Lebanon — Airport neighbors aim to delay a plan to clear more than 30 acres of city-owned land near Poverty Lane this winter, according to a letter submitted to the City Council this week.
The project is intended to improve visibility for pilots on the south side of the airport’s east-west runway.
“Residents overwhelmingly want the land the council has authorized to be cleared, as a forested buffer between themselves and the airport and highway,” wrote Poverty Lane resident Charles Henry on behalf of himself and 20 other residents in the letter to city officials.
The project includes clearing 33 acres of trees, moving a fence and replacing 38 red obstruction lights on telephone poles with two flashing hazard beacons on 100-foot poles nearby.
Assistant Mayor Sue Prentiss said the planned tree cutting is necessary in order for the city to continue to receive annual federal funding to support the airport and for the facility to remain insured.
“The city insurance carrier said without doing this, it would no longer insure the airport,” she said in an interview.
After first rejecting the project in 2012, councilors approved it in 2013 as a part of the city’s Capital Improvement Program. It was then held up by council questions about impacts of the project on the environment and residents of Poverty Lane.
However, following a council review of the project’s environmental assessment in September, the logging and other work appeared to be back on track. The same month, airport manager Rick Dyment anticipated the beacons would go up this fall and the trees would be cut this winter.
Now, the neighbors — 21 in all — are asking the council to delay the work again so that their concerns can be addressed and incorporated into the airport’s master plan.
During Wednesday’s City Council meeting, Henry suggested the project might be “reasonably postponed.”
Poverty Lane resident Amy Dingley, a signatory of the letter, said in an interview that increased airport and highway noise and light from the new beacons “significantly degrades our quality of life.”
“What is the benefit?” she said. “I hope it could be delayed and reconsidered.”
As presented to the council in September, the project is predicted to cost $1.2 million. The Federal Aviation Administration was to pay 90 percent of the bill, while the city and the state were to each chip in $61,500.
Dingley said she did not find the size of the federal government’s share to be comforting.
“Well, that’s our money,” she said, noting that she pays federal as well as municipal taxes.
The federal money will just support the initial cutting, she said. According to the September presentation, the city would be responsible for maintaining the property through annual grass cutting, at a cost to the city.
The project is anticipated to impact nearly 7 acres of wetlands, which will need to be mitigated. To that end, in September, officials said they were considering the conservation of Rix Ledges, a privately owned 34-acre parcel on the Etna Road side of Mount Support. However, they were unsure whether the Environmental Protection Agency would approve the Rix Ledges site because the ruggedness of the terrain may mean it cannot be developed. Land that is not able to be developed is not considered acceptable for mitigation.
Longtime Poverty Lane resident Tony Gow, a letter signatory, said he felt that the council was not listening to residents’ concerns.
“It’s almost a foregone conclusion that they’re going to start cutting trees,” said Gow, reached by phone. “I feel it’s unnecessary.”
Gow said he felt the scale of the planned cut was dramatic and would damage wetlands and alter wildlife habitat.
The residents’ letter alleges that there has been “substantial expansion” of the project’s scope beyond the original proposal presented to the council; the environmental assessment does not include consideration of noise from the highway in addition to that from the airport; and states concerns about light pollution and heavy equipment disrupting the residential character of the road.
The letter also requests further information about financial consequences to the city if the work is not performed, as well as safety data documenting the need for the work.
Dyment, the airport manager, declined to comment on the letter on Thursday. He said the city is working to prepare a response.
The federal funding that city officials say is at stake if the trees are not removed is critical to the airport budget. Without the $1 million annually, the cost of operations would be shifted to the city’s taxpayers, she said.
Prentiss, the assistant mayor, described such a prospect as an “untenable position to be in.”
She said she did not anticipate the City Council taking another vote on the issue, but she said she expected the administration to respond to the residents’ concerns.
“We can’t go back; we can only go forward,” she said.
City Councilor Steve Wood, a direct abutter of the airport, said in an interview that he continues to oppose the project and is skeptical of the safety and insurance reasons for the pursuing the project.
“I don’t want to think these things are lost causes,” he said. “I’d be very happy to revisit it.”
- Source: http://www.vnews.com
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment