[edrxty]

The issue is the tower is intended to be as high as 480ft. This is significant as that means it will end up being listed on charts and factored into any nearby instrument approach procedures.

All that said, this is a case where the FAA probably shouldn't be dragging their heels. It's trivial (single digit minutes) to figure out what this impacts and shouldn't be more than a day to come to a conclusion and generate a report on necessary approach, chart, and notam updates among others. Unfortunately this isn't how these agencies operate.

EDIT: The FAA reviewed the site multiple times, including earlier this year and found no impact on aviation navigation so unclear what they're potentially upset about. The area is rather sparse and the closest airport is a small untowered field 15 miles away.

[fennecfoxen]

> Unfortunately this isn't how these agencies operate.

I have some state-run tennis courts nearby. In order to sign up you need to bypass the certificate warning, identify what kind of nonprofit you aren't, specifically ask for the "tennis" amenity at the tennis court location, and explain what you want to do there (tennis). Oh, and you need to sign up at least two days in advance so the bureaucrat can approve it.

Indeed, it is not how these agencies operate.

[wil421]

A small untowered airport seems like exactly the type of place where someone could fly into a nearby tower.

[breckenedge]

It’s 15 miles away. No instrument approach I’ve flown is that low that far away. Never would I ever fly below 500 feet AGL in IFR conditions and not on final approach.