11-A-2&3 Airport ReportAGENDA INFORMATION SHEET
PROJECT: Review survey information and recommendations of the Airport Advisory Board
regarding private hangars; review survey information regarding Airport Advisory Board membership;
review information regarding fees for T-Hangars at Cox Field Airport.
BACKGROUND: At City Council's March 26, 2001, City Council instructed that City Staff
undertake a study, survey, and review of the City's current policy regarding construction of private
hangars at Cox Field Airport. Among the directives was for the City Staffto survey other cities with
comparable or similar airports to determine the basis by which private hangars are constructed at
those airports. In addition to conducting the survey and reporting the results to the Council, the
Council also requested the staffto seek recommendations from the Airport Advisory Board, separate
and apart from the survey, as to critical issues related to the policy for constructing private hangars.
The Council also charged City Staff to include in the survey inquiries regarding the size and nature
of Airport Advisory Boards at other airports, as well as to tabulate information related to the fees for
use of T-Hangars at those airports. A recommendation from the Airport Advisory Board for use of
T-Hangars at those airports. A recommendation from the Airport Advisory Board for use of the
City's T-Hangars was already pending.
The survey was conducted on the airports recommended by Ms. Tammie Stone, a
representative ofthe airport branch ofthe Texas Department of Transportation. While all information
requested in the survey was not available or was not received from the airports surveyed, significant
information was accumulated. In addition, the Airport Advisory Board, during the process of
considering its recommendations, also recommended additional cities to be included in the survey.
Subsequent to the completion of the survey, and following several meetings with the airport advisory
board at which an issue paper was considered by the board and recommendations made on the issues
presented, the information has been accumulated and is summarized in a number of attachments to
this agenda information sheet.
DESCRIPTION: The following discussion summarizes the results, by the use of exhibits or text, of
the survey of various cities on issues related to the policy for private hangars. It also summarizes
other information related to the membership of the Airport Advisory Board and the fees for T-Hangar
rentals:
1. Summary of current agreements attached to this agenda information sheet is Exhibit 1,
which is a tabular summary of the existing leases between the City of Paris and various
occupants of private hangars at the airport. Review of Exhibit 1 will allow the reader to
determine how the agreements have been revised over the years, to compare the size of the
hangars to the length of the lease, and to issues related to the amount of insurance carried
by the occupants. As you will note, the leases extend for initial terms of between twenty-
five (25) and fifty-five (55) years, with additional options from anywhere from ten (10) to
twenty (20) years. The maximum possible terms under the outstanding and existing leases
are anywhere from thirty-five (35) years in length to seventy (70) years in length. Other
-1-
information pertinent to the remainder of the discussion is contained in Exhibit 1 for future
reference.
II. Current Policy. The current policy of the City with regard to long term hangar leases is set
out in Resolution No. 96-011, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 2. As stated
in the lease, the minimum primary term was established at twenty-five (25) years, with two
additional ten (10) year options, or a total of forty-five (45) years. Rental would be paid
during the first ten (10) year option at an amount stated as the "fixed rental", and the
second ten (10) year option would likewise require some rental at the amount of $.06 per
square foot (it is unclear whether this amount would be paid annually or monthly) or
something established as the "fair market value" at the time the option is exercised. There
is no language in the policy that describes how either fair market value or the fixed rental
is to be established. The policy establishes a maximum primary term of forty-five (45)
years, with a possibility of two additional fifteen (15) year options, or a total potential term
of seventy-five (75) years. Again, payment of nominal rent would be due during the two
option periods, again based on fixed rentals and fair market value. Finally the policy
contained some rather undefined standards stating that the size of the hangar, type and
number of aircraft, use of both the hangar and the aircraft, and the estimated income to the
airport operation (presumably as a result of having the hangar there) would be taken into
account when determining the lease terms.
The current policy is vague on a number of the pertinent issues that needed to be considered
in determining the term of a lease. Indeed, a review of Exhibit 1 fails to show a discernable
consistent trend with regard to the length of the term of the lease as compared to say the
size of the hangar, although there is a general trend that the larger the hangar, the longer
the term. Likewise, there is no consistency in the amount of payments set out in the leases
for the future options. It should also be pointed out that the option payments provided for
in the leases do not provide for escalation based on any sort of consumer price index of the
option payments. That is, presumably an optional payment of $100 per month beginning
in 2019 will not represent near the amount of money that $100 per month represents in the
year 2001. Current policy is there for Council's review and further deliberation.
III. Exhibit 3 to the Agenda Information Sheet contains the results of the Legal Department's
survey of other cities. You will note that information is included in the survey for some
seventeen (17) municipal or municipal related airports. Inquiries were made regarding
whether or not private hangars were available; whether or not ground leases were required
incident to construction of the private hangars; whether or not ground lease rent was paid
and the amount of that rent; the term of the primary lease; whether or not the lessee was
responsible for taxes, if any were due; whether or not ownership of the hangar reverted to
the City and when; the kind of insurance required and information related to the existence
of an airport advisory board. Without attempting to submit this information to any kind of
detailed and systematic analysis, I think certain trends can be identified. First of all, all of
the responding airports had private hangars available. Secondly, all the responding airports
-2-
had ground leases incident to those hangars. All but one other city and the City of Paris
required the payment of ground lease rentals. The amount of the ground lease rental
payment varied considerably, from as low as $.07 per square foot per year to amounts based
on the actual appraisal of the property. A number of the leases charged a ground lease in
the neighborhood of $.10 to $.12 per square foot per year, with a CPI adjustment at some
time interval. The terms of the leases also varied, there is no mention of options for
extension. Terms were anywhere from ten (10) years to forty-five (45) years, with the
majority of the lease terms from twenty (20) to thirty (30) years. All of the leases with the
exception of one other city and the City of Paris had language in the leases requiring the
lessee to be responsible for any taxes assessed, if any, as a result of the leasehold
arrangement. All the leases had a provision for the ownership of the hangar to pass to the
city at the expiration of the lease; most of the leases provided for an outright transfer at the
end of the lease, while some had provisions dealing with some financial adjustment related
to the transfer. With regard to insurance, some requirements were quite significant as to
the amount of insurance required; others were less stringent. A discussion of the Airport
Advisory Board information will be at a later time in this Agenda Information Sheet.
IV. Issues with regard to a policy for private hangars. A series of issues were submitted to the
Airport Advisory Board, as well as presented to the airports that were surveyed, for
consideration in developing a more definitive policy for private hangars. A blank issue page
is appended to this Agenda Information Sheet as Exhibit 4. Exhibit 4 was the document
utilized in surveying other cities, as well as soliciting the recommendations from the Airport
Advisory Board. Reference in this section will be made to Exhibit 2, the current policy;
Exhibit 3, the survey of other cities; and Exhibit 5 attached hereto, the recommendations
of the Airport Advisory Board.
1. Term length.
a. Current Policy - minimum primary term twenty-five (25) years with two (2) ten
(10) year options; maximum primary term forty-five (45) years with two (2)
fifteen (15) year options. Total possible terms of forty-five (45) years to seventy-
five (75) years. Considerations in setting the term includes size of hangar, type
and number of aircraft, use of the hangar and aircraft, and estimated income to the
airport.
b. Survey Results - consists primarily of fixed primary terms without options. The
terms are from ten (10) year to forty (40) years, with the predominate term twenty
(20) to thirty (30) years.
-3-
c. Airport Advisory Board Recommendation - hangars up to 5,000 square feet,
twenty-five (25) year terms; greater than 5,000 square feet up to 20,000 square
feet, thirty (30) year terms; over 20,000 square feet, negotiable.
City Council should consider what arrangements should be adopted for inclusion in the
future policy with regard to the duration of the lease.
2. Options.
a. Current Policy - provides for two (2) ten (10) year options at expiration of the
minimum primary term; two (2) fifteen (15) year options at the expiration of the
maximum primary term.
b. Survey - options were not encountered in a significant number of the cities
surveyed.
c. Board Recommendation - the Board recommended their be no options in new
lease agreements. However, the Board did recommend that at the end of the
initial term, the City would seek competitive bids for the next primary term of the
hangar, and based on those bids, the tenant who had originally built the hangar
and was then in the hangar would have the opportunity to exercise, within thirty
(30) days, a right of first refusal.
The City Council needs to determine whether or not options should be continued to
be offered as part of the lease term.
Should plans for the hangar go through the City's typical building plan review process.
a. Current Policy - is silent on this issue.
b. Survey - they were not included in the survey per sea, generally the information
indicated that all such hangars had to comply with the specific standards
applicable to them in each respective building code.
c. Board Recommendation - the Board recommended that all hangars goes though
the City's building plan review, including permits and fees. The Board also
recommended standards specific to hangars be developed.
The City Council needs to determine whether or not construction of hangars must be
in full compliance with the City's building code, and whether or not additional
standards should be developed for hangars.
-4-
4. Should special consideration be given in hangar leases which are used for business or
economic development purposes in contrast to purely personal use? What should
those considerations be? The City's current lease does not prohibit living quarters per
sea, and some people live in the hangars. Should future leases allow this?
a. Current Policy - the current policy makes vague reference to issues such as the
use of the hangar and the income to the airport operation, but no specific
reference or special consideration given to hangars associated with business or
economic development activity as opposed to personal use.
b. Survey - certain cities do give preference to hangars associated with economic
development or business activity, but they are not a majority. It was commented
that doing so is difficult to enforce. Likewise, none of the cities surveyed
indicated the hangars were used for living quarters.
c. Board recommendation - the Board recommended future leases prohibit tenants
from living in the hangar or having full living quarters in the hangar. However,
such items as a sink, bathroom, or associated facility to allow temporary over-
night stay or perhaps social use of a portion of the hangar was recommended.
The City Council needs to consider and determine whether or not there should be some
sort of incentive for business use hangars. The Board acknowledged that if such an
incentive was appropriate, it should probably come more from the Paris Economic
Development Corporation. Likewise, the Council needs to determine whether or not
future leases will allow tenants to live in the hangars.
5. Should there be a specific beginning and end date for construction of a private hangar?
a. Current Policy - the current policy is silent on this issue.
b. Survey - certain cities responded that they do require a beginning and end date
for construction of the private hangar.
c. Board Recommendation - the Board recommended that each lease require the
construction of the hangar to be completed within eighteen (18) months.
6. Should the lease provide for ground lease payments? Ground lease payments or
payments made for lease of the ground on which the improvement is located.
-5-
a. Current Policy - the current policy does not require ground lease payments. None
of the current leases for private hangars in the City of Paris require the payment
ground lease payments.
b. Survey - almost all of the cities surveyed require the payment of ground lease
payments for private hangars. The City has received informal information from
those associated with or working with TxDot indicating that future leases should
include the requirement for ground lease payments.
c. Board Recommendation - the Board recommended a ground lease payment of
$.12 per square foot per year, adjusted every five years with a Consumer Price
Index adjustment.
The City Council must consider whether or not ground lease payments should be
charged for future leases, and determine the amount of that lease payment.
7. Should the lease place the burden for taxes, if any taxes are due, on the hangar tenant?
a. The Current Policy - the current policy is silent on the issue of who would be
responsible for taxes, if any taxes are determined to be due.
b. Survey - with the exception of one other city and the City of Paris, all the leases
for all of the other cities surveyed would place the responsibility for payment of
taxes, if any taxes are due, squarely on the tenant. The City Attorney is
recommending that a clause be included in the lease to place the tax responsibility
on the tenant.
The City Council needs to determine whether or not future leases will place the
responsibility for taxes on the tenant.
8. How much and what insurance should be required? The Cities form lease requires
$250,000 personal injury, $500,000 event, $100,000 property damage coverage in
each policy. The question is whether or not more extensive insurance coverage,
including fire and casualty insurance on the actual hangar should be an obligation of
the tenant.
a. Current Policy - the current policy is silent on the entire issue of insurance.
b. Survey - the amount of insurance required as determined in the survey varies
widely among cities. However, it does appear that most of the other cities require
either a broader range of insurance, or a higher amount of insurance coverage, or
both.
-6-
c. Board Recommendation - the Board recommended the current requirement of
general liability insurance be continued. However, the Board took the position
that requiring fire or casualty insurance of the tenant to the benefit of the City as
a co-insured, should not be a requirement of the lease. The Board further
recommended that the City should be responsible for obtaining its own insurance
for this particular purpose. Related to this issue is a letter from City Clerk, Mattie
Cunningham, detailing her discussion with the City's TML and other insurance
carriers on this issue (Exhibit 6). This letter was presented to the Airport
Advisory Board at the time this issue was deliberated.
The City Council needs to determine how extensive and how much insurance the
tenant should be required to obtain as part of the new policy on private hangars.
V. Structure of Airport Advisory Board. Exhibit 3 includes as a separate part of the
questionnaire information sought from the respective cities regarding whether or not they
have an Airport Advisory Board, and if so how that board is constituted. As you will note,
most of the Boards have a membership of seven (7) members; however, two boards are
eight (8) and nine (9) members respectively, two boards have five (5) members, and two
boards have (6) members.
The Airport Advisory Board of the City of Paris has varied in its number of inembers. The
earliest resolution available in the City Legal Department files indicate that the board
membership consisted of a Chairman and six members (seven (7) total) in 1970 (Resolution
No. 1354); was reduced to five (5) members by Resolution No. 1538 sometime before
1974; was later expanded to six (6) members by Resolution No. 1646 in 1974; was reduced
in size to five (5) members by Resolution No. 1722 in December of 1975; and was
expanded to its current membership of seven (7) by Resolution No. 89-095 in August of
1989. The survey also indicates that some boards have requirements with regard to the
members who serve on those boards. In addition, the board members themselves have
widely varying background as reflected in Exhibit 3. Some members have had the emphasis
on pilots and airport related individuals; some boards have a cross-section of the
community; some require residency as a condition of inembership on the board, and one
board requires a member of city council.
The Paris Airport Advisory Board has recommended that the size ofthe board be expanded
to eleven (11) members.
It should be noted that one of the concerns expressed as a justification for expanding the
board was the need to continue to have a quorum for board meetings. The most recent
attendance record for the Airport Advisory Board is included in this agenda information
package as Exhibit 7. It is worthy of noting that for the eleven (11) meetings held in
calendar year 2001, the board had a quorum for each of those meetings.
-7-
The City Council needs to determine and provide guidance to the staffas to whether or not
a resolution should be prepared expanding or changing the size or makeup of the Board
VI. Expenditure, revenue, and fee issues. The City Council also directed that further input be
received regarding fees charged by the City for T-Hangars located at the airport. Included
with the Agenda Information Sheet related to this discussion is an Exhibit 8 on the grant
history and monies expended at the airport related to grants; a current revenue and expense
statement (Exhibit 9); and a table of 1999/2000 rates and charges for general aviation
airports, including the City of Paris, for comparison purposes (Exhibit 10). This material
was derived from a publication by the Texas Department of Transportation. Within those
categories of rates and charges are rental rates for T-Hangars for comparison purposes.
The currents rates charges at Cox Field Municipal Airport for T-Hangars is $49 per month
for open hangars (1,344 square feet); $85 per month for closed hangars (1,344 square feet);
and $110 per month for closed hangars 1,750 square feet in size and some 1,344 square feet
in size. The Airport Advisory Board has recommended that the T-Hangar rentals be
increased to $55 for open hangars, $95 for the closed 1,344 square feet, and $110 per
month for the larger closed hangars.
Based on this information, including the revenues, expenses, comparison table, and
recommendation of the Board, the City Council needs to provide guidance to staff as to
whether or not the rates for T-Hangars need to be adjusted so that a resolution can be
returned increasing those rates.
COST: See detailed discussion above regarding fees and expenditures.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: See recommendations for action under each issue above.
STAFF CONTACT: Thomas E. Haynes, Project Coordinator; and Larry W. Schenk, City Attorney
SCHEDULE: Not applicable.
COUNCII, MEETING: Discuss and provide guidance to staff members at City Council's August
13, 2001, regular Council meeting. Resolutions if necessary to implement changes will be returned
in September for certain items and at the October Council meeting for other items.
ADDITIONAL MATERIALS: See attached exhibits and other referenced material referred to the
text of this Agenda Information Sheet.
-8-
EXHIBIT 1
SUMMARY OF CURRENT HANGAR LEASES - COX FIELD AIRPORT
LESk7EE
. INk7TRUMENT .
. E~FECT OF .
. TERM.
. O~~~~~
~~TAL .
"O~~~
HA~GAR
GEI?IERAfh
_ FIRE
'
INSTRUMENT
'
'
I,]ABII,]TY
MSIIRANCE
I[~S[IRAt~iCE
REQllIltED? _
RE1'Ufi€I3'A~~
~ERM
Loma Alto Corporation (Ferguson) and Russell Gifford (HANGAR D- T-Hangar)
F. Andrew Fasken, Harley Wagnon,
Lease Agreement
25 years
NIA
$1.00
6,550 sf
$100,0001
No
N/A
and Loma Alto Corporarion
3I12179
8/1179 - 7/31/04
Construct
$300,0001
Hangar
$10,000
Assignment of Lease
Partitioned hangar and
1/20/81
assigned a portion to Rich
Brock (Fasken/Wagnon -
north hanger; Brock - center
hangar; Loma Alto - south
hangar)
Addendum Number
Changed insurance
$250,0001
No
One
requirements
$500,0001
6I10191
$100,000
Assignment of Lease
FaskenlWagnon assigned
4I16193
north hangar to Billy and
Donna Winters
Addendum Number
Eatended lease term on
30 years
5 years
$150lmonth
Two
north hanger; provided an
8/1179 - 7/31/09
8I1/09 -
beg. 8/1/04
9I13193
option; provided for lease
7131/14
payments during option
Contract of Sale
Jesse L. Wintermute sold
7I20194
center hangar to Russell
Gifford (neither assignment
to Wintermute nor sale to
Gifford was brought to the
Council)
Page 1 of 5
I,ESSEE
iNSTRU141ENT '
EFPL•CT OF
TERM'
OPTION
TOTAL
AMOUN`I`
FIANGAR
GEAIEfiAL
~an~suax~
FIRE
~sv~~;
Il~S~'RI~M~+ 1~T
POSSiBLE
Si~
INSuRANcE
i~~UIRED?
aEPuRCHAsE
fiERM
First Amended Lease
In consideration of the
35 years
10 years
45 years
$100/month
$250,0001
No
N/A
Agreement
lessees making repairs and
8/1179 - 7131/14
8I1I14 -
beg. 8/1/04;
$500,0001
1117196
renovarions (see file),
7131124
Option -
$100,000
eatended primary term of
greatest of
lease; added a second oprion
finv or 6¢Isf
Assignment of Lease
Winters assigned north
4I14197
hangar to Gifford
Townes, Larry C. (HANGAR'I)
Larry C. Townes
Lease Agreement
55 years
15 years
70 years
$300lmonth
At least
$250,0001
No
1/40, no pmt
519194
5/1194 - 4/30149
5I1149 -
beg. 5/1134;
9,000, not
$500,0001
thereafter
4I30164
Option -
more than
$100/000
fmv
18,000;
actual
16,000 sf
Addendum Number
Described area to be leased
One
as 1.65 acres
12/12/94
Addendum Number
Allows for expansion of
Two
hangar up to 25,000 sf
5/14/O1
Buster, Mark (HANGAR 11)
Mark Buster
Lease Agreement
35 years
10 years
45 years
$250lmonth
4,356 sf
$250,0001
No
1/25, no pmt
10/9/95
10/15I95 -
10I15/30 -
beg.
$500,0001
thereafter
10/14I30
10I14/40
10/15I20;
$100,000
Option - frnv
Lancaster, Edwin (HANGAR K)
William T. Boothe
Lease Agreement
35 years
10 years
45 years
$100/month
2,000 sf
$250,0001
No
1/25, no pmt
7I11194
8/1194 - 7131129
8I1129 -
beg. 8I1/19;
$500,0001
thereafter
7131139
Option -
$100,000
fmv
Page 2 of 5
I,ESSEE
iNSTRU141ENT '
EFPL•CT OF
TERM'
OPTION
TOTAL
AMOUN`I`
FIANGAR
GEAIEfiAL
~an~suax~
FIRE
~sv~~;
Il~S~'RI~M~+ 1~T
POSSiBLE
Si~
INSuRANcE
i~~UIRED?
aEPuRCUAsE
fiERM
Assignment of Lease
Assigned to Ken Barber
918197
Assignment of Lease
Assigned to Edwin
5/9/00
Lancaster
Adams, Toby Reg (HANGAR AAA)
Toby Rex Adams
Lease Agreement
35 years
20 years
55 years
$270lmonth
3,000 sf
$250,0001
No
1/35, no pmt
319198
4/1198 - 3131133
4I1133 -
beg. 4/1133;
$500,0001
thereafter
3I31/53
2nd Option -
$100,000
fmv
Haggard, Bob and Sarah d.b.a Pterodactyl, LLC (UNNUMBERED HANGAR)
Bob and Sarah Haggard, d.b.a.
Lease Agreement
35 years
20 years (10
55 years
$280lmonth
6,630 sf
$250,0001
No
1/35, no pmt
Pterodactyl, LLC
1I30198
2/1198 -1131133
each)
beg. 2/1133;
$500,0001
thereafter
2I1133 -
2nd Option -
$100,000
1I31/53
fmv
Clifford, Eric S. (HANGAR G)
Eric S. Clifford
Lease Agreement
25 years
10 years
35 years
$100/month
2,000 sf
$100,0001
No
1/25, no pmt
11/14/88
11/1188 -
11I1/13 -
beg.
$300,0001
thereafter
10/30I13
10I30123
11/1198;
$10,000
Option - frnv
Addendum Number
Changed insurance
$250,0001
No
One
requirements
$500,0001
6I10191
$100,000
Clifford, Eric S. and Victor Abeles (HANGAR F)
Eric S. Clifford and Victor Abeles
Lease Agreement
35 years
10 years
45 years
$100/month
4,800 sf
$100,0001
No
1/25 during
10/14I85
9/1/85 - 8/31I20
9I1I20 -
beg. 9I1/10;
$300,0001
entire lease,
8I31/30
Option -
$10,000
options
fmv
included
Page 3 of 5
I,ESSEE
iNSTRU141ENT '
EFPL•CT OF
TERM'
OPTION
TOTAL
AMOUN`I`
FIANGAR
GEAIEfiAL
~an~suax~
FIRE
~sv~~;
Il~S~'RI~M~+ 1~T
POSSiBLE
Si~
INSuRANcE
i~~UIRED?
aEPuRCHAsE
fiERM
Corrected Lease
Corrected the repurchase
1/25, no pmt
Agreement
anangement
thereafter
2I13189
Addendum Number
Changed insurance
$250,0001
No
One
requirements
$500,0001
6I10191
$100,000
Winters, Billy and Donna (HANGAR V)
Billy and Donna Winters
Lease Agreement
35 years
10 years
$280lmonth
4,686 sf
$250,0001
No
1/25, no pmt
10/9/95
10/15I95 -
10I15/30 -
beg.
$500,0001
thereafter
LESSEES WOiJLD
10/14I30
10I14/40
10/15I20;
$100,000
NOT ACCEPT THIS
Option - ftnv
LEASE
First Amended Lease
Eatended option;
35 years
20 years
55 years
$280.00lmon
REMOVED
Agreement
REMOVED
3/1196 - 2128131
3I1131-
th
2I12196
REPURCHASE WORDING
2I28/51
Beginning
3I1131
Jimmy D. Smyers (HANGAR H)
Jimmy D. Smyers
Lease Agreement
10 years
lst - 5 years
20 years
$875lmonth
?
$250,0001
Yes, with
N/A
3I26/01
511101 - 4/30I11
511111-
plus utilities
$500,0001
extended
4I30/16
(increases
$100,000
coverage,
2nd - 5 years
annually
AND
for full
5I1I16 -
with CPI-i)
construc-
insurable
4I30121
tion liab-
value
(Lessor's
ility:
oprions)
$100,0001
$250,0001
$500,000
Glass, David (HANGAR E)
Roger Allen Boxwell
Lease Agreement
35 years
$150lmonth
$100,0001
No
1/25, no pmt
819182
8/1182 - 7131/17
beg. 8/1/07
$300,0001
thereafter
$10,000
Page 4 of 5
I,ESSEE
iNSTRU141ENT '
EFPL•CT OF
TERM'
OPTION
TOTAL
AMOUN`I`
FIANGAR
GEAIEfiAL
~an~suax~
FIRE
~sv~~;
Il~S~'RI~M~+ 1~T
POSSiBLE
Si~
INSuRANcE
i~~UIRED?
aEPuRCUAsE
fiERM
Assignment of Lease
Assigned to John Gann, III
4I13187
Addendum Number
Changed insurance
$250,0001
No
One
requirements
$500,0001
6I10191
$100,000
Assignment of Lease
Assigned to Carter Aircraft
319198
Service, Inc.
Assignment of Lease
Assigned to David Glass
11/9/98
Addendum Number
In consideration of Lessee
45 years
10 years
55 years
$150lmonth
5,600 sf
Two
increasing the size of the
8/1183 - 7131127
8I1127 -
beg. 8/1/17
after
12/14/98
hangarby 25%, extended
8I1137
expansion
term and gave option
Richey, J. B. (FIXED BASE OPERATOR LEASE)
J. B. Richey
Fixed Base Operator
10 years
10 years
20 years
0
N/A
$100,0001
No
N/A
Lease
1119198 - 1118108
11I9/08 -
$300,0001
1119198
1118/18
$10,000
Page 5 of 5
EXHIBIT 2
RESOLUTION NO. 96-011
WHEREAS, the Airport Advisory Board, upon finding that there is considcrable
difference in the sizes of hangars requested, the types and numbers of aircraft [o be opera[ed
from such hangars, and the use of both hangars and hangared aireraft, recommended to the City
Counci] that the lease policy a[ Cox Field Airport he flexible based upon size, use, and es[imated
income to the Airport opera[ion with a minimum [wenty-five (25) year primary [erm, rental
prepaid by constmction of the hangar, a ten year option at a fixed ren[al, and a ten year option
based on either $.06 per square foot or fair market value a[ the [ime of the exercising of the
option, whichever is greater, and a maximum forty-five (45) year prunary [erm, rental prepaid
by cons[ruction of the hangar, with a fif[een (15) year option at a fixed rental and an additional
fifteen (15) year op[ion wi[h ren[al based on ei[her $.06 pcr squaze foot or fair market value a[
the time of the exercising of the option, whichever is grearer, with the Airport Advisory Board
having an opportunity to make recommendations concerning the terms of leases under
consideration 6y the City Council of the City of Paris; NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THC CITY OF PARIS, [hat a
lease policy for Cox Field Airport be, and the same is hereby, established as follows:
1. That the minimum primary [erm of any lease shall be twenty-five (25)
years, ren[al prepaid by conshucdon of the hangar, wi[h a[en (10) year option
at a fixed rental and an additional [en (10) year op[ion wi[h renfal based on ei[her
$.06 per square foot or fair market value at the time of the exercising of the
option, whichever is grea[er;
2. That the maximum primary [erm of any lease shall be CoRy-five (45)
years, rental prepaid by construction of the hangar, with a fifteen (15) year option
xt a fixed rental and an additional fiReen (15) year op[ion with rcntal based on
either $.06 per square foot or fair market value at the time of the exercising of
the option, whichever is grea[er;
3. That the size of the hangar requested, the type and number of aircraft to
be operated from such hangaz, the use of both the hangar and the hangared
aircrafr, and tlie estunated income to the Airport operation shall be taken into
consideration when de[ermining the lease [erms to be offered; and
4. That the Airport Advisory Board shall be given an opportunity to make
recommendations to the City Council conceming the terms of leases under
consideration by the City Council.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of February, 1996.^
Eric S. Clifford, Mayor
ATTEST:
Mattie Cunningham, City Clerk\
nrPRovEn n , roxM:
,
T. K. aynes, Citf Attomey
EXHIBIT 3
SURVEY RESULTS - AIRPORT QUESTIONNAIRE
Private Hangars
Ground
Graund I~ease Rental?
Terms of Leases
If Taxes Due,
Ownership Revert
iGnds of insuranee Required .
Airport
Make-up of Baard
Available?
Leases?
(Primary)
tu 6e Faid by
tu City? When.
Advisury
Lessee?
Board
Size
TEMPLE'
Yes
Yes
Current rate unknown.
20years
Yes
Yes. Atexpiration
FireandExtendedCoverage - Notless
9
REQUIREMENTS:
When the hangars were
of 20 year term.
than 80% of the fair insurable value.
5 must be residents of
first built several years
city, 1 must be
ago, the rate was $0.03 per
resident of Belton
sf per year, adjusted
(chosen by Mayor of
annually with the CPI
Belton), and 3 must
be county residents:
ACTUAL: a doctor,
2 builders, an
investor, a corporate
pilot, a retired
general aviationpilot,
a business owner, and
an insurance agent
GiLLESFiE ~OUNTY
Yes, but not for
Yes
$0.12619 per sf per year,
30 years
Yes
Yes. At eapiration
Fire and Eatended Coverage; Public
6
ACTUAL: 3 pilots, 3
AIRPORT'
private endeavors
adjusted annually with the
of Lease.
Liability -$300,000 or higher if state
non-pilots
(FREDERiCKSBURG
CPI
law requirement changes
~
GEORGE1OWN'
Yes
Yes
$0.10 per sf per year,
20years
Yes
Yes. At endof
PublicLiability-$1,000,OOO;Aircraft
7
REQUIREMENTS:
adjusted every 5 years
oprion at no cost or
Liability; Fire and Extended Coverage
must be a resident of
withthe CPI
at end of primary
-$80%of full replacementvalue
the city's ETJ;
term for then fair-
ACTUAL: pilots,
market-value.
non-pilots, business-
men, citizens
BRADYi
Yes, but not for
Yes
$0.10 per sf per month
10 years
No. Hangars
Yes. At the end of
Public Liability; Hangar-keeper's
5 plus
REQUIREMENTS:
private endeavors.
are owned by
the primary term.
Insurance. All insurance as
sheriff
one resident from
All are built by their
the EDC.
recommended by TxDot.
each county precinct
EDC.
and 2 residents of the
city; ACTUAL: a
retired Colonel and 3
businessmen from
local industries
Page 1 of 6
Private Hangars
Available?
Ground
Leases?
Graund I~ease Rental?
Terms of Leases
(Primary)
If Taxes Due,
tu 6e Faid by
Lessee?
Ownership Revert
tu City? When.
iGnds of insuranee Required .
Airport
Advisury
Board
Si~e
Make-up of Baard
ARANSAS COI1NTY
Yes
Yes
$0.07 per sf per year,
20 years maximum
Yes
Y e s. A t
Public Liability -$250,0001
6
REQUIREMENTS:
AIlZPORT'
increased every 5 yearsby
termination of
$1,000,0001$500,000
county residents;
(ROCKPOR'I')
$0.005 per sf per year
lease, whether by
PREFERENCE: 2
completion or
local business
default.
leaders, 2 members
with interest or
history in aviation, 2
members with no
interest or history in
aviation
McKIlNNEY'
Yes
Yes
WAITING ON AIR-
Negoriable
Yes
Yes
All insurance required by law,
7
ACTUAL: mostly
PORT MANAGER TO
including but not limited to, workers
citizens, some are
RETIIRN CALL
compensarion - $500,0001$500,0001
pilots
$500,000; insurance covering the
specified activities; and premises
insurance (replacement cost with no
depreciation) against fire, lightning,
wind, hail, flood (if in flood zone),
eaplosion, riot, smoke, and vandalism.
Page 2 of 6
Private Hangars
Available?
Ground
Leases?
Graund I~ease Rental?
Terms of Leases
(Primary)
If Taxes Due,
tu 6e Faid by
Lessee?
Ownership Revert
tu City? When.
iGnds of insuranee Required .
Airport
Advisury
Board
Si~e
Make-up of Baard
ADDiSON'
Yes
Yes
WAITING ON AIR-
Negotiable based on
Yes
Yes. At end of
LosslDamage to improvements by fire,
N/A
The town elected to
PORT MANAGER TO
value of the
leaseterm.
lightning, and other risks, sprinkler,
dissolve its Airport
RETIIRNALL
improvements
vandalismandmaliciousmischief-inan
Advisory Board
amount not less than 100% of the actual
because it put another
replacement value; Commercial General
tier between the
Liability - $2,000,000 per
airport management
occurrencel$4,000,000 aggregate (must
a n d t h e t o w n
include contractual liability); Workers
government.
Compensation - statutory limits;
Employers Liability - not less than
$1,000,000; BoilerlPressure Vessel
Insurance on steam boilers - $500,000 (if
applicable); Automobile Liability
(owned, non-owned, and hued car
coverage) - $1,000,000 CSL; Hangar
Keeper's Liability - $1,000,000 per
occurrence if engaged in maintenance,
repau, or servicing aircraft belonging to
third-party or any operation in which
tenant has care, custody, or control of
aircraft belonging to third-party; All-
Risks Builder's Risk Completed Value
Policy - during period of construction;
Aircraft Liability - in minimum limits
required by regulatory agencies, but not
less than $1,000,000 each occurrence
Page 3 of 6
Private Hangars
Ground
Graund I~ease Rental?
Terms of Leases
If Taxes Due,
Ownership Revert
iGnds of insuranee Required .
Airport
Make-up of Baard
Available?
Leases?
(Primary)
tu 6e Faid by
tu City? When.
Advisury
Lessee?
Board
Size
TEXARKANA'
Yes
Yes
Averages to be 20,000
Yes
Yes
Yes. Immediately
Loss/Damage to improvements - fire
8
AIRPORT
square feet at $0.15 per
upon completion of
and extended coverage - in an amount
SEE
AUTHORITY - The
square foot per year,
improvements.
not less than 80% of the fair insurable
NEXT
Authority owns the
increased every 5 years
value; General Liability -$300,000
COLUMN
airport and governs
witlt tlte CPI
bodily injury; $300,000 property
t h e a i r p o r t
damage; Workers Compensation - in
operations.
amounts as may be required;
Members are: 2
Comprehensive Automobile Liability -
attorneys, 3 small
in amounts as may be requued; Aucraft
business owners, a
Liability - in amounts as may be
h o u s e w i f e, a n
required ; All-Risks Builder's Risk
insurance specialist,
Insurance - during period of construction
and 2 retirees.
for not less than 80% of the fair
insurance value
CLEBURNE3
AWAITING
A RESPONSE
BiG SPRING'
Yes
Yes
If there is an existing
Not more than 20
No
Yes. At end of
Hangar-keeper's Insurance; Liability.
7
REQUIREMENTS:
concrete pad -$84.00 per
years
primary term.
The Cityprovides structural insurance
must reside within
acre per month; if there is
under its policy and passes the cost
city; ACTUAL: 2
exisring asphalt -$42.00
along to the tenant.
active pilots, 3
per acre per month; if the
businessmen, and 2
land is raw -$21.00 per
citizens
acre per month; all
adjusted every 5 years
with the CPI
TERRELL3
Yes
Yes
10% of the appraised
25 years
Yes
Yes. At end of
1. Real properry owned by the City is
8
ACTUAL: 5 pilots, 3
value of the land per year,
lease term.
insured under its policy; Lessor
m e m b e r s n o t
adjusted every 5 years
provides insurance for any personal
affiliated with airport
with the CPI
properry; Liability; Business liability
in any way
insurance; Bond with City listed as
beneficiary in the event of damage to
the Airport
Page 4 of 6
Private Hangars
Ground
Graund I~ease Rental?
Terms of Leases
If Taxes Due,
Ownership Revert
iGnds of insuranee Required .
Airport
Make-up of Baard
Available?
Leases?
(Primary)
tu 6e Faid by
tu City? When.
Advisury
Lessee?
Board
Size
KERRVILLE'
Yes
Yes
Based on property
20 years; 25 years if
Yes
Y e s. A t
During construction, Contractor's
5
ACTUAL: pilots and
appraisal.
hangarfinanced
termination ar
Insurance; Commercial General
business-men linked
completion of lease.
Liability -$1,000,000; Automobile
in some way to the
Liability - not less than $1,000,000;
airport
Properry and Casualty Eatended
Coverage - at least 90% of
replacement value; Hangar-keepers'
liability - $1,000,000
NA~~GDOCHLS'
Yes
Yes
$0.1624 per sf per year,
20 years
Yes
City has right-of-
G e n e r a 1 L i a b i 1 i t y -
5
PREFERENCE: 3
adjusted annually with the
first-refusal upon
$100,0001$300,0001$300,000
pilots, 2 non-pilots
CPI
sale, default, or
determinarionnotto
enter into a new
lease.
ANGELINA COUNTY
Yes
Yes
$0.15 per sf per year
40 years
Yes
Y e s. A t
WAITING TO RECENE THE
7
ACTUAL: abouthalf
AIRPORf',
termination of
LEASE TO COMPLETE THIS
are pilots with the
OLUFKIN)
lease.
SECTION.
remainder being city
or county residents
CORSICANA2
Yes, but there has
Yes
Based on the value of the
20 to 30 years
Yes
Y e s . A t
G e n e r a 1 L i a b i 1 i t y -
7
ACTUAL: a doctor,
been no new
hangar.
termination of
$300,0001$500,0001$200,000
the Chancellor of the
construction for 20
lease, whether by
local college, a flight
years
completion of the
i n s t r u c t o r, 2
terms of otherwise.
commercial airline
pilots, 2 others
GAINE~VILLLE 2
Yes
Yes
$0.12 per sf per year,
20 to 30 years for
Yes
Yes. At the end of
No insurance is required at this time.
7
REQUIREMENTS:
adjusted every 5 years
private hangars; 30
the primary lease
The Airport Manager advised that he
must be a resident of
with the CPI
to 40 years for
term.
and the City Attorney are looking into
t h e c o u n t y;
businesses
this issue to begin establishing
ACTUAL: some
requirements.
have hangars, some
do not
B1~OWNWOOI2
Yes
No
Construction of hangar in
20 years
No, but they are
Yes. Immediately
Fire and Casualty Insurance - in an
7
REQUIREMENTS:
lieu of ground lease
researching to
upon completion of
amount equal to fair market value of
1 must be member of
payments
do in the future.
construcrion.
the hangar, payable to the City;
city council
Liability - $1,000,000 per occurrence
Page 5 of 6
Private Hangars
Available?
Ground
Leases?
Graund I~ease Rental?
Terms of Leases
(Primary)
If Taxes Due,
tu 6e Faid by
Lessee?
Ownership Revert
tu City? When.
iGnds of insuranee Required .
Airport
Advisury
Board
Size
Make-up of Baard
PARiS
Yes
Yes
Not addressed
25 - 45 years,
Not addressed
During primary term
Liability -$250,0001$500,0001
7
A C T U A L: 4
depending on size of
of lease, City is
$100,000
members who own
hangar
required to pay a
planes and rent or
percentage of the
own hangars (1 of
value of the hangar
which is also the
u p o n 1 e a s e
FBO), 1 with strong
termination
interest in aviahon, 2
general citizens
RECOMMENDED BY
Yes
~~s
W 12 per sf ~ear,
~ears if less than
Chose not to
N o
No insurance
11
AI"ORT
adjusted every ~years
5,000 sf, 30 years it
m a k e a
recommendation
ADViSORY BOARD
wikh the CPI
5,001 sf t~ 20~000
recommendatio
made
sf, n~~otiable if over
n
20,000 sf
' Recommended by TxDot
z Recommended by Airport Advisory Board
3 Recommended by both TxDot and Airport Advisory Board
Page 6 of 6
EXHIBIT 4
Discussion with Airport Advisory Board, April 17, 2001
DISCUSS POLICY CONSIDERATIONS AND PROVISIONS OF LEASE AGREEMENTS
FOR NEW PRIVATE HANGARS.
1. Term Length.
Current policy.
2. Cost versus amortization.
Length of options
4. Option fees - amount and adjustment for inflation.
II. Should plans for the hangar go through the City's typical building plan review,
thereby requiring a building permit and applicable fees?
III. Should special consideration be given in hangar leases which are used for business or
economic development purposes in contrast to purely personal use?
What should those considerations be?
2. Our lease does not prohibit living quarters per se (although the lease does say
it is for aviation purposes only), and people live in the hangars. Should future
leases allow this?
IV. Specific begin and end date for construction.
Should it be required?
2. How long?
V. Should the lease provide for ground lease payments?
Policy at other airports.
2. TxDot input.
If so, how much?
VI. Should the lease place the burden for taxes, if any, on the hangar tenant?
Current lease is silent on taxes.
2. No taxes are paid.
Policy at other airports.
VII. How much insurance should be required?
Insurance currently required.
2. Practice at other airports.
EXHIBIT 5
Recommendations of Airport Advisory Board
DISCUSS POLICY CONSIDERATIONS AND PROVISIONS OF LEASE AGREEMENTS
FOR NEW PRIVATE HANGARS.
1. Term Length.
Size versus amortization.
The Advisory Board recommended a policy for term lengths using a sliding
scale based on the size of the hangar being constructed by the tenant. The
Board also recommended there be minimum standards set for the construction
of airport hangars so all hangars will meet minimum requirements, such as
gage of inetal insulation, air conditioning, heating, etc. The Board
recommended this sliding scale based on size in lieu of a sliding scale based
on cost versus amortization because they felt the size of the hangar more
accurately reflected long-term usability of the hangar, whereas cost could
reflect the expense of adding certain items to the structure itself which would
not have long-term applicability. Subsequently, the Board made a specific
recommendation that leases for hangars up to 5,000 square feet in size would
be for a twenty-five (25) year term; leases for hangars sized larger than 5,000
square feet but no larger than 20,000 square feet would be for a thirty (30)
year term; and all hangars sized in excess of 20,000 square feet would be for
a term negotiated between the hangar owner and the City.
2. Options
The Board recommended there be no options specified in the lease agreement
and the term be for the original term only.
Right of first refusal after end of term
Thereafter, the Board recommended a process similar to that process used for
Hangar H, whereby the subsequent rental of the hangar after the City took it
over following expiration of the initial term would be based on a competitive
bidding process for a rate for use of the hangar, and the tenant who had
originally built the hangar would then have the opportunity to exercise, within
thirty (30) days, a right-of-first-refusal to rent the hangar for whatever period
of time the City desired to rent it out at the rental rate which was bid in the
competitive bidding process. Again, no options would be provided in the
contract.
Page 1 of 3
II. Should plans for the hangar go through the City's typical building plan review,
thereby requiring a building permit and applicable fees?
The Board recommends all hangars go through the City's typical building plan review,
including the requirement for building permits and fees. However, the Board also
recommended standards for hangars be developed if they are not already set out in the
building code.
III. Should special consideration be given in hangar leases which are used for business or
economic development purposes in contrast to purely personal use?
What should those considerations be?
The policy being developed for private hangars should apply equally to
business purpose hangars and personal use hangars. Economic incentives for
business-use hangars are available from and should be exclusively derived
from the Paris Economic Development Corporation.
2. Our lease does not prohibit living quarters per se (although the lease does say
it is for aviation purposes only), and people live in the hangars. Should future
leases allow this?
The Advisory Board recommended future leases provide tenants cannot live
in the hangar or have full living quarters in the hangar. The intent is to allow
some facilities which otherwise would be included in living quarters, such as
a bar, sink, bathroom facilities, and even a temporary cot. The point was
made that sometimes these hangars are used for parties and that should not be
prohibited. However, the Board was unanimous in its consensus that future
leases should not permit the tenant to live in the hangar.
IV. Specific begin and end date for construction.
Should it be required?
Yes.
2. How long?
The Board recommended eighteen (18) months from signing of the lease to
complete construction.
Page 2 of 3
V. Should the lease provide for ground lease payments?
The Board recommended for all new lease agreements a ground lease payment by the
tenant of $0.12 per square foot of ground per year, adjusted every five (5) years by
an amount equal to the Consumer Price Index for the previous five (5) years.
VI. Should the lease place the burden for taxes, if any, on the hangar tenant?
Current lease is silent on taxes.
The Board reviewed the language which the City Attorney provided which was
derived from four (4) separate contracts for four (4) other airports. The purpose of
these clauses is to make sure if any taxes are ever due and payable on the property or
structure of the private hangars, then the responsibility for those taxes would be the
tenant's alone, and not the City. The Board understood it was the City Attorney's
intent to recommend such language to the City Council, and therefore wanted the
record to reflect it neither made a recommendation for or against such inclusion.
2. No taxes are paid.
VII. How much insurance should be required?
The Board debated the necessity for and amount of insurance to be required on such
hangars. The Board recommended to continue the general liability requirement. The
Board considered the issue of requiring occupants of private hangars to have full
coverage fire and casualty insurance on the hangar, equal to the value of the hangar.
After further discussion, the Board recommended that the lease not require the
occupant to have fire and casualty insurance at the expense of the occupant; rather,
the Board concluded that the City should pay the cost of such insurance on the hangar
if the City desired to have insurance coverage to protect the City's interest in the
hangar.
Page 3 of 3
EXHIBIT 6
MEMORANDUM
TO: LARRY SCHENK, CITY ATTORNEY
FROM: MATTIE CUNNINGHAM, CITY CLERKTV~,
SUBJECT: INSURANCE - PRIVATE HANGARS AT COX FIELD
DATE: JULY 12, 2001
In regard to your question, does the City of Paris carry personal property
insurance coverage on private hangars located at Cox Field Airport, the City of
Paris has never carried this type coverage for private hangars located on the
Airpart property. The city does have coverage for city owned hangars.
I talked with Stephanie Harvey the City's Insurance Underwriter with Texas
Municipal League and Ms. Harvey advised, after reviewing a copy of one of the
lease agreements with their legal department, that the City of Paris does have a
vested interest in the leased hangars at Cox Field. She also advised that
insurance coverage for the leased hangars could be added to the city's insurance
schedule at the current rate of $.086 per one hundred dollars, with a deductible
of $2,500.00 per occurrence. Ms. Harvey also suggest the lease agreements be
revised with the Lessee's furnishing this coverage for their hangars with the City
of Paris being shown as an additional insured.
Another item Ms. Harvey pointed out, after reviewing the lease agreement, was
there were no provisions where the Lessee would be required to rebuild the
hangar in case of it being damaged or destroyed. Ms. Harvey suggested placing
this requirement in the lease agreements in order to protect the City's interest.
If additional information is needed, please let me know.
EXHIBIT 7
AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD
ATTENDANCE LIST
MEETING I 1st I 2nd I 3rd I4th I 5th 6th I 7th
DATE Director Director Director Director Director Director Director
02105/07
attended
attended
aftended
attended
attended
attended
QUORUM
02121107
attended
aftended
aftended
attended
attended
attended
aftended
QUORUM
03127107
attended
attended
attended
attended
attended
attended
QUORUM
04/77/01
aftended
aftended
attended
attended
aftended
artended
QUORUM
05108101
attended
attended
attended
attended
attended
SPECIAL
QUORUM
05115/01
attended
attended
attended
attended
attended
QUORUM
05129101
aftended
aftended
attended
attended
attended
SPECIAL
QUORUM
06119107
attended
aftended
attended
attended
aftended
QUORUM
06128101
attended
aftended
aftended
aftended
SPECIAL
QUORUM
07117/01
attended
attended
attended
attended
aftended
QUORUM
AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD
ATTENDANCE LIST
MEETING I 7st I2nd 3rd I4th 5th 6th 7th
DATE Director Director Director Director Director Director Director
SPECIAL
QUORUM
05/15101
*absent*
•absenY
QUORUM
05129101
*absent*
*absent*
SPECIAL
QUORUM
06/19/01
*absent*
*absent*
QUORUM
06128101
*absent*
*absent*
`absent*
SPECIAL
QUORUM
07/17101
*absent*
*absent"
QUORUM
EXHIBIT 8
AIRPORT IMPROVEMENTS GRANTS
1. Project No. 9-41-149-5701 (Civil Aeronautics Administration) - Construction of new
terminal building.
Amount: $113,706.99 Total Cost; $56,505.86 Federal Funds; $57,201.13 Matching Funds
(1957)
2. Project No. A-48-0169-01 (US-FAA) - Develop Master Plan.
Amount: $5,653.00 Federal Funds
(1957)
3. Project No. 8-48-0169-02 (US-FAA) - Acquire land; extend runway 17-35 by 1,500 feet;
install medium intensity runway lights on extended runway 17-35; install rotating beacon,
segmented circle, and lighted wind cone; and perform pavement marking incidental to
construction.
Amount: $380,302.67 Total Cost; $285,227.00 Federal Funds; $41,075.67 State funds;
$54,000.00 Matching Funds
(1975)
4. TAC Project No. 741-4-25183 (also 751-5-26012) - Acquire south clear zone easements;
extend Runway 17/35 from 4,500' to 6,000; install lighting; construct T-hangar and taxi-
ways.
Amount: $50,000.00 State Funding
(1975)
5. Project No. 6-48-0169-03 (DOT); Contract No. DOT FA 76 SW-8001 - Phase One -
Overlay and mark old portion of Runway 17/35; and
Project No. 6-48-0169-04 (DOT); Contract No. DOT FA 77 SW-8182 - Phase Two -
Overlay and mark new extension of Runway 17/3 5; and construct T-hangar taxiway.
Amount: Phase One -$154,659.00 Federal Funding; Phase Two -$145,884.00 Federal
Funding
(1977)
6. TAC Project No. 785-14 - Pave multiple T-hangar apron.
Amount: $12,500.00 State Funding
(1978)
7. TAC Project No. 836-20 - Construct fuel storage and access ramp.
Amount: $115,000.00 State Funding
(1983)
1
8. TAC Project No. 866-24 - Seal cracks and joints in Runways 13/31, 3/21, taxiway, and
apron; re-stripe Runways 13/31, 3/21, and 17/3 5; replace rotating beacon; and install taxiway
guidance signs.
Amount: $130,000.00 State Funding
(1988)
9. Project No. 3-48-0169-01-90 (US-FAA) - Master Plan Update.
Amount: $40,500.00 Federal Funding; $4,500.00 Matching Funds
(1990)
10. Project No. 91/43-7-4 (Texas Department of Aviation) - Construction of aircraft hangars
and associated appurtenances.
Amount: $120,600.00 State Funds; $13,400.00 Matching Funds
(1991)
11. Project No. 3-48-0169-02-92 (US-FAA) - see also TDA Project No. 92/29-8-1 (Texas
Department of Aviation) - Extend Taxiway A; grading and drainage improvements for
Runway 17/35, Taxiways A and B; construct helipad and helipad access road; overlay
entrance road; and install perimeter fencing.
Amount: $458,889.00 Total Cost; $413,000.00 Federal Funds; $22,944.00 State Funds;
$22,944.00 Matching Funds
(1992)
12. TxDOT Project No. 94-43-103 - Install lighted guidance signs on Runway 17/35.
Amount: $92,136.00 Total cost; $82,922.40 State Funds; $9,213.60 Matching Funds
(1994)
13. TxDOT Contract No. 6XXFA032; TxDOT Project No. AP PARIS 4; TxDOT CSJ No.
9601PARIS (Texas Department of Transportation) - Reconstruct and overlay hangar
access taxiway; install segmented circle; construct drainage improvements; construct terminal
building; install erosion/sedimentation controls; and associated appurtenances.
Amount: $750,000.00 Total Cost ($480,000.00 for construction of terminal building [50%
funding available]; $270,000.00 for other items [90% funding available]); $483,000.00 State
Funds; $267,000.00 Matching Funds
(1995)
14. TxDOT CSJ No. AMOIPARIS (Texas Department of Transportation) - Crack repair;
seal coats; edge seals; herbicide application; striping; sweeping; and mowing.
Amount: $15,422.00 Total Cost; $7,711.00 State Funds; $7,711.00 Matching Funds
(1996)
2
15. TxDOT Contract No. 7XXFA020; TxDOT Project No. A PARIS 5; TxDOT CSJ No.
9701PARIS (Texas Department of Transportation) - Reconstruct and rehabilitate Runway
17-35; stripe and mark Runway 17-35; rehabilitate Taxiway A; rehabilitate Taxiway B;
replace medium intensity runway lights for Runway 17-35; seal PCC joints and mark apron;
install prevision approach path indicator for Runway 17; install aircraft tiedowns; drainage
improvements; prepare Airport Layout Plan and Exhibit "A"; install erosion/sedimentation
controls and associated appurtenances.
Amount: $2,308,000.00 Total Cost; $2,308,000.00 Eligible for StateFunding; $230,800.00
Matching Funds
(1996)
3
EXHIBIT 9
COX FIELD AIRPORT
INCOME V. EXPENSES
Income
October 1, 1998 - Septemb
er 30, 1999
$41,484.24
Sources of Income:
Land Leases
$2,893.00
Terminal Lease
$2,217.33
T-Hangar Rentals
$27,808.00
Fuel Flowage Fees
$8,565.91
Income
October 1, 1999 - Septemb
er 30, 2000
$44,312.76
Sources of Income:
Land Leases
$240.00
Terminal Lease
$4,017.00
T-Hangar Rentals
$31,184.00
Fuel Flowage Fees
$8,871.76
Expenses
$108,274.17
($141, 251. 00)
(budgeted)
Expenses
$160, 870.06
($164, 465. 00)
(budgeted)
EXHIBIT 10
1999/2000 Rates and Charges
General Aviation Airports in Texas
Cay,CowiY
AkVW
Fmil .ddrm
M,pa,
Amw~
RaW Rtla
T.H.gl
TieOowdRury
PukegLal(fpa)
NmAVUdonAOa~
(hvlyy/
p"
N.me
dm
FlipJ,t
(fpaN.dPaY')
'
SmfMed/I{
F.
PBO%of
Ow.pefm
(~7
OP.W.
hnd/o9
iodlugeMyya
ova 1 iouvh
Wd'm`Fm
IndWUI lApiavYue
pror
~
11ny / M1faitB
fp.6 SprAae
11~^wnwoadl
Ormmwwd
N/A
I300
]O,WO
WA
SII01N/A/f110
WA/IIO
WA
1LA
WA
MA
WA
11rwn Co.
& gaul
'
11wm
Bwnn
mWimU@lb~
110.34
MA
WA
M0O/f200/WA
MA
MA
MA
WA
MA
IIO
Mmiryd
CWdoMill.
GddoMiN
N!A
150
10,000
MA
51601WA/WA
SISlWA
Wp
TYA
MA
MA
MA
Miniopd
Ca1dvA!
CuA.dl
MA
40.9
10,000
MA
f100lWA/MA
WA/fi]7
NU
MA
MA
MA
MA
Bwiam Co.
F4nitpd
GNamCo.
GliwnCO.
WA
WA
10,000
WA
=7513100/WA
f3lf33
MA
WA
WA '
IOOK
WA
Port Uvao
Cfi.obt++
M+h.
*AM.dumbvs
li
101000
x07/WA/S73pada.
S1II315130/5300
MA/MS
MA
MA
MA
N!A
WA
CountY
Wmie
.LCw
Ciwo
Ciwo
MA
MA
10,000.
MA / WA /f333
MA
WA
WA
WA
WA
WA
MA
EWmdCa.
AW~ie~al .
Clovn
CbwFidd
dova3@flmiuia
30L9
100,000
f.lf f y27pI3L35
$195 /337311773
SS/f33-f73
MA
TUA
MA
IOfi
MA
CdIUG.
A'vpuk•
N/A
81
10,000
MA
f173/WA/f3U0
yi/p0
pVA
WA
WA
WA
MA
DdW
Canm&e
ComoChe
WA
IU
10,000
WA
fE3390/WA/WA
MA
MA
WA
MA
WA
MA
CaotyClY
.
.
6.dl
Fovd
WA
33
MA
MA
MA
WA
MA
N/A
MA
WA
MA
ca.ay
nw+o
GWao
mv4dewitlrsti
75
1,000
MA
S50 1 530/WA
$1-#1 S70460
WA
WA
MA
WA
WA
A1~niapal
~w
~
~ 1a+@F'LAS1L
1'7g
'W.WO
S446/f0.lO1WA
S(A.f165fWA/WA
$7d(0/T30
WA
MA
WA
MA
A03
1
D°"°
D.. Ch
W&.QmA.
131.7
IO,OOD
WAJWA/i07
3LO5 pQ.qd
NG
MA
WA
!UA
MA
WA
1999/2000 Rates and Charges
General Aviation Air orts in Texas
cayrcwur
k,v«d
~a.ad..
n'upon
~.w
nm.iww
T.xnPn
r nM*'x.m
r.~t;g LA (sv=)
N. n.ini. aoa.
m.s.f.
eud
N.
wm
Flidu
(S~w.apn)
smrMMiL,
Fm
aeoxor
na.., r=
(~aa7
Opcriaw
IW1o9iodlu8<hnyn
ove ! mnah
Is~d'ngFeu
foAmliJ /AgiaYme
Crou
vwl
My / ldmh
IqA SpQAae
Gl.~nal
0W+frta
NlA
700
10,000
3.12lWA/5.13
565/WAIWA
NIA
MA
WA
MA
WA
WA
Crtegg
AUnicipd
"
Gmala
G.I.
NU ~
18
WA
WA
f75/Y73/WA
WA
WA
WA
WA
MA
MA
Mmi4,l
GmMuy/
QiaryFidd
WA
74
10,000
S.GS•.13Jf1.73/WA
S153 /t300/5700
SI1 330
WA
MA
WA
MA
WA
Hoad
Gny+m
Onyim
MA
1400
7Q000
5.06•.U/f1.e8•SS,00/
SI50/S17515770
f3lZ70
WA
MA
WA/Sl3pamnd
MA .
5.04ebms
cmdY
C^aY
Al4,37.3&39kS1.47
hb
IO.OOOpI
G.Y.
C-ty
Codar Mille
flpw@.d.mn
43
Ia,aW
MA
MA
WA
MA
MA
MA
WA
WA
GruvaI
Orvw
gM1iE@pumnel
169
NA
510lWA/WA
f43/WA/WA
MA .
MA
WA
WA
MA
MA
H+nsford
Municpl
Hukdl
Nukdl
WA
80
MA
WA
f601WA/WA
WA
MA
WA
WA
MA
MA
MwiryJ
lfeme1
Hnme
hnme(dptaM1elnat
WA
MA
S.O]!WA/ MA
160•f175/f3007
WA/.q33
MA
WA
WA
MA
NJA
Aabaluo
Mwicpd
,U35
HondeJMed'mi
Haodo
HmdaayQvuil
SOlpa
10,000
i0131WA/MA
MA
!UA/f10
WA
MA
f.10If1.00
WA
fA5
Nau+mMuri.
WdmeA'v
WA
103
10,000+
WA/WA/WA
S3301S770fW0
LS.ODlWA
MA
WA
WA
MA
WA
Prtk
1nm/Pmn
hun
WA
76
10,000
WA
WA
WA
MA
MA
FLniryJ
InpmdlSm
TP
-pn4@eo.oom
1I4
lO,OW
[OS/NA/NA
WA
MA
MA
WA
WA
WA
MA
Pnridd
Md.uipbell
'
,
1.d~hwdJ~
7K4abaa
WA
WA
lO,OW
MA
S30/f30!!LA
MA
WA
WA
MA
WA
MA
Mmicpl
1999/2000 Rates and Charges
General Aviation Airports in Texas
Crty/Cwnry
AirynM1
Fmil~ddru+
Aiqwl
Aonwl
RaEalRdn
T-Hmpn
TwDaMP~
PutegLal(fpe)
NmAViMimA~
CL'ryafar
Rr{
N.me
um
Fligta
(7pnq.QpaN)
SmlMad/I.e
Fw
FBO% af
ftw+gefm
_
(.ae)
Opaatiw
Iv0o111004rgelm`us
ava / mamh
IrWn6Fee
Indu4id lApiwhuro
O~
nippt
0.y ~ l.7m1h
fql SpvAae
M.tPlewu
hlawt
hauwry~'~uucaom
101
10,000
N/A/WA/I.OS
WA
WA
WA
WA
WA
N/A
WA
Plmemt
ALni~.l
NauBnwkle
Ncw
dpM1illip@eucne
993
30,000
Alo/f6.0U/f1.80
5160/WAlWA
S].OO/f7o.00
WA
WA
3.I01I35
I%
t07
Bnue44
A1mi6pd
Neatm
Nwrtm
MA
100
10,000
MA
f75131003177
WA
WA
MA
WA
WA
WA
MioiWd
U-g~g
Omg
dnoa(dao.amge
UO
30,000
WA/SIOJI63
S130lWA/WA
SI0f510
WA
MA
WA
WA
$.07
Coway
CavLLY
M.
Pbm'vm
Pdm'vne
ga6ioMn@tWhai
300
10,000
f33pamvlM1lWA/WA
tJ/A
f1/530
MA
WA
MA
MA
IOIIOOOt
A4nkipd
t02V7m
Pw'
CoKFidd
MA
I337
10,000
WA/3l0l51.80
H91 S95 1 II00
MA
MA
WA
WA/SB.tlaop
MA
f.03
S3.41 pwve
Pamll/Frio
McKmlry
WA
70
I0,000
WA/WAlSlP,000yr
5331WA/WA
WA
iUA
f1.00lWA
WA
MA
WA
Pndmd
Pinduk
N/A '
IRS
IO,OW-
N/A
f10.001WA/WA
WA
WA
WA
WA
MA
WA
M.xyd
Poi11q,Ran,ft
FlyngMd,
mdm(ddmoledu
293
I,OOD
MA
fl001S150/WA
f10/S70
WA
WA
WA .
WA
MA
fl~
Pia~
MA
91
10,000
S.M/WA/WA
580/5100/1175
MA
WA
WA
WA
MA
WA
ASniepai
Port~!
Mu4og
crtypMUmu@ae
MA
WA
WA
WA
5445lf33434
WA
MA
MA
WA
WA
Nuav
Be&
tiuqidna
PaN~ad/
Him[1
WA
S
WA
WA
S931WA/WA
WA/f13
WA'
WA
MA
WA
WA
Sn PMrido
Rd~gioCouLLy
RaataFidd
MA
Il!
10,000
MA
MA
WA
WA
MA
MA
WA
M
1999/2000 Rates and Charges
Reliever Airports in Texas
CrtylCwntY
AWaM1
Fm~il.ddea
.1iWpM
Amiul
R~IRYp
T-Haeyn
15eDoxdRuW
Pukngld(Spv)
NmAvitlimA~
p
Fud
N~me
um
FlisM
(SpaNdPafT)
Sm/Madllg
Fm
FE0liaf
O.pfae
Ucn)
Opaniw
hnd/~adlugehmigan
mv / mmih
Lmdi" Pw
LWiWUI lAyiwkurc
G.
nwt
DaY / Mm6
Sp1 fpvAas
M'vgm
M'v~gLm
airyan@o.vlnp}m
300
30,000+
S.IO/f10.5015136
516313163/5150
f1lf10
WA
WA
MA
WA
f17,30
Mmiw.l
tz.m
'
Fm"in
Pas CPI
Houmontl
Bwumad
WA
393
70,000
103410lMAIH/A
SI031S160./WA
561f44
WA
MA
t033.10/WA
MA
i03
kffawn
Mwiap.l
1~t
D~
D~vputmm
700
70AW+
03415/WA/57.50-f4.00
f63-T760lf191-f190
f3lbPf30
MA
WA
WA/SIL33
10%
1%6%
Dnam,.
Mmi'ryal
/570034W
FmWaU✓
MeIdw
dp~ed@d.fal-
743
10,000F
f.194111S6-40.5I1.301
¢701T270lN7A
f3-f67/f100.
S.BSSlpr
WA.
MA
WA
{.07•III
Tuna
LtlemYimd
wMhicm
5137
57,300
IOOOm
C+mrgRwn
OmMdam
WA
500
50,000+
.LIO/WA/f1.17
SRRSfM11/MA
f1/S30
WA
MA
WA/A7
WA
i10
AUnicpl
GmdRaine
Gmd
booaOd.gW.
167
70,000+
f.10/f1.77•I3.00/II.Oi
31331 f180/WA
t3 /330
WA
WA
MA
MA
i70
Pnirie
pnirintcw
$1.71
Mmicqd
UPonelHu,'u
Wo4
yllm-w,W
700
10,000.
i01/WAlWA .
MA
WA/t70
WA
WA
MA
WA
MA
MwiaPd
pplttx.W
M<Kenry/
AfcKinry
kuroe@vdcumry.
766
100.406t
5.11/WA/WA
5175/b971f420
t37f60
WA
WA
WA
WA
3.09
CoOo.
Mmi*d
laaaarg
AduWee;
Mequie
qodGey@damqui
300
SO,OW+
t14/WA/5.11
f1707f1771S330
S7375
WA
WA
MA
WA
WA
D.U.
Mem
le.LCtr
Mmlgmsy
Mu¢gamy
ma~
1,166
30,000
5.10/WA/WA
SI30/S235/WA
$31330
N7A
WA
$IIOIWA
WA
f.01
Caety
CaK9
,
SoMum~
SwALroo,
j,dpiphly@mlyryi
1,336
50,000+
$.1015.30lWA
f133.32751WA
57If70 ~
MA
WA
PA1VlBd
1%
1%
bmWal
WA
whohuy
Ty1aG-ty
TylaCm2y
N/A
MA
WA
WAIWA/S233130mo
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
MA
W.m
1
1 TSTC
1'NNSO@hleek
1,600
SO.OODa
f.10/17.11/SIJO
MA
WA
S.Ilpr
MA '
WA/A.B9
WA
L10
10006
1999/2000 Rates and Charges
Medium and Large Hub Airports in Texas
cay,c~ty
npln
~wi
ap~
Fudrl~p
rt,wiww
ra,MdnrdsP.atsrew.dvw nl
rtm,icw
T-xmq-(svQ
rbm..o
L-ai
rUkatd
NweA~
Name
E~rylmmiaw
um
Fm
(Spaq.flW+Y*)
awNa/RelawWfkMadfi^W/
matlh
m~h)
ro4fae
FoOa
(fPQ)
A~
Indfa9'is/Wgehanyr
Advv~iainguguxY.g~w
mioimw/
mll/med/lg
orvtigll/
IODOU
drylmatl6
Ind7At
M pm
modh
Abilmc/
Abiim<
WA
1.700
5.0673
S.045.S.II5/DVA!=.60
SI5.37/WA/WA/304i
SI000110%
SI101 5270/5330
MA
.fif-
541WA
WA
T.yla
Regimd
xu
NwilWl
AmuiOo
434,I10
5,300
3L0333
II31 310.4171 f1.10
SI8.7318%I874/10%
WA/10%
WA
f3/WA
SAS
54-f6!
f1.351f3.70
Para
EmaoYimJ
MA
Au+n/Tmis
eaptmn
7,192,199
4,300
S10
5171f61.171WA
S64.371%/%/S11,OWyr
WA/IOX
MA
WAlSI00
SI.U-
SWI&
WA
mKanWmd
$3.70
MA
Bm,mrvilk/
SwahPdre
75,000
1,900
$A6
S,I0I3.73/L%
f1601I0%/10%123%
T3,5W/10%
WA
MA
T.93-
WA
f.101SI00
C.
bI.ed
LN
Immivul
Ddlu/0.11u
DdWtcve
3,409,930
1a73
L04
S.20 K3.08•53.731 S231
f9.701%/%!SI&7311a13%
534000110%
MA
MA
L15-
SS-f7/
T3.73•533&
Fdd
137
MA
[J/A
EIPw
EIPaw
1,6W.690
7.000
106
5.]0.131/SI.3015]OOmo
531.30110~1'i%/1~ ISX
fB,I]JJ]/
S1004IIOIS2WI
316A0/S30
190
SI.50.
TJ.fO•IlQ'
Inlaoriwl
]OX
$200
56.70f
MA
f19]-
suuo
OrtgCanty
Cm{g
70,000
1,300
5.01
f.iO/WAlN/A
f1010/1VAlN/A
f100l9.3%
SI771 530013170•
WA
i30
f3/WA
S.OSlWA
C~Y
t700
Nrtlngm
Vdiry
470,000
7,300
101
1061WA/2.11-SJI
539.67111XI541II%/30%
WAlIOIi
MA
WA
SbY
f4•SS/
WA/SJO
hAaRAMW
5.711
MA
1Cill.
ICiilam
90.O29
702
S055
I511 f7.201fI.03
511.731 f5,318.14yx/f7S0/25%
t1,886.17
f99.671SI72/WA
SS-f7/
S37-
f1.70MlA
MA
A4nw,d
Lrtwe
52I13
116
I.ado
laIalo
76,000
1,800
1013
1I81S.I31f1.N
.SIS/SI3.18/SSJ9170%
$I,770/WA
WA
MA
U0
WA
itt-i40/
h0as4md
WA
Lubbndk
Wbha*
60D.000
7,000
S04
f.1102 lS1611807341.10
SI7.1]IWA/WAMlA
10%
WA
WA
165-
f447931
LIO%/%
lttl3
WA