In recent years, general aviation airports such as Solberg-Hunterdon have faced the real decision as to what is the highest and best use of the property. For good or bad, some have succumbed to closure as a result of the financial reality that without significant government subsidy many general aviation airports are a labor or love rather than an economic engine sustaining their own growth. Fortunately, there are examples that have established a critical mass of general aviation services capable of allowing them to survive and even flourish within a reasonable distance of Solberg. This as Solberg has suffered a decline in recent years. What’s wrong with Solberg?
Going back to the want vs. need evaluation… For the 1997 Master Plan and Airport Layout Plan (ALP) the demand analysis made a clear and compelling argument for a facility the could accommodate faster, larger and heavier jet aircraft on two extended and rebuilt runways. Additional facilities accommodated these same aircraft in low visibility “bad” weather conditions using a precision Instrument Landing System (ILS) which required the airport owners to “control” large amounts of land not directly owned by the airport for safety purposes. All of this well beyond the operation of the existing airport and only comprehended in the imagination of Readington’s residents, especially those in close proximity to the airport and flight paths based on knowledge of similar facilities.
So what has happened in the 26 years since the 1997 Plans? Foremost, we are still waiting for the forecast of the demand analysis to materialize. Teterboro, Morristown and and Trenton-Mercer airports have managed to accommodate the demand forecast without resorting to parking planes in unimaginable places. Further, some of these facilities as well as Solberg, have seen a decline in aviation demand. Additionally, during this time of supposed demand increase, Solberg has met it’s needs to continue as a viable business; without expansion or massive government subsidy. These facts speak to the 1997 planning as being more want than need.
So how will want vs. need play out in 2024? Given that the DOT has funded by grant, the Master Planning Initiative, it is not unreasonable to assume they are on the side of expansion. Maintaining the status quo could be had for free! Looking at the consultant that was hired with that grant, the firm is knowledgeable and experienced in Master Planning and anyone knowledgeable would fully expect that expertise to develop a plan targeting what the Airport Sponsors want.
Until more information is available, we can only speculate. Given the history, however, it would not be surprising for the Plan to document a massive expansion that will decimate the rural character and investment homeowners have in their property.