Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Lawmakers hear 'Airspace Protection Act' to tighten tall-structure permitting near airports
Loading...
Summary
Proponents told the House Transportation Committee HB333 would harmonize state rules with FAA Part 77, expand protections for circling/VFR surfaces and require ODOT to consider local airport sponsor input on tall-structure permits; witnesses cited safety incidents and the need for clearer state permitting.
The House Transportation Committee held a second hearing on House Bill 333 on March 10, a proposed "Airspace Protection Act" intended to strengthen how Ohio handles tall-structure permitting near airports.
Proponent Kyle Lewis of the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association told the committee he would show a video illustrating a real-world accident in which a light aircraft struck a steam stack near a runway. "It was within half a mile of the runway," Lewis said, describing steam and color choices that made the stacks blend into the background; he said the FAA had called for painting and obstruction lighting but the markings and lighting were not in place in the final-report account.
Tony Fiore, executive director of the Ohio Aviation Association, described the state economic footprint of aviation and argued that current Ohio law leaves some visual flight rules (VFR) and circling surfaces outside the state’s tall-structure permitting reach. Fiore told the committee ODOT processed roughly 12,000 applications over four years and denied about 21, a figure he said equates to a 99.825% approval rate; he argued HB333 would harmonize Ohio law with FAA Part 77, clarify ODOT responsibilities and require written input from local airport sponsors.
Witnesses and lawmakers discussed technical questions including the FAA’s Part 77 imaginary surfaces, navigable airspace (referred to in testimony as generally anything above 200 feet AGL), circling patterns, and examples where the FAA turned off instrument approaches or lighting to mitigate obstructions. Supporters emphasized the bill is meant to improve safety and transparency rather than to forbid construction outright; the bill would also set timeframes for ODOT and require airports to provide written reasons tied to Part 77 concerns.
Committee members asked for additional follow-up and technical details; Tony Fiore and other witnesses offered to provide district-specific airport materials and data. The hearing was recorded as the committee’s second hearing on HB333.
