1

Appendix B

VERNON REGIONAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN CONSULTATION AND PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT

1. Introduction

Stakeholder involvement and public input are key elements throughout the planning process. The consultation process, as illustrated in Figure 1, provided an environment for a wide range of knowledge, opinions and interests. The consultation process included close coordination with the Staff Advisory Committee and the Technical Advisory Committee, workshops with different stakeholder groups, in-depth interviews, surveys, an open house for the general public and a media awareness campaign.

Appendix B summarizes the information received from the community during the consultation and public engagement process, and includes a series of recommendations that have helped guide the preparation the draft Master Plan.

Following the endorsement of the preferred Airport Facility and Development Plan, additional consultation was sought in order to provide input on the endorsed plan and the proposed Project Phasing Plan. Section 7 below, provides a review and results of the additional consultation.

Figure 1: Vernon Regional Airport Master Plan Consultation Process

2. Committees

Staff Advisory Committee:

The Staff Advisory Committee, established at the beginning of the planning process, included representatives from several City Divisions: Community Infrastructure and Development,

Council (6)

Aviation StakeholdersIn-Depth Interviews (25)

Survey (44)

Workshops:City Council (2)

City Committees (8)Aviation Stakeholders (2)

Developers and Realtors (1) Local Business and Tourism (2)

Okanagan Indian Band (1) &Locatees (2)

General Public Open House and

Awareness Campaign (3)

Technical Advisory

Committee (5)

Staff Advisory Committee (6)

(#) Number of Meetings

2

Operations, Finance, Real Estate and Communications. The Committee scope was to delineate the Plan’s goals, to review the results of each stage of the process and develop recommendations for Council’s consideration. The Staff Advisory Committee helped guide the Master Plan from beginning to end. Four Staff Advisory Committee meetings were convened during the planning process, as presented in Table 1. Table 1: Staff Advisory Committee Meetings

Meeting Date Agenda Discussed

1 2014.09.09 Airport Master Plan’s vision, goals and planning process 2 2015.04.04 Master Plan branding, consultation process and land use plan 3 2015.07.07 Stakeholder Interview results, airport demand and forecasting,

economic impact and preliminary development alternatives 4 2015.10.06 Review consultation results, alternatives output analysis and

gathering consensus on the recommended development option On October 6, 2015, members of the Staff Advisory Committee met for the purpose of considering the feedback received from the public open house and survey, and to define the parameters of a preferred development option which would form the basis of a draft Master Plan. The team has recommended the creation of a new development concept, which is a combination of Options 2 and 3, excluding the runway extension project.

Airport Technical Advisory Committee:

The Airport Technical Advisory Committee (ATAC), established February 2015, included representatives from key airport stakeholders, the aviation industry, local businesses and City Administration (Table 2). As per the ATAC Terms of Reference, the mandate of the Committee is to provide advice and feedback to the City of Vernon during the development of the Master Plan. The ATAC’s role is advisory only; it is not a decision making group.

The purpose of the Committee was to:

• Provide feedback on key issues during the Airport Master Plan. • Assist with consultation activities and review of the results. • Review and provide feedback regarding proposed Master Plan development concepts

and alternatives. • Review and provide feedback on the draft Master Plan and associated studies and

documents. • Advise on other related issues, as needed.

3

The ATAC was comprised of ten (10) representatives from key airport stakeholders, the aviation industry, lease holders at the airport and local businesses, as presented in Table 2.

Table 2: Airport Master Plan Technical Advisory Committee Members

Sector Member I Member II

Corporate Aviation Rob Barnard Manager/Chief Pilot Kal Aviation

Murray Weeks Director of Real Estate and Construction, Kal Tire

Private Aviation Steve Foord President Vernon T-Hangars Ltd.

Aviation Related Industry Robert Gallagher President & Accountable Executive Coldstream Helicopters Ltd.

Recreational Aviation Rick Thorburn President Vernon Flying Club

Aviation Education Kathleen Poynton Chief Flight Instructor Full Moon Air Services Inc.

Dale Keegstra Manager Aerospace Department Okanagan College

Aviation Tourism Bret Chalmers Okanagan Skydive

Land Use Development Peter Lockhart Downtown Realty Ltd.

Aviation Related Businesses Jim Schwerman President. Seaplanes West Inc.

The ATAC convened four times during the planning process, as presented in Table 3. On October 1, 2015, the ATAC identified a preferred development option for the Master Plan. The committee recommended Option 3: Expansion with Runway Extension. This option includes an acquisition of properties and expanding the airport toward the east, and an extension of Runway 05-23 to

4

4,000 feet. In addition, the Committee also recommended exploring the feasibility of developing a new airport business park north of the airport, along Tronson Road. The majority of these lands are currently zoned Agriculture and are designated Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR).

Table 3: Airport Technical Advisory Committee (ATAC) Meetings

Meeting Date Agenda Discussed

1 2015.03.25 ATAC Introduction, Master Plan’s vision, goals and planning process 2 2015.05.26 Master Plan branding, consultation process and land use planning 3 2015.07.29 Stakeholder Interview results, airport demand and forecasting,

economic impact and preliminary development concept and alternatives

4 2015.10.01 Review consultation results, alternatives output analysis and gathering consensus on the recommended development alternative

3. Aviation Stakeholders In-depth Interviews and Survey

The consultation with aviation stakeholders focused on in-depth interviews, surveys and workshop. The one-on-one in-depth interviews with the stakeholders provided an opportunity for each stakeholder to share their personal opinion, experiences and suggestions for airport operations and vision in greater depth. The interviewees were identified by the two committees and were held during April and May, 2015. During this time, 25 aviation stakeholders were interviewed. A stakeholder survey with similar questions as in the interview was also available on-line (Attachment 1), and 44 additional responses were received.

The results from the one-on-one interviews were analyzed by qualitative methods and evaluated using the SWOT analysis model. By using SWOT, the interview results were used to evaluate the strengths, weaknesses, opportunity and threats with regard to the airport and the aviation industry, as illustrated in Figure 2. The results of the SWOT analysis are provided below.

Helpful Harmful

Inte

rnal

Item

s

Strengths – internal items accomplished particularly well or unique assets of the airport or the organization, especially in comparison to competitive and comparable airports or organizations. Strengths need to be preserved, built on, and leveraged.

Weaknesses – internal items that: (1) are not accomplished particularly well; (2) hinder or prevent desired performance; or (3) are acutely lacking or need improvement. Weaknesses need to be addressed and remedied.

Exte

rnal

Item

s

Opportunities – external items that could help realize the mission and vision for the airport. Opportunities may be identified by studying changes or trends within the industry, the marketplace, or the community. Opportunities need to be seized or capitalized on.

Threats – external items that could threaten the realization of the airport's mission and vision. As with opportunities, threats are typically identified by studying changes or trends within the industry and the local marketplace. Threats need to be managed, or if possible, eliminated.

Figure 2: Airport SWOT Analysis

5

Vernon Regional Airport Internal Strengths:

Feedback regarding the strengths of the airport primarily focused on:

• Airport location • Airport size • Airport current management • High level of services • Friendly and welcoming

environment • Affordability and cost of

doing business at the airport

Vernon Regional Airport Internal Weaknesses:

Weaknesses of the airport identified included:

• Commercial and private hangar availability

• Tie-down space • Apron 1 rehabilitation and

expansion • Terminal building • Runway 05-23 length • Paved helipad • A fixed-base operator

(FBO) • On site restaurant

6

Vernon Regional Airport External Opportunities:

The aviation stakeholders were asked to provide their ideas for opportunities that may be important for the airport to pursue over the next 20 years as part of the master plan:

• Constructing an airport business park, on the lands north of Tronson Road

• Attract aviation users from busy Kelowna International Airport

• Support the Vernon Flying Club

• Promote Heli tourism • Gliders’ activity • Airport community events • Runway extension

Vernon Regional Airport External Threats:

Stakeholders were asked for their perspectives on factors external to the airport that could have an impact on the airport:

• Cost of doing business in the aviation industry (aircraft, maintenance, insurance, etc.)

• High cost of aviation fuel • Older age of the general

aviation users • Shortage of pilots • Other airports in the region

(Kelowna, Salmon-Arm)

Aviation Stakeholders Survey Results

As the in-depth interviews with aviation stakeholders were held during the early stages in the planning process, additional feedback was required following development of the airport

7

alternatives. A second stakeholders survey (Attachment 2) was distributed during July and August, 2015, asking for their preference in regard to the four proposed airport development alternatives. Graph 1 illustrates the survey results for the preferred development alternatives, by aviation stakeholders. Option 3 was the most popular alternative (36%). Option 2B was the second preferred option (29%). 35% respondents chose Option 1 and 2, which doesn’t include the runway extension.

Graph 1: Aviation Stakeholders Results for Preferred Development Alternative

4. Workshops

A series of workshops with different interest groups were held during the planning process. The workshops were an opportunity where each group was encouraged to share their vision, opinions and ideas for the way they would like to see the Airport in the future, and to provide their comments on the proposed development alternatives. Table 4 identifies the workshops held during the consultation process.

Table 4: Airport Master Plan Workshops Schedule

Group Date 1 Vernon City Council workshop and an airport visit 2015.06.15 2 Tourism Advisory Committee 2015.07.15 3 Aviation Stakeholders and Vernon Flying Club 2015.07.30 4 Greater Vernon Chamber of Commerce and

Economic Development Advisory Committee 2015.08.10

5 Transportation Advisory Committee 2015.08.13 6 Advisory Planning Committee 2015.08.18 7 Vernon Rotary Club 2015.08.19 8 Economic Development Advisory Committee 2015.11.17

21%

14%

29%

36%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Option 1: SomeImprovements without

Expansion

Option 2: MaximizeValue Without

Expansion

Option 2B: MaximizeValue With Runway

Extension

Option 3: ExpansionWith Runway Extension

8

5. Okanagan Indian Band (OKIB) and Locatees

The Okanagan Indian Band and the Locatees are key stakeholders in the consultation process, due largely to their partial ownership of the Airport lands as well as the fact that the Airport is adjacent to Indian Reserve #6 (IR#6) (Priest Valley). The consultation process with the Okanagan Indian Band and the Locatees is the opportunity to learn more about the group’s concerns, the Band’s vision for the IR6 land use and possible future development options.

On July 16, 2015 Administration met with the Locatees’ representatives and provided a review of the draft Airport Master Plan process, discussed on the preliminary development alternatives and the Locatees’ vision for their lands.

On January 15, 2016, Administration met with the Okanagan Indian Band (OKIB) and the Locatees’ representative and provided a review of the draft Master Plan.

6. General Public Survey, Open House and Awareness Campaign

6.1 Open House

The public open house is the last component of the public consultation process. The open house concept allows the public more flexibility in joining the process and a better opportunity to engage staff in dialogue.

Two public open houses were provided during the planning process. The first open house was held at Vernon Downtown Friday Market on July 16, 2015. During the open house, visitors were able to view a series of large boards with information on the airport and on the four preliminary development alternatives. Staff were available to provide a review of the airport and to answer any questions raised by the public. Approximately 40 people stopped at the public open house tent.

The second public open house was held at the Lakers Clubhouse on September 17, 2015. The open house was the final stage of the consultation process in the development of the draft plan. Approximately 70 people attended the public open house. During the open house staff provided information and addressed questions and documented concerns. A brief presentation was provided, and information boards were displayed. Many noise-related comments and concerns were raised by the public. The open house presentation and boards provided information on expected noise levels associated with future airport development and projected activity.

6.2 Public Survey

A public engagement survey was open to the public from July 16 to October 5, 2015, affording an opportunity to offer comments and input on the airport vision and proposed development alternatives (Attachment 2). The survey was available on-line and distributed during the second

9

public open house, and a total of 135 responses were received. The results from the public survey are presented on Graph 2. Option 3 (Expansion with Runway Extension, was the most popular option. Option 1 was the second preferred option (26%). It is important to note that opinions on the runway extension itself were split, with 45% of respondents choosing an option that does not include a runway extension (Options 1 and 2) and 44% of respondents choosing an option that does include the extension (Options 2b and 3). 11% of respondents didn’t have any preferred option.

Graph 2: General Public Survey Results

The survey also asked for the reasons for chosen development option. A compilation of the main written comments are as follows:

Option 1: Some Improvements Without Expansion (26%)

• More air traffic = more noise and less quality of life for residents in the immediate area and the city. A valuable improvement would be to restrict planes which make excessive noise - notably, old jets and underpowered prop-jobs which are overloaded.

• We will never be a major airport with YLW just 40 km down Highway 97, so we should improve the airport as finances allow, but there is no need to expand in a big way.

• I live on Mission Hill and already experience air traffic, the Kal Tire Jet is quite loud when it is approaching the airport. I assume an extended/expanded airport would accommodate larger size airplanes/jets with increased frequency, which could negative.

• That area is already destroyed, now you want to move the creek? Vernon airport is in a terrible place, expanding it is stupid. How about instead the city spend money on the wetland at the end of the lake that is currently for sale and try to save some of the nature

• Worried about increased traffic coming and going down Ok Landing and Tronson. Air contamination/even more airplanes/jets taking off and landing means even more jet fuel in the air with the smell and fumes filling the yards of nearby houses.

• This airport tends to serve the wealthy minority. The air traffic has increased over the past few years and as a home owner in the flight path, the noise is unbearable. Not to mention there are thousands of people living within close proximity of the airport.

26%

19%

7%

37%

11%

Option 1: Some Improvements without Expansion

Option 2: Maximize Value Without Expansion

Option 2B: Maximize Value With Runway Extension

Option 3: Expansion With Runway Extension

None of the Above

10

• Why should tax payers pay for this expansion when it doesn't benefit 90% of the locals? This expansion will only cause louder jets and exhaust from coming and going leaving

• I own a house at the end of the airport on Lakeshore Road. The large planes are very noisy flying over our house (with exception of the small sky diving plane which is also very loud). I wish the larger planes would stick to the Kelowna airport.

• The run way should not be going over creek that's park land, walking trails.... Habitat for herons, ducks, deer, etc don't u think we have taken enough of their wild life already!! There are better ways to spend Vernon tax dollars....

• Until something is done about the noise some of these airplanes make, there should be no more expansion. In fact, I would close the airport down until mufflers, etc. are mandatory on all aircraft. The noise is deafening. This is intolerable.

• I think Vernon has many other planning & investment priorities that are more important than the airport. YLW Kelowna Airport is within an hour's easy drive for most Vernon residents and has great commercial service and general aviation facilities as well.

Option 2: Maximize Value Without Expansion (19%)

• I would like to see the airport become an economically sustainable, if not profit-generating city asset, without increasing its footprint. It would be challenging to expand the runway and/or add commercial passenger service when we are already well served

• There is a lot of residential development that has been permitted to grow around the airport. So much so that any expansion, could potentially, impact the residential community.

• If the airport isn't going commercial, what's the point of expansion? Don't see sense in upgrading at taxpayers cost to make an airport nicer for those rich enough to own their own plane or take flying lessons. I'd still have to drive to Kelowna to fly.

• The noise and pollution for the airport are a determent to life in the Vernon area. Kelowna hosts a larger facility will all the amenities that is literally 30 minutes’ drive away. The argument to have a local airport in Vernon is nonexistent.

• The airport is used primarily for small pleasure crafts/sky diving etc. We do not need a larger commercial airport here as Kelowna and Kamloops are so close. An extension to the runway would mean more traffic at the airport and more commercial usage whit noise.

• Costs are the main reason - no idea how the expansion options would be funded and whether there is any pay off. Sorry but as a taxpayer I am not interested in helping corporation flights.

• Kelowna International Airport is only 30 minutes away. Expansion means larger and more airplanes. Residential homes at west end of runway. Elementary school at east end of runway.

• We live under the flight path of the airplanes and find it very noisy, especially the planes that are used for the skydivers as the plane is always grinding up to get to the right altitude . It is extremely annoying when you want to enjoy your backyard.

• The city has grown around the airport and the footprint should remain static with no expansion beyond its current boundaries. Expansion westward will impede the development of the linear park on Lakeshore Road which is a valueable tourism area.

11

Option 2B: Maximize Value With Runway Extension (7%)

• Makes sense for growth. • To open up Vernon to more opportunity for travelers who wish to come here. Whether it be

business, pleasure or both and not have to do the Kelowna airport. It would be better for us locals who want to fly out as well.

• A longer runway would accommodate larger aircraft as well as make it safer for the other aircraft. More hanger space allows for more aircraft to stay on the airport which encourages more people to stay in Vernon to spend money in Vernon.

• The runway extension is strictly for safety. With the size of corporate jets using the Vernon airport at this time the runway length is adequate but a greater margin of safety would be better. This is a GA airport with a few small aviation related businesses.

• Need as much as having a good road system. • Brings more business, here to this region. • It seems self-evident to me that the airport operators know what they are doing, since they are

running a large municipal facility very responsibly at a breakeven profit/loss level. Therefore they've earned the right to use more taxpayer money for expansion.

Option 3: Expansion With Runway Extension (37%)

• If Vernon is going to grow, the airport needs to grow too, and to the maximum it can. Putting off expansion will only make it more expensive.

• So we could enhance travel out of the Okanagan as it gets harder to obtain flights to Calgary/ Vancouver and beyond All the local airlines are all using small jets maybe we could do the same Let's keep the dollars local.

• Vernon airport is an economic driver that supports current business and could attract much more. It is critical for Air Ambulance service to assist those in our community when in need.

• I have lived in Vernon since 1970; I would have preferred the acquisition of the ALR Ranch when it was proposed. Now for safety reasons and the future, we need our airport to be brought up to date and safer runway length.

• Emphasizing Vernon as a small size airport is a smart move for Vernon and the RDNO, however, with the increase in property values in the area, more of the part time residents and resort visitors utilize small jets and helicopters as their mode of transportation.

• I am a pilot, living in Kelowna. The Vernon airport has always been a favourite as a place to buy affordable fuel, and even to practice on a smaller runway (i.e. than Kelowna) without having to juggle around airline traffic.

• I think we have to look to the future. If we are going to leave the airport at its present location, we need to expand it before there is any more development. In my opinion, it is already in the wrong location.

• Vernon need expansion, not contraction! • Economic benefits to Vernon of expanded airport. Vernon must expand this successful business. • I believe that the airport is an important part of our history and an essential part of our future.

While our city grows so should our infrastructure and the airport is a vital portion of that.

12

• Allows for growth of the airport, economic development opportunities (corporate planes, corporate headquarter relocation, etc.), provides a great alternative to Kelowna.

• Employment and increase revenue for Vernon • Economic growth and Employment opportunities for Vernon residents. Everything grows over

time and so do the infrastructures, amenities and services along with population so it would only make sense to maximize to capabilities / requirements.

None of the Above (11%)

• After reviewing the options, I am disappointed that there is not an option for "no improvement necessary". The airport is not compatible with current development in the area due to safety and noise causing health issues.

• I do not believe any of the above options are viable! • I own a home on lakeshore Rd, and having an airport near so many residents, and a school baffles

me every time I think about it! This airport needs to be at the city limits, for safety reasons, and noise control! It's become very loud.

• I hear that the average age of the small aircraft pilots is 65. If that's not dangerous now, it soon will be. I vote for no increase spending.

• I don’t feel there is any need for this money to be spent on the airport, anywhere from $700,000 to 9 million dollars.

6.3 Awareness Campaign

In addition to the open house, the planning process was fully transparent to the public during each stage through an awareness campaign, press releases, a project website (www.vernon.ca/airportmasterplan) and direct communication with staff. The draft Master Plan will be made available to the public in December 2015, following presenting the draft to Vernon’s City Council.

7. Additional Consultation Process

Following the endorsement of the preferred Airport Facility and Development Plan from the draft Master Plan, additional consultation was sought in order to provide input on the endorsed plan and the proposed Project Phasing Plan. A series of presentations were presented to four Council Advisory Committees and a final meeting was held with the Airport Technical Advisory Committee (ATAC). A public open house was held for the public at the Lakers Clubhouse on July 6, 2016, and an online survey was available. Each committee was asked to provide comments and recommendations for Council’s consideration. The consultation meetings on the proposed airport development and phasing plan were held on the following dates (Table 5):

13

Table 5: Vernon Regional Airport Master Plan Additional Consultation Schedule

Interest Group Date (Y.M.D) Economic Development Advisory Committee 2016.05.17 Tourism Advisory Committee 2016.05.18 Transportation Advisory Committee 2016.05.26 Advisory Planning Committee 2016.06.14 Airport Technical Advisory Committee (ATAC) 2016.06.23 General Public Open House 2016.07.06

7.1 Summary of Additional Consultation Results

Vernon’s Council Advisory Committees:

Presentations on the preferred development and phasing plan were made to the Advisory Planning Committee, the Transportation Advisory Committee, the Tourism Advisory Committee and the Economic Development Advisory Committee. The Committees provided the following comments and recommendations:

At its meeting of June 14, 2016, the Advisory Planning Committee provided no comments or recommendation.

At its meeting of May 17, 2016, the Economic Development Advisory Committee encouraged development of the plan to continue as presented.

At its meeting of May 18, 2016, the Tourism Advisory Committee encouraged development of the plan to continue as presented.

At its meeting of May 26, 2016, the Transportation Advisory Committee adopted the following resolution:

“THAT the Transportation Advisory Committee appreciated the opportunity to provide comment on the Vernon Regional Airport Master Plan and supports Council’s decision with proceeding with the plan”.

Airport Technical Advisory Committee (ATAC):

The ATAC convened five times during the planning process. At its June 23, 2016 meeting, the ATAC reaffirmed its previous recommendation, which was to develop the airport under Option 3: Expansion with Runway Extension. This option include acquisition of properties to expand the airport toward the east, and an extension of the runway westward to 4,000 feet. In addition, the

14

Committee supported Council’s recommendations to explore the feasibility of new employment lands north of the airport, along Tronson Road.

General Public Open House Results:

Two public open houses were held during the preparation of the Draft Vernon Regional Airport Master Plan. A third open house was held at the Lakers Clubhouse on July 6, 2016 to allow Vernon residents to comment on the revised plan. Approximately 35 people attended the public open house. During the open house, Administration provided information and addressed questions on the preferred airport’s development plan (Development Alternative 2), the project phasing plan and the implementation costs. A survey was available to the public online from July 6 to July 18, 2016, affording an opportunity to provide comments and input on the development plan for the airport. As presented in Figure 3, the public comments were grouped into strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats with regard to the future of the Vernon Regional Airport under the preferred development plan. The most commonly cited strength of the preferred development plan was that extension of the runway is not recommended. Noise related issues were the most commonly cited weakness. A compilation of the written comments can be found in Table 6.

Figure 3: General Public Third Open House Survey SWOT Analysis Results

Helpful

Harmful

Inte

rnal

Ite

ms

Strengths: • Responsible development plan • No extension of the runway • Positive economic impact • Airport’s beautification

Weaknesses: • High level of noise • Lack of noise study and noise

monitor instruments • Airport’s location • Taxpayers cost vs user pay

Exte

rnal

Item

s

Opportunities: • Increase in economic

development • Supplementary airport to

Kelowna International Airport • Employment lands north to the

airport • Float plane services

Threats: • Safety in residential

neighbourhoods • Negative environmental impact • Increase of aircraft movement • Impact on development feasibility

of the Waterfront Neighbourhood Centre

15

Table 6: General Public Third Open House Survey Written Comments

What do you like or dislike about the Vernon Regional Airport Master Plan?

Do you have any other comments or suggestions related to the Vernon Regional Airport Master Plan?

1 The Airport is too close to residential area and recreational properties (Okanagan Lake).

We need to address the noise created from the skydiver plane. Very annoying as it flies over the city to get to proper altitude.

2 Like the expanded area for maneuvering of larger aircraft. Dislike expanded area for private aircraft parking. More emphasis on commercial activity.

There will be pressure from Kelowna to move more of their smaller traffic out of their area and likely to Vernon. Same happened at YVR to Boundary Bay. Private owners will have to pay commercial rates. Private aircraft provide little revenue and contribute most problems. 80/20 Rule.

3 We agree with the current master Plan re: no runway extension. This airport is for the use of small aircraft, Kelowna is a very short distance away! We need airport/plane curfews!

Something needs to be done about the noise pollution created by the Skydiver business. Also, the exhaust fumes are hazardous to the children who are involved in soccer. We are not against change but this area is residential and planning to be even more populated. Please nip these issues in the bud & save our area & lifestyle!!

4 Dislike that Kal Tire wants larger planes. More planes, more noise pollution. Check to see who is in favour of the expansion but do not live on the runway path or in the area.

With all of the new housing around the airport and expansion does not make sense. Vernon is a beautiful piece of paradise and an increase of noise pollution with airport. Expansion for a few is not fair for the common good. There is too much vagueness to the time lines. There must be a better idea for the lands.

5 Like - no expansion of facility. Dislike - increase in usage, exhaust, noise! The corporations (Kal Tire, etc) want what is best for them ($$$) and have no interest in what negative effects they have on the lives of the local residents!

The "cone" needs to be expanded out to the end of Adventure Bay in order to keep the planes from "cutting the corner" and buzzing the residential areas (Adventure Bay, etc.). There is no reason why these pilots could not be more considerate and stay out over the water - no reason to come directly over and in front of homes (sometimes within 100 metres, sometimes at 6:00 am and/or 11:00 pm). I hope you watch for people who say they are in favour but they don't live in the "affected" area.

6 We agree in limiting the runway to the existing length.

We strongly object to the incessant noise of the sky dive airplanes. If the pilot adjusted the drop pitch when gaining altitude it may help to reduce the noise.

16

What do you like or dislike about the Vernon Regional Airport Master Plan?

Do you have any other comments or suggestions related to the Vernon Regional Airport Master Plan?

7 I dislike the fact that they continue to ignore the concerns of the residents in the area - Noise pollution from the planes; safety concerns with near misses and documented crashes and injuries caused to sky divers and the disregard for the unsightly look and closeness to homes.

Move the airport to a rural area which can sustain its size and operation - this would be supported by residents. The existing airport has run its due course (City of Vernon & Airport did not plan well for the future of the airport) - take advantage of existing & possible future Provincial grants or (public/private funding) work with First Nations to develop beautiful waterfront park/beach instead and conserve environment.

8 The whole project is a wonderful idea. Nothing but positive things, bring money into the Vernon economy, create jobs, and hopefully expand north for industrial land to help with the industrial shortage. It's fair to say it all makes a lot of sense for minimal amount of money.

9 I like that some landscaping will be put in, as far as that I find the airport full of pollutants and noise. The night flying is disturbing the surrounding areas and the constant noise from the sky diver plane is unacceptable. I would like to see some measures in place to monitor the noise from aircraft as it will only increase!

Noise regulation & curfews on flying. The boat plane also flies dangerously low just above our roof lines. As per page 2 of 4 highlighted reduce the noise at the source help manage land use. Let's think of the future and be considerate of the housing surrounding the airport, people live here and it's not acceptable that tax payers foot the bill and it's a "too bad so sad" attitude about the noise. Complaints will increase!!

10 It's a good size to service Vernon with smaller aircraft that are restricted in Kelowna. Unfortunate city was not able to secure land to water for float planes.

Restrict further housing development under airport flight path to reduce airport complaints. The public should be educated in the value of an airport - Medivacs, Kal Tire, Okanagan College, and Skydiving.

11 Skydiver Plane too noisy Planes fly too low - very dangerous.

12 I like the plan but the runway should be extended.

17

What do you like or dislike about the Vernon Regional Airport Master Plan?

Do you have any other comments or suggestions related to the Vernon Regional Airport Master Plan?

13 Dislike - loud airplane used for skydiving-great company but doesn't help community appreciate airport. It brings jobs at the airport & tourism income to the community. Vernon airport is convenient, accessible, offers education and job opportunities for the community. Education is available at the college and also for pilots for annual courses called the 'Rust Remover'. This annual event brings tourism to Vernon as pilots from anywhere are welcome. Kids COPA program excellent event for community.

Suggestion to have an 'Open House' event for the community annually such as the Father's Day event in order to remove any exclusiveness to the community. This would help "buy in" from community to support the future development of the airport.

14 Well, it seems that the general area is maintained. I was worried about the nearby residences and the impact it would have on our beaches, walking, etc. Right now, I hear a jet (at 7:00 am and around 5 pm). That doesn't bother me, but too many (4-5) would impact our quality of life.

Perhaps, as planned, a cleanup of existing buildings (some of which are for sale or abandoned) would help. I think noisy large planes should use the Kelowna Airport - that's what it's for. If this airport expands and the noise level increases, it is only a matter of time before an accident occurs, and someone is injured or their home demolished.

15 I, as a longtime (43 years) Vernon resident, do not want to see any money spent on this. How many times do we need to say NO!?

Let's spend our tax dollars on the whole community not on a small group, i.e., Roads, beaches, lakefront.

16 Looks okay. Include a coffee shop in the terminal building, it will create a feeling of community with local residents - windows looking over runway. Install drainage - my hangar floods from rain storms. Get water stand pipes working.

17 There are only a few (very few) tax payers who are benefiting by the airport master plan. The properties for sale along Lakeshore Drive would be developed much sooner if the beaches were made more appealing (cleaned up & paths made).

Only the minimum amount of money should be spent on the airport. More money should be spent on the Okanagan Lake beaches. There should be walkways & lawn along the beaches. They are also not kept clean. The disc-golf is also a waste of tax payer's money.

18

What do you like or dislike about the Vernon Regional Airport Master Plan?

Do you have any other comments or suggestions related to the Vernon Regional Airport Master Plan?

18 We do not need a bigger airport, Kelowna is very close. We need to do maintenance to the lake (water front) Kin Beach and put in a nice walk way. Kin Beach, and other areas of the lake are extremely in bad shape. This area needs to be addressed before an airport that is used by so few people.

19 I feel with Kelowna Airport so close it is unnecessary to change the Vernon Airport. I think the money could be better spent to improve the local beaches.

I hope you would consider the people living in close proximity to the airport. I'm sure most would not like any changes!!

20 I like they are not lengthening the runway. I do not like the plans for a terminal building - we do not have commercial flights nor is there a need.

You need to do something about the noisy aircraft, particularly the helicopters - there is not many noisy, but there are some extremely noisy.

21 I am opposed to spending this proposed amount on the airport for the following reasons: A helicopter landing pad is not required, the helicopters are able to land anywhere and will continue even if there is a landing pad. They just have to stay away from the wind sock! Building or renovating the terminal building- is the building unusable right now? It's something that isn't used by the majority of taxpayers that will fund it. Resurfacing the runway is ok if it's required, as long as they don't extend the runway while they have the equipment there. Noticed that a new assisted living facility is proposed close to the end of the runway, have the noise studies been done for the area around the airport? The development around the airport is squeezing it out. I think the airport noise is going to cause its own demize.

It seems that many cities are moving their airports outside the city for safety and noise If there was a soccer game going on when that plane crashed into Marshall fields, would the city be able to handle the financial strain?