California Aviation System Plan 2010 System Needs Assessment Executive Summary
Download 11.59 Kb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Table E-1 All Airports Project Cost Estimate Comparisons (2010 SNA : 2003 SRE)
- Table E-2 Statewide System Needs Assessment Priority Projects Cost Estimate
|
Executive Summary This 2010 System Needs Assessment Element (SNA) updates the 2003 Systems Requirement Element (SRE). It continues the summation and prioritization of unencumbered projects at primarily General Aviation (GA) airports that would benefit the Statewide system of airports. There are two priority rankings for airports, either Priority 1 or 2 for National Plan of Integrated Airports Systems (NPIAS) airports, or Priority A or B for non-NPIAS airports. Highest priority is generally given to airport projects that address safety, capacity and system needs on a Statewide level before recommending regional then local projects. The system of approximately 249 public use airports makes California a dynamic environment for the positive economics that come with a synergistic network of airports working together. Capturing the benefit of aviation is easily understood when we look at just one factor, namely the value of cargo per ton, when transported via air transport. In 2007, air transport nationally averaged $59,464 per ton, followed by truck at $934 per ton, water at $253 per ton, and rail at $201 per ton. To that end, the SNA works with airport operators and regional/local governments to identify improvements that would benefit the State aviation system. This report is also used to help educate decision makers on various improvement projects and the associated costs. To get to the place where improvements at GA airports appear warranted, the SNA first took a brief look at Commercial/Primary hub airports and their capacity issues. It is generally accepted that the movement of passengers, planes, and cargo on the ground at commercial service (CS) airports, along with existing GA activities, is what limits how well that CS airport grows and operates. As they reach operational capacity, the GA activities that also share the airport are usually displaced to Reliever-GA airports then other GA airports to make more room for CS activities. As such, the SNA briefly looked at CS activities at the thirteen primary CS airports in the State and tried to forecast which Reliever and GA airports would be affected and how. This assessment, along with regional then local priorities became the basis for the SNA recommendations. Reporting the recommended needs or projects, and the associated costs, is grouped geographically using the 12 District boundaries delineated by the California Department of Transportation (Department). Recommended improvements to all public use airports in the State could cost in excess of $270,000,000, as shown in Table E-1. This is roughly a 225 percent increase over improvement costs estimated in the 2003 SRE. The most notable reason for this increase is the few airports that actually get the recommended improvements completed in a timely manner. Those that defer or experience improvement delays commonly experience increased costs for maintenance and upgrades, sometimes exponentially. With some airport improvement funding programs suspended due to budget constraints, this trend is not expected to substantially improve in California over the near term. Stewardship towards maintaining the investments of previous generations in our air transport system is a paramount goal of the Department. Figure E-1 graphically shows the Statewide distribution of improvement costs by priority and non-priority airports. Costs associated with this edition of the SNA are also summarized by reviewing only priority project and airport rankings, as shown in Table E-2. All totaled, the recommended priority projects could cost in excess of $197,000,000 over a multi-year period. Of this sum, approximately $106,976,283 is attributed to just Priority 1 project improvements. This breakdown is graphically shown in Figure E-2. Making sense of these tables and numbers will always depend on what one is looking to discern. One way to use the estimated costs for planning and budgeting purposes is to consider a scenario such as if the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) could fund just the priority 1 projects through Airport Improvement Program grants over a multi-year period ($101,627,468 or 95%), over roughly the same period of time the State would need to plan for the expenditure of $2,540,687 to provide the approximate 2.5 percent State match with the applicant providing the remaining 2.5 percent local match. Looking ahead, the system of airports in California continues to struggle with a slow economy that is not expected to improve until sometime in 2011 for passenger service, and 2013 for air cargo. Notwithstanding national economics, California airports still find their greatest adversary to be land use encroachment stemming from compromising land development approvals. Additionally, the ability of many commercial service airports to handle the combined movements of people, goods and aircraft on airport property continues to move towards the upward limits of capacity. Some commercial airports are forecast to reach capacity by 2015 others by 2025, although both dates may depend on recession recovery efforts. Addressing capacity constraints is a critical consideration facing GA airports, particularly reliever airports. As business, cargo and recreation aircraft face displacement from some commercial facilities nearing capacity, the need to improve reliever and other airports to accommodate these business sectors continues to increase. Delaying improvements means potentially losing the business and economic benefits that follow these activities. Investing in system improvements continues to be championed by the FAA Airport Improvement Program (AIP) grants. Funding up to 95% of eligible project costs, California typically matches approximately 2.5% of the cost with local agencies funding the remaining 2.5% match. While the State match was suspended for the 2009/2010 fiscal year, the California local airport loan program remained unaffected. Using the SNA’s recommended projects and order of magnitude cost summary helps airport operators prioritize activities in their Capital Improvement Plans, hopefully increasing the chance for funding Over the next decade, enhancements in the nation’s air operations are expected to substantially improve with the introduction of Next Generation (NextGen) satellite-based technology. As the FAA rolls out technologically superior equipment geared for the cockpit, the need for airports to keep pace with this technology will also increase. To that end, the Division of Aeronautics continues to strive for a safer and more efficient network of airports that serves the transportation needs of the State in a changing global environment. Table E-1 All Airports Project Cost Estimate Comparisons (2010 SNA : 2003 SRE) 
Figure E-1 Statewide System Needs Assessment Project Cost Estimate 
Table E-2 Statewide System Needs Assessment Priority Projects Cost Estimate 
Figure E-2 Priority 1 Projects by Cost, Type and Quantity 
E- Directory: committees committees -> Naic winter National Meeting Property and Casualty Insurance Committee committees -> Dec. 2, 2009 Consultation Paper on Regulatory Capital Requirements and Overarching Accounting/Valuation Issues for the Solvency Modernization Initiative committees -> Emergency Interoperability Consortium Membership Meeting committees -> Technical Communicators, Get ready: Here comes Augmented Reality! Rhonda Truitt committees -> Oasis set tc committees -> Isme presentation to Joint Committee on Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation Access to Finance: the sme perspective committees -> Athletics, Council on Minutes – 2013-2014 February 28, 2014 Members Present committees -> Mark fleischhauer karen hatter diane kantros committees -> Santa Ana College Institutional Effectiveness and Assessment Committee committees -> Agenda Call to Order at 1: 33pm approvals Download 11.59 Kb. Share with your friends:
|
