19
Protecting the Bay Area’s Aviation Resources The Land-Use Connection Regional Airport Planning Committee April 2005
Protecting the Bay Area’s Aviation ResourcesThe Land-Use Connection
Regional Airport Planning CommitteeApril 2005
CVR3
Protecting the Bay Area’sAviation ResourcesThe Land-Use Connection
Regional Airport Planning CommitteeApril 2005
Published by:
Metropolitan Transportation CommissionJoseph P. Bort MetroCenter101 Eighth StreetOakland, CA 94607-4700Tel. 510.464.7700TDD/TTY 510.464.7769Fax 510.464.7848E-mail [email protected] address <www.mtc.ca.gov>
CVR4
Table of Contents
Introduction
Why Airports Are Important to the Bay Area
Consequences of Not Protecting Airports
The Impact of Airports on Communities
Key Questions to Ask When Evaluating NewLand-Use Proposals Around Airports
The Final Decision
Where to Go to for More Information
Appendices• Data References• Contacts
3
5
13
15
17
23
24
2627
2 3
IntroductionAppropriate land-use planning around airports is a shared respon-sibility involving local governments, county airport land use com-missions and the public. This guide is intended to serve as aresource for the general public and elected officials who will beaddressing future land-use proposals near airports. It explains whyairports are, and will continue to be, important to the Bay Area andprovides a “checklist” of key questions local decision-makers andthe public should consider when evaluating new land uses for com-patibility with established airport noise and safety criteria. Theguide also lists key sources of information and contacts to helpmake informed decisions.
The Bay Area is home to some 23 airports that serve commercialand general aviation users. This regional airport system forms anintegral part of the Bay Area’s transportation network by providinglinks to communities throughout the United States and abroad.Because of the growing demand for aviation services in the BayArea and difficulties encountered with past airport improvementplans, it is essential that the capacity of existing airports be pre-served. Bay Area communities, faced with accelerating housing andeconomic needs, are increasingly having to make difficult decisionsconcerning the amount and type of new development to allow inand near airport flight corridors. Development that is not compati-ble with aviation activity, due to noise or safety factors, may strainairport and community relations as well as create long-term opera-tional problems for the airport. Thus, land-use decisions by localgovernments have become inextricably linked with the future ofaviation in the Bay Area.
This guide has been prepared by the Regional Airport PlanningCommittee, an advisory committee to the Metropolitan Trans-portation Commission, Bay Conservation and Development Com-mission, and Association of Bay Area Governments. The committeeis charged with addressing the long-term aviation needs of the BayArea and addressing regional environmental issues associated withserving projected aviation demand.
Bay Area Airports
Oakland
San Jose
San Francisco
Sonoma County
Napa County
Nut Tree
Travis AFB
Concord
Livermore
Reid Hillview
Hayward
San Carlos
Palo AltoHalf Moon
Bay
South County
Moffett(NASA)Legend
General Aviation
Commercial(Air Passenger/Air Cargo)
Military/Federal
Cloverdale
Healdsburg
Angwin-Parrett
Rio Vista
Byron
GnossField
PetalumaSonoma Skypark
Sonoma Valley
4 5
Jobs, Jobs, JobsA comprehensive economicstudy of the Bay Area’s threemajor commercial airports in1999 attributed nearly 470,000Bay Area jobs — roughly one inseven jobs — to workers con-nected to the airline industry aswell as workers providing ser-vices to business travelers andtourists from outside the region(i.e., jobs with airlines, the air-port itself, airport concessions,airport ground transportation,air freight forwarders, hotelsand restaurants, etc.). One newstartup airline to be headquar-tered in the Bay Areaannounced it would create1,500 new jobs and pump mil-lions of dollars into the localeconomy.
The region’s only remainingmilitary airport, Travis AirForce Base, is the largest
employer in all of Solano Coun-ty, with 15,000 military andcivilian workers. The MoffettFederal Airfield complex, sup-porting NASA’s Ames ResearchCenter and Lockheed’s aero-space operations, employs thou-sands of workers in the SouthBay and is helping to keep theBay Area in the forefront of theaerospace industry. In addition,numerous other jobs are pro-vided by the region’s 20 generalaviation airports, including air-port staff, businesses on the air-port, and the police, fire andother emergency services thatuse these airports.
Bay Area airports also providejob training opportunities forpeople who are planning tobecome pilots, aviation mechan-ics, or work in the fields of air-port management/ operations,and air traffic control.
Airport-generated jobs 51,170
Indirect/induced jobs due to airports 43,440
Visitor-related 373,590
Bay Area total: 468,200
Why Airports Are Important to the Bay Area
Jobs Attributed to Bay Area’s Three Major Airports, 1999(1)
7
Travel ConvenienceOf course, the primary reasonfor airports in the first place isto allow people to travel forbusiness, vacations, family gath-erings, school and other typesof trips. Bay Area commercialairports provide access to thenational and international avia-tion network, with direct flightsto over 70 domestic and 30international cities, and serve 55 million air travelers a year.
General aviation airports handleabout four times as many flightsas the commercial airports, andover half of the flights have des-tinations outside the immediateairport area (i.e., are not localtraining flights). Typically peo-ple use general aviation for pur-poses similar to a private car —to visit friends and relatives,
make business trips, commuteto a distant job, or take recre-ational trips (see sidebar “Facesof Bay Area General Aviation”).About 75 percent of the nation’sairline passenger activity takesplace at only 30 major airportsaround the country. Thenation’s 5,400 smaller generalaviation airports not only allowtravelers to avoid these crowdedairport hubs, but also extendthe reach of the nation’s airtransportation system.
The Business AdvantageIn today’s competitive businessworld, there is no substitute forface-to-face contact. Twenty-fivepercent of Bay Area air travelerslist business as their primarytrip purpose(3). The Bay Area’sairports allow business leadersin the fields of computers,biotechnology, telecommunica-tions and higher education totravel frequently and stay in theforefront of their fields. Moreand more, business travel is notjust conducted using the sched-uled airlines, as a number of
6
A Boost to the EconomyThese aviation-generated jobscreate over $1.8 billion in per-sonal income for Bay Area resi-dents. When all the revenuesderived from aviation productsand services are tallied up (i.e.,airline tickets purchased, ship-ment of air cargo, rental carincome, hotel/motel incomefrom visitors, etc.), they totaledover $37 billion in 1999 (1).Highlighting the importance ofairports in bringing visitors tothe Bay Area, $17 billion ofthese revenues was the productof visitor spending on suchitems as lodging, meals, enter-tainment and ground trans-portation during their stay. Visi-tors using the Bay Area generalaviation airports, such astourists to the northern WineCountry, have similar spendingpatterns, but estimates of theserevenues are not available.
The airports also boost theeconomy by playing a centralrole in the freight industry,allowing rapid shipment of aircargo ranging from high-valueelectronic products to perish-able agricultural goods, to smallcatalog items purchased overthe internet. Air cargo will con-tinue to expand as more and
more companies turn to ship-ment by air to avoid transporta-tion delays, keep inventory andwarehousing costs down, andbetter meet the demand for seasonal products or productsthat have a short shelf life. Aneconomic study by Caltrans(2)
estimated that the value of aircargo shipped through the BayArea’s three commercial airportsin 2000 was $46 billion, about16 percent of the value of all USair exports.
San Francisco International Air-port plays a primary role inoverseas air cargo shipment, dueto the large number of interna-tional routes flown out of thisairport, and Oakland Interna-tional Airport is a regionalfreight hub for the largestdomestic air freight operator inthe country. Together, the BayArea’s commercial airports han-dle some 1.5 million tons ofdomestic and internationalfreight and air mail each year.
9
This enables airports to be self-supporting, rather than relyingon local government generalfunds. Still, local governmentsand school districts derivefinancial benefits from aviationactivity through taxes on fuel,possessory interest and proper-ty. Statewide these taxes totalapproximately $250 million ayear, with about $100 milliongoing to the state and $150 mil-lion going to cities, counties andschool districts(2).
Indirect benefits to local govern-ments come from the taxes paidby workers in the aviation indus-try on retail purchases and prop-erty taxes and from taxes paidby visiting air travelers to the BayArea (estimated to be some $2billion a year) which flow intolocal government coffers(1).
Communities having an airportnearby also may benefit whencompanies needing access toaviation services make decisionsabout where to expand or relo-cate. Businesses located nearairports also can provide anadditional economic boost to acommunity by maintaining andenhancing property values inthese areas.
Public Safety and Other ServicesAirports are valuable assetswhen it comes to protecting lifeand property, as local govern-ments have increasingly recog-nized the value of aviation inresponding to crime, fires andmedical emergencies. When thenext major earthquake hits theBay Area, the commercial andgeneral aviation airports thatare not damaged will almostcertainly be heavily used todeliver critical medical andemergency supplies to localcommunities. Bay Area airportscurrently provide the followingpublic services:
• law enforcement• fire protection • lifeline medical services and
organ transport • aircraft used to fight forest
fires• search-and-rescue aircraft • real-time traffic surveillance
and reporting
8
corporations own and operatetheir own aircraft. This allowsbusy managers to get to theirplants and customers quicklywhile avoiding delays and thehassle of today’s crowded air-port terminals. Many otherindividuals purchase generalaviation aircraft for business useas well. Federal AviationAdministration (FAA) surveysshow that 26 percent of generalaviation aircraft are used exclu-sively for business, while 60 per-cent of all general aviation air-craft are used partially for busi-ness.
Financial Contributions to Local Governments and School DistrictsUnder current federal law, mostrevenues generated on the air-port must stay on the airport.
Faces of Bay Area General Aviation
• Paul B. uses his helicopterto avoid commuting to hiscompany on a pair of thestate’s most congestedhighways (I-580 and I-680).
• Rich R. lives in Durango,Colorado, and uses his air-craft to commute weekly tohis workplace in the Tri-Valley area.
• Ron D., Mike G., and sevenother aircraft owners, flytheir aircraft for U.S. CoastGuard Auxiliary patrols,ranging from the Montereyseashore to the northernCalifornia state boundary.
• Ken B. transported severalloads of wheelchairs in hisprivate jet as a donation toseveral needy countries.
• J. Smith donates her aircraftand time to “Angel Flightsof America” to fly patientsand their families free ofcharge to hospitals formedical treatment. She hasalso flown organs to trans-plant recipients with last-minute notice.
1110
Airports and Open Space PreservationAs urban land is developed andthen redeveloped to satisfy theBay Area’s changing housing andeconomic needs, maintainingadequate public open space andpreserving natural resources willcontinue to be important to theoverall quality of life in a com-munity. Airports provide a nat-ural island of open spacebecause of the large amount ofland required for their runwaysand runway safety zones. Citieshave put this protected land togood use by creating communityfacilities with low intensity uses
and recreational facilities likeparks and golf courses. Typically,community traffic impacts asso-ciated with a general aviationairport are considerably lessthan if the same landwere developed formulti-family resi-dential housing,an office park,or a retailshoppingmall.
1312
Past experience in the Bay Areaand elsewhere shows that build-ing a new airport or improvingthe capacity of existing runwaysis a long and resource-intensiveprocess, with unpredictable out-comes. Individually, a singlelocal land-use decision may haveonly a negligible impact on anairport, but the cumulativeeffect of a series of poor land-use decisions over time couldlead to increased public pressureto restrict airport activity oreven close the airport (as hasbeen suggested for several small-er airports in the Bay Area).Good land-use compatibilityaround airports is the chiefmeans available today to protectthe future capability of the BayArea’s existing airports.
Although closure of any of theregion’s large commercial air-ports is unlikely, the potentialaddition of new residents or tallstructures near these airports isa continuing concern. More atrisk are the region’s general avia-tion airports, which perform thebulk of the work in handlingsmaller aircraft that would oth-erwise tie up operations at thelarger commercial airports,resulting in prolonged and fre-quent flight delays. Closure ofany airport could have a dominoeffect, as the aircraft and theirflight operations are relocated toairports in other communitiesthat may not have planned fortheir presence or may not haveappropriate land-use controls inplace for the increased level ofactivity.
Consequences of Not Protecting Airports
14 15
As the Bay Area airports havegrown, communities surround-ing these airports have also beenexposed to more impacts fromintensified aviation use. Some ofthe more noticeable impacts,noise and smoke from older air-craft engines, have beenaddressed through technologicalmeans — aircraft engines todayare much quieter and cleanerthan in the past due to aggres-sive federal regulations. Aircraftnoise, both near and furtheraway from airports, will likelycontinue to be the most notice-able and vexing impact of air-ports into the foreseeablefuture. Through FAA funding,some Bay Area airports havebeen able to help local home-owners insulate their homes toreduce interior noise from air-craft flying overhead. Furtherprogress in the noise arena willdepend on a number of ongo-ing discussions between the air-ports, the FAA, airlines and thepublic concerning possiblechanges to current aircraft noisestandards, to aircraft flightpaths, hours of airport opera-tion, runway use, etc. Thesechanges typically require FAAapproval and are limited by fed-eral legislation in their scope.
While aircraft engines do pro-duce emissions that contributeto smog, the Bay Area’s few dayswith poor air quality are largelydue to motor vehicles andindustrial sources. Furtherreductions in emissions fromaircraft engines will depend onEPA action, since aircraftengines are not subject to stateor local control. A portion ofthe emissions from aircraftengines contain toxic air conta-minants (just as automobilesdo), which are a known healthconcern and which are receivingmore attention as to their local-ized impacts.
Finally, a central issue that willaffect a number of communitiesthroughout the Bay Area andhas not been resolved is where,when and how to provide newrunway capacity to serve expect-ed aviation growth. Potentialsolutions include new runwaysat existing airports; a new air-port at a more remote location;or a series of incremental air-field and technologicalimprovements to boost thecapacity of existing runways —which will help but probablynot solve predicted future run-way capacity problems.
The Impact of Airports on Communities
1716
Airport land-use decisions haveoften triggered vigorous debatesbetween airport users and localcommunities. Initiatives toreduce the impacts of airportoperations on local communi-ties can take a number of yearsto accomplish because of legaland other considerations. Onthe other hand, land-usechanges near airports can occurrelatively quickly and have animmediate impact on an air-port’s operating environment.
Maintaining good land-usecompatibility in the airportenvirons requires that threecritical areas be addressed —noise, safety of persons on theground, and safety of persons inthe air. When presented with anew land-use proposal near anairport, local governments haveseveral options: avoid the prob-lem (do not approve a newincompatible use), mitigate theproblem (approve with condi-tions), or change the underlying
conditions (consider a changein type and location of develop-ment or in airport operations).As discussed later, there are avariety of places people can goto get more information onthese issues.
Protecting PeopleFrom Aircraft NoiseAircraft noisecan be annoyingbecause it inter-feres with regu-lar indoor andoutdoor activi-ties, and in casesof very highnoise levels, canbe harmful tohealth. Different types of landuses and activities will presentdifferent airport noise compati-bility issues. While most of theongoing airport noise mitiga-tion programs focus on areasclosest to airport runways, noiseproblems also can occur atsome distance from airportsunder busy flight corridors.
Key Questions to Ask When Evaluating NewLand-Use Proposals Around Airports
19
Protecting People on the GroundFrom Crash HazardsTo protect people from injury,development is almost alwaysrestricted off the ends of an air-port’s runways where the risk ofa crash or emergency landing isgreatest. Other safety areas fur-ther away from the runwaysmay also need to be protected,due to known risk factors.Appropriate questions forreviewing new developments inor near airport safety zonesinclude:
• Is the development in adefined “safety zone” for theairport’s runways?
• If not in a defined safetyzone, is the new land useunder the flight path usedby aircraft for landings andtakeoffs? Have there beenany prior aircraft accidentsin this area?
• How many people will belocated in the proposeddevelopment, and what willthe intensity of use be (i.e.,will large numbers of peoplebe concentrated in a smallarea?)
• Has the developer of theproperty been informed ofthe airport land-use com-
patibility considerationsearly on in the developmentprocess, and if an EIR isrequired for the project, hasthe lead agency used theCaltrans Airport Land UsePlanning Handbook for itsevaluation of future safetyimpacts as required by statelaw?
• Can the design of the pro-posed development be modi-fied for improved safetythrough the position andstructural design of build-ings, location of parking lotsand type of landscaping?
• Would approval of the pro-posed development raise liability issues for theapproving jurisdiction dueto increased safety risk forpeople on the ground?
• If the proposed develop-ment is in a high safety riskarea, should the land insteadbe acquired by the airport toprevent future incompatibledevelopment?
18
Key questions local officials andthe public should ask whenreviewing new land-use propos-als around airports are listedbelow:
• Is the proposed land useconsidered noise “sensitive”(e.g., residential, schools,hospitals, libraries, etc.)?
• What are the existing ambi-ent noise levels in the areafrom non-aviation sources?
• What are the expected air-craft noise levels in the area,based on current and pro-jected airport activity?
• Is the development in anarea where noise levelscould exceed the Californiaairport noise standard (65CNEL, or community noiseequivalent level)? Howmany new people would beexposed to higher levels ofaircraft noise?
• If the proposed develop-ment is not in an areaexceeding the state airportnoise standards for cumula-tive noise exposure, is itunder one of the main flightpaths used by aircraft forlandings and takeoffs?
• Can the indoor noise levelsbe mitigated to an accept-able level through construc-tion techniques (soundinsulation, double-panedglass, etc)?
• Should a noise easement(the right to make a certainlevel of noise) be granted tothe airport operator as acondition of approval forthe proposed development?
• Is the proposed land use inan area subject to a state-mandated buyer awarenessprogram, requiring potentialhome buyers to be notifiedof the property’s proximityto an airport?
• Has the developer of theproperty been informed ofthe airport land-use com-patibility considerationsearly on in the developmentprocess, and if an EIR isrequired for the project, hasthe lead agency used theCaltrans Airport Land UsePlanning Handbook for itsevaluation of future noiseimpacts as required by statelaw?
21
Other Land-Use ConsiderationsLand fills and bodies of waterthat attract birds can createsafety problems, since aircraftbird strikes are a well knownoccurrence in aviation and havecaused crashes and extensivedamage to aircraft. New devel-opments that produce glare orhave unusual lighting can alsodistract pilots. Therefore, keyquestions are:
• Will the proposed land useattract birds?
• Will the proposed land useproduce unusual lightingeffects that could distractpilots?
20
• Are there any future plans tomodify airport flight pat-terns that would have aneffect on the positioning ofsafety zones?
Protecting People in the Air The erection of a single tallbuilding or other tall structurein the wrong location can com-promise use of an airport dur-ing visual or instrument flyingconditions and endanger air-craft occupants. Tall trees orvegetation near the airport canpose similar problems, as canradio and TV towers that aresome distance from an airport.Appropriate questions forreviewing tall structures nearairports include:
• What is the height of theproposed building or struc-ture in relation to estab-lished FAA height limita-tions around the airport?
• Has the local planning staffalerted the potential devel-oper of the applicable heightlimitations in the airportarea?
• Has the developer submittedthe necessary project notifi-cation form to the FAA andreceived a “determination ofno hazard”?
• Would approval of the pro-posed development raise lia-bility issues for the approv-ing jurisdiction due toincreased safety risk for peo-ple in the air?
• Should the height or designof the structure be modifiedto conform with FAA heightor project-specific limita-tions?
• Should an easement specify-ing structure height limitsbe granted to the airportoperator as a condition ofdevelopment approval?
• Are there any future plans tomodify airport flight pat-terns that would have aneffect on allowable heightsfor structures in the vicinityof the airport?
22 23
Airport land use commissions(ALUCs) have developed landuse compatibility plans for all ofthe Bay Area airports, but it isup to local jurisdictions toimplement and enforce the rec-ommendations in these plansthrough their General and Spe-cific Plans, zoning regulations,development approval condi-tions, real estate disclosurenotices, etc. Under state law,local jurisdictions may overridean ALUC plan recommendationwith a 2/3 vote, but in doing sothey must document facts sup-porting the override decisionand must inform both Caltrans’Division of Aeronautics and thelocal ALUC of the findings sup-porting the override action.
When the city or county mak-ing the airport land-use com-patibility decision is the same asthe jurisdiction that owns theairport, the jurisdiction shouldreview conditions on pastgrants from the FAA for airportimprovement projects that mayrequire the local jurisdiction tomaintain compatible land usearound the airport. Other juris-dictions also should be cog-nizant of potential liabilityissues in overriding ALUC planrecommendations.
It is not likely that airport land-use compatibility decisions willbecome any easier in the future.By preparing this guide, theRegional Airport PlanningCommittee encourages localgovernment leaders and thepublic to:
1) review General Plans, SpecificPlans and zoning regulationsfor consistency with ALUCplans, and revise as necessary;
2) consider the checklist of keyland use compatibility ques-tions;
3) use available informationresources to evaluate thecompatibility issues;
4) engage stakeholders in aforthright and open dialogueabout the future impacts ofthe potential new land useon the airport;
5) search for reasonable com-promises when they areavailable; and
6) in the end, make a carefuland informed decision thatensures that the interests ofboth the aviation communi-ty and the local communitywill be well served in thefuture.
The Final Decision
24 25
Airport land-use compatibilitydecisions are rarely black orwhite, but fortunately there isabundant guidance on this topicand a number of places localplanners and the public can gofor more information.
County Airport Land Use Commission(ALUC) StaffFirst, check with the county air-port land use commission staff.The ALUC is charged withpreparing and updating an Air-port Land Use CompatibilityPlan for each airport. Newdevelopment may be subject toALUC review; however, theprocess varies by county. ALUCplans will delineate areas of crit-ical concern from an airportnoise and safety standpoint andprovide guidelines for review. Alist of ALUC contacts is includ-ed in the Appendix.
Airport StaffAirport staff are well versed inFAA and state requirements foroperating an airport safely andin methods for analyzing airportnoise impacts. Airports periodi-cally prepare and update an air-port master plan that identifiesfuture aviation needs and rec-ommends facility improvementsto serve these needs.
CaltransCaltrans’ Division of Aeronau-tics staff have served as advisorsto local governments for a num-ber of years, particularly withrespect to the state’s airportnoise standards, as well as forother airport land-use compati-bility issues. Caltrans is alsocharged under state law withreviewing proposals for locatingschools and state buildings nearairports. To help ALUC staff andother local planners evaluatenew land-use proposals for areasnear airports, Caltrans has pre-pared a comprehensive resourceguide called the Airport LandUse Planning Handbook. TheHandbook is simply guidanceand is not intended to carry theforce of law or regulation.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)The Federal Aviation Adminis-tration is charged with ensuringthe safety of persons in the airand managing the national air-space. Only the FAA can makedecisions about aircraft flightpatterns and airspace safety.The FAA administers federalregulations setting forth heightrestrictions in the vicinity ofairports and notificationrequirements for proposedbuildings and other structuresthat may pose a potential haz-ard to air navigation.
Regional Airport Planning CommitteeThe purpose of the RegionalAirport Planning Committee(RAPC) is to assess the ability ofthe region’s air carrier and gen-eral aviation airports to serveprojected growth in air passen-ger, air cargo and general avia-tion activity. The Committeeevaluates alternative strategiesfor addressing this growth andforwards suggestions to the air-ports and FAA for considerationin their planning processes. Inits periodic evaluation of theBay Area’s future aviation needs,the Committee reviews a varietyof regional issues related to air-
port development includingrunway and airspace capacity,surface transportation needs, airquality, aircraft overflight noiseand potential impacts of airportimprovements on the Bay. Thestaff of RAPC have knowledgeof regional aviation capacityissues, institutional roles andrelationships in airport plan-ning, and airport environmentaland land-use compatibilityissues.
Where to Go for More Information
27
Contacts
Airport Land Use Commissions (ALUC)
Alameda CountyStaff Contact: Cindy HorvathPhone: (510) 670-6511Community Development Agency224 W. Winton Avenue, Room 111Hayward, CA 94544E-mail: [email protected]
Contra Costa CountyStaff Contact: Lashun CrossPhone: (925) 335-1229Community Development Department651 Pine Street4th Floor-North WingMartinez, CA 94553E-mail: [email protected]
Marin CountyStaff Contact: Jeff RawlesPhone: (415) 499-6548Public Works Department3501 Civic Center Drive, Room 304San Rafael, CA 94903E-mail: [email protected]
Napa CountyStaff Contact: Nancy JohnsonPhone: (707) 253-4417Conservation, Development and Planning Department1195 Third Street, Suite 210Napa, CA 94559E-mail: [email protected]
26
Appendices
San Mateo CountyStaff Contact: David F. CarbonePhone: (650) 363-4417City County Association ofGovernments of San Mateo CountyAirport Land Use CommitteeCounty Office Building455 County Center, Second FloorRedwood City, CA 94063E-mail: [email protected]
Santa Clara CountyStaff Contact: Dana PeakPhone: (408) 299-5798Airport Land Use CommissionCounty Government Center,East Wing70 West Hedding Street, 7th FloorSan Jose CA 95110E-mail: [email protected]
Solano CountyStaff Contact: Ronald GlasPhone: (707) 784-3170Dept. of Resource Management675 Texas Street, Suite 5500Fairfield, CA 94533E-mail: [email protected]
Sonoma CountyStaff Contact: Bob Gaiser Phone: (707) 565-7386Permit and Resource ManagementDepartment2755 Mendocino Avenue, Room 203Santa Rosa, CA 95403E-mail: [email protected]
References for Economic Data Used in This Report
(1) Air Transport and the Bay Area Economy(Phase 1), Bay Area Eco-nomic Forum, February 2000
(2) Aviation in California: Benefits to Our Economy and Way of Life,Caltrans Division of Aeronautics, June 2003
(3) Air Passengers from the Bay Area Airports, 2001 and 2002, pre-pared for the Metropolitan Transportation Commission by CharlesRiver Associates and Polaris Research and Development, September2003 (with minor revisions February 2004)
2928
Airport ContactsSan Francisco International AirportIvar SateroSan Francisco International AirportPO Box 8097San Francisco, CA 94128Phone: (650) 821-5000FAX: (650) 821-7799E-mail: [email protected]
Metropolitan Oakland InternationalKristi McKinney Port of Oakland530 Water StreetOakland, CA 94607-2064Phone: (510) 627-1335FAX: (510) 835-0178E-mail: [email protected]
Mineta San Jose International Cary Greene Norman Y. Mineta International Airport Administration Offices1732 N. First St. #600San Jose, CA 95112Phone: (408) 501-7702FAX: (408) 573-1671E-mail: [email protected]
Hayward Executive AirportBrent ShinerHayward Executive Airport20301 Skywest DriveHayward, CA 94541-4699Phone: (510) 293-8678FAX: (510) 783-4556E-mail: [email protected]
Livermore Municipal AirportLeander HauriLivermore Municipal Airport636 Terminal CircleLivermore, CA 94557Phone: (925) 373-5280)FAX: (925) 373-5042E-mail: [email protected]
Oakland North Field (General Aviation)Larry BerlinOakland International Airport9532 Earhart Road, Suite 106Oakland, CA 94621Phone: (51) 577-4074FAX: (510) 636-0672E-mail: [email protected]
Buchanan Field and Byron Airports(Contra Costa County)Keith Freitas550 Sally Ride DriveConcord, CA 94520Phone: (925) 646-5722FAX: (925) 646-5731E-mail: [email protected]
Gnoss Field (Marin County)Ken RobbinsMarin County Airport451 “A” Airport RoadNovato, CA 94945Phone: (415) 897-1754FAX: (415) 897-1264E-mail: [email protected]
Napa County AirportWanda KennedyNapa County Airport2030 Airport RoadNapa, CA 94558Phone: (707) 253-4300FAX: (707) 253-4330E-mail: [email protected]
Half Moon Bay and San Carlos Airports(San Mateo Co)Mark LarsonSan Carlos Airport620 Airport DriveSan Carlos, CA 94070Phone: (650) 573-3700FAX: (650) 573-3762E-mail: [email protected]
Santa Clara County Airports (Palo Alto, Reid Hillview, South County)Carl HonakerCounty Airport Administration2500 Cunningham AvenueSan Jose, CA 95148Phone: (408) 929-1060FAX: (408) 929-8617E-mail: [email protected]
Nut Tree Airport (Solano County)Andrew SwansonNut Tree Airport301 County Airport RoadVacaville, CA 95688Phone: (707) 469-4600FAX: (707) 451-8529E-mail: [email protected]
Rio Vista Airport (Solano County)Felix AjaxiRio Vista AirportPO Box 745Rio Vista, CA 94571Phone: (707) 374-6747FAX: (707) 374-6047E-mail: [email protected]
Petaluma Airport (Sonoma County)Mike GlosePetaluma Municipal Airport601 Sky Ranch DrivePetaluma, CA 94954Phone: (707) 778-4404FAX: (707) 778-4405E-mail: [email protected]
Charles M. Schultz Airport (Sonoma County)Jon Stout2290 Airport Blvd.Santa Rosa, CA 95403Phone: (707) 565-7243FAX: (707) 542-5303E-mail: [email protected]
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)Elisha Novak831 Mitten RoadBurlingame, CA 94010Phone: (650) 876-2928FAX: (650) 876-2733E-mail: [email protected]
CaltransState Division of AeronauticsRon Bolyard1120 N StreetPO Box 942874Sacramento, CA 94274-001Phone: (916) 654-7075FAX: (916) 653-9531E-mail: [email protected]
Regional Airport Planning CommitteeMetropolitan Transportation CommissionDoug Kimsey101 Eighth StreetOakland, CA 94607Phone: (510) 464-7700FAX: (510) 464-7848E-mail: [email protected]
Association of Bay AreaGovernments (ABAG)Patricia Perry101 Eighth StreetOakland, CA 94607Phone: (510) 464-7900FAX: (510) 464-7957E-mail: [email protected]
Bay Conservation and DevelopmentCommission (BCDC)Lindy Lowe50 California Street, Suite 2600San Francisco, CA 94111Phone: (415) 353-3600FAX: (415) 352-3606E-mail: [email protected]
30
Editorial –
Copy-editing –
Illustrations –
Design –
Chris Brittle, Doug Kimsey
Brenda Kahn
Jack Desrocher
David Cooper
Credits
Regional Airport Planning Committee
Joseph P. Bort MetroCenter
101 Eighth Street
Oakland, CA 94607-4700
Tel. 510.464.7700
TDD/TTY 510.464.7769
Fax 510.464.7848
e-mail: [email protected]
Web address <www.mtc.ca.gov>
