Agendas and Minutes

Airport Committee (View All)

Regular Monthly Meeting

Tuesday, July 01, 2003

These Minutes are preliminary pending approval by Council at the August 19, 2003 City Council Meeting.

July 1, 2003




1. CALL TO ORDER: 10:00 AM

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: May 6th minutes were approved as written.

3. Public Forum: Merle Miles asked for clarification on how the rental rates are set. It was his belief these costs were set by the CPI increase. Commission informed him that the hangar rentals are set by commission vote. He voiced irritation at the recent increases in cost.


A. Superunicom Update

Still pending the FAA approvals. Skinner will inform staff and commission of any change.

B. Self-Fueling Update

Fueling has been functional for one month now. There have been about 3,000 gallons worth of late night sales. Publications have been notified and the word is spreading that it is available. Skinner is having a keypad installed to register N numbers of aircraft. This will make it easier to track the tie-downs. Applied Technology has one for about $500. Signage is also needed to tell pilots that there is a 1/10th gallon delay on the system. This confuses some people when the fuel starts pumping slowly. This addition to the airfield is great. There is a $ .20 difference between self fueling and having the truck service.

Skillman asked if a collection box could be installed for overnight tie-down fees. Skinner would like to have the system be able to charge the tie-down fee right on the credit card with the fuel cost. This would be the optimal option.

Action: Skinner will continue to research ways to make the fueling system more efficient and will come up with wording for the signage for the system.

C. Web Cam

No report from Fitch, staff will research further.

D. 2003 Pavement Maintenance Program (PMP)

W&H Pacific is still working on the engineering and will be advertising soon for a contractor for the work. Brown and Skinner were both impressed with the degree of detail they put into the project. A representative from W&H and Teddi Baker, ODA both met with Staff to go over the pavement and discuss the project. Brown is excited with the amount of work we will be getting for our 10% match.

Skinner will stay in contact with the chosen contractor to ensure that proper notification is given while the airport is expected to be closed. Tout asked if the times could be arranged so that an early out time would be possible on the first day of work. It would be helpful if closure could be postponed until 9 AM or so. This will give pilots a chance to leave in the morning and if the runway is closed until the next afternoon it wouldn't be as inconvenient. Brown estimates two days of closure for the airport runway and she will trust Skinner's discretion to handle any emergencies that arise.

E. T-Hangar Proposal Update - City vs. Contract Build

The Commission reviewed a memo from Brown outlining an approximate cost for the building of the hangars. Staff is awaiting several responses from hangar manufacturers on estimates for building:

11 nested closed door T-hangars in a footprint of 225X50

Include electricity but no individual water or sewer services

Building Requirements: 80 MPH wind rating, 25/lbs sq foot load rating, both insulated and non-insulated costs.

Brown used the current city owned lease rate of $.4153/sf for a building footprint of 11,250 square feet with an annual rate of $4,673 less the 25% to the FBO ($1,168.25 annually) the city revenue would be $3,504.75 which would pencil out to $87,618.75 in 25 year's time.

If the City built the hangars and rented them out for $220/month the revenue would be $29,040 a year minus the FBO 25% to be a total of $21,780 per year. Over 25 years this could potentially bring in $544,500 less the initial capital outlay of the T-hangars.

Skinner and Commission feel with the long waiting list of prospective renters these hangars would stay fully occupied and the higher rental rate is because the hangars would be newer and have electricity which the older hangars don't offer. The current tenants could be given first right of refusal for moving into the new hangars.

Brown stated that owning the hangars ourselves would be the best way to recoup the cost of building the hangars. Lee Tuneberg, Finance Director addressed the Commission on several sources of fudning that he would be willing to research to fund the project. Looking at a cost of construction somewhere between $120,000 - $180,000. He feels financing for under $200,000 gives many options. To do a bond financed loan the interest rate would most likely be between 4-5%. There are several national and special district funds that may be available. A combination of different funds may also be an option. The revenue and expenses need to be researched for payback and risk assessment as well as the financial sufficiency of the airport. Tuneberg would like to focus on internal funding because it will be more practical. If we achieved support from Council and the funding is available than we would borrow from the City pool with a lower interest rate. This will be similar to the fuel storage tanks where money was available in the equipment funds, except this will have the rents as the payback. Brown agreed on the in-house money option, but that adds the layer of approvals and out-sourcing the funding would be the worst case scenario.

William Tout addressed the Commission and offered a suggestion for having the renters do a ten year pre-paid lease for their hangars. If you ask for $220/ month times 12 months for 11 T-hangars you would have more than your initial $200,000. Zeve countered that the cost to build your own hangar is around $30,000 and if the option was open to build why would they do a ten year rental. Tout agreed but that would be without your yearly cost of the lease on a private so there is not a great difference in the costs.

Tuneberg felt monies could be secured within 90 days. Construction could take 6-9 months so rentals could start for next summer. Zeve asked if there was a disadvantage to having the City own the hangars. Brown felt other than finding the financing, no there would be no down side. If a private contractor owned them their goal would be to make money and the City would only get a share of that money.

Action: Hendrickson moved to have City staff move ahead with outlining financing options for building the hangars. Sky seconded the motion, passed unanimously.


A. Tout Hangar Proposal

There has been a slight change to this proposal. Tout has now optioned to buy Treg Scott's hangar. This purchase relieves his necessity to construct a hangar. Tout is still interested in building a hangar, preferably two hangars if the Commission approves the proposal but would first like to clarify dimensions of the hangar area available.

Tout addressed the Commission on the salable value of the hangars that are constructed. There is a limited amount of available building area. By letting contractors/owners build hangars that are not consistent with available building space (i.e. if the hangar is built to be 60 X 40 when the space could support a 60 X60 hangar there is wasted space that could have meant income for the airport) the airport is losing money and that extra space is wasted. By enforcing a required size, a larger size, then the airport is being used to its full capacity. The size of the hangars should also be built with aircraft usage in mind. Not all aircraft can fit into hangars that don't have large enough door openings and this limits potential buyers to owners with smaller aircraft. If hangars are built with larger aircraft in mind then any aircraft could use them. The Commission was thankful to Tout for this insight.

Tout's proposal is pending on certain information that he is hoping to receive. Staff will present a layout plan for the remaining hangar spaces in the Day row. This will give Tout a feeling on how large of a hangar he will be able to build in these areas after wing clearance easements and hangar configuration is considered. His hope is to create two doors for the end hangar accessing both taxiways. This may not be feasible because of the grade to the east. Brown will have engineering staff draw up these layouts with the distances clearly defined. Tout is willing to wait to further pursue his proposal when the layout is available. He did state that if someone else were interested in the third space he would gladly step aside. He wanted to pursue the end space and would not build one hangar while leaving the other space skipped.

Action: Staff will produce a clear map showing distances and hangar size limits for the Day row.


A. Status of Airport, Financial Report, Review of Safety Reports

Activity has been busy. The tourist and fire season are upon us. Airport Day was a GREAT SUCCESS this year! THANK YOU CLARK!


A. Signage - Dan Gunter, Street Department, has the signage ready but Skinner was unclear on where to post them. Rostykus worked on a map showing where they need to be posted. Gunter was unclear whether to use breakaway posts. Skinner and staff will research the regulation on what is required for the signage.


ADJOURN: Meeting adjourned at 11:30 AM

End of Document - Back to Top

Online City Services

Pay your bill & more 
Connect to
Ashland Fiber Network
Request Conservation
Proposals, Bids
& Notifications
Request Building
Building Permit
Apply for Other
Permits & Licenses
Register for
Recreation Programs

©2024 City of Ashland, OR | Site Handcrafted in Ashland, Oregon by Project A




twitter facebook Email Share
back to top