City staff advance plan to shift Prescott Regional’s primary runway to reduce land buys, increase safety and lessen noise

Prescott — City and airport consultants told the City Council on Sept. 23 that shifting the primary runway at Prescott Regional Airport (Ernest A. Love Field) would improve safety, reduce the need for extensive land acquisitions and reduce noise exposure for nearby neighborhoods.

Charlie McDermott, aviation planning manager for Dibble Engineering, described a runway “shift” as moving usable pavement from one runway end to the other, not changing the runway’s alignment. He said the shift would allow the runway protection zone to sit entirely on airport property and would reduce obstructions affecting the one‑engine‑inoperative (OEI) departure surface.

McDermott summarized results of public outreach conducted in June (two open houses with 61 and 40 attendees and 27 written comment cards) and told council the shift would also generate cost savings when compared with the prior strategy of purchasing multiple parcels to protect approach/departure surfaces. Staff estimated the remaining seven of eight previously considered parcels on the south side would not be needed if the shift proceeds, saving an estimated $14,000,000 in acquisition costs; staff presented a back‑of‑envelope net savings estimate in the range of about $8,000,000 when offsetting West‑side acquisitions.

Why it matters: Consultants said the shift improves safety margins for small‑aircraft takeoffs and landings, will move some aircraft noise away from the Deepwell Ranch area and reduces the city’s exposure to high acquisition costs previously contemplated to protect OEI departure surfaces.

Technical and community context

McDermott and airport staff explained that FAA defines a runway “shift” as removing pavement from one end and providing new pavement at the opposite end; the existing pavement can be striped out of service or removed later. The primary benefits presented were: placing the runway protection zone on airport property, increasing safety margins for OEI departures, and reducing the number and cost of external land acquisitions.

The consultants presented graphics showing the OEI departure surface before and after the proposed shift and said that shifting the runway moves the departure point farther from the Deepwell Ranch community. Rick Kreider, Airport Director, and McDermott noted that updated noise contours (DNL) will be required under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) once a formal project proceeds.

Project scope, costs and sequencing

- The study materials show a shift that reassigns approximately 1,160 feet of usable runway pavement from the western end to a new threshold at the eastern end (presenters and council referenced the same 1,160‑foot figure during discussion). - The shift is intended to be executed before or as part of a larger runway extension and strengthening project; the extension/strengthening (shown on project drawings) would support larger aircraft and heavier loads and would include a parallel taxiway and end‑around taxiway for general aviation movements. - Staff said the City already owns a parcel (the “AD parcel”) adequate to accommodate both the shift and subsequent extension; the proposal would therefore reduce or eliminate the need to buy additional south‑side parcels previously considered. - Staff estimated the avoided south‑side acquisition cost at about $14,000,000 and provided an illustrative net savings estimate of roughly $8,000,000 after considering required west‑side buys.

Public reaction and operational concerns

Consultants said June open houses drew substantial public attendance and that most attendees expressed general support but also raised concerns about aircraft noise, flight paths, hours of operations and some flight‑school activity. McDermott said the public workshop included extensive Q&A and 27 written comment cards.

Council questions focused on whether the removed pavement needs to be physically demolished (staff said it may be striped off and retained for emergency rollouts) and whether shifting the runway removes the city’s obligation to buy property on the south side (staff said it would remove the need to buy the previously considered seven of eight parcels related to the OEI surface).

Safety and operational rationale cited by council members

Council members and staff noted two recent small‑aircraft incidents in which aircraft were forced to land near development areas, and several council members said the additional safety margins for aircraft that lose power were an important rationale for the change. Council members also emphasized that shifting the threshold would help certain small training and single‑engine aircraft “gain altitude” more quickly and thus reduce community noise impacts.

Next steps and council direction

At the study session, McDermott asked council for feedback and said staff would return a formal resolution for council consideration. He told council, “we’ll prepare a resolution, bring it back, next month for your consideration.” Council members signaled broad support for advancing the approach and asked staff to return with a resolution and the environmental analysis required for FAA and NEPA review.

Who spoke (selection)

Charlie McDermott — Aviation Planning Manager, Dibble Engineering (consultant)Rick Kreider — Airport Director, City of PrescottCouncil members including Mayor Pro Tem (name as on roll), Councilman Gamboge and Councilman Grady attended and asked technical questions; multiple airport advisory committee members were present at the meeting.

Ending note

Council directed staff to continue with the runway‑shift approach and to present a resolution and environmental documentation for formal action. If adopted, staff said the shift would both materially reduce the city’s acquisition obligations and become the first step toward the larger runway extension and strengthening program.