Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Airport Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Airport board reviews multi‑million dollar apron and taxiway bids as FAA grants begin to issue
Summary
Board members reviewed bids for apron expansion, taxiway foxtrot and reconstruction work, discussed possible local matches and grant timing, and directed staff to place bid documents on a future agenda for formal review.
The Grand County Airport Board reviewed bid results and discussed funding options for several capital projects, including a large apron expansion, a loop taxi lane to connect park operations to a new apron, and phased reconstruction of existing aprons.
Staff reported the engineer’s total estimate for the combined project set at about $3.18 million. The low total bid received for the federally funded schedule was $2.698 million and the high was $4.181 million. For the federally funded portion (schedule 1), the engineer estimate was roughly $2.635 million; the lowest responsive bid was approximately $2.032 million (TSJ Construction). Several locally funded components (for example, taxiway foxtrot and pavement in front of county hangars) were bid as part of the overall package; the board was told FAA will only award based on the federal component and that some locally funded pieces came in over estimates.
Board members discussed next steps if FAA grant awards arrive. Staff said the FAA had begun issuing grants nationally and that the airport’s projects—apron expansion or the loop taxiway—are likely candidates to be funded first. The board discussed using local funds as match money and asked staff to check whether funds that had been held by the county general fund and earmarked to return to the airport could be used as local matching funds; staff said they would obtain a legal/auditor opinion.
The board also discussed pursuing funding from the state Community Impact Board (CIB). Staff said adding local match or demonstrating previous airport fund commitments improves an application’s competitiveness. Tourism‑related funding (TRCCA) was noted by a board member as an eligible source in past cases.
On procurement details, staff reported multiple responsive bids for different schedules. For the apron reconstruction schedule the engineer estimate was about $3.18 million; the low bid reported for that schedule was $1.994 million. The board asked staff to put the full bid documents and a detailed funding plan on the next agenda so members could review mobilization, federal/local splits and contingencies before recommending any contract award to the county commission.
Ending
No contract awards were made at the meeting. The board directed staff to place full bid packages and funding scenarios on a future meeting agenda and to continue coordinating with FAA, the county attorney and potential funding sources.
