Menu
Kelcey Patrick-Ferree Law Iowa Minnesota header logo
Midwest Business Law Firm Serving Iowa & Minnesota
  • About
    • Who is Kelcey Patrick-Ferree?
    • Who is David Ferree?
  • Areas of Practice
    • Business Law
    • Intellectual Property
    • Contracts & Licensing
    • eCommerce
    • Privacy & Data Security
  • Blog
  • Resources
Close Menu

Contact Us Today

Iowa farm grain elevators have height restrictions near airports

Iowa Supreme Court Takes Conservative Approach to Airspace Hazards

Justin Compliance, Government Airport law, Carroll Airport Commission v. Danner, FAA, Federal Aviation Administration, Hazards, Height Restrictions, Iowa Supreme Court, Obstructions, Part 77, Supremacy Clause, Zoning Ordinances

Restrictions on land use near an airport are important for obvious reasons. Tall objects create hazards to ascending and descending aircraft, and local land uses that attract large numbers of people produce a greater risk of injury if something does go wrong on take off or landing. Various methods exist to limit building height and land uses; the most familiar are local zoning ordinances. 

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has also enacted rules for airports, known as the Part 77 rules. These rules help ensure the safe operation of the airport by describing “imaginary surfaces” above and around the airport that cannot be penetrated by obstructions like buildings or trees. The rules require that any proposed construction within certain distances from an airport be submitted to the FAA for a hazard determination. Until the FAA performs its assessment, construction is prohibited. The regulations permit the FAA to determine that an obstruction may not be a hazard even if it penetrates a Part 77 surface, if certain mitigating measures are taken.

The Iowa Supreme Court recently decided a case, Carroll Airport Commission, v. Danner, in which local farmers (the Danners) wanted to build a  twelve-story grain leg (bucket elevator) in the flight path of the Carroll, Iowa, municipal airport.  Unbeknownst to the Danners, the airport commission had adopted zoning regulations that limited the height of structures in the vicinity of the airport. The regulations generally match the Part 77 height restrictions. The Danners began construction before notifying the FAA or the airport of their plans. 

 A local airport commissioner saw the Danners’ construction taking place. The commission then told the Danners that the grain leg violated airport zoning regulations and would not be approved. The commission also asked the FAA to perform a hazard evaluation under Part 77. Though the proposed elevator leg exceeded the Part 77 height limits, the FAA made a “no hazard” determination “on the condition the farmer paint it and place blinking red lights on top.”  Despite the “no hazard” determination, the commission refused to grant a variance from its zoning height restrictions and sued to require the elevator leg be torn down as a nuisance. The Danners defended the suit on the basis that, once the federal agency made a “no hazard” determination, that ruling took precedence and the commission was preempted from enforcing a more rigorous requirement.

The Iowa Supreme Court had to decide whether the local airport zoning could be enforced even though it was more exacting than the FAA’s determination. This raises the question of when a federal government action preempts local regulation. The answer implicates the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution:

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

Article VI, Clause 2, United States Constitution

The Supremacy Cause makes federal law the supreme law of the land, which controls over conflicting local law. This leaves open the possibility that local law is enforceable where it does not conflict with federal law. After analyzing the federal regulations, case law, and Iowa law, the Iowa Supreme Court determined there was no conflict between federal and local law here and, in fact, the federal laws contemplated that local rules could be more restrictive. In conclusion, the Court upheld the commission’s finding that the grain leg was a nuisance and a hazard to air navigation and ordered the structure removed.

Eminent Domain and the Bakken Pipeline Redux Employment Non-Compete Clauses and Liquidated Damages in Iowa

Related Posts

Working from home woman business owner typing and texting.

Business Law, Compliance, Contracts and Licensing, Intellectual Property

Ideas for Businesses and Business Owners Unexpectedly Working From Home Part I

Iowa farm land

Government

Eminent Domain and the Bakken Pipeline Redux

Connected-to-Midwest

Government

Upcoming Event: Local Government Law CLE

Recent Posts

  • Contracts in Disasters and Emergencies
  • Ideas for Businesses and Business Owners Unexpectedly Working From Home Part II
  • Ideas for Businesses and Business Owners Unexpectedly Working From Home Part I
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus and Resources for Your Business
  • Updating Your Website? Update Your Terms!

Categories

  • Business Law
  • Compliance
  • Contracts and Licensing
  • Government
  • Intellectual Property
  • Internet
  • Privacy and Data Security
  • Real Estate and Land Leasing
  • Social Media
  • Uncategorized

Tags

Advertising CAN-SPAM Compliance Contracts Contracts and Licensing Copyright Copyright Act Copyright Infringement Copyright Office Coronavirus COVID-19 Creative Commons Crowdfunding Distinctiveness Emerging Growth Company Eminent domain Fair Use Funding Platform How Do I Protect My Idea? Intellectual Property Internet Internet Law Iowa Iowa Supreme Court JOBS Act Legal Terms in Real Life Licensing New Terms of Use Nondisclosure Agreement Patent Pinterest Pinterest Fair Use Pinterest Terms of Service Pinterest Terms of Use privacy policy Service Mark Small Business Social Media Supreme Court Terms of Service Terms of Use Trademark Trade Secret Types of IP Web Sharing

How Can We Help?

Contracts & Licensing

Contracts in Disasters and Emergencies

Recent Posts

To schedule your initial free consultation,
fill out this form:

Contact Us
Checkboxes *
Kelcey Patrick-Ferree Law header logo
  • About
    • Who is Kelcey Patrick-Ferree?
    • Who is David Ferree?
  • Areas of Practice
    • Business Law
    • Intellectual Property
    • Contracts & Licensing
    • eCommerce
    • Privacy & Data Security
  • Blog
  • Resources

Minnesota: 612.568.5573

Iowa: 319.383.0659

136 South Dubuque St, Iowa City, IA 52240

By Appointment Only

© 2021 Patrick-Ferree Law, P.L.L.C. | Website Development by Vortex Digital Business Solutions © – All Rights Reserved | Contact Webmaster
Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

Disclaimer

The information provided on this website, including the blog, is not intended to be and should not be relied upon as legal advice. Using this website or contacting Patrick-Ferree Law, P.L.L.C. through this website does not create an attorney-client relationship. As a general rule, you should not provide any confidential information to any attorney until an attorney-client relationship has been established in writing. Please feel free to contact Patrick-Ferree Law, P.L.L.C. for an initial consultation, but be aware that this does not form an attorney-client relationship. The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. A description or indication of practice does not mean that any agency or board has certified such lawyer is necessarily any more expert or competent than any other lawyer. All potential clients are urged to make their own independent investigation and evaluation of any lawyer being considered. Attorney advertising.