As of November 7th there is some question as to the Township actually receiving a formal Notice of Rejection. Such notice would be required if, in fact, the DOT has authority to approve or reject.
The NJ DOT (Department of Transportation), whos Commissioner recently spent hours “listening” to citizens offer information and opinions about Solberg Airport’s Master Plan development, has REJECTED Readington Township’s recently passed ordinance (#19-2025) intended to comply with New Jersey’s Airport Safety Zoning reuirements accordin to an article in the November 2025 issue of The CHronicle.
The airport’s safety zones are defined by state law in relationship to the facility’s runways. Presumably, the rejection focuses on Readington having recognized Solberg’s main paved runway (04-22) as being 3,735 feet long, the paved length. The airport’s owners argue that runway is 5,598 feet long, based on “self reported” information supplied to and published by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Apparently, the NJ DOT agrees with the airport owner’s alleged misrepresentations. The owners add “displaced thresholds” of 544 feet and 1,319 feet, at either end of main runway, as included in runway length despite the fact that landing on a displaced threshold is prohibited.
A significant number of citizens objected to this “self reporting” when addressing the DOT Commissoner at the recent Listening Session.
Further discounting the airport owner’s contention that the Solberg displaced thresholds are “runway”, is the FAA’s Master Record for Solberg and a published report at an aviation reference website, AirNav.com. As of October 30, 2025 a report for Solberg Airport (N51) documents the “RWY 04 TURF PORTION POOR AND UNUSBL” and the “RWY 22 TURF PORTION POOR AND UNUSBL.“. This information is taken directly from the Master Record. To be clear, UNUSABLE (UNUSBL) turf areas should not be counted for runway length!
In preparing Readington’s Airport Safety Zone ordinance, the governing body consulted with expert airport planners and attorneys. These experts developed the Airport Safety Zone based on documented information regarding the airport’s facilities and clearly determined the main runway to be 3,735 feet long. The documented UNUSABLE displaced thresholds the Solberg’s claim are runway are “in their dreams”. It is unfortunate that the airport’s owners are so blinded by their unrealistic expansion dreams.
At this point it is impossible for us to discern what the FAA definition of airport runway length includes and excludes. An internt search for this subject makes apparent that even airport and aviation experts are “in discussions” to resolve this issue. Common sence, however, should dictate that ground deemed UNUSABLE for aircraft take off and landing purposes should not be deemed to be “runway”.
As an asside to this discussion, the airport owner’s are employing every trick in the book to avoid community participation in issues related to their airport. The FAA reauires “public hearings” with regard to a runway’s relocation or significant lengthning. In the past the Solberg’s have used the included length of an unusable displaced threshold to document a runway’s length, subseuently gaining approval, without a public hearing, to pave and enlarge that runway. Again today, the Solberg’s have slipped “self reported” displaced thresholds of 544 feet and 1,319 feet into the FAA records for their main runway’s length. Because they made no improvements and took no governemnt funding to “create” the additional runway length with displaced thresholds there was no REUIRED Public Hearing for this expansion of their main runway! The same holds true for the relocation of turf Runway 10-28. They made no improvements nor took government funding to simply change the endpoints, relocationg the runway without the REUIRED Public Hearing. The FAA and, it appears now, the NJ DOT condone such actions despite SIGNIFICANT COMMUNITY OPPOSITION.
Additional independent information: How long is the runway, actually?
While this article provides significant factual information, it also includes opinions of authors.