Destined to repeat history
Despite advice from the FAA and AOPA that a proposed residential development is “incompatible” with the nearby airport environment, the city of Longmont, Colorado, Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval for the project.
The Modern West 2 development proposal lies within the airport influence overlap zone at Vance Brand Airport. Aviation advocacy groups are strongly opposed to this development, warning the city may face serious consequences if it chooses to move forward with the project in this location.
“While we fully understand the necessity of residential development as our populations grow, it needs to be done in a safe and smart way,” Schuster wrote. “The best way for zoning authorities to ensure the safety and well-being of aviators and future development occupants and minimize potential liability risks to the city is to consider FAA and other related guidance on compatible land use near airports.”
The FAA is closely involved in ongoing opposition to the proposal. It has issued two letters to the Longmont City Council, warning against moving forward with the development as planned and reminding councilors of their grant assurance obligations—to which the city is bound as the sponsor of the airport—since the council has accepted federal funding for airport development and maintenance.
In its July 2 letter, the FAA pointed out that that it views the Modern West 2 development as contrary to the compatible land use obligation, which requires sponsors to “Take appropriate action, to the extent reasonable…to restrict the use of land adjacent to or in the immediate vicinity of the airport to activities and purposes compatible with normal airport operations, including landing and takeoff of aircraft.”
In the same letter, the agency states that failure to comply with federal grant assurances could lead to a loss of funding for the airport if the FAA is forced to issue a Notice of Investigation under FAR Part 16, Rules of Practice for Federally-Assisted Airport Enforcement Proceedings.
AOPA’s advocacy team has seen this scenario play out time and time again. Schuster wrote, “In AOPA’s over 85 years of experience, we have seen countless well-intended developments built near airports end up causing great community strife, conflict, and lawsuits for a wide range of reasons, from aircraft incidents and accidents to lawsuits over airport noise and other airport-related second order effects.”
The proposed development in Longmont bears a striking resemblance to development projects near airports in cities across the United States. As they get well into the planning and approval stage without addressing compatibility concerns, they ultimately lead to a variety of unintended, and in some cases, tragic consequences.
A recent case at Rocky Mountain Metropolitan Airport in Denver is a classic example. Advocates at the airport, which has been in existence since the 1960s, emphatically warned the city of Superior, Colorado—the approval authority for the development—that noise complaints would ensue if residential developments housing thousands were built in the airport’s area of influence. These warnings were ignored, and now the airport has faced legal entanglements for years.
Ultimately, incompatible land use and encroachment around airports are existential threats to our country’s airports. AOPA will continue to vigorously challenge incompatible land uses near airports and monitor developments like those at Longmont to ensure that any developments being considered near airports are always designed and located in a manner that is in the best interest of the surrounding communities, the airport, and its users.
