Typically an airport operator has an "Airport Land Use Commission/Group/Agenecy etc..." responsible for ensuring compatible growth around an airport and it's approach paths. The most gross example I know of can be observed at San Diego. Up until recently, the Land Use Commission was a run by a different agency than the agency charged with operating the airport. As a result, you had competing agencies approving use of land. This resulted in incompatible growth around SAN
and the other airports in San Diego county over the years. From what I've read, the change has caused quite the stir as the San Diego Airport Authority now not only controls land use around SAN
, but also the military bases and all the other airports in the County. The cities associated with the airports have been pitching a fit over project rejections that are incompatible with the associated airports claiming the Authority has "Overstepped its Authority". I say too bad.
The FAA doesn't do much to help the situation. I've ssen form letters over the years that read: "The approval of use resides with the local land use agency in the region, the FAA has no concerns over the proposed project. Please contact them for additional approvals. The later part being the problem. They always point out "the FAA says it's okay". Nice huh???
I'd just once like to see a letter like this:
Dear Idiot Developer,
There's an airport with an active approach and departure path over your proposed development. As such, there are inherent risks with your project, namely the safety of those in the air and on the ground. On occassion, aircraft do crash, statistically such incidents are more likely to occur within a 5 mile perimeter of said airports every 15-20 years. It has been 25 years since the last such incident at the airport in question. Please consult your insurance company for project approval.
[Edited 2006-03-08 01:59:03]