“10,000 Hawks” Take Flight Against Tweed Expansion

Some people want a thriving regional economy, and some people don't.

New Haven needs to compete, and a functioning airport is a huge boost.

The issues of noise and pollution are NOT limited to the area around Tweed itself. Right now planes fly over the Quinnipiac River and Fair Haven Heights and further add to the noise invasion here.
It's good to see a citizen group jump in to monitor the changes and advocate for the humans who will have to live with them.

You can have a functioning airport and still keep an eye on environmental/quality of life issues in the surrounding areas, these are things that can be compatible.

Please also remember this is not all about just New Haven, East Haven residents should also have the opportunity to ask questions and advocate for what they might feel is needed.

Fair Haven folk--- ask the candidates for alder what their position is on expansion of the airport and vote accordingly.

Mayor Elicker is pro-Tweed expansion. What about KDW?? The other candidate?

Find out candidate positions and vote accordingly. It's time for New Haveners to smarten up and vote for what is in the best interests of the residents; rather than Yale and suburbanites who want a big airport but NITBY!!

Do we breathe or do we work?

Nationally and internationally, Dems/liberals are looking for a Green New Deal and working toward a New Energy Economy. Why then are local leaders complacent and complicit with increasing soot (carbon) and VOCs & NOX (creating toxic ground-level ozone) raining down on the economic justice (a state designation of vulnerability) neighborhoods in New Haven and East Haven?

There are many other viable paths to regional economic growth which won't kill us or the Planet.

To be transparent, I am a Tweed Supporter. For the issue of the environment, remember we are not talking about clearing land to build a new airport. Instead we are using the our existing airport, with no additional property, and talking about a Green terminal to be built with a new entrance on the eastern part of the airport. The # of cars alone, that will not be driving to NY airports, is good for the environment. The current American Airlines flights have been full in recent months, and with Avelo starting flights soon, that will only help the New Haven economy, which benefits the entire region. The fact that it will be a Green terminal and is union-backed, makes this a win on many levels.

Smarcus-- I oppose expansion of Tweed. The cars that will not pollute the air going to NY will pollute it coming to Tweed. The extra planes will pollute our air, the wash/gas/etc will flow into the creek and thence to the NH Harbor, the noise will affect our ears.
Tweed has never helped the NH economy and is a wish by suburbia and Yale to have their very own airport right close. There is no evidence to show this overwhelming boost to the area economy, though some individuals and individual businesses are very happy with the convenience but there is not a benefit to have it.
Tell me:
If Tweed could be such a benefit to a region, why have the wealthy privileged suburbs not jumped up to offer all their open spaces to this project? Come on-- Old Lyme, Old Saybrook, Madison, Guilford!!!!! Where are the civil rights groups to protect poor cities like NH from opportunistic suburbs and their NIMBYism??

There is a video on YouTube about Morris Creek. The runoff from the tank farm on Peat Meadow Road and Interstate 95 travel toward the Sound. There is a river that goes under ground near the Townsend estate. It then comes out from underground near the airport terminal. The water then flows through the marshes of Tweed. All that oil soaked run off from the area filter through the Tweed watershed into the Sound. Cleaner. The video is titled The Morris Creek Watershed. Another Tweed fact

In my dreams, I wish more airport opponents would take Rachel's advice and move. This campaign against one of the most promising Tweed developments in decades is misguided and starting to look like a personal vendetta. Many statements blissfully ignore the facts, as evidenced by the absurd idea that future aircraft will be four times as noisy. Where did that come from? Certainly not from any professional report or air industry research. It's also unfortunate that the group ignores (or disbelieves?) the entire Connecticut regulatory framework. There will be plenty of environmental oversight as the project develops; let DEEP do its work! Worst of all, there is a sad undertone that the group wants the city to stay small and poor, except of course for their neighborhood. That is depressing.

I live in the flight path of these planes. Currently, there are a few that pass over every day. It is deafening and it sounds like they are landing in my back yard.
They may be quieter than previous models, however, anyone in the flight path will tell you otherwise. Maybe these officials need to take a field trip.

I feel that I have had a say if this will lead to the devaluation of my property.

I will gladly oppose the expansion!

Oh wait, it was already approved through clandestine meetings. I understand the revenue will be going to East Haven rather than New Haven. So yes funded, we save on future funding, why wasn't a revenue share negotiated?Who makes these deals? How does this benefit New Haven taxpayers?
How many more flights over my home will need to take place daily to generate enough revenue to pay for that 70 million dollar expansion? Has anyone seen the plans?

I don't feel that it was transparent to the New Haven Alderman so they could advocate for their constituency.

@secretagent. I have been a lifelong resident of New Haven. I find incredious that you would suggest that I relocate to a accommodate a planned expansion that has not been presented. Clearly, you don't have planes flying over your home.
I will point out that Tweed did have expanded service in the 90's that did nothing for New Haven. We are close enough to plenty of airports. People choose direct flights and cost over convenience all day long.

To leftoncharlie- if you want to believe that a few grasses can clean up oil, gas, chemicals from the tank farms then we should have that grass everywhere. The stench is quite noticeable when driving through the I91 & I95 interchange. I like to believe in miracles, too, so this might be so but why risk it?......

To secretagent-- I often wish the same thing about those who support expanding the airport. YOU KNEW when you moved here that it was a small, limited airport. If you wish for a great big airport; why don't YOU move where there already is one? Why do WE have to move because YOU want another boondoogle project? Move to Windsor Locks or over by JFK/LaGuardia or Boston or Newark.
Your argument is weak on that point. And to all the New Yorkers who have invaded us-- go back to NYC if a big airport is all you want. You can have it.
NH is sad and poor thanks to failed policies of politicians and suckers like yourself- always chasing the next "sure thing" mirage. And the argument of rich vs poor used against the East Shore is too ridiculous and insulting to even respond to. Save it for your next COMINTERN Convention to rouse the proletariat.

I understand the impacts of airport noise. I spent most of my childhood in a a town abutting Chicago-O'Hare, at the time the world's busiest airport. Jets of that era (707s) were far noisier than contemporary jets, and one of the flightpaths went a couple of hundred feet over our house.

Rachel et al. face a conundrum. Either the city's noise ordinance would substantially restrict air traffic at Tweed or it would not. If it does, it would likely violate the constitution's Commerce Clause. If it does not, the ordinance would have limited effect on noise and air pollution. The Commerce Clause does not preclude municipal regulation of commercial airports. But such regulations typically address overnight operations and preferred flightpaths. (I'm not a lawyer, but saw this issue play out living for years in the shadow of O'Hare.) Although dated, this FAA webpage has a useful discussion of these issues https://www.faa.gov/airports/resources/publications/orders/compliance_5190_6/media/5190_6b_chap13.pdf

It is simply too early to estimate how an expansion of service from Tweed would affect air pollution, including CO2 emissions. At this point, we don't know (1) how many additional flights there will be, (2) the destinations of these flights, (3) the number of passengers on them, and (4) whether and how these passengers would have travelled if service was not expanded. It is possible that expanded service would generate totally new trips and the resulting pollution. But it is possible that the bulk of passengers would have otherwise flown out of Bradley and the NYC airports, leading to a net decrease in pollution.

And are the 10,000 hawks also going to stop out of state pollution from reaching the East Shore? How much comes from New York? Or do they care?
This time last year, one million tons of raw sewage washed up on the shores of East Haven and Branford. I can't find ANY commentary from Rachel Hereema on that.
And there seems to be NO concern of the emissions spewed by the thousands of motor vehicles and dozens of trains that cross Lake Saltonstall, a major source of the region's drinking water, every day. Meanwhile, the Mill River, which has been polluted for decades, continues to empty into Long Island Sound.
Just more "selective indignation" from, not environmentalists, but micro-environmentalists, which is what they REALLY are.
If it weren't so sad it would be laughable.

Dear Cousin Vinny, I can't speak for anyone but myself and all those items you mentioned are very concerning to me. I breathe wherever I go , which is why I don't want the air to be made any worse by more/bigger air traffic to our city, as well as the runoff that will end up in our harbor and Sound.
I applaud your concern and hope you will become involved in any or all of the fights you mention. Most of us can't fight all day every day, which is why the money powers always win. I hope you will reconsider what a bigger airport will mean to the environment on top of what you wrote about.

To Yolo and others: I guess I should have said that I live next to the airport-- I can see the runway from my windows-- and I have no complaints. It's exciting to see New Haven be connected to the rest of the world.

"Bigger planes mean decibel levels that are four times louder than are permitted in current city ordinances, noise pollution that will begin to reach Fair Haven and Fair Haven Heights."
Where is the proof for this kind of claim? Did they consult any professionals? Did the journalist consult any professionals, or did they just post a claim by an activist without any fact checking? Did the airport refuse to comment about their plans? What do they have to say for themselves? How can they plan to exceed a city ordinance by 4x? That...sounds...implausible.
I appreciate Rachel raising the point, protecting our neighborhood, but it's very tough to form an opinion when the article lacks any professional insight. Just because a few of my neighbors are playing Expert Google, doesn't mean I want to. Bring back balanced reporting.

Morris Cove Homewoners: https://imgflip.com/i/5fmjl6

Seriously, the gall to pretend you give a shit about pollution while six lanes of I-95 traffic spew congestion into downtown and I know goddamn well most of you don't ride the bus as your primary form of transportation.

What about the massive container ships that come into New Haven Terminal? Surely that pollution bothers you, I am sure you are definitely going to protest that, right?

Or is it only when it's in YOUR neighborhood that you care about pollution and noise? It's not about what's "best for New haven." It's about what's best for you. And if it sucks for someone else, well hey, that's their problem, not yours.

Meanwhile literally nobody is demanding Tweed become a large airport. There is no danger of it replacing Bradley. We just think maybe like it could be like HPN, the White Plains airport that actually has some use to someone. You know? Something that actually flies somewhere people might want to go once in a while.

But noooooo even one flight more a day is too many because you bought a house next to an airport.

Then you'll bitch about taxes as your drag the city into another pointless lawsuit you'll lose.

Same as it ever was.

I bought a house at a four way intersection and on a preexisting bus line a few years ago. I hear cars stopping and starting all day long - with buses every 20 minutes. Being several blocks from a firehouse, sirens scream by two to three times per day as well. In addition to noise, there are also proven effects on the air quality and PM coming from braking and accelerating. Undoubtedly my property value is impacted. So I well understand the issues cited here.

But I also bought here with full knowledge of what was around me and what that might mean. I couldn't now bring myself to ask for bus lines to be shifted, fire stations moved, or traffic restricted - even if bus service were to become more frequent or traffic increased.

Municipal services exist for the public good and many people in this city bear daily impacts of the provision of these community services. No matter how generously and community- or environmentally-oriented a group tries to frame it, protesting a privately-funded increase in service at Tweed will always come across to me as a self-interested reaction to feeling put upon when asked to bear a similar civic share that so many others quietly assume to support our Greater New Haven community.

@Kevin McCarthy: Good information, as always.
I personally would prefer a flight path that didn't go along the Q. River where our local oyster company
is still recovering from the pandemic and the oysters lie peacefully in their beds.
Right now the path is literally over my roof in an area where we are already over-burdened with police sirens, ambulances and fire trucks.
Next year Q. Ave. from the Bridge to Foxon Blvd is due for traffic calming re-design.
I can only hope that the construction noise will be less than the daily cacophany of emergency vehicles and sociopathic speeders (who regularly crash into local properties and each other).

Dear noxinwj--because people like you knew they bought on a busy street, near a firehouse, by an airport, does not mean you have to roll over to increased speeding, shrieking sirens of firetrucks responding to chest pains, or expansion of an airport that has always been little and a good neighbor ( aside from a few crashes and polluting the harbor and air).

I do disagree that Tweed is private venture. You know darn well that the airport is subsidized heavily, Any infrastructure changes made to accommodate the plans will be borne by the taxpayers of the surrounding towns. And when the airport fails to make the dough they claim; it will be tossed back to the City of New Haven for us to carry or maybe even to the State (for us to carry). This is why the airlines are so hot to come here-- they get all the profit -- we get all the risk and ultimate responsibility. I don't want this risk for my city.

Tweed shouldn't ever be like Bradley, but it should have a good 20 or 30 commercial jet flights every day to places like Chicago, DC, and Atlanta. If it did, the city's hotels and catering businesses would thrive, and we could lower everyone's property taxes.

As it is now, companies located in New Haven have to host their business meetings in New York City, because there's no accessible airport here. Many of them decide to move out as they get to be a certain size, because it's difficult to run a proper business without an airport nearby. With Yale here, New Haven could easily host dozens of large conferences and events if it had a few more flights.

10,000 Hawks is a creative name, but it just makes you think about how there are thousands of people who support the new terminal building at Tweed and the hundreds of jobs that will bring to New Haven, and then there are about 10 snowbirds in a wealthy white neighborhood who are trying to peck away at the economic futures of all city residents.

Boston flight path over the cove 18,000 feet, Bradley 9000'. Do those planes matter.

Another video on YouTube shows the tide gates Tweed controls. One side 9' of water the other two feet. Just imagine if Tweed didn't care about the neighborhood.

The planes fly over my home. I hear them, but I also hear the sirens from emergency vehicles, air brakes from big trucks, gunshot mufflers, fireworks, honking horns from vehicles, and drag racing cars on route 80. I also get pollution from Route 80, I-95 and I-91. I'm looking forward to more people choosing to buy hybrid and electric vehicles, more mass transit becoming convenient for passengers like electric buses and trains, and better airline service from Tweed. I took several flights from Tweed to Chicago long ago. It was much better than going to Bradley or NY/NJ airports. Before when I was looking to buy a home I looked at one right next to the airport, and decided I wouldn't like to live there. If you bought a home after the airport was built, you can't complain about a preexisting airport. I know people who have lived nearby for decades and many of them don't mind it at all. The newer commercial planes are supposed to be cleaner and quieter than the smaller private planes. Moving the terminal to the EH side on a main road makes more sense. Expanding service makes more sense for the region economically. Encouraging regular electric buses and shuttle routes for the airport to reduce traffic makes sense. Encouraging cleaner airplane fuel technology makes sense. Encouraging the airport to be a good neighbor and as clean as technology allows makes sense. Holding hostage an airport service expansion to two small neighborhoods because they wish the airport would go away and not expand service when they bought their home after the airport was built doesn't make sense. You can't stop progress for long, but what you can do is ask it to be more progressive and to reduce the human and environmental impact in its progress.

CityYankee - I said nothing about speeding (illegal) and only referred to increased traffic volume - which is the appropriate analogy for the expansion. I would be glad to line up behind opposition to the airport being used for illegal activities.

And do I understand that you consider me to be 'rolling over' if I'm not asking my neighbors consider how the sirens might disrupt my day when they feel chest pains and think they should call for an ambulance? I'm not sure how else to read that comment so please do clarify if I misunderstood.

anonymous-- I was reading you till you threw out the " wealthy white" canard , which is tired, overused, offensive, as well as untrue. These racist remarks should not be allowed in the discussion. I will now ignore your comments as you are into racial retribution; not the good of my city.

My comment about "rolling over" refers to the excessive use of fire trucks as EMT's , which is a whole other discussion. Noxinwj-- yes you did mistake my meaning. To expect people to just accept the excessive noise, speeding, disturbances that get out of hand is more than just "living in the city". We are entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of our homes; protected from undue disturbance. I hope that makes it clear.

@"I personally would prefer a flight path that didn't go along the Q. River". The flight paths are determined by the runway headings and since the runway has the same directions it has had for decades, that cannot change. Safety requires that a straight line approach is the best for safety reasons. As far as noise, "Bigger planes mean decibel levels that are four times louder than are permitted in current city ordinances". An out and out lie. More bilge water being pumped by those who concoct horror stories meant to frighten people and run in panic mode. Avelo will provide what area travelers have wanted for years, a nearby airport to use, not in New York or almost up to Massachusetts, but a small regional airport that will serve the needs of many. Tweed for years has had its hands tied and could never reach its potential, now for the first time Tweed will be able to upgrade its facilities without going beyond its borders. Florida flights will be very popular for area flyers and hopefully more airlines will commit to Tweed. Some of those opposed have made totally false claims such as water running down to the end of runway loaded with deice fluid and other materials. Everyone of them knew the airport preceded them and they still bought homes, why, homes near the airport sell for less, it's just simple economics, but they try to paint the picture that they were taken in by the homes beauty and pristine surroundings. It's the cove area, a low to middle income area and has been so for years.
So take a dose of reality, you bought what you bought, either live with it or move. Those are the only 2 options that present themselves. In 2 months a new airline will provide a travel option Tweed never had, a low cost airline that will enable more people to fly at lower costs. The SCOTUS has ruled Tweed can extend it's runway and that was the last barrier to be overcomed.

So your against four trained Emergency Medical Technicians getting to your Cove home in under four minutes. In life and death medical emergencies that quick interaction could save your or a family member. From experience most of the time Engine 16 rolls it is legit.

"10,000 Hawks"? Is that because "10,000 Maniacs" was already taken?

Steve, the regulatory situation is more complicated than you suggest. The Court of Appeals held that the federal government has "occupied the field" of aviation safety and therefore the state could not regulate runway lengths. The Supreme Court declined to review this case, so this decision is final. But the runway extension will require a number of permits which have not been issued.

BTR, the port is a real economic asset for the city. But it is a major source of air pollution, as you note. The folks on the East Shore may want to replicate the efforts to clean up the (far larger) Ports of Los Angeles/Long Beach. https://www.governing.com/archive/gov-california-ports-emissions-air-pollution.html

Kevin McCarthy, I appreciate your post and hurdles will have to be cleared. The new master plan states the wetlands will be increased and that is after parts of the overruns are paved. I see much thought and planning being done, a carbon neutral terminal is a new process I have not heard of before. All work will be done within Tweed's property lines and not all of the overruns will be paved. Soon Avelo will reveal what cities will be served from Tweed and committing three 737's shows they are in it for the long haul. This will be a first for Tweed having a low cost airline. I am hoping for all that this will be a positive move for the entire greater metro New Haven area. No more reliance on Bradley field and keeping travelers dollars spent in the local area, not Hartford. I don't see Tweed becoming a large operation, the market will dictate the level of service offered. No wide body aircraft, even Bradley does not have wide body flights as some in the past have feared for Tweed.

Funny how the green voters, have not weighed in on this. How many of those in policy making posts, for the public, appointed and elected, have left out aspects of carbon footprint, air, water, and noise pollution have been ignored by them in the discussion. But flip-flopping, and hypocrisy, are the rule not the exception. And who will this service be for? Locals who need direct flights to Florida, cheap, or Yale's business based commuters, who need to go to DC daily?

Steve, thanks. I have no doubt that the Airport Authority will make a good faith effort to offset the harm done to wetlands as a result of the runway expansion. What is unclear at this point is how well the restored wetlands will function when compared to the existing wetlands. Wetlands provide a wide range of environmental services, whose value varies substantially from site to site. I suspect the project will have an Environmental Impact Statement, which will address this issue in detail.

Bassmaster, Rachel Heerema, who is a "green" as anyone I know, is quoted in the article and has commented on this thread. A number of other commentators have described the environmental issues this project raises.

@Yolo "I live in the flight path of these planes.' Just wondering, when did you buy your home? The flight paths to the runway have never changed, it's been the same for many decades. You must have known the airport was nearby and planes pass over your home. Now you want to make an issue of something that has been in effect for years and you were in full knowledge about.
Can't say I feel sorry for you, "let the buyer beware" is something you ignored. Tweed has been in operation since 1931 and it's not going away but will add much needed flights that people want.
One thing that stays the same is change, and Tweed will change, not turning into a large operation but with flights to meet the local demand and keep the money spent in the local area, not Hartford.
Wait and see if it will be as bad as a few say it will be. You can't experience something that has not happened yet. Some locals in the past predicted a bad time coming when United airlines had flights to Chicago. Nothing changed that much, sure more traffic but it was spread out over the day. Give it a chance before thinking the worst.