03/01/99 Memo re: Proposed Amendment of Reso 3306MEMORANDUM
TO: AL THELEN, INTERIM CITY MANAGER
FROM: PJ SORENSEN, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
DATE: MARCH 1, 1999
RE: PROPOSED AMENDMENT OF RESOLUTION 3306
Presently, the height of buildings near the airport and within the city limits is governed by
Resolution 3306. The Resolution was passed in 1980, establishing the perimeter boundary of the
airport and directing the Building Official to issue or deny permits based on that boundary and
Title 67, Chapter 5, MCA. As I described in my memos of January 22, there are several problems
with the Resolution. In an effort to minimize those problems and implement some of the
substance of the FAA regulations for a BII-visual airport, the City Attorney has requested that I
prepare a proposed amended Resolution for the Council's consideration which accomplishes
those goals through the mechanism of Title 67, Chapter 5.
The attached Resolution amends Resolution 3306 by changing the perimeter boundary of
the airport to a line which reflects the FAA's transitional and approach surfaces. Under the FAA
regulations for a BII-visual airport, the approach surface is a 20:1 slope beginning 200 feet from
the end of each runway, which has an initial width of 250 feet and extends 5000 feet to a width of
1250 feet. Under the state statute, the approach zone is an area starting at the perimeter
boundary and extending two miles to a width of 2500 feet. Within that zone, a building,
structure, or other object's height may not exceed 1/20 of its distance to the boundary. By
establishing the perimeter boundary at 200 feet from each end of the runway, the FAA approach
surface would substantially match the state restrictions in an approach zone (although the state
approach zone encompasses a much larger area).
The FAA transitional surface is a 7:1 slope beginning at 125 feet from each side of the
centerline of the runway and extending 5000 feet. Under the state statute, the turning zones'are
the areas between the approach zones, beginning at the boundary and extending for two miles.
Within that zone, heights are restricted to 1/7 of the distance between a building, structure, or
other object and the boundary. Again, by establishing the perimeter boundary at 125 feet from
each side of the runway centerline, there is a substantial match between the state statute and FAA
regulations.
The proposed Resolution addresses many of the problems I raised in my earlier memos. It
brings the focus on the runway rather than the boundary. The runway should be the proper focus
since the purpose of height restrictions is related to planes landing on and taking off from the
runway. Also, by changing the irregular perimeter boundary of Resolution 3306 to a rectangular
shape, the application of the height restrictions to different lots lying the same distance from the
runway becomes more equitable. An additional benefit is that the perimeter boundary in the
proposed Resolution can flex with any runway realignment while the perimeter boundary in
Resolution 3306 is stationary.
It is important to the Daley Field development that the proposed Resolution be passed at
this time. At present, the Daley Field lots' property lines and the Resolution 3306 perimeter
boundary are the same. Thus, a twenty -foot tall building could not be constructed on the Daley
Field lots any closer than 140 feet from the back property line. This result causes two significant
problems. First, in the Rosauer's agreement, the City and Rosauer's agreed that the height of any
development on the property would conform with the height restrictions for a BII-visual airport.
Resolution 3306 is more restrictive on that particular piece of property than the BII-visual
requirement or the City's representations. A building permit may not be issued even if the new
construction conforms to the development agreement. Second, a similar problem affects the two
Daley Field lots the City is presently contemplating selling or leasing. The more restrictive
Resolution 3306 requirements would limit development on those two lots beyond the FAA
requirements and unnecessarily reduce the value of the lots.
The proposed Resolution does not cover all the building restriction issues related to a BII-
visual airport. First, the method of determining the maximum height under the state statute and
the FAA regulations are different. The FAA establishes sloped surfaces commencing at an
elevation equal to the elevation of the nearest point on the runway centerline while the state
statute is based on a fraction of the distance from the boundary. Second, the state statute does
not address conical surfaces or horizontal surfaces, which are both included in the FAA
regulations. However, both surfaces are 150+ feet in elevation above the airport. Within the
Kalispell city limits, their omission has little impact at the present time. Third, there are pockets
near the junction of the approach zone and turning zone in which the height restrictions contained
in the state statute and the FAA regulations are different due to the different methods of
establishing surfaces/zones. Fourth, the proposed Resolution does not create an object free area.
Finally, as a City resolution, it does not govern any property located outside the city limits.
If the airport upgrade goes forward, a height restriction ordinance based on the FAA
model ordinance should be considered and adopted as part of the upgrade in order to address
matters covered by the FAA regulations, but not the state statute.
I have conferred with both the Airport Advisory Board and Morrison-Maierle in the
preparation of the proposed Resolution. Both feel that it is a step in the right direction.
RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 3306 BY REDEFINING THE
PERIMETER BOUNDARY OF THE LANDING FIELD OF THE KALISPELL CITY
AIRPORT.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the City of Kalispell established the perimeter boundary of the Kalispell City
Airport through Resolution 3306 on September 8, 1980; and
WHEREAS, Phase I of a feasibility study for the Kalispell City Airport has recently been
completed, revealing certain discrepancies between the height restrictions established by
Resolution 3306 and height restrictions desired by the Federal Aviation Administration as part of
an upgrade of the airport; and
WHEREAS, the height of buildings and other structures surrounding the airport should be
subject to such regulation as to promote the public order, health, and safety, and to help ensure
the airport and surrounding uses are compatible with a potential upgrade of the airport facilities;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Resolution 3306 is hereby amended by
deleting the paragraph beginning "NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED ..." and replacing
said paragraph with the following:
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, for purposes of Section 67-5-201,
M.C.A., et sec ., the established perimeter boundary, as distinguished from the actual boundary of
the Kalispell City Airport, shall be defined as a line located on each side of the runway at one -
hundred -twenty-five (125) feet from the runway centerline and extending two -hundred (200) feet
beyond each end of the runway, with the northwest ends of each such segment connected by a
straight line two -hundred -fifty (250) feet in length and the southeast ends of each such segment
connected by a straight line two -hundred -fifty (250) feet in length.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF KALISPELL, THIS DAY OF , 1999.
Wm. E. Boharski, Mayor
ATTEST:
Theresa White
Clerk of Council