Norm Rosene overview:

We had a few more people, with some different ideas. As far as the building design goes:

  1. A question was asked whether a separate room was required for nursing mothers.
  2. Sherry the Airport Manager is concerned whether the “baggage make-up area”, which is the space dedicated to handling the departure baggage, is large enough. She feels that it is too small.
  3. There was a discussion of the potential for underground tanks in the construction area. That will have to be determined during excavation for construction.
  4. Two new younger members want to see a “tap” room, type restaurant as part of the site plan. That led to a discussion of revenue sources in the terminal building. It also led to a discussion about whether or not the existing building has a second floor. There is a door that leads to some sort of second floor or attic space. Sherry had never been up there and could not provide any details.

My take on the discussion of the floor plan was that the floor plan was generally accepted with the only questions being about the “nursing” room and the adequacy of the departure baggage space.

Additionally, we may want to protect space in the site plan for a “future restaurant”. Likely to the north of the proposed structure, but perhaps to the south. It might encourage support for the plan by providing a potential future income source.

Jerry’s notes from the meeting:

Norm preamble — review of where we are to date for a few newcomers

Kelly: Question of private area (non visual inspection areas) inclusion? for TSA

Where will baggage be screened by TSA (included?) also needs to be done in private?  Sherry says no…search in public…only when searching the body or looking for explosive — TSA wants the ability to do all searches in private?  What are best practices?

Steve: has bumped up seating for departure to 150 souls

Private nursing stations (what is the threshold of passenger usage that triggers this rule into play) Sherry has taken this on

Sherry:  Baggage make up area (green square) might be too small — loads of equipment going in there

TSA review of space needs prior to moving forward — another Sherry responsibility??? to facilitate

Karl: Community project to remove existing (asbestos laden) building adjacent to property

Norm: asbestos in the siding ….can that be removed and disposed of

Sherry: also Lead to be removed as well

Ben: any tanks or hazmat issues as we expand the footprint? or if we expand the footprint?

Underground tanks??

GROUND PENETRATING radar device by CIM??

????: revenue generating areas added to the terminal — a 2nd Sierra Nevada brewhouse….external entrance that isn’t exclusively accessed by airport patrons

Sherry:  Add a second floor??

Provides for a partnership opportunity to add a second floor that is tenant improved hospitality space SNB — event/meeting space

Greg: The existing terminal is already two stories…..load bearing shell exists

Maybe those additions are site plan additions instead of terminal specific additions

Ben: any runway concerns?  condition? length?

Sherry: None currently with the planes we’re targeting

Repair and lengthening already planned  that provides even better surfaces

Ben:  Wood chipping/composting business location, bird attraction?

Sherry:  Plans in the works to move their business

Karl:  where are they moving to?  Sherry:  unknown at this point?

Greg: hearsay from several years ago, 6800 ft is sufficient for FAA concerns but airlines themselves put restrictions on the length of the run way

Sherry: True, We’re classified as a C3 airport … certain airlines restrict pilots from landing at classifications and under certain conditions

Sherry: Meeting Airservices conference … gain and retain and grow air service … speed dating for carriers and airports….no Alaska or United though

  • Sherry needs help
  • document how much usage
  • demand forecast
  • economic benefit study
  • marketing plan
  • all city generated
  • needs something along these lines provided
  • Focus on University and large businesses
  • facts and few pictures (why are people are going to fly in)

Meeting in October

David will deal with take-offs and elevations once we’ve finalized design parameters

Ben: can we grow the footprint….is our effort expandable?

Yes, room for expansion on land holdings (City) and in facility design (Steve)

Karl:  market assessment and feedback as a next step?

Norm:  elevations at next meeting and then moving on to other pertinent issues….including marketing. Financing is the foremost issue on the table:  Travel bank (seat guarantee) and construction of the facility.  Needs to be a public/private partnership.

Sherry:  advertising….naming rights ….in leu of construction

Robby:  Financing mechanisms

moved back from Indiana….served on planning commission….used TIFFS/redevelopment funds

financing ….district build ….Public Goods projects

?????   need to look at this …..could have multiple targets for partnering

Losing a Million per year in entitlement funds by not having 10K passengers per year…..now getting only 150K dollars have to go to the airport enterprise fund….terminal improvements are tricky

Robb:  because airport was a former military installation ….may be eligible for special projects funding

Chico Chamber needs to state publicly that the City needs to have air service — Ben to carry message forward

Ben:  Can we ask for an on-time guarantee if we provide a travel bank guarantee

Chamber approval from a business generation context

Military has unlimited use of the airport free of charge in perpetuity ……???  How does that effect our moving forward?

Can we contact military services for assistance — Greg Sanger to take on responsibility