Let New Haven’s Tweed Airport Have More Flights

Agree! Good letter.

Mindless Opinion Notes:

Dear Noteworthy. Maybe you need to do your homework. Fares from Tweed are considerably low on many routes. Check AA.com starting in May. The new jets are quiet. How much involvement with neighborhoods do you want. Because, meetings, hearings and complaint-fests have been going on for decades. You complainers or anti-tweed people do not know what your talking about half the time. You blurt out opinions not actual facts. Here is the harsh truth. You decided to live near the airport. How can any of you complain and not expect modern day changes? On the subject of the runway. There is a big difference of pavement vs usable runway length. So let me clear this rumor up. If the runway was expanded go the 7200 feet( on their property ) only up to 6600 feet would be used in one direction. The planes are filled up. There is airline interest and AA is very successful with full planes, looking to upgrade aircraft and expand routes. You complainers do not speak for all of us who also live around there. It's just prejudice against airplanes. The Airport is not going anywhere and will be a success. You and the other Anti Tweed Bandits should really listen to facts, before putting out false information. I know alot about this airport. You got questions? Ask me, I'll tell you the truth about what's going on

I recently flew out of Tweed to the North Carolina airport and 7 passengers had to be deplaned as the weight of all of us plus our luggage was too much for the length of the runway. I then overheard, once airborne, folks discussing the advantages and limitations of flying from New Haven. The opinion, of course, was that the runways should be lengthened.
Yes, all stakeholders should be involved in developing a new agreement, but, that being said, East Haven should get on board with the development needs of the surrounding area.

Quote, Noteworthy
" There is an agreement. It needs to be honored or a new community benefits agreement needs to be drafted, presented and get neighbors to the airport to sign off." Neighbors have shown to be unreasonable, they all have moved near an existing airport and then complain when an improvement can be made to increase flights. Thinking the Tweed would stay frozen in time is foolish, airports have grown over the years, why not Tweed?

So many New Haveners are reclusive to a fault. Not only do they fight the changes that are needed for a vibrant downtown, but they oppose the things that are needed to allow New Haven to grow. They want everyone to use trains, but oppose the parking additions that actually would accomplish that. They want new high tech development and to become an incubator for startups, but oppose improvements to Tweed that make it easier to grow and expand that type of business. New Haven is in a prime location, but isolationism is so entrenched among its citizens, that the world is passing it by.

Some of these Tweed neighbors have an unbelievable sense of entitlement... I think there should be talk of eminent domain to take their homes to put in a hotel, golf course, and major airport terminal, runway, and access road expansion. I think this is the only way to restore balance to this argument and get them to shut up already on benefits.

There have already been plenty of benefits to this group, including the tens of thousands of dollars of home improvements every single one has been offered. They claim this was not a benefit but entitled to them? Where was my free insulation, windows, and air conditioning when I91 & 95 was being rebuilt for 10 years? The nerve to ask for more...

Most importantly, this group has already received fair market value of their homes by purchasing a reduced-price home in a nice neighborhood near the CT coast line. Ever wonder why those homes are some of the cheapest waterfront in CT? If you dont like the airport noise move to Branford. That is how an open fair market works, and has worked for this community: the airport predates their arrival and historically had many more flights in louder planes. It is the best time ever to live near the airport. Don't now complain it isn't fair to you.

Nonetheless, Tweed has been an excellent neighbor pursuing sound proofing and laying out additional potential community benefits.

The request to expand 1000ft is a small expansion that wont even restore Tweed to its normal historic volume.

These 50-100 households need to understand a minor concession on their part greatly improves the entire region. I don't think 5-10% more air traffic is too much to ask.

Steve:

Spend some time in Fair Haven Heights when the jets fly over the Quinnipiac River and our historic neighborhood and tell me that opposition to Tweed's increasing flights is part of "entitlement".

@ Noteworthy, the 2009 MOA was written up that allowed one of the parties to back out, so nothing illegal was done. The neighbors involved have shown themselves to be very unreasonable saying they are not open to any give and take, how does one proceed with attitudes like that? In a past NHI article, quote, "Heerema bought her house in the Cove in 2012 based on an assumption: Tweed would remain a small airport without expanding with more commercial flights. She made that assumption based on a peace treaty struck in 2009." She assumed wrong as the MOA also included a daily limit of 30 flights and up to 6 airlines. The 2018 passenger totals were over 77,000., a 40% increase over 2017 and 2019 should be even higher. There is a healthy demand for more service and as far as fares, I pointed out in the NHR that the fare to Charlotte was lower from Tweed than from Bradley on the first day of the service, not saying Tweed is always less, but fares change many times during the day. what will also help to lower fares is to have other airlines offer service. You can't bring yourself to see anything positive about Tweed, the ease of using a nearby airport, the large increase in passengers and in May, American airlines is replacing the 50 seat planes with larger ones, and just to preempt a reply, these larger planes are not louder as they are newer models. Tweed will never a large operation, but with 3-5 airlines, it can offer service that can meet 90% of the area travelers needs. Tweed will never offer international flights and will not need more runway than what is currently planned that will take place on airport property. With all that's going on in the world and in the state, Tweed upgrading its runway is NOT is the sky is falling scenario some are painting. Talk of children getting sick, the runway being a water chute dumping toxins in the water are all scare tactics, not facts.

Steve-
It's a lack of integrity not illegal behavior. It's easy to withdraw when you make a poor effort to engage and craft a solution. When that's rejected, it's equally easy to claim the right to negate the agreement. As for rates, I've Checked rates 5 or 6 times in the last 12 months. Rates at Tweed are at least 30 percent higher every time. Maybe if you're retired and can fly anytime, or have a business account, it doesn't matter but to New Haven residents, 95% of whom can't afford to fly Tweed or even for families like mine who could, by time you figure that increase times 4 tix, it's a lot of money. There needs to be a community benefits agreement, traffic mitigation etc - and I think there'd be an agreement. Absent that the thugs in Hartford will try to ram this through with the help of City Hall, who never stands with its taxpayers. Not ever.

@ Noteworthy, I agree that traffic mitigation should be addressed & since growth will be slow at Tweed, there is time to craft a traffic plan.The MOA was flawed in many areas,1.Limiting the parking spaces on airport property was not a smart move. If the present lots were to fill up, travelers may not want to chance finding a space & instead be dropped off & picked up, resulting in two round trips per passenger instead of one. 2.The daily limit of 30 flights along with the yearly boarding total of 180,000 would average out to 17 passengers per flight based on a 50 seat aircraft, even at 15 daily flights, the average would be 34 passengers per flight. No airline could operate profitably under those restrictions. 3. Mr O'Brien has been very militant & not open to to the realization that many more people are involved apart from his small group, his default response always
is no. Tweed is not going to disappear & the present service by American is doing very well meaning a strong market exists & can support more airlines and flights. The present runway plan will be enough to lift Tweed from the present marginal operation that causes weight restrictions such as the flight to Charlotte on Saturday, 8 people had to be deplaned. Plain & simple the MOA was flawed & could not reach its goal. If those opposed to Tweed could realize that Tweed will never reach the likes of Bradley or even Westchester airport, but with service by 3-5 airlines to 4-6 hub airports,Tweed could be a valuable asset in making travel easier, keep travelers money in the local area, increase the airports income and add airport & airport related jobs. The anti airport people say no airlines want to come to Tweed & then in next breath say the area would be choked by the increased traffic.The homes that were & will be insulated & sound proofed is a good start in learning to be reasonable & accept change that will benefit thousands. For 50 years the runway has not changed, the time has come to upgrade.

There are no good traffic routes to get to the airport --- The only way is by traveling through quiet residential neighborhoods. If you expect to have a vibrant airport, you need a way to get there.

@Patricia Kane, Tweed is a public airport and is used by thousands of travelers every year but commercial airline service constitutes a very low percentage of the daily operations. Do you want to ban private and charter aircraft? You are exaggerating an idea you have that is a fantasy. Tweed is a low volume airport and even when more flights are added, private operations will still exceed airline flight numbers. Your comment about developing the Sikorsky shows your lack of research before commenting. The Sikorsky airports runways are 1000 feet shorter than Tweed's, so no commercial airline service is possible and there is not enough land for FAA required overruns and clear air space. The prop planes that served that airport in the past are long gone and regional jets like the ones that serve Tweed are unable to operate on runways that short. For years I have spent much time at Tweed and never have seen the type of problems you allege.
The airport has been in operation since 1931 and yet people buy a home nearby and then complain, go figure. If the airport or another public facility bothered me that much, I'd move and not expect to be given preferential treatment. I perceive there are those in the area who like having airline service a few minutes away and not have to drive to Bradley field. More and more people every day are discovering that Tweed is a good choice for air travel as the numbers show a 40% passenger increase in 2018 over 2017. As far as a health study, what about one for I-95 and I-91, 24 hours a day with thousands of cars and trucks? Tweed is a drop in the bucket in that regard and even with an increase in flights, its still a low volume airport. Bradley has many times more flights and no health concerns are being reported, but by your comments, the area around Bradley must be a killing field. Your distaste for the airport shows in your unresearched comments. There are much bigger problems facing the local area but Tweed is not one of them.

@ Noteworthy, For those who say Tweed's fares are too high, AA.com shows on 3-2-19 Tweed's fare to Charlotte is $164.00 and Bradley's fare is $ 564.00. On 3-11-19 Tweed $516.00 and Bradley $561.00. There may be times when its the other way around but when one factors the extra ground travel time to out of the area airports, parking fees, tolls if any, Tweed is a good deal many times especially if a passenger is being dropped off or picked up.

@ Noteworthy, quote, "It's a lack of integrity not illegal behavior. It's easy to withdraw when you make a poor effort to engage and craft a solution. The few who are opposed are not open to a solution. Mr OBrien has say we will not negotiate, does that sound like someone who seems reasonable? Not to me, but more like a child who demands his or her's own way. Look at the number of homes that have been remodeled with insulation and new windows, all homes that people bought knowing the airport preceded them in the neighborhood. You somehow feel the few who are opposed should have the final say regarding a public facility that serves thousands every year. For decades the airport has been hamstrung and complaints made that it uses public funding, airlines don't want to come to Tweed, that there is no market for air travel in the area,& the one tired old excuse, the airport exists for Yale. Back many years when Eastern flew to Tweed, the runway was 5600 feet and there were weight restrictions, fast forward to 2019 & the runway is still 5600 and American airlines flights have at times weight restrictions. Do we see a common thread here? If a few would realistically look at Tweed, they would see an airport that would grow, but not to huge proportions, an airport with a reasonable amount of flights to several hub airports, 3-4 flights to each hub airport, no hourly shuttle flights, no international flights and no wide body planes. We are living in a world where most people protest anything new, I somehow feel there are more important issues facing New Haven,Connecticut,the country & the world than an airport adding much needed & wanted air service. The fact that American airlines is replacing 50 seat aircraft in use with larger ones speaks volumes about the demand for local air service. The new planes are much quieter than those of the past, Eastern's 727's and Allegheny's BAC-1-11, the loudest airliner I ever heard, but those are all gone. Hopefully sanity will prevail.

How ironic that, after getting the state statute passed giving the state power over New Haven's airport, State Sen. Len Fasano is displaying selective indignation over the state's attempt to regionalize local school systems. Karma.
Sec. 120j(c) is an unjust law that should never have seen the light of day. It was an outgrowth of a 2009 agreement brokered by a man with NO working knowledge of aviation and aeronautics, who ran for Congress as a Socialist in the early years of the millennium. An agreement that severely limited the airport's two chief sources of income: passenger facilities charges and parking fees.
How can you call the airport a "money loser" while at the same time support the very regulation that keeps it on public subsidy? Because it gives Tweed's foes hope in their ultimate goal: The complete and utter irradication of the airport.
The era of good feeling" about Tweed we're seeing now is the culmination of more and more people flying to other U. S. cities (out of Bradley and New York), seeing how THEIR airports have improved, and returning home asking, "What's wrong with New Haven?" "Don't they 'get it'?"
Toni Harp "gets it."
If people near Tweed genuinely feel they are in jeopardy, then, to paraphrase Nancy Reagan, the solution is not to take the airport from the residents, but the residents from the airport. Fair market value, with the seller's new residence to be at least five miles from Tweed.

the quality of life issues (health, noise, pollution) are not limited to the immediate neighborhood around Tweed. Fair Haven Heights gets an unwanted share of the noise in an historic district that does NOT benefit from the airport.

@ Patrica Kane "pumping up an airport that was never intended to grow significantly." That statement is false, why should the airport be constrained when the local market is ripe for more service. American airlines is enjoying high passenger loads and that has led to larger planes replacing all the present flights in May. Look at other airports over the span of years since the 70's. Providence and White Plains airports have built new terminals, the same for the Manchester and Portland airports. Providence has extended its main runway and yet Tweed still has the same runway. All the airports mentioned have grown but not Tweed. To expect the airport to remain frozen in time is not realistic or beneficial for the local travelers and businesses. Tweed has potential to add more service but not on the level of Bradley field and it will not affect the area such as you have painted a picture of doom and gloom. If 2-3 airlines come to Tweed with a few daily flights to hub airports, life will go on without the dire consequences you paint in your comments.
Your default setting is to oppose Tweed on all levels, get to know more regarding the benefits an upgraded Tweed can offer, go beyond your same comments posted over and over.