Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

>> WE CAN HEAR YOU FINE. >> THE TIME IS 6:00 ON THE DOT.

[Items 1 - 3]

[00:00:08]

OBVIOUSLY CHAIRPERSON WITH US. I'M GOING TO HELP US GET THROUGH THE MEETING THIS EVENING SINCE THIS IS A LITTLE BIT UNUSUAL.

I'M GOING TO HELP RUN THE AGENDA AND THE PROCESS OF CONVERSATION.

I'M GOING TO HELP OUR DISCUSSION A LITTLE BIT.

WHEN WE GET TO AGENDA ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION, I'M GOING TO PRESENT THE ITEM. WE'LL GIVE YOU ALL THE INFORMATION FOR THE ITEMS IN THE PACKET AND I'LL GO INDIVIDUAL BY INDIVIDUAL SO WE'RE NOT TALKING OVER EACH OTHER AND EVERYBODY HAS A CHANCE TO COMMENT. WE'RE GOING TO START WITH A ROLL CALL.

>> ON THE LINE WITH US THIS EVENING WE HAVE RYAN FROM FLIGHT SERVICES AND BRETT AND CHRIS. YOU CAN SEE THEM ON ZOOMFUL AND I MISSED ONE PERSON ON THE BOARD.

>> >> NEXT ON THE AGENDA WE'LL DO PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. YOU GUYS PROBABLY DON'T HAVE A FLAG. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAGE D STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. NEXT SUP PUBLIC COMMENT.

WE HAVE MISTAMMY IN THE ROOM WITH US.

I'LL CHECK WITH HER TO SEE IF WE HAVE ANYBODY FOR PUBLIC

INCIDENT. >> NO.

>> WE HAVE NO PUBLIC COMMENTS? AS I MENINGED TO THE GROUP WHEN I SENT OUT THE AGENDA, I MADE IT SHORT BECAUSE THIS IS UNUSUAL FOR US. THERE ARE NO OLD BUSINESS ITEMS I PLACED ON THE AGENDA. I PUT TWO NEW ITEMS.

[Item 6.1]

AS THE GROUP KNOWS WE HAVE A DESIGN BRANCH OF THE FAA AND I'VE BEEN WORKING NUMEROUS MONTHS ON DESIGNING THE REHABILITATION PROJECT TO RENAILED RUNWAY.

AS PART OF THAT PROJECT, THAT PROJECT WILL REBUILD OR RECONSTRUCT THE RUNWAY IN IT'S CURRENT STATE.

EWER NOT LENGTHENING IT. I HAVE OUR ENGINEER ON THE LINE WHO HELPED WITH THE DESIGN PROCESS.

I'M GOING TO HAND IT OVER THE HIM AND HE'S GOING TO GIVE YOU BANG GROUND ON THE SCOPE OF THE PROJECT.

WE OPENED BIDS ON THE PROJECT LAST WEEK AND ALL BIDS CAME IN BELOW THE ESTIMATE. THIS PROJECT IS SLATED TO BE 100% FUNDED BY THE FAA AS PART OF THE CARES ACT.

THE FAA APPROPRIATED $2.6 MILLION APPROVED TO COVER 100% OF THE COST. YOU ARE GOING HAVE TO UNMUTE.

>> DO YOU HAVE AUDIO CONNECTED BY CHANCE, YOUR MICROPHONE?

[00:05:47]

>> I DON'T THINK WE CAN HEAR BRAD.

WE MIGHT GO WITH A PLAN B. I'LL PRESENT SOME INFORMATION FOR YOU. DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION?

>> I'M JUST GOING TO BRING UP A POINT ABOUT 1331.

I THOUGHT THERE WAS SOME KIND OF PLAN.

USE PART OF THIS FUNDING FOR 1331?

>> GOOD QUESTION. SO THE IT'S FOR 927.

SO THE FAA WE PUT IN A PROJECT ESTIMATE AND THE FAA WOULD COVER 90%. WE HAD PROGRAMMED FOR THE AIRPORT TO COVER 5%. F DOT PROGRAM AID MATCHING COMPONENT FOR TO US PARTICIPATE AT $100,000.

WHAT WILL HAPPEN SINCE THE FAA WILL BE FUNDING THIS PROJECT AT 100%, THAT $100,000 WE'VE BEEN ALLOWED TO REPROGRAM THAT FOR ANOTHER PURPOSE. WE CURRENTLY WE'RE MOST LIKELY GOING TO REPURPOSE THAT AND RESTRIPE 927 IN THE UP COMING SEASON. WE GET THROUGH 422 REHABILITATION MOST LIKELY IN THE SPRING AFTER CONCORD GETS THROUGH THE W WORK AND WE'LL VAGRANT TO RESTRIPE 927.

AND THEN THERE IS A SEPARATE EMAIL WHICH WE'LL TALK ABOUT AT THE END WHICH WILL TALK ABOUT 1331 AND I CAN WALK EVERYBODY THROUGH CONVERSATION ON THAT. I KNOW IT'S BEEN CONFUSING.

I'VE BEEN SENDING OUT EMAILS ON MULTIPLE RUNWAYS.

SINCE WE'RE HAVING ISSUES WITH BRAD.

I'M GOING TO WALK YOU THROUGH AT 422.

I EMAILED OUT TODAY, ESSENTIALLY A MEMORANDUM THAT GAVE BASIC INFORMATION ABOUT TIME LINES FOR THE PROJECT.

TIME LINE FOR THIS PROJECT IS REALLY CONTINGENT UPON THE POINT YOU RECEIVED YOUR FAA GRANT AS MOST PROJECTS ARE.

SOMETIMES GRANT FALL EARLY IN THE YEAR.

SOMETIMES YOU DON'T SEE A GRANT UNTIL AUGUST OR TOWARD TEND OF THE SEASON. BASED ON THEIR INTENT TO STIMULATE THE ECONOMY WITH CARES ACT TO DROP THE MONEY.

WE'VE SEEN THE APPROPRIATIONS PUBLISHED ON THE WEBSITE AND IT'S BEEN APPROVED. I BELIEVE WE'RE GOING TO SEE A GRANT OFFER QUICKLY. WE'LL BE SUBMITTING A GRANT APPLICATION TOMORROW AFTERNOON OR EARLY MONDAY.

SO THE GRANT APPLICATION IS GOING IN.

I DON'T THINK IT WILL BE LONG BEFORE WE SEE THAT GRANT OFFER COME BACK TO THE FAA. ON THE DOCUMENT I SENT OUT, THERE ARE SOME SCENARIOS. IF YOU LOOK AT OPTION 1A WHICH SHOWS US BY THE TIME WE GET A GRANT OFFER WHICH WE THINK WE WILL GET BEFORE JUNE 26, WE START CONSTRUCTION IN AUGUST AND BE DONE ON JANUARY 4. IT'S A 140 DAY PROJECT.

THERE ARE THREE PHASES TO THE FRONT.

AND SO THERE IS WORK ON 422, WE OBVIOUSLY HAVE TO CROSS THE INTERSECTION OF 1331 AND THEN THE NORTH SIDE OF 422 WAS PREVIOUSLY REHABILITATED. WE DON'T HAVE TO DO ANY PAVEMENT CROSSING 927 BUT WE ARE PUTTING IN NEW L.E.D. LIGHTING ON THE RUNWAY. WE WILL HAVE TO CLOSE 927 AT SOME POINT. THREE PHASES ARE KEEPING 1331 AND 927 OPEN THERE. IS A CLOSURE TO 1331 FOR 20 DAYS AND CLOSURE TO 927 WHEN 1331 OPENS BACK UP.

WE HAVE IMPACTS GOING ACROSS THE TIME LINE THERE.

WHY THIS IS IMPORTANT IS PRIMARILY I WANTED TO KNOW THE SCENARIOS THAT WE THINK WE'D BE FACED WITH WITH MARCH SO WE MAKE A GOOD DECISION. I THINK OPTION 1A IS WHAT WE

[00:10:03]

WILL SEE. THAT GET THE PROJECT DONE IN JANUARY WITHOUT IMPACT TO CONCORD.

I SHOWED AN OPTION 1B WHICH IS SLIDING FURTHER.

YOU DON'T SEE THE GRANT OFFER COME BACK FROM THE FAA AS QUICKLY AS WE BELIEVE IT WILL. WE PUT AN ASTERISK WE NEED TO START CONSTRUCTION BY OCTOBER TO MAKE SURE WE'RE DONE FOR CONCORD. IF WE DON'T GET AN OFFER BACK IN TIME WE STARTED A BID ALTERNATE. THE LOW BID CAME BACK AT 1.9 MILLION AND CHANGE. WE DO PLAN ON WORKING WITH THE FAA TO SEE IF WE CAN ADD ADDITIONAL STORMWATER WORK.

THE ALTERNATE TO WAIT UNTIL AFTER CONCORD IS ABOUT $50,000.

THAT WOULDN'T BE FUNDED BY THE FAA.

SO THE $50,000 IS NOT ELIGIBLE FUNDING UNDER THE PROJECT F. WE HAVE TO MAKE THAT DECISION, HAVE TO FUND HA ON OUR OWN.

IF WE GET THE GRANT OFFER UNDER 1A AS WE BELIEVE WE WILL, WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO EASILY GET THIS PROJECT DONE.

BRAD IS BACK WITH US. >> CAN YOU HEAR ME?

>> YOU ARE JUST IN TIME. >> SORRY ABOUT THAT GUYS.

WHERE WERE WE? WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE RUNWAY?

>> I'VE WALKED THEM THROUGH SCOPE OF THE PROJECT , THE THREE PHASES , THE TIME LINES ON THE MEMO , THE LOW BID NUMBERS AND KIND OF WHERE WE ARE AT ON THE PROJECT.

I MAY HAVE COVERED THE GROUND FOR YOU.

WE'RE READY TO OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS ABOUT IT.

>> OK GREAT. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE GROUP ON THE PROJECT , THE TIME LINE, WHERE WE'RE AT AND WHERE

WE'RE GOING? >> IF WE GET THE GRANT MONEY BACK WITHIN A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME, WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE THE DECISION OF GOING FORWARD BEFORE THE END OF SUMMER

RIGHT? >> YEAH, SO OUR TRIGGER IS BASED ON THE GRANT OFFER. WHEN WE GET THE GRANT OFFER BACK, WE'LL BE ABLE TO MAKE A DECISION AND ENTER A CONTRACT.

WE HAVE POSITIVE CONTROL OF THAT PROCESS.

IT'S WHEN YOU GET THE GRANT OFFER THAT'S GOING TO DRAW THE

TIME LINE. >> OK.

>> AND I THINK WE'RE IN GOOD SHAPE.

FROM THE FAA WILL BE 100%. IT'S CLEARED THE OFFICE OF SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION. AND THE GRANT APPLICATION IS PRETTY MUCH PUT TOGETHER. I THINK WE'RE LOOKING FOR ONE MORE PIECE AND THAT WILL BE ABLE TO BE ADVANCED TO THE FAA.

AND THEN I WOULD EXPECT THAT WE RECEIVE A GRANT OFFER MID TO LATE JUNE. I JUST THINK IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN EARLIER THIS YEAR THAN IT HAS IN YEARS PAST.

THEY WANT TO GET THE MONEY OUT. THE BIG HURDLE FOR US WAS IT'S ALREADY BEEN ACKNOWLEDGED. IF YOU GO TO THE FAA WEBSITE

YOU'LL SEE A GRANT. >> COULD YOU GO OVER THERE WAS A $50,000 FEE, WOULD YOU GO THROUGH AONE MORE TIME.

THERE WAS A FEW UNKNOWNS WHEN WE WERE PUTTING THE BID PACKET TOGETHER. ONE WITH COVID 19 TAKING PLACE, WE DIDN'T KNOW THE EFFECT ON THE GRANT FUNDING FROM THE FAA IN THAT TIME LINE. WE KNOW WE HAVE CON CORE IN MARCH. WE DON'T WANT 422 CLOSED BECAUSE WE HAVE 927 CLOSED. THE ALTERNATE IS START THE PROJECT IN MARCH. WAIT AND NOT START UNTIL MARCH.

LOW BID FOR THE PROJECT WAS 1.9. IF WE GET THE GRANT OFF THE GROUND, WE'D MAKE A DECISION AND START IN MARCH $50,000.

>> THAT'S OPTION TWO. >>

. >> YES, SIR IT WOULD COST

[00:15:01]

$50,000 TO MAKE THAT DECISION. >>

>> ANY QUESTIONS? NIGHEST.

WHAT I'M SAYING IS I THINK. >> WOULD THE EDGE LIGHTS BE

IDENTICAL? >>

>>. IT WILL BE A NEWER LESS BETTER

ENERGY CONSUMPTION SYSTEM. >> AT LEAST FROM THE STANDPOINT WHATEVER PROVISIONS FOR RUNNING THE POWER.

WOULD THAT BE CONSISTENT WITH FUTURE NEEDS.

>> ANY ELECTRICAL MODIFICATIONS. IF IT OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF, THEY FORCE YOU INTO AND IN THIS PROJECT.

>> DAVEY, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?

>> NO, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY I REALLY LIKE THE THREE OPTIONS, I THINK IT WELL PLANNED AND IT'S HARD TO FIND FAULT WITH THE KIND OF FUNDING THAT YOU GOT. NICE JOB.

>> YOU BET THANK YOU SIR. >> ANY QUESTIONS?

>> NO, I'D LIKE TO ECHO WHAT DAVE SAID.

GOOD FUNDING AND HARD WORK YOU PUT THIS TO GET ALL OF THAT PUT TOGETHER. KUDOS.

>> YOU BET, THANKS SIR. >> CHUCK, ANY QUESTIONS?

>> NO, NOTHING FROM ME. >> DON, HOW ABOUT YOU?

>> NO, I'M FINE. GOOD JOB.

>> BRAD, ANYTHING FINAL TO ADD? >> NO.

THAT'S A GREAT PROJECT. WE'RE HAPPY TO BE PART OF IT.

IT'S GOING TO BE A GREAT CONSTRUCTION PROJECT.

>> I HAVE A COMMENT. >> WE HAVE A PUBLIC COMMENT.

>>

>> WE HAVE AN INDIVIDUAL ON THE LINE WHO IS GOING TO PROVIDE US

[00:20:01]

A PUBLIC COMMENT. CAN YOU HEAR MY VOICE?

>> THEY ARE NOT CONNECTED YET. >> THEY ARE STILL TRYING TO CONNECT. IT IS MR. WICKER.

HE PUT HIS VIDEO ON. WE'RE A GUINEA PIG IN THIS PROCESS. OUR I.T. DIRECTOR WAS TESTING THE PROCESS. HE DIALED IN.

HE'S NOT GOING TO GIVE A PUBLIC COMMENT.

WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO THE NEXT DISCUSSION ITEM WHICH IS ON

[Item 6.2]

THE ARCHITECTURE STANDARDS FOR THE AIRPORT.

SOMETIME AGO YOU'LL REMEMBER WE COMPLETELY REWROTE THE ARCHITECTURE STANDARDS FOR THE AIRPORT.

HANSON PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CAME IN AND HELPED US WITH THAT.

WE'VE HAD A CHANCE SINCE WE PUT THE STANDARDS IN PLACE TO RUN SOME PROPOSALS THROUGH STANDARDS.

I WOULD SAY 90% OF THEM WORKED AS WE THOUGHT THEY WOULD.

THERE ARE A FEW MINOR NOTES WE OBSERVED WHERE I THINK WE COULD USE REFINEMENT YET TO PERFECT THE STANDARDS.

SO I PUT THAT BACK IN FRONT OF US FOR DISCUSSION.

THE OTHER ITEM WE TALKED ABOUT IT WAS T HANGER DISCUSSION.

I MADE A CHANGE TO LANGUAGE I SENT OUT.

THERE ARE ONLY FOUR OR FIVE ITEMS HERE FOR CONVERSATION.

I'M GOING TO EXPLAIN THESE AND THEN WE'LL HAVE CONVERSATION

WITH THE GROUP. >> IF YOU HAVE A CHANCE TO LOOK AT YOUR PACKET, IT STARTS ON THE FIRST PAGE OF THE STANDARDS.

I DID THIS BY TRACK CHANGES. THE FIRST CHANGE IS SIMPLY IDENTIFYING THAT OUR MASTER PLAN IN THE SECOND PARAGRAPH MAY CHANGE OVER TIME. WE IDENTIFIED A SPECIFIC DATE OF A MASTER PLAN. WE CAUGHT THIS AFTER IT WENT THROUGH AND SAY MOST CURRENT AND APPROVED.

THAT'S MORE OF A CHANGE TO MAKE A CORRECTION.

THAT DOESN'T HAVE NUISANCE FOR US IN CONVERSATION.

IF YOU FLIP TO THE NEXT PAGE, I PUT A COMMENT UNDER SETBACKS IN PARAGRAPH FIVE WHERE I WAS PROPOSING REMOVAL OF THIS ONE SENTENCE WHERE IT SAYS SUCH HANGERS WOULD HAVE A MINIMUM 25-FOOT SETBACK ON ALL ATTACHED SIDES FROM THE BOUNDARY LINE.

SO THE 25-FOOT SETBACK IS ACTUALLY MENTIONED A FEW PARAGRAPHS PRIOR AS FAR AS BEING FROM AN ADJACENT BOUNDARY.

THAT'S DRIVEN BY FIRE CODE GUIDANCE BECAUSE YOU HAVE A CLEAR SET BETWEEN BUILDINGS. THE UNATTACHED SIDES, THERE ARE GOING TO BE SCENARIOS LIKE WE SAW AT THE RECENT PROPOSE BILLION A STORMWATER POND OR SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE.

I THINK WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO BE MORE FLEXIBLE ON THAT.

WE WANT TO BE EFFICIENT WITH SPACE.

I IDENTIFIED THAT GOING THROUGH. AS LONG AS WE'RE MEETING THE FIRE CODE AND PROBABLY NOT HAVE THAT SENTENCE IN THERE.

SO THAT WAS THE INTENT OF THAT. ON THE NEXT PAGE UNDER THE -- WITH RESPECT TO WHAT YOU WERE SPEAKING ABOUT, WITH THE NEW T HANGER PROPOSAL WHERE THE HANGERS ARE GOING TO GO NEXT TO THE HANGER I'M IN AND THE CAP HANGER OVER TOWARD THE PARKING LOT, HOW IS THAT GOING TO AFFECT THAT SPACE YOU WANT TO PUT IN BETWEEN THE HANGER I'M IN WITH THE ELECTRICITY ON THE OUTSIDE

AND THE NEXT HANGER OVER. >> IT WILL WITHB THE SAME STRUCTURE. WE'RE NOT DEVELOPING A NEW STRUCTURE TO REQUIRE THAT STEPBACK.

WHAT MOST LIKELY WILL HAPPEN, IT A BREEZEWAY -- YOUR QUESTION

[00:25:08]

ABOUT THE SETBACKS. IT'S GOING TO BE AN EXTENSION OF THE EXISTING BUILDING SO YOU ARE GOING TO CONSIDER IT THE SAME

HANGER BUILDING. >> THANK YOU.

>> THAT'S A GOOD SOLUTION. >> SAVES US SPACE.

OUR KEY THERE IS WE WANT TO STAY UNDER 12,000 SQUARE FEET AND SPRINKLING IS A COST DRIVER. UNDER THE NEXT SECTION WHICH IS HANGER BUILDINGS, HANGERS AND BUILDINGS, WE TALKED LAST TIME ABOUT THE T HANGER COMPONENT. I DRAFTED AN RFP FOR THIS AND WE TALKED ABOUT TRYING TO FIND A WAY WHICH YOU COULD POSSIBLY OPEN THIS UP AND STILL HAVE SOME CONTROL.

I PROPOSED A LITTLE BIT OF LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT MEETS WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT AND CHATTED WITH THE FAA ABOUT AWARDING T HANGERS UNDER A SELECTION PROCESS AND IDENTIFYING THAT ON THE AIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN. THAT'S WHERE I CAME ONE THAT LANGUAGE. FIND A WAY TO OPEN IT UP IN SOME FASHION AND STILL CONTROL THE MARKET AND I THINK THAT ALLOWS TO US DO THAT. THE CHALLENGE IS GOING TO BE WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT FINDING A SITE THAT IS REASONABLE FOR A DEVELOP TORE COME IN AND BEING PREPARED FOR ANY ISSUES THAT COME WITH THAT SUCH AS IS IT REASONABLE FOR UTILITY ACCESS AND DO THEY HAVE TO REMOVE A LOT OF TREES WHICH WOULD APPROXIMATE A DISCUSSION WE NEED TO TALK THROUGH SOME OF THOSE ISSUES.

WE NEED TO FIND A SITE. >> I'VE GOT A QUESTION ABOUT ARE

YOU ON NUMBER FIVE RIGHT NOW? >> YES, SIR.

I'M UNDER THE HANGERS AND BUILDING SECTION PARAGRAPH FIVE

TALKING ABOUT THE T HANGER. >> ARE WE GOING TO DEFINE THAT

PROCESS IN THIS REVISION? >> WE COULD PROVIDE MORE DETAIL.

WE ABSOLUTELY COULD. I ONLY CAME UP WITH JUST A BASIC SENTENCE SAYING THAT WE WOULD ONLY BE AUTHORIZED BY COMPETITIVE SELECTION PROCESS. WE COULD FRAME OUT A PROCESS IN

HERE. >> I'M JUST CURIOUS ABOUT IT.

BECAUSE WE'RE POINTING AT IT. >> WHAT I ENVISION THAT TO BE , THE DISCUSSION I HAD WITH THE FAA IS IF YOU DRAW OUT A SECTION WHERE YOU HAVE UNDER YOUR ALP SAY THIS IS GOING TO BE THE PUBLIC T HANGER AREA AND YOU DO A SELECTION AND GET SOMEBODY TO GET A GROUND LEASE IN THAT AREA. THAT IS WHAT MET THEIR REQUIREMENT FOR NOT BEING -- NOT GIVING AN EXCLUSIVE RIGHT BECAUSE YOU COORDINATED ON THE ALP.

THAT WAS THE THOUGHT PROCESS BEHIND IT IF YOU WANTED TO CONTROL IT. YOUR THREE OPTIONS ARE IT'S BEEN IN THERE A LONG TIME, WE'RE EXCLUSIVE TO THE CITY.

YOU COULD OPEN IT WIDE OPEN AND BE SILENT OR PUT SOMETHING LIKE THIS AND IF YOU WANTED TO PUT OUT A RFP.

WE JUST NEED TO BE READY IF YOU HAVE THE SPACE AND THEY WANT TO DO IT, AND IT MEETS THE STANDARDS, YOU NEED TO BE ABLE

TO PROCESS IT. >> OK, UNDERSTOOD THANKS.

>> IFTH NEXT COMMENT IF YOU FLIP TO THE NEXT PAGE WHICH IS PAGE FOUR. I HAVE A TYPO THIS HERE AND I'LL EXPLAIN THIS. WHAT I MEANT IT TO SAY IS DUE TO FOREIGN DEBRIS, THIS CAME UP ACTUALLY IN A RECENT DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL. WE HAVE PARKING REQUIREMENTS THAT COME ALONG FOR VEHICLES WITH OUR HANGERS.

AND THE CITY HAS SEPARATE REQUIREMENTS FOR USE OF PERSONALLABLE PAVEMENT FOR SO MUCH OF YOUR PAVED SURFACE THAT YOU PUT IN. ON THE AIRPORT SIDE ONE THING WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL OF IS RATTLING OF ASPHALT.

THERE IS A LOT OF GUIDANCE ABOUT PERSONALLABLE PAVEMENTS ON AIRPORTS. IT CAN BE DONE.

IT HAS TO BE DONE TO A CERTAIN SPECIFICATION TO MAKE SURE IT'S DONE WITHOUT CREATING A RATTLING ISSUE.

[00:30:03]

PERSONALLABLE PAVEMENT IF YOU GO IN THE TERMINAL BUILDING PARKING LOT YOU'LL SEE THE PERSONALLABLE.

THEY REQUIRE SO MUCH BE PERMEABLE.

WHAT I DIDN'T WANT TO HAVE THAT REQUIREMENT AND SOMEBODY PUTS IN A PARKING SPACE AND FOR THE LIFE OF THE FAST SI TY WE'RE STRUGGLING BECAUSE IT'S NOT MAINTAINED AS WELL OR SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE. THAT'S WHERE THAT SENTENCE CAME FROM. MORE OF A CONCERN ABOUT IF YOU DON'T DO IT TO A CERTAIN SPECIFICATION AND MAINTAIN IT WELSHING I WOULDN'T WANT TO SEE US BREEDING A HAZARD.

>> IS THERE A GREATER LIFE TO THE ASPHALT THAT IS IMPERMEABLE.

I KNOW THAT YOUR PERMEABLE ASPHALT IS A GREATER EXPENSE.

IT DOES MAKE IT CHEAPER. THE AIRPORT ACCOMMODATES STORMWATER RUNOFF WHERE HE FELT A DESIGN FOR THE AIRPORT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE. WE ACCOMMODATE OUR OWN STORMWATER. BRAD MIGHT BE ABLE TO SPEAK TO

THE LIFE OF IT. >> THE PERVIOUS PAVEMENT IS MORE EXPENSIVE AND NEEDS TO BE MAINTAINED.

YOU ARE RIGHT REGARDING THE RAVELING.

YOU NEVER WANT TO PUT A PERVIOUS PAVEMENT ON A RUNWAY OR TAKESWAY FOR FEAR OF FOD. IT'S AN ASPHALT MIXTURE WITHOUT FINES. IT ALLOWS WATER, IT'S POUROUS.

IT'S HELD TOGETHER ONLY WITH THE ASPHALT CEMENT AND IT WOULD BE V A PROCLIVE TOY GRAVEL WHICH MEANS THE SMALL AGGREGATE PARTICLES COME LOOSE FROM THE MIX AND IT'S JUST RESTING THERE.

WE WOULD NEVER WANT TO PUT IT ON AN ACTIVE AIRFIELD PAVEMENT.

BUT AN AUTOMOBILE PARKING LOT IT'S COMPLETELY FINE.

>> HOW ARE YOU GOING TO REWORD THIS?

>> SOMETHING CLOSE TO I HAD ONE TYPO, I MEANT PERMEABLE.

SOMETHING CLOSE IN THE DOCK. WHEN YOU GO TO THE LANDSIDE SIDE OUTSIDE THE FENCE WITH PARKING LOTS IT'S FINE.

IF IT'S ON VEHICLE PARKING ON THE AIR SIDE ADJACENT TO AN ACTIVE TAKESWAY YOU ARE GOING TO SEE POTENTIAL FOD.

>> UNDERSTAND. THANK YOU.

>> MOVING ON TO HANGER DOORS, I HIGHLIGHTED A SECTION OF THE DOCUMENT THAT TALKS ABOUT THE HEIGHT AND WIDTH.

TO HELP WAS THIS PROCESS, WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO DO IS DRIVE A WAY IN WHICH WE COULD MAKE OUR OUR HANGERS AND SOMEBODY'S BUILDING WOULD SUPPORT ALL AIRPLANES.

THIS SOUNDED WONDERFUL ON PAPER AND IN THE EXECUTION PROCESS WE FIGURED OUT THIS IS REALLY CHALLENGING.

BUILDINGS BEING BUILT FOR DIFFERENT PURPOSES AND THE EXECUTION DIDN'T WORK AS WELL AS WE THOUGHT.

I THINK RETHINKING THIS SECTION MAKES SENSE.

I THINK AT A MINIMUM PERHAPS WHAT WE CAN DO IS JUST SAY WE SHOULD HAVE A MINIMUM HEIGHT WHICH IS 1 FEET FOR A DOOR.

AS WE GET A PROPOSAL LOOK AT HAVE THAT CONVERSATION WITH SOMEBODY WHO IS PROPOSING IT. THESE PARAMETERS ENDED UP BEING COMBERSOME AND CHALLENGING AS WE SAW PROPOSALS COME THROUGH THE DOOR. IT DIDN'T WORK AS WELL AWE THOUGHT. I THINK WHAT WE'LL DO THERE IS STRIKE THAT HAVE A DOOR HEIGHT OF 12 FEET AND THEN HAVE A DISCUSSION WITH EVER LESSEE COMING THROUGH DOOR.

>> WHY DIDN'T YOU TAKE TWO FEET OFF OF THAT MINIMUM.

IT WAS 14 FEET. WHY 12?

>> 14 WAS GOOD. >> WE CAN WHETHER I SHALL.

14 AT THAT SIZE DOOR, IF YOU GO TO THERE IS A CHART OF ALL AIRCRAFT WINGSPAN AND TAIL HEIGHT.

14 FEET WAS ESSENTIALLY A MINIMUM THAT AT THAT DOOR WIDTH

[00:35:05]

EVERY AIRPLANE ON THE CHART SO YOU ARE COVERED.

YOU COULD FIT EVERY AIRPLANE IN THERE.

IT'S REALLY A QUESTION OF DO WE WANT TO MANDATE THAT WE FIT EVERY AIRPLANE IN THERE AT 15 FEET OR LOOK AT THE DOOR.

AS YOU GO FROM 40 FEET 45 THINGS CHANGE DRASTICALLY.

IF YOU ARE AT 39 FEET OR SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE, YOUR T HANGER MOST OF THOSE ARE 12 OAR 13 FEET.

ON THE LOWER END IT MAKES SENSE TO BE 12.

AS YOU GO 40 AND ABOVE GETTING UP TO 50, THAT'S WHERE YOU KIND OF SEE IT THE CAP POTENTIAL ON HAVING A 1 FOOT DOOR.

THAT'S ONE OF THE ISSUES I WAS TRYING TO EXPLAIN.

ON THE LOW END OF THE SPECTRUM IT MA MAKES SENSE TO HAVE A LOWR

HEIGHT DOOR. >> I UNDERSTAND.

>> I CAN EXPLAIN A LITTLE MORE. I HELPED HIM COME ONE THIS FORMULA. THERE IS A CHART THAT LISTS ALL THE PLANES. AND THERE IS A CERTAIN THING THAT HAS TO DO MORE ABOUT THE DEPTH OF YOUR T HANGER AND DEPOSITION OF YOUR BOX HANGER AND YOUR WIDTH.

WHAT HAPPENS IT LIMITS THE PLANES THAT YOU CAN PUT IN THERE. WE TRY TO HAVE AT LEAST FIVE FEET ALL AROUND YOUR PLANE IN STORAGE.

WHAT WE FOUND IS THERE IS HUNDREDS OF PLANES THAT FIT WITHIN THAT FEET THAT YOU CAN ALLOW FOR A T HANG THEY'RE WORKS GREAT AT 12 FEET AND UNDER. THAT STILL ALLOWS TWO FEET FOR THE TAIL. WITH THAT RULE OF THUMB WHAT WE DID IS WE TALKED ABOUT IT AND REALLY GET PEOPLE TO COME AND WANT TO SPEND MONEY AND BUILD HANGERS, WE GOT TO MAKE IT LESS RESTRICTIVE AND MAKE A LOT OF SENSE.

DEVELOPERS COME IN AND THEY ARE MONEY PEOPLE AND THEY ARE GOING TO LOOK AT THESE THINGS. IF WE SHOW THEM WE CAN FIT X AMOUNT OF PLANES AND THIS IS HOW IT WORKS, IT'S LOGICAL TO SAY THIS DOOR HEIGHT IS WHAT IS REQUIRED.

WE'RE NOT MAKING PEOPLE THROW MANY TWO FEET MORE AND WASTING MONEY ON HEIGHT BECAUSE WE WANT TO ENCOURAGE THEM TO DEVELOP IN

THIS AREA. >> THAT'S A GOOD POINT.

THANK YOU. >> SO THE LAST SECTION IS WHAT I DID THERE IS I REDUCED THE PARKING QUANTITY SLIGHTLY FURTHER THAN WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT LAST TIME.

THE REASON I DID THAT WAS WE HAD A PROPOSAL FOR TWO BOX HANGERS ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE AIRPORT.

FOR SMALLER HANGERS WITHOUT OFFICE SPACE , THE NUMBERS WERE WORKING WELL. AS A REMINDER WHEN WE PUT THIS STANDARDS WE GOT OUT OF ARP DOCUMENT INDUSTRY STANDARDS.

WE DIDN'T PULL OUT NUMBERS. IT STILL TURNED OUT TO BE A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF PARKING MORE THAN WHAT I THINK WE NEEDED. SO I'VE READJUSTED SOME OF THOSE PARKING NUMBERS AND MADE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS.

I GAVE YOU IN THE COMMENTS WHAT YOUR PARKING WOULD BE FOR DIFFERENT SIZE OF HANGERS. I THINK IT'S A SLIGHT ADJUSTMENT BUT GETS YOU MORE TOWARD WHAT WOULD BE REASONABLE FOR SOME OF THE HANGERS. ONE OF THE THINGS I OFTEN SEE IN A LOT OF OLD HANGERS DEPENDING ON THE USE.

IF YOU HAVE SOMEONE THAT COMES IN AND THEY HAVE OFFICE SPACE, THEY MAY HAVE --

>> DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS SIR?

>> I HAVE NO QUESTIONS. >> TOM, HOW ABOUT YOU?

>> NO, I'M GOOD. THANK YOU.

>> DON? >> I'M FINE.

I THINK IT LOOKS GOOD. >> NONE FOR ME.

LOOKS GOOD. >> I'M FINE.

>> NO, IT LOOKS GOOD. GOOD WORK.

>> WHAT I CAN DO IS CLEAN THE LANGUAGE UP AND GIVE IT BACK AND

[00:40:01]

ASK FOR A RECOMMENDATION AND WE'LL MOVE IT FORWARD IN PLANNING. I'LL GET THE LANGUAGE CHANGES

AND GET THIS MOVED FORWARD. >> I'M GOOD WITH IT.

>> I'M SORRY DAVE. YOUR VIDEO DISAPPEARED.

I THOUGHT MAYBE YOU STEPPED OUT OF THE ROOM.

>> I'M HERE. THE INDIVIDUAL JOE DOING

VIDEO IS DOING SOMETHINGFUNNY. >> OK.

[Item 7.1]

>> I JUST HAVE MY REPORT AND THEN I'LL HAND IT OVER TO YOU.

I GAVE YOU MY MONTHLY REPORT WITH THE PACKET.

I MENTIONED IN THE REPORT THAT APARTMENT INSTALLED SOLAR PANELS. THEY MADE THE CONNECTION TO THE BUILDING AND WE'RE OPERATING OFF OF SOLAR.

THE PANELS ARE PRODUCING MORE POWER WHEN WE HAVE A GOOD WEATHER DAY. WE COULD SEE $500 A YEAR COMING BACK. I'LL JUST REPORT TO THE GROUP AND YOU CAN MEASURE THE OFFSET OF THE POWER.

WE ESTIMATE 30% CONATIVELY. SUBMIT ARE ALSO MOVING FORWARD.

TALK ABOUT 422. THE CITY COMMISSION APPROVED THE DESIGN SERVICES T HAPPENING ESCROCS ON MAY 5 MEETING.

I'LL BE WORKING ON DESIGN OF THE HANGERS THROUGH COURSE OF THE SUMMER. I'M WORKING ON A BIT PROSAYS MOVING IN THE FALL. I PUT A PROFIT BUDGET TOGETHER.

THIS NEXT YEAR WE'LL APPROXIMATE HEAVY ON CONSTRUCTION WITH THE AIRPORT. WE HAVE THE 422 REHABILITATION.

NEW UNITS WE'LL BE INSTALLING EARLY IN THE PHYSICAL YEAR.

WE'LL TAKE THAT MATCH AND TURN IT INTO STRIPING OF 927 DURING THE YEAR. WE'RE GOING TO PURCHASE ANOTHER AT THE AIRPORT. NEXT YEAR WE'RE GOING TO START ONE OF YOUR NEXT PROJECTS. THAT WILL BE YOUR NEXT FAA UNDERRED PROJECT. WHAT I'M PLANNING ON DOING IS GETTING A DRAFT BUDGET. HOPEFULLY NEXT MONTH WE'LL BE ABLE TO COME IN AND TALK ABOUT THE BUDGET A LITTLE BIT.

I MET WITH THE ARMY NATIONAL GUARD.

I THINK THEY ARE GOING TO JOIN US AT OUR NEXT MEETING.

THEY PLANNED TO COME IN IN MARCH.

I THINK THEY ARE GOING TO COME IN AND SEE US IN THE JUNE MEETING. I DIDN'T THINK IT WAS GREAT TO HAVE THEM COME JOIN US. WE WILL HAVE AN EVENT AT THE AIRPORT ON MAY 17. I'VE WORKED WITH THE CITY ON SOCIAL DISTANCING PRACTICES AND THEY WILL PUT IN PLACE.

OFTEN THEY ALLOW GENERAL PUBLIC TO COME UTFA.

THAT WON'T BE THE CASE. IT WILL ONLY BE OPEN TO MEMBERS OF THE EVENT. WE HAVE INTERNAL PRACTICES THEY WILL PUT INTO PLACE. I KNOW WE'RE SORRY TO SEE KENT GO. I SENT AN EMAIL TO THE GROUP ABOUT. CONTINGENCY THAT COMES ALONG WITH THAT IS TO PROVIDE 1431 THEY WILL NOT PROVIDE FUNDING FOR 927. WE SHOULD TALK ABOUT AS AGENDA ITEM AND I'LL TAKE A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE GROUP.

THAT'S AN EXPENSIVE DECISION TO MAKE.

THEY'LL WANT A RECOMMENDATION FROM THIS GROUP.

>> HOW ABOUT COMMENTS FROM ANYBODY ON THE AC?

>> >> UPDATE ON THE FIRE HOUSE?

>> IS THERE A DESIGN WORK ORDER ON THE PUBLIC FIRE STATION THAT

[00:45:02]

IS GOING TO CITY COMMISSION ON MAY 1.

THAT DESIGN WORK ORDER WILL COMPLETE THE DESIGN PROCESS FOR THE FIRE HOUSE. AND THEN F DOT I'VE HAD SOME DISCUSSION WITH F DOT ABOUT FUNDING OF THAT PROJECT.

AND TENTATIVELY IN STATE FISCAL YEAR 22 AND STATE FISCAL YEAR 23 THEY HAVE THEY ARE SHOWING $575,000 IN FUNDING SUPPORT.

AIRPORT FIRE FIGHTING COMPONENT. THAT WILL OFFSET THE TOTAL COST BY $575,000. FOLLOWING THAT PROJECT WE ALSO HAVE OUR VEHICLE ACQUISITION PROJECT.

THAT DESIGN WORKER SENT OUT EMAIL WITH A POWER POINT PRESENTATION. ANY COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, PLEASE SEND THEM TO ME. I'LL MAKE SURE HE GET THEM AND PASSES THEM ALONG TO THE CITY COMMISSION.

>> ANYBODY ELSE? >> I HAVE A QUESTION.

>> GO AHEAD. >> YOU HAVE HEARD ANYTHING FROM THE PROPOSAL PEOPLE FLIGHT SCHOOL.

HAVE THEY FOUND SOMEWHERES? >> WE SPOKE ABOUT A WEEK AGO.

THEY ARE MEETING WITH THE AIRPORT IN FLORIDA.

THEY HAVE A TOWER. AND THEY HEARD A LOT OF FEEDBACK IN THE COMMUNITY HERE. PRIMARILY IT SOUNDED LIKE IT WAS THE TOWER COMPONENT DOWN THERE THEY FELT WAS VERY IMPORTANT.

>> OK. >> THIS IS DON.

DID I UNDERSTAND THE FIRE STATION PRESENTATION PROPERLY THAT WHEN YOU SAID THE FUNDING WAS THIS AND I SAID IT'S GOING TO BE THIS MUCH, I DID PRESENTER THAT CORRECTLY?

>> DON, I DIDN'T LOOK AT YOUR -- I SAW YOUR COMMENT.

I DIDN'T SEE THE PRESENTATION. I TALKED TO A COUPLE OF FOLKS IN THE OFFICE. WE AGREED WITH WHAT YOU COMMENTED ON. I THOUGHT YOUR COMMENTS WERE -- I TALKED TO ANDREW. ANDREW SAID I AGREE WITH WHAT DON SAID. THAT'S THE CHANGE WE GOT TO

MAKE. >> WE DON'T NEED ANOTHER CITY COUNCIL MEETING WHERE EVERYBODY JUST SITS AROUND AND GETS BEAT

UP. >> I AGREE.

I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS. >> THANK YOU.

>> FOR THE GROUP WHAT DON ASKED ABOUT IS THERE WAS AN INITIAL PROGRAMMING COST OF THE FIRE STATION.

I BELIEVE THERE IS ADDITIONAL AS PART OF THAT AND THE PROGRAMMING ESTIMATE IS 3 MILLION AND ADDITIONAL COMPONENTS NOT SHOWN IN THE ESTIMATE FOR THE PROJECT THAT WOULD INFLATE THAT PRICE.

THAT SHOULD BE A PART OF THE PRICE AND BE A SURPRISE TO

ANYBODY. >> IF I'M MISSING THE MARK ON THAT. ANYBODY ELSE?

>> IF I RECALL THAT HALF A MILLION COMES OUT OF OUR FUTURE

F DOT FUNDING. >> IT DOES.

WHAT WE DO IS EVERY YEAR WE SIT DOWN AND HAVE A PROGRAMMING MEETING. NORMALLY IF YOU HAVE GOOD PROJECTS, YOU CAN GET SOMEWHERE AROUND A MILLION PROGRAMMED.

SOME OF IT COMES OUT OF EXISTING.

SCHOOL YEAR N.22 WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY MONEY ALIGNED FOR F DOT FUNDING. I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT HAPPENED.

GOT A LITTLE MORE FUNDING IN THE CONVERSATION.

THEY CAME TO THE TABLE AND HELPED US BY PUTTING 75,000 MORE

ON THE TABLE FOR US. >> YOU MENTIONED THE HAIR GILLS PROJECT. WHERE DOES THAT STAND RIGHT NOW?

>> GREAT QUESTION. WE TALKED TO MR. GILLS.

THEY WERE DELAYED BY THE COVID 19 SCENARIO.

WE'VE BEEN IN TOUCH WITH THEM A FEW TIMES.

THE LAST I HEARD WAS THEY WERE COMPLETE IN FINANCING AND READY

[00:50:05]

TO MOVE FORWARD SOON. STILL MOVING FORWARD.

>> THEY ARE YES, SIR,. >> ONE PERSON I CAN'T SEE DAVE.

DID YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? >> I THINK WE'RE DONE UNLESS ANYBODY ELSE HAS ANYTHING TO HAD.

>> I MOVE WE ADJOURN. >> IS THE NEXT MEETING DATE UP

IN THE AIR? >> I BELIEVE.

[Items 9 & 10]

SO LET'S TENATIVELY PLAN ON OUR SECOND THURSDAY MEETING.

AND THEN WHETHER IT'S IN PERSON OR VIRTUAL WILL BE THE CITY'S

DISCRETION AT SOME POINT. >> JUNE 11 IS THE DATE OF THE

NEXT MEETING. >> AND BEFORE THEN I'LL HAVE FEEDBACK FROM THE CITY AS TO WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE AN IN PERSON MEETING OR VIRTUAL.

>>

>> THAT IS SOMETHING I CAN REACH OUT TO BOARD MEMBERS AND GET A SENSE OF TOO. IF WE DO HAVE AN IN PERSON MEET

PROGRESS SIDING SOME CAPABILITY. >> THERE A MOTION TO ADJOURN.

>> SECOND. >>

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.