Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-11-20-HFAC-min Hanscom Field Advisory Commission Minutes November 20, 2007 Prepared by Massport Staff 1.Minutes: There were no corrections or comments for the October Minutes. Richard Canale reported having received (as requested at the September meeting) hard copies of the Airport Layout Plan. 2.Communications Regarding Hanscom:  Representative Kaufman email: Hank Manz read an email written by Representative Jay Kaufman related to a discussion he had with Secretary Cohen’s office regarding Hanscom operational concerns.  Bedford Selectman Letter: Gordon Feltman summarized a letter the Bedford Selectmen sent to Governor Patrick that conveys their concerns related to references in the Logan Airport 2006 EDR regarding the use of regional airports for cargo services. The letter also asserts that the document declares that cargo facilities are being established at Hanscom. In the letter, the selectmen also suggest that the governor include Massport in his consolidation of the state transportation agencies to unify the state’s transportation planning. 3.Monthly Noise Report: Cedric Daniel presented the monthly noise report. In response to questions, the following was discussed: October witnessed some military jet activity as a result of the World o Series, and this was a likely contributor to the increase in noise complaints. Comparing October 2007 night operations to October 2006 night o operations, there was an increase but the activity level was not inconsistent with past months and years. G. Feltman reminded the group that every month he questions the o usefulness of the noise report and other dialog at HFAC meetings. 4. Community Concerns/Discussion:  John Williams commented that HFAC and the communities need to accept Hanscom’s role in the regional aviation system and noted that the airport is not static. He believes that it will grow with the growth of aviation, the economy and local development. He suggested that unless there is an agreed upon strategic plan, there will always be conflict. In addition, he noted that he there seems to be more openness between the HFAC participants and a willingness to discuss issues and develop solutions.  G. Feltman noted that planning happens daily, and the result of planning or lack thereof can alter a region’s transportation infrastructure. R. Canale suggested that Massport should include the towns in its planning process by engaging the towns’ planning offices and committees. He noted that some time ago a group of stakeholders developed a set of ideas that they believed could be a solution but only a fraction of those ideas have been adopted by Massport. He added that HFAC should be proactive and be able to channel where growth occurs. Margaret Coppe noted that there was a time when there was a consolidated effort to produce a Memorandum of Understanding that was turned down by Massport.  D. Steele stressed that the Environmental Status and Planning (ESPR) report is the tool that Massport uses for planning, and the development of the ESPR incorporates a public process that is open to all interested parties. G. Feltman commented that disclosure is not discussion.  G. Feltman expressed his belief that Massport has no interest in HFAC and asked why HFAC doesn’t meet annually with Massport’s CEO, as has been done in the past. D. Steele informed the group that Tom Kinton (Massport’s Executive Director and CEO) is very interested in meeting with the towns’ selectman and HFAC members and that she had recently been directed to organize an informal gathering. She also informed the group that plans are being discussed to schedule community office hours that are open to the public. Selectmen Manz and Feltman offered to make town space available to Massport for the office hours. At G. Feltman’s request, it was agreed that the meeting with T. Kinton should be scheduled to take place after January 6, 2008. 5.Capital Projects/Development:  Dorothy Steele noted that the statuses of Hangars 24 and 10 have not changed since the last HFAC meeting. She reported that there are parties interested in developing at Hanscom, and Massport is evaluating the East Ramp for hangar development, as discussed in the 2005 ESPR. A utility upgrade program, to support this development, will possibly go to the Massport Board in January. (A map from the ESPR was passed around.)  In response to questions about how Massport envisions this project being pursued, D. Steele explained that the regular process would be followed: Massport would produce a scope for the work and solicit bids. She noted that a new access road is not anticipated at this time, although she concurred with comments that the ESPR identified possible East Ramp access via Hartwell Road.  In response to questions about cargo development on the East Ramp, D. Steele said that Massport has not received any recent interest from cargo operators; although DHL did request a tour, as reported earlier in the fall. She said that the interest is coming from corporate and other general aviation entities. R. Canale said that it’s generally understood that Logan is only interested in international cargo, which means Logan would like to see domestic cargo operations performed at regional airports. He asked which regional airports are being considered for this activity. D. Steele said she would get back to the Commission on this question. She noted that the FAA produced the regional aviation plan.  There were comments from both the aviation and residential community that the utility work was premature and that Massport wasn’t pursuing a well thought out plan for development. John Williams was concerned that there wasn’t a strategic plan for development. G. Feltman stated that he understands the ties between economic development and growth and is not against either, but he doesn’t see Massport incorporating appropriate planning. G. Feltman suggested that these concerns need to be shared at the meeting with Tom Kinton.  D. Steele commented that Massport’s role is to manage and operate various transportation facilities and infrastructure in Eastern Massachusetts that support the transportation needs of the region. Massport is not involved in planning, for example, corporate development on I-95; however that corporate development influences demand at Hanscom. D. Steele explained that development at Hanscom is pursued based on the needs of those who use the airport, and the process and timing may be adjusted according to those needs.  D. Steele commented that she is not a planner and cannot answer all the questions poised but, Massport creates the ESPR for planning purposes. She explained that Massport has identified a market for additional corporate development at Hanscom. Therefore, Massport is prepared to explore development opportunities on the East Ramp and address the East Ramp’s utility infrastructure needs. She also noted that Hanscom needs to produce enough revenue to become self- sufficient and suggested that corporate aviation development provides an important revenue stream (through ground lease income). 5. Other:  M. Coppe asked about the status of the nighttime fee discussions with the FAA and AOPA. D. Steele replied that Massport is working closely with the FAA and believes that at this time, this is the best approach for maintaining a nighttime fee. Massport will keep HFAC informed on any developments. D. Steele suggested that other airports have dealt with similar issues and she will try to provide information on this. She will also provide HFAC a copy of the AOPA letter to the FAA.  D. Steele reported that Massport hopes to contact the Town of Bedford in the near future to pursue a Vegetation Management for Runway 5/23 program.  H. Manz informed the group that he plans on building a new section on the HFAC website that will have “highlights” from HFAC meetings. This will help inform the public before the minutes are posted, which usually takes 3-4 weeks. The next meeting was set for December 17, 2007.