Public survey puts City on notice over Flight School Airport Noise and Quality of Life Issues

Early results from two city-commissioned online surveys on the future of the municipal airport show sharp divisions between nearby residents and airport users, with environmental impacts, aircraft noise, and flight-school activity emerging as dominant concerns.

The City of Fernandina Beach conducted separate online surveys as part of the ongoing master planning process for the Fernandina Beach Municipal Airport. One survey targeted the general public, while a second focused on airport tenants and users. City officials said the surveys are intended to guide long-term planning decisions and identify areas of conflict or consensus.

As of Monday, the general public survey had drawn 323 responses. The majority of respondents identified themselves as residents of Fernandina Beach, with a substantial portion also reporting that they live adjacent to or near the airport.

When asked to identify the three most important issues for the airport’s future, environmental impact was by far the most frequently selected topic, cited by 251 respondents. Flight-school activity ranked next, followed by concerns over private development near airport property, traffic impacts from nearby roads, and runway configuration or length.

Written comments reflected strong frustration from residents who live under flight paths or near airport operations.

“There are too many large planes already using the airport and the environment is being affected,” wrote Henry Raggio, a Fernandina Beach resident.

Maria Laurenzi said, “Too many large planes and the environment is being affected. The noise is constant and disruptive.”

Several residents specifically pointed to flight training as a quality-of-life issue.

“The noise generated by touch and goes by flight schools is excessive," wrote Gary Walker.

Julie Armstrong wrote "the flight school use of the airport is rather disruptive to nearby neighborhoods."

Robert Ploehn agreed writing "This is not a NIMBY response. The community should not have to absorb unlimited impacts."

Not all comments were critical. Some respondents emphasized the airport’s value to the community and region.

“You have a hidden gem with this airport,” wrote, Matthew Golden who identified himself as a pilot. “Incredibly valuable for emergency services and economic activity if managed responsibly.”

Several survey respondents urged the city to prioritize open space and recreational uses on airport property, warning against incompatible development as the master plan moves forward.

“Leave the airport property as green areas throughout. Why pollute it with incompatible uses?” wrote Robert Ploehn, a Fernandina Beach resident.

Carol Westbrook suggested using airport land to support community recreation, writing that it could provide “airport property, new location for soccer fields with better parking.”

Jeff Walukonis emphasized the broader public benefit of careful land-use decisions, noting that airport-related revenue “can be used to fund assets,” including community amenities.

The separate tenant and airport-user survey received 33 responses, primarily from aircraft owners, hangar tenants, and aviation-related businesses.

Tenant comments focused less on noise and more on operational and infrastructure concerns, including fuel pricing, access to facilities, and coordination with regulators.

“Discounted fuel prices for tenants — fuel prices are not competitive,” wrote airport tenant Kevin Allen.

Several tenants also urged the city to balance neighborhood concerns with the airport’s role as an active aviation facility.

“Work with the FAA and flight standards district office to manage operations realistically,” one tenant commented. “The airport cannot function if every use is treated as a nuisance.”

Peter Marsh said, "over the last 10 years, the airport has become more restrictive for those of us who are based here."

City officials have said the surveys are only one component of the airport master plan, which will also include technical studies, public workshops, and coordination with state and federal aviation agencies.

Survey results to date suggest that community trust and compatibility issues — particularly noise, environmental protection, and flight-training intensity — will be central to upcoming discussions.

City officials said the airport master plan update is being conducted in accordance with Federal Aviation Administration and Florida Department of Transportation standards, including grant assurances that emphasize public involvement throughout the process.

According to the city, the master planning effort will use multiple public engagement tools as the study progresses. These include a project website featuring frequently asked questions and background information, as well as opportunities for residents to submit comments or sign up for email updates.

The city has also formed a Technical Advisory Committee, or TAC, made up of stakeholders selected by airport and city staff to provide technical guidance during the planning process. The committee is expected to meet four times over the course of the master plan update and participation is by invitation.

In addition, the city plans to hold two public open houses where residents can learn more about the study, review preliminary information, and ask questions of airport staff and the city’s consultant team. Dates and locations for those meetings have not yet been announced and will be posted on the project website once finalized.

Additional public meetings are expected later this year as the master plan team refines alternatives and presents recommendations to the City Commission.

Residents who wish to continue participating in the process may opt in for meeting notifications through the survey platform, according to the city.