HISTORY

The Friedman Memorial Airport has been the subject of a number of planning studies over the years in an attempt to address the design standard, safety, and operational deficiencies at the Airport, as well as the increasing demand on Airport facilities. The following studies are major past publications pertaining to SUN at its existing location, which identify and document issues encountered at its location, as well as the need and possibilities for a non-constrained, replacement airport site.

1985 Airport Master Plan
Options for runway movement and alteration of SUN configuration, along with the potential for an alternate site for the Airport were topics raised in the 1985 Airport Master Plan. Discussion of runway movement included the relocation of State Highway 75, on the east side of the Airport, to the abandoned Union Pacific railroad grade which is located farther east from the site. However, the cost and difficulty associated with this type of movement in developing the Airport to correct FAA discrepancies were considered extreme. Mention of a new replacement airport occurred in the study with regard to ideal placement outside of the Wood River Region.

1990 Airport Feasibility Study
The 1990 Airport Feasibility Study's purpose was primarily to identify and compare the improvements necessary to modify the current airport site's deviations to FAA standards versus construction of a new airport at a different location in the Wood River Region. The final site choice was located in western Blaine County near the Camas County line, north of Camas Creek, and east of Moonstone Mountain (situated on Moonstone Ranch property).

The residents of Blaine County and the Blaine County Airport Commissioners were the final authority on deciding the action to take preceding this study. They concluded that staying with the current airport site was the best decision at the time.

1994 Airport Master Plan Update
The 1994 Master Plan Update sought to identify airside, landside, and airspace capacity for the Airport and determine noise impacts experienced by residents surrounding the Airport. Another aspect of the study was directed toward resolving "inconclusive results" from the 1990 Airport Feasibility Study with regard to the effects of no alternative action being taken at the existing Airport as an option.

In addition, the study recognized that growth at the existing Airport would eventually require relocating the entire airport away from its present site and the valley. A time frame for this relocation was not included in the study, and design standards necessary for accommodating ARC C-II and D-II private jet operations at the existing site were also not accounted for.

2004 Airport Master Plan Update
As a result of ARC C-III aircraft replacing the existing Airport's (B-III) design/critical aircraft and the FAA's requirements for appropriate airfield design criteria (i.e. safety area dimensions), the 2004 Master Plan Update was undertaken to examine alternatives to rectify the Airport's deviations from FAA design standards. Factors under consideration in this study included identifying improvements needed for existing airport facilities, evaluating alternative development options in order to meet required standards, as well as developments necessary to meet long-range (20-year) airport requirements based on the projected increase in future airport operations.

The 2004 Master Plan Update explored both short-term and long-term alternatives. The Airport Authority opted to begin with the required short-term improvements, but due to the combination of high costs, negative community reaction to required land acquisition, and lack of resolution for long-term airport growth requirements, the authority also approved a study for investigating alternate airport locations and selecting a new airport site.

2006 Site Selection and Feasibility Study
The 2006 Feasibility Study was conducted as a result of the findings and conclusions reached by the 2004 FMA Master Plan Update. The goal of the study was to identify alternate airport site locations away from the existing airport, select a preferred site from these locations, and conduct a financial feasibility analysis for the new airport. This study confirmed that the current airport site was no longer a viable option to pursue when considering how to correct deficiencies with FAA standards for current and future airport operations.

The final site selected by the Friedman Memorial Airport Authority (FMAA) Board was labeled as Site 10. The 2006 Feasibility Study aimed to serve as a prerequisite for the replacement airport's EIS by providing research and background information for its preparation.