The City of Marshfield Jetport

Marshfield related issues.
Forum rules
Please Click Here To View Rules ---- To contact the administrator please email admin@southshoreforums.com.
Joseph
Citizen
Citizen
Posts: 4466
Joined: Jan Wed 05, 2005 1:01 am

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Joseph » Jul Tue 12, 2016 8:49 am

Airport officials have said the project is necessary because improvements will bring the airport into compliance with FAA safety and design standards.
Misleading, deceptive, inaccurate, untrue statement. But, it sounds 'right'. - 'cause it's designed to.

And that sums it up: The airport gang has used sleight of hand and sleazy, slippery unethical methods which appear to have been coordinated by a former state official, now 'consultant'. And, they have been aided and abetted by your state representatives, state DEP officials and local officials in the destruction of the environment, loss of tax revenue and endangerment of the residents. Payment by the many for the enrichment of the few.

Oh, and of course - there was the 'scrivener's error' that was the final stroke/twist of the knife.

Now Galvin has taken his experience with this bunch of scumbags to Plymouth Airport - which just signed him up to be their mouthpiece. He may miss a few more meetings in Marshfield - since he's so busy taking care of his other clients.
Why do so many officials FEAR and kowtow to the Marshfield Airport gang?

What is the source of their power? Does it involve some kind of unseemly enterprise? A government entity?

User avatar
Bridges
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 11302
Joined: Aug Sat 05, 2006 12:29 pm
Location: Marshfield

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Bridges » Jul Tue 12, 2016 8:36 pm

Joseph wrote:
Airport officials have said the project is necessary because improvements will bring the airport into compliance with FAA safety and design standards.
Misleading, deceptive, inaccurate, untrue statement. But, it sounds 'right'. - 'cause it's designed to.
No, 100% accurate. And this has been explained to you time and again by myself (e.g report.php?f=1&p=508649), Max, I suspect Ann Pollard, and probably a slew of others.

The exact same sort of project has been done at airports all over the Commonwealth, and all over the country, using the exact same FAA grant program. NOTHING in the least bit unusual about our runway project.

But at this point, I could care less what you think. As many others besides me have pointed out, you chose to live next to this airport. It was here LONG before you.

And it will most certainly be here for decades to come. Yes, eventually rising sea levels will likely claim the airport. But of course, as you live smack next to the airport, rising seas will claim your house (and all your neighbors), right about the same time they claim the airport...
Scituate BOS, BU Prof and scientist Rick Murray: The only real answer is retreat. I feel for these people...They inherited their house from their great grandmother or spent a lot of money to buy it. But...we are fighting a losing battle with the sea.

Joseph
Citizen
Citizen
Posts: 4466
Joined: Jan Wed 05, 2005 1:01 am

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Joseph » Jul Tue 12, 2016 11:14 pm

Sure - it's 100% accurate that is what 'officials' SAID.
But, it is NOT accurate or true that the expansion project was necessary to bring the airport into compliance.
If the expansion project had not been done the airport would still be open.

More SLEAZE and MICHIGAS from Bridges.
Why do so many officials FEAR and kowtow to the Marshfield Airport gang?

What is the source of their power? Does it involve some kind of unseemly enterprise? A government entity?

clover
Resident
Resident
Posts: 1433
Joined: Oct Fri 19, 2007 10:52 am

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by clover » Jul Tue 12, 2016 11:29 pm

NOTHING in the least bit unusual about our runway project.
And this statenment is also untrue. I know because I've read about many open public discussions. hearings and votes regarding the rezoning of lands around expanding or changing small airports. No such things went on in this town. The project just slid through a ZBA Hearing in one night, and only a tiny special permit was granted for a big jet runway in a residential zone. That does NOT happen all around the country.

Marshfield's Zoning Board is a complete "joke" (if you find unequal zoning law application funny,) and it's been proven by the four nights of Hearings needed for the proposed Harbormaster building. The ZBA was again planning a quick little special permit in the residential zone, but they were caught, this time, ignoring Marshfield's zoning bylaw.

Inglewood1
Tourist
Tourist
Posts: 70
Joined: Jul Wed 06, 2016 5:22 pm

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Inglewood1 » Jul Wed 13, 2016 3:29 am

[youtube][/youtube] http://youtu.be/xBp9src00fY Fireside Chat @ the Marshfield Munincipal Airport
image.jpg
image.jpg (44.29 KiB) Viewed 1451 times
Dinner for 2 @ the Fairview,Brant Rock. All you can eat ! The best 3 minute 25 second short clip ever. Turtles lives mater,can you believe that **== :-@ ^#(^

Inglewood1
Tourist
Tourist
Posts: 70
Joined: Jul Wed 06, 2016 5:22 pm

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Inglewood1 » Jul Wed 13, 2016 3:48 am

**== :-H :-BD [youtube][/youtube] http://youtu.be/mwrFMzLwefw 4 minutes of kids just having some fun @ Bass Creek,Marshfield.Not so fun if live at the Plymouth Ave end of the Marshfield Munincipal Airport. What would (RIP) George Harlow think if he knew this was happening at minimum 5 time a day to his most beloved Fieldston section neghborhoods ?
image.jpg
image.jpg (49.55 KiB) Viewed 1450 times
image.jpg
image.jpg (34.8 KiB) Viewed 1450 times

Inglewood1
Tourist
Tourist
Posts: 70
Joined: Jul Wed 06, 2016 5:22 pm

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Inglewood1 » Jul Wed 13, 2016 3:59 am

**== [-X **== :YMBRINGITON: [youtube][/youtube] http://youtu.be/yKh_8fhSFTw Jet Fuel Runoff Seepage into Bass Creek ? Water sample test results ? Jet Fuel Exhaust Soot on many Bass Creek area homes ? Where's the Marshfield Conservation Commission when you need him ? Many unanswered questions. How many more Mista Speaker ? How many more ! Family Ties
image.jpg
image.jpg (133.01 KiB) Viewed 1449 times
image.jpg
3 minute 11 second U Tube video of the environmental carnage,under enviromental health attack? Your turn Piper Cub Mr.Bridges : Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport
Postby Bridges » Jul Mon 11, 2016 12:21 pm

:shock: Umm...when you folks wanna get back to discussing something related to aviation or our airport, y'all let me know...
Scituate BOS, BU Prof and scientist Rick Murray: The only real answer is retreat. I feel for these people...They inherited their house from their great grandmother or spent a lot of money to buy it. But...we are fighting a losing battle with the sea.
Last edited by Inglewood1 on Jul Wed 13, 2016 4:29 am, edited 2 times in total.

Inglewood1
Tourist
Tourist
Posts: 70
Joined: Jul Wed 06, 2016 5:22 pm

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Inglewood1 » Jul Wed 13, 2016 4:18 am

[youtube][/youtube] http://youtu.be/aMfa3Qxi7XY How close is close ? How high is high ? How low is low ? Very short 49 second video clip Plymouth Av Marshfield neghborhoods are very concerned about the environmental health impact with Jets & Turboprop Planes flying way to close to homes and very very low
Residents raise health concerns about Marshfield airport
By Lisa Kashinsky
lkashinsky@wickedlocal.com
Posted Oct 23, 2014 at 3:00 PM

A group of residents worried about jet fuel fumes from planes at Marshfield Municipal Airport has brought their concerns to the town’s Board of Health.

Resident Joe Pecevich, a member of Marshfield Citizens Against Airport Pollution, last week gave the board an overview of the group’s concerns – including fumes and noise from jets – that he said has gotten worse since the airport reopened after a $15.43 million runway expansion and safety improvement project in June.

"We’re getting to a point now where we are getting lots of bad, adverse impacts," Pecevich said.

Board of Health Chairman Gerald Maher said that his board could act as a liaison between the citizens and airport officials.

But, Maher said, his board did not have the equipment or the authority to either monitor or control the airport.

"As far as the Board of Health goes, if in fact a health hazard exists, we need to prove it," Maher said. "We would need specific equipment that we don’t have to prove that the health hazard exists."

Pecevich is the first to come in front of the Board of Health and make a presentation about perceived health issues with the airport, according to Vice Chairman Mark MacDonald, who was absent from Wednesday night’s meeting.

MacDonald had encouraged the group to come before the Board of Health during a special Selectmen’s meeting last month that addressed the concerns of fellow citizens group member Richard Reardon.

The citizens group has been meeting with various town boards since the airport reopened, bringing up issues from low-flying planes to concerns over fumes and noise.

Pecevich told the Board of Health at its Oct. 15 meeting that he felt the airport project "wasn’t properly vetted."

"Plans showed there were going to be problems, including increased jet exhaust into people’s homes," he said.

Some of the worst instances of fumes, Pecevich said, could be attributed to a jet that regularly takes off before 7 a.m.

"Fumes from that takeoff operation will linger for at least half an hour in that neighborhood," he said. "It’s pretty disgusting."

Pecevich also pointed to studies done at the Logan Airport and Los Angeles International Airport that show particles from jet fuel fumes to be dangerous and said, "Jet exhaust, in particular, is very, very nasty."
image.jpg
image.jpg (66.09 KiB) Viewed 1448 times

Joseph
Citizen
Citizen
Posts: 4466
Joined: Jan Wed 05, 2005 1:01 am

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Joseph » Jul Wed 13, 2016 7:22 am

Don't you guys get it? Bridges is simply 'interested in aviation.' :lol: :lol: 8-| :-J

6:30 this morning - noisy turboprop arrives skimming over house in Fieldston.
6:55 this morning - noisy and VERY SMELLY jet takes off on Runway 24 blowing jet fumes into the neighborhood and homes.

Thanks (Special Permit mill) ZBA!

Thanks Mike (My Mom lives there) Harrington!

Thanks Rep. (Bring Money to Marshfield) Cantwell!

Thanks Bob (It's good for business) Hedlund!

Thanks (Hey - we just follow orders from above) DEP!

Thanks (We're sleazy and love our cushy Federal job and follow orders from the aircraft lobby) FAA!

Thanks (That's not our problem) Conservation!

Thanks Gerry (I Love Keith Polansky) Maher!


And others...
Why do so many officials FEAR and kowtow to the Marshfield Airport gang?

What is the source of their power? Does it involve some kind of unseemly enterprise? A government entity?

Joseph
Citizen
Citizen
Posts: 4466
Joined: Jan Wed 05, 2005 1:01 am

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Joseph » Jul Wed 13, 2016 7:37 am

Inglewood1 wrote:**== :-H :-BD [youtube][/youtube] http://youtu.be/mwrFMzLwefw 4 minutes of kids just having some fun @ Bass Creek,Marshfield.Not so fun if live at the Plymouth Ave end of the Marshfield Munincipal Airport. What would (RIP) George Harlow think if he knew this was happening at minimum 5 time a day to his most beloved Fieldston section neghborhoods ?
image.jpg
image.jpg

The kids in the video say: "Awesome! "Crazy!" "That was SO loud!"


And we just had ANOTHER jet take off at 7:30 AM -with all the fumes.
Why do so many officials FEAR and kowtow to the Marshfield Airport gang?

What is the source of their power? Does it involve some kind of unseemly enterprise? A government entity?

clover
Resident
Resident
Posts: 1433
Joined: Oct Fri 19, 2007 10:52 am

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by clover » Jul Sun 17, 2016 11:34 am

The suit against the airport has been dismissed for now. While I understand the law regarding the 20 day appeal period of a ZBA decision, I don't understand how this airport is protected under MGL Chapter 40A Section 7, titled "Enforcement of zoning regulations; violations; penalties; jurisdiction of superior court." There was no building permit issued for the runway project, am I correct? Doesn't that leave "no limitation on the time for taking action against" the unlawful nonconforming use of a runway in a residential zone? Seems to me the use of this runway can be challenged at any time, forever.

Here's part of a summary of MGL 40A Section 7 from the Mass Bar Association website:
http://www.massbar.org/publications/sec ... ctures-and
The provision provides two statutes of limitations for structures built illegally or mistakenly. First, there is a six-year limitation on suits to compel the removal, alteration or relocation of a structure that was built in violation of Chapter 40A or a zoning bylaw, if the structure was built in accordance with the terms of the original building permit. This protection applies even where the building inspector had improperly or mistakenly issued the building permit. Second, there is a 10-year limitation on suits to compel the removal, alteration, or relocation of a structure that was built without a building permit.

With regard to uses commenced illegally, Section 7 provides the same six-year limitation on suits to compel the abandonment, limitation or modification of a use commenced under the terms of the original building permit. The use is only protected however, if the building permit specifically contemplated the use. Lord v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Somerset, 30 Mass. App. Court 226 (1991). There is no limitation on the time for taking action against uses that were not authorized by a building permit.


Massachusetts General Law 40A Section 7
https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralL ... A/Section7

User avatar
Bridges
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 11302
Joined: Aug Sat 05, 2006 12:29 pm
Location: Marshfield

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Bridges » Jul Sun 17, 2016 11:43 am

clover wrote:The suit against the airport has been dismissed for now.
For now?

Swell - you folks gonna waste still more of the taxpayer's money fighting this, in a battle you will not win (the court has made that abundantly clear)?
Scituate BOS, BU Prof and scientist Rick Murray: The only real answer is retreat. I feel for these people...They inherited their house from their great grandmother or spent a lot of money to buy it. But...we are fighting a losing battle with the sea.

Inglewood1
Tourist
Tourist
Posts: 70
Joined: Jul Wed 06, 2016 5:22 pm

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Inglewood1 » Jul Sun 17, 2016 11:54 am

The collateral enviromental health damage is large and very unforgiving for young and elderly. I hope the Bridge man will come full circle and help those that need his flight data Intel, it will help many many family's as a early warning system to get out of the house to a safe breathable place. I believe that he is just a just a misunderstood brainiac, and that's kinda sad. Carry on Bridgeman,let your soul be your guide.Sincerely Inglewood1
image.jpg
image.jpg (17.46 KiB) Viewed 1307 times

User avatar
Bridges
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 11302
Joined: Aug Sat 05, 2006 12:29 pm
Location: Marshfield

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Bridges » Jul Sun 17, 2016 12:14 pm

I'd be glad to help.

We see anywhere from 0 to 4 jet ops in any given day.

We see thousands of car and truck operations in any given day.

The cars and trucks drive all over town, at ground level.
The jet in Joseph's video was airborne, and out over the ocean within seconds of takeoff.

So you explain to me how cars and trucks are not a MUCH bigger air quality issue?
Scituate BOS, BU Prof and scientist Rick Murray: The only real answer is retreat. I feel for these people...They inherited their house from their great grandmother or spent a lot of money to buy it. But...we are fighting a losing battle with the sea.

Inglewood1
Tourist
Tourist
Posts: 70
Joined: Jul Wed 06, 2016 5:22 pm

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Inglewood1 » Jul Sun 17, 2016 12:37 pm

:)] Fare and Balanced,for this math. 4 operations.Cut the year down to 200 days. 4x200=800 Since the number 23 Woodbine Road home owner spoke up,that's a total of 4800 operations. That's a big number of high level toxic jet fuel exhaust fumes spewing into your breath, in very close proximity to many many hundreds of real live people,all without a early warning confidential flight heads up data for KGHG " George Harllow Field " That's a estimate only, how cool would it be if the Bridge man droped the complete 411 with the needed data. Clap for the Bridge man
image.jpg
image.jpg (106.47 KiB) Viewed 1298 times

User avatar
Bridges
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 11302
Joined: Aug Sat 05, 2006 12:29 pm
Location: Marshfield

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Bridges » Jul Sun 17, 2016 12:57 pm

First of all, we do not average 4 jet operations per day.

We have thousands of car and truck operations every single day in this town. These operations are MUCH longer duration events, and they occur entirely at ground level (unlike the aircraft).

Cars and trucks emit many of the same sorts of pollutants / fine particulates, that jet aircraft do.
Your Woodbine pals live right off 139 - the busiest road in town.

http://www.eesi.org/articles/view/the-h ... e-symposiu
National Academy of Sciences 2014 wrote: growing body of research that links petroleum-derived particle pollution to a variety of ever larger serious health problems and premature death.
...
Those living in the urban core are especially at risk, due to their close proximity to congested roadways and also refineries producing aromatics. As much as 40 percent of the population of the United States lives in close proximity to a major roadway.
...
Despite the removal of lead from the U.S. fuel supply in 1990, individuals are still needlessly exposed to toxic air pollutants contained in gasoline. Particle pollution from gasoline use in motor vehicles is caused by the use of aromatic hydrocarbons to boost octane; these compounds comprise roughly 20 percent of every gallon of fuel.
You are speculating. You have ZERO evidence of harm.

Your Woodbine friend sees more nearby car / truck operations in a single day, than he's seen in total jet operations since he first complained (and that's over multiple years).
Scituate BOS, BU Prof and scientist Rick Murray: The only real answer is retreat. I feel for these people...They inherited their house from their great grandmother or spent a lot of money to buy it. But...we are fighting a losing battle with the sea.

Inglewood1
Tourist
Tourist
Posts: 70
Joined: Jul Wed 06, 2016 5:22 pm

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Inglewood1 » Jul Sun 17, 2016 1:21 pm

Bridgie Bridgie , I totally admire and understand your " official line " , but it's a very very weak attempt at the game of diversionary spin tactics. Maybe the MaHoney cartoonist will pencil up a GATRA bus ridding around the Kent Park //Re: The wording may be discouraging , isn't that a nice thing to say.
Postby Inglewood1 » Jul Sun 17, 2016 11:31 am

Your intelligence your wear on your sleeve is telling, your just not that bright with subjects you know nothing about.For your enjoyment I will jokingly say no comment until the time limit is up.You clearly don't know how they feel,the innocent collateral health damaged. You are a master diversion specialist in your own mind sir. And that's fine, but you fool no one.I I like the part where you admit to being a Town of Marshfield " official " A diversionary activity is one intended to attract people's attention away from something which you do not want them to think about, know about, or deal with. " false narratives were started by the official
image.jpg
image.jpg (183.53 KiB) Viewed 1292 times

Joseph
Citizen
Citizen
Posts: 4466
Joined: Jan Wed 05, 2005 1:01 am

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Joseph » Jul Sun 17, 2016 10:36 pm

Bridges is 'just simply interested in aviation.'

Zoning law is being violated by the 'airport.'

Street traffic in the area of the airport is creating the incidents and episodes of higher concentrations of ultrafine particulates and putrid, gagging, greasy exhaust?
Really Bilge? Prove it.
Why do so many officials FEAR and kowtow to the Marshfield Airport gang?

What is the source of their power? Does it involve some kind of unseemly enterprise? A government entity?

Eric K
Tourist
Tourist
Posts: 283
Joined: Jul Wed 29, 2015 11:22 am

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Eric K » Jul Mon 18, 2016 8:39 am

Unfortunately the airport case was dismissed. Fortunately there are people like clover who like to do their homework.
I don't know if those involved in the litigation against the airport runway are going to pursue this further but I am sure there was some out of pocket expenses.
Would it be worth it to set up some kind of go fund me page and see if people are willing to chip in if those involved in the litigation are willing to pursue this further?

Inglewood2
Visitor
Visitor
Posts: 27
Joined: Jul Sun 17, 2016 7:16 pm

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Inglewood2 » Jul Mon 18, 2016 5:34 pm

**== :)] FYI SUNDAY NIGHT , thats the one ! " scared the crap out of me big-time " Anyone else hear or smell this ( VLJ ) Cessna 560 Citation XL ? OWNER : Encore Plus Aviation 45 Braintree Hill Park,Braintree Ma. It's a new purchase , the old FAA tail # N360HS .Recently just got re numbered as N681ZL . It's a very frequent flyer at Marshfield Municipal George Harllow Field,man that thing scared the crap out of me.Late Sunday night , invasion of peace and quiet !! [
N681ZL
(Track inbound flight) 7-17-2016
Unknown Owner · United States of America (USA) (registration)
Capital City (KCXY – info)
Harrisburg, PA
Marshfield Muni (KGHG – info)
Marshfield, MA
09:08PM EDT
10:10PM EDT
Scheduled: 08:55PM EDT
Scheduled: 09:56PM EDT
Other flights between these airports
Duration: 1 hour 2 minutes
Sunday, July 17, 2016
Status Landed over 19 hours ago (track log & graph)
Aircraft Cessna Citation V (twin-jet) (C560 – photos)
Speed Filed: 429 kts (graph)
Altitude Filed: 29,000 feet (graph)
Distance Direct: 347 sm Planned: 415 sm Flown: 436 sm
Route SEG187 SEG HNK GDM LOBBY (Decode)
attachment=0]image.jpg[/attachment]
FAA REGISTRY
N-Number Inquiry Results
N360HS is Assigned
Data Updated each Federal Working Day at Midnight
Print This Page Goto New Search Page
Aircraft Description
Serial Number 560-0808 Status Valid
Manufacturer Name CESSNA Certificate Issue Date 06/03/2016
Model 560 Expiration Date 06/30/2019
Type Aircraft Fixed Wing Multi-Engine Type Engine Turbo-fan
Pending Number Change 681ZL Dealer No
Date Change Authorized 06/07/2016 Mode S Code (base 8 / oct) 51006414
MFR Year 2009 Mode S Code (base 16 / hex) A40D0C
Type Registration Corporation Fractional Owner NO
Registered Owner
Name ENCORE PLUS AVIATION LLC
Street 45 BRAINTREE HILL PARK STE 402

City BRAINTREE State MASSACHUSETTS
County SUFFOLK Zip Code 02184-8730
Country UNITED STATES
Airworthiness
Engine Manufacturer P&W CANADA Classification Standard
Engine Model PW535B Category Transport
A/W Date 04/10/2009

The information contained in this record should be the most current Airworthiness information available in the historical aircraft record. However, this data alone does not provide the basis for a determination regarding the airworthiness of an aircraft or the current aircraft configuration. For specific information, you may request a copy of the aircraft record at http://aircraft.faa.gov/e.gov/ND/
Other Owner Names
None
Temporary Certificates
Certificate Number T164218 Issue Date 06/06/2016 Expiration Date 07/06/2016
Fuel Modifications
None
Data Updated each Federal Working Day at Midnight
Submit Submit
Attachments
image.jpg
image.jpg (11.97 KiB) Viewed 1226 times

Inglewood2
Visitor
Visitor
Posts: 27
Joined: Jul Sun 17, 2016 7:16 pm

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Inglewood2 » Jul Mon 18, 2016 6:54 pm

:YMAPPLAUSE: :YMAPPLAUSE: **== Erik K he's OK,sounds like a wonderful idea.Someone get it up and Inglewood 2 will make a 110% effort to help promote the need for the airport area citizens to appeal to a higher court system. $100 grand or more would be a great appeal fund.The #23 Woodbine Road resident stand up gentleman warned everyone back in 2011 that this was a concern for his Woodbine Road neighbors. With the Sunday 7-17-16 night Encore Plus Aviation LLC Jet Data, he was right. l-) What the heck is a Encore Plus Aviation LLC ? What's that all about ? Many questions about that noisy and smelly airplane ! :)]
image.jpg
image.jpg (55.71 KiB) Viewed 1213 times

Inglewood2
Visitor
Visitor
Posts: 27
Joined: Jul Sun 17, 2016 7:16 pm

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Inglewood2 » Jul Mon 18, 2016 7:47 pm

**== $-) *-:) Many deep pockets and big hearts in the Santa Monica Valley,California , please someone connected to that citizens group get the Go Fund Me up, Ive changed my pledge of 110 % effort to get this rolling,the Inglewood 2 will give it a 150 % nation wide campaign! Go Fund Me is a excellent tool for things of this nature,especially when many many children and elderly at risk. “Abundance of Caution” Cited for Santa Monica Airport Warnings
By Niki Cervantes
Staff Writer for the Santa Monica Lookout News
2016 -- An “abundance of caution” is being cited as the reason the City has posted signs warnings of possible exposure to toxic chemicals at the observation decks at Santa Monica Airport, according to a new report.

Although not legally required to do so, the City started posting the Proposition 65 warning signs on January 7, an airport spokesperson said.

The postings were based on findings by Tetra Tech, a major environmental consulting firm hired by the City to review the presence at the airport to three chemicals linked to severe health hazards: 1,3-butadiene, benzene and carbon tetrachloride.

“In assessing these concentrations, the City has decided, in an abundance of caution, to post Proposition 65 signage on SMO’s upper and lower observation decks,” Airport Manager Stelios Makrides said in a March 24 update to the City Council.

The chemicals cited are blamed for a variety of health issues, from minor problems such as dizziness at low levels of exposure to life-threatening conditions involving the liver, kidneys and central nervous system, as well as to illnesses leading to death.

Neighbors have complained for decades that the 227-acre airport is too close to homes and poses safety risks and health hazards, and City officials have long cited pollution as one of the reasons for wanting to close the century-old airport and possibly replace it with parkland and other community uses,
( "Airport Neighbors Protest Jet Traffic, April 23,2007.)

But SMO’s proponents say it is a vital, if small, part of the region’s efforts to handle its increasingly busy skies.

The City Council has imposed new anti-pollution rules in an effort to take control of airport leasing and has been engaged in a legal battle with aviators and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), which oversees the nation’s airports.

So far, though, few major decisions -- outside of those made at City Hall -- have favored shuttering the airport.

In his report to the Council, Makrides said that Tetra Tech found SMO’s air emissions are “similar to and often lower than those measured elsewhere in the South Coast Air Basin,” when compared to government studies from 2006 and 2010.

But Tetra Tech also found that emissions are still high enough to warrant concern, and would have triggered Prop. 65 warning signs if the City had been legally required to do so, Makrides said.

Prop. 65, formally the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, was passed to “protect California citizens and the State’s drinking water sources from chemicals known to cause cancer, birth defects, or other reproductive harm, and to inform citizens about exposures to such chemicals.”

However, the Act exempts federal, state and local agencies. That would include SMO, since it is owned and operated by the City, the report said.

The Tetra Tech review looked at the concentration and chemical composition of the air emissions previously measured at the airport and compared them to how Prop. 65 would rate them now.

The consultants found the concentrations of 1,3-butadiene and carbon tetrachloride were above Prop. 65’s most minor category of concern, or the “No Significant Risk Level.”

Concentrations of Benzene were also higher than the “NSRL,” but did not reach the Act’s “Maximum Allowable Dose Level,” the report said.

Previous tests were not conducted on the observation decks, the report said. But, based on previous testing elsewhere at the airport, the Prop. 65 warning signs would be appropriate for the observation decks if they were tested now, Tetra Tech said.

SMO has two outdoor observation decks -- the Runway View Deck and Public Sky-Deck -- both at the administration building at 3223 Donald Douglas Loop South. Both are open to the public 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

The report said flight operations records show that from 2006 to 2014 all but three percent of the flights to and from SMO involved jet and piston-powered aircraft.

In 2006, there were 133,308 jet/piston takeoffs or landings at the SMO, the report noted. By 2014, the number dropped by nearly 40 percent, to about 79,605 takeoffs and landings. Last year, that total rose to 86,976, the report said.

The general decline in jet/piston flights at SMO over the last nine years “may have contributed to a decrease in the previously identified levels of chemicals of concern in air at the SMO,” the report added.

It recommends a new health-risk assessment be conducted to determine if that is the case.
Convention and Visitors Bureau Santa Monica....SAMPLE ; Hello friend Iam a citizen reporter from the Boston Massachussets area and would like to tell you a quick story about the enviromental health concerns in a little sea coast town 30 miles south of Boston..............Thank You Inglewood 2 ( Becky ) **== :!! :)]

User avatar
Bridges
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 11302
Joined: Aug Sat 05, 2006 12:29 pm
Location: Marshfield

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Bridges » Jul Mon 18, 2016 9:24 pm

So here's jet operations for 1st two days of month. No time to work much on scripts yet, so compiled by hand.

Date 12 AM to 7 AM 7 AM to 10 PM 10 PM to 11:59 PM

7/1/2016:
12 AM to 7AM: 1
7 AM to 10 PM: 3
10 PM to midnight: 0
4 operations total

7/2/2016
12 AM to 7AM: 1
7 AM to 10 PM: 0
10 PM to midnight: 0
1 operations total

When scripts are done it will go a lot faster.
I will try to have it automatically post to a public Google docs spreadsheet, or something like that.
Scituate BOS, BU Prof and scientist Rick Murray: The only real answer is retreat. I feel for these people...They inherited their house from their great grandmother or spent a lot of money to buy it. But...we are fighting a losing battle with the sea.

User avatar
Bridges
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 11302
Joined: Aug Sat 05, 2006 12:29 pm
Location: Marshfield

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Bridges » Jul Mon 18, 2016 9:35 pm

As for Santa Monica...they averaged something like 34 jet flights per day in recent years. That's over 5 times our daily average.
And they are MUCH bigger jets too. FAR more emissions per operation, on average.

You can't possibly make any valid comparison between Santa Monica and Marshfield.
Scituate BOS, BU Prof and scientist Rick Murray: The only real answer is retreat. I feel for these people...They inherited their house from their great grandmother or spent a lot of money to buy it. But...we are fighting a losing battle with the sea.

User avatar
Bridges
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 11302
Joined: Aug Sat 05, 2006 12:29 pm
Location: Marshfield

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Bridges » Jul Mon 18, 2016 9:45 pm

Eric K wrote:Unfortunately the airport case was dismissed. Fortunately there are people like clover who like to do their homework.
Does her homework?

Yes. But sometimes she get the wrong answers. Like this time.
Town counsel said she wrong.
Judge in court proceedings said she was wrong.

Go appeal. Max said you folks have already cost the taxpayers well in excess of a million dollars, what with added costs from construction delays, and legal fees. That is money that could have been well spent on other things this town desperately needs.

I think if more taxpayers knew about this massive waste of their money, driven by neighbors and frivolous lawsuits and challenges, they'd be PISSED!
Scituate BOS, BU Prof and scientist Rick Murray: The only real answer is retreat. I feel for these people...They inherited their house from their great grandmother or spent a lot of money to buy it. But...we are fighting a losing battle with the sea.

Inglewood2
Visitor
Visitor
Posts: 27
Joined: Jul Sun 17, 2016 7:16 pm

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Inglewood2 » Jul Mon 18, 2016 9:55 pm

MAKE THE PLEDGE , Clap for the Bridge man, no so fast. :YMAPPLAUSE: Flight Operation Numbers / Health Risk Factor : toss in the runway to human population factor. Fare/ Balanced Debate or Apples and Oranges twist. :YMAPPLAUSE: Clap for the Bridge man. If you would just try to understand how bad it is to be continually breathing jet fuel fume exhaust. l-) Debate is contention in argument; strife, dissension, quarrelling, controversy; especially a formal discussion of subjects before a public assembly or legislature, in Parliament or in any deliberative assembly. Debate is a method of formally presenting an argument in a disciplined manner.
image.jpg
image.jpg (5.4 KiB) Viewed 1194 times

Inglewood2
Visitor
Visitor
Posts: 27
Joined: Jul Sun 17, 2016 7:16 pm

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Inglewood2 » Jul Mon 18, 2016 9:59 pm

Thank you for the 2 day stats, Clap for the Bridge man. :YMAPPLAUSE: It's a two way street Bro l-)
image.jpg
image.jpg (55.88 KiB) Viewed 1193 times

User avatar
Bridges
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 11302
Joined: Aug Sat 05, 2006 12:29 pm
Location: Marshfield

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Bridges » Jul Mon 18, 2016 10:10 pm

Inglewood2 wrote:If you would just try to understand how bad it is to be continually breathing jet fuel fume exhaust.
That would be bad - if they were in fact CONTINUALLY breathing jet fumes. But they're not.

1) We have something like 0 to 4 jet operations per day, typically.

2) You saw Joseph's video. Yes, it was loud. It was also very short duration - from takeoff to out over the ocean in mere seconds.

3) Airport neighbors chose to live near an airport. They did not have to do that. There was never any legal ban on jets operating here. There are small jets flying today that are designed to operate on small, unimproved grass runways. Meaning, if this airport had never been improved, it quite likely would still have seen jets at some point. The fact that airport neighbors did not factor in possible future changes at the airport, when deciding to buy, does not impress me. Caveat Emptor - do your homework before you buy.

4) Nobody at the airport, nor any town official, ever gave any assurances that the airport would never change, or that the aircraft mix would never change. If neighbors assumed that, it was a very bad assumption.

The vast majority of town residents are completely oblivious to the airport. They can't hear it, as the noise footprint is tiny. They can't smell anything, as the fume footprint is also very small, relative to the size of the town.
Scituate BOS, BU Prof and scientist Rick Murray: The only real answer is retreat. I feel for these people...They inherited their house from their great grandmother or spent a lot of money to buy it. But...we are fighting a losing battle with the sea.

Inglewood2
Visitor
Visitor
Posts: 27
Joined: Jul Sun 17, 2016 7:16 pm

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Inglewood2 » Jul Mon 18, 2016 10:48 pm

Not to have the ability to know the time of day a Flight Operation is to happen, is wrong. Many have read all all FAA regs on this subject. But it doesn't make it right. Flightaware.com tracking / Airport Search Section,Code ; KGHG, it has only been used for good,as a preventive health measure. As Rocco Longo's Town of Marshfield representative on Logan Airport noise consulting, you may not be in a position to speak objectively.The jet fuel exhaust fume situation is not going away soon enough and that's a miscarriage of justice. A small 1 or 2 time injestion is awful,
image.jpg
image.jpg (33.42 KiB) Viewed 1188 times
but day in and day out for many many years is a tragedy.Inglewood 2 will cease and desist any further banter with you on this subject, the electronic footprint of your view is large.Thank you Sir and have a good day.
(Track inbound flight) 7-17-2016
Unknown Owner · United States of America (USA) (registration)
Capital City (KCXY – info)
Harrisburg, PA
Marshfield Muni (KGHG – info)
Marshfield, MA
09:08PM EDT
10:10PM EDT
Scheduled: 08:55PM EDT
Scheduled: 09:56PM EDT

Inglewood2
Visitor
Visitor
Posts: 27
Joined: Jul Sun 17, 2016 7:16 pm

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Inglewood2 » Jul Mon 18, 2016 11:27 pm

It is what it is , not what it use to be.You don't know how it feels. You have no idea how bad it really is.
image.jpg
image.jpg (44.29 KiB) Viewed 1186 times

Eric K
Tourist
Tourist
Posts: 283
Joined: Jul Wed 29, 2015 11:22 am

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Eric K » Jul Tue 19, 2016 1:34 am

Just because the vast majority of town you say is oblivious to the airport doesn't mean the people that live around the airport that there health and well being don't matter.
Just because it may be 4 planes today doesn't mean it won't be 15 tomorrow.

Inglewood2
Visitor
Visitor
Posts: 27
Joined: Jul Sun 17, 2016 7:16 pm

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Inglewood2 » Jul Tue 19, 2016 4:37 am

Patrick Ronan writes about " 11 vote difference " Democracy or Diversionary Tactics of Facts ? Airport safety project squeaks by at Marshfield town meeting
By Patrick Ronan
Posted Oct 25, 2011 at 12:01 AM
Updated Oct 25, 2011 at 9:38 AM

Eleven votes made the difference Monday night as residents approved to borrow $200,000 to support safety improvements at the local airport.

Debate over the airport project accounted for about 45 minutes of the two-hour special town meeting, which took place in Marshfield High School’s gymnasium. Proposed by the town’s airport commission and department of public works, the $10 million improvement project at George Harlow Field – most of which would be funded by the Federal Aviation Administration – will widen and lengthen the runway, move the runway west to mitigate air traffic noise for abutting neighborhoods, install new lighting systems and dredge nearby Bass Creek.

Needing a two-thirds majority to pass, the measure squeaked by with a 179-74 tally. Eleven votes the other way would have prevented the airport project from moving forward.

In other business Monday night, Marshfield Fire Chief Kevin Robinson backed off his proposal to implement a town-wide meals tax, which he previously said would help generate additional revenue for the town to build a new fire station at 21 Massasoit Ave. He said he will ask for support from the capital budget committee and ask the town to support a new station at the annual town meeting next spring.

Inglewood2
Visitor
Visitor
Posts: 27
Joined: Jul Sun 17, 2016 7:16 pm

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Inglewood2 » Jul Tue 19, 2016 4:59 am

**== \M/ Victory is Sweet , severely impacted airport neghborhoods didn't have a chance. Has the Go Fund Me been set up ?
" Grateful to all our supporters and good neighbor " Maybe the goal for the Go Fund Me should be $250 thousand , with all the " good neighbors wanting the little jet side effects from Encore Plus Aviation , Braintree Ma.Maybe a plea to the owners of that airline company or whatever they are may help.They are in the book. :)] :-@
We're pleased to report the Marshfield Airport Marshfield Airport Expansion UpdateCommission and Shoreline’s Airport Management Team have made significant strides toward moving forward with the construction of a new runway and taxiway system in 2013. For the past several years, we've worked to pave the way for these updates which will bring the airport into compliance with new FAA airport safety and design standards. Recently we've achieved several milestones towards this end.

Funding & Support from the town of Marshfield

Working in close collaboration with local, state and federal officials to move the Runway Safety Improvement Project forward through a complex and costly permitting process, we've now completed three related environmental studies in addition to executing the purchase of the adjacent sixty acre Woodbine Farm and a second property at the end of Old Colony Lane.

We have also received approval from the town of Marshfield for $200,000 in funding, representing the local share of this project.

Our community outreach efforts to educate residents on the many ways the town benefits from maintaining a community airport -- both economically and in other ways -- generated a very positive response, and we're grateful to all our supporters and good neighbors who have helped spread the word and provide support.

Funding Commitment from FAA & MassDOT

We're also pleased to confirm FAA and MassDOT Aeronautics have committed more than $12,000,000 to complete important safety improvements which include widening the runway to 100 feet, widening the taxiways, shifting the runway and constructing 300’ paved safety areas on either end, a 300 foot runway extension, new lighting systems, new instrument approaches (including WAAS/LPV approaches) and much more.

Last week, US Senator Scott Brown, State Senator Bob Hedlund and State Representative Jim Cantwell toured Marshfield GHG Airport to demonstrate their support for the runway project and to assure us that they are doing everything they can to help keep project funding on track.

We would not be getting through the permitting process without their assistance and support at countless permitting meetings. If you run into members of our legislative team, please be sure to thank them and explain to them how important the airport is to you! Better yet, we encourage you to send a note (or a check!) to thank them for their assistance. If you fly for business, please be sure to mention the airport is an important tool for your business.

Bass Creek Dredging Update

As part of the required permitting process, we are working closely with DEP to secure a Variance for the project. Other permitting agencies include the Army Corp. of Engineers, MA Natural Heritage, Marshfield Conservation, Marshfield ZBA and several others. In the course of designing our environmental mitigation for the project, Marshfield DPW approached us looking for some help with dredging Bass Creek, which is located 100 feet east of the threshold of Runway 24.

Bass Creek is clogged with invasive vegetation and silt and is causing a host of issues. In an effort to work cooperatively with the Town and accomplish another important project in conjunction with our safety improvements, we asked DEP if we could incorporate Bass Creek dredging into the mitigation plan for the runway project. We are excited to report they agreed and our environmental consultants are busy updating the mitigation plans, federal, state and local permits and preparing for a tree clearing project this summer in advance of runway construction, planned for some time in 2013.

Inglewood2
Visitor
Visitor
Posts: 27
Joined: Jul Sun 17, 2016 7:16 pm

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Inglewood2 » Jul Tue 19, 2016 5:55 am

**== Under duress ,the pain and suffering of many hundreds of innocent Marshfield Airport Pollution Zone residents / citizens, is it possible that more litigation avenues are on the way ? Severly impacting jet fuel exhaust fumes is now the normal every day standard operating procedure, the # 23 Woodbine Road resident way back in 2014 summed it up best , leaving " under duress ", then they demolished his home.xxx **== Reposted Resident Comment " The suit against the airport has been dismissed for now. While I understand the law regarding the 20 day appeal period of a ZBA decision, I don't understand how this airport is protected under MGL Chapter 40A Section 7, titled "Enforcement of zoning regulations; violations; penalties; jurisdiction of superior court." There was no building permit issued for the runway project, am I correct? Doesn't that leave "no limitation on the time for taking action against" the unlawful nonconforming use of a runway in a residential zone? Seems to me the use of this runway can be challenged at any time, forever.

Here's part of a summary of MGL 40A Section 7 from the Mass Bar Association website:
http://www.massbar.org/publications/sec ... ctures-and
The provision provides two statutes of limitations for structures built illegally or mistakenly. First, there is a six-year limitation on suits to compel the removal, alteration or relocation of a structure that was built in violation of Chapter 40A or a zoning bylaw, if the structure was built in accordance with the terms of the original building permit. This protection applies even where the building inspector had improperly or mistakenly issued the building permit. Second, there is a 10-year limitation on suits to compel the removal, alteration, or relocation of a structure that was built without a building permit.

**== With regard to uses commenced illegally, Section 7 provides the same six-year limitation on suits to compel the abandonment, limitation or modification of a use commenced under the terms of the original building permit. The use is only protected however, if the building permit specifically contemplated the use. Lord v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Somerset, 30 Mass. App. Court 226 (1991). There is no limitation on the time for taking action against uses that were not authorized by a building permit.

Massachusetts General Law 40A Section 7
https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralL ... A/Section7 " **== :-BD

Joseph
Citizen
Citizen
Posts: 4466
Joined: Jan Wed 05, 2005 1:01 am

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Joseph » Jul Tue 19, 2016 8:04 am

Noisy turboprop plane skimming over our roofs, arriving at Marshfield this morning... AT 5:35!!!!
Why do so many officials FEAR and kowtow to the Marshfield Airport gang?

What is the source of their power? Does it involve some kind of unseemly enterprise? A government entity?

Joseph
Citizen
Citizen
Posts: 4466
Joined: Jan Wed 05, 2005 1:01 am

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Joseph » Jul Tue 19, 2016 8:14 am

Bridges wrote:Go appeal. Max said you folks have already cost the taxpayers well in excess of a million dollars, what with added costs from construction delays, and legal fees. That is money that could have been well spent on other things this town desperately needs.

"Max said..." Oh, really? Go ahead Max or Bilges - PROVE IT!

Similarly, imagine what the town could do with an amount of money equal to what was spent - and is being spent on the airport. $18 MILLION could do a lot.

And of course, we have negative impacts to residents' health and the environment. What's the cost of that?

And, what's the cost of lost tax revenues due to houses being torn down and property values depressed?

Oh, yeah - the airport gang will tell you that Marshfield Airport is the 'gateway to the world' and, imply that planeloads of people are coming here to stay at the Fairview (Doesn't exist anymore) and buy pizza. =)) =)) =))

It's really more like the private airstrip for a few multi-millionaires out for a joy ride and a number of unknowns on milk runs to Dutch Country or from/to around 'The Farm' under a cloak of secrecy.
Why do so many officials FEAR and kowtow to the Marshfield Airport gang?

What is the source of their power? Does it involve some kind of unseemly enterprise? A government entity?

Joseph
Citizen
Citizen
Posts: 4466
Joined: Jan Wed 05, 2005 1:01 am

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Joseph » Jul Tue 19, 2016 8:35 am

From the Forum thread: Neighbors say Airport causing health problems

A post by "Bridges" 08 Feb 2012 10:37 am

"....

But I will tell you this (and Max has pointed out many times)...There are VERY few jet flights in a week.

....

Economies of scale say you are gonna be getting VASTLY more pollution from the roads, than from that airport. Common sense, since jet traffic is such a rare event."


'Economies of scale???' WTF is that? How about comparing emissions quantities and composition and Short Term Exposures?


I hope that everybody recognizes this as an example of the SPIN that has been employed by airport gangsters throughout this deceptive process leading to the EXPANSION of the airport and the related increased negative effects: "Very few jet flights...". And, "...jet traffic is such a rare event."

And the EXPANSION was referred to as a 'reconstruction.'

See the set-up? Now Bridges says that when the residents moved into the area we all should have KNOWN that that the airport would change and, that there are '0-4' operations a day. Is up to 28 operations a week 'very few' or 'such a rare event' when the fumes fill our neighborhood and homes? And besides, often it is MANY more 'operations' per week.

Just like the SPIN that was used to keep Rexhame residents away from Town Meeting - through mixing the Bass Creek dredging into the EXPANSION project.

Even though the Bass Creek could have been dredged by the town and it's contractors separate from the airport EXPANSION, it was linked and the residents put into a hostage situation. In effect, those residents were told that they had to stay away from the Town Meeting article on the EXPANSION or vote FOR the airport EXPANSION - or else they were in for more flooding and more mosquitoes.
Why do so many officials FEAR and kowtow to the Marshfield Airport gang?

What is the source of their power? Does it involve some kind of unseemly enterprise? A government entity?

User avatar
Bridges
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 11302
Joined: Aug Sat 05, 2006 12:29 pm
Location: Marshfield

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Bridges » Jul Tue 19, 2016 9:00 pm

I am mystified by your fascination with this runway project.

Joseph made completely absurd predictions that we would see impossibly large jets in here after the runway project was completed.

Max, Ann Pollard, and I, all told Joseph and pals that the aircraft mix would not appreciably change, as the runway length has not changed enough for that to happen.

And in fact, to my knowledge, we have NEVER seen any aircraft larger than the Cessna Citations, and we saw those for years before the runway project. Meaning: the runway project did pretty much nothing to change the mix of aircraft we see.

Look at the flat out lies Joseph spread about this runway project:

posting.php?mode=quote&f=1&p=467468
Joseph 4/18/2012 wrote:It's very simple. When most folks bought property around the airport it was a grass strip or a Class BI airport for planes weighing less than 12,500 pounds.

They snuck in bigger planes and at some point (Who knows when?) the airport was classified as a BII airport - meaning BIGGER and HEAVIER planes. Now they want to INCREASE the classification to CII - meaning BIGGER HEAVIER and FASTER JETS and other planes.

Bridges posts pictures of planes that are Class BI or MAYBE Class BII.

Here is a Class CII plane- comparted to what Bridges throws out there this pic is more like what we will see at the airport if the EXPANSION happens.

Image
1) The ARC of the airport was B-II before the runway project. It is STILL B-II. It is NOT C-II, as Joseph claimed.

2) Has anyone seen any aircraft even REMOTELY that big? Joseph just made that crap up (like his claim that he made, multiple times, that we could see aircraft as big as USAF C-17's in here...which is also ridiculous).

:shock: :shock: That is what Joseph claimed we'd see.

It is also flagrantly false that the airport bothers everyone nearby. Many are on record as saying otherwise.

viewtopic.php?p=462228#p462228
Gidget 12/5/2008 wrote:I live a mile away from airport and it has never bothered me as I like the sound of airplanes.
Also by Gidget around that time wrote:Frankly, I live near the airport (within 2 mi) and have not experience any undue noise or pollution
viewtopic.php?p=396813#p396813
The Pilot 12/3/2008 wrote:I don't live too far from the airport, and I've never had a problem with noise.
viewtopic.php?p=260449#p260449
Neggy 2005 wrote:I do like to hear the Citation V take off when I am sitting on my front porch.
There have been others in other threads as well.

As for the "plight" of the neighbors:

viewtopic.php?p=495266#p495266
techlacroix 6/25/2014 wrote:Yea, I am sick of the posts. I bought a house near the ocean and not near an airport. Because I didn't want to live next to an airport. Endless debates on the internet are foolish and a waste of time. I come here to find out about my community, but all I see are posts from nuts who don't have the sense to live where they can be happy.
http://southshoreforums.com/phpBB3/view ... 26#p487626
lost cause wrote:Next time dont buy a house near an airport
Also by lost cause wrote:Hey you are the clown that bought next to an airport, if you dont like it just shut up and move.
And again by lost cause wrote:The answer is No I am not concerned at all. You and others have chosen to live near the airport and must adapt to whatever happens there. I think it is pretty naive that you would believe that the airport would never modernize and adapt to the technology (modern small jets) currently being used.
lost cause wrote:I would not have chosen to live near any airport, do to the fumes, plane noise, among other things. That being said if I had chosen to live near the airport, I would not be bitching about those issues. I also would not live next door to a fire station do to the noise either, but if I didn't I wouldn't be complaining about it.
viewtopic.php?p=263588#p263588

The following is an EXCELLENT point:
Neggy wrote:My family has been summering here since 1923

we have 4 houses , 3 are close enough to the airport that I can read tail numbers as they come over the seawall

I have been watching planes take off and land here for longer than I can remember, and that is probably why I chose to learn to fly and why I decided to do it here.

BTW I am not the only aviation person on my street either.

any one of my motorcycles makes more noise than 99.999 % of the planes that come in or out of that airport.

Maybe we need to implement the George Carlin housing plan and move deaf people to the housing near airports.

And I bet none of the complainers ever fly out of Logan, TF Green, or anyplace else. If you fly commercially you are bothering someone who lives near the airport. If you feel so strongly about quality of life issues make sure the next time you want to take the kids to DisneyWorld that you drive. I so dislike the NIMBY crowd
This is true. I bet Joseph has flown out of Logan. I bet all of you complainers have flown out of Logan. And CERTAINLY you've received goods or mail that have shipped through Logan. Meaning, you've contributed to the same pollution and noise you're railing against, and bothered somebody too.

NIMBY is exactly right. You're all for aviation - WHEN IT SUITS YOUR NEEDS. :roll:
Scituate BOS, BU Prof and scientist Rick Murray: The only real answer is retreat. I feel for these people...They inherited their house from their great grandmother or spent a lot of money to buy it. But...we are fighting a losing battle with the sea.

Tara Drive
Visitor
Visitor
Posts: 29
Joined: Jul Wed 20, 2016 5:27 pm

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Tara Drive » Jul Fri 29, 2016 7:05 pm

~~~590 THE FRIDAY 7-29-2016 NEWS DUMP / BOSTON GLOBE IS HERE **== :?:
bobkat wrote:You know I don't side with Joe P because he comes off as the boy who cried wolf too many times. But I am changing the way I think about Marshfield Airport. I don't live in the flight path (I live in Blackmount) ,but every morning there is a jet that takes off that delivers the most unpleasant noise . Lately there has been jet running their motors or taking off in the midday. I don't know how the people living next to the airport or in their flight path can live with the noise. I bet the values of those homes have not risen lately because of the airport.

Bridges you always say that Joe P should have known before buying a home on Plymouth Ave. Well Joe P isn't the only one living around the airport .I would guess that these people bought their homes before jets arrived at the airport. This noise pollution has to come to an end or the airport should be paying to noise proof peoples homes. It is just not right .
:arrow: Marshfield Airport officials look to future after court win :YMAPPLAUSE: :-B

By Jennette Barnes GLOBE CORRESPONDENT JULY 29, 2016
Marshfield Airport officials are looking to the future after a Superior Court judge ruled against a local man’s 2014 lawsuit protesting the reconstruction of the facility’s sole runway.

A consultant hired by the Marshfield Airport Commission will work on a new five-year plan for the facility, said Ann Pollard, vice president of Shoreline Aviation, the private company that operates the municipal airport.


The $15 million reconstruction moved the runway about 190 feet southwest, lengthened it by 300 feet, and created paved 300-foot safety buffers on each end.

Largely complete by the end of July 2014, the project was funded with about $13 million from the Federal Aviation Administration. The town of Marshfield contributed $200,000, and additional money came from the state.

In October 2014, Marshfield resident John Whippen sued the town’s Zoning Board of Appeals, saying the permit the board issued was invalid because a notice to abutters indicated the runway extension would occur in a business zone, when it was actually in a residential zone.

Plymouth Superior Court Judge Robert Cosgrove determined that the discrepancy was a typographical error and did not invalidate the permit. Whippen also filed his appeal far too late, the judge saidin his June 30 decision granting the board’s motion for summary judgment.

Whippen appealed about three years after the Zoning Board of Appeals issued the permit, but appeals must be filed within 20 or 90 days, depending on the circumstances, the judge said.


Robert Galvin, a lawyer for the town, said that despite the error in the abutters’ notice, the notice did detail which lots were involved in the construction, and the plans filed with the town showed the correct zoning district. “The notice was very descriptive,” he said.

A number of Marshfield residents objected to the runway reconstruction, fearing it would bring more fumes and noise, although the airport said it anticipated no appreciable increase in traffic.

Some neighbors also opposed the use of wood pilings treated with chromated copper arsenate in the soft peat beneath the runway, arguing the treatment could leach out and harm the environment.

“The whole group felt that the airport didn’t have the proper permitting in place to do what it did,” said Hugh Beagan, an airport neighbor and member of an ad-hoc group called Marshfield Citizens Against Airport Pollution.

Whippen’s attorney, Sean Beagan, who is Hugh Beagan’s son, declined through an assistant to comment.

Following the judge’s decision, airport officials are “reevaluating and contemplating what the future might hold,” Pollard said.

No new major projects are planned at the airport for five to seven years beyond maintenance and repair, she said.

Asked if the airport has considered adding a restaurant, Pollard said it has, but the property is too small. “We’ve often thought that maybe a food truck would be a fun addition,” she said.

A full-scale restaurant tends to attract extra traffic, and Marshfield Airport simply does not have the necessary parking — for planes or cars, she said.

The airport sits on roughly 135 acres, she said. It deeded about 100 unbuildable acres to Mass Audubon as part of the construction.

Plymouth Municipal Airport, in contrast, has hundreds of acres and a restaurant called “Plane” Jane’s Place. The airport website advertises some 203 acres available for non-aviation development, plus another 120 acres for future hangars.

Once an unpaved airfield in the shadow of a barn, Marshfield Airport was acquired by the town in 1965. Visitors are welcome every day, from 8 a.m. until dusk.

Adults and children visit regularly to watch planes take off and land, Pollard said. The experience gets young people interested in flight, and about 15 students under legal driving age are learning how to fly with experienced flight instructors, she said.

Members of the airport staff offer tours to school groups and clubs, and on Friday, Aug. 12, the airport will host Molly Movie Mania, a public movie night sponsored by the Molly Fitzgerald Memorial Fund. The movie is Disney’s “Planes: Fire & Rescue.” Details will be posted on the airport Facebook page.

Also for visitors, the airport aims to create a display of artifacts uncovered by archeologists on airport property prior to the construction, including cutting tools, thousands of pottery shards, and other items that show humans lived in the area 3,500 years ago, according to David Suffredini, vice chairman of the Airport Commission.

The display should be ready by the end of the year, Pollard said. The airport also plans to create a website or Web page dedicated to the artifacts and their history.

Jennette Barnes can be reached at jennettebarnes@yahoo.com.

User avatar
Bridges
Pinnacle
Pinnacle
Posts: 11302
Joined: Aug Sat 05, 2006 12:29 pm
Location: Marshfield

Re: The City of Marshfield Jetport

Post by Bridges » Jul Fri 29, 2016 7:51 pm

Rather than just endlessly posting entire big honking articles in every thread, you could:

1) Post snippets of articles that make your point (you do have a point by bombarding us with all these articles? :roll: ), then comment on them.
You know...make your point. Any point? :roll:

2) Just link to the article, and let us read it for ourselves (without taking up pages of forum space).
about 15 students under legal driving age are learning how to fly with experienced flight instructors
That's excellent. Aviation is a fantastic hobby, that could easily turn into a fantastic career for some of these kids.

Of course, Joseph and his pals continually insist the airport is just a playground for rich millionaires... :roll:
Scituate BOS, BU Prof and scientist Rick Murray: The only real answer is retreat. I feel for these people...They inherited their house from their great grandmother or spent a lot of money to buy it. But...we are fighting a losing battle with the sea.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest