Last Mile in General Aviation—Courtesy Vehicles and Other Forms of Ground Transportation (2020)

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.

18 Airport courtesy vehicles have become a popular, almost expected, amenity for an airport or FBO to provide the flying public. At many general aviation airports, this may be the only mode of ground transportation available. Sometimes a smaller community may not support any other external alternatives, making a courtesy vehicle an even more important asset in providing last mile ground transportation for users of general aviation airports. If no options exist, connectivity to the communities that they serve is lacking, which may diminish the value of the airport. This chapter summarizes the findings about airport courtesy vehicles at general aviation airports. Benefits of Courtesy Vehicles The survey data, case examples, and input from pilots all show that general aviation air- ports serving communities of all sizes benefit by providing courtesy vehicles. In the survey, over 87 percent of the airports reported utilization of an airport courtesy vehicle as a mode of ground transportation (Question 3). Courtesy vehicles were the most common form of airport ground transportation identified in the study. Limited ground transportation options at an airport deter the ability of airports to both provide a service and generate revenue. The majority of airports cited either severe (21.9 percent) or some (59.4 percent) economic impact if there were no ground transportation available (Question 27). There were many courtesy vehicle benefits discussed in the case studies with key findings summarized as follows: • Provides ability to connect airport to the community and enhances economic impact for the airport and the community. • Increases ability to meet customer needs and increased usefulness of the public facility for the community. • Increases fuel sales. • Promotes recreation and tourism. • Improves access to the local business community. • Identified as a revenue producing tactic as businesses experience increased sales when pilots and passengers spend money in the community. • Increases aircraft traffic and repeat business. • Provides competitive advantage over neighboring airports. • Creates positive reflection of airport and/or business located on airports. • Promotes use of other available ancillary services at the airport. • Decreases the frustration felt by airport staff by being unable to meet needs of airport customers. C H A P T E R 4 Findings About Airport Courtesy Vehicles

Findings About Airport Courtesy Vehicles 19 • Builds positive relationships with local officials and businesses and increases awareness of the airport’s role in the local community. • Improves visibility of the airport within the community. Frequency of Use The demand for courtesy vehicles and rate of use varies depending on local factors such as size of community, traffic at airport, or specific demand within the area that the air- port serves. The majority of airports described the frequency of use of courtesy vehicles as moderate (55.2 percent), with approximately four to 20 users per week. Others reported more infrequent use of between zero and three users per week (34.5 percent). Only one respondent cited frequent use of over 21 to 50 users in a week (Question 24). Procurement Sources There are a number of ways that general aviation airports acquire courtesy vehicles, which many times depends on the service structure of the airport. Determining who is responsible for providing direct service with airport customers is a factor in vehicle procurement. The entity responsible for providing the courtesy vehicle was most often an FBO (36.7 percent), city (26.7 percent), or county (16.7 percent) for airports in the study (Question 8). Others reported donated vehicles or privately provided vehicles (Figure 9). Work with Governing Authority The airports participating in this study were predominantly owned by municipal and county governments. This ownership structure is common for general aviation airports, and the survey data and case studies reflect that many airports work successfully with the governing authority to procure courtesy vehicles. Many airports were able to obtain a retired police vehicle or other hand-me-down fleet vehicle from other departments (Question 10). O’Neill Airport serves a community of approximately 4,000 people and currently uses five vehicles obtained from the police department. The airport manager works closely with city departments, and although the airport is under an authority structure, they maintain a positive relationship with other divisions within the city (Chapter 5, Case Example 2). This relationship is useful for coordination of vehicle needs. 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 5.0 8.0 11.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 Other Donated Airport Authority Privately Owned County City FBO Figure 9. Entity that provides courtesy vehicle. (Source: AirportAdmin, LLC, Survey Results.)

20 Last Mile in General Aviation—Courtesy Vehicles and Other Forms of Ground Transportation Livingston County Airport (OZW) uses a retired 2002 Crown Victoria police vehicle as a courtesy vehicle. Acquiring the vehicle took years of perseverance by a long-term airport manager willing to champion the effort to convince the county. For OZW, the barrier was not the cost or availability of a vehicle but overcoming a liability concern to accomplish the task (Chapter 5, Case Example 1). The survey data identified one airport that was able to acquire a Chrysler Town and Country minivan through funding provided by the county economic development fund (Question 10). This demonstrates the interdependent relationship between the community and the airport from an economic impact standpoint and underscores the need for connectivity between the two. In this instance, the economic development authority of the county bought into the concept of providing connectivity by supporting a courtesy vehicle because of the economic benefit potential. Purchase Another obvious choice for courtesy vehicle acquisition is to simply purchase a vehicle. This option can be cost prohibitive for small airports that may be on limited budgets. An airport that has services provided by an FBO may perceive the need for a courtesy vehicle differently than a city- or county-operated service. Both may recognize and support the community benefit of providing a courtesy vehicle; however, an FBO may view the vehicle as more of a business and service asset. The FBO at Mt. Sterling Montgomery County Airport believes that it is essential to provide a courtesy vehicle as a business tool that helps to increase fuel sales. They regularly rotate newer dealer-purchased vehicles in very good condition. Vehicle costs are offset by the increased traffic and fuel sales for the business. This capital investment supports the business of the FBO while also providing a tremendous public service to the airport, users, and community (Chapter 5, Case Example 4). Donation The survey data and case examples revealed that a number of airports have had courtesy vehicles donated. There are many potential scenarios whereby airports have received such donations. Vehicles may be donated by a local business or organization to meet a specific ground transportation need or perhaps a pilot group, or even a frequent out of area user that has a transportation need on return trips. Hillsdale Airport has a courtesy van that was donated by nearby Hillsdale College to support frequent visitors arriving via the airport. This donation also helps the airport provide service and provide an economic benefit to the community. This public-private arrangement is therefore advantageous to all parties including the arriving passengers (Chapter 5, Case Example 3). The Alexandria Municipal Airport has a 2000 Buick LeSabre as one of two courtesy vehicles available for use. This was donated by a pilot who needed the vehicle for personal use when arriving at the airport (Chapter 5, Case Study 5). Airport staff knows the pilots and users of the airport and can work with individuals or groups to find creative or simple solutions. Federal Surplus Personal Property Program for Public Airport Purposes FAA Advisory Circular 150/5150-2C describes the Federal Surplus Personal Property Pro- gram for Public Airport Purposes. The advisory circular explains procedures for airports to use to apply for authorized credentials to request surplus personal property. This program is

Findings About Airport Courtesy Vehicles 21 “The availability of a reliable and clean courtesy crew car is a significant factor in making my general aviation plans. This is a minimum equipment checklist item I include during my pre-flight planning for a seamless connection with recreation and business community assets.” —Joe Harris, Multiengine Commercial, Instrument, and CFI Pilot Lake Elmo Airport (21D), Minnesota administered through the General Services Administration (GSA) for the disposition of federal surplus personal property. There can be acquisition costs through this program; however, vehi- cles can be obtained for little or no costs and may be an avenue to explore for vehicle acquisition. State Programs One survey respondent was able to procure a courtesy van through funding assistance from a state department of aeronautics (Question 10). The states of Idaho and Montana have both developed programs designed specifically to support airports with the acquisition of courtesy vehicles (Chapter 5, Case Examples 7–8). This has included legislative action providing fund- ing for such use. Most states have department of transportation aviation divisions that can be resourceful in assisting airports with needs and could be responsive to developing a program. Other Sources Another potential source for securing the use of an airport courtesy vehicle would be working through a local car dealership or rental car company. One respondent to the survey indicated that their car was provided to the FBO by a car rental company. Working with community businesses, civic organizations, or even a chamber of commerce may be worth considering as possible partners for vehicle use as a means of promoting both the airport and the community or businesses therein (Figure 10). Types of Vehicles Used for Courtesy Vehicles Courtesy vehicles at general aviation airports vary widely (Question 9). Some airports choose to provide new vehicles in excellent condition while others may work with older retired hand- me-down vehicles. Others may use vehicles better suited for the weather, terrain, or locally themed destinations. A number of airports use both a smaller vehicle and a larger vehicle to accommodate different needs for customers such as the Mt. Sterling Montgomery County Air- port (Chapter 5, Case Example 4). Within the survey data group, the most common vehicle was found to be the Ford Crown Victoria, which is a typical police car make and model for many communities (Figure 11). The airport in Gaylord, Michigan, painted shark teeth nose art on their courtesy vehicle. When the car is in use in town, it is well known that the car came from the airport and serves Figure 10. Multiple passenger van sponsored by local Lions Club. (Source: Kreg Anderson.)

22 Last Mile in General Aviation—Courtesy Vehicles and Other Forms of Ground Transportation as a visual reminder that the airport increases patronage of local business. Being more identi- fiable helps to enforce good driver conduct by the user. The nose art on the courtesy vehicle also serves as a unique talking point for pilots to put on their Facebook page and other social media generating conversation about the local general aviation experience. The most common body style of courtesy vehicles found in the study was the sedan (Fig- ure 12). Minivans or SUVs were also identified as common body styles for survey respondents. Insuring a Courtesy Vehicle and Liability Insuring a courtesy vehicle for public use is often cited as a barrier to vehicle acquisi- tion. The survey found that liability concerns were among the biggest issues surrounding overall provision of ground transportation at general aviation airports with 37.9 percent of the respondents (Question 30). So how are airports going about insuring courtesy vehicles? The survey data show that this may depend on the service structure in place at the airport and Figure 11. Gaylord Regional Airport, MI, courtesy vehicle. (Source: Gaylord Regional Airport.) 1.0 1.0 2.0 7.0 8.0 23.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 Coupe Compact Pickup Truck SUV Minivan Sedan Figure 12. Courtesy vehicle body styles. (Source: AirportAdmin, LLC, Survey Results.)

Findings About Airport Courtesy Vehicles 23 ownership of the vehicle. The responsibility for insuring the vehicles can be by cities, counties, airport authorities, FBOs, states, or private individuals or organizations (Question 11). Many airports will insure courtesy vehicles as part of an overall fleet policy as any vehicle would be that is owned by a city or county. This normally involves a policy covering the vehicle both for damage and liability claims resulting in property damage or bodily injury. The Higginsville Airport is an example of an airport that uses a city vehicle that is insured through a municipal fleet policy. The airport further utilizes a vehicle check-out agreement that makes the driver’s personal policy primary, discusses the driver’s responsibilities, and outlines procedures for handling accidents (Chapter 5, Case Example 6). Courtesy vehicles may also be insured through insurance companies that offer coverage for FBOs. It is also possible to purchase coverage through an insurance company that will cover a courtesy vehicle under a standalone policy. The data in the case studies regarding cost of coverage varied depending on factors including value of vehicle, limits of coverage, and type of policy. Other ways that airports can reduce exposure concerns with use of courtesy vehicles are through more formal procedures for checkout and use. This documentation may include hold harmless language, set rules of use, or require the user to furnish driver’s license and insurance information. Many states have airport organizations that provide services such as advocacy and train- ing for its members. The state airport organization in Minnesota reviewed the subject of airport courtesy vehicles. A board member then researched the issue with the state department of aeronautics and common insurance provider for cities, summarized the information, and provided an information sheet to members discussing insurance and other considerations for providing courtesy vehicles (Interview Tiedeman 2017). This resource is in Appendix H. Air- ports may think about ways to work through state department of transportation divisions, airport organizations, or municipal insurance cooperatives to address insurance strategies. The results of the literature review, survey, case examples, and analysis of sample forms have been summarized in a checklist that can be used to help general aviation airports with courtesy vehicle procurement and insurance. The checklist is in Appendix C. Maintenance and Facility Access Considerations Courtesy vehicles are typically owned and operated by airports and FBOs at airports. The survey data and case studies show that it is normal for the entity that owns the vehicle to also be responsible for its maintenance (Question 12). Many airports reported that maintenance issues and vehicle rotations were handled by a city or county public works department as with all fleet vehicles. The majority of airports (65.5 percent) in the study had no formal maintenance program (Question 13). Other airports used a local repair shop or dealership to maintain vehicles. It is not unusual for airport or FBO staff to take care of routine and preventive maintenance issues. For many that work in general aviation and with aircraft, there is a culture of taking pride in working on annual aircraft maintenance needs. Routine maintenance and replacement schedules or manda- tory maintenance compliance is customary to many that work at small airports, and it would follow that this may sometimes also include similar habits with maintaining courtesy vehicles. General upkeep and maintenance of courtesy vehicles can be an important consideration. Keeping vehicles clean, well maintained, and sheltered when possible are examples of ways to prolong the life and appearance of the vehicle while also ensuring the vehicle will be in good operational condition for users.

24 Last Mile in General Aviation—Courtesy Vehicles and Other Forms of Ground Transportation The costs for maintaining courtesy vehicles varied (Figure 13). The most cited annual cost range (53.6 percent) for courtesy vehicle maintenance needs was between $500 and $1,000 (Question 14). From a budget standpoint, maintenance costs may be: • Handled through an annual budget allocation. • Made part of a governing authority or FBO budget. • Supported privately. • Supported by donations or user fees. One airport charges a fee for use if the user does not purchase aviation fuel, with a premium being charged for overnight use. A number of airports in the study do not budget for vehicle charges and costs (34.5 percent; Question 16). Fueling of these vehicles was most often the responsibility of the owner (39.3 percent); however, many airports encourage users to donate for fuel or simply add fuel to the car when using. In many cases, users contribute fuel or cash in support of the use of the vehicle (Question 15). At some point, all vehicles will meet or exceed their useful life, and airports should consider planning for courtesy vehicle replacement to ensure uninterrupted service for users. Courtesy vehicles are often rotated local government fleet vehicles that are well known to maintenance staff. This familiarity can be helpful from both a maintenance and replacement decision-making standpoint. The research indicated that vehicle replacement methods or planning consider- ations may include: • Working with governing authority to include courtesy vehicle in overall fleet vehicle replace- ment schedule. • Regularly scheduled trade-in and replacement with automobile dealerships. • Planned budgetary allocation for vehicle replacement. • Acquire surplus vehicle from governing authority or federal/state surplus programs. • Coordinating with local business or civic organizations to plan for replacement as needed. • Working with pilots or pilot groups that support courtesy vehicles at an airport to plan, fundraise for, or seek replacement alternatives for aging vehicle. • Work with potential partners that may have interest in donating a replacement courtesy vehicle, possibly advertising trade-off opportunity. 4.0 1.0 1.0 15.0 7.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 Do Not Know $5,000 - $10,000 $1,000 - $5,000 $500 - $1,000 $0 - $500 Figure 13. Annual costs for maintaining courtesy vehicle(s). (Source: AirportAdmin, LLC, Survey Results.)

Findings About Airport Courtesy Vehicles 25 The survey and case examples found that a number of airports (24.1 percent) have provisions in place to enhance safety and security of facilities for users of the airport courtesy vehicle or to address after-hours accessibility (Question 22). Facility considerations included: • Use of signage. • Posted customer instructions. • Fencing and gates. • Access codes. • Well lighted parking areas. • Use of key drop boxes. The results of the literature review, survey, case examples, and analysis of sample forms have been summarized in a checklist that can be used to help general aviation airports evaluate their courtesy vehicle facilities and maintenance. The checklist is in Appendix F. Reservation and Check-Out Procedures The survey and case studies found that most airports in the study (77.8 percent) do not use any reservation system. Some of the airports reported using a paper calendar to note reserva- tions, and one airport can keep track by memory (Question 20). Additionally, the majority of respondents (53.3 percent) reported using an informal first come, first served procedure for requests to use the courtesy vehicle (Question 19). Developing procedures for vehicle checkout will depend on local preferences that take into consideration factors such as demand for use of the vehicles, staff availability, and number of vehicles available. Airports may consider tightening up casual processes to increase security and decrease risk. Although informal procedures may be appreciated by pilots, airports should consider ways to balance risk. A number of airports prefer to use a formal courtesy vehicle check-out form. The Livingston County Spencer J. Hardy Airport, for example, requires users to complete a check-out agree- ment that provides guidelines of use and requests user information together with hold harmless language to reduce liability risk (Chapter 5, Case Example 1). Another factor to consider when developing check-out procedures includes an evaluation of what staffing will allow. There appear to be many benefits to the utilization of a formal check- out form including: • Communicates rules. • Provides limitations of use. • Documents user identification. • Obtains user contact information. • Reduces exposure. Having multiple vehicles may also reduce occurrences of lack of availability. Requiring a check-out form also creates a record of use. Having this documentation helps airports track the number of users in any given period of time, which may help with justification of vehicle or determine future needs. Sample courtesy vehicle check-out forms are located in Appendices D and J. Providing After-Hours Accessibility to Courtesy Vehicles Most of the airports in the study provided for courtesy vehicle accessibility after hours (Figure 14).

26 Last Mile in General Aviation—Courtesy Vehicles and Other Forms of Ground Transportation There were a number of procedures used to assist customers with after-hour needs. There can be difficulties with providing this service at times that the airport is unattended. Many of the airports in the study work with customers through prior arrangement and have developed innovative ways to provide access to buildings and vehicle keys: • Provide key code access to facilities. • Leave instructions for pilots. • Install lockboxes with combinations in accessible locations. • Prearrange location of keys in discreet location. One airport in the study reported using automation to better secure access through camera surveillance by the key located in a sign-out book. These systems are used where it may be impractical to have call-out services. Airports should evaluate security factors as part of the planning process for providing after-hours courtesy transportation. Guidelines of Use at General Aviation Airports The majority of airports in the study had guidelines of use for courtesy vehicles (62.1 percent). Examples of guidelines of use found included terms and conditions such as: • Requirement to replace gas. • Special instructions on vehicle operation. • Requirement to sign a use agreement prior to use. • No smoking. • Driver to provide proof of insurance. It may be advantageous to develop expectations of use that can be communicated to users and applied consistently. Utilizing a written policy that is posted or provided to users also ensures that employees are not put in a position to make uncomfortable decisions based on personal discretion. Higginsville Airport is an example of a small airport with highly developed written guidelines of use that are incorporated into a courtesy vehicle agreement (Chapter 5, Case Example 6). Policies are printed directly on the check-out form and include rules that specify for pilots only, who can drive the vehicle and other guidelines such as no smoking or use of alcohol. Other airports find value in a less formal structure as a way of serving customer needs. O’Neill Airport has limited staffing and finds flexibility and customer satisfaction in more casual proce- dures with multiple vehicles (Chapter 5, Case Example 2). When developing a courtesy vehicle program and assessing needs, it is important to consider the needs for policy of use and how guidelines will be communicated and implemented. Pro- visions for how vehicle accidents or traffic violations are handled may be included. These are 10.0 19.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0 No After-Hours Accessibility After-Hours Accessibility Figure 14. After-hours accessibility of courtesy vehicles. (Source: AirportAdmin, LLC, Survey Results.)

Findings About Airport Courtesy Vehicles 27 dependent on local circumstances. Guidelines provide clear policy of use for both employees and pilots and protect the owner from possible misuse. Guidelines typically cover a variety of limitations of use as discussed in the following section. A sample guideline of courtesy vehicle use policy is provided in Appendix E. Limitations of Use Many of the general aviation airport respondents incorporate limitations of use of courtesy vehicles as part of their guidelines (Figure 15). Communities contemplating the addition of a courtesy vehicle should evaluate appropriate limitations of use. The survey data show that limitations based on duration of use, area limita- tions, and age of driver are not uncommon. For example, many of the airports (53.3 percent) in the study require that the courtesy vehicle can only be used within the local area or specify a mile range such as 5, 10, or 20 miles. Of the airports that indicated limitations on duration of use (53.3 percent), the most common time limitation was under 2 hours. Others limited the amount of time that the vehicle could be used to 24 hours or longer. Having multiple vehicles may alleviate the time restriction by providing more availability. Another practice is to specify a time limitation unless prior arrange- ments are made for taking the vehicle for longer periods of time, which may be reasonable at times of low demand for its use. Another limitation of use discussed in the study requires an aviation fuel purchase for use of the airport courtesy vehicle. This practice places a condition of use that encourages patrons to make use of other airport services in support of an airport or FBO. Kentucky Airmotive at the Mt. Sterling Montgomery County Airport believes that this is an effective and reasonable restriction (Chapter 5, Case Example 4). Other limitations cited had to do with donated vehicles and preferred user destinations based on who donated the vehicle, overnight restrictions, and crew only limitations (Ques- tion 23). Limitations of use should be considered as a matter of policy or where the vehicle owner has concerns of possible abuse of the intended use. 6.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 7.0 16.0 16.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 Other Only Available for Fuel Customers There are No Limitations of Use No After-Hours or Overnights Must Be of Certain Age Only for Certain Duration Only Within Certain Area Figure 15. Courtesy vehicle limitations of use. (Source: AirportAdmin, LLC, Survey Results.)

28 Last Mile in General Aviation—Courtesy Vehicles and Other Forms of Ground Transportation Marketing of Courtesy Vehicle Having a way for pilots to move around to places on the ground provides an economic impact to the community and makes the airport more attractive to users that need last mile connectivity. To ensure that users are aware of the availability of courtesy vehicle transporta- tion, airports use a variety of marketing methods: • Published directories – Airport Facilities Directory (AFD)/Chart Supplement – State or local specific printed materials • Web-based directories – AirNav – AOPA airport directory • App-based directories – Foreflight – Airport Courtesy Car App • Airport websites • Chamber of commerce websites • Word of mouth Advice from Other Airports Looking at how other airports procure, insure, maintain, and develop policy of use for courtesy vehicles can provide valuable insight for those seeking guidance on how to develop a program as the sole ground transportation mode at an airport or to complement other existing modes. The following are key suggestions taken from the survey responses, case examples, and pilots regarding airport courtesy vehicles. • Work with the governing authority to acquire, insure, and maintain courtesy vehicles. • If you are trying to run a business on the airport, you must have a courtesy vehicle. • If your airport has a 5,000-foot runway, a courtesy vehicle is a must. • A courtesy vehicle is essential to driving increased fuel sales and increased revenues. • It is beneficial to have more than one courtesy vehicle. • A lockbox in an accessible area makes it easy to provide services after hours. • “Do not over think it.” • Cost should not be a barrier because vehicles may be donated and easily maintained by the airport or pilot groups. • Encourage these organizations to think outside the box and be creative. • Persistence is sometimes required when seeking approval for use of a governing authority fleet vehicle.