Bay City Regional Airport

Consolidated Hazard Area and Compatible Land Use Zoning Regulations

Questions & Answers—Airport Zoning

1. Q: What are the Airport Zoning Code and Ordinance No. 1667?

A: Ordinance 1667, the Consolidated Hazard Area and Compatible Land Use Zoning Requirements for the Bay City Regional Airport, is currently included in the Airport Zoning Code (Article II of Chapter 18 of the City of Bay City Code of Ordinances). It was first adopted by the City Council of Bay City on October 13, 1966 (by Ordinance No. 622) and a reciprocal Ordinance was quickly adopted by the Commissioners’ Court of Matagorda County on October 17, 1966. The original name was the Bay City Airport Zoning Ordinance. It has been amended several times since to remain in compliance as the federal and state laws it is based on are updated. The most recent update was in 2021 via Ordinance No. 1667.

2. Q: Why does the airport need zoning?

A:  The most important reason for the zoning rules is safety. Hazards and obstructions can endanger the lives and property of both the Airport patrons and the surrounding landowners. Zoning laws allow the community to ensure nothing is built that would cause a safety hazard for the Airport. Examples of safety concerns include structures that would affect, limit, or prevent the safe takeoff or landing of aircraft, reduce areas available for landing, departing or movement of aircraft; and noise that aircraft make using the airport creates. In addition to ensuring safety because it is the right thing to do, the Airport also has legal requirements to ensure it does not allow hazards to be created, and contractual requirements through grants it has received requires it to ensure the Airport does not become hazardous to land at or takeoff from. Zoning rules also ensure that future purchasers of nearby properties understand the appropriate use of their property and are not unduly affected by the Airport being nearby. For example, designations of compatible and incompatible land use ensure that the properties surrounding the Airport are not used for purposes that would be impaired by the noise of the airport such as residential housing, nursing homes, hospitals or schools and instead are used for purposes that would not be as affected such as mechanic shops, industrial warehousing, and agriculture.

3. Q. What does the Ordinance say now?

A. In general, the Ordinance lays out a framework to ensure the Airport is safe for both the pilots using it and the people in the surrounding areas. It gives definitions of terms; creates a framework for how the surrounding areas can be used in a way that doesn’t create dangerous conditions; defines specific “zones” that require heightened scrutiny for land use, including the entire county for safety related concerns; and describes a permitting process to ensure any use of the land keeps the Airport and its surroundings as safe as possible.   This permitting process also describes a way for those who dispute an initial decision regarding their use of the surrounding land to appeal to a Board of Adjustment and eventually to the local district court.

4. Q. What changes were made to the Ordinance in 2021?

A. Several changes were made to reflect the changes that had recently been made to the Texas Local Government Code. These included changing the name of the Ordinance; adding 16 new definitions; adding regulations for land use permits, and updating the appeals process, where the use might impact the airport; the inclusion of maps showing newly required hazard zones, including noise, height, and wildlife protection areas; requiring notices to be attached to property records when the property is sold or transferred; and explicitly codifying a previously understood interpretation of the safety clause to include authority over the entire county if the proposed use might affect the safety of the Airport.

5. Q. Does the Ordinance apply to properties that are in the County but not in the City?

A. If the proposed land use would affect Airport safety, then the Ordinance can apply to land that is anywhere in Matagorda County. Due to the vast number of flight paths for aircraft, there is no way to determine the exact location to protect. This part of the ordinance deals with the unknown safety issues that arise in this ever-changing world. The County’s previous ratification of the Ordinance and continued operation is in accordance with the Ordinance.

6. Q. Many wind turbines are already in the County, why would any of them need approval now?

A. The first turbines installed were reviewed by the FAA and the Airport, they were found not to be a safety issue for the Airport. The recent wind turbines are taller and closer to the Airport’s runway and flight paths. As such the FAA and the Airport have found that some would cause a change to the departure procedures published for the Airport.

7. Q. What is happening now that requires a Board of Adjustment Meeting and why is the City Council of Bay City involved?

A. In 2024 Peyton Creek Wind Farm II, LLC submitted 59 permit applications to the Matagorda County Environmental Health Department. As part of evaluating those permits, the Environmental Health Department forwarded the applications to the Airport (which is designated as the Administrative Agency by the Ordinance) to ensure they wouldn’t negatively impact it. The Airport was able to immediately approve 49 of the applications as not negatively affecting it. However, 10 of the permit applications required further study. Since then, 5 of the remaining permits were held for more study and 5 were denied by the Airport based on continuing safety concerns they had. Peyton Creek Wind Farm II, LLC has requested a variance. Under the Ordinance, all variances must be decided by the Board of Adjustment—and the City Council of Bay City was appointed as the Board of Adjustment in the Ordinance.

8. Q. Why did the Airport deny those 5 permit applications?

A. The Airport was concerned that the placement of the 5 wind turbines would make it much more difficult for airplanes to take-off because, from certain directions, the pilots would have to climb at a much steeper angle than they do today to reach required elevations to clear turbines. The Airport is concerned that an unnecessary added level of difficulty could lead to pilot errors and potentially to accidents. The FAA has previously noted that there are safety concerns with the 5 wind turbines and one of the wind turbines is in open public comment period with the FAA now. In addition to the immediate safety concerns, the proposed placement of those 5 wind turbines will limit growth and customers in the future because it would limit how the airport can be used. The Airport is the City and Counties center for disaster preparedness and recovery and was previously instrumental in regional disaster relief during Hurricane Harvey and other natural disasters. The Airport is undergoing review to be designated as the regional center for disaster preparedness and recovery at this time. Limiting the Airport’s capacity because of safety hazards or limitations in growth will inhibit the utility of the Airport in future similar disasters.

9. Q. What would happen if the permits are approved and there is still a safety hazard?

A. If the permits are approved and there is a safety hazard, several things could happen. First, and foremost, someone could get hurt—and this is something the Airport, and Board of Adjustment, want to avoid if at all possible. Second, there are federal and state laws that the Airport, and by extension Bay City (as the Airport’s owner), could be in trouble for violating. And third, when the Airport has been awarded grants by the FAA, they and the City (as the owner of the Airport) are

required to sign “grant assurances,” promising to either do certain things or refrain from doing other things. Most of these grant assurances are promises to follow requirements that are already in federal laws, and it is the City’s understanding that there is no way for the FAA to waive those assurances. If the Airport does not honor those grant assurances the FAA can stop paying current grants, refuse to approve future grants, and in some cases even claw back previous grants, requiring the Airport (and by extension the City) to pay back millions of dollars (up to the last 6 years of the grants they have received), until the Airport is in compliance again.

10. Q. What would be required to get the Airport back into compliance if the grant assurances are violated?

A. If the FAA did find that the Airport was violating the grant assurances it would require the City to create a “Corrective Action Plan.” This plan would most likely require the Airport to remove any offending structures to be brought back into compliance. To accomplish this, removal would require the Airport to negotiate with the owner of the wind turbine and would be asking them to remove an actively producing turbine. If they were unwilling to do so the Airport would risk the penalties listed above.

11. Q. How is it decided what qualifies as a hazard to users of the Airport in the County?

A. All structures built in the United States that are 200 feet tall or greater, or taller than a defined slope away from the airport when nearby, must file a Form 7460-1 with the FAA. This initiates an FAA-conducted aeronautical study to determine if the structure is a hazard to any airspace. The Airport Manager uses these airspace studies to look at the obstruction and determine how it will affect the safety of operations into and out of the airport. Those structures that do adversely affect operations into or out of the airport, whether determined to be a hazard to air traffic by the FAA or not, may be determined to be a hazard to users of the airport pursuant to zoning ordinance.

If you have additional questions, please email them to

airport@cityofbaycity.org