Long Beach, CA
File #: 14-0948    Version: 1 Name: LBA - Airfield Geometry Study D5
Type: Agenda Item Status: Approved
File created: 10/23/2014 In control: City Council
On agenda: 12/2/2014 Final action: 12/2/2014
Title: Recommendation to approve preferred Alternative 3A of the Airfield Geometry Study for the Long Beach Airport; and authorize City Manager to finalize and submit the Airfield Geometry Study to the Federal Aviation Administration for review and approval. (District 5)
Sponsors: Long Beach Airport
Attachments: 1. 120214-R-33sr&att.pdf
Related files: 11-0117, 11-1217, 14-1031, 15-1084
TITLE
Recommendation to approve preferred Alternative 3A of the Airfield Geometry Study for the Long Beach Airport; and authorize City Manager to finalize and submit the Airfield Geometry Study to the Federal Aviation Administration for review and approval. (District 5)

DISCUSSION
On February 8, 2011, the City Council authorized the City Manager to apply for Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Airport Improvement Program (AIP) grant funds to conduct an Airfield Geometry Study and Airport Strategic Plan (Study) to evaluate the existing airfield geometry and provide alternatives for safety, operational, and financial benefits, and the reduction of risk for the Long Beach Airport (Airport). The FAA provided that grant funding for the Study at the end of Fiscal Year 2011.

On December 13, 2011, the City Council authorized the City Manager to execute an agreement with HNTB Corporation (HNTB) in the amount of $1,100,000 for planning and engineering consulting services for the Study. Since that time, Airport staff and HNTB have engaged in extensive public outreach, including stakeholder and technical working group meetings with various tenants and Airport users.

The Study prepared by HNTB provides a comprehensive evaluation of the airfield geometry, providing alternatives for the reduction of risk in response to the Commercial Aviation Safety Team (CAST) Report and analysis of the airfield design, which help to reduce excess infrastructure and increase financial benefits through lower operation and maintenance costs. The Study also analyzed a “no project” alternative. The Study included all necessary coordination with the FAA, user groups, tenants, and the public, where appropriate. Budgetary estimates for the design and construction of the most promising alternatives have been included (Attachment).

The “no project” alternative evaluated the impact of maintaining the current airfield geometry without addressing the conditions which necessitated the Study. ...

Click here for full text