Little River Airport Chapter of the California Pilots Association work party May 25 at 10AM We are planning a work party for Saturday May 25 from 10am to 2pm to complete painting the airport office building. We made a great start on the weekend of 5/11-5/12 with a good turnout. We still have the back wall to caulk, prime and paint, and we still have the trim to paint. We had hoped to finish up the weekend of 5/18-5/19, but there was rain through 5/18 and the building wasn't dry enough for painting. The work-party will include a pot-luck lunch. Tim and Diana Scully will bring soft beverages. If the weather is wet or foggy on May 25, we'll try Sunday May 26. If the weather is still bad, or if we haven't completed the work, we'll meet again on Saturday June 1 at 10am with Sunday the 2nd as a fall-back time in case of bad weather. Bring food for the pot-luck. Wear old clothes, and bring gloves and goggles or glasses if you have them. Tim Scully Minutes of the Ad Hoc Airport Advisory Committee 4/28/96 The Little River Airport Ad Hoc Airport Advisory Committee met on Sunday 4/28/96 from 4-6:00pm. Five committee members were present: Tim, Trey, Jack, Susan and Joel. Norma, Dick Ahrens, Neil Boyle (from the Mendocino Beacon), Charlie Meinershagen, Richard Gallagher and Jim Davis were also present. Diana Scully was present for part of the meeting. We agreed that the next Ad Hoc meeting will take place Sunday, May 12 from 4-6pm at Coast Flyers. minutes ------- The minutes of the previous meeting were approved. Trey asked if the two letters had been sent to the County. Tim said he thought he'd sent copies to the committee members, and said he'd send them with the minutes of this meeting. One letter asked the Supervisors to personally contact the FAA regarding the timber harvest revenue and the other asked the Supervisors to contact Caltrans to request a response to our proposed noise abatement policy. reports ------- Tim reported that he contacted Bill Heil to ask for advice regarding tree planing near the pond where trees have blown down. He also asked Bill about whether it makes sense to plant anything in the areas that once were graded (e.g., the infield and approach zones). He explained the concern that Trey has raised about the roots from plants breaking up the pigmy soil and causing drainage problems. Bill said that he doubts that planting will cause drainage problems and cited the example of roads which don't have cleared zones on the shoulders. He suggested that water-loving plants would be best near the pond, perhaps a member of the willow family. He suggested several possible contacts for additional information: Tom Schott, Els Cooperrider, Greg Guisti and Teresa Sholars. He also put Linda Perkin on the phone. Linda has walked around the airport with Els Cooperrider, specifically looking at what might be done with native grasses in the graded areas. She and Els had thought in terms of some small (perhaps 10'x10') test plantings to see what would grow well. Bill and Linda suggested that we might be able to get seeds or a grant from the Hoplan Field Station. Bill and Linda asked if we were interested in organizing opposition to the timber harvest at Little River. Bill said that he sees damage from the original construction, 50 years ago, that has not been repaired. He has been attending Forest Council meetings. I invited them to come to an Ad Hoc Committee meeting and talk with us. Susan Winding volunteered to follow up the leads that Bill suggested and do more research on what we might plant. Tim reported that the pilot's 501(c)3 group had voted in its meeting earlier in the day to organize as a chapter of the California Pilots Association and scheduled an initial work-party for Saturday 5/11/96 at 10AM to start on painting the airport office. Jim Davis --------- Jack Reichel brought a guest, Jim Davis. Jim is a Director of the California Pilot's Association. He spoke for a few minutes about CPA and its activities. He is from Modesto, where they had a problem with development encroaching on the airport's approach path. Their CPA chapter took the devloper to court, with help from CPA's legal fund and legal services department. They were able to stop the undesired development. Hangars ------- We handed out copies of Dick's 4th draft hangar report. Trey said he wants more of his history and excerpts from the Airport Master Plan included. We agreed to go through Dick's draft paragraph by paragraph, editing as we go. We got through page 11, giving Dick various edits to make. The session was productive. Jack Reichel had prepared a written statement on the hangar issue which he read to the group. A copy is appended to these minutes. Dick will work on another draft of the report and will try to get it to Tim in time for duplication and distribution before our next meeting. other business -------------- Charlie Meinershagen donated $20 for postage and copying costs, Richard Gallagher donated $10. Next Meeting ------------ We agreed that we will meet next on 5/12 from 4-6pm and that the agenda will be: - approve minutes - reports on recent events - hangars - GPS approach - non-aviation uses - timber harvest - tree planting - Airport Land Use manual mentioned in the CPA - agree on agenda for next meeting April 29, 1996 To: Tim Scully, Chairman Mendocino County Airport ad hoc Aviation Advisory Committee Dear Tim, Following is a summary of my personal view of the Hangar issue: 1. The policy of the County to take over the hangars was a personal agenda item for Norm de Vall and was pushed through the Board in 1991. However, with de Vall now gone and the July 1999 takeover date getting closer, the unanswered questions from de Vall's resolution are looming larger and larger, namely: a. How much will the purchase of the hangars cost the County? A buyout at the "depreciated value" as specified in the resolution will never fly legally since it is an unlawful appropriation, and the "Fair Market Value" would probably end up being the governing criterion. This would therefore end up totalling at least $400,000 (16 hangars x 25K each, min.) b. Where will this capital outlay come from and is this a beneficial use of County funds? c. The County presently receives an average of $132 per month from each hangar. The County could possibly receive up to an additional $40 per month per hangar if they owned them and rented them out, but then they would be responsible for maintenace (painting, roofs, windstorm damage, etc.) which would probably end up being a push. d. Therefore, if the County expends $400,000 capital to purchase the hangars (plus the extensive administrative costs for appraisals, liability insurance, possible lawsuits, staff costs, etc.) they would probably end up with no additional annual revenue and would have $400,000 of capital tied-up. 2. But after all this capital outlay and administrative machinations related to the County purchasing the existing private hangars, the present problem of hangar shortage would still not be alleviated. 3. I recommend that if the County still desires to ultimately obtain the private hangars they change the resolution to a policy of retaining First Right of Refusal, based on a fair market value and a timely decision period. ------------------------ Jack Reichel