Somerset Air seeks tighter lot-coverage variance and new hangars at George Walker Field

Somerset Air Services, which operates George Walker Field, presented a phased plan to replace older hangars with larger, modern buildings and to add office and maintenance space — a package that would raise lot coverage on the airport's 200-acre site to 10.62%, above the township's 10% limit.

Christopher Quinn, the applicant's attorney, opened the application and said the project seeks preliminary and final major site plan approval and one bulk variance for lot coverage. Quinn told the Bedminster Township Land Use Board the application does not propose any changes to runway lengths or approaches at the 150 Airport Road property.

Ron Kennedy, the applicant's civil engineer and planner, walked the board through aerial exhibits and described the site as split between an eastern developed airport area and western floodplain and wetlands along the north branch of the Raritan River. Kennedy said the airport comprises roughly 19 existing buildings (about 122,679 square feet gross) and three runways; the longest runway is an asphalt runway about 2,730 feet long. He confirmed the application proposes no runway modifications.

Kennedy described the proposal as four independent phases (north, central, east and south) that together would remove eight small historic hangar buildings and replace them with six larger new buildings able to accommodate up to about 94 aircraft inside hangars (plus one helicopter), up from roughly 80 inside buildings today. He gave program numbers: existing net habitable area about 23,918 square feet and proposed about 35,918 square feet; existing lot coverage about 9.26% and proposed 10.62%, a change Kennedy said is driven by siting constraints around the runways.

"We're not proposing any changes to those runways or approaches," Kennedy said, adding the airport use is a permitted conditional use in the R-10 zone. Kennedy said the project design keeps new development out of mapped wetlands and floodplain areas and that a freshwater wetlands letter of interpretation done in 2021 remains valid for the site.

Steve Parker, who identified himself as a family owner/operator of George Walker Field, said the business needs larger indoor hangar space to serve modern aircraft (which he said often cost hundreds of thousands of dollars) and to expand maintenance and flight-school operations. "Our maintenance shop is great," Parker said. "We're hemmed in and we can't keep up with working on airplanes inside the existing hangar." He told the board financing will dictate the timing of later phases.

Richard Holes, the applicant's aviation engineer, described building footprints and standard hangar types, noting door heights and obstruction-lighting where FAA surfaces are impacted. He said designs would match existing hangars in materials and color, and that obstruction lights would be installed where FAA transitional surfaces require them.

Neighbors and counsel raised questions about legacy approvals, potential rights from prior resolutions and how many outdoor tie-downs and transient aircraft might be accommodated after construction. Jay Bone, attorney for neighboring property owner Steve Forbes, and Bill Monday, counsel for adjacent owners, pressed the applicant to clarify whether older approvals or "banked" parking shown in past documents survive and whether the submitted plans accurately reflect prior entitlements. Kennedy and Parker said they would research the historical approvals and return with clarifying material.

Kennedy reviewed engineering details including lighting (dark-sky-compliant, downward LED fixtures above hangar doors, owner-operated), utilities (a proposed new well near the north maintenance building, and septic tanks/pumps tying into an existing disposal field) and a stormwater strategy that relies on multiple distributed basins and porous pavement in some areas. He reported a total construction disturbance of about 6.62 acres for stormwater calculations.

Town engineering staff said they found numerous stormwater-review comments (the record shows 55 items in the review letter) and requested additional soil testing and plan/calculation consistency. Board engineering recommended follow-up revisions and said the driveway configuration and some other site details may require design waivers or supporting planning testimony.

Public questioning ranged from aircraft types that could operate on a 2,700-foot runway to parking, tie-down counts and whether operations would intensify; applicant testimony emphasized the project is intended mainly to move aircraft indoors, not to expand runway capacity. Parker said the airport already supports occasional turbine-powered airplanes and medevac operations and that most proposed changes address hangar condition and usability rather than runway operations.

Because the board and staff said engineering and planning testimony remain incomplete and additional stormwater work is necessary, the board carried the application without further notice to a continuation on March 12, 2026, at 7:00 p.m. The board also asked the applicant to document any previous approvals or resolutions that the applicant believes still bind the property and to provide revised stormwater materials for staff review before the next hearing.

Next steps: the applicant is to provide the board with the requested historic approvals documentation and detailed stormwater revisions; planning testimony and any requested design-waiver justification will follow at the March 12 continuation.