Does Kalispell need its very own airport? If so, what’s the best place for it? If not, should the current city airport remain open? Those are the fundamental questions underlying the the dispute over whether to expand the current city airport south of town.
Glacier Park International Airport, an all weather facility whose 9,000-foot runway can handle Boeing 737s as well as Piper Cubs, is eight miles north-northwest of the intersection of Highways 93 and 2 in Kalispell, a mere 20-minute drive from the city’s center. Because GPI can handle all of the Flathead Valley’s aviation needs, Kalispell does not need its city airport.
That’s the key fact in this discussion. If a city needs an airport, a marginal site — one near residential areas, obstructions, and so forth — could become acceptable. Noise abatement procedures and such would mitigate the hazards, the risks would be accepted, and operations would go forward.
But if an airport is not needed, undesirable site characteristics have a much larger role in approval decisions. Major unavoidable risks and nuisances become disqualifying factors. As I observed a few days ago, if an airport for Kalispell were proposed today for the current location, it never would be approved.
Instead, an unneeded, out of compliance, city airport dating from 1929 already exists. Those running Kalispell have decided not to close the airport, but to bring it into compliance. According to the Save Your Airport group:
Your airport no longer meets today’s standards for safety. The FAA has prioritized the Kalispell City Airport for upgrading. Economic studies have been completed, the plans are drawn. Runways will be made safer, noise reduction is included, financing is in place. Support the plan by voting AGAINST Repeal.
“Financing has been identified, but is not certain,” might be a better choice of words. If expanded according to plan, the airport will become safer, although how much safer is not a question answered easily. And given my personal experience with GPI, I have my doubts that noise reduction will be meaningful to people living nearby:
I live 8.6 miles south-southwest of GPI. Every couple of weeks, a business jet powered by turbojets blasts off from GPI, climbs steeply to the southwest, and thunders over my house at a decibel level that forces me to remove my hearing aid. If I ever get the guy’s tail number, I’m filing a complaint. If the city airport’s runway is lengthened, Mr. Turbothunder might start landing his noise machine there. Given his behavior so far, I doubt he would throttle back out of concern for the eardrums of people on the ground below him.
Because Kalispell does not need its city airport, closing the airport provides the highest degree of risk and noise reduction. Voters should keep that in mind as the debate concentrates on money and airport operations statistics.