NOVEMBER 7, 2006
MEMBERS PRESENT: RICHARD HENDRICKSON, PAUL WESTERMAN, BOB SKINNER, TOM BRADLEY, RUSS SILBIGER,
STAFF: DAWN LAMB, JAMES OLSON, DALE PETERS
Visitors: Benjamin Lindner
1. CALL TO ORDER: 9:30 AM
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: October 3, 2006, minutes approved as written.
3. Public Forum:
4. OLD BUSINESS:
A. Burl Brim Hilltop Helipad Development
Pre-application for the hangar expansion has been submitted to Planning for review from all departments. The parking area has yet to be formally requested. Krippaehne will check with Brim on his parking requirements. The commission was given a copy of the pre-application to review for their review. The Planning Department will than meet with Madrona Architect to go over any conditions. The addition is proposed to be a 16 by 60 two-story addition to the existing hangar. It will add meeting space, offices, and restrooms. The lease and SASO lease will be adjusted after the certificate of occupancy is issued.
Skinner advocated for the addition of the parking in the adjacent hangar space. There could be a month to month arrangement at the lower lease rate. DeBoer was opposed to the parking because it would create a difficulty for the eventual development of a hangar on the site. The Brim employees can use the public parking area along with the shared lot between Sky and Skinner. Zeve suggested tabling the conversation until a formal request is received from Brim. DeBoer moved to approve the pre-application concept pending the planning process approvals and conditions. Hendrickson would like more time to read over the application. Krippaehne felt that the approval would not be required until after the pre-application process was complete. DeBoer withdrew the motion. There may need to be some variances submitted and the Commission could offer help with that process. The formal application should be submitted in December.
Action: Commission will be made aware of the outcome of the pre-application process with the Planning Department.
B. Strategic Planning Action Items:
4. NEW BUSINESS:
A. Entitlement Grant
Jim Olson asked the commission to help him choose the next priority for the entitlement grant money. He has already started gathering some current information on the SuperAWOS and the reconstruction of the parking lot. The entitlement is only for $150,000 and must be used for improvements that benefit safety and will not be used to generate revenue for the airport. The installation of utilities or the construction of hangars does not qualify. The grant approval will be announced in March of 2007. Olson asked the commission to make a formal project choice.
The taxiway addition will be upwards of $320,000 which exceeds the grant allocation. The excavation of the 17,000 cubic yards of material will be costly to achieve. There would need to be nine foot cuts made to achieve the 1% taxilane grades. The construction of the parking lot may be done by in house crews to a city standard to reduce the cost. This could offer cost savings. The SuperAWOS has some costs hat may be hard to determine. The ODA had a project to purchase the SuperUnicom a few years back, but the approval process by the FAA took to long and the money was reallocated. The funds could be enough to accomplish both projects if force account funds are used. The SuperAWOS has some unknown cost if it is required to be sited for location by an engineer. The SuperAWOS equipment is a $70,000 cost the parking lot is estimated at about $80,000.
DeBoer asked if fencing was still a project identified for the future. Olson said that the AIP funding is still out three more years. The AWOS would be a great safety improvement to the airport. Support was given to having a 24-hour notification system for weather reporting. Monies can not be used to pay down debt service. Skinner liked the idea of combining the projects and thought that the parking lot and the SuperAWOS were good choices. All of the items are listed in the adopted master plan. Olson would also do an overlay of the access road to help lengthen its useful life. The parking lot essential life is zero. The asphalt will need to be completely redone down to the sub-base. The engineering of an FAA project is a long process. The engineering firm that is chosen by the City must also be reviewed by an independent engineering firm before they can proceed with the project. This raises the cost of any project where outside engineering firm needs to be involved. If all the money is not used, it will be carried over to the next year. We have a remainder from last year’s grant money.
Could the triangular spots be asphalted over during this project? This is not eligible expense for the grant. The commission discussed that the top priority is the SuperAWOS system and feel the recommendation from Olson to rebuild the parking lot. If there is left over funds they can be carried over until next year for another project.
Action: Bradley moved to follow the CIP projects as presented by Jim Olson for the entitlement grant monies. Seconded by Hendrickson and passed unanimously. The grant will be used for the SuperAWOS system and the parking lot reconstruction.
B. Budget Information:
Lamb presented a breakdown of the adopted costs for this year and the spent costs from last year. A spreadsheet also showed the revenue from Skinner Aviation for last year. The revenue is still below where it needs to be. DeBoer asked if the audit was ready for review. The Finance department has been working with the auditors. Lamb will see when the audit is expected to be completed. Once the audit takes place a subcommittee will be formed to review the audit paperwork. DeBoer, Bradely, Lobaugh and Zeve will meet.
C. Potential Developer Activity- Benjamin Lindner
Benjamin Lindner, Rockin’ C & L Ranch Properties, is interested in developing hangars at the
Lindner would like to be able to continue with negotiating leases for options with City staff. He would like to move on this quickly. Lindner does not want to compete with the City for business.
Hendrickson voiced that the commission would be in support of moving ahead with negotiations when Lindner was ready to move forward. Lindner is interested in small GA airports because he is a pilot and appreciates the atmosphere of smaller airports. The smaller airports that are general aviation pilot friendly are becoming harder to support for communities and developers such as himself are helping to continue their existence. Skinner agreed that there is a lot of support for the growth in this atmosphere. Lindner will be contacting persons on the list and then contact people in
D. SASO – Valley Investments
For this discussion, Alan DeBoer will abstain as he is a partial owner in Valley Investments.
In 2002 the commission added hangarkeeper to the SASO definitions. Staff has approached various businesses on the field to collect the appropriate fees. The fee to Valley Investments has yet to be agreed upon. DeBoer feels that the lease with Valley Investments should not be added to qualify for new fees. Continuing to add random fees to existing leases is a bad practice and the airport will be less attractive to businesses and individuals interested in residing at the airport. There is no justification to arbitrarily adding a fee to the existing lease. The company voluntarily moved from the lower lease rate to the privately owned lease rate a few years back, but to create more hardship for the renters is not fair business. The lease has no clause for applying new fees as they are created. Zeve agreed that the lease should be looked at and if the clause does not exist then it would be unfair to imply a new fee in the middle of a lease. Bradley highly doubted that any lease would have that type of clause. This is a contractual agreement that exists. Westerman asked if it would be prudent to have legal look at this issue. DeBoer felt that if lawyers were to look at this there would be a great deal of time, energy and money spent for little gain. Skillman felt that if the motivation of the lease is changed than it is a different lease. DeBoer said that the purpose of the lease has not changed and that the hangars have been rented out since they were constructed. DeBoer still disagreed with the hangarkeeper inclusion in the SASO fees. Bradley felt that if there was not change in the lease structure, then do not impose the SASO fee. Valley Investments has three more years on their lease. At that time it can be reevaluated.
Commission agreed not to impose the SASO fee for Valley Investments.
E. January Meeting Date
Lamb will be out of town for the last two weeks of December and returning on the day the meeting is to take place. Would the commission want to change the meeting or cancel until the February meeting. The meeting will be on January 9th.
5. AIRPORT MANAGER REPORT/FBO REPORT/AIRPORT ASSOCIATION:
A. Status of Airport, Financial Report, Review of Safety Reports
Skinner staff is asking for help to look at how people on the waiting list are contacted. There is a large amount of time spent every time a hangar is open for rent. Commission would like to look at that during the February meeting.
Renumbering of the hangars is still in the works.
B. Maintenance Updates – Estimates for Upgrades to FBO Office
Dale Peters, Facilities Maintenance was introduced by Lamb. Peters is the person who responds to maintenance requests at the airport and maintains all the City owned buildings. A while back Skinner asked if it would be possible to do some renovations to the FBO office. He is going to get new furniture and do some other updating and would like to have the office worked on at the same time. Lamb sent a memo to Peters asking about what he would recommend for cost, longevity and maintenance.
Peters has a limited budget for maintenance at the airport and the commission needs to consider what it would feel was a priority.
The Peters looked into different types of floor treatment such as carpet, tile or concrete. Carpet is typically the most used to absorb sound and keep a safe surface to walk on. The cleaning cost and wear and tear can sometimes be more work. The vinyl in the restroom and the walls need treatment. There is heavy damage in the restroom from a water leak a few years back. The concrete slab would be the least costly up front, but if there is damage to the floor that needs attention, then the cost would quickly escalate. The concrete is also not as sound dampening and could be a slippery surface in inclement weather. For most of the work we would have to get bids from contractors so the price estimates could change.
Skinner agreed that he would prefer a floor treatment that had a low skid surface. Hendrickson said that carpet does absorb more sound. DeBoer suggested that Peters keep a eye out for carpet deals or remnant sales. Lamb suggested because this is almost a year’s worth of maintenance budget that the commission and Peters work together to form a strong estimate of the cost for the renovation and that it be asked to be included in the facility capital improvement list for next year (July 2007).
7. NEXT MEETING DATE: December 5th, 2006, 9:30 AM
ADJOURN: Meeting adjourned at 11:25 AM