Federal rules may crimp airport plans

Plans for Kalispell City Airport may not be back at square one, but they may need to be retraced a few steps.

A Federal Aviation Administration official told the City Council on Monday night that, before the city could receive 95 percent federal reimbursement for any of the $3.5 million it has invested in the airport since 1999, it would have to make certain changes there.

To make those changes — including lengthening the runway and protecting the space for another expansion in the future — FAA official Gary Gates said the city almost certainly would have to get easements or buy land surrounding the southern end of the airport.

If that land is to include tracts owned by Doug and Judy Wise and their children, it may not be available.

Family members in recent months have told the council that they adamantly oppose giving over their land to make way for airport needs. Mayor Tammi Fisher said Tuesday morning she had confirmed that with Randy and Debbie Wise in a recent conversation.

“If the priority there is to expand to the minimal FAA standards, that would require impeding private property — and that’s the Wise family,” Fisher said Tuesday morning. “If they are reluctant to provide [an easement or sell land outright], it’s a non-starter.”

The council has made it clear that it does not intend to condemn any private property to gain the land it needs for airport expansion.

Council members also heard Monday night that they could not impose a noise ordinance at the airport and still get FAA money, nor could they restrict hours of operation and types of aircraft used there.

After months of public meetings, the council invited Gates to attend Monday night’s work session and answer direct council questions. He is the lead community planner and project manager at the FAA Airports District Office in Helena.

Public comments, not questions, were accepted at the end of the meeting. Some council members relayed questions submitted by their constituents, asking Gates for those answers directly.

Gates told council member Bob Hafferman the FAA would help fund a 3,700-foot runway — it is 3,600 feet now — only if it is the first stage of an extension to 4,300 or 4,700 feet and if the city acquires open land to protect the extra length, 1,200 feet at each end. The aviation agency would consider rotating the runway 5 degrees, called for in the 1999 master plan, or another realignment.

But, Hafferman pressed, if the city makes safety upgrades, moves the runway and acquires land, would FAA fund a 3,700-foot runway?

“That could be explored,” Gates said. “We have not supported that to date. For us to be involved, we would need to look at expanding beyond 3,700 feet.”

The minimum FAA-approved length under the master plan is 4,300 feet, with 4,700 feet considered the “ultimate” length. The agency may, however, support moving the runway 1,000 feet to the south and realigning it to avoid obstacles if a new study shows that it’s safe.

Gates said the 1999 document is the current planning guide and, “under that, we would expect the city to protect to 4,700 feet.” He said a 4,300-foot runway would accommodate 95 percent of the current fleet, which includes aircraft up to 12,500 pounds carrying 10 passengers.

Later, Gates answered Randy Kenyon’s question on whether easements restricting a landowner’s use so it’s airport-compatible would satisfy the mandate to protect the air space.

“Yes, but the challenge has been that … [the FAA] doesn’t allow buildings, people to gather there,” and other landowner uses, he said, “that by the time you negotiate those restrictions it would be as costly as buying the land.”

He also said if the city accepts FAA money, it could not restrict which aircraft use the airport and must allow 24-hour operation every day of the year.

“The airport must be open to all classes and types of aircraft that could safely use that airport,” he said. Pilots of larger planes would avoid the airport but the city could not restrict training flights, for example, at any time of the day or night.

Tim Kluesner asked whether the city could collect any FAA reimbursement for its $3.5 million investment if the KGEZ radio towers, which are identified as a safety hazard for landings and takeoffs, are removed but nothing else changes at the airport.

“We would have to take a look at it but we can’t [reimburse] if the configuration does not meet FAA standards,” Gates said. Although legal, Kalispell’s airport does not meet those standards.

Proximity to Glacier Park International Airport has prompted calls for shifting training flights there, redirecting larger aircraft or even closing the city airport. Randy Kenyon quizzed Gates on the feasibility of two nearby facilities.

The city airport’s existence for the past eight decades and its high volume of traffic are two arguments in its favor, Gates said. And it lies just outside distance and travel limitations that restrict two FAA-sponsored airports in the same area. Sending training flights to Glacier Park International is a safe option, he said.

Kenyon also asked whether the FAA has any concerns about effects on homes or schools from training flights at the fixed-base operation, Red Eagle Aviation. Gates said he knows of no safety issues, but minimum flight altitudes and other FAA restrictions would be imposed.

In response to a question on whether the current site is the best possible, Gates said “there are many challenges” but it remains the preferred site; others could be considered. It doesn’t meet FAA standards as is.

He suggested the city could look into zoning to avoid “noise sensitive areas” such as schools and homes to assure the airport is in a compatible environment.

“We’re not able to secure that, but that is a challenge,” he said. Many pilots now are voluntarily controlling their noise levels and flight times but the city cannot impose a noise ordinance requiring quiet operations.

Over the next month, City Manager Jane Howington said she expects to work with staff on what the council’s next consideration should be, then bring it back for council action probably early in May.

Reporter Nancy Kimball may be reached at 758-4483 or by e-mail at nkimball@dailyinterlake.com