The county owns more than 180 acres, most of which remains undeveloped on the east side of the runway, but officials are opposed to building new facilities.
“That’s not something we want to do. That would cost millions of dollars,” County Commissioner Dave Young said last month as the commissioners agreed to cover the taxiway repaving costs.
This week, the commissioners are expected to open the bids for the repaving job, estimated to cost about $320,000, while planning to apply to the FAA next year for about $1.5 million to help widen and repave the runway.
Since 2001, FAA said it has funded about $4 million in projects at the airport, including about $3.4 million for the land on both sides and the north and south ends of the runway, according to a spreadsheet prepared by the Warren County Airport Authority.
“It’s been a very slow, gradual process,” said Bruce McGary, the county prosecutor representing the commissioners. Before determining the FAA wanted it east of the runway, land was acquired to the west in anticipation of moving over the taxiway, McGary said.
Parcels have been acquired and easements secured to protect the airspace on all four sides. Much of the available land for future development is east of the runway.
“If circumstances change with the property ownership on the west side or if the airport decides to pursue a taxiway and airport development on the east side, the FAA is open for that discussion and the potential for the work to be incorporated into your airport’s Capital Improvement Plan (ACIP),” Brian Tenkhoff, program manager for FAA in the Detroit Airports District Office, said in a June 30 letter to Warren County.
Currently, the county is negotiating an access agreement, calling for, among other things, payment from the fixed-based operator, Warren County Airport Ltd., for its “through-the-fence” access to the taxiway and runway.
This would be the first time the county has been paid for this by the operator of the airport, which opened in 1956 after the Lane family donated the 25 acres upon which the taxiway and runway are located to the county.
In exchange, the Lanes operated the airport, before selling their land and and buildings to another operator. While paying nothing for the access, the operator is responsible for upkeep and operation of the facilities.
“The FAA doesn’t like that. The FAA prefers the government body that owns the airport owns all the land,” said Alan Wolfson, airport manager and secretary-treasurer of the authority board.
The board, appointed by the county commissioners, oversees the airport, working with FAA, the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT), the fixed-based operators and others operating at the airport, including a CareFlight medical emergency helicopter.
Over the past 15 years or so, the county has been acquiring land and easements around the airport from the operator and other private owners. FAA has reimbursed the county for the 90 percent of land costs and other projects.
So far, the county has invested $721,723 in county funds in land.
In addition, $599,304 in federal and county funding has been spent on other costs, such as pond removal, according to the spreadsheet.
The county and operator wanted to capitalize on opportunities created when a small-plane airport in Blue Ash in Hamilton County, closed. The operator paid for expansion of the hangars and other facilities west of the taxiway and runway, officials said.
In addition to providing funding, FAA and ODOT regulate and inspect the airport.
“Safety is FAA’s primary concern,” Elizabeth Isham Cory, an FAA spokesperson, said via email. “When ODOT discovers safety issues, the FAA partners with that agency to determine the best resolution(s).”
In addition to safety, FAA requires airports accepting federal funds to meet other regulations, including one at odds with the fixed-based operator’s access to the taxiway and runway in Warren County.
“There is no easy solution,” Wolfson said. “We don’t anticipate that changing.”
Next, the county plans to pursue FAA funding for the runway project, while holding off on other changes favored by aviation officials.
“Finally the FAA recommends the county continue to evaluate options that could permanently eliminate the through-the-fence condition as it can create situations that could lead to violations of the airport’s federal obligations,” Tenkhoff concluded the June 30 letter.
About the Author
