Compilation of State Airport Authorizing Legislation (2012) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 20-30
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 20... ...
21 • In McGrath v. City of Gautier,180 a Mississippi court determined that purchasing insurance for damages exceeding a statutory cap did not waive sovereign immunity, while in Gregg v.
|
From page 21... ...
22 bility to coordinate airport development on a statewide basis and prepare a plan for a statewide system of airports.189 With respect to a given airport, however, the state may limit its planning authority or expressly impose planning limitations on a given airport entity. For example, Maryland law prohibits expansion at a specific airport until requirements are met for noise and highway improvements.190 State laws typically give local government agencies planning responsibilities involving airports.
|
From page 22... ...
23 For example, states may support the development of intercity rail services to link airports or airport access by bus feeder linkages, high speed rail, shared-ride transportation, or mass transit.202 Florida state law establishes road and rail transportation corridors connecting airports with ports and economic regions.203 States also may pursue innovative methods for reducing local surface traffic. For example, laws may be aimed at reducing congestion created by airport employees, such as a law promoting airport bicycle transportation facilities.
|
From page 23... ...
24 aeronautics act effectively preempted a municipality's condemnation action when it sought to condemn an airport based on a stated need for open space and to protect a species of bird.212 Federal law may have a preemptive effect as well if a neighboring jurisdiction tries to prevent land from being used for aeronautical purposes.213 Privately owned airport entities may or may not benefit from laws facilitating airport condemnation actions. For example, Nebraska state law expressly prohibits condemnation powers from being used for the benefit of a privately owned airport, even when operated for public use.214 States also may view the role of private operators more expansively if their operations support public transportation and may delegate limited eminent domain authority to them.
|
From page 24... ...
25 port. These entities must commit to take "appropriate action" to protect terminal airspace (by mitigating existing hazards and preventing future hazards from being established)
|
From page 25... ...
26 measures at the state level, and the state's general right to adopt such measures has been upheld.232 When states follow the guidelines of the FAA's model ordinance they typically adopt the purpose statements found in the model ordinance regarding the nuisance created by airspace obstructions and the need to protect the general welfare. Some also note that airport hazards endanger lives and property and reduce the capacity of an airport, thus impairing its utility and the public's investment in the facility.233 State laws commonly provide for establishing an area surrounding an airport where local governments may enact airport zoning regulations.
|
From page 26... ...
27 lating an airport's runway or in other specified areas, and some require municipalities to notify airport entities if they enact changes in zoning regulations for surrounding areas.241 A state also may empower an aeronautics agency to retain zoning authority over certain areas or to approve local zoning regulations.242 State requirements also exempt some areas and address others more specifically.243 States thus enact a range of state powers (and grants of municipal power) to provide for basic zoning functions to help protect airspace.
|
From page 27... ...
28 grams; or for use as wetlands, game, and wildlife areas.252 The diverse measures that states use to address land-use compatibility near an airport reflect the complexities involved in making local land-use decisions that balance the public interest in aviation with the interests of property owners. All of these basic zoning laws are aimed at providing airport entities, neighboring communities, and the state with the ability to protect airport operations by addressing the key elements essential to that protection.
|
From page 28... ...
29 significant concerns for airport entities. The policies that these laws express do not differ significantly whether they are being applied at an airport or at another location.
|
From page 29... ...
30 in federal cases to determine whether a taking involving airspace has occurred. Those federal standards directly address airspace issues and essentially presume that no taking has occurred unless the circumstances of the case establish a substantial impairment or destruction of the property.
|
From page 30... ...
31 not include precise height restrictions, but provided a means to determine them and a means to further review them, the airport zoning ordinance was not void for vagueness.281 Challenges to airport actions may also focus on an airport entity's powers to acquire property interests. Airport entities typically may purchase real property to expand, control certain locations affected by noise, or where airspace obstructions or other incompatible uses have been established.282 States may also empower airport entities to establish an airport district on lands near the airport in which the entity can acquire easements for development rights and require that the land be used for agricultural or other specified purposes.283 Airport entities and local government may acquire air rights and avigation easements as well, which normally convey rights to the airport entity to permit flight, aircraft noise, and other effects.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.