Flagstaff airport trims snow-removal building plan after FAA eligibility review; cost, site work drive redesign

Flagstaff City airport staff presented a redesigned plan for a snow-removal equipment building on May 8, saying the original $33 million estimate required significant right-sizing to align with Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) grant eligibility and the airport’s available entitlement and discretionary funds.

Adam Yelli, airport programs manager, walked the commission through the project history: the design evolved over several years, multiple engineers and contractors have worked on it, and the project has shifted into a construction-manager-at-risk procurement to allow early contractor input. The airport estimated an initial total project of approximately $33,000,000; staff then identified roughly $10,000,000 of that as earthwork/site costs and began “right-sizing” to fit probable FAA funding and eligibility rules.

Yelli said the programmatic changes reduced the building from an original plan of about 25,000 square feet to about 16,000 square feet, cut storage bays from 12 to four (capacity for eight vehicles) and removed administrative space and restrooms after FAA staff indicated those items would likely be ineligible for AIP (Airport Improvement Program) grant funding. "We went from 2,500 square feet down to 1,600 square feet — 16,000 square feet," Adam said when reviewing the revised program. (Staff corrected a slip during the presentation; the final program is 16,000 square feet.)

Staff explained funding sources: annual FAA entitlement funding tied to enplanements, five years of "BRIC"-style infrastructure entitlement collection the airport has banked, and a discretionary FAA grant program. The FAA’s AIP rules and guidance determine which building features are eligible; airport staff and FAA liaisons have iterated on eligibility. Airport staff said features supporting personnel — lockers, desks and restrooms — are generally ineligible for AIP funding, while vehicle storage, maintenance and wash bays are eligible.

Commissioners pressed cost reasonableness. Commissioner Andrew Schaus asked whether the $33 million estimate was reasonable and whether the airport had solicited multiple bids; staff said the construction-manager-at-risk approach had produced subcontractor pricing for components (two to five bids per subcomponent) and that an independent fee estimate will be required by FAA before grant submission. Yelli and Brian noted multiple factors that raise cost relative to a private build: specialized FAA standards, large bay door span requirements (staff said bay openings were reduced from 35 feet to 28 feet as part of right-sizing), a required 3-ton crane, federal Buy American rules for materials, and Davis-Bacon prevailing-wage requirements for federally funded projects.

"Anything that is for support of personnel essentially is not eligible for federal funding," Brian said, describing FAA guidance and recent FAA-staff review. Staff described a possible phased site approach: current earthwork would accommodate a one-bay future expansion without additional excavation; larger expansions would require additional retaining walls and more earthwork.

Next steps: staff will meet with FAA contacts to confirm the right-sized scope and eligibility and then produce construction-ready drawings, renegotiate design contracts for the smaller scope, and prepare the FAA grant submittal (including an independent fee estimate). Staff stressed estimates remain preliminary until final plans and contractor bids are locked and noted the FAA grant cycle timing. The commission did not take a formal funding action at the meeting; the presentation and follow-up work are intended to refine scope and confirm grant eligibility before any construction procurement or final grant request.