7b supp
ITEM NO: 7b_Supp . DATE OF MEETING: April 12, 2016 SUSTAINABLE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN (SAMP) UPDATE April 12, 2016 Briefing overview Where we are in the planning process Major plan elements Airside simulation modeling Landside simulation modeling Public outreach Next steps 2 Where we are in the planning process Current work Developed options for major plan elements Exploring various facilities layouts within Concept 4 Airside simulation modeling Assessed capacity of existing airfield at increased activity levels Assessed capacity of airfield with improvements at increased activity levels Determined aircraft hold positions are critical to airfield/gate operations Additional modeling to better understand timing of need for aircraft hold positions and inform recommended layout of facilities and phasing plan Assessing impacts of runway/taxiway separation Evaluated one and two terminal options Continued study of one terminal option to avoid or delay second terminal On-going work to explore phasing for gates, terminal and hardstands 3 Where we are in the planning process Stakeholder feedback Airlines Use of aircraft hold positions for departures metering is reasonable Hardstand for aircraft hold positions and Remain Over-Night (RON) parking is needed both north and south of future gates Alaska Airlines prefers aircraft maintenance facilities on existing Air Operations Area (AOA) as opposed to SASA FAA Use of potential centerfield hardstand for RON would create significant operational impacts due to towing aircraft across runways City of SeaTac Would like to see commercial development in SASA in support of transit oriented development around Sound Transit's Angle Lake Station Passed resolution requesting that "the Port of Seattle Commission not authorize actions related to SASA that would conflict with the City's Comprehensive Plan and the Angle Lake District Station Are Plan" Formed SeaTac Airport Committee 4 Major plan elements Plan development (iterative process) Determine preferred gate expansion concept Assess airside capacity and required airfield & terminal facilities Gates Aircraft hold positions Airfield improvements Allocate remaining land based on hierarchy Terminal Airfield Landside Cargo Airline support Airport support 5 Major plan elements Development constraints & key functional areas 6 Major plan elements Plan development and narrowing of alternatives SAMP planning objectives and FAA guidance on working towards preferred alternative(s): Provide balanced facilities capacity for all functional areas of the airport Airport capacity limited to the fixed capacity of the 3 runway airfield Provisions for gates, terminal, cargo, landside and airline & airport support facilities Eliminate alternatives that do not meet long term needs/requirements of the airport to meet the region's forecasted demand Demonstrate through Implementation Plan and Plan of Finance that preferred alternative is reasonable SAMP planning objectives and FAA guidance on alternatives analysis 7 Major plan elements Federal and State rules for narrowing of alternatives Environmental review requirements for narrowing of alternatives are defined by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Alternatives carried forward for environmental review must: be "reasonable" and "prudent and feasible" Must fulfill the "purpose and need" for the proposalNEPA Order 5050.4(B), section 201(B) "Reasonable alternatives" are actions capable of attaining or approximating the proposal's objectivesWAC 197-11-440(5)(b) Alternatives that fail to satisfy the "purpose and need" for the proposal and are not "prudent and feasible" should not be carried forward for environmental analysis Requires analysis of a "No Action" alternative Recommend that the agency's "preferred alternative" be identified Federal and State rules for narrowing of alternatives 8 Major plan elements Concept 1 Description New widebody international gates on extension of Concourse A Extension of Concourse D to two piers to the north Aircraft hold positions provided to the north only Primary concerns/flaws New south end gates in congested aircraft movement area Does not provide aircraft hold positions on south end Eliminates aircraft maintenance NOTE: Development concepts illustrate major plan elements independent of 1 vs 2 terminals Concept 1 does not meet all program needs 9 Major plan elements Concept 2 Description New widebody international gates on Concourse B Extension of Concourse D to three piers to the north Less aircraft hold positions provided to the north Primary concerns/flaws Does not provide aircraft hold positions on south end NOTE: Development concepts illustrate major plan elements independent of 1 vs 2 terminals Concept 2 does not meet all program needs 10 Major plan elements Concept 3 Description New widebody international gates on Concourse B Extension of Concourse D to three piers to the north Aircraft hold positions provided to the south and north Primary concerns/flaws Eliminates aircraft maintenance NOTE: Development concepts illustrate major plan elements independent of 1 vs 2 terminals Concept 3 does not meet all program needs 11 Major plan elements Concept 4 Description New widebody capable international gates on Concourse B Extension of Concourse D to three piers to the north Aircraft hold positions provided to the south and north SASA accommodates displaced aircraft maintenance and cargo growth Primary concerns/flaws Displaces aircraft maintenance Cost Primary advantages Meets all program needs Best operational layout in terms of gate access/distribution of activity NOTE: Development concepts illustrate major plan elements independent of 1 vs 2 terminals Concept 4 meets all program needs and provides best operational layout 12 Major plan elements Plan development Staff is recommending additional analysis of Concept 4 New widebody capable international gates on Concourse B Aircraft hold positions provided to the south and north of future gates SASA required to meet gate need, accommodate displaced facilities and provide for cargo growth Consideration of accommodating airport needs for SASA and allowance for local development goals Elimination of Concepts 1, 2 and 3 will allow staff to test variations of Concept 4 and develop a recommended alternative(s) for Commission consideration Further analysis is needed on: Potential to delay the need for second terminal Airport access and modeling to test performance of landside concepts Staff recommends carrying Concept 4 forward for additional analysis 13 Major plan elements Variations on Concept 4 Three pier gate expansion to the north U-shaped gate expansion to the north Variations on Concept 4 could involve gate layouts 14 Major plan elements Variations on Concept 4 Reconfigured cargo area with shared taxilane Reconfigured cargo area with shared landside Variations on Concept 4 could involve capacity tradeoffs in cargo functional areas 15 Major plan elements Variations on Concept 4 Aircraft maintenance in SASA Aircraft maintenance on existing air operations area Variations on Concept 4 could involve capacity tradeoffs with aircraft maintenance 16 Airside simulation modeling Modeling Objectives: Determine timing of need for aircraft hold positions Informs construction phasing Determine delay-reduction benefit of potential airside improvements at 2034 activity level Test 2034 demand against alternative facility layouts Need ultimate facility layouts before work can progress on implementation plan Requirement for aircraft hold positions south and north of future gates will likely be a critical element to managing: (1) the departure queue, (2) movements on and off the gates, and (3) overall congestion on airfield Airside modeling results inform construction phasing 17 Airside simulation modeling Modeling Approach: Model runs at 2029 & 2034 activity levels Establish refined rules base for use of gates and aircraft hold positions Gates and aircraft hold positions provided based on reasonable assumption of what can be built Test scenarios with variations on number of aircraft hold positions provided south and north of future gates Annualized delay indicates whether or not facilities provided are adequate Airside modeling tests variations on aircraft hold positions provided 18 Landside simulation modeling Current work Model Mid-term improvements & strategies Dwell time enforcement Divert demand to alternate drive and/or main garage Dedicated exit/approach for RCF buses Model 2 terminal roadway system Mid-term improvements Relocated southbound lanes of North Airport Expressway 2nd terminal ingress/egress Simulation modeling will test efficacy of improvements & strategies 19 Continuing Public Outreach Community open houses 1st Series: SAMP process, goals, forecast (March 2015) 2nd Series: Major Plan Elements (March 2016) 3rd Series: Preferred Development Alternative (Q3 2016) King County survey Q1 2016 Formal Environmental Review begins mid-2016 Ongoing engagement with tenants, operators, FAA, & TSA Series of meetings with FAA Airfield modeling Compliance with airfield design standards Approach to alternatives development and environmental review Series of meetings with airlines Airfield modeling Alternatives development Gathering input and creating wide public understanding 20 Public Outreach Complete or in Process Upcoming Round One Open Houses (Des Translated documents Moines, Seattle, Bellevue) Economic development follow-up Air Mail newsletter (ongoing) Website update Interjurisdictional Transportation Video Advisory Group Social media emphasis Airport Communities Business & Media outreach Economic Development Roundtables Focus groups Environmental community outreach SAMP notebook for Commissioners SAMP brochure Environmental Review process Social Justice outreach Round Three Open Houses (Burien, County-wide research Seattle, Eastside) Round Two Open Houses (SeaTac, Seattle, Bellevue) Commission-hosted round tables 21 Next steps Airfield Continue assessing impacts of runway/taxiway separation Complete simulation modeling and post processing of modeling results Gates Phasing plan Terminal Continued analysis of one vs two terminal concepts Landside On going capacity analysis through modeling Develop roadway layouts and assess challenges Support Airport Ops to further develop mid-term strategy & spin-off projects Support facilities Incorporate support facilities into overall development plan Determine land uses for South Aviation Support Area & timing of development Continued robust community engagement Commission-hosted roundtable discussions 22 SAMP Planning Schedule Activity forecast (completed Q1 2015) Alternatives analysis & development alternatives(s) for major elements (Q4 2014 Q4 2015) Iterative process, finalizing facility requirements and defining development alternatives Commission engagement at key decision points Development of integrated preferred alternative(s) (Q1 2016 Q3 2016) Constructability assessment Phased implementation plan Planning level cost estimates Capital program & plan of finance (Q1 2016 Q3 2016) FAA ALP review (Q4 2016 Q3 2017) Environmental review (Q1 2016 Q2 2017) 23
Limitations of Translatable Documents
PDF files are created with text and images are placed at an exact position on a page of a fixed size.
Web pages are fluid in nature, and the exact positioning of PDF text creates presentation problems.
PDFs that are full page graphics, or scanned pages are generally unable to be made accessible, In these cases, viewing whatever plain text could be extracted is the only alternative.