Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Airport topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hastings Airport official tells commissioners airport activity is growing; FAA taxiway grant requires small county match
Summary
Airport staff told the Barry County Board of Commissioners that hangars are near capacity, there is a waiting list for space, and an FAA-funded $500,000 taxiway project will require a small county match. Staff also described planned installation of an AWOS weather station and revenue-generating non-aviation uses of airport property.
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Airport topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
At a Barry County Board of Commissioners meeting, airport staff reported rising activity at Hastings Airport, described a mix of aeronautical and non‑aeronautical property uses, and outlined near-term projects including an FAA-funded taxiway and a proposed AWOS weather station.
The presentation, delivered by Gino (airport representative), said most hangars are full, the field is busy, and there is a waiting list for hangar space. “We have about 7 people on our waiting list right now to move into our hangars,” Gino said. He estimated the airport is “probably about 65% full” of usable aeronautical space and pointed to infrastructure limits — taxiways and electrical service — as the primary barriers to building more hangars.
Why it matters: the airport manager framed the facility as a local economic asset that generates revenue, supports manufacturers based in the county, and provides emergency medevac access. Commissioners asked about funding and oversight for capital work and about safety and public events held at the field.
Gino said the county received a $500,000 FAA taxiway grant; the FAA pays the bulk of that cost but the airport must provide a local match. “Is that paid for by the FAA? Yes. We have a matching fund that we have to put in for that. I do I don't have everything on that right now… our matching funds should be right around 5%,” Gino said. He contrasted that with terminal building grants, which may require a larger local share (he estimated terminal matches can be “more like 20%, 30%” for components the FAA does not cover).
On weather infrastructure, Gino said an AWOS (Automated Weather Observing System) is approved and expected to be built in the fall once the FAA completes its approvals. He described how AWOS data are distributed via NOAA so phone weather apps would draw the new station’s real‑time conditions: “All of the weather apps on your phone get their weather from NOAA… So that information will be disseminated through all the apps.” He said construction of the station would take “90 days to build the station.”
The presentation included operational and safety details: most sightseeing/training aircraft accommodate three people (pilot plus two), though some twin‑engine planes can carry up to six; the field uses ADS‑B and monthly safety briefings; Grand Rapids approach provides additional support. Gino also described the airport’s non‑aeronautical assets — including a racetrack on airport property — that could be leased for revenue if FAA notification requirements are met.
Commissioners and other board members thanked staff for outreach and special events. Gino described a Halloween “haunted hangars” event that drew an estimated 400 children and included free flights and community participation. He also said pilots have been asked to reserve ramp space for medevac flights because those aircraft arrive unpredictably and can require immediate access.
Substantive clarifications captured at the meeting: - Hangar waiting list: about 7 people. - Estimated usable aeronautical occupancy: ~65%. - FAA taxiway project: $500,000; local match estimated at ~5%. - Terminal building matches: larger and variable; speaker estimated 20–30% for areas not FAA‑eligible. - AWOS: FAA approvals complete; construction expected in fall; build time ~90 days; data distributed via NOAA to phones and avionics. - Typical sightseeing plane capacity: generally 3 (pilot + 2); some twin‑engine aircraft up to 6.
Discussion vs. decision: the board received the report and asked questions; no formal vote on airport projects was recorded during this meeting. Staff said they will return with maps and additional project details as requested.
Ending: airport staff asked commissioners to notify them if they want site tours or additional maps; staff said they will provide follow‑up information and a clean set of project documents for commissioners’ review.
