Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Airport Hangar topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Carroll City reviews airport budget, seeks federal grants for proposed corporate hangar
Summary
At a preliminary budget session, airport representatives told Carroll City Council they plan a 100-by-100-foot heated hangar to shelter midsize corporate jets, citing safety and economic reasons; staff said engineering estimates put total costs in the mid‑$1 millions and they will pursue federal and state grants to cover most of the expense.
Greg Seaman, an airport presenter, told the Carroll City Council that the city’s airport is seeing a surge in midsize and super‑midsize corporate aircraft and lacks hangar capacity to protect those planes from ice, hail and storm damage. “We have tremendous amount of jet traffic out there more than anyone in the whole area,” Seaman said, arguing that a larger hanger would reduce weather‑related safety risks and help retain visiting corporate traffic.
Seaman described a proposed building roughly 100 feet by 100 feet with an approximately 80‑foot door and a 24‑foot opening that staff believes could shelter one midsize or super‑midsize corporate jet at a time. Engineers from McClure & Associates provided cost estimates, and Seaman cited a total project figure in the mid‑$1 million range. He told the council that federal airport improvement programs (AIP/BIL) and other federal funding streams are being pursued and that the airport is hoping for a federal participation rate that could be as high as about 95 percent for the prime construction phase.
Council members pressed staff on the budget line items that support airport operations. Seaman clarified that some line items—such as a $28,800 amount—reflect farm lease income, while other revenues from hanger rents and fuel concessions are accounted for separately. He explained the city’s agreement with the airport operator (identified in the transcript as Don) was structured to insulate Carroll City from operator liability and that contract terms had been adjusted over time to reflect changes in local charter and corporate traffic patterns.
Councilors also asked how the city would provide local match funding. Seaman said the plan is to pursue a combination of federal funds for building construction and state funds for related horizontal work; staff suggested local option sales tax revenue (roughly $390,000 mentioned in the meeting) could help meet the required local share. He warned that delaying the project could reduce the federal participation rate on a later phase from the expected rate to a lower percentage, which would increase local costs.
Seaman and councilors discussed hangar economics: small plane hangars rent for about $140 per month, the large shop hangar currently brings about $1,000 per month, and transient overnight stays can fetch roughly $300. Seaman cautioned, however, that a single new hangar would not be expected to cover its full capital costs through rent alone and that the airport continues to operate at a net loss in most years; the rationale for the investment, he said, is economic development and the ability to attract and retain businesses that use corporate aircraft.
The airport presentation concluded with staff inviting council members to follow up with questions and noting long‑serving commission members and volunteers who help run the facility.
