HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION gzt. z;u
SOUTF MEST REGION
P, 0. sox 1669
FORT WORTH, TEXAS 161D1 1
'04~N~6 6w`0
September 7, 1977
SEp 81977
C"N 0:R SEOFFIICE
Mr. William K. Cole
Assistant to the City Manager of Denton
Municipal Building
Denton, Texas 76201
Dear Mr. Cole;
Enclosed for youlr information and files are two copies of the
approved Negative Declaration covering proposed development at
Denton Municipal Airport,
Sincerely,
IGH W
W. LYON
Chief, Planning Branch, ASW-610
2 Enclosures
r'-'"-' "•A"~
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
CAM. Auguat 4, 1917 WUMVEST RC410N
A 0. sax IGH
H 0~ .Q
I~erWIX ASW-616 FORT WORTH. UXAS 78101 3
:uattcyt Decision Paper for Proposed Construction at
Denton Municipal Airport, Denton, Texas ~'~~s+►*'
FWM1 ASW-610
to. ASW-600
PROPOSED ACTION: This is to recommend approval of a 16(c)(4) Coordinated
Negative Declaration covering construction of certain improvements at
Denton Municipal Airport. The proposed development includes strengthening,
marking, lighting and extension of the existing NIS runway and taxiway
system from the present rukiway length of 4150 ft. to 6000 ft.; relocation
of Farm Road 1515 at the north end of the NJS runway; relocation of
- existing VASI-2 installation and conversion to VASI-4; installation of new
rotating beacon, lighted wind cone and segmented circle marker; strength-
ening and expansion of the existing aircraft parking apron; approach
clearing north and south of the extended runway; obstruction marking and
lighting of existing power transmission lines in the north and south
approaches to the N/S runway. A FAA ILS/ALS system is planned fot
Runway 17. The City of Denton has requested Federal assistance under
the Airport Development Aid Program, as authorized by the Airport and
Airway Development Act of 1970, ar amended.
I
BACKGROUND AND EVALUATION: An Environmental Impact Assessment Report was
prepared and an offer of an opportunity to reques. a public hearing was
published on February 2 and February 9, 1977. No requests for d public
hearing were received. Coordination of the proposal with the North
Central Texas Council of Governments has been accomplished. The record
supports the conclossion that the proposed project is consistent with
plane for the development of the area and that fair consideration has
been given to the interest of local communities.
The Negative Declaration was forwarded to appropriate Federal and state
agencies for review, including EPA and DOI. Responses to all substantive
etmments resulting from this review are included in Exhibit 11, beginning
on Page 79. No objections to the proposed development were interposej.
The Donton Municipal Airport is located within the city limits, but some
lands contiguous to the airport property lie outside the city limits in
the area of extraterritorial juriedictio•.. The City has provided a
letter (See Page 44) outlining its sutf,ority and intentions with regard
to compatible land use in the vicinity of the airport, and the require-
ments of Section 18(4) of PL 91-258 ire considered satisfied.
2
Str RMTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS i
1. Location and Area Cl-aracteristics
The City of Denton is located approximately 30 miles north of
the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex in north central Texas. The
City has experienced rapid growth in recent years, along with
other Metroplex communities. The Municipal Airport is situated
approximately 2~ miles west of the central business district in
an area zoned for light industry.
2. Purpose and Need
The intent of the proposed project is to upgrade the airport
to a basic transport category to meet the forecast aviation
needs of the community.
3. Safeguards to Avoid Short-term Effects on the Environment
All construction will be accomplished in accordance with the
provisions of Advisory Circulars 150/5370-7, "Airport
Construction Controls to Prevent Air and Water Pollution," and
150/53?U-1,1, "Standards for Specifying Construction of Airports."
4. Air, Water, Noise, Solid Waste and Visual Pollution
The increase in air and water pollutants due to construction
and aviation operations at the airport is within acceptable
limits. No significant residential or other noise-sensitive
areas lie within the forecast 100 CNR contour plot. Solid
waste is collected periodically and deposited in the City's
approved sanitary land fill. No adverse visual impact from
the proposed development is anticipated.
5. Scenic, Wildlife, Recreational, Caltural, Historical or
Archeological Areas Affected
No established scenic, wildlife, recreational areas, or known
historical or archeological sites will be adversely affected
by the proposed construction. An archeological field survey
was conducted in the area with negative results. A copy of
the archeologist's report is shown on Page 43.
6. Coordination and Consideration of the Interests of Communities
in the Vicinity of the Airport
Other than the City of Denton, there are no established com-
munities in the vicinity of tLe airport.
i s.
3
7. Displacement of Persons or Businesses
The project will result in the displacement of three
individuals and the removal of two residences and associated
outbuildings. Uniform Relocation ,ssistance and Real
Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (URARPAPA) proce-
dures will be followed.
S. Public Lands
No public lands are involved in the project.
9. DOT Section 4(f) Land
No such lands will be affected by the project,
10. Controversy, Objections or Other Adverse Comment
The proposal has been publicized locally and no adverse comments
have been received. The Negative Declaration has been coordi-
nated with appropriate Federal, state and clearinghouse agencies,
Copies of correspondence resulting from this coordination,
together with responses to the comments, are included in
Exhibit 11, Page 79, No opposition to the proposal resulted
froar the coordination.
FEDERAL FINDING: After careful and thorough consideration of the facts
developed herein, and after consultation with EPA and DOI pursuant to
Section 16(c)(4) of the Airport and Airway Development Act of 1970 re-
garding the effects of the proposed action, the undersigned finds: that
the proposed Federal action is consistent with existing national environ-
mental policies and objectives as set forth in Section 101(a) of the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA); that it will not sig-
nificantly affect the quality of the human environment or otherwise include
any condition requiring full consultation pursuant to Section 102(2)(C) of
NEPA; that there is no feasible and prudent alternative to the proposed
action; and that the proposed action includes all possible steps to mini-
mize any adverse effects. Having met all relevant requirements for
environmental consideration and consultation, the proposed action is
authorized to be taken at such time as other requirements have been met.
RECOMNDATICN: I recommend that you approve the proposed development
subject to the conditions set forth herein.
HUGH . LYON
Aje 4/~
CONCUR, '
e5-077
DATES
e ional Counsel, ASW-7
4
APPROVED:
DATE: ej-_6 7
e f S 0
ieE, Airports Divi r
DISAPPROVED: DATE:
Chief, Airports Division; ASW-600
DEPAR'!HIfNT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL AVIATION ALMINISTRATION
NWATIVE DECLARATION - 16(c) (4) COORDINATION
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT FOR
DENTON MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
DENTON, TEXAS
The City of Denton, acting through the Mayor and city Council,
proposes to construct certain improvements to the existing City-
ovned airport located on the vest side of the City, Some of these
Improvements are as recommended in an Airport Master Plan prepared
for the City in 1973. The improvements include strengthening and
extension of the existing runvay, taxiway and apron system, road
relocation, runvay and taxivay marking and lighting, VASI relocation,
ALSALS installation, and approach clearing. It is anticipated that
eligible projects vill be constructed vfth Federal financial assistance
under the Airport Development Aid Program, as authorised by the Airport
and Airvay Development Act of 19701 as amended.
Oiven hereinafter is a summary of the proposed development and an
analysis of the Impact upon the environment as prescribed by Federal
Aviation Administration Order 5050.2$
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE NO.
1. INTRODUCTION 1
II. PURPOSE I
III. PIANNING ASPECTS S
IV. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT 8
V. IMPACT OF THE PROJECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT
A. Temporary Impacts on the Environment 9
B. Permanent Impacts on the Environment 11
VI. UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 30
VII. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION 32
VIII. SHORT-TERM EFFECTS/LONG-TERM BENEFITS 34
IX. IRREVERSIBLE OR IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS
OF RESOURCES 37
X. PUBLIC HEARING 38
XI. LETTERS 39
XII. EXHIBITS 47
INTRODUCTION
The Denton Municipal Airport, a goners! aviation facility located approximately
three milos wost of the City, was constructed in 1994 by the City of Denton
with financial assistance from the Civil Aeronautics Administration, The
airport has since been administered by the City of Denton and in recent years
has expnrienced a greater than normal increase in aircraft traffic. In January,
1972 t'ne City authorized the preparation of an Airport Master Plan Study to
determine the needs at the airport. As a result of the study, a plan for improv.
ing the airport was formulated and a pre-application for federal assistance was
prepared and forwarded to the FAA by the City of .Denton. This environmental
impact assessment report describes the relationship and effects of the proposed
development t)ction upon the environment.
11. PURPOSE
The purpose of the proposed airport development action at Denton is to provide
an airport facility which will meet the needs of eixisting and forecasted aviation
demand in a safe and economical manner. To make P. reasonable forecast of
aviation demand, data on the present aviation activity was obtained by conducting
an aircraft traffic count during the months of January, February and August,
1972 and an inventory of based aircraft operations and applying forecasting
factors to the data. In addition to making a determination of the present aircraft
traffic, a forecast of based aircraft operations, general aviation operations and
-1-
business jet operations was projected for the years 1977, 1982 and 1992.
A summary of those forecasts of aviation demand are as follows:
FORk;CASST OF AVIATION DYMAND
AVIATION ACTIVITY FORECAST FOR YT-'.AR
1972 1977 1982_ 1992
Based Aircraft Operations
Single Engine Loss than Four Place 1,068 1,330 1, 440 3o240
Single Engine, Four Places & More 39,92B 70$300 80,100 99,000
Multi-Engine 10370 40440 12o360 27o600
Business Jets 0 811 1, 136 1, 786
General Aviation Operations
Itinerant 46, 870 830 105 123, 505 184, 450
Local 66, 509 k 6, 000 54,000 63, 000
Jet erations 0 895 10495 20550
Itinerant
Local 0 0 0 0
Total Operations Projected 113j379 140,000 17%000 250, 000
- 2 -
na prediction that Denton Airport could suppot•t a total of 811 annual business
jet operations prior to 1980, provided facilities were available, is a dominant
factor in determining the need for extending t%e Nor'ii-South Runway from its
present length of 4, 150 foot to 6, 000 feet.
Another factor in the development of improvements at Denton is a proposal
by the Federal Aviation Administration that an instrument landing system at
the Denton Airport wuald be necessary and desirable both to handle anticipated
training traffic and to accommodate business jots. The need for an ILS at
Denton was brought about when the FAA revised its regulations governing
training requirements for pilot licensing. Among the changes was a require-
ment that pilots receive additional training in instrument flight, This resulted
in an increase in the number of instrument approaches being flown at many
airports including those in the Dallas-Fort Worth area. While normal growth
in aircraft traffic i►t the area was taking place, other significant charges in
the airport and airspace pointed to the need for additional instrument training
facilities in the metroplex. With the opening of the Dallas-Fort Worth Airport
in 1974, the Creator Southwaii Airport was permanently closed to air traffic.
The instrument lancing system at Greater Southwest could no longer be used
for training and the traffic was diverted to other more congested airports nearby.,
While most of the airline training flights were shifted to the Waco-Connally
Airport in late 1973, general aviation tra'ning was absorbed at airports closer
to Dallas and Fort Worth. At that time only a few instrument landing systems
were available. These included the systems on DFW Airport, none of which
were twallable for training; Meacham Field in Fort Worth; and Love Field
and Addison Airport in Dallas.
.3.
In late 1973, the FAA conducted an Internal study o the problem to determine
the amount of traffic that would require use of the TLS equipment and Nvhether
or not the facilities were available in tho Dallas-Fort Worth Metropolitan
Area. The study considered the number of ILS training operations, air traffic
procedures and airspace use, in particular, possible training locations which
would be compatible with the Dallas-Fort Worth Terminal area operations,
and other factors such as convenience to users and airport layouts, Based on
this study, the Denton Municipal Airport was tentatively selected for installation
of a FAA-owned and maintained ILS and Approach Light System,
The proposed ILS would provide precision guidance to aircraft approaching
to land on Runway 17 (to the South) and is designed and sited so that the
electronic glide path would intersect the runway surface approximately 1, 000
feet past the runway and, With an existing runway only 4, 150 feet long it is
clear that additional length would be desirable for the purposes of accommodating
traffic using the ILS.
The environmental effect of the ILS and accompanying medium intensity
approach light system is discussed in Exhibit 9. The vol,ime and type of
aeronautical activity attributable to this installation are considered in the
forecast of aviation demand, Page 2.
Another important factor to consider at Dentc,n is the Demand-Capacity relation-
ship. In calculating the capacity the following factors were considered;
Forecast of Aviation Population Fleet Mix
Number and Types of Runway Exits
-4.
Percent of Touch-and-Go Operations
Ratio of Arrivals to Departures
Runway Utilisation
Based upon these factors, the capacity of the Denton Municipal Airport was
determined. An airport runway may generally be considered to have reached
capacity when delays to departures averaging 4 minutes during the normal
peak 2-hour period (adjc;cent hours) of the week. The departure delay lovol
for runways utilized by small aircraft is 2 tnirutes for the peak hour of tho
week. Applying this criteria and using data applicable to the Denton Municipal
Airport, the practical annual capacity (PANCAP) and practical hourly capacity
(PHOCAP) were calculated as follows:
PANCAP - lbq, 000 annual operations
PHOCAP - 120 operations per hour
Comparing aviation demand at the Denton Municipal Airport with these capacities,
it appears that the capacity of the airport will be exceeded during the 1960's.
The capacity can be increased slightly by adding additional exits from the run-
way to the parallel taxiway but any substantial increase in capacity will come
from constructing an additional runway,
Ili, PLANNING ASPECTS
The North Central Texas Counril of Governments (NCTCOG) has the areawide
planning responsibility for Denton County, the area where the airport is
located. The NCTCOG is a voluntary association of local governments serving
e sixteen county state planning region centered in the Dallas-Fort Worth urban
-5-
area. The NCTCOG is charged with a variety of responsibilities including:
Promotion of intergovernmental cooperation and coordination
Conducting comprehensive regional planning
Providing a forum for the study and resolution of areawide problems.
In carrying out these responsibilities, the NCTCOG Staff and their consultants
have prepared a number of planning studies for the region. Jrcluded among
the studies is a Regional Airport System Plan for the 19-county area which
constitutes the North Contral Texas and Texoma State Planning Regions. The
Denton Municipal Ali-port is one of approximately 16C airports in the nineteen
county area. The study c-)ncludes that there will be a substantial increase in
air carrier activity through the year 1990 and the available General Aviation
airports will be able to accommodate only 2.4 million of the 5. 3 million
forecast operations. In addition to the need for new General Aviation airports,
a number of existing airports will require upgrading. Of the 12 General Utility
Airports in tho nineteen county area, Denton Municipal Airport is one of two
general utility airports having the capab!Hty of becoming a basic transport
facility. When the development plan proposed for Denton is completed, the
airport will have the facilities required of a basic transport airport.
As previously stated in this assessment report, the City of Denton
has made application to the Federal Aviation Administration for federal
. 6 -
assistance to construct the proposed improvements. A review of this
application has been made by the North Central Texas Council of
Governments planning staff, the Air Transportation Technical Ad-
visory Committee, the Government Applications Review Committee
and the NCTCOG Executive Board. On the basis of this review process
the NCTCOG Board adopted the following areawide position on this
proposal;
"The NCTCOG Review Process has disclosed no conflict
with the review criteria of areawide comprehensive planning
as outlined in OMB Circular A-95 (revised), Favorable
consideration of the application by the funding agency is
recommended on the basis that it is consistent with NCTCOG's
Airport Systems Plan and will allow the City of Denton and
the FAA to proceed with the programming process of the
application. This recommendation is made with the under-
standing that an Environmental Impact Statement for the
project will be prepared for distribution to NCTCOG and
other interested agencies and individuals for full con-
sideration of the possible environmental impacts which
might result if this project is implemented."
-7-
V. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT
The following items of proposed development are shown on Exhibit 6,
Page 53.
1. Strengthen existing 4100' NIS runway and taxiway system.
2. Extend NIS runway and taxiway 1000' to the south.
3. ixtend NIS runway and taxiway 850' to the north.
4, Relocate Farm Road 1515 on north end of NIS runway,
5. Construct Medium-Intensity runway lighting system on extended
NIS runway and taxiway and construct rotating beacon, lighted
wind cone and segmented circle marker.
6. Relocate the existing Visual Approach Slope Indicator (VASI-2)
and convert to VASI-4,
7. Apply precision instrument marking to the extended NIS runway
and taxiway.
8. Strengthen and extend existing aircraft parking apron,
9. Clear approaches north and south of the extended NIS runway.
10. 6 11, Mark and light existing power transmission lines
north and south of the extended NIS runway,
Cost estimates and design considerations for the above work are included
as Exhibit 10, Page 62,
-8-
V. IMPACT OF THE PROJECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT
A. TEMPORARY IMPACTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT
During the construction of the proposed improvements at the Denton Municipal
Airport, there will necessarily be activities which will cause a temporary
effect on the environment. Included in these temporary effects are air
pollution, water pollution, noise pollution and solid wastes disposal.
1. AIR POLLU rION
Federal Aviation Administration Advisory Circ+ilar 150/5370-7, "Airport
Construction Controls to Prevent Air and Water Pollution" establishes
provisions for the control of dust generated during construction. The
specifications for constructing the i.nprovemon~s will include the provisions
of th+a FAA Advisory Circular to insure that dust emissions will conform to
Federal, State and Local regulations.
During the construction of the improvements the clearing and disposal of
trees and vegetation could be a source of potential air pollution, if the
Contractor is allowed to burn such trees and vegetation the specifications
will require that the Contractor conform to Local, State and Federal air
pollution .•egulations. It is anticipated that there will be some clearing
and disposal of trees and vegetation during the construction of the Improve-
ments.
Another possible source of air pollution during construction Is exhaust
emissions, from construction eq+sipmont. The extension of the runway,
-9-
particularly, on the South and will require a considerable quantity of
embankment construction. This type of construction will require large
earth moving equipment which emits exhaust fwnes. It is anticipated,
however, that such exhaust emissions will constilcto an insignificant
portion of total vehicular emissions in the airport area.
2. WATER POLLUTION
During the construction of the airport improvements, another temporary
impact could result if surface run-off is not controlled, thus resulting in
water pollution. Possible sources of water pollution resulting from surface
run-off include stream contamination by detergents, fuel, oil, and other
contaminants. Also uncontrolled surface run-off results in erosion of the
land, siltation and sedimentation.
Incorporation of FAA Advisory Circular 150/5370-7 into the specification
for constructing the improvements will minimize possible temporary impacts
upon the water quality in the Denton area. Specifically, run-off into streams
will be controlled by the use of drainage structures and ditches during
construction.
3. TEMPORARY NOISO IMPACTS DURING CONSTRUCTION
The improvement project at the Denton Airport will require the operation of
heavy earth moving equipment during construction. This equi?ment will
impose certain temporary noise impacts on the environment,
-10-
4. !SOLID WASTE
Small quantities of solid waste will be generated nt the airport during
the construction of the improvements. These wastes will be disposed of
in accordance with Local, State and Federal regulations and this is not
expected to be a problem.
B. PERMANENT IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT
The improvements proposed at the Denton Airport wilt cause increased
aviation activity and this activity will have definite permanent effects
on the environment. The permanent impact will be felt by both the
human environment and the natural environment.
1. IMPAC C OY HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
a. NOISE EFFECT
Improvements at the Denton Municipal Airport will cause certain
noise impacts upon the environment. Expansio•i of the airport
will cause increased activity, 3rowth, additional employment
and some noise. Sound planning and careful identification of
environmental qualities, howeve.•, can be carried out to achieve
a useful public facility while assuring the proteWon of natural
environmental values. If the required facilities at the airport
are constructed in stages as recommended, theto stages will
-11-
probably take place over a number of years. As operations
increase as a result of expanded facilities, there will be many
new environmental considerations which must be dealt with
in the operation of the airport anu aircraft noise is probably
the most significant. To assess the extent and severity of
the noiso impact, an accepted :methodology was used - the
composite noise rating (CNR) system.
The CNR procedure involves the use of generalized noise
contours to estimate community response to aircraft noise
generated by existing and future aviation activity. Contours
around an airport are adjusted to reflect anticipated subjective
response to aircraft noise. The CNR is not a noise measure-
ment; it cannot be measured on any sound meter. However,
it has been found to be a useful means of estimating the effectA
of aircraft operations on an airport's surroundsings. Below are
definitions of three'CNR zones taken from the Bolt, Berank%k
and Newman Technical Report on Land Use Planning Relating to
-12-
~x
Aircraft Noise dated October. 1964, followed by expanded definitions
adapted from material prepared by the North Central Texas Council
of Governments for use with the map entitled "Aircraft Sound Exposure,
Dallas/Fort Worth Regional Airport and Environs." elated October 14, 1971.
BBN:
Zone 1 - Less Than 100 CNR: Essentially no complaints would be expected.
The noise may, however interfere with certain activities of the residents.
Zone 2 - 100 to 115 CNR: Individuals may complain, perhaps vigorously.
Concerted group action is possible.
Zone 3 - Greater than 115 CNR: Individual reactions would likely include
repeated, vigorous complaints. Concerted group action might be expected.
NCTCOG:
Zone 1 - Zone of minimal effect. Few activities will be affected by air-
craft sounds except for especially sound-sensitive actions (such as
I auditoriums, churches, schools, hospitals, and theatres) in areas closest
F
to the airport. Sound control should be considered in the building design
of such activities. Also in areas closest to the airport, open air activities
may be disrupted. Detailed studies by qualified personnel are recommended
for outdoor amphitheatres and like places of public assembly. Otherwise,
.13-
so far as aircraft sound is concerned, generally all uses may be
acceptable.
Zone 2 - Middle zone of effect. Activities where uninterrupted commi,nica-
tion is essential should consider sound exposure in design. Generally,
residential development is not considered a suitable use although multi-
family developments where sound control features have been incorporated
in building design might be considered. Open-air activities and outdoor
living must consider aircraft sound. The construction of auditoriums,
schools, churches, hospitals, and theatres and like activities should be
avoided within this zone where possible.
The following types of uses may generally be considered without any special
sound treatment: agricultural uses, mining, fishing; wholesale commercial
and some retail, industrial/manufacturing, transportation, communication
utilities and cemeteries.
The following types of uses may be considered without any special sound
treatment except when near Zone 3: livestock farming and animal breeding;
golf course, riding a tables, water-based recreational areae and cemeteries.
The following types of uses may be considered o_ my if sound treatment is
included in building design: multi-family apartments, dormitories, group
quarters, orphanages, retirement homes, etc; transient lodging, e. g. ,
motels and hotels, office buildings, personal, business and professional
-14-
services; retail commercial, movie theatres, restaurants; and noise-
sensitive types of manufacturing and communications uses.
Zone 3 - Zone of greatest effect. Lanr' ahould be reserved for activities
that can tolerate high level of sound exposure such as some agricultural,
industrial, and commercial uses. Such sound-sensitive activities as
schools, offices, hospitals, churches, and like activities should not be
constructed in this area. No residential developments of any type are
recommended. All regularly occupied structures should consider sound
control in design.
Exhibit 7 shows the CNR noise contours which would be produced by
1977-lovel operations of twin and single engine piston aircraft on the
existing 9150-foot runway. Exhibit 7 also shows `he CNR contours
i
produced by 1992-level operations which are forecasted to occur if the
proposed runway extensions are not constructed.
Exhibit 8 shows the CNR noire contours which would be produced by
forecasted 1992-level operations if the existing 4150 foot runway were
extended to the proposed 6000 foot configuration. Of course since the
6000 foot runway allows the operation of business jets, both turbofan
and turbojet aircraft were considered in the analysis, in addition to the
twin and single engine general aviation aircraft.
-15-
It should be noted that Zone 3 is not shown on either exhibit because
it is very small and contained entirely within the airport boundaries.
The most critical contour set of the three presented in this aFSessment
is shown on Exhibit 8. The CNR 100 contour on that exhibit produces
a Zone 2 with limits between 5700 feet north of the present North runway
end to a point approximately 8200 feet south of the present South runway
end. An analysis of the contours using exhibits, aerial photographs and
ground inspections and surveys, results in the following findings:
(1) Several farm buildings located approximately 2200 feet North of
the runway end including houses, barns and silos are located within CNR
Zone 2. The residents of these buildings will be relocated,
(2) No hospitals, clinics, schools, parks, rest homes or areas of
public assembly are located within Zone 2.
(3) CNR Zone 1 is that area lying outside of the 100 CNR Contour.
Only especially sound-sensitive activities close to Zone ' wouli, be
affected. Currently, approximately 50 residences are located between
the 90 and 100 CNR contours, No other sound-sensitive activities exist
within this area.
b. LAND USE AND COMMUNITY PATTERNS
Denton is a rapidly growing urban center in North Central Texas
characterized by urban expansion and moderate industrial expansion.
-1b-
7 7
Contributing factors include the booming growth of two large state colleges
within the cities boundaries and a state children's school and the intensive
growth of the Dallas-Fort Worth Metropolitan Complex to the south. A
community having a well-planned airport with complete physical facilities
can attract now business and industry into the community and provide jobs
and tax dollars which are necessary to the growth and well being of the
community.
The Municipal Airport is situated approximately 1. 7 miles West of 125 on
Farm Road 1515. Some industrial growth has occurred in the area between
the airport and the Denton urban area.
The improvements to the Denton Airport are expected to be a stimulus to
further industrial growth Wrst of the city. As highway and street improve-
menu develop, such as the extension of Loop 288 around the Western part
of the city, further urbanization and industrialization will 'Likely occur.
co LAND USE PLAN Ilk' TON
The city of Denton has carefully considered the affects of the proposed
airport expansion and its land-use plans for the Western portion of the
city. Steps have been taken and will continue to be In1en to assure that
uses made of the land will be compatible with the airport. The actions
being taken are stunmarized on the following page;
-17-
I. A land use plan has bean prepared to aid the Denton City
Council and staff in making decisions concerning the area
West of Denton in which the airport is the major planning
factor.
2. The City of Denton has a master street plan and the alignment
of proposed streets will reflect the needs at the airport.
3. The proposed alignment of Loop 288 which affects the
airport has been officially adopted as part of the Cit}y's
plan.
4. Zoning applications in the area around the airport will be
acted upon by the city and disposition of each will be
generally consistent with the airport.
d. AIRPORT ACCESS
The Denton Airport is conveniently located, being situated approximately
1.7 miles West of Interstate 35 on Farm Rcad 1515. Direct routes from
the Central Business District to the airport are available along the Oak
Street corridor to Interstate 35, access to Interstate 35 from the North
and Fast parts of the city is available along Uni-+ersity Drive which has
been improved to thoroughfare status. Approximate driving time from
the CBD is now 20 minutes.
-la-
Loop 288 which traverses the Eastorn perimeter of Denton is planned
as an eventual loop highway which will be located in close proximity
to tie airport property, and will provide convenient access for growth
areas. As the airport becr^mes a more vital part of the community,
particular routes to the ai-ip t from the central business district and
suburban areas will require improvements to provide good access to
the facility as well as to serve other transportation needs. As highway
and street improvements develop, such as the extension of Loop 288
around the Western part of the City, the airport facility and its need
for good access should be considored. Upon completion of Loop 288
the approximate driving time to the airport should be reduced to In
minutes. At this point in time access to the airport should be considered
excellent.
e. DIVISION OR DISRUPTION OF ESTABLISHED COMMUNITIES
As there are no established communities in the immediate airport area,
the development and operation of the airport is not expected to divide or
disrupt any established community or divide existing uses such as cut-off
residential areas :rim recreational or shopping areas in the vicinity of
the airport.' The nearest residential areas of concentration of people
include the City of Denton Z. 5 miles to the East, the town of Krum, 4. 4
miles to the Northwest, the town of Argyle, 5 miles to the South and
the town of Sanger, 10. 5 miles to the North.
-19.
. _r
f. RELOCATION OF PERSONS
As discussed previously, the occupants of farm residences North of the
airport will be displaced by the project. The project will not divide or
disrupt an established community and no unusual problems in the
relocation are anticipated.
The persons who must be displaced will receive assistance consistent with
the "Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies
Act of 1970," Public Law 91-646. The following relocation assistance
procedures will be adhered to by the City of Denton.
1. An investigation will be made to determine the number of
individuals and families that will be displaced, after which a survey
will be conducted to determine the availability of suitable replacement
housing within the means of those displaced. Replacement housing
supplements, if applicable, will be determined. Each displaced
person will be given at least 90 days' notice before being required
to move.
The City of Denton will maintain personal contact with, and exchange
information with other agencies, including social welfare, urban renewal,
.20.
public housing authorities, Federal Housing Administration, Veterans
Admiaistration, and the F,?-aeral Housing Administration, Veterans
Administration, and the Small Business Administration. Contact will
also be maintained with private sources such as real estate brokers,
multiple listing service, and apartment ownern and operators. News-
paper files will be maintained to give Information on properties for
sale, available rentals, and other replacement housing information.
In addition, maps will be maintained showing the location of schools,
parks, playgrounds, shopping centers, and public transportation routes.
Also, FHA and VA booklets and information concerning local ordinances
and building codes and data concerning such cost as utility depsoits,
closing costs, and interest rates and terms will be made available.
Each displaced person will be advised on the information available, and,
as relocation progresses, any needed service such as providing contact
with public agencies or private firms, will be furnished on an individual
basis. Close contact will be maintained with each displaced person
-21-
r 77-
until his or her move has been completed and all payments to which he
or she is entitled have been paid.
Based on a preliminary survey, adequate replacement housing will be
available in a number of locations in the Denton area.
The proposed project will not proceed until all displaced persons have
been relocated into, or offered decent, safe and sanitary housing that
is open to all persons, regatdless of race, color, religion, sex, or
national origin; is consistent with the requirements of Title V11I of
the Civil Rights Act os 1968; and is within the financial means of the
displaced family or individual. Similar procedures will insure fair
and equitable treatment and payments to the affected business.
As indicated on Exhibit 8, several other residences are located further
North of the -airport. None of these are proposed to be acquired as
part of this project.
.22-
2. IMPACT ON THE NAT'.TRAL ENVIRONMENT
The effects of the proposed airport on the natural environment may be
divided into the following areas-
Wildlife breeding, nesting, or feeding grounds
Acquatic or marine life
Wildlife refuges, waterfowl areas, and flood plain areas
Recreation areas
Historical, archeological, and scenic sites
Air pollution
Water pollution and sewage treatment
a. IMPACT ON WILDLIFE BREEDING. NESTING, OR FEEDING
GROUNDS
Inasmuch as the proposed airport improvements will be an extension
to an existing, active airport, no interference wil.h wildlife breeding,
nesting, or feeding grounds is anticipated. Review of area information
indicates that no such officially designated area exists within % 20 mile
radius of the proposed airport.
The only known species which occupy the area around the Denton Airport
Include the mourning dove, cottontail rabbits, coyotes and grey squirrel.
It is not expected that any of these species will be endangered by the
improvements to the airport. The mourning dove, a migratory fowl,
does not have a permanent nesting and feeding ground and fields adjacent
to the airport improvements will be undisturbed and available to them.
.23-
1
r
Alternate wildlife breeding, nesting and feeding grounds for rabbits,
coyotes and squirrels are also available in adjacent fields and along
Hickory Creek and other creeks in the close proximity of the airport.
b. IMPACT ON AQUATIC AND MARINE LIFE
The principal source of potentipl impact on aquatic and marine life
resulting from this project is surface runoff. The paving of additional
land for runways, taxiways and apron will result in additional surface
runoff; however, it is not anticipated that the magnitude of Phis
additional runoff will be sufficient to influence measurably- the flow
or characteristics of streams in the area.
Some aircraft washing may be anticipated at the airport. However,
wash water will generally be absorbed into the ground surrounding
aircraft parking areas and will not reach streams in unfiltered form.
On the basis of these conditions, the proposed project is not anticipated
to have any effect on aquatic or marine life.
c. IMPACT ON WILDLIFE REFUGES, WATERFOWL AREAS
AND FLOOD PLAIN AREAS
There are no wildlife refuges or waterfowl areas in the vicinity of the
proposed airport; therefore, no adverse effects upon such will be
produced by the new airport. The runway extension at the South end of
the North.-South Runway will project into the flood plain of Hickory Creek,
but thesti improvements are not expected to have any effect on wildlife
in the are%*
-24-
d, IMPACT ON RECREATION AREAS
Thera are no recreation areas in the vicinity of the airport and
therefore no impact is anticipated.
e. IMPACT UPON HISTORICAL, ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND
SCENIC SITES
Review of the com.nunities in the area of the air=port indicates no
adverse impact upon historical, archaeological, or scenic sites
due to the absence of such sites in the vicinity of the airport. (see
Archeologist's report in Section XI.)
f. AIR POLLUTION
Air quality at an airport is directly related to the various sources
of air contaminants that exist at the airport. These Include:
Aircraft
Ground vehicles
Stationary sources
-25-
In addition, the air quality at an airport is influenced by meteorological
conditions (wind direction, wind velocity, atmospheric stability, etc.)
which affect the dispersion of airborne contaminants generated by airport
pollution sources. Furthermore, non-airport sources of air pollution can
affect the air quality at the airport under certain meteorological conditions.
In the calculation of aircraft emissions, the general practice is co include
only ground operations *of the aircraft and in-flight operations below 3,500
feet altitude (ACL). Emissions at higher altitudes cannot be considered
in the same light as those emitted at or near ground level due to major
differences in diffusion at higher altitudes and differences in efficiency of
aircraft engine operation. Calculation of emissions based on operations
below 3, 500 feet has become accepted practice for use in Congressional
investigations pursuant to the Clean Air Act of 1967 as well as in airport
planning studies. Total emissions below 3, 500 feet are estimatee on the
basis of the landing-takeoff (LTO) cycle, which includes approach, landing,
taxiing, takeoff, and climbout. Though only about 20 percent of total air-
craft fuel is consumed during the LTO cycle, about 80 percent of all
aircraft airborne contaminants are emitted during this phase of aircraft
operation, The amount of contaminant emissions in each phase of the LTO
cycle is dependent on a number of factors such as waiting time, length of
taxiway, rate of climb, delays, etc.
-26-
Because of the presence of impurities in fuels or incomplete combustion,
the following five pollutant materials are produced during each phase
of the LTO cycle-
• Carbon monoxide (0)
• Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
• Sulfur dioxide (S02)
• Hydrocarbons (HC)
• Particulate matter (C)
Calculation of aircraft emissions was performed combining the following
factors for operating conditions at the proposed airport.
• The type of aircraft and volume of operations expected at the airport.
• The known specific emissions for those specific aircraft utilized.
• The fuel consumption during a complete landing and takeoff {LTO)
cycle for the various aircraft types.
Following is a summary of annual emissions levels generated by the airport
including both aircraft and ground traffic emissions for the forecast level of
activity anticipated when the airport reaches capacity.
-27-
AIRPORT-GENERATED AIR POLLUTION LOAD
Tons per Year
Pollutant Surface-Generated Aircraft-Generated Total
CO Negligible 893.8 893.8
NOx " 5.4 5.4
S02 " 1.5 1.5
NC " 33.2 33.2
Particulate " 1. 6 1.6
Total 935.5
This data indicates the following:
• Forecasted air pollution load attributable to the airport is small and
will comprise an extremely small percent of the total air pollution generated
in the area. The two factors causing the aircraft-generated air pollution
load to be small are the type of aircraft using the airport ane. the volume
of operations at the airport.
• Surface-generated air pollution load will be negligible because the
amount of surface transportation induced by the presence of the airport
will be minimal as noted in the discussion of access,
g. WATER POLLUTION AND SEWAGE TREATMENT
Two potential sources of water pollution will exist upon completion of the
-28.
t
airport development - surface runoff and wastewater (sewage). Increased
surface runoff will result from extension of the runway, taxiway, aircraft
parking apron, and similar facilities. Because these paved areas comprise
such a small portion of the land area surrounding the airport, it is sot
anticipated that a significant increase in surface runoff well result, nor is
it anticipaled that this small increase in storm water runoff will materially
affect the flow of streams in the area.
Increased aviation activity at the airport could increase the potential for
water pollution and facilities to eliminate these problems will.be necessary.
As aviation activity grows, a means of properly treating domestic sewage,
industrial wastes and other airport wastes becomes more critical. The
present method of treating wastewater at the airport is by septic tank and
the field. The City has recently improved this system and it should have
suffice ent capacity for the present level of operations. Also recently the
City voted Lends to extend water and sewer service to the airport and the
City's water and waste treatment systems should be available when additional
capacity is needed at the airport.
Fuel spillage on the apron areas is a potential pollution problem. When
this occurs the fuel or oil is often carried by storm water runoff or by
water from aircraft washdown areas into waste treatment plants or open
streams. Fuel separators which will separate and store waste aircraft
fuel can be constructed to prevei:t this type of pollution. The two creeks
-29.
located in the vicinity of the airport, Hickory Creek and dry fork of
Hickory Creek, are subject to possible erosion caused by storm water
runoff from the airfield areas of the airport. Drainage channels which
receive discharge from the storm sewer system should be sodded or
lined with concrete to prevent erosion and possible silting of the natural
streams.
h. WATER TREATMENT
Water at the airport is supplied through connections to the city water system.
The city water system is approved by state and federal agencies.
L EFFECTS O THE `
r N WATER 1 ABLE OF THE AREA
Operation or construction of improvements at the airport are not expected to
have an effect on OLe water table as the pr'ncipal water supply is expected to
come to the airport through a pipe system.
J. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
Solid Waste collection and disposal at the airport is performed by the Sanitation
Department of the City. The solid waste is deposited in a city-owned landfill
and this landfill has been approved by the Texas State Health Department.
V1. UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The proposed airport development action will impose certain unavoidable
adverse environmental effects; however, the magnitude and extent of thes6
impacts are consf.dered minimal. Each of these impacts is summarized
on the following page.
-30-
NOISE
The proposed airport improvements at Denton will impose a limited noise
effect upon areas not previously afft;:Eed ?ue to the extension of the runway
to 6, 000 feet. The new runway lacngth will attract some business jet aircraft
and it is expected that these aircraft will impose a noise impact which will
generally be confined to the airport property and to land currently devoted
to agricultural uses.
WATER POLLUTION
The proposed improvements will cause a small increase in surface runoff,
thus creating an increase potential for adverse affects upon water quality
due to erosion, siltation and sedimentation. These effects will be minimized
by the use of accepted engineering principles.
AIR QUALITY
The improvements at the Denton Airport will result in a small increase in
air pollution due to increased aircraft activity and surface transportation to
and from the airport. It is expected that the total emissions level will be
minimal and therefore the impact on the quality of the air will be moderate.
-31-
VII. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION
In preparing recommendations for airport development actions, a variety
of alternatives were considered. Included among these are;
Do-Nothing alternative
a'spansion of existing facilities
Construction of a new airport on a new site.
An analysis of each of these alternatives is presented below.
Do-Nothing Alternative
The do-nothing alternative is unacceptable for the following reasons. First,
potonti3l aviation activity at the Denton Airport indicates a need for improve-
ments which will allow the airport to accommodate business jet aircraft. The
type of aircraft expected at Denton will require a 6, 000 foot runway. The
present runway length is 4, 150 feet and therefore the runway must be extended
to accommodate the expected demand for services.
Second, the Denton Airport has been tentatively selected for installation of
a FAA owned and maintained instrument larding system and approach lighting
system. The purpose of this installation is to provide an airport in the Dallas-
Fort Worth area for ILS Training Operations. Denton has been determined
as a compatible location with the Dallas-Fort Worth Terminal Area Operations
for such a training site.
Third, the existing runway pavement at the Denton Airport has begun to spall
and is seriously in need of rehabilitating. The do-nothing alternative would
-32.
not be wise in view of the multi-million dollar inventment at the airport
by the City of [Denton.
EXPANSION OF YXISTING FACI ATIP_S
Expansion of the existing Denton Airport is possible and desirable. A
description of the proposed development action is described elsewhere
in this report and a logical segiience for constructing the proposed
improvements is as follows;
1. Overlay North-South Runway,
2. Relocate FM 1515.
3. Extend North-South Runway and Taxiway 850 feet to north,
reconstruct lighting system and rel;;cate VASI-2 on north
end, North-South Runway,
4. Construct Instrument Landing System,
5. Extend North-South Runway and Taxiway, 1000 feet on south
end, extend lighting system and convert VASI-2 to VASI-4.
6. Strengthen existing taxiways and apron.
CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW AIRPORT ON A NEW SITE
Construction of a new airport an a new site and abandonment of the
existing airport is not recommended, Using present clay construction costs,
such a plan would not be economicalli, sound and would be wasteful. The present
-33-
airport facility requires some remedial construction but is generally in
good condition.
VIII. SHORT-TERM EFFECTS/LONG-TERM BENEFIT
Short-Term Effects
The proposed airport development action w,ll impose certain temporary
effects upon the area surrounding the airport site. Included among these
are fugitive dust emissions generated during construction, especially by
site preparation work. In order to minimize the potential for generation
of dust during construction, construction specifications for this project
will include the provisions stated in FAA's Advisory Circular 150/5370-7,
"Airport Construction Controls to prevent Air and Water Pollution."
Adherence to these specifications during construction will also serve to
I
minimize the potential for erosion and siltation generated by the surface
run- off.
Long-Term Benefit
.~%n airport development action of the type described in this report will
produce and induce a number of positive effects upon the community served
by the airport. These effects are treated in subsequent paragraphs under
two broad headings economic benefits and socio.environmental benefits.
i
I
-34- I
I
Economic Benefits
The proposed ~.irport expansion will produce both direct and indirect
economic effects. Included among these are;
Direct effects - The direct econornic benefits accruing to the
communities will take the form of increased jobs arid income attributed
to the operation of the airport. If the forecasted levels of aircraft
operations materialize, as they should, it may be safely stated that a
LAI, t?me airport manager and support staff will be required. These
jobs and incomes may be termed direct economic benefits of the
proposed project.
• Indirect effects - The proposed airport expansion will also
produce several secondary and tertiary economic effects within the
community. These secondary effects include the jobs and incomes
created within the community as a result of increased sales and sorvices
to the airport and airport users.
-35-
Tertiary benefits are perhaps the most important affect, however, and
include such factors as savings in travel time for airport users and the
provision of adequate airport facilities as part of the communities' service/
institutional infrastructure. Clearly, if airport users in the Denton area
are compelled to use more distant airports because of inadequate airport
facilities, then each trip to and from an alternative airport will exact
a travel time cost, contribute to traffic congestion and air pollution,
and produce unnecessary consumption of gasoline through extra driving.
These effects will be averted by the provision of a convenient, expanded
airport facility.
In terms of the airport's contribution to area communities' infrastructure,
come background is necessary. Economists concerned with economic
development in underdeveloped national regions as well as in economically
advanced areas have recognized the essential nature of adequate transporta-
tion facilities and services as a precondition for optimal growth. Such
facilities comprise a part of what is termed social overhead capital (SOC).
SOC also includes other public and quasi-public facilities and services
such as schools, hospitals, and policA/fire protection.
While it must be acknowledged that the Denton area is not economically
underdeveloped or deprossed because of inadequate SOC, the proposed airport
expai,sion will add to the area's appeal to light inuustries and other businesses
which operate corporate aircraft. The effect will be to make the area more
attractive for new business locations.
-36.
Mhrs~
• Socio-Environmental effects - Tho proposed airport development
action will provide the 19-county NCTCOG study area with an essential
component in the region's airport system study. The disruptive effects
will be minimal, as noted previously.
IX. IRREVERSIBLE OR IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES
The proposed airport development action will involve no irreversible or
irretrievable commitments of resources except that the labor a•Ad materials
associated with construction of the airport improvements will be consumed
in the implementation of the project. It is not possible to accurately predict
the amount of fuel and other materials that will be consumed by the con-
struction. The best indication of the committment of resources is cost.
-37-
X, PUBLIC HEARING
A notice of an opportunity to request a public hearing was published
in the local newspaper on February 2 and February g, 1977. No
requests for a hearing were received, (See letter and publisher's
affidavit in Section YI.)
-38.
xI. LETTERS
PAGE N0.
A. City of Denton - Public Hearing 40
S. North Texas State University - Archeologist's Report 43
C. City of Denton - Compatible Land Use 44
D. North Central Texas Council of Governments 46
-39-
o~
GitY Of Denton s-o Municipal Building, Dent07t 7 xas 76201
.
(ss RYCIOY
~ I ~Ia;oass
March 7, 1977 (MAR 14 1g)7
,^.tilrf Ixo
Gee
Mr, Steve Stuckey
P, 0. Box 1669 Fort worth, Tx. 76101 Oear Steve: C7
FAA Litizi
Enclosed is the publisher's affidavit for a Notice of Oppor-
tunity For a Public Hearing. As you probably know, we received
no requests for a public hearing.
Let me know if You need anything else.
Sincerely,
William K. Cole
Assistant to the City Manager
- WKC/fs
Encl. .
-40-
IIEHF•;1'ASTETI[ENOTICEfly P114. Nit,
PUBLICATION CUI' FROM PAPER -
I '~fORPUSLPCHeA
The Cityy ,'f Denton intends to ' INTIlP: ,11,1'1"fF;li O1"I'lIF;
'ubmll f0 the Federal Aviation
Administration a request for
Fedoraf fowl to hetP If curt' fo
out
- - the to UOwlnO0 development of Denton MunJctpat Alrport, Denton,
Texas?
1. Strengthen Exlnt;ng 4,130 Fool
North -South Runway and Taxiway
Syyuem
L Extend North South Runway
and taxiway 1,006 Fee, to the
South - -
3- Extend North South Runway
and Tsxtway 850 Feel to the North
HorIh SMddof N th South Runway AFFIUAVITOF 1'(1111,ISIIF
S, construct Medium 11 T()
Runway Lighting PUBLICATION OF LEGAL NOTICE Intomsity
COW FOd ?lorlh SYSIam on the PUBLICATION South Runway
and Taxfws System Dry Con.
strucf Rotatrng leacon, Lighted
Windcom and Segmented Circle
S. Relocalo Exists visual
Cert fo 919 il Indic or•t and F'€Irt; Ihr• ~_tlay
IfMtcatorJ PProach slope
1. Construct Precision Instrument
Men king on LOCO Pelly North South t 9~`
S Strengthen and Eland Existing
AlrcreN Parking Ago"
f. Clear AAprach Areas on North
and South End 4,060 Foot North.
South Runway
A10ondW*ra TrannsmLiss Line)sIeeuKf,yn _
E, MarktInd~L hi TP&f 10 KY.
Powertranamh' LIn#onNorth
End, North•South Runway
Array Parson may request that on
open pubtic hearing be had for the
POPOSe of conslderlr the socialtt
economic and any ronmemo
effect' of the airppoort location and lltgnrl~
its conslstmWif with the goals and
fo has been arrriedboauutpfor th s
,area.
Fors requast for "Ic haarl. fo
be honOf0d, a 'Ignad, Writ}M
requost muff tiAe III D1 mall or In
rsgrn and n,,feivsd not later IMP
tAa 0%fke 2111th he City Secrifiry
WCity Nall, Oenton, Texas 1001. A
document wmmaririno the kn•
pail which the V0 %-a proied Is
expected to have upon the en.
vironmenl hae been Prepared and
review, la In fhi o0ft ce Of Person the C~ nOr h
Socr ourstffor N 1ys1 Qatnall ys iWlowins
fx+bfkoftan of thIs notice and of for
to any he4nt1"' whe ra
f011>t R
Rkhsrd 0. Stewart
ChalrMan, + n
lr rt 'Cf:rMDenton
A
• ua~ p, I port vffory Board
5~ -41-
IN THE AIATTF,R OF
I Y OF DENTO
•riw s'rATE OF TEXAS
Hoy Conn I), edDenlHoy Appleton, Jr.
bring duly sworn, says he is the Ceneral Manager of the Denton Record•Chronicb'. a newspapa-r
of general circulation which has been continuously and regularly published for a period of not
less than one year In the County of Denim, Texas, preceding the date of the attached notice. and
Ihat the sold notice was published In said paper on the following IlalesI
NOTICE OF CPPORTttHITy FOR A PUBLIt~HEARING Cit
rungs to help it carry out the followi~ Extend~NorthUSouthoruwAeral
Construct Medium intensity Runway Lightin~System...Mark and Light TP•A L
60XV...person may request that an open marizing the impact which the proposed p h sum,
p rrooJ ct is s exp expectted ed to to ha ve...
available...30 clays following publication of th noti -
February 2, 9, 1977
Subscribed and sworn to before nie this 2Bth__ day of Y ----February
19 1'
Witness my hand and official seal.
t a ~i y rte. ,
j Notary Publt D Iton ('a►n WI
xas
-42.
1177
(}r ~~r + April 7, 1977
+ North Texas
Slate
University
Uenton, Texas
76203
hislItute -
of
Mr. King Cole Applied
City Manager, City of W nton Sciences
Municipal Building
Denton, TX 76201
Dear Kings
This letter is a report on the results of an archaeological survey
of approximately l0g a::es to be affected by the proposed City of
Denton Airport enlargement. •
The survey was designed to locate and evaluate any cultural
resources which would be adversely affected by the proposed construction
and to identify cultural sites eligible for nomination to the National
Register of Historic Places.
A Research Archaeologist and student assistants from the Institute
of Applied Sciencos, North Texas State University, conducted an intensive
on-foot survey of the enlargement area. The portion of the land owned by
Mr. 6. A. Weaver was not surveyed because access was not granted.
Visual inspection of the proposed enlargement areas failed to reveal
the presence of any cultural resources. Much of the area was covered by
thick vegetation or recent flood debris and was thus inaccessible for
evaluation. The negative results of the survey do not procludc the
possibility'that subsurface resources will be found during cnnstruction
operationsf 11"these are encountered, they should ix: reported in order
that they may be properly recorded. Our past experience in this and
nearby areas, however, indicates that: the probability of such finds is
unlikely.
Sincerely,
tc
i.t-ol L
Olin P. McCormick
Research Archaeologist
OFM/ms
-43-
VACity of Denton o Arttitiril)(d Bit ilding. Denton, kras 76201
March 17, 1977
Mr Hugh W. Lyon
Chief, Planning Branch
Federal Aviation Administration
Southwest Region
P.O. Box 1669
Fort Worth, TX 76101
P T'%~~; ^
Dear Mr. Lyon t
This letter is in response to your inquiry concerning
Denton's jurisdictional authority to regulate land
development in the area surrounding the airport. The
Denton Municipal Airport is located on the west side of
the city just within the present city boundaries. There
is a limited area on the perimeter of the north and
south aides of the airport property, and an extensive
area on the east side of the airport property that is
within the city and subject to zoning control. The
airport property itself is zoned Light Industrial while
the surrounding property is zoned Agricultural. For
properties outside the present city boundaries, Denton
has the right of subdivision review and approval for a
two mile radius making up our Extra Territorial Juris-
diction area.
While the present zoning and subdivision tools do provide
a degree of protection, it is the staff opinion that these
controls are not fully adequate to insure that incompatible
development does not occur on the perimeter of the airport.
We are certainly An agreement that this area needs special
development standards to protect both the airport operation
and surrounding property owners. The city planning staff
is investigating several ways to provide this protection.
The most direct a preach would be to annex into the city
the area that will be adversely affected by airport noise
and to design a special zoning classification that. would
exclude most residential development. It is our intention
-44.
Mr, Hugh W. Lyon
Page 2
March 17, 1977
that a staff recommendation proposing development stan-
dards in the airport area will be submitted to the de-
cision makers during the next several months. These
proposals will, of course, be coordinated with the
s ecial height requirements developed to prevent flight
obstructions.
If we can provide additional information, please contact
me.
Sincerely,
s ~
John Lavretta
Director of Planning
JL:dw
-43- ,
,rli''l;entrat:lems Council L)l bavernrnonfA
$f U.;;1nq
^ Frye t~ KEASF 001
I EPISOK£ NVUBER NY'IIBER Jul 2,9 44~
Tl7
P O E7rrvibr COO A,t~r,trtc~+, tora& 7t;011
(817) 640.3300 ^rl,,,, ,
MU SALSr AI)
GYrSS)
NcTcoa
C f ! O. 011AWN COO
.L ~ AR[INOI ON.7LK. 74011
v June 24, 1976 n
f~- Z.
Mr. Jim W. Whita
City Managor, City of Denton RE: 6-06-03000, Received May 10, 1
Municipal Building, Airport Improvements Project
`"'J' _
Denton, Texas 76201 Denton Municipal Airport ur':"Yf ~
FIL& _
Dear Mr. White:
Your opplicotion for a grant in the amount of $1,656,038 from the Department of Tranrwriotion,
rudorai Aviation A&ilrilstrotion for the a~ova entitled project I,as been reviewed by the
North Central Texas Council of Governments. This roviow included the notification of i
potentially affected local governments including Denton ISD and Denton County. These I
local governments were Invited to comment on she local impact of the proposal, however,
no response to this notification has been received as of this date.
In addition, the project was reviewed for appropriate area-wide concerns. This review
process included consideration by appropriate NCTCOG planning staff, by tho Air Trans-
portotion Technical Advisory Committee on Juno 2, by tha Government Applications Review
Committee on June 16, and by the NCTCOG Executive Board on June 23. On the basis
of that review process, the Board adopted the following aromAde position on this propcsoh
"The NCTCOG Review Process has disclosed no conflict with the
review criteria of areawide comprehensive planning as outlined in
OMB Circular A-95 (revised). Favorable consideration of the
application by the funding agency is recommended on the basis that
It is consistent with NCTCOG's Airport Systems Plan and will allow
the City of Denton and the FAA to proceed with the programming
process of the application. This recommendation is made with the
understanding that an Environmental Impact Statement for the project
will be prepared for distribution to 14CTCOG and othsr Interested
agencies and Individuals for full consideration of the possible environ-
mental impacts which might result If this project Is Implemented."
We sincerely thank you and your staff for your kind cooperation in this molter, and if we
con be of further service or assistance, please feel free to call upon us,
Sin rely,
• ~ Vicak
-46- William J. Pit Executive Director
cr. rnnrne D. Conlev. Actinn Chief. FAA
E X H I B I T S
PACE NO.
1, Location Map 48
2, Airport location in Dallas-Ft. Worth
Terminal Control Area 49
3, Airport location in Relation to
Terrain and Drainage Features 50
4, Denton Municipal Airport Service
Area 25 51
5, Relationship of the Denton Municipal
Airport to Dallas - Ft. Worth Metropolitan Area 52
6. Airport Development Plan 53
7. OR Noise Map 4150-Ft. Runway 54
8. OR Noise Map 6,000-Ft. Runway 55
9. Environmental Assessment of a Standard Category I
Instrument Landing System 56
10. Project Design and Cost Considerations 62
11. Coordination Comments and Responses 79
-47.
' .I
{r~r
I
.J N x
w
_ %
aQ
W J
4 ~
o z - - v - O
Q 0 N w Q
~i li} u
N L Oa v ~ m•I = n H z ~
J v CC o
f 0
Z
Z
Y
U
000
C-3 ~y /lo,.
o L)
N
a
J V
scQ UI A
i
° 09£ 'H'S
O
' 35 E N
v Z ° a~~~~ t = i-
W U 0 .
o 0
Z N ti J~ Li N tY % F
t
F- D Z ►a-
o N 0 V ,t 0
ck: y 20 ► Z p 4j
O ~S cn I U.S. ~ tb d ~
-49- ~ ~ ~f o •i ~
DENTON AIRPORT
1' A
- 1 lwl7c? .I . r } Ilk Oct .'°itl 111."•( aYn' i` ,1 ri .rt'irR
ra f t~ 1
~y~1~lt r~a~u,~. '•Y. --4 ~s_.J i. Yin./ 1. `rr ~Ir • +4
.I l II(/i \rrll I ~ •1..~%r~ , - '~1=: i. 1{~i
p J sJ~,yl
ti
I c :r ai. • r'Jt :'W a ,1. ~ i ~ Pyf . r. !f'~'?~`~I t ~ ~ , ,
r )-F W AIRPORT s
r•yM •„1.?' tip', S ,,t,
" 1 ~ , 1 rr • 1 y i .
s
ir, ' r• ~ ,il H y. i ,
r
1 11 ~ h 1 ; SF _ ~,y. w, w
« •1 r
IM ' ~ 1 M .~M A I' .
wit
r~ F
1 ct
men
,.r i ~t r7 r' M i 1
AIRPORT LOCATION IN DALLAS-FT WORTH
TERMINAL CONTROL AREA
-49-
10 EXHIBIT 2
SCALE IN STATUTE MILES
y co
16
1lYll f)
it 0
ell) j
tLi
-o r a~O
(NIJ
a p 02,
a~a
a O a ai
1' r
1 1 1 i h ~ `w-
T I ttS ♦ ~ f 1
I i ~ r ~ 1 U 1 1"~
rf ~
oil
1
j O 1 * W
1• 1
l
Q 1 f 1} 2
u
-50- N
COOKE GFANNIN
21 22 23
WISE DENTON COLLIN
24 25 ?6 HUNT
28
ROCK-
WALL
PALO PINTO PARKER 27
9 WffINSNO 3 iAacA
KAUFMAN
30
HOOD-
SOMERVELL
JOHNSON
32 33 ELLIS
ERATH 34
31
NAVARRO
35
DENTON MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
SERVICE AREA 2$
-51-
IMPA R, JACQiS L FINMA,
C049ATIPOGtW.4M 3 EXHIBIT 4'
Let
'x~ ~ y 1 `ter ~,,,~~~r ~ .%/3 ~
d0l
\ , r is 1 4'ri .
7
lk,
%A I Y1. ! I 11/I', tom{ yw l~' l~-(J~. opt
J ~ M~ l``IrrF ~ ~J1 1 1 J ~rT r, ~J!, J I][y.S•''~~'T~' \~J V
r Si/' ~.+r,.!(v //'1".1 M- 1 ( 1 1 n-•1 r r h ♦ Q
' n~ tr ~4~y♦~ j'•.. • Y r .3. r ' ~ I~ r~~y ~ ~ - ~ ~ r f~
O
0.
1 r F
-
f r q r ,1 r
z
2
L.J
l~ T~ I .1' 1 l , w r ! -r w
OF 7
LL IX
00
P M A
-52-
far
µ
%et \ x . e
/ 1t
{Ltf;~ _.r~_.. rwrpf tirr .Ina, •l
' • 1 I/iflF IM I rrr......w
r'. l • u ECM - [fifit w/yTi r[ +
' MNf ltl 11 bi 4A
er - rl-r r+rPllr HrlMwt r"Ilr EP'dM oe Ilf• YrM fli x w1.1 Itil..
} Anu•r rrr rlr•~4a a. rqi Ki • kd 11-. na X-
IF 1164 1 Fiat p
I rY Nr,l Y~ I r• .
to
1-4 1 Is 01' rY111M VICIMIIT 10l1♦
w ,M r P, ro rn fn y
r•II ,r writ
KIND-_R9±L Itro
,n•tr rn,•pp rl n c :1 raw mq rt I i% / i P t 1
i., r1 rRI VNUr f} fl.... a
.lynrM
rl rw ,Y xpry Iv.
X./ .rnuu'4 oi. fi r ELM, xt nrfr l~x_ ru'ue fu • . - of .•u 1
1 M rum r wn n. 1
µp} wY. M IYlaf fo='2m S 1
r4o4 r,ernt!u' t"L" rdhr «n cw ILA at ~'`H m
" far "to -rl RU'f~ IK}~ •-^i~ w= h, f y ~.o
41 , wa..lr : rrrn+n \ 7 1 'd~11 I L
tav4,r 1 t:n,Ye. =-1 r•~ y ~.I r`"x,, yr 1 ~I
, [IfH IW r.r.. w, t' n j ! Irr14 r/ r11H LM
qb.
f to IL / rnrtr vol" rK,rwn rr an fnp
~ nfy to no r -
Yfylrala two ~ J_.,~}ff -
La..~;lrw I lr
411 ,
•~;1. JV ,al l wari l r r,.o rn/
AIAPOR1 INrROYt Mf [dts
14wt I r trllq ale lppr YY ra ndrnr hXM., •,E r
•1 F '
r IrryM • y lyyy FN,u. frr firxfr Mqe IIIr 1^ f}1W 4-M
r, ►
II I.n Y•IY lylM raH /Yl lrli'.Ir f,Pr1lI rP ~ r~•_~-ter _
• _ H1t Ilal lrlal _ • _
nrlv,rl I• y rpl Yna t. lord..
=lT~w (`O hM.ir Mii
rir ur r'r jrj,i
• [rvuar, wr,lyY ugN fl •u,r.r rx. uM • or" ~
•
nsr• r•tKn al,,yi/ f itrl f s _ G f d M« ^r 1 11
1~•.,rrl wAlr :o,lY b+ur i•u • f
ino
ti rpnlr rl t. rlrrl w 44, $1, T" {E{rt12 fIA nai dr lirl r: 4L
< `5M
. ~~O•
r rllMrlr trnrnyl Irtlf frrl(••lrl 10 Yr,l, itM ..fl idn
> 1n+ rant J 4irf Lfl
1
ihSH rf I. i:• ovoid
Ill, I,w r1r«rrr 111 ala,t 111 IM`e'"t tat
'110 nnnr. rw Ili.n °II'll" 011 rr «P tm1 It
81 al ill..
to )•^IM•H r 1r •yf M MMI~K M l IF,1 rUMIM1I L r6%r ~ - MA !i L
f 1 1 a r I nr .rM tarot I 101., -r n6
tlr ~r It. I oa In of rv w 11 ,n tn. n /Y+. It pnl d.fwit f KYtt. nlt hl Imi7nY. tdoo rnMl
..'I • , • u ...I.a LIw1 1Mn 61x1 lnca A, E4, Ain r'pr11 F)E VIL I MMENi PLAN
rl,..,n l Irlr , Y l,l.w I,YI ny I Iw . .4,
. , « r f,w f1 „ ,ll Exrrlfit l
I YL.NI,p r 1.1 ,r• ,In Vrl. u. ,r.l~:'nW .r, Y~ rr, 6
rrl ~Il rlr~rrlf l~Irr.
Ilk
PLAY
~E.•; w • t ll %
100 CkA ~•.1`, •r
- ±Z.: y~,.r. 'Y.,i 1f ~ •1 f I J, ~Cf i yet>,'~1.7~
_ 90 CAR
10
f '~4
! % 'x` ! ► t it tI, cJJ~ t
ZONE
~I I~=140.00 ~•A rr 1V~f~ /t'
dip
4$' it?' l• + to CNII i 1 -9.-ir•1 l•
r y• V •
Ile J.
OENTON MUNICIPAL: AIRPORT
il°thl~riRS out to o►cl~ano0s C N R NOISE MAP 4,,15 0 RUNWAY
Cor,)0VI19 Dut 10 o>tAAf10Mf _
I!1 1991
'54' EXHIBIT 7
• t~ P%`~ ~i `C,. / 'I •s~t~4..~~1 ,11i~± E / r i~ Y-~
• ~ ' i _ ~ .tip'' t.i, ~ , ~ .
1
- -Y r~•+`N .1. i_r(1 -5'.' IT , tie
`^\r ~~~f • ~7i'` ~'Y i ',y iti ~ a..r ~ •it;l \T1 v1~-)~• 1
i r4
< } ZONE I
f~r > J f00 CNR ~ ! ^ r l
IGZA
rti
~~1 90 CNR
4
' uon •1 .Y~4 ^f
" ' } / ✓ 1 ` ) ~ r ' ! .may, i N / \
Y ~f `J • - 1 ' I aY ff~.`~l I"~ ] I L~ a ti t~•.
J t: f1 s ZONE 2
r I 1•• 7
ZONE I~ -.rte 't:
100 chit
A At
rte./ ~~,SF~Fr 'ft / r': ~yl l * 1 1 ,
Olt
OENTON MUNICIPAL AIRPORT,
CNR NOISE MAP 6jOOdRUNWAY
•1992 OPFRATIONS
_-Vail SIT
8 -55-
EXHIBIT 9
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
SOUTHWEST REGION
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF A STANDARD CATEGORY I INSTRUMENT LANDING
SYSTEM
1. INTRODUCTION. This assessment reflects the technical characteristics ' and the
normal environmental impact of the standard instrument landing system (ILS) with a
medium intensity approach lighting system JMAI.SR).
II. DESCRIPTION.
A. The instrument landing system including a medium intensity approach
lighting system will be located on existing airport property except possibly for the
marker beacons and portions of the MALSR. The Category I ILS approach is defined
as an instrument approach procedure which provides approaches to minimums of a
decision.height of 200 feet and runway visual range of 2400 feet.
1. The ILS provides guidance information to pilots of properly equipped
aircraft, assisting them in landing safely under weather conditions of reduced
ceilings and lowered visibility. The use of the II.S materially aids the service to
airports so equipped.
2. The ILS provides the pilot in the aircraft with three basic types of
navigation information as outlined below. Other aids may also be provided to
supplement the ILS,
(a) Lateral guidance information provided by the ILS localizer
indicates to the pilot whether the aircraft is tie right, left, or in alignment with
the approach course line. This guidance applies principally to the front course
and usually to the back course.
(b) Vertical guidance information provided by the ILS glide
slope indicates the aircraft position above, below, or along the proper descent
angle toward the runway touchdown point.
(c) Distance information provided by the ILS outer and middle
markers and/or distance measuring equipment indicates the aircraft approximate
distance from the runway threshold.
-56-
(d) Supplomentarx Aids. Compass locators are sometimes pro-
vided at one or other marker sites to assist the pilot of the aircraft in locating
the ILS course. Other types of navigational aids may also be used for this purpose.
?viediurn intensity approach lighting systems with sequence flashers and other visual
aids are usually provided to work in conjunction with the Ii.S. Attachment I shows
the standard characteristics and terminology of the ILS. The components of the
!LS are continuously monitored at the site with automatic equipment to shut down
the facility if the signal parameters exceed preestablished limits,
B. Medium Intensity Approach Lighting System
1, The term "visual guidance lighting system" is used for identifying
those light configurations located on and in the vicinity of an airport for the purpose
of providing pilots with a visual reference for guidance purposes or improving the
operational safety of the aircraft during approach for landing.
2. The medium intensity approach lighting system is a configuration
of lights disposed symmetrically about the extended runway centerline starting at
the landing threshold and extending ostward into the approach zone of the airport.
This system provided vis ial information on runway alignment, roll guidance, and
horizontal references. It is used for precision approaches in conjunction with an
ILS and for Category I operations and is normally 2400 feet in length, except at
some international airports in which it is 3000 feet in length. The standard 2400-
foot MALSR with sequenced flashers used for precision approaches under Category
I operations is designated MALSR.
III. CHARACTERISTICS,
A. Electronic Emissions
The electronic emissions produced by the ILS are low in power density,
which precludes abnormal biological effects. The frequencies are within th, se
assigned to the aeronautical services.
1. Component Emissions
a, Loccaaliizer
Operates on one of the 20 assigned r_hannels within the frequency
band of 108 to 122 MHz, Transmitter power can vary from 20 to 200 watts with an
antenna gain of 4 to 12 db. The localizer signals are adjusted to produce an angular
width between 3 degrees and 6 degrees and a linear width of about 700 feet at the
runway threshold. The usable distance varies from 18 to 25 mites. At 25 miles
-57-
the usablo signal is within + 10 degrees of the centerline at .114 dbw/m2. At
17 miles the usable signal is within f 35 degrees of centerline. The localizes
course tends to be a straight line which coincides with the runway centerline
in two directions forming a front and back course. The sizo of the localizer
building housing the electronic equipment is approximately 8' r. UV: and is on
the airport near the runway it serves.
b. Glide Slope
Operates in the frequency band of 329. 3 through 335.0 MHz
with 20 assigned discrete frequencies available within this band. The maximum
power varies from 10 to 14 watts to a usabledistance of 10 miles and t 8 degrees
of the centerline of the runway at -95 dbw/m . The glide slope or path projection
angle is normally adjusted to 3 degrees abuv•. the horizontal so that it intersects
the middle marker at about 200 feet and the outer marker at about 1400 feet above
the runway elevation. The size of theglide slope building housing the electronic
equipment is approximately 8' by 10' and is on the airport adjacent the runway it
serves.
co Marker Beacons
Operates at 75 *dHz in a highly directional vertical plane
which makes an elliptical shape in the horizontal plane. Theusable pattern
should be the width of the localizer path at themarker and extended vertically
in elliptical shape to 3000 feet. The power is 3 watts or less. The outer and
middle markers are usually pole mounted and within a fenced area of 12' by 121.
B. Li. ht Emissions
The MALSR consists of seven centerline bars of five white lights in cdch
bar and 200-foot spacing of the bars. Abeam each side of the fifth centerline
bar is a bar of five white lights. The sequenced flashing lights emit a bluish-
whi'e light and flash in sequence toward the threshold at a rate of two flashes
per second. The 114s)-ing lights appear as a ball of light traveling toward the
runway threshold at a speed of approximately 4100 miles per hour. There are
five flashers, each spaced at 200-foot intervals, beginning at 1600 feet from the
runway threshold along the centerline extended to 2400 feet. ~y
The types of lights used in a medium intei.sity approach lighting system are as #
follows:
(l) 150-watt, PAR-38 lamps for steady burning, above ground white
lights.
-58-
(2) Condenser -dischargo light (sequenced flasher). The light is
distributed as a beam of light emitting 12. 5 degrees from the light beam center
as follows:
Step 3--15, OOOJ 3, 000 effective candles
Step 2-- 3, 900 750 effective candles
Stop 1-- 150 50 effective cawlies
The flash duration is between 75 and 300 microseconds at the 50 percent candle
power intensity level. The peak effective candles do not exceed iB, 000.
C. Noise Emisoions
In each of those buildings, an air conditioner or a ventilating system
may be installed. Either system must meet the criteria in Specification FAA-C-
2256a, Temperature and Humidity Control Equipment. The noise of the associated
electronic system in the building is measured at a point of highest noise level
at a distance of 3 feet from the exterior surface of the equipment, The combined
noise mustnot exceed the criteria of Specification FAA-G-2100/1b, Electronic
Equipment, General Requirements, Part I, Basic Requirements for all Equip-
ments. This criteria is tabulated below:
Frequency 20 25 150 300 600 1200 2400 4800
Brand HZ 75 150 300 600 -1200 240,0 4800 10000
Sound Pressure
Level db
A/C, 69 62 56 50 47 45 43 43
Electronic
Equipment 100 89 82 76 73 70 68 67
This criteria is within the acceptable level of the damage-risk contours for an
8-hour work day.
The localtzer, glide slope, and marker beacon shelter may have an engine generator
for standby power. Those engine generators range from 20 kw, 15 kw, and 5 kw
respectively. The noise produced by the engine generator is mostly contained within
the building. Maintenance personnel attending these units are in the engine
generator room for short period of time, and the noises should have no damaging
effect to their hearing. Occupational health standards have been established for
perconnel working with this equipment,
.59-
Fossil Fuel j,,rassions
In order to have an adequate margin of safety for aircraft utilizing
the ILS, engine generators provide a andby power in the event of a commercial
power failure. The fossil fuel emis-iono produced by the engine generator are
ininimal or similar to that of an aut )mobile engine and can be anticipated to occur
only during emergency operations h: periods of routine maintenance. Current
programs have been introduced to modify all fuel tanks in accordance with HEW
standards to prevent vapor omissions during refueling.
E. Air Traffic Pattern.
The installation of an TLS will designate the primary in +trument runway
with the result that the utilization of that runway will increase during inclement
weather. The not effect in the airport vicinity could be an increase in air traffic
over one area and a decrease in another area. However, with an ILS, the traffic
pattern should be mor::egulated. Therefore, it is not anticipated that there will
be any appreciable effect on wildlife, fish, n.aving life, or population patterns
from aircraft approacHng the runway using the ILS as a navigational aid,
F. Suinmar
As indicated by the above, the effect of the ILS with ALS on the environ-
ment is not anticipated to be significant. The impact of an 149 will be (a) to provide
aircraft an additional nagivation aid for safer utilization of the airport during
periods of inclement weather and (b) to provide a more stabilized flight path and
procedures for approach to the runway.
IV, PROBABLE hOVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS,
Adverse environmental effects of the ILS with an ALS could result from light
emissions from the sequenced flashers of the approach light system, fossil fuel
emissions, and noise from the associated engine generators.
The sequenced flashers could have a damaging effect to the r} tins of the damage
particularly if viewed with any optical magnifying agent. of the
could occur will depend upon many variables, including distance, power
magnification and the physical condition of the eyes involved,
-60-
It is therefore recommended under no circumstance should the sequenced flashers
by viewed through magnifying agents. The annoying effects could be created by
the flashers if an occupied building is in proximity of the flashers. However, de-
flectors could be installed to alleviate those annoying effects.
The cngino generators are only in operation during power failure and during routine
maintonLnce; therefore, the adverse effects of noise and fossil fuel emissions
would be limited. The safety aspect of having the engine generators for standby
power will more than offset any adverse effects. The ondino generators for this
system must meet the requirements of Specification FAA-E-2204a, which limits
the smoke reading to 4. 5 as analyzed on a Robert Bosch analyzing instrument.
The electronic emissions could affect an electronic device not properly manu-
factured which will receive those frequencies assigned to the aeronautical service.
i
-61-
EXHIBIT 10
IV. PROJECT DESIGN AND COST CONSIDERATIONS
The following items of development are proposed in the project as depicted
on Exhibit 6.
ITEM 1 - STRENGTIII':N EXISTING 4150-Four
NOATH-SOUT11 RUNWAY AND TAXI.
WAY SYSTEM
Item I consists of constructing a bituminous pavement overlay of the
existing 4150' x 150' Portland cement concrete North-South Runway and
Taxiway. A study of potential aviation activity at Denton Airport in-
dicates a need to improve the facilities to accommodate business jet
aircraft. Included in the required improvements is strengthening the
existing runway and taxiway pavement to accommodate aircraft having
a maximum gross we',ght of 60, 000 pounds. Investigations have deter
mined that the existing concrete pavement varies in thickness from
5.5 inches to 7 inches, and that the flexural and compressive strengths
are high.
Although plate bearing tests on the existing runway and taxiway pavement
were not within the scope of the preliminary investigation, other teats
indicate that the modulut of subgrade reaction (K) of the subgrade beneath
the existing pavement is in the range of 90 pounds per cubic inch.
A preliminary analysis of the overlay thickne.* tequlred for the run-
way and taxiway is as follows,
.6Y.
Design Aircraft Weight: 60, 000 pounds on Dual Gear
Traffic Level: 1200 Annual Mipartures
Approximate Modulus of Subgiade Reaction (K) = 90 PCi
Working Stress = Flexural Stren th = 650= 371 psi
Safety Factor 1, 75
Existing Thickness (he) = 6 inches
Overlay Thickness (t) = 2.5 (Fh - Cb he)
Where F Factor which controls cracking of base pavement,
h = Single Thickness of rigid pavoment required for design
conditions.
Cb = Condition Factor for base pavement.
he = Thickness of existing rigid pavement in inches.
Based on a K value of 90 and an annual traffic of 1200 departuras
the F value is 0. 90.
The Condition Factor (Cb) has been judged to bn 1. 0.
i
i
i
-63-
v
For Design Conditions Working Stress ='371
K = 90
A/C Wt = 60,000
h = 8.4 inches
(Fig 3-11 AC 15015320/6B)
T :ereforet
t =2.5(0.9x8.4-1.0x6)
t = 3. 91, USE 4" Bitdminous
Overlay on N-S
Runway & Taxi
Cross sections of the existing 4150' x 150' K/S Runway were used to
establish preliminary grades and cross slopes on the proposed surface of the
bituminous overlay pavement. Quantities of bituminous overlay pavornent used
in the preliminary estimate were calculated from the, cross sections.
ESTIMATE OF COST
Item Description Quaff Unit UniPrice Amount
1 Rout exist redwood expansion
joints 8$300 L. F. $ 0150 $ 4, 150.00
2 Reseal expansion joints 8, 300 L. F. 0.45 31 735. 00
3 Rout existing longitudinal
construction joints 19, 700 L. F. 0.50 9, 850.00
4 Reseal longitudinal con-
strur.tion joints 26, 250 L. F. 0.45 11, 812.50
5 Clean transverse joints I L. S. 50000 5, OUO. 00
6 Tack Coat 100000 Gale. o. 60 6, 000.00
7 Hot Mix Asphaltic Concrete 21,150 Tons 18.00 .-A80M. 700.00
Subtotal $421, 247.50
Contingencies anti Engineering 84. 752.50
-64- Total $506, 000.00
l
ITEM 2- EXTEND NORTii-SOUTH RUNIVAY AND
AXIWAY 1000 FEET TO SOUTH
The eaiating 4150' x 150' North-South runway and taxiway will
require an extension to 6000 feet to accommodate the prtential business
jet traffic. Studies have indicated that the facility can be economically
extended 1000 feet on the south end and this extension will also allow
the installation of a localizer for a future Instrument Laming System
on the runway. A preliminary design analysis of the required pavement
structure on this runway and taxiway extension is as follows:
Design Aircraft Weighti 60, 000 pounds on Dual Gear
FAA Soil Class E-8
AC/5320-6B
+ Critical Areas (1000' 1'.unway & Taxiway Extension)
Base Thickness 6"
Sub-base Thickness V +
Pavement Thickness 41+
Total 1711
Top 611 of high P.1. Subgrade uhall be treated with hydrated lime.
i
-65-
OF COST
~ Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Amount
1 Airfield Excavation 62, 205 C. Y. $ 0.75 $ 460654
2 Borrow Excavation 17, 147 C. Y. 1.00 17,147
3 Compact Embankment 79o352 C. Y. 0.50 39p676
4 Hot Mix Asphaltic Concrete 5o653 Tons 18-00 101o754
5 Crushed Stone Base (P-209) 40 308 C, Y. 16.00 68, 928
6 Subbase (P-154) 5, 133 C. Y. 10.00 51, 330
7 Lime Treated Subgrade 27, 091 .3. Y. 0.60 16, 255
8 Hydrated Lime 402 'I'ons 36.00 140472
9 Prime Coat 10, 166 Gale. 0.60 6, 100
10 Obliterate Threshold
Markings 1 ' 2, 000.00 20000
11 Construct Displaced
Threshold 1 L, S, 20000.00 2,000
12 Construct Temporary
Threshold Lights 1 L. S. 10000.00 1"000
13 36" Reinforced Concrete Pipe 600 L, F. 20.00 12"000
14 Concrete Headwall 1 Ea. 11000.-00 10000
15 Drop Inlet 2 Ea. 800.00 1, 600
16 Turfing 1 L. S. 10, 000.00 100000
17 2-way underground electric duct 170 L. F, 6.00 1, 0?.0
18 4-way underground electric duct 50 14, F, 12.00 600
19 Reulove Existing Farm Fence 2, 000 L. F. 1.00 20000
20 Construct New Farm Fence 5, 600 L. F, 2.50 -4, 000.
'Subtotal $409,536
Contingencies and Engineering _81L464
Total $4910000
-6g.
3
I
1TEld 3 . EXTEND NORTH-SOUTH RUMVAY
AND TAXIWAY 850 FEET TO NORTH
An 850 foot extension c,f the North-South Runway and Taxiw,+.y is
required on the north end to complete the required 6, 000 foot runway
and taxiway system. A preliminary design analysis has resulted in a
pavement structure consisting of the following;
Base 'thickness 6"
Subbase Thickness 71' j
Pavement Thickness 4"
"Dotal Required Thickness 17"
To 6" of High P.1, sub rade shall be treated with hydrated lime,
ESTIMATE OF COST
Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Amount
1 Airfield Excavation 9, 704 C. Y. $ 0.75 $ 7o278
2 Borrow Excavation 4, 880 C, Y. 1, 00 4, 880
3 Compact Excavatioxi 14, 584 C. Y. 0, 50 7, 292
4 Hot Mix Asphaltic Concrete 4,293 ions
18,00 77,274
5 Crushed Stone Base (P-269) 30 325 C, Y. 16.00 53, 200
6 Subbase (P-154) 31963 C. Y. 10.00 39j630
'1 Lime Treated Subgrade 20j954 S. Y. 0.60 17., 572
8 Hydrated Lime 311 Tons 36.00 11, 196
9 Prime Coat 1,980 Gallons 0,60 40788
10 Construct Temporary
Threshold Lighting 1 L. S. 10000.00 I, no
11 36" Reinforced Concrete Pipe 55U L, F. 20.00 110000
.67-
. . xr.
It. a l~3scriptlon quanlily Unit Unit Price' Amount
12 Concrete Headwall 1 Ea. $ 10000.00 $ 10060
.
13 Drop Inlet 2 Ea. 800.00 1,600
14 Turfing 1 L. S. 10, 000.00 10,1000
15 2-way underground electric
duct 170 L. F. Jb.00 11020
16 4-way underground electric
duct 50 I., F. 12.00 600
17 Remove Existing Farm Fence 6, 500 L. F. 1.00 S, 500
18 Construct New Farm Fence 6a000 L. F. 2.50 150000
19 Remove Exist. Farm Bldg3. 1 L. S, 20, 000.00 200000
Subtotal $285j830
Contingencies and Engineering 57, 170
Total $343j000
ITEM 4 - RELOCATE FARM ROAD 1515 ON
NORTH END OF NORTH-SOUTH
R UNWA Y
Existing Farm Road 1515 will be relocated approximately 1000 feet to the
north to accommodate the 850 foot extension on the north end of the North-South
Runway. The Relocation will also provide the required 15-foot clearance between
the 50;1 approach surface and relocated Farm Road 1515,'
ESTIMATE OF COST
Item Description Qusn_ City Unit Unit Price Amount
1 Roadway Excavation 6,000 C. Y. $ 1.25 $ 7t500
2 Hot Mix Asphaltic Concrete 660 Tons 18.00 11#880
3 Crushed Stone Base 21000 C, Y. 10.00 200000
4 Lime Treated Subgrade 13,000 S. Y, 0.60 7, 800
5 llydrated Lime 150 Tons 36.60 50400
-68-
i
Item _DeacrEaW lion quanta Unit
Unit Price Am~ cuut
6 Drainage Improvements
l I'' S• ~'Z• 000. 00 $ 2, 000
7 Roadway Striping 1 500
S. F. 0.40 600
S ubtotal. $ 55, 180
Contingencies and 1"n8inooring 14 120
Total $69, 300'
ITEM 5 - CONSTRUCT MEDIUM INTENSITY RUNWAY
LIGHTING SYSTEM ON THE 6000-FOOT
NORTH-SOUTH RUNWAY AND TAXIWAY
SYSTEM AND CONSTRUCT ROTATING
BEACON, LIGHTED WINDCONE AND
SEGMENTED CIRCLE,
A. Runway Lighting System
This item shall consist of a complete Medium Intensity Lighting System
for the 6000 foot Runway; a now 3611 Rotating Beacon and Tower and a new
Lighted Windcone and Segmented Circle. The ligh%n shall be spaced in accord-
ance with FAA criteria, generally at 200' intervals, Th,► lighting system shall
include taxi guidance signs.
ESTIMATE OE' COST - RUNWAY LIGHTING SYSTEM
Item Descri Lion Quanta
!y Unit_ Unit Price Amount
1 Medium Intensity Runway
Lights 58 Ea.
$ 110.00 $ 6j380
2 Medium Intensity Threshold
Lights .
16 Ea. 125.00 20000
3 Cable Trench 13 000
L. F. 0.45 50850
-69-
1
Item Description Qum Unit Unit Price Amount
4 Cable in Trench 14, 000 L. F. $ 0.50 $ 7, 000
5 Underground Cable in Duct 600 L. F. 0.50 300
6 Lighted Taxiguidauce Signs 8 Ea. 450.00 3, 600
7 Airport Regulator and Vault
Equipment 1 I., S, 6, 000, 00 6, 000
8 Rotating Beacon 1 L. S. 6, 500.00 6, 500
9 Lighted Windcone and Segmented
Circle 1 L, S. 50000.00 00 00
Subtotal $42,630
Contingencies and Engineering 81370
Total $510000
B. Taxiway Lighting System
This item shall consist of a complete Medium Intensity Lighting
System for the North-South Parallel Taxiway and related taxiways.
ESTIMATE OF COST - TAXIWAY LIGHTING SYSTEM
Item Descriptica Quanta Unit Unit Price Amount
1 Medium Intensity Taxi_
way Lights 100 Ea. $110.00 $110000
2 Cable Trench 14, G00 L. F. 0.45 60 300
3 Cable in Trench 14,000 L. F, 0.50 : 7, 000
Subtotal $24s300
Contingencies and Engineering 4, 700
Total $290000
.70.
ITEM 6 - RELOCATE EXISTING VAST-2
AND CONVERT TO VASI-4
The 1)00 foot extension on the south and the 850 foot extension on the
north will r squire the relocation and conversion of the existing VAST-2
system, 'business Jet Aircraft will be using the 6000 foot runway and a
VASI-4 it required, therefore this item ^onsists of converting the existing
VAST-2 to ~ VASI-4.
Lump Sung Coat $250000
ITEM 7 - CONSTRUCT PRECISION INSTRUMENT
MARKING ON 6000 FEET NORTH-SOUTH
RUNtiVAY AND TAXIWAY,
This itom consists of marking the runway and taxiway in accordance
with FAA requirements for Precision Instrument Marking,
COST OF ESTIMATE
Item Description Quantity Unit Unit__Price Amount
1 Runway and Taxiway
Marking 133s000 S. F. $0.25 $330 250
Contingencies and Engineering 30 250
'T'otal $36, 500
-71-
ITEM $ - STRI NGTREN AND EXTEND
EXISTING AIRCRAFT PARKING
APRON
A. Strengthen Existing Aircraft Parking Apron
The existing aircraft parking apron consists of a 50 foot wide portland
cemont cOncrote taxiway bordering the airport side of the apron and a bituminous
pa,. red aircraft parking apron consisting o. approximately 33, 000 square yards
adjoining the corcrote taxiway. A core boring of the bituminous apron indicate.4
a thickness of approximately S. 5 inchea at one location. The apron will most
frequently be used by light propel'.er driven aircraft an9 a large portion of the
apron should be strengthened to accommodate the 30, 000 pound gross aircraft
weight. An area of existing apron in close proximity to the terminal building
having a dimension of approximately 20G' x 150' should be strengthened to
accommodate large business jet aircraft having a gross weight of 60, 000 pounds,
An analysis of the pavement improvements required in the two areas is as followa;
ANALYSIS OF PAVEMENT FOR 30~ 000 POUNDS
Exist Bituminous Pavement Thickness = S. 4"
FAA Soil Class = E-8
Subgrade Class _ F-6
Gross Aircraft Weight = 30, 000 lb on dual wheels.
Required Pavement Thickness = 12"
(AC 150'/5320/6$)
Base = 5,,
Subbase = 5„
Bituminous Pavement " 211
Total 12" Required Thickness of better material.
-72-
%
To calculate an overlay thickness of bituminous pavement required which
is equivalent to a total of 12 inches of new pavement, the following equivalent
factors are used:
V Bituminous Pavement = 1,•1/2" P209 Crushed Stone Base
1" Bituminous Pavement=. 2" P'54 Subbase
1" Bituminous Pavement = 1" Bituminous Pavement
THEREFORE:
P209 J3_ase = 3, 4" Bituminous Pa
1 vement
5"P154 Subbase = 2. 5" Bituminous Pavement
211
2" Bituminous Pavement = 1,
0" Bituminous pavement
Required Pavement Thickness = 7. 9" Bituminous Pavement
Existing Pavement Thicknes3 = 5, 4"
Overlay Thickness = 2151)
USE 3 inches Bituminous Overlay on the apron which will support a 30, 000 poune
aircraft:
An estimate of the cost of constructing the biturninous pavement overlay-,Is
as follows:
.gOjT OF ESTIMATE
Item Description ion Ru___ah_tity Unit Uni~ t_ Price Am t
1 Hot Mix Asphaltic Conc, 3, 823
Tons •$18.00 $68o814
2 Tack Coat
2, 317 Gals. 0.60 1 Igo
Subtotal $70$204
Contingencies and Xngineering I4 7 6
Total $85,,000
w tiANALYSIS OF PAVEMENT FOR 60,000 LBS.
Exist Bituminous Pavement = 5, 4"
FAA Soil Class = E..g
Subgrade Class F_6
Cross Aircraft Weight = 6o, 000 lb, on dual wheels,
Required Pavement Thickness = 17 inches
Base = 611
Subbase = 711
Pavement = 41,
Total 17" Required thickness
To calculate an overlay thickness equivalent to 17 inches, the following
factors are used:
V Bituminous Pavement = 1-1/211 P209 Base
V Bituminous Pavement = 21, P154 Subbase
1" Bituminous Pavement = 1" Bituminous Pavement
THEREFORE:
6"P209B Base 4.0
1.5 '
711P154 Subbase r 3.5
2
4"Bit. Pavement = 4.0
1
Total 11. 5 inches Bituminous Pavement Required
.74-
7 7
Rb'it.:red pavement = 11.501
Existing Pavement = 5.4"
Raquired Overlay = 6. 1" Hot Mix Asphalt
USE 6" OVERLAY
An estimate of the cost of constructing the bituitlinous pavement overlay
is as follows;
COST ESTIMATE
Item Description Quantity Unit, Unit Price Amount
1 Hot Mix Asphaltic Conc. 1, 100 Tons
$18.00 $198800
2 Tack Coat 334 Cal$. 0.60 200
Subtotal $200 000
Contingencies and Engineering 4 000
't'otal $2400()o
B. Extend Aircraft Parking Apron
Improvements to the aircraft parking apron will also include an extension
having a dimension of approximately 300' x 200' at the Sowth and of the existing
apron. Also, it is proposed that the curved portion of tho apron in front of tho
terminal building be extended to provide additional apron for transient aircr.dt.
These areas are planned to accommodate 30, 000 pound aircraft and an naalysis
of the required pavement is as follows;
-75-
5" P209 Base
5" PI54 Subbase
2" Bituminous Pavement
12'1 Total
The top 6" of subgrade will be treated with hydrated lime.
The cost of extending the aircraft parking apron is as follows:
COST OF ESTIMATE
Item Description Qu_ unit Unit Price Amount
I Excavation 2s800 C. Y. $ 1.25 $ 3o500
2 Hot Mix Asphaltic Conc. 921 Tons 18.00 16o578
3 Crushed Stone Base 1,186 C. Y. 11) 00' 18j976
(P-209)
4 Subbase (P-154) 200 C. Y. 10.00 12, 000
5 Lirne Treated Subgtade 8j650 S. Y. 0.60 5v190
6 Hydrated Lime 122 Tons 36.00 4j392
7 Prime Coat 2, 540 Gals. 0.60 1, 524
Subtotal $62,160
Contingencies and Engineering L2# 840
Total $75,000
ITEM 9- - CLEAR APPROACH AR'!AS ON
NORTH AND SOUTH END, 6000
FOOT NORTH-souni RTJYWAY
This item consists of clearini; all trees and other obstructions in approach
aroas, each end of North-South Runway.
Lump Sum Cost $20000
.76-
L
1♦~~.
NONE
F TEM 10 - MAB.K AND LIGHT TP&L 139 KV
POIVER TRANSMISSION LINE SOUTH
END, NORTH-SOUTH RUNWAY
ump Sum Cost $3, 500
TEM 11 - MARK AND LIGHT TP&L 60 KV
POWER TRANSMISSION LINE ON
NORTH END, NORTH-SOUTH
RUN VAX.
Lump Sum Cost $50000
ITEM 12 - RELOCATION COSTS
J
Item 14 con,)ists of the costs required in connoctlon with the "Uniform
Relocation Assistance and Real. Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970,
Lwnp Sum Cost $200 000
-77-
t
SUMMARY OF CONSTRUCTION PHASES
A summary of the construction phases for improvements at Denton Municipal
Airport and the estimated cast including contingencies and engineering As as
follows:
1. Strengthen Existing 4150-Foot North-S+uuth Runway and
Taxiway System 506,000
2. Extend .North-South Runway and Taxiway 1000 feet to South 491,000
3. Extend North-South Runway and Taxiway 850 feet to North 343,000
4. Relocate Farm Road 1515 on North End, North-South Runway 69t300
5. Construct Medium Intensity Runway Lighting System on
6000-foot North-South Runway arid Taxiway System and
construct Rotating Deacon, Lighted Windrone and Seg-
mented Circle 801 000
6. Relocate Existing VAST-2 and Convert to VASI-4 ?.5, 000
7. Construct Precision Instrwzient Marking on 6000-foot
North-South Runway and Taxiway 36, 500
8. Strengthen and Extend Existing Aircraft Parking Apron 184, 000
9. Clear Approach Areas art North and South End, 6000-foot
North-South Runway. 2, 000
10. Mark and light TP&1, 139kv Power Transmission Line on
South End, North-South Runway 3, 500
I1. Mark and light TP&L 60kv Power Transmission line on ,
North End, North.-South " )nway 5, 000
12. Relocation Costs 200000
T O T A L $1,765,300
.78«
f7CHIRIT 11
COORDINATION COMNTS AND RESPONSES
Coordination of the Negative Declaration with Federal, state and local
offices resulted in the following comments: (Copies of letters of comment
are included following this discussion.)
1. The United States Department of the Interior commented that the proposed
project should be cleared with the State Historic Preservation officer.
Response: The State Historic Preservation Officer, in commenting on
the Negative Declaration, has advised that the proposed project should
not affect sites Presently listed in the process of submission to the
National Register of Historic Places, but, in the event that cultural
resources are encountered during constructions his office should be
consulted. (See Page 82) Such a requirement will be included in
appropriate engineering contracts executed in connection with any ADAP
project for construction covered by this Negative Declaration.
2. The Fort Worth District Office, Corps of Engineers c amnente that extension
of the runway to the south appears to be a-s encroachment into the flood
plain of Hickory Creek and further information as to the amount of fill
will be required before a decision can he made concerning the requirement
for a Section 4543 permit prior to construction. (See Page 83)
Response: The first phase of runv.9y development includes extension to
the north only. Although extension to the south is not anticipated for
a period of years, we have initiated correspondence with the Corps of
Engineers leading to a determination by that office as to the need for
a Section 404 permit. If a permit is required, appropriate action will
be taken to secure the document well in advance of any proposed con-
struction in flood plains. (See Page 84)
3. The 'texas Water Development Board commented that since the proposed runway
extensions appeared to extend into flood plains north and south of the
airport, approval of the project by the Water Development Board would be 1
required prior to the initiation of construction. (See Page 87)
Responses After receipt of additional information from the City's
consultant, the Water Development Board advised that an application for
approval of the north runway extension would not be required, but that
such an action would be required prior to initiation of construction
associated with the south runway extension. (See Page 88) We believe
that if cur coordination with the Corps reveals no appreciable penetration
of the Hickory Creek flood prone area from runway or other construction
to the touch, the Texas Water Development Board may drop Its requirement
for an Application for Approval. If not, appropriate action will be token,
as in the case of the Section 404 permit discussed above, to obtain the
necessary approvals.
19
4. The Texas Air Control Board advised that the proposed project is con-
sistent with the goals of the Texas Air Pollution Control Implementation
Plan. (See Page 89)
5. The Texas Water Quality Board advir,ed that the provisions made for con-
trolling water pollution furnish reasonable assurance that the proposal
will be located, designed, constructed and operated so as to comply
with presently established and accepted water quality standards. (See
Page 90)
6. The North Central Texas Council of Governments, in its preliminary review
of the proposed project development, recommended favorable consideration
by the funding agency provided that an environmental impact statement be
coordinated with NCTCCG as well as other interested agencies and indi-
viduals. (See Page 46) After reviewing this Negstive Declaration,
Lq(T000 advised that the Environmental Assessment Report accurately
describes the scope of the project and its potential environmental
impacts, and recommended proceeding with the project without further
environmental studies. (See Page 91)
In addition to the above, the following comments were received from internal
FAA coordination of the Negati%e .Declaration:
Comment; Further discussion is needed regarding the noise impact resulting
from airport construction, industrial growth in the vicinity of
the airport and future construction of Loop 288.
Response: As stated in paragraph V.A.3., construction activities associated
with airport expansion will tend to temporarily increase noise
levels in areas adjoining the airport. In addition, to the extent
that airport improvements lead to an expansion of the nearby in-
dustrial area, additional noise will be produced by building can-
atruction and increased auto traffic. Future construction of
hoop 288 on the west side of the city will introduce additional
noises. Since it is likely that construction of Loop 288 and
further development in the industrial area will occur regardless
of the proposed airport development, the extent of nonav.lation
noise impact attributable to airport expansion is considered
minimal. As pointed out elsewlere in the report, there are no
residential developments or other noise sensitive areas in the
immediate area of the airport, and noise impact resulting from
airport construction will not produce a significant impact. The
major nonaviation noise source in the area is interstate Highway
35 and 35N.
Comment; Ilia section on air pollution should relate forecast pollution
levels to some standard permiusible level.
Response; Air pollution data shown on Pg. 28 lists the quantity of pollutants
produced by annual nirport operaticne. Another method of analysis
eo
was the so-called Box Model, in which the quiintities of pollutants
emitted by different types of aircraft during a landing-takeoff
cycle (LTO cycle) are considered to be disseminated throughout a
standard volume of air which varies with the operating character-
istics of each aircraft type. The result is a pollutant concen-
tration, expressed in milligrams (mg) or micrograms (ug) per
cubic meter, which can be compared to National Ambient Air
Quality Standards promulgated by the Environmental Protection
Agency, Shown below is a table prepared to show the total con-
centrations of various pollutants resulting from a peak hour
activity level forecast for the year 1992. It should be noted
that this level of activity, expressed in LTO cycles per peak
hour, exceeds the normal capacity for a single runway and will
not be achieved at the airport until a parallel runway is con-
structed. Additional environmental review will be required
before any such construction can be initiated.
The table on Pg. 2 shows that total anticipated aircraft operations
at Denton Municipal Airport, including business jets, will ap-
proximate 250,000 operations annually by 1992. It is estimated
that peak hour activity, based on this volume of annual operations,
would be in the area of 130 operations, or 65 landing-takeoff
cycles. The following table shows peak hour polluti:: concentra-
tions, based on data furnished by EPA.
Aircraft LTO Cycles Particulates Sulfur Carbon Hydro Nitrogen
Type (Peak Hour) (ug/m ) Dioxide Monoxide Carbons Oxides
ug/m3) (mg/m3) (ug/m3) (ug/m3)
Business 1 0.008 0.025 0.001 0.231 0.106
Jets
General 15 0.006 0.003 0.003 0,105 0.013
Aviation
(Twins)
General 49 0.01 0.005 0.005 0.196 0.024
Aviation
(Single
En ine)
TOTALS 65 0.024 0.033 0.009 0.532 0.143
When the predicted concentration levels of pollutants are com-
pared to EPA's table of Nationrl ..mbient Air Quality Standards,
as shown in tha following pages, it is apparent that air quality
deterioration resulting from aircraft activity at the airport is
insignificant, even at the high operational levels anticipated
in the future. If pollution levels resulting from ground vehicles,
stationary powar sources, and laporation of fuels at the airport
80•s
equal or even exceed those produced by flight operations, which
is unlikely, the totals still amount to a very small percentage
of allowable levels.
Comment: The discussion of fuel spillage and water runoff on Pg. 29 and
30 should be expanded to show what will, rather than what can,
be done to minimize adverse impacts.
Response: Fuel is dispensed by qualified personnel and spillage resulting
from normal fueling operations is minimal, Since fueling
activities are conducted on paved surfaces, most spillage evapo-
rates without contamination of soils. Occasional spills of
larger amounts of fuel are dispersed with water, and again,
evaporation removes most of the volatiles, although some soil
contamination adjacent to the apron areas may occur. In the case
of a major fuel spill, or where soil contamination results from
long-term use of a fueling area, soils will be aerated for
evaporation and removed for disposal in the city's sanitary land-
fill. The prospect of significant contamination of ground or
surface water as a result of fueling operations is considered
remote.
During the period of construction on the airport the contractors
will be required to take specific actions to control water runoff.
These measures include the construction of temporary berms, dikes,
dams, sediwent basins, as appropriate. Also, limits are estab-
lished to specify the maximum area of soil which may be exposed
to erosion at any one time, and requirements for seeding, turfing
and mulching of graded areas and cut slopes are specified. New
drainage channels will be seeded or otherwise treated to minimise
contamination of local streams by waterborne sediments. After
completion of construction care will be taken to assure that any
developing erosion areas are promptly attended to.
Comment: Further discussion is needed regarding the alternative of relo-
cating to a new site, (Pg. 33)
Responses If it were established that proposed development of the present
site would result in significant adverse environmental impact
due to noise, air or water quality deterioration, or degradation
of scenic areas, parks or places of historic interest, the
alternative of reestablishing the needed airport facilities at
a more favorable site would receive careful study. However, it
is likely that in the area readily accessible to the City of
Denton, a newly-established airport comparable to that already
existing would create more adverse impact than would result from
the construction proposed at the present site. These considera-
tions, as well as the economic factors, led to a decision to
reject this alternative.
80-b
IMMENSE
Comment: The discussion of the need for an IIS for training purposes
(Pg. 3) implies that large air carrier type aircraft will use
the facilities at Denton.
Response: Instrument training at Denton Hunicipal Airport will be limited
to general aviation type aircraft, No airline training will be
conducted.
Comment.: Further discussion is needed regarding possible construction in
flood plains,
Response: In the course of coordinating the EIAR with other Federal and
state agencies, a question arose as to the extent, if any, of
extension of construction into the flood plain of Dry Fork Creek
to the north and Hickory Creek to the south of airport property.
In the most recent letter from the Corps of Engineers, dated
August 18, 197;, we were advised that proposed construction
would not penetrate the Hickory Creek flood plain. (See Pg. 92)
At the north end, it has been determined that the runway and
taxiway extension will not penetrate the flood plain of Dry
Fork Creek. Installation of the outer portion of the approach
light system will, however, result in the location of five
lights in the Dry Fork flood plain. (See sketch, Pg. 06.)
These sequenced-flashing lights are individually mounted on
wooden poles, supplied with electrical power through buried
cables, and are an integral part of a standard approach lighting
system. The structures will not alter the configuration of the
flood plain, or present an impediment to the movement of flood
waters, and because of their nature, are resistant to flood
damage. The only feasible alternative, considering the need
for a 6000 ft. runway, was to install the approach light system
at the opposite end of the runway; which scheme was rejected
since it would lead to the installation of larger, more complex
lighting structures in the Hickory Creek flood plain.
80-c
NATIONAL AME`'E AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
pollutant
Carbon•monoxide
10 milli
(Primary and secondary Crags per cubic motor
standards are the $ago&) (9 ppr+) r reaxiMum 8-hour concentra-
tion not to be exceeded more than
once per year,
-40 millieraols por cubic meter
(35 ppm), m.txtnsm one-hour concen-
trotion not to be exceeded rca:e thsA
once per year,
Hitrogon dioxide - 100 micro rams
(Primary and secondary a per cubic meter
standards are the satra) (045 ppm), annual arithmetic t-.ean.
hydrocarbons (non-methane) -160 micrograms per cubic meter
-(Primary and secondary (O s24 standards are the save) eonrentret)i' aon►axi(6-:,:.9rr, a.m.} not ) not :~r
„ to be
exceeded more than once per yaar,
ror use-as a Autde in devittl%;
'implorent ticn plans to meet the
oxidant standards.
Particulate matter -)S micro
Primary standard . trams per cubic teeter,
annjal geometric scan.
-160 micrograms per cubic rotor,
maxilrim 24-heu: concentration not
to be exceeded more chart once per
year,
Secondary standard -60 tuicro ram;
E per cubic mlt,tx,
at+nual gew;etric :~can, as a £uide
to.bo used in arot;stin; imple-anta-
tion plans to ochtcvc the 24-hour
standard,
450 tticro-rains per cubic mot:r,
Poxi:,nim 24-hour cenccntratio n not
to be exceeded rroro than once per
year,
~f
BDrd
~._....r
n
7777777,
Pollutant Scendard
Sulfur dioNido -g0 Nicrcgrams pier cubic meter,
Primary standard annual arithnatic mean.
-365 micrograms par cubic meter,
msxinum 21P-hour concentration not
to ba exceeded more than once per
yoar,
Secondary standard .%300 nicrog vans per cubic ureter,
roximum three-hour concentra.cion
not to be exceeded more than once
per year.
Photochemical Oxidant .160 microtror..s per cubic meter,
(PriT3ry on.d scr.oa•Jary ~c~itonba~~axcecJrdor.~rettl~inGOnce
standards are the 6404) per year.
with
Ketionol Primary Standards: a1 adlevels of air equato margin quality lsafety$ toaprotect
tho public has Ith.
to
National Secondary Standardsi The !avels ofOIT quality fne,,cntr~n
protect tiro public coy
or anticipated advursa affect c: a pollutant,
Sources 1:11Vlroratontal Protect Ion At ency, "!{atimtal Priwary and Secondary I
Ambient Air Quallty S:•andarJ}," (federal Itogistor, 36 (84), o
April 30, 1971) re 81'.k.7
■
y
_ Ju11 13 1971
~~'s United States Department of the Interior
~ OF'F'ICE OF THE SECRETARY
SOUTHWEST REGION O
POST OFFICE BOX 2088
ER-77 25 ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO 87103
G /G
JUN 10 1977
Mr. Hugh W, Lyon
Department of Transportation
Federal Aviation Administration pRl~;•
Southwest Region
P.O. Box 1669 LF11l,r, P!
Fort Worth, Texas 76102 _ / Q
Dear Mr. Lyon:
This responds to your request for our review of the environmental
assessment for Denton Municipal Airport, Denton County, Texas.
We have reviewed the subject assessment and offer tho following comment.
Page 41, item e. IMPACT UPON HISTORICAL ARCHEOLOGICAL M SCENIC SITES
The negative declaration or other subsequent envirormental document
should include clearance of the project by the State Historic
Preservation Officer and any comments he may offer relative to
the impact of the proposed development upon properties on or
eligible for in^.2uslon in the National Register of Historic Places.
He iss Mr. True"t Latimers Executive Director, Texas Historical
Commission, 11.0. Box 22276, Capitol Station, Austin, Texas 78711.
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this assessment.
Sincerely yourss
jind P. Churan
Regional Environmental Review Officer
-81.
BOA 12174, N01i4 Slation
/Austin, Treat 7011
Tnu+r li+rMn
E~er~r,w Luraw
Xay 6, 1977
Mr. Donald 1:. Harley
Economic Deve)opment and Transportation
Budget and Planning Office
Office of the Covornor
411 west 13th Street
Austin, Texas 70701
Re: Negative Declaration 16(c) (4) Coordination,
Dr!nton Municipal Airport, Denton, Texas
near Mr. Harley:
Thank you for the archc-olorlical evaluation forwarded to the Texas
Historical ComrnisSi.on concerning the above-referenced undertaking.
We have revic-w(.,d the fintlinys and conclude that, as described, the
proposal should not affect sites on the National Register of
Historic places, nor any site presently in the process of submis-
sion to the National Rcdister. The survey of sites in your area
which may be eligible for inclusion within the National Register,
however, has not, been completed. Thoreforu, should cultural re-
sources be encountered dvrin,1 construction, work will cease and
the State Ilistot•ic Precrrvation officer and the Advisory Council
on Historic Pre,iorvatiat7 will be afforded the opportunity to comment
in accordance with the Procedures for the Protection of )lis_toric and
Cultural Properties (36 C.F.R, Part 800).
Thank you for tbo opportunity to participate in the review process
in our common goal of providing the future with a past. rf we may
be of further srrvice, please advise.
Sincerely,
Truett Latimer
State Historic I)roservution officer
~y RECL IV L L.
Alton x. Briggs N,kY 9 1911
hrc},ealr,~~ibt.
Cultural ttc.,ourccr Man,~~J,:inr.til -82-
Budget/Planninp
ARDs la
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
FORT WORTH DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENG'NRL'Ra
P. O. BOX 1700
FORT WORTH. TEXAS 76102
• M[►4Y to
AIMXTloN 01.
SWFED-PR 8 June 19
JUtt 9 f97)
Hr. Hugh W. Lyon
Chief, Planning Branch G
Federal Aviation Administration
PO Box 1689 GiG
Fort Worth, Texas 76101 6
ORiG.
Dear Mr. Lyons OR
The Negative Declaration for the Denton Municipal Airport has been FILE
reviewed as requested in your letter of April 29, 1977.
The following comments are submitted for considerations
a. It appears the extended runway will be an encroachment into the
flood plain of Hickoiv Creek, a tributary to Le-.risville Lake, a Corps of
Engineers project. Additional information on the amount of fill will have
to be determined before the decision for a section 404 permit can be shade,
although the present median streamflow of Hickory Creek is less than those
normally requiring a section 404 permit,
b. A detailed hydrologic and hydraulic study should also be provided.
c. Inclosed is a map ahcwing the present flood prone areas around the
airport.
d. The proposed project will not conflict with any existing or author-
ised Corps of Engineers projects.
Thank you for the opportunity to present our comments.
Sincerely yours,
1 Incl D. L. HILLS
As stated Chief, Planning Branch
-83.
i
I
July 26, 1971
ASK-616
Negative Declaration/16(c)(4) Coordination
Denton Municipal Airport, Denton, TX
4hief, Planning Branch, ASH-610
Dopcrtment of the Army
Corps of Engineers, Fort North District
Attn,t Flood Plain Management Branch
P, 0. Box 17300
Fort {forth, TX 76102
to a letter dated June 8, 19778 the Planning Branch, Fort Korth District
advised us that the proposed runway extension dincussod in the subject
negative declaration would be an encroachment into the flood plain of
hickory Creek mouth of the airport and that further data relating to
quantities of fill material as well as hydrologic and hydraulic informa-
tion is necessary before a decision can be made as to the need for a
Section 404 permit. Included with the letter was a copy of a USG8 Flood
Prone Area map depicting 100-year flood contours for both HickM Crook
to the south and Dry Fork Crook to the north of airport property. We
have enclosed a portion of this map which has been enlarged by approxi-
mately SOX and have sketched in the proposed extended runway sad taxiway
system, together with the location of the lighting structures, localixor
antenna and associated localirer equipment building. It Is apparent from
this drawing that none of these items penetrate the Hickory Creak flood
prone area of shown, although it to possible that some fill material at
the southwest corner of the runway graded area may do so. We believe the
flood contours shown on the drawing are not sufficiently accurate to
permit a calculation of the amount of that enevoschuu at, it any. At the
north end of the airport a total of five pole-mounted strobe lights,
spaced at 200-ft. intervals, will be located in the Dry Forte flood pitons
aras as depicted on the drawing. These lights are a necessary element of
the instrument landing system planned for installation at the airport.
It is our viuw that none of the above•doscribed construction will result in
any measurable increase in stream turbidity, reduction to streeo flow or
any other significant siverse impact on the flood prone areas. In addition,
we believe that both Hickory and Dry Fork Creaks way be classified as
Category 4 waters covered by the "nationwide permits" discussed in the
document ti.tlod "Regulatory Programs of tho Corps of ISogiuoors" published
as Part 2 of the Federal Register dated Tuesday# July 19, 1977.
It the above discussion does not resolve the question as to the need for a
ioctton 404 po mit, we would appreci&ts being provided with alevations of
the 100-year flood contour at its intersection with the extended runway
-84-
e
2
centerline in both hickory and Dry Fork Creeks. If there is any signift-
cant difference in elevation of the contour across a $00 ft. width
contored on the extended runway centerline, we wound like to have this
information so well. with these elevations we can advise you as to the
extonts if any, of fill material penetration into the flood plain. In
this connection, it should be noted that the City intends to extend the
runway to the north as the first phase of the ultimst~i runway development.
Although we do not anticipate an extension to the south fo•r a period of
sevoral years, it would be desirable to resolve tho matter of permit
requirements at this title.
ORIGINAL SIGNED M
HUGH W. LYON
HUGH W, LY(M
Enclosure
+I
II
I
i
i
-t~s- ~
NNW=
r 0
•
• c54~~YJ%~itC,c~ f/jrrti~~ •
Li~i,fJ ~Pa!'C Mw,vH1s~~
• ~DD 4"M ter. r• w1~~ I~w.
• ` • ~_pyhwi ~k tCuJ1011 ~ ~ ~
1 ~ II ~
f/nt,•~ of C'K~1vo1~ j
I
. • P
• I
v l at
h I 1
1
~ew1r~
~~ov11 ! ~ ~ r:i
i •
.~J I Il j • .
LIP 4.
PRO
to ' 1 1 't Pp 1
Na
ItXAS WATER IaBVELO~~Mr?1~t1' ]BOARD
JAMES M R10151
MEMBERS)
Er
A L BLACK C-a.-.N
~7y
K7hA f.~a' G 1077
ACESE R T 9 G106100E. ViCt CN.1.NhN MAY h5
ma Vll
Mn:TON T ROTTE
JOMN N GARRET T
4CWAION pO BOX 13787 AREA COG _ LLL ~~J
47531
GEGRGE W McCI£SKEY CAPITOL STA;ON
AL'STIPI TEYAS 78711 1700 NOR4c'O FL'F /~Y NVE
LU►►CKR Ja
GL£NERONEY May 23, 1977
rt .uW
IN R V
TV BE-_
ORIG.
Mr. Hugh W. Lyon, Chief COPY
Planning Branch
Department of Transportation ( FILE
Federal Aviation Administration
Southwest Division
P. o. Box 7.689
Fort Worth, Texas 76101
Dear Mr. Lyon:
Re: Negative Declaration .16(0)(4)
Denton Municipal Airport
Denton, Texas
please refer to your letter of April 29, 1977 and enclosure thereto.
Thank you for allowing this agency to review the report on proposed
development for the Denton Municipal Airport, Denton, Texas,
Staff has reviewed the report and have found that the north-south
runway of the prefect will extend into the flood plain of Hickory
Creek on the south and possibly into the flood plain of Dry Fork
Creek on the north. Under Section 11.458 of the Texas Water Code,
plans for projects which might affect the flood flow of streams in
Texas must be approved by the Texas Water Development Board prior to
initiation of construction. In this regard, a copy of the Rules and
Re ulations of the Texas 4!ater Devel_pmmen~t Board Relating, twee
3m~~`rove►nenT5ie iota n~_° OV-c3~Plans- or t'`eo ama on ro acts
is eno ose cr yosu ~n3`orma on.
Should you have: any questions regarding this or other matters, please
do not hesitate to contact us. Everett W. Rowland, Director, Flood
Protection and Disaster Assistance Division, at the above address, or
telephone 512/1175-2171, is thoroughly f"miliar with this particular
matter.
Sincerely,
"M. Rode
-81.
Enclosure
TL1XAS WATER DL7VETOPMENT BOARD
MEMBERS
JA MESM ROSE
A. 1. BLACK, CkMOVAN E V1 Chat T04
SP RF.CiI',i
ROBERT 11 GfLMORE. Vc[ CKAAYAN AIRPORTS
oA~w P
}•IILTON T. POT Ti
LhINC[TON ) ~IT9T}'
JOAN N. GARRETT • ~~MO
V.,'pK /le
P.O. SOX 13007
GEWFGEW MCCLESKEY CAF11OL STATK)N AREA Cr
l4o►$01 A U•o Tl N, TEXAS 78711 1700 NORTH CO 1 AVENUE
GLEN E. RONEY
MC P[IAN July 22, 1977
IY ■ 1LA[IlN TG
Z 1DBi
o~IO.'
Vr. Y. G. Finklea, P.H. CO?Y
Shimek, Jacobs and Finklea FIE
Consulting Engineers
1300 Adolphue Tower
Dallas, Texas 75202
Doar idre Flnkleai
This is in response to your June 23, 1977 letter regarding possible
encroachment into the flood plain of the Dry Fork of Hickory Creek
by extension of tho Denton Municipal Airport runway 850 feet to
tha north. The material you providod has boon reviewed by otaff[
Reviow of the data indicates that the proposed extension of who
runway to the north will not encroach into the 100-year flood plain
of the Dry Pork of Hickory Creek. Therefore, an A lication fsr.
Ak oval of Levee Plans need not be subrhitted to to exas a or
Sova oprgen oar oft Chis portion of the airport improvements. It
is to be understood that this finding in no way relieves the City
of the obligation to seek the Board's approval for the south exten-
sion of the runway prior to the construction of that portion of the
project,
Should you have further questions regarding this matter, please do
not hesitate to contact ua.
Sinoeroly,
James M. Rose
oos Mr. Hugh W. Lyon
Fodoral Aviation Administration
-88.
WWaaa.
i
'I' 14
IXA i AIR CONTROL BOARD
PHONE 51Y4SI-S?11
,P,E.
" 5310 SHOAL CREEK GOVLEVARD EXECUTIVE VE E DIRECTOR
CENJOHN L. BLAIR, Chritman AUSTIN, TEXAS - 70754
WILLIE L. ULICH, Ph.D., P.E., Vice Chairman CHARLES A. JAN YES
WILLIAM N, ALLAN 0. JACK KILIAN, M.O,
JOE C. BRIDGE FARMEA. F.E. WILLIAM q, FAMISH
FRED HARTMAN E. W. ROBIIdbON, P,E,
May 131 1977 l? E C 1 V I
11hy 37
ft'r. Donald V. }iarlcy
Economic DevtJopnient rind TY-RnspOrtotion Bobt/+f
Budget and Planning Office
Office of the Governor
411 West 13t1l Street
Austin, Texas 78701
Subject: };Votive Declaration 16(c)(4) Coordination, Denton
Municipal Airport, Denton, Texas
Hear Mr. Harley:
In reviewing the above cited docum!eat it was noted that although
the data on page 44 indicated annual totals of pollutant emissions
no data was included for Mak hour or for avers o da However,
based on the aircraft upe:rat oIls and the miX-I'n~j c>ad our figures
plus the stated intent to take all possiblo precautions tc prevent
excess emissions durfiik all phases of construction works verify
the contention that the ningnitude of the project is such that the
effect on air quHlity t;ili be minimal, The propased airport
dcveloprlent action for Denton is therefore consistent with the
goals of the Texas Air Po1111tion Control Implementation rlAn.
Thank you for the reviviv aiiportunity. If we can assist further,
please contact n.e.
Sincerely yo
Roger R. Wallis, Deputy Director
Standards and Regulations Program
cc: Mr. Melvin Lewis, Vc-gional Supervisor, Fort Borth
-89-
~~id'~
' it
Y I, S
OFFICE OF THE GYPERNOR
BUDGET AND PLANNING OFFICE
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
Ph. 522/415-2421
COMMENTS
The negative declaration and impact assessment report
for the proposed Denton Municipal Airport in Denton County
has been reviewed and the agency has concluded that the
provisions made for controlling water pollution furnishes
reasonable assurance that the proposal will be located,
designed, constructed and operated so as to comply with
the presently established and accepted water quality stan-
dards,
.Pews Conducting Review ISigneture)
~al_99~rd _ -94- -0 ete a ZZ
iklei Con TeW Council of Govemmenis
P.O.NaWetCOQ Arlington. Texas 760ti
b 0 ! 54;;i'rtkc,
April 29,
to 146 slyode~y w -
Jim W. White ~r~W
City Manager ~-rr-
City of Denton RE: 7-04~ ~cofved March 25, 19lp
215 E. McKinney Improvement to Denton Municipal ¢
Denton, Texas 76241 Airport Q
Dear Mr. Whites
Your EAR In connection with the above entitled project hos been reviewed by the North
Central Texas Council of Governments. This review Included the consideration of paten.
Holly affected local governments for possible project notification, No potentially affected
local governments were identified under NCTCOG's Local Significance Criteria. The
pre-a llcotton submitted by the City of Denton on May 10, 1976 was reviewed by NCTCOG
and a favorable comment was provided (see attached letter),
In addition, the EAR was reviewed for opproprtale areawide concerns. This review process
included consideration by appropriate NCTCOG planning staff, by the Government Appli-
cations Review Committee on April 13, and by the NCTCOG Executive Board on April 27.
On the basis of that review process, the Board adopted the following aroawtde positions
The NCTCOG Review Process has been completed and it is the opinion of the
agency that the Environmental Assessment Report accurotely describes the scope
of the protect and its potential envlrc4%mental impacts. We, therefore, recom-
mend proceeding with the project taithout further environmental studies.
We sincerely thank you and your staff for your kind cooperation In this matter, and if we
can be of further service or assistance, please fool free to call upon us.
Sin e1 y,
'r
William J. Pitst
Executive Direc r
4
WJPA
ecs Carroll Finklea, Shimek, Jacobs and Finloa, Engineers
Henry L. Newman, lirector, Southwest Region Federal Aviation Administration, DOT
Ed Foreman, Regional Reprosontatlve of the Secretary, Department of Transportation
John Roark, Director of Transportation, NCTCOG
.91-
SW Rr,x
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY FAITd'Cr'
111! FORT WORTH DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEER{ RUj ~a t( i,17
P. O. BOX 17300 50UiI1"
FORT WORTH. TEXAS 76102 /G
v«.s, PErlr TO
AlfUMON a. ~k
e. 44
I
SWFED-PR 18 August 1 77
ORIG.
Mr. Hugh W. Lyon COPY
Chiefs Planning Branch FILE
Federal Aviation Administration r---
PO Box 1689
Fort Worth, Texas 76101
Dear Mr. Lyont
As requested in your letter dated July 26, 1977, we have revieved the
additional information furnished us on the negative declaration for the
Denton Municipal Airport construction.
P,,u permit under Section 404 of PL 92-500 will not be required since the
median stream flow of both Ilickory Creek to the south and Dry Fork Creek
to the north of the airport is less than five (5) cfs.
Baaed on the enlarged portion of the flood plain limits near the proposed
airport construction, the extended runways will not be an encroachment
into the flood plain. The enlarged portion of the flood plain showing
the proposed construction would be an asset to the negative declaration.
Thank you for the opportunity to present additional comments.
Sincerely yours,
D. L. MI. S
Chief, Planning Branch
92
v ~t~~
DEPARTMENT OF TRANVORTATION
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
DATC August 4, 1977 SOUMINEST Wool
I'l 00
IN Rt/lY F. O. 00% 1619
REFER T0: ASW-616 FORT woRTM. TEUS 76101
3UalECT: Decision Paper for Proposed Construction at ,
o
Denton Municipal Airport, Denton, Texas
r:::1►~
FROM, ASW-610
to: ASW-600
PROPOSED ACTION: This is to recommend approval of a 16(c)(4) Coordinated
Negative Declaration covering construction of certain improvemenia at
Denton Municipal Airport. The proposed development includes ett:engthening,
marking, lighting and extension of the existing N/;' runway and taxiway .
system from the present runway length of 4150 ft, to 6000 ft.; relocation
of Farm Road 1515 at the north end of the N/S runway; relocation of
existing VASI-2 installation and conversion tc VASI.4; installation of new
rotating beacon, lighted wind cone and segmented circle marker; strength-
ening and expansion of the existing aircraft parking apron; approach
clearing rorth and south of the extended runway; obstruction marking and
lighting of existing power transmission lines in the north and south
approaches to the N/S runway. A FAA ILS/ALS system is planned for
Runway 17. The City of Denton has requested Federal assistance under
the Airport Development Aid Program, as authorized by the Airport and
Airway Development Act of 1970, as amended.
BACKGROUND AND EVALUATION: An Lnvirinmental Impact Assessment Report was
prepared and an offer of an opportunity to request a public hearing was
..published on February 2 and February 9, 1977. No requests fur a public
hearing wore received. Coordination of the proposal with the North
Central Texas Council of Governments has been accomplished. The record
supports the conclusion that the proposed project is consistent with
plans for the development of the area and that fair consideration has
been given to the interest of local communities,
The Negative Declaration was forwarded to appropriate Federal and state
agencies for review, including EPA and DOI. Responses to all substantive
comments resulting from this review are included in Exhibit 11, beginning
on Page 79. No objections to the proposed development were interposed,
'Pile Denton Municipal Airport is located within the city limits, but some
lands contiguous to the airport property lie outside the city limits in
the area of extraterritorial jurisdiction, The City has provided a
letter (See Page 44) outlining its authority and intentions with regard
to compatible lard use in the vicinity of the airport, and the require-
ments of Section 18(4) of PL 91.258 are considered satisfied.
2
SUMMATION_ OF ENVIRONMENTAL ItfPACPS:
1. Location and Area Characteristics
The City of Denton is located approximately 30 miles north of
the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex in north central Texas. The
City has expezienced rapid growth in r,:cent years, along with
other Metroplex communities. The Municipal Airport is situated
approximately 2J miles west of the central business disZrict in
an area zoned for light industry.
2. Purpose and Need
The intent of the proposed project is to upgrade the airport
to a basic transport category to meet the forecast aviation
needs of the community.
3. Safeguards to Avoid Short-term Effects on the Environment
All construction will be accomplished in accordance with the
provisions of Advisory Circulars 150/5370.7, "Airport
Construction Controls to Prevent Air and Water Pollution," and
150/5370.10, "Standards for Specifying Construction of Airports."
4. Air, Water, Noise, Solid Waste and Visual Pollution
The increase in air and water pollutants due to construction
and aviation operations at the airport is within acceptable
limits. No significant residential or other noise-sensitive
areas lie within the forecast 100 CN R contour plot. Solid
waste Is collected periodically and deposited in the City's
approved sanitary land fill. No ad-verse visual Impact from
the proposed development is anticipated.
5. Scenic, Wildlife, Recreational, Cultural, Historical or
Archeological Areas Affected
No established scenic, wildlife, recreational areas, or known
historical or archeological sites will by adversely affected
by the proposed construction. An archeological field survey
was conducted in the area with negative results. A copy of
the archeologist's report is shown on page 43.
6. Coordination and Consideration of the Interests of Communities
in the Vicinity of the Airport
Other than the City of Denton, there are no established com-
munities in the vicinity of the airport.
r~
3
7. Displacement of Persons or Businesses
Ilie project will result in the displacement of three
individuals and the removal of two residences and associated
outbuildings. Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real
Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (URARPAPA) proce-
dures will be followed.
8. Public Lands
No public lands are involved in the project.
9. DOT Section 4(f) Land
No such lands will be affected by the project.
10. Controversy, Objections or Other Adverse Comment
The proposal has been publicized locally and no adverse comments
i have been received. The Negative Declaration has been coordi-
nated with appropriate Federal, state and clearinghouse agencies.
Copies of correspondence resulting from this coordination,
together with responses to the comments, are included in
Exhibit 11, Page 79. No opposition to the proposal resulted
from the coordination.
FEDERAL FINDING: After careful and thorough consideration of the facts
developed herein, and after consultation with EPA and DOI pursuant to
Section 16(c)(4) of the Airport and Airway Development Act of 1970 re-
garding the effects of the proposed action, the undersigned finds: that
the proposed Federal action is consistent with existing national environ-
mental policies and objectives as set forth in Section 101(a) of the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), that it will not sig-
nificantly affect the quality of the human environment or otherwise Include
any condition requiring full consultetion pursuant to Section 1G2(2)(C) of
NEPA; that there is no feasible and prude,,t alternative to the proposed
action; and that the proposed action includes P11 possible steps to mini-
mize any adversc effects. Having met all rele. nt requirements for
environmental consideration and consultation, I.a proposed action is
authorized to be taken at su-h time as other requirements have been met.
RECOMMENDATION: I recommend that you approve the proposed development
subject to the conditions set forth herein.
HUGH LYON
~'2Sr
CONCUR: o o el. & 1 ~ dl"LZwv"7~. DATE: `4tt~ /977
e onal Counsel, ASW-7
P
4
APPROVED: DATE:
of, Airports Divis AS 0
DISAPPROVED: DATE:
M ief, Airports Division, ASW-600
I
r~
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL AVIATION AEMINISTRATION
N MATIVE DECLARATION - 16(c)(4) COORDINATION
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT FOR
DFNTON MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
DEMN, TEXAS
The City of Denton, acting through the Mayor and City Council,
proposes to construct certain improvements to the existing City-
owned atrport located on the vest bide of the City. Some of these
improvements are as recocamended in an Airport Master Plan prepared
for the City in 1973- The improvements include strengthening and
extension of the existing runway, taxiway and apron system, road
relocation, runvay and taxivay marking and lighting, VABI relocation,
Ai,B/IW installation, and approach clearing. It is anticipated that
eligible projects x111 be constructed with Federal financial assistance
under the Airport Development Aid Program, as authorized by the Airport
and Airway Development Act of 19700 as amended.
Given hereinafter is a summary of the proposed development and an
analysis of the impact upon the environment as prescribed by Federal
Aviation Administration Order 5050.2E
~.s~as:nsssr►
TI.BLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE NO.
1. INTRODUCTION 1
11. PURPOSE 1
Ill. PLANNING ASPECTS 5
IV. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT 8
V. IMPACT OF THE PROJECT ON THE ENVIRON'.*24T
A. Temporary Impacts on the Envirounent 9
B. Permanent Impacts on the Enviroax,.nt 11
VI. UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 30
VII. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION 32
VIII. SHORT-TERM EFFECTS/LONG-TERM BENEFITS 34
I
IX. IRREVERSIBLE OR IRRETRIEVABLE CONAIITMF.NTS
OF RESOURCES 37
X. PUBLIC HEARING 38
XI. LETTERS 39
I X1I. EXHIBITS 47
I, INTRODUCTION
The Denton Municipal Airport, a general aviation facility located approximately
three miles west of the City, was constructed in 19,14 by the City of Denton
with financial assistance from the Civil Aeronautics Administration. The
airport has since been adminiOcred by the City of Denton and in recent years
has experienced a greater than normal increase in aircraft traffic. In January,
1972 the City authorized the preparation of an Airport Master Plan Study to
determine the needs at the airport. As a result of th-. study, a plan for improv.
ing the airport wao formulated and alire- application for federal assistance was
prepared and forwarded to the FAA by the City of D^nt~ n. This environmental
impact asae,%sment report describes the relationship and effects of the propaeed
development action upon the environment.
Ii. PURPOSE
The purpose of the proposed airport development action to ^enton is to provide
1 an airport facility which will meet the needs of existing and forecasted aviation
demand in a safe and economical manner. To make a reasonable forecast of
aviation demand, data on the present aviation activity was obtained by conducting
an aircraft traffic count during the months r,.f January, February and Augl;st,
1972 and az inventory of based aircraft operations and applying forecasting
factors to the: data. In addition to making a determination of the present aircraft
traffic, a forecast of based aircraft operations, general aviation operations and
-l-
,
business jet oporations was projected for the years 1977, 1982 and 1992.
A summary of these forecasts of aviation dernand are as follows:
FORECAST OF AVIATION DFMAND
AVIATION ACTIVITY FORECAST FOR YEAR
1972 1977 1982 1992
Based Aircraft Operations
Single Engine Less than Four Plane 1,068 1, 330 1,440 3, 240
Single Engine, Four Places & More 39, 928 700 300 808100 990 000
Multi -Engine 1, 370 40 440 12, 360 27s600
Business Jets 0 811 1,136 1, 786
General Aviation Operattons
Itinerant 46$870 83,105 123s505 184m450
Local 66, 509 56P000 54,000 630000
Jet Operations 0 895 10495 Z,550
Itinerant
Local 0 0 0 0
Total Operations Projected 113t379 140,000 1790000 250s000
2-
777777
The prediction that Denton Airport could support a total of 811 annual business
jet operations prior to 1980, provided facilities were available, is a dominant
factor in determining the need for extending the North-South Runway from its
present length of 4, 150 feet to 6, 000 feet.
Another factor in the development of improvements at Denton is a proposal
by the Federal Aviation Administratio,i that an instrument landing system ak
the Denton Airport would be necessary and desirable both to handle anticipated
training traffic and to accommodate business jets. The need for an ILS at
Denton was brought about when the FAA revised it,3 regulations governing
training requirements for pilot licensing. Among the changes was a require-
ment that pilots receive additional training in in,3trument flight. This resulted
in an increase in the number of instrument approaches being flown at many
airports including those in the Dallas-Fort Worth area. While normal growth
in aircraft traffic in the area was taking place, other significant changes in
the airport and airspace pointed co the need for additional instrument training
facilities in the metroplex. With the opening of the Dallas-Fort Worth Airport
in 197:-, the Greater Southwest Airport was permanently closed to air traffic.
The instrument landing system at Greater Southwest could no longer be used
for training and the traffic was diverted to other more congested airports nearby.
While most of the airline training flights were shifted to the Waco-Connally
Airport in late 1973, general aviation training was absorbed at airports closer
to Dallas and Fort Worth. At that time only a few instrument landing systems
were available. These included the systems on DFW Airport, none of which
were available for training; Meacham Field in Fort Worth; and Love Field
and Addison Airport in Dallas.
3-
In late 1973, the FAA conducted an internal study of the problem to determine
the amount of traffic that would require use of the ILS equipment and whether
or not the facilities were available in the Dallas-Fort Worth Metropolitan
Area. The study considered the number of ILS training operations, air traffic
procedures and airepace use, in particular, possible trai;,ing locations which
would be compatible with the Dallas-Fort Worth 'T'erminal area operations,
I
and other factors such as convenience to users and airport layouts. Based on
this study, the Denton Municipal Airport was tentatively solected for installation
of a FAA-owned and maintained ILS and Approach Light System.
The proposed ILS would provide precision guidance to aircraft approaching
to land on Runway 17 (to the South) and is designed and sited so that the
electronic glide path would intersect the runway surface approximately 1, 000
feet fast the runway end. With an existing runway only 4, 150 feet long it is
clear hat additional length would be desirable for the purposes of accommodating
traffic: using the ILS.
The environmental effect of the II.S and accompanying medium intensity
approacl, light system is discussed in Exhibit 9. The volume and type of
aeronautical activity attributable to this installation are considered in the
forecast of aviation demand, Page 2.
Another important factor to consider at Denton is the Demand-Capacity relation-
ship, In calculating the capacity the following factors were considered.
Forecast of Aviation Population Fleet Mix
Number and Types of Runway Exits
-4-
Percent of Touch-and-Go Operations
Ratio of Arrivals to Departures
Runway Utilization
Based upon these factors, the capacity of the Denton Municipal Airport was
determined. An airport runway may generally be censidere:ri to have reached
capacity when delays to departures averaging 4 minutes during the normal
peak 2-hour period (adjacent hours) of the week. The departure delay level
for runways utilizer; by small aircraft is 2 minutes for the peak hour of the
week. Applying this criteria and using data applicable to the Denton Municipal
Airport, the practical annual capacity (PANCAP) and practical hourly capacity
(PHOCAP) were calculated as follows;
PANCAP - 169, 000 annual operations
PHOCAP - 120 operations per hour
Comparing aviation demand at the Denton Municipal Airport with these capacities,
it appears that the capacity of the airport will be exceeded during the 191301.5.
The capacity can be increased slightly by adding additional exits from the run-
way to the parallel taxiway but any substantial increase in capacity will come
from constructing an additional runway.
111, _ PLANNING ASPECTS
The North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) has the areawide
planning responsibility for Denton County, the area where the airport is
located. The NC7COO is a voluntary association of local governments serving
a sixteen county state planning region centered in the Dallas-Fort Worth urban
-5-
area. The NCTCOG is charged with a variety of responsibilities including;
Promotion of intergovernmental cooperation and cnurdination
Conducting comprehensive regional planning
Providing a forum for the study and resoktion of arnawidn problems.
In carrying out these responsibilities, the NCTCOG Staff and their consultants
have prepared a number of planning studies for the region. Included among
the studies is a Regional Airport System Plan for the 19-county area which
constitutes the North'Central Texas and Texoma State Planning Regions. The
Denton Municipal Airport is one of approximately 160 airports in the nineteen
county area. The study concludes that thert: will be a substantial increase in
air carrier activity through the year 1990 and the ax ailable General Aviation
airports will be able to accommodate only 2.4 million of the 5. 3 million
forecast operations, In addition to the need for new General Aviation airports,
a number of existing airports will require upgrading. Of the 12 General Utility
Airports ir the nineteen coiinty area, Denton Municipal Airport is one of two
general utility airports having the capability of becoming a basic transport
facility. When the development plan proposed for Denton is completed, the
airport wilt have the facilities required of a basic transport airport.
As previously stated in this assessment report, the City of Denton
has made application to the Federal Aviation Administration for federal
-b.
:as
assistance to construct the proposed improvements. A review of this
application has been made by the North Central Texas Council of
Governments planning staff, the Air Transportation Technical Ad-
visory Committee, the Government Applications Review Committee
and the NCTCOG Executive Board. On the basis of this review process
the NCTCOG Board adopted the following areawide position on this
proposal:
"The NCTCOG Review Process has disclosed no conflict
with the review criteria of areawide comprehensive planning
ac outlined in OMB Circular A-95 (revised), Favorable
consideration of the application by the funding agency is
recommended on the basis that it is c,)nsistent with NCTCOG's
Airport Systems Plan and will allow the City of Denton and
the FAA to proceed with the programming process of the
application. This recommendation is made with the under-
standing that an Environmental Impact Statement for the
project will be prepared for distribution to NCTCOG and
other interested agencies and individuals for full con-
sideration of the possible environmental impacts which
riight result if this project is impleimented."
-7-
T ,
r•
IV. DESCRIPTION OF THE PRW ECT
The following items of proposed development are shown on Exhibit 63
Page 53.
1. Strengthen existing 4100' NIS runway and taxiway system.
2. Extend NIS runway and taxiway 1000' to the south.
3. Extend NIS runway and taxiway 850' to the north.
4. Relocate Farm Road 1515 on north end of NIS runway.
5. Construct Medium-Intensity runway lighting system on extended
NIS runway and taxiway and construct rotating beacon, lighted
wind cone and segmented circle marker.
6. Relocate the existing Visual Approach Slope Indicator (VAST-2)
and convert to VASI-4.
7. Apply precision instrument marking to the extended NIS runway
and taxiway.
8. Strengthen and extend existing aircraft parking apron.
9. Clear approaches north and south of the extended NIS runway.
10. b 11. Mark and light existing power transmission lines
north and south of the extended NIS runway.
Cost estima.es and design considerattuns for the ebove work are included
as Exhibit 10, Page 62.
I
-8-
V. IMPACT OF THE 13ROJECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT
A. TEMPORARY IMPACTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT
During the construction of the proposed improvements At the Denton Municipal
Airport, there will necessarily be activities which will cause a temporary
effect on the environment. Included in these temporary effects are air
pollution, water pollution, noise pollution and solid wastes disposal.
1, AIR POLLUTION
Federal Aviation Administration Advisory Circular 150/5370-7, "Airport
Construction Controls to Prevent Air and Water Pollution" establishes
provisions for the control of dust generated during construction, The
specifications for constructing the improvements will include the provisions
of this FAA Advisory Circular to insure that dust emissions will conform to
Federal, State and Local regulations,
During the construction of the improvements the clearing and disposal of
trees and vegetation could be a source of potential air pollution. If the
Contractor is allowed to burn such trees and vegetation the specifications
will require that the Contractor conform to Local, State and Federal air
pollution regulations. It is anticipated that there will be some clearing
and disposal of trees and vegetation during the construction of the improve-
ments.
Another possible source of air pollution during construction is exhaust
emissions, from construction equipment, The extension of the runway,
.9.
particularly, on the South end will require a considerable quantity of
embankment construction. This typo of construction will require large
earth moving equipment which units exhaust fumes. It is anticipated,
however, that such exhaust emissions will constitute an insignificant
portion of total vehicular emissions in the airport area.
2. WA'TF:R POLLUTION
During the construction of the airport improvements, another temporary
impact could result if surface run-off is not controlled, thus resulting in
water pollution. Possible sources of water pollution resulting from surface
run-off include stream contamination by detergents, fuel, oil, and other
contaminants. Also uncontrolleu surface run-off results in erosion of the
land, siltation and sedimentation.
Incorporation of FAA Advisory Circular 150/5370-7 into the specification
for constructing the improvements will minimize possible temporary impacts
upon the water quality in the Denton area. Specifically, run-off into streams
will be controlled 1,y the use of drainage structures and ditches during
construction.
3. TEMPORARY NOISE IMPACTS DURING CONSTRUCTION
The improvement project at the Denton Airport will require the operation of
heavy earth moving equipment during construction. This equipment will
impose certain temporary noise impacts on the environment.
-10-
4, SOLID WASTE
Small quantities of solid waste will be gonorated at (lie airport during
the construction of the improvements. These wastes will be dispored of
in accordance with Local, State and Federal regulations and this is not
expected to be a problem.
B. PERMANENT IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT
The improvements proposed at the Denton Airport will cause increased
aviation activity and this activity will have definite permanent effects
on the environment. The permanent impact will be felt by both the
human environment and the natural environment.
1. IMPACT ON HUMAN ENVIRONMEN:r
a. NOISE EFFECTS
Improvements at the Denton Municipal Airport will cause certain
noise impacts upon the environment Expansion of the airport
will cause !ncreased activity, growth, additional employment
and some noise. Sovnd planning and careful identification of
environmental qualities, however, can be carried o+:t to achieva
a useful public facility while assuring the protection of natural
environmental values. If the required facilities at the airport
are condtructedinstages as recommended, these stages will
-li-
probably take place over a number of years, As operations
increase as a result of expanded facilities, there will be many
new environmental considerations which must be dealt with
in the operation of the airport and aircraft noise is probably
the most significant. To assess the extent and severity of
the noise impact, an accepted methodology was used - the
composite noise rating (CNR) system,
.
The CNR procedure involves the use o generalized noise
contours to estimate community response to aircraft noise
generated by existing and future aviation cictivity. Contours
around an airport are adjusted to reflect anticipated subjective I
response to aircraft noise. The CNR is not a noise measure-
ment; it cannot be measured on any sound meter. However,
it has been found to be a useful means of estimating the effects
of aircraft operations on an airport's surroandsings. Below are
definitions of three'CNR zones taken from the Bolt, Beranek
and Newman Technical Report on Land Use Planning Relating to
-12-
i
Aircraft Noise dated October, 1964, followed by expanded definitions
adapted from matorial prepared by the North Central Texas Council
of Governments for use with the map entitled "Aircraft Sound Exposure,
Dallas/fort Worth Regional Airport and Environs, " dated October 14, 1971.
BBN:
Zone I - Less Th-in 100 CNR: Essentially no complaints would be expected.
The noise may, however interfere with certain activities of the residents.
Zone Z - 100 to 115 CNR: Individuals may complain, perhaps vigorously,
Concerted group :fiction in possible.
Zone 3 - Create- than 115 CNR: Individual reactions wo-►ld likely include
repeated, vigorous complaints. Concerted grouts action might be expected.
NC,r CO C:
Zone 1 - Zone of minimal effect. Few activities will be affected by air-
craft sounds except for especially sound-sensitive act!ons (such as
auditoriums, churches, schools, hospitals, and theatres) in areas closest
to the airport. Sound control should be considered in the building design
of sucl. activities. Also in areas closest to the airport, ripen air activities
may be disrupted. Detailed studies by qualified personnel are recommended
for outdoor amphitheatres and like places of public assembly. Otherwise,
-13-
so far as aircraft sound is concerned, generally all uses may be
acceptable.
Zone 2 - Middle zone of effect. Activities where uninterrupted communica-
tion is essential should consider sound exposure in design. Generally,
residential development is not considered a suitable use although multi-
family developrriente whero sound control features have been incorporated
in building design might be considered. Open-air activities and outdoor
living must consider aircraft sound. The construction of auditoriums,
schools, churches, hospitals, and tnsaires an9 liko activities should ba
avoided within this zone where possible.
Th3 following types of uses may generally be considered without any special
sound treatments agricultural uses, mining, fishing; wholesale commercial
and some retail; industrial/manufacturing, transportation, communication
utilities and cemeteries.
The following types of uses may be considered .vithout any special sound
treatment except when near Zone 3: livestock farming and animal breeding;
golf course, riding stables, water-based recreational areas and cemeteriee.
The following types of uses may be considered only if sound treatment is
included in building design: multi-family apartments, dormitories, group
quarters, orphanages, retirement homes, etc; transient lodging, e, g. ,
motels and hotels; office buildings, personal, business and professional
-14-
services; retail commercial, movie theatres. restaurants., and noise.
sensitive types of manufacturing and corninuni cations uwcB.
Zone 3 - Zone of greatest effect. Land should be reserved for activities
that can tolerate high level of sound exposure s-ich as some agricultural,
industrial, and cc-.nmercial uses. Such sound-sensitive activities as
schools, offices, hospitals, churches, and like activities should not be
constructed in this area. No residential developments of any type are
recommended. All regularly occupied structures should consider sound
control in design.
Exhibit 7 shows the CNR noise contours which would be produced by
1977-level operations of twin and single engine piston aircraft on the
existing 4150-foot runway. Exhibit 7 also shows the CNR contours
produced by 1992-level operations which are forecasted to occur if the
proposed runway extensions are not constructed.
Exhibit 8 shows the CNR noise contours which would be produced by
forecasted 1992-level operations if the existing 4150 foot runway were
extended to the proposed 6000 foot configuration. Of course since the
6000 foot runway allows the operation of business jets, both turbofan
and turbojet aircraft were considered in the analysis, in addition to the
twin and single engine general aviation aircraft.
-15-
It should be noted that Zone 3 is not shown on either oxhibit because
It is very small and contained entirely within the airport boundaricos.
The most critical contour set of the three presented in this assessment
is shown on ]exhibit 8. The CNR 100 contour on that exhibit produces
a Zone 2 with limits between 5700 feet north of the present North runway
end to a point approximately 8200 feet south of the present South runway
end. An analysis of the contours using exhibits, aerial photographs and
I
gro,vid inspections and surveys, rer-alts in the following findings.
(1) Several farm buildings located approximately 2200 feet North of
the runway end including houses, barns and silos are located within CNR
Zone 2. The residents of these buildings will be relocated.
(2) No hospitals, clinics, schools, parks, rest homes or areas of
public assembly are located within Zone 2.
(3) CNR Zone I is that area lying outside of the 100 CNR Contour.
Only especially sound-sensitive activities close to Zone 2 would be
affected. Currently, approximately 50 residences are located between
the 90 and 100 CNR contours. No other sound-sensitive activities exist
within this area.
b. LAND USE AND COMMUNITY PATTERNS
Denton is a rapidly growing urban center in North Central Texns
characterized by urban expansion and moderate industrial expansion.
-16.
r~srs.ss ~stss,
Contributing factors include the booming growth of two large state colleges
within the cities boundaries and a state children's school and the intensive
growth of the Dallas-Fort Worth Metropolitan Complex to the south. A
community having a well-planned airport with complete physical facilities
can attract new business and industry into the community and provide jobs
and tax dollars which are necessary to the growth and well being of the
community.
The Municipal Airport is situated approximately 1. 7 miles West of 135 on
Farm Road 1515, Some industrial growth has occurred in the area between
the airport and the Denton urban area.
The improvements to the Denton Airport are expected to be a stimulus to
further industrial growth West of the city. As highway and street improve-
ments develop, such as the extension of Loop 288 around the Western part
of the city, further urbanization and industrialization will likely occur.
c. LAND USE PLAN IN DENTON
The city of Denton has carefully considered the affects of the proposed
airport expansion and is land-use plans for the Western portion of the
city. Steps have been taken and will continue to be taken to assure that
uses made of the land will be compatible with !ice airport, The actions
being taken are summarized on the following pages
rlf- ,
1. A land use plan has been prepared to aid the Denton City
Council and staff in making decisions concerning the area
West of Denton in which the airport is the major planning
factor.
2. The City of Denton has a master street plan and the alignment
of proposed streets will reflect the needs at the airport.
3. The proposed alignment of Loop 288 which affects the
airport has been officially adopted as part of the City's
plan,
4. Zoning applications in the area around the airport will be
acted upon by the city and disposition of eac'i will be
generally coi.sistent with the airport.
d. AIRPORT ACCESS
M The Denton Airport is conveniently located, being situated approximately
1.7 miles West of Interstate 35 on Farm Road 1515. Direct routes from
the Central Business District to the airport are available along the Oak
Street corridor to Interstate 35, access to Interstate 35 from the Nerth
and East parts of the city is available along University Drive which has
been improved to thoroughfare status. Approximate driving time from
the CBD Is now 20 minutes.
-1,9-
Loop 288 which traverses the Eastern perimeter of Denton is planned
i as an eventual loop highwa/, which will be located in close proximity
to the airport property, and will provide convenient access for growth
areas. As the airport becomes a more vital part of the community,
particular routes to the airport from the central business district and
suburban areas will require improvements to provide good access to
rl;e, facility as well as to serve other transportation needs. As highway
- A street improvements develop, such as the extension of Loop 288
Lround ti;e Western part of the City, the airport facility and its :iced
for good access should be considered. Upon completion of Loop 288
the approximate driving time to the airport should be reduced to 10
minutes. At this point in time access to the airport should be considered
excellent.
e. DIVISION OR DISRUPTION OF ESTABLISHED COMMUNITIES
As there are no established communities in the immediate airport area,
the development and operation of the airport is not expected to divide or
disrupt any established community or divide existing uses such as cut-off
residential areas from recreational or shoppb,j; areas in the vicinity of
the airport. The nearest residential areas of concentration of people
include the City of Denton 2.5 miles tc the East, the town of Krum, 4.4
miles to the Northwest, the town of Argyle, 5 miles to the South and
the town of Sanger, 10. 5 mtlaa to the North.
-19.
f. RELOCATION OF PERSONS
As disc+issed previously, the occupants of farm residences North of the
airport will be displaced by the project. The project will not divide or
disrupt an established community and no unusual problems In the
relocation are anticipated.
Th.3 persons who must be (isplaced will receive assistance consistent with
the "Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies
Act of 1970," Public Law 91-646. The following relocation assistance
procedures will be adhered to by the City of Denton,
1. An investigation will be made to determine the number of
individuals and families that will be displaced, after which a survey
will be conducted to determine the availability of suitable replacement
housing within the means of those displaced, Replacement housing
supplements, if applicable, will be determined. Each displaced
person will be given at least 90 days' notice before being required
to move.
The City of Denton will maintain personal contact with, and exchange
information with other agencies, including social welfare, urban renewal,
-20-
public housing authorities, Federal Housing Administration, Veterans
Adminintration, and the F, -feral Housing Administration, Veterans
I
Administration, and the Small Business Administration. Contact will
also bo maintained with private sources such as real estate brokers,
multiple listing service, and apartment owners and operators. News-
paper files will be maintained to give information on properties for
sale, available rentals, and other replacement housing information.
In addition, maps will be maintained showing the location of schools,
parks, playgrounds, shopping centers, and public transportation routes.
Also, 'FHA and VA booklets and information concerning local ordinances
and building codes and data concerning such cost as utility depsoits,
closing costs, and interest rates and terms will be made available.
Each displaced person will be advised on the information available, and,
as relocation progresses, any needed service such as providing contact
with public agencieu or private firms, will be furnished on an individual
basis. Close contact will be maintained with each displaced person
-21-
1. 1
I
until his or her move has been completed and all payments to which he
or she is entitled have been paid.
Based on a preliminary survey, adequate replacement housing will be
available in a number of locations in the Denton area,
The pr;posed project will not proceed until all displaced persons have
been rolocated into, or offered decent, safe and sanitary housing that
is open to all persons, regardless of race, color, religion, sex, or
national origin; is consistent with the requirements of Title VIII of
the Civil Rights Act us 1966; and is within the financial means of the
displaced family or individual, Simllar procedures will insure fair
and equitable treatment and payments to the affected business.
As indicated on Exhibit 8, several other residences are located further
North of the airport. None of these are proposed to be acquired as
part of this project.
-22.
2. IMPACT ON THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
The effects of the proposed airport on the natural environment may be
divided into the following areast '
Wildlife breeding, nesting, or feeding grounds
Acquatic or marine life
Wildlife refuges, watorfowl areas, and flood plain areas
Recreation areas
- Historical, archeological, a.id scenic sites
Air pollution
Water pollution and sewage treatment
a, IMPACT ON WILDLIFE BREEDING. NESTING, OR FEEDING
GROUNDS
Inasmuch as the proposed airport improvements will be an extension
to an existing, active airport, no interference with wildlife breeding,
nesting, or feeding grounds is anticipated, Review of area information
indicates that no such officially designated area exists within a20 mile
radius of the proposed airport,
The only known species which occupy the area around the Denton Airport
include the mourning dove, cottontail rabbits, coyotes and grey squirrel.
It is not expected that any of thcne species will be endangered by the
improvements to the airport. The mourning dove, a migratory fowl,
does not have a permanent nestingand feeding ground and fields adjacent
to the airport improvements will be undisturbed and available to them.
.23-
Mir a
Alternate wildlife breeding, nesting and leading grounds for rabbits,
coyotes and squirrels are 8150 av&ilahle in adjacent fields all along
Ifickory Creek and other cracks in the close proximity of the airport,
b, ~P~~6N AQUATIC AND MARINA LIFE
The principal source of potential impact on aquatic and marine life
resulting from thin project is surface runoff, The paving of additional
land for runwayii, taxiways and apron will result in additional surface
runoff, however, it is not anticirated that the magnitude of this
additional runoff will be sufficient to influence measurably the flow
or characteristics of streams in the area.
Some aircraft washing may be anticipated at the airport. However,
wash water will generally be absorbed into the ground surrounding
aircraft parking areas and will not reach streams in unfiltered form.
On the basis of these conditions, the proposed project is not anticipated
to have any effect on aquatic or marine life,
c. IMPACT ON WILDLIFE REFUQES, WATERFOWL AREAS,
AND FLOOD PLAIN AREAS
Where are no wildlife refuges or waterfowl areas in the vicinity of the
proposed airport= therefore, no adverse effects upon such will be
produced by the new airport. The runway extension at the South end of
the North-South Runway will project into the flood plain of Hickory Creek,
but these improvements are not expected to have any effect on wildlife
In the area.
-24-
i
d, IMPACT ON RECRFATION AREAS
There are no recraoition areas in the vicinity of the airport and
therefore no impact is anticipated.
e. IMPACT UPON HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND
SCENIC SITES
Review of the communities in the area of the airport indicates no
adverse impact upon historical, archaeological, or sconic sites
due te) the absence of such Sites in the vicinity of the airport. (gee
Archeologist's report in Section XI.)
f. AIR POLLUTION
Air quality at an airport is directly related to the various uuurces
of air contaminants that exist at the airport. These include;
. Aircraft
Ground vehicles
Stationary sources
'In addition, the air quality at an airport is influenced by meteorological
conditions (wind direction, wlnd velocity, at.nospharle stability, etc, )
which affect the dispersion of airborne contaminants generated by airport
pollution sources. Furthermore, non-airport sources of air pollution can
affect the air qunlity at the airport under certain meteorological conditions.
In the calculation of aircraft omissions, the general practice is to include
i
only ground operations of the aircraft and in-flight oporations below 3, 500
feet altitude (AOL). Emissions at higher altitudes cannot be considered
in the same light as those einitted at or near ground level due to major
differences in diffusion at higher altitudes and differences in efficiency of
aircraft engine operation, Calculation of emissions based on operations
below 3, 500 feet has become accepted practice for use in Congressional
investigations pursuant to the Clean Air Act of 1967 as well as in airport
planning studios. Total emissions below 3, 500 feet are estimated on the
basis of the landing-takooff (LTO) cycle, which includes approach, landing,
taxiing, takeoff, and climbout. Though only about 20 percont of total air-
craft fuel is consumed during the LTO cycle, about 80 percent of all
aircraft airborne contaminants are emitted during this phase of aircraft
operation. The amount of contaminant emissions in each phase of the LTO
cycle is dopen3ent on a number of factors such ati waiting time, length of
taxiway, rate of climb, delays, etc.
-26.
0 "s'
Because of the presence of impurities in fuels or Incomplete combustion,
the following five pollutant materials are produced during each phase
of the LTO cycle-
, CLrbon monoxide (0)
, Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
• Sulfur dioxide ($02)
• Hydrocarbons (HC)
• Particulate matter (C)
Calculation of aircraft emissions was performed combining the following
factors for operating conditions at the proposed airport,
• The type of aircraft and volume of operations expected at the airport.
The known specific emissions for those specific aircraft utilized.
• The fuel consumption during a complete landing and takeoff (LTO)
cycle for the various aircraft types.
Following is a summary of annual emissions levels generated by the at, port
including both aircraft and ground traffic emissions for the forecast level of
activity anticipated when the airport reaches capacity.
.27-
' i
AIRPORT-GENERATED AIR POLLUTION LOAD
Tone per Year
Pollutant
Surfaee-Generated Aircraft-C;enorntad Total
CO Nogligible 893.8 893,8
NOX 5.4 5, 4
SOZ 1.5
1. 5
HC " 33, 2
33.2
Particulate 1. 6
1,6
Total 935, 5
This data indicates the following,
, Forecasted air pollution load attributable to the airport is small and
will comprise an extremely small percent of the total air pollution generated
in the area. The two factors causing the aircraft-generated air pc,:lution
load to be small are the type of aircraft using the airport and the volume
of operations at the airport.
, Surface. generated air pollution load will be negligible because the
amount of surface transportation induced by the presence of tha airport
will be minimal as noted in the discussion of access.
g. WATER I'OL1.UTlON ANU SEWAGE TREATMENT
Two potential sources of water pollution will exist upon, wmpletion of the
.2g.
airport development - surface runoff and wastewater (sewage). Increased
surface runoff will result from extension of the runway, taxiway, aircraft
parking apron, and similar facilities. Because theso paved areas comprise
such a small portion of the land area surrounding the airport, it Is not
anticipated that a significant increase in surface runoff will result, nor is
it anticipated that this small increaao in storm water runoff will materially
affect the flow of streams in the area.
Increased aviation activity at the airport could increase the potential for
water pollution and facilities to eliminate these problems will be necessary.
As aviation activity grow. a means of properly treating domestic sewage,
industrial wastes and other airport wastes becomes more critical. The
present method of treating wastewater at the airport Is by septic lank and
tile field, The City has recently improved this system and it should 1 , ve
sufficient capacity for the present level of operations. Also recently the
City voted bonds to extend water and sower service to the airport and the
i
City's water and waste treatment syatems should be available when additional
capacity is needed at the airport.
Fuel spillage on the apron areas is a potential pollution pi:obler.,. When
this occurs the fuel or oil is often carried by storm water runoff or by
water from aircraft washdown areas into wasto reatment plants or open
streams, Fuel separators which will separate and store waste aircraft
fuel can be constructed to prevent this typo of pollution. The two creeks
-29.
located in the vicinity of the airport, Hickory Creek and dry fork of
Hickory Creek, are subject to possible erosion caused by storm water
runoff from the airliold aroas of the airport. Drainage channels which
receive discharge from the storm sewer system should I,o sodded or
lined with concrete to prevent erosion and possible siliing of the natural
streams.
h. WATER TREATI ENT
Water at the airport is supplied through connections to the city water system.
The city water system is approved by state and foderal agencies,
i. EFFECTS ON THE WATER TABLE OF THE AREA
Operation or construction of improvements at the airport are not expected to
have an effect on the water table as the principal water supply Is expected to
come to the airport through a pipe system,
j. SOI.ID_WAS', E DISPOSAL
Solid Waste collection and disposal at the airport is performed by the Sanitation
Department of the City. The solid waste is deposited In a city-owned landfill
and this landfill has been approved by the Texas State Health Department.
VI. UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The proposed airport development action will Impose.cortairn unavoidable
adverse environmental effects; however, the magnitude and ox `ont of these
impacts are considered minimal. Each of these impacts Is summarized
on the following page,
-30-
NOI. SF=
The proposed airport improvements at Denton will impose a limited noise
effect upon areas not previously affected due to the extension of the runway
to 6, 000 feet. The now runway length will attract some business jet aircraft
and it is expected that these aircraft will impose a noise Impact which will
generally be confined to the airport property and to land currently devoted
to agricultural uses.
WATER POLLUTION
The proposed improvements will cause a small Incruaso in surface runoff,
thus creating an incroase potential for adverse affects upon water quality
due to erosion, siltation and sedimentation. Those effects will be minimized
by the of accepted engineering principles.
AIRS QUALITY
The improvements at the Denton Airport will rosult in a etnall Increase in
air pollution due to increased aircraft activity aid surface transportation, to
and from the airport. It is expected that the total emissions level will be
minimal and therefore the impact on the quality of the air will be moderate,
-31-
VII, AI.71MNATIVES TO TIIE PROPOSED ACTION
In proparing recommendations for airport development actions, a variety
of alternatives were considered. Included among these area
Do-Nothing alternative
Expwision of existing facilities
Construction of a new airport on a now site.
An analysis of each of those alternatives is prosentod below,
Do-Nothing Alternative
The do-nottiing alternative Is unacceptablo for the following reasons. First,
potential aviation activity at the Denton Airport indicates a need for Improve-
monts which will allow the airport to accommodate business Jot aircraft. The
type of aircraft expected at Denton will require a 6,000 foot runway. The
I
present runway longth is 4, 150 foot and therefore the runway must be extended
to accommodate the expected demand for services.
Second, the Denton Airport has been tentatively selected for installation of
a FAA owned and maintained instrument landing system and approach lighting
system. The purpose of this installation is to provide an airport in the Dallas-
Fort Worth area for ILS Training Operations, Denton hag been determined
as a compatible location with the Dallas-Fort Worth Terminal Area Operat .-ni,
for such a training site.
Third, the existing runway pavement at the Denton Airport has begun to ,pall
and is seriously in need of rehabilitating, The do-nothing alternative would
-32-
not be wise in view of the multi-million dollar Investi
by the City of Denton, rinnt at the airport
EXPANSION OF EXISTING FACILITIES
Expansion of the existing Denton Airport is p0,1siblo and desirable. A
description of the proposed development action is described elsewhere
in this report and a logical sequence for constructing the proposed
improvements is as follows;
1, Overlay North-South Runway,
2. Relocate FM 1515,
3, Extend North-South Runway and Taxiway 850 feet to north,
reconstruct lighting system and relocate VASI-2 on north
end, North-South Runway,
4, Construct Instrument Landing System,
5, Extend North-South Runway and Taxiway, 1000 feet on south
end, extend lighting system and convert V.ASI.2 to VASI-4,
6. Strengthen existing taxiways and apron,
CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW AIRPORT ON A NEW SITE
Construction of a new airport on a new site and abandonment of the
existing airport is nat recommended, Using present day construction costs,
such a plan would not be economically sound and would be wasteful, The present
-33.
airport facility requires soma remedial construction but is generally in
good condition.
VI11. SNORT-TERM EFFECTS/LONG-TERM BENEFIT
Short-Term Effects
The proposed airport development action will impose certain temporary
effects upon the area surrounding the airport site. Included among these
are fugitive dust emissions generated during construction, especially by
site preparation work. In order to minimize the potential for generation
of dust during construction, construction specifications for this protect
will include the provisions stated in FAA's Advisory Circular 150/5370.7,
",^.irport Construction Controls to Prevent Air and Water Pollution."
Adherence to these specifications during construction will also serve to
minimize the potential for erosion and siltation generated by the surface
run-off.
Long-Term Benefit
An airport development action of the type described in this report will
produce and induce a number of positive effects upon the community served
by the airport. These effects are treated in subsequent paragraphs under
two broad headings economic benefits and socio-environmental benefits.
I
i
-34-
l
conomic Benefits
The proposed airport expansion will produce both direct and Indirect
economic; effects. Included among those are:
Direct effects - The direct economic benefits accruing to the
communities will take the form of increased jobs and Income attributed
to the operation of the airport. If the forecasted ievols of aircraft
aperations materialize, as they should, it may be safely stated that a
full-time airport manager and support staff will be required. These
jobs and incomes may be termed direct economic benefits of the
proposed project.
Indirect effects - The proposed airport expansion will also
product;, several secondary and tertiary economic effects within the
community. These secondary effects include the jobs and incomes
created within the community as a result of increased sales and aerv;ces
to the airport and airport users.
-33-
Tertiary benefits are perhaps the most important effect, however, and
include such factors as savings in travel time for airport users and the
provision of adequate airport facilities as part of the communities' service/
i,nstituQonal infrastructure, Clearly, if airport users in the Denton area
are compolled to use more distant airports becauso of inadequate airport
facilities, then each trip to and from an alternative airport will exact
a travel time cost, contribute to traffic congestion and air pollution,
and produce unnecessary consumption of gasoline through extra driving.
These oftects will be averted by the provision of a convenient, expanded
airport facility.
In terms of the airport's contribution to area commt,nilios' infrastructure,
some background is necessary. Economibts concerned with economic
development in underdeveloped national regions as well as in economically
advanced areas have iocognized the essential nature of adequate transporia-
Lion facilities and services as a precondition for optimal growth, Such
facilities comprise a part of what is termed social overhead capital (SOL).
SOC also includes other public and quasi-public facilities and services
such as schools, hospitals, and police/fire protection,
While it inust be acknowledged that the Denton area is not oconomictilly
underdeveloped or depressed because of inadequate SOC, the proposed airport
I
expansion will add to the area's appeal to light industries and other businesses
which operate corporate aireroft, The effect will be to make the area more
attractive for now busineva locations,
-3b•
Socio-Environmental effects - The proposed airport development
action will provide the 19-county NCTCOG study area with an essential
component in thf- region's airport system study. The disruptive effects
will be minimal, as noted preivionsly.
IX. IRREVERSIBLE OR IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES
The proposed airport development action will involve no irreversible or
irretrievable commitments of resources except that the labor and materials
I
associated with construction of the airport improvements will be consumed
in the implementation of the project. It is not possible to accurately predict
i
the amount of fuel and other materials that will be consumed by the con-
struction. The best indication of the committment of resources is coat.
-37-
i
II
X. PUBLIC HEARING
A notice of an opportunity to request. a public hearing was publJohed
in the local newspaper on February 2 end February 9, 1977. X,)
requests for a hearing were received, (See letter and publisher's
affidavit in Section XI-)
-38-
XI. LETTERS
PAGE NA_._
A. City of Denton - Public Hearing 40
B. North Texas State University - Archeologist's Report 43
C. City of Denton - Compatible Land Use 44
D. North Central Texas Council of Governments 46
-34-
M
IVA OtY Of Denton s) Miniripal Building, Denton,7~xas76201
si Rrotor
FA bays
March 7, 1977 AIAR 14 1911
?OUT NO
Mr. Steve Stuckey t`'s
FAA
P. 0. Box 1689
Fort North, Tx. 76101 ORIG.
Dear Steve: COPY
Enclosed is the publisher's affidavit for a Notice of oppor- tins
tunity For a Public Hearing. As you pro;;ably know, we received
no requests for a public hearing.
Let me know if you need anything else.
Sincerely,
4
William1K. Cole
Assistant to the City Manager
WKC/ f s. t
Encl.
-40-~
HERE PASTETHE NOTICE BY
PUBLICATION CUT FROM PAPER t'rr~
I FO.~-RRAPICHP-ARNho
The City or t>,nton tnunde to ' IN""' EmxrmR OF TIIF:
suomn 10 IM Pederal Avlstion
Adminlafration a rVuest for
Federal funds to here carry out
the fotlowln? deve opment at
Denfon Municipal Airport, Donlon,
Texnt
I. Strengthen Exhting 4,150 Foot
North,Soufh Runway and Taxiway
stem
11. Extend North•Soulh Runwav
and Taxiway 1,006 Feet to Ihb _
and Taxlway 7ttteend OR Feel 10 the NOAR
Rt
NorhEtruct edlwa°,nR~ w y AFF'IDAVITOF 1'I111LISII 11 To
On 1ho I'F11i1.l(:ATION OF' I,F:(;,%I, \1)'1•II;F:
Coon Foot %otin.souilh*M Runway
and Text= System and Con.
eruct Rotating Beacon, Llaahied
WlndcoM and Soo, nenfed Clrele
1. Relocate l0 visual Exislinqq Visual
Approach Slope IndeIII V and
Cowlor.I 1 iI~'tllhs•
Approach Slope
ndiut '
COnWKII Precis bn In-drumenl
Marking oA 1,000 Pest Noris-South
Runway and Text*#Y Iq`_
l Sir* rpthen and ~Ex Bend Exl►tlno
Irci,
ApaprrOaCh "I Oft NoAh
f!}hd South End, 1,006 Foot North
IsslgoouuMarrk andLfgPitppnnTP&L 179 KV
End kalh ha !Mp/Runw•Mye South
Ph Tronim~lp on l llnnipn~ko h r
End, korth•soulh Runway '
A^y penon may repwM Mat an
open pubIle hMritq be had for the
~)r 0 of confldartnp Me social
to lei and env ran mental
eftecis of he ~erropoprl iocW and .
11}
Its eonalatencYWcwlfh he poets and 1)rltul}
66 has been ib Oulploar Ph
For a NQwsl for Publk hMrlffQQ to
is honored, pea ergnej wrlflam
roquost W 4FN f rolve d not iallor ffhran
p'm..the thol Fe wary, 1071
tl tM oflke WW tM trill Gty Hall Detdarl TexN 11711, A
documa4 wmppmartcinqq Ih IM.
.
eWP*dW to ravi~'pp ^11 on.
vironmant has !aeon Prepared and
N available b?envmgpfanon
ho n r N 1Our 60 sp devs W;owt csx,
p
PuDlkafw of thle 001icl and prior
loamy MiRMQ 11~g I IS ppfff~~fN
Rkhard
tCOhairmin,
I
NY of Donlan
Airport Advrary Board
i
~41r
f
IN THE AiA'I"I'E11 OF
CITY OF gcNT01~_
TILE STATE; OFTE:XAS Ray Appleton, Jr.
CAmnty of Drnion
heing duly miorn, says he Is the Geru-ral Manager of the Dcnh►n Record-Chronirle, n newspaper
of general eirculatlon which has liven rontlnrroualy and regularly publiAhed for a period of not
less than tine year In the County of Desiton, Tu%n.n, preceding the date of the altar-hed notice, and
that the s~ald notice wan published in sahl paper on this following dnU+ri s
_NOTICE OF OPPORTUNITX 1'OR A PUBIC HEARING...City ,request for Federal
funds to help it carry out the following... Extend North-South runway...
Construct Medium intensity Runway Lightin System... Mark and Light TP 6 L
60KV4..person may request that an open publi hearing... document sum-
marizing the impact which the proposed prof ct is expected to have,,a
available... 30 days following publication of th noti - V~
February 2, 9, 1977 _
Subscribed and sworn to before me Ihin _---Uth_day of _..._.February .19 _T_Z.__.
Witness my hand and official seal. ee'.•
f Notary PUbli Mentor Cuu '
3, ins
.42.
11 ~ 1 t 1'I
• ii)~{r• April 70 1977
North Tau
State
University
Denton. Texas
76203
^fnstilute
of
Mr. King Cale Applied
Sciences
City Manager, City of Denton
Municipal Building
Dontone TX 76201
Dear Kingt
This letter is a report on the results of. An archaeological survey
of approximately 108 acres to be affected by the proposed city of
Denton Airport enlargement.
The survey was designed to locate and evaluate any culuural
resources which would be adversely affected by tho proposed construction
and to identify cultural sites eligible for nomination to the National
Register of Historic Places.
A Research Archaeologist and student assistants from the Institute
of Applied Sciences, North Texas Stato University, cbnduct:vd an intensive
on=foot survey of the enlargement area. The portion of the land owned by
Mr. B. A. Weaver was not surveyed because access was not granted.
Visual inspection of the proposed enlargement areas failed to reveal
the presence of any cultural resources. Much of the Area was covered by
thick vegetation or recent flood debriu and was thus inaccessible for
evaluntion. The negative results of the purvey do not rroclude the
pogsibility'that subsurface resources will be round durinq construction
operationsf W these are encountered, they should IN1 rvjortcd In order
that they may be properly recorded. cntr past experience in this and
nearby areas, however, indicates that the probability of such finds to
unlikely.
Sincerely,
/ IL Olin F. McCormick
Research Archaeologist
OFM/ms
-43.
r
C.
sty of Denton o Atunu ripai Birit(mig, 1)ettf01t,7pt0s 7'6201
V
4!!x.112 t 1
March 17, 1977
e. -ell
Mr Hugh W. Lyon
Chief, Planning Branch
Federal Aviatfon Administration
Southwest Region
P.O, Box 1689 `
Fort Worth, TX 76101
Dear Mr, Lyon:
This letter is in response to your inquiry concerning
Denton's jurisdictional authority to regulate land
development in the area surrounding the airport, The
Denton Municipal Airport is located on the went side of
the city just within the present city boundaries. There
is a limited area on the perimeter of the north and
south aides of the airport property, and an extensive
area on the east side of the airport property that is
within the city and subject to zoning control. The
airport property itself is zoned Light Industrial while
the surrounding property is zoned Agricultural. For
goporties outside the present city boundaries, Denton
s the right of subdivision review and approval for a
two mile radius making up our Extra Territorial Juris-
diction area.
While the•present zoning and subdivision tools do provide
a degree of protection, it is the staff opinion that these
controls are not fully adequate to insure that incompatible
development does not occur on the perimeter of the airport.
We are certainly in agreement that this area needs special
development standards to protect both the airport operation
and surrounding property owners. The city planning staff
is investigating several ways to provide this protection.
The most direct approach would be to annex into the city
the area that will be adversely affected by airport noise
and to design a special zoning classification that would
exclude most residential development. It is our intention
-44.
Mr. Hugh W. Lyon
Page 2
March 17, 1977
that a staff recommendation propposing development stan-
dards in the airport area will be submitted to the de-
cision makers during the next several months,
proposals will, of course, be coordinated with here
special height requirements developed to prevent flight
obstructions.
If we can provide additional information, please contact
me.
Sincerely,
r
ll 4 r0'_' 4
John Lavretta
Director of Planning
JL. dw
-45-
,n,I Central takes Worm of 60yernments
T ~ 1, 1. [ , N. O Oriv.V COO Arbr,rlirn. Teas KIASF NOTE 011R khY ,
s rrorr
iLItPHOAE NauecR J!►1' 28 9'is
3 ~J s (817) 640.3300
(4HU SA)Ar. A))pArs$) -
NCTCLNG
ARLI
.,rK. ?wri
F 0- June 24, 1976
Mr. Jim W. White r~~-
City Manager, City of Benton
e. t
Municipal er,ding, RE: 6-06-03000
1 Received
Airport Impro ~mants Project 10, 19
Renton, Texas 76201 ~l • ~
Denton Munictpnl Airport ccl!):.
Dear Mr. White: FILE `.y
Your application for a grant In the amount of $1,656,038 from the Department of Trans
rvdtrol Aviation Admlydsfrotion for file above eritttlcd P0160 PoAotion,
has been ewod by ia
North Central Texas Council of Governments. This review Inclu
ded thernotifica ion tof
potentially affected local governments including Denton ISD and Denton County. These
focal governments were invited to comment on the local impact of the `noposol, however,
no response to this notification has been received as of this date.
In addition, the project was reviewed for appropriate area-wide concern T.
This
process Included consideration by appropriate NCTCOG planning staff, by the Air T ans-
portation Technical Advisory Commlttee on Jvno 2, by the Government Applications
Committee on June 16, and by the NCTCOG Executive Board on June 23, On the basisiew
or that review process, the Board adopted the following oroowide position on this proposal:
"The NCTCOG RevNw Process hot disclos,rd no conflict with the
review criteria of oreawlde comprehensive planning as outlined in
OMB Circular A-95 (revised), Favorable consideration of the
application by the funding agency is recommended on the bails that
It is consistent with NCTCOG's Airport Systems Plan and will allow
the City of Denton and fhe FAA to proceed with the programming
process of the application. This recomrnondotion Is made with the
understanding that an Environmental Impact Statement for the project
will bb prepared for distribution to 14CTCOG and other interested
agencies and indtvlduols for full consideration of the possible environ-
mental Impacts which might result if this project Is implemented."
We sincerely thank you and your staff for your kind cooporation in this mot tort and if we
can I,e of further service or osststance, ploose feel free to call upon us.
Sln roly,
(o -46- William J. Pit ck
Executive Director
° f;rnrne D. Cen1PV. Actinn Chief. FAA
E X H I B I T S
PACE lot)?
1. Location Map
48
2. Airport location in Dallas-Ft. Worth
Terminal G ntrol Area
49
3. Airport location in Relation to
Terrain and Drainage Features
50
4, Denton Municipal Airport Service
Area 25
51
5. Relationship of the Denton Municipal
Airport to Dallas - Ft, Worth Metropolitan Area
52
64 Airport Development Plan
33
7. CNR Noise Map 4150-Ft. Runway 54
8, CNR Noise Map 6,000-Ft. Runway
55
9. Environmental Assessment of a Standard Category I
Instrument Landing System
56
10, Project Design and Cost Considerations
62
11. Coordination Comments and Responses
79
-47-
x
. I J
J o '
W N x
M W
fx p
w O. in a.
F- a Q Q
v J ~
_Q4 a ii p
y I
I = J J 1 r 0 J
vi w .-0 1
z
z
Y
0100
u
y
O'I
z1
a ? ~
w ~
r - fog a"
135 ~ Q ~
V 4
now WA
09£ 'H'S
WMAVANNOMONOW 3 5 E N
v o
• Z a r~e
tu z u co
Z N of a Nl
W % cr
o x z
~Iz Q
w vi tl H
_ t
OQ r IU.5. W
~ tom- ~1 ® II
.5. r
r"' UAi
led
DENTON AIRPOiZ r /
• i e L O•
L
.r n ~ r ,r't tai ~ ~ _ / ~ % v.'
~ f M
1 Mili'.tr t fi ~'4 _ ,..r u•, ' 1 r ~ ' 'rJ it
1 ,l~ •,N a~ w: 1 r lam, ~ ~ ~ •
ylx 1 NJ r.,j~ A.. r
w r 1 \ r.
lip,
a ' S SUR 1~ r .Y'
tP'L a1, r ' . ~ r%.,.:1 fi • • 1f•
r - 0-FW'AIRi~oRt _ y
' w r
N
lit
If A
• 6
IIM_rr
" 'Loy ►„l s~ ~ , 1 ~ • ~l ' r~ I .L• ~ '
uls
✓ r
' ~,I► e f e'C' E ~ ~ ' ~
• 111! , r.,l urulr n/ j•1
AIRPORT LOCATION IN DALLAS-FT WORTH
TERMINAL CONTROL AREA
0 ti `49`
!0 EXIIISIT 2
SCALF. IN STATUTE MILES
r
M
UA3;~h--''mil •lti
LXW
.r- O,i':} ~~r I!1~ • 1 ~~~`aVl,
0 AT •I - t tit \ _ .~1,1t~ ~i ti., i+ d
elf ~i/ ~°~f-_, ,
j ' A ~'v t LY
, \ ~v ti•), its •II` Y.,, ` ` _ I Q 44
a
n d
s s O Y (3 p
r w ~ ~
a 1,- ~ ` pa ~ ~ fir. o J Z
0 Qp. ce
a I I,. ~•I ,
7 ~ ` ~ [ I - ~ I , it
16
-10 f
1 I j
r C! 7
I ~ 1 , 1 • ♦ V1
0
u
-50-
COOKE GRAYsON JFANN 21
22
WISE DENTON COLLIN
24 25 26
HUNT
28
ROCK
PALO PINTO- WALL
PARKER 27
9 WTVAIM SNOYAM
KAU FMAN
HOOD• 30
SOMERVELL
JOHNSON
33
E
4
ERATH X32
31 ~
NAVARRO
35
'-FNTON MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
-51- SERVICE AREA 23
V414ilw, hC0ll&ffNKLl,%
cu~:vrir~ t+cNtiu
EXHIBIT 4
1 ~ _ -yy V L•
MMN ,
•q
V4
. •N it 1. 1 J { 1~
•1 /
- ♦y ILL 1 • I
- r , ~~+C' x r 1 K
r
r r ti `j
1 W I
t A., Er U3
oQ
1 off
f` Q
•sz-
l A,~i•"
~l Y rj.r„ r. Ir~
I °r t. A 1 16 1
e
air[ Ol'A 1401 Iill
°1 4 1 } .J w♦ 1 tlNa~l oni ul~r
Ii~71IGA - .II1~
I/hA,k. 1114 I l
w n . x Iolnrrt r1 i~ I)... i
J yy ' rorl I1 II'q M'R r; O
1 r1 I r~~~i ~ tl . ~ ie rl wi ii:YYK ti. iyi ore ll~, rY ry~~x~ ••~I•~.
• y ` J a MAN GYI II:/ til Rir rid 1. w'
r r
" t
t
1
VIGIMIiT MaA
! ry 1 IA ~ rillw
.t,' 1•..1 4u II '
r
•Y• t, '4 5
~IN4 _ Rlili ~
Itit 13 0 P.
Mot, h.woPV •nt N,q INr4 nuA a ~ I I
Y1 gNrll• IyrI IU. IYIIIf to rYr{uH MFq ~ i
ANN rrl 1, 4111 N'A }N NA; 111 U IYYf
Y rn IYrI 1'+1 1
1. r 11•1Q1tr / /1 ,AL I f /(~rl°YFIN f N.w{.Arlt1 { „J I A 1 ♦n..II w
;n FMC4ANNI C1 r.a I A rent wn1«I.~ i` 1
J' Itrr1. Ir1 l
1 I t. ' 14. L~ ' - j r w 1 ~ i nJ A 1~ 11,Y i
1.01 _ A-.
T
, _ I__.Y_1 s i t RVryI/.~,INI r. _ N w M qu
w
111 r.'r I1AYI FO./r I r; .S 1.,.,_,.r !~1~~...1. .w MIL _t...,afrf/.,., u.~ 1J 1 1 II{I 1 f 1).. 1 a~.tli
}.111V4.Nf lIM1. I / / +r .r. "aJ ~nrf' f~/ . .NI -~--•1" .Irww~{lY~ + 1/ / l~l! ~ I
r1!` !j IInYOeIY AF' iF 1 rv Iint Y• I i
HqY Iny HIY.u t•r LL.. 4 / `l l a1N ha
I
01/~% i R~Imnll~tlwA.ln'
I r, LL YI"to Ir.IAN}NarMrnNl dlU lr+N r / ! L~S~I
11111110} I 10.111 j1 111111
JvvL
' r _ aa,l~lr .rl f i r
r.t«1 Ir NH. eq" n~rMle
r 1' t i ,r/ li, 1i AN! tAo na .e
AlNetlgf IMpgOVIMiHIS ~ i r ~-'r
r N4}W/ hY1V{ 110110} VO INIMlx NAM, AM
Or{^r "I"I YI. 1n1tl1 I" MINI. 1044 qlt or -pool Ir=F ARf T»_" y~~.-~»a- I _
11 rte.. _ _
"I'm r17•,* vY1111 NNMr IYf HIIa11 IAn Illr to jiyf 611,1 IiAll
AuNiL Ilid• _
1 n1A111 1604 0040 Alt m w,Alll fu, rMto 1MtN 00,
ij•-tIF 111
FYiill lot of
.II frIYr i
MN
' 1111100 al 1. r.a M}HL}r FAIIr Utr 4Yt tH ll. AY IM{IIYI 1411 lMill Ilth Alt
6 f ,1r.YpI II 1MIM t11r 11 to ~rti+ too +'1#r I;li(~r.1 hl.tli M{'AYI l ~k 1 {I IX
1 Irne III a ArIAS It M, rrt« 11 W, AW 41 + A'~ fi7d1 rn i
rr{~i~ 11' 1.. 41
.I lMlll 11Nr1A. Hu I IIe IfN"BI }A t4lr 1 4 t iiA I
r n•+`nwr Mlrfp~r Iwll I11NY1 uinrl °r/mn.lMr l_ l_ 1 _.l_ / LAK41r t.ll 2Mht 11N Lil 641N, /1t {lIrw «1. Ix .1r 1 411.14 r'y`ylr'V`ylll
\+ry0 /1wIA1,l1 _ 1411
Y lif 11Y'! tvilmq AU., ri..Al AWN yal i NIVAe/ 1'fl IHIAI'If Yi Isili of fF
Ilgrll I Ir
felt ~rrn~~• AMII Mwrll lti lY to" ANN 1'1 11 ~N~ fryr w 1hll 41161 EUYY hi0y t0y1
rNU.14d nM1AHIdrtlkN0 t w,wI
khI F A1111ORY orVElomlINT P1 AN
1l 111 Y 111.11
•\.r rwA IrI,YI Ir11 III ""'s r. r1 ......p I } 11Yr DIY
Ir.Nx INY N^'.1,1i1N R!A., 1Ai. txFrirr r
P".6, Ml nl ".1~AYI INI♦ Nr,l { q .1 1
n W... IVn l All, IIYI IOq 4441
♦VIU 1.16 M1x 1':In1x A.1Y 111 16114 y., .r.11 'I F. 1.-1r ,..1 •rnlm i arv 1111111.11iA'.l 14
t Vey,
r
to C44
•~i 1. ~',yi` V 1 • /I
\ ` 1
It.
100 CNII
rte, I 1 r • L
36 IF
till
'I s14000 ;
OEN1'ON MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
~k ; ;"sI ova to 009401"1
C N R NOISE MAP 4,1501 RUNWAY
I
coNloulu oust to orclurloms ,
IH IN>t
.Sy. KXHIBiT 7
• ` i ~r, j~F•1'.i -•~r!'1~• .Z :1:t6', b ~ r • L.J~ ~ ~ fr
14 N-p
_ r JI'~,' .:1 ilk .i t _ T~ r+, ~
/ ` , "Ir \ Vfp 1 ♦ '.1 fry
%
ZONE loo ChR
1 ~ •t,• j y ~y1~f}
rs VIA
J . % ~S! • 777 • , l`'s t ~ ~ j
to ch err?
f ~ l41 r v
to CHR
1 F r. IS r' ,i+
` _rK ZONE 2 ' ..LsJ - 'r O / 4q ,
1 ZONE 1 -
0 of
loo twill
r1.7~~'~ 1 F-.~» ` .y,jS~• r-~•7~-.. rK~.yr~•. F'• ' ~ • ` lI ~ f~i ,l
%
.41
lit
PA 4
DENTON MUNICIPAL AIRPORT.
CNR NOISE MAP 6,000' RUNWAY
1992 OPERATIONS
EKHIBIT 8 -55-
EXHIBIT 9
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPOIJTATION
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
SOUTHWEST R11:GION
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF A STANDARD CATEGORY I INSTRUMENT LANDING
SYSTEM
1. INTRODUCTION, This assessment reflects the technical characteristics' and the
normal environmental impact of the standard instrument landing system (ILS) with a
medium intensity approach lighting system (MALSR).
11, DESCRIPTION.
A. The instrument landing system including a medium intensity approach
lighting system will be located on existing airport property except possibly for the
marker beacons and porMons of the MALSR. The Category I ILS approach is defined
as an instrument approach procedure which provides approaches to minimums of a
decision hoight of 200 feet and runway visual range of 2400 feet.
1. The 1IS provides guidance information to pilots of properly equipped
aircraft, assisting them in landing safely under weather zonditions of reduced
ceilings and lowered visibility. The use of the ILS materially aids the service to
airports so equipped.
2. The ILS provides tho pilot in the aircraft with three bas!c types of
navigation information as outlined below. Other aide may aleo be provided to
supplement the ILS.
(a) Lateral guidance information provided by the ILS localizer
indicates to the pilot whether the a craft is to't a right, left, or in alignment with
the approach course line. This guidance applies principally to the front course
and usually to the back course.
(b) Vertical guidance information provided by the ILS glide
slope indicates the aircraft position above, below, or along the proper descent
angle toward the runway touchdown point.
(c) Distance information provided by the ILS outer and middle
markers and/or d;gtance measuring equipment indicates the aircraft approximate
distance from the rn,nway threshold.
-Sb.
4
(d) Supplemontarr Compass locators are sometimes pro-
vided at one or other marker sites to assist the pilot of the aircraft in locating
the ILS course. Other types of navigational aids may also be used for this purpose.
Medium intensity approach lighting eystebris with sequence flashers and other visual
aids are usually provided to w+-rk :n conjunction with the ILS. Attachment I shows
the standard characteristics and tormin0ogy of the US. The components of the
1[s are continuously monitored at the Pite with automatic equipment to shut down
the facility if the signal parameters r.tcceed preestablished limits.
B. Medium Intensity Approach Lighting SXStem
1. The term "visual guidance lighting system" is used for identifying
those light configurations located on and in the vicinity of an airport for the purpose
of providing pilots with a visual reference for guidance purposes or improving the
operational safety of the aircraft during approach for ?anding.
2. The medium intensity approach lighting system is a configuration
of lights disposed symmetrically about the extended runway centerline starting at
the landing threshold and extending outward into the approach zone of the airport,
This system provided visual information on runway alignment, roll guidance, and
horizontal references. It is used for precision approaches in conjunction with an
ILS and for Category I operations and is normally 2400 feet In length, except at
some international airports in which it is 3000 feet In length, The standard 2400-
foot MALSR with sequenced flashers used for precision approaches under Category
I operations is designated MALSR.
Ill. CHARACTERISTICS.
A. Electronic Emissions
The electronic emissions produced by the ILS are low in power density,
which precludes abnormal biological effects. The frequencies are within those
assigned to the aeronautical services.
1. Component Emissions
as Localizer
Operates on one of the 20 assigned channels within the frequency
)and of 108 to 122 MHz, Transmitter power can vary from 20 to 200 watts with an
intenna gain of 4 to 12 db. The localizer signals are adjusted to produce an angular
width between 3 degrees and b degrees and a linear width of about 700 feet at the
runway throshold. Cho usable distance varies from 18 to 25 miles. At 25 miles
•S1-
the usable signal is within ± 10 degrees of the centerline at .114 dbw/m2, At
17 miles the usable signal is within t 35 degrees of centerline, The localizer
course tends to be a straight line which coincides with the runway centerline
in two directions forming a front and back course. The size of the localizer
building housing the electronic equipment is approximately 8' x 10' and is on
the airport near the runway it serves.
b, Glide Slope
Operates in the frequency band of 329. 3 through 335, 0 MHz
with 20 assigned discrete frequencies available within this band, The maximum
power varies from 10 to 14 wa►►3 to a usabledistance of 10 miles and f 8 degrees
of the centerline of the runway at .95 dbw/m , The glide slope or path projection
angle is normally adjusted to 3 degrees above the horizontal so that it intersects
the middle marker at about 200 feet and the outer marker at about 1400 feet above
the runway elevation. The size of theglide slope building housing the electronic
equipment is approximately 8' by 10' and is on the airport adjacent the runway it
serves.
c. Marker Beacons
Operates at 75 MHz in a highly directional vertical plane
which makes an elliptical shape in the horizontal plane, The usable pattern
should be the width of the localizer path at themarker and extended vertically
in ellip!ical shape to 3000 feet. The power is 3 watts or less. The outor and
middle markers are usually pole mounted and within a fenced area of 121 by 120.
B. Light Emissions
The MALSR consists of seven centerline bars of five white lights in each
bar and 200-foot spacing of the bars. Abeam each side of the fifth centerline
bar is a bar of five white lights, The sequenced flashing lights emit a bluish-
white light and flash in sequence toward the threshold at a rate of two flashes
per second. The flashing lights appear as a ball of light traveling toward the
runway threshold at a speed of approximately 4100 miles per hour. There are
five flashers, each spaced at 200-foot intervals, beginning at 1600 feet from the
runway threshold along the centerline extended to 2400 foot,
The typth of lights used in a medium intensity approach lighting system are as
followb;
11) 150-watt, PAR-38 lamps for steady burning, above ground white
lights,
.58-
s
(Z) Condenser-discharge light (sequenced flasher). The light is
distributed as a beam of light emitting 12.5 degrees from the light beam center
as follows:
Stop 3--15, 000} 3, 000 effective candles
St* 2-- 3, 900 750 effective candles
Step 1-- 150 50 effective candlos
The flash duration is between 75 and 300 microseconds at the 50 percent candle
power intensity level. The peak effective candles do not exceed 18, 000.
C. Noise Emissions
In each of these buildings, an air conditioner or a ventilating system
may be installed. Either system must meet the criteria in Specification FAA-C-
2256a, 't'emperature and Humidity Control Equipment. The noise of the associated
electronic system in the building is measured at a point of highest noise level
at a distaw:e of 3 feet from the exterior surface of the equipment. The combined
noise mustnot exceed the criteria of Specification FAA-0-2100/lb, Electronic
Equipment, General Requirements, Part I, Basic Requirements for all Equip-
ments. This criteria is tabulated below:
Frequency 20 25 150 300 600 1200 2400 4800
Brand HZ 75 150 300 600 -1200 240.0 4800 10000
Sound Pressure
I.ovel db
A/C 69 62 56 50 47 45 43 43
Electronic
Equipment 100 89 82 76 73 70 68 67
This criteria is within the acceptable .oval of the damage-risk contours for an
8-hour work day.
The localizer, glide slope, and marker beacon shelter may have an engine generator
for standby power. Those engine generators range from 20 kw, 15 kw, and 5 kw
respectively. The noise produced by the engine generator Is mostly contained within
the building. Maintenance personnel attending these units are in the engine
generator room for short period of time, and the noises should have no damaging
effect to their hearing. Occupational health standards have been established for
personnel working with this equipment.
-59-
SPIN
D. Fossil Fuel Emissions
In order to have an adequate margin of safely for aircraft utilizing,
the ILS, engine generators provide standby power in the event of a commercial
power failure. The fossil fuel emissions produced by the engine generator are
minimal or similar to that of an automobile engine and can be anticipated to occur
only during emergency operations or periods of routine maintenance. Current
programs have been introduced to modify all fuel tanks in accordance with HEW
standards to prevent vapor emissions during refueling.
E. Air Traffic Pattern
The installation of an ILS will designate the primary instrument runway
with the result that the utilization of that runway will increase during Inclement
weather. The net effect in the airport vicinity could be an increase in air traffic
over one area and a decrease in another area. However, with an ILS, the traffic
pattern should be more regulated. Therefore, it is not anticipated that there will
be any appreciable effect on wildlife, fish, moving life, or population patterns
from aircraft approaching the runway using the ILS as a navigational aid,
F. Summary
tis indicated by the above, the effect of the ILS with ALS on the environ•.
ment is not arattelpated to be significant. The impact of an ILS will be (a) to provide
aircraft an additional nagivation aid for safer utilization of the airport during
periods of inclement weather and (b) to provide a more stabilized flight path and
procedures for approach to the runway.
IV. PROBABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS,
Adverse envlrononentsil effects of the ILS with an ALS could result from light
emissions from the sequenced flashers of the approach light system, fossil fuel
emissions, and noise from the associated engine generators.
The sequenced flashers could have a damaging effect to the retina of the eyo,
particularly if viewed with any optical magnifying agent. Any damage which
could occur will depend upon many variables, Including distance, power of the
magnification and the physical condition of the eyes involved.
.60-
It is therefore recommended under no circumstance should the sequenced flashers
by viewed through magnifying agents. The annoying effects could be created by
the flashers if an occupied building is in proximity of the flashers. llowever, de-
flectors could be installed to alleviate these annoying effects,
The engine generators are only in operation during power failure and during routine
maintenance; therefore, the adverse effects of noise and fossil fuel emissions
would oe limited. The safety aspect of having the engine generators for standby
power will more than offset any adverse effects. The engine generators for this
system must meet tho requirements of Specification FAA-E-2204x, which limits
the smoke reading to 4. 5 as analyzed on a Robert Bosch analyzing instrument.
The electronic emissions could affect an electronic device not properly manu-
factured which will receive those frequencies assigned to the aeronautical service.
.b1-
EXHIBIT 10
IV. PROJECT DESIGN AND COST CONSIDERATIONS
The following items of development arc proposed in the project as depicted
on Exhibit 6.
ITEM 1 - STRENGTHEN EXISTING 4150-FOOT
NORT11-SOUTH RUNWAY AND TAXI-
WAY SYSTEM
Item 1 consists of constructing a bituminous pavement overlay of the
existing 4150' x 150' portland cement concrete North-South Runway and
Taxiway. A study of potential aviation activity at Denton Airport in-
dicator a nead to improve the facilities to accommodate business jet
aircraft. Included in the required improvements is strengthening the
existing runway and taxiway pavement to accommodate aircraft having
a maximum gross weight of 60, 000 pounds. InveeRgations have deter.
mined that the existing concrete pavement varies in thickness from
5.5 inches to ? inches, and that the flexural and compressive strengths
are high.
Although plate bearing tests on the existing runway and taxiway pavement
were not within the scope of the preliminary investigation, other tests
indicate that the modulus of subgrade reaction (K) of the subgrade 5eneath
the existing pavement is in the range of 90 pounds per cubic inch.
A preliminary analysis of the overlay thickness required for the run.
way and taxiway is as follows;
.6y-
Desigi► Aircraft Wei-ht: 60, 000 pounds on Dual Gcar
Traffic Level: 1200 Annual Departures
Approximate Modulus. of Subgrade Reaction (K) = 90 hCf
Working Stress = Flexural Stren th = 650= 371 psi
Safety Factor 1.75
Existing Thickness (he) = 6 inches
Overlay Thickness (t) = 2. 5 (Fh - Cb he)
Where F = Factor which controls cracking of base pavement.
h = Single Thickness of rigid pavement required for design
conditions.
Cb = Condition Factor for base pavement.
he = Thickness of existing rigid pavement in inches.
Based on a K value of 90 and an annual traffic of 1200 departures
the F value is 0. 90.
The Condition Factor (Cb) has been judged to he 1. 0,
-63-
For Design Conditions: Working Stress = 371
K = 90
A/C Wt = 60, 000
h = 8.4 inches
(Fig 3-11 ACS 150/5320/617)
Therefore:
t = 2. 5 (0. 9 x 8. 4 - 1. 0 x 6)
t = 3. 9" USE 4" Bituminous
Overlay on N-S
Runwav & Taxiway
Cross sections of the existing 4150' x 150' N./S Runway were used to
establish preliminary grades and cross slopes on the proposed surface of the
bituminous overlay pavement. Quantities of bituminwxs overlay pavement used
in the preliminary estimate were calculated from the cross sections.
FSTIMATE OF COST
Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Amount w
1 Rout exist redwood expansion
joints 80 300 L. F. $ 0.50 $ 4, 150.00
2 Reseal expansion joints 89 300 L. F. 0.45 3o735.00
3 Rout existing longitudinal
construction joints 19, 700 L. F. 0. 50 q, 850. 00
4 Reseal longitudinal con-
struction joints 260250 L. F. 0.45 11, 812.50
5 Clean transverse joints 1 L. S. 5, 000 5, 000.00
6 Tack Coat 100000 Gals. 0. 60 6, 000.00
7 Not Mix Asphaltic Concrete 21,150 Tons 18.00 380, 700. 00
Subtotal $421, 247.50
Contingencies and Engineering 84t752.50
-64- Total $506,000.00
ITEM 2- EXTEND NORTH-SOUTH RUNWAY AND
TAXIWAY 1030 FEET TO SOUTH
The existing 4150' x 150' North-South runway and taxiway will
require an extension to 6000 feet to accommodate the potential business
jet traffic. Studies have indicated that the facility can be economically
extended 1000 feet on the south end and this extension will also allow
the Installation of a localizer for a future Instrument Landing System
on the runway. A preliminary design analysis of the required pavement
structure on this runway and taxiway extension is as follows;
Design Aircraft Weight: 60, 000 pounds on Dual Gear
FAA Soil Class E-B
AC/5320-6B
Critical Areas ( 1000' Runway & Taxiway Extension)
Base Thickness 6"
Sub-base Thickness 7"
Pavement Thickness 4"
Total 17"
Top 6" of high Y. I. Subgrade shall be treated with hydrated lime,
-65-
Eg IMATEIOF COST
Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Amount
1 Airfield Excavation 620205 C. Y. $ 0.75 $ 46,654
2 Borrow Excavation 170 147 C. Y. 1.00 17,147
3 Compact Embankment 790352 C. Y. 0.50 39,676
4 Hot Mix Asphaltic Concrete 5, 653 Tons 18.00 101, 754
I
5 Crushed Stone Base (P-209) 4, 308 C. Y. 16.00 68,928
6 Subbase (P-154) 5,133 C. Y. 10.00 51, 330
7 Lime Treated Subgrade 270 091 S. Y. 0.60 1.6, 255
8 Hydrated Lime 402 Tons 36.00 140472
9 Prime Coat 100 166 Gals. 0.60 60 100
10 Obliterate Threshold
Markings 1 L. S. '20000.00 21000
11 Construct Displaced
Threshold I L. S, 20000.00 20000
12 Construct Temporary
Threshold Lights 1 L. S. 1, 000.00 1, 000
13 3611 Reinforced Concrete Pipe 600 L. F. 20.00 120000
14 Concrete Headwall 1 Ea. 1, 000.00 10000
15 Drop Inlet 2 Ea. $00.00 1, 600
16 Turfing 1 L. S. 10, 000. 00 100000
17 2-way underground electric duct 170 L. F, 6. 00 It G7.G
18 4-way underground electric duct 50 L. F. 12.00 600
19 Remove Existing Farm Fence 2, 000 L. F. 1.00 20000
20 Construct New Farm Fence 51600 L. F. 2.50 140 000
'Subtotal $4090536
Contingencies and Engineering 81,464
Total $491, OOO
-66.
r
ITEM 3 - EXTEND NORTH-SOUT11 RUMVAY
AND TAXINVAY 850 FEET TO NORTH
An 850 foot extension of the North-South Runway and Taxiway is
required on the north end to complete the required 6,000 foot run Hay
and taxiway system. A preliminary design analysis has ro-sulted in a
pavement structure consisting of the following:
Base Thickness 6"
Subbase Thickness 7"
Pavement Thickness 4"
Total Required Thickness 17"
Top 6" of High P. I. subgrade shall be treated with hydrated lime.
ESTIMATE OF COST
Item Des :r~ip-tion Quanta Unit Unit Price Amount
1 Airfield Excavation 9s 704 C. Y. $ 0.75 $ 70278
2 Borrow Excavation 4j880 C. Y. 1.00 41.880
3 Compact Excavation 14, 584 C. Y. 0.60 70292
4 Hot Mix Asphaltic Concrete 4,293 Tons 18.00 779274
5 Crushed Stone Base (P-209) 3, 325 C. Y. 16.00 53; 200
6 Subbase (P-154) 30 963 C. Y. 10100 39, 630
7 Lime Treated Subgrade 20s954 S. Y. 0.60 12, 572
8 Hydrated Lime 311 Tons 36.00 lit 196
9 Prime Coat 7o980 Gallons 0,60 4o788
10 Construct Temporary
Threshold Lighting 1 L. S. 10000.00 10000
11 36" Reinforced Coneroto Pipe 550 L. F. 20.00 111000
-67-
It_It_ end Desscriptton Quantity Unit Unit Price Amount
12 Concrete Headwall 1 Ea. $ 10000.00 $ 1,060
,
13 Drop Inlet 2 Ea. 800.00 1,600
14 Turfing 1 L. S. 100 000. 00 100000
15 2-way underground electric
duct 170 00 it 020
16 4-way underground electric
duct 50 12.00 600
17 Remove Existing Farm Fence 6, 500 L. F. 1.00 6, 500
18 Construct New Farm Fence 6, 000 L. F. 2.50 15s 000
19 Remove Exist. Farm Bldgs. 1 20, 000.00 20, 000
Subtotal $2850830
Contingencies and Engineering 57, 1'10
Total $343, 000
ITEM 4' - RELOCATE FARM ROAD 1515 ON
NORTH END OF NORTH-SOUTH
RUNWAY
Existing Farm Road 1515 will be relocated approximately 1000 feet to the
north to accommodate the 850 foot extension on the north end of the North-South
Runway. The Relocation will also rrovide the required 15-foot clearance between
'the 50;1 approach surface and relocated Farm Road 1515,
ESTIMATE OF COST
Item Description Quantity Unit
Unit Price Amount
1 Roadway Excavation 6'000 C. Y
$ 1.25 $ 7, 500
2 Hot Mix Asphaltic Concrete 660 Tone
18.00 11,880
3 Crushed Stone Base 20000 C. Y. 10.00 201000
4 Lime Treated Subgrade 13, 000 ,S, Y. 0.6D 7, B00
5 Hydrated Lime 150 Tons
36.x;0 50400
-68.
Item Description Quantity Unit
Unit Price Amount
6 Drainage Improvements 1
$21 000- or) $ 2,000
7 Roadway Striping 10500 S. F. 0.40 600
Subtotal. $ 551 180
Contingencies and 1"DjOncering 14, 120
Total $69, 300-
ITEM 5 - CONSTRUCT MEDIUM INTENSITY RUNWAY
LIGHTING SYSTEM ON THE 6000-FOOT
NORTH-SOUTH RUNWAY AND TAXIWAY
SYSTEM AND CONSTRUCT ROTATING
BEACON, LIGHTED WINDCONE AND
SEGMENTED CIRCLE.
A. Runway Lighting System
This item shall consist of a complete Medtur►i Intensity- Lighting System
for the 6000 foot Runway; a new 36" Rotating Beacon and Tower "nd a new
Lighted Windcone and Segmented Circle. The lights shall be spaced in accord..
ante with FAA criteria, generally at 200' intervals. The lighting system shall
include taxi guidance signs.
ESTIMATE OF COST - RUNWAY LIGHTING SYSTEM
Item Desch n Quanti Unit
tX Unit Price Am0Unt
1 Medium Intensity Runway
Lights 58 Ea. $ 110.00
$ 6o380
2 Medium Intensity Threshold
Lights 16 Ea. 125.00 20000
3 Cable Trench 13 000
L. F. 0.45 50850
-69.
Item Descri~tlon Quantit
~_Y Unit tTni~t price Amount
4 Cable in Trench 14,00o L. F.
$ 0-50 $ 7,000
5 Underground Cable in Duct 600
0.50 300
6 Lightn,3 Ta.xiguidance Signs 8 Ea.
450. 00 600
7 Airport Regulator and Vault
Equipmen*. I
L. S. 6,000.00 6, 000
8 Rotating Beacon 1
L. S. 60500.00 6, 500
9 Lighted Windcone and Segmented
Circle I
L. S. 5, 000, 00 11000
Subtotal $42,63
Contingencies and Engineering _ 8 370
Total I
$51, 000
B. Taxiway Lighting System
This item shall consist of a complete Medium Intensity Lighting
System for the North-South Parallel Taxiway and related taxiways.
ESTIMATE OF COST - TAXIWAY LIGHTING S: STEM
Item Descriitioa Quanta
t Unit Unit Price Amount
1 Medium Intensity Taxi-
way Lights 100
Ea. $110.00 $11,1000
2 Cable Trench 14, 000 L. F. 0.45 6, 300
3 Cable in Trench 14, 000
L. F. 0.50 --?j 000
Subtotal $24,300
Contingencies and Engineering 4 700
Total $290000
-70-
ITEM 6 _ RELOCA'T'E EXISTING VASI-2
AND CONVERT TO VASI-4
The 1000 foot extension on the south and the 850foot extension on the
north will require the relocation and conversion of the existing VASI-Z
syste?,i. Business Jet Aircraft will be using the 6000 foot runway and a
VASI-4 is required, therefore this item consists of converting the existing
VASI-2 to a VASI-4.
Lump Sum Cost $25, 000
ITEM 7 - CONSTRUCT PRECISION INSTRUMENT
MARKING ON 6000 FEET NORTH-SOUTH
RUNWAY AND TAXIWAY.
This item consists of marking the runway and taxiway in accordance
with FAA requirements for Precision Instrument Marking.
COST OF ESTIMA'T'E
Item Description Quanti Unit Unit Price Amount
Runway and Taxiway
Marking 133, 000 S. F. $0.25 $33 250
Contingencies and Engineering 3, 250
Total $369 500
-71-
1
ITEM 8 - STRENGTHEN AND EXTEND
EXISTING AIRCRAFT PARKING
APRON
A. Strengthen Existing Aircraft Parking Apron
The existing aircraft parking apron consists of a 50 foot wide portland
cement concrete taxiway bordering the airport side of the apron and a bituminous
paved aircraft parking apron consisting of approximately 33, 003 square yards
adjoining the concrete taxiway. A core boring of the bituminous apron indicated
a thickness of approximately 5. 5 inches at one location. The apron will most
frequently be used by light propeller driven aircraft and a large portion of the
apron should be strengthened to accommodate the 30, 000 pound gross aircraft
weight. An area of existing apron in close proximity to the terminal building
having a dimension of approximately 200' x 150' should be strengthened to
accommodate large business jet aircraft having a gross weight of 60, 000 pounds.
An analysis of the pavement improvements required fn the two areas Is as follows:
ANALYSIS OF PAVEMENT FOR 30, 000 POUNDS
Exist Bituminous Pavement Thickness = 5. 4"
FAA Soil Class = E-8
Subgrade Class - F-6
Gross Aircraft Weight = 30, 000 lb on dual wheels.
Required Pavement Thickness = 12"
(AC 150'/5320/6B)
Base =
Subbase = 5"
Bituminous Pavement " 2"
Total 12" Required Thickness of better material.
-72-
To calculate an overlay thickness of bituminous pavement required which
is equivalent to a total of 12 inches of new pavement, tho following equivalent
factors are used:
1" Bituminous Pavement _ 1-1/2" I-1209 Crushed Stone Base
1" Bituminous Pavement= 2" P'54 Subbase
1" Bituminous Pavement, = 1" Bituminous Pavement
THEREFORE:
5"p209 Base = 3.4" Bituminous Pavement
1-1/2"
5"PI54 Subbase = 2. 5" Bituminous Pavement
2"
'L" Bituminous Pavement = 1. 0" Bituminous Pavement
lot
Required Pavement Thickness = 7. 9" Bituminous Pavement
,
Existing Pavement Thickness = 5.41
Overlay Thickness = 2. 5"
USE 3 inches Bituminous Overlay on the apron which will support a 30, 000 pound
aircraft:
An estimate of the cost of constructing the bituminous pavement overlay
is as follows:
COST OF ESTIMATE
Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Amount
1 Not Mix Asphaltic Conc. 318Z3 'i'ons $18.00 $68o814
2 Tack Coat 20 317 Gals. 0.60 - 1, 390
Subtotal $70,204
Contingencies and )engineering 14,796
Total $85t000
-73-
ANALYSIS OF PAVEViENT FOR 60, 000 LBS.
Exist Bituminous Pavement = 5.41'
FAA. Soil Class = E-8
Subgrade Class = F-6
Gross Aircraft Weight = 60, 000 lb, on dual wheelr;,
Required Pavement Thickness = 17 inches
Base = 6"
Subbase = 711
Pavemec t = 4"
Total 17" Required thickness
To calculato an overlay thickness equivalent to 17 inches, tl_u following
factors are used:
I" Bituminous Pavement = 1-1/2" P209 Base
V Bituminous Pavement = 2" P154 Subbase
I" Bituminous Pavement = 1" Bituminous Pavement
THEREFORE:
61IP209 Base = 4.0
1.5
71IP154 Subbase base = 3.5
2
4"Bit, Pavement = 4.0
Total 11. 5 inches Iliti::ninous Pavement Required
-74-
Required Pavement = 11.5"
Existing Pavement = 5, 4"
Required Overlay = 6. 1" Hot Mix Asphalt
uSF. 6" OVERLAY
An estirnate of the cost of constructing the bitwnirnous pavement overlay
is as follows;
COST H,STINIATE
Item Descri tp ion Quantit
-._.._.~Y Unit Unit~ce AMOUnt
1 Hot Mix Asphaltic Conc. 10 100
Tons $18.00 $19,800
2 Tack Coat 334
Gale. 0.60
~ fl
Subtotal $20, 000
Contingencies and Engineering 4,000
Total $24,,000
B. Extend Aircraft Parking Apron
Improvements to the aircraft parking apron will Tlso include an extension
having a dimension of approximately 300' x 200' at
the South end of the existing
apron. Also, it is proposed that the curved portion of the apron in front of the
terminal building be extended to provide additional apron for transient aircraft
These areas are planned to accommodate 30,000 '
pound aircraft and an analysis
of the required pavement is as follows;
-75-
5" P209 Base
5" P154 Subbase
Bituminous Pavement
IV Total
The top 6" of subgrade will be treated with hydrated iitne.
The cost of exEending the aircraft parking apron; is as follows;
COST OF ESTIMATE
Item Description. Quantity _
Unit Unit Price Am-- °-unt
1 Excavation 20800
C. Y. $ 1, 25 $ 31500
2 Hot Mix As Conc. 921
Tons 18.00 16,578
3 Crushed Stone Base 1,186
(P-209) C. Y. 16. 00 18o976
4 Subbase (P-154) 11200
C. Y. 10.00 12,1000
5 Lime Treated Subgraus 650
S. Y. 0.60 50190
6 Hydrated Lime 122
Tons 36.00 4s392
7 Prime Coat 2o540 Gals. 0.6o 1 ,
Subtotal $62,160
Contingen:ies and Engineering 12 840
Total $750000
ITEM 9_ _ CLEAR APPROACH AREAS ON
N70RTFI AND SOUTH END, 6000
FOOT NORTH-SOUTH RUNWAY
This item consists of clearing all trees and other obstructions in approach
areas, each end of North-South Runway.
Lump Slim cost
$20000
-76-
ITEM 10- MARK AND LIGHT TP&L 139 KV
POWER TRANSMISSION LINE SOUTH
END, NORTH-SOUTH RUNWAY
Lump Sum Cost $3 500
ITEM 11 - MARK AND LIGHT TP&L 60 KV
POWER TRANSMISSION LINE ON
NORTH END, NORTH-SOUTH
RUrAVAY.
Lump Sum Cost $50 000
ITEM 12 - RELOCATION COSTS
Item 14 consists of the costs required in connection with the "Uniform
Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970.
Lump Sum Cost $200000
.77.
07
SUMMARY OF CONSTRUCTION PHASES
A sum:-nary of the construction phases for in1provemento at Denton Municipal
Airport and the estimated cost including contingencies and engineering is as
follows:
1. Strengthen Existing 4150-Foot Nurlh-South Runway and
Taxiway System 506.000
2. Extend North-South Runway and Taxiway 1000 feet to South 491,000
3. Extend North-South Runway and Taxiway 850 foot to North 343,000
4. Relocate Farm Road 1515 on North Fnd, North-South Runway 690300
5. Construct Medium Intensity Runway Lighting System on
6000-toot North-South Runway and Taxiway System and
construct Rotating Beacon, Lighted Windcone and Seg-
mented Circle 800000
6. Relocate Existing VASI-2 and Convert to VASI-4 250000
7. Construct Precision Instrument Marking on 6000-foot
North-,South Runway and Taxiway 36j500
8. Strengthen and Extend Existing Aircraft Parking Apron 184,000
9. Clear Approach Areas on North and South End, 6000-foot
North-South Runway. 20000
10. Mark and light TP&L 139kv Power Transmission Line on
South End, North-South Runway 30 500
11. Mark and light TP&L 60kv Power Transmission line on
North End, North-South Runway 5, 000
12. Relocation Costs 200000
T O T A L.......... $1,765,300
-78-
EXHIBIT 11
COORDINATION C%MNTS AND RESPONSES
Coordination of the Negative Declaration with Federal, state and local
offices resulted in the following comments: (Cop104 of letters of comment
are included following this discussion.)
1. The United States Department of the Interior commented that the proposed
project should be cleared with the State Historic Preservatiran Officer.
Response: The State Historic Preservation Officer, In commenting on
the Negative Declaration, has advised that the proposed project should
not affect sites presently 10 ted in the process of submission to the
National Register of Historic Places, but, in the event that cultural
resources are encountered during construction, his office should be
consulted, (See Page 82) Such a requirement will be included in
appropriate engineering contracts executed in connection with any ADAP
project for construction covered by this Negative Declaration.
2, The Fort Worth District Office, Corps of Engineers comments thrt extension
of the runway to the south appears to be an encroachment into the flood
plain of Hickory Creek and further information as to the amount of fill
will be required before a decision can b3 made concerning the requirement
for a Section 404 permit prior to construction. (See Page 83)
Res once: The first phase of runway development includes extension to
the north only. Although extension to the south is not anticipated for
a period of years, we have initiated correspondence with the Corps of
Engineers leading to a determination by that office as to the need for
a Section 404 permit. If a permit is required, appropriate action will
be taken to secure tits document well in advance of any proposed con-
struction in flood plains, (See Page 84)
The Texas Water Development Board commented that since the proposed runway
extensions appeared to extend into flood plains north and south of the
airport, approval of the project by the Water Development Board would be
required prior to the initiation of construction, (See Page 87)
Response: After receipt of additional information from the City's
consultant, the Water Development Board advised that an application for
approval of the north runway extension would not be required, but that
such an action would be required prior to initiation of construction
associated with the south runway extension, (See Page 88) We believe
that if our coordination with the Corps reveals no appreciable penetration
of the Hickory Creek flood prone area from runway or other construction
to the south, the Texas Water Development Board may drop its requirement
for an Application for Approval. If not, appropriate actitm will be taken,
as in the case of the Section 404 permit discussed above, to obtain the
necessary approvals,
79
i
I
i
4. The Texas Air Control Board advised that the propound project is con-
sistent with the goals of the Texas Air Pollutior. Control Implementation
Plan. (See Page 89)
5. The Texas Water Quality Board advised that the provisions made for con-
trolling water pollution furnish reasonable assurance that the proposal
will be located, designed, constructed and operated so as to comply
with presently established and accepted water quality standards. (See
Page 90)
6. The North Central Texas Council of Covernments, in its preliminary review
of the proposed project development, recommended favorable consideration
by the funding agency provided that an environmental impact statement be
coordinated with NCTCOG as well as other interested agencies and indi-
viduals. (See Page 46) After reviewing this Negative Declaration,
NCTCOG advised that the Environmental Assessment Report accurately
deacribes the scope of the project and its potential environmental
impacts, and recommended proceeding with the project without further
environmental studies. (See Page 91)
In addition to the above, the following comments were received from internal
FAA coordination of the Negative Declaration:
Comment., Further discussion is needed regarding the noise impact resulting
from airport construction, industrial growth in the vicinity of
the airport and future construction of Loop 288.
Response: As stated in paragraph V.A.3., construction activities associated
with airport expansion will tend to temporarily increase noise
levels in areas adjoining the airport. In addition, to the extent
that airport improvements lead to an expansion of the nearby in-
dustrial area, additional noise will be produced by building con-
struction and increased auto traffic. Future construction of
Loop 288 on the west side of the city will introduce additional
noise. Since it is likely that construction of Loop 288 and
further development in the industrial area will occur regardless
of the proposed airport development, the extent of nonaviation
noise impact attriLutable to airport expansion is considered
minimal. As pointed out elsewhere in the report, there are no
residential developments or other noise sensitive areas in the
immediate area of the airport, and noise impact resulting from
airport construction, will n(t produce a significant impact. The
major nonaviation noise source in the area is Interstate Highway
35 and 35W,
Comment: The section on air pollution should relate forecast pollution
levels to some standard permissible level.
Responses Air pollution data shown on Pg. 26 lists the quantity of pollutants
produced by annual airport operations. Another method of analysis
so
r
was the so-called Box Model, in which the quantities of pollutants
emitted by different types of aircraft during a landing-takeoff
cycle (LTO cycle) are considered to ba disseminated throughout a
standard volume of air which varies with the operating character-
istics of each aircraft type. The result is a pollutant concen-
tration, expressed in milligrams (mil) or micrograms (ug) per
cubic meter, which can be compared to National Ambient Air
Quality Standards promulgated by the Environmental Protection
Agency. Shown below is a table prepared to show the total con-
centrationP of various pollutants resulting from a peak hour
activity level forecast for the year 1992. It should be noted
that this level of activity, expressed in LTO cycles per peak
hour, exceeds the normal capacity for a single runway and will
not be achieved at the airport until a parallel runway is con-
structed. Additional environma,,,tal review will be required
before any such construction can be initiated.
The table on Pg. 2 chows that total anticipated aircraft operations
at Penton Municipal Airports including business jets, will ap-
proximite 250,000 operations annually by 1992. It is estimated
that peak hour activity, based on this volume of annual operations,
would be in the area of 130 operations, or 65 landing-takeoff
cycles. The fallowing table shows peak hour pollutant concentra-
tions, based on data furnished by EPA.
Aircraft LTO Cycles Particulates Sulfur Carbon Hydro- Nitrogen
Type (Peak }lour) (ug/m ) Dioxide Monoxide Carbons Oxides
(u /m3) (ng/m3) (ug/m3) (Ig/m3)
Business 1 0.008 0.025 01001 0,231 0.106
Jets _
General' 15 0.006 0,003 0.003 0.105 0.013
Aviation
(Twine)
General 49 0.01 01005 0.005 0.196 0.024
Aviation
(Single
En ins; ~ -
TOTALS 65 0,024 0.033 0.009 0,532 0.143
When the predicted concentration levels of pollutants are com-
pared to EPA's table of National Ambient Aic Quality Standards,
as shown in the followin3 pages, it is apparent that air quality
deterioration resulting from aircraft activity at the airport is
insignificant, even at the high operational levels anticipated
in the future. If pollution levels resulting from ground vehicles,
stationary power sources, and evaporation of fuels at the airport
80-a
equal or even exceed those produced by flight operations, which
is unlikely, the totals still amount to a very small percentage
of allowable levels.
Comment; The discussion of fuel spillage and water runoff on Pg. 24 and
36 should be expanded to show what will, rather then what can,
be done to min,.mize adverse impacts.
Response: Fuel is dispensed by qualified personnel and spillage resulting
from normal fueling operations is minimal. Since fueling
activities are conducted on paved surfaces, most spillage evapo-
rates without contamination of soils. Occasional spills of
larger amounts of fuel are dispersed with writer, and again,
evaporation removes most of the volatiles, although some soil
contamination adjacent to the apron areas may occur. In the case
of a major fuel spill, or where soil contamination results from
long-term use of a fueling area, soils will be aerated for
evaporation and removed for disposal in the city's sanitary land-
fill. The prospect of significant contamination of ground or
surface water as a result of fueling operations is considered
remote.
During the period of construction on the airport the contractors
will be required to take specific actions to control water runoff.
These measures include the construction of temporary berme, dikes,
dams, sediment basins, as appropriate. Also, limits are estab-
lished to specify the maximum area of soil which may be exposed
to erosion at any one time, and requirements for seeding, turfing
and mulching of graded areas and cut slopes are specified. New
drainage channels will be seeded or otherwise treated to minimize
contamination of local streams by waterborne sediments. After
completion of construction care will be taken to assure that any
developing erosion areas are promptly attended to.
Comment: Further discussion is needed regarding the alternative of relo-
cating to a new site. (Pg. 33)
Responses If it were established that proposed development of the present
site would result in significant adverse environmental impact
due to noise, air or water quality deterioration, or degradation
of scenic areas, parks or places of historic interest, the
alternative of reestablishing the needed airport facilities at
a more favorable site would receive careful study. However, it
is likely that in the area readily accessible to the City of
Denton, a newly-established airport comparable to that already
existing would create more adverse impact than would result from
the construction proposed at the present site. These considera-
tions, as well as the economic factots, led to a decision to
reject this $lternative.
80-b
Comment: The discussion of the need for an IbS for training purposes
(Pg. 3) implies that large air carrier type aircraft will use
the facilities at Denton.
Response: Instrument training at Denton Municipal Airport will be limited
to general aviation type aircraft. No airline training will be
conducted.
Comment: Further discussion is nr,eded regarding possible construction in
flood plains.
Response: In the course of coordinating the EIAR with other Federal and
state agencies, a question arose as to the extent, if any, of
extension of construction into the flood plain of Dry Fork Creek
to the north and Hickory Creek to the south of airport property.
In the most recent letter from the Corps of Engineers, dated
August 18, 1977, we were advised that proposed construction
would not penetrate the Hickory Creek flood plain. (See Pg. 92~
At the north end, it has been determined that the runway and
taxiway extension will not penetrate the flood plain of Dry
Fork Creek. Installation of the cuter portion of the approach
light system will, however, result in the location of five
lights in the Dry Fork flood plain. (See sketch, Pg. 86.)
These sequenced-flashing lights are individually mounted on
wooden poles, supplied with electrical power through buried
cables, and are an integral part of a standard approach lighting
system, The structures will not alter the configuration cf the
flood plain, or present an impediment to the movement of flood
waters, and because of their nature, are resistant to flood
damage. ThA only feasible alternative, considering the need
for a 6000 ft. runway, was to install the approach light system
at the opposite end of the runway; which scheme was rejected
since it would lead to the installation of larger, more complex
lighting structures in the Hickory Creek flood plain.
80-c
NATIONAL AM9IE\Y AIR QUALITY £TANDARDS
pollutant
Carbon'monoxids 10 milligram per cubic muter
(Primary and secondary (9 ppm) , rnaxinNm 8-hour concentra-
standards are the same) tion not to be exceeded more than
once per year.
«40 milligrams par cubic meter
(35 ppm), nuxinam ona-hour conccn-
tration not to bo exceeded more than
once per year,
Nitrogen dioxide - 100 microorAms per cubic meter
(Primary and secondary (0.05 ppm), annual arithmetic mean,
standards are the ssmJ)
liydrocarbons (non-methane) .160 micrograms per cubic meter
(Primary and secondary (0,24 ppm), maxi-Mm throe-hour
standards are the same) -concentration (6.9 a.m.) not to be
exceeded more than onto per year,
For use-as a ouLde in davisit.g
'tmplorcentatien plans to tact the
oxidant standorda.
P& rtleW ate matter -75 micrograms per cubic motor,
Yrimary standard. Annual georsetric mcan.
«260 microersms par cubic meter,
maxtimim 24-hour concentration not
to bo exceeded nwro chott once per
year,
Secondary standard •60 wtcrograms per cubic mater,
annual geor.;ctrtc r..can, as a tuide
to bo used in avsessin* impLoronts-
tion plans to achieve the 24-hour
standard,
w150 iaicro-rajas per cubic met:r,
poxi:,jim 24-licur concentration .'ot
to be exceeded more than onto per
year.
80rd
yww. rr~n,w-wv v.
t
Pollutant Standard
i
Sulfur dloxido 40 micrograms par cubic cater,
Primary standard annual aritlingtic mean.
465 micrograms per cubic meter,
m xtrum 24-hour concentration not
to bo exceeded more than once par
yoar. .
Secondary standard •1300 microgram per cubic meter, ~
naxinrim three-hour concentration
not to be exceeded more than once
per year.
Photochenical Oxidant -160 micrograr.s per cubic meter,
(Primiry a»•i sceuadary maxtau,n one-hour concentration
standards are the sae) not to be exceeded rANre than once
per year,
National Primary Standards; TU levels of air quality necessary, vith
an adequate margin of safety, to protect
tho public health.
National Secondary Standards= The !ovals of air quality necssia ry to
protect the public i.•elfare frcia cny ;cw n
or Anticipated ad verve uf:ect of a pollutant.
Sources tolvlrow!cntol Protection Atoncy, ":rational Primory and Secondary
Ambient Ali, Qu31sty $tandardx," (['eder.11 Iteglstor, 36 (e4)0
April 30, 191,14) p. f.l;;y
A
Pow, United States Department of the Interior JUc. 1977
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
SOUTHWEST REGION ~O
ER-77 425 POST OFFICE
N W MF:x1 p 6710;1
JUN 101977
Mr. Hugh W. Lyon
Department of Transportation
Federal Aviation Administration
Southwest Region ORI" •
P-0. Box 1669 COPY
Fort Worth, Texas 76101
Dear Mr. Lyon:
This responds to your request for our review of the environmental
assessment for Denton Municipal Airport, Denton Coln)ty, Texas.
We have reviewed the subject assessment and offer the following comment.
Page 41, item e. IMPACT UPON HISTORICAL
ARCHEOLOGICAL AND SCENIC SITES
The negative declaration or other subsequent environmental document
should include clearance of the project by the State Historic
Preservation Officer and any comments he may offer relative to
the impact of the proposed development upon properties on or
eligible for inclusion in the Nat!.onal Register of Historic Places.
He iai Mr. Truett Latimer, Executive Director, Texas Historical
Commission, P.O. Box 12276, Capitol Station, Austin, Texas 78711.
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this P.asessment.
Sincerely yours,
7dP. Churan
Regional Environmental Review Officer
-81-
r t~, ~~1 j~ Ffet 11174. CaJ i~o) .StatN~~
t(J' Austin, Tesam 7F711
~+..,,r,,.+'~ t+wtt Jatinrn
tarnhw L~rrcta
May 6, 1977
Mr. Vonald r. ltarley
Economic Development and Tratssl')urtation
Budget and Planning Office
Office of the Governor
411 West 13th Street
Austin, Texas 78701
Re: Negative Declaration 16(c) (4) coordination,
Dr'nton Municipal Airport, Denton, Texas
Dear Mr. Ilarley..
Thank you for tha archoolorJiral evaluation forwarded to the Texas
Historical Co%fl scion runrerning the above-referenced undertaking.
Wo have reviowcd the fi::ditiys and conclude that, as described, the
proposal should not affect sites on the National Register of
Iistoric places, nor any site presently in the process of submis-
sion to the National Rryister. The survey of sibs in your area
which may be eligible for inclusion within the National Register,
however, has nut been completed. Thoreforu, should cultural re-
sources he encountered durinti construction, work will cease and
' the State Historic. Preaurvation Officer and the Advisory Council
rn historic Prosvrvutiun will be afforded the opportunity to comment
in accordance with thu Prr,c.-cc3_ures for the Proter_tion of listoric and
(cultural properties (36 C.P. R, part 800).
Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the review process
in our common goal of providing the futuro with a past. If wo may
be of further service, please advise.
Sincerely,
Truutt Latimer
State Historic proservution officer
b
A4''~y1(1
Alton K. Briggs HAY ~ 1971
Archcoloyist
Cultural Rer,ourco Mc anti r.Jrrtrtr_ttl -820 Bidget/Planninp
AYA t la
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
FORT WORTH DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
ot- P. O. BOX 17300
FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102
REPLY TO
AlrENTN)N O1,
SWFED-PR
8 June 19
-ii^JI
JU;~ A 1:. )
Mr. Hugh W. Lyon
Chief, Planning Branch ~C'
Federal Aviation Administration Crf
PO Box 1689
Fort Worth, Texas 76101
Deer Mr. Lyon1 CaiG,l^
copy
The Negative Declaration for the Denton Municipal Airgort has been FILE
reviewed as requested in your letter of April 29, 1917. " ~w
copy
The following comments are submitted for consideration:
a. It appears the extended runway will be an encroachment into the
flood plain of Hickory Creek, a tributary to Lewisville Lake, a Corps of
Engineers project. Additional Information on the amount of fill will have
to be determined before the decision for a section 404 permit can be made,
although the present median streamflow of Hickory Creek is less than those
normally requiring a sections 404 permit.
b. A detailed hydrologic and hydraulic study should also be provided.
c. Inclosed is a map ahowing the present flood prone areas around the
airport.
d. The proposed project will not conflict with any existing or author-
ized Corps of Engineers projects.
Thank you for the opportunity to present our comments.
Sincerely yours,
1 Incl /U.- 04 ' ' -v
D. . MILLS
As stated Chief, Planning Branch
.83-
111111111111111126
! r
July 26. 1977
s
ASU-616
Negative Declaration/16(c)(4) Coordination
Denton Municipal Airport, Dontcn, TX
Chief, Planning Branch, ASW-610
Department of tits Army
Corps of Enginters, Fort {forth District
Attn.1 Flood Plain K.nagement Branch
P. 0. Boa 17300
Fort North. TX 76102
In a letter dated June 8, 1977. the Planning Branch, Fort Korth District
advised us that the proposed runway extension discussed in the subject
negative declaration would be an encroachment into the flood plain of
Hickory Creak south of the airport and that further data relating to
quantities of fill material as well as hydrologic and hydraulic informs-
tiou is ruceseary before a decision can be made as to the noad for a
Section 404 permit. included with the letter was a copy of a USGS Flood
Prone Area map depicting 100-year flood contours for both Hickory Creek
to the south and Dry Fork Creek to the north of airport property. We
have enclosed a portion of this map which has been enlarged by approxi-
mately 50% and have sketched in the proposed extended runway and taxiway
system, together with the location of the lighting structures, locallaer
antenna and associated localizer equipment building. It is apparent from
this drawing that none of these items penetrate the Hickory Creek flood
prone area as shown, although it is possible that some fill material at
the southwest corner of the runway graded area may do so. We believe the
flood contours shown on the drawing are not sufficiently accurate to
permit a calculatLon of the amount of that encroachment, if any. At the
north end of the airport a total of five pole-mounted strobe lights,
spaced at 200-ft. intervals, will be located in the Dry fork flood prone
area as depicted on the drawing. These lights are a necessary element of
the instrument landing system planned for installation at the airport*
it is our view that none of the above-desorlbed construction will result in
any measurable increase in stream turbidity, reduction in stream flow or
any other signiftesn. adverse impact on the 11bod prone areas. In addition,
we bolieve that both Hickory and Dry Fork Creeks my be classified as
Category 4 voters covo!sd by the "nationwide permits" discussed in the
document titled "Regulatory Programs of the Corps of Engineers" published
as hurt 2 of the Yedaral Register dated Tuesday, July 19, 1971.
If the above discussion does not resolve the questien as to the need for a
Section 404 permit, we would appreciate being p.cvi.' d with elevations of
the 100-year flood contour at Its intersectiun with the extended runway
-84-
Z
centerline in both Hickory and Dry Pork rY Creeks. If there is
cant diffe an st nlf -
r ,i y 1
e ce in eleva
t g
centered on the extended runway of the contnvut centerline, we would like to have hthis
information as well, With these eletiations ve can advise you as to the
ei.tont, it any, of fill material penetration into the flood plain. In
this connection, it should be noted that the City Intends to extend the
runway to the north as the first phase of the ultimate runway development,
Although we do not anticipate an extension to the south for a period of
several years, it would he desirable to resolve the matter of permit
requirements at this time.
ORIGINAL %jVD 5
HUGH W. LVOU
HUGH W. LYON
&closure
r
-85-
I#
•
Li71i~s ./Dale MPY..... '
.
,.fir ~ I
1 O
OFNror,
r
M ' •
/ I ICI
/fHIW 3Fy Y wo I
" ~~7 Pv it I ~ I
Lft~l~=e►~y.9
PRO~1E
I-e
l t
Ba
`IL;XAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD
MEMBERS JAMES M, ROSE
A. L BLACK. CHAAW&N El
raONA
ROBERT B GILMORE. VKII CHAS WAN ~V C i
DA~LA* MAY A~.u 11;71
MILTON T. POTTS
LIVINa6roN t'
J041N H GARRETT ~
Moustw. ~ ~
P.O Box 13087 AREA COD t
GEORGE IN MCCLESKEY CAPITOL STATION ♦75 31
LUSSMA AUSTIN, TEXAS 7870 1700 NORTH CONC NUE
GLEN E RONEY May 23, May 23, 1977
IN .[ri
I1W BE
Mr. Hugh W. Lyon, Chief OBTO,
Planning Branch COPY
Department of Transportation ` PILE
Federal Aviation Administration
Southwest Division
P. 0. Box 1689
Fort Worth, Texas 76101
Dear Mr. Lyon:
Re: Negative Declaration ,16(c)(4)
Denton Municipal Airport
Denton, Texas
Please refer to your le+.ter of April 29, 1977 and enclosure thereto.
Thank you for allowing this agency to review the report on proposed
development for the Denton Municipal Airrc~rt, Denton, Texas.
Staff has reviewed the report and have found that the north-south
runway of the project will extend into the flood plain of Hickory
Creek on the south and possibly into the flood plain of Dry Fork
Creek on the north, ;Under Section 11,458 of the Texas Water Code,
plans for projects wi,ieh might affect the flood flow of streams in
Texas must be approved by the Texas Water Development Board prior to
initiation of construction. In this regard, a copy of the Rules and
_Reg~_ulattions of the 'Texas Water Development Board Relating to ee
mrovemen, sTFIie175an Appprova o Plans or Reclamation ro e'
cts
is enclosed or your informations
Should you have any questions regarding this or other, matters, please
do not hesitate to contact us, Everett W. Rowland, Director, Flood
Protection and Disaster Assistance Division, at the above address, or
telephone 512/475-2171, is thoroughly familiar with this particular
matter,
Sincerely,
James M, Rose
Enclosure .87-
TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD
MEMBEI I
A L BLACK CMAiRMARI JAMES M. ROSE
facha £ firl aRtGfM
ROBERT 0GILMORE.VK.CHAIRMAN
6F RRCiCS
OAIU. AIR: ORT.3
MILTON L POTTS L!"".
T *0
LMAIG.tOM
JOHN H. GARRETT
MOV.toM / / ~v.
GEORGE W. MCCL£SKEY PO . BOX 13087 C'` CJ
~unocR CAPITOL STATION AREA C
AUSTIN, TEXAS 7871 } 47'S t
GLEN E RONEY 1 700 NORTH GOI AVENUE
MGALLGM July 22, 19'17
GAG
~ R itJll,[R ro
rDB~ • _
Ohio,
:sr. Y. C. Finklea, P.B. COPY,
Shimek, Jacobs and Finklea COPY
Consultin, Ensinoore FIbE
1300 Adolphus Toner
Dallas, Texas 75202
Dear 1-tr. Finklea:
This is in response to your June 23, 1977 letter regarding possible
encroachment Into the flood plain of the Dry Fork of Hickory Creek
by extension of the Denton ftunioipal Airport runway 850 feet to
tho north, The material you provided has boon reviewed by otaff.
Raview of the data indicates that ',he proposed extension of the
runway to the north will not enorlach into the 100-year flood plain
of the Dry Fork of Hickory ;reek. Therefore, an _ApZl_i_oation for
A roval of Levee Plans need not be submitted to the fiexas ater
bevo oilmen oar o tr hlo portion of the airport improvemente. It
is to be understood that this finding in no way relieves the City
of the obligation to seek the Board's approval for the south exten-
sion of the runway prior to the oonstruotion of that portion of the
project.
Should you have further questions regarding this matter, please do
not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely,
James M, Rose
oo: Mr. Hugh W. Lyon
Fedoral Aviation Administration
-86-
v ,
TEXAS AIR CONTROL BOARD
PHONE S1114S1.5711 CIIARLsS R. BARDEN, P. E.
4520 SHOAL GREEK BOULEVARD EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
JOHN L. BLAIR, Cheirman AUSTIN, TEXAS - 74154
WILLIE L. LILICH, Ph.D., P.E., Viu Chairman 0CHARLES R. JN, MID
WILLIAM N. ALLAN WIL.LIAJACKM KI D. . A PARISH
JOE C. BRIDGE FARMER, P.E. FRED HARfMAN E. W. gOBINSON, P,E,
May 13, 1977
SAY 117 yrJi,
Mr. Donald Y. Marley
Economic Development and Transportation ~~~~~e~~
Budget and Planning Office
Office of the Governor
411 hest 13th Street
Austin, Texas 78701
.Subject: Negative Declaration 36(c)(4) Coordination, Denton
Municipal Airport, Denton, Texas
Dear Mr. Marley;
In reviewing the above cited document it was noted that although
the data on page 44 il.dicated annual totals of pollutant emissions
no data was included for peak hour or for avers€o day, However,
based on the aircraft upc;raFU%i s and the m3z 3'nd3cated our figures
plus the stated inttnt to take all possible precautions to prevent
excess emissions durillt; all pphases of construction works verify
the contention that the nlngnitude of the project is such that the
effect on air qusility wi11 lie minimal, The proposed airport
development action for Benton is therefore consistent with the
goals of the Texas Air Po1111tion Control Implementation Plan,
Thank you for the reviciv upportunity. If we can assist further,
please contact ne.
Sincerely yo ,
Roger R. Wallis, Deputy Director
Standards and Fegulrltion. Program
cc: Mr. Melvin Lewis, Rcgiontal Supervisor, Fort Worth
-89-
r
rr
OFFICE OF THE GY'ERNOR
BUDGET AND PLANNING OFFICE
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
Ph. 512/475-2427
COMMENTS
The negative declaration and impact assessment report
for the proposed Denton Municipal Airport in Denton County
has been reviewed and the agency has concluded that the
provisions made for controlling water pollution furnishes
reasonable assurance that the proposal will be located,
designed, constructed and operated so as to comply with
the presently established and accepted water quality stan-
dards$
e fwn G>nduct np Review IS;yniture) Y- G
p %y-.jxas water Ouality 0-2pm _ go. Otte
av 19
..,.r
O N,~7/t' 1 a 7 7
toriJi-'G ntitil` etas Count;d of Qovornmarh
C P. O, 1>#*or 000 Arlington, Texas 76011
0c) ) , 7
April
, 1~ IA!
Pit
Jim W. White
City Manager t'
City or Denton REt 7-04=03 calved March 25, 19p
215 E. McKinney Improvement to Donlon Municipal
Denton, Texas 76201 Airport C~a
Dear Mr. Whites
Your EAR in connection with the above entitled project has been reviewed by the North
Central Texas Council of Governments. This review included the consideration of poten-
tially affected local governments for possible project notification. No potentially offbcted
local governments were identiFiad under NCTCOG's Local Significance Criteria. The
pre-application submitted by the City of Denton on May 10, 1976 was reviewed by NCTCOG
and a favorable comment was provided (see attached letter).
In addition, the EAR ms reviewed for appropriate arearride concerns. This review process
included consideration by oppropriote NCTCOG planning staff, by the Government Appli-
cations Review Committee on April 13, and by the NCTCOG Executive Board on April 27.
On the basis of thal review process, the Board adopted the following areawide positions
The NCTCOG Review Process has been completed and it is the opinion of the
agency that 1' a Environmental Assessment Report accurately describes the scope
of the project and Its potential environmental impacts. We, therefore, recom-
mend proceeding with the project without further environmental studies.
We sincerely thank you and your staff for your kind cooperation in this matter, and if we
con be of further service or assistance, please feel free to Bali upon us.
J. P itst
iExecutl y,
vo Dirac r
WJPA
eel Carroll Finklea, Shlmek, Jacobs and Finlea, Engineers
l Henry L. Newman, Director, Southwest Region Faders) Aviation Administration, DOT
I Ed Eoremn, Regional ^oprosontative of the Secretary, Department of Transportation
I John Roorki Director of Tronsportation, NCTCOG
-91-
~rsi•
R.~`~ rx
Ci"
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY FAI~1~
FORT WORTH DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS AU'3 ~qi7
P. O, eox MOD Iti0'J"r If"
FORT WORTH. TEXAS 76102
Al T[NTIM OI. ..I
SWFED-PR 18 August V77
ORIG.
Mr. Hugh W. Lyon COPY
Chief, Planning Branch FILE
+/~7
Federal Aviation Administration
PO Box 1689
Fort Worth, Texas 76101
Dear Mr. Lyons
As requested to your letter dated July 260 1977, we have reviewed the
additional information furnished us o►. rue negative declaration for the
Denton Municipal Airport construction.
The permit under Section 404 of PL 92-500 will not be required since the
median stream flow of bosh Hickory Creek to the south and Dry Fork Creek
to the north of the airport is less than five (5) cfs.
Based on the enlarged portion of the flood plain limits near the proposed
airport construction, the extended runways will not be an encroachment
into the flood plain. The enlarged portion of the flood plain showing
the proposed construction would be an asset to the negative declaration.
Thank you for the opportunity to present additional comments.
Sincerely yours,
D, L. MIL S
4
Chief, Planning Branch
92