 |
| Search |
|
|
|
|
Editorials
Lancaster Airport Inc. owner Tom Geles and Shawn Bray, Passero Associates consulting engineer, addressed the Lancaster Town Board at their work session Monday evening requesting their support in receiving State funding for a completed land purchase and on the possibility of swapping land that would allow the airport to extend its parallel taxi runway.
“Right now, although we have been here for forty years, we don’t have a parallel taxiway and we are back taxing onto the active runway in order to take off,” declared Geles. “The development of the airport is incremental and is dependent upon federal and state funds. There are all kinds of regulations that have to be met. What I am trying to covey is that we have a very pressing need for a full parallel taxiway.”
Shawn Bray informed the board that there were two needs. “On December 7th, we sent to the town a request for an endorsing resolution from the town. What that essentially means is that the federal government pays for the airport expansion projects and the state picks up the 2-1/2%. To get the 2-1/2%, the state requires the town endorses the project. I am not sure of the wording but there was a sample letter sent to the town. The resolution requests in simple terms that the project in question was the piece of land purchased from Ecology & Environment. We have the FAA grant, but we are still 2-1/2% short from the state. The state is a little slow in handing out money. So this endorsing resolution is just for us getting the state share for purchases and the state share to negotiate and do due diligence on the terms (environmental, survey, etc.), not the purchases.”
Bray was not sure of the dollar amount on the state funding but estimated it at a “few grand.” “It is important for the airport to get the endorsing resolution to get the state funding.” He asked whether the resolution was on the agenda that evening and was told it was not. “It is done on every state grant that matches an FAA grant and has been done for 15 years at the airport. That is the thing that needs to be done for the two projects.”
Brady then produced a drawing to show what property the airport currently owns and what was needed to further airport expansion, namely, a piece of property the town owns – Enterprise Drive. It is needed to allow for a full taxiway. “It is a high priority project for the FAA regarding safety.” In order for the airport to extend the current taxiway to allow for corporate jet operation, the airport needs approximately 0.2 acres of Enterprise Drive, a town road. They would also have to purchase the Advanced Thermal building in the future and demolish some of it otherwise it would be an obstacle with airplane wings would be going through the building.
Bray declared that he had sent a letter to the board on December 9, 2009, with a drawing, showing the piece of property the airport needs from the town and reason why, namely, to develop a cul-de-sac for aircraft turnaround. They are asking the board for some direction on to acquire the property as they cannot force the town to do anything. “We need an opinion on whether a land swap would be possible. We need to get back to the FAA as soon as possible.” He added that the FFA approved further expansion conditioned on the full parallel taxiway and that this was the next logical step in the process. “It is an airport standard feature.”
Supervisor Robert Giza declared that they would have to go through the same process they always did, declaring it surplus property and putting it up for bid.
Airport owner Tom Geles interjected that he would gladly provide letters from the pilot users of the airport who would point out the urgency of having a parallel taxiway. According to Geles, pilots are back-taxiing on an active runway causing safety concerns. “It’s a very critical safety thing, and our development is incremental. We can only do one thing at a time as federal funds become available. When they become available, we go for it. It (parallel taxiway) is essential."
After questioning Bray on the API and the FAA approval conditioned on full parallel taxiway requirement, Town Attorney John Dudziak asked whether the FAA had any authority (eminent domain) to claim the property. Bray replied that “the FFA has no right to do this.” “That is why we are looking for something from the town. If this was to happen than we could pursue planning to get funding, otherwise it would be irresponsible for us to make this happen.”
Council Member Donna Stempniak asked what would happen if the town did not give its approval. “You would not get the state funding?” Bray replied that they would not get the 2-1/2% state funding portion. Stempniak then asked whether the airport had already purchased the land. Bray answered that they had (from Ecology & Environment [E &E] for $938,000). “The state is about a year behind in issuing grant money, said Bray. “This property was bought a while ago.”
Supervisor Giza asked Bray again on what the amount of money was to be recouped from the state. Bray answered, “It’s probably a little more than I think now,” answered Bray. He had said earlier that the amount was a few thousand.
Geles interjected: “It’s a lot of money to the airport as the airport is a marginal operation. It pays taxes and depends on grants and monies…
Supervisor Giza: “If we didn’t approve the grant, would you still buy the E&E property?” He was reminded that the property was already purchased by Bray. “The airport is out $10,000, or whatever the money is,” Bray added.
Geles again interjected with: “The airport collects state taxes, federal taxes through fuels, sales taxes, etc. This is a way that those taxes are paid back to us; and we depend on it for development of the airport. For years the airport was not a reliever, privately owned, and held its own by paying for all its expenses while at the same time paying into the fund with taxes. So, now we are getting back on what we collected in fuel taxes and sales taxes.”
Comments
There could be numerous comments on the slippery slope presentation. I will put this on the message board and let SAC and the residents have a go; with the following exceptions:
* This airport is currently set up to accommodate the 55 or so planes housed at the Lancaster Airport. This is all about further expanding the airport to accommodate for jet air traffic and furthering profit for the airport while not benefiting 99% of the community. The airport pays next to nothing on property it has acquired; property that could have housed industrial/commercial developed that would have significantly increased the tax base.
* How dare Mr. Geles say that through the years the little used airport contributed taxes in such volume that they deserve to get millions (12) in return? And how dare the town and/or state allow for funding to take place at this time of fiscal crisis?
* Mr. Bray stated, “. “It (town approval) is done on every state grant that matches an FAA grant and has been done for 15 years at the airport.” Really, then why is it I never seen such resolution before the Town Board. The Town keeps declaring that they have no jurisdiction in the airport expansion and/or did not help in any way that allowed the airport to get grant funding. What is the real story?
* How does Mr. Bray go from a few thousand to $10,000 when 2-1/2% of $938,000 is somewhere around $24,000?
* Why did Lancaster Airport Inc. purchase the E&E property for further runway expansion (for jet aircraft) when he knew he needed a piece of town owned property to move forward. The Town has maintained all along it had nothing to do with this project regarding advancing its expansion, well we shall see.
Truth and transparency are so hard to come by.
© Copyright 2009 by Speakupwny.com - hosted by Online Media, Inc
Top of Page
|
|
|
Editorials
Latest Headlines
|
|
Buffalo NY Web hosting By OnLineMedia, Inc
www.olm1.com
Part of
www.onlinebuffalo.com
[where: 14206]
|