SR 09-26-2017 4A
City Council Report
City Council Meeting: September 26, 2017
Agenda Item: 4.A
1 of 8
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Susan Cline, Director, Public Works, Civil Engineering
Subject: Options for the Removal of Excess Runway Pavement at Santa Monica
Airport
Recommended Action
Staff Recommends that the City Council:
1. Review and provide direction to staff regarding the preferred option for excess
pavement removal at Santa Monica Airport to be implemented as a separate and
distinct project once the runway shortening is completed; and
2. Provide direction to staff with regard to proceeding with procuring engineering
design services for excess pavement removal.
Executive Summary
Santa Monica Airport (SMO) over the last century has grown from a dirt airstrip
designed for biplanes to a busy general aviation airport with more than 80,000 landings
and take-offs last year. For the past three decades, the City government has sought to
rein in the increasingly severe noise, health and safety impacts on surrounding
neighborhoods. After protracted litigation, the City of Santa Monica and the Federal
government entered into a landmark Consent Decree to authorize permanent closure of
SMO at the end of 2028. The Consent also authorized the City to shorten the Santa
Monica Airport’s runway by 40% to curb large jet operations. Runway shortening
construction is scheduled to be complete by the end of December.
The runway shortening creates more than 700’ feet of excess pavement on each end of
the runway. At the May 24, 2017 special meeting, concurrent with selecting the
preferred option for shortening the runway and adopting related CEQA actions, Council
directed staff to investigate pavement removal options for the unused and abandoned
portions of the runway, taxiways and adjacent in-field pavement that could be
implemented as a separate and distinct project once the runway shortening project is
2 of 8
complete.
Figure A below depicts the abandoned pavement that is potentially eligible for removal,
and shows its relation to the Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) and Runway Safety Area
(RSA). The RPZ is an area at ground level beyond the ends of the runway to enhance
the safety and protection of people and property on the ground. For airports in urban
areas, due to historical circumstances, the RPZ often extends beyond the airport
boundary and into the surrounding neighborhood. The RSA is the surface immediately
at each runway end prepared in a manner that reduces risk of damage to airplanes in
the event of an undershoot, overshoot or excursion from the runway. At SMO the RSA
extends 300 feet beyond the active runway.
Figure A - Abandoned pavement removal options in relation to the RSA and RPZ
This report presents three options, listed below, for pavement removal for City Council’s
consideration (see Figure A above and Attachment A, Figures 1 and 2 for reference).
3 of 8
These options involve removing unused pavement outside and within the RSA.
Option 1 - Remove all unused pavement outside the RSA and hydro-seed.
Pulverize in place and stabilize pavement within the RSA ($3.44M)
Option 2 - Remove all unused pavement outside the RSA and install artificial turf.
Pulverize in place and stabilize pavement within the RSA ($5.69M)
Option 3 - Pulverize in-place all unused pavement outside and within the RSA
and stabilize ($2.73M)
Pavement removal areas under Options 1, 2, and 3 are partially within the RPZ. The
RPZ is a very critical safety area that should be kept free and clear of all objects in order
to protect people and property.
Background
On February 28, 2017 (Attachment B), Council awarded Feasibility Professional
Services Agreement 10436 (CCS) to AECOM, which engaged AECOM to study
reducing the length of Runway 3-21 at SMO to 3,500 feet. The agreement included an
initial feasibility phase to provide runway shortening options for Council consideration
and future selection.
On April 24, 2017 (Attachment C), staff issued an Information Item responding to
Council’s inquiry about a potential phased interim project for the removal of pavement at
the ends of the runway and evaluation of future uses of the excess runway area. The
Information Item provided an update on those topics, as well as the overall status of the
runway-shortening project.
On May 24, 2017 (Attachment D), Council selected the center-aligned shortened
runway option from the two options presented for runway shortening construction. At
that meeting, Council also:
Authorized staff to proceed with further design of the preferred option to establish
a guaranteed maximum price (GMP) for a design-build agreement between the
4 of 8
City and AECOM to complete runway-shortening construction prior to December
31, 2017;
Adopted Resolution No. 11044 stating that the runway-shortening project is
categorically exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA); and
Directed staff to investigate pavement removal options for the unused and
abandoned portions of the runway, taxiways and adjacent in-field pavement that
could be implemented as a separate and distinct project once the runway
shortening project is complete.
On August 8, 2017, (Attachment E), Council authorized the City manager to execute a
design-build agreement with AECOM, for a GMP of $3.52 million to complete runway
shortening construction by December 31, 2017. The City and AECOM are in the
process of executing the Design-Build Agreement, with construction scheduled to begin
in early October 2017 and be complete by the end of 2017.
Discussion
The runway shortening project will result in 736 feet of unusable pavement for aircraft
operations at each end of the runway. Of the 736 feet, the first 300 feet adjacent to each
runway end is required for the Runway Safety Area (RSA).
The RSA must be well-graded with no ruts, humps or surface depressions and capable
of supporting Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) equipment. Additionally, the first
150 feet of the RSA adjacent to each runway end, which includes the blast pad, must be
essentially non-erodible under jet blasts to minimize the generation of Foreign Object
Debris (FOD) that represent a major hazard to all aircraft.
Pavement Removal Options
The existing runway pavement consists of approximately six inches of asphalt surface
pavement over approximately eight inches of concrete pavement. The abandoned
taxiways, shoulders and in-field areas consist of variable asphalt and concrete
5 of 8
pavements ranging from three to eight inches thick.
Option 1 - Hydro-seeding ($3.44M)
This option includes removing the abandoned pavement outside the RSA, backfilling
and hydro-seeding the graded surface. The depth of excavation varies from three
inches to thirteen inches, representing the full thickness of the abandoned pavements,
and would require minor grading and slope protection. This option also includes
pulverizing in place the abandoned pavement within the RSA (Attachment A, Figures 1
and 2). The depth of pulverization is approximately thirteen inches, representing the full
thickness of existing runway pavement. The pulverized pavement would be compacted,
graded for drainage and stabilized with a soil stabilizer. Drainage improvements would
likely be required for collecting storm water and to control excess storm water surface
runoff from this area. Closure of the runway would be required during construction.
This option has less up-front costs, but potentially more on-going maintenance
requirements. Scheduled maintenance of the hydro-seeded area would be required on
an annual basis, supplemented by monthly or quarterly maintenance to control weeds
and other vegetation. An irrigation system is not included in the estimate for this
scenario. Even with the use of drought tolerant or native plants, to prevent dust from
becoming an issue, periodic watering would be required. This option requires no
imported fill material. There is a risk that this option may attract wildlife, which is
generally discouraged near airports.
Option 2- Artificial Turf ($5.69M)
This option includes removing the abandoned pavement outside the RSA and installing
artificial turf. The depth of excavation varies from three inches to thirteen inches,
representing the full thickness of the abandoned pavements. This option also includes
pulverizing in place the abandoned pavement within the RSA (Attachment A, Figures 1
and 2). The depth of pulverization is approximately thirteen inches, representing the full
thickness of existing runway pavement. The pulverized pavement would be compacted,
graded for drainage and stabilized with a soil stabilizer. Closure of the runway would be
required during construction.
6 of 8
This is the most expensive option initially, but requires less on-going maintenance.
Nominal scheduled maintenance of the artificial turf including monthly vacuuming and
grooming would be required. Artificial turf would be least susceptible to premature
deterioration due to the elements. The drainage improvements for collecting storm
water and to control excess surface runoff contribute to the higher project cost. A
downside to this option is the considerable number of truck trips generated by the
amount of exported material generated and required imported fill. Further, it is
anticipated that this option would take the longest to construct by a couple of months.
Option 3 - Pulverizing In-Place ($2.73M)
This option includes pulverizing in place the abandoned pavement outside and within
the RSA (Attachment A, Figures 1 and 2). The depth of pulverization varies from three
to thirteen inches representing the full thickness of the abandoned pavement. The
pulverized pavement would be compacted, graded for drainage and stabilized with a
soil stabilizer. Drainage improvements would likely be required to control excess storm
water surface runoff from this area. It is anticipated that scheduled maintenance of the
stabilized area would be required on an annual basis, with ongoing maintenance to
control weeds, between the scheduled maintenance. Closure of the runway would be
required during construction.
This is the least expensive option and requires no exporting or importing of material.
Additionally, this option will likely have the shortest construction duration. This option
requires as-needed maintenance to re-compact and stabilize the surface in order to
maintain its integrity. This results in the highest maintenance costs of the three options.
For all three options, to conform to FAA requirements, the pulverized pavement within
the RSA would be well-graded with no ruts, humps or surface depressions and would
be capable of supporting Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting equipment and the
occasional passage of aircraft without causing damage to the aircraft. The initial 150
feet at each end of the shortened runway (representing the runway blast pad areas)
would be resurfaced with asphaltic material, conforming to FAA requirements that the
7 of 8
runway blast pad area shall be non-erodible under jet blasts to minimize the danger of
debris (FOD). All excavated areas would need to be backfilled, graded and compacted
prior to the opening of the runway. All runway threshold lights, runway end lights and
signs would need to be restored and operational at the end of each working shift.
Anticipated Schedule
Staff anticipates the following completion schedule for implementing any of the three
pavement removal options, based on the City's design-bid-build procurement process.
Procure Design Services - January 2017
Final Design Completion - April 2018
Construction Award - August 2018
Construction Completion - February 2019
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Determination
It has been determined that removal of the excess runway pavement at Santa Monica
Airport (SMO) would be categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Sections 15301
and 15304 of CEQA Guidelines. Section 15301 provides a Class 1 exemption for the
minor alteration of existing public or private facilities involving negligible or no expansion
of use. Section 15304 provides a Class 4 exemption for minor public or private
alterations in the condition of land and/or vegetation. The project would make
improvements to existing un-useable pavement at SMO, which will include the removal
of existing pavement and the installation of a stable surface (artificial turf, hydro-seeded
soil and mulch, ground-in-place and stabilized pavement, etc.). Therefore, the project
qualifies as a Class 1 and Class 4 exemption. In addition, none of the exceptions
specified in Section 15300.2 of CEQA Guidelines would apply that would preclude the
use of this CEQA exemption - the project site is not located in a sensitive environment,
the project will not have a significant effect on the environment, the project would not
damage scenic resources, the project would not be located on a hazardous waste site;
and the project would not cause a change to a historical resource. Therefore, this
project is determined to be categorically exempt from CEQA.
8 of 8
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
Once design and construction management costs are factored in, the cost for excess
pavement removal would range from, approximately $2.7 million to $5.7 million
(depending on the option selected) based on estimates developed by AECOM
(Attachment A). There are no funds set aside or available in the City's Fiscal Year 17-18
Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for this project. Additionally, the Airport Fund does
not have sufficient reserves and could require a loan from the General Fund to remove
the excess pavement. If directed by Council to proceed with one of the options
presented above, staff would issue a Request for Proposal to select an engineering
design consultant through a competitive process, and would return to Council in early
2018 to potentially authorize the City Manager to advance a General Fund loan to the
Airport Fund and award a Professional Services Contract to initiate the design phase of
the project, along with recommended budget actions.
Prepared By: Allan Sheth, Civil Engineering Associate
Approved
Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. Feasibility Report - Removal of Abandoned Pavement at SMO
B. February 28, 2017 Staff Report
C. April 24, 2017 Staff Report
D. May 24, 2017 Staff Report
E. August 8, 2017 Staff Report
F. Written Comments
G. Powerpoint Presentation
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL
AIRPORT
FEASIBILITY REPORT
FOR
Runway Shortening Phase II
Removal of Abandoned Pavement
City of Santa Monica
1437 4th Street, Ste. 300
Santa Monica, California 90401
(310) 458-8721
September 14, 2017
Intentionally Left Blank
Santa Monica Municipal Airport Runway Shortening Phase II
Feasibility Report
Table of Contents i September 14, 2017
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction.…. ..........................................................................................................................1
Part 1 Removal of Abandoned Pavement ............................................................................1
1.1 Methods and Criteria .......................................................................................................1
1.2 Site/Location....................................................................................................................2
1.3 Pavement Removal Options ............................................................................................3
1.4 Construction Cost Estimates ...........................................................................................5
1.5 Findings/Recommendations ............................................................................................5
Part 2 Runway Protection Zone Potential Land Uses Memorandum..................................6
APPENDICES
A. EXHIBITS
B. ROM COST ESTIMATE
Santa Monica Municipal Airport Runway Shortening Phase II
Feasibility Report
Table of Contents ii September 14, 2017
Intentionally Left Blank
Santa Monica Municipal Airport Runway Shortening Phase II
Feasibility Report- Memorandum
1 September 14, 2017
Introduction
The purpose of this study is to evaluate various options for the abandoned pavement at runway
ends (retain; remove and compact existing native soil; remove and install artificial grass,
compacted earth, etc.). The scope includes development of three (3) options for removal of
existing pavement at abandoned runway ends, abandoned taxiways, abandoned shoulders and
associated infield pavement, and placement of various surface treatments.
The feasibility report also includes preparing rough order of magnitude (ROM) construction cost
estimates for each option, and a planning memorandum that documents land uses that are
permissible and prohibited within the Runway Protection Zone (RPZ). The land use information
was requested by the City of Santa Monica. The land use memorandum within the RPZ is
included in Part 2 of this feasibility report.
Part 1 Removal of Abandoned pavement
1.1 Methods and Criteria
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5300-13A, Airport Design,
Change 1 dated February 26, 2014, inclusive of all errata changes through May 25, 2017,
referred to as AC-13A was used as basic guidelines for evaluating pavement removal options.
The evaluation included the following elements:
· Taxiway Safety Areas (TSA)
· Runway Safety Area (RSA)
· Runway End Blast Pads
· Runway End Object Free Area (ROFA)
· Grading, drainage, and surface gradient (slopes)
· Soil stabilization and erosion control
· Runway End Obstruction Clearances, Approach and departure Surfaces such as
Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) and Precision Approach Path (PAPI) to remain clear of
obstacles.
Runway Blast Pads. Per AC-13A Paragraph 304 d. Runway Blast Pads are to be paved.
Provide blast erosion protection beyond runway ends during jet aircraft operations.
Runway and Taxiway shoulders. Per AC-13A Paragraph 307 b. Turf, aggregate-turf, soil
cement, lime or bituminous stabilized soil are recommended adjacent to runways and taxiways
accommodating Airplane Design Group (ADG) for ADG-I and for the limited aircraft operations
under ADG-II , which are the primary/only aircraft permitted at Santa Monica Airport.
Runway Safety Areas.Per AC-13A Paragraph 307 b. the RSA must be:
(1) cleared and graded and have no potentially hazardous ruts, humps, depressions, or
other surface variations;
(2) drained by grading or storm sewers to prevent water accumulation;
(3) capable, under dry conditions, of supporting Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF)
equipment, and the occasional passage of aircraft without causing damage to the
aircraft; and
Santa Monica Municipal Airport Runway Shortening Phase II
Feasibility Report- Memorandum
2 September 14, 2017
(4) free of objects, except for objects that need to be located in the RSA because of their
function. Objects higher than 3 inches above grade must be constructed, to the extent
practical, on frangible mounted structures of the lowest practical height with the frangible
point no higher than 3 inches above grade. Other objects, such as manholes, should be
constructed at grade and capable of supporting the loads noted above. In no case
should their height exceed 3 inches above grade.
(5) Compaction of RSAs must comply with FAA Standards for Specifying Construction of
Airports AC 150/5370-10G.
(6) RSA standards cannot be modified. The standards remain in effect regardless of the
presence of natural or man-made objects or surface conditions that preclude meeting full
RSA standards.
RSA Grading Requirement. Per AC-13A Paragraph 313 d. the RSA grades must be:
(1) For the first 200 feet of the RSA beyond the runway ends, the longitudinal grade is
between 0 and 3.0 percent, with any slope being downward from the ends. For the
remainder of the safety area the maximum allowable positive longitudinal grade is such
that no part of the RSA penetrates any applicable approach surface or clearway plane.
The maximum allowable negative grade is 5.0 percent. Limitations on longitudinal grade
changes are plus or minus 2.0 percent per 100 feet. Use parabolic vertical curves where
practical. Avoid the use of maximum grades if possible.
(2) Keeping negative grades to the minimum practicable contributes to the effectiveness of
the RSA.
(3) The existing longitudinal grade at Runway 3 end is approximately 1.2 % downward and
will meet the FAA grading criteria.
(4) The longitudinal grade at Runway 21 is approximately 1.2% upward. The upward
longitudinal grade within the first 200 feet of the runway can be acceptable due to
installation of PAPI and maintaining suitable surfaces meeting FAA requirements in the
blast Pad area and RSA.
1.2 Site/Location of Pavement Removal
The shortening of Runway 3-21 resulted in un-useable pavements for aircraft operations at both
ends of the runway. Each runway end includes approximately 736.5 feet length of abandoned
pavement bounded by parallel Taxiways A and B. From the 736.5 feet length, 300 feet is to be
used for the RSA, Runway Object Free area (ROFA) and blast pad (150 feet) per Table 3-5 of
AC-13A, for Aircraft Design Group (ADG) II, which represents the largest aircraft permitted at
Santa Monica Airport.
Existing runway pavement consists of approximately 5.5 to 6 inches thick asphalt (AC) surface
course over approximately 6 to 8 inches thick concrete pavement (PCC). The abandoned
taxiways, shoulders and in-field areas consist of variable AC/PCC pavements ranging from 3 to
6 inches thick AC and 7.5 inches thick PCC.
Santa Monica Municipal Airport Runway Shortening Phase II
Feasibility Report- Memorandum
3 September 14, 2017
1.3 Pavement Removal Options
The primary objective for the study is to develop various options for the abandoned pavement,
evaluate each option and to identify any potential impacts and influences to the airport
operations.
The following options and alternatives were developed for removal and replacement of
abandoned pavements and various surface treatments.
Conceptual plans and details are provided in the Appendix A to provide sufficient information for
the various options considered.
·Option 1
Option 1 includes removal of abandoned pavement within Runway 3-21 Approach ends,
including taxiways, shoulders and in-field pavements outside and adjacent to the RSA as
shown in Figures 1 and 2 (enclosed under Appendix A). This option includes removal of
abandoned AC and PCC pavement in full depth, hauling and disposal of excavated material
off site, and the placement of hydro-seed mixed with mulch the excavated surface.
The depth of excavation varies from 3 inches to 13 inches and requires minor grading and
slope protection. Drainage improvements for storm water collection and connection to the
existing storm drainage system are required due to change in surface condition and new
surface elevation being lower than adjacent pavement. The abandoned pavement removal
section is shown on Detail A-A Option 1 of Exhibit Typical Section 1 (enclosed under
Appendix A).
This option will require hydro-seeding of the excavated surfaces for erosion and dust
control. Scheduled maintenance of the hydro-seeded area will be required for plant
establishment and continued care of the seeded area.
This area is located within the ROFA and runway departure/approach clearance surfaces,
and closure of the runway will be required during the construction of this option. All
operational airfield lighting system and signs must also be protected and/or restored if
damage at the end of each working shift.
·Option 2
Option 2 includes removal of abandoned pavement within Runway 3-21 Approach ends,
including taxiways, shoulders and in-field pavements outside and adjacent to the RSA as
shown in Figures 1 and 2 (enclosed under Appendix A). This option includes removal of
abandoned AC and PCC pavement in full depth, hauling and disposal of excavated material
off site, import soil material and backfill the excavated area up to 2.5 inches below the
existing finished grade and the Installation of artificial turf on top of the compacted soil.
The depth of excavation varies from 3 inches to 13 inches. It is recommended to provide
drainage improvements for storm water collection and connection to the existing storm
drainage system due to change in surface condition and control of excess storm water
surface runoff across this area. The abandoned pavement removal and replacement section
is shown on Detail A-A Option 2 of Exhibit Typical Section 1 (enclosed under Appendix A).
Scheduled maintenance of the artificial turf will be required under this option.
Santa Monica Municipal Airport Runway Shortening Phase II
Feasibility Report- Memorandum
4 September 14, 2017
This area is located within the ROFA and runway departure/approach clearance surfaces,
and closure of the runway will be required during the construction of this option. All
operational airfield lighting system and signs must also be protected and/or restored if
damage at the end of each working shift.
·Option 3
Option 3 includes pulverizing in-place the abandoned pavement within Runway 3-21
Approach ends, including taxiways, shoulders and in-field pavements outside and adjacent
to the RSA as shown in Figures 1 and 2 (enclosed under Appendix A). This option includes
pulverizing of abandoned AC and PCC pavement in full depth and keeping in-place the
pulverized pavement. Re-grading the surface as required for drainage and stabilize the
graded surface with soil stabilizer.
The depth of pulverization varies from 3 inches to 13 inches. It is recommended to provide
drainage improvements for storm water collection and connection to the existing storm
drainage system due to change in surface condition and control of excess storm water
surface runoff across this area. The abandoned pavement pulverization section is shown on
Detail A-A Option 3 of Exhibit Typical Section 2 (enclosed under Appendix A).
This option will require stabilizing the graded surface with dust control stabilizer. It is
recommended using dust control stabilizer such as Soiltac material (white color) or similar
product sprayed in two coats over the pulverized surfaces for erosion and dust control. The
Soiltac soil stabilizer have been used at other airports and proven to be effective in dust
control and erosion control of the airfield infield area, Soiltac has also been used for
stabilizing the dirt vehicular service roads at the airports by heavier application rate.
Depending on the application method and rate, Soiltac can remain effective from weeks to
several years. Scheduled maintenance of the stabilized area will be required.
This area is located within the ROFA and runway departure/approach clearance surfaces,
and closure of the runway will be required during the construction of this option. All
operational airfield lighting system and signs must also be protected and/or restored if
damage at the end of each working shift.
·Alternative 1 (Additive to Options 1, 2 and 3)
Alternative 1 includes pulverizing in-place the abandoned runway pavement within Runway
3-21 Safety Area, as shown in Figures 1 and 2 (enclosed under Appendix A). This option
includes pulverizing of abandoned AC and PCC pavement in full depth; Regrading,
compacting and resurfacing the runway blast pads, and hauling and disposal of the excess
pavement material off site.
The depth of pulverization is approximately 13 inches and requires backfilling, re-grading
and compaction of the pulverized area. It is recommended to provide drainage
improvements for collecting of the storm water and connection into the existing storm
drainage system due to change in surface condition and control of excess storm water
surface runoff across this area.
Santa Monica Municipal Airport Runway Shortening Phase II
Feasibility Report- Memorandum
5 September 14, 2017
This alternative will require the pulverized AC grinding material to be placed on top of the
pulverized concrete, regraded and compacted for supporting Aircraft Rescue and Fire
Fighting (ARFF) equipment, and the occasional passage of aircraft without causing damage
to the aircraft. The graded surface must be stabilized conforming to the FAA Runway Safety
Area requirements.
This alternative also includes runway blast pad (150 feet within RSA at each end) and
requires to be resurfaced with asphaltic material conforming to the FAA Blast pad
requirements.
This area is located within the RSA and closure of the runway will be required during the
construction of this alternative. Additionally, all excavated areas must be backfilled, graded,
and compacted prior to the opening of the runway. All runway threshold lights, runway end
lights and signs must also be protected and/or restored if damaged and be operational at
the end of each working shift.
1.4 Construction Cost Estimates
Rough order of magnitude (ROM) construction cost estimate is prepared for options 1, 2, 3 and
the alternative and summary of the ROM costs is included in Table 1.4. The ROM cost
breakdown for each option and the alternative is included in Appendix B.
Table 1.4 – Summary of Options and Estimated ROM Cost
Outside RSA Within RSA
Options Description Estimated
ROM Cost
Description/
Alternative 1
Estimated
ROM Cost
Total ROM
Cost
Option 1
Remove
Pavement and
Hydro-seed
$ 2,285,692
Pulverize
Pavement and
Stabilize
$ 583,592 $ 2,869,284
Option 2
Remove
Pavement, backfill
and Install Artificial
Turf
$ 4,534,002
Pulverize
Pavement and
Stabilize
$ 583,592 $ 5,117,594
Option 3
Pulverize
Pavement and
Stabilize
$ 1,573,199
Pulverize
Pavement and
Stabilize
$ 583,592 $ 2,156,791
Note:
The estimated ROM construction cost is for comparison of the various pavement removal
options and alternatives and does not include Design and Construction Management, and for
any contaminated soil removal or environmental requirements.
1.5 Findings/Recommendations
This feasibility report provides the City the ability to evaluate the potential options and their
additive alternatives and then select the most suitable option that meets the City’s needs. It is
AECOM’s recommendation that the existing pavement, within the runway safety area, to remain
Santa Monica Municipal Airport Runway Shortening Phase II
Feasibility Report- Memorandum
6 September 14, 2017
in-place. Maintaining paved surfaces will provide blast erosion protection beyond runway ends
during jet aircraft operations and also provides benefit of minimizing the foreign object debris
(FOD) potential into the runway and will enhance the margin of safety for aircraft which
undershoot, overrun into the RSA. In addition, by leaving the existing pavement within the RSA
minimizes the impacts to the airport operations during construction.
Part 2 Runway Protection Zone Potential Land Uses Memorandum
A memorandum is prepared and included in this feasibility report.
Santa Monica Municipal Airport Runway Shortening Phase II
Feasibility Report- Memorandum
1/7 September 14, 2017
To:
Allan Sheth
City of Santa Monica
Public Works-Civil Engineering
1437 4th Street, Suite 300
Santa Monica CA 90401
CC:
AECOM
997 Town & Country Road
Orange
CA, 92868
USA
aecom.com
Project name:
Santa Monica Municipal Airport
Runway Reduction
Project ref:
60539247
From:
AECOM
Date:
September 14, 2017
Memorandom
Subject:Runway Protection Zone Potential Land Uses
Introduction
This memorandum documents land uses that are permissible and prohibited within the Runway
Protection Zone (RPZ). This information was requested by the City of Santa Monica City
Council. The following standards and guidelines were used in the development of this
memorandum:
·Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5300-13A, Airport
Design, Change 1 dated February 26, 2014, inclusive of all errata changes through May
25, 2017, referred to as AC-13A;
·FAA Memorandum titled Interim Guidance on Land Uses Within a Runway Protection
Zone, referred to as FAA RPZ Memo;
·Caltrans Airport Land Use Planning Handbook dated October 2011, referred to as
Caltrans Handbook; and
·Code of Federal Regulations Title 14, Chapter I, Subchapter E, Part 77 – Safe, Efficient
Use, and Preservation of the Navigable Airspace, referred to as Part 77.
Santa Monica Municipal Airport Runway Shortening Phase II
Feasibility Report- Memorandum
2/7 September 14, 2017
The remainder of this memorandum will follow this sequence: Definition and Purpose of the
RPZ; Listing of Permissible and Unacceptable Land Uses; FAA Notification Requirements for
Construction Near an Airport; and a Summary.
Definition and Purpose of the RPZ
The Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) is defined by the FAA as “an area at ground level prior to
the threshold or beyond the runway end to enhance the safety and protection of people and
property on the ground.”1 AC-13A further states that this protection “is best achieved through
airport owner control over RPZs. Control is preferably exercised through the acquisition of
sufficient property interest in the RPZ and includes clearing RPZ areas (and maintaining them
clear) of incompatible objects and activities.”2
RPZ Background
AC-13A provides extensive background information on the RPZ. Relevant portions are provided
below.
Approach protection zones were originally established to define land areas underneath aircraft
approach paths in which control by the airport operator was highly desirable to prevent the
creation of air navigation hazards. Subsequently, a 1952 report by the President’s Airport
Commission, recommended the establishment of clear areas beyond runway ends. Provision of
these clear areas was not only to preclude obstructions potentially hazardous to aircraft, but
also to control building construction as a protection from nuisance and hazard to people on the
ground. The FAA adopted “Clear Zones” with dimensional standards and guidelines were
developed recommending that clear zones be kept free of structures and any development that
would create a place of public assembly. RPZ is the replacement term for Clear Zone.
The RPZ function is to enhance the protection of people and property on the ground. Where
practical, airport owners should own the property under the runway approach and departure
areas to at least the limits of the RPZ. It is desirable to clear the entire RPZ of all above-ground
objects. Where this is impractical, airport owners, as a minimum, should maintain the RPZ clear
of all facilities supporting incompatible activities. The FAA Memo states “although the FAA
recognizes that in certain situations the airport sponsor may not fully control land within the
RPZ, the FAA expects airport sponsors to take all possible measures to protect against and
remove or mitigate incompatible land uses.”
As part of its development of the Land Use Handbook, Caltrans commissioned an extensive
study to determine where aircraft accidents occurred in relation to the airport. The RPZ was
determined to have a very high risk level and account for 20 to 21 percent of the near runway
accidents studied. Within the RPZ, aircraft are typically less than 200 feet above the runway
elevation and are on very close final approach or departure, the riskiest phases of flight. Some
examples of types of arrival accidents are due to downdrafts, wind gusts, and low glide paths,
1 AC-13A.2 Ibid.
Santa Monica Municipal Airport Runway Shortening Phase II
Feasibility Report- Memorandum
3/7 September 14, 2017
and examples of departure accidents are runway overruns, aborted takeoffs, and engine
failures.
RPZ Size and Location
The Airport Reference Code (ARC) will be B-II (aircraft with approach speeds less than 121
knots and aircraft with wingspans less than 79 feet and tail heights shorter than 30 feet) and
represents the size and type of aircraft operating on the runway. The ARC has a direct
correlation to the size of the RPZ. Additionally, the types of instrument approach procedures will
also affect the size of the RPZ. After the runway is shortened, the instrument approach
minimums for both runway ends will be equal to 1-mile (currently Runway 21 has an approach
with 7/8-mile visibility minimums).
The RPZ is trapezoidal in shape and centered about the extended runway centerline. At Santa
Monica Municipal Airport (SMO), the RPZ begins 200 feet prior to the approach end of the
runway and widens as it moves away from the runway end into the approach area (see Figure
3). Therefore, as noted in Figure 3, the size of the RPZ is:
· 1,000 feet long;
· 500 feet wide (200 feet from the runway end);
· 700 feet wide (1,200 feet from the runway end); and
· Encompasses approximately 13.77 acres.
1 Ibid.
The RPZ is subdivided into two areas (see Figure 3):
·Central Portion of the RPZ -extends from the beginning (200 feet on the approach
side of the runway) to the end of the RPZ (1,200 feet on the approach side of the
runway), centered on the runway centerline. Its width is equal to the width of the Runway
Object Free Area (ROFA), which is 500 feet at SMO.
·Controlled Activity Area -is the remaining area of the RPZ on either side of the Central
Portion of the RPZ.
For each runway end there is an approach and departure RPZ. In the case of SMO, the
departure RPZs are the same size and co-located with the approach RPZs.
Santa Monica Municipal Airport Runway Shortening Phase II
Feasibility Report- Memorandum
4/7 September 14, 2017
Land Uses
Permissible Land Uses
Table 1 identifies the permissible land uses, as identified in the standards and guidelines
referenced at the beginning of this memorandum.
Table 1. Permissible Land Uses
Source
Document
Permissible Land Use
AC-13A
Farming that meets airport design standards (see below for additional
information on this land use)
Irrigation channels that meet the requirements of AC 150/5200-33 and
FAA/USDA manual, Wildlife Hazard Management at Airports
Airport service roads, as long as they are not public roads and are directly
controlled by the airport operator
Underground facilities, as long as they meet other design criteria, such as
(Runway Safety Area) RSA requirements , as applicable
Unstaffed NAVAIDs and facilities, such as equipment for airport facilities
that are considered fixed-by-function in regard to the RPZ
FAA RPZ Memo None stated
Caltrans
Handbook
Normally no land uses are allowed (only open space)
Part 77 None stated
Sources: As noted.
Agricultural Uses within the RPZ
Additional guidance on agricultural uses at an airport is found in AC 150/5200-33B, Hazardous
Wildlife Attractants on or Near Airports. The FAA generally discourages agricultural uses of
airport property due to the fact that nearly all crops attract hazardous wildlife at some point
during production. Agricultural uses may be permitted on an airport in order to facilitate financial
viability for the airport. Agricultural uses at an airport are subject to all airport design criteria,
including horizontal and vertical clearances associated with runways, taxiways/taxilanes, and
aprons. Community gardens, while not explicitly listed in the guidelines would likely be viewed
by the FAA as an agricultural use. Figure 3(starting 300 feet from the runway end) identifies the
areas where agricultural use can occur within the RPZ according to airport design standards (in
Santa Monica Municipal Airport Runway Shortening Phase II
Feasibility Report- Memorandum
5/7 September 14, 2017
accordance with AC 150/5300-13, Airport Design, Change 18; this table is not contained in the
current version of AC 150/5300-13 but was referenced in AC 150/5200-33B).
Generally Prohibited Land Uses
Table 2 identifies generally prohibited land uses for new and reconfigured RPZs, as identified in
the standards and guidelines referenced at the beginning of this memorandum.Allowable land
uses would be considered on a case-by-case basis in consultation with the FAA, Caltrans and
the County Land Use Commission. Introduction of new generally prohibited land uses may
increase risk and liability for the City of Santa Monica.
Table 2. Prohibited Land Uses
Source
Document
Prohibited Land Use
AC-13A All above ground objects
FAA RPZ Memo1
Buildings and structures (Examples include, but are not limited to:
residences, schools, churches, hospitals or other medical care facilities,
commercial/industrial buildings, etc.
Recreational land use (Examples include, but are not limited to: golf
courses, sports fields, amusement parks, other places of public assembly,
etc.)
Transportation facilities (Examples include, but are not limited to: rail
facilities – light, or heavy, or passenger or freight; public roads/highways;
vehicular parking facilities; etc.)
Fuel storage facilities (above and below ground)
Hazardous material storage (above and below ground)
Wastewater treatment facilities
Above ground utility infrastructure (i.e. electrical substations), including any
type of solar panel installation
Caltrans
Handbook
Avoid nonresidential uses except if very low intensity in character and
confined to the outer sides
Avoid parking lots, streets, roads
Prohibit all new structures and residential land uses
Part 772 None stated, but all development should not create penetrations to the Part
77 approach surfaces
Sources: As noted.
1 Items listed are to be considered on a case-by-case basis. New and reconfigured uses as described
would require approval by the Regional and ADO staff who must consult with the National Airport
Planning and Environmental Division (APP-400), who in turn will coordinate with the Airport
Engineering Division (AAS-100).
Santa Monica Municipal Airport Runway Shortening Phase II
Feasibility Report- Memorandum
6/7 September 14, 2017
2 Except for traverse ways on or near an airport with an operative ground traffic control service furnished
by an airport traffic control tower or by the airport management and coordinated with the air traffic
control service, traverse ways used or to be used for the passage of mobile objects shall have the
ground elevation increased by: (1) 17 feet for an Interstate Highway that is part of the National System
of Military and Interstate Highways where overcrossings are designed for a minimum of 17 feet vertical
distance; (2) 15 feet for any other public roadway; (3) 10 feet or the height of the highest mobile object
that would normally traverse the road, whichever is greater, for a private road; (4) 23 feet for a railroad;
or (5) For a waterway or any other traverse way not previously mentioned, an amount equal to the
height of the highest mobile object that would normally traverse it.
Review of Land Uses in the RPZ
Development within the RPZ requires review by the FAA in the following circumstances:
· Any new or reconfigured land uses proposed in the RPZ require FAA review per the FAA
RPZ Memo.
· Any construction or alteration that exceeds a 100 to 1 surface that extends 20,000 feet
from the nearest point of the nearest runway (for airports with runways longer than 3,200
feet). This would be submitted and subsequently reviewed through the 7460-1 Notice of
Proposed Construction or Alteration process.
· Development within the RPZ is within the Airport Influence Area for SMO. In order to file
an Aviation Application with the LA County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) the
proposed development requires airspace clearance (7460-1 Notice of Proposed
Construction or Alteration).
Summary
The RPZ is a very critical safety area that should be kept free and clear of all objects in order to
protect people and property on the ground and pilots/aircraft operating near an airport,
especially during emergencies. Generally, no development should occur within the RPZ, nor
should there be any traverse ways.
In order to ensure a safe operating environment for pilots and aircraft, any non-aviation use
within the RPZ that requires public access must be conducted outside of the airport
perimeter/security fence. Therefore, any relocation of the on-airport service road and the
perimeter/security fence must be completed to allow for public access into the RPZ area. This is
consistent with the Transportation Security Administration Security Guidelines for General
Aviation Airports (May 2004) which suggests that for an airport like SMO, access to the facility
should be controlled.
Santa Monica Municipal Airport Runway Shortening Phase II
Feasibility Report- Memorandum
7/7 September 14, 2017
All development (new or relocated) should seek to avoid creating hazardous wildlife attractants
and solar glare, along with remaining clear of all approach and departure surfaces, and should
not obstruct light paths of any visual navigational aids located at SMO. Additionally, new or
relocated development should also remain outside of the RSA, Runway Obstacle Free Zone
(OFZ), and ROFA. It is highly likely that any proposed development within the RPZ will trigger
FAA and/or Caltrans review of the development.
Santa Monica Municipal Airport Runway Shortening Phase II
Feasibility Report
APPENDIX A
EXHIBITS
1000'
300'
RSA
150'
7
0
0
'
736.5'N E W
R W Y
E N D
RWY EDGES = 1.2% DOWN
T W Y
A 3
NEW RWY END
ELEV. 126.48'
200'
T W Y
B 3
T W Y
A 2
T W Y
B 2
T W Y
A 1
T W Y
B 1
P
E
R
I
M
E
T
E
R
ROAD
RPZ
RPZ
2 3 R D
S T .
EXIST. RWY END
ELEV. 117.38'
TWY A
TWY B
BLAST PAD
SANTA MONICA AIRPORT
SHORTENING OF RUNWAY 3-21
LEGEND:
AIRPORT PROPERTY LINE
1 inch = 200 ft. FULL SIZE
PHASE II - REMOVAL OF ABANDONED PAVEMENT
RWY 3 END - FIG. 1
SEP 14, 2017
RUNWAY PROTECTION ZONES
RUNWAY OBJECT FREE AREA
RUNWAY SAFETY AREA
ABANDONED RUNWAY PAVEMENT (6"± AC OVER 7.50"± PCC) OUTSIDE RSA TO BE REMOVED
ABANDONED TAXIWAY PAVEMENT (4" TO 6"± AC) OUTSIDE RSA TO BE REMOVED
ABANDONED IN-FIELD PAVEMENT & SHOULDERS (3"± AC) OUTSIDE RSA TO BE REMOVED
ABANDONED TAXIWAY PAVEMENT (7.50"± PCC) OUTSIDE RSA TO BE REMOVED
A
A
B1
ALTERNATE 1 - ABANDONED RUNWAY PAVEMENT (6"± AC OVER 7.50"± PCC) WITHIN RSA TO BE REMOVED
REMOVAL AREAS BY LOCATION, TYPE AND THICKNESS:
300'
RSA
1000'
7
0
0
'
T W Y
A 5
200'
RWY EDGE
736.4'
P R O P .
R W Y
E N D
EXIST. RWY END
ELEV. 177.40'
L
TWY A
TWY B
S = 1.2% DOWN
T W Y
B 5
T W Y
A 4
T W Y
B 4
PERIMETER ROAD
P E R I M E T E R R O A D
RPZ
RPZ
NEW RWY END
ELEV. 169.82'
S B U N D Y D R .
EXIST
BLAST FENCE
150'
BLAST PAD
1 inch = 200 ft. FULL SIZE
SANTA MONICA AIRPORT
SHORTENING OF RUNWAY 3-21
LEGEND:
AIRPORT PROPERTY LINE
RUNWAY PROTECTION ZONES
RUNWAY OBJECT FREE AREA
RUNWAY SAFETY AREA
PHASE II - REMOVAL OF ABANDONED PAVEMENT
RWY 21 END - FIG. 2
SEP 14, 2017
A
A
B2
ABANDONED RUNWAY PAVEMENT (6"± AC OVER 7.50"± PCC) OUTSIDE RSA TO BE REMOVED
ABANDONED TAXIWAY PAVEMENT (4" TO 6"± AC) OUTSIDE RSA TO BE REMOVED
ABANDONED IN-FIELD PAVEMENT & SHOULDERS (3"± AC) OUTSIDE RSA TO BE REMOVED
ABANDONED TAXIWAY PAVEMENT (7.50"± PCC) OUTSIDE RSA TO BE REMOVED
ALTERNATE 1 - ABANDONED RUNWAY PAVEMENT (6"± AC OVER 7.50"± PCC) WITHIN RSA TO BE REMOVED
REMOVAL AREAS BY LOCATION, TYPE AND THICKNESS:
RPZRPZRPZ RPZRO
F
A
R
O
F
A
RSA ROFA ROFAROFA
R
P
Z
R
P
Z
R
P
Z
R
P
Z
R
O
F
A
R
O
F
A
R
S
A
R
S
A
R
O
F
A
R
O
F
A
R
O
F
A
S
A
N
T
A
M
O
N
I
C
A
A
I
R
P
O
R
T
R
P
Z
S
Y
M
B
O
L
DESCRIPTIONRUNWAY SAFETY AREA (RSA)LEGENDRUNWAY OBJECT FREE AREA (ROFA)RUNWAY PROTECTION ZONE (RPZ)
R
O
F
A
R
O
F
A
R
P
Z
R
P
Z
AIRPORT PROPERTY LINE
D
R
A
F
T
:
F
o
r
D
i
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
P
u
r
p
o
s
e
s
O
n
l
y
N
O
T
T
O
S
C
A
L
E
N
F
i
g
u
r
e
1
CENTRAL PORTION OF THE RPZCONTROLLED ACTIVITY AREA OF THE RPZ
F
I
G
U
R
E
3
5#06# /10+%# #+42146
5∗146∋0+0) 1( 4709#;
2∗#5∋ ++ 4∋/18#. 1( #∃#0&10∋& 2#8∋/∋06
∋:∗+∃+6 6;2+%#. 5∋%6+10
5∋2
5#06# /10+%# #+42146
5∗146∋0+0) 1( 4709#;
2∗#5∋ ++ 4∋/18#. 1( #∃#0&10∋& 2#8∋/∋06
6;2+%#. 5∋%6+10
5∋2
Santa Monica Municipal Airport Runway Shortening Phase II
Feasibility Report
APPENDIX B
ROM COST ESTIMATE
Santa Monica Airport
Shortening of Runway 3-21
09/14/2017
Description Pavement
Type
Pavement
Thickness
AVG. (Inch)
Area
(Sq. Ft.)
Volume
(Cu. Yd.)Quantity Unit Unit Price Estimated
ROM Cost
Remove and Dispose
Abandoned Pavement at
Runway 3 End
AC (Over
PCC)5.5 65,464 1,111 7,274 SY $ 23.00 $ 167,297
Remove and Dispose
Abandoned Pavement at
Runway 3 End
PCC (Below
AC)7.5 65,464 1,515 7,274 SY $ 31.50 $ 229,124
Remove and Dispose
Abandoned Taxiways A, B
and Run-up Pavement at
Runway 3 End
AC & AC
Over PCC 5 107,350 1,657 11,928 SY $ 17.50 $ 208,736
Remove and Dispose
Abandoned Taxiways A
and Run-up Pavement at
Runway 3 End
PCC 7.5 11,277 261 1,253 SY $ 31.50 $ 39,470
Remove and Dispose
Abandoned Shoulder and
In-field Pavement at
Runway 3 End
AC 3.25 86,840 871 9,649 SY $ 9.50 $ 91,664
Remove and Dispose
Abandoned Pavement at
Runway 21 End
AC (Over
PCC)5.5 65,464 1,111 7,274 SY $ 23.00 $ 167,297
Remove and Dispose
Abandoned Pavement at
Runway 21 End
PCC (Below
AC)7.5 65,464 1,515 7,274 SY $ 31.50 $ 229,124
Remove and Dispose
Abandoned Taxiways A, B
and Run-up Pavements at
Runway 21 End
AC & AC
Over PCC 5 64,575 997 7,175 SY $ 17.50 $ 125,563
Remove and Dispose
Abandoned In-field
Pavements at Runway 21
End
PCC 7.5 46,555 1,078 5,173 SY $ 31.50 $ 162,943
Remove and Dispose
Abandoned Shoulder and
In-field Pavement at
Runway 21 End
AC 3.25 108,795 1,091 12,088 SY $ 9.50 $ 114,839
Grading and Drainage
Improvements 1 Lump Sum $ 130,000 $ 166,000
Airfield Lighting Base Can
Removal 1 Lump Sum $ 12,000 $ 22,000
Hydroseeding with Mulch &
Erosion Control 556,320 61,813 SY $ 0.82 $ 50,687
Mobilization and Traffic
Control 1 Lump Sum $ 100,000 $ 130,000
$ 1,904,743
$ 380,949
$ 2,285,692
Note:
The estimated construction cost is for comparison of the various pavement removal Options
and does not include Design and Construction Management, and for
any contaminated soil removal or environmental requirements.
Subtotal
Total Construction Cost
Contingency @ 20%
Table 1 - Option 1 – Full Depth Pavement Removal & Hydroseeding Mixed With Mulch
1
Santa Monica Airport
Shortening of Runway 3-21
09/14/2017
Description Pavement
Type
Pavement
Thickness
AVG. (Inch)
Area
(Sq. Ft.)
Volume
(Cu. Yd.)Quantity Unit Unit Price Estimated
ROM Cost
Remove and Dispose
Abandoned Pavement at
Runway 3 End
AC (Over
PCC)5.5 65,464 1,111 7,274 SY $ 23.00 $ 167,297
Remove and Dispose
Abandoned Pavement at
Runway 3 End
PCC (Below
AC)7.5 65,464 1,515 7,274 SY $ 31.50 $ 229,124
Remove and Dispose
Abandoned Taxiways A, B
and Run-up Pavement at
Runway 3 End
AC & AC
Over PCC 5 107,350 1,657 11,928 SY $ 17.50 $ 208,736
Remove and Dispose
Abandoned Taxiways A
and Run-up Pavement at
Runway 3 End
PCC 7.5 11,277 261 1,253 SY $ 31.50 $ 39,470
Remove and Dispose
Abandoned Shoulder and
In-field Pavement at
Runway 3 End
AC 3.25 86,840 871 9,649 SY $ 9.50 $ 91,664
Remove and Dispose
Abandoned Pavement at
Runway 21 End
AC (Over
PCC)5.5 65,464 1,111 7,274 SY $ 23.00 $ 167,297
Remove and Dispose
Abandoned Pavement at
Runway 21 End
PCC (Below
AC)7.5 65,464 1,515 7,274 SY $ 31.50 $ 229,124
Remove and Dispose
Abandoned Taxiways A, B
and Run-up Pavements at
Runway 21 End
AC & AC
Over PCC 5 64,575 997 7,175 SY $ 17.50 $ 125,563
Remove and Dispose
Abandoned In-field
Pavements at Runway 21
End
PCC 7.5 46,575 1,078 5,175 SY $ 31.50 $ 163,013
Remove and Dispose
Abandoned Shoulder and
In-field Pavement at
Runway 21 End
AC 3.25 108,795 1,091 12,088 SY $ 9.50 $ 114,839
Import and Compact Soil
material (to 2.5" Below FS)Soil 556,340 6,881 6,881 CY $ 32.00 $ 220,189
Drainage Improvements 1 Lump Sum $ 80,000 $ 116,000
Airfield Lighting Base Can
Removal 1 Lump Sum $ 12,000 $ 22,000
Artificial Turf Turf 556,340 61,816 SY $ 27.00 $ 1,669,020
Mobilization and Traffic
Control 1 Lump Sum $ 150,000 $ 215,000
$ 3,778,335
$ 755,667
$ 4,534,002
Note:
The estimated construction cost is for comparison of the various pavement removal Options
and does not include Design and Construction Management, and for
any contaminated soil removal or environmental requirements.
Table 2 - Option 2 – Full Depth Pavement Removal & Replace with Soil and Artificial Turf
Subtotal
Contingency @ 20%
Total Construction Cost
2
Santa Monica Airport
Shortening of Runway 3-21
09/14/2017
Description Pavement
Type
Pavement
Thickness
AVG. (Inch)
Area
(Sq. Ft.)
Volume
(Cu. Yd.)Quantity Unit Unit Price Estimated
ROM Cost
Pulverize Abandoned
Pavement at Runway 3
End
AC (Over
PCC)5.5 65,464 1,111 7,274 SY $ 10.50 $ 76,375
Pulverize Abandoned
Pavement at Runway 3
End
PCC (Below
AC)7.5 65,464 1,515 7,274 SY $ 12.50 $ 90,922
Pulverize Abandoned
Taxiways A, B and Run-up
Pavement at Runway 3
End
AC & AC
Over PCC 5 107,350 1,657 11,928 SY $ 8.50 $ 101,386
Pulverize Abandoned
Taxiways A and Run-up
Pavement at Runway 3
End
PCC 7.5 11,277 261 1,253 SY $ 12.50 $ 15,663
Pulverize Abandoned
Shoulder and In-field
Pavement at Runway 3
End
AC 3.25 86,840 871 9,649 SY $ 5.50 $ 53,069
Pulverize Abandoned
Pavement at Runway 21
End
AC (Over
PCC)5.5 65,464 1,111 7,274 SY $ 10.50 $ 76,375
Pulverize Abandoned
Pavement at Runway 21
End
PCC (Below
AC)7.5 65,464 1,515 7,274 SY $ 12.50 $ 90,922
Pulverize Abandoned
Taxiways A, B and Run-up
Pavement at Runway 21
End
AC & AC
Over PCC 5 64,575 997 7,175 SY $ 8.50 $ 60,988
Pulverize Abandoned In-
field Pavements at Runway
21 End
PCC 7.5 46,555 1,078 5,173 SY $ 12.50 $ 64,660
Pulverize Abandoned
Shoulder and In-field
Pavement at Runway 21
End
AC 3.25 108,795 1,091 12,088 SY $ 5.50 $ 66,486
Drainage Improvements 1 Lump Sum $ 80,000 $ 116,000
Airfield Lighting Base Can
Removal 1 Lump Sum $ 12,000 $ 22,000
Soil Stabilization (Soiltac-
Dust Control)556,320 61,813 SY $ 5.60 $ 346,155
Mobilization and Traffic
Control 1 Lump Sum $ 100,000 $ 130,000
$ 1,310,999
$ 262,200
$ 1,573,199
Note:
The estimated construction cost is for comparison of the various pavement removal Options
and does not include Design and Construction Management, and for
any contaminated soil removal or environmental requirements.
Contingency @ 20%
Total Construction Cost
Table 3 - Option 3 – Full Depth Pavement Pulverize and Soil Stabilization (Dust Control)
Subtotal
3
Santa Monica Airport
Shortening of Runway 3-21
09/14/2017
Description Pavement
Type
Pavement
Thickness
AVG. (Inch)
Area
(Sq. Ft.)
Volume
(Cu. Yd.)Quantity Unit Unit Price Estimated
ROM Cost
Pulverize & Reuse
Abandoned Pavement at
Runway 3 End
AC Over
(PCC)4 45,000 556 5,000 SY $ 8.50 $ 42,500
Pulverize Abandoned
Pavement at Runway 3
End
PCC (Below
AC)7.5 45,000 1,042 5,000 SY $ 12.50 $ 62,500
Pulverize & Reuse
Abandoned Pavement at
Runway 21 End
AC (Over
PCC)4 45,000 556 5,000 SY $ 8.50 $ 42,500
Pulverize Abandoned
Pavement at Runway 21
End
PCC (Below
AC)7.5 45,000 1,042 5,000 SY $ 12.50 $ 62,500
Place AC Grinding,
Grading and Compaction 90,000 1,111 10,000 SY $ 4.50 $ 45,000
Remove and Dispose
Excess Material
AC (Over
PCC)1.5 90,000 417 10,000 SY $ 5.50 $ 55,000
Drainage Improvements 1 Lump Sum $ 40,000 $ 40,000
Runway End Lighting
Protection 1 Lump Sum $ 10,000 $ 10,000
AC Re-surfacing of Blast
Pad (2" AC)45,000 543 Ton $ 89.00 $ 48,327
Surface Treatment (Dust
Control stabilizer)45,000 5,000 SY $ 5.60 $ 28,000
Mobilization and Traffic
Control 1 Lump Sum $ 50,000 $ 50,000
$ 486,327
$ 97,265
$ 583,592
Note:
The estimated construction cost is for comparison of the various pavement removal Options
and does not include Design and Construction Management, and for
any contaminated soil removal or environmental requirements.
Table 4 - Alternative 1 (Additive for All Options)
Full Depth Pavement Pulverize of Runway Safety Area, and Stabilization
Subtotal
Contingency @ 20%
Total Construction Cost
4
Information Item
1
Date: April 24, 2017
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Susan Cline, Director of Public Works
Subject: Update on Airport Runway Shortening
Introduction
On February 1, 2017, the Settlement Agreement between the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) and the City of Santa Monica (City) was approved and entered as
a Consent Decree that, among other things, allows the City to shorten the runway by
approximately 1,500 feet and operate a runway of 3,500 feet at Santa Monica Airport
(SMO) until December 31, 2028. On February 28, 2017, the City Council awarded RFP#
SP2500 to AECOM/Aeroplex (AECOM) for reducing Runway 03-21 at Santa Monica
Municipal Airport (SMO) to 3,500 feet per the Consent Decree.
During discussions at the February 28 meeting, Council inquired about a potential phased
interim project, removal of pavement at the ends of the runway, and evaluation of future
uses of the excess runway area. This report provides an update on those topics, as well
as an update on the overall status of the runway shortening project.
Discussion
Execution of Feasibility Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with AECOM
On March 16, 2017 the City of Santa Monica executed Feasibility Professional Services
Agreement 10436 (CCS) with AECOM for reducing Runway 03-21 at SMO to 3,500 feet.
The agreement includes an initial feasibility phase to provide alternatives for Council
consideration and future selection; and ensures appropriate compliance with applicable
2
environmental review requirements, the required scope being dependent upon the
alternative selected. Phase one consists of this feasibility analysis for design alternatives,
which will be presented to Council for comment and direction on May 24th, 2017. Phase
two consists of preconstruction services including all design work necessary to develop
a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP), which will be the basis for the design-build
agreement expected to be awarded by September 2017. Phase three is the construction
phase based upon the scope of work covered by the GMP and will shorten the runway
by the end of December 2017.
Meetings with the FAA
The City and AECOM organized meetings with FAA staff to present preliminary
conceptual options for the runway shortening, and to discuss the potential for an interim
phase that could be implemented prior to the start of runway shortening construction. In
attendance at the meeting were staff from Public Works Administration; Airport and Civil
Engineering Divisions; personnel from AECOM and Aeroplex; staff from various divisions
within the FAA; and Caltrans Division of Aeronautics. The FAA had no substantial
concerns with the preliminary options for runway shortening.
Staff will present the final alternatives for Council consideration at the May 24th Council
meeting.
Interim Shortening Discussion
An interim phase to provide a shortened runway for immediate implementation was
explored and would have likely involved re-striping and minor pavement maintenance
excluding modifications of the existing the runway lights, signs and navigational aids. The
interim solution would possibly generate unfavorable conditions including the reduction
of operational safety at the airport, extension of the project completion date beyond the
end of 2017, and being perceived as not in the spirit of the Consent Decree. The project
team discussed the interim phase with the FAA and as further explained below, the interim
shortening work is not supported by the FAA or recommended by staff.
3
Runway Considerations
Interim shortening by summer would not allow enough time for the relocation of
Runway End Identifier Lights nor the Precision Approach Path Indicator
navigational aid. Both of these features are currently operational at SMO and
taking them out of operation to install an interim phased project would result in a
non-standard and an unsafe operation.
Specifically, the Runway End Identifier Lights are flashing strobe lights that enable
a landing pilot to identify the beginning of the runway in a sea of city lights. The
Precision Approach Path Indicators provide the landing pilot with a set of lights
located adjacent to the runway that indicate if the aircraft is too high, too low or on
the correct glide slope to land in the desired location on the runway in a safe
manner. Therefore, operating the airport without these features is contrary to
safety standards
Taxiways Considerations
An interim project phase would also require aircraft to “back-taxi” (taxi against the
direction of arriving traffic and then turn 180 degrees to depart ) at both ends of
runway, which is considered to be a nonstandard operation, extends aircraft time
on the runway, and subsequently decreases safety.
Airspace Considerations
The runway thresholds (runway ends) would have to be relocated as part of any
interim shortening of the runway. As a result, the approach and departure
procedures would need to be updated by the FAA for the interim shortening and
potentially again when the final design changes are implemented. Updated
procedures are published to the aviation community on a 54-day cycle. Given the
construction schedule for an interim solution, the FAA would not have time to
4
update and publish the new procedures. It should be noted that the goal is to
complete all required work in time to meet the FAA December 7, 2017 deadline for
publication of updated approach and departure procedures, and if that date is
missed, the City would have to wait for the February 1, 2018 publication. Hence,
time is of the essence
During meetings with City staff, the FAA indicated the implementation of an interim
phase with one or more of these non-standard features may not be consistent with
the Consent Decree. In the FAA's view, under the Consent Decree the City should
operate the airport in accordance with the minimum applicable Federal standards.
Future Repurposing of Land Outside the Shortened Runway
Section III of the Consent Decree acknowledges that the City may use property no longer
needed for the Airport (released land) with a shortened runway, and that the City may
transition the released land from aeronautical to non-aeronautical uses that are safe and
compatible with the operation of the Airport.
The full range of options available for the repurposing of future released lands – from
leaving the unused runway surface in place to removing excess runway surface - has not
yet been explored. While some individual Council members have expressed preferences
for how the excess runway surface could be repurposed, there has been no Council action
or direction on the range of options for future uses of released land that might be
combined with removal of excess runway surface. If directed by the City Council, staff
would develop, evaluate, and present possible future uses for the excess runway area
after completion of the runway shortening in compliance with environmental review
requirements.
Functionally, the potential future uses of excess runway surface or released land is
separate from the runway shortening project. In other words, the runway shortening
project is not dependent on or linked in any way to future uses of the excess runway
5
surface, but rather a standalone, distinct, and separate project which should proceed in
an expeditious manner independent of future project(s) that may repurpose the excess
runway surface. Furthermore, it should be noted that completion of the runway shortening
project does not limit the City’s authority to make improvements to any future excess
runway surface or released land. In fact, allowing the shortening project to proceed
independently and expeditiously will in turn allow for a robust, encompassing discussion
regarding the future use of excess runway and released land, as is appropriate for such
an important matter.
Given the above, staff is pursuing a more streamlined runway shortening construction
project - one that involves re-striping, minor pavement maintenance, and related
modifications of the existing runway lights, signs and navigational aids to allow the project
to stay on schedule for completion by the end of December 2017.
Outreach
Staff will present the information in this report to the Airport users and stakeholders on
April 25, 2017 and the Airport Commission on May 2, 2017. Staff will keep records of any
feedback received at these meetings.
Prepared By: Allan Sheth, Civil Engineering Associate
Item 4-A
9/26/17
1 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
2 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
3 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
4 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
5 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
6 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
7 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
8 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
9 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
10 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
11 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
12 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
13 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
14 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
15 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
16 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
17 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
18 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
19 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
20 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
21 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
22 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
23 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
24 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
25 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
26 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
27 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
28 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
29 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
30 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
31 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
32 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
33 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
34 of 36
Item 4-A
9/26/17
35 of 36
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Cathy Larson <fospairport@rocketmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, September 26, 2017 10:54 AM
To:Council Mailbox; Gleam Davis; Kevin McKeown Fwd; Pam OConnor; councilmtgitems;
Sue Himmelrich; Ted Winterer; Terry O’Day; Tony Vazquez
Cc:Rick Cole
Subject:Item 4-A SMO Runway Reduction
Dear Councilmembers,
We support:
The hydro-seeding option
Removal of all pavement not necessary for the reduced runway/taxi way
Directing staff to return with options on enhancing pedestrian/bike access to southern side of the
runway including Airport Park, SMC, Dog Park, and businesses
Directing staff to return with options for emission study along the lines recommended by the Airport
Commission to measure emissions prior to the runway reduction, when the airport is closed, and after
the newly reduced runway is in operation
Thank you,
Cathy Larson and Roger Allen
Santa Monica Residents
Item 4-A
9/26/17
36 of 36
REPLACEMENT OF EXCESS
PAVEMENT AT SMO
RUNWAY ENDS
City Council Meeting
September 26,2017
MAY 24TH, 2017 COUNCIL MEETING
“Direct staff to return to Council as soon
as possible with options for projects to
remove the now unneeded pavement at
either end of the runway”
AIRPORT PAVEMENT 3,500’ Runway
Taxiway Runway Safety Area (RSA)
Pavement Removal
436.5 300
Runway Protection Zone (RPZ)
436.5300
TERM DEFINITION
Runway Safety Area (RSA) –surface
suitable for reducing the risk of
damage to airplanes in the event of
an overrun
Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) –area
beyond the runway to enhance the
protection of people and property
on the ground
•Support aircraft rescue and
firefighting equipment
•Minimal surface variations
(depressions, ruts)
RUNWAY SAFETY AREA (RSA)
ALL OPTIONS INCLUDE:
•Pulverize and stabilize existing
pavement in the RSA
•90,000 SF
PAVEMENT REPLACEMENT OPTIONS
OPTION 1: HYDROSEEDING $3.4M
OPTION 2:ARTIFICIAL TURF $5.7M
OPTION 3:PULVERIZE & STABILIZE $2.7M
OPTION 1: HYDROSEEDING
Outside RSA
„Remove unused pavement and apply hydroseed (556,000 SF)
COST
„Estimated $3.44M
CONSIDERATIONS
„As needed maintenance,natural materials,no soil import
Used at San Bernardino International Airport exclusive of RSA
OPTION 1: HYDROSEEDING
3,500’ Runway
Taxiway
Runway Safety Area (RSA)
Pavement Removal
OPTION 1: HYDROSEEDING
Outside RSA
„Remove unused pavement and install artificial turf (556,000 SF)
COST
„Estimated $5.69M
CONSIDERATIONS
„Minimal maintenance,durability, aesthetics,high cost,
significant truck trips (import and export)
Used at San Diego International Airport exclusive of RSA
OPTION 2:ARTIFICIAL TURF
OPTION 2:ARTIFICIAL TURF
Runway Safety Area (RSA)
Pavement Removal
OPTION 2:ARTIFICIAL TURF
3,500’ Runway
Taxiway
OPTION 3:PULVERIZE & STABILIZE IN PLACE
Outside RSA
„Pulverize unused pavement and stabilize (556,000 SF)
COST
„Estimated $2.73M
CONSIDERATIONS
„high maintenance,aesthetic concern,low cost, no material
import/export
Used at San Jose International Airport exclusive of RSA
OPTION 3:PULVERIZE & STABILIZE IN PLACE
Runway Safety Area (RSA)
Pavement Removal
OPTION 3:PULVERIZE
3,500’ Runway
Taxiway
„All three options are expected to have similar
implementation schedules
Design
Procurement
(2-4 months)
Design
(3-4 months)
Construction
Procurement
(2-4 months)
Construction
(4-6 months)
ANTICIPATED SCHEDULE
NEXT STEPS
„Council would provide staff with direction
„Staff would prepare a Request for Proposal for
design services
„Staff would return to Council end 2017/early 2018 for
(1) award of design contract and (2) approval of
recommended budget actions.