01/05/94 Williams/Airport Neighborhood PlanDATE:
TO:
Ivy
January 5, 199
ak—
Mayor and Council
Bruce Williams, City Manager
KalispellThe .rt Neighborhood Plan c. .
airport1993 was undertaken to provide the City with a useful tool for
future land use planning for the City
surrounding..
The plan assumes that the airport facility will remain open and
therefore focuses much of the analysis on discussion associated
with implementing several strategies designed to improve
operations and safety conditions at the airport while enhancing
opportunities for increased private investment and development
in the area.
The plan recommends the adoption of six primary goals for the
airport and the area of influence. They include:
Goal A. "Minimize hazards to navigation": by implementing 10
specific strategies targeted at complying with FAA
airport design standards for a B-1 category airport by
2) improve approach conditions to the run way which
requires implementing 5 specific strategies 3)
regulate uncontrolled access onto the airport taxiway
and runway, involving two specific strategies 4)
Install a fence around the identified airport
perimeter 2 strategies and 5) establish a half time
to full time airport manager with two strategies.
Goal B. "Develop the airport in accordance to an Airport
Layout Plan": by 1) establishing a single designated
area for the FBO's which includes 8 specific
strategies 2) establishment of a designated area on
City property for airport related leasing
opportunities with 3 specific strategies 3)
maintaining a defined building restriction line for
all structures adjacent to the airport facilities with
3 specific strategies.
Goal C. "To increase dt
properties":, by
in the area of e
dependent with t
OVE A)O F.--r H
TRF?,ES14J)L-D 2
A QD nearby
)erties
: airport
41700 Lo0c
"To promote con and the
airport": by i"ons to
establish the irmitted
uses within tt h seven
strategies 2) 13 to all
land divisions Oignated
airport boundary W1LIL �gy 3)
attempt to apply City review authority Tairport
abutting properties when associated land use proposals
are airport dependent with one specific strategy.
Goal E. "To establish funding for airport operations and
capital requirement": by 1) establishing reasonable
airport user fees with sex specific strategies 2)
utilize the revenue to fund cost for routine airport
maintenance with three strategies and 3 )designate
monies from the sale for City properties to an airport
fund with 1 specific strategy.
Goal F. "To establish a priority schedule - for plan
implementation": by 1) designating short-term capital
projects 1-5 years for plan implementation with six
specific strategies and 2) designate long-term 5-15
years capital priorities for plan implementation with
6 specific strategies.
The report® however fails to provide an evaluation of the fiscal
impacts associated with implementing these goals and related
strategies. For the purpose of providing this information we
focused our attention to Goal F which contains the short and
long term capital strategies requiring investment for plan
implementation. our estimate includes the following:
_k 1. Land cost associated with A 10 000/ Do 0
run way extension -4tM XQ:20
ISO V,
2. Excavation and pavement for
runway extension NOW �T
(3. Private ad re
�Pr i road
so
end of runway atY2 . 5 0 �.u.
4. Extend single parallel taxiwalA
5. Increase existing taxiway to 241
K,
6. Remove all objects in protective
zone 8,000
* 7. Strobe light KGEZ radio tower 2,500
8. Build helicopter landing pad 6,130
9. Install PAPI navigation system 15,000
* 1/2 10. New lights and wiring 120,000
11. 6° chain link fence '','�^ ,
lin. ft. I it,
12. Increase bearing load of runway
2" overlay Gr..r2 vv
* 1/2 13. Engineering Cost 90,000
" ! ; ZA
Short term 1-5 years
Total cost for improvements identified as strategies by the
report is _.;__... Of this amount approximately $*9-374H is
identified as short term to be implemented within 1-5 years.
1 , Z 10 1, 40141100
How do we fund these improvements? Although the report
discusses funding options it does not provide any useful options
for funding major capital improvements as discussed above.
About the only way improvements of this scope can be funded is
through a general obligation bond which requires voter approval.
Revenue bonds represent the traditional method of funding
improvements for municipal enterprises however the revenue
generating capacity of our airport is extremely limited as
indicated by past performance. For example in Fiscal 93 total
revenue generation for the airport was $7,229, not even enough
to fully fund the bare boned operating budget of the enterprise.
As mentioned the report discusses options which could improve
the annual revenue to fund the operation of the airport, but
none that would significantly improve upon the present fiscal
situation of the airport, particularly if we were to employ the
services of an airport manager as suggested in the report. The
most reasonable revenue recommendation for operation and
maintenance of the airport is to use property tax.