Officials in Colorado took a major step toward determining the future of Aspen-Pitkin County Airport (ASE) at a recent county board of commissioners meeting when they voted to approve one of 18 airport layout plans (ALP) for the development of the airport. Group III airport design requires at least 400-foot separation between the runway centerline and the taxiway centerline. With only 320 feet of separation, the airport has been operating for the past decade under an FAA-granted modification to standard. As a result, the maximum wingspan allowed there was 95 feet, not the 118 feet permitted by the Group III standard. While that limit allows operations by the Global 5000 and 6000 and G550, which span 94 feet, it excludes the G650, which exceeds the modified standard by nearly three feet, and the future Global 7000 and 8000, which will span 104 feet.
An Eye to the Future
While that exclusion concerns the area’s well heeled residents and visitors, the plan the County has set in motion is concerned mainly with ASE’s future viability, as it seeks to avoid any disruption to scheduled commercial service, according to airport director John Kinney. “The workhorse aircraft here, the Q400 and the CRJ700, are going to be retiring, mostly by 2025,” he told AIN. “The majority of regional jets coming on board have a wingspan greater than 95 feet.” According to Kinney, the FAA has emphasized it prefers that any AIP grant-assisted development plans at the airport be aimed at achieving full Class III status, to allow these new aircraft to operate safely there.
The final proposal, 8A, as approved by the Pitkin County Board of Commissioners, includes relocating the airport’s 8,000-foot single runway 80 feet to the west, widening it to 150 feet from 100 feet, and raising its weight-bearing capacity to 150,000 pounds from 100,000 pounds. The $90 million project includes construction of an 80,000-sq-ft commercial terminal to replace the existing 40-year-old 17,500-sq-ft structure.
The plan approval now triggers an 18- to 20-month environmental assessment (EA) that airport officials hope will find no significant impact. A large part of the EA will involve feedback from the local community, among them business jet owners and operators. “We’re talking with people who have primary or secondary residences in this community and can’t bring the jet into their backyard,” Kinney said. Among the issues the EA will address will be the suitability of larger aircraft such as the Boeing 737 (which spans 117 feet, five inches with winglets) and the similarly sized Airbus A320 operating at ASE after the runway improvement. “Can it physically fit in the box? Yes, but can it operate at these altitudes?” questioned Kinney, referring to the airport’s challenging terrain and the performance requirements for a single-engine missed approach.
Kinney is confident that funding for the project will be available as the successful conclusion of the EA process. “I’ve never seen the FAA leave an airport standing at the altar when it comes to the character of the airport being changed or scheduled service being interrupted because grant funds were not delivered in a timely way,” he said. “Even if we decided to push the button today, and say we are going to develop and modernize the runway and the FAA pushed a bucket of money right toward us, what we are doing today [launching the EA phase of the project] is exactly what we would be doing if they presented the money to us tomorrow.” If all goes according to plan, the project is slated to break ground in 2018, for completion around 2025.
The selection of Plan 8A, and its stated priorities of runway improvement and the construction of a new terminal, also puts a hold of at least 10 years on proposed development of the west side of the airport, including the establishment of a second FBO, a discussion that has churned for the past several years, as it would involve the rerouting of a local road.