THE 2V2 TIMES

5/20/03 - Winter's finally over and as the weather warms up, so will activity at the airport.  This site hasn't been updated for a few months due to several issues (site not accessible, non-airport matters, and frankly not a lot going on) and sometimes no news is good news.  Unfortunately, there's been bad news to overshadow some of the good.  In the update below (1/24/03) the aircraft lost in Utah was indeed based at Longmont.  I didn't know the pilot or passengers, but did fly the aircraft several times and know the owner of AirWest who was renting it.  All four who were onboard the aircraft were from Longmont, none survived.  The investigation is still pending.  Late April saw another fatal accident involving Longmont planes and pilots.  Jeff Sands (owner of Mile High Skydiving) and Tom Bullington were killed when the aircraft they were flying crashed north of Longmont.  As I look at the petition for the Noise Abatement Procedure, both of their signatures are on the same page.  I did not know Tom, but was good friends with Jeff.  Unfortunately I was away on a family emergency the day of the crash and the memorial.  I understand it was very well done.  On the brighter side the Longmont City Council voted unanimously to approve the first lease for south side hangar construction.  Signal Construction should be starting fairly soon.  Vance Brand's Automatic Weather Observation System (AWOS) is finally FAA certified and available on 120.0.  It gives out information on winds, weather, and temperatures.  Hopefully soon it'll be available via a phone number as well.  Lastly, the County of Boulder has decided to crank up taxes on hangar owners.  Longmont can't be far behind as their budget crisis worsens.  Stay tuned.

1/24/03 - Within 24 hours, 3 local area aircraft were presumably lost.  Two were involved in a midair collision over Denver Friday night, the third departed Longmont Thursday night bound for Las Vegas, NV has yet to be located.  It was reported that one of the aircraft involved in the midair was from Longmont, but later reported that one was from Jeffco and one from Centennial.  Search and rescue is ongoing for the missing aircraft, last heard and seen near La Sal, Utah.  No other information has been released in the investigation of either case.

1/21/03 - "2003 A City Council Oddity" continued tonight as Council approved 6-1 to buy land west of the runway, up to 75th Street.  This coming on the heels of Council voting down a runway extension.  Ironically, the approved land purchase is right about where a runway extension would be.  Council also approved the "setting aside" of land for a "possible" location for Front Range Community College on airport property.  The smart money is on that this college will never be built there, stay tuned in about 5-7 years for more.

1/9/03 - Larger and more diverse crowd at AAB Meeting.  Tonight at the monthly Airport Advisory Board meeting there were several people from Tuesday nights City Council meeting that spoke out against some of the airport issues.  Hopefully some of what was talked about will go towards both sides understanding the others position.  An idea I had thought about after the City Council meeting, and was suggested tonight, was some kind of Q&A section somewhere that answered any misconceptions or preconceived notions.  The City Council, and the Board to some extent, were told tonight that the presentation and decision, or lack thereof, was not satisfactory.  The initial presentation by Tim Barth was great, but what followed possibly needed a little bit more reigning in by Staff or the AAB.  City Council went all over the place, attempting to rewrite the Master Plan in City Council chambers.  Throwing in Front Range Community College, a tower, etc just irritated the public and confused some of council.  Hopefully this will be cleared up shortly.  The K.I.S.S. (Keep It Simple Stupid) rule really needed to be applied.  By the time Gordon Pedrow attempted that to clarify what was the decision on the runway, it was too late, literally and figuratively.  Getting back to tonight's AAB meeting, I hope we continue to see the people who were outspoken against the airport.  I'd like to think that tonight and future meetings are examples that we airport users and aviation enthusiasts are not out to spoil anyone's day or ruin their quality of life.  And that the AAB is not just a good ol' boy network of pro-airport people not willing to listen and consider outside objections.

1/8/03 - City Council finally takes on Airport Master Plan.  Last night the Longmont City Council got the presentation of the Airport Master Plan by Tim Barth, as well as 26 people speaking publicly.  The major issue was the extension of the runway, which a slight majority in the audience encouraged the approval of.  In a confusing vote, the council voted against extending the runway 850' (FOR: Wilson, Pirnack, Brown / AGAINST: McCoy, Lange, Winger, Block) but also voted against leaving the length it's currently at (FOR: McCoy, Winger, Block / AGAINST: Wilson, Lange, Pirnack, Brown)!  What exactly that means to the inclusion of anything about the runway in the Master Plan is not known yet.  Councilman Lange was the only member of council who's votes contradicted themselves.  Perhaps it was the late hour, the nonstop parade of citizens, or some mistaken switch thrown.  The council did however vote for the Noise Abatement Procedure, and many of the airport opponents even suggested to vote in favor of it.  They also voted to put off the discussion until a later time on the possibility of setting aside space for non-aviation use, in this case a Front Range Community College campus.  One anti-airport speaker made a good point of why would you want to put a medium-high density item like a college near the airport when in the past its been acknowledged that it should remain low density commercial or industrial for safety's sake. 

The college was a last minute surprise thrown in in the last few days.  The master plan has been in the works for about a year and has had plenty of public input, none of which about a college campus.  Initially the story was that an aviation program provided by Aims might be included on the campus, later it was said that there is no agreement with Aims, that there'd maybe be an Aims-like program, or possibly no aviation program at all.  This pilot took flight training through a community college program similar to what was talked about, I think it's a great way to fly.  But I also think this airport and this community doesn't have the demand to support it.  If it worked in conjunction with the current flight schools, perhaps they could have a few ground school classes.  But in reality, all this move is is an attempt to take away airport land for non-airport uses.  The only way I'd support it is if there is more than a 'possibility' of future aviation program.  I understand that it probably would bring in revenue to an airport that could use it, but as that one person said, it goes against the past thinking of keeping the area around the airport low density.

This writer got up in front of council, and I won't know until I rent the video tape from the library, but I'm pretty sure I didn't get my full 5 minutes in.  The final points I wanted to make was that the future of the airport rested with this council, a council due to term limits will not be in office when any runway construction would take place.  Also I wanted to address some outright untruths spoken by some of the airports neighbors.  I don't claim to know everything about everything, sometimes not anything about some things, some would say nothing about anything, but at least I try to learn something about what I'm going to talk to council about.  One man said every pilot must file a flight plan to fly, and that they are in violation of FAA regulations - totally false.  You do not have to file a flight plan unless you are going to go IFR, which stands for Instrument Flight Rules, basically going into the clouds or above 18,000 above the ground.  Another man said that less than half of the owners of aircraft at the airport live in Longmont, while that may be true, the part that those owners don't pay their way to Longmont is not true.  Anyone who buys an airplane and brings it here pays a pretty serious sales/use tax, resident or not.  I've heard of no other airport or local municipality that does that.  How many who spoke against the airport who live outside the city limits can say they pay a local or property tax to Longmont?  And lastly a control tower.  I hesitate to bring this up as I and many at the airport would rather not have a tower (this coming from an air traffic controller), I was surprised how many anti-airport people spoke against having one.  A tower would be the only way to monitor and enforce any kind of regulations and/or adherence to a noise abatement procedure.  A tower is a friend to the neighbor, not so much the users, once again the anti-airport camp is confused about how airports, airplanes, and the system work.

One idea brought up by Councilman Brown that hadn't been thought of before was perhaps instead of a runway extension adding 300' or so of a flat graded overrun area.  One that in the case of emergency an aircraft could go on to and not destroy itself.  This idea has some merit, but as Councilman Wilson pointed out gravel, dirt, or grass is far different than pavement, and it may not have the desired outcome.  The most logical point made all night came from Councilman Wilson, he pointed out that their are obviously two camps that are very far apart in this issue.  The neighbors are worried that any expansion could lead to even more expansion and encroachment on to their way of life.  The pilots worry that encroaching on to the airport or limiting the possibility of growth could lead to diminishing or actually closing the airport.  He makes a good point and perhaps we're both a little paranoid and over protective to our causes - my words, not his.

11/14/02 - AOPA President comes to Colorado.  Tonight in Denver, Phil Boyer, president of AOPA (Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association) brought his Town Hall meeting to Colorado.  It was an entertaining couple of hours, Mr. Boyer is a very good and interesting speaker.  There was a multimedia presentation throughout with graphics, video, and instant polls from selected audience members.  Some of the video segments included Colorado Senator Wayne Allard, the heads of the FAA and TSA, and Robin Williams, of all people.  Mr. Boyer spoke of a new program called "Airport Watch", which will be aviations version of "Neighborhood Watch", and also spoke about the "GA Serving America" website that graces the homepage of this website.  Members and representatives from the Colorado Pilots Association, Angel Flight West, and of course our own AOPA Airport Support Network volunteer Paul Hansen were in attendance.  Turnout was fairly large.

10/23/02 - Final Master Plan meeting occurs in City Council chambers.  Tonight a crowd of around 50 came out to the City Council chambers for the final Master Plan public meeting.  Strong opinions were made from both airport supporters and opponents, some comical, some caustic, some emotional, some informed, and some not so informed.  Safety was probably the biggest point of argument between the two sides, one side saying it wasn't the issue, the other saying it was the biggest if not only issue.  The two main parts of the debate were noise and a possible runway expansion.  The Master Plan will now go before City Council during study sessions on November 5th and/or November 19th, depending on their agenda and backlog.  It is assumed that a large part of the crowd that showed up tonight will also be at those meetings. 

10/10/02 - NEW & IMPROVED Noise Abatement Procedure Gets Approved.  Tonight the Airport Advisory Board voted unanimously to approve an amended Noise Abatement Procedure for the Vance Brand Municipal Airport.  The procedure brings the pattern in tighter to the airport, from 1 mile in the old wording to 1/2 to 3/4 mile from the runway for downwind.  It also raises the pattern from 800 feet above ground level (AGL)  to 1,000 feet AGL.  Public comment was made about the proposal to raise the initial turn to crosswind to 700 feet AGL and also the comment about the airport receiving "over 100" noise complaints per year.  In the motion that was made and voted on, the recommendation to raise the crosswind turn to 700 feet AGL was deleted in favor of the current 500 feet AGL, and the wording on complaints was changed to "numerous".  Also the LDN (noise) lines, and the X's in circles denoting "noise sensitive areas" were removed from the map.  Prior to the discussion, a petition with 214 signatures was presented to the board that basically asked for something similar to what was approved.  It was urged by the board that supporters of the airport need to come out and voice that support in the upcoming meeting Wednesday October 23rd in City Council Chambers, and again on Tuesday November 5th when the Master Plan is presented to City Council, also at the City Council Chambers.

9/30/02 - How much was spent?  About $250.  But on to bigger news: 
Amended Noise Abatement Procedure will be discussed and voted on at the next Airport Advisory Board meeting, to be held Thursday October 10, 2002.  This amendment takes into account much of what was asked for in the above mentioned petition.  Said petition will be withdrawn upon approval of amended plan, with some possible changes made to the plan before the final vote.  The biggest change is a tighter pattern, 1/2mile to 3/4mile from the runway.  Like most things in life, there was give and take.  The take here being the addition of 200 feet in two key places, prior to turning crosswind (now 700') and pattern altitude (now 1,000').  The amended plan should be a much slimmer document, possibly fitting on a normal 8.5"x11"sheet of paper.  Much of the unnecessary filler has been removed.  If nothing else, this helps proves that involved and educated people can make a difference.  The parties involved, from the Mayor and City Council, to City Staff and the Airport Advisory Board, who either made this change possible, or got out of the way to allow their previously flawed ideas to be corrected, should be congratulated.  This is how democracy is supposed to work.  Thanks to all who supported this and of course you petition signers, it wasn't a waste of time.

9/21/02 - A new shield was spotted on the north side of the beacon tower.  The shield blocks the beacon from the homes on the north.  An idea similar to this was pitched to the Airport Manager recently, with a shield all the way around the beacon, not just for one complainer.  While this surely didn't cost the City the price to move the beacon altogether, how much was spent?

9/20/02 - It's been learned that the Noise Abatement Procedure is going to "have another look" by the AAB prior to City Council seeing it in the Master Plan approval.  Hopefully this means going back to something like the previous procedure.

9/12/02 - As of this date, 135 people have signed the above petition.  The signatures, and its accompanying speech were presented to the Airport Advisory Board on this date.  This is not the first time the AAB heard opposition to this procedure, but their continuing circling of the wagons around this ill conceived idea goes on as usual.  

9/7/02 - The Airport "Meets the Mayor".  Saturday morning, Mayor Julia Pirnack came out to the airport to meet and talk to a crowd of hangar owners, airport users, pilots, FBO owners, and a couple Airport Advisory Board members.  It was a fairly large crowd packed into a hangar, all seats were taken.  Mayor Pirnack started the meeting with some comments that were positive towards the airport, including, with the advent of more security, the attraction to business people to use airports like Vance Brand for their business trips.  She also though pointed out the tough task ahead of the current budget and the financial situation with the City.  Carol Leyner then spoke to the Mayor about the benefits of General Aviation and Vance Brand Airport specifically.  She invited the Mayor and all of City Council to come out for a free ride in an airplane to sample the traffic pattern depicted in the Noise Abatement Procedure.  The Mayor jokingly commented that perhaps it's not a good idea to take them all up at the same time.
     Carol also mentioned that the AAB needs to have someone in it like a hangar owner, and that a couple have tried but never seem to get far in the interview process once they mention they own a hangar.  Some people in the crowd backed that up in comments later also.  The Young Eagles program was discussed, and an idea to have a 'ride-along' with the Longmont Police Department to give them an idea of who should be at the airport, and who shouldn't be.  It was suggested to the Mayor the passage of the Airport Master Plan is important, as long as the Noise Abatement Procedure is eliminated from it.
     The floor was then opened up to people in attendance to speak to the Mayor for about 2 minutes each.   Common concerns were the Noise Abatement Procedure, relationship with the City and neighbors, safety, and some explanations and education of what is done at the airport.  A common thread was the importance of the airport and what a treasure it is.  After the crowds comments, the Mayor then made some of her own.  She suggested we promote the airport with ideas like the viewing area on Airport Road, telling people and showing them the vintage airplanes, getting together with neighbors, and showing the opportunities at the airport other than the financial impact - like how it could enhance quality of life.  Along those lines Carol suggested perhaps an "Airport Appreciation Day", which was talked about more after the meeting concluded.
     Overall, the meeting was very positive and helped possible future alliances between the diverse and sometimes opposing factions within the airport.  No matter what background the crowd came from, it was obvious they all had one common goal:  the survival, improvement, and promotion of this facility - everyones airport.

The meeting also kicked off the petition drive to amend or delete the current Noise Abatement Procedure from the Airport Master Plan.  The package includes the former noise abatement procedure, the current one, and excerpts from the Longmont Area Comprehensive Plan that deal with the airport.  Mayor Pirnack was also given a copy of this package.  The petition states:  "I, the undersigned am against the current Vance Brand Airport Noise Abatement Procedures, specifically flying a wide pattern with a large noise footprint, at an unsafe distance (the railroad tracks) from the airport.  I ask that the Airport Advisory Board remove this current procedure from the Airport Master Plan and come back with a procedure similar to the 1992 NA plan.  I am in favor of SAFE Noise Abatement Procedures that are considerate to our neighbors, with a tight close-in pattern to reduce the noise footprint to the greater community."
     If you'd like to sign your name on this petition you can find it at Airwest and Twin Peaks Aviation.  By sometime in October this will be presented to the AAB and City Council. 

Copyright ©2002-2006 Longmont Airport.Com.  All Rights Reserved.