Fairfield planning commission recommends town council approve ordinance repealing and reinstating air‑park overlay

The Fairfield Planning and Zoning Commission voted Sept. 25 to send Ordinance 2025-17, an ordinance repealing and reinstating Fairfield Town Code section 10.11.275 (the air‑park overlay), to the town council with a positive recommendation.

The measure passed during the commission’s regular meeting after public comment from property owners and their counsel, who asked the commission to delay action to resolve ambiguities in permitted uses and possible impacts on adjacent owners. Commissioners said adopting the revised overlay now would allow the town council to consider the ordinance and gave staff and stakeholders time to refine the language later.

Why it matters: the ordinance replaces the town’s existing air‑park overlay language and, according to staff, aligns local rules with state code requirements. Public commenters questioned whether the draft improperly folds in FAA advisory circulars and whether the draft clearly permits or prohibits residential uses and other nonaviation development within the overlay. Those concerns touch on property rights, possible regulatory burdens on adjacent landowners, and the town’s ability to revise the ordinance after it moves to council.

At the meeting, a public commenter identified as Mamie told commissioners she understood the proposal to rely on state code but raised concerns about FAA advisory circulars, saying those circulars are advisory and “not law.” A lawyer identifying themselves as counsel for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter‑day Saints, which owns property in the area, urged the commission to delay the ordinance to resolve internal ambiguities. That counsel said the draft does not list residential uses explicitly and questioned whether the overlay’s scope might impose additional burdens on neighboring properties or amount to a taking if expanded.

Town representatives and other commissioners responded that the revised overlay was drafted to conform with state code language and that adopting it would ensure compliance. Commission members said they were open to continuing to work with property owners and attorneys to polish the ordinance after forwarding a recommendation to the town council. Commission discussion included a staff statement that the town was operating under a notice of intent that runs through Sept. 29 and that staff had been advised previously that the notice could not be extended without the property owner’s agreement.

Procedural outcome: a commissioner moved to send Ordinance 2025-17 to the town council with a positive recommendation; another commissioner seconded. The roll call recorded “yes” votes from Kevin, Jamie, Wayne and David; the motion carried. The commission subsequently approved a motion to adjourn.

The commission’s recommendation is advisory; the town council will consider final adoption. Commissioners and several commenters said they expect additional discussion and possible edits at future meetings if stakeholders reach agreement or request changes.