Attachment_2_-_PIE_Master_Plan_-_March_2021-_Appendices.pdf

Prepared for:

St. Pete – Clearwater International Airport 14700 Terminal Boulevard, Suite 221 Clearwater, FL 33762

Airport Master Plan A P P E N D I C E S

ST. PETE – CLEARWATER INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT

March 2021

APPENDIX A

Correspondence

Orlando Airports District Office 8427 SouthPark Circle, Suite 524 Orlando, FL 32819-9058

Phone: (407) 487-7220

Fax: (407) 487-7135

March 19, 2021

Mr. Thomas R. Jewsbury Executive Director 14700 Terminal Blvd., Ste 221 Clearwater, FL 33762

Dear Mr. Jewsbury:

RE: St. Pete-Clearwater International Airport (PIE), Clearwater, Florida

ASN 2020-ASO-5535-NRA

Conditional Airport Layout Plan Approval

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) conditionally approves your Airport Layout Plan (ALP) for St. Pete-Clearwater International Airport, dated March 2021. This approval is subject to the condition that any proposed airport development shown on the ALP requires environmental processing and may not be undertaken without the FAA's prior written environmental approval.

All New On-Airport Development, including but not limited to:

Future Runway 18L/36R Future Commercial Apron Epansions Future Terminal Expansion Future Genral Aviation Apron Epansions ** And any other action requiring NEPA documentation action under FAA Order 5050.4.

This ALP approval is conditioned on acknowledgement that any development on airport property requiring Federal environmental approval must receive such written approval from FAA prior to commencement of the subject development. This ALP approval is also conditioned on acceptance of the plan under local land use laws. We encourage appropriate agencies to adopt land use and height restrictive zoning based on the plan.

Please make note and take action of the following comments:

ALP reviewed as a planning document and does not include any obstacle evaluations. Any changes to the runway physical end latitude/longitude coordinates or elevations must be uploaded into this iOEAAA runway/data base, to ensure the FAR Part 77 and TP calculations are run on the most recent data.

The FPT review the NRA case at St Pete-Clearwater Intl Airport, the ALP is conditionally approved for planning purposes only. All construction projects are subject to final FAA approval via a separate aeronautical study ie stock piles, haul route, equipment storage and construction equipment. Any projects that will require the development of new or amendment of procedures (movement of thresholds, displaced-threshold, renumbering / runway extensions, new runways or taxiway) must be coordinated/ requested with the FPT 24 to 36 months prior to the completion of construction project, If not procedures will be NOTAMed N/A until new or amend procedures are published. This however is not a request for procedures. Official procedure request must be done though the information gateway web site below https://faa.gov/air_traffic/flight_info/aeronav/procedures/ifp_form/. Any and all aeronautical ,runway and or navigational data (obstacle survey data because of movement of threshold or displacement (VG or NVG survey) must be submitted 18 - 24 month prior to the requested publication chart date through the Airports GIS portal site at https://adip.faa.gov/agis/. Failure to have all data up load into the portal 18 -24 month will delay requested publication date.

Airport Layout Plans (ALPs) are both long term planning and current condition documents. The long term planning portion is considered conceptual in nature.

ALP review and acceptance does not constitute blanket approval of new structures given the absence of detailed information required for comprehensive review. All new construction requires separate aeronautical study submissions with detailed building/construction plans for independent study. Ensure appropriate Notice of Construction/Alteration, FAA 7460-1, is filed for review of all new permanent and temporary structures. Review and acceptance of this ALP shall not be considered as an approval of any future projects or any non-standard conditions. The airport proponent should initiate a request for a Modification of Standards for any airport design criteria that does not meet the standards described in AC 150/5300-13A.

Flight Standards has no objection to the PIE ALP as submitted.

VISAIDS COMMENTS: Proposed RW 18L-36R PAPIs & REILs 1. The ALP proposes to install a future RW 18L-36R, two future PAPIs, and two future REILs, one set on each end of the runway. 2. Coordination will be required with the FAA ATO P&R Group if the future PAPIs or REILs will be owned or maintained by the FAA. 3. Coordination will be required with the FAA National Flight Data Center, the owner of the future PAPIs to complete a VGSI Data Form for each PAPI. 4. No object shall penetrate the Obstacle Clearance Surface (OCS) for the future PAPIs.

5. Coordination will be required with the FAA Aircraft Operations (FAA Flight Inspection Services) to perform a commissioning flight inspection for the future RW 18L-36R PAPIs & REILs. 6. There must be a clear line of sight to the future PAPIs & REILs from approaching aircraft, from the ATCT or from any other controlling point. WEATHER COMMENTS: Identify and show ASOS location on ALP page 3 of 20. GENERAL COMMENTS: Airport Layout Plans (ALPs) are long term planning initiatives and limited in scope, therefore conceptual in nature. ALP approval does not constitute blanket approval of new structures given the absence of detailed structure information required for comprehensive review. All new structures require separate aeronautical study submissions with detailed building plans for independent study. Ensure appropriate Notice of Construction/Alteration, FAA 7460-1, is filed for review of all permanent and temporary structures.

The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018, section 163(d), has limited the FAA’s review and approval authority for ALPs. The Act limits the FAA’s authority to those portions of the ALP that:

Materially impact the safe and efficient operation of aircraft at, to, or from the airport;

Adversely affect the safety of people or property on the ground adjacent to the airport as a result of aircraft operations; or

Adversely affect the value of prior Federal investments to a significant extent.

FAA has not made a determination on whether or not it retains review and approval authority for any proposed facilities depicted on the ALP associated with this letter (unless otherwise noted). Under Section 49 USC §47107(a)(16) (as revised per section 163(d) of Pub.L. 115-254), FAA must separately determine whether it retains approval authority for each individual proposed facility depicted on an ALP before construction occurs.

Although section 163(d) has limited the FAA’s review and approval authority of proposed projects depicted on an ALP, airport sponsors must continue to maintain an up-to-date ALP in accordance with Federal law, 49 U.S.C. §47107(a)(16).

In making this determination, the FAA has considered matters such as the effects the proposal would have on existing or planned traffic patterns of neighboring airports, the effects it would have on the existing airspace structure and projected programs of the FAA, the effects it would have on the safety of persons and property on the ground, and the effects that existing or proposed manmade objects (on file with the FAA), and known natural objects within the affected area would have on the airport proposal.

The FAA has only limited means to prevent the construction of structures near an airport.

The airport sponsor has the primary responsibility to protect the airport environs through such means as local zoning ordinances, property acquisition, avigation easements, letters of agreement or other means.

Approval of the plan does not indicate that the United States will participate in the cost of any development proposed. AIP funding requires evidence of eligibility and justification at the time a funding request is ripe for consideration. When construction of any proposed structure or development indicated on the plan is undertaken, such construction requires normal 60-day advance notification to FAA for review in accordance with applicable Federal Aviation Regulations (i.e., Parts 77, 157, 152, etc.). More notice is generally beneficial to ensure that all statutory, regulatory, technical and operational issues can be addressed in a timely manner.

Furthermore, the design and location of any stormwater retention/detention facilities on or near the airport must comply with FAA Advisory Circular 150/5200-33, "Hazardous

Wildlife Attractants on or Near Airports", and must be approved on the ALP prior to construction.

We look forward to working with you in the continued development of your airport.

Sincerely, Pedro J. Blanco Lead Program Manager

Enclosure cc:

FAA Lines-of-Business (via AGIS) FDOT/ 7 w/ALP (via email) FDOT Central Office (via email)

Orlando Airports District Office

8427 SouthPark Circle, Ste 524 Orlando, FL 32819 Phone: (407) 487-7720 Fax: (407) 487-7135

April 18, 2018 Mr. Thomas R. Jewsbury Airport Director 14700 Terminal Blvd, Suite 221 Clearwater, FL 33762

RE: St. Petersburg-Clearwater International Airport, Clearwater, FL

AIP 3-12-0075-043-2017

Approval of Airport Forecast for Airport Master Plan

This letter responds to your submittal of “Chapter 3: Forecast of Aviation Activity” for St.

Petersburg-Clearwater International Airport dated April 2018. The based aircraft, operations forecast and passenger enplanements shown in Table 3-43, of the report are approved to be used in your on-going master planning efforts.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 407-484-7234.

Sincerely, Jenny Iglesias-Hamann Program Manager/Community Planner

APPENDIX B

Public Outreach

Date:

Name:

Address:

Phone or Email:

EMAIL: info@piemasterplan.com MAIL: Douglas DiCarlo

ESA

4200 West Cypress St, Suite 450 Tampa, FL 33607

Comments may be submitted at the Workshop, by email, or to the address below.

Comment Form

Master Plan Public Workshop

Please provide comments in the area below (use back or attach additional sheets if necessary):

St. Pete-Clearwater International Airport

October 2017 version Page 1 of 2

GENERAL PUBLIC SURVEY

The St. Pete-Clearwater International Airport (PIE) Management and the Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners are continuously working to improve the airport for its tenants, the traveling public, and surrounding community. An important part of this effort is the creation of a new 20-year Airport Master Plan. We encourage your participation in the Master Plan process to learn about your experiences at PIE, ideas for the facilities, suggested improvements, desired services, and long-term vision for the airport.

Please take a few minutes to complete and return this survey. Thank you!!

Name

Address

Phone Number

Email Address

Date

1. In general, tell us about your overall impression of PIE and your experiences when using PIE for travel.

2. What would you like to see improved at PIE?

October 2017 version Page 2 of 2

3. Looking to the future, what is your vision for PIE and what should be accomplished at the airport over the next 20-year period?

4. Additional Comments:

Your information is greatly appreciated!

Please return survey to:

Douglas DiCarlo

E-Mail: info@piemasterplan.com

Mail: ESA 4200 West Cypress Street, Suite 450 Tampa, FL 33607

November 2017 version Page 1 of 2

GENERAL AVIATION USER SURVEY

The St. Pete-Clearwater International Airport (PIE) Management and the Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners are continuously working to improve the airport for its tenants, the traveling public, and surrounding community. An important part of this effort is the creation of a new 20-year Airport Master Plan. We encourage your participation in the Master Plan process to learn about your experiences at PIE, ideas for the facilities, suggested improvements, desired services, and long-term vision for the airport.

Please take a few minutes to complete and return this survey. Thank you!!

Name

Address

Phone Number

Email Address

Date

1. How long have you been a tenant or user of general aviation facilities at PIE?

2. Do you rent hangar space or an apron tie-down? If you rent hangar space, what type hangar do you rent?

3. Do you participate in any airport aviation-related organizations or committees? If Yes, which ones?

4. In general, tell us about your experience as a tenant / airport user at PIE.

5. What airside improvements would improve your experience at PIE? (i.e. hangars, taxiway improvements,etc.)

6. What NAVAIDs / instrument approaches would improve your utilization of PIE? Are there any obstructions that hinder your use of the airport?

7. What landside improvements would improve your experience at PIE? (i.e., parking, security improvements, etc.)

November 2017 version Page 2 of 2

8. What type of additional aircraft storage hangar facilities at PIE would best suit your needs? (Select one or more).

_____ Regular T-Hangar _____ Large T-Hangar

_____ Clearspan Hangar (approx. 60’ x 60’) _____ Clearspan Hangar (approx. 100’ x 100’)

_____ Corporate Hangar (150’ x 150’) _____ Other

9. Understanding that many general aviation services are provided by private commercial service providers (FBOs), what general aviation services do you feel need improvement at PIE?

_____ Fixed Base Operator Services _____ Apron Tie-Downs

_____ Fuel Sales and Service _____ Apron Parking

_____ Aircraft Maintenance Services _____ Vehicle Access and Parking

_____ Avionics Repair Services _____ Access to Wireless Networks

_____ Flight Planning / Weather _____ Signage

_____ Aircraft Rental _____ Food / Refreshments

_____ Counter Sales _____ Concessions

_____ Flight Instruction _____ Security / Access Control

_____ Ground Transportation Services _____ Other

Specifically, what would you like to see improved?

10. Looking to the future, what is your vision for PIE and what should be accomplished at the airport over the next 20-year period?

11. Additional Comments:

Your information is greatly appreciated!

Please return survey to:

Douglas DiCarlo

E-Mail: info@piemasterplan.com

Mail: ESA

November 2017 version Page 1 of 2

FBO AND SERVICE PROVIDER SURVEY

The St. Pete-Clearwater International Airport (PIE) Management and the Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners are continuously working to improve the airport for its tenants, the traveling public, and surrounding community. An important part of this effort is the creation of a new 20-year Airport Master Plan. We encourage your participation in the Master Plan process to learn about your experiences at PIE, ideas for the facilities, suggested improvements, desired services, and long-term vision for the airport.

Please take a few minutes to complete and return this survey. Thank you!!

Name

Address

Phone Number

Email Address

Date

1. How long have you been a tenant at PIE?

2. Do you participate in any aviation-related organizations or airport committees? If Yes, which ones?

3. In general, tell us about your experience as a tenant and commercial aviation service provider at PIE.

4. What airside improvements would help improve your services at PIE and your customer’s experience? (i.e., apron improvements)

5. What type NAVAIDs/instrument approaches would improve your services at PIE? Do obstructions that hinder your use of the airport?

6. What landside improvements would improve your experience at PIE and your customer’s experience? (i.e.. parking, security improvements, etc.)

November 2017 version Page 2 of 2

7. What type of additional facilities and improvements at PIE would best suit your needs and those of your customers? (Select all that apply).

_____ Regular T-Hangars _____ Large T-Hangars

_____ Clearspan Hangars (approx. 60’ x 60’) _____ Clearspan Hangars (approx. 100’ x 100’)

_____ Corporate Hangars (150’ x 150’) _____ Other

_____ Building Maintenance/Repairs _____ Apron Tie-Downs

_____ Fuel Storage Facilities _____ Apron Parking

_____ Roadways _____ Signage

_____ Flight Planning/Weather _____ Gate Access Control

_____ IT Infrastructure _____ Security and Lighting

_____ Common Area Landscaping _____ Solid Waste Services and Recycling

_____ Site Drainage _____ Utilities

_____ Ground Transportation Services _____ Other

Specifically, what would you like to see improved?

8. Looking to the future, what is your vision for PIE and what should be accomplished at the airport over the next 20-year period?

9. Additional Comments:

Your information is greatly appreciated!

Please return survey to:

E-Mail: info@piemasterplan.com

Mail: ESA

PIE Airport Master Plan Communications Strategy

Public Meetings

• PIE Open House kick-off meeting at Hilton Carillon St. Pete – 11/30/17 5 pm-8 pm

• Public Workshop 2 – Forecast

• Public Workshop 3 – Alternatives analysis/Present concepts/Pros & cons

• BCC Presentation/ Adoption

Communications for Public

• Media Release of Kick-off meeting and additional public meetings distributed to o Full email distribution list (media, airport employees, tenants, aviation industry, TDC, County BCC/Admin/Communications, Chambers of Commerce, Hoteliers, etc.)

- sent 10/30/17 to full list o Outreach to Chambers of Commerce Presidents

- Sent individual Chamber emails to Chris Steinocher (SP), Robin Sollie (TB

Beaches), Joni James (DP), Carol Hague (Clw), Darlene Kole (CLW Beaches);

Kathleen Good sent to Tom Morissette (Central Pinellas), Michael (PP Chamber) o Email to Mayors of all municipalities (2nd time) – 11/21/17 o Sent additional email to BCC, Barbara Hernandez, Mark Woodard, Michael Zas, Jake

Stowers, David Downing, Mike Meidel o PCED distributing to 8000 on social media o SPDP distributed to membership o Website news subscribers – sent 11/21/17 o Mark to send to Noise Abatement Task Force o post on social media – FB, Twitter – 11/21/17 o post on PIE website – 10/30/17 o Fly2PIE News Fall edition feature highlights from the director - 11/2/17 o Info presented and distributed at Regional PIO meeting December 14th; follow-up email sent from County Communications to full PIO directory

• Meeting notice and info posted on Pinellas County Website – Public Meetings Section 10/30/17

• Website – create Airport Master Plan Update page – ESA 10/30/17

Communications Strategies for Employees/Tenants (Operations Division)

• All Tenant All Hands meeting – kick-off overview

• Tenant Manager Meetings (ongoing)

Tampa Bay Times – Interview with Rick Danielson 11/16 (Doug, Tom, Michele) – for publication 11/26 TBBJ – Fran McMorris – published article 11/30/17

-Ad Proof-

Ad ID: 547797

Start: 10/29/17 Stop: 11/05/17

Total Cost: $640.00 Billed Lines: 58.0 Total Depth: 2.58 # of Inserts:

Phone # Email: jharrison@tampabay.com

Date: 10/27/17

Account #: 56252 Company: ST PETE CLEARWATER

INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT

Contact: LAURIE GRIFFITH

Address: 14700 TERMINAL BLVD

SUITE 221

CLEARWATER, FL

33762

Telephone: (727) 453-7806 Fax: (727) 453-7846 Email: llgriffith@fly2pie.com

This is the proof of your ad scheduled to run on the dates indicated below. Please proof read carefully if changes are needed, please contact us prior to deadline at or email at jharrison@tampabay.com.

Ad Proof

Publications:

Tampa Bay Times TampaBay.com

Zones or Sections:

Baylink All Pinellas

Classification:

Legal

St. Pete-Clearwater International (PIE) Airport Master Plan Public Kick-off Meeting

PIE and the Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners are beginning preparation of a comprehensive Airport Master Plan. The last Airport Master Plan Update for PIE was completed in January 2004. There have been a number of changes at the airport, as well as in the aviation industry, prompting the need for an updated Master Plan.

The primary goal is to create a 20-year airport development program to maintain a safe, efficient, economical, and environmentally acceptable airport facility for the Tampa Bay community. To achieve this goal, it is essential to receive input from key stakeholders, including the interested public and surrounding community, and users and tenants of the airport’s facilities. PIE is required to provide periodic updates of their planning documents for receiving development grants from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Florida Department of Transportation

(FDOT).

PIE is hosting a public informational meeting on November 30, 2017 to kick-off the Airport Master Plan study and the public is encouraged to attend. This meeting will be conducted in an open house format and the public is welcome to attend anytime between 5:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. The meeting will be held at the Hilton St. Petersburg Carillon Park (950 Lake Carillon Dr., St. Petersburg, FL 33716) with directional signage on site for attendees. Please come out and learn more about PIE, the Airport Master Plan process, and to provide input to the overall Master Plan study.

(547797) 10/29, 11/5/2017

October 30, 2017

St. Pete-Clearwater International Airport (PIE) Airport Master Plan Public Kick-off Meeting

PIE is hosting a public information open house meeting to kick-off its Airport Master Plan study.

The meeting is Thursday, November 30th at the Hilton St. Pete Carillon Park (950 Lake Carillon Drive) and the public is welcome and encouraged to attend anytime from 5 pm – 8 pm.

PIE and the Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners are beginning preparation of a comprehensive Airport Master Plan. The last Airport Master Plan Update was completed in January 2004. There have been a number of changes at the airport, as well as in the aviation industry, prompting the need for an updated Master Plan. A website dedicated to the PIE Master Plan development will be launched November 1st, visit piemasterplan.com

The primary goal is to create a 20-year airport development program to maintain a safe, efficient, economical, and environmentally acceptable airport facility for the Tampa Bay community. To achieve this goal, it is essential to receive input from key stakeholders, including the interested public, surrounding community, and users and tenants of the airport’s facilities.

PIE is required to provide periodic updates of their planning documents for receiving development grants from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT).

This meeting will be conducted in an open house format and conducted by airport representatives and ESA, the consultant contracted to complete the Master Plan. Please come out and learn more about PIE, the Airport Master Plan process, and to provide input to the overall Master Plan study.

Contact: Michele Routh, Airport Public Relations Director mrouth@fly2pie.com 727-453-7879 http://www.piemasterplan.com/ mailto:mrouth@fly2pie.com

From: Yarley, Scott A <syarley@fly2pie.com>

Sent: Monday, October 30, 2017 12:44 PM

To: Jewsbury, Thomas R.; Routh, Michele G; Douglas DiCarlo

Subject: FW: updated masterplan media release

Attachments: AirportMasterPlanPublicKick-offMeeting2017.docx

I’m good with this media release. I have talked with Doug and have asked him to go live with the website on Wednesday, November 1. I thought it would be best to go live on the same day we have the official kick-off.

Scott Yarley, P.E.

Airport Engineer St. Pete-Clearwater International Airport 14700 Terminal Blvd.

Suite 221 Clearwater, FL 33762

Office: (727) 453-7830 Fax: (727) 453-7846 syarley@fly2pie.com

From: Routh, Michele G Sent: Monday, October 30, 2017 11:07 AM To: Jewsbury, Thomas R. <jewsbury@fly2pie.com>; Yarley, Scott A <syarley@fly2pie.com> Subject: updated masterplan media release

Added the website – please let me know when I can send.

Michele Routh, Public Relations Director mrouth@fly2pie.com 727-453-7879

April 23, 2018

St. Pete-Clearwater International (PIE) Airport Master Plan Public Workshop #1

PIE and the Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners are preparing a comprehensive Airport Master Plan. The last Airport Master Plan Update for PIE was completed in January 2004. There have been a number of changes at the airport, as well as in the aviation industry, prompting the need for a new Master Plan.

The primary goal is to create a 20-year airport development program to maintain a safe, efficient, economical, and environmentally acceptable airport facility for the Tampa Bay community. To achieve this goal, it is essential to receive input from key stakeholders, including the interested public and surrounding community, and users and tenants of the airport’s facilities. PIE is required to provide periodic updates of their planning documents for receiving development grants from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT).

PIE is hosting the first public informational workshop on May 30, 2018 to provide information on the first working paper of the Airport Master Plan study. This includes study background information, the existing airport conditions, forecasts of aviation activity, and an assessment of the passenger terminal building condition. As with the previous Kick-off Meeting, this workshop will be conducted in an open house format and the public is welcome to attend anytime between 5:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. The meeting will be held at the Hilton St.

Petersburg Carillon Park (950 Lake Carillon Dr., St. Petersburg, FL 33716) with directional signage on site for attendees. Please come out and learn more about PIE, the Airport Master Plan process, and to provide input to the overall Master Plan study.

Airport Contact: Michele Routh, Airport Public Relations Director

-Ad Proof-

Ad ID: 688129

Start: 09/30/18 Stop: 10/14/18

Total Cost: $618.00 Billed Lines: 56.0 Total Depth: 2.403 # of Inserts:

Phone # (727) 893-8358 Email: vmarshall@tampabay.com

Date: 09/20/18

Account #: 56252 Company: ST PETE CLEARWATER

INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT

Contact:

Address: 14700 TERMINAL BLVD

SUITE 221

CLEARWATER, FL

33762

Telephone: (727) 453-7806 Fax: (727) 453-7846 Email: llgriffith@fly2pie.com

This is the proof of your ad scheduled to run on the dates indicated below. Please proof read carefully if changes are needed, please contact us prior to deadline at

(727) 893-8358 or email at vmarshall@tampabay.com.

Ad Proof

Publications:

Tampa Bay Times TampaBay.com

Zones or Sections:

Baylink All Pinellas

Classification:

Legal

St. Pete-Clearwater International (PIE) Airport Master Plan Public Workshop #2

PIE and the Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners are preparing a comprehensive Airport Master Plan. The last Airport Master Plan Update for PIE was completed in January 2004. There have been a number of changes at the air-port, as well as in the aviation industry, prompting the need for a new Master Plan.

The primary goal is to create a 20-year airport development program to maintain a safe, efficient, economical, and environmentally acceptable airport facility for the Tampa Bay community. To achieve this goal, it is essential to receive input from key stakeholders, including the interested public and surrounding community, and users and tenants of the airport’s facilities. PIE is required to provide periodic updates of their planning documents for receiving development grants from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Florida Department of Transportation

(FDOT).

PIE is hosting a public informational workshop on November 5, 2018 to provide infor-mation on the most recent sections of the Airport Master Plan study, including the assessment of airport facilities and potential alternatives for improvements. This meeting will be conducted in an open house format and the public is welcome to attend anytime between 5:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. The meeting will be held at the Hil-ton St. Petersburg Carillon Park (950 Lake Carillon Dr., St. Petersburg, FL 33716) with directional signage on site for attendees. Please come out and learn more about PIE, the Airport Master Plan process, and to provide input to the overall Master Plan study. (688129) 09/30, 10/14/2018

September 22, 2018

St. Pete-Clearwater International Airport (PIE)

Airport Master Plan Public Workshop #2 Presents Facility Assessment and Alternatives for Improvement – November 5th 5:00-7:00 PM at Hilton Carillon

PIE and the Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners are preparing a comprehensive Airport Master Plan. The last Airport Master Plan Update for PIE was completed in January 2004. There have been a number of changes at the airport, as well as in the aviation industry, prompting the need for a new Master Plan.

The primary goal is to create a 20-year airport development program to maintain a safe, efficient, economical, and environmentally acceptable airport facility for the Tampa Bay community. To achieve this goal, it is essential to receive input from key stakeholders, including the interested public and surrounding communities, and users and tenants of the airport’s facilities.

PIE is hosting a public informational workshop on November 5, 2018 to provide information on the most recent sections of the Airport Master Plan study, including the assessment of airport facilities and potential alternatives for improvements. This meeting will be conducted in an open house format and the public is welcome to attend anytime between 5:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. The meeting will be held at the Hilton St. Petersburg Carillon Park (950 Lake Carillon Dr., St. Petersburg, FL 33716) with directional signage on site for attendees. Please come out and learn more about PIE, the Airport Master Plan process, and to provide input to the overall Master Plan study.

Please visit, www.piemasterplan.com for more information and to provide input for the Airport Master Plan.

Airport Contact: Michele Routh, Airport Public Relations Director http://www.piemasterplan.com/

APPENDIX C

Terminal Building Conditions Assessment

St. Pete-Clearwater International Airport | Terminal Building Conditions Assessment

Introduction/

Overview

For the last five years, St. Pete-Clearwater International Airport (PIE or The Airport) has experienced unprecedented growth, averaging double-digits each year. Because of the significant growth, the Airport surpassed 2 million annual passengers (MAP) for the first time in it’s history. The primary reason for this growth is Allegiant Air, which now serves nearly 60 destinations from PIE. PIE is one of Allegiant’s strongest hubs in Florida, and there is a commitment from the airline to expand service.

While passenger numbers are at record levels, terminal facilities have struggled to keep up with the pace of growth. Until Allegiant’s presence, the airport had limited air service and the terminal facilities were adequate. However, the terminal facilities are now operating well beyond their capacity and not up to the level of service standards that is expected at most US airports. The Airport has tried to keep up with growth by adding small additions to the terminal building, one at a time, and adding or improving apron areas to accommo-date Allegiant’s aircraft. Recently completed or ongoing projects to improve the terminal facility include security checkpoint expansion, holdrooms expansion, baggage makeup reconfiguration, and apron area improvements. These are all incremental improvements that improve the facility. However, the result of this is an ad hoc approach to terminal development instead of a comprehensive terminal strategy.

Currently, the Airport is developing a “from-scratch” airport master plan that will review all airport facilities, including the terminal building, and develop a comprehensive develop-ment strategy that meets passenger demand and can be implemented in an incremental, fiscally responsible manner. The terminal is a major element of the master plan. Proposed terminal alternatives will remain at a high-level, but this document will serve as a basis of understanding for some of the terminal challenges and opportunities.

Purpose of this Document

The purpose of this document is to present a high-level building conditions assessment. Existing airport records, drawings, and reports on key backbone site utilities, architectural elements, structural elements, and mechanical, electrical, and plumbing (MEP) systems were reviewed. An overview of facility condition related to architectural, structural, MEP, and site utilities facilities and equipment is provided. This information will be utilized as a baseline for developing Master Plan alternatives, including projecting future needs for proposed development. Additional capacity assessments for specific areas of development will be identified during the Master Plan alternatives phase. These focused assessments will be defined by the Airport and the Consultant team based on the most promising terminal development alternatives.

Building

Architecture

Assessment

Introduction/

Overview The terminal building is comprised of multiple building projects throughout its lifespan, whether renovations, demolitions, or additions. The construction of the front façade, which serves as the main circulation spine and entry to the terminal, provides a unify-ing aesthetic from the street to the piece by piece construction. In addition, there is a current project underway performing a rehabilitation and adding on to the structure on the north side of the building. This portion of the building under construction is assumed to meet all the current codes and has been excluded from this portion of the assessment with exception of the roof condition.

The following is a summation of what was found during visual inspection of the building, the plans that were available, and discussions with Airport staff.

Building

Code

Compliance The terminal building has seen continuous renovations and additions over the last 5 years and no major Code related issues were noted during the visual inspection and walk-through. The terminal building also appears to be accessible and in compliance with the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) throughout.

In the Electrical and Mechanical rooms adjacent to the Gate 2-6 exit there was evidence of incomplete thru-pene-tration fire proofing following new piping and conduit penetrations that should be properly sealed for a complete assembly. It is unclear whether or not this is a typical condition throughout the building or only in this location.

The other relevant items were operational, maintenance, or layout related and not specifically a violation of the Building Code. These items are noted in the next section.

Electrical room near Gates 2.6, incomplete firing proofing for piping and conduit.

Operation, Maintenance, and Building Layout The following operation, maintenance, and building layout issues were noted and discussed with Airport staff during the site walk-through and subsequent meetings.

Building Entry Corridor Airport staff noted energy efficiency concerns and water infiltration issues at the main corridor, running the length of the front of the building.

The corridor serves as the Energy Code required vestibule between con-ditioned space of the terminal and the exterior. The corridor is separated from the main terminal space by sliding aluminum doors. The overall cor-ridor depth, frequency of use, and lack of interlock of the two sets of doors does not block air leakage between the building areas allowing condi-tioned air to escape quicker than it can be replenished. When passengers use the corridor for egress to the baggage claim, walking in front of the exterior, automatic doors triggers them to open, further negatively impact-ing the building’s heating and cooling capability and efficiency.

Additional-ly, the height of the curtain wall and overall volume of space seem to have caused conditioning problems in the corridor itself and lead to continual condensation issues. Sealant failures at the roof parapet, causing some in-filtration of water and ponding issues, were noted on the roof areas above. The corridor serves the purpose of a more modern front façade, unilateral connector of the interior, and vestibule, but it makes wayfinding confusing and is mostly redundant circulation space. This creates an inefficient build-ing layout. The exterior canopies, while tied to the building aesthetic, are not efficient in stopping a driving rain due to their design and separation from the building face. This allows additional water to enter through the door openings.

Gates 4 and 5 Ramps Airport staff expressed maintenance and safety concerns with the dual ramp access to the Gate 4 and 5 Passenger Boarding Bridges (PBBs). These are high, narrow spaces that make routine maintenance difficult, such as changing a lightbulb or other repair work due to the ramped floor.

Public circulation corridor from

Ticketing B to baggage claim.

Water Evidence of continual water intrusion issues were noted at the second level flooring of the concessions space. This may be a combination of tenant or typical usage or an inefficient drainage system for the current equipment layouts.

Entry lobby At the entry lobby outside the TSA screening for Gates 2 through 6, continual maintenance issues exist above the ceiling in relation to roof drainage systems. The repairs have been completed in a piecemeal manner that have not addressed the full concerns in this area. Repairs have been made difficult by the presence of multiple existing ceiling levels above the current Acoustic Ceiling Tile (ACT) ceiling system. These ceiling areas could be removed to allow proper maintenance access as well as raise the ceiling height in the interior corridor, which is proportionally low for the space. Additionally, it is recommended that all of the abandoned infrastructure be removed too. Trying to assess leaks in pipes that end up being a dead end is not an efficient use of maintenance staff.

Restrooms The main restroom areas have been upgraded recently, are ADA compliant, and appear to meet the overall build-ing capacity needs. However, from a functional layout perspective, they are disproportionately sized between the pre-secure lobby and the post-security holdroom uses. Capacity for the holdroom toilets is undersized for the occupant load and the pre-security restrooms have significant excess. Reconfiguration of this area could alleviate usage issues and improve the travel experience.

Airport offices The Airport office area on the second level is typical of an old military layout with a double loaded cor-ridor. Currently, the area is near capacity, with only two open offices. The materials are consistent throughout and are in good condition, but the layout is inefficient and confusing for public ac-cess. A modern building design would likely make more efficient use of the same square footage.

Ramps to passenger boarding ridges at Gates 4 and 5.

Interior Elements and Equipment The following interior elements and equipment were noted and discussed with Airport staff during the site walk-through and subsequent meetings.

Interior finishes Overall the facility is in very good condition and finishes are well-kept and modernized, with few exceptions. Wall coverings vary between paint, vinyl and tile. Ceilings are ACT or sus-pended gypsum, and flooring varies between carpet, tile and terrazzo. There is a make-shift ceiling access panel between Ticketing B and the Customs entry that is inconsistent with the remaining level of finish. Some water damage was apparent in the Baggage Claim restrooms as well. It is understood that both of these areas will be renovated in an upcoming project.

Interior doors Interior doors are a mix of wood and hollow metal, and visually ap-pear in good shape. The Gate 2-6 exit corridor mechanical room door hinges were missing multiple screws which impede operation and could result in a safety concern. There are a few examples like this around the airport, but generally not a widespread concern.

Baggage systems The baggage handling systems are reliable and the only issues that have arisen are with TSA staffing related issues. Baggage system capacity issues are noted to exist in Ticketing A but it is understood this is being addressed in a current construction project. Baggage claim belts are reliable, but all 7-9 years old, which may be getting towards the end of their useful life.

Baggage belts are not standardized, in terms of controllers, making maintenance cumber-some.

Passenger Boarding Bridges There are only two PBBs, located at Gates 4 and 5. The two PBBs are Thyssen-Krupp models from 2009 and are operating properly.

Baggage claim area.

Building

Envelope The following Building Envelope issues were noted and discussed with Airport staff during the site walk-through, and subsequent meet-ings.

Facade The exterior façade is comprised mainly of concrete masonry units (CMU), exterior insula-tion and finish system (EIFS), or glazed alumi-num curtain wall. All items are generally in good condition with some localized areas of damage.

Doors Exterior doors are either hollow metal or glazed aluminum and are in good condition.

Metal overhead doors are in fair condition due to frequency of use and show some signs of damage. These could require replacement in the near future.

Roof The roof consists of multiple roof levels and areas. Walkway pads exist throughout for maintenance traffic. The membrane is gen-erally white in color and varies from poor to good condition depending upon building area, though no irreparable areas of visual water damage on the interior were noticed.

The roof above Ticketing A is in very good condition with only minor ponding noted, and some minor membrane non-adhesion at the parapet, but not considered a significant issue.

The roof area above CBP is in good condition with minor ponding noted.

Building exterior at baggage claim area.

The roof above the Gate 2-6 hold room is in poor condition visually. A concentrated area of ponding and subsequent loose membrane were noted at the second floor access door landing.

Significant areas of patching at removed equipment was noted on the high roof area above concessions.

On the roof areas above the second floor spaces there are significant ponding areas and poor drainage patterns, espe-cially over the main cor-ridor which could be con-tributing to water issues noted there. This area also shows a substantial amount of fasteners that have become loose from the deck and insulation that are starting to push on the membrane, and in some instances have punctured the membrane.

The second floor walls extending above the first floor roof level are clad in EIFS. Some areas show cracking and ensuing repairs. While the repairs have been completed and no new damage is noted, this could be indicative of moisture infiltration and should be monitored closely.

The new hold room addition is incomplete and missing edge flashing. This area also has visual craftsmanship concerns with areas of loose insulation, loose membrane, and seam poor quality. This area will likely need to be completely reroofed.

The Baggage Claim roofing is in good condition, but has one area that needs re-pairs from recent wind damage. Areas above rental car counters where skylights were infilled do show signs of water damage and roofing needs to be repaired.

This is the only roof area that has lightning protection in place.

Cracked wall paneling and roof ponding.

Loose membrane and incomplete seam.

Insulation fastener pushing through membrane.

Opportunities/

Challenges

Summary The main issue from an architectural design perspective that is noted regarding the existing building is the piecemeal approach to renovations and additions. This has resulted in a disjointed building layout and inefficient circulation pattern. The biggest opportunity from a renovation perspective would be to review the building holistically and simplify the building in terms of massing and flow. The massing piece will allow various plan changes and roof levels to be normalized reducing the areas where energy efficiency and weather-tightness are most compromised. Simplifying the building layout will clarify the traffic patterns and help de-stress and improve the overall traveler experience.

An entirely new facility would allow this holistic approach to occur without the existing constraints and also afford the opportunity for centralized passenger screening and back-of-house baggage handling operations. This will further simplify the building usage and result in reduced operational costs that exist with two separate ticketing halls and check-points.

Phasing of renovations to the existing building will be a challenge, specifically in terms of not impacting day-to-day operations and causing flight delays. Careful consideration will need to be paid to phasing plans, maintaining Code required egress, and safety of passengers.

Overall, this building has many opportunities for renovation and expansion.

The structure is simple enough in many areas that improvements could be economical and beneficial as long as the above challenges have been taken into consideration.

Rental car counters.

Structural

Systems

Introduction/

Overview At a quick glance from the exterior, the terminal building appears to be one cohesive structure. However, it is, in fact, an assembly of many types of construction that have been added in piecemeal fashion numerous times through the life of the building. The earliest drawings found on site were from the mid 1940’s, spanning through 2017. There have been multiple iterations of construction, demolition, and rehabilitation to all parts of the structure. In addition, there is a current project underway performing a rehabili-tation and adding on to the structure on the north side of the building. This portion of the building under construction is assumed to meet all the current codes and has been excluded from this portion of the assessment.

Based on visual inspection, the building appears to be in good structural condition. There were no major issues found, nor did the staff of the airport bring up any current condi-tions that warranted concern.

The following is a summation of what was found during visual inspection of the building and the plans that were available.

Foundations The foundations of the building were not inspected due to the inaccessible nature of subgrade foundations.

Partial demolition and digging equipment would have been required, which was outside the scope of this proj-ect. Based on the existing plans, there are various foundation types including CMU stem wall on shallow spread footers, concrete piers atop shallow foundations, concrete grade beams, and monolithic concrete foundations. All foundations appear to be shallow from the information available.

Based on visual inspection of the interior and exterior of the building, the existing foundations appear to be working as intended. There were no major cracks or spalling in the walls or slabs. Interior floor tiles appear to be in good shape, which is an indicator that if any cracks exist, they are minor in nature. There was no visible cracking in the walls, indicating that the foundations are supporting the building without any major or differential settlement.

This is also a good indicator that the soils are stable and dense enough to support the intended design loads.

Overall, the foundations appear to be designed and constructed properly. Based on the way the soils and shallow foundations are performing, it is safe to theorize that any expansion or future construction on or near the facility could likely use shallow foundations in a similar fashion.

Original drawings depicting shallow foundations throughout building.

Floor and Roof Framing Overview In general, the floor and roof framing consists of structural steel beams and open web joists. A number of areas were inaccessible for visual inspection and, therefore, could not be verified. Of the steel that was accessible for observation, no issues were found. Exterior steel was prime painted and appeared to be in good condition. Con-nections were typical bolted shear plates and all bolts appeared to be in good working condition.

The second floor consists of metal deck with concrete infill. It is unclear whether the deck-ing is acting with composite action. The deck is acting as a diaphragm to transfer lateral loading from the exterior walls to the shear resisting system.

The roof consists of metal decking acting as a diaphragm. The connections from the deck to the structure are not clear on the existing draw-

Exposed framing in good condition in new holdroom construction area.

ings. Based on the unknowns, a capacity of the roof deck may be difficult to estimate for any future renovations or expansions. It is recommended that any future additions to the building be designed isolated from the existing lateral resisting system.

No water staining or corroded areas were observed during the site walk, which was sur-prising considering the poor condition of the roof membrane. (See architectural for more on the roof membrane condition.) The lack of water staining could indicate that the roof deck and water proofing membrane are performing adequately. It could also indicate that the maintenance team is doing a good job of repairing any leaks and replacing the ceiling tiles in a timely manner. When asked directly if there were any issues or leaking in the roof, the maintenance team did not seem to have any areas of concern.

Overall, the floor and roof decking and framing members are in good condition. In refer-ence to future expansion, adding to the building at the ground level is a relatively straight-forward option. From a structural perspective, adding a second level to the baggage claim level or reconfiguring the 2nd floor office area into usable public space also appear feasible. The amount of design and construction cost to accomplish this is not in this as-sessment. Furthermore, it is unclear whether or not doing this work would actually add any benefit from a passenger flow or experience perspective. Further inves-tigation is warranted in the alternatives phase of the Master Plan if these ideas are deemed beneficial by the Airport.

Original drawing depicting steel second floor and roof framing throughout.

Wall

Systems The structural wall systems consist of traditional steel column and beam framing, CMU, and concrete. In the oldest portions of the building there are still some areas consisting of brick walls that have been covered up by modern block…