Loading...
680-Orlando Sanford Airport AGREEMENT CONCERNING ORLANDO SANFORD AIRPORT 1997, by the SANFORD AIRPORT AUTHORITY (Authority) and the FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AffAIRS (DCA). RECITATIONS A. The DCA is an agency of the State of Florida responsible for the administration and enforcement of Chapter 380, Florida Statutes (F.S.), which includes provisions related to Developments of Regional Impact (DRIs). The DCA has "the power and the duty" under Section 380.032(3), F.S., to: Enter into agreements with any landowner, developer, or governmental agency as may be necessary to effectuate the provisions and purposes of this act or any rnles promulgated hereunder. B. The Authority is a dependent special district of the City of Sanford and the operator and developer of the Orlando Sanford Airport (Airport) located in Seminole County, Florida. C. The Airport has represented the following: The Airport opened prior to the 1940s. In 1942, the City of Sanford (City) deeded the Airport to the Navy, which used it for major periods of time from Wo~d War II to 1968 as a Naval Air Station and for aviation training. The City took over the Airport again in 1969. D. On August 25, 1969, the City approved and sent to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) a revised Airport Layout Plan (1969 ALP) attached hereto as Exhibit A. The FAA also approved the ALP in November 1969. The 1969 ALP depicted existing Airport and former Navy industrial and office activities, as well as areas designated for future Airport and industrial uses. E. In reliance on the approved 1969 ALP, among other things, the City sought creation of a dependent special district to govern the Airport and its activities. The Authority was created by Special Act of the Legislature (Chapter 71-924, Laws of Florida) (Act) on June 30, 1971. The Act, among other things, gave the Authority broad powers to acquire, finance, develop and operate the Airport and related aviation activities and to develop industrial and manufacturing activities. The Authority has represented that it and the City approved numerous aviation-related and industrial leases within the Airport property prior to July 1, 1973. F. Prior to July 1, 1973, as confirmed by a March 1972 aerial photograph and other documentation, extensive aviation-related and other land uses had been developed on the Airport site. Those uses included the main east-west Airport runway, known as Runway 9L-27R. Prior to July 1, 1973, as confirmed by the 1969 ALP, March 1972 aerial photograph and other documentation, Runway 9L-27R had a length of approximately 11,635 feet of paved runway in good condition, which was in use for aircraft takeoffs and landings. The Authority has represented that the length of this runway was in use prior to July 1, 1973, and thereafter during the 1970s for large DC-8 passenger jet aircraft charter traffic, as well as for large military aircraft. 2 G. The Airport has represented and the DCA has no reason to dispute the further history of Runway 9L-27R as follows: The Airport has never abandoned use of the full length of the runway. No part of the runway has ever been tom down or demolished, and various maintenance activities for it have occurred over the years. Major portions of the 11,635-foot runway have been recently repaved, or "overlaid." H. The main north-south runway at the Airport, known as Runway 18-36, also was in existence prior to July 1, 1973, with a length of approximately 6,000 feet, as confirmed by the ALP and March 1972 aerial photograph. I. The 1969 ALP also depicted an additional 6,000-foot long east-west "Future Runway" parallel to and south of Runway 9L-27R. J. The original Airport terminal, containing approximately 13,340 square feet, was in existence prior to July 1, 1973, as confirmed by the 1969 ALP and March 1972 aerial photograph. This terminal is still in use for terminal services. K. Two terminal expansions have occurred. The first expansion of approximately 30,000 square feet for a U.S. Customs facility for international flights received a local building permit in January 1994. The second expansion received local building permits from the City in May and June 1995. The Authority has represented that the second expansion contained approximately 137,360 square feet for an international departure lounge and other terminal facilities. In addition, the Authority has represented that it intends to seek FAA and local approval to proceed with an additional terminal expansion in the near future. (See 1997 proposed ALP attached hereto as Exhibit B). 101086.1 3 L. The Airport also currently contains substantial airport support and general aviation activities, such as corporate hangars, t-hangars for small private planes, avionics and other aircraft maintenance and repair facilities, and airline flight training facilities. The Authority also has represented that similar airport support and aviation uses were in existence prior to July 1, 1973. The Authority has further represented that it intends to build additional airport support or general aviation facilities in the near future, including new al~ine cargo facilities. The Airport also currently contains Runway 9R-27L, a runway 3,500 feet long and 75 feet wide, that is in use for "touch and go" flight training and general aviation purposes. M. In 1996, the Authority also proposed development of a new 3,500-foot long and 75-foot wide runway located in the southeast portion of the Airport property to be used for "touch and go" aviation training activities currently conducted on Runway 9R-27L. The new "touch and go" runway would be located as shown on the 1997 revised ALP attached hereto as Exhibit B. The Authority has proposed to move these operations to this new runway as a safety measure to alleviate air traffic congestion. This runway has been approved for FAA funding and a federal Finding of No Significant Impact on the human and other environment was issued for the project in September 1997. N. The Authority has further represented the following concerning the proposed "touch and go" runway and its operations: The development of the runway does not have the potential to increase the annual rated capacity of the Airport for flight operations or change the existing types of aircraft activity. The runway will be 75 feet in width; will be used for flight training; will not have runway or approach lights or an Instrumentation Landing System; will not be paved to a thickness allowing large transport air carrier use; and is not long enough at 3,500 feet or wide enough at 75 feet to permit such use. O. The Airport also contains certain office and industrial uses. The Authority has represented that certain buildings were in use by the Navy for office and industrial purposes before July 1, 1973. In addition, the 1969 ALP shows extensive acreage on the western portion of the Airport property designated and approved for future industrial use. The Authority has represented that any new industrial development since July 1, 1973 has occurred within the acreage areas shown for industrial use on the 1969 ALP. P. The Airport is currently classified by the FAA as a general aviation non-hub airport. Scheduled flight service as defined by the FAA regulations commenced at the Airport on April 2, 1997. Q. On December 22, 1995, as part of its approval of a 1995 Airport Master Plan Update and revised ALP for the Airport, the FAA approved what was described as a "2,000-foot extension" to Runway 9L-27R. In fact, the approved new additional runway pavement beyond that existing prior to July 1, 1973, would be an additional 515 feet at the eastern end of Runway 9L-27R. R. As part of the December 1995 Airport Master Plan Update and revised 1995 ALP, the FAA also approved 2,000 feet of additional paved runway length for Runway 18-36. This extension has not received any local approval by the City, as required by the Act or other laws. The Authority has since determined that this runway extension is not necessary in the foreseeable future and has requested that the FAA rescind its approval and delete it from the ALP. The Authority has represented that it has received oral confirmation that the FAA will not object to this requested deletion and that the Authority will process the 1997 revised ALP attached hereto as Exhibit B for FAA approval expeditiously. S. None of the development at the Airport to date has applied for or received approval as a DRI pursuant to Chapter 380, F.S. T. On September 17, 1997, the DCA issued a Notice of Violation and Order (Notice and Order) to the Authority alleging that the proposed extension of Runway 9L-27R was conclusively a DRI and ordering all development at the Airport to cease until the DRI status was resolved or DRI approval was obtained. On October 7, 1997, the Authority filed a petition for formal administrative hearing disputing the DCA's allegations in order to preserve its rights. The Authority also filed a motion to abate proceedings in order to continue negotiations with the DCA. This motion was granted by the DCA on November 9'1~4, 1997. U. The Authority voluntarily ceased all development upon receipt of the DCA's Notice and Order and commenced extensive negotiations with the DCA to resolve DRI-related issues. As part of those negotiations, the Authority has provided extensive additional information to the DCA that was not known to the DCA at the time of the DCA's issuance of the Notice and Order. V. In light of the lengthy and complex history of the Airport and its operations; extensive additional information provided by the Authority to the DCA since issuance of the Notice and Order; the ongoing operations of the Airport and the Airport's beneficial regional, state and international economic, tourism, employment and other impacts; the mutual opportunity to clarify and establish DRI-related parameters tbr the future; and the potential for long and costly litigation, the parties wish to resolve any disagreement over the DRI status of the Airport and its activities in the manner provided for in this Agreement. It is in the best interest of the parties to enter this Agreement which effectuates the provisions and purposes of Chapter 380, Florida Statutes. COVENANTS AND CONDITIONS NOW, THEREFORE, based on the factual statements and recitations set forth above and in view of the mutual covenants, consideration and conditions herein, the parries hereto agree as follows: 1. The representations set forth above are incorporated herein and are essential elements of this Agreement. The Authority and DCA assert and warrant that all of the representations and statements above are true, accurate, and correct. 2. The DCA agrees that Runway 9L-27R at the paved length of 11,635 feet in existence for aircraft use prior to July 1, 1973, has vested rights pursuant to Section 380.06(20), F.S., at the location shown on the 1969 ALP attached hereto as Exhibit A, and therefore, use of that runway is not subject to DRI review pursuant to Chapter 380, F.S. The DCA further agrees that the proposed extension of 515 feet of additional paved runway at the eastern end of Runway 9L-27R also is conclusively not a DRI pursuant to Section 380.0651(3)(a)2., F.S. (1995), because 515 feet is less than a 25 percent extension of the vested runway length of 11,635 feet. Provided, however, the parties agree that the 5 15-foot extension and/or any other future extension of Runway 9L-27R that is less than 25 percent of 11,635 feet shall be cumulatively counted toward the length of non-vested extensions of this runway. The parties further agree that, absent an intervening change in the law that alters this result, a cumulative 7 extension of 2,908 feet or more to the i1,635-foot vested Runway 9L-27R shall subject any extensions beyond 11,635 feet to DRI review pursuant to Chapter 380, F.S. 3. The DCA agrees that Runway 18-36 at a paved length of 6,000 feet was in existence for aircraft use prior to July 1, 1973, that this runway has vested fights at that paved length pursuant to Section 380.06(20), F.S., and therefore, the ranway is not required to undergo DRI review. The parties further agree that any cumulative extension of Runway 18-36 beyond 6,000 feet that is 1,500 feet or more shall be required to undergo DRI review pursuant to Chapter 380, F.S., absent any intervening change in the law that alters this result. 4. The DCA agrees that approximately 13,340 square feet of the existing terminal building has vested rights pursuant to Section 380.06(20), F.S., and is not required to undergo DRI review. The parties further agree that the prior terminal expansions are not required to undergo DRI review pursuant to Section 380.065(3)(a)2., F.S., because the Airport has been and presently is classified by the FAA as a non-hub airport. The parties further agree that, absent any intervening change in the law that alters this result, any further terminal expansions for which the Authority receives a local government building permit while it is classified by the FAA as a non-hub or small-hub airport are conclusively not subject to DRI review pursuant to Section 380.0651(3)(a)2, F.S. (1995). 5. The parties agree that prior and future airport support activity (other than office or industrial uses) that is not defined as a DRI pursuant to Section 380.056(3)(a), F.S., or successor statutes or related rules, is ancillary development not subject to independent DRI review and/or is vested pursuant to Section 380.06(20), F.S., and not subject to DRI review. 101086.1 8 6. The DCA a~,_ .zs that the "touch and go" runway witt, _.e characteristics as stated in Paragraphs M and N of the representations of this Agreement is not required to undergo DRI review pursuant to the safety-related exemption stated in Section 380.065 1(3)(a)3., F.S. (1995). The parties further agree that a material change in the characteristics of the "touch and go" runway represented in Paragraphs M and N above could require the entire new "touch and go" runway and any future modifications to it to undergo DRI review. The parties also acknowledge that the Authority has represented that it received authorization under the 1969 ALP, upon which ALP it relied prior to July 1, 1973, to build an additional 6,000-foot east-west runway at a different location than that currently approved by the FAA for the "touch and go" runway. Therefore, the Authority agrees that prior to commencement of any material modifications to the characteristics of the "touch and go" runway facility set forth in Paragraphs M and N above, it will (a) apply for and obtain DRI approval of the entire "touch and go" runway and any proposed modifications to it pursuant to Chapter 380, F.S.; or Co) obtain written permission from the DCA to undertake the proposed modification without undergoing DRI review because the proposed modification does not trigger DRI review under Chapter 380, F.S.; or (c) demonstrate to the satisfaction of the DCA that the existing and proposed runway development has vested fights pursuant to Section 380.06(20), F.S., and has not divested these rights based on the criteria in Section 380.06(4)(e) and (f), F.S. 7. The parties agree that the existing industrial uses and related parking at the Airport are located within the approximately 138 acres designated for such use on the 1969 ALP attached hereto as Exhibit A and the existing office development at the Airport consisting of approximately 50,200 square feet are not required to undergo DRI review either because they are vested or below 80 percent of any applicable DRI threshold. The parries intend that the existing uses shown on the 1997 revised ALP attached as Exhibit B shall serve as a benchmark for any future analysis of office or industrial activities at the Airport. 8. Without limitation of other activities that may occur at the Airport without undergoing DRI review, the parties further agree that the Authority may immediately commence development of the following five activities as described in the October 3, I997, letter from the Airport Director attached hereto as Exhibit C. a. ARFF station. b. FAR Part 107 Security System. c. Taxiway "B" West. d. Air cargo building. e. Parking lot transition project. The approximate location of these projects is indicated on the proposed 1997 ALP attached as Exhibit D. 9. As part of this Agreement, the DCA hereby withdraws its Notice of Violation and Order dated September 17, 1997, with prejudice, thereby rendering moot the petition for formal administrative hearing filed by the Authority concerning the Notice and Order. The Authority shall file with the DCA a notice of voluntary dismissal of its petition with prejudice within five (5) days of its receipt of a fully executed original or copy of this Agreement. Each party shall bear its own attorneys' fees and costs in conjunction with this Agreement and the above related proceedings. I0. This Agreement does not entitle the Authority to any final DRI development orders approving Airport development, or to any other necessary approvals, permits or authorizations. 11. Nothing in this Agreement shall constitute a waiver by any party of the right to appeal any future development order pursuant to Section 380.07, F.S. 12. This Agreement affects the rights and obligations of the parties under Chapter 380, F.S. It is not intended to determine or influence the authority or decision of any other federal, state, regional or local government or agency in the issuance of any permits or approvals that might be required by law for any development authorized by this Agreement. 13. In the event of a breach of this Agreement or failure to comply with any conditions of this Agreement by the Authority, or if the Agreement contains materially inaccurate information provided by the Authority, the DCA may terminate this Agreement or may file suit to enforce it as provided in Section 380.06 and 380.11, F.S., may seek appropriate injunctive relief, or may require renegotiation of the Agreement based upon accurate information. In the event of breach of this Agreement by the DCA, the Authority may file suit in the Circuit Court for Seminole County for its enforcement and seek appropriate declaratory and/or injunctive relief. 14. The terms and conditions of the Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the successors and assigns of the parties hereto. No other party shall be construed to be a third party beneficiary of this Agreement. The Authority shall ensure that future owners, lessees, assigns and developers of any land affected by this Agreement are bound by the terms of this Agreement. The Authority shall record a notice of this Agreement which complies with Section 380.06(8)(a)10, F.S., in the official records of Seminole County, Florida, and shall provide the Department with a copy of the recorded notice including Book and Page number within 30 days of the execution of this Agreement. 11 15. This Agreement is the entire Agreement among the parties. No verbal modification is effective unless agreed to by the parties by written amendment to this Agreement. 16. The date of execution of this Agreement shall be the date that the last party signs and acknowledges the Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties, by and through the undersigned duly authorized representatives, have executed this Agreement on the dates set forth below. SANFORD AIRPORT AUTHORITY Its: Chairman \ ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF as~'~~ . He/she is 'personally g to me or has produced as identification and who did [did not] take an oath. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AffAIRS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF ~¥ O ~' The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this lc~ day of c-~]~,Ou~,%vxk~'(', 1997, by-'~'Tho~\c~ S ~ec-k~ , C~a~zL-~L_oca. l ~)lana; of the DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, on behalf of the DEPARTME~ OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. He/she is personally known to me or has produced as identification and who did [did not] ta~e an oath. [Name of Notary, typed, printeft] [Serial number, if any] . l:.:"Z'.,,;.~ ..z? ,."t ~."'1, ,ST 7.~ '.~ '.' -':~ ~ :'3 ~, ,~;;c ~a ',-' :;,- : ~- ':--'