HomeMy WebLinkAboutDraft of Heliport Master Planning Study - March 1983 DRAFT /236y
1 drY aERrcs
� coP
1
1
� HELIPORT MASTER
PLANNINC STUDY
1
City Huntington Beach
March 1983 CH2M mmmm HILL
1
i
HUNTINGTON BEACH
HELIPORT MASTER PLAN STUDY
i
for
' THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
CALIFORNIA
1
by
CH2M HILL
1
' MARCH 1983
tN16513 .AO
1
' CONTENTS
' THE NEED FOR A HELIPORT I-1
' BACKGROUND TO THE PLANNING
DECISION II-1
HELIPORT PLAN III-1
' ECONOPICS A11D CAPITAL COSTS IV-1
' ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT V-1
' APPENDIX I - GLOSSARY
' APPENDIX II - PLANTS
' APPENDIX III - WILDLIFE
' APPENDIX IV - DRAINAGE CALCULATION SHEETS
I
1 '
1
' i
' The preparation of this document was financed in
' part through a planning grant from the Federal
Aviation Administration as provided under
Section 13 of the Airport and Airway Development
' Act of 1970 , as amended. The contents of this
report reflect the views of CH2M HILL, INC. , and
' do not necessarily reflect the official views or
policy of the FAA. Acceptance of this report by
' the FAA does not in any way constitute a
commitment on the part of the United States to
' participate in any development depicted therein
nor does it indicate that the proposed development
is environmentally acceptable in accordance with
' applicable public laws.
ii
1
Chapter I
THE NEED FOR A HELIPORT
The City of Huntington Beach has been a pioneer in the use
of helicopters for law enforcement. When the City first
' began using Hughes helicopters in 1969, there were no facil-
ities within the City to accommodate the new craft.
' Operations were conducted from nearby Long Beach Airport.
To facilitate local operations , a portion of the Central
' Park property which was located on an old landfill site was
adapted for police helicopter use. Later, a hangar,
' touchdown pad, pad lighting, and fuel tanks were installed.
The use of these aircraft proved to be an important adjunct
to the surveillance and control of traffic in the City,
observations against crime areas , etc. As the Hughes
aircraft became exhausted from use , military surplus Bell
' Helicopters were added to the inventory. Today, the Cite
operates four Bell Model 47 helicopters.
' In the latter 1970 ' s and early 1980 ' s, the heliport located
' behind the pistol range experienced severe soil settling
problems. As the soil settled and slumped, the hangar was
warped out of shape and became unusable. The touchdown pad
' sloped noticeably towards the west, and the fuel tanks had
I-1
to be removed, repaired, and reset. Since the onsite office
was unusable, a trailer was moved to the site and operations
' were conducted from this facility.
' At this point a question was raised about establishing a
heliport which met the planning criteria of the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) . It was also discovered that
a heliport open for public use might qualify for Federal aid
in its acquisition and development. This, in turn, raised
' more questions which needed to be discussed before a defini-
tive decision could be reached.
1 . What is the FAA criteria to qualify for Federal
' aid?
The criteria are fairly simple. The City should
1 own the facility and the heliport should be open
and available to the general public for helicopter
' usage. The FAA' s publication Heliport Design
Guide states "The term 'public use heliport' is
' applied to any heliport that is open to the
general public and does not require prior
permission of the owner to land. However, the
' extent of facilities provided may limit operation
to helicopters of a specific size of weight. "
2. How would the City obtain this Federal aid?
' The City apply could a 1 to the FAA for a grant to
develop the heliport. Federal Air Regulation
Part 152 states: "The program provides grant
' funds to public agencies such as states,
territories, counties, municipalities, or other
tax-supported organizations to plan, construct, or
' improve a public-use airport. A project for
I-2
1
' heliport development may be approved if it is
listed or could be listed in the current National
' Airport System Plan (HASP) , which identified
locations and project development considered
necessary to the national airport system. "
3. Is Huntington Beach listed in the NASP?
Yes, Huntington Beach is listed in the NASP as
' requiring a "general aviation" type of facility.
The heliport would qualify as a "general aviation"
' facility.
' 4 . Who would use the heliport?
Unless there were some fair and nondiscriminatory
' limitation, the heliport would be open to all
helicopter users.
' 5. Would this include large commuter helicopters?
9 P
' It could, unless there was sufficient
' justification to limit the size or weight of the
heliport to helicopters of a smaller size.
' 6. What would commuter operations entail?
' The City would want to provide a commuter terminal
where the passengers could be processed. There
' would need to be sufficient public parking spaces
for the people, and the field area would need to
' be kept secure (fenced) . There would probably
need to be space for one--maybe two--commuter size
helicopters.
I-3
1
' 7. If there were, say, three commuter flights a day,
what size facility would be needed?
Most of the commuter carriers are using
helicopters that carry 15 to 20 passengers. A
' small terminal capable of handling this number of
enplaning and deplaning people, plus some
' visitors , would be needed. This might require a
building of about 1 ,500 square feet. Since most
' commuters would be travelling to Los Angeles
International (LAX) and connecting to other air
carriers, there would need to be ample parking
space for their cars while they travel. Assuming
an average of a 2-day stay, the parking lot should
be capable of handling up to 120 cars.
' 8. Who else could use the heliport?
' The helicopter has certain unique characteristics
which make it highly desirable to perform flights
out of limited spaces. Fire fighting, air
ambulance services, police surveillance, and
search and rescue missions are often undertaken by
governmental agencies. The business and
professional world uses helicopters for
' transportation, cargo, construction work, and even
aerial spraying.
' 9 . The site we are considering is very limited in
' size, and we need to accommodate our police
activity. Is there room for any other helicopter
activity?
With limitations , yes. The helipad (touchdown and
takeoff area) needs a certain amount of space; and
I-4
' the police facility would include a maintenance
hangar, parking space, and some maneuvering room.
1 These will take about half the property being
considered.
The remainder of the property--less than 2-1/2
acres--could be used for helicopters. It could be
' used as the commuter terminal facility, or it
could be used for business and commercial users;
but it is not large enough for both. The size of
the property limits the amount of activity that
' can be accommodated.
' 10. What about safety criteria?
The FAA publishes in their Heliport Design Guide
some dimensional criteria that are designed to
provide sufficient clearances for the safe
operation of the helicopters. Obviously, the
larger the helicopter, the larger its rotor system
' is; and consequently the larger are the clearances
that are needed.
' 11 . What about noise?
' Noise from a helicopter is generated by the
operating engine and the rotor system. The engine
' is the primary source of noise, but there is some
noise from the rotors (usually the familiar blade
' slap that can be heard occasionally) . The heavier
the helicopter, the more engine power is needed to
' lift it and conduct flight.
I-5
tTherefore, as a general rule of thumb, it can be
said that the heavier helicopters produce more
' noise than do the lighter ones.
' Having a heliport that is in the industrial area
helps isolate the noise problem. An additional
benefit is the fact that the approaches are over
nonresidential areas. Furthermore, the technology
of helicopter design is stressing noise reduction
' in the engine, in the main rotor system, and in
the tail rotor system. These three factors
' mitigate the noise problem as far as the
Huntington Beach heliport location is concerned.
t12. If we were to consider the lighter helicopters,
are there any in the area that could use this
' facility?
Yes, a search of the FAA' s aircraft registration
tapes indicates that there are 25 helicopters of
this type owned by people or firms within 5 to
6 miles of the proposed site. There has been
' considerable interest expressed by these and other
users to base their craft at the heliport.
' 13 . Is there anv economic benefit to having a public
use heliport?
Yes, opening the heliport to public use (even with
t its limitations) could qualify the facility for
Federal aid. And the lease income from an
' operator who would handle the civil helicopters
could be sufficient to offset the operating costs
of the heliport itself. The FAA' s grant program
' will furnish up to 90 percent of the acquisition
I-6
and development costs for all eligible items on
the heliport.
' 14 . Taking all these factors into consideration, can a
' viable heliport be designed which will be
compatible with the City' s need for police
helicopters, and the apparent need by business and
icommercial users of helicopters; yet have a
minimal impact on the surrounding land uses?
' The master plan stud has been structured to
P Y
i examine this issue, and the remainder of this
report will present the findings and conclusions
iof this search.
BACKGROUND
In 1982 , a 5-acre parcel of ground became available adjacent
ito the City' s Joint Fire Training Facility on Gothard
Street. This site was examined closely, and a number of
' advantages became obvious. The Fire Training Facility would
provide some buffer between flight activity and other users ,
' and could also provide the fire protection that would be
important to a civil heliport. Also, the new site was
adjacent (on the rear) to a large City-owned pond that would
' ultimately be developed as a park. The only privately-owned
land was another 5-acre parcel located adjacent to the new
isite. This parcel is zoned MI-CD, meaning that it is a
Light Industrial Civil District. Such uses would be
i compatible with heliport operations. Furthermore, the
flight paths could be developed so that the approach and
departure paths were over the pond area; and no structures
would be under the approach or departure of the helicopters.
The 5-acre parcel was purchased in early 1983, and the City
i
I-7
' then applied for, and received., a Federal grant to prepare
this master plan for the heliport.
The Master Plan Study
' The City contracted with the firm of CH2M HILL to prepare
the Heliport Master Plan. The scope of work was structured
to cover the topics necessary to consider Federal approval
of the site for a publicly-owned, public-use heliport. The
' plan is to cover a 20-year period from 1983 to 2003.
' The master plan is to provide guidelines for future
development to satisfy police requirements as well as
potential civil uses of the facility. Specifically, the
' master plan will:
' 1 . Provide a concise and descriptive report so that
the impact and logic of its recommendations can be
understood by those authorities needing to decide
on the heliport.
2. Provide an effective graphic representation of
potential development on the heliport property.
3 . Establish a schedule of priorities for
' improvements documented in the plan which are
within the municipality' s financial capability.
' 4 . Present the pertinent backup information and
' methodologies essential to development of the
plan.
' Because the report uses terminology unique to the aviation
community, a glossary is included as an appendix.
I-8
' General Conclusions
' From the beginning there have been two broad approaches to
the development of the facility. One approach utilized the
' rear one-half of the property for the police facility, but
could permit civil helicopters to land and take off
occasionally. There were no facilities to regularly
' accommodate the civil units and all their operations would
be transient.
' The other approach utilized the entire parcel for heliport
PP P P
' operations, but included a civil facility for the basing,
maintenance, and servicing of civil helicopters in addition
' to the police units.
The second approach was found to have the greatest merit for
' the heliport development. There were several reasons for
adopting this approach.
' 1 . The civil fleet that can safely operate erate from a small
' heliport site do not generate enough noise to
significantly impact the residential communities of the
1 City.
2 . As a publicly-owned, public-use facility, the heliport
' could qualify for Federal and/or State aid in its
acquisition and development.
' 3. There is a known demand within the County for
' helicopter facilities--especially at a facility that
does not require the helicopters to mix with the
' fixed-wing aircraft.
4. The City is experiencing strong growth among the com-
mercial and industrial businesses. Many of these
I-9
' enterprises use, or own, helicopters . The proximity of
a civil heliport in the commercial/industrial section
' of the City is an inducement to new industry and opens
the way for existing industry to improve their
transportation methods and plans.
5 . There is the potential for lease revenues to offset the
operation and maintenance expenses.
The 5-acre site is just large enough to accommodate the
police activity that is anticipated over the foreseeable
' future; plus the touchdown pad and its approach and
departure paths; and plus a civil fixed base operation. The
adjacent Fire Training Facility provides fire protection;
' the zoning of the area is totally compatible with helicopter
operations; and the site requires a minimal amount of
preparation to become operational.
' Recommendations
' Based upon the research that is presented in this report,
and the general conclusions discussed above, it is
recommended that:
1
1 . The City approve the concept of a heliport that
' accommodates both police and civil helicopters
with the limitations outlined in this report.
' 2. The City request approval of the heliport design
tby appropriate Federal, state, and local agencies.
I
3. The City apply to the Federal Aviation
' Administration for grants to establish the
heliport.
I-10
' Huntington Beach was the first City in Orange County to use
helicopters for police work. Huntington Beach now has the
1 opportunity to be a leader in the establishment of a first
class heliport to serve the civil and police helicopter
1 needs of its citizens and businesses.
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I-11
1
1
' Chapter II
BACKGROUND TO THE PLANNING DECISION
The City of Huntington Beach was originally known as Shell
' Beach. In 1901 the name was changed to Pacific City after a
gentleman named P. A. Stanton purchased 40 acres, formed a
syndicate, and subdivided 20 acres on each side of Main
Street. His interest in the new city was short lived , how-
ever, because in 1902 he sold his interest to the Huntington
Beach Company, a group of businessmen from Los Angeles. The
name was changed again in 1904 to Huntington Beach in honor
of Henry E. Huntington. Incorporation took place in 1909.
At that time the City had about 3. 57 square miles of land
' and a population of 915.
From those early years until today, the City has experienced
various periods of growth. The oil interests generally
' dominated the City until the 1960 ' s. A total of
46 annexations took place from 1945 to 1972 , increasing the
original 3. 57 square miles to the present 27. 74 square
miles.
' The population grew from 11 , 000 in 1960 to 174 , 487 in 1982 .
During the decade of the 1960 ' s, Huntington Beach was the
' fastest growing city in the United States, growing
II-1
908 percent. This period of growth saw the City change from
an oil city to a burgeoning bedroom city with all the
growth pains accompanying such growth. New schools, parks,
shopping centers , and residential areas were developed. Two
1 industrial zones were created and have attracted a signifi-
cant number of businesses. A new Civic Center was completed
in 1974 and houses the administrative and police functions
of the City.
' Police Activitv
' It was during the latter years of the 1960 ' s that the Police
Department began investigating better ways to meet its
responsibilities. Huntington Beach not only covers a large
territory in Orange County, but is also blessed with
beautiful beaches facing the Pacific Ocean. These beaches
attract large crowds in the summer, and police patrolling
becomes difficult.
In 1968 , the Police Department observed the success that the
' Los Angeles County Sheriff' s Department was having with he-
licopter patrol over the City of Lakewood. The benefits
' were convincing to the City, and in 1969 the first of two
Hughes helicopters was purchased. Huntington Beach became
the first city in Orange County to institute helicopter pa-
trol. Experience has proven the wisdom of this action. Not
only have the helicopter patrols aided in the control of.
' traffic, the apprehension of criminals, and the surveillance
of the community, but have proven themselves invaluable in.
' the saving of lives. For example, police units recently
saved the lives of four children in a dramatic rescue from
their boat when it was capsized offshore. The police heli-
copters have also proved to be valuable aids to City Council
members, disaster aid officials, and others during the
' recent heavy rains and flooding in Orange County.
II-2
The original heliport site in the City was located on an old
sanitary landfill. A touchdown pad, perimeter lighting,
' hangar, and fuel facilities were built. It was not too many
years later that the settling of the land became noticeable.
1 Although the touchdown pad was tilting, it was useable. The
hangar, however, required constant maintenance to keep it
serviceable. In 1979, the hangar could no longer be re-
paired or adjusted and was abandoned.
The settling action on the site forced the operations and
maintenance activities to be relocated to John Wavne
' Airport, 10 miles away. The original heliport is still be-
ing used for landings and takeoffs during surveillance work
1 because of its central location within the City. moreover,
the John Wayne Airport site is being leased and is not con-
sidered to be a long-term solution due to response time and
Ifinancial considerations.
' Search for a New Site
' From the early 1970 ' s, the Police Department has lead the
search for a heliport location in the City. Several sites
have been identified over the years, but for various reasons
none were selected. With the move of the operations and
maintenance activities to John Wayne Airport, the need for a
' central heliport location became even more important. The
search was intensified, and a site was identified on Ellis
' Avenue; but this site was rejected.
' In 1982, a 5-acre site (actually 4 . 7 acres) adjacent to the
Citv' s Fire Training Facility became available. Nego-
tiations with the owner indicated that the price of the land
was reasonable, and the search for a heliport site focused
on this location. The land was essentiallv flat and was
' used as a gravel storage yard. No demolition of structures
1
II-3
Iwould be required, and there were no tall structures nearby
except for the adjacent fire training tower. The land to
' the south was used by a nursery; the land to the west was an
abandoned gravel pit owned by the City and scheduled to be
made into a small park some time in the future; and the land
to the north was the Fire Training Facility. Across the
street, to the east, is an industrial park. The nearest
' residential area. is 0 . 2 miles to the east. The site ap-
peared to offer the best opportunity the City had seen for
the location of the heliport. In early 1983 the site was
purchased for $1 . 22 million, or about $5. 96 per square foot.
' The parcel is about 330 feet wide along Gothard Street and
runs approximately 620 feet deep alongside the Fire Training
Facility. The location is illustrated in Figure II-1 .
Potential Users
The size and use of the parcel posed a problem for the City
' to consider. One of the primary users of the facility had
to be the Police Department, but the City was willing to
consider a heliport that was open to the public. There are
many uses for helicopters that are enhanced by the craft' s
unique characteristics . These include:
• Law enforcement and patrol
' • Fire fighting and surveillance
• Air ambulance
• Search and rescue
• Civil emergencies
• Executive transport
• Business linkages to the national air system
1
i
II-4
WARMER AVENUE
_< ¢
i O j
� T¢
y 1Q O
T7 m
SLATER } AVENUE
1
TALBERT T AVENUE
° T
y Oa
u } PROJECT
ELLIS AVENUE LOCATION
L SHOPPING
CENTER
° 1
� •z
w 0
;o �z 54
0
- O
y
OIL GARFIELD AVENUE
_ FIELOS —
• x
z °
GOLF
C HOT TO SCALE
COURSE
,OR A TOWN
AVENUE
\ G I B- H S H
C; HOOL
PACIFIC m
L M17a N
OCEAN e
FIGURE 11-1
VICINITY MAP
HUNTINGTON BEACH PROFESSIONAL HELIPORT
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA
HILL
N16513.AO
' The importance of the helicopter to the business world is
highlighted by a recent survey conducted by The Wall Street
' Journal entitled "Corporate Aircraft - A Survey of Chief
Pilots" in 1982. In response to various questions, these
pilots provided valuable information about helicopter activ-
ities in their companies.
The survev revealed that firms in the manufacturing, fi-
nance, business and professional services were the greatest
users of helicopters. Almost 60 percent of the firms using
helicopters were in these fields. More than 64 percent of
the firms having helicopters employ more than 1 , 000 people ,
and more than 61 percent do more than $100 million a year in
business. The majority of the flights by their helicopters
are less than 100 miles - a distance comparable to a round
trip between Huntington Beach and Los Angeles International
Airport.
It would appear that a local heliport could be an asset to
the business and industrial community. Are there any heli-
copters in the local area? A search was made of the air-
craft registration computer tapes maintained by the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) . It was found that there are
' 25 helicopters owned by persons or businesses within 5 to
10 miles of Huntington Beach. These included 10 Bell 47
Itype craft, 5 of the Bell 206 series, and 20 of the
Hughes 269/369 series. Inquiries were made to some of the
' operators of these aircraft, and it was found that there is
a definite interest in sharing the use of a heliport.
Furthermore, there have been tentative inquiries from other
police departments about basing their helicopters in
Huntington Beach should there be space available.
There appear to be several reasons why civil helicopter us-
ers want to share the heliport.
II-6
i
1 . The site is close to the industrial centers of
Huntington Beach.
The site is close to some of the homes of the
business leaders.
3. The helicopters would not have to mix with the
fixed-wing aircraft.
' 4 . The site is away from the congestion of the regu-
lar airports.
' 5 . The site could take advantage of the unique flight
characteristics of helicopters.
With these facts in hand, a tentative decision was made to
' examine the site and see if shared use was possible. Before
accepting the decision, four elements would have to be
' proved.
' 1 . The civil use of the facility would not interfere
with the police mission.
' 2. The helicopter activity would not create unaccept-
able noise on residential areas.
3. The design of the facility could meet FAA heliport
planning criteria.
4. The civil use of the facility should not impose
any financial burden on the City.
II-7
Compatibility with Police Helicopter Activity
1 The helicopter fleet is generally divided into three cat-
egories: Category I are those helicopters weighing under
6,500 lbs; Category II being those weighing between 6 , 500
1 lbs and 12, 500 lbs; and Category III being those weighing
more than 12 ,500 lbs. Because of their size and operating
characteristics, it was obvious from the start that Category
III helicopters could not fit within the limiting parameters
1 of the proposed heliport; therefore, the analysis
concentrated on Categories I and II helicopters. In the
' table below are the typical rotorcraft that fit within each
category.
1 Table 1
HELICOPTER DATA BY CATEGORY
1
Rotor
1 Name Weight Diameter Length
Category I
1 Bell 47 Series 2 , 850# 38. 0 ' 43 . 6 '
Bell 206B-J Jet Ranger 3, 200 33. 3 39. 1
Bell 206L Long Ranger 4 , 150 37. 0 42 . 4
' Hiller UH12E 2 , 800 35. 4 40. 7
Hughes 300C 2 , 050 26 . 8 30 . 8
Hughes 500C 2 , 550 26 . 3 30. 2
1 Hughes 500D 3 ,550 26. 4 30 . 5
Aerospatiale SA315B Lama 4 , 850 36 . 1 42 . 4
Aerospatiale SA316B Alouette 3 4 , 960 36. 1 42 . 1
1 Aerospatiale SA341G Gazelle 3, 970 34. 5 39. 2
Aerospatiale SA342L,J Gazelle 4 , 190 34 . 5 39 . 2
Aerospatiale AS350D AStar 4 , 190 35. 1 42. 6
Aerospatiale AS355E 4 , 630 35 . 1 42 . 6
' MBB B0105CB 6 , 253 32. 1 38. 4
MBB BK117 6 , 173 36 . 1 42 . 6
Agusta A109 5 , 400 36. 0 42. 9
i
1
1
II-8
' Category II
Bell 205A-1 9,500 57. 1 48. 0
' Bell 212 11 , 200 48. 2 57. 3
Bell 412 11 , 600 46. 0 56. 0
Bell 214B-1 Big Lifter 12 , 500 50. 0 60. 8
Bell 222 7 , 850 39. 8 47 . 6
' Sikorskv S62A 7, 900 53 . 0 62. 2
Sikorsky S76 10 , 000 44. 0 52 . 5
Aerospatiale SA360 Dauphin 6, 615 38. 3 43. 6
' Aerospatiale SA361 Dauphin 7 , 495 38. 3 43. 5
Aerospatiale SA365 Dauphin 2 7 , 055 38. 3 43. 6
Westland WG23 Lynx 10, 500 42. 0 49. 9
' Westland WG30 12, 000 43. 8 52. 2
The police helicopters all fall within Category I. The Cat-
egory II craft tend to be the types of helicopters used by
commuters, construction firms, or other corporations
requiring greater capacity or lifting ability. Helicopters,
by their very design, depend on lift from their rotors . The
' action of these rotors creates a downwash of air. The FAA
has defined downwash as: "The volume of air moved downward
by the action of the rotating main (lift) rotor. When down-
wash strikes the ground or some other solid surface, it
causes a turbulent overflow of air from beneath the helicop-
ter. " When one helicopter is taxiing (hovering) in the vi-
cinity of fixed objects such as buildings, there is little
' or no problem. But if another helicopter is hovering near-
by, or has not tied down its rotors when parked, then the
downwash of air can cause damage. The clearance needed be-
tween a taxiing or hovering helicopter and another helicop-
ter should be great enough to prevent any damage from
occurring. The clearances needed around Category II
helicopters is greater than that needed around. Category I
tcraft. The proposed site for the heliport does not appear
to have enough space to allow Category I and Category II to
' operate compatibly at the same time. It is recommended that
the site be limited to those units which would be compatible
with the police helicopters.
II-9
' Another aspect of the compatibility question is the numbers
of helicopters involved. The Huntington Beach Police De-
partment currently operates four helicopters. There do not
appear to be any plans to increase this number, but it is
possible that other police departments might want to share
' the heliport. It is estimated that a total of 10 police
units could be based here within the 20-year planning peri-
od. The site is large enough to accommodate about 20 heli-
copters total - if they are all Category I size. Thus it
' would appear that there would be sufficient room for civil
units to be based at the field and not interfere with the
police activity.
Helicopter Noise
The next element that needs to be examined is that of heli-
copter noise. To develop the noise data, it will be neces-
sary to forecast the activity that could take place at the
' heliport should civil and police helicopters be based there.
' The forecasts of activity span 20 years, with specific fore-
casts given for 5 years (short term) , 10 years (intermediate
' term) and 20 vears (long term) . For forecasting purposes,
it is estimated that there will be 4 police units based at
the heliport in the short term, 6 in the intermediate term,
and 10 in the long term. Not all of these would belong to
the City of Huntington Beach.
' On the business side of the field, it is estimated that the
' civil spaces will be filled shortly after the field is
opened. The civil facilities will include space for
' 10 light helicopters. It may be possible for an operator to
"squeeze" in one or two more, but the forecast is for 10
units.
II-10
Transient helicopters are those that use the heliport on a
"stop and go" basis. They usually fly in, meet someone or
pick up someone , and leave. Most transients stay on the
ground for a few minutes but could stay overnight--if there
is space to accommodate them.
Table 2
' FORECASTS OF OPERATIONS
Estimated
' Year and Type of Activity Activity Level Operations
' 1988 - 5-Year Forecast
4 police units 16 ops/day avg. 64
4 business units 4 ops/day 16
4 business units 2 ops/day 8
2 business units 1 op/day 2
4 transients 2 ops/dav 8
98 ops/day
or 35 , 300 ops/yr.
' 1993 - 10-Year Forecast
' 6 police units 18 ops/day 108
4 business units 4. 5 ops/day 18
' 4 business units 2 ops/day 8
2 business units 1 op/day 2
1 8 transients 2 ops/day 16
152 ops/day
' or 54 , 700 ops/yr.
2003 - 20-Year Forecast
10 police units 20 ops/day 200
1 4 business units 4. 5 ops/day 18
II-11
4 business units 2. 5 ops/day 10
2 .husiness units 1. 5 ops/day 3
' 12 transients 2 ops/day 24
255 ops/day
or 91 , 800 ops/yr.
1
* ops = operations, or landings and takeoffs.
1
When would most of this activity take place? These are data
' that are necessary for computing the noise contours that
would be generated by the craft. Most of the flights would
' take place during the daytime, with some activity (primarily
police) in the evening hours . Very little would take place
in the nighttime. The following table gives an estimate of
the time of day activity.
' Table 3
OPERATIONS BY TIME OF DAY
' Near Intermediate Long
Time Period Term Term Term
7 am to 7 pm 86% 84% 82%
t7 pm to 10 pm 11% 12% 14%
10 pm to 7 am 30 4% 4%
' A computer analysis of these data reveals that there are no
residential areas within the 60 , 65 , or 70 CNEL areas . CNEL
is an abbreviation for California Noise Equivalent Level and
is a measure of the "noisiness" of an area. These noise
contours represent an averaging of the noise events over a
tyear ' s time of all the individual flights that have been
forecast.
II-12
These noise contours are predicated on the use of the facil-
ity by light helicopters making their approach at a 9° an-
gle. Helicopter approaches can be made between 6° and 121 .
For Huntington Beach the specified angle should be 9° .
rThe conclusion that can be reached from this computer analy-
sis is that the new heliport site is compatible with the
' surrounding area; that no residential areas will lie inside
the 60, 65 , or 70 CNEL lines; and that the activity should
be limited to light helicopters. Furthermore, the approach
area that has been selected is very similar to the existing
approach pattern to the present heliport at the landfill
site. The helicopter activity into and out of the present
' site has not proved to be a nuisance to adjacent land users.
FAA Heliport Planning Criteria
Preliminary sketches of the heliport revealed that the FAA
criteria can be met on the site. The dimensional require-
ments associated with the light helicopters can be accom-
modated on this site, but the dimensional requirements of
I
the medium weight helicopters (Category II) are marginal and
' may be constrained. This subject is developed more fully
later in this report.
It can be concluded that the new site is capable of handling
the light helicopters and will meet planning criteria.
Financial Impact
If the heliport were limited to police helicopter use only,
it is questionable whether the site would qualify for Feder-
al grants in aid. Without this aid, the City would be faced
with the entire cost of buying the property and making the
II-13
Iimprovements necessary to handle the maintenance and opera-
tion of the facility.
If, however, the facility is opened to civil usage, it can
' meet the FAA criteria as a "public-owned, public-use" facil-
ity. By permitting civil units to fly into and out of the
heliport, and by permitting civil units to be based there on
a space available basis (it is estimated that this will be
about 10 helicopters) , the City can request FAA assistance
' in buying the property (reimbursement for the land cost) and
in developing the eligible items on the field. It is es-
timated that the FAA participation in the overall cost of
acquisition and development could be in the order of $1. 7
million.
Furthermore, the civil operator on the heliport would have a
' leasehold for which he would make lease payments. Leasehold
payments, plus fuel flowage fees, should more than cover the
1 costs associated with operating and maintaining the
heliport. This does not include the costs of operating the
' police helicopters , but does include the costs associated
with the heliport itself.
' It can be concluded that the use of the heliport by civil
units will not be a financial burden on the City, and may,
' in fact, produce a modest surplus of funds that can be used
to upgrade the facility.
Planning Decision
A review of the four elements above indicates that the
shared use of the heliport by civil units is feasible. The
master planning study, therefore, has prepared a layout plan
which incorporates police and civil facilities on the
II-14
4 . 7 acre-site. The police and civil activities are kept
physically separate but share the same touchdown and takeoff
' point (the helipad) . Each would have its own hangar and
office space, its own fueling facility, and its own parking
' pads. This provides an additional assurance that the civil
units will not interfere with the police activity, nor will
police activity interfere with civil activity. The shared
use of the helipad poses no problems.
Information can be disseminated to based and transient pi-
lots on the approved routes of approach and departure so
' that low flights over residential areas can be avoided.
1
1
II-15
t
1
t
1
1
' Chapter III
1 HELIPORT PLAN
The Huntington Beach Heliport layout has been divided into
three main sections. Of paramount importance is the helicop-
ter operating area which includes the touchdown pad and its
approaches, the taxilane connecting the touchdown pad with
' the parking pads, and the various parking pads. The second
component of the design is the police facility which consists
of the maintenance hangar and office, the refueling facility,
and the police auto parking area. The third component is
the civil fixed base operator area which consists of the
' maintenance/storage hangars, an office area, the refueling
center, and the auto parking area. Throughout the entire
area are small buffer areas, parking islands, etc. , all of
which are landscaped to make the heliport more aesthetically
pleasing.
1 Design Guidelines
The FAA has published an Advisory Circular entitled "Heliport
Design Guide" (AC 150/5390-1B) which lists some of the dimen-
sional criteria to be considered in planning a heliport. A
III-1
t
summary of the criteria is given in Appendix 1 of that Advisory
Circular, and a review of the data reveals that some dimensional
criteria had not been developed by the time the Advisory
Circular was issued in 1977 . Furthermore, the experience of
a major user of helicopters revealed that one or two dimensions
were minimal and should be increased somewhat. Based upon
the Advisory Circular, and the experience of these users of
' helicopters , the following design criteria have been adopted
for this study.
' Table 4
DESIGN GUIDELINES
Element Criteria
Takeoff and landing area 1 . 5 times overall length of de-
sign craft
Peripheral area, width 0 . 25 times overall length, but
not less than 10 feet
Touchdown pad 1 . 0 times disc diameter
Taxilane, width Disc diameter, plus 0 . 33 times
disc diameter each side, but not
less than 20 feet
Parking Pads Length of design helicopter, or
(hover in and turn) disc diameter, whichever dimen-
sion is greater
Distance between 0 . 33 times disc diameter, but not
parking pads less than 20 feet
(rotors turning)
Distance from fixed or 0 . 33 times disc diameter, but not
' moveable object less than 15 feet
The disc diameter is the same as the rotor diameter. The
elements given in these guidelines are shown on the drawings
accompanying this report.
III-2
t
Using these guidelines and combining them with the "design
helicopter, " the following table shows the minimum requirements
to be considered in planning for the heliport.
The "design helicopter" is not a single helicopter, but is
' an imaginary helicopter incorporating the most demanding
features of each of the real helicopters shown in Table 5.
For this report the design helicopter has these features:
Weight: 6 , 000 pounds
Rotor: 38 ft. diameter
Length: 44 ft. overall
Table 5
' HELIPORT MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
' Minimum
Element Requirements As Designed
Takeoff and landing area 64 . 5 ' dia. 106 ' dia.
Peripheral area, width 10. 75 ' 20 '
Touchdown pad 37. 0 ' dia. 66 ' dia.
Parking pads 43. 0 ' 45 '
Taxilane, width 77. 0 ' 80 '
Distance between parking pads 20. 0 ' 20 '
' Distance from fixed or 15. 0 ' 15 '
moveable object
' Planning Considerations
' 1 . The site purchased for the heliport has a number of
inherent limitations. First of these is the size and
acreage of the parcel. It is approximately 330 feet by
620 feet and contains about 4. 7 acres total.
III-3
' 2. The site is located on the edge of an urban, and develop-
ing, environment. On the north side is the Fire Training
' Facility with a 56. 5-foot high training tower. On the
east side is Gothard Street having many industrial and
commercial establishments. However, only 0. 2 miles
away on the east are residential areas. On the south
side is a parcel of about the same size and is presently
used by a nursery. It is zoned for light industry and
could be developed in accordance with that zoning. On
' the west side is the gravel pit (now a pond) which will
ultimately be developed as City property.
3 . The prevailing winds are from the ocean, meaning that
they are from the southwest. Departures towards the
' southwest do not present any significant problems, but
arrivals are limited by the urban development. Most
' arrivals are southbound with a turn in towards the touch-
down pad at the existing helistop. It is expected that
' VFR activity would continue this pattern since it
provides the best approach that will disturb the fewest
people.
*
4. To consider IFR approaches, the airspace in the vicinity
of the heliport would need to be carefully programmed.
The site lies under the front course approach into Long
Beach Municipal Airport, and there are numerous routes
flown by aircraft approaching John Wayne Orange County
Airport, the Los Alamitos NAS, and Torrance Municipal
Airport that overfly various parts of the Huntington
' Beach area. However, conversations with FAA airspace
analysts indicates that the potential for an IFR approach
may exist if the approach is from the west and is low
enough to underfly most of the other activity.
' * See Glossary for definitions.
III-4
5. The site, being as small as it is, cannot accommodate a
large amount of public parking and still serve as the
' base for any reasonable number of helicopters. Further-
more, the City has expressed concern over any type of
activity which would generate large numbers of auto
' traffic. Considering the space requirements for the
touchdown area, and the police facility, there is less
' than half of the remaining parcel available for based
helicopters and public parking.
6. Helicopters , by their very design, depend upon lift
' from their rotors. The action of these rotors creates
a downwash of air. The FAA had defined downwash as:
"The volume of air moved downward by the action of the
' rotating main (lift) rotor. When downwash strikes the
ground or some other solid surface, it causes a turbulent
overflow of air from beneath the helicopter" (Page 4 ,
AC 150/5390-1B) .
' When one light helicopter is taxiing (hovering) in an
' area, there is generally no problem associated with the
downwash effect on other objects or parked helicopters.
The heavier the helicopter , the stronger the downwash.
' Because of this downwash situation, the planning guide-
lines have been structured around the light helicopters
' rather than including the medium weight craft.
7. Environmental considerations and community sensitiveness
are items of continuing concern. This site, which has
some buffer areas around it, should be able to contain
the noise problems within acceptable limits provided
the Category I helicopters are the only users. The
chapter on environmental analysis presents the detailed
information on the noise issue for this site.
III-5
1
' Planning Guidelines
' Based upon the material that has been gathered to date, and
the site limitations discussed above, it is recommended that
the Huntington Beach heliport be limited to light helicopters
' and the touchdown pad marked with a 6 , 000-pound limitation.
The full site can be developed with the appropriate touchdown
pad, a facility for maintaining and refueling the police
' helicopters, and a fixed base operator facility to handle
civil helicopters including maintenance, storage, and refueling.
I
' Even through the percentage of light helicopters which are
equipped for IFR flying may be less than the other categories,
the facility design should not preclude the installation of
' a microwave landing system (MLS) should one be approved in
the future.
In the sections which follow, the various design features of
' the heliport will be discussed.
' Helicopter Operating Area
The touchdown pad is located on the western part of the parcel.
The pad itself is a circular design, 66 feet in diameter,
with two squared off sides corresponding to the approach/
' departure paths. The touchdown pad is the same as the takeoff
and landing area which also coincides with the imaginary
' "primary surface" as described in FAR Part 77.
' There are two approach/departure paths to the heliport.
Because of the prevailing winds off the Pacific Ocean, the
primary approach path will bring the helicopters to the touch-
down pad on a course of 145° True. This will mean that the
aircraft will have a slight crosswind during the approach.
iThe primary departure path will be towards the prevailing
III-6
winds, on a course of 222° True. Each of these paths can be
used in the reverse direction during Santana wind conditions .
' The 142° approach course has been modified from the standards
' given in the Heliport Design Guide. The shape and configura-
tion of the course are the same, but the slope of the course
has been set at 15 : 1 instead of the standard 8: 1 . This is
more restrictive and has been adopted to permit IFR operations
should they be approved in the future. This approach course
has also been divided into two segments. The first maintains
the 15 : 1 approach slope and curves westward from the 142'
' alignment for IFR approaches. The second is primarily for
VFR approaches and curves northward at the steeper 8 : 1 slope.
' Drawing HB-3 shows the layout of these courses.
The departure course, on a 2221 bearing, proceeds straight
' to the Ocean. Its size and configuration are standard. The
slope is 15: 1 to protect for IFR departures. It is recog-
nized that helicopters will deviate from this course once
they have reached operating altitude.
' Surrounding the touchdown pad (primary surface) is the peri-
pheral area. This area has a width of 20 feet and is circular
' in shape. The purpose of the peripheral area is to provide
a buffer around the touchdown pad which precludes the con-
struction of any object which would be a hazard or obstacle
to helicopter operations.
Further protection is provided by the transition surface
' (another imaginary surface) which slopes upward from the
edge of the primary area at a 2: 1 ratio.
' Connected to the touchdown pad on its eastern edge is the
taxilane. The taxilane has an overall width of 80 feet and
' is completely paved to facilitate movement of the aircraft
to and from any of the positions on the flight line.
III-7
' Adjacent to the taxilane are the parking pads. These pads
are 45 feet in diameter and are separated by a distance of
' 20 feet. The pads will accommodate any of the Category I
helicopters and provide sufficient separation to permit opera-
tions on adjacent pads with due consideration to the downwash
problem. Two of the pads on the south side of the field are
designated as refueling pads for police units , and two pads
on the north side of the field are designated as a refueling
pad for the civil units. Each refueling station is equipped
for two grades of fuel.
Field Capacity
' There is no specific computational method established for
determining the capacity of a heliport. The only way to
approach this problem is to use the methodology established
' for airports , and make certain assumptions and modifications
that appear logical. The computational method that has been
used in this report is that given in the FAA report RD-74-124 ,
and the final capacity is known as Annual Service Volume
' (ASV) . For these computations the following data have been
used:
' Weather split: VFR 86. 8%
IFR 10. 3%
Closed 2 . 9%
' Aircraft Mix: (C+3D) is zero
Percent of Arrivals: 50%
tPercent of Touch and Go: zero
' Exit Taxiway Locations: Because pad occupancy is
minimal , this would equate to a large number of exits .
Assume more than 4 .
1
III-8
From Figure 2-3, the VFR hourly capacity is 98. 7
From Figure 2-43 , the IFR hourly capacity is 69. 3
' Daily ratio is assumed at 300
Hourlv ratio is assumed at 8
The weighted capacity (Cw) is 84. 0
Annual service volume is 84. 0 x 300 x 8 = 201 , 600 operations.
' Use 200, 000 operations.
' With this approximation of the heliport capacity, it can be
seen that the level of operations that can be expected over
' the next 20 years will not exceed the capacity of the system.
Navigation Aids
1
The heliport is expected to operate under VFR rules initially.
' The FAA has stated that they are investigating various standards
associated with the IFR activity at heliports. At present,
the planning criteria is governed by the TERPS* manual and
is primarily focused on heliports situated on airports.
' Because of the unique characteristics of helicopters, it has
been long recognized that more definitive data and standards
needed to be adopted to permit IFR operations at heliports
' which are not located on airports. To date, no standards
have been published.
1
This report, therefore, has had to make some assumptions on
the planning criteria which could apply to heliports such as
this one. The 15 : 1 approach slope is one such assumption.
It is also assumed that the field, if equipped for IFR acti-
vity, would use the new microwaye landing system (MLS) with
co-located Distance Measuring Equipment (DME) . Because of
*See Glossary
1
III-9
' the airspace congestion in the vicinity of Huntington Beach,
it has also been assumed that the IFR front course approach
would be eastbound to the field in order to avoid the
approach and departure routes used at Long Beach Airport,
Los Alamitos NAS, and Torrance Municipal Airport.
In order to make the final approach to the touchdown pad
' coincide with part of the VFR approach course, the MLS equip-
ment would have to be located "off site. " Actually, the
' location chosen is on the adjacent parcel at the rear of the
Fire Training Facility. This would bring the helicopters
' down the front course approach until they clear the bottom
of the clouds or come within visual range of the field, then
permit them to make a partial right hand turn to align them-
selves with the final approach to the touchdown pad. The
DME could be co-located with the MLS equipment, or could be
adjacent to the touchdown pad, as shown.
This IFR capability for the heliport does not assume that
the facility will qualify for an instrument approach, nor
' that the FAA will install such equipment. The IFR approach
configuration and MLS installation are included in the plan
so that sufficient space will be "reserved" for this equip-
ment if or when it is approved.
' Field Lighting
The touchdown pad is equipped for night operations. The pad
is surrounded by the standard heliport lighting which consists
' of yellow omnidirectional lights set about 3 feet from the
edge of the pavement. The approach paths are also lighted
1 with white ODALS lights on 50-foot spacing except at the
directional arrow where they are on 10-foot spacing. The
ODALS lights extend outward approximately 200 feet from the
' touchdown pad.
1II-10
Blue apron lights mark the boundary of the paved area for
helicopter operations. The parking pads are lighted with
' shielded floodlights to permit full visibility of the operat-
ing area. The shields will prevent the light from blinding
any pilot hovering or taxiing his craft on the field, yet
will permit him to see any activity that is taking place.
Red obstruction lights will be placed on top of the Fire
' Training Tower, the police maintenance hangar, and the tops
of fence posts in the approach/departure corridors. The
tri-color heliport identification beacon will be installed
in a position on the east part of the field where it will
' not interfere with approaches to the field. The wind cone,
located at the west edge of the field, will also be lighted.
' Field Marking
The touchdown pad will be marked with the standard triangular
heliport symbol , boundary line, and weight limit marking.
' The approach/departure arrows will also be painted white.
In addition, there shall be a 2-foot diameter concrete pad
placed around the base of each ODALS light and painted white.
The taxilane centerline stripe shall be the standard yellow
line. Parking pads shall be outlined with a yellow stripe
in the pattern shown on the drawing. The standard 3-foot
diameter solid yellow circle marks the parking position on
each pad.
' The field weight limit of 6 , 000 lbs. is indicated by the
number "6" placed in red numbers inside a white box on the
' edge of the touchdown pads , as shown on the drawings. The
words "Huntington Beach" provide an identity on each approach
side of the pad.
Police Facility
The police facility consists of the maintenance hangar/office,
' the refueling station and adjacent auto parking.
III-11
The hangar structure is a 70-foot by 100-foot building and
houses the maintenance hangar, shops, offices, storage rooms
' and a classroom. Restrooms and a central pilot work area
are also provided.
The fuel facility consists of two underground 15 , 000-gallon
tanks located across the field near the Fire Traininq Facility.
Fuel is delivered to the field by truck and off-loaded on
the Fire Training Facility side of the wall. There is suf-
ficient room on this property for the trucks to maneuver,
off-load, and leave . Fire protection is also available.
' From the storage tanks , the fuel is connected to the dispens-
ing station by underground pipes. Grades of fuel (100 octane
and jet A fuel) will be handled from the same location, and
the helicopters can be refueled from hoses.
The police auto parking area is located behind the hangar
area. Six-foot chain link fencing separates the auto areas
from the aircraft operating areas. Gates are provided at
two key points , and are under the control of the police dis-
patcher on the site. Auto access to the field area is strictly
limited to necessary vehicles , or emergency vehicles.
' Fixed Base Operator Area
The civil facility consists of a maintenance/storage structure
with associated office/shop space. It is anticipated that
' the building will house one or two helicopters in the mainten-
ance bay, and three or four in the storage bay. The number
' of helicopters that can be accommodated depends on the size
and types of rotors on the helicopters. The office/shop
area provides a point where visitors and others must check
in before proceeding to the field area. Parking for visitor
and user autos is provided adjacent to the FBO area. The
parking area is separated from the helicopter area by a 6-foot
III-12
' chain link fence having no gates. Pedestrians must pass
through the office in order to reach the field, and vehicles
must use the police gate to gain access to the field. It is
considered extremely important that vehicular use of the
field be kept to a minimum.
The fuel station for civil operations also contemplates the
use of two grades of fuel. Two 15, 000-gallon underground
storage tanks, located adjacent to the police tanks, will
' provide the needed capacity. The tanks are connected to the
fuel pumps by underground lines, as shown on the drawing.
' The fuel pumps are located in one unit , and refueling is
handled with hoses.
1
I
III-13
I
i
R BASIC DATA TABLE
I TOUCHDOWN PAD DATA HELIPORT DATA
1 ULTIMATE ULTIMATE
INSTRUMENT APPgp AC AILS
HELIPORT ELEVATION SS'SMLS
PAVEMENT STRENGTH 6,000 I6e.
IfR 13.1 AIRPORT APPROACH II .T
APPROACH SURFACE ,AERPRENCE POINT LOOROMATES IWII]00'07-
VER B:1
I J a PAD LIGHTING YCILU\V
NORMAL MA%.
' TEMPERATURE OF ]I-I A°A°e,
�\ •) PAD MARKING ITANUARI) HOTTEST MONTH
TRAINING CENTER I M13,IIAIE,
NAVAIDS AILS,maNA VAtDSILIPO E TERMINAL
OI)ALS,VASI
NAVAIDS
HEIIPAD OM.
/ PARKING AREA 66 MISCELLANEOUS FACILITIE/ J I �WIND COYERAOE 1001 HEI IPORT BEACON,LK:M'0EO WP10 CONE,
3
"
f, o coNrgoL Z LEGEND
' TOWER W
PAVEMENT AIRCRAFT
= f—
\ L Q LU HELIPORT BOUNDARY
2 W —
' cc
CLEAR ZONE
FIRE COO)
TRAINING TOWER I In •.LL AIRCRAFT PARKING
I W LIMIT LDIE
b 31 O PAD LIGHTS,ODALS•YELLOW
A
i I d • APRON LIGHTS •BLUE
1i _ - • a FIRE = O OBSTRUCTION LIGHTS•REO
3 STATION
} \ z SHIELDED FLOOD LIGHTS-
WHOTE
...• �r a I !• ? 4p • . Yo �� BUILDING
o
-0 OCT
IA... i I I, 'iiY e� • �F
... !ice I \\ •• re•� a _--_ u--' • ° v,4;
ol
ou.. \�`.'' _i � •+"A I�\� I — _.._.-- —_ —_— .rL—_ °I I_,I L'W„.•o.A f � �' !Y
LOCATION MAP A
o ° I••� \'/^� 'r ' -- -- -- II \i x I it q o '
-�� - ; ALL-WEATHER WIND ROSE
CALM:
° ., / \,\ ' i �1•5�,•• TOTAL OBSERVATIONS',
.Ilo ce rAAOAn - P.
.— a,n\c•.w No �{A�
•� T• STD
1
� �,0 w°wnwlw L Nu ••�FA°,°U..,P- w.R°]U -- - r,u OA,•I,COw% f = � 1
/\ \ AA
' U
• • _ o
III
IFR WIND ROSE
00 0 JO CALM:
\ SCALE IN FEET I TOTAL OBSERVATFONS:
' DRAWN HE PREPARATION OF THIS DOCUMENT WAS FINANCED IN PART HUNTINGTON BEACH I APPROVED: DRAWING NO.
THROUGHM AN AIRPORT ASTER PLANNING GRANT FROM THE
CHECKED DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, FEDERAL AVIATION I I CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
CH2M::HILL PROFESSIONAL HELIPORT ADMINISTRATION UNDER PROVISIONS OF THE AIRPORT AND i _ I HELIPORT LAYOUT PLAN HB_ 1
APPROVED AIRWAY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1970,AS AMENDED. I _
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH , CALIFORNIA
I VO,I KEVISIOV BY L•\PPK.'DAiE
r
TAAINM6 CENTEA ,
I
' DRAFTING
PARKING AREA
z
z
t O W
0 > cr
G � LL1
c p a
i p CONTROL ° 1•-
Z
= TOWER W
u
w �
W
< � . Z
' W
LU
F c
[IFIRE
RAINING TOWER cr
I 31
,Q a
• ,e
i
Z
s` R STATION
a W .
z • do . • ..: .. g o.
o` a y •z - - •�� of : t4 0
• I 4
•u CO i
52. 1
/d V al �O�MER VAULT
O / �
_ e cL bwc.
o
r ` II I I iI
\, \� y't•F�4, 9 \j� \ // I '� 1
GA TANKS
♦00 lit 1•• •6. •• • I `
NAXMNANCE
7 I
N I t01' TAXMAN[ O t MW MAR
r — a
lop
AVLL
• .�lAD i L T •tm - _ .-
r ►L L vAaz
s.to►• cc
/ •_. V Y I `�. y .}-^' 111 x
a.
\
7 / 1 L 'OiITCE• WMTE,QMlCtLNAAtOA11 .i , I � 'aKyc>a•'�.o`tr%.t..F /•IL Q
, ate I tto' u i • 't• • j� • SPA'f,T.•.,yz.. &x` e� V
; � r; ..�. .I ;C• c nlaLc iARR•a ''.... �tgSL 0
�'. � 1 r r _�\ /� 1•`\ I i� . • !F �� r� •va>Q IA✓ALL•q i.�+L' , � i +' �'� ,f •7i4,
•i> w r�• R•N L•rr '..zF >"0 '': i�' r':Y1T i i Aq oAn t� 4`4
4
C�L.c -`9,�r•�„ ,t
/ • mrr�
a, i •\
.��, �S•cl�..,•• R . L . r- �'K"' ��rARR•w < -� �,L+\$+2�� '1'j/�s� r• 'cA�.{n ..r neLc Iuu..o },�.�d
'C �'.r • ' �. • cNA.I Lr Rw w t '- . l .3. �� Rt I � Ys✓'1 t �� I
� to pRrCE wo.D.• `:;-'�� tt7w' ^str-srn-^r:-av:'+� �5.l;t�� ..J..:ye tirr.�• }: k •✓kti` i
TRM p.nstw LI•�• D LT.81D. `nIEL►U✓•Wi NOtE• .• /
/ NELIPORT•EACO.-
i
DRAWN TK PREPARATXNI OF THIS DOCUMENT WAS FINANCED N PART HUNTINGTON BEACH APPROVED: I DRAWING NO.
7H604)0I AN AIRPORT MASTER PLANNNC CLLNT FROM THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
CH2M::HILL 0fCKED DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION,FEDERAL AVIATION PROFESSIONAL HELIPORT HELIPORT LAYOUT PLAN
ADMINISTRATION UNDER PROVISIONS OF TIE AIRPORT AND I APPROVED HB
AIRWAY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1970,AS AMENDED. CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH , CALIFORNIA I H
\O.1 REVISIOV I BY IAPPR:DATE
1
' CHAPTER IV
' ECONOMICS AND CAPITAL COSTS
' The City of Huntington Beach needs to consider four types of
costs associated with the new heliport. These are the land
' purchase costs, the development costs , the operating costs,
and the annual maintenance costs. Each of these will be
' briefly discussed so that the City can take them into con-
sideration in budget preparations.
' Land Purchase Costs
tThe cost of the parcel was established by the actual pur-
chase of the land in 1983. The parcel contains about 204 ,600
' square feet and was purchased for $1. 220 million, or $5. 963
per square foot.
' Development Costs
tThe capital construction costs for the heliport are given in
the following table. These costs are based on estimated
quantities for the various components of the project, using
the latest unit costs available for the area.
IV-1
' Table 6
DEVELOPMENTAL COSTS
' Unit Total
Item Quantity Costs Cost
Clearing and Earthwork
' *Clean and level 4. 7 acres 24, 000 sy $ 1 . 00 $24 , 000
*Remove 25 trees (est) 25 ea 300 . 00 7, 500
*Topsoil - 6" deep 60 ,000 sf 0 . 56 33 , 600
' Aircraft Paving (6" PCC/4"BM)
*Touchdown Pad & Taxilane 33 ,300 sf 3 . 25 108 , 250
*North Parking Pads 25 , 000 sf 3. 25 81 , 250
' *East Apron Area 16 , 000 sf 3 . 25 52 , 000
South Pads and Apron 24 , 000 sf 3. 25 78 , 000
' Auto Parkinq and Roads (3" AC/8" BM)
Public Parking & Roads 17,000 sf 1 . 20 20 , 400
Police Parking & Roads 14 , 400 sf 1 . 20 17 , 280
' Limited Access Road 3,600 sf 1. 20 4 , 320
Curbs 210 if 10. 00 2 , 100
Structures
' Police Building (complete) 7, 000 sf 40 . 00 280 , 000
FBO Hangars & Office (shell only) 9, 000 sf 20 . 00 180 , 000
' Fuel Storage Facility
*Underground storage tanks,
15 , 000 gal ea 4 ea 47, 500 190, 000
' *Pipelines 1, 800 if 7. 22 13, 000
*Dspensing Pumps with hoses 3 ea 3 , 000 9 , 000
Lighting
' *Touchdown Pad, Yellow L-861 lights 14 ea 800 11 , 200
*ODALS, Yellow L-861 Lights 20 ea 400 8, 000
*Apron edge, Blue L-861 Lights 73 ea 300 21 , 900
*Obstruction, Red 12 ea 150 1 , 800
*Heliport Beacon, tri-color, on
standard 1 ea 6 , 000 6 , 000
*Floodlights, shielded, on
' standards 6 ea 2 , 000 12 , 000
IV-2
1
Unit Total
Item Quantity Costs Cost
*Floodlights, shielded, rooftop
' mounting 3 ea 1 , 000 3, 000
*Cable 5, 000 if 0. 65 3 , 250
*Misc. Cable 2, 500 if 0. 40 1 ,000
*Trenching 3,000 if 3. 00 9, 000
*Handholes 5 ea 600 3 , 000
*Regulator 1 ea 4 , 500 4 , 500
*Misc. Controls LS 1 , 500 1 , 500
1 Marking
*Directional Arrows & ODALS, Pads,
' White 591 sf $0. 75 $ 443
*Heliport triangle symbol, white 145 sf 0 . 75 109
*Touchdown boundary, white , 18" 296 sf 0. 75 222
' *Weight limit marking, white
background 544 sf 0 . 75 408
*Weight limit numeral , red 200 sf 0. 75 150
*Taxilane centerline, yellow, 6" 234 sf 0 . 65 152
' *Parking pad limits, yellow, 6" 1 , 088 sf 0 . 65 707
Auto parking stall lines, white 860 sf 0. 65 559
Road curb painting, red 400 sf 0. 65 260
' Road directional arrows, white 2 ea 45. 00 90
Fencing
*Chain link fence, 6 foot 1 , 745 if 8 . 25 14 , 400
' *Vehicle gates, 12 ' wide 3 ea 62 . 00 18 , 600
Utilities
' *Fire hydrants, valve 3 ea 2 , 000 6 , 000
*Fire water line 600 if 16 . 83 10 , 100
Potable water line 600 if 8 . 20 4 , 920
' Electricity, connections to
building is 2 , 500 2 , 500
Natural gas, connections to
building is 580 580
Miscellaneous
*Wind cone, 81 , lighted 1 ea 3 ,500 3 , 500
' *Sidewalks , arrows, ODALS pads 840 sf 1 . 50 1 , 260
*Block wall extension, 6 . 5 ' high 180 if 50. 00 9 ,000
Signs , 15 sq. ft. est. 1 ea 400 400
t 30 sq. ft. est. 1 ea 700 700
Landscaping, ground cover 60, 000 sf 0. 30 18 , 000
Landscaping, trees 20 ea 120. 00 2 , 400
Irrigation system 60 , 000 sf 0. 20 12,000
SUBTOTAL $1 , 294 , 310
Contractor mobilization @ 5% 64 , 716
' Engineering, administration and contingencies @ 25% 323 , 578
TOTAL $1 , 682, 604
*Items considered eligible for Federal participation.
IV-3
1
' Of the costs given above, the FBO could fund his own devel-
opment, depending upon the negotiations with the City. Of
the items listed above which could be considered for FBO
' development, the FBO hangar structure and fuel facilities
could be the subject of negotiation.
In this regard, it is recommended that the City give consid-
eration to leasing the FBO facility to an operator who is
already established on an airport in the region. The heliport
' activity may not generate enough money to make an FBO operation
economically viable on its own, but as a satellite operation
from an established operator it could prove to be an excellent
' adjunct to an ongoing business. All existing operators who
can meet the City' s minimum standards for operating the FBO
' heliport facility should be given the opportunity to bid on
the leasehold.
' Operating Costs
The operating costs are primarily associated with Police
Department activity as far as the City' s budget is concerned.
' The costs of operation associated with the FBO lease would
have to be borne by that operator. For the City, the primary
' costs would be:
Electricity
Landscape care and watering
' Other utilities (water and natural gas)
Security and inspections
Insurance and taxes (if any)
Of these, the first two will most likely be the more demand-
ing. The electricity will be higher than most installations
because of the field lighting; the landscape care and watering
because of mowing, weeding, seeding, and watering costs.
IV-4
For the operating costs, as a whole, it appears that an annual
budget of $5 ,000 should cover the costs. This number can be
' modified as actual experience is gained in the operation of
the heliport.
' Maintenance Costs
' In the early years the pavement and structures should need
little maintenance. The primary costs that will be associ-
ated with the maintenance of the facility are the replacement
of small items, repair of minor items, repainting of field
' and auto areas, and similar items. For the maintenance costs ,
as a whole , it would appear that an annual budget in the
early years of $8 , 000 should be sufficient.
Sources of Revenue and Financing
' For the development costs there are four sources of fund-
ing. 1) The FAA, through the Airport Improvement Program
(AIP) funds, assists municipalities in the acquisition of
' land and development of certain eligible parts of the field.
2) In addition, the State, acting through the Department of
Aeronautics, provides funds for the development of public
' facilities. 3) The City, through its own budgetary process ,
can furnish funds and may need to provide some funds as match-
ing funds when Federal or State funds are used. 4) Last are
the funds provided by the private sector, such as the FBO
' lessee who may pay for the development of all or part of his
leasehold.
' For the operation of the heliport, there are three sources
of funds. 1) The State provides an annual "credit" for eli-
gible public facilities. This credit is currently $5 , 000
annually and may be drawn on a yearly basis or allowed to
' accumulate for up to 3 years. 2) The City also provides
funds for the operation of the field, mostly through the
' budgets of the Police Department or others who would benefit
IV-5
i
' from the facility. 3) And lastly, the leasehold rentals
which would be paid by the FBO or other lessees.
Developmental Financing
' Three sources of funding have been used in developing the
funds that are available for the land purchase and develop-
ment funding. They are the FAA, the City of Huntington Beach,
and the FBO. These sources are listed in Table 7.
' The FAA, in their National Airport System Plan, has listed
' the City of Huntington Beach as needing a "general aviation"
facility. The new heliport serves that function since it
caters to the civil helicopter fleet, is publicly owned, and
' is open for general public use with the only limitation be-
ing on the weight of the helicopters. There is room for one
' civil FBO facility and one police FBO (operated by the City) .
' Revenue Sources
' The development funds mentioned above are one time sources
of money. On a recurring basis, the City has three sources
of funds that can be used for the operation/maintenance and
' development of the facility.
1 1 . Leasehold Income. The City' s purchase price of $1 . 220
million is the equivalent of $5. 963 per square foot. A
' 10 percent return on investment, which is fairly standard
in the aviation industry, would equate to an annual
' rental amount of 60� per square foot.
The civil FBO facility could occupy up to 51 , 000 square
tfeet on the heliport, which would result in an annual
income of $30 , 600 for the land rental . If the City
' were to fund the development of all or a portion of the
civil FBO facility, then the improvements rentals would
' be higher.
IV-6
Table 7
DEVELOPMENTAL FUNDING
Item Source Amount
' Land Purchase City - 10% $ 122, 000
FAA - 90% 1 , 098 , 000
Clearing and Filling Cite - 10% 6 , 510
' FAA J - 90% 58 , 590
Aircraft Paving City - 32% 102 , 150
FAA - 68% 217, 350
' Auto Parking and Roads City - 100% 44, 100
Structures City - 61% 280 , 000
FBO - 39% 180 , 000
Fuel Storage Facility City - 50% 106, 000
FBO - 50% 106 , 000
' Lighting City _ 10% 8 , 615
FAA 90% 77, 535
Marking City - 36% 1 , 128
FAA - 64% 1 , 972
Fencing Citv - 10% 3 , 300
FAA - 90% 29, 700
' Utilities City - 20% 4 , 850
FBO - 20% 4 , 850
t FAA - 60% 14 , 490
Miscellaneous City - 69% 32, 376
FAA - 26% 12, 384
' FBO - 5% 2, 500
Mobilization, engineering, etc. City - 28% 109, 800
FAA - 60% 233 , 198
' FBO - 12% 45 , 296
TOTALS City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 820, 784
' FAA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 338 , 601
TOTAL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2, 902, 604
' 2. Fuel Flowage Fee. Throughout the aviation industry,
the collection of a fee from general aviation users of
airports has been handled as a fuel flowage fee in lieu
of a landing fee. These fees typically range from 2� to
1
IV-7
1
5�! per gallon of fuel delivered to the FBO. The FBO,
in turn, adds this amount to his retail sales. For
Huntington Beach, the fuel flowage fee that is recom-
mended is 3� per gallon. Assuming that the 10 civil
helicopters based at the field fly an average of 400 hours
' a year, and consume an average of 15 gallons of fuel
per hour, then a total of 60, 000 gallons would be needed.
However, some fuel would be purchased elsewhere; and
for purposes of calculations it is assumed that one-third
of the fuel would be purchased at other stations, leaving
40 , 000 gallons to be sold at the heliport. This should
produce about $1 , 200 of revenue per year.
The Police Department may also sell fuel to other govern-
mental units and could lower the fuel flowage fee to,
say, 1 cent to cover incidental costs of handling the
fuel. If these governmental sales used around 20 , 000 gal-
lons per year, then the incidental income would be about
' $200 per year.
3 . State Revenue Sharing. The State of California, through
' the Department of Aeronautics , shares aviation fund
money with qualified airports throughout the State. At
' present, these airports qualify for $5 , 000 annually and
may draw down these funds annually, or may allow them
' to accumulate for up to 3 years.
' Administration of the Heliport
The City, if it accepts Federal assistance in developing the
' heliport, will assume a number of obligations. Among those
will be the responsibility to operate and maintain the heliport
' for public usage on a fair and nondiscriminatory basis for a
period of 20 years . Many cities have found that the establish-
ment of an enterprise fund is the best way to isolate and
IV-8
account for the revenue and expenses of an entity such as an
airport/heliport. It is recommended that the City give serious
' consideration to the establishment of an enterprise fund for
the heliport. It can, of course, be administered by the
Police Department since they are the onsite user of the facility.
The administrator of the heliport will need to establish a
set of enterprise books (normally done by the Finance Depart-
ment) ; establish lease policies; set the rates, fees, and
' charges; handle the billings for transient users if not done
by the FBO, and make any other arrangements necessary to
' operate a public facility. One person is usually designated
as Heliport Manager and services as the focal point for busi-
ness with the facility.
Summary of Revenues and Expenses
In the two tables below are given the capital development
' costs, and probable sources of revenue to build the facility
and the operation and maintenance budget for the first year
' of operation.
Table 8
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
' Item Amount
' Land Purchase $ 1 , 220,000
Heliport Development $ 1 , 682 , 604
TOTAL $ 2, 902, 604
FAA Airport Improvement Program Funds $ 1 , 743, 219
Fixed Base Operator Funds $ 338 , 601
' City of Huntington Beach Funds $ 820 , 784
TOTAL $ 2, 902 ,604
IV-9
1
Table 9
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE BUDGET
' Item Amount
' Revenue
Leasehold Income $ 30 , 600
Fuel Flowage Fees $ 1 , 400
State Revenue Sharing $ 5 , 000
City of Huntington Beach $ 0
Sub-Total $ 37 ,000
' Expenses
Operating Expenses $ 5 , 000
Maintenance Expenses $ 8,000
' Sub-Total $ 13 , 000
Net Amount, Profit or (Loss) $ 24 , 000
1
It is emphasized at this point that the operating and main-
tenance expenses are estimates only and will depend heavily
on the way the field is run and maintained. These figures
' will be refined with experience , and will be influenced by
the levels of activity that actually take place at the field.
1
IV-10
' CHAPTER V
' ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
' AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
The Huntington Beach area, because of its seaside location,
moderate climate , and land availability, has experienced
' tremendous growth in the last two decades, growing from 10 , 000
in 1960 to over 160, 000 today. It needs and provides first
' rate community services including police protection. The
helicopter surveillance segment of the police services has
been operated out of John Wayne Airport for the last few
years, but that is no longer a viable option.
' The history and reasons for a heliport in Huntington Beach
have been discussed in other sections of this Master Plan
Report. Please refer to those sections for that discussion
and for a description of the site plan.
' The site proposed for this heliport has been selected after
several years of looking for an appropriate one (refer to
Alternatives discussion in this chapter) .
' The site is in the midst of the City' s planned General Indus-
trial corridor. At the present time, the area is a mixture
V-1
of undeveloped land and industrial/civic uses. Adjoining
the site on the north is the Joint Powers Fire Training Facility.
' The site itself has been completely altered from its natural
state by development of the adjacent lands, roadways, and by
the historical resource extraction activities which no longer
exist.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
' This chapter section addresses environmental impact categories
which were believed to be the only ones which might be affected
in any substantial way by the heliport. These include:
' • noise and land use
• air quality
' • biology
• cultural resources
' • drainage
' Other categories sometimes discussed in an environmental
assessment were determined by clearly have no significant
effects.
Noise and Land Use
Background
' Noise is most often defined as unwanted sound. Sound levels
' can be easily measured in units of decibels with meters , but
the variability in subjective response to sound complicates
the analysis of impact on people.
1
Some of the factors identified by psychoacoustical researchers
' over the years which affect our perception and cause us to
V-2
' categorize a sound as an annoyance or, in other words, as
noise are:
' s Magnitude of the sound event particularly in relation
to the background
• Duration of the sound event
t
• Frequency of occurrence of these events
• Time of day that these events occur
' Also it should be mentioned that the human ear is not equally
sensitive to sound at all frequencies; and, as a result, a
' frequency-dependent rating scale called the A-weighted sound
level scale has been devised to measure sound in a similar
' manner to the way a human hearing system responds.
' The noise level scale is logarithmic; therefore, doubling
the sound energy of a noise source causes the noise level to
' be increased by 3 dB. However, due to the nonlinearities in
the response of the human hearing system, a sound level must
be nearly 10 dBA greater than another to be subjectively
' judged twice as loud. It follows that a sound level increase
of 20 dB is four times as loud, and a 30-dB increase is judged
' eight times as loud.
' The State of California has adopted the Community Noise Equiva-
lent Level (CNEL) methodology as a basis for describing airport
*
' noise exposure: These standards also apply to a heliport.
The CNEL scale was designed as a planning tool, is based on
A-weighted noise levels, and incorporates factors of annoyance
' mentioned earlier.
' *California Noise Standards . California Administrative
Code, Title 21 , Chapter 2. 5, Subchapter 6 , Articles 1
through 14 .
v-3
' CNEL is essentially the weighted daily average noise energy
level , and is calculated from the average integrated noise
energy level of aircraft flyovers (in a 24-hour period) and
the number of flyovers during designated day, evening, and
nighttime periods. This designation of three time periods
' is to account for the increased annoyance of aircraft noise
during the evening and nighttime hours. This is accomplished
' with the CNEL scale by applying a weighting of S dB to noise
levels of aircraft events occurring between the hours of
' 7 : 00 p.m. and 10 : 00 p.m. and a weighting of 10 dB to noise
levels of aircraft events occurring between 10 : 00 p.m. and
' 7: 00 a.m. One way to express the formula for CNEL is :
CNEL = SENEL + 10 Log (Nd + 3Ne + ION n) - 49. 4
Where
SENEL = Average Single Event Noise Exposure Level (SENEL)
' value in a 24-hour period for all aircraft noise
events. The SENEL value combines both noise level
' (dB) and duration to indicate the integrated noise
energy-time level (dB) .
' Nd = Number of aircraft from 7 : 00 a.m. to 7: 00 p.m.
Ne = Number of aircraft from 7: 00 p.m. to 10: 00 p.m.
' Nn = Number of aircraft from 10 : 00 p.m. to 7: 00 a.m.
t The State Noise Standards use the CNEL system to determine
whether or not an airport has a "noise problem. " Essentially
' the law says that there should be no incompatible land uses
within a specified CNEL (refer to Table 10) . Compatible
land uses are:
• Agricultural
' • Airport property
• Industrial and commercial property
t
v-4
• Open space
• Property subject to an avigation easement
• Multifamily dwellings which have adequate noise
insulation
' Land use types of concern are those listed as incompatible
by the State of California Division of Aeronautics. Incom-
patible land uses are:
• Single-family dwellings
• Multiplefamily dwellings
' • Trailer parks
• Schools of standard construction
• Hospitals
*
The Noise Insulation Standards require an acoustical analysis
for residential structures (other than detached single-family
residential) located within an annual 60 CNEL generated by
' an existing airport/heliport. An annual CNEL of 45 may not
be exceeded in any habitable room.
' Table 10
NOISE LIMITS
Effective Date CNEL Limit
' 12-1-71 80
' 1-1-76 75
1-1-81 70
1-1-86 65
As a new heliport, the Huntington Beach Professional Heliport
' would be required to meet the most stringent level (65 CNEL) .
*California Administrative Code, Title 25, Chapter 1,
Subchapter 1 , Article 4, Section 1092.
v-5
' The Noise Element of Huntington Beach' s General Plan discusses
noise and land compatibility guidelines in Optimum Noise
Levels. These guidelines (which are tabulated below) are
described in the Element as "target levels toward which efforts
should be directed. "
Table 11
' OPTIMUM NOISE LEVELS
' Land Use CNEL
Residential 60
tInstitutional 60
Golf courses, Riding
' Stables, Water Rec Areas,
Cemeteries 70
' Office - Professional 75
General Commercial , Industrial 80
At present, as can be seen in the Sectional District Map
(See Figure V-1) , the heliport site is zoned Ml-CD which is
' a combination light industrial and civic district. The sur-
rounding adjacent areas are similar. The nearest residential
' area is approximately 1, 000 feet east, past the Southern
Pacific Railroad corridor. Huntington Beach Central Park
lies northwesterly of the site.
' The City' s General Plan Land Use (See Figure V-2) indicates
a continuation of the types of land use which currently exist.
' Impact
To ascertain if the heliport complies with the State noise
standards and city policy, CNEL contours were developed with
' the Integrated Noise Model (INM) . The INM is a computerized
' V-6
PLANNING ZONING DM 39
' SECTIONAL DISTRICT MAP 35-5-II
NDTI .
CITY OF
' Cm Lal•C-L pI1D[r\I•Li rp 1M �'� e-•..[[•.
HUNTINGTON BEACH _
�W
' ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
AMENDED ET ZONE CASE- v `+•
�.«.m.�w,m.�s•.«.r�.rs.«.ua.tn.tr
M I ff-C D
MF
t!G}Y.},•.},f.tt♦.!0►Mi\rJ..N.�.r-0•.\f.��.N.}i.,0-�0_�O-il.r�.ti,i.�l.rtA s•1}.• e_� .[a •.�[.a et.c
tt-�\.11r-1}-\.,t�)•li�••n�f 1)-AllA.11 lnrr)•.r}i•.n�}>lYtp.r•-\1•.•�rH),14n t\1\A.,\}\C.11.[1M. i�i ..e +ono
MBA -4 i
(Q)R2-PD
RI C 4 .
CF.R
' MI-CD I MI-A
•I R
MI-CD
! �
RI I�CF-R :rrr.-T-v:.---•R,°- C2
1= I
�RI
MIMM a,..b p• - C2 •�
' RA-0-CD �r I IRI R a
RI RI
CF-C RI RI
MI I a �antc a I,
RI RI ,r' I-
MI-CD IRI RI RI �RI
RI b
RI R3
Y,.�p t' ^
RI R3
� MI-0-CD I' MI +• -�R -� -R2—T— �-7
>' Rz...
Mloll R2 _...__ - C2 C2 :
-- MI 1
RA-0-CD Ri' / R5
"� •� M2-0 R3
R3
MI-0 R3- of.c I
.'� -R2:.a vpI I
AM � -I •G• �R2.. af,rR• !i
.,I RS aA C4
' -A-CD PACIF E:A PLAN R3
MI-OI +�� (DI ICT QFEI
MI-0 •M2-ol
2
�_A_W I MI-0 - RS •-R6
6 y Rs R 2I
r,-ma R5 R2 `"a R2 R3 ' IS
RA-0 5' R2
GARFIELD AvE
1
' FIGURE V-1
SECTIONAL DISTRICT MAP
HUNTINGTON BEACH PROFESSIONAL HELIPORT
' CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA
CH2M
NHILL
N16513.AO
I
I
AMENDMENTS
' PLANNING COMM. CITY COUNCIL
DATE RESOLUTION DATE RESOLUTION Land Use Categories
11-6-76 1187 12.6.76 4368 1
6.7-77 1196 B-1-77 4484
9.29.77 1202 11-7-77 4551 RESIDENTIAL
12-6-77 1206 F2-19.77 4572
Estate 5 2 unrgac
' 8-I-78 1232 11 6-78 4696 ®Estate 5 4 un/gac
11-21-78 1239 11-18-8 4708 0 Low Density <_ 7 un/gaC
II 6-79 1239 I318-78 47C8 �«
3-6-79 12a2 3-19-79 4T28
3-18-80 1261 4-7-80 4865 Medium Density 5 iJun/gac
10.21-80 1258 12-15-80 4936
11-13-81 1273 6-17-81 5053 / � Q Medium High Density 525un/gac
II-17- 1 1279 12-7-81 506 ill /
' n-IT"BI 1zT9 12 z1-81 so6o ✓ \ / f ®High Density>25 un/goc
COMMERCIAL
a�,
`T1. O`, ®General
Office Professional
...........
:..
-• ®Mixed Development
{ ' INDUSTRIAL
z: z` General
h
............................:..::::......................: � � '• PUBLIC USE
::::: .:::::::::.::::::::::::::::::::::::_::::::::::::::: :::. _ . ®'`€€€ € I ::. PUbIIC,9uasi public, Institutional
:.............................................................
. ..............................................................
r,. Open Space
\�:: €:::�: ? €€€ i::::::'.• ,; PLANNING UNITS
Planning Reserve
EEiifiiEiii:E2i:ci:• } _ \, 6�%• .}:w31' ' �
KiHiiiiii-ii
• Planned Community
OTHER USES
Resource Production
AW
EL/PORT SITE
- _
•�_ri'?• �•� •`' f v�?may�Y�� <0� '
IV .
l ¢
Fa Lerw Usa n tna eaew Zone See Local Gaaeui Hen 5 COAST_ .r t~A'� �r`• PACIFIC
J
Berg awa o rCaur of P e"Oe - • r
i I
a
A �••�,5. For lan0 Ux n ma Goaai.l Zoro Se.Lxai Coa"el Pt.,
OCEAN
PACIFIC ' OCEAN' " PACIFIC�
I
1
1 •
HUNTINGTON BEACH, 01UFORNIA I FIGURE V- 2
' ® PWNNING DEPARTME9 :GENERAL P L A N
ADOPTED DECEMBER 1976 LAND USE DIAGRAM
' REVISED DECEMBER 1981
HUNTINGTON BEACH PROFESSIONAL HELIPORT
' CITY OF N HU TINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA
N16513.AO
CH2M
' i ::HILL
' noise calculation method which takes into account the types
of helicopters, the number of flights daily by each type,
' the noise vs. distance characteristics of each helicopter
type, estimated time-of-day breakdown for the flights flight
tracks and flight profiles. The model then calculates the
' noise exposure around the heliport and connects points of
equal CNEL value into contours. This was done for study
' years 1988, 1993 , and 2003 in accordance with the forecasts
presented in an earlier section. The contours (see Figures V-3 ,
t V-4 , and V-5) were overlain on a map containing zoning and
land use information to see if they enclosed any incompatible
' uses .
The preliminary approach track brought the approaching heli-
copters down a 1800 heading corridor from the Golden West
College area and over Central Park before turning left on to
a 1221 heading for the final approach and touchdown at .the
heliport.
' This track was initially selected for its simplicity, but
' the resulting contours enclosed some residential areas within
60 CNEL. There was no incompatible land use as defined by
the State; but to avoid any action that would be in technical
' noncompliance with City policy, a different curvilinear track
was tested with the INM. This track resulted in contours
' free of incompatible land for every study year.
' Future Noise Reduction Technology. The contours presented
for the future, particularly the year 2003, are conservative
' since they do not incorporate noise reduction technology
which is beginning to come off the drawing boards and onto
the production lines at the major helicopter producers.
' Advanced models of the Hughes 500, for example, are reported
to be 2 to 3 dB quieter on the average in the various flight
, modes than their predecessors. Quiet tail rotors, five-bladed
V-9
tMAGNOLIA ST. _ r ���•----- / ���--�� '� I I � `^�
—77' - - . ■ 1 iti I 'C�-
I •••,� -___ / '�,_,. Jam'-•.1�(�„�7�j';•y�� -I�+ _._-_ i. -. I� I -�! _n' _'-�-`� ��.. •. J � I`��%_i
1 1.■■ `]GI-----c T- _ ._.�_ I �• n _ - ��)r' ^t��i -n-�S' _tom._f .J:. f-' _7- _
._.- ',_ •--+-�•�'.\ it n`'"- �u-'t--•^• C�'r-1t- •,:.��-'� -I,•e i , �-1•; _� _-_-. - _ i, -I = t' --{�:-,��'_� (- >•'- y�l.• �? �C�...�. '-.T.�- -��d-'-..�'-1:_I*_.
1000 0 1000 2000 i
NEWLAND ST I~ _-_� �Jr
' SCALE IN FEET = — r- --r- .L�Y=i 4!- 'F" + ,� -r _'- --�
J/ 1; T-Tom'}+_r -ryr" __• wr, t�� I'--r-'-_CAI I ^LIIJ �� fir;;✓,.a.- /�i ,t: -�
W �_1 I / - `J=- — m C [-� t-' - 1 F.I.v s f o _.:� .,.•,
•:_• I / ��•ls� � r� 1'= I
' �� II •�' :'\ 1 :a,'�=r!__ 1; W I I�i —'�'I ��- �`I: I >'r'. �` 7 �''. t-.1 �i `� 1.. L i' ,.
I ••' � -__,1 c"�=i I ,3� __ r`-�,"al ��_'�7'- -- ,.
Julr,r ' ?=.-; 'r (•"I u :--" r-- t Y---:r- '--•a...��- a��--1r1 _ ..1 �ir�tts' •'=. 6.
''.;\ i�G t, L 'r_ '`='1 I- -:a rL,_.t•.?J�=-- is i' lt�I I I W_ �.j T_1 -_-
' ILL
E'~-=-`'_ tt T�_.L_�f
BEACH BLVD. �•� !`"Ii�'' `:—T='_'`..,;; I .__' I ) 1i____.-}r�,��, -�:I-� ' -I�' �._, �� �-���---- �I � ' 1=--
� ,-. F- ,\ l,�,r `�,{�_--x^Lr'-•I�� ���_�- ,._ - 1 L—�''�.-'--1=�.1 ��I j' ^I --�' II 1 :f III ! �r Ir,^•_�_ _
.;{ I ...—j -�__ �I�_-i'll' '. •I �T�. i. a' � - ..... '{- -- - = I I,: S. I�; I �' ��`I �_ - I�' -- _
—_• `—_ _ \ °. ,,... It{ _.,. 1 � J I f� FC l 7, -
IL �..`� __^�_.:� ��___ •-�1,.�' _-.,.-':r. 1 L1�-�1_ ;I t--� I� �' '-'' 1� __ -�W
•� - :=i-L i '_ � `. -- I*F :_ I 9._ !�..•It_i;- yy� i 1r� -_ _ "T"�i�l: 1 -+- L��-1—
WI I - ?__ _-_ , ' _ _ W f_ LJI \\I ": tF `' >i �I� --?'-
>,. - -•i^ i'= nF.._y7 _...—, C:'.�I^I^^� IIh7F .�--.�._ ^Ci I .L I _ j _T �IiTr Q' _-
¢I �._ ¢ __-- Wr' r�l¢ -6,' '?\�_ -1• _ I� _- !�� a - .I- !� -_�c�=,'af� -•J�,� C� -I —L-1�.. IL.
L_--
- - -t�L"L 1 J� ,r \•;
i _r; �•,, - II W; = 1 ; i t i= 1 \ 1 I L_ e 5 u 1i - -�` _'r cz--.c-1'.W I i5 1 UL -- -
i _ Z -�,�� � 'J 1`1.�=f; --11- ,t�. ;,�II •- - --- ¢I'-YS_�r--• i. S �rr'i: `.-G:1e�r�J:�_ \\ 'QI
�,QSI— -,�i f-L _�.'�'
_ �'�' .
O _ mot_- W --- -
I / W c,�r _
5 I �I
_._
I _.`/ .♦ ..yr.__ - �_ �1�' i-^. ..—_^„-.�' L I _"r•'1' _. I i I I , UI I I �- •-'J t
16
I
�;, .._,___.: _>:_'!—_: -_ —`--��a.� =-0 Et: � v s :I:i I, I� �i =�• � I�� u 70 I' I � I I '
el ' _'J._. ''� �� I_ _-- " -' " —:�,._;�', � I�-� •: ��.. _ - w -i1=--,I I I r�-� I 'i -I'_r /�" ,
I... .— 3 �;��~ �=�____ 11 •�'�I, -I]- I _ e_°�"`F -W$�—\ I� ` r _^I�' �„ i 4 �LI L.- _ GOB ENW
"C- <
- - -ter_•' I-1,-
u: rr--.-�-`• _ —;=_-L-_,r-'I_.�'� .J'_ ~1 � .r� w i .. �,--.�_ 'i J_j
¢, - 1- -_ ^,-�..,-�•-. •i` e. -.. _.-\�_v, t, _- �,L;��,-;— i 1-
.r �— '------ - r -3---� � I rI��"_-�r�..? �-......— �-i � -•,,,--��,�u; _� .:� I _r W _- 'v% - --•-' - Vie:' '. - - - - -��-- ------- - v,
E�j ^._.. II-�_l._-- .I���G�_-. =��+ _—A.� _7 _ -I _ 4 -j:R,' _-�i?�':.'•,L.1,�.J _ ?. —�8.•.i`- _
- -
1 i -T _:--�'^' I •1 i r• l r� _ - _�'^.�.fni. _ _!' - -� �,-J I'� -• I t .j; _.-_-I
_*=F-~- t? �.__':- I .'�-s-�^^ •� -k 'I.i.- :.j•_ __ - _ - - _-_�r.Ri -.L•.. -=�J.4"�. _ -_�� J :a.nrri I� I .__ __-.
TDVV
:a-- I r' •L'.',':.:@ �� .,�.:�•,I - e• -_r., I L_- _ T—�+'y:_F`_-_..=�'_-_-o —-_
'I.:. _:-f'r - •fir=-� N T �.. �.-r---,•�.���� _ ,• =-,fir-.:�'•1•,_�-j= ;._� ��._�-:.>�;-� - - �: _..J. ,._._...,-•' ,
w
'WV �::.`;:^= W-: �•'G�J.--�. ;�_-!h;J.--, -.,t=R'-�"-S�t;I_~I-.�._---,-=..-r�.,, -1Iif F�
FIG
V1E�-
......... CNEL NOISE C ONTOURS
_-_•.. - .._....--
_ _ -_ •�' _ - - -r=--_=`-
1988
v_._ - - -
_' - -
�-A.�-e _l__. .__ ............. _ ' P-•ems.-.._ _..._��_�:_ _---__---:r_`n'.:�-�I
- - -- =_
, � : _ � INGTON BEACH PROFES
SIONAL HE
LIPORT
Y
l �
_ — -
-
RIN DALE ST,__
�.:-mac-�--
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA
-_- --_ __•• � __ l,,!.�-_�.- - --:,�>=.� ---' � - - - =1�-----== ----�-_�,_ � •'HILL
N16513.AO
1�
J
MAGNOLIA ST.
r 1�
4�
— I•
M
I'
I..
.r
■
1000 2000 _ , / �tt-r`-e^ "=_„f _ U.
7000 0 - - - 47��i _ _l: �, — t�''^� .\__T_^\ l,`�___ _ - ■ ��_-�_�
' SCALE IN FEET
NEWLAND� __---- ST.`-'--1 _ - �'; , � _'\`.- -- --_ -- - =
- - --_� - +�;•—��=-'�_� � r—Jj3_�',C�=����,i � --f ' ' ,-�L ,_ 1.:� ,.� J•t - _ _-'-'_�I."I hj� '�',�'u-1,'
Ia� if�",`1-7 +-_.--_ —x"i- L _� 'z•_ s t r....�I;•'-'� + '-•l s.� �� �.` :'t-I•'•;,,;/'' ''1 '�F �' 1
L F;,.��---n�=�� Iul� _ - mac;% �i '•;�I bLi I �.�, �I ;.�� :� I ��-'�J!'�,�'�:r ,�,-�'-t•.'-
�� ',�_ �`-' - ••`ter 4--+'--•t�f..i G`I .�-.v- '.'.fit !z: ice .:. -• =u --:1
a �- •: il, � � C�<Li;�-=_Ir��•• I !:._.-- =r' _ ^'�11 I�`7r- � `�._ �` �^ S, - t-;_.,_� - wY �•�-I, �-•.:
O ' - —�.'-'� �. U � -Y=��'-Y_� —_ / -_ i - -_-- I i .__-is--.-+r-�1 ,._._I __ -• -�,w= �_-- --y��.!_
' Q —7 J'� --.y.a ._--�1�T Ui ram_ _
1 s
ILL s '--
- - •'-�'.,�o - -_ I I CI;_ �-� it_ -� �_ '..sc':.- .n.��, _ ____— 7
'' _. —.',!.,W.4IIp.L`.'_.-f-_..�_--1 1^'_�°'_..-./,--,,•:•I1.:..:a'-�'__/..:'jr.:l.�.if.:.f..VL-.;•1.�.!.—.'.:�.:.c...J_:.,I8I.:-am.-_�.a,.i._te".L_..Y-a-:"_•a..'S 1 iII Il!•f',�_Fl.I'-i}l.r-
�"-'...---.-.-•-�.--.:,Vi�•-�r.1--••'aVF•">.•'.r�✓--_.-___-1'''_.-_--__-l..':U,_—_-.-.,-•�,�:-..-Y.-.._-r....--.-_-_—_,�.bI1ti.f,.r
--_,�-.�-L_-l---(•�:.e.-__:.s_—_.�a:c..1,r'.''.T4':.`r'...__-�-�__—.._-_'1"!,`.c._--.�--�T-=.�.-s,R•.8>-,-.-r=.+�"_,c.-_r:aJ�._',r''._'):a 1-=,'_�;::_ll�e'-P11''�x=-rtR_"::�_�.�,.0..�,f-Ir_!--N_"--_'t.r'.�Fu D__a:tr i A-�C�--II?iE.'__�a'--,._".._`—--�_----_--.-.ma�:�1.•'r:c_4
�.•-'---(._•--_.-_.,�f t-_-.-�_•.'�'__�='r._�`�:.�i�am.'._�0Ja�ti 1'I t I Il_I�iI�LI
--_-_----__--'_:ti-_rp-_-.-__:`--^-�-`I.__„.r'—_4-}_-S�'--1,.•'-w.--•T-'I,_.^.'-_WW�.7.--.�;•._\-..--,�_fi��r.-VI''-^'�_T�D.!_-,r--•;I_�-.
I_--��f`I,,-_-:I,r�__:.I.,I_'1r..-_� I-i Ii!•�•-•x�.a!1I��.1..._.��_a r�I j Ii-I r7---�-__�-
:`-_�I1.4_�v'•:tLC'_�.,-•--.'z--�_'___L�_'I-u1='-_a�-s
l.,:"_.•r_".--i_•.pi._c'.=1��_w_�-.-t.-
,r;_`_��'.�tC��•a.I�"-am..-•.-,;,-;_--_--�---_--_-
_.wV.-r-,---W-T�__-�_--lI--�--;'-:--1---`__�t�.�.^!---_-,�_-'•,te--,.�_
_._I!i-•`�i-_L--,'F.1"_=_---_-__--�-.•-
_--"c�t•si_--':.
,-c�-_a--P�er�.J.ly•�'.�i�--H>t��,--,I=�IC I
i�—�—'r^-.'�_-•-_.1�-��
-.._,•:�
.. .z,I-�_-�-__a�h 1-~•��_=�-__'L"��-'�,-�`�I-!"-'�j`.•'r^`.J'I 1yt.����i'—I''�BEACH BL
...j�_�I•-,-
>r•_P�.�I
LL
-F�-iII-•._-_---�ri�'
r'f1
.r
F W LLl _ -i , U
; f ~I
LLI
cr
W JS _
—771
WT--ARD T60
70
65
--------------
itGOLDENWEST 1
is
�_
-- 1
-
FIGURE V-4c-- J-
L:t N NOISE CONTOURS
r. HUNTINGTON BEACH PROFESSIONALiaT.- HELIPORT
1993
- ' �
CITY HUNTINGTON BEACCALIFORNIA -.--.-
-.-...-
:
I
--
[--
` '
_,� ___- '-- -.._ ----�-'- —_�--- ,; `_I�-�-==x"r�-'`_`~ram---`�=_-� �• - - -'- - --'- - -___ - CH2M
L
N16513.A0
i-
MAGNOLIA ST. / -�J -VJ
WL
1000 0 1000 2000 _i - i'r -'` Z - _.. ., -.-. . _ - ,, .d•:,, Y -�
_ ._ ST.
' NEWLAND — .__ .
SCALE IN FEET _
1(--1� t I WT `ram f �..I� + t.,3 - ) ;- ) •.
^.�. _
-- ,, ,E�
77 ii ii
wQI '_ �'1^ u ram' + y _._ y"�a-- — C^ _ }•- --
Q G_ - -
g BEACH BLVD. E. --� --� _ .._. I: j _ _�I �� = - -
—
77
1-11
jLLLl I __ w—,• -�'- K—�7. LLS :,� —' - -n WI i \�< __ LLl -
>, I I ^[ - - -- W
�' . _
J
-
- �• -�-..li \\ - ._ - _--- � ,_. + _ ' Ifs L �` - II
__.. �:_ .� -- . _ _- _ _ , -- �: ,tom I --��� �_ � •I� -�:,J
cr
ui
Q i W - - W _.. w —
NILL
--- / I 2 t' f If; - 'Z T- F- -mi
,' o
J - ZI - Q - I - - - ' --_ -
m' W -�-
>�lf —- - - -- - -—— --- -
__.
1 - y I - - - --- --- -- -
- ._ I �T
/ } 1 _ 60
� .—_ t• ^� w �, 1' III O — f
z. -.
,
•1 � -+ � I —_ � -f
-I'_.._ .- ST -
'
// � = W I � !, `fir- ..._ .. -t - -_ - .L _ - .• _ ...__ 1' '� .___.__-_. - _ - I.
i
J
W
' S
�]`f ,.w�-�tee---, _ _-fit_'-- - -- � '—_ _ ���~ f �� •r•' _ I. _ _�I _
1 -- -- --- - - - - _ - -- - - -
-
IF-
45
.... -
77
7.
I !•
L .
_.
CNEL NOIS------------
E CONTOURS
` I y
SPRINrbALE_.._`- ,' '- �";' ' _ �.._ �� .- _�.,..----= -=-- HUNTI ON BEACH PROFESSIONAL HELIPORT
I
-- -- _ T�_- d —=r ,_ ---_�, y. NGT H
1 s CfTY OF HUNTINGTON BEAC
H, CALIFORNIA
—
a
t
N16513.A0 .r I
' main rotors, and other such technological advances are respon-
sible for these noise improvements. Other manufacturers are
' proceeding along similar lines.
The end result is that the future noise, even though it is
' not projected to cause any compatibility problems, will be
even less as the newer, quieter helicopters are phased into
' the fleet.
' Mitigation Measures
' Since no incompatible acres are enclosed within either State-
or City-defined excessive noise areas with the modification
in the approach flight track, no further mitigation measures
' are needed.
' Air Quality
' Environmental Setting
' The heliport site is within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB)
(See Figure V-6) . These air basins are delineated by terrain
and meteorological conditions and have been established in
' an effort to develop a strategy at the regional level to
improve and maintain air quality as required in the Federal
' Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977.
' Monitoring of air quality in SCAB is the responsibility of
the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) ;
' however, helicopter emission rates are regulated by the U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) . The EPA also, under
the authority of the Clean Air Act, has promulgated air quality
' standards (referred to as the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards or NAAQS) . Table 12 lists the NAAQS. The State
also has standards which, in fact, predate the NAAQS; however,
V-13
1
' — NORTHEAST
PLATEAU
1 NORTH - -- - . CH)
COAST
-- Sc N.ENTO _
SAKE SCALE IN MILES
_AKA ^-� 6uViA TAHOE p Ipp
r0, � GDU.':i IDS
I
AN
' SFRAt:CISC0
BAT AREA
fI J -
✓� GREAT
NORTH =.. SAN JOAOUIN BASIN \
' CENTRAL _
:VALLEY
COAST VALLEYS
SOUTH SOUTHEAST
CENTRAL _•___
COAST - _----
' -•W -~ .,�,�... DESERT
------------
SOUTH --- - -
COAST� {
/ SAN
' HELIPORT SITE O I E G O
' F1 AME V-G
CALIFORNIA AIR BASINS
HUNTINGTON BEACH PROFESSIONAL HELIPORT
' CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA
CH2M
RHiLL
' N16513.AO
t
i
Table 12
1 FEDERAL AND STATE OF CALIFORNIA AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
FEDERAL CALIFORNI4
' AVERAGING
POLLUTANT TIME Primary Secondary Primary
Carbon
Monoxide 8 hrs 9.0 ppm3 Same as ...
' (10 mg/m ) primary
standards
1 hr 35.0 ppm3 40.0 ppm
(41 mg/m ) (47 mg/m3)
1 12 hrs ... ... 10.0 ppm
(12 /R,3�
Nonmethane 6-9 a.m. 0.24' ppm3 Same as ...hydrocarbons (160 w g/m ) primary
standards
Photochemical 1 hr 0.12' ppm3 Same as 0.12 ppm oxidants (1 Mg/m ) primary (200 -g/m )
standards
Nitrogen Annual 0.05 ppm3 Same as
' dioxide (100 wg/m ) primary
standards
1 hr ... ... 0.25 ppm3
(480 rg/m )
Particulate Annual 75 Mg/m3 60 rg/m3 60 vg/m3
geometric
Mean
24 hrs 260 µg/m3 150 rg/m 100 v g/m3
Sulfur Annual 0.03 ppm3 0.02 ppm3 ••.
' dioxide arithmetic (80 µg/m ) (53 kg/m )
Mean
24 hrs 0.14 ppm3 0.10 ppm3 0.04 ppm3
' (373 og/m ) (267 vg/m ) (107 )Ag/m )
3 hrs 0.50 ppm3
(1334 „g/m )
' 1 hr ... ... 0.50 PPm3
(1334 A g/m )
' mot to be exceed more than one per year. ppm 3-parts per million
mg/m3-milligrams per cubic meter
.g/m -micrograms per cubic meter
1
V-15
1 goals of the Clean Air Act Amendments are to attain and maintain
the NAAQS. As such, air quality at the site should be considered
with respect to California standards as well as the NAAQS.
It is well known that Southern California frequently experi-
ences conditions that inhibit the dispersion of atmospheric
pollutants. Radiation inversions produce low mixing heights
in the early morning, approximately 70 percent of the time
during winter. Also, like the rest of the California coast,
Huntington Beach is subject to elevated subsidence inversions.
However, there is generally adequate ventilation from prevail-
ing winds to offset this potentially detrimental meteorological
condition.
Impact
' In general, during the site preparation and construction
stage , dust and particulates would be the primary problem
' with some gaseous pollutant emissions from the construction
equipment and vehicular traffic. Since this is a short-term
problem and one that is mitigated by standard practices, the
pollutants were not considered.
' The usual method of analyzing the impact of a project is to
compile an emission inventory and compare it to a regional
' inventory. That is because air pollution is a regional problem
and must be attacked on that level. Occasionally, a large
' complex project with heavy polluting sources or vehicle traffic
will be subjected to dispersion analysis; but that is not
' needed here.
Based on EPA emission factors and assumptions about vehicle
' usage (i.e. , 2 trips/LTO and 10 miles/trip) , the vehicle
emissions were calculated.
V-16
1
' Table 13
VEHICLE EMISSIONS
' Emissions (Lbs/Day)
' Pollutant 1988 1993 2003
CO 89. 1 138. 2 234 . 1
HC 5. 6 8. 7 14 . 7
' NO 5. 6 8. 7 14. 7
' The basic parameter for calculating helicopter emissions is
the landing/takeoff cycle (LTO) . The LTO includes the heli-
copter' s approach and landing, taxiing, idle, takeoff and
' climbout. Emission rates have been developed for each of
these segments and combined into one factor for the entire
' LTO (see Table 14) . Since a range of helicopters may use
the heliport, a composite LTO factor was applied in calculat-
ing the helicopter emissions in Table 15.
' Table 14
HELICOPTER EMISSIONS
1
Emissions (Lbs/Day)
Pollutant 1988 1993 2003
' CO 396. 1 614 . 4 1 , 030. 7
' HC 19. 9 30 . 9 51 . 8
NOx 8 . 3 12. 9 21 . 6
i
V-17
1
Table 15
COMBINED EMISSIONS
Emissions (Lbs/Day)
' Pollutant 1988 1993 2003
CO 485. 2 752. 6 1 , 264. 8
HC 25. 5 39. 6 66. 5
NOx 13. 9 21 . 6 36. 3
' The regional totals for these pollutants as developed for
the Air Quality Management Plan are:
1 Table 16
REGIO14AL EMISSIONS
Emissions Da Tons
( / y)
Pollutant SCAB Orange County
' CO 8 ,443 1 , 559
HC 2 ,871 548
NO 1 , 303 194
Compared to the Orange County portion, this heliport' s emissions
would add virtually a negligible amount. For example, the
CO addition at the 2003 level is only 0. 04 percent, the HC
addition is 0. 006 percent, and the NO addition is 0 . 009 percent.
' Also, it should be pointed out that most (if not all) of the
emissions are already occurring at John Wayne Airport.
' Mitigation Measures
There are no significant long-term impacts to air quality
from the proposed heliport. Total emissions from short-term
V-18
sources during construction can be reduced through the following
basic procedures:
l • Restrict open burning
' • Equip drilling apparatus with water or chemical
dust-control systems
• Clear and expose minimum land area
' • Use covered haul trucks
• Use vacuum-equipped sandblasting systems
tBiological Assessment
Introduction
' The purpose of this assessment was to inventory all plant
and wildlife on or near the project site; to determine habitat
1 quality and quantity; and to determine the existence or antici-
pated existence of all Federal and/or State listed rare,
threatened, and endangered species on or near the study area.
This was accomplished by systematic walk-over surveys of the
property in March 1983. All plants and wildlife encountered
during the surveys were identified from experience, familiarity
tof the general area, and the use of taxonomic field guides
(Munz , 1974; McMinn, 1974; Peterson, 1969) . The rare and
' endangered status of each organism was determined by con-
sulting published species lists prepared by the California
Native Plant Society (Smith et al. , 1980) , the Department of
Fish and Game (1980) , the Federal Register, and the Audobon
Society (1982 Blue List) .
V-19
' Based upon field observations , the potentially adverse or
beneficial impacts were assessed. Whenever possible, mitigation
measures were recommended to alleviate or reduce the severity_
of potentially adverse impacts.
Environmental Setting
The site appears highly disturbed. Approximately 30 percent
of the site is covered by large debris piles of broken concrete
and asphalt. The remainder of the site is covered by a thick
mantle (2- to 3-inch base) of coarse gravel intermixed with
asphalt. The gravelly soil was imported and poorly graded
over the site. Although the site appears relatively flat,
it is subject to severe ponding and inundation.
Vegetation. The site is relatively denude of vegetative
cover. The past heavy equipment traffic had removed all
existing vegetation from the central portions of the site.
' The mulching effect of the gravel mantle had prevented vegeta-
tion growth and recovery. Hence, any onsite vegetation is
confined to areas immediately adjacent the site borders .
The onsite vegetation is simple and consists of introduced
grasses and broadleaved weeds. The most conspicuous grasses
consist of Wild Oats (Avena fatua) , Barley (Hordeum volgare) ,
' Foxtail (Bromus rubens) , and Crab Grass (Digitoria sanguinalis) .
A number of broadleaved weeds are intermixed with the introduced
grass species. These include Field Mustard (Brassica rapa) ,
Wild Radish (Raphinus sativus) , Jointed Charlock (R. raphinistrum) ,
Storksbill (Erodium circutarium) , Russian Thistle (Salsola
' iberica) , and several others. These plants are of little
economic importance and are considered as garden pests .
The arboreal vegetation is very sparse, provides only marginal
cover, and consists of a few representative species. There
V-20
1 are two specimens of eucalyptus: Red Gum (Eucalyptus camaldensis)
and Red Flowering Gum (E. ficifolia) . Both trees are of
medium height (20 feet) and stature providing minimal canopy
cover. There are single specimens of Black Pine (Pinus nigra)
and Australian Fan Palm (Livistona australia) . All onsite
Itrees are considered nonnative and were introduced to the
site.
A detailed itemization of all plants encountered on the project
site are listed in Appendix II. All plants are considered
common species, and are not considered as either rare and
endangered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the California
' Native Plant Society.
' Wildlife. The relatively simple vegetative structure and
marginal cover provide a low quality wildlife habitat that
attracts and supports few wildlife species. The lack of
vegetative diversity, cover, and density provide few foraging
and nesting opportunities for wildlife. The few wildlife
species that were observed or expected are considered as
transients rather than as permanent residents.
A complete listing of observed or expected wildlife is provided
in Appendix II. None of the listed wildlife is considered
endangered by either the Department of Fish and Game or the
' U. S. Department of the Interior.
Impacts
Approval of the proposed project would result in the removal
of introduced weedy and arboreal plant species. This does
not pose an adverse environmental impact. The plants and
' wildlife observed or expected on the site are quite common.
However, the introduction of landscaping should provide limited
' cover and foraging opportunities for some urban seed eating
bird species.
V-21
Mitigation Measures
There are no recommended mitigation measures necessary to
protect the existing onsite vegetation or wildlife.
Cultural Resources
Archaeological Research, Inc. , (ARI) conducted a scientific
resources survey and inventory of the entire City territory
in the latter part of 1972. This included extensive field
inspection by teams of experienced archaeologists and paleon-
tologists. The report on this survey indicated that there
are no important fossil deposits; and, of the approximate
30 areas of prehistoric occupation, only 40 percent have any
tsubstantial scientific value. The others are too damaged by
recent human activity. As can be seen in Figure V-7 none of
i
the resource areas are near the heliport site.
The ARI report also discussed historic properties within the
City. Only two, according to the report, were important.
One of these, the Morillo Adobe, has not been precisely located
but is thought to have been on the western side of the Hunting-
ton Beach Mesa near Slater. The other is the Newland Ranch,
' a well known area. Neither of these is near the heliport
site.
Figure V-8 shows a plotting of Historic/Landmark sites.
Again, none of these is near the heliport site.
Archaeological survey statistics are maintained at the Univer-
sity of California at Los Angeles. This regional office for
*Report of a Scientific Resources Survey and Inventory:
Conducted for the City of Huntington Beach, California,
Archaeological Research, Inc. , January 1973 .
V-22
i
1
1
I �`ca P ^ ¢�1 +tic ♦° ♦,• i ® ARCHAEOLOGICAL SfTES
{aP, C}y7 4EJ ♦` ' \•j•C, PG ! V I ♦ ♦ _ SITE AREA REMAINING
c''f '____J`- _ -___ — P°�♦~ two ® SITE AREA DESTROYED
145 ORA SITE NJNBERS AS
I�`.♦�' Poo♦? / INVESTIGATED BY A.R.I.
-
%
' - p eL
I yG
E
V296
4♦ �S
94 I+ 346 - .
367 [�
Q359 \ 'cue, `♦ .
HELIPORT'" $56o- .P?P
-- \ P
S - " I TE
87142
S 282
`
88
3580.
276 I
E \ �84 (� _
89
293
292
' PACIFIC
CO-ASS 0149
- _ 290291
SOLECE: AEL JAW 1774
1 HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT FIGURE V-7
1 _ R A CHAEOLOGICAL SITES
HUNTINGTON BEACH .PROFESSIONAL HELIPORT
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA CH2M
CD HILL
1
f �o ¢� tic td its
% ,
I ---
14 o SL
%\ � ' ♦
y
Q � P
OgJ' ,, , ♦ PO tt'
13 I '
J _
SITE
z
10
r 8
19
16
�.
P4Cli IC COAST 6
1 SOUiK!:/t6 R ANNWCi 9-1-77
i ® HUNTINGTON BEACH C4LO IF RNIA
lo p PLANNING DEPARTMENT FIGURE V-8
1
HISTORIC/LANDMARK SITES
i
HUNTINGTON BEACH PROFESSIONAL HELIPORT
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA CH2M
N 16513.AO ::HILL
i
I
' Los Angeles, Orange, and Ventura Counties is a division of
the State Department of Parks and Recreation. Data in this
' office reveal that the historical and archaeological findings
are negative at the heliport site. *
tDrainage
' Existing Site Drainage
' The site drains by overland flow in a southeasterly direction.
Ponded water exists on the site, following rain events , due
to the uneven surface. The site appears to be used for stock-
piling construction debris. An abandoned, water-filled rock
quarry forms the west boundary of the proposed heliport. An
' existing Joint Powers Fire Training facility forms the north
boundary of the site. This facility drains by overland flow
' to several grate type inlet basins. Pipes transport this
water for discharge into the rock quarry. East of the site
' is Gothard Street. The street drainage north of the Mt. Joy
drains to the north to a storm drain at Prodan Drive. Street
drainage south of Mt. Joy drains to the south toward Ellis
' Avenue. The south boundary of the proposed site fronts on
private property zoned for restricted manufacturing, M1-CD.
Future Drainage
' The City of Huntington Beach Public Works Department will
' require that the heliport site drain toward Gothard Street.
Preliminary hydrology was performed for the site based on a
storm with a reoccurrence interval of 25 years. The unim-
proved site will generate nearly 7 c. f. s. during a 25-year
storm. Developing the site will increase the 25-_year flow
*Telephone conversation with Mr. Richard Aycock on April 5 ,
1983.
V-25
I
' to nearly 10 c. f. s. (see Appendix for calculations) . This
increase in flow is consistent with the City' s zoning ordi-
nances and will be mitigated by downstream drainage facilities
designed and maintained by the City of Huntington Beach.
' Alternatives
' As mentioned earlier, the search for a heliport site has
been a long one, and a number of sites have been looked at
' over the years particularly for housing the police helicopter
operation. Five alternative locations are described in this
' section. Each one is in the corridor planned for general
industrial uses as is the current site. Each was previously
rejected because of environmental or economic costs.
Metzler Site
' This site is shown as Alternative 1 in Figure V-9. The Metzler
' Site was considered as an alternative site for relocation of
the police heliport. It is located 400 feet east of Gothard
' Street midway between Slater and Talbert Avenues and comprises
an estimated 2. 5 acres, which is too small for the current
joint use concept. This site would need considerable site
' preparation due to the existence of a drainage swale in the
middle of the property. The Metzler Site is currently vacant.
' During the aerial survey, much of this site was under water
(February 29 , 1980) .
' The Metzler Site is located 1, 000 feet due west from a residen-
tial community.
Manthei Site
The Manthei Site is a 3-acre vacant parcel adjacent to the
A To Z Wrecking Yard. This site is shown as Alternative 2
in Figure V-9. This site is just 200 feet south of Site 1
near Gothard Street and Talbert Avenue.
1
V-26
i
WARNER AVE
'na OR
: I I
r - - I
C F-E
IM.Mt'tS3',R:✓t ter. $Cn':-GLi
CF-RL"RA'ss
CEDAR ME` j I t -_{. M±� L1:;i1L
i
CF-EBETTY � I
YANfYXEE DRU61R
' W_ '
CF-C �^O ED
I E. II
I!1• J_J
�I
F [=_�
-
a(ER
::::: 1 1_
T-
1—{
F.44
3 r ��'�>:��:?;�r< J�? I±.{ • 'l1.i1 1, 1 I,•'• ' aoaA.o E�
Z ILI
!. 1 ;1'tlilllll Hit.!lia , ;
u.1,}:y,.l.$J t•L.171•i rT���i ;i ii7:1'� ' I'
TALBERT AVE
tc Aat ,R t'w
FIGURE V-9
ALTERNATIVES 1, 2, and 3
HUNTINGTON BEACH PROFESSIONAL HELIPORT
CITY OF HMTNGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA
CH2M
I�Hll.L
N18613.A0
The nearest residential community is located to the east
about 1 , 400 feet. As with Alternative 1 , this site is too
' small for a joint use heliport.
Buccella Site
The Buccella property is midway between Alternatives 1 and 2
just to the east across the Southern Pacific right of way.
This site is shown as Alternative 3 in Figure V-9. Notice
' that not more than a few hundred feet separate these alter-
native sites. The Bucella Site is. closest to the residential
tract, 800 feet away. This vacant site is relatively flat.
Fujita Site
1
The Fujita Property is depicted as Alternative 4 in Figure V-10 .
The Fijita Site is located on the west side of Gothard Street
' midway between Talbert Avenue and Ellis Avenue. The Orange
County Transfer Station is north and the Joint Powers Fire
' Training Facility is just to the south.
The nearest residential community is located 800 feet to the
' east.
tThe Fujita Site is comprised of a labor camp and a rubber
molding company. These tenants have a 5-year lease and are
' just completing the first year of that lease. If this site
is selected, the relocation of these tenants will ultimately
' be paid for by the City of Huntington Beach. This expense
coupled with the accelerated cost of this parcel ($850 , 000)
' in recent years may be prohibitive.
Alternative 5
This site received substantial consideration and, in fact,
' was analyzed via the EIR process 3 years ago. It offered
V-28
' TALBERT AVE
T.
5
ri"
HI
ff�, ,
s z
'�
=a�a
T
1 =
y N
4 _ - - - �
ONt.np DR
-o " 00
_1
—
' •IlLLOM DO
3. TIPELLIS
S I U
•�1
FlCd1w000.`E CA
-
N
_ n
N — -
W '
I
.� �� �• ITT =' �_V�
► 1.�—1 �-1
' GARFIELD AVE
OAM I,,
FKAM V-10
ALTERNATIVES 4 and 5
HUNTINGTON BEACH PROFESSIONAL HELIPORT
' CRY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA
CH2M
CHILL
N18Sl3.A0
' sufficient size and location (see Figure V-10) for a joint
use concept but was rejected on environmental grounds . Approach
tracks into this site would have produced an unacceptable
' level of noise in a nearby residential area.
1 SUMMARY
1 A heliport operated at the levels forecast appears to have
no adverse environmental impacts and is in conformance with
1 the City' s General Plan.
i
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
i
1
V-30
U)
w
U
H
Ll
2
W
a
a
' APPENDIX 1
GLOSSARY
' a. Aircraft. A device that is used or intended to be used
for flight in the air. (FAR Part 1)
b. Airport. An area of land or water that is used or intended
' to be used for the landing and takeoff of aircraft, and
includes its buildings and facilities, if any. (FAR
' Part 1)
c. Approach-Departure Path. The flight track of the helicop-
ter as it approaches or departs from the heliport' s
designated takeoff and landing area.
d. Autorotation. A rotorcraft flight condition in which
the lifting rotor is driven entirely by action of the
air when the rotorcraft is in motion. (FAR Part 1)
' e. Downwash. The volume of air moved downward by the action
of the rotating main (lift) rotor. When downwash strikes
' the ground or some other solid surface, it causes a
turbulent outflow of air from beneath the helicopter.
f. Enroute Altitude. The cruising altitude maintained by
' the helicopter along the route of flight between origin
and destination.
' g. Ground Effect. An improvement in flight capability
that develops whene-Ter the helicopter flies or hovers
near the ground or other surface. It results from the
cushion of denser air built up between the ground and
' the helicopter by the air displaced downward by the
rotor.
1
h. Helicopter. A rotorcraft that, for its horizontal motion,
depends principally on its engine-driven rotors. (FAR
' Part 1)
i. Helicopter Landing Site. A location used for helicopter
itakeoffs and landings on a one-time, a temporary, or an
infrequent basis.
j . Heliport. An area of land, water, or structure used or
' intended to be used for the landing and takeoff of heli-
copters. (FAR Part 1)
k. Heliport Approach Surface. The approach surface begins
at each end of the heliport primary surface with the
' same width as the primary surface, and extends outward
and upward for a horizontal distance of 4 , 000 feet where
tits width is 500 feet. The slope of the approach surface
is 8 to 1 for civil heliports and 10 to 1 for military
heliports. (FAR Part 77)
' 1. Heliport Elevation. The elevation of the takeoff and
landing area and the heliport primary surface.
' M. Heliport Primary Surface. The area of the primary surface
coincides in size and shape with the designated takeoff
' and landing area of a heliport. This surface is a horizon-
tal plane at the elevation of the established heliport
' elevation. (FAR Part 77)
' n. Heliport Transitional Surfaces. These surfaces extend
outward and upward from the lateral boundaries of the
heliport primary surface and from the approach surfaces
' at the slope of 2 to 1 for a distance of 250 feet measured
horizontally from the centerline of the primary and
' approach surfaces . (FAR Part 77)
i 0. Hover. A flight characteristic peculiar to helicopters
and certain other aircraft which enables them to remain
imotionless above a fixed point on the earth' s surface.
p. Hover Taxi. The very low level, slow flight of a helicopter.
1
q. Instrument Approach Procedure. A series of predetermined
1 maneuvers for the orderly transfer of an aircraft under
instrument flight conditions from the beginning of the
i initial approach to a landing, or to a point from which
a landing may be made using visual procedures.
ir. Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) . Rules that govern the
procedures for conducting instrument flight.
i
S. Parking Area (Apron or Ramp) . A defined area on the
iheliport intended to accommodate helicopters for purposes
of loading or unloading passengers or cargo, refueling,
iparking, or maintenance.
t. Perimeter Lights. A system of lights defining the peri-
meter of a heliport takeoff and landing area.
lU. Peripheral Area. An obstruction-free area adjacent to
the takeoff and landing area serving as a safety zone.
lV. Takeoff and Landing Area. A designated area on the
l heliport which is coincident with the heliport primary
surface and the boundaries of which are used to establish
the FAR Part 77. 29 imaginary surfaces. These surfaces
lare used for determining obstructions to air navigation.
As such, it is the heliport area from which helicopter
' departures and approaches are intended to originate or
terminate.
i
1
' W. Taxiing. The powered movement of the helicopter from
one area to another; i.e. , from the takeoff and landing
area to the parking area. Helicopters equipped with
skid- or float-type landing gear must hover taxi , while
helicopters equipped with wheeled landing gear may taxi
' with wheels in contact with the ground.
' X. Taxiway. A designated, but not necessarily paved, path
or route for helicopters to taxi from one heliport area
' to another.
y. Terminal Instrument Procedures. Procedures for instrument
approach and departure of aircraft to and from civil
and military airports.
Z . TERPS. Terminal Instrument Procedures Manual.
' aa. Touchdown Pad. The load-bearingportion of the heli ort ' s
P P
' designated takeoff and landing area on which a helicopter
may alight.
' bb. UNICOM. An air-to-ground ratio communication facility
providing advisory information on airport and heliport
' services and utilization. Locations and frequencies of
UNICOM' s are shown on aeronautical charts and publications .
' cc. Visual Plight Rules (VPR) . Rules that govern the procedures
g g
' for conducting flight under visual conditions.
SOURCE: Advisory Circular 150/5390-1B.
APPE14DIX II
PLANTS
Family Name*
Common Name* Scientific Name*
Amaranthaceae - Amaranth Family
' Tumbleweed Amaranthus albus
' Apiaceae - Carrot Family
Queen Anne' s Lace Daucas carrota
Araceae - Palm Family
Australian Fan Palm Livistona australia
Araliaceae - Ginseng Family
' English Ivey Hedra helix
1 Asteraceae - Sunflower Familv
Prickly Lettuce Lactuca serriola
' Telegraph Weed Heterotheca
Common Dandelion Taraxacum officinale
Mule Fat Baccharis glutinosa
t
Boraginaceae - Borage Family
Fiddleneck Amsinkia intermedia
' Brassicaceae - Mustard Family
Field Mustard Brassica rapa
' Black Mustard Brassica nigra
Jointed Charlock Rhaphinus raphinistrum
Wild Raddish Rhaphinus sativus
Chenopodiaceae - Goosefoot Family
Lamb' s Quarter Chenopodium album
' Fabaceae - Pea Family
Bur-Clover Medicago polymorpha
Geraniaceae - Geranium Family
Storksbill Erodium cicutarium
1 Lamiaceae - Mint Familv
Horehound. Marrubium vulgare
Malvaceae - Mallow Family
Cheeseweed Malva parviflora
1
Myrtaceae - Myrtle Family
' Red Gum Eucalyptus Eucalyptus camaldensis
Red Flowering Gum Eucalyptus ficifolia
Pinaceae - Pine Family
' Black Pine Pinus nigra
Poaceae - Grass Family
' Barley Hordeum vulgare
Crabgrass Digitaria sanguinalis
Foxtail Bromas rubens
Wild Oats Avene fatua
Winter Grass Poa annua
Polygonaceae - Buckwheat Family
Wild Rhubarb Rumex hymenosepalas
Solanaceae - Nightshade Family
Tree Tobacco Nicotiana lg auca
' APPENDIX III
WILDLIFE
' Avifauna
' Common Name Species Name
' Western Meadowlark Sturnella neglecta
' Common Crow Corvus bradyrhynchos
' Starling Sturnus vulgaris
Killdeer Charadirus vociferus
' House Finch Carpodacus mexicanus
' Mammals
' Domestic Cat Felis domesticus
' Domestic Dog Canis familaris
Harvest Mouse Reithrodontomys sue.
' Norwav Rat Ratus norvegicus
Valley Pocket Gopher Thomomys bottae
' Lizards
' Side-blotched Lizard Uta stansburiana
Western Fence Lizard Sceloporus occidentalis
1
1 APPENDIX IV
DRAINAGE CALCULATION SHEETS
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
t
1
1
1
Isimm Moll"RAINFALL INTENSITY DATA FOR ,
Moll 25 YEAR RECURRENCE INTERVAL 'i
01110mom
®®® ®® ®®®®®®■■■®■®■®®■■■■■
®®■1 I■■ '`' „��®®®■■■ER ■■■■■■■■■
c •
lop
®®NE■ /W®MI®®MI® ®® ®®®®
- imm wo®m®®IMIMMIMISIMMIMIMIMIM
®�®�'�®MI®M ®®®®®®®®®
■mmmumil ®®®®® ®®®®®M®
■IMIMoI>®■r ■®®®■ ■®®®®®®
. : IM
® mnl ®r®®®®®® ®®IM
® rill'® ®®®®®®®®®®®® MINE
OWIRIAMrr®®®r®®®rr®®®®®®
=6E®r®®®®®®®®®®r®®®®®
®®®a;® ®® ®r®®®®®®®®
. ®®E®J® - il®iMIM®®®IM®®®®M�
OME1 1 ®®®IM®®®®®®MI®i
®®®Ifl® ®® mmmmm®m®®i ®E
mmi ®!®r®1� ®®�irr ® ®I rr
RIMI®®®Ifi®®RI®MIMM ®MIM®IMIMI : ®E
®®!11®®®®IMIMIMM®®IM®®M®l ®E
0101111®®®IMMIMIN®MIM®®®MIl _ i®
®®lii!®mm®mmmmmmim®®i : M®
®MIIiA®MMIMM MMMMIMIMM®I
®®11111M®IMINISMIOMMM®IMMMIll ME
M®iSIMIOMMIEMMMMMMIMMISM ®
®®i®I N®ISMIUMMMMM®MMM®®®r®
FACILITY NO 8 NAME HUNTINGTON BEACH HELIPORT FACILITY F
alculated by G.L.J. Date.3-18-83
Checked by Date
Concentration b Arpa Soil Land tAc est tc F I o Discharge FlowpT Slope V Hydraulics and
Pointin ef
Description No. Group Use min min in/hr n 0 Left n
ft /ft ft /sec Notes
PRE—DEVE OP ENT HYD LG OY
700 0.003 Ah=2' IN
~s.E.SITE 1 A 4.9 4.9 D PARK 20.1 25 1.85 V 0.7H7 6.7 6.7 SE DIRECTION
CORNER
POST—DEV LO PMEh T Hy )ROL OGY
700 0.003 Ah=2' IN
3.E.31TE 1 A 4.9 4.9 D COMM- 13.2 25 2.34 0.845 9.70 9.70 SE DIRECTION
CORNER ERCIAL
INCREASE IN FLOW-3.0 cfs
45% INCREASE
I
RATIONAL. METHOD DISCHARGE
CALCULATION SHEET �-"=^I
::I ill l_
N1e513.A0
' SOURCES
BASE MAP —QUADRANGLE MAPS,GEOLOGICAL SIRVEY,
US DEPT OF THE INTERIOR.
SOL GROUPS —REPORT FOR GENERAL SOIL MAP,ORANGE COMM,
— CALIFORNIA,SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE,
US DEPT OF AGRICULTURE,1966
,A .v. `:+? .\• V.
'_fir �t:.. �.�i'"?4t,;.\ �`.'\r` �\V�,�\�,l �i�%.�\ �'►o '�.o i
v.
,N'..
Lu
V / � `;Aar J�,� �.,e- �. � '�` •'. ``� •
' LOCATION `
I` "V '
`le.
%NLL
� °. • ,.,. :�. '�;�F .:;j. Wiz..,� ',.�,�'�
ot
HUNTINGTON"�?»;,
BEACH
3 ,' ♦. �,
LEGEND
A� /]B C(�/�D HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUPS
\VJ INv/I! RAINFALL INTENSITY ZONES SEE PLATE A-I.
v U V U HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP BOUNDARY
' HYDROLOGY
CLASSIFICATION OF SOILS
PER O.C.F.C.D.MANUAL PLATE B-la 1973 CH2M
!Z HiLL
N18613.A0
TIME OF CONCENTRATION FOR INITIAL SUBAREAS
' Teo
Limitations;
L 100 1. Maximum length - 1000'
coo 90 2. Maximum area - 10 acres s
900 eo
Boo 70 M 6
' . goo 4/ v
700 SO too W 7 0
y
d
a 100 �
' 600 so M go e
> so a o 9
soo 40 20 o W
w
w K 10 , 10—
Dens ass �!/ m
400 ° H
w 30 Ave Grass c 2 12 0
w
w 350 m 25 (2 poor GrassAj
.. ° �s I 13
a ) �� 3 m 14 c
' w 300 6 Agrieultu c b 1s E
1 School
2s0
7 Single Family 0e
' u F 16 Multiple Family c
so `� I s `
c o
14 C 20 u
200 t v 02 j
' u
.Oog r
� 10 005 2 s w
150 0 9 KEY d
' e L H Tc — K ►Tc' 30 .5
E+
' 7 EXAMPLE:
(1) L - 550', H - 0.7', K - Single Family 35
Land Use, Tc - 18.5 min.
6 (2) L - 550', H - 0.7', K - Agricultural 40
100 Lane Use, TO - 24.7 min.
' s
L3 / 1/5
Tc - K H
' 4
TIME OF CONCENTRATION
' NOMOGRAPH
' PER O.C.F.C.D.MANUAL PLATE E-1,1973
g LL
' N16513.AO
....................................................._.._--- -------------------------------------------
R!!! .....N WIN,
......�..
LEGEND:
1. COMMERCIAL 4. SINGLE FAMILY
3. TRAILER PARK 6. PARK
Ham BASIS FOR CURVES
A. EQUATION: C = 0.85 [a, + x a
NT I = RAINFALL INTENSITY
mom®1 .- .. f = LOSS RATE,•
MEMO
SOIL COVER: RESIDENTIAL LANDSCAPING
D.
MEN ,; ® .
MEOM PLATE E-4
W
� ., ® .
G. I FROM PLATE E-2a OR E-2b
EEO MEMEMMommmmAMEN Ei