Tie Down Fees

MooneyDriver78 said:
~$650 at KSUA...they are one of the few that had hangars available.


Tom
Click to expand...

Pretty steep but not as bad as I thought it would be based on the tiedown fee. That's about twice the cost of a hangar at KBOI, if you are actually lucky enough to get one. At the current pace I may actually get a hangar in 20 years...
 
I've paid anywhere from $50-$100 a month when temporarily based away from home. The more expensive places were Metro areas with significant services and paved tiedowns.

I'd have your airport board call similar size regional rural airports and see what they charge to get an idea of a typical competitive market price. I'm surprised they have allowed free tiedowns at all. That's mighty nice, but not financially responsible to the taxpayer. The idea is to find a balance between keeping based aircraft and financial practicality.
 
Clip4 said:
The airport is owned by Morgan County and West Liberty.
Morgan County KY has a population of less than 14,000 with 3,300 living in West Liberty. The median family income is less than $40,000.
Click to expand...
Probably they should get out the airport business - is there enough room parallel to the rwy to have a grass strip?
 
If my only option were tying down my planes outdoors so that I could watch them deteriorate and melt into the ground, I simply wouldn’t own an aircraft. Charging someone a fee to do so is a cold blooded thing to do. If you can’t afford an airport and/or it is deemed unnecessary for commerce in the county, close it! While you’re at it, close Main Street too for further savings. Let me know how well it all works for you.

My $0.02,
 
MBDiagMan said:
If my only option were tying down my planes outdoors so that I could watch them deteriorate and melt into the ground, I simply wouldn’t own an aircraft. Charging someone a fee to do so is a cold blooded thing to do. If you can’t afford an airport and/or it is deemed unnecessary for commerce in the county, close it! While you’re at it, close Main Street too for further savings. Let me know how well it all works for you.

My $0.02,
Click to expand...

Perfect solution, instead of tie down fees close the airport.
 
Clip4 said:
Perfect solution, instead of tie down fees close the airport.
Click to expand...

My point is that a municipal airport is for the benefit of the community. If the community doesn’t recognize enough benefit to justify the expense, do away with the expense. There are far too many municipalities in debt beyond all hope because they live beyond their means as do far too many individuals. If you can’t afford it don’t buy it or get rid of it.
 
MBDiagMan said:
If my only option were tying down my planes outdoors so that I could watch them deteriorate and melt into the ground, I simply wouldn’t own an aircraft. Charging someone a fee to do so is a cold blooded thing to do. If you can’t afford an airport and/or it is deemed unnecessary for commerce in the county, close it! While you’re at it, close Main Street too for further savings. Let me know how well it all works for you.

My $0.02,
Click to expand...

It only deteriorates if you don't maintain it. A Bruce cover will keep the interior and the windows in shape. The occasional wash and wax keeps the paint from deteriorating. Sure, a hangar is preferable, but not always affordable.

Sounds like the local owners are ok with paying a reasonable tiedown fee for everyone to contribute a small part to the airport upkeep. Relative to the cost of maintaining even a 2400ft runway, the $4800/year a tiedown fee would net is still a small amount, but it's better than nothing.

An airport like that will never make the town money , but so does a playground or a baseball field. It's probably not in the FAA airport plan so the only grant money for those small municipal fields is sometimes a couple of $$ from state aeronautics to do crack-sealing. Count your blessings if the town is willing to keep the airstrip open.
 
Last edited:
MBDiagMan said:
My point is that a municipal airport is for the benefit of the community. If the community doesn’t recognize enough benefit to justify the expense, do away with the expense. There are far too many municipalities in debt beyond all hope because they live beyond their means as do far too many individuals. If you can’t afford it don’t buy it or get rid of it.
Click to expand...

Closing an airport because a bunch of pilots think the community should let them free load is rather short sighted.
 
For your location and capacity I would go no higher than $25/mo or maybe $200/yr.

Sure would be nice if you could write the agreement so you have the ability to prevent "junk" planes from being parked there no longer than X months. I always wondered if there was a way to have something where if the plane has been flown in the past 6 months you reset the clock. Maybe set a much more painful monthly rate once you exceed 6 months and it hasn't been flown.
 
Sinistar said:
Sure would be nice if you could write the agreement so you have the ability to prevent "junk" planes from being parked there no longer than X months. I always wondered if there was a way to have something where if the plane has been flown in the past 6 months you reset the clock. Maybe set a much more painful monthly rate once you exceed 6 months and it hasn't been flown.
Click to expand...

Just require them to have insurance, I doubt most derelict owners are keeping up on their insurance payments if they aren’t flying.
The insurance costs would force many of these owners to sell their planes.
This is SOP for marinas, they also require boats to be operational so then can be moved in case of a hurricane.

Tom
 
Last edited:
MBDiagMan said:
My point is that a municipal airport is for the benefit of the community. If the community doesn’t recognize enough benefit to justify the expense, do away with the expense. There are far too many municipalities in debt beyond all hope because they live beyond their means as do far too many individuals. If you can’t afford it don’t buy it or get rid of it.
Click to expand...

By this logic, we may not have any public use airports...lots of folks want free services, or better yet, services paid for by someone else...
 
Clip4 said:
Closing an airport because a bunch of pilots think the community should let them free load is rather short sighted.
Click to expand...

By that logic, the folks in town unfortunate enough not to own a garage and park their car in the street in front of their house, should pay a monthly parking fee. How is the airport different from Main Street?
 
Last edited:
Sinistar said:
For your location and capacity I would go no higher than $25/mo or maybe $200/yr.

Sure would be nice if you could write the agreement so you have the ability to prevent "junk" planes from being parked there no longer than X months. I always wondered if there was a way to have something where if the plane has been flown in the past 6 months you reset the clock. Maybe set a much more painful monthly rate once you exceed 6 months and it hasn't been flown.
Click to expand...

I have seen clauses in hangar lease agreements that prevent aircraft being housed that are not legally airworthy. I hangar at one of the best small municipal airports you ever saw with a LONG waiting list. The manager is the nicest guy in the world, but he has politely evicted several planes that weren’t airworthy as is required in the lease agreement.

We have beaucoup tiedown spots and you can tie down for free. There are ZERO planes tied down and there are probably at least three dozen tie down spots. It would be interesting, however, to see how long a plane would remain there if not flown for an extended period.
 
Airport near me is $50/mo for a tie down. But it's 5000', lit with multiple services.

Honestly, unless I lived next door to the airport, I'd consider moving if it was more than about $150/year. I mean, if I gotta go somewhere else every time I go somewhere....might as well start out there.

Now, if fuel was available, then I'd consider it more strongly. I like the idea to sell fuel at a discount and have people drop in to buy gas. It will more than pay for itself, creates some jobs and moves a lot close toward self sufficiency than hitting up the few local pilots for few hundred a year.
 
Clip4 said:
Closing an airport because a bunch of pilots think the community should let them free load is rather short sighted.
Click to expand...

In a humble community as described by the OP, I seriously doubt that there are very many people with a freeloading mentality. I fully expect that folks in a community like that, pay their taxes without excessive complaint.

It would be interesting to know if the government of this community has accumulated excess debt as have so many local governments. I would have a different view of their proposal based on if they want to raise money to keep from going in debt as opposed to raising money to dig out of a hole that they should not have dug. It is all too easy for beauracrats to spend other people’s money.
 
weilke said:
It only deteriorates if you don't maintain it. A Bruce cover will keep the interior and the windows in shape. The occasional wash and wax keeps the paint from deteriorating. Sure, a hangar is preferable, but not always affordable.

Sounds like the local owners are ok with paying a reasonable tiedown fee for everyone to contribute a small part to the airport upkeep. Relative to the cost of maintaining even a 2400ft runway, the $4800/year a tiedown fee would net is still a small amount, but it's better than nothing.

An airport like that will never make the town money , but so does a playground or a baseball field. It's probably not in the FAA airport plan so the only grant money for those small municipal fields is sometimes a couple of $$ from state aeronautics to do crack-sealing. Count your blessings if the town is willing to keep the airstrip open.
Click to expand...

Respectfully, if you think a plane with a canopy cover and a coat of wax doesn’t deteriorate at the same rate as if it were in an enclosed hangar, you are mistaken IMHO.
 
chemgeek said:
By this logic, we may not have any public use airports...lots of folks want free services, or better yet, services paid for by someone else...
Click to expand...

So.... do these folks being charged to tie down not pay taxes?

If anyone has the reason to feel like they are partially paying for folks to tie down, it would be me. I pay a significant amount in local taxes and pay a very large amount for a very large rent for very large city owned hangar. I would find it appalling to see the airport start charging people so that they could store their plane outside to rot.
 
MBDiagMan said:
Respectfully, if you think a plane with a canopy cover and a coat of wax doesn’t deteriorate at the same rate as if it were in an enclosed hangar, you are mistaken IMHO.
Click to expand...

You may have to re-paint it earlier than the hangared plane. If you believe that a plane that flies regularly but is stored on a tiedown will 'deteriorate and melt into the ground', you are mistaken. And my opinion is never humble.
 
I have massive respect for your opinion and you have all the right in the world to it. There is much more to an airplane than a paint job.
 
MBDiagMan said:
It would be interesting, however, to see how long a plane would remain there if not flown for an extended period.
Click to expand...
Don't ya think arrangements could be made?
 
bflynn said:
Airport near me is $50/mo for a tie down. But it's 5000', lit with multiple services.

Honestly, unless I lived next door to the airport, I'd consider moving if it was more than about $150/year. I mean, if I gotta go somewhere else every time I go somewhere....might as well start out there.

Now, if fuel was available, then I'd consider it more strongly. I like the idea to sell fuel at a discount and have people drop in to buy gas. It will more than pay for itself, creates some jobs and moves a lot close toward self sufficiency than hitting up the few local pilots for few hundred a year.
Click to expand...
Yep. I'd drive an extra ten miles or so, maybe more, to be based at an airport with fuel. (Of course, I live in the Cincinnati area; you can't fly five minutes without being within gliding distance of an airport with fuel.)
 
MBDiagMan said:
By that logic, the folks in town unfortunate enough to own a garage and park their car in the street in front of their house, should pay a monthly parking fee. How is the airport different from Main Street?
Click to expand...

Main Street is probably used by everybody - I’m pretty sure the vast majority of towns people do not use the airport. Unless the airport is set up to help the local economy it is nothing more than a nice convenience for local pilots but a drain on local taxpayers - especially in a small town. The Feds should be supporting these airports as part of the NAS or making it worthwhile for private owners to step in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Tommar98 said:
Main Street is probably used by everybody - I’m pretty sure the vast majority of towns people do not use the airport. Unless the airport is set up to help the local economy it is nothing more than a nice convenience for local pilots but a drain on local taxpayers - especially in a small town. The Feds should be supporting these airports as part of the NAS or making it worthwhile for private owners to step in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

If the community can’t afford it, they should sell it. If they can make people stand still for paying for tie down spaces and that makes it solvent, go for it. One big problem in this case is that 2500 feet isn’t enough to help commerce in the community. It is only enough for people to have fun buzzing around in their J3 or some such. It would take 4,000 feet for it to allow traffic that might benefit the commerce of the community.

If it were enough to add to the commerce of the community it would be as important as Main Street.

If the Feds support it, where should the money come from? Fuel tax only goes so far. If the Feds offered any money, the city would have to come up with ten percent. If the community discussed in this thread is scraping the bottom of the barrel to a point of a few dollars a month for a tie down space, can they come up with ten percent?
 
Last edited:
Tommar98 said:
Main Street is probably used by everybody - I’m pretty sure the vast majority of towns people do not use the airport. Unless the airport is set up to help the local economy it is nothing more than a nice convenience for local pilots but a drain on local taxpayers - especially in a small town. The Feds should be supporting these airports as part of the NAS or making it worthwhile for private owners to step in.
Click to expand...

Feds do support small airports through the AIP, to the tune of millions of dollars in grants for capital improvements. There are very few public airports that have not been touched by AIP funds. (If not, then they are not really trying very hard.) The FAA does not fund day-to-day operations. For that, both the flying community and the taxpayer support operations, no different than running the municipal utilities or maintaining the local roads. Our airport is primarily supported by fuel sales and rental fees, but the taxpayer has to chime in a little, too, especially for matching funds for capital improvement grants. An airport can be a real asset to a community. Airports don't just serve the pilot population--they are also a source of economic activity for the community. The estimated annual impact of our local airport is quite significant. (We are in the middle of a study to better quantify this for the public, and for our own knowledge.) The turbine and piston travelers that frequent our airport stay around for a few days on a typical trip, contributing to local and regional economic activity. Much of this travel would never happen without the ease of access provided by the airport. The military and law enforcement also use our airport as well for training and staging aviation operations. Without the airport, local hotels, restaurants, and shops would not do as much business. Many airports, like our own, also have an attached business park which leverages the transportation options provided by the presence of an airport with good approaches. The FAA helped us start and develop both the airport and the airpark many years ago. It's a tough slog, but we do have businesses located in the airpark.

Once you decommission an airport, they never come back. We (KVGC) have the LAST remaining public use airport in our county. There used to be several. In our sample of one, when the airport was privately owned, it was a wreck. Once the our local (small, as in pop. 3000) village took it over, we dug out of something like $250-500K of debt and we now have beautiful and sustainable facility, but it does take financial support to maintain it. The taxpayers can't bear all the burden. There are no free hangars or tiedowns.
 
MBDiagMan said:
By that logic, the folks in town unfortunate enough not to own a garage and park their car in the street in front of their house, should pay a monthly parking fee. How is the airport different from Main Street?
Click to expand...

Good point, park your plane on the street with the rest the transportation machines.
 
Clip4 said:
Good point, park your plane on the street with the rest the transportation machines.
Click to expand...

What does that have to do with paying parking fees for your car on the street? The municipal airport is Main Street for airplanes. If you charge parking fees at the airport, it’s only fair to charge for parking on Main Street. Put parking meters at both places.
 
In a interesting way, you are onto something.

Perhaps a small airport that needs to charge for outside multi-day tie downs could use an app like any major city uses. No need for a actual "meter". You wouldn't be able to reserve a spot that is already paid for and the city could then move a plane (that could get nasty) if it's sitting there not paid. You could reserve in advance...maybe 24hrs...to help for trip planning. And offer a long term option of some sort.

That service could be easily implemented across many airports. At the airport you would just need some signage and clearly marked spots. And a gun to handle the revolt :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top