— from Joe Symons —
Joe, Thank you for your inquiry. The project is still in progress. We currently have the draft alternative development options on the website for public comment. The files are located here: https://www.portoforcas.com/master-plan/ and comments received by July 13th will be considered for the preferred alternative. This alternative will be presented in September at a pubic open house.
Thank you,
Leah R. Henderson, C.M., ACE
Manager Aviation Planning and Design
Thank you for your prompt attention to my inquiry.
I have quickly reviewed the “maps” that appear to be the “plan”. They look like something equivalent to engineering drawings. Is there no text describing the intentions/meaning and benefits/costs of each alternative? Is there any contextualization for these alternatives?
Has anyone done any thinking about what each alternative would mean relative to plane traffic in/out of Eastsound? Who would come? How many would come? Impact on the community? Possible pros/cons of these alternatives as they impact not just the airport but the island? Is there any “space” for a public conversation, not just submitted comments?
To me, the issue has virtually nothing to do with federal regulations, safety or access to what appears to be free money from the feds. That’s all opioid-laced candy. Once the commissioners are addicted, the rules, as they always do, will continue to change and it may not be the port that calls the shots. If this were a proposal to consider “alternatives” that would discuss the number and location of additions to/of ferry docks, you can be sure there would be a whole lot of concerned folks. Taking testimony at public hearings is not the same as a comprehensive conversation.
There is a point when a community needs to at least talk about the concept that ‘enough is enough’. To introduce wisdom into the planning process. To recognize that continued growth is in some cases literally impossible, or it is extremely expensive, or it benefits only a small subset while dumping external costs on the majority.
I’m not a pilot. I don’t fly much. I was walking on a back trail in Moran State Park last evening. This 2 hour hike was 99.9% silent. Just me and the woods. A low flying biplane came by; it’s sound could be heard for miles and miles. It totally disrupted the peace and tranquility that a hiker would enjoy and, obviously, expect. The pilot and his/her passengers have no concept of what an intrusion the noise makes. As a culture we have come to take this asymmetric impact (passengers go wow! hundreds of people have to stop talking because of the noise) as somehow normal and, worse, acceptable.
Unrelated to your project is considerable public concern here in the San Juans of the impact of jet noise from Growlers stationed at the Whidbey Island NAS. Still, it is an example of this asymmetry.
I would hope there would be a higher standard regarding the impact of various public policies and proposed development than the passive “submit a letter” process.
Again, I appreciate your prompt reply and hope you might address some of the issues I raise here.
Thanks
Joe Symons
Olga WA
I say it again: It is time for the Airport Board to come clean on what if any, quid pro quo exists between FAA money and the American Security apparatus. As Joe Symons so appropriately puts it, this is “opiated candy” as is all monies attached to priming the pump of a never ending and insatiable, military industrial complex
Between NAS Whidbey and Orcas International Airport the dots connect in a straight line. I’m personally tired of living in a mobbed up town where no public input has a meaningful chance of enduring and abiding over the “process”
“Those who trade liberty for security deserve neither,” sayaeth the wise guy Franklin.
Amen
Mr. Symons,
As a pilot of 22 years, both military and civilian, pilots enjoying flying for recreation. The pilot flying the biplane has just as much right to enjoy the scenery from his airplane as you do from the ground. You’re not entitled to absolute silence. Flying is a major source of recreation for many people. And there are no rules at all prohibiting pilots from flying in your airspace.
We will continue.
I am concerned about the possibility of losing the airport terminal and Orcas receiving yet another mainland-style “improvement.”
Dear Mr. Rader,
I fully understand the need for air travel as well as the rights of citizens to fly their planes for recreation. Most pilots operate their planes in a respectful manner. By that I mean taking off to the north whenever possible and keeping proper altitude as well as having their engines and mufflers tuned! There are more than a handful that do not. When a pilot irresponsibility creates so much noise that everyone outside in the Eastsound core is unable to speak until a plane passes a line has been crossed. And it happens often.
When Joe has his windows rattled in Doe Bay..a line has been crossed.
I liken it to thoughtless bikers who slowly ride down the middle of the road or stop at a blind corner to photograph a deer. It paints all bikers as thoughtless and self serving while inconveniencing the rest of us. All bikers are not that way.
How is it that there are noise ordinances for people on the ground but the sky is no holds barred (asking for a friend)?
So how about we respect each other a little more and move away from snarky comments and try to solve a real problem together?
PS-thank you for your service!!
Thank you for your well-thought comment letter, Joe Symons. Joe Murphy, as usual you are spot-on and i agree with all points you both articulate.
If the airport gets the 10,000 deplanements – and based on what i have seen at the airport including skydivers from helicopters (is each jump by each person from full days of nonstop skydiving a “deplanement?”) , it looks like the Port WILL get the 1$million a year. Are they then going to force this expansion on us, no matter how many comments against it we make? Is this all just for show? Will we be forced to grow in ways we don’t want or need, even though we have never had a carrying capacity assessment done for Orcas? Are they going to waste our time on letting us think we can sway what may already be a “done deal?”
What strings come with the money? Why do we need immigration and customs here, or “homeland security”?
My biggest concern, being on the “receiving end” of the proposed re-route of Mt. Baker Road becoming a North-South road and coming out right at Lavender Hollow Apartments, a high density low income apartment complex with kids, pets, hikers, bikers, and a school across the street of a dead-end road that is still relatively safe for us – is that we will be severely impacted by the road. The noise of planes flying directly over my roof is deafening. I’m scared for my cat, who hunts in that field.
But it gets even worse – the proposed road goes RIGHT THROUGH the last dying part of Eastsound Swale, once a Category 2 wetland until the County made every parcel developable with “wild west” exemptions, The Development Dept ignoring the Conservancy Overlay district, and “site specific” wetland delineation being implemented mainly due to “property rights” people with the money to sue; this is happening everywhere in the global “me” era.
What gives the County, the Port, or the FAA or anyone else the right to destroy a wetland that once went from shore to shore in Eastsound Basin and then “downgrade” it to having NO protections because they helped destroy it piecemeal?
The ecocide committed here in Eastsound and continuing to be committed by the Port and the County is an atrocity.
As for the comment by James Rader: How disappointing and disturbing to read the un-neighborly and challenging his comment toward Joe Symons. It seems we are attracting more and more people who don’t care about community or the land – only about themselves and their own entitlements no matter what it does to the rest of us. That is the attitude that will finish this place off if we don’t push back against it and stand for something we love.
The economy is so tenuous here and another big crash can happen any minute, and we are going full steam towards maximum unlimited growth and a crash that is going to be ugly, for lack of a better word.
Bottom line: the people coming in are DON’T WANT US HERE – not in the UGA and not outside of the UGA. the tone and tenor is that if we can’t afford it anymore, tough ducks – we should move somewhere else. All of it is heartbreaking if this is your longtime home.
Can we imagine if this proposed expansion was to close Mt Baker Road which is the access for the Fire Department ? That would be the worst scenario for emergency response !
And then we have the County vehicles, Opalco and the list goes on. Federal funding for an expansion takes away our local jurisdiction. Enough already !
If you wish to sign a petition opposing airport expansion please stop by Score! Nifty Thrifty Mon-Sat 11-4 — ASAP folks
One of the things that bothers me about this Airport Expansion Proposal is that in spite of its potentially extreme impacts to the island, until very, very recently ALMOST NOBODY I SPOKE TO ON ORCAS HAD EVEN HEARD ABOUT IT.
This smacks of deliberate intention on the part of the Port, or whoever it is who is who ought to be keeping the public informed. Now, less than a week from the end of the Public Comment Period, people are finally getting the word. As far as I know, or anyone not ‘In the Know’ knows, there won’t be any public hearings at all.
Also: The maps on the website do not have keys or legends to let those of us who want to know what is happening understand it. Mt. Baker Road, for instance, is drawn in a combination of blue, pink, green and white lines — but the legend does not say what the colors mean. And even after expanding the area of the map around Brandt’s Landing marina, it is impossible to tell whether Option 2 (for instance) will cut off access to the present Harbormaster’s office and all of the boats that are moored on the west side of the “Ditch.” How can the people who will be affected have meaningful input if we don’t even know what is really being proposed? I pray that the Public Comment Period will be extended — but I seriously doubt that those who will be making the decisions want this to happen, or they would have done an earlier and better job of letting us know what is hanging over our heads.
And speaking of cutting off access to the west side of the marina: Brandt’s Landing is the only public marina on the north side of Orcas. I personally do not want to see any boats lose their “parking places.” Orcas already has extremely limited public shoreline access; the marinas are full and have long wait lists for boat spots, especially at Brandt’s. I do not believe that the “needs” of air traffic should be prioritized over the needs of people who want to get on the water on an island. (Note: My family has kept a small boat at Brandt’s since the 1970’s. We use it to access our cabins on Waldron, and without that spot our water commute would become at least twice as long, and more difficult and dangerous to a degree which I cannot overemphasize).
To my mind, the only acceptable one of the “Alternatives” proposed by the Port is Alternative One – “Leave it as it Is.” I have every confidence that the more radical Alternatives will be proposed again (and again, and again) but maybe the next time around the public who will be affected will be informed in time to have some ability to react. This time, the worm has been sneaked into our apple. I hope that we did not see it too late.
PS: What Sadie said: Right again, Sadie.
If the airfield is extended to the south, the wetlands there will be even more destroyed. Noise impacts on Eastsound village will increase, not only onto the largely low-income residents to the south and west of that area but also onto all of the houses, inns and businesses on the southwest side of town and on the hill there.
Bad idea. People who live there, WRITE YOUR COMMENTS AND SEND THEM TO THE PEOPLE WHO MAKE THE DECISIONS.