Utah Continuous Airport System Plan

UDOT’s Division of Aeronautics is responsible for oversee-ing aviation issues in Utah and works closely with airport sponsors and managers to ensure that each airport func-tions as an integral part of the statewide system of airports.

Mission and Role:

Determine which system airports are most essential to Utah’s transportation needs and economic objectives

Identify projects which have the greatest potential to improve the performance of Utah’s airport system

Demonstrate how investment improves the performance of the Utah airport system relative to established perfor-mance measures

•

•

•

The Federal Aviation Administration classifies airports into two types Commercial and General Aviation. To better evaluate airports in the context of the needs of the State of Utah, the Utah Continuous Airport System Plan (UCASP) developed five airport clas-sifications based on activities served, economic indicators, facilities, accessi-bility to the public, and demographics.

For those airports classified by the FAA as Commercial Airports, the UCASP classified them as:

Utah’s Division of Aeronautics

Purpose of the Utah Continuous Airport System Plan

International Airport: SLC International provides essential national and international com-mercial airline access.

National Airports: Accommodate a high level of commercial service and general aviation activity and serve major population centers or tourism destinations in the state.

General Aviation Regional Airports: Serve primarily general aviation activity, including jet and multi-engine aircraft and provide access to major population centers.

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.

Administer all state funding for public-use airport capital project construction and maintenance.

Disburse aviation fuel tax revenues back to airports where fuel was purchased.

Operate a small fleet of aircraft to serve state elected officials and employees who travel around the state and to neighboring states for official business.

Maintain its own agency aircraft and aircraft operated by other state agencies.

Operate and maintain state-owned air navigation aids.

Promote the growth and development of aviation at all levels throughout Utah.

•

•

•

•

•

•

1

For those airports classified by the FAA as General Aviation, the UCASP classified them as:

System Plan Airport Classifications

2

Manila

Vernal

Parowan

Skypark

Junction

Fillmore

Wendover

Hurricane

Jake Garn

Monticello

Hanksville

DutchJohn

Green River

Logan-Cache

Bryce Canyon

Bluff

Manti-Ephraim

Morgan County

Bullfrog BasinHalls Crossing

Mount Pleasant

Kanab Municipal

Delta Municipal

Salina-Gunnison

Nephi Municipal

Provo Municipal

Heber City Municipal

Beaver MunicipalWayne WonderlandMilford Municipal

Blanding Municipal

Duchesne Municipal

St George Municipal

Escalante MunicipalCedar City Regional

Panguitch Municipal

Richfield Municipal

Price-Carbon County

Roosevelt Municipal

Salt Lake City Intl

Huntington Municipal

Salt Lake City Municipal 2

Tooele Valley

Moab-Canyonlands Field

Brigham City Municipal

Spanish Fork-Springville

Ogden-Hinckley Municipal

Tooele

Millard

San Juan

Iron

Kane

Emery

Juab

Uintah

Box Elder

Garfield

Grand

Utah

Beaver

Wayne

Duchesne

Sevier

Summit

Rich

Washington

Carbon

Sanpete

Cache

Piute

Wasatch

Weber

Daggett

SaltLake

Davis

Morgan

UCASP Roles

International Airports

National Airports

GA Regional Airports

GA Community Airports

GA Local Airports

Utah’s airports not only support essential transportation services but have a very important role in the statewide and local economies. While Salt Lake City International Airport provides the greatest economic benefit, the National, Regional, Community and Local airports need to be recognized as well. The 2004 Utah Airports Economic Impact Study determined that the state’s airports (excluding Salt Lake City International) provided 5,098 full-time equivalent jobs with an annual payroll of over $133 mil-lion. The total annual economic output of these airports (which includes the goods and services related to aviation) is over $339 million. Excluding Salt Lake City International, in 2004, 27 of the airports had an economic output of $1 million or greater.

econoMic iMpact of Utah’s aiRpoRts

General Aviation Airports

Employment

Payroll

Economic Output

3,673 jobs

$96.67 million

$274.28 million

Utah’s Commercial Service Airports*

Employment

Payroll

Economic Output

1,425 jobs

$36.59 million

$64.88 million

SLC International

Employment

Payroll

Economic Output

101,257 jobs

$2.70 billion

$5.34 billion

*Excludes SLC InternationalSource: Economic Impact of Utah’s Airports, Executive Summary, UDOT, 2004

Economic Impact (Benefit) of Airports

3

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 business aircraft. These lower costs will enable greater numbers of people to efficiently travel via general aviation business aircraft.

U.S. Air Force photo/

Alex R. Lloyd

The UCASP identifies in detail system airport projects that are recommended over the next 20 years. These capital improvement projects first and foremost involve preservation of pavement and other elements of Utah’s airport system.

Improvements that are suggested include runway extensions or widening at 13 airports, new navigational aids, modern lighting, additional aircraft storage and improved taxiways. These improvements will help bring the Utah airport system into compliance with FAA and state guidelines, support economic development goals, and meet critical business needs.

Over the next 20 years, more than $752 million is needed to maintain the existing system’s infrastructure and implement new essential improvements. The approximate annual average cost to raise the level of performance of airports throughout Utah excluding Salt Lake International would be at least $26.6 million. Historically, when federal, state, and local funding sources are all considered, each year an average of approximately $17 million has been invested in the Utah airport system, excluding Salt Lake International. This average annual amount is approximately $9.6 million below the average annual amount identified for airport maintenance and improvements. Based on historic funding levels, a total estimated funding shortfall over the next 20 years of $193 million could be expected.

Over the last five years approximately 40% of all federal airport improve-ment funds were allocated to the improvement of the states general aviation airports. The remaining 60% was primarily allocated for improvements at SLC International with the St. George and Cedar City airports also receiving a portion for airport improvements.

The Utah Division of Aeronautics administers state programs for funding airport planning, construction, and maintenance projects. The primary source of fund-ing utilized by the Division is generated by aviation fuel taxes and registration fees on aircraft based in Utah. The revenue generated from these taxes and fees are deposited into a restricted account from which funds are appropriated annually by the Utah Legislature. The state appropriation for airport improve-ments has averaged approximately $2.3 million annually over the last five years.

Financial Needs to Maintain & Improve Airports

International Airports

$200.63 million

National Airports

$210.78 million

Regional Airports

$245.58 million

Community Airports

$65.03 million

Local Airports

$30.19 million

Total System

$752.20 million

2007 – 2027 estiMated developMent costs by aiRpoRt classification

Utah’s system of airports provides excellent coverage and access to the state’s population and employment centers.

Over 95% of Utah’s population has adequate access to commercial service airports

Nearly all (99.7%) of Utah’s population is within a 30-minute drive time of a system airport

Approximately 90% of Utah’s population is within 30 minutes drive time of an airport capable of serving business jets

Over 99% of Utah’s employment is within a 30-minute drive time of a system airport

More than 95% of Utah’s popula-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

•

•

•

•

•

•

Evaluation of System Needs

With an understanding of the existing aviation infrastructure in Utah, the anticipated demand for growth, and the roles airports within Utah serve, an analysis of how the system is performing is necessary to evaluate future needs. The analysis determines where changes in the system are needed to improve performance by considering:

The adequacy of the current airport sytem

Deficiencies of the current airport system

Surpluses or duplication of service within the airport system

•

•

•

5

International

National

GA Regional

GA Community

GA Local

Airport Classifications (30-Minute Drive Times)

Employment within 30-Minute DriveTimes of Airport by Classification

International 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 EmploymentCoverage

2,359,060 (99.7%)

Land Area within 30-Minute Drive Times of Airports by Classification

Square Miles

International 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%)

Recommended System & Criteria

6

Ucasp MiniMUM facility and seRvice obJectives

National AirportsGeneral Aviation Regional Airports

General Aviation Community Airports

General Aviation Local Airports

Airport Reference Code (ARC)

C-III or Design Aircraft C-II or Greater B-II or Greater A-I

Runway Length: Accommodate 75% of large aircraft at 90% useful load

Accommodate 75% of large aircraft at 60% useful load

Accommodate 75% of small airplanes

Maintain Existing

Runway Width: To Meet ARC To Meet ARC Minimum 75’ Maintain Existing

Runway Strength:

Single-wheel gear – 60,000 lbs. or equivalent for dual wheel

Single-wheel gear – 30,000 lbs. or equivalent for dual wheel

Single-wheel gear – 12,500 lbs.

Single-wheel gear – 12,500 lbs.

Taxiway: Full Parallel Partial ParallelTurnarounds & Connectors

Connector and/or Turnarounds

Navigational Aids:

Precision ApproachNon-Precision Straight-In Approach

Non-Precision Approach

N\A

Visual Aids: MALSR, GVGIs GVGIs, REILs GVGIs, REILs N\A

Lighting: MIRL, Beacon, Windsock MIRL, Beacon, WindsockMIRL, Beacon, Windsock

Reflectors or LIRL, Beacon, Windsock

Weather: Automated Weather Automated Weather Automated Weather N\A

Services:

Phone

Restrooms

FBO – Full service

Maintenance facilities & hangar 5,000 sq. ft

On-site rental car

Perimeter fencing, controlled access

•

•

•

•

•

•

Phone

Restrooms

FBO – Limited service

Maintenance facilities – Limited service

On-site courtesy car

Perimeter fencing

•

•

•

•

•

•

Phone

Restrooms

FBO – Limited service

On-site courtesy car

Perimeter fencing

•

•

•

•

•

Phone

Restrooms

Perimeter fencing

•

•

•

Facilities:

Modern terminal

Hangars – 75% of based fleet & 25% of overnight aircraft

Apron – 25% of based fleet & 75% for transient

Auto Parking – Per master plan

•

•

•

•

Terminal with appropriate facilities



Auto Parking – Equal to 33% of based aircraft

•

•

•

•

Pilots lounge



Auto Parking – Equal to number of based aircraft

•

•

•

•

Pilots lounge

Auto Parking – 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

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.

Airport Criteria National Airports Objective

National Airports Meeting Objective

in 2006

National Airports to Meet Objective with Recommended

Improvements

ARC C-III or Design Aircraft (1 of 2) 50% (2 of 2) 100%

Runway LengthAccommodate 75% of large aircraft at 90% useful load

(1 of 2) 50% (2 of 2) 100%

Runway Width To Meet ARC (1 of 2) 50% (2 of 2) 100%

Runway StrengthSingle-wheel gear – 60,000 lbs. or equivalent for dual wheel

(1 of 2) 50% (2 of 2) 100%

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/Hangar

5,000 sq. foot hangar (2 of 2) 100% (2 of 2) 100%

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%

Na

tio

Na

l a

irp

or

ts

UC

AS

P M

INIM

UM

FA

CIL

ITy

AN

D S

ER

VIC

E O

BjE

CT

IVE

S

re

gio

Na

l a

irp

or

ts

UC

AS

P M

INIM

UM

FA

CIL

ITy

AN

D S

ER

VIC

E O

BjE

CT

IVE

S

Airport Criteria Regional Airports Objective

Regional Airports Meeting Objective

in 2006

Regional Airports to Meet Objective with Recommended

Improvements

ARC C-II or Greater (6 of 18) 33% (15 of 18) 83%

Runway LengthAccommodate 75% of large aircraft at 60% useful load

(7 of 18) 39% (15 of 18) 83%

Runway Width To Meet ARC (16 of 18) 89% (17 of 18) 94%

Runway StrengthSingle-wheel gear – 30,000 lbs. or equivalent for dual wheel

(9 of 18) 50% (15 of 18) 83%

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%


Weather Automated Weather (13 of 18) 72% (16 of 18) 89%

Phone Phone (17 of 18) 94% (18 of 18) 100%


Fixed Base Operator Limited Service (17 of 18) 94% (18 of 18) 100%


Limited Service (15 of 18) 83% (18 of 18) 100%

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

Co

mm

uN

ity

air

po

rt

sU

CA

SP

MIN

IMU

M FA

CILIT

y A

ND

SE

RV

ICE

OB

jEC

TIV

ES

Airport Criteria Community Airports ObjectiveCommunity Airports Meeting

Objective in 2006

Community Airports to Meet Objective with Recommended

Improvements

ARC B-II or Greater (13 of 14) 93% (14 of 14) 100%

Runway LengthAccommodate 75% of small airplanes

(11 of 14) 79% (14 of 14) 100%

Runway 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%


Phone Phone (12 of 14) 86% (14 of 14) 100%


Fixed Base Operator Limited Service (8 of 14) 57% (14 of 14) 100%

Ground Transportation

On-site Courtesy Car (4 of 14) 29% (14 of 14) 100%


Terminal Pilots’ Lounge (11 of 14) 79% (14 of 14) 100%

Hangars50% of Based Fleet & 25% of overnight aircraft

(11 of 14) 79% (14 of 14) 100%

Apron50% of based fleet & 25% for transient

(13 of 14) 92% (14 of 14) 100%

Auto ParkingEqual to number of based aircraft

(9 of 14) 64% (14 of 14) 100%

Airport Criteria Local Airports ObjectivePercent of Local Airports Meeting Objective in 2007

Percent of Local Airports to Meet Objective in Future

ARC A-I (12 of 12) 100% (12 of 12) 100%

Runway Length Maintain Existing n/a n/a n/a n/a

Runway Width Maintain Existing n/a n/a n/a n/a

Runway 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%



Terminal Pilots’ Lounge (3 of 12) 25% (12 of 12) 100%

Auto Parking Auto Parking (12 of 12) 100% (12 of 12) 100%

loC

al

air

po

rt

sU

CA

SP

MIN

IMU

M FA

CILIT

y A

ND

SE

RV

ICE

OB

jEC

TIV

ES

8


9

Airport Reference Code (ARC)

Airport Length

Runway Width

Runway Strength

Taxiway

Navigational Aid

Visual Aids

Lighting

Weather

Phone

Restrooms

FBO Service


Ground Transportation

Fencing

Terminal/Pilots Lounge

Hangars

Apron

Auto Parking

70% 93%

56% 91%

85% 97%

72% 93%

78 98%

47% 88%

62% 94%

83% 96%

75% 90%

78% 100%

80% 100%

79% 100%

85% 100%

56% 100%

37% 100%

70% 100%

79% 100%

74% 100%

76% 100%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

System Airports Meeting Objective in 2006

System Airports Meeting Objective withRecommended Improvements

The state’s long-range aviation planning efforts are guided by UDOT’s mission and four strategic goals, which are:

10

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

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

System Goals and Target Objectives

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.

The ability of the legacy carriers to effectively compete with the low cost carriers through further reduc-tions in non-fuel operating costs, achievement of a fuel efficient fleet, and a route system that empha-sizes the highest yield in profitable markets.

A shift in the U.S. away from larger jets to regional jets (Rj) and greater use of Rjs with 70 or more seats.

•

•

Changes in regulation and funding of the Federal Essential Air Service (EAS) program that could directly impact scheduled commercial air service at the Vernal, Moab and Cedar City airports.

The extent to which corporate aviation embraces micro jets or very light jets (VLjs) and utilizes point-to-point air service using these aircraft.

•

•

The degree to which higher aircraft operating costs and potential user fees and taxes reduce general aviation recreational and business flying.

•

11

national tRends inflUencing aviation deMand in Utah:

Transportation Improvements: Planned surface transportation improvements will impact the state’s overall transportation infrastructure and could result in changes in demand for aviation facilities and services. In addition, these improvements may increase the accessibility of certain airports, making them more attractive to airport users, particularly in the Wasatch Front and St. George areas.

Tourism: Tourism plays a sig-nificant role in Utah’s economic health. While much of the tourism takes place in six of Utah’s urban counties, many rural communities in Utah are extremely dependent on tourism dollars. Tourism domi-nates the economies of counties in the northeast and southeast regions of the state, comprising a significant portion of the counties’ employment and economic activity.

Oil/Gas: Increasing energy costs have boosted oil and gas exploration and interest in oil shale, particularly in eastern Utah. Should they become feasible energy sources, oil shale deposits could significantly increase demand for aviation services in the region. The Vernal, Price and Richfield airports

•

•

•

have experienced increased activ-ity from oil and gas exploration.

Retirements/Second Homes: As increasing numbers of “baby boomers” retire, development of retirement and second homes is increasing nationwide. Utah’s mountainous areas east of Salt Lake and the St. George area have experienced increased home development in part from retire-ment and second homes. This activity has increased demand for aviation services at the Salt Lake City International, Heber, St. George and Hurricane airports. Future development of retirement and second homes is expected to increase demand at several additional airports including Ogden-Hinckley, Kanab, Cedar City, and Beaver.

Population Growth: Population growth in Utah is projected to occur primarily in established cities and towns along the I-15 corridor. The highest growth rates are projected to occur in the Wasatch Front region and southwest area of the state. Airports located in these regions are more likely to experi-ence higher levels of demand for aviation services. Salt Lake County is projected to experience the

•

•

greatest population increase in Utah, adding over 328,000 addi-tional residents by 2025.

Employment Growth: Utah’s employment growth is forecast to mirror population growth with the largest growth occurring in the northern and southwestern portions of the state. Salt Lake County is projected to experience the greatest overall increase in employment, adding over 320,000 new jobs by 2025.

•

12

Regional factoRs and tRends inflUencing aviation deMand in Utah:

Utah’s top 10 airports for general aviation operations accommodate 76 percent of all general aviation operations statewide.

Aviation Demand, Activity and Forecasts

13

top 10 aiRpoRts Ranked by 2006 total opeRations

AirportTotal

Operations

Total General Aviation

Operations

Percent of Total General

Aviation 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%

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 Enplaned\Deplaned Air Cargo

1,836,828 2,429,745 1.41%

Based Aircraft 2,326 3,282 1.74%

*Average Annual Rate of Change

The increased demand for aviation facilities and services will have an impact on certain airports throughout Utah. Generally, it is not desirable for an airport’s operations to exceed 60 percent of its annual airfield capacity without planning for 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 to control or reduce delay. The UCASP has identified three airports with potential capacity 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

Airspace along the Wasatch Front is impacted by limited radar coverage due to mountainous terrain and growing air traffic. The area stretching from Brigham City in the north to Spanish Fork in the south is densely populated and includes the busiest airports in the state: Salt Lake City International, Hill AFB, Provo Municipal, Ogden-Hinckley and Salt Lake City #2. The airspace in this region is used by a wide variety of aircraft ranging from gliders and helicopters to large commercial aircraft and high-speed military jet fighters. Coordination between air traffic control facilities using the airspace will be increasingly important as air traffic continues to grow.

It is important that the State of Utah and airport sponsors within the Salt Lake City terminal airspace area work closely with the FAA to implement available technology and procedures to improve the safety, capacity and utilization of the airspace in the region, especially over the Utah Valley area.

•

•

•

•

The table above reflects projected changes over time of aviation activity in Utah.

14

Activity, Capacity and Airspace

activity

capacity

aiRspace

For more information, contact:

Utah Department of TransportationDivision of Aeronautics135 North 2400 West

Salt Lake City, UT 84116

Phone: 801-715-2260Fax: 801-715-2276

Utah Continuous Airport System Plan

Documents

Transcript of Utah Continuous Airport System Plan