Airport advisory board recommends city buy 1,400-sq.-ft. modular building to expand flight-school space

At a meeting of the Palatka Airport Advisory Board, members voted to recommend that the City of Palatka procure a modular building of about 1,400 square feet to expand space for the flight school and airport operations.

The board said the measure is intended to preserve a key tenant and revenue stream while the city resolves competing claims to the airport’s old terminal and completes pending Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) reviews tied to other airport transactions.

Board members and staff described several steps that prompted the recommendation: FAA review of a sale package tied to airport property; historical written promises to two tenants made in 2020; the flight school’s current space being roughly 600–700 square feet; and a need for a near-term option that would not require major construction. The advisory board discussed three possible placement locations on the airfield — east of the existing building, immediately west, and in front of the sellers’ area — and emphasized aesthetics, customer access and permitting constraints when weighing options.

Bernie Douglas, speaking on behalf of tenant Jeff Nations, said the parties have worked together for months. "We have spent a lot of time, and we appreciate all the effort that the advisory board has put into this," Douglas said, and urged continued collaboration to find an "economical" modular option. Douglas said his client supports the advisory board’s work to keep the flight school and to protect the airport’s image for visiting customers.

Board members and staff referenced preliminary cost estimates in the meeting. Participants gave preliminary price ranges that varied by condition and source: about $75,000 for a new modular unit, roughly $14,800 for a used unit mentioned early in the discussion, and other options identified by tenant representatives described as under $48,000. The board did not adopt a dollar figure at the meeting and instructed staff to return with a firm cost estimate before placing the item on a city commission agenda.

Several speakers also flagged permitting and utility issues that could affect cost and placement. An advisory-board member cautioned that whether a modular unit must include restrooms will be determined through the building-permit process; the meeting record identifies the building department as Putnam County’s office, not an internal city department, and attendees said an early conversation with permitting officials would be critical to avoid added expense. "The issue of a restroom ... is absolutely going to come up as part of that permitting process," one board member said.

The board discussed a prior written commitment described in 2020 correspondence that may give another tenant — identified in meeting remarks as "Mr. Russ" — a contractual right or expectation to the old terminal once certain benchmarks were met. Staff advised the board that legal review is needed to "perfect" the city’s understanding of any rights and to determine whether the city must offer the old terminal to that tenant before repurposing it.

After discussion, the advisory board made and seconded a motion to recommend the city procure a modular building (approximately 1,400 square feet) for airport use, with the city manager to determine lease and procurement terms and the airport manager to determine the length of use and placement consistent with the airport master plan. The motion passed on a voice vote; the board chair called for those in favor and the motion-carried announcement followed.

Board members stressed the recommendation is not a final purchase: the item is unbudgeted, and the board asked staff to return with a clear dollar figure and a procurement approach (purchase vs. lease) before presentation to the City Commission. Attendees said the board will seek tenant contributions or other cost-sharing if feasible and will continue to pursue the school-district modular option that staff previously inspected as a lower-cost choice.

Next steps recorded in the meeting: staff will refine cost estimates, verify permitting requirements with Putnam County building officials, confirm whether restroom facilities must be included or can be served by an annex, and report back to the advisory board so the board can place a more detailed recommendation before the City Commission.

The discussion also touched on separate airport business and ongoing FAA review of another airport property transaction; board members said those items remain distinct but related to the airport’s operational needs and revenue considerations.