A zoning dispute involving Solberg-Hunterdon Airport (N51) in New Jersey is drawing attention across the general aviation community, as its outcome could influence how privately owned, public-use airports are regulated statewide. AOPA commented on the situation last week, as Solberg Aviation Co. challenges a newly adopted Readington Township zoning ordinance that governs airport property and operations. The lawsuit marks the latest chapter in a long-running series of disagreements between the airport and local officials over land use, modernization, and regulatory authority.
Township ordinance establishes new airport zones
At issue is Readington Township’s Ordinance 19-2025, which creates a Solberg-Hunterdon Airport Zone District consisting of an Airport Safety Zone overlay and a standard airport zoning district divided into airside and landside subzones. Despite the primary runway’s federally published length of 5,598 feet by 50 feet, which includes both paved and turf sections, the ordinance lists Runway 4-22 as 3,735 feet by 50 feet, which is the length of its paved section only.
According to the privately owned, public-use airport, the ordinance also rezones 531 of the airport’s 744 acres away from any future airport development use.
The ordinance establishes a 3,000-foot setback from Readington Road for structures in the airside subzone. In effect, this would substantially limit where future airport infrastructure can be placed on the southern end of the property. The ordinance further prohibits activities at the public-use airport including advanced air mobility platforms, including eVTOL aircraft, heliports, and certain airside facilities. Township officials have said the zoning framework is intended to comply with the New Jersey Air Safety and Zoning Act and the Municipal Land Use Law.
Runway definition drives zoning and development limits
A central issue in the lawsuit is how Runway 4-22 is defined for regulatory and planning purposes. State and federal aviation records list the runway as 5,598 feet long, which includes presently unpaved portions, while the township ordinance defines it only by its paved section, at 3735 feet. While that distinction does not change what physically exists on the airfield today, it affects how zoning boundaries, safety areas, and setbacks are calculated under local land-use rules.
According to the lawsuit, defining the runway as shorter allows the township to apply zoning constraints in a way that limits infrastructure shown in the privately owned, public-use airport’s ongoing, New Jersey Department of Transportation-funded master plan. The complaint says that these constraints affect the privately-owned, public-use airport’s ability to pave the runway to its full length, construct a full-length parallel taxiway, and develop hangars in areas identified in the plan.
“Our 5,598-foot runway is clearly depicted on all navigation and airport directories as being what it is, 3,735 feet paved with turf extensions at each end,” said Ed Nagle, of the Solberg Airport to local reporters. “The 4-22 5,598-foot runway is approved, licensed and regularly inspected by the FAA/DOT. This documentation is public information and on file with the governing authorities, the FAA and NJDOT.”
Dispute follows decades of legal and planning conflict
The current lawsuit follows earlier disputes between Readington Township and the privately owned, public-use airport that date back decades. In the 1990s, a prior airport master plan received conditional approval from the FAA and the New Jersey Department of Transportation, but faced local resistance. The township later pursued multiple eminent domain actions aimed at acquiring the airport property, efforts that were rejected by the courts. In a 2009 appellate decision, judges found that a prior condemnation attempt improperly sought to use municipal authority to control airport operations.
Aviation organizations have said that history adds weight to the current case because New Jersey has 23 privately owned airports among its 40 public-use facilities.
“New Jersey’s air safety zoning regulations are intended to protect the airport by establishing zoning at the start of the airport’s boundary, moving outward and away from the airport,” said AOPA Eastern Regional Manager Sean Collins. “… the town has intentionally zoned inward from the airport’s boundary, establishing an arbitrary 3,000-foot setback that would reduce the usable portion of the existing runway, while preventing the planned construction of a full-length parallel taxiway, among other operational restrictions.”
Solberg Aviation Co. is asking the court to declare the ordinance invalid and to clarify the extent of municipal authority over public-use airport zoning. As the case proceeds, how the court addresses the interaction between local land-use powers and state and federal oversight of public-use airports could set important precidents for the future in similar cases.
0 replies