The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2003-02-18 - Agendas - Final FAYETTEVIRLE - -� C THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS FINAL AGENDA CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 18, 2003 A meeting of the Fayetteville City Council will be held on February 18, 2003 at 6: 30 p.m . in Room 219 of the City Administration Building located at 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. NOMINATING COMMITTEE REPORT AIRPORT 2002 ANNUAL REPORT DRAINAGE STUDIES: PRESENTATION BY USINFRAST-RUCTURE, INC. LIBRARY PRESENTATION A. CONSENT 1 . APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES : Approval of the minutes from the Special City Council meeting on January 27, 2003, City Council meeting February 4, 2003 and revision of the December 3, 2002 City Council meeting minutes. AS-03, 2o PUBLIC ACCESS: A resolution accepting a contract for public access television services from March 1 , 2003 thru December 31 , 2003 . 3, STORM WATER PHASE, 11 : A resolution to authorizing the Mayor or his designee to submit the City of Fayetteville "Storm Water Phase II" dy-AA permit application to the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ). Such permit application shall be submitted no later than March 10, 2003 . Compliance shall be phased over a time period of up to five years according to a schedule to be developed with ADEQ complying with all federal and state requirements. 4, PUBLIC LIBRARY: A resolution to approve naming the Fayetteville Public Library. 117 WEST MOUNTAIN 72701 479.521-7700 \ FAX 479.575-0257 B. OLD BUSINESS 1 . NATER TANK SITE: A resolution approving the sale of 3 .0 acres of a the City's Gully Rd. Water Tank site ( 12 .0 ac) as requested by Ozark Electric Cooperative for the appraised price of $ 105 .000.00 including access to and from Gulley Road, plus payment for specific City costs associated with the preparation of said property to be sold. The resolution was tabled at the December 17, 2002 City Council meeting. 2. VA 03-1 .00: An ordinance approving vacation request VA 03- 1 .00 as submitted by Kim Scott of Mountain Mechanical Contractors on behalf of Gary Harvey of AMC Land Associates and Mountain Mechanical Contractors for property located west of S. School Avenue on 9'h Street. C The request is to vacate a section of the street right of way as shown and described on the attached map and legal description. The ordinance was left on first reading at the February 4, 2003 City Council meeting. 3. ANX 03-01 .00: An ordinance approving annexation request ANX 03- 01 .00 for property owned by George and Sara Lee Anderson and located at 3632 East Zion Road. The parcel is in the Planning Area and contains 57.00 acres. The request is to annex into the City. The ordinance was left on the first reading at the February 4, 2003 City Council meeting. 4. RZN 034.00: An ordinance approving rezoning request RZN 03-4.00 as submitted by Michele Harrington of Harrington, Miller, N'eihouse & Krug Q on property owned by George and Sara Lee Anderson and located at 3632 l � � East Zion Road. The property is currently in the Planning Area with a P request to be annexed into the City of Fayetteville pending and contains approximately 57.00 acres. The request is to rezone to R- 1 , Low Density Residential . The ordinance was left on the first reading at the February 4, 2003 City Council meeting. ec�� yoy 5. DICKSON ENHANCEMENT: A resolution approving Change Order #5 �. to the construction contract with Township Builders, Inc. for Dickson t Street Enhancement Project. The resolution was tabled at the January 21 , 2003 City Council meeting. C. NEW BUSINESS 1 . ADM 03-3.00: A resolution to approve amendments to the Bill of a y oa Assurance submitted with Ordinance No. 4411 , passed and approved by the City Council on September 3, 2002. 2. OFFER & ACCEP'T'ANCE : A resolution to approve the Offer and Acceptance Contract between the City of Fayetteville and the University Pa dq -03, of Arkansas for a price of $370,000.00 3. COMPOSTING SITE: A resolution authorizing staff to begin the \3 purchasing process for a compost row turner and to solicit bids for a contractor to construct the compost pad. MoD 4. COMPACTOR AND DROPBOX BUSINESS EXPANSION : A resolution approving a budget in the amount of one million one hundred g seventy-three thousand two hundred eight dollars (S1 , 173,208.00) to allow the Solid Waste and Recycling division to implement a new commercial ^ , � p?� drop box program. 5. NEW COMMERCIAL COMPACTOR AND DROP BOX PROGRAM : A resolution authorizing the hiring of seven (7) additional �I g 003 full time employees to implement a new commercial compactor and drop box program. 6. VA 03-2.00: An ordinance approving vacation request VA 03-2.00 as �,5i submitted by Gary Coover"of McClelland Consulting Engineers on behalf of James Ezell of the University of Arkansas for property located north of P Fairview Street on Harmon Avenue and alleys west of Harmon Avenue, Fayetteville, Arkansas. The request is to vacate Harmon Avenue between Fairview Street and William Street and the alleys west of Harmon Avenue. D. INFORMATIONAL 1 , COUNCIL TOUR: February 25 , 2003 at 4:0`_0 p.m. IV�ti, q '. oco LU alai 7 ' oo Meeting of February 18, 20010 'may C/ ;ate Rota A � if-k as 49, & Rhoads ✓ tew� ✓ 1 � \ Davis 3o-GD S az, Too pmrapt ✓ Lucas ✓ v � � Jordan ✓ / ✓ Reynolds ✓ db 5 4a; A Thiel Cook ✓ ✓ �/ �/ Marr V/� / ✓ t/ Mayor Coody l�11 t ( Uu#u Ta*A& uvc Rhoads ✓ � Davis ✓ � Lucas ✓ f k?4 ` Jordan N U £ p ` Reynolds ✓ ✓ �D Thiel Cook Marr ✓ i/ �;n .RD ti E Mayor Coody JEa-fes t6c4 PAQ kinnaay vis � wucD "c nr U LCa+w �j �o-U� cO �Aocic,� Q. C�C WOO ♦.A • lVc1lac L (Now - 0001 aw Meeting of February 18, 2001 • Ufa 4�a 3- 14 00 J%nt Rhoads LQcul; S Davis � d44, Lucas Jordan C5 Reynolds Thiel ✓ Cook Marr ✓ Mayor Coody ADLV f/d.J IS &As �+ 3 Aw 03-1" o o Stwisrej /U j, cA-V ( �- Rhoads ✓ Davis ✓ Lucas ✓ a'a^^A P Jordan N 0 N 0 Reynolds ✓ D gn 240.x. Thiel ✓ ✓ 0 Cook / . I v Marr Q ' Cul%S Mayor Coody w&juoue �� V Www-r`_ OJO (S t wµ p ^� � ;� � UJW cit �0 wad I w G� 9 'k �� - moit ve Meeting of February 18, 20 • Rhoads ✓ ✓ Davis ✓ Lucas ✓ Jordan Reynolds ✓ ✓ Thiel ✓ ✓ / X Cook Marr ✓ ✓ Mayor Coody 5 Drck S "'A c� ru Rhoads ✓ ylyJ� � Davis ✓ Lucas l�Ute" Jordan Reynolds 7 " �Thie1 Cook Marr Mayor Coody Meeting of February 18, 2000 • Al d DM D313 ,b Rhoads � Q Davis ve �Ml'—npL�l Lucas ✓ Jordan Reynolds Thiel ✓ Cook f Marr Mayor Coody 6 F c"'t. Rhoads Davis Lucas Jordan /✓ Reynolds ✓� Thiel Cook Marr Mayor Coody Meeting of February 18, 200• / art NB ila �o { o (L� a YY U 1 Olaf' 4{.3 Corw�c6�� Safe, f� Rhoads ✓ Davis / pia to Lucas ✓ " lSA ^n � Jordan ✓ Reynolds ✓ (� Thiel ✓ T'�!/tJ Cook ,,,"I " / Marr '� 0� Mayor Coody NB - 4 cas Rhoads Davis ✓ Lucas Jordan ✓ Reynolds ✓ I Thiel ✓ Cook ✓ Marr Mayor Coody Meeting of February 18, 200• • ua4mkL Rhoads ✓ /u Davis Lucas ✓ C�.pl (-b� 6 +0 Jordan , 1 Reynolds ✓ / Thiel ✓ C4� " Cook µ$chi 6)*-- ' ✓ U Marr Mayor Coody �o io Spur Cs.r-P r10 � fir/" A� LP 03- a • no � SF S� T Q�d , R7e � Wastc WikWd• Rhoads ✓ ✓ Davis ✓ ✓ ? Lucas ✓ ✓ Jordan ✓ ✓ Reynolds ✓ Thiel ✓ ✓ �t �lkk�i Cook ✓ l,�Uvti Marr ✓ to/ ✓ �ue( I(aVQ Mayor Coody 4.A'• TIM CLY.� iti C6k^^'-•-'1 179-a%r�.ti, FAYETTEVILa-jE r THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS FINAL AGENDA CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 18, 2003 A meeting of the Fayetteville City Council will be held on February 18, 2003 at 6:30 p.m. in Room 219 of the City Administration Building located at 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. NOMINATING COMMITTEE REPORT AIRPORT 2002 ANNUAL REPORT DRAINAGE STUDIES: PRESENTATION BY USINFRASTRUCTURE, INC. LIBRARY PRESENTATION A. CONSENT P11 APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: Approval of the minutes from the Special City Council meeting on January 27, 2003, City Council meeting February 4, 2003 and revision of the December 3 , 2002 City Council meeting minutes. 2. PUBLIC ACCESS : A resolution accepting a contract for public access television services from March 1 , 2003 thru December 31 , 2003. 3. STORM WATER PHASE II : A resolution to authorizing the Mayor or his designee to submit the City of Fayetteville "Storm Water Phase II" permit application to the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ). Such permit application shall be submitted no later than March 10, 2003 . Compliance shall be phased over a time period of up to five years according to a schedule to be developed with ADEQ complying with all federal and state requirements. 4. PUBLIC LIBRARY: A resolution to approve naming the Fayetteville Public Library. 113 WEST MOUNTAIN 72701 479-521-7700 FAX 479-5754257 B. OLD BUSINESS 1 . WATER TANK SITE: A resolution approving the sale of 3 .0 acres of n , „ , �,Q the City's Gully Rd. Water Tank site (12.0 ac) as requested by Ozark f{J� Electric Cooperative for the appraised price of $ 105.000.00 including access to and from Gulley Road, plus payment for specific City costs associated with the preparation of said property to be sold. The resolution was tabled at the December 17, 2002 City Council meeting. 2. VA 03-1 .00: An ordinance approving vacation request VA 03- 1 .00 as submitted by Kim Scott of Mountain Mechanical Contractors on behalf of Gary Harvey of AMC Land Associates and Mountain Mechanical Contractors for property located west of S. School Avenue on 9's Street. The request is to vacate a section of the street right of way as shown and described on the attached map and legal description. The ordinance was left on first reading at the February 4, 2003 City Council meeting. 3. ANX 03-01.00: An ordinance approving annexation request ANX 03- 01 .00 for property owned by George and Sara Lee Anderson and located at 3632 East Zion Road. The parcel is in the Planning Area and contains 57.00 acres. The request is to annex into the City. The ordinance was left on the first reading at the February 4, 2003 City Council meeting. 4. RZN 034.00: An ordinance approving rezoning request RZN 03-4.00 as submitted by Michele Harrington of Harrington, Miller, Neihouse & Krug on property owned by George and Sara Lee Anderson and located at 3632 East Zion Road. The property is currently in the Planning Area with a request to be annexed into the City of Fayetteville pending and contains approximately 57.00 acres. The request is to rezone to R-1 , Low Density Residential. The ordinance was left on the first reading at the February 4, 2003 City Council meeting. 5. DICKSON ENHANCEMENT: A resolution approving Change Order #5 to the construction contract with Township Builders, Inc. for Dickson Street Enhancement Project. The resolution was tabled at the January 21 , 2003 City Council meeting. C. NEW BUSINESS 1. ADM 03-3.00: A resolution to approve amendments to the Bill of Assurance submitted with Ordinance No. 4411 , passed and approved by the City Council on September 3, 2002. 2. OFFER & ACCEPTANCE : A resolution to approve the Offer and Acceptance Contract between the City of Fayetteville and the University of Arkansas for a price of $370,000.00 3. COMPOSTING SITE : A resolution authorizing staff to begin the purchasing process for a compost row turner and to solicit bids for a contractor to construct the compost pad. 4. COMPACTOR AND DROPBOX BUSINESS EXPANSION : A resolution approving a budget in the amount of one million one hundred seventy-three thousand two hundred eight dollars ($ 1 , 173,208.00) to allow the Solid Waste and Recycling division to implement a new commercial drop box program. 5. NEW COMMERCIAL COMPACTOR AND DROP BOX PROGRAM : A resolution authorizing the hiring of seven (7) additional full time employees to implement a new commercial compactor and drop box program. 6. VA 03-2.00: An ordinance approving vacation request VA 03-2.00 as submitted by Gary Coover of McClelland Consulting Engineers on behalf of lames Ezell of the University of Arkansas for property located north of Fairview Street on Harmon Avenue and alleys west of Harmon Avenue, Fayetteville, Arkansas. The request is to vacate Harmon Avenue between Fairview Street and William Street and the alleys west of Hannon Avenue. D. INFORMATIONAL I . COUNCIL TOUR: February 25, 2003 at 4:00 p.m. Nominating Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, February 3, 2003 Room 111 . City Hall Chairman Alderman Don Marr called the committee meeting to order 4:35 pm Committee Members Present: Alderman Shirley Lucas, Alderman Robert Rhoads, Alderman Kyle Cook, and Alderman Don Marr The Nominating committee reviewed the schedule of applicants, and the packet of information prepared by City Clerk Sondra Smith. The packets contained positions to be filled, along with a description on term appointment lengths, special requirements (i.e. representative of the business community, or field of forestry, etc.) The committee then began interviews as scheduled by the City Clerk's office. All applicants were interviewed with the exception of Mr. John Duval — applicant for the Trees and Landscape Committee (unable to make the appointment) and Bill Ackerman (Applicant withdrew his application for Parks and Recreation Advisory Board). A variety of questions were ask of the applicants with a focus on meeting attendance, citizen of Fayetteville, reason for interest in the position they were seeking, prior volunteer activities, etc. After interviews appointments were made to all committees where there were more appointments than applicants. This was done because all applicants appeared to be qualified and strong candidates for appointment. The following recommendations for appointments fell in this category: • Audit Committee — William (Bill) Golbuff- 3 yr term ending 12/31/05 • Tree & Landscape Committee — o Joel Rudolph — 2 yr term, ending 12/31/04 filling the Field of Forestry o John Dnvat= 2 yr term, ending42/31/049-frBingenvironmental foebs un treeipreservstion, and pending no issues with reapplying since be vas-ueabkto' make the appointment o Beverly Melton — 2 yr term, ending 12/31/04 Citizen at Large o Jonathan.Fry - 2-yr term,eadieg-1-2/31M*,-Clkizenat Large. Jgnathaa was arroriginai appticantferthe f'arks•Beard,-heweyer aiioreelhein�selected fbrthe parks-board•4he committee felt.that JOjuatharaavas-rstibng applicant and should be considered ferother The other recommendations for appointments had some discussion. The discussion on the Airport board was around, reducing `conflict of issue' potential, and making appointments that involved the average citizens, so that it did not appear that we were making appointment of individuals only involved in the airport itself. The committee took comment from Mr. Rick McKinney, chairman of the Airport Board, Mr. Ray Boudreaux, and Mr. Charles Wallace. The nominating committee recommends the following appointments • Airport Board - o Michael Andrews — reappointment as the Business Representative on the Airport Board, 5 yr terra, ending 12/31/07 o Bob Nickle — new appointment as Member at Large, 5 yr term, ending 12/31/07 The discussion of the Parks Board applicants centered around 3 reappointments. The committee felt that we had 3 very hard working, great attendance volunteers that should be reappointed and the discussion of the 41h appointment centered on stronger qualifications and experience in the National Parks system. The committee recommends the following appointments • Parks and Recreation Advisory Board — o Jerry Bailey — new appointment, 2 yr term, ending 12/31/04 o Wade Coldwell, reappointment, 2 yr term, ending 12/31/04 o Gail Fads, reappointment, 2 yr term, ending 12/31/04 o Bob Shoulders, reappointment, 2 yr term, ending 12/31/04 The committee ended by discussion the need for attendance requirements to be studied for committees and written within the bylaws of various committees for members attendance requirements, and particularly the major commissions & boards, like the Planning Commission, Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, etc. The committee also recommended that committees that had no applicants such as the Housing Authority Board of Commissioners, and the Telecommunications Board be advertised for openings, and to encourage all Aldermen to seek applicants that might have an interest and be qualified for these openings. We still need to fill one Telecommunications Board unexpired term that goes through 6/30/03 and one five-year term ending 12/31/07 for the Housing Authority Board of Commissioners. It is the understanding of the nominating committee that this Board should seek their applicants and make a recommendation to the nominating committee per their by laws. The nominating committee meeting adjourned at 6:40 pm • • • Property of the City Clerk • • • h Fayetteville Municipal Airport • • Dra.Ce Fzeld • THE RECENT HISTORY • ' OF DRAKE FIELD • • • A supplement of the Annual Report of the Drake Field Advisory Board • • FEBRUARY 2003 • • • • • • • • oA • D N • T N • C 0 • v • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • THE RECENT HISTORY OF DRAKE FIELD - A SUPPLEMENT • TO THE DRAKE FIELD AIRPORT BOARD ANNUAL REPORT - • For the Year Ending December 2002 • By Frank B. Burggraf, Board Secretary PREFACE. • Originally intended as a draft of the Fayetteville Municipal Airport Boards Annual • Report, the first draft prepared by the Secretary proved to be more than a mere chronicle • of the year's activities. The Board decided that it should stand alone, as an account of the circumstances surrounding the departure of commercial aviation from Drake Field. It also • concludes my service with the Board. In June of 1996, Leo Yonda, then in his second • term on the Board, and who had been elected Chairman on April 1 1993 , resigned from • the Board as he had moved to Winslow. I served out his term and currently complete my • own full term. 1 am now obliged to conclude my Board service, because, ironically, 1 also moved to Winslow, and while the City Council authorized me to continue to the • conclusion of my term, further service cannot be permitted from someone not a citizen of • Fayetteville. • Thus, 1 enjoy the perspective of a long involvement in the Board's activities and can • relate matters with candor and without necessarily implicating the Board or the Drake Field Managers in those associated opinions herein set forth. It is my sincere belief that • Drake Field is now at the threshold of becoming the premier airport of Northwest Arkansas, if not of the tri-state region. • • INTRODUCTION The filing of an annual report by the Drake Field Airport Board would normally be appropriate. This year, however, it is particularly significant for several reasons: • • First, the past year saw the appointment of a new Director, Ray Boudreaux and the • reconstitution of the Airport Board. • Second, the election of new Alderman suggests appropriate briefing on the history and functioning of Drake Field. Third, the considerable lack of public information about the recent history, functioning • and prospects of the airport, as well as the misinformation that attended the departure of • airline service from Drake Field suggests some factual narrative. • Finally, the Airport Board has committed itself to plans and policies for the operation and • development of Drake Field, which it has developed and which needs to be • communicated to the City Council, and the Mayor who will necessarily make their • realization possible. • • • • 1 • • • • BACKGROUND Aviation is customarily divided into three major categories. Commercial airline service is • what most people think of when they think of the operation of an airport. There is also • military aviation- Air Force, Navy, Marines and Army all have flying programs with both active and reserve components participating. The third category is called General • Aviation and it embraces a diversity of activities including business flying, charter • passenger service, cargo transport, crop dusting, photogrametric and aerial surveying • activity, flight training and recreation flying. Recreation flying, in tum, covers a mix of distinctly different activities. Recreation activity includes both military and civilian • historic aircraft restorations and air shows. It also includes experimental and ultra-light • flying activities, gliders, sailplanes, balloons and skydiving. It also includes skywriting • and acrobatic flying. It also includes using the aircraft as the means of transportation to • various locations for recreation such as access to ski areas, golf courses, resorts, and national parks or even to other countries. • • General Aviation is a fifteen billion dollar industry that generates an additional forty-five • billion dollars in annual economic activity. General Aviation aircraft fly an estimated twenty-nine million hours annually. This is more than twice the hours flown by all the • airlines. More than 70% of the general aviation hours are for business and commercial • purposes. General aviation airports serve more than 5 ,000 communities while scheduled • airlines serve less than 500. • The Federal government, in carrying out its role in support of aviation, also has a fleet of • aircraft, which are dispatched to test and calibrate navigational aids, landing systems and • in the investigation of crashes. The FAA is responsible for maintaining radar controls of flight, weather briefing of pilots and the operation of control towers as well as the administration of pilot licensing and certification. It also administers certification of the airworthiness of all aircraft. It has a long history of regulating airways and airports. In the creation of facilities in support of aviation, the Federal and State governments operate in a manner similar to the Bureau of Public Roads and State Highway • Departments in that they disburse funds from taxes on the fuel consumed by all aircraft. • Certain facilities such as runways, taxiways, instrument landing systems and airport • lighting may be paid almost entirely from these funds. In tum, the government establishes standards that must be met in order to qualify for such funding and for safe operation. • • A municipal field such as Drake field normally derives income from several sources. • They include the leasing of buildings or ground on which to construct buildings, car • rentals and other support activities, as well as landing fees. Sometimes it leases facilities to store and repair aircraft. Sometimes it derives income from the operation of fuel sales • and by leasing facilities to a Fixed Base Operator or FBO. The FBO services aircraft with fuel, mechanical repairs, deicing, and a host of services associated with aircraft operations. Sometimes the municipality will function as the FBO • as Drake Field currently does. The income from various activities supports the various • • • Z • • • • operations of the field, maintenance and capital improvements. Customarily improvements that qualify for federal and state assistance require some monies from the • airport. Over the years Drake field accumulated a significant income from the airline's • operations, which was placed in an account that draws interest and from which funds are • drawn for capital improvements as well as day-to-day operations. It is from these funds that Drake Field has been operating since the departure of the airlines. It is important to • note that, as yet, there has not been any use of city funds derived from the taxpayers. Of • importance to the city is the husbanding of these resources in such manner that taxpayer • monies need not be employed and that operations in time might again generate enough income to support all operations. In this regard the Airport Board has spent considerable • effort in devising accounting procedures that permit the regular determination of the • fiscal situation and that can provide insight into development strategies. REGULATION AND DEREGULATION • At one time if you wanted telephone service you applied to "THE" telephone company. • They would install a phone that was a black, rotary dial instrument for which you paid • rent in addition to a local charge fixed by the State regulatory agency and long distance charges fixed by the Federal Communications Commission. If you had a phone twenty • years you still paid rent on it. If you wanted to relocate a phone, telephone people had to • do it. Even the military, which had technicians capable of relocating and connecting • phones, was obliged to call in telephone company people to move commercial phones. • In the early seventies Alfred E. Kahn, former Dean of Arts and Sciences at Cornell • University and a Professor of Economics of intemational reputation, became Head of the • New York State Department of Public Service (PSC). Hearings were held on why • customers should not be able to connect telephones or other equipment that they would own. The Company insisted that such connections would disturb the integrity of the • system. Testimony of experts revealed that those allegations were not founded on • scientific fact and the PSC ordered the company to permit private connections. • Subsequently, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) initiated similar hearings that led to the deregulation of the industry and compelled AT&T to divest itself of local • exchanges and its research arm and to permit other long distance companies to compete. • The results are everywhere obvious to us. • We can purchase telephones of all colors, shapes, sizes and sounds, some for less than • what was once a monthly rental, and we can put them in service anywhere within our • home or business with a connection to a system that may involve different local • telephone companies and long distance servers. Deregulation permitted more economies, • new technologies (such as fiber optics) and better quality services than regulated monopoly of the industry. • • During the Carter administration Professor Kahn was employed as the Director of the • FAA that, up to that time, regulated the airlines in the assignment of routes. It was argued by many authorities that the system prevented real competition and innovation and • perpetuated marginal companies and unproductive routes. Kahn presided over the • • • 3 • • • • subsequent deregulation that modernized the airline industry (The Airline Deregulation • Act of 1978). In some instances by bankrupting some companies and forcing consolidations and, in others, by permitting new, lean operators to compete for new • service. The market share of independent commuter airlines such as Air Midwest eroded • as strong commuter tics to the major airlines became the dominant force in short-haul markets. Subsequently Kahn was appointed as Jimmy Carter's economic advisor. As of • August of 1996, five commuter airlines served FYV. All five had code-sharing links to • major airlines for a combined total of 46 daily departures. American Eagle captured 43 percent of passengers at FYV during 1995 . This market • share was twice that of ASA and TW Express which captured 20 percent, nearly four • times that of Northwest Airlink which captured 12 percent and over six times that of • USAIR Express which captured 6 percent. • In theory, the new FAA was to encourage competition to the ultimate benefit of the • airline passengers, through improved routing and lower fares. As we shall see, this • proved not to be the case in the competition between Drake Field (FYV) and the • Northwest Regional Airport (XNA) at Highfill. • THE CHALLENGE • • It is no secret that the regional airport was created largely for the benefit of Walmart. Its location makes it convenient to their Bentonville headquarters, but makes it much less • convenient to people from Fayetteville. When it became evident that the regional airport • (XNA) would draw airlines from Drake Field several strategies were considered. It was • decided that given a level playing field, Drake could compete and retain some airline • service. It was later to become evident that the field was not level and, as we shall see, that the full might of Walmart, politics and even some FAA aiding and abetting the efforts was directed to eliminating almost all Flying activities from Drake. • Drake field is situated surrounded by hills. The runway was thought to be limited in • length by the topography. In retrospect, considering what would be spent to start XNA • from scratch, it would have been more economical to extend the runway by such heroic • measures as depressing highway 71 B, moving hills and even relocating some local • businesses. Drake field's location near the Interstate would also have obviated the need for improved highway access contemplated now for XNA and estimated to be nearly 50 • million dollars more. This was not to say that Drake Field, at the time, was not pressing the limits of some of its facilities. It had been growing at an unprecedented 1 I % a year • with an overall increase from 1978 through 1995 of nearly 200%. • W.A . Schwab and W. D. Mangold of the University of Arkansas prepared a study of the • use of Drake field in June of 1997, entitled: • "Survey of Resident Passengers at the Fayetteville Municipal Airport : Place of • Residence and Workplace, Travel Times and Altitudes about Regional Airport." • • • • 4 • • • • • It disclosed travel patterns and travel times from passenger's homes and workplaces to • Drake field. It complemented an earlier survey done in 1996. Conducted between Mayl4 • and June 6, 1997 it sampled flights from each time period, interviewing about 300 • passengers. Among the findings was that: • 58% of the passengers flew for business reasons. Sampled passengers flew frequently, on average 13 .2 times in the past year. • One third of the passengers were residents of Fayetteville. Rogers had the next • largest number of residents followed by Springdale, Bentonville and Bella Vista. • Residents of Northwest Arkansas made up half the sample, but accounted for nearly 70% of all boarding. Resident business passengers made up only 23% of • the sample, yet they accounted for 51 % of the boarding. Resident business • travelers averaged over 19 flights per year. • One third of all passengers in the survey have flown from Tulsa or other regional • airports in the last year. Longer travel times were offset by advantages of more and superior Oct) connections with major cities. Although Tulsa flyers • acknowledged the large number of daily flights from the Fayetteville airport and • its convenience. • Over two thirds of the passengers worked in the region's four largest cities. The largest number being employed in Fayetteville, followed by Bentonville, • Springdale, and Rogers. • • Nearly three-quarters of the passengers felt they were informed or very well informed about the Northwest Arkansas Regional Airport. Sixty four percent felt • the construction of the regional airport was a good idea. • • The analysis examined various factors and strategies, and finding that a large number of • passengers lived and worked in Fayetteville it encouraged the belief that Drake Field should have a competitive advantage in retaining some airline service. The study of travel times indicated those who did not think XNA was a good idea expected their driving time • to increase by 21 minutes. Fayetteville alone accounted for 35% of the flyers yet • represented only 30% of the two county populations. In a separate analysis the Schwab- Mangold study estimated that nearly 60,000 people live within 10 miles of Drake Field, • while 46,000 live within the same distance of XNA • • MYTHS • A lot of misinformation has been circulated about Drake Field, some of it calculated to • create disfavor with its viability. It has been asserted, for example, that operations arc • frequently hindered because of morning fog. Kelly Johnson, the XNA airport manager • recently repeated this assertion to a local newspaper. As former assistant manager of Drake Field she certainly should know better. During the period when the airlines • operated at Drake failures to meet the flight schedules for ALL reasons including • equipment and personnel problems never exceeded 2%. Now that XNA is a reality and • both fields have nearly the same minimums XNA has more days with fog-imposed limitations than Drake. About the time that XNA first opened, Governor Huckabee flew • in for the dedication of the Hopper tunnel on the Interstate. Both fields were socked in at • • • 5 • • • • the time and his plane circled the area waiting for the fog to lift. He landed at Drake field about fifteen minutes before XNA went above minimums. • • In Fayetteville Municipal Airport Master Plan Update, of June, 1999 URS • Greiner, the Planning Consultants, stated that based on meteorological data, Drake Field operates 91 .4 percent of the time under VFR (Visual Flight Rules) • conditions and 7 percent of the time under IFR ( Instrument Flight Rules) • conditions. Weather conditions below minimums of the available approach • occurred approximately 1 .6 percent of the time. Further Runway 16/34 provides a • wind coverage pf 99. 77 percent during all weather conditions with a maximum crosswind component of 16 Knots. • Another fiction was that the six thousand foot runway at Drake field was insufficient for operation of jets under conditions of full load and fuel. Before the airlines departed Drake • the FAA announced it would open a few slots at Chicago O' Hare an airport so congested • that the FAA regulated the opportunities for landing and taking off. American Eagle • proposed to fly jet service from XNA if awarded the slots. They would not offer such service from Drake. The President of Atlantic Coast Airways, CEO Kerry B. Skeen, • accompanied by Senior Vice President/Customer Service Mike Davis and Public • Relations Manager Jennifer Heronema flew in to Drake in a brand new United Express • Canadair Regional Passenger jet on January 20, 1998. • In a public announcement attended by the press, aldermen and airport board members, he proposed to immediately offer jet service to Chicago if awarded the necessary slots. • Atlantic Coast Airlines (ACA). Which operates in the eastern United States as United • Express, announced on December 17, 1997 that it had applied to the U. S. Department of Transportation for "slots" to operate three round-trip flights with 50 passenger regional • jet aircraft between Chicago's O' Hare Intemational Airport and Fayetteville/Drake Field. If granted the slots ACA would have begun service as early as March 1998. • Tours of the new plane were invited and the pilot spoke of its versatility. When asked if • he could operate from Drake with a full fuel load and maximum passengers, he replied • that he could easily take off with such a load and if he lost an engine could still continue • to climb at 1 ,500 feet per minute- a significant performance statistic. The Drake Airport • Board proposed supporting Atlantic Coast's proposal and requested Mayor Hannah to send a strong letter to the FAA in that respect. lie was unwilling to do so. While it is • uncertain if it would have made any difference, it indicated to the board, a reluctance to • fully support Drake field. Similarly the Fayetteville Chamber of Commerce appeared to • support XNA over Drake or at best was ambiguous about it, considering the loss of revenues that would obviously result. See the copy of the letter of Dale Frederick to • Chamber Member, Addendum 1 . • Again to quote the Master Plan Update, "FAA criteria specify that the runway • length requirements for an airport such as FYV be determined using the 75% fleet at 60% useful load unless a critical aircraft having a greater requirement can be • identified. A runway length of 5,500 feet is required. For aircraft greater than • • • 6 • • • • 60,000 pounds, the required runway length is 5 ,870 feet based on a haul length of 700 miles. This haul length was selected because it is sufficient to reach the next • layer of hub airports not currently serving FYV such as Atlanta, Chicago, • Cincinnati, Denver and Minneapolis." • "According to FAA Master Record Form 5010- 1 , Runway 16/34 has pavement • strength of 90,000 pounds single wheel loading, 150,000 pounds dual-wheel • loading, and 175,000 pounds dual wheel tandem loading. This strength is • sufficient to accommodate all existing and future aircraft projected to regularly • operate at I'YV." • THE RESPONSE • Ruddy Furr was hired to undertake a marketing effort both to try to retain airlines serving • Drake Field and to attract others. In January of 1997, the Board forwarded Airline • Contract modifications to City Council. It provided for a reduction of five percent in their rental each year for five years, provided they remain at Drake Field. Kelly L. Johnson, • the Assistant Manager for Drake Field for ten years began her new job as Airport • Manager for Northwest Regional Airport on the first of November 1996. • It had also been rumored that Drake field is not safe. The following arc some of the • things that have been done in the interests of improving service and safety at Drake: • Terminal Expansion (Phase 1) June 1995 $498,000 Replacement of runway and taxi lights including provisions for operation from the Control Tower, including the ability to increase intensity. Contract approved • December 1996. • Runway obstructions removal February 1997 $3 ,0009000 • Runway 16 Safety Area Extension September 1996 $ 755,734 • • Terminal Expansion (Phase 11) September 1996 $ 484,347 • Snowplow January 1997 $ 111 ,534 • New snow blower (3000 tons/hr.) Added to airport equipment. Some of this equipment was later loaned to XNA to help them during a severe snowstorm. • December 1996 $ 269,307 • Ramp Sweeper March 1997 $ 585314 • • LDA Installation' August 1997 5 1 ,010,409 • ' A state-of-the-art Localized Directional Aid with Glide Slope was completed in 1996. • the LDA was funded entirely out of the Drake Field funds with no FAA assistance. This • • 7 • • • • was an effort to have the landing minimums returned to 312 feet MLS and 3/4 mile visibility. In spite of the ILS system being installed and land clearing on the north and • south ends of the Airport in compliance with FAA and the Oceanic Construction Team' s • measurements the FAA continued to drag its feet on lowering the minimums. • After visits to the FAA office in Ft. Worth and many phone calls, the Oklahoma • City FAA said they would publish a NOTAM (official notice to airmen) that would give • the general flying public a decision height of 500 feet. They would provide special • instructions to the airlines familiar with Drake that would allow them to approach down • to 312. The published approach plates still said 500 feet. Nowhere in the country did a similar proposition exist. Working relationships with FAA people had always been • productive and cordial, and remained so. None of those contacts could explain why the • approvals were not forthcoming. • Dr. McFarland, Director Emeritus of the Avionics Engineering Center, an expert on the • ILS who oversaw the design and installation and who contacted the FAA several times on • behalf of Drake Field, could find no reason or explanation why full approval of the • minimums was not forthcoming. After fruitless efforts to determine where the approval was being held up a trip was made in July of 1997, to the FAA office by board members • and the airport manager. An employee, Pete Dula newly assigned from Alaska as • manager of the FAA, s Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), arranged a 60 day pilot • comment period for review of the LDA-DME He told us that he would assure us • approval or provide us with the reasons why not, if a majority of evaluations received were positive. We got his assurance, but it was not until December 5, 1997, almost a year • after completion that the minimums were officially set as 312ft and I mile. We later • learned that the employee who had pressed for the approval was transferred to • Washington. Whether this was because of or in spite of his assistance is not known. There was continued contact with FAA to secure a further reduction to '/< mile. See • Addendum 2, a letter to FAA from Alett Little of October 30, 2000, and Donald Harris 's • response. The minimum remains I mile. • Expansion of employee/permit parking lot ( 1 12 spaces). At this time the long • term and short-term lots were at capacity about three times a week. • July 1997 $ 50,000 • Sewer Lift Station November 1997 $ 96, 167 • • Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting Truck • March 1998 S 288,377 • Terminal Passenger Canopy March 1998 $ 158,746 • • Safety Area Extension Runway 34 June 1998 $ 706,533 • Fire Station July 1998 $ 666,600 • • • • 8 • • • • Commercial Ramp Rehabilitation and Expansion August 1998 S 600,290 • • Above Ground Fuel Farm November 1998 $ 364,000 • (To comply with new environmental standards) • • There seems little doubt that the FAA was working with the Walmartians to ensure its • investment in XNA would not fail for want of air traffic. They had invested huge sums in • outright, unprecedented grants and matching funds. Alice Walton ' s firm marketed the Bonds which were never actually offered to the public. Only four investment houses • purchased all but 3 .715 million of the 75 .5 million bonds. It was increasingly evident that • the cards were stacked against Drake Field. The last of the airlines, the Delta Connection • left Drake Field. In the time that they operated as the Ione airline they were almost 100% booked. Given the choice, a large portion of the market preferred the convenience of • Drake Field. • • One remaining advantage at Drake Field was a Microwave Landing System (MLS) , one of the very few in the United States. It was used by the military and for a period of time • we had C- 130s from around the country practicing approaches as the MLS is a very • common system in Europe and with many flights to Bosnia and other places in support of • our military, these practices were useful. We had aircraft from as far away as Minnesota • regularly making these approaches. The system went into service On May 9, 1995 and was paid for entirely out of airport revenues. The United States Air Force shot two MLS • approaches in its VC-25A Boeing aircraft, more commonly identified as "Air Force • One". XNA announced it had executed a contract with the military to supply jet fuel to • transient military aircraft. We learned from Little Rock AFB that they now "preferred" to land on longer runways when training crews and were thus going into XNA. This, • notwithstanding the fact that C- 130s have the capability of landing and taking off on very • short runways. Indeed during their active use of Drake it was not unusual to watch the C- • 130s shoot multiple TAGS (Touch and go) s and once in a while stop and refuel. When the MLS went down for repair FAA was reluctant to put it back in service. In a letter, • Richard J. Macha, Manager of the FAA Red Rivers System Management Office in • Bethany, Oklahoma pointed out that its repair was expensive since it is manufactured in • Germany and the cost no longer justifics its operation and they would decommission it. • Dale Frederick, then the Drake Field Manager had made inquiries of the various military units that had employed it in the past and all said they no longer needed it. Thus in June of 2000 we allowed the decommissioning. These flights were important, as the maintenance of the Control Tower by FAA is contingent upon enough flights to warrant the expense of maintaining it. General aviation • flights count much less than airline and military operations. For this reason the current • budget provides for what the FAA has calculated we must pay towards the continued • operation of the Control Tower. The Board remains reluctant to recommend elimination of or curtailment of Control Tower operation. We did request they consider more current • data reflecting the increased operations since their initial evaluation. See Addendum 3, • • 9 • • • • Congressman John Paul Hammerschmidt 's letter, that of John Lewis, Bank of Fayetteville, and that of Mayor Dan Coody and that of Chancellor John White, • concerning this matter. PRECISION APPROACH — FAA SHELL GAME? • In 1999 Dale Frederick, Airport Manager for Drake Field reported that he had gotten a • call from a consultant to the FAA to the effect that Fayetteville and Hot Springs had been • chosen by the FAA Southwest Region to develop and prove a WAAS approach and that such approach would result in minimums of 250 feet and I mile or less. • When it was later learned that the project had moved forward but the funding for Drake • Field as a test location of the system had been transferred to XNA it became obvious that • FAA was not going to provide any assistance to FYV that would make it competitive • with XNA. See addendum 4, Letter from Richard McKinney, Chairman of the Airport Board. • • TRANSITION At the Airport Board meeting of June 8, 2000, Dale Frederick announced that after • twenty years with the City he would be taking retirement as of July I ". He further • explained that as of July I " he would be working through a program called Stage • Retirement and would be working for Alett Little, marketing the airport. He explained that the City was merging the Economic Development Office and the Airport • Administration Office, and each office would retain its identity. Day to day management • of the Airport would be taken over by Alett and he would fill in where he could. Board Chairman, Charles Wallace commented: ". . .That he wanted to keep the big picture of what is best for the airport in front of • them and to remove as much as possible personalities and history from the present and • the potential of the Airport. He said he thought the new plan is not the best one and that • he thought they could do better. Saying that to have the Economic Development Director as a part-time manager, and a semi-retired former manager of the Airport as development • person, or the marketing person, is maybe not in the most progressive interest of the • airport. He would like to see the Board find a person who is credentialed, qualified, and • experienced to run an airport, and who is highly motivated to make this a successful • Airport." He also expressed misgivings about the Airport Board being solely an advisory board. • "Any advisory board is usually asked for advice. Big issues, like changing airport • management come to us as a done deal, the decision was made without any official input from anyone in the airport community, and particularly from the only official board we • have, and that concerned him." "The Airport Board is really, at this point, insulated enough that there is not much for us to do. What we really need is to be involved in trying to shape the future of the • airport. " • • 10 • • • • • • Alen Little responded that other City committees arc not consulted when other • department heads are hired. Those are administrative decisions that arc outside the • board 's decisions. That is not to say that it won't change if this board does evolve into an • Airport Authority. • This became the basis for some brainstorming about the how the Board could function in • the future and the extent to which they should participate in the functioning of the airport. • In retrospect it seems odd to have had a manager with no experience in running an airport • being a part-time manager. In fact, a city planner operating with developers is also something of an anomaly. As a planner Ms Little was usually in an adversarial • relationship with developers. One of the strangest developments was her interpretation • that the airport would have to apply through the planning office for a large scale • development plan such as a private developer would have to do. This is an odd arrangement as it obliges one city agency to apply to another city agency when the city • council has the deciding authority over both agencies. One particularly odd result was Ms Little's insistence that the airport should be prepared to build a sidewalk along Highway • 71 B just as if they were a private developer. This extra cost to come from the airport 's • precious and dwindling funds, notwithstanding the fact that a sidewalk exists on the opposite side of the highway that is never used. Fortunately, the matter was not pressed and the sidewalk issue was placed in Limbo. The upshot of discussions led to the • expansion of the Airport Board to include two additional members, one to come from the • University. The other intended to reflect regional interests was to permit a non-resident membership on the Board. This was not approved. There was also an affirmation from • city councilmen that they regarded the Board 's inputs extremely valuable and the • administrations expression of willingness to avoid future bypassing of the Board. • FIXED BASE OPERATIONS • • The FBO at Drake Field for many years was Aero-Tech Services, Inc. They also were the • FBO for Springdale and XNA. They provided fuel services to both the airlines and general aviation aircraft. They also provided mechanics to service aircraft. They operated • from an airport building, which they rented from the City. From time to time the city has • considered opening up the FBO to bids, particularly when there were some complaints • about the nature of the services provided. At one point Acro-Tech agreed to operate on a year-to-year basis. With the airlines move to XNA, their operations at Drake Field • diminished significantly. They transferred their mechanics to Springdale. It appeared that • their only reason to continue to operate at Fayetteville was that it pre-empted any • competition. They repeatedly argued that installation of self-service fueling would • deprive them of revenue. This had been considered by the Airport Board even before the departure of the airlines and remains one of the priorities for making Drake Field more • attractive to General Aviation. See Addendum 5 , a letter from William Underwood 's • letter to Mark Cordin of the SCS Group. • The Board favored moving operations from the building that Aero-Tech had occupied for • many years to the now vacant but newer terminal building. Alterations necessary and the • • • 11 • • • • costs associated with such action became a point of contention. Finally in the last week of July 2002, Aero Tech announced that it was departing Drake Field, a full month before !' the end of their contract. This thrust upon Drake Field 's new manager, Ray Boudreaux • and his staff, the responsibilities for Fixed Base Operations. This has proved to be one of • the bright spots of recent history as the City FBO, now in control of fuel sales and services has made Drake Field competitive. The final irony is that Aero-Tech has had • difficulties at Springdale that is forcing it to sell out its operations there. • • Shortly before this event, Alett Little resigned from her employment with the City of • Fayetteville. Clearly while she gave her best effort to the job of development and airport management, Ray Boudreaux 's appointment made her best career opportunities to lie • elsewhere. THE PROSPECTS • The reconstituted Airport Board began holding planning meetings in addition to the regular scheduled meetings. The first priority was to redefine its role and that of Drake • Field. Past attempts at Master Planning including a number of contracts with consultants, who failed to provide effective direction and indeed generated more questions than were • answered. Airport staff participated fully and a new mission statement was generated. Priorities established projects, which enabled budgeting with a clear vision of the future • of the airport. In the past the Board continued a program of constructing T hangers when • it was not entirely clear if there would be tenants. In each case, by the time they were completed they were quickly filled. The five-year plan contemplates a continuation of these provisions for general aviation as well as some additional capital expenditures. It is . the aim of the Board, to the full extent possible, to invest the accumulated funds in capital • projects that, in time, will generate enough income to make the airport self-supporting. • In the years following the departure of the airlines, the Board has sought to get a grasp on • the actual financial situation. The format of the cities budgeting failed to provide a clear • picture of how "we were doing" in terms understandable to the average person. Indeed, much has been made of the annual shortfall and presumptions about the viability of the • airport itself abounded. Assuming the role of FBO staff has initiated record keeping • which enables a monthly computer generated report that not only provides current data • but meaningful comparisons. A market study developed useful insights into the • perceptions of Drake Field by the aviation community. • It is important for the public and the City leadership to understand the enormous financial • impact of Drake Field on the local economy. First and foremost, is the impact of federal • and state funds that are expended in the community with only a limited contribution from our savings. Sec the attachment (6) that documents the projects of the past year. This money is almost entirely expended in the local economy with the purchase of materials, • the wages and salaries of consulting engineers, contractors and materials suppliers. In • addition the tenants of Drake Field that provide important aviation services such as aircraft maintenance, avionics support and flying lessons all generate economic benefits • as well as rental income to FYV. • • • 12 • • • • • • It is also tempting to compare our performance with XNA that is currently proposing to • refinance its debt of 79. 5 million dollars. It may pay a premium to buy back its bonds • estimated at between 5- 12 percent. At the same time, it is looking to make expansions • that will require additional financing. The annual savings from such refinancing, estimated at 800,000 dollars is more than the cost of all Drake Field operations. Drake • Field has no debt service. For at least the next three years, at the present rate of • expenditures, we will be able to live from our accumulated savings and returns from • operations. Even if we had to borrow or use taxpayer funds with the return from such capital investments as we are experiencing it would obviously still be prudent to do so. • Attached at the end of this report the addendum (6) is a breakdown of the capital • improvements of the last year that shows how much Drake Field has contributed to the • Fayetteville economy. • With the prospects of the Forest Service flying out of Drake Field (and the additional • investments, salaries, fuel purchases represented) the number of takeoffs and landings • will also increase thus perhaps diminishing the City' s costs of the control tower. • LONG RANGE PLANNING • • The Master plan update prepared by URS GREINER in June of 1999 was an ambitious • undertaking. It recognized the potential of XNA to capture commercial operations from Drake Field. It analyzed three possible futures for Drake based upon the assumptions that • none of the airlines would leave, some of the airlines would depart, or all of the airlines • would depart. For each of the scenarios appropriate projections were made for the future • of Drake with respect to what additions would be required and some of these options were cost estimated. • During the brief period of Alett Little 's incumbency she engaged yet another planning • firm to do an update. Again there were projections and plans prepared. Unfortunately • neither of these expenses seems justified by hindsight as almost all of the projections • failed to be of use to the Board. The Board chose to continue to construct T-Hangers in the belief that the best hope for Drake was to encourage the growth of general aviation. In • Grenicr's Plan they projected a T Hanger in each of 1997, 2007 and 2017. The Board has • relied on its own projections and all three of the projected T-Hangers were built and are • currently fully occupied. Another is planned. The five-year capital budget is the best long-range plan yet devised. Expenditures for outside consultants to update the Master • Plan in the near term would now seem unwise and redundant • • PROSPECTS • It is difficult to predict the future with respect to aviation. Clearly the 9- 11 tragedy has • changed the complexion of aviation not only in terms of the airlines, but the • encouragement of business to look toward more use of there own aircraft. The possibility • of war and rising fuel costs make projections suspect. These will still likely benefit FYV. It is obvious that the longer delays and security problems of airline flights make it • attractive for businessmen to seek more general aviation solutions to their travel needs. • • • 13 • • • • There is renewed interest in possible commuter flights from Drake. At some point in • time, competition may even generate interest in scheduled airline service or Drake may function as a reliever airport as XNA continues to grow. The bankruptcy of United • Airlines is indeed a grim omen of the vagaries facing the industry. All of the airlines are • in financial difficulty and people are increasingly avoiding flying making matters worse. Added costs such as a charge of $80 for a third checked bag and watering down frequent • flyer advantages are adding to the passenger discomforts. Annoyances and inconveniences of the increased security measures are such that people will avoid flying • whenever they can. • In this light the future of Drake Field remains promising. At one time all of the station managers of the airlines at Drake indicated that they were unlikely to relocate to • anywhere that costs were significantly higher. Yet they all did. There is no doubt that our • costs remain competitive. Perhaps there may yet be room for a link to one of the nearby hubs. XNA has achieved its goals and is operating at capacity and is no longer trying to keep FY V from other revenue sources and traffic. The return of athletic team charters, to • FYV, for example, is indicative of this trend. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 14 •