Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutAAC Minutes 1998 04/08AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES April 8, 1998 The Airport Advisory Committee meeting was called to order in the Toothman-Orton office conference room on the second floor of McCall Air Taxi's building at 12:03 p.m. Persons present were Rick Fereday, Tom Tucker, Mike Anderson, Charles Sundby, Jim Fronk, Jackie Fields, Merrill Saleen, and Gene Heikkola. Since Jackie was not present when the meeting began, the order was changed, and item IIIB, the Runway Light Pre-app was discussed first. Chuck reported that he had sent a memo to the City Manager asking whether it was the City's desire to have Toothman-Orton do the pre-app (which would cost the City $2500) and had received no reply. Rick Fereday responded that he had received a call from the City Manager saying he was going to have RH2 Engineering do the pre- app. Mr. Sundby said that was O.K. with him. It was below the threshold for consultant selection, but felt we as a committee needed some assurance that RH2 had airport experience. He had done some checking with Seattle Airports District Office and they have no knowledge of the outfit doing any kind of ALP -funded projects. Their names do not appear on attendance lists of FAA -sponsored conferences in the Northwest Region. Mike Anderson expressed his dismay that the Airport Advisory Committee was not consulted on this decision and felt it was similar to when Dale Points was selected for Airport Manager without consulting the Committee. Mr. Sundby also made it clear that while the pre -application was below consultant selection threshold, the project itself was over it, so if RH2 does the pre-app, we will still have to do the consultant selection in order to proceed from that point. At that point (12:12), Jackie arrived and the topic shifted to item IIIA - Regional Best Management Practices. She stated that she had hoped to have some news to report, but funding was on hold. She said she would rather take the route through behind the "T-hangars" and over to "Kangas Pond", if possible, instead of south behind the "200 Series" hangars. Mr. Sundby responded that there was already a culvert at the intersection of the diagonal taxiway and N-S taxiway and did not foresee any significant problems with that approach. Merrill Saleen arrived at 12:18 and was apprised of the situation, and the topic again shifted back to the runway light project pre -application. Rick Fereday said he'd ask for RH2's airport experience and Mr. Sundby suggested contacting Paul Johnson (425:227-2655). Mike Anderson moved that the Airport Advisory Committee go on record recommending that Toothman-Orton Engineering be reaffirmed as the City's Engineering firm and retained for AIP-07, the Runway Lighting Project. Tom Tucker seconded, and the motion carried unanimously. Merrill then asked about project timing, and Mr. Sundby responded that "FY 99" funds have already been programmed, '00 and '01 projects are in the planning/application phase, however; if a project gets deleted and we have a pre-app in, there is some possibility of getting moved up. It's relation to the Airport Master Plan came up. Gene reported that the City Manager considers the latest iteration a draft because it makes no reference to the future light industrial development which both agreed should be included in the plan. Mr. Sundby stated that Dave Rickerson had a statement to that effect in the original version and had to take it out at the FAA's request.. Rick concluded that a representative of the Committee should appear before City Council to make the Committee's feelings on several issues clear. Some of those being 1) Airport Master Plan, 2) AIP- 07 pre-app, 3) AIP-06 funding (City share). Tom reiterated the Committee's displeasure with the City accounting methods, budget numbers, and the fact that operations should be separated from capital improvements. He asked the question of how other airports do their budgets compared to us. Mr. Sundby suggested calling Rick Baird for a copy of Hailey's budget and stated that the practice of charging administrative overhead on a figure that includes AIP Grant Funds might come under the heading of "Diversion of Funds", which would get us in hot water with FAA in no time. Tom asked why the airport budget appears to be near $1 Million, when actually it's more like $100,000. Mike said the whole City budget is only $20 Million, and thought it would be outrageous to assume that the airport takes 5% of that figure, when in reality it is more like 1%. Rick Fereday then asked Tom if he would research the Coeur D'Alene and Hailey budgets, at which point, Mr. Sundby passed out copies of a list of names and addresses of airport managers developed by Division of Aeronautics. Tom moved that we set up a meeting with the City Manager to discuss the budget. Rick seconded, and the motion carried unanimously. Jackie then gave a brief update on the "Airport Sewer Project", which is presently undergoing Value Engineering. The schedule of events was previously predicated on bidding in February and March. Rick asked if we still could go from Notice -to -Proceed to completion in time for this building season. Mr. Sundby responded that it was getting "tight", but may be possible if we can get bidding done by early June. Next up was item IIIC: Considerations for resuming construction on AIP-06. Mr. Sundby commented that doing Value Engineering on a project in the middle of construction was not very smart. Value Engineering is done in the design phase, and the FAA makes that determination at the pre -design conference. Also the funding (which might run upwards of $50,000) will not come out of the FAA grant, and expending local funds for Value Engineering on a 90% grant project is not wise at this time. Some discussion of where that money would come from then ensued. Mr. Sundby pointed out that since it was not a grant -eligible expense in all likelihood would come out of the Airport Budget. The Airport Manager stated that the Airport Budget could not bear such an expense, seeing as how there was only $15,000 left for the balance of the year. Such an expense would put the Airport Budget into deficit. As far as the consequences of halting a project to which Federal grant funds have been committed, Mr. Sundby cited the example of Gem County, 1988. As he recalled, since they balked at having to pay $90,000 local share and halted an airport project in mid -stream, they ended up having to pay over $300,000 back in grant monies. Rick said he'd add that to the list of things he will bring up before City Council. Mike Anderson stated that it was clearly in the City's interest to continue the project as scheduled. He then moved, and Tom Tucker seconded that the Airport Advisory Committee go on record opposing Value Engineering AIP-06 since it was redundant, wasteful, and definitely not cost- effective at this late stage in the game. The motion carried unanimously. The topic then shifted to when construction would likely be resumed. Mr. Sundby reported that a pre -construction conference should occur sometime in the next two to three weeks, depending on weather, Jackie stated that she likes to see a ground temperature of 50 degrees and rising before allowing any paving to be done, and felt the contractors were agreeable to that requirement. Mr. Sundby responded that such a requirement, or one very much like that was in the contract specifications. At any rate, the contracts for all Schedules (A-D) were already executed, signed, and notarized, and until someone tells him otherwise, construction will resume as soon as the weather cooperates. A statement which was unanimously supported by the entire Committee. Some discussion of incorporating the bike path into the relocated Deinhard Lane occurred and it was generally agreed that now was the time to do that. Jackie felt that it could be done with minimal cost adjustment because it didn't necessarily have to be paved, that additional unpaved shoulder on each side of the road was all that was necessary. She reported that she had discussed it with the Mayor and they agreed that unpaved shoulder would suffice. She offered to take that issue before the Transportation Committee and get their input. Mr. Sundby agreed that it could be handled as a "field adjustment" at little or no cost to the City. Tom asked if the City still knows where the $100,000 (plus) matching funds are? He reported that the Committee had a deal with the previous City Manager that concerned the $45,000 the City had set aside for the AWOS upgrade. When that system got changed to the ASOS that was "free" to the City, the $45,000 was to have been added to the AIP-06 "pot", along with approximately $43,000 in tax revenue from the $3.4 Million valuation on airport improvements. Mr. Sundby mentioned a $29,803.12 reimbursement request that had not been submitted to FAA, but was apparently being held at City Hall? Costs for AIP-06 total $1,974,522, which means approximately $118,000 will be the City's share - does the City have that amount budgeted? Rick Fereday then asked the Airport Manger to contact Harley Hinshaw, the Valley County Assessor, to see if the $100,000 comes out of the County funds. (Airport Manager talked to City Treasurer the following Monday and found that money is in the City's general fund). Due to the length of discussions so far, the Chair then tabled items IVA and IVB (New Business) until next meeting. IVA was hangar lease rates, so Mike Anderson presented a paper he had prepared on that subject and asked the Airport Manager to forward it on to the City Manager. He then briefly mentioned how he had been at an Airports Conference in Boise and had seen a presentation on the new Transponder Landing System, which like the Microwave Landing System could provide any approach and/or missed -approach path you wanted and all it required was a transponder and ILS display, which a lot of GA aircraft already have. The system costs about $700,000, depending on local configuration requirements, but it is a grant -eligible system, or will be as soon as it is certified, which is expected to occur in April, if all goes well. This could be just the system we need here because it is the missed -approach path that gets critical due to rising terrain on the north side of the airport. If we were to install such a system with grant money, it would only cost the City in the neighborhood of $35,000 since we only have to come up with 5% (assuming 5% State grant in addition to the 90% Federal grant). The airport manager offered that this would do a lot toward making it possible for a commuter airline to operate in and out of McCall and that, in turn, would take a lot of pressure off the hangar owners and FBOs to provide sufficient revenues. Mr. Sundby suggested that the City prepare a pre -application so that we could "get in line" for grant monies, when they become available. Pre -application was not contingent upon having the project budgeted, but without it, we could have a very long wait before getting the project "off the ground". Mike Anderson moved, and Rick Fereday seconded that we authorize Toothman- Orton Engineering to prepare the pre -application for installation of the TLS, and the motion carried unanimously. Submitted by: Gene Heikkola, Airport Manager Approved by: / i Rick Fereday, Chair( THE CITY OF MCCALL AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMITTE WEDNESDAY, APRIL 8, 1998 The Airport Advisory Committee will hold a regular meeting at 12:00 p.m. Wednesday, April 1, 1998 at the offices of Toothman-Orton Engineering, located at 300 Deinhard Lane (Hangar 103), McCall, Idaho. The following items are scheduled for discussion: AGENDA I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL II. MINUTES of March 4, 1998 and March 17, 1998. III. OLD BUSINESS: A. Regional Best Management Practices - Jackie Fields, City Engineer B. Runway Light Project Pre -Application - Kevin Bissel, Toothman-Orton Engineering C. Considerations for resuming construction on AIP-06. IV. NEW BUSINESS: "/e V. ADJOURNMENT Lease Rates for New Leases - Brian Olson, City Manager Administrative fee - Parking fee collection. f-jd ear Aldo///,7