SU0011836 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• • Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report Page IV.A-24 • Forward Inc.Landfill 2018 Expansion Project agricultural land in San Joaquin County and the Central Valley. The project would have no • I mpact to agricultural lands and no mitigation is required. • Impact A.3: The proposed project could exceed FAA height limits for structures near airports. (Revises 2013 EIR Impact A.3) As discussed above, the nearest runway of the • Stockton Metropolitan Airport is approximately one mile west of the existing Forward Landfill. • For purposes of aircraft safety, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations (Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR)Part 77) establish height limits for structures near airports. The regulations include airport imaginary surfaces, which are three-dimensional boundaries that extend outward and upward from airport runways. An analysis of the proposed expansion's • conformity with FAR height limitations was conducted by an independent consultant retained • by the applicant, and summarized below. (Williams Aviation Consultants, 2018). FAR Part 77 Obstruction Criteria identify Mean Sea Level (AMSL) heights for Stockton • Metropolitan Airport (SCK), consisting of a horizontal imaginary surface that extends 10,000 • feet from a point 200 feet beyond the end of the nearest runway, and is 150 feet above the published airport elevation (33 feet at Stockton), or 183 feet msl. Beyond the horizontal imaginary surface, the conical imaginary surface extends upward from the horizontal surface at 20:1 for an additional 4,000 feet. Thus, obstructions greater than a height of 183 feet msl would • exceed the horizontal imaginary surface limits for the Stockton Metropolitan Airport. Outside • the 10,000-foot limit of the horizontal surface, obstructions into the conical imaginary surface that slopes upward from an elevation of 183 feet msl would exceed the conical imaginary surface limits. Both portions of the 2018 Expansion Project would not penetrate into either the • horizontal or the conical imaginary surfaces. • An analysis of the Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS) criteria was completed to determine the maximum elevation to which a structure could be erected without impacting SCK instrument approach and departure procedures. Penetration of the Obstacle Clearance • Surfaces (OCS)by a proposed structure would result in the need to increase the procedure's Minimum Descent Altitude (MDA) (the lowest altitude that a pilot can descend on an approach) and would likely receive a Hazard Determination from the FAA. The elevation of the lowest OCS is approximately 210 to 230 feet Above Mean Sea Level (AMSL) over the project area. Therefore the proposed 180.7' AMSL South Infill and 190' AMSL Northeast Infill would • not penetrate this OCS, and therefore would not have an adverse impact on arrival procedures at SCK. Each instrument approach procedure to SCK contains a Circle-to-Land option. The circle-to- • land portion of the procedure allows a pilot to approach the airport in instrument conditions • then, when the airport environment is in sight, the pilot can maneuver the aircraft to the opposite end of the runway to land. A pilot would execute this type of instrument approach procedure if the winds were not favorable for landing on the primary runway for which the procedure was designed. The surfaces which protect the Circle-to-Land consist of horizontal • circular surfaces that extend from the end of each runway. The radius of each circle is dependent on the category of aircraft utilizing the Circle-to-Land approach. A project would not impact the Circle-to-Land protected airspace if it does not penetrate the OCS described above. The proposed expansion project would not penetrate the OCS and, therefore, would not •