Jay Honeck wrote:

Yes. Many of us would do this in a heartbeat, if the city would allow it.

Alas, they still would rather build and own the hangars, and lease them.
I'm sure it's for the same old "how can we ever close this airport if pilots
own the hangars" reasons...

:-(

Thats interesting...

I too am in a city hangar, but they are literally the Taj Mahal of
T-hangars.. They have two 20 amp feeds in the older ones, and the newer
ones have single 20 amp feeds. Sodium lamps over the main bay,
florescent lighting over the personnel door. Each of the small T hangars
(V-shaped, really) are able to hold a high and low wing easily or even a
corporate aircraft each. The LARGE ones.. well.. we have 3 Mig 21's in
one, a Huey and 2 Hillers in another, and one had 2 Longs, A cozy, A
cirrus and a cabin twin shoehorned in it. Gas heating for freeze
protection. No power meters. Its "behind the fence" and there is
security on-site 24-7 because of the military and NASA presence. On-site
CFR too, and several CAT 1 ILS runways. We pay about $400 for the small
ones and about $800 for the big ones a month.

BUT... Houston really doesnt want to be in the hangar business, believe
it or not, and they would prefer to issue a long term lease with
conditions. In Houston's case, there is a requirement for continuous
improvement over time, and the improvements become part of the lot.

I can not imagine why the city there would not want to be able to simply
lease the land, collect their money and not have to do anything more
than ensure code compliance. Not have to screen tenants (the hangar
builders can do that), issue keys, replace lightbulbs and so forth.

So, Jay... I guess the city wouldn't let you put a ramp adjacent to the
Hotel and allow you to have planes park there? Or perhaps allow you to
become some sort of competing FBO?

Dave