FAA opposes Reid-Hillview closure. B1
County says the agency can’t block closure if it doesn’t accept federal grants
As Santa Clara County explores the possible closure of Reid-Hillview Airport in East San Jose, the federal agency that regulates the 180-acre airport has shot off a letter saying it “strongly opposes” such a move.
The Board of Supervisors voted in December to stop accepting new federal grants for Reid-Hillview, opening the possibility the airport could close as soon as 2031.
In a letter to the county dated Oct. 18, Mark McClardy, the Federal Aviation Administration’s Office of Airports director for the Western Pacific area, described Reid-Hillview as a crucial asset for regional aviation.
“We appreciate the County’s interest in finding adequate locations to build low income housing, however, we ask the Board to also consider the adverse impacts of closing,” McClardy wrote. “Please understand that many of the public use airports in the Bay Area are physically constrained and may find it difficult to absorb the air traffic activity currently served by RHV.”
The letter also notes the airport has seen an uptick in runway incursions — unauthorized aircraft or vehicles on runways
— because signs and markers that are supposed to guide pilots don’t meet current standards. The signage, according to the letter, “supports an environment that has risk factors that could result in a potentially catastrophic incident.”
Harry Freitas, director of the county’s roads and airports, said he doesn’t view the letter as a threat, noting that county supervisors haven’t actually voted to close Reid-Hillview.
Besides, he added, the FAA can’t block the closure once current grant obligations expire in 2031.
“The way we interpret the law is that once the grant assurances expire, the FAA does not have discretion,” Freitas said. “But we’re not even in that mode, of closing the airport, at this point.”
He also disputed the FAA’s contention that airport incursions are increasing. “Our data doesn’t show an increase, and we meet with the FAA regularly to identify if we have hot spots on the airfield. We have not been able to identify repeat incursions that are tied to the existing signage or wayfinding,” Freitas said.
Supervisor Cindy Chavez, who proposed rejecting new FAA grants, said the agency’s stance is not surprising.
“The FAA’s job with regional airports is to keep them open, and local government’s job is to look out for the health and welfare of the community,” Chavez said. “I think they’ve been clear they have a strong opinion about how to use these kinds of resources, and all we’re saying is let’s take a look about how these resources can be better used in the community.”
Although the supervisors have turned down new federal grants, they haven’t taken any official action to close the airport or formally asked the FAA for permission to close it. They did recently authorize hiring a consultant to study other land uses for the 180-acre property and are planning to stage public meetings beginning in December to gather residents’ input about possible uses of the property.
Asked if the agency has other avenues to block the airport’s closure, FAA spokesman Ian Gregor declined to answer.
“We’re not going to speculate about what could happen in 2031,” Gregor said an email. “The FAA’s longstanding position is that Reid-Hillview is a critical aviation asset and should remain open as an airport. The most pressing immediate issue is that the county must address the safety issues that both
‘The FAA’s longstanding position is that ReidHillview is a critical aviation asset and should remain open as an airport. The most pressing immediate issue is that the county must address the safety issues that both the FAA and Caltrans have identified at the airport.’
— Ian McGregor, FAA spokesman
the FAA and Caltrans have identified at the airport.”
Proposals to close Reid Hillview — and the FAA’s opposition to such a course — are nothing new.
East San Jose residents long have complained about noise, safety issues and lead pollution associated with the airport, which was built in 1939, years before the homes that now surround it. They argue the county property should be turned into a park, affordable housing or other uses, rather than remain an airport for private pilots and flight schools.
The county has talked about shuttering the airport multiple times over the past four decades.
In November 1996, ahead of a supervisors’ vote to possibly close the airport, then-FAA acting Administrator Linda Daschle sent a letter to the county “strongly objecting” to the airport’s closure.
In its letter last month, the FAA noted the airport provides relief for San Jose and San Francisco international airports and is used by many private pilots, f light schools and a San Jose State University aviation program.
The FAA also questioned a proposal to move operations at Reid-Hillview to the county airport in San Martin.
“This expectation is unrealistic given the limited facilities,” McClardy wrote.
McClardy added that although the FAA is willing to provide grants that would fund 90% of airfield improvements at Reid Hillview, some of the upgrades necessary for San Martin to accommodate additional airport traffic “may not be eligible” for FAA funding “and would therefore need to be funded by the county.”
Freitas said not all the operations at Reid-Hillview would move to San Martin, and they likely would be absorbed by several airports in the area.
He also said the signage problems cited by the FAA letter aren’t major safety problems but rather an issue of the airport not meeting the most recent minimum standards.
“I liken it to an older road — it might have narrower lanes than the standard, but people can still drive safely on an older road,” Freitas said. “You have to adjust your standards based on the geometric constraints of our airport … there simply isn’t room between certain taxi ways to install signage in a perfectly standard way.”
“We are going to operate these facilities in a safe manner, and make improvements when needed,” Freitas said.