McCall Aviation is suing the City of McCall over a development agreement the city council made with itself this rear that put in place new restrictions at the McCall Municipal Airport.
The lawsuit that was filed Nov. 19 claims the development agreement is illegal because it in effect changed zoning ordinances already in place.
The lawsuit asks a judge to declare the development agreement null and void.
"You can't use a development agreement to circumvent the law," McCall Aviation President
Dan Scott said. "It is an illegal document and we are confident any legal jurisdiction will strike it down."
Scott said the city is using the development agreement as "stopgap" until the city can change the zoning code legally. He called the strategy "bizarre."
City Manager Lindley Kirkpatrick said the city is working on a zoning code amendment that addresses building heights in the airport zone.
"If adopted, it will resolve many of the issues raised by this lawsuit," Kirkpatrick said.
The lawsuit says that property within the airport zone is exempt from scenic route zone requirements, including building height restrictions.
The lawsuit claims the city violated both Idaho law and city code when it passed the new airport development agreement in September.
When the city council rezoned the airport into the city's airport zone at its Sept. 13 meeting, it also approved a development agreement with the city that placed scenic route corridor restrictions on all leased properties at the airport.
The development agreement idea was originated by city attorney Bill Nichols as a way to
place the airport in the airport zone while putting in place restrictions that would ensure the scenic route corridor would not be affected with the change to a less restrictive zone.
Three days before the council approved the development agreement, McCall Aviation attorney Jeffrey Pusch, of the Boise law firm Fisher, Pusch & Alderman, informed the city that the action would be "an unauthorized and illegal amendment to validly enacted" city code.
On Sept. 21, McCall Aviation submitted a design review application with plans for the construction of a 50-foot tall aircraft hangar.
On Nov. 1, Pusch again reiterated that the action was illegal and asked the city to rescind the agreement.
The city had spent six months attempting to find a palatable way to place the airport in the airport zone. Many people had spoken against the rezone at earlier public meetings due mainly to building height limits that would increase to 60 feet in the airport zone.
Citizens against the rezone wanted the city council to wait for the completion of the city's comprehensive land-use plan that goes before the council and the Valley County Board of Commissioners tonight.
Others opposed to the rezone used the public hearings to voice their opinions that the airport should be moved somewhere else in Long Valley.
The council wanted the airport in the new zone so that the airport would no longer be a nonconforming use within the city's industrial zone.
The airport master plan, also completed this fall, required the airport be placed in a zone that protects aviation operations at the airport.
If the airport remained in the industrial zone, Federal Aviation Administration funding could be in jeopardy. The FAA provides the bulk of the funding for the airport.
Scenic route zone requirements include a building height limit of 35 feet within 300 feet of any street intersection. The P&Z would approve scenic route applications.
The city council would not be required to approve any scenic route applications unless there is an appeal of a P&Z decision to council. The city has until Dec. 13 to respond to the lawsuit.
