Loading...
1999/03/01 Resolution 4451 - Airport Height RestrictionsRESOLUTION NO. 4451 A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 3306 BY REDEFINING THE PERIMETER BOUNDARY OF THE LANDING FIELD OF THE KALISPELL CITY AIRPORT. 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 to 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. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL, MONTANA, AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. That Resolution 3306 is hereby amended by deleting all paragraphs beginning with "NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED" and replacing said paragraphs with the following: "SECTION I. That for purposes of Section 67-5-201, M.C.A. et sea., 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 center line 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. 4451 airport boundary.wpd 1 SECTION II. That a scale drawing of said established perimeter shall be prepared and made available for public inspection in the office of the City Building Department showing references and distances to established roads and other landmarks in the vicinity of the Kalispell City Airport. The City Building Official shall use such scale drawing for reference purposes in issuing or denying building permits in the enforcement of Title 67, Chapter 5, Montana Code Annotated." SECTION II. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage by the City Council _PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND SIGNED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL, MONTANA, THIS DAY OF MARCH, 1999. Wm. E. Boharski Mayor Attest: Theresa White Clerk of Council 4451 airport boundary.wpd 2 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 NO. 3306 A RESOLUTION TO DEFINE AND ESTABLISH THE PERIMETER BOUNDARY OF THE LANDING FIELD OF THE KALISPELL CITY AIRPORT. WITNESSETHi WHEREAS, the City of Kalispell has owned the Kalispell City Airport for many years and the perimeter boundary of the landing field portion thereof has never been defined or established as dis- tinguished from the actual boundary -6f said Airport as a tract of land owned by the City of Kalispell; aind WHEREAS, until recently the height of buildings and other structures in the vicinity of the said City Airport has not required regulation to promote the public order, health and safety; but, with increased building in the vicinity of said Airport, it does now appear reasonable and proper that the City should define and estab- lish the perimeter boundary of the landing field portion of said City Airport due to the irregular boundaries and divergent uses of the whole of said City Airport property; and WHEREAS, it will be of benefit bo builders to know or be able to ascertain the perimeter boundary of such landing field with cer- tainty and, further, enable the City to enforce the Montana Airport Hazard Regulations with certainty and equity if the perimeter of said landing field is established and defined; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that pursuant to Sec. #67-5-201(3), M.C.A., the following is hereby established and defined as the per- imeter boundary of the Kalispell City Airport landing field as dis- tinguished from the actual boundary of the Kalispell City Airport property as a whole: (See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof) B D hea a scale drawing of said established 5 perimeter shall be prepared and made available for public inspection in the office of the City Building Department showing references and distances to established roads and other landmarks in the vicinity of the Kalispell City Airport. The City Building Official shall use such scale drawing for reference purposes in issuing or denying build- ing permits in the enforcement of Title 67, Chapter 5, Montana Code LAnnotated. PASSED AND.APPROVED BY THE YOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KALISPELL, THIS - DAY OF �t,,,., �tti , 1980. Norma E. Happ, Mayor 1 ATTRCT-