Salinas Airport managers outline multi-airport economic study and terminal, fence and hangar upgrades

The Salinas Airport Commission on Thursday received an administrative update that covered a planned four‑airport economic impact study, a terminal patio rehabilitation tied to Jonathan’s Flying Artichoke restaurant, a cost‑shared fence replacement along Skyway Boulevard, a hangar roof epoxy project and several smaller facility and community programs.

Airport manager said the commission and staff expect a multi‑airport Airport Economic Impact Study (AEIS) that includes Salinas, Watsonville, Hollister and Marina to take roughly six months before publication. “We are now finally everything’s approved, signed, sealed, and delivered,” the airport manager said. He said a joint study reduces redundant work and cost while allowing each airport to retain distinct local data.

The AEIS will collect data from tenants and other stakeholders to measure jobs, direct and indirect revenues and sales activity tied to the four airports. The manager said the group pursued a joint study because “things are more expensive now, and so by having a … joint study would save on some redundancies,” and because comparative data could help each airport “further leverage our airports.”

The commission also reviewed a terminal rehabilitation project focused on the restaurant patio at Jonathan’s Flying Artichoke. The airport manager described landscaping, shade awnings, lighting and relocated seating intended to make the patio a visible destination. He said the project will not include astroturf at this time because the quoted cost was about $5,500 and staff wants to “watch the budget.” The manager told commissioners the patio work was expected to be finished “on or around July 15.”

Staff reported moving Calstar’s operations eastward at the field to reduce rotor wash that had affected patio umbrellas. “We did successfully move Calstar about a 125 feet … to the east just to eliminate or reduce the rotor wash,” the airport manager said.

On perimeter work, the airport reported an agreement with Sierra Management Golf (the golf course operator) to replace deteriorated fencing along Skyway Boulevard. The total cost was described as about $9,000; the airport and the golf course will split the expense, leaving roughly $4,500 for the airport’s share. Commissioners asked whether the golf course or the city was the paying party; the manager said the agreement called for a 50/50 split with the golf course.

A city grant for free trees was also mentioned. Staff said the golf course will be offered trees under the city’s grant program and that the airport identified areas on golf‑course property where planting would be compatible with safety zones; the airport noted Runway 26’s runway protection zone is not a compatible area for tree planting.

Maintenance work on a large World War II‑era hangar included an epoxy roof coating project that staff said cost “about $85,000 plus” and carries a 20‑year warranty. The coating and related work were described as part of a longer‑term plan to “reskin” the hangar exterior in the future.

The commission heard about a continuing partnership with Social Vocational Services, a local organization that brings a crew of three adults with developmental disabilities to the airport for light maintenance three days a week. Staff said the participants are paid through their organization at $16 an hour and that the program provides work experience and community engagement.

A planned car show tied to airport activities was postponed after the event organizer backed out; staff said they will leave the date open in case another organizer can use it. The manager closed the report by noting the commission’s next regular meeting is scheduled for July 24.

Why it matters: the AEIS could supply updated local economic figures that staff and commissioners said would help with future planning and marketing. The capital and maintenance work — from patio upgrades to hangar preservation and fence replacement — aim to improve airport safety, customer experience and neighborhood appearance while spreading costs through partnerships with the golf course and community organizations.

The report included several cost and schedule details: astroturf was quoted at about $5,500 but deferred; fencing estimated at $9,000 total, split 50/50 with the golf course; the hangar epoxy project cost about $85,000 plus and carries a 20‑year warranty; the patio project targeted completion around July 15; and staff estimated the AEIS would take about six months to publish. Commissioners asked clarifying questions about responsibilities for the fence and whether the airport had heard back from Amazon about potential operational interest; staff said they had reached out to Amazon multiple times but had received no responses to date.

No formal motions or votes were taken on these items during the report; the items were presented as administrative updates and recommended projects.