Mr. Blue,

The exhibit you asked about (FAA DD Exhibit 1, Item 3) is actually the
complaint filed by the complainant in that case.  It includes nearly 300
pages in exhibits.  I am unable to provide you with a link to that
document.  You might be able to access it through the DOT docket management
system under FAA Docket No. 16-06-06 Director's Determination.  I doubt
that the complaint would be useful to you, however, since the issue of a
residential airpark adjacent to the airport was raised by the FAA based on
other information contained in the administrative record rather than raised
directly by the complainant in that case.  (The complainant's allegation
involved allowing some on-airport tenants to use their hangars as
residences while denying others the same privilege.)

The FAA has determined that residential development on or adjacent to
airports is inconsistent with 49 United States Code (U.S.C.) 47107(a)(10)
and the associated federal grant assurance 21, Compatible Land Use.  Noise
is a substantial issue, but not the only issue.  Your assertion that most
people who live in hangar homes like airport noise has not been borne out
by our experience.  People who live in residential hangars like to fly ...
they don't necessarily like the noise.  They complain just like everyone
else when the noise is from an aircraft that isn't theirs.  In addition,
when the residential hangar is sold or bequeathed to someone who is not a
pilot, the allure of living right next to a runway is not so great.  FAA
has determined residential airparks adjacent to airports are an
incompatible land use.  Allowing incompatible land use in proximity of a
federally obligated airport can create a number of undesirable conditions,
including: noise complaints, diminished security, diminished safety,
efforts by residential neighbors to restrain the growth of the airport or
impose restrictions, unfair competition with on-airport business operators,
and wild life issues.

You should also know the FAA actively discourages airport sponsors from
entering into through-the-fence agreements, especially if they involve
residential or commercial development.

While you are welcome to discuss your particular issue with the local
Airports District Office, I must advise you that there is no compromise
when it comes to federally funded airports.  Residential airparks are
incompatible land use, and through-the-fence arrangements of any kind are
strongly discouraged.  Your best option might be to construct your own
private airstrip without federal funding.

Katherine


Katherine Baxter
FAA Airport Compliance and Field Operations Division
(202) 267-9024