Let's Get On With It
The Committee to Stop Airport Expansion and the East Hampton Aviation Association agree on one thing. Both say they do not want to see a larger, busier airport in East Hampton. The agreement stops there.
Even after the election, even after a closed-door session between the Federal Aviation Administration and incoming Democrats on the Town Board, and even after a long and detailed public meeting intended to clear the air, the controversy and the talk of lawsuits continue. This is not as it should be.
The length of a runway is the determining factor for drawing larger jets, not its width. Although a longer main runway, along with rerouting Daniel's Hole Road and a global positioning system, were improvements the Republican Town Board majority had thought should be explored in a new airport master plan, no one has been arguing for any of these options since the November election.
The Republicans now say they are against lengthening the main runway, runway 10-28, and the Aviation Association recently offered to quell Democratic doubts by putting its opposition to a longer runway in writing. They should do so. Then the town should get on with rebuilding it so that its full 100-foot width is usable.
Pilots say that the project will help smaller, rather than larger planes because smaller craft are more vulnerable to crosswinds while landing and taking off. In addition, the town natural resources director says the project would have a "negligible" impact on the environment.
The F.A.A. says that regardless of whether the repair of runway 10-28 is paid for with Federal or local funds, the strip must be 100 feet wide - anything less does not meet F.A.A. standards. It has therefore warned of legal action if the town insists on a narrower strip.
And what if, after a delay and further review or an unfavorable lawsuit, the town cannot secure another F.A.A. grant for the work? Who, if anyone will pay? With all the looming expenses at the town landfills do taxpayers really want to foot a $2.7 million (and growing) bill?
The time has come for Supervisor Cathy Lester and other Town Board Democrats to relent on the runway, make it safe and solid, accept the F.A.A. grant, and put all the interminable arguing to rest. As much as some might like it to, the airport is not going to pick up and fly away.
Michael Bottini, a planner for the Group for the South Fork, is among those who have suggested that the town guarantee that the airport will never expand by putting the town-owned lands at its runways' ends into a parks and conservation zoning district. That's a proposal worth debating.