Sections

Neighborhoods

Features

Follow Us

NHI Newsletter

Some Favorite Sites

Government/ Community Links

Paving Quest Reignites Airport Anger

by Liana Teixeira | Jun 11, 2014 4:36 pm

(28) Comments | Commenting has been closed | E-mail the Author

Posted to: Transportation, Morris Cove

Liana Teixeira Photo The city’s development chief made a two-part pitch to skeptical Morris Cove neighbors: Support further paving of Tweed-New Haven Airport’s runway. And trust us.

The two pitches are inextricably linked, as illustrated by the history of neighborhood-City Hall tensions over the airport.

Those tensions were on display Tuesday night at an East Shore Community Management Team meeting held at the Morris Cove firehouse.

Some neighbors were up in arms over a plan to pave over a total of 600 feet of dirt and gravel at the ends of the airport’s runway. The city wants to see that happen so that more jets can fly in and out of Tweed, theoretically boosting economic development in New Haven.

The idea infuriated neighbors at the meeting. They said they worry that the plan may exacerbate already-increasing flooding in Morris Cove. And they pointed out that New Haven’s previous mayor had signed a 2009 “Memorandum of Understanding” with East Haven that that specifically called for no further paving of the runway, to keep it at its current 5,600-foot length. (Click here to read about that agreement.) Neighbors called the new plan the latest example of a violation of trust.

Airport manager Tim Larson had mentioned the new plan at a previous neighborhood meeting, setting off the sparks; the airport’s authority has authorized borrowing money to begin engineering work. Tuesday night, instead of Larson, city Economic Development Administrator Matthew Nemerson, a longtime proponent of expanding airport service, showed up to address the issue.

Neighbors let him have it.

“The city and airport have credibility issues,” said Renate Dicks (pictured), the management team’s secretary. “You can’t just come back five years later and say, ‘Now we need more space.’”

Tweed needs another 600 feet or so of runway to maximize the use of the airport and accommodate new, quieter aircraft that require more space to take off and land, Nemerson told the neighbors. Nemerson said the airport could then send out eight or nine affordable flights a day to places people want to visit, like Chicago and Washington D.C.

He called such flights crucial to New Haven’s economic future.

“There is no plan to expand to 7,000 feet,” assured Nemerson.

At the time of the 2009 memorandum of understanding, officials believed that a new generation of smaller, fuel-efficient jets like the Embraer 190 would require less runway space than the old 737s they have replaced, according to Nemerson. That turned out to be false, he said. They need more like 6,200 feet, he said.

As a result, he said, the city is seeking “to change an agreement we [previously] thought we could live with.”

Jody Rowell (pictured) of Concord Street remained unconvinced.

“This isn’t just about expanding,” said Rowell. Since moving to the neighborhood in March 2013, Rowell said, she has experienced a constant problem with flooding. She claims Tweed is in control of the floodgates near the creek behind her house and pumps excess storm and sewer water into her neighborhood.

If the airport expands, she predicted, the flooding will get worse.

Nemerson said that before paving would occur, an environmental study will be done to address that very concern, to assess whether how much extra runoff would occur into catch basins as a result of more paving.

“We need to talk about this,” Nemerson said after the meeting. “I understand exactly why they would look at me with dubious eyes. This remains a huge economic opportunity for the city as more and more of the economy goes to service-sector jobs. An immigrant or someone coming out of prison is not going to get a job at a factory, most likely. You are going to get a job at a hotel or restaurant or some aspect of leisure or hospitality.”

More of those jobs will come here if, for instance, if the developer of the old Coliseum site can build an envisioned four-and-a-half-star 18-story hotel, and if Yale and Yale-New Haven Hospital can host “millions of dollars’ worth” of extra conferences, Nemerson said. And that can happen, he argued, only if more jets can fly into and out of Tweed.

“They’re absolutely right to dump on me,” Nemerson said of the neighbors. “We need to build their trust before we can build” a longer runway.

Paul Bass contributed reporting.

Share this story with others.

Share |

Post a Comment

Comments

posted by: anonymous on June 11, 2014  3:46pm

Nemerson is absolutely correct on this issue. Technology changes. Let the gravel get paved so that we can retain a few jobs in our city.

posted by: Noteworthy on June 11, 2014  4:09pm

Tweeddle Dumb Notes:

1. How does Nemerson expect to build trust when he comes to tell them the city and Tweed are going to violate an agreement where the ink has barely dried?

2. This is part of a pattern of bait and switch - just give me more money, says Tweed; give me more runway says Tweed; give me more bonded debt on your credit card - and nothing happens.

3. There is massive airline consolidation. The chances of more jets at Tweed are somewhere between slim and none.

4. Most taxpayers and residents in New Haven including those around the airport cannot afford to fly out of Tweed which remains to this day, an airport that is mostly for the well heeled, well off nearly all of whom live in suburbia - and those with private planes who like to fly in to have their nails done or to eat at one of our fine restaurants.

5. Build trust? Keep your word.

posted by: RHeerema on June 11, 2014  4:14pm

Mr. Nemerson assures people that, “There is no plan to expand to 7,000 feet,”  However, the airport master plan INCLUDES expansion to over 7,000 feet.

Tweed is also buying houses near the airport. Why would Tweed buy more land near the airport unless it does, in fact, plan to expand to meet the goals of the Tweed master plan? 

Link to the 1999 master plan: http://ccea.uconn.edu/studies/Tweed Impact Final Report.PDF

posted by: Brian V on June 11, 2014  4:32pm

The East Shore suffers from the worst air quality in the State. We already have to tolerate sludge burning from the waste water plant, toxins pumped into the air from ships at Gateway, from English station and Bridgeport too. Now we have to accept bigger planes and 6 times the number of flights?

Tweed and the city are liars, plain and simple and can not be trusted in this matter. They lied to all in an effort to extend the runways for “safety reasons”.  From the beginning, they fully intended to pave those safety areas and lied just to get part one of their plan completed.

What happens when, as Mr Larson said, the ‘market changes’ again?
Does the airport shove a 7000 foot runway, Airbus 300s and 747s down our throats?

posted by: anonymous on June 11, 2014  4:47pm

Maybe the State of CT should come in and buy up the nearest 200 homes.

Having an airport with flights to Chicago and DC for the 2 million people here who live closer to Tweed than to any other airport, and the tens of thousands of jobs that would create, is more important than having 200 homes.

posted by: TheMadcap on June 11, 2014  5:00pm

Pave the darn gravel. An economic asset to the whole county shouldn’t be held hostage because a bunch of people who could afford to live in numerous places willingly chose to live next to an airport(an airport that is less busy currently than it was when some of those people originally moved in back in the 90’s). Maybe the airport can finally stand mostly on its own, not to mention the neighbors might actually have less noise to deal with if better planes could land.

Also, that paper from 1999 in its intro has numbers for something that has previously been asked about
“The analysis shows that the total economic impact of Tweed-New Haven Airport ranges from $63,783,485 for the
status quo(in 1999 dollars) forecast to $327,238,964 for the high-growth alternative by 2019

Also the 7,000ft proposal was for the high growth potential of no building restrains. Considering we can’t even get gravel paved without it being a battle I doubt the airport is going to be able to go for the unrestrained option.

posted by: Atticus Shrugged on June 11, 2014  6:45pm

I’m pretty sure that the City of New Haven, under Kelo v. City of New London, can ride rough shod over the Morris Cove bunch.  Assuming that is, the environmental study permits it.  And since the Morris Cove residents didn’t vote for Mayor Harp in any significant quantity, she really has nothing to gain by having Mr. Nemerson negotiate.  Like, she actually loses by doing this.

The memo of understanding is dry.  It took place five years ago, half a decade, under an old mayor.  Since it was not a legally binding contract (pretty sure the Morris Cove residents didn’t give anything of value to the city for it), it can be negated or ignored at the Mayor’s pleasure. 

In this instance, expanding the airport may benefit the entire city while burdening only a handful of homeowners around the airport.  And it may not turn out to be a burden, as the residents can use this as leverage to deal with the flooding, etc.  But instead, they’re just ready to shoot down any plan. 

As for Mr. Nemerson’s statement, sometimes trust can’t be gained by being reasonable.  One need only look at President Obama to understand that.  If there is truly a viable business plan that the city can sell, it should be put to referrendum.  Let the city decide, take some slack off of the Board and the Mayor.  Let New Haven residents decide the fate of New Haven.  Not a small group of its residents.

posted by: Noteworthy on June 11, 2014  8:38pm

Madcapper Notes:

1. Economic impact projections are at best, only guesses by consultants and politicians or their minions, who have a vested interest in the outcome.

2. They are rarely if ever true, and even if they were, there is zero opportunity to measure said impact, or to even accurately measure it.

3. How many times have I read of the tremendous economic impact of the tennis tournament? It’s always in relation to taxpayers subsidizing not only the construction of the stadium for the once a year event, but the annual cost of said event too. That of course is supposed to be offset by the overwhelming economic impact. Best wishes at best - BS at worst.

posted by: Claudia Bosch on June 11, 2014  9:57pm

1. The city as well as the airport are following the master plan (http://www.cga.ct.gov/2002/rpt/2002-R-0360.htm). Step for step. If Nemerson points out that a 7,000 feet runway is not planned. He is LYING. Quote from the summary:

“Phase 3 involves paving the runway safety areas created in Phase 1 and, in so doing, allowing them to be used for aircraft takeoffs. This action will allow for 6,500 feet for takeoffs and 5,600 feet for landing in each direction.

Phase 4 calls for an actual runway extension of 600 feet to the south end of Runway 2-20, construction of a new 1,000-foot safety area for Runway 2 and some related changes. This will result in a 7,200-foot runway for takeoffs and a 6,200-foot runway for landings in both directions.”

2. The economic data is wrong too. The forecasts are based on enplanement numbers that have not been reached yet. Instead of increasing, the flight activity is declining at Tweed. The potential economic growth would have to be corrected down if Nemerson and co. would be honest. (http://ccea.uconn.edu/studies/Tweed Impact Final Report.PDF)

3. In addition where are the airlines that want to serve New Haven? So far the airport is begging every airline to come. It is not that this is a hot and contested market. Tweed is a shelf warmer. The airlines are pulling out of the regional airports. They are centralizing their services. Tweed is in competition with plenty of airports all around us.

4. New Haven is easily reachable. We are not on an island or in rural Vermont (where I visited a conference in April despite a missing airport, we drove). In 45 min. one is in Bradley. Quite wasting taxpayers’ money on an outdated model. Conferences in New Haven will be visited because of Yale and the city. Not because there is an airport.

posted by: Esbey on June 11, 2014  10:13pm

If you don’t like new jobs, but you do like high taxes, then you should oppose the Tweed runway expansion.

posted by: Johnilovenh on June 12, 2014  1:05am

It aggravates me when people continually try to hinder Tweeds progress. “its not feasable,there’s no results!” WHAT DO YOU EXPECT WHEN YOU FIGHT TOOTH AND NAIL TO HINDER ITS PROGRESS- DUH!!!! I always wondered what was in people’s minds to move near an airport and not expect it to expand??? I am sure the flooding issue will be addressed. We need Tweed to expand.. IT WILL BE A HUGE ASSET TO THE AREA. I am thinking an airline like JETBLUE would scoop up the chance to fly into TWEED. I am sure they will offer competitive fares…  I WISH PEOPLE WOULD OPEN THEIR EYES and STOP thinking they live in some tiny little Mayberry NC town of 200 and realize its a city and its not all about them!!!!

posted by: Noteworthy on June 12, 2014  8:43am

What does Tweed have to do with high taxes? We have Tweed now and we have really high taxes. We have had an explosion in eds and meds and yet we have high taxes.

Those property taxes will continue to rise regardless of anything at Tweed because our city leaders past and present have little regard for our families and care more about protecting the status quo.  New car, more staff with inflated salaries, a driver and the continued practice of building more massively expensive schools with plans for trollies, a Q-house with zero plans to harness technology to reduce staff and create efficiencies. There is zero control over the BOE.

Tweed will not lower or flatten taxes. If any positive financials ever come from Tweed which is highly improbable, given the short sighted history and lack of common sense, the money will be spent.

posted by: 32knot on June 12, 2014  9:02am

There are very very few people left in the Cove that bought their houses before the airport was started. therefore no complaining allowed, you should have known better. The Cove has been flooding for a very long time. If you bought a house in the wet areas you should have done your due diligence, again no complaining, its a lot better than it was 10 years ago. ( i live and the Cove and looked at all those factors before i bought into the area).

Having said the above, the City said it was not going to pave the areas in question in a written agreement. Regardless of the economics of the situation the question is ” Is the City of New Haven’s word good or not in a written agreement?”.

posted by: Claudia on June 12, 2014  10:18am

Reality check:
1. The reason why Tweed has not grown significantly in recent years is not because the neighbors are content with the given status quo of runways, and thus oppose expansion.

2. The reason is that the airline industry has changed. Smaller airports are in trouble as reported by the NYTimes and the Wall Street Journal, or backed by a study from MIT.

I recommend reading the article “Why small airports are in big trouble” by S. Carey in WSJ 04/07/2014. http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304688104579465711898215996

Interestingly the SMALL airport chosen as example is Huntsville International with about 600,000 enplanements in 2010. The challenge for Huntsville is that the possible customers are willing to drive to other airports in the region to get better service (price, connections). In the region means 2 hours.

3. By these standards (willingness to drive up to 2 hours for better service) Tweed is competing with Newark, JFK, Laguardia, Bradley, White Planes, or Green Airport (RI) [I am sure I missed some airports].

For us in CT a 45 min. ride might mean a lot, for the rest of the country 45 min. is short. Tweed is facing an uphill battle due to how the airline industry works, not because of neighbors that what to preserve the status quo.

posted by: anonymous on June 12, 2014  10:29am

Note:
So we should never do anything to better our economy because the money that comes in as a result *might* get spent on teachers, public transit, fixing potholes, or something else?

posted by: Claudia on June 12, 2014  10:41am

More facts about the airline industry from our government’ s accountability office - http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-14-454T

I quote: “Air service to small communities has declined since 2007 due, in part, to higher fuel costs and declining population, and for some communities, compounded by more attractive service (i.e., larger airports in larger cities) within driving distance. In fact, airports of all sizes have lost capacity in the number of available seats, and largely for flights as well. However, medium-hub and small-hub airports have proportionally lost more service than large-hub or nonhub airports (see figure).”

Can Tweed turn the tide?

posted by: TheMadcap on June 12, 2014  10:52am

” If any positive financials ever come from Tweed which is highly improbable, given the short sighted history and lack of common sense, the money will be spent”

Basically we can’t try to improve the airport because it just can’t work, it’s just set in stone that way and even if it does you’ll find another reason why it will fail(i.e. money will be nebulously wasted)

4. New Haven is easily reachable.

Yes, we are. That’s why it might be nice to have an airport actually connecting to DC or Chicago because NH is within easy reach of almost a million people who when traveling may want to chose the ease of Tweed and get a connecting flight vs going through the hectic Bradley/JFK/LGA. I mean Tweed only goes to one place, and that one place is Philly on top of it, not exactly transfer station, yet passenger numbers have increased quite a bit over the past 6-7 years. You can’t say the demand isn’t there, and everyone just can’t wave away potential economic impact by finding whatever excuse to try to nullify it.(I mean seriously first we have economic impact studies are vague and just predictions, then it’s the studies are highlighting a high end fantasy, then it’s well even if this happens who cares the impact will be wasted)

Also no one can say with a straight face the airport is moving step by step with the master plan for high end expansion when that plan was written 15 years ago and we’re still arguing over whether or not to pave gravel.

posted by: Friendly Neighborhood Spiderman on June 12, 2014  1:11pm

Is the fact that there is an airport within 10 minutes from downtown really a factor when people do business or travel to an area? Come on. If they really want to visit the New Haven area, they’re gonna do it whether they have to fly to BDL or JFK etc… Bigger planes are nothing more than a convenience for those who can afford it. Its like saying you will never go to Disneyworld because Orlando Airport is a 1/2 hour away. If people need to get to Yale, They’re gonna get to Yale.

posted by: Jonathan Hopkins on June 12, 2014  2:22pm

Brian V,

Where are you getting the information from that East Shore, Morris Cove specifically, has the worst air pollution in the State?

From what I’ve seen, Morris Cove has pretty decent air quality. The area around the Mill River has the worst in the City and possibly the State.

Vlad Isakov, et al. Combining Regional- and Local-Scale Air Quality Models with Exposure Models for Use in Environmental Health Studies “Jounral of the Air & Waste Management Association” (April 2009)

PDF link:
http://tinyurl.com/pn5tdkv

posted by: Claudia on June 12, 2014  2:37pm

MadCap - where did you get your facts from?

Reality check:
1. You write “... passenger numbers have increased quite a bit over the past 6-7 years”
The reality of the passenger numbers as presented by FAA, U.S. Department of Transportation, NH Register, or Aviation Today:
130,000 (1993), 38,159 (2000), 65,781 (2006), 33,000 (2009), 35,926 (2010), 40,074 (2011), 36,975 (2012), 36,737 (2013).
Please name your sources that are the base of your statement. My sources do not back up your findings. The numbers are stagnant at best.

2. Have you looked at the Economic Impact Study from 1999 on which the master plan from 2002 is based? I did. It is vague, the assumed increase of enplanements never happened (= fantasy). For 2012 they predicted 106,719 commercial passengers. Still the proponents argue with these figures when it comes to possible economic development. I would like to know how the numbers were generated without calculating actually a Yale effect.

3. Also the master plan is the guideline by which Tweed is moving forward. Just read it.

Or name your sources.

posted by: TheMadcap on June 12, 2014  8:58pm

Claudia,

I was thinking about the fact that from 2008 to 2011 it increased from 33,000 to almost 41,000 despite no change in service, and is still hovering at 36,000 despite air travel costs increasing above inflation every year(i.e. more people thinking about flying less often). It’s a whole lot higher than the low points of 2002-2003 as well. Some of you are being myopic though in viewing Tweed as only a way to get to NH. NH isn’t the only city in the area, and it’s ignoring the departure half of flying where people can leave Tweed but also would have to come into NH both when venturing to depart and returning and going back home. To quote the FAA

“Functional Role
Despite its catchment area of 2.8 million passengers, the fifth largest in New England, only one percent of that catchment area used New Haven in FY 2004, 59 percent used Bradley, 23 percent used the New York City area airports, and 13 percent used Providence.”

Like this isn’t even a hypothetical on whether or not more people would go to Tweed if there was more service, it was in the not so distant future that 120-130k were flying out of Tweed yearly. Yeah, we might have Bradley, JFK, ect, but there’s a serious incentive to use a small airport over a large airport for many people as it’s substantially less hassle actually getting through the airport and onto the plane. As for the future of airlines, just because large airlines have been consolidating it doesn’t mean they’ve completely abandoned smaller airports(I mean c’mon as I type this a subsidiary of US airways is flying out of Tweed), there are hundreds of small airports around the nation that will continue to have passenger service and a good deal of them don’t have the catchment area population or transit connections nearby Tweed does. As for the master plan, bring it back up when there’s any actual serious discussion about a 7,000ft runway(maybe in 60 years??)

posted by: steve on June 14, 2014  1:29pm

Well,here we go again. More misinformation by some.
1.The runway is 5250 feet long, not 5600 feet.
2. Several airlines wanted to start service at Tweed but the limited runway prevented it.
3. Northwest tried twice, American and Southwest also tried.
4. The 2009 agreement allows for 180,000 passengers yearly at Tweed. Can’t happen with the runway in its present form.
5. Paving the overruns would not change their use as landing aircraft would have to fly over them before touching down.
6. Paving the overruns would be on airport land, no streets need to be closed.
7. The Dash-8 used by Usairways is the only airliner that can be used at Tweed under varying weather conditions.
8. The 2009 agreement allows up to 6 airlines to serve Tweed, no other airline uses the Dash-8 so other airlines are out of the question.
9. The 2009 agreement was not drawn up by airline or airport professionals, but only 2 mayors and a third party with no airport experience.
10. United left after almost 5 years due to the limited runway and the trees in the flight path.
Quote “Does the airport shove a 7000 foot runway, Airbus 300s and 747s down our throats?” Another foolish comment, 747’s are not used at Bradley,White Plains,or Providence airports, so Tweed will never see one.
As far as master plans go,in the late 60’s the airport master plan had a 60,000 square foot terminal planned, it never happened. Master plans rarely have all facets come to fruition.
Paving the overruns will allow other types of airliners and airlines to serve Tweed and no further addition will be necessary.
To blame the airport for air pollution is nonsense, its the daily thousands of cars on I-95 & I-91. Paving the overruns will no effect on flooding, its a natural low lying area boarding long island sound.
Bigger planes do not mean louder noise. The new Regional jets are quieter than the old prop planes that use Tweed.
Its time for a few to do some homework and get accurate information, not unfounded rumors.

posted by: Don in New Haven on June 15, 2014  5:57pm

From January 1991 to July 1994, I made monthly round trip UAL flights between Tweed to Chicago. The runway was no problem.

Extending the runway will only benefit those who construct the extension, those who maintain the Airport and those who try to convince our Mayors that they have earned the high wages they demand for management.

Who can tell me how much money Tweed contributes to the New Haven Budget???

What does New Haven offer to any business? Taxes? Crime? What?

Suppose you live in Bridgeport and want to take a flight from Tweed. When you walk out of Union Station, you look for a bus to Tweed only to learn that there is no direct bus service between the Station and Tweed. No, you must either change buses at the Green or take a taxi at a cost of $20.00, or more. You may have had more choices at the same cost and time wasted if you went to JFK or Bradley.

If Tweed has so much promise, why doesn’t the Connecticut Airport Authority want to administer Tweed? Please go to this web site and read about the Connecticut Airport Authority. Notice the airports that are administered by CAA.

http://ctairports.org/

Tweed should be converted to a Fixed Base Operation airport and become home to a technical high school that teaches kids how to perform in the aviation industry as aircraft mechanics, pilots, controllers and others.

We need to stop chasing our tail and listen to Lao Tzu:

“If you do not change direction,
You may end up where you are heading.”

posted by: steve on June 15, 2014  8:06pm

Reply to Don. I also used that service and at times the flights to Tweed were oversold but United left because the limited runway and the trees in the flight path. At times, United had to deplane passengers because of weight restrictions. Airlines cannot make money when passengers are denied boarding and have to be reaccommodated on another airline.
Paving the overruns does not constitute extending the runway as landing aircraft will have to fly over the paved overrun before touching down.
The greater New Haven metro area can support more service than it currently has, but the last impediment is the limited runway.
As far as the Connecticut Airport Authority is concerned, Tweed is not a state operated airport and they put all their eggs into Bradley field.
Local transportation to the airport will follow when yearly boardings rise. Also being so close to I-95 & I-91, being dropped off is a quick trip for many passengers.
Tweed needs the last piece of the infrastructure runway improvement completed so it can realize its full potential. With the merger Of American & Usairways, it will open up the possibility of service to Chicago that was popular with local travelers when United flew to Tweed.
Look at other similar sized cities and see the level of service they enjoy and its only the limited runway at Tweed that prevents more service. At present, only the Dash-8 can operate profitably from Tweed and the Dash-8 fleet is shrinking, four aircraft left the fleet last year & two more will leave the fleet this year.
Its not that other airlines or Usairways don’t want to serve Tweed, plain & simple they can’t with the present conditions at Tweed.

posted by: accountability on June 15, 2014  11:32pm

Over about 5 years, I traveled nearly a half million miles for work, 99% of it from Bradley, LaGuardia.and JFK.

Tweed flights are expensive.

They only go to Philly, the worst big airport in the country, and at which you have to take a bus to make a connection.

the aborted Pan Am revival went to BWI, which, door to door to DC is about a half hour faster than Amtrak. With all the pain in the neck associated with air travel on tiny planes.

At tweed::

Flights are often late.
Last flight home from Philly’s around 7. So if you’re coming from anywhere west of the Appalachians you can’t get home after doing business somehwere else during the day.

On the other hand, driving to Hartford or New York sucks. So:

Improve service.
Lower rates
Later inbound flights.
Fly to more places.
And yeah, get a shuttle going from the train station.


Do that and a lot of people would use Tweed, Because driving to LaGuardia, in particular, really sucks.

If you can’t make those improvements, don’t waste time, money and the energy needed to bully the cove into runway expansion.

posted by: Anon-neighbor on June 16, 2014  9:01am

Thank you Don for a pilot’s perspective—we need more!.  AND Thank you NH Independent for furthering this discussion! 
Don, You bring up some great questions and new ideas. 
I’m looking forward to researching/getting answers to:
—Why Tweed isn’t part of the CAA?
—What it would mean for Tweed to be a fixed base operation airport?
—How many airport-industry schools are in CT—why not one at Tweed?
If anyone can enlighten us on these questions, that would be a great addition to our knowledgebase. Now that we have the full Master Plan, neighbors can plan accordingly.  South End Rd folks—look out in the future!  Meantime, Mr. Larson has offered airport tours to everyone—take advantage of his offer and get his answers to the above questions!  Bring your information to the next East Shore Management Team meeting on July 8th at the Morris Cove Fire House and join the neighborhood discussion!!

posted by: steve on June 16, 2014  2:28pm

To accountability. To improve service, the runway needs to be optimized to accept other airlines and airliners. Tweed can never add more meaningful service without paving the overruns,while many say there is no market here or that airlines no not want to service Tweed, the lone fact is they cannot operate out of tweed in its present condition.
When one factors in the added time and cost of going to out of area airports, Tweed is a good deal many times.
As far as the Philadelphia airport, it offers one stop connections from Tweed to the entire country and much of Europe and the Caribbean. Most of if not all of my dozen or so trips to Europe were from Philly.
I have flown from Bradley and find Tweed to be hands down the least stressful airport to depart & arrive from.
Quote :On the other hand, driving to Hartford or New York sucks. So:
Improve service.
Lower rates
Later inbound flights.
Fly to more places.
Quote :If you can’t make those improvements, don’t waste time, money and the energy needed to bully the cove into runway expansion.

The above points can only be achieved by paving the runway overruns and open the airport to other airlines and other types of airliners.
You can’t put two pounds of liver in a one pound bag, and you cannot operate other types of airliners in an airport that can only accommodate the Usairways Dash-8.
Its just that simple. Don’t blame airport management, they can only work with what they have and considering that Tweed has retained the Usairways service while both Bridgeport and Groton/New London airports lost their usairways service, the market shows that it can support commercial airline service and more flights with improving the runway.

posted by: Anon-neighbor on June 19, 2014  8:48am

Hello Don, Please chime with more info and ideas.  Why should Tweed become CAA airport?.  Why should Tweed become a Fixed Base Operation Airport?  The last point you made is obvious—an air-industry high school would offer great hands-on career (not service industry) opportunities to New Haven youth (see CT schools in Hartford area and Stratford—list below).  Other pilots—chime in please!
Re the CAA and Tweed:  When the CAA was created, it was charged with owning and operating the state-owned airports. Tweed, at that time and as it is now, is a municipally-owned airport versus state owned. However, the CAA enabling legislation also allows the CAA to acquire other airports if it is determined to be in the best interest of the Authority.


Re: What is a Fixed Base Operation Airport? - A Fixed Base Operator (FBO) is a commercial business granted the right by an airport to operate on the airport and provide aeronautical services such as fueling, hangaring, tie-down and parking, aircraft rental, aircraft maintenance, flight instruction, etc. In common practice, an FBO is a primary provider of support services to general aviation operators at a public-use airport either located on airport leasehold property or, in rare cases, adjacent to airport leasehold property as a through-the-fence-operation.

Re: How many air-industry focused technical high schools in CT?
CREAC Schools – Academy of Aerospace & Engineering, Hartford, CT Greater Hartford Regional School Choice Office – Academy of Aerospace and Engineering, Bloomfield, CT CT Technical High School System – Stratford School for Aviation & Maintenance Technicians, Stratford, CT CT Technical High School System - CT Aero Tech School, Hartford, CT

Events Calendar

loading…

SeeClickFix »

Pre-dawn trash collection.
Oct 1, 2014 5:01 am
Address: Quinnipiac Court New Haven, Connecticut
Rating: 2

This housing complex had it's trash collected at 6:15 in the morning today. I was...

more »
Traffic Signal / Pedestrian Signal
Oct 1, 2014 4:14 am
Address: Clinton Ave And Pine St New Haven, Connecticut
Rating: 2

Could we please get a traffic light on Clinton Ave and Pine St. intersection....

more »

PosterWallAdd your Poster

Sponsors

N.H.I. Site Design & Development

smartpill design