Our View: Airport studies make options clear
Sunday, August 19, 2007
The Steamboat Springs City Council's response to development plans for the Steamboat Springs Airport was on target.
On Tuesday, the council voted unanimously to direct Armstrong Consultants, an airport engineering and planning firm based in Grand Junction, to continue preparing for an update of the airport's master plan, a plan that could lead to expansion of the general aviation airport. That action, coupled with the news coming from the city's other airport study - the study into possible alternative uses of the airport - indicate the airport's future is somewhat of a foregone conclusion.
The council, of course, will wait to comment until both studies are presented in February. But we don't have to wait to say what seems obvious - the airport is quite secure.
The city had hired Armstrong in September 2006 to conduct the $216,000 study into the master plan update, which is primarily funded by the Federal Aviation Administration. The study includes options for a longer runway, larger hangar and new taxiways at the 255-acre airport site on Routt County Road 129. A 600-foot runway expansion would cost about $10 million, but the FAA and state grants likely would cover 97.5 percent of that cost.
The consultant said the changes at the airport would boost fuel sales and traffic, and that the expansions would pay for themselves in 20 years. We certainly have come to believe in the airport's importance to second-home owners and visitors.
Contrast that news with the progress on the study into alternative uses. Consultant Matrix Design Group, which was commissioned to conduct the $100,000 study, began by interviewing a collection of 48 "stakeholders" - airport tenants, community leaders, government officials, etc. - on the pros and cons of the airport. In a memo presented last month to the Airport Steering Committee, Matrix wrote, "The majority of the stakeholders surveyed indicated the airport should remain open."
This is consistent with what the steering committee learned leading up to hiring Matrix. Five of the seven committee members recommended that the alternative uses study not be conducted at all. The committee cited information from the Federal Aviation Administration that indicated while closure is technically possible, it had never been done and likely would be cost-prohibitive. Any effort to close the airport would require the city to pay the FAA millions in grants issued during the years.
Just five years ago, Yampa Valley Regional Airport was in desperate need of an upgrade. The parking lot was unpaved. The jet apron was restrictive. The terminal was so crowded that a tent had to be erected outside to house passengers waiting to have their bags checked. It made sense then to focus any and all airport funding on YVRA, which has significantly greater economic impact on the community.
But thanks to tens of millions in improvements, YVRA is a very different facility in 2007 with a new terminal, new parking, expanded jet capabilities and more flights than ever. No longer can money spent at Steamboat Springs Airport be seen as bleeding dollars desperately needed in Hayden.
We still want to see the studies. It would be nice to know, once and for all, what Steamboat Springs Airport is costing taxpayers. But as the council is learning, closing the airport isn't a realistic option.
Comments
rlphillips 5 years, 9 months ago
An extension of SBS runway 32-14 to a little over 5000 feet will enable the smaller generation of corporate and personal jets to land and takeoff with adequate performance margins. To renovate Steamboat Springs and the ski area without building an airport to accomodate those who travel by air would not make sense. As a retired professional pilot, my decision to invest in Steamboat six years ago was based primarily on accessibility in my personal aircraft. A jet-friendly airport will produce unimaginable dividends for this city.
bubba 5 years, 9 months ago
I guess I don't see why the private jets can't land at the recently updated other airport. In a time when city council seems to be so excited about preserving downtown and everything environmental, encouraging more air travel from bigger planes closer in seems contradictory to me. I don't think the airport will impact me personally, but it does seem like this all important 'character' of Steamboat will be changed when it is repeatedly buzzed by low-flying jets, and I have read plenty of studies about the poor air quality surrounding airports due to jets taking off (they're not too hard to find online), which strikes me as a bigger concern than what kind of grocery bag people use.
Again, they referenced a 10 million dollar investment with a 20 year payback period, based largely on fuel sales. Again, this seems out of line with the city council's green initiatives, and just doesn't make sense financially. I understand that allowing folks to land their private jets close in might help tourism to some degree- I doubt it is a measurable benefit though, as Hayden is close as far as airports go, and the people buying all of this real estate clearly plan on getting here somehow.
id04sp 5 years, 9 months ago
Anybody who can afford a frickin' jet airplane can afford to land it at Hayden and make the 20-minute schlep to town.
Somebody with a set of working frontal lobes needs to go out there and figure out how many cubic yards of fill material will have to be hauled in to extend the runway, divide that by the number of trucks, and multiply that by the red-@$$ factor of putting that many dump truck loads on CR-129 for the weeks or months it would take to do the job (not to mention the noise, dust, and busted windshields).
The all-important "character" of Steamboat will not be helped by the stench of kerosene, or by the nearly identical stench of diesel truck and heavy equipment exhaust that will be required.
We don't have money for the dadgum school construction projects because the county commissioners gutted the treasury to build the justice center from county funds when, in fact, the state is required to bear the cost of construction by law whereas the county expenditure was 100% voluntary.
Enough of this useless spending. Let's build a pyramid in honor of Bufoonius, the God of Frivolity, west of town and put a giant traffic circle around it to remind us how stupid our elected officials are.
Requires free registration
Posting comments requires a free account and verification.
Or login with:
OpenID