Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Airport Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Port Control previews $26 million plan to replace 12 jet bridges at Cleveland Hopkins
Summary
The city's Department of Port Control presented a July ordinance to purchase up to 12 passenger boarding bridges for Cleveland Hopkins International Airport, estimating $26 million in FAA/PFC-funded costs and asking the committee to discuss details ahead of introduction.
The Transportation and Mobility Committee on Monday discussed a Port Control proposal to buy up to 12 passenger boarding bridges for Cleveland Hopkins International Airport, a project staff estimated at about $26 million funded by passenger facility charges and the Federal Aviation Administration.
Assistant Director (name withheld) told the committee the project would proceed as a design-build procurement to replace two groups of bridges across Concourses A, B and C. The assistant director said the second phase covers gates A2, A6, A8 and A10; B3 and B7; and C3, C5, C6, C7, C9 and C11. Staff estimated roughly $2 million per bridge on average and said they added a 10% escalation factor to the projection.
The proposal is being prepared for introduction in July; no vote was taken at the committee meeting. The assistant director said initial design work will begin promptly, but actual installation timing will depend on construction seasonality and coordination with airlines to avoid disrupting passenger travel.
Council members asked technical and financial questions. Councilman Cazy sought confirmation that a passenger boarding bridge is the enclosed walkway passengers use to board flights; the assistant director said that was correct. Council members pressed staff on ownership and operations: the assistant director said they believed Cleveland Hopkins owns the bridges but would confirm ownership and provide a count of existing bridges and spares before the next meeting.
Several members also asked about Concourse D, described by staff as largely unused and "pillaged" but still serviced with utilities; staff agreed to follow up with revenue office staff about current lease arrangements for that concourse.
The chair said the ordinance will be introduced in July and moved on to other items. Committee members requested a short follow-up memo with a bridge inventory, a clearer installation timeline and confirmation of funding sources before any formal vote.
Next steps: the ordinance will be introduced in July; the committee did not take action at the meeting.
