Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-08-14-minutes-public-works-study-sessionKITTITAS COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Public Works Study Session Regular Meeting Monday August 14, 2017 - 1:30 PM Commissioners' Auditorium 205 West 5th Room 109 - Ellensburg 1. Call to Order 2. Bowers Field Runway Update 3. Other business 4. Adjourn Created on 8/11/2017 7:5924 AM KITTITAS COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS STUDY SESSION MINUTES COMMISSIONERS' AUDITORIUM, 205 WEST 5TH ROOM 109 - ELLENSBURG Regular Meeting MONDAY Board members present O'Brien 1:30 PM August 14, 2017 Chairman Paul Jewell; Vice -Chairman Obie Others: Mark Cook, Candie Leader, Public Works; Dan Carlson, Stephanie Mifflin (CDS); Neil Caulkins (PA); David Miller, Kurt Addicott, Century West Engineering; Twenty-six (26) Members of the Public At 1:30 pm Chairman Jewell opened the Public Works and Community Development Services (CDS) Study Session with CDS conducting their agenda first. BOWERS FIELD RUNWAY UPDATE Chairman Jewell explained the process and expectations of the meeting prior to the start of the Public Works Study Session. Mark Cook gave background on Runway 7/25 and the decision to close the runway due to several years of pavement deterioration and limited maintenance. Mark Cook stated that pothole patching on the runway has been performed and spent the majority of last year working with a Citizen's Advisory Group on the Master Plan and the focus was Runway 11/29 and the need for a parallel taxiway. Mark Cook continued that recently staff was contacted during the Public Works' chip seal program that a large pothole was on Runway 7/25. Mark Cook added that it took several days to get the repair done due to chip seal operations being conducted. Mark Cook stated that the concern with the runway is risk management for the county and safety of users of the airport. Mark Cook commented that during several meetings with the Airport Advisory Committee he discussed the closure of Runway 7/25 and it took several weeks to coordinate the temporary closure. Mark Cook added that the weeds on that runway are also an issue and a new mower was purchased to mow the runway because chemical application is no longer working to control the weeds. Mark Cook stated that the temporary closure does allow for future remedial action to be taken on the runway and in conversations with Century West several options were discussed for repairs. Mark Cook explained two of the options; one being considered a "band-aid", where an attempt to grout and seal the larger cracks with a sealcoat on the runway. Mark Cook continued that this option would last six months to a year and that would be sufficient enough to put the runway in service when the extension 2017-08-14 MINUTES of Runway 11/29 begins, however, continued inspection of the repair would be necessary to monitor the condition. Mark Cook then discussed the second option which is to potentially rubblize the entire runway pavement structure then the rubblized asphalt would be reconstituted and then paved over. Mark Cook states that this option would be a ten to twenty year life expectancy on this approach with costs in the million to a million and a half range. Mark Cook added that the first option would be in the five hundred thousand range. Mark Cook continued that the other conversation had with one County Commissioner would be a third -party review of the runway. Mark Cook added that he has tried to be clear about why this action has been taken, while some have stated that the runway is perfectly safe, it is a matter of risk management and the asset has now become a liability. Chairman Jewell asked David Miller with Century West Engineering, the current Airport Consultant for Kittitas County, if he had anything to add to the discussion. David Miller explained the contract with the county for services they provide. Chairman Jewell inquired if Century West Engineering is an expert on runway pavement and if Century West Engineering has evaluated Runway 7/25. David Miller responded that yes, Century West Engineering does consider themselves to be experts in runway pavement and that they have evaluated the runway based on available data including physically walking the runway within the last three months and prepared cost estimates for the rehabilitation options Mark Cook outlined. David Miller then referred to Kurt Addicott with Century West Engineering who is a pavement engineer, if further level of detail is required. David Miller explained the Washington State Department of Transportation WSDOT) Aviation Division's pavement management program and rating criteria with the last rating being done around 2012. David Miller added that the west end of Runway 7/25 received a rating of ten out of one hundred on the rating scale that WSDOT Aviation uses to rate the runway's in the state; other sections rated a bit higher with a thirty to thirty-three rating. David Miller continued that with the rating numbers being so low that putting an overlay on the existing pavement is not possible without rebuilding the base. Discussion was held on the preferred rating for pavement and the reason why Runway 7/25 is not funded by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Further discussion was held. Chairman Jewell then addressed Kurt Addicott with Century West Engineering, inquiring about his experience and his knowledge of pavement. Kurt Addicott stated that he is a Senior Project Manager Engineer with specialty in pavement engineering for airports. Chairman Jewell asked if the runway closure was valid. Kurt Addicott replied that he concurs with Mark Cook's action of closing the runway and that the state of the pavement at the level of PCI rating is in the condition of presenting both property damage and life safety issues. Discussion was held. 2017-08-14 MINUTES Ten members of the public spoke about the closure of Runway 7/25. Chairman Jewell thanked the public for their comments and stated that currently in place is a temporary closure of Runway 7/25 and staff is recommending getting a second opinion and referred to staff for confirmation. Mark Cook commented that prior to obtaining a second opinion there is a procurement issue to solve and a process piece for timeliness. Mark Cook added that the main issue is funding and second opinion on the condition of the runway is going to be a standard answer, that the pavement is deteriorated from any consulting firm. Mark Cook added that when he wrote the briefing that was presented it was prior to meeting with Century West Engineering. Mark Cook continued that it's going to cost another five to ten thousand dollars on a second opinion to say that the pavement is bad, however, it may be able to give staff a more involved dissertation of how to get it back in service but we have not sought that from Century West Engineering either. Further discussion was held. Staff was directed to secure a second opinion on the pavement condition through the procurement process and schedule an emergency meeting with the Airport Advisory Committee, if necessary, to make a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners and in the meantime work with the scenarios currently presented from Century West Engineering and the financing and partnership options with the runway remaining closed until a solution is found. 2017-08-14 MINUTES KITTITAS COUNTY COMMISSIONERS KITTITAS COUNTY, WASHINGTON Laura Osiadacz, Chairman KITTITAS COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS—BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS STUDY SESSION STAFF REPORT STUDY SESSION DATE: August 14, 2017 TOPIC: Bowers Field Runway Update ACTION REQUESTED: Validate a Third Party Review of Runway 7/25 LEAD STAFF: Mark R. Cook RECOMMENDATION: Support staff s decision seeking a third party review of the serviceability of runway 7/25 at Bowers Field. BREIFING SUMMARY: • The temporary closure of runway 7/25 is being met with community resistance • A third party review of the deteriorated runway pavement is expected to address the lack of confidence in staff decision making OR validate that the runway can be utilized in the absence of remedial action BACKGROUND: During the past two years, Public Works (PW) has responded numerous times applying asphaltic patches to runway 7/25 potholes. The potholes result from landing aircraft mobilizing existing runway pavement. The existing asphalt pavement is deteriorated to the point that temporary patches are not adhering to the larger pieces of asphalt. Cracks up to three inches in width are wide spread throughout runway length. Last year, attempting to manage complaints from the weed board (weeds growing through runway pavement), PW purchased a rotary cutter for our weed mowing tractor. Maintenance of the runway, coupled with maintenance costs associated with runway 11/29, make ongoing use of 7/25 infeasible in its current condition. Currently, PW is engaged in a Master Plan process for Bowers Field (Century West). That process has validated the preference for investing in the extension of runway 11 /29. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has stated that it will not support investing in both runways. Planning for an eventual extension of runway 11/29 (three-four years out); PW has been communicating with Central Washington University (CWU) about the potential for CWU to rehabilitate 7/25. PW is anxious to begin conversation with FAA regarding the ability for CWU to create a private runway within the County's sponsorship of Bowers Field. This action might allow the flight school to stay in operation during construction of 11/29 runway improvements. Page 1 of 4 PUBLIC WORKS BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT DISCUSSION: Temporary closure of runway 7/25 minimizes County liability for damaged aircraft and danger to airmen. Continued patching of the runway acknowledges the advanced state of disrepair of the asphalt surface and affirms our inability of securing a safe runway condition. The gap of time between the notice of pothole repair from our FBO and the County's ability to respond could create sufficient time delay for a catastrophic landing event. The most recent patch requirement occurred during chip seal operations (all PW operators) allowing several days before PW responded. Even with an on-call pavement responder, it could be several days to affect repairs. Our current FBO did not close the runway during the past pothole event. Without full time County presence at the airport, we rely on our FBO for services. Given the totality of risk exposure associated with current runway 7/25 conditions, the lack of available funding to remediate failed pavement and our lack of full time presence at the airport, PW has implemented a temporary closure of runway 7/25. Securing a third party opinion on the reliability of 7/25 pavement (not relying on current PW consultants) might generate an understanding amongst closure critics. In the event the Board of County Commissioners desires a third party pavement evaluation; an outside consultant should be pursued. PW is in the process of identifying possible airport pavement consultants to perform the third party review at the request of the Board. FISCAL IMPACTS: A third party pavement evaluation is anticipated to cost in the range of $5,000 to $7,000. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit 1: Photo of recent pavement repair. Exhibit 2: 7/25 updated costs. Page 2 of 4 PUBLIC WORKS BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT EXHIBIT l: PHOTO Page 3 of 4 PUBLIC WORKS BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT n EXHIBIT 2: 7125 UPDATED COSTS Page 4 of 4 PUBLIC WORKS BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT .................:..,_:___;___:,..,.....,! /2§ t;ag R\` `- fail �� / | ( § ! � ! ' . , ! \ia�wea�GwRCee , t,.l.O . ! �R / §g- aeee\o\e�oeaa®oaaeeo; ,a.� §4 &b RggR9/aQgx/Apes// 92 §C h/ )� tsB 9g9a�^©©9aa99GR9a2G9 g#G#//9QRaRbRaH##AQR It 1 ,| �- (� '/ -I!7!!2!|■!!|3 �§|E!!)!r!lE,;E! 2 { ` § E | r;�.,,■e,�,).�.!{ , !! � ;o;TPIT �� „ G;; ;;;| a• a ■g... 888888» ■■�2 ;,;* ,��;. . �,��;.��a,.. ,| �- (� '/ 2, ; )| - x■ | / §§ TIP { � �• �§ i§t4))&!■&e@*@§§■;5} f� !\Il;2)«!r`■P,;lEms�� - !7£!I|,,,.E:«\! _ lE;z�.,.!!\!E;■ ` - ( §2f! ;$!! ■w■a■■ „;;;8�■m;;#s, El77 ;§£! � „ � §2)» §§§§§§§;�■-�§!§)k###$ saaa.e9#;g9w55s9,es»! 2, ; )| - x■ | / §§ { � �• �§ �� f� rjN -A Rig --jL j tj Rig k § R )§ { � u §� \§ !l2yyf( § _ !»�!!!i» - �3 k 2! ®|! �\ ( q! �§ |� _ §! ko V`K �)) in i:mki§ k § R )§ { � u §� \§ !l2yyf( !»�!!!i» - �3 2! q! �§ |� _ §! ko V`K i:mki§ 6!,!;l:;! :4 k)k§ '.0 ))k.§§ ;Ba ;ae;«an k § R )§ { � u §� \§ &§§\ /BOM ■ �(|_;!! 2 - } ) � } �jj\\}/}/�� �\ s §2 qc 7 /�\ !!! i � § \ ! 8.��§;2§£-.�«ƒ 03 §/ §/ i■ - �§{ )kk E\ �■R;■;me.., .�._ ;;E |§88 s §2 qc 7 r|t!/{|;l:|�[/J\ 2a3 !'� !_�!`!!l=•E )E(M-M m _ - \E! !. (8 § § !!lid 0§ 2.9 |{ ! )|ki ,w| �)|k \k(k}\§k)km §k!k s8 889\ k§k2 Mk## M8890-80 ` ;a■� �;:; lssa..■&wpm,;e»s,,,m .0..