Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Terminal Optimization topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Nantucket Airport Commission authorizes design work for terminal optimization amid debate over size and cost
Summary
The commission voted unanimously to approve a letter authorizing McFarland Johnson to begin terminal optimization design work while commissioners debated whether the proposed 361-seat redesign would meet current and projected demand and how much design funding to commit before federal grant results are known.
The Nantucket Memorial Airport Commission voted unanimously on Feb. 3 to approve a letter of authorization allowing McFarland Johnson to begin design work on a terminal optimization project aimed at replacing the seasonal tent and increasing indoor hold-room capacity.
Airport manager Smith told the commission the airport's current hold-room plus tent capacity is 313 people and the design McFarland Johnson drafted would increase that to 361 seats. "Our current hold room plus tent plus the little space that you walk out to the tent capacity is 313 persons," Smith said. He and the firm warned final task orders, FAA and Massachusetts Department of Transportation review and an independent fee estimate would follow the authorization.
Rich Lazdan, McFarland Johnson's consultant, outlined the FAA grant process and cautioned awards are discretionary and announced in spring: the application estimated roughly 53% eligibility of construction costs and final grant dollars would be based on completed design and contractor bids. "You literally could get nothing," Lazdan said of possible award outcomes.
Commissioners focused much of the discussion on whether the 15% increase in hold-room seats would be sufficient. Commissioner Levitt and others noted last summer's busy weekends, where staff-calculated configurations suggested a theoretical maximum of 578 passengers on the ramp and earlier peak conditions produced about 477 passengers; they argued the planned increase could leave the airport "treading water." Lazdan and staff countered that local load factors are typically closer to 60%, reducing worst-case counts, and that the proposed scheme is expandable later.
Cost and timing were central to the debate. Commissioners cited peer projects with design fees in the millions and discussed authorizing an interim amount before committing to a full $3.0 million design fee if needed to be competitive for FAA funding. Staff said work can be stopped if the airport is not awarded sufficient grant money; a stop would leave the commission responsible only for design work completed to that point.
Despite differing views on scale and cost, the commission concluded the tent needed replacement and authorized the letter of authorization as presented, with a commitment to hold a follow-up meeting with the architect and a subcommittee to refine the programmatic direction and scope. The motion passed by roll call with aye votes from Commissioner Planzer, Commissioner Buscaren, Commissioner Levitt and the chair.
Next steps include a working session with up to two commissioners, further refinement of program goals, development of a task order with an independent fee estimate and submission of a completed design package for FAA and MassDOT review ahead of any grant application.
The commission took the action to move forward with design authorization and agreed to return with more detailed options before committing to construction funding.
