<p>A proposed $39.7 million redevelopment and expansion plan for the Martha’s Vineyard Airport will get its first public airing Wednesday.</p>
This story was updated to reflect the rescheduling of the MEPA meeting from Jan. 16 to Jan. 31 at 5:30 p.m. in the airport terminal.
A proposed $39.7 million redevelopment and expansion plan for the Martha’s Vineyard Airport will get its first public airing Wednesday when the aiport commission meets to discuss a timeline for the project.
The proposal would alter about 118 additional acres of land in and around the airport, 20 acres of which are rare species habitat, and add 17.4 acres of impervious surface, according to a notice from the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) office. Any proposal involving the alteration of more than 50 acres of land and the creation of more than ten acres of impervious area must by law be reviewed by MEPA.
The airport’s plans include renovating and expanding runways, more than doubling the size of the terminal building, constructing additional aircraft hangars for private jets and charter planes and adding 549 new parking spaces. The work would be done in phases over four years, beginning in 2020, according to a summary filed with MEPA.
MEPA officials had scheduled a public consultation session for Wednesday, Jan. 16 but rescheduled the meeting for Thursday, Jan. 31 at 5:30 p.m. in the airport terminal “to receive advice and comments from agencies, officials and citizens regarding which environmental issues, if any are significant for this project,” according to the hearing notice. The deadline for submitting additional comments on environmental issues is Feb. 12.
The regularly scheduled airport commissioners meeting will take place Wednesday, Jan. 16 at 4 p.m. in the airport’s conference room, and the public is welcome to attend to hear more about the project, said airport director Ann Richart in an email.
The project will also require a Conservation and Management Permit from the Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program and is receiving about $27,000 in funding from MassDOT for environmental studies.
According to the airport’s 2016 Master Plan, the airport has documented some two dozen species, including of plants, birds and insects, that are considered threatened, rare or endangered by the state.
Ms. Richart first announced the airport’s capital improvement plans in August, telling airport commissioners that she had applied for $6 million in Federal Aviation Administration grant funding to cover phase one design and permitting costs for a project.
In an interview this week, Ms. Richart said the airport has yet to hear whether the grant application has been approved.
“We’re hoping to hear back anytime,” she said.
If the $6 million is approved, Ms. Richart said the airport would apply for an estimated $33.7 million in federal grant money to cover construction costs. The funding would come from a $1 billion FAA omnibus bill passed last spring for small airports and their infrastructure projects.
“The projects are 100 per cent dependent on federal funding,” she said.
The airport summarized nine projects falling under the airport’s capital improvement in an Environmental Notification Form (ENF) filed with the MEPA, an agency within the state Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs.
The projects include renovating two runways, removing and reconstructing a taxiway and paving and expanding several areas to improve safety and to better accommodate parked aircraft. A new aircraft hangar would be constructed to house large corporate aircraft and four existing hangars would be taken down and replaced by up to three larger ones. The fueling area would be paved, and the terminal building would be expanded from 9,800 to 21,850 square feet. The number of parking spaces would be increased from 369 to 918. The plan also includes adding a right turn lane exiting Airport Road.
Much of the proposed work on the runways and taxiways are described as necessary to address safety concerns, while other projects are described as critical to meeting current or projected demand and to relieve traffic congestion.
For example, the airport said it has current demand for a new tenant interested in leasing a 15,900-square-foot hangar to base their aircraft at the airport. “Hangars are necessary because they protect aircraft from harsh weather elements and ensure aircraft readiness,” the report said.
The increase in terminal space is justified in part by the need to address TSA security requirements.
“Current conditions lead to long security lines and holding areas in open courtyards with no restrooms or other facilities,” the summary said.
In a section of the MEPA form that asks about whether alternatives were considered, the airport said that not expanding the terminal would result in continued long security lines and vehicle congestion and that “no alternatives were studied as a smaller expansion would not meet projected need and a larger expansion would not be needed. The proposed parking and roadway improvements may be phased based on demand and need.”
The airport’s 2016 master plan update noted that between 2000 and 2013, there was an average of 51,151 flights into and out of the airport, about half of which occurred between June and August. However, FAA statistics show the airport has averaged less than 50,000 takeoffs and landings per year in the last five years. In 2017, there were 49,767 passenger boardings recorded, down eight per cent from the year before and 30 per cent less than in the peak year of 2000.
Written comments about the potential environmental impacts of the project may be submitted by Feb.12 to the Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs, MEPA Office, 100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900, Boston MA 02114, or emailed to [email protected]. The identification number for the airport project is 15964.
PDF:15964marthasvineyardairportcapitalimprovementplanprojects-01.pdf
Comments
Simply put, the Vineyard does
Jason NYC/ChilmarkSimply put, the Vineyard does not need any part of this expansion. We have so much jet traffic already, why are we trying to encourage more of it?
Wholeheartedly agree. Jet
James NYC/ChilmarkWholeheartedly agree. Jet traffic is a scourge benefitting so few and impacting so many, especially in the summer.
+1 and it seeemed worse this
Ken Chilmark+1 and it seeemed worse this year with air traffic coming over the west end of the island.
... jet traffic must be cut
fitz Atherton... jet traffic must be cut back and then banned ... it is ludicrous to accept that the island must be served, without argument, by these small planes and their screaming engines ... if you need jet access - you don’t belong here ...
Absolutely agree.
Mack West TisburyAbsolutely agree.
This has an "Alice in
Alex MThis has an "Alice in Wonderland" quality to it. Build a large hanger for corporate aircraft? Really? Add 549 parking spaces? More than double the size of the existing terminal? Are they talking about Marthas's Vineyard or did they get confused along the way? This proposal is extravagant and out of touch with the realities of Vineyard life and our ecosystem.
Could not agree more. We do
Mr. B ChilmarkCould not agree more. We do not need more planes and more asphalt. What good will come of this? More jobs for the servant class, jobs that last three months?
Dont do it. Island has
Arthur Hasson BaltimoreDont do it. Island has already lost some charm since we have been going the past 25 years. Yes its difficult to get there but it's all part of the nature of the place.
Just what we need more
Skate Sharpener Smith HollowJust what we need more airplanes flying in.
"Don't it always seem to go
TAD Chappy"Don't it always seem to go
That you don't know what you've got
"Till it's gone
They paved paradise
And put up a parking lot" - Joni Mitchell
This is another slippery
JM 02539This is another slippery slope for the Island. The points about TSA security and the associated waiting areas are fair, but the direct (and indirect) environmental impacts are highly regrettable, and the inevitable strain on the rest of MV and its infrastructure from the added capacity (i.e. influx of more people) will lead to yet other issues.....some tangible (aren’t our roads jammed enough during the summer months?!) and some intangible (further change to the vibe of the Island). I am hopeful that the decision makers here have an appreciation of these dynamics.
I'd certainly like to see the
David Pritchard Oak BluffsI'd certainly like to see the reasons for what, it seems to me, is overreach by the airport. I think this is a waste of taxpayer dollars. I have serious doubts about the reasons already given. This is nothing more than an ego trip among the airport administration!
Wow, that is an enormous
gina Menemsha/nycWow, that is an enormous expansion.. I use the airport seasonally ( 6 months per yr.) & have rarely noticed a huge back up on the TSA line . Occasionally in the summer there will be Jet Blue, Delta, & American, arriving close together other wise the passengers appear to have plenty of space.. The biggest lines are usually @ the individual Airline checkins due to their staffing problems.. .. & as for the new parking system, I'd rather not comment on that, but where would another approx 500 cars go ?? Definitely an excessive plan..
This is a very large
Thomas Hodgson WTThis is a very large expenditure of money and land to primarily benefit the richest among us. This is a bad idea whose time has not yet come. Has the Airport contracted "Edifice Complex Disease" from the Steamship Authority?
If the Vineyard is going to extract multiple millions from the Federal government, how about money for fixing up our aging high school?
And some affordable housing.
Carla CooperAnd some affordable housing.
Another agency looking to
Bob EdgartownAnother agency looking to spend money where it may not be needed but that is what they like to do. Interesting flight traffic is down but we need newer and bigger. Public offices are never happy with what they got and always seem to want the new toy. Problem is these toys cost money and money comes from taxes that we have to pay. By the way federal money is not free money which some seem to think that is tax money as well.
You're wrong. Federal 'tax
here we go again edgYou're wrong. Federal 'tax dollars' are collected on airline ticket taxes, federal excise tax on private charters, and fuel taxes on private and corporate planes. If you don't buy an airline ticket, fly on a charter plane, or own a private plane, its NOT YOUR MONEY. You do NOT pay into the system. Its self sufficient and paid for by the USERS. And it must stay in the system. You can't take FAA Federal tax dollars that are used for the national airspace system of airports and use it on anything that is NON-aviation related. Suggest you read the FAA enabling act before you make an INNACURATE post about taxes that 'we have to pay'.
549 new parking spaces!? I
joanne chilmark549 new parking spaces!? I have never had any problem parking in the existing lots.
Agree 100%. 549 spaces is
Matthew Jamieson WTAgree 100%. 549 spaces is ridiculous. And if the idea is to think about the future - I propose they downsize the parking lot. Uber and shared rides is the future - probably for all means of transport but certainly for a trip to the airport. As for the rest of the plan - I don’t even know where to begin. I would sum it up by saying it is completely out of whack with the island’s whole character and charm.
It my hope that citizens will
Dean Rosenthal EdgartownIt my hope that citizens will attend the meeting next Wednesday at 1 PM at the AARF conference room at the airport to voice their concerns. To me, this project seems extraordinary. Let led by a well meaning airport managert who has lived here for a grand total of three years and in conversation with me showed little grasp of the consequences of completing such a project — and who was concerned about bad reviews for the airport on Yelp (this is a true story) — there needs to be professional and completel oversight of her vision, that includes oversight by those who live here, all of us.
More than doubling the size
Geraldine Brooks West TisburyMore than doubling the size of the terminal? Almost tripling the parking? We are at capacity in summer on this small fragile island. The last thing we need is bigger planes bringing more people who will need more cars which will cause yet more traffic congestion. We are a small rural place with a small rural airport. Abutters already put up with significant degradation to their quality of life from large plane and private jet traffic in summer (not to mention poisoned wells). Given the stated environmental impacts, the answer to this should be a loud and resounding No. And who schedules meetings at 1pm on a work day and expects hard working year round residents (or for that matter summer abutters) to be able to have their say? I will be writing to MEPA and I hope other Vineyarders will too. The island has limits to growth. It’s past time to draw the line.
Absurd, the statement about
Gary A. Stuber ChilmarkAbsurd, the statement about long TSA lines is a patent Lie. The “NEED”for more parking spaces is a Lie. I have never encountered either long lines or lack of adequate parking.
This proposed expansion
Islander Too TisburyThis proposed expansion raises so many red flags that it is hard to know where to begin! Fortunately, Islanders are already on the ball with their criticisms of this ridiculous overkill project as evidenced in this comment thread. I hope that many attend the meeting.
By all means repair runways and the terminal. By all means hire more TSA staff if that will speed things up during busy periods. Other than that I see nothing whatsoever in this proposal that the airport, or the Island, needs. And whole lot that it does not need, such as ridiculously expanded parking, pollution of the water source, and replacement of habitat for endangered species with habitat for corporate jets and their denizens. I am disgusted by this pandering to Private Jet Syndrome. The rich and privileged can take a regular airplane like the rest of us. These frequent fliers should be patronizing air lines that serve all islanders. Airport management should not be creating an aviation gated community for the rich. This is a misguided, INEQUITABLE sucking at the public purse.
It sure looks to me like the airport manager saw a fat pot of money sitting in DC and decided to channel a large chunk of it toward her own outfit--a far larger chunk than is needed for basic repairs. This is a very common malady that leads to poor planning and overdevelopment. Meanwhile I can imagine that there are many far more truly remote and underserved rural communities all over the USA that genuinely need these federal funds for airports or airport upgrades just to establish and maintain basic services just as Medevac, air freight deliveries that modern life so depends on (e.g., UPS, FedEx), not to mention passenger services. Come on, be fair. The well-off really should not hog the pot. And destroy the host and the environment in the process.
This project never should have seen the light of day, but now that it has, maybe it can become a learning experience.
What a massive waste of money
Patrice Daniels EdgartownWhat a massive waste of money. 21,000 square feet of terminal for 90 days that the airport is busy. This manager is out of touch. Why not make improvements to the existing building. What are they going to do with all that space in the winter when cape air only has 4 flights a day. Imagine the heating costs. Bigger parking lots ? For what. More income ? The only good idea out of this whole plan is the right hand turning lane.
100% in favor of the right
Mr. B Chilmark100% in favor of the right-hand turn lane.
Before I even started to read
[email protected]Before I even started to read the article I just read the "Topic" of the piece I knew the reason for this would be that the airport is expanding not for the better of the Vineyard but for the private jets that would roll in and the further destruction of what once was a beautiful island and one that no longer exists. I go way back (mid 70's) when the island was so so beautiful and it has gone to "from the good to the bad and ugly"! What a shame and am glad that never purchased a home there in the early years of our startup love affair with what was once "this beautiful little pure island known then not now as "The Vineyard"!
If you build it, they will
jackie MVIf you build it, they will come. If that's what you want.
FYI FYI This meeting has been
Keith Chatinover, Dukes County Commissioner EdgartownFYI FYI This meeting has been changed to Jan 31 at 5:30 PM. I hope as many people attend as possible!
The comments show how
here we go again edgThe comments show how clueless the general population is. The island is a destination. Tourists come here for the Island, NOT TO VISIT THE AIRPORT! Private jets don't decide to come here for a 'nice terminal'. They DON'T USE IT. They don't come here because there is a hangar! The hangar is a way for the airport to get some revenue instead of parking planes outside. Many owners get dropped off and send their planes off-island rather than leave them parked outside in the salt air. So having a hangar would DECREASE not increase traffic. Same thing for added parking/ramp space.When the ramp is full, planes must drop off and leave AND return instead of parking longer term.Auto parking spaces allow people to arrive and depart ONCE instead of having TWO roundtrips to be dropped off and picked up! Fortunately the airport is part of the national airspace system and governed by the funding and rules, rather than being subject to local armchair experts.
I don't see a reason for
Islander TooI don't see a reason for catering to private jets at all.
I don't care if their jets get salted.
These spoiled rich people could just take commercial flights. Or have a helicopter built in their backyard (joke!)---or, say, at Squibnocket. There's an idea. It could be built on top of the causeway and bridge.
The rich people (who spoiled
here we go again edgThe rich people (who spoiled themselves with hard work to achieve their wealth) are coming here to enjoy their homes whether or not a hangar is built and whether or not there is a parking lot for cars being expanded. They can afford to send their planes off island to park, which doubles the traffic here due to lack of space. And lucky for you and the rest of the complainers, they are willing to pay grossly inflated prices for mediocre goods and services here. I remember in the 'old days' when everyone here was poor, but thanks to 'rich people' willing to spend, the economy here is insulated from the real world. Don't bite the hand that feeds you.
When one of the SSA boats
Bring it on! EdgartownWhen one of the SSA boats sinks and the whole mess in Woods Hole is shut down we're going to need some way to get off island. Maybe we could even have a competitor for Cape Air and a r/t to Boston wouldn't cost $800
One commentor said--Jet
charlie so boston/edgartownOne commentor said--Jet traffic is a scourge that benefits so few and affects so many. Well the truth is it's those snobby few who run this once nice island and they get what they want because they tell those in charge what to do and they could care less about peoples concerns and they look down on the average person. And if those in charge don't obey their masters,they will be out from their cushy jobs.
Seems absurd to contemplate
David Finkelstein West TisburySeems absurd to contemplate this expansion. Yes, fix runways for safety but the dream of “ build it and they will come” is the opposite of what is needed. Just because money is available is not a reason to do something. Take your blinders off- we don’t need more corporate jets.
The appointed seven-member
Nelson Sigelman Vineyard HavenThe appointed seven-member airport commission is responsible for the care and custody of the airport. It sets airport policy and approves the master plan (the current master plan was approved in Oct. 2016). The airport commissioners are the decision-makers.
Not to be overlooked is the role of the Dukes County commission, which is responsible for appointments to the airport commission. If I recall, there are two appointments up but good luck finding information on the county website.
It is also worth noting that the county commission is responsible for appointing the Island member of the Steamship Authority board. My point is that the often overlooked quality of county appointments affects Island transportation planning.
I will be at the meeting on
Mack West TisburyI will be at the meeting on Wednesday, and I hope there is a good crowd of dissenters more eloquent than I. Let's nip this in the bud. Just a terrible idea.
WAY over the top. Please come
Angela Andersen West TisburyWAY over the top. Please come out and protest this new development. I think they have moved the date and time to Jan. 31st, 5.30 pM?
Bigger is definitely not better in this case. And let's inquire who offered to lease the new private hangar for ten years. A resident? Developer?
17.4 acres of pavement!
Christina West Tisbury17.4 acres of pavement! Islanders can have a heightened sense of doom with any change, the roundabout, Squibby restoration project etc but I think we do have reason to be afraid of this oversized needless expansion. The island is crowded in the summer, so is every seasonal resort anywhere. It is the price we pay living in a beautiful place. We are uncomfortable and yes crowded for a few months. Airports, in general, are crowded, it is part of the process of traveling. These are things we live with.
To double the size of an airport that is mostly a ghost town the rest of the year, add an insane amount of parking, for who?
What are we missing in this story?
I submitted a letter to the
Garri Saganenko Martha's VineyardI submitted a letter to the editor of the Vineyard Gazette in September of 2018 shortly after reports of this plan were announced.
You can read it here (https://vineyardgazette.com/news/2018/09/27/misguided-initiative)--if hyperlinks are not permitted in comments then you will have to copy and paste the link inside of the parentheses into the address bar (aka URL bar). Additionally, the link can be entered as a Google Search to find the letter.
The letter was met with a response by Robert Rosenbaum, Chairman of the Martha's Vineyard Airport Commission, which can be read here (https://vineyardgazette.com/news/2018/10/04/airport-chairman-responds), follow the same process above if hyperlinks are not permitted.
My initial thoughts remain unchanged by the points raised in Mr. Rosenbaum's letter, which sought, through basic tactics of rhetoric, to dismiss the objections I raised by claiming I advocated the "building of a wall around the Island." Mr. Rosenbaum also characterized my objections to "the airport commission’s ongoing efforts to address obvious operational problems with the current terminal building" as a suggestion that the commission's plan might "bring about the apocalypse."
I have only two thoughts to add to my initial criticism of this plan.
Firstly, the Vineyard is not--nor is any place for that matter--immune to the problems brought on by the expansion of air travel. These problems are not necessarily worse than other problems brought by advances in technology, they're just different. A commenter above ("Christina, West Tisbury") is correct to distinguish the uproar over the airport expansion from, say, that over the roundabout. An airport, by nature, invites and encourages continued growth or, rather, quickens its pace. I do not believe the Vineyard will always be able to prevent the fast, inexplicable change that alters a place's identity, but it has many measures in pace to slow this growth (hyper-local government, for example). By allowing this expansion when, for all I have seen and read, it is not needed would irreversibly damage the Island's ability to slow unchecked growth.
Secondly, those in charge of the Master Plan have "Documented some two dozen species, including of [sic] plants, birds and insects, that are considered threatened, rare or endangered by the state." I assume this means within the vicinity of the airport and are what will be irreversibly damaged (in the amount of 20 acres) by the alteration of land. This is disturbing and, for those in charge of this proposal (Ann Richart, it seems), wildly out-of-touch with the conversation efforts that unite---rich and poor-- the Island. I need only to look at recent news to highlight these efforts (the sale of the Graham estate and ensuing promises to leave it undeveloped; the reversal of Stop and Shop's implementation of the eco-loop bag per the VCS' criticism). It may seem silly and overblown to some, but people really do have the say when it comes the conservation of habitat and the lives of animals. This proposal, like so many before it, treats the fact of the irreversible damage this project will inflict upon these species as a hindrance, rather than a clear sign that this project will effect real harm.
I hope residents will continue to fight this change by attending the meeting on Jan. 31st.
Add new comment