SR 05-24-2017 8A
Ci ty Council
Report
City Council Meeting : May 24, 2017
Agenda Item: 8.A
1 of 15
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Susan Cline, Director , Public Works, Civil Engineering
Subject: Airport Runway Shortening Options
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Select the preferred option for shortening the runway at Sa nta Monica Airport
(SMO), referred to as Option B in this staff report, to an operational length of
3,500 feet (the Project);
2. Direct staff to proceed with further design of the preferred option in order to
establish a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) for a design -build agreement
between the City of Santa Monica (City) and AECOM Technical Services, Inc.
(AECOM) to complete runway shortening construction by December 2017, in
accordance with the existing Feasibility Professional Services Agreement with
AECOM;
3. Find that the Project is categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(3), 15302, and 15308; and
4. Adopt the attached Resolution that the Runway Shortening Project is
categorically exempt from review under the Calif ornia Environmental Quality Act .
Executive Summary
Regaining local control of land use at Santa Monica Airport (SMO) and reducing the
health and safety impacts on adjacent residents is one of the City Council’s Strategic
Goals. Earlier thi s year, the City and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) entered
into an historic Settlement Agreement and Consent Decree to resolve the City’s
litigation to secure local control. On February 1, 2017, the United District Court for the
Central Distri ct of California entered an Order approving the Settlement Agreement as a
Consent Decree . Among other provisions, the Consent Decree allows the City to
reduce the current nearly 5000 foot runway to 3,500 feet pending the City’s right to
close the Airport “forever” after December 31, 2028. Accordingly, s taff and the City’s
aviation consultant AECOM have developed the two most -viable options to shorten the
runway at SMO to 3 ,500 feet for City Council review and direction to proceed. Option A,
the easterly -al igned option, provides for a shortened runway furthest to the east
(Attachment A). Option B, the center -aligned option, provides for a shortened runway
that is centered equidistant from the existing runway ends (Attachment B). Both options
are aligned alon g the existing runway. Unlike the existing runway, however, both
options meet FAA standards and safety requirements, and are consistent with the
2 of 15
Consent Decree . Option B is recommended by City Staff as well as the Airport
Commission (with additional condi tions). Two other options that centered the shortened
runway west of the existing runway’s center were also evaluated but not developed
further due to noise and safety factors .
Staff in the Planning Department and in the City Attorney’s Office have revie wed both
concept designs for conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
and the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA). The consensus determination is
that both proposed options are categorically exempt from the provisions of CE QA, and
that no environmental documentation in compliance with NEPA is required for the
project to proceed. Additionally, AECOM has prepared Technical Memoranda
addressing noise, traffic, historical resources, air quality, and other aspects of the
environm ent that support the CEQA categorical exemption determination (Attachment
C).
Staff recommends that the City Council review the two options presented for shortening
the runway at SMO and direct staff to proceed with designing the preferred option (in
ac cordance with AECOM’s existing Feasibility Professional Services Agreement), to
establish a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) for a design -build agreement between
the City and AECOM to complete the Project by December 2017.
There is no immediate financial im pact or budget action necessary as a result of the
recommended action. Once the preferred option is selected by City Council, staff and
AECOM will proceed with design of the preferred option (under the existing Feasibility
Professional Services Agreement) to a 60% complete design, whereupon a GMP to
complete design and construction can be established. Staff will return to Council for
approval of the GMP and Design -Build Agreement by or before August 22, 2017 , which
would provide for shortening the runway by December 2017.
Background
Disputes over operation and control of SMO go back decades. On February 1, 2017,
the United District Court for the Central District of California entered an Order approving
a Consent Decree between the FAA and the City to resol ve these longstanding disputes
pertaining to the design and operation of the Airport . The Court concluded that the
Consent Decree “is fair, reasonabl e and adequate to all concerned.” Among other
provisions, , the Consent Decree allows the City to reduce the current nearly 5000 foot
runway to 3,500 feet pending the City’s right to close the Airport “forever” after
December 31, 2028 .
On March 16, 2017, the City of Santa Monica executed Feasibility Professional Services
Agreement 10436 (CCS) with AECOM, whi ch engaged AECOM to study reducing
3 of 15
Runway 3 -21 at SMO to 3,500 feet. The agreement includes an initial feasibility phase
to provide runway shortening options for Council consideration and future selection.
Discussion
In preparation for developing the runw ay shortening options for Council consideration
and future selection, the City and AECOM organized meetings with FAA staff to present
preliminary conceptual options for shortening the runway. In attendance at the meetings
were staff from Public Works Admin istration; Airport and Civil Engineering Divisions;
personnel from AECOM and Aeroplex; staff from various divisions within the FAA; and
Caltrans Division of Aeronautics.
While the FAA had no substantial concerns with any of the preliminary options for
run way shortening construction, further discussions with staff and the design team were
useful in reducing the range of feasible options to the easterly and centered options
presented in this report, including for the reasons discussed below.
Westerly -aligne d Shortened Runway
AECOM presented four design options for the City to consider, including westerly -
aligned options. The westerly -aligned options were rejected because they would
provide the least reduction of noise, air quality, and safety impacts, inclu ding impacts on
residential areas surrounding SMO and, in particular, the westerly residential areas . It
is important to note, that 95% of the airport’s operations depart to the west and
therefore aligning the runway with a westerly configuration would im pede aircraft from
gaining enough altitude over the residential areas west of the Airport .
Option A: Easterly -aligned Shortened Runway (See Attachment A)
A 3,500 -feet shortened runway that has an easterly -alignment within the current runway
configuration would have the following distinguishing characteristics:
Approximately 438 -feet between the existing Runway 21 threshold and the new
threshold at the easterly end of the shortened runway.
Approximately 1,035 -feet between the existing Runway 3 threshol d and the new
4 of 15
threshold at the westerly end of the shortened runway.
Fully FAA -compliant Runway Safety Areas (RSA) at each end of the shortened
runway, estimated to be 300 -feet long, based on Category B -II design standards
being applicable for SMO post t he runway shortening.
Approximately 19.2 acres of contiguous land within the west remainder parcel,
and 5 acres of contiguous land within the east remainder parcel (i.e. more
contiguous land apportioned to the west remainder parcel)
Better line -of -sig ht visibility for the Air Traffic Control (ATC) tower, compared to a
centered alignment and existing runway , due to the ATC tower being situated at
the easterly end of SMO.
Better connectivity and access for aircraft, compared to a centered alignment and
existing runway , because more aircraft tie -down areas and hangars are within
the easterly portion of SMO property.
Option B: Center -aligned Shortened Runway (See Attachment B)
A 3,500 -feet shortened runway that is centered within the current runway ali gnment
would have the following distinguishing characteristic:
Approximately 736 -feet between the existing and new thresholds at each runway
end.
Fully FAA -compliant RSAs at each end of the shortened runway, estimated to be
300 -feet long, based on Cate gory B -II design standards being applicable for
SMO post the runway shortening .
Improved line -of -sight visibility for the ATC tower compared to the existing
runway .
Improved connectivity and access for aircraft compared to the existing runway.
Ap proximately 14.3 acres of contiguous land within the west remainder parcel,
and 8.5 acres of contiguous land within the east remainder parcel.
Improvements Required for both Center - or Easterly -aligned Shortened Runway
Both center - and easterly -aligned o ptions for a 3,500 -feet shortened runway would
require essentially similar modifications to the existing runway and taxiway striping,
5 of 15
markings, signs, lighting, and to the various navigational aids at SMO. Both options
would also require the creation of si x new taxiways within already utilized and paved
areas of the Airport, at regular spacing along the re -aligned 3,500 -feet runway,
providing improved safety for arriving aircraft taxiing off the runway. The defined
taxiways would allow the air traffic contr ol (ATC) tower to better control and direct
aircraft movement on - and off -the runway, and would be compliant with current FAA
standards. The existing non -standard, non -compliant condition that allows aircraft to taxi
off at any point along the runway is so mething that the FAA has previously indicated it
would like to see corrected because of safety concerns . Finally, both the center - and
easterly -aligned options would likely require taxiways at the runway ends to also be
reconstructed to ensure maintenance -free operations until closure of SMO in 2028,
regardless of whether they align or are coincident with existing taxiways.
Runway Siting Evaluation Criteria
The runway siting evaluation criteria table (Figure 1 ) summarizes the factors of safety,
noise, air quality, land use, cost, schedule, and features in the Runway Protection Zone
(RPZ) that are relevant for Council to consider in selecting an option. As reflected in
F igure 1 , noise, air quality, cost, and schedule are not expected to vary significantly
be tween the two options. For the safety item, while both options provide the required
RSA prescribed by the FAA and therefore meet safety standards, each option provides
varying amounts of buffer area (the paved portions of the unused runway that are not
re moved) at each end the runway. Additionally, as previously mentioned, as between
the two options, line -of -sight visibility for the ATC tower is better in the easterly -
alignment (Option A). The other differentiating factors for the two options fall under la nd
use and the number of features in the RPZ. The easterly -alignment (Option A) would
allocate more contiguous land to the west remainder parcel and the center -alignment
(Option B) would contain fewer residences, tie -downs, and reduce roadway exposure
wit hin the RPZ. Both the easterly -aligned and the center -aligned options would produce
improvements in terms of taxiway configuration, runway visibility from the airport traffic
control tower, and the size of contiguous land relative to the existing runway.
6 of 15
Figure 1 – Evaluation criteria used by staff in siting of the shortened runway
Environmental Analysis
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) experts working for AECOM, and staff
from the Planning Department and the City Attorney’s Office have revie wed both
proposed concept designs for conformance with CEQA and the National Environmental
Protection Act (NEPA). As explained below, the consensus determination is that both
proposed options are categorically exempt from the provisions of the CEQA, and th at no
environmental documentation in compliance with NEPA is required for the project to
proceed.
CEQA Compliance
CEQA applies only to projects that have the potential for causing a significant effect on
the environment. A project is not subject to CEQA u nder CEQA Guideline Section
15061(b)(3) “where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the
activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.” In addition,
7 of 15
Section 15302 provides a categorical exemption from CEQ A for the replacement or
reconstruction of existing structures and facilities where the new structure will be
located on the same site as the structure replaced and will have substantially the same
purpose and capacity as the structure replaced. Section 15 308 provides yet another
categorical exemption for actions taken by regulatory agencies, as authorized by state
or local ordinance, to assure the maintenance, restoration, enhancement, or protection
of the environment where the regulatory process involves procedures for protection of
the environment. The City has determined that the proposed Runway Shortening
Project does not have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment,
and is categorically exempt from CEQA review under CEQA Guid eline sections 15302
and 15308.
The proposed Runway Shortening Project implements the Consent Decree by replacing
the existing 4,973 -foot runway at SMO with an operational runway of 3,500 feet. The
shortened runway will be located on the same site and wi ll have the same purpose as
and no greater capacity than the existing runway. The repositioned and replaced
runway lights, signs, FAA visual aid equipment and taxiways will have adequate
capacity to serve the shortened runway. The proposed Project also is an action by the
City, as operator of SMO pursuant to local ordinance and the Consent Decree, in
consultation with the FAA, to bring the Airport into compliance with safety and design
standards and to maintain and protect the environment. As demonstrated in this staff
report and detailed in the Technical Memoranda (Attachment C), the Project would
enhance safety and reduce adverse environmental impacts caused by existing Airport
operations. A CEQA Categorical Exemption, and supporting Technical Memoranda
h ave been prepared by experts at AECOM to analyze potential impacts resulting from
the Project. The following are the results of the analyses prepared for this Project:
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas – Technical Memorandum
A Technical Memorandum was prepa red on May 15, 2017, to analyze potential impacts
to air quality from construction activities and long -term changes to airport operations.
During construction, it was determined that the project has minimal air quality impacts
within the South Coast Air B asin. During operations, the reduction in air traffic will result
8 of 15
in improved air quality at and adjacent to the project area due to a 44% reduction in
aircraft at Santa Monica Airport associated with the proposed P roject. A study prepared
by Coffman Asso ciates determined that reducing the runway’s operational length as
provided for by the Consent Decree would result in decreased use of the Airport by
larger, louder, and less efficient aircraft, due to those aircrafts’ abilities to comply with
landing limi tations imposed by DOT regulations, and consequently reduce the number
of flights at the Airport by 4 4 %. (The Coffman Associates Study is found in Attachment
D .) It is a matter of speculation if and where these jet aircraft may operate.
Nonetheless , t he s mall increase in the use of other local airports by these aircraft and in
associated personal vehicle trips to other local airports would have no measurable air
quality impact.
Cultural Resources – Technical Memorandum
A Technical Memorandum was prepar ed on May 12, 2017 to determine if there is a
potential for impacts to historical resources. Background research and records
searches, a field survey, and a historical evaluation for the runway and taxiways were
prepared as a part of this investigation. It was determined that the levels of alterations
to the runway and taxiways that have been conducted as a necessary part of airport
maintenance and operations throughout the airport’s history have impacted the historic
integrity of the airport; therefore, the runway and taxiways are not considered historical
resources, and no impact would occur as a result of the proposed P roject. The
evaluation also analyzed impacts to any known or existing historical resources at the
airport. The Santa Monica Airport Rot ating Beacon Tower is presently listed as City
Landmark 19; however, there would be no direct or indirect impacts to the resource
from the project, due to its distance from project and the small -scale nature of the
improvements.
Noise – Technical Memorand um
A Qualitative Analysis Technical Memorandum was prepared on May 15, 2017, to
analyze potential noise impacts that would result from the proposed P roject. The
analysis determined that noise would be moderately reduced by the proposed P roject
9 of 15
for the fol lowing reasons. First, the change in starting point for takeoff operations would
shift either 438 feet or 736 feet away from residences that are adjacent to the east end
of the airport, reducing noise levels in those neighborhoods. Second, the shorter
ru nway length would result in a 4 4 % reduction in jet aircraft operations because the size
and type of aircraft that could safely land at Santa Monica Airport in accordance with
FAA landing requirements would be limited . Third, as supported by the Coffman
As sociates study, due to heavier, louder jets no longer using the runway, both the
easterly -aligned and the center -aligned options would result in generally lower noise
levels , and any anticipated increases of SENELs for aircraft that would continue to use
t he shorter runway would be imperceptible in residential neighborhoods. The anticipated
growth rate in flight operations of smaller aircraft that will continue to use the Airport is
approximately 5%, which would not result in noise levels returning to pre -c onstruction
levels. Because construction associated with the shortened runways is limited to
construction of new taxiways, pavement restriping and modification to navigational
lighting, noise from construction or changes to traffic is expected to be less than
significant. If construction activities include taxiway pavement removal and nighttime
work, an After Hours Construction Permit would need to be obtained from the City and
practical noise control strategies may be implemented to minimize noise impact s.
Traffic - Technical Memorandum
A Traffic Assessment Memorandum was prepared on May 15, 2017, to evaluate
potential traffic impacts that would result from the proposed P roject. During
construction activities, the proposed Project is anticipated to gene rate short -term project
construction trips on the regional roadway system. However, the additional non -
recurring traffic is not anticipated to conflict with the Los Angeles County Construction
Management Program. The proposed Project will minimize potent ial impacts by
complying with City of Santa Monica Temporary Traffic Control Plans (TTCPs).
During operations under the proposed Project , approximately 52 jet aircraft would no
longer be able to land at Santa Monica Airport in compliance with safety and FAA
requirements on a daily basis . It is a matter of speculation if and where these jet aircraft
may operate. Nonetheless, airports within the region that would still be able to
10 of 15
accommodate these jets include:
• Burbank Bob Hope (BUR)
• Camarillo (CMA)
• El Monte (EMT)
• Hawthorne (HHR)
• Van Nuys (VNY)
• Whiteman, San Fernando Valley (WHP)
• Zamperini Field, Torrance (TOA)
Thus, there would be at most minimal increases in activities at such airports.
Only a nominal, insignificant increase in personal vehi cle trips per day to or from each of
these local airports would occur due to the se aircraft using other airports. T his small
increase in vehicle trips to other local airports would not result in significant traffic
impacts.
Safety
It is anticipated that the increased buffer between the runway and adjacent residential
areas, addition of FAA -compliant RSAs of at least 300 feet, elimination of non -compliant
taxing operations, and 4 4 % reduction in jet aircraft would substantially reduce safety
hazards for pe ople residing or working near the Project area. These changes, which will
bring the Airport into compliance with federal safety and design requirements, will also
improve aviation safety . Limited closures and construction best management practices
would be implemented in order to maintain construction -site safety for people residing
or working near the Project area during construction activities.
The City reviewed Appendix G to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Guidelines and determined that neither the center -aligned option nor the easterly -
aligned option would adversely impact any other environmental factors listed in
Appendix G. In light of these analyses, it can be determined that neither of the runway
shortening options would have a signi ficant effect on the environment and, therefore,
are not subject to CEQA review pursuant to CEQA Guideline Section 15061(b)(3).
NEPA Compliance
11 of 15
Environmental documentation in compliance with NEPA applies to projects involving
federal funding or federal ap provals. For the proposed project, however, there is no
federal funding and, as a result of the Settlement Agreement/Consent Decree, the
Airport is not a federally obligated airport and there is no major federal action required
for the project to proceed. Therefore, no environmental documentation in compliance
with NEPA is required for the project to proceed.
Navigational Aids (NAVAIDS)
The existing runway at SMO has navigational aids (NAVAIDS) to assist pilots in the
landing phase of flight on both ends of the runway. Runway 3 has a Visual Approach
Slope Indicator (VASI) and Runway 21 has a Precision Approach Path Indicator (PAPI).
Both runway ends also have Runway End Identifier Lights (REIL) that are flashing
strobe lights that aid the pilot in identify ing the runway at night in a sea of city lights. All
existing equipment is owned and maintained by the FAA.
The installation of new PAPIs and REILs will be required for the new runway as a result
of relocating both runway ends (thresholds). The approach f or the procurement and
installation of the new equipment is to have the design -build team (AECOM) procure,
install, and certify the equipment. The FAA would continue to be involved throughout the
process for the formal decommissioning process of FAA equipm ent. A flight to certify
the equipment will be required before full certification to ensure light angles are accurate
and no obstacles penetrate PAPI’s Obstacle Clearance Surface.
Instrument Departure and Arrival Procedures
The existing runway at SMO has instrument approach for landing and instrument
departure procedures that will need to be updated as a result of the relocation of both
runway ends (thresholds). Several meetings with the FAA have occurred to discuss the
process and expectations for updati ng instrument procedures at SMO. Instrument
procedures are updated o n a rotating cycle. The deadline to submit the required
information to update procedures for the December 7, 2017 publication date has
already passed. The next publication date is in Febru ary 2018. The FAA has indicated
the ir willingness to work with the City to meet the December 7, 2017 publication date,
12 of 15
but existing workload and other factors may result in missing the December date. The
FAA has received the proposed runway end coordinates for both the easterly -aligned
and center -aligned options. Both options reflect the comments received by the staff and
consultants during informal consultations with the FAA . In fact, as discussed above, the
proposed Project w ould improve safety and bring existing Airport operations into
compliance with FAA design and safety standards . Continued coordination with the FAA
is ongoing to ensure updates to the procedures will not delay the opening and use of
the 3,500 -foot runway by the end of the year.
Public Outreach Efforts
Staff and the consultant team initiated extensive notification and public outreach efforts
in early April, with the approach of:
Organizing a community and airport stakeholder meeting (at an airport venue to
encourage maximum participat ion) where the two options developed for Council
consideration would be presented and comments received.
Conducting a presentation for the Airport Commission, subsequent to the
community and stakeholder meeting, that presented the two options developed
f or Council consideration and summarized the comments from the earlier
community & stakeholder meeting.
Community and Stakeholder Meeting
On Tuesday April 25 th from 10 AM to 12 noon, City staff and the consultant team
conducted a community and stakeholder meeting at the Museum of Flying, a venue
selected to encourage maximum participation. The meeting was moderated by a
professional facilitator and well attended, with approximately 100 attendees comprising
members of the community, airport tenants, and some professional associations.
Notification of the proposed meeting was distributed to the airport tenants and the wider
community via email approximately 2 weeks prior. A summary of the comments
received and a full report by the facilitator, MIG, are provide d as Attachment E .
Airport Commission Meeting
13 of 15
On May 2 nd , City staff and the consultant team attended the Airport Commission
meeting to present the two options developed for Council consideration, and to
additionally summarize the comments from the earlie r community and stakeholder
meeting. Comments received during the Airport Commission meeting have been
summarized and provided as Attachment F . Additionally, the Airport Commission made
the following recommendations:
To adopt Option B [center -aligned opti on], if and only if, the City obtains binding
agreement from the FAA for a two -part project that consist of phase 1 which
implements Option B and prevents aircraft incursion (excursions) into the
decommissioned runway, and phase 2 which replaces the excess concrete/
asphalt at the runway ends. This recommendation was approved by a vote of 3 -
2.
Urge the City Council to direct staff to initiate the CEQA process as soon as
possible and that it be completed with requisite haste. This recommendation was
approve d by a vote of 4 -1.
As the project proceeds, staff will continue with outreach efforts to engage the
community, airport tenants and other constituent stakeholders to ensure full
transparency, disclosure, and fairness.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommend s Option B – the centered option - as the best option to carry forward
to a 60% design completion stage, given that the FAA and the City’s aviation
consultants see the differences between the two options as subtle; that staff views
differences between impl ementing the construction of either option as the same; and
that there is significant community support, from both Santa Monica and Los Angeles,
for the centered option.
The above recommendation is based on the consensus opinion that the relative
advanta ges of either option in terms of taxiway configuration, or runway visibility from
the ATC tower, or contiguous remainder parcel size, are minimal.
14 of 15
Staff agrees with the Airport Commission that there should be future discussion
concerning any removal/reuse of the decommissioned runway. However, there are
potentially many options and issues to consider in dealing with use of the property no
longer needed for the Airport with a shortened runway. Anything that might be done
with the decommissioned portion of the current runway would be a separate and
independent project from the runway shortening to 3,500 feet. Any future decision has
no bearing on or functional link to the issue of design for runway shortening and should
be considered completely separately.
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the
recommended actions. Once the preferred option for runway shortening is identified by
City Council, staff and AECOM will continue deve lopment of the preferred option to a
level, typically 60% complete design, whereupon a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP)
to complete design and construction can be confidently established. Staff will return to
Council for approval of the GMP and Design -Build Agreement by or before August 22,
2017 to complete the runway shortening construction by December 2017.
Prepared By: Allan Sheth, Civil Engineering Associate
Approved
Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. Option A
B. Option B
C. Technical Memoranda
15 of 15
D. Coffman Associates Study
E. Summary Report - Community and Stakeholder Meeting
F. Summary Report - Airport Commission Meeting
G. Resolution
H. Written Comments