Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission directs Mead & Hunt to study eastern parcel (alternative 1B) for hangar development
Summary
The commission voted to advance an economic analysis with consultant Mead & Hunt focusing on 'alternative 1B' (the eastern parcel near the car dealership) and asked staff to report on soils, drainage, access, grant opportunities and hangar sizing (majority demand expected for 50×50–60×60 units).
The Airport Commission directed city staff to work with Mead & Hunt to scope an economic and feasibility study for hangar development focused on the eastern parcel identified as alternative 1B in the airport master plan.
Staff presented Mead & Hunt’s initial scoping memo and commissioners discussed hangar mix and demand: several commissioners and the airport manager said the bulk of demand is for smaller single‑aircraft units (roughly 50×50 to 60×60 feet), while setting aside some capacity for larger corporate hangars. Commissioners emphasized the need to check subsurface soils and drainage (borings) because earlier work showed challenging organic soils in parts of the parcel, which could substantially increase site preparation costs.
Mead & Hunt’s alternative 1B was described as the most feasible immediate parcel on city‑owned land; commissioners asked staff to gather historical cost data for prior airport development (including TIF funding used previously), evaluate grant or FAA funding opportunities for taxiway and pavement work, and present options for public vs. private hangar ownership/lease models.
The commission voted to direct staff to continue work with Mead & Hunt on alternative 1B and to return with follow‑up answers on soils, cost estimates, recommended hangar sizes and potential funding sources.
