GAINESVILLE-ALACHUA COUNTY REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY
Thursday, March 18, 2004 – 5:00 p.m.
Gainesville Regional Airport
Passenger Terminal - Restaurant
Monthly Meeting
Highlights
Call To Order By The Chair
Vice-Chair Jim Stringfellow called the meeting to order at 5:02 p.m.
Invocation: Pat Bainter delivered the invocation.
Pledge Of Allegiance: Vice-Chair Stringfellow led the Pledge of Allegiance.
Authority Members Present At Roll Call: Pat Bainter, Billy Brashear, Jim Gallagher, Janice Honeyman-Buck, Jim Stringfellow and Marilyn Tubb. C.B. Daniel arrived at 5:59 p.m. Bob Todd and Jon Morris were excused.
Determination Of A Quorum It was determined that a quorum had been reached.
Approval of Meeting Highlights for February 19, 2004
Dr. Gallagher moved to approve the meeting highlights of February 19, 2004. Mrs. Tubb seconded the motion. Motion passed.
Adoption of the Agenda
Mr. Crider asked the Board to consider only the proposed FY04 DBE Contract Goals and remove from the consent agenda the DBE Concession Goals due to additional analysis that needs to be completed.
Dr. Gallagher moved to adopt the agenda. Mrs. Tubb seconded the motion. Motion passed.
The proposed FY2004 DBE Contract Goal of 10% was approved with the adoption of the agenda.
Citizens Input – Non-Agenda Items
Dashwood Hicks, citizen, inquired about the status of Angel Flight funds earned by Mr. Bainter after the Authority consented to the activity. Mr. Bainter indicated that Mr. Hicks should provide specifics of any allegation he was making and inform the Authority of any concerns he has in writing.
Jamshid Armaghani, Director of Concrete Paving with the Florida Concrete & Products Association, Inc., asked the Board to consider the concrete overlay option for the Runway 10-28 rehabilitation instead of asphalt. He indicated that an asphalt overlay may be unsuccessful because cracks would reflect through; he asked the Board to bid the project both ways, concrete and asphalt, to see how the money can best be spent.
Mr. Crider replied that he, Mr. Penksa and Mr. Skillman met with the contractors and will present recommendations to the Facilities & Planning Committee next week.
Dr. Gallagher questioned the vast difference in the bid amounts and the engineers’ estimate. He recommended considering a concrete solution if Dr. Armaghani indicates that FAA standards can be met within the budgeted amount for the project.
Mr. Crider stated that the high bids were due to contractor risk associated with a 10-14 day construction period and showed up in escalated mobilization costs in both bids. Compared to the engineer’s estimate, the asphalt cost was higher due to rising fuel prices; aggregate would also need to be trucked in from Georgia. He indicated that in order to meet FAA requirements, the concrete design required 8 inches, while asphalt would require a 3” – 4” layer.
Mr. Penksa reported the following information:
· The bids were skewed. Both contractors confirmed that they viewed the 11-day construction period as very risky and that they submitted high mobilization/demobilization costs to mitigate the $60,000 per day liquidated damages that would be assessed if they didn’t finish the job within the 11-day window.
· There were also some hidden variables. The existing pavement would be pulverized which would open up the surface and allow rainwater to get into the sub-base. This would cause many problems if it rained, and additional delays would occur while the projected dried out.
· There was a fairly large amount of money set aside for additional unspecified materials, such as stone, if the sub-surface needed to be resurfaced and repaired.
· The contract was based on 11-calendar days versus 11-work days so if there was a rain or construction delay the contractor would be unable to perform. Omitting the $1.3 to $1.4 of the $1.7 million for mobilization, and omitting the cost set aside for unspecified materials; such as stone and excavation, results in a figure that’s very close to GACRAA’s construction budget.
· He reported that an asphalt job was recently completed in Fort Lauderdale and it cost approximately $74 per ton of asphalt. The low asphalt bid received by Gainesville Regional Airport was $75 a ton.
· The solution under consideration is a 20-year fix to the problem, through a standard 2” to 3” variable depth asphalt pavement to correct the grade deficiencies. Also under consideration is the possibility of using a crack relief layer between the old and new pavements which have proven successful in helping to stop some of the reflective cracking.
Dr. Armaghani stated that grade can be easily handled with design, and a runway and taxiway were done in 11 days at the Fernandino Beach Airport.
This matter will be addressed again at an upcoming Facilities and Planning Committee meeting.
Airport Authority Input – Non-Agenda Items - None
Airport Business:
Information Items:
Keep Alachua County Beautiful Award
The Airport received a Bronze award for its “Just Plane Rocks” garden in front of the Airline Passenger Terminal. Landscape Specialist James Townsend led the effort to create this new landscape feature.
Project Summary
Mr. Crider stated that the power to the new Port-A-Port pads was established and that Mr. Penksa and the City are working out the variance issue.
Mr. Crider reported that University Air Center continues to make its capital improvements. They have done some boring under connecting taxiways, and permitting for the projects is moving forward.
Mr. Crider mentioned that the final interest payments have been paid on the GA Ramp Rehabilitation Project, and the airport is in the process of closing that project out with the FAA.
Regarding the Runway 10-28 rehabilitation project, Mr. Crider stated that the project would be considered at a joint meeting of the Facilities & Planning and General Aviation Committees on March 24.
Mr. Crider mentioned that we have received support from the FAA on the ditch enclosure project. The FAA recommends utilizing discretionary funds for this project. He anticipates this $1.1 million project will be accomplished without entitlement funds in FY2004.
Mr. Crider said that the environmental assessment for Runway 6-24 is underway. Part of the consideration of alternatives to rehabilitate Runway 10-28, was the length of time it will take to finish the environmental assessment, to cross the creek and put a substantial number of capital dollars in the construction project. It is moving forward and we expect to fund Phase 2 of the environmental assessment in this upcoming FAA grant. However, staff recommends moving forward with Runway 10-28 rehabilitation and not wait on Runway 6-24 extension.
Mr. Crider stated that next week we would be getting some drawings and presentations from RS&H. They are moving through the conceptual designs and have some great ideas. Most of the Authority members have met with them and they have a meeting set-up downtown with other committee members.
Mr. Crider reported that the St. Johns River Water Management District has tentatively agreed to let GACRAA record the conservation easement on the Gum Root Swamp property across 39th Avenue, as opposed to the property that’s adjacent or on the airfield.
Mr. Crider said that conversations with Northwest Airlines are going forward. We’ve had inquiries from their Governmental Affairs & Facilities Departments, so they are considering GNV. We hope to have some preliminary idea of which way they are going to go in the next 3-4 weeks.
Mrs. Tubb mentioned that GACRAA has retained Winston & Strawn, a consultant firm in Washington, who helps identify opportunities for federal funding and helps pursue that funding. In a recent trip to Washington, she and Rick Crider met with the congressional delegation and representatives from Congressman Cliff Stearns’ & Congresswoman Corrine Brown’s offices were there. They were complimentary of the work, improvements and air service developments. They also offered encouragement for funding of an Aviation Education Center, general aviation improvements, rehabilitation money and monies for the terminal. They were very responsive to our modest requests and she remains hopeful that our improved relationship with them will bring back some good things for Gainesville and Alachua County.
Mr. Crider mentioned that they also met with the FAA and they were very encouraging about our requests for next year.
Mr. Crider reported that our traffic is rebounding from January. We have had a strong March with the announcement of US Air substituting regional jets for turbo-prop aircraft, and there were only 2-3 empty seats on his and Mrs. Tubb’s flight.
Mr. Mac McEachern complimented Mr. Penksa on the outstanding job he did getting the necessary permits from the City.
Federal Express Facility
Mr. Crider reported that Jeff Breeden has completed the alternative analysis and is recommending the old Gator building. Due to management changes, a meeting should be established within the next 30 days.
Mr. Crider reported that the ADSB is going to happen and a letter was sent to the local facilities people. Equipment will be installed at the Flight Service Station and we will be one of five ADSB sites in Florida.
Finance Report
Dr. Gallagher, Chair of the Finance and Operations Committee, provided a report of the GACRAA budget and actual revenues and expenditures through January 31, 2004. Total operating revenue is running slightly ahead after four months at $123,000. We are about $200,000 ahead when you include our operating expenses. Contributing to the year-to-date income are the Passenger Facility Charge Reimbursements, which are $112,000 ahead. The Industrial Park land sales which were estimated at $12,000 have come in at $25,000. The Airport Administration expenses are over by $69,000; and the fuel storage facility fees and the commercial aviation fuel sales are down.
Mr. Bainter moved to accept the Finance Report. Mrs. Tubb seconded the motion. Motion passed.
Facilities & Planning Report
Mr. Stringfellow reported that the bids came in too high for the Runway 10-28 Rehabilitation project.
Dr. Honeyman-Buck moved to reject the bids, explore with the bidders whether a revised specification for the rehabilitation could result in bids within the airport’s budget, and failing that option, re-bid the project as a mill and overlay job as quickly as possible. That motion passed and the committee will be meeting again next Wednesday.
Mr. Stringfellow reported that Mr. Penksa has outlined the construction and cost of 20 new T-hangars.
Mr. Crider stated he would like to re-bid the mill and overlay within the next 30-40 days. The proposed design will not disturb the base material; it will use the milling machine to hit the high points, correct the grade and the cross slope issues, and overlay with asphalt. He believe this will bring it within the $5.1 million budget.
Mr. Marc A. Skillman, P.E., Regional Director of R.W. Armstrong, reported that the first bid was a short-term fix. It did not correct the line and grade problems and the cross slope problems that the FAA identified. It was meant to be a short-term repair and allow asphalt or concrete to be applied on top. The 20-year fix was to reshape the base and put the asphalt down exactly as it should be.
Mr. McEachern would like to see T-hangars built in the same area, and feels that charging premium rates is not compatible with growing aviation. He is looking forward to public hearings and surveys that will be held prior to a final determination on the size and amenities included in these new hangars.
Mr. Penksa reported that the type of building and amenities will depend upon the Authority. However, his survey of 11-12 people netted the following results.
· Some were ambivalent, but they all agreed that full height partitions are better than partial height. The difference in cost is minimal, only a few hundred dollars per unit, which over a 20-year life is a couple of dollars on the rent.
· Two out of the 11 were adamant about the electric door, and the others were ambivalent.
· He offered two different buildings, one with electric doors and one with sliding doors. The 48-ft wide unit is a heavy door. However, pushing that door could be difficult for a woman, someone small in stature or the elderly. The cost for it would be $1,700, $1,500 for door and $200 for electrical connections. This would come to $7-9 a month. We may want to consider a mixture of door types, but get a manufacturer who also makes the door so that the system works well together. In terms of price, one tenant indicated he would be willing to pay $250-$300 per month.
Mr. Crider reported that FDOT requires the Airport obtain fair market value for the T-hangars. “Premium” was used to suggest an enhanced amenity like an electric door, additional lights or full-height partitions. However, that does not mean we would charge the highest in that range.
Mr. McEachern said he advocates rate information being given out at public hearings. That way, the Authority can see what the tenants want.
Mr. Penksa reported that we have some constraints on the space because it’s not wide enough to put a nest of T-Hangars where the tail and wings of each unit are interlocked. If we build over there, we are forced to go with a stacked arrangement, and that would reduce the number of hangars we could put in per square foot. He further stated that we are working with the City and are expecting an answer on the ability to build in the flood plane area that was approved in 1998, but we would have to meet their flood-proofing requirements. Since we have a limited amount of property to build T-Hangars on, and will eventually run out of space, Mr. Luster suggested putting in a clear span unit for a little bit larger hangar. There are certainly other options for using up that land.