ii>~<
:::I Q) <;
c -CD
'R >cn
CD -.-
- ....
CD "'C
o
....
-
::!J
C)
.....C
:;:0
r,1
en
%
o
::0
....
I
....
m
::0
i:
."
::0
o
c..
m
"
....
en
I II
III
III
III
III
III
I II
I II
III
III
III
I If
III
III
III
I II
III
\ \ \
\ \ \
\ \ \
\ \\
\\\
\\\
\ \\
\ \\
\ \\
\\\
\ \\
\\\
\\\
\\\
\\\
\\\
\\\
~ ~ (/)
:;:0 :;:0 C)
~ ~ Z
)>
Z Z C)
)> )> ,."
r r
-0
,." (/) :;:0
~ ~ 0
)> 0 C)
Z -< ~
(/) ""' ~
o z
z 0 Z
""' -l 0
Z (/) -l
o ::J: (/)
-l 0 ::J:
(/) ~ 0
6 ""'-' ~
~ ""'-'
""'-'
-rj p )> -0 r
OJ )>. :;:0 :;:0 rrl
o ('),." G)
:;:0 -0 rrl
-0 ::J: )> )> z
)> )> -rj :;:0 0
:;:0 Z -l ,."
^ C)
Z )> ~)> !!!
c):;:o (/)
-0 (/) ""'
:;:0 ::J: Z
o :;:0 0
~ )> -l
,." (') (/)
(') ^ ::J:
-l 0
~
""'-'
I""
)>
;,s
~
-<
)>
1 0
~
I!;J
.,.
)>
s;
)>
~I
I I I~
s.f
I
I I
~ ~J
++-t-
\
TAXIWAY F
~~
c!<(/cp
o
'~"'\
\
Executive Summary
Intermediate- Term Proiects (2008 throueh 2012)
Projects included in the intermediate-term focus on implementation of airfield improvements. It
is anticipated that the EIS and associated environmental approvals would take a number of years
to obtain. Therefore, assuming that the necessary environmental approvals are obtained, the
construction of airfield projects would likely occur in the intermediate-term period. These
projects are illustrated in Figure 2. Estimated costs for these projects are shown in Table 2.
TABLE 2
INTERMEDIA TE- TERM (2008 TO 2012)
PROJECT COST ESTIMATES
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
$7,920,000
$2,600,000
$2,500,000
$13,020,000
$1,980,000
$650,000
$1,000,000
$3,630,000
$9,900,000
$3,250,000
$3,500,000
$16,650,000
Source: URS Corporation, 2003.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master P1ao\Exec Sum.doc\3/14103
ES-5
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
J:\KEY WESl\
MASTER PLAN UP
DATE\EXHIBITS\F1G 2
I II .DWG 03/12/03
III
III
\11
III
1\1
\\1
1\1
III
III
\II
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
\II
III
III
1\1
III
III
1\1
1\1
III
III
III
1\1
III
\1\
\II
III
1\1
Iii
//1
II/
/;j/
II(
",
\\\
\\\
1\1
II'
Iii
1/1
III
\II
1\1
III
III
1\1
1\1
\11
III
,_ III
11r-......::::............
\~ -
,..::::-..=-
--~,
\ \\
III
Iii
III
III
III
III
Iii
III
Iii
III
III
111
III
Iii
III
Iii
111
/II
ii/
III
ii/
1//
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
II/
III
III
111
/11
1/1
1/1
1/1
III
1/1
III
III
III
III
II/
III
III
III
/II
/II
111
III
III
III
III
\II
III
\1\
\II
\II
\II
\II
\11
\II
\\I
\1\
\II
III
\1\
\1\
\1\
\1\
\1\
\1\
\11
\1\
\1\
\1\
\1\
\1\
\1\
\\\
\1\
",
'"
,"
\1\
,~
,~
",
,,'
",
",
",
",
",
",
",
",
",
"....
.......,........,;:-
--~
I
i@98
)>
::::0
"'0
o
::::0
-i
"'0
::::0
o
"'0
f'TI
::::0
~
Z
"'0
I
"'0
:c
)>
(J)
f'TI
'-J
(")
o
z
(J)
~
C
(")
-i
::::0
C
Z
~
-<
f'TI
X
jTf
Z
(J)
o
z
(")
o
z
(J)
~
C
(")
-i
::::0
C
Z
~
-<
(J)
)>
"'T1
f'TI
=<
,....,
Z
o
-i
(J)
:c
o
~
-
)>
::::0
f'TI
)>
r
Z
f'TI
Cl
8
o "Z
S"
-
i: CD
II> ...
@- i ~
.... ::!:. CD
~ 0 '<
~ i:e
~ CD
c. >0
CDet -.-
-a
o
...
-
~~
~~
o
--- ------ -
------ ---- --
---- ----- ----
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
MASTER PLAN UPDATE
DRAFT REPORT
Prepand for:
MolU'Oe County, Florida
and the
Fedenl Aviation Administration
",~,'I.'@~"
~ """\ ,\1
~~
Prepand by:
URS
Mareh 2003
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTI ON 1 - INVENTORY ............................................ ...............................................................1-1
1.1 IN'TRODUCTION .............. ........ .... ..................... '" ............. ....... ....... .......... ......... ............. .1-1
1.2 AIRPORT mSTOR Y ............. ................ ........ ..... ....... ..... ..... .......... .......... .................. ........1-2
1.3 FACILITIES IN"VENTOR Y ............... ..................... .............................. ....... ......................1-2
1.3.1 Airfield Facilities........................................................................... .................... .1- 2
1.3.1.1 Runway............................................................................................ ..1- 2
1.3.1.2 Taxiways.......................................................................................... ..1-3
1.3.1.3 Aprons.............................................................................................. ..1-3
1.3.2 Building Area Facilities.. .......................... ......................... ... ..............................1-4
1.3.2.1 Passenger Terminal................... ..... ............. ............ ............. .... ........1-4
1.3.2.2 Cape Air Annex ............. ..... ............... .............. .......... .................. .....1-4
1.3.2.3 Federal Inspection Services Building ...............................................1-4
1.3.2.4 Fixed Base Operator (FBO) Facilities ..............................................1-4
1.3.2.5 Individual Aircraft Storage Hangars ................................................1-5
1.3.2.6 Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting (ARFF) Building .........................1"'5
1.3.2.7 Air Traffic Control Tower (A TCT) ..................................................1-5
1.3.2.8 FedEx Cargo Building............ ................................... ............ ........ ...1-5
1.3.2.9 Rental Car Facilities ...... ..................................................... ............ ..1-5
1.3.2.10 Highway Patrol.............. ......................... ......... ...... ...........................1-5
1.3.2.11 Teenage Center of Key West............................................................1-6
1.3.2.12 Island Aeroplane Tours ................................ .................. ..................1-6
1.3.2.13 Monroe County Department of Public Works .................................1-6
1.3.2.14 East Martello Museum and Garden.................................................. 1-6
1.3.2.15 Roads and Parking ............. ..... .......... ........ ...... ........................... .... ...1-6
1.3.2.16 National Weather Service (NWS) Upper Air Inflation Building.....1-7
1.3.2.17 Automated Surface Observation System (ASOS) ............................1-7
1.4 METEOROLOGICAL DATA........ .................. ..... .............. ................. ........ .................... ..1-7
1.4.1 Temperature and Precipitation ......... .......... ........ ............................. ............ ......1-7
1.4.2 Ceiling and Visibility...................................................................................... ..1-8
1.4.3 Wind Analysis. ........................................ ... ................................. .... ..................1-9
1.5 AIRSP ACFJ AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL PROCEDURES .................................................1-10
1.5.1 Neighboring Airports ..... .................................... ..... ........... ...............................1-10
1.5.2 Operational Procedures. ........ ................... ...... ..................... ..... ................. ........1-1 0
1.5.3 Flight Corridors.............................................. .................................................. .1-12
1.5.4 Navigational and Visual Aids ................ .................. ......... ................................1-12
1.5.5 Existing Published Approaches ..... ..... .... ....... .............. ................................... ..1-12
1.5.6 EYW A TCT ......... .................... .................. ............ ......... .......... ....................... .1-12
1.5.7 Runway Protection Zones (RPZ) ......................................................................1-13
1.6 ENVIRONMENTAL DA T A..............................................................................................1-13
1.6.1 Salt Ponds.. .................... ..... .......... .......... ....... ....................... .... ....... .......... ...... ..1-13
1.6.2 Mangroves..... ................. ..... .... ........... ........ ........ ....... ...................................... ..1-14
1.6.3 Development Considerations .... ...... ...................... ..... .... ........ ......... ............ ......1-14
W:112637817_KWIA Master PIanITOC.doc
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
1.7 LAND USE .......................................................................... ..................................... ...1-14
1.7.1 Adjacent Land Use... ......................................................................................1-14
1.7.2 Current Airport Land Use .............................................. ............................. ...1-15 .
SECTION 2 - FORECASTS OF A VIA TION ACTIVITY ........................................................2-1
2.1 mTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... .............. .2-1
2.2 AIRPORT SERVICE AREA...........;......................... ........................................................ .2-1
2.3 ANALYSIS OF FORECAST FACTORS ..........................................................................2-1
2.3.1 EconomyfTourism............................................................................................... .2-2
2.3.2 Seasonality...................................................................... .................................... .2- 2
2.3.3 Roadway Congestion..................................................... ...... ............................... .2-2
2.3.4 Competing Modes of Travel............................................ ....................................2-2
2.3.5 Reestablishing Diplomatic Relations with Cuba .................................................2-3
lIISTORICAL AIRLINE ACTIVITy............................................................................... .2-3
2.4.1 Passenger Enplanements. .... .......... ........................................................ ...............2-3
2.4.2 Monthly Passenger Distribution......................................................................... .2-5
2.4.3 Airline Market Shares......................................................................................... .2- 5
lIISTORICAL AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS.................................................................... ..2-6
2.5.1 Annual Aircraft Operations............. ................................................................... ..2-6
2.5.1.1 Air Carrier Operations .........................................................................2-6
2.5.1.2 Commuter Operations .........................................................................2-7
2.5.1.3 General Aviation Operations ...............................................................2-8
2.5.1.4 Military Operations ............ .............. ........................................ ...........2-8
2.5.2 Monthly Aircraft Operations.............................................................................. ..2-9
2.5.3 Based Aircraft........................... ......................................................................... ..2-9
AVIATION FORECASTS ... ......... .... .............. .......... .......... ............................... ................2-10
2.6.1 Passenger Enplanements .................. ..................................................... ...............2-10
2.6.1.1 Previous Forecasts... ...................................... .................... ..................2-10
2.6.1.2 Updated Forecasts ........................................................ ......... ...... ........2-11
2.6.1.3 Recommended Forecast ............. .................... .....................................2-13
Airline Operations........................................ ...................................................... ..2-15
General Aviation............................... ............................... ................................... .2-16
2.6.3.1 Based Aircraft.......... ............. ...............................................................2-16
2.6.3.2 Based Aircraft Fleet Mix .....................................................................2-16
2.6.3.3 General Aviation Operations.. .......................................................... ...2-17
2.6.4 Military Operations............................................................................................. .2-18
2.6.5 Total Aircraft Operations ................. .................. .......................................... ........2-18
PEAKmG CHARACTERISTICS...................................................... ........ ...................... ..2-18
2.7.1 Passengers................................... ..................................................................... ....2-19
2.7.2 Aircraft Operations............................................................................................ ..2-20
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.6.2
2.6.3
11
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PIan\TOC.doc
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
SECTION 3 - DEMAND/CAPACITY ANALYSIS AND FACILITY REQUIREMENTS ...3-1
3 .1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. .3-1
3.2 AIRFIELD......................................................................................................................... .3-1
3.2.1 Demand/Capacity Analysis................................................................................. .3-1
3.2.1.1 Meteorological Conditions ....... ......... ........................................ ....... ...3-2
3.2.1.2 Aircraft Mix........................................................................................ .3- 2
3.2.1.3 Runway Use ............... ....... .................................... ......................... .....3-3
3.2.1.4 Touch-and-Go Operations ....... .... ........................................................3-3
3.2.1.5 Percentage Arrivals ............................................................................ .3-4
3.2.1.6 Exit Taxiway Locations........................................................ ...............3-4
3.2.2 Capacity Analysis Results................................................................................... .3-4
3.2.2.1 Hourly Capacity ................................................................................. .3-4
3.2.2.2 Annual Capacity................................................................................ ..3- 5
3.2.3 Requirements...................................................................................................... .3-6
3.2.3.1 Design Criteria .......... .......... ...... ........ ......................... .... ..... ................3-6
3.2.3.2 Runway Safety Areas ..........................................................................3-8
3.2.3.3 Runway Object Free Area ...................................................................3-9
3.2.3.4 Runway Separation Standards ...... ..... ............... .............. ..... ..... ...........3-9
3.2.3.5 Number of Runways........................................................................... .3-9
3.2.3.6 Runway:Length .................... ....... ....... .................... ............... ..............3-10
3.2.3.7 Runway Width...... ... ..... .... ...... ............................................. ..... ...... .....3-14
3.2.3.8 Runway Strength ... ... ......... ...... ............................... ........................ .....3-14
3.2.3.9 Runway Pavement Markings....... ................ ........... ........................... ..3-14
3.2.3.10 Taxiways ......... ................. ........ ........... ............... ........ ............ ..... ........3-15
3.2.3.11 Holding Bays ............... ...................... ......... ........ ............ .......... ..... ......3-15
3.2.3.12 Navigational Aids.... ................ ...... ......................... ... ............ ......... .....3-15
3.2.3.13 Airfield Lighting... ................ .............. ....... ........ ........ ..... .... .................3-16
3.3 AIRSPACE ........... ..... ..... ................ ......... ............. ......... ................... ............................. .....3-17
3.3.1 Demand/Capacity Analysis..... ............... ......................................... ......... ..... .......3-17
3.4 TERMIN"AL AREA. ..... ...... ................................ ............................ .................... ................3-17
3.4.1 Passenger Terminal............... ... ........................... ................................ .................3-18
3.4.1.1 Demand/Capacity Analysis ........ ........ .................................................3-18
3.4.1.2 Facility Requirements........ .............................. ........... .... ........ ... ..........3-20
3.4.2 Terminal Apron................................................................................................... .3- 21
3.5 SURFACE TRANSPORTATION ................... ..... ....... ..... ............ ....... ...............................3-21
3.5.1 Introduction.. .... ...... ............................ ......... .......... ..... .............. ........... ... ......... .....3-21
3.5.2 Airport Roadways............................................................................................... .3- 21
3.5.3 Airport Parking................................................................................................... .3-22
3.5.4 Terminal Curbside .. ........... .... ... ........ ..... ........... ... ..... ..... ... ...... ... ...... ...... ..... .........3-23
3.6 AIRCRAFT RESCUE AND FIREFIGHTING (ARFF).....................................................3-24
3.7 SUPPORT F ACI1JTIES.. ............ ..... ........... .... ........ ... ...... ........ .... ...... ... ............. ... .......... ...3-25
3.7.1 Airport Maintenance ....... ... ......... ........... ........ ....... ..... ................. ............... .... .... ..3-25
W:\l2637817_KWlA Master PIan\TOC.doc
111
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
3.8 GENERAL AVIATION AREA .........................................................................................3-25
3.8.1 Storage Hangars ..................... ................. ........... ...... ....... ............................... ......3- 25
3.8.1.1 Demand/Capacity Analysis ................. ................................................3-25
3.8.1.2 Facility Requirements................. ................... .............. .......... ..............3-26
3.8.2 Based Aircraft Apron......................................................................................... ..3-26
3.8.3 Transient Aircraft Apron..................................................................................... .3-27
3.9 AVIATION FUEL STORAGE FACILITIES ....................................................................3-27
3.10 SUMMARY OF FACILITY REQUlREMENTS...............................................................3-28
SECTION 4 - AL TERN"A TIVES ANALYSIS ............................................................................4-1
D
4.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. .4-1
4.2 AIRFIEill ALTERNATIVES ......................................................................................... ..4-1
4.2.1 Airfield Alternative 1- No-Action .......................................................................4-2
4.2.2 Airfield Alternative 2 - Establish Runway Safety Area .......................................4-2
4.2.3 Airfield Alternatives 3 through 5A .......................................................................4-3
4.2.4 Airfield Alternative 5B - Runway Extensions and Shift of East Runway Safety
Area..................................................................................................................... ..4-4
4.2.5 Airfield Alternative 6 -750' Extension on West End, 1,050' Extension on East
End .............................................................................................................. ..4- 5
4.2.6 Preferred Airfield Alternative .................................... .............. ..... ........ ................4-6
4.3 TERMIN'AL AREA CONCEP'TS.......................................................................................4-7
4.3.1 Terminal Concept A............................................................................................ .4-8
4.3.2 Terminal Concept B............... ...... ............................. ............... ..... ............ ...........4-9
4.3.3 Terminal Concept C .................... ............ .................... ......... .................. ............ ..4-10
_ 4.3.4 Terminal Concept D ......... .......... .......... ........ ................... ............ ............ ...... .......4-10
4.3.5 Terminal Concept E ............................................................................................ .4-11
4.3.6 Preferred Terminal Concept........................ .... ........ ............ .......... .......................4-11
4.4 AIRCRAFf RAMP ALTERNATIVES ................................................. ................ ....... .....4-13
4.4.1 Aircraft Ramp Alternative 1 ........................................... ..... ................................4-13
4.4.2 Aircraft Ramp Alternative 2 ................... .............................................................4-14
4.4.3 Aircraft Ramp Alternative 3 ............ ......................... ........................... ................4-14
4.4.4 Aircraft Ramp Alternative 4 ............... ..................................... ............. ............ ...4-15
4.4.5 Preferred Aircraft Ramp Al ternati ve ...................................................................4-15
4.5 GENERAL AVIATION FACILITIES ALTERNATIVES ................................................4-16
SECTION 5 - ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS ....................................................... 5-1
5 .1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ ..5-1
5.2 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION OF AIRPORT PROJECTS ..................................5-1
5.2.1 Consideration of Environmental Impacts ...........................................................5-1
5.2.2 Proposed Airport Projects Requiring Environmental Review ............................5-2
5.3 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS ..... ............ ........ .......... ................... .............. ..5-2
5.3.1 Aircraft Noise and Compatible Land Use ...........................................................5-2
5.3.2 Social Impacts. ........ ..... ....... ....... ..... ... ...... .......... ..... ......... .... ....... .... ..... ........ ...... ..5-6
W:\12637817_KWlA Master PIan\TClC.doc
IV
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
5.3.3
5.3.4
5.3.5
5.3.6
5.3.7
5.3.8
5.3.9
5.3.10
5.3.11
5.3.12
5.3.13
5.3.14
5.3.15
5.3.16
5.3.17
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
Air Quality.......................................................................................................... .5-9
Water Quality ..................................................................................................... .5-9
Department of Transportation Act, Section 303(c) (Formerly Section 4(f)) ......5-10
Historic, Architectural, Archaeological, Cultural Resources ..............................5-11
Biotic Communities........................................ .................................................... .5-11
Endangered and Threatened Species ........................... ...... ................ ................ .5-12
Wetlands ................................................... ......................................................... .5-14
Floodplains ......................................................................................................... .5-15
Coastal Zone Management Program .................................................. .... .............5-15
Wild and Scenic Rivers ......... ........... ............ ............................. .............. ............5-15
Farmland ............................................................................................................ .5-15
Energy Supply and Natural Resources ...............................................................5-16
Light Emissions ................................................................................................. .5-16
Construction Impacts.......................................................................................... .5-16
Environmental Justice .............. ........................................................................... .5-17
SECTION 6 - DEVELOPMENT PLANS ...................................................................................6-1
6.1 INTRODUCTION ... .......... .... .................. ............... ............ ... .................... .........................6-1
6.2 AIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN.............................................................................................. .6-1
6.2.1 Runways.............................................................................................................. .6-1
6.2.2 Taxiways............................................................................................................. .6- 2
6.2.3 Navigational Aids............................................................................................... .6-3
6.3 TERMIN' AL AREA PLAN................................................................................................ .6-3
6.3.1 Passenger Terminal........ ...... ...... ..... .......... ............. ........................ .... ......... .... .....6-3
6.3.2 Roadway Access ... ..... .... ............. ... ... .............. ..... ... ..................... ..... ............... ....6-4
6.3.3 Automobile Parking............................................................................................ .6-4
6.3.4 Rental Car Facilities............................................................................................ .6- 5
6.3.5 General Aviation Facilities...................................................... .......................... ..6- 5
6.4 AIRSPACE PLAN............................................................................................................. .6-6
6.5 ON-AIRPORT LAND USE PLAN ....................................................................................6-6
6.6 AIRPORT PROPERTY MAP . .... ............ ..... .......... ... ............ ...... .......................................6-7
SECTION 7 - PROJECT IDENTIFICATION, STAGING AND COST ESTIMATES ........7-1
7.1 rnTRODUCTION ... .................... ................................ ...... ....... ........ .................................7-1
7 .2 SHORT-TERM PROJECTS .. ............ ...... ............................... ........ ...... ..... .......................7-1
7.2.1 Prepare Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) ..................................................7-2
7.2.2 Construct Aircraft Wash Rack ... ....... ................. ........ ................ ......... ........ .........7-2
7.2.3 General Aviation Hangar Project... ................ ......................................................7-3
7.2.4 FBO Parking Rehabilitation and Expansion ........................................................7-3
7.2.5 Conduct Roadway Signage Plan and Program ....................................................7-3
7.2.6 Terminal Area Study / Preliminary Design .........................................................7-3
7.2.7 Short-term Passenger Terminal Expansion... ................ .......... ............. ...... ..........7-3
7.2.8 New FBO Access Road .......................................................................................7-4
v
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
W,112637817_KWlA Master PlanlTOC.doc
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
7.2.9 New Passenger Terminal. ......... ................. ............... .................................... .......7-4
7.2.11 Noise Insulation Program - Phase 4....................................................................7-4
7.2.12 Noise Insulation Program - Phase 5....................................................................7-4
7.2.13 Noise Insulation Program - Phase 6....................................................................7-5
7.3 INTERMEDIATE-TERM PROJECTS ..............................................................................7-5
7.3.1 Construct Runway Safety Area........ .................................................................... 7-5
7.3.2 Construct Runway Extension................... ..................................... ................. ......7-6
7.3.3 Noise Insulation Program -Phase 7 .....................................................................7-6
APPENDIX A
APPENDIX B
APPENDIX C
APPENDIX D
APPENDIX E
APPENDIX F
WEIGHTED HOURLY CAPACITY
RUNWAY LENGTH ANALYSIS
PASSENGER TERMINAL SPACE PROGRAM
SALT PONDS, WETLANDS, AND MANGROVE MAPS
INTEGRATED NOISE MODEL DATA
COST ESTIMATES
W;\I2637817_KWIA Master Plan\TOC.doc
VI
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
LIST OF TABLES
Pae:e
1.1 Ceiling and Visibility Conditions .................... ............................. ...... ................. .............. ....1-8
1.2 Wind Coverage Analysis ........................ ....................... ........................................................1-9
1.3 Airports Within 25 Miles ............................. ................ ............ ................ ........................... ...1-1 0
1.4 Flight Corridors............................................ ................................................. .......... .............. .1-12
2.1 Historical Passenger Enplanements ...................................................................................... .2-4
2.2 Monthly Distribution of Passenger Enplanements ................................................................2-5
2.3 Historical Total Aircraft Operations ......................................................... .............................2-7
2.4 Historical Aircraft Operations by Category (1991 - 2001) ...................................................2-8
2.5 Monthly Distribution of Aircraft Operations .........................................................................2-9
2.6 Based Aircraft Mix .............................................................. ............................................... ...2-1 0
2.7 Comparison of Monthly Passenger Enplanements ................................................................2-12
2.8 Comparison of Updated Passenger Enplanements ................................... .............................2-13
2.9 Forecast of Airline Operations ..... ..................................... ............. ................. .............. .........2-15
2.10 Forecast of Based Aircraft Fleet Mix........................................................ .............................2-17
2.11 Forecast of General Aviation Operations ..............................................................................2-17
2.12 Forecast of Total Aircraft Operations .......................................... ............ ..............................2-19
2.13 Peaking Forecasts - Passenger Enplanements ......................................... ...................... ........2-20
2.14 Peaking Forecasts - Aircraft Operations ...............................................................................2-20
3.1 Typical Aircraft Mix ............................................................................................................. .3- 3
3 .2 Hourly Airfield Capacity ................................. ..................................................................... .3- 5
3.3 Airport Design Criteria................................................. ........................................................ .3-7
3.4 Aircraft Fleet........................................................................................................................ ..3-11
3.5 Runway Length Analysis .......................................................... ..... ......................... .... ...........3-11
3.6 Passenger Terminal Space ........... .... .................................................... .... ......................... .....3-18
3.7 Terminal Space Requirements.............................................................................................. .3- 21
3.8 Parking Requirements........... ............................. ................................................................... .3- 23
3.9 ARFF Equipment Requirements........................................................................................... .3-24
3.10 Historical Fuel Sales (Gallons) ............................ ................................ ..................................3-27
4.1 Comparison of Airfield Alternatives ..................... ............ .................................................. ..4-4
4.2 Airfield Alternatives Evaluation Matrix............................................................................... .4-6
5.1 Aircraft Operations for INM................................................................................................. .5-4
5.2 Land Use Compatibility with Yearly Day-Night Average Sound Levels .............................5-7
5.3 Summary of Threatened and Endangered Species Known to Occur in the
Vicinity of EYW ... ........ ........... .......... ............ .......................... ................ ......................... .....5-13
5.4 Potential Wetland Impacts - Proposed Runway Extension Altemative................................5-14
6.1 On-Airport Land Use ................... ....... ............... ..... .................. .... .... .............. .................... ...6-6
7.1 Short-Term (2003 to 2007) Project Cost Estimates...............................................................7-2
7.2 Intermediate-Term (2008 to 2012) Project Cost Estimates ...................................................7-5
W:112637817_KWIA Master PIanITOC.doc
VB
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
LIST OF FIGURES
1.1 Airport Location Map
1.2 Airport Facilities
1.3 Terminal Area Plan
1.4 Passenger Terminal (First Floor Layout)
1.5 Cape Air Annex and FIS Building
1.6 ARFF Facility
1.7 ARFF Vehic1es
1.8 Air Traffic Control Tower
1.9 Rental Car Facility
1.10 Annual All Weather Wind Persistency Chart
1.11 VMC Annual Weather Wind Persistency Chart
1.12 IMC Annual Weather Wind Persistency Chart
1.13 Monthly All-Weather Wind Persistency Chart
1.14 All Weather Wind Rose
1.15 Visual Meteorological Condition Wind Rose
1.16 Instrument Meteorological Condition Wind Rose
1.17 VFR Airspace Structure
1.18 IFR Low Altitude Airspace Structure
1.19 Instrument Approach Procedure GPS Runway 9
1.20 Instrument Approach Procedure GPS Runway 27
1.21 Instrument Approach Procedure NDB or GPS-A
1.22 Salt Ponds and Floodplains
1.23 Key West Land Use
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
2.10
2.11
2.12
2.13
Airport Service Area
Historical Passenger Enplanements
Historical Average Annual Growth Rate of Passenger Enplanements
Monthly Passenger Distribution
2000 Airline Market Share
Historical Airline Market Share
Historical Aircraft Operations (1976 to 2001)
Historical Itinerant and Local GA Aircraft Operations
Previous Forecasts of Passenger Enplanements
Updated Forecasts of Passenger Enplanements
Forecast of Based Aircraft
2001 Based Aircraft Fleet Mix
Forecast of Total Aircraft Operations
.-,
3.1 Hourly Airfield Capacity Graph
3.2 Runway Safety Area Dimensions
3.3 Security Queues
3.4 Project Parking Demand
3.5 Historical Jet-A Fuel Sales
3.6 Historical A vgas Sales
viii
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
W:\l263781LKWlA Master PIan\TGC.doc\3114iU3
LIST OF FIGURES (CONTINUED)
4.1 Runway 9 Safety Area Requirements
4.2 Runway 27 Safety Area Requirements
4.3 Runway 9-27 Safety Area Requirements
4.4 Airfield Alternative 1- No Action
4.5 Airfield Alternative 2 - Establish Runway Safety Area
4.6 Airfield Alternative 3 - 500' Extension on West End
4.7 Airfield Alternative 3A - 750' Extension on West End
4.8 Airfield Alternative 4 - 500' Extension on East End
4.9 Airfield Alternative 5 - 500' Extensions on Both Ends
4.10 Airfield Alternative 5A - 500' Extension on East End, 750' Extension on West End
4.11 Airfield Alternative 5B - Runway Extensions and Runway Safety Area Shift
4.12 Airfield Alternative 6 -750' Extension on West End, 1,050' Extension on East End
4.13 Terminal Concept A
4.14 Terminal Concept A Cross Section
4.15 Terminal Concept B
4.16 Terminal Concept B Cross Section
4.17 Terminal Concept C
4.18 Terminal Concept D
4.19 Terminal Concept D Cross Section
4.20 Terminal Concept E
4.21 Terminal Concept Evaluation
4.22 Revised Terminal Concept
4.23 Potential Short-Term Terminal Expansion
4.24 Aircraft Ramp Alternative 1
4.25 Aircraft Ramp Alternative 2
4.26 Aircraft Ramp Alternative 3
4.27 Aircraft Ramp Alternative 4
4.28 General Aviation Facilities Plan
5.1 Environmentally Sensitive Areas
5.2 2002 Noise Contours
5.3 2021 Noise Contours with Proposed Projects
5.4 Wetlands Resources
6.1 Airport Layout Plan
6.2 Terminal Area Plan
6.3 General Aviation Plan
6.4 Airspace Plan
6.5 Land Use Plan
6.6 Property Map
7 .1 Short-Term Projects
7.2 Intermediate-Term Projects
W:\12637817_KWIA Master PIanITOC.doc
IX
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
'"it
SECTION 1
INVENTORY
f''''Oli
Section 1 Inventory
1.1 INTRODUCTION
This master plan update has been undertaken by Monroe County for the purpose of providing a
comprehensive plan for the future development of Key West International Airport (EYW). It
provides an assessment of existing and forecasted aviation demand and includes a description of the
facilities required to meet that demand. The primary product of this study is a series of drawings
referred to as the Airport Layout Plan (ALP), which depict existing and future conditions at EYW for
the 20- year planning period 200 1 through 2021. This report provides the justification and reasoning
for the development depicted on the plans.
The airport's previous master plan was completed in 1986. Because a considerable amount of time
has past since that study was completed and because operational conditions and facilities at the
airport have now changed, it was deemed appropriate to prepare an updated master plan. This plan
was financed by Monroe County through funds generated by airport passengers at EYW.
The master plan update consists of the following elements:
· Inventory - Existing facilities and operational conditions were documented.
· Forecasts - Projected growth rates for passengers and aircraft operations were
established.
· Demand/Capacity Analysis and Facility Requirements - Comparisons were
made between the capacity of existing facilities and projected levels of demand
for those facilities. New facilities were recommended on the basis of any
shortfalls identified in the demand/capacity analysis.
· Alternatives - Various methods of providing new or expanded facilities were
identified and evaluated.
· Environmental Overview - The potential for environmental impacts resulting
from proposed development was evaluated.
· Airport Plans - A consolidated plan for airfield, terminal area and general
aviation facilities was prepared on the basis of recommended alternatives.
· Project Identification, Phasing and Cost Estimates - The costs of the
individual projects included in the development program were estimated and
projects were phased depending upon need and projected availability of funding.
This section of the master plan update presents the findings of tasks performed to determine the
existing configuration and general condition of EYW as determined from airport records, airport
management personnel, and field inspections.
W:\12637817 _KWlA Master P\an\'UlInventory.doc\3114103
1-1
Key West International Airporl
Master Plan Update
Section 1 Inventory
1.2 AIRPORT HISTORY
Maps of the airport from the 1940' s, then called Meacham Field, indicate that the airport consisted of
three runways and four blimp pads. The runway alignments were 4/22, 8/26 and 11/29. Runway
4/22 had a length of 3,500 feet. Runway 8/26 had a length of 4,000 feet and Runway 11/29 had a
length of 4,000 feet. Four blimp pads were located north of the airfield.
In 1955, Runway 8/26 was realigned to a 9/27 orientation and lengthened to its current length of
4,801 feet. At some point, the other two runways were removed from service. In 1957, the airport's
passenger terminal was constructed and the airport was renamed to Key West International Airport.
Since that time, numerous improvements have been made to airfield and terminal facilities. Existing
facilities at the airport are described in the following paragraphs.
1.3 FACILITIES INVENTORY
EYW is located in the southeast quadrant of the island of Key West as shown in Figure 1.1. The
airport reference point is at 24033'22!1N Latitude and 81045'34 "W Longitude (NAD 83). The airport
elevation is 3 feet (NA VD 88) mean sea level (MSL). Existing airport property and facilities are
shown on Figure 1.2.
1.3.1 AIRFIELD FACILITIES
Airfield facilities include the runway, taxiways, and aprons and are described in the following
paragraphs.
1.3.1.1
Runway
EYW has one paved runway in an east-west orientation. Runway 9/27 has a length of 4,801 feet and
a width of 100 feet. The runway consists of an asphalt overlay, completed in 1979, on asphalt
concrete pavement and is in poor condition. Engineering design for an overlay of the runway
pavement was completed in 2001. This overlay is scheduled to be constructed in 2003.
The runway has shoulders that are 10 feet wide on the north side and 40 feet wide on the south side.
The shoulder on the south side of the runway is paved. The shoulder on the north side is stabilized
marl (i.e., a mixture of limerock and limesilt). There are no paved blast pads at either end of the
runway. However, the surface is stabilized marl and is capable of supporting the occasional passage
of an aircraft in a portion that would be considered a blast pad area. Runway strength is reported to
be 40,000 pounds single gear, 95,000 pounds dual gear, and 130,000 pounds dual tandem gear. The
runway is marked for visual approaches from each direction. The runway is equipped with medium
intensity runway lights (MIRL) located 10 feet from the edge of the runway pavement.
W:\12631811_KWIA Master PlanIS_I\lnvenlory.doc\3/12103
1-2
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
~(]{)
" \l{j'V .
",t:;3c)
o
d
Gulf
of
Mexico
~
...
"
<;t.
~
o
~
to>
"
I>
q
~
\;)
Gg
N
.
NTS
\'j)t
..dIJL/
. "-~1Nest
",'
6C?o
~
'\J
D@
~
6'
6'
I}
@
~,
%'j - iJ.
:&
'"
QD
CJ
o
'\
,
Gulf
Of
Mexico
<l
(J,itS
st1"
Key West
. ooal Airport
(EYW)
LEGEND
~
~.
.,
s
.,
;,;
:5
~
.~
..
ti
!
'"I
~
.~
<:
~
~
...
~
~I
~
~
..N
"
"'
~I
:.>
Q3 u.s. Highway
@ County Road
Major Roads
Minor Roads
.
Monroe County
City of Key West
10,000 0
r""--_-___-_
10,000 Feet
,
Source: Rorida Geographic Data Ubrary (FGDL)
URS Corporation, 2001
N
.
Scale: 1" = 10,()()(J
Key VVest
International Airport
Master Plan Update
AIRPORT LOCAllON MAP
I FIGURE I
1.1
QI. !
I
~ ~
~ ~
:c :c
-0 -0
~ ~
-l -l
OJ OJ
C c
5 ~
~ ~
~ ~
:c :c
:!l -0
I; !il
-l
~ ;g
~ !ti
~ ~
~ ~
r::
~
Ol
o
o
o ItZ
10/14/02
14:32
~
~
~
~
~
o
~
~
~
~
~
YJ,
'i
i"
)>
-
:D
."
o
:D
-f
."
)>
o
r=
=t
;;;
o
----- --- - ----
--- ----- -------
- -----------
I
\
Section 1 Inventory
1.3.1.2 Taxiways
The airfield has one parallel taxiway (Taxiway A) that extends the full length of Runway 9/27 and
several connector taxiways. The connector taxiways are designated B through F. Taxiway A has a
width of 50 feet and is located 315 feet south of the centerline of Runway 9/27. There are also
numerous taxiways connecting Taxiway A to the aircraft parking aprons. Taxiway pavements
consist of asphalt concrete pavement that has received asphalt overlays. The pavement recently
received an overlay in 2001 and is in excellent condition. Taxiway A is equipped with medium
intensity taxiway lights.
1.3.1.3
Aprons
Aircraft parking aprons include the following:
· Commercial Terminal Avron - The commercial aircraft parking apron, east of
the centerline of Taxiway E, consists of approximately 33,000 square yards of
asphalt pavement (690 feet by 430 feet). The apron is adj acent to the commercial
terminal and the Federal Flight Inspection Station (PIS). The apron is marked for
twelve parking spaces including one reserved for U.S. Customs inspections. The
apron pavement consists of asphalt concrete pavement that received an overlay in
2001. Flooding on the northern and eastern edges has been greatly reduced
through recent drainage improvements. Apron flood lighting is provided by high
mast mounted lights. Aircraft park on a first-come, first-serve basis under the
cooperative efforts of the airlines. An additional 8,000 square yards of apron in
front of the FedEx building provides parking for cargo aircraft.
· GA Avron - The approximate 33,000 square yards ofGA apron is approximately
680 feet (centerline of Taxiway E to west edge of apron) by 370 feet (average
distance to FBO buildings and fence lines) and an additional area west of the
FBO building. The apron pavement consists of asphalt concrete pavement in
good condition. Aircraft tiedowns are provided via cables. Apron flood lighting
is provided by high mast floodlights similar to those at the commercial apron.
GA aircraft overflow parking occurs in two paved areas west of the individual aircraft storage
hangars. The first area allows for aircraft parking in a linear fashion parallel to Taxiway A. This
area provides just over 2,000 square yards of apron and can accommodate approximately 18 small
aircraft. The second area provides slightly more than 6,000 square yards of apron and can
accommodate approximately 19 aircraft.
W:\12637817 _KWlA Master P1an\S_llJnvenlory.doc\3/14I03
1-3
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 1 Inventory
1.3.2 BUILDING AREA FACILITIES
Building area facilities are shown in Figure 1.3 and are described in the following paragraphs.
1.3.2.1
Passenger Terminal
The passenger terminal is approximately 21,000 square feet in size. Of this amount, approximately
16,700 square feet is available on the first floor including public and non-public space as shown in
Figure 1.4. The terminal houses airport management offices and a restaurant in addition to the public
and air carrier spaces. The terminal was renovated in 1998.
1.3.2.2
Cape Air Annex
The Cape Air annex is a manufactured building of approximately 1,000 square feet located east of
the passenger terminal. The building, which is in poor condition, is shown in Figure 1.5.
1.3.2.3
Federal Inspection Services Building
The PIS building was constructed in 1997. It consists of approximately 6,600 square feet and houses
three tenants. These tenants are Greyhound Bus Terminal, the National Weather Service and the
United States Customs Service. The PIS building is shown in Figure 1.5 and is in good condition.
1.3.2.4
Fixed Base Operator (FBO) Facilities
There is one FBO (Island City Flying Service) at EYW. FBO facilities serving GA operations
include the following:
. FBO Shop Han2ar - The FBO occupies a shop hangar built by the FBO in 1995.
The shop hangar is owned by the FBO and is located on land leased from EYW.
The hangar is a metal structure approximately 60 feet by 130 feet (7,800 square
feet) in excellent condition.
. FBO Offices - The FBO's office building is approximately 20 feet by 57 feet
(1,140 square feet) and includes a sales counter and waiting area in addition to
FBO offices. The building is owned by the FBO and is on land leased from the
airport. The building is in good condition.
. Fuel Farm - The fuel farm is owned and operated by the FBO. It consists of
three 12,000-gallon above ground storage tanks. Two of these tanks contain Jet
A, while the third tank contains avgas. The fuel farm also has three fueling racks.
Fuel is distributed via these racks to four fueling trucks. Two of these trucks
have a 1 ,200-gallon capacity and are used for avgas. The other two trucks have a
3,000-gallon capacity and are used for Jet-A. The fuel farm is in good condition.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master P1ao1S_lllnvenlOry.doc\3/12103
1-4
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
J:\KEY WES1\MASTER PLAN UPDATE\EXHIBIlS\FlG 1.3R.DWG 08:40
I I I II
8
I I I
~ 01 I I I
0
Ill>
o"ll
>;1;
f;jO "Z I I I
"Ill
~O 0
.>
r-
II 1'1
~z I I I
~;;j IT1
1'1
-f I I I 3:
-0
5
-<
~ I I I ~lH+ttD
0
0
I I I ^
z
I I I G) (}#t8)
J J I
I I /
I I I
I I I
I I I ~, ~
I I I ~
~ ^
I I I z
G)
~ ~
I I I ^ I
z
I I I I
I II t t I
I I I I >
-0 -0 -0 -0
C C C :::0
~ I ~ OJ OJ OJ 0
I I c c c z
~ () () ()
;~. \\\1\1 ""'"
~ I II -0 ~ ~
2:: ~~ >
:::0
~ ^ ^ ^
\ \ \ z z z
<J ~F G) G) G)
0 \ \ \ ~o
c H H H 10
CJ 3:
~ \ \ \
2::
\ \\ [J ........-1
~~
t 1T1~
\ \\ z
~ ~>
:::or
\ \\ -~
z
~ ~
\ \\ G) ff
~o
\ \\ 0:::0 t
1T1-1
Z
\ \\
\ \\ ;:::J
0
~
\ \\ ;~~ ~
\ \\ ^
z
G)
-I \ \\ ~ 0
3" m ~
-
CD :a \ \\
1=3" ~
~ m CD Z
III ~'< \ \\
ii:e )>
r-
I -CD )> \ \\
~!e.
- .., :a
CD "C m \ \\
0 )>
..,
-
." \ \\
r-
)>
::!l Z \ \\
......G')
.c
V1;;o \ \\
~
J:\KEY WEST\MASTER PIAN UPDATE\EXHIElITS\F1G 1.4.DWG 10/14/02 14:36
(
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i I
~ I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I ()
)>
I z
0
I -0
-<
I
I
I
I
'" I
0 I
I
0 I
::u
0
en:>- I
n'U
,..:1:
~O o _Z I
en
~n I
,,..
r
I ,., I
~Z
...., I
,.,
,.,
..... I
I
'" I
0 ~
~ I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
;;"'0 I
5" -)> I
- =0(1)
CD I
3: .., (1)(1)
Do ~^
.. -1m I
- !2.CD
. -nZ
... 0''<
"V r-C> I
.. ~:E
::a om I
1 -CD 0=0
>(1) l
-.- =0.....
;;- ..,
-,::J r-m '----
0
.., )>=0
- -<3:
Oz
C)>
::!l -Ir-
-
.......(;)
. C
.f:lo.:;:o
~
I I r
r : r
x,x-x-x_x
I I 0
0 CD 0 )> 0 r
0 )> rT1 :::0 :::0 I'T1
z G) ""'0 r- 0 G)
0 G) )> z c I'T1
rT1 )> :::0 rT1 r- Z
U (f) G) -l )>
(f) r'1"J C (f) -l CJ
0 :::0 ""'0 0
0 r'1"J
Z r- )> Z
(f) )> r- 0
~ 0 rT1
C
Z
L _ --... G)
I rT1
0
f'T1 I
-0
)> I 1011
:::0
-j
c I
:::0
f'T1 I
I
I :::0 (f) :::0 (f)
r'1"J rT1 r'1"J rT1
Z 0 (f) )>
-l C ;d :::l
)> :::0 Z
r- -l 0 G)
0 -< 0
)> s:: )>
(f) :::0
:::0 r'1"J
(f) )>
(f)
"
u-_-_-_-_-! t,.)
,:,
'.
===:;'===;~':..~I
II II
..c==:L
CAPE AIR ANNEX
FIS BUILDING
G'l
~
:I:
o
I
en
:::!
;::
'tl
C
! . ,nte:~~,;~E::ort
u.
;..
CAPE AIR ANNEX AND
FIS BUILDING
FIGURE:
1.5
Section 1 Inventory
1.3.2.5 Individual Aircraft Storage Hangars
There are 11 individual aircraft storage hangars. Three hangars are owned by the county and leased
to individual aircraft owners. Eight hangars are privately owned and are on land leased from the
airport. All of these building are in extremely poor condition.
1.3.2.6
Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting (ARFF) Building
A new ARFF facility was constructed adjacent to the west end of the passenger terminal and became
operational in 2001. This facility, shown in Figure 1.6, provides 3 bays for firefighting vehicles and
equipment. The ARFF station is presently equipped to meet the requirements of Index B (please see
Section 3.6 for a description of Indexes ). Vehicles in the facility consist of a 1999 Oshkosh T -1500.
This vehicle has a 1,500-gallon water capacity and a 21O-gallon foam capacity. In addition, the
facility has a GMC rapid response vehicle and one other pick-up truck shown in Figure 1.7. A water
rescue boat and equipment was acquired in 2002.
1.3.2.7
Air Traffic Control Tower (A TCT)
The airport's air traffic control tower is shown in Figure 1.8 and is located west of the ARFF station.
The station was constructed in 1972 and was refurbished in the 1990s. Visibility of airport
operational areas and runway approaches is good. The tower is operational 7:00 a.m. through 9:00
p.m.
1.3.2.8
FedEx Cargo Building
The 3,000-square-foot cargo building is occupied by FedEx overnight parcel services. The concrete
block structure is owned by the airport and is in good condition.
1.3.2.9
Rental Car Facilities
Avis car rental occupies an approximately 1, 180-square- foot building for cleaning vehicles on a lot
of approximately 0.7 acre in size leased from the airport. Dollar car rental occupies an
approximately 950-square-foot building on a lot of approximately 0.6 acre in size leased from the
airport. These facilities are shown in Figure 1.9.
1.3.2.10 Highway Patrol
The Florida State Highway Patrol leases a building of approximately 3,780 square feet located on
airport property with direct access to Roosevelt Boulevard. The building is owned by the airport and
was renovated in 2002. The building is currently being used by the Drivers License Bureau.
W:\12637817 J{WIA Maslel' PlanlS_l \1nvenrory.doc\3114103
1-5
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 1 Inventory
1.3.2.11 Teenage Center of Key West
The Teenage Center of Key West occupies a building of approximately 4,200 square feet located on
airport property with access from Roosevelt Boulevard. The building is owned by the airport and is
in fair condition.
1.3.2.12 Island Aeroplane Tours
Island Aeroplane tours occupies an approximately 4oo-square-foot wood frame building in fair
condition. Island Aeroplane Tours also occupies an approximately 320-square-foot mobile home
type building in fair condition. Both of these buildings are on land leased from the airport.
1.3.2.13 Monroe County Department of Public Works
The Monroe County Department of Public Works owns and occupies approximately 10 buildings on
approximately 1.6 acres of airport property located on the eastern edge of the airport building area.
The Department of Public Works pays the airport fair market value rent for the occupied property.
1.3.2.14 East Martello Museum and Garden
The East Martello Museum and Garden occupies approximately 3.3 acres of airport property along
South Roosevelt Boulevard between the airport entrance and exit. The museum consists of a battery
built in 1862 by the U.S. Army to protect Fort Zachary Taylor from Confederate attack. The site is
listed on the National Register of Historic Places.
1.3.2.15 Roads and Parking
Access to EYW is provided via Roosevelt Boulevard (U.S. Highway 1). Roosevelt Boulevard is a 4-
lane undivided Federal Highway. There are no dedicated turn lanes for entering or leaving airport
properties. Access on airport property is provided via Faraldo Circle, a two-lane, one-way facility
that connects the airport to South Roosevelt Boulevard and provides access to the public parking, the
passenger terminal, rental car lots and general aviation facilities. In addition to Faraldo Circle,
access to the rental car ready lots, the Department of Public Works and air cargo is provided via
Stickney Road which also connects to South Roosevelt Boulevard. Stickney Road is a 2-lane, 2-way
asphalt road in fair to poor condition. The FBO and GA apron area access is from Faraldo Circle
west of the passenger terminal. This area has been subject to some flooding and a project to alleviate
that flooding has been designed.
The public parking lot provides a total of 439 spaces. Of these, 31 spaces are devoted to short- term
parking, 280 spaces are devoted to long-term car parking and 128 are devoted to rental car
ready/return spaces. There are also a few spaces dedicated to tenant managers. The parking lot was
resunaced in 2002 and is in good condition. An additional employee parking lot was constructed in
2002 on the west side of Faraldo Circle. This lot provides parking for 92 vehicles.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PlanIS_lllnventory.doc\3114103
1-6
Key West International Airpon
Master Plan Update
G'l
~
::J:
o
!!l
~
en
~
"D
C
"D
o
~
~
o
,-
'Tl
~
U.
)>
Key West
International Airport
Master Plan Update
ARFF FACILITY
FIGURE:
1.6
G)
~
:I:
o
en
5<
~
en
~
"
j ...' , Intern~~~:~~irport I
~ Master Plan Update
.:..
)>
ARFF VEHICLES
I
FIGURE:
1.7
C>
~
:I:
o
~
~
(J)
~
"
c
! e.. ' Intern~~I~:"~~irport
~ . Master Plan Update
b.
)>
AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL TOWER
FIGURE:
1.8
AVIS FACILITY
DOLLAR FACILITY
(;)
~
:I:
(')
~
en
~
'tl
C
'tl
o
~
'"
C>
C>
,-
..,
t
)>
Key West
International Airport
Master Plan Update
RENTAL CAR FACILITY
FIGURE:
1.9
Section 1
Inventory
Parking for official vehicles at the fire station and air traffic control tower is provided south and west
of the ARFF building. The access to that parking area is from Faraldo Circle. This parking is paved
and is in good condition.
Parking for the FBO is provided in a paved parking lot just south of the FBO building and hangar.
The condition of this parking lot is fair, but is subject to flooding that will be addressed by a planned
project. Overflow parking in this area is provided across the access road adjacent to the fuel farm.
Parking in this area is not paved.
1.3.2.16 National Weather Service (NWS) Upper Air Inflation Building
A NWS Upper Air Inflation Building is located adjacent to the Runway 27 threshold. It is in a
concrete block structure approximately 100 square feet in area plus a covered storage area of
approximately 100 square feet in area.
1.3.2.17 Automated Surface Observation System (ASOS)
An ASOS is located adjacent to the Runway 27 threshold and the NWS Upper Air Inflation
Building.
1.4 METEOROLOGICAL DATA
Weather conditions play an important role in determining an airport's capacity and facility
requirements. Items of interest are temperature and precipitation, ceiling and visibility, as well as
local wind conditions. Temperature information will be used to determine runway length
requirements, while precipitation, ceiling, and visibility data will be used to determine the capacity of
the existing airfield. Wind data will be used to determine the need for any additional runways.
Temperature and precipitation conditions at EYW were analyzed using the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration's "Climatography of the United States Report No. 81 for the State of
Florida," which encompasses the period from 1961 to 1990. Wind and ceiling/visibility conditions
at EYW were analyzed using hourly observations collected by the National Climatic Data Center for
the period January 1991 through December 2000.
1.4.1 TEMPERATURE AND PRECIPITATION
The normal maximum mean temperatures at EYW range from a low of74.8 degrees Fahrenheit (oF)
in January to 89.2 OF in August, the hottest month of the year. On an annual basis, the normal mean
maximum temperature averages 82.5 OF. In comparison, the normal mean minimum temperature
ranges from 65.0 OF to 79.6 OF for the months of January and July, respectively. The annual average
normal mean minimum temperature is 77.8 oF.
Key West is located in south end of Florida peninsula. Hurricanes periodically pass through during
June to November. March is the driest month with a normal rainfall of 1.71 inches, while September
W:\126378IU(WIA Master PIanIS_lllnventory.docl3/14103 1-7 Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 1
Inventory
is the wettest month with a normal rainfall of 5.85 inches. The normal annual precipitation at EYW
is 40 inches. Approximately 50 percent of the annual rainfall occurs during the wet season of July
through October.
1.4.2 CEILING AND VISmILITY
The FAA has defined certain limits of ceiling height and visibility limits as visual meteorological
conditions (VMC) and instrument meteorological conditions (IMC). These limits affect flight
operations by establishing certain rules and procedures for pilots, aircraft and air traffic control.
During VMC, pilots must adhere to visual flight rules. During IMC, pilots must adhere to
instrument flight rules.
VMC is defined as that period when the ceiling is greater than 1,000 feet and the visibility is greater
than 3 miles. IMC is defined as that period when the ceiling and visibility is less than 1,000 and/or 3
miles, but greater than 500 feet and 1.0 mile.
Table 1.1 presents the percent occurrence for various ceiling and visibility conditions. As the table
indicates, EYW experienced VMC conditions 99.2 percent of the time, IMC conditions 0.6 percent
of the time, and weather conditions below the airport's approach minimums approximately 0.2
percent of the time.
TABLE 1.1
CEILING AND VISIBILITY CONDITIONS
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
IMC2
>1,000 feet and >3 miles
<1,000 feet and/or <3 miles but
>500 feet and >1.0 mile
<500 feet and/or <1.0 mile
0.60%
0.20%
100.00%
Below A roach Minimums
All Conditions
Notes: 'VMC - Visual Meteorological Conditions
2 IMC _ Instrument Meteorological Conditions
Source: U.S. Department of Commerce
National Climatic Data Center, Weather Station 72201, Key West, Florida (Data Period 1991-2(00).
Compiled by URS Corporation, 200 1.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PIanIS_llInventol)'.docI3114103
1-8
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 1 Inventory
1.4.3 WIND ANALYSIS
Winds in the vicinity of EYW are predominantly from the northeast and southeast. Figures 1.10
through 1.12 illustrate the percentage of observations, by direction, during all-weather, VMC, and
IMC conditions. As the figures indicate, winds are primarily from the northeast and southeast.
In addition to annual wind conditions, monthly wind conditions at EYW were examined. Figure
1.13 provides an illustration of all-weather winds by month. It should be noted that there is little
variation in the direction of the winds from month to month. Winds remain from the northeast and
the southeast every month. During the month of February, winds are variable from north, northeast
and southeast.
An analysis of the wind coverage provided by the existing runway system is provided in Table 1.2.
Wind coverage indicates the percentage of time that crosswind components are within an acceptable
velocity. For the purpose of runway wind analyses, a crosswind component can be defined as the
wind that occurs at a right angle to the runway centerline. Crosswind components oflO.5, 13, and
16 knots were used for analyzing the runway system at EYW. These components were used because
they are the velocities specified for runway having reference codes up to D-III (the issue of airport
reference codes is discussed in Section 3.2.3). The wind roses for all-weather conditions, VMC, and
IMC are presented in Figures 1.14, 1.15 and 1.16 respectively.
TABLE 1.2
WIND COVERAGE ANALYSIS
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
All-Weather 9/27
VMC 9n7
IMC 9n7
VMC - Visual Meteorological Conditions
2 IMC - Instrument Meteorological Conditions
Source: U.S. Department of Commerce
National Climatic Data Center, Weather Station 72201, Key West, Florida (Data Period 1991-2000).
86.87%
87.05%
63.53%
93.32%
93.46%
75.45%
98.19%
98.27%
88.38%
Notes:
Compiled by URS Corporation, 2001.
FAA guidelines recommend that an airport's runway system provide wind coverage of 95 percent. If
wind coverage is less than 95 percent, FAA guidelines recommend that the construction of additional
runways be considered. The all-weather wind rose indicates that Runway 9/27 at EYW provides
wind coverage of less than 95 percent with a 1O.5-knot crosswind component, although coverage of
more than 95 percent is provided at higher crosswind components. While additional runways are
eligible for consideration under FAA guidelines, additional runways at EYW are not feasible due to
site constraints.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Masler PlanlS_ll1nventory.doc\3/12I03
1-9
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 1 Inventory
1.5 AIRSPACE/AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL PROCEDURES
Airport facilities, in-flight services, obstructions, and restricted airspace associated with an aircraft in
flight were considered in the airspace inventory. Factors inventoried included neighboring public
and private airports, civil and military flight corridors, navigational and visual aids applicable to
EYW, military restricted and operational areas, landing approaches to the airport, and known
obstructions that affect approaches to the airport. Airspace features that occur within 25 nautical
miles (NM) of EYW are listed and described as follows.
1.5.1 NEIGHBORING AIRPORTS
Airports within 25 NM of EYW on the Miami Sectional Aeronautical Chart published by the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration are listed in Table 1.3. The closest of these
airports are Chalk Seaplane Base, 2.7 NM northwest (281 degrees) and NAP Key West, 4.1 NM
northeast (68 degrees). They are within EYW controlled airspace.
TABLE 1.3
AIRPORTS WITHIN 25 MILES
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Chalk (Sea lane Base)
Private
Private
U.S.Na
Private
Summerland Ke Private
Source: Miami Sectional Chart, February 2001.
Compiled by URS Corporation, 2001.
-
-
-
-
.
. .
Gulf of Mexico (Sea lane Base)
NAP Ke West
Su ar Loaf Shores
1.5.2 OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES
Operational procedures within EYW airspace are subject to certain conditions due to the close
proximity of NAP Key West. EYW and NAP Key West airspace adjoins each other. Operations
within the two airspaces are coordinated by the NAP Key West air traffic control tower (A TCT) and
radar approach/departure control personnel. Aircraft landing at EYW are handed off to EYW A TCT
personnel once their destination is known and there is no conflict with other traffic. Operating
characteristics within the airspaces are as follows:
. Adioinin2 Airspace - A line of demarcation has been established to define areas
of operation in the adjoining airspace as depicted in Figure 1.17.
VFR Conditions - Under VFR conditions, civil aircraft operating west of
the line are required to make a left turn following takeoff from EYW
Runway 9. Military aircraft stay east of the line by making their approaches
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PlanlS_lllnveDlOry.doc\3/14lO3 1-10 Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
3600
3200
3100
3000
2900
2800
2700
2600
2500
2400
2300
2200
2100
1900 1700
1800
3500
100
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
Cl
~
:I:
o
~ Source:
I
o
S;
'1'
'T1
I~
I~
~
3:
(')
<:
;::
(')
~
NOAA National Climatic Data Center, Ashville, N.C.
Station: 72201 Key West, Florida
Period of Record: 1991-2000
Compiled by URS Corporation, 2001
Wind Data depicted relative to true north (NAD 83)
Runway 9 Orientation: 89'23' 26"
Runway 27 Orientation: 269'23' 48"
Notes:
This graphic depicts the percentage of time
that the wind was recorded as occurring from
each compass heading (eXCluding calm
conditions) during the period 1991 to 2000.
Key West
International Airport
Master Plan Update
ANNUAL ALL WEATHER WIND
PERSISTENCY CHART
FIGURE:
1.10
3600
3500 100
3300
3200
3100
3000 600
2900 700
2800 800
2700 900
2600 1000
2500 1100
2400
2300
2200
2100
1900 1700
1800
G)
~
:r
~
~ Source:
I
o
z
:>-
l'
."
I~
I~
~
lE
o
<:
;;::
o
~
NOAA National Climatic Data Center, Ashville, N.C.
Station: 72201 Key West, Florida
Period of Record: 1991-2000
Compiled by URS Corporation, 2001
Wind Data depicted relative to true north (NAD 83)
Runway 9 Orientation: 89' 23' 26"
Runway 27 Orientation: 269'23' 48"
Notes:
This graphic depicts the percentage of time
that the wind was recorded as occurring from
each compass heading (excluding calm
conditions) during the period 1991 to 2000.
.
Key West
International Airport
Master Plan Update
VMC ANNUAL WEATHER WIND
PERSISTENCY CHART
FIGURE:
1.11
3600
3500 14% 100
3300 300
3200
3100
3000 600
2900 700
2800 800
2700 900
2600 1000
2500 1100
2400 1200
2300
2200
2100
1900 1700
1800
C'l
~
:I:
.~ Source:
I
o
~
-\,
i5
',-
I~
;;;
',.
~
3:
o
<:
~
o
~
NOAA National Climatic Data Center, Ashville, N.C.
Station: 72201 Key West, Florida
Period of Record: 1991-2000
Compiled by URS Corporation, 2001
Wind Data depicted relative to true north (NAD 83)
Runway 9 Orientation: 89"23' 26"
Runway 27 Orientation: 269"23' 48"
Notes:
This graphic depicts the percentage of time
that the wind was recorded as occurring from
each compass heading (excluding calm
conditions) during the period 1991 to 2000.
.
Key West
International Airport
Master Plan Update
IMC ANNUAL WEATHER WIND
PERSISTENCY CHART
FIGURE:
1.12
en ~
0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
c: ~
~
~~~ g-oenz
<l>liiO
ii5. i8:g~
III III 0
'<'<Ill ~o"z
"'u:llii --..jlll
-..j0a. CT::o",=
'<<1>",0
0:>.<1> c8~iil
:::I. CD "0
~~Sl ::0 ., -
liie.ll enR-~Q (..
e.o giO'< ~ )>
g;:!~ -g ~~e. (..
oo III . en (') Z
00_
~~~. iil l:S.r" lit ij ~ c: ij ~
~~o g8~lii Z c:
'",- -..., 5:~ )>
"'0'>2 ~ m
~ .CD o Ill::> q ::: q ~
"'" ::> ~ a; "l
~ 0 -.,
;:a. il;"
~
z ~
~
)> JD
0
00 z
~ !:1
~ l!! l!! ~ l!! q
~ ~ '" '" ~ '"
q l!l q
"T1
~ m
(.. OJ
~ '" c: ~ ~ ;U
~ '" '" l!l
C! l!! ~ c:
C! q q )>
~
z
~ 0
< "l ~ l!! q ~ l!! q
~ ~ m
s:
OJ ~ '" '" ~ '" '"
~ q ~ C! q ~ C! l!!
m
;U
~ '" )> ~ s:
~ l!! l!J !'J
c: )>
ij ~ G) ij ~ ;U
~ '" '" c:
~ C! l!! 0
q en ~ q J:
-I
c
~ m
0
m q ~ l!! l!! ~ l!! l!!
~ ~ s:
~ N
OJ ~ '" ~ C! ~
l!!
~ q m
;U
en
'" m
l!! ~ !'J "'0 ~ ~ )>
~ l!! -I "'0
~ ~ m ~ ~ ;U
s: -
::: q OJ ~ q j'"
"l m
;U
8@;J z
0
::J 0 _0 -
a..OCll ~
a: a. CO
o (tl ..,
::J a.. III
~Ill-g. ~ l!! l!! ~ l!! !!!
a.. CIl -.
3: " COO
0 m 508 g. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '"
-< CO!:;"O '" ~ l!!
Z :7 ::!o cr !!J
'"tJ -I ~ (tl <5 (jj
"0 __
m ::J: m (tl a ::r
~!:( ~ en 50 3 (tl
-f a.. CD "0
> - ....Ill~
en)> en z (Og.o ~
!! -l -f (0 (tl 0
m .... ::J
(j) -I r- m -8-
::0 o3~ ~ 0 ~ ~
c: m r- "'tJ AJ ~"O (tl -I s:
AJ z~ ~ Z o III 0 0 ~
m ~ OCll_ ~ ~ ~ ~
Om z o CIl D:J
- ~c:t.
. ri~ c: 6 CD 3 m
- "'tJ III CD C! 0 ~ q
w Z a.. ;::a
C _. -
)> ::J ::r
::J:::J: ~ co III
r- --
)> m m (tl _
~ >< ::r
;0 ;0 a(tl
-I ~ AJ ~ ~o
"'C ::J ::J
0 CO a..
- ~ :E
Z ~ ~ l!! l!! ~ l!!
-Ill l!!
C 3 CIl
~
'"
...
~
,.,
~
,.,
"-
,.,
o
~
o
~
()
5-
I!!
iii
::. SOURCE: NOAA NAllONAL CLlMAllC DATA CENTER. ASHVlLLE. N.C.
.9 STAllON: 72201 KEY WEST, FlORIDA
j!! PERIOD OF RECORD: 1991-2000
<
o
Q.
::>
~
Q.
g!
Ul
<
~
Ul
!t
t
?
";
E
..-.-
E'-I
NOTES:
1. lHlS CHART PLOTS, FOR lHE DATA PERIOD, lHE RECORDED OCCURENCES
(IN PERCENT) OF WIND BY DIRECllON AND SPEED \'MILE lHE RECTANGULAR
BOXES REPRESENT lHE MAXIMUM ACCEPTABLE CROSSWIND COMPONENT
FOR EACH RUNWAY. lHE WIND COVERAGE CAPABILITY OF lHE AIRFIELD IS
lHUS DETERMINED BY TOTALING ALL OCCURENCES FAWNG W1lHIN lHE
RECTANGLES.
URS CORPORA llON, AUGUST 2001
Key West
International Airport
Master Plan Update
ALL WEATHER WIND ROSE
FIGURE:
1.14
'-'=I W
;;;
~
..,
~
..,
"-
..,
o
........
E iE'o.I
i
o
~
Cl
5-
~
in
~ SOURCE: NOAA NATIONAL CLIMATIC DATA CENTER, ASHVlllE, N.C.
W STATION: 72201 KEY WEST, flORIDA
~ PERIOD OF RECORD: 1991-2000
o
g; URS CORPORATION. AUGUST 2001
z
j
a.
11!
(I)
~
?
(I)
~
l;;
?
";
NOTES:
1. THIS CHART PLOTS, FOR THE DATA PERIOD. THE RECORDED OCCURENCES
(IN PERCENT) OF WIND BY DIRECTION AND SPEED WI-lILE THE RECTANGULAR
BOXES REPRESENT THE MAXIMUM ACCEPTABLE CROSSWIND COMPONENT
FOR EACH RUNWAY. THE WIND COVERAGE CAPABILITY OF THE AIRFIELD IS
THUS DETERMINED BY TOTALING All OCCURENCES FALLING WITHIN THE
RECTANGLES.
Key West
International Airport
Master Plan Update
VISUAL METEOROLOGICAL
CONDITION WIND ROSE
FIGURE:
1.15
~
w
E
---
IE"I
!f
~
..,
~
..,
"
..,
o
~
o
u;
<>
5-
~
m
~ SOURCE: NOAA NATIONAL CLIMATIC DATA CENlER, ASHVlllE, N.C.
~ STATION: 72201 KEY WEST, flORIDA
~ PERIOD OF RECORD: 1991-2000
<
o
~ URS CORPORATION, AUGUST 2001
z
:s
0..
NOTES:
1. THIS CHART PLOTS. FOR THE DATA PERIOD, THE RECORDED OCCURENCES
(IN PERCENT) OF WIND BY DIRECTION AND SPEED v.HllE THE RECTANGULAR
BOXES REPRESENT THE MAXIMUM ACCEPTABLE CROSSWIND COMPONENT
FOR EACH RUNWAY. THE WIND COVERAGE CAPABILITY OF THE AIRFIELD IS
THUS DETERMINED BY TOTALING All OCCURENCES FAlliNG WITHIN THE
RECTANGLES.
~
Ul
<
?
Ul
~
~
?
~
FIGURE:
1.16
Key West
International Airport
Master Plan Update
INSTRUMENT METEOROLOGICAL
CONDITION WIND ROSE
\
2700
9 Area.
aircrall
G'l
~
:I:
(';
~
~
i
~
:I:
~
'tl
.",
~
~
if
()
~
(")
...
\
\ R A
\
\
\
\
\
WARNING\
\
W-174C \
\
to,)
.0
T
s
Source:
Miami Sectional Aeronautical Chart,
U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation
Administration, National Aeronautical Charting Office
Chart date February 22, 2001
uousu
ADIZ
Check Inr.moti
for Prohibited
Area. In lh, vi
.
Key West
International Airport
Master Plan Update
VFR AIRSPACE STRUCTURE
FIGURE:
1.17
Section 1
Inventory
on radials from the NAP Key West Runway 7 threshold when landing on
that runway.
IFR Conditions - Under IFR conditions, NAP Key West ATCT and radar
approach/departure control personnel provide position and altitude data to
all aircraft. Departures from EYW are held whenever an instrument
approach under IFR conditions is made to either EYW Runway 9/27 or
NAP Key West runways. The IFR airspace structure surrounding EYW is
presented in Figure 1.18.
· ATCT and Radar - The EYW ATCT is operational from 0700 to 2100 p.m.
NAP Key West ATCT and radar approach/departure facilities are operational
from 0600 to 2200 and are served by an airport surveillance radar (ASR-8) unit.
They interface with the Miami air route traffic control center (ARTCC). The
ARTCC provides airspace services to the combined airspace from 2200 to 0600.
· Non-Precision Instrument Procedures - As of October 2002, there are three
non-precision instrument approaches available at EYW. These approaches
consist of straight-in GPS approaches to Runway 9 and Runway 27 as well as a
circling approach. NAP Key West has six Airport Surveillance Radar (ASR)
approaches, three Precision Approach Radar (PAR) approaches, three Tactical
Air Navigation (TACAN) approaches and one Very High Frequency
Omnidirectional Range (VORT AC) approach.
· Warninl!: Areas - NAP Key West and EYW airspace is adjacent to the Air
Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ), the United States Defense Area, and
numerous warning areas outside of FAA jurisdiction and over international
waters. Traffic from the north and northeast is routinely routed clear of warning
areas. The U.S. Navy states that some warning areas are used for high-speed
aerial combat training including surface-to-air and air-to-air missile firings and
anti -aircraft gunnery.
· Obstructions - Obstructions within 25 NM of EYW include the following:
Balloon - Strobe lighted and marked balloon to 14,000 feet MSL 14 NM
northeast of airport.
Towers - Numerous towers are located west, north and east of airport.
These towers have elevations ranging from 143 to 611 feet.
W:\126378 17 _KWIA Master PIanIS_1 IInven.ory.docl3/14I03
1-11
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 1 Inventory
1.5.3 FLIGHT CORRIDORS
Low altitude Federal Airways, shown on the Miami Sectional Aeronautical Chart, in the vicinity of
EYW are listed in Table 1.4. Low altitude Federal Airways are corridors defined by radials between
very high frequency omnidirectional radio range (VOR) ground radio stations. They provide
navigational guidance to aircraft that are equipped with onboard equipment capable of receiving
signals from those stations.
TABLE 1.4
FLIGHT CORRIDORS
Key West International Airport
Master Plan U date
West VOR EYW
West VOREYW
West VOR EYW
WestVOREYW
V3 Ke WestVOREYW
Source: Miami Sectional Chart, February 200 1.
Compiled by URS Corporation, 2001.
VORTAC
LeeCoun VORTAC
Miami VOR
Miami VOR
Miami VOR
1.5.4 NA VIGA TIONAL AND VISUAL AIDS
Existing navigational and visual aids (NA V AIDS) located on EYW include a rotating beacon,
runway end identifier lights (REIT...s), visual approach slope indicators (V ASIs), lighted wind cone,
and medium intensity runway lights (MIRLs). NA V AIDs at EYW can be viewed on Figure 1.1,
previously referenced.
1.5.5 EXISTING PuBLISHED ApPROACHES
Existing published approaches (effective 3 October 2002) to EYW, available to aircraft operators
after obtaining clearance from the U.S. Navy approach control and the EYW air traffic control tower
(ATCT), include GPS approaches to Runways 9 and 27 as well as a circling NDB or GPS-A
approach. These approaches are depicted in Figures 1.19 through 1.21.
1.5.6 EYW A TCT
Air traffic control services at EYW have been provided by a FAA contract tower since August 28,
1995. The ATCT is operational from 7:00 a.m. through 9:00 p.m.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PIanIS_llInventol)'.doc\3/12103
1-12
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
~
-46
IZ
-.
~
-0
~
111111 IIIIF.
4-
(Oeean Reef
i~ ~;' rMI'A~I''''
~,<." Miami
\ /,!!;.~",8,,;~
/
,,/
DROWN
MRA 5000
\ \I \I \ \11\ \\111 \1\\\ \11\ 1\\1 \11\111\ 1\11 \\\\\\1\1\\\ \I
United States Government
Flight Information Publication
IFR Enroute Low Altitude - US A
Chart No: L-19 R
July 12, 2001
WI
.~, """
_.. "';'. _oil' .-
Key West
International Airport
Master Plan Update
IFR LOW ALTITUDE
AIRSPACE STRUCTURE
FIGURE:
1.18
C)
~
~ Source:
!
o
~
~
-\,
ifi
,-
,iD
~
."
(g
~
.
KEY wesr,l'l.OIlI>>.
Af'f' CI$~ldg 480;
oar Apt El.v 3
..
ANA
093" 10
tlW09
'01
1DlE
3
44~'
_ x 100 -
l.~.~
8Qn
RBlIho)ls 9aad 27'
_~ 9'-21'
KEYwesr. tl.OI'aQA
er;g,e02108
United States Government
Flight Information Publication
U.S. Terminal Procedures
Southeast Volume 3 of 4
October 3, 2002
Al..-606(FAAJ
GPSRWY9
~wtSrtm.(EYW)
ASIt
MlSSa) API'Il:OACtt Cflmb.1O l500 dit'1Id 8UIU"f WP ond
hold.
JiQQ
~
TWn~.
T
'H
~
./
.....
'lMIOP,
'!oNM
'C'AltGOIn'
A
.
5-9 $$O-l577,(~n
OI.CUNG 5flO.lm (600-11
24.~;lfl. 44'W
't<"..
Key West
International Airport
Master Plan Update
INSTRUMENT APPROACH
PROCEDURE
GPS RUNWAY 9
FIGURE:
1.19
C>
~
~ Source:
;
~
~
~
'"
~
,:,
'?
~
C>
~
~
~
.
kFf wesT, ROIlI).6.
APtQS ~Idg ~
273". Apt S... 3
.
4..NA
1.42
Al~fFMJ
A.SR
GPSRWf.2;
KEY WEST IHJL(EYW)
MISSED AJlfllOACH; Clilllb to 6dO .Jhan dhabillg Wt tUm.1O
1.500 &f6d 8UlWV WI' and hold.
It>lE .c6t:. 600
*'. It lOG 3. . ~ .t
Jyy
80 12 27V to
RW27
.
'Of
Rell ~ 9 and 27'
MlI1 Rwy 9.27'
lCEY WfSr,ROllI:lA
0ri9-8 W""'.
United States Government
Flight Information Publication
U.S. Terminal Procedures
Southeast Volume 3 of 4
October 3, 2002
Key West
International Airport
Master Plan Update
T
~~.
f1~
IURPY TIIl'I'I
NA
IlW'l7
,
.........
273"
JjQQ.
CAl'tGOIl.V
$-27
u_
A I
.s_
46Q..l 457 ($Ot) U
0flCuNG 500-1 .m 150C>-11
24"33'N..s'" .c6'W
INSTRUMENT APPROACH
PROCEDURE
GPS RUNWAY 27
FIGURE:
1.20
Gl
~
:I:
o
~ Source:
~
o
~
."
'"
C>
~
.;,
~
~
:i>
"
z
~
C,
."
~
~
.
..
'.40
Al-606tFMJ
KEY wt:ST.Jl.OIlI)A
NDa fl$ API" CIS Iwy rd9 MIA
....... ono TDlE NlA
- Af>l a... 3
NDB or GPS-A
KEY 'NEST IN1l. (EYW)
MISSm Af9ROAt)t: dilIlbino IJt I\IItl to 1,500. Yio heodill9
3600. ;en left tumdiNd AS NDa.ond hold.
"
ASR
-<<It
.-01 1I 1(1)
"~~
8072
HOG 3W 332
CATEGOIV A
ORCUNG 500-'
KEY WEST .!!...0llI).I.
Amell l~
2,,033'N-8l'" MlW
KEY weST INTl fEX\V)
NDS' or GPS~A
United States Government
Flight Information Publication
U.S. Terminal Procedures
Southeast Volume 3 of 4
October 3, 2002
Key West
International Airport
Master Plan Update
INSTRUMENT APPROACH
PROCEDURE
NDB OR GPS-A
FIGURE:
1.21
Section 1 Inventory
1.5.7 RUNWAY PROTECTION ZONES (RPZ)
Existing RPZs for each end of Runway 9/27 are 1,700 feet in length, 500 feet wide at the inner edge,
and 1,010 feet wide at the outer edge. These RPZ dimensions are the current standard for visual and
not lower than I-mile visibility non-precision approaches by aircraft approach categories C and D.
The approach slope associated with these RPZs is 34: 1.
Portions of these RPZs are not under the full control of the airport. An area of approximately 2 acres
on the northern edge and 1.4 acres on the southern edge of the RPZ for Runway 27 is privately
owned. Approximately 2.5 acres of the north edge of the RPZ for Runway 9 is owned by the City of
Key West. The adequacy of these RPZs for future operations will be discussed in Section 6 _
Airport Plans.
1.6 ENVIRONMENTAL DATA
Primary environmental features affecting airport development and operations are salt ponds and
mangroves. A description of principal salt ponds and stands of mangroves and the effect on airport
development and operations follows.
1.6.1 SALT PONDS
Salt ponds exist on all four sides of the airport. Some ponds are connected to the Atlantic Ocean
through culverts and are tidally influenced. Others are isolated from tidal influence with water levels
fluctuating due to rainfall. Salt ponds and floodplains are depicted in Figure 1.22. Major salt ponds
and current enhancement projects are as follows:
· South of Runwav 9 - The largest portion of the salt pond located south of
Runway 9 between Roosevelt Boulevard and the airport fence line is on City of
Key West property. It extends onto airport property adjacent to the threshold of
Runway 9 and the T -hangar area. A former abandoned access road that restricted
flow between this salt pond and a salt pond west of the threshold of Runway 9
has been closed and channels have been created to allow free flow of water
between these salt ponds.
· West of Runwav 9 - Several salt ponds are located west of the threshold of
Runway 9. The majority of these salt ponds are located on airport property.
· North of Runwal: - There are large salt ponds and associated mangrove stands
north of the runway extending from south of the Hawk missile site near the
north/south portion of Government Road eastward to the abandoned blimp pads.
W:\12637817 _KWlA Master PIan\'UlInventory.doc131l2lO3
1-13
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section I
Inventory
.
East of Threshold 27 - There are salt ponds and associated mangroves east of
the threshold of Runway 27. Almost the entire RPZ is covered with mangroves
and salt ponds. In accordance with a consent order, the mangroves have been
trimmed to below the runway's approach slope.
.
South of Threshold 27 - Portions of the salt ponds and mangroves in the
Runway 27 RPZ extend south of the Runway 27 threshold and east of the
commercial aircraft parking apron up to areas developed fornon-airport-related
commercial uses.
1.6.2 MANGROVES
Stands of mangroves exist in the RPZ for Runway 27 and adjacent to edges of salt ponds.
Mangroves beneath the 34: 1 approach surface to Runway 27 have been trimmed in accordance with
a consent order. Mangroves also border the salt ponds described above around the periphery of the
airport.
1.6.3 DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS
Development activities within areas with wetlands (salt ponds) and/or mangroves will require
permits from several regulatory agencies including, but not limited to, the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, the South Florida Water Management District, and the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection. Mitigation would be required for any unavoidable impacts to wetlands.
Permits are required for trimming of mangroves.
1.7 LAND USE
1.7.1 ADJACENT LAND USE
Land use in the vicinity of EYW was identified through a combination of windshield surveys and a
review of aerial photography. A description of the land use is provided below and is depicted in
Figure 1.23.
· North - Land use to the north of the airport is residential. There is a buffer of
City of Key West property consisting of former blimp pads and the former Hawk
missile site between airport property and residential property on Riviera Drive.
This land was formerly owned by the U.S. Navy, but was transferred to the City
of Key West in 2001.
· East - Land use east of airport property is a mixture of environmentally sensitive
mangroves, and hotel/motel complexes.
W:I12637817 _KWIA Master PlanI.'UllnvenlOry.docI3/1W3
1-14
Key West Inter1Ultional Airport
Master Plan Update
\
\
\
,
,
"
\
,
\
,
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
....
....
"
....
"
N
-0
PZ
fT1
01
........>-
fT1
N
-0
PZ
fT1
.....
........>-
fT1
N N I
o 0 I
~ z, \ I
fT1 I I
< >- '
fT1 fT1 I I
,
~(") CD (I)
:::l~ > >
o (I) (I) r
z-l 1"'1 -I
~~ ~
CD"T1 0
>. 0
(1)0 0
1"'10 1"'1
~O j;i
03!: ~
O~ :::l
o 0
1"'1 rii z
j;i. (I)
~g g
:::l::j rrt
0-< ;:0
Z:t ~
(I)> -
ON Z
1"'1> 1"'1
rrt;:O 0
;:00
~'i'
Z>
8rii
c
Z
1"'1
>
~
~
~
<l
o
<l
f:2
~
_N
1Tl0
rZ
01
8
o .Z
5'
-
~ CD
II> ~
(II =--
i .... ~
~CD
"'tl 0 '<
~::J<
c: !!. <;
"0 _CD
Co _en
a ::;.....
(l) "C
o
~
-
en
:.
~
-t
"tJ
o
Z
C
en
go
."
~
o
o
C
"tJ
~
:.
Z
en
_N
1Tl0
rZ
...fT1
~<
fT1
- -- -- ~
------ ~
....
....
----
..-//-
..,..,/.........- .......
.......;/...... ......-
...-;..-..- ..-
..-/'......,.; .......
....../..-........ ......
....... --/................-
~ - - ...:- -"'~...;-....::::;:-..;:-- - --
---"- -- ,-
.... .....
\ "
, ""
.....
.....
....
[. f
I~
i~ .-
n:
IC'O
~.' ~
!} i
i.f]
~. C en
r} ~ i:
~};p~ 0
.~ g .
:;,: H
V 1"
rf ~
f~; -
~:
., :L
,. rn
fi.' ..
\;~
Li
~i: ,."
[',0
!~8
rL .. ~
RID" ~.,.. ,.~
"." "".' ':'.'~ .
~ \ ~0 ;~:..
:J: :I: ~ f 6" ~ ;;0 :I: Zo -f c: G) ~
-. -. IS. :it ~ 31 ii'~ 3 II'-ri
~~ -. - 0 - 0: 6''!J.l~i is' Ii i5
i'i'~~CIl~~5-g!!.Q,i~
iiliiloo~~i~~bl&>s.:>
~~ i i '< ~ (j!!. a ~ 3 3
~;;o~~;;oc31~ CDal3
i!ffl~2~~i~i
~9tIII.~ ~I
~ ~ ~
~ IYl ~
i I i
z
~
Z
o
~
ii
I
;;0
o
~
""
:I:
~ "TI
~ ~r-
_< ~m
,:\~ m "'"
~'~{' UI
ZC03:~=!O~~]!~S; m
Sli-~~ I: i'i 2:2:~ iz
~ari~ li~n~!..;? 0 Z
cgif~Ii~~if~;;o ~C
!.3a ~?Ii -.-.!. m
~~ li- JJ!
~CD Dl a 5'5"0
iiJ a::f 2.2,'03
rnCll '.
a en;;o ;;0 ~
::f Ii ~CIl_
CD CD i~Dl
~ lYl!la
IYl 6-(5'0
CD ~~CD
i:n "" Ii
nOD
8i~
-~CD
!'~a
~.
gi
n........
",,0
enC5:
CPc}
~1
!it
c:r
:;
a
rn
FIGURE:
1.23
,."
8
o
-i-
,."
o
8
~
!It.
KEY WEST LAND USE
.
Key West International Airport
Monroe County, Florida
Master Plan Update URS
Section 1
Inventory
.
South - Land use south of the airport is a mixture of commercial (hotels)
recreational (beach) and residential (Key West By the Sea Condominiums).
.
~ - Land use west of airport property is a mixture of institutional (Key West
High School), commercial, residential, recreational, and wetlands.
1.7.2 CURRENT AIRPORT LAND USE
Airport property amounts to approximately 255 acres. It is currently in use as follows.
· Airoort Ooeratin2 Area (AOA) - The runway, taxiways, and apron with their
safety areas, object free areas, building restriction lines, and parking limit lines
make up the AOA.
· Runwav Protection Zones (RPZ) - An RPZ is a protected and controlled area
beneath the inner portion of the approach slope. The size, shape, and the slope of
the surface above the RPZ is determined on the basis of the category of the
highest level of precision of approaches to the runway. The RPZs at EYW are
based on non-precision approaches with visibility minimums not lower than one
mile. The RPZs are 1,700 feet in length, 500 feet in width at the inner edge, and
1,010 feet in width at the outer edge. The slope of the approach surface above
the RPZ is 34: 1. The RPZs are approximately 29 acres each for a total of 58
acres.
· Aviation-Related Use - Aviation-related use includes the commercial terminal,
FHO facilities, cargo facilities, private hangars, and other facilities including auto
parking and support facilities or areas related to aviation activities.
· Non-A viation-Related Use - Non-aviation-related land use at EYW includes the
County Department of Public Works yard, the Florida Highway Patrol Station,
and the Teenage Center of Key West.
· Recreational - Recreational land use on airport property includes a public park
and the East Martello Gallery and Museum.
· Environmental Areas - Environmental areas at EYW include wetlands and
mangroves. Portions of the areas extend within the AOA, the RPZs, and the
aviation-related areas.
· Ooen Soace - Open spaces are land areas unavailable for development due to
airspace or restrictive dimensions (too small to develop).
· Roadwavs - Roadways on airport property are Faraldo Circle, Stickney Road,
and unnamed connecting or recirculation roads.
W:\l2637817 _KWIA Master PIanIS_l\Inventory.doc\3114103
1-15
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
SECTION 2
FORECASTS OF AVIATION ACTIVITY
Section 2 Forecasts of Aviation Activity
2.1 INTRODUCTION
This section presents forecasts of aviation demand at Key West International Airport (EYW)
through the year 2021. These forecasts provide information that will be used in subsequent
sections of the master plan update to determine whether new airport facilities or improvements of
existing facilities is warranted. In addition, the forecasts provide information concerning the
timing that any new or improved facilities would be required. Ideally, facilities will be
developed at the time they are required, thereby avoiding the costs associated with building too
late or too early.
Forecasts of passenger enplanements (i.e., the number of people that boarded scheduled
commercial aircraft) will be used in subsequent sections of this report to estimate future demand
for passenger handling facilities, such as airport roadways, automobile parking, ticket counters,
baggage carousels, etc. Likewise, forecasts of aircraft operations will be used to determine the
future demand for airfield facilities, such as runways, taxiways, parking aprons, and fueling
facilities. The forecasts presented in this section were prepared on the basis of historical annual
activity through 2001 and monthly activity through April of 2002. Annual data for 2002 was
subsequently added after completion and FAA approval of the forecast.
It should be noted that forecasting consists of the educated estimates regarding future activity
levels. While past trends and current industry events provide clues regarding future levels of
activity, the actual level of passengers and aircraft operations that will occur at EYW are
unknown. Thus, the forecasts presented on the following pages should be reviewed with this fact
in mind.
2.2 AIRPORT SERVICE AREA
An airport service area is the geographic region from which an airport derives the majority of its
originating passengers. It is important to define an airport's service area before attempting to
prepare forecasts because the socioeconomic data needed to prepare the forecast should be
representative of the same geographic area. Items considered when defining an airport service
area include roadway access, the location of competing airports, the relative strength of air
service provided at competing airports, and other appropriate factors.
For the purpose of this master plan, the airport service area for EYW is considered to encompass
all points between Key West and Vaca Key as shown in Figure 2.1. This does not mean that all
residents located within this area will use EYW instead of competing airports such as Miami
International Airport. It does mean that the majority of EYW originating passengers reside or
are visiting within this geographic area.
2.3 ANALYSIS OF FORECAST FACTORS
A variety of factors are usually considered in the development of forecasts. Factors considered
in the development of forecasts for EYW are described in the following paragraphs.
W,\l2637817_KWIA Master Plan\S_2\S_2.docI31l2lO3131l2lO3
2-1
Key West International Airporl
Master Plan Update
Section 2 Forecasts of Aviation Activity
2.3.1 ECONOMYffoURISM
The Key West economy is primarily based on tourism associated with recreational activities such
as boating, commercial and recreational fishing, diving, snorkeling, and, like most other Florida
cities, seasonal tourism. Tourism, which is at its peak in early spring, is the city's primary
generator of economic activity. Because the vast majority (more than 80 percent)! of passenger
enplanements at EYW are tourist related, the state of the economy and the health of the Key
West tourism industry are significant factors affecting future passenger levels.
About two-thirds of all employment in Key West in 1990 were in either the retail trade or service
sectors. Almost half of all retail trade positions were in eating and drinking establishments, and
the professional and related category accounted for half of all service positions. Approximately
66 percent of the economic base is directly or indirectly tied to tourism. The economic bases of
the city, in comparison to statewide averages, are high in retail trade and public administration
employment and equally low in the manufacturing and wholesale trade sectors.
2.3.2 SEASONALITY
Seasonality is another factor considered when forecasting air travel. Demand for air travel in
Key West is extremely seasonal. Typically, the peak month occurs during the first quarter of the
year with March being the peak month. Approximately 40 percent of EYW's annual
enplanements occur during this 3-month period. During the summer season, Key West attracts
primarily Florida tourists, who are much less likely to fly to the Keys than the northern visitors
who frequent the Keys during the winter and spring. To accommodate this factor, all forecasts
projected in this study are based on the peak quantity of tourists and visitors expected during the
year.
2.3.3 ROADWAY CONGESTION
Access to Key West is provided via U.S. Highway 1, which is the sole means of surface access
to the island. Congestion on U.S. 1, particularly during peak periods, can make this mode of
transportation less desirable to some travelers. It is anticipated that congestion on U.S. 1 will
worsen in the future as traffic levels increase. The extent to which this roadway congestion will
influence a traveler's choice of transportation is not known. However, it can be anticipated that
as roadway congestion increases, air travel would become a more attractive mode of
transportation to Key West.
2.3.4 COMPETING MODES OF TRAVEL
Some visitors to Key West are beginning to use alternative modes of transportation to the island.
Ferry Service has been initiated by various operators from points such as Ft. Myers and Naples
to Key West. In addition, a new high-speed catamaran is planned from Ft. Myers to Key West.
1 The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration conducted a comprehensive study of visitors to the Florida Keys in
1996 entitled "Visitor Profiles: Florida Keys/Key West". This study provided an estimate of 199,687 visitors arriving through
EYW from June 1995 through May of 1996. Therefore, the estimate that 80 percent of passengers at EYW are visitors was
derived by dividing the 199,687 visitors by the 248,441 passenger enplanements recorded at EYW during 1995.
W:\12637817_KWlA MssrerPIanIS_21.'U.doc\31l2lO3\31l2lO3 2-2 Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
en
2
~
c:!J
::u~
(l)e.
b>\lI {q
~j 9!..
!I!
~iil ...
g~ .
II
. C) Co)
~c ~
~~ ~
C
0-
iil
~
'";'j
(j)
c
.c
.... z
5"
-
CD
3
m
-
o'
::J
m="
-CD
~~
"0 CD
oen
::l_
o
w
o
o
o
o
if
-
~'i8
'jl
r-
o
~
;0
o
Q)
a.
(I)
[d..... I~.'.;'.'.',r....
... ,..
-:-:-: ',-",:t
... ~J
...... ~
(1)-"
CDaCD
<CD,<
-.3 ~
~ a CD
-'(I)
~o_
m ~
~
-a
o
::I.
o
'V
~
'<
~
en
-
. .
'"
C1 I),
".' ~.....,.
(3<7
..
~,Q,.cl1I).."
~
t. "Il.
I<--.f-. .
~ Il:!l.'ll:tl .
1. \
.fJ . k
fJ'
~:.
.~,
~. ~
I>
<1
c
cc
m
.,
0"
!t.
~
'<
~
'"
eP
c;:>
~
~
~.
~
Q.
~
a
s:
Q)
S'
;0
o
Q)
a.
en
~
\
"'tt
g.
~
~
~
r
CD
CO
CD
::J
a.
... '"
d
o~
(;
::J
a.
in Dr
Dr
3
o
D1
a.
I(J m
b/
&
Key West
International Airport
~ ~
~ 0 ~
~.~ ~
g ~
.c?
r"
o
o
o
~
6'
II
o
C':7
-
o
t9
o
o
<('
o?
to
''.l::!..
r',-
· 8~e-oC;;>
D
~
~
l>
Master Plan Update
AIRPORT SERVICE AREA
(])
/if
()
a
co. ~
o
'\:)
".~
~
Figure
2.1
Section 2
Forecasts of Aviation Activity
These ferries provide an alternative to using air transportation from certain coastal points in
Florida.
Trip time using the ferry service takes approximately 3 to 4 hours (one-way) as compared to 1
hour by air. Price is difficult to compare since there is significant variation in fares depending
upon seasonal and advance purchase requirements. However, round-trip prices for ferry services
range from $100 from Naples and Ft. Myers to $140 from Bradenton. By comparison, air travel
costs generally range from $200 with advance purchase to as much as $500 with walk-up fares.
2.3.5 REESTABLISHING DIPLOMA TIC RELATIONS WITH CUBA
Another factor that may impact future levels of passenger and operational activity at EYW is the
potential for reestablishment of diplomatic relations with Cuba. Previous master plans for EYW
speculated on the impact of this factor. The master plan conducted for EYW in 1974 estimated
the future number of passengers between Key West and Cuba by using the number of passengers
that occurred during the late 1950's and applying average annual growth rates. This
methodology is extremely suspect and led to a "high growth" projection in the master plan of
2 million passengers between Key West and Havana by the year 1994.
Since the potential for the reestablishment of diplomatic relations with Cuba is pure speculation,
there is no quantitatively valid method of estimating future passengers. Reliance on the number
of passengers that occurred preceding the severance of diplomatic relations four decades ago
bears no resemblance to the number of passengers that may be generated with air service at this
time. Therefore, estimates for passenger generation related to this factor must be based upon
judgment and the basic driving factors of the potential for this service. This issue will be
discussed further in the forecasts of passenger enplanements.
2.4 HISTORICAL AIRLINE ACTIVITY
Understanding past trends of aviation activity and the factors influencing activity levels is
important when projecting future growth. Therefore, historical activity statistics were compiled
for airline activity. These data are presented and discussed in the following paragraphs.
2.4.1 PASSENGERENPLANEMENTS
Annual historical passenger enplanement statIstIcs recorded by EYW airport management
personnel for the years 1970 through 2002 are presented in Table 2.1 and Figure 2.2. As shown,
passenger enplanements have increased although the rate of growth has steadily decreased.
W:\l2637817_KWIA Master PIanIS_21S_2.doc\31l2lO3\31l2103
2-3
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 2
Forecasts of Aviation Activity
TABLE 2.1
HISTORICAL PASSENGER ENPLANEMENTS
Key West International Airport
Master Plan U ate
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
22,371
26,066
39,523
38,667
49,421
50,012
56,137
67,521
89,393
83,513
91,226
93,643
102,700
101,361
102,512
95,819
139,575
166,395
164,124
151,783
198,510
188,364
202,787
218,817
250,297
248,441
282,193
278,025
271,425
276,829
285,372
262,761
266,413
16.5%
51.6%
-2.2%
27.8%
1.2%
12.2%
20.3%
32.4%
-6.6%
9.2%
2.6%
9.7%
-1.3%
1.1%
-6.5%
45.7%
19.2%
-1.4%
-7.5%
30.8%
-5.1%
7.7%
7.9%
14.4%
-0.7%
13.6%
-1.5%
-2.4%
2.0%
3.1%
-7.9%
1.4%
Source: Key West Airport Management Records.
Figure 2.3 shows the average annual growth rate of passenger enplanements at EYW for each of
the last three decades. The average annual growth during that period has decreased from 15
percent during 1970 to 1980, to 8 percent during 1980 to 1990 to 3.7 percent during 1990 to
2000. By comparison, the average annual growth rate for passenger enplanements in the United
States was 4.8 percent from 1980 through 1990 and 3.6 percent from 1990 through 2000. Thus,
during the last 10 years enplanements at EYW grew at approximately the same rate as
enplanements across the nation.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PIanIS_2\S_2.doc\3J12103\3/12103
2-4
Key West International Airporl
Master Plo.n Update
300,000
250,000
J!l 200,000
c
II)
E
II)
C
I'Cl
ii
c 150,000
w
...
II)
C)
c
II)
/Jl
/Jl
I'Cl 100,000
Q.
50,000
0 C> - .... .., '<t on CD .... CD ... C> -
C> ;: .... .., '<t on CD .... CD ... CD CD CD CD CD CD CD ... ...
.... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... CD CD CD ... ... ... ... ... ...
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
... ... ... ... ... ... ... - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Year
Note: Vertical shading indicates periods of economic recession.
"
~
"0
:I:
n
en
:;;
~
en
~
"0
C
"0
<>
~
8
,~
1ti
'i"
'"
~
.
Key West
International Airport
Master Plan Update
HISTORICAL PASSENGER
ENPLANEMENTS
FIGURE:
2.2
16.0% 15.1%
14.0%
12.0%
.c
~ 10.0%
0
~
C)
.... 8.1%
c:
CD 8.0%
(,)
~
CD
Q.
6.0%
4.0%
2.0%
0.0%
1970 to 1980 1980 to 1990 1990 to 2000
C'l
~
::c
o
U>
:;<
~
:;:
m
~
."
C
."
o
:!:i
m
'"
<:>
<:>
,-
'T1
~
W
)>
. Key West
.J . ... . International Airport
_ Master Plan Update
HISTORICAL AVERAGE ANNUAL
GROWTH RATE OF PASSENGER
ENPLANEMENTS
FIGURE:
2.3
Section 2
Forecasts of Aviation Activity
During 2001 passenger enplanements decreased 8 percent from the level attained in 2000 due to
the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Comparison of passenger levels during the months
after the attacks show that passenger levels were down 20 to 30 percent from levels a year ago.
However, by January of 2002, the decrease from the same month of 2001 had shrunk to 17
percent. During the subsequent months of February 2002 through April 2002, passenger
enplanements were averaging 6 percent less than levels recorded during the preceding year.
2.4.2 MONTHL Y PASSENGER DISTRIBUTION
On the basis of monthly enplanement data from 1998-2000, March has historically been the peak
month for air travel at EYW. This trend is consistent with the high percentage of tourists during
that period. The monthly distribution of passenger enplanements is presented in Table 2.2.
TABLE 2.2
MONTHLY DISTRIBUTION OF PASSENGER ENPLANEMENTS
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
~ ~~-~
I I " , 'I
~
January 26,421 9.7% 24,210 8.7% 26,662 9.3%
February 26,426 9.7% 25,069 9.1% 26,560 9.3%
March 30,854 11.4% 30,717 11.1% 30,109 10.6%
April 25,593 9.4% 27,889 10.1% 25,825 9.0%
May 26,674 9.8% 27,783 10.0% 27,432 9.6%
June 22,023 8.1% 22,425 8.1% 22,326 7.8%
July 20,473 7.5% 21,238 7.7% 21,524 7.5%
August 20,482 7.5% 19,739 7.1% 19,425 6.8%
September 14,502 5.3% 15,211 5.5% 16,350 5.7%
October 14,415 5.3% 19,023 6.9% 21,779 7.6%
November 23,580 8.7% 24,390 8.8% 25,156 8.8%
December 19,982 7.4% 19,135 6.9% 22,224 7.8%
Source: Key West International Airport Management Records.
The monthly distribution of passengers from 1998 through 2000 is depicted in Figure 2.4. As the
figure indicates, the trend is fairly consistent from year to year, although variations of passenger
levels can be seen during the months of September and October when hurricanes are more
prevalent. The existence or even the potential for a major storm to pass near Key West can result
in sudden decrease of tourists for short periods. Data for 2001 were not included in the figure
due to the highly unusual effects of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
2.4.3 AIRLINE MARKET SHARES
An analysis of airline passenger enplanements was conducted to determine market shares. As
presented in Figure 2.5, the top three airlines operating at EYW in 2000 included American
Eagle with 35 percent of the market, US Airways with 24 percent, and Gulfstream with 21
percent. It is to be expected that American Eagle would have the largest share of the EYW
market due to its connections with American Airline's large hub operations at Miami
International Airport. Passengers that fly to or from Key West on American Airlines are likely
W:\12637817_KWIA MOSIer PlanIS_21S_2.doc\3/12103\3/12AJ3
2-5
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 2
Forecasts of Aviation Activity
to have fewer connections due to the fact that Miami is a hub for American Airlines and provides
non-stop service to a large number of destinations.
Figure 2.6 provides a comparison of market share, by airline for 1995 and 2000. American
Eagle's market share has remained essentially constant, while Cape Air and Gulfstream have
gained market share during this period. Conversely, Comair and US Airways have lost market
share. These general trends reflect the relative strength of the markets they serve. As noted,
American Airlines' strong hub operation at Miami gives American Eagle a dominant position in
the Key West market. US Airways operations connect to Tampa and Miami. While the Tampa
and Miami operations for US Airways are not hubs, they do offer non-stop service to a number
of northern destinations. Furthermore, the Tampa Bay and Miami markets have significant
population bases. These factors provide an explanation why US Airways has the second-largest
market share at Key West.
Gulfstream Airlines provides service to Miami, Ft. Lauderdale, and Tampa. Gulfstream has
gained market share as a result of the aforementioned factors and the code-share agreement with
Continental Airlines
2.5 mSTORICAL AIRCRAFf OPERATIONS
Data regarding historical aircraft operations have been compiled to provide an understanding of
past trends that could prove useful for estimating future growth. Historical aircraft operations
were obtained from airport management records, EYW ATC records and personnel, and
historical FAA Terminal Area Forecasts (T AF). Historical operational data are presented and
discussed in the following paragraphs.
2.5.1 ANNUAL AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS
Historical total annual aircraft operations from 1976 through 2002 are presented in Table 2.3 and
Figure 2.7. Total aircraft operations increased from approximately 68,000 in 1976 to
approximately 95,000 in 2001. It should be noted that differences in the methodology used to
count aircraft operations account for some of the recent fluctuation of totals. For example, in
1996 through 1999 military aircraft operations that transitioned through EWY airspace were
counted as operations. This practice was stopped in the year 2000. Historical aircraft operations,
by category, for the years 1991 through 2002 are presented in Table 2.4.
2.5.1.1
Air Carrier Operations
For traffic count purposes, an air carrier aircraft is defined as an aircraft capable of carrying more
than 60 passengers. Historically, most aircraft operating at EYW were commuter aircraft in the
19- to 35-seat category. However, in 1999, American Eagle began operating the ATR-72 aircraft
to the Key West market. The A TR -72 can accommodate up to 68 passengers and is, therefore,
considered an air carrier aircraft. This has led to the recent increase of air carrier operations as
presented in Table 2.4.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PIanIS_21S_2.docl3/1210313/12103
2-6
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
35,000
30,000
J!! 25,000
c
Q)
E
Q)
i 20,000
Q.
c
w
...
~ 15,000
c
Q)
III
III
co
Q. 10,000
5,000
Cl
5:
"'ll
:I:
(')
~
~
~
"'ll
c:
"'ll
o
~
8
,-
."
if'
J;:
;..
o
rb-~ ~~
~.;:,: ~.;:,:
':) t1j <<l>
.~
~
~
;,.~ ru<'
~Oj ~
~ ~0
c:l~
I...... 2000 -11-1999 ......1998 I
~~
~
ru<' 0<' ru<'
~ ~ ~
OC'f ~0 CJ0~
~O Q(l;
~~
!::-0
':) .s
~
~~
Key West
, International Airport
Master Plan Update
MONTHLY PASSENGER
DISTRIBUTION
FIGURE:
2.4
Cl
~
:I:
(')
en
:><
~
rn
~
"'ll
c:
"'ll
o
~
8
,-
."
if'
~
;..
US Airways
24%
American Eagle
35%
Gulfstream
21%
Comair
13%
Key West
International Airport
Master Plan Update
2000 AIRLlN E MARKET SHARE
FIGURE:
2.5
40%
35%
30%
25%
e
co
.c
en
- 20%
Q)
~
...
co
:E
15%
10%
5%
0%
American Eagle
Cl
~
:I:
(')
en
:><
rn
-<
::;:
rn
U>
:::!
;::
"'ll
c:
"'ll
o
~
8
,-
."
c;
~
~
.
Cape Air
Comair
Gulfstream
US Airways
I [11995
. 2000 I
Key West
International Airport
Master Plan Update
HISTORICAL AIRLINE
MARKET SHARE
FIGURE:
2.6
140,000
120,000
100,000
III
C
0 80,000
:;::;
e
Q)
C-
o
~
e 60,000
~
:(
40,000
20,000
Cl
5:
"'ll
:I:
(')
en
;;<
~
rn
U>
~
"'ll
c:
"'ll
o
~
rn
8
I~
c;
IV
.:..
;..
.
0 C1; It) CD .... GO en 0 .... N
;g It) CD .... GO en 0 .... N .., en en en en en 0 0 0
CD !::: GO en 0 .... N .., GO GO GO GO GO en en en en en en en en en en 0 0 0
.... .... GO GO GO GO en en en en en en en .... .... N N N
.... en en en en en en en en en .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ....
en en .... .... .... .... .... ....
.... .... .... .... .... ....
Year
Key West
International Airport
Master Plan Update
HISTORICAL AIRCRAFT
OPERATIONS (1976 to 2002)
FIGURE:
2.7
Section 2
Forecasts of A viation Activity
TABLE 2.3
HISTORICAL TOTAL AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
r--------------:-~~--~-~
I , ,
1976 68,182 -
1977 62,391 -8.5%
1978 62,494 0.2%
1979 69,168 10.7%
1980 61,446 -11.2%
1981 60,041 -2.3%
1982 67,606 12.6%
1983 63,693 -5.8%
1984 61,006 -4.2%
1985 66,506 9.0%
1986 53,735 -19.2%
1987 69,521 29.4%
1988 79,439 14.3%
1989 82,583 4.0%
1990 88,147 6.7%
1991 86,748 -1.6%
1992 96,018 10.7%
1993 94,902 -1.2%
1994 106,288 12.0%
1995 94,363 -11.2%
1996 115,058 21.9%
1997 126,916 10.3%
1998 120,178 -5.3%
1999 123,295 2.6%
2000 92,591 -24.9%
2001 95,038 2.6%
2002 91,524 -3.7%
Sources: Key West Air Traffic Control Tower.
Airport Management Records.
FAA Terminal Area Forecasts.
2.5.1.2
Commuter Operations
In recent years, operations by commuter aircraft have accounted for approximately one-third of
all aircraft operations at EYW. Historical commuter operations are presented in Table 2.4.
Common types of commuter aircraft include the ATR-42, Beech 1900, DeHavilland DASH-8,
and the Embraer Brasilia. Due to the introduction of the ATR-72, which is classified as an air
carrier aircraft rather than a commuter aircraft, as well as other reasons, commuter operations
have decreased in recent years.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PIanIS_21S_2.docI31l2lO3131l2lO3
2-7
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
120,000
100,000
III 80,000
c
0
:;::;
~
Q)
c. 60,000
0
~
~
~
:( 40,000
20,000
0
CD ..... co CI) 0 ..... N M 'lit It) CD ..... co CI) 0 ..... N M 'lit It) CD ..... co CI) 0 ..... N
..... ..... ..... ..... co co co co co co co co co co CI) CI) CI) CI) CI) CI) CI) CI) CI) CI) 0 0 0
CI) CI) CI) CI) CI) CI) CI) CI) CI) CI) CI) CI) CI) CI) CI) CI) CI) CI) CI) CI) CI) CI) CI) CI) 0 0 0
..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... N N N
Year
I!Iltinerant . Local
Cl
5:
"'ll
:I:
(')
U>
:><
rn
~
rn
U>
.~
"'ll
c:
"'ll
o
~
8
,-
."
if'
'"
Co
>
.
Key West
International Airport
Master Plan Update
HISTORICAL ITINERANT AND
LOCAL GA AIRCRAFT
OPERATIONS
FIGURE:
2.8
Section 2
Forecasts of Aviation Activity
but merely transited through EYW's airspace en route to NAF Key West. An overflight is not an
operation at the airport and therefore, distorts the statistics.
2.5.2 MONTHLY AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS
Aircraft operations have historically peaked at EYW during the month of March when tourist
season is at its peak. This trend can be seen in the data for 1999 through 2001 which is presented
in Table 2.5.
TABLE 2.5
MONTHLY DISTRIBUTION OF AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
~~--------------- ~~---- ~-- ---~-~-~~--~-------"
,
I
January 11328 9.2% 8555 9.2% 9388 9.9%
February 11873 9.6% 8756 9.5% 9173 9.7%
March 13933 11.3% 9133 9.9% 10020 10.5%
April 14784 12.0% 8147 8.8% 9168 9.6%
May 11610 9.4% 7950 8.6% 9016 9.5%
June 11029 8.9% 7248 7.8% 8101 8.5%
July 9424 7.6% 7107 7.7% 7277 7.7%
August 9075 7.4% 5971 6.4% 7113 7.5%
September 7423 6.0% 6311 6.8% 5063 5.3%
October 7034 5.7% 7732 8.4% 6881 7.2%
November 8134 6.6% 7975 8.6% 6185 6.5%
December 7648 6.2% 7706 8.3% 7653 8.1%
Source: Key West International Airport, Air Traffic Control Tower.
2.5.3 BASED AIRCRAFT
The historical and current mix of aircraft based at EYW is shown in Table 2.6. Data from 1980
indicates that the total number of based aircraft has been approximately 50 for an extended
period of time. A detailed inventory of based aircraft including registration numbers (tailor N-
numbers), ownership data, make and model, number and type of engines, number of seats, and
range of weights was taken in March 1996 by the fixed base operator (FBO) and updated for this
master plan in July 2001.
There were 56 aircraft based at EYW in July 2001. The based aircraft fleet mix was 59 percent
single engine piston powered (33), 29 percent light multi-engine piston powered (16), 9 percent
turboprop powered (5), 2 percent turbojet aircraft (1), and 2 percent helicopters (1). The turbojet
aircraft included one Citation Jet.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PIanIS_2\S_2.docl3/12I0313112103
2-9
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 2
Forecasts of Aviation Activity
TABLE 2.6
BASED AIRCRAFT MIX
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
.---------~--~~_.~-~--~
, '
, , '
, -
1980 36 14 0 0 0 50
1994 35 10 0 2 0 47
1996 32 12 2 4 0 50
2001 33 16 5 1 1 56
Source: 1996 and 2001 Data - Survey by Island City Flying Service, Inc.
2.6 A VIA TION FORECASTS
This section presents forecasts of passenger enplanements, aircraft operations, and based aircraft.
Forecasts from other studies and sources are presented first to provide a reference from which to
compare the forecasts developed for this study. The forecasts presented in this report account for
the effects that the terrorist attacks of September 11,2001, had on air travel demand at EYW.
2.6.1 PASSENGER ENPLANEMENTS
A forecast of passenger enplanements is needed to size a variety of facilities at the airport
including the passenger terminal and the public portion of parking facilities. The following
paragraphs provide an overview of forecasts previously prepared for EYW and is followed by
forecasts developed for this study.
2.6.1.1
Previous Forecasts
Forecasts of passenger enplanements at EYW were obtained from three independent sources.
These sources include the Florida Aviation System Plan prepared by the Florida Department of
Transportation, the FAA's Terminal Area Forecast, and the 1986 Key West International Airport
Master Plan. These forecasts and historical passenger enplanements at EYW from 1980 through
2002 are presented in Figure 2.9.
Florida Aviation System Plan (F ASP)
The F ASP provides forecasts of passenger enplanements and aircraft operations at each of the
commercial service airports in Florida. The methodology used to prepare the forecast consists of
obtaining average annual growth rates from specific planning documents and then applying that
growth rate to the number of passenger enplanements that occurred in the year 2000. The
forecast then projects the number of passenger enplanements that would occur through the year
2021. In the case of EYW, the specific planning document used was the FAA's 2000 Terminal
Area Forecast, which predicted a growth rate of 4.4 percent. Applying this growth rate to the
285,000 passenger enplanements that occurred in 2000 results in a forecast of 704,000 passenger
enplanements at EYW in the year 2021.
W,\12637817_KWIA Master PIanIS_21S_2.docl3/12I0313/12103
2-10
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
800,000
700,000
600,000
III
-
c
Q)
~ 500,000
c
co
Q.
~ 400,000
...
Q)
C)
c
: 300,000
III
co
Q.
200,000
100,000
Cl
5:
"'ll
:I:
(')
U>
:x:
rn
~
rn
U>
~
"'ll
c:
"'ll
o
~
o
o
,~
."
~
;..
0
0 N "<t co ClO 0 N "<t co ClO 0 N "<t co ClO 0 N "<t co co 0
ClO ClO ClO ClO ClO en en en en en 0 0 0 0 0 .... .... .... .... .... N
en en en en en en en en en en 0 0 0 0 o. 0 0 0 0 0 0
.... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... N N N N N N N N N N N
Year
I -+- Historical --2000 FASP --*-1986 Master Plan -- 2002 T AF I
Key West
International Airport
Master Plan Update
PREVIOUS FORECASTS OF
PASSENGER ENPLANEMENTS
FIGURE:
2.9
Section 2
Forecasts of Aviation Activity
FAA Terminal Area Forecast
The FAA publishes a forecast for all commercial service airports in the United States that is used
to guide federal decisions regarding airport facilities. The most recent T AF available is the one
released in 2002; this forecast did not take into account the terrorist attacks of September 11,
2001. Consequently, the 2002 TAF is likely to significantly overstate future growth. The
average annual growth rate forecasted by the T AF is 3.5 percent. The forecast predicts 472,000
passenger enplanements at EYW in the year 2015 as depicted in Figure 2.9.
1986 Kev West International Airport Master Plan
The previous master plan provided a forecast of passenger enplanements from 1986 through
2006. According to the master plan, a time series regression of historical passenger
enplanements was conducted to derive the forecast. The forecast predicted an average annual
growth rate of 5 percent. This resulted in a forecast of 347,000 passengers in the year 2006 as
depicted in Figure 2.9.
2.6.1.2
Updated Forecasts
This section presents new forecasts of passenger enplanements at EYW that consider a variety of
factors. Forecasts of these items from other sources and for larger regions such as the State of
Florida and the United States are also presented for comparison purposes.
Forecasts of passengers are usually prepared on the basis of the population residing within the
airport's service area, their disposable income, and some variable that is representative of the
average airfare. This is because the demand for air travel is predominantly a factor of the
number of people desiring air service, their ability to pay for air service, and the cost of air
service to the customer. While this is an acceptable methodology in instances where the majority
of the people using the airport are local residents, it is significantly less valuable for airports
where the majority of the passengers are visitors. At EYW the majority of the passengers are
tourists visiting Key West for pleasure. Consequently, reliance on socioeconomic data of the
airport's local service area is of little value for forecasting.
Therefore, forecasts for EYW were based upon a series of assumptions. These assumptions were
used to create scenarios. The development of scenarios is useful when planning for situations
that have a high level of uncertainty and hence the likelihood for a wide disparity in the likely
level of growth.
Three scenarios were created for the forecast of passenger enplanements at EYW. These
scenarios included low-growth, moderate-growth, and high-growth scenarios. The assumptions
contained in each of these scenarios are listed below:
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PIanIS_2\S_2.docl3/12lO3\3112103
2-11
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 2
Forecasts of Aviation Activity
Growth Scenario Assumptions
Issue Low-Growth Moderate-Growth Hieh-Growth
Use of Regional Jets No Use Limited-Use Successful-Use
Air Service Potential Loss Remains Constant Remains Constant
Air Fares High Fares Prevail Moderate Fares Moderate Fares
Alternate Modes of Further Congestion on
Other Factors: Transportation Gain US Highwav 1
Potential Operations
to Cuba
Average Annual
Growth Rate 1% 2.5% 3.5%
Another issue to consider is the impact of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and the
effect on passenger enplanements that is likely to occur during the next 2 years. To assess this
impact, a comparison of monthly passenger trends since September 11, 2001, was made. This
comparison is depicted in Table 2.7. As the table indicates, monthly passenger levels were
reduced by approximately 30 percent in the months immediately after the attacks. However, this
decrease lessened to 17 percent by January of 2002. By the key tourist season months of
February through April, passenger enplanements were just 5 to 6 percent lower than levels the
preceding year.
TABLE 2.7
COMPARISON OF MONTHLY PASSENGER ENPLANEMENTS
(2001 AND 2002)
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
I "
I <' , l' <,
~
2001 September 11,512 -30%
October 16,826 -23%
November 17,414 -31%
December 17,572 -21%
2002 January 22,881 -17%
February 24,368 -6%
March 28,763 -5%
April 26,363 -6%
Source: Key West International Airport Management Records.
For the year 2001 as a whole, passenger enplanements at EYW were 8 percent lower than 2000.
For the year 2002 it is estimated that passenger enplanements will be 15 percent lower than the
level experienced during 2000. This further decrease would be because during 2001 only 4
months of passenger levels that year were impacted by the terrorist attacks; however, during
2002, it is possible that all months will experience lower levels of passengers.
By the year 2003, it is assumed that passenger levels will experience a strong rebound and will
return to the level attained in 2000. This is expected as time from the attacks increases and
passengers return to flying and the general state of the economy in the United States improves
from the recessionary conditions experienced during the latter part of 2001.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PIan\S_2\S~.docI3/1210313/12103
2-12
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 2
Forecasts of Aviation Activity
Figure 2.10 provides an illustration of passenger enplanement forecasts that would result
assuming a rebound of passengers in 2003 as described in the preceding paragraphs; and the low,
moderate; and high growth rates beginning in 2004 and continuing until the end of the forecast
period. As the figure indicates, there is a fairly wide disparity between the resulting number of
passenger enplanements that would result in the year 2021. With the low growth forecast,
approximately 341,000 passengers are projected. This would increase to 445,000 with the
moderate growth forecast and 523,000 with the high growth forecast. A breakdown of the
resulting level of passenger enplanements for 5-year increments with each of the three growth
rates is presented in Table 2.8.
TABLE 2.8
COMPARISON OF UPDATED PASSENGER ENPLANEMENTS
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
~~ -~--~ ----~-~----~---~~- ~---~- --~-------
I
I
I " ~,
2001 262,761 262,761 262,761
2006 294,019 307,314 332,454
2011 309,017 347,698 395,873
2016 324,780 393,388 459,293
2021 341,347 445,083 522,712
Source: URS, 2002.
2.6.1.3
Recommended Forecast
As previously depicted in Figure 2.3, historical trends show a distinct slowing of the annual
average growth rate for passengerenplanements at EYW over the last three decades. The
average annual growth during the last three decades has decreased from 15 percent during 1970
to 1980, to 8 percent during 1980 to 1990, to 3.7 percent during 1990 to 2000. Thus, on the basis
on long-range trends, it is likely that the average annual rate of growth at EYW will continue to
slow.
Another factor to consider is the growth rate projected nationally, the FAA's Aerospace
Forecasts for fiscal years 2002 to 2013 projects that air carrier passenger enplanements will
decline in 2002 by over 13 percent from 2001 and then rebound strongly during 2003. For the
2003 fiscal year passenger enplanement growth is projected to reach nearly 15 percent. The
FAA projects that domestic air carrier enplanements will increase 3.8 percent a year for the
remainder of the forecast period. For regional/commuter aircraft, the FAA projects that
enplanements will grow in 3.7 percent in 2002 and 8.7 percent in 2003 and then grow at a
stabilized rate of 5.5 for the remainder of the forecast period. The dramatic difference between
the forecasted increase of passenger enplanements in the regional/commuter segment and the
forecasted decrease in the air carrier segment reflects the difference of the Comair strike on the
2001 numbers. Overall, it is envisioned that passenger enplanements in the Key West market
will more closely follow the FAA projections for the air carrier segment of the market than the
regional/commuter segment even though all the operations at EYW are in the commuter
segment. Support of this premise is provided by historical activity at EYW that has closely
W:\12637817_KWIA Master PIan\S_2\S_2.docl3/1210313112103
2-13
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 2
Forecasts of Aviation Activity
followed the national growth rate for enplanements between 1990 and 2000, as previously noted
in Section 2.4.1.
In addition to these major factors, there are several qualitative factors that should be considered
when selecting a forecast for planning future facilities. Therefore, the following qualitative
factors were considered to develop a recommended forecast:
1. Population in Monroe County is not projected to grow at the same rate as
population within the State of Florida. The Bureau of Economic and Business
Research at the University of Florida projects that population in Monroe County
is likely to grow by just 5 percent during the period ending in 2030. By
comparison, population within the State of Florida is projected to grow by 52
percent during the same period. These growth rates appear to favor a slow growth
rate of air passenger at EYW because resident passenger will grow very little and
while the growth for Florida residents is very significant, this segment of visitor
(i.e., those within a reasonable driving distance of Key West) are the least likely
to fly to EYW.
2. The airport's service area will remain the same size. No new airports are planned
near the airport service area, nor is there a high feasibility that one could be
established. The possibility of establishing joint use of NAF Key West has been
studied as recently as 1995 and found to be not feasible for scheduled commercial
service. Indications from the Unites States Navy are that NAF will not be a
candidate for joint use for the foreseeable future.
3. The airport's landside facilities such as access roadways, terminal space and
automobile parking space are constrained. While some further expansion of all of
these facilities is possible, land and environmental constraints limit the ultimate
magnitude of potential expansions.
4. The current system of hub and spoke operations, whereby commuter operations at
EYW connect to air carrier operations at hub airports, such as Miami, will
continue for the foreseeable future. This factor limits the number of new
destinations that are likely to have direct air service established to EYW.
5. Certain commuter airlines, especially those providing connecting service to air
carriers, will transition to regional jets. This will be due to the fleet strategies of
certain airlines that plan to have an all jet fleet, as well as a passenger preference
for the comfort and amenities offered by regional jet aircraft.
6. As previously noted in Section 2.3.5, the potential reestablishment of diplomatic
relations with Cuba could create demand for air service from Key West. Previous
attempts to estimate the timing and level of this demand have been a failure.
Therefore, this master plan will not attempt to make a similar estimate. However,
it appears reasonable to draw certain conclusions regarding the type of air service
that may likely occur and the implications for the overall forecast of future
passenger levels.
The structure of air service in the United States at the time service from Key West to Cuba was
discontinued bears little resemblance to the structure of air service today. Point to point air
service is now less common than service through hub airports. Thus, is likely that any future air
service from Cuba will focus on hubs and cities in the United States that have high
concentrations of Cuban-American populations. Furthermore, any future air service between
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PIan\S_2\S_2.docl3/12lO3\3/12103
2-14
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
600,000
500,000
J!!
c
Cl) 400,000
E
Cl)
c
.!!!
c..
c 300,000
w
...
Cl)
tn
C
Cl)
tn 200,000
tn
ca
a..
100,000
0
0 N V CQ co 0 N V CQ co 0 N V CQ co 0 N V CQ co 0 N V CQ co 0
..... ..... ..... ..... ..... co co co co co 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0 0 0 0 0 .... .... .... .... .... N
0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
.... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... N N N N N N N N N N N
Year
-+- Historical -- Low Growth --/r- Moderate Growth ~ High Growth
"
~
:I:
(')
~
rn
U>
~
;g
"'ll
o
~
8
,-
."
c;
'i>
C';
;..
.
Key West
International Airport
Master Plan Update
UPDATED FORECASTS OF
PASSENGER ENPLANEMENTS
FIGURE:
2.10
Section 2
Forecasts of Aviation Activity
Key West and Cuba would likely be tourist driven and would be limited in magnitude.
Consequently, if such air service is reestablished at some point in the future, it is not anticipated
that it would account for a high percentage of passenger enplanements at EYW.
Considering the above factors it is anticipated that the rate of passenger enplanement growth at
EYW will continue to slow in agreement with the trend of the last 30 years. Consequently, it is
recommended that the moderate-growth forecast, which projects an average annual growth rate
of 2.5 percent, be selected as the basis for planning future facilities at EYW with the low- and
high-growth forecasts used as the limits of possible future activity levels.
2.6.2 AIRLINE OPERATIONS
The number of aircraft operations by scheduled airlines at EYW is a function of the forecasted
number of passengers, the average number of seats per aircraft operation, and the average load
factor (i.e., number of seats filled with passengers). An analysis of load factors at EYW during
2000 revealed that load factors were averaging 62 percent. This analysis was conducted by
dividing the number of enplaned passengers during 2000 by the number of scheduled seats for
the same period. While this methodology contains a small amount of error, because it does not
account for cancelled flights, it provides the best measure of load factors that is readily available.
The average number of seats per departure was calculated for 2001 by multiplying the actual
number of departures (by aircraft type) by the number of seats per aircraft to obtain the total
number of departing seats and then dividing that figure by the number of aircraft departures. For
2001 this figure was calculated to be 24 seats per aircraft departure.
Using this load factor and seats per departure as a starting point, a forecast of airline departures
was prepared. The resulting forecast is presented in Table 2.9. This forecast assumes that the
average load factor for all airlines at the airport will increase slightly to 63 percent as a result of
increasing sophistication of yield management. The forecast also assumes that the number of
seats per departure will increase from 24 to 36 as larger aircraft such as regional jets are
introduced to the Key West market.
TABLE 2.9
FORECAST OF AIRLINE OPERATIONS
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
~.
, J I
, '~l H i
,
, I
" , ' , " , ' < ' ~ i " , : ,,', '. I
, ^
2006 307,314 28 0.62 17.36 17,702 35,405
2011 347,698 31 0.63 19.53 17,803 35,607
2016 393,388 33 0.63 20.79 18,922 37,844
2021 445,083 36 0.63 22.68 19,624 39,249
Source: URS, 2002.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PlanIS_2\SJ.docI311210313112103
2-15
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 2 Forecasts of Aviation Activity
2.6.3 GENERAL A VIA TION
General aviation is a term used to describe all segments of the civilian aviation industry, except
for airline operations. It includes a diverse range of aviation activities including business,
agricultural, training and pleasure flying. To determine the requirements for various general
aviation facilities, a forecast of general aviation demand has been prepared.
2.6.3.1
Based Aircraft
Historical levels of general aVIatIOn aircraft based at EYW were indicated in Table 2.6,
previously shown. The table indicated that general aviation aircraft at EYW have remained
fairly stable during the last two decades although some growth was recorded in the latest survey
that counted 56 aircraft at the airport.
The FAA's Aerospace Forecast makes projections on the number of active aircraft across the
United States. The projection contained in the 2002 forecast estimates that the active fleet of
general aviation aircraft will increase at 0.3 percent annually through 2013. However, it should
be noted that the growth rate is a composite for the fleet as a whole. Certain types of aircraft and
certain areas of the country will experience different rates of growth or even decline as a
preponderance of older aircraft are retired from service.
The FAA's forecast notes that there are a variety of factors affecting the state general aviation
activity. In recent years, the most significant factor was the passage of the General Aviation
Revitalization Act of 1994. That piece of legislation limited the liability on general aviation
aircraft to 18 years. The legislation has been judged to be a success since the production of
general aviation aircraft have increased in recent years. On the negative side, the general
aviation industry continues to struggle with cost of ownership and cost of operation issues.
Consequently, any future growth of aircraft is expected to be very small.
In light of the recent gradual increase of based aircraft and favorable factors with regard to a
forecast of based aircraft has generated by applying an average annual growth rate of 0.9 percent
to the current 56 aircraft based at the airport. This forecast is depicted in Figure 2.11. This
forecast is very similar to the forecast of based aircraft contained in the FAA's 2002 Terminal
Area Forecast which projects 64 based aircraft at EYW in the year 2015.
2.6.3.2
Based Aircraft Fleet Mix
The fleet mix for based aircraft and general aviation operations is expected to remain fairly
constant in future years, because very little growth is expected in the general aviation segment.
The mix for aircraft based at EYW in 2001 is depicted in Figure 2.12. As the figure indicates,
nearly 60 percent of based aircraft are single-engine and nearly 30 percent are multi-engine. The
remaining 10 percent are turbo-prop, jets or helicopters. This preponderance of lower
performance aircraft is expected to continue at the airport in the future. By applying the 2001
fleet mix to the forecast of based aircraft a breakdown of future aircraft was obtained. This
forecast is presented in Table 2.10.
W:112637817 _KWIA Master PIan\S_2IS_2.docI311210313/12103
2-16
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
70
60
.
50
.
~
e 40
CJ
...
:(
"C
Q)
III 30
co
a1
20
10
0
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Year
I -+- Historical - Forecast I
Cl
5:
"'ll
:I:
(')
en
:><
~
rn
en
~
"'ll
c:
"'ll
o
~
rn
~
o
,-
."
c;
~
~
Key West
International Airport
Master Plan Update
FORECAST OF BASED
AIRCRAFT
FIGURE:
2.11
Multi-Engine
29%
Cl
5:
"'ll
:I:
(')
U>
:;;;
rn
~
rn
U>
~
"'ll
c:
"'ll
o
~
~
C>
,-
.."
c;
~
;,.
Turboprop
9%
Jet
2%
Helicopter
20/0
Single Engine
58%
Key West
International Airport
Master Plan Update
2001 BASED AIRCRAFT
FLEET MIX
FIGURE:
2.12
Section 2
Forecasts of Aviation Activity
I
2001 33 16 5 1 1 56
2006 35 17 5 1 1 59
2011 36 17 5 1 1 61
2016 38 18 6 1 1 64
2021 39 19 6 1 1 67
TABLE 2.10
FORECAST OF BASED AIRCRAFT FLEET MIX
Key West International Airport
Mt PI Udt
Source: URS, 2002.
2.6.3.3
General Aviation Operations
Itinerant general aviation operations are projected to increase at an annual rate of no more than
1.5 percent. This rate of growth is in line with the FAA's projected growth rate of hours flown.
While hours flown is not the same as aircraft operations, it can be used as a gauge for overall
activity levels.
With this rate of growth, itinerant general aviation operations would reach 45,000 annual
operations (a level of operations last attained in 1997) again in the year 2011. By the end of the
forecast period in 2016 itinerant general aviation operations would reach 52,000.
A forecast of local operations was made by examining recent activity and gradually increasing
operations throughout the forecast period. Historically, local operations have been in the range
of 20,000 although this level dropped precipitously in recent years, dropping to 12,000 in 2000
and 10,000 in 2001. While the events of September 11, 2001 had a significant affect on local
operations during 2001 and likely accounts for the lower number of local operations recorded
that year, it is obvious that the number of local operations were significantly lower during 2000.
Thus, the forecast begins by rounding up the number of local operations recorded in the year
2000 and grows the activity by few thousand up to a level of 16,000 by the end of the study
period. This forecast is presented in Table 2.11.
I
~~
I ' ,I tl, ,;
, 'C; ",,!. ~ " " f ' ,-I:J. 1" h< ; ,t ,~,
2001 35,692 10,948 46,640
2006 42,257 14,000 56,257
2011 45,523 15,000 60,523
2016 49,041 16,000 65,041
2021 52,831 16,000 68,831
TABLE 2.11
FORECAST OF GENERAL A VIA TlON OPERATIONS
Key West International Airport
Master Plan U date
Source: URS, 2002.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PIan\S_2\S_2.docI311210313/12103
2-17
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 2 Forecasts of Aviation Activity
2.6.4 MILITARY OPERATIONS
Military operations at EYW are very difficult to track. A review of recent historical counts for
local and itinerant operations have varied dramatically from one year to another, as indicated in
Table 2.4. Consultation with air traffic control personnel at EYW revealed that part of the reason
for the changes in traffic counts was due to what ATC personnel were recording as "operations."
Apparently military aircraft transiting through EYW airspace, but never landing or taking off
from EYW, were recorded as itinerant operations for a number of years. This seems to account
for the large increase of itinerant military operations that were recorded during 1996 through
1999. Recent counts of itinerant military operations recorded activity levels that were generally
in agreement with those recorded during earlier years. On the other hand, the number of local
military operations jumped from just over 3,000 during 2000 to just over 11,000 during 2001.
Part of this increase may have been related to increased military activity associated with military
actions following September 11, 2001.
Since the level of military aircraft operations is not related to market forces, but rather
operational and situational requirements of the military. It was deemed appropriate to select an
activity level that is representative of recent historical levels, but that accounted for any known
changes in the manner military operations are counted. Consequently, an annual level of 2,000
itinerant operations and 4,000 local operations was selected for military activity for the
remainder of the study period.
2.6.5 TOTAL AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS
The resulting forecast of total aircraft operations including commuter, general aviation and
military activity is presented in Table 2.12 and Figure 2.13.
2.7
PEAKING CHARACTERISTICS
Information concerning the peaking characteristics of passenger enplanemnets and aircraft
operations is required to properly ascertain the demand for various airport facilities. This
information will be used in the demand/capacity analysis presented in the next section. The
following definitions were observed in determining and presenting peaking information:
· Peak Month - The month when the greatest number of passenger
enplanements or aircraft operations occur.
.
Average Day, Peak Month (ADPM) - The average day during the peak month
(i.e., the monthly value divided by 30 days).
.
Peak Hour - The peak hour during the average day of the peak month.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PIanIS_2\S_2.docl3/1210313112103
2-18
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
140,000
120,000
100,000
III
C
0
:;::; 80,000
e
Q)
C-
O
~ 60,000
co
...
~
:(
40,000
20,000
Cl
~
:I:
(')
U>
:><
~
rn
en
~
"'ll
c:
"'ll
o
~
~
I
."
~
W
;..
0
(0 00 0 N ~ (0 00 0 N ~ (0 00 0 N ~ (0 00 0 N ~ (0 00 0
..... ..... 00 00 00 00 00 en en en en en 0 0 0 0 0 "l"" "l"" "l"" "l"" "l"" N
en en en en en en en en en en en en 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
"l"" "l"" "l"" "l"" "l"" "l"" "l"" "l"" "l"" "l"" "l"" "l"" N N N N N N N N N N N
Year
I ~ Historical -- Forecast I
Key West
International Airport
Master Plan Update
FORECAST OF TOTAL
AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS
FIGURE:
2.13
Section 2
Forecasts of Aviation Activity
TABLE 2.12
FORECAST OF TOTAL AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS
Key West International Airport
MasterPlan Update
2001 36,241 35,692 887 72,820 10,948 11 ,270 22,218 95,038
2002 31,299 39,814 2,000 73,113 13,000 4,000 17,000 90,113
2003 35,406 40,411 2,000 77 ,817 13,000 4,000 17,000 94,817
2004 34,947 41,017 2,000 77 ,964 14,000 4,000 18,000 95,964
2005 35,821 41,633 2,000 79,453 14,000 4,000 18,000 97,453
2006 35,405 42,257 2,000 79,662 14.000 4,000 18.000 97.662
2007 36,290 42,891 2,000 81,181 14,000 4,000 18,000 99,181
2008 35,915 43,534 2,000 81,449 14,000 4,000 18,000 99,449
2009 35,585 44,187 2,000 81,773 14,000 4,000 18,000 99,773
2010 35,896 44,850 2,000 82,746 15,000 4,000 19,000 101,746
2011 35.607 45,523 2,000 83,129 15.000 4,000 19.000 102,129
2012 36,497 46,206 2,000 84,702 15,000 4,000 19,000 103,702
2013 36,240 46,899 2,000 85,139 15,000 4,000 19,000 104,139
2014 37,146 47,602 2,000 86,748 15,000 4,000 19,000 105,748
2015 36,921 48,316 2,000 87,237 16,000 4,000 20,000 107,237
2016 37,844 49,041 2,000 88,885 16,000 4,000 20,000 108,885
2017 37,649 49,777 2,000 89,426 16,000 4,000 20,000 109,426
2018 38,590 50,523 2,000 91,114 16,000 4,000 20,000 111,114
2019 38,425 51,281 2,000 91,706 16,000 4,000 20,000 111,706
2020 39,386 52,050 2,000 93,436 16,000 4,000 20,000 113,436
2021 39,249 52,831 2,000 94,080 16,000 4,000 20,000 114,080
Source: URS, 2002.
2.7.1 PASSENGERS
Forecasts of peak hour enplanements are used to determine the future demand for facilities
primarily used by departing passengers, such as ticket counters and departure lounges. The
forecasts of peak hour deplanements will be used to assess the demand for facilities used by
arriving passengers, such as baggage claim facilities. Likewise, the forecasts of total peak hour
passengers will be used to determine the future demand for facilities used by passengers arriving
and departing at the same time. These facilities include all general circulation areas, rest rooms,
concessions, rental car counters, and terminal curb.
A review of the historical passenger levels at EYW revealed that the monthly distribution of
enplanements and deplanement is essentially the same. Therefore, for the purpose of this study it
will be assumed that peak month enplanement and peak month deplanement percentages will be
the same.
From 1996 to 2000, the peak month for passenger enplanements has averaged 11 percent of
annual passenger enplanements. On the basis of the March 2001 flight schedule listed in the
Official Airline Guide, the peak hour for enplanements and deplanements averaged 17 percent of
daily passengers. Using these peaking factors, a forecast of peak hour passenger enplanements
was developed and is shown in Table 2.13. The peak hour for enplanements occurs in the early
W:\12637817_KWIA Master PIan\S_2\S_2.docl3/1210313112103
2-19
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 2
Forecasts of A viation Activity
morning between 5:45 am and 6:45 am. The peak hour for deplanements occurs in the late
morning between 11:45 am and 12:45 pm.
TABLE 2.13
PEAKING FORECASTS - PASSENGER ENPLANEMENTS
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
..-----~--------~ ~------~--- -~~ -----~---------..,
I -
!
, ,
, ,
I
2001 262,761 28,904 964 164
2006 307,314 33,805 1,127 192
2011 347,698 38,247 1,275 217
2016 393,388 43,273 1,443 246
2021 445,083 48,960 1,632 278
Source: URS, 2002.
2.7.2 AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS
An analysis of aircraft operations from air traffic control tower logs for 1997 through 2001
revealed that the peak month typically occurs in March and accounts for 11 percent of annual
aircraft operations. With respect to hourly peaking, air traffic control tower logs for the week of
March 11, 2001, and the week of June 10, 2001, were obtained and analyzed to determine the
peak hour. The results of this analysis indicated that the peak hour represented approximately 13
percent of daily operations. However, a review of actual peak hour traffic count for the week on
March 11,2001, indicated that hourly counts as high as 53 operations were recorded. To better
match the peaks observed and to account for the extreme peak that the airfield experiences
during Fantasy Fest and other busy periods a peak hour percentage of 15 percent was used to
calculate peak hour forecast as shown on Table 2.14.
TABLE 2.14
PEAKING FORECASTS - AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
2001 95,038 10,455 349 53
2006 97,662 10,743 359 54
2011 102,129 11,235 375 57
2016 108,885 11,978 400 60
2021 114,080 12,549 419 63
Source: URS, 2002.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Mas.er PIanIS_2\S_2.docl3/1210313112103
2-20
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
..
...
SECTION 3
DEMAND/CAPACITY ANALYSIS
AND FACILITY REQUIREMENTS
-..
...
Demand/Capacity Analysis
Section 3 and Facility Requirements
3.1 INTRODUCTION
In the previous section, forecasts of aviation demand were presented for Key West International
Airport (EYW) through the year 2017. These forecasts included projections of annual passenger
enplanements, aircraft operations, based aircraft, aircraft fleet mix, and peaking characteristics for
both passenger enplanements and aircraft operations. Using this information, the capability of
specific components of the airport system such as: the airfield, surrounding airspace, terminal
facilities, general aviation facilities and ground access, is evaluated to determine if they are able to
accommodate forecasted levels of demand without incurring significant delays or an unacceptable
decrease in service levels.
The capacities of the various airport components are identified and described in this section. These
capacities are then compared to forecasted levels of demand to determine if deficiencies presently
exist, or are expected to occur in future years. If deficiencies are identified, a determination of the
approximate size and timing of new facilities is made. The requirements for new facilities needed to
accommodate projected demand in a safe and efficient manner are also presented in this section.
Section 4 examines alternative methods of providing the required facilities identified in this section.
3.2 AIRFIELD
3.2.1 DEMAND/CAPACITY ANALYSIS
The methodology used for analyzing airfield capacity is described in FAA Advisory Circular
150/5060-5, entitled "Airport Capacity and Delay." The methodology describes how to measure an
airfield's hourly capacity and its annual capacity which is referred to as annual service volume.
Hourly capacity is used to assess the airfield's ability to accommodate peak hour operations. Hourly
capacity is defined as the maximum number of aircraft operations that can be accommodated by the
airfield system in one hour.
Annual service volume (AS V) is used to assess the adequacy of the airfield design, including the
number and orientation of runways. ASV is defined as a reasonable estimate of an airport's annual
capacity. As the number of annual operations increases and approaches the airport's ASV, the
average delay incurred by each operation increases. When annual operations are equal to the ASV,
average delay to each operation is approximately one to four minutes depending upon the mix of
aircraft using the airport. When the number of annual operations exceeds the ASV, moderate to
severe congestion will occur.
A calculation of the airfield's hourly capacity and annual service volume depends upon a number of
factors including the following:
· Meteorological Conditions - The percentage of time that visibility or cloud cover
are below certain minimums.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PIan\S31Sec_3.docl3/12I03
3-1
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 3
Demand/Capacity Analysis
and Facility Requirements
.
Aircraft Mix - The percentage of operations that are conducted by certain
categories of aircraft.
.
Runway Use - The percentage of time that each runway is used.
.
Percent Touch-and-Go - The percent of aircraft operations that are touch-and-
go's.
.
Percent Arrivals - The percent of arrivals in relation to departures during peak
hours.
.
Exit Taxiway Locations - The number and locations of exit taxiways for landing
aircraft.
3.2.1.1
Meteorological Conditions
Meteorological conditions have a significant effect upon runway use, which, in turn, affects an
airfield's capacity. During Visual Meteorological Conditions (VMC), runway use is usually
determined by the direction of the prevailing winds. During Instrument Meteorological Conditions
(IMC), runway use is dictated by the type and availability of instrument approach procedures.
lllustrations of predominant wind conditions during VMC, IMC, and all-weather conditions were
previously presented in Section 1 - Airport Inventory. That data, and consultation with air traffic
control personnel, indicated that Runway 9 is the most commonly used runway end during both
VMC and IMC conditions. It is estimated that the airport operates under VMC conditions 99.2
percent of the time and IMC conditions the remaining 0.8 percent of the time.
3.2.1.2
Aircraft Mix
Variations in aircraft approach speeds and landing distances affect runway occupancy times, which,
in turn, affect airfield capacity. Table 3.1 summarizes representative aircraft types found in each
aircraft classification. On the basis of historical activity, it is estimated that Class C aircraft
comprise 35 percent of operations. The remaining operations are conducted by aircraft in Class A
and Class B. The aircraft breakdowns were obtained from the Key West International Airport 2000
Noise Contour Update Report. The percentage of operations conducted by each class is expected to
remain fairly constant throughout the planning period.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master Plan\S_3\Sec_3.docI3112103
3-2
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 3
Examples:
Class B:
Examples:
Class C:
Examples:
Class D:
Examples:
Source: URS, 2002.
3.2.1.3
Demand/Capacity Analysis
and Facility Requirements
TABLE 3.1
TYPICAL AIRCRAFT MIX
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Runway Use
As indicated in Section 1 - Airport Inventory, the airport has one runway, which is Runway 9/27.
Consultation with air traffic control personnel indicated that the use of the runway end is
approximately 95 percent east-flow and 5 percent west-flow. This is primarily due to prevailing
wind conditions, but is also affected, to a lesser extent, by the presence of NAF Key West just east of
the airport. Due to noise abatement considerations and the easier coordination of operations between
the two airfields when operating in east flow, there is a desire to maintain a east flow operation to the
greatest extent possible.
3.2.1.4
Touch-and-Go Operations
A touch-and-go operation occurs when an aircraft lands and takes off without making a full stop.
This is usually done for the purpose of practicing landings. Touch-and-go operations do not occupy
the runway as long as a full-stop landing or a departure. Therefore, an airfield with a high number of
touch-and-go operations can normally accommodate a greater number of operations. On the basis of
consultation with airport management, touch-and-go activity at EYW is estimated to equal less than
10 percent of total operations.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PIan\S_3\Sec_3.docl3/12103
3-3
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Demand/Capacity Analysis
Section 3 and Facility Requirements
3.2.1.5 Percentage Arrivals
The percentage of aircraft operations that are arrivals has an important influence on a runway's
hourly capacity. For example, a runway used exclusively for arrivals will have a different capacity
than a runway used exclusively for departures or a. runway used for a mixture of arrivals and
departures. In general, the higher the percentage of arrivals, the lower the hourly capacity of a
runway. Arrivals were assumed to comprise consistently 50 percent of peak hour operations at
EYW.
3.2.1.6
Exit Taxiway Locations
Exit taxiways affect airfield capacity because their location along a runway influences runway
occupancy times for aircraft. The longer an aircraft remains on a runway, the lower the capacity of
the runway. When exit taxiways are properly located, landing aircraft can quickly exit the runway,
thereby increasing the runway's capacity. Runway 9/27 has two exit taxiways on the south side of
the runway to minimize runway occupancy time.
3.2.2 CAPACITY ANALYSIS RESULTS
The capacity of the airfield was calculated on both an hourly and annual basis using the
methodologies specified in FAA Advisory Circular 150/5060-5. The results of these analyses are
presented in the following paragraphs.
3.2.2.1
Hourly Capacity
Hourly capacity values were determined using the following equation:
Hourly capacity of the runway component = C * T * E
C is the raw capacity number provided by the advisory circular figures. The appropriate figures for
VMC and IMC conditions single runway airfield, such asEYW, are depicted in Figure 3.1. T is the
touch and go factor. The touch and go factor is also obtained from the advisory circular by
determining the percentage of touch and go operations during VMC. E is the exit factor. The exit
factor is also obtained from the advisory circular by determining the number and location of exit
taxiways on the runway.
Using the data presented in Section 3.2 and the graphs in Figure 3.1, it was determined that the
airfield's hourly capacity during VMC is 65 operations (68 * 1.04 * 0.93). The airfield's hourly
capacity during IMC is 51 operations (56 * 1.0 * 0.92). As indicated in Table 3.2, the unconstrained
forecast of peak hour operations will not exceed the VMC hourly capacity of the airfield during the
planning period.
W:\12637817 ~KWIA Master PIan\S_3\Sec_3.docl3/12103
3-4
Key West International Airporl
Master Plan Update
HOURLY CAPACITY BASE C.
3'0
200
T 0 U.( H I G {) F A c" TOR T
\.
III
1...
1.U
1.10
l.n
1...
~
.~....
~ 0 V C' . G i:I r" C~ 00 r
1 .. 1.
Ubn
upn
n ...,
.1 .. 50
x E :: Hou,.lyCapaC:).ty
E X I T FAt l {) R E
fi:-~hl~-."'r&t
l~ ""~ . ..l~ It..... I. ~....... ..~ h,.. II""'" ..!<OW
a. hi' ~''iiU~. .~*.................r'f .atO(M'....ldo
".,.' ,.. wtl:li.1lI ~atit ...tr...... <1M. f1Ol' .....h_...t
Ill",", nll'.t
J. If....<< _. _. 1'_.1."
'.lI.'..l." 1........ D. ........ ...~. ..... ... .... '.. ..Ia;i.~. ...IMt..... ....... ,..... t","" ...1....',.
...........- .....ll.....~~..l"U
FIGUItE 3-3. flOU!lLY CAPACity Of RUNWAY-USE DUGRAH NOS.: 1.511 FOR VfR COHDlTIOHS.
H 0 oa lYe A P AC IT Y BAS E C.
lQ)
....
L..... 7
--
i.
~
i::..
il!
!..
S
;..
Ie 30
20
Cl
~
:I:
j
en
if
"'ll
c:
"'ll
i
,:;;
if'
~
~
TOUClf& GO FACTORT
T . 1.00
III X E = Hourly CaJi)8CJty
E X I TF ACt 0 R . E
"'MtioftllH. blt r~r,-t!'
1. """"'aM ....It r.....'......~Ul.. <lit.. ........ f_ tOk ...!<OW
1. ....... _&.-.1 _"" .~.. . ~ _.... r.... ~r..' "'It. &UllO' ....1<.
-. I" Wltlil. ___rlll...a", ........ -3'..,.ftt.. lor ...
b....'" n. r_
)~ I'... 'tw'....,. ""'r~1' ,. 1,,00
.. If Ilia 1_....... ,;"tO~ "'it 1'",",- r..... tlIIol. ....... ,....
--....... """ ~.....""_t ............
>It" ,_._
,,"_tIC.DI
1-.).1-$0
to
II.. SO
Utoto
tl to U.
HI toU'
FIGURE 3-43. HOURLY CAPACITY OF RUNWAY -USE DIAGRAM NOS. 1. 54 FOR IFR CONDITIONS.
Key West
International Airport
Master Plan Update
HOURLY AIRFIELD CAPACITY
GRAPHS
FIGURE:
3.1
Section 3
Demand/Capacity Analysis
and Facility Requirements
TABLE 3.2
HOURLY AIRFIELD CAPACITY
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
2001 65 51 53
2006 65 51 54
2011 65 51 57
2016 65 51 60
2021 65 51 63
Source: URS, 2002.
Although the airfield's hourly capacity during IMC is less than the forecasted peak hour operations
this is not a constraint because peak hour operations would be lower during IMC. Furthermore, IMC
occurs a very small amount of time and is more usually temporary in nature (i.e., a passing
thunderstorm) than at other locations. Consequently, hour capacity of the airfield will be adequate to
accommodate projected demand during the study period.
3.2.2.2
Annual Capacity
An airfield's ASV is calculated by determining the following three items:
· The weighted hourly capacity - C,
· The daily demand ratio - D, and
· The hourly demand ratio - H.
The weighted hourly capacity is calculated via a formula that considers the hourly capacity values
during VMC and IMC as well as the percentage of time that each weather condition occurs. The
weighted hourly capacity ofEYW was calculated to be 64 operations (the details ofthis calculation
are presented in Appendix A). This value is nearly the same as the VMC value because VMC
weather condition occurs 99.2 percent of the time.
The daily demand ratio is calculated by dividing the annual number of aircraft operations by the
average daily operations during the peak month. This calculation (92,591 /295) results in a daily
demand factor of 314 for EYW. This value falls within the range of 300 to 320 that is listed in the
FAA advisory circular as being typical daily demand factors for an airport with a mix index between
21 and 50. As presented in Section 3.2.1.2, EYW has a mix index of 35 percent of operations.
Multiplying this mix index by the percentage of time that VMC and IMC occur at the airport results
in a composite index of 35 percent.
W:\12637817_KWIA Master P1an\S_3\Sec_3.docl3/12i1l3
3-5
Key West International Airport
. Master Plan Update
Section 3
Demand/Capacity Analysis
and Facility Requirements
The hourly demand ratio is calculated by dividing the average daily operations during the peak
month by the average peak hour operations during the peak month. This calculation (294 I 36)
results in a daily demand factor of 8.25 for EYW. This ratio is lower than the range of 10 to 13 that
is listed in the FAA advisory circular as being typical hourly demand ratios for an airport with a mix
index between 21 and 50. This ratio is lower at EYW because EYW has a very high peak hour that
is approximately 12 percent of average daily operations during the peak month. EYW's peak hour is
nearly twice as high as the 7 to 9 percent that is indicated as being typical in the advisory circular.
Using the values derived, the ASV for EYW is presented in the following equation:
ASV = C (64) * D (314) * H (8.25) = 165,792 operations
The result of the equation is an ASV that is low for a single-runway airfield. A typical ASV range
for single-runway airfield is approximately 195,000 to 230,000. Nonetheless, the projected ASV still
exceeds the projected annual aircraft operations throughout the study period by a wide margin.
Therefore, it can be concluded that the existing airfield has adequate capacity to accommodate
projected annual aircraft operations.
3.2.3
REQUIREMENTS
3.2.3.1
Design Criteria
To properly and consistently plan future facilities, design criteria must be identified and applied.
Airport design criteria are specified by the airport reference code that consists of two components.
The first component is the aircraft approach category. This component is related to the approach
speed of aircraft and provides information on the operational capabilities of aircraft using the airport.
The second component is the airplane design group. This component is related to the wingspan of
the aircraft and provides information regarding the physical characteristics of aircraft using the
airport. Table 3.3 provides a listing of the approach categories and design groups.
W:\12637817_KWIA Master PIan\S_31Sec_3.docl3/12103
3-6
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 3
Demand/Capacity Analysis
and Facility Requirements
TABLE 3.3
AIRPORT DESIGN CRITERIA
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
A
B
C
D
E
Less the 91 Knots
91 to 120 Knots
121 to 140 Knots
141 to 165 Knots
166 Knots or Greater
I U to 48 Feet
II 49 to 78 Feet
III 79 to 117 Feet
IV 118 to 170 Feet
V 171 to 213 Feet
VI 214 Feet or Greater
Source: FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13, Airport Design, September 29,1989.
Aircraft Approach Catee:orv
A review of aircraft presently using, and forecasted to use, EYW reveals that aircraft in approach
category C (i.e., approach speed of 121 knots or more but less than 141 knots) regularly use the
airport. This includes the Canadair CRJ-700 and certain business jets.
The Canadair CRJ-700 regional jet began use of EYW in October 2002. This aircraft falls within
approach category C (i.e., approach speed of more than 121 knots but less than 141 knots).
Therefore, approach category C will be used to plan future airfield facilities associated with Runway
9/27.
Airplane Desie:n Group
Although larger aircraft, such as the B-737 use EYW on an occasional basis, the DASH-8 is
anticipated to be the largest aircraft in terms of wingspan to regularly use EYW in the future.} This
aircraft has a wingspan of 90 feet, which places it within design group ill (i.e., a wingspan of 79 feet
up to but not including 118 feet). Therefore, future facilities associated with Runway 9/27 will be
designed to meet group ill standards. It should be noted that all of the regional jets anticipated to use
EYW have wingspans less than that of the DASH-8. Thus, even though the fleet mix at the airport is
changing, the airplane design group is not expected to increase from its current category.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PIan\S_3\Sec_3.docl3/IW3
e of aircraft.
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 3
Demand/Capacity Analysis
and Facility Requirements
Airoort Reference Code
The airport reference code is determined by combining the aircraft approach category letter with the
airplane design group number. Consequently, the airport reference code for EYW is C-ill. It should
be noted that this is a significant increase from the airport reference code listed in the last master plan
which was a B-ill. This increase is primarily related to the introduction of regional jet aircraft
service at EYW.
3.2.3.2
Runway Safety Areas
Runway safety areas (RSA) are defined by the FAA as "surfaces surrounding a runway that are
prepared or suitable for reducing the risk of damage to airplanes in the event of an undershoot,
overshoot, or excursion from the runway." Runway safety areas consist of a relatively flat graded
area that is free of objects and vegetation that could damage aircraft. According to FAA guidance,
the runway safety area should be capable, under dry conditions, of supporting aircraft rescue and fire
fighting equipment, and the occasional passage of aircraft without causing structural damage to the
aircraft.
It should be noted that the FAA standard for the runway safety area at EYW previously had a width
of 300 feet and a length of 600 feet beyond each end of the runway. However, the actual amount of
runway safety area that meets FAA standards beyond each end of the runway is as little as
approximately 100 feet at the west end of the runway and an irregular shaped area of approximately
200 feet at the east end of the runway. The width of the area that meets FAA standards is
approximately 300 feet.
With the introduction of regional jet service at EYW in September 2002, the dimensional standards
of the runway safety area increased to a width of 500 feet and a length of 1,000 feet beyond each end
of the runway. As was previously the case, the actual amount of safety area provided beyond the end
of the runway falls far short of the standard. Furthermore, due to the greater width of the safety area
(i.e., 500 feet instead of 300 feet), there is a portion of the runway safety area north of the runway
that also does not meet standards because of mangroves and salt ponds.
Figure 3.2 provides an illustration of the dimensions of the runway safety area in relation to
surrounding salt ponds, mangroves and other features. The portion of the runway safety area that
extends beyond the west end of the runway encompasses wetlands, a pond, mangroves and the East
Martello Battery Bunker, which dates back to World War ll. The portion of the safety area that
extends beyond the east end of the runway encompasses wetlands, salt ponds and mangroves. In
addition, a portion of the runway safety area north of the runway encompasses wetlands, salt ponds
and mangroves.
The requirements for bringing the runway safety area into conformance with FAA standards will be
addressed in the airfield alternatives portion of this report contained in Section 4 - Alternatives.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PIan\S_3\Sec_3.docl3/12103
3-8
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
J:\KEY WE$i\t.tASTER PLAN UPOATE\EXHIBITS\F1G 3.2R.OWG 03/04/03 09:48
:a
c
z
:E
:J>
5" -<
- en
CD
3: .., :J>
D> ::;'"
en "T1
CD !2.CD m
.... <:5""<
"tl -f
Q) ~~ -<
::I
c: -CD :J>
"0 >(1)
Co
D> -.- :a
CD ..,
"0 m
0 :J>
..,
-
52
!:
m
:!J Z
"",C) en
-
.c 0
"';;0
!:l Z
en
Demand/Capacity Analysis
Section 3 and Facility Requirements
3.2.3.3 Runway Object Free Area
In addition to the runway safety area, an object free area (OFA) is also defined around a runway in
order to enhance the safety of aircraft operations. The OF A is cleared of all objects except those that
are related to navigational aids and aircraft ground maneuvering. However, unlike the runway safety
area, there is no physical component to the object free area. The OF A for runways serving aircraft in
approach categories C and D has a width of 800 feet and a length beyond the runway end of 1,000
feet. The existing OFA at EYW does not meet this standard. Requirements for bringing the OFA
into conformance with FAA standards will be addressed in the airfield alternatives portion of this
report contained in Section 4 - Alternatives.
3.2.3.4
Runway Separation Standards
Separation standards indicate the distance that various facilities such as taxiways, aprons and other
operational areas must be located from runways. These standards ensure that aircraft can safely
operate on both areas simultaneously without fear of collision. These standards also ensure that no
part of an aircraft on a taxiway penetrates the runway safety area or obstacle free zone.
The runway-to-taxiway separation standard for a D-ill runway with visibility minimums not lower
than % statute miles is 400 feet. The current separation between Runway 9/27 and Taxiway Alpha is
315 feet; 85 feet less than the requirement. However, the critical aircraft at EYW in terms of
wingspan is the DASH -8 which has a wingspan of 90 feet. Application of the FAA's Airport Design
computer program, Version 4.2 reveals that a runway centerline to taxiway centerline separation of
295 feet is allowed for a critical aircraft having a wingspan of 90 feet. Thus, the existing runway
centerline to taxiway centerline exceeds this allowance by 20 feet. Therefore, a modification ofF AA
standards for the existing separation of 315 feet should be sought as part of the ALP approval
process.
3.2.3.5
Number of Runways
The number of runways required at an airport depends upon factors such as wind coverage and
operational capacity. Wind coverage indicates the percentage of time that crosswind components are
below an acceptable velocity. The FAA recommends that an airport provide wind coverage of at
least 95 percent. This means that the runway is able to accommodate aircraft operations that fall
within their limits of crosswind performance 95 percent of the time. If an airport does not provide
the recommended wind coverage, additional runways should be considered.
A review of wind data presented in Section 1 indicates that Runway 9/27 provides adequate wind
coverage at a crosswind component of 16 knots during VMC and all-weather conditions but less than
adequate wind coverage during IMC. While an additional runway is technically eligible under FAA
standards, there is little need for an additional runway and site constraints preclude its consideration.
In addition to wind coverage, the required number of runways depends upon capacity needs. The
results of the demand/capacity analysis indicate that the existing runway system will provide
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PIan\S_3\Sec_3.docI3112103
3-9
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 3
Demand/Capacity Analysis
and Facility Requirements
adequate capacity on an hourly and annual basis throughout the study period. Therefore, on the basis
of both wind coverage and capacity requirements, the existing runway will be adequate to serve the
future needs of the airport.
3.2.3.6
Runway Length
Runway length requirements at EYW were determined through a combination of methodologies
including the following:
. FAA "Airport Design" computer program Version 4.2
. FAA Southern Region Guidance Letter RGL 01-2 dated August 10, 2001
. Takeoff Performance Tables for the CRJ200 and CRJ700 regional jets
These methodologies range from general guidance, in the case of the Airport Design program, to
detailed site-specific data, in the case of Takeoff Performance Tables. Because EYW is an extremely
constrained site, it was deemed appropriate to consider a variety of methodologies and to consider
methodologies that are more detailed than would normally be considered in the context of a master
plan update. Each of the methodologies and the results obtained from each are described in the
following paragraphs.
AirDort Desb!:n ComDuter Proe:ram. Version 4.2
The FAA's Airport Design computer program considers the following items:
. Airport elevation
. Mean daily maximum temperature of the hottest month
. Maximum difference in runway centerline elevation
. Length of haul for airplanes of more than 60,000 pounds
. Pavement conditions (wet or dry)
Information relevant to EYW for the above items was entered into the program. The results of the
program are specified for aircraft of more than 60,000 pounds and aircraft of less than 60,000
pounds. The category of less than 60,000 pounds is further subdivided by the groups of aircraft and
their gross takeoff weight.
Groups of aircraft are specified by using either 75 or 100 percent of the fleet. Table 3.4 lists some of
the aircraft types that comprise 75 and 100 percent ofthe fleet. Gross takeoff weight is specified by
using 60 percent or 90 percent of useful load.
W:\12637817_KWIA Master Plan\S_3\Sec_3.docl3/12103
3-10
Key West International Airporl
Master Plan Update
Section 3
Demand/Capacity Analysis
and F acUity Requirements
TABLE 3.4
AIRCRAFT FLEET
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Large aircraft less than 60,000 pounds that comprise 75 percent of the fleet include the following:
Gates Lear Jet
Rockwell International
Cessna
Dassault Br uet
British Aeros ace
Israel Aircraft Ind.
Lear Jet (20, 30 & 50 series)
Sabreliner (40, 60, 75, & 80 series)
Citation (II & III)
Falcon (10, 20, & 50 series)
HS-125 (400, 600, &b 700 series)
1124 Westwind
Large aircraft less than 60,000 pounds that comprise 100 percent of the fleet include the aircraft listed
above and the following:
Canadair
Dassault Br uet
Grumman
Lockhead
Source: URS, 2002.
Challen er 601
Falcon (900 series)
Gulfstream (I-IV)
J etstar
The results of the runway length analysis using the Airport Design Program methodology are
presented in Table 3.5. FAA criteria specify that the runway length requirements for an airport such
as EYW be determined using the "75 percent fleet at 60 percent useful load" unless a critical aircraft
having a greater requirement can be identified. As the table indicates, a runway length of 5,340 feet
is required. For aircraft greater than 60,000 pounds, the required runway length is 5,400 feet based
on a haul length of 700 miles. This haul length was selected because it is sufficient to reach Atlanta,
which is currently the farthest destination from EYW.
TABLE 3.5
RUNWAY LENGTH ANALYSIS
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Aircraft of 60,000 Pounds or Less
75% of these aircraft at:
60% useful load
90% useful load
100% of these aircraft at:
60% useful load
90% useful load
Aircraft more than 60,000 unds
Source: FAA Advisory Circular 150/5325-4A.
1 Assumes wet runway conditions.
2 Assumes a haul length of 700 miles.
5,340
7,000
5,500
8,200
5,400
3-11
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PIan\S_3\Se<:_3.docI31\2I03
Section 3
Demand/Capacity Analysis
and Facility Requirements
FAA Southern Re2ion Guidance Letter RGL 01-2. dated AU2Ust 10. 2001
This methodology consists of a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet program that the FAA Southern Region
recommends to supplement the information provided for business jets in the "Airport Design"
program. It consists of data for a variety of business jets and allows the user to modify the base data
to account for elevation, temperature and runway gradient at each airport. It should be noted that this
methodology does not consider aircraft other than business jets. Consequently, this methodology can
only be used to supplement the preceding methodology.
Three aircraft, the Citation X, the Leatjet 60 and the Gulfstream IV, were selected and used in the
analysis as being representative of the types of business jet aircraft that operate at EYW. Runway
length requirements for these aircraft at 60 percent useful load range from 4,730 to 5,015. Runway
length requirements for these aircraft at 100 percent useful load range from 5,900 feet to 6,300 feet.
The FAA Southern Region guidance letter indicates that runway lengths are normally designed for
60 percent useful load unless justification for higher loads can be provided. Print outs from the
spreadsheets for these three aircraft are provided in Appendix B - Runway Length Analysis.
Takeoff Performance Tables for CRJ200 and CRJ700 Series Reirlonal Jets
Comair began operating the Canadair CRJ -200 aircraft to Orlando from EYW in September of 2002.
In October 2002, Atlantic Southeast Airlines began operating the Canadair CRJ -700 to Atlanta from
EYW. It was deemed appropriate to examine, in greater detail, the runway length requirements
associated with these aircraft because they have significantly more demanding runway length
requirements than the turboprop aircraft that have operated at the airport in recent years.
Aircraft manufacturers' airport compatibility manuals are typically used to ascertain the required
runway length for operation by air carrier aircraft and regional jets. These manuals contain runway
length curves that are simple to use. However, the runway length curves are somewhat broad and
sometimes need to be supplemented with more detailed data for individual airlines and site-specific
conditions. This is especially true at airports that have physical and/or environmental constraints
such as EYW.
In order to obtain more detailed data for the CRJ - 200 and CRJ -700, takeoff performance tables were
obtained. These tables do not directly indicate runway length requirements. They indicate takeoff
and landing weight limitations for a given temperature and multiple other factors on a specific
runway at a specific airport. The advantage of using these tables is that they provide the same level
of information used by the airlines for actual aircraft operations. The disadvantage of using these
tables to determine runway length requirements is that they are a very cumbersome methodology.
This is because each table is prepared for a specific runway length at a specific airport. Therefore,
multiple tables are sometimes needed to determine a required runway length to operate an aircraft at
a specific weight or to determine weight limitations at various runway lengths. Furthermore, the
likely operating weight of the aircraft to each destination must be known.
URS consulted with the flight operation departments of Comair and Atlantic Southeast Airlines to
determine the fuel loads necessary to operate regional jets to Orlando and Atlanta. This allowed
W:\12637817_KWlAMasterPIanI.'U\Sec_3.docl3/12lO3 3-12 Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 3
Demand/Capacity Analysis
and Facility Requirements
URS to determine the required takeoff weight for operations to these markets with full passenger
loads.
URS then obtained takeoff performance tables that reflected the removal of all existing vegetative
obstructions from the runway approaches at EYW. This was done to ensure the data in the takeoff
performance tables was not biased by existing obstructions within the runway approaches thereby
indicating a longer runway length than would otherwise be required. This is because obstructions
within runway approaches can have a significant adverse impact on takeoff weight limitations.
The result of these consultations indicate that the critical takeoff weights are as follow:
CRJ200 to Orlando - 45,300 Ibs. - (40 seat variant)
CRJ200 to Orlando - 47,500 Ibs. - (50 seat variant)
CRJ700 to Atlanta -71,000 Ibs.
Takeoff performance tables for the CRJ200 and CRJ700 with a runway length of 5,800 feet (i.e., a
500-foot runway extension on each end of the existing runway), and no vegetative obstructions, is
shown in Appendix B - Runway Length Analyses. The first column of the table indicates air
temperature. Thus, for a given temperature, the table indicates the weight limitation for takeoff on
each end of the runway. The weight limitation for takeoffs on Runway 9 is provided first, followed
by the weight limitation for takeoffs on Runway 27.
The mean maximum temperature for the hottest month at EYW is 89 degrees Fahrenheit (32 degrees
Celsius). Thus, runway length requirements should be calculated on the basis of this temperature.
Using a temperature of 89 degrees, the indicated weight limitations on both Runway 9 and Runway
27 for the CRJ700 is 72,260 pounds. This is slightly more than the 71,000 pounds required for
operation to Atlanta. Thus, a runway length of 5,800 feet would be capable of accommodating the
operation of this aircraft to Atlanta without restrictions on passenger loads except during unusually
hot conditions.
Review of the table for the CRJ200 indicates that the weight limitation at 89 degrees is 47,864
pounds. This exceeds the takeoff weight of 45 ,300 pounds for the 40-seat variant and is very close to
the takeoff weight of 47,500 pounds for the 50-seat variant. Therefore a runway length of 5,800 feet
would be capable of accommodating the operation of this aircraft to Orlando without restrictions on
passenger loads except during unusually hot conditions.
For comparison purposes, the takeoff weight limitation for these aircraft with the existing runway
length of 4,801 feet is shown in Appendix B. The takeoff weight limitation for the CRJ700 ranges
from 63,000 to 65,000 pounds depending on the runway end used for departure. The takeoff weight
limitation for the CRJ200 ranges from 42,000 to 43,000 pounds depending on the runway end used
for departure. Thus, both aircraft would not be capable of departing with a full passenger load.
Calculations indicate that the number of seats blocked would range from 21 seats on the CRJ-200 to
as many as 25 seats on the CRJ700 under hot day conditions.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PIan\S_3\Soc_3.docl3!\2I03
3-13
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 3
Demand/Capacity Analysis
and Facility Requirements
The results of the analysis indicate that a runway length of approximately 5,800 feet is required to
operate the 40-seat and 50-seat version of the CRJ-200 series and the CRJ-700 series to existing
destinations without any limitations on passenger loads. Thus on the basis of the takeoff
performance table methodology it appears that a runway length of 5,800 feet is required.
Conclusion
The results of the three methodologies revealed the following runway length requirements at EYW.
Methodolo2V
Airport Design Computer Program
FAA Southern Region Guidance Letter
Takeoff Performance Tables
Runwav Lensrth Requirement
5,400 Feet
5,015 Feet
5,800 Feet
As previously noted each of the methodologies has inherent limitations. However, of the three
methodologies the takeoff performance tables are by far the most accurate and are based upon
aircraft that operate at EYW on a daily basis. Since these aircraft have the most demanding runway
length requirements, a runway length requirement of 5,800 feet is justified.
3.2.3.7
Runway Width
Runway width requirements are determined by airplane design group standards. The recommended
width for runways serving aircraft in design group III is 100 feet. Runway 9/27 currently has a width
of 100 feet. This width meets standards and is adequate to serve all aircraft projected to use EYW on
a regular basis throughout the study period.
3.2.3.8
Runway Strength
Pavement strength requirements are related to three primary factors: 1) the weight of aircraft
anticipated to use the airport, 2) the landing gear type and geometry, and 3) the volume of aircraft
operations. According to the airport' s FAA 5010 Form "Airport Master Record," Runway 9/27 has a
pavement strength of 40,000 pounds single-wheel loading and 95,000 pounds dual-wheel loading
and 130,000 pounds dual tandem loading. This strength is sufficient to accommodate all existing and
future aircraft projected to regularly operate at EYW.
3.2.3.9
Runway Pavement Markings
Runway 9/27 currently has visual runway markings. This type of runway marking is not adequate for
the existing non-precision approaches to Runway 9 and Runway 27. Therefore, it is recommended
that non-precision runway markings be applied to the runway at the time the runway is rehabilitated.
3-14
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
W:\12637817_KWIA Master PIan\S_31Se<:_3.docI3112103
Demand/Capacity Analysis
Section 3 and Facility Requirements
3.2.3.10 Taxiways
Taxiways are needed to accommodate the movement of aircraft from parking aprons to the runways
and vice versa. In order to provide for the efficient movement of aircraft, it is desirable to have a
parallel taxiway and several exit taxiways associated with each runway. The recommended width is
50 feet for taxiways serving aircraft in design group ill. As noted in Section 1 - Inventory, most of
the taxiways at EYW have a width of 50 feet, except Taxiway Bravo and Foxtrot that have widths of
150 feet. Thus, the existing taxiway widths are adequate to serve all existing and future aircraft that
are projected to use the airport on a regular basis.
The existing taxiway system at EYW provides convenient access to all operational areas of the
airport. The only taxiway improvements that may be required in the future would be an extension of
Taxiway Alpha to serve any proposed runway extensions.
3.2.3.11 Holding Bays
There are no holding bays on the taxiway system at EYW. The purpose of holding bays is to provide
space for one aircraft to pass another in order to reach the runway end. This reduces airfield delays
when one aircraft is conducting engine run-ups or is being held for air traffic control reasons.
Consultation with air traffic control personnel at EYW indicated that due to the nature and low
volume of aircraft operations at EYW, holding bays are not needed. Thus, the construction of
holding bays is not recommended at this time.
3.2.3.12 Navigational Aids
There are no electronic navigational aids located at EYW, although the airport does have a series of
visual navigational aids as described in Section 1- Inventory. In addition, there are electronic
navigational aids located in the vicinity of the airport. These include a non-directional beacon which
is located slightly more than 1 mile west of the airport. This NDB is used for non-precision
approaches to Runway 9. A VORTAC is also located northwest of the airport, but is not used for a
published instrument approach to EYW.
The need for a precision instrument approach at EYW was expressed during a Safety Risk
Assessment conducted by the Air Line Pilots Association in March 2002. This Safety Risk
Assessment was conducted to assess issues related to the establishment of regional jet operation at
EYW. The results of the risk assessment identified two risks that were classified as being
undesirable. The first was the lack of runway safety areas. The second was the lack of precision
approach capability.
The installation of an Instrument Landing System at EYW is not feasible due to a variety of reasons
including lack of land and required clearances from other objects. Furthermore, the FAA is in the
process of transitioning from ground based navigation aids, such as ILS, to satellite based navigation,
such as GPS. Therefore, as of March 2003, there appears to be two potential options for providing
precision instrument approach capability at EYW. These options include the use of GPS or the use
W:\12637817_KWIA Master PIan\S_3\Sec_3.docl3/12103
3-15
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 3
Demand/Capacity Analysis
and Facility Requirements
of a Transponder Landing System (TLS). The use of GPS as a precision approach technology
depends on the Wide Area Augmentation System (W AAS) or a Local Area Augmentation System
(LAAS). Current FAA plans call for the W AAS to be commissioned at the end of 2003. However, a
number of events must occur before either W AAS or LAAS would become a reality at EYW. These
issues include the development of appropriate approach procedures and the installation of
appropriate avionics in the aircraft that would use the approaches. Consequently, it is not anticipated
that GPS approaches will provide precision approach capability at EYW until the 2007 to 2019
timeframe.
The use ofTLS is a more immediate option because the technology currently available is certified by
the FAA and is currently operational. This technology consists of some ground based electronic
equipment that use the signal received from an aircraft's transponder to determine the aircraft's
position relative to a glide path. The pilot is able to determine whether the aircraft is above or below
the glide path as though the pilot was flying an ll...S approach.
One of the primary benefits of TLS is its ability to be installed at site-constrained airports where
insufficient airport property exists for the installation of an ll...S. This is especially appropriate for
EYW due to its lack of property. Disadvantages of TLS include the need for a ground operator and
limitations on the number of approaches that can be accomplished in a period of time and the fact
that it is not certified for FAR Part 91 operations.
A preliminary assessment of the feasibility of installing a TLS at EYW has been completed. The
results of the assessment indicated that the installation of a TLS at EYW is feasible and would
improve current minimums at the airport. This finding is subject to a more detailed evaluation.
Unfortunately, TLS is not currently eligible for funding under the FAA's Airport Improvement
Program. It is eligible for FAA Facility and Engineering funds if appropriated by congressional
action. Of course, TLS could also be funded through non-federal sources. The cost of a system is
approximately $825,000 plus installation costs.
If a precision approach capability is desired in the short-term, it is recommended that the installation
of a TLS be considered. Augmented GPS would be the best option for precision approach capability
at EYW on an intermediate-term to long-term basis, because it is funded by the FAA and will
provide capability for both FAR Part 121 and Part 91 operations.
3.2.3.13 Airfield Lighting
Approach Li2htin2
Runway End Identification Lights are currently installed on both ends of Runway 9/27. No other
type of approach lighting system is located at EYW. The need for an approach lighting system is
connected to the establishment of a precision instrument approach procedure and the need to achieve
certain approach minimums. Specifically, an approach lighting system is needed to obtain visibility
minimums lower than 1 statute mile for an approach procedure with vertical guidance and less than
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PIanIS_3\Sec_3.docI3112103
3-16
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 3
Demand/Capacity Analysis
and Facility Requirements
% mile for precision instrument approaches. Considering the lack of suitable land, the environmental
constraints and the small percentage of time that low visibility conditions occur, the installation of an
approach lighting system is not recommended at this time.
Runwav and Taxiwav Li2htin2
Runway 9/27 is equipped with medium intensity edge lighting. This system is standard for runways
with non-precision instrument approaches and is acceptable for precision instrument approaches that
do not have RVR based minimums. This edge lighting system is sufficient to serve existing and
future needs at EYW.
3.3 AIRSPACE
3.3.1 DEMAND/CAPACITY ANALYSIS
Airspace in the vicinity of EYW is constrained by regulatory, physical, and operational factors. A
brief description of these factors is provided in the following paragraphs.
As noted in Section 1, Naval Air Facility (NAF) Key West is located approximately 3 miles east of
EYW and its airspace adjoins the airspace for EYW. The distance from the approach end of Runway
27 to the boundary of NAF airspace is only 1.33 nautical miles. This necessitates that aircraft
departing from Runway 9 make an immediate left turn after departure to remain clear of NAF
airspace. Conversely when approaches are being made to Runway 27 tight turns close to the runway
are required to remain clear of NAF airspace. These constraints are managed through coordination
of air traffic control service between EYW and NAF Key West.
While the proximity of the two airports and their adjoining airspace is clearly a constraint on
operations, air traffic control procedures are able to manage the interaction of aircraft using each
airport. Furthermore, aircraft operations at EYW are projected to grow by less than 20,000
operations over the next twenty years; an annual grow rate of one percent. Given this small amount
of growth, existing airspace constraints are not projected to negatively affect the ability ofEYW to
accommodate these operations.
3.4 TERMINAL AREA
The capacity of terminal area facilities was calculated and compared to the forecasted levels of
passenger demand. The primary areas analyzed in this section include the passenger terminal
building and terminal apron area, while vehicle access and parking requirements are considered in
Section 3.5. The capacities of these terminal components were evaluated in relation to forecasted
demand to determine the overall adequacies of each component of the terminal area. Deficiencies in
capacity of the terminal area were identified to determine future needs.
3-17
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master Plan\S_3\Sec_3.docl3/12103
Demand/Capacity Analysis
Section 3 and Facility Requirements
3.4.1 PASSENGER TERMINAL
3.4.1.1 Demand/Capacity Analysis
A summary of space in the existing terminal, by function, is provided in Table 3.6. As indicated,
approximately 16,700 square feet of the existing passenger terminal is dedicated to passenger
processing and operational purposes on the first floor. Space on the second floor is occupied by
airline offices, FAA offices, restrooms and airport management and totals approximately 4,300
square feet. Total space on both floors equals slightly more than 21,000 square feet. An additional
1,000 square feet of space is available in the Cape Air annex building.
The future demand for space in the passenger terminal was calculated using a bottom-up
methodology. This method consists of calculating the amount of space required for each terminal
function such as airline space, public space, baggage claim, etc. The amount of space required for
each of these functions is then added together to determine the total amount of terminal space
required. This approach requires that planning factors or dimensions be specified for each terminal
function.
TABLE 3.6
PASSENGER TERMINAL SPACE
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Subtotal
4,466
307
61
1,278
3,922
329
374
882
1,237
3,004
345
23
563
6,051
29%
Subtotal
5,507
26%
Concessions
Ground Trans rtation
Restaurant
Gift Sho
Subtotal
4,586
22%
Other
Janitorial
Mechanical/Electrical/Structural
Subtotal
586
3%
Total First Floor
Total Second Floor
Grand Total
16.730
4,336
21,066
79%
21%
100%
W:\12637817_KWIA Master PIan\S_3\Sec_3.docl3/12103
3-18
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 3
Demand/Capacity Analysis
and Facility Requirements
Airline Ticket Counter and Offices
The existing ticket counter space is adequate in terms of counter length, but is woefully inadequate in
terms of office space, passenger queuing area, and security screening area. With respect to ticket
office, counter area and passenger queuing area, the existing terminal provides approximately 4,090
square feet of space. Demand projections indicate that approximately 8,625 square feet of space is
required including space for passenger queuing.
PassenS!er Departure LounS!e
The existing departure lounge contains 1,278 square feet of space excluding security screening, but
including space consumed by airline podiums and access points to the aircraft ramp. Demand
projections indicate that approximately 3,500 square feet is currently needed for a departure lounge
and will increase to 5,700 square feet to accommodate passenger demand in the year 2021. The
current deficiency of space in the departure lounge as well as the lack of access to restroom facilities
results in passengers being held on the unsecure side of the security screening station until a flight is
announced as being ready for boarding. Once a boarding announcement is made, all of the
passengers for the flight are processed through security screening. While this method of processing
passengers limits the extent of crowding in the departure lounge, it creates extreme passenger queues
at the security station that block passenger circulation in the terminal and force passengers outside of
the terminal (see description under the Security Screening heading).
An additional problem is lack of space for secondary screening. As a result of increased security
mandated following the events of September 11, 200 1, passengers are selected on a random basis for
secondary screening. This screening presently occurs just outside of the passenger terminal in an
area that has been fenced to control passenger movement to the aircraft. Adequate space for
secondary screening should be provided inside the departure lounge so passengers can be protected
from the weather while being contained in a secure area.
Security Screenin2
The amount of space for security screening is slightly more than 300 square feet. This includes the
area occupied by the x-ray machine and the walk-through magnetometer as well as a lO-foot queuing
area in front of the screening station. Visual observations of demand at the screening station reveal
that the amount of space is severely undersized to accommodate existing passenger loads and will
become even more problematic as passenger volumes increase in the future.
Queues for security screening often extend out the terminal entrance and down along the terminal
curbfront area as shown in Figure 3.3. As noted above, this blocks passenger circulation inside the
terminal and inconveniences passengers as they are forced into waiting in extended queues.
Although there is a canopy over the curbside area, passengers are still exposed to the heat and during
thunderstorms can be subject to wind-driven rain. Consultation with terminal tenants revealed that
attempts to maintain these queues inside the terminal have led to severe conflicts with passenger
queues for ticket counters or passenger queues for rental cars and baggage claim.
3-19
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
W:\12637817_KWIA Master PlanlS_3ISec_3.docl3/12103
Section 3
Demand/Capacity Analysis
and Facility Requirements
Demand projections indicate that over 900 square feet of space is currently needed for primary
security screening. This requirement will increase to over 1,300 square feet in the year 2021,
depending on the number of security screening stations used.
Restrooms
In addition to being undersized to meet passenger demand, existing restroom facilities in the
passenger terminal are not optimally situated. The existing restroom facilities are located in two
places. The first location is near baggage claim, while the second location is near the restaurant. The
restrooms near baggage claim are the smaller of the two, are seriously undersized, and often have
queues extending out of them. The restrooms near the restaurant are bigger and better able to
accommodate demand, but are remote from the majority of passengers and not easily visible.
These two sets of existing restrooms occupy approximately 800 square feet of space. The space
program indicates that just under 2,000 square feet of restroom space is needed. This space
requirement includes an allocation for restrooms accessible from the departure lounge.
Baf!f!af!e Claim
The existing baggage claim area is undersized both in terms of baggage claim carousel as well as
baggage claim lobby area. The existing baggage claim carousel is situated in the middle of an area
that accommodates rental car counters as well as the entrance from the aircraft ramp and a primary
exit to the terminal curb. Passenger flow in this area becomes congested as a result of numerous
crossing passenger flows as well as passengers waiting for baggage to arrive on the carousel.
The existing baggage carousel provides 61 linear feet of claim device. The space program indicates
that approximately 100 feet is currently needed and will increase to 170 feet in the year 2021.
Other Terminal Functions
In addition to the major terminal functions listed in the preceding paragraphs, the space allocation
program also determined area requirements for functions such as public seating areas, meeter/greeter
areas, concessions, mechanical/electrical, general circulation, airport management and janitorial
needs. The methodology used to calculate the required areas for each of these functions is provided
in the spreadsheet shown in Appendix C - Passenger Terminal Space Program.
3.4.1.2
Facility Requirements
The requirements for additional terminal space were calculated by subtracting the existing amount of
terminal space from the estimated demand for each of the growth scenarios. Table 3.7 presents a
summary of the additional terminal space required during the study period. As the table indicates,
the amount of additional space required ranges from 16,500 to 27,5000 square feet during the study
period. It should be noted that the deficiencies in some functions are more severe than others as can
be seen in the spreadsheet contained in Appendix D - Passenger Terminal Space Program.
W:\12637817 _KW1A Master PIan\S_31Sec_3.docI3112103
3-20
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
SECURITY QUEUE
SECURITY QUEUE EXTENDING OUT OF TERMINAL
Cl
~
:I:
(')
U>
;;<
rn
~
rn
U>
:::!
;::
"'ll
c:
~. Key West
'! ..,. ..... International Airport
if' _ Master Plan Update
z:
;..
SECURITY QUEUES
I
FIGURE:
3.3
Section 3
Demand/Capacity Analysis
and Facility Requirements
TABLE 3.7
TERMINAL SPACE REQillREMENTS
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
2001 38,500 22,000 16,500
2006 41,000 22,000 19,000
2011 43,000 22,000 21,000
2016 44,000 22,000 22,000
2021 49,500 22,000 27,500
Note: The quantity for existing terminal space includes both floors of the existing terminal as well as the Cape Air Annex.
Source: URS. 2002.
3.4.2 TERMINAL APRON
The aircraft parking apron for commercial passenger flights adjoining the passenger terminal has 700
linear feet of frontage and a depth of approximately 420 feet. It encompasses an area of
approximately 32,600 square yards. Within this area is space for 12 aircraft parking positions
including one space for U.S. Customs inspections. This leaves 11 aircraft parking positions for
commercial aircraft flights. If a maximum of five air carriers provide service at the airport, these
parking positions provide sufficient space for two aircraft to be parked at anyone time with one
extra. While this amount of space is sufficient during hours of operations, airlines often need to park
additional aircraft overnight to operate early morning departures.
The demand for overnight spaces can be controlled through use of rates and charges. Given the
extremely limited space at EYW and the high cost of attempting to provide facilities for limited use,
such as overnight parking, the construction of additional ramp for this purpose is not recommended
at this time.
3.5 SURFACE TRANSPORTATION
3.5.1 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this section is to evaluate existing and future vehicle traffic operations and identify
any improvement needs for the surface transportation system supporting EYW. This analysis
includes the airport circulation roadway, the terminal curb frontage, and the parking facilities.
3.5.2 AIRPORT ROADWAYS
EYW is served by Faraldo Circle, a two-lane, one-way facility that connects the airport to South
Roosevelt Boulevard and provides access to the public parking, the passenger terminal, rental car lots
and general aviation facilities. In addition to Faraldo Circle, access to the rental car ready lots, the
W:112637817 _KWIA Master PIan\S_31Scc_3.docI3112103
3-21
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 3
Demand/Capacity Analysis
and Facility Requirements
department of public works and air cargo is provided via Stickney Road which also connects to
South Roosevelt Boulevard.
The performance of roads is qualified based on levels of service (LOS), which are given letter
designations from "A" to "F." LOS "A" represents the best operating conditions and LOS "F' the
worst.
The capacity of Faraldo Circle is approximately 2,000 vehicles per hour. Visual observations
indicate that the road operates and Level of Service A and will continue to operate at Level of
Service A throughout the study period. No capacity improvements to Faraldo Circle or Stickney
Road are required.
3.5.3 AIRPORT PARKING
An inventory of parking facilities was conducted. This inventory recorded the number of parking
spaces available for all public and employee parking facilities and also for the rental car lot. The
following summarizes the existing parking facilities:
Type of Parkine:
Short-Term Public
Long-Term Public
Rental Car
Employee
Number ofPar&ne: Spaces
31
280
128
92
The existing short-term parking facility already operates at or near capacity during the peak periods.
The inventory and consultation with airport management indicated that overall 70 percent of the
long-term parking spaces were occupied. However, this percentage is highly seasonal. During the
peak season months of December through March this percentage can be close to 100 percent, while it
can be as low as 50 percent during off peak months. Typically, the peak parking occupancy rate
should not exceed 85 to 90 percent in order to avoid excessive vehicular circulation by motorists
searching for an empty space.
Consultation with rental car operators revealed that the ready and return lots operate at 100 percent
of capacity. Consultation with rental car operators reveals that additional ready/return spaces will be
needed to meet future levels of demand.
Based on the existing demand, it is evident that the existing parking facilities are already operating
near capacity during peak travel periods, but have significant excess capacity during other periods.
Table 3.8 lists the estimated parking needs for future years for short-term and long-term public
parking, as well as parking for rental cars and employees. For design purposes, future parking
requirements for public and rental car parking were calculated by applying the projected growth rate
of passenger enplanements to current level of peak period occupancy. As shown in this table,
approximately 22 additional spaces will be needed for short-term parking and 46 additional spaces
for long-term parking by the year 2021. The greatest need is projected for rental car parking, which
W:\12637817_KWIA Master PIan\S_3\Sec_3.doc\3112103
3-22
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 3
Demand/Capacity Analysis
and Facility Requirements
will need 93 additional spaces by 2021. This demand could potentially be mitigated through
operational efficiencies by the rental car companies. Therefore, this demand should be reexamined
prior to the construction of any additional parking facilities for rental car purposes.
TABLE 3.8
PARKING REQUIREMENTS
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
31 36 42 47 53
31 31 31 31 31
0 5 11 16 22
192 226 259 293 326
280 280 280 280 280
uired -88 -54 -21 13 46
130 153 176 198 221
128 128 128 128 128
2 25 48 70 93
80 85 90 95 100
92 92 92 92 92
-12 -7 -2 3 8
433 500 567 633 700
531 531 531 531 531
-98 -31 36 102 169
The growth rate of passenger enplanements is not an appropriate methodology for estimating
employee parking requirements. Therefore, a somewhat arbitrary factor of 1 parking space per year
was applied to employee parking requirements. This rate of growth results in a demand for 8
additional parking spaces in the year 2021.
As shown in Figure 3.4 the total demand for parking spaces in the year 2021 is estimated to equal
700 spaces, which is 169 more parking spaces than the 531 spaces that are provided by existing
parking facilities. Options for increasing automobile parking capacity at the airport will be examined
in Section 4 - Alternatives.
3.5.4 TERMINAL CURBSIDE
The curb in front of the passenger terminal provides approximately 300 linear feet for passenger
loading and unloading. An additional 50 feet of curb is provided in front of the terminal annex
where Cape Air operates. Consultation with airport management, and visual observations, indicate
that the terminal curb is rarely full, even during peak hours. This is due to a combination of factors
3-23
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PIan\S_3\Sec_3.doc\3/12103
Section 3
Demand/Capacity Analysis
and Facility Requirements
including the fact that majority of passengers using the airport are visitors that typically go straight to
taxis, rental cars or hotel courtesy vehicles rather than private vehicles. Furthermore, low-cost short-
term parking is available directly across from the terminal curb for residents picking up arriving
passengers. This further reduces demand for terminal curb. On the basis of current use patterns the
existing amount of terminal curb will be sufficient to meet projected levels of demand.
3.6 AIRCRAFT RESCUE AND FIREFIGHTING (ARFF)
The FAA has established specific requirements for aircraft rescue and firefighting (ARFF)
equipment. These requirements shown in Table 3.9, vary depending upon new frequently aircraft of
various sizes serve the airport. As the table indicates, the requirements are stated in terms of
"Indexes" that begin with the letter "A" for airports serving small aircraft and extend to Index "E"
for airports serving large aircraft. Each Index letter defines a range for aircraft length. Index A is
defined as aircraft that have a length of less than 90 feet. The longest index group with an average of
5 or more daily departures by air carrier aircraft is the Index required for the airport.
TABLE 3.9
ARFF EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Under 90
(Dash-8)
90-125
(CRJ-700)
126 to 158
(MD-80)
159 to 199
(767)
Over 200
(747)
Length of largest aircraft providing an average of five scheduled departures per day. If there are less than an
average of five daily departures by aircraft in a particular index, then the next lower index applies.
B
1
1
500 Sodium or
450 Potassium
500 Sodium or
Halon
o
100
A
1
o
1,500
C
1
2
500
3,000
D
1
2
500
4,000
E
1
2
500
6,000
Through the first half of 2002 there were no commercial service aircraft having a length greater than
90 feet that averaged 5 or more daily departures at EYW. Thus, the airport was classified as Index
A. However, it is likely that EYW will need to meet the requirements for Index B in the near future
due to the introduction of CRJ -700 regional jet service at the airport. The CRJ -700 has a fuselage
length of 106' 8" feet which places it in Index B. As a result of these regional jet operations, airport
management requested that the ARFF services at EYW be certified by the FAA as meeting the
requirements of Index B. This was accomplished in September 2002. Regular operations by aircraft
in Index C are not projected to occur during the 20-year study period.
W:\I263781LKWIA Master PIan\S_3\Sec_3.docl3/12103
3-24
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
800
700
600
" Existing Parking = 523 Spaces
c -------------
~ 500
CD
c
Q)
~ 400
c.
en
Cl
c
~ 300
ell
0..
Cl
~
:I:
(')
~
:i
rn
~
"'ll
c:
"'ll
o
~
8
,~
c;
t
;..
.
200
100
o
2001
2006
2011
2016
2021
Year
Key West
International Airport
Master Plan Update
PROJECTED PARKING
DEMAND
FIGURE:
3.4
Section 3
Demand/Capacity Analysis
and Facility Requirements
As described in Section 1 - Inventory, ARFF services at EYW are currently provided from a modem
ARFF station located between the passenger terminal and the air traffic control tower. Services
provided from this facility meet the vehicle, equipment and personnel requirements of Index B as
specified by Federal Aviation Regulation Part 139.315. Therefore, the existing ARFF facilities are
sufficient to meet existing and future demands.
3.7 SUPPORT FACILITIES
3.7.1 AIRPORT MAINTENANCE
The maintenance function at an airport is responsible for a wide range of facilities including
buildings, pavements, utility systems (lighting, drainage, fueling) and open land. In conjunction, the
supplies and equipment required to maintain each of these facilities/systems are numerous and
varied. As described in Section 1 - Inventory, the airport maintenance building is the former ARFF
station. It is located adjacent to the west-end of the passenger terminal.
The building has one bay for vehicle storage as well as storage of equipment and supplies.
Consultation with airport management reveals that this building is sufficient to meet the maintenance
and storage requirements of the airport through the duration of the study period.
3.8 GENERAL A VIA TION AREA
The purpose of this evaluation is to determine the capacity of existing general aviation facilities and
their ability to meet forecasted levels of demand during the planning period.
In this analysis, the following types of facilities were evaluated:
· Storage hangars
· Based aircraft apron
· Transient aircraft apron
Details of the analysis for each type of facility is provided in the following paragraphs.
3.8.1
STORAGE HANGARS
3.8.1.1
Demand/Capacity Analysis
The demand for storage hangars is dependent upon the number, and types, of aircraft expected to be
based at the airport, as well as local climatic conditions, airport security, and owner preferences. The
percentage of based aircraft that are stored in hangars varies from state to state, but is usually greatest
in regions that are subject to extreme weather conditions.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master Plan\S_3\Sec_3.docI3112103
3-25
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 3
Demand/Capacity Analysis
and Facility Requirements
Demand for storage hangars is usually estimated by assuming that a certain percentage of aircraft
owners will desire hangars for their aircraft. The percentage of owners desiring hangar space usually
varies by type of aircraft. It is assumed that a greater percentage of owners of high-performance
aircraft will desire hangar space as compared to owners of low performance aircraft. Because the
estimates are based upon assumptions of demand, the actual demand for hangar space can vary
significantly from the estimate.
The actual demand for hangar space at EYW was recently assessed as a result on an ongoing project
for the construction of additional open-bay hangars and T -hangars by Island City Flying Service and
a group of based aircraft owners. The project has planned the demolition of 11 existing hangars that
are in extremely poor condition and the construction of 10 new open-bay hangars and 10 T -hangars
to replace these facilities and meet current demand. Consultation with Island City Flying Service
revealed that all of the open-bay hangars are committed for occupancy; however, 4 T-hangars are
still available for rent. Representatives of Island City Flying Service revealed that the demand for
hangar space is highly sensitive to price.
On the basis of the actual demand assessed through this project, it is estimated that the demand for
hangar space is approximately one-third of the aircraft based at the airport. Assuming this
relationship remains constant in the future, it is estimated that demand will exist for approximately
22 hangars by 2017. This represents two more hangars than are planned for in the current project.
Since the demand for hangar space is largely a personal preference of the aircraft owner. The
demand is highly variable and subject to change. This issue will require re-evaluation throughout the
course of the study period.
3.8.1.2
Facility Requirements
On the basis of the hangar demand relationship discussed in the preceding paragraph, it is estimated
that there will be a demand for two additional hangars through the study period. As noted, this issue
will require evaluation over time.
3.8.2 BASED AIRCRAFT APRON
Apron areas should be provided for based aircraft that are not stored in hangars. Parking for based
aircraft is provided north and west of the FBO. These areas provide approximately 33,000 square
yards of paved apron for aircraft tie-downs. The capacity of apron for based aircraft at EYW is
somewhat difficult to determine because both based aircraft and itinerant aircraft are parked on the
ramp in front of the FBO. The original design of the ramp areas provided parking for approximately
60 aircraft. However, due to variations in aircraft size and where the aircraft are actually parked on
the apron, it appears that approximately 70 spaces are actually available.
Consultation with Island City Flying Service revealed that the existing ramp along with the planned
hangars project, which includes space for ten additional tie-downs, will be adequate to meet existing
W:112637817 _KW1A Master PIan\S_3\Sec_3.docl3/12103
3-26
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 3
Demand/Capacity Analysis
and Facility Requirements
and future demands for parking of based aircraft. Therefore, no additional apron for based aircraft is
required at this time.
3.8.3 TRANSIENT AIRCRAFT APRON
Transient aircraft visiting EYW typically park at the apron in front of the FBO as well as overflow
parking to the west. The demand for transient ramp is usually estimated by applying a factor to
design day aircraft landings. The accuracy of these estimates varies from one airport to another.
Therefore, Island City Flying Service was consulted regarding the demand for transient ramp at
EYW. This consultation revealed that although the number of aircraft varies from day to day, a
typical demand is for 5 to 10 aircraft on a slow weekday. Island City Flying Service indicated that
the existing ramp area is sufficient to serve existing levels of itinerant demand except during major
events. These events include Fantasy Fest at Halloween, which attracts as many as 200 aircraft over
a period of 2 to 3 days, New Year's Eve which attracts as many as 150 aircraft over 2 to 3 days, and
Cayman Caravan which attracts up to 100 aircraft. During these events, aircraft fill the existing
aprons and are parked on unpaved areas of the airport. Because the peaks of aircraft associated with
these events are so extreme and occur on an infrequent basis, it does not appear to be cost effecti ve at
this time to provide additional paved ramp to accommodate these operations. Therefore, no
additional itinerant ramp is proposed at this time.
3.9 AVIATION FUEL STORAGE FACILITIES
Table 3.10 and Figures 3.5 and 3.6 present historical fuel sales at EYW from 1993 through 2001. As
noted in Section 1 - Inventory, the airport has three 12,000-gallon fuel tanks in the fuel farm. Two
tanks contain Jet-A, while the other tank contains avgas.
TABLE 3.10
HISTORICAL FUEL SALES (GALLONS)
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
1993 643,186 392,994 1,036,180
1994 879,377 419,663 1,229,040
1995 510,947 516,429 1,027,376 8,000 476,798 484,798 1,512,174
1996 581,798 496,141 1,077,939 40,000 442,072 482,072 1,560,011
1997 717,743 631,931 1,349,674 80,000 480,680 560,680 1,910,354
1998 763,190 534,665 1,297,855 32,000 499,869 531,869 1,829,724
1999 858,570 622,441 1,481,011 40,000 461,073 501,073 1,982,084
2000 831,253 682,109 1,513,362 24,000 432,461 456,461 4,969,823
2001 732,735 780,390 1,513,125 48,000 406,877 454,877 1,968,002
A figure of 10 percent of annual fuel sales was used to estimate peak month sales. This equates to
45,500 gallons for avgas and 151,000 gallons for Jet-A. On the basis of a 12,000-gallon capacity for
avgas, a fifteen-day fuel supply is currently provided. With respect to Jet-A, a four-day to five-day
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PIan\S_3\Sec_3.docl3/12103 3-27 Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 3
Demand/Capacity Analysis
and Facility Requirements
supply exists on the basis of the existing 24,000-gallon capacity. These capacities are adequate for
existing levels of demand, but may not be sufficient to accommodate projected demand. The
following paragraphs examine future fuel storage requirements.
Projections of future fuel flow were made using a series of assumptions and calculations. For fuel
use by general aviation, the same percentage of growth forecasted for operations (48 percent) was
applied to fuel flow. For fuel use by airlines, a gallons per departure factor was determined for
existing operations and then was applied to the future number of departures.
Applying these factors led to an estimated of peak month fuel flow of 65,000 gallons for avgas and
219,00 gallons for Jet-A in 2017. These volumes equate to an eleven-day supply for avgas and a
three-day supply for Jet-A.
According to Island City Flying Service personnel, approximately 7,500 gallons of fuel are delivered
daily to the fuel farm. This volume could be increased in the future to meet increased level of future
demand. Therefore, an expansion of fuel farm facilities to accommodate future levels of demand is
not anticipated at this time. However, sufficient space is available at the existing fuel farm location
to accommodate additional storage tanks for A VGAS or Jet-A should it be required.
3.10 SUMMARY OF FACILITY REQUIREMENTS
The results of the demand/capacity analysis and an examination of facility requirements revealed the
following:
Airfield
. The existing airfield is adequate to meet projected demand of aircraft operations
on an hourly and annual basis throughout the twenty-year duration of the study
period.
. The airfield's safety areas do not meet FAA criteria and need to be improved.
. The existing runway should be extended from its existing length of 4,801 to a
length of 5,800 feet to enable unrestricted operation of regional jets to existing
destinations. This conclusion is subject to further environmental investigation
concerning feasibility and cost.
. The possibility of providing precision instrument approach capability should be
explored through the use of a transponder landing system or GPS with LAAS.
. The existing airspace structure is constrained by the proximity of NAF Key West,
but should not present a problem in terms of the ability of EYW to accommodate
the projected number of aircraft operations throughout the study period.
W:\12637817_KWIA Master PIan\S_3\Sec_3.docI3112103
3-28
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
1,600,000
1,400,000
1,200,000
1,000,000
III
C
.2 800,000
'iii
Cl
600,000
400,000
200,000
0
1993 1994
Cl
5:
"'ll
:I:
(')
I
en
~
"'ll
c:
"'ll
o
~
8
,-
."
if'
~
;..
Key West
International Airport
Master Plan Update
1995
1996
1997
1998
Year
I-+- Total __GA """*-Airline I
HISTORICAL JET-A
FUEL SALES
1999
2000
2001
FIGURE:
3.5
600,000
500,000
400,000
01
C
~ 300,000
III
C)
200,000
100,000
Cl
~
:I:
(')
U>
~
~
en
~
~
I
,-
."
t
;..
o
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Year
I-+- Total __Airline --....-GA I
Key West
International Airport
Master Plan Update
HISTORICAL AVGAS
SALES
FIGURE:
3.6
Section 3
Demand/Capacity Analysis
and Facility Requirements
Terminal
· The existing passenger terminal is undersized to accommodate existing levels of
passengers.
· Certain passenger processing elements of the passenger terminal are severely
undersized, including security screening, the departure lounge and restrooms.
· New terminal facilities will be required short term to meet immediate needs. In
the long-term a new passenger terminal will be required.
Access and Parkin2:
· Existing access to the airport is adequate to meet existing and future levels of
demand.
· Existing parking is adequate to meet demand, but future demand will exceed
capacity. Additional parking facilities will be required.
· Additional parking for rental car storage will be required.
General Aviation Facilities
· Proposed hangar construction will meet all short -term demand. Long-term
additional hangar space may be needed depending upon market factors.
· Existing aircraft ramp for based and transient aircraft will be sufficient to meet
demand with the exception of certain special events. The construction of
additional ramp to meet the needs of the special events is not deemed to be cost
effective and is not recommended at this time.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PIan\S_3\Sec_3.docI3l12103
3-29
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
"'"
SECTION 4
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
Section 4 Alternatives Analysis
4.1 INTRODUCTION
This section examines alternative methods of providing the facilities that were identified in the
preceding section as being needed to serve projected levels of demand during the study period. The
alternative analysis focuses on three primary functional areas of the airport:
. Airfield Facilities
. Terminal Area Facilities
. Aircraft Parking Ramp
In addition to these areas, the analysis briefly addresses general aviation facilities. For each of the
functional areas, alternatives were developed and are described in both text and graphical form on
the following pages. Advantages and disadvantages associated with each alternative are identified
and quantified to the extent possible. Conceptual construction cost estimates are also included for
comparison purposes.
4.2 AIRFIELD AL TERNA TIVES
Airfield alternatives were developed to address two primary objectives. The first objective is to
provide a runway safety area that meets FAA airport design standards. The second objective is to
assess ways of increasing the existing runway length of 4,801 feet to a length of 5,800 feet in
accordance with the runway length requirements identified in Section 3.
The existing runway safety area does not meet FAA design standards. These standards specify that
the runway safety area for runways serving aircraft in Design Group C-lII extends 1,000 feet beyond
the end of pavement and has a width of 500 feet. As previously shown in Figure 3.2, the amount of
land surrounding Runway 9/27 that meets the RSA clearance and grading requirements is
significantly smaller than the FAA standard.
At the west end of the runway, see Figure 4.1, the runway safety area extends approximately 110 feet
beyond the edge of pavement. The land beyond that point consists of mangroves followed by ponds.
On the east end of the runway, see Figure 4.2, the amount of runway safety area provided is
approximately 210 feet, although an irregular shaped area extends for approximately 400 feet before
entering mangroves and ponds. In addition to the constraints at each end of the runway, mangroves
and salt ponds also encroach upon a portion of the runway safety area north of the runway as
depicted in Figure 4.3. Alternatives presented in this section address the requirements of
establishing a runway safety area that meets FAA design standards.
With respect to the issue of runway length, a length of 5,800 feet was identified as the requirement to
accommodate aircraft projected to regularly operate at EYW. This runway length would enable
regional jets serving EYW to operate without limitations on the number of passengers that the
W:\12637817J(WlA Master Plan\S_4\S3.doc
4-1
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 4
Alternatives Analysis
aircraft could accommodate. Airfield alternatives presented in the following paragraphs examine a
variety of methods of extending the existing runway. Because the existing site is so constrained, a
large number of alternatives were examined including many that would provide less than the
required 5,800 feet. Furthermore, many of the airfield alternatives use a concept referred to as
"Declared Distances". Declared distances is a process whereby an airport owner declares a certain
portion of the runway as being available for takeoff or landing in order to meet runway safety area,
runway object free area or runway protection zone requirements in a constrained environment.
Consequently, this usually results in a portion of the runway pavement not being used for takeoff or
landing calculations and can adversely affect aircraft and airline operations.
Because the concept of declared distances involves a number of terms and concepts that can be
difficult to understand, the alternatives that follow have been presented in terms of showing the
portion of runway that would be available for landing and takeoff. This greatly simplifies the
terminology while still presenting the key variables to the reader.
4.2.1 AIRFIELD ALTERNATIVE 1- No-ACTION
With this alternative, no improvements would be made to bring the existing runway safety area into
conformance with FAA design standards and no extensions would be made to the runway. This
alternative is depicted in Figure 4.4.
FAA guidance for runway safety areas is contained in FAA Order 5200.B entitled Runway Safety
Area Program and dated October 1, 1999. The guidance contained in the order specifies that all
runway safety areas at Part 139 certified airports, such as EYW, shall conform to the appropriate
FAA standards to the extent practicable. Alternative 1 would not conform to this guidance because it
does not show any attempt to investigate the planning, engineering and environmental factors
associated with improving the RSA to the extent practicable.
4.2.2 AIRFIELD AL TERNA TIVE 2 - ESTABLISH RUNWAY SAFETY AREA
With this alternative a standard runway safety area, having a width of 500 feet and a length that
extends 1,000 feet beyond each end of the runway would be constructed as depicted in Figure 4.5.
Implementation of this alternative would bring the runway safety area into conformance with FAA
standards. This alternative would require the acquisition of approximately one-third of an acre of
land along the northeast boundary of the airport, because the width of the runway safety area extends
beyond the current property boundary.
Implementation of this alternative would have impacts to wetlands, mangroves, and ponds. Impacts
to these habitats on the basis of land use cover were quantified and are shown in Appendix D.
Overall, it is estimated that Alternative 2 would impact 31 acres of wetlands. It should be noted that
this estimate is based upon aerial photo interpretation and does not represent field verification and
delineation of wetlands.
W:\12637817_KWIA Master PIan\S3\S3.doc
4-2
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
'"
~
o
'"
-i
'"
Ii:
./
~
m
:;:
~
./
~
o
ll.
::>
z
:'i
ll.
~
€
~
~
'"
-:(
LEGEND
N
-
AIRPORT PROPERTY UNE
UMITS OF RUNWAY SAFETY AREA (RSA)
300 0 300
I
v/~
AREA THAT MEETS RSA REQUIREMENTS
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
Key West
International Airport
Master Plan Update
RUNWA Y 9 SAFETY AREA
REQUIREMENTS
FIGURE:
4.1
~
o
Ii
N
..
<>
5-
~
m
:;:
1:)
~
o
D..
::>
z
:5
D..
~
~
~
?;;
'"
./
-';
LEGEND
N
-
AIRPORT PROPERTY UNE
UMITS OF RUNWAY SAFETY AREA (RSA)
300
I
o
300
v/~
AREA THAT MEETS RSA REQUIREMENTS
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
Key West
International Airport
Master Plan Update
RUNWAY 27 SAFETY AREA
REQUIREMENTS
FIGURE:
4.2
"
~
o
0:'
...,
,.:
"
IL
./
~
m
:;:
~
./
~
o
C-
O)
LEGEND
N
-
AIRPORT PROPERTY UNE
UMITS OF RUNWAY SAFETY AREA (RSA)
300
I
o
300
v/~
AREA THAT MEETS RSA REQUIREMENTS
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
~
C-
i
~
w
~
~
'"
./
-';
.CD
, .
~
\; ~ -"::: !
. --- - - .
.....,..:~ ,:.~...".
Key West
International Airport
Master Plan Update
RUNWAY 9-27 SAFETY AREA
REQUIREMENTS
FIGURE:
4.3
J:\KEY WEST\MASTER PlAN UPDATE\EXHISI1S\FlG 4.4R.DWG 03/04/03 10:39
0>
8
CD IT!
IT! X
-<-
oU)
Z~
CZ
G')
:I!::o
::oU)
IT!)>
U).....
I.....
00
r ..
C
I
.I
) '.
\ \
I I J
- ,
i/w
/7 ,
: I
I
F
m
><
en
Z-t
052
OG)
m=
Oc::
....Z
:J>:e
=:J>
a<
0....
-m
enZ
-tG)
:J>-t
Z:J:
o
mil
en...,.
co
o
-!:
~
VI~
~~
i:;jC'>
::..~ o"z
II i:;j
o>z
&6
(' ""
0,-,/ v' r
I"' .
I I I
I '''1
1 ~ ,
: 1.1/ 0
I I
I J ....,
I' "-
I
1
0>
8
:J>
-
=
5" " I
-
- m
CD z....
s::: ~
l>> =" 00
en
- !lCD
S!l cP< I:J>
." :J>.... ~ ~ r
is> i:e
=" O-t VI ~ fT1 CD IT!
.a: -CD -tm ~ ~ G") IT! X
c. >0 -:=0 " -oj fT1 ~U)
l>> -.- Oz ~ ;g Z
CD ~ Z~
~ Z:J> ~ ~ 0 CZ
0 ~ ;J G')
~ -t
- - ~ ~ :I!::o
rfi S;; c: ::oU)
6 Z IT!)>
_ 1"1
[ill Z U)N
... "
I.....
.c 00
~::o r ..
IT! C
J:\KEY WESi\
MASTER PLAN UPDATE\
EXHIBITS\F1G
4.!iR.DWG
Ol
8
~
Ul~
~:I:
f;i1'5
::~
II'~ o.Z
3"
-
~ CD
II> ..,
en :::a "'r
.... ID ~
~ _ CD
::2 cr '<
g: i ~
~ -CD
g. > (I)
... --..
CD -a
o
..,
-
~
~C>
Ole
:::0
rTJ
:a )>
c:: -
Z :a
~ ffI
-<mr-
enC
en....)>
)>)>r-
-r1ta....
mr-m
;!en~
)>x)>
:a ....
m -
)> rfi
en N
I I
I I I
I : I :
I I I
~ ~ ,., ~
;sz2S;or
;o~Ul"tlrTJ
~~~~G)
:I:Ul rTJ
i~!ja
?(~-i=:
"tl ,., CD -<
;0 > so r::
o 6 Z
;;j z'"
g fh
~
~
,.,
I
+
\
\
--.l
m
><
zen
O~
cC)
m:a
Oc::
r-Z
)>~
~)>
0-<
Cr-
-m
enZ
....C)
)>....
Z:::J:
o
mil
en."..
CD
o
-.
.
Section 4
Alternatives Analysis
On the west end of the airport, this alternative would impact the East Martello Battery Bunker. This
bunker, which is in extremely poor condition, is a World War IT era facility that protrudes
approximately 20 feet from the surrounding ground. Because this facility is eligible for listing on the
National Register of Historic Places, additional study of the facility would be required to evaluate
options for constructing a standard safety area in this location.
The estimated construction cost for a runway safety area that meets FAA standards is $7.7 million
exclusive of land acquisition and environmental mitigation costs.
4.2.3 AIRFIELD AL TERNA TIVES 3 THROUGH SA
Five airfield alternatives examined a series of extensions to the east and west end of the existing
runway. These alternatives attempted to provide runway extensions that would primarily remain
within the area created by the establishment of a standard runway safety area as well as within the
existing airport property boundary. The extensions also attempted to minimize impacts to the salt
ponds by modifying the proposed parallel taxiway to serve the proposed runway extensions.
Alternatives 3 through 5A are depicted in Figures 4.6 through 4.10. Several conclusions can be
drawn from these alternatives and are listed below:
· Proposed runway extensions would increase the takeoff distance only for
departures in the other direction. In other words, an extension on the west end of
the runway, such as proposed by Alternative 3, would only increase takeoff
distance available for departures to the east. This is because the proposed runway
extension could not be considered as useable runway for departures to the west.
Takeoff calculations must provide for a full safety area beyond the end of useable
runway when using the declared distances concept. Thus, although the runway
extension would provide additional pavement, the additional pavement could not
be considered in takeoff calculations because it is assumed to be safety area.
· Proposed runway extensions would not change the location where aircraft land on
the runway for any alternatives considered. This is because the location of the
landing thresholds (i.e., a marked location on the runway where an aircraft can
land on the runway) would not change in any alternative. Thus, landing aircraft
would not be lower when passing over surrounding land uses than they are with
the existing runway.
· Extensions on both ends would be needed to provide a reasonable balance
between takeoff lengths available in each direction. This is because airlines need
to have a reasonable expectation of the carrying capability of aircraft operations
at the airport. For example, if one runway end were significantly shorter than the
other, the airline would have to plan its operation for the shorter of the two
runways. Otherwise the airline could be is a situation where they would have to
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PIan\S_ 4\S_ 4.ooc
4-3
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 4
Alternatives Analysis
deny boarding to passengers if the shorter runway end was being used on a
particular day.
. Noise contours were generated for each of the alternatives on the basis of aircraft
operations in 2000. The figures for each alternative presents the noise contour
for the existing runway and the noise contour that would result with
implementation of the proposed runway extensions. In general, most of the noise
contours are only affected by proposed extensions to the west end of the runway.
This is because approximately 95 percent of all operations takeoff and land to
the east. Consequently, proposed extensions on the east end of the runway do not
have much of affect on the noise contour.
None of these alternatives provide the recommended runway length of 5,800 feet. However, they do
answer a series of "what if' questions regarding the capabilities that could be provided by
constructing shorter extensions on each end of the existing runway. The quantities of wetlands
impacted by each alternative, as well as each alternative's conceptual construction cost, is presented
in Table 4.1.
TABLE 4.1
COMPARISON OF AIRFIELD ALTERNATIVES
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
1 0 $0.0
2 31 $7.7
3 33.2 $9.1
3A 33.8 $9.3
4 32.5 $9.1
5 34.7 $10.0
5A 35.3 $10.1
5B 37.8 $10.4
6 36.2 $10.8
Source: URS, 2002.
4.2.4 AIRFIELD ALTERNATIVE 5B - RUNWAY EXTENSIONS AND SHIFT OF EAST RUNWAY
SAFETY AREA
Alternative 5B is depicted in Figure 4.11. This alternative proposes an extension of 750 feet on the
west end of the runway and an extension of 500 feet on the east end of the runway. In this regard, it
is the same as Alternative 5A. However, Alternative 5B proposes one important difference that
would increase the available runway length for takeoffs to the east. This change consists of shifting,
or extending, the runway safety area beyond the east end of the runway an additional 250 feet. By
extending the runway safety area on the east-end, an additional 250 feet of the proposed extension on
W:\126378ILKWIA Master PIan\S_ 4\S3.doc
4-4
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
J:\KEY WES1\t.lASTER PLAN UPMTE\EXHIBITS\F1G 4.11R.DWG 03/04/03 11 :01
c.n
0 I I
q~ I
- I I
m:D en I I I
0
)("T1 0
5" ...- I I
- mJ!! I I
s: CD I
... zc ~
m ~"
en ~~
CD aCD ~~
... 0.'< >2: ~ ~ 0 ~~~~f;j
"'Cl Or- 1;;0 !ti
ji) i:e o "Z ~ ~ ." Z VI ."
Z... ., III ~~~~~G')
::J _0
c:: -CD Om II'~ z '" c! ~ -< G) -t rrJ
> 8
"8. >0 z~ ~ 0 ~J:~2:;gZ
m -.- enz ;$j en ~~~~~O
CD ... &13
'0 ~~ en \11
0 \11 ~ Z Z !;:)
... ~ r- ~~>-t::(
- -< -< ;0 CD
C'nrfi r- Z ." ." ~ S;; c:
Z Q ;0;0 I; Z
Q fIl o 0 - r'1
... en fIl 0 M M Z
0J me,.) 8 o 0 ~
o ~ ~ ~
.C Z ~ a ~ ~
0>:;0 C a c N N
C ;0 ~
rrI ;0 0
~ r'1
s:
z
o
... Z
CD C)
o 0
~ Vi
~
z
o
I'T1
~
"
I'T1
... 0
CD ~
9 0
. en
~
z
o
I'T1
s:
z
o
Z
!'-C)
ODO
o _
~~
>
Z
~
~
"
I'T1
!.71~
VI
952
. VI
~
Z
o
I'T1
l
-- '.
.......
......
c.n
o~ I
.. -
m::xJ I I
5" )<:!! I I I
-tm
- m'- I I
CD Ol I I
3: ~ zC 0 I
II> :J" 0
<I> !:a~
CD aCD
... c5" '< 0'-
"'C ~ r:i ~~~rT1~r
ji; i=: z-t ~ ~ ~ "U"Uz~;grt1
::I m ~~ ~~~~~G)
c: -CD 0::xJ ~~I z '"
"0 >0 >~ ~ 8 -< C) -l rt1
0. zz J;iO Al2V1>"UZ
II> -.- o "z ~~
~ .. VI ;$; Ol > - ~
CD "0 ~~ -0 ~~9~!l1O
0 .> Ol U1
~ II J;i U1 0 Z ~ !:a
- OlZ \' _.~ o Z ~>>-l~
cnrfi - ,--- z ,.... -< -< ~ a:J
~r:l :=---r::f::::". - ,.... Z "U"U~s;;c
-t 1\ I ~'- - :-=~---rll Z Q ~ ~ 5 Z
rT1 ~---- Q Iil o 0 - rT1
-l --
0J (,.) \ \ Iil 0 iTl iTl ~
m~ I I \: j o 0 VI
o ~ :::l :::l
.c Z I \ ~ g ~ ~
""-J;::o C 0>
JT1 8 \ \ L____], 8 ~ N N
o ~
~ ~ rT1
J:\KEY WES1\IoIASTER PlAN UPDATE\EXHIBITS\F1G 4.7R.DWG 03/04/03 11 :08
s:
z
c
Z
!'- (j')
g: C
.... -
. (I)
-l
>
Z
(')
I'T1
~
^
I'T1
o
~ ~
9 S2
(I)
~
Z
(')
I'T1
s:
z
c
Z
!'-(j')
CD c
o _
~~
>
Z
(')
I'T1
~
^
I'T1
9'~
(]I
~ S2
. (I)
~
Z
(')
I'T1
J:\KEY WES1\MASTER PlAN UPDATE\EXHIBITS\F1G 4.8R.DWG 03/04/03 11:08
<II
0 I
Q:. I I
- I I I
m:O
><:!! en
5' -1m 8 I I
- I I
3: CD mr- I
~ ZC
II> ="
U> se:.
- aCD ~
CD ~ ~ 0 ~~~~r
-. C)"'< ~~
'"tJ Or- ~ ~ III "z (/)'8 ITI
ii> i~ Z-I ~~ ~~~~~G)
::J Z 1'0>
-5 -CD Om o "Z ~ 8 22-(C)-i1Tl
Q. >(1) z~ II'~ ~ en ill ~~;gZ
II> -.- ~~~~!60
a;- ~ en (II
"C m:' enz (II 0 Z Z ~ rT1
0 ~r:l o z ~~~-i~
~ :.:1 z r- -( -( aJ
- rT1 r- z " " ~ s; c
~~ -i Z Q ~ ~ 5 Z
~ ~ o 0 _ rT1
\ r;l r;l ~
[1] m'" rT1 0 o 0 (/)
en o 0 ::l ::l
o Z ~ ~
Z 0 ~ g
.C 0
00:;:0 C g ~ N N
J'TI ~ ~ ~
rT1 rT1
s:
z
o
Z
~ c;')
Ql
o 0
~ Vi
>
z
n
r'1
~
r'1
01 0
(., ~
9 2
. (J)
>
z
n
r'1
'J,
- I \
\ I i
LJ I.
(\111
~ 1 /
~ I I .
:IE I i I
:( : ~
(/) T/ I
~ f i
~ I' .
~ Ii !
> II I
I' .
I, !
I I
II .
II I
II i
I, i '
4
.II
)1'
\ 1\
I I /
I 1_ ,
I/d
I I
/ I ,
J ,
I ..~
s:
z
o
Z
.flI> c;')
Co 0
o _
~~
>
z
~
>
;:IIi;
r'1
.flI> 0
. ~
Ql
92
. (J)
>
z
n
r'1
J:\I<EY WES1\
MASTER PLAN UPDA
TE\EXHIBITS\F1G
4.9R.DWG
5"
-
CD
~ ...
en ;:,..
..0)-"
~ _ CD
3! Cr '<
! i:E
.a: - CD
i" > (I)
... -.....
CD -a
o
...
-
0J
~C')
coC
;;0
IT1
(J'I
o
o
..)>
m-
)<=
-I!!
mm
Z~
(/)0
0)>
Z~
-I
Om
z=
z
I:D)>
0-1
....-
:c~
m(J'l
z
o
(/)
~
o
Z
~ G')
g 52
. (J)
>
z
()
fTI
03/04/03 11
:17
~
o
Z
~G')
00
o 0
.... -
. (J)
>
z
g
>
"
fTI
E ~
g 0
. en
>
z
()
fTI
0>
8
o "z
>
"
fTI
o
E~
go
. en
>
z
g
! ! : I I I
I I I i I
: I I I I II
I I I I: I
~ ~ c ~ ;0
~~~"tl~~~r
~~;o~~~"tlfTl
::f ~~~t5~G)
~ IT1:J:Vl -ifTl
0>0> ;o;o>~;gZ
0101 c:c:i:l;Oo
c~~~~~"tlO
~,...>>>-i!il
Z -<-<;otD~
~Q;g;g~C:C
I(l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
8 ~ g g ~
~ g ~ ~
;0 ;0 ~ ~
IT1 IT1
J:\KEY WESl\
t.4ASTER PLAN UPDATrt
,'~ ,EXHIBI1S\F1G
4. 1 OR.DWG
5"
-
~ (1)
II> ~
en :::::I..
- ID""
~ _(1)
::2 c)" '<
!!l :::::1<:
c: e!.-<
"&. >~
a ~....
<D "0
o
~
-
[ill.,.,
.G)
.....c
0::0
rT1
.....CII
ClIO
Qo~
.. -
mm::D
><><!!
-I-Im
mmr-
zzC
~(I)~
00r-
zz-l
m
OO::D
zzz
~m~
(I)~<
-I~m
mmCII
zz~
CC
03/04/03
11:23
):
z
o
Z
~ C)
9 !2
. (I)
~
z
()
IT!
~
^
IT!
UI 0
c.. ~
9 0
. u;
~
z
~
(l)
o
o
o .z
):
z
o
Z
~ C)
Q)
00
... -
. (I)
~
z
()
IT!
~
^
IT!
o
~~
~o
. en
~
z
()
IT!
! ! l I I I
I I Ii,
: I I I I I,
I I I I: I
~ ~ 0 > :ll
~?OIll~C~~r
z ?O:ll Z (J) :ll ...,.,
~ ~ c! ~ ~ ~ ~ '"
<0 :llo-<C>-iG")
r'1 r'1:I: (J) IT1
(l)(l):ll:ll~~;gZ
OI01CC,;j:ll!il
o~~~=<~"'o
~r->>>-i:ll
ZZ -<-<~lJl=<
120 ;g;g>CC:
(J)~OO EiZ
r'1 M M Z '"
~ ~ g g Bl
g g ~ ~
:ll :ll !:l !:l
Z Z
r'1 r'1
J:\KEY WEST\MASTER PLJ,N UPDllTE\EXHIBITS\F1G 4.11 R.DWG 03/04/03 11 :29
5"
-
CD
:s:::: ...
~ ::s"
CD a CD
; 0.'<
! i =e
~ -CD
Q. :!:!!.
~ ...
CD "C
o
...
-
::!J
~G)
:....C
......:;0
fT1
:u
:uc:
C:Z:J>
Z~_
~:J>:3:J
:J>-<!!
-<mJ!!
en><O
:J>....:J>
"T1~r-
men....
....-m
-<O:3:J
:J>Zz
:3:Jen:J>
m:J>....
:J>z~
enO
::Cmc.n
;;:J>m
....en
....
I
I
I > :;
z ^
:; e rr1
> ^ z (JIO
Z rr1 (JI (i) bJ~
e be
~ Z (JI 0 (JI _ 92
(i) ~ ~~
CD ~ . (/)
0 e 0 c > :;
..... en ..... z
en (') z
:; :; rr1 (')
Z rr1
~ Z
(')
1"1
'"
o
o
l
,
....... .......,
'--
~
~~
>;!;
:~
II'~
"'z
8...
',.,
,.,
-l
I, "" )l~
;g~ II" -- ~
~~ \ I r~::'-~__- ~;:::::: ~II- -
gc! I I / --....::: - - , \
~~ II 1/ I , \: I
N::O \ / V' I
~~ I I / ,
,.,~ , / , ,
~\ Lf---- I
, I X,
, / ' ,
1\\/ /',!
, / , ,
I \L__________1.._J/
\ ' I /,
\ '
/
o "z
'"
o
o
! I
i i
I I
I I
I
~ ~
~ ?O
z '"
> 0
:::l 8
;;; '"
m l.7l
l.7l 0
o z
Z r-
r- Z
Z Q
Q I<l
I<l 8
8 z
Z -l
g ~
::0
~~~~~r
~;g~Vl"tJrrl
~~>~!ilG)
Co-<C'l-lrrl
~:I:Vl;!!:;gZ
~~~~SilO
z Z -< ::0 ,.,
~~>-l~
-< -< ::0 III
"tJ "tJ ~ ~ c:
::0::0 6 Z
o 0 -,.,
iT1 iT1 t5
g g Vl
~ ~
N N
~ ~
,., ,.,
Section 4
Alternatives Analysis
the east end could be considered in takeoff and landing calculations. This would provide 5,800 feet
for takeoffs to the east and 5,051 feet for landings to the east using the declared distances concept.
Limitations of this alternative include the fact the takeoff distance for departures to the west would
be restricted to 5,300 feet and landing distances to the west would remain the same as existing 4,801
feet. In addition, the extension of the runway safety area to the east would entail additional impacts
to wetlands and mangroves. By extending the runway safety area by 250 feet, the amount of
wetlands and mangroves impacted would increase to 37.8 acres an increase of 2.5 acres over
Alternative 5A.
With respect to noise impacts, Alternative 5B would shift the 65DNL noise contour to the west as
depicted in Figure 4.11. However, no noise sensitive land uses would be encompassed by the noise
contour.
The preliminary construction cost for Alternative 5B is $10.4 million.
4.2.5 AIRFIELD ALTERNATIVE 6 -750' EXTENSION ON WEST END, 1,050' EXTENSION ON
EAST END
Alternative 6, depicted in Figure 4.12, proposes an extension of 750 feet on the west end of the
runway and an extension of 1,050 feet on the east end of the runway. As shown in the figure, the
proposed extension on the east end of the runway would not have a parallel taxiway. That is because
such a taxiway could not be constructed without the acquisition of adjoining land that is currently
occupied by a hotel. Therefore, a turnaround is provided at the east end of the runway that would
allow aircraft to taxi on the runway to the east end and then turnaround for departures to the west.
The primary advantage of Alternative 6 is it is the only alternative that would provide the
recommended length of 5,800 feet for takeoffs in both directions. Landing distances would be 5,051
to the east and 4,801 to the west. The primary disadvantage of this alternative is the lack of a parallel
taxiway on the east end of the runway. This would necessitate that aircraft taxi on an active runway
which is undesirable and becomes even more significant when considering the fact that air traffic
control services are not available 24-hours a day.
Alternative 6 would impact 36.2 acres of wetlands, the second most of any of the alternatives
evaluated. Noise impacts associated with Alternative 6, in terms ofthe 65 DNL noise contour, would
be similar to Alternatives 5A and 5B. However, on a single event basis Alternative 6 would have
greater impacts due to the proximity of the extended east-end of the runway to adjacent hotels.
The preliminary construction cost of Alternative 6 is $10.8 million.
W:\12637817_KWIA Master PIan\S_ 4\S3.doc
4-5
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 4 Alternatives Analysis
4.2.6 PREFERRED AIRFIELD AL TERNA TIVE
An evaluation matrix was prepared to assist in the selection of a preferred airfield alternative. The
matrix compares the operational, environmental and financial factors associated with each airfield
alternative. The matrix is presented in Table 4.2.
TABLE 4.2
AIRFIELD ALTERNATIVES EV ALUA TION MATRIX
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
1 4,801 25 21 0 $0.0
2 4,801 25 21 31 $7.7
3 5,301 8 10 33.2 $9.1
3A 5,551 1 6 33.8 $9.3
4 4,801 25 21 32.5 $9.1
5 5,301 8 10 34.7 $10.0
5A 5,551 1 6 35.3 $10.1
5B* 5,801 0 1 37.8 $10.4
6 5,801 0 1 36.2 $10.8
Source: URS, 2002.
Notes:
* A proposed shift of the Runway 27 runway safety area by 250 feet would increase takeoff length on
Runway 9 to 5,801 feet.
** Construction cost estimates do not include environmental mitigation.
1) Landing lengths will remain the same as existing (4,801 feet) under all alternatives.
2) The number of seats blocked is based upon a temperature of 89 degrees Fahrenheit.
A few conclusions can be reached when reviewing the matrix. First, with respect to operational
factors, alternatives that increase runway length by as little as 500 feet provide significant reduction
in payload penalties. Alternative 3, which provides an extension of 500 feet on the west end of the
runway, would reduce payloads penalties by 68 percent for the CRJ -700 (70 seat) regional jet and by
52 percent for the CRJ - 200 (50-seat) regional jet. Runway extensions that provide additional runway
length further reduce payload penalties, but 5,800 feet is required to essentially eliminate payload
penalties for the types of regional jet operations evaluated.
With respect to the issue of environmental factors, the evaluation matrix reveals that impacts to salt
ponds and wetlands are primarily driven by the construction of a standard runway safety area, not the
runway extensions. This can be observed by comparing Alternatives 2 and 3. Alternative 2 would
W:\l2637817 _KWIA Master PIan\S_ 4\S_ 4.doc
4-6
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
J:\KEY WEST\lAASTER PlAN UPDATE\EXHIBITS\FKl 4.12R.DWG 03/04/03 11 :33
5:
z
o
Z
~ C)
01 0
o _
~ (J)
>
Z
o
fT1
>
^
fT1
CJl 0
bl ~
~ Q
. (J)
>
Z
o
fT1
~
o
Z
CJl C)
00
CJl _
~~
>
Z
o
fT1
>
^
fT1
CJl 0
. ~
01
g Q
. (J)
>
Z
o
fT1
I
,
I
'" l
0
0
- "-
C)
::0 ---
en2g
():t:
>-
f;:j() o "Z
.. en
-()
II'~
"'2
0
q~
~
'"
0
0
...
.. ......
Oc.n I
c.n
oq~ I I
.. - -0>
mm:::o ::0-0 I I I
0' I
5" ><><:!! M::O
()o I I
........m :::t>
- ~Q I I
3: CD mmr- I
... ZZC ::0
II> =" NC:
(j) cn!a~ oz
- eta> z~
~ 0.'< 1T1> ~ ~ 0 >::OIT1>r
" 50r- ~ IT1 ~~~~('TI
i:e ~ ?V -0
ii> ZZ.... > g~~!6G)
~ ::0
m Z N c!
c: -a> ~ 8 Q -< C) ~ ('TI
"0 >0 00:::0 ::0
Co IT1 ~2:;gz
~ -.- zZz ~ Ol i~~~o
... ::0
CD "C ~ Ol U1 c:
0 U1 0 Z
... itjm.... o z ~ ~?V~~
- ~- z r- -<
cncnrfi r- Z -0 IT1 ~ C
z Q -0 ~ > !2 ~
::0
...."" Q ~ 0 ~ z
.Jlo.:::!J ~ () ~ C)
me>> en
() ~ :::t ::l
.C> mz ~ g ~ ~
.....c z,=, g ::0
~:;:o ~ N
'=' 0
ITI ::0 Z
IT1 IT1
Section 4
Alternatives Analysis
cause impacts to approximately 31 acres, yet it proposes no runway extension. Alternative 3, which
proposes the construction of a 500-foot runway extension, would cause impacts to approximately
33.2 acres, just 2.2 acres more than Alternative 2. Thus, 93 percent of the impact to ponds and
mangroves in Alternative 3 is caused by the construction of the runway safety area and 7 percent of
the impact is caused by the runway extension. Similar ratios occur for the other alternatives that
propose runway extensions.
With respect to the issue of financial factors, the evaluation matrix reveals that costs, like
environmental impacts, are driven primarily by the construction of a standard runway safety area, not
the runway extensions. Roughly 80 percent of the cost for the alternatives that propose runway
extensions is attributable the construction of the safety area, while the remaining 20 percent is
attributable to the construction of a runway extension.
Airfield alternatives were initially presented to the master plan update Advisory Committee on
February 28, 2002. The airfield alternatives were again presented to the Advisory Committee on
January 30,2003 for the purpose of selecting a preferred alternative. A wide-ranging discussion
occurred at the meeting concerning the merits of airfield alternatives and the potential impacts to
surrounding wetlands, salt ponds, and mangroves. It was noted that a feasibility study for the
construction of a standard runway safety area was being conducted to define the possibilities for
mitigating impacts to the surrounding environment. Thus, the selection of the preferred alternative
was predicated on the assumption that the results of feasibility study will enable the FAA to make a
decision that the construction of a standard runway safety area at the airport is feasible. If the FAA
determines that the construction of a standard runway safety area is not feasible, the selection of a
preferred airfield alternative will have to be revised.
Seven members of the Advisory Committee indicated a preference for Alternative 5B, five members
indicated a preference for Alternative 1, and four members indicated a preference for Alternative 3A.
On the basis of those results, Alternative 5B was included as the preferred alternative.
4.3 TERMINAL AREA CONCEPTS
In addition to development alternatives for the airfield, the master plan update also examined
methods of providing additional terminal area facilities. As noted in the preceding section, the
existing passenger terminal has severe deficiencies that must be addressed during the study period in
order to accommodate projected levels of passengers in a safe and efficient manner. In addition, the
demand capacity analysis indicated demand would occur for additional automobile parking during
the study period.
Unlike the alternatives that were developed for the airfield, which are fairly specific in terms of
runway length and width, methods of providing improvements to the terminal area are less specific
and broader in scope. Thus, the term "concept" has been substituted in lieu of "alternative". This
reflects the fact that any of these concepts would require further evaluation and would be subject to
revision during any subsequent design process.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PIan\S3\S_ 4.doc
4-7
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 4
Alternatives Analysis
Before discussing the concepts developed, it is important to recognize that the locations where new
terminal fac~lities could be considered is fairly small and is constrained by a number of existing
facilities. These facilities include those listed below by direction from the existing passenger
terminal:
. To the west - the new ARFF station opened in 2001.
. To the east - the PIS building which was opened in 1997.
. To the north - the aircraft ramp which is critical to the operation of the airport
and cannot be reduced in size.
. To the south - the East Martello Museum which is listed on the National Register
of Historic Places.
The area left for consideration of new terminal facilities is fairly small and requires that concepts
propose the reconstruction of facilities in their current location. This means that significant
disruption to existing operations would be required with nearly all concepts. However, the degree of
disruption would vary considerably between concepts.
The following paragraphs present a series of concepts that were developed for the terminal area. The
primary focus of these concepts is the provision for the construction of a new passenger terminal to
accommodate projected levels of future passengers.
4.3.1 TERMINAL CONCEPT A
As shown in Figure 4.13, Concept A consists of the construction of a new passenger terminal in the
same place as the existing passenger terminal and using all space between the existing ARFF station
and the F.I.S. Building. This terminal would provide approximately 39,000 square feet of space on
the first floor and the balance of the required space, approximately 10,000 square feet on the second
floor.
According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Rate Map of Monroe
County, the area where the terminal would be constructed is located in a coastal flood zone with
velocity hazard (i.e., wave action) an~ has a base elevation of 10. This means that a building in this
location must be elevated such that its lowest supporting floor beam is clear of the base elevation. To
meet this requirement, the terminal would have to be elevated. A typical cross section for Concept A
is shown in Figure 4.14.
As the cross section indicates, the first floor would have a finished floor elevation of 15 feet. This
would provide approximately 7.5 feet of clearance under the building that would allow for
unrestricted work area for airline employees and baggage carts and would keep the building clear of
the base flood elevation.
W:\12637817_KWIA Master PIanIS_ 4\S_ 4.doc
4-8
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
J:\KEY WES1\MASTER PLAN UPDA1E\EXHIBrTS\F1G 4.13R.DWG 03/04/03 11:52
I I \_/
I I I
I I I II
I I I
I I I
J:\KEY WES'T\MASlER PLAN UPDATE\EXHIBllS\F1G 4.14.DWG 10/23/02 14:12
'"'0
)>
:::0
2S
z
G')
G')
)>
:::0
)>
G')
,."
:::0
o
)>
c
~
-<
:::0
,."
r
o
(")
)>
iT1
c
iT1
:::0
3':
z
)>
r
~ ~ :::0
.... en :::J 0
m N ,.... C.
O::a 0 0
5" ." ."
- ::a I: ."
CD r
3: ... OZ " 0 r '"'0
II> ::I" A:J 0 )>
U> (1):':- > 0 ,."
CD aCD "'0 0 '"'0
... c)"'< (l)r- :I: :::0 )>
"tJ ('5 :::0 ^ :::0
iI> i:E (1)0 0
::> Vl ,."
(') ,."
~ -CD mo > 0 r ,." Z
>(1) oz M . r r
Q. .
a -.-
... ....(") z ~
CD "'C ~
0 -m ~ Con Con
... 0"'0 co ~
- z.... ITI
-f
:.:-
IT(] N
0
.C)
......c
.Jl.;o
rrl
Section 4
Alternatives Analysis
In order to provide sufficient space between the terminal and the roadway curb, this alternative
proposes that the existing road in front of the terminal be shifted approximately 10 feet to the south.
This shift would provide adequate space for passengers to load and unload from vehicles.
The alternative also proposes the construction of a parking garage that would provide one elevated
level of parking. This garage would provide approximately 620 parking spaces that would
accommodate projected demand. Access to and from the second level of the garage would be via
ramps located at the south end of the garage.
The primary advantage of this concept is that it maximizes use of existing space and essentially
maintains each terminal function in its current location. Its primary disadvantages would be the
tremendous disruption to the passengers and tenants in the existing terminal during the construction
process and the fact that vertical elevation changes via stairs and ramps would be required for all
passengers and employees leaving and entering the terminal.
As depicted in Figure 4.14, passengers arriving at the terminal curb would have to use both stairs and
ramps or elevators and escalators to enter the building. This is undesirable from a passenger
convenience point of view and, in the case of elevators or escalators, a cost-to-operate point of view,
because the operation of escalators and elevators can be expensive over the long run. This factor
takes on added significance in a semi -tropical climate. The conceptual construction cost estimate for
Concept A is $23.5 million.
4.3.2 TERMINAL CONCEPT B
Concept B, shown in Figure 4.15, is similar to Concept A except for one important difference.
Concept B proposes the construction of an elevated roadway in front of the terminal. This would
allow for direct access from the second level of parking garage, across the roadway and into the
terminal.
A cross section of Concept B is provided in Figure 4.16. As the figure indicates, no change of
elevation would be required for access from the roadway to the terminal. This would provide a
significant improvement in convenience for the majority of passengers. While there would still be
some passengers who park at the lower level of the parking garage and would be required to make a
vertical transfer, the majority of passengers would not.
The primary advantage of Concept B is the reduction of vertical transfers and the improved
passenger service as well as the reduced cost -to-operate associated with fewer vertical transfers. The
primary disadvantage of the concept is the high cost associated with the construction of an elevated
roadway.
Conceptual cost estimates for the elevated roadway depicted in Concept A are in the range of $3.5
million. This is a significant investment for a small airport. The conceptual cost estimate for
construction of Concept B is $26.7 million.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PIan\S3\S_ 4.doc
4-9
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 4 Alternatives Analysis
4.3.3 TERMINAL CONCEPT C
Concept C proposes the construction of a new passenger terminal directly in front of the existing
terminal as shown in Figure 4.17. Constructing the terminal in this location would allow for a larger
amount of space to be constructed on the first floor because the existing ARFF station and the FrS
building would no longer limit the west and east boundary of the site. This concept also proposes the
construction of an elevated roadway in front of the terminal to minimize vertical transfers of
passengers.
Because this concept consumes a substantial portion of the area where a parking garage is proposed
for Concepts A and B, this concept proposes a substantially different arrangement for providing
parking facilities. This concept proposes the construction a small elevated parking deck directly in
front of the terminal. This parking ramp would provide some short-term parking and/or some spaces
for rental car. Long-term parking and the bulk of rental car ready and rental car storage parking
would be provided in a new two level parking garage in the area occupied by rental car storage lots
and the department of Public Works. Access to this new garage could be provided via an elevated
walkway from the terminal.
The primary advantage of this concept is that unlike Concepts A and B it would not require
construction in the same location as the existing facility and therefore would reduce construction
phasing problems and impacts to operations. However, the location of the proposed terminal would
still have severe impacts upon existing access roadway and would require temporary walkways to the
existing terminal.
The primary disadvantage of this concept is the overall use of land. First, the area occupied by the
existing terminal would be of limited use because no aircraft would be able to park in this area.
Consequently, this area would amount to excess and unusable ramp space. Second, this concept
requires the use of land that is currently occupied by the rental car for the construction of the primary
parking garage.
The conceptual cost estimate for construction of Concept Cis $27.6 million. Thus, Concept C is
significantly more expensive than the two preceding concepts.
4.3.4 TERMINAL CONCEPT D
In the course of developing terminal concepts it became obvious that construction phasing and
impacts to existing operations was a significant issue. Concept D was developed to address these
issues. As shown in Figure 4.18, Concept D proposes the construction of a new passenger terminal
on the south side of the existing access road with an elevated walkway across the existing roadway to
a new concourse. This concept would allow the new terminal to be constructed with minimal
impacts to the existing terminal or access road. The construction of the new concourse could be
phased to minimize impacts to the existing terminal.
W:112637817_KWIA Master PIan\S_ 4\5_ 4.doc
4-10
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
J:\KEY WES1\MASTER PLAN UPDATE\EXHIBITS\F1G 4.15R.DWG 03/04/03 11:59
I I II
J I
I { I
I { I
{ { I
{ { I
{ { I
{ { {
I I J
I I I
I I I
J I I
J I I
I { I
I I I
I { { ~ >
I I J c
{ I ~ a
( I "U
I I ~ >
Al
I I ^
I I ~ Z
I I G)
I I :;:
J:\KEY WEST\MASTER PLAN UPDAlE\EXHIBITS\F1G 4.18.DWG 10/23/02 14:13
..... ..... '" ;0
m en ::s 0
5' O=el '" ,..... C-
O 0
- =ell!
3: CD ""T'1 ""T'1 ""T'1
... Oz r-
~ =" Q r-
en (I)~ 0 -u
tD aCD ::0 0 >
... (I)~ > 0 rrl
S.'< -0 0
'" :I: ;0 > -u
iiJ i=: (1)0 ('; ;0 ;0
= ^
c: -CD mo 1Il rrl 0
"0 >0 (") rrl
c. Oz > 0 r rrl :z
e -.- I:;:j r-
... -10 r-
CD "C .
-m z .
0 .....
... 0"'0 M 01 '" 01
- Z-l (0
I'T1 ~
-l
aI
[ill '"
.G')
~c 0
0):;0
rr1
-u
>
;0
^
:z
G')
G')
>
;0
>
G')
rrl
;0 rrl
o r-
> rrl
o ~
~ rr1
~ 0
rr1
;0
s:
:z
>
r-
J:\KEY WES1\MAST!R PlAN UPDA'TE\
EXHIBITS\FIC 4. 17R DWG
. 03/04/03
I T I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I J I
J J I
I J J
/ / I
/ I J
I / /
I I /
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I /
I
I
I
I
r 18
C)1.t1l
;0 .., 0
~
:t:
n
~
z
;:R
~
U 8
.
5"
-
s::: (1)
D> ""'
~ i ~
CD
.., !:!: CD
:2 0'<
~ i.~
"&. > g:
!. ~.....
CD "C
o
""'
L--
olltz
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I f
I I
I ,
I I
, I
I
I
I
I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I 1
\ \
I I
\ \
\ \
\ \
, \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
>
~
~
<J
C
<J
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
I
-
[ill:!J
.G')
~c
......:::0
ITI I
~
~
F=
,
I
I
l
~ \
~
m
~
I:
Z
~
....
o
o
z
o
m
"tJ
~
o
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
-
I
,
,
r
13:08
r
,
,
,
,~
~
~
~
~
~
lSl
ct
~
~
;0
r
~
2:-
~
.,,::1
~~
~##J ~ lOt
I /1 L \ /~
111 ',T(. '-j)
I ~ rLlLllJ) == Q- 0
~ lfTTTTU ~ ~j Q
I rLillLn =::;"'/10
t= 0 IJlTW --' olA
t-- ~ ,./'>
~ ~~
\'illriiiH",:mlllilfiii!::::::
::'f7'. i- , ,,,,., mTI
i! l~iUi ;, : :i:liimiii;iiiliii ~
~ !ffil;"":i~~"",II- -, ,,,"""" .!!I!I!i!i ~
~ I!iiiiti~;:e-IIIII: I l!!::ii:it:1 !
;0 ffi~::::'H*~#Ht.tJ.~: - :r,t"::. . :~ ~ :. :. .tln.::. I
~ 'ii1!m::::i:imi t#,::'!f: = ~::: : i~~ ini :~:ii: :
~ I ii::::::;!rt*~~~' r= ~ : :~. ~ :: :: :!:D.:::: I
iilimi:::ii8i ~!i"n!f: - ::::-'::: : ::i<Hnni.iim :
Rh::::::lifu~~:C= ;~.:: : :::~JE!:::~:::: I
I ;r:tt:~::i:i:;U,ij.: w~:r:J:;~~: _ ::.:' '.;' : in~ ~;:~ !~:l:! I
~[::':'H~mm~~- ... :.: ':!i~::'::I.::::: I
~~111W18it: ir~HB: >--- :.;:~< 11!i:IWI!!':: ~ 11~ ! :.:: !lil I
l:i II ~,::)iillt. !f:*~:\::::~1f:*: - :r;r,;.;':' : ,::: .:::: ,:: : .::::;:: I
~~::!:!,:.....' ~! I i(":::: :i::~:; :':!: !:,:,::!:i! I
i:U:::iii *4l~ - ~:::' , ~'i' iiiiiiiii' ~ c
~;:::.::!~: titi::l;';l##f >--- .. . :.: : :m~:::' :~..:.
1!1!!!!illl;~ :5:::: I ill~:; I! i~!!li
I "",.,..."w ~~ ,.,' .m~. ,. .' .1,,',
i!!!II!III~~: iii,J!:! ! iiil iii~!lilli" ~:' ~ l ~ ~
"""""iii~'''',:~- ,,''''''', ' "I"" ,.J,M,DlI
~""""~ ;miiii~~ 1!lli !m~:lllllillllllill )
,- _ +- ;:iHti - J I) r- 0
_ _ -f- H'i:I;~~;;;; - H" I - - '---"'1-<
I- - - -- :,::'::: - ::' I
_ _ -+- ::::;li' -l"
_ _---_ =~I:;i. -':ll~ i? I i
-r,::.HUt:: _:: ~ / / (
~ == =~m:ii:i--J i: ,v '- I
__ _ ::::::1 -:: >
~ --'_ -IJniijj , >i
~ ~ _t::, I,i ~
\ J umlllll~~i' l/,r~ cI
~ , 7~ ".~~~-
/...- ~ _______ :1' ," \
~ ~. 12 .
~___ 1"\'S-o\':) 0 !: ..~ \
\ ~ ~~.:\''''ii;i'iiii:iii::niiii!!lmlllll'';;I!!iili!III1;;;;1mil'!iii1i\
\ r ..., "."" l'"'' ",."".4!ll.,."".",lm"'" ' ,
~'i!:::<'iW :ii!iiHi!""",'i!i;;!i"""'" ~ \ ~ ~::I
.,.".".." .".,.., _,J% ~ ~
.' . . '.' . .' ..,.., ---- ' ~
.i"""..';....,.. ~ . "-
\\'''' ~ ~~ V
\ "V' " \ ~ d \
\,
I
,
I
,
,
,
,
--
-/..:r-.-
C)
>
~",
;0>
-<~
>1:
z>
0;0
~~
UlO
~
I:
~
~
I
,
,
~
../
II
r-----
o
o
-
Qi;'
Ql"
o
"U"U
~1ij
;>:;C
(')
<
.~
r)
>
(
C)
>."
;00
0;0
",-1
Z
\.__/
I
r8 / >
k---- :/"': c:
l..::: :/"': d
- ~ ~
- ~ ~
~~
l:::::: /-'"'
x f[
==
~
---'l-\
---1
-
~
==-0
"-J IIIlT
;a
<~
D>~
?~
-II:
g
J~
;0
"U
~
-I
.
I
~
')
^
5.oa-
,;;:;,
...
I
>
"U
;0
~
!
~
^ L
~
~
I
,-, ~
L- .....J_._._._.
(
~
I~
8
",
X
"U
>
;0
;>:;
z
Cl
+
-
J:\KEY WEST\MASTER PlAN UPDATE\EXHIBITS\F1G 4.18R.DWG
I
f
I
I
I
I
J
I
I
f
I
I
I
I
I
f
f
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
J
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
I
I
f
I
f
I
I
I
I
I
8
~
;!g
J:
n
Ul
o
o"z
03/04/03
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
f I
I I
I f
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I f
I I
I I
I I
I f
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
/ I
I I
I I
I I
f f
I I
I I
I f
I I
I I
I
I
f
I
f
I
I
f
I
I
f
I
I
I
I
f
I
I
I
f
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
\
\
\
\
f
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
>
5
~
<J
o
~
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~
z
;ll
1"1
-i
-
8
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
s::
II>
CI>
CD
...
s
-
CD
~
::::s"
etCD
(p<
i:e
-CD
>cn
-.-
~
"0
o
~
-
"'0
j;;'
~
c:
"0
C.
II>
CD
[]]"TJ
.G")
.....c
00;0
IT1
....
m
:u
I:
Z
~
r-
(')
o
z
(')
m
"a
....
C
13:115
",-,--,/
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
+
"
>>
~c
~d
C>
Section 4
Alternatives Analysis
A cross section for Concept D is shown in Figure 4.19. As shown, the walkway from the terminal to
the concourse would provide sufficient clearance for buses. This would allow traffic on Faraldo
Circle to continuing servicing the existing terminal while the new terminal is under construction.
Once the new facilities were in operation the existing terminal and roadway would be closed and
demolished. The area currently used for these facilities would become operation areas for baggage
make-up and delivery.
Access to the new terminal would be provided via an elevated access roadway as proposed in
Concepts Band C. The parking facilities would be very similar to those proposed in Concept C
except that the space available for the short-term parking deck would be less and would only
accommodate some short-term parking. The majority of parking would be provided in a proposed
parking garage east of Faraldo Circle.
The primary advantage of concept D is that it is far superior to the other concepts in terms of
construction phasing and minimizing impacts to passengers and operations. Its primary disadvantage
is its higher cost compared to the other alternatives. The conceptual cost estimate for construction of
Concept D is $33.5 million.
4.3.5 TERMINAL CONCEPT E
Concept E, shown in Figure 4.20, is basically a variation of Concept B. It changes the location of
access into the terminal area from Faraldo Circle to Stickney Road. The logic of this concept is that
it would allow for the long-term future expansion of both the proposed terminal building and the
parking garage. The ability to expand facilities in the future is typically a key factor when evaluating
concepts. With respect to the passenger terminal, this concept would allow either the expansion into
the PIS building or the demolition of this building and the expansion of the new terminal eastward at
some point in the future. Likewise, for the parking garage this concept would allow for unrestricted
expansion of the garage to the east since the ramp for the elevated roadway would be located at
Stickney Road.
The primary disadvantage of this concept relative to the others is the higher costs associated with
constructing a longer elevated roadway. The conceptual cost estimate for construction of Concept E
is $27.5 million.
4.3.6 PREFERRED TERMINAL CONCEPT
In order to evaluate the merits of each terminal concept, evaluation criteria are needed. Therefore,
the following criteria were established:
· Total Cost
· Passenger Convenience
W:\l2637817 _KWIA Master PIanIS_ 4\S_ 4.doc
4-11
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 4 Alternatives Analysis
. Safety and Security
. Construction Phasing
. Flexibility of Use
. Ability to Expand
. hnpact on Access
. hnpact on Operations
Concepts were ranked on a relative basis as to whether they were better, worse or the same as the
other alternatives for each of these criteria. The comparison is depicted in Figure 4.21. Review of
the comparison indicates that Alternative D is superior to the other alternatives in every category but
cost.
A presentation of the terminal alternatives was given to the Advisory Committee on August 20,
2002. Review of the alternatives by members of the advisory committee also revealed that the
majority of the members believed that Alternative D was superior due to the other alternatives due to
the reduced disruption that would occur to existing operations.
While Alternative D was judge to be superior, its cost presents a serious challenge to its feasibility.
Thus, in an attempt to address this and other concerns, a revised version of Alternative D was
prepared and is depicted in Figure 4.22. These revisions consisted of the following:
. The terminal was reduced from two floors to one floor.
. The size of the concourse was reduced to better meet the terminal space
requirements.
. The long-term parking garage and walkway to the terminal was eliminated.
. The location of the walkway to the concourse was shifted to minimize impacts to
the existing terminal during construction.
. The size of the elevated roadway was minimized
. A walkway and stairs to the Martello Museum was added.
As a result of all these changes, the preliminary construction cost of the alternative was reduced to
$20.6 million from $33.5 million. However, consultation with airport management indicated that the
feasibility of financing such a project was questionable considering that Monroe County typically
does not bond airport projects. Therefore, an alternate short-term solution to terminal capacity
W:\12637817_KWIA Master PIan\S3\S_ 4.OOc
4-12
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
J:\KEY YlEST\MASlER PLAN UPOATE\EXHIBITS\FIG 4.19.0WG 10/23/02 14:14
....... '" :::0
en :::s 0
,.... c.. 0
." ." ."
r
0 r -U
0
:::0 I'T1 0 0 I'T1
0 X :::0 :::0 )>
)> ^
0 en I'T1 I'T1
:::::t r I'T1
~ . r r
Z . .
G') .......
-< co (.N 01 ~
. (.N ())
01 . r
01 .
01 ^
~
-<
;;:1
:::0
~
-
Z
)>
r
I\) ("')
0
0
Z
-t c;') ("')
;:0
m > 0
0:0 "U
5' :J: c:
- :o~ (; :::0
CD
3: ... OZ 1Il en
'" =" (") 0
en en~ > I'T1
- !!tCD r-
CD enr- I'T1
... cP<
'"0 Z
~ S:e enO M
.a: -CD mo I'T1
Co >0 Oz -l
'" -.- )>
- ... -to
CD "0 I'T1
-m -u
0 0." I\) r
... 0 . :::0
- Z-t 0
.......
0 en z
"'T1
~-
.C)
......c
to:;O
ITI
T ota I Cost
Passenger Convenience
Safety and Security
Construction Phasing
Flexibility of Use
Ability to Expand
Impact on Access
Impact on Operations
G'l
5:
"'ll
:I:
(')
~
)>
~
:I:
o
Z
)>
~
"'ll
'"
<>
"'1
~. Key West
:~ International Airport
~
Cl Master Plan Update
~
)>
Terminal Concept
BCD E
Legend
_ Ranks Favorably Compared to Other Alternatives
I Ranks Neutral Compared to Other Alternatives
_ Ranks Unfavorably Compared to Other Alternatives
TERMINAL CONCEPT
EVALUATION
FIGURE:
4.21
J:\KEY WESl\MASTER PLAN UPDATE\EXHtBITS\F1G 4.20R.DWG 03/04/03 13:20
I I
I I
I I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
J I
I
I
I
I
J
J
I
I I
I I I
~ I I
I
~ I
I
~ I
I
~ I
I
~ J
CJ I I
I I
I
0 J I
I
CJ I J
I
~ I J
I I
I I
~ I
Section 4
Alternatives Analysis
constraints was also prepared. This solution consists of constructing a new elevated building
between the existing terminal and the FrS building as depicted in Figure 4.23.
The new building would be connected to the existing terminal and would eliminate the existing Cape
Air annex. Approximately 8,000 square feet of new terminal space could be provided in this area.
This would enable the airport restaurant and some other terminal functions to be relocated into the
new building. Space vacated in the existing terminal could be reused for airline functions.
The elevated building would have a construction cost in the range of $4 million including the cost of
renovating space in the existing terminal. This option is within the financial capabilities of the
airport on a pay-as-you-go basis. The exact dimensions layout and function of the new building and
reuse of the existing terminal building would be determined through the design process.
4.4 AIRCRAFf RAMP ALTERNATIVES
During the first Advisory Committee meeting held during the preparation of the master plan update,
concerns were expressed by committee members regarding the use of the aircraft ramp. These
concerns focused on two issues: 1) the safety of passengers walking across the ramp to and from
aircraft and 2) the overall efficiency of the current aircraft parking arrangement. With respect to the
passenger safety issue, committee members indicated that due to the high volume of aircraft
operations on the ramp and the considerable distances that some passengers walk across the ramp,
there is a potential for an accident to occur. Consequently, airline personnel must be exceptional
vigilant in controlling the movement of passengers during the loading and unloading process.
Committee members suggested that alternate methods of controlling passenger movement to and
from the aircraft be examined. With respect to the issue of the efficiency of the existing aircraft
parking configuration, committee members indicates that they believe alternative parking
configurations could potentially increase the number of parking positions on the ramp.
The master plan considered both of these issues and developed alternatives that attempted to address
both of these concerns. These alternatives are discussed and depicted in the following paragraphs
and figures.
4.4.1 AIRCRAFT RAMP ALTERNATIVE 1
Alternative 1 is the existing aircraft ramp configuration as depicted in Figure 4.24. This parking
configuration yields 11 parking spaces for commercial passenger aircraft and one parking space for
Federal Inspection Services associated with the United States Customs Service. The configuration
allows any airline aircraft to use any parking space. All spaces are sized to aCcommodate the aircraft
with the greatest wingspan currently operating at the airport (i.e., DASH-8).
The major advantage of this alternative is the flexibility of allowing any aircraft to park in any
parking position and the relatively large amount of space provided between aircraft which allows for
easy servicing of aircraft by fuel trucks, baggage carts, etc. The major disadvantages are those
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PIan\S_ 4\S_ 4.doc
4-13
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Alternatives Analysis
Section 4
previously discussed above (Le., the large amount of space consumed thereby reducing the number
of parking positions available and the operational safety concerns).
4.4.2 AIRCRAFT RAMP AL TERNA TlVE 2
Alternative 2 proposes the construction of a covered walkway out across the aircraft ramp as shown
in Figure 4.25. The purpose of the covered walkway would be to centralize the flow of passengers
within the limits of the walkway and to provide a certain measure of weather protection. By having
all passengers walk within the confines of the walkway and having aircraft park around its perimeter,
passengers would be controlled in a safe corridor and would not pass around operating aircraft. The
walkway would also provide a limited amount of protection from sun and light rains.
From an operational point of view, aircraft would park in a taxi-in I taxi-out configuration as they do
today, but would require that aircraft turnaround and taxi-out in the opposite direction. This should
not present a problem, since it is common method of operations at other airports. This parking
configuration would also require that two taxiway islands adjacent to Taxiway A be paved to allow
aircraft parked at the end of the walkway to taxi in and out of position.
As depicted in Figure 4.25, the proposed configuration would provide for eight parking positions
(including a combined position for two small aircraft) and could include three regional jet parking
positions. Additional parking positions for three additional aircraft would remain the same as they
operate today. While this is not desirable, in should be kept in mind that these positions are
primarily used only at the beginning and end of the day.
The primary advantage of constructing a covered walkway is that it is a relatively low-cost solution
to addressing passenger safety concerns. Preliminary construction cost estimates indicate that
construction of a walkway of the size shown in Alternative 2 would cost in the range of $500,000.
The primary disadvantage is that will still be three aircraft parking positions that would be remote
from the walkway.
4.4.3 AIRCRAFT RAMP AL TERNA TIVE 3
Aircraft Ramp Alternative 3 proposes the incorporation of a concourse into one ofthe new passenger
terminal concepts. A concourse would consist of a completely enclosed, air conditioned and
elevated building similar to the passenger terminal. It would provide complete weather protection
for passengers and would allow for the use of boarding bridges common at other airports.
Figure 4.26 depicts a linear concourse constructed along with a new passenger terminal. The
concourse would consist of a central circulation corridor with passenger holdrooms on each side of
the corridor. The concourse could be operated with either a taxi-in I taxi out operation without
loading bridges or a taxi-in I push-back operation with loading bridges. Figure 4.26 depicts a mixed
fleet of regional jets and turboprop aircraft. With this type of mixed fleet, the concourse could
4-14
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PIan\S_ 4\S_ 4.doc
J:\KEY WES1\
MASTER PlAN UPDATE\
EXHIBITS\F1G 4
.23.DWG
8 I I I
I I I
o "Z I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I II ~
I II l
I I I
I I /
I I /
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
> I I I
~ I II ~
~ I II ~~
~
CJ I \ \ ~I.
a \ \ \
~
~o
> \ \ \ c:
~ ~
\ \ \
\ \ \
\ \\
\ \\
\ \\ ~
~ A)O
\ \\ g~
z
\ \\
\ \\ ~
~
\ \\ -g
-I" ~
:r \ \\ l2.
- mO ~
~ CD ~-I
D> .., ~
rn :::s" i:~ \ \\ t
..... I:D
!!l - CD
J;! cP< --I ~
Z-
~ :::S:e :J>:J> \ \\
c: !!!. r-r- ~
"0 >CD
fir en men
CD ~..... \ \\
"0 ><::E:
0 .,,0
.., :J>~
- \ \\
Z-I
en.
_-I
om \ \\
Z~
i: \ \\
\ \\
\ \
H
H
~
\
i-
\ 8
i- Q
\ ~
i- Z
\ Q
~~~
r-5; 0
~(J)
~
A)
o
z
m""U
x::o
-00
>-0
Zo
~(/)
om
zO
~
::0
3:
z
)>
r
03/13/03 11:10
O*H-O
O#W
----
/
- ...--
/
'>
/
1\11\1
o
/
(
I
I
1
l
/
\
\
\
\
\
,
'---
~
+
."1.
:r
-
CD
f 3"
!eo !. CD
S!l _.'<
o
::2 ::J <:
II> A) <;
:;, -CD
~ >0
g. ::;....
CD "0
o
...
-
:I>
-
:a
o
:a
:I>
."
....
:a
:I>
~
"tI
:I>
~
....
m
:a
z
:I>
....
<:
m
~q/\
/\
-"
I
, I
' '~---> I
> ---,-;;;-- ':
'( i
I
I
I
I
I
I
, ~> I
'> ---}J>----, :
'( !
I
I
I
I
I
I
, ~~ I
' ~-- I
~---
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
- - -,....-- I
- - -;;::::-- / I
/ I
( :
I
I
I
I
++
o.z
8
\)
\1
'i
I
I
I
l
,1 '",
<( j /:>-
'~ I
r
/
/1
~: I
,\1
'j
1
I
1
/~
/1
=::: I
'\,
'j
I
1
)
/1
<: I
'\'
'j
I
1
I
1
I
1
I
,
l
\
\
,
"---
J:\KEY WES1\WSTE:R PLAN UPDATE\EXHIBI1S\F1G 4.24R.OWG 03/04/03 14:02
..J . . . . , , . t /
/"
t otH-HJ
~
3
J
"""
5'
-
CD
~ ..."
~ ="
CD aCD
~ <:5""<
~ ;:e
c: -CD
"&. > en
!. ::;....
al "0
o
..."
-
"'TJ
~G)
.c
"':;;0
(}JP.1
\,
'i
I
I
I
I
~
<<,/'j '",-
'''\ I /
Y
II
-<,/1
'"" I
'~
I
I
J
/I
<,/1
'''\,1
1
I
J
,/'1
<'''\,1
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
l
\
\
(")
o
<
fTl
;0
fTl
CJ
:E
)>
r
^
:E
)>
-<
111111
I
---1----- !
------------ ~~--- -----1
- - - -~~3r?~'.1UOLANE - - -~~I
""W-
III
III
---------~---- ------ I
+!
--~------------------:
~ X Xi
~ -------------~
==-=====----I,;N'.......-------'
I I
i ~ I
--- ;. ----- I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
9"
9"
/
+
~
o
+
++
~
-
:a
o
:a
~
"
.....
:a
~
i:
"
~
r-
.....
m
:a
z
~
.....
~
~
8
~
>
"ll
:I:
c;
III
o
>
f;j
z
U1
o
o"z
r:l
~
o
o
<0~g/\
/0
N
"
'-.....
J:\KEY WES1\WSTE:R PLAN UPDATE\EXHIBI1S\F1G 4.26R.DWG 03/13/03 11:11
f:
3
J
"""
5'
-
CD
~ ..."
~ ="
CD aCD
~ c.o.<
~;:e
.a: - CD
Co :!: ~
~-a
o
..."
-
"'TJ
~G)
.c
"':;;0
0)P.1
~ XXi
--~-----------------~
------------1';1UO~'-------,
r I
i ~ I
;. I
---- --------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-________ I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
IJ-..:::: /'
111111
---1-
I
J
i~
-----------_.....::-
-~$"
'1T(
,
I
'-...--.,~
-"II'"
III
III
-----~-----
9"
Jr
+
o
+
++
~
-
:a
o
:a
~
"
.....
:a
~
i:
"
~
r-
.....
m
:a
z
~
.....
<:
m
~
o~gA
8
~ U1
0
~
:I:
c; o"Z
III
0
>
f;j
z
~
-l
~
8
'i
I
I
I
I
~
-",/'1 '",-
'''\ I /
Y
II
-<,/1
'''\ I
'~
I
I
J
II
<,/1
'''\, j
1
I
J
,/'j
<, "\,j
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
l
\
\
(")
o
z
(")
o
c
;0
(f)
fTl
"
'-.....
Section 4
Alternatives Analysis
operate with a combination of push-back operations on one side of the concourse and taxi-out
operations on the other side of the concourse. Such a configuration would provide ten parking
positions.
The larger regional jet shown in a dashed line pattern near the west base of the concourse represents
a CRJ-700 regional jet. This regional jet has a longer fuselage and was used to properly space the
concourse from the nearest taxilane.
The primary advantage of constructing a concourse would be the superior level of comfort and
security it would provide for passengers. The primary disadvantage would be its substantial cost to
construct. Preliminary construction cost estimates indicate that construction of a concourse would
cost approximately $4.7 million.
4.4.4 AIRCRAFT RAMP AL TERNA TIVE 4
Aircraft Ramp Alternative 4 consists of a concourse similar to that proposed by Alternative 3.
However, this concourse would be extended to the east in an attempt to maximize use of the
available ramp area and maximize the number of aircraft that could be boarded directly from the
concourse. This alternative is depicted in Figure 4.27.
As the figure indicates, this alternative would enable a large number of aircraft to park adjacent to
the concourse. Hence these aircraft could be boarded via loading bridges. The primary disadvantage
of this alternative is the fact that aircraft parked along the north side of the concourse would have to
push-back into Taxiway A. This is not a desirable operation since it would hinder the flow of
aircraft taxiing along Taxiway A and would increase workload on the part of air traffic controllers.
Furthermore, this aircraft parking arrangement would require that unpaved islands between Taxiway
A and the existing ramp be paved. This may further complicate existing drainage of the aircraft
ramp.
In addition to operational concerns, this alternative would have an even higher cost that Alternative
3. Preliminary construction cost estimates indicated that this type of concourse would cost
approximately $6.9 million to construct.
4.4.5 PREFERRED AIRCRAFT RAMP AL TERNA TIVE
Consultation with members of the master plan update Advisory Committee revealed that after
reviewing the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative there was a strong preference to
maintain the existing aircraft ramp operation. Committee members felt the exceptional high cost of
the concourse alternatives ruled them out as feasible alternatives. With respect to the walkway
alternative, committee members felt that the flexibility and standardization offered by the existing
ramp operation was preferable to turning aircraft that would generate prop wash and jet blast back
toward the walkway as the aircraft taxied out of its parking position.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Mas"" PIanIS_ 415_ 4.OOc
4-15
Key West International Airporl
Master Plan Update
Section 4 Alternatives Analysis
4.5 GENERAL AVIATION FACILITIES ALTERNATIVES
Alternatives for providing general aviation facilities were previously addressed through a Hangar
Feasibility Study conducted in 1999. That study assessed hangar requirements and formulated a
series of alternatives for providing the required facilities. A preferred alternative was selected and
has since been refined to meet tenant requirements. The preferred alternative is depicted in Figure
4.28. As noted in Section 3, this project is currently in the planning phase and consists of the
construction of open-bay and T -hangars as well as aircraft tie downs.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PIanIS_ 415_ 4.doc
4-16
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
J:\KEY WES1\WSTE:R PLAN UPDATE\EXHIBI1S\F1G 4.27R.OWG 03/13/03 11:12
\j
I
I
I
I
~
<,/'j '",-
'''\ I /
Y
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
______-1
I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
I
ll: /'
) otH-HJ
~~
(")
o
z
(")
o
c
;0
(f)
fTl
3
111111
-=,/'i
,
,,\1
'~
I
I
l
II
--<,/1
'''\,i
1
I
J
,/'1
-<
'''\, i
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
l
\
\
------1---'
-----l +:
I I
I I
I + I
I I ~I
I I ,
I I
I I JL I
I iT'
I I
I I
I !+~ II
LL-------~-----~'
~ - --- ~~ ----_:
I
I
I
I
+++ i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\\I \\I Ill""
Jr
\
'j.
\
~
\
~
\
~
\
o
~
-
:a
o
:a
~
"
.....
:a
~
i:
"
~
r-
.....
m
:a
z
~
.....
~
8
C') U1
::0 0
~
:I:
c;
III o"Z
0
~
z
~
-l
8
5'
-
~ CD
..."
II> ="
uo
CD aCD
... c'o.<
"'tJ
Dr ;:e
::0
c: -CD
og >en
Co
II> -.-
CD ..."
"0
0
..."
-
"
'-.....
o~~
"'TJ
~G)
'C
"':;;0
"P.1
.,.
I
,
I
,
I
,
I
,
!.
'I
/,
/' I
-:+-<::~ i
/ I " '
(I ',!
'I I~
I I
i I 0 ,1
~ /'
!\ I /' !
I "'-, -/' I
i ,/'f;:-"',,, i
( '\i
i I I
,I '
I ~
~ I ,Ii
i ',I - :/,/ i
, ;p-- '" '
r'l '\1
i I \
!! !
! I !
I I
,ii i I i
I I I I ~
L---1----~--l------+- : )\
, , , / I '"
---=-~ ----~,~----- ~I :/' 'I ''----:
, -- ~ 1'--- '" .---
,/ ,/' ,/~ ,/' I ''', i ,/
I \1;/
l'
I I
,
I j
I l;
J:\KEY WES1\WSTE:R PLAN UPDATE\EXHIBI1S\F1G 4.28R.OWG 03/13/03 11:13
I
I
I 8
:
I C) U1
;c 0
~
:I:
n
Ul o"z
0
~ VI
Z )>
r
~ -f
....
-0
0
0 Z
0 0
II~I
/
/
I
/
"-
'../'.
;g ;g a~ ~ f;i
!5 !5 lD VI VI C)
o 0 1T1~ ~ ~
sa sa ;:0 " " 0
o 0 ~lD lD
-0 ::t O~ C
)> )> rii5 {;
rii ~ Oz z
~ )> ""
IT1 ;:0 VI VI
~ VI
~"'-"'-')
... . . .'
""", . \. /"
.'. I >- "" ...
'-... g!2!~
rn~"
VI ~
IT1
~>O
~E;~
Z
,
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
al '
o
##J
1fD
J?otH-HJ
~
;C
o
z
5'
-
~ ~
lXl ="
~D)CD
al _
... -'0.<
31 0
lXl = <
::J D)-<
c: -CD
"&. > en
lXl -.-
- ..."
al "0
o
..."
-
C)
"m
~z
om
-:a
C~
.....r-
m~
C/):s
,,~
r-.....
~-
zO
z
+
l
"'TJ
~G')
'c
"':;;0
CXlP.1
o
SECTION 5
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
Section 5 Environmental Considerations
5.1 INTRODUCTION
This section provides a brief summary of environmental review requirements for airport
development actions proposed in this master plan study and a discussion of environmental
conditions and likely consequences relative to proposed actions. A detailed review and analysis
of potential impacts will be conducted in an Environmental Assessment (EA) or Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS).
5.2 ENVIRONMENTAL EV ALUA TION OF AIRPORT PROJECTS
5.2.1 CONSIDERA TION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
All airport improvement projects that are considered "Federal actions," or otherwise involve
federal funding or approvals, must be examined from an environmental standpoint in order to
comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Guidance for the FAA's
consideration of environmental impacts is provided in FAA Order 5050AA, Airport
Environmental Handbook and FAA Order 1050.1D, Policies and Procedures for Considering
Environmental Impacts. Other federal, state, and local regulations and policies are also integral
to the process of considering potential environmental impacts generated by airport development.
For any proposed Federal action, an initial environmental determination that considers the type
of action and its potential effect upon the environment is performed. The result of the
determination is the selection of one of the following three environmental processes:
· Categorical Exclusion (CE) - A proposed action may be considered
categorically excluded if it typically does not result in significant
environmental impacts and for which an Environmental Assessment or
Environmental Impact Statement is not specifically required. A CE may
require brief documentation of the project's description and environmental
impact potential in order to support its processing as a CE.
· Environmental Assessment (EA) - An EA is prepared for proposed actions
with expected minor or uncertain environmental impact potential. An EA
requires analysis and documentation similar to that of an EIS, but with
somewhat less detail and coordination. Depending upon whether certain
environmental thresholds of significance are exceeded or not, an EA will
either lead to a Finding of No Significant Impact (FaNS I) or a requirement
for the preparation of an EIS.
· Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) - An EIS is prepared for major
federal actions, which are expected or known to have the potential for
significant environmental impacts. An EIS involves thorough evaluation and
documentation of a proposed action's purpose and need, alternatives, affected
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master P1anlS_5\Environmental.docI03l12103
5-1
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 5
Environmental Considerations
environment, and environmental consequences. The study requires
coordination with involved Federal, state, and local agencies and the public.
5.2.2 PROPOSED AIRPORT PROJECTS REQUIRING ENVIRONMENTAL REvIEW
Projects proposed for Key West International Airport (EYW) include improvements to the
runway safety area (RSA), the runway, and the taxiway. Additional, projects proposed in this
plan include a new passenger terminal building, on-airport roadway and access improvements,
automobile parking improvements, and additional aircraft storage hangars. Projects that may
require NEP A environmental review include the following:
Proiect
TVDe of Review
Runway Safety Area Improvements
EAlEIS
Runway 9/27 Extension
EAlEIS
A detailed discussion of projects and thresholds that determine which environmental process is
applicable are described in FAA Order 5050AA, Airport Environmental Handbook.
Environmental studies, if required, should be prepared well in advance of a planned project.
5.3 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
The following environmental impact categories are considered to be most relevant to the
proposed projects at EYW: aircraft noise, wetlands, biotic communities, endangered species,
water quality, historic resources, and cumulative environmental impacts. Each of these impact
categories has the potential to represent either some constraint on future development, or may
result in conditions that would require mitigation measures to offset the adverse environmental
impact. Figure 5.1 illustrates environmentally sensitive areas on, and adjacent to, EYW.
The following pages briefly describe each environmental impact category and provide a general
discussion of likely consequences and the coordination processes. Detailed analysis of each
environmental impact category will be performed when an EA or EIS is prepared for a specific
proposed project.
5.3.1 AIRCRAFT NOISE AND COMPATffiLE LAND USE
One of the most important environmental considerations related to airport development is that of
noise compatibility. Monroe County has addressed aircraft noise issues in accordance with
Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 150, Airport Noise Compatibility Planning. The result
is the development of Noise Exposure Maps (NEMs) and implementation of a Noise
Compatibility Program (NCPs). The airport's Noise Compatibility Program update (commonly
referred to as a Part 150 Study) was approved by the FAA in May 1999. The NEMs for the
airport are updated annually.
W;\12637817 _1(YV1A Master Plan\S_5\Enllironmental.doc\03I12103
5-2
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
t QI'!
;i; 0
C'l ~
rTI :l.
;;! ;0
::l "ll
~ ~
-i
'> a:J
::g C
~ f2
x z
.:..., C'l
~
I
>
;0
"ll
o
;0
-i
~
5
z
C'l
~ ~ r
> ;0 fTl
~ ~ C)
a:J -i fTl
8 ~ z
-< 0 0
..... "ll
~ !il
~ =<
o c
~ ~
o "Z
'"
8
~
~
~
~
CJ
o
CJ
~
~
:t:,,~
-fT'I>
(1)-<;0
d r;1
;o~F
0(1)0
>-i
'>Ci) "
~;o> rTI
-<
~-i~ ~
~
fT'I>;o z
CZ-< ~
~C z
>
::l
0
z
>
r-
~
;0
"ll
!6
-l
m
z
:S
:a
0
z
5' i:
- m
CD z
~ ..." .....
II> =" ~
CI> aCD
;;-
~ c'o.< r-
"'tl r-
li) ;:e -<
:::I
c: -CD
"&. >cn en
-.- m
~ ..."
al "0 Z
0 en
..."
- =i
~
"'TJ
(}Ie;)
.C
.....:;;0
P.1
-
-
--
--
-- -
-- -
-- -
-- -
-- -
-- -
-- -
-- -
-- -
-- -
Section 5
Environmental Considerations
For this Master Plan Update, noise contour maps were produced for the existing condition (based
on 2002 operational data) and for the level of activity projected for 2021. The noise contour
maps, while not supplanting the official Noise Exposure Maps for the airport's NCP, provide a
valuable gauge for anticipating future aircraft noise impacts that may be associated with projects
proposed in this Master Plan Update.
The following paragraphs describe the development of the noise contour maps and potential
impacts in the vicinity of the airport.
5.3.1.1
Aircraft Noise Metrics
A variety of noise metrics are used to assess airport noise impacts. Noise metrics are used to
describe individual noise events (such as a single operation of an aircraft taking off overhead) or
groups of events (such as the cumulative effect of numerous aircraft operations, the collection of
which creates a general noise environment or overall exposure level). The most frequently used
metric at civilian aviation airports is the Day-Night Average Sound Level (DNL).
The Day-Night Average Sound Level (DNL) represents noise as it occurs over a 24-hour period.
It is the same as a 24-hour equivalent sound level (Leq), with one important exception: DNL
treats nighttime noise differently from daytime noise. The equivalent sound level is the log of
the average value of the sound exposure during a stated time period. It is often used to describe
sounds with respect to their potential for interfering with human activity. In calculating DNL, it
is assumed that the A-weighted levels occurring at night (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) are 10 dB
louder than they really are. This penalty is applied to account for greater sensitivity to nighttime
noise and because events at night are often perceived to be more intrusive.
Values of DNL can be measured with standard monitoring equipment or predicted with
computer models. Most aircraft noise studies, and the one conducted for this report, utilize
computer-generated estimates of DNL.
5.3.1.2
Noise Prediction Methods
This section summarizes the noise prediction methodology for preparing noise contour maps for
current and projected operations at EYW. The FAA's Integrated Noise Model (INM) Version
6.0c is a complex computer program that calculates aircraft noise levels around an airport from
user defined input data and internal database of aircraft noise and performance statistics. The
input data includes average daily and nightly aircraft operations by specific aircraft type; typical
flight path and runway geometry; and average annual runway and flight path use statistics by
aircraft category.
The FAA developed the INM as the primary tool for analyzing and evaluating noise impacts
from aircraft operations. Its use is prescribed for all FAA-sponsored projects requiring
environmental evaluation. The INM contains a set of noise and profile databases that can be
modified by the analyst to enable input of data for new aircraft and engine types and to account
for specific changes in flight procedures.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PlanlS_5\EnvironmentaJ.doc\03l12103
5-3
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 5
Environmental Considerations
The input data used in this noise prediction model are derived from a number of sources
including, but not limited to, records maintained by EYW, the FAA, and assumptions made by
URS regarding projected aircraft activity levels. Input data for the INM is briefly described as
follows.
Activity Levels and Fleet Mix - The average daily number of aircraft operations for the year
2002 and 2021 were the basis for developing noise exposure contours for the airport. The
number of aircraft operations (annual and average day) for these years are presented in Table 5.1.
The 2002 data reflects actual operations experienced at the airport. The 2021 data is based on
the forecast of aviation activity prepared for this Master Plan Update. The operations data do not
include military operations since most of the military activity in the vicinity of EYW are
overflights to nearby military bases.
TABLE 5.1
AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS FOR INM
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
2002
2021
82,036
108,080
225
296
Source: URS Corporation, 2002.
The make and model of aircraft used in these operations were also identified for the development
of a fleet mix. Fleet mix refers to the various types of aircraft that operate at the airport and
included specific information such as engine type, FAR Part 36 Noise Stage Certification, gross
weight, and distance to destination. Application of the fleet mix to the average-daily aircraft
operations figures produced the number of average-daily operations by aircraft type. As fleet mix
and aircraft operations data were collected, appropriate aircraft categories were established to
reflect activity at the airport by airlines, corporate, and general aviation users. The operation and
fleet mix input data for the base year and 2021 are described below. Detailed information
regarding input data is provided in Tables E.1 through E.8 located in Appendix E.
Physical Input _ Physical input parameters include runway layout, runway utilization, and flight
tracks. Input for these parameters is discussed as follows:
Runway Definitions - The existing 4,801-foot runway was modeled for existing 2002
conditions. A 1,250-foot runway extension was modeled for year 2021. The proposed extension
assumes a 750-foot extension on the west end of the runway and a 500-foot extension on the east
end of the runway.
Runway Use _ Runway use refers to the frequency with which aircraft utilize each runway
during the course of a year as dictated or permitted by wind, weather, aircraft weight, air traffic
control conditions, and noise considerations. The more often a runway is used throughout the
W:\ 12637817 _tt:Y/IA Master P1an\S_5\Enllironmental.doc\03I12103
5-4
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 5
Environmental Considerations
year, the more noise is created in communities located off the end of that runway.
Approximately 95 percent of flights at EYW utilize Runway 9 for arrivals and departures.
Flight Tracks - Flight tracks are the aircraft's actual path through the air projected vertically
onto the ground. All flight tracks do not represent the precise paths flown by all aircraft utilizing
the airport. Instead, they represent the primary flight corridors for the airport. For EYW, a
standard left-hand traffic pattern and straight-inlstraight-out approached are utilized. The same
flight tracks are used for 2002 and 2021 study years. A summary of flight track assignments is
included in Table E.9 located in Appendix E.
5.3.1.3
2002 Noise Exposure Estimate
2002 Noise Contour Map - Noise exposure levels resulting from 2002 operations are depicted
as DNL contours in Figure 5.2. The figure depicts noise exposure contours of DNL 65 dB, 70
dB, and 75 dB. DNL contours are a graphical representation of how the noise from aircraft
operations is distributed over the surrounding area on an average day of a given year. The 2002
65 DNL noise exposure contour encompasses approximately 0.366 square miles of land.
Although most of the contour is over airport property and open water, the contour includes areas
of residential and transient lodging land use to the north and west of the airport.
Affected Population - The FAA defines DNL 65 dB as the threshold of noise compatibility with
residential land uses. Thus, the DNL 65 dB contour is important for population impact
assessments. Based on 2002 data, there are approximately 208 housing units (with
approximately 450 residents) in the area between the DNL 65 and 70 dBA noise contours. No
housing units will be in an area of DNL 70 dBA and higher. The area of land, by land use; the
population; and the number of housing units exposed to noise levels of DNL 65 dB and higher is
presented in Table E.1O located in Appendix E.
2021 Noise Contour Map - Noise exposure levels resulting from projected 2021 aircraft
operations are depicted as DNL contours in Figure 5.3. The figure depicts predicted noise
exposure contours of DNL 65 dB, 70 dB, and 75 dB. The 2021 65 DNL noise exposure contour
encompasses approximately 0.415 square miles of land. This is a 0.049 square mile increase
from the 2002 noise contour. The contour is generally wider along the length of the runway and
shorter on the west end of the airport. This can be primarily attributed to an increased number of
aircraft operations projected for 2021, and somewhat quieter engines. Areas of residential land
use are still located within the noise contour.
Affected Population - In 2021, there will be approximately 210 housing units (with
approximately 441 residents) in the area between the DNL 65 and 70 dBA noise contours. No
housing units will be in an area of DNL 70 dBA and higher. The area of land, by land use; the
population; and the number of housing units exposed to noise levels of DNL 65 dB and higher is
presented in Table E.11 in Appendix E.
W:\I2637817 _KWIA Master PlanlS_5\Environmental.doc\03I12103
5-5
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 5 Environmental Considerations
5.3.1.4 Land Use Compatibility
The FAA has adopted guidelines regarding the compatibility of land uses with various noise
levels measured using the DNL metric. These guidelines are listed in Table 5.2. The
development of these guidelines was intended to establish a consistent process for estimating
noise compatibility and for considering Federal funding for noise compatibility programs
implementation. These guidelines also aid local jurisdictions that have not established land use
guidelines with respect to airports and surrounding lands. The FAR Part 150 land use
compatibility guidelines are consistent with land use compatibility guidelines developed by other
Federal agencies such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Welfare (RUD).
It should be noted that the land use compatibility guidelines do not constitute a Federal
determination that a specific land use is acceptable or unacceptable under Federal, state, or local
laws. The responsibility for determining acceptable land uses rests with the local authorities
through their zoning laws and ordinances.
Monroe County's Part 150 Noise Compatibility Program evaluates land uses within the existing
and projected (2003) DNL 65 dBA noise exposure contours for compatibility and identifies
strategies to mitigate noise impacts. Please refer to EYW NCP for a detailed discussion of land
use compatibility and planned mitigation measures. The NCP implemented by Monroe County
includes noise attenuation for noise sensitive structures, land acquisition, and zoning measures to
promote land use compatibility.
The proposal to extend Runway 9/27 will require the detailed analysis of noise impacts that may
result from increased aircraft operations and/or operations by different or larger aircraft. The
analysis would be accomplished and documented as part of an Environmental Assessment for the
proposed runway extension.
5.3.2 SOCIAL IMPACTS
Other than noise impacts as described above, the developments proposed in this Master Plan
Update are not expected to generate substantial adverse social impacts, disrupt planned
developments, create an appreciable change in employment, or alter surface transportation
patterns.
The Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan identifies EYW as the primary public
aviation facility in Monroe County (Monroe County Comprehensive Plan 1997). The
comprehensive plan acknowledges projected demands and proposed projects as identified in the
1991 Airport Master Plan (pBS&J 1991) and discusses constraints (site limitations and
surrounding land uses) at the airport.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master P1an\S_5\Environmental.doc\03I12/03
5-6
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
I.
i'
i'.
OGIIJDODl_ ~
zOS:::I:S:S:'-!;!?::Oo'Cfr~ m
a "OS' =cQ" 8.. 8.. ~ c5 ~_ c; ~_::J -g ~
~CD :7____ -~;;;!.IitCD...
::J C;C;OCD l!t.a.....-
.. m-< :? 3 3 CD "11 !!._
--j ::Joli'ilQ)cr.RRR N
12 ~CD.~~~~33 {g
~j,~ic:31 i i ~ r
;.i::Oi5:~2 i.g-D. ~
a. CD Ij""110 -!!.Q) Z
CD · - c
alS:a:~
Qi- CD CD !!. C
-::J::J . ,^
cr. cr. &> VI
'l!-!!.Q) m
o II>
o Iii"
Q) -
UI
I!t
r-
r[,..;' ~ ~"\ g 111111 . r-
U1"O" "I\) c: 0 s: "11 --i ~ m
v Z~C;Q)iili6-
I ...,..., m 0 ~!cS ~ :;: 5' C)
[i;.. ~ ~ 0 C/) ~a~ !~g> m
t zzzmQ)5-CDCD~< Z
i '-'-'-0 3cc iag- c
I.... 0 3 ~ CD In In
. z 8!l. ~So---
' --i;><"lD ::J-5
o UI ~~:-
C So en ::0
:;:0 :T Iii" III
~ C/) (I) iDji
o !!l <:!:
!l. 0
(I) ::J
en
o
c;
~
r~
;~
;,0
,. CD
,)0
, g m
~~~
."0.... 0
Ii a .
'-0 II
!;;CD~
l:~q
;, )>
r,1
t,o
lo~
i'CD
l8
t-:,e,;.,.,."".;
.-<>-z
m
W
::T
8
p;
~
c;
2:
,r
AD
en
(I)
3
T-
~
c;
2:
,'i"
.-
1IJ
::J
Co
rn
U)
o
o
"11
CD
!!.
'.-,;( ,:~,,;...'.,. ",",'~'_'~ ~U;'" .\.-~~,'. "~'y~.',:,
~. F.I.G -U.RE:
Il_ 5.2
I ... Om
2002 NOISE CONTOURS.-- . --. -Ie
Key West International Airport
Monroe County, Florida URS
Master Plan Update
Orwnrnl_1 ~
LII.. r en ;;0 -l C (i) ~ m
O""::r:s::s::o -.CD 03 CD-o ~
Z ::!!:-OCDCD<=::Jl/)C;:;:CD::JO
o -0 =10 0. 0. "" 10 -. :!. CD ;::a.
-CDS':T~o~.OiD~~o.!!. c
i: ~~ i' 3 3 ~ ;;r ~ 0 ~ 0 N
~o-o ::J 00 l/) 3 Ql 0 0 m
IOQl ~.CDCD~=:::::0333 0
~~ ~::Jii: '< 333
0. ;;0 !!!. -. ~ c 31 ~ CD CD s;:
CD ~~ l/) ::J.o 12. g. (; Z
-.;:;:CD Ql Ql_.
l5:;;o~~l/) --!!!. 0
CDm~.a C
::J 0:0.-.
ii'CDCD~ en
-::JaO m
~iii.o
!!!. - Ql
. l/)
o _
o Ql
m -
l/)
Ii!
,"\,\. ~~
~\.O\.U1\...... c 0 ~ ir g 6-
Z"2.S::Jl/)!!!.=
o m ~IO:T 0
"~ m_5.~o~:Een
~ 0 0 enm ::rg,ii ~i:~
Z Z m::J '::Jcr
Z r r (') 310 :Eo. CD
r 03:E CDl/).fII
om ~o_.
Z 0_ m-::J
-f '" ~ 5. ~ !2-
o 0 l/)en;;O
C :: S'~
::0 :T _(jl
co en dI dim
o en ~
r 0 i g
dI _
en
~
o
iir
o
.-<r.
m
co
g
"11
CD
~
FIGURE:
5.3
"
C
2:
o.
l:ID
en
CD
3
T"
"
C
2:
0.
f;
::J
0.
fa
ONTOURS
~2;:g~~D PROJ_E':TS
- - ational Airport
Key West Inct~~nty Florida
Monroe , te
Master Plan UPda_
UR$_
TABLE 5.2
FEDERAL A VIA TION REGULATION 14 CFR PART 150
LAND USE COMPA TIBIUTY WITH YEARLY DAY-NIGHT AVERAGE SOUND LEVELS
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Residential
Residential (Other than mobile homes & transient
lodges)
Mobile Home Parks
Transient Lodging
Public Use
Schools
Hospitals, Nursing Homes
Churches, Auditoriums, Concert Halls
Governmental Services
Transportation
Parking
Commercial Use
Offices, Business & Professional
Wholesale & Retail Building Materials, Hardware &
Farm Equipment
Retail Trade - General
Utilities
Communications
ManufacturiD2 & Production
Manufacturing, General
Photographic and Optical
Agriculture (Except Livestock) & Forestry
Livestock Farming & Breeding
Mining & Fishing, Resource Production & Extraction
Recreational
Outdoor Sports Arenas, Spectator Sports
Outdoor Music Shells, Amphitheaters
Nature Exhibits & Zoos
Amusement, Parks, Resorts, Camps
Golf Courses, Riding Stables, Water Recreation
w:1126378 17 J(WIA ITable 5.2.x1s\3/1212003
Below 65
Decibels
Yearly Day-Night Average Sound Level (DNL)
65-70 7~75 75-80 8~85
Decibels Decibels Decibels Decibels
Over 85
Decibels
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y y 25 30
Y Y y2 y3
Y Y 25 30
Y Y y2 y3
Y Y 25 30
Y Y y2
Y Y 25
Y y6 y7
Y y6 y7
Y Y Y
y
y
y
y
y
TABLE 5.2
FEDERAL A VIA TION REGULATION 14 CFR PART 150
LAND USE COMPATIBILITY WITH YEARLY DAY-NIGHT AVERAGE SOUND LEVELS
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
NOTE: The designations contained in this table do not constitute a Federal determination that any use of land covered by the
program is acceptable or unacceptable under Federal, State or local law. The responsibility for determining the
acceptable and permissible land uses and the relationship between specific properties remains with the local authorities.
FAA determinations under Part 150 are not intended to substitute Federally determined land use for those determined to
be appropriate by local authorities in response to locally determined needs and values in achieving noise-compatible
land uses.
KEY TO TABLE:
Standard Land Use Coding Manual.
Land Use and related structures are compatible without restrictions.
Land Use and related structures are not compatible and should be prohibited.
Noise Level Reduction (outdoor to indoor) are to be achieved through incorporation of noise attenuation into the design
and construction of structure.
25,30, or 35 Land use and related structures are generally compatible; measures to achieve NLR of25, 30, or 35 dB
must be incorporated in design and construction of structure.
I Where the community determines that residential or school uses must be allowed, measures to achieve outdoor to indoor NLR
of at least 25 dB and 30 dB should be incorporated into building codes and be considered in individual approvals. Normal
residential construction can be expected to provide a NLR of 20 dB, thus, the reduction requirements are often stated as 5, 10 or
15 dB over standard construction and normally assume mechanical ventilation and closed windows year round. However, the
use of NLR criteria will not eliminate outdoor noise problems.
2 Measures to achieve NLR of 25 dB must be incorporated into the design and construction of portions of the buildings where the
public is received, office areas, noise-sensitive areas, or where the normal noise level is low.
3 Measures to achieve NLR of 30 dB must be incorporated into the design and construction of portions of the buildings where the
public is received, office areas, noise-sensitive areas, or where the normal noise level is low.
4 Measures to achieve NLR of 35 dB must be incorporated into the design and construction of portions of the buildings where the
public is received, office areas, noise-sensitive areas, or where the normal noise level is low.
5 Land use compatible provided special sound reinforcement systems are installed.
/) Residential buildings require an NLR of 25 dB.
7 Residential buildings require an NLR of 30 dB.
~ Residential buildings not permitted.
Noncompatible land use.
SLUCM
Y (Yes)
N (No)
NLR
Source: 14 CFR FAR Part 150, Appendix A, Table 1 (28 December 1995).
w:1I2637817_KWIAITable 5.2.xJs\3/1212003
Section 5 Environmental Considerations
5.3.3 AIR QUALITY
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EP A) and the Florida Department of Environmental
Protection (DEP) share regulatory authority over air quality in Monroe County, which includes
EYW. The EPA has established National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) to protect
public health, the environment, and the quality of life from the detrimental effects of air
pollution. The standards have been set for the following criteria pollutants: carbon monoxide
(CO), lead (Pb), oxides of nitrogen (NOx), ozone (03), particulate matter (PMlO and PM2.s), and
sulfur dioxide (S02). The Florida DEP has adopted these same standards.
In accordance with the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1977, all areas within the State
of Florida are designated with respect to the NAAQS as attainment, nonattainment, or
maintenance. An area with air quality better than the NAAQS is designated as attainment, an
area with air quality worse than the NAAQS is designated as non-attainment, and an area that is
in transition back to attainment is designated as attainment/maintenance. Monroe County is
classified as attainment for all criteria air pollutants.
Since the existing and forecasted levels of general aviation aircraft operations are below the
FAA's threshold of 180,000 annual operations, and the existing and forecasted number of annual
passengers are below 1.3 million, a detailed air quality analysis should not be required for the
evaluation of the Master Plan's proposed project's affect on air quality. However, the scoping
process for the environmental study for the proposed airport projects will help establish the
documentation and analysis requirements necessary for an EA or EIS. In any case, the study will
include a discussion of any measures to be incorporated in the action to minimize air quality
effects, including control of air pollution during construction.
5.3.4 WATER QUALITY
In general, nearshore waters of the Keys area have already been impacted by human activity.
There are numerous activities that affect water quality, to varying degrees, in the Keys. Such
activities include wastewater treatment discharges, septic tanks, urban runoff, inactive landfills
and abandoned dumps, marinas and live-aboard vessels, and seafood processing facilities
(Monroe County Comprehensive Plan, 1997).
Water quality issues on airports normally involve storm water runoff and potential impacts
related to spills and/or releases of pollutants (e.g., aircraft fuel). EYW is subject to several
environmental regulations and permit conditions in regard to storm water discharge, fuel storage,
spill prevention, and pollution control.
Water resources potentially affected by airport operations and the Master Plan's proposed
projects are salt ponds, tidal swamps, ground water, and adjacent coastal waters. The proposed
projects at the airport include additional fill embankments and additional impervious, paved
surfaces that will generate some increase in storm water runoff. Currently, a portion of the storm
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master P1an\S_5\Environmental.doc\03I12/03
5-9
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 5
Environmental Considerations
water runoff at the airport is receiving some pre-treatment and is discharged into wells located on
airport property.
The proposed runway extension and RSA projects will also have the potential to generate
temporary water quality impacts during construction. Erosion and sedimentation during
construction can be minimized through the use of Best Management Practices (BMPs).
The designation of the Florida Keys as an Area of Critical State Concern and as having
Outstanding Florida Waters provides an emphasis on maintaining water quality in the Florida
Keys area. The evaluation of impacts associated with the proposed airport projects in an
environmental study will require particular attention to water quality issues.
5.3.5 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ACT, SECTION 303(c) (FORMERLY SECTION
4(F))
Section 303(c) of the DOT Act, Title 49 U.S. Code, provides protection for special properties,
including publicly owned parks, recreation areas, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, or significant
historic and archeological sites. Section 303 prevents the approval of a proposed Federal action
that requires the use of these special properties unless no feasible and prudent alternative exists
and the project includes all possible planning to minimize harm to the resource resulting from
such use.
A public park and museum (Martello Gallery-Key West Art and Historical Museum) are located
on airport property between the terminal automobile parking lot and South Roosevelt Boulevard
(AlA). The Martello Gallery-Key West Art and Historical Museum is listed on the National
Register of Historic Places. A public swimming beach (Smather's Beach) is located along the
south side of South Roosevelt Boulevard, across from the airport. Little Hamaca City Park - Key
West Salt Ponds is located on the north side of the airport on Government Road.
The operation of the airport and the projects proposed in this master plan are not expected to
require the use of, or substantially impact, any existing public park, recreation area, or wildlife
refuge.
The construction of the standard RSA would involve an abandoned military bunker (East
Martello Battery Bunker) on property that had been transferred from the US Department of
Defense to the County for airport use. The deed transferring the property includes reference to
the bunker being eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. The bunker, part
of a Cold War-era missile site, would be affected by construction, and likely environmental
mitigation requirements, if the standard RSA were implemented. In accordance with the terms
of the deed, any proposed impact to the bunker will require coordination and approval of the
State Historic Preservation Officer. This potential impact will have to be evaluated in
environmental studies prepared in advance of the proposed runway projects.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master P1anlS_5\Environmental.doc\03l12103
5-10
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 5 Environmental Considerations
5.3.6 HISTORIC, ARCHITECTURAL, ARCHAEOLOGICAL, CULTURAL RESOURCES
The Martello Gallery-Key West Art and Historical Museum, located on airport property between
the terminal automobile parking lot and South Roosevelt Boulevard (AlA), is listed on the
National Register of Historic Places. A review of available documents did not identify any
known archaeological sites and cultural resources in the immediate vicinity of the airport. A
report entitled A Strategic Plan for the Key West Salt Ponds (Braun 2000) notes several features
in the vicinity of the airport that may have cultural significance, however, no comprehensive
survey of the area was conducted for the report to determine their significance. The features
include: remnants of dikes from salt harvesting activities dating from the mid-1800's; remnants
of the East Martello Battery bunker west of the runway; World War II-era blimp pads north of
the airport; and abandoned missile sites.
The runway extension and RSA projects for Runway 9 will impact a portion of the abandoned
bunker property, including structures. According to a quitclaim deed (dated August 8, 2000)
transferring the federal property to the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners, the
bunker on the property is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. In
accordance with the terms of the deed, any proposed impact to the bunker will require
coordination and approval of the State Historic Preservation Officer (Florida Department of
State, Division of Historic Resources).
The significance of potential historic and cultural resources that may be affected by the proposed
runway extension, RSA, and airfield projects will have to be determined, documented, and
coordinated when an environmental study is prepared for the proposed runway improvement
actions.
5.3.7 BIOTIC COMMUNITIES
The airport contains a variety of habitats and biotic communities located in an urban setting. The
dominant features are the salt ponds, which contain areas of open water, wetlands, and uplands.
Habitats found in this area include sea grass beds, mangrove swamps, exposed rock with marsh
grass, and upland areas vegetated with indigenous and invasive plant species. The salt ponds,
which have been modified by residential, commercial, military, and transportation development,
comprise an estuarine habitat that is expected to be highly variable in regards to water properties
(e.g., salinity, temperature).
Salt pond flora typically includes algae, Widgeon grass (Ruppia maritima), Spike rush
(Eleocharis cellulosa), Shoal grass (Halodule wrightii), Black mangrove (Avicennia germinans),
and Red mangrove (Rhizophora mangle) (Monroe County, 1997). The salt ponds provide habitat
for a wide variety of wildlife, including mammals, reptiles, birds, fish, invertebrates, crustaceans,
and mollusks. Bird issues may involve potential effects on migratory patterns and wetland
habitat dependent species. Several species of flora and fauna classified as threatened,
endangered, or of special concern, may occur in the vicinity of the airport.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PlanlS_5\Environmental.doc\03I12/03
5-11
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 5
Environmental Considerations
Monroe County has sponsored several mitigation projects on airport property to offset airport-
related impacts. Mitigation projects include the selective removal of fill material in the salt pond
and the removal of invasive plant species. Removal of fill associated with abandoned roadways
and military sites represent an ongoing effort to mitigate airport impacts and participate in salt
pond restoration. The mitigation efforts seek to improve water flow in the salt ponds and help
restore benthic, aquatic, and upland habitats.
The area potentially impacted by the proposed airport projects have been identified as Essential
Fish Habitat (EFH) by the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (SAMFC). Categories
of EFH found within the project area may include scrub/shrub mangroves, estuarine emergent
wetlands, intertidal flats, seagrasses, and coral and hardbottom reef habitats. Several of these
categories of EFH have also been designated as Habitat Areas of Particular Concern (HAPC) by
the SAMFC. Federally managed species associated with mangrove, seagrass, and wetland
habitat include postlarval, juvenile, and adult gray, lane and schoolmaster snappers; juvenile
Goliath grouper and mutton snapper; and adult white grunt.
The proposed airport projects will have the potential to impact water, benthic, and upland
habitats. As such, environmental studies for proposed airport development actions will require a
systematic survey of the biotic communities and an evaluation of potential impacts to those
systems. The proposed airport projects affecting wetlands and other natural resources will
require permit approval and mitigation.
5.3.8 ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES
A Draft Environmental Assessment prepared for EYW in 1993 included coordination with state
and federal agencies in regard to threatened and endangered species. The coordination effort and
field observations identified a listing of species known to occur in the vicinity of the airport that
are classified as threatened, endangered, candidate, or of special concern by the US Fish and
Wildlife Service and/or the State of Florida. The listing includes a variety of indigenous fish,
bird, and mammal species that inhabit coastal and estuarine habitats. The Monroe County Year
2010 Comprehensive Plan (Monroe County, 1997) examined biological communities in Monroe
County and identified forty-five vertebrate species, four invertebrate species, and eighty-two
plant species listed by federal and state authorities as endangered, threatened, or of special
concern. A database maintained by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission was
reviewed for this overview and it was noted that the status for the Bald eagle (Haliaeetus
leucocephalus) has been upgraded from endangered to threatened.
A summary of threatened and endangered species known to occur in the vicinity of EYW, as
identified in the 1993 Draft Environmental Assessment, is provided in Table 5.3 for information
purposes only. The preparation of environmental documents for the proposed airport projects
will require new coordination with state and federal agencies to determine the current status of
listed species, and newly-listed species, known to occur in the vicinity of the airport. The agency
coordination will likely need to be supported by field surveys to identify species and/or their
critical habitat that may have the potential to be impacted by the proposed project(s).
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PlanlS_5\Environmental.doc\D3I12/03
5-12
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 5
Environmental Considerations
TABLE 5.3
SUMMARY OF THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES KNOWN TO OCCUR
IN THE VICINITY OF EYW
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Plants
Tamarandillo
Dildo cactus
Porter's broom spurge
Joewood
Bay Cedar
Sea lavender
Twisted airplant
Fishes
Key Silverside
Reptiles
Lower Keys red rat snake
Florida Keys mole skink
Key mud turtle
Birds
Roseate spoonbill
White-crowned pigeon
Little blue heron
Reddish Egret
Snowy Egret
Tricolored heron
White ibis
Southeastern American
kestrel
Bald eagle
Osprey
Brown Pelican
Least tern
Roseate tern
Mammals
West Indian manatee
Acacia choriophylla
Cereus pentagons
Chamaesyce porteriana var
sco aria
Jacquinia keyensis
Suriana maritima
Tournefortia gnaphalodes
Tilandsia circinata
Candidate
Candidate
Endangered
Threatened
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Threatened
Threatened
Special Concern
Threatened
Endangered
Special Concern
Threatened
Special Concern
Special Concern
Special Concern
Special Concern
Threatened
Threatened
Special Concern
Special Concern
Threatened
Threatened
Endangered
Adapted from:
Draft Environmental Assessment - Key West International Airport Improvements, Dames & Moore (1993).
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, 1997.
Menidia conchorum
Elaphe guttata
Eumeces egregius egregius
Kinosternon baurii
Candidate
Ajaia ajaja
Columba leucocephala
Egretta caerulea
Egretta rufescens
Egretta thula
Egretta tricolor
Eudocimus albus
Candidate
Falco sparverius paulus
Haliaeetus leucocephalus
Pandion haliaetus
Pelecanus occidentalis
Sterna antilllarum
Sterna dougallii
Threatened
Threatened
Trichechus manatus
Endangered
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PlanlS_5\Environmental.doc\03I12103
5-13
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 5 Environmental Considerations
5.3.9 WETLANDS
Wetlands surround much of the airport property. The setting for the wetlands is within, and
associated with, salt ponds which can generally be described as a network of shallow
impoundments with limited tidal flow. The salt ponds and wetlands have been altered over time
by airport, residential, military, commercial, and roadway development.
Wetlands on, and adjacent to, airport property are comprised of several types habitat. Figure 5.4
depicts the wetland resources that have the potential to be affected by the proposed airport
projects. The subject wetlands are classified under the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms
Classification System (FLUCFCS) as bays and estuaries; mangrove swamps; and exposed rock
with marsh grasses. It should be noted that a comprehensive delineation and inventory of
wetland resources on airport property has not been conducted. Over the years, individual
projects have resulted in the delineation of wetlands in specific areas on the airport.
The proposed runway and taxiway development, as well as the associated grading of the RSA,
are anticipated to impact approximately 37.8 acres of wetlands, subject to review and approvals
by regulatory agencies. Anticipated wetland impacts, by type, are presented in Table 5.4.
TABLE 5.4
POTENTIAL WETLAND IMPACTS - PROPOSED RUNWAY EXTENSION ALTERNATIVE
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Source: URS Corporation, 2002.
Some additional wetlands may be impacted by the planned redevelopment of the general aviation
hangar area located west of the aircraft parking apron. The redevelopment of the hangars in this
area is anticipated to impact less than one acre of wetland. The County is currently applying for
a permit to place fill in this wetland area.
The required NEP A environmental documentation and subsequent permit application process for
the proposed airfield developments (whether an RSA project for the existing runway or for the
runway extension) will require the detailed evaluation of alternatives. Of special concern to the
permitting agencies are alternatives that first avoid the wetland resources, then minimize any
unavoidable impacts. Upon meeting these requirements, the state and federal permit application
process will require mitigation for unavoidable wetland losses and impacts. Typical mitigation
scenarios may include replacement, restoration, enhancement, and/or preservation of wetlands.
Based on recent studies, it is likely that the mitigation for the impacts will include a combination
of mitigation methods applied to on-site and off-site mitigation projects. The physical nature of
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master Plan\S_5\Environmental.doc\03l12103
5-14
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
STER PLAN UPDATE\EXHIBITS\F1G 5.4.0WG
J:\KEY WEST\MA
03/13/03
II
-t
0
-t
)>-
r
::E
M
-t
~ ..., -0
Z 00 '-l 0' VI ..,. to nr :;0
-t 00 N
0 0 ~ VI ..,. N 0 O?5-P
0
Vl -t ~ ~ N II "'- 0..., 3:~
II II
)>- ..,. Mn-c_
,....., r VI Vl )>- Z
VI '-l n)>-
~ -t:;o
0 Vl-<
0' )::'-0
VI -t n :;0
'-l VI N VI N tN 0:;00
VI ~ 0 '-l N 0 -t Me....
~ N ~ U, <.0 VI )>- Vll"'l
'-" en U1 r "-' n
-t
II I"'l
0
~
)>-
n
:;0
M
Vl
n
en U1 .j:. 0
OJ OJ '-l N lO <
tN .j:. N 0 M
.j:. N 0 "'- :;0
.j:. )>-
tN
---.J Z
0
..., ...,
m )>m 0 0 r
:;0 )> Cl fTl ;;: )> C:;o IJ :;0 0
0 -:;ox )> -< (j))> fTl r :;0
)>- :;O)>IJ Z (j) -tN Z 0
0 IJ (j) 0 Cl :;0- )>-
(j) o (j) (j) :;0 )> )>C )::
:;0 I"'l fTl 0 Z r)> Cn r
)> -t(j)O < 0 );:Z Z ~!; )>-
Z I'l Z-o 0 OVl Z
0 :;0 I'l Vl~ 0
0 (j) (j) IJI'l
I 0 ::;;: -t -IJ ::! C
C) ^ )> C Z-o 0 Vl
;;: )> fTll'l )>- r'"1
I ::;;: IJ :;0 :;0 :::!
::;;: =i (j) fTl "'- 0
)>
-< I (j) Z
(j) ;;:
Vl
)> -<
:;0 Vl
(j) -t
I I"'l
3:
I I I
I I] I I
-:-:.:-:-:-: I I I I I
'.>:->:-:-
....... I I
............ I
:.;.;.:-:-: I I
.;-:-:<.:-, I
............ I
............ I I
I I I
"0 ,,> '" '" )>- r
" 0> "''' C X ;;j rrl
'" -'" "'''' O"ll Z Vi "
0 "'", 0" --<'" ~ ::I 0 C)
~> --<)>-
" "'''' "'0 z '"
0 --<0 nc! n)>- -< <;) --< rrl
0 ::In
ji;"Tl ::I", o::c Vl > -0 Z
-0" g", Z'" > ;;j '"
>", "Tl -0 0 0
'" N'" NC '" -0
C no --< 0 '"
z --<;.; OC oz -< '" '"
ZZ Z::E --< --<
::E n ",::E "')>- )>- -<
)>- ;:;1 )>- -< '" lD
-< -< '" C r
0 )>- r= z
0 '"
z
<;)
Vl
Ol
:E 0
0
5" m
- --I
(I) r- <;)
~ ..,
:;,^ )> '"
'" >
U> ~CD Z -u
~ ::c
0.'< 0 n
-U ~:E CJ) Vl o"z
ii) n
OJ >
-CD :0 r
C '"
u >en
a. m z
'" -.-
m ..." CJ) "Tl
"0 '"
0 0 '"
--<
.., c::
-
:0
0 Ol
m 0
0
CJ)
."
U1G)
.c
~:;;o
IT!
Section 5
Environmental Considerations
the Florida Keys limits the opportunity for single, large-scale mitigation opportunities. It is
likely that several smaller projects would be combined to provide mitigation.
5.3.10
FLOODPLAINS
EYW is located within a special flood hazard area inundated by 100-year floods. Portions of the
airport located in the flood hazard area are also subject to coastal flooding with velocity (wave)
hazard (FEMA, 1997). The airport is subject to flooding from heavy precipitation and periodic
storm surges associated with hurricanes.
The proposed runway projects should be designed to comply with local flood regulations and
Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management, to "reduce the risk of flood loss and minimize
the impact of floods on human safety, health, and welfare, and to restore and preserve the natural
and beneficial values served by floodplains."
5.3.11
COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
The Florida Coastal Management Program (FCMP) consists of a network of statutes
administered by eleven state agencies and four of the five water management districts. The
FCMP is designed to ensure the prudent use and protection of the state's coastal resources.
Under provisions of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, any federal activity that
has the potential to impact Florida's coastal resources is reviewed for consistency with the
FCMP. If state review determines a project is not consistent with Florida's statutes, the FCMP
can require that the applicant revise its plans. The proposed airport projects, funded in part by
the Federal Aviation Administration, will require that the projects be submitted for FCMP
consistency review.
The airport is not located within a barrier island or coastal barrier resource unit. As such, the
provisions of the Coastal Barrier Resources Act do not apply.
5.3.12
WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS
There are no Wild and Scenic Rivers, or stream segments included in the Nationwide River
Inventory, in the vicinity of EYW.
5.3.13
FARMLAND
The soils and land uses found on, and in the vicinity of, the airport do not meet prime farmland
criteria and are not subject to the requirements of the Farmland Protection Policy Act.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master P1anlS_5\Environmental.doc\03I12103
5-15
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 5 Environmental Considerations
5.3.14 ENERGY SUPPLY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
The improvements to the terminal and airfield facilities at EYW are expected to generate a slight
increase in the demand for electrical power. The additional electricity demand anticipated from
the proposed airport expansion should not be substantial and should be supplied through existing
power distribution systems.
Mineral resources in the vicinity of the airport include limestone and sand. The operation and
proposed projects to the airport should not impact any mineral resources which could be
considered to be in short supply or unusual in nature.
5.3.15
LIGHT EMISSIONS
Airfield lighting currently in use at EYW includes Medium Intensity Runway Lights (MIRL),
Medium Intensity Taxiway Lights (MITL), and Runway End Identifier Lights (REIL). Visual
Approach Slope Indicator (V ASI) lights are installed for both runway approaches. Other airfield
lighting includes outdoor area lighting at the aircraft parking apron, terminal building, parking
lot, and aircraft storage hangars. The proposed airfield projects would include the installation of
new runway and taxiway edge lights in association with the proposed runway and taxiway
extensions. The proposed runway extension will not require the relocation of the runway
threshold lights and Runway End Identifier Lights. An approach lighting system for the runway
is not proposed.
Lighting impacts are normally concerned with the extent to which airport lighting would create
an annoyance among residents or traffic in the vicinity of the airport. EYW is located in an
urbanized setting with residential developments (single-family residences and condominiums)
and roadways located nearby. Substantial impacts related to airport lighting are not anticipated
since the lighting configuration will change little from existing conditions. However, the issue
will need to be reviewed in more detail in the environmental study required for the proposed
runway project.
5.3.16
CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS
Construction activity has the potential to produce temporary impacts in areas on or adjacent to
the airport. Measures to minimize these impacts will be implemented in accordance with FAA
established procedures before construction on any improvements begin. The incorporation of the
provisions and specifications of FAA Advisory Circular 150/5370-10, Standards for Specifying
the Construction of Airports~ Item P-156, should be used in order to avoid and/or minimize
adverse construction impacts.
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master P1an\S_5\Environmental.doc\03I12J03
5-16
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 5 Environmental Considerations
5.3.17 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
The projects proposed at EYW are not expected to unfairly or adversely impact any group of
people, including racial, ethnic, or socioeconomic groups. Detailed review of census data should
be accomplished in the preparation of environmental documents for the proposed runway
projects to document the demographic profiles of neighborhoods potentially affected by the
proposed airport projects.
W:\ 12637817 _KWIA Master P1an\S_5\EnvironmentaJ.doc\03l12103
5-17
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
--
.,&..
SECTION 6
DEVELOPMENT PLANS
.....
Section 6 Development Plans
6.1 INTRODUCTION
This section of the study presents the plans for the future development of Key West International
Airport (EYW). The development shown on these plans is based upon information contained in
the preceding section of this report, as well as input from the study's Advisory Committee.
These plans present how the airport could be developed through 2021. All facilities are drawn to
scale and represent the implementation of recommendations presented in the previous sections.
The plans contain the following:
. Airport Layout Plan
. Terminal Area Plan
. Airport Airspace Plan
. On Airport Land Use Plan
. Airport Property Map
The following paragraphs describe these plans.
6.2 AIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN
The airport layout plan (ALP) serves as a guide for development at the airport through 2021. It
provides a scaled depiction of all existing and proposed facilities, their location on the airport,
and the associated FAA design standards. A reduced size version of the ALP is illustrated in
Figure 6.1. A brief discussion of the major elements of the ALP is provided in the following
paragraphs.
6.2.1 RUNWAYS
Proposed development associated with Runway 9/27 consists of two projects. The first project
consists of bringing the runway's safety area into conformance with FAA design standards for
airport reference code C-ill facilities. The second project consists of extending the runway by
750 feet on its west-end and 500 feet on its east-end.
The runway safety area project would consist of filling ponds, removing vegetation, and grading
land around the runway to meet the FAA's clearance and grading requirements. The proposed
runway safety area would have a width of 500 feet and a length that extends 1,000 feet past the
Runway 9 threshold and 1,250 feet past the Runway 27 threshold. Although the FAA's standard
only requires a length of 1,000 feet beyond the end of pavement, a safety area of 1,250 feet is
proposed for the east-end of the runway. By extending the runway safety area on the east-end,
an additional 250 feet of the proposed runway extension on the east-end could be considered in
W:\12637817J:WIA MlISter PbnlS_6\Dev Pbn.doc\3ll1J03
6-1
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 6
Development Plans
takeoff and landing calculations. This would increase the effective runway length for departures
on Runway 9 to 5,801 feet with the proposed runway extensions.
The runway extension project would provide 5,801 feet of useable runway for departures to the
east and 5,301 feet of useable runway for departures to the west. The landing distance on
Runway 9 would increase to 5,051,while the landing distance of Runway 27 would remain 4,801
feet. The location of landing thresholds would not change. Therefore, aircraft landing at EYW
would pass over surrounding land uses at the same elevation as they do with the existing runway.
The construction of a standard runway safety area and the proposed runway extensions would
require numerous environmental approvals due to impacts that would occur to surrounding
wetlands, salt ponds, and mangroves. In order to obtain such approvals, appropriate mitigation
measures would be required. Due the limited availability of land in the Key West area, such
mitigation measures may be difficult or cost prohibitive. In order to explore this issue and
provide the information to the FAA, a feasibility study is examining the issues associated with
mitigation and environmental approvals. Information from the study will be forwarded to
Monroe County and the FAA so that a determination can be made regarding the projects'
feasibility.
If the feasibility of the projects appears high, the next step would be the preparation of an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Information obtained from the preparation of the EIS
would then be used to seek permits from the appropriate environmental agencies.
If the feasibility of the project is determined to be low, or environmental approvals ultimately
cannot be obtained, a different course of action from that outlined above will be required. This
may entail the consideration of runway safety area improvements that are less than FAA
standards, but more than currently exists around the runway. Further consultation with the FAA
would be required at that point to define a course of action.
6.2.2 T AXIW A YS
The only taxiway projects included in the plan are extensions of Taxiway A to serve the
proposed extensions at each end of Runway 9/27. The westward extension of Taxiway A is
proposed to angle toward Runway 9 to minimize impacts to the adjacent salt pond. This
configuration does have drawbacks. Specifically, it would increase the distance from the runway
threshold to the taxiway hold line in order to keep aircraft outside the runway's safety area.
Further, evaluation of this issue may be required at the time of preliminary design.
The eastward extension of Taxiway A is proposed in a standard parallel configuration that would
enable aircraft to taxi to the extended east end of the runway. The construction of this taxiway
segment would necessitate the demolition, or relocation, of the National Weather Service's
balloon launch facility. It is anticipated that the balloon launch facility will no longer be in use
at the time a runway extension is pursued. The National Weather Service office currently
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PIanIS_6\Dev Plans.docl31l4lO3
6-2
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
r-- -
I~ rE rH I ~P:f:F ~ I
I ~ · [!!.If'' 0
~ hia~i ~
. ~ : f;i!~ ~
~ !(J h ~ "&1 g
!O aa!l:J I=:Z:
. Bl .:~ia,:z
'!il la"r1!!!.~
I .nf~.-
> .:con-on
) 1] ~ 8 Go..... ...,
II ;g ~~~il.!~ ~
~ a..g: ~3-g 0
f'. ~,l!-g," 5
I l I -, II ~ ~l;g.~ ~
----J I -.:- ~ L~' ~~
-
~EY WEST\
MASTER PLAN
I UPDATE\EXHIBITS\F1G 6
.1.OWG
~
if; ;U;,~
!i! j'lll ! ill! 11111 i inl! I !ill ~ !!~I! p 1111 P .1
'I[! l ! ! II I! ;j I i ~
! ~J P G)
+- a+- J I ~
J~ ~ ;;;: . 0
lJ' il~I;:'I~I~lg ~ - ~ .1 -r.-
11 I' II ~. . ~11'1'1"'I'.'i
Ip 1!I!!H!HI
~" g I i ~ ~ ~ 8 i ~ ~
~ n~ K ~~~
i ~ i
<H0,,:oIHllI11111 Ii >
":;'i).-HEl8oi ~ .111""1 11 IllI III
.' ~~~~ 1118
I r T j Ii Bl I
b
IIIII
J~ _ r C
11,1 0:'><.' .:..-rTt: ~ > 0
I rfJ....... 'f::. . r.\. .tJ.t:1. r=
I IJ-n.' .'H~' .'. · · ~
~ . 1-:-r.-.1 . ., ~
.' 5~ E I ,;t";\. ~ :i! >
~;~ _~;~" ~~ 'p; :~T.~" ~ z
! '. ':{.r.-:M. ... ~
m. .:t..."1' . .' '"
'" I.' .' 5l
,..,
_ ill-;:--
-
I!III -.
Illl oVWI; \ i II
~ ~. ~ r[ . . 11-
~ .OL.+ .1 ~ ~,- ;;J
jiB .: 'I ' · ". ·
u. 1-~~: iN ..~~.,t ::'r- " :
. ..~., Vl
!Ii . ...1';. "
~ .' .
_ ill'''''''''
_ Z7 ..l..L-l
-
re ~ 1 r
-~I
5'
-
~ CD
II> ..."
tn =--
..... l>>"'"
!!1 - CD
-C c' 0.<
~ = <
c: et<
~ _ CD
i" _en
CD ::;-...
"0
o
..."
L - I
- ......
I
~
-
:a
"
o
:a
.....
r-
~
~
c:
.....
"
r-
~
z
-,
"'TJ
0)(;)
.C
......:;;0
I L ~ J L
03/13/03 08:42
I 'I I I I I
'I' " II I !I! II .11111
! I Ii i i ~i I! q q i ! ill i II 11111,,11 lIUT n
'! II i .' ! I! ! ! I! WI I !II !I'll
,I. i 1.'q1, i II Iii II' I I' I U ~ a I
~.sJ ~ c.Tn ~T5 II' T ~ ~
hi, , liP' - J T t, ~
. " _ "U: !I" i" I' i' "i' 11.1, I T T J :
! E I ~ II'nl~IJMlI~ Ii' .I~I ~I ~t -111,;,1 IC ~ ~ III ~
~!lfl rnillJ]~ i I ill Ii I ill m! !:II' -IILI J I Ili8!: 1~1""
'l I Ii !i liB nU~
~' I I I I "
'J" I! 1111!'n'IlIT 1
__--' I !i Ii \ ! 11!111 i III II Ill!ll! _!':dl!
... \\'" , !I.!!; >
". i b ! ~;! ~
- ! ....
_ S i~ ~
. Ii W"
~~ 1!'H~H
f:\'~ '~l E I n I ) di . i
~' \\ -' ~::.
~
~\ ~
Ib "\ ....." l I ~ 1 g
~ S 5 0
^ ' . >
11('1/\ U ., ~ ~
.. 'II ' o ClOCl 0 \) ~ ~~ I i ~ 00
, i loooo'ui~ '
'Ul ! u. i~'?"...-e " . IIIITII ~
'" ' ~""",=<<6 II '!! III a
, :! Ilt'~"'~ '\ ~
Wi III i
i 0" ~ ..... L I Ii! IIli'
i ~\ , 'I"
," "I,l~ ~ ~ _ h!1 IIIIT
~1 " !I!I ~~
I \ i __I ~ ':, l !:!!!I U;;I ~~
iI , = - dill! I' .! "0
f" """.' ~; Ii!!!lll 'I ~~
\ \~ ui " II !! ~"
O \\ rl !I I' II ~~
~II 0, '~~~. ,~':- :.; Iii i!!! ~~
I 0 \\\ \} \ I! I i! ': ~a
\\ ,\ ~
\\ \ \'
~ " \~
'o"~' l
o~
(3,Ot
\\
I
,
I
, I
\ I 'If I
??~ \CV~~ ~ ~ I
9\\G~ ~'1 II
~ \, rT. 'i
~(( \ ~ ..,.
\
\
III
III
III \
\~ ~
III
11\
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
1\ \r\\~\f\\
I:~I ~\\~- ~
\~\ \ ~~~a1\.\)
III ~ ~
III \?t
III '-
III ........---
III ,.\.-::;;
II, I'
/i/l
\1\
'\'\'\
\\\
11\
III \
III ~
III \
III --
III
11\
III
fir
~f-':;:~
"""----
-............,
\\\\ III (
III
III
fii li I ~w
/II "I ~
III ~ cl
III · I ~
III ,,' \! 0 I~ i
III ~, o! 1
"I ~ ~ 0
III I I
(:i' ,"/ (rO 11 :~
~I 'w' ,
[/Ii \ I
J /II ,! II III
i IIi I' I I II
i ':!i I;
/lIe I '
~ ~,~
III ~I I r
,1/ \tl
in I : r~
/1, // I
is "'/'/ !jl IJ · I
I( ill I
{.)it'- ,I i
III ... D II 1
,. /II .. .. I! D I ~ 1
/,:1 .. OliO!
/,1 ,,,,.,. I I
((( ~ ~' I
:~ . i . D I
~,~ ,N f-e I D · f :
I~(I ,\J!J :)j f-€) I 0 i I I V ~
'\ ~ ~ f.@ I ~)I ~~5
\11 (' '(zt'i, :;p.,. '- 0 I bi
'\~\'*') II~' 1 v!!'
'\. 1 \!?~ I . . I "I I'
'\ .~! \ .,~! ~CJ ~ ~ 0 \ l
'\ ~L~' !(~K ~~~ c0Y ~
,~"',~"_~171--' \ - ~l~ -
,~? ' \ II ~f~ ~ \ .J-o.
,~ .~~:fI; ~! II \,)i C::][;,\/t 011\)1~ -:'
~ '" t1 i ~ III)=----> ~~ --- \\
. ,,,.J' ,~ ~ ~ --"",,"/ \ \
, ~' , ~/
1 if17 '""'~t.::-"'~;';'~~;';'~~=~"""""""-
L!~ ' \ \ II
~(+I _ ~.~71' _ _ ~ 115iU ~~
1 h h ' -\J\ fA ~i~ ~~
~i l:d ~~~ ~~ ~
---- ,"! ,'~
I "~'i - \ ijl~ ~~ :
I I' \ ~~i~ =1: ~
,"r:::~
II i \\ m.
i \ ~ I ·
8
\ I
r g
~ I ~~5
, 11"1l Ii!
~..
~1 "~
Ii / n
!f
~~
l I
-I
r
)>
Z
-I
,
I
I
,
~
~ elil;
n ..
'" ~..
o ~;1~-
S;; ~~
z ~~
.., '"
a
-
---z
I
-
Section 6
Development Plans
located at the airport is scheduled to move off airport property in 2004. Consequently, it is
expected that another balloon launch facility will be constructed off-site. However, if relocation
on airport property is required, the facility could be relocated in roughly the same area, but just
outside of the proposed taxiway's clearance lines. The clearance requirement for taxiways
serving aircraft in design group ill is 93 feet. An area of clear land exists just outside this
clearance requirement that is suitable for the relocation of the facility.
6.2.3 NA VIGA TIONAL AIDS
As previously noted in Section 3.2.3.12, there is a desire to have precision approach capability at
EYW. Two options were noted for this to occur at EYW: W AAS or TLS. As noted, there are
still are number of hurdles that must be overcome for W AAS to become a viable option for
providing precision approach capability including operator equipment issues. Therefore, it
appears that TLS is the most viable option for providing precision approach capabilities at EYW
in the short term. It is recommended that further evaluation of this option be explored through
consultation with tenant airlines.
6.3 TERMINAL AREA PLAN
6.3.1 PASSENGER TERMINAL
The plan provides two options for future terminal facilities. These options depend on funding
availability and the willingness of Monroe County to issue bonds to cover the cost of
constructing a new passenger terminal.
The preferred option is the construction of new passenger terminal. As described in Section 4,
the master plan update Advisory Committee expressed an interest in pursuing the revised version
of Concept D as the preferred terminal plan. This concept proposes the construction of an
approximately 50,000-square-foot terminal with an elevated access road and elevated parking
structure in the area currently occupied by automobile parking. A concourse facility would
extend over Faraldo Circle and would extend to the current edge of aircraft parking apron. The
existing passenger terminal would remain in operation until such time the new terminal became
operational. The terminal area plan is depicted in Figure 6.2.
The proposed terminal would be elevated to meet floodplain requirements and to allow the
construction of an elevated concourse walkway over Faraldo Circle. This would enable Faraldo
Circle to remain operational while the new terminal is under construction.
The preferred option represents a sizeable investment and requires a commitment of Federal,
state, and local funding. Estimated construction costs for this facility are $23.2 million with
program costs of approximately $5.3 million for a total cost of $28.5 million. Program costs
W:\12637817_KWIA Master PIanIS_6\Dev Plans.doc\3/14lO3
6-3
Key West International Airporl
Master Plan Update
Section 6
Development Plans
include change order contingency, design fees, project management and construction
management.
If funding is not available and Monroe County does not wish to issue bonds to finance the
construction of a new passenger terminal, an alternate approach is to consider the construction of
a new elevated building between the existing terminal and the FIS building. As noted in Section
4, such a building could be constructed in the space currently occupied by the terminal annex.
By demolishing the terminal annex, sufficient space would exist for the construction of 8,000
square feet of new terminal. Certain facilities in the existing terminal could be relocated into the
new space created by this expansion and would allow passenger processing functions inside the
existing terminal to be reconfigured and expanded.
This alternate approach would provide only one-half of the increase in space needed to serve
existing levels of passengers and would not provide any space to accommodate forecasted
growth of passengers. Overall, it is anticipated that this approach would be pursued as a short- to
intermediate-term strategy until funding could be obtained for the construction of a new terminal
in the long-term.
6.3.2 ROADWAY ACCESS
Construction of the revised Concept D would result in the portion of Faraldo Circle that passes in
front of the existing passenger terminal being removed from use as a roadway. Passenger traffic
entering the airport would use the elevated roadway to access the terminal or would enter ground
level parking in front of the terminal. Access to the FIS building would also be maintained.
However, vehicles that currently access the fuel farm, general aviation facilities, the air traffic
control tower, and the Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting Station would no longer be able to
access those facilities via Faraldo Circle. Therefore, a new method of accessing those facilities
would be required.
A new access road is proposed to resolve this issue. This new road would be located west of the
Florida State Highway Patrol building and would provide a connection from South Roosevelt
Boulevard to the fuel farm, general aviation facilities, the air traffic control tower and the
Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting Station. Construction of the road would require demolition of
a small, concrete block, storage building that was associated with a National Weather Service
radar facility that has been removed from the airport. Construction of the road would also
require appropriate environmental approvals and permits
6.3.3 AUTOMOBILE PARKING
Automobile parking facilities proposed by the plan include the construction of an elevated
parking deck across from the terminal. This parking deck could provide approximately 110
spaces and would be suitable for rental car ready/return parking. Additional parking for the
public could be provided south of the elevated roadway and beneath the elevated parking
W:U2li37817JCWIA Master P1anlS_6\Dev Plan.doc\3l1l/ll3
6-4
Key West International Airporl
Master Plan Update
OWG 03/13/03 08:51
R PLAN UPOATE\EXHIBfTS\F1G 6.2.
J:\KEY WE$T\MASTE
~~~S~~ ~~
"zC:" ~ ~ ~.... ~ ~ fY1 -I Z G c: 0 ,., 0
... u "'. ,., ,., !ti ~ z ;0 VI 6 ~
~~ ~ - ~ ~ i -<" 'l.. ~;'l::;
80 ~ .... ~ ~ lZ '" .., ~ ~,,~
1:::( ttI o......;:! M P'I "":to- ,.,"'U c:
<;2:;; \:! c il ~ ~ ~ i'j:::! ~:;:
g: ~ g ~ 0 .. g ~ ~ ~ ~
" '" ~ ~~ ~
~~ ~ c
M ~
'-', ',.... ~ : 0 I. J ~ f ill II! i ~
r\:!), -:- 'l7': J I I I I
11 : II II I' ..,
I :: I I S
~ ~ ~ ~ : II I ~
.. .. ~ ~ I II I
I I : ::
o
,.(~:',., -f- E9 g rl g
'"
o
o
G)
;0
>
"ll
:I:
C'i
~ O.Z
f;j
Z
r:l
rTJ
-i
'"
o
o
5'
-
CD
~ ..."
ll> ="
*" a CD
.., -'0.<
" 0
- = <
~ m <;
c: -CD
"0 >en
g. -.-
-- ..."
CD "0
o
..."
-
::!J
0)G1
.c
"':;;0
P.1
III
III
III
III
II;
III
II;
I II
I II
I;;
) ;)
I /;
III
I II
I II
I II
I 'I
\ \ \
\ \ \
\ \ \
\\\
\ \\
\\\
\ \\
\\\
\\\
\\\
\\\
\\\
\\\
\\\
\\\
\\\
\\\
\\\
\\\
.....
m
:a
~
z
~
r-
~
:a
m
~
"
r-
~
z
I...
~
~
-<
>
~
Ul
::1
z
"
~
:z:
~
...
'"
c
z
~
-<
...
~
q
x
o
q
s
++-t-
..
\
~:'- ,7
Q
~~
c!<C;Ey
o~
Section 6
Development Plans
structure. Space for approximately 160 vehicles is available in this area. It is assumed, for
security reasons, that parking beneath the terminal structure will not be permitted. Thus, the
number of automobile parking spaces will be in the range of 270. This is significantly less than
the 439 spaces that are currently provided for public and rental cars and provides no spaces to
account for future growth. It was projected by the demand/capacity analysis that parking
demand would increase to 700 spaces by 2021. However, it was noted that the projection was
heavily influenced by rental car demands that can be influenced by operational strategies.
The fact that the preferred terminal concept would provide fewer parking spaces was discussed
by members of the master plan update Advisory Committee. It was noted during these
discussions that parking rates at the airport are considerably below market rates and therefore,
encourage island residents to park at the airport. Adjusting these rates would encourage the use
of taxis and mass transit alternatives and may reduce future demand for parking at the airport.
Furthermore, the construction of additional parking areas could be considered around the
proposed terminal. This issue could be explored during future terminal planning.
In conclusion, the preferred terminal concept would provide fewer parking spaces than existing
conditions. Demand for parking facilities would have to be controlled through adjustments of
parking rates.
6.3.4 RENTAL CAR FACILITIES
Existing rental car facilities for A vis and Dollar will remain in their existing locations. Capital
improvements are planned at these facilities as part of lease renewals. These capital
improvements will consist of re-paving, drainage, and aesthetic enhancements.
It is also planned that the Monroe County Department of Public Works facilities located along
Stickney Road will be relocated off airport property. This parcel will then be redeveloped for
rental car use. It is anticipated that rental car facilities on this parcel will consist of a service
facility and parking area.
6.3.5 GENERAL A VIA TION FACILITIES
Planned improvements to general aviation facilities consist of two projects. The first project will
replace the existing dilapidated hangar area with new hangars and tie-downs. The second project
will rehabilitate and expand the FBO automobile parking area. These projects are depicted in
Figure 6.3.
The hangar project will replace the 10 existing aircraft hangars with 20 new hangars. The new
hangars will consist of 12 individual hangars and 8 nested T-hangars. The plan also includes the
construction of a paved apron that will accommodate approximately 10 aircraft tie-downs. The
construction of this apron will require the relocation of a lighted wind cone and segmented circle.
W:\l2637817J{WIA Master PlanlS_6\Dev Plan.doc\3ll1lO3
6-5
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 6
Development Plans
It is proposed that the wind cone and segmented circle be relocated to a site on the north side of
the runway.
The rehabilitation and expansion of the FBO automobile parking will entail the removal of one
hangar and two storage buildings and the realignment of the roadway entrance to the aircraft
apron. The realignment of the roadway entrance will cut across the existing automobile parking
lot. Parking lost as a result of this realignment will be replaced be new parking on the southwest
side of the realigned roadway.
6.4 AIRSPACE PLAN
Airspace requirements associated with airports are specified by Part 77 of the Federal Aviation
Regulations. These regulations define a series of imaginary surfaces that extend upward and
outward from an airport's runways. The purpose of these surfaces is to define the volume of
airspace required to ensure the safe and efficient use of navigable airspace by aircraft. Objects
that penetrate Part 77 surfaces are considered obstructions and may be hazards to air navigation.
Therefore, it is desirable to maintain Part 77 surfaces clear of all obstructions.
The Part 77 surfaces associated with the proposed airfield will be different from those associated
with the existing airfield. The primary difference will be that the primary surface will increase in
length to account for the proposed extensions on the east and west ends of the runway.
Likewise, the approach surfaces will shift outward due to the extensions. Airport height zoning
for the City of Key West and Monroe County will need to be updated to reflect the changes from
existing airspace. Figure 6.4 presents the airspace plan.
6.5 ON-AIRPORT LAND USE PLAN
Future on-airport land use will be a combination of airfield, aviation development, non-aviation
development, community facilities, and environmental areas (consisting of salt ponds,
mangroves and wetlands). The majority of airport land, approximately 50 percent, is used for
airfield operations. The second greatest use of land, just over 30 percent of airport property, is
for environmental areas. The composition of airport land is presented in Table 6.1. Figure 6.5
presents the land use plan.
TABLE 6.1
ON-AIRPORT LAND USE
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
127
40
2
5
80
254
50%
16%
1%
2%
31%
100%
W:\12637817 _KWIA Master PlanIS_6\Dev Plans.doc\3/12lO3
6-6
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
J:\KEY WES1\MASTER PLAN UPOATE\EXHIBI1S\F1G 6.3.OWG 03/04/03 16:09
I
I
<5
I 0
I Cl (]I
::0 0
>
"ll
:I:
(')
(/) O"Z
0
> Ul
r;; )>
z r
." -I
l"'l
l"'l
-i
\J
0
z
<5 0
0
'I
I.
/' I
~' ,
---:+--: ~, I
/ I '" '
(' I '\!
i I 1
i I 0 !i
l I'
!\ I /' !
I "-, -~' I
i ,/'t=-~,,,, i
( '\i
I I \'
I I I
i !i
~ I ,Ii
i ',I - :~,/ i
I ~~ I
~' I '\1
i I '1
, ,
! I !
! I !
I I
I i I i
!! i i I f'
L--l-~-~-~-\--~----r I )\
, , , / I '"
'-----":-'~,--- ----~>------ ,~t---<:::' i
/ / ,/ / I '''', i /
, \' /
- I if
- .~ """""""""~ ~""""",>",~~ (
G;;:~t".~., ~. II "
- __1-
l I /1
I.~D
/
/
/
/
\J \J -l ", ", r
;;0 ;;0 0 x x fT1
o 0 to iii iii G)
~ ~",~ ~ ~
~ ~;;Oc;') c;') 0
o 0 ~to to
C C
~ ~ ~I; I;
r;; ~ Oz z
:s::: )> c;') c;')
", ;;0 Ul (J)
~ Ul
(.-...-.)
.... ............ '. ".. ./
I )> c;') \l ,..
",.. g~~
"''''\l
~~~
r",
~>o
~~~
z
-x__x ~~
-x1 p~
~ 113'
I \x/"
1HJ x-x_x,
J?01tH-t
5'
-
~ ~
D> ="
;. aCD
~ c'o.<
ii>=<
:::I D)-<
c: - (1)
"&. > en
D> -.-
- ..."
al "0
o
..."
-
"'TJ
O)G")
.c
VI:;;o
P.1
OJ
o
~
::0
o
Z
"
m
z
m
:a
~
r-
~
S
3>
~
o
z
"
r-
~
z
!;;;;;::-:::""l. ~~
. I'
~ t
CD
c
5
.z
Cl
o
'----
..---
J:\KEY WEST\MASTER PlAN UPDATE\EXHIBITS\F1G 6.4.OWG 03/06/03 13:D4
.."
)>
:::0
"tJ
)>
:::0
-I
-.-J
-.-J
(j)
C
:::0
.."
)>
()
ITl
(j)
I
"tJ
:::0
o
.."
r=
ITl
S;
ITl
=E
j
I I
~ -- -1--1--1---
c ------ u_ If --
~ ~=~.~ ~-H'-
1< I
Il 1
" ..=~=-=-~ =~-<0 l' "'--
.; .-..----.l-.r---- t-
, I
: ~tft
III
~ I
~ +----1-- #_. ~_
" I ' I
@ -- li-'-i-
-- u~ ti
~ -/I-----+--
I I
~ --- -/-1 ___~---
/ i u_~
~ -/--- fu-- ,_un.
~l__.__j .... _._
I
~~, I
;':='t :
1
I
I.
I'
I)
11
I;
I,
I
1
-~, . '" I
I
-'.~~ :'~
~~;~.-'''J 1
\'3i-'i;;;(;)
L,~ 1
l -1~.~=~~r'"
j _ -\---:
! -j ----i--
--l..-.i"
; =~=,\~l=C"
I
i .-- ----\1- -----+----
~~ I
J -.----+.~ .-.---+.--..-
1'\, I
i --.----+\.--1-...---
l ________i__ '--r-
: ~ i
j - --- --:---\-1-
~ - ....-- c---\I--
\ I
j--------I -..--1--.-.-
\ '
j ------ _\-1-__
\\ I
\1
~ ------ --- -'t---
\
\
~-- ---- --.--- ---\-
--..;;:,
,--@
"'
l;1o
-ltJ
-I:;'
--:-_=.-~~-'~l;
.Q-
I
I
.-----+---
-+----
,
S 00.
,."""";",,",,
-
::L;
.'~
. ...,.,,,.i;.< .
\~I ~ C 0
~
5'
-
CD
:s:: ..."
ll> = ~
~ a ro
-0 c' '<
~ ; =E
~ -(I)
g. ~~
ro-o
o
..."
-
>
-
:c
CJ)
"
>
o
m
"
r-
>
z
:!J
me;)
~~
P.1
C)
;lJ
>"ll
1J;lJ
:I: 0
('5:!l
r-
~!':1
~rii
"';lJ
z~
"Tl>
",r-
",
-1
.."
)>
:::0
"tJ
)>
:::0
-I
-.-J
-.-J
(j)
C
:::0
.."
)>
()
ITl
(j)
I
"tJ
r-
)>
z
S;
ITl
=E
,. .
'.J.
;/: \; .,.U
;:'..-".'"
;:;: ..
'. .:
'~I . 1_':;
::
,.:' . .:1 '..' :;.\~
,'- '\'i, \
'. '....,
( v.
;\~
/;,\
'. . :.0':
"y-:~ .
"'i,t'(\: .(i~'~; :,
f'.'.: .,' " ..:", '.
:;: ~,~'
'\;
'"", /.'
'.. ." ,
..""". '.' '
". '/ " .
;"..: ...i'\
" '. >
.' ',,' " "".'-
;: .
i",
\fl>
"':!.
':, :\'
:) .",'
:',"':
...:;....;:;.,....'::.: ,
:..,.' ". ",,'" \\.\.
'"
o
o
o
C)
;lJ"ll
>;lJ
"ll0
I"Tl
nr
",
Ul ..
n:I:
>0
F;;~
N
z~
"Tl-1
",>
",r-
-1
'"
o
o
'"
o
o
o
....
o
o
o
o
C)
;lJ
>
"ll
I
('5"ll
Ulii:
nz
~s;
"''''
z::E
"Tl
",
",
-1
o "z
'"
o
o
o
....
o
o
o
;:;;.- '. ,'J ';.':"
.; ~ .. . ..' :
J
,\
\1.. (~.~.
..... "
1"1
;
.; . .
,... .
: . i' :'~
:.:
i'.,., ....".'..,.
,.... ""., ~
."'" a-...8 :",
i::;~... ." I::.' > .'
"", :'.. ". '. \1 w \..,..
, .\j'
~ '.:
"
~, \
\
;;,,\j,~{,
+'i
~ . .;... CO,"-..
W
'I. ,.:, 'I
__ 0 ....I
-;...,..
~ }' .-
~
I I-~:~>-
,
~
~
:I:
~)>
.1
~.
7'
, n
, .
I
'.' t.
"
.',:
,- .'
~, ',.'. " ': ., -.
.- '. '. ...."
...,
.
, ,,'
. '.'
'.,
..
A
"
"
"
\J.v'd )"
,
'ti; ';,
, .
50
.~ J~!. ~~-~\~.
\
I'.",' ~\iV.: S,:~.l..:..y.'. ..,,;
\ ft~ t.i
~I~'~~' ." 'i.:./
-;'::-";,: .rt-.. -~,-,,:;:=!'~~""';' //':
~rw/
..
..",,,,i" II
.,,,, Lf~~L'
L.
'\(fF1\~;.& .
!\\~., ,
j;.' I
';
p pi
., p' ~
.'
,i)~
:5
k' ~
~:'>
~
o
" :~;
.:.1 \
,~-~
.f/::' ~
.
'"
r
"" k
1\
" ~09~~
..
S-
o
..0
, ~;i'~~-f
,
,'~>:, !
j'\:,~'l.~' \~~.1
I ><":;J~
:~~t]
'-.'" ,&1:"
.~
::: ..."- - --_.::~~~~!l~~~::_ I ?or-
~HHlHgl~11111 ~!~H~~~m ~~
~~~>~~>~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~ ~~
-~~~-~~~~~- OO~~~- >~>
!~~~~~i~H~ \Hi~PP;~~ ~$
;:;~~;~~;;:~ ~;;~;~:~; ~~
;;~R;~~-;;;; ~~~~;5--- ~b
g ;:2r:ig.; ~~oq ~grig:;:. ,...,
.. J e;::: ~ ~ ~ ~ E.:: ~ ~.~ ~ ~:~ E ~ 1: e c t ~.., ~: ~ltIG!
~~~~~et~~~~d~~:'~~~5 d
g
'!::;:1::~ff~~~xz:z:z:~~:~'z~~~zzzzz Z zzz 2;1 I z~z ~~~zlzz~~zzzz
~ooo ~, co'oo 0 :; 0 cacoo 0 ':>0 oc 0.000 ::>ooc ~.o
~"z~i~ig~~~>>g~g~~,"j~~~~.~.~t~~it~i,ii.i.i~~i~~>>"~t~~~ g~
~~Z ~~~~g,~~,~~~~,~,~~g~Q~gCgf'~'Qg~~~~~~g~g~~~~~M~g~!~~~~ i~
~1~1,~I~~~ii~ill~i;~~i~ii9 ~ ~ii ~ ~;i ~~~i~ii~;~!it ~
'''Q
....()Jl
,~
;
,-.,' ~
. ~r,:~~
\;:. ~"
~:;.
~. < \ \';;:;"-f-.
\ \'\1 \ \ . ~\J' 'i
",>" i.roc~\) :\~\ ,l,\-
,'e;- ~-=-, '~-,*:,.,,~~\ '
<.. .." ...."'.<...S~\ .' . .
-, .j: J. . '\ 0.
". ,~: '<"0"~' ;,h,'
~S/~:. !_-. _Id;~~>~:;~t,,;~<:,
"\', t C")~?:~lf;.;F: ~!\<~.
'0, r'l. '~!A!~;/'<Y ,~\.~.;,..,.. ".~
'"i~, .'c_'~!~'~, ~:~'!../<1t' \{~':.'~}~L l:
'''LI~L .,A."\t.. ./
000 5:5 ~ ~r5 5 ~ ~:5:Si5 ~'5:;:~'~ (:'5; ~; ~ ~ i5 ~ 3 ~ ~ fi 5!;' 5 5 a 5 5 5 is 5 6 6 5 5.S 5 5 is 5;' ~,;, ~ ~
4'"
'.
f!
03/08/03 13:27
~ 0 ,
~ . . I~II 0) I
. . 11111 01
. . I
. . 0 I
. . z I
r
,
-I'TI (") Z > >
(/)Z 0 "" :;0 >
>s 0 S ;0 0 c
Cj:;o ~ Z > :!J ~ Z ;0
~ I :::I ~ "
,,0 c > I'TI 0 r
OZ ~ s 0 5 Z :;0 (TJ
Z Q -< -i
z~ ~ > G)
ol'Tl :::I :;0 (/) " "
(/)z 0 I'TI I'TI :;0 :;0 (TJ
. ~ "TJ r 0
> Z (") 0
~r (") > 0 M " Z
>c E :;0 M Z (") I'TI 0
I'TI :;0
z(/) :::I ~ 0 d :::I ~
~I'TI I'TI 0 C 0
0 (/) M I'TI :;0 Z c
rii 0 rii N Z
r 0 I'TI
.Yl 0 0 Z
rii I'TI " I'TI
rii ~
G) r I'TI
I'TI 0 Z
~ " -i
:::I ~
I'TI
0 Z
Z -i
.........
>
....
r-
>
Z
....
()
>
E
0
()
1""1 ~
>
z ~
en
0
0
C'l
::ll
~
:I:
1'i
~ o "z
>
f;j ~
z ~
~
-l
en
0
0
5'
-
~ ~
~ ="
CD aCD
~ c'o.<
m=.c
:::l A)-<
c: -CD
"&. > en
DO -._
.... ..."
al "0
o
..."
-
:!J
O)G">
.c
(}I:;;o
P.1
o
z
~
-
:a
"
o
:a
.....
r-
~
z
c
c=
en
m
"
r-
~
z
",'4~OO
Section 6 Development Plans
6.6 AIRPORT PROPERTY MAP
The airport property map, depicted in Figure 6.6, indicates how and when the various parcels that
comprise the airport were acquired. The first transfer of airport property to Monroe County
occurred in 1952. Additional parcels were acquired in 1974, 1990, and 2000. No further land
acquisition is proposed as part of the master plan update.
W:\lZ637817 _KWIA Master P1anlS_6\Dev P1an.doc\3l11103
6-7
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
J:\KEY WES1\WSTE:R PLAN UPDATE\EXHIBI1S\F1G 6.6.OWG 03/06/03 14:12
"ll
>
::0
~
'" '" U1 VI '" ~ r-
ID > Z
C
~
lD
~
Z
0
f.I ~ ~ ~ po I'> ~ > ""U
~ it ~ s: ~ 1tl g :::0 '-
"ll '" rT1 0
> CD III
::0 ""U
~ ~ sa
.,.
u; rT1 -l
0 -<
Z "T1
0 ~~~~~~~f)
-f
0
0 ~O )>
z
:::f ~ C -l
Cl
c ~ (/)
g r ~
III C -l )>
:i ~ 0
:r iD N.....--- Z Z ~
0 8 co co co co >
.... U1 CD U1 U1 0 -l
:r .,. '" 0 '" '" g r
~ -f'Tl
::0 G)
"ll 8 f'Tl ("')
>
::0 Z I
0
rT1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0
r- 0
!'l ::0 ::0 ::0 ::0 ::0 :I:
"ll "ll "ll "ll "ll 0 ("') I
E E E s E E ~
III III III > III III > l'Tl I
;1l ;1l ;1l :i ;1l ;1l 8
~ ~ ~ F ~ ~ $ )> I
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 z
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ J
I 0)
'" I
0
0
I
I
~
> I
"ll
:I:
0
III o.Z "ll > r
0 > $ f'T1
> ::0 "ll (j)
f;j 0 0 f'T1
rT1 ::0
Z r- -f Z
lD "ll 0
r:l 0 ::0
C ~
rT1 Z
-l C ~
>
::0 ~
-<
c
'" z
0 rT1
0
5'
-
~ ~
~ ="
CD aCD
~ C'o.<
~;:e
c: -CD
"&. :!: ~
~-a
o
..."
-
:!J
O)G>
.c
0):;;0
P.1
:!:
:a
"
o
:a
.....
."
:a
o
"
m
:a
.....
-<
i:
~
"
..I
./
\
\
\
~i~Jfl=~f~I~~!!~!~:!.f~I!!iJ@~;~llJI~i a
~'!fl;f~~fIJfr;!r~lli~f~!r~i~~!;!i!.f~ ~
l,tr~"~f'kf~i;P!lf~o8~:lii 1.~tJg ';if~I a
~~~:I!lfJI'[lf~Jr;I'~~~~!iJ!I'fl!if~!iJ I( ~
1~~~r2~~~~Ji, ~ ~fi.~~r~ ,~~!lj~~~lls ~
a _ 0 "C !::t Ii !I.- IS _ . ,,<5' l!!t. ~
1!~U[J~!j r~il!~;J;~I!h~;~iH[Jf~;ff i
s~t~~~~!~~!~;2;!irl:~i~f~iJf:I'11J.~!l~
l~l~r~~r~lr'i~o t ,~-~l~~.r~g~~ fll".
ii~J;i~~ij~l.riJ;~fri,jiJ~~!f~!i~:flff
"'ii;:;~ l~lil ~ Jr;ojl;>t;"~r o~ri'l{;;fi~F~,.l~
ie!!iii~,!:,!~!~i~ifi!!!~I?ir~ili!lf~i;
~H' ~fU!~F~~i'Plf~~~iil~t ~l~d1
~~liJ!~f!~:~oi!~';fi;~~f~~III;!lijifil
i~i~ l 'f :!h~!~S~j~! '!~irr ~[!ll ~i
/
I
I
/
~~;J:'irH~OlI ~p fHo ~!::'l~lWW'!gt.t!'.~]l:J"
;)is; t;~=~~ ,e:f~[Elf.t ,Th~~f~U:~~i! lliSi~~ !
Jr~1~1~'~!I~ir~r~f:~r~!!~2;!~I".:~~l~gPf'
1)0 &" !~ !J5I.a.aS'~l a"< S" -,0.;_ -''''i 10 Q .c
!r'lf~;~[lif~;f'fJ!~ft~;l:~if;~I~fri~;;1
~~a~Ro r ;oli:t!"..... -izi ~o.&:r "".ll li!'~~tf
J~~,~i:"ri~,1~!;5a;l!j~!lff~;~:f~!~1~.I~ii~
.r;::11U1 ollll oe!"91'h. !~!gl I't.a ~h! .1'
If ~: ~~12;li~i~jlf~;!~f~;:ffiffJ:i ;1'
"!s' hidl~,r'i ~ pr\: r::~!'.l"'!rtlr' f
iUli:l~'J1lt:H ~I~lfr" ~irrli f!fir H.<slR
!larfJr- ~ ~2;"rtr.~~r ",~~'~[l~li~h ~lf~
i~"'lf~!:;~~!~fallfrl;~~~I:~l'lrif~~JJJ~~
08~ R~g~ttl ..,r" ofJ t .t~ ~8"e i'!l -. ....!.
;: ';'<z;OI:I z8 ~D3!l. gJ ~i. 51. 5I.il'C..t.rN:!Ii):-cr
.~=f~~rrjli"'~~~!lii~~,!II!~~f~~rl!!I~fl
:!;!~;I~ii~~~~f41~;I";~8-r:jl~;:~i!lrls~~f
~ui'!'.~~rI~~i~h'-t i ,," ~ob~,'~o o2'1rr
i~r;!rJ~~,~~;~!~fi!faJ~lr!I.~rrI!~]l:;~;I
~ ~PI'" ,f rrJo~~~l!! 'f~~"" flill~f} ~lh
! 0 ...10-" '<a. ~rr ~~ . ! IS-III.
--
--
--
......-
............
.................
..................
-'/~.-
.-/~ .-
------
....... -::;: ........
-- .......................
--=-~ ~./
~--
SECTION 7
PROJECT IDENTIFICATION,
STAGING AND COST ESTIMATES
Section 7 Project Identification, Staging and Cost Estimates
7.1 INTRODUCTION
This section identifies the capital improvement projects that comprise the development plans
presented in the preceding section. Projects were identified on the basis of safety, capacity
shortfalls, as well as airport management and tenant priorities. In certain cases, alternate projects
have been identified as a way of meeting capacity shortfalls. The ultimate implementation of
projects will be decided on the basis of funding availability, environmental approvals, and
management and tenant priorities.
This section provides conceptual cost estimates for all projects in 2003 dollars. Cost estimates
are divided into construction costs and program costs. Construction costs include all physical
items and the labor associated with their installation. Unit prices used to develop the
construction costs account for the higher prices typically incurred in the Key West market.
Program costs include change order contingency, project management, construction
management, design services during construction, and design fees. Details of the cost estimates
are provided in Appendix F.
Phasing of projects was accomplished on the basis of existing and projected demand for
facilities, anticipated timelines for environmental approvals, consultation with airport
management, and tenant priorities. Although projects have been assigned to short-term and
intermediate-term periods, project phasing can be altered to meet funding limitations. Phasing
for this master plan has been established as follows: short-term (2003 through 2007) and
intermediate-term (2008 through 2012) and long-term (2013 through 2021). None of the
proposed projects are scheduled for the long-term.
7.2 SHORT-TERM PROJECTS
Project priorities during the short-term period include continuing environmental studies to
support the construction of a standard runway safety area and runway extension, the construction
of terminal area projects, and the continuation of the ongoing sound insulation program. These
projects are described below and are illustrated in Figure 7.1. Estimated costs for these projects
are shown in Table 7.1.
With respect to terminal area projects, it should be noted that there are two options. The first
option is to construct a new passenger terminal. The second option is to construct a modest,
short-term terminal expansion that would provide some level of relief to the passenger
congestion that occurs in the existing terminal.
W:U2637817_KWIA Moster PIaolS_7\Proj Staciog.d0c\3/11103
7-1
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 7
Project Identification, Staging and Cost Estimates
TABLE 7.1
SHORT-TERM (2003 TO 2007)
PROJECT COST ESTIMATES
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
1 NA $1,000,000 $1,000,000
2 $150,000 $40,000 $190,000
3 $1,530,000 $380,000 $1,910,000
4 $160,000 $40,000 $200,000
5 $110,000 $40,000 $150,000
6 NA $60,000 $60,000
7 $4,290,000 $1,070,000 $5,360,000
8 $310,000 $70,000 $380,000
9 $23,810,000 $5,950,000 $29,760,000
10 $2,500,000 $1,000,000 $3,500,000
11 $2,500,000 $1,000,000 $3,500,000
12 $2,500,000 $1,000,000 $3,500,000
13 $2,500,000 $1,000,000 $3,500,000
Source: URS Corporation, 2003.
Notes: 1 These projects to be financed by a combination of third party funding.
7.2.1 PREPARE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (EIS)
As noted in Section 6, a feasibility study is being conducted to examine issues related to certain
environmental impacts associated with the proposed construction of a standard runway safety
area and runway extensions. Environmental issues being examined include impacts to wetlands,
mangroves and salt ponds, as well as historic resources. On the basis of the information obtained
from the feasibility study, the FAA will decide whether safety and financial considerations
justify proceeding with an EIS for these projects. If a determination is made to proceed with an
EIS, this project will consist of preparing such a study.
7.2.2 CONSTRUCT AIRCRAFT WASH RACK
The airport does not currently have any facility for the collection of wastewater from washing of
aircraft. This project consists of the construction of a designated area east of the FBO hangar for
W:1I2637817 _KWIA Master PIanIS_7\Proj S'aging.docI3l14103
7-2
Key West InterfUltional Airport
Master Plan Update
J:\KEY WES1\MASTER PlAN UPDATE\EXHIBITS\F1G 7.1.OWG 03/12/03 11:25
~ ~ ~
:;;0 :;;0 e;)
:s:: :s:: z
>
Z Z e;)
> > I'Tl
r r
-0
I'Tl en :;;0
~ c! 0
> 0 e;)
Z -< ~
en ,...... :s::
o Z
Z 0 ,......
-l Z
,...... 0
Z en -l
o :c en
-l 0 :r:
en ~ 0
5 -- ~
:E --
Z
--
@@@(9)@@)8@@8998
Z Z Z Z Z "'T)
-0 -0 -0 -0 ~ ~
I ~ f;
-0 :;;0 ()
:r: :s:: I'Tl
> Z en
~ > en
r :;;0
0.l 0
>
o
-0 -0 -0
:r: :r: :r:
> > >
en en en
I'Tl I'Tl I'Tl
0> (}I ~
,...... ,...... ,...... ,......
Z Z Z Z
o 0 0 0
-l -l -l -l
en en en en
:r: :r: :r: :r:
o 0 0 0
~ ~ ~ ~
-- -- -- --
'"
o
o
"
:;0
>
"ll
:I:
n
~ o.z
Z
r:l
,."
-I
'"
o
o
5'
-
s::: ~
'" ="
~ l>> CD
al _
~ c'o.<
iil = c:
:::l l>>-<
c: -CD
"&. > en
'" -.-
..... ..."
al "0
o
..."
-
"'T)
'-Ie;)
.C
.....:;;0
P.1
00
::c
o
:a
.....
I
.....
m
:a
s:
"
:a
o
c..
m
o
.....
00
C3 p > -0 r
o ?> :;;0 ~ rrl
() -0 G)
-0 :r: :;;0 > rrl
> > > :;;0 Z
:;;0 Z "'TJ I'Tl 0
^ e;) -l
t5 ~ ~ ~
-0 en ,......
:;;0 :r: Z
o :;;0 0
c... > -l
I'Tl () en
() ^ :r:
-l 0
~
--
I....
>
lS
~
-<
>
III
III
III
III
III
I II
; I;
II;
; II
I II
/ 1/
I II
I I;
I ;1
; ;;
I II
III
\ \ \
\ \ \
\ \\
\ \\
\\\
\\\
\ \\
\\\
\\\
\\\
\ \\
\\\
\\\
\\\
\\\
\\\
\\\
I c
I I
I
~
I'=B
~
>
s
>
~I
I I dl
I ~
+
++-t-
\
~f
~~
c!'<C;F~
o
\
Section 7
Project Identification, Staging and Cost Estimates
washing aircraft. The facility would consist of a properly marked, graded and paved area that
would collect wastewater resulting from washing of aircraft. The facility would provide water
supply and would also contain an oil/water separator for proper disposal of oils. This project
would be funded by a combination of third party sources.
7.2.3 GENERAL A VIA TION HANGAR PROJECT
This project consists of the demolition of 10 existing aircraft hangars and the construction of 20
new hangars. The new hangars will consist of 12 individual hangars and 8 nested T-hangars.
This project also includes the construction of a paved apron that will accommodate
approximately 10 aircraft tie-downs. The construction of this apron will require the relocation of
a lighted wind cone and segmented circle to a site on the north side of the runway. This project
would be funded by a combination of third party sources.
7.2.4 FBO PARKING REHABILITATION AND EXPANSION
This project consists of the realignment of the entrance roadway to the general aviation aircraft
apron, the removal of one hangar and two storage buildings, and the rehabilitation and expansion
of the FBO automobile parking lot. This project will enable the general aviation hangar project
to construct hangars adjacent to the existing entrance road. This project would be funded by a
combination of third party sources.
7.2.5 CONDUCT ROADWAY SIGNAGE PLAN AND PROGRAM
Roadway signage at the airport is currently a confusing mixture of styles and colors.
Furthermore, there is no apparent hierarchy to the signs and the placement of many signs is
confusing. This project consists of the preparation of a comprehensive signage plan that would
address the issues of hierarchy, style, color, and placement. Following the preparation and
approval of a signage plan, the signs specified by the plan would be installed.
7.2.6 TERMINAL AREA STUDY I PRELIMINARY DESIGN
This project consists of further analysis and definition of new passenger terminal facilities in
order to finalize a concept that could proceed to design. The study will examine the potential to
modify certain terminal elements, and/or the timing of elements, recommended by the preferred
alternative in order to meet funding constraints.
7.2.7 SHORT-TERM PASSENGER TERMINAL EXPANSION
This project consists of the construction of a terminal expansion of approximately 8,000 square
feet between the existing passenger terminal and the FIS building. This project would include
W:U2637817_KWlA MastorPlanlS_7\Proj Stqlnc.doc\3l11103
7-3
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 7
Project Identification, Staging and Cost Estimates
the demolition of the existing terminal annex. This project would only be pursued if sufficient
funding could not be secured for the construction of a new passenger terminal.
7.2.8 NEW FBO ACCESS ROAD
This project consists of the construction of a new FBO access road. The new road would be
located west of the Florida State Highway Patrol building and would provide a connection from
South Roosevelt Boulevard to the fuel farm, general aviation facilities, the air traffic control
tower, and the Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting Station. This project is required only if a new
passenger terminal is constructed.
7.2.9 NEW PASSENGER TERMINAL
This project consists of the construction of an approximately 50,OOO-square-foot terminal with an
elevated access road and elevated parking structure in the area currently occupied by automobile
parking. A concourse facility would extend over Faraldo Circle and would extend to the current
edge of aircraft parking apron. The existing passenger terminal would remain in operation until
such time the new terminal became operational and would then be demolished.
7.2.10
Noise Insulation Program - Phase 3
This project consists of installing sound insulation in 53 residences in the Riviera Shores
subdivision along Venetian Drive, Jamaica Drive, and Bahama Drive. These residences fall
within the 65 DNL noise contour as identified by the airport's Part 150 Study. Phase 1 of the
noise insulation program has been completed and Phase 2 is scheduled for completion in 2003.
7.2.11
NOISE INSULATION PROGRAM - PHASE 4
This project consists of installing sound insulation in 53 residences in the vicinity of 4th Street
and 5th Street between Flagler A venue and Juanita Lane. These residences are located within the
airport's 65 DNL noise contour and have been identified as being eligible for sound insulation as
part of the airport's Part 150 Study.
7.2.12
NOISE INSULATION PROGRAM - PHASE 5
This project consists of installing sound insulation in 65 residences in the vicinity of 2nd Street
and 3rd Street near Flagler Avenue. These residences are located within the airport's 65 DNL
noise contour and have been identified as being eligible for sound insulation as part of the
airport's Part 150 Study.
W:\12637817 _KWlA Master P1anlS_7\Proj Staginc.doc\3l11103
7-4
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 7 Project Identification, Staging and Cost Estimates
7.2.13 NOISE INSULATION PROGRAM - PHASE 6
This project consists of installing sound insulation in 55 residences in the vicinity of 11th Street
and Riviera Drive. These residences are located within the airport's 65 DNL noise contour and
have been identified as being eligible for sound insulation as part of the airport's Part 150 Study.
7.3 INTERMEDIA TE- TERM PROJECTS
Projects included in the intermediate-term focus on implementation of airfield improvements. It
is anticipated that the EIS and associated environmental approvals would take a number of years
to obtain. Therefore, assuming that the necessary environmental approvals are obtained, the
construction of airfield projects would likely occur in the intermediate-term period. These
projects are described below and are illustrated in Figure 7.2. Estimated costs for these projects
are shown in Table 7.2.
TABLE 7.2
INTERMEDIA TE- TERM (2008 TO 2012)
PROJECT COST ESTIMATES
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
1
2
3 NIP- Phase 7
Intermediate-Term Cost Totals
$7,920,000
$2,600,000
$2,500,000
$13,020,000
$1,980,000
$650,000
$1,000,000
$3,630,000
$9,900,000
$3,250,000
$3,500,000
$16,650,000
Source: URS Corporation, 2003.
7.3.1 CONSTRUCT RUNWAY SAFETY AREA
This project entails the construction of a safety area around Runway 9/27 that meets FAA criteria
for runways serving C-ill aircraft such as the CRJ-700. The project would consist of filling
ponds, removing vegetation, and grading land around the runway to meet the FAA's clearance
and grading requirements. The proposed runway safety area would have a width of 500 feet and
a length that extends 1,000 feet past the Runway 9 threshold and 1,250 feet past the Runway 27
threshold.
W:\12637817_KWIA Master PIanIS_7\Proj Staging.do<:13I12J03
7-5
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Section 7 Project Identification, Staging and Cost Estimates
7.3.2 CONSTRUCT RUNWAY EXTENSION
This project consists of extending the runway by 750 feet on its west-end and by 500 feet on its
east-end. The project includes paving for the runway extensions, associated taxiways and blast
pads, lighting, signage and marking.
7.3.3 NOISE INSULATION PROGRAM -PHASE 7
This project consists of installing sound insulation in 42 residences in the vicinity of Linda
A venue and Government Road. These residences were identified as being eligible for sound
insulation as part of the airport's Part 150 Study.
W:U2637817 _KWIA Master P1anlS_7\Proj Staginc.doc\3l11103
7-6
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
J:\KEY WES1\
WSTE:R PLAN UPDA='
.. ~ ,EXHIBI1S\F1G 7
.2.OWG 03/
I II 06/03
III
III
Iii
III
\\1
\\1
\11
\11
\11
\11
\\1
\1\
III
III
III
\11
\\1
11\
\11
1\1
1\1
\II
\II
III
1\1
1\1
III
\11
III
III
11\
\\1
1\1
III
)11
Iii
I II
/;:jI
\1(
",
\\\
\\\
III
11\
III
III
\\1
11\
\\1
11\
1\1
\iI
Iii
ill
( II
17r=:....::::.!..~
\,-,- -
,...::--..=-
--~
\\\
III
iI\
/II
/II
/II
III
/II
III
III
/II
III
/II
III
III
III
/II
III
III
/II
III
/II
{/I
/II
III
III
III
III
/II
III
/II
/II
/II
/II
III
III
/II
/II
III
III
/II
III
/II
/II
/II
III
III
/II
/II
Iii
/II
{/1
{/1
111
{/1
III
III
/II
III
Iii
{/I
{/I
{/1
III
III
III
III
III
\1\
\1\
\1\
\1\
\II
\1\
\1\
\1\
\\1
\\1
\1\
\1\
\1\
\11
\11
\\\
\\\
,"
\\'
\\\
\\\
\\\
\ \\
\\\
\\\
\\\
\\\
\\\
\\'-
\'-\
\\\
\\\
\'-\
,,'
",-
,,\
",
",
,~
,~
",
,\\
",
",
",
,..........
....................;::--
----::
I
i@)@)8
)>
;0
"1J
o
:;;0
-i
"1J
:;;0
o
"1J
fT1
:;;0
~
Z
"1J
I
"1J
::c
)>
(J)
fT1
--.J
r
Z
fT1
,.....,
Z
o
-i
(J)
::c
o
~
'-'"
'"
o
o
o "Z
n
o
z
(J)
;d
c
n
-i
:::0
C
Z
~
-<
fT1
X
~
Z
(J)
o
z
n
o
z
(J)
;d
c
n
-i
:;;0
C
Z
~
-<
(J)
)>
"'TJ
fT1
~
)>
:;;0
fT1
)>
z
.....
m
:a
i:
m
c
i>
.....
m
I
.....
m
:a
i:
"
:a
o
e.-
m
o
.....
en
14:29
o
APPENDIX A
WEIGHTED HOURLY CAPACITY
Appendix A
Weighted Hourly Capacity
The methodology described in FAA Advisory Circular 150/5060-5 "Airport Capacity and
Delay" was used to calculate the weighted hourly capacity and Annual Service Volume (ASV) of
the airfield at EYW.
The weighted hourly capacity was derived by utilizing the following equation:
Cw=
(p]*C] *W])+(P2*C2* W2)
(p]*W])+(P2*W2)
Cw= Weighted hourly capacity
P = Runway use configuration in percent (VFR and IFR)
C = Unadjusted hourly capacity
W = ASV weighting factor
Cw=
(.992*65*1)+(.008*51 *8)
(.992*1)+(.008*8)
Cw=
64.48+3.26
.992+.064
Cw=
67.74
1.056
Cw=
64.15 (64)
W:\12637817_KWIA Master PIan\Appendix Adoc
A-I
Appendix A
Weighted Hourly Capacity
Once the weighted hourly capacity is determined, the following equation is used to derive the
airfield's ASV:
ASV=Cw*D*H
Cw = Weighted hourly capacity
D = Daily demand ratio (annual demand divided by average daily demand during peak
month)
H = Hourly demand ratio (average daily demand divided by average peak hour demand
during peak month)
D=
92.591
295
= 314
H=
294
36
= 8.25
ASV= 64*314*8.25
= 165,792
W:\12637817_KWIA Master PIan\Appendix A.doc
A-2
APPENDIX B
RUNWAY LENGTH ANALYSIS
....
,......
&a8L -- KEYW - EYW -- TAKEOFF PERFORMANCE -- KEYW - EYW
CANADAIR REGIONAL JET KEY WEST, FL
ELEVATION 3 CF34-3B1 ENG KEY WEST INTL
* APU ON *
*** APR ARMED *** TAKEOFF FLAPS 20.0 DEGREES ENGINE BLEED CLOSED
RUNWAY 09 27
LENGTH 5801 5801 CLIMB
SLOPE 0.00 0.00 LIMIT
TMP N1-BLD
DEG C CLSD/OPEN LIMIT WEIGHT / V1
-20 84.7/ 84.6 53783/140 53783/140 60000.
-15 85.5/ 85.4 53341/139 533411139 60000.
-10 86.3/ 86.2 52909/138 529091138 60000.
-5 87.1/ 87.0 52477/138 52477/138 60000.
0 87.9/ 87.8 52045/137 52045/137 60000.
2 88.2/ 88.1 51874/137 51874/137 60000.
4 88.5/ 88.4 51703/137 51703/137 60000.
6 88.8/ 88.7 51532/136 515321136 60000.
8 89.1/ 89.0 51362/136 513621136 60000.
10 89.5/ 89.4 51190/136 511901136 60000.
12 89.8/ 89.7 510191136 51019/136 60000.
14 90.1/ 90.0 50848/135 50848/135 60000.
16 90.4/ 90.3 50677/135 50677/135 60000.
18 90.7/ 90.6 50506/135 50506/135 60000.
20 91.1/ 90.8 50420/135 50420/135 60000.
22 91.4/ 90.8 50279/134 502791134 60000.
24 91. 4/ 90.7 499211134 499211134 59794.
26 91.2/ 90.5 493801133 493801133 58990.
28 91. 0/ 90.3 48893/133 48893/133 58152.
30 90.8/ 90.1 48414/132 48414/132 57315.
32 90.6/ 89.9 47864/131 478641131 56433.
34 90.3/ 89.6 47315/131 473151131 55551.
36 90.1/ 89.2 467451130 46745/130 54669.
38 89.7/ 88.9 461701129 461701129 53788.
40 89.4/ 88.5 455961128 455961128 52906.
45 88.6/ 87.6 44127/126 441271126 50591.
49 87.9/ 87.0 429561125 429561125 48739.
HW +LBS/KT 126 112
TW -LBS/KT 501 501
APU OFF+LBS 0 0 440
APR OFF-LBS 1890 1990 3430
BLD OPN-LBS 790 790 1330
CWL AI ON-LBS 800 800 1030
WNG+CWL AI-LBS 3030 3030 5770
ASKD INOP -LBS 5750/29 5750/29
SPLRS INP -LBS 550 550
ACCEL HT(MSL) 800 800
*** OBSERVE STRUCTURAL LIMITS *** 24JAN02
&a8L -- KEYW - EYW --
ELEVATION
3
LANDING PERFORMANCE
CANADAIR REGIONAL JET
CF34-3B1 ENG
-- KEYW - EYW
KEY WEST, FL
KEY WEST INTL
*** APPROACH CLIMB LIMITS - APPROACH FLAPS 8 ***
CLIMB PERFORMANCE NOT LIMITING BELOW 45 (C)
TEMP(C) -20 45 49
CLMB WT 55000. 55000. 54294.
CORRECTIONS: BLEED OPEN SUBTRACT 1543 POUNDS ABOVE 45. DEGREES C
COWL ANTIICE ON SUBTRACT 0 POUNDS ABOVE -20. DEGREES C
WING+COWL ANTIICE ON SUBTRACT 0 POUNDS ABOVE -20. DEGREES C
*** LANDING FIELD LENGTH LIMITS - LANDING FLAPS 45 ***
RUNWAY 1
LENGTH WIND I
SLOPE KTSI
-101
1
01
1
101
201
CRT Twl
SUB LB/KTI
09
5801FT
0.00
-101
I
01
I
101
201
CRT TWI
SUB LB/KTI
27
5801FT
0.00
I
1
I
NA I
1
428661
1
466361
505441
01
-9951
ANTI-SKID OPERATIONAL
SPLRS-OPER I SPLRS-INOP
DRY WET 1 DRY WET
46659
55000
55000
55000
-3
-1191
46659
55000
55000
55000
-3
-1191
380991
I
488301
1
530311
550001
01
-10731
380991
I
488301
I
530311
550001
01
-10731
40776
51981
55000
55000
o
-1120
40776
51981
55000
55000
o
-1120
NA I
I
428661
1
466361
505441
01
-9951
INOPERATIVE
I SPLRS-INOP
I DRY WET
NA 1
I
NA I
I
NA I
NA 1
01
NAI
I
I
I
NA I
I
NA I
I
NA I
NA I
01
NAI
ANTI-SKID
SPLRS-OPER
DRY WET
NA
NA
NA
NA
o
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
o
NA
NA I
1
NA I
I
NA 1
NA I
01
NAI
NA
NA
NA
NA
o
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
o
NA
NA I
1
NA I
1
NA I
NA I
01
NAI
LANDING
FLAPS 0
DRY
45366
55000
55000
55000
45366
55000
55000
55000
24JAN02
&a8L -- KEYW - EYW --
ELEVATION 3
* APU ON *
*** APR ARMED ***
RUNWAY
LENGTH
SLOPE
TMP N1-BLD
DEG C CLSD/OPEN
-20
-15
-10
-5
o
82.9/ 82.5
83.7/ 83.2
84.5/ 84.0
85.4/ 84.8
86.0/ 85.5
2
4
6
8
10
86.3/ 85.8
86.6/ 86.1
86.9/ 86.4
87.2/ 86.7
87.5/ 87.0
12
14
16
18
20
87.8/ 87.3
88.1/ 87.6
88.4/ 87.8
88.7/ 88.1
89.0/ 88.4
22
24
26
28
30
89.3/ 88.7
89.6/ 89.0
89.8/ 89.3
90.1/ 89.6
90.4/ 89.9
32
34
36
38
40
90.1/ 89.5
89.8/ 89.2
89.3/ 88.7
88.8/ 88.2
88.3/ 87.7
TAKEOFF PERFORMANCE
CANADAIR RJ-700
CF34-8C1 ENG
TAKEOFF FLAPS 20.0 DEGREES
09
5801
0.00
72750/126
72750/126
727501126
72750/126
727501126
72750/126
727501126
727501126
727501126
727501126
727501126
72750/126
727501126
72750/126
72750/126
727501126
727501126
72750/126
727501126
727501126
722601126
713091126
70302/125
692451124
681801123
45
49
86.9/ 86.2 65253/121
85.7/ 85.0 62974/120
HW +LBS/KT
TW -LBS/KT
APU OFF+LBS
BLD OPN-LBS
CWL AI ON-LBS
WNG+CWL AI-LBS
ACCEL HT(MSL)
161
629
o
870
o
o
800
27
5801
0.00
LIMIT WEIGHT / V1
727501126
727501126
727501126
727501126
727501126
727501126
727501126
727501126
727501126
727501126
72750/126
72750/126
727501126
72750/126
727501126
727501126
727501126
727501126
727501126
727501126
722601126
713091126
703021125
690921124
677381123
644161120
619271120
62
629
160
1180
o
390
800
*** OBSERVE STRUCTURAL LIMITS ***
-- KEYW - EYW
KEY WEST, FL
KEY WEST INTL
ENGINE BLEED CLOSED
CLIMB
LIMIT
75000.
75000.
75000.
75000.
75000.
75000.
75000.
75000.
75000.
75000.
75000.
75000.
75000.
75000.
75000.
75000.
75000.
75000.
75000.
75000.
75000.
75000.
75000.
74639.
73007.
68819.
65424.
510
1500
o
o
24JAN02
&a8L -- KEYW - EYW --
ELEVATION
3
LANDING PERFORMANCE
CANADAIR RJ-700
CF34-8C1 ENG
-- KEYW - EYW
KEY WEST, FL
KEY WEST INTL
*** APPROACH CLIMB LIMITS - APPROACH FLAPS 8 ***
CLIMB PERFORMANCE NOT LIMITING BELOW 49 (C)
CORRECTIONS: BLEED OPEN SUBTRACT 0 POUNDS ABOVE -20. DEGREES C
COWL ANTIICE ON SUBTRACT 0 POUNDS ABOVE -20. DEGREES C
WING+COWL ANTIICE ON SUBTRACT 0 POUNDS ABOVE -20. DEGREES C
*** LANDING FIELD LENGTH LIMITS - LANDING FLAPS 45 ***
RUNWAY I DESTINATION
LENGTH WIND 1 AIRPORT
SLOPE KTSI DRY WET
-101
-51
I
01
1
101
201
CRT TWI
SUB LB/KT/
09
5801FT
0.00
-101
-51
I
01
1
101
201
CRT Twl
SUB LB/KT'
27
5801FT
0.00
63681
67000
67000
67000
67000
-7
-1106
63681
67000
67000
67000
67000
-7
-1106
1
I
I
NA 1
590121
/
665751
I
670001
670001
01
-15231
NA
NA
1
1
1
NA I
NA 1
I
591631
1
645981
670001
01
-14891
MEL
ASKD I SPLR
INOP 1 INOP
NA I
590121
1
665751
I
670001
670001
01
-1523/
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
o
NA
NA
NA
NA
o
NA
NA 1
NA I
1
591631
1
645981
670001
01
-14891
- CONTAMINATED RUNWAYS-
DRY 1 COMP 1 SLUSH 1 ICY
SNOW 1 SNOW 1 WATER I RWY
62867
67000
67000
67000
67000
-7
-1377
62867
67000
67000
67000
67000
-7
-13 77
670001
670001
1
670001
I
670001
670001
-101
01
670001
670001
I
670001
1
670001
670001
-101
01
57889
64004
67000
67000
67000
-2
-1138
57889
64004
67000
67000
67000
-2
-1138
1
1
1
NA I
NA 1
1
NA I
1
NA 1
593641
01
NAI
NA I
NA 1
1
NA I
I
NA I
593641
01
NAI
LANDING
FLAPS 0
DRY
63501
67000
67000
67000
67000
63501
67000
67000
67000
67000
24JAN02
APPENDIX C
PASSENGER TERMINAL SPACE PROGRAM
wli:
o
a.
0::
:;(
o~
c(
Z
o
i=
c(
Z
"0::
W
I-
~
l-
ll)
mW
:::
>-
W
~
>-
x
;:
>
:>
z
o
i=
:5
:>
"
a:
13
'"
w
::>
i=
::l
~
o
a:
w
~
w
'"
'"
-<
~
:e
~
~
o
.
'"
'"
-<
~
x X
a:
w
:I:
~
-'
~
o
z
-<
a:
w
"
z
w
'"
~
Ii:
d
'"
on
....
'"
a:
w
"
z
w
'"
~
Q.
" a:
Z w
~ ~
Ci '"
it: ~
o Q.
~ ~
o ~
... u;
~ 5'
~....
CO
N
f
::!
'"
'" a: '"
It: e 0:::
w u; e
~ :; ii)
w " 5'
~ z c.?
~ ~ ~
c.? ~ ii:
Z ~ a:
~ -' ~
C3 g g
a:: .... ....
~ ~ ~
C'!';ft.;fl.
....00
X
~ ~
X
~ t;: ~
o '" Q.
~ ~ 1'l
-' W
Q. :I:
~ ~
.".,,0
"'''''''
.... "'....
'"
a:
w
"
Z
W
'"
'" '"
~ ~
Z "
~ ~
:e :5
a: "
~ '"
a: a:
:> ~
~ ffi
'" '"
~ ~
~ ~
CO."
dci
'"
"
ia
"
Z
:e
:5
"
a:
w
"
Z
W
'"
'"
ct
a:
w
Q.
~
Ii:!
....
...
z
~
o
'"
o
o
CO
'"
r-..oN8gg<D
~~ Q)~co..q-~
"'an
"
Z
9
Ii:
o
...
~
m
X "
W Z
o :e
~ :5
Ii: ~
~ ~
Z
W
'"
'"
-<
X I!,
ili .
~ 5
- '"
....~
I
'"
I.."....'...
1
fq.l
!l1
~J
>- ill
m
o
w
o
2:
o N
a:
w
~
~ ~
'" 0
ct ~ i
~ ~ 1
i ~ j
~ ~Ij
~ ~~l
~~I
~ ;! 181
z z t~
~~ II~
:: "''''lor5
~ .....00' Ii.
~! I
-
...
a:
w
:>
w
:>
o
o
'I
,....o~ggg~
v~ co~a:J'V~
"'N
M~
.... ....
<r-8ggv
co~CO"l:tm
"'N
~;:
zz
~~
00
.... '"
J!Ql
I
I.""
,
N}
""i
'" or'"
z z '" ....~l
~ ~ fi.. ..r.i.~i)
~M I
..... "'!O.!
~~ '" .....\1.:.
00
.... '"
o
en
:.c:
0::
<
:IE
w
0::
:I:
Ii:
w
o
a:
w
...
Z
:>
o
"
'"
CO.....
..... ~
"'....
~~co~
..... I "l:t M U') 0
t') ("),....0>
(') (") en (')
1:::'"
N~~
<00
.... ."
....
,-Ooov
~~ ~ ~ <<;
"'N
en en
0:: w
w I-
Cl ~ ~
i1:i ~ 0::-
en 0
~ ,~N a 0
en r=- a. ~ ~ UJ ~ _
ffi liJ ~ ffi g;1 ~ ~ ~ ~ 5 c t
h L z ~ z z I z 0 ~. * .~~~ w . '
U~~~~ ,Ii i ~U ~ Iltj~ ~.. I~~ iBL~~ d H~i I
Q.~i~z~zffi !Cl~:~w<( ~.:.5...t.i... ~~o~i ~: ~.r.1....I.:'.. ~e!~I~i~! I ~ ;~i~~~~ !w~oi~U~:2:U;;~ I mi~~ !..I..,.'..I........
m ~ 8 8! ~ 5 ~ I; ~ g; ~ en ffi Ii ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ i ~~ ~ ~ ffi ~ ~ i ffi 5 ~ g ~ II ~ ~ ~ ~ ffit!1
~I~~~ ~i~ _ ~~~~~ ~ ~I~I~!~; ~ I ~Ia =~Iili~ I ~Imlil
fz~~~ ~~S _ ~~f5~ I ~~o<~~uo _. ~ ~~8 ~~w<mu~ W ~~~~~~i
_IN~ ~1~1~1~1~1~1~1~1::!1~1~1~1~1~1~1~INI~I~I~I~I~I~I~I~lgl~1~1~1~I~l~~I~l~~.I~I~I:I~I~I~I~I~I~r~~~I~I~I~I~I~
-<
Q.
o
lI)
z~
W
::i!:
:oW
0::
5
-'a
W
",0::
U1
~o::
c(
-~
c(
Z
:I:~
0::
W
"I-
0::
W
Cl
z
...w
lI)
lI)
c(
a.
!l! !5
=:i aU
a: '"
;i; ~
li:i ~
~ ffi
~ ~
::; 0
on ."
N '"
..
..
..
U') u) CD Il)
"'<0'"
.... <0
aj
U)U)0)Lt)
"'<0'"
.... <0
aj
.
..
N
..
..
101.t)0)1l)
"'<0'"
~ <0
aj
.
~
1l)lt)0>U'>
"'<0'"
.... <0
aj
..
..
..
LtlIl)O>lt)
"'<0'"
.... <0
co.
I
I
'1
CD It co("')U)o
0) m......o>
N N O)M
~~~
<0."
~ o~
....
ll)Q)lO"Ct
~'V LO
.....~
NCO
i"~'l
~
.~
dl0
CD a;M~g
N N C>>('I')
iillt
i~;
I
.....~.....
N""'co
""''Vll)(J)
~ ~
N
",'"
",0>
.........
,!!Z'
iD;~
__ ...-Noe
M M lOCO
N N CON
~~J:::
.... ....
NmVM
"'''' ~
....
~.....
~t;
,.... I I,..... N 0 0
m (J)IJ')CO
..- ...... co N
:;M~
.... ....
VMVt--
<0'" '"
....
m~.....goolO
T"" ~~~~
"'N
8
~
>- ii
)( '"
;: g
a:
> '"
0
0
OJ 5 w
0
i= ;:
:5 Ii:
OJ
0 W, ~
'"
o. x
>- r
LL >-
"
~ Z
0: W
....
W :;
OJ 8
0 1Il w
lI:: OJ '"
a
0:: Ii: 9
< 0
::E 0: r
0 W g ~
(/) 0:: a: ~ ~ w w
'"
z I- 0 a .... ....
w OJ OJ OJ
Z 0 ~ 0 0 0
W ui 0 0 0
:E CIl "- :; :; :;
w CIl ct Ul r r r
:; W '" 0 0 0 0
0::: ~ w " Ii: ~ ~ z ~ .Ii
" z z z 0
:5 z i= g 0 0 ~
CIl W '" ~ ~ '.J'f
a CIl " CIl ct ~ a a
.... w '" CIl a ::>
W 0 ~ ct CIl CIl "- CIl
'" W 0 ::> ::> .. 0 ..
0::: z " w 0 w "- w Ie "- w '" "- w ili ili ili
" w Ii: z " ~ 0 0 .... 0 .... ~ 5 .... ::; '" '" '"
< " ~ z 2: "- ::> "- ::> ::> w ..: ..: ..:
<( w 0 0 0 ili
w LL CIl .. 0 0 , 0 , ~ 0 , 0 '" '" '"
z x z z z <(
~ 0::: 0 a CIl ili :E :; Ii: :E :; Ii: z :E :; Ii: "- '" 0 0 ~
'" ..: ~ r 0 CIl <( 9 9
< a: "- '" r r
w '" <( "": 0 0 N "": 0 0 N CIl 0 0 N W " LL LL LL
-oJ m ui 0 w + :; N g M N ~ M '" N g N .... Z CIl CIl CIl
:; .... "- Ii: w m 9 CIl CIl CIl
< ::> 0 ~ t 8 " ili 0 0 0
z z u: a x .... x z ct CIl 5 '" '" '"
LL ~ '" "- "- w
r ~ x 0 d CIl 0 '" 0 x '" 0 x CIl 0 x ::> m " " "
..: Ii: lli 5 w LL W Ii: w LL W Ii: CIl LL W Ii: LL LL LL LL LL
0::: .J x CIl !i 0 "- " 0 "- ct 0 "- 0 0 0 0 0
lO lO r z lO ... m ;f!. ;f!.
W 0 lO .... W ~ ~ ... w ;f!. .... ;f!. ~ ~ ;f!.
N ..... ~ CIl 0 N CIl N ~
" I- 0 CIl ~ ~ lO lO M lO 0 lO
0 ct ~ ~
0::: >- "-
W lO 0 ..... CD m CD 0 ... <0 lO CD lO lO CD ..... ~ CD M <0 M titS
C> CD <0 '" '" ~
0 M ..... 0 N ~ lO. 0 ~ ..... 0 ... ..... lO 0 lO Ii!
z ~ N Z N ~ M M N 0 0
LL W N !'!) :E M ~ ~ N ..r N
0
(/) N ~. N
(/) 0 0
< M e:i N
.
Q. lO 0 ::;l'gl '" lO CD 0 ... ~ ~ CD 0 M CD lO N CD M ..... M I8l Ii'
CD CD '" '" ~
0 ... CD '" o. M. ..... ... ..... ..... ... M <0 M "-
I- .. ~ !t:-21 N z ..... N N N CD. '" CD. ,,0>
w ~t?.t :E N M 'J:1
0::: 0 ~ii_:;',::
N 11
0 0
Q. M 'oj
0::: lO 0 N CD CD CD i....
4: 0 ... ..... M ~ CD m N '" m N '" ..... ;:: ~ ... m ...
0 M N '" o. N. M ..... M ..... ~ ... CD <0 CD ;N
-oJ Z ... N N N ...... lO ...... t_OO
0 0 :E N ,,; t'N
< N r:~
Z 0 N'
0 M it'
i= lO fiS" 0 CD CD CD
< 0 ~I N ... 0 N ;:: '" ;:: '" N 0 ~ ... CD ... ;~
0 m ... <0 ..... N ... ~ ... m m CD m
Z .. Z ~ N "'. M <0. kUJ
0 0::: 0 ,,<... :E N M to
0
W N ''''l'
0 I~'
I- M
~ ... 0 CD CD CD
I- 0 ... ... M lO N J 0 m ~ '" 0 m ~ '" ... CD ~ ~ M '" M
CD M '" N ... ..... CD ... co ... ~ ... 0 0 0
(/) ~ ~ z CD. ~ "'. N "'.
m W :E t M
~ 0
>- M
W
~
VI VI VI
vi w a::
a:: 0
z I-- 0
<( ::> I-- ;:::
a:: z 0:; 0:;
I-- ~ :;
Cl :;
0 Cl
Z M Cl
::> z z
VI 0 ;;;; <( <(
I-- a:: VI VI VI
Z 0 a:: a:: a::
w Vi w w w
z a:: 0 0 0 VI
0 W W Z Z VI Z I--
a.. U I-- W w I-- w w VI
::E z z VI 0 VI W VI .... a::
<( 0 w ::> VI z '~i VI .... VI VI VI 5 w
0 0 0 <( 8 <( 5 w w ~ I-- 0 VI
::E <( 0 "- "- I-- .... 0:: a:: z ::E
0:: u.. 0 a:: ::> ::> 0 0 w 0
i2 a:: 0 VI Cl I-- Z <( VI 0 tZ
<( <( z 0 0 0:: ;::: u.. w VI 0:: E' ii
8 <..> <..> "ii' ::E ;::: u.. ::E <( VI 0:: <( C '-'~
.... 0() 0 ~ I-- <( I-- <( "- w.-")- C :0::
.... a.. Z .... 0"'2
0:: ~ ~ ... 0 2 I-- W 2 W .... 0 ;I!!
II 0:: Ci w w :E w Cl
"- .... c ~ :I:
2 2 Cl ::E 0:: ::E 0:; <( l'i <( 0
w w 0:: cr ~ I-- I--
w ::E 0 .... w w w 0:: 0 D. f,u'!i UJ II;;
0:: 0:: 0 0 0:: <( I-- 0:: I-- <( ~~a;l~
;::: I-- ;;:
LL u.. <..> :I: 0:: 5 LL U) 0:: 5 0:: U) 'W
0 0 <!l <( 0:: ::> 0 0 ::> 0 ::E ::> Q ~i( <( '::E
0:: :I: ;;;; LL 0 0 w 0:: 0:: 0 w 0 0 0:: ::lll<:iifi 18
w I-- W u.. :I: 0:: w <( :I: a:: 0 :I: <(
CD 0 0 <( ~ ~ CD I-- ~ ~ a:: I-- w is'i I--
::E 2 0:: w U'i U'i ::E w U'i <( Cl W ~ ~;'; ~
::> w ::> 0:: ::> .... w .... ....
2 .... VI <( a.. "- z ~ "- "- 0 5 0*01::E
:I: I-- U/U)
0> @ ~
0>
APPENDIX 0
SALT PONDS, WETLANDS, AND MANGROVE MAPS
-
13:25
RRS
KFS
GGF
6 11 02
.
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FLUCFCS OVERVIEW
ALTERNATIVE 1
NO-ACTION
FIGURE 1
DAlE RE1IISIONS
(XI (XI -...J m <.n .,..
.... .... ("j .,.. "" 10
.,.. "" 0 "" 0
........
.,..
("j
-...J
::tl ~ G)fT1 s::: lD )>lD 0
0 ::tl ::tlX )> ~ C;o -c
)> -c &j-c Z ~~ fTI
0 0 ud1~ G) Z
Ul ::tl ::tl ::tl-
--l ITIfT1 0 )> )>c ~
)> UlO < Z ,)>
Z fTI 0 j;Z Z
0 ::tl Z-c 0
0 Ul fTI
:J: n ~ Ul -cfTI
C5 ^ --l --c
C Z-c
:J: ::E s::: ~ fTIfT1
:E -c ::tl
~ =i Ul fTI ........
Ul :J: Ul
s:::
)> l
::tl ,'"
Ul \,\
:J:
.,
I I j"
I
I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
I
,., ,., ~ r
x x
in in :u fTl
"ll
:::t :::t 0 C)
z z :u
C) C) -t fTl
::0 ~ "1J Z
c :u :u
z "ll 0 0
~ ~ "ll
,.,
::0
-< -l ::;!
III m
> C r
r:l ;= z
~ 1:1 ,.,
Z
~ C)
,.,
>
URS Corpo.wIIon SouINtn
----""",-
- """-""'-
T..... FL 33e07-1-482
....000lI0002
-f 1JI 1JI ..... CJ) Ul . - " -U
0 - - c.. - . N CO Or- :;0
-f . - - N 0 N 0 oC: 1'1
~ . . . ~ 00 -r-
~-
r- 1'1" -u~
c.. 0 ~-
..... en OZ
-f~
en:;O
-<
');:'-U
- -f 0:;0
. ~ -..J CO ..... u. N N 0 :;00
~ t..J 00 i.l io t..J en -f 1'1<-
. ~ e~
. r-
-f
1'1
0
DESIGN RRS . KEY
UAS~ ....... DRAWN KFS
__ 78l5OWeltCoumey
"""- eo.-,.
T..... Fl33807-1482 GGF
No.lIl1lIDOOll2
DATE: 6-11-02
tc__
""111.
.
-f
o
-f
~
r-
~
1'1
-f
~
Z
o
en
-
UI
.
9
CJ)
-
c..
.....
c..
.......
II
~
~
o
:;0
1'1
!II
Ql Ql
- -
.po. -
-..JCJ)U1
u.-.
NO
.po. -
N CO
NO
"
.po.
U.
-oJ
:;u ~ (;) fTl
O-:;UX
~:;U~"
O"UlO
UlOUlen
:;UfTlfTl
~--ieno
Z
o
~
(;)
I
:E
~
Ul
>m 0
C:::o "
en > fTl
-fN z
~E r
r> )>
)>Z Z
Z" 0
~ra
z"
fTll"'1
:::0
"
s:::m
~~
~en
:::0>
Oz
~O
~enl"'1
O~~
^fC
:E"?o
=iUlj'Ti
I en
s:::
>
:::0
en
I
I
I
D I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
2~ ;E~ ;u ", ;!:
c: )( ;u
;u", 0"11 z in "ll
~> ;;t;U ~ :::t 0
-10 00 Z AI
i:" :::t~ -< CO) ....
O:I: III > "ll
"1I"ll Z ~ ;0 AI
>AI AI 0
00 NC: "ll "ll
.... Co. oz ~ 0 ",
", z::e AI ;U
0 .... ~
a "'> ~
-< ID
", c: C
> G z
z '"
CO)
III
J..J:iC"
\
\
L_______~
ALTERNATIVE 2
WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT ESTABLISH CATEGORY "0"
MASTER PLAN UPDATE RUNWAY SAFETY AREAS
FLUCFCS - OVERVIEW FIGURE 2
DAlE
REIllSIOIIS
-t 011 011 ..... OD US . ~ "" -0
0 ~ ~ ~ ~ . N CD 0..... ::0
-t . ~ - N 0 N 0 oC: Pl
-.....
~ . . . ~ cO :1:-
..... Pl"" -0:1:
~ 0 ~-
..... en 0%
-t~
en::O
~
')::'-0
-t 0::0
. - - 0 ::00
US ~ ;-J - ()) VI ~ p.J -t Pl'-
en ~ p.J c.. b io p.J m ~ ~~
..... -t
Pl
C
.
-l
o
-l
~
.....
~
Pl
-l
~
%
C
en
,....
US
.
P
OD
~
~
.....
~
~
-
II
t
~
o
::0
Pl
en
()) ()) ...... m 01 ~ -
~ ~ VI ~ p.JCD
~ ~ "-' 0 "-'0
"
~ ....
VI
......
::;0 ~ c;) ITl :s::: aJ ~aJ 0
0 - ::;ox ~ ~ C~ "tJ
~ ::;0 ~"tJ (J) ITl
1::1 "tJ 0 c;) (J) -t Z
(J) o (J) (J) ::;0 ~C >
::;0 ITl ITl 0 ~
~ -t (J) 1::1 ;;; Z >~ Z
Z 1::1
1::1 ::;0 ITl Z"tJ 1::1
0 (J)
I (") ~ (J) "tJ1Tl
-t -"tJ
C) ^ C Z"tJ
I :s::: ~ ITlITl
::E ::E "tJ ::;0
~ ~ (J) ITl "
I (J)
:s:::
~
::;0
(J)
I
I
I D I
,-'<< , I
I I
Co I
'':;1 I
I
I
I
"ll g~ "ll0 J~ ::0 1"1 ~
::0 ::oltl C x ::0
~ ::01"1 ~~ O"ll % iii -0
~> ;;:1::0 ~ ::f i
0 -10 00 %
l(l O~ ~2 -< " -I
0 i:.... ::f::o III ~ -0
"ll"ll ~1"1 ~ ::0
::0 >::0 ::0 ::0 0
C ~~ N::O NC -0 "ll
% ~~ 0% .... 0 !3
~ fi!i~ -< ::0
0 1"1~ .... ~
-< a -< ~ lD
-< 1"1 C c::
> [; %
Z 1"1
"
III
URS~_
- ....-""'-
"""-~
l:1:.Fl~7'f482
DESIGN BY:
DRA WN BY:
K Y:
DATE:
RRS
KFS
.
\
L_______---1
ALTERNATIVE 3
500' EXTENSION ON
WEST END
FIGURE 3
IIE\1ISIOIIS
KEY
WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FLUCFCS - OVERVIEW
6-11-02
DAlE
-f 01 01 ~ OS UI . .- ..... "lJ
0 .- .- c... .- . N CO or :::u
-f . .- .- N 0 N 0 oC: 171
)0- * * * r:;:::- eO -r
~-
r 171..... "lJ~
c... 0 )0--
~ en OZ
-f)o-
en:::U
-<
~"lJ
- -f 0:::U
. !=l ~ co 011 c... N !'> 0 :::uo
UI 01 Co Co i.l ~ P1c...
(,. ~ ~ os ~~
r -f
171
e
Ie
-
,-
*
-f
o
~
r
~
171
-f
!i:
Z
e
en
.........
UI
.
E:J
os
.-
c...
~
c...
.-
'-"
II
~
)0-
o
:::u
171
en
011 011 ~ 0) 01 ~ -
~ c... - ~ NlO
~ N 0 NO
........
~
c...
~
::0 )00 (;) 1"'1 ~ lD )oolD 0
0 -::ox )00 ~ C::o -0
)00 ::O~-o Z ~j!:j 1"'1
e -0 0 (;) Z
o (J) (J) ::0-
(J) ::0 )ooC
::0 1"'1 1"'1 0 )00 ~
)00 -f (J) CI Z r)oo
< CI 5>Z Z
Z 1"'1
CI ::0 Z-o CI
0 (J) 1"'1
I 0 ~ (J) -01"'1
-f --0
C) ^ C Z-o
I ~ ~ 1"'11"'1
~ ~ -0 ::0
~ :::j (J) 1"'1 ........
I (J)
(J)
~
)00
::0
(J)
I
I
I D I
~" -. . ,I I
, I I
l{.. I
'I-I, I
",
I
I
I
"ll Q~ "llC ;g~ ::0 ... ~
::0 ::0'" C x ::0
0 ::0... O"ll 0-0 Z in "ll
"ll ~> ;;l~ ;;l::O ~ :::I ~
0 -10 00 Z
l(l Oc! 52 -< .., -I
z:.... :::1::0 III "ll
C ~... >
"ll"ll Z > ::u ::0
::0 >::0 ::0 r:l 0
C 00 N::O NC "ll "ll
Z -I c.. OC oz ~ 0 ...
~ ... Zz z:e ::0 ::0
0 ...~ ...> .... ~
-< ;;l -< ~ lD
C -< ... C r-
> 5 z
z ...
..,
III
URS ""'-........
- --""",-
fEi:i~
DESIGN BY:
DRAWN BY:
DATE:
RRS
KFS
.
24,',
. I~"""
I \
\
., \ \
.(" \
u_______.LJ
ALTERNATIVE 4-
500' EXTENSION ON
EAST END
FIGURE 5
-
KEY
WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FLUCFCS - OVERVIEW
6-11-02
DAlE
SHllISIo\3Il
3lVO
M31^~3^O - S~.:I~nl.:l
31VGdn NVld ~31SV~
1~Od~IV lVNOIlVN~31NI 1S3M A3>1
.
lO ~ ~ 9
j~~
Sj>f
S~~
:31va
:). >f~
:),8 NMV~a
:),8 N~IS3a
........ ....
ZSlt'J.lOliIEt1:t......J.
~== --
........---=>"""
~
Z
l&J 9
z <(
::J 5 l&J
lEI ~ >- >- c
~ ~ <( I!:! >-
~l&J ~l&J ~
15 15 ~ ZZ ZZ 0
::)2 ::)0 ~.... Z
2> 0.. ~ ~ l!:N 00 ::)
~ ~ <( O~ ~~ l!:<( ~
0.. <( VI 0..0.. C
~ CI >- <(F ~F u.~ ~
15 Z ~ 00 ~~ o~ 0
0.. F ~I!:! <(0 2>
~ VI Z 0..0 Ih~ ......
<( ~ ::) o..~ ~~ ~
l!: <(0.. co.. <(C 0..
I D
I
l/)
D:::
<(
~
l/) I ~
....... W l/) I-
D::: a::: a.. ~ ~
Ww <( ~ I
a..Z :J ~ ~ Q
a..- I-
Wa.. l/) U I
a..Z W l/) 0
0 D::: 0
- Z Z~ 0 W z
.:.cii :s <(...J Z > o l/) I- <(
-<( <( 0 WW D:::
::::!D::: 0:: l/) l/) 0 l/)
z ~ln l/) Cl ~~a.. ~
W ~ z
:: ~.~ a.. D::::J <( XD::: D::: 0
0 /D<( ~ WC>:C( D:::
lD
~ r--
If')
v
.......
0 N 0 N V
m N V - If') -
V 10 10 r-- IX) IX)
en
w
D:::
U
<(
e ~
w
.....
U en ;;;J. II
~w..... 10 If') m v ~ 10 V 10 ......
00::0 N N ..; m - r.: ci "
0:: U ..... - ~ If')
0..<( ....
>-en ..;
~..... CD
ZUen .... c5
-<( U If') ~
::::E a.. w
-::::ELa..e ~ ...J 10
...J_UO . . . <( '-'
~ 3u 0 N 0 N - ~ I- en
m N ~ If') - 0
a.. La.. ~ 10 CD .... ao ao l- e
z
j
.....
w
~
...J
<(
I-
0
l-
.
Dl'LI
'II
R:
:IMG
.
~
0
~
~
r
::e
IT!
~
~
z ~ QlI QlI ..... CJ) UI ...
C
VI 0 .... (If .... ... N CD
~ ... .... N 0 N 0
- . . .
UI r ...
... (If
p .....
CJ)
....
(If
~ ... I'.)
(If QlI !=l ..... 0 VI I'.) !'>
"-' c.. Ol OJ ~ 0 Co L.. Ol
II
~
~
0
:;u
IT!
!II
DI DI ..... Ol UI ...
.... .... VI .... ... I'.) <0
... .... I'.) 0 I'.) 0
""-
...
VI
.....
:;u ~ G)(T1 s::: OJ ~OJ 0
0 ;;0 ~~ ~ ~ C;;o -0
~ -0 Z ~~ (TI
C 0 VIa G) z
VI (1)(1) ;;0 ;;0-
;;0 ~ ~c
~ (TI(T1 0 s;:
~ (1)0 Z r~
z ~ 0 :;;z z
0 ;;0 Z-o 0
0 (I) (TI
:::I: 0 ~ (I) -o(TI
C) ^ ~ --0
C Z-o
:::I: s::: ?O (TI(T1
~ ::e -0 ;;0
=i (I) jTj ""-
~ :::I: (I)
s:::
)>
;;0
(I)
:::I:
I
D I
I I
(r rxt. !I
~;~"
I
I
I
"ll 2~ "tIO ::g~ ;u FTI ~
;u ;UITI C X
0 ;uFTI O"ll O"tl Z iii ;u
"ll l:i> ii1~ ii1;u ~ :::t "tI
0 ~
III --10 oc! 00 Z
ITI i:" :::t> -< to) -I
0 :::t;u 02 III "ll
"ll"tl ~FTI >
;u >;u z > ;0 ;u
C 00 N;U ;u r:l "tI 0
NC "ll
Z --IfrI OC ~z ~ ~ FTI
~ 0 ZZ ;u
a FTI~ FTI~ > -I ~
-< -< -< ;u lD
FTI c: C
> 5 Z
Z FTI
to)
III
URS~_
---""""""'
~R~
No.
,4<,.
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT500'
MASTER PLAN UPDATE 50'
FLUCFCS - OVERVIEW
ALTERNATIVE SA
EXTENSION ON EAST END
EXTENSION ON WEST END
FIGURE 7
IlE\ilSIOIIS
DAlE
.
-t
0
~
r
::E
1"1
-t
!;
Z -t ClI ClI '-I Ql (II .... ""1
C
(I) 0 - - (II .... N q)
-t .... - - N 0 N 0
" ~ . . .
(II r ....
.... (II
P '-I
Ql
-
(II
~ (II - N
(II !=' :--J - N ~ '" VI
....... N m (II ~ 0, to i.l 0
II
~
~
(")
;0
1"1
~
01 ClI '-I m 01 ....
- VI .... '" to
.... '" 0 N 0
........
....
VI
'-I
A! ~ G')fTI ;;:: CD )>m 0
0 A! ~~ )> ~ CA! -0
)> -0 Z ~iei fTI
c 0 G') (I) Z
(I) (1)(1) A! A!-
A! fTIfTI 0 ~ )>C ):
)> -t (1)0 Z ,)>
Z ~ 0 j;Z Z
0 A! Z-o 0
0 (I) fTI
:J: (") ~ (I) -o1Tl
C; ^ -t --0
C Z-o
:J: ;;:: )> fTIfTI
=E =E -0 ~ A!
~ =i (I) 1"1 ........
:J: (I)
(I)
;;::
)>
A!
(I)
:J:
D I
"ll !2~ "llC ;g~ AI ,., ~
AI AI'tl C x AI
~ AI,., O"ll Z in
~> ~~ "ll
PIAl ~ ::I 0
0 ~~ 00 Z AI
f<l g~ ::12 -< " -i
0 ;;:: oAl (II ~ "ll
"11"11 z'" ~ ~ ;:0
AI >AI AI AI ~
C 00 NAI NC "11
Z -ic... !!~ ~ 0
... oz !a
~ ~~ AI
0 ,.,::e -i ~
-< PI > -< ~ ID
0 -< ,., C C
> 5 z
z ,.,
"
III
URS~........
__ 7850w.tCourlney
..... S7"J-~
17,IIJ
ALTERNATIVE 58
WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT RUNWAY EXTENSIONS AND EAS
MASTER PLAN UPDATE RUNWAY SAfETY AREA SHIFT
FLUCFCS - OVERVIEW FIGURE 8
DAlE
RE-..s
--~-~
~~ ,...
~--~----
()
OJ OJ '-l m (Jl ~ 0
lJ.J ~ N lD <
~ N 0 N 0 rrI
.......... ::0
~
lJ.J )>
'-l Z
0
:;0 ~ GJJTl ~ CD )>IJJ 0
0 :;0 :;ox )> ~ C:;o -0
)> -0 )>-0 Z Ul)> JTl
0 0 UlO GJ Ul -fN Z
Ul UlUl :;0 :;0-
:;0 fTlJTl 0 )> )>C ~
)> -f UlO Z r)>
< j>Z
Z JTl 0 Z
0 :;0 Z-o 0
0 Ul fTl
I () ~ Ul -oJTl
-f --0
GJ ^ C Z-o
I ~ )> JTlJTl
~ ~ \J :;0 :;0
)> =i Ul fTl ..........
-< I Ul
Ul
~
)> Ul
:;0 -<
Ul Vl
I -f
rrI
'!::
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
MASTER PLAN UPDATE
F'LUCF'CS - OVERVIEW
ALTERNATIVE 6
5.800 FEET ON RUNWAYS
9 AND 27
FIGURE 9
DATE
REVISIONS
I D I
" 0)> "0 ,,)> '" fTl )>
:0 ;u~ ;ofTl ;0" e X ;ij
0 O"ll 0" Z Vi "ll
" [i> ;;1~ ....:0 ::l!: :::l 0
0 ....0 fTlo > Z :0
v> ~~ n)> -< (;) ....
fTl 3:'-" :::In
0 "ll"ll 6;0 O:r v> > "
zfTl Z > ;u :0
:0 >:0 ;0 -" 0
e no N:O Ne fTl " "
z .... c- oe oz .... 0 fTl
~ fTl ZZ Z::l!: -< :0 :0
n fTl::l!: ....
;;1 fTl)> > ~
-< > -< ;0 rn
0 -< fTl e r
)> ;= z
0 fTl
Z
(;)
Vl
....--
.... 1160 w.t c.oum.r
- ""-""-
~ R. 33IIJ1-M8Z
APPENDIX E
INTEGRATED NOISE MODEL DATA
~
....
u.i
W
-I
ID
<
.-
>
a:
<
:5
a::51:
!!:!;:)&.
a:(/)...
a:(/)<i:S
CCZ_G
OOG'O
a:-CQ,
-!;;:.2~
CCa:1iic
-'WCG
CCl1....a:
ZoS...
2>.ES
CJ:::!1i)=
WCCCD:=
II:c3:
N W >-
8CJCD
C\lCC~
II:
W
~
OOC")C")C\IC")C")C")C")'<;tcor--
.....r--OO>O>OIOOCOC\lC\l
O>O>CO.....'<;tcor--co.....r--o
o>r--'<;tOOOO>COor--oo
o"":o"":o..,roC":iooC":i
C\I '<;t..... .....0>
0>
10
, r-- '
o
ci
000
C")O
'lOCO
000>
00
r--IO.....
C\lO>C\I
'ococo
00>00
ooC\i
O>COC\lCOr--.....oo.....lOooC")
IOOO'<;tO>'<;tr--COOIOCOO>
0> 0>10 0 C\I r--C\l(I') O.....C")
'<;t 00..... 100..... 1OQ)0'<;t0
o ocioo"":..,r"":o..,r..,r
..... C\I '<;t
0>
10
'0>
'<;t
o
0> 10
0> 0
'IOQ)'
0> 0
cio
OC")
'<;to>
,.....CO
0>00
00
O>IOC\I
C\lO>CO
'ocoo>
oo>r--
ooC":i
r--COCOr--C\l'<;t.....C")Q)C")
OOO>O>'<;tCOQ)OIOCOO>
'C")'<;tOC\l..........C")O.....o
0>..... 100..... COQ)O '<;t CO
a)ooo....:..,r....:o~C\i
C\I '<;t
'ii
....
..... 010<0
'<;tooo.....~cooo~;'!oo.-
wC3~~<(uumlXlj::!
<(W....J....JZ:I::I:~~CJ)
mmUUUClClWW:I:
o
o
r--
- -
Q) ..... Q)
-:lC") ....,
n;(j) n;
C.9- c
02 0...2 ~
Q) ~r-- g> 0a:01O
a:~~a:ool-~;'!
'<;t ......!::00><(..........
lUQ)lU ..... ~Q)Q)
ClU1:J.c.cOO~~~
.c (.) (.) .c .c .c a:
lU~~~~~~EEI-
UUwummClww<(
(.)
q
CO
C
o
0Ci)
.....
Q)
>
CD
1:J
o
~
Q)
en
.0
Z
"0
Q)
-
~
0'1
Q)
-
E
C\i
o
o
C\I
t
o
a. .
.!:: C\I
<(0
o
n;C\I
c ~
o Q)
.- 1:J
tu.S
Eel
2 Q)
E.!;;;
L:
i<i:
~~
>..2
Q)::=
:::'::::0
CD
e
:J
o
CJ)
<?
o
o
l;j
~
;;:
...
W
I
~
c:
..
0:
i
:;
<(
~
.....1
0;
....
<?
<0
~
~
N
u.i
W
-I
m
<C
t-
>
~
:!:
:!:
::J
(J)
(J)
Z
o
!:it:
a:&.
W.:
D..<CQ)
O'ijm
>c"C
-100.
<C- .- ~
m
cci
W~O::
e,,-...
<c.EJ!!
a:-cn
wcnca
~~:!:
t->-
u.. Q)
<C~
a:
o
a:
:cc
t-
w
,
N
o
o
N
C\lC\IOIXlI.C)r-...,....<X)OC\l~C\la>
MMO~a>.,.....,....l.C)mMr-..~r-..
.,.....,....I.C)a>IXlIXlr-.. COr-...,.... a>1Xl0
OOC\lMC\lIXl.,....OOO.,.....,....~
0000000000000
1.0
1.0
o
o
o
.,....
o
(')
o
o
r-..
C\I
o
o
o
1.0 1.0
1.0 1.0
00
00
00
COCOI.C)~IXlr-..l.C)mr-..coC\lCOO 1.0
COCOa>r-..~OI.C)C\lCOCOMCO~ M
00.,....a>~.,....1Xl(')(')0a>1Xl0 C\I
OO.,.....,.....,....~OOOOOOC\l M
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
LO..... 0
~ ~ g
-~ >
(J) C\I :::. :.c
~~ "'0
~ '" ::c CO a> .!a
>- (J) ......... C\I ..c
X...J .LOM:J
CIl _ 01.0.,.... III
e;;g OLO-o:t::
(!) ~~(J)~
.t:: 01.0 CD .
1.00 """M-CO
C\lOOC.........~CO
.,....COt::O"""OI.C)
"""'OooM.3;=::
LOOCOe;;..... 1.0
>>C\I~'OU.~LO!:Q
-- """O"<t ....JCOO
EEE.,....o.....o ......1.0
CIlCllCll"O.,....CDOO(J)1.C)
CD CD ~ .~ 05 .~ ~ g .~ CIl
5~~t)~~~i3.,....~5i
0:!:::!:::!::1Il 3=..cCD'O..c III
CIl:J:J:J~CIlCllCDOCllCD
u.(!)(!)(!);>::CU)aJlXlU)O
C\lr-..~
IXlC\lr-..
OOC\l
000
000
r-..O
C\I .,....
0.,....
00
00
COCOOC\lO~LOC\lLOCOI.C)~O
COCOI.C)a>C\lMLOO<X)COOm~
OOC\lIXl~"""IXl(,)C\lOa>IXlO
OO.,.....,.....,....~OOOOOOC\l
0000000000000
OCO 001.0
0~(')0"""01.C)~0 1.0
.....,....t-OOLOr-...,....C\IaJ>>C\I
,.~ L1J CO CO .... .... "" ....J - - .,....
r-.. O-...J...J................<:ffl(!)(!).,....
M<: OOZZ~u..'-" <:
r-..aJ OOL1J -
o
!:Q
o
o
o
C\I
C 1.0
8 C\I
e;; !:Q
u. (;
M Cl 6.,.... 1.0
,CDooO'OO
r-.. a: 1.0 coco 0 1.00
~ .!::: CO .!::: .!::: 1.0 r-.. ~ ~
Cl~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C
.~ CIl III CIl CIl III III 0
(J)CIIlCCIIlIll.2
oCllCDCIlCllCD(J)CIl
aJoooooou..
o
o
r-..
(j)
.
C\lr-..
IXlC\l
00
00
00
o
<X)
LO
CO
o
LO
1.0
o
o
o
a>
.,....
C\I
o
o
.,....
r-..
o
M
o
1.0
C\I
a:
<:
w
...J
C\l0a>
r-..co.,....
MCOC\l
r-..o~
MC\im
<X)
~
1.0
o
o
1.0.,....
r-..r-..
lOCO
0.,....
00
IXl
(')
.,....
ClC!
.,....
1.0 <X)
I.C)M
r-..~
a> 1.0
o-.t
C\I
.,....
r-..
o
o
lOr-..
r-..M
1.0.,....
OC\l
00
~
r-..
a>
~
.,....
I.C)M
lOr-..
r-..a>
a>~
o-.t
1.0
M
a:
<:
L1J
...J
'ii
.,....-
00
ot-
M
:::>
~
o
o
<D
C
o
.w
.....
(J)
>
(j)
-0
o
~
CD
III
'0
Z
"0
CD
Cti
.....
Cl
(J)
-
C
C\i
o
o
C\iC\l
o .
ot
C\I&.
. .....
CD .-
0<:
.~ e;;
CD C
U) .Q
-
ClCll
C C
~05
u.c
>-
- -
.- III
OCD
-03:
C
CIl>
- CD
!!l~
Q;
o
.....
:J
o
U)
'"
8
~
~
~
...
W
I
;jj
c
..
a:
Q;
10
~
<(
~,
....
a;
....
'"
<0
~
~
CO)
aU
W
..J
ID
cC
t-
t>
cCC:::
c:::cC
0==
C:::==1::
<i:::::)&,
o ...
D.0'- CD
OZCC....
C:::0'ii~
D.-Co.
0~.2::::)
lDc:::ac
O::wcca
::::)D.~ii:
t-O.......
C>.5S
Z..J....cn
cC-cnca
Z~~:E
Ow >-
~~~
D.c:::
NW
g~
N
...-
10
C\I
C!
0>
C')
C\I I'-- 0 C\I 0>
C\I C') 0 OJ I'--
I'-- C\I 0 C') ...-
C\I ...- 0 10 ...-
N .,f 0 cr) r...:
...- ...-
I'--
C')
...-
C\I
o
'<tl'--
...-'<t
OC\l
...- 0
00
C') <0 0>
0> OJ ...-
'<t 0> C\I
000
000
0>
OJ
0>
C\I
ai
...-
OJ C\I 0 OJ C')
'<tl'--OO> 0
C') C') 0...- <0
0001'-- '<t
cO NO""': ex)
00 0>
0> 0 C')
00 0>
...- 0 '<t
ai 0 cO
<00
C\l0
C') 0
10 0
"';0
10
10
o
'<t
ex)
0> 0
0> 0
C\l0
10 0
"';0
o 10...-
C') 10 CO
<0 01'--
o 010
o ci 0
0>
C')
OJ
...-
cr)
OJ
'<t
10
o
ci
...-
C\I
0>
...-
M
<0
o
:c
o
.....
(I)
a.
~C\i a:
(Il::t OJo
(Il"'-'<tl'--O f\lC\I
(I) ...- '<t I'-- ...- ~ C\I
o ~ ~ ...- ~ CO ~ '<t .S
cOo~~l8 Ci;5 Ci; Ci; 0>
t::: -..-.:t ::::;: ...- ...- 0 00::: 10
OJ ,., -.. ~ .- 00::: .0:::...-
IO~OO~Oo...o::: 0..0 ~C\I
-"C')C')IOOJ'<t ~ ~ ~OJO._ E
1O-..-.....-...-C')'<tCOCOOIOO..cCll
10 I'-- C') Cll Cll .= C\I C') -.:t 0> .= C\I .sa (I)
..c~C\lCCCll..c..c~..cCll..c.c~
O~Ci;(Il(ll>oo~o>o:J(Il
(1)0 (Il(llC(I)(I)~(I)C(I)(Il:!::
(I) ...- ._ (I) (I) 0 (I) (I) OJ (I) 0 (I);!:: :J
alC')o..OOOalalC\lalOal::2:G
I'--
o
10
C')
o
OJ 0>
COC\l
o C')
...-0
00
0>
...-
CO
...-
C')001O
O>O>OC\l
C\lC\IOC\l
0001'--
cON 0""':
0>
...-
a..
OJ
10
o
W
al
~~ It
...-C\I w
<(<(C')C/)
ZZO<(
OOOG
CO '<t I'--
CO C') '<t
'<t \l) C\I
o ...- 0
000
>
a..
w
C/)
<(
G
...-0
'<tOJ
'<t1O
<(II:
z>
00
00
COCO
'<tC\l
C\l0>
""':N
0>
100>
I'--'<t
...- OJ
CO OJ
oLri
'<t
OC\l
C') C')
C\I 0>
<0 <0
ciLri
'<t
ca
....
<( 0
OJt-
'<t
I'--
C/)
:c
0>
0>
<0
I'--
ci
o
o
cO
C
o
'i!?
(I)
>
G)
"0
o
::2:
(I)
(Il
.0
Z
"0
(I)
-
Cll
.....
0)
(I)
-
C
N
o
o
C\I
t
o
a.
.....
<( .
- C')
Cllo
Co
.2 C\I
-
Cll ~
C 5
..... .-
~n;
C .....
- 0
- a.
(Il .....
(I) 0
3:0
>oC/)
(I) II:
~:J
CD
o
.....
:J
o
C/)
M
o
o
~
~
"ll
...
W
-'
~
'"
i[
:.
gj
~
<(
~
...'
co
I"-
M
'"
N
~
"=I"
ui
w
.....
~
>
0::
oct
==
==
::J
en
en
z
o
~
0::
W
D.
o
o
CJt:
C 0
ze-
oct .-
:I:~
01'0
::J C
0.2
t-'S
> C
..... i
ctca..
c-s
w1ii=
~~==
0::>-
W Q)
>~
c:(
z
o
~
.~
.....
c:(
0::
W
Z
W
CJ
N
o
o
N
S
1'0
~
C.
~
C
1'0
ii:
,.....
C\I
o
C")
-.i
C\I
C\I
~
~
T""
T""
LO
o
CO
CO
e\i
0>
LO
to
T""
ci
,.....
CO
~
ci
C\I
,.....
C")
o
ci
CO
CO
T""
T""
-.i
T""
~
C")
0>
C'!
~
C")
C\I
CO
e\i
T""
T""
LL. > a..
a.. a.. CO
w W LO
(/) (/) U
<( <( w
(!) (!) lD
C\i a; cO X ex) ale: nf
LO a. 0.- m 0
T""a:: C\I(/) .c:m~
a! - a!Q) OQ)Q)
e:- e:Q) Q)U(/)
m'? m~O Q)-
m"") m lDC\I L-
Q)........ Q)a; 0Q)
U .0 U .c: cD ~ .9-
::I -U ~a!o..
cU ~ L- ::I e: -
~~ :;;.~ ~~~
a! a:: e: a.. ~ U <(
e: _ m - O-L-
m ,..... m 3: .c: 0 Q)
m,..... Q)o O~a.
Q) T"" U t: ~ C") a::
Ua! nf<( lDa!_
~~ ~ a; -~.s
~ mQ) CO a! .9- 5 ~ m
a. C\! e: a.. L- " 0 Q)
.- U <( 0 a! '-' a;
cJ5C\io..lDc(])lDc<(g
,..... Q).t::T""'" o1ij~ ~.E
T""Q)~C\I~L-C")~(])
a!~oa!...Jo~a::(/)
.c:~e-5~L--5m _L-
omQ)(])mQ)Q)mT""Q)
Q) Q) .c: Q) Q) ._ (]) (]) C\I ._
lDUUlDUo..lDU~o..
LO
LO
o
CO
oj
C\I
0>
T""
,.....
C")
ci
CO
C")
C")
C\I
oj
C\I
a!
-
o
I-
o
o
cO
e:
o
'0
L-
Q)
>
a;
"t:l
o
~
Q)
m
.0
Z
"0
Q)
-
a!
L-
0>
Q)
-
e:
e\i
o
o
C\I
e:
o
:;:::;
a!
L-
o
a.
L-
o
U
(/)
a:
::::>
CD
e
::I
o
(/)
'"
8
l;l
~
)(
..;
~I
~
<:
..
c::
..
1;)
..
::.
<(
~
....'
CD
....
(')
co
'"
3i
It)
aU
UJ
....I
m
c(
I-
>
0::
c(
::E
::E
:)
en
en
z
o
~
0::
UJ
D-
O
UJ
CJ
c(
0::
UJt::
~ 0
c.
> .!::: CI)
....1<(_
<e-ca
CClS'O
c: C.
0::.2:)
UJ-
a:~i
o::~ii:
c(-...
oC:s
o::-cn
_~CIS
~;:::E
c(>
Z CI)
O~
(;
UJ
0::
Z
o
i=
C
z
o
o
UJ
0::
:)
I-
:)
u.
.....
N
o
N
C') C')
~ . ~
..... .....
LO LO
COCO
cici
0> 0>
C'!C'!
..... .....
C')OOLOCO
OLOCOCO
c\ic\icir--:
0> CO LO............
......C\lLOOO.....
crioiC':iC':i..t
'o:t
iii
-
LOCO 0
ffi<DO~'o:t1-
oogcaiJj
w::r:...J:::;Ec:(
caClOWca
.....
o
o
cD
c
o
.Ci)
....
Q)
>
Q)
-0
o
:::;E
Q)
U)
.0
Z
-0
Q)
-
<<l
....
OJ
Q)
-
c
('I)
o
o
C\l
c:
o
:;::;
<<l
....
o
a.
....
o
o
en
a:
:J
iD
e
:J
o
en
'"
8
~
~
)l
0;
w
11)'
~
'"
a:
i
:;
0(
~
...1
a;
...
'"
<D
~
~
CD
uJ
W
...I
m
c(
t-
>-
0:
c(
:E
:E
::)
en
en
z
o
!it:
o:&.
w.!::
Q.c(
o
>-
...I
Ci
C
W
~
0:-
W (II
~~
t:~
c(~
0:
o
a:
<C
t-
W
"")
....
C\I
o
C\I
G)
-
'ii as
c"
o c.
.- ::)
-
as c
c as
.a:
-
.s:G
-
(II
as
:E
<O<O<OC').qo>o>o
CX)CX)C')cx)O><Oor-C')
or-or-IOIOO.q.qO> ,
OOC')IO.qC\IC\I0
OOOOO~OO
10
10
o
q
o
or-
o
C')
o
o
C\I......q
CX)C\I.....
OOC\l
000
000
.....0
C\lor-
o or-
00
00
CX)O>OO
<OOC\l<O
..........00>
OOor-C\lC\lIO
000000
OCX)O
or-C')or-
C\I.qor-
or-OO
000
to to 0> C\I
.....oeo 10
'0><0..... <0
C\I C\I 10 .q
o 0 0 0
.....
C\I
o
o
o
10 10
to 10
00
00
00
.q to 10 or-
C') .q CX) .....
, .q C\I CX) C\I
or- C\I C\I
o 0 0 0
C\I.....
tOC\I
00
00
00
.....1010
0.....CX)
'.qC\lCX)
or- .... C\I
000
0<0 0 00100 10
O~C')oog~~C\lI:O> C\I
C')wl-<o<o<(<(I:O.....J=->or-
~<(O.....J.....JZZ~<(GGG:;c
.....1:0 OOOOWLL -
.q
o
10
.....
to
10
10
o
o
o
CX)
.q
10
o
o
.q
o
C\I
CX)
C\i
0>
....
C\I
o
o
C\I
or-
.....
o
o
.....
o
....
C\I
o
o
.q
o
CX)
C\i
10
C\I
0:
<(
W
.....J
10
C')
0:
<(
W
.....J
to'..... 0
~ (]) 0
_.q -5 C')
(]) C\I :;;. :c
J = 'u 0
o '" :r: <0 0> .~
--010 $(' (]) __ C\I ..c
o ctl.....J O~~~
o g ctlO O~U~
..... C\I G~ ~~(])~
~ c 10 to'O ~IO~O
~ ~ ~ ~g~5~~m
05 LL or- ""oooC')3~
o .- . 0 ~ 0 <0 ctl (ij 10
C')~ Oor-~ >>C\I~OLL(])tO'~
I (])ooooo -- ""o.q ......J<oO
~O:lOeo<oOIOO E E Eor-o.....o ......10
.....<O~~1O.....00ctlctlctlU....(])00(])1O
.....~ctlctlctlctlctlO>C\I~~~~.....~.qo~ctl
~UCUUCCCC___0~m~OmC
~ctl0ctlctl0000000--.....0.........0
(])C0CC0000~~~~3:..c(])O..c0
Octl(])ctlctl(])(])ctl~~~~>ctlctl(])octl(])
I:OOOOOOOLLLLGGG>:r:ool:OCX)ooo
.q.....
C').q
C')C\I
o~
MC')
or-
10 or-
..........
10 <0
Oor-
00
C\IC\I
0> 10
100>
-.:l:.q
cO
10.....
.....C')
10 or-
O,,!
00
C\I<O
0> to
1O.q
~-.:l:
or- <0
or-
o
o
C')
::>-
~.s
o
I-
o
o
cO
C
o
.~
(])
>
m
u
o
~
(])
o
.0
Z
u
(])
-
ctl
....
~
(])
-
E
C\i
o
o
C\IC\I
gt"
C\I&.
. ....
~ <c .
.~~ 8
(])co
00 .2 C\I
~'tii c
C C 0
~Cii1ii
LLc....
~= &.
U~o
u~O
~ >.00
-(])o:
~~::>
CD
o
....
~
o
00
8
~
~
"R
oi
W
",,
~
as
a::
Q;
1;j
as
::;:
<
~
';::.'
CD
....
'"
<0
~
"i
.....
ui
W
...I
In
c(
I-
>
a:
c(
:E
:E
:)
tn
tn
Z
o
~
a:
w
a.
o
>
...I
-1:
c( 0
00.
W .: CI)
CJc(_
c(-ta
a:ta'C
wCe.
>~:)
c(taC
t:Cta
fiO:
c(-...
a:.5S
O-en
a: en ta
<~:E
a. >0
o CI)
a:~
a.
o
In
a:
:)
I-
o
Z
c(
Z
o
I-
(J)
c::
....
N
o
N
....
o
0'>
,....
&.0
10
..... 00 0 00 10
10 ,.... 0 M 00
IOMOO 0
M 00 0 0 C\I
.....: &.0 0 &.0 ..,f
,.... C\I
C\l0
C\I 0
ex> 0
ex> 0
C\io
,....
M <0 0'>
0'> 00 ,....
"<:t 0'> C\I
000
000
C\I 0 0'>
0'> 0 00
,.... 0 C\I
"<:t 0 10
m 0 ..,f
<0 "<:t .....
<0 M "<:t
"<:t 10 C\I
o ,.... 0
000
00
o
10
~
,....
,....
"<:to
<00
,....0
"<:to
mo
.....
C')
00
oi
o 10....
C') 10 00
<0 0.....
o 010
o 0 0
00
"<:t
10
o
o
,....
.....
M
10
..,f
<0
U
I
o
....
a>
a.
al ,.... 0..0-
cC\I
CI)~ 006
CI),...."<:t.....O f'lC\l
CI) ,.... ..,.. ..... ,.... ~ C\I
U~~,....~ ~~ "<:t .~
<OO~C\iClO .... C .... L:
"..,..,.........00 CI) 00 CI) CI)
......-.M,....,.... ::2:
~~ooC\ioO:::2: 0:0 ~C\I,....E
--C')C')IOCIO"<:t ~ - _000._
1O-.-.,....,....M"<:t<O<oOIOOL:al
10 ..... C') al al .~ C\I M "<:t 0'> .~ C\I .~ !>>
.c~C\lCCal.c.c"S.cal.c'O+::
(.) ,., .... CI) CI) > (.) (.) ~ (.) > (.) ::J CI)
(1)oa>CI)CI)CCI)CI)~CI)CCI)CI)::!:::
CI) ,.... ._ CI) CI) 0 CI) CI) 00 CI) 0 CI) :t:: ::J
alMo..UUUalalC\lalUal::2:(!)
.....
M
,....
C\I
o
"<:t.....
,...."<:t
OC\l
,....0
00
"<:t
,....
00
C')
.....:
C\I
10 C') 0 <0 <0
<O,....OC\l 10
.....0'>010 0
IOCIOO"<:t 0
cx:i C\i 0 C\i C\i
,....
.....
o
10
M
o
00 0'>
<OC\I
o M
,....0
00
"<:t
"<:t
"<:t
C\I
.....:
C\I
OOOM
,....C')01O
.....00010
10 00 O"<:t
cx:iC\i0C\i
a..
00
10
U
W
al
C\I<O I.L
.....0 a..
;(~Mm
ZZU<(
UUO(!)
>
a..
w
00
<(
(!)
o
"<:too
"<:t1O
<(CI:
Z>
UU
,.... ex>
C\I.....
<0 ,....
"::"<:1;
,....
C')
<0 00
10 0
.....M
00 ,....
OU;
<0
00
,....0'>
CIOM
CIOm
o..,f
<0
<(
00
"<:t-
..... al
000
II-
m
10
0'>
m
<0
.....
o
(.)
o
<0
C
o
.f?
a>
>
Q)
"C
o
::2:
CI)
CI)
'0
Z
"C
a>
a;
....
a)
CI)
c
C\i
o
o
C\I
t
o
a.
....
<.
-M
alo
Co
.2 C\I
-
al ~
C g
.... .-
,Sa;
C ....
-0
-a.
CI) ....
CI) 0
~U
>,00
(1)CI:
~=>
CD
~
::J
o
00
'"
8
~
~
>l
ai
W
",'
!:iJ
c:
.,
a:
l;;
gj
::;0<(
~
....'
ex>
....
'"
<0
'"
"i
co
u.i
W
...I
m
<
....
>
0::
<
:e
:e
:J
en
en
z
o
~
0::
W
D-
O
o
Clt=
C 0
ZQ.
<0:
<s
J:-ca
Oca"
:JcQ.
0.2::::)
""GC
>cca
=iD:
<-...
C.:CD
--
wcnfd
~~:e
0::>-
w CD
>~
<
z
o
~
~
...I
<
0::
W
Z
W
Cl
....
N
o
N
co
I"-
.-
~
.-
C\I
C\I
-=:t
C")
I!)
,....:
.-
m
-=:t
co
C\I
ci
m
I"-
C\I
C\I
ci
m
C\I
('I)
<'!
.-
C\I
C")
CD
o
('I)
,....:
u. > 0.
0. 0. co
W W I!)
Cf) Cf) 0
<( <( W
(!) (!) co
C\i (j; <<5 x ex) ~ ai
LO 0. 0'- .- en 0
.-a:: C\ICf) .c(J)~
al ~ alQ) OQ)Q)
e- eQ) Q)0Cf)
(J) C? (J)(J) "5 Q) ~
(J)"" Q)..... COC\l.....Q)
Q)- Q) 0
o ..c 0 .c cD -=:t .90
::J ~O ":'::alo.
60 C\I..... ::Je ~
I!)..... co Q) Cl (J) 0Q)
Q) .- 0. (J)
'-0. al .- :::: Q) N
ala:: co. e!0<(
e~ (J)(J)'> o~.....
(J)I"- ;> .cOQ)
(J)I"- Q)o o-=:to.
Q).- 0 l::: lEC")a::
Oal ~<( coal ~
~e ~..... ~~tu
(j;~ e~ e(J)-
c. Q) co al ._ 0 Q) (J)
.90 0 C\I 5 0. tu 0 eQ) Q)
..:.:: <(co ~ CO (5
Cf) C\i 0. 0 Q) 6 <( .~
_1"-Q)'EC\io::::C;;(j;E
cu'-Q)al ~e! 0.Q)
..... al..:.:: 0 al.....J 0 al.-Cf)
oeo.ce .ceO'.....
i3~(j;~~(j;~~~Q)
CD Q) .c CD CD ._ Q) CD C\I .-
COOOCOOo.COO-=:to.
CD
C")
co
C")
-<i
o
l"-
I!)
o
ci
CD
CD
C\I
C")
-<i
CD
I!)
('I)
co
et:i
-=:t
m
m
CD
I!)
ci
co
I!)
CD
C\I
et:i
-=:t
al
-
o
t-
o
o
<Ci
e
o
'en
.....
Q)
>
Q)
"0
o
~
Q)
(J)
'0
Z
"0
Q)
<<1
.....
Ol
Q)
-
e
et:i
o
o
C\I
e
o
:;:;
al
.....
o
0.
.....
o
o
Cf)
a:
::::>
CD
o
.....
::J
o
Cf)
t')
8
~
~
"5il
ci
ill
",,
~
..
a::
:;;
]j
=-
<(
~
....'
a;
....
t')
<0
N
3i
TABLE E.9
2002 and 2021 FLIGHT TRACK UTILIZATION
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
Source: KWIA A TCT, 2000.
URS Greiner Woodward Clyde, 2000.
w:\12637817 _KWIA Master P1an\E-5_E-9.x1s\3l1212003
87.0%
5.0%
7.0%
1.0%
100.0%
87.0%
5.0%
7.0%
1.0%
100.0%
93.0%
1.0%
5.0%
1.0%
100.0%
93.0%
1.0%
5.0%
1.0%
100.0%
38.0%
57.0%
2.0%
3.0%
100.0%
38.0%
57.0%
2.0%
3.0%
100.0%
95.0%
5.0%
100.0%
TABLE E.10
2002 EXISTING CONDITION NOISE EXPOSURE ESTIMATES
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
AREA BY LAND USE lACRES) @DNt16!htBA: ~:~DNL?l(rasA~ ::DNlil15afBA~ tttmQTAE~:~mr
................................. ................................ ................... ............
Multi-Family Residential 6.0 0.4 - 6.4
SinQle-Family Residential 6.6 - - 6.6
Mobile Homes - - - -
Transient lodQinQ 4.9 - - 4.9
Parks & Recreation - - - -
Community Facilities 2.3 - - 2.3
Commercial - - - -
Airport 35.6 45.0 52.7 133.3
Militarv 15.9 3.0 0.1 19.1
Roads 5.0 0.4 - 5.4
Vacant land 16.2 7.8 - 24.0
Water 24.4 5.1 2.5 32.0
Mixed Use 0.1 - - 0.1
TOTAL 117.1 61.7 55.3 234.1
DNlflsdBA' ]'Ntt7:(UnlA~ ::SNIWl$.:dBA: ::::~:t:TOrAtt::~:::::
. ... ... ..
... ... ... ....
.. ... . ..
CONTOUR AREA (Square Miles) ::: -"" '-':::. . ".::-." ........;
0.1 83 0.096 0.086 0.366
POPULATION ]lNt165:~dBA: ~:DNL:7(Ut8A ::DNllt15]iBA~ '--TOTAL-'-
~tt~t ::. .:. ':: ::: . : ==\{f
................................. ................................ ................................ .............................
Single Family Residential 145 - - 145
Multi-Family Residential 205 - - 205
Mixed Use 2 - - 2
Transient lodQiml 98 - - 98
TOTAL 450 0 0 450
~DNIW6SR1BA: "DNIl70'dO' 'D.NIZ7:&.dBA ..mOrAE....
HOUSING UNITS . . -.. .... .. . ... ... ... t~tt~ ~:. :.): :::.: : ::::ff~~
.. . .... - .... . . . ........ ..
.. ...... . .. .... . ..
",. ....... .. .. .... .. -
. . . .-.' . . .
.. . . -. . ;: ...... U:::' ,:, ' ,::. ',..:
,', .... '," '.. ..... . ."..
Single Family Residential 63 - - 63
Multi-Family Residential 89 - - 89
Mixed Use 1 - - 1
Transient LodQinQ 55 - - 55
TOTAL 208 0 0 208
Source: URS Corporation, 2003.
w:\12637817 _KWIA Master Plan\E-l0_E-ll.x1s\3l1212003
TABLE E.11
2021 FUTURE CONDITION NOISE EXPOSURE ESTIMATES
Key West International Airport
Master Plan Update
USE lACRES) ::~DNtr65j:aBA: ~~DNE7o.t(lBA~ ~~DNtl7s.~dBA: .....TOTAL.....
AREA BY LAND ~t~tt ;:. :. :: ::: . : ;;::~l~t
................................. ................................ ................................ .............................
Multi-Family Residential 7.1 1.5 - 8.6
SinQle-Family Residential 4.3 - - 4.3
Mobile Homes - - - -
Transient lodQinQ 7.2 0.1 - 7.2
Parks & Recreation - - - -
CommunitY Facilities - - - -
Commercial - - - -
Airpo rt 33.7 48.1 55.9 137.7
Militarv 13.0 5.5 9.9 28.5
Roads 5.3 0.0 - 5.4
Vacant land 24.9 5.4 - 30.3
Water 31.2 7.8 5.0 44.0
Mixed Use - - - -
TOTAL 126.8 68.3 70.8 266.0
~~DNlt~ISj~dB.A: iDNtl7:ctdSAi ::SNli1$.::dSW: ~firTQm":
CONTOUR AREA (Square Miles)
0.198 0.107 0.111 O.
POPULATION fDNlt6!fdBA ]lNE70fdSA: DNlW15]ilBA ....TOTAL....
~tft: ::. :'.;: ::: . : ::?~~~f~
................................. ............................... . ................................ .............................
SinQle Family Residential 94 - - 94
Multi-Family Residential 202 - - 202
Mixed Use - - - 0
Transient lodoino 144 - - 144
TOTAL 441 0 0 441
HOUSING UNITS ])NtJ6!UtbA: DNU'm"dBW' ])Nlf7:5.j~aB.A: ............................
. ... .... .. {{{:: ~:OTALt:{
.. ... ......
. . . ...... .
-.. ..........
. . ..... .. . .
. . . .. .
,', .... ',' '.. ..... . . '..
Sinole Family Residential 41 - - 41
Multi-Family Residential 88 - - 88
Mixed Use - - - 0
Transient lodoino 81 - - 81
TOTAL 210 0 0 210
Source: URS Corporation, 2003.
wl12637817 _KWIA Master Plan\E-l0_E-l1.x1s13/1212003
...
"""
APPENDIX F
COST ESTIMATES
'""
CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATE
FOR
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
MASTER PLAN UPDATE
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Key West. Florida
Prepared by
URS CorpOration
7650 West Courtney Campbell Causeway
Tampa, FL 33607-1462
(813) 286-1711
FAX: (813) 287-8591
Page 2 of 29
Basis and Scqpe of Estimate:
1. This estimate has been prepared by the URS Cost Engineering Department
using various Master Plan Documents, preliminary concept plans, airport
layout plans and miscellaneous drawings.
2. The documents used to prepare this cost estimate are conceptual in nature
and scope, and the quantities and costing applied are consistent with this
level of detail.
3. Reasonable allowances have been made for any items not quantified.
4. All Airfield project costs are in 1999 dollars. All Roadway and Parking,
Terminal and Support Facility project costs are in 1998 dollars.
5. All direct costs are based on current bid prices from similar airport projects,
historical bid data, quotes from local contractors performing this type of
work, and publications such as R.S. Means and Richardsons cost data
6. All unit pricing Includes contractors markups for labor burden, material and
equipment taxes, field overhead, home office overhead, and profit.
7. This estimate is intended for budgeting purposes and should be reviewed
carefully for intended scope. These estimates should also be refined as
design concepts are developed to ensure conformance with the bUdget
and project scope.
8. The detailed unit price estimates provide construction costs. The summary
sheet for each project Includes the following program costs where
Mitigation
Land Purchase
Design Fees
Permits
Construction Phase Services
Owner Costs
Project Administration
9. No escalation is included in any estimated cost in this document.
10. Some projects include large quantities of embankment. These quantities are
based on incomplete topographic data and general visual observations. It is
recommended that further study of these quantities be done to provide a
more accurate cost estimate.
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
MASTER PLAN REPORT - SUMMARY OF ESTIMATES
I Esfimate \,;OOSIIUC1IOI1 10101 ~ I
Description Cost Program Cost (Rounded)
1 EIS for RSA & Runway Extension $0 $1,000,000 $1,000,000
2 Establish Runway Safety Areas $7.920,000 $1,980,000 $9,900,000
3 Construct Runway Extension $2,600,000 $650,000 $3,250,000
4 Construct Aircraft Wash Rack $150,000 $40,000 $190,000
5 General Aviation Hangar Project $1,530,000 $380,000 $1,910,000
6 FBO Parking Rehab & expansion $160,000 $40,000 $200,000
7 Signage Plan & Program $110,000 $40,000 $150,000
8 Terminal Area Study / Preliminary Design $0 $60,(xx) $60,000
9 Passenger Terminal - Short Term Expansion $4,290,000 $1,070,000 $5,360,000
10 New Passenger Terminal $23,230,000 $5,342,900 $28,572,900
11 FBO Access Road $310,000 $70,000 $380,000
12 NIP - Phase 3 $2,500,000 $1,000,000 $3,500,000
13 NIP - Phase 4 $2,500,000 $1,000,000 $3,500,000
14 NIP - Phase 5 $2,500,000 $1,000,000 $3,500,000
15 NIP - Phase 6 $2,500,000 $1,000,000 $3,5OO,())()
16 NIP - Phase 7 $2,500,000 $1,000,000 $3,500,000
I TOTALS $52.800.000 $15.672.900 $68.472.900 I
3/7/2D03 - 4: 12 PM Key West Intemational Airport-Master Plan Update.xls I UR5-DKC
Page 3 of 29
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
Master Plan Update - Capital Improvement Plan
1 - EIS for RSA & Runway Extension
Factors
Cost
Item Totals
Cumulative Totals l
I Description
I CONSTRUCI1ON COSTS
CONTINGENCIES
Change Order Contingency 10%
I
ESCAlATION
Number of Years
Annual Inflation 4.0%
CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL
MANAGEMENT COSTS
Force Account n/a
Project Management 4.5%
Construction Manaaement 6%
esign Svcs. During Construction 4.5%
Design Fees $1,000,000
T1,OOO,OOO $1,000,000
OTHER COSTS
Land Purchase (0 acres)
SUNey Fees Is
Utility Relocations Allow
$1,000,000
PROJECT TOTAL $1,000,000 ,
3/7/2fJ03 - 4: 12 PM Key West Intemational Airport-Master Plan Update.xls / UR5-DKC Page 4 of 29
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
Master Plan Update - Capital Improvement Plan
2 - Establish Runway Safety Areas
~ Description
I
. Factors
.
COst
Item Totals Cumulcllive Totals I
$7,200,000 $7,200,000 I
CONTINGENCIES
Change Order Contingency 10% $720,CXX)
$720,000 $7,920,000
ESCALATION
Number of Years
Annual Inflation 4.0%
CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $7,920,000
MANAGEMENT COSTS
Force Account nla
Project Management 4.5% $356,40)
Construction Manaaement 6% $475,200
esign Svcs. During Construction 4.5% $356,40)
Design Fees 10% $792,(XX)
$1,980,000 $9,900,000
OlHER COSTS
land Purchase (0 acres)
SUNey Fees Is
Utility Relocations Allow
$9,900,000
PROJECT TOTAL $9,900,000 I
3/712003 - 4: 12 PM Key West Intemational Airport-Master Plan Update. xis 1 UR5-DKC Page 5 of 29
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
Master Plan Update - Capital Improvement Plan
EST.
DESCRlPDON
QUANTITY UNIT
UNIT PRICE
COST
2 ESTABUSH RUNWAY SAFETY AREAS
3!7/2f1J3 - 4: 12 PM
Key West International Airport-Master Plan Update.xls / URS-DKC
Page 6 of 29
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
Master Plan Update - Capital Improvement Plan
~ EST.
DESCRlPIlON
QUAN11lY UNIT
UNIT PRICE
COST
SAFETY AREA - NORTH
RW 27 MOBlUZE
1 Is
$5,000.00
$5,000.00
$5,000
$23,000
RW 27 MAINTENANCE OF AIR OPERATIONS
1LS
Maintenance of Air Operations
1 lS
RW 27 CLEARING.. MANGROVES - PREVIOUSLY CLEARI
OLS
RW 27 STRIPPING and/or MUCK REMOVAL
5,867 CY
$6.90
~,480
4" Strippng
Muck Remoyal
5.867 CY
CY
RW 27 EARTHWORK - STRIP SITE & PREP FOR FILL
8,889 CY
$9.20
$81,778
Strip Site & Prep for fill
figure moving 6" of material from onsite tc
400JXXl SF
8.889 CY
RW 27 EARTHWORK
QUANTJTY based on fIIJ volume
Cut
Offsite Fill
Place and compact onsite
Fine grade. topsoil. grass
27,778 CYn
$51.55
$1.431,879
eYN
27.178 CYN
27.778 CYN
4OOJXX) SF
SUBTOTAL
$5,986,906
$1.197.381
$7,200,000
3/7/2003 - 4:12 PM
Key West International Airport-Master Plan Update.xls / URS-DKC
Page 7 of 29
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
Master Plan Update - Capital Improvement Plan
3 - Construct Runway Extension
I Description
I
Factors
Cost
Item Totals Cumukifive TOtalS'
$2,366,139 $2,366,1391
CONTINGENCIES
Change Order Contingency 10% $236,614
$236,614 $2,602,753
ESCAlATION
Number of Years
Annual Inflation 4.0%
CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $2,602,753
MANAGEMENT COSlS
Force Account n/a
Project Management 4.5% $117,124
Construction Management 6% $156,165
esian Svcs. Durina Construction 4.5% $117,124
Design Fees 10% $260,275
$650,688 . $3,253,442
OTHER COSTS
land Purchase (0 acres)
SUNey Fees Is
Utility Relocations Allow
$3,253,442
PROJECT TOTAL $3,253,442 I
3/7/2003 - 4: 12 PM Key West Intemational Airport-Master Plan Update.xIs 1 UR5-DKC Page 8 of 29
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
Master Plan Update - Copitallmprovement Plan
EST.
DESCRIPTION
QUANTITY UNIT
UNIT PRICE
COST
3. CONSTRUCT RUNWAY EXTENSION
3/7/2003 - 4: 12 PM
Key West International Airport-Master Plan Update.xls / URS-DKC
Page 9 of 29
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
Master Plan Update - Capifollmprovement Plan
I EST.
DESCRIPTION
QUANTITY UNIT
UNIT PRICE
COST
SUBTOTAL
$1,971.783
Contingency 20%
I CONSTRUCTION TOTAL (Rounded)
$394,357
$2.366.139
I
317/2003 - 4: 12 PM
Key West International Airport-Master Plan Update.xls / URS-DKC
Page 10 of 29
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
Master Plan Update - Capital Improvement Plan
4 - CQIlStruct Aircraft Wash Rack
I Description
I CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Factors
Cost
Item Totals CUrnuI(JtiveTotaIs I
$137,198 $137,1981
CONTINGENOES
Chanae Order Contingency 10% $13.720
$13,720 $150,918
ESCALATION
Number of Years
Annual Inflation 4.0%
CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $150,918
MANAGEMENT COSTS
Force Account n/a
Proiect Manaaement 4.5% $6.791
Construction Manaaement 6% $9,055
esian Svcs. Durina Construction 4.5% $6,791
Design Fees 10% $15,092
$37,729 . $188.647
01llER COSTS
Land Purchase (0 acres)
Survey Fees Is
Utility Relocations Allow
$188,647
PROJECT TOTAL
$188,647 ,
3/7/2003 - 4: 12 PM Key West Intemational Airport-Master Plan Update.xls 1 URS-DKC
Page 11 of 29
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
Master Plan Update - Capital Improvement Plan
~ EST.
DESCRlPnON
QUANTITY UNIT
UNIT PRICE
COST
4 CONSTRUCT AIRCRAFT WASH RACK
Mobilization
Barricades I Traffic Control
Demolition (Pavement Remoyal)
Drainage
Structures
Pipe
New Water Supply
Waftl Equipment
Power to equipment
Oil I Water Separator
New Paving
Misc. Signagel Pavement Markings
1 Is 10% $10,394
1 Is 2% $2,038
400 sy $6.00 $2,400
3 eo $3,00100 $9,(XX)
500 If $48.00 $24,(XX)
250 If $20.00 $5,(XX)
1 Is $15,(XX).00 $15,(XX)
250 If $16.00 $4,(XX)
1 eo $28,(XX),oo $28,(XX)
400 sy $30.00 $12000
1 Is $2,500.00 $2,500
SUBTOTAL
$114,332
Contingency 20%
I CONSTRUCTION TOTAL (Rounded)
$22866
$137,198
,
3/7/2003 - 4:12 PM Key West International Airport-Master Plan Update.xls I URS-DKC
Page 12 of 29
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
Master Plan Update - Capital Improvement Plan
5 - General Aviation Hangar Project
~ Description
I CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Factors
Cost
Item Totals Cumulative Totals ~
$1,388,040 $1,388,040 I
CONnNGENOES
Change Order Contingency 10% $138,804
$138,804 $1,526,844
ESCAlATION
Number of Years
Annual Inflation 4.0%
CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $1,526,844
MANAGEMENT COSTS
Force Account n/a
Project Management 4.5% $68,708
Construction Management 6% $91,611
esign Svcs. Durina Constl\lction 4.5% $68,708
Design Fees 10% $152,684
$381,711 $1,908,555
OTHER COSTS
Land Purchase (0 acres)
SUNey Fees Is
Utility Relocations Allow
$1,908,555
PROJECT TOTAL $1,908,5551
3/7/2fJ03 - 4: 12 PM Key West Intemational Airport-Moster Plan Update. xis I UR$-OKC Page 13 of 29
KEY WEST INTERNAnONAL AIRPORT
Master Plan Update - Capifallmprovement Plan
I EST. DESCRlP110N QUAN11TY UNIT UNIT PRICE COST ~
5 GENERAL AVIATION HANGAR PROJECT
Mobilization 1 Is $5O,(XX).OO $5O,(XX)
Building Demolition 1 Is $10,(xx).00 $10,(XX)
concrete Demolition 1 ,300 sy $6.00 $7,800
Pavement Demolition 6.400 sy $2.50 $16,(XX)
Excavation 1 grading 11,200 sy $3.00 $33,600
Urnerock Base (6) 1,550 cy $35.00 $54,250
Asphalt Pavement (2") l,l 00 ton $100.00 $11 O,(XX)
Drainage System 1 Is $70,(xx).00 $70,(xx)
Interiro 1 Ext Lighting for Hangars 1 Is $4OJXXloo $4O,(XX)
Reinforced Concrete Foundation (6") 800cy $220.00 $176,(XX)
T-Hangar Building 16,500 sf $13.70 $226,050
Rectangular Hangar Building 25,(XX) sf $14.20 $355,(XX)
Relocation of Wind Cone 1 Is $6,(XX).00 $6,(XX)
Payement Markings 1 Is $2,(XX),OO $2(xx)
SUBTOTAL
$1.156.700
$231,340
$1.388.040
3/7/2003 - 4: 12 PM Key West International Airport-Master Plan Update.xls I UR5-DKC
Page 14 of 29
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
Master Plan Update - Capilallmprovemenl Plan
6 - FBO Parking Rehab & Expansion
Factors
Cost
Item Totals CumukdiveTOtals I
$144,850 $144,850 I
I DeSCription
I CONSTRUCTION cosrs
CONTINGENCIES
Chanae Order Continaency 10% $14,485
$14,485 $159,335
ESCALATION
Number of Years
Annual Inflation 4.0%
CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $159~335
MANAGEMENT COStS
Force Account n/a
Project Manaaement 4.5% $7,170
Construction Manaaement 6% $9,560
esian Svcs. Durina Construction 4.5% $7.170
Desian Fees 10% $15,934
$39,834 $199,169
OTHER COSTS
land Purchase (0 acres)
SUNey Fees Is
Utility Relocations Allow
$199,169
PROJECT TOTAL
$199,169 ,
3/7/2003 - 4: 12 PM Key West Intemational Airport-Master Plan Update.xls 1 UR5-DKC
Page 15 of 29
SUBTOTAL
$120,708
Contingency 20%
I CONSTRUCTION TOTAL (Rounded)
$24,142
$144,850
,
3/7/2f1J3 - 4:12 PM Key West International Airport-Master Plan Update.xls / UR5-DKC
Page 16 of 29
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
Master Plan Update - Capital Improvement Plan
7 - Signage Plan & Program
~ Description
I CONSTRuCTION com
Factors
Cost
Item Totals Cumulative-Totals ~
$100,000 $100,000 I
CONnNGENClES
Change Order Contingency 10% $1O.<m
$10,000 $110,000
ESCALAnON
Number of Years
Annual Inflation 4.0%
CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $110,000
MANAGEMENT COSTS
Force Account n/a
Project Management 4.5% $4.950
Construction Management 6% $6.6OCJ
esign Svcs. During Construction 4.5% $4.950
Design Fees 22% $24.200
$40,700 $150,700
OTHER COSTS
land Purchase (0 acres)
Survey Fees Is
Utility Relocations Allow
$150,700
PROJECT TOTAL
$150,700 I
3/7/'2fJ03 - 4: 12 PM Key West Intemational Airport-Master Plan Update.xls / UR5-0KC
Page 17 of 29
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
Master Plan Update - Capitol Improvement Plan
8 - Tenninal Area Study I Preliminary Design
~ Description
I CONSI'RUC110N COSTS
CONTINGENCIES
Change Order Contingency 10%
Factors
Cost
Item Totals
CUmutafive Totcis I
I
ESCAlATION
Number of Years
Annual Inflation 4.0%
CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL
MANAGEMENT COSTS
Force Account nla
Project Manaaement 4.5%
Construction Management 6%
esian Svcs. During Construction 4.5%
Design Fees LS $60,000
$60,000 $60,000
OTHER COSTS
Land Purchase (0 acres)
Survey Fees Is
Utility Relocations Allow
$60,000
PROJECT TOTAL
$60,000 I
3/7/2003 - 4; 12 PM Key West Intemational Airport-Master Plan Update.xIs 1 UR5-DKC
Page 18 of 29
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
Moster Plan Update - Capital Improvement Plan
9 - Passenger Terminal - Short Term Expansion
I DescriptiOn
I
Factors
COst
Item Totals CUmulative Totals I
$3,900,000 $3,900,000 I
CONnNGENOES
Change Order Contingency 10% $390,000
$390,000 $4,290,000
ESCAlAnON
Number of Years
Annual Inflation 4.0%
CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $4,290,000
MANAGEMENT COSTS
Force Account n/a
Project Management 4.5% $193,050
Construction Manaoement 6% $257,400
esign Svcs. During Construction 4.5% $193.050
Design Fees 10% $429,000
$1,072,500 $5,362,500
OlHER COSTS
land Purchase (0 acres)
SUNey Fees Is
Utility Relocations Allow
$5,362,500
PROJECT TOTAL $5,362,500 I
3/7/2fXJ3 - 4: 12 PM Key West Intemational Airport-Master Plan Update. xis / UR5-DKC Page 19 of 29
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
Master Plan Update - Capifallmprovement Plan
I EST.
DESCRlP110N
QUANnTY UNIT
COST
2 PASSENGER TERMINAl- SIiORT TERM EXPANSION
Demolition
Utility Relocations
New Terminal Expansion (1 Level Elevated:
Renoyation of Existing Terminal (75% of are
1 allow
1 allow
8,(0) sf
12,548 sf
UNIT PRICE
$50,(0).00
$80,(0).00
$290.00
$65.00
$50,(0)
$80,(0)
$2320,(0)
$815,588
SUBTOTAL
Contingency 200)
I CONSTRUCTION TOTAL (Rounded)
$3,265,588
$653,118
$3,900,000
,
3/7/2003 - 4: 12 PM Key West International Airport-Master Plan Update.xls / URS-DKC
Page 20 of 29
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
Master Plan Update - Capital Improvement Plan
10 - New Passenger Tenninal
I DescriptiOn
I CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Factors
Cost
Item Totals CUmuklliVe Totals f
$23,230,000 $23,230,000 f
CONDNGENCIES
Change Order Contingency 2.5% $580,750
$580,750 . $23,810,750
ESCALADON
Number of Years
Annual Inflation 4.0%
CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $23.810,750 I
MANAGEMENT COSTS
Force Account n/a
Project Management 4.0% $952,430
Construction Management 5.0% $1, 190,538
esian Svcs. Durina Construction 3.0% $714,323
Design Fees 8.0% $1,904,860
$4,762,150 $28,572,900
OTHER COSTS
Land Purchase (0 acres)
SUNey Fees Is
Utility Relocations Allow
$28,572,900
PROJECT TOTAL $28,572,900 I
3/7/2003 - 4: 12 PM Key West Intemational Airport-Master Plan Update.xls 1 URS-DKC Page 21 of 29
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
Master Plan Update - Capital Improvement Plan
~ EST. DESCRIPTION QUAN111Y UNIT UNIT PRICE COST
10 "(EW PASSENG~R 11:RMINAL
11:RMINAL &: CONCOURSE
Terminal Building (Single Story 1 Elevated Structure)
Basic Structure 39,275 sf $263.00 $10,329,325
Bog Claim Conveyor 120 If $1,350.00 $162,(0)
Airline fitout 5000 sf $55.00 $275,(0)
Graphics 1 allow $15O,(XX).00 $150,(0)
Vertical Circulation 3 eo $180,(0).00 $540,(0)
Demolish Old terminal (Ind. Hauling & Disposal; 24,500 sf $8.90 $218,050
Concourse (Single Story 1 Eleyated Structure) 1 0,(0) sf $240.00 $2400,(XX)
SllEWORK &: PARKING
Site Clearing & Demolition 5.51 ac $10,600.00 $58,402
Elevated Roadway Structure 15,518 sf $140.00 $2,172,520
Approaches
MSE Walls 6,800 sf $42.00 $285,600
Embankment 4,785 cy $26.75 $128,004
Roadway 1.436 sy $35.70 $51,249
At Grade Roadway 1,833 sy $33.50 $61.417
Parking Structure
At Grade Paved parking 18,065 sy $31.20 $563,629
Elevated Precost Structure 33,047 sf $44.60 $1.473,896
Signage & Pavement Markings
Moster Signoge Is $55,(0).00 $55,(0)
Pavement Markings Is $13,500.00 $13,500
Utility Relocations allow $300,(0),00 $300,(0)
Landscaping Allowance 48,(0) sf $2.50 $120,(0)
SUBTOTAL $19,357,592
Contingency 20% $3,871.518
I CONSTRUCTION TOTAL (Rounded) $23,230,000 ,
3/7/2003 - 4: 12 PM Key West International Airport-Master Plan Update.xls 1 URS-DKC
Page 22 of 29
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
Master Plan Update - Capital Improvement Plan
11 - FRO Access Road
I DescriptiOn
I
Factors
,
Cost
IIemTolaIs CUmulative'TOlaIs f
$279,961 $279,961 I
CONnNGENOES
Chanoe Order Continoency 10% $27,996
$21,996 $307,957
ESCALAnON
Number of Years
Annual Inflation 4.0%
CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $307,957
MANAGEMENT COSTS
Force Account n/a
Proiect Manaoement 4.5% $13,858
Construction Manaaement 6% $18,477
esian SVcs. Durino Construction 4.5% $13,858
Desian Fees 10% $30,796
$76,989 $384,946
OTHER COSTS
Land Purchase CO acres)
SUNey Fees Is
Utilitv Relocations Allow
$384,946
PROJECT TOTAL
$384.9461
3/7/2fXJ3 - 4: 12 PM Key West Intemational Airport-Master Plan Update. xis / UR&-DKC
Page 23 of 29
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
Master Plan Update - Capifallmprovement Plan
I EST. DESCRlP110N QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE COST I
II FBO ACCESS ROAD
Mobilization 1 Is 12.0% $24,996
MOT 1 Is 2.5% $5,081
Clearing & Demolition 0.78 ac $8,(XX).00 $6,244
Utility Relocations 1 allow $80,(XX).00 $80,(XX)
Earthwork / Grading 3,778 sy $2.50 $9,444
Drainage
Structures 6 ea $3,(XX).00 $16,(XX)
Pipe 650 If $60.00 $39,(XX)
Curbs 1,050 If $9.75 $10,238
Stabilized Subgrade 1,733 sy $2.75 $4,767
Lirnerock Base (6j 1,400 sy $8.50 $11,900
Asphalt Pavement (2") 1,233 sy $10.00 $12,333
Grassing 2,544 sy $2.75 $6,997
Pavement Markings 2CXX) If $0.65 $1,300
Signs 15 ea $200.00 $3,(XX)
SUBTOTAL
$233,300
Contingency 20%
I CONSTRUCTION TOTAL (Rounded)
$46,660
$279,961
~
3!7/'2JYJ3 - 4: 12 PM Key West International Airport-Master Plan Update.xls / URS-DKC
Page 24 of 29
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
Master Plan Update - Capital Improvement Plan
12 - NIP - Phase 3
t Description
I CONSTRUCTION cosrs
Factors
Cost
Item Totals CUmUlative'TotaIs I
$2.272.727 $2.272.7271
CONDNGENClES
Change Order Contingency 10% $227,273
$227.273 $2.500.000
ESCALADON
Number of Years
Annual Inflation 4.0%
, CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $2.500.000
"
MANAGEMENT cosrs
Force Account nla
Project Management 7.5% $187,500
Construction Management 10% $250,00,)
esign Svcs. During Construction 7.5% $187,500
Design Fees 15% $375,00,)
$1.000.000 $3.500.000
OTHER cosrs
land Purchase (0 acres)
Survey Fees Is
Utility Relocations Allow
$3.500.000
PROJECT TOTAL $3,500,000 I
3/712003 - 4: 12 PM Key West Intemational Airport-Master Plan Update. xis 1 UR5-DKC Page 25 of 29
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
Master Plan Update - Capital Improvement Plan
13 - NIP - Phase 4
Factors
Cost
Item Totals Cumulative Totals 'I
$2,272,727 $2.272,7271
I DescriptiOn
I CONSl'RUCI10N COSTS
CONTlNGENOES
Chanoe Order Contingency 10% $227,273
$227,273 $2,500,000
ESCAlATION
Number of Years
Annual Inflation 4.0%
CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $-2,500,000
MANAGEMENT COsls
Force Account n/a
Project Manaoement 7.5% $187,500
Construction Management 10% $250,(0)
esign Svcs. Durina Construction 7.5% $187,500
Design Fees 15% $375,(0)
$1,000,000 $3,500,000
OTHER COSTS
Land Purchqse (0 acres)
SUNey Fees Is
UtiiffY Relocations Allow
$3,500,000
PROJECT TOTAL $3.500.000 I
3/7/2fJ03 - 4: 12 PM Key West Intemational Airport-Master Plan Update. xis / URS-DKC Page 26 of 29
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
Master Plan Update - Capltallmprovemenf Plan
14 - NIp.. Phase 5
I ~ription
J CONSTRUCTION COSTS
.Fc1ctors
Cost
Item Totals Cumulative Totals I
$2.272.727 $2.272.7271
CONnNGENCIES
Change Order Contingency 10% $227,273
$227.273 $2.500.000
ESCALAnON
Number of Years
Annual Inflation 4.0%
CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL '2.500.000
MANAGEMENT COSTS
Force Account n/a
Project Management 7.5% $187,500
Construction Management 10% $250,()(X)
esign Svcs. Durina Construction 7.5% $187,500
Design Fees 15% $375,()(X)
$1.000.000 $3.500.000
OTHER COSTS
land Purchase (0 acres)
Survey Fees Is
Utility Relocations Allow
$3.500.000
PROJECT TOTAL $3,500,000 I
3/7/2003 - 4: 12 PM Key West Intemotional Airport-Master Plan Update.xls 1 URS-DKC Page 27 of 29
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
Mosler Plan update - Capital Improvement Plan
15 - NIp. Phase 6
Factors
Cost
Item Totals Cumulative Totals I
$2,272,727 $2,272,7271
I Descrlplon
I CONSl'RUC110N COSTS
CONllNGENCIES
Change Order Contingency 10% $'227,273
$227,273 $2,500,000
ESCALATION
Number of Years
Annual Inflation 4.0%
CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL T2,5OO,OOO
MANAGEMENT com
Force Account n/a
Proiect Management 7.5% $187,500
Construction Management 10% $250,COO
esian Svcs. During Construction 7.5% $187,500
Design Fees 15% $375,000
$1,000,000 $3,500,000
OlHER COSTS
Land Purchase (0 acres)
Survey Fees Is
Utilitv Relocations Allow
$3,500,000
PROJECT TOTAL $3,500,000 I
3/7/2fJ03 - 4: 12 PM Key West Intemational Airport-Master Plan Update. xis / URS-DKC Page 26 of 29
KEY WEST INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
Master Plan Update - Capital Improvement Plan
16 - NIP - Phase 7
I oescrlpti()n.. '
I CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Factors
Cost
Item Totals CUmu.latlve Totals ~
$2,272,727 $2,272,7271
CONTlNGENOES
Change Order Contingency 10% $227,273
$227,273 $2,500,000
ESCALATION
Number of Years
Annual Inflation 4.0%
CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $2,500,000
MANAGEMENT COSTS
Force Account n/a
Project Manaaement 7.5% $187,500
Construction Management 10% $250,000
esign Svcs. During Construction 7.5% $187,500
Design Fees 15% $375,000
$1,000,000 $3,500,000
OTHER COSTS
Land Purchase (0 acres)
Survey Fees Is
Utiltty Relocations Allow
$3,500,000
PROJECT TOTAL $3,500,000 I
3/7/2fJ03 - 4: 12 PM Key West Intemational Airport-Master Plan Update.xls / URS-DKC Page 29 of 29