Council hears 20-year airport master plan calling for runway work, 203-acre development parcel

Sierra Vista — Kaufman and Associates on Tuesday presented a draft 20-year Sierra Vista municipal airport master plan and asked the City Council to adopt the plan locally so the city can submit an Airport Layout Plan (ALP) to the Federal Aviation Administration for technical review.

Consultant Chandra Burks said the master plan "is a long range study that considers what the airport could look like over the next 20 years." She told the council the study includes aviation demand forecasts, a recommended development concept, and a capital improvement program with cost estimates and priorities.

Why it matters: the master plan is the technical foundation the FAA and the Arizona Department of Transportation use when considering grant funding for airport projects. City staff and consultants said adopting the local plan and getting FAA approval of the ALP are prerequisites for eligibility for federal Airport Improvement Program (AIP) grants.

Most important recommendations and figures: the draft plan calls for an extension of the crosswind runway (12/30), construction of a north-side parallel taxiway for primary Runway 8/26, decommissioning Runway 3/21 (conversion to taxiway), potential approach lighting for Runway 26, upgrades to navigation aids, and expanded hangar and apron area. The consultants showed a proposed acquisition of about 203 acres north of Airport Avenue to provide room for hangars, a helicopter facility/vertiport area and a central non‑aeronautical development area intended to generate airport revenue.

Consultants provided demand forecasts that project growth in based aircraft from 61 in 2023 to about 75 over 20 years, and an increase in annual operations from roughly 117,000 in the base year toward about 142,000 by the end of the planning period. The plan also includes a "critical aircraft" determination (FAA: the aircraft type that operates at least 500 times per year) and a technical Airport Layout Plan drawing set the FAA must approve.

Cost estimates and funding: the short-term (years 1–5) program is estimated at about $4.9 million, largely for safety and maintenance projects. Consultants described intermediate (years 6–10) and long-term (years 11–20+) phases; the long-term phase alone lists about $40.3 million in projects. Consultants reported the combined, multi-horizon capital improvement program totals about $80.7 million, with roughly $15.1 million identified as a local share. The presentation emphasized that most airfield projects are AIP‑eligible and thus candidates for FAA funding, with ADOT and local airport funds expected to contribute to non-eligible or matching costs.

Utilities and site development: council members asked whether sewer and utility extensions are included. Burks and city staff said utilities are not AIP‑eligible but that the master plan does include utility analyses and potential costs. Burks said those utility costs are captured in the intermediate-term cost estimates and in specific projects intended to serve the 203-acre parcel. City staff noted development of the 203-acre site currently depends on extending sewer service and that the site currently uses septic in places.

Outreach and next steps: the consultants said the process included a Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) with representatives from the city, the FAA, ADOT Aeronautics Division and Fort Huachuca, three public information workshops, and a project website hosting study materials. Burks concluded by asking the council for local approval of the draft master plan so the city can submit the ALP to the FAA; she warned FAA review timelines are delayed and that final FAA approval may take longer than originally anticipated.

Discussion vs. formal action: the presentation was a staff and consultant report requesting local adoption and submission to the FAA. The transcript records council questions and staff answers; no formal vote on adoption was recorded in the meeting transcript provided.

End note: staff said master plans are updated periodically (typically every 7–10 years) and that the plan represents a snapshot of priorities and cost estimates that can change as funding and needs evolve.