Loading...
1995-04-06 Regular Meeting Airport Advisory Committee April 6, 1995 7. 00 p.m. Borough Conference Room MINUTES I. CALL TO ORDER The Airport Advisory Committee regular meeting of April 6, 1995, was called to order by Wayne Stevens, Chairman, at 7:00 p.m. in the borough conference room. He ROLL CALL P- Absent S_ Gue t Stosh Anderson Joe Brodman Jerome Selby Corky McCorkle Wesley Campbell John Chya Rachael Miller Murph O'Brien (for Cmdr. Miller) Mike Waller Mike Machulsky Cecil Ranney Scott Schleiffer Wayne Stevens A quorum was established. III. ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA The agenda was accepted with the addition of FY 96 Budget as an item of business as suggested by Stosh Anderson. IV. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING The November 15, 1994 meeting minutes were unanimously approved as submitted. V. ITEMS OF BUSINESS 1) 1h)date on lease issues from Murph O'Brien, Chief of Leasing. Central Region, State of Alaska. Department of Transportation Mr. Stevens welcomed Murph O'Brien of the State of Alaska Department of Transportation (DOT). Mr. O'Brien stated that the lease negotiations between the State of Alaska and the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) were ongoing. He indicated that the State had provided comments back to the USCG in Alameda regarding a concern over the title of the agreement. He stated that the USCG was calling the document a license and the State would like to have a lease. He commented that a license might not give sufficient property of interest for the State to sublease with tenants and pointed out that this might result in financial institutions being unwilling to lend for new capital improvements by tenants. Mr. O'Brien stated that several financial institutions had been contacted regarding the license language and two underwriters had responded they had a problem Airport Advisory Committee Page 1 of 14 April 6, 1995 f with the agreement being called a license. He stated that the USCG in Alameda had responded to the State's concerns with revised language but had indicated that if the State wanted a lease it could only be for five years and fair market value would apply. He indicated the revisions were taken back to the underwriters who maintained that the 3 State needed a long -term lease. Mr. O'Brien stated that John Horn, Regional Director at DOT, had been apprised of the situation and had met with Captain Abiles, Kodiak Support Center Commanding Officer. Captain Abiles was understanding of the State's concerns and expressed that he did not want to take over the operation of the runway and thought the State was doing a good job. Captain Abiles had expressed support for the State's efforts and 4 ndicated that the problems with the USCG were coming from Alameda. Captain i Abiles had suggested working from the top down in Alameda. Mr. O'Brien stated that Alameda's new regulations allowed for the issue of licenses for long -term agreements and leases for five year agreements. He commented that the State was now going to work from the top down in Alameda. He pointed out that the situation in Kodiak, where another governmental entity operated the active part of the airport, was unique to r the USCG as compared to elsewhere in the nation. He indicated that the State and USCG were in agreement on a majority of other terms in the license but pointed out that the State did not want to enter into an agreement that would prevent leasing to tenants. Mr. Schleiffer questioned what could be accomplished if there couldn't be economic development. He asked if Alameda had been requested to cite the specific point that was holding everyone up. Mr. O'Brien stated that the USCG had given the State citations that supposedly explained their reasoning but he indicated the State had been unable to interpret the citations. He stated that the underwriter did comment that the matter of the license would not impact any existing loans. t Mr. Schleiffer stated that the USCG had nothing to gain by not approving the lease. Mr. O'Brien stated that the fair market value estimate for the airport based on 10% rental was about $100,000. He stated that in FY94 the State pitched in $800,000 to operate the airport including snow removal. He indicated that basically every point had Y been answered in the lease. He pointed out that the State had put in over 10 million in capital improvements over the last 10 -15 years and had $7.5 million in `j improvements proposed in 1997. Mr. O'Brien stated that now it was a matter of the powers getting together on the s license and working it out. He indicated that Captain Abiles had suggested ownership. Mr. O'Brien pointed out that there was no need to panic because there were still 16 -17 years left on the existing lease. He stated that economic development could still occur. Mr. O'Brien indicated that it was John Horn's goal to resolve the license /lease in six s months. D d 4 Mr. Schleiffer asked if there was language in the existing lease regarding renewal. t Mr. O'Brien indicated that the lease had historically been renewed every five years so that a 20 -year term could be maintained to meet federal aviation requirements. Airport Advisory Committee Page 2 of 14 April 6, 1995 Mike Machulsky asked if there was any angle the Borough could come in on in regards to the license /lease. Mr. O'Brien suggested that letters of support could be sent to the USCG with copies to the S tate. Mr. Schleiffer expressed that the USCG had no reason to prevent economic development. Mr. O'Brien stated that when the USCG came up with the revised regulations, they probably did not have Kodiak in mind. Mr. O'Brien brought up the other airport issue of the Foreign Trade Zone (FTZ). He indicated that the State had come out in support of the FTZ. He stated that Captain Abiles had passed on information to Alameda and did not see any problems or adverse impacts of the zone. Mr. Machulsky asked what areas at state airport were included in the zone. Mr. O'Brien stated the zone would include all the property the State controlled such as the active runways, taxiways, and anything beyond the building restriction line. Mr. Machulsky asked if the base facility was included. Mr. O'Brien stated that the base facility was not included and stated that everything on this side of the center line was included. He stated there was some concern about the passenger terminals being in the FTZ and therefore they would probably be excluded. Mr. Machulsky asked if the designation would re- configure heavy ramp and commercial usage and the ramp side of the airport as far as what was accessible to the FTZ. Mr. O'Brien indicated he was not sure. Mr. Stevens stated that he did not think the intent of the FTZ was to reallocate resources within a parcel but was rather to designate an area as a FTZ to allow the opportunity to conduct foreign commerce. Mr. O'Brien stated that with passenger access there would not be complete control vs. a warehouse situation. Stosh Anderson asked what the relationship on maintenance was between the USCG and the State. Mr. O'Brien indicated that the State maintained the active operation areas and the USCG and State cooperated on aircraft rescue and firefighting. He indicated the State provided the vehicle and the USCG provided the personnel. He stated the USCG paid 50 of bill on runway lights and navigational aids and indicated this arrangement worked well. Mr. O'Brien indicated that the USCG was in charge of the water/sewer with fees assessed to tenants and with the state reimbursing the USCG. He stated that DOT was the operator of the airport and the USCG was the owner. Mr. Anderson asked if the USCG had made any direct contribution into the capital improvements of the facility, other than federal monies. Airport Advisory Committee Page 3 of 14 April 6, 199 Mr. O'Brien indicated that the capital improvements had been primaril from the FAA's airport development pro and the airport improvement pro He stated these were federal transportation monies that were based on fuel tax and landin fee revenues etc. Mr. Anderson asked if there were an annual fees paid to the USCG, Mr. O'Brien indicated that no fees were paid. Mr. Stevens indicated that Ma Selb had to leave to attend the Assembl meetin and su that he provide the committee an update on the crash harbor ramp improvements. 21 Update on engineering and costs of proposed improvements_ of Coast Guar small boat harbor ramp at State Ai provided b Bud C assidy. Kodiak Island Borou Resou Manager, Ma Selb stated that the Borou had cost estimates for improvements to the ramp. He stated that the Borou had been waitin on resolution of the lease to move ahead but indicated that now he thou the Borou could g o directl to Captain Abiles to do the improvements. He indicated that total cost for improvin the ramp would be around $5-6,000. Mr. Machulsk asked for a clarification from a discussion at the previous meetin re the fact that the ramp was covered b the lease but under a caveat that it was etas is, where is". Mr. O'Brien indicated that the current lease lan re the use of the ramp was etas is, where is". He stated that the ramp was outside the boundaries of the lease but the USCG had said it could be used with the understandin that the would assume no liabilit He stated that there was a problem with addin an additional maintenance costs to the State in li of bud cuts. Mr. Machulsk stated that at the last meetin it was su that if there was sufficient area a private part mi be interested in leasin that area. He asked if that possibilit could be included in the lease. Mr. O'Brien stated he could check on that and indicated it could be a proposal but cautioned that he did not know how successful it would be. He indicated that John Horn had looked at the ramp earlier in the da and had asked where is "as is, where is" and had said that the State could not afford to do more. Mr. O'Brien stated that it made sense to have some sort of operation there and su an individual could perhaps g et a five y ear lease to operate there. Mr. Machulsk indicated that obviousl no one would be able to start a facilit there on a five y ear lease. He stated the committee could barel come up with a scenario to fix it up and make it useable, Mr. Stevens asked if the committee wanted to make an recommendations to the State re the ramp before Ma Selb had to leave for the meetin Mr. Schleiffer stated that it was an issue on the a later on and asked if it could be dealt with at that time, Airport Advisor Committee Pa 4 of 14 April 6, 1995 Mayor Selby suggested that the committee split the $14,000 this year. He stated this would leave them in a good situation to get funding next year especially because both the Borough and City groups were working together. Mr. Schleiffer stated that he was going to recommend that the committee fund the ramp project and then give the balance to the City. Mr. Anderson asked Mayor Selby about the timeline for FY96 budget requests. Mayor Selby indicated that requests should be submitted as soon as possible. He cautioned that the school district had asked for $950,000 more in their budget for FY96 and the committee would be competing head to head with that request. Mr. Stevens asked if there were any objections to going ahead and having the City give their presentation on their plans for municipal airport. Mr. Schleiffer and Mr. Machulsky wanted to finish exploring the crash harbor ramp options. Mr. O'Brien suggested the committee write a letter that stated it was the recommendation of the Airport Advisory Committee to include the crash harbor facility in the boundaries of the lease. He warned the committee to keep in mind that the proposal might meet with resistance. Mr. Schleiffer asked what the resistance would be. Mr. O'Brien indicated that there was a general resistance by the State not to take on more maintenance responsibilities. Mr. Schleiffer stated that the committee was just trying to embrace a few more square feet of land. Mr. Machulsky stated that it was more a liability issue than a maintenance issue for the State. He indicated the committee understood the ramp area would be on the bottom of the maintenance list. He suggested that language regarding the fact that the ramp would be last on maintenance list should be included in the letter. He stated that people currently used the ramp all the time. Mr. Anderson asked what kind of access problem the committee might get into with the ramp. Mr. Schleiffer stated that access was not a problem. There was a discussion regarding access to the ramp. Mr. Anderson stated if the committee intended to pursue the ramp that they needed to make sure they had access to it. Mr. Schleiffer indicated that access might be a little inconvenient in that a user cou not just "pull right up" but he indicated that access could be dealt with. Mr. Machulsky that users currently accessed the ramp pretty regularly. Airport Advisory Committee Page 5 of 14 April 6, 1 I i f I f 9 F i 4 6 6 Mr. Stevens indicated that there was a motion to write a letter to the State recommending that the crash harbor ramp area be included in the upcoming lease discussions. i The motion was approved unanimously. 3) Discussion and recommendation to the Assembly regarding the City_ of Kodiak's request for a share of the aviation taxes collected by the Borough f use f a f and electric m ai t Corky McCorkle, City of Kodiak Harbormaster and Stosh Anderson, Member of the City Ports and Harbors Airport Subcommittee were present to discuss the City's plans for municipal airport. Mr. Anderson stated that Mayor Selby had set the tone for an equitable approach to the Y Y PP projects for state and municipal airports. He indicated that the following projects (with cost estimates were ro sed for municipal airport: P Po P Pro'ect Cos Fencing $21 Gates at Von cost dependent on style chosen Pe Y Scheele and by Kings Diner Lighting deferred for capital and maintenance reasons Signage $3,000 Mr. McCorkle stated that the City's number one priority was safety. He stated that the City was nervous about liability at municipal with the exposure of kids and adults who walked down the runway. He stated that he had met with a number of airport security le in Anchorage and the had suggested that the City et an 8 -foot high security PAP g Y gg Y g g Y fence around the facility. He stated that some poles for the fence were currently in place but indicated that the contractor had poured the concrete in freezing conditions and the City Engineer had stopped the job until tests could be done. Mr. McCorkle indicated that the City had $35,000 in the airport improvement fund that he had requested in the budget this for the fence. He stated that along with g year money g the $7,000 from the Borough could be used to expand the fence as much as possible. Mr. McCorkle indicated that the fence would be the focus in the next few years. He stated that a five year development plan was going to be drafted to include a new draft of a municipal airport ordinance to include the trident basin float plane facility. He stated the ordinance would allow the subcommittee through the Ports and Harbors Advisory Board to have their own ordinance. He stated this would allow for aircraft and fishing boats to be dealt with separately. He stated the subcommittee's long -term goal was to mend fences with the Borough. He stated the subcommittee was made up of good people trying to solve problems and there was a new attitude, regardless of what may have happened in the past. He stated the subcommittee realized the importance of the aviation industry on the island and was interested in looking at aviation on Kodiak Island as a whole. He stated that in light of shrinking resources, that it would take groups like the City and Borough airport committees to solve Airport Advisory Committee Page 6 of 14 April 6, 1995 problems that came up. He emphasized that the City Airport Subcommittee wanted to work together with the Airport Advisory Committee as part of a team. Mr. Anderson expanded on Mr. McCorkle's comments and stated that a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) had been obtained for a dock facility at trident basin and indicated the City was looking at zoning of uplands. He stated they were trying to get some reasonable long -term development. He indicated that trident basin would be a nice facility that would hopefully attract tourists. He stated that there would be emphasis on the facility being attractive rather than just slapped together. He expressed that having both committees work together would benefit all aviation in the community. Mr. Machulsky asked if there was any plan for trident basin. Mr. McCorkle indicated that develo ment at trident basin was difficult (due to rock) and very expensive. He stated that T1 million had already been spent on the road and stated it cost $600,000 to move the floats, build a new float and to do the upland development there. He stated that it would probably it would cost $600,000 to do the dock. Mike Machulsky asked if the City was still considering fuel trucks with hoses running down the docks at trident basin. Mr. McCorkle stated the City had contacted Petro Marine to discuss the fuel issue. He stated that Petro Marine was interested in looking at trident basin and state airport in the areas of jet fuel and aviation fuel. He indicated that he would like to follow up on that and suggested that representatives from the main fuel companies could be invited down to look at business opportunities in Kodiak. Mr. Anderson stated that in respect to immediate development at trident basin that a contract had just been given to Brechan to install the water /sewer, telephone and electricity. Mr. McCorkle indicated that the lines would be all underground with the work to be completed by September. He stated that the City was looking at FAA funding. He stated that FAA funding could be obtained for the float plane facility but not for municipal because the airport was not approved by them. He stated that there could be funding for trident basin in the amount of $150,000 or $50,000/year for 3 years, but he pointed out that to be eligible for this funding there would first have to be an environmental study of the area. Mr. Machulsky asked about the previous work done for the Corps of Engineers (COE) permit. Mr. McCorkle indicated that the information from the COE permitting was still out there to use but stated he was unsure if it was good enough for the study. He stated that it would cost $75,000 to do the study but pointed out that the study would be federally funded out of the $150,000. Mr. O'Brien stated that if Kodiak were to get an entitlement the money could be spent on airports as Kodiak wanted. He stated this would not preclude working the state side to possibly obtain Airport Improvement Program (AIP) funds for the facility. He stated that airport master plan studies that had been done on smaller State -owned airports were essentially an environmental work up plus a preliminary design. He Airport Advisory Committee Page 7 of 14 April 6, 1995 i i g i i I t p F k p L indicated that the City could use the federal grant to do the environmental and ultimate design at trident basin. Mr. McCorkle indicated that the City did not yet have the environmental and ultimate design at trident basin and stated that they intended to use the federal grant to for those projects. Mr. Anderson asked if those funds would also be applicable to municipal airport. PP P rP 1 I 1 Mr. O'Brien indicated that the FAA would not participate at all with municipal because municipal does not meet any kind of standards. He stated that if the airport could be brought up to standards that funding could be obtained for that but he indicated this was probably not feasible. Mr. Anderson asked about Merrill Field meeting FAA standards. Mr. O'Brien indicated that Merrill Field received federal entitlements but pointed out that it met all of the FAA standards. Mr. O'Brien stated that considerable money had been spent buying buildings to clear out the approach zone. Mr. Schleiffer stated that he did not think anyone would ever see municipal meet those FAA standards. He stated that support could be given to abating the security problem there but questioned the idea of getting too carried away with development at municipal due to the fact that it would never meet the standards. Mr. Machulsky asked if municipal would be in the FTZ. Mr. McCorkle stated that just the harbors and not trident basin were included in the zone. Mr. Machulsky commented that he was glad the issue of safety at municipal had been brought up. He stated that the issue was not only people walking on the runway but also the issue of aviation safety. He stated that people had hinted at putting municipal in the FTZ. He stated that if the airport were put in the zone, that would be the justification to close it because almost every day pilots broke minimums or busted airspace. Mr. Machulsky also pointed out that the growth of the area around the airport served to decrease the safety zone. He stated that for development at municipal to occur it would have to be marketed and people would have to pay. He stated the more activity that would happen as a result would increase the danger. He expressed that it was his premise that in the grand scheme as the communit y grew, it would be a detriment in aviation industry to split resources between two facilities with one that could never grow. Mr. Machulsky commented that he was not sure if development or growth at municipal would be a good investment for the future. He stated that he agreed with splitting the dollars currently available from the Borough. He indicated that his personal mission was to plan for the future of Kodiak's aviation community based on the idea of state airport becoming a transportation hub. He stated that he agreed with the safety concerns mentioned. He stated that the real concern was the aviation safety concern. He stated that the aviation safety issue had never been addressed in any of the conversations he had with municipal airport. Mr. Schleiffer stated that he thought the fence project should be supported to enhance safety at municipal. He indicated however, that he did not want to see development Airport Advisory Committee Page 8 of 14 April 6, 1995 fostered there which would bring people into an area that was already a congested, confined area. He stated that statistically, it was just a matter of time before another accident. He commented that the committee needed to help with the fence issue. He stated that lighting was a good point but agreed with the City in that it would become a maintenance issue. He stated that the peak activity at the airport occurred during light times of year. He indicated that lighting would be a significant capital investment and maintenance overhead. Mr. Anderson clarified that the proposed lighting was security lighting only. Mr. Stevens asked if there were any motions to recommend to the Assembly that $7,000 be spent on the ramp at state airport and $7,000 be spent for fencing and gates at municipal airport. It was clarified that the money was from the FY 95 budget. Mr. Anderson moved to split the $14,000 with $7,000 being spent on the improvements of the crash harbor ramp and $7,000 to be used for the municipal airport gate and fencing project. Mr. Schleiffer seconded the motion with the amendment that if the costs for ramp improvements at the crash harbor facility did not use up the $7,000, that any balance would be turned over to the City to use for fencing at municipal. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Machulsky asked if the City ever considered user fees at municipal. Mr. McCorkle indicated that concept was looked at every year. 41 FY 96 Budget. Mr. Anderson suggested that there should probably be a request for funding from the aviation community for FY 96. He stated that the money would be for both airports and that specific projects could be identified. Mr. Schleiffer stated that having two committees reporting to two bodies seemed silly. He stated that one committee with appropriate representatives that could report to both bodies could review projects of both airports. He indicated that there had been a lot of effort in the past 10 years and stated that a lot of homework had been done. He stated that it was time to move forward and there was a need to get the City and the Borough to combine committees. He suggested that everyone could now meet at the same time with recommendations going to both legislative bodies. Mr. McCorkle agreed with Mr. Schleiffer. He stated that he had made the same recommendation to the Ports and Harbors Advisory Board and Airport Subcommittee. He stated that they felt that the Ports and Harbors Advisory Board had a lot of clout with the Council and the Airport Subcommittee felt more comfortable being a subcommittee. He stated that Mr. Schleiffer's suggestion could be taken back to the City committee. Mr. Anderson stated he thought there was a consensus to work together. He indicated that he saw a stumbling block in the City over what was going to be done at municipal airport and trident basin. Airport Advisory Committee Page 9 of 14 April 6, 1995 f i E E E s Mr. Anderson indicated that he agreed with Mr. Schleiffer's recommendation from a previous meeting for approach lighting on runway 25 at state airport. Mr. Machulsky stated that Governor Knowles would probably fund aerospace development. He stated that the Kodiak Launch Facility would receive most of the funding. Mr. Machulsky 'discussed the need for infrastructure in light of such development. He indicated that different ideas were being explored as to how to bring the rockets into Kodiak. He indicated that on a minor scale there had to be considerations of the level of people who would be spending time in the community. He stated that Kodiak would have to look at the facilities they could provide to this new industry base. He stated that the last few years the focus had been on tossing around ideas related to general aviation. Mr. Machulsky commented that Kodiak would be inundated by tourism but also by mega-corporations. He stated that he wanted to put it on the table that while the committee was considering general aviation needs, there would also need to be some forethought to services for these mega corporations. He stated that with thoughts of the future needed to be considerations of a grand scale. He stated Kodiak needed to address the infrastructure for the future and how to prepare for j the influx that would happen. He charged the committee to expand their perimeters because this growth and change would surely happen. Mr. Anderson asked what size aircraft was anticipated to transport the rockets. Mr. Machulsky indicated that C -141's would be used. He stated that it was the same as the difference between the Chiniak Highway before logging and the way it was now when people drove out for weekend outings. Mr. O'Brien indicated that the State recognized several transportation hubs in southwest Alaska. He stated that he did not see there being one hub for southwest Alaska. He commented that the State's aviation plan addressed overall aviation for the State. He indicated that Kodiak needed a regional transportation study that would address roads and aviation. He stated that what state airport provided and the main purpose of trident basin were areas that needed consideration. He indicated that the launch facility was a new issue. He stated that there could be a proposal for a regional transportation study to address that. Mr. Stevens explained how he and others were envisioning Kodiak as a regional transportation hub. He indicated that Pen Air would be starting regular flights to King Salmon. He stated that the Southwest Alaska Municipal Conference (SWAMC) was putting on pressure as to the inaccessibility to Fish and Game in Kodiak. He indicated they had suggested moving Fish and Game to Anchorage. He stated it was his recommendation to open flights to other areas such as King Salmon, Dillingham and Cold Bay. He stated that he recognized that there were other hubs in southwest Alaska but stated there was a need to get some service from Kodiak to those other areas. Mr. Schleiffer stated that flying to Anchorage to get to King Salmon was a long trip when King Salmon was really just over the hill from Kodiak. Mr. Stevens stated that there were ways to accomplish that. He stated that there was an alliance between Northern Air Cargo and Samson Tug and Barge to provide to Bristol Bay at certain times. He indicated that when such links were created there was subsequently created a demand for air. He stated that the process went from affiliations to opportunity to demand. He stated that creation of these links would be started through such avenues as cargo and hospital needs. h Airport Advisory Committee Page 10 of 14 April 6, NO Mr. Schleiffer stated that King Salmon, Port Heiden, and Cold Bay were served by two different hubs. He stated that the whole country was littered with such situations. He indicated that it made great sense to be able to go beyond just travel between Kodiak and Anchorage. Mr. O'Brien stated that there would have to be links as Mr. Stevens suggested. He stated that it sounded as if there was more than just aviation infrastructure needed. Mr. Machulsky stated that the issue of a FTZ brought up the circumstance of international flights. He stated that this perhaps would require the funding of a customs agent. He asked if Kodiak would then become an international airport. There were some other issues raised in response to the idea of an international airport. It was stated that with bigger aircraft there was no problem in landing but there would be a problem with parking. It was also asked who would service such larger aircraft. Mr. McCorkle asked how many rocket launches per year were proposed. Mr. Machulsky stated that rockets may not be brought in via the airport. He indicated that the airport would have to service the associated people and parts for such a project. Mr. Stevens asked the question of how to prepare for such a situation. Mr. O'Brien stated that a good analogy would be the road to Whittier. He stated that the road was brought in but pointed out there was no infrastructure. Mr. McCorkle asked that if there was an opportunity for the public to come in and build on their own nickel if private parcels were offered. Mr. Anderson asked if it would be more cost effective to pave Chiniak or to build a runway out by the rocket launch facility. Mr. Ranney stated that he liked the analogy earlier of the logging trucks that travel back and forth to Chiniak. He stated that having logging trucks downshifting in front of one's house every 20 minutes might be cause to rethink the current discussion. Mr. Stevens indicated that the committee was still considering the agenda item of FY 96 budget. Mr. Anderson stated that he was not currently prepared to look at infrastructure for Kodiak but he emphasized that if the committee did not put in a funding request that they most likely would not receive any funds. Mr. McCorkle stated that the City wanted to continue the security fence and indicated that he could provide the committee with a figure to fence all of municipal. Mr. Schleiffer asked if the fence would go around Lilly Lake. Mr. McCorkle indicated the fence would go around the airstrip only. Mr. McCorkle asked the committee what projects they had in mind for general i aviation. Airport Advisory Committee Page 11 of 14 April 6, 1995 4 i I Mr. Schleiffer indicated that the committee was interested in improving the crash harbor ramp and had also been discussing a fresh water rinse facility. He stated that it was found there were man barriers (including environmental issues to buildin Y g a rinse facility and indicated it would probably cost $20- 25,000. a Mr. O'Brien asked if the facility would be for any kind of washing. Mr. Schleiffer indicated the facility ould only be for rinsing salt water off of Y Y g floc tp lanes. Mr. Machulsky stated that if the facility was implemented it would facilitate a possible opportunity for a FBO person. Mr. O'Brien indicated that it was hard to say if that were true. He stated that sometimes FBO' s could ride on the State's tail for a permit. Mr. Schleiffer stated that the ramp idea was good but pointed out that when trident basin was completed, use of the ramp may be reduced. He further stated that if there was overflow at trident basin that the crash boat harbor would be the next natural place for operators to go. Mr. Anderson asked if the crash boat facility was the best place to access the airport. Mr. Schleiffer indicated that it was and stated this was especially due to the breakwater which kept the area very protected. Mr. Stevens suggested the committee could ask for $14,000 again with the understanding that they would come up with a detailed list of planned improvements. Mr. McCorkle asked if the $14,000 reflected all taxes collected. It was stated that the $14,000 figure reflected taxes collected at municipal airport. Mr. Schleiffer mentioned that the committee had requested at the November meeting a listing of the records of tax collections on aircraft in the Borough. He stated that the January g meetin had been cancelled and the committee had not yet seen the list. He suggested that the committee not limit the figure to $14,000 and instead base the figure on the taxes collected. Mr. Machulsky interjected that trident basin was a jewel waiting to be built. He stated that state airport could be that for the community as well. Mr. McCorkle asked the committee if they had asked the users of state airport what the needed. r Y Mr. Machulsky indicated that it was a general feeling. He stated there were many different players with many different needs. He pointed out the FTZ, space science industries and stated that Kodiak would have to support them in any way. He stated he was talking about what it would take to operate a successful airport. Mr. Schleiffer suggested that the committee spend what little they had to find private investors and convince them of a market in Kodiak. Airport Advisory Committee Page 12 of 14 April 6, 1995 Mr. O'Brien stated that Petro Marine had been mentioned earlier. He pointed out that the fuel company was moving into the Seward harbor at their own expense. Mr. McCorkle asked if there was room for Petro Marine to put in a facility at state airport. Mr. Machulsky stated that it would take an FBO and it was not convenient because many services would need to be offered. Mr. McCorkle stated that Kodiak did not have those services and needed them. Mr. Machulsky commented that obviously trident basin would need such services. Mr. McCorkle stated that in moving over to trident basin, Kodiak moved into the 21st century. Mr. Anderson stated that he was in agreement with that but indicated that a lot of rock would have to be moved for a fuel facility, Mr. McCorkle stated that trident basin was a very costly area to develop, He stated that a master plan was needed. He indicated that the Airport Advisory Committee needed to identify some small projects for the $7,000 funding. Mr. Stevens entertained a motion to recommend to Mayor Selby to include a line item in the FY 96 budget for funding for general aviation with the understanding that details as to the use of the funds would follow. Mr. Anderson stated that at the November meeting a breakdown of total aviation taxes for the community had been requested. He stated that the committee needed to convey to the Assembly that they were a taxpaying entity and not freeloading. Mr. Stevens stated that in light of budget cuts, the aviation community needed to keep their "foot in the door" for funding. Mr. Schleiffer stated that he would still like to see the figures for aviation taxes collected within the Borough. Mr. Stevens indicated that he would check with Pat Carlson, Borough Assessor, to get the tax figures. Mr. Schleiffer suggested that there needed to be another meeting to discuss more ideas for needed projects. The committee unanimously approved a motion to recommend that the Mayor include a line item in the FY 96 budget for general aviation with details to follow. It was mentioned that the figure would be based on the taxes collected. VI. CO TS The next meeting date was set for Wednesday, May 10 at 6:30 p.m. Mr. Machulsky stated that he had been involved with the committee and related committees ever since the Borough had been looking at buying state airport (an action he was opposed to) He thanked the City for their presentation and for their openness Airport Advisory Committee Page 13 of 14 April 6, 1995 to working together. He agreed that both the City and the Borough needed to work together and that he had hopes of looking beyond state and municipal airport. He stated that the airport committee had always lacked City participation and indicated that he hoped they could make the committee a larger group. Mr. Schleiffer made a motion that the City's airport subcommittee be invited to the meeting on the 10th of May to make it a joint meeting. He suggested that the following two items be placed on the agenda: 1) List project ideas; and 2) Development of language to send to both governmental bodies re: combining the two committees. 9 Mr. Stevens asked if the City Airport Subcommittee members needed an official invitation to the next meeting. g Mr. McCorkle indicated that a letter from the Airport Advisory Committee chairman to the City Airport Subcommittee chairman would be nice (with a copy �'Y sent to G Bloomquist, City Manager). Mr. O'Brien commented on the fact that Mr. McCorkle would soon be leaving the City a and stated that over the years he had thoroughly enjoyed his association with Mr. McCorkle. VII. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:42 p.m. Respectfully mi sub tted by. 71 Rachael V. Miller Way a Stevens, Chairman Secretary Airport Advisory Committee Page 14 of 14 April 6. 1995 Airport Advisory Committee Meeting Thursday, April 6, 1995 Stosh Anderson made a motion to split the $14,000 the assembly designated as available for general aviation use with $7,000 to be used for improvements of the crash harbor ramp at state airport and $7,000 to be used for the municipal airport gate and fencing project. Scott Schleiffer seconded the motion with the following amendment: If the costs for ramp improvements at the crash harbor facility did not use up the $7,000, the balance would be turned over to the City for use for fencing at municipal. The motion was approved unanimously: Stosh Anderson AYE Mike Machulsky AYE Cecil Ranney AYE Scott Schleiffer AYE Wayne Stevens AYE Next meeting date was set for Wednesday, May 10 at 6:30 p.m.