This article is published in Aviation Week & Space Technology and is free to read until Jan 19, 2026. If you want to read more articles from this publication, please click the link to subscribe.
This view illustrates the proximity of the highway to the runway at Heber Valley Airport. The only physical feature that separates two is an airport security fence.
What can airports do once they recognize their airport is no longer in compliance with safety standards for larger business jets already operating at the airport?
A recent example illustrates the legal and administrative complexities when an airport needs to be upgraded to bring it into compliance, and ultimately, how this will affect business aviation.
Heber Valley Airport (KHCR) is located 20 min. from the luxury resort of Deer Valley, Utah. The nearby slopes, bobsled runs and ski jumps were the venue for many events during the 2002 Winter Olympics and will again serve as venues for the 2034 Winter Olympics. The exclusive gated communities in the Deer Valley/Park City area are home to an economic elite, including owners of professional sports teams and mega-star athletes. The most convenient aviation access is through KHCR.
The airport was originally a quaint general aviation field where recreational flyers enjoyed practicing patterns on the weekends. Its runway was extended to 6,900 ft. in 1992, making the high-altitude airfield an inviting destination for passengers using private jets, often including Gulfstreams and Bombardier Globals.
The airport currently has 54 hangars and more than 100 aircraft and is home to the Heber Valley Air Museum. A study for its master plan determined there were 12,605 landings and takeoffs at KHCR in 2021, with a significant proportion of that traffic being private jets.
The increase in jet traffic had an unforeseen consequence. The original airport was never designed to handle these faster aircraft. Its current layout, to include its Runway Safety Area (RSA), does not currently comply with the federal safety standards. US Route 189, a heavily traveled highway, runs parallel to the runway and is only 300 ft. away. Aircraft hangars are even closer on the opposite side of the runway.
In 2016, the FAA directed Heber City, the owner of the airport, to plan safety upgrades. To bring the airport into compliance with the increased usage by jet aircraft, the FAA recommended KHCR be upgraded from a B-II to a C-II classification which requires larger dimensions for its runway safety area and runway protection zone.
What do these terms mean, and why are they important? The FAA’s system of defining requirements for airports is comprised of two elements: Aircraft Approach Category based on an aircraft’s approach speed, and Airplane Design Group based on wingspan and tail height. The Aircraft Approach Category is designated by a letter (A through E); Airplane Design Group by Roman numeral (I through VI).
Each airport has a critical aircraft, typically defined as the most demanding aircraft (or combination of aircraft) that performs at least 500 annual operations. Motion-activated cameras were utilized during 2019 and 2020 to determine the runway’s activity at KHCR. There were at least 1,064 category C or larger operations and 3,410 group II or larger operations conducted annually at HCR in 2019. Currently Heber Valley Airport’s critical aircraft is the Challenger 350 which falls into the C-II classification.
Compliance to C-II standards requires that the runway be widened and relocated to the southwest, giving a larger buffer distance from the adjacent highway. This is to ensure that if a jet crashes, it would be less likely to collide with automobile traffic on the nearby highway.
The airport master plan’s consultant, Jeremy McAlister, estimates the total cost of the project is $118.5 million. The FAA would cover 90% of the expense. Heber City would pay $5.5 million and the state of Utah $6.5 million.
The Utah Department of Transportation has attempted to inform citizens about the contributions of the airport to the local community. KHCR is estimated to provide $16.8 million in annual economic benefit, balanced against an average annual investment of $1.3 million. It creates 35 on-airport jobs, 13 jobs through capital investment, and 72 off-airport jobs from visitors.
The municipal airport generates $624,200 in annual sales and income tax revenue. The bottom line is that the airport’s benefits far exceed its annual needs. But these positive numbers did little to change local opinions.
Local Opposition
The previously tranquil Heber Valley is undergoing a rapid transformation. The population grew by 50% from 2010-20. The local city and county government are besieged by multiple problems from the burgeoning growth. Entirely new neighborhoods are being built at a rapid pace, resulting in a constant stream of construction traffic and new arrivals on roads that were originally designed for an agricultural setting. Aging waterlines required digging up most of the paved roads. The main thoroughfare is now inundated with bumper-to-bumper traffic.
The valley’s scenic and recreational assets have attracted affluent out-of-state buyers who bought into exclusive developments. The local economy shifted to tourism, real estate and construction. Growth pressures from its high birth rate contributed to the state-wide problem of lack of affordable housing. Property values skyrocketed, making it harder for locals to afford homes in the area.
Yes, jobs were created by the growth, but being a cashier at a fast-food restaurant doesn’t provide enough income for first-time home buyers. This is a local populace more concerned about affording a home and aggravated by the traffic jams getting to work or the grocery store.
How did the local citizenry respond when the topic of upgrading KHCR hit the news?
The 151-page “Heber Valley Airport Master Plan Update: Public Comments” gives an indication of the strong local opinions against the airport project. The overwhelming majority of commentors had harsh opinions about the airport.
Commenting on the Heber Valley Airport Master Plan, local resident Hugh Smith sums up many of the reasons residents dislike the airport:
“The Heber airport has historically been a place for gliders and very small propeller aircraft which is in keeping with the past needs of this community,” Smith wrote.
"Park City was smart enough to turn down having an airport with its big disadvantages and was pleased to let other communities bear the burden of hosting the private jets with their noise and pollution while they get the tourist dollars brought in from second homes, hotels, restaurants and ski resorts. The peace of our community has been more frequently shattered by the roar of jet engines overhead that have shaken our homes and rattled our nerves. The flight path of these aircraft goes over Mill Hollow Elementary School, Timpanogos Middle School and Wasatch High School as well as over our homes and businesses.
We are opposed to any measure that would make the Heber airport more attractive to air traffic and we would be in favor of doing anything possible to discourage airport use, including closing the airport completely, or at least closing it to all jet aircraft, shortening the runways, etc. The small amount of revenue produced by the airport cannot begin to pay for the damage to our valley.”
Clearly many respondents do not believe their local community financially benefits from the airport. Their statements often rang with the message, “Who wants to see the airport expansion? No one who lives here.”
FAA grant assurances for Airport Improvement Program funding run in perpetuity, Heber City officials learn, in Part 2 of this article.
Related Content
