Meeting called to order at 1:03 PM

None

None

Moved by Robert Hanovich, seconded by Kolby White

Vote: 7 - 0 - Unanimously

Moved by Robert Hanovich, seconded by Andrew Shouse

Vote: 7 - 0 - Unanimously

None

January’s enplanements were up 11% over 2024 with the highest [January] number we have had since 2022. January is usually a low enplanement month, so we are within typical range at 4,540.
 
January’s total operations were 2,551 which is down 11% from 2024 but still within our range for this time of year.
 
Currently, we only have 2024 for comparison, but January’s parking revenue was up 14% from last year.
 

• Fuel flow for January 25 was 68,592 gallons, which was remarkably similar to January 2024, only a half a percent difference between the two.
• Turbine traffic has been very slow for the second half of January and all of February thus far.
• The military traffic has been consistent.
• General aviation traffic continues to be very light despite a drier than normal winter.
• Fuel prices remain relatively flat.
• A Marine Corps Sea Stallion 53E with a mechanical issue was with Wiseman for an extended period of time in January.
• Wiseman ordered four new Bronco Sport crew cars last Fall for the locations and took delivery of the first one in December.
• The Wiseman Team is competing again in the Canyon Coolers sled race.  Staff is making some tweaks to our cooler (sled).  Cooler Runnings 2025 will be at Ft. Tuthill on Friday, February 21, 2:00 to 8:30 pm.
• The annual Christmas party was held in the Verde Valley at the Blazing’ M Ranch
• Wiseman is having a branding refresh in progress.
• Record dry winter thus far and our readiness for a potential active wildland fire season including personnel, facilities, equipment and fuel supply.

• The Express Visitor Center:
  • Construction contract has been signed, and the Purchase Order is in routing. We have a pre-construction meeting scheduled for 2/19/2025 and expect construction completion by 4/30/2025.
  • During operation hours we will be selling alcoholic beverages as well as other gifts such as neck pillows, souvenirs and things like that. This is oriented for the traveling public, a lot of maps and be able to give more information about the city Flagstaff.
• Micro-Market:
  • Contract negotiations have been completed, and a contract was developed and signed. Staff will present the contract to the City Council in March.
  • Micro-market project has two parts to it; one location will be off the open space next to the Express Visitor Center and the other will be through security in the hold room.
  • These amenities will be served through a self-checkout system and primarily include food and drinks.
    We anticipate this to be done around the same time as the Express Visitor Center.
• Snow Removal Equipment Building (SREB):
  • FAA has completed their initial review of the GMP
  • The project team (staff, designers and the contractor) is scheduled to meet in February to review the revised understanding of grant eligibility funding; following that meaning, we should be able to walk away from there knowing approximately how much we need in an additional funds.
• Airfield Maintenance Phase VI:
  • The project is to correct deficits identified during the part 139 inspection:
    • Rubber on the existing pavement markings on the runway
    • Repaint hold position markings (A1)
    • Blast Pad – large thermal cracks with vegetation growing in the cracks.
    • Ramp lighting – Three fixtures are not working.
    • Signage along the perimeter roadway (RSA notifications)
  • Staff presented the scope to the City budget team requesting funding. The budget team approved the request and approved staff to proceed to contracts. Procurement is generating the contract for $429,358.00 with the contractor. The pavement marking work is anticipated to be conducted in the evening hours.

• FLG was featured in the January edition of Airliner World which is one of UK’s most popular aviation magazines. It was available for sale at Barnes and Noble or you can request a digital copy from us.
• LAX service will resume on Saturdays. Right now, it's available to book from March 8th through May 3rd. This schedule has fluctuated, and we will keep the commission up to date as we continue to work with American Airlines about an increased frequency to perhaps make the route more successful.
• We are still waiting on a few items, but we will be adding a new widget on our website. This will allow customers to book directly off of our website, flyflagstaffaz.gov. This will also allow us to capture that demographic information and use it to better market the airport.
• We will be launching a new marketing campaign next month and are excited to show that soon.

Airport’s land use presentation was part of a follow-up conversation on previous budget discussions where staff mentioned working towards increased development and an increase in aircraft storage availability.
 
The Flagstaff Airport sits on 795 acres of City-owned land that was given to the City in 1948 by the US Government for the purpose of constructing an airport, plus 313 acres of navigation easements with the USDA Forest Service.
Land use on the airport is governed by three primary regulations:

1. Federal Aviation Administration - 88 Federal Register 85474, 12/08/2023 - Policy Regarding Processing Land Use Changes on Federally Acquired or Federally Conveyed Airport Land and 49 USC 47104, 47107(c), 47125(a), 47153(a)

• FAA policies breaks down airport land into 3 types:
  • Federally Acquired
  • Federally Conveyed
  • Sponsor Acquired
• Pertains to federally acquired or federally conveyed airport land which the Flagstaff Airport is (federally conveyed)
• There are 4 airport land use categories that the FAA considers:
  • Aeronautical Use (any activity that involves, makes possible, is required for the safety of, or is otherwise directly related to, the operation of aircraft) FAA Approval Not Required
  • Airport Purpose (Uses directly related to the actual operation or the foreseeable aeronautical development, and the non-aeronautical components do not impact existing aeronautical uses or conflict with existing or foreseeable aeronautical needs/demands) FAA Approval Not Required
  • Non-Aeronautical Use (All other uses that are not considered aeronautical or airport purpose) FAA land use consent/approval required
  • Mixed Use (Aeronautical and non-aeronautical uses. The FAA will consider if non-aeronautical component, would impact existing aeronautical users, or conflict with existing or foreseeable aeronautical needs/demand.) FAA land use consent/approval required
• Evaluation of land-use change requests – Major FAA considerations
  • Reasonableness and practicality of the airport sponsor's request,
  • The effect of the request on needed aeronautical facilities,
  • The net benefit to civil aviation, and
  • Compatibility of the proposal with the needs of civil aviation. (Incompatible land uses on the airport, including residential use, are prohibited by FAA policy and are contrary to federal obligations.

 

2. Flagstaff Airport Master Plan
   • Chapter 5 – Recommended Master Plan Concept
     • A majority of land surrounding the airport is designated to aeronautical use or for aviation related revenue support. What we do not see is very much non-aeronautical use because all of our facilities, essentially most of the property you have available in the airfield, has been identified for existing or future aeronautical needs in our master plan.
   • Appendix E – Airport Layout Plan
     • The Airport Layout Plan (ALP), is a federally recognized document that can be found in Appendix E of our master plan.
     • It's essentially the same data in the Master Plan but put into the format that the FAA wants to see it, and that's what really codifies.
     • When requesting any kind of land use change to the FAA or any kind of development at all. Their first question is, is it consistent with your ALP, and the second is how it fit with existing and proposed aeronautical needs.

 

3. Flagstaff City Code, Title 10 – Flagstaff Zoning Code
   • PF - Public Facility (only zone that allows hangar development)
   • RD – Research and Development
   • HC – Highway Commercial (broad uses)
   • RR – Rural Residential
   • PLF – Public Lands – Forest
   • Rezonings must be requested through a Concept Zoning Map Amendment and approved by City Council

There are a number of different zones around the airport; the main one that most of the airport on is called a public facility. It’s a broad zone, and it's the only zone in the Flagstaff City zoning code that allows for hangar development.

Another zone is search and development zone, those are the business parks that are on the other side of the street from the airport facilities itself, with no direct access to the airfield and are things that are on airport property that were identified early on for that non-aviation use.

There are some areas designated as rural residential. Now, any land development we do have to be in compliance with our airport layout plan and with those FAA rules about land use. Rural residential areas are considered incompatible land uses to the FAA which means we can't build out here.

In order to get a rezoning of the land, we would have to have a concept zoning map amendment where we look at the parcels that are currently zoned with the incompatible land use on the airport, take that to the planning team and tell them what we want to have. In our case, it would probably be a public facility for those aeronautical purposes, as the FAA would never approve any type of residential development there. Once that zoning is approved by that team, they would take it to council for final approval that would make that amendment to the zoning.

There's a difference between permanent residency and transient residency on airport property. Essentially, what we've heard from the FAA is that housing is a hard no but things that are for travelers could be a part of a mixed-use development, such as a hotel.

There is a process in which property can be released from those FAA rules. This was done for about 32 acres on the opposite side of JW Powell from the airport. This land was part of what was conveyed from the federal government and is still owned by the airport, but because of the way the road layout ended up being completed, that area did not have any access to the airfield. Now there are new rules that say if you get a release for airport property, and we agree there is no aeronautical need for this property, our only option is to sell it in the open market, and we can take the funding and put it back into the airport to support the airport operations.

If we were to pursue a release for non-aeronautical use of any of our convey property, we would just have to sell it and with the property that we have left, I think we'd be unlikely to be granted the release, because everything that remains on the airport basically has access to the airfield and it's really hard to say that something that has access to the airfield is never going to have a future aeronautical need.

We've had demand for additional aircraft-related businesses, and so we have two options for that.

1. One, we can construct our own hangars and facilities there, and then lease those out either individually or as groups. To complete that process, we need to do a rezoning from research and development back to public facilities. Additionally, we need capital funding to build whatever infrastructure we were going to put there and then bid for construction. We could then rent those out and hopefully recuperate our costs.
2. The second option is to enter ground leases with private developers to develop that site, similar to what we're doing with the 32-acre parcel, where we need to get an appraisal to determine what fair market value is for that property is, we would still need to go through a rezoning process and a request for proposals for a competitive bid process where we would ask for different developers to bring us their ideas of what they would want to build there based off of certain criteria.

The airport has multiple committees that are working on determining which would be the most advantageous to the airport at this time.

None

Moved by Gail Jackson, seconded by David Steiner

Vote: 7 - 0 - Unanimously