![A jet on a runway at Flagler County airport. The county is crafting a new ordinance regulating airport overlays. (© FlaglerLive)](https://i0.wp.com/flaglerlive.com/wp-content/uploads/jet-airport.jpg?resize=1000%2C662&ssl=1)
The Flagler County Commission is moving toward adopting a long-required ordinance regulating the county airport’s flight-zones approaches. The ordinance applies to land use around the airport, restricting or prohibiting certain structures or vegetation, to minimize risks to and enhance the safe operation of planes. A 2016 sate law requires all local governments with airports in their midst to adopt such an ordinance. Flagler County is late, but finally doing so.
Some residents surrounding the airport who have been objecting to the seemingly perpetual touch-and-go flights of a flight school at the airport, and complaining about the noise, will be disappointed. The ordinance does nothing to address flights or airport use, which is not in the county’s jurisdiction anyway, and nominally addresses noise. In the main, the ordinance ratifies practices already in place.
“This is a a requirement through DOT to preserve the airspace,” Flagler County Growth Management Director Adam Mengel told the County Commission in a workshop Monday. “And so we really shouldn’t be thinking in any other terms other than that. This is something to protect your public investment in your airport itself.”
The ordinance regulates the permissible height of vegetation or structures, the use of land within the noise-regulated zone, the use of land subject to overflights, and other uses that could result in impeding in-flight visual or electronic interference or even aircraft bird strike hazards.
Airport protection overlay zoning primarily concerns obstruction hazards which may impact the vertical and horizontal airspace surrounding the airport. The zoning identifies incompatible uses that should be discouraged or prohibited near the airport-including house construction.
Obstruction hazards “endanger the lives and property of users of an airport and of the occupants of land in its vicinity by reducing the size of the area available for aircraft taking off, maneuvering, or landing, thus tending to destroy or impair the utility of the Airport and the public investment” in it, the ordinance states.
The ordinance establishes two zones: the airport height notification zone, and the airport overflight zone. The two together form the overflight zone. Residential construction is prohibited within a certain length of the runways (half the longest runway’s length, from each runway’s end points). Those distances do extend slightly past Belle Terre Boulevard and a little east of Seminole Woods Boulevard, encompassing some existing residential houses. Mengel calculated that there are existing, vacant lots that could be built on. The ordinance would prohibit construction there.
One of the airport’s runways could be extended from 5,500 to 6,500 feet if there was a need for it, Airport Director Roy Sieger said. The other runway “will never be extended.”
In May 2023 the County Commission, against its own Planning Board’s recommendation, cleared the way for a 240-unit apartment complex beyond the northwest end of two of the county airport’s runways, and east of Aldi, the grocery store. The Planning Board had recommended keeping the general commercial and industrial zoning rather than converting it to high-density residential. The complex would have been in the zone where no residential construction would be allowed.
“Luckily,” Mengel said, “it sounds like we’re out of that business. So it’s going to end up being another big box, the way it sounds.”
“It would be a taking if this was adopted,” Mengel said, meaning that the government would have to compensate the land owners for preventing them from profiting from the land, “because what would happen is new residential construction occurring on those residential lots would be prohibited. Those that exist now would be treated as non conformities.” Residents and homeowners could continue living there. But if a catastrophic event were to destroy a house, that house could not be rebuilt there.
That’s not new. Years ago, Mengel said, the county bought land that had been plated for houses east of the airport, on the west side of Seminole Woods Boulevard. Yet a church and a new Palm Coast fire station are approved or under construction in some of the overlays. Those may be approved through special permissions, as was the case with a cell monopole at Flagler Palm Coast High School and even a temporary construction crane at AdventHealth Palm Coast. “We try to catch them as we can, city and us both working together,” Mengel said. “For the most part, we’ve done a pretty good job, thankfully, and that’s been reflected in the safety of our airspace.”
So how will people know whether their land is under one airport overlay or another? The county would have to develop a database enabling property owners or residents or businesses to plug in an address and know precisely whether they are under any of the restrictions or prohibitions, and what those would be. At least that’s the approach Mengel is recommending.
Local governments may implement the ordinance two ways. One is through a joint agreement (an “interlocal agreement”) between the affected local governments. That would include Flagler County, Palm Coast and Bunnell. If Flagler Beach annexes the western portion of John Anderson Highway that will include the Veranda Bay development, the agreement would include Flagler Beach as well. The second avenue is to create an airport joint planning board. When the administration discussed the approach in 2018, the joint agreement was the preferred route.
Public hearings are expected on March 3 and March 17. Commissioners have no objection to the ordinance, which has been discussed previously–and requested by the commission for two years, according to Commissioner Leann Pennington. It’s not clear why it’s taken this long for it to be drafted.
“I do feel that this zoning ordinance is very important to our airport,” Commissioner Kim Carney said in January. “If we grow as we grow, whatever the situation is the state is requiring it.”
RobdaSlob says
Am I missing something – this has been in Florida Code for over 10 years:
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0300-0399/0333/0333.html&StatuteYear=2016
If my understanding is accurate why is Flagler County just now getting around to it?
Derrick redder says
So you bought by or next to the airstrip and now you want to change the place you moved to to the place you left.
This said I see no reason why they can’t fly over the ocean or interstate why buzz the housing 5 miles out and at like at 0600hrs on a Sunday. smdh
Ed Danko, former Vice-Mayor, PC says
Gotta love people that move next to an airport and then complain about the airplanes. Kinda like people that move next to a zoo and complain about the animals, or those folks that move to the beach and complain about the sand and the salt!
XYZ says
This airport overlay ordinance is NOT ALL THAT MEETS THE EYE, and the county
is trying too intensely to get it passed very quickly. Added to this mix the FAA made changes to
this ordinance the last minute, from the middle of last weeks meeting about it to that
same Friday which is why this Monday the FCBOCC had to have another meeting about it.
The city was not given proper notice to learn so that they can properly address this 15 page
or so ordinance and citizens had to inform the city about this confusing rather perplexing
presentation given by Sean Moylan and Roy Sieger. But the county needs an interlocal
agreement to pass the ordinance of which Moylan made a point of saying that the county
does not need the city’s vote but now Flagler Beach is involved due to the possible annexation
annexation of Veranda Bay. The obfuscation of Moylans presentation caused Mayor Norris
and Vice Mayor Pontieri to demand clarification for the affected residents homes and properties,
after all how can you make a bullet presentation claiming that over 9,000 residents will be
affected and not EXPLAIN as to HOW these residents will be affected. It’s asinine and should
be broken down to simplified explanations that the average citizen will be able to understand.
A very important meeting on February 25th at City Hall will be scheduled to clarify residents
concerns and will specify how specific homes in various sections will be impacted by the passage
of this ordinance.If you care about the future of your home and property it is imperative that all
residents attend this meeting.
Jane Gentile Youd says
I addressed the issue,in your headline in person to the board that no mention of ‘touch and goes’ is not part of this ordinance and that they are not prohibited by this proposed Ordinance nor compensation for homes that were built BEFORE FLIGHT SCHOOLS were allowed to start.
Skibum says
Jane, your comment about the local ordinance not being written to prohibit “touch and goes” seems to imply that a city or other local government where there is an airport somehow has such authority to enact an ordinance that limits or prohibits planes from practicing touch and go landings and takeoffs at airports. Touch and goes are an integral part of pilot training – an absolute necessity for student pilots as well as experienced pilots to practice their proficiency on a regular basis. It would be just as nonsensical to have a community swimming pool and expect a local authority to prohibit diving or jumping in to make a cannonball splash because of the potential for noise. I would love to see ANY evidence where a local governing authority has been able to usurp the FAA when it comes to making rules for plane landings and takeoffs, so if ANYONE can provide such evidence of a local jurisdiction anywhere that has succeeded in passing a local ordinance which has the effect of law and usurps federal authority to regulate planes doing touch and goes at a local airport, please do tell. Then, and only then, will I shut up and cease writing about what I think is absolute nonsensical fantasizing from people who move next to, or close to an existing airport and THEN want to complain and demand that planes stop making noise. Go ahead… make my day. Anyone???
RobdaSlob says
“Ed Danko, former Vice-Mayor, PC says….”Gotta love people that move next to an airport and then complain about the airplanes…”.
Sir I don’t know anything about you but I will say this comment is likely why your title has “former” in it. Why wouldn’t a government agency not want to have their constituents bring their concerns to them? If the elected officials are dismissive of those concerns as you have stated then their only recourse is to select new elected officials.
I have been engaged in aviation my entire 60 years of life. Earliest memories were riding in my grandfather’s plane. But while I am a fierce advocate for aviation I fully recognize we must be good stewards to our community. That is the obligation of the aviation community. If someone doesn’t think we are meeting that obligation then the community should listen and make all efforts to address the concern.
The county runs the airport they are obligated to protect the community from any potential harm – whether it is environmental, safety, financial, etc. No different than any other county run facility, park, beach, etc. Obviously it is risk management and our best opportunity to get the pendulum to settle in the middle is to embrace diverse perspectives and that in turn will lead to the best solution.
Don’t count on my vote in the future.