We Have The Money !!!!!!!

Friday, September 21, 2007 03:30 PM

MLA Pat Bell, Prince George Mayor Colin Kinsley, Premier Gordon Campbell, and Federal Minister of Natural Resources, Gary Lunn reveal the provincial committment to the Prince George Airport expansion.

Premier Gordon Campbell today announced $11 million dollars in funding for the Prince George Airport Expansion.

The Prince George Airport is seeking to extend its main runway so it can service larger airlines flying between Asia and North America, Premier Gordon
Campbell announced today.

"The Prince George Airport is strategically located to service air cargo traffic travelling between North America and the booming economies of China, Taiwan, South Korea and other Asian countries," Campbell said.

"This funding, along with earlier provincial contributions for improvements at the airport, allows Prince George to move forward on its plan to become a major international gateway for cargo and passenger traffic."

The Prince George Airport Authority (PGAA) is planning to increase its main runway to 11,400 feet from the current 7,400 feet, and upgrade its taxiway, apron system and navigational aids. With air traffic increasing between North America and Asia and other airports on the circumpolar route nearing capacity, the PGAA identified the need for an additional facility where aircraft can re-fuel and, eventually, transfer cargo.

The Province’s contribution to the runway expansion project includes $1 million committed earlier for related engineering and design work. In addition, in 2005, the Province contributed $3 million towards the expansion of the airport’s terminal building.

"This latest funding confirms our commitment to improve our transportation infrastructure and reinforce British Columbia’s position as Canada’s, and North America’s, Pacific Gateway," Minister of Transportation Kevin Falcon said. "The expansion of the Prince George Airport is key to the airport’s continued contribution to economic
growth and opportunities in Central and Northern B.C."

The Northern Development Initiative Trust (NDIT) and Western Economic Diversification Canada are also providing $11 million each towards the project. Established in 2004 with an initial investment of $135 million from the B.C.-CN Rail Partnership, the NDIT assists B.C.’s northern communities with economic development and diversification projects.

Work is expected to begin immediately on the runway expansion, Jim Blake, Chair of the PGAA, said.

"Now that funding is in place, we can begin construction and continue discussions with those airlines that have expressed interest in using the Prince George Airport," Blake said. "With a longer runway, Prince George is perfectly positioned to be that facility."

Federal Natural Resources Minister Gary Lunn says the check for $11 million from the Federal Government for the airport expansion is, “on the way”. The mood was light hearted, and Lunn strayed from his notes to joke about his initial announcement that was made back in January "I had to announce it back then so we could get all the paper work done in time to be here with you ( Premier Campbell) today." Lunn said," this is the finalizing of the project ", expected to cost about $36 million dollars.

Jim Blake, Airport Chair says the Authority will sign the contract next week with IDL-Sharpe construction for the project “phase 1” . The project Blake says should be finished by fall of 2008.

He says that while the budget is for $36 million and we only have $33 million in place he hopes some saving can be found during construction, and failing that, he has confixcence the government's will come to the plate to help out if necessary.

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Friday, September 21, 2007 03:30 PM in News by 250 News

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: DPJ on September 21 2007 4:07 PM

Congratulations to Jim Blake and the board members of the Prince George Airport Authourity for the hard work they put into making thes project "fly away". Jim Blake must have been pulling his hair out a bunch of times and had many nights of no sleep over this.

Posted by: Runner46 on September 21 2007 4:32 PM

This is one of the many days I am glad I chose to move here 1/4 of a Century ago.

Now lets get on with the show.

Posted by: owl on September 21 2007 4:47 PM

I think this will the the first time in my life that I will be able to observe whether there is any truth to the statement "build it and they will come"

Posted by: palomino on September 21 2007 5:13 PM

This is awesome news for Prince George !!

Now we can show up on the radar of ALL the air carriers worldwide that fly over, or near us, even if its just to add emergency landing capabilities to their public safety committment. You can bet your boots quite a few will be checking out the commercial possibilities of landing here, well before the last foot of runway sees the paver!! These Companies didn't get to where they are today by letting the competition slip in somewhere before they even clued in to some opportunity out there.

Absolutley no worries Owl. They will truely come, and they will truely not come until we build a runway they can safely use.

By the way, does anyone know which runway is to be extended ? Is it the north-south one, or the east-west one ?

Posted by: Chadermando on September 21 2007 5:29 PM

I hope the runway is done before the Olympics so we can create some tourism oportunities as well...

Great news IMO.

Posted by: Palopu on September 21 2007 5:50 PM

Enjoy while you can. This project is a long way from ever amounting to anything, however time will tell.

The runway that is going to be expanded is the North-South Runway which will end approx 1000ft short of Johnston Road.

Owl **build it and they will come** They may very well come, but on the other hand this project is based over a 20 year period, so some of us may not be here to see it.

Before anyone gets a heart attack over this project consider that the Airport is **hoping** that they can get 12% of the smaller Cargo Flights that presently go through Anchorage. 12% which they have stated converts into approx 4 flights per day. Again projected over 20 years, so dont rush out to buy your ear protection equipment just yet.

They have now completed the easy part. Getting Government Money. The next stage is to spend the money. Which they will do without any effort, and then finally they will have to try and generate some money, and of course this is when it will get interesting.

Posted by: dgdiggler on September 21 2007 7:18 PM

I'm still not voting for Gordo .

Posted by: Palopu on September 21 2007 8:34 PM

dgdiggler. Whats the alternative????

Posted by: scotty kb on September 21 2007 10:33 PM

wow sounds great eh ??!!!???,
I hope everything works out but they say it will now cost around 36 million? and the board hopes to get another 3 million out of the government(the tax payer)...
What are they using the 15 dollar AIF(airport improvement fee) for?....hmmmm

Posted by: owl on September 22 2007 8:33 AM

The AIF can only be used for restricted items. I believe it is restricted to the improvement of passenger related facilities. They will also be altering the existing entry area, as I understand it. Then the terminal buildng will look more like it was all built at one time.

The other matter, of course is still whether they will ever build a proper skybridge to the planes so that the handicapped will no longer need to access by lift and everyone can get off and on without walking in the weather.

At one time that seemed to be high priority, but does not appear to be anymore. That alone would cost a few million.

The AIF simply would not be sufficient for something like runway expansion.

Posted by: owl on September 22 2007 8:38 AM

We have flights from Vancouver to PG, so toursts can use that, as they can use the highways with the RVs they might rent. Then there is the train ... and the bus ....

Plenty of opportunities.

The key that is going to get 200+ who might land here with an open jaw to Vancouver would be infrastructure on the toruist accommodation and activity side. For instance, something as simple as one way RV rentals between here and Vancouver, or even Calgary.

Then there are lodge opportunities - just sitting by a river or lake and being pampered.

I suppose in the winter that would entail ice-fishing. :-)

And driving on black ice in February with an RV would be intersting too....
;-)

Posted by: Andyfreeze on September 22 2007 11:28 AM

As dgdiggler said,"I am still not voting for Gordo"
You are correct Palopu...what IS the alternative?
And that is exactly the problem with B.C.politics.
Because there is a lack of viable alternatives, that does NOT mean that Gordo is actually the best man for the job as leader or for B.C.
And I will not be voting for him either!
The B.C.Liberals may have done an acceptable job over the long term,but that doesn't mean Campbell had much to do with it!
He is dictatorial,arrogant,and my guts tell me,not to be trusted.
He is however,surrounded by some very astute political organizers and spin doctors.
Fortunately, these things have a way of eventually catching up with people like him,but it is the party itself that will pay the price down the road.
:-(

Posted by: palomino on September 22 2007 4:10 PM

Well Andyfreeze and dgdiggler, you've ( obviously inadvertently ) revealed a serious flaw in the democratic system we have in place today, that continuously rears its ugly head when people like you get on a rant, and particularly in BC politics for some reason.
When you and I and all the other voters in a democratic society are given the priviledge of casting a ballot, one would hope that at least the majority of voters in any given election, would be casting those ballots with enough intelligence to know something about not only the "person" they are voting for, but more importantly, about the "party" that may come to power as a result of that vote!
Just because we have a personal dislike for a particular individual, does not mean that the party he or she represents is the "wrong" one for the Province, or the Country, or its peoples.
When one goes to the ballot box in this Province, I really hope that person has done some serious thinking about which party will be be best for ALL British Columbians, not just which one might serve his own selfish interests better, and to hell with the rest of us!
You've both indicated you're not voting for "Gordo", and probably because you don't "like" him, and of course you have every democratic right to do so. However, if that means you're not going to vote at all, then you're not doing your part in this society Guys, and really have no right to yap about anything in politics that dosen't suit you! If it means you're going to vote, but just to "throw" your vote to some other party with no hope of ever making a really significant contribution to the Province, ( such as the Rhino party, or Marijuana party ) just out of spite, then you're a hell of a lot bigger problem to this great land than "Gordo" ever was or will be !!
One thing we've apparently failed to teach in our schools in my opinion is, just what a priviledge it is to be able to cast a ballot, and be part of a democracy, but more importantly, just how to decide who we vote for, and what that ballot may mean to the future of "all" of us, not just a way to serve ones own selfish needs.
Those of us who constantly try to put down real accomplishments by individuals, or groups of individuals that improve the lives and well being of all of us, even if that means some personal sacrifice to themselves and their families, obviously haven't clued in yet as to what it takes to make a real difference in society.
I ask you Andyfreeze, and dgdiggler, what have YOU done to make life better for all of us proud British Columbians??

Posted by: YamaDooPolCat on September 22 2007 9:12 PM

You tell 'em Pal..

Posted by: Palopu on September 22 2007 10:12 PM

Owl. My understanding is that they will not build a sky bridge until the enplaned, deplaned, numbers reach 600,000 passengers. This apparently is the **magic** number when that type of facility is considered to be cost effective. 600,000 en/deplaned passengers would generate 300,000 @ 15.00 per head for a yearly AIF income of $4.5 Million. Their present forcast of increases in passengers is 2.9% per year. They are hoping to get to the magic number by 2012. Dont hold your breath.

AIFees can be used for any improvements to the Airport, so I suspect that they can use them for this runway expansion, however because the Airport Authority is broke at this time, it cannot come up with their share of the money for the expansion, and therefore have borrowed the money from the Northern Trust Initiative Funds, to be paid back with interest at the rate of inflation. So in effect all the monies collected from the AIF in the foreseeable future, (at least 7/8 years) will go towards paying back the loan. Hence no money for other expansions unless you get a big increase in passengers.

So what do we have. $22 Million for Prov and Feds. 11 Million borrowed, and an expansion that now will cost $36 Million instead of $33 Million. Future revenues based on a 2.9% increase in passenger travel in and out of Prince George per year. Lease payments that the Airport Authority has to start paying the Federal Government in 2011. This lease payment I beleive is based on a percentage of gross income. Plus a significant loan from CIBC that they must start paying interest and principal in the next few years.

The only thing that can save this project from going broke would be a huge increase in Cargo Flights and a huge increase in passengers. Neither are a gaurantee.

Their own projections of 4 Cargo Flights per day (Assuming $1000.00 per take off and landing fee) would be $3.5 Million per year but it could take over 10 years to get this number on a consistant basis. These Cargo Airlines are not exactly flying around over Prince George waiting to land.

Any decrease in landing and take offs, and passengers at this Airport in the near future will cause it no end of greif.

Keep in mind that their net revenue over expeditures in 2006 was $40,000.00

Posted by: acrider54 on September 23 2007 6:32 AM

Election coming up promises to be broken starting already.

Posted by: owl on September 23 2007 9:34 AM

"However, if that means you're not going to vote at all, then you're not doing your part in this society Guys, and really have no right to yap about anything in politics that dosen't suit you! "

I completely disagree with that concept. Until we have "none of the above" on the ballot, people have a right to vote "none of the above" by any means they wish, including spoiling a ballot on purpose.

There is absolutely no rationale why someone should vote for mediocrity if that is all that is on the ballot!!!

Posted by: palomino on September 23 2007 10:35 AM

Well now Owl, spoiling a ballot IS a form of voting insn't it ??
Your vote thus becomes "none of the above" and hopefully is duly recorded as a spoiled ballot, rather than just turfed in the trash can. Then at least you get yourself on the voters list, and show up in the stats as part the total turnout for the given election.
In a democracy, even how many voters turned out for an election, and how many ballots were spoiled, has weight in the the final outcome.
But of course, wise old Owls already know that, don't they !!

Posted by: Chadermando on September 23 2007 1:09 PM

Palomino I really don't have the time to respond, but this needs a response.

Your opinion is totally ignorant of the issues losing candidates stand for and therefore you advocate winner takes all politics that does not recognize the other stakeholders in society. Yours is a politic of parties and not the individual when it comes to forming the opinions that shape the political debate.

If a person does not have a viable candidate supplied to them by the party and is told take it or leave it, then the voter has a right to reassess how they will vote. If another candidate stands firmly on a particular issue that the voter feels strongly about then there is nothing wrong with saying my 'none-of-the-above' ballot will actually be a 'name-your-cause' protest vote, because them damn parties keep representing their money sources and not my interests.

The main defence between myself and Palomino is that Palomino believes the political party among others should 'educate children on just how to decide who we vote for'. Thought control.

I on the other hand believe a voter has a right to decide and form their own opinions based on the facts that are presented for each issue on an issue by issue basis.

Posted by: Chadermando on September 23 2007 1:12 PM

Its urban politicians with views like those of Palomino that rural BC will have to be on gaurd against IMO.

Posted by: palomino on September 23 2007 6:29 PM

"I on the other hand believe a voter has a right to decide and form their own opinions based on the facts that are presented for each issue on an issue by issue basis".

Maybe you should re-read my post !! I did say I hoped the majority of voters would do so with some intelligence! "Of course, if there is absolutely no issue or cause you agree with, or absolutely no candidate in ANY Party that will uphold the values that you hold dear and stand for, then I suppose you have no choice but to trash your vote, as you say. In the real world though, I find this possibility highly implausible.

Thought control !!! Well yeah, now that I think of it, I suppose as you say, some teachers with a particular slant towards "their" favorite Party, could and probably would take advantage of some of their Students. This would be particularly dangerous in a place where the majority of teachers all belong to the same Party (or Union). I admit I wasn't thinking of our teachers as being a "threat" to our way of electing our leaders, when I said we should teach our Kids to vote unselfishly! I say again -- unselfishly !! UNSELFISHLY, in my mind, had no connection to ANY particular Party. Good thing you clued me in to the dangers in that one !!

Anyway, in the long run, the Party that comes to power, gets at least to try to pull the strings for awhile, whether we like it or not! If your Politician(s), or Party didn't get "in" this time, then lets hope it wasn't by just one one vote (the one you trashed.) Even those of us who don't like ANY of the candidates running, will have SOMEONE he'd rather see win, than all those other rejects he sees in his own mind. I suggest a vote for that person would better serve democracy. At the very least, maybe it'd help the official Opposition to the Party you so hate, be a little more effective.

Posted by: Chadermando on September 24 2007 9:15 AM

Palomino, I would be interested in your opinion of the BCSTV proposal and why you would or would not support it at referendum time. A vote that will count.

Do you support the concept of consensus majority (50%+1) elect (BCSTV); or do you support the least of all evils elect despite minority support?
Positive politics, or negative politics?
Politics according to the will of the voter; or politics based on the will of the party hierarchy?
Do you support politics managed by the voter; or by corporations and union financial interests?