Airparks; Living On The Beaten Path?

In article ,
WJRFlyBoy wrote:

On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 13:00:14 -0400, Orval Fairbairn wrote:

I develop real estate with a slant to the niche, luxury market place
(beach, bay, waterfront at the present.) In my area of SW FL, there is
only one airpark and, imo, it's not up to what folks want.

The picture that I am getting is that "WJRFlyBoy" has a vested interest
in shutting down the airpark at North Captiva. Just how many new
(expe$sive) home$ can he build there if he can force the place to close?

None would be my answer. The last thing I would want is to

1) have my named attached to a closing then
2) Have my name attached to a new development.
3) Raise public (incorrect) perceptions to the safety issues
4) Have my name attached to a new development.

In a previous posting I recited one of my criteria for an airpark place
to live: "Big enough to defend itself when the Philistines attack." Is
"WJRFlyBoy" one of those Philistines?

lol

North Captiva is small, apparently with only 20-30 homes there.

Many more than that.

The
residents would have to shell out a lot of money in lawyers' fees if
somebody mounted a strong movement against them.

They got it, I doubt there are any homes under $1M

The Chicken Littles
would pour out of the woodwork, crying "The sky is FALLING!" In steps
Mr. Foxy Loxy, promising to develop houses on the site, if only they can
get rid of those pesky, dangerous airplanes.

So much for the above, Orval.

If you are telling the truth, please accept my apologies.

I have seen too many airport battles where developers have stirred
things up withthe "natives" in order to destroy airports in the name of
"safety."

--
Remove _'s from email address to talk to me.

On Mar 17, 7:32*pm, Orval Fairbairn
wrote:
In article ,





*WJRFlyBoy wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 13:00:14 -0400, Orval Fairbairn wrote:

*I develop real estate with a slant to the niche, luxury market place
(beach, bay, waterfront at the present.) In my area of SW FL, there is
only one airpark and, imo, it's not up to what folks want.

The picture that I am getting is that "WJRFlyBoy" has a vested interest
in shutting down the airpark at North Captiva. Just how many new
(expe$sive) home$ can he build there if he can force the place to close?

None would be my answer. The last thing I would want is to

1) have my named attached to a closing then
2) Have my name attached to a new development.
3) Raise public (incorrect) perceptions to the safety issues
4) Have my name attached to a new development.

In a previous posting I recited one of my criteria for an airpark place
to live: "Big enough to defend itself when the Philistines attack." *Is
"WJRFlyBoy" one of those Philistines?

lol

North Captiva is small, apparently with only 20-30 homes there.

Many more than that.

The
residents would have to shell out a lot of money in lawyers' fees if
somebody mounted a strong movement against them.

They got it, I doubt there are any homes under $1M

The Chicken Littles
would pour out of the woodwork, crying "The sky is FALLING!" In steps
Mr. Foxy Loxy, promising to develop houses on the site, if only they can
get rid of those pesky, dangerous airplanes.

So much for the above, Orval.

If you are telling the truth, please accept my apologies.

I have seen too many airport battles where developers have stirred
things up withthe "natives" in order to destroy airports in the name of
"safety."

--
Remove _'s *from email address to talk to me.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Telling the truth....don't think he has a clue about what the truth
is. Showed up on the student pilot group back in November wanting
information of taking lessons. Then he claims several hundred hours
in the "left" seat. Turns out that he still hasn't started taking
lessons much less having time as PIC in any seat. See one of his
posts from Feb 28 below.

================================================== =========


1. WJRFlyBoy View profile
More options Feb 28, 4:11 am


Newsgroups: rec.aviation.student, rec.aviation.piloting
From: WJRFlyBoy
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 04:11:04 -0500
Local: Thurs, Feb 28 2008 4:11 am
Subject: The Differences Between PPLicensing And Learning
Reply | Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show
original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
I have been reading the various threads about spins, forced landings,
etc
and talking with CFIs. The road to a PPL is preset in requirements by
FAA.
I see that most people are happy to do nothing more than that.
Outside
of
the cost factors, I find this much more than curious considering the
consequences. You can get killed, that one keeps jumping out at me


I am asking the group for assistance in developing a list of
instructional
and solo experiences, testing, mandatory reading.....if you ran the
FAA,
what would you require in a near-perfect world that a PPL would
require? I
am a zero-hour wannabe pilot FYI


For a start, I won't begin my first instruction until I can do the
following:


Pass all tests with a 95% minimum
Handle with ease all traffic control and similar commo
Dissect the anatomy of my training aircraft
Understand what and how the instrumentation works (shortcomings
included)
Own all the fundamentally necessary flight gear (i.e carry-ons in
flight
bag or on person)
Obtain hours in flight simulation
More...enough for now.


TIA. The group is an extremely valuable resource; I sincerely doubt I
would
be so focused and confident without your past, present and future
work
here.
--
================================================== ======

On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 20:30:47 -0700 (PDT), BobR wrote:

I am asking the group for assistance in developing a list of
instructional
and solo experiences, testing, mandatory reading.....if you ran the
FAA,
what would you require in a near-perfect world that a PPL would
require? I
am a zero-hour wannabe pilot FYI

Note sig below.

I hesitate to add to this discussion because I'm not an instructor,
just a rather slow student who's not qualified to give advice that
might kill someone.

On Mar 18, 12:53*pm, WJRFlyBoy wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 20:30:47 -0700 (PDT), BobR wrote:
I am asking the group for assistance in developing a list of
instructional
and solo experiences, testing, mandatory reading.....if you ran the
FAA,
what would you require in a near-perfect world that a PPL would
require? I
am a zero-hour wannabe pilot FYI

Note sig below.

I hesitate to add to this discussion because I'm not an instructor,
just a rather slow student who's not qualified to give advice that
might kill someone.

Hell, based on what I have seen, you are not a student...slow or
otherwise. You did get one point right though, you are not qualified
to give advice!

In article
,
Orval Fairbairn wrote:

In article ,
WJRFlyBoy wrote:

On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 13:00:14 -0400, Orval Fairbairn wrote:

I develop real estate with a slant to the niche, luxury market place
(beach, bay, waterfront at the present.) In my area of SW FL, there is
only one airpark and, imo, it's not up to what folks want.

The picture that I am getting is that "WJRFlyBoy" has a vested interest
in shutting down the airpark at North Captiva. Just how many new
(expe$sive) home$ can he build there if he can force the place to close?

None would be my answer. The last thing I would want is to

1) have my named attached to a closing then
2) Have my name attached to a new development.
3) Raise public (incorrect) perceptions to the safety issues
4) Have my name attached to a new development.

In a previous posting I recited one of my criteria for an airpark place
to live: "Big enough to defend itself when the Philistines attack." Is
"WJRFlyBoy" one of those Philistines?

lol

North Captiva is small, apparently with only 20-30 homes there.

Many more than that.

The
residents would have to shell out a lot of money in lawyers' fees if
somebody mounted a strong movement against them.

They got it, I doubt there are any homes under $1M

The Chicken Littles
would pour out of the woodwork, crying "The sky is FALLING!" In steps
Mr. Foxy Loxy, promising to develop houses on the site, if only they can
get rid of those pesky, dangerous airplanes.

So much for the above, Orval.

If you are telling the truth, please accept my apologies.

I have seen too many airport battles where developers have stirred
things up withthe "natives" in order to destroy airports in the name of
"safety."

In this county, we've one airport closed down (and is now a shopping
center that's doing barely OK), restricted operations at another, and
we're watching the county supervisors trying yet again to shut down the
largest GA airport that takes some of the pressure off the bigger nearby
international airport.

The same county supervisors who OK'd development adjacent to the GA
field, and are now using that development (large shopping mall) as a
reason that the airport is too dangerous to keep in operation.

It's a revenue enhancement issue at bottom.

On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 22:31:45 -0700, Steve Hix wrote:

In this county, we've one airport closed down (and is now a shopping
center that's doing barely OK), restricted operations at another, and
we're watching the county supervisors trying yet again to shut down the
largest GA airport that takes some of the pressure off the bigger nearby
international airport.

The same county supervisors who OK'd development adjacent to the GA
field, and are now using that development (large shopping mall) as a
reason that the airport is too dangerous to keep in operation.

It's a revenue enhancement issue at bottom.

Combined with growing public anti-sentiment toward private airparks
in/around existing or upcoming residential neighborhoods. They have the
budget deficit numbers to solve and the phone calls from the citizenry
to resolve.

Here you have neither.

http://www.visualtour.com/shownp.asp?prt=85&t=1217861

http://preview.tinyurl.com/39avgz Use satellite mode

The point would appear to be that if your airpark isn't relatively off
the beaten path,or required (as Captiva is). you potentially face an
ever increasing chance that the gov ain't gonna luv you.

Here's a link as to the ammunition that can be used against the airparks
from the airparks themselves.

http://fmi.typepad.com/lwyp/2008/03/survey-results.html
--
Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!
I hesitate to add to this discussion because I'm not an instructor,
just a rather slow student who's not qualified to give advice that
might kill someone.

WJRFlyBoy wrote:


http://fmi.typepad.com/lwyp/2008/03/survey-results.html

Are you getting paid to promote this site? You've posted this thing
about 5 times now.

On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 14:04:27 -0500, Gig 601XL Builder wrote:

Are you getting paid to promote this site? You've posted this thing
about 5 times now.

http://fmi.typepad.com/lwyp/2008/03/survey-results.html

Now I have to give you part of my commission. Sheesh, make your own
money.
--
Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!
I hesitate to add to this discussion because I'm not an instructor,
just a rather slow student who's not qualified to give advice that
might kill someone.

On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 20:32:31 -0400, Orval Fairbairn wrote:

North Captiva is small, apparently with only 20-30 homes there.

Many more than that.

The
residents would have to shell out a lot of money in lawyers' fees if
somebody mounted a strong movement against them.

They got it, I doubt there are any homes under $1M

The Chicken Littles
would pour out of the woodwork, crying "The sky is FALLING!" In steps
Mr. Foxy Loxy, promising to develop houses on the site, if only they can
get rid of those pesky, dangerous airplanes.

So much for the above, Orval.

If you are telling the truth, please accept my apologies.

I have seen too many airport battles where developers have stirred
things up withthe "natives" in order to destroy airports in the name of
"safety."

Here's an article that you can take back to your own airpark. FYI.

http://fmi.typepad.com/lwyp/2008/03/survey-results.html
--
Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!
I hesitate to add to this discussion because I'm not an instructor,
just a rather slow student who's not qualified to give advice that
might kill someone.