Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Airport Cip topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Airport board: FAA signs off on five-year CIP including hangars, perimeter fence and AWOS
Summary
Board members said a capital improvement plan covering roughly $5.6 million over five years has been approved and forwarded to the FAA; projects listed include PAPI installation, T‑hangars, apron and taxiway repairs, a perimeter fence and an AWOS. Members also discussed hangar wait lists and funding sources.
Chair reported that the airport’s capital improvement plan (CIP) has been approved and forwarded to the Federal Aviation Administration, which "have actually signed off on it," and described the projects included in the plan.
The plan, described by the Chair as covering approximately the next five years and totaling about $5,600,000, lists projects such as PAPI lighting and related work, construction of T‑hangars, an airport perimeter fence, apron rehabilitation, taxiway rehabilitation, access‑road improvements, installation of an AWOS and a possible 60‑by‑60 box hangar. The Chair said funding sources include AIP and referenced federal infrastructure funds, and that the state is expected to pay for the perimeter fence and some other items.
Nut graf: The board characterized the CIP as a significant multi‑year investment intended to support general aviation at the field and ease demand for hangar space. The Chair said the FAA sign‑off moves several projects from planning toward construction and that the airport will circulate the CIP details to members on request.
Members also discussed hangar demand. The Chair said he maintains two wait lists (one for applicants with aircraft and one for applicants without) and reported about 16 people on the combined wait list; he said completion of an additional hanger would add eight spaces and ‘‘make a dent’’ in the backlog. The Chair said priority is given to applicants who already have aircraft, and noted turnover when aircraft are sold or hangars become available.
The board did not record a formal funding schedule in the transcript; the Chair said a more detailed project timeline is in the packet and offered to make copies available to members. He also noted the Kentucky Airports Association conference in October and that the association’s lobbyists were meeting with legislators in Frankfort to advocate for general aviation.
Ending: The board framed the CIP as a forward step that enables next steps—outsourcing design and scheduling work with state and federal partners—and said staff would provide members with the CIP copy and upcoming meeting materials.
