County’s EGE Airport? Not So Fast – Mr. Romer!

by Mitigating Effects

In a former life, Mr. Romer must have been some sort of Cheerleader.

ECT supports efforts to create new private sector jobs in Eagle County, particularly in the down valley (Eagle-Gypsum) communities since those families are the folks that continue to suffer most from Home Foreclosures.

The ECT takes issue with Mr. Romer’s claim about our Gypsum Airport (EGE) that “the addition of an international terminal will benefit the ‘entire community’ in a positive way…”

The ECT believes that we’ve determined Mr. Romer doesn’t own a home at the end of our Airport’s Runway in Gypsum.

Like all reasonable people the ECT would like to see the costs/trade offs/environmental impacts..etc) reviewed publically with and for the folks in Gypsum closest to our Regional Airport.  Everyone knows (except Mr. Romer?) that increasing traffic and noise at an Airport has impacts.  Even our ‘Junior Fishwrap’ – a.k.a. the  Eagle Valley Enterprise has picked up on this fact.  (Click Here)

Mr. Romer, let’s make sure we “get this one right” and make sure the folks impacted the most are heard from publically.  They’re our neighbors and friends, not our Community’s doormat for economic development.  Again, the ECT supports creating new private sector jobs, let’s just make sure we do this with our ‘eyes wide open’ and not ‘eyes wide shut’ which the ECT is concerned…may be Mr. Romer’s current view.  Disappointing that Mr. Romer’s recent comments printed in the Fishwrap did not once mention any impacts on our fellow citizens.  (Click Here) to see for yourself.

The ECT is anxious to ‘play on the same team’ Mr. Romer – let’s get this one right so we can all win and not just at the expense of someone else.

Advertisements

2 responses

  1. (Cost to local governments when they expand an airport –can Eagle County actually afford this?)

    Annual average (noise) mitigation costs per single-family home ranged from a low of $17,300 in 1994 to a high of $45,000 in 2001-

    The costs of insulating individual schools varied from $850,000 to $8 million.

    A total of approximately $52 million was spent on the school sound insulation program. 64 to 60 DNL noise contour area. (*** A 60-65 DNL CONTOUR AREA Impacts 6.7 SQ. MILES ***)

    http://www.macnoise.com/pdfs/2010-FINAL-MSP-Annual-Noise-Contour-Report-2-24-11.pdf
    ————————————————————
    (Costs to local Colorado government back in 1990-)

    * City of Aurora, CO
    A significant project to reduce the impact of airport noise was the Stapleton Noise Insulation Program, which involved the expenditure of $20,000,000 to sound-insulate homes in Aurora, CO. http://www.auditory.org/asamtgs/asa93dnv/3aNS/3aNS1.html

    * AIRPORT NOISE INSULATION OF HOMES SURROUNDING STAPLETON INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT Accession Number: 00497400
    – The project area includes approximately 3,936 homes, 22 churches, and 8 schools.

    – The Stapleton Noise Insulation Program (SNIP) to provide aircraft noise insulation modifications to schools and churches within the 65-L sub dn contour of Stapleton International Airport.

    http://pubsindex.trb.org/view.aspx?type=CO&id=312960
    ——————————-
    (Our Federal Government Congressional report October 25, 2007 on airport noise and cancer-causing pollution “Environment: Impact “)

    = What GAO Found:

    Key factors affecting the level of aviation noise that communities are exposed to include jet aircraft operations, land uses around airports, and aircraft flight paths

    FAA has issued guidance that discourages incompatible land uses, such as residences, schools, and hospitals,

    * Aviation noise is still a problem when communities allow incompatible land uses— such as
    – residences
    – schools and
    – hospitals near airports.

    Need to assess the human health and welfare risks of aviation noise, and, develop online resources to better inform the public about aviation noise issues –

    http://www.gao.gov/htext/d08216t.html

    http://pubsindex.trb.org/view.aspx?type=CO&id=312960

  2. As a candidate for Gypsum Town Council I would like to have the residents of Gypsum consulted with regard to the airport expansion to an international terminal. I am not opposed to expansion per se, but believe that there are questions that need to be answered. First, what will be the benefits to Gypsum from all the additional traffic generated? Are there going to be new jobs, sales tax revenues or landing fees for the town and residents. Second, what will be the hours of operation? We already have aircraft leaving in the middle of the night on occaison and really don’t need a steady stream of flights either before 6:00AM or around midnight. Also, will some noise abatement program be followed. Third, has the U.S. government agreed to staff the customs clearing area on a full time basis or is this going to just be a seasonal terminal.Fourth, has the Town of Gypsum been consulted regarding the expansion and if so what has been the input. I haven’t heard anything regarding ths subject to ths point.
    I understand how and international terminal might be a big plus for Vail and Beaver Creek with the World Cup coming in 2015. This also might be a good construction job generator if companies down valley are used.However, the down valley towns already go through the boom and bust cycles of resort development and therefore need to have a say in how this idea progresses.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: