Okaloosa County BOCC — January 21, 2014 — Exhibit 2 Destin Airport Helipad Siting Study

TECHNICAL RSif MEMORANDUM IMPROVING YOUR WORLD Destin Airport Helipad Siting Study RS&H Project No. 201-0940-013 Date: January 3, 2014 Subject: DTS helipad location Prepared For: Mike Stenson, Tracy Stage Prepared By: Ken lIbold CC: Brad Wente 1 HELIPORTS A heliport consists of a number of elements. The Touchdown and Liftoff Area (TLOF) is the actual spot where the helicopter touches down. To minimize the chances of catching a skid and experiencing a dynamic rollover, this area should be paved, preferably with concrete. The Final Approach and Takeoff Area (FATO) is the area surrounding the TLOF where the helicopter concludes its approach and begins its takeoff. FAA recommends this area be paved if possible, but in any case should be capable of supporting the helicopter should it touch down outside the TLOF. The Safety Area surrounds the FATO and should be cleared of all objects except small frangible objects that by their function must be there (such as lighting fixtures). See Figure 1 for a depiction of essential heliport features. Figure 1 Essential Heliport Features FATO APPROACH/DEPARTURE TOR / SURFACE TLOF PERIMETER MARKING SAFETY AREA —, ° Fa a << ~ ~ WIND CONE ~ \ 7 2 ~ of APPROACH/DEPARTURE ma \ 5 SURFACE oA 4 ‘ —— TDPC MARKING HELIPORT IDENTIFICATION MARKING \__IN-GROUND FATO EDGE MARKING Notes. 1. Locate the wind cone so that it will not interfere with the Approach/Departure Path or Transitional Surface 2. TLOF size and weight limitation box omitted for clarity Source: AC 150/5390-2C Destin Airport Helipad Siting Study 1 January 2014 / Version 0.2 The minimum dimensions shown in Table 1 are recommended for ground level, visual flight rules heliports. The standard design dimension basis is given, as well as the specific dimension based on the operation of a Robinson R44 helicopter, which is a typical small helicopter used personal flight and light commercial purposes. Based on these dimensions, the protected ground area for an R44 helicopter conducting typical daytime VFR operations is 97.4 feet x 97.4 feet, assuming the pavement is fully marked. Table 1 Standard Helipad Dimensions Standard Design Recommended Element (Fully Marked) na Surface TLOF 1.0 x rotor diameter 33.0’ Concrete FATO 1.5 x overall length 57.4 Paved 1/3 rotor diameter, but Safety Area not less than 20 feet, 20.0’ each side of FATO Free of incompatible objects and activities Total Size 97.4’ Source: AC 150/5390-2C In addition to the landing area, the FAA recommends the heliport operator identify approach/departure paths that are free of obstructions and are in airspace suitable for safe approaches to and from the helipad. For the purposes of this study, one VFR approach/departure path is oriented to the southeast, parallel to the extended runway centerline of Runway 14-32. An additional “crosswind” VFR approach/departure path is recommended, oriented at least 135 degrees from the primary approach/departure path, to enable greater operational safety and flexibility. At DTS, this secondary approach/departure path can be oriented to the north, crossing the Runway 32 approach path. The preferred flight path would be the southeast flight path. The approach and departure paths extend outward laterally in a trapezoid that starts at the edge of the FATO and spreads to a width of 500 feet at a point 4,000 from the FATO. Vertically, the paths have an 8:1 slope to the point 4,000 feet away. That is, for every eight feet horizontally, the path rises 1 foot vertically. The heliport operator should, if possible, control the area on the ground underneath the 8:1 slope for the first 280 feet from the FATO. In addition to the departure paths, a helipad should observe the following provisions: e Have a protected transitional surface that extends from the FATO edges parallel to the flight path at a slope of 2:1 for a distance of 250 feet horizontally e Provide a Helipad Protection Zone under the 8:1 surface to a distance of 280 feet from the FATO edge that should be controlled by the Airport and free of incompatible objects and activities. Destin Airport Helipad Siting Study 2 January 2014 / Version 0.2 The helipad protected surface dimensions are illustrated in Figure 2. Figure 3 and the attached exhibits show the helipad siting requirements depicted at Destin Airport. The exact location of the helipad on airport property is based on preliminary sketches supplied by the client. It could be moved to other locations on the airport. The primary purpose of this study was to compare the relative availability of space at the airport with the demands for helipad siting. Figure 2 Heliport Protected Surfaces FATO \ SURFACE BASED UPON THE 8 -Q4544) - - PREDOMIMATE WIND DIRECTION 7 ne RE } ra @ fi | __ “4 = SEE DETAIL neo 7 2 / \ OPPOSITE See ~ PREFERRED APPROACH/DEPART URE Jf \ ff N ~~ APPROACH/ LLY : yy Y/Y \ DEPARTURE 47) f HBLIPORT / a ‘i \ we “oY ONY aw SURFACE ae 4 YPICAL U™. ; Pa T ) MS/ SN 135 “SHADED AREA TO HAVE SAME CHARACTERISTICS AS FATO H | 500 FT [152 M] | 260 FT [76M] | “ 500 FT [152 M] 4,000 FT [1,219 M] J LEGEND " \ 8:1 Approach/Departure}- - Surface = 250 FT FATO —_— 8 KKK KON vem 2:1 Transitional Surface BX <3.054 500 FT [152 M] Source: AC 150/5390-2C Destin Airport Helipad Siting Study 3 January 2014 / Version 0.2 Source: RS&H 2014. 2 DESIGN ELEMENTS APPLIED TO DTS Figure 3 above depicts a fully marked VFR helipad for a Robinson R44 helicopter sited at an unimproved location currently used by a helicopter operator conducting helicopter banner tow operations. While this location has acceptable operational dimensions, other circumstances come into play that affect the suitability of this location for such operations. The first is the unimproved nature of the site. Although helicopters can and do operate from grass, any location routinely used for helicopter landings should be paved with concrete, according to FAA Advisory Circular 150/5390-2C Heliport Design. A minimal infrastructure improvement would be required to comply with AC 150/5390- 2C, to include a fully marked concrete TLOF and paved FATO. In addition, the location should include suitable ingress/egress for the helicopter operator, either through the existing leasehold of Regal Aviation or through a gate in the perimeter security fence. Currently, neither of these exists. The existing Regal Aviation lease agreement would prohibit unrelated uses, and the ability of the Airport to renegotiate the lease to support helicopter banner tow operations should not be assumed. Installing an access point through the fence to negate the need for a lease amendment would require approval and permitting from the City of Destin to allow a curb cut at the access point. Additional infrastructure involving, at a minimum automobile parking, would also be necessary. In addition, the specific location currently in use is identified on the Airport's approved Airport Layout Plan (ALP) as the site of future apron, and so would require an amendment to the ALP. Destin Airport Helipad Siting Study 4 January 2014 / Version 0.2 A second design consideration reflects the position of the approach and departure paths relative to the extended runway centerline. AC 150/5390-2C recommends two distinct approach/departure paths, separated by at least 135 degrees, to accommodate crosswind operations. The primary departure path shown in Figure 3 is aligned with Runway 14 and offset approximately 440 feet to the southwest of the runway centerline. In southerly wind conditions, operations would be expected to include a departure along the southeast route, and approaches to be along the northern route. In northerly wind conditions, departures would be along the northern route and approaches would be along the southeast route. Because DTS is currently a non-towered airport, approach and departure directions are left to the pilots’ discretion. The existence of a helicopter approach or departure route that crosses the extended runway centerline creates a significant risk of collision between helicopter and fixed wing traffic. In addition to the design issues, there are significant operational challenges present. Helicopters hovering for banner pickup or drop off should confine hover operations to areas over Airport property. This could be problematic when the wind is not calm, as the banner could blow into the RPZ or else the helicopter may have to hover in the RPZ, depending on wind direction. In some wind conditions, a helicopter attempting a banner drop-off from a hover condition may run the risk of having the banner or tow line descend onto Airport Road, which is a major arterial roadway in Destin. In addition, hovering operations in general tend to be incompatible with the residential areas on the other side of Airport Road. Finally, the banner tow operator should be expected to file FAA Form 7711-2 Application for Certificate of Waiver or Operation with the Flight Standards District Office. Among other things, this application identifies how and where they intend to do their operations. It is expected that the operating procedures proposed in the waiver application would be developed as a coordinated effort between the banner tow operator and the Airport. After the FSDO reviews the plan and aircraft equipment, the FSDO may then issue the waiver. If the waiver application is approved, the certificate is required to be carried in the aircraft and available for inspection. The only way that a certificate of waiver is not required is if the banner tow operator has a special Helicopter External Load certificate under Part 133. (This is somewhat similar to a Part 135 certificate except that it covers a different area of operation. A Part 135 certificate does not give an operator approval for banner towing.) 3 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Helicopter operations at DTS are compatible with airplane operations; however the presence of a dedicated helipad for banner tow operations creates a number of potential problems that should be reconciled to ensure safe operations for all aircraft, as well as maintaining the Airport’s compatibility with the nearby residential community. Therefore, in association with the analysis above the following recommendations are made: 1) The current area of helicopter banner tow operation does not appear compatible with existing conditions at Destin Airport. While a standard helipad could be sited at the location, the siting requirements do not include the specialized requirements of banner tow operations. In addition, the current area is it compatible with the existing FAA-approved ALP. Banner tow operations should not be allowed in this area. 2) The helicopter banner tow operator should be instructed to develop an operating plan consistent with the requirements of FAA Form 7711-2 Application for Certificate Destin Airport Helipad Siting Study 5 January 2014 / Version 0.2 3) 4) Destin Airport Helipad Siting Study 6 of Waiver, and to submit the operating plan to the Airport for concurrence prior to submitting the Application to the FAA Flight Standards District Office. The operating plan should ensure compatibility between the banner tow operation and Airport traffic under various wind conditions, describe helicopter hovering areas that are as far from residences as possible, and outline methods to prevent hovering or banner pick-up/drop-off in the RPZ and/or Airport Road. The Application for Certificate of Waiver by the helicopter banner tow operator should be submitted only with the Airport’s concurrence, and should include a statement such as “the certificate holder shall obtain the airport manager's approval to conduct banner tow operations at each airport of intended operation.” In addition, the Airport should ensure this language is in the waiver application. If the helicopter operator develops an operating plan acceptable to the Airport and to the Flight Standards District Offices, and if a Certificate of Waiver is granted, the Certificate should be carried in the aircraft during helicopter banner tow operations, and made available for inspection. FAA clearly states that “non-compliance with the provisions attached to the certificate is non-compliance with the certificate of waiver.” January 2014 / Version 0.2