0:00The meeting commenced with a presentation by consultants from CHA Consulting, who provided an overview of the project. Paul Puley, a vice president with CHA, outlined the eight-step process mandated by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) for airport development. He confirmed that a preliminary feasibility study had been positively reviewed by the FDOT, securing further backing for the project. The project’s inclusion in the Florida State Airport System Plan is expected to facilitate its review by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), which would eventually lead to its incorporation into the National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems.

Further elaboration was provided by Jose Blanco, the project manager, who highlighted the airport’s potential role in enhancing medical response capabilities, disaster recovery efforts, and pilot training. Blanco also noted the economic benefits observed from neighboring airports, citing data from a Florida Department of Transportation study. He emphasized the strategic importance of establishing an emergency operations center at the airport to improve response coordination in emergencies.

59:03Despite these assurances, the meeting saw considerable public concern and skepticism. Residents voiced doubts about the project’s financial feasibility and environmental impact. Christy Marroy, a resident from Port St. Joe, shared her apprehensions, drawing parallels with the Panama City airport’s relocation issues, including contractor change orders and environmental concerns. She called for comprehensive feasibility studies and greater transparency, questioning the necessity of a new airport given the existing facilities in neighboring counties.

Deborah Mays, representing the Gulf County Citizens Coalition, questioned the valuation of land for the airport and the county’s leasing agreement with the St. Joe Company. She stressed the need for a full Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) rather than a simple Environmental Assessment (EA) to evaluate the project’s potential impacts thoroughly. Concerns were raised about the shift from agricultural to industrial land use and its implications for the region’s character and economy.

David Smith, a resident of White City, expressed skepticism about the project’s transparency and necessity. He emphasized the need for reliable documentation and voiced concerns about the airport’s potential impact on local quality of life, particularly the noise from low-flying aircraft.

16:30The council also discussed ongoing infrastructure planning, including road improvements and drainage solutions, to support the airport. The project is currently at a 30% design completion stage, with plans for a 6,500-foot runway, taxiways, and facilities for corporate hangars and a fuel farm. The engineering team outlined proposed changes to State Road 71, including the addition of turn lanes to accommodate increased traffic.

Stakeholder engagement was highlighted as a crucial component of the project’s planning phase, with efforts underway to gather support from local pilots and aircraft operators. The council acknowledged potential competition with existing airports, particularly Tyndall Air Force Base, although no formal objections had been lodged by the base.

31:44Funding for the airport remains a contentious topic, with the FAA expected to cover 90% of the costs and the FDOT contributing 5%. The remaining 5% is anticipated to come from local sources, potentially through private investment in hangar facilities. Concerns about Franklin County’s historical reluctance to collaborate on regional airport development were acknowledged, as was the importance of maintaining positive relations with neighboring counties.