Can the airport ban bicycles?

But it sounds like it is the municipality protecting the federal funding,
right? If the funding was provided with stipulations that the funds be used
for only aviation related activities, then that is being passed on to the
leasors as a restriction.

The problem is with the stipulations of the funding. As one of the "We the
people" I don't mind subsidizing airports and hangars as long as they are
used for aviation related purposes. I also don't mind someone storing their
boat or other non-aviation related stuff in the hangar - as long as it is
also used as a hangar.

But, if someone wants to use the hangar that was built with aviation
subsidies that I provided as merely a storage shed, I gotta a problem with
dat. There are lots of public storage facilities that they can use (and
probably pay more per square foot).

--
-------------------------------
Travis
Lake N3094P
PWK

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
oups.com...
I wouldn't be surprised if it's not a CYA move on the owner's part to
restrict any other "vehicles" being "parked" there and the hangar
becoming a "garage" for insurance purposes.

The "owners" are "We the People" -- it's a municipal airport hangar.

I believe the original intent of the clause(s) was to prevent the use
of hangars as non-aircraft storage units. The current commission,
however, is taking a very rigid reading of the lease, and has
announced a ban on ANYTHING not directly related to aviation --
including bicycles, of all things.

Our airport support group, "Friends of Iowa City Airport", is
absolutely abuzz with comments and crossfire, from commissioners and
tenants. It's actually kind of fun, but the ramifications are too
serious to really enjoy it.

Honestly, just when you thought you had seen everything...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

But, if someone wants to use the hangar that was built with aviation
subsidies that I provided as merely a storage shed, I gotta a problem with
dat. There are lots of public storage facilities that they can use (and
probably pay more per square foot).

Agree 100%. There should be no hangars occupied by "stuff" instead
of an airplane.

However, what our airport commission (one ****ed off commissioner,
more accurately) is insisting is that we cannot keep "stuff" in our
hangars along *with* our airplanes.

This is a huge change, and will destroy what minimal social aspects
our airport has to offer. If we can't keep a fridge full of
refreshments, or a couch, the hangars revert to being nothing but a
tin shack on hot asphalt.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On Wed, 29 Aug 2007 03:32:58 -0500, "Travis Marlatte"
wrote:

But it sounds like it is the municipality protecting the federal funding,

They aren't. They may think so though.

right? If the funding was provided with stipulations that the funds be used
for only aviation related activities, then that is being passed on to the
leasors as a restriction.

The feds only care about the airport, not the hangars...as long as
what you have in there is legal.


The problem is with the stipulations of the funding. As one of the "We the
people" I don't mind subsidizing airports and hangars as long as they are
used for aviation related purposes. I also don't mind someone storing their
boat or other non-aviation related stuff in the hangar - as long as it is
also used as a hangar.

But, if someone wants to use the hangar that was built with aviation
subsidies that I provided as merely a storage shed, I gotta a problem with

You can get subsidies for building hangars?
All the hangars here were built with either city or private money. No
fed funds were available.

dat. There are lots of public storage facilities that they can use (and
probably pay more per square foot).

The feds would probably have a problem with the airport being used as
and renting public storage facilities. Although, any money brought in
from ... say renting open land out for parking for near by events is
permissible as long as the money goes to the airport fund. It can not
go into the general fund.

"Roger (K8RI)" wrote in message ...

The feds would probably have a problem with the airport being used as
and renting public storage facilities. Although, any money brought in
from ... say renting open land out for parking for near by events is
permissible as long as the money goes to the airport fund. It can not
go into the general fund.


I seem to recall Santa Monica airport in CA doing all kinds of rentals of the hangars, very few with airplanes...

"Blueskies" wrote in
t:

I seem to recall Santa Monica airport in CA doing all kinds of rentals
of the hangars, very few with airplanes...

The People's Republic of Santa Monica have always done many bizarre things.