public meeting series #3 – september 16, 2014 public ... · public meeting summary: springfield...

1

Public Meeting Series #3 – September 16, 2014

PUBLIC MEETING SUMMARY: Lebanon

Public Meeting Date and Location September 16, 2014 Warren County Career Center Commons Area 3525 North State Route 48 Lebanon, OH 45036 Meeting Host Matt Schnipke Economic Development Warren County # Attendees: 25 Project Team Participants Jim Bryant (ODOT) Dave Dennis (ODOT) Scott Sanders (CDM Smith) Eric Laing (CDM Smith) Marc Cocanougher (CDM Smith) Matt Schnelle (RS&H) Marie Keister (Engage) Stu Nicholson (Engage) Meeting Summary The meeting began at 2:30 pm. Meeting co-host Matt Schnipke of the Warren County Dept. of Economic Development welcomed the crowd and thanked them for coming. Facilitator Marie Keister made team introductions and then invited everyone in the room to introduce themselves. Ms. Keister summarized the agenda, her role, the meeting purpose and agenda. Meeting Purpose To provide an overview of the Ohio Focus Study draft findings and recommendations. Study Purpose ODOT is conducting the Ohio Airport Focus Study to help ODOT and the FAA make informed decisions on funding for Ohio’s 97 publicly owned general aviation airports.

2

The Focus Study will be used to optimize investment in Ohio’s airport system with an eye toward safety, efficiency and economic growth. It identifies needed system improvements, provides information to decision makers to assist in prioritizing projects, and assesses the economic impact of each publicly owned airport. The Study’s findings will assist ODOT and FAA in making decisions on proposed airport development in a period of limited funding. CDM Smith project manager Scott Sanders summarized the general aviation system results identified by the study. (See PDF of meeting presentation at www.AirportsFocusStudy.Ohio.gov). Among the findings:

• Ohio has a robust airport system – 98 percent of Ohioans are within 30 minutes of an airport – General aviation airport infrastructure is valued at $5.2 billion

• Cost to meet new system classification benchmarks – $215 million to $345 million

• Cost to meet system compliance: – Runway Protection Zones – up to $14 million – Runway Safety Areas – up to $42 million – Pavement maintenance – more than $450 million

• Economic impact: – $13.3 billion output – 123,456 jobs – $29.6-million in tax revenues are generated by general aviation airports annually

He went on to explain how the summary for each general aviation airport is available on the ODOT Aviation website: www.AirportsFocusStudy.ohio.gov Ms. Keister facilitated a series of questions and comments from the audience. She also reminded everyone of how to access both the statewide and local data from the study. She said comments will continue to be taken through October 10, 2014. Matt Schnelle with RS&H reviewed the Compliance Analysis and how the study got the data that it used. He also reviewed how they studied the Runway Safety Area and costs to maintain current GA pavement over a 20 year period at satisfactory or above levels.

• 31 airports were recommended for RSA improvements • 65 airports were recommended for RPZ acquisitions

He also discussed the findings re: total potential runway and facilities improvement. Eric Laing with CDM Smith walked the meeting attendees through how they came to the airport classification benchmarks. He went on to explain how the summary for each general aviation airport is available on the ODOT Aviation website: www.AirportsFocusStudy.ohio.gov

http://www.airportsfocusstudy.ohio.gov/


3

Audience Comments and Questions (Summaries, not word for word accounts)

• (Comment/ Clermont County) We recently got beat out by other airports based on our shortcomings and wanted to know other airports’ experiences.

• (Comment/ Greene County) Hanger space availability is a big issue among airports, but

local county officials don’t seem to look upon it as a priority.

• Is the objective to get everyone more capacity? (ODOT: No. Our goal is to provide adequate coverage, not to raise every airport up to the highest level. We do, however, want to promote the economic development potential of every airport.)

• How often will this data be updated? (ODOT: FAA likes to update master plans every 7 years.)

• Is there any way to reach a more equitable data point to identify where airports can

share services and needs like jet fuel or aviation gas? (Scott Sanders: we didn’t drill quite that deep, but it is a good question and one that airport directors could work out among themselves. There are market area overlaps that could enable such cooperative efforts.)

• Glad to see Lebanon’s airport upgraded in status, but the rest of us (nearby airports)

who were on the borderline between classifications are wondering what we need to do to get to the next level. (Scott Sanders said there is not grant money associated with each classification level; this data will be valuable as airports approach the FAA with requests for improvements. It will enable airports to better justify funding requests.)

• There is one targeted Ohio seaplane base in Ohio. It seems like ODOT discourages

seaplane usage. What are the standards for takeoffs and landings at Ohio lakes and reservoirs? (ODOT Aviation’s James Bryant said he is not aware of any effort to prohibit seaplanes, and in fact has a staff member is now taking lesson to get a seaplane rating. He said he would be glad to look into this further and get back to the individual with more information.)

• Is the goal to make every airport classified as a Level 1 airport? Do we need that much

overlapping coverage? (ODOT Aviation’s Dave Dennis said that is not the goal. There is adequate aviation coverage in Ohio to meet current demand in most cases. While ODOT hopes Ohio airports will promote their economic value to local communities, when it comes to grant requests FAA wants to see how the proposed improvement will address a specific need.)

• (Question / Greene County) Our level classification bugs us since it may cost us millions in grant funding if we are perceived as not important. (ODOT/CDM: The classification system level is not meant to imply a Level 2 or 3 airport is less justified in making a

4

funding request than a Level 1 airport, or is less likely to be awarded a grant. FAA will use this study as just one tool in an arsenal of tools to distribute scarce funding. FAA is also very interested in compliance factors and potential service overlaps. Each individual airport still needs to do its own planning and funding requests. FAA/ODOT funding decisions will still be made on a case by case basis.

Mr. Sanders explained the next steps: to incorporate public feedback, complete the technical report and the executive summary. All information will be posted on the project website. Ms. Keister thanked everyone and adjourned the meeting at 3:45 p.m.

1


PUBLIC MEETING SUMMARY: Springfield

Public Meeting Date and Location September 17, 014 Avtec Main Conference Room 4170 Allium Ct. Springfield, OH 45505 Meeting Host Tom Franzen Economic Development Director City of Springfield # Attendees: 21 Project Team Participants Jim Bryant (ODOT) Dave Dennis (ODOT) Scott Sanders (CDM Smith) Eric Laing (CDM Smith) Zach Duvall (CDM Smith) Beth Easterday (IBI Group) Stu Nicholson (Engage) Meeting Summary The meeting began at 2 pm. Meeting host Tom Franzen welcomed the crowd and thanked them for coming. He also updated everyone on the status of the Springfield Airport, which is transitioning from military to civilian operations. The city has decided to close the air control tower for financial reasons. He also mentioned that Speedway is moving a large headquarters operation to Springfield (same office park as Avtec) and is expected to be a user of the local airport. Facilitator Beth Easterday made team introductions and then invited everyone in the room to introduce themselves. Ms. Easterday summarized the agenda, her role, and the meeting and study purpose. Meeting Purpose To provide an overview of the Ohio Focus Study draft findings and recommendations.

2

Study Purpose ODOT is conducting the Ohio Airport Focus Study to help ODOT and the FAA make informed decisions on funding for Ohio’s 97 publicly owned general aviation airports. The Focus Study will be used to optimize investment in Ohio’s airport system with an eye toward safety, efficiency and economic growth. It identifies needed system improvements, provides information to decision makers to assist in prioritizing projects, and assesses the economic impact of each publicly owned airport. The Study’s findings will assist ODOT and FAA in making decisions on proposed airport development in a period of limited funding. CDM Smith project manager Scott Sanders summarized the general aviation system results identified by the study. (See PDF of meeting presentation at www.AirportsFocusStudy.Ohio.gov). Among the findings:





He went on to explain how the summary for each general aviation airport is available on the ODOT Aviation website: www.AirportsFocusStudy.ohio.gov Matt Schnelle with RS&H reviewed the Compliance Analysis and how the study got the data that it used. He also reviewed how they studied the Runway Safety Area and costs to maintain current GA pavement over a 20 year period at satisfactory or above levels.





3

Ms. Easterday facilitated a series of questions and comments from the audience. She also reminded everyone of how to access both the statewide and local data from the study. She said comments will continue to be taken through October 10, 2014. Audience Comments and Questions (Summaries, not word for word accounts)

• Do you envision this data as a tool going forward to use in seeking and supporting funding for airport improvements? (CDM Smith/Scott Sanders: Yes.)

• Level 3 & 4 airports are worried over the Federal AIP Program, which runs out next year. (ODOT: We understand the concern, but any decisions on funding airport improvements will be decided on more than just the study data.)

• Did FAA give any guidelines about how economic impacts would be weighted or considered? (CDM Smith/Scott Sanders: The FAA isn’t here to answer that question, but we will make sure they know your concerns.)

• Is pavement condition (PCI) data still valid since it uses 2012 data? (CDM Smith/Scott

Sanders: FAA and ODOT know this data represents a snapshot in time and may not reflect everything an airport has done since this data was collected and analyzed. This report will not replace individual airport analysis of needs.)

• We need to have more frequent runway condition inspections (PCI). (ODOT Aviation/Dave Dennis: We’re not funded to do that, but we will come out on request to do runway inspections; just call us.)

• Two airport directors questioned accuracy of the aviation fuel sales data from the

commercial service airports. (CDM Smith/Scott Sanders: let us know your specific concerns and we will be glad to go back and recheck the data.)

• I still don’t like the benchmarks, but I think it still has some value. I think the economic value of flight training is underestimated and unconsidered. Most GA airports offer such training at some level. (CDM Smith/Scott Sanders: We do have very detailed discussion of aviation education in the body of the technical report, which has not yet been released.)

• I remain concerned about funding cutbacks by the FAA. (ODOT/Dave Dennis: We are

hopeful that this study can enable Ohio to get more dollars from the FAA.)

• (Comment/OAA Board Member): The use of aviation fuel tax revenues is still an issue. The revenues generated by aviation fuel sales need to be redirected into a fund devoted to aviation needs. This study can be a huge asset for the effort to make change.

• Why is a 3-cent per gallon tax applied to aviation fuels by the state? (CAT tax). (ODOT

Aviation/Dave Dennis said he was not aware of this.)

4

Scott Sanders explained the next steps: to incorporate public feedback, complete the technical report and the executive summary. All information will be posted on the project website. Ms. Easterday thanked everyone and adjourned the meeting at 3:45 p.m.

1


PUBLIC MEETING SUMMARY: Waverly

Public Meeting Date and Location September 18, 2014 Pike County Gov’t Center Rooms 104 & 105 Conference Room 230 Waverly Plaza Waverly, Ohio 45690 Meeting Host John Hemmings III Executive Director Ohio Valley Regional Development Commission # Attendees: 16 Project Team Participants Jim Bryant (ODOT Aviation) Dave Dennis (ODOT Aviation) Scott Sanders (CDM Smith) Eric Laing (CDM Smith) Matt Schnelle (RS&H) Beth Easterday (IBI Group) Stu Nicholson (Engage) Meeting Summary The meeting began at 2 pm. Meeting host John Hemmings welcomed the crowd and thanked them for coming. Facilitator Beth Easterday with IBI Group made team introductions and then invited everyone in the room to introduce themselves. Ms. Easterday summarized the agenda, her role, and the meeting and study purpose. Meeting Purpose To provide an overview of the Ohio Focus Study draft findings and recommendations. Study Purpose ODOT is conducting the Ohio Airport Focus Study to help ODOT and the FAA make informed decisions on funding for Ohio’s 97 publicly owned general aviation airports.

2






He went on to explain how the summary for each general aviation airport is available on the ODOT Aviation website: www.AirportsFocusStudy.ohio.gov Matt Schnelle with RS&H reviewed the Compliance Analysis and how the study got the data that it used. He also reviewed how they studied the Runway Safety Area and costs to maintain current GA pavement over a 20 year period at satisfactory or above levels.


He also discussed the findings re: total potential runway and facilities improvement. Eric Laing with CDM Smith walked the meeting attendees through how they came to the airport classification benchmarks. He went on to explain how the summary for each general aviation airport is available on the ODOT Aviation website: www.AirportsFocusStudy.ohio.gov Ms. Easterday facilitated a series of questions and comments from the audience. She also reminded everyone of how to access both the statewide and local data from the study. She said comments will continue to be taken through October 10, 2014.



3


• How does our state compare with other states? (CDM Smith/Scott Sanders: Ohio does have one of the largest, most robust aviation systems of any state he has studied.)

• (Comment/Adams County) Adams County needs about 300 additional feet of runway to land jet aircraft. We recently tried to fly in an Air Force jet and it could not land or take off. Another attendee explained it is more about being able to take off safely.

• (Comment / Portsmouth Airport) If we had any money to do a project, this would be valuable data.

• (Question / Waverly Airport) How do we know where we fit in as to our airport rating

recommendation? (CDM Smith handed out the individual airport recommendation reports).

• Results are about what we expected.

• Will this study be revisited and revised to show improvements already underway and reflect it? (ODOT Aviation/Dave Dennis: The state could revisit this in the next 7 years, which is about how often FAA likes to see system plans updated.)

• If we don’t undertake recommended improvements, does that jeopardize our rating?

(CDM Smith/Scott Sanders: No, these are just recommendations and not hard and fast mandates.)

• Is there funding for security? Any requirements for airports to get involved in the use of

drones? (ODOT Aviation/Jim Bryant: Drone operation takes special certification, and there are a lot of concerns about operating them around airports. It is doubtful you will see them used around airports until a way can be found to integrate them into the airspace.)

• (Comment? Ross Co. Airport): We had our Wi-Fi antenna pointed at the airport entrance and worked out a deal with local sheriffs to use that area to park and do their reports and await calls. This has helped enhance overnight security.

• Our airport is visited by TSA twice a year. They are very helpful in suggesting ideas for enhancing security.

• Do you foresee any moves toward privatization of airports? (ODOT Aviation/Dave Dennis: Not aware that anything like that is happening in Ohio.)

4

Mr. Sanders explained the next steps: to incorporate public feedback, complete the technical report and the executive summary. All information will be posted on the project website. Ms. Easterday thanked everyone and adjourned the meeting at 3:15 p.m.

1


PUBLIC MEETING SUMMARY: Cambridge

Public Meeting Date and Location September 22, 2014 Zane State College, EPIC Building Room 608 9900 Brick Church Road Cambridge, OH 43725 Meeting Host Norm Blanchard Executive Director Guernsey Cambridge CIC # Attendees: 13 Project Team Participants Jim Bryant (ODOT Aviation) Dave Dennis (ODOT Aviation) Scott Sanders (CDM Smith) Eric Laing (CDM Smith) Matt Schnelle (RS&H) Marie Keister (Engage) Danny Louwers (Engage) Meeting Summary The meeting began at 2:05 pm. Facilitator Marie Keister with Engage made team introductions and then invited everyone to introduce themselves. Meeting host Norm Blanchard welcomed the crowd and thanked them for coming. Ms. Keister summarized the agenda, her role, and the meeting and study purpose. Meeting Purpose: To provide an overview of the Ohio Focus Study draft findings and recommendations.

2

Study Purpose: ODOT is conducting the Ohio Airport Focus Study to help ODOT and the FAA make informed decisions on funding for Ohio’s 97 publicly owned general aviation airports. The Focus Study will be used to optimize investment in Ohio’s airport system with an eye toward safety, efficiency and economic growth. It will identify needed system improvements, develop a framework for prioritizing those projects, and assess the economic impact of each publicly owned airport. The Study’s findings will assist ODOT and FAA in making decisions on proposed airport development in a period of limited funding. The Study’s findings will assist ODOT and FAA in making decisions on proposed airport development in a period of limited funding. CDM Smith project manager Scott Sanders summarized the general aviation system results identified by the study. (See PDF of meeting presentation at www.AirportsFocusStudy.Ohio.gov). Among the findings:

• Ohio has a robust airport system, but a number of gaps were seen where improvements could be made to extend runways or other upgades.

– 98 percent of Ohioans are within 30 minutes of an airport – General aviation airport infrastructure is valued at $5.2 billion


• Cost to meet system compliance: – Runway Protection Zones (RPZ) – up to $14 million – Runway Safety Areas (RSA) – up to $42 million – Pavement maintenance – more than $450 million

• Economic impact: – $13.3 billion output – 123,456 jobs – $29.6 million in tax revenues are generated by general aviation airports annually

Matt Schnelle with RS&H reviewed the Compliance Analysis and how the study got the data that it used. He also reviewed how they studied the Runway Safety Area and costs to maintain current GA pavement over a 20 year period at satisfactory or above levels.


He also discussed the findings re: total potential runway and facilities improvement and how they were determined. Eric Laing with CDM Smith walked the meeting attendees through how airport classification benchmarks were determined.


3

He went on to explain how the summary for each general aviation airport is available on the ODOT Aviation website: www.AirportsFocusStudy.ohio.gov Scott Sanders presented “the best news”: the economic impact data. (See above.) Ms. Keister facilitated a series of questions and comments from the audience. She also reminded everyone of how to access both the statewide and local data from the study. She said comments will continue to be taken through October 10, 2014. Audience Comments and Questions (Summaries, not word for word accounts)

• Q/C: I’m still concerned with how you classified the airports (especially relating to turbine engines). It seems like it is better to be in a category 3 than a 2 as far as FAA money is distributed.

o A: Let’s chat after the meeting is over so we can make sure we review your concerns with you. (CDM Smith/Scott Sanders)

o A: The money is not being distributed based on what classification your airport is. Each project is studied on its own merits. (Engage/Marie Keister)

o A: The project helps with starting points, not funding priorities. If you are a level three and need a runway extension, you could potentially get funding over a level 1. I don’t want everyone to think that they won’t get any more funding based off of the airport’s level classification. (ODOT Aviation/Dave Dennis)

• Q/C: When companies (oil and gas) come in and want to know what type of airport we have, I don’t want to tell them our airport is a level 3. It makes us sound less important.

o A: These classification levels are pretty meaningless to the layman. They are designed for ODOT/FAA use, not as a marketing tool for the airports. We don’t think it’s something you would want or need to talk about with people who use your airport. (ODOT Aviation/Dave Dennis).

• Q/C: With economic development, how do you quantify jobs created with an airport?

How did you arrive at that number? We don’t want to undercut ourselves with how many jobs our airport helped bring in, but the oil and gas companies would be here either way, so we can’t take all credit.

o A: We will go through the methodology for calculating jobs and economic benefits a little later in the presentation. (Marie Keister)

• Q/C: Is there any value in our airports having access to the survey data? o A: When you break the data down to the airport level, there probably aren’t

enough responses to make the number mean anything to your airport. The data used to determine economic impacts was done at a more regional level. It might not be everything you want, but it would be good information for the OAA. The economic impact report will be posted online soon. It will have appendices and more detail that you’ll be able to use if you are interested. (Scott Sanders)


4

• Q/C: Is somebody going to look at this map of Ohio from OhioMeansJobs or the Governor’s Office and say, “Oh look at the airport system, where are we going to fly our plane out of?” I don’t think we are going to get Boeing coming here to build a plant, but people will use our system.

o A: We created a fact sheet and individual airport economic impact sheets for each airport to use to their benefit. We have also had representatives from the Governor’s regional offices attend these meetings, and we know they are very interested in the economic impact information. A representative from Ohio Development Services Agency has also served on the Project Advisory Committee. (Marie Keister)

o A: We will make it available to economic development agencies across Ohio and I will make sure it gets to Jobs Ohio. (Dave Dennis)



Eric Laing with CDM Smith walked the meeting attendees through how they came to the airport classification benchmarks. Audience Comments and Questions (Summaries, not word for word accounts)

• Q/C- Marie Keister: Can you see yourself using this information? o CertainlyKabsolutely. o The runway extension for Cambridge airport has been worked on for over 20

years. I don’t see how this study fixes that. Scott Sanders reviewed specific detail on the data, including an in depth look at the direct and multiplier impacts of the airports on Ohio’s economy. He also spoke about taxes generated from general aviation. Mr. Sanders asked the attendees to get in touch with Mr. Laing or him if they have any questions about the individual airport economic impact sheets. Ms. Keister showed the audience where to go online to view all of the documents, including the public meeting powerpoint. Audience Comments and Questions (Summaries, not word for word accounts)

• Q/C: There are too many airports for the amount of money that ODOT has.

• Q/C: Who did you use for the economic analysis?

5

o A: We did it in house at CDM Smith using FAA methodology and a well-known economic model. We have done similar statewide studies all over the country. (Scott Sanders)

• Q/C: I see nothing wrong with what you did, but I still think you looked at the wrong data.

I would rather see the $40-50 million worth of aircraft sitting at my airport than the amount of jobs my airport created.

o We didn’t include that because there was no way to capture how much of the total money generated by those deals was a result of the airport. We wanted a conservative number that was verifiable. These numbers can be subject to a lot of scrutiny when you need to back the number up, so we stuck with an approved and tested methodology. (Scott Sanders)

• Q/C: But along the same lines, how do you justify the multiplier? Where does that data come from?

o The data comes from a company called Implan. It looks at over 500 industries and is widely accepted.

• Q/C: I looked through your criteria and one of the things that killed Cambridge (classified

it as a Level 3 instead of a Level 2) was that we don’t have a maintenance base. We have people in the community that want to make it happen, but it is difficult to do. Do you promote that or how do you help us get something like that?

o A: What the analysis has done is validate the need for your community to do that. (Scott Sanders)

o A: Local airports usually have to pay for hangers and terminals without state or FAA funds. FAA occasionally helps fund terminals but almost never hangers. FAA and ODOT can’t operate under that type of a model. If anything changes at your airport regarding a maintenance operation, make sure you let ODOT and FAA know. (Dave Dennis)

Ms. Keister thanked everyone and adjourned the meeting at 3:15 p.m.

1


PUBLIC MEETING SUMMARY: Delaware

Public Meeting Date and Location September 23, 2014 Delaware Community Center YMCA 1121 South Houk Road Delaware 43015 Meeting Host Dan Whited, Delaware Economic Development Dept. # Attendees: 33 Project Team Participants Jim Bryant (ODOT) Dave Dennis (ODOT) Scott Sanders (CDM Smith) Eric Laing (CDM Smith) Matt Schnelle (RS&H) Marie Keister (Engage) Stu Nicholson (Engage) Meeting Summary The meeting began at 2 pm. The meeting co-host, Dan Whited, welcomed the crowd and thanked them for coming. Facilitator Marie Keister made team introductions and then invited everyone in the room to introduce themselves. Ms. Keister summarized the agenda, her role, the meeting and study purpose, Meeting Purpose To provide an overview of the Ohio Focus Study draft findings and recommendations. Study Purpose ODOT is conducting the Ohio Airport Focus Study to help ODOT and the FAA make informed decisions on funding for Ohio’s 97 publicly owned general aviation airports. The Focus Study findings will be used to optimize investment in Ohio’s airport system with an eye toward safety, efficiency and economic growth. It identifies needed system improvements,

2

provides information to decision makers to assist in prioritizing projects, and assesses the economic impact of each publicly owned airport. The Study’s findings will assist ODOT and FAA in making decisions on proposed airport development in a period of limited funding. CDM Smith project manager Scott Sanders summarized the general aviation system results identified by the study. (See PDF of meeting presentation at www.AirportsFocusStudy.Ohio.gov). Among the findings:





Ms. Keister facilitated a series of questions and comments from the audience. She also reminded everyone of how to access both the statewide and local data from the study. She said comments would continue to be taken through October 10, 2014.

Audience Comments and Questions (Summaries, not word for word accounts) Marie Keister asked “Does this data make sense to you?” She explained that the data can help make the case for more funding as the airports identify projects. (There were no questions or comments.) Matt Schnelle with RS&H reviewed the Compliance Analysis and how the study got the data that it used. He also reviewed how they studied the Runway Safety Area and costs to maintain current GA pavement over a 20 year period at satisfactory or above levels.





3

• (Question) Is this funding that is available? Answer/ODOT Aviation/Dave Dennis: This

study is not intended to be a funding recommendation study. It is simply to give airports data they can use as a starting point for determining project funding needs.

Marie Keister explained that hard copies of individual airport study results are available. A few airport representatives raised their hands that they already viewed theirs on-line.

• (Comment / OAA Board Member) We’ve been very aggressively reminding legislators that this is an important study and shows a need for redirecting revenues from aviation fuel sales back into the airports. But even if that money is available, there is still a funding gap to be met. We received a good reception for the proposal in the last budget cycle.

Scott Sanders presented “the best news”: the economic impact data.

• Economic impact: – $13.3 billion output – 123,456 jobs – General aviation airports are worth an estimated $5.2-billion (replacement cost) – $29.6-million in tax revenues are generated by general aviation airports annually


• (Question) How does inflation factor in to the dollar data connected to airport improvements that the study identified? Can that be part of the project: to look at the funding resources that are likely to be available going forward and what kind of funding gaps there will be: Answer/ODOT Aviation/Jim Bryant: the effort to increase state funding dates back to the early 1990’s and very little has been accomplished to increase funding, though not from a lack of trying. ODOT Aviation office has gone from 50 people to around 19 currently.

• (Question) Are the study results going to be distributed to legislators and administration officials by ODOT or is that up to us? Answer/Marie Keister: this info will be shared with all state agencies with an interest in aviation. We urge individual airports to go back to their local stakeholders as well to seek support, including local foundations or newly elected local officials.

Meeting was adjourned at 3:05 PM by Marie Keister.

1


PUBLIC MEETING SUMMARY: Findlay

Public Meeting Date and Location September 24, 2014 Findlay Inn and Conference Center Hancock Room 200 E. Main Cross St. Findlay, OH 45840 Meeting Host Lydia Mihalik Mayor City of Findlay # Attendees: 37 Project Team Participants Jim Bryant (ODOT Aviation) Dave Dennis (ODOT Aviation) Scott Sanders (CDM Smith) Eric Laing (CDM Smith) Matt Schnelle (RS&H) Beth Easterday (IBI Group) Danny Louwers (Engage) Meeting Summary The meeting began at 2:00 pm. Facilitator Beth Easterday with IBI Group made team introductions and then invited everyone in the room to introduce themselves. Meeting host Lydia Mihalik, Mayor of Findlay, welcomed the crowd and thanked them for coming. Ms. Easterday summarized the agenda, her role, and the meeting and study purpose. Meeting Purpose To provide an overview of the Ohio Focus Study draft findings and recommendations.

Study Purpose ODOT is conducting the Ohio Airport Focus Study to help ODOT and the FAA make informed decisions on funding for Ohio’s 97 publicly owned general aviation airports.

2






Mr. Sanders went on to explain how the summary for each general aviation airport is available on the ODOT Aviation website: www.AirportsFocusStudy.ohio.gov Ms. Easterday facilitated a series of questions and comments from the audience. She also reminded everyone of how to access both the statewide and local data from the study. She said comments will continue to be taken through October 10, 2014. Audience Comments and Questions (Summaries, not word for word accounts)

• Q/C: According to the FAA, there were a lot of airports they were not able to classify in the FAA Asset Study. Does this help them do that?

o A: No

• Q/C: Can you compare how Ohio compares to other states? o A: We did not do that with this study (CDM Smith/Scott Sanders)

• Q/C: Wouldn’t it be helpful for the state of Ohio to have those numbers that Ohio has a robust system?


3

o A: That would be for economic development officials to determine. Does anyone here have any ideas? (CDM Smith/Scott Sanders)

o This study has had a lot of contact with economic development at the local level. I would hope this study is helpful to them. (ODOT Aviation/Dave Dennis)

o From the feedback that we got from our first round of meetings, it seemed like a lot of different groups were getting together to keep each other up to speed. I don’t know if that has been maintained or not. (CDM Smith/Scott Sanders)

• Q/C: Was security factored into your study?

o A: That was not within the scope of this study. (CDM Smith/Scott Sanders)

• Q/C: Are all of these maps online? o A: Yes. This presentation is online. The technical report is being drafted and

should be available online by the end of the year. We will notify you when everything is posted (CDM Smith/Scott Sanders).

• Q/C: For those new to the area, are you surprised by the extent of airport coverage? (Beth Easterday)

o A: Well, it is the birthplace of aviation.

• Q/C: How do you think your airport might use this data? (Beth Easterday) o A: For a grant request for improvement/changes at the airport. o A: Promote the opportunity for business that could come to your community. o A: It’s important to educate people to make decisions that don’t know much about

aviation.

• Q/C: I will have legislators in the state look at this. Have you been contacted by them? It’d sure be nice if they had more interest in it.

o A: We have not had direct contact with any legislators. When the study is published, it will be made available to all state agencies and the Legislature. (ODOT Aviation/Dave Dennis)

Matt Schnelle with RS&H reviewed the Compliance Analysis and how the study collected the data that it used. He also reviewed how the team studied the Runway Safety Area and costs to maintain current GA pavement over a 20 year period at satisfactory or above levels.


Eric Laing with CDM Smith walked the meeting attendees through the process of determining airport classification benchmarks. Audience Comments and Questions (Summaries, not word for word accounts)

• Q/C: What can the RPZ be used for? Only grass?

4

o A: Doesn’t necessarily need to be grass, but it needs to be under control with no public access to that area. (CDM Smith/Scott Sanders)

• Q/C: 65 airports are recommended to have RPZ improvements. How were these recommendations developed?

o A: Using FAA regulations, that is how we determined it. (CDM Smith/Scott Sanders)

• Q/C: The ARC defines what type of aircraft utilize the airport? o A: Basically, it’s the approach speed of the aircraft and wingspan. It defines the

most demanding aircraft that uses the airport on a regular basis and we base it on that. (CDM Smith/Scott Sanders)

Scott Sanders reviewed specific detail on the economic impact data, including an in depth look at the direct and multiplier impacts of the airports on Ohio’s economy. He also spoke about taxes generated from general aviation. Mr. Sanders asked the attendees to get in touch with him or Mr. Laing if they have any questions about the individual airport economic impact sheets. Ms. Easterday showed the audience where to go online to view all of the documents, including the public meeting PowerPoint. Audience Comments and Questions (Summaries, not word for word accounts)

• Q/C: Do the airports still have opportunity to come back to ODOT if we have some changes to our airport information now?

o A: If you came back to us now, we can add or remove something. Especially if there is extenuating circumstances. We would like all comments in by October 10th.(CDM Smith/Scott Sanders)

• Q/C: Is this going to be a living document? o A: This is not something that will be continually updated. ODOT should be kept

aware of any changes, but these things are typically updated on 7 year cycles. We do pavement inspections on 3 year cycles. But by all means, let us know if you have any changes. (ODOT Aviation/Dave Dennis)

• Q/C: The tax numbers don’t take into account income taxes? o A: Correct, this is just general aviation sales and fuel sales. (CDM Smith/Scott

Sanders)

Ms. Easterday thanked everyone and adjourned the meeting at 3:10 p.m.

1


PUBLIC MEETING SUMMARY: Brecksville

Public Meeting Date and Location September 29, 2014 Brecksville Community Center 1 Community Place Brecksville, Ohio Meeting Host Akron Chamber of Commerce # Attendees: 34 Project Team Participants Jim Bryant (ODOT) Dave Dennis (ODOT) Scott Sanders (CDM Smith) Eric Laing (CDM Smith) Matt Schnelle (RS&H) Marie Keister (Engage) Stu Nicholson (Engage) Meeting Summary The meeting began at 2 pm. Facilitator Marie Keister welcomed the crowd on behalf of the Ohio Department of Transportation and the Akron Chamber of Commerce and thanked the attendees for coming. She made the team introductions and then summarized the agenda, her role, the meeting and study purpose. Meeting Purpose To provide an overview of the Ohio Focus Study draft findings and recommendations.

Study Purpose ODOT is conducting the Ohio Airport Focus Study to help ODOT and the FAA make informed decisions on funding for Ohio’s 97 publicly owned general aviation airports. The Focus Study findings will be used to optimize investment in Ohio’s airport system with an eye toward safety, efficiency and economic growth. It identifies needed system improvements, provides information to decision makers to assist in prioritizing projects, and assesses the economic impact of each publicly owned airport. The Study’s findings will assist ODOT and FAA in making decisions on proposed airport development in a period of limited funding.

2

CDM Smith project manager Scott Sanders summarized the general aviation system results identified by the study. (See PDF of meeting presentation at www.AirportsFocusStudy.Ohio.gov). Among the findings:

• Ohio has a robust airport system, but a number of gaps were seen where improvements could be made to extend runways or other upgades.

– 98 percent of Ohioans are within 30 minutes of an airport – General aviation airport infrastructure is valued at $5.2 billion


• Cost to meet system compliance: – Runway Protection Zones (RPZ) – up to $14 million – Runway Safety Areas (RSA) – up to $42 million – Pavement maintenance – more than $450 million




He also discussed the findings re: total potential runway and facilities improvement and how they were determined. Eric Laing with CDM Smith walked the meeting attendees through how airport classification benchmarks were determined. He went on to explain how the summary for each general aviation airport is available on the ODOT Aviation website: www.AirportsFocusStudy.ohio.gov Scott Sanders presented “the best news”: the economic impact data. (See above.) Audience Comments and Questions (Summaries, not word for word accounts) Marie Keister asked “Does this data make sense to you?” Explained that the data can help make the case for more funding as the airports identify projects, although it does not align with a specific source of funding. However, it does give decision makers access to more tools through better data.



3

• (Question) Did the numbers include projects already underway? (A; RSH/Matt Schnelle said they were not if they weren’t underway after a certain date).

• (Comment) Seems like some completed airport projects weren’t included. (A; Matt said they took great pains to review to see if we missed anything. ODOT Aviation/Dave Dennis said data can be amended to reflect anything in the ground before the end of 2012, but not for anything after that date. This is a system plan, so it is a snapshot in time. FAA usually requires these plans to be updated every five to seven years. In the meantime, each airport should communicate with ODOT if anything changes.)

• (Question) What do you do when your airport is landlocked and the new airport master

plan recommends building a new airport? (A: ODOT Aviation/Dave Dennis suggested working with FAA.) Comment: FAA shortened the usable runway distance. We have a local businessman who is willing to put up a portion of funding for new location, but FAA declined request for matching funds.

• (Question) How will ODOT & FAA use this data? (A: ODOT Aviation/Dave Dennis said

ODOT would use the data as a starting point for working with the FAA and airports to evaluate funding requests. Airports should be sure to keep the state and FAA updated on any changes or upgrades.)

• (Comment) It would have nice to have a structure that showed how similar-sized airports

compare, as this would help us in making a stronger case to decision makers. (A: CDM Smith/Scott Sanders indicated that the individual reports do have most of that information. He directed the commenter to where he could find that information on the website.)

• (Comment) Kent State’s airport seems to have higher economic impact multipliers than what the entire state averages. (A: CDM Smith/Scott Sanders: This is because the overall multipliers for the state are pulled down by visitor multipliers from the commercial service airports. GA airports tend to have higher multipliers since they typically do not have large numbers of visitors relative to their other impacts.)

• (Comment) How much of the $30-million in General Revenue funds generated by aviation sales taxes come back to airports? (A; ODOT Aviation/Dave Dennis said only $500K comes back to ODOT annually for its grant program.)

• (Comment from Ohio Aviation Association) We are working with Governor and

legislators to change that, but we need local airports to support this effort by making their feelings known about getting a larger share of sales tax revenues returned to airports.

• (Question) What were the classification levels of airports that were closed or relocated?

(A: ODOT Aviation/Dave Dennis said Bellefontaine, a Level 2, was relocated. Blue Ash

4

was closed before the end of 2012, so it was not included in the analysis. However, we estimate that it would have been classified as a Level 2 had it remained open.)

• (Question) Are air traffic control towers becoming less of a factor as FAA moves toward next-Gen technology? (A: ODOT Aviation/Jim Bryant said it will take a while for FAA to implement its goal of reducing air traffic control towers.)

Meeting was adjourned at 3:17 PM by Marie Keister.

public meeting series #3 – september 16, 2014 public ... · public meeting summary: springfield...

Documents