99-003180 Shirley W. Dunbar And David M. Dunbar vs. Department Of Transportation
 Status: Closed
Recommended Order on Thursday, February 3, 2000.


View Dockets  
Summary: Application for seaplane base site approval should be denied because the applicant has not provided a final FAA air space approval, Respondent did not consider the minimum safety standards in FAA Advisory Circular No. 150/5395-1, and site is inadequate.

1STATE OF FLORIDA

4DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

8SHIRLEY W. DUNBAR and )

13DAVID M. DUNBAR, )

17)

18Petitioners, )

20)

21vs. ) Case No. 99-3180

26)

27DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, )

31)

32Respondent. )

34______________________________)

35DAVE LA HART and )

40VAL LA HART, )

44)

45Petitioners, )

47)

48vs. ) Case No. 99-3181

53)

54DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, )

58)

59Respondent. )

61______________________________)

62HOWARD GRINER, )

65)

66Petitioner, )

68)

69vs. ) Case No. 99-3182

74)

75DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, )

79)

80Respondent. )

82______________________________)

83RECOMMENDED ORDER

85A formal hearing was conducted in this case on November 16,

961999, in Tallahassee, Florida, before the Division of

104Administrative Hearings, by its Administrative Law Judge,

111Suzanne F. Hood.

114APPEARANCES

115For Petitioners: Thomas Crapps, Esquire

120Douglas Law Firm, P.A.

124Post Office Box 1674

128Tallahassee, Florida 32302

131For Respondent: Ollie L. Evans, Esquire

137Department of Transportation

140Haydon Burns Building, Mail Station 58

146605 Suwannee Street

149Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0458

152STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

156The issue is whether Respondent properly issued Site

164Approval Order No. 3-99-01 for Ochlockonee Bay Seaplane Base

173pursuant to Chapter 330, Florida Statutes, and Chapter 14-60,

182Florida Administrative Code.

185PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

187On November 24, 1998, Respondent Department of

194Transportation (Respondent) issued a Notice of Intent to issue

203site approval for a proposed private seaplane base to be known

214as Ochlockonee Bay Seaplane Base. The Notice of Intent stated

224that a public meeting would be conducted on January 14, 1999, to

236determine the following:

239(a) that the site is adequate for the

247proposed seaplane base; (b) that the

253proposed seaplane base if constructed or

259established, will conform to minimum

264standards of safety contained in Rule

270Chapter 14-60, F.A.C.; and (c) that safe

277air traffic patterns could be worked out for

285such proposed seaplane base and for all

292existing airports and approved airport sites

298in its vicinity.

301On June 21, 1999, Respondent issued Site Approval Order

310No. 3-99-01. This order granted site approval for the proposed

320seaplane base with the following provisions:

3261. All operations are to be conducted in

334VFR [visual flight rules] weather

339conditions.

3402. Aircraft operations are limited to use

347only by the licensee and invited guests. It

355is the responsibility of each invited

361pilot(s) to comply with federal flight

367requirements.

3683. That the provisions in FAA [Federal

375Aviation Administration] approval letter

379dated May 22, 1998, be complied with.

386affic patterns and operational

390procedures are subject to review by this

397department prior to licensing or

402relicensing.

403This determination in no way preempts or

410waives any ordinances, laws or regulations

416of any other governmental body or agency.

423By letter dated June 27, 1999, Petitioners Shirley W.

432Dunbar and David M. Dunbar requested an administrative hearing

441to contest the site approval. Petitioners David LaHart and Val

451LaHart requested an administrative hearing by letter dated

459July 1, 1999. Petitioner Howard Griner requested an

467administrative hearing by letter dated July 6, 1999. Respondent

476referred these requests to the Division of Administrative

484Hearings on July 28, 1999.

489The Division of Administrative Hearings assigned DOAH Case

497Nos. 99-3180, 99-3181, and 99-3182 to the requests for an

507administrative hearing filed by Petitioners Shirley and David

515Dunbar, David and Val LaHart, and Howard Griner respectively.

524The undersigned consolidated the cases by order dated August 13,

5341999. Hereinafter, Petitioners Shirley and David Dunbar, David

542and Val LaHart, and Howard Griner shall be referred to

552collectively as Petitioners.

555A Notice of Hearing dated August 13, 1999, scheduled a

565formal hearing on November 16-17, 1999. During the hearing,

574Petitioners presented the testimony of three (3) witnesses and

583offered thirteen (13) exhibits, which were accepted into

591evidence. Respondent presented the testimony of one (1) witness

600and offered no exhibits for admission into evidence.

608The Transcript of the proceeding was filed on December 6,

6181999.

619On December 16, 1999, the parties filed a Joint Motion for

630Continuance requesting additional time to file their proposed

638recommended orders. This motion was granted by order dated

647December 20, 1999.

650The parties filed their Proposed Recommended Orders on

658January 6, 1999.

661FINDINGS OF FACT

6641. On July 8, 1997, Walt Dickson, the applicant, filed an

675Airport Site Approval and License Application with Respondent

683for a seaplane base located two (2) miles south of Panacea,

694Florida, in Ochlockonee Bay, Wakulla County, Florida, at

702Latitude N29 degrees, 59'35" N, Longitude W 84 degrees, 23'73"

712W.

7132. The application gives the following legal description

721of the proposed facility: Lot lying between Williams Brothers

730Lumber Co. lot and Troy Fain lot on river in SW 1/4 of Section

7441.

7453. A map of the proposed seaplane base was attached to the

757application. The map shows a sea lane 1/ toward the middle of

769Ochlockonee Bay. The sea lane has an east/west heading. It is

780three (3) miles long with a primary width of one (1) mile and a

794usable width of one-half (1/2) mile. The application does not

804indicate the exact position of the sea lane.

8124. The application's map indicates that a bridge for U.S.

822Highway 98 is located east of the proposed sea lane and

833shoreline facilities. The bridge crosses the bay, connecting

841the bay's northern and southern shores. The bridge has an

851approximate height of 42 feet above sea level. East of the

862bridge, the mouth of the Ochlockonee Bay opens into the

872Apalachee Bay and the Gulf of Mexico.

8795. The application's map indicates that the shoreline

887facilities of the proposed seaplane base are located on the

897northern shore of the Ochlockonee Bay, west of the bridge and

908east of Bayside Marina. A plot of the proposed shoreline

918facility shows a dock or pier, of undetermined length and width

929extending into the bay.

9336. Ms. Ann Tiller, Respondent's aviation licensing

940specialist for district three, performed the initial review of

949the subject application. She considered Chapter 330, Florida

957Statutes, Chapter 14-60, Florida Administrative Code, and FAA

965Advisory Circular No. 150/5395 in conducting her review of the

975application.

9767. First, Ms. Tiller reviewed the application to ensure

985that it was complete. She determined that the application

994contained, among other things, the following information:

1001FAA air space determination, zoning approval

1007from the appropriate governmental agency,

1012copy of the deed, lease or easement, legal

1020description that indicates section,

1024township, range and geographical

1028coordinates, general location maps showing

1033nearby roads, towns and landmarks, U.S.

1039Geological Survey quadrangle maps . . . [o]r

1047equivalent with facility plotted.

10518. Ms. Tiller testified that the application "in itself

1060probably would not show that [the site] is adequate." She

1070stated that "[w]hen [the applicant] sends me the application, he

1080is telling me that he thinks it is adequate."

10899. The application did not address the following factors

1098outlined in FAA Advisory Circular No. 150/5395: performance

1106characteristics of the proposed seaplane, water currents or wave

1115action, shifting channels, ship or boating activity on the

1124water, prevailing winds, wind data during daylight hours,

1132adequacy of the water depth for a seaplane, or information about

1143the taxi channel dimensions for the take-out and launch ramp.

115310. On May 8, 1998, Ms. Tiller conducted a site inspection

1164to determine the adequacy of the site. She did not go out into

1177the bay on a boat.

118211. During the inspection, Ms. Tiller advised the

1190applicant's representative that the required approach ratio for

1198the takeoff and landing area was 20 to 1 and that the applicant

1211would need to install a windsock before receiving a license.

1221She made a general observation of the proposed site, finding no

1232obvious reason to deny site approval.

123812. After making the inspection, Ms. Tiller completed an

1247Airport Site Inspection report. The report states that the site

"1257is feasible for the proposed use and can meet the requirements

1268set forth in Airport Licensing and Zoning Rule Chapter 14-60."

1278Ms. Tiller did not consider the factors listed in the FAA

1289Advisory Circular in making this determination.

129513. According to Ms. Tiller, the standards in the FAA

1305Advisory Circular apply after the applicant receives site

1313approval. She considers them as guidelines during the licensing

1322phase of the application review, showing "what possibly could be

1332done."

133314. By letter dated May 22, 1998, the FAA informed the

1344applicant as follows:

1347. . . it has been determined that the

1356subject seaplane base will not adversely

1362affect the safe and efficient use of

1369airspace by aircraft provided the following

1375requirements are complied with:

13791. All operations are conducted in VFR

1386weather conditions.

13882. The landing area is limited to private

1396use.

13973. You execute and maintain an operational

1404letter of agreement with the Wakulla County

1411Airport that would insure operation at this

1418proposed seaplane base will not disrupt or

1425conflict with operations at the existing

1431public use airport.

1434We recommend you reference FAR [Federal

1440Aviation Regulations] 91.69, Right of Way

1446Rules; Water Operations and comply with FAA

1453Advisory Circular, AC 150/5395-1, Seaplane

1458Bases.

145915. On April 19, 1999, the Wakulla County Board of County

1470Commissioners executed an Operational Letter of Agreement

1477between the Ochlockonee Bay Seaplane Base and the Wakulla County

1487Airport.

148816. Prior to the hearing, Bobby Grice, Respondent's Public

1497Transportation Manager, made a site inspection. He did not go

1507out into the bay on a boat.

151417. Mr. Grice determined that the proposed takeoff and

1523landing area met the required approach ratio of 20 to 1. He

1535also concluded that the proposed sea lane, which is west of the

1547bridge with a heading of 927, did not require a pilot to takeoff

1560and land in close proximity to the bridge. Mr. Grice reached

1571this conclusion without knowing the precise location of the

1580takeoff and landing area.

158418. Mr. Grice's observation of the site did not reveal

1594anything that "[p]rohibited [him] from saying that . . .

1604somewhere in the bay that's 3 miles long and a mile wide, that

1617somewhere in there we cannot find an area that is at least 1800

1630feet long, that's at least deep enough for a plane, and without

1642obstruction."

164319. Mr. Grice testified as follows when questioned

1651regarding the possible placement of crab traps in the area that

1662serves as the proposed takeoff and landing area:

1670I would not know if someone had gone in

1679there and put [a crab trap] out, no more

1688than I would know if one was out there with

1698a motorboat running over it. But with the

1706low tide, not the lowest, that's when we

1714would go out and look with the applicant.

1722And at that time if we saw some areas [where

1732crab traps could not be seen] at low tide,

1741then we would certainly assume that . . . at

1751higher tide that [the crab traps] would not

1759be in the way.

176320. The greater weight of the evidence indicates that crab

1773traps, twelve (12) to eighteen (18) inches in height, are

1783exposed in the proposed seaplane runway during tides which are

1793low but not the lowest. When the tide is higher, the crab traps

1806are submerged, leaving no indication as to how deep they are in

1818the water. In addition to crab traps, other debris such as

1829picnic tables and pieces of destroyed docks are submerged or

1839floating at unknown locations in the bay.

184621. Mr. Grice saw channel markers in the bay. He did not

1858know whether there were any markers in the area of the proposed

1870sea lane. He assumed that the proposed sea lane area was large

1882enough for the applicant to find at least some place where

1893channel markers would not interfere with the required minimum

1902length and approaches.

190522. The greater weight of the evidence indicates that

1914channel markers are located directly in the proposed flight path

1924of the seaplane. However, there is no persuasive evidence that

1934these channel markers create a hazard in the approach and

1944departure path of the proposed sea lane.

195123. The evidence also shows that the largest concentration

1960of channel markers is located near the seaplane base's taxi and

1971launch areas along the north shore of the bay. The seaplane

1982will have to taxi across the channel and over the mudflats,

1993areas of the bay with soft bottoms, to reach the proposed sea

2005lane.

200624. Mr. Grice did not consider the depth of the water in

2018the proposed launch area, taxi area, and sea lane. Therefore,

2028he did not know whether the water depth was adequate for a

2040seaplane. He did not know what type of seaplane(s) would use

2051the seaplane base. According to Mr. Grice, Respondent can place

2061restrictions on the site before licensing to prohibit the use of

2072the seaplane base when the water is at a depth that Respondent

2084determines is unsafe.

208725. The depth of the water at mean lower low water levels

2099ranges between one (1) and four (4) feet in the proposed sea

2111lane area. The four (4) foot soundings are located at the

2122eastern tip of the proposed sea lane area, closet to the bridge.

213426. The depth of the water at mean lower low water levels

2146ranges between one-half (1/2) foot and three (3) feet along the

2157bay's northern shore in the vicinity of the seaplane base's

2167launch area.

216927. Respondent asserts that its primary concern is safety.

2178Therefore, Respondent makes a judgement call about boats and

2187people swimming in the landing area. There is no evidence that

2198Respondent considered the effect of boat traffic before

2206approving the site at issue here.

221228. The channel of the bay is within 100 feet of the place

2225where the proposed seaplane will be taken in and out of the

2237water. The greater weight of the evidence indicates that many

2247grouper boats and sport fishing boats use the channel on weekday

2258mornings. On the weekends, boat and jet ski traffic in the

2269channel increases substantially. The weekend boat traffic in

2277the channel is fairly constant.

228229. The prevailing wind on the bay is out of the southeast

2294or southwest during most of the day. The prevailing wind runs

2305perpendicular to the proposed sea lane area. A crosswind

2314takeoff and landing is dangerous, especially over a certain

2323speed.

232430. The proposed seaplane base is located 80 feet from a

2335dock referred to as the Williams dock. A channel marker is only

2347a few feet from the end of the dock. The greater weight of the

2361evidence indicates that taking a seaplane in and out of the

2372water at the proposed seaplane base launch area is dangerous due

2383to the following conditions: (a) swift channel current of six to

2394ten knots that runs horizontal to the bay's northern shore and

2405perpendicular to the dock; (b) heavy boat traffic in the

2415channel; (c) the concentration of channel markers near the

2424launch area; (d) prevailing winds which run almost perpendicular

2433to the proposed launch area; and (e) the close proximity of the

2445Williams dock.

244731. Respondent considers site approval as permission to

2455build the proposed airport. According to Mr. Grice, "[i]t gives

2465the applicant[s] some kind of assurance that they don't go out

2476and spend a lot of money and then DOT comes back and goes

2489through this hearing process after they have spent a lot."

249932. Respondent uses the FAA Advisory Circular as a

2508guideline primarily during the licensing phase of application

2516review. Respondent acknowledges that the language in each

2524provision of the circular determines whether a provision is

2533advisory or mandatory. Respondent admits that provisions of the

2542circular containing the words "should" or "shall" relate to

2551mandatory safety issues.

255433. Approximately two weeks before the hearing, the FAA

2563requested clarification concerning the coordinates of the

2570seaplane base because its proposed latitude and longitude as

2579provided by the applicant may be incorrect. If the FAA does not

2591issue an approval after receiving clarification, Respondent will

2599deny the application due to the lack of an FAA air space

2611determination.

2612CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

261534. The Division of Administrative Hearings has

2622jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter of this

2631proceeding. Sections 120.569 and 120.57(1), Florida Statutes.

263835. Petitioners must prove by a preponderance of the

2647evidence that the proposed seaplane site does not meet the

2657requirements of Section 330.30, Florida Statutes, and Rules 14-

266660.005 and 14-60.007, Florida Administrative Code. Florida

2673Department of Transportation v. J.W.C. Co., Inc., and the

2682Department of Environmental Regulation , 396 So. 2d 778 (Fla. 1st

2692DCA 1981).

269436. Section 334.044(2), Florida Statutes, requires

2700Respondent to "[t]o adopt rules, procedures, and standards for

2709the conduct of its business operations and the implementation of

2719any provision of law for which the department is responsible."

272937. Section 330.29, Florida Statutes, provides as follows:

2737330.29 Administration and enforcement;

2741rules; standards for airport sites and

2747airports.--It is the duty of the department

2754to:

2755(1) Administer and enforce the provisions

2761of this chapter.

2764(2) Establish minimum standards for

2769airport sites and airports under its

2775licensing jurisdiction.

2777(3) Adopt rules pursuant to sections

2783120.536(1) and 120.54 to implement the

2789provisions of this chapter.

279338. Section 330.30, Florida Statutes, provides as follows,

2801in pertinent part:

2804330.30 Approval of airport sites and

2810licensing of airports; fees.--

2814(1) SITE APPROVALS; REQUIREMENTS, FEES,

2819EFFECTIVE PERIOD, REVOCATION.--

2822(a) Except as provided in subsection (3),

2829the owner or lessee of any proposed airport

2837shall, prior to the acquisition of the site

2845or prior to the construction or

2851establishment of the proposed airport,

2856obtain approval of the airport site from the

2864department. . . . The department, after

2871inspection of the airport site, shall grant

2878the site approval if it is satisfied:

28851. That the site is adequate for the

2893proposed airport;

28952. That the proposed airport, if

2901constructed or established, will conform to

2907minimum standards of safety and will comply

2914with applicable county or municipal zoning

2920requirements;

29213. That all nearby airports,

2926municipalities, and property owners have

2931been notified and any comments submitted by

2938them have been given adequate consideration;

2944and

29454. That safe air-traffic patterns can be

2952worked out for the proposed airport and for

2960all existing airport site in its vicinity.

2967(b) Site approval may be granted subject

2974to any reasonable conditions which the

2980department may deem necessary to protect the

2987public health, safety, or welfare. . . .

299539. Rule 14-60.003(1), Florida Administrative Code, states

3002as follows, in pertinent part:

3007(1) Purpose. The purpose of this rule

3014chapter is to promote safe civil aviation by

3022eliminating hazards; to provide standards

3027for airport sites and categories; to license

3034airports subject to the licensing

3039requirements of Chapter 330, Florida

3044Statutes; to provide for airport markings;

3050and to promote flight safety by providing

3057for airspace protection.

306040. Rule 14-60.005(8), Florida Administrative Code, set

3067out the requirements for site approval as follows, in pertinent

3077part:

3078(8) Site Approval.

3081(a) Prior to receiving site approval, an

3088applicant shall:

30901. Demonstrate that the site is adequate

3097for the proposed airport.

31012. Demonstrate that the proposed airport,

3107if constructed or established, will conform

3113to minimum standards of safety as defined

3120herein.

31213. Include documentation evidencing local

3126zoning approval by the appropriate

3131governmental agency. Where there is no

3137local zoning, a written statement of that

3144fact from the appropriate governmental

3149agency official shall be submitted.

31544. Provide the Department a list of all

3162airports and municipalities within 15

3167nautical miles of the proposed airport and

3174all property owners within 1,000 feet of the

3183proposed airport or within 300 feet,

3189horizontal measurement, of the primary

3194surface of a proposed heliport or helistop.

32015. Provide the Department with a copy of

3209FAA airspace determination, of applicable,

3214or, if not applicable, demonstrate that safe

3221air traffic patterns could be worked out for

3229the proposed airport.

32326. Demonstrate that the runway(s) on the

3239proposed airport will not be within 5,000

3247feet of any solid waste management facility,

3254monofill, or sludge land spreading for

3260airports serving only non-turbine aircraft,

3265or within 10,000 feet of any aforementioned

3273facilities or operations for airports

3278serving turbine-driven aircraft.

3281(b) All airport sites must be inspected by

3289a representative of the Department and a

3296written report containing a recommendation

3301shall be filed by the Department.

33071. If the inspection shows that the site is

3316feasible and can meet the requirements set

3323forth in Rule 14-60.005(9)(a)1.--5. [sic]

3328above, the Department shall issue a notice

3335of intent.

3337a. A notice of intent shall state the name

3346of the applicant; give the location of the

3354airport by latitude and longitude as well as

3362by section, township and range, and state

3369the type of license applied for and the

3377earliest date a site approval order may be

3385issued.

3386b. The notice of intent shall be published

3394in a newspaper of general circulation in the

3402county in which the proposed site is

3409located. . . .

3413c. Interested persons, in order to request

3420a public meeting, must submit a written

3427request to the Department. . . .

3434d. If requested in writing, a public

3441meeting shall be conducted prior to the

3448issuance of a site approval order. . . .

3457e. If after the public meeting, if one is

3466held, and in full consideration of any

3473comments received, the Department determines

3478that the proposed airport can comply with

3485the standards set forth in Rule 14-

349260.005(9)(a)1.--6. [sic] and considering the

3497airspace determination from FAA and "area of

3504critical concern" approval from the Florida

3510Department of Environmental Protection (if

3515such approval or determination is

3520applicable), the Department shall issue a

3526site approval order.

3529f. The site approval order shall state:

3536(I) The name and mailing address of the

3544applicant;

3545(II) The location of the proposed airport

3552by geographical coordinates (latitude and

3557longitude); section, township and range; and

3563distance and direction from the nearest

3569community; and

3571(III) Any special conditions which must be

3578met prior to licensing.

358241. Rule 14-60.006, Florida Administrative Code, sets

3589forth the requirements for airport licensing as follows, in

3598pertinent part:

3600(1) Upon compliance with all conditions

3606enumerated in the site approval order,

3612satisfactory final inspection by a

3617representative of the Department, and

3622payment of the required license fee, an

3629airport license shall be issued subject to

3636any conditions deemed necessary to protect

3642the public health, safety, or welfare.

3648* * *

3651(8) Specific conditions will be attached to

3658all private airports, limited airports, and

3664emergency hospital helistops in accordance

3669with the following provision. Safety

3674considerations and operational procedures

3678will be added as conditions to any aviation

3686facility license to insure the public

3692health, safety, or welfare. Conditions

3697implementing zoning restrictions related to

3702airport operations will also be added as

3709needed to avoid unnecessary disturbance of

3715persons or activities on the ground.

3721(a) At a minimum, the conditions for a

3729private airport will include:

37331. Aircraft operations are limited to use

3740only by the licensee and invited guests. It

3748is the responsibility of each invited

3754pilot(s) to comply with federal flight

3760requirements.

3761affic patterns and operational

3765procedures are subject to review by the

3772Department prior to licensing.

377642. Rule 14-60.007, Florida Administrative Code, sets

3783forth the minimum standards for airports. This rule requires

3792private airport landing strips to be at least 1,800 feet in

3804length with 100 feet for the primary surface width and 50 feet

3816for the usual landing width. Rule 14-60.007(2), Florida

3824Administrative Code. The rule also sets the approach zones for

3834public and private airports at a 20 to 1 approach slope. Rule

384614-60.007(3), Florida Administrative Code.

385043. Rule 14-60.007(5), Florida Administrative Code, sets

3857forth specific minimum standards for seaplane bases as follows,

3866in pertinent part:

3869(a) No seaplane base shall be approved

3876which requires aircraft to land or take off

3884in close proximity to a bridge, public

3891beach, poser line, boat dock or other area

3899which could constitute a danger to person or

3907property.

3908(b) If a seaplane is to be based, moored,

3917or hangared at any given location in

3924Florida, a Florida airport license must be

3931obtained.

3932(c) All seaplane bases shall have, in

3939addition to the facilities required of land

3946airports (where applicable), the following

3951minimum services facilities:

39541. At least three U.S. Coast Guard approved

3962life preservers of the ring or throwing

3969type, with sufficient line attached to each,

3976shall be kept available during hours of

3983operation.

39842. An operational propelled boat (an

3990outboard is permissible) shall be

3995immediately available at all times when

4001flights are in progress.

40053. A dock or float, suitable for the type

4014of seaplane using the base, shall be so

4022located as to afford the maximum degree of

4030safety in taxiing approach.

40344. Suitable beaching facilities for the type

4041of aircraft using the base shall be

4048provided. Where an adequate ramp is

4054maintained, the dock or float may be

4061omitted.

40625. A source of fresh water at the beaching

4071area and sufficient hoses for washing

4077aircraft shall be accessible.

40816. An adequate supply of line for heaving,

4089towing, securing, or rescue operation shall

4095be kept available.

40987. The minimum water depths and landing

4105area lengths shall be posted at the dock

4113area and noted.

4116(d) Seaplane base standards as defined in

4123the current FAA Advisory Circular 150/5395-

41291, Seaplane Bases, are incorporated herein

4135by reference.

413744. Depending on the language of each provision, FAA

4146Advisory Circular Number 150/5395-1, provides standards and/or

4153guidelines for seaplane bases. Some of the provisions include

4162minimum safety standards which Respondent "should" consider in

4170determining whether the site of a seaplane base is adequate, and

4181if constructed or established, will conform to minimum standards

4190of safety. Some of the relevant provisions include, but are not

4201limited to, the following:

4205CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

4208* * *

42112. EXPLANATION OF TERMS

4215* * *

4218d. Hazard to Air Navigation. Any

4224obstruction to air navigation having a

4230substantial adverse effect upon the safe and

4237efficient use of the navigable airspace by

4244aircraft or upon the operation of an air

4252navigation facility. An obstruction to air

4258navigation is presumed to be hazard to air

4266navigation until an FAA study determines

4272otherwise.

4273e. Obstruction. Any object, including a

4279parked aircraft, which may hinder aircraft

4285operation or which may have an adverse

4292effect upon the operation of an air

4299navigation facility.

4301f. Obstruction to Air Navigation. Any

4307object, including a parked aircraft, located

4313in navigable airspace.

4316* * *

4319CHAPTER 2. SITE SELECTION

4323* * *

432612. WATER OPERATING AREA

4330a. Size. The size of the water operation

4338area depends on: The performance

4343characteristics of the seaplanes using the

4349site, existing or potential obstructions in

4355the surrounding area, water currents, and

4361wave action.

4363b. Location. The location of the water

4370operation area and related shore development

4376is influenced by:

4379* * *

4382(5) atmospheric and meteorological

4386conditions, such as fog, wind, and smoke;

4393* * *

4396(7) ship and boating activity. . .

4403* * *

4406c. Coordinated Use. Although each

4411community and site is different, a

4417relationship does exist, and operational use

4423of seaplanes must be coordinated with other

4430users and interested parties in the area.

4437Ample maneuvering and turning areas should

4443be provided with consideration made for

4449shipping, pleasure boats, prevailing winds,

4454and currents.

445613. APPROACH AND DEPARTURE PATHS.

4461a. Populated Areas. The approach and

4467departure paths should be clear of

4473established shipping or boating lanes. An

4479over water approach is preferable to an

4486approach-departure path over populated

4490areas, beaches, and shore developments.

4495Where surrounding development mitigates

4499against straight-in approach and/or

4503departure paths, an over water climbing turn

4510or letdown procedure may be possible.

4516b. Operational Limitations. The approach

4521and departure paths should be clear of

4528hazards. If an obstruction to air

4534navigation, determined to be a hazard,

4540cannot be altered or removed, the FAA will

4548impose aircraft operational limitations,

4552e.g. limit the type of aircraft operations,

4559to mitigate the hazard. Lighting, or

4565marking obstructions to air navigation is

4571frequently sufficient to preclude an object

4577being a hazard and avoid the need for

4585operational limitations.

458714. WATER AREAS. When selecting a site, it

4595is necessary to choose one that has adequate

4603length, width, and depth dimensions, as well

4610as an unobstructed approach and departure

4616path for the type of seaplanes to be

4624accommodated.

4625a. Current Flow. Landing and takeoff

4631area should be located where the currents

4638are less than 3.5 mph (5.5 kn/h). Where

4646currents exceed this recommendation,

4650provision should be made to allow space to

4658accommodate handling difficulties

4661particularly in the slow taxiing mode used

4668to approach a floating dock or in beaching

4676operation. It is preferable to have the

4683current flow away from the dock or float.

4691Prevailing winds may negate some adverse

4697effect of currents. The following locations

4703should be avoided:

4706(1) currents that exceed 7 mph (12 km/h);

4714* * *

471715. WATER SURFACE CONDITIONS.

4721* * *

4724b. Floating Debris. Areas subject to

4730excessive debris or debris over extended

4736periods of time should be avoided. Logs are

4744not only a hazard to aircraft, but also to

4753docking facilities constructed in the river.

4759A floating log moving at river speed has

4767considerable momentum and the potential for

4773destruction when it impacts a fixed object.

4780* * *

478317. SEA LANE ALIGNMENT.

4787a. Operational Flexibility. An unmarked

4792sea lane or water operating area is normally

4800the choice of seaplane pilots. This allows

4807the pilot to take advantage of the entire

4815water area in order to adjust landing and

4823takeoff operation for current, wind, and

4829waves.

4830b. Prevailing Winds. If a sea lane is

4838designated, it should be aligned to provide

4845maximum wind coverage. It may be desirable

4852to limit wind analyses to wind data taken

4860during daylight hours since seaplane

4865operation are almost nil after dark.

4871c. Wind Data. Recorded wind observations

4877taken in the immediate vicinity of the site

4885over an extended period of time are the most

4894desirable. When local observations are not

4900available, data from a nearby locality or

4907airport can be used. Wind data should be

4915validated by comparing observed wind

4920conditions at the proposed water operating

4926area with winds reported at the nearby

4933location. These comparisons should be made

4939under conditions of high and low wind

4946velocity, from all quadrants, on both clear

4953and cloudy days, and at substantially

4959different temperatures.

496118. BOTTOM CONDITIONS.

4964a. Type. Soil type and bottom conditions

4971can influence construction of fixed and

4977floating dock structures, as well as affect

4984taxi operations from the water operating

4990area to the shoreline facility. Mud bottoms

4997ordinarily present little or not

5002difficulty. . . .

5006b. Conditions. . . .Objects that project

5013from the bottom and constitute a water

5020hazard should be removed. If this is

5027impractical, then the objects should be

5033conspicuously marked to alert users to their

5040presence.

504119. BIRD HAZARDS. The location of bird

5048sanctuaries or areas that attract flocks of

5055birds should be considered when orienting

5061water operating areas. Waterways

5065historically used by large flocks of birds

5072should be avoided.

5075* * *

5078CHAPTER 3. WATER OPERATING AREA

5083* * *

508622. WATER OPERATING AREA DIMENSIONS. A

5092water operating area at least 2,500 feet

5100(750m) by 200 feet (60m) is recommended.

5107This size will accommodate a sea lane 2,500

5116feet (750m) by 100 feet (30m) with 200 foot

5125(60m) diameter turning basin at each end.

5132Although a depth of 6 feet (1.8m) is

5140preferred, a minimum depth of 3 feet (1m) is

5149adequate for single-engine operation. The

5154length of the water operating area needs to

5162be increased by 7 percent per 1000 feet

5170(300m) of elevation above sea level to

5177compensate for the change in density

5183altitude.

518423. TAXI CHANNEL DIMENSIONS. A taxi

5190channel for small seaplanes should have a

5197minimum width of 125 feet (38m), although a

5205width of 150 feet (45m) or more is

5213desirable. The channel should provide

5218direct access to the onshore facility and,

5225when possible, should be oriented so the

5232approach to the ramp or float will be into

5241the prevailing wind or

5245current. A minimum clearance of 50 feet

5252(15m) should be provided between the side of

5260the channel and the nearest obstruction.

5266* * *

5269CHAPTER 4. SHORELINE FACILITIES

5273* * *

527626. INTRODUCTION

5278a. Shoreline Facilities. Shoreline

5282installations provide two general functions:

5287(1) enable servicing, loading and

5292unloading, and mooring without removing the

5298aircraft from the water, and

5303(2) provide haul-out facilities for

5308removing seaplanes from the water for fresh

5315water wash downs and maintenance.

532027. SLIPWAYS. Rectangular slips dredged in

5326the shore line are common and economical and

5334often need no specially constructed sides or

5341ends. . . .

5345a. Location. A slipway should be where

5352the water level change is not greater than 2

5361feet (.6m) and the minimum low water depth

5369is not less than 1.5 feet (1.5m).

5376* * *

537928. RAMPS. Ramps vary widely in size,

5386shape, and construction materials. . . .

5393a. Location. A minimum of 100 feet (30m)

5401of unobstructed water should be available

5407directly offshore from the ramp, in the

5414direction from which approaches are normally

5420made.

5421* * *

5424d. Depth. A 4 foot (1.2m) depth of toe

5433will provide sufficient clearance for most

5439waterborne aircraft. A 3 foot (1m) depth

5446will accommodate all but the heaviest types

5453of amphibians. An 18 inch ( 45cm) depth is

5462adequate for small, light floatplanes. In

5468all cases, depth dimension should be

5474established based on the low water level

5481datum in that locality.

5485* * *

548829. FIXED DOCKS.

5491a. Location. A minimum of 100 feet (30m)

5499of unobstructed water or a turning basin

5506should be available in the direction from

5513which approaches are normally made to the

5520floating dock. Docks should be located so

5527that aircraft have access to both sides.

5534Aircraft are usually tied on the inshore

5541side of the dock during inclement weather,

5548in order to use the dock as a breakwater.

5557b. Clearance. The recommended minimum

5562clearance between the centerline of a taxi

5569route and the near faces of piers, floats,

5577ramps, or marine railway is 60 feet (18m).

5585Waterborne aircraft can safely taxi past

5591obstructions as close to the centerline of

5598the taxi route as one-half their wingspan

5605plus 15 feet (5m); however, this factor

5612should be increased at locations having

5618strong currents and windy conditions. An

5624unobstructed dock surface area 21 feet

5630(6.5m) wide will provide for wing clearance

5637over the dock and permit most floatplanes or

5645small amphibians to come alongside the dock

5652or pier.

5654c. Separation. When aircraft operate

5659under their own power into, out of, or

5667between mooring positions, the recommended

5672minimum separation between the limits of the

5679mooring positions is 30 feet (10m). When

5686aircraft are moved by hand, the separation

5693distance between the centers of the berthing

5700or mooring positions should be no less than

570860 feet (18m).

5711* * *

571433. PIERS. Piers are recommended where the

5721variation in water level is 16 inches ( 45cm)

5730or less.

5732a. Location. A minimum of 100 feet (30m)

5740of unobstructed water or a turning basin

5747should be available in the direction from

5754which approaches are normally made to the

5761pier. Piers should be located so that

5768access to them by the public will not

5776require crossing the apron or hangar area.

5783b. Design Concepts. The pier should

5789extend into the water to a point where the

5798depth at mean low water level is at least 3

5808feet (1m). . . .

5813FAA Advisory Circular Number 150/5395-1 (emphasis added).

582045. Respondent should deny the application for site

5828approval for three reasons. First, the record shows that the

5838applicant has not provided a final FAA airspace determination as

5848required by Section 330.30(1)(a)4., Florida Statutes, and Rule

585614-60.005(8)(a)5., Florida Administrative Code. The FAA has

5863requested clarification of the longitude and latitude

5870coordinates for the proposed seaplane base. The application is

5879incomplete pending receipt of the FAA's determination that the

5888proposed seaplane base will not adversely affect the safe and

5898efficient use of airspace by aircraft.

590446. Second, the application for site appro val should be

5914denied because Respondent has not considered all of the relevant

5924minimum safety standards contained in FAA Advisory Circular

5932Number 150/5395-1. Respondent must consider these safety

5939standards before it issues a site approval order. Section

5948330.30(1)(a)2., Florida Statutes; Rules 14-60.005(8)2., and 14-

595560.007(5)(d), Florida Administrative Code.

595947. Respondent considered the following in determining

5966that the proposed site met minimum safety standards: (a)

5975whether the approach slope met the 20 to 1 ratio pursuant to

5987Rule 14-60.007(3), Florida Administrative Code; (b) whether the

5995proposed sea lane met the minimum length and width requirements

6005pursuant to Rule 14-60.007(2), Florida Administrative Code; and

6013(c) whether a sea plane would have to take off and land in close

6027proximity to the bridge pursuant to Rule 14-60.007(5)(a),

6035Florida Administrative Code.

603848. Respondent did not consider provisions in the FAA

6047Advisory Circular Number 150.5395-1 related to the following:

6055(a) the performance characteristics of the seaplane(s) using the

6064site; (b) existing or potential obstructions in the surrounding

6073area; (c) water currents; (d) prevailing winds; (e) boating

6082activity; and (f) water depth. See FAA Circular Advisory Number

6092150/5395-1, Chapters 2-4, cited above. All of these factors,

6101except the type of seaplane(s) using the facility, involve

6110safety issues that are beyond the applicant's control.

611849. In the instant case, consideration of these factors is

6128necessary to determine whether the proposed site is adequate,

6137and if constructed, will comply with minimum safety standards.

6146Additionally, Respondent's failure to consider these factors

6153during the site application and site inspection process, is

6162contrary to Respondent's stated policy of ensuring that the

6171applicant does not spend a lot of money on an inadequate site.

618350. Finally, Petitioners presented competent evidence that

6190the proposed site is not adequate and does not meet minimum

6201safety standards. The site contains numerous obstructions, such

6209as crab traps in the vicinity of the taxi channel and the sea

6222lane. Channel markers, which are concentrated in the channel,

6231also obstruct a seaplane's approach to and departure from the

6241launch area. Prevailing winds from the southeast and southwest

6250present cross winds to the takeoff and landing area. Prevailing

6260winds will not be available in the direction from which

6270approaches are made to the dock. Water in the sea lane, taxi

6282channel, and launch area is too shallow for single-engine

6291operations. Boat traffic is heavy and concentrated in the

6300channel near the launch area. Water currents in the channel are

6311too strong in the taxi and launch area. The proximity of the

6323launch area is too close to the Williams dock. All of these

6335conditions constitute a danger to persons or property.

6343Respondent did not present any persuasive evidence to the

6352contrary.

6353RECOMMENDATION

6354Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of

6364Law, it is

6367RECOMMENDED

6368That Respondent rescind Site Approval Order 3-99-01 and

6376deny the site approval application for the Ochlockonee Bay

6385Seaplane Base.

6387DONE AND ENTERED this 3rd day of February, 2000, in

6397Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

6401___________________________________

6402SUZANNE F. HOOD

6405Administrative Law Judg e

6409Division of Administrative Hearings

6413The DeSoto Building

64161230 Apalachee Parkway

6419Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060

6422(850) 488-9675 SUNCOM 278-9675

6426Fax Filing (850) 921-6847

6430www.doah.state.fl.us

6431Filed with the Clerk of th e

6438Division of Administrative Hearings

6442this 3rd day of February, 2000.

6448ENDNOTE

64491/ A sea lane is a defined path on a seaplane base prescribed

6462for the landing and takeoff run of aircraft along its length.

6473FAA AC 150/5395-1, Section 2-g.

6478COPIES FURNISHED:

6480Thomas Crapps, Esquire

6483Douglas Law Firm, P.A.

6487Post Office Box 1674

6491Tallahassee, Florida 32302

6494Ollie L. Evans, Esquire

6498Department of Transportation

6501Haydon Burns Building, Mail Station 58

6507605 Suwannee Street

6510Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0458

6513Thomas F. Barry, Secretary

6517Department of Transportation

6520Haydon Burns Building

6523605 Suwannee Street

6526Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0450

6529Pamela Leslie, General Counsel

6533Department of Transportation

6536Haydon Burns Building, Mail Station 58

6542605 Suwannee Street

6545Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0450

6548NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS

6554All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within

656415 days from the date of this Recommended Order. Any exceptions

6575to this Recommended Order should be filed with the agency that

6586will issue the Final Order in this case.

Select the PDF icon to view the document.
PDF
Date
Proceedings
PDF:
Date: 03/14/2000
Proceedings: Agency Final Order
Date: 03/14/2000
Proceedings: Final Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 02/03/2000
Proceedings: Recommended Order
PDF:
Date: 02/03/2000
Proceedings: Recommended Order sent out. CASE CLOSED. Hearing held 11/16/99.
Date: 01/06/2000
Proceedings: Proposed Recommended Order of Respondent, Department of Transportation filed.
Date: 01/06/2000
Proceedings: Petitioner`s Recommended Order (for Judge Signature); Disk filed.
Date: 12/20/1999
Proceedings: Order Granting Continuance sent out. (PRO`s due by 01/06/2000)
Date: 12/16/1999
Proceedings: Joint Motion for Continuance (filed via facsimile).
Date: 12/06/1999
Proceedings: Notice of Filing; (Volume 1 of 1) DOAH Court Reporter Final Hearing Transcript filed.
Date: 11/16/1999
Proceedings: CASE STATUS: Hearing Held.
Date: 11/15/1999
Proceedings: (T. Crapps) Notice of Service of Answers to Interrogatories; Department`s First Set of Interrogatories filed.
Date: 11/12/1999
Proceedings: (T. Crapps, O. Evans) Pretrial Stipulation filed.
Date: 10/22/1999
Proceedings: (T. Crapps) (2) Subpoena Duces Tecum for Deposition; (2) Notice of Taking Deposition filed.
Date: 10/15/1999
Proceedings: Notice of Serving Respondent`s First Set of Interrogatories to Petitioner; Department`s First Set of Interrogatories; Department`s First Request for Production of Documents filed.
Date: 08/31/1999
Proceedings: Order Changing Location of Hearing sent out. (hearing will be held at DHSMV, Neil Kirkman Building)
Date: 08/13/1999
Proceedings: Notice of Hearing sent out. (hearing set for November 16-17, 1999; 10:00am; Tallahassee)
Date: 08/13/1999
Proceedings: Order of Pre-hearing Instructions sent out.
Date: 08/13/1999
Proceedings: Order of Consolidation sent out. (Consolidated cases are: 99-003180, 99-003181, 99-003182)
Date: 08/10/1999
Proceedings: Joint Response to Initial Order filed.
Date: 07/29/1999
Proceedings: Initial Order issued.
Date: 07/28/1999
Proceedings: Agency Referral Letter; Request for Hearing (letter); State of Florida Department of Transportation Site Approval Order filed.

Case Information

Judge:
SUZANNE F. HOOD
Date Filed:
07/27/1999
Date Assignment:
07/29/1999
Last Docket Entry:
03/14/2000
Location:
Tallahassee, Florida
District:
Northern
Agency:
ADOPTED IN TOTO
 

Related DOAH Cases(s) (3):

Related Florida Statute(s) (7):

Related Florida Rule(s) (4):