Practices in Preserving and Developing Public-Use Seaplane Bases (2015)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

CONTENTS 1 SUMMARY 3 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Objective, 3 Methodology, 3 Literature Review, 4 National Plan of Integrated Airports Systems, 6 Report Organization, 7 8 CHAPTER TWO WHAT IS A SEAPLANE BASE? History, 8 Seaplane Types, 9 Defining a Seaplane Base, 10 Ownership Options, 12 Public Role and Purpose, 14 Regulation and Environmental Issues, 17 Summary, 18 19 CHAPTER THREE ECONOMIC BENEFIT AND FUNDING Economic Impact, 19 Capital and Operational Funding, 21 Summary, 24 25 CHAPTER FOUR DEVELOPING SEAPLANE BASES Seaplane Base Registration, 25 Advisory Circular 150/5395-1A Seaplane Bases, 25 Facility Needs and Amenities, 27 Summary, 35 36 CHAPTER FIVE PRESERVING SEAPLANE BASES Data Gathering and Messaging, 36 Comprehensive Transportation and Management Planning, 39 Environmental Safeguards, 40 Public Outreach, 41 Summary, 42 43 CHAPTER SIX CHALLENGES AND GAPS IN PRACTICE Development Challenges, 43 Safety Challenges, 44 Airspace Challenges, 45 Management Challenges, 46 Funding Challenges, 46 Environmental Challenges, 47 Compatibility Challenges, 48 Gaps in Practice, 48 Summary, 49

50 CHAPTER SEVEN CASE EXAMPLES Tavares, Florida—America’s Seaplane City™, 50 Seattle, Washington—Lake Union, 54 57 CHAPTER EIGHT CONCLUSIONS Further Research, 58 60 REFERENCES 65 ACRONYMS 66 APPENDIX A SURVEY INSTRUMENT 73 APPENDIX B NUMBER OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SEAPLANE BASES IN THE UNITED STATES 74 APPENDIX C LIST OF SURVEY PARTICIPANTS 75 APPENDIX D A QUICK REFERENCE GUIDE FOR PUBLIC POLICYMAKERS 76 APPENDIX E SAMPLE FLORIDA SEAPLANE BASE ECONOMIC BROCHURE 78 APPENDIX F SAMPLE IDAHO AIRPORT BASE ECONOMIC BROCHURE 81 APPENDIX G EXAMPLE OF SEAPLANE BASE DATA COLLECTED AT TAVARES, FLORIDA Note: Many of the photographs, figures, and tables in this report have been converted from color to grayscale for printing. The electronic version of the report (posted on the web at www.trb.org) retains the color versions.

SUMMARY PRACTICES IN PRESERVING AND DEVELOPING PUBLIC-USE SEAPLANE BASES Public-use seaplane bases (SPBs) throughout the United States are facing constant chal- lenges and threats to their continuing operations from a number of different sources, yet seaplane operations continue to provide valuable services and serve a multitude of pur- poses, including promotion of local economies. Seaplanes operate in highly diverse environments, from congested airspace to unim- proved remote locations—the latter being more prevalent. Very similar to many small general aviation airports and backcountry airstrips, many pressures and challenges face seaplane operations and, in particular, the viability of SPBs. The objective of this report is to review current practices in developing and preserving public-use SPBs throughout the United States, and identify their benefits, challenges, and gaps in practice. Collectively, the information in this study provides an overview of SPB operations to those not familiar with them, is useful for discussing the future direction of SPB operation, and serves as an impetus for future research and educational efforts. It further describes potential gaps in data collection, operational activity, facilities, and similar parameters. The challenges and gaps faced in development and preservation efforts are explored, as they may relate to federal and state planning, funding assistance, reg- ulations, and operating requirements. The report reviews and presents for development consideration, information on the SPB planning process, design considerations, permits, regulatory requirements, and SPB facility and service needs. Presented for preservation consideration are aspects of data collection and messaging, comprehensive transportation planning, environmental safeguards, and public outreach possibilities. The report synthe- sizes available information on all of the topics mentioned in the previous paragraph, to present a state-of-affairs report on SPBs. Thirty-one of 35 SPB operators from 11 different states responded to a survey seeking information on their current practices, challenges, threats, and outreach activities. The study found that the term “seaplane base” can have different meanings. A public-use SPB can be solely a registered waterway used for takeoff and landing, or it can be a registered waterway site and include land and support facilities, in which case the land facilities can be either publicly owned, privately owned, or publicly owned with a private operator. This report focuses on public-use SPBs and includes all three scenarios. The majority of public- use SPBs in the United States are similar to privately owned land airports that are open to the public. The SPB landing, takeoff, and docking areas are available as public use, but the land and facilities are privately owned and operated or leased to a private operator, such as a private business marina or individual docking area. Despite the possible confusion, an important distinction is that an official SPB designation on a body of water is not needed for a seaplane to operate. If a boat is permitted to operate on a body of water, then unless sea- plane activity is specifically disallowed, a seaplane is permitted to operate as well because both are considered “vessels” under existing laws. The study also found that SPBs can be grouped into three general categories: (1) those that exist to meet basic community transportation needs and access to the National Airspace

2 System (NAS) because of their remote location; (2) those that serve a recreational or sporting purpose; and (3) those that serve as an economic focal point for community development and attraction. Alaska and the San Juan County area of Washington State are examples of meet- ing basic community transportation needs. Where little to no road access connectivity exists, seaplanes provide a lifeline for many communities. The use of SPBs for sporting purposes is seen across the northern U.S. tier, especially in Washington, Minnesota, and Maine, where resorts and sporting lodges prosper. Indiana and Florida are examples of where the recre- ational use of an SPB is very common. The last category, economic development, recognizes the potential for community growth through the use of SPBs, as an attraction for economic development, commercial activity, and tourism. The towns of Tavares, Florida; Rising Sun, Indiana; and Greenville, Maine, are examples. SPBs in Union Lake, Washington, and Lake Hood, Alaska, provide commercial air service and promote tourism, while SPBs in Louisiana support the oil industry. The main challenges discovered through the literature search and in the survey are those associated with SPB development, safety, airspace, noise, management, funding, regulation and permitting, environmental regulations, and local compatibility and acceptance. More specifically, the challenges for continued SPB operation are reflected in the competing use of the waterways by other recreational vessels; an unfamiliarity by the general public with SPB facilities, services, and benefits; the different and oftentimes complex nature of regula- tory oversight by various governmental agencies; inadequate or weak financial investment, support, and funding of facilities and operation; and a low or dwindling interest in SPB operation and the number of seaplane pilots. Like any business or recreational activity, an economic value is associated with SPB activities. They employ individuals, they purchase supplies and services from the local community, and they attract commercial and recreational activity to the community. Being included in a state aviation system plan recognizes the value and importance of an SPB and raises awareness of its impact on intergovernmental planning and development reviews. The high interest and constant monitoring efforts of state aviation agencies and various seaplane pilot associations are the main sources of efforts to preserve many existing public- use SPBs throughout the United States, and to open new ones. SPB interviewees indicate the development of economic and operational tools and public outreach are needed to help sustain existing SPBs and to develop new ones. The study found that there is a need for better operational data collection, better planning and regulatory acceptance of SPBs, better fund- ing opportunities, and better means to convey the value and benefits of SPB operation to the local communities and other users of public waterways.

3 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Like many other general aviation (GA) activities, seaplane activity at lakes, rivers, and other waterways in the United States is thriving in some places but struggling in others. The growth and continuation of seaplane operations faces many pressures and challenges. This research focuses on existing public-use SPB facilities that are identified in the FAA airport master record database (the 5010 database) (Airport Data & Contact Information). Not included in the study are the numerous privately owned SPBs that are not open to the public or not listed in the FAA database, but are well known in the seaplane operating community and available for use with the operator’s permission. Seaplane bases generally can be categorized into those that exist to meet basic transportation access to the NAS and to a com- munity because of its remote location, those that serve a recreational purpose, and those that serve as an economic focal point for the community. The first is a way of life and is evident in Alaska and in the Puget Sound area of Washington State. The second is prevalent throughout the United States and common in its recreational and private purpose. The last is becoming more common as cities like Tavares, Leesburg, and Flagler County, Florida; Greenville, Maine; and Rising Sun, Indiana, seek to become destina- tion cities and attract seaplane-related businesses for economic development purposes. OBJECTIVE The objective of this study is to identify current practices in developing and preserving public-use SPBs. It further outlines the challenges discovered in the course of the research related to those same public-use SPBs. Challenges facing SPBs can be the general public’s unfamiliarity with the facilities, services, and benefits provided; pressures from environmental and special interest groups; funding constraints; and gaps in published guidance (e.g., design, engineering, and planning guidelines). Development refers to the establishment of new facilities, the upkeep of older ones, and the means to do both. In this regard, the study looks at SPB operational requirements and site selection to include the benefits, economic impacts, and funding aspects of SPB operation. Development also includes an overview of the planning process, design considerations, permits, regulatory require- ments, and facility needs and services. The available information on these topics was synthesized to present a state-of-affairs report. Preservation refers to the efforts made to manage the pressures and challenges that could reduce opportunities for seaplane operations across the country. How SPB operators publicize the value of an SPB through marketing, advertising, economic studies, planning, community education, and other outreach efforts are synthesized and reported. In support of the study’s objective, practices that currently exist within SPB communities and potential gaps in data col- lection, activity, facilities, and similar parameters are identified. The challenges and gaps in development and preservation efforts are further explored as they may relate to federal and state planning, funding assistance, regulations, and operating requirements. Collectively, the information in this study provides an overview of SPB operations to those not familiar with it, is useful for discussing the future direction of SPB operation, and can serve as an impetus for future research and educational efforts on the subject matter. METHODOLOGY To collect information and data on the development and preservation of SPBs, a literature review was undertaken, a survey was administered (Appendix A), interviews were conducted, and site visits were performed. The literature search entailed a review of documents available through a variety of general, academic, and meta-search engines. It also entailed visits to the Seaplane Pilots Association (SPA) library and the collection of information and reports from SPB site

4 visits and interviews. A review of the 2013–14 Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) Airport Directory identified 119 public-use SPBs in states other than Alaska, and 128 public-use facilities in Alaska (Haines 2012). The SPB information listed in the directory derived from the FAA Airport Master Record database. The AOPA directory was used along with the FAA’s 5010 online database, as the latter does not allow for a search inquiry on the category of seaplane bases. Appendix B highlights the number of public and private SPBs listed in the AOPA directory. An initial inquiry was made to all 247 SPB operators noted in the AOPA directory, inviting each to participate in the survey. Thirty-five SPB operators self-selected to participate in the study and were subsequently sent surveys. Thirty-one operators responded to the survey, representing an 89% response rate of those that self-selected. Appendix C lists those SPB operators that participated in the study. Their general geographic locations are shown in Figure 1. LITERATURE REVIEW Numerous books, articles, and publications are devoted to seaplane pilots and history. Less information is available on seaplane bases, which is the focus of this research. One of the first publications to promote the feasibility of SPBs as a means to better use available lakes, rivers, and harbors is a U.S. Department of Commerce publication titled Seaplane Facilities (Seaplane Facilities 1949). First published in 1949, its purpose was to answer questions associated with the planning of seaplane bases and to assist local communities or persons interested in solving aviation problems concerning seaplane facilities. In particular, it addressed whether a community needed a seaplane base, where to locate one, and what improvements, either on-shore or off-shore, might be needed in the future. FIGURE 1 Location of seaplane base participants.

5 The 1949 Department of Commerce publication became the forerunner to today’s FAA advisory circular (AC) on SPBs. History shows that advances in aircraft technology and the growing network of roadways and other transportation modes in the United States diminished the perceived importance of seaplanes (Nicolaou 1998). Land airports became the predominant base for commercial use of airplanes. Still, seaplanes proved resilient at what they do best—accessing remote areas of the country or the in-close areas of urban centers that are located adjacent to waterways. The FAA has published two excellent resources that include information on SPBs: (1) FAA Handbook H-8083-23, Seaplane, Skiplane, and Float/Ski Equipped Helicopter Operations Handbook (FAA Handbook H-8083-23 2004) and (2) Advisory Circular 150/5395-1A—Seaplane Bases (Advisory Circular 150/5395-1A 2013). Additional safety information is provided in Advisory Circular 91-69A, Seaplane Safety for FAR Part 91 Operators (Advisory Circular 91-69A 1999). Within the United States, numerous seaplane-accessible landing areas exist. However, many have not sought to be registered in the FAA’s database as a public-use SPB, or to be published in a directory. An example of unlisted facilities is found in New Hampshire, where a comprehensive economic development strategy report states: “More than 100 privately owned airports, heliports and seaplane bases are available for private use in New Hampshire. They are not required to register with the state or with FAA” [Lake Region Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) 2013 Report 2013]. In total, only 30 states have public-use seaplane facilities listed. “Public use” refers to an airport available for use by the general public without a requirement for the airport owner or operator’s prior approval (FAA Order 5010.4 1981; Advisory Circular 150/5200-35A 2010). Twenty of the 30 states have three or fewer public-use facilities, with 14 of those states having only one listing (see Appendix C). Information about an SPB can be found using the online 5010 database for searching airport master records and reports (“AirportIQ5010” 2014). As noted, AOPA publishes an annual compilation of the 5010 data in a more usable format. While numerous water landing areas are not registered in the FAA database, SPA publishes a Water Landing Directory that provides information on the location and accessibility of water landing areas and SPBs throughout the United States (“Water Landing Directory” 2011). NavCanada produces a navigational and water aerodrome supplement that contains information on SPBs in Canada (Water Aerodrome Supplement 2014). In a meeting on November 19, 2014, SPA Executive Director Steven McCaughey indicated that there are approximately 32,000 seaplane-rated pilots in the United States. The number was obtained from a special data query search by the FAA, as the data are not readily available on the FAA’s website or other reports. Also not accurately known is the number of seaplane aircraft in the United States, as the FAA does not make a distinction within its aircraft registry between airplanes on floats, wheels, or skis. Amphibian-type aircraft can be counted in the registry, but into what category would they be placed…land or seaplane? The same difficulty in categorization exists for classifying those aircraft that are seasonally switched from wheels to skis to floats. SPA has published a number of publications that seek to introduce facts about seaplanes and SPB operations. A single- sheet quick reference guide for public policymakers is provided in Appendix D (Seaplane Operations n.d.). Another pub- lication is a booklet that discusses the valuable services provided by seaplane operations, addresses issues and concerns about these operations, and provides some background information on the history, utility, and benefit of seaplanes to individuals and communities throughout the country (Flying America’s Waterways 2001). Another publication is a white paper that serves as a useful reference for resolving conflicts between the seaplane community and those interested in curtailing seaplane operations (Seaplane Compatibility Issues: A Report about Seaplanes Focusing on Safety, Noise and Jurisdiction 1996). The handbook provides perspective on three issues related to seaplane activities: safety, jurisdiction, and noise. A number of reports and documents found in the literature search describe site-specific economic and feasibility impacts, site selection, and planning studies. Those documents are cited in their respective sections throughout this report. One feasi- bility study in particular provides a comprehensive insight into the economic feasibility of an SPB and its planning process. The study was conducted in August 2008 for the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT&PF) (Eco- nomic Feasibility Study of a New Floatplane Facility Located in Anchorage, Alaska 2008). Owing to high demand and long waiting lists for SPB facilities in the Anchorage area, the report evaluated the financial feasibility of constructing an additional SPB to increase capacity and accommodate future growth. Aspects of the report are referenced elsewhere in this study. Cost data provided in the report may not be applicable to other areas of the country because the Anchorage area has some unique construction and development issues.

6 On the European front, an initiative to investigate the seaplane transport system throughout the European Union (EU) resulted in a collaborative organization known as Future Seaplane Traffic (FUSETRA) (http://www.fusetra.eu). Funded by the European Commission Directorate General, its goal was to demonstrate the needs and quantify the potential for seaplane traffic business development, as well as to propose recommendations for the introduction of a new seaplane/ amphibian transportation system. A series of workshops and reports were produced in 2010 that reflected the status of worldwide seaplane/amphibian operations and their effectiveness. The workshops and research also reviewed concepts and requirements for a new European seaplane/amphibian transport system that could be integrated into the sea/air/land transport chain. As commissioned by the EU, another purpose of FUSETRA was to directly affect the strategy of future regulatory issues in the EU. FUSETRA laid out a road map to address how existing or new rules may be adapted to achieve a goal of interdisciplinary cooperation between sea, land, and air, and between local and EU authorities. As a result of its efforts, four main deficiency areas were described and several improvement concepts were highlighted in the following areas: (1) permission and certification, (2) availability of trained staff, (3) aircraft and infrastructure, and (4) market and profitability. FUSETRA did not receive continued funding beyond its initial study term, and no further studies have been developed. NATIONAL PLAN OF INTEGRATED AIRPORT SYSTEMS The National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS) is a planning document maintained by the FAA for identifying nearly 3,400 existing and proposed airports that are significant to national air transportation. Airports listed in the NPIAS are eligible to receive federal grants under the Airport Improvement Program (AIP). Based on data from the 2015–2019 NPIAS Report to Congress, approximately 610,500 active pilots, 209,000 GA aircraft, and 6,700 air carrier aircraft use 19,360 landing areas in the United States (Foxx 2014). The landing areas include 14,212 private-use (closed to the public) and 5,148 public- use (open to the public) facilities. There are 488 total SPB facilities, of which 272 are private use and 216 are public use. To be included in the NPIAS, a number of criteria must be met. An SPB must have an eligible sponsor, be open to the public, have enough activity (usually at least 10 locally based aircraft), and be located at least 20 miles from the nearest other NPIAS airport, or it must enplane at least 2,500 passengers. The NPIAS data presented in Table 1 was updated on September 30, 2014. The data were not available at the time this study began; hence, the data differ slightly from the 2012 database used for determining eligible SPBs for this study. Fewer SPBs are listed in the newer database than in the 2012–2013 database. The 2015–2019 NPIAS reports that there are 5,148 public-use airports, of which 3,331 are in the NPIAS. Of those 3,331 public-use airports listed, 514 accommodate airline or commercial service and receive the bulk of federal grant funding. There are 38 SPBs listed in the NPIAS. The majority (34) are located in Alaska. Lake Hood, Alaska, is a primary commercial service airport, while Craig, Metlakatla, and Thorne Bay, Alaska, are nonprimary commercial service SPBs. All others are GA. TABLE 1 NUMBER OF AIRPORTS IN THE NPIAS AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 2014 Type of Facility Total U.S. Facilities Private-Use Facilities Public-Use Facilities Existing NPIAS Facilities Airport 13,112 8,266 4,857 3,283 Heliport 5,579 5,513 66 10 Seaplane Base 488 272 216 38 Balloon Port 13 12 1 — Gliderport 35 30 5 — Ultralight Flightpark 122 119 3 — TOTAL 19,360 14,212 5,148 3,331 Source: Foxx (2014). Note: The total number of SPBs (216) differs from the study’s 247 SPB list due to an update of NPIAS data during the course of the study. The 2014 data are shown in the table. Dash indicates no data. Each state has a state airport system plan (SASP) that identifies the development needed to establish a viable system of air- ports within its state. To be included in a SASP, state requirements may include the same or similar stipulations as for the NPIAS. Airports included in a SASP, but not in the NPIAS, are usually smaller airports that have state or regional significance but are not considered to be of national interest, one of the main requirements for inclusion in the NPIAS.

7 The 2014 NPIAS report indicates that between 2009 and 2013, the number of aircraft has declined by approximately 7%, the number of public-use landing areas has declined 1%, and the number of pilots has increased 1%. Statistics cited in the Alaska DOT&PF feasibility study for a new SPB in the Anchorage area reveal that the average survey respondent was male, had a household income of $113,000 per year and a 4-year college education, and was 55 years old in 20. These averages were higher in every category than for that of the general population in the Anchorage area (Economic Feasibility Study of a New Floatplane Facility Located in Anchorage, Alaska 2008). REPORT ORGANIZATION This synthesis report is organized into eight chapters with additional sections for references, acronyms, and appendices. Within the report, references are made to the survey questions by use of the bracketed letter {Q} along with a number that corresponds to the survey question of the same number (e.g., Q1, Q2, Q3) Chapter one provides an introduction to the synthesis and describes its purpose, the literature review and study methodol- ogy, and background information on the NPIAS, which is necessary to better understand the context for how SPBs can be preserved and developed. Chapter two provides a basic history of SPB development and delves into defining what an SPB is, given that various defini- tions exist and different regulatory bodies may have oversight of their operation. Chapter three discusses the economic impact of SPBs and the capital and operational means to help fund their development. Chapter four focuses on current practices in developing SPBs as derived from the literature and survey responses. An over- view of guidance material related to the SPB planning process and factors to address in the design and construction is provided. Chapter five addresses the collection of operational, safety, and accident data and how the data are used to help preserve existing SPBs. Information is presented on what SPB operators are currently doing in the area of environmental protection and public outreach, promotion, and advocacy. Chapter six groups into seven sections survey responses on the challenges operators perceive as affecting their continued preservation and development. The challenges are development, safety, airspace, management, funding, environmental, and community acceptance. Gaps in current practice are also addressed. Chapter seven provides two case examples—one of a community using its SPB to promote economic development and the other of an SPB that supports commercial operation. Chapter eight provides the conclusions and suggestions for further research.