Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Capital Projects topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board outlines funding and scope for apron rebuild, taxiway relocation and hangar-area pavement repairs
Summary
Board reviewed engineering plans for Taxiway Alpha-1 relocation, apron reconstruction and a $54,670.50 mill-and-overlay for pavement in front of hangars; members agreed to pursue bundled bids, possible borrow sites and multiple funding sources (FAA discretionary grants, AIP/BIL, CIB and local funds).
Grand County's airport board spent a large portion of the meeting discussing airfield projects, local pavement failures and options to finance repairs.
Engineering presented project structure and timing: the Alpha-1 taxiway relocation is under contract and expected to begin as weather allows; the contractor agreed to hold bid pricing for an apron expansion so the two efforts can be paired into a single discretionary grant request to the FAA. Engineering also identified a separate locally funded mill-and-overlay for a 50-foot apron area in front of two county-owned hangars with an estimate of $54,670.50.
Board members discussed adding a problematic sinkhole near the drive-through gate and the gate replacement into a larger bid package to take advantage of lower unit costs and to simplify contractor procurement. Members also debated whether to require hangar tenants to contribute; staff said there is no lease language that obliges renters to maintain county-owned pavement and that the county would be unlikely to force tenant-paid replacements without an express contractual basis.
Board and staff outlined funding options: bundle projects into FAA discretionary or AIP/BIL funding where eligible, pursue state Community Impact Board (CIB) grants or loans for design and planning costs, and use local county funds for elements not eligible for federal money (for example, terminal parking is not an AIP-eligible expense). The board asked engineering and staff to prepare a scoped design estimate and phased cost breakdown so the county can pursue CIB planning grants and other opportunities.
Engineer Eric Trinklein said the team could draft a scope and preliminary costs in roughly two weeks and recommended preparing both a planning-level estimate for grant applications and a full design scope for later bidding. The board asked staff to prepare site-specific project documents to present to CIB and to prioritize the sinkhole area when finalizing the bid schedule.
Next steps: staff and engineering will prepare a project scope with phased costs for CIB and FAA grant rounds, evaluate borrow-site clearance with FAA environmental staff and return a packaged proposal for the board to prioritize in its March budget list.
