Airport Commission to discuss expansion

12
Martha's Vineyard Aiport has filed for a wide-ranging expansion. Here, airport manager Ann Richart, right, gives Sen. Edward Markey a tour of the airport, highlighting issues along the way. — Gabrielle Mannino

The Martha’s Vineyard Airport Commission will meet Wednesday afternoon to discuss a Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) filing connected with projects meant to fulfill part of the airport master plan. Further development of runways, taxiways, aprons, hangars, and the terminal are the aspects of the master plan relative to the MEPA filing, according to airport manager Ann Richart. All of these involve the airport proper and not the business park.

On Jan. 31 at 5:30 pm, MEPA officials will hold a forum on the filing in the airport terminal.

Comments concerning environmental impacts of the project can be mailed to the Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs, MEPA Office, 100 Cambridge St., Suite 900, Boston MA 02114. They can also be emailed to Alex Strysky at alexander.strysky@mass.gov. The identification number for the airport project, 15964, must accompany comments. The deadline for public comment is Feb. 12.

 

12 COMMENTS

  1. Do we really want larger jets, more noise, more air pollution, more chance for an inflight air disaster with more airplanes, more tourists? The master plan should be to not expand further, just maintain what we have now.

    • I concur with your comments. I witnessed a greater volume of commercial aircraft this past summer–it was annoying. I can’t imagine how more commercial air traffic is a plus for MV residents. Bigger is not better in this case. More importantly, the Airport Commission should focus on the on-going ground water contamination issues before embarking on more illustrious projects.

  2. I think a larger airport is a bad idea. More and larger jets are not needed.The Airport Commission should be more concerned with groundwater abatement ,and how to deal with the current PFAS contamination.

  3. I really hope everyone that is against the expansion will contact the appropriate people with their concerns. I am completely against this idea and I also agree they need to take care of the current situation of the PFAS.

  4. When it comes to the MVY Airport , there is a lot to be considered. To start with, I agree with the opinions above. We should not expand at this time. What say we get the house in order first and make the improvements necessary to make the airport a first class operation from top to bottom. There is a lot of room for improving the facility as it stands right now. From the ageing tarmac to the TSA processing areas, much can be done for relatively small money. Then think about whether or not you really want to have a busier airport. And when you do, don’t forget to look at not just the commercial jet traffic, but take a good hard look at your private jets that come in and out of there on a daily basis during the busy season. There are far more of those elites coming and going than the commercials. Ask your selves, expend for what purpose? Is it just about the revenue AGAIN like all the other “expansion” projects on the island. Or is it actually a good thing for the island and the quality of life of the RESIDENCE both year round and seasonal? Bigger is not usually better and less is usually more!

  5. Its apparent the airport has not done a good ‘pr job’ of explaining the ‘expansion’. New terminals and hangars do not attract air traffic OR larger planes. Commercial airline traffic is driven by “O and D’ (origin and destination) demand between city pairs. If they built a monster terminal, which they are not, it would not increase commercial airline traffic, since passengers come here to the beaches and restaurants, NOT to hang out at an airline terminal. A seasonal place like this has a big demand for 3 months, and then nothing for 9 months. Perhaps a more efficient use of the current terminal (and air conditioning) would be a better expenditure of money, rather than to accommodate the JetBlue and American embraer E190’s that seem to schedule at the same time which creates the demand and crowding in the terminal. The airport can’t tell the airlines when to schedule, but they could ‘nudge’ them into cooperation as the airport does control the rental of counter space which is necessary for the airlines. The fears of additional ‘private jet traffic’ are unfounded. If someone owns a home here or visits via private jet, any terminal is a non-issue since ‘general aviation’ is relegated to a small pilot lounge, And…someone with a private jet doesn’t say ‘oh lets go visit someplace with nice parking a new terminal”- that’s quite a misconception. Private jet traffic will not increase/decrease because of a terminal that is used by AIRLINES, or new hangars. In fact the ability to park in a hangar will decrease traffic since many jet owners do not want their planes sitting out on the ramp in the salt air, and send it over to the mainland to park, where their pilots also stay in a cheaper hotel. What this DOES do, if there is a hangar to park inside, will ELIMINATE some jet traffic as the planes won’t have to fly in AGAIN to pick up the passengers.. they will be PARKED here in the hangar!. As far as auto parking, I’m not sure about the size of the current lot. If there is not currently sufficient space to park, then passengers must be picked up and dropped off, which DOUBLES the trips necessary via auto. What they REALLY need to do is get a police officer to direct traffic at the corner of airport rd and west Tisbury road since the traffic backs up to the terminal when 3 airliners arrive at once. AND…with respect to a corporate jet hangar being constructed. I suspect the 3 dilapidated hangars adjacent to the ramp will be demolished to make space (former Hadley hangar, air new England hangar, duchess aviation hangar).

  6. The airport is slowly becoming a greater and greater threat to the dark skies we used to have on the Vineyard.
    Remember when it used to be easy to see the Milky Way at night?
    The Commission requires businesses to have outside lights at night, but the way most do that is to just slap a bright LED light to the side of the building… which does not actually illuminate the building and sends most of the light up into the sky to increase light pollution. So, when the Airport is rebuilt “newer and bigger,” it would be good to request they pay attention to reducing light pollution. Next step would be for NSTAR to put hoods on the huge sodium vapor lights they have shrining up into the sky at their emergency transformers on Edgartown-Vineyard haven Road….

Previous articleWest Tisbury firefighters snuff chimney fire
Next articleVineyarders bounce Nantucket in girls hoops