If I had to guess, I would say at the time your airport was built it was surrounded by fewer homes and businesses than it is today.
That is a generalization, of course, but one I believe is pretty accurate for non-backcountry airports.
The world of residential airparks is no different.
Back in the day, someone bought a big parcel of land, far from much of anything, put in a runway and taxiways, then sold lots around it.
Boom. The ultimate aviation lifestyle.
Now, decades later, the surrounding community has grown up all around those airparks.
Take, for instance, Georgia’s Warner Robins Air Park (5A2), a privately owned, public use airport with a 2,833-foot turf runway.
According to 5A2 pilot Pete Wilson, via a WGXA News story, the airport was built in the mid-1960s and “there was nothing but farms around.”
Today?
Check out this aerial image from Google Maps.
Where’d the farms go?
At a recent Warner Robins city council meeting, the council approved the annexation of a small parcel of land off the end of 5A2’s runway from Houston County. The parcel in the red box.
Today, the parcel is trees.
Tomorrow? Probably homes.
Yet another squeeze on 5A2.
At issue is safety. And tax revenue.
For 5A2 pilots, the small grove of trees on the parcel is a little extra margin for safety.
For city officials, the parcel represents eight to 12 more property tax-paying homes.
Not being a resident of Warner Robins, I can’t imagine why the city would want to annex the land if development wasn’t the ultimate plan.
As the saying goes, “A mile of highway will take you a mile, but a mile of runway will take you anywhere.”
But in most cases, for safety, we actually need a little more than just the runway proper. Not much, but more.
While I don’t think that is too much to ask, other community members may feel otherwise.
And it is those other community members, elected and otherwise, that we pilots need to engage with.
We have to pay attention to what’s going on around us.
And never stop. Because your airport could be the next 5A2.
I taught out of Canastota airport, NY in the early 80s. A developer made an irresistible offer to the city for the airport property. The city agreed but stipulated that the aircraft owners be given 30 days to remove their airplanes to a new location. Unfortunately they did not stipulate that the runway was to remain open for the 30 days. The day after the sale closed the new owner destroyed the runway by dumping large loads of dirt every few feet down the length. When the aircraft owners confronted him he told them to pound sand. They all had to truck their planes out. I remember it well. The Warner Robins airpark in the article is not long for the world. The city WILL find a way to get that land. Count on it.
As a regional manager for AOPA, I work on airport issues every day, and I’ll tell you the comments thus far are refreshingly spot-on. I’d just like to emphasize what Randy said about Part 77 regs having no teeth and highlight that this includes public airports, not just private ones. The FAA can tell them that something isn’t safe, but it has no power to prevent construction…that requires local control. Sponsors of publicly owned airports (often the City or County) need to have zoning in place that is compatible with the airport (i.e. limits on structure heights, no nearby residential development, etc.). The best zoning ordinances mirror Part 77 specifically.
Without proper zoning, even your public airport may be as vulnerable as the private ones mentioned in the article. Ask your Airport Manager or City/County Zoning Department to find out what zoning is around your airport. Typically, the smaller the airport and town, the more likely that proper zoning is not in place. If you are interested in protecting and promoting your airport, please consider becoming your airport’s AOPA Airport Support Network volunteer. Thanks for this important article, Ben!
I’ve been in aviation over 50 years. Worked at several airports. If you want to protect the approach, own the property. Don’t depend on local land use zoning. City officials will always approve what brings in the most tax revenue (development). 14 CFR Part 77 doesn’t have any teeth to protect the approach (except for transmission towers that require FCC license). A few states have effective height zoning.
Airport management has to be vigilant about protecting the approaches and keeping them clear. It’s hard to detect that trees and objects have penetrated the approach because they grow so slow. It is the airport’s responsibility to maintain a clear approach.
It’s best to clear cut the underlying area and mow it regularly. Some airports have instituted cost saving measures by not mowing under their approach then, surprise! 10-15 years later they have to spend lots of money to clear cut their approach AGAIN.
If the local government doesn’t support the airport, there’s little hope of protecting the approaches.
Could not agree more. My initial thought was to buy the property. Locally here in central Pennsylvania, zoning ordinances are always challenged by some property owner who wants a variance of an existing ordinance. No one is safe from commercial incursion. Good luck!
Privately-held airports do not share the same advantages as their public counterparts, particularly in the area of development and mandated impact statements. Permitting agencies ignore the obvious conflicts and potential long-term ramifications, and if not challenged, construction moves forward.
Utility planners erecting cell phone towers and transmission masts do consult with local airport representatives regardless of ownership status but only in an act of self-preservation, rather than a nod to the private airport’s existence.
Changing local and state statutes to force recognition would be a lengthy process, but a good start is found in engaging city and county planning and permitting offices. They will listen to private airport owners when outside pressures from development compromise safety, but they really perk up if storm water drainage is mentioned.
Old real-estate saying….You can buy the property but you can’t buy the scenery.
I think the resolution is purchasing the property you need for overrun.