Cape Cod Airport Neighbors Sign On!!!

From local paper:

"By Tom J. Sullivan

The line in the sand has been drawn.

We understand you have leadership problems in Barnstable. We empathize
with our Barnstable neighbors, but the voters must step up to the plate
on our behalf.

We don't want your money.

We just want the Barnstable Airport and it's Commissioners to do what is
right. Since 1957 the Barnstable Municipal Airport (BMA) has been
expanding its runway approaches. These approaches go over public and
private land in the Town of Barnstable and the Town of Yarmouth.

Now at a recent Airport Commission meeting the Yarmouth Representative
announced that the approaches would be moved further east into the Town of
Yarmouth. The reason for moving the flight paths now is the new tower
under construction at the hospital.

When will your Airport Commissioners obey the State Laws that regulate
airports?

When will the Airport Commissioners and the Town of Barnstable respect
individual property rights? Federal and State laws require the town to
pay property owners for land takings.

Cotuit councilor Rick Barry is ignoring Barnstable and Yarmouth’s airport
noise pollution with his claim, "the airport was here first, and we
shouldn’t have bought homes in the flight paths."

What has he to say about homes that have been here for decades, and the
flight paths are encroaching over these properties? How would he like
when he is awaken out of a sound sleep at 5:15 AM?

If you want to move into our space, buy our homes.

The time has come for someone in town hall sit down with the property
owners in Barnstable and Yarmouth, after the Airport identifies the
affected property owners, to discuss mitigation for the land takings that
have occurred."

"The reason for moving the flight paths now is the new tower under
construction at the hospital."

Sounds like the neighbors should be fighting the hospital.

"Skylune" wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
From local paper:

"By Tom J. Sullivan

The line in the sand has been drawn.

We understand you have leadership problems in Barnstable. We empathize
with our Barnstable neighbors, but the voters must step up to the plate
on our behalf.

We don't want your money.

We just want the Barnstable Airport and it's Commissioners to do what is
right. Since 1957 the Barnstable Municipal Airport (BMA) has been
expanding its runway approaches. These approaches go over public and
private land in the Town of Barnstable and the Town of Yarmouth.

Now at a recent Airport Commission meeting the Yarmouth Representative
announced that the approaches would be moved further east into the Town of
Yarmouth. The reason for moving the flight paths now is the new tower
under construction at the hospital.

When will your Airport Commissioners obey the State Laws that regulate
airports?

When will the Airport Commissioners and the Town of Barnstable respect
individual property rights? Federal and State laws require the town to
pay property owners for land takings.

Cotuit councilor Rick Barry is ignoring Barnstable and Yarmouth’s airport
noise pollution with his claim, "the airport was here first, and we
shouldn’t have bought homes in the flight paths."

What has he to say about homes that have been here for decades, and the
flight paths are encroaching over these properties? How would he like
when he is awaken out of a sound sleep at 5:15 AM?

If you want to move into our space, buy our homes.

The time has come for someone in town hall sit down with the property
owners in Barnstable and Yarmouth, after the Airport identifies the
affected property owners, to discuss mitigation for the land takings that
have occurred."

With the new tower at CCH (Cape Cod Hospital) the BMA is attempting to
adhere to FAR Part 77, obstructions to Navigation. Here's a link:
http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/aviation/Pla...FAR_Part77.pdf

Planning, it was a three hour course at Harvard.

Have a great one!

Bush


On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 08:21:24 -0500, "Skylune"
wrote:

From local paper:

"By Tom J. Sullivan

The line in the sand has been drawn.

We understand you have leadership problems in Barnstable. We empathize
with our Barnstable neighbors, but the voters must step up to the plate
on our behalf.

We don't want your money.

We just want the Barnstable Airport and it's Commissioners to do what is
right. Since 1957 the Barnstable Municipal Airport (BMA) has been
expanding its runway approaches. These approaches go over public and
private land in the Town of Barnstable and the Town of Yarmouth.

Now at a recent Airport Commission meeting the Yarmouth Representative
announced that the approaches would be moved further east into the Town of
Yarmouth. The reason for moving the flight paths now is the new tower
under construction at the hospital.

When will your Airport Commissioners obey the State Laws that regulate
airports?

When will the Airport Commissioners and the Town of Barnstable respect
individual property rights? Federal and State laws require the town to
pay property owners for land takings.

Cotuit councilor Rick Barry is ignoring Barnstable and Yarmouth’s airport
noise pollution with his claim, "the airport was here first, and we
shouldn’t have bought homes in the flight paths."

What has he to say about homes that have been here for decades, and the
flight paths are encroaching over these properties? How would he like
when he is awaken out of a sound sleep at 5:15 AM?

If you want to move into our space, buy our homes.

The time has come for someone in town hall sit down with the property
owners in Barnstable and Yarmouth, after the Airport identifies the
affected property owners, to discuss mitigation for the land takings that
have occurred."

by "Steve Foley" Nov 29, 2005 at 01:47 PM


"The reason for moving the flight paths now is the new tower under
construction at the hospital."

Sounds like the neighbors should be fighting the hospital


Maybe get the AOPA to see if the hospital can be torn down, so as to
better accomodate the airport's needs. ;-)

I like the writer's point about airports' encroachment on surrounding
residential areas. GA airports in communities that have grown should only
be expanded if the affected communities agree to the expansion after an
open and honest assessment of the pros and cons. As we have seen again
and again and again, once the airport is expanded, the community loses
control to the FAA meatheads who unconcerned about the negative effects of
GA.

"Skylune" wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...


Maybe get the AOPA to see if the hospital can be torn down, so as to
better accomodate the airport's needs. ;-)

I like the writer's point about airports' encroachment on surrounding
residential areas. GA airports in communities that have grown should only
be expanded if the affected communities agree to the expansion after an
open and honest assessment of the pros and cons. As we have seen again
and again and again, once the airport is expanded, the community loses
control to the FAA meatheads who unconcerned about the negative effects of
GA.

If a community has an airport that gets government funds of any kind, then
there should be a committee to oversee the operation. If there isn't a
committee, then those who seek redress for greivences should be up their
elected officials rear ends to form one.

If people choose to be sheep and not get involved in their local government
affairs then they get what they get.

Jay B

by Bushleague Nov 29, 2005 at 04:33 PM


With the new tower at CCH (Cape Cod Hospital) the BMA is attempting to
adhere to FAR Part 77, obstructions to Navigation. Here's a link:
http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/aviation/Pla...FAR_Part77.pdf

Planning, it was a three hour course at Harvard.

Have a great one!

Thanks. I agree this seems to be a problem not of the airports making.
This is a problem with uncoordinated planning. The rerouting of the
flight paths should have been anticipated by the hospital construction
consultants. Maybe it was and it was not in their scope of work. Now
comes another agency (the FAA) and says, "approaches now need to be
modified to comply with FARs."

What is missing? The community. Areas around the airport that will now
experience increased small plane noise will have people who understandably
will get upset. Some will fight. Some will join STN. Some will write
letters to newpapers and politicians.

by "Jay Beckman" Nov 29, 2005 at 02:53 PM


"Skylune" wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...


Maybe get the AOPA to see if the hospital can be torn down, so as to
better accomodate the airport's needs. ;-)

I like the writer's point about airports' encroachment on surrounding
residential areas. GA airports in communities that have grown should
only
be expanded if the affected communities agree to the expansion after an
open and honest assessment of the pros and cons. As we have seen again
and again and again, once the airport is expanded, the community loses
control to the FAA meatheads who unconcerned about the negative effects
of
GA.

If a community has an airport that gets government funds of any kind,
then

there should be a committee to oversee the operation. If there isn't a
committee, then those who seek redress for greivences should be up their
elected officials rear ends to form one.

If people choose to be sheep and not get involved in their local
government
affairs then they get what they get.

Jay B

I completely agree with each of your points. People who are asleep, and
THEN complain about something the govt does to them absolutely deserve it.


Probably, many airport noise whiners fall into this camp. Others take a
pro-active stance. Personally, I refuse to accept the FAA/Airport
Authority bum rush and their nonsensical public presentations.

GA airports in communities that have grown should only
be expanded if the affected communities agree to the expansion after an
open and honest assessment of the pros and cons.

Communities near airports should only expand if the affected airport
agrees to the expansion after an open an honest assessment of the props
and jets.

g,d,r Jose
--
You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Beginning with Dan Wolf and Bill McGrath no dought. STN I'm not
familiar with?

Bush

On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 16:55:22 -0500, "Skylune"
wrote:


by Bushleague Nov 29, 2005 at 04:33 PM


With the new tower at CCH (Cape Cod Hospital) the BMA is attempting to
adhere to FAR Part 77, obstructions to Navigation. Here's a link:
http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/aviation/Pla...FAR_Part77.pdf

Planning, it was a three hour course at Harvard.

Have a great one!

Thanks. I agree this seems to be a problem not of the airports making.
This is a problem with uncoordinated planning. The rerouting of the
flight paths should have been anticipated by the hospital construction
consultants. Maybe it was and it was not in their scope of work. Now
comes another agency (the FAA) and says, "approaches now need to be
modified to comply with FARs."

What is missing? The community. Areas around the airport that will now
experience increased small plane noise will have people who understandably
will get upset. Some will fight. Some will join STN. Some will write
letters to newpapers and politicians.

by Bushleague Nov 29, 2005 at 05:39 PM


Beginning with Dan Wolf and Bill McGrath no dought. STN I'm not
familiar with?

Bush

On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 16:55:22 -0500, "Skylune"
wrote:


by Bushleague Nov 29, 2005 at 04:33 PM


With the new tower at CCH (Cape Cod Hospital) the BMA is attempting to
adhere to FAR Part 77, obstructions to Navigation. Here's a link:
http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/aviation/Pla...FAR_Part77.pdf

Planning, it was a three hour course at Harvard.

Have a great one!

Thanks. I agree this seems to be a problem not of the airports making.
This is a problem with uncoordinated planning. The rerouting of the
flight paths should have been anticipated by the hospital construction
consultants. Maybe it was and it was not in their scope of work. Now
comes another agency (the FAA) and says, "approaches now need to be
modified to comply with FARs."

What is missing? The community. Areas around the airport that will now
experience increased small plane noise will have people who
understandably
will get upset. Some will fight. Some will join STN. Some will write
letters to newpapers and politicians.

STN is an acronym for a group called "Stop the Noise," which is based in a
small town in north-central Massachusetts. This group has been tussling
with various flight schools that have chosen to pick their community for
acrobatic flight training. After years of fighting with the FAA, the
various flight schools, etc. about excessive noise, they have filed suit
in state district court against individuals that continue to conduct
acrobatics over their home.

The FAA/AOPA alliance (in this case) tried to get the suit dismissed on
the grounds of federal pre-emption. The state judge disagreed, and
remanded the case to district court for trial. This is a real big one,
with national implications.

I think its also a case where a few pilots got ****ed when the group
started getting vocal, and retaliated by harrassing the people at STN with
low flights. (The fliers obviously deny this, and claim the FAA has
"investigated" and found no violations of FARs.) Rather than seek
compromise, both sides have become radicalized, and then STN sued.
Details are on their web site.

Its interesting that there is another anti-GA noise group in the same town
called "Plane Sense." They tried to negotiate with the pilots and spread
acrobatic training around. Of course they have been completely
unsuccesful. One of the flight schools actually went so far as to
register their planes in the corporate name of "Plane Nonsense," a smack
at Plane Sense and an insight into the mentality of owners of this
particular school.

Dan Wolf, and McGrath: who are these people?