HomeMy WebLinkAboutAirport Site Selection study June 1985I
I
I
I
I
I
!
I
I
CONSOLIDATED REPORT
AIRPORT SITE SELECTION STUDY
FOR
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK
PREPARED BY:
PRC ENGINEERING, INC.
AND
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & ENGINEERING, INC.
JUNE, 1985
ENVIRONMENTAL ECIENCE
AND ENQINEERING, INC.
June 11, 1985
Mr. Francis J. Murphy, Supervisor
Town of Southold
Town Hall
Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
Dear Mr. Murphy:
We are herewith enclosing the Consolidated Report (Phase I and Site Selection)
produced as part of the Airport Feasibility Study. Although this report was
not part of our original contract, we felt that it would help expedite the
Town Board's review of the study. We, therefore, agreed to producing this
report.
We look
once this report has been reviewed by the Town Board.
questions pertaining to the Consolidated ~a~rt or the study
please feel free to give us a call. / / .-'%
/Sinc rely/y// /, ,
Paul ~. Puckli
Project Manager
forward to completing the remainder of the Airport Feasibility Study
If you have any
in general,
PSP/dag
Enclosure
CC:
5406
Ken Kroll, FAA Eastern Region
Norman Gaines, NYSDOT Region #10
James A. Schondebare, Town Board
Joseph L. Townsend, Jr., Town Board
Paul Stountenberg, Town Board
Jean Cochran, Town Board
Raymond Edwards, Town Board
George R. Latham, Jr., Planning Board
William Muller, Jr., Planning Board
Edwin Reeves, Advisory Committee
David C. Spohn, Advisory Committee
Ruth Olive, Advisory Committee
Robert Felber, Suffolk Co. Planning Dept.
Raymond Dean, Highways & Public Works
Hoover Fqoulevarcl, Suite [] Airport Service Center
Tampa, F:lorida 33614
P. O. Box 1 ~51167 Tampa, Florida 336S4-1167 813/886-6672
!
I
I
I
!
I
!
I
CONSOLIDATED REPORT
(PHASE I & SITE SELECTION)
AIRPORT SITE SELECTION/MASTER PLAN STUDY
FOR TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK
Prepared by:
PRC ENGINEERING, INC.
300 East 42nd Street
New York, New York 10017
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING, INC.
5406 Hoover Boulevard, Suite D
Airport Service Center
Tampa, Florida 33614
June 1985
RECEIVED BY
IV .~ 3 1985'
DATE- '~ ~
I
I
I
!
I
I
!
I
!
SOUTHOLD85-DT.1/TOC.1
6/11/85
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY
1.2 CONTENTS OF THIS REPORT
1.3 UTILIZATION OF REPORT DATA
1.4 RELATED REGIONAL/LOCAL PLANNING
2.0
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
3.0
INVENTORY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS
3.1 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
3.2 ALTERNATIVES TO AIR TRANSPORTATION
3.3 HISTORY OF AVIATION IN THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
3.4 INVENTORY OF EXISTING FACILITIES
3.5 SURVEY OF POTENTIAL AIRPORT USERS
3.6 METEOROLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS
4.0
FORECAST OF AVIATION DEMAND
4.1 INTRODUCTION
4.2 POPULATION OF LONG ISLAND
4.3 INCOME
4.4 GENERAL AVIATION SCENARIO
4.5 BASED AIRCRAFT AND AVIATION ACTIVITY
4.6 POTENTIAL COMMUTER/AIR TAXI ACTIVITY
4.7 INSTRUMENT ACTIVITY
4.8 FUEL FLOWAGE
4.9 CONSOLIDATED FORECASTS
5.0
DEMAND/CAPACITY ANALYS~S AND FACILITY REQUIREMENTS
5.1 AIRPORT ROLE
5.2 AIRSIDE FACILITIES
5.3 LANDSIDE FACILITIES
6.0
SITE SELECTION ANALYSIS
6.1 INTRODUCTION
6.2 NOISE CONTOUR DEVELOPMENT
6.3 PRELIMINARY SCREENING
6.4 FINAL EVALUATION
6.5 RECOMMENDATIONS
APPENDIX A--ABBREVIATIONS & GLOSSARY
APPENDIX B--POTENTIAL USER SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
APPENDIX C--BUSINESS/PROFESSIONAL QUESTIONNAIRE
APPENDIX D--GENERAL AVIATION AIRCRAFT MOVEMENTS MODEL
APPENDIX E--UNIT COSTS FOR AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT
APPENDIX F--SOUTHOLD INM INPUT DATA
Pa~e
1-1
1-1
1-3
1-4
1-5
2-1
3-1
3-1
3-1
3-5
3-9
3-22
3-33
4-1
4-1
4-2
4-10 '
4-20
4-21
4-35
4-36
4-40
4-42
5-1
5-1
5-3
5-13
6-1
6-1
6-3
6-6
6-13
6-26
I
I
!
i
!
I
I
SO~OLD85-DT. 1/TOC. 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(Continued, Page 2 of 2)
Section
APPENDIX G--SOUTNOLD TOWN BOARD RESOLUTION ON
CONDEMNATION OF LAND
APPENDIX H--CORRESPONDENCE FROM LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY
(LILCO) ON BURIAL OF TRANSMISSION LINES
APPENDIX I--MEMORANDUM ON DRAFT MASTER PLAN UPDATE SUMMARY
REPORT AND PROPOSED ZONING REGULATIONS
I
I
I
i
!
I
I
I
Table
3-1
3-2
3-3
3-4
4-1
4-2
4-3
4-4
4-5
4-6
4-7
4-8
4-9
4-10
4-11
4-12
4-13
4-14
SOUTHOLD85-DT.1/LOT.1
6/11/85
LIST OF TABLES
Airports in the Vicinity of Southold
Results of Potential User Survey
Pilot Reco~mmendations for Proposed Southold Airport
Wind Orientation by Direction and Speed for
Proposed Southold Airport
Population Profile of Long Island,
1960 through 2003
Center of Population Calculations,
Long Island Region
1980 Summer Population Estimates, Town of Southold
Population Market, Long Island, Suffolk, and
Southold
Median Family Income, Long Island, Suffolk,
and Southold
Distribution of Income Sources
Occupational Distribution; Long Island, Suffolk,
and Southold; 1970
Long Island Regional Employment Projection,
1984 through 1990
Selected Economic Assumptions
Long Island Region Net Employment Increases
to 1990
Tourism/Convention Expenditures
Airports with Based Aircraft in the Vicinity
of the Town of Southold
Constant Market Share
Based Aircraft at Southold Public Use Airport,
Downstate General Aviation System Plan Study
Pa~e
3-11
3-26
3-29
3-35
4-3
4-4
4-8
4-9
4-i1
4-13
4-14
4-16
4-17
4-18
4-19
4-22
4-24
4-25
I
I
I
I
I
!
!
il
Table
4-15
4-16
4-17
4-18
4-19
4-20
4-21
4-22
4-23
4-24
4-25
4-26
5-1
5-2
5-3
5-4
5-5
5-6
SOUTHOLI)85-DT.1/LOT.2
6/11/85
LIST OF TABLES
(Continued, Page 2 of 3)
Southold Airport Anticipated Based Aircraft (1984)
Total Based Aircraft--Southold Airport
Southold Airport--General Aviation Based
Aircraft by Type
Forecast of General Aviation Local and Itinerant
Movements--Southold Airport
Forecast of General Aviation Movements by Type--
Southold Airport
General Aviation Terminal Relationships--
Southold Airport
Forecast of Cormmuter/Air Taxi Operations--
Southold Airport
Forecast of Commuter/Air Taxi Passenger Enplanements--
Southold Airport
Commuter/Air Taxi Terminal Area Relationships--
Southold Airport
Forecast of Instrument Activlty--Southold Airport
Fuel Flowage Estimates--Southold Airport
Consolidated Forecasts--Southold Airport
Airfield Separation Criteria--Proposed Southold
Airport
Derivation of Passenger Area Requirements in
General Aviation Terminal Buildings
Terminal Building Space Requirements and
Distribution by Usage--Southold Airport
Automobile Parking Space Requirements--Southold
Airport
Aircraft Parking Apron Requirements--Southold
Airport
Area Required for Aircraft Storage by Type--
Southold Airport
Page
4-27
4-29
4-30
4-31
4-33
4-34
4-37
4-38
4-39
4-41
4-43
4-44
5-10
5-15
5-16
5-18
5-19
5-22
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table
5-7
5-8
5-9
6-1
6-2
6-3
6-4
SOUTHOLD85-DT. 1/LOT. 3
6/11/85
LIST OF TABLES
(Continued, Page 3 of 3)
Based Aircraft Storage Requirements--Southold
Airport
Monthly Fuel Storage Requirements--Southold Airport
Requirements for Aircraft Maintenance Facilities--
Southold Airport
Estimated Development Costs--Site 2
Estimated Development Costs--Site 5
Comparison of Sites 2 and 5
Evaluation Matrix Town of Southold--Airport Site
Selection Study
Pa~e
5-23
5-25
5-28
6-19
6-25
6-27
6-28
I
I
I
I
!
I
I
!
Figure
3-1
3-2
3-3
3-4
4-1
4-2
4-3
6-1
6-2
6-3
6-4
6-5
6-6
SOUTHOLD85-DT. 1/LOF. 1
6/11/85
LIST OF FIGURES
Location Map
Town of Southold, New York, Primary Study Area
Town of Southold Airport Site Selection Study,
Airspace Environment and Adjacent Airports
Wind Roses--Proposed Southold Airport
Long Island Region--Center of Population, 1980
Suffolk County--Center of Population, 1980
Comparison of General Aviation Forecasts--Mattituck
Airport vs. Southold Airport
Candidate Airport Sites
Mattituck Airport
Town of Southold Airport Site Selection Study
Site Plan - Site 2
Town of Southold Airport Site Selection Study
Site Plan - Site 5
Page
3-2
3-3
3-10
3-33
4-5
4-7
4-45
6-2
6-7
6-15
6-16
6-21
6-22
!
I
I
!
I
I
I
i
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT.1/INTRO.1
6/10/85
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Town of Southold is contemplating establishing a publicly owned
airport to serve the aviation needs of Southold Town and surrounding
communities on the east end of Long Island. To determine the potential
and feasibility of the Airport to serve general aviation users in the
Town, Southold applied for a Planning Grant to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) under the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) of the
Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982. In September 1983, a
contract was awarded to PRC Engineering, Inc. (PRC), in association with
Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc. (ESE), for the preparation of
a comprehensive Airport Site Selection/Master Plan Study for the Town of
Southold.
This consolidated report is a combination of the first two project
reports that documented the research, analyses, and findings of the
Phase I and Site Selection portions of the Study. It will be revised and
superceded by subsequent reports which will be produced during later
phases of the project. At the conclusion of the Study, a final report
will be issued together with a set of airport plans, all of which will
thoroughly document the entire work program.
1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY
This Airport Site Selection/Master Plan Study will identify the most
feasible site for locating the proposed Airport and will also provide
guidelines for the development of the facility. This development program
will satisfy aviation needs within the context Of community goals and
environmental considerations. It will provide a forecast of aviation
demand for short- (1988), intermediate- (1993), and long-range (2003)
periods and planned development of airport facilities for this activity
within the constraints identified during the study effort.
1-1
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD8 5-DT. i/INTRO. 2
6/10/85
The Town of Southold is in need of an Airport Site Selection/Master Plan
Study at this time for the following reasons:
o The Town of Southold proper does not have a publicly owned,
unrestricted-use airport. Mattituck Airport and Rose Field are
both under private ownership with restrictions placed upon their
use (the Town owns and operates Elizabeth Field on Fisher's
Island.) Without a publicly owned airport, the Town is lacking in
adequate aviation facilities to serve potential corporate, air
taxi, commuter, and general aviation users; thus, these operators
are taking their business elsewhere. However, the Town would like
to be in a position to attract a portion of these potential users.
In order to do this, it is felt that an airport equipped with
runway lighting and navigational aids is necessary.
o To ensure proper placement of the Town-owned airport, a
comprehensive evaluation of alternative sites must be undertaken
to catalog economic, environmental, and operational consider-
ations.
o The environmental impacts of developing the new Airport must be
evaluated in view of the current environmental requirements set
forth by Federal, State, and local governmental agencies.
o To apprise the local community, through conferences, public
meetings, and publication of the Study report itself, of present
and future needs of the new Airport and the effects development
will have on the local area.
The main objective of this Study is to determine the feasibility of
developing a publicly owned airport on the North Fork of Long Island.
The next step in the process is the preparation of an airport master plan
to determine the extent, type, and schedule of development needed to
accommodate future aviation demand in the Town of Southold. The
recommended development should satisfy aviation demand and be compatible
with the environment, community development, and other transportation
!
!
1-2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT.I/INTRO.3
6/10/85
modes. Above all else, the plan must be technically sound and
economically feasible. The following objectives shall also serve as a
guide in the preparation of the Study:
o To provide an effective graphic presentation of the ultimate
development of the proposed Airport;
o To establish a schedule of priorities and phasing for the various
improvements proposed in the plan;
o To present the pertinent back-up information and data which were
essential to the development of the Site Selection/Master Plan;
o To describe the various concepts and alternatives which were
considered in the establishment of the proposed plan;
o To provide a concise and descriptive report so that the impact and
logic of its recommendations can be clearly understood by the
community and by those authorities and public agencies which are
charged with the approval, promotion, and funding of the improve-
ments proposed in the Study;
o To ensure that the Airport thoroughly complements and supports the
development envisioned for Southold Town;
o To assess future environmental impacts on land surrounding the
proposed Airport and provide recommendations to discourage
incompatible development; and
o To insure the reliability and safety of airport operations.
1.2 CONTENTS OF THIS REPORT
This consolidated report covers the work tasks conducted during the
Phase I and Site Selection portions of the work program. The work
program of Phase I can be summarized in the following major subject
areas: inventory of existing conditions, forecasts of aviation demand,
and assessment of needed airport facilities in terms of their ability to
accommodate potential future traffic volumes. The site selection task
entailed a thorough analysis of alternative airport sites in Town.
1-3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT.1/INTRO.4
6/10/85
This report is organized into six sections which are set out in a logical
order that follows the sequence of work tasks accomplished. The detailed
documentation of research and analyses is contained in Sections 3 through
6. These are preceded by Section 2, which summarizes the findings
contained in this report, and Section 1, this introductory section.
Section 3 contains information about the existing airport facilities in
the Town of Southold and the study area, and the results of potential
user surveys. Section 4 presents the forecasts of potential aviation
demand that should be accommodated at the Town's Airport. Section 5
documents the assessment of needed facilities (demand/capacity) and also
presents the facility requirements needed to accommodate the projected
traffic volumes. Finally, Section 6 discusses the alternative airport
sites and sets forth a recommendation for the preferred site to develop
the new airport.
1.3 UTILIZATION OF REPORT DATA
The data contained in this report form the basis of the study data bank
and also the basis for airport feasibility and plan formulation and
evaluation. The inventory of existing facilities serves as a reference
for the determination of the transportation system on the North Fork.
The air trade demand forecasts provide the potential traffic volumes in
terms of based aircraft and aircraft movements which should be
accommodated by the proposed airport. This forecast of demand can then
be translated into needed airport facilities.
The facility requirements, therefore, provide the basis for sizing of the
Airport and the formulation of the plan which is designed to accommodate
the projected demand. The site selection portion translates these
facility requirements into an actual site.
!
!
1-4
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT.1/INTRO.5
6/10/85
1.4 RELATED REGIONAL/LOCAL PLANNING
The New York State DepartmEnt of Transportation has recently embarked on
a regional aviation system plan for the area that includes the Town of
Southold. This study, which is known as the Downstate New York General
Aviation System Pian (GASP), is intended to address the future of general
aviation activity and facilities in the downstate area. In addition, the
Town of Southold is currently in the process of updating its Master Plan
for the Town. The objective of this update is to refine the
comprehensive development plan for the Town. The Airport Site
Selection/Master Plan Study for the Town of Southold has been closely
coordinated with both of these planning studies. This coordination
effort is important in that the results of this Study should be incor-
porated into both the GASP Study and the Master Plan Update. Likewise,
findings and conclusions of these studies need to be considered in
evaluating the feasibility of a publicly owned airport on the North Fork.
1-5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT. 1/FC. 1
6/10/85
2.0 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
This section summarizes the highlights of this consolidated report. The
purpose of the summary is to afford the reader a quick overview of the
significant analyses performed by the Consultant.
1. A survey of registered aircraft owners and pilots considered to
be within a reasonable distance of Southold Town (residing in
the Towns of Southold, Shelter Island, and Riverhead) found that
over 80 percent of the aircraft owners responding to the survey
would anticipate using an airport in the Town.
2. A survey of 44 local businesses and professionals presently
operating in Southold Town was conducted. Over 50 percent of
those surveyed support the proposed airport and anticipate
utilizing it.
3. By the year 1990, the tourist industry of Long Island will
exceed $10.0 billion. The east end of Long Island will account
for 40 percent of this total ($4.0 billion). Thus, the condi-
tions which must prevail in order for aviation to prosper do
exist, and future aviation growth in the Town appears to be
strong through the year 2003.
4. In the towns surrounding Southold, there are 13 general aviation
airports housing 874 based aircraft. In the Town of Southold,
there are three airports housing 28 aircraft. These aircraft
represent approximately 3.2 percent of the total aircraft based
in the vicinity. It is anticipated that the based aircraft
fleet at the new Southold Airport would consist of single-
engine and light twin-engine aircraft for the duration of the
study period.
5. Based general aviation aircraft at the new Southold Airport will
double by the end of the planning period, with 67 based aircraft
in 2003 compared to a base year (1984) total of 33.
2-1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ii
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT.1/FC.2
6/10/85
6. General aviation movements will increase from 16,900 in 1988 to
20,200 in 1993 and 31,500 operations in 2003. Air taxi/commuter
operations are projected to total 9,800 in 1988 and increase to
12,500 in 1993 and 20,200 in 2003. Passenger enplanements are
expected to be 17,640 in 1988, increasing to 22,500 in 1993 and
36,360 by the end of the study period in 2003.
7. Potential instrument approaches at the new Airport are projected
to stand at a level of 930 in 1988 and rise to 1,842 approaches
by the end of the study period in the year 2003.
8. General aviation peak-hour activity at the new Southold Airport
is projected to increase from its initial level of 7 movements
to 13 movements at the close of the study period.
9. Potential commuter/air taxi activity is forecast to be 46
movements per day during the peak summer season in 1988 and rise
to 95 movements per day during the summer months (May-October)
by the close of the study period in 2003. On an annual basis,
air taxi/commuter activity is initially projected at a level of
9,800 operations to increase to 20,200 operations in 2003.
These operations are expected to be conducted solely by small
twin-engine aircraft (i.e. Piper Navajo, Cessna 402, etc.).
10. It is recommended that the proposed Southold Airport be ulti-
mately constructed according to FAA criteria for a General
Utility-Stage I Airport. FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-4B
defines such a facility as one that serves" . all small
airplanes. Precision approach operations are not usually
anticipated." Initial plans call for construction standards
typical of a Basic Utility-Stage II airport.
11. Assuming a single-runway configuration, the new airport will
have an airfield capacity of approximately 183,000 operations
per year. This capacity rating is more than adequate in that
the 20-year forecast of activity projects only 51,700 opera-
tions.
2-2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT. 1/FC. 3
6/lO/85
12. It is recommended that the primary runway be built at an initial
length of 3,000 feet and an ultimate length of 3,600 feet to
accommodate light twin-engine aircraft. If it is feasible to
construct a secondary or crosswind runway, it should be
constructed with an overall length of 2,400 feet initially and
lengthened to an ultimate size of 2,900 feet.
13. Based on a comprehensive wind analysis, the optimal allgnment
for the primary runway is northeast-southwest (04-22), with a
southeast-northwest (13-31) orientation as the best crosswind
alignment.
14. The minimum land requirement for a single-runway airport in
Southold is 100 acres, and with a crosswind runway an additional
62 acres are needed.
15. In terms of navigational aids, it is recommended that the new
airport be equipped with a nonpreclsion instrument approach,
medium intensity runway edge lights (MIRLs), visual approach
slope indicator (VASI) systems and runway end identifier lights
(REILs) on both ends of the primary runway.
16. Initial landside facilities that are needed include: a
1,029-square foot terminal building; 8,640-square foot auto
parking lot; 44,550-square foot transient aircraft parking
apron; 38,000 square feet of based aircraft tie-down space;
20 T-hangar spaces; 3,200-square foot conventional hangar for
based aircraft storage; 10,000-gallon underground fuel tank; and
13,000 square feet of aircraft maintenance facilities (hangar
and apron). Recommendations are also set forth for expansion of
the above facilities to meet increasing demand.
17. Based on a preliminary screening of 12 potential airport sites,
two sites were identified as representing the most feasible
opportunities for developing the Airport; Site 2, which is
located at the northwest corner of Oregon Road and Alvahs Lane,
and Site 5, which is situated north of County Route 48 and
1,000 feet east of Bridge Lane, emerged as the two most favor-
able potential sites.
m
m
2-3
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOmOLDS~-DT. 1/FC. 4
6/10/8~
18.
A comprehensive alternatives evaluation of these two sites was
conducted. The recommendation that resulted from this analysis
was that the Town should pursue developing Site 5 as its
municipal airport to serve Southold Town proper.
2-4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SO~HOLD85-DT. 1/3 · 1
6/10/85
3.0 INVENTORY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS
3.1 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
The Town of Southold is a peninsula located on the North Fork of Long
Island as shown in Figure 3-1. Southold Town proper is depicted in
Figure 3-2, which shows the primary study area. Southold's western
boundaries begin at Laurel and Mattituck just east of the Town of
Riverhead and extend to Orient Point. Plum Island and Fishers Island
extend northeastward from Orient Point. Robins Island is located south
of Southold in the Peconic Bay. Ail of these islands are part of the
Town of Southold.
There are eleven communities within the Town of Southold. They are
listed below along with their population, according to the 1980 census.
o Cutchogue and New Suffolk - 2,788
East Marion - 656
Fishers Island - 318
Greenport - 2,273
Greenport West - 1,571
Laurel - 962
Mattituck - 3,923
Orient - 855
Robins Island - 0
Peconic - 1,056
Southold - 4,770
Total Town Population 19,172
3.2 ALTERNATIVES TO AIR TRANSPORTATION
A basic set of alternatives that could affect the development of a
publicly owned airport on the North Fork is the use of other modes of
transportation in place of air travel. There are three primary modes
that presently provide the type of long distance travel required: rail
transportation, surface transportation, and shore-to-shore transporta-
tion.
!
!
3-1
Figure 3-1
LOCATION MAP
SOURCE: ESE, IJSW
LoNG ISLAND soUND
NASSAU
couNTY
suFFOLK couNTY
oO~A~
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK
Airport Site Selection/
Master Plan Study
Figure 3-2
PRIMARY STUDY AREA
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK
A~IRPORT SITE SELECTION/
MASTER PLAN STUDY
SOURCE: ESE, 1985
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT. 1/3.2
6/i0/85
3.2.1 Rail Transportation
There is only one railroad line that serves the North Fork. This llne is
part of the Long Island Railroad, which serves the entire Island. This
east-west diesel tine ends at Greenport with intermediate stops at
Southold, Cutchogue, and Mattituck. The railroad runs into Jamaica
Station where passengers then transfer to electric trains into Manhattan.
This trip usually takes approximately three hours.
3.2.2 Surface Highway Transportation
There is one interstate highway that directly connects the eastern end of
Long Island with Manhattan. This limited-access highway is the
Long Island Expressway (LIE) or Interstate 495. The LIE runs west-east
and ends in Riverhead. Once in Riverhead one must then take County Route
58 which turns into Route 25. This is the main route through Southold
and is known as Main Road. County Route 48 (formerly designated County
Route 27), known as the North Road, is the fastest route to all towns on
the North Fork in that it is a four-lane improved highway. These two
roads are the principal east-west arteries on the North Fork. A trip
from Manhattan to the North Fork by automobile usually takes 2-1/2 to 3
hours if traffic is light and weather conditions are good.
No major bus companies have requested permits to provide scheduled bus
service directly from New York City to the other communities on Long
Island; therefore, the major bus companies do not operate to the east end
of the Island. There are several local bus companies that do offer
service to the North Fork and other Long Island communities. There is
local bus service to Riverhead and East Hampton from Greenport (Route S-
92) and smaller bus feeder service from Orient Point to Mattituck (Route
9A) and Riverhead (Route SA). Busses on Routes 8A and 9A do not have
connecting schedules or routes.
3-4
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT.I/3.3
6/10/85
3.2.3 Shore-to-Shore Transportation
There is daily ferry service to/from Shelter Island and Greenport and
to/from Orient Point and New London, Connecticut. There ia ferry service
from New London to Fishers Island but no direct service is available
between the North Fork and Fishers Island, both of which are part of the
Town of Southold.
There is also no public ferry service to Plum Island, which is owned by
the federal government and off limits to the general public. The only
service available is strictly enforced by the U.S. Government and is used
by government employees commuting to Plum Island.
3.3 HISTORY OF AVIATION IN THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
The first airport opened in the Town of Southold was Mattituck Airport,
which commenced operations in 1946. In its early days, Mattituck Airport
was a privately owned facility with a single grass strip that supported
the commercial operations of Mattituck Aviation. This airport was opened
to the public on a limited basis.
In 1948, Rose Field in Orient was opened. It consisted of a short grass
runway and was utilized by Cross-Sound Air Taxi Service. Rose Field was
a restricted field and thus not opened to the public.
Aviation facilities in the Town of Southold remained status quo until
1959 when the Town assumed the ownership of Elizabeth Field on Fisher's
Island. The federal government, which built Elizabeth Field, turned it
over to the Town of Southold in 1959, giving the Town its first publicly
owned airport.
In 1960, Malcolm S. Spelman Associates prepared the "Comprehensive Plan
and Development Program for Airports and Air Terminals in Suffolk
County." This study recommended that the Town of Southold maintain its
3-5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SO~HOLI)85-DT. 1 / 3.4
6/10/85
three aviation facilities (Mattituck, Rose, and Elizabeth) and implement
some modest improvements. Funds were made available for improving the
Town's airports, but were not accepted by the Town.
Mattituck Airport was utilized for transporting freshly harvested
scallops in 1963. However, this operation was hampered during wet
periods due to the turf composition of the runway. In response to this
situation, the Town of Southold conducted a public hearing on establish-
ing an all weather airport in the Town. The Southold Town Board voted
unanimously to develop such a facility. As a result, Msttituck Airport
was leased by the Town for a period of ten years, beginning in 1964. The
Town Highway Department constructed a hard surface runway. The lease
also included provisions for the installation of runway edge lighting.
In 1967, the Town of Southold retained the services of Raymond and May
Planning Consultants, to update the "701" Master Plan for the Town. At
that time, only three years of the 10-year lease with Mattltuck Airport.
had elapsed. The plan included a general aviation airport north of
Oregon Road in Mattituck. A requirement of "701" approval was that if an
airport had ever been proposed for the area, it must be included in the
plan. This particular site had been proposed by Suffolk County, the New
York State Department of Transportation, Bureau of Aviation and others.
After some revisions to the plan, informational hearings were held in
August and September of 1969. These hearings, while generally favorable,
identified two specific areas of disagreement. The first point of
disagreement was the airport and the other was the future of agriculture
in the Town of Southold. As a result of these areas of disagreement, the
airport was deleted from the plan and a comprehensive study of the future
of agriculture was undertaken. On October 2, 1970, the final
informational hearing was held on the Master Plan for the Town. At this
meeting, 85 percent of those in attendance expressed approval of the plan
as presented. As a result of this approval, the Southold Town Board, on
3-6
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOU~OLD~5-DT.1/3.5
6/10/85
November 23, 1971, amended the zoning ordinance in its entirety,
including adoption of a revised zoning map. Finally, on September 11,
1973, the Town Board authorized the code book which resulted in revision,
re-numbering and codification of the plan. It also made permanent all
Town ordinances, local laws, and rules and regulations.
The initial lease for Mattituck Airport expired in 1974, at which time
the Town renewed it for another five years. However, the provision for
runway lighting was deleted from the new lease.
The Development Plan of the Tow~ of Southold was prepared and submitted
to the Town Board for approval in September, 1978. However, no action
was taken on this plan. The zoning map which accompanied this plan, did
not show any aviation facilities in the Town, existing or proposed.
At the Town Board meeting of June 6, 1978, Supervisor Martocchia made the
following statement: "There has been some discussion relative to the
Mattituck Airport not providing enough service. There is less than a
year to go on the Mattituck Airport lease, and although a renewal is
pretty well assured...," he appointed Councilman Henry Drum to head a
committee to make a study among the Southold Town residents, to determine
the cost to lease or purchase land. Councilman Drum was asked to
organize his own committee members. Councilman Drum was appointed
because of his 30 years in the U.S. Navy, many of which were in an
administrative position; he retired as a Captain. Supervisor Martocchia
felt he would be the most qualified to gather these statistics.
The study was to address the loss of income from taxes, the cost to the
Town, the cost of building, staffing, and equipping an airport to make
operational, and if the purchase of land was warranted.
3-7
I
!
I
I
I
I
!
I
}
SOUTHOLD85-DT. 1/3.6
6/10/85
It was noted by Supervisor Martocchia that: "There are many items which
may come into the picture, such as state or federal aid." He then
announced that: "This report will be sobmitted three months prior to the
expiration of the Mattituck Airport lease in March of 1979."
In 1979, Councilman Drum appointed the following to the committee to
study the airport issue: Henry Raynor, Deputy Chairman of the Town
Planning Board; Frank Bear, President of the North Fork Environmental
Council; and David Spohn, airline captain and interested Town resident.
The lease between the Town of Southold and Mattituck Airport, which
expired in 1979, was not renewed. This left the Town of Southold proper
without an unrestricted public use airport. In response to this situa-
tion, the Town Board in 1980, applied for federal funds under the Airport
Development Aid Program (ADAP) to undertake a study to determine the
feasiblity of establishing a Town-owned airport. Unfortunately, the
legislation authorizing the distribution of the necessary funds expired.
shortly after the Town's application was filed. The lapse in legislation
lasted for two years until Congress passed the Airport and Airways
Improvement Act of 1982, which included the Airport Improvement Program
(ALP) as its funding mechanism. Once again federal funds were available
for airport planning and development. As previously stated, FAA made a
grant offer to the Town in September 1983, which the Town Board promptly
accepted to allow initiation of the airport feasibility study.
The Town Board recently authorized an update of the Town Master Plan.
The draft version of this update, which was prepared by Raymond, Parish,
Pine and Weiner, Inc. (RPPW) was submitted to the Town for review on
April 29, 1985. It is interesting to note that the proposed zoning for
airport facilities in the draft of the Master Plan Update is" .left
in the Industrial District requiring a 100-acre minimum site and is
limited to a Basic Utility-Stage II airport." None of the three airports
I
I
3-8
I
!
I
I
!
i
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT.1/3.7
6/10/85
that presently exist in the Town of Southold are zoned industrial; they
are all zoned for residential use (Mattituck Airport and Rose Field are
zoned R-80, Residential Low Density A, and Elizabeth Field on Fishers
Island is zoned R~120, Residential Low Density B). See Appendix I for a
description of the proposed zoning categories. Further, there is not one
parcel of land in the Town that has a minimum size of 100 acres and is
zoned for industrial use.
One recent development that may affect the status of aviation in Southold
Town is that Mattituck Aviation has recently sold its aircraft engine
overhaul and distribution business to a firm located in Ohio. This
situation should be watched closely in that it could affect the future of
Mattituck Airport.
3.4 INVENTORY OF EXISTING FACILITIES
The purpose of performing a comprehensive inventory of existing airport
facilities in the area is that in later phases of the work program, these
facilities will be assessed as to their ability to accommodate future
traffic volumes. This is important in that other airports in the area
will affect the potential demand at the proposed airport in Southold.
The following section describes airport conditions and facilities
existing on Long Island in a 40-mile radius from the center of the Town
of Southold (Town Hall). The purpose of this study area is to determine
the impact of neighboring airports on the new Southold Airport. The
impact of surrounding airports must be considered in determining the
particular role of, and potential demands for the Airport. For this
purpose a total of 19 airports were considered and analyzed to obtain an
up-to-date reading on their operations and facilities. These airports
are depicted in Figure 3-3 and discussed in Table 3-1. From the 19
airports analyzed, a total of 9 airports have paved runways and 12 are
3-9
Y
N
NEW
LONDON
CALVERTON
MOA
CA L VER TON
I MOA
Figure 3-3
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD AIRPORT SITE SELECTION STUDY
AIRSPACE ENVIRONMENT AND ADJACENT AIRPORTS
SOURCE: ESE, 1~8S
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK
Airport Site Selection/
Master Plan Study
Table 3-1. Airports in the Vicinity of Southl~ld (R~dlu~ of 40 {{retinal Miles)
Airport Nnne {md ~ity {~le~) ~y~ Surface
SO~I~J~T. l,qflB3-1. I
61~18~
/tt~ni-
stratlte/
~en
10/2 - 4,242' ~phalt
Eastern Loeg lslm~d ~bspit~l 4/4
37/41
07/25 - 2,05~'
12/30 - 2,850'
06/24 - 5,999'
10128 - 3.036'
iSL/33R- 3,212'
15R/3~- 5,186'
mm mm_
mm mm~ m.. m_. mm
m{m~ m~ m ,.m. re_m_ I. m~
}t~ttltock 6/1[ 01/19 - 2,200' ~aphalc Pet Y~s 1.1 --
Nmtauk-~'y Portel 28/67 06/2~ - 3,472' ~sphalt l~t Yes 14 --
811~111311~-~. ljffl~3-1.2
6/]~/8a
o6/2s/~4
Table 3-1. A~rp~rcs in the V~cinity of ~hhold (Radius of ~0 ~d~icel ~les) ((h~timed. Pqe 3 of 3)
!
!
I
I
!
I
I
i
SOUTHOLD85-DT.1/3.8
6/10/85
opened to the public. The source of specific airport information,
including aircraft operations, is FAA Form 5010-1 and Airports 1984,
which is published annually by the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association
(AOPA).
3.4.1 Airspace Environment
As can be readily observed in Figure 3-3, the area is traversed by a
network of low altitude "Victor" airways. Most of these airways inter-
sect at one of the three VOR facilities in the area. A VOR facility is a
ground-based, very high frequency, omnidirectional radio station that
transmits radials in all directions. It provides azimuth guidance to
pilots. The area's VOR stations are:
o Calverton (CCC) VORTAC - 117.2 MHz
o Hampton (HTO) VORTAC - 113.6 MHz
o Madison (MAD) VORTAC - 110.4 MHz
Also shown in Figure 3-3 is the Terminal Radar Service Areas (TRSA) for -
Long Island MacArthur Airport. This area identifies the airspace
surrounding MacArthur wherein Air Traffic Control provides radar vector-
ing, sequencing, and separation on a full-time basis for all IFR and
participating VFR aircraft. Although pilot participation is urged, it is
not mandatory within the TRSA. A restricted area (R-5202) is also shown
off the end of the North Fork. This area is designated as Calverton 2
MOA (Military Operating Area), which is restricted between the hours of
0600 and 2300. Adjacent to R-5202 is 'Calverton 1 MOA, which serves as a
warning to pilots that aircraft may be performing unusual flight
activities in this area. Airport Control Zones are also shown in
Figure 3-3. These are areas of controlled airspace and exist from the
ground up to the base of the Continental Control Area (14,500 feet msl).
As seen, a number of airports have published instrument approach
procedures in effect. There are presently no airports in the immediate
vicinity of the North Fork that have published instrument approach
procedures. The closest airports that do have such procedures are
3-14
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
SO~HOL~5-DT.I/3.9
6/10/85
Calverton, Suffolk County, and East Hampton Airports. Calverton has a
straight-in approach to Runway 32 and a circling approach, both utilizing
the Calverton (CCC) VORDME facility. Neither of these instrument
approach procedures require overflying the Town of Southold. East
Hampton Airport has a published circling approach using the Hampton (HTO)
VOR facility. East Hampton also has an RNAV approach to Runway 10. This
procedure relies on the HTO VOR facility and area navigation equipment
located five nautical miles west of the runway threshold. Neither of
these instrument approach procedures necessitate flying over the Town of
Southold. Suffolk County Airport has three published instrument approach
procedures. The first procedure is the instrument landing system (ILS)
approach to Runway 24, which has three principal components: localizer,
glide slope, and outer marker. The outer marker is a non-directional
radio beacon (NDB) that serves as the Initial Approach Fix (IAF), which
is situated 4.6 nautical miles from the threshold of Runway 24 on a
heading of 235 degrees. The glide slope is an on-airport electronie
component that emits signals to provide the pilot with vertical guidanc~
to assist in the approach and landing phase. The localizer component is
also an on-airport facility physically placed on the other end of the
runway that it serves. It is an electronic component that provides
course guidance to the runway. The three published instrument approach
procedures utilize at least one of the components of the ILS. Naturally,
the ILS procedure on Runway 24 uses all of the components. A localizer
(LOC) back eourse to Runway 06 utilizes the same localizer facility but
to the opposite end of the runway. The third procedure utilizes the NDB
for an approach to Runway 24. None of these instrument procedures
require flying over the Town; however, if an instrument procedure were
established to Southold's Airport from the south or southwest, a
potential conflict during IFR conditions with aircraft landiag on Suffolk
County Airport's Runway 24 is possible. No other airspace conflicts are
anticipated if the Town proceeds with establishing an airport.
I
I
3-15
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT.I/3.10
6/lO/85
3.4.2 Airports in the Town of Southold
A. Eastern Long Island Hospital
Eastern Long Island Hospital maintains its own heliport for medical
emergencies. It is restricted to private use, and thus this heliport
located on the hospital grounds in Greenport is not capable of accommo-
dating any of the potential traffic in Southold Town.
B. Elizabeth Field
Elizabeth Field is located on Fishers Island. The Airport is owned by
the Town of Southold and is opened to the public. The draft Town Master
Plan recommends that Elizabeth Field be zoned R-120 (Residential Low
Density B). It is located northeast of Southold and approximately eight
miles southeast of New London, Connecticut. Its two runways 07/25 and
12/30 are paved with asphalt. The Airport is usable during instrument
weather conditions (IFR) in that it has a VOR approach. VOR refers to a
very high frequency, omnidirectional radio station for navigational and
landing purposes. Tie-downs are available and the Airport is attended
during daylight hours. Elizabeth Field is also equipped with runway edge
lighting.
Fishers Island is accessible to the Town of Southold proper by ferry
service to New London, Connecticut, and then to Fishers Island. Fishers
Island is also accessible by air from the two other private airports in
Southold or by private boat across the Long Island Sound. The annual
operations (opns) at Elizabeth Field, which has two based aircraft, are
estimated as follows:
Air Taxi 5,000
GA Local 1,200
GA Itinerant 3,800
Military 100
Total Opns. 10,100
3-16
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT. 1 / 3.11
6/10/85
C. Rose Field
Another airport in the Town of Southold is Rose Field in Orient. It is a
privately owned, VFR (visual flight rules) airport and is not opened to
the public. Rose Field is also proposed to be zoned for residential use
(R-80) in the updated Town Master Plan. It has a total of three based
aircraft. Its Runway 17/35 consists of a turf composition. It has no
facilities except for a hangar that houses one aircraft and runway edge
lighting.
D. Mattituck Airport
Mattituck Airport is also located in the Town and is proposed for R-80
residential zoning. It is also a private VFR airport. It is opened to
the public but most of the flight activity there involves the business of
new and remanufactured engines and engine overhaul and repair. No sales,
rentals, lessons, or charters are offered, but several operators will
pick up passengers at Mattituck. Fuel is available. The Airport has 23
based aircraft and its Runway 01/19 is paved with asphalt. Its yearly
operations are estimated as follows:
Air Taxi 300
GA Local 12,000
GA Itinerant 4~000
Total Opns. 16,300
3.4.3 Airports Outside of the Town of Southold
A. Bayport-Edwards Field
Edwards Field is located in Bayport in the Town of Islip, approximately
39 nautical miles (46 road miles) southwest of Southold. It is a VFR
airport which is owned by the Town of Islip and is opened to the public.
Its Runways 01/19 and 18/36 are composed of turf. Tie-downs and hangars
are available for storage. Services include charter, aircraft rental,
and flight instruction.
3-17
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT.1/3.12
6/10/85
B. Brookhaven Airport
Brookhaven Airport, which is owned by the Town of Brookhaven, is located
approximately 24 nautical miles (29 road miles) southwest of Southold.
It is an IFR airport with VOR and NDB approaches. It is opened to the
public and is operated by two fixed-base operators. Its Runways 06/24
and 15/33 are asphalt. Tie-downs and hangars are available for storage.
Its services include charter, fuel, flight instruction and aircraft
rentals. It is attended 24 hours a day and glider activity is reported.
Its annual level of operations has been estimated as follows:
Air Taxi 5,000
GA Local 84,000
GA Itinerant 42,000
Total Opns. 131,000
C. Calverton-Peconlc River Plant/Grumman Airport
Calverton-Peconic River Plant/Grun~nan Airport is located 19 nautical
miles (24 road miles) west of Southold. It is an IFR airport with ILS _
and VOR approaches. Its Runways 14/32 and 05/23 consist of asphalt and
concrete. It is closed to the public.
D. Coram Airport
Corsm Airport is located 28 nautical miles (39 road miles) west of
Southold in the Town of Brookhaven. It is a privately owned airport and
there is the possibility of it being closed. Its Runway 06/24 consists
of a turf composition. Tie-downs are available for storage. Services
available are charters, flight instruction, and aircraft rentals.
E. East Hampton Airport
East Hampton Airport, which is owned by the Town of East Hampton, is
located approximately 17 nautical miles (41 road miles) from Southold.
It is a publicly owned airport with a VOR approach. Its Runways 10/28,
04/22, and 16/34 consist of asphalt. Hangars and tie-downs are available
3-18
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
for storage.
flight instruction, aircraft rentals, and fuel.
a.m. to dark by one fixed-based operator (FBO).
East Hamptoo are as follows:
SO~HOLD85-DT.1/3.13
6/lO/85
Available services include aircraft maintenance, charter,
It is attended from 9:00
Cormmuter 2,900
Air Taxi 2,900
GA Local 10,600
GA Itinerant 29,700
Military 50
Total Opns. 46,150
Annual operations at
F. Long Island MacArthur Airport
Long Island MacArthur Airport is located approximately 37 nautical miles
(41 road miles) southwest of Southold. It is owned and operated by the
Town of Islip. It is a publicly owned, IFR airport with ILS and NDB
approaches. Its Runways 06/24, 10/28, 15L/33R and 15R/33L consist of
asphalt composition. A flight service station (FSS) is located on the
airport grounds. Hangars and tie-downs are available for storage. Its
services include aircraft maintenance, charter, flight instruction,
oxygen, rental, and fuel. It is attended 24 hours and has five FBOs.
There are also scheduled airline services available at Long Island
MacArthur Airport.
Air Carrier
Air Taxi
GA Local
GA Itinerant
Military
Total Opns.
Its yearly operations are distributed as follows:
17,780
108
101,389
93,387
10,279
222,943
G. Montauk-Sky Portel Airport
Montauk-Sky Portel Airport is located approximately 28 nautical miles (67
road miles) southeast of Southold. It is a privately owned, IFR airport
with a VOR approach. The Airport is reported closed five months out of
m
!
3-19
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT. 1/3.14
6/10/85
the year. It is opened during the summer months, April-October, to the
public. Its Runway 06/24 is paved with asphalt. Tie-downs are available
for storage. Its annual operations are as follows:
Air Taxi 1,000
GA Local 850
GA Itinerant 6,500
Total Opns. 8,350
H. Montauk Seaplane Base
Montauk Seaplane Base is located approximately 28 nautical miles (67 road
miles) southeast of Southold. It has one landing lane, 01/19, and it is
opened to the public. There are no services available.
I. Riverhead Airpark
Riverhead Airpark is located approximately 12 nautical miles (15 road
miles) west of Southold. It is a privately owned, VFR airport, which is
presently closed to aircraft operations. Its Runway 16/34 is turf. Tie-
downs are available for storage. The Airport is attended during daylight
hours. There are no services available.
J. Riverhead-Talmage Field
Riverhead-Talmage Field is located 14 nautical miles (15 road miles) west
of Southold. It is a privately owned VFR airport that is closed to the
public. Its Runway 16/34 is turf. There are no services available.
K. Shelter Island Airport
Shelter Island Airport is located eight nautical miles southeast of
Southold. It is a privately owned, VFR airport. Its Runway 03/21
consists of turf. There are no services or facilities available. Its
yearly operations are as follows:
GA Local 150
GA Itinerant 400
Total Opns. 550
I
I
3-20
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT.1/3.15
6/10/85
L. Shelter Island-Westmoreland
Shelter Island-Westmoreland is located six nautical miles southeast of
Southold. It is a privately owned, VFR airport that is closed to the
public. Its Runways 04/22 and 13/31 are of a turf composition. There
are no services or facilities available.
M. Spadaro Airport
Spadaro Airport is located 19 nautical miles (26 road miles) southwest of
Southold. It is a privately owned, VFR airport. Its Runway 18/36 is
composed of asphalt. Tie-downs are available for storage. Services
include charter, flight instruction, aircraft rental, seaplane charter,
and fuel. The Airport is attended during daylight hours. There are some
parachuting activities reported on weekeuds. The annual level of
operations is estimated as follows:
GA Local 1,000
GA Itinerant 200
Total Opns. 1,200
N. East Morlches Flying Club
East Moriches Flying Club is located 19 nautical miles (26 road miles)
southwest of Southold. It is a privately owned, VFR airport. Its
Runway 18/36 consists of turf. The facility is attended during daylight
hours only. There are no services available.
O. Southampton Heliport
Southampton Heliport is located 13 miles southwest of Southold.
publicly owned heliport.
It is a
P. Suffolk County Airport
Suffolk County Airport, which is located in Westhampton Beach and owned
by the County, is located 15 nautical miles (28 road miles) southwest of
Southold. It is a publicly owned, IFR airport with ILS, NDB, and LOC/BC
(locallzer/back course) approaches. Runways 06/24, 15/33, and 02/20 at
3-21
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
SOUTHOL I)85 -DT. 1 / 3.16
6/10/85
Suffolk County are concrete. Hangars and tie-downs are available for
storage.' There are seven FBOs that offer the following services:
aircraft maintenance, charter, flight instruction, rental, and fuel. The
Airport is attended 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. Its yearly operations are as
follows:
Air Taxi 330
GA Local 79,081
GA Itinerant 33,280
Military 11,559
Total Opus. 124,250
3.5 SURVEY OF POTENTIAL AIRPORT USERS
3.5.1 General Aviation Survey
At the present time, there is no publicly owned airport on the North
Fork. Potential demand for a new general aviation airport in the Town of
Southold does exist. A survey of registered aircraft owners and pilots
considered tn be within a reasonable distance of the Town of Southold
fonnd that over 80 percent of the pilots responding to the survey would
anticipate using an airport in the Town. The survey form was sent to
individuals residing in the Towns of Southold, Shelter Island, and
Riverhead.
This subsection will discuss the above mentioned survey questionnaire.
The Consultant (PRC/ESE) sent out 62 separate survey forms to registered
aircraft owners and pilots in the above mentioned towns in November of
1983. A copy of the questionnaire appears as Appendix B.
Each question is summarized as to the percentage of pilots responding to
the questionnaire. Seventy-nine percent of the pilots (49 responses)
involved have responded, and the results are as follows (the number in
parenthesis is the actual number of respondents):
o Questions #1 and #2 asked for the name and address of the
respondent.
!
I
3-22
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT.1/3.17
6/10/85
o The results of Question #3, which asked for the number of flight
hours flown annually, are as follows:
0-99 Hours - 55% (27)
100-300 Hours - 25% (12)
301-500 Hours - 2% (1)
Over 600 Hours - 18% (9)
o Question #4 asked for the
surveyed. The results are as follows:
Student - 12% (6)
licenses and ratings of the pilots
Private - 43% (21)
Commercial - 31% (15) .
Instrument - 39% (19)
ATR - 29% (14)
Multi-Engine - 31% (15)
Flight Instructor - 33% (16)
Rotorcraft - 2% (1)
Note that some individuals hold more than one license and/or
rating, which results in the above percentages totaling in excess
of 100 percent.
o Question #5 asked if the pilot owned his own aircraft, and if so,
where it was based. The results of this question are discussed
below.
Of the 49 responses received, 51 percent (25 pilots) do not own
their own aircraft. The remaining 24 pilots do own their own
aircraft, and it should be noted that some of them own more than
one aircraft. In fact, these 24 individuals who stated that they
are aircraft owners own a total of 36 aircraft. Of these
36 aircraft, 94 percent (34) are single-engine aircraft; the
3-23
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT.1/3.15
6/10/85
remaining two aircraft are multi-engine types. These aircraft are
based at seven separate airports on Long Island and two airports
in Connecticut as follows:
- Mattituck Airport - 9 aircraft
- Shelter Island - 5 aircraft
- Suffolk County Airport - 4 aircraft
- Talmage Field - 3 aircraft
- Rose Field - 3 aircraft
- Riverhead Airpark - 2 aircraft
- East Hampton Airport - 1 aircraft
- Airports in Connecticut - 9 aircraft
Of the above 36 aircraft owners, 25 (69 percent) have indicated
that they would relocate their base of operations to the proposed
airport in Southold Town. Another 5 (14 percent) stated that they
would utilize the facilities at the~new airport. The remaining
6 aircraft owners (17 percent) do not anticipate utilizing the
Town's airport.
Question #6 was directed towards pilots who are not aircraft
owners. The question asked what airport these pilots used most
often. The results are as shown below:
Suffolk County Airport - 36% (9)
Mattituck Airport - 32% (8)
Long Island MacArthur Airport - 8% (2)
Rose Field - 8% (2)
Out of State - 4% (1)
Republic Airport - 4% (1)
Brookhaven Airport - 4% (i)
John F. Kennedy International Airport - 4% (1)
I
I
3-24
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT. 1 / 3.19
6/10/85
o The next question, #7, asked all of the respondents to rate the
airport and its facilities that they utilize most often. A
summary of the base airports, their facilities and how they are
rated by the pilots using them is shown in Table 3-2.
o Question #8 asked the pilots what type of aircraft they use most
often. The following shows the results of this question.
Single-Engine 1-3 Place - 43% (21)
Single-Engine 4+ Place - 53% (26)
Multi-Engine <12,500 Lbs - 8% (4)
Turboprop >12,500 lbs - 2% (1)
Note that the percentage total does not equal 100 percent, and
that the actual number does not total 49; this is because some
respondents gave multiple aircraft types.
o There are four main reasons pilots reported for using a particular
base airport, as discovered from Question #9. The results are as
follows:
Close to Home - 41% (20)
Convenience - 16% (8)
Facilities (Flight School, Night Operations, Approach
Facilities, etc.) - 29% (14)
No Airport in Soothold Town - 14% (7)
o Question #10 asked for the primary source of flight activity from
the pilots responding. The results of this question are as
follows:
Personal - 65%
Business - 37%
Student - 18%
Instructor - 20%
Air Taxf (Pass.)- 6%
3-25
8CUIllI~U)-T. 1/H~3-2.1
Table 3-2. Results of Poter~ial User Survey
Aircraft
Fit. Rehool Yainteesnce Fuel Storage & FID
Ntraber of Rate Rates Coats Parkiag Services
Airport Respo~ienta (ii) (1) (Il) (Il) (X)
13
t5 Aug
81o~
31 ~one
Suffolk (bmty 13 31 [U&h
38 AUg '
31 fl]& ·
~elter Islmt 5 60 l~w
20 AUg
2O#/A
Pose Field 4 100 Rme
1~ Ialard Foc~rthur 3 66 ~g
33 aish
Bccokhaven I 1CO Itigh
Rivertead Airpark I --
Republic I 100 Aug
Ta]taage Field-Riverheat I N/A
gdmrds Fiels I --
~aterford (C~) 2 100 Low
5~Aug
15Fore
31
31 aigh
69 Avg
5~ AUg
2O ~igh
4O AUg
20 Pone
20 N/A
l~O ~
66Aug
33 aish
I(1) Aug
100 Aug
100 Aug
15 High
Aug
~/A
38
.6 Aug
16 N/&
20 Aug
60 low
2O N/A
75 Aug
25 Low
66 ~g
33 ~h
23 Exc
23 Good
8 Fa/r
15 Poor
31 N/A
38 (hod
31 Fair
23 Poor
8
20 Fair
20 Poor
~O Forte
20 N/A
100 Fore
33 Exc
66 G~od
100 Poor
1~0 ~c
Table 3-2.
Peaults of Potent/al User ~vey ((~ntinued, Page 2 of 2)
SOJrIH)LO~. 1/BI~3-2.2
06/28/8~
Bazar Paw~mt ~
Faclhties O~dition Rmo~al locat ~oe
Airport R~AII~ (%) (~) (Z) (%)
Hattittck 8 Fair 8 (hod 15 Exc
31 Poor 38 Fair 46
23 None 15 Poor 39 Fa/r
38 N/A 8 ¥.
8 None
23 N/A
Suffolk/busty 15 E~c 8 Fair 16 Exc
31 Fa/r 8 None ~8 gai~
23 N/A
8 E~c 15 E~c
38 (hod 47 Coed
23 Fair 15 Fair
23 Ibor 15 Poor
8 N/A 8 ~/A
8Exc 8 Fac
23 Fair ~6 Fair
8 ~ 31 Poor
7 N/A
20 Fair 60 Fxc
20 lbor
40 ~bne 20
20 N/A
25 I~c 25 ~c
~0 Good
25 lbor 25 Poor
l~ng l~lard ~x:Arthur la3 [~c 33 8~c 66 Exc 33 ~c 33 ~c
66 Goal 33 12~1 66 ~ood 33Q~d
33 Fair
· -ookhaven 1~0 B~c ~ ~ ~ __
East lbnFton 1~0 (hod 100 ~c IgO Bat 1~0 Good 1~0 Poor
Rived-ead Airpark IG0 O:~od ~ 100 (2md ~ 100 Cbod
Repoblic 1~0 Exc 100 l~c 100 gxc 100 (bo/ 100
Talm~e F/eld-Rived~ead
Edwards r~eld -- 100 Poor ,Sod 1~0 ibor 100 (bcd
Waterford (CT) 100 ~ 100 None 100 Fair 1~0 E~c 1~0 I~c
Note: ~hree respondents ~ere not inclnded in this figure; one c~rently flies o~t of state, one is not ctrrent, and o~ flies
exclusively air carrier aircraf£ at the present t/me.
~u~ce: HC/ESP: AnalYsis of Swvev Olestinnr~alro~.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT.I/3.20
6/10/85
Note that some individuals gave multiple responses and thus the
percentages do not total 100 percent.
O
There are two types of operations - itinerant and local. Itiner-
ant operations are those flights for which the flight either
begins or ends at an airport other than the base airport. All
other operations are considered local (i.e., touch-and-go's are
local operations). Question ~11 asked for an estimate of local
versus itinerant activity. The results of this question from the
responding pilots relative to their activity during the past 12
months are shown below.
Operations Local Itinerant
N/A 22% (11) 37% (18)
1-50 37% (18) 45% (22)
51-99 16% (8) 8% (4)
100-199 12% (6) 0% (0)
200-300 2% (1) 2% (1)
Over 300 8% (4) 8% (4)
Question #12 asked directly if the pilot would relocate his flying
activity to Southold if the Town established a new airport.
Eighty-four percent (41) of the pilots responding would relocate
and use the new airport. Ten percent (5) would not relocate but
would use the facilities. Six percent (3) would not relocate or
utilize the new airport at all.
o The final question asked for opinions on what facilities the new
Southold Airport should have. Table 3-3 shows the requirements
pilots would like to have at the new airport.
3-28
I I
I I I
I~P33. 3/HTB3-3. l
Table 3-3. Pilot l~ccmr~atioos for Proposc~l So~th~ld Airport
Nanway Maintenance FBO
Length R~VAH~ A/C Park Facilities Services
Terminal
Facilities
1.
2. 2,000
3. 2,500
4. 2,500
5. 3,5~0
6. 3,000
7. 2,5~0
8. 2~000
9. 3,000
10. 3,000
11. 3,500
12. 3~000
13. 3,000
14. 3,000
15. 3,000
16. 3,500 UNI024
17. 3,000 Beacon Lights
18. ~'~ ~,~S/ time
inrr/ c
19. 2,500 L~s/VASI T-~gr
WX~qD~
20. ~,000 None T--~gc
21. -- -- ~
22. 2,800-3,000 Rnwy/Igh ~ Tiedo~n
23. 2,000 Rnwy/Lgh ~ Tiedovm
2/*. 3,000 ~B/RNaV Tiedo~n T-Hngr
25. 3,000 ~OR ~ Tiedoma
26. 2,500 UNI~3M Tiedo~n
27. 3,000 I~C/VOR/~B T-~agr
28. 3,000 VOR Tiedo~
29. -- Yes Yes
30. 3,000 -- T-Hngr
31. 3,500 lghts Tiedo~n
LTS/VASI Tiedowa Yes Fuel/Chtr l~ntal Pit I. nge/UNICCH/FSS Mm
MIN. TO/NO Tiedo~u Nme X/O~tr X/~trnt
Nooe Tiedo~n ~ F~el Nmae
LTS T/edowa Yes Fuel IIqlCO~FSS
~ Tiedo~n l-l~gar lnspt & Maint Ontr/Inst L~IC~4
-- Tiedo~n ~ Fuel Ye~
Yes Tiedo~n Yes Fuel/Inst A1 !
VASI/V~R Tiedo~ l~d~o Work Fue! Al!
VAS I/V~R Tiedo~t Radio Work
Basic Tiedo~n Basic Fuel/Last X/Rstrnt
Beacon or ~R No~e Yes Fuel Phone
IY~s. T-tk~r linger (K Ftc[ All
-- T-t~gr Insp. Fuel/P~nt Imst Rstm/FSS Mm/Imge
l~mway Lights Tiedo~ l~ar M~mor Svc F~el/~atr Inst/No hge/UNIG~4
Rstrm
Tiedo~ Yes Ail X/P~trnt
Tiedown Minor Fuel/~ent lnst Rstm/PSS Mm/Ver~
l~r Airfm l~pr/& Insp Fuel --
Fuel
WoS ~m/P~t r~Vend
No~e Fuel/Inst P~t ~b N~ed
~ Al I X/Vend
~ & ~ Fuel/Rent 4 I~C A/C Rstm/Phn
Yes All FSS Fan/Pit Lr~e
-- Fuel/l~flt Lust Rst m/FSS
(IW~L Fuel Ail if Possible
Yes All ~bove Ail Above
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Fuel F~ Fan/Cbt t s/UNICO~/Rs t m
-- Fuel/Inst r P. st m/FSS Fan/UNICO~
~E~33, 3/BI~3-3. 2
8/~?/8~
Table 3-3. P~lo~ Recmmendatioa for Proposed Soufl~old Airport (Co~rimed~ Pa&e 2 of 2)
Run,,,,~ay Ma~nten~e
length I~VAII~ A/C Park Facilities
32- 3,500 Lts/VOR Tiedown
33. 4,000 No~ Nec. Tiedo~m
34. 5,(]30 ILS llaflgar
35. 3,000 ADF T-l~gr
36. 2,5(]0 Nght-Lt. Tiedo~rl
37. 3,500 VOR-APP T'-~r C~
39. 3,000 No~e Ttedo~
41. 3,50O ~R/ND~ Z4angar/~
42. 3,000 APP CapabL A~!
43. 3,000 No~ Nec. Yes
~4. 3,000 No~ Nec. Yes
45. 3,000 ARe' Yes
47. 25-3~000 ~I~ Yes Ali.
68. 3,000 None T[edom Cb~gr
49. 3,500 VASI T~edo~a~
. ~ Terminal
Services F~-i lit les
Yes Fuel/Lqstr Rental Rst m/UNI(X~I
Not Nec. Fuel FSS Fnn/Rst~/Lnge G~ts
Yes Fuel All Above
Yes Fuei/Instr Rent X/Rs~rn:/Ven~
Light ~uel Ln&e/~tm/t~C~/~SS ~
None Fuel/O~l Rsrm
Yes Fuel/Insrr grit l/Onl:r X/L~e/~nr t s/P, strnr
Yes All All
Reliable All All'md All --
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
Airfrme ~ngine Fuel Rstm/UNICCi~FSS Fnn
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
S~rce: ESE, 1984.
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOLrrHOLD85-DT. 1/3.21
6/10/85
3.5.2 Business Survey
In addition to the survey conducted of potential general aviation users
of the proposed airport, the Consultant also conducted a survey of local
businesses and professionals currently operating in Southold Town. In
March 1984, 44 separate survey forms, a copy of which is included as
Appendix C, were mailed to various business and professional concerns,
soliciting their interest in the airport and how it might affect their
normal business activities. Of the 44 surveys sent out, 25 responses
were received, which represents'a response rate of 57 percent. It is
interesting to note that all of the responses received favored a Town-
owned airport. Thus, it is assumed that the remaining 1~ forms that were
not returned were sent to concerns who would not utilize the airport in
Southold Town. The intent of this section is to present the results of
the business survey.
o The first question asked if the business or professional would use
the new airport. All 25 respondents answered in the affirmative.
The next part of this question asked for the most frequent
destinations and what type of aircraft would be used (i.e.,
charter, private, air taxi, etc.). The most frequent destination
mentioned were points in New England including destinations in
Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts. Private (52
percent) was listed most often as the type of aircraft. Charter
and taxi aircraft were both mentioned by 32 percent and 16 percent
were unsure. The above percentages do not total 100 percent in
that some respondents listed more than one type.
The second question asked if the particular business owned privte
aircraft. Fifty-two percent (13 respondents) do own at least one
aircraft, forty-four percent (11 respondents) do not have
aircraft, and one respondent stated that he would consider
purchasing an aircraft if the Town proceeded with establishing an
airport. Among the 13 respondents who do own aircraft, there are
27 aircraft, 18 of them are single-engine and 9 are multi-engine
aircraft.
3-31
I
!
I
i
I
!
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT.1/3.22
6/10/85
The third question queried how often the proposed Southold Airport
would be used on a monthly basis. Of the 25 respondents, 16 of
them (64 percent) stated that their use of the facility would
amount to less than ten times per month. Five (20 percent) others
estimated that their monthly frequency of use would range between
11 and 20 times. The remaining four respondents (16 percent)
expect that they will utilize the new airport in excess of 20
times per month.
The next question inquired whether or not use of the airport would
vary according to season. Fourteen of the responses (56 percent)
indicated that their use 'of the facility would vary depending upon
the season, while the remaining 11 respondents (44 percent) expect
that their activity would remain reasonably well-balanced
throughout the year.
O
The fifth question asked whether an airport established in
Southold Town would enhance their business. Remarkably,
84 percent of the respondents (21) stated that a publicly owned
airport on the North Fork would enhance their business. Only four
respondents (16 percent) said that it would not affect their
business; however, one of them did state that it would be a
convenience to his operation.
The final question asked if it would be advantageous to be able to
make one-day business trips, which is possible with a Town
airport, versus longer trips due to deficiencies in transportation
to/from the North Fork. Surprisingly, 88 percent of those respond-
ing (22) said that it would, while the other three did not feel
that 1-day trips were an advantage.
3-32
I
I
i
!
I
I
i
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT.1/3.23
6/lO/85
3.5.3 Conclusions
The principal reason for conducting these two surveys was to identify the
potential aviation activity and in turn determine the need for a publicly
owned airport on the North Fork. It seems that the need for the airport
is present and that there should be no difficulty in attracting users.
In addition, the majority of the business community members in the Town
are supportive and have stated their need for the facility. In short,
the proposed Southold Airport certainly seems to be a most feasible
endeavor and should be pursued.
3.6 METEOROLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS
Meteorological considerations for the proposed Southold Airport focused
on a comprehensive review of weather observations taken at Suffolk County
Airport and Tweed-New Haven Airport. This was necessary since no U.S.
Weather Bureau (USWB) reporting station currently exists on the North
Fork. The meteorological analysis consisted of review of 43,818 weather
observations taken at Suffolk County Airport over the 10-year period
between 1954 and 1963 and 36,480 weather observations taken at Tweed-New
Haven Airport over the 10-year period from 1955 to 1964. The results of
these weather observations were compiled and checked for consistency in
terms of wind orientation to assist in identifying the optimal runway
alignment that should be pursued at the proposed Southold Airport. One
additional weather station was utilized to confirm the results of the
composite Suffolk County/New Haven analysis. This weather station, which
is not approved by the USWB, has taken observations of wind direction and
speed on the North Fork. It is operated by the Long Island Lighting
Company (LILCO) and is located in Jamesport. The weather analysis
culminated in the preparation of the wind roses depicted in Figure 3-4,
which are a compilation of the weather observations taken at Suffolk
County and Tweed-New Haven Airports. Table 3-4 shows the wind orienta-
tion broken down by velocity (greater than 5 knots and greater than 10
knots). The reason for this breakdown is that most small general
aviation aircraf~ can operate safely with a 5-knot crosswind; however,
3-33
ALL WEATHER WIND ROSE
PERCENT OF VRF WEATHER - 83.47%
PERCENT OF IFR WEATHER - 16.53%
PERIOD: 1954-1963 (43,818 OBSERVATIONS AT SUFFOLK COUNTY AIRPORT)
1955-1964 (36,480 OBSERVATIONS AT TWEED-NEW HAVEN AIRPORT)
LOW VISIBILITY WIND ROSE
(LESS THAN 1000' CEILING, LESS THAN 3 MILES VISIBILITY)
Figure 3-4
WIND ROSES--PROPOSED SOUTHOLD AIRPORT
SOURCE: NATIONAL OCEANIC & ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION.
NATIONAL CLIMATIC CENTER, ASHEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK
Airport Site Selection/
Master Plan Study
i
i
i
I
1
I
i
/
SObT~0LD-T. 1/V]~3-4.1
Table 3-~. ~ Orientation by Direction aed Speed f~r Proposed ~outh~old Airport
Direction
w/nd speed (% Occurrence)
5 - 9 Knots 10+ Knots Totals
VFR IFR Total VFR IFR Total VFR IFR Total
North (N) 3.18 0.55 3.73 2.06 0.42 2.~8 5.2A 0.97 6.21
North-Northeast (~:) 2.15 0.51 2.66 1.49 0.65 2.14 3.64 1.16 4.80
Northeast (~) 1.49 0.55 2.0~ 0.97 0.74 1.71 2.46 1.29 3.75
East-Northeast (gl~) 0.92 0.41 1.33 0.87 0.63 1.50 1.79 1.0~ 2.83
East (g) 0.9~ 0.53 1.51 0.86 0.53 1.39 1.8~ 1.06
East-~outheast (ESE) 1.31 0.39 1.70 1.03 0.27 1.30 ;2.3~ 0.66 3.00
~outheast (SE) 1.45 0.39 1.84 0.74 0.18 0.92 2.19 0.57 2.76
Sou~h-Southeast (S~) 1.64 0.35 1.99 0.59 0.16 0.75 2.23 0.51 2.74
~outh (S) 2.03 0.52 2.55 1.0~ 0.26 1.30 3.07 0.78 3.85
South-Southwest (S~) 2.88 0.62 3.50 2.28 0.24 2.52 5.16 0.86 6.02
South~eat (~,4) ~6.11 1.34 7.45 ~3.95 0.55 4.50 10.06 1.89 11.95
West-South~mst (W~) 3.27 0.41 3.68 2.00 0.14 2.14 5.27 0.55 5.82
West (W) 3.(~ 0.20 3.22 2.06 0.06 2.12 5.08 0.26 5.34
West-North~st (W~W) 2.63 0.13 2.76 3.54 0.06 3.60 6.17 0.19 6.36
Nortl~est (~/) 3.25 0.18 3.43 4.09 0.12 4.21 7.34 0.30 7.~4
North-Not,st (~W) 2.64 0.23 2.87 2.91 0.22 3.13 5.55 0.45 6.00
Note: c~1~ Winds (0 to 4 knots) eecur 18.07 percant of the time oa ma anmml basis.
Percentages ~ay not agree with wind roses (Figure 3Z4) due to r~a~i~g.
VFR Weather: Clo~ ceiling greater than or equal to 1,000; visibility greater than or
equal ~o 3 miles.
Weather: Cloud ceiling less than 1,000; visibility less than 3 miles.
Source: PRC/E~ /kmly~is of U.S. Weather It~reau O~servations at Suffolk Cotmty Airport (1954-
1963) m~ ~ed-New Proven Airport (1955-1964), filed with National Oceanic
Atmos~ser~ ~ministration, 1984.
3-35
!
I
i
I
i
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT. 1/3.24
6/10/85
most of them will experience some difficulty with a 10-knot crosswind.
Thus, it is important to consider the wind orientation when wind speeds
exceed 10 knots to determine the most effective runway alignment.
By reviewing Figure 3-4, it is clear that the predominant wind direction
is from the southwest, during both VFR and IFR weather conditions. The
wind patterns that have resulted from this analysis show that the North
Fork is typical of most of Long Island, with the wind orientation
distributed among all directions. During VFR conditions, the next three
most frequent directions of wind occurrence are northwest, west-
northwest, and north-northwest. The next three most frequent IFR wind
orientations are northeast, north-northeast, and east. It should be
further noted that the fact that southwest is the predominant wind
direction also coincides with LILCO's readings at its Jamesport reporting
station.
3-36
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT.1/4.1
5/29/85
4.0 FORECAST OF AVIATION DEMAND
4.1 INTRODUCTION
Historically, transportation has been the controlling factor in the
original location of man's political and economic environment. This is
clearly true in the Town of Southold, where the early settlers had little
choice but to locate at points available to water transportation, either
on the Long Island Sound or at Greenport on the Peconic Bay. Therefore,
townspeople looked to New London, New Haven, New York City, and Boston as
markets for their prodocts, the primary source for their supplies, and
the bankers for their enterprises.
The impact of seacoast-oriented water transportation on the economy of
Southold was reinforced by early roads and by railroads, since both
generally followed the then-established patterns of trade. Thus for some
300 years after the founding of Greenport, Mattituck, and New Suffolk,
Southold's economy continued to be tied directly to the developments of
water transportation, which linked it directly to the New England region.
The era of modern highway transportation gave Southold its first
opportunity to free itself from its necessary dependence on New England
as a hub of economic activity. While the highway system as it has
developed to date is far from ideal, Southold no longer needs to look to
New England to develop its economic relationships. The Town can now look
west, to New York City, with greater ease than traveling to New England.
Air service, to which the Long Island Sound would not impose a barrier
and which would provide Southold with flexibility in its ioterregional
transportation system, has been achieved only to a limited degree at
best. However, the opportunity does exist for improved air service
provided the right conditions exist.
4-1
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
i
I.
SOUTHOLD85-DT.1/4.2
5/29/85
This section will evaluate the conditions which must prevail for aviation
to exist and prosper. Since the Town of Southold is part of Suffolk
County and since economic data at the township level does not exist in
the State of New York, the socioeconomic analysis of the environment of
Southold will first analyze the overall Long Island Region, especially
Suffolk, and then consider the economy of Southold in relation to that of
the region, with particular interest in evaluating the growth potential
of the Town of Southold.
4.2 POPULATION OF LONG ISLAND
The population of the Long Island Region during the 1960.to 1970 period
grew at an annual rate of 2.7 percent. It rose from a level of
1,967,000 persons in 1960 to 2,555,800 persons in 1970, as recorded by
the U.S. Bureau of the Census. However, between 1970 and 1980, the
population growth rate decreased considerably. Population grew at an
average annual rate of only 0.2 percent. This limited growth is
attributable, in part, to specific policies of various governmental
agencies to slow down or retard growth in the region.
It is anticipated that by the year 2003, the total population of the Long
Island Region will reach 2,905,000 persons, which reflects an average
annual growth rate of 0.5 percent over 1980. This is a slight increase
in the region's population growth rate over the 1970 to 1980 period (see
Table 4-1).
4.2.1 Center of Lon~ Island Population
The approximate center of population for the region, as calculated in
1980 (Table 4-2), was 40°45'11'' latitude and 72°80'55'' longitude. This
location is slightly west of the Nassau/Suffolk border line (Figure 4-1).
The location of the center of population, given the potential population
growth rate to the year 2003, suggests that the Town of Southold will be
about 50 miles from the center of population. Thus the Town of Southold
lies on the ring of the population base.
4-2
i
J
J
!
i
Table 4-1.
Year
History
1960
1970
1980
Porecast
1988
1993
1998
2003
D-SOLrrI.{OLD.1/VTB4-1.1
O8/lO/84
Population Profile of Long Island, 1960 Through 2003
Population
1,967,000
2,555,800
2,605,813
2,690,000
2,760,000
2,831,000
2,905,000
Average Annual
Growth Rate
(Percent)
2.7
0.2
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.5
Sources:
U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1980.
New York State Department of Commerce Population Projections,
1983.
PRC/ESE, 1984.
4~3
1/~,fflV+-2.1
08/10/84
Table 4-2. Center of Populatio~ Calculations, Long Island Region
Latitude
Popular ion (Minutes)
1970 1980 N of 40°
Polmlation Weighted
by Latitude
(in thousands )
1970 1980
Lcmgitude
(Minutes)
W of 72°
Populatio~ Weighted
by Latitude
(in thousands)
1970 1980
Nassau
N. Nenpstead 235,007 218,624 45
H~tead 834,719 772,5g0 40
Oyster Bay 359,112 303,368 50
Suffolk
Htmtington 200,172 201,512 48
Babyloaa 203,570 203,683 42
Islip 278,880 298,897 46
Smlthtown 144,657 116,663 50
Brookhave~ 245,760 365,015 ~0
Riverheed 18,909 20,243 55
Soutl~ptm 36,154 43,166 53
Southold 16,804 19,172 66
East Hampton 10,980 14,029 55
~nelter Island 1,664 2,071 66
IOTAL 2,555,868 2,605,813
1960
10,575 9,838 108
33,389 30,906 104
17,694 15,18~ 92
9,~08 9,673 80
8,550 8,546 95
12,828 13,750 75
5,733 5,883 73
12,228 18,251 60
1,060 1,113 ~0
1,916 2,287 24
1,109 1,265 27
604 771 19
108 137 20
115,644 117,552
Latitude Longitude
1960 40°45.10' 72°92.00'
1970 40°45.25' 72'88.79'
1980 ~0°45.11' 72°80.55'
25,381 23,611
86,811 80,369
33,038 27,939
16,614 16,121
19,339 19,331
~0,916 22,417
8,370 8,516
14,746 21,g00
756 810
868 1,036
453 518
2O9 267
226,933 222,881
Sources: U.S. Bureau of Census, 1980.
PRC/ESE, 1984.
RIVERHEAD
!
/
L K
$OUTHAMPT
LEGEND
.... COUNTY
..... TOWN
Figure 4-1
LONG ISLAND REGION--
CENTER OF POPULATION, 1980
SOURCE: ESE, lg85
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK
Airport Site Selection/
Master Plan Study
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT.1/4.3
5/28/85
The center of population for Suffolk County lies in the Town of
Brookhaven, still a considerable distance from the Town of Southold
(Figure 4-2). Suffolk County's center of population in 1980 has been
calculated to lie at a point 40°46'94'' latitude and 72°69'39'' longitude.
4.2.2 Population of Southold
The permanent population of the Town of Southold rose from 16,804 persons
in 1970 to 19,172 persons in 1980. However, since the purpose of this
study is to assess the potential for aviation activity in the Town of
Southold, it is necessary to assess both the permanent residents and the
summer residents in the Town. ~
According to the 1980 Special Census of the Population, the net increase
in the summer residents was 20,646 persons. Table 4-3 shows these
estimates, which were prepared by the Long Island Regional Planning
Commission. Combining these figures (summer residents) plus the
permanent residents shown in 1970, the total population market was
approximately 30,000 persons. By 1980, the population market rose to
29,818 persons, representing an average annual growth rate of
3.6 percent between 1970 and 1980. This was almost three times the
growth rate of Suffolk County during the same period. The observation to
be made is that Southold's population market is growing faster than the
population market for Suffolk County.
Through the period from 1980 to the year 2003, the Southold population
market is expected to grow by 1.4 percent annually through 1993 and by
1.1 percent annually thereafter. Thus, the Southold population market by
the year 2003 is estimated to be 53,100 persons, a population which would
exceed the growth rate for both the County of Suffolk and the Long Island
Region. Table 4-4 shows these calculations.
4-6
BIB
i SlJITHTOWN ~
OYSTER ~HUNTINGTONi r---'-~
TOWN ~ I
O L K
EAST
HAMPTON
LEGEND
..... COUNTY
....... TOWN
Figure 4-2
SUFFOLK COUNTY--
CENTER OF POPULATION, 1980
SOURCE: ESE, 1985
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK
Airport Site Selection/
Master Plan Study
i
i
I
I
I
i
i
D.-SOUTHOLD. 1/VTB4-3.1
08117/84
Table 4-3. 1980 Sumer Population Estimates, Town of Southold
Population
1980 Population
Persons Per Household
Sumner Guest
Second Homes
Summer Population
Camp Sites
Persons Camping
Motel Units
Capacity
Total Increase in Summer Population
Total Population
Growth Rate, 1980/1970
19,172
2.54
5,596
3,185
~. 12,740
186
744
533
1,566
20,646
39,818 Persons
3.6 Percent per
Year
Sources:
U.S. Bureau of Census, 1980.
Long Island Regional Planning Commission,
1980.
4-8
i
i
I
I
I
1
I
i
D-SOUTHOLD. 1/VTB4-4.1
08/17/84
Table 4-4. Population Market, Long Island, Suffolk, and Southold
Growth
Long Rate Southold
Island Suffolk (Percent) Winter Summer
Total*
History
1970 2,556 1,127 -- 16,804 NA 30,000
1980 2,606 1,284 1.3 19,172 20,646 39,818
Forecast
Growth
Rate
(Percent)
1988 2,690 1,390 1.0 21,200 23,100 44,300 1.4
1993 2,760 1,495 1.4 22,900 24,600 47,500 1.4
1998 2,831 1,540 0.6 23,800 26,500 50,300 1.1
2003 2,905 1,611 0.8 24,800 28,300 53,100 1.1
* Estimate for total winter and summer.
U.S. Bureau of Census, 1980.
Long Island Regional Planning Commission, 1980.
PRC/ESE, 1984.
New York State Department of Commerce Population Projections,
1983.
4-9
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT.1/4.4
5/28/85
4.3 INCOME
The median family income of the permanent residents in the Town of
Southold in 1979, as well as in 1970, was lower than for Suffolk County
as a whole.
Both Southold and Suffolk County are considerably less affluent than
Nassau County. The median family income in Nassau in 1979 was $26,246
compared to $24,195 for Suffolk and $21,013 for Southold.
In the 10 years under study, Suffolk County was gaining relative to
Nassau County, primarily because of the influx of new residents. The
increase was +2.56 percent in Suffolk compared to +2.33 percent in
Nassau. However, the Town of Southold, compared to either Nassau or
Suffolk, had the strongest growth rate (+2.90 percent) over the same time
period. Thus the rate of income growth for the Town of Southold is
strong.
Over the study period to the year 2003, it is anticipated that income in
the Town of Southold will continue to grow at a faster rate than the Long
Island Region or Suffolk County.
Between 1970 and 1980, double-digit inflation was the rule rather than
the exception. The levels of absolute income were extremely high,
resulting in large absolute changes in the median family income. For
this forecast, using the Econometric Model of Long Island, the level of
median family income for Long Island will approximate $46,303 by the year
2003. The Econometric Model of Long Island was developed by
Prof. T. Conoscenti, Director--Division of Management, Polytechnic
Institute of New York. (This assumes a 3.5-percent annual rate of change
in the consumer price index.) For the Town of Southold, it is
anticipated that the median family income will approximate $43,600
(Table 4-5 presents these calculations). This represents an average
annual growth rate of 3.2 percent between 1980 and 2003.
4-10
i
l
i
1
t
i
I
i.
D-SOUTHOLD. 1/VTB4-5.1
08/17/84
Table 4-5. Median Family Income, Long Island, Suffolk, and Southold
Long
Island Suffolk Southold
History
1970 $ 7,878 $ 6,795
1980 $26,246 $24,195
Percent Change +233 +256
Forecast
1988 $32,000 $30,200
1993 $36,200 $34,650
1998 $40,900 $39,800
2003 $46,300 $45,800
Annual Growth Rate
$ 5,386
$21,013
+290
$27,700
$32,875
$39,000
$43,600
1980-2003 2.5% 2.8% 3.2%
Sources:
U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1980.
Econometric Model of Long Island, 1980.
OBERS Report, 1980.
PRC/ESE, 1984.
4-11
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT.1/4.5
5/28/85
Since the income levels presented approximate the income levels for the
permanent residences of Southold only, it is necessary to establish the
relative value of median family income for those who have second homes in
the Town. Discussions with mortgage officers at a number of major Long
Island banks (e.g., Long Island Trust Co., Norstar Bank, Nassau Trust
Co.) suggest that, on the average, the median family income of second
homeowners is two and one-half times that of permanent residents.
Given the 1980 dates, the median income for second homeowners will
approximate $53,000. Using a simple average, it is estimated that the
combined median family income in 1980 was $37,000 per yeJr.
To summarize, the recorded income for the Town does not reflect the true
level of income, since it does not account for second homeowner
residents.
4.3.1 Sources of Income
The population of the Town of Southold derives approximately 55.7 percent
of its income from wages, salaries, and proprietors' income, compared to
either Long Island or Suffolk County, which derive over 84 percent of
their incomes in the same manner. The lower percentage point difference
reflects the fact that almost one-half of the income is derived from
nonproduction sources, which represent a stable environment for growth
since expenditures patterns are consistent over time (Table 4-6).
An interesting point to observe is that Southold, compared to the region
or county, derives a higher percentage of its income from blue collar
employment rather than white collar employment. Table 4-7 presents these
findings.
In a recent study of the Long Island Region (Long Island's Economic
Outlook, 1984-1990), it is anticipated that by the year 1990, employment
by place of work will grow by 2.5 percent, annually growing from an
4-12
i
i
I
I
I
I
I
i
D-SOUTHOLD. 1/VTB4-6.1
O811O184
Table 4-6. Distribution of Income Sources (Percent)
1980 Southold
Nassau Suffolk 1980t 1970
Wages and Salaries 76.3 80.3 47.0 44.1
Self Employment* 8.2 5.6 8.7 7.2
SUBTOTAL 84.5 85.9 55.7 51.3
Interest and Dividends 7.6 4.8 NA NA
Social Security 3.7 4.3 22.1 19.6
Public Assistance 0.4 0.7 1.7 1.5
All Others 3.8 4.3 20.5 27.6
TOTAL i00.0 100.0 i00.0 100.0
* Includes farms.
T Estimates Econometric Model of Long Island, Prof. T. Cnnoscenti,
Director-Division of Management, Polytechnic Institute of New York.
Source: PRC/ESE, 1984.
4-13
I
I
I
I
D-SOb~fHOLD . 1/VTB4-7.1
08/10/84
Table 4-7. Occupational Distribution (Percent); Long Island, Suffolk,
and Southold; 1970
Long
Occupation Island Suffolk Southold
White Collar Occupation 60.4 53.7 48.4
Professional, Technical, Kindred 18.7 18.4 14.6
Nonfarm Managers and Administrators 11.8 9.6 10.0
Sales Workers 9.8 8.3 6.9
Clerical and Kindred Workers 20.1 17.4 16.9
Blue Collar Occupation 27.6 32.4 33.6
Craftsmen, Foremen, Kindred 13.6 15.7 16.1
Operatives 10.6 12.7 10.7
Nonfarm Laborers 3.4 4.0 6.8
Farm Occupations 0.3 0.6 5.0
Service Occupations 11.7 13.3 12.9
TOTAL 100.0 100.0 100.0
Source: U.S. Census, 1970.
4-14
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT.1/4.6
5/29/85
employment base of 953,100 persons in 1981 to 1,121,400 persons in 1990.
This study was prepared by Prof. T. Conoscenti, Director--Division of
Management, Polytechnic Institute of New York, in January 1984.
Table 4-8 presents these calculatlons. For the forecast period, it will
be assumed that the Region's growth rate between 1990 and the year 2003
will be 2.0 percent. The interesting observation to make is that by the
year 1990, the services sector of the economy will be the largest single
compooent of the Long Island economy. Table 4-9 presents some selected
econometric assumptions. Table 4-10 shows this sector to account for
over 55 percent of the total environment. For Southold, this means that
as the Long Island economy transforms itself towards a service economy,
so will the economic base of the Town of Southold. The implication is
that white collar jobs will imcrease in the work force, resulting in a
higher income base for the Town.
4.3.2 Tourist Industry
In recent years, the tourist industry has played a significant role in
the development of the Region's economy. A recent study released by the
Long Island Tourist Convention Commission indicated that the tourist
industry on Long Island will exceed $10.0 billion by the year 1990,
growing at an average annual rate of 11.5 percent per year between 1984
and 1990. Table 4-11 shows these calculations. The study also indicated
that the east end of Long Island will account for 40 percent of this
total, or $4.0 billion. For Sonthold, the significance is that a good
portion of this money will be spent in the Town, thus increasing the
level of employment and income.
4.3.3 Economic Scenario
The necessary economic conditions which must exist to produce an
environment for aviation to exist and prosper do, in fact, exist in the
Southold area.
4-15
o8/18/8~
Table 4-8. Long Islm~d Regional M~ployment Projection, 1984 Through 1990
(Fmployment by Place of Work)
Emplo~ent (Thousands)
1983 1984 1990
Gr~rch Rates*
83/82 84/83 90/85
Total Nonagricultural 953.1
Contract Construction 36.9
ManufacDaring 167.7
Durables 115.0
Nondurables 52.7
Trmaspor ration, C~mamications, 43.0
and Public Utilities
Wholesale ~nd Retail 250.3
F irmnce / Insuxmace/Real Estate 52.9
Services mad Miscellmaeous 233.9
govermnent 168.8
969.5 1,121.4 +1.2 +1.7 +2.5
37.5 40.1 +1.1 +1.6 +1.1
171.1 237.4 0 +2.0 +5.6
117.4 174.2 +0.2 +2.1 +6.8
53.7 63.2 0 +1.9 +2.7
44.1 50.3 +2.6 +2.5 +2.2
256.9 297.3
53.3 62.1
238.5 261.2
168.1 173.0
+2.5 +2.6 +2.5
-0.1 +0.1 +2.6
+2.9 +2.1 +1.5
-1.5 -0.4 +0.5
* Avera~ annual growth rates.
Source: E~trie Model of Long Island, 1984.
4-16
m~
I
I
I
I
Table 4-9.
Selected Economic Assumptions
D-SOLFI'HOLD.1/VTB4-9.1
08/17/84
GNP average annual growth rate of 2.5 percent per year; 1985 to 2003.
Defense Contracts for the region growing by 6.0 percent per year 1985 to
1990; and 4.5 percent per year, 1990 to 2003.
New York City's Gross Regional Income growing by 3.5 percent per year.
Comuter Income growing by at 3.0 percent per year.
Population Growth: see Figure 4-7.
Prime Rate: 12 percent per year.
Energy Assumption: 10.5 percent per year.
Source: Polytechnic Institute of New York, 1984.
4-17
I
!
i
i
I
!
!
D-$ OUTflOLD, 1/VTB4-10.1
07/10/84
Table 4-10. Long Island Region Net Employment Increases to 1990
Average
Net Growth
1990 (in Percent Increases Rate
thousands) of Total (Actual) (Percent)
!
!
Total Nonagricultural 1,121.4 100.0 151,900
Contract Construction 40.1 3.6 2,600
Manufacturing 237.4 21.2 66,300
Durable 174.2 15.5 56,800
Nondurable 63.2 5.6 9,500
Transportation, Communications, 50.3 4.5 6,200
and Public Utilities
Wholesale and Retail 297.3 26.5 40,400
Finance/Insurance/Real Estate 62.1 5.5 8,800
Services and Miscellaneous 261.2 23.2 22,700
Government Federal/State/Local 173.0 15.4 4,900
Service Sector 55.2
2.5
1.I
5.6
6.8
2.7
2.2
2.5.
2.6
1.5
0.5
Sources: Econometric Nodel of Long Island, 1984.
4-18
D-$OUTHOLD. 1/VTB4-11.1
08/10/84
Table 4-11. Tourism/Convention Expenditures (Billions)
Growth Rate
(Percent)
i Histor~
1978 $ 1.377- NA
i 1979 ....
1980 -- __
1981 2.686 25.8*
I 1982 -- __
1983 4.658 31.5
~ Forecast
1984 $ 5.800 26.1?
1990 10.000 11.5
i
i
!
i
i
i
i
i
* Average annual growth rate.
t Percent change, 1984/1983.
Sources: Long Island Tourist Convention Commission Study, 1983.
1983 and 1984 Tourist Market Estimates, 1983.
4-19
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT. 1/4.7
Sl29/85
In the case of Southold, the growth rate of the population base
(permanent plus sunnner) will exceed that of Suffolk County throughout the
forecast period. Median income is expected to grow by 3.2 percent
annually throughout the forecast period, reaching a level of $43,600 by
the year 2003. Hbwever, as noted, the actual level of income will be
higher due to higher income levels of second homeowners. In addition,
throughout the forecast period, the sources of income for the population
base will continue to shift away from blue-collar employment towards
white-collar employment, especially in the service industries (i.e,
retailing, wholesaling, personal and business services).
As part of the service sector, tourism will play an important role in
providing the transition from blue-collar jobs to service sector jobs.
Although it is difficult to quantify the role a growing tourist base will
have on the level of aviation activity, it can only be assumed that they
are interrelated and will support each other during the forecast period.
To conclude, the data and analysis presented herein indicate the Town of
Southold will grow significantly by the year 2003.
4.4 GENERAL AVIATION SCENARIO
The widespread acceptance of air transportation since the early 1960s and
the country's increasing dependence upon air transportation for intercity
travel has not been limited to common-carrier air transportation offered
by the scheduled airlines and scheduled tormenter operators. On the
contrary, general aviation, which encompasses all civil flying other than
the scheduled services, now accounts for a significant number of aircraft
and aircraft flight hours.
Given the current state-of-the-art in the technology of small aircraft
(i.e., fuel-efficient, light weight, etc.), it is expected that the level
of the general aviation market will rise by the year 2003. The
4-20
I
I
I
I
!
I
i
I
I
I
i
I
i
i
I
SOUTHOLDi~5-DT. 1/4.8
5/29/8~
integration of these factors, coupled with national and local economic
factors, will determine the anticipated levels of general aviation
activity within Southold.
General aviation activity, in broad terms, is determined by the number of
based aircraft at the airport and by the number of transient aircraft
utilizing the airport. The procedure employed to forecast general
aviation activity is first to forecast the number of aircraft which will
be based at the airport. The next step is to forecast the level of
aircraft operational activity.
4.5 BASED AIRCRAFT AND GENERAL AVIATION ACTIVITY
The number of aircraft based at an airport is one of the basic yardsticks
of general aviation demand. A based aircraft is defined as being stored
at the airport for an extended period of time. This figure is projected
by first forecasting the number of actively registered aircraft in the
region and then estimating the portion based at the subject airport.
4.5.1 Aircraft Ownership
An investigation of the availability of general aviation facilities
revealed that in the towns surrounding Southold, there are 13 general
aviation airports housing 874 based aircraft. In the Town of Southold,
there are three airports with a total of 28 based aircraft. These
aircraft represent approximately 3.2 percent of the total aircraft based
in the vicinity. Table 4-12 presents these findings.
Since the level of based aircraft in Southold is small relative to the
total, it is necessary to forecast the relative levels of registered
aircraft for the region and then relate this forecast to the Town of
Southold to determine the number of potential based aircraft.
Although the objective of this study is to determine the anticipated
activity in the Town of Southold and not that of the region, close
coordination between this study and the ongoing Downstate New York
4-21
i
!
I
!
!
i
I
Table 4-12.
D-$OUTHOLD.1/VTB4-12.1
08/10/84
Airports with Based Aircraft in the Vicinity of the Town of
Southold
Based
Township Aircraft Percent
Brookhaven 207 23.7
Brookhaven 180
Coram 6
Spadaro 21
Isllp 479 54.8
L.I, MacArthur 423
Bayport 56
East Hampton 65 7.4
East Hampton 51
Montauk 14
Riverhead 12 1.4
Riverhead 6
Talmase 6
Southampton 83 9.5
Suffolk County 83
Southold 28 3.2
Mattituck 23
Rose Field 3
Elizabeth 2
TOTAL 874 100.0
!
Sources:
FAA Form 5010-1.
FAA Terminal Area Forecast FY1982, 1981.
Personal interviews with airport operators,
1984.
!
4=22
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
l
I
I
I
I
SOUT~OL~85-DT. 1/4.9
5/29/85
General Aviation System Plan (GASP) Study is necessary. This
coordination is considered essential in that the Town of Southold falls
within the Downstate New York GASP Study Area.
The GASP Study utilized a number of different methodologies in
forecasting the Downstate area's regional requirements, each yielding
different levels of aviation activity. The forecast that will be
utilized in this study represents constant market share projections.
results of this forecast are shown in Table 4-13.
The
By the year 2005, it is anticipated that there will be approximately
4,443 registered aircraft. This represents a 3.1-percent average annual
growth rate over 1985.
4.5.2 Southold Based Aircraft
Several factors influence an owner's decision as to where his aircraft
should be based (stored). A recent survey conducted by the
U.S. Department of Transportation revealed that the most influential
factor is accessibility. Other significant factors are the quality of
the airport, the quality of fixed based operators, airport and FBO
prices, and aircraft operational requirements. During the GASP's base
year (1982), there were 23 aircraft based at the sole public use airport
(Mattituck) in Southold Town proper. Using this figure as a basis for
their forecast, the GASP Study estimated the number of based aircraft at
Southold's public use airport to rise to 45 by the year 2005. These
levels of based aircraft are shown in Table 4-14.
This represents an increase of 3.1 percent growth per year between 1982
and 2005. The forecast is based on the assumption that the number of
based aircraft in Southold will grow at the same rate as the region
(i.e., 3.1 percent per year for the region; 3.1 percent per year for the
airport).
4-23
I
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
D-SOUTHOLD, I/VTB4-13.1
08/10/84
Table 4-13. Constant Market Share
Region's
Year Registered Aircraft
1985 2,394
1990 2,890
1995 3,418
2005 4,443
Avera8e Annual Growth Rate:
3.1%
i
i
I
i
i
I
1
Source=
PRC/ESE,' 1984.
4-24
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 4-14.
SOUTHOLD85-DT.1/VTB4-14.1
5/29/85
Based Aircraft at Southold Public Use Airport, Downstate
New York General Aviation System Plan Study
Year Number
1982 23
1985 24
1990 29
1995 34
2005 45
Source:
Downstate New York GASP Study, 1984.
4-25
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT. 1/4.10
6/10/85
During the month of November 1983, a survey of potential airport users
was conducted to identify aviation activity at the Town of Southold's
airport. As part of the survey, members of the North Fork Aviation
Association (NFAA) were surveyed, in addition to other potential users of
the airport. The results of the survey have been discussed in the
previous section of this report.
However, of the 49 respondents, 24 individuals did own aircraft (some own
more than one aircraft). Of the total 36 privately owned aircraft
reported, only 12 aircraft are based in Southold. Of the remaining
24 aircraft, 13 aircraft would be relocated to Southold if adequate
facilities were available. A discussion with members of the NFAA
indicated that the primary reason for their not basing their aircraft in
the Town of Southold was that the Mattituck Airport has limited
facilities and is closed after dark.
Assuming that a new airport facility would provide solutions to these
shortcomings, then the total level of aircraft based at a new airport in
Southold in 1984 would approximate 33 aircraft (Table 4-15). This
assumes that relocation of aircraft would occur (according to the survey
results) from other airports to Southold. It should also be noted that
of the 23 aircraft currently based at Mattituck, the owners of
approximately one-quarter of them have indicated that they would remain
there.
Since the questionnaire primarily surveys the Southold area, it is most
likely that others would relocate their aircraft to Southold especially
during the summer months when population increases. Considering that the
economic base of Southold is expected to grow faster than that of the
region and using both 33 based aircraft as the initial count and the
previously discussed econometric model of Long Island, it is estimated
that the growth rate of based aircraft at the proposed Southold Airport
4-26
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
D-SOUTHOLD.I/VTB4-15.1
08/10/84
Table 4-15. Southold Airport Anticipated Based Aircraft (1984)
Currently Based at Mattltuck that Would Relocate
Relocated from Other Airports*
TOTAL
17
16
33
I
I
i
i
I
I
* Includes multiple aircraft ownership.
Source: PRC/ESE, 1984.
4-27
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOLrI'HOLD85-DT. 1/4.11
6/10/85
will exceed the region's growth rate to the year 2003. Table 4-16
presents these figures. This parallels the economic discussion in the
previous subsection, with corresponding economic assumptions.
4.5.3 Based Aircraft by Type
The base year mix of aircraft ownership was identified by reviewing the
master aircraft registration file. A forecast of individual aircraft was
then prepared by extrapolating the 1984 trend of individual aircraft
types and by assuming that the current mix of aircraft will change
towards slightly larger and faster (multi-engine) aircraft during the
planning period. By the year 2003, it is anticipated that the aircraft
mix at the new Southold Airport would consist of 90 percent single-engine
aircraft, 4 percent helicopters, and 6 percent multi-engine aircraft.
This translates into a mix of 60 single-engine aircraft, 3 helicopters,
and 4 multi-engine aircraft. Table 4-17 presents the based aircraft
fleet mix.
4.5.4 Aircraft Movements
The total number of general aviation aircraft movements at Southold
Airport is comprised of aircraft movements performed by based aircraft
and those performed by transient aircraft. These movements are further
classified as itinerant or local aircraft movements. Itinerant movements
are landings and takeoffs performed by aircraft in transit between
Southold and another airport. Local movements are those landings and
takeoffs associated with training or sightseeing flights. Table 4-18
presents the projections of general aviation activity in terms of local
and itinerant aircraft movements.
Due to the lack of available historical data, the development of an
integrated analysis for projecting operations and fuel usage is
inappropriate because neither the inputs nor the results can be verified.
The results of the General Aviation Aircraft Movements Model developed
I
I
4-28
t
i
i
i
I
i
I
~-..80UTHOLD. 1/VTB4-16.1
08/17/84
Table 4-16. Total Based Aircraft--SouChold A£rporC
Aircraft
1988
1993
1998
2003
Average Annual Growth Rate:
4.2%
36
44
54
67
i
i
i
i
i
/
i
I
SonTce:
PRC/gSg, 1984.
4-29
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 4-17.
SOUTHOLD85-DT.1/VTB4-17.1
6/10/85
Southold Airport--General Aviation Based Aircraft by Type
Aircraft Type 1984' 1988 1993 1998 2003
FORECAST
Single-Engine 23 23 25 31 38
1-3 Seats
Single-Engine 10 12 16 19 22
4+ Seats
Helicopter -- 1 2 2 3
Multi-Engine .... 1 2 4
~12,500 lbs.
TOTAL 33 36 44 54 67
PERCENT DISTRIBUTION
Single-Engine 70 64 57 57 57
1-3 Seats
Single-Engine 30 33 36 35 33
4+ Seats
Helicopter -- 3 5 4 4
Multi-Engine .... 2 4 6
~12,500 lbs.
TOTAL 100 100 100 100 100
I
I
I
I
Source:
*Records of Aircraft Based at Mattituck Airport and NFAA Survey
Results.
PRC/ESE, 1984.
I
I
4-30
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD~.5 -DT . 1 / VTB4-19,1
5/29/85
Table 4-18. Forecast of General Aviation Local and Itinerant Movements-
-Southold Airport
Off-Season* Seasont Total Total
Year Local** Itiperant Localt~ Intinerant Local Intinerant Movements
1988 3,700 1,900 7,500 3,800 11,200 5,700 16,900
1993 4,600 2,300 9,200 4,600 13,800 6,900 20,700
1998 5,600 2,800 11,200 5,600 16,800 8,400 25,200
2003 7,000 3,500 14,000 7,000 21,000 10,500 31,500
* Assumes 26 weeks. (November-April)
~ Assumes 26 weeks. (May-October)
** Four movements/week/aircraft.
~ Eight movements/week/aircraft.
Source: PRC/ESE, 1984.
4-31
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT.1/4.12
6/10/85
for the Oswego County Airport Master Plan were utilized. This model
revealed that the number of itinerant movements performed by transient
aircraft equals the number of itinerant movements performed by based
aircraft multiplied by 1.5 for each aircraft type. Appendix D outlines
the general specifications of the General Aviation Aircraft Movements
Model.
Table 4-19 presents the estimated base year operations and forecast of
aircraft movements at Southold Airport. Table 4-20 shows the forecast of
activity by type of aircraft and type of operation. Total general
aviation aircraft movements are forecast to be 16,900 movements by 1988.
By 1993 this is expected to rise to 20,700 movements, and by the year
2003 to a level of 31,500 per year. The long-run forecast of total
movements represents an average long-run annually compounded growth rate
of 4.2 percent.
4.5.5 Terminal Area Relationships
Terminal area relationships were calculated based on survey data from
other similarly sized airports in the Northeast. This information
revealed that approximately 11.4 percent of general aviation itinerant
operations, and 12.6 percent of general aviation local operations, occur
during the peak month of the peak season annualized. Additionally, FAA
survey data reveal that approximately 10 percent of local activity, and
9 percent of itinerant activity, occur during the peak hour of the
average day of the peak month.
The above-mentioned relationships are applied to the annual forecasts_ as
a basis for preparing the general aviation terminal area relationships.
Table 4-20 presents the forecast terminal area relationships.
I
!
4-32
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT. 1/W~4-20.1
5/29/85
Table 4-19. Forecast of General Aviation Movements by Type--Southold
Airport
Aircraft Type 1988 1993 1998 2003
Single-Engine, 1-3 Seats 11,000 12,000 14,000 17,300
Single-Engine, 4+ Seats 5,300 7,000 8,000 9,700
Helicopters 300 900 1,700 2,000
Multi-Engine 300 800 1,500 2,500
Local Movements:
Based Aircraft 11,200 13,800 16,800 21,000
Transient Aircraft --
Itinerant Movements:
Based Aircraft 2,300 2,750 3,350 4,200
Transient Aircraft 3,400 4,150 5,050 6,300
Total Movements 16,900 20,700 25,200 31,500
Source:
PRC/ESE, 1984.
I
I
4-33
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT. 1 / VTB4-23.1
6/10/85
Table 4-20. General Aviation Terminal Relationships--Southold Airport
1988 1993 1998 2003
Based Aircraft:
Local Movements
Peak Month 1,408 1,726 2,102 2,627
Average Day 47 58 70 88
Peak Hour 5 6 7 9
Itinerant Movements
Peak Month 470 569 693 867
Average Day 16 19 23 29
Peak Hour 1 2 2 3
Transient Aircraft:
Itinerant Movements
Peak Month 235 285 346 433
Average Day 8 10 12 14
Peak Hour 1 1 1 1
PRC/ESE, 1984.
I
!
4-34
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT. 1/4.13
6/10/85
4.6 POTENTIAL COMMUTER/AIR TAXI ACTIVITY
The proposed Southold Airport is primarily planned to accou~odate general
aviation activity. However, the need to evaluate commercial activity is
apparent in view of the fact that many general aviation airports are
serviced by small'air taxi operators. In the case of Southold, air taxi
operators do serve the area from as nearby as 20 miles away (across the
Long Island Sound in New London) to as far away as points in New Jersey.
There are four air taxi operators which currently serve the Southold
area: Action Air, Coastal Air, New England Airlines, and Yankee Airways.
These operators were contacted to provide estimates of air taxi activity
at the proposed Southold Airport.
4.6.1 Aircraft Operations
At present, there are an average of 36 operations (landings or takeoffs)
per day during the summer months and 6 operations per day during the
winter months. Yankee Airways has served the area for the longest period
of time with the other operators coming into the marketplace within the
last 3 years.
Since no historical records exist pertaining to this activity, any
detailed analysis would be inappropriate. However, discussions with
Yankee Airways and ESE internal staff analyses suggest that if a new
airport is built, the number of operations per day would most likely grow
at a rate of approximately 5 percent per year throughout the forecast
period. By the year 2003, winter operations are anticipated to reach a
level of 16 per day, and summer operations are expected to increase to a
level of 95 per day. Assuming a daily operational level of 16 during the
off-season (November-April), the total number of operations for this 6-
month period would increase to 2,900 in 2003. Similarly, the 6-month
peak season (May-October) would yield 95 daily operations which
translates into 17,300 total operations. Thus, it is projected that in
2003, the proposed Southold Airport will handle 20,200 annual operations
I
I
4-35
I
I
I
I
I
!
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT.1/4,14
6/10/85
by commuter/air taxi aircraft. Ail of these operations are expected to
be conducted by light twin-engine aircraft. The projections of potential
commuter/air taxi activity are presented in Table 4-21.
4.6.2 Passenger Enplanements
As previously discussed, it is expected that all commuter/air taxi
operations will be conducted by light twin-engine aircraft. The seating
capacity of typical aircraft is 6 seats (i.e. Piper Navajo, Beech Baron,
Cessna 402, Piper Twin Comanche, etc.). It is further assumed that the
typical load factor for air taxi operators flying these aircraft types
averages 60 percent. Thus, the resulting average enplanements per
departure is 3.6 passengers. The forecast of passenger enplanements on
commuter/air taxi aircraft is presented in Table 4-22.
4.6.3 Terminal Area Relationships
Statistical trends of the commuter/air taxi industry in terms of peaking
factors were analyzed to determine aircraft terminal area relationships.
This analysis revealed that approximately 10 percent more operations th~n
the level of the peak season operations occur during the peak month (most
likely August) and it is estimated that about 20 percent of average day
operations occur during the peak hour. These percentages were applied to
the forecast of aircraft operations to arrive at a forecast of
commuter/air taxi terminal area relationships (shown in Table 4-23).
Total passenger terminal area relationships were calculated in a similar
manner.
4.7 INSTRUMENT ACTIVITY
Table 4-24 presents the forecast instrument operations and approaches at
the proposed Southold Airport. Since there is no history, the activity
projected in this forecast represents a potential that could be realized
should the Airport be equipped with an approach NAVAID. An instrument
operation is defined as an aircraft movement handled by an Air Traffic
Control (ATC) facility for the arrival or departure of an aircraft at an
!
!
4-36
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
S~Iri'flOLD-T. 1/VI~-~-21.1
~/2~/85
Table 4-21. For,mast of Cc~muter/Air Taxi Operation~--Southold Airport
Daily Operations real Operations
Of f~Season Season Of f~Season Season Total
Base Year-1983 6 36 1,100 6,500 7,600
1988 8 46 1,400 8,400 9,800
1993 10 59 1,800 10,700 12,500
1998 12 75 2,200 13,600 15,800
2003 16 95 2,900 17,300 20,200
Note:
Off-season is November-April, season is May-October.
All operations are projected t~ be conducted by multi-engine aircraft weighing less than
12,500 pounds.
Source: Yankee Airways, 1984.
PRC~ES~, 1985.
4-37
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD-T. 1/VTB~-22.1
~/29/85
Table 4-22.
Forecast of Co~nuter/Air Taxi Passenger Euplanements--
Southold Airport
Enplanemests
Off-Season Season ' 'Total
Base Year-1983
1988
1993
1998
2003
Note:
1,980 11,700 13,680
2,520 15,120 17,640
3,240 19,260 22,500
3,960 24,480 28,440
5,220 31,140 36,360
Off-season is November-April, season is May-October.
Source: PRC/ESE, 1985.
I 4-38
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD-T. 1/VTB4-23. 1
5/29/85
Table 4-23. Commuter/Air Taxi Terminal Area Relationships--SouChold Airport
1988 1993 1998 2003
Aircraft Operations:
Peak Month 1,540 1,960 2,490 3,170
Average Day 51 65 83 106
Peak Hour 10 13 17 21
Passenser Enplanements:
Peak Month 2,770 3,530 4,480 5,710
Average Day 92 118 149 190
Peak Hour 18 24 30 38
Source: PRC/ESE, 1985.
I
I
4-39
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
SO~rHO~.D85-DT. 1/4.15
6/10/85
airport on an Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) flight plan or for the
provision of IFR separation. An instrument operation may occur in visual
(VFR) as well as IFR conditions. An instrument approach, on the other
hand, is an IFR approach made under actual IFR weather conditions. For
purposes of this analysis, it was assumed that the North Fork experiences
VFR conditions 83.5 percent of the year, IFR conditions approximately
12 percent of the time on an annual basis, and "below minimums"
approximately 4.5 percent of the year when the Airport would be closed.
The above percentages, which are rounded, are based upon the combined
meteorological analysis of conditions at Suffolk County and Tweed-New
Haven Airports, as discussed in Section 3. It was further assumed that
the minimums for a nonprecislon instrument approach at Southold Airport
would closely resemble those at Calverton with its VORDME approach to
Runway 32. Calverton's minimums with this NAVAID are a cloud ceiling of
580 feet above mean sea level and visibility of 1 mile. By applying the
forecast level of operations to the above weather characteristics on the
North Fork, annual instrument operations and approaches were estimated
for each of the forecast years as shown in Table 4-24.
4.8 FUEL FLOWAGE
Fuel flowage refers to the number of gallons of aviation fuel projected
to be sold at Southold Airport. The forecast of fuel flowage is provided
to allow projections of future airport revenues.
Since historical fuel flowage data for Southold is not available, certain
assumptions have been made. The fuel flowage figure for 1988 and
throughout the planning period was estimated based on the assumption that
aircraft purchase an average of 5 gallons per departure. This figure is
based upon the fuel consumption statistics at other local airports (i.e.,
Brookhaven, East Hampton, and Suffolk County Airports). The fuel burn by
aircraft type and the percent purchased at the base airport were obtained
4-40
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT. 1/VTB4-21 . 1
6/10/85
Table 4-24. Forecast of Instrument Activity--Southold Airport
1988 1993
1998 2003
Total Itinerant Movements 15,500 19,400 24,200 30,700
Instrument Operations* 3,720 4,656 5,808 7,368
Instrument Approaches 930 1,164 1,452 1,842
* Assumes 20-percent instrument operations if approach were available.
NOTE: Above estimates based upon 83.5 percent VFR, 12 percent IFR, and
4.5 percent below possible approach minimums (airport closed due
to inadequate ceiling and/or visibility).
Source: PRC/ESE, 1984.
4-41
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOL~5-DT.1/4.16
6/10/85
from various FAA and PRC/ESE survey data. Based on the data, the
estimated fuel flowage will approximate 129,250 gallons per year by the
year 2003.
Table 4-25 presents fuel flowage estimates at Southold for the planning
period 1988 to 2003.
4.9 CONSOLIDATED FORECASTS
The preceding discussion of forecasts of aviation demand at the proposed
Southold Airport are presented in Table 4-26 in a consolidated format for
ease of reference. The subsequent section (Demand/Capacity Analysis and
Facility Requirements) will translate these forecasts into sizing needs
for the various airport component facilities.
Figure 4-3 illustrates a comparison of two recent forecasts prepared for
airports in the Town of Southold. The forecasts for Mattituck Airport
were developed as part of the Downstate New York General Aviation System
Plan; the projections for the proposed Southold Airport are presented i~
this report.
4-42
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 4-25.
SO~HOL~5-DT.1/VTB4-22.1
6/10/85
Fuel Flowage gstimates--Southold Airport
Year Fuel Flowage (Gallons)
1988 66,750
1993 83,000
1998 102,500
2003 129,250
Source:
PRC/ESE, 1984.
I
I
4-43
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD-T.I/VTB4-26.1
6/11/85
Table 4-26. Consolidated Forecasts--Southold Airport
1988 1993 1998 2003
Based Aircraft:
Single-Engine 1-3 Seats
Single-Engine 4+ Seats
Helicopter
Multi-Engine ~ 12,500 lbs.
23 25 31 38
12 16 19 22
1 2 2 3
0 I 2 4
TOTAL 36 44 54 67
11,200 13,800 16,800 21,000
5,700 6,900 8,400 10,500
9,800 12,500 15,800 20,200
Operations (Annual):
GA Local
GA Itinerant
Air Taxi Itinerant
TOTAL 26,700 33,200 41,000 51,700
Operations (Annual by Aircraft Type):
GA Single-Engine 1-3 Seats 11,000
GA Single-Engine 4+ Seats 5,300
Helicopter 300
GA Multi-Engine < 12,500 lbs. 300
AT Multi-Engine ~ 12,500 lbs. 9,800
12,000 14,000 17,300
7,000 8,000 9,700
900 1,700 2,000
800 1,500 2,500
12,500 15,800 20,200
TOTAL 26,700 33,200 41,000 51,700
Instrument Operations
Instrument Approaches
3,720 4,656 5,808 7,368
930 1,164 1,452 1,842
Source: PRC/ESE, 1985.
I
I
I
I
I
I
4-44
80 ' 40,000 '
70, 3,5,000 '
50' 0 25,000 -
40. ~ 2o,ooo -
~o. g ~,ooo -
t~O00 -
I O' 5,000 '
0
YEAR YEAR
....... ~A~ITUCK AIRPORT
8OUTHOLD AmRPORT
Figure 4-3
COMPARISON OF GENERAL AVIATION FORECASTS- SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK
g~IIII~CK AIRPORI VS. SOHIHO[D ~IRPORI ~irport Site Selection/
SOURCE: "*TTITUCK *'RPO"T-DOWNSTAT[ NEW YORK OENER*L *VI*TION SY~T~' PL*N, J'84: Master Plan Study
SOUTHOLO *mPO"T-P.C/ESE,
I
I
I
I
!
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT.1/5.1
6/10/85
5.0 DEMAND/CAPACITY ANALYSIS AND FACILITY REQUIREMENTS
Having established demand parameters for the proposed Southold Airport,
in terms of potential traffic projections, the capacity and sizing of
needed aviation f~cilities can be calculated. These computations are
then compared to the anticipated demand to determine the extent of
development of the various airport components.
Projections of potential aviation demands have been set forth in
Section 4.0 (Forecast of Aviation Demand). The following section
presents the capacity of various airport facilities needed to accommodate
this demand and recomendations for providing these facilities.
Capacity requirements have been determined for the following three
aspects of the proposed Southold Airport: (1) the landing area, (2) the
terminal and support area, and (3) airspace and navigational aids.
Additionally, a discussion on the viability of and need for establishing
a publicly owned airport in the Town of Southold precedes the presenta-
tion of capacity requirements.
The capacity calculations, based upon various forecast components, should
be regarded as generalized planning tools which assume attainment of
forecast levels. Should the forecast prove conservative, proposed
development should be advanced in schedule. Likewise, if traffic growth
materializes at a slower rate than forecast, deferral of expansion would
be prudent.
5.1 AIRPORT ROLE
The surveys of potential users of the proposed airport conducted as part
of this study and discussed in Section 3.0 identified various aircraft
types that intend to utilize the Town airport. In addition, these
surveys served to demonstrate that both the local aviation community and
the business sector strongly support a Town-owned airport. Both sectors
I
!
5-1
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT. 1/5.2
6/lO/85
stated that the facility is needed and would serve to promote tourist,
business and aviation activity in the Town of Southold. However, this
activity should be balanced so as not to jeopardize the environmental
quality present in Southold. Thus, the role of the airport should
carefully consider both concerns. Based upon the surveys, it is expected
that single-engine aircraft will be the primary users of the new Southold
Airport; however, it is anticipated that the facility will also be
utilized by some helicopters and light twin-engine aircraft.
According to FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-4B, dated September 23, 1983
(Utility Airports--Air Access to National Transportation), there are four
types of utility airports. Since it is expected that Southold's airport
should be designed for small twin-engine aircraft (i.e., Piper Navajo,
Cessna 402, Beech King Air, etc.), the airport should ultimately conform
with the standards of a General Utility-Stage I airport. Based on FAA's
definition, as discussed in AC 150/5300-4B, the proposed airport should
serve ". . . all small airplanes. Precision approach operations are not.
usually anticipated. This airport is also designed for small airplanes
in Airplane Design Group I."
Initial development plans should be designed to meet the criteria of a
Basic Utility-Stage II airport, which according to FAA AC 150/5300-4B,"
· .accomodates the airplanes of Stage I (75 percent of the
single-engine and small twin-engine airplanes used for personal and
business purposes), plus a broader spectrum of small business and air
taxi-type twin-engine airplaines."
The Town of Southold has stated that the proposed airport should be
capable of accommodating only small general aviation aircraft types,
which includes all single-engine and light twin-engine aircraft. The
Town's position is also to restrict operations by jet aircraft, which is
possible by the availability of facilities that are only capable of
accommodating smaller aircraft (i.e. no jet fuel, limited pavement
I
I
5-2
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
i
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT. 1/5.3
6/10/85
strength, limited runway length, etc.). It is also possible to prohibit
jet aircraft by stating that the facility is "closed to jet-powered
aircraft without prior permission" in the appropriate pilot flight
manuals (i.e. Jeppesen Airway Manual).
5.2 AIRSIDE FACILITIES
The airside facilities at the new Southold Airport consist of any
facilities specifically intended to accormodate arriving and departing
aircraft and their access to or from the active landing strip.
Typically, these facilities include the runway, taxiing routes, and
navigational aids. This section presents a discussion of these specific
facility requirements at the new airport.
5.2.1 Airfield System Capacity
The capacity of a given airfield system is dependent on its basic
configuration, on the type and mix of aircraft, and on system usage.
Inherent to the concept of capacity is the assumption of acceptable delay
in accommodating aircraft demand.
To understand fully the magnitude of potential demand and probable
capacity at the new Southold Airport, a typical airfield configuration
was assumed. The basic layout consists of a single runway with a single
taxiway access route at the approximate midpoint of the runway. In
addition, it was assumed that neither an instrument landing system nor
radar coverage would be available at the new airport. Other assumptions
that have been made based upon FAA Advisory Circular 150/5060-5, Airport
Capacity and Delay, dated September 23, 1983, include the following: the
airport is used exclusively by single-engine and small twin-engine
aircraft, arrivals are equal to departures, and touch-and-go activity
constitutes approximately 20 percent of the total activity. It is felt
that the previously mentioned assumptions would reasonably approximate
the Southold Airport situation in terms of airfield capacity.
I
I
5-3
I
I
I
I
i
I,
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT.I/5.4
6/10/85
FAA AC 150/5060-5 states that this airport configuration is capable of
accommodating between 59 and 72 operations per hour during visual flight
rules (VFR) conditions and between 20 and 24 operations during instrument
flight rules (IFR~ conditions. VFR conditions are typically declared
when weather permits a minimum visibility of 1 mile and a cloud ceiling
of 1,000 feet above ground level. IFR conditions are representative of
inclement conditions, which are below the above minimums, when the use of
instruments in the cockpit of the aircraft are required.
Utilizing the FAA's annual capacity methodology, the new Southold Airport
should be capable of accommodating approximately 183,000 operations on an
annual basis. Therefore, it is important to note that no airfield
capacity constraints can be expected at the new airport during the first
20 years of its life and, assuredly, well beyond that point. This
statement is made based upon the forecast of activity presented in the
year 2003 (51,700 total aircraft movements). This level of activity is
only 28 percent of the total airfield capacity. Thus, no airfield
facilities are warranted at the new Southold Airport for capacity
5.2.2 Runwa7 Length
Runway length is a critical consideration in airport planning and design.
Aircraft need specified runway lengths to operate safely under varying
conditions of wind, precipitation, temperature, and takeoff weight.
The FAA publication Utilit~ Airports--Air Access to National Transporta-
tion, AC 150/5300-4B (dated September 23, 1983) contains criteria
utilized in developing the runway length requirements needed to accommo-
date the smaller types of general aviation aircraft. The recommended
runway lengths are based upon performance curves developed from FAA-
approved flight manuals. Runway length curves for General
Utility-Stage I airports were used in this analysis for the ultimate
runway length requirements. The initial runway length was determined by
!
!
5-4
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT. 1/5.5
6/10/85
evaluating the curves for Basic Utility-Stage II airports. Runway
lengths were developed based upon a mean maximum temperature of 86°
Fahrenheit and an approximate airport elevation of 50 feet above mean sea
level (MSL). This resulted in a runway length requirement of 3,000 feet
in the initial development stage and ultimately 3,600 feet for the new
Southold Airport. d runway with this length is capable of accommodating
the following typical aircraft types:
1. Piper Twin Commauche,
2. Beech Baron,
3. Cessna 402, and
4. Piper Navajo.
Two of the survey respondents own aircraft of the types previously
mentioned; thus, it is recommended that the airfield configuration at the
new airport include initial plans of 3~000 feet with the capability of
being extended to a 3,600-foot runway. Operations by larger twin-engine
aircraft than those identified above are expected to be on an infrequent
basis. Therefore the critical aircraft types are considered to include'
the types listed.
Based on criteria set forth in FAA AC 150/5300-4B for the length of a
crosswind runway, if it is determined that Southold's airport needs a
second runway and if it is feasible at the recommended site, it should be
at least 80 percent of the length of the primary runway. In light of the
recommendation for a 3,600-foot length for the primary runway, the
crosswind runway at Southold should be at least 2,880 feet in length
(2,400 feet initially to coincide with a 3,000-foot runway length).
Thus, if a crosswind landing strip is warranted at the proposed Southold
Airport to meet FAA criteria, as noted in the above Advisory Circular, of
95-percent annual wind coverage with a lO.5-knot crosswind, it is
recommended that this runway be built at an ultimate length of
2,900 feet.
!
m
5-5
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
i
I
SOUTHOLD85 -DT. 1 / 5.6
6/lO/85
5.2.3 Runway Width
FAA AC 150/5300-4B specifies certain minimum dimensions, clearances, and
separation standards for the design of utility airports. A minimum
runway width of 60 feet is recommended for visual and nonprecision
runways that are expected to serve aircraft with a wingspan of less than
49 feet (Airplane Design Group I). In that it is expected that the new
Southold Airport will be equipped with a nonprecision instrument
approach, rather than precision instrument approach capabilities, it is
recommended that the runway be constructed at a width of 60 feet.
5.2.4 Pavement Strength
In light of the fact that the proposed Southold Airport is intended to
serve only smaller general aviation aircraft, it is recommended that the
pavement be designed to accommodate these aircraft. FAA AC 150/5300-4B
indicates that a pavement strength of 12,500 pounds is recommended for
General Utility-Stage I facilities. As such, a pavement strength of
12,500 pounds is recommended for the proposed Southold Airport. The two
most critical aircraft, in terms of weight, that are expected to operate
at the new airport both weigh less than 12,500 pounds. The Beech Baron's
maximum takeoff weight is 6,200 pounds and the Piper Navajo is listed at
6,500 pounds, according to FAA AC 150/5300-4B.
5.2.5 Runway Orientation
Crosswind runway requirements are a function of aircraft performance,
crosswind components, and the desirable percentage of wind coverage.
Planning guidelines suggest that when the need for a crosswind runway is
evaluated, a maximum crosswind component of 10.5 knots (12 miles per
hour) should be used for basic and utility-type aircraft and 13 knots
(15 miles per hour) for transport and air carrier aircraft. Since it is
expected that the $outhold Airport will only need to accommodate smaller
!
I
5-6
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT.1/5.7
6/lO/85
aircraft types, a 10.5-knot crosswind component is appropriate. Further,
according to FAA AC 150/5300-4B, sufficient runways of different orienta-
tions should be planned to ensure that the airport achieves an annual
all-weather wind coverage of at least 95 percent with a lO.5-knot
crosswind.
As presented earlier in Section 3, the predominant wind orientation is
from the southwest during both VFR and IFR weather conditions. A runway
alignment of northeast-southwest (04-22) was first tested to determine
its annual wind coverage. Under "all time periods," this orientation
provided 85.89-percent wind coverage, which is well below the FAA
standard of 95 percent. The next test direction evaluated was
southeast-northwest (13-31), which increased the annual wind coverage
slightly to 86.62 percent. The final runway alignment which was
considered was a south southeast-north northwest (15-33) direction, which
resulted in an 86.14-percent annual wind coverage. The conclusion which
can thus be reached is that there is not one runway alignment that will
provide an airport on the North Fork with the recommended 95-percent wind
coverage. Further, it appears that based on "all time periods," which
includes VFR, IFR, day, night, and all seasons, the orientation of the
primary runway is flexible; however, it should be noted that the proposed
Southold Airport should consider plans for a two-runway configuration to
provide the needed wind coverage if feasible. It appears that the two
best alignments for Southold's airport are southeast-northwest (13-31)
and northeast-southwest (04-22), which provide a total wind coverage of
98.17 percent on an annual basis. In order to maximize wind coverage it
is recommended that the new Southold Airport consist of two intersecting
runways with the previously discussed orientations. However, if this is
not possible for other site specific reasons (i.e. land availability,
cost factors, etc.), a single runway providing optimal usability is
suggested.
I
I
5-7
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOL~SS-BT.1/5.8
6/10/85
Since there is only a marginal difference between the amount of wind
coverage provided by the two above alignments (04-22 and 13-31), further
weather analyses of wind coverage during inclement (IFR) weather condi-
tions and peak season (s,,,nmer) were conducted to assist in the determina-
tion of the best runway direction. If one direction provides a signifi-
cant advantage in terms of coverage during IFR conditions and the peak
summer season, the provision for instrument approach capabilities should
be considered on that runway. Since the primary runway is recormnended to
be 700 feet longer than the crosswind runway, it is advisable that the
instrumented runway have the extra length and, thus, be designated as the
primary runway. Likewise, if a single runway configuration proves to be
most viable, a determination of which end of the runway should be
designated as the primary end is also necessary.
The IFR weather evaluation resulted in a determination that the predom-
inant wind direction during inclement conditions is from the southwest.
However, the combined coverage of NNE, NE, and ENE is better than that of
the opposite end (SSW, SW, and WSW). In fact, the 04 end provides 10.11
percent IFR wind coverage versus 9.34 percent on the 22 end. For
comparison purposes, the 13-end provides 9.14-percent wind coverage
during IFR weather, while the 31 end only provides 8.37 percent. Ail of
the above percentages include 4.01-percent calm wind conditions.
The analysis of wind conditions during the summer peak season also
revealed that a NE/SW orientation would prove the most usable (SW being
the predominant direction). The second most feasible alignment for
summer winds is NW/SE, with the predominant orientation to the NW.
Based on this analysis, it is thus recommended that the northeast-
southwest (04-22) runway be designated as the primary runway with the
Runway 04 end equipped with instrument approach capabilities. However,
if a single runway configuration is planned with the runway oriented
NW/SE, the end thaf should be designated as the instrument runway is
5-8
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT.I/5.9
6/10/85
Runway 13 (SE) to account for IFR winds originating more from the south-
east than from the northwest. Therefore, the recommendation being set
forth is that the primary runway (04-22) should be constructed with an
overall length of.3,600 feet. It is also recommended that the crosswind
runway, 13-31 (southeast-northwest), be constructed at a length of
2,900 feet. Further, if a SE-NW runway is the only runway proposed at
the Airport, it should be planned for an ultimate length of 3,600 feet.
5.2.6 Taxiway Requirements
As discussed in Section 5.2.1, the proposed Southold Airport does not
need any airfield facilities for capacity reasons in that its capacity
rating with just a single runway is well in excess of its requirements.
However, from a safety standpoint, it might prove desirable to construct
a parallel taxiway on the primary runway. For ultimate planning
purposes, a parallel taxiway is also suggested on the crosswind runway.
This type of improvement will serve to permit taxiing aircraft to do so
off of the active runway. Without a parallel taxiway, a landing aircraft
will need to hold away from the Airport and delay initiating its final
approach until the active runway has been vacated. Thus, based upon the
Airport's final configuration, a parallel taxiway should be considered on
the primary runway at the outset and in later planning phases on the
crosswind runway, if it is paved. If such a taxlway is established, it
should be constructed with an overall width of 25 feet and with a runway
centerline-to-taxiway centerline separation distance of 150 feet. These
dimensional standards are recommended in FAA AC 150/5300-4B.
5.2.7 Airfield Separation Criteria
FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-4B sets forth separation criteria for a
number of airfield components. Since the proposed Southold Airport is
expected to ultimately comply with the standards of a General
Utility-Stage I airport, the airfield separation criteria of a General
Utility-Stage I should also apply. These standards are outlined in
Table 5-1.
I
i
5-9
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLDS5-DT. 1/VTB5-1.1
5/29/85
Table 5-1. Airfield Separation Criteria--Proposed Southold Airport
Dimension (feet)
Runway Centerline to:
Parallel Taxiway Centerline
Building Restriction Line
Aircraft Parking Area
Property Line
Taxiway Centerline to:
Parked Aircraft and Objects
Building Restriction Line
Property Line
Runway Safety Area:
Length Beyond Runway End
Width
Taxiway Safety Area Width
150
125
125
150
5O
5O
5O
240
120
49
I
I
I
I
I
I
Source:
FAA AC 150/5300-4B, as amended.
I
I
5-10
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT. 1 / 5 · 10
6/10/85
5.2.8 Land Requirements
Based on the previously discussed separation criteria, airfield safety
areas and FAA recommendations for the sizing of the terminal area, an
approximation of the total land requirements for establishing Southold's
airport can be made. The minimum land requirements of typical utility
airports is addressed in FAA AC 150/5300-4B, which can serve as a useful
guide in identifying potential airport sites of adequate size.
For a single-runway General Utility-Stage I airport with an overall
runway length of 3,600 feet, the total minimum land requirement is
100 acres. This acreage is broken down as follows:
1. Forty-six acres for landing area (runway and required safety
areas)~
2. Thirty acres for approach areas (clear zones, noise zones,
etc.), and
3. Twenty-four acres for building areas (hangars, aprons, auto
parking, etc.).
As discussed in Section 5.2.5, for an airport on the North Fork to meet
the FAA criteria of 95-percent annual wind coverage, two intersecting
runways are needed. The additional land requirement for a 2,900-foot
crosswind runway is 62 acres (30 acres for the approach area and 32 acres
for the landing area). Thus, the minimum land requirement for the
proposed Southold Airport is 162 acres, assuming a 3,600-foot primary
runway and a 2,900-foot crosswind runway. If due to site specific land
constraints, a two-runway configuration is not feasible, the viability of
a short turf crosswind runway should be considered.
5.2.9 Airspace and Navigational Aids
Analysis of the airspace environment relative to a new airport on the
North Fork revealed no problems or restrictions under VFR conditions in
that all existing facilities are sufficiently removed from the Town of
Southold. Under IFR conditions, the interaction of approach airspace
5-11
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLI)85-DT.1/5.11
6/10/85
areas with other airports utilizing the same navigational aid results in
simultaneous approaches. Additionally, as previously discussed, an
airspace conflict during IFR conditions with Suffolk County Airport is
possible. However, due to present and anticipated low levels of
instrument approach activity, the severity of the problem is reduced.
Airport construction and/or abandonment in the vicinity of the Town
should be continuously monitored to ensure that no unexpected airspace
interactions occur in the future.
On an annual basis, according to the meteorological analysis conducted as
part of this study, IFR weather conditions exist on the North Fork
16.53 percent of the time. In accordance with annual instrument approach
(AIA) criteria stated in FAA Order 7031.2B (Airway Planning Standard
Number One--Terminal Air Navigation Facilities and Air Traffic Control
Services) and the forecast of AIAs presented in Section 4.5.5, the
proposed Southold Airport would not qualify for a precision instrument
landing system. However, in light of the high percentage of IFR weather
that is typical of Long Island, it is recommended that the new Southold
Airport be equipped with a nonprecision instrument approach. Since there
are a number of existing VOR facilities in the area (CCC and HTO on Long
Island and MAD across the Sound in Connecticut), it should be no problem
to establish at least a circling approach, if not a straight-in
instrument approach procedure. Nonetheless, it is recommended that FAA
conduct an investigation of the feasibility of a nonprecision instrument
approach and the procedures needed to utilize such an approach at the
Town airport. To allow the new Southold Airport to be usable after
sunset, it is recommended that initially the primary runway be equipped
with medium-intensity runway edge lighting (MIRLs) and that ultimate
plans include MIRLs on the crosswind runway, if it is paved. It is
further recommended that in the initial development stage, both primary
runway ends be equipped with Runway End Identifier Lights (REILs). This
recommendation is made based upon the qualifying criteria set forth in
I
I
5-12
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT. l / 5.12
6/~0/85
FAA Order 7031.2B, as amended, that a runway end would be eligible for
REILs if it handled at least 1,200 air taxi landings per year. It is
expected that Southold Airport's primary runway end will reach the 1,200
level in its initial year of operation (forecast projects in excess of
4,900 air taxi landings in 1988). Based upon the forecast of aviation
activity and current FAA criteria, the proposed Southold Airport would
also be eligible for a visual approach slope indicator (VASI) system on
both ends of the primary runway in the initial development stages. It is
further recommended that the Airport be equipped with a rotating beacon.
5.3 LANDSIDE FACILITIES
The following discussion deals with the landside elements of the proposed
Southold Airport. Landside facilities are typically the buildings, paved
areas, and associated infrastructure that acconnnodate users of the
airport. The landside components together with the previously discussed
alrside elements form all of the airport development facilities required
to accommodate the forecast level of activity.
Since the airfield development program has been based on an ultimate
level of some 51,700 annual operations at the proposed Southold Airport,
the planning of landside facilities should be based on striking a balance
of airside and landside capacity. The determination of landside
facilities for Southold Airport has been accomplished for the three
future planning periods of 1988, 1993, and 2003. It should be noted that
some provisions are needed for commuter/air tax~ activity, as noted in
the following discussion.
5.3.1 Administration/Terminal Buildin~
The focal point of activity at a typical general aviation airport is the
Fixed-Base Operator (FBO). An individual FBO may provide from one to
several services to airport users, including: (1) fuel, (2) aircraft
maintenance, (3) air taxi/charter, (4) aircraft rental, (5) flight
instruction, and (6) sale' of pilot necessities. In some cases, the FBO
I
I
5-13
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT. 1/5.13
6/10/85
may also manage, operate, and maintain the entire airport. Various
airport management options will be evaluated in a subsequent portion of
the study. Since a decision on the most desirable form of airport
management has not been reached, FBO management will be considered.
Under this type of arrangement, the FBO functions as a terminal, serving
as the transfer point between air and ground transportation modes, and at
times, also as the airport administrator. To fulfill this role, a
centrally located multifunctional building is needed to accommodate
waiting pilots and passengers, space for flight planning, management and
operations area, public conveniences, and concessions. These structures
are often built in conjunction with larger buildings or in proximity to
the FBO's facilities.
The amount of terminal building space required is a function of the
expected peak demand (i.e., the peak hourly volume of pilots and
passengers that are expected to use the facility). The planning standard
of 49 square feet per peak-hour pilot/passenger is then applied to the
number of peak-hour itinerant pilots/passengers to determine the required
building area. Table 5-2 presents the breakdown of the 49-square-foot
planning standard.
Applying the factor of 49 square feet to the projected level of busy-hour
passenger activity, as derived in Table 5-3, a terminal and operations
building of 1,029 square feet in size is needed initially. In light of
the expected growth of activity once the Airport establishes itself as a
viable aviation facility, the terminal building will require an expansion
of 1,000 square feet so that an ultimate floor area of 2,156 square feet
is available. This facility has been sized to efficiently accommodate
both commuter/air taxi and general aviation users during the peak summer
5-14
!
!
Table 5-2.
D-SOUTHOLD.1/VTBS-2.1
06/28/84
Derivation of Passenger Area Requirements in General Aviation
Terminal Buildings
Operational Use Area Required (SF)
I1
Waitin8 Area/Pilot's Lounge
Management Operations
Public Conveniences
Concessions, Dining, etc.
Circulation, Hechanical, Maintenance
TOTAL
15
3
1.5
5
24.5
49
J
!
J
/
NOTE:
Space requirements for circulation, mechanical, and maintenance
should be allocated equally among the other terminal building uses
in calculating total building requirements.
Source: FAA, 1969.
' 5-15
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOIfi'HOLD85-DT. 1/VTBS-3.1
6/10/85
Table 5-3. Terminal Building Space Requirements and Distribution by
Usage--Southold Airport
1988 1993 1998 2003
Annual GA Operations 16,900 20,700 25,200 31,500
Peak Hour Itinerant Operations 2 3 3 4
Peak Hour GA Itinerant Passenger- 3 6 6 6
Pilots*
Annual Con~nnter/Air Taxi Operations 9,800 12,500 15,800 20,200
Peak Hour Cormmuter/Air Taxi 10 13 17 21
Operations
Peak Hour Conmmuter/Air Taxi 18 24 30 38
Enplanementst
Total Annual Operations 26,700 33,200 41,000 51,700
Total Peak Hour Operations 12 16 20 ~5
Total Peak Hour Enplanements 21 30 36 44
Operational Areas in Square Feet:
Waiting Area/Pilot's Lounge 315 450 540 660
Management Operations 63 90 108 132
Public Conveniences 31.5 45 54 66
Concessions, Dining, etc. 105 150 180 220
Circulation, Mechanical, 514.5 735 882 1,078
Maintenance
Total Building Area (Sq. Ft.) 1,029 1,470 1,764 2,156
* An average of 3.0 passenger-pilots per peak hour departure was assumed.
An average of 3.6 passenger enplanements per peak hour departure was
assumed.
Source: PRC/ESE, 1984.
5-16
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT. 1 / 5.14
6/10/85
5.3.2 Automobile Parking
Automobile parking must also be evaluated so that sufficient space is
provided for passengers, visitors, and employees at the Airport. In
Southold's case, the factor that has been utilized in determining
automobile parking requirements assumes that 1.3 spaces should be
provided for peak hour passengers. This factor accounts for full
utilization by peak-hour passengers (100 percent), and use by visitors
and employees (30 percent), which results in a factor of 130 percent. It
should be noted that one parking space covers an area of 320 square feet.
The evaluation of automobile parking space requirements is presented in
Table 5-4, which shows that, at the end of the study period in the year
2003, Southold Airport will need an auto parking lot covering an area of
18,240' square feet. An automobile parking lot of this size is capable of
accommodating 57 vehicles. The initial size of the parking lot has been
determined to cover an area of 8,640 square feet, which has a capacity of
27 automobiles.
5.3.3 Aircraft Parking Apron
A sufficient amount of aircraft parking space must be provided in the
vicinity of the terminal building for transient aircraft, as well as
commuter/air taxi aircraft and a limited number of based aircraft.
Table 5-5 presents space requirements for the aircraft parking apron
based on the assumptions discussed below.
The Forecast of Aviation Demand (Section 4) identified the number of
transient aircraft and commuter/air taxi aircraft that can be expected to
be on the ground on the average day of the peak month (ADPM) during the
study period. Using this as a base, the following certain assumptions
were made and applied to this activity to determine apron space
requirements.
5-17
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLDSS-DT.I/VTBS-4.1
5/29/85
Table 5-4. Automobile Parking Space Requirements--Southold Airport
1988 1993 1998 2003
Total Annual Operations
Total Peak Hour Passengers
Parking Spaces Required
Total Area Required (Sq. Ft.)
26,700 33,200 41,000 51,700
21 30 36 44
27 39 47 57
8,640 12,480 15,040 18,240
Note:
One automobile parking space covers an area of 320 square feet,
which includes consideration of maneuvering and access within the
Source: PRC/ESE, 1984.
5-18
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT. 1 / VTB5-5.1
6/10/85
Table 5-5. Aircraft Parking Apron Requirements--Southold Airport
1988 1993 1998 2003
Annual GA Operations 16,900 20,700 25,200 31,500
8 10 12 14
Average Day (ADPM) Transient
Operations
Transient Aircraft Parking Spaces:
Single-Engine
Multi-Engine
Annual Commuter/Air Taxi Operations 9,800
Average Day (ADPM) Commuter/Air
Taxi Operations
51
Commuter/Air Taxi Aircraft Parking Spaces
Single-Engine 0
Multi-Engine 6
Based Aircraft Parking Spaces:
Single-Engine
Multi-Engine
3 3 3
0 0 1
12,500 15,800 20,200
65 83 106
Total Aircraft Parking Spaces:
Single-Engine
Multi-Engine
0 0 0
8 10 13
Total
2 2 3 3
0 0 0 0
Apron Area Requirements
Single-Engine
Multi-Engine
(Sq. Ft.):
10,800
33,750
4 5 6 6
10 13 16 20
13,500
45~000
16,200
56)250
16,200
78~750
Total 44,550 58,500 72,450 94,950
Source: PRC/ESE, 1984.
5-19
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT. 1/5.15
6/z0/H5
1. The majority of these transient and commuter/air taxi aircraft will
arrive and depart on the same day. Therefore, it is assumed that
the actual number of peak day transient aircraft is one-half of the
transient activity;
2. During the peak period, 50 percent of the transient aircraft and
25 percent of the commuter/air taxi aircraft will be on the ground
at any given time;
3. Thus, 25 percent of the ADPM transient activity and 12.5 percent of
the commuter/air taxi activity will need parking space;
4. Five percent of the based aircraft will be parked temporarily on the
terminal apron at any given time; and
5. Single-engine aircraft require 2,700 square feet, and multi-engine
aircraft need 5,625 square feet of apron space for parking and
maneuvering.
As can readily be seen from Table 5-5, there is a present need for a
transient aircraft parking apron at Snuthold Airport of 44,550 square
feet. This apron should cover an area of this size to adeqoately
accommodate the demand on the average day of the peak month, which is
considered to be a satisfactory figure for planning purposes. The
transient aircraft parking apron should continually be expanded so that
by the end of the study period, in the year 2003, it should offer nearly
95,000 square feet of paved parking space.
5.3.4 Based Aircraft Storage
Typically, airports that serve the general aviation sector offer both
hangar and tie-down storage for based aircraft. There are two types of
tie-down aprons normally used by airports, paved and turf aprons. Due to
the relatively high frequency of inclement weather conditions in the
northeast, paved tie-down space is much more common than onpaved.
Therefore, it is recommended that Southold Airport provide paved aprons
for based aircraft tie-down. There are also two forms of hangar storage
5-20
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT.1/5.16
6/10/85
space, T-hangar and conventional. A typical general aviation airport
offers a combination of both, and therefore, it is recommended that
Southold do the same at its proposed airport.
According to the forecast of based aircraft demand at Southold Airport,
the number is expected to increase from its anticipated 1988 level of 36
aircraft to 67 aircraft in the year 2003. Adequate storage facilities
should be provided to accommodate the various based aircraft forecast
levels.
The demand for hangar storage of based aircraft at Southold Airport
should be greater than the national average at general aviation airports
due to the relatively colder, more inclement weather conditions that are
typical of the Northeast. Based on this, the following assumptions were
made in determining the need for the various types of storage:
o Forty percent of the based single-engine aircraft would use a tie-
down space. Fifty-five percent of the total would be stored in T-
hangars, and the remaining five percent would use conventional
hangar storage space.
Eighty percent of the multi-engine aircraft based at Southold
would be stored in hangars. Sixty percent of these (48 percent of
the total) would use T-hangars, and 30 percent of these (32
percent of the total) would be stored in conventional hangars.
Tha remaining twenty percent would utilize tie-down space.
The based aircraft storage requirements were computed by utilizing the
assumptions presented in Table 5-6 and are summarized in Table 5-7.
Aa can be seen from Table 5-7, Southold Airport will need the following
facilities for based aircraft storage at the outset of its operation:
I
I
5-21
I
!
I
I
I
I
~-SOUT~OLD. 1/V~5-6, 1
Table 5-6. Area Required for Aircraft Storage by Type--Southold
Airport
Aircraft Type
Tiedo~n Space
Required (Sq. Ft.)*
Hangar Space
Required (Sq. Ft.)
Single-Engine 2,700 1,620
Multi-Engine 5,625 3,150
Storage Type
Storage Demand by Aircraft Type (Percent)
Single-Englne
Multi-Engine
Tie-Down Space 40 20
T-Hangar 55 48
Conventional 5 32
Total 100 100
*Includes aircraft parking and maneuvering areas.
Source: Surveys conducted by PRC and ESE at various general aviation
airports.
5-22
I
I
I
i
I
I
l
[
D-SOUTHOLD. 1/VTBS-7 . 1
08/17/84
Table 5-7. Based Aircraft Storage Requlrements--Southold Airport
1988 1993 1998 2003
Tie-Dovn Storage Space:
Single-Engine 14 17 21 25
Hulti-EnEine 0 0 0 1
Total Spaces 14 17 21 26
Total Area (Sq. Ft.) 37,800 45,900 56,700 73,125
T-Hangar Storage Space:
Single-Engine 20 24 28 35
Hulti-Engine 0 1 1 2
Total Spaces 20 25 29 37
Conventional Hangar Storage Space:
Single-Engine 2 2 3 3
Hulti-Englne 0 0 I 1
Total Spaces 2 2 4 4
Total Area (Sq. Ft.) 3,240 3,240 8,010 8,010
i
i
[
!
!
!
i
i
PRC/ESE, 1984.
5-23
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
!
I
1
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT.I/5.17
6/10/85
1. 37,800 square feet of tie-down space,
2. 20 T-hangar spaces, and
3. 3,240 square feet of conventional hangar space.
The above storage facilities will be in need of expansion as activity
increases at Southold Airport. It is expected that, in the year 2003, an
area covering in excess of 73,000 square feet will be needed for tie-down
space, a total of 37 T-hangar spaces will be warranted, and an aircraft
storage hangar with a total floor area of just over 8,000 square feet
will be required.
5.3.5 Fuel Storage Facilities
A forecast of annual fuel flowage was presented in Section 4.5.6 of this
report. An analysis of the monthly fuel requirements of 100-octane fuel
was conducted and is presented in Table 5-8. This analysis was based on
relating forecast fuel sales to the peak activity associated with it at
other typical general aviation airports with seasonal variances. It wa~
assumed that twice as much fuel will be sold in the warm weather months
(May to October) as in the other months of the year.
Table 5-8 shows that, in the year 2003, storage capacities of more than
one month of 100 octane are possible with the installation of a 10,000-
gallon underground fuel tank. In order to provide surplus fuel storage
capacity, consideration should be given to installing a second 10,000
gallon underground fuel tank. Since it is expected that aircraft
activity at Southold will be limited to single-engine and light twin-
engine aircraft, the need for jet fuel is not justified. Further, in
order for the Town to limit or restrict operations by turbine-powered
aircraft (jets), the unavailability of jet fuel will serve to discourage
this type of activity.
I
i
5-24
I
I
i
I
I
I
i
Table 5-8.
D-SOUTHOLD.1/VTBS-8.1
08/17/84
Honthly Fuel S~orage Requlremen~$ (Gallons)--Sou~hold
Airpor~
Fuel Grade 1988 1993 1998 2003
100 Octane 4,700 5,800 7,000 8,800
Source: PRC/ESE, 1984.
I
i
i
i
i
I
i
i
5-25
I
I
I
I
I
I
/
1
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
SOUTHOL D85 -DT. 1 / 5.18
6/10/85
5.3.6 Crash-Fire-Rescue Facilities
There are six volunteer fire departments in the Town of Southold proper.
They are located in Cutchogue, East Marion, Greenport, Mattltuck, Orient,
and Southold. With the dispersed placement of these companies, the To~r~
is provided with excellent fire protection coverage. Likewise, it is
quite possible for the airport site to be such that a response time of no
more than 10 minutes can be expected. This type of fire protection is
acceptable as a secondary means; however, on-airport capabilities are
recommended for quick response protection. The Federal Aviation Admini-
stration has developed recou~nended guidelines for such service and has
outlined these criteria in Advisory Circular No. 150/5210-6B, Aircraft
Fire and Rescue Facilities and Extinguishing Agent~, January 26, 1973.
Under these guidelines and on the basis of expected operations, according
to aircraft type, Southold Airport should comply with the requirements of
an Index 1 airport. To meet these criteria, the Airport needs one
vehicle with one of the three following capacity capabilities:
1. 200 gallons of water for foam production for aqueous film
forming foam (AFFF) with a solution application rate of
150 gallons per minute,
2. 300 gallons of water for foam production for protein foam with a
solution application rate of 230 gallons per minute, or
3. 300 pounds of dry chemical powder.
Thus, provisions should be made to supply the Airport with one of the
above capabilities once it becomes operational.
5.3.7 Aircraft Maintenance Facilities
The demand for aircraft maintenance will increase as activity at Southold
Airport grows. To a¢comodate this demand for aircraft maintenance,
provisions should be made to provide this service. The sizing of
aircraft maintenance facilities assumes that one maintenance space should
be provided for every 10 based aircraft. For obvious reasons, the area
5-26
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-DT. 1/5.19
6/10/85
requirements for the various types of aircraft are greater than those
needed for parking space. It has been determined by surveys conducted by
PRC and ESE of fixed-base operators at various general aviation airports
that single-engine aircraft require 3,200 square feet and multi-engine
aircraft need 4,700 square feet of space for maintenance purposes. These
area requirements allow for building clearances, apron area, and
maneuvering area.
Table 5-9 presents the results of this analysis. Initial requirements
for aircraft maintenance should provide for an area (hangar and apron) of
nearly 13,000 square feet. By 1998, the aircraft maintenance facilities
should consist of a total area of approximately 16,000 square feet and
should be further expanded so that, by the end of the study period in the
year 2003, 19,200 square feet of hangar and apron area should be avail-
able for aircraft maintenance services.
I 5-27
D-SOUTROLD. 1/VTBS-9 . 1
08/18/84
Table 5-9. Requirements for Aircraft Maintenance Facilities--
Southold Airport
1988 1993 1998 2003
4 4 5 6
4 4 5 6
Number of Maintenance
Spaces:
Single-Engine
Multi-Engine
Total Spaces
Area Required (SF):
Single-Engine
Multi-Engine
Total Area
12,800 12,800 16,000 19,200
12,800 12,800 16,000 19,200
Note: Area required per maintenance space is 3,200 square feet for
single-engine and 4,700 square feet for multi-engine aircraft.
Source:' PRC/ESE, 1984.
5-28
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHHOLD84-DT.1/SOUTHOLDl.1
6/10/85
6.0 AIRPORT SITE SELECTION ANALYSIS
6.1 INTRODUCTION
Section 5 this report identified the general spacing, sizing, and
facility attributes which are to be used as broad overall criteria or
goals for airport development in the Town of Southold. Twelve (12)
sites throughout the Town were identified as candidate airport sites.
These twelve sites are depicted in Figure 6-1 and are designated with
number identifiers. A number of these candidate sites were previously
considered as potential airport sites in earlier planning studies. Some
additional sites have been included in this initial listing of candidate
airport sites so as to not preclude any site that may prove feasible.
The 12 initial sites were determined based on a review of available
mapping material. This screening process, which was conducted by the
consultant and representatives of the Town, included existing airports,
any sites that were previously considered, and other sites that appeared
to be potentially feasible. The rationale used to determine if a site
was potentially feasible included: the availability of the site;
remoteness of its location from concentrated areas of development; or
its exclusion from the farmland preservation program. The 12 sites
which were selected were considered to be representative of the full
spectrum of potential sites across the entire township. Ail of the
sites shown in Figure 6-1 conform as closely as possible to documented
parcel boundary lines, which results in some of the sites having
irregular shapes and varying.sizes.
The next step was an evaluation of all potential sites so that a
determination could be made of which sites could conceivably support an
aviation facility. Each site is systematically reviewed in this
section. In considering each location, its physical characteristics,
environmental constraints, location with respect to neighboring
sensitive uses, as well as ability to satisfy the target goals
established in the facility requirements analysis were taken into
account. The purpose is to eliminate those sites which unavoidably
compromise one or more of the practical criteria which must be applied.
This process is both judgmental as well as analytical. Its outcome is a
6-1
. ~~ .~~
~ ,.' I .~ ~._~__I
'.'" ~" ..' ,,,~z'"""'"~..~. b.L~ ~<, ~
' "'~~,,'-~~.. jI~,'~'. '...~,, ~, ~:~!~i,~i ~: ·
,, ,~ , ' ' ~"-' ~ .,. ~' ,;5
· ~ .//~ ~ ' 'i, ~, · '
~ ~ : ,~-, .~,,
"'~. ~ · , .2'a, 'c
'/ ~~,~t. :. , , .~. ,,.,... ,~ ~ ..., ,
· -.~ , ,, \ , , . · .,t
~~._:.,- ,.... .. ,.
· . \~, ~,-~~. ~,~,~. . .~. ,o, ,,.: ~, ..,
..... : ....... -- $ . .,,. · ~,.:~.,',~, . , , .. ,
I ~,~~~~..' ..'.
'..~}' A~ ~ ,,,
~[ :-.'~.,.,..',i~~,? · ' ,
~,~~.=~-:.7.~." '~', , , ·
· .~:,,, .~ ~ . ,
I!l~ ~ z,''~'''- '~;'~ '!' '~'° ' '
' ~ '?~'"~t'..
Figur~ 6-1
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK
CANDIDATE AIRPORT SITES AIRPORT SITE SELECTION/
~ASTER PLAN STUDY
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
!
I
i
SOUTHHOLD84-DT.1/SOUTHOLD1.2
6/10/85
reduced number of practical potential sites which can then be considered
in detail to determine one or more sites which may ultimately accommo-
date aviation activity now and through the end of the planning period.
In sun~ary, this phase of the investigation will refine the available
range of sites by eliminating those which are obviously undesirable
relative to others that are potentially available so that detailed
comparisons can be made between the most promising sites.
6.2 NOISE CONTOUR DEVELOPMENT
Experience has shown that environmental impacts resulting from aircraft
operations are important in determining whether any airport at all is
acceptable in a specific region or township. This is particularly true
in areas such as Southold where the overall level of environmental
quality is high and the public at large is dedicated to its protection.
Frequently, the overriding issue is aircraft generated noise. Clearly,
it is desirable to direct aircraft traffic away from the more heavily
populated community areas.
Noise impacts at small general aviation airports are typically limited
to the airport itself. Noise impacts at the proposed Southold Airport
are consistent with this generalization.
Detailed quantification of expected noise impacts are measured through
the use of the Day-Night Average Sound Level (Ldn) measurement system.
This methodology has been established by the Federal Aviation
Administration as the single system for depicting noise impacts at
airports nationwide. The Ldn system is based on the A-weighted decibel
[dB(A)] which is the most common measure for environmental noise. A-
weighting is simply a means of adjusting the measured noise level
through an electronic network so that the noise meter approximates the
frequency sensitivity of the human ear. Noise impact information for
airports is often developed through the application of a computer.model
which produces a series of nested contours of equal cumulative noise
intensity. These contours can then be plotted on a map. The contours
are interpreted through the use of a recommended table of land use
6-3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
SOUTHHOLD84-DT.1/SOUTHOLD1.3
6/10/85
compatibility standards. This can be used to determined the presence or
absence of incompatible land uses in the airport vicinity. In this case
the Integrated Noise Model (INM) was used to produce the noise contour
information. The INM was developed by the FAA and is available directly
from that agency.
6.2.1 Noise Model Input Data
As is the case with any computer model, its results are entirely
dependent on the specification of the input data which in turn reflects
certain assumptions about the conditions expected to exist. Input into
the noise model included the volume of aircraft activity, the types of
aircraft expected to use the airport, the time of day of operation (day
vs. night), the physical specification of the runway location and its
utilization, the aircraft flight patterns, the annual average ambient
temperature, and the airport altitude. Information on aircraft source
noise characteristics, flight profiles, and engine power settings is
normally supplied through the data base of the noise model itself.
In the case of the proposed Southold Airport, the utllmate runway length
of 3,600 feet was assumed to be available. The level of expected
operations is consistent with the revised activity forecasts as
presented in Section 4. These overall annual activity levels are broken
down to generate a daily average of activity by aircraft type according
to the average runway use, time of day of operation and type of
activity. These data are summarized in Appendix F, Southold INM Input
Data. Two aircraft types are expected to use the Airport, single engine
general aviation aircraft (SEGA) and twin engine general aviation
aircraft (TEGA). Source noise characteristics for these two different
aircraft types are contained in the INM and reflect the average noise
signature for the entire class of aircraft represented. Three types of
activity are expected to take place: local operations, itinerant
operations and touch and go operations. In terms of noise model input
data there is no difference between a local or an itinerant operation.
However, one half of local operations by SEGA aircraft, were assumed to
be touch and go's, (i.e. training flights). Ail touch and go's were
6-4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
SOUTfLqOLD84-DT. 1 ! SOUTHOLD1 . 4
6/10/85
assumed to operate to the northwest and occur during the day period (7
a.m.-10 p.m.). These training flights would normally occur during clear
weather and during daylight or early evening hours. All remaining
operations were divided equally between the two runway ends. Ten (10)
percent of these operations were expected to occur during the night
period, primarily before 7:00 a.m. in the morning.
The remaining assumptions included an airport altitude of 50 feet above
mean sea level (msl), and an annual average temperature of 59 degrees
Fahrenheit. Flight tracks were assumed to be straight in and out, (i.e.
aligned with the extended runway centerline).
6.2.2 Expected Noise Impacts
The INM was run for each of the four (4) future forecast years.
were obtained for the Ldn 65 and the Ldn 60 contours as follows:
Results
1988 1993 1998 2003
Ldn 65 25.6 acres 32.0 acres 38.4 acres 51.2 acres
Ldn 60 57.6 acres 70.4 acres 89.6 acres 128.0 acres
As can be seen from inspection of the Ldn 65 contour, illustrated in
Section 6.3, it can be expected to remain entirely on airport property
and primarily on or around the runway itself for the duration of the
forecast period. Generally, all land uses, particularly residential
land uses, are normally compatible with cumulative noise levels below
Ldn 65. Additionally, the Ldn 60 contour can be expected to remain
largely on proposed airport property for the entire forecast period.
Inspection of plots of the year 2003 contour indicates the presence of
small areas of Ldn 60 beyond the runway clear zones. However, these are
primarily over the water to the northwest of the Airport and in
compatible rural uses to the southeast, assuming a northwest-southeast
runway orientation. Therefore, the proposed level of service and
resultant noise impacts should not create land use incompatibility in
any off-airport areas.
6-5
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
SO].~I'HHOL I~34-DT. 1 /SOUTHOL D1.5
6/10/85
6.3 PRELIMINARY SCREENING
In order to reduce the number of candidate airport sites to a manageable
number, a preliminary screening process will serve to eliminate specific
sites which are clearly unfeasible. Included among the reasons for
eliminating sites are: parcel not of adequate size; incorrect orienta-
tion for runway; obvious off-airport conflicts; and availability of
land. It is hoped that this preliminary screening will be able to
eliminate the majority of the candidate sites, leaving three or four of
the most feasible sites for further detailed evaluation.
6.3.1 Site 1
Site 1 is Mattituck Airport, the existing public-use airport in the Town
of Southold proper, which is depicted in Figure 6-2. This facility is a
privately owned airport that is opened to the public on a limited basis.
It consists of 18 acres and a 2,200-foot paved runway. The proposed
zoning as suggested by the Town's draft Master Plan lists Mattituck
Airport as R-80 (Residential Low Density A). The location of Mattituck
Aviation's engine overhaul business is designated LI (Light Industrial).
Mattituck Airport is surrounded on all sides by residential development,
especially north, east and south as shown in Figure 6-2. In addition,
there is a salt marsh which is located approximately 200 feet north of
the runway and a road (Marratooka Road) further to the north. Because
of these, the possibility of extending the runway to meet the needs of
the proposed Southold Airport (3,600 feet) is unlikely. In addition,
the overall size of the parcel is considered much too small for
Southold's needs. The owner of Mattituck Airport has indicated that the
facility is not for sale. Further, in view of the Town Board's
resolution not to resort to condemnation to acquire Mattituck Airport
(see Appendix G), it has been determined that Site 1 does not warrant
any detailed evaluation in this study. For these reasons it is believed
that development of Mattituck Airport as the Town-owned facility is not
practical. Thus, it will not be considered further in the site selec-
tion study.
!
!
6-6
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
/\
t AIRCRAFT
PARKING APRON
LEGEND
...... POWER LINE
~ RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
--- AIRPORT PROPERTY LINE
200 0 ~30 400 FEET
Figure 6-2
MATTITUCK AIRPORT
SOURCE: TOWN OF SOUTHOLD;
6-7
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK
Airport Site Selection/
Master Plan Study
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOLr~flflOL D84-DT. 1 / SOUTHOLD1.6
6/10/85
6.3.2 Site 2
Site 2 is located north of Oregon Road at the northwest corner of Alvahs
Lane. It was previously recon~nended as the Town's airport site in a
study conducted by the New York State Department of Transportation
(NYSDOT). The majority of Site 2 is shown as A-C (Agricultural
Conservation) in the Town's draft Master Plan. An 800-foot-wide strip
along the coastline is designated RR-A (Resort Residential A). It
consists of six parcels of land, four of which are on the north side of
Oregon Road. The other two parcels, which cover 55.3 acres are on the
south side of Oregon Road and the west side of Alvahs Lane. This
acreage includes a small corner lot (0.7 acres) situated on the
southwest corner of Oregon Road and Alvahs Lane. The six parcels
combined cover an area of 184.2 acres, which is more than adequate in
terms of overall size. The most desirable runway orientation (northeast-
southwest) is not possible at this site; however, a northwest-southeast
runway of adequate length is certainly possible. This alignment is a
close second in terms of desirability for crosswind purposes. A 3,600-
foot runway can be constructed at this site. Site 2 also offers the
added capability of protected clear zones, with one end of the runway
facing towards Long Island Sound and the other end south of Oregon Road
(included as part of the entire site). There is very little development
in the area surrounding this site. All things considered, Site 2 does
seem feasible and further evaluation is warranted.
6.3.3 Site 3
Site 3 is located north of Route 48, east of Depot Lane, south of Oregon
Road, and west of Cox Lane. The existing Town landfill is located on
Site 3; however, it is planned to be closed and relocated elsewhere in
the future. This potential airport site encompasses 17 separate parcels
(2 of which are owned by the Town of Southold) and covers an area of
188.6 acres, which is sufficient to support an airport of the size
envisioned. A northeast-southwest runway at the desired length is not
possible at Site 3. Likewise, a runway orientation of northwest-
southeast cannot be constructed. The only alignment that can support a
3,600-foot runway is north-south, which is not the optimal orientation.
6-8
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOb~fHHOL D84-DT. 1 / SOUTHOLD1 . 7
6/10/85
Most of the land that makes up this site is available. The owner of two
parcels that are essential to the development of Site 3 as an airport
has recently stated that his land holdings are not available. In the
existing Town Master Plan (which is presently being updated), a large
portion of Site 3 is zoned "C-l," which is defined as "General
Industrial" and "For Sale" signs are visible on one of the parcels.
However, the draft of the new Master Plan suggests a change to the
zoning in this area; most of Site 3 is proposed for A-C, with the east
and northeast portion of Site 3 listed as LIO (Light Industrial/Office
Park). There is some limited development adjacent to the landfill and
across Cox Lane on Mathews Lane. However, Site 3 does not appear to be
a feasible site since a necessary portion of it is not available and the
Town has decided not to resort to condemnation. Thus, it will not be
considered further in the evaluation of potential airport sites.
6.3.4 Site 4
Site 4 is situated south of the Long Island Railroad right-of-way and
between Depot Lane and Cox Lane. The Town's draft Master Plan proposes
that this site be zoned A-C. Portions of five separate parcels form
this site. The total acreage amounts to 97.4 acres, which is slightly
below the recommended minimum of 100 acres. Due to the size of this
site, there is not one runway orientation that provides the needed
runway length. In addition, a church is located directly west of the
site and there is some limited development along both Depot Lane and Cox
Lane. For these reasons, Site 4 is considered unfeasible and is
eliminated from further evaluation.
6.3.5 Site 5
Site 5 is located north of and adjacent to Route 48, just east of Bridge
Lane. This site, which consists of one large parcel, covers an area of
141.8 acres. The proposed zoning of this site is A-C, except for an 800-
foot-wide strip along the Sound that is shown as Resort Residential A
(RR-A). Although its orientation will not permit a northeast-southwest
runway alignment, it will support the second most desired direction,
northwest-southeast. This site will also permit a runway length of
6-9
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHHOLD84-DT.1/SOUTHOLD1.8
6/10/85
3,600 feet with surplus on either end for clear zone protection. There
is limited development in proximity to Site 5. This parcel is allegedly
for sale and thus available as an airport location. Based on the
favorable status of all the preliminary screening factors, Site 5 is
considered a feasible site for the airport and will be evaluated
further.
6.3.6 Site 6
Site 6 is situated due east of Site 5. It consists of two large parcels
and two relatively small parcels, one of which is the property of
Suffolk County and presently is a water retention basin. Residents near
Site 6 have reported that this basin does not normally attract birds.
The Town's draft Master Plan proposes that Site 6 be zoned in a similar
fashion to Site 5 (A-C and RR-A). The total area of Site 6 is 138.7
acres, which is large enough to support the proposed Southold Airport.
As was the case with Site 5, Site 6 is oriented in such a way as to
permit only a northwest-southeast runway alignment. However, it too can
accormodate a runway of sufficient length to serve the needs of Southold
Town. There is little or no development in the immediate vicinity of
Site 6. However, it is believed that the land comprising this site is
no longer available, as was originally thought during previous phases of
the study. Therefore, it is felt that Site 6 does not represent a
feasible option for locating the proposed airport since the Town does
not wish to condemn any land for developing the airport. Thus, Site 6
does not warrant further consideration in subsequent investigations.
6.3.7 Site 7
Site 7 is located south of the Long Island Railroad right-of-way,
between Bridge Lane and Peconic Lane. Nine separate parcels are
encompassed by Site 7; however it is proposed to acquire only the 1,000
feet nearest the railroad tracks of each parcel. This will result in an
overall size of 100.0 acres for this site, which is adequate for a
single runway airport. The proposed zoning of Site 7 is A-C. Two
problems do present themselves in acquiring land for this site. First,
it is unlikely that all of the owners will be willing to sell and
6-10
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
!
I
SOUTHHOLD84-DT. 1 / SOUTHOLD1 . 9
6/10/85
second, it is even more unlikely that they all will be willing to sell a
portion of their property. The orientation of the runway on Site 7 will
be east-west, which is not one of the most desirable alignments.
Further, there is some residential development on both ends of the
property, in addition to a school (Peconic School) just southeast of the
site. It should also be noted that there is no ground access presently
available to Site 7. All things considered, Site 7 does not appear to
be very feasible and, as such, further consideration of this site is not
warranted.
6.3.8 Site 8
Site 8 is also situated south of the Long Island Railroad right-of-way.
It is east of Site 7 and is placed between Carroll Avenue and Bowery
Lane. Like Site 7, Site 8 is composed of portions of a number of
parcels. The 1,000 feet closest to the railroad of 8 separate parcels
forms the boundaries of Site 8. The size of this site is estimated to
be 94.7 acres. Site 8 is also proposed for the A-C zoning category.
However, the problem of dealing with 8 property owners is present in
this situation. Likewise, there is some residential development in the
i~nediate vicinity of Site 8, in addition to Peconic School, which is
just southwest of the site. This site also does not have readily
available ground access. Finally, the east-west runway alignment is not
the most desirable orientation. Thus, Site 8 does not present a
feasible alternative in developing an airport site and is eliminated
from further consideration.
6.3.9 Site 9
Site 9 is located on 3 parcels of land south of Route 48. This
particular site is bordered on the east by Chapel Lane and on the west
by Albertson Lane. It is directly across Route 48 from the Soundview
Restaurant. The entire portion of Site 9 is shown as R-80 zoning. Site
9 covers a total area of 136.3 acres, which is of suitable size for
Southold's airport. However, it will not permit the desired runway
alignment -- the only feasible orientation at this site is east-west.
Although the land which comprises Site 9 is available, it is largely
6-11
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHHOLD84-DT. 1 / SOUTHOLDI . 10
6/10/85
wetlands. This type of land typically proves to be relatively expensive
in developing an airport, in addition to being environmentally
unacceptable. It should also be noted that Site 9 requires extensive
clearing in that a large portion of the property is covered with trees
and other vegetation. A further consideration is that with the east-
west orientation of Site 9's runway, operations to/from the east will be
directly over the Village of Greenport, which is only one mile away from
the eastern boundary of this site. All factors considered, Site 9 does
not appear to be feasible for developing an airport and thus further
consideration of it is not warranted.
6.3.10 Site 10
Site 10 is situated north of and adjacent to Main Road at the point
where Manhasset Avenue intersects it. Island End Golf and Country Club
is located next to Site 10 on its east side. This site is made up of
one parcel and covers 136.6 acres. Site 10 can accommodate a 3,000-foot
runway oriented in a northeast-southwest direction. The Village of
Greenport abuts Site 10 to the south, which is an undesirable situation
in that activity to/from the southwest will fly directly over this
densely populated area. Indications are that this parcel is not
available. The existing Master Plan shows that Site 10 is zoned "M,"
which is defined as "light multiple residence." The draft Master Plan
has changed this identifier to RD (Hamlet Density Residential). This
type of zoning is clearly incompatible with airport activity. In light
of Site 10's inability to support a 3,600-foot runway, its proximity to
Greenport, and the residential zoning of the property, it is being
eliminated from further consideration as an airport.
6.3.11 Site 11
Site 11 is a narrow strip of land which encompasses two parcels and
covers an area of 50.4 acres. This size is considered to be inadequate
to support ~irport development. It is situated between Main Road and
Narrow River Road. The proposed zoning that encompasses Site 11 is
R-200 (Residential Low Density C). A 3,000-foot runway aligned in a
northwest-southeast direction can be constructed on Site 11. There is
6-12
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
SOUTHHOLD84-DT . 1 / SOUTHOLD1 . i 1
6/10/85
some limited residential development due north of this site. In
addition, there are some extensive wetlands south-southeast of the site.
Clearly, Site 11 presents many problems and does not lend itself to the
development of the Town's airport.
6.3.12 Site 12
Site 12 is Rose Field, which is an existing, privately owned airfield.
It presently consists of one parcel; however, it appears that the two
adjacent parcels to the east are available. With these three parcels,
Site 12 covers an area of 37.6 acres, which is clearly undersized for an
airport. These three parcels are all proposed for zoning in the R-80
category (Residential Low Density A). It is capable of accommodating a
2,000-foot runway oriented northwest-southeast. There is some limited
residential development south of Site 12. Based upon its size, it is
felt that investment in this site is not a very worthwhile venture.
Thus, Site 12 will not be considered further in the airport site
selection analysis.
6.3.13 Conclusions of Preliminary Screening
Based upon observations made during the preliminary screening of the
twelve candidate airport sites, two sites have emerged as the most
feasible, warranting further evaluation. These sites are as follows:
o Site 2 (Oregon Road and Alvahs Lane); and
o Site 5 (Route 48 of Bridge Lane).
6.4 FINAL EVALUATION
The final evaluation of the two previously identified potential airport
sites will consider a number of factors in reaching a recommendation.
Included among these factors are the following:
o Possible airfield layout and terminal area configuration,
o Surrounding land and buffer zones,
o Proximity of residential development,
o Location of lands in Farmland Preservation Program,
o Ground access to site,
o Cost of developing site, and
o Environmental impacts of developing site.
6-13
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHHOLD84-DT.1/SOUTHOLDl.12
6/10/85
The above evaluation factors will be considered for both sites. A
rating system will be developed and applied to Site 2 and Site 5. The
results of this evaluation process will be one recommended site for
constructing the proposed Southold Airport.
6.4.1 Site 2
As previously identified, Site 2 is situated north of Oregon Road at the
northwest corner intersecting with Alvahs Lane. The general location of
Site 2 is shown in Figure 6-3, with the ultimate (2003) noise contours
superimposed. It is depicted in more detail in Figure 6-4 with a
suggested runway orientation. This site consists of six parcels (four
north of Oregon Road and two south) totalling 184.2 acres.
A. Airport Configuration
The runway orientation shown in Figure 6-4 is northwest-southeast
(13-31), which is the second most desirable orientation. However, the
most desired alignment (04-22) is not possible at either of the final '
sites. With the alignment of Runway 13-31, it has been determined that
the wind coverage of Site 2 is 86.62 percent with a 10.5-knot crosswind.
The remainder of the time, the Airport would be closed to aircraft that
are not designed to operate with a crosswind in excess of 10.5 knots.
Runway 13-31 at Site 2 is shown with a full 3,600-foot length.
Figure 6-3 depicts the terminal area on the east side of the runway,
where there is ample space for such development. Since the most desired
runway orientation is not possible, but runway length and terminal area
development are feasible, Site 2 was awarded a 3 (Very Good).
B. Surroundin~ Land Use/Buffer Zones
As can be seen from Figure 6-4, Site 2's proposed property limits
include the clear zone on the south end (across Oregon Road). The clear
zone on the north end is over water. A 13 kV, 50-foot high overhead
powerline parallels Oregon Road on its south side, which would ~equire
burial. Thus, Site 2 would have total control over its clear zones and
as such received a rating of 4 (Excellent) on this factor.
6-14
'1
II
I
I
I
I
I
$OUTHOLO-$41611
O IOOO 2000 FEET
Waterville
LEGEND
CLEAR ZONE
PROPERTY LINE
RUNWAY
' Ldn
--%
Duck Pond
Poin
0
Figure 6-3
SITE 2
SOURCE: NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, 1981
ESE. 1984.
6-15
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK
Airport Site Selection/
Master Plan Study
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
PORTION OF OVERHEAD
POWER LINE TO BE
BURIED (1200 FOOT
SECTION)
0
LILCO _P~WER
LINE (50 HIGH)
OREGON
RELOCATION
SOUND
°1
i_~....'~' '
~EGEND
~-~ PROPERTY LINE
.... PARCEL BOUNDARY LINE
....... OVERHEAD POWER LINE
(~) PARCEL IDENTIFIER
RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURI
UTILITY STRUCTURE
AIRPORT ACCESS
ROAD
kV
Figure 6-4
SITE PLAN-SITE 2
SOURCE: ESE, 1685
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK
Airport Site Selection/
Master Plan Study
6-16
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOCHHOLD84-DT. 1 / SOUTHOLD1 . 13
6/10/85
C. Proximity of Residential Land
Although there is some residential land uses on both sides of Oregon
Road, it is limited. There are five farmhouses and seven utility
buildings (i.e. barn, shed, garage), which would necessitate removal.
In addition, one-half mile west of the site, there is a housing
development, which includes a number of homes. These homes are located
on Soundview Avenue. Based upon the proximity of residential
development adjacent to Site 2 on the south and nearby to the west, it
received a 1 (Fair) in this category.
D. Proximity of Farmland Preservation
There are no Farmland Preservation lands in reasonable proximity to
Site 2. It should be noted that it is desirable to have such lands
surrounding the proposed airport site, because it would serve as an
excellent buffer zone to the Airport. Since the land which surrounds
Site 2 is zoned for agricultural and residential use, it is possible
that incompatible development may occur; however, this type of
encroachment would not be possible if the surrounding land was in the
Farmland Preservation Program. Therefore, Site 2 was only awarded a 2
(Good) in this area.
E. Ground Access
Ground access to Site 2 would be from the Route 48 north on Alvahs Lane.
However, since Alvahs Lane dead ends at Oregon Road, the need to extend
it so that it would serve the Airport is required. In addition, the
portion of Alvahs Lane between the Route 48 and Oregon Road may require
some improvements (i.e., resurfacing, widening, etc.). A portion of
Oregon Road would require relocation, as shown in Figure 6-4, to permit
a 15-foot clearance over the road as recommended by the FAA. Since
ground access connections to Site 2 are in need of some improvement, it
was given a rating of 2 (Good).
F. Development Costs
The base estimated cost for constructing the proposed Southold Airport
in its initial phase is $2.475 million, (exclusive of land acquisition),
6-17
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
SOUTHHOLD84-DT. 1/SOUTHOLD1.14
6/10/85
$1.667 million of which is eligible for federal and state funding
covering 97.5 percent of the cost ($1.625 million). The remaining
$42,000 would be the responsibility of the To~n.
Development items which are eligible for FAA and NYSDOT funding include:
runway, taxiway and apron construction; airfield lighting; drainage,
etc. The remainder of the $2.475 million total ($808,000) is for
terminal area development, which is typically not eligible for reim-
bursement from the two funding agencies. However, most, if not all, of
this development would be constructed by tenants at the Airport, such as
hangars, terminal/pilots lounge, and auto parking lot. (See Appendix E
for a detailed presentation of the unit costs applied to the above
costs).
Site specific costs for developing Site 2 include: land acquisition;
burial of overhead power line; relocation of Oregon Road; tree clearing
along the bank of Long Island Sound; extension of Alvah's Lane; and
demolishment of several residential and utility structures. Table 6-1
presents the estimated costs of developing Site 2. Of the total
estimated cost of $8,057,000, $7,067,500 is eligible for federal and
state funding, and $808,000 is typically associated with private
interests. Thus, of this estimated cost, $181,500 would be the
responsibility of the Town. Because it appears that Site 2 will be much
more costly to develop than Site 5, it received a I (Fair) in this area.
G. Environmental Impacts
As previously discussed, environmental impacts that are typically
associated with airports are not relevant in the case of the proposed
Southold Airport. The two primary areas of concern are usually noise
impacts and air quality.
In view of the comparatively low level of projected aircraft operations
and the type of activity (single.engine and light twin engine aircraft),
the expected environmental impacts of the proposed airport are
considered negligible. In terms of noise impact, the FAA has identified
the Ldn 65 noise contour as the level where noise mitlgation measures
for residential development should be considered. Noise levels below
6-18
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD-T.1/VTB6-1.1
6/lO/85
Table 6-1. Estimated Development Costs--Site 2
Unit Total
Item Cost Cost ($)
Land Acquisition:
Parcel A
Parcel B
Parcel C
Parcel D
Parcel E
Parcel F
Power Line
Burial (1200 LF)
Road Construction
(16,000 ft2)
Tree Clearing
(12 acres)
Extension of Alvahs
Lane (30,000 ft2)
$20,O00/acre
$33,755/acre
$15,060/acre
L.S.
$36,630/acre
L.S.
$100/lin ft
$1.90/ft2
S2,500/acre
$1.90/ft2
Demolishment of 0.35/ft3
Structures (100,000 ft3)
Relocation Costs $3,000/family
(5 families)
Total Site-Specific Costs
Base Estimated Cost
Total Development Cost
$950,000
1,600,000
500,000
130,000
2,000,000
115,000
120,000
30,000
30,000
57,000
35,000
15,000
$5,582,000
$2,475,000
$8,057,000
Note: L.S. = Lump Sun.
lin ft = linear foot
ft2 = square foot
ft3 = cubic foot
Source: ESE, 1985.
6-19
I
!
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
/
i
I
I
SOb'THHOL D84-DT. 1 / SOb'THOLD1.15
6/10/~5
Ldn 65 are considered inconsequential. As discussed previously, it is
therefore important to note that the Ldn 65 contour remains entirely on
the proposed airport property centered around the runway. Figure 6-3
presents the Ldn 65 noise contour for the ultimate case. It is
important to keep in mind that the Ldn 65 contour represents the
threshold set forth by federal guidelines of noise impacted areas. (See
Section 6.2 for a detailed discussion of airport noise considerations).
If the proposed Southold Airport were built, federal and state air
quality standards would also not be of concern. The expected impacts on
air quality from an airport of the size proposed for the Town of
Southold are insignificant. No other potential environmental impacts
are expected at this site. As such, Site 2 was awarded a rating of 4
(Excellent) in terms of its expected environmental impacts.
6.4.2 Site 5
Site 5 is located north of Route 48 approximately 1,000 feet east of
Bridge Lane. It consists of one parcel and encompasses an area of 141.8
acres. The general location of Site 5 and the ultimate Ldn 65 noise
contour are shown in Figure 6-5. Site 5 is also shown in Figure 6-6
with a suggested runway configuration.
A. Airport Configuration
The runway orientation at Site 5 is northwest-southeast (12-30), which
is the second most desirable alignment. This runway orientation
provides 86.67 percent annual wind coverge with a 10.5-knot crosswind
which is slightly higher than Site 2's wind coverage. The length of the
runway at Site 5 is shown in Figure 6-6 as 3,600 feet and the terminal
area is shown on the west side of the runway. Since Site 5 cannot
accommodate the most desirable runway orientation (northeast-southwest),
it received a rating of 3 in the Airport Configuration category.
B. Surroundln~ Land Use/Buffer Zones
As can be seen from Figure 6-6, the clear zone on the north end of the
runway lies almost entirely over water, which is a very desirable
situation. The other clear zone encompasses undeveloped land east of
6-20
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
!
t
i
SOUTHOLD-841611
~~.~ ..
Cu~
Figure 6-5
Sllfi 5
~irport Sito Soloetion/
SOURCE: NEW YORK STATE OEPAET~ENT OF TRANSPORTATION. ,.8, Master Plan Study
ESE, 1984.
!
I
6-21
I
I
i
i
I
I
I
I
'i"." ' · ° ~'/~ ' ' · ' "" .~ '-PROPER~Y LINE
~ ~ ~: "''' :'"" ']";'"' ~ UTILITY STRUgTURE
~ A)RPORT. ~ ~
g'~ (~'_]~L--~ .... ~-~+ ..... ~--~v-' .................
'- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~WER LINE TO BE
Figure 6-6 SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK
SITE PLAN-SITE 5 Airport Site Selection/
Master Plan Study
I
I
6-22
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
i
I
I
!
I
SOLrl'HHOLI~4-DT.1/SOUTHOLDI.16
6/10/85
the proposed property line and Route 48. The clear zone associated with
Runway 30 does not include any land south of Route 48. There are two
overhead lines situated along both sides of Route 48: On the north side
is a 40-foot-high telephone line, and to the south is a 50-foot-high,
69 kV power line. Based on a 20:1 approach slope to Runway 30 with a
runway length of 3,600 feet, neither of these lines constitute
obstructions. Since Site 5 would have authority over most of its clear
zones, with the remainder being undeveloped, it was awarded a 4 in this
C. Proximity of Residential Land
Site 5 is reasonably well isolated from residential development. It is
approximately one mile west of the development on Henry's Lane, which is
the only concentrated residential development in the area. There are
some scattered homes west of the site along Bridge Lane. There is one
farmhouse and a number of utility structures (i.e. barn, garage, shed)
on the north side of the Route 48. Three structures (two-story
farmhouse, a hen house and a garage) are located on a 40,000-square foot
parcel that is notched out of the proposed airport property, as shown in
Figure 6-6. The owners of this parcel have publicly stated that their
property is not for sale; however the need to acquire this land is not
considered necessary in order to develop Site 5.
As can be seen from Figure 6-6, a number of other utility-type
structures are situated adjacent to the above-mentioned parcel, but are
physically located on the parcel that comprises Site 5. According to
the most recent survey of the property conducted on July 7, 1969,
included among these structures are two large barns, a garage, and two
sheds. Additionally, two shacks are situated along the western edge of
the property. However, none of these structures are required to be
relocated based on the runway alignment shown in Figure 6-6. There is
an abandoned barn that is situated in the Runway 30 clear zone, which
will need to be demolished.' Since concentrated areas of residential
development are not present near Site 5 and only one unused utility
structure needs to be removed, it received a 4 (Excellent) in this
category.
6-23
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
/
I
I
!
SOUTt-~IOLD84-DT. 1 / SOUTHOLD1.17
6/lO/85
D. Proximity of Farmland Preservation
There are some lands which are presently in the Farmland Preservation
Program in proximity to Site 5. There is presently one parcel about one-
half mile east o~ Site 5 which is in the program. Three other parcels
adjacent to and west of this parcel (which also abuts Site 5) have been
offered for inclusion in the Farmland Preservation Program. This is an
ideal situation because it would provide an excellent buffer between the
only sizable residential development (Henry's Lane) and the site. There
are two other parcels that are presently in the program: one south of
Route 48 and west of the clear zone, the other south of the railroad
tracks and north of Main Road slightly west of the extended runway
centerline. This also represents an excellent situation in that the
south approach is protected from future encroachment. Therefore the
areas that can potentially support incompatible development are
protected; in addition, the existing development has a natural buffer.
As a result, Site 5 received an Excellent rating (4) in this area.
E. Ground Access
With Site 5's proximity to Route 48, ground access to it would not be a
problem. Convenient access from all points in Town is possible. The
only improvement to the site that would be required is construction of
au exclusive airport access road, as shown in Figure 6-6. Since ground
access is so convenient, a rating of 4 was given to Site 5.
F. Development Costs
The estimated base cost of developing Site 5 is the same as Site 2
($2.475 million). Capital improvement costs not reflected in the above
figure include land acquisition, power line burial, tree clearing, and
access road construction. The owners of the one parcel (141.8 acres)
that makes up Site 5 have placed an asking price of $2,325,000 on this
land. LILCO has estimated the cost of placing the 23 kV high tension
power line that traverses Site 5 underground to be $350,000 (see
Appendix H). The preliminary estimate for constructing the airport
access road is $57,000, assuming a 1,500-foot-long road. The total
estimated cost for developing Site 5 is shown in Table 6-2. The
estimate of $5.229 million is substantially lower ($2.828 million) than
6-24
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD-T . 1/VTB6-2 . 1
6/10/85
Table 6-2. Estimated Development Costs--Site 5
Unit Total
Item Cost Cost ($)
Land Acquisition $16,400/acre $2,325,000
Power Line Burial:
23kV line $260/lin ft 350,000
Tree Clearing (6 acres) $2,500/acre 15,000
Construction of Access $ 1.90/ft2 57,000
Road (30,000 ft2)
Demolishment of Barn 0.35/ft3 7,00~
Total Site-Specific Costs
Base Estimated Cost
Total Development Cost
$2,754,000
$2,475,000
$5,229,000
I
I
I
I
i
I
Source: ESE, 1985.
I
I
6-25
I
!
I
!
I
I
I
I
SOUTHHOLD84-DT. 1 ! SOUTHOLD1 . 18
6/10/85
the estimate for Site 2. Of this total amount, $4,310,500 is eligible
for federal and state funding and $808,000 would typically be associated
with private concerns. Thus, the remaining $110,500 would be the
responsibility of the Town, which is $71,000 less than the Town's share
associated with Site 2. In light of the significantly lower total
development costs estimated for Site 5 and the resulting lower cost for
the Town, Site 5 received a rating of 3 (Very Good) in this category.
G. Environmental Impacts
The environmental impacts that are expected from developing an airport
at Site 5 are negligible. Noise and air quality impacts are essentially
non-existent at an airport the size of that being considered. Since
Site 5 is somewhat isolated from incompatible development, even single
event noise problems should not pose a serious problem. Based on this,
Site 5 was given a 4 in terms of Environmental Impacts.
6.5 RECOfR4ENDATIONS
A suu~narized comparison of the two final sites is shown in Table 6-3.
Based upon the detailed alternatives evaluation presented in Section 6.3
and reflected in Table 6-4, Site 5 surfaced as the most feasible site
for developing the Town's airport. Table 6-4 is a summary of the
evaluation results and clearly shows that Site 5 is far superior to
Site 2. If for some unforeseen reason, it is not possible to develop
Site 5 as the Southold Airport, then the alternative site would be Site
2. However, every attempt should be made to develop Site 5 as the
airport. This process should be pursued in an expeditious manner so
that any potential incompatible land uses do not materialize in the area
and so that development costs do not escalate further. It is also
recommended that the Town's Master Plan Update be revised to reflect
Site 5 as the airport capable of being upgraded to General Utility-Stage
I, so that the proper zoning is enacted. The remainder of the Airport
Site Selection/Master Plan Study will focus on producing a detailed
development plan for Site 5.
6-26
!
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
i
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-T. 1/VTB6-3.1
5/24/85
Table 6-3. Comparison of Sites 2 and 5
Site 2 Site 5
Size of Site 184.2 acres 141.8 acres
Number of Parcels 6
Runway Orientation 13-31 12-30
Wind Coverage 86.62% 86.67%
Runway Length, Width* 3600', 60' 3600', 60'
Residential Structures Relocated 5 0
Utility Structures Relocated 7 1
Total Development Costs $8.057 million $5.229 million
*Initial development plans suggest a 3,000-foot length with provisions
for an ultimate 3,600-foot runway.
Source: ESE, 1985.
I
I
6-27
!
I
I
I
I
I
SOUTHOLD85-T.I/VTB6-4.1
5/24/85
Table 6-4. Evaluation Matrix Town of Southold--Airport Site Selection
Study
Potential Airport Sites
2 5
Airport Configuration 3
Surrounding Land Use/ 4
Buffer Zone
Proximity of R~sidential Land !
Proximity of Farmland Preservation 2
Ground Access 2
Development Costs 1
Environmental Impacts 4
TOTAL
Excellent
Very Good
Good
Fair
Poor
17
Source: ESE, 1985.
3
4
4
4
4
3
4
26
APPENDICES
D- SOUTHOLD . 1/VOCAB . 1
08/17/84
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
!
-A-
AC - Advisory Circular.
ADAP - Airport Development Aid Program.
AGL - Above Ground Level.
AIA - Annual Instrument Approaches.
AIP - Airport Improvement Program.
AIR CARRIER - Aircraft operating under certificates of public convenience
and necessity issued by the CAB authorizing the performance of scheduled
air transportation over specified routes and a limited amount of non-
scheduled operations.
AIRCRAFT TYPES - An arbitrary classification system which identifies and
groups aircraft having similar operational characteristics for the
purpose of computing runway capacity.
AIR NAVIGATIONAL FACILITY - Any facility used for guiding or controlling
flight in the air or during the landing or takeoff of aircraft.
AIR ROUTE SURVEILLANCE RADAR - Long-range radar which increases the
capability of air traffic control for handling heavy enroute traffic. An
ARSR site is usually located at some distance from the ARTCC it serves.
Its range is approximately 200 nautical miles. Also called ATC Center
Radar.
AIR TAXI - Aircraft operated by a company or individual that performs air
transportation on a non-scheduled basis over unspecified routes usually
with light aircraft.
AIRPORT SURVEILLANCE RADAR - Radar providing position of aircraft by
azimuth and range data without elevation data. It is designed for a
range of 50 miles. Also called ATC Terminal Radar.
AIRPORT TRAFFIC AREA - Unless otherwise specifically designated, that
airspace within a horizontal radius of five statute miles from the
geographical center of any airport at which a control tower is operating,
extending from the surface up to but not including 3,000 feet above the
surface.
AIR ROUTE TRAFFIC CONTROL CENTER (ARTCC) - A facility established to
provide air traffic control service to aircraft operating on an IFR
flight plan within controlled airspace and principally during the enroute
phase of flight.
AIRSPACE - The space lying above the earth or above a certain area of
land or water which is necessary to conduct aerodynamic operations.
A-1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D-SOUTHOLD.I/VOCAB.2
08/17/84
ALP - Airport Layout Plan.
ALS - Approach Light System.
APPROACH FIX - The point from or over which final approach (IFR) to an
airport is expected.
ATC - Air Traffic Control.
ATCT - Air Traffic Control Tower.
BASED AIRCRAFT - An aircraft permanently stationed at an airport, usually
by some form of agreement between the aircraft owner and airport
management.
BASIC TRANSPORT AIRPORT - An airport designed to serve operations by
business jet aircraft.
BASIC UTILITY AIRPORT - An airport of this type is designed to
accommodate about 95 percent of the propeller aircraft fleet under
12,500 pounds.
BIT - Bituminous Asphalt Pavement.
BRL - Building Restriction Line.
-C-
CAB - Civil Aeronautics Board.
CCC - Three-letter identification for Calverton VOR facility.
CIRCLING APPROACH - A descent in an approved procedure to an airport, a
circle-to-land maneuver.
CLEAR ZONE - Inner portion of runway approach zone.
COMMUTER AIRLINE - Aircraft operated by an airline that performs
scheduled air transportation service over specified routes using light
aircraft in accordance with CAB Economic Regulation Part 298. Light
aircraft means an aircraft having 30 seats or less and a maximum payload
capacity of 7,500 pounds or less.
CONC - Portland Cement Concrete Pavement.
I
I
A-2
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
D-SOUTHOLD.I/VOCAB.3
08/17/84
CONTINENTAL CONTROL AREA - This inclues the airspace at and above
14,500 feet msl of the 48 contiguous states, the District of Columbia,
and Alaska, excluding the Alaskan peninsula west of longitude 160 degrees
west. It does not include the airspace less than 1,500 feet above the
surface of the earth nor most prohiblted or restricted areas.
CONTROL AREAS - These consist of the airspace designated as VOR Federal
Airways, additional Control Areas, and Control Area Extensions but do not
include the Continental Control Area. Control zones that do not underlie
the Continental Control Area have no upper limit. A control zone may
include one or more airports and is normally a circular area with a
radius of five statute miles and any extensions necessary to include
instrument departure and arrival paths.
CONTROL TOWER - A central operations facility in the terminal air traffic
control system consisting of a tower cab structure (including an
associated IFR room if radar-equipped) using air/ground communications
and/or radar, visual signaling, and other devices to provide safe and
expeditious movement of terminal air traffic.
CONTROL ZONES - These are areas of controlled airspace which extend
upward from the surface and terminate at the base of the Continental
Control Area. Control zones that do not underlie the Continental Control
Area have no upper limit. A control zone may include one or more
airports and is normally a circular area with a radius of five statute
miles and any extensions necessary to include instrument departure and
arrival paths.
CONTROLLED AIRSPACE - Airspace designated as Continental Control Area,
control area, control zone, or transition area within which some or all
aircraft may be subject to air traffic control.
CFR - Crash, Fire, Rescue.
DECISION HEIGHT (DH) - With respect to the operation of aircraft, this
means the height at which a decision must be made, using an ILS or PAR
instrument approach, to either continue the approach or to execute a
missed approach.
DISTANCE MEASURING EQUIPMENT (DME) - An electronic installation
established with either a VOR or ILS to provide distance information from
the facility to pilots by reception of electronic signals. It measures,
in nautical miles, the distance of an aircraft from a NAVAID.
-E-
ENROUTE - The route of flight from point of departure to point of
destination, including intermediate stops (excludes local operations).
A-3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D-SOUTHOLD. 1/VOCAB.4
08/17/84
ENROUTE AIRSPACE - Controlled airspace above and/or adjacent to terminal
airspace.
-F-
FAA - Federal Aviation Administration.
FAR - Federal Aviation Regulation.
FBO - Fixed Base Operator.
FINAL APPROACH IFR - The flight path of an aircraft which is inbound to
the airport on an approved flea1 instrument approach course, beginning at
the point of interception of that course a~d extending to the airport qr
the point where circling for landing or missed approach is executed.
FINAL APPROACH VFR - A flight path of landing aircraft in the direction
of landing along the extended runway ceeterllne from the base leg to the
runway.
FLEET MIX - The proportion of aircraft types or models expected to
operate at au airport.
FLIGHT SERVICE STATION (FSS) - A facility operated by the FAA to provide
flight assistance service.
GASP - General Aviation System Plan.
GENERAL AVIATION (GA) - Refers to all civil aircraft and operations which
are not classified as air carrier.
GENERAL UTILITY (GU) AIRPORT - An airport which is designed to
accommodate substantially all propeller-driven aircraft of less than
12,500 pounds.
GENERAL TRANSPORT (GT) AIRPORT - This airport designation is used when an
airport is forecast to support general aviation transport aircraft
between 60,000 and 175,000 pounds MGW.
GLIDE SLOPE (GS) - The vertical guidance component of an ILS.
-H-
HGRS - Hangars.
I
I
A-4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
D-SOUTHOLD. 1/VOCAB. 5
O8117184
HIGH ALTITUDE AIRWAYS - Air routes above 18,000 feet msl. These are
referred to as Jet Routes.
HIRL - High Intensity Runway Lighting.
HOLDING - A pre-determined maneuver which keeps an aircraft within a
specified airspace while awaiting further clearance.
HTO - Three-letter identifier for East Hampton VOR facility.
-I-
INSTRUMENT APPROACH - An approach conducted while the final approach fix
is below VFR minimums.
IFR - Instrument Flight Rules that govern flight procedures under IFR
conditions (limited visibility or other operational constraints).
INSTRUMENT LANDING SYSTEM (ILS) - A precision landing aid consisting of
localizer (azimuth guidance), glide slope (vertical guidance), outer
marker (final approach fix), and approach light system.
INSTRUMENT OPERATION - A landing or takeoff conducted while operating on
an instrument flight plan.
ITINERANT OPERATION - All aircraft arrivals and departures other than
local operations.
-j-
JET ROUTES - See High Altitude Airways.
-L-
LANDING DIRECTION INDICATOR - A device which visually indicates the
direction in which landings and takeoffs should be made.
LANDING MINIMUMS/IFR LANDING MINIMUMS - The minimum visibility prescribed
for landing while using an instrument approach procedure.
LAT - Latitude.
LDA - Localizer Type Directional Air - A NAVAID used for non-precision
instrument approaches with utility and accuracy comparable to a localizer
but which is not a part of a complete ILS and is not aligned with the
I
I
A-5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D-SOmOLD.1/VOCAB.6
08/17/84
LIE - Long Island Expressway.
LILCO - L0ug Island Lighting Company.
LIRPC - Long Island Regional Planning Commission.
LOC - Localizer - Part of ILS that provides course guidance to the
runway,
LONG ISLAND REGION - Area encompassed by the Counties of Nassau and
Suffolk.
LOM - Compass locator at an outer marker (part of an ILS). Also called
COMLO.
LOCAL OPERATION - Operations performed by aircraft which: (a) operate in
the local traffic pattern or within sight of the tower; (b) are known to
be departing for, or arriving from, fllght in local practice areas
located within a 20-mile radius of the control tower; or (c) execute
simulated instrument approaches or Iow passes at the airport.
LOW ALTITUDE AIRWAYS - Air routes below 18,'000 feet msl. These are
referred to as Victor Airways.
LONG - Longitude.
MAD - Three-letter identifier for Madison VOR facility.
MALS - Medium (intensity) Approach Light System.
MALSF - MALS with sequenced flashing lights.
MALSR - MALS with runway alignment indicator lights (RAILs).
MARKER BEACON - A VFR navigational aid which transmits a narrow
directional beam. It is associated with an airway or an instrument
approach.
MASTER PLAN - Long-range plan of airport development requirements.
MGW - Maximum Gross Weight.
MICROWAVE LANDING SYSTEM (MLS) - An instrument landing system operating
in the microwave spectrum which provides lateral and vertical guidance to
aircraft having compatible avionics equipment.
MILITARY OPERATION - An operation by military aircraft.
A-6
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D-SOUTHOLD.I/VOCAB.7
08/17/84
MINIMUM DESCENT ALTITUDE (MDA) - The lowest altitude, expressed in feet
above mean sea level, to which descent is authorized on final approach or
during circling-to-land maneuvering in execution of a standard instrument
approach procedure where no electronic glide slope is provided.
MIRL - Medium Intensity Runway Lighting.
MISSED APPROACH - A prescribed procedure to be followed by aircraft that
cannot complete an attempted landing at an airport.
MITL - Medium Intensity Taxiway Lighting.
MM - Middle Marker - Part of an ILS that defines a point along the glide
slope normally located at or near the point of decision height (DH).
MOA - Military Operating Area.
MOVEMENT - Synonymous with the term operation, i.e., a takeoff or a
landing.
MSL - Mean Sea Level.
NAS - NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM - The eommon system of air navigation and
air traffic control encompassio8 communications facilities, air
navigation facilities, airways, controlled airspace, special use
airspace, and flight procedures authorized by Federal Aviation
Regulations for domestic and international aviation.
NAVAID - See Air Navigation Facility
NDB - NON-DIRECTIONAL BEACON - An electronic ground station transmitting
in all directions in the L/MF frequency spectrum; provides azimuth
guidance to aircraft equipped with direction finder receivers. These
facilities are often established with ILS outer markers to provide
transition guidance to the ILS system.
NFAA - North Fork Aviation Assoeation.
NM - Nautical Mile.
NOISE ABATEMENT - A procedure for the operation of aircraft at an airport
which minimizes the impact of noise on the environs of the airport.
NON-PRECISION APPROACH PROCEDURE/NON-PRECISION APPROACH - A standard
instrument approach procedure in which no electronic glide slope is
provided.
I
I
A-7
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I·
D-SOUTHOLD. 1/VOCAB . 8
08/17/84
NOTICE TO AIRMEN/NOTAM - A notice containing information (not known
sufficiently in advance to publicize by other means) concerning the
establishment of, conditions of, or change in any component (facility,
service, or procedure or hazard in the National Airspace System) the
timely knowledge of which is essential to personnel concerned with flight
operations.
NPI - Non-precision Instrument runway marking.
NPIAS - National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems.
NYSDOT - New York State Department of Transportation.
OBSTRUCTION - Any object/obstacle exceeding the obstruction standards
specified by FAR Part 77.
OBSTRUCTION LIGHT - A light, or one of a group of lights, usually red or
white, frequently mounted on a surface structure or natural terrain to
warn pilots of the presence of an obstruction.
OM - Outer Marker - A marker beacon, which is part of an ILS, located at
or near the glide slope intercept altitude of an ILS approach.
OPERATION - An aircraft arrival at (landing) or departure from (takeoff)
an airport.
OPNS - Operations.
OUTER FIX - A point in the destination terminal area from which aircraft
are cleared to the approach fix or final approach course.
-p-
PAR - Precision Approach Radar.
PI - Precision Instrument runway marking.
POSITIVE CONTROL AREAS - Airspace wherein aircraft are required to be
operated under Instrument Flight Rules.
PRECISION APPROACH - A standard instrument approach in which an
electronic glide slope is provided.
PROHIBITED AREA - Airspace of defined dimensions identified by an area on
the surface of the earth within which flight is prohibited.
A-8
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
PU - Publicly owned airport.
PVT - Privately owned airport.
D-SOUTHOLD.1/VOCAB.9
08/17/84
-R-
RAIL - Runway Alignment Indicator Lights.
RASP - Regional Airport System Plan.
REIL - Runway End Identifier Lights.
RELIEVER AIRPORT - An airport which, when certain criteria are met,
relieves the aeronautical demand on a high density air carrier airport.
RESTRICTED AREAS - Airspace of defined dimensions identified by an area
on the surface of the earth within which the flight of aircraft, while
not wholly prohibited, is subject to restrictions.
RNAV - Radar navigation.
ROTATING BEACON - A visual NAVAID displaying flashes of white and/or
colored light used to indicate location of an airport.
RUNWAY SAFETY AREA - An area symmetrical about the runway centerline and
extending beyond the ends of the runway which shall be free of obstacles
as specified.
RVR - Runway Visual Range.
RW and R/W - Runway.
-S-
SALS - Short Approach Light System.
SDF - Simplified Directional Facility landing aid providing pattern
direction.
SEGMENTED CIRCLE - An airport aid identifying the traffic pattern
direction.
SEPARATION MINIMA - The minimum lougitudinal, lateral, or vertical
distances by which aircraft are spaced through the application of air
traffic control procedures.
(S)SALS - Simplied Short Approach Light System.
A-9
I
I
I
I
I
i·
D-SOUTHOLD.I/VOCAB.10
08/17/84
SSALF - Simplified Short Approach Light System with Sequenced Flashing
lights.
STOL - Short Takeoff and Landing.
STRAIGHT-IN APPROACH - A descent in an approved procedure in which the
final approach course alignment and descent gradient permit authorization
of straight-in landing minimums.
SYSTEM PLAN - A representation of the aviation facilities required to
meet the in~nediate and future air transportation needs and to achieve the
overall goals.
-T-
TACAN - Tactical Air Navigation.
TERMINAL AIRSPACE - The controlled airspace normally associated with
aircraft departure and arrival patterns to/from airports within a
term/ual system and between adjacent terminal systems in which tower
enroute air traffic control service is provided.
TEEMINAL CONTROL AREA (TCA) - This consists of controlled airspace
extending upward from the surface or higher to specified altitudes within
which all aircraft are subject to positive air traffic control
procedures,
TERMINAL RADAR SERVICE AREA (TRSA) - This area identifies the airspace
surrounding MacArthur Airport wherein Air Traffic Control provides radar
vectoring, sequencing, and separation on a full-time basis for all IFR
and participating VFR aircraft. Although pilot participation is urged,
it is not mandatory within the TRSA.
TERPS - Terminal Instrument Procedures.
T-HANGAR - A T-shaped aircraft hangar which provides shelter for a single
airplane.
THRESHOLD - The physical end of runway pavement.
TOUCH-AND-CO OPERATION - An operation in which the aircraft lands and
begins takeoff roll without stopping.
TRAFFIC PATTERN - The traffic flow that is prescribed for aircraft
landing at, taxiing on, amd taking off from an airport. The usual
components of a traffic pattern are upwind leg, crosswind leg, downwind
leg, and final approaeh.
TRANSIENT OPERATIONS - An operation performed at an airport by an
aircraft that is based at another airport.
A-10
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D-SOUTHOLD.I/VOCAB.11
08/17/84
TVOR - Terminal Very High Frequency Omnirange Radio Station.
TW and T/W - Taxiway.
UItF - Ultra High Frequency.
UNCONTROLLED AIRSPACE - That portion of the airspace that has not been
designated as Continental Control Area, control area, control zone,
terminal control area, or transition area and within which ATC has
neither the authority nor the responsibility for exercising control over
air traffic.
UNICOM - Radio communications station which provides pilots with
p~rtinent airport information (winds, weather, etc.) aC specific
a~rporCs.
USWB - United States Weather Bureau.
-V-
VASI - Visual Approach Slope Indicator providing visual glide path.
VASI-2 - Two-Box Visual Approach Slope Indicator.
VASI-4 - Four-Box Visual Approach Slope Indicator.
VASI-12 - Twelve-Box Visual Approach Slope Indicator.
VECTOR - A heading issued to an aircraft to provide navigational guidance
by radar.
VFR - Visual Flight Rules that govern flight procedures in good weather.
VFR AIRCRAFT - An aircraft conducting flight in accordance with Visual
Flight Rules.
VHF - Very High Frequency.
VICTOR AIRWAYS - See Low Altitude Airways.
V/STOL - Vertical/Short Takeoff and Lauding.
VTOL - Vertical Takeoff and Landing (includes but is not limited to
helicopters). ' ,
I
I
A-il
D-SOUTHOLD.I/VOCAB.12
08/17/84
WARNING AREA - Airspace which may contain hazards to non-participating
aircraft in internatlonal airspace.
WIND-CONE (WIND SOCK) - Conical wind direction indicator.
WIND TEE - A visual device used to advise pilots about wind direction at
an airport.
A-12
!
I
I
!
I
I
i
i
!
m
I
I
I
m
m
AIRPORT ACTIVITY QUESTIONNAIRE
FOR A SITE SELECTION STUDY - TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
1. NAME (OPTIONAL): i
2. HOME ADDRESS:
· (PLEASE MENTION AT LEAST CITY OR TOWN)
3. NUMBER OF FLIGHT HOURS LOGGED DURING PAST 12 MONTHS:
4. LICENSE AND RATINGS:
. STUDENT
mi. PRIVATE
COMMERCIAL
ATR
DO YOU OWN YOUR OWN AIRCRAFT?
MULTI-ENGINE
INSTRUMENT
FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR
ROTORCRAFT
IF YES, WHAT iS .THE TYPE AND WHERE IS IT BASED?
6. IF YOU DO NOT OWN AN AIRPL~ANE, WHAT AIRPORT DO YOU CURRENTLY DO
MOST OF YOUR FLYING?
7. PLEASE RATE THE FOLLOWING FACILITIES AT THE AIRPORT YOU USE MOST
OFTEN:
A. FLIGHT SCHOOL RATES: HIGH AVERAGE LOW
B. MAINTENANCE RATES: HIGH AVERAGE LOW
C. FUEL COSTS: __ HIGH AVERAGE LOW
D. AIRCRAFT STORAGE/
PARKING FEES: .... HIGH - AVERAGE .._~LOW
E. FSO SERVICES: . EXCELLENT GOOD FAIR POOR
F. NAVAIDS: ,, EXCELLENT GOOD FAIR POOR
G. HANG. AR
FACILITIES: EXCELLENT _ GOOD FAIR POOR
I
!
I
I
!
I
H. PAVEMENT
CONDITIONS: .... EXCELLENT GOOD FAIR POOR
I. SNOW REMOVAL: . EXCELLENT GOOD FAIR POOR
J. GEOGRAPHIC
LOCATION: . EXCELLENT . GOOD , FAIR POOR
8. WHAT TYPE OF AIRCRAFT DO YOU NORMALLY USE AT THAT AIRPORT?
SINGLE ENGINE 1-3 PLACE
SINGLE ENGINE 4+ PLACE
MULTI-ENGINE <12,500 LBS
· MULTI-ENGINE >12,500 LBS
· OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) ....
9. WHY DO YOU USE YOUR BASE AIRPORT RATHER THAN ANOTHER AIRPORT?
TURBOPROP <12,500 LBS
TURBOPROP >12,500 LBS
TURBOJET
ROTORCRAFT
io.
IN TERMS OF TRIP PURP~)SE FROM YOUR BASE AIRPORT, PLEASE MARK THE
.PRIMARY SOURCES OF YOUR FLIGHT ACTIVITY:
BUSINESS
PERSONAL
STUDENT
INSTRUCTOR
AIR TAXI OPERATIONS (PASSENGERS)
'AIR TAXI OPERATIONS (CARGO)
OTHER (SPECIFY)
ii.
THERE ARE TWO TYPES OF OPERATIONS - ITINERANT AND LOCAL. ITINERANT
OPERATIONS ARE THOSE FLIGHTS FOR WHICH THE FLIGHT EITHER BEGINS OR
ENDS AT AN AIRPORT OTHER THAN YOUR BASE AIRPORT. ALL OTHER OPERA-
TIONS ARE CONSIDERED LOCAL (I.E., TOUCH AND GO'S ARE LOCAL
OPERATIONS).
WITH THESE DEFINITIONS IN MIND, PLEASE INDICATE THE ESTIMATED NUMBER
OF OPERATIONS (LANDINGS AND TAKEOFFS) WHICH YOU PERFORMED DURING THE
PAST 12 MONTHS AT YOUR B~'S'E'AIRPORT:
I2.
LOCAL ITINERANT
IF THE TOWN OF SOUI'HOLD DECIDES TO BUILD THE AIRPORT ON THE NORTH
FORK, WOULD YOU CONSIDER RELOCATING AND USING THIS AIRPORT FOR YOUR
FLYING NEEDS?
I
I
I
I
I
I
13.
WHAT WOULD YOUR REQUIREMENTS BE FOR THE FOLLOWING FACILITIES IF
AN AIRPORT WERE BUILT ON THE NORTH FORK?
- RUNWAY LENGTH
NAVAIDS
AIRCRAFT PARKING (I.E., T-HANGARS, COVENTIONAL HANGARS, TIE-
DOWN
MAINTENANCE FACILITIES
FBO SERVICES (I.E., FUEL, FLIGHT INSTRUCTION RENTAL, CHARTER)
i.
TERMINAL FACILITIES {I.E., PILOT LOUNGE, RESTAURANT, VENDING
MACHINES, REST ROOMS, UNICOM, PHONE TO FSS, CHARTS)
m
m
APPENDIX C
BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL QUESTIONNAIRE
BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL QUESTIONNAIRE
FOR A SITE SELECTION SllJDy
TOWN OF SOUlq~OLD
Would your business or the firms you do business with use an airport
in the Town of Southold for .business purposes?
If Yes, what destinations would.you/they fly to most often? What
type of 'aircraft..would you/they use (i.e., charter, private, air
taxi).
Does your business ~r fires .you do business with currently own or
plan to buy its own aircraft?
If Yes, what type aircraft.
How often would you or the firms you do business with plan on using
an airport in Southold on a monthly basis?
Would your use of the airport, or the firms you do business with use
of the airport, vary accordinq to season?
Do you feel an airport in the Town of Southold would enhance your
business/ ·
Would it be advantageous to your business to have one day business
trips which can be more easily accommodated by an airport in the
· Town of Southold?
If you have any questions concerning this questionnaire and the Airport
Site Selection Study, please contact: David Spohn, Technical Advisory
Committee, Downstate General Aviation System Plan - 516/323-3543 or
Paul Puckli, Project Manager - 813/886-6G72.
¢-1
SOUTHOLD85-DT.I/VTB4-18.1
6111/85
Appendix D. General Aviation Aircraft Movements Model
TOTt = ~ ~ BAMj~t + TAMj~t
k=l j=l
Given:
BAMj~t = BACj~t * PFTj~t * MPHj~t * PBAj~t USEj?t
TAMj~t = 1.50 * BAMj~t K = 1
Where:
TOTt = Total aircraft movements during same period (t).
BAM;ktJ, = Based aircraft movements In' flight type (1) and aircraft type
(j) during year (t).
TAMj~t = Transient aircraft movement in flight (k) and aircraft type (j)
during year (t).
BAC = Based aircraft.
HRS
PFT
MPH
Hours flown by based aircraft.
Percent of hours flown.
Movements per hour.
PBA
USEa
= Percent of movements conducted at base airport.
Given usage mix (a);
Aircraft type (j):
Flight type (k):
1 - single-engine 1-3 seats,
2 - single-engine 4+ seats,
3 - multi-engine ~12,500 lbs.,
4 - multi-engine >12,500 lbs.,
5 - turboprop <12,500 lbs.,
6 - turboprop ~12,500 lbs.,
7 - turbojet,
8 - rotor,
9 - other; and
1 - itinerant flight,
2 - local flight.
Source:
PRC/ESE, 1984.
D-1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SOIJTHOLD-T. l/APPE. I
APPENDIX E
Unit Costs for Airport Development
Runway
Taxiway Construction
Aircraft Parking Apron Construction
Runway Lights Installation
Taxiway Lights Installation
Drainage Construction
Fuel Tank Construction
Road/Parking Lot Construction
Conventional Hangar Construction
T-Hangar Construction
Terminal Building Construction
Earthwork (cut and fill)
$190/lin ft
$105/lin ft
$2.50/ft2
$45/lin ft
$90/lin ft
$35/lin ft
$52,500/fuel tank
$1.90/ft2
$23/ft2
$12/ft2
$35/ft2
$5/cubic yard (yd3)
Source: ESE, 1984.
E-1
m
m
m m m m
m
m
m
m
SOU1TNDLD-T. I/H'IBII~. 1
6/11/85
A~raft
T~
Total
UPS
Day Night Day Night Day Night Day N~ght Day To~ch
T/o r/o T/O T/O Lm Lm L~ Ln~ an~ ~bes
RIB RI3 R31 R31 PI3 RI3 R31 R31 I{31
Total
Daily Operat~om
1988
SMC.,A
TEGA Taxi
'IUrALS
1993
S~
TEC~ Taxi
$~
~ ~axi
20O4.
SECA.
~ Taxi
16~
9828
2672B
2O3O{)
4OO
125~
33258
24200
1000
15834
41034.
29600
107(30
20202
11200
13800
16800
21000
6.97 0.77 6.97 0.77 6.97 0.77 6.97 0.77
6.06 0.67 6.06 0.67 6.06 0.67 6.06 0.67
13.02 1.45 13.02 1.45 13.02 1.45 13.02 1.45
8.26 0.92 8.26 0.92 8.26. 0.92 8.26 0.92
7.99 0.89 7.99 0.89 7.99 0.89 7.99 0.89
16.25 1.81 16.25 1.81 16.25 1.81 16.25 1.81
9.74 1.(~3 9.74 1.08 9.74 1.08 9.74 1.08
10.38 1.15 10.38 1.15 10.38 1.15 10.38 1.15
20.12 2.24 20.12 2.24 20.12 2.24 20.12 2.24
11.77 . 1.31 11.77 1.31 ll.77 1.31 11.77 1.31
19.05 2.12 19.05 2.12 19.05 2.12 19.05 2.12
30.8~ 3.42 30.82 3.42 30.82 3.42 30.82 3.42
7.67
7.67
9.45
9.45
11.51
11.51
14.38
14.38
73.23
91.12
112.42
165.76
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX G
SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD RESOLUTION
ON CONDEMNATION OF LAND
!
!
Paul S. l u~
Tam[ a, [ o~
Dear Mr. Puckli:
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
February 7, 1985
Town ilall. 53095 Main Ro:~d
P.O. Box 728
Southold, New York 11971
~516} 765-1801
Paul S. Puckli, Senior Aviation Specialist
Environmental Science and Engineering, Inc.
5406 Hoover Boulevard, Suite D
Airport Service Center
Tampa, Florida 33614
In response to your letter of February 1, 1985 to Supervisor
Murphy, relative to the Town Board's position on condemnation for
airport purposes, the following resolutions were adopted:
"RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby
state their official position on the following point:
I. The Southold Town Board is unwilling to condemn the necessary
land needed to develop a new Town-owned airport if such land is not
available for purchase."
"RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby
state their official position on the following point:
2. The Southold Town Board is unwilling to condemn the existing
Mattituck Airport to develop it as the Town-owned airport if it is not
available for purchase."
Very truly yours,
·
Judith T. Terry
Southold Town Clerk
I
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
APPENDIX H
CORRESPONDENCE FROM LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO.
ON BURIAL OF TRANSMISSION LINES
(LILCO)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Verbal estimate provided by
LILCO's Engineering Department
WRITTEN CONFIRMATION TO FOLLOW
H-1
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX I
MMMORANDUM ON DRAFT
MASTER PLAN UPDATE SUGARY REPORT
AND PROPOSED BONING REGULATIONS
., ,; 4: RECEIVED BY
I" . ~. ---. ,--.. - · SOUIflOLD TOi'i~l F~NI~IG BOARD
j i'HHHW
Raymond, Parish, Pine & Weiner, Inc. 35 Worth Ave, P.O~ Box 5486A, Hamde~, Connecticut. 06518-0486 203/248-630g
I Memorandum
I April 29, 1985
I TO= Southold Planning Board
· Supervisor Murphy and Town Board Members
I iM. P~PW, Inco
i RE. ~ster plan U~late Sunmmry Report: and Proposed gonin~ Re~/ulations
This memorandum accompanies a ~raft of the Master Plan Update Summary Re~ort and
I Proposed Zoning Regulations. With regard to the zoning provisions, this memo
reflects revisions made to the draft of Articles I - XIV that was submitted to
iO the Planning and Town Boards in January.
.
The Plan Summary reflects all of the Planning Board's latest revisions to the
draft that was first prepared for the public meetings in December 1983 and
February 1984.
I
I
I
I
I
I
The Master Plan Update Stumnary is essentially the Planning Board's
reco~unendations to the Town based on the work of its consultants and input from
the public. This re~or~ includes the goals of the Plan, descriptions of the
land use proposals, a discussion of hamlet studies and an outline of future
steps. Plan maps for the four major h~mlet areas have been included within the
draft, but the Plan Map for the whole Town is being shown at a scale of 1" =
1,600' and will be reduced following our April 30 joint meeting.
The attached draft of the proposed revised Town Zoning Ordinance has evolved out
of a process that involved a Dumber of draft proposals, draft maps, discussions
with the Supervisor, Town Board members, Zoning Board of Appeals Chairman,
Building Inspector and other Town officials and a series of meetings with the
Planning Board to examine plan objectives, land use proposals, zoning
designations, and a variety of supplementary regulations. The Proposed Zoning
Regulations include sections on Definitions and Zoning Districts as well as a
proposed Use Table, Lot Size and Density Tables, and Bulk Tables and various
procedural and administrative sections and sections on supplementary
regulations. The Planning Board has reviewed the articles within the revisions
dealing with Districts, Use and Bulk Schedules and Site Plan Review and these
portions of the draft directly reflect their comments.
I
I
I-1
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Generally, new or revised wording is underlined. For those articles (~ncluding
districts) that are being revised, the changes are underlined and significant
deletions are mentioned in this cover memorandum. Proposed new articles are so
indicated by a note showing which, if any, sections of the current zoning
ordinances have been incorporated. The new articles, however, do not contain
underlining.
There are a number of new and revised definitions to reflect items included in
the districts, definitions that needed clarification, and some that were
suggested during earlier discussions.
Each article now has a "Purpose" section in order to establish the basic policy
and rationale and what it is intended to accomplish.
The proposed zoning map has been prepared at the larger 1" = 800' scale.
Reduced versions (1"~ 1600'), the scale of the Master Plan map, accompany this
draft.
Revision of Districts
We feel that it is important to begin the review of the new and revised
regulations with an examination of the districts, particularly to determine how
they relate to the Master Plan objectives.
The proposed ordinance has a number of new districts designed to implement
specific policies included in the Master Plan.
The Agricultural Conservation (AC) and proposed Low Density Residential R-80
Districts are the basic 2-acre zones. The AC district includes mandatory
clustering, whereas the Planning Board may or may not require clustering in the
R-80; but the AC District is otherwise distinguished from the R-80 District only
by its name and location in areas to be given priority for agricultural
conservation as indicated in the Master Plan.
The Low Density Residential R-120, R-200 and R-400 Districts are all new and are
basically the same as the R-80 except that minimum lot areas are 3 acres (Fisher
Island), 5 acres (Orient) and 10 acres (Robins Island).
The R-40 District is a proposed one acre minimum residential district that is
mapped in areas already predominantly developed or committed to one acre lots or
less.
The Hamlet Density (HD) District, which essentially replaces the "M" zone and
can include various types of residential use, may be applied by the Town Board
upon petition only if certain criteria are satisfied, particularly provision of
utilities and proximity to hamlet centers. A major objective of the zone and a
criteria to be considered in its application, is the provision of moderate cost
housing. The following densities may be permitted in HD areas once mapped by
Town Board.
If public water service and sewage treatment were not available, the
maximum density permitted would be two units per acre or 20,000 square
I-2
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
foot lots for a conventional subdivision (or by special exception
permit multifamily dwellings at the same density.) T~is could vary
based on property characteristics and County approval.
If public water and sewage treatment were available, then areas
designated as Hamlet Density could be developed at densities up to
four units per acre.
The Resort Residential A District is new and is basically the same as the R-80
zone except that it permits low density resort, seasonal and motel and hotel
development particularly in waterfront areas consistent with the surrounding low
density and agricultural development. In addition, the new Resort Residential B
allows recreational marinas and a higher density of residential development.
This district is intended basically for more intensively developed waterfront
areas, but does not include businesses (see Marine-Business District).
The RR-B District is also applied to some. sites that are now zoned "M"
originally to acco~m~odate motels, hotels, seasonal housing and second homes.
Year-round residential use is really a secondary purpose.
Residential Office (RO) District is a proposed new district that permits profes-
sional and limited business offices in areas that are a transition between the
hamlet centers, outlying business areas and low density residential areas.
Residential density is basically one acre.
The Limited Business (LB) District is new and is intended to allow very limited
business activity (antiq~le shops, wineries, bed and breakfast, professional
offices) that are appropriate for limited outlying and low density areas. The
primary purpose of this district is to accommodate areas currently zoned for
business, but which in accordance with the Master Plan policy are not intended
to expand or be intensively developed. To do so would create strip development
and inappropriate uses in agricultural and low density areas.
On the other hand, the Hamlet Business (HB) District is a modified version of
the present B-Light Business zone and allows an array of business, office,
specialty and residential uses at higher densities (if utilities are available)
in the hamlet centers.
General Commercial District is essentially the present B-1 District and is
intended for auto-oriented uses, commercial uses that are more land-extensive
and not as dependent on pedestrian traffic, and commercial uses that are not
necessarily appropriate in a hamlet center. This district is applied along
1An earlier version of this district had a base density of 1 per acre and
permitted 2 with water al~d 4 with water and sewer. Another earlier provision
was to allow additional density in exchange for the provision of moderate cost
housing. If the moderate cost housing is not mandated, the incentive would
assure that at least a portion of the housing is set aside for low and moderate
income families.
I-3
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
major roads (basically Route 25) near the hamlets and near the Village of
Greenport.
Two special marine districts are proposed. The Marine Recreation M-Rec District
is intended to encourage and accommodate recreation-oriented marine activities
in selected waterfront locati6ns. Motels would only be permitted by special
exception if part of a water-related development. The important priority is
maintaining and expanding access to the water whether it is public or generally
available as a public commercial use. This theme is also evident in the Marine
Business MB District.
The Marine Business (MB) category is similar except that it can accommodate more
intensive marine businesses such as boatyards, commercial fishing stations and
free-standing restaurants, as well as residential development which is secondary
to and part of a water-related or marine-oriented use.
Two industrial categories, Light Industrial Park/Office Park (LI0) and Light
Industrial (LI) are included. Both of these are similar to the existing "C"
Light Industrial category. The primary distinction between the two proposed
districts is the intensity of use. The former requires larger parcels and low
coverage and is intended for industrial areas away from the more congested
hamlet areas.
Many inappropriate and environmentally undesirable uses now included in the
General Industrial District (C-1) are proposed to be eliminated. Further, the
way that the present C-1 is written, virtually all uses except residences but
including businesses are permitted in the C-1 category.
Since we now have specific marine districts, marine uses are eliminated from the
industrial district, thus avoiding the possibility of unwanted industrial uses
along the water.
Other Changes
The proposed ordinance retains the existing format since it is basically sound
and people are used to working with it.
Summary use tables, expanded minimum lot, density and bulk tables as well as
expanded parking and loading schedules are added.
Special Exceptions - The draft reflects a proposed shift of responsibility for
special exceptions from the Zoning Board of Appeals to the Planning Board.
Special Exceptions generally involve planning decisions in that they are con-
cerned with land use relationships. The ZBA can focus on appeals, variances and
matters of interpretation.
Air~ort - This is left in the Industrial District requiring a 100 acre minimum
site and is limited to a Basic Utility - Stage II airport.
Shopping Center - As a specific use this is not included, however, the uses that
go into a shopping center are included in HB and B-1 Districts and there is
nothing specified to prevent a shopping center. In fact when compared to a
I-4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
strip of individual stores, a shopping center is preferable in terms of being
able to li~t curb cuts, achieve better design etc. However, unless an
incentive is provided such as increased coverage or decreased parking or a
disincentive is included for conventional development such as requiring very
large lots, there is little reason to distinguish shopping center as a specific
use, except possibly to permit joint use of parking, thus allowing more
landscaped space.
Marine Uses in Business Districts - Since we now have proposed a specific marine
district, uses such as marinas and fishing stations are eliminated from business
districts which, as a rule, will not be located on the water.
Bed and Breakfast - This use i~ proposed in the Limited Business District
applicable to structures existing prior to the date that zoning was in effect.
They would also be permitted in those districts that allow hotels and motels.
The ordinance could be further revised to apply to houses that are at least 50
years old. This would serve to limit its applicability and assist in preserving
older houses.
Signs - Generally, this draft suggests reducing the size of signs. While we
opted to leave the basic sign provisions in each district comparable to the
current sections, there is a general article on signs addressing permit
requirements, design guidelines and enforcement provisions. Also, roof signs
are eliminated.
Protection of Natural Features and Landscapinq - Two new articles have been
added to further emphasize the importance of protecting natural coastal features
and enhancing the natural beauty of the land through maintenance and appropriate
landscaping.
Miscellaneous - While new or added uses are noted or underlined several sp6cific
uses are eliminated or moved:
Tourist camps are excluded from the Hamlet Business District.
Non-farm labor camps are not included in this draft.
Maximum Coverage Chan~es - Incorporated in the bulk tables are several changes
in coverage requirements:
Reductions in the maximum coverage have been recommended in the
residential districts requiring a lot size of three acres or more.
20% coverage in these districts is unrealistic and might encourage the
development of large buildings, particularly for permitted non-
residential uses.
The two proposed industrial districts permit lower coverage than is
currently allowed in order to reduce impacts of industrial use and to
provide for careful site planning (LIO maximum coverage ~ 20% and LI
maximum coverage = 30%).
I-5
II
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
The Hamlet Business District maximum coverage has been increased to
40% to reflect more intensive uses that are appropriate in these
pedestrian-oriented hamlet central business areas. For the most part,
existing development is already at this density.
Coverage has been increased slightly (20% to 25%) for the Hamlet
Density Residential District and the Resort Residential B District to
allow for greater variety in development patterns. This will still
permit sufficient land for landscaping, open space and parking.
Issues For Further Discussion
There are several known issues that are addressed in the text, but may need
further Town action to respond to the needs identified. This action may take a
variety of forms in addition to revisions to the Zoning Ordinance.
Roadside Farm Stands - The revised ordinance includes the basic provisions of
the present ordinance with some reorganization and a limitation on products to
be sold to only those grown on the premises.
Accessor~ Apartments - Suggested provision for accessory apartments as a special
exception use is included in all residential districts, with rigorous restric-
tions. These include owner-occupancy of the structure, applicability to exist-
ing structures (cut off date currently recommended to be 4/9/57). This date
could be changed to one closer to the present, such as January 1, 1984, which
would still prevent the construction of new two-family homes on smaller lots.
An earlier date could be used to limit establishment of apartments and preserve
old houses.
Two-Family Houses - The current policy of allowing two-family homes as a special
exception on parcels double the size of the single family minimum is retained.
However, two-family homes would be permitted on smaller lots if water and/or
sewer is available in some districts, e.g., the Hamlet Density Residential
District, but always at twice the land area required for a single-family house
in that district.
Moderate Cost/Lower Cost Housing
This is partially addressed in (a) provision for accessory apartments and (b)
increased density (to four units) in Hamlet Density. It may be very appropriate
to go beyond these zoning measures to provide housing for older and younger
residents of the Town who have incomes below Southold's median income level.
E.g., local housing and/or building codes should be checked to determine if
modular housing can be approved since this is a potential source of moderately
priced housing. Perhaps in some cases incentives could be used such as reduced
dwelling unit size or higher densities than four units per acre.
Trailers-Mobile Homes/Mobile Home Parks
This is a complex issue. In its definition of a dwelling unit, however, the
Town specifically excludes house trailer. Therefore, a house trailer cannot be
put on a lot as a house. This draft does not include a specific change, except
that in cases of natural emergencies or construction of a building, a trailer
could be located on a site by permit of the Town Board.
I-6
Tourist camp and recreation vehicle parks are allowed by special exceptions of
the Town Board under Chapter 88 of the Town Code. These house trailers are
allowed in certain areas for seasonal or recreation use. These provisions are
referenced in the zoning ordinance.
Individual house trailers are subject to special permit of the Town Board
anywhere in the town, which essentially provides an opportunity to locate one in
any district, except not as a dwelling unit. It may be difficult to sustain
this position. This matter should be discussed further in order to assure
internal consistency (i.e. a house trailer or mobile home are not dwelling
units) and a sustainable position.
Limitin9 Conversions of Hotel or Motel Units - A section in the supplementary
regulations, limits conversion of hotel or motel units to condominium and
cooperative units to location in residential districts. There is some desire to
be more restrictive, i.e., limiting conversion in residential districts as well,
but there is also some question about whether this could be enforced if dwelling
unit livable area and density requirements were met.
Wineries - The draft zoning ordinance has maintained the provision that wineries
could sell wine produced from grapes grown on the premises and added the
provision that grapes also could be grown within the Town. Wineries would be
allowed in the agricultural conservation and Low Density R-40, R-80, R-120,
R-200 and R-~00Districts, as well as the Resort Residential A, Limited .Business
and General Business Districts.
I-7