Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-11-10 Info Packet� L 1 CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET CITY OF IOWA CITY www.lcgov.org November 10, 2016 IPI Council Tentative Meeting Schedule NOVEMBER 15 WORK SESSION I132 Work Session Agenda I133 Memo from Airport Operations Specialist: Airport Master Plan IP4 Memo from Asst. to the City Manager: 2017 Legislative Priorities MISCELLANEOUS IP5 Pending City Council Work Session Topics IP6 Article from City Manager: The Ultimate Guide to Retirement/Best Places to Retire IP7 Memo from Parks and Recreation Dir.: Update 2016 Iowa City Farmers Market Outreach Programs I138 Memo from Equity Dir.: 2015 Report on Racial Equity I139 Civil Service Entrance Examination: Maintenance Worker III - Wastewater I1370 Copy of November 2 letter to Mayor from IAC (International Automotive Companies): Notice of Workforce Reduction I1311 Email from Tracy Barkalow, Big Ten Property Management to City Staff: 505 Brookland Park Drive Iowa City IA — Tailgate IP12 Email from Anne Duggan, President, Think Bicycles Johnson County: Five-year bike plan [Staff response included] IP13 Copy of press release: City Council Listening Post Email from Director of Parks & Recreation: Park Master Plan Stakeholder Workshop — December 16t [Distributed as a late handout on 11/15/16.1 DRAFT MINUTES IP14 Board of Adjustment: October 12 IP15 Human Rights Commission: October 18 IP16 Planning and Zoning Commission: October 20 CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET CITY OF IOWA CITY www.icgov.org November 10, 2016 I131 Council Tentative Meeting Schedule 1 NOVEMBER 15 WORK SESSION IP2 Work Se\Aiport da IP3 Memo froperations Specialist: Airport Master PlanIP4 Memo frohe City Manager: 2017 Legislative Priorit' s MISCELLANEOUS IP5 Pending City Council Wo Session Topics IP6 Article from City Manager: The Itimate Guide to tirement/Best Places to Retire IP7 Memo from Parks and Recreation ir.: Update 016 Iowa City Farmers Market Outreach Programs IPS Memo from Equity Dir.: 2015 Report on IP9 Civil Service Entrance Examination: A IP10 Copy of November 2 letter to Mayor c of Workforce Reduction 'a' Equity n nance Worker III - Wastewater IAC ternational Automotive Companies): Notice IP11 Email from Tracy Barkalow, Big en Property Managdcn Drive Iowa City IA — Tailgate IP12 Email from Anne Duggan, resident, Think Bicycles J [Staff response included] IP13 Copy of press release- City Council Listening Post DRAFT MINUTES IP14 Board of Adj tment., October 12 IP15 Human Ri is Commission: October 18 IP16 Plannin and Zoning Commission: October 20 to City Staff: 505 Brookland Park County: Five-year bike plan r City Council Tentative Meeting Schedule IP1 ^tri Emma J. Harvat Hall Subject to change 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Saturday, January 7, 2017 November 10, 2016 CI F IOWA CITY Emma J. Harvat Hall Tuesday, January 10, 2017 1:00-7:00 P Date Time Meeting Location Tuesday, November 15, 2016 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall Formal Meeting 7:00 PM Formal Meeting 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall Emma J. Harvat Hall Tuesday, December 6, 2016 TBA Work Session and tour 5:00 PM 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, January 3, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Saturday, January 7, 2017 8:o0A-5:o0P Budget Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall Tuesday, January 10, 2017 1:00-7:00 P Budget Work Session (CIP) Emma J. Harvat Hall Tuesday, January 17, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, February 7, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, February 21, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, March 7, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, March 21, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, April 4, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, April 18, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, May 2, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, May 16, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting IP2 1 r i ® of CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 (319) 356-5000 (3 19) 356-5009 FAX www.icgov.org City Council Work Session Agenda Tuesday, November 15, 2016 Emma J. Harvat Hall - City Hall 5:00 PM • Discuss Airport Master Plan [IP # 3 of 11/10 packet] • Determine 2017 legislative priorities [IP # 4 of 11/10 packet] • Clarification of Agenda Items • Information Packet Discussion [November 3, 10] I •_,--,.® CITY OF IOWA CITY LL3 �� MEMORANDUMmmj Date: November 9, 2016 To: City Council, City Manager From: Airport Commission, Airport Operations Specialist Re: Airport Master Plan We are pleased to present the 2016 Airport Master Plan to the City Council The Airport Master Plan is a document that is completed by airports under a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) governed process. The Airport Master Plan looks at short (5 -year), medium (10 -year), and long term (20 -year) operations forecasts and community aviation needs and creates planning tools to manage the airport development to be consistent with those forecasts and needs. The Airport Master Plan process ends in the creation of the Airport Layout Plan which is the graphical depiction of existing and future airport facilities. The FAA also reviews the Airport Layout Plan for any potential hazards to aviation uses that might be caused by future development of facilities. Airport Layout Plans are updated periodically as projects are completed. The Airport Master Plan was developed by an advisory group consisting of representatives of Airport tenants, operators, Airport Management staff, City Management staff, and neighborhood representatives. The Airport Commission accepted the advisory group recommendations and submitted the plans to FAA for review and concurrence. The previous Airport Master Plan was completed in 1996. We will be presenting more details of this plan to you at the November 15 work session. Airport Master Plan Iowa City Municipal Airport (IOW) Iowa City, Iowa Final Report October 2016 Submitted by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. 2730 Ford Street PO Box 668 Ames, IA 50010-0668 P: 515-233-6100 it T, CITY CITY OF IOIVA CITY Airport Sponsor: City of Iowa City 410 E. Washington St. Iowa City, Iowa 52240 P: 319-356-5000 BOLTON 8, MINK, INC- 0O3U[, rg Eng raers & Surveyors Qlbo U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Cental Region 901 Locust Administration Iowa, Kansas, Kansas City, Missouri 64106 Missouri, Nebraska (816)329-2600 November 07, 2016 Mr.Michael Tharp Operations Manager Iowa City Municipal Airport 1801 Riverside Drive Iowa City, IA 52246 Dear Mr. Tharp: Airspace Analysis Determination — No Objections Iowa City Municipal (IOW), Iowa City, IA 14 CFR Part 77 — Airspace Case No. 2016 -ACE -3624 -NRA We conducted a review of the subject Airport Layout Plan (ALP) based on considerations relating to the safe and efficient utilization of airspace, factors affecting the control of air traffic, conformance with FAA design criteria, and Federal grant assurances or conditions of a Federal property conveyance. Our determination of No Objections is derived from the analysis of information supplied in the ALP. We conclude that the proposal will not adversely affect the safe and efficient use of navigable airspace by aircraft provided the conditions are met as explained in the enclosed FAA Memorandum dated November 07, 2016. We have reviewed the proposal from an airport's planning viewpoint and the effect on airport programs. We have coordinated the proposal with the appropriate FAA offices, and their comments are contained in the enclosed FAA Memorandum. We have reviewed the ALP for structures that may adversely affect the flight or movement of aircraft, cause electromagnetic interference to NAVAIDs, communication facilities, or, when applicable, derogate the line -of -sight visibility from a control tower. Comments on objects that exceed the obstruction standards of 14 CFR Part 77 are enclosed. Comments on the development of the ALP, which are based on requirements contained in FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5070-6, Airport Master Plans, and AC 150/5300-13A, Airport Design, have already been provided. This determination does not constitute a commitment to provide Federal financial assistance to implement any development contained on the ALP. An ALP is a graphic depiction of the existing and future airport facilities showing the clearance and dimensional requirements to meet applicable standards. The ALP serves as a record of aeronautical requirements and is used by the FAA in its review of proposals that may affect the navigable airspace or other missions of the FAA. This determination does not constitute FAA approval or disapproval of the physical development involved in the proposal. It is a determination with respect to the safe and efficient use of navigable airspace by aircraft and with respect to the safety of persons and property on the ground. In making this determination, the FAA has considered matters such as the effects the proposal would have on existing or planned traffic patterns of neighboring airports, the effects it would have on the existing airspace structure and projected programs of the FAA, the effects it would have on the safety of persons and property on the ground, and the effects that existing or proposed manmade objects (on file with the FAA), and known natural objects within the affected area would have on the airport proposal. The FAA cannot prevent the construction of structures near an airport. The airport environs can only be protected through such means as local zoning ordinances, acquisitions of property in fee title or aviation easements, letters of agreement, or other means. As a reminder, the sponsor is advised to coordinate the completion of project construction with the cycle of FAA publications, and to notify the FAA with the required information before the cut-off date coinciding with the next publication cycle. This determination does not constitute a commitment of Federal funds and does not indicate that the proposed development is environmentally acceptable in accordance with applicable Federal laws. An environmental finding is a prerequisite to any major airport development project when Federal aid will be granted for the project. This approval is given subject to the condition that the proposed airport development identified below shall not be undertaken without prior written environmental approval by the FAA. These items include: • Move runway thresholds • Acquire property • Remove obstructions • Construct taxiways • Construct hangars • Construct new apron • Expand existing apron If you have any questions regarding this project please call me at at (816) 329-2637 or via email at jeff deitering@faa.gov. Sincerely, Jeffrey D. Deitering, P.E. Iowa State Planner Enclosures CC: Melissa Underwood, Bolton & Menk, Inc. Michelle McEnany, Iowa Office of Aviation Qlbo U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration Date: November 7, 2016 Memorandum Subject: IOWA CITY MUNICIPAL (IOW) — IOWA CITY, IA Aeronautical Study Number: 2016 -ACE -3624 -NRA Airport Layout Plan Update From: Airports Airspace Specialist, ACE -620F Reply To: To: Mr. Jeff Deitering, ACE 611D We have completed an airspace analysis of: Future RWY 7/25 and RWY 12/30 Extensions John D. Karrasch, ext 2617 Our aeronautical study has determined that the proposed updates will not adversely affect the safe and efficient use of airspace by aircraft. Therefore, we have no objection to the proposal. 01[!]I:11I Any request for IFPS is a separate action that must be submitted to the FAA in writing or via the AVN website a minimum of 24 to 36 months before the desired usage. All runway data VGSI, runway lighting information must be submitted not later than 12 months prior to the publication date. We will determine eligibility and notify you following receipt of the request. Please contact the Central FPO at 817- 222 5841 when you're ready to submit your request. We will provide you the web address or other physical address and specialist contact information at that time. NOTE: Noting on the ALP that an obstruction will be removed does not constitute an official request that an obstruction has been removed. If it is noted that an obstacle has been identified, but, will be removed later, this action must be followed-up on, and a confirmation letter sent that the obstacle has actually been removed. Future structures and/or construction equipment were not evaluated as part of this study. These must be submitted separately in accordance with 14 CFR Part 77. This determination does not constitute FAA approval or disapproval of the physical development involved in the proposal. It is a determination with respect to the safe and efficient use of navigable airspace by aircraft and with respect to the safety of persons and property on the ground. In making the determination, the FAA has considered matters such as the effects the proposal would have on existing or planned traffic patterns of neighboring airports, the effects it would have on the existing airspace structure and projected programs of the FAA, the effects it would have on the safety of persons and property on the ground, and the effects that existing or proposed manmade objects (on file with the FAA) and known natural objects within the affected area would have on the airport proposal. This aeronautical study was not circulated to the public for comments. 2016 -ACE -3624 -NRA The FAA cannot prevent the construction of structures near an airport. The airport environs can only be protected through such means as local zoning ordinances, acquisitions of property in fee title or aviation easements, letters of agreements, or other means. This determination in no way preempts or waives any ordinances, laws, or regulations of any government body or agency. This aeronautical study was not circulated to the public for comments. Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLEOF CONTENTS............................................................................................................................................... i LISTOF FIGURES....................................................................................................................................................... ii LIST OF APPENDICES..............................................................................................................................................iii EXECUTIVE SUNRVIARY..........................................................................................................................................iv 1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................1-1 1.1. Purpose.............................................................................................................................1-1 1.2. Background......................................................................................................................1-1 1.3. Areas of Emphasis........................................................................................................... 1-1 1.4. Structure of an Airport Master Plan................................................................................. 1-2 1.5. Public & Agency Outreach.............................................................................................. 1-2 2. AIRPORT INVENTORY.............................................................................................................................2-1 2.1. Location...........................................................................................................................2-1 2.2. History.............................................................................................................................2-1 2.3. Surrounding Development............................................................................................... 2-2 2.4. Socioeconomic.................................................................................................................2-2 2.5. Airport Role.....................................................................................................................2-4 2.6. Airport Management........................................................................................................ 2-5 2.7. Aviation Activity............................................................................................................. 2-5 2.8. Airport Design Standards & Obstructions....................................................................... 2-7 2.9. Climate...........................................................................................................................2-11 2.10. Airside Facilities............................................................................................................2-12 2.11. Landside Facilities .........................................................................................................2-18 2.12. Surrounding Land Use & Zoning..................................................................................2-21 2.13. Environmental Overview...............................................................................................2-22 3. AVIATION FORECASTS...........................................................................................................................3-1 3.1. Introduction...................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.2. Aviation Trends............................................................................................................... 3-1 3.3. Emerging Business & Population Trends........................................................................ 3-3 3.4. User survey Summary......................................................................................................3-3 3.5. Business User Survey......................................................................................................3-6 3.6. Existing Based Aircraft & Annual Operations................................................................ 3-9 3.7. Based Aircraft Forecast.................................................................................................3-11 3.8. Annual Operations Forecast...........................................................................................3-13 I. TABLE OF CONTENTS i Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan 3.9. Future Critical Design Aircraft......................................................................................3-22 3.10. Summary........................................................................................................................3-22 4. FACILITY REQUIREMENTS....................................................................................................................4-1 4.1. Introduction...................................................................................................................... 4-1 4.2. Airfield Capacity & Demand Analysis............................................................................ 4-2 4.3. Instrument Approaches.................................................................................................... 4-3 4.4. Runway Facility Requirements........................................................................................ 4-9 4.5. Primary Runway 7/25...................................................................................................... 4-9 4.6. Secondary Crosswind Runway 12/30............................................................................4-12 4.7. Airport Visual Aids & Navigational Aids.....................................................................4-13 4.8. Meteorological Facilities...............................................................................................4-14 4.9. Taxiway & Taxilane Facility Requirements..................................................................4-14 4.10. Apron Size & Tie -Down Requirements.........................................................................4-15 4.11. Iowa Aviation System Plan Airside Recommendations................................................4-17 4.12. Landside Facility Requirements....................................................................................4-17 4.13. Iowa Aviation System Plan Landside Recommendations.............................................4-21 4.14. Summary........................................................................................................................4-21 5. IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS...................................................................................5-1 5.1. Capital Funding Sources.................................................................................................. 5-1 5.2. Financial Analysis & Implementation Plan..................................................................... 5-3 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2-1 Airport Vicinity Map.......................................................................................................2-27 Figure 2-2 Airport Location Map......................................................................................................2-28 Figure 2-3 Existing Airport Layout...................................................................................................2-29 Figure 2-4 2014 Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Rating................................................................2-30 Figure 2-5 Existing Building Area....................................................................................................2-31 Figure 2-6 Built Environment & Compatible Land Use Considerations..........................................2-32 Figure 2-7 Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) Dimensions..................................................................2-33 Figure2-8 Airport Zoning.................................................................................................................2-34 Figure 2-9 Airport, County & City Zoning Map...............................................................................2-35 Figure 2-10 Natural Environment.......................................................................................................2-36 Figure 2-11 Soils & Floodplain...........................................................................................................2-37 Figure 2-12 Cultural Resources Information......................................................................................2-38 If. TABLE OF CONTENTS 11 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Figure3-1 Drive Time......................................................................................................................3-23 Figure 4-1 Planning Considerations Map..........................................................................................4-22 Figure 4-2 Runway 12 Existing Conditions......................................................................................4-23 Figure 4-3 Runway 7 MALSF Analysis...........................................................................................4-24 Figure 4-4 Runway 25 Threshold Analysis Existing Conditions......................................................4-25 Figure 4-5 Runway 25 Threshold Analysis No Displaced Threshold...............................................4-26 Figure 4-6 Runway 25 Threshold Analysis 100' Displaced Threshold............................................4-27 Figure 4-7 Runway 7 Threshold Analysis Existing Conditions........................................................4-28 Figure 4-8 Runway 7 Threshold Analysis 213' Extension...............................................................4-29 Figure 4-9 Runway 7 Threshold Analysis 778' Stopway.................................................................4-30 Figure 4-10 Runway 30 Threshold Analysis Existing Conditions......................................................4-31 Figure 4-11 Existing Building Area Expansion..................................................................................4-32 Figure 4-12 Future Building Area.......................................................................................................4-33 Figure 4-13 Future Building Area Layout...........................................................................................4-34 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A User Survey Appendix B Airport Layout Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS 111 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Airport Master Plan for the Iowa City Municipal Airport (IOW) evaluates the needs of the existing and future users of the airport over the next 20 years. The Airport Master Plan was last updated in 1996 with an as -built Airport Layout Plan (ALP) update in 2012. The 2012 ALP update depicted extending Runway 7/25 to 5,015 feet and constructing a full parallel taxiway to Runway 7/25. Runway 17/35 was still in use, but was planned to be closed. Building area expansion included an extensive apron expansion and additional hangar development The 2012 ALP update was completed to incorporate the changes that had occurred at the airport since 1996. This included closing Runway 17/35, extending Runway 7/25 5,004 feet, adding an 809 -foot displaced threshold to the Runway 25 end, planning for a parallel taxiway to Runway 12/30, and building area growth in the south quadrant of the runways. The Airport Master Plan is a joint effort between the City of Iowa City, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and Iowa Office of Aviation. An Airport Master Plan includes discussion of the existing inventory at the airport, the results of the user survey submitted to the service area around the airport, the forecasts of aircraft activity including based aircraft and operations, the facility recommendations to meet the forecasted needs of the users of the airport, alternatives of the recommended facilities, and the financial analysis. The City of Iowa City is located in Johnson County in eastern Iowa. The City is located approximately 25 miles south of Cedar Rapids and 55 miles west of Davenport. Iowa City is the county seat of Johnson County. The airport is a general aviation facility primarily service business owners and recreational pilots that use single-engine and multi -engine propeller driven aircraft in addition to small and medium sized business jets. There are currently 82 based aircraft at the airport. There is an A/D building, one public conventional hangar for transient aircraft storage, one private conventional hangar, six T -hangars for based aircraft storage, one four -unit mixed hangar, one hangar for the Fixed Based Operator (FBO), and 14 in pavement tie -downs available for aircraft parking. The airport has two runways. Runway 7/25 is a concrete runway 5,004 feet long by 100 feet wide. There is an 808 -foot displaced threshold on the Runway 25 end. Crosswind Runway 12/30 is a concrete runway 3,900 feet long by 75 feet wide. There is a Global Positioning System (GPS) with vertical guidance (LPV) approach to the Runway 25 end, and a GPS approach to the Runway 30 end. There is a full parallel taxiway to Runway 7/25 and connecting taxiways to both runways for access to the building area. The aviation forecasts show growth in based aircraft over the next 20 years to 117 aircraft in 2034, which represents a growth of 35 aircraft. The annual operations area estimated to be 36,900 growing to 52,650 over the next 20 years. The forecasted based aircraft and operations numbers are supported by the FAA. Based on the 20 year forecasts, facility recommendations were developed. The critical design family of aircraft proposed to use the airport over the next 20 years are B -II aircraft. The existing airport is design to GII aircraft standards which represent aircraft with faster approach speeds that require larger safety areas around the runway. This change in runway classification allows the safety areas to be smaller and gains additional landing distance to the Runway 25 end from 4,196 feet to 4,904 feet In addition, the classification change allows a runway extension to the Runway 7 end of 213 feet. The combined changes allow for a future landing distance to the Runway 25 end of 5,117 feet with a total runway length of 5,217 feet. Additional needs addressed in the user survey and activity forecasts included additional hangar space for private hangar development, development of the south quadrant of the airport, and obstruction removals to both runway ends. HIS EXECUTIVE SUNEVLARY ry Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan 1. INTRODUCTION immalklaeld: An Airport Master Plan is a comprehensive study of an airport and describes the short (0-5 year), mid (5- 10 year), and long-term (10-20 year) development plans to meet existing and future aviation demand based on identified airport safety, facility, and aviation system needs. The Airport Master Plan will provide direction and guidance to the airport owner, the Iowa City Airport Commission, regarding future airport preservation and development priorities for the Iowa City Municipal Airport (IOW). It will become the Airport Commission's realistic strategy for the development of the airport considering financial, environmental, and socioeconomic factors. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) outlines the requirements and process to prepare an Airport Master Plan through Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5070-613, Airport Master Plans. 1.2. BACKGROUND The City of Iowa City last completed an Airport Master Plan in 1996 with an as -built Airport Layout Plan (ALP) update in 2012. The 2012 ALP update depicted extending Runway 7/25 to 5,015 feet and constructing a full parallel taxiway to Runway 7/25. Runway 17/35 was still in use, but was planned to be closed. Building area expansion included an extensive apron expansion and additional hangar development. The 2012 ALP update was completed to incorporate the changes that had occurred at the airport since 1996. This included closing Runway 17/35, extending Runway 7/25 5,004 feet, adding an 809 -foot displaced threshold to the Runway 25 end, planning for a parallel taxiway to Runway 12/30, and building area growth in the south quadrant of the runways. The Iowa City Municipal Airport Five Year Strategic Plan was completed in April 2010. The plan's purpose was to guide the direction of the airport for fiscal years 2011-2015. The Johnson County Council of Governments completed the Long Range Multi -Modal Transportation Plan for the years 2007-2035. The plan references the strategic planning efforts undertaken in the Iowa City Municipal Airport Strategic Plan. Additionally, the Iowa Department of Transportation Office of Aviation has published an Aviation System Plan for the years 2010 through 2030. This report includes both an overview of the Iowa aviation system as well as specific information related to the Iowa City Municipal Airport. The report serves to provide a better understanding of their role within the state and as a guide to improve facilities and services for their aviation users. The previously completed airport documents provide useful references to the goals for the airport over the previous 20 years. The information in these documents will be incorporated into this Airport Master Plan report One of the goals of this document is to have one cohesive report to use as a guide to the development at the airport for the next 20 years. 1.3. AREAS OF EMPHASIS An Airport Master Plan process evaluates many aspects of an airport facility. The following areas of emphasis have been specifically identified by the Airport Commission and will be reviewed in greater detail for IOW. Runway Alternatives The airport is land locked, however there may be opportunities to maximize runway length and/or reduce impacts to certain surrounding landowners. The Airport Master Plan will review various runway alternatives including shifting runway end locations, lengthening the runway, and accommodating a non - precision approach to Runway 7. Airport design standards will be evaluated against the current and future critical design aircraft. Impacts will be evaluated including cost, land acquisition, and obstruction �IIL. AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 1-1 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan removal. The tradeoffs between the alternatives will be evaluated with the Airport Commission and Master Plan Advisory Group. Obstruction Evaluation There is a need for the airport to mitigate FAR Part 77 obstructions to the navigable airspace. The Airport Master Plan and ALP will identify obstructions to existing and proposed future runway configurations and design standards. The analysis will help determine impacts of airport development on surrounding landowners. Building Area Plan The existing terminal area is constrained by two runways and West Frontage Road. Although some development areas exist, a long-term plan will be developed to accommodate aircraft storage and aviation business development. The Airport Master Plan will evaluate development and access options for the four quadrants around the airport's runways. Surrounding Land Uses The Airport Master Plan will evaluate ways to maximize on -airport land use to attract business development to the airport. Other City land uses will be evaluated to ensure off -airport impacts are compatible with airport operations, community planning needs, and airport zoning requirements. Financial Feasibility The Airport Master Plan will evaluate revenue enhancement strategies, which may include air cargo, industrial park development, and other airport business development. This will allow the airport to be maintained, operated, and developed in an efficient manner. 1.4. STRUCTURE OF AN AIRPORT MASTER PLAN • Existing airport inventory • Environmental overview • Aviation activity forecasts • Capacity and demand analysis • Facility requirements including alternative analysis • Implementation plan 1.5. PUBLIC & AGENCY OUTREACH Outreach is an important aspect of the Airport Master Plan process to solicit input and foster support for the vision of the airport over the next 20 years. The Airport Master Plan is to be used as a guide for decision makers when evaluating existing and future needs of the airport and implementing improvements. Although more detailed justification and funding of individual projects are key components before any development can occur, the Airport Master Plan recognizes the "big picture" potential of the airport and puts an overall plan in place for the future. There were two primary forms of outreach throughout the Airport Master Plan process. • Development of a Master Plan Advisory Group (MPAG) — this group met six times through the Airport Master Plan process to provide input on the issues, needs, and development for the airport over the next 20 years. The MPAG consisted of members from the Airport Commission, City of Iowa City staff, Johnson County, FBO staff, pilots at the airport, and FAA staff. Staff from the various organizations represented the interest of their areas of expertise. AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 1-2 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Airport User Survey — A user survey was distributed to current and potential recreational users of IOW and another user survey was sent out to business users of the airport. The recreational pilots were asked how often they use the airport, why they use the airport, and what facilities, services, or airport improvements are needed to increase their use of the airport. The business user survey asked about the business purpose for using the airport, how often they go to IOW for business, if they transport passengers or cargo, the type of aircraft they use and if they plan to purchase a different aircraft type in the future. This information was used to assist in development the forecasts and facility requirements for IOW. Public Open House — Atter the inventory and forecasts were determined by the MPAG and approved by FAA, a public open house was held to inform the public of the airport Master Plan process and the 20 year forecasts for based aircraft and operations at the airport. Approximately 50 people from the public were in attendance. The open house included a presentation about the project and a forum for those in attendance to ask questions about the project or the airport in general. A second public open house was held after the alternatives were developed for the airport. Approximately 30 people were in attendance. The open house included a presentation about the airside and landside development alternatives proposed at the airport. • Other community meetings —In addition to the MPAG meetings, updates were given throughout the project to the Airport Commission. This allowed additional input throughout the process and concurrence with the reasoning for the development alternatives. VIII AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 1-3 2. AIRPORT INVENTORY The existing facilities and conditions at the airport provide the baseline for comparison to the improvements determined necessary to implement future safety and capacity airport improvements. This will result in a plan for the future development of the airport. Collection of both on -airport and off -airport background information is important so that the development of the future facilities can be accomplished in partnership with the surrounding community. 2.1. LOCATION Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan The City of Iowa City is located in Johnson County in eastern Iowa. The City is located approximately 25 miles south of Cedar Rapids and 55 miles west of Davenport. Iowa City is the county seat of Johnson County and is a Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) as defined by the United States Census Bureau. An MSA is a geographical region with a high population density and strong economic ties throughout the area. Figure 2-1, at the end of this chapter, shows the regional location of Iowa City. The Iowa City Municipal Airport (FAA Identifier: IOW) is two miles southwest of the central business district of Iowa City. The airport access road is located off South Riverside Drive east of the airport. The airport property is located within Iowa City limits. Figure 2-2, at the end of this chapter, shows the local airport location. Airport property consists of approximately 580 acres in fee and 0.36 acres in easement, owned and operated by Iowa City. The field elevation for the airport is 684 feet above mean sea level (MSL). The airport's official location is defined by the Airport Reference Point (ARP), which marks the center area of the usable runways at the airport. The ARP for IOW is N 41°38'23.16", W 091°32'53.29". 2.2. HISTORY The Iowa City Airport is the oldest civil airport west of the Mississippi River still in its original location. Of the 113 public airports in Iowa, the Iowa City Municipal Airport is the second busiest general aviation airport in the state. The Iowa City Municipal Airport has been a public use airport since the City of Iowa City purchased land in 1929 to develop an airport. However, the idea of an airport within the City began in 1918 when pilots used the area as a landing strip. Some of the major milestones in the history of the airport's development are documented below: 1918: Pilots used the airport location as a landing strip. 1920: The landing strip area was used by the U.S. Postal Service as a fuel stop for the Chicago to Omaha airmail route. 1920s: United Airlines constructed a hangar for aircraft storage. 1929: Public ownership was established and land acquired to develop a municipal airport. 1930 — 1959: United Airlines provided commercial service to the surrounding community. 1937: An asphalt runway, Runway 12/30, and a rock surfaced runway, Runway 6/24, was opened. VIII AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 2-1 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan 1940: Additional land acquired to improve Runway 6/24 to a concrete runway 150 feet wide and 4,000 feet long. Runway 12/30 was also extended an additional 600 feet. The runway improvements were completed to provide a base for the Rock Island Arsenal. 1943: The Iowa City Municipal Airport included three runways. 1944: The Airport Commission was created to oversee the day to day operations at the airport. 1951: Arrival/Departure (A/D) building was constructed. 1959 — 1972: Ozark Airlines provided commercial air service to the surrounding community. 2004 —2005: Runway 7/25 was extended to 5,004 feet. More fencing was added at the airport. 2006: Taxilanes to the south corporate hangar area were constructed. 2007: Added a Jet A Fuel System. 2008 —2009: Performed Runway 7/25 rehabilitation/reconstruction. 2010: A corporate hangar was constructed. 2011: Updated the A/D building, added airfield lighting, and improved security at the airport. 2012 — 2013: The full parallel taxiway to Runway 7/25 was constructed. 2.3. SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT The Iowa City Municipal Airport is surrounded by the Iowa River to the east, Highway 218 to the west, and Highway 1 to the north. Land uses in the immediate vicinity of the airport include commercial, industrial, and public institutional. Sturgis Ferry Park is located east of the airport off the Runway 25 approach. The Iowa City Municipal Airport has developed land uses on all sides of the airport. This report will evaluate expandability and development alternatives at the airport to meet the needs of the community and the flying public. 2.4. SOCIOECONOMIC Socioeconomic information provides background on area population, employment, and income. These measures identify trends in the airport service area which may contribute to changes in airport activity. Long-term, steady growth of population, employment, and personal income in the airport service area is generally an indication of a healthy local economy and increased aviation demands. 2.4.1. POPULATION Iowa City is the largest city in Johnson County and has had an annual growth rate of 0.93% since 1970. Johnson County has also had a steady population increase since 1970. Table 2-1 depicts the historic and projected population information for these two areas in addition to the State of Iowa. The increasing population trends are expected to continue. Both Johnson County and the City of Iowa City are growing at a faster rate than the reported statewide rate of 0.5% per year. VIII � AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 2-2 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Table 2-1 Local and Regional Existing and Forecasted Population Year Iowa City Johnson County State of Iowa 1970 46,850 72,127 2,824,376 1980 50,508 81,717 2,913,808 1990 59,735 96,119 2,776,755 2000 62,220 111,006 2,926,324 2010 67,862 130,882 3,046,355 2020 81,368 158,456 3,172,237 2030 97,563 184,445 3,328,308 2040 116,980 210,695 3,487,942 Historical Trend (increase/year) 0.93% 1.50% 0.19% Forecast Trend (increase/year) 1.80% 1.80% 1.80% Source: U.S. Census Bureau (2010), Iowa Data Center Forecasts (2009) *Iowa City growth rate extrapolated from projected 2010 to 2013 forecasted growth rate Iowa City is one of nine MSAs within the State of Iowa. The Iowa City MSA consists of Johnson and Washington Counties. Johnson County has the second fastest growing county population in Iowa, and the Iowa City MSA is the fastest growing MSA in Iowa. Table 2-2 shows the population growth of the nine MSAs in Iowa. Table 2-2 Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) population Iowa Metropolitan Statistical Average Annual Areas (MSA) 2010 2011 2012I2010- 2013 Iowa City MSA 152,941 155,303 158,370 161,170 1.76% Des Moines -West Des Moines 571,955 580,779 589,443 599,789 1.60% MSA Ames MSA 89,595 90,834 91,630 92,406 1.04% Omaha -Council Bluffs MSA 868,087 876,836 885,471 895,151 1.03% Dubuque MSA 93,887 94,460 95,062 95,697 0.64% Cedar Rapids MSA 258,362 260,856 261,628 262,421 0.52% Waterloo -Cedar Falls MSA 167,888 168,221 168,536 169,484 0.32% Davenport -Moline -Rock Island 380,267 381,069 382,590 383,681 0.30% MSA Sioux City MSA 168,789 168,822 168,754 168,714 -0.01% Source: U.S. Census Bureau (March 2014) The Iowa City MSA has the highest average annual growth rate among the nine MSAs in the state of Iowa. This information is useful when determining future growth in aviation. VIII In AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 2-3 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan 2.4.2. EMPLOYMENT Employment is another socioeconomic measure of the vitality of a regional economy and associated demand for aviation. Johnson County has a well-rounded employment which includes health care (28.1%), retail trade (14.3%), accommodation/food services (12.4%) and manufacturing (8.3%). Total employment within the Iowa City MSA is growing faster than the State of Iowa. According to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, data taken from 1970 to 2012 shows a historical trend of growth in total (full-time and part time) employment rates of 1.04% for the State of Iowa and 2.38%for the Iowa City MSA. Johnson County has a yearly total employment growth rate of 2.64% per year from 1970 through 2012. Unemployment in Johnson County is 4.3% of the labor force (2012), which is lower than the Iowa rate of 5.6% and the United States average of 9.3%. Employment is anticipated to continue to grow consistent with projected population growth referenced above. Based on Iowa City Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for 2013, the 10 largest employers in Iowa City are: • University of Iowa and University of Iowa Hospital and Clinics (30,804 employees) • Iowa City Community School District (1,700 employees) • Veterans Administration Medical Center (1,562 employees) • City of Iowa City (1,283 employees) • NCS Pearson (1,200 employees) • Mercy Hospital (1,187 employees) • ACT Inc. (1,181 employees) • Hy -Vee (1,166 employees) • System Unlimited (890 employees) • International Automotive Components (785 employees) 2.4.3. INCOME Income is another socioeconomic measurement tool which can provide assumptions into new businesses and development. Generally, higher income levels translate to greater demand for aviation activities. According to the 2010 U.S. Census Bureau, the median household income for Johnson County was $53,993, which was higher than the State of Iowa average of $51,129 and the United States average of $53,046. The State of Iowa has a per capita personal income of $26,545 compared to $28,051 in the United States. Iowa City has a per capital personal income of $25,154. 2.5.1. FEDERAL NPIAS The National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS) is made up of 3,330 airports that are open for public use. These airports are considered significant to the national air transportation system and are eligible for Federal funding. Airports are classified as commercial service (primary, non -primary), cargo service, reliever airports, or other general aviation airports. Iowa City Municipal Airport is classified by the FAA as a general aviation airport. Over 2,900 airports in the NPIAS have this classification. General aviation airports economically support local businesses, provide critical community access, allow for emergency response, and provide other specific aviation functions. In 2012, a study was completed by the FAA in an effort to classify general aviation facilities, titled General Aviation Airports: A National Asset. These airport categories have been further broken X11 AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 2-4 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan down by the FAA as national, regional, local, basic or unclassified facilities within the NPIAS system. IOW is classified as general aviation regional airport. There are 467 regional general aviation airports in the national system. Regional — Airports located in metropolitan areas which serve relatively large populations. These 467 airports support interstate and some long distance (cross country) flying with more sophisticated aircraft. Forty-nine states currently have regional airports with the exception of Hawaii. They account for 37% of total flying at the studied general aviation airports and 42% of flying with flight plans. There is a substantial amount of charter (air taxi), jet flying, and rotorcraft flights at regional airports. There are no heliports or seaplane bases in this category. 2.5.2. STATE SYSTEM PLAN Each state is responsible for developing a more detailed system plan with development objectives. The Iowa Office of Aviation classifies airports as commercial service, enhanced service, general service, basic service, or local service. IOW is classified as an enhanced service airport in the 2010 Iowa State Aviation Svstem Plan (SASP). Enhanced Service— airports with runways of 5,000 feet or greater in length, facilities and services that can accommodate a full range of general aviation activity including most business jets, serve business aviation, are regional transportation centers, and economic catalysts. The 2010 SASP identified projected airport development facility needs for each airport based on its classification. The 2010 SASP has identified the following anticipated needs for IOW: • Reduce on -airport wildlife habitat and mitigate hazardous wildlife activity to limit potential safety concerns. • Engage community leaders and stakeholders in developing a strategic plan to guide the development of the airport, coordinating with economic development interests. • Develop a welcome image for visitors arriving by air and provide directional signage to the business community to ensure a connection. • Actively work to protect runway approaches by developing or enforcing height and compatible land use zoning. 2.6. AIRPORT MANAGEMENT The Iowa City Municipal Airport is owned by the City of Iowa City, Iowa and operated by the Airport Commission. The Iowa City Airport Commission is comprised of five members appointed by City Council. The Airport Commission has been granted all powers to operate IOW including control of all airport funding. The Airport Commission makes decisions on the management, budgeting, operations, maintenance, and development needs at IOW. The Airport Commission has a contractual arrangement with the current Fixed Base Operator (FBO) to provide on-site airport maintenance and management services at IOW. The Airport Commission continues to provide updates to City Council on airport items. 2.7. AVIATION ACTIVITY Aviation activity provides measurement of the number and type of based aircraft and operations to an airport facility. 2.7.1. BASED AIRCRAFT Based aircraft are aircraft that are stored at an airport for the majority of a year. They are typically split �IIL AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 2-5 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan into type of aircraft, including single and multi -engine piston aircraft, jet, and ultralight aircraft. Sources of historical and current based aircraft data include the FAA Terminal Area Forecasts (TAF), Airport 5010 Master Record, 2010 SASP, the Iowa City Municipal Airport Strategic Plan (2010), the South Airfield Planning Study (2006 based aircraft data), the 1996 Airport Master Plan, as well as local verified records and counts. Some sources do not break down the total number of based aircraft by aircraft type. Table 2-3 shows that current based aircraft estimates from existing sources. The number of based aircraft from these sources ranges from 74 to 87. Table 2-3 Based Aircraft — Existing Sources Source Sin gle Engine Multi- Engine Jets Helicopters/ Gliders Total FAA TAF (2013) 70 11 4 2 87 FAA 5010 Report 67 6 9 2* 82 State System Plan (20 10) 69 11 4 1 85 2011-2015 Iowa City Municipal Airport Strategic Plan 84 1996 Airport Master Plan 74 2009 South Airfield Planning Stud 2006 60 15 2 1 78 Local Count (2014) 65 7 7 3 82 *Helicopters and gliders not included in FAA 5010 report based aircraft totals Source: Iowa City Municipal Airport staff, FAA, Iowa DOT Office of Aviation, McClure Engineering, AECOM, www. basedaircraft. corn Based on a field inventory conducted by the airport manager in 2014, the number of based aircraft at IOW is 82 including 65 single-engine aircraft, seven multi -engine aircraft, seven jets, one helicopter, and two ultralight'experimental aircraft. The number of based aircraft was confirmed on www.basedaircraft.com and was used as the baseline for forecasting future aircraft growth at IOW. The website is part of the National Based Aircraft Inventory Program created by the FAA. The aircraft submitted to this inventory are verified by FAA to ensure aircraft are not based at multiple airports across the county. The website is used to update the FAA Airport 5010 Master Record. 2.7.2. AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS An operation is classified as either a takeoff or a landing. Touch and go training operations count as two operations. Airport operations are typically split into local and itinerant operations. Local operations are defined in the FAA's Forecasting Activity by Airport as "aircraft operating in the traffic pattern or aircraft known to be departing or arriving from flight in local practice areas, or aircraft executing practice instrument approaches at the airport. Itinerant operations are aircraft operations other than local operations." Aircraft operations are also categorized by the use of the aircraft operating at the airport. Examples of this include commercial, general aviation, and military operations. Sources of historical and current airport operational data include the FAA TAF, Airport 5010 Master Record, 2010 SASP, the Iowa City Municipal Airport Strategic Plan (2010), the South Airfield Planning Study (2003 operations data), and the 1996 Airport Master Plan. X11 AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 2-6 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Table 2-4 lists the current airport operations estimates from existing sources. The number of operations differs greatly depending on the source of information. Chapter 3: Aviation Forecasts will develop a baseline for existing airport operations and forecasts for the number of anticipated operations at the airport for a 20 year planning period. Table 2-4 Annual Operations — Existing Sources Source: Iowa City Municipal Airport staff, FAA, Iowa DOT Office of Aviation, McClure Engineering, AECOM, www.basedaircraft.com Note: -- represents information fimt is not reported in the referenced source. Available FAA Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) data was also obtained to determine the number of flights arriving and departing IOW under IFR operations. There were 4,061 arrivals and departures from November 2013 to October 2014. 2.8. AIRPORT DESIGN STANDARDS & OBSTRUCTIONS FAA airport design standards are based on two key components. The first component is based on the critical aircraft family currently using the airport or proposed to use the airport within the next five years. The second component is based on the type of approach developed for each runway end. Both the critical aircraft and the approach type are discussed in the next two sections to determine the design standards to be followed when planning future development at IOW. 2.8.1. CRITICAL DESIGN AIRCRAFT Airport Reference Code (ARC) Development of the existing and future facilities at an airport relies upon the identification of the most demanding aircraft type currently utilizing or projected to utilize the airport. The FAA defines the critical aircraft as an aircraft or a family of aircraft that is expected to conduct at least 500 annual itinerant operations at the airport (one takeoff and one landing is considered two operations). �IIL. AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 2-7 Itinerant Operations Local Operations Source Air Taxi & Commuter Commercial General Aviation Military General Aviation Military Total FAA TAF (2013) 2,200 0 13,100 287 3,700 0 19,287 5010 Report 2,200 0 13,100 287 3,700 0 19,287 State System Plan 29,750 (2010) 2011-2015 Iowa City Municipal Airport -- -- -- -- -- -- 36,000 Strategic Plan 1996 Airport Master 0 0 29,637 0 7,409 0 37,046 Plan 2009 South Airfield -- -- 20,470 -- 15,570 -- 36,040 Planning Study (2003) Source: Iowa City Municipal Airport staff, FAA, Iowa DOT Office of Aviation, McClure Engineering, AECOM, www.basedaircraft.com Note: -- represents information fimt is not reported in the referenced source. Available FAA Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) data was also obtained to determine the number of flights arriving and departing IOW under IFR operations. There were 4,061 arrivals and departures from November 2013 to October 2014. 2.8. AIRPORT DESIGN STANDARDS & OBSTRUCTIONS FAA airport design standards are based on two key components. The first component is based on the critical aircraft family currently using the airport or proposed to use the airport within the next five years. The second component is based on the type of approach developed for each runway end. Both the critical aircraft and the approach type are discussed in the next two sections to determine the design standards to be followed when planning future development at IOW. 2.8.1. CRITICAL DESIGN AIRCRAFT Airport Reference Code (ARC) Development of the existing and future facilities at an airport relies upon the identification of the most demanding aircraft type currently utilizing or projected to utilize the airport. The FAA defines the critical aircraft as an aircraft or a family of aircraft that is expected to conduct at least 500 annual itinerant operations at the airport (one takeoff and one landing is considered two operations). �IIL. AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 2-7 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan The ARC translates the operational and physical characteristics of the aircraft intended to operate at the airport to FAA airport design criteria. The ARC is based on three components which include approach speed, wingspan, and tail height. The approach speeds are divided into four categories and are defined in Table 2-5. The wingspan and tail heights are divided into six Airport Design Groups (ADG) and are defined in Table 2-6. Table 2-5 FAA Aircraft Approach Category Source: FAA AC 150/5300-13A,Airport Design Table 2-6 FAA Aircraft Design Group (ADG) Group I Wingspan (feet) < 49 Tail Height (feet) < 20 ft Example Aircraft Type Beech Baron 58, Cessna 172 II 49 - < 79 20 - < 30 Beech King Air, Cessna Citation Series III 79 - < 118 30 - < 45 B-737, DC -9, CRJ-900 IV 118 - < 171 45 - < 60 A-300, B-757, B-767 V 171 - < 197 60 - < 66 B-747,13-777 VI 197 - < 26 66 - < 80 Lockheed C -5A, A-380 Source: FAA AC 150/5300-13A,Airport Design According to AC 150/5300-13X Airport Design, the ARC does not restrict the type of aircraft that can safely use the airport, the ARC is for planning and design purposes only. The existing ARC is C -II for Runway 07/25 and B -II for Runway 12/30. Approach Reference Code (APRQ & Departure Reference Code (DPRC) An Approach Reference Code (APRC) system is used to determine the current operational capabilities of a runway and associated parallel taxiway with regard to landing operations. An APRC identifies the operational capabilities of a runway using the ARC (aircraft approach category, airplane design group) with planned runway approach visibility minimums to establish design standards. Visibility minimums are expressed in Runway Visual Range (RVR) values, in feet, as defined in Table 2-7. The Departure Reference Code (DPRC) describes the current operational capabilities of a runway and associated parallel taxiway with regard to takeoff operations. It is similar to the APRC and is composed of the airport approach category and the airplane design group, however, not visibility minimums. In addition, a runway may have more than one DPRC designation. cul In AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 2-8 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Table 2-7 Runway Visual Range (RVR) values RVR (feet) Approach Type Visibility Minimums VIS Visual — no instrument approach Not applicable 5000 Non -Precision Approach or Approach with Vertical Guidance No lower than 1 mile 4000 Approach with Vertical Guidance Lower than 1 mile but not lower than'/4 mile 2400 Precision Approach (Category 1) Lower than'/4 mile but not lower than '/2 mile 1600 Precision Approach (Category II) Lower than %2 mile but not lower than %4 mile 1200 Precision Approach (Category 111) Lower than %4 mile Source: FAA AC 150/5300-13A,Airport Design The existing APRC for Runway 7/25 is C-11-5000 and the DPRC is C -II. The APRC for the crosswind runway, Runway 12/30, is B-11-5000 and the DPRC is B -II. Both the APRC and DPRC may change over time as improvements are made to each runway such as obtaining lower visibility minimums. Runwav Design Code (RDC) The Runway Design Code (RDC) signifies the design standards to which the runway is to be built. The RDC is composed of the same three components as the APRC. However, the RDC is based on planned development for each runway and does not have any operational application for the current conditions for the runway as with the APRC and the DPRC. The RDC will be discussed in greater detail at the end of Chapter 3: Aviation Forecasts to determine the runway design standards to be used for the critical aircraft proposed to use the airport over the next 20 years. 2.8.2. APPROACH TYPES Instrument approach procedures provide arriving pilots with guidance to the airport runway environment during periods of low visibility. FAA publishes instrument approach procedures defining the horizontal and vertical flight path to land at an airport. Flight visibility and cloud ceiling height minimums are established for each instrument approach procedure based on available navigational aids, airspace obstructions, aircraft equipment, and pilot certification. Weather minimums change as the approach speed of an aircraft increases. Visual approaches to a runway have no instrument approach procedure nor do they require additional aircraft or ground equipment. There are three types of instrument approaches: Non -Precision Approach — A standard instrument approach procedure with horizontal guidance but no vertical descent guidance. Types of non -precision approaches include localizer, RNAV/GPS (area navigation/global positioning system), RNAV/RNP (area navigation/required navigation), NDB (non -directional beacon), and VOR/TVOR (very high frequency omni- directional range/terminal very high frequency omni -directional range). These type of approaches require additional equipment in the aircraft but no additional ground-based equipment is needed. • Approach with Vertical Guidance — An instrument approach procedure providing electronic course and vertical descent guidance. These approaches usually require additional aircraft equipment. These approaches can utilize ground-based navigational aids such as a glide slope or can be accomplished with only a satellite based navigational aid such as a Localizer Performance with Vertical Guidance (LPV). VIII In AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 2-9 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Precision Approach —An instrument approach procedure with both vertical descent guidance and horizontal guidance to the runway. These type of approaches utilize ground based equipment such as an Instrument Landing System (ILS). Currently IOW has an RNAV (GPS) approach to Runway 25 and Runway 30. The approach to Runway 30 is non -precision GPS with lateral navigation (LNAV) while the GPS approach to the Runway 25 end is a non -precision approach that has Localizer Performance with Vertical Guidance (LPV) capability, which lowers the cloud ceiling minimums to 394 feet. The LPV approach to Runway 25 has visibility minimums of 1'h miles and the LNAV approach to Runway 30 has 1 mile visibility minimums. The airport has a VOR approach which enables aircraft with a receiving unit to determine their position in relation to IOW. The nearest precision approach is available at the Eastern Iowa Airport located approximately 16 miles northwest of IOW. The ILS approach procedure provides a 200 -foot cloud ceiling minimum with 'h mile visibility. This approach is a good alternative if weather conditions are below instrument approach minimums at IOW. Based on current weather data, this occurs at IOW 10% of the time. 2.8.3. AIRPOT OBSTRUCTIONS Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77 Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77 Safe, Efficient Use, Preservation of the Navigable Airspace defines the standards used in determining obstructions in the navigable space around the airport. Simply put, FAR Part 77 is an obstruction identification standard. Obstructions are considered to penetrate the imaginary airspace surfaces and can be a hazard to air navigation unless an airspace study would show otherwise. Imaginary surfaces include the approach surface, primary surface, horizontal surface, and conical surface. The slopes and dimensions of these surfaces are determined by the approach type for the runway as discussed in Section 2.8.2. Obstructions must be lowered below the FAR Part 77 airspace surfaces, lighted with FAA approved obstruction lighting, or removed unless an FAA airspace study determines otherwise. If obstructions to these surfaces are not mitigated, the published approaches to the airport may be cancelled. Approach/Departure Surfaces In addition to FAR Part 77 surfaces, approach/departure surfaces are determined for each runway end based on the type of aircraft and visibility minimums planned for the runway. These surfaces are defined in FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13X Airport Design. The surface applicable to IOW is Row 3 from Table 3-2 and defined as "approach end of runways expected to accommodate instrument approaches having visibility greater than or equal to'/4 statute miles, or expected to serve large airplanes (day or night)." Large airplanes are aircraft that weigh greater than 12,500 pounds. The FAR Part 77 and approach/departure Row 3 surfaces cover very similar areas for IOW; however, Row 3 is a narrower surface and therefore requires clearance of a smaller area of obstructions. Airspace obstructions at IOW Numerous airspace obstructions currently exist at IOW and the Airport Commission has a program in place to mitigate them. An Environmental Assessment (EA) is currently underway at IOW to comply with National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) environmental documentation requirements. The primary purpose of the EA is to cover actions that are required to mitigate existing obstructions to Runway 12/30. The primary obstruction mitigation actions that will be required will be tree removal (or possibly trimming) and some lighting or lowering of power poles. Approximately 85 individual tree obstructions were identified. If the landowner desires trimming instead of removal, FAA and City funding will cover the initial trimming, but the landowner is then responsible for all future trimming for the life of the tree. Additional mitigation needs will be evaluated in Chapter 4.0, Facility Requirements VIII AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 2-10 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan 2.9. CLIMATE Climate considerations for airport planning include wind, temperature, precipitation, cloud cover and visibility. East Iowa, including Iowa City, experiences a humid continental climate characterized by large seasonal temperature differences. Precipitation is well distributed year-round. Wind data is important as it helps define runway characteristics at an airport. Aircraft are designed to take off and land into the wind. Crosswinds and tailwinds can create a hazardous situation for pilots, particularly those flying smaller aircraft. Wind data defines prevailing winds and crosswind components at the airport. The National Climatic Data Center in Ashville, North Carolina collects wind data through an Automated Surface Observing System (ASOS) at the airport. The FAA recommends ten years of wind data be collected at the airport site or the closest airport site where the data is available to conduct a wind analysis. Wind data for IOW was gathered from the on-site ASOS for the time period from January 2005 through December 2014 to conduct a wind analysis. The existing wind coverage for both Runway 7/25 and 12/30 at IOW is summarized in Table 2-8. The FAA recommends the primary runway orientation provide 95 percent wind coverage. When this is not achieved, a crosswind runway may be needed. The allowable crosswind component per Runway Design Code (RDC) is 10.5 knots for RDC A -I and B -I, 13 knots for RDC A -II and B -II, 16 knots for RDC A- DI, B -III, C -I through C-111, and D -I through D -III, and 20 knots for RDC A -IV and B -IV, GIV through C -VI, D -IV through D -VI, and E -I through E -VI. Table 2-8 Wind Coverage Source: National Climatic Data Center for Iowa City, IA (2005-2014) AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 2-11 All Weather Crosswind Component Runway 13 knots 16 knots IFR Crosswind Component Runway 13 knots 16 knots Source: National Climatic Data Center for Iowa City, IA (2005-2014) AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 2-11 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan The ARC for the primary runway (Runway 7/25) is C -II which has an allowable crosswind component of 16 knots. However, the crosswind runway is utilized by smaller aircraft with an ARC of B -II and an allowable crosswind component of 13 knots. Table 2-9 below is the combined wind coverage including the varying allowable wind coverage at the airport. Table 2-9 Combined Wind Coverage Source: National Climatic Data Center for Iowa City, IA (2005-2014) Runway 7/25 is below the recommended 95% wind coverage for 13 knot crosswinds, but has adequate wind coverage for 16 knot crosswinds. Smaller aircraft are affected by wind more than operations with larger aircraft. The crosswind Runway 12/30 has adequate wind coverage for 13 knot crosswinds. The combined crosswind coverage for Runway 12/30 at 13 knots and Runway 7/25 at 16 knots is 99.5%. The future RDC may change based on the operations forecasts that will be developed in the next chapter. The type of aircraft proposed to use the airport over the next 20 years will be evaluated to determine if the RDC will change and if additional wind coverage is needed at the airport. Temperature is important in determining airfield facility requirements as it is a critical factor in calculating required runway length. Warm temperatures cause the air to become less dense, thus requiring aircraft to use longer runway lengths for takeoff. Additionally, precipitation causes contamination of the runway leading to longer required runway lengths. Cloud cover and visibility influences the need for navigational aids and approach procedures to runways. The closest observation station with reliable historical temperature data is a co-operative station located in Iowa City. The mean maximum temperature in the hottest month (July) was measured at 87 degrees Fahrenheit from 1981 to 2010. Average total annual precipitation is 37.6 inches annually, with a maximum of 5.1 inches in June. Annual snowfall is 28.0 inches. Using available data from the IOW ASOS, weather conditions requiring pilots to operate aircraft with reference to instruments rather than visual landmarks occurs, on average, 10% of the time. 2.10. AIRSIDE FACILITIES The existing airside facilities are defined as the airport features that support aircraft operations. These include runways, taxiways, aprons, navigational aids, and visual aids. Figure 2-3, at the end of this chapter, depicts the existing facilities at the airport. VIII � AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 2-12 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan 2.10.1. RUNWAYS Runway 7/25 The primary runway at the airport, Runway 7/25, is 5,004 feet in length, 100 feet in width, and is a paved concrete surface. Runway 7/25 is marked with non -precision runway markings delineating the centerline, aiming point, and threshold. This runway accommodates visual and non - precision (Runway 25 only) instrument approaches. The published pavement strength for the runway is 25,000 pounds for single -wheel gear aircraft and 45,000 pounds for dual -wheel gear aircraft. A runway with this pavement strength is considered an other -than -utility runway. The Runway 25 end has an 808 -foot displaced threshold due to the location of South Riverside Drive. Instead of relocating the roadway or shortening the runway, the threshold was displaced, which requires aircraft to land beyond the displaced threshold to ensure adequate clearance over the roadway. Displaced threshold markings are depicted in the photo on the right side of the page. Runway 7/25 is designed to C-11-5000 standards. This signifies the current operational capability of accommodating aircraft with approach speeds up to 141 knots, wingspans up to 79 feet, and runway approaches as low as one mile visibility. Runway Crosswind Runway 12/30 at is 3,900 feet in length, 75 feet in width, and is a paved concrete surface as seen in Figure 2-3. Runway 12/30 is marked with non -precision runway markings delineating the centerline, aiming point, and threshold. This runway accommodates visual and non -precision (Runway 30 only) instrument approaches. The published pavement strength for the runway is 15,000 pounds for single -wheel gear aircraft and 20,000 pounds for dual -wheel gear aircraft. A runway with this pavement strength is considered an other -than -utility runway. Runway 12/30 is designed to B -II -5000 standards, which signifies the current operational capability of accommodating aircraft with approach speeds up to 121 knots, wingspans up to 79 feet, and runway approaches as low as one mile visibility. VIII AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 2-13 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan 2.10.2. AIRPORT VISUAL AIDS Airport visual aids are an important feature that provides airport visual references to pilots, especially during low visibility or night operations. The following is a summary of the visual aids available at IOW. Rotating Beacon: A rotating beacon identifies the location of an airport facility to pilots in the air. Most civilian general aviation airports alternate white and green lights from dusk until dawn, and during instrument flight rules (IFR) conditions during the day. A rotating beacon is located east of the main apron near Holton and Airport Drive and is in marginally fair condition (see Figure 2-3). The status of the rotating beacon will be A picture of the rotating beacon is located on the right side of the page. Runway Edge and Threshold Lighting: Runway edge and threshold lights are installed to outline the edges of runways in low -light and restricted -visibility conditions. White/orange lights identify the runway edge, while red/green lights identify the runway threshold at each end. Runway lighting systems have three different intensity levels; low, medium, and high depending on the classification of the runway. IOW has Medium Intensity Runway Lights (MIRLs) installed along both Runway 7/25 and Runway 12/30. The runways are lit from dusk until dawn. The lights are stake -mounted and in fair condition. Taxiway Edge Lighting: Taxiway edge lights or markers outline the edges of taxiways. Taxiway lights are blue and have the same intensity systems available as runway lights. Retro -reflective markers, which use reflective blue tape mounted on a pole, may be used in lieu of taxiway lighting as a low-cost alternative. IOW has Medium Intensity Taxiway Lights (MITLs) installed along the edges of the taxiways. Runway Markings: Runway markings are installed for visual identification of a paved runway during all weather conditions. Markings vary in complexity based on the type of approach for a runway; visual, non - precision instrument, and precision instrument. Runways 7/25 and 12/30 have non -precision runway markings delineating the runway centerline and threshold. Displaced threshold markings indicate the first 808 feet at the Runway 25 end. The runway markings are in good condition. Guidance Signs: Guidance signs provide location, direction, and guidance information to pilots. Mandatory signs are to be placed at intersections with runways to indicate critical holding areas. IOW has all mandatory guidance signs installed along with additional identifier and directional signs. The signs are in good condition. A picture of one of the guidance signs is located on the right side of the page. Runway End Identifier Lights (REILs): REILs are installed to provide rapid and positive identification of the approach end of a runway during night and low visibility conditions. The REILs system consists of two synchronized flashing white strobe lights, located laterally on each side of the runway facing the approach path. IOW has REILs installed at the Runway 7 and 25 ends, which are in fair condition. VIII AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 2-14 Visual Glide Slope Indicators (VGSI): VGSI provide vertical guidance to the runway to ensure the proper glide path is maintained for landing. Short Approach Visual Approach Slope Indicator (SVASI), Visual Approach Slope Indicator (VASI), and Precision Approach Path Indicator (PAPI) lights are types visual aids installed to provide guidance information. There is a four light PAPI system installed on each end of Runway 7/25, which are in fair condition. A picture of the PAPI system can be seen on the right side of the page. 2.10.3. NAVIGATIONAL AIDS Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Instrument navigation aids are satellite or ground based equipment established to provide pilots with critical guidance information to the airport environment. With the proper equipment and procedures developed, pilots can use the instrument navigational aids for horizontal and/or vertical guidance to a waypoint or a runway. Instrument -based navigation, including approaches to airport runways, is required for flight in Instrument Meteorological Conditions (IMC). These navigational aids include: Very -high frequency Omni -directional Range (VOR): Ground-based facilities that provide distance and radial information used for non -precision en -route and terminal navigation. A VOR station is located at IOW. Instrument Landing Svstem (ILS): Ground-based facilities (Localizes Antenna, Glide Slope Antenna, Approach Lighting System) provide distance, horizontal and vertical guidance information to capable airport runways. The closest ILS runway is at the Eastern Iowa Airport in Cedar Rapids. Runway 9 and 27 in Cedar Rapids are served by this navigational aid. Global Positioning System (GPS): Equipment and satellites that enable pilots to navigate to a waypoint without the primary need for primary ground-based equipment. GPS provides horizontal guidance, but can also provide vertical guidance for instrument approaches with published procedures. GPS with vertical guidance is called Localizer Performance with Vertical Guidance (LPV) procedures. A GPS approach procedure has been established to the Runway 25 and Runway 30 ends at IOW. Runway 25 has LPV capabilities. Non -Directional Beacon (NDB): Ground-based facilities that provide horizontal directional guidance. The closest non -directional beacon (NDB) is located at the Washington Municipal Airport, approximately 23 miles south of Iowa City. This beacon can be utilized to assist pilots navigating to this area. NDBs are currently being decommissioned by FAA in lieu of GPS navigation. VIII AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 2-15 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan 2.10.4. METEOROLOGICAL FACILITIES Timely weather information is important to the safety of aircraft operations. Pil weather information from the following sources: Wind Cone: The wind cone is used to indicate wind direction at IOW. The wind cone is located north of the building area (see Figure 2-3). A picture of the wind cone can be seen on the right side of the page. Segmented Circle: A segmented circle indicates the traffic pattern at the airport. The segmented circle is located south of the apron and includes a wind indicator in the center. Automated Surface Observing System (ASOS): An ASOS measures critical meteorological data on-site at airports including wind speed, wind direction, temperature, dew point, cloud coverage and ceiling, visibility, precipitation, and barometric pressure. IOW has an ASOS weather facility on-site located east of the Runway 7/25 and Runway 12/30 intersection near the abandoned Runway 18/36 (see Figure 2-3). 2.10.5. TAXIWAYS AND TAXILANES A taxiway system at an airport provides access to and from the runways, aircraft aprons, and hangar facilities. Taxiways are constructed for safety purposes to expedite the flow of departing and arriving aircraft from the runway. A taxiway system consists of parallel taxiways and/or connecting taxiways. IOW currently has one connector taxiway to the north providing access from the apron and hangar area to the Runway 25 end and one connector taxiway to the south providing access to the Runway 30 end. A full parallel taxiway to Runway 7/25 was constructed in 2012 and connects the runway to the building area (see Figure 2-3). There is currently an aligned taxiway to the Runway 25 end. The centerline of an aligned taxiway coincides with the runway centerline. Operations on an aligned taxiway are considered runway operations and therefore preclude other aircraft from using the runway once an airplane has maneuvered onto the aligned taxiway. According to FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13X aligned taxiway should be removed as soon as practicable. The existing aligned taxiway will be evaluated in greater detail in Chapter 4: Facility Requirements. Taxilanes are used within the building area to provide access from the apron to the hangars. Various taxilanes for low speed use have been constructed at IOW to provide access to the public and private hangars within the building area. 2.10.6. APRON The aircraft apron provides an area for aircraft parking, aircraft movements, fueling operations, and access to the Arrival/Departure (A/D) building and other hangars. The existing apron is approximately 8,900 square yards and is located west of the building area (see Figure 2-3). There are 14 in -pavement tie - downs available for aircraft parking in addition to eight grass tie -downs. A picture of the apron can be seen on the right side of the page. VIII AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 2-16 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan 2.10.7. PAVEMENT CONDITION In order to continue to receive federal funding, all airports must implement a pavement maintenance program for any pavement constructed or repaired with federal money. The Iowa DOT Office of Aviation helps airports with this grant assurance by having a research company prepare pavement evaluation reports. All airports within the state are evaluated on a three year cycle. An evaluation update was completed for IOW in November 2014. The evaluation report identifies the Pavement Condition Index (PCI) for each pavement section at the airport. The rating is used to identify pavement improvement needs based on FAA AC 150/5380-7A, Airport PavementManagement Program and American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) D5340. The pavement ratings are shown in Table 2-10. Table 2-10 PCI Ratings Periodic pavement rehabilitation projects have been completed at the airport in recent years. Table 2-11 summarizes the PCI rating for each major pavement section at IOW. These areas are graphically represented in Figure 2-4 at the end of this chapter. Table 2-11 Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Ratings Pavement Area Runway 7/25 Last nstruction ,� 2008 —2009 2014 PCI 95-98 Runway 12/30 2009 98 Full Parallel Taxiway 2012 100 Connector Taxiways 1945, 2008 —2013 48, 96 — 100 Apron 2007 98 Parking Lot 1945 73 Source: IOW Pavement Condition Report (2015), Iowa DOT The pavement at IOW ranges from reconstruction to preventative maintenance conditions. The runways and apron are in excellent condition. Older pavements include the south connector taxiway to the Runway 30 end and the automobile parking lot which will require reconstruction in the near future. VIII AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 2-17 2.11. LANDSIDE FACILITIES 2.11.1.ARRIVAL/DEPARTURE (A/D) BUILDING An Arrival/Departure (A/D) building is utilized at a general aviation airport to provide an area for local and transient pilots and passengers to transition to and from the aircraft operations area. The A/D building at IOW was constructed in 1951 and is east of the apron area. The A/D building is approximately 5,400 square feet (see Figure 2-5 at the end of this chapter). Facilities within the building include restrooms, a pilot's briefing area, a large conference room on the second floor, airport manager and Fixed Base Operator (FBO) offices, and lounge space for local and transient pilots. A picture of the A/D building can be seen on the right side of this page. Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan 2.11.2. AUTOMOBILE ACCESS & PARKING The primary airport access point to the A/D building and automobile parking area is located off South Riverside Drive. The airport access road and automobile parking lot are paved. There are 45 automobile parking stalls near the A/D building. The parking lot is in fair condition and is commonly used by airport business employees, visitors, and transient passengers. Airport tenants commonly park their vehicle adjacent to their aircraft storage hangar (see Figure 2-5). 2.11.3. AIRCRAFT STORAGE Aircraft hangars provide indoor storage for aircraft and aircraft tie -downs provide outdoor storage. Public hangars at IOW include the following: • Five, 10 -unit T -hangars • One, 9 -unit T -hangar • One, 4 -unit mixed hangar • One, 2 -unit public conventional hangar • One conventional hangar (FBO) There is also one private conventional hangar located at the airport (see Figure 2-5). The FBO has a large conventional hangar south of the A/D building. This hangar stores FBO aircraft and also provides transient aircraft storage. There are 14 tie -downs and grass tie -downs for outdoor aircraft storage. In addition to aircraft storage, Building D houses Care Ambulance Service. They store their medical vehicles in this building. VIII AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 2-18 2.11.4. AIRPORT FUEL SYSTEM The Airport Commission owns two 12,000 gallon fuel tanks — one for 10OLL fuel and one for Jet A fuel. The tanks are operated by the FBO, who also owns and operates a 1,200 gallon 10OLL fuel truck, as well as a 2,200 gallon Jet A fuel truck. The FBO is available for full service fueling, however, a credit card reader is available for fuel 24 hours a day. 2.11.5. FIXED BASE OPERATOR (FBO) A common airport tenant is a fixed based operator (FBO). An FBO is a commercial business providing one or more aviation -related services to the general flying public. Examples of these services include aircraft maintenance, flight instruction, charter services, aircraft fueling, aircraft parking, and hangar storage. IOW is served by one multi -service FBO: Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Jet Air, Inc. — provides aviation services including executive travel, air medical services, aircraft sales, aircraft maintenance, and flight training. Other services include hangar space, aircraft parking, a pilot lounge, lavatory service, oxygen service, and courtesy cars. The aircraft fleet includes six Cessna Citation 500 series jets, a Learjet 35X a Cessna 402 Businessliner, Cessna 421 Golden Eagle, and a Cessna 425 Conquest I. 2.11.6. AIRPORT MAINTENANCE The Iowa City Airport Commission entered into an agreement with the FBO to provide and monitor the condition of the airport. This includes providing snow removal, grass cutting, and general maintenance services at the airport such as building maintenance, routine hangar maintenance, maintaining runway/taxiway lighting, maintaining signage, fence maintenance, and issuing Notice to Airmen for pilots. Airport maintenance equipment storage is located outside. The Airport Commission provides the FBO with the following equipment: a large truck with a blade, a pickup truck, a tractor with blade, loader, mower, and snow blower attachments, a skid loader, a snow fence, and hand and riding mowers. 2.11.7. FENCING & SECURITY Airport fencing is installed to deter or prevent unauthorized access by persons or vehicles onto airport property. Fencing is typically installed for protection from wildlife, as well as define outer airport property boundaries. There is perimeter fencing located around the majority of the airport except for some areas near Runway 12 and along Willow Creek. A picture of the fencing and a public viewing area located north of the A/D building can be seen in the picture to the right of the page. There are two vehicle access gates, one to the north building area, and one to the south building area. Each requires a code to access the building area. VIII AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 2-19 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan 2.11.8. UTILITIES & DRAINAGE Electrical and natural gas service to the airport is provided by MidAmerica Energy. Communication lines including cable and internet are provided by Mediacom and Quest South Slope. The City of Iowa City provides water service through a six-inch water main along Airport Drive. Drainage patterns on the airport are identified in Figure 2-10, at the end of this chapter. Stormwater on airport property travels southeast towards the Iowa River. I]ffI!`MA1.1a8l i9'l1.101:14AC7 Airport property consists of approximately 580 acres, owned in fee by the City of Iowa City. The airport also has acquired approximately 0.36 acres in aviation easements protecting airport airspace and land use compatibility interests (see Figure 2-3). Runwav Protection Zone FAA has established land use standards in the form of a Runway Protection Zone (RPZ). An RPZ area is designed to enhance protection of persons and property on the ground in the vicinity of the runway approach. An RPZ has a trapezoidal shape centered along runway centerline. It begins 200 feet beyond the end of each runway. The FAA prefers that the RPZ be clear of structures, and purchased in fee whenever practicable. RPZ dimensions are based on the runway design and approach types established for a runway. According to the FAA, land uses prohibited in the RPZ include buildings, residences, and places of public assembly (i.e. churches, schools, hospitals, office buildings, shopping centers, and other uses with similar concentrations of persons). The FAA in 2012 published interim guidance about land uses within RPZs. If the RPZ dimensions or location change, or if there is a local development proposal, FAA coordination is required for the following land uses: • Building and structures • Recreational land uses • Transportation facilities (including public roads/highways, vehicular parking facilities) • Fuel Storage facilities • Hazardous material storage • Wastewater treatment facilities • Above -ground utility infrastructure If the RPZ isn't proposed to be clear, coordination with the FAA is required. An alternative analysis must be performed to avoid the new land use, minimize its impacts within the RPZ, or mitigate risk to people and property on the ground. There is a separate approach RPZ and departure RPZ for the Runway 25 end due to the displaced threshold on the runway end. The dimensions of the arrival and departure RPZ is the same, however, the footprint of the RPZ are different. The approach and departure RPZ have the same dimensions on other runways. Figure 2-7, at the end of this chapter, depicts the RPZ's at the airport. Table 2-12 lists the dimensions of the RPZs for each runway end at IOW. VIII AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 2-20 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Table 2-12 FAA Runwav Protection Zone Dimensions 7 500' x 1,700' x 1,010' 25 Approach RPZ 1,000' x 1,700' x 1,010' Devarture RPZ 1.000' x 1.700' x 1.010' 12 500' x 1,000' x 700' 30 500' x 1,000' x 700' Source: FAA AC/150 5300-13AAirport Design The Iowa City Airport Commission owns the majority of property within the RPZs to each runway end. However, there are small areas not owned in fee due to the surrounding urban development. • Runway 7 RPZ: Approximately 90% of the Runway 7 RPZ is owned in fee. The remaining portion is over Highway 1, which will limit development in this area. • Runway 25 RPZ: The Runway 25 approach and departure RPZ areas are owned in fee by either the City of Iowa City or the Airport Commission except for two or three businesses located on the southeast corner of the approach RPZ. • Runway 12 RPZ: The airport owns the entire Runway 12 RPZ in fee. This area was purchased in November 2014. • Runway 30 RPZ: Half of the Runway 30 RPZ is owned in fee. South Riverside Drive traverses under the RPZ. There is an existing 0.68 acre easement on the east side of South Riverside Drive. Easements allow for airspace protection and restrict the heights of objects in these areas. Ownership of the remaining portions of the existing or future RPZ will be discussed in Chapter 4: Facility Requirements. 2.12. SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING Adjacent land use considerations are important in this Master Plan from two perspectives. First, the evaluation of airport improvement alternatives needs to consider existing and future neighboring land uses. Second, development in the vicinity of the airport must meet airport compatibility standards and aviation safety restrictions to protect the airport, those on the ground and in the air. 2.12.1. LAND USE AND GENERAL ZONING INFORMATION Figure 2-6 at the end of this chapter provides aerial imagery and identifies significant built environment elements in the vicinity of IOW. The airport is located within the southern portion of Iowa City, on its southerly border. West Lucas Township is directly south of the airport. To the west, north, and east, the airport is surrounded by existing roadways and urban development, primarily in the form of commercial and light industrial land uses. In addition, Sturgis Ferry Park is directly adjacent to the airport across Riverside Drive east of Runway 25. There are some vacant parcels north of the airport and north of Ruppert road which are available for continued commercial development per local zoning regulation. As can be seen on Figure 2-6, there is land directly south and southwest of the airport which is currently agricultural and which may be developed with other land uses in the future. The identified commercial AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 2-21 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan subdivision was approved by the City of Iowa City in 2005. Figure 2-9, at the end of this chapter, depicts general land use zoning information for the airport and surrounding areas. For the land in Iowa City, this information was provided by the City of Iowa City. For the land in West Lucas Township, this information was provided by Johnson County. The airport itself is in the City's Neighborhood Public zoning category. It can be seen that the area south of the airport and north of Mormon Trek Boulevard within the City is a combination of Intensive Commercial and Commercial Office, and within the Township is Residential R20 or is unspecified. It may be noted that in the Future Land Use Map in the 2013 Iowa City Comprehensive Plan, the area south of the airport and north of Mormon Trek Boulevard in West Lucas Township is Intensive Commercial to the west and General Industrial to the east. It is recommended that further coordination take place between the City of Iowa City, West Lucas Township, and Johnson County regarding guided land use in the area south of the airport and north of Mormon Trek Boulevard. 2.12.2. AIRPORT ZONING Iowa Code Chapter 329 enables municipalities with airports to adopt, administer, and enforce zoning regulations to prevent airport -related hazards. Under this authority, the City of Iowa City has adopted Airport Zoning Regulations in Title 14 Chapter 6 of the Iowa City Code. Because some of the restricted areas are outside of City limits, Johnson County has jurisdiction and responsibilities for enforcement in those areas. The Airport Zoning Regulations apply overlay zones around the airport to protect people on the ground and the pilots and passengers in the air from incompatible land uses around the airport. The overlay zones can be seen in Figure 2-8 at the end of this chapter. Information on the individual zones is provided below: • Approach Overlay — intended to provide clear airspace along the approach surface to the runway ends. Clearance heights along the approach surface vary depending on the runway end. The clearance height becomes less restrictive the farther it is from the runway end. • Controlled Activity — a critical overlay surface that reflects the RPZ areas for each runway end. The ordinance prescribes limitations in these areas from incompatible land uses. • Transitional Overlay — includes those areas that are parallel to the runway pavement and extend 1,050 feet from the edge of the primary surface. • Horizontal Overlay — elliptical in shape, the zone protects structures from penetrating a 150 -foot ceiling above the airport elevation. • Conical Overlay — this area is the outermost zone and has the least number of land use restrictions. The zone begins at the edge of the horizontal overlay and is 4,000 feet in width. The approved airport zoning maps currently depict Runway 18/36 as a useable runway. Since this runway has since been abandoned, it is recommended that zoning be discussed in greater detail in Chapter 4: Facility Requirements. 2.13. ENVIRONMENTAL OVERVIEW The purpose of this section is to provide a general overview of environmental features which should be considered in the future development of the airport. The intent is not to perform detailed analysis, but rather to assemble readily available information in a systematic manner. More comprehensive environmental analysis would be performed during the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process when a future project becomes justified and triggers this type of review. AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 2-22 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Following FAA guidance, the discussion of existing environmental conditions and considerations are provided in the following sections. Figures 2-10 through and 2-12, at the end of this chapter, depict important environmental considerations in and around IOW. 2.13.1. AIR QUALITY CLASSIFICATION The Clean Air Act (CAA) established National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for six pollutants (particulate matter, ground -level ozone, carbon monoxide, sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, and lead) termed "criteria pollutants." There are no non -attainment areas in Johnson County. General conformity regulations do not apply to a Federal action in an area that is designated attainment for all six criteria pollutants. 2.13.2. AQUATIC CONCERNS Airport Drainage Overall drainage in the area of the airport is east to the Iowa River. General airport drainage flow is depicted on Figure 2-10. Along the northern portion of the airport, drainage runs to the east-northeast via a wetland directly northeast of Runway 12 and ditch along the northern edge of the airport property. This drainage is conveyed under Old Highway 218 via a culvert to discharge to the Iowa River. The western portion of the airport drains to Willow Creek which enters airport property from the northwest and then is aligned along the southern airport boundary until it crosses under Mormon Trek Boulevard approximately 900 feet west of Runway 36. This drainage then is routed along the south side of Mormon Trek Boulevard under Old Highway 218 for discharge ultimately to the Iowa River. The central portion of the airport drains generally east-southeast to a culvert under Old Highway 218 approximately 500 feet northeast of Mormon Trek Boulevard. Drainage from the eastern portion of the airport building area is routed to a culvert under Old Highway 218 approximately 500 feet south of the main airport access road. Rivers As referenced above, Willow Creek passes through the airport and receives drainage from the western portion of the airport. It discharges to the Iowa River after crossing under Old Highway 218 and South Riverside Drive. Willow Creek is not identified as an impaired water. Drainage from the airport ultimately discharges to the Iowa River. Based on a 2010 Water Quality Assessment performed by the Iowa Department of Natural Resources, the reach of the Iowa River that receives airport drainage has been classified as impaired under section 303(d) of the Clean Waters Act. The impaired use is Primary Contact Recreation, and the cause/stressor category is Indicator Bacteria (E. coli). The Water Quality Assessment referenced above states that, while the monitored levels bacteria during the 2006-2008 timeframe were high enough to trigger the impaired classification, they are not excessively high relative to other Iowa rivers. The Iowa River is not classified as by the Iowa DNR as an Outstanding Iowa Water. Wetlands Wetlands can often be a significant issue for municipal airport planning and development. The National Wetlands Inventory (N)A7I) is compiled and maintained by the US Fish and Wildlife Service. NWI wetlands in the vicinity of IOW are depicted on Figure 2-10. It can be seen that there are no NWI wetlands on the airport and only a limited number of NWI wetlands in the vicinity of the airport The wetland directly north of Runway 12 is a classified as a Freshwater Pond and the wetland on the south side of Mormon Trek Boulevard is classified as a Lake. Neither of these can be identified on 1930 or 1950 historic aerial photographs. The Clean Water Act affords protection for wetlands by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 and by the Iowa Department of Natural Resources by Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. -IIS In AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 2-23 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Construction, excavation, or filling of wetland habitats may require permit approval, and possibly mitigation of wetland impacts, from both agencies. Floodplains Floodplains are defined in Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management, as: "...the lowland and relatively flat areas adjoining inland and coastal waters including flood prone areas of offshore islands; including, at a minimum, that area subject to a one percent or greater chance of flooding in any given year." This definition refers to any area that would be inundated with floodwaters from a 100 -year flood. To meet Executive Order 11988, federally approved actions must avoid the floodplain, if a practicable alternative exists. If not practicable alternative exists, actions in a floodplain must be designed to minimize adverse impact to the floodplain's natural and beneficial values. The design must also minimize the potential risks for flood -related property loss and impacts on human safety, health, and welfare. As identified on Figure 2-11, most of the airport is in the 100 -year floodplain as designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). This means that the area has a 1 percent annual chance of flooding and it triggers regulatory requirements for construction. The Iowa Department of Natural Resources regulates construction in all flood plains and floodways in the state and requires permit approval for construction, excavation or filling within the floodplain. 2.13.3. TERRESTRIAL CONCERNS Soils Figure 2-11 depicts soil types on and around the airport based on US Department of Agriculture Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) classifications. It can be seen that most of the developed portion of the airport is identified as Orthents, loamy. In these areas, original soils have generally been cut away or covered with loamy fill material. Other soils present on the airport include: • Wiota silt loam, 1-3 percent slopes • Sparta loamy fine sand, 0-2 percent slopes • Nevin silty clay loam, 0-2 percent slopes • Colo silty clay loam, 0-2 percent slopes • Watseka loamy fine sand, 0-2 percent slopes • Hoopeston fine sandy loam, 0-2 percent slopes • Lawler loam, 0-2 percent slopes • Bertrand silt loam, 1-3 percent slopes For the most part, these soils as they are present on the airport are poorly drained to somewhat poorly drained, based on NRCS information. Prime and Unique Farmlands This is not a major environmental category at IOW given that the airport is generally surrounded by urban development. With this context, coordination with NRCS of the US Department of Agriculture regarding airport development projects under the Farmland Protection Policy Act would result in low impact scores. Contaminated Areas Federal, State, and local laws regulate hazardous materials use, storage, transport, or disposal. These laws may extend liability to past and future landowners of properties containing these materials. In addition, disrupting sites containing hazardous materials or contaminants may cause significant impacts to soil, surface water, groundwater, air quality, and the organisms using these resources. qui AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 2-24 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan In reviewing the Contaminated Sites Database maintained by the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (DNR), there is only one site of potential interest on the airport property. This is a leaking underground storage tank (UST) leaksite on the airport which was reported in August of 2001. The location identified is in the north hangar area. This site received a determination of No Action Required by the DNR on May 16, 2002. Habitat-Endangered/Threatened Species The airport is largely surrounded by urban development which limits the potential for airport development projects to have impacts to protected species and their habitat resources. The areas that are most likely to provide animal habitat in the general vicinity of the airport are: a) the band of woods on either bank of Willow Creek, and b) relatively limited riparian vegetation along the Iowa River directly east of the airport. The US Fish and Wildlife Service compiles a list of federally protected species organized by county within the US. The species identified for Johnson County, along with their habitat as described by USFWS are summarized in Table 2-13. Table 2-13 Federally Protected Species in Johnson County Species Habitat Indiana bat (Myotis sodahst) Summer habitat includes small to medium river and stream Status: Endangered corridors with well-developed riparian woods. Winter habitat for hibernation is primarily in a relatively limited number of caves that meet their physical requirements. Northern long-eared bat (Myotis Summer habitat include live and dead trees underneath bark, septentrionalis) in cavities, or in crevices. Use tree species based on suitability Status: Proposed by USFWS for to retain bark or otherwise provide cavities or crevices. Winter Endangered habitat for hibernation is in caves and mines. Eastern massasauga rattlesnake Wet areas including wet prairies, marshes and low areas along (Sistrurus catenates catenatus) rivers and lakes. Status: Candidate Higgins eye pearlymussel (Lampsilis Iowa River. higginsii) Status: Tkpgtgned Prairie bush clover (Lespendeza Dry to mesic prairies with gravelly soil. leptostachya) Status: Threatened Eastern prairie fringed orchid Mesic to wet prairies. (Platantheraleucophaea) Status: Threatened Western prairie fringed orchid Wet prairies and sedge meadows. (Platanthera praeclara) Status: Threatened Based on the information provided above, it appears unlikely that development projects at the airport would have significant impacts to federally protected species, assuming proper design in accordance with applicable regulatory requirements. However further review and coordination with appropriate agencies would be required as part of the NEPA review process for future projects. X11 In AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 2-25 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan 2.13.4. CULTURAL RESOURCES Residential and Parks Most of the developed land use directly adjacent to the airport is commercial. However, there is a large (approximately 80 acres) manufactured housing park directly south of the airport on the south side of Mormon Trek Boulevard (see Figure 2-6). These areas often have Environmental Justice characteristics. Under Executive Order 12898, federal actions may not have disproportionately high and adverse impacts on low income or minority populations. Federal actions would in this case include significant improvements to IOW. Environmental Justice is one of the impact categories that needs to be addressed in environmental review documents prepared to comply with NEPA requirements. Park locations are depicted on Figure 2-6. It can be seen that there are many parks/open spaces in the general vicinity of the airport, including 15 within one mile: • Benton Hill Park • Brookland Park • Harlocke Hill Park • Kiwanis Park • Mesquakie Park • Napoleon Park • Ned Ashton Park • Ryersons Woods Park • Sand Lake Park • Sand Prairie Open Space • Sturgis Ferry Park • Tower Court Park • Villa Park • Wetherby Park • Willow Creek Park One of these, Sturgis Ferry Park, is directly adjacent to the airport, approximately 200 feet east of the Runway 25 threshold on the other side of Old Hwy 218. This is a 38 acre park which includes boat ramps for access to the Iowa River. Given the abundance of parks surrounding the airport, improvement projects need to consider the potential for impacts to parks. Historic and Archeological According to the National Park Service there are 11 individual properties and one Historic District that are currently listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRNP) within one mile of existing airport property. None of these NRIIP-listed properties is on airport property, however, IOW itself is inventoried as being considered eligible for NRNP -listing. Additionally, there are numerous standing structures within one mile of that are inventoried by the State Historic Preservation Office, with and without a formal evaluation of NRIIP-eligibility. The files of the Office of the State Archaeologist (OSA) contain 50 records for known archaeological sites within one mile of the airport. Of these 50 sites, 34 contain prehistoric components and 28 contain historic components. None of these sites is located on or immediately adjacent to airport property, however, according to the OSA files, less than 20% of existing airport property has been surveyed for cultural resources and it possible that cultural resources are present that have not been identified. These properties and the previously -surveyed areas are depicted in Figure 2-12. Future improvements at IOW are likely to require Section 106 consultation to consider specific potential impacts to cultural resources. -III AIRPORT INVENTORY Page 2-26 s f RB 3 6 MARKET ST F 5 _ o z E JEFFERSON ST HAWpNS Q z z R KAWAAVE IOWAAVE M FALCONER .,♦ v G ♦ •�FL o GRANOAV Wto BUR — P z E LSiGTON . Q o o u MELROSEAVE ; �•V�•�� %1 1v ECOORT ST MAP PETSEL PL 1 OIJSlrllM i ti o BOWE STcAtvl ,, �n BARTLETT RD AVENw MYRTLE AW ¢ o .,, ySE/ iTOWERCT m,• z o' a 2 m ;SOA KCRESiA:•• EBENTON ST PAGE ST a P ; •� WBENTON ST �.� z i a a F a Boucus sr 1ST ST AND STS o�Oµ CT x o 3RD ST wE OLLCT g.a AOR c PCO,y '¢ o E0.. NG)R ,,,///��� �.�u1■ AOCC ST o a� BCV vo 000 0 , ABBEY IPf � � 1v.. ABERAVE A �u� ..�• � ••�••♦ PLAEN Di ', • ',• 1 i• i OLYMPIC CT Gs�i �♦ CRY op c,�app • R�ii SOOTHGATEAVE y�bT m w�'^ ��• c_,.cfIl CROSS PPRK AVE EARL RD �� U•UN'_V Y Q, `SANOIISKV OR :. t ■ �r�v`.�j oQG 1 PSpEN CT 1� ♦ ��. �gvis� y. , f1>x� flRIAROP x r • t� 4 Off ■ {� i \O'••♦ 218 ¢ " nvMAL �� �� 'fee,1 w % /STFk out,'F', ,:a. fiMccotti Rey VO ._.... 1 j Airport ? Iowa City Township ® Easements Parks "I". o� �'......._........_........_.._ . s - o� �'......._........_........_.._ . � a �✓ sa��-�a s' � o 0 0 EL r s 1 p0 r/ Jf`�� R{Jr�iid;si4� b M © E S � 3 SYNtYti9�� 4 1({] b C. 1 \\ ...� .•� i ..fin -: b.W� � ' ..... 11 gy rte;U _ _ Al W2 C? S` 7 S V IT z z v a x x A A AIT IT x E E IT EIT IT 3 0 t S = E a EIT IT IT IT IT IT 8 i a 8 m m m o E E S F IT E E E E E ❑m❑❑s ■ w —1®❑❑❑❑❑- -11 5![R FM Fi ss ; 1 4�1 P� gWBMdlYt19 6N019M/Q -� \ G' m JI 14'11 r s a r FTrID Mqy qM i 1 • 1 A shNNSINEok 11w M a IT &Gb GS NNX $ A R ot y1 Nl of Ss�� IY *w{Jw`-0 M[ INS snaam _w m S I \ o � _ 1 N V i o 3MRI _ Y6 p 'S 1 yygp45i' tlN➢ _ 5!R u M� R NV�F SI • _ IL �Y �I IT '1 tlie26i i I — ' 1 �i i k 15 A]NIJ]! Ty�3 1 � y L �` Sye �. V 0..- Lb ]OSISLN HSN �a s' r� rem �._� TR a IM BE 1.11 DEEs RAI N j IIIryOFV4F 6 �� el v goss s �. m ED S DUBUQUE Y. I •• ' I / tl04 l J v _ JR4 'asnentl ••.••.•...ti R�aERsoEOR � � �� •ga� �_ � � G Ery - ., fey `� �♦ - iv I 3SpbryNti3a]Mba S ♦ � g d NIl1ERAVE fit _.I. BI BE „ L , BE I s ��yy{� it o Eel' ko •,. i an — - s �Z kiIt Ellv Eas mm nanxnvEes 3 S �� �e,� ¢ (�(�vl�(\ Q S¢(\1 (\/✓¢�/\ F gill a_ a 3 � 4ta ri Qo � .. � ❑ ❑ i � m - —eta _+ :_.y..- u g ❑❑ J a J SI Ey Yip ♦ � .. � . "t I k } r , s T 2 N C = m 2 S — K U 2 K Z Z 1 IZ 9 o EL —�C ®09 f�•y f._., _ _ a_ a 3 � 4ta ri Qo � .. � ❑ ❑ i � m - —eta _+ :_.y..- u g ❑❑ J a J SI Ey Yip ♦ � .. � . "t I k } r , s 3. AVIATION FORECASTS 3.1. INTRODUCTION Evaluation of current and forecasted aviation activity is vital in preparing an Airport Master Plan. Aviation forecasts are necessary to evaluate current and potential future airport facility safety and capacity requirements. Aviation forecasts are based on numerous Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan factors, including socioeconomic data, local, regional, and national aviation trends, and FAA aviation forecasting methodology. Guidance used to help develop aviation activity forecasts includes the following resources: • Forecasting Aviation Activity by Airport (July 2001), GRA, Inc., prepared for FAA. • ModelforEstimatingGeneralAviationOperationsatNon-ToweredAirportsUsingToweredand Non -Towered Airport Data (July 2001), GRA, Inc., prepared for FAA. Forecasts for general aviation airports commonly include based aircraft, annual operations, and critical design aircraft projections over a 20 -year planning period. The time period for the forecasts at IOW are from the base year, 2014, through 2034. Based aircraft counts are split by the following aircraft types: single-engine piston, multi -engine piston, turboprop, turbojet, rotorcraft, and experimental aircraft. Annual operations are classified as local or itinerant. Forecasting Aviation Activity by Airport defines local operations as "aircraft operating in the traffic pattern or aircraft known to be departing or arriving from flight in local practice areas, or aircraft executing practice instrument approaches at the airport." Itinerant operations are defined as operations "other than local operations." Critical design aircraft projections are used to determine the airport design standards. Forecasts developed are unconstrained; they identify the actual aviation demand for the facility regardless of limiting factors such as hangar availability or runway length, etc. If the aviation forecast differs by more than 10% from what is published in the FAA Terminal Area Forecast (TAF), additional FAA coordination is required. 3.2. AVIATION TRENDS 3.2.1. NATIONAL, REGIONAL & STATE TRENDS In 2013, there were improvements to every market segment of general aviation, except business jets. The agricultural sector saw a large increase in deliveries for turboprop, rotorcraft, and multi -engine piston aircraft. According to the General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA), deliveries were up 6.4% in 2013 marking the third straight year with an increase in delivered aircraft. Single-engine piston aircraft shipments increased 4.5%, and combined with an increase of multi -engine piston aircraft shipments of 27% after years of decline, the overall piston engine segment increased 6.5% from 2012 to 2013. Turboprop shipments increased 13.8% from 2012 to 2013 with its third year of strong growth beginning in 2011 with a 76.3% increase from 2010, and in 2012 with an increase of 16.2% from 2011. Business jet deliveries in 2013 grew at a slower rate (3.7% increase) than in 2012 (4.7% increase). The total growth in turbine aircraft shipments (turboprop and business jets) was 6.3%. AVIATION FORECASTS Page 3-1 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan According to the FAA Aerospace Forecast (2014-2034): "The long term outlook for general aviation is favorable even though the slow growth of the U.S. economy, contributed by uncertainties caused by debt ceiling crises, sequestration, government shutdown, and the European recession have affected the near term growth, particularly for the turbojet sector. While it is slightly lower than predicted last year, the growth in business aviation demand over the long term continues, driven by a growing U.S. and world economy especially in the turbojet, turboprop, and turbine rotorcraft markets. " Overall, according to the FAA 2014 — 2034 aerospace forecasts, the active general aviation fleet is projected to increase at an average of 0.3% per year for the forecast period with activity increasing by 1.4% per year. National and Iowa aviation trends can be measured by activity levels published in the FAA Terminal Area Forecasts (TAF). Statewide trends provide a closer look into how the national aviation trends translate on a regional level. Measures of the FAA TAF based aircraft and operations trends are listed in Table 3-1 and Table 3-2. Table 3-1 2014 FAA TAF — National, Regional, & State Based Aircraft Source: FAA Terminal Area Forecast (2014) Notes: Trend indicates annual growth rate. Central Region includes Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska. Overall aviation trends show a steady increase in based aircraft for the United States, the Central Region, and in the State of Iowa. Historically, Iowa had a lower based aircraft growth rate than the Central Region, but higher than the United States. The future trend, however, shows Iowa is projected to have a higher growth rate than the Central Region, but a lower growth rate than the United States. AVIATION FORECASTS Page 3-2 United States RegionYear Central 1990 162,173 8,295 2,057 1995 157,769 8,367 1,959 2000 179,740 10,170 2,130 2005 197,226 10,636 2,489 2010 165,742 8,952 2,151 2015 167,349 9,490 2,363 2020 174,642 9,756 2,444 2025 182,442 10,054 2,536 2030 190,278 10,359 2,627 2035 198,617 10,676 2,725 Future Trend 0.86% 0.59% 0.72% Source: FAA Terminal Area Forecast (2014) Notes: Trend indicates annual growth rate. Central Region includes Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska. Overall aviation trends show a steady increase in based aircraft for the United States, the Central Region, and in the State of Iowa. Historically, Iowa had a lower based aircraft growth rate than the Central Region, but higher than the United States. The future trend, however, shows Iowa is projected to have a higher growth rate than the Central Region, but a lower growth rate than the United States. AVIATION FORECASTS Page 3-2 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Table 3-2 2013 FAA TAF — National, Regional & State Annual Operations Source: FAA Terminal Area Forecast (2013) Notes: Trend indicates annual growth rate. Central Region includes Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska. Overall aviation trends show an average annual decrease in operations since 1990, and an increase in future, annual operations for the United States, Central Region, and the State of Iowa. 3.3. EMERGING BUSINESS & POPULATION TRENDS The Iowa City Municipal Airport is located in the Iowa City Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). This is an area of growing population. Increasing population both within the City of Iowa City, Johnson County, and the larger region is anticipated to lead to increased aviation activity and demand. 3.3.1. IOWA CITY METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA The Iowa City Metropolitan Core Based Statistical Area (CBSA) is defined as Johnson County and Washington County, Iowa, which includes the City of Iowa City (see Figure 3-1, at the end of this chapter). A metropolitan statistical area is a geographical region with a high population density and strong economic ties throughout the area. Population in the Iowa City MSA is 161,170, and has been growing at an average annual rate of 1.76% in recent years. This is the fastest growing MSA of the nine MSAs in Iowa (see Chapter 2: Airport Inventory for details on the nine Iowa MSAs). Iowa City is a cultural, commerce, health care, and education center for the region. The U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis shows growth in employment for both the Iowa City MSA (2.38%) and Johnson County (2.64%) are greater than the employment growth rate for the State of Iowa (1.04%). 3.4. USER SURVEY SUMMARY To assist in determining the number of local aviation operations at IOW, and to help determine local aviation needs and trends, an airport user survey was conducted. A general aviation questionnaire was sent to users or potential users of the airport facility. In addition, a business user survey was sent to 35 known business users of the airport. A copy of the airport user survey and the business user survey is located in Appendix A. AVIATION FORECASTS Page 3-3 United States RegionYear Central 1990 105,376,406 5,239,967 11118,888 1995 109,065,416 4,994,926 1,040,325 2000 121,891,415 4,921,995 911,628 2005 115,411,625 4,344,138 848,818 2010 101,345,016 4,659,989 925,960 2015 100,067,196 4,695,718 935,910 2020 103,845,207 4,780,753 945,456 2025 107,498,471 4,861,963 955,360 2030 111,504,664 4,951,747 967,820 2035 115,718,031 5,045,532 978,273 Future Trend 0.73% 0.36% 0.22% Source: FAA Terminal Area Forecast (2013) Notes: Trend indicates annual growth rate. Central Region includes Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska. Overall aviation trends show an average annual decrease in operations since 1990, and an increase in future, annual operations for the United States, Central Region, and the State of Iowa. 3.3. EMERGING BUSINESS & POPULATION TRENDS The Iowa City Municipal Airport is located in the Iowa City Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). This is an area of growing population. Increasing population both within the City of Iowa City, Johnson County, and the larger region is anticipated to lead to increased aviation activity and demand. 3.3.1. IOWA CITY METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA The Iowa City Metropolitan Core Based Statistical Area (CBSA) is defined as Johnson County and Washington County, Iowa, which includes the City of Iowa City (see Figure 3-1, at the end of this chapter). A metropolitan statistical area is a geographical region with a high population density and strong economic ties throughout the area. Population in the Iowa City MSA is 161,170, and has been growing at an average annual rate of 1.76% in recent years. This is the fastest growing MSA of the nine MSAs in Iowa (see Chapter 2: Airport Inventory for details on the nine Iowa MSAs). Iowa City is a cultural, commerce, health care, and education center for the region. The U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis shows growth in employment for both the Iowa City MSA (2.38%) and Johnson County (2.64%) are greater than the employment growth rate for the State of Iowa (1.04%). 3.4. USER SURVEY SUMMARY To assist in determining the number of local aviation operations at IOW, and to help determine local aviation needs and trends, an airport user survey was conducted. A general aviation questionnaire was sent to users or potential users of the airport facility. In addition, a business user survey was sent to 35 known business users of the airport. A copy of the airport user survey and the business user survey is located in Appendix A. AVIATION FORECASTS Page 3-3 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan The service area for IOW covers the area half way between IOW and the surrounding airports with similar facilities. Since one advantage to flying is reduced travel time, it is assumed that pilots will use the airport closest to their residence that has the facilities to meet their needs. The service area for IOW includes Johnson County and the northeast quadrant of Washington County. User Surveys were sent to registered pilots within the service area in addition to registered pilots within the 30 minute drive time of the airport (see Figure 3-1). The user survey at IOW was completed in September 2014. Of the nearly 300 questionnaires sent out, there were a total of 51 questionnaires returned. This is a return of 17% of the surveys exceeding the goal to have 10% of the surveys returned. There were 83 aircraft reported in the 51 surveys, with some respondents owning as many as four aircraft. A summary of the operations reported in the survey are shown in Table 3-3. Table 3-3 User Survey (2014) Annual Operations Notes: Some survey respondents own more than one aircraft Of the 83 aircraft reported, 33 were based at IOW (26 surveys). This represents 40% (33 out of 82 aircraft) of the based aircraft at IOW. Another five aircraft were reported as being based at airports within 30 nautical miles of IOW. In total 38 of the 83 aircraft reported are based in and around IOW. The fleet mix of the reported aircraft can be seen in Table 3-4. Table 3-4 User Survey (2014) Fleet Mix Type Number Reported Single -Engine Piston 50 Multi -Engine Piston 5 Single -Engine Turboprop 3 Multi -Engine Turboprop 4 Helicopter 0 Jet 20 LSA/Ultralight/Glider 1 Total 83 Source: IOW Airport User Survey (2014) Notes: Some survey respondents own more than one aircraft Most of the reported aircraft were small aircraft and owned by the respondents. Nine aircraft were corporate aircraft, with 13 of the 51 returned user surveys declaring use of their aircraft for business travel. Three users expressed interest in upgrading their aircraft fleet within five years to either replace aging aircraft or for performance improvements such as increased range, speed, and payload. Pilots were asked if they use the approaches at IOW. There were 34 pilots who indicated use of the LPV approach to Runway 25, or the RNAV (GPS) approach to Runway 30. Pilots were asked to explain whether the approaches met their needs, and if they did not, what needed to be improved to meet their needs. There were nine users who responded they would like lower approach minimums, seven of which AVIATION FORECASTS Page 3-4 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan specifically mentioned the need for a GPS approach to Runway 7, and two to Runway 12. Three surveys requested precision instrument approaches be published at the airport. Runway length was addressed in the survey by asking respondents whether the runway length was adequate for their most demanding aircraft at their desired weight. Runway 7/25 was identified by 10 surveys as not being long enough during wet or icy conditions, and seven said it was too short on hot days. Runway 12/30 had 16 users identify the length as too short during wet or icy conditions, and 12 said it was too short on hot days. The users specified runway lengths from 4,000 feet for crosswind Runway 12/30 to 6,500 feet for Runway 7/25 were required to land at the airport. Users who indicated the runway was too short for their most demanding aircraft would have to make the following concessions in order to land on the runways: must arrive/land with lower or minimal fuel (7 responses), must divert if runway is wet (7 response), purchase less fuel/depart with less fuel (3 responses), and arrive with higher weather minimums (1 response). The basis for these requirements were from pilot operating handbooks, company policy, insurance requirements, Part 135 requirements, personal judgment/experience, and standard operating procedures/aero club. Four pilots indicated they would base their aircraft at IOW if adequate facilities existed such as: an available single hangar; a hangar with a 46 -foot door; longer runways, ILS approaches, larger hangars; and one mentioned they would be based at IOW once they completed construction of their hangar. There were 11 surveys from pilots based at IOW, or soon to be based, who indicated they needed hangar space, and three surveys indicated a need for hangar space from pilots not currently based at IOW. The following question asked what type of hangar they would like to have (users were allowed to select more than one answer): T -hangar (7 responses), "Box" hangar (3 responses), and private hangar (6 responses). In order to gauge the effectiveness of facilities at IOW, respondents rated the airport facilities with regards to their operations at IOW. Table 3-5 indicates the user responses. AVIATION FORECASTS Page 3-5 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Table 3-5 Survey Question 11: Please rate the airport facilities with regards to your operations at IOW Runway 7/25 Length Inadequate 4 Marginal 8 Adequate 35 Not Applicable 1 Aircraft storage - T -hangar rental unit 2 6 15 25 Aircraft storage - Conventional hangar development site 4 5 8 31 Aircraft storage - Transient/ovemight 4 4 16 24 Aircraft Repair/Maintenance 1 2 24 21 Self Service Fueling 1 1 35 11 Full Service Fueling/Line Service/ Fueling Truck 0 3 39 6 Ground transportation (shuttle, taxi service, rental cars, courtesy car) 0 2 28 18 Pilot Shop 4 11 13 20 Crew Rest Area 1 5 28 14 Flight Training/Instruction 0 3 19 26 Aircraft Charter 0 0 10 22 Business center/meeting facilities 1 5 22 20 Source: IOW Airport User Survey (2014) Most of the airport facilities were considered adequate by respondents. Other facilities that were inadequate to pilots were the pilot shop, development sites for hangar storage, and overnight storage. Additional comments included: Adequate hangar space at a reasonable price (3 responses); taxiway improvements are needed (2 responses); a grass runway would be nice (3 response); MOGAS availability (2 responses); snow clearance gets behind/nothing is used to melt the snow on the runway after it is plowed (2 responses); improved utilities in hangars (2 responses); improved approaches (2 responses); reconsider closure of 18/36, consider 18/36 an emergency runway (2 responses); increase ramp space (4 responses); need a longer runway (3 responses); and would like a crew rest area (2 responses). 3.5. BUSINESS USER SURVEY The user survey at IOW was completed between September and December 2014. There were 35 surveys sent out, and 11 surveys were returned. This is a return of 31.4%. The business user survey asked businesses how they use general aviation, how often they fly to IOW, and what airport accommodations they use or need at IOW. Some corporate pilots may have responded to a user survey instead of a business user survey, and their survey data is included in the user survey section. A summary from the websites of a few of the businesses are listed below: AVIATION FORECASTS Page 3-6 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan • 425 Investments Company LLC 425 Investments Company LLC is the group behind a number of projects such as Mindseye Project Partners and Advancement Resources. Mindseye was created to create compelling donor engagement, communications, and presentation projects. Advancement Resources is a world leader in philanthropic research and professional education in development. They operate several aircraft, including one they own, all based at IOW. If they are not operating their Cessna 425 Conquest I based at IOW, they fly charter from on one of the Cessna Citations at IOW. picture of a Cessna 435 Conquest I, similar to the one flown by 425 Investments Company LLC, can be seen on the right side of the page. They perform approximately 108 flights annually out of IOW, and their clients visit approximately 40 times per year. Billion Auto Group (http://www.billionauto.com/) Billion Auto Group, also known as Billion Automotive, is a family owned auto dealer that operates in Iowa, Montana, and South Dakota. They have been in business since 1935, and have expanded to over 23 locations with nearly 7,000 automobiles at their dealerships. They currently have 800 full-time employees, including a corporate flight department. They operate a Beechcraft King Air 200 based at Joe Foss Field Airport (FSD) in Sioux Falls, South Dakota. A picture of a King Air 200, similar to one flown by Billion Auto Group, can be seen on the right side of the page. They perform approximately 36 flights annually out of IOW for site visits, meetings, marketing, checking inventory, and for technical visits. Their clients visit approximately 30 times a A year. • Carver Aero, Inc. (http://www.carveraero.com/index.php/) Carver Aero Inc. is the FBO at Davenport Municipal Airport (DVN) in Davenport, Iowa. They have a second FBO location at the Muscatine Municipal Airport (MUT) in Muscatine, Iowa. They provide charter services, aircraft management, aircraft maintenance, flight training, and aircraft rental at both locations. They operate out of IOW approximately 120 times annually. A picture of their fleet of charter aircraft including aircraft such as the Cessna Citation XLS, Beechcraft King Air 350, and Cessna Citation Ultra can be seen on the right side of the page. AVIATION FORECASTS Page 3-7 • Fortney Hospitality Group, Inc. Flying a Cessna Citation 525, Fortney Hospitality Group visits IOW about 12 times a year, and has clients who visit four times a year. Their aircraft is based at La Crosse Regional Airport (LSE) in La Crosse, Wisconsin. A picture of a Cessna Citation 525, similar to the one operated by Fortney Hospitality Group, can be seen on the right side of the page. Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan HawkeyeSky LLC HawkeyeSky LLC flies a Piper Malibu Meridian based at the Sheldon Municipal Airport (SHL) in Sheldon, Iowa. Their clients visit IOW approximately 10 ti mes a year. A picture of a Piper Malibu Meridian, similar to the one operated by HawkeyeSky LLC can be seen on the right side of the page. • Industrial Maintenance Services, Inc. (IMS) (http://www.imscontracting.com/) IMS is a heavy and general construction company with a diversified project portfolio. They also provide professional, technical, and construction services to many industries and agencies. They operate a Cessna 208B Grand Caravan based at Delta County Airport (ESC) in Escanaba, Michigan. They operate out of IOW approximately 24 times a year and have clients that use IOW 20 times a year. A picture of a Cessna 208B Grand Caravan, similar to the one operated by IMS, can be seen on the right side of page. AVIATION FORECASTS Page 3-8 • Jet Air, Inc. (http://www.jetairine.com/) Jet Air, Inc. is the Fixed Based Operator (FBO) at IOW, Galesburg Municipal Airport (GBG) in Galesburg Illinois, and Southeast Iowa Regional Airport (BRL) in Burlington, Iowa. They are a provider of aviation services including executive travel, air medical services, aircraft sales, aircraft maintenance, and flight training. Their location at IOW offers hangar space, aircraft parking, a pilot lounge, lavatory service, oxygen service, courtesy cars, and does not charge handling fees. Their fleet, many of which operate or are based at IOW, includes six Cessna Citation 500 series jets, a Learjet 35X a Cessna 402 Businessliner, Cessna 421 Golden Eagle, and a Cessna 425 Conquest L One of Jet Air's Cessna 500 series jets can be seen on the right side of the page. They estimate an annual 240 operations in their Cessna Citations at IOW. Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Overall the businesses flying into IOW conduct business in Iowa City, or have clients who visit them using IOW. Of the businesses, 73% said their operations were to remain the same, with the remaining 27% indicating their use of IOW was to increase. The length of Runway 7/25 was an issue for 45% of the respondents who indicated they would increase their use of IOW if it were longer. 3.6. EXISTING BASED AIRCRAFT & ANNUAL OPERATIONS Previous forecasts provide useful insights into the projected demand at IOW. One study, the Iowa City Airport Relocation Feasibility, was completed in 1991. Table 3-6 shows the IOW forecasts from the 1991 study. Table 3-6 1991 Aviation Forecast Summary Forecast Data 1991" II2012 Based Aircraft 53 57 63 76 Annual Operations 22,500 26,000 30,000 39,000 Operations Per Based Aircraft 425 450 470 510 Local Operations 4,500 5,200 6,000 7,800 Itinerant Operations 18,000 20,800 24,000 31,200 Military Operations 400 400 400 400 Annual Instrument Approaches 1 440 1 640 1 850 1,200 Source: Coffman Associate, Inc. Iowa Citv Airport Relocation Feasibilitv Studv, 1991 The forecasts from the 1996 Master Plan are referenced below in Table 3-7. AVIATION FORECASTS Page 3-9 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Table 3-7 1996 Master Plan Aircraft Operational Activity, 1996-2015 Based Aircraft "6 58 2000 61 2005 66 2010 70 2015 75 Annual Operations 26,730 31,161 34,794 37,046 39,529 Itinerant Operations 21,384 24,929 27,835 29,637 31,630 Local Operations 5,346 6,232 6,959 7,409 7,908 Source: McClure Engineering Company, Iowa City Murdcinal Airport Master Plan, 1996 Another forecast was developed during the South Airfield Planning Study in 2009. The preferred based aircraft and operations forecast can be seen in Table 3-8. Table 3-8 2009 Preferred Aviation Forecast Summary Based Aircraft 2003 74 2012I 93 100 I22 108 2026 114 2046 146 -Single Engine 59 70 76 81 84 108 -Multi Engine 11 16 16 17 18 23 -Turboprop 3 2 3 4 5 6 -Jet 0 4 4 4 5 6 -Other 1 1 1 2 2 3 Annual Operations -Local 15,570 21,800 23,850 26,250 28,200 36,150 -Itinerant 20,470 22,810 25,050 27,520 29,600 37,900 -InstrumentOperations 3,750 4,100 4,550 4,900 6,250 Total Operations 36,040 48,360 53,000 58,320 62,700 80,300 Source: AECOM, South Airfield Planning Stu dv, 2009 Both the FAA TAF and the 2010 Iowa State Aviation System Plan (SASP) provide based aircraft and operations forecasts for individual airports. These forecasts provide baseline data to aid in forecasting based aircraft and operations at a local level. Table 3-9 shows the based aircraft forecasts for IOW from the FAA TAF and the 2010 Iowa SASP. Table 3-9 Existing Based Aircraft Data Year Based FAA TAF Aircraft 2010 Iowa SASP Based Aircraft 2010 77 85 2015 87 90 2020 87 96 2025 87 102 2030 87 109 Trend: 0.61% 1.25% Source: FAA Terminal Area Forecast (2013); Iowa State Aviation System Plan (20 10) AVIATION FORECASTS Page 3-10 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan According to the City of Iowa City, there are currently 82 based aircraft at IOW in 2014. There are currently 10 aircraft on a waiting list for hangar space. In addition to based aircraft, both the TAF and SASP forecast annual operations at IOW for the next 20 years. Table 3-10 shows the FAA TAF operations forecast data through 2035, and Table 3-11 depicts the SASP operations data through 2030. The SASP projected airport operations using local, regional, and national data as well as trends for general aviation. The SASP develops its operations based on the growth of the based aircraft. The compound annual growth rate for based aircraft is 1.25%. The SASP then multiplies the based aircraft by an acceptable operations per based aircraft determined by the number of based aircraft. For airports with 31 to 99 based aircraft, an OPBA of 350 is applied. The TAF forecasts operations and based aircraft from historical data collected since 1990. The TAF typically shows no growth for most general aviation airports. The current operations were assigned in 2008 and have not changed since. Table 3-10 FAA TAF Trends (2014) Year TAIT Operations Itinerant TAIT Local Operations Total Operations Based •,B 2012 15,587 3,700 19,287 87 222 2015 15,587 3,700 19,287 87 222 2020 15,587 3,700 19,287 87 222 2025 15,587 3,700 19,287 87 222 2030 15,587 3,700 19,287 87 222 2035 15,587 3,700 19,287 87 222 Source: FAA Terminal Area Forecast (2014, 2012 data) Notes: Trend indicates annual growth rate; OPBA —Operations Per Based Aircraft Table 3-11 State Aviation System Plan Operations Forecast (2010) Source: Iowa State Aviation System Plan(2010) for IOW Notes: Trend indicates annual growth rate; OPBA = Operations Per Based Aircraft 3.7. BASED AIRCRAFT FORECAST Based demand is typically a product of population, income, and labor force. The baseline for the number and type of based aircraft at IOW was derived from local records. There are 82 aircraft based at IOW including 64 single-engine, piston aircraft; 6 multi -engine, piston aircraft; 1 single-engine, turboprop aircraft; 1 multi -engine, turboprop aircraft; 7 jet aircraft; 1 helicopter; and 2 ultralight experimental aircraft. This number and mix of aircraft was confirmed on the FAA National Based Aircraft Inventory Program (www.basedaircraft.com). AVIATION FORECASTS Page 3-11 Total Based Year Operations •,B 2010 29,750 85 350 2015 31,500 90 350 2020 33,600 96 350 2025 35,700 102 350 2030 38,150 109 350 Source: Iowa State Aviation System Plan(2010) for IOW Notes: Trend indicates annual growth rate; OPBA = Operations Per Based Aircraft 3.7. BASED AIRCRAFT FORECAST Based demand is typically a product of population, income, and labor force. The baseline for the number and type of based aircraft at IOW was derived from local records. There are 82 aircraft based at IOW including 64 single-engine, piston aircraft; 6 multi -engine, piston aircraft; 1 single-engine, turboprop aircraft; 1 multi -engine, turboprop aircraft; 7 jet aircraft; 1 helicopter; and 2 ultralight experimental aircraft. This number and mix of aircraft was confirmed on the FAA National Based Aircraft Inventory Program (www.basedaircraft.com). AVIATION FORECASTS Page 3-11 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan The SASP provides a forecast of based aircraft for airports in Iowa. An annual growth rate can be established based on these numbers over the 20 year period from 2010 to 2030. According to the SASP, IOW has a based aircraft annual growth rate of 1.25%. The service area for IOW is shown in Figure 3-1. To determine trends in the IOW service area, nearby airports were considered and their growth rates were also evaluated. The average annual growth rate for based aircraft of the four nearby airports is 1.28%. The surrounding airports include: The Eastern Iowa Airport, Iowa City (CID); Muscatine Municipal Airport, Muscatine (MUT); Mathews Memorial Airport, Tipton (8C4); and Washington Municipal Airport, Washington (AWG). The individual growth rates can be seen in Table 3-12. Table 3-12 Based Aircraft Growth Rates of Nearby Airports Source: Iowa State Aviation System Plan (20 10) *IOW is not included in the annual growth rate average The population of the State of Iowa, Johnson County, and the Iowa City MSA is projected to increase over the next 20 years. In addition, the SASP shows growth in based aircraft over the next 20 years. These are both indications that based aircraft will also continue to grow at IOW. The 1991 Aviation Forecast Summary showed a based aircraft growth rate of 1.73% and the 1996 Master Plan forecasted a growth rate of 1.36%. Using the average growth rate of the surrounding airports is more realistic than using the population growth rate, or the growth rate of previous Master Plans, considering the slow growth rate of the industry according to the FAA Aerospace Forecasts 2014-2034. Therefore, the average annual growth rate of 1.28% was used to forecast the based aircraft over the 20 -year planning period at IOW. Another factor considered was aircraft waiting for hangar space. Of the 30 pilots on the hangar waiting list, 10 are ready to base at IOW. The five single-engine piston aircraft waiting for hangar space are artificially added to the growth of based aircraft in the year 2020 to simulate the completion of a private hangar development area. A new corporate area is planned in the future as well, and in 2025, five new aircraft were added to the based aircraft to account for corporate development. One multi -engine, one turboprop, and three jet aircraft are added to the growth of the based aircraft in 2025. The growth rate from year-to-year still remains 1.28%. The 20 -year planning period shows an increase in based aircraft from 82 aircraft in 2014, to 117 based aircraft in 2034. Table 3-13 shows the based aircraft forecasts over the next 20 years including the increase in based aircraft in 2020 due to private hangar construction and 2025 for the corporate hangar construction. Growth of individual aircraft types are shown according to growth rates seen in the General Aviation section of FAA Aerospace Forecast Fiscal Years 2014-2034. AVIATION FORECASTS Page 3-12 SASP Based Aircraft Nearby Airports to 10W Base Year 20152020 2025 2030 Annual 2010 Growth , ate Iowa City (IOW) 85 90 96 102 109 1.25%* Cedar Rapids (CID) 135 144 153 163 173 1.25% Muscatine (MUT) 32 34 36 39 41 1.25% Tipton (8C4) 10 11 11 12 13 1.32% Washington (AWG) 27 29 31 33 35 1.31% Average: 1.28% Source: Iowa State Aviation System Plan (20 10) *IOW is not included in the annual growth rate average The population of the State of Iowa, Johnson County, and the Iowa City MSA is projected to increase over the next 20 years. In addition, the SASP shows growth in based aircraft over the next 20 years. These are both indications that based aircraft will also continue to grow at IOW. The 1991 Aviation Forecast Summary showed a based aircraft growth rate of 1.73% and the 1996 Master Plan forecasted a growth rate of 1.36%. Using the average growth rate of the surrounding airports is more realistic than using the population growth rate, or the growth rate of previous Master Plans, considering the slow growth rate of the industry according to the FAA Aerospace Forecasts 2014-2034. Therefore, the average annual growth rate of 1.28% was used to forecast the based aircraft over the 20 -year planning period at IOW. Another factor considered was aircraft waiting for hangar space. Of the 30 pilots on the hangar waiting list, 10 are ready to base at IOW. The five single-engine piston aircraft waiting for hangar space are artificially added to the growth of based aircraft in the year 2020 to simulate the completion of a private hangar development area. A new corporate area is planned in the future as well, and in 2025, five new aircraft were added to the based aircraft to account for corporate development. One multi -engine, one turboprop, and three jet aircraft are added to the growth of the based aircraft in 2025. The growth rate from year-to-year still remains 1.28%. The 20 -year planning period shows an increase in based aircraft from 82 aircraft in 2014, to 117 based aircraft in 2034. Table 3-13 shows the based aircraft forecasts over the next 20 years including the increase in based aircraft in 2020 due to private hangar construction and 2025 for the corporate hangar construction. Growth of individual aircraft types are shown according to growth rates seen in the General Aviation section of FAA Aerospace Forecast Fiscal Years 2014-2034. AVIATION FORECASTS Page 3-12 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Table 3-13 Based Aircraft Forecast Year Single Piston Multi Piston Turboprop bo Experimental 2014 64 6 2 71 2 82 2015 65 6 2 7 1 2 83 2016 66 6 2 7 1 2 84 2017 66 6 2 8 1 2 85 2018 67 6 2 8 1 2 86 2019 68 6 2 8 1 2 87 2020 74 7 2 8 1 2 94 2021 74 7 2 9 1 2 95 2022 75 7 2 9 1 2 96 2023 75 7 3 9 1 3 97 2024 76 7 3 9 1 3 98 2025 77 8 4 13 1 3 105 2026 78 8 4 13 1 3 106 2027 79 8 4 13 1 3 107 2028 79 8 4 14 1 3 109 2029 80 8 4 14 1 3 110 2030 78 9 4 15 2 3 112 2031 79 9 4 15 2 3 113 2032 79 9 4 16 2 3 114 2033 81 9 4 16 2 3 116 2034 1 81 1 9 1 5 1 17 1 2 1 3 1 117 Source: Bolton & Menk Analysis 3.8. ANNUAL OPERATIONS FORECAST 3.8.1. CONFIRMED OPERATIONS The lack of an FAA Air Traffic Control Tower does not allow for exact aircraft operation counts at a general aviation airport like IOW. Therefore, FAA Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) flight data from November 2013 — October 2014 was obtained to get an understanding of the larger corporate users at IOW. IFR flight data is recorded when pilots file a flight plan with the FAA. It does not take into account fair weather flights, touch and go operations, or flights with flight plans cancelled before landing at the airport. Table 3-14 shows the confirmed operations from the IFR data from November 2013 to October 2014 for piston aircraft, and Table 3-15 shows the total operations by turboprop and turbofan/jet aircraft over the same time period. Table 3-16 summarizes the operations by aircraft ARC The ARC for the critical design aircraft, the aircraft or family of aircraft performing more than 500 annual operations, will determine what design standards the airport will adhere to. AVIATION FORECASTS Page 3-13 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Table 3-14 Aircraft Types and Operations from IFR Data, Piston Operations Aircraft ARC Piston Aircraft Total Ops Aircraft ARC Total • ps Aero Commander 500 A-II/s 8 Diamond DA -20 A-I/s 1 Beechcraft 35 Bonanza A-I/s 113 Diamond Katana A-I/s 1 Beechcraft 55 Baron B-I/s 12 Douglas DC -3 A-III/L 2 Beechcraft Baron (58) B -1/s 38 Eurocopter EC -130 HELI 1 Beechcraft Bonanza (33) A -1/s 27 Eurocopter EC -635 HELI 5 Beechcraft Bonanza (36) A -1/s 131 Experimental OTH 12 Beechcraft Duchess A-I/s 3 Flight Design CT A-I/s 1 Beechcraft Musketeer A-I/s 1 Grumman AA5 A-I/s 10 Beechcraft Queen Air B-II/s 3 Mooney M20 A-I/s 34 Beechcraft Sierra A-I/s 6 Mooney M20 Turbo A-I/s 43 Beechcraft Travel Air A-I/s 1 Navion G A-I/s 4 Bell 429 Global Ranger HELI 36 North American P-51 Mustang B-I/s 2 Cessna 140 A-I/s 1 OMT Symphony A-I/s 1 Cessna 150 A-I/s 10 Piper Aerostar A-I/s 12 Cessna 152 A-I/s 2 Piper PA 20 Pacer A-I/s 1 Cessna 172 Skyhawk A-I/s 195 Piper PA 23/27 Aztec A-I/s 14 Cessna 177 Cardinal A -Us 46 Piper PA 24 Commanche A -Us 76 Cessna 182 Skylane A-I/s 126 Piper PA 28 Cherokee A-I/s 130 Cessna 182 Turbo Skylane RG A-I/s 4 Piper PA 28 Cherokee Arrow A-I/s 13 Cessna 195 A-I/s 5 Piper PA 28 Dakota/Pathfmder A-I/s 2 Cessna 205 A-I/s 2 Piper PA 28 Turbo Arrow A-I/s 8 Cessna 206 Stationair A-I/s 10 Piper PA 30 Twin Commanche A-I/s 5 Cessna 210 Centurion A-I/s 29 Piper PA 31 Navajo A-I/s 65 Cessna 310 A-I/s 11 Piper PA 32 Saratoga A-I/s 115 Cessna 340 B -1/s 13 Piper PA 32R Saratoga/Lance A -Us 13 Cessna 402 Businessliner B-I/s 155 Piper PA 34 Seneca A-I/s 37 Cessna 414 Chancellor B-I/s 15 Piper PA 44 Seminole A-I/s 5 Cessna 421 Golden Eagle B-I/s 107 Piper PA 46 Malibu Mirage A-I/s 43 Cessna Cutlass RG A-I/s 1 Piper PA -31T3-500 T-1040 Navajo A-I/s 3 Cessna T303 Crusader A-I/s 11 Stoddard -Hamilton Glasair A-I/s 5 Champion Decathlon A-I/s 1 Van's Aircraft RV 10 A-I/s 1 Cirrus SR20 A-I/s 9 Van's AircraftRV4 A-I/s 1 Cirrus SR22 A-I/s 118 Van's AircraftRV6 A-I/s 2 Columbia 300/Cessna 350 A -Us 3 Van's AircraftRV7 A -Us 10 Columbia 400/Cesna 400 A-I/s 13 Van's AircraftRV9 A-I/s 4 Diamond 40 Diamond Star A-I/s 7 Velocity Aircraft A-I/s 2 Diamond 42 Twin Star A -1/s 7 Total Piston Operations: 1,964 AVIATION FORECASTS Page 3-14 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Table 3-15 Aircraft Types and Operations from IFR Data, Turbine and Turbofan/Jet Operations Aircraft Beechcraft Bonanza Turbine ARC A -Ps Turboprop Total Ops 2 Aircraft Daher-Socata TBM850 ARC A-I/s Total Ops 32 Beechcraft King Air 90 B -IUs 69 Fairchild Dornier SA-227DC Metro B-IFL 2 Beechcraft King Air 100 B -IUs 4 Grumman OV -1 Mohawk B -FL 1 Beechcraft Super King Air 200 B -IUs 280 Mitsubishi MU -2 B-I/s 47 Beechcraft Super King Air 300 B-II/L 18 Piaggio P. 180 Avanti C-I/s 6 Beechcraft Super King Air 350 B-II/L 15 Pilatus PC 12 A -IUs 27 Cessna 208 Caravan A -IUs 28 Piper PA 3lT1-620 Cheyenne II B-I/s 14 Cessna 425 Conquest B-I/s 112 Piper PA3lT1-620 Cheyenne III B-I/s 8 Cessna 441 Conquest II B -IUs 12 Piper PA 46 Malibu Meridian A-I/s 29 Daher-Socata TBM700 A -Fs 79 Rockwell Turbo Commander 690 B-I/s 12 Aircraft Aero L29 Delfin ARC B-I/s Turbofan/Jet Total Ops 17 Total Turboprop Operations: Aircraft Dassault Falcon 2000 ARC B-IFL 797 Total Ops 2 Aero L39 Albatros B-I/s 1 Dassault Falcon 900 B-IFL 8 Beechcraft Beechjet B-I/L 38 Dassault Mystere-Falcon 50 B-IFL 3 Bombardier Global 5000 B-III/L 2 Eclipse 500 A-I/s 4 Cessna Citation CH B-I/s 28 Embraer Phenom 100 B-I/s 8 Cessna Citation CJ2 B-IFs 9 Embraer Phenom 300 B-IFL 8 Cessna Citation CJ3 B-II/L 12 IAI Gulfstream G150 C-IFL 2 Cessna Citation CM B-II/L 15 Learjet 25 B -FL 4 Cessna Citation Excel B-II/L 23 Learjet 31 B -FL 2 Cessna Citation I B -Fs 66 Learjet 35 C -FL 14 Cessna Citation I B -Fs 20 Learjet 45 C -FL 51 Cessna Citation II B -FL 389 Learjet 60 C -FL 6 Cessna Citation III B-I/s 12 Mitsubishi MU -300 Diamond B -FL 4 Cessna Citation Mustang A -Ps 10 North American Sabreliner B -FL 2 Cessna Citation Sovereign B-II/L 8 Raytheon Hawker 800 B-IFL 6 Cessna Citation V B-II/L 148 Raytheon Premier 1 B-I/s 6 Dassault Falcon 10 B-I/L 11 Total Turbofan/Jet Opeartions: 939 Total IFR Operations (All Aircraft): 3,700 Source: FlightAware, Nov. 2013 to Oct. 2014 Notes: HELI — Helicopter; OTH — Experimental or Glider; /s — small aircraft; /L —large aircraft greater than 12,500 pounds AVIATION FORECASTS Page 3-15 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Table 3-16 Aircraft ARC and Operations from IFR Data ARC Total Ops ARC Total • ps A -1/s 1,711 13-11I/1, 2 A-H/s 63 C -Us 6 A-111/1, 2 C-1/1, 71 B -1/s 693 C-II/L 2 13-1/1, 451 HELI 42 B -IUs 377 OTH 12 B-II/L 268 Source: FlightAware, Nov. 2013 to Oct. 2014 Notes: HELI — Helicopter, /s — small aircraft; /L —large aircraft greater than 12,500 pounds Data collected from IFR flights show there were 126 unique aircraft that operated at IOW. There were 3,700 flights from these unique aircraft. An additional 361 operations were conducted from aircraft that were either unknown or had their aircraft information blocked. There were a total of 4,061 operations at IOW from November, 2013 to October, 2014. Pilots who reported their operations in the user survey confirm their use of IOW. The user survey asked the type of aircraft and how many flights performed annually at IOW in that aircraft. Table 3-17 shows the confirmed operations from the user survey, and Table 3-18 shows the total operations by aircraft ARC from the user survey. The ARC for the critical design aircraft, the aircraft or family of aircraft performing more than 500 annual operations, will determine what design standards the airport will adhere to. AVIATION FORECASTS Page 3-16 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Table 3-17 Aircraft Types and Operations from User Survey Responses Aircraft ARC Piston Aircraft Total Ops Aircraft ARC Total • ps Aero Commander 500 A-II/s 5 Cessna 421 Golden Eagle B -Fs 54 Aeronca Champ A -Fs 36 Christavia Mk I A -Fs 10 Aerospool Dynamic WT9 A -Fs 50 Cirrus SR22 A -Fs 60 Arion Lightning A -Fs 150 Flight Design CT A -Fs 60 Beechcraft Baron 58 B -Ps 13 Glassair III A -Ps 100 Beechcraft Bonanza A -Ps 464 Hannaford D-1 A -Ps 2 Boeing Stearman A -Ps 12 Mooney M20 A -Ps 14 Cessna 150 A -Ps 399 Piper PA -18 Super Cub A -Ps 3 Cessna 172 Skyhawk A -Ps 1,592 Piper PA -24 Commanche A -Ps 275 Cessna 177 Cardinal A -Ps 70 Piper PA -28 A -Ps 81 Cessna 182 Skylane A -Fs 284 Piper PA -32 Saratoga A -Ps 30 Cessna 402 Businessliner B -Ps 150 Rutan VariEze A -Ps 120 Cessna 414 Chancellor Aircraft B -Ps ARC 13 Turboprop Total Ops Aircraft ARC Total • ps Beechcraft King Air 90 B -IUs 8 Cessna Conquest I B -Ps 58 Beechcraft Super King Air 300 B-II/L 8 Daher-Socata TBM 700 A -Ps 83 Beechcraft King Air 200 Aircraft B -IUs ARC 13 Turbofan/Jet Total Ops Pilatus PC -12 Aircraft A-II/s ARC 8 Total • ps Beechjet 400 B-I/L 43 Cessna Citation V B-II/L 12 Cessna Citation CJI B -IUs 8 Dassault Falcon 900EX B-II/L 26 Cessna Citation CJ4 B-II/L 20 Dassault Mystere-Falcon 50 B-II/L 5 Cessna Citation I B-11/1, 65 Learjet 45 C -UL 130 Cessna Citation II B -UL 300 Total Operations (All Aircraft): 4,834 Source: IOW Airport User Survey (2014) Notes: /s — small aircraft; /L —large aircraft greater than 12,500 pounds AVIATION FORECASTS Page 3-17 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Table 3-18 Aircraft ARC and Operations from User Survey Responses ARC Total • ps A-I/s 3,895 A -11/s 13 B -Ps 288 B -UL 343 B -IUs 29 B-II/L 136 C -UL 130 Source: IOW Airport User Survey (2014) Notes: /s= small aircraft; /L—large aircraft greater than 12,500 pounds There were 40 unique aircraft identified in the user survey. For reference, the following images represent the ARC of aircraft seen at IOW. A -I small (<12.500 lbs.): Small, single-engine piston aircraft; few light multi - engine piston aircraft; Example: Mooney M20 AA=IL• Single-engine turboprop; agricultural aircraft; Example: Air Tractor 602 A -III Lar2e(>12,500lbs.): Older, piston military or civil service aircraft; large wingspans, slow flying; Example: Douglas DC -3 B -I small (512,500 lbs.): Most light multi -engine piston aircraft; Example: Cessna 414 B -I Large (>12,500 lbs.): Small but heavy business jets; Example: North American T-39 Saberliner B -II Small (<12,500 lbs.): Light, multi -engine turboprop aircraft; small business jets; Example: Beechcraft C90GTi AVIATION FORECASTS Page 3-18 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan B -II Large (>12,500 lbs.): Large turboprop aircraft; mid -large sized corporate jets; Example: Dassault Falcon 2000 B -III Larae (>12,500 lbs.): Large corporate jets; large wingspans; Example: Bombardier Global 5000 C-1 small (512,500 lbs.): Small, fast turboprop aircraft and corporate jets; Example: Piaggio P. 180 Avanti C-1 Larae (>12,500 lbs.): Small, heavy, and fast corporate jet aircraft; Example: Learjet 55 C -II Large (>12,500 lbs.): Large Corporate Jets; Example: Gulfstream III 3.8.2. ANNUAL OPERATIONS FORECAST Helicopter: Piston and turbine rotorcraft; Example: Bell 412 Annual operations are the count of both takeoffs and landings at an airport. Baseline (year 2014) airport operations were estimated using FAA approved Operations Per Based Aircraft (OPBA) figures. The OPBA figure is an average that includes both based aircraft and transient aircraft traffic. FAA Order 5090.3C Field Formulation of the National Plan oflntegrated Airport Systems recommends 250 operations per based aircraft for rural general aviation airports, 350 operations per based aircraft for busier general aviation airports with more itinerant traffic, and 450 operations per based aircraft for busy reliever airports. The OPBA could be as high as 750 for busy reliever airports with more itinerant traffic, however the order emphasizes the estimates should be refined by comparing to activity levels at similar airports or through a user survey. The SASP uses a similar method, but determines the size of the airport by the number of based aircraft. IOW fits in the 31 to 99 based aircraft category, which is assigned an OPBA of 350. The SASP shows 85 based aircraft in 2010, and multiplying the number of based aircraft by the OPBA yields 29,750 operations in 2010. The current FAA TAF shows 19,287 operations for IOW Dividing the number of annual operations by the 2014 FAA TAF based aircraft number, 87, yields 222 OPBA. The 1991 Aviation Forecast Summary shows 76 based aircraft in 2012 with 36,000 operations. This yields an OPBA of 510. The Aircraft Operational Activity, 1996-2015 from the 1996 Master Plan forecasted 37,046 operations in 2010 and 70 based aircraft for an OPBA of 529. The most recent forecast (2009) shows 48,360 operations in 2012 with 93 based aircraft for an OPBA of 520. A large percentage of the operations at IOW are itinerant flights. The 1991 Aviation Forecast Summary and the 1996 Master Plan forecast itinerant operations as 80% of operations at the airport. The TAF AVIATION FORECASTS Page 3-19 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan shows 68% of operations were itinerant, and the most recent forecast (2009) forecasted 57% of operations were itinerant. This forecast assumes 70% of all operations are itinerant. One methodology to develop an OPBA is to compare the OPBA of surrounding airports. As seen in Table 3-19, the average OPBA at these airports is 306 according to the SASP. Table 3-19 Operations Per Based Aircraft at Nearby Airports Nearby Airports to 1OW Iowa City (IOW) Operations BaseYear 2010 29,750 •'C BaseYear 2010 350 Cedar Rapids (CID) 50,490 374 Muscatine (MUT) 11,200 350 Tipton (8C4) 2,500 250 Washington (AWG) 6,750 250 Average: 306 Source: Iowa State Aviation System Plan (20 10) *IOW is not included in the OPBA average An OPBA of 306 is lower than 350 suggested for busier general aviation airports. The amount of itinerant traffic into IOW suggests the OPBA should be closer to 450 instead of 350. Using an OPBA of 450 and 82 based aircraft yields 36,900 operations as a baseline in 2014. With the growth in based aircraft over the next 20 years increasing to 117, the annual operations increases to 52,650 (117 x 450). It is important to forecast operations by aircraft ARC in order to determine what design standards the airport will use. This is determined by the critical design aircraft, or the family of aircraft which exceed 500 operations annually. The baseline for all itinerant aircraft ARCS, not including A -I, come from the IFR data. A majority of operations at the airport are ARC A -I aircraft, therefore the remaining operations are applied to ARC A -I aircraft. The IFR data was a baseline for itinerant operations, and assumed to be 70% of operations by that aircraft type. The remaining 30% was calculated and added to the local operations. There are no based aircraft larger than B-I/L. The growth in operations per aircraft ARC was determined by applying the average annual growth rates for activity in certain aircraft categories based on engine type. These activity growth rates were obtained from the FAA Aerospace Forecast, Fiscal Years 2014-2034, Tables 28 and 29. ARC A -II aircraft grew by total turbine rate of 3.3%, due to a large increase in agricultural activity throughout the country and many agricultural aircraft being A -II; B-I/s and B-II/s grew by the turboprop rate of 1.8%; helicopters grew by the total rotorcraft rate of 2.8%; and B -FL, B-II/L, C -FL, and C-II/L grew at the turbojet rate of 4.2%. The annual operations forecast for IOW over the 20 -year planning period is shown in Table 3-20. AVIATION FORECASTS Page 3-20 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O OM OM 01 M N l� - r N �cN r O 7 N �c 01 N N M M 7 l� l� � 01 01 O O � N 4 N M M M M M M 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 Vl Vl Vl Vl Vl 01 O N M 7 vi �D r- l� 01 O � N N 7 vi l� � O N m M • --i N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M 7 7 7 01 01 O O O O --i N l� O 7 O M �c O m O 7 l— l— r- C1 C1 C� O O O . . . N N M .. N N N N N N N N N O 1= N M M 7 7 Vl ID ID r- C1 O O N N M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M 7 7 7 7 l� U1 O N M 7 Vl �c U1 O M 7 O N N N N M M M M M M M M M 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 Vl Vl l— C1 O N m Vl r- C1 O- m Vl r— N �c r r— — M 7 r- O� C1 O� C1 N M N M 7 1, O� O N n 0 0 0 0 0 0 — — N N N M M M M M 7 7 7 7 7 N N N N N N M M M M M M M M 7 7 7 7 7 7 Vl O O O N N M M 7 7 Vii �c �c r - r C� C� C� . . C1 M �c C1 M l— N 7 C1 r r C1 N �c O �D l— C1 O N 7 N M vi l— C1 M �c • N N N M M M M M M M 7 7 7 7 7 7 Vl Vl Vl Vl �D vi l- 01 M Vl r O N Vl O M r O M r O 7 C p 01 01 01 � r- C� C= r- N ' U1 U1 l� C1 C1 O N N M 7 C1 O N N M • M M M M 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 vi vi vi vi vi vi 7 Vl 01 7 M 7 O �c N C1 vi M O O ti M 7 N 7 vi l— C1 O N m viC1 • �D l� l� l� l� l� l� l� l� C1 C1 C1 C1 � C1 M �c C1 M l— M Vl l� 01 N 7 l� 01 N 7 l� O M �D 01 C.=, O O N �D C, C, C1 C1 �c O 7 l— O M O 7 �c r- O O O O N N N M M N N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M M M M C1 O C1 O N M 7 --i--i--i--i--i--i N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan 3.9. FUTURE CRITICAL DESIGN AIRCRAFT 3.9.1. RUNWAY DESIGN CODE (RDC) & AIRPORT REFERENCE CODE (ARC) Most of the existing airport operations at IOW are in small aircraft 12,500 pounds or less. This would include aircraft such as Piper PA -32 Saratoga (RDC A -I) and Pilatus PC -12 (RDC A -II). The user survey and IFR data confirm larger aircraft weighing more than 12,500 pounds operate regularly at the airport. Because user survey data may overlap with IFR data, and the user survey data is an estimate by the user, IFR data was used to determine there were 796 operations in large turboprop and jet aircraft such as the Cessna Citation II (RDC B -I, large) and the Bombardier Global 5000 (RDC B -III, large) known to use the airport from November 2013 to October 2014. As described in the Airport Inventory Chapter, the existing ARC used when establishing safety dimensional criteria at IOW was GIl, large aircraft. There are currently less than 500 operations per year for aircraft in the C -II category, but there are more than 500 operations per year by large aircraft and ADG-II aircraft. The existing critical design aircraft with greater than 500 itinerant operations is a B -II, large aircraft. These operations are typically those that support local businesses and a growing community. Based on documented data, estimates, statewide criteria, and discussions with the Master Plan Advisory Group and Airport Commission, the future airport configuration should be designed to 13- 11, large safety standards. Changing the critical aircraft design standards from C -II to B -II reduces the size of the Runway Safety Area, Runway Object Free Area, and Runway Protection Zone. Due to the site constraints of the existing airport facility, changes to the design standards will add takeoff and landing distances on the primary runway without physically extending the runway pavement. Runway alternatives will be discussed in greater detail in Chapter 4.0, Facility Requirements. Changing the ARC does not prevent GII or larger aircraft from operating at the airport. However, the critical design aircraft that use the airport most frequently will gain useable runway distance and may reduce the need for the entire existing displaced threshold on the Runway 25 end. The Airport Commission should continue to monitor airport operations and evaluate the needs of current and future users of the airport. 3.10. SUMMARY The following points summarize key findings with regard to the based aircraft and general aviation forecasts at IOW: • IOW airport operations are a mix of recreational and business flights. The user survey and business user survey indicated local use of aviation for business travel. These flights provide local travel needs for existing business activities. • Based aircraft are projected to increase from 82 to 117 by the end of the planning period in 2034. The annual growth rate of based aircraft is 1.28%. This growth rate is comparable to the existing State Aviation System Plan forecasts of nearby airports. • Baseline aircraft operations are estimated by multiplying an OPBA of 450 times the number of based aircraft to obtain 36,900 operations in 2014. As the number of based aircraft increases over the next 20 years, the annual operations will increase to 52,650 in 2034. • The existing critical design aircraft is B -II, large, however, the airport is currently designed to C- II standards. It is recommended that the design standards at the airport meet B -II requirements. FACILITY REQUIREMENT S Page 3-22 4. FACILITY REQUIREMENTS 4.1. INTRODUCTION The Facility Requirements Chapter evaluates the airside, landside, and support facility requirements at the airport. Airside areas for general aviation airports include the runway and taxiway environment, as well as general aviation aircraft parking, storage hangars, and fueling needs. Landside and other airport support facilities include airport support buildings, access roads, parking lots, fencing, and utilities. Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Although there are similar infrastructure and operational requirements every Airport Master Plan evaluates, individual airports have different areas of focus to address specific safety related concerns, future facility needs, and/or environmental and planning considerations for the surrounding environment. These specific areas for IOW, both on and off airport property, are identified on Figure 4-1, at the end of this chapter. The primary planning considerations at IOW include evaluating options to maximize the existing runway configuration, identifying obstructions to the navigable airspace, determining the compatibility of airport development with the surrounding natural resources, evaluating the compatibility of airport operations with the local community comprehensive growth plan and local zoning ordinance, develop long-term building area plans and maximizing funding sources for the airport. In addition to addressing the existing conditions at the airport, this chapter evaluates the ability for the airport to accommodate the forecasted demand and meet applicable airport facility requirements for the users of the facility. These areas will be addressed in the following sections: • Airfield capacity and delay analysis • Instrument approaches • Runway facility requirements • Airport visual aids & navigational aids • Meteorological facilities • Taxiway & taxilane facility requirements • Apron size and tie -down requirements • Iowa Aviation System Plan airside recommendations • Landside facility requirements • Iowa Aviation System Plan landside recommendations Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5300-13X Airport Design, was referenced for the design standard criteria used to evaluate the impacts of the recommended development throughout the Airport Master Plan and corresponding Airport Layout Plan (ALP). Specific facility requirements are based on aeronautical compliance, demand, or triggering events, rather than specific time periods. This allows the Airport Commission to use the Airport Master Plan as a tool for decision making and funding prioritization over the next 20 years. IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 4-1 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan 4.2. AIRFIELD CAPACITY & DEMAND ANALYSIS 4.2.1. AIRFIELD CAPACITY Airfield capacity is defined as the maximum aircraft operations an airfield configuration can accommodate. The FAA metric used to determine reasonable airfield capacity is Annual Service Volume (ASV). ASV is a calculated number that represents a reasonable estimate of an airport's annual operational capacity taking into account differences in runway utilization, weather conditions, and aircraft mix that would be encountered in a year's time. The ASV is determined by grouping aircraft into classes per FAA AC 150/5060-5, Airport Capacity and Delay. These classes identify aircraft based on recommended arrival and departure separation distances (see Table 4-1). Table 4-1 Annual Service Volume Classifications Source: FAA AC 150/5060-5 Airport Capacity and Delay The largest aircraft to utilize IOW includes ASV Class C aircraft (12,501-300,000 pounds). Examples include the Beechcraft King Air B-300 turboprop and smaller business jets. The aviation forecasts for IOW presented in Chapter 3.0, Aviation Forecasts estimate, in the long-term, operations will be comprised of 4% ASV Class C airplanes (approximately 2,300 annual operations), nearly 3% ASV Class B airplanes, and the remaining 93% being ASV Class A airplanes. FAA AC 150/5060-5, Airport Capacity and Delay was used to calculate the ASV for a single -runway scenario at IOW. The runway configuration assumes the crosswind Runway 12/30 is limited to use by small airplanes based on the lack of non -precision approaches to the runway. The results are shown in Table 4-2. Table 4-2 Annual Service Volume 1 52,650 1 230,000 1 22.9% 1 Source: Bolton & Menk Analysis, FAA AC 150/5060-5 Airport Capaeity and Delay Under these conditions, the airfield configuration for one primary runway will adequately meet the capacity demand over the next 20 years. 4.2.2. AIRFIELD DEMAND The demand of an airfield is a function of the number and location of exit taxiways, the runway configuration, wind, and weather conditions. The methodology for computing the relationship between the demands placed upon an airport versus its capacity is also contained in FAA AC 150/5060-5. In order IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 4-2 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan to facilitate this comparison, computations were made to determine the hourly capacity of a single runway configuration in visual flight rules (VFR) and instrument flight rules (IFR). VFR are when a pilot operates an aircraft during weather conditions that allow the pilot to see the ground and visually avoid obstructions. IFR are when a pilot operates an aircraft using instruments within the cockpit versus referencing the ground due to the surrounding cloud cover and weather conditions. Based on the forecasts presented in Chapter 3.0, Aviation Forecasts, the peak hourly operations were calculated for the existing 2014 operations and for the future 2034 operations. The national FAA guidance for general aviation airports assumes a single general aviation runway can accommodate 98 operations per hour during VFR conditions and 59 operations per hour during IFR conditions. The FAA guidance also assumes the busiest month at a general aviation airport conducts 14.8% of the annual operations. This equates to 5,462 operations in the busiest month for 2014 and 7,792 operations in 2034. The number of peak operations for the busiest day in the busiest month is 182 (5,462/30) in 2014 and 260 (7,792/30) in 2034. The national FAA guidance also assumes at general aviation airports, the peak hour is 20% of the peak daily operations. Therefore, the peak hourly operations for 2014 are 36 (182 x 0.20) and the peak hourly operations in 2034 are 52 (260 x 0.20). Based on the airport layout and conditions at IOW, the hourly capacity is shown in Table 4-3. Table 4-3 Hourly Capacity Source: Bolton & Menk Analysis, FAA AC 150/5060-5 Airport Capaeity and Delay The vast majority of operations at IOW will occur under VFR conditions. Peak hourly operations will likely never be achieved under IFR conditions. Using these assumptions, the peak operations forecasted within the planning horizon will adequately meet the demand of a single runway during VFR and IFR weather conditions. No significant long-term delays are forecasted. 4.3. INSTRUMENT APPROACHES Instrument approach procedures provide arriving aircraft with electronic guidance to the airport runway environment during periods of low visibility. For FAA to develop an approach to a runway end, various airspace surfaces are evaluated to determine any obstacles that may alter or prevent a specific type of approach from being published. The airspace criteria are published in both Federal Aviation Regulations Part 77, Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace and FAA Order 8260.3C, United States Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). Part 77, among other topics, was established to "provide aeronautical studies of obstructions to air navigation, to determine their effect on the safe and efficient use of airspace." Obstructions to any Part 77 surface should be analyzed by FAA to determine if they are a hazard to the airspace of a particular runway end. In some cases, obstacles can be a penetration to the Part 77 surface but not be a hazard if the obstacle is marked or lighted. If there are obstacles that are determined to be hazardous which cannot be mitigated, approach/departure surfaces are evaluated. These Visual Area surfaces are described in FAA Order 8260.3C and dimensions for these surfaces can be found in FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13X Airport Design. FAA develops approaches to a runway end based on a clear approach/departure surface. Should there be obstacles to the approach/departure surface, the approach may be cancelled or turned off during night time operations. IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 4-3 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Due to the amount of obstacles surrounding IOW, both Part 77 and the approach/departure surfaces were evaluated on each runway end to determine if the existing approaches are adequate for the airport users, clear of obstructions, or if additional approach procedures can be developed. Section 2.8.2 listed the three types of instrument approaches at an airport including non -precision, approaches with vertical guidance, and precision approaches. IOW experiences weather conditions requiring the use of an instrument approach procedures approximately 10% of the time. Visual approaches to a runway have no instrument approach procedure nor do they require additional aircraft or ground equipment. A summary of the types of instrument approaches at an airport are described below: • Non -Precision approach — A standard instrument approach procedure with horizontal guidance to the runway end and no electronic vertical descent guidance. These approaches utilize ground- based or satellite -based navigational aids such as GPS, VOR, and NDB. The definitions for GPS, VOR, and NDB are included in Section 2.10.3 of this report. • Approach with vertical guidance — An instrument approach procedure providing course and vertical descent guidance. These approaches utilize ground-based glideslope navigational aids or satellite based navigational aids such as a Localizer Performance with Vertical Guidance (LPV). • Precision approach — An instrument approach procedure with course and vertical descent guidance and visibility minimums of less than '/a mile (4,000 foot Runway Visual Range). These approaches utilize ground-based navigational aids as part of an Instrument Landing System (ILS). The two components of an ILS are a localizer antenna for course guidance and a glideslope antenna for vertical guidance. IOW currently has non -precision approaches to Runways 25 and 30. The approach to Runway 25 also has vertical guidance. The LPV added to the Runway 25 approach lowers the cloud ceiling minimums to 394 feet. The visibility minimums are 1 mile for the Runway 30 approach and 1 '/z miles for the Runway 25 approach. If pilots do not see the runway end within 1 or 1 % miles of the runway end, they cannot land at the airport. There are also circling procedures available for all runway ends during the day and Runway 25 at night. A circling approach procedure is used when a straight -in landing from an instrument approach procedure is not desirable due to wind conditions or other factors. A circling procedure cannot be authorized unless the airport owner/sponsor has provided documentation that the runway has a clear approach/departure surface. There are currently obstructions to the approach/departure surfaces prohibiting use of circling approaches to the Runway 7, 12, and 30 ends at night. The dimensions of the appropriate approach/departure surface used on the runway ends in IOW are found in Table 4-4. Approach/departure surface dimensions are based on the type of approach and the type of aircraft proposed to use a specific runway end. The approach/departure surface described in Table 4-4 is for "approach end of runways expected to accommodate instrument approaches having visibility greater than or equal to'/a statute mile, or expected to serve large airplanes (day or night). Including circling approaches." Runway ends 25 and 30 have instrument approaches with visibility minimums greater than '/a mile and all four runway ends have circling approaches. IIIA IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 4-4 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Table 4-4 20:1 Visual Area Surface Dimensions Source: FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13A, Change 2 There are currently four tree obstructions to the Runway 7 approach/departure surface. These tree obstructions are located on airport property. Once the obstructions are removed and documented with FAA, the night time circling approach to Runway 7 can be reinstated. Runway 25 does not have any obstructions to the approach/departure surface. The Runway 25 non -precision approach with vertical guidance is adequate for the 20 year planning period. There are 114 tree and pole obstructions to the Runway 12 approach/departure surface. Only one of these obstructions is on airport property. The remaining 113 obstructions are on private property. Runway 30 has six tree obstructions to the approach/departure surface. One of the trees is located within an existing easement owned by the airport. The remaining five trees are located on private property. Once the six trees have been removed and documented with FAA, the night time circling approach to Runway 30 can be reinstated. The FAA requires the airport sponsor to, at a minimum, own an avigation easement over the property where obstruction mitigation is needed. This ensures the airport has control over regrowth and any other potential obstructions to the airspace around the airport. The FAA will only fund obstruction removal in a particular area once at an airport. They will not participate in funding to continue to trim or remove the same obstructions multiple times. The Runway 30 end currently has six tree obstructions to the approach/departure surface. One of the tree obstructions is located within an existing avigation easement which airport staff will be able to remove. The remaining five trees are located on two privately owned parcels. Mitigation of these trees will be determined during the environmental assessment process. The Runway 12 end has 114 obstructions to the approach/departure surface. Because of these penetrations, the night time circling approach to Runway 12 is not available at night. The 114 tree and pole obstructions are located within a residential neighborhood on 87 different parcels owned by private property owners. Each parcel has a home and approximately six to ten trees on each property. The trees identified during the obstruction analysis may identify more than one tree trunk, however, due to the leaf canopy of the trees, only one tree is identified. In addition, during the analysis, the number of trees located within five feet of the approach/departure surface were also calculated so as not to remove a tree and then the following year go back to the property owners to take another tree. There are 26 trees located within five feet of the existing approach/departure surface (see Figure 4-2). Runwav 12 Approach/Departure Surface Mitigation Various alternatives were discussed with the Airport Commission to mitigate the approach/departure surface without removing all 140 trees (114 plus 26 within 5 feet of the approach/departure surface) from the residential neighborhood. The devastation to the existing residential neighborhood north of Runway 12 to clear 140 trees for a visual runway end is not acceptable to the Airport Commission. Therefore, various alternatives were evaluated. IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 4-5 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan The approach/departure surface starts 200 feet from the runway threshold. In order to reduce the number of trees to be removed, the runway threshold location must change. The runway threshold would need to be displaced 730 feet to allow all trees to remain in the residential neighborhood and not be an obstruction to the airport. A displaced threshold of 730 feet only provides 3,170 feet of runway for aircraft landing on Runway 12 and taking off on Runway 30. This runway length is too short for aircraft that may use Runway 12/30 during days when the crosswind component is too high for Runway 7/25 or Runway 7/25 is closed for other reasons such as construction or incidents at the airport. Therefore, the Airport Commission evaluated alternatives which required less of a displaced threshold than 730 feet but did not impact the residential neighborhood in a way that could not be justified. Table 4-5 lists the number of trees to be removed with each displaced threshold that was analyzed. Table 4-5 Tree Impacts to Runway 12 The Airport Commission evaluated the type of aircraft currently using the airport and proposed to use the airport over the next 20 years to determine a runway length that would be acceptable. The existing runway length of 3,900 feet is important to the existing users of the airport. However, the difference in the number of residential homes impacts between a 400 -foot displaced threshold and a 500 -foot displaced threshold was significant enough to warrant pursing a displaced threshold. The declared distances for Runway 12/30 based on the 500 -foot displaced threshold are listed in Table 4-6. Table 4-6 Declared Distances — Runway 12/30 Declared Distances Number of remaining Runway30 Number of parcel Feet of Approach/Departure Takeoff Distance Available (TODA) owners to contact for Displaced Surface obstructions to Number of obstructions remaining obstruction Threshold mitigate cleared removal The Airport Commission evaluated the type of aircraft currently using the airport and proposed to use the airport over the next 20 years to determine a runway length that would be acceptable. The existing runway length of 3,900 feet is important to the existing users of the airport. However, the difference in the number of residential homes impacts between a 400 -foot displaced threshold and a 500 -foot displaced threshold was significant enough to warrant pursing a displaced threshold. The declared distances for Runway 12/30 based on the 500 -foot displaced threshold are listed in Table 4-6. Table 4-6 Declared Distances — Runway 12/30 Declared Distances Runway12 Runway30 Takeoff Run Available (TORA) 3,900' 3,900' Takeoff Distance Available (TODA) 3,900' 3,900' Accelerate Stop Distance Available (ASDA) 3,400' 3,900' Landing Distance Available (LDA) 3,400' 3,900' A displaced threshold of 500 feet reduces the landing distance for Runway 12 to 3,400 feet. Because the existing users of the airport require a 3,900 -foot runway, alternatives were evaluated to add additional landing distance to the Runway 30 end. IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 4-6 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Additional Landing Distance—Runwav 30 The landing distance for Runway 12 was reduced to avoid impacting 87 residential property owners north of the airport. A displaced threshold of 500 feet is being proposed which requires 28 trees to be removed from 23 residential property owners. To mitigate the loss of 500 feet of landing distance to Runway 12, alternatives were evaluated on the Runway 30 end. The existing Runway 30 threshold cannot be relocated without impacting Old Highway 218 South. In addition, moving the Runway 30 threshold would also increase the number of obstructions to the Runway 30 approach/departure surface which is not acceptable to the Airport Commission. Therefore, an alternative was evaluated to add landing distance to Runway 12 approaches without causing additional obstructions. There is enough room on existing airport property to add a 300 -foot displaced threshold to Runway 30. By doing this, the runway safety areas remain on airport property and no additional approach/departure surface penetrations are added. The declared distances with the additional 300 feet of displaced threshold is depicted in Table 4-7. Table 4-7 Declared Distances with Runway 30 Displaced Threshold Declared Distances Runway12 Runway30 Takeoff Run Available (TORR) 4,200' 4,200' Takeoff Distance Available (TODA) 4,200' 4,200' Accelerate Stop Distance Available (ASDA) 3,700' 3,900' Landing Distance Available (LDA) 3,700' 3,900' The goal of the additional alternatives to Runway 12/30 were to maintain the existing use of the crosswind runway while avoiding detrimental tree removal to the existing residential neighborhood north of the airport. The selected alternative of displacing the Runway 12 threshold 500 feet and adding a 300 - foot displaced threshold to the Runway 30 ends accomplishes this goal. Precision Approach IOW does not have a precision approach. A precision approach can lower cloud ceiling minimums to 200 feet over the runway elevation and reduce visibility minimums to 'h mile. Adding a precision approach at the airport requires a larger and steeper approach/departure surface to be clear of obstructions. The inner width is 800 feet instead of 400 feet and the slope is 34:1 instead of 20:1. To clear the Runway 25 end for a precision approach, the runway would need to be shortened by 250 feet. The existing landing distance on Runway 7/25 is already shortened to 4,196 feet. Losing 250 additional feet of runway length would not benefit the existing users of the airport. In addition, the minimum runway length required for a precision approach with'/4 mile visibility minimums is 4,200 feet. Therefore, the crosswind runway (Runway 12/30) would need to be extended before a precision approach could be published. Due to these circumstances, a precision approach is not recommended at IOW within the 20 year planning period. Consequently, the airport users expressed interest in evaluating the possibility of a non -precision approach being published on the Runway 7 or Runway 12 end. This would provide additional options for aircraft landing at IOW. Runway 7 Non -Precision Approach Alternative The Runway Safety Area and Runway Object Free Area design standards do not change when transferring from a visual approach to a non -precision approach. However, the Part 77 approach surface dimensions change from 500 feet x 5,000 feet x 1,500 feet to 500 feet x 10,000 feet x 3,500 feet In IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 4-7 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan addition, the approach slope changes from a 20:1 slope to a 34:1 slope. The purpose of Part 77 surfaces is to identify obstructions to air navigation which require further airspace analysis to determine if the obstructions are hazardous to the type of approach proposed at the airport. The airspace analysis will suggest mitigation measures to mark or light obstacles if they are hazards. The controlling object for evaluating Part 77 obstructions on the Runway 7 end is Highway 1. The Part 77 approach surface is required to clear a public roadway by 15 feet. This provides adequate clearance between approaching aircraft and vehicles on the roadway. Highway 1 is a 12.7 -foot penetration to the Part 77 non -precision approach surface. To determine if this is a hazard to the Runway 7 approach, an airspace analysis would need to be completed by FAA. Highway 1 is a key transportation system in the City of Iowa City and moving or closing Highway 1 is not an acceptable alternative. Because there are hazards to the Part 77 non -precision approach surface, an analysis was done for the approach/departure surfaces to Runway 7. The approach/departure surface for a non -precision approach in this situation has a 20:1 slope. The surface has a 400 -foot inner width surface instead of a 500 -foot inner width surface with the Part 77 approach surface. In general, the approach/departure surface is less restrictive than the Part 77 approach surface. An analysis of this surface depicted four light poles, one billboard, and eight additional tree obstructions. Publishing a non -precision approach to Runway 7 has been discarded due to the impacts of Highway 1. Another alternative considered was adding a Medium -Intensity Approach Lighting System with Sequenced Flashers (MALSF) to the Runway 7 end to provide a visual light path to the runway threshold. A MALSF is a series of sequenced flashing lights that lead pilots to the end of the runway. There are other versions of approach lighting systems, however a MALSF system fits within the physical constraints of the airport and would not require property acquisition prior to installation. The FAA will not pay for a MALSF system that isn't justified or in association with an existing non - precision approach. The Airport Commission could consider installation of a MALSF funded 100% with local dollars, but the installation will not lower any visibility minimums or change the existing visual approach to a non -precision approach. The cost for installation of a MALSF system would be approximately $1.3 million. Figure 4-3, at the end of this chapter, shows the location of the MALSF lighting system. The Airport Commission should continue to monitor the users of the airport to determine if the cost associated with this type of development would be beneficial to airport users. Because the users of the airport feel runway length is more important than obtaining a non -precision approach to Runway 7, a non -precision approach was removed from further consideration. Runway 7 will remain a visual runway for the 20 year planning period. The Airport Commission should continue to monitor the need for an approach lighting system to the Runway 7 end. Summary — Instrument Approaches The existing non -precision approach procedures to Runway 25 and 30 are adequate for the next 20 -year planning period. It is recommended that the existing Visual Surface Area obstructions be removed to Runway 7, 12, and 30 to allow for night time circling approaches to those runway ends. This includes relocating the Runway 12 threshold 500 feet and mitigating the Runway 30 end as funding allows. F1uu IIIA IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 4-8 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan 4.4. RUNWAY FACILITY REQUIREMENTS Runways at airports need to meet applicable design standards for safe operations and to remain eligible for federal and state funding. These standards are established by regulatory agencies in order to provide for the safe and efficient operation of aircraft on and in the vicinity of an airport. The design standards are based on two components which include the critical design aircraft and the most demanding type of approach established for either runway end. The future critical design aircraft for Runway 7/25 was determined in the forecast chapter to be B -II, large aircraft throughout the 20 year planning period. The runway is currently designed to C -II standards, and is recommended to change the safety areas to meet B -II requirements. The critical design aircraft is important when determining the design standards for the future development of not only the runways, but the entire airport. 4.5. PRIMARY RUNWAY 7/25 4.5.1. RUNWAY LENGTH Runway length is a critical component to any airport design, as it provides aircraft a defined area for takeoff and landing operations. Runway length requirements are determined by reviewing the needs of the critical design aircraft planned to use the airport for a total of 500 annual operations or more. Aircraft require the most runway length during their takeoff roll. Factors affecting runway length include aircraft performance, aircraft load factor, route length, airport elevation, runway gradient, runway condition, and temperature. FAA AC 150/5325-413, Runway Length Requirements for Airport Design, provides guidance in determining runway length requirements. Table 4-8 lists the recommended runway lengths for IOW. Table 4-8 Recommended Runway Lengths (airplanes less than 60,000 pounds) Airport Data Airport elevation 684 feet mean sea level Mean daily maximum temperature of the hottest month 87°F Maximum difference in runway centerline elevation Aircraft Criteria 33 feet Runway Length Small airplanes (with less than 10 passenger seats) 95% of these small airplanes 3,300' 100°/% of these small airplanes 3,900' Small airplanes with 10 or more passenger seats 4,200' Large airplanes of 60,000 pounds or less 75 percent of fleet at 60 percent useful load 4,750' 75 percent of fleet at 90 percent useful load 6,550' 100 percent of fleet at 60 percent useful load 5,400' 100 percent of fleet at 90 percent useful load 8,300' Source: FAA AC150/5325-4$ Runway Length RequirementsforAirportDesign Runway 7/25 has 5,004 feet of pavement. There is an 808 -foot displaced threshold on the Runway 25 end to account for the safety area between Riverside Drive and the end of the runway. The useable landing distance to Runway 25, which has the non -precision approach, is 4,196 feet. Small aircraft weighing less IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 4-9 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan than 12,500 pounds have adequate runway length to operate at IOW. Large aircraft are grouped by percentage of fleet and useful load factor. Seventy-five percent of fleet covers those aircraft up to the 75' percentile in terms of runway length needs. The 100 percent of fleet category contains the remaining 25' percentile of aircraft and therefore, requires greater runway lengths. Useful load factor is the difference in the maximum allowable structural gross weight of an airplane and the operating empty weight. For calculations of runway length, the useful load factor is split into two groups, either 60 percent or 90 percent. Therefore, the runway length calculations take into consideration the weight of the aircraft during takeoff operations. Large aircraft currently using IOW are summarized in Table 3-15 and Table 3-17. Of the 26 large aircraft models documented in the tables, 21 are in the 75 percent of fleet category and five are in the 100 percent of fleet category. According to Table 4-8, the existing 5,004 feet of pavement is adequate for 75 percent of fleet at 60 percent useful load. However, the useable runway landing length on the Runway 25 end is not adequate for the large aircraft that use the airport. A runway length of 6,550 feet would meet the 20 year needs for the users of the airport. However, due to the physical constraints of the airport site, alternatives were evaluated to maximize the existing length of the runway within the boundaries of airport property. g!Lyi a11L1VJ/_\'ArJll11111: FAA airport design standards require an RDC B -II runway with a non -precision instrument approach have a width of 75 feet. The existing runway width of 100 feet exceeds these standards. The City will need to continue to justify the larger runway width for the FAA to continue to fund maintenance for this additional pavement. Due to the family of aircraft proposed to use the runway over the next 20 years, the additional runway width will need to be justified or the runway width will be reduced to 75 feet when reconstruction is required. No changes to the runway width are recommended over the 20 year planning period. 4.5.3. RUNWAY PAVEMENT STRENGTH, TYPE, AND CONDITION Airport pavement strength is based on single wheel and dual -wheel landing gear configurations. The gear configuration determines how the weight is distributed on the pavement. Published weight bearing capacity is a result of the pavement section thickness, materials, and underlying soils. The published pavement strength for Runway 7/25 is 40,000 pounds single wheel or 60,000 pounds dual wheel. The maximum gross weight of the future critical design aircraft will continue to be up to but not exceed 60,000 pounds. Aircraft greater than 60,000 pounds may use IOW on a non -regular basis. Future pavement design should ensure these operations can be accommodated without jeopardizing the pavement condition. The existing runway is concrete and is proposed to remain concrete throughout the 20 year planning period. The 2015 Pavement Condition Index report states that Runway 7/25 is in excellent condition. The implementation plan, which is discussed in Chapter 5.0, will include a pavement maintenance schedule to maintain the life of the pavement. 4.5.4. RUNWAY LENGTH ALTERNATIVES Based on the needs identified in the Runway Length section above, alternatives were evaluated to accommodate a runway length that maximizes the use of the existing airport property. Each runway end was evaluated to determine if additional runway length could be gained due to the change in Airport Reference Code from C -II to B -II as discussed in Section 3.9. IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 4-10 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan 4.5.4.1. RUNWAY 25 END ALTERNATIVES The existing Runway 25 displaced threshold, Runway Object Free Area (ROFA), and Approach Departure Surface (APDS) are depicted on Figure 4-4, at the end of this chapter. The APDS determines the type of approach and visibility minimums allowed on each runway end. Obstructions to the APDS will turn off existing approaches until the obstruction is mitigated. The ROFA is defined in FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5300-13X Airport Design, as "An area centered on the ground on a runway centerline provided to enhance the safety of aircraft operations by remaining clear of objects, except for objects that need to be located in the OFA for air navigation or aircraft ground maneuvering purposes." To meet C -II design standards, the ROFA is 800 feet wide and extends 1,000 feet beyond the end of the runway threshold. The existing threshold is displaced to keep the ROFA on airport property. The ROFA for B -II aircraft is 500 feet wide and extends 300 feet beyond the end of the runway. Two alternatives were analyzed to maximize the runway length to meet B -II design standards. Runwav 25 — No displaced threshold Removing the displaced threshold completely while still clearing the approach surface over Riverside Drive would gain 599 feet of useable pavement. Therefore, the runway length would be 4,795 feet which is greater than the 4,196 feet of useable landing pavement that exists today (see Figure 4-5 at the end of this chapter). Runwav 25 — 100 -foot displaced threshold The second alternative would keep 100 feet of the displaced threshold, keep the ROFA on airport property, and gain 708 feet of useable runway pavement. Therefore, the runway landing distance available would be 4,904 feet (see Figure 4-6 at the end of this chapter). Preferred Runway 25 alternative Keeping a 100 -foot displaced threshold allows pilots to use 4,904 feet of pavement when landing on the Runway 25 end. This is an addition 109 feet of pavement and was therefore chosen as the preferred alternative by the Master Plan Advisory Group. 4.5.4.2. RUNWAY END ALTERNATIVES The existing Runway 7 ROFA and APDS are depicted on Figure 4-7, at the end of this chapter. The Runway 7 end is as far west as allowed because of the size of the ROFA. Two alternatives were evaluated to maximize the runway length on the west end of the airport. Runway 7 extension To maximize airport property and keep the APDS clear over Highway 1, an additional 213 feet of runway can be added to the Runway 7 end. This would increase the total pavement of Runway 7/25 to 5,217 feet with the useable landing distance on the Runway 25 end increasing from 4,904 feet to 5,117 feet (see Figure 4-8 at the end of this chapter). The runway extension would remain on airport property and meet the needs of the existing and future users of the airport. Runwav 7 Stopwav As previously discussed, a runway length of 5,217 feet maximizes the physical location of the airport and is adequate for the 20 -year planning period. If either runway end were to be extended, either Highway 1 or Riverside Drive would need to be relocated, which is not feasible for the City of Iowa City. IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 4-11 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Another option to continue to increase takeoff length calculations for pilots, while avoiding road relocation, is to construct a stopway off the Runway 7 end. Takeoff is the most critical operation for an aircraft and requires the most runway length. A stopway increases the Accelerate Stop Distance Available (ASDA). ASDA is the amount of runway plus stopway length available for the acceleration and deceleration of an aircraft aborting a takeoff and bringing the aircraft to a stop in the event of an emergency. This pavement is capable of supporting the critical design aircraft without causing structural damage, however, it is not capable of supporting regular aircraft operations and is to be used for emergency purposes only. It does not increase the length of the takeoff run. To maximize the use of airport property, a stopway of 778 feet was added to the Runway 7 end (see Figure 4-9 at the end of this chapter). This increases the ASDA to 5,995 feet when taking off from the Runway 25 end. The addition of a stopway shifts the Runway Object Free Area beyond the end of the stopway pavement. However, the start of the APDS continues to be based on the existing threshold location. At this time, FAA Airport Improvement Program funds are generally not allowed for construction of stopways. The Airport Commission should continue to monitor the need for this additional pavement. 4.6. SECONDARY CROSSWIND RUNWAY 12/30 Crosswind Runway 12/30 is 3,900 feet long by 75 feet wide. Primary Runway 7/25 has wind coverage of 93.08% for a 13 knot crosswind component. This is below the recommended 95% wind coverage for the critical aircraft at the airport. A crosswind runway is necessary for safe operation of all users of the airport. With the addition of the crosswind runway, the combined wind coverage with the primary runway is 98.70% for a 13 knot crosswind. The crosswind runway is designed to RDC B -II standards. This is adequate for the existing and future users of the airport. 4.6.1. CROSSWIND RUNWAY LENGTH The existing crosswind runway is 3,900 feet by 75 feet. The suggested crosswind runway length according to FAA AC 150/5325-413, Runway Length Requirements for Airport Design, is "100% of the length determined for the lower crosswind capable airplanes using the primary runway." The type of airplanes using the crosswind runway are predominately recreational aircraft with low approach and takeoff speeds. Based on review of several aircraft manufacturing manuals and discussions with the existing users of the crosswind runway, a runway length of 3,900 feet is adequate for the existing and future users of the airport over the 20 year planning period. The penetrations to the approach/departure surface to Runway 12 and Runway 30 will change the future runway length until both recommended mitigation measures can be constructed. The immediate need is to relocate the Runway 12 threshold 500 feet to reduce the number of obstructions to the approach/departure surface to 28. Once funding and justification is available, the Airport Commission can move forward with constructing a 300 -foot displaced threshold to the Runway 30 end. This will keep the declared distances at a similar length as exists today. 4.6.2. CROSSWIND RUNWAY WIDTH FAA Airport Design standards recommend a runway width based on the Aircraft Approach Category and Airplane Design Group of the critical aircraft using or proposed to use the runway. B -II aircraft using a non -precision approach runway with visibility minimums greater than '/a mile have a runway width requirement of 75 feet. The existing runway width of 75 feet is adequate for the 20 year planning period. IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 4-12 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan 4.6.3. CROSSWIND RUNWAY PAVEMENT STRENGTH, TYPE, & CONDITION Airport pavement strength is based on single wheel and dual -wheel aircraft wheel gear configurations. The gear configuration determines how the weight is distributed on the pavement. Published weight bearing capacity is a result of the pavement section thickness, materials, and underlying soils. The published pavement strength for the crosswind runway at IOW is 15,000 pounds single wheel or 20,000 pounds dual wheel. The maximum gross weight of the future critical design aircraft will continue to be up to but not exceed 60,000 pounds. The airfield pavement should be verified that regular use of aircraft of this size can be accommodated. The 2015 Pavement Condition Index report states that Runway 12/30 is in excellent condition. The implementation plan, which is discussed in Chapter 5.0, will include a pavement maintenance schedule to maintain the life of the pavement. 4.6.4. CROSSWIND RUNWAY ALTERNATIVES No crosswind runway alternatives need to be reviewed because the existing facility meets the needs of the existing and future users of the airport. There is an existing non -precision approach to the Runway 30 end. As with the Runway 12 end, and as discussed in Section 2.8.3, there are existing tree and pole obstructions to the FAR part 77 surfaces (see Figure 4-10 at the end of this chapter). The Airport Commission is currently working on an environmental assessment and documentation to begin to remove the existing obstructions from both runway ends. 4.7. AIRPORT VISUAL AIDS & NAVIGATIONAL AIDS Airport visual aids are a necessary component to provide pilots with the proper guidance within the immediate airport environment. As discussed in the Airport Inventory chapter, there are several visual aids at the airport. Table 4-9 lists the navigational aids at the airport visual aids and navigation aids and the ownership of each of those facilities. All the visual aids at the airport are adequate for the 20 year planning period. The existing PAPIs and REILs will need to be relocated when the displaced threshold on Runway 25 is moved and also when the Runway 7 end is extended; however, no additional navigational aids are proposed at the airport over the next 20 years. IIIA IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 4-13 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Table 4-9 Airport Navigational Aids Navigational Aid Ownership Rotating Beacon Airport Precision Approach Path Indicators (PAPIs) FAA Runway End Identification Lights (REILs) Airport Very -high Frequency Omni -directional Range (VOR) FAA Guidance Signs Airport Runway Lights Airport Taxiway Lights Airport Automated Surface Observing System (ASOS) FAA Source: Iowa City Municipal Airport staff 4.8. METEOROLOGICAL FACILITIES There are two wind cones located at the airport. There is a wind cone with a segmented circle located south of the apron area (see Figure 2-3.) This wind cone is visible to pilots on the Runway 12, 30, and 7 ends. An additional wind cone is located north of the Arrival/Departure building and is visible to pilots using the Runway 25 end. It is recommended that the wind cones remain in the current locations over the next 20 years. The existing Automated Surface Observing System (ASOS) must be kept clear of agricultural operations within 100 feet of the tower, clear of objects above the 30 -foot sensor height within 500 feet, and clear of high objects or structures within 1,000 feet of the system. There are tie -downs located within the ASOS critical area, however, the aircraft are less than 30 feet high and will not interfere with the sensor. The existing location of the AWOS is adequate for the 20 -year planning period (see Figure 2-3). 4.9. TAXIWAY & TAXILANE FACILITY REQUIREMENTS 4.9.1. TAXIWAY REQUIREMENTS The existing taxiway system at IOW consists of three paved connecting taxiways and a full parallel taxiway to Runway 7/25 (see Figure 2-3). There is also a connecting taxiway to the Runway 30 end of the crosswind runway. Taxiway facilities at an airport are established to enhance the safety and efficiency of airfield operations. A full parallel taxiway prohibits the need for aircraft to back taxi on an active runway after landing or prior to takeoff. The runway to taxiway centerline separation distance and the taxiway safety area dimensions are defined by the critical aircraft and type of approaches proposed to be used at the airport over the next 20 years. The future critical design aircraft for the runway is RDC B -II and the future approaches are proposed to be non -precision with less than one mile visibility minimums. Based on this criteria, the parallel taxiway should be constructed 240 feet from the runway centerline. The taxiway object free area (TOFA) width is 131 feet centered on the taxiway centerline to ensure proper wing tip clearance. Only objects necessary for air navigation may be placed within the TOFA. The existing runway to taxiway centerline separation is 400 feet. This separation distance is adequate for approach category C aircraft with less than'/a mile IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 4-14 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan visibility minimums. Although the existing separation standard is greater than required for B -II aircraft, category C aircraft are known to use the airport and a change in separation distance is not required. Taxiway width, fillet, and curve design are based on the Taxiway Design Code (TDG) of the critical aircraft identified for use on the parallel taxiway. The TDG is based on the width of the main gear of the aircraft and the distance between the cockpit and main gear of the critical design aircraft The classification for taxiway development at IOW is TDG-2. The taxiway width for this group of aircraft is 35 feet. The existing parallel taxiway width is 35 feet. This width is adequate for the 20 year planning period. According to the updated FAA AC 150/5300-13X Airport Design, any taxiways leading from the apron area directly to the runway should be avoided to discourage pilots from accidently taxiing directly from the building area onto the runway. IOW has a taxiway leading from the apron area directly to the runway near the Runway 30 end. It is recommended that a full parallel taxiway be constructed on the northeast side of Runway 12/30 to avoid the direct access from the building area to the runway. The first phase of the parallel taxiway to be constructed should be the connection between the Runway 30 end and the connector taxiway leading to the building area. This will discourage pilots from taxiing directly onto the runway. There is also a direct taxiway connection between the existing building area and the Runway 25 end. This connecting taxiway extends north of the runway towards the industrial park (see Sheet 2 of the Airport Layout Plan found in Appendix B). The connecting taxiway should be removed from the parallel taxiway north to the industrial park. This will discourage pilots from taxiing directly on the runway. Pilots can access Runway 25 from the parallel taxiway which leads to the end of the runway pavement. 4.9.2. TAXILANE REQUIREMENTS While taxiways provide access from the active runway to the building areas, taxilanes provide access to hangars and other facilities throughout the building area. Taxilanes are not as wide nor do they require the same safety area widths as taxiways due to aircraft operating at a lower speeds. There are two groupings of aircraft that are in the existing hangars or do business at IOW. The TDG for the type of aircraft using the hangar area at the airport is TDG-lA and TDG-2. Based on the fillet design tables for taxiways, the minimum recommended taxilane width for TDG-lA aircraft is 25 feet and the taxilane width for TDG-2 aircraft is 35 feet. The taxilane object free area used to maintain adequate wing tip clearance between hangars is based on the ADG of the critical aircraft and should be 79 feet for ADG I aircraft and 115 feet for ADG II aircraft. The majority of separation distances in the existing building area meet standards. Any new taxilanes constructed in the building area should meet the width and separation distance standards as mentioned above. The 20 year building area plan in the ALP depicts the different separation standards and taxilane access within the building area (see Appendix B). The ALP may show more development than necessary within the 20 year planning period, however, this provides a plan in the event hangar growth occurs more rapidly than expected. 4.10. APRON SIZE & TIE -DOWN REQUIREMENTS An aircraft apron provides an area for aircraft parking, aircraft movements, fueling operations, and access to the hangar area. The apron space requirements are developed according to local trends and FAA design standards. The existing apron is 8,900 square yards and provides 14 tie -downs. � I IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 4-15 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Aircraft Tie -Downs An analysis of the overall tie -down and apron size requirements was completed to determine the future needs at the airport. The peak number of operations on the busiest day of the year at IOW were used to calculate the number of tie -down spaces needed in the base year and also at the end of the 20 year planning period. This will ensure there are adequate tie -down spaces available at any time throughout the year. The demand at the airport was calculated at the beginning of this chapter. In 2014, the peak number of operations on the busiest day is 182. Itinerant aircraft represent 50% of the operations or 91 operations or 45 aircraft on the busiest day of the year. It is assumed 50% of itinerant aircraft that use the airport on the busiest day will stay and park at the airport for a total of 23 tie -downs needed in 2014. The same formula was used to determine the number of tie -downs necessary at the end of the 20 year planning period. The peak number of operations at the airport in 2034 is 260. Therefore, there are approximately 130 operations per day by 65 aircraft on the busiest day of the year. If 50% of the itinerant aircraft that use the airport on the busiest day stay and park at the airport, 33 tie -downs will be needed in 2034. There are currently 14 tie -down spaces available for ADG-I aircraft at IOW. Nine additional tie -downs are needed at IOW. Three or four of the future tie -downs should be able to support ADG-2 aircraft with larger wingspans. Although larger aircraft prefer indoor storage, there are instances where this type of aircraft has a short stay at the airport and indoor storage is not necessary. There are times when the apron is at capacity for tie -down space, such as during the University of Iowa home football games and during the week with business aircraft. The existing apron tie -downs are at full capacity the majority of summer months. The transient hangar storage is full during the winter months since most pilots visiting would like heated space. The building area plan on the ALP depicts the future tie -down locations. Apron Size General aviation apron space requirements necessitate an assessment of the number of aircraft tie -downs, airplane types, wingtip clearances, and aircraft maneuverability. Existing apron facilities at the airport consist of a main 8,900 square yard area for parking, aircraft tie -downs, fueling, and general aircraft circulation. FAA size factors for apron space assume 960 square yards of apron space to accommodate both the aircraft and a taxilane for ADG-I airplane and 1,385 square yards to accommodate both the aircraft and a taxilane for an ADG-II airplane. To accommodate ADG-II aircraft, an apron of 31,855 square yards is recommended for the existing conditions (23 tie -downs using ADG-11 design standards) increasing to 45,705 square yards in 2034. (33 tie -downs using ADG-II design standards). The existing apron should be expanded within the 20 year � I IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 4-16 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan planning period to accommodate future demands including parking for ADG-II aircraft. Actual apron size will be based on meeting local constraints and maneuverability requirements. r% Ili Mrely%We\9/ellIII 191O ' &I1:11► I»e1►Ie11311U74:7X4181L 1► 14►D7_lk III 181LI ''. The Iowa Aviation System Plan gives a top down approach to looking at the needs of the aviation system in Iowa. Although the Airport Master Plan process is a more in depth look at a specific airport, the Iowa Aviation System Plan recommends basic needs for the airport based on how the airport serves the aviation system as a while within the state. IOW is classified as an Enhanced Service Airport in the 2010 Iowa Aviation System Plan. Enhanced Service Airports such as IOW have a paved and lighted primary runway 5,000 feet in length. These airports are capable of accommodating most business jets, serve business aviation, and are regional transportation centers. In addition, Enhanced Service Airports serve as an asset to community economic development. The existing facilities at IOW meet the target needs recommended for airside development at Enhanced Service Airports except the landing distance available to Runway 25. Gaining additional runway length as discussed in the airside facility requirements section will allow IOW to reach this target. The additional runway length will be depicted on the ALP (see Appendix B). 4.12. LANDSIDE FACILITY REQUIREMENTS Building area facilities at a general aviation airport support airfield operations providing aircraft storage, fueling operations, aviation services, Arrival/Departure (A/D) building space, and automobile parking. Overall facility requirements should be designed to accommodate ARC B -II aircraft to meet existing and future critical aircraft requirements. 4.12.1.ARRIVAL/DEPARTURE (A/D) BUILDING General aviation A/D buildings provide an area for local and transient pilots and passengers to transition to and from the aircraft operations area. The existing A/D building, located east of the apron, is 5,400 square feet in size and was constructed in 1951. The building was updated in 2011 and includes restrooms, a pilot's briefing area, a large conference room on the second floor, airport manager and Fixed Base Operator (FBO) offices, and lounge space for local and transient pilots. The facilities located within the building are adequate for the type of users at IOW. Public space requirements are designed around the number of passengers (including the pilot) during the peak hours of operations at the airport. A general average of one pilot and one passenger per general aviation flight can be assumed. A general aviation A/D building requires approximately 50 square feet per passenger for circulation, waiting area, management/operations space, public conveniences, concessions area, and storage. The recommended size of the A/D building is based on the peak hourly operations of 36 in 2014 and 52 in 2034. Assuming two persons per flight, the existing activity at IOW requires a 1,800 square foot building increasing to 2,400 square feet within the 20 year planning period. The existing A/D building of 5,400 square feet is adequate for the 20 year planning period. 4.12.2. AIRPORT ACCESS & AUTOMOBILE PARKING Access The entrance to IOW is on the east side of the airport accessible via Riverside Drive. The airport entrance road provides access to the building area and automobile parking. The access road is paved and adequate IIIIIII� IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 4-17 to serve the existing and projected needs of the airport. Parkine An airport needs to provide adequate automobile parking to accommodate pilots, employees, visitors, and passengers. The existing automobile parking lot is paved and has 62 automobile parking stalls in immediate proximity to the A/D building and Fixed Based Operator (FBO). IOW meets the requirements in the Iowa Aviation System Plan which recommends that an Enhanced Service Airport has a paved entrance road and available parking by the A/D building. The based aircraft forecasts show 117 based aircraft in 2034. On-site aviation businesses also require additional vehicular parking needs for employees and their visitors. Additional automobile parking lots have been added to the building area to give pilots closer parking access to their hangars and near the FBO hangars to give employees and visitors additional parking spaces as well. Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan 4.12.3. AIRCRAFT STORAGE Aircraft are typically stored in conventional box hangars, or T -hangar structures on the airport. Currently, IOW has: • Five public 10 -unit T -hangars • One public 9 -unit T -hangar • One public 4 -unit mixed hangar • One public 2 -unit public conventional hangar • One conventional hangar (FBO) • One private conventional hangar Planning considerations for hangar facilities include the appropriate number and type of hangars to accommodate the projected based aircraft, hangar owner/tenant needs, and geographic/environmental constraints. Aircraft storage needs are driven by the based aircraft forecast and the type of aircraft storage demand. Currently, most of the based aircraft at IOW utilize T -hangar units for storage. Demand for T -hangar space is assumed to remain strong as it is economical for the user. Currently, there are ten people on a waiting list for T -hangar space. However, the cost to construct a T -hangar is not economically feasible for the City at this time. Therefore, future growth in the existing building area is shown through private hangar development. Building area alternatives were developed not only to accommodate the existing needs of the airport but to also understand the potential of the building area and determining the appropriate location for various hangar types and other building area needs. First the existing building area was developed to determine the number of additional hangars that can be developed within the constraints of this area (see Figure 4- 11 at the end of this chapter). Additional automobile parking spaces were added in addition to an apron expansion to accommodate the additional tie -downs needed at IOW. The building area can fit four 80 feet by 80 feet hangars and five additional smaller private hangars (50 feet by 50 feet and 60 feet by 60 feet). IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 4-18 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan There are only approximately ten hangar development areas left within the existing building area. The forecasts show a growth of 35 based aircraft over the next 20 years. Therefore, another location for hangar development was evaluated to accommodate this growth. There is an open space area in the south intersection of Runway 7/25 and Runway 12/30 that is currently owned by the airport and would have adequate space for hangar development. Access to the area would be available from Mormon Trek Boulevard south of the airport. There is adequate space to develop a large apron, additional tie -down spaces, and both private and public hangars (see Figure 4-12 at the end of this chapter). Parking is dispersed throughout the building area to separate vehicle and aircraft traffic. Placing the building area in this location allows for potential commercial business development in the area immediately adjacent to Mormon Trek Boulevard (see Figure 4-13 at the end of this chapter). One concern with development in this area is the floodplain for Willow Creek (see Figure 4-12). Although the Iowa River is closer to the airport than Willow Creek, the airport is within the 100 -year floodplain of Willow Creek but not the Iowa River. In May 2015, Hawkeye Consulting, Inc. completed a Master Redevelopment Plan for the airport. One of the purposes of the report was to recommend options to development the south quadrant of the airport while taking into consideration the flooding concerns in the area. Various alternatives were developed during the study. The outcome of the study determined that a levee system would need to be installed prior to development of the south quadrant of the airport. The hangar development for the existing building area and the south quadrant are depicted on the ALP included in Appendix B. 4.12.4. AIRPORT FUELING SYSTEM Fuel storage requirements are based on the average forecasted number of annual operations and fuel sales data for the airport. Based on fuel sales data since 2008, the average fuel sales at IOW are 66,355 gallons (100LL) and 134,665 gallons (Jet A) annually. The peak month for fuel sales is estimated to be 20% of the total annual operations. Tank capacity at an airport should be large enough to store peak month fuel sales on site. Thank size for 10OLL should be 13,300 gallons and tank size for Jet A fuel should be 27,000 gallons. IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 4-19 The existing Jet A fuel facility at IOW is located on the south side of the east apron and the 10OLL fuel facility is located on the south side of the west apron. Both of the fuel tanks can hold 12,000 gallons of fuel. The FBO also owns and operates a 1,200 gallon 10OLL fuel truck and a 2,200 gallon Jet A fuel truck. The existing underground storage capacity does not meet the needs of the existing fuel sales at the airport. It is recommended that larger tanks be installed at the airport An additional fuel system is proposed to be added at the airport when the south quadrant building area is being constructed. By installing a fueling system in the new building area, aircraft will not need to taxi back to the existing building area for fuel. 4.12.5. AIRPORT MAINTENANCE Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan The Airport Commission entered into an agreement with the FBO to provide and monitor the condition of the airport. This includes providing snow removal, grass cutting, and general maintenance services at the airport such as building maintenance, routine hangar maintenance, maintaining runway/taxiway lighting, maintaining signage, fence maintenance, and issuing Notice to Airmen for pilots. Airport maintenance equipment is currently stored outside. An airport maintenance and snow removal equipment storage building on airport property is recommended. This structure would be located in the north building area near the existing 10 -unit T -hangars. A snow removal equipment storage building of 60 feet by 60 feet would be adequate to store airport snow removal equipment and attachments. The proposed location for the SRE building is shown in Figure 4-11 and will be depicted on the ALP (see Appendix B). 4.12.6. AIRPORT PROPERTY Airport property consists of 580 acres, owned in fee by the City of Iowa City. In addition, the City has acquired 0.36 acres in aviation easements protecting airport airspace and land use compatibility interests. All future development recommendations can be accomplished on the existing airport property, including the extra runway length for Runway 7/25 and the development of a new building area in the south quadrant of the airport. There are small areas of the existing Runway Protection Zones that are not owned in fee. Purchasing these areas will be shown on the ALP to meet FAA standards. 4.12.7. FENCING & SECURITY IOW has a perimeter fence located around the majority of the airport except for some areas near Runway 12 and along Willow Creek. There are two vehicle access gates, one to the north building area, and one to the south building area. Each requires a code to access the building area. It is recommended that the perimeter fence be completed around the runway 12 end in addition to the area along Willow Creek once the south quadrant development begins. 4.12.8. STATE AIRPORT ZONING The City of Iowa City has adopted Airport Zoning Regulations in Title 14 Chapter 6 of the Iowa City Code. The ordinance generally protects from new airspace incompatibilities within the City. Because some of the restricted areas are outside of City limits, Johnson County has jurisdiction and responsibilities IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 4-20 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan for enforcement in those areas. The approved airport zoning maps currently depict Runway 18/36 as a useable runway. This runway has since been abandoned. It is recommended that the zoning ordinance be updated to include this change in addition to accommodating the future changes to Runway 7/25. 4.13. IOWA AVIATION SYSTEM PLAN LANDSIDE RECOMMENDATIONS All of the landside targets for an Enhanced Service Airport are met at IOW. The Iowa Aviation System Plan recommends maintaining the existing services and landside conditions at the airport. 4.14. SUMMARY The following points summarize the key facility requirements at IOW: • Design standards at the airport currently accommodate ARC C -II aircraft. Future design standards are recommended to accommodate ARC B -II aircraft to maximize the existing airport property for future development. • The existing displaced threshold to the Runway 25 end can be minimized to 100 feet instead of the existing 708 -foot displacement. This will increase the landing distance available on the Runway 25 end. • To maximize existing property, the Runway 7 end can be extended an additional 213 feet without impacting Highway 1. This will allow a landing distance of 5,117 feet, which meets the needs of the existing and future users of the airport. • Building area improvements include additional private hangar development in the existing building area with future expansion plans in the south quadrant of the airport. • An SIZE building is proposed to store maintenance and snow removal equipment. It will be located within the existing north building area. IIIA IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 4-21 G T � m N N C C 2 n 3 l0 0- d Q ®� .J \ v A.A A /.... m r v' YY/ y a -1, q m o m � w v A v m E y a 0 p Y : l=a �2- / � v � m m \ v A.A A /.... m r v' y a tj- \ v A.A A /.... m '\ is ^pej i i OF i I .......... \+ a0ryam21 � x aM� 1 t q ! YS w6 Al 1h F W p a O LL Q C+ o d r e a a w a w w a w LL o a - 0 • Te \ o \ tl�n n ar u O p U � Q OLL a p m O m m 3 O w LL w _ N W Ijv Te \ o \ tl�n n ar M O O LL px[g� � A U 00 h. LI o ti M O \ / - \ / ° & \ `� ƒ\ = ■ � a a : \ 2 I c z — �c, Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan 5. IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS This chapter presents the financial implementation analysis for IOW and will examine various facets of the airport's financial operating condition. In addition, this chapter examines IOW's historic operating revenues and expenses, and provides projections for future financial results over the next 10 year period. The projections of airport revenues and expenses focus on two of the three planning periods of this Airport Master Plan's Capital Improvement Program (CIP): short-term (present -5 years) and mid-term (6-10 years). These planning periods are used to identify the ability of the airport to contribute to the local share of the anticipated costs, as required. It should be noted that IOW's Airport Master Plan CIP is used a guideline, and that capital projects should be undertaken when demand warrants and funding becomes available. The overall approach for the development of the Implementation & Financial Analysis included the following elements: • Gathered and reviewed key airport documents related to historical financial results, capital improvement plans, and operating budgets • Interviewed key airport management personnel to gain an understanding of the existing operating and financial environment, as well as the overall financial management philosophy • Reviewed the Airport Master Plan CIP, cost estimates, and development schedule anticipated for the planning period in order to project the overall financial requirements for the program • Determined and analyzed the sources and timing of capital funding available to meet the financial requirements for funding the CIP • Analyzed historical and budgeted operating expenses, developed operations and maintenance expense assumptions, and projected future operating costs for the planning period • Analyzed historical and budgeted operating revenues, developed operating revenue assumptions, and projected future operating revenues for the planning period • Completed results of the analysis and evaluation in a Financial Plan Summary that provides conclusions regarding the financial practicality of the CIP 5.1. CAPITAL FUNDING SOURCES The development of the Airport Master Plan CIP is anticipated to be funded from several sources. These sources include federal grants, state grants, net operating revenue/cash reserves, and other funding sources. Each of these funding sources are described in the following sections. 5.1.1. FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION (FAA) FUNDING To promote the development of airports to meet the nation's needs, the Federal Government embarked on a Grants -In -Aid Program to units of state and local government after the end of World War IL Following multiple earlier versions of federal funding programs, the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) was established through the Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982. The initial AIP provided funding legislation through fiscal year 1992, but since then, it has been authorized and appropriated on a yearly or even quarterly basis. Funding for the AIP is generated through taxes on airline tickets, freight waybills, international departure fees, and general aviation fuel sale taxes. AIP grants include entitlement dollars, which are allocated among airports by a formula that is driven by passenger enplanements, and by discretionary grants that are awarded in accordance with specific N. IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 5-1 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan guidelines. Generally, primary airports receive entitlements based on the number of enplaning passengers and landed cargo weights, while non -primary airports, which include general aviation airports, receive a set entitlement amount per year (currently $150,000) and may also be eligible for state apportionments. The total amount of state apportionment is based on an area/population formula for the state, while the amount of non -primary entitlements is computed from the needs list for the particular airport in the published National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS). Federal Airport Improvement Funds must be spent on FAA -eligible projects as defined in FAA Order 5100.38C "Airport Improvement Program (AIP) Handbook." The handbook and the latest authorization, Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, state that: • An airport must be included in the current version of the NPIAS; • Non -primary entitlement funds of up to $150,000 per year can be accumulated for up to four years; • The federal portion of AIP grants is 90% for all general aviation airports; and • If an airport has no airside improvement needs, entitlement funds can be used for certain landside projects. Under the Modernization and Reform legislation and based on its inclusion in the NPIAS, IOW is eligible to receive entitlements of up to $150,000 per year (the maximum) through 2015. But again note that the approval of AIP discretionary funding is not guaranteed and is based on a project eligibility ranking method the FAA uses to award grants based on a project's priority and importance to the national airport and airway system. For the IOW CIP, this financial plan assumes discretionary grant awards totaling $2.6 million during the short-term period, $4.2 million during mid-term, and $13.3 million for the long-term period. 5.1.2. IOWA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (DOT) —OFFICE OF AVIATION GRANTS State grants for aviation projects in Iowa are administered through the Office of Aviation of the Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT). State funding is available for all publicly owned airports in Iowa primarily through two funding programs — the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) and the Vertical Infrastructure Program. The Iowa Transportation Commission approves annual funding allocations and approves project selections for these two programs. The Office of Aviation's AIP program funds aviation safety programs, and aviation planning and development projects. The Vertical Infrastructure program funds landside development and renovation of terminals, hangars, maintenance buildings, and fuel facilities for both commercial service and general aviation airports. For the IOW CIP, it is not anticipated that any state funding grants will be utilized. 5.1.3. NET OPERATING REVENUES/CASH RESERVES Currently, the airport has limited cash reserves (Airport Fund) and annual net operating revenues (including the annual city contribution directed to the Airport Fund) to provide funding for the development of capital projects not eligible for federal funding. The analysis assumes a restricted application of these sources to capital projects, to ensure that positive year-end cash balances are maintained. �uu m IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 5-2 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan 5.1.4. OTHER FUNDING Another potential source of funds for airport improvements is from private investors. Private investors may construct needed facilities as part of a lease agreement with the airport that will allow time to amortize their investments. This type of funding is particularly suitable for corporate hangar development and other privately owned projects. 5.2. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS & IMPLEMENTATION PLAN This section, along with the tables presented at the end of the chapter, provides the analysis and results of evaluating financial reasonableness of implementing the IOW Airport Master Plan CIP during the planning period through 2035. 5.2.1. ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS AND DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE A listing of capital improvement projects has been assembled based on the preferred development alternative for IOW established in Chapter 4.0, Facility Requirements. This project list has been coordinated with the Airport Layout Plan (ALP) drawing set and the CIP, both of which should be continuously updated by airport management and the FAA, as required. Generally, the CIP itself has three primary purposes: Identify improvement projects that will be required at an airport over a specific period of time; • Estimate the order of implementation of the projects included in the plan; and Estimate the total costs and funding sources of the projects. It is important to note that as the CIP progresses from project planning in the current year to projects planned in future years, the plan becomes less detailed and more flexible. Additionally, the CIP is typically modified on an annual basis as new projects are identified, projects change, and financial environments evolve. For IOW, Table 5-1 presents a summary of the proposed capital improvement projects over the 20 -year planning period, broken down into three phases, representing short-term (2016-2020), mid-term (2021- 2025), and long-term (2026-2035) planning horizons. Table 5-2 breaks down each of the proposed improvements listed Table 5-1 into their appropriate planning periods and include estimates of the funding source eligibility for each project Note that the estimates contained in these tables were derived from analyzing similar projects, but should be re-evaluated at the time of project initiation. When combined, the 20 -year CIP for IOW represents $22.1 million in development projects, most of which is currently eligible for federal participation at 90%. IIIA IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 5-3 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Table 5-1 Capital Improvement Plan Summary Short -Term Mid -Term Long -Term Program Project (2016-2020) (2021-2025) (2026-2035) Total Total Total Total AIRFIELD Runway 25 Threshold Relocation Pavement maintenance Runway 7/25 Pavement maintenance Runway 12/30 Runway 7 Extension Runway 7 Stopway Runway 7 MALSF System Parallel Taxiway Construction - west side Parallel Taxiway Construction - east side GENERAL AVIATION AREA Apron Expansion Taxilane Construction Snow Removal Equipment (SRE) Building Vehicle Parking in Existing Building Area Apron in New Building Area Taxilanes in New Building Area Fuel System in New Building Area Vehicle Parking in New Building Area PLANNING/ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Environmental Assessment SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL OBSTRUCTION REMOVAL/MITIGATION Runway 12 Displaced Threshold Runway 12 Obstruction Removal Runway 30 Obstruction Removal Runway 25 Obstruction Removal Runway 07 Obstruction Removal & Lighting Runway 30 Displaced Threshold SUBTOTAL $250,000 $0 $0 $250,000 $600,000 $0 $0 $600,000 $0 $420,000 $0 $420,000 $0 $1,170,000 $0 $1,170,000 $0 $1,180,000 $0 $1,180,000 $0 $0 $1,300,000 $1,300,000 $0 $0 $3,400,000 $3,400,000 $0 $0 $3,400,000 $3,400,000 $850,000 $2,770,000 $8,100,000 $11,720,000 $1,250,000 $0 $0 $1,250,000 $0 $235,000 $0 $235,000 $0 $600,000 $0 $600,000 $0 $1,200,000 $0 $1,200,000 $0 $0 $3,600,000 $3,600,000 $0 $0 $900,000 $900,000 $0 $0 $700,000 $700,000 $0 $0 $1,200,000 $1,200,000 $1,250,000 $2,035,000 $6,400,000 $9,685,000 $150,000 $150,000 $300,000 $600,000 $150,000 $150,000 $300,000 $600,000 $250,000 $0 $0 $250,000 $280,000 $0 $0 $280,000 $72,000 $0 $0 $72,000 $6,300 $0 $0 $6,300 $6,300 $0 $0 $6,300 $500,000 $0 $0 $500,000 $1,114,600 $0 $0 $1,114,600 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM TOTALS $3,364,600 $4,955,000 $14,800,000 $23,119,600 Source: Bolton & Menk, Inc. III IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 5-4 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Prepared: March 2016 Table 5-2 Capital Improvement Plan Summary by Planning Period and Funding Type Project Estimated Capital FAA State Local Costs Eligible Share Share SHORT-TERM (2016-2020) Runway 12 Displaced Threshold $250,000 $225,000 $0 $25,000 Runway 12 Obstruction Removal $280,000 $252,000 $0 $28,000 Runway 30 Obstruction Removal $72,000 $64,800 $0 $7,200 Runway 25 Obstruction Removal $6,300 $5,670 $0 $630 Runway 7 Obstruction Removal & Lighting $6,300 $5,670 $0 $630 Pavement Maintenance Runway 7/25 $600,000 $540,000 $0 $60,000 Runway 25 Threshold Relocation $250,000 $225,000 $0 $25,000 Apron Expansion $1,250,000 $1,125,000 $0 $125,000 Runway 30 Displaced Threshold $500,000 $450,000 $0 $50,000 Environmental Assessment $150,000 $135,000 $0 $15,000 MID-TERM (2021-2025) Runway 7 Extension $1,170,000 $1,053,000 $0 $117,000 Pavement Maintenance Runway 12/30 $420,000 $378,000 $0 $42,000 Taxilane Construction $235,000 $211,500 $0 $23,500 Snow Removal Equipment (SRE) Building $600,000 $540,000 $0 $60,000 Vehicle Parking in Existing Building Area $1,200,000 $1,080,000 $0 $120,000 Environmental Assessment $150,000 $135,000 $0 $15,000 Runway 7 Stopway $1,180,000 $1,062,000 $0 $118,000 LONG-TERM (2026-2035) Runway 7 MALSF System $1,300,000 $0 $0 $1,300,000 Environmental Assessment $150,000 $135,000 $0 $15,000 Parallel Taxiway Construction - west side $3,400,000 $3,060,000 $0 $340,000 Parallel Taxiway Construction - east side $3,400,000 $3,060,000 $0 $340,000 Environmental Assessment $150,000 $135,000 $0 $15,000 Apron in New Building Area $3,600,000 $3,240,000 $0 $360,000 Taxilanes in New Building Area $900,000 $810,000 $0 $90,000 Fuel System in New Building Area $700,000 $630,000 $0 $70,000 Vehicle Parking in New Building Area $1,200,000 $1,080,000 $0 $120,000 Total $23,119,600 $19,637,640 $0 $3,481,960 Source: Bolton & Menk, Inc. Prepared: March 2016 The following tables (Table 5-3 through Table 5-5) provides the Airport Commission with project details to help determine other project elements that would need to be completed with the chosen capital improvement such as environmental documentation. The table also provides the project purpose and IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 5-5 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan scope, which was described in detail earlier in the Airport Master Plan. The tables are grouped based on short-term development, mid-term development and long-term development. Table 5-3 Capital Improvement Plan Project Descriptions — Short -Term Development (2016-2020) ' Obstruction Removal 2016 Project Scope: Add six obstruction lights Project Purpose: To clear obstructions to the 20:1 Visual Area Surface Interrelated Projects: None Special Considerations: Necessary mitigation will be determined through the environmental process being completed in 2015 $11,000 Estimated Cost: Federal funding (90%) _ $9,900 Local funding (10%) _ $1,100 ' I Obstruction Removal 2016 Project Scope: Add three obstruction lights and remove 13 trees Project Purpose: To clear obstructions to the 20:1 Visual Area Surface Interrelated Projects: None Special Considerations: Necessary mitigation will be determined through the environmental process being completed in 2015 $72,000 Estimated Cost: Federal funding (90%) _ $64,800 Local funding (10%) _ $7,200 ' Obstruction Removal 2016 Project Scope: Remove one tree Project Purpose: To clear obstructions to the 20:1 Visual Area Surface Interrelated Projects: None Special Considerations: Necessary mitigation will be determined through the environmental process being completed in 2015 $6,300 Estimated Cost: Federal funding (90%) _ $5,670 Local funding (10%) _ $630 IIIA IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 5-6 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan ' Obstruction Removal & Lighting 2016 Project Scope: Remove one tree Project Purpose: To clear obstructions to the 20:1 Visual Area Surface Interrelated Projects: None Special Considerations: Necessary mitigation will be deterimed through the Interrelated Projects: environmental process being completed in 2015 Special Considerations: $6,300 Estimated Cost: Federal funding (90%) _ $5,670 Local funding (10%) _ $630 Project Name: Runway 7/25 Pavement Maintenance 2017 Project Scope: Route and seal Runway 7/25 Project Scope: The existing runway pavement is almost 10 years old and in Project Purpose: need of pavement maintenance to maintain the integrity of the pavement Interrelated Projects: None Special Considerations: A Categorical Exclusion will be required before the project begins $600,000 Estimated Cost: Federal funding (90%) _ $540,000 Special Considerations: Local funding (10%) _ $60,000 ' Relocation 2017 Relocate the runway lights, PAPIs, and REILs and repaint Project Scope: the runway to identify the new location of the Runway 25 threshold An 808 -foot displaced threshold is no longer necessary on the Runway 25 end due to the change in critical design Project Purpose: aircraft. Therefore this project shifts the runway threshold to gain an additional 700 feet of takeoff and landing distance for pilots using Runway 25. Interrelated Projects: Obstruction removal for Runway 25 Special Considerations: A Categorical Exclusion will be required before the project begins $250,000 Estimated Cost: Federal funding (90%) _ $225,000 Local funding (10%) _ $25,000 uu m IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 5-7 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan ' 2019 Project Scope: Expand the existing aircraft parking apron Project Scope: The existing apron is at capacity. The apron expansion will Project Purpose: allow additional tie -down spaces for TDG 113 and TDG 2 aircraft Interrelated Projects: None Special Considerations: A Categorical Exclusion will be required before the project Special Considerations: begins $1,250,000 Estimated Cost: Federal Funding (90%) _ $1,125,000 Estimated Cost: Local funding (10%) _ $125,000 Project0 Displaced Threshold 2019 Project Scope: Add a displaced threshold to the Runway 30 end Project Scope: To gain back some of the declared distances lengths lost Project Purpose: when the Runway 12 end was displaced for obstruction mitigation. This is needed for the based aircraft operating at IOw Interrelated Projects: None Special Considerations: A Categorical Exclusion will be required before the project begins $500,000 Estimated Cost: Federal funding (90%) _ $450,000 Interrelated Projects: Local funding (10%) _ $50,000 ' 2020 This project involves the examination of potential Project Scope: environmental impacts associated with the Runway 7 extension project including extension of the parallel taxiway and relocation of the runway visual aids This project is necessary to satisfy the local, state, and federal environmental regulations and the National Project Purpose: Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) of the proposed action. Prior to the runway extension, an environmental assessment will need to be completed. All projects will be justified in the Purpose and Need section of the report Interrelated Projects: Construction of the runway extension, taxiway extension, and relocation of visual aids Special Considerations: None $150,000 Estimated Cost: Federal Funding (90%) _ $135,000 Local funding (10%) _ $15,000 Source: Bolton & Menk, Inc. Prepared: October 2015 �pluu IIIA IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 5-8 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Table 5-4 Capital Improvement Plan Project Descriptions — Mid -Term Development (2021-2025) ProjectI I Pavement Maintenance 2022 Project Scope: Extend Runway 7 and the existing parallel taxiway 213 feet Project Purpose: To gain additional runway length for the existing and future Project Purpose: users of the airport Interrelated Projects: This is a stand-alone project Special Considerations: Necessary mitigation will be determined through the Special Considerations: environmental process being completed in 2020 Special Considerations: $1,170,000 Estimated Cost: Federal Funding (90%) _ $1,053,000 Estimated Cost: Local funding (10%) _ $117,000 ' I Pavement Maintenance 2022 Project Scope: Route and seal Runway 12/30 The existing runway pavement is almost 10 years old and in Project Purpose: need of pavement maintenance to maintain the integrity of Project Purpose: the pavement Interrelated Projects: None Special Considerations: A Categorical Exclusion will be required before the project Special Considerations: begins $420,000 Estimated Cost: Federal Funding (90%) _ $378,000 Estimated Cost: Local funding (10%) _ $42,000 ProjectI Project Scope: Construction of 350 linear feet of taxilanes to access new private hangars in the existing building area The existing hangars are at capacity. Requests have been Project Purpose: made for space to develop private hangars. Construction of the taxilanes will allow access to these areas Interrelated Projects: Construction of private hangars in the existing building area Special Considerations: A Categorical Exclusion will be required before the project begins $235,000 Estimated Cost: Federal Funding (90%) _ $211,500 Local funding (10%) _ $23,500 IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 5-9 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan ' '• Building 2023 Project Scope: Construct a Snow Removal Equipment Building Project Scope: Construction of a SIZE building will allow equipment to be Project Purpose: stored inside and provide easy access to the equipment by Project Purpose: City staff Interrelated Projects: This is a stand-alone project Special Considerations: A Categorical Exclusion will be required before the project Interrelated Projects: begins Special Considerations: $600,000 Estimated Cost: Federal Funding (90%) _ $540,000 Interrelated Projects: Local funding (10%) _ $60,000 '2024 Project Scope: Providing six additional vehicle parking lots near existing Project Scope: hangar areas The existing vehicle parking lot is near capacity. Expansion Project Purpose: of the vehicle parking lot will allow pilots to park closer to their hangars and leave ample parking for airport visitors Project Purpose: near the A/D building Interrelated Projects: This is a stand-alone project Special Considerations: A Categorical Exclusion will be required before the project begins Interrelated Projects: $1,200,000 Estimated Cost: Federal Funding (90%) _ $1,080,000 Special Considerations: Local funding (10%) _ $120,000 ProjectI This project involves the examination of potential Project Scope: environmental impacts associated with the addition of a stopway and MALSF lighting system to the Runway 7 end This project is necessary to satisfy the local, state, and federal environmental regulations and the National Project Purpose: Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) of the proposed action. Prior to construction, an environmental assessment will need to be completed. All projects will be justified in the Purpose and Need section of the report Interrelated Projects: Construction of the stopway and installation of a MALSF lighting system Special Considerations: None $150,000 Estimated Cost: Federal Funding (90%) _ $135,000 Local funding (10%) _ $15,000 � I IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 5-10 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan ProjectI 2030 Project Scope: Add a 778 foot stopway to the Runway 7 end Project Purpose: To gain additional Accelerate Stop Distance Available Interrelated Projects: (ASDA) for larger aircraft using Runway 25 Interrelated Projects: This is a stand-alone project Special Considerations: Necessary mitigation will be determined through the Estimated Cost: environmental process completed before the project $1,180,000 Estimated Cost: Federal funding (90%) _ $1,062,000 Local funding (10%) _ $118,000 Source: Bolton & Menk, Inc. Prepared: October 2015 Table 5-5 Capital Improvement Plan Project Descriptions — Long -Term Development (2026-2035) '2027 2030 Project Scope: Install a MALSF system to the Runway 7 end Project Purpose: To add visual guidance to the Runway 7 end Interrelated Projects: This is a stand-alone project Special Considerations: Necessary mitigation will be determined through the environmental process completed before the project Estimated Cost: $1,300,000 Local funding (100%) _ $1,300,000 ' 2030 This project involves the examination of potential Project Scope: environmental impacts associated with the development of full parallel taxiways to both sides of Runway 12/30 This project is necessary to satisfy the local, state, and federal environmental regulations and the National Project Purpose: Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) of the proposed action. Prior to construction, an environmental assessment will need to be completed. All projects will be justified in the Purpose and Need section of the report Interrelated Projects: Construction of a full parallel taxiway to both sides of Runway 12/30 Special Considerations: None $150,000 Estimated Cost: Federal Funding (90%) _ $135,000 Local funding (10%) _ $15,000 �uu m IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 5-11 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan ' 2030 Project Scope: Construct a full parallel taxiway on the west side of Runway Project Scope: 12/30 including three connector taxiways A full parallel taxiway prevents aircraft from back taxiing Project Purpose: on the runway. This allows for safer aircraft operations when entering and exiting an active runway Interrelated Projects: The parallel taxiway will be needed when the future Special Considerations: building area is justified for construction Special Considerations: Necessary mitigation will be determined through the environmental process completed before the project Estimated Cost: $3,400,000 Estimated Cost: Federal Funding (90%) _ $3,060,000 Local funding (10%) _ $340,000 ProjectI Project Scope: Construct a full parallel taxiway on the east side of Runway Project Scope: 12/30 including three connector taxiways A full parallel taxiway prevents aircraft from back taxiing Project Purpose: on the runway. This allows for safer aircraft operations when entering and exiting an active runway Interrelated Projects: This is a stand-alone project Special Considerations: Necessary mitigation will be determined through the environmental process completed before the project $3,400,000 Estimated Cost: Federal Funding (90%) _ $3,060,000 Special Considerations: Local funding (10%) _ $340,000 ProjectI This project involves the examination of potential Project Scope: environmental impacts associated with the development of a building area in the south quadrant of the airport This project is necessary to satisfy the local, state, and federal environmental regulations and the National Project Purpose: Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) of the proposed action. Prior to construction, an environmental assessment will need to be completed. All projects will be justified in the Purpose and Need section of the report Interrelated Projects: Construction of a new apron and taxilanes Special Considerations: None $150,000 Estimated Cost: Federal Funding (90%) _ $135,000 Local funding (10%) _ $15,000 fur. IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 5-12 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan ProjectI Building Area 2035 Project Scope: Construct a new apron to begin developing a new building Project Scope: area in the south quadrant of the runways Once the existing building area has been fully developed Interrelated Projects: and the request for additional hangar space is at a high Project Purpose: demand, a new building area will be constructed in the south quadrant of the airport. Construction of the apron will Interrelated Projects: be the first step to developing the new building area Interrelated Projects: This is a stand-alone project Special Considerations: Necessary mitigation will be determined through the environmental process completed before the project Estimated Cost: $3,600,000 Estimated Cost: Federal Funding (90%) _ $3,240,000 Local funding (10%) _ $360,000 ' Building Area 2035 Project Scope: Construction of a connector taxiway and 800 linear feet of Project Scope: taxilanes to access new private hangars in the future building area Interrelated Projects: A connector taxiway and taxilanes will be developed in the Project Purpose: new south building area quadrant to allow construction of private hangars for both TDG 1B and TDG 2 aircraft Interrelated Projects: Construction of private hangars in the south building area Special Considerations: Necessary mitigation will be determined through the environmental process completed before the project $900,000 Estimated Cost: Federal Funding (90%) _ $810,000 Local funding (10%) _ $90,000 ProjectI Project Scope: Construct a fuel system in the new building area Project Purpose: To avoid the need for aircraft to cross an active runway for fuel, a fuel system will be added to the new building area Interrelated Projects: This is a stand-alone project Special Considerations: Environmental documentation will be required for this project prior to construction $700,000 Estimated Cost: Federal Funding (90%) _ $630,000 Local funding (10%) _ $70,000 uu m IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 5-13 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan ProjectI Project Scope: Construction of a main automobile parking lot in the future building area Parking lots will be constructed along the south side of airport property to allow vehicle parking for hangar owners Project Purpose: and business operators. In addition, construction of a vehicle parking lot prevents aircraft and vehicles from mixing on the aircraft movement areas Interrelated Projects: This is a stand-alone project Special Considerations: A Categorical Exclusion will be required before the project begins $1,200,000 Estimated Cost: Federal Funding (90%) _ $1,080,000 Local funding (10%) _ $120,000 Source: Bolton & Menk, Inc. Prepared: March 2016 5.2.2. AIRPORT OPERATING REVENUES AND EXPENSES An important consideration in examining the feasibility of the recommended development plan included in the Airport Master Plan is the sponsor's ability to fund the local share of project costs. Airport revenues are typically generated through leases and user fees charged by the airport for the facilities and services that are provided. These fees are typically established by the airport based on market conditions and vary from airport- to- airport. Further, these fees or revenue are maintained by the airport solely for use on airport -related activities and follow the policies of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) under Order 5190.613 (FAA Airport Compliance Manual) Chapter 15, Permitted and Prohibited Uses ofAirport Revenue. Airport operating revenues are collected at IOW from the following primary sources: • Fuel Receipts (Royalties & Commissions) —The airport receives a 10¢ fuel flowage fee from the FBO. The fuel receipts accounted for 2% of airport -generated revenue in 2015. • Land/Hangar Leases (Rents) — The majority of airport tenants lease land and hangar areas from the airport on which they have constructed hangars or other aviation -related facilities. The majority of these leases are under a 3 -year term. Land/facility rents currently account for 25% of the total airport revenue. • General Levy - The airport received $72,342 from the City's General Fund in 2014. In 2015, the amount allocated to subsidize the airport was $68,415. • Sale of Assets — In 2015, the airport completed the sale of its last commercial land lot. The sale of this final property and properties in previous years has allowed the Airport to pay off all outstanding loans to the Landfill Fund and accounted for 67% of the revenue generated in 2015. At most airports, landside facility development and levels of aviation activity are usually the primary factors affecting airport operating revenues. As additional development occurs at IOW and as the number of based aircraft and itinerant aircraft operations increases, it is likely that IOW's operating revenues will increase in a corresponding fashion. Projections of future Airport operating revenues will be outlined in the next section, Airport Financial Plan. IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 5-14 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Airport operating expenses are comprised of the day-to-day costs incurred by the airport sponsor in the operation of IOW. Included in operating expenses are salaries, benefits, supplies, services and capital outlay that include equipment and projects. Salaries and benefits have stayed relatively constant throughout the period (Note: The increase in salary between FY2012 and FY2013 was a result of the employee going from 0.75 FTE to 1.0 FTE). Other expenditures such as capital outlays for projects are unpredictable and were not examined because they vary on an annual basis and are typically funded primarily through federal and state grants. Table 5-6 presents a summary of IOW revenues, expenses, and operating income for fiscal years 2011 through 2015. The City of Iowa City's fiscal year starts July V. Revenues from airport operations are derived from the following: • Interest Revenue — This revenue category captures interest earned on Airport Fund's balance. • Rents —Revenues generated from ground/building/hangar leases and fees. • Royalties and Commissions — These revenues are from the fuel flowage fee that the Airport collects from the FBO. • Miscellaneous — These revenues include all other fees, contributions, and donations (e.g. Fly Iowa in 2014) the airport receives. • Sale of Assets — Revenues from the sale of the airport's commercial land. • General Levy — The subsidy received from the City's General Fund. Airport operating expenses are made up of the following items including transfers out: • Personnel— This includes salary and benefit costs of airport workers/staff. • Services — This includes professional services, contractual maintenance services, and conference/training expenses. • Supplies — This includes professional services, contractual maintenance services, and conference/training expenses. This category includes such things as office/building supplies, postage, and uniform expenses. • Capital Outlay — This category includes machinery, equipment, building maintenance and minor pavement maintenance. • Operating Transfers — These are transfers to the airport's share of capital improvement projects, an operating subsidy to fund a portion of the City's economic development position, and an interfund to repay the Airport's loan to the Landfill Fund. IIIA IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 5-15 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan Table 5-6 Historic Airport Operating Revenues, Expenses, and Income Categories FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 Operating Revenues $269,113 $242,040 $232,752 $286,166 $243,607 Interest Revenues $1,170 $1,314 $1,236 -$578 $1,314 Rents $276,226 $282,023 $289,305 $300,491 $295,647 Royalties & Commissions $17,028 $24,248 $24,696 $27,049 $25,130 Misc- Contributions/Donations $0 $0 $0 $28,410 $0 Misc - Other Misc Revenue $0 $3,156 $110 $0 $0 Sale of Assets $376,500 $400,747 $336,936 $212,505 $799,393 General Levy $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $72,342 $68,415 Total Operating Revenues $770,924 $811,488 $752,283 $640,219 $1,189,899 Operating Expenditures Personnel $42,320 $47,181 $64,264 $68,450 $70,179 Services $269,113 $242,040 $232,752 $286,166 $243,607 Supplies $5,748 $7,718 $5,342 $4,221 $4,594 Capital Outlay $33,495 $33,837 $18,898 $4,715 $40,000 Sub -Total Operating Expenditures $350,676 $330,776 $321,256 $363,552 $358,380 Transfers Out Capital Project Fund $73,425 $49,594 $503,369 -$35,693 $117,955 Operating Subsidy $10,219 $11,517 $11,892 $0 $0 InterFund Loan Repay Landfill $42,317 $323,882 $279,240 $180,513 $512,126 Sub -Total Transfers Out $125,961 $384,993 $794,501 $144,820 $630,081 Total Operating Expenditures & Transfers Out $476,637 $715,769 $1,115,757 $508,372 $988,461 Net Ooeratine Income 1Loss1 5294.287 S95.719 -S363.474 S131.847 S201.438 Prepared: July 2015 For the purposes of this financial analysis, the ability of IOW to generate revenues and cover operating costs is a top concern. From a historical perspective, operating revenues have sufficiently covered operating expenditures. It is important to note that during this time period, the sale of the airport's commercial property has accounted for a significant portion of each year's operating revenue; while simultaneously allowing the airport to retire its debt to the Landfill Fund. Beginning in FY2014, the airport no longer funded a portion of the City's economic development position (as shown in the Operating Subsidy line item of Table 5-6). Further, it is this historical information, which will form the baseline of projecting financial information conducted in subsequent sections. 5.2.2.1. INDIRECT REVENUE It is important to note that, in addition to direct operating revenues generated at IOW from leases and fuel flowage fees, IOW also generates indirect revenues. Indirect revenues include those generated by taxes on real property improvements and business personal property, including aircraft. The airport has numerous tenants and aviation -related businesses that accounted for 115 jobs' within the local community in 2009. The State of Iowa and City of Iowa City both receive a significant amount of indirect revenues from IOW and the total economic impact realized in the area generated by the activity at IOW equates to more than Iowa Economic Impact of Aviation Study, 2009 F1uu � IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 5-16 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan $11.2 million as determined by the 2009Iowa Economic impact ofAviation Study conducted by the Iowa Department of Transportation's Office of Aviation. 5.2.3. PROJECTED AIRPORT OPERATING REVENUES AND EXPENSES The continued growth of IOW, in terms of activity, tenants, new leases and facility development, will impact the airport's operating revenues and expenses over the planning period. Actual future financial outcomes will be determined by a variety of factors, many of which are impossible to identify at the current time. However, the projections developed in this evaluation depict future airport operating revenues and expenses based on recent financial results, budgeted revenues and expenses for 2016, and activity and tenant growth trends identified in previous chapters. Projections of future airport operating revenues and expenses at IOW for the periods 2017 through 2026 are presented in Table 5-7. The following information for operating revenues was established through close consideration of historical trends, as well as proposed airport development initiatives and how they might impact those future revenues. In most cases, revenue projections resulted from normal growth factors refined to more closely reflect the circumstances of IOW. A more in-depth analysis of royalties on fuel sale projections and a correlation between historic fuel sales at IOW and trends in national fuel consumption was determined. FAA Aerospace growth rate projections for fuel consumption were applied to IOW by fuel type (-0.9% annual growth rate for 10OLL and 2.5% annual growth rate for Jet A fuel). On the operating expenses side, increases in salaries and wages, as well as overall operational activities are based on 2016 Congressional Budget Office annual growth rates (2.4% annual growth). IIIA IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 5-17 O LL O LL m rl 0 LL ao rl O LL O W V O O O N Vl rl O Vl Vl Vl N tD tD N W L/1 V a m W m +n m O O M O O O M vOi o m vOi vOi vOi O N W O L6 V O m m n m +n m O O w O O O ro O m o O O O n Vl O O Vl Vl Vl rl N N V L/1 V Ot M +n m m +n m O O m O O O m O T M O O O N Vl O Vl Vl Vl T 'M G1 V1 M W M n vm m +n O m Vl 00 0 Vl Vl Vl O 0 0 N n h h M W ti N N L/1 O h D O O O M N N N N M O h N O O O M N N M m +n m O O M O O O M Vl N M O O Vl Vl Vl N m m 14 O O M v M n m O O w O O O ro Vl N O Vl Vl Vl N m a M m o O O m v M +n m O O m O O O m T T G1 O N M M n vm O O O O O O O Vl 00 0 Vl Vl Vl O 05 io v M N N N V1 Vl M V1 M O M N D D O M OD N N W L/1 D m m +n O1 Vl N M n O O n O D W C m o m m m .-i vi io Vl N M h W Lri N W W W Vl n Vl N M O m N O n N N O ul W ul Cl Vl N M M N r io O M M .i O O io io m N r N W O N O V ti W tD Vl �/1 w 0 n wO r o m m v ni Vl N M O D N W r D N m m Vl N M N o n io r v n h V Vl N Vl N M M N V O V N V O h V Vl N h h tmi2 0 m h N L/1 V N r m +n ti Vl N M V1 V1 v c c > 0 0 c c E K > Vx ~ 0 n v dJ 0 c c 0 0 0 'M c V w h o W W C 0 vUi C vUi W W O. O -Crtu in O M uvi i'n O a V1 �I n N nl n vi ti �IN N N 0 ti O m N nl N N a vi A Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan 5.2.4. FINANCIAL PLAN SUMMARY The primary goal is for Iowa City Municipal Airport to evolve into a facility that will best serve the transportation needs of the region while simultaneously developing into a self-sustaining economic generator for the City of Iowa City. This Airport Master Plan Update can best be described as being the road map to helping the airport achieve these goals. But it should be recognized that planning is a continuous process that does not end with the completion of the Airport Master Plan in that the fundamental basic issues that have driven this Airport Master Plan will remain valid for many years. Therefore, the ability to continuously monitor the existing and forecast status of airport activity will be a key ingredient in maintaining the applicability and relevance of this study. In order to realize those goals through the successful implementation of airport development projects, sound and measured decisions by the City of Iowa City must be made. Two of the most important factors in influencing the decision to move forward with a specific improvement are airport activity and funding timing. Both factors must be considered in the implementation of this Airport Master Plan in that while airport activity levels provide the "why" in the establishment of airport improvements, the time of funding provides the "how." Through the course of this Airport Master Plan effort, the "why" has been discussed in detail in previous chapters. This chapter has addressed the "how" by detailing the practical financial realities required to implement this overall airport development program. However, it cannot be understated that although every effort has been made to in this effort to conservatively estimate when facility development may be needed, aviation demand will ultimately dictate when facility improvements need to be accelerated or delayed. For IOW, the Financial Plan Summary presented in Table 5-10 includes projection totals for operating revenues, operating expenses, capital expenditures, capital outlay, capital project funding, and cash flow that result from the projections presented in Table 5-7. Previous sections of this analysis provided a practical approach for scheduling capital expenditures to match the availability of capital financing. Based on the assumptions identified within the previous sections, implementation of the Airport Master Plan CIP is financially possible, subject to the availability of AIP discretionary grant awards. The reasonableness of funding the capital program can be characterized by the level of identified funding indicated in each phase of the program. Throughout the entire planning period 100% of the funding sources have been identified. Key assumptions supporting the financial plan relate to the availability and timeliness of the funding sources that have been indicated. Continuation of the FAA AIP Entitlement Program at authorized funding levels is essential. Receiving AIP discretionary grants of $2.6 million during the short-term, $4.2 million during the mid-term, and $13.3 million during the long-term as indicated previously, are critical to the financial feasibility of implementing these projects. Without this level of discretionary funding, these projects are not feasible and would have to be delayed or cancelled unless another source of funds could be acquired. Tables 5-8 through 5-10 present the detailed financial analysis for the implementation of IOW's Airport Master Plan CIP. 111 IMPLEMENTATION & FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Page 5-19 M A """. \\•\~ �� : ` Hill � |\ tR o o \)j \{)\\\\ }\ )\} A a C m O Vr Vr Vr N im m E o 3 N V) L c v � a a m ; cc C LL RP 0.. b m p o s c m a "N"aa a o o c 4 y o m �a N N C w O O o n mm r.l as a N N e o o m mm ra N n ti � a O b ui N N ti NNlair N »N NH �� ymmj m pryj b w o q � O � n m N ti ff vai O N C/] N z ��� mae �aa6 oe m z a n +n n N n o o �aN aoi L. N o 4 m n n O O O�� N b Carl n N N aa Obi N m O� b N o m pp .� o In p RP 0.. b m p o o o c 4 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan APPENDIX A USER SURVEYS APPENDIX A AIRPORT USER SURVEY IOWA CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT AIRPORT MASTER PLAN The Iowa City Municipal Airport (IOW) is preparing an Airport Master Plan to evaluate airport facilities to better serve the economic vitality of the Iowa City community and surrounding area. The data collected in this survey will assist in making decisions for the improvement of the airport. No identifying information (contact information, N -numbers, etc.) will be published in the Airport Master Plan document. The survey can be completed by -hand or online. An online version of this survey is available at: https://www.suweymonkey.com/s/IOWAirportUsersSuNey or by scanning the OR code to the right. Please return this survey, or direct any questions to: Cole Hartfiel, Airport Planner 12224 Nicollet Avenue Burnsville, MN 55337 Phone: (952) 890-0509 Ext. 2977 Fax: (952) 890-8065 E-mail: coleha@bolton-menk.com Please complete the following survey to the best of your ability: 1. How do you utilize general aviation aircraft? ❑ Own ❑ Fractional/Shared Ownership ❑ Rent ❑ Corporate Owned -Aircraft ❑ Lease ❑ Flying Club 2. Do you base your aircraft at IOW? El Yes ❑ No If no, and you own an aircraft, where is it based? If adequate facilities existed, would you base your plane at IOW? What additional facilities would you need to base your plane at IOW? ❑ Yes ❑ Other (Please Specify) FW 3. What type of aircraft do you use when flying? If you use more than one aircraft, please include it here: Aircraft Make/Model N -Number (Optional) The following auestions are about your flight operations at IOW: An operation is defined as either a takeoff or a landing. A single visit to an airport is comprised of two operations, arriving at the airport, and later departing from the airport. An "itinerant" operation is a landing or takeoff of an airplane traveling from one airport to another airport at least 20 nautical miles away. Local operations include flights to local practice areas, touch-and- go operations within the traffic pattern, and agricultural aerial application operations. 4. Please estimate your annual operations at IOW: Local Operations Itinerant Operations 5. Are you considering an upgrade to your aircraft fleet in the next five years? _Yes No If yes, please indicate the following: Aircraft Make/Model Annual Operations at IOW Reason for Upgrade 6. Are the runway lengths available at IOW adequate for your most demanding aircraft at desired weight? Runway 07-25 (5,004 feet) Runway 12-30 13,900 feet) Adequate if wet/icy? El Yes ❑ No El Yes ❑ No If no, what runway length would you require to land at IOW? (OVER) Adequate if hot? El Yes ❑ No El Yes ❑ No AIRPORT USER SURVEY IOWA CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 7. Do you currently make aircraft load concessions to operate at IOW? If yes, what concessions do you make? 1:1 Yes ❑ No 8. Please indicate the basis of your runway length requirements: ❑ Pilot Operating Handbook ❑ Insurance Requirement ❑ Company Policy ❑ Other (Please Specify) 9. Do you use the existing instrument approaches? El Yes ❑ No If the approaches do not meet your needs, please explain: 10. Are you in need of additional ha ngar space at IOW? El Yes ❑ No If yes,whattypeof hangardoyou prefer? ❑T -Hangar ❑'Box"Hangar ❑ Private Hangar Site 11. Please rate the airport facilities in with regards to your operations at IOW 12. Please provide any additional comments or concerns about the IOW airport facilities or future needs: CONTACT INFORMATION (OPTIONAL) Please provide the following information pertaining to the individual who completed this survey. Name: Address: Phone: E-mail: May we contact you with any specific questions about this user survey? El Yes ❑ No NOTE: If your company or related vendors/clients operate from IOW, we kindly request you forward this survey to these individuals. The City of Iowa City thanks you for completing this Airport User Survey! Please contact Cole Hartfiel, Airport Planner, at colehaCcDbolton-menk.com with any questions. Please Return by September 30, 2014 Inadequate Mareinal Adequate Not Applicable Runway 7/25 Length O O O O Aircraft Storage —T -Hangar Rental Unit O O O O Aircraft Storage— Conventional Hangar O O O O Development Site Aircraft Storage—Transient/Overnight O O O O Aircraft Repair/Maintenance O O O O Self Service Fueling O O O O Full Service Fueling/Line Services/Fueling Truck O O O O Ground Transportation(Shuttle, Taxi Service, O O O O Rental Cars, Courtesy Car) Pilot Shop O O O O Crew Rest Area O O O O Flight Training/Instruction O O O O Aircraft Charter O O O O Business Center/Meeting Facilities O O O O 12. Please provide any additional comments or concerns about the IOW airport facilities or future needs: CONTACT INFORMATION (OPTIONAL) Please provide the following information pertaining to the individual who completed this survey. Name: Address: Phone: E-mail: May we contact you with any specific questions about this user survey? El Yes ❑ No NOTE: If your company or related vendors/clients operate from IOW, we kindly request you forward this survey to these individuals. The City of Iowa City thanks you for completing this Airport User Survey! Please contact Cole Hartfiel, Airport Planner, at colehaCcDbolton-menk.com with any questions. Please Return by September 30, 2014 BUSINESS USER AIRPORT SURVEY IOWA CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT (IOW) AIRPORT MASTER PLAN The Iowa City Municipal Airport (IOW) is preparing an Airport Master Plan to evaluate airport facilities to better serve the economic vitality of the Iowa City community and surrounding area. The data collected in this survey will assist in making decisions for the improvement of the airport. No identifying information (contact information, N -numbers, etc.) will be published in the Airport Master Plan document The survey can be completed by -hand or online. An online version of this survey is available at: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/IOWBusinessUserSurvey or by scanning the OR code to the right Please return this survey, or direct any questions to: Cole Hartfiel, Airport Planner Phone: (952) 890-0509 Ext. 2977 12224 Nicollet Avenue Fax: (952) 890-8065 Burnsville, MN 55337 E-mail: coleha@bolton-menk.com CONTACT INFORMATION (OPTIONAL) Please provide the following information pertaining to the individual who completed this survey. Business Name: Address: Phone: E-mail: Respondent's Name/Title: / May we contact you with any specific questions about this user survey? ❑ Yes ❑ No FF. NOTE: If your company or related vendors/clients operate from IOW, we kindly request you provide us with their information so we may reach out to them to get their feedback about the airport. COMPANY INFORMATION This business is: ❑ Directly Involved in Aviation ❑ Not Involved in Aviation Number of employees: Full time: Parttime: Please describe your business and how it uses aviation, if applicable: BUSINESS AIR TRAVEL 1. Does your company use air travel (commercial or general avaition)? ❑ Yes (Company) ❑ Yes (Clientele) ❑ No If yes, what type? ❑ Commercial Airline ❑ Air Charter ❑ Company Aircraft 2. Do you or your clientele use IOW for business purposes? ❑ Yes ❑ No If your clientele use IOW, how many times per year do clients arrive using IOW? times/year If you and/or clientele don't use IOW, why not? ❑ No air travel needs ❑ Other 3. If yes to question 2, please indicate how you use IOW for business purposes (check all that apply): ❑ Site Visit/Meeting ❑ Aircraft Repair/Service ❑ Other (please specify) ❑ Customer Contact ❑ Cargo/Shipping/Parts ❑ Marketing ❑ Flight Training/Instruction ❑ Do not use IOW but use General ❑ Inventory/Technical Visits ❑ Aerial Surveillance/Mapping Aviation ❑ Aircraft Charter (Passenger) ❑ Agriculture/Natural Resource 4. How does your company have access to a general aviation airplane? (Check all that apply) ❑ Own ❑ Rent ❑ Lease 5. What type of aircraft does your company operate: (Over) ❑ Fractional/Shared Ownership ❑ Other N -Number (Optional): BUSINESS USER AIRPORT SURVEY IOWA CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT (IOW) AIRPORT MASTER PLAN 6. At what airport is this airplane based? 7 What is your company or clientele's flight activity at IOW? _ • Average business-related flights at IOW per month? • Average number of passengers per flight? • Average flight distance? • Most frequent destinations to and from IOW: 1: 2: 3: 8. Do you have a corporate flight department? ❑ Yes ❑ No 9. What is the projected future business-related use of IOW: ❑ Increase ❑ Decrease ❑ Remainthesame AIRPORT ACCOMMODATIONS Yes No 10. Are you aware of the services available to you at IOW? O O AIRPORT FACILITIES 18. Please rate airport facilities and equipment with regards to your operations at IOW: Inadequate Yes No hVA 11. Is the location of IOW convenient for your business? O O O 12. Would you base your corporate aircraft at IOW if hangars and/or sites for O O O O hangar development were available? O O O 13. If you answered 'Yes' to question 12, please state what hangar size you O O Ground Transportation (Shuttle, Taxi Service, Rental O would require (Example: 80 ft by 80 ft): O Cars, Courtesy Car) 14. If hangar sites with direct airfield access were available, would your O O O O company be interested in locating or expanding its corporate use of IOW? O O O 15. Would a longer Runway 7/25 increase your ability to use IOW? O O O 16. Would improved approaches to Runway 7/25 increase your ability to use O O O O IOW? 17. When you are unable to use IOW, what airport is used as an alternate? AIRPORT FACILITIES 18. Please rate airport facilities and equipment with regards to your operations at IOW: 19. Please provide any additional comments or concerns about IOW airport facilities or future needs The City of Iowa City thanks you for completing this Airport Business User Survey! Please contact Cole Hartfiel, Airport Planner, at coleha@bolton-menk.com with any questions. Please Return by September 30, 2014 Inadequate Marginal Adequate Runway 7/25 Length O O O Aircraft Storage — Transient/Overnight O O O Aircraft Repair/Maintenance O O O Self Service Fueling O O O Full Service Fueling/Line Services/Fueling Truck O O O Ground Transportation (Shuttle, Taxi Service, Rental O O O Cars, Courtesy Car) Pilot Shop O O O Crew Rest Area O O O Flight Training/Instruction O O O Aircraft Charter O O O Business Center/Meeting Facilities O O O 19. Please provide any additional comments or concerns about IOW airport facilities or future needs The City of Iowa City thanks you for completing this Airport Business User Survey! Please contact Cole Hartfiel, Airport Planner, at coleha@bolton-menk.com with any questions. Please Return by September 30, 2014 Iowa City Municipal Airport - (IOW) Master Plan APPENDIX B AIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN APPENDIX B m a xii a y 1 � or 5/ E 1. 1 � LbOR g Lei ii - _ b 2�F`a ®. i { .� // JnEr%. ♦ eFnx aw �. y b rn . i� - my ♦ �$ K / r � ' mx.. '7 ae4 e S ✓✓✓✓✓✓� ,a, nZ J � e a .. vs r c gi l AlIl VMD[ � s3nvdans k8VNIOVAI " LL 1?lvd atld VIIlnlllll� _ 11 1 Illlllllllllt - 11■11 1111 111111111111 ... b_ 0 111111 NO 11111111111 11■11 Illll - 11111111111, 11■11■11111F �, ""'a'' II■111111111 -` IIII�II� 11111111111111[ �������, 11■11■11111 11111111111111i� "' ""� 11■11 1111. IIII1 Nth 11111111111111 ... b_ 0 u0� wxr sxos.a °q� a W 3lId08d 9 NVId G' d�Q H�tl02JddtlLAVMNnN 32ffllfld 9 SNIlSIX3 YX3W9XWlR i e O, £ � � I 3 b}} M• ^8 [ 1 I k@ Y A r k + � G Y i �a - ON 4Z- �"s € 'D d �, yl IU❑ / „V � ...i® � �I .IBJ is®� 36N® ■■■■t ■■■ ■■■ ■■■■� y ■■■■r ■■■ ■■_■_ ■= ■ ■m■■. ■M■■■ P MEN■� ■ NEN ■r■ -__ ■■O__ ■E ■■® ■■■■ ■ �■■■I� ■■E MINIM MINIM �■■■i 36N® 3�idoad � Nrld G'�'"l/� H�tl021ddtl ZL AtlMNflil 32ffllfld 9 SNIlSIX3 YX3W9XWlR 5. s y — E 4 ..a W t s tae y g I; tl X 1 i f i i mf. Y p L o w 5 y .z e 55 i s $ ¢ I Z`y 1. E ��� v'.'i�q�j�� '� Xq yy H�tl021ddV 0E AtlMNfli1 s w n � 32ff11f1d9SNIlSIX3 0 yp anwsau txEwvxwioe� X S �£ c HIM z yG¢� 7i e MET e� e 3 ve d � � m Yx h ", � ( 30 ; 1. E [N 3V dv32N 9NJialla9 � 3TJala3E�JNIISIX3 Cx ------------ 5 t `3 Y 0000000000 z 3 a.ep,Rim� /O a . p , w .��v i F9NINOZRisn(INVI`� : . ()jjjjj(� /�)\`■`\■\■■■■■ � dVW AHO1N3ANI A1N3dONd 1210dN1tl N W11913X3 �� nmd'wonn�ai vzNVId i"O)Vl roads N � � o iaoaam �naiownu wonxa Ntlld 1f10Atll 1LOdTJItl - %" 1NOdHIV ltldIOINlIW Alp VMOI t - w o � �w o tl r _< 1 spa 0 oz a� M NlO 39NtlH1 , 3OYN t M „00,8.0 NOLLVNfI'J30 DLL3N9tl% � 6 53$Yet �, vr,.oi'woauui inoaaia,vaiam"avmm W03� S319V1VIVO A1M3dONd 1MOdNIV .V. llalHX3 �- - _ LALVOP CON 133m0 ddlVVVJ NVId 1nOAVl lbOdUIV 1NOdillV ltldIOINOW AlIJ VMOI 3 ' 3 p 'a $ m i a u, w p a E E CCo�wE'�b Ce e3eCGo -rEwEw_ _ E 0 Cao ai3Ewo°CeCar_ "au Ewe _ s a 3 3 33 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 33 3 33 3 3 33 3 3 F F FF F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F FF F FF F F FF F F C m Fo 3 3 r y 6 O Z O rc Fw w C �o V 6 C a'z 3 3 33 3 3 3 3 0 3 3 3 3 3° C a v � cs sm s mss„ �w Fo C _ B o� oh O 0 Mdk. r o¢ 2r MMM..rv..8 MM 44444444444 w wW a3 �b ww rW F' m o r o 3� O6 CCo�wE'�b Ce e3eCGo -rEwEw_ _ .E Cao ai3Ewo°CeCar_ "au Ewe 3 3 33 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 33 3 33 3 3 33 3 3 F F FF F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F FF F FF F F FF F F r CITY OF IOWA CITY ;P4 MEMORANDUM Date: November 10, 2016 To: Geoff Fruin, City Manager From: Simon Andrew, Assistant to the City Manager Re: 2017 Legislative Priorities Prior to the start of each State of Iowa legislative session, the City Council traditionally adopts legislative priorities and communicates the City's positions on those issues to our elected delegation. City Council is scheduled to discuss 2017 legislative priorities at the November 15, 2016 work session. In previous years, Council's adopted priorities included support for legislative efforts of the Iowa League of Cities and the Metro Coalition. The League of Cities 2017 priorities are attached for reference. The Metro Coalition is meeting on November 15, 2016 to define their 2017 priorities; those priorities were not available at the drafting of this memo. City Council's 2016 priorities are also attached for reference. Staff is expecting to have a resolution defining Council's 2017 priorities ready for consideration at Council's December 6, 2016 meeting. Staff requests direction from Council regarding 2017 priorities at the November 15 work session in order to prepare the resolution. Prepared by: Geoff Fruln, Assistant City Manager, 410 E. Washington SL, Iowa City, IA 52240 (318) 3565010 RESOLUTION NO. 16-25 RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE CITY OF IOWA CITY'S 2016 LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES WHEREAS, the Iowa City City Council seeks to encourage legislation that enhances the quality of fife for residents in Iowa City as well as the State of Iowa; and WHEREAS, the City of Iowa City and other cities play a critical role in the future of the State; and WHEREAS, it is in the interest of the citizens of Iowa City that the City Council establish legislative priorities and convey said priorities to our State delegation and other relevant stakeholders. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Iowa City City Council hereby outlines its legislative proposals to the Iowa City area legislative delegation for the 2016 Iowa State legislative session as follows: Ensure the financial sustainability of the Municipal Fire and Pollee Retirement System of Iowa (MFPRSI) Cities that are required to participate in the State MFPRSI pension system for public safety personnel have experienced rapidly growing costs, which are necessarily inflating local property tax rates. The State needs to carefully examine the long-term financial feasibility of this system and consider reforms that protect taxpayers and ensure that our public safety employees have fair benefits that can be counted on in their retirement years. The State should carefully consider the differences in employee benefits and the cost implications for cities between the MFPRSI system and IPERS system, which also provides for police and fire personnel in the state. The City encourages Iowa to reinstate the State contribution to the MFPRSI system and to consider a tiered reform that protects benefits for current members and offers a more sustainable benefit package for new enrollees. Provide local governments more flexibility in determining local revenue sources and preserve the Local Option Sales Tax election process and distribution formula 2013 property tax reform measures are placing significant financial pressures on cities across the state. Over the next several years, cities will be challenged to maintain basic service levels that meet community expectations. In order to achieve a healthier diversification of revenue sources and meet community demands for municipal services, cities need enhanced flexibility to raise local revenues. Iowa City advocates for increased local control of revenue decisions that can strengthen our cities and facilitate future economic growth in the state. The City also encourages the State to preserve the existing Local Option Sales Tax election process and distribution formula. Increase infrastructure funding that supports a diverse transportation network Current revenue streams are not keeping up With the growing costs of maintenance on our transportation network. As a result, cities are increasingly utilizing properly tax dollars for basic infrastructure needs. The City encourages the state to consider measures to (1) increase funding of revenue sources for transportation infrastructure, and (2) commit to further diversifying our transportation network In a manner that will make it more competitive and Resolution No. 16-29 Page 2 sustainable in the years ahead. Examples of such diversification measures include pedestrian, bicycle, and transit accommodations, as well as regional passenger rail. Support the University of Iowa's efforts to be global leader in 21" century higher education The University of Iowa plays a critical role in the local, regional and statewide economies. It is important the State of Iowa provides the university the needed resources to become a global leader in higher education. Ensuring the university's continued competitiveness in the higher education field will provide stability in the economy and facilitate growth opportunities in varied sectors of business community. The City encourages the State to carefully consider and support the legislative and financial priorities of the university. Support the legislative efforts of the Iowa League of Cities and the Metro Coalition Iowa City, as a member city of both organizations, supports the legislative priorities set forth by the Iowa League of Cities and by the Metropolitan Coalition for the 2016 legislative session. Passed and approved this 19th day of January '2016 G OR ATTEST: Ap ,r�►i.J �C �/ CI LERK City Attomey's Office Resolution No. 16-25 Page 3 It was moved by Thomas and seconded by Dickens the Resolution be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Botchway Cole Dickens Mims Taylor Thomas Throgmorton Iowa League of Cities 2017 Legislative Priorities The 2017 Legislative Session begins Monday, January 9'. In the coming session, the League will be advocating on behalf of cities in several legislative priority areas. Our priority language during was developed by the League's Legislative Policy Committee, and approved by the League Board and the general membership at the League's annual conference. Economic Development Increase funding levels for quality of life initiatives and economic development programs such as nuisance abatement, CAT, RECAT, and the derelict building grant program; preserve economic development policies, such as tax increment finance, as flexible tools for economic growth in cities of all sizes; and provide programs and policies that further develop our local workforce to attract economic development to both rural and urban areas and help close the skills gap. Financial Sustainability Eliminate unfunded mandates; diversify revenue options available to local governments and protect existing revenue options and the services they support for the taxpayer; and continue to ensure the commercial and industrial property tax backfill. Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Advocate for additional funding sources and flexible policies related to water, wastewater, and storm water infrastructure development to meet the demands of increased environmental regulation for cities of all sizes and support a clean water supply and the protection of public health and the environment, including the development of opportunities for partnership with the agricultural community and environmental groups to meet these requirements. Home Rule Promote cities as innovation centers and the incubators of ideas; advocate for and sustain Home Rule and its flexibility to make decisions at the local level — where decisions are made closest to the people they impact and can be tailored to fit local conditions, needs, and concerns in order to better serve taxpayers. Public Safety Ensure cities have the adequate resources to provide and fund public safety services, including addressing costs under the Municipal Fire and Police Retirement System of Iowa (MFPRSI). � r 6IP5 +mE•� Cin Or IOWA CITY UNESCO Ott OF UEEMTURE PENDING CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION TOPICS November 10, 2016 December 6th. 2016 1. Public Works facility tour and master plan overview (start time TBD) Strategic Plan / Budget Related Topics: 1. Provide timely and appropriate input on the ICCSD's planned 2017 bond referendum 2. Significantly improve the Council and staff's ability to engage with diverse populations on complex or controversial topics 3. Set a substantive and achievable goal for reducing city-wide carbon emissions by 2030, and create an ad- hoc climate change task force, potentially under an umbrella STAR Communities committee, to devise a cost-effective strategy for achieving the goal. 4. Identify and implement an achievable goal to reduce disproportionality in arrests 5. Identify a substantive and achievable goal for the provision of affordable housing in Iowa City and implement strategies to achieve this goal 6. Determine scope of Council identified housing market analysis of core neighborhoods 7. Determine scope of Council identified complete streets study 8. Discuss expectations for working with the ICCSD, Kirkwood Community College, Iowa Works, labor organizations, and others to explore the feasibility of an industrial arts/crafts facility in Iowa City From the City Manager MONEY: Personal Finance News & Advice The Ultimate Guide to Retirement _The Best Places to Retire Sarah Max @Money A dozen cities with top-notch services, plenty to do, and a tax -friendly climate that lets retirees hang on to more of their money. When it comes to choosing a retirement destination, the big challenge is whittling down the possibilities. One critical factor to consider: how much of a bite local taxes will take out of your nest egg. This year we went in search of the tax -friendliest small cities in the country— places big enough to have the amenities that retirees prize, such as access to great health care and recreation, but still affordable and compact enough to be manageable. Starting with states that have the lowest overall tax burdens, we zeroed in on locales that offer breaks on income, Social Security, pension, estate, and other taxes. These 12—a winner and runner-up in each region of the country—rose to the top. Best in the Midwest: Iowa City, Iowa Alessandro Imbriaco--contrasto/Redux AT A GLANCE (POP. 72,042) Population over age 55 23% Median home price $187,000 Average property tax $3,553 Top income tax rate 8.98% When famous authors plan their North American book tours, the schedule often reads like this: New York, Los Angeles, Chicago ... Iowa City. As the only Unesco City of Literature in North America, Iowa City's writerly roots run deep. The University of Iowa Writers' Workshop, founded in 1936, counts 17 Pulitzer Prize winners and six U.S. poets laureate among its alumni, many of whom return for workshops or the annual Iowa City Book Festival, a six-day celebration of the printed word held every fall. Iowa City, Iowa: Why It Wins Donnell—The New York Times/Redux Like most of our top retirement destinations, Iowa City punches above its weight in arts, entertainment, and sports offerings. Unlike some others, it has a relatively hefty state income tax, but low property taxes and breaks on Social Security and pension income help offset it, making this one of the tax -friendliest places in the Midwest. Linda Farkas, 64, relocated to Iowa City from Milwaukee in 2007 with her husband, Ed, 62. Before the move, friends back in Milwaukee questioned whether the couple would be starved for culture. Then they came to visit the Farkases in their high-rise downtown condo, from which they walk everywhere. "Now they keep coming back," says Linda, who was a banker and sits on several boards. One big draw: the influence on the city of the University of Iowa, with its 33,000 students. "You have this concentration of people from all over the world who are doing amazing things," she says. WHAT ELSE IS GREAT: Massive flooding of the Iowa River in 2008 did devastating damage throughout the city, but the rebuilding has brought some major upgrades, including the new Hancher Auditorium a world-class performance venue with seating for i,800 people. The floods also helped uncover more of the Devonian Fossil Gorge, where visitors can get a close look at a 375 -million -year-old seafloor and fossils of tropical sea life. Today's water lovers flock to the 5,000 -acre Coralville Lake for fishing and paddling. THE DOWNSIDE: The chilly winter temps—January lows average i4Aa F—and distance to major metro areas can be a drag. Des Moines (and its airport) is about two hours away. CITY Of IOWA CITY To: City Council From: Juli Seydell Johnson, Director of Parks & Recreation Date: November 8, 2016 Re: Update 2016 Iowa City Farmers Market Outreach Programs The reach of the Iowa City Farmers Market was extended during the 2016 season by offering a mechanism for low income individuals to purchase food at the market. The investment in equipment for this purpose also allowed for more convenient use of debit and credit cards by all shoppers and vendors. In total, the changes increased attendance and revenue at the market. The market offered participants of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (formerly food stamps) the ability to use their benefits at the market to purchase food. SNAP program participants swiped their benefit cards with Market staff in order to obtain wooden tokens which could then be used with participating food vendors. $4,000 in SNAP benefits were redeemed for purchases at the market. Offering this program allowed shoppers wishing to use debit or credit cards to purchase tokens rather than having to leave the market to find an ATM. The tokens were accepted as payment by all market vendors for all items sold at the market. Providing this service allowed easy use of credit and debit card purchases at all vendors. The City paid $2,533 in the banking transaction fees for these purchases. $64,896 of tokens were purchased using debit and credit cards. During the second half of the summer, SNAP program participants we able to double their food purchases through the "Double Up Food Bucks" program. This was a statewide healthy food incentive program with matching dollars provided by the City of Iowa City. Through this program, participants received twice the dollar value of tokens up to $10 per market with use of their SNAP benefits at the market. $2,777 of matching funds were provided to SNAP participants through this program. Both the addition of the ability to accept SNAP benefits and the Double Up Food Bucks program were publicized through social media, print ads and outreach efforts to low income residents. The use of these programs grew through the season. A typical week in May resulted in $25 of SNAP tokens purchased then grew in later markets to $200+ SNAP tokens purchased. 220 S. Gilbert Street • Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1632 • (319) 356-5100 • FAX (319) 356-5487 CITY OF IOWA CITY 1P8 =64�� MEMORANDUM Date: November 9, 2016 To: Geoff Fruin, City Manager From: Stefanie Bowers, Equity Director Re: 2015 Report on Racial Equity Attached please find the 2015 Report on Racial Equity. This report corrects a data set and a report that were mislabeled in the 2013 and 2014 Reports on Racial Equity. In those two editions, a data set and the appendix report were labeled as "arrests based on race, ethnicity, and gender," however, that specific data and that specific report actually represent a charge and not an event, like an arrest. Due to this fact, that specific data and that report did not represent what it purported to and thus any past generalizations or conclusions previously made are inaccurate. The 2015 Report on Racial Equity is also updated to reflect the proper language that should be used when referring to youth and the criminal justice system. The appendix for the 2015 Report on Racial Equity is available on the City of Iowa City's Social Justice and Racial Equity Initiative page or at the link below. hftps•//www icgov omlcity-governmentldepartments-and-divisions/human-rights/social-justice and -racial -equity -initiatives City of Iowa City's Report on Racial Equity 2015 3Nm Vit, CITY OF IOWA CRY uwExoan avutunnu In June 2012, the Iowa City City Council established the Diversity Committee, which was formulated to serve as an ad hoc council committee to review issues relating to diversity within the City organization. The committee reviewed the policies, practices and procedures within the Iowa City Police Department and the Transportation Services Department with the Table of Contents intent to provide a set of recommendations to the City Race and Hispanic Origin Populations Council on diversity -related matters. In March 2013, the in Iowa City as of April 1, 2010 1 Diversity Committee supplied the City Council and City Boards and Commissions 1 staff with their recommendations. City staff developed Human Rights Commission 1 an implementation form and reporting process Top Five Neighborhoods for designed to incorporate recommendations from Youth Related Calls for Service 2 both the Diversity Committee and City staff. The City eferrals to Juvenile Services (2011-2015) 2 Manager initiated a Diversity Task force and appointed Youth Charges by Race an Equity Directorto ensure the recommendations are and Hispanic Origin 3 implemented and in compliance with the goals of the Youth Curfew Violations 3 City Council. In 2015,the Council passed a resolution Race a nd Ethnicity Comparison, 2014-2015 to 2015-2016 4 supporting various recommendations from City staff Calls for Service to Schools 4 and the Diversity Committee. City of Iowa City Workforce by Race and Hispanic Origin 5 Since then, staff issues a quarterly update on Persons Applying 2015 5 the Diversity Initiative (which is available on the Traffic Stops by Age, Race City website) and continues to implement the and Gender (Male) 6 recommendations of the Diversity Committee. Traffic stops by Age, Race and Gender (Female) 7 "Advancing social justice and racial equity" is one of Charges by Race, Hispanic Origin the seven top priorities of the City's Strategic Plan and Gender 2013-2014-2015 6 for2016-2017. Community Police Review Board 9 The following data reports are on calendar year 2015 except for the data of the Human Rights Commission and Community Police Review Board whose data is on a fiscal year for 2015 (FY 15). Race and Hispanic origin populations in Iowa City as of April 1, 2010 Remarks for population: • All populations saw increases in Iowa City except for American Indian or Alaska Native. Boards and Commissions Source: Voluntary Survey for Current Board/Commission Members Remarks for Boards and Commissions: • The City has over 130 persons serving on boards and commissions • 80 responses in 2013,85 responses in 2014 and 85 responses in 2015. AFWhite 82.5% Black or African American 6.8% American Indian and Alaska Native .2% t Asian 6.8% Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander Hispanic or Latino` 5.3% Two or More Races 2.5% 41* White (80)88% ren Black orAfrican American p)10% BlackorAfHiSpeoloorLatino 001% HiAmerican Indian and Alaska Native(2)1% American Indian a 'The U.S. Census Bureau asks persons to mark the "face or races with which they most closely identify.'[ Ethnicity distinguishes between those who report ancestral origins in Spain or Hispanic America (Hispanic and Latino Americans), and those who do not (Non -Hispanic Americans). Hispan Ica or Latinos may be of any race, so also a re i ncluded in applica ble race catego ry. Human Rights Commission Source: Human Rights Commission Annual Report FY15 Remarks for Human Rights Commission: • There has been a slight decrease in the number of complaints filed since 2013. • Complaints alleging race,color, or national origin discrimination have remained relatively stable. 55 52 50 2013 45 Total Complaints Filed 41 40 2814 2015 35 30 27 25 21 20 20 19 7 16 16 15 15 11 12 1 12 10 8 6 8 8 5 5 4 2 2 0 1 0 0 1 ro v es w a in m a n m a Lo m a N ro a m n a yr :2 e s 'o N N N N N N N N N N N I° a� F py Q°oa 1 Clry of ii at" ",,ty 2015 Top Five Neighborhoods for Youth Related Calls for Service" 'There was an issue with the field population in the Source: Iowa City Police Department Youth Report 2015 CAD database that identifies the neighborhood 120 area for 2014. The Police Department Identified Remarks for Youth Related Calls for Service: this and had the software vendor correct it and • The overall number of calls for services specifically classified as youth related P Y Y aerencete the iin the numbersectly fromch meYoutay explain the diiference in the numbers from the Youth the difference complaints increased about 47% from similar calls placed in 2010. Repo it of 2014 and the Youth Report of 2015. 330 300 270 Total 240 221 ill - 210 2010 180 150 120 95 90 83 )5 85 60 51 92 30 0 239 22 205 Y� 2012 63 45 51 42 !: !1 24 23 55 2014- 40 4> 33 26 324 46 45 Grant Wood Northwest Wetherby Southeast Downtown Miller Orchard This number does not encompass all youth related calls for service, as the original call for service may not have been classified as involving youth, but was 2 listed by the type of incident, for example. shoplifting. cltyouowacry's Peparton Papal Eqully 1015 Referrals to Juvenile Court Services (2011-2015) Source: Iowa City Police Department Youth Report 2015 Remarks for Juvenile Court Services: • Overall referrals to Juvenile Court Services declined by about 34% from 2011 to 2015. 500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Youth Charges by Race and Hispanic Origin Source: Iowa City Police Department Youth Charges Report Remarks for Youth Charges: Youth charges are referrals to Juvenile • Youth charges for all races declined from 2013 to 2015. Courtservices. 394 Total 319 303 -30% 220 200 180 160 140 120 100 60 60 40 20 0 White Black or African American 62 Hispanic or Latino 22 18 Asian or PI 5 _ 5 2013 2014 2015 American Indian and Alaska Native O charges in any of the three years shown Raceunknown 0charges in any of the three years shown Youth Curfew Citations Source: Iowa City Police Department Youth Report 20151 Remarks for Youth Curfew Citations: • Citations have gone down by 27% since 2013. 30 Total Number of Citations White 25 2 Z627 Male 20 21 15 22 10 Female 5 Black or African American --'fi ______-� Hispanic or Latino 0 -7.306 -40% -66% %Change 'Although not under the juri sdiction of the Juvenile Court Services youth can be cited for the local cudewlaw. Of those 22 citations. 13 were described as being White by race. Of those 13 While classified citations.3 individuals identified their ethnicity as being Hispanic. Youth issued this citation are not referred to Juvenile Court Services. 30 2 Z627 21 22 •.._.._... 17 --'fi ______-� - 15 11 -------------- _______10 4 3 3 2013 2014 2015 Asian 0 citations in any of the three years shown 3 city M cry's itei ...sial avuli Race and Ethnicity Comparison, 2014-2015 to 2015-2016 Source: Iowa City Community School District Enrollment Demographics and Class Size Report Winter 2015-2016 \white 64.5% Black arAfricanAmerican 18.8% :an Indian and Alaska Native .3% Hispanicor Latino 8A% y Asian/PI 6.7% ai Other .2% Calls for Service to Schools NWhite 63.8% Black or African American 20.5% can Indian and Alaska Native .3% Hispanic or Latino 8.4% Asian/PI 6.8% Other .2% Source: Iowa City Police Department Calls for Service Elementary, Jr. and Sr. High 2015 Iowa City Community School District Enrollment, Demographics and Class Size Report Wlnter2015-2016 4 Remarks: cnymi eci,ys " Calls for servlceto all schools has declined by 28% since 2013. Calls for service are only for schools physically a`e°"°nRa- I • Calls for service to elementary schools 42%since 2013. located in Iowa CB OWIW 2015 rY Y y 2013 2014 2015 Total racial minority Asian/PI Black Hispanic A. Ind. Wood 127 94 105 71.1%-74% 4.59° 49.1% 17.1% " Hoover 49 19 22 19.5%-24.3% 4.2% 8.1% 6.6% ` Lincoln 47 55 31 29.5%-36.3% 19.8% 8.9% ' Lemme 0 1 0 25.8%-29.7°% 4.9% 7.9% 12.5% " Weber 59 33 20 45.1% 7.1% 28.2% 9.8% ' Mann 20 12 10 41.9%-45.2% 14.5% 27% ` Horn 90 11 5 40.4%-42% 14% 21.5% 4.7% " Lucas 58 34 34 40.5%-42.5% 2.5% 22.2% 15.6% " Longfellow 48 45 48 12.2%-19.5% 11.2% " Twain 40 39 42 58.4%-64.1% 35.5% 22.2% " Shimek High Schools 27 14 11 6.3%-15.8% 5.1% ' ` Tate 51 27 49 58.9%-64.2% 43.7% 14.6% ` City 178 135 166 36.91/-37.9% 4.6% 20.2% 11.9% ` West Junior High 165 178 183 31.4°%-32.2% 8.4% 18.3% 4.6% ' r ` South East 68 137 152 39.9°%-41.9% 3.8% 22.99° 13% ` Total 1080 891 777 'Cell sizes less than 10 have been suppressed. City of Iowa City Workforce by Race and Hispanic Origin Source: Iowa City Employee Statistics Report Remarks for City of Iowa City Workforce: • Since 2013 the number of City employees has decreased. • 7.5% of City employees identified as Black,Hispanic, Asian or American Indian in 2015. 2013 White Black Hispanic Asian Native Total Females permanent 172 5 1 3 1 182 Males permanent 411 10 15 3 0 439 Females temporary 253 8 6 10 2 279 Malestemporary 195 7 4 5 1 212 Total 2014 1031 White 30 Black 26 Hispanic 21 Asian 4 Native 1112 Total Females permanent 161 5 0 2 1 169 Males permanent 397 12 14 2 0 425 Females temporary 226 6 6 6 1 245 Malestemporary 149 9 3 7 1 169 Total 2015 933 White 32 Black 23 Hispanic 17 Asian 3 Native 1008 Total Females permanent 160 5 0 2 1 168 Males permanent 402 it 12 2 0 427 Females temporary 203 3 9 6 1 222 Malestemporary 114 8 6 4 1 133 Total 879 27 27 14 3 950 Persons Applying 2015 Source: Munis Enterprise Resource Planning Remarks for Persons Applying: • 1129 per sons applied for City employment. • 630 persons of that number voluntarily reported out on their race and Hispanic origin. • Of that number 16% identified as Black or African American, Asian or Hispanic or Latino. Total Applications 1129 0 . tv #I White female 191 Hispanic or Latino female 15 Black or African Am. femaleV Asian female 10 Whitemale341 Hispanic or Latino male 23 Black or African Am. male 33 5 airofi aolyS P,p r O. R—W ,query 2015 Traffic Stops by Age, Race and Gender (Male) Source: Iowa City Police Department Traffic Stop Report 2015 Remarks for Male Traffic Stops: • Male traffic stops in Iowa City increased 10.8% from 2013 to 2015. • Males aged 20-29 across all races were the most frequently stopped in 2015 at about49%. 2013 Under16 16-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+ Total No Classification of Race 0 7 24 8 8 6 5 58 Asian or Pacific Islander 1 44 239 60 28 14 7 393 BlackorAfrican American 3 114 472 235 149 93 22 1088 Caucasian 39 394 2272 809 614 563 371 5062 Hispanic or Latino 8 42 152 105 70 30 17 424 American Indian 0 3 8 5 4 1 2 23 Other 1 11 78 42 20 9 3 164 Unknown 1 5 18 11 10 2 1 48 Total 2014 53 Under16 620 16-19 3263 20-29 1275 30-39 903 40-49 718 50-59 428 60+ 7260 Total No Classification of Race 1 2 36 14 7 6 8 74 Asian or Pacific Islander 0 67 335 58 30 17 5 512 Black or African American 9 130 554 274 167 94 23 1251 e Caucasian 32 455 2382 784 536 498 361 5048 °.` ,r, �aR.l Hispanic or Latino 3 37 176 91 82 31 4 424 ,quuyams American Indian 0 0 9 3 1 1 1 15 Other 1 16 67 42 31 21 5 183 Unknown 1 10 40 13 5. 6 2 77 Total 2015 47 Under16 717 16-19 3599 20-29 1279 30-39 859 40-49 674 50-59 409 60+ 7584 Total No Classification of Race 0 0 1 0 1' 1 0 3 Asian or Pacific Islander 3 78 335 69 27 15 6 533 Black orAfrican American 9 109 669 254 143 82 15 1281 Caucasian 51 580 2588 802 537 529 436 5523 Hispanic or Latino 6 50 205 100 59 42 13 475 American Indian 0 0 6 4 2 1 1 14 Other 2 13 - 65 26 19 12 1 138 Unknown 1 8 39 16 7 8 2 81 Total 72 838 3908 1271 795 690 474 8048 Traffic Stops by Age, Race and Gender (Female) Source: Iowa City Police Department Traffic Stop Report 2015 Remarks for Female Traffic Stops: • Female traffic stops saw a modest increase of 5.3% more stops from 2013 to 2015. • Females aged 20-29 across all races were the most frequently stopped in 2015 at about 46Y. of total stops 2013 Under16 16-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+ Total No Classification of Race 2 3 18 10 11 4 1 49 Asian or Pacific Islander 2 16 115 35 19 6 8 201 Black orAfrican American 6 56 285 131 91 41 8 618 Caucasian 30 327 1564 461 465 348 230 3425 Hispanic or Latino - 3 21 87 47 21 17 3 199 American Indian 0 2 3 4 1 0 0 10 Other 0 6 20 8 12 3 1 50 Unknown 0 4 11 4 2 3 1 25 Total 2014 43 Underl6 435 16-19 2103 20-29 700 30-39 622 40-49 422 50-59 252 60+ 4577 Total No Classification of Race 0 4 15 7 7 4 4 41 Asian or Pacific Islander 4 13 143 24 18 10 5 217 7 Black or African American 3 84 378 152 76 34 10 737 c¢yer iowaaa's Re,t an Rac.al Caucasian 31 314 1529 447 334 330 230 3215 EgUlryxme Hispanic or Latino 3 22 79 52 28 19 6 209 American Indian 0 0 7 4 0 1 1 13 Other 1 10 17 9 12 2 0 51 Unknown 0 3 14 8 4 2 0 31 Total 2015 42 Under16 450 16-19 2182 20-29 703 30-39 479 40-49 402 50-59 256 60+ 4514 Total No Classification of Race. 1 0 2 1 0 0 0 4 Asian or Pacific Islander 2 36 152 28 23 10 3 254 Black or African American 7 76 317 159 71 39 11 680 Caucasian 38 407 1599 511 404 303 261 3523 Hispanic or Latino 5 29 101 43 34 17 4 233 American Indian 0 2 3 2 2 0 1 10 Other 2 3 18 10 6 3 0 42 Unknown 3 6 19 8 7 2 2 47 Total 58 559 2211 762 547 374 282 4793 Charges by Race, Hispanic Origin and Gender 2013-2014-2015 Source: Iowa City Police Department Charge Report 2015 Remarks for Arrest Reports: • Total number of charges has decreased by 13% since 2013. Totals by Ethnicity 2013 2014 2015 Hispanic or Latino 553(8.6%) 440(70%) 397(7:1%) Non -Hispanic or Latino 5804(90.6%) 5712(91.8%) 5106(92%) Unknown 48(.74%) 68(1.0%) 68(1.2%) Totalsby Race 2013 2014 2015 White 4419(68.9%) 4008(64.3%) 3636(65.2%) Black orAfrican American 1867(29.1%) 2109(33.8%) 1802(32.3%) Asian or Pacific Islander 84(1.3%) 80(1.2%) 100(1.8%) American Indian orAlaska Native 9(.14%.) 7(.11%) 17(0.3%) Unknown 26(.40%) 20(.49%) 21(0.4%) Total Number of Charges 6405 6224 5577 e Totals by Gender 2013 2014 2015 Male 5000(78%) 4832(77.6%) 4276(76.7%) Female 1405 (21.9%) 1392 (22.3%) 1301(23.3%) Totals by Race and Gender 2013 2014 2015 White Male 3517 (54.9%) 3118 (50%) 2747 (49.2%) White Female 902(14.0%) 890(14.2%) 889(15.9%) Black orAfrican American Male 1389(21.6%) 1638(26.3%) 1418(25.4%) Black orAfrican American Female 478(74%) 471(75%) 384(6.9%) Asian or Pacific Islander Male 63(.98%) 55(.88%) 81(1.4%) Asian or Pacific Islander Female 21(.32%) 25(.40%) 19(0.34%) American Indian orAlaska Native Male 9(.14%.) 7(.11%) 14(0.25%) American Indian orAlaska Female 0 0 3(0.05%) Unknown Male 22(.34%) 14(.22%) 16(0.29%) Unknown Female 4(.06%) 6(.09%) 5(0.09%) Each number represents a charge filed and not necessarily custodial arrest. An individual could be charged with more than one criminal offense. Community Police Review Board Number and Type of Allegations Eleven complaints were filed during the fiscal year July 1, 2014—June 30, 2015. Seven public reports were completed during this fiscal period, one complaint was withdrawn and three complaints were summarily dismissed, one complaint filed in FY15 was still pending before the Board when the report was published. Of the eighteen allegations listed in the seven complaints for which the Board reported, two were sustained. The Board made comments and/or recommendations for improvement in police policy, procedures, or conduct in three of the reports: Complaint 15-01 CPRB acknowledges cultural differences and mannerisms may make it difficult to accurately assess and interpret behavior, especially when compared to others behavior/ responses. Complaint#14-fl 1. Off icer failed to sufficiently investigate the motor vehicle collision as directed by ICPD General Order 99-09, Section IV, Procedures.—NOTSUSTAINED 2. Officer's determination that the Complainant was at fault in the accident was incorrect and the traffic citation for following too closely should not have been issued—SUSTAINED 3. Officer did not listen to the Complainant's point of view in regard to how the accident occurred —NOT SUSTAINED 4. Officer's threat to take the Complainant tojail was inappropriate under these circumstances— NOTSUSTAINED 5. Officer issued the Complainant a citation because she Is not an "American". — NOTSUSTAINED Complaint#15-01 1. Racial Profiling—NOT SUSTAINED 2. Discourtesy—NOT SUSTAINED Ely at, nwact" Repos an Racial Equity 2015 Allegations Complaint #14-02 Complaint#14-02 The CPRB acknowledges that suitable 1. Excessive Use of Force—SUSTAINED changes have been made to the Weapons policy. Complaint#14-03 1. Illegal Search of the Vehicle—NOT SUSTAINED 2. Harassment—NOT SUSTAINED 3. Use of a Racial Epithet—NOT SUSTAINED Complaint#14-04 Complalnt#14-04 The original eight allegations are 1. Responsibilities —NOTSUSTAINED summarized in the three categories 2. Obedience to laws and regulations—NOT SUSTAINED listed to the right. 3. Incompetence —NOT SUSTAINED Complaint #14-05 —SUMMARILY DISMISSED Complaint #14-06 1. Unlawful Search—NOT SUSTAINED 2. Unlawful Seizure—NOT SUSTAINED Complaint #14-07—WITHDRAWN Complaint #14-08 1. Officer included inaccurate information in an official police report— NOTSUSTAINED 2. This was retaliation against the Complainant for filing a complaint against another officer in an earlier CPRB complaint—NOT SUSTAINED Complaint #14-08 —SUMMARILY DISMISSED Complaint #14-10—SUMMARILY DISMISSED Complaint 15-01 CPRB acknowledges cultural differences and mannerisms may make it difficult to accurately assess and interpret behavior, especially when compared to others behavior/ responses. Complaint#14-fl 1. Off icer failed to sufficiently investigate the motor vehicle collision as directed by ICPD General Order 99-09, Section IV, Procedures.—NOTSUSTAINED 2. Officer's determination that the Complainant was at fault in the accident was incorrect and the traffic citation for following too closely should not have been issued—SUSTAINED 3. Officer did not listen to the Complainant's point of view in regard to how the accident occurred —NOT SUSTAINED 4. Officer's threat to take the Complainant tojail was inappropriate under these circumstances— NOTSUSTAINED 5. Officer issued the Complainant a citation because she Is not an "American". — NOTSUSTAINED Complaint#15-01 1. Racial Profiling—NOT SUSTAINED 2. Discourtesy—NOT SUSTAINED Ely at, nwact" Repos an Racial Equity 2015 11-10-. _.� IP9 CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City. Iowa 52240-1826 (319)356-5000 (3 19) 356-5009 FAX www.icgov.org November 7, 2016 TO: The Honorable Mayor and the City Council RE: Civil Service Entrance Examination — Maintenance Worker III — Wastewater Collection Under the authority of the Civil Service Commission of Iowa City, Iowa, I do hereby certify the following named person(s) as eligible for the position of Maintenance Worker III —Wastewater Collection. Jesse Eister IOWA CITY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION �AA, W Lyra W. Dickerson, Chair International Automotive Components November 2, 2016 Mayor Jim Throgmorton 410 E. Washington St. Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Dear Mayor Throgmorton: I-1 b UWLCM 0 UAC Group North Amer IAC Iowa City, 2500 Hwy 6 E ■ Iowa Gty, IA, USA Phare 319.338.9281 ■ www.iacgroup.com Enclosed please find an updated notice issued in compliance with the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act and Iowa Code § 84C. International Automotive Components Iowa City, LLC. (IAC), located at 2500 Highway 6 East, Iowa City, IA 52240 will experience a reduction in its workforce between December 23, 2016 -January 6, 2017 as a result of a significant loss of business. The layoff is expected to be permanent. The full list of affected employees is attached. (G44 a( /a�S /it j'; L--' w ei' e'llYe u44Y The bargaining unit employees are represented by the Teamsters Local #238, which is located at 5000 J St. SW, Cedar Rapids, IA 52404. Its principal officer is Gary G. Dunham. The union representative of the employees has received timely notification of the layoff. Employees who are not represented by the union have been individually and timely notified. The employees subject to the collective bargaining agreement may have bumping rights as set forth in that agreement. Employees who are not subject to the collective bargaining agreement do not have bumping or transfer rights. If you have further questions or need additional information, you may contact me at (319) 688- 6425. Sincerely, R el Human Resources Manager International Automotive Components Iowa City, LLC. o c ""� cC5 M 3745974.1 Affected Hourly Employees Represented by Union Job Title Service Person Injection Operator Vac Form Operator Finish Operator Store Room Attendant Finish -Containment Injection Operator Service Person Vinyl Compounder Injection Operator Injection Operator Injection Operator Injection Service Injection Service Injection SPC Pour Head Operator Packer Injection Operator Packer Injection Operator Injection Operator Packer Apprentice -Tooling Mechan Injection Operator Packer Finish Operator Quality Technician Finish Operator Finish Operator Injection SPC Finish Operator Apprentice -Pour Head Mech Shipper Injection SPC Finish Operator Finish Operator Journeyman, Maint Mechani Finish Operator Packer Injection Service`; R` Injection SPC " Injection Opera Packer '' ` KOH , f, Journeyman, Pourhead eco Finish Operator ` i 11.3 3745923.1 Injection Service Finish Operator Apprentice -Tooling Mechan Injection SPC Injection Operator Pour Head Operator Packer Injection Operator Slush Operator Packer Injection Operator Injection Operator Injection Operator Finish Operator Injection Operator Process Technician Finish Operator Injection Operator Finish Operator Injection Operator Maintenance Oiler Injection Service Injection Operator Slush Operator Pour Head Operator Journeyman, Injection Mol Injection Operator Service Person Pour Head Operator Pour Head Operator Injection Service I Apprentice -Electrician Injection Operator Injection Operator Packer Store Room Attendant Journeyman, Injection Mol Journeyman, Tooling Mecha Vac Form Operator Pour Head Operator Process Technician Journeyman, Electrician ` Injection Operator,, .1'1 " 113 viW Materials Coordina r%,'a I ! i Process Technician Receiver Finish Operator Injection Service Z-3-3 t Finish Operator Receiver Group Leader, Production Outside Truck Driver Injection Service Outside Truck Driver Injection Operator Injection Operator A rentice-In'ec Mold Set Pour Head Operator Finish Operator Injection Operator Apprentice -Machinist Injection Operator Finish Operator Pour Head Operator Injection Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Journeyman, Pourhead Mech Injection Operator Finish Operator Service Person A rentice-In'ec Mold Set Finish Operator Injection Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Pour Head Operator Injection Operator Finish Operator Service Person Hand Spray Operator Injection Operator Apprentice-Toolinq Mechan Injection Operator Packer Injection Operator Injection Operator Finish Operator Injection SPC r; y Finish Operator Injection SPC , y Finish Operator t, t; - (ttJ a Finish -Containment Finish Operator 3745923.1 Injection Operator Packer A rentice-In'ec Mold Set Finish Operator Injection Operator Receiver Packer Injection Service A rentice-In'ec Mold Set Materials Coordinator Finish Operator Pour Head Operator Injection Operator Injection Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Injection Operator Hand Spray Operator Injection Operator Finish Operator Injection Operator Injection Operator Injection Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Injection Service Injection Operator Receiver Vac Form Operator Service Person Finish Operator Pour Head Operator Injection Operator Hand Spray Operator Finish Operator Packer Shipper Finish Operator Injection Service Finish Operator Injection Operator Injection Operator t ,O Pour Head Operator Packer Finish Operator 14 Injection Service A rentice-In'ec Mold Set 3745923.1 Finish : erator Finish Operator Toolin Mechan sonainmentatorrvice Finish O =rentice-Toolin Finish.0 Prato `l, Finish' 4 erator Finish Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Packer Packer Slush Operator Finish Operator Finish O erator Finish O erator Packer Finish O erator Finish O erator Finish O erator Service Person Finish Operator Injection Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Injection Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Pour Head Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Packer Finish Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Pour Head Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator ',`, IJ, v Finish Operator „ tl Finish Operator I'll t is Finish Operator 3745923.1 9 Finish : gator �} Finish Operator A rent; Fi (9', :I n' c Mo F -atot Finish O rator` Finish.0 Prato `l, Finish' 4 erator Finish Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Affected Hourly Employees Not Represented by Union Job Title Continuous Improvement Te Finish Operator Hand Spray Operator Hand Spray Operator Injection Operator Service Person Injection Operator Injection SPC Service Person Injection Operator Finish Operator Injection Operator Injection Operator Injection Service Service Person Injection Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Process Technician Service Person Packer Injection SPC Service Person Injection Operator Hand Spray Operator Injection Operator Injection Operator Injection Operator Finish -Containment - Injection Service Pour Head O erator, 1, -t '•,i ;i_ Finish Operator Injection Operator �a 3745923.1 Injection Operator Service Person Idection Operator Injection Operator Continuous Improvement Te Journe man-Injec Mold Set Injection Operator Injection Operator Injection Service Injection Operator Packer Injection Operator Quality Technician Finish Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Pour Head Operator Packer Injection Operator Injection Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Injection Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Injection Operator Injection Operator Packer Packer Finish -Containment Hand Spray Operator Finish Operator Injection SPC Finish Operator Receiver Packer Injection Operator Injection Operator Injection Operator Pour Head Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator ° W i Injection Operator '! = VJ AAIJ Pour Head Operator Pour Head Operator I `7 Injection Operator Injection Operator 3745923.1 Injection Service Hand Spray Operator Finish -Containment Injection Operator Finish Operator Injection Operator Injection Operator Injection Operator Finish Operator Service Person Finish -Containment Injection Service Finish Operator Injection Operator Finish -Containment Injection Service Finish Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator In-ection Operator Injection Operator Injection SPC Finish Operator Finish Operator Sewing Operator Injection Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Injection Operator In-ection Operator Injection Service Injection Service Injection Service Injection Operator Finish Operator Service -injection Finish Operator Packer Injection Operator Finish Operator Injection Operator Pour Head Operator Finish Operator Injection Operator Packer Pour Head Operator Finish Operator Injection Operator 711-i i .:i$ `i— 17,17jo Injection Operator Ir ection Service >"i Finish Operator u`1 Injection Operator Injection Service Injection Operator Packer Injection Operator Finish Operator Service Person Pour Head Operator Injection Operator Packer Injection Service Outside Truck Driver Journeyman, Electrician Injection Operator Injection Operator Group Leader, Production Finish Operator Injection Operator Injection Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Quality Technician Apprentice-[ njec Mold Set Injection Operator Injection Operator Service Person Finish Operator Injection Operator Injection Operator Finish Operator Injection Operator Injection Operator Finish Operator Receiver Finish Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator Finish Operator „ :1 Finish Operator u`1 .=s•" ''— ` ' Finish Operator Finish Operator 3745923.1 3745923.1 ^_§ _j n a . Affected Employees Not Subject to Collective Bargaining Agreement Job Title Qualit Technician II Technician II Su ervisor Production II Process En ineer 1 Su ervisor IT Accountin Analyst III Tooling Engineer I Technician II Quality Technician 11 Superintendent Production Technician II SR Materials Staff Associate Supervisor Production 11 SR Manager Engineering Quali Technician 11 Technician II MProducfion En ineer I s Staff Associate Associate ineer 11 roduction Iineer II Process Engineer I -Tooling Engineer II -Supervisor Production 11 -Supervisor Production I Process Engineer I Q uality Engineer II Supervisor Materials 11 Quality chnician 11 Production IIsources Mana erls Staff Associateals Staff Associate.; dV�;!7g Supervisor Maintenance I ; _j -m Supervisor Production 11 Supervisor Production 11 7, il IV 37459231 From: Big Ten Property Management LLC <rentals@bigteniowacity.com> Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 11:53 AM To: Jann Ream; Stan Laverman Cc: 'Joseph T. Moreland'; Council; Doug Boothroy; Eleanor M. Dilkes Subject: 505 Brookland Park Drive Iowa City IA - Tailgate Importance: High Jann- Sorry I am just going to send this out not in a formal letter just a little unhappy with your comments on the phone today and this ridiculous situation that could affect tens of thousands of Hawkeye Fans if what you claim is true. Per our conversation on the phone just a few minutes ago I want to express my grave concern with your comments relating to Tailgating on Game Day as a hole as your comments were alarming and grossly not accurate. Your tone frankly was arrogant and argumentative and not appreciated. You specifically stated on the phone to me that no property owner can have anyone "Tailgating" on their property unless the "Tailgaters" live at the property those were your words not mine! And you emailed me the same today see email below. This is not an accurate statement. This use is permitted per City Code and is not an accessory use as you claim in your email below. You stated further that "Tailgating" is not permitted on any property and that property owners are only permitted to "park cars" on properties and those parked on the properties are not permitted or allowed to "Tailgate" on them for Gameday. This is not an accurate statement. You further told me you are working on enforcing "parking only" on property owners and plan on stopping "Tailgating" on properties in the area per City Council and Staffs direction and you went onto state that you are only enforcing the City Code as it is written. You also email that statement to me read your email below. Clearly City Code allows for "Tailgating" as it is written. It defines it in the City Code. So let's look at the City Code as it is written. Very important here is an email series from you to me in October 2011 discussing this exact issue before us today and you defining "Tailgating" on the properties per City Code. "Tailgating" per your email is an "informal social gathering that is non-commercial" so if property owners are only allowed to park cars and not "Tailgate" why would the City Code allow for this use i.e. "an informal social gathering" and define it as "Tailgating"? For the record what occurred at 505 Brookland Park Drive meets the text book definition of "Tailgating" per City Code per your email in 2011 "an informal social gathering that is non-commercial" So, as a non — commercial gathering, it does not require a temporary use permit". Please show me where it states in the City Code that the only persons permitted to perform "Tailgating" have to live at the property as you claim in your letter and email. The folks that used the property paid to park at this location and were "Tailgating" per your definition of the City Code that is all that occurred at this location nothing more nothing less. Jann your email today also claims a service for a fee was provided i.e. "Nor services provided for a fee"? This claim is not accurate or supported and clearly that language within the code is there for Vendors if they are selling goods and services not people Parking or simply Parking and "Tailgating" as permitted by the code. If that was interrupted the way you mean it to then you could not even rent parking on the property and that would make the City Code meaningless. That is ridiculous. No services were provided by us or the party renting the space and no commercial use occurred at this location requiring permits. All that occurred at this location on the date in question was normal "Tailgating" per City Code nothing more nothing less. If you have some sort of facts that I am not aware to support your claims in this Notice of Violation, your letter or emails please provide them to me now if not you can void this Notice of Violation. Also looking at your email if you are confused on "Tailgating" vs. "Tailgate" it clearly to us has the same meaning and to anyone in public eye so not sure if this is some sort of word play but this entire situation is a waste of time. This is your email to me on October 21, 2011: You clarified Commercial Use (Such As Vendors) no vendors or commercial use occurred at 505 Brookland Park Drive no services for fees were provided as defined in the City Code by anyone at this location. From: Jann Ream [mailto:Jane-Ream(a),iowa-citv.or¢l Sent: Friday, October 21, 20118:31 AM To: 'Tracy Barkalow' Cc: Sarah Holecek; Sara Greenwood Hektoen Subject: RE: Question - Gameday I think I understand your question. "Tailgating" is specifically defined in the zoning code as an informal social gathering that is non-commercial. So, as a non —commercial gathering, it does not require a temporary use permit. No alcohol is sold at a tailgate, nor is any admission fee charged, goods sold or given away, nor services provided for a fee. In this same definition, temporary parking for tailgate events is allowed —so, again, the temporary parking does not need a temporary use permit. The commercial uses (such as vendors) require a temporary use permit. Hopefully, this answers your question. Jann From: Tracy Barkalowfmailto:Tracy(a,barkalowhomes.coml Sent: Thursday, October 20, 20114:28 PM To: Jann Ream Subject: RE: Question - Gameday So I take it that you would say a commercial use would be the reason for a Temporary Use Permit as a Tailgate does not need a Temporary Use Permit correct? Respectfully, "OH, BY THE WAY I'M NEVER TOO BUSY FOR YOUR REFERRALS" TRACY S. BARKALOW - CBR COMMERCIAL - RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT REAL ESTATE BROKER Barkalow & Associates Realtors T.R. Investments Inc./DBA Barkalow & Associates Realtors 373 E College Street Iowa City Iowa 52240 Mobile 319-631-3268 Office 319-354-8644 Toll Free 800-728-6819 ext.202 Fax 319-354-8652 Website: www.barkalowhomes.com Licensed Broker in the State of Iowa This e-mail, including attachments, is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510- 2521, is confidential, and maybe legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Please reply to the sender that you have received the message in error, and then please delete it. Thank you Respectfully, Tracy Barkalow, , Manager Big Ten Property Management LLC MAIL: PO Box 1490 Iowa City, IA 52244 OFFICE: 250 12' Avenue Ste 150 Coralville IA 52241 Phone: (319) 354-0028 Fax: (319) 354-0921 Email: rentalsCa,BigTenlowaCity.com Website: www.BigTenIowaCity.com Owner is an Iowa Real Estate Broker *All lease pricine, terms and conditions can chance at anytime prior to lease execution without notice. This e-mail, including attachments, is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510- 2521, is confidential, and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Please reply to the sender that you have received the message in error, and then please delete it. Thank you From: Jann Ream [mailto:Jann-Ream@iowa-city.org] Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 10:10 AM To: 'Big Ten Property Management LLC; Stan Laverman Subject: RE: 505 Brookland Park Drive Iowa City IA - Tailgate Tracy — See the zoning code's definition of tailgating below: "TAILGATING: A home football game day informal social gathering that is noncommercial and may include eating and drinking beverages (alcoholic or nonalcoholic) as part of the activities. Temporary parking on unimproved surfaces located on private property is allowed during tailgate events. No alcohol is sold at a tailgate, nor is any admission fee charged, goods sold or given away, nor services provided for a fee." "Nor services provided for a fee" is the pertinent language in this situation. When Stan contacted Tyler about the trash issue at the property, Tyler was very clear in his statement that the people who were responsible were from out of town and had rented the property for their tailgate. This has been corroborated by neighbors. If the tenants were having the tailgate, that would fine since they live there and the tailgate would be accessory to their use. If an outside party (not a resident) were to lease a property for the purposes of a tailgate, that would be a violation. It is not accessory and is a service provided for a fee. So the tailgating activity does not meet City code and must cease. Please be aware that tailgating enforcement has been prioritized. You are not the only property owner to receive a notice of this type. We will be checking these activities on home football game days for compliance. At this time we are requesting your Informational Disclosure and Acknowledgement form for this property. Please submit that to either Stan or myself by Wednesday of next week. Thank you -Jahn From: Big Ten Property Management LLC fmailto:rentalsC&bisteniowaciiy.coml Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 3:48 PM To: Stan Laverman Cc: Jann Ream Subject: 505 Brookland Park Drive Iowa City IA - Tailgate Importance: High Jann- We received your attached letter dated October 31, 2016 today regarding 505 Brookland Park Drive Iowa City this Notice of Violation is baseless. At no time has there ever been any type of "commercial tailgating activities" at this location. All football tailgating activities at this location meet current City of Iowa City Ordinances in effect for tailgating i.e. the use is parking and tailgating at this property and do not require a permit. If there is something we are missing of that you have information about that we are unaware of feel free to let me know. Tracy Barkalow, Manager Big Ten Property Management LLC MAIL: PO Box 1490 Iowa City, IA 52244 OFFICE: 250 12`s Avenue Ste 150 Coralville IA 52241 Phone: (319) 354-0028 Fax: (319) 354-0921 Email: rentalsna,BigTenIowaCity.com Website: www.BiRTenIowaCity.com Owner is an Iowa Real Estate Broker *All lease pricing terms and conditions can change at anvtime prior to lease execution without notice. This e-mail, including attachments, is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510- 2521, is confidential, and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Please reply to the sender that you have received the message in error, and then please delete it. Thank you This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com Marian Karr From: Big Ten Property Management LLC <rentals@bigteniowacity.com> Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 11:59 AM To: Jann Ream; Stan Laverman Cc: 'Joseph T. Moreland'; Council; Doug Boothroy; Eleanor M. Dilkes Subject: 505 Brookland Park Drive Iowa City IA - Tailgate Attachments: doc20161103114910.pdf Importance: High Sorry forgot to attached your letters Respectfully, Tracy Barkalow — Manager Big Ten Property Management LLC 13M11rAEel *.M§EW 17 Iowa City, IA 52244 OFFICE: 250 12a' Avenue Ste 150 Coralville IA 52241 Phone: (319) 354-0028 Fax: (319) 354-0921 Email: rentalsaa.BigTenIowaCitv.com Website: www.Bi¢TenIowaCitv.com Owner is an Iowa Real Estate Broker *All lease pricing, terms and conditions can change at anytime prior to lease execution without notice. This e-mail, including attachments, is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510- 2521, is confidential, and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Please reply to the sender that you have received the message in error, and then please delete it. Thank you This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. Iq www.avast.com CITY OF IOWA CITY Department of Neighborhood and Development Services 410 Washington Sheet Iowa City, Iowa 52240 October 31, 2016 TSB Holdings LLC Big Ten Property Management PO Box 1490 Iowa City, IA 52244 Dear Tracy and Tyler: It has been brought to the City's attention that the property you own and manage at 505 Brookland Park Drive in Iowa City has been contracted for commercial tailgating activities during this current football season. From conversations with the Senior Housing Inspector, Stan Laverman, concerning trash on the exterior, it was made apparent that the tenants were not responsible for the trash. The property was rented to persons from out of Iowa City and who do not live at the residence to use as a tailgating venue. Commercial recreational uses are not permitted in residential zones. By definition, a tailgate cannot be for commercial purposes. The tailgate cannot be considered an accessory use because the actual residents of the property were not part of the tailgating activity. Enclosed is a Notice of Violation requiring that this use cease immediately. The property must not be used for any commercial tailgating activity during any subsequent home football games. If you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter further, please contact me at 319-356-5120. Th you, G//I�YI Ream ode Enforcement Specialist City of Iowa City NOTICE OF VIOLATION DATE : October 31, 2016 TSB HOLDINGS LLC PO BOX 1490 IOWA CITY, IA 52244 Case #: COM16-01634 Location of Violation: 505 BROOKLAND PARK DR Dear Property Owner. CITY OF IOWA CITY According to the records of the tax assessor, you are an owner of the above -referenced property. On 10128/2016, 1 observed an apparent violation of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Iowa City on your property. Type of Violation: zones 14-2A-2: Commercial recreational uses are not permitted in RS -5 14-9A-1: Tailgating uses cannot be for commercial purposes 14-4C-1: Accessory uses must be subordinate to the principal use on the property. Corrective Action Required: CEASE USING PROPERTY AS COMMECIAL ENTERTAINMENT VENUE VIOLATION MUST BE ABATED ON OR BEFORE: 11/112016 If you believe that you are not In violation of the City Code, please contact this office to review the situation. If you intend to bring the property into compliance with the Code, but cannot meet the stated deadline, please contact this office and we will attempt to work with you on a short etdension. If you do not take the requested action or make other arrangements with this office by the specified date, we will begin formal enforcement action. You will not receive an additional warning before we begin formal enforcement action. Enforcement action may include civilpenalties, administrative remedies such as denial or revocation of City permits and licenses, criminal court. proceedings, and/or action for an injunction or other court order directing elimination of the violation. An administrative fee of $75 will be assessed for a 1st offense violation that Is not abated by the reinspection date. All subsequent violations cited under the same code section will be assessed a $75 administrative fee. If you wish to discuss any aspect of this order, please call me at 319-356-5120. Ynn ReamNCODE ENF. SPECIALIST com viol.rpt IP12 Julie Subject: FW: Five-year bike plan From: Kent Ralston <Kent-Ralston@iowa-citv.org> Date: November 4, 2016 at 1:47:54 PM CDT To: 'Think Bicycles Johnson County <thinkbicycles(a,atnail.com>, Sarah Walz <Sarah-Walz(a,iowa- cjt .or >, Mary Niichel <Mary-Niichel@iowa-city.org> Cc: Council <Council(cDiowa-city.org> Subject: RE: Five-year bike plan Hello Anne —Thank you for the kind note. Staff also very much appreciates your willingness to assist with the process — it was a great team effort. I look forward to working with you and the other members of Think Bicycles of Johnson County to ensure that the Bike Master Plan is a success. Best Regards, Kent Ralston, AICP Executive Director I Metropolitan Planning Organization of Johnson County Transportation Planner I City of Iowa City 410 E. Washington St. Iowa City, IA 52240 319.356.5253 From: Think Bicycles Johnson County[mailto:thinkbicycles(ftmail.coml Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 1:00 PM To: Kent Ralston; Sarah Walz; Mary Niichel Cc: Council Subject: Five-year bike plan Kent, Sarah, and Mary, This is just a short note to thank you for your work in getting the five-year bike plan up and running. In some ways, the bulk of the process has just begun, but I was very impressed with how much work goes into the making of a request for proposal and how smoothly it all went. Without your hard work up front, it wouldn't have happened in a timely fashion! Alta and RDG have done great work in other communities like ours and I see great things for bicycles in our future! Best, Anne Duggan President Think Bicycles of Johnson County Together we can make a difference! Individual memberships of Think Bicycles of Johnson County cost only $10 a year. Sponsoring businesses and organizations are $25 a year. Find out more at thinkbicycles.org. Facebook: Think Bicycles of Johnson County Twitter: @thinkbicycles Email: thinkbicycles(a) mail.com From: City of Iowa City<CityoflowaCity@public.govdelivery.com> Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2016 2:33 PM To: Marian Karr Subject: City Council Listening Post © SHARE Having trouble viewing this email? View it as a Web page. °��°� 10WACITY FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Date: November 9, 2016 (revised date) Contact: Marian Karr Phone: 319-356-5041 City Council Listening Post The fifth City Council listening post will be held in the lobby of the Senior Center, 28 South Linn Street, on Tuesday, November 15, from 11:00 AM to 1:00 PM. Two Iowa City Council Members will attend each listening post and those two Council members will report back to the entire Council. Members of the community are encouraged to stop by and meet with Council representatives to discuss any community issue. No formal agenda or presentation is planned. The City Council of Iowa City approved the 2013 Equity Report Action Plan and five areas of focus for relationship building. The plan outlined top priorities and new initiatives developed by City staff and Council to promote racial equity and diversity. One of the new initiatives is to host listening posts in various locations throughout the year. Other listening posts are planned in other areas later in the year. For additional information, questions, or suggestions on future locations for listening posts please contact City Clerk Marian Karr at Marian-KarrcDiowa-citv.org, 319-356-5041; or Equity Director Stefanie Bowers at Stefanie-Bowers(a)iowa-citv.org, 319-356-5022. �ara� CITY Of IOIYA CITY lM[SCOCITYOT lnIRATURE STAY CONNECTED: Questions? Contact Us IP13 a P Marian Karr From: Marian Karr Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 4:27 PM To: Marian Karr Subject: Response Requested: Park Master Plan Stakeholder Workshop — December 1, 2016 Subject: Response Requested: Park Master Plan Stakeholder Workshop — December 1, 20(bate) Meeting invitation. Please respond with "yes" or "no" by Wednesday, November 16. Greetings community leaders, We're working on the next critical step in the development of our Iowa City Parks System Master Plan, and we need your help. Your attendance is requested for a strategic workshop to shape the future of our park system. Some of you have participated in small group discussions about this plan. Our workshop will build from those conversations and prepare us to take ideas to the public for feedback. We will keep you busy that morning, but you will need to do no advance preparation to participate - and we will provide coffee and refreshments. The workshop will be held Thursday, December 1 at 7:30-10:30 a.m. at the Robert A. Lee Recreation Center, 200 S. Gilbert St. Please note that this is not a meeting open to the general public. You have been chosen based on your connection to a key area of interest to our parks and users. If you are unable to attend, please let us know as soon as possible, so that we may invite another person. Please RSVP regarding your ability to participate by replying to this email. Your ideas and thoughts are critical to success of this important plan. We hope to see you on Thursday, December 1. Juli Seydell Johnson Director of Parks & Recreation Late Handouts Distributed From: ICPR community Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2016 4:35 PM To: ICPR community Cc: Juli Seydell-Johnson Subject: Response Requested: Park Master Plan Stakeholder Workshop — December 1, 20(bate) Meeting invitation. Please respond with "yes" or "no" by Wednesday, November 16. Greetings community leaders, We're working on the next critical step in the development of our Iowa City Parks System Master Plan, and we need your help. Your attendance is requested for a strategic workshop to shape the future of our park system. Some of you have participated in small group discussions about this plan. Our workshop will build from those conversations and prepare us to take ideas to the public for feedback. We will keep you busy that morning, but you will need to do no advance preparation to participate - and we will provide coffee and refreshments. The workshop will be held Thursday, December 1 at 7:30-10:30 a.m. at the Robert A. Lee Recreation Center, 200 S. Gilbert St. Please note that this is not a meeting open to the general public. You have been chosen based on your connection to a key area of interest to our parks and users. If you are unable to attend, please let us know as soon as possible, so that we may invite another person. Please RSVP regarding your ability to participate by replying to this email. Your ideas and thoughts are critical to success of this important plan. We hope to see you on Thursday, December 1. Juli Seydell Johnson Director of Parks & Recreation rmMrTm IP14 mJ MINUTES PRELIMINARY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OCTOBER 12, 2016 — 5:15 PM EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Larry Baker, Gene Chrischilles, Connie Goeb, Becky Soglin, Tim Weitzel MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Susan Dulek, Sarah Walz OTHERS PRESENT: Mark Bulechek, Duane Musser, Rick Streb CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 5:15 PM. ROLL CALL: A brief opening statement was read by Baker outlining the role and purpose of the Board and the procedures that would be followed the meeting. SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEM EXC16-00007: Discussion of an application submitted by Mark Bulechek for a special exception to reduce the front principal building setback for property located in the Low Density Single -Family (RS -5) zone at 9 Forest Glen. Walz began the staff report showing a map of the area to show. Walz explained that it is not a traditional street design with a uniform setback along the street, the houses are turned at various angles and in some cases the garages are set forward of the houses. In this instance setback averaging applies, requiring a deeper setback than the standard 20 feet. The applicant is proposing a new addition to enlarge two existing small bathrooms at the front of the house to make them handicapped accessible. Walz explained that there is practical difficulty in accomplishing this in part because the street is actually at a higher elevation than the house. In order to work with most of the existing floor plan and the existing plumbing it makes sense to extend the bathrooms at the front of the house rather than to reorient them to the back of the house. Walz reviewed the purpose of the setback standards. The proposed addition does not contradict any of the purposes and will not reduce separation between adjacent homes. However, because the addition faces the street, Staff recommends that Board include a condition that the new addition have windows (clerestory windows) along the front face of the addition. Walz stated that staff recommended approval the special exception to reduce the front principal setback allow a 10 x 17 foot home addition for the property, subject to the following conditions: • Substantial compliance with the floor plan submitted. • Inclusion of windows on the front face of the home addition, requiring one window per bathroom. Board of Adjustment October 12, 2016 Page 2 of 8 Baker opened the public hearing. Mark Bulecheck (9 Forest Glen) came forward to answer any questions from the Board. Baker asked Bulecheck if he had any problems with the Staff recommendation regarding the windows. Bulecheck replied that he is fine with complying with that condition. Baker closed the public hearing. Chrischilles noted that the Staff Report outlines the special difficulties with this particular application. Goeb stated that when she drove by the property it appears as if this addition will be fairly well disguised due to the elevation of the street in relation to the house. Goeb moved to approve EXC16-00007, a special exception seeking to reduce the front principal setback allow a 10 x 17 foot home addition for property located in the Low - Density Single -Family (RS -5) zone at 9 Forest Glen, subject to the following conditions: • Substantial compliance with the floor plan submitted. • Inclusion of windows on the front face of the home addition -one per bathroom. Chrischilles seconded the motion. Chrischilles stated regarding agenda item EXC16-00007 he concurs with the findings set forth in the Staff Report of October 12, 2016 and conclude the general and specific criteria are satisfied, in particular that the situation is peculiar to the property in that the topography limits an addition to the rear and the existing plumbing makes such an addition practically difficult. Furthermore the existing setbacks are not consistent and other buildings have elements that project from the front and the elevation plain. The reduction of the setback requirement can be accommodated safely under the existing lot and does not reduce privacy between the subject property and abutting property. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. Baker stated the motion declared approved, any person who wishes to appeal this decision to a court of record may do so within 30 days after this decision is filed with the City Clerk's Office. SPECIAL EXCEPTION ITEM EXC16-00009: Discussion of an application submitted by Tom Streb for a special exception to allow expansion of an existing Quick Vehicle Servicing use located in the Neighborhood Commercial (CN -1) zone located at 2221 Rochester Avenue. Walz showed an aerial view of the subject property, noting that the gas station is located in the CN -1 zone and that zone includes requirements that pedestrian oriented development, with buildings facing the street. The zone is intended for small scale businesses that serve the surrounding neighborhood, not regional or city-wide serving shopping areas. For that reason, expansion of a Quick Vehicle Servicing requires a special exception. This application does not expand or alter the building so there is not an opportunity to reorient the site in that manner Board of Adjustment October 12, 2016 Page 3 of 8 envisioned in the code. However, the applicant has addressed other elements of the they did site and bring it closer into compliance with the current regulations. Walz explained that the applicant is seeking to extend the gasoline service portion of the business and add a new canopy. The existing canopy is approximately 50 feet long and the new one would be almost 90 feet in length. There would also be the addition of another gasoline pump, currently there are two gas pumps present; the addition would allow for six vehicles to access the pumping area simultaneously. This will require a change in configuration and some of the improvements will include some additional landscape screening, removal of concrete in some areas and installing more landscaping, and extension of the sidewalk and reduction of parking along that sidewalk area and moved to be tucked behind the building. The applicant has moved the required bike parking rack to an area that is just off the sidewalk. Walz showed pictures of the site and noted that Staff did not see any issues with the proposed expansion. The applicant will have to meet all the City's requirements with regards to lighting of the canopy. New gasoline tank storage is permitted through the DNR with the Fire Department provides comment. Walz stated that the site plan that was submitted meets the standards of the setback of this area from the adjacent residential zones. The residential zone across the street is the site of Regina Educational Center and a single-family house to the north and east. There are additional commercial properties between the site and any other residential properties to the west and south. Walz stated that the southernmost loading space in the service area, currently appears to extend into a parking aisle that is shared by other properties in the commercial center. Staff recommends that the site plan be modified to better define and separate the vehicle fueling area from the shared aisle. This may be accomplished in one of two ways: (1) reorient the fueling spaces to make them perpendicular rather than angled spaces; or (2) extend the landscaped island (located west of the fueling area) to better define the edge of the shared aisle. A detailed landscaping plan must be reviewed to determine compliance with the S2 screening standard. Staff recommends approval of the special exception to allow the expansion of the Quick Vehicle Servicing Use in the Neighborhood Commercial subject to the following conditions: • Substantial compliance with the site plan submitted with the following alternations: o Staff approval of a detailed S2 landscaping plan for areas to the north and west of the parking and vehicle fueling area. o Modification of the fueling stalls or landscaped island to better define and separate the shared aisle from the fueling area. Soglin asked about the area to the south of the existing building and how it would be accessed since it is being blocked by the sidewalk. Walz showed on the photo how one would drive into the area and access the parking. Soglin asked about the height of the canopy and if it would be the same as the existing canopy. Walz stated the applicant can answer that question. Soglin noted that under the standard regarding Quick Vehicle Servicing, item C states "fuel dispensing equipment must be set back at least ten feet (10') from any street right of way and at least seventy feet (70') from any residential zone boundary" and there is housing in the building nearby. Walz explained that statement is only for residential zone. Soglin asked what kind of protection is available for the rental units that are in the area. Walz showed measurements on the site plan indicating that the dwelling units units will be more than ninety (90') feet from the Board of Adjustment October 12, 2016 Page 4of8 fuel pumps Soglin asked what the normal hours allowed for this gas station, could it be open 24 hours, which she understands might be a question for the applicant. She also questions the sign, not knowing if that can be part of this discussion, and feels vehicle need to be across the sidewalk to see around that sign. Soglin questioned moving of the dumpster, she noted when she visited the site she saw a garbage dumpster as well as a recycling bin, but the application talks of only one dumpster and it appears the spot they are indicating to move it to seems inaccessible for the garbage truck. Walz said Staff did look at that, and it will have to be worked out by the applicant and their dumpster company. Soglin asked how close the dumpster could be to a neighboring property and Walz said it can abut as long as there is proper screening. Chrischilles asked if there was anything from the City's perspective that the applicant couldn't make this a drive-through type filling station, get rid of the median strip. Walz said that, because it is a shared drive, there must be a setback from a shared drive. Baker asked about the diagram, and the southernmost pump that goes over the line, and what that line represents. Walz said that line is the setback for the canopy from the adjacent property to the east. Baker asked if the parking spaces were striped and Walz said they were. Baker stated there was a legal requirement that the parking space be a certain depth, so the space in- between the parking is a shared driveway and is there a specific required width for that shared driveway. Walz said there is a minimum width but this one is larger than the minimum. Baker discussed the configuration of the gas pump spaces, how they would be accessed. Finally he questioned the wording of the Staff recommendation and "modification of the fueling stalls or landscaped island to better define and separate the shared aisle from the fueling area" where does that get settled beyond the decision of the Board. Walz said it would be approved by Staff, however if the Board saw fit to approve a specific modification they may make that a condition of approval. Baker opened the public hearing and invited a representative from the Applicant to come forward and address the Board. Duane Musser (MMS Consultants) addressed the Board on behalf of the Applicant, his firm prepared the site plan and surrey. He stated that the intent of the angled approach to the gas pumps is to try to control traffic so there is not someone pulling through at the same time someone else is backing out. After doing several convenience store site plans over the years they find that one can pull through those angled spots and go around to avoid backing out into traffic. They eliminated several parking spaces to make that flow better and to circulate a clock- wise rotation. Musser also noted that the minimum for a shared driveway is 22 feet and this driveway is in excess of 26 feet. He also said they are in agreement to remove the concrete and add the raised landscaping and moving the bike rack. With regards to the dumpster, the current location doesn't meet any design standards or codes, they are just in the middle of the parking lot and not screened. It will be either the owners or the trash -haulers responsibility to get the new dumpster out of the enclosure, roll it out and to the garbage truck. That is common at other businesses. Musser stated they also reconfigured this plan as right now there are no safe ways to get from parking south up to the store, but by extending the sidewalk they are providing that pedestrian access. Soglin asked for more information about the dumpster location, noting there is not room there for two dumpsters (trash and recycling). Musser explained it would be only one dumpster. Board of Adjustment October 12, 2016 Page 5 of 8 Soglin stated her concern about the residential units close by the dumpster, with regards to odors and noise. Soglin asked about the canopy height and Musser confirmed it would be the same height at the current canopy. Walz added some additional information regarding the dumpster issue. The building setback, as shown on the site plan, is more than 16 feet and the relocation of the dumpster is a zoning requirement and if they change the site they have to move and screen the dumpster to comply. Soglin questioned the angle of the gas pumps and noted that all spaces would have to back out. Musser disagreed and said the landscaping is far enough away that a vehicle can go forward and turn left to exit the pumping station. Chrischilles asked about the transformer pad that is currently located in the space, and if there was anything on that pad. Musser stated there is a transformer on that pad and it will stay in the same spot. Chrischilles questioned if it would block the dumpsters and Musser doesn't believe it will. Rick Streb (2221 Rochester Avenue) came forward to answer the questions about the dumpster location and access. Streb said that they will have a dumpster that rolls, it will be on wheels, and be able to be moved out into the parking lot to the dumpster truck for disposal. Streb also confirmed they would just have the one dumpster, they will use their recycling facilities at another location for recycling needs. Baker closed the public hearing. Chrischilles noted his concern about the shared driveway, he feels there is room to maneuver through as Musser indicated, but is worried about the space on the south that intrudes into the shared driveway, it could be a conflict. Soglin also is concerned about the maneuverability around the gas pumps. Streb was called back to the podium to address that question and he noted it is not uncommon to have this configuration and they are confident that especially smaller vehicles will be able to pull through and that is why they are angled as shown. Soglin asked where in Iowa City there is a gas station with angled pumps. Streb stated he does not have a station with this configuration, but he has been to other sites where this configuration works. The gas company actually set up this configuration, and they have done a lot of research and assures them this is common and will work. Baker wondered whether they are trying to direct traffic by using the slanted drive-through from north to south—he asked how this would effect vehicles entering the commercial site form First Avenue vs. Rochester. Streb explained they are trying to make it convenient and most of the traffic does come from Rochester. Streb stated they looked at many possibilities, but this configuration seems to work the best. Musser added that they also had to remember that they must get a full size semi -truck into the space to fill the tanks and with this plan they are trying to make that easier and more convenient as well. Board of Adjustment October 12, 2016 Page 6 of 8 Weitzel moved to approve EXC16-00009, a special exception to allow the expansion of the Quick Vehicle Servicing Use in the Neighborhood Commercial (CN -1) zone at 2221 Rochester Avenue, subject to the following condition: • Substantial compliance with the site plan submitted with the following alternations: o Staff approval of a detailed S2 landscaping plan for areas to the north and west of the parking and vehicle fueling area. o Staff approval of modification of the fueling stalls or landscaped island to better define and separate the shared aisle from the fueling area. Chrischilles seconded the motion. Chrischilles asked about the motion and what is the Board then saying about the orientation of the gas pumps and the landscaping. Will there be landscaping to the southernmost stall. Walz said that second sub condition clarifies that. The Board can decide they like the current configuration and remove that second condition, or keep the condition and state they would like a modification. Chrischilles stated the potential trade-off in safety due to the better traffic flow versus the slight overhang into the shared driveway (which still allows for the required width of the shared drive) means the way it is currently shown on the site plan is satisfactory, it allows for a better traffic flow. Therefore he feels that second condition can be removed, and not modification is necessary. Weitzel stated he would agree with that as a friendly amendment to his motion. Soglin still has concerns, and would have liked to see examples of where this configuration has worked. Her concern is safety and thinks the access should be consistent, either always backing out of the spaces or always pulling forward, but to have both options could cause issues. She also feels there hasn't been enough information provided on other options, or even the need as to why an increase in pumps. Weitzel withdrew his first motion, Chrischilles withdrew his second, and Weitzel stated a new motion: Weitzel moved to approve EXC76-00009, a special exception to allow the expansion of the Quick Vehicle Servicing Use in the Neighborhood Commercial (CN -1) zone at 2221 Rochester Avenue, subject to the following condition: • Substantial compliance with the site plan submitted with the following alternation: o Staff approval of a detailed S2 landscaping plan for areas to the north and west of the parking and vehicle fueling area. Chrischilles seconded the motion. Goeb asked about the sign on Rochester Avenue, and if that will remain as is. Dulek said it can only be addressed if it is tied to one of the standards, or a safety concern. Baker stated he does not see a problem with the sign. Soglin said she did have a problem seeing traffic coming without pulling into the sidewalk. Baker asked if the sign is currently conforming. Walz cannot verify that at this time. Soglin said that is her concern. Dulek said she would have to know if the sign was grandfathered in if it is found to be non -conforming. She will look into that issue Board of Adjustment October 12, 2016 Page 7 of 8 and the City would take care of any non -conforming issues. Musser noted that there is currently no plan to replace the sign and there would be an expense opposition to relocating the sign. Soglin stated that the sign issue is related to general safety and welfare and does have safety concerns to the public due to additional traffic to the site. Soglin moved to amend the motion to add that if the sign is found to be non -conforming that it be brought into conformance and does not impede the vision of the sidewalk. Goeb seconded the amendment. The Board voted on the amendment, and it was added by a 5-0 vote. Chrischilles stated regarding agenda item EXC16-00009 he concurs with the findings set forth in the Staff Report of October 12, 2016 and conclude the general and specific criteria are satisfied unless amended or opposed by another Board member he recommends that the Board adopt the findings in the Staff Report as altered as our findings with acceptance of this proposal. Soglin expressed concern about the design of the fuel pump spaces and asked that the owners be attentive to any problems that might arise once this is built. She stated that it would have been helpful to have examples that this configuration has worked at other gas stations. Soglin added her finding under general standard 1 that the sign has the potential to obstruct views of the sidewalk and is therefore a public safety issue, especially as there are many school children in this area. A vote was taken and the motion passed 4-1 (Soglin dissenting). Baker stated the motion declared approved, any person who wishes to appeal this decision to a court of record may do so within 30 days after this decision is filed with the City Clerk's Office. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT INFORMATION: Walz stated that the Board will be hearing from the attorney that represents them in the Lusk Avenue case with an update. Baker added that the attorney has said that although the Board's written statements were part of the public record, anyone can access them through the City Clerk's office, but the Board should not individually provide those opinions to anyone. ADJOURNMENT: Weitzel moved to adjourn this meeting. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ATTENDANCE RECORD NAME TERM EXP. 12116 1/13 2117 3/9 4/13 6115 7/13 8110 9/14 9121 9/30 10112 BAKER, LARRY 1/1/2017 X X O/E X X X X I X X X X X GOEB, CONNIE 1/1/2020 X X X X X X X X X X O/E X GRENIS, BROCK 1/1/2016 X — CHRISCHILLES, T. GENE 1/1/2019 X X X X X O/E X X X X X X SOGLIN, BECKY 1/1/2018 X X X X O/E X X X X X X X WEITZEL, TIM 1/1/2021 X X X X X X X X X X KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused — = Not a Member IP15 Minutes Human Rights Commission October 18, 2016 Lobby Conference Room 111 1741 W Members Present: Eliza Willis, Andrea Cohen, Paul Retish, Shams Ghoneim, Adil Adams, Kim Hanrahan, Joe D. Coulter, D'Angelo Bailey, Barbara Kutzko. Staff Present: Stefanie Bowers. Recommendations to City Council: Yes. Amend the by-laws of the Iowa City Human Rights Commission to replace the phrase "men and women" with "persons" to be consistent with §2-2-3 of the Human Rights Ordinance. See attached memo from Human Rights Coordinator. Call to Order: Ghoneim called the meeting to order at 5:30 PM. Approval of September 20, 2016 Minutes: Coulter moved to approve the minutes; the motion was seconded by Willis with a friendly amendment to add the word "possibly" to the sentence on participation by speakerphone to the award selection committee under Human Rights Breakfast. A vote was taken and the motion passed 9-0. Introduction of New Commission Members: Commissioners went around the room to introduce and welcome the two newest members, Barbara Kutzko and D'Angelo Bailey. Amendment to the By -Laws for the Human Rights Commission: Coulter moved to approve the amendment to the Human Rights by-laws to replace the phrase "men and women" with "persons" to be consistent with §2-2-3 of the Human Rights Ordinance; the motion was seconded by Willis. A vote was taken and the motion passed 9-0. Celebrating the World's Children: The Commission donated its two complimentary tickets to persons who would not otherwise be able to attend this event due to the price of the tickets. The event is scheduled for Sunday, October 23 at the University of Iowa Athletic Club. Proclamations: Adams will accept on behalf of the Commission the proclamation for National Disability Employment Awareness Month at the Council meeting of October 18. Bailey will accept the proclamation for National American Indian Heritage Month at the Council meeting of November 1. Human Rights Breakfast: The recipients of this year's awards were announced and the Commission will recognize each on October 26. Diane Finnerty, Assistant Provost for Faculty at the University of Iowa, will deliver the keynote address. Ad Hoc Committee on Know Your Rights: Willis, Adams, Cohen and Hanrahan will meet in the near future to plan a series of workshops. Event topics may include domestic violence law and child abuse law. Building and Crossing Bridges Together: The event was a great success. The turnout for the afternoon session was very strong. However, the evening session did not have as many attendees. Ghoneim is planning a post planning committee meeting to follow up on the event and will also report back on evaluations of the event from participants, attendees and planners. Ad Hoc Committee on Why Vote? What's in it for Me: Willis provided an update on this series which included an event at Aspire and New Creations International Church. Willis would like to see this specific type of programming continue particularly during election season. Iowa City Community School District Equity Committee: Retish reported that the October meeting was canceled as it was scheduled over Yom Kippur. Retish would like to see the Commission do outreach to organizations to address the scheduling of meetings over religious holidays. The Ad Hoc Committee on Know Your Rights will discuss ways in which the Commission can address this concern. University of Iowa Center for Human Rights Advisory Board: Ghoneim reported that the next meeting is scheduled for November 29. The event on "Being Muslim in America" has been rescheduled for November 3. Reports of Commissioners: Coulter requested for the Commission, at its November meeting, to discuss making a recommendation to the Council to recognize Indigenous People's Day; noting that there are some states and cities across the nation that observe it as an alternative to recognizing Columbus Day. Ghoneim will participate in the I" round of interviews for candidates selected to interview for the position of Police Chief. Kutzko mentioned that she serves on the Diversity and Social Justice Committee for the University of Iowa School of Social Work and it will be hosting an open forum on sexual harassment. Adams attended a United Nations Johnson County event that was held at Pheasant Ridge earlier in the month and thought it was a well-planned program. Retish spoke on a group of parents who are organizing to create support for youth with disabilities in the work force. Cohen has recently been appointed to the University of Iowa Center for Human Rights Advisory Board. Adjournment: 7:04 PM. 2 t Agenda Item 5a CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMUO Date: October 7, 2016 To: Human Rights Commission From: Stefanie Bowers 4-.n ..G , 4� Re: Amend the By -Laws of the Iowa City Human Rights Commission Introduction/Background: The Human Rights Ordinance was given a comprehensive update in December, 2015. At that time, reference to "housing accommodation" was removed, as the term had no counterpart in the Fair Housing Act. The phrase was replaced with "dwelling." However, we were notified by the codifier that a few stray references to "housing accommodation" remained in the Ordinance. Because these references needed to be removed and replaced with "dwelling," we also had the opportunity to address another issue. The phrase "men and women' was used in describing desired appointments to the Commission. Given Iowa City's commitment to human rights for all, including those of all gender identities, we felt that replacing "men and women" with "persons" was more inclusive and better reflected the spirit of the City. Recommendation: Amend the by-laws of the Iowa City Human Rights Commission to replace the phrase "men and women" with "persons" to be consistent with the §2-2-3 Human Rights Ordinance. BY-LAWS OF THE IOWA CITY HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION iTICLE 1 THE COMMISSION Section A. The name of this organization is the Iowa City Human Rights Commission, referred to in these By -Laws as the Commission. The Commission is authorized by the City Council of the City of Iowa City through Municipal Ordinance Number 03-4105, effective date December 16, 2003. ARTICLE 2 PURPOSE Section A. As stated In Section 2-1-2 of the City Code. Section B. The purpose of the Commission is to provide for execution within the City of Iowa City, the policies of the larva Civil Rights Act of 1985 and the Federal Civil Rights Act. The Commission also promotes cooperation between the City of Iowa City and the State and Federal agencies enforcing these acts. ARTICLE 3 DUTIES Section A. Duties of the Commission shall include: 1) disseminate Information, educate the public on illegal discrimination and civil rights, and provide the enforcement necessary to further the goals of Tide 2 of the City Code; 2) cooperate within the limits of any appropriations made for its operation, with other agencies or organizations, both public and private, whose purposes are not inconsistent with those of Title 2 of the City Code; 3) plan and conduct programs designed to eliminate racial, religious, cultural and other intergroup tensions; and 4) educate the public on Illegal discrimination. I ARTICLE 4 MEMBERSHIP Section A. The Iowa City Human.Rights Commission shall consist of nine (9) members, appointed by vote of the City Council. All members shall be qualified electors of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, and shall serve as such without compensation but shag be entitled to the necessary expenses, including traveling expenses incurred in the discharge of their duties. so,�S Section B. Appointments shall take into consideration nfwertren of the various racial, religious, cultural, social and economic groups in the City. Section C. Members shall serve for a term of three (3) years and thereafter until a successor has been appointed. Section D. Orientation for members, including functions, duties and responsibilities, shall be conducted by the staff assigned to the Commission. Section E. Commissioners are expected to attend twelve (12) regularly scheduled monthly meetings during the calendar year. The Chairperson or Human Rights Coordinator shall be notified of an absence prior to any meeting. Section F. Three (3) consecutive, unexplained absences of a member from regular meetings shall result in a recommendation to the City Council from the Commission to discharge saki member and . )point a new member. Section G. Four (4) absences, unexplained absences in a 12 month period shall result in a recommendation to the City Council from the Commission to discharge said member and appoint a new member. `Section H. if position becomes vacant by reason of resignation or otherwise and results In an unexpired term of sic months or less, the Council may choose to fill the unexpired term in such a manner that the appointee shall continue in the position not only through the unexpired term but also through subsequent regular term. ARTICLE 5 OFFICERS Section A. The Commission shall have three (3) officers: Chairperson, Vice Chairperson and Secretary. Section B: Officers shall perform the duties set forth In these by-laws. Section C. The Chairperson and Vice -Chairperson shall be elected from the Commission's membership at its regular January meeting for a one (1) year tern. Section D. The Secretary shall be selected at the January meeting for a one (1) year term. The Secretary may, but need•not be, a Commissioner. Section E. The Commission shall fill vacancies among its officers for the remainder of an unexpired term. Section F. Chairperson, The Chairperson, when present, shall preslde at all meetings of the =mission, appoint committees, call special meeting and in general, perform all duties incident to the l' office of the Chairperson and such other duties as may be prescribed by the members from time to time. Section G. Vice -Chairperson. In the absence of the Chairperson or in the event of his/her death or inability or refusal to act, the Moe -Chairperson shall perform the duties of the Chairperson and when so acting shall have all the powers of and be subject to all the restrictions upon the Chairperson. Section H. Secretary. The Secretary shall be resporisible for keeping the official minutes of the Commission, filing the minutes and official documents and such other duties as may be prescribed by the members from time to time. ARTICLE 6 MEETINGS Section A. At least one (1) regular meeting shall be held each month. section B. The Chairperson, Vice Chairperson, or any three (3) Commissioners may call a special meeting. Section C. Meetings shall be held in an accessible, public meeting place. Notices of meetings (agenda) for all regular and special meetings shall be posted and distributed to members and the media at least 24 hours before any meeting is held. All provisions of the State open Meeting Law shall be followed. The Chairperson or a designated representative, together with appropriate members of the City staff shall prepare an agenda for all meetings. ( Section D. Commission officers shall set the agenda provided Commissioner suggestions are considered• ! .. icfion E. A quorum shall consist of five (5) Commissioners. A majority of present and voting members shall be necessary to pass a motion. The Chairperson shall vote as a member. Section F. The rules in the current edition of Roberts Rules of Order Newly Revised shall 'govern the Commission in all cases to which they are applicable and In which they are not inconsistent with these bylaws and any special rules or order the Commission may adopt. Section G. No formal action shall betaken on items not on the agenda. Section H. Time shall be made available during all regular meetings for public comment on items not on the agenda. Commentators shall address the Commission for no more than 5 minutes. Commissioners shall not engage in discussion with the public concerning said Items. Section I. Time shall be made available during all regular meetings for Commissioner reports of items not on the agenda. Commissioners shall not engage In discussion with one another concerning said reports. Section J. The Commission's Secretary and/or designee shall record all activities and statements made at Commission meetings, hereafter known as minutes of the me6fing. All Commission records shall be public except those excidded pursuant to Iowa Code, Chapter 22; City Code, Section 2-2a4. ARTICLE 7 SUBCOMMITTEES ( -cuon A. Formation of subcommittees shall be by majority vote of the Commission In whatever subject area, or whatever number -of committees, is deemed necessary. The committees) shall consigt of no more than four members. ARTICLE 8 AMENDMENTS Section A. The By-i.aws can be amended at any regular Commission meating by a majority vote, provided that the amendment has been submitted In writing to the Commission three (3) days prior to the meeting at which It Is to be acted upon and such amendment Is not in conflict with the Human Rights Ordinance, as amended. Indigenous Peoples' Day (From; Wikipedia) Columbus Day Non -observance The U.S. states of Hawaii, Alaska, Oregon, South Dakota and Vermont do not recognize Columbus Day at all; however, Hawaii, South Dakota, and Vermont mark the day with an alternative holiday or observance. Hawaii celebrates Discoverers' Day, which commemorates the Polynesian discoverers of Hawaii on the same date, the second Monday of October, 's 20 though the name change has not ended protest related to the observance of Columbus' discoveryAll The state government does not treat either Columbus Day or Discoverers' Day as a legal holiday;LLI state, city and county government offices and schools are open for business. Similarly, in 2016, Vermont started celebrating "Indigenous People's Day" instead of Columbus Day. Because this change was made by Governor Peter Shumlin's executive proclamation, it only applies for 2016. In the future it would have to be issued by the sitting governor on a yearly basis, or officially changed by the legislature in order to become permanent.LL11 On the other hand, South Dakota celebrates the day as an official state holiday known as "Native American Day" rather than Columbus Day.iL41 Oregon does not recognize Columbus Day, neither as a holiday nor a commemoration; schools and public offices remain open. Two additional states, Iowa and Nevada, do not celebrate Columbus Day as an official holiday, but the states' respective governors are "authorized and requested" by statute to proclaim the day each year. 26 Several other states have removed Columbus Day as a paid holiday for government workers while still maintaining Columbus Day either as a day of recognition or a legal holiday for other purposes. These include California and Texas .1111WU29 301 The city of Berkeley, California, has replaced Columbus Day with Indigenous People's Day since 1992, 31 a move which has been followed by multiple other localities including Sebastopol and Santa Cruz California; Dane County, Wisconsin; Minneapolis -Saint Paul, Minnesota; Seattle, Washington; Missoula Montana; Cambridge, Massachusetts; Denver, Colorado; and Phoenix Arizona. [281[32] [ 3 311 3 4I13511361 Various tribal governments in Oklahoma designate the day "Native American Day", or name the day after their own tribe. 31 Human Rights Commission Attendance Record Key X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused R = Resigned — = Vacant TERM 11/17 12/15 1/19 2/16 3/15 4/18 5/17 6/21 7/7 7/19 8/16 9/20 10/18 NAME EXP. IS 15 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 Joe D. Coulter 1/1/2019 X X X X X X O/E X X O/E X O/E X Adil D. 1/1/2019 — -- O/E O O/E O X X X X X X X Adams Eliza Jane 1/1/2019 — — X O/E X X X X X X X X X Willis Paul Relish 1/1/2017 X X O/E X X X X X X X X X X Orville 1/1/2017 X X X X X X X X X X R R R Townsend, Sr. Karol Krotz 1/1/2017 -- -- --- — — __ O O O R R R R Andrea Cohen 1/1/2018 --- -- X X X X X X X X X X X Kim 1/1/2018 X X X X O/E X X X X X O X X Hanrahan Shams 1/1/2018 X X O/E X X X X X X X X X X Ghoneim Barbara 1/1/2020 — -- -- — --- -- — — — _ X Kutzko D'Angelo 1/1/2020 — -- -- --- — — -- — _- — — — X Bailey Key X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused R = Resigned — = Vacant IP16 MINUTES PRELIMINARY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OCTOBER 20, 2016 — 5:30 PM — FORMAL MEETING HELLING CONFERENCE ROOM — CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Carolyn Dyer, Mike Hensch, Ann Freerks, Max Parsons, Mark Signs, Jodie Theobald MEMBERS ABSENT: Phoebe Martin STAFF PRESENT: Tracy Hightshoe, John Yapp OTHERS PRESENT: Freerks called the meeting to order at 5:30 PM. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: There were none PRESENTATION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING ACTION PLAN: Hightshoe presented and discussed the Affordable Housing Action Plan which includes 15 affordable housing strategies that the City Council approved at their September meeting. Hightshoe explained that affordable housing is considered those under 80% of median income for home ownership and people under 60% for rentals. Overall to be considered affordable is for a family to be paying less than 30% of their income on housing. The need for affordable housing in Iowa City keeps rising over the years. Hightshoe showed data on the needs versus the inventory of affordable housing in Iowa City. Yapp noted this presentation is being made to the Commission because there are many code amendments as part of this larger plan which will make their way in front of the Commission, and it will help put those code amendments into the larger context of the strategy. Hightshoe gave an overview of the Affordable Housing Strategy. Freerks asked about the goal of keeping families with children in the same home for stability, and why isn't there an incentive to stay put and not allow the housing vouchers to transfer to new locations. Hightshoe agreed that stability is important, but it is a federal program to allow tenants to move. She noted it is rare for families to move frequently once they are settled in a home. There was discussion about tenant displacement and assistance. Freerks asked about how it would work if it were a student housing unit that was being torn down. Yapp said that if more than 12 units are being torn down, it does not matter if the tenants are students or household families, then the tenant displacement policy would take effect. Planning and Zoning Commission October 20, 2016— Formal Meeting Page 2 of 4 Freerks asked about rooming houses and Yapp stated that under the Code a rooming house is considered one household because they share a kitchen. So he would need to follow up on that situation because it could affect more than 12 tenants. Rooming houses typically rent a 'room' to each tenant, so that each room might be able to be considered a household in a rooming house situation. Hightshoe noted that developers have said the City's design standards can be an obstacle for constructing affordable housing so the City will be looking into a review of the design standards. Freerks cautioned against varying the design standards noting they were put in place because the City was told the multi -family design standards in Iowa City are weak compared to other communities. Yapp said the multi -family design standards have evolved over the past 10-15 years and have gotten stricter with the goal (especially in the older neighborhoods) is for the project to fit into the neighborhoods and be constructed with high quality materials. Yapp said the concern is the design standards add costs. Freerks agreed, but commented that looking at some of the older multi -family buildings in the City shows why those design standards are necessary. Theobald asked about rentals and over occupancy and how that is enforced. Hightshoe said when the City hears complaints they do investigate about over -occupancy, but the City does have to give notice to landlords so a lot of times when the landlords are given notice they have time to move out some of the beds. Dyer asked about tiny houses if they could be used for affordable housing. Yapp said those could be used for affordable housing however tiny houses have to be hooked up to water and sewer and if it is not then it's considered a recreational vehicle. Dyer said that in some areas they have placed tiny houses in areas to help with homelessness. Freerks stated her concern about the use of duplexes and triplexes as the City had just undergone extensive zoning code amendments about use of duplexes in residential areas. Yapp said this would be factored into a form -based code item, so with a form -based code duplexes and triplexes could be allowed, according to location and design criteria in a Form Based Code. Parsons asked why the Council wanted to include the Northside in the request for proposal for form -based code (in addition to the Alexander School area). Yapp said there was perhaps an opportunity to add housing diversity to the Northside. Yapp noted most of the Northside is covered by historical or conservation overlays. Freerks added she feels the Council should rethink adding the Northside to this request. Freerks stated it would be great if the school district and other communities (Coralville and North Liberty) would also be on board with this type of affordable housing plan because it cannot truly be successful as a community until everyone is a part of it. Signs added that he knows there is pressure on Coralville (and North Liberty to a lesser extent) to do more with affordable housing and the Affordable Housing Coalition will be working on those fronts heavily in the upcoming years. The approach the Affordable Housing Coalition needs to take with the other communities is to give them an assortment of ideas and that process will likely begin in Coralville soon. Hightshoe noted that she did a similar presentation to a joint meeting with representative from Coralville and North Liberty and they seemed very interested in the ideas Iowa City had to share. Planning and Zoning Commission October 20, 2016— Formal Meeting Page 3 of 4 Signs added that the thing about affordable housing is everyone agrees communities need it, however no one wants it in their neighborhood. So how is a community to fill the need for 2200 units if no one wants them in their neighborhood? The Commissioners thanked Hightshoe for the presentation. CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: OCTOBER 6, 2016 Hensch moved to approve the meeting minutes of October 6, 2016 with changes. Parsons seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION: Yapp noted that on agendas instead of listing 'other business" it will be listed as "Planning and Zoning Information" per a directive of the legal department. "Other Business' is vague and implies there may be other official business, when the intent is for this part of the agenda to be for sharing of information. Yapp also referred to a flyer for a presentation by Jeff Speck, a renowned advocate for walkability, who will be lecturing in Iowa City on October 24. ADJOURNMENT: Parsons moved to adjourn. Hensch seconded. A vote was taken and motion carried 6-0. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2015-2016 KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused -- = Not a Member 11/5 11/19 12/3 1/7 1/2112/1913/3 3/17 417 4/21 5/5 5/19 6/2 7/7 7/21 8/4 9/1 10/6 10/20 DYER,CAROLYN X X X X X I X X X X X X X X X X X X X X EASTHAM, CHARLIE X X X X X X X X X X — — — — — FREERKS, ANN O/E X X X O/E X X X X X X O/E X O/E X X X X X HENSCH, MIKE X X X X X X X X X X X X X X O/E X X X X MARTIN, PHOEBE O/E X X X X X X X X X X X X X O/E X X X O/E PARSONS, MAX X O/E X X X X X O/E X X X X X X X X XX X SIGNS, MARK — — — — — — — X X X X X X X X X THEOBALD, JODIE X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused -- = Not a Member