Using GIS for Collaborative Land Use Compatibility Planning Near Airports (2019)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

27 At the foundation of any decision making process resides input information. For example, locations of objects—potential obstructions—and characteristics (attributes) that need to be collected, stored, and organized in a manner that allows its practical use. A contemporary GIS usually consists of a computer-based relational database for data storage and retrieval and an interface for data manipulation, analysis, and visualization. Furthermore, the GIS typically represents objects with one of three basic geometries: point, line, or polygon. There are other important geospatial data types that may be useful depend- ing on the application, such as aerial imagery and digital elevation models (DEMs). With each object’s geometry, the GIS usually associates a table of attribute values. Finally, the GIS also typically facilitates organization of data into groups of like items, generally referred to as layers, rounding out the data abstraction or modeling functionality. Several factors can serve to support or limit the use of GIS in the land use planning process. As shown in Chapter 1, these can include varying organizational and governance structures, limited funding sources, and a fragmented planning process, involving multiple stakeholders. Initiating Collaboration As stated in ACRP Synthesis 59: Integrating Airport Geographic Information System (GIS) Data with Public Agency GIS: Airports and the communities they serve have a mutual dependence. This interdependence requires that airports and municipal, county, and state agencies share information. Much of this information is geographic in nature, identifying the locations of assets, facilities, infrastructure, events, or boundaries. Specifically, airports require geographic information from surrounding communities to support plan- ning and development, airspace analysis, property acquisition, noise mitigation, environmental protec- tion, customer service, and other procedures. Public agencies require geographic information from air- ports for transportation planning, compatible land development, emergency response, and zoning. Airports and public agencies have found a variety of ways to share geographic information and related resources, many of which are limited, given interpersonal relationships and organi- zational constraints. Step 1. Identify Useful Resources The first step in exchanging data is to identify sources from other organizations and/or inform others about resources available from your organization. A simple avenue for identifying resources can be a simple cursory review of an organization’s website. Descriptions provided in department-specific websites can include contact information or links to websites frequented by C H A P T E R 4 Using GIS

28 Using GIS for Collaborative Land Use Compatibility Planning Near Airports that particular group of planners or by their stakeholders. Sometimes going down these rabbit- holes can unearth a treasure trove of contacts that may even be located in offices down the hall or in the next building on a city government campus or airport office complex. Some larger, well-established agencies or departments publish newsletters or send emails via a subscriber service filled with information about recent projects or new goals and objectives for the coming year. Generally, these types of materials include, at a minimum, at least one point of contact who is accessible via phone or email. In almost all cases, they can answer further ques- tions or direct you to additional contacts more relevant to the specific data exchange contact. Step 2. Discover and Leverage Existing Datasets Local airport planners and community planners should have easy access to airport or govern- ment websites and, in many cases, may have access to intranets established within municipalities for the specific intention of information sharing. Many municipalities or departments leverage SharePoint websites or on-line collaborative tools such as SmartSheet for projects that span multiple organizations or planning/project periods. In many instances, specific websites can include links to useful information such as available GIS data or pre-baked maps that can be utilized to enhance collaboration. Many organizations such as state departments of transportation (DOTs) or environmental agencies have constructed ever-evolving GIS datasets for decades—filled with useful features, attributions, and metadata. Many local planning departments include geo-referenced PDF files of parcel data or zoning maps that can be leveraged easily with airport planning materials to amplify land use compatibility opportunities or challenges. Organizations fortunate to already have enterprise GIS systems in place can provide controlled access to thousands of local features and data points, and, in many instances, imagery and remote-sensing. Most airport and local agency planners use orthorectified aerial imagery as visual reference in their maps and web applications. Some airports rely on imagery regularly collected by surround- ing jurisdictions. Others have collaborated with local agencies to collect imagery that satisfies both of their needs (such as the Portland Case Study in ACRP Synthesis 59). Airports are also beginning to use imagery periodically collected by vendors and made available via web map services for a subscription fee. One challenge airports often faced when utilizing imagery col- lected by or for others is that airport resolution requirements (often 3 in. pixel size or better) and optimal flight patterns for collecting aerial imagery for FAA airports GIS projects are often not met. Some airports have also found it difficult to participate in cost sharing agreements with public agencies, which fall outside of normal procurement practice. Step 3. Seek Collaborative Forums Airport planning, planning, and GIS professionals participate in a variety of forums such as conferences, user group meetings, and regional or local outreach sessions. Events such as these can provide a wealth of information and experiences that can be extrapolated into further infor- mation sharing targeted at specific stakeholders or for specific programs. The key is to take the first step to embrace introductions through meetings and to then initiate purposeful informa- tion sharing events such as brown bag sharing opportunities or more formal presentations to management. For example, FAA Airports in the Northwest Mountain Region (ANM) conducted several outreach strategies to agency colleagues in the ATO’s Western Service Center (WSC). Many in WSC had never heard of AGIS or had little knowledge of the origins or purpose of the data they were using. After conducting an information sharing event, the line opened between

Using GIS 29 FAA Airports and ATO for further discussion and sharing of resources. As a result, many in offices such as flight procedures, Technical Operations, and National Airspace Planning and Integration, began to leverage access to AGIS data to help them garner a better understanding of NAVAID locations or airspace geometries and make planning decisions in their analysis. Step 4. Appreciate Differing Perspectives There are numerous stakeholders when it comes to airport planning and community devel- opment, and each stakeholder has a different lens through which they operate. These lenses are filled with biases (which are not necessarily a bad thing) that can drive decision making as it relates to planning and collaborating for compatible land use at airports (Table 5). The best approach with different perspectives is to always listen first and talk next. Seek to understand these biases and put yourself in the other person’s shoes. Ask at least three questions before offering even one sentence of your perspective. This approach opens up the opportunity for increased dialogue as well as opportunities to appreciate how to truly collaborate. Acknowledged Limitations Several of the most common, acknowledged limitations facing airports and community plan- ners as they relate to using GIS in the pursuit of collaboration for facing land use compatibility challenges are as follows. Data Maintenance Sustaining organization/end user confidence in data/solutions. As with broader, enterprise- oriented IT and GIS solutions, maintaining data in a systematic manner across the organization, Airport and Community Development Community Perspective Airport Perspective Commercial Retail Development Sales Tax/ Revenues Tourism Potential Concentrations of People Impacts to Infrastructure Visual Obstructions (Lighting) Industrial Land Use Economic Impact Job Creation Property and Income Taxes Concentrations of People Hazards to Flight Visual Obstructions (Lighting) Residential Land Use Economic Impact Housing Choices Property and Income Taxes Concentrations of People Development Density Infrastructure Impacts Future Noise Complaints Table 5. Community and airport perspective differences.

30 Using GIS for Collaborative Land Use Compatibility Planning Near Airports and in many cases with external stakeholders, will benefit any solution in terms of current, accurate data. Although data upkeep is challenging in terms of staff time and resources, lack of investment in such procedures may result in inaccurate analysis and potentially expose the orga- nization to liabilities. Collaboration Lack of collaboration within an organization and/or with external stakeholders engaged in the land use planning process. Aviation planners particularly need efficient access to, if not oversight over, GIS data, tools, and procedures related to land use planning. Access to Data/Software Funding is required to organize and maintain GIS data/solutions. Leveraging other state or local access to GIS software and/or datasets can be a cost-effective way to begin building a foundation for GIS at an airport. Many on-line survey respondents indicated their organiza- tions employ an enterprise GIS and/or asset management system, meaning that a common set of GIS data and system capabilities is available across multiple departments. However, a similar number of respondents indicated their organizations use GIS solely within one department. In the case of the latter, this makes purposed collaboration efforts all the more important. Plan- ners in these constructs should consider fostering connections or run the risk of furthering the siloed nature of their organization. Geospatial data that depicts parcels based on current land use and zoning restrictions is the most common data required. Noise contours, complaints, and flight tracks are necessary to study noise, but are often only available in organizations with sophisticated noise monitoring capabilities. Obstacles, OIS, and flight procedures are required to study obstructions to navi- gable airspace. Habitats and the location of sightings is required for wildlife analysis. Geocoded road centerlines are needed for surface transportation studies. Demographic and other non- spatial data that can be linked to geospatial data is helpful for more in-depth studies. Advanced queries—including height restrictions and buffer analyses—are needed in the tools used to analyze land use compatibility issues using GIS. Views of past and planned future conditions in two and three dimensions, with links to photos and other related documents, is also desired to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the issue. Geocoding was also identified as a characteristic that would be helpful to identify impacts on specific locations, as well to serve as an anchoring point to other location-based data. Much of the data accessibility described comes from federal, state, and local agencies, although consultants and increasingly third party vendors (Richetson 2016) are becoming more and more capable of providing needed information as either an extension of staff or preferred vendor. Cost, lack of availability, access restrictions, and poor follow up have been challenges to getting the information required for land use compatibility. Organizational Size and Structure Specific communities and airports include a broad range of governance relationships, stat- utes and regulations, organizational constructs, technological sophistication, funding prioriti- zations, and planning for economic development. Because these variables can quickly become diverse and compounding, collaboration will depend upon the diverse variables in play for each individual airport.

Using GIS 31 Large municipalities and the largest commercial service airports may have multiple depart- ments and require more extensive coordination and lead time to develop and deploy GIS prod- ucts. In these constructs, collaboration may actually be more challenging because departments and divisions can become myopic and focus on their individual roles and responsibilities related to tactical implementation (as opposed to the broader strategic objectives). Conversely, smaller municipalities, airports, and supporting departments still require careful coordination; however, they may require less lead time to develop and deploy GIS products. It is important to note that these arenas are, by nature, resource-limited and may have difficulty implementing a solution scaled to their needs. In these locations collaboration, particularly with technology, can help to overcome obstacles relating to limited resources. It is also important to note that municipally governed airports may have direct access to municipal GIS data sets, while those associated with governing authorities may not have direct access. The latter operational construct may require additional steps related to data sharing agreements, data governance standards, and ready access to geospatial data and mapping resources. Circumstances such as these require proactive application of effective practices to assist in collaborative efforts. Effective Practices These effective practices listed here, applied appropriately to an organization’s unique cir- cumstances, can mitigate many of the challenges with collaboration. To assist in successful deployment of GIS for land use planning purposes, airports and communities should seek to incorporate the following effective practices. Champion the Technology Identify and/or be a GIS champion within the organization. Often a planner, environmental specialist, or other similar community planning or aviation professional will take initiative to develop a GIS-oriented strategy for land use planning. This may include experimenting with several types of data to show the value added to senior executives. The best methodology is to also include cost savings with the analysis to help decision makers place tangible value to the new intelligence. Organizational Support Establish management and executive-level buy-in. Sustain support by tying research results into briefs and project status updates to highlight successes. With organizational buy-in, GIS and/or land use planning can serve as a catalyst for broader airport solutions including but not limited to: wayfinding, emergency services, automated maintenance orders, and a host of other technology-based efficiencies. Quick Wins Start small and identify specific opportunities/use cases for quick wins. Often this will mean limiting initial implementation of a GIS solution to land use planning to the highest priority and/or most easily implementable one. For example, an airport may choose to first incorpo- rate FAR Part 77 surfaces for obstruction evaluation, to be consistent with local zoning ordi- nances, rather than attempting to incorporate additional airspace surface types such as TERPS or additional elements found within FAA’s airport design criteria.

32 Using GIS for Collaborative Land Use Compatibility Planning Near Airports On-line survey respondents indicated the information generated from GIS analyses is readily produced over time on desktop and laptop computers. However, respondents indicated live results in presentations and meetings tend to elicit better responses from decision makers and senior executives. Additionally, portable capabilities to use on site (whether on foot or in vehi- cles) provide tremendous utility via a live feel to the data. Minimize Software Costs Minimize software and data hosting costs by utilizing cloud-based software programs/licensing. Related to quick wins, in many cases a simple, identifiable use case with a limited set of concrete functional requirements can be implemented using lower-cost cloud-based services. Leverage Existing Requirements Existing federal, state, and local regulations and grant assurances include requirements to maintain updated information related to land use. For example, FAA planning and engineer- ing requirements include keeping ALPs up to date after each project is complete and as-built drawings are submitted. In addition, FAA requires airports to develop an OAP (FAA 2015b) to identify obstructions and plan for solutions to mitigate potential penetrations to airspace sur- faces and include details of how and when each of the surfaces will be cleared and maintained. A variety of land use regulations and restrictions are also often set in place by local communi- ties, planning organizations, and/or governments. For example, zoning ordinances are intended to promote the health, safety and general welfare of the public and to implement (if adopted) the comprehensive plan for the orderly and controlled development of the municipality. Local planning departments often already maintain electronic documents such as CAD drawings or land use compatibility maps that are directly related to these regulations and ordinances. Leverage Existing Data Sources and Systems Leverage federal, state, and local data sources as well as any new data being produced/submit- ted to the community or airport for proposed projects. Additionally, for airports that are part of a municipal, county, or state agency, leveraging existing GIS systems, software, data, and other resources is beneficial. However, in some cases, particularly with large commercial airports, organizations may decide to own certain resources within the aviation department of a county or city. Nonetheless, in such cases there are usually opportunities to leverage existing county/city resources such as software licenses. Build and Maintain Internal and External Relationships This generally means good relationships with other staff and departments within and/or out- side agencies. For example, if GIS is maintained in an IT department, a community planner overseeing land use planning and collaboration will need to productively work with GIS and IT staff to implement a desired solution or application. Data sharing with outside agencies is also a key success. For example, an airport would benefit from obtaining reliable geospatial data regarding proposed projects from an adjacent municipality or state agencies such as DOTs to ensure roads do not interfere with airspace obstruction and/or RPZ standards. GIS can be used to benefit each of the land use compatibility concerns identified in this guide- book. Examples on how GIS can be used to address aircraft noise and obstructions illustrate how GIS can be applied to other land use concerns as well.

Using GIS 33 Example of Using GIS for Aircraft Noise and Land Use Compatibility Once the process of collecting and analyzing the data collected is in place we can determine the impact in the airport’s vicinity. Combining noise data with land use data in a geospatial environment using GIS allows the airport and entities involved, including the communities, to interact and further analyze the data for better community and airport planning decision making. At the same time, combining data into GIS will result in a more efficient way to determine methods to minimize and limit airport noise impacts. These impacts can be divided into four basic groups, each with a significant role to play if the goal of quieter communities is to be attained: Preventative Measures A wide variety of land use planning measures designed to avoid encroachment of incompat- ible development into an airport environment. These measures include general plans, specific plans, and zoning ordinances adopted by local governments. Remedial Actions The objective of this method is to change existing incompatible land uses into ones that are compatible or at least more acceptable. Property redevelopment and reuse are examples of remedial actions that can be fostered by local governments and taken by property owners. Airports can achieve remedial action through programs such as property acquisition and soundproofing of existing structures. Source Noise Reduction Most communities believe the ideal method of limiting aircraft noise impacts is to reduce aircraft noise at its source. However, local entities, including airports and local land use jurisdic- tions, have no control over this technique. Responsibility for source noise reduction actions rests with the federal government, aircraft manufacturers, and aircraft owners. A basic setback with implementing this process is that it takes time between creation of new technology and when it is put into use. Operational Limitations Operational methods to reduce noise include a variety of measures affecting how, where, and when aircraft are flown. The main authority over these actions rests with the federal government and the pilots of aircraft. Airport authorities have some influence over these measures by work- ing with the FAA and pilots, but only to the extent that the airport proprietors’ actions are not preempted by federal law, and are implemented in a manner that is reasonable, non-arbitrary, and nondiscriminatory. Airport proprietors also can affect where aircraft fly by modifying the configuration of airport runways. Other than when they are also the airport proprietor, local governments have no authority over aircraft operations. Fort Lauderdale International Airport (FLL) is currently using GIS as tool in their noise miti- gation program. They have developed an application that allows them to display and analyze the data collected on the property participating in the program and all the additional informa- tion derived from it (see legends and attribution windows on Figures 4, 5, and 6).

34 Using GIS for Collaborative Land Use Compatibility Planning Near Airports Figure 4. Screen capture, FLL noise mitigation program (legend). Figure 5. Screen capture, FLL noise mitigation program (attribution window). Using GIS Collaboration for Obstructions and Land Use Compatibility At the foundation of this regulatory framework, airspace, spatial clearance, and standardiza- tion particularly relate to the obstructions issue. The most important data for obstacle analysis is the highest point of objects that could be obstacles to moving aircraft (or that could be affected by aircraft) sit at the core of data needs. A helpful attribute, horizontal distance of an object from aircraft flight paths and approach/departure runway ends, affects the likelihood of that object being an obstacle to movement. These object data naturally constitute a GIS layer, again

Using GIS 35 logically a point layer. Similar information about moving aircraft—the other end of the physical, three-dimensional obstruction relationship—technically would complete the description of the proximity of aircraft and objects. However, landing and departing aircraft trace different paths through space, depending on a multitude of factors, such as aircraft type and speed, weather and visibility, configuration of the destination or departure airport, and electronic and visual guidance available. This variability affects the probability of aircraft impacting obstacles. Governments long ago recognized the critical safety challenge of protecting aircraft from collision with objects in the natural and built environment and have evolved a wide and complex regulatory framework to meet this challenge. Regarding airspace, protecting a defined airspace, a volume through which many different aircraft move, will protect all aircraft moving through it. Secondly, maintenance of spatial sepa- ration or clearance between aircraft and potential obstacles will allow for the variation in aircraft flight paths that naturally occurs. Thirdly, standardization of flight paths that aircraft may use increases the predictability and control of aircraft position, thereby decreasing the probability of aircraft collision with objects in the environment. Authorities have indeed established standards of airport design and of approach and departure procedure design that protect aircraft through protecting their airspace, especially by keeping them separated from obstacles. Accordingly, in evaluating obstructions to airspace, data about airfield layout (including runway end positions and runway lengths and widths; landing and departing aircraft; and standardized flight paths and the variables that influence them) should be collected. A useful source of information about the latter flight paths is the Instrument Approach Pro- cedures (IAPs) or plates designed and published by the FAA for all runways offering electronic guidance to landing and departing aircraft. Digital—Terminal Procedures Publication (d-TPP)/ Airport Diagrams is a 26-volume set of printed paper books containing IAP, departure proce- dure charts (DP), standard terminal arrival charts (STAR), and airport diagrams (AD). Also included are takeoff, radar, and alternate minima textual procedures. d-TPP is a presentation of the same data as the TPP only in a digital PDF format. Most of the airfield layout information Figure 6. Screen capture, FLL noise mitigation program (attribution window).

36 Using GIS for Collaborative Land Use Compatibility Planning Near Airports will come from high-accuracy ground survey, acquired for a particular project, or from pub- lished federal database information. The airport data accessible via the AirportIQ 5010 Air- port Master Records and Reports site is structured in accordance with the FAA Airport Master Record Forms (5010-1 and 5010-2). The data displayed is derived from the FAA’s Aeronautical Information Services. The date of the data matches the date of the most recent Airport Facilities Directory (AFD). Federal regulations establish horizontal but especially vertical safety buffers between aircraft and obstructions. For example, common to the components of many specific clearance rules is required obstacle clearance (ROC), a minimum altitude value that accounts for the highest objects along the flight path. Approach procedure designers must always develop flight paths that maintain ROC throughout a flight. Obstruction analysis, therefore, largely involves the identification of vertically projecting objects that could be obstructions to airspace. In one way, the concept of an obstacle is simple: if it sticks up, it could be an obstacle. In general, any object that sticks up too far and obstructs airspace triggers certain regulatory con- siderations or actions aimed at reducing the threat to moving aircraft. For example, an obstacle may require restriction of visibility minimums for an approach procedure, modification of the object’s height, or complete removal of the object. In practical application, though, this concept necessarily prompts the question “How does one decide when objects are too high and are, therefore, obstacles?” FAA ACs, Orders, and other guidance, and the CFR all define standardized, imaginary, 3D surfaces through which vertically projecting objects should not penetrate. These regulations specify a multitude of obstruction surfaces and the consequences of their penetration that provides a physical standard against which to compare the positions and heights of objects. Operationalizing the spatial comparison of objects against standard obstruction surfaces clearly calls for a GIS solution. A relevant example of using GIS as a collaboration tool within a local community for obsta- cles to navigable airspace is found at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport (ATL), which sits adjacent to the City of College Park (Figure 7). ATL’s Planning and Development Department is home to its GIS group. With GIS data, ATL garnered a comprehensive under- standing of not only three-dimensional arrival and departure surfaces, but also underlying parcel and zoning map data in relation to the obstruction environment near these surfaces (ALT 2014). ATL utilized multiple data sources and worked in collaboration with College Park to identify specific trees in danger of encroaching on various surfaces and worked from parcel data to determine who to contact to help with mitigation. Using GIS Collaboration for Fauna that is Hazardous to Aircraft Operations Another relevant example of using GIS as a collaboration tool within a local community for land use challenges is found at Portland International Airport (PDX). Operated by the Port of Portland, PDX wildlife hazard management specialists utilize the Port’s GIS platform to display information for habitat location on and off airport property (Figure 8). These specialists work with local planners and environmental specialists in concert with both the State of Oregon and State of Washington’s geospatial data to determine the most appropri- ate nesting locations for relocation of frequent offender birds whose behavior poses a potential hazard to aircraft operations (Port of Portland 2014).

Using GIS 37 Figure 7. GIS-based obstruction identification at ATL. Figure 8. GIS-based wildlife hazard mitigation at PDX.