__MK__tabaqat · StrataMobility & Logistics
Airports & Aviation

How tall can I build
here?

Drop a pin, type a height — and read, in one column, every ceiling that governs that spot, which one bites first, and by how many feet. Federal screening and the local referral gate, in the same click.

Live demo on real FAA · USGS · Caltrans data · keyless · sovereign
© 2026 Tabaqat · Built on Strata — sovereign geospatial applications.
The gap

The hard 5% is sold. The easy 95% isn't.

Obstacle-surface engines are excellent — and they are licensed desktop products run by the airport's consultant, a few times per master-plan cycle. They serve the specialist.

The volume is somewhere else entirely: the developer sizing a building, the city planner at the permit counter, the crane operator, the county commission processing a referral. They ask one question, constantly — and they have no map to ask it on.

ACRP Research Report 195 tells airports to build an obstruction-management programme and share the surfaces with the surrounding land-use jurisdictions. That sharing step is where practice collapses.

45 + 60days — the notice period before construction, plus the FAA's own stated aeronautical-study time. The cost of guessing wrong is a stop-work order on a standing crane.

The surfaces sit in a consultant's geodatabase. The permits are issued at a city counter. The airport finds out when the crane is already up.

The insight

The regulation is arithmetic. All three inputs are now public.

Airport elevation

FAA US_Airport.ELEVATION — the Part 77 datum, published for every US airport.

Distance to the runway

FAA runway geometry + its published length — which selects the 100:1, 50:1 or 25:1 notice slope.

Ground at the site

USGS 3DEP point elevation — keyless and CORS-open, so it can be read straight from a browser.

14 CFR §77.9 needs nothing else. The FAA's own Notice Criteria Tool does this calculation — as a form, with no map, no neighbours, and no answer about the local gate. Nobody had put the arithmetic on an open map.

The Altimeter

The answer is a height — so read it on a height axis.

Height ladder

Every governing ceiling stacked on one feet-MSL axis, your structure drawn against them, the binding rung named.

Verdict & margin

Clear · notice required · presumed obstruction — with the margin in feet and the rule that produced it.

The local gate

The county compatibility zone under the pin, its adopted rule text and plan link — or an honest "unknown".

Referral packet

A printable screening record: every rung, its formula, its three inputs and their sources. The deliverable.

A developer, a city planner, a commission analyst and an airport planner can all read the same screen — and the section view shows them why: the slope rising from the runway threshold, the terrain beneath it, and what is already standing in between.

The signature loop · worked live

One pin. Two heights. Two different answers.

San José Mineta (KSJC): airport elevation 62.3 ft MSL, longest runway 11,000 ft ⇒ the 100:1 slope applies for 20,000 ft. A site 14,000 ft out, ground 59 ft from 3DEP.

§77.9(b) allows 62.3 + 14,000 ÷ 100 = 202.3 ft MSL. At 130 ft AGL you top out at 189 — clear by 13 feet. At 320 ft you top out at 379 — a presumed obstruction by 177.

Same pin. Same formula. The number moves, and so does the answer — printed with its provenance, every time.

Height ladder — ft MSL
585§77.17(a)(1) · 500 ft AGL
412§77.19(b) conical 20:1
379structure at 320 ft AGL
262§77.17(a)(2) · 200 ft @ 2.30 NM
202§77.9(b) 100:1 slope ◀ binding
189structure at 130 ft AGL
59site ground — USGS 3DEP
130 ft → CLEAR +13 ft 320 ft → OBSTRUCTION −177 ft
Running on real data — every endpoint verified

No sample data. No API keys.

49,950FAA Digital Obstacle File records in California — with height AGL and MSL, lighting, marking and the 7460 study number
242California public-use airports from Caltrans Aeronautics — carrying the state class and the manager a referral actually goes to
370,441FAA UAS Facility Map cells — the advisory LAANC drone ceiling, shown as advisory
2,339California services catalogued, 245 tagged to ten airspace roles — any of them addable to the map

Sources: the FAA Aeronautical Information Services ArcGIS org (107 services — airports, runways, obstacles, class and special-use airspace, airport mapping), USGS 3DEP elevation, Caltrans Division of Aeronautics, and county compatibility-plan geometry. Everything EPSG:4326, keyless, fetched live.

Honest scope

It never says "approved".

This is a screening pre-check, not a determination. It computes §77.9 notice criteria, §77.17 obstruction standards and the §77.19 horizontal and conical surfaces — and hands the user to the FAA's filing portal.

  • No TERPS or one-engine-inoperative surfaces — the two that actually cap downtown San José. Shown as a labelled not computed rung, because silence must never read as clearance.
  • Compatibility-plan coverage is genuinely patchy. Where a county publishes no zone geometry, the app says "referral status unknown" — never a green tick.
  • Terrain is 3DEP, excellent for screening and wrong for filing. A surveyed elevation always overrides, and the packet records which was used.
3numbers behind every verdict — and all three are printed with their source, on screen and in the exported packet

A screening tool that hides its arithmetic is worse than no tool. Every rung carries its rule citation, its formula and its inputs — so the answer can be checked, argued with, and defended.

Where it fits

Coexistence, not replacement.

 Obstacle-surface enginesThe Altimeter
Who uses itThe airport's consultant, on a master-plan cycleDevelopers, city counters, commission staff, airport planners — daily
OutputAuthoritative 3D surfaces, charts, eTOD deliverablesA screening verdict, a margin in feet, and a referral packet
DeploymentLicensed desktop / enterpriseOpen, keyless, on your servers behind your SSO
DataSurvey + licensed feedsPublic feeds only — verified, cited, refreshable

An airport that already owns an obstacle-surface engine should publish its authoritative surfaces into this app — that is the ACRP recommendation, finally executable. And the same three numbers answer an ICAO Annex 14 safeguarding question, which matters as states work toward the 2030 obstacle-surface transition.

How it's built

Designed from the business, verified against the services.

Bespoke, not templated

An open design — the vertical height axis is the navigation. No sibling app in the catalogue shares its silhouette.

Verified, not assumed

Every endpoint curl-checked before it entered the catalogue; 35 assertions run the shipped geometry and the regulation against live services.

Sovereign by default

Runs on your infrastructure, keyless, EPSG:4326 — and re-pointing it to another state or country is configuration, not development.

14 CFR Part 77FAA OE/AAA · Form 7460-1FAA ADIP / AGIS ICAO Annex 14 · Annex 15 eTODACRP RR 195California PUC §21670 USGS 3DEPEPSG:4326

Three traps in the public data cost real time and are now documented in the build: the runway table keys on a GUID, obstacle type codes are space-padded, and runway geometry is never a centreline.

__MK__tabaqat · StrataMobility & Logistics
See it live

Put the arithmetic
on the map.

Running today on real FAA, USGS and Caltrans data. Point it at your airports, your compatibility zones, your counter — and give everyone who asks "how tall can I build here?" a defensible answer in one screen.

tabaqat.net info@tabaqat.net
© 2026 Tabaqat · Screening pre-check — not an FAA determination. File FAA Form 7460-1 via the FAA's OE/AAA portal. Esri and other marks used nominatively.
1 / 10