Submitted by Suanne Z. Thamm
Reporter – News Analyst
June 13, 2017 2:47 p.m.
The General Aviation Terminal Building Evaluation Committee convened at 1:00 p.m. on June 13, 2017 to review and rank contractor-bidders for Fernandina Beach’s future municipal airport general aviation terminal/welcome center. Following 15 minutes of discussion and review, the committee voted unanimously to recommend to the Fernandina Beach City Commission (FBCC) an award of bid for only the base building and site to F&G Construction.
The recommendation to award does not include a notice to proceed. Should the FBCC approve the recommendation, Passero Associates, the city’s airport consultants, will then meet with F&G representatives in an attempt to further reduce the costs in the $4.395M bid. Should these efforts prove unsuccessful the city may move to the next low bid.
Members of the evaluation committee included: City Manager Dale Martin, chair; Community Development Director Marshall McCrary; City Engineer Andre Desilet; Andrew Holesko and Mike Cornell, Passero Associates.
In reviewing the bids, Andrew Holesko reported that Passero Associates had compared amounts provided in the rebid of this project to those received initially. With more clearly defined requirements, rebids received came in between $540K-$1.075M lower than initial bids.
Holesko explained that the recommendation would only cover the base site and building work. Bid additives for the nose/tail structure, Quonset hut, emergency generator, under wing construction, and related site work covering landscaping and parking would be considered at a later date. He expressed concern that all four bidders appeared to greatly exceed the estimated amount required for the nose/tail structure. He also expressed some disappointment that bid deductions for extending the deadline for completion from March to June 2018 at the request of the bidding contractors did not produce significant savings.
Bidders were ranked as follows for base building and site work:
- F&G: $4,395,000.00
- Scherer Construction: $4,539,110.55
- West Construction: $4,566,705.00
- OTAK: $6,048,462.85
Editor’s Note: Suanne Z. Thamm is a native of Chautauqua County, NY, who moved to Fernandina Beach from Alexandria,VA, in 1994. As a long time city resident and city watcher, she provides interesting insight into the many issues that impact our city. We are grateful for Suanne’s many contributions to the Fernandina Observer.
Another example of the City of Fernandina Beach, the Fernandina Beach City Commission, and Passero and Associates wasting taxpayer’s money. Building a new “Airport Terminal/Welcome center will not bring any more business to the airport. There will be no increased revenue generated;
No more aircraft traffic coming to the island.
The traffic into the Fernandina Beach Municipal Airport is driven by three entities. 1. Corporate business meetings going to the Ritz Carlton or the Omni Resort; 2. Families flying here for vacation; 3. People who own second homes here on the island, who also happen to be aircraft owners.
The building of a new “Airport Terminal/Welcome Center” will have absolutely no effect on future traffic. What the City Commission needs to concentrate on is improving on the existing facilities, and spending much less money than the current plan calls for.
those are the three reasons
In previous articles it was suggested that the new terminal building would be designed to be an emergency shelter if needed. Is that still part of the plan? Won’t it require emergency generator equipment if that is an anticipated use?
Attribution to S. Coleridge for this:
“Ah! Well a-day! What evil looks
Had I from old and young!
Instead of the cross, the albatross
About my neck was hung.”
Indeed, the albatross is now about to be worn by the City of Fernandina Beach in the form of this Terminal/Welcome Center. As Betsie points out above, how does an emergency center operate without an emergency generator? Kind of like an airplane with no motors, it does not.
The airport is not a destination for most people. The flying public see it as a place to go through en route to their real destinations. As such, the architecture of the FBO will not appreciably affect the decision to go to the airport. What will affect that decision is excellent service, reasonable fuel and parking prices, and availability of hangaring facilities and basic repair and maintenance services. Most passengers on the business jets do not spend much time in the terminal area, not to mention admiring the architecture from outside. Restrooms, snacks, drinks, and pilot services are what we need in the FBO building.
If the airport facility is to double as an emergency center I’d think the first design proposed was woefully inappropriate. Let’s see if we can mix utility and attractive but not excessive design details and get this built.
As a frequent user of the Fernandina FBO, I feel that it is entirely adequate for the needs of pilots and arriving passengers. The airstrips are just fine and the services provided by the FBO, fuel, food, restroom facilities, car rental and tie-down support are all working well. Naturally, any facility can use a facelift and this could easily completed along with up-dating the walls and windows of the building. All pilots that I speak with, including passengers, think the idea of adding an airplane to the roof is absolutely silly!! Spend a few hundred thousand and upgrade the appearance and maybe pave the rental car parking area. Stop wasting our money!!!
We can spend $4+ million on a new airport facility (while we have one that works) that goes virtually unseen, yet have a marina that remains a public eyesore noticed by almost every visitor to our island. I remain confused on how our elected leadership makes their decisions.