The latest terminal area charts for San Diego and Los Angeles show new VFR waypoints, which were championed by AOPA. The waypoints are designed to help GPS-equipped pilots navigate in and around the region's complex maze of Class B and Class C airspace. The waypoints can also be used to identify VFR corridors and flyways. The AOPA Air Safety Foundation first proposed the creation of VFR waypoints four years ago. A formal request was submitted to the FAA in May 1998, and the agency assigned development of the idea to an Aeronautical Charting Forum subcommittee. That subcommittee, which was chaired by AOPA, selected Los Angeles and San Diego as test sites for the new program.
The new charts include two VFR waypoint symbols. The first, a four-pointed star similar to the IFR waypoint symbol, indicates a navigation fix that is a point in space — such as the entry to a flyway or an airspace boundary. The second symbol, a flagpole and pennant, was already used on the charts to indicate a visual checkpoint or air traffic control visual reporting point.
All VFR waypoints are named with five-letter identifiers beginning with "VV." For instance, the Queen Mary, which has long been used as a visual checkpoint for Long Beach Airport, is now listed in the FAA's navigation database as VVLQM.
As GPS manufacturers add VFR waypoints to their databases, pilots will be able to navigate to those fixes in the same way they do to any other waypoint. In the meantime, latitude/longitude coordinates for VFR waypoints can be found in the Airport/Facility Directory.
Pilots who use the new waypoints should remember that the new five-letter identifiers cannot be used when talking to air traffic controllers. For instance, instead of reporting your position at VVLQM, report that you are at the Queen Mary.
Developers of the new VFR waypoints expect that they will be added to all terminal area charts within the next two years. For more information about the waypoints and to view a training presentation, visit AOPA Online ( www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/1999/vfr_waypoints.html).
Airport managers from around the Bay Area expressed their disappointment with the latest update to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's Bay Area Regional Airport System Plan. The plan, which was reviewed during a recent meeting of area airport managers, is not as comprehensive as many of the managers had hoped. It focuses exclusively on the area's three primary commercial airports — San Francisco, Metropolitan Oakland, and San Jose international airports. Airport managers at the regional meeting felt that the plan should also address the role of general aviation reliever airports that serve to reduce congestion at the primary airports, as well as the role of other GA airports in the nine Bay Area counties.
Also at the meeting, several airport managers announced proposals to update their airport land-use or master plans. Among the airports working on updated plans are Sonoma County and Livermore Municipal airports.
Meanwhile, airport improvement projects are scheduled for Oakland North Field Airport and Palo Alto Airport. Oakland North Field is in the process of beginning what is described as a major rehabilitation and repaving project.
A battle is brewing between airport supporters and school district officials in Hawthorne. At the heart of the conflict is a proposal to build a school on the site of the former Hawthorne Mall, just 2,400 feet from Hawthorne Municipal Airport.
Under state law, Caltrans Aeronautics must review any plans to build a school within two miles of an airport. That review must take place before the local school district can purchase the land. In this case, the Caltrans Aeronautics review determined that building a school on the proposed site would constitute an incompatible land use.
Since that decision, members of the Caltrans Aeronautics staff have met with school district officials and local politicians who asked whether the school or the airport was more important to local residents.
Although the school district can appeal the decision, the appeals process has never been used before, and the district is considered unlikely to win. As a result, many airport supporters fear that local politicians will try to close the airport or to change state law to remove Caltrans Aeronautics from the review process for school sites near airports. The Hawthorne City Council recently proposed closing the airport to develop a retail shopping center.
More than 100 airport managers from across the state were expected to gather at the third annual California Airport Managers Working Group meeting in Lake Tahoe. The meeting, scheduled for August 12 and 13, was expected to cover a wide range of issues.
Among the items scheduled for discussion were state aeronautics program projects, including the pavement management system program and updates of the airport land-use commission handbook and capital improvement program funding. The group was also scheduled to discuss FAA compliance issues, a recent General Accounting Office re-port on grant-assurance compliance, and FAA revenue policy.
As part of the meeting, nine statewide aviation organizations were invited to take part in a roundtable discussion on the formation of a comprehensive statewide aviation alliance. The proposed group would be designed to help organizations deal more effectively with legislative and administrative policy issues.
The Sacramento County Board of Supervisors is seeking a new county airports director. The director will be responsible for Sacramento International, Sacramento Mather, Sacramento Executive, and Franklin Field airports. The county executive officer will make the final selection with the help of a selection panel, which includes AOPA Regional Representative Jack Kemmerly. Among the projects facing the new director will be ongoing expansion at the area's airports and updates to each airport's master plan.
At Visalia Airport, the work of AOPA Airport Support Network volunteer Darryl Grant has preserved the field's single runway. Grant worked with the airport land use commission to ensure that a proposal to build a 15,000-seat stadium one-quarter mile from the runway centerline was denied. The land-use commission's recommendation that the permission to build the stadium be denied was forwarded to the county's board of supervisors. A letter from AOPA supported that recommendation for denial, and the board of supervisors voted down the proposed stadium.