FAA tells Warren County Airport: runway extension would remove long‑standing waiver; commissioners weigh costs, road impacts

Jack De Brunner, president of the Warren County Airport Board, opened discussion by asking consultants to explain how the airport authority reached the recommendations in a recently completed master plan and to report back on whether the Federal Aviation Administration would again grant a modification of standards (a waiver) for changes to the runway.

Nick Brown, lead consultant from CMT, told the board the FAA’s Air Force District Office and the Airport District Office have reviewed the master plan and said a runway extension or other change to runway geometry is not an “incremental improvement” and therefore would not receive the same waivers the airport has historically obtained. "It is a degradation of compliance to those standards, not an incremental improvement," Brown said, summing up the FAA position. He told the board the FAA planners (Robert Jekowsky and Alex Erskine in the ADO) had reviewed the master plan by teleconference and had been categorical: modifications that change runway ends or geometry remove the previous waiver authority.

The master plan’s preferred development shown to commissioners includes a full‑length parallel taxiway on the west side of Runway 1/19, additional hangars on recently purchased property, and a runway widened to 100 feet and lengthened to roughly 5,006 feet. Consultants said they evaluated about 72 conceptual alignments ranging from about 4,800 to 6,500 feet, then narrowed to four alternatives: extend both ends, extend only the north end, extend only the south end, or rotate the runway to a new alignment.

A recurring practical problem is the runway protection zone (RPZ) that today overlaps GreenTree Road. Brown said current practice had allowed the county to operate with an RPZ that includes a public road, but that the FAA’s interpretation of RPZs tightened around 2012 and the district office will not re‑issue or preserve a waiver that allows an RPZ to include a public roadway if the runway geometry is changed. "They will not allow that waiver to exist anymore," Brown said. That change means any alternative that extends or otherwise modifies the runway end in a way that preserves the existing RPZ condition over GreenTree Road would still require relocation of the road or construction of another workaround (for example, a tunnel), both of which consultants and county staff described as costly or operationally problematic.

Alternatives and likely impacts

- Alternative 1 (north and south extension): Achieves roughly 5,000 feet but requires acquisition of a minimum of two properties and still affects GreenTree Road. Consultants said when the plan was refined this concept produced a runway length above 5,000 feet (about 5,310 feet in the conceptual layout) because the team maximized length while limiting the number of property takings.

- Alternative 2 (north extension only): Would leave the southern runway end in place and still leaves an RPZ over GreenTree; consultants said that option would likely require tunneling or other substantial road work and additional property acquisition to the north.

- Rotation option (realign/runway rotation): Moves the runway alignment to avoid placing the RPZ over GreenTree Road. Consultants reported this would affect three agricultural parcels to the north (they said the parcels currently had no structures) but would introduce new flight tracks over homes that do not now experience overflight. The rotation option also likely requires a prolonged airport closure for construction and is operationally disruptive.

Consultants and commissioners debated tradeoffs: extending to 5,000 feet would increase reliability for light and midsize business jets, attract a higher percentage of the same classes of aircraft already using the field, and may increase fuel sales and economic activity. Brown cited an older state economic impact study stating the airport’s 2014 annual economic impact was about $13.8 million, and he said applying growth since 2014 would increase that to roughly $23.8 million in today’s dollars. He and staff emphasized that a more precise, updated economic analysis would be done during any advanced planning stage.

Costs, community impacts and next steps

Commissioners and staff repeatedly said they do not want to relocate GreenTree Road if it can be avoided. County engineers and consultants told the board tunneling beneath the RPZ generated concerns about safety, access management (driveways and frontage roads), long‑term maintenance costs and sight‑line requirements that could push property takings beyond the tunnel footprint. Local officials also raised community‑impact concerns about new flight tracks crossing neighborhoods if the runway were rotated.

Several commissioners said they were willing to let the airport authority record the preferred alternative in the master plan to preserve the option and to acquire property now to avoid future land‑locking. At the same time they asked staff to confirm a critical legal question with FAA staff: whether adoption of an updated master plan that shows a future extension would by itself eliminate the airport’s current waiver/grandfathered operational status, or whether the grandfather status remains until the county physically modifies the runway geometry. County staff said they would ask the FAA ADO for written clarification.

The airport board and consultants emphasized that approving the master plan only preserves options and enables near‑term safety and pavement projects; any runway extension would require detailed advanced studies, further public review, environmental work, design, and separate funding decisions.

Ending

Commissioners signaled they were not ready to instruct construction; instead they sought FAA written clarification about waiver status, asked for updated economic analysis during any future advanced planning stage, and indicated they would continue to weigh operational benefits against road relocations, property takings and community impacts before committing to any physical change. The airport authority will return with the FAA clarification and additional analyses if the county agrees to advance the master plan process.