01/14/94 Williams/Airport Neighborhood PlanCily
A
I e
Incorporated 1892
Telephone (406) 752-6600 Douglas RoLdv
F.O. Box 1997 MOM
Zip 59903- i 99T
&tee WILorm
Cty Coin
M E M O s:
Gory W. NyW
Word I
DATE: January 14, 1994
Ctifff Cdl'uts
TO: Mayor and Council Wad
Baboro mcws
FROM: Bruce Williams, City Manager Word
SUBJECT: Airport Neighborhood Plan Fred Bud
Wald M
f im Akinsw
The Kalispell City Airport Neighborhood Plan completed February, Word
1993 was undertaken to provide the City with a useful tool for touenGia,
io
future land use planning for the City airport and the Wordy
surrounding properties.
P B.
The plan assumes that the airport facility will remain open and Word N
therefore focuses much of the analysis on discussion associated M.Duoretason
with implementing several strategies designed to improve WordEV
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:
Goa_ "Minimize hazards to navigation": by implementing 1)
specific strategies targeted at complying with FAA
airport design standards for a B-1 category airport by
2) improving approach conditions to the runway which
requires implementing five specific strategies 3)
regulate uncontrolled access onto the airport taxiway
and runway, involving two specific strategies )
Installing a fence around the identified airport
perimeter two strategies and 5) establishing a half
time to full time airport manager with two strategies.
Goal g. "Develop the airport in accordance to an Airport
Layout Plan": by 1) establishing a single designated
area for the FBO's which includes eight specific
strategies 2) establishment of a designated area on
City property for airport related leasing
opportunities with three specific strategies 3)
maintaining a defined building restriction line for
all structures adjacent to the airport facilities with
three specific strategies.
K,
Goal C. "To increase development opportunities on nearby
properties": by 1) identifying City -owned properties
in the area of existing airport that are not airport
dependent with two specific strategies.
Goal D. "To promote compatible land uses in and around the
airport": by 1) applying zoning regulations to
establish the type, location and size of permitted
uses within the airport influence area with seven
strategies 2) applying subdivision regulations to
all land divisions adjacent to or within the
designated airport boundary with one specific strategy
3) attempting to apply City review authority to all
airport abutting properties when associated land use
proposals are airport dependent with one specific
strategy.
Goa_ 1 E. "To establish funding for airport operations and
capital requirement": by 1) establishing reasonable
airport user fees with six specific strategies 2)
utilizing the revenue to fund cost for routine airport
maintenance with three strategies and 3) designating
monies from the sale for City properties to an airport
fund with one specific strategy.
Goad "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) designating long-term 5-15
years capital priorities for plan implementation with
six 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:
1. Land cost associated with
runway extension 250, X 1600, $1,000,000
Private road closure south end
of runway at 2.50
2. Excavation and pavement for
runway extension 1600 feet 210,000
3. Extend single parallel taxiway 24,700
4. Increase existing taxiway to 24, 13,215
5. Remove all objects in protective
zone 8,000
* 6. Strobe light KGEZ radio tower 2,500
7. Build helicopter landing pad 6,130
* 8. Install PAPI navigation system 15,000
* 1/2 9. New lights and wiring 120,000
10. 6' chain link fence 11,350 174,600
lineal feet
11. Increase bearing load of runway
2" overlay 72,065
1/2 12. Engineering Cost 90,000
$1,736,210
* Short -rm 1-5 years $1,402,10A
q
Total cost for improvements identified as strategies by the
report is $1,736,210. Of this amount approximately $1,402,100
is identified as short term to be implemented within 1-5 years.
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.
2
As you know this option is not presently being used for several
reasons. 1) Council's philosophy that enterprise activities
should pay their own way 2) property tax revenue has been
earmarked for general government services 3) Council has the
past three years reduced our property tax levy by approximately
12 mills. Using a property tax levy to fund the revenue
shortfall in the airport fund while an appropriate use of this
tax does not appear to be in line with present Council
philosophy. Therefore funding for operation, maintenance and
capital improvements for the airport remains a major problem now
and into the future.
With respect to appropriate land use in the "Airport
Neighborhood" the plan advocates zoning that would allow a
variety of commercial, office and light industrial uses. All
recommendations contained within the plan are predicated upon
the assumption that the airport will be improved and remain in
operation.
The plan specifically calls for office type zoning on the City -
owned property adjoining Highway 93. A mix of office and
commercial uses would be appropriate adjacent to Highway 93.
Given the concerns associated with financing airport
improvements and operating expenses Council might want to
consider other options for the neighborhood. There appear to be
three options, a fourth would be do nothing, however we will
focus on three that seem most reasonable with respect to the
neighborhood plan.
Option One would be to adopt the neighborhood Airport Plan as
presented in the Greer report. This option would provide the
followings
Benefits of This Option
1. A very busy general aviation airport would remain open in
public ownership.
2. Direct benefit to approximately 60 local pilots and an
undetermined number of out of town pilots.
3. Improved safety conditions at the airport facility as a
result of implementing safety strategies.
4. Possible relocation of sport facilities away from the
airport.
5. Undetermined community economic benefit from the continued
operation of the airport.
6. Creation of limited commercial opportunity along Highway 93.
0
7. Opportunity to promote compatible land uses around the
airport.
8. Opportunity to create airport authority/or possibly use
existing airport authority for management purposes.
Costs of This Option
1. Significant Capital cost associated with airport
improvements and recreation facility relocation.
2. Liability exposure associated with operating an airport of
this type inside the City.
3. Continued revenue short fall for proper maintenance and
operation of the airport.
4. Public subsidy required for both operation and capital
improvements.
5. Airport does not qualify for FAA funding assistance.
Option Two would involve privatizing the airport by selling the
asset to an individual or group with the condition the airport
remain operational:
Benefits of This Option
1. Release City from liability exposure
2. Eliminate public funding requirements for operation and
capital expenses
3. Keep airport as general aviation facility
4. Retain sale proceeds of property for other municipal
purposes
5. Relocate ball fields and convert property to
Commercial/Industrial Use
Costs of This Option
1. FBO's might suffer some financial loss
2. Property would have to be marketed
3. Cost to relocate ball fields may be too expensive (estimate
$500,000 includes property purchase)
G
4. May not be able to find qualified buyers for the airport
facility.
5. Airport does not qualify for FAA funding
6. Buyer might require airport be brought to BI standard prior
to purchase
The Third Option would be to close the airport and convert all
publicly owned property to higher and better use.
Benefits of This Option
1. Liability exposure goes away
2. Conversion of property to commercial/industrial use would
improve property value and increase tax base.
3. No public subsidy for maintenance and operation and capital
improvements.
Cost Associated With This Option
1. Elimination of a very busy general aviation airport
2. City would have to buy out lease hold improvements -cost
unknown
3. FBO's might suffer economic loss
4.. Possible economic loss to surrounding businesses
S. Job loss to those employed by FBO's
6. Negative impact on local pilots and visitors who use the
airport
As you are aware the Greer Report is recommending Option One.
The other two options have been offered in light of the cost and
liability associated with the continued operation of the City
airport. If you decide that Option One most closely represents
your desire then we need to begin developing a realistic plan
for both funding the annual operations of the airport and most
importantly committing to fully funding the capital improvements
suggested in the study.
If you decide one of the remaining two options is more desirable
then we need to begin developing a transition policy either for
privatizing or closing the airport and redoing the Neighborhood
Plan to fit your choice.