Utah Continuous Airport System Plan
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Utah Continuous Airport System Plan

on

  • 1,071 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,071
Views on SlideShare
1,071
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
28
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Utah Continuous Airport System Plan Utah Continuous Airport System Plan Document Transcript

    • Utah’s Division of Aeronautics UDOT’s Division of Aeronautics is responsible for oversee- The Federal Aviation Administration ing aviation issues in Utah and works closely with airport classifies airports into two types sponsors and managers to ensure that each airport func- Commercial and General Aviation. To tions as an integral part of the statewide system of airports. better evaluate airports in the context of the needs of the State of Utah, the Utah Continuous Airport System Plan Mission and Role: (UCASP) developed five airport clas- sifications based on activities served, • Administer all state funding for public-use airport capital economic indicators, facilities, accessi- project construction and maintenance. bility to the public, and demographics. • Disburse aviation fuel tax revenues back to airports where fuel was purchased. For those airports classified by the FAA as Commercial Airports, the UCASP • Operate a small fleet of aircraft to serve state elected classified them as: officials and employees who travel around the state and to neighboring states for official business. International Airport: SLC • Maintain its own agency aircraft and aircraft operated by International provides essential other state agencies. national and international com- mercial airline access. • Operate and maintain state-owned air navigation aids. • Promote the growth and development of aviation at all National Airports: Accommodate levels throughout Utah. a high level of commercial service and general aviation activity and serve major population centers or tourism destinations in the state.Purpose of the Utah Continuous Airport System Plan For those airports classified by the FAA as General Aviation, the UCASP classified them as: • Determine which system airports are most essential to Utah’s transportation needs and economic objectives General Aviation Regional Airports: Serve primarily general • Identify projects which have the greatest potential to aviation activity, including jet and improve the performance of Utah’s airport system multi-engine aircraft and provide access to major population • Demonstrate how investment improves the performance centers. of the Utah airport system relative to established perfor- mance measures General Aviation Community Airports: Provide aviation access to smaller population centers and are used for emergency air medical operations, business, recreational, and personal flying activities. General Aviation Local Airports: Have local importance, primarily serving recreational and personal flying activities.1
    • System Plan Airport Classifications UCASP Roles International Airports Cache National Airports Logan-Cache GA Regional Airports Rich Brigham City Municipal GA Community Airports Box Elder GA Local Airports Weber Ogden-Hinckley Municipal Morgan Morgan County Davis Manila Dutch Skypark Summit Daggett John Wendover Salt Lake City Intl Salt Salt Lake City Municipal 2 Lake Tooele Tooele Valley Heber City Municipal Vernal Duchesne Wasatch Roosevelt Municipal Jake Garn Provo Municipal Spanish Fork-Springville Duchesne Municipal Utah Uintah Juab Nephi Municipal Carbon Price-Carbon County Mount Pleasant Sanpete Delta Municipal Huntington Municipal Manti-Ephraim Grand Millard Fillmore Green River Salina-Gunnison Emery Richfield Municipal Sevier Moab-Canyonlands Field Beaver Milford Municipal Piute Wayne Wonderland Hanksville Beaver Municipal Junction Wayne San Juan Iron Garfield Panguitch Municipal Monticello Parowan Escalante Municipal Cedar City Regional Bryce Canyon Blanding Municipal Bullfrog Basin Halls Crossing Washington Kane Bluff Hurricane St George Municipal Kanab Municipal 2
    • Economic Impact (Benefit) of Airports Utah’s airports not only support econoMic iMpact of Utah’s aiRpoRts essential transportation services but have a very important role General Aviation Airports in the statewide and local economies. While Salt Lake City Employment 3,673 jobs International Airport provides the Payroll $96.67 million greatest economic benefit, the Economic Output $274.28 million National, Regional, Community and Local airports need to be Utah’s Commercial Service Airports* recognized as well. The 2004 Utah Airports Economic Impact Employment 1,425 jobs Study determined that the state’s airports (excluding Salt Lake City Payroll $36.59 million International) provided 5,098 Economic Output $64.88 million full-time equivalent jobs with an annual payroll of over $133 mil- SLC International lion. The total annual economic output of these airports (which Employment 101,257 jobs includes the goods and services Payroll $2.70 billion related to aviation) is over $339 million. Excluding Salt Lake City Economic Output $5.34 billion International, in 2004, 27 of the *Excludes SLC International airports had an economic output Source: Economic Impact of Utah’s Airports, Executive Summary, UDOT, 2004 of $1 million or greater. Utah is home to a number of US military facilities, and the Salt Lake City Municipal 2 Airport houses a National Guard Unit. Many of the state’s airports also accommodate transient military training aircraft and exercises. The eco- nomic effects of these activities have been included above. While it was not included in the 2004 Utah Airports Economic Impact Study, Hill Air Force Base in Ogden was estimated at that time to employ over 22,000 personnel (military and civilian) and added $2.1 billion to Utah’s economy. The Utah system of airports provides facilities and services in support of sev- eral aeronautical manufacturing companies. The companies include: Adam Aircraft, Spectrum Aeronautical and Williams International. Adam Aircraft and Spectrum Aeronautical are both in the process of developing and producing next generation business aircraft powered by engines developed by Williams International. These new aircraft are projected to significantly lower the acquisition and operating costs of businessU.S. Air Force photo/Alex R. Lloyd aircraft. These lower costs will enable greater numbers of people to efficiently travel via general aviation business aircraft. 3
    • Financial Needs to Maintain & Improve AirportsThe UCASP identifies in detail system airport projects that are recommended 2007 – 2027 estiMatedover the next 20 years. These capital improvement projects first and foremost developMent costs byinvolve preservation of pavement and other elements of Utah’s airport system. aiRpoRt classificationImprovements that are suggested include runway extensions or widening at 13airports, new navigational aids, modern lighting, additional aircraft storage andimproved taxiways. These improvements will help bring the Utah airport system International Airportsinto compliance with FAA and state guidelines, support economic developmentgoals, and meet critical business needs. $200.63 millionOver the next 20 years, more than $752 million is needed to maintain theexisting system’s infrastructure and implement new essential improvements. National AirportsThe approximate annual average cost to raise the level of performance ofairports throughout Utah excluding Salt Lake International would be at least $210.78 million$26.6 million. Historically, when federal, state, and local funding sources areall considered, each year an average of approximately $17 million has beeninvested in the Utah airport system, excluding Salt Lake International. Thisaverage annual amount is approximately $9.6 million below the average annual Regional Airportsamount identified for airport maintenance and improvements. Based on historicfunding levels, a total estimated funding shortfall over the next 20 years of $193 $245.58 millionmillion could be expected.Over the last five years approximately 40% of all federal airport improve- Community Airportsment funds were allocated to the improvement of the states general aviationairports. The remaining 60% was primarily allocated for improvements at SLC $65.03 millionInternational with the St. George and Cedar City airports also receiving a portionfor airport improvements.The Utah Division of Aeronautics administers state programs for funding airport Local Airportsplanning, construction, and maintenance projects. The primary source of fund-ing utilized by the Division is generated by aviation fuel taxes and registration $30.19 millionfees on aircraft based in Utah. The revenue generated from these taxes andfees are deposited into a restricted account from which funds are appropriatedannually by the Utah Legislature. The state appropriation for airport improve- Total Systemments has averaged approximately $2.3 million annually over the last five years. $752.20 million
    • Evaluation of System NeedsUtah’s system of airports provides With an understanding of the existing aviation infrastructure in Utah, theexcellent coverage and access to the anticipated demand for growth, and the roles airports within Utah serve, anstate’s population and employment analysis of how the system is performing is necessary to evaluate future needs.centers. The analysis determines where changes in the system are needed to improve performance by considering:• Over 95% of Utah’s population has adequate access to commercial • The adequacy of the current airport sytem service airports • Deficiencies of the current airport system• Nearly all (99.7%) of Utah’s • Surpluses or duplication of service within the airport system population is within a 30-minute drive time of a system airport Airport Classifications• Approximately 90% of Utah’s (30-Minute Drive Times) population is within 30 minutes drive time of an airport capable of International serving business jets National• Over 99% of Utah’s employment is GA Regional within a 30-minute drive time of a system airport GA Community• More than 95% of Utah’s popula- GA Local tion is within a 30-minute drive time of an airport with an instru- ment approach procedure• Nearly 100% of the state’s regis- tered pilots are within a 30-minute drive time of a system airport Employment within 30-Minute Drive Times of Airport by ClassificationInternational 1,260,340 (53.2%)National 105,379 (4.4%)GA Regional 2,278,741 (96.3%)GA Community 187,526 (7.9%)GA Local 115,584 (4.9%)Utah Employment 2,359,060 (99.7%)Coverage Land Area within 30-Minute Drive Times of Airports by Classification Square MilesInternational 1,314 (1.6%)National 1,643 (2.0%)Regional 12,322 (15.0%)Community 8,214 (10.0%)Local 2,464 (3.0%)Total 25,957 (31.6%)5
    • Recommended System & Criteria Ucasp MiniMUM facility and seRvice obJectives General Aviation General Aviation General Aviation National Airports Regional Airports Community Airports Local AirportsAirport Reference C-III or Design Aircraft C-II or Greater B-II or Greater A-ICode (ARC) Accommodate 75% of large Accommodate 75% of large Accommodate 75%Runway Length: Maintain Existing aircraft at 90% useful load aircraft at 60% useful load of small airplanesRunway Width: To Meet ARC To Meet ARC Minimum 75’ Maintain Existing Single-wheel gear – 60,000 Single-wheel gear – 30,000Runway Single-wheel gear Single-wheel gear lbs. or equivalent for dual lbs. or equivalent for dualStrength: – 12,500 lbs. – 12,500 lbs. wheel wheel Turnarounds & Connector and/orTaxiway: Full Parallel Partial Parallel Connectors TurnaroundsNavigational Non-Precision Straight-In Non-Precision Precision Approach NAAids: Approach ApproachVisual Aids: MALSR, GVGIs GVGIs, REILs GVGIs, REILs NA MIRL, Beacon, Reflectors or LIRL,Lighting: MIRL, Beacon, Windsock MIRL, Beacon, Windsock Windsock Beacon, WindsockWeather: Automated Weather Automated Weather Automated Weather NA • Phone • Phone • Phone • Phone • Restrooms • Restrooms • Restrooms • Restrooms • FBO – Full service • FBO – Limited service • FBO – Limited • Perimeter fencing • Maintenance facilities & • Maintenance facilities serviceServices: hangar 5,000 sq. ft – Limited service • On-site courtesy • On-site rental car • On-site courtesy car car • Perimeter fencing, • Perimeter fencing • Perimeter fencing controlled access • Modern terminal • Terminal with appropriate • Pilots lounge • Pilots lounge • Hangars – 75% of based facilities • Hangars – 50% of • Auto Parking fleet & 25% of overnight • Hangars – 60% of based based fleet & 25% – Equal to number aircraft fleet & 25% of overnight of overnight aircraft of based aircraft • Apron – 25% of based aircraft • Apron – 50% ofFacilities: fleet & 75% for transient • Apron – 40% of based based fleet & 25% • Auto Parking – Per master fleet & 50% for transient for transient plan • Auto Parking – Equal to • Auto Parking 33% of based aircraft – Equal to number of based aircraft International Airport: UDOA will work with SLC to identify facility and service objectives that are consistent with FAA, UDOA, and SLC facility needs 6
    • Recommended System & Criteria An evaluation was made of how well the state’s airports met minimum facility and service objectives for airports of each classification. The following tables identify the number and percent of airports meeting minimum facility and service objectives now and in the future with recommended improvements. National Airports National Airports to Meet Meeting Objective Objective with Recommended Airport Criteria National Airports Objective in 2006 Improvements ARC C-III or Design Aircraft (1 of 2) 50% (2 of 2) 100% UCASP MINIMUM FACILITy AND SERVICE OBjECTIVES Accommodate 75% of large aircraft at 90% Runway Length (1 of 2) 50% (2 of 2) 100% NatioNal airports useful load Runway Width To Meet ARC (1 of 2) 50% (2 of 2) 100% Single-wheel gear – 60,000 lbs. or equivalent Runway Strength (1 of 2) 50% (2 of 2) 100% for dual wheel Taxiway Full Parallel (1 of 2) 50% (2 of 2) 100% Navigational Aid Precision Approach (0 of 2) 0% (2 of 2) 100% Visual Aids MALSR, GVGIs (0 of 2) 0% (2 of 2) 100% Lighting MIRL, Beacon, Windsock (2 of 2) 100% (2 of 2) 100% Weather Automated Weather Reporting (2 of 2) 100% (2 of 2) 100% Phone Phone (2 of 2) 100% (2 of 2) 100% Restrooms Restrooms (2 of 2) 100% (2 of 2) 100% FBO Fuel Full Service (2 of 2) 100% (2 of 2) 100% Maintenance Facilities/ 5,000 sq. foot hangar (2 of 2) 100% (2 of 2) 100% Hangar Ground Transportation On-site Rental Car (1 of 2) 50% (2 of 2) 100% Fencing Perimeter Fencing, Controlled Access (2 of 2) 100% (2 of 2) 100% Terminal Modern Terminal (1 of 2) 50% (2 of 2) 100% Hangars 75% of Based Fleet & 25% of overnight aircraft (2 of 2) 100% (2 of 2) 100% Apron 25% of based fleet & 75% for transient (1 of 2) 50% (2 of 2) 100% Auto Parking As per Master Plan (2 of 2) 100% (2 of 2) 100% Regional Airports Regional Airports to Meet Meeting Objective Objective with Recommended Airport Criteria Regional Airports Objective in 2006 Improvements ARC C-II or Greater (6 of 18) 33% (15 of 18) 83% Accommodate 75% of large aircraft at 60% UCASP MINIMUM FACILITy AND SERVICE OBjECTIVES Runway Length (7 of 18) 39% (15 of 18) 83% useful load Runway Width To Meet ARC (16 of 18) 89% (17 of 18) 94% regioNal airports Single-wheel gear – 30,000 lbs. or equivalent Runway Strength (9 of 18) 50% (15 of 18) 83% for dual wheel Taxiway Partial Parallel (14 of 18) 78% (17 of 18) 94% Navigational Aid Non-Precision Straight-In Approach (12 of 18) 67% (14 of 18) 78% Visual Aids GVGIs, REILs (12 of 18) 67% (16 of 18) 89% Lighting MIRL, Beacon, Windsock (15 of 18) 83% (16 of 18) 89% Weather Automated Weather (13 of 18) 72% (16 of 18) 89% Phone Phone (17 of 18) 94% (18 of 18) 100% Restrooms Restrooms (17 of 18) 94% (18 of 18) 100% Fixed Base Operator Limited Service (17 of 18) 94% (18 of 18) 100% Maintenance Facilities/ Limited Service (15 of 18) 83% (18 of 18) 100% Hangar Ground Transportation On-site Courtesy Car (14 of 18) 78% (18 of 18) 100% Fencing Perimeter Fencing (7 of 18) 39% (18 of 18) 100% Terminal Terminal with Appropriate Facilities (17 of 18) 94% (18 of 18) 100% Hangars 60% of Based Fleet & 25% of overnight aircraft (14 of 18) 78% (18 of 18) 100% Apron 40% of based fleet & 50% for transient (11 of 18) 61% (18 of 18) 100% Auto Parking Equal to 33% of based aircraft (12 of 18) 67% (18 of 18) 100%7
    • Community Airports to Meet Community Airports Meeting Objective with RecommendedAirport Criteria Community Airports Objective Objective in 2006 ImprovementsARC B-II or Greater (13 of 14) 93% (14 of 14) 100% UCASP MINIMUM FACILITy AND SERVICE OBjECTIVES CommuNity airports Accommodate 75% of smallRunway Length (11 of 14) 79% (14 of 14) 100% airplanesRunway Width Minimum 75’ (12 of 14) 86% (14 of 14) 100%Runway Strength Single-wheel gear – 12,500 lbs. (12 of 14) 86% (14 of 14) 100%Taxiway Turnarounds & Connectors (9 of 14) 64% (14 of 14) 100%Navigational Aid Non-Precision Approach (4 of 14) 29% (14 of 14) 100%Visual Aids GVGIs, REILs (9 of 14) 64% (14 of 14) 100%Lighting MIRL, Beacon, Windsock (13 of 14) 92% (14 of 14) 100%Phone Phone (12 of 14) 86% (14 of 14) 100%Restrooms Restrooms (12 of 14) 86% (14 of 14) 100%Fixed Base Operator Limited Service (8 of 14) 57% (14 of 14) 100%Ground On-site Courtesy Car (4 of 14) 29% (14 of 14) 100%TransportationFencing Perimeter Fencing (4 of 14) 29% (14 of 14) 100%Terminal Pilots’ Lounge (11 of 14) 79% (14 of 14) 100% 50% of Based Fleet & 25% ofHangars (11 of 14) 79% (14 of 14) 100% overnight aircraft 50% of based fleet & 25% forApron (13 of 14) 92% (14 of 14) 100% transient Equal to number of basedAuto Parking (9 of 14) 64% (14 of 14) 100% aircraft Percent of Local Airports Percent of Local Airports to UCASP MINIMUM FACILITy AND SERVICE OBjECTIVESAirport Criteria Local Airports Objective Meeting Objective in 2007 Meet Objective in FutureARC A-I (12 of 12) 100% (12 of 12) 100% loCal airportsRunway Length Maintain Existing n/a n/a n/a n/aRunway Width Maintain Existing n/a n/a n/a n/aRunway Strength Single-wheel gear – 12,500 lbs. (11 of 12) 92% (12 of 12) 100%Taxiway Connector and/or Turnarounds (12 of 12) 100% (12 of 12) 100%Lighting Reflectors or LIRL, Beacon, Windsock (8 of 12) 67% (12 of 12) 100%Phone Phone (5 of 12) 42% (12 of 12) 100%Restrooms Restrooms (6 of 12) 50% (12 of 12) 100%Fencing Perimeter Fencing (4 of 12) 33% (12 of 12) 100%Terminal Pilots’ Lounge (3 of 12) 25% (12 of 12) 100%Auto Parking Auto Parking (12 of 12) 100% (12 of 12) 100% 8
    • Recommended System & Criteria 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Airport Reference Code (ARC) 70% 93% Airport Length 56% 91% Runway Width 85% 97% Runway Strength 72% 93% Taxiway 78 98% Navigational Aid 47% 88% Visual Aids 62% 94% Lighting 83% 96% Weather 75% 90% Phone 78% 100% Restrooms 80% 100% FBO Service 79% 100% Maintenance Facilities/Hangar 85% 100% Ground Transportation 56% 100% Fencing 37% 100% Terminal/Pilots Lounge 70% 100% Hangars 79% 100% Apron 74% 100% Auto Parking 76% 100% System Airports Meeting Objective System Airports Meeting Objective with in 2006 Recommended Improvements9
    • System Goals and Target ObjectivesThe state’s long-range aviation planning efforts are guided byUDOT’s mission and four strategic goals, which are: Take Care of What We Have: • Pavement Preservation Make the System Work Better: • Improvements to Accommodate jet Traffic • Improvements to Accommodate Very Light jets (VLj) • Improvements to Accommodate Emergency Medical Aircraft Improve Safety: • Improvements to Runway/ Taxiway Dimensions • Improved Lighting, Weather Reporting, Visual Aids • Develop New and Improved Instrument Approach Procedures Increase Capacity: • Promote Compatible Land Use Planning • Increase Hangar and Apron Space in Areas of High Demand 10
    • Aviation Demand, Activity and Forecasts One of the first steps in analyzing an airport system’s needs is to evaluate the existing conditions, as well as projected demand for aviation. Utah’s 47 airports were home to over 2,300 based aircraft in 2006. These aircraft, as well as others that travel to Utah for both commercial and general aviation purposes, conducted over 1.4 million operations. The state’s commercial service airports served more than 10.9 million people who boarded airlines in Utah in 2006. national tRends inflUencing aviation deMand in Utah: • The ability of the legacy carriers to • Changes in regulation and funding • The degree to which higher aircraft effectively compete with the low of the Federal Essential Air Service operating costs and potential user cost carriers through further reduc- (EAS) program that could directly fees and taxes reduce general tions in non-fuel operating costs, impact scheduled commercial air aviation recreational and business achievement of a fuel efficient fleet, service at the Vernal, Moab and flying. and a route system that empha- Cedar City airports. sizes the highest yield in profitable • The extent to which corporate markets. aviation embraces micro jets or very • A shift in the U.S. away from larger light jets (VLjs) and utilizes point-to- jets to regional jets (Rj) and greater point air service using these aircraft. use of Rjs with 70 or more seats.11
    • Regional factoRs and tRends inflUencing aviation deMand in Utah:• Transportation Improvements: have experienced increased activ- greatest population increase in Planned surface transportation ity from oil and gas exploration. Utah, adding over 328,000 addi- improvements will impact the tional residents by 2025. • Retirements/Second Homes: state’s overall transportation As increasing numbers of “baby infrastructure and could result in boomers” retire, development of changes in demand for aviation retirement and second homes facilities and services. In addition, is increasing nationwide. Utah’s these improvements may increase mountainous areas east of Salt the accessibility of certain airports, Lake and the St. George area making them more attractive to have experienced increased home airport users, particularly in the development in part from retire- Wasatch Front and St. George ment and second homes. This areas. activity has increased demand• Tourism: Tourism plays a sig- for aviation services at the Salt nificant role in Utah’s economic Lake City International, Heber, St. health. While much of the tourism George and Hurricane airports. takes place in six of Utah’s urban Future development of retirement counties, many rural communities and second homes is expected in Utah are extremely dependent to increase demand at several on tourism dollars. Tourism domi- additional airports including nates the economies of counties Ogden-Hinckley, Kanab, Cedar in the northeast and southeast City, and Beaver. • Employment Growth: Utah’s regions of the state, comprising a employment growth is forecast • Population Growth: Population significant portion of the counties’ to mirror population growth with growth in Utah is projected to employment and economic activity. the largest growth occurring in occur primarily in established cities the northern and southwestern• Oil/Gas: Increasing energy and towns along the I-15 corridor. portions of the state. Salt Lake costs have boosted oil and gas The highest growth rates are County is projected to experience exploration and interest in oil shale, projected to occur in the Wasatch the greatest overall increase in particularly in eastern Utah. Should Front region and southwest area of employment, adding over 320,000 they become feasible energy the state. Airports located in these new jobs by 2025. sources, oil shale deposits could regions are more likely to experi- significantly increase demand for ence higher levels of demand for aviation services in the region. The aviation services. Salt Lake County Vernal, Price and Richfield airports is projected to experience the 12
    • Aviation Demand, Activity and Forecasts top 10 aiRpoRts Ranked by 2006 total opeRations Percent of Total General Total General Total Aviation Aviation Airport Operations Operations Operations 1 Salt Lake City International 419,488 66,324 6.9% 2 Provo Municipal 159,793 156,868 16.2% 3 Ogden-Hinckley Municipal 116,116 115,076 11.9% 4 Logan-Cache 80,450 79,600 8.2% 5 Skypark 75,912 75,762 7.8% 6 Salt Lake City # 2 71,253 65,823 6.8% 7 Spanish Fork-Springville 55,221 54,891 5.7% 8 St. George Municipal 45,307 35,497 3.7% 9 Tooele Valley Airport 44,998 44,888 4.6% 10 Heber City Municipal 40,306 38,746 4.0% Utah’s top 10 airports for general aviation operations accommodate 76 percent of all general aviation operations statewide.13
    • Activity, Capacity and Airspace activity aviation deMand foRecasts 2006 2026 AARC* Total Commercial Operations 374,820 447,152 0.89% Total General Aviation Operations 967,405 1,389,790 1.83% Total Operations 1,358,999 1,884,274 1.65% Total Passenger Enplanements 10,877,538 13,900,763 1.23% Total Pounds of EnplanedDeplaned 1,836,828 2,429,745 1.41% Air Cargo Based Aircraft 2,326 3,282 1.74% *Average Annual Rate of ChangeThe table above reflects projected changes over time of aviation activity in Utah. capacityThe increased demand for aviation facilities and services will have an impacton certain airports throughout Utah. Generally, it is not desirable for an airport’soperations to exceed 60 percent of its annual airfield capacity without planningfor capacity enhancements or implementing demand management strategies.When airport activity reaches 80 percent of annual capacity, new airfield facili-ties should be constructed or demand management strategies implemented tocontrol or reduce delay. The UCASP has identified three airports with potentialcapacity constraints and one airport that currently exceeds its capacity:• Logan: 64% of capacity in 2026• Ogden: 69% of capacity in 2026• Provo 60% of capacity now; 109% of capacity in 2026• Salt Lake City International 102% of capacity now; 129% of capacity in 2026 aiRspaceAirspace along the Wasatch Front is impacted by limited radar coverage due tomountainous terrain and growing air traffic. The area stretching from BrighamCity in the north to Spanish Fork in the south is densely populated and includesthe busiest airports in the state: Salt Lake City International, Hill AFB, ProvoMunicipal, Ogden-Hinckley and Salt Lake City #2. The airspace in this region isused by a wide variety of aircraft ranging from gliders and helicopters to largecommercial aircraft and high-speed military jet fighters. Coordination betweenair traffic control facilities using the airspace will be increasingly important as airtraffic continues to grow.It is important that the State of Utah and airport sponsors within the Salt LakeCity terminal airspace area work closely with the FAA to implement availabletechnology and procedures to improve the safety, capacity and utilization of theairspace in the region, especially over the Utah Valley area. 14
    • For more information, contact:Utah Department of Transportation Division of Aeronautics 135 North 2400 West Salt Lake City, UT 84116 Phone: 801-715-2260 Fax: 801-715-2276